prompts
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: ELECTRICITY TRADED VOLUMES since 1994; [EMail-Body]= I think he was looking to make a sector-wide point. For example, how much of the total market moved to wholesale traded volumes? He wants to make the point that even a nontraded commodity - ie electricity in 1994 - can rapidly progress to a traded market - as electricity did between 94 and 00. Margaret Carson 09/21/2000 04:25 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: ELECTRICITY TRADED VOLUMES since 1994 Steve I provided Andy West with this and the 35 percent a year growth was compelling Marg. ---------------------- Forwarded by Margaret Carson/Corp/Enron on 09/21/2000 04:18 PM --------------------------- From: Simon Shih on 09/21/2000 03:44 PM To: Andy West/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Margaret Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: First Cut at High Tech Messages; [EMail-Body]= Looks good. I think you implicitly say this, but I think you should make it more explicit: The continued growth of the new economy is threatened by our electricity infrastructure more than anything else. The high tech industry requires market driven solutions to reliability and pricing not the old style command and control regulated monopoly approach. Let's start getting the word out! Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 09/26/2000 02:06 PM To: skean@enron.com, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Sue Nord/NA/Enron@Enron, Margaret Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, mpalmer@enron.com, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: First Cut at High Tech Messages Attached is a first rough cut. Work continues but wanted to distribute for feedback. All is welcome and appreciated. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Follow Up On California Information; [EMail-Body]= Alan and I spoke about point #2 on the comparison benchmark. At this point, we may be able to just say it is based on a comparison of the contracts with today's forward market and gloss over the exact forward curve we used. Of course if there is a way to come up with a similar number using publicly available data (or if we are willing to provide our numbers if pressed) then all the better. In the mean time, should I hold off on using the $13.8 billion number until I hear back from you about the conversation with Steve? Also, do I understand correctly from Alan that the $13.8 billion figure is NOT comparing the long term contracts California signed with recent spot market prices, but rather is a comparison of the contracts to our present forward pricing curves? From you e-mail, it is the latter, I take it. As to point #1, on the deal last year, we just need a similar ""back of the envelope"" calculation on what California could have saved had California taken us up on the offers we and others made. Any guidance on where to get that would be most helpful. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Marketing Plan & Meetings; [EMail-Body]= Sandeep, This looks great. I would talk to all the heads of structuring desks, including the right persons (Zimin, Krishna, Vasant) in the conversations. Also, please talk to Andrea Reed and ask who are good targets in the EIM organization. We can talk about other targets when I get back. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Kohli, Sandeep Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 2:43 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Marketing Plan & Meetings Vince, Just a short note to update you since you are not here for the Tuesday meeting. I had sent a mail to Chris Calger on Friday copying you too. I will be following up with a phone call. I have fixed a meeting with Bill Rust (Mgr. East Desk), and Tom Dutta (Mgr. Generation Investments) for Friday. I will be presenting our skill set to him; would like to include Martin and Lance. Am working with Krishna on the EES contract, and he will talk to you about a meeting date Am working on a request from LNG group on their Nigeria LNG contract (meeting at 10.30). Will like to include Paulo; have already talked with Zemin. Would like to talk to you about which people to target as regards the Marketing Plan. Regards, Sandeep. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: FW: Meeting with Mayor Willie L. Brown, Jr.; [EMail-Body]= I think it would be a good idea for them to talk, but I wouldn't want Jeff to go to California right now. Maybe they could meet outside the state (if, for example, brown is going to be in DC or New York) or by phone. From: Joannie Williamson/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/13/2001 08:36 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: FW: Meeting with Mayor Willie L. Brown, Jr. Wanted you to be aware that Mayor Brown is inviting Jeff to meet with him, either in San Francisco or elsewhere. Please advise, but I know that Jeff would probably not travel to California. Mark Koenig and Andy Fastow will discuss meeting with Mayor Brown on the CalPERS issue. Thanks, Joannie -----Original Message----- From: Michael Moyer <mamoyer@pacbell.net>@ENRON Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 3:50 PM To: Skilling, Jeff Subject: Meeting with Mayor Willie L. Brown, Jr. Dear Mr. Skilling, On behalf of Mayor Willie L. Brown, Jr. (San Francisco), it is my pleasure to invite you to meet with him regarding energy issues in California. Mayor Brown wishes to meet with you in his capacity as a trustee of the Board of Administration of the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS). As you know, CalPERS is the largest public pension fund in the nation and is a sizeable investor in domestic energy stocks, bonds, debentures, etc. The Board has appointed Mayor Brown to lead a delegation of trustees to meet with the CEOs of CalPERS' largest energy holdings. Enron represents one such holding. The Mayor would be pleased to host you in his office at the newly renovated City Hall in San Francisco or arrange an alternative location at your earliest convenience. I will await your response. Sincerely, Monique Moyer Director, Mayor's Office of Public Finance City & County of San Francisco [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Confidential A&A PRC Results; [EMail-Body]= Hi, got your message. We will have it to you before 4pm. -----Original Message----- From: Kitchen, Louise Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 1:07 PM To: Melodick, Kim Subject: FW: Confidential A&A PRC Results I will be leaving at 4pm - so please get me the files asap -----Original Message----- From: Deffner, Joseph Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 11:02 AM To: Kitchen, Louise Subject: FW: Confidential A&A PRC Results Catherine has been in Global inance for Enron Americas for the past year. She has been ranked a Category 1 during year-end 2000 and mid-year 2001 PRC. She is responsible for the financial modeling of all the greenfield project development opportunities being pursued by Origination. She has learned to articulate the banks' concerns with the projects and equipment to be financed within E-Next and other structures to both the originators and accounting. The successful effort Origination has had this year with developments has provided tremendous document flow which has allowed Catherine to develop her document review skills from both a financing and commercial perspective. The growth in maturity she has experienced driven by her deal flow has made her one of the core ""go to"" junior people in my group when a deal calls for financial analysis. She has been performing at the manager level for six months and is seen as a leader among the junior staff in the group. -----Original Message----- From: Slone, Jeanie Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 10:30 AM To: Deffner, Joseph Subject: RE: Confidential A&A PRC Results Louise and John will be reviewing these early next week. Since Catherine is eligible and has a 1 rating I do not believe this will be an issue. Louise has requested that each manager write a brief statement about why the employee should be promoted. Please submit it to me by noon tomorrow if possible. I apologise for the late notice. The need for a written summary just came up. If this is an issue, just let me know and we can resolve another way. Thanks. -----Original Message----- From: Deffner, Joseph Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 6:50 AM To: Slone, Jeanie Subject: FW: Confidential A&A PRC Results Jeanie, is there anything additional I need to do with regards to Catherine Clark's promotion? -----Original Message----- From: Bosien, Teresa Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 5:40 PM To: Deffner, Joseph Subject: Confidential A&A PRC Results Below are the final PRC rankings for the Analysts and /or Associates who were assigned to you for the mid-year PRC process. Please communicate these results to the appropriate supervisor. PRC reviews with the Analysts and Associates should be completed by early August, and the signed evaluation forms should be returned to me at EB3539b. The Program recommends that if asked, the supervisor should provide the actual ranking to the Analyst or Associate. In addition, we recommend that the PRC representative be involved in providing feedback to the Analyst or Associate. Name PRC Level BU Hire Date Supervisor Ranking Promotion Edmonds, Marcus R Analyst-2 ENA 7/19/1999 Ms. Lisa Bills 3 No Clark, Catherine J Associate ENA 9/13/1999 Ms. Lisa Bills 1 ** Liu, Ying Associate ENA 8/7/2000 Ms. Lisa Bills 3 No **Catherine is eligible for promotion to Manager - waiting on business unit approval. Contact Jeanie Slone if you need additional information. Thank you for your participation in this important process. Terry Bosien Human Resource Manager Associate & Analyst Program 713/853-5230 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: SRP SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL - PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL FOR
 SETTLEM	ENT DISCUSSIONS ONLY; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: =09Joel Greene [mailto:IMCEANOTE= =20 Sent:=09Monday, July 30, 2001 11:11 AM To:=09agold@coral-energy.com; amy.sheridan@williams.com; barryp@bp.com; bbr= igham@sidrichgas.com; bealljp@texaco.com; bgray@cc.state.az.us; Bgray@EPEle= ctric.com; bjost@huberlaw.com; bwhitta@pnm.= com; carpentierd@dsmo.com; caschindler@hhla= w.com; cbrechte@apsc.com; cbulf@oneok.com; = coganja@aol.com; craigc@calpine.com; dani= el.collins@elpaso.com; daswanstrom@verner.com; Dave Huard Esq. (E-mail) (E-= mail); dbmcvick@srpnet.com; dfulton@enron.com; dga@sloverandloftus.com; djo= hn@jhenergy.com; dkirkla@pnm.com; dlh@jmbm.com; dlsmith@pplweb.com; dmcwash= @mshpc.com; douglas.porter@sce.com; dtom@btuwatch.com; Dwilliams@kmg.com; e= aro@dynegy.com; edward.mcmurtrie@swgas.com; elizabeth.herdes@elpaso.com; em= yerskerbal@shb.com; Fritz Kolb (E-mail); frl3@pge.com; gbaker@sempra.com; g= cvenz@duke-energy.com; gduede@apsc.com; glander@skippingstone.com; gsmith@j= henergy.com; haorndorff@aeraenergy.com; jab@cpuc.ca.gov; jalward@cc.state.a= z.us; Tholt, Jane M.; jay.golub@bakerbotts= .com; jcashin@epsa.org; jdoering@regroup.com; jeff.goforth@williams.com; je= rry.strange@elpaso.com; jgregg@mbolaw.com; jhmcgrew@brudergentile.com; jima= @pandaenergy.com; jmoriarty@fw-law.com; Joel Greene; jpa3@pge.com; jparker@= govmail.nv.state.us; jpfloom@gkrse-law.com; jpnevins@hhlaw.com; jrlilyestro= m@hhlaw.com; jrogers@btuwatch.com; jstaffier@sdsatty.com; jsuwara@sempra.co= m; judy.heineman@elpaso.com; kadaly@moheck.com; kaprice@srpnet.com; karilee= .ramaley@pinnaclewest.com; kathleen.royal@elpaso.com; kbedwards@gkrse-law.c= om; kbosley@reliant.com; kclark@jhenergy.com; com; klm@dwgp.com; larry.black@swgas.com; lhamilto@utilicorp.com; lindseyho= wdowning@dwt.com; lpadilla@gas.pemex.com; lwsmith@midcogen.com; mark.cook@e= lpaso.com; mark.minich@elpaso.com; mcregar@aeglobalmarkets.com; melissa.max= well@bakerbott.com; mfenton@pnm.com; Michael McElrath (E-mail); mike.langst= on@southernunion.com; millertr@bp.com; mmexal@giant.com; napedersen@jonesda= y.com; Norm Walker; Pat Anderson (E-mail); patricia.shelton@elpaso.com; pau= l.gendron@eng.pge.com; pcervin@br-inc.com; pckissel@gkrse-law.com; pete.fro= st@usa.conoco.com; pkeeler@br-inc.com; pmohler@hewm.com; pserrano@epelectri= c.com; racosta@epelectric.com; rcashdollar@apachenitro.com; Cantrell, Rebec= ca W.; redavis@sempra.com; rhewlett@aepnet.org; richard.derryberry@elpaso.c= om; rlacey@govmail.nv.state.us; robert.tomlinson@elpaso.com; rosa.jackson@e= lpaso.com; rpetti@ladwp.com; rrich@bracepatt.com; salleyoo@dwt.com; sally.t= urley@elpaso.com; sandrar@prestongates.com; sarah.tomalty@dynegy.com; sbree= n@czn.com; scmertz@aep.com; Scott Walton; sjf@cpuc.ca.gov; sjroyka@columbia= energygroup.com; slevine@brattle.com; Susan Ginsberg; susan.jones@eng.pge.c= om; tarpeysp@bp.com; tcarlson@apsc.com; tcubbage@cov.com; tdickers@westerng= as.com; vitagliano@gas.pemex.com; vrspurg@ppco.com; william.healy@elpaso.co= m; wlansinger@sempra.com Subject:=09SRP SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL - PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL FOR SETTLE= M=09ENT DISCUSSIONS ONLY Importance:=09High Attached are three documents (cover memo, draft settlement proposal, settlement procedures timeline) comprising SRP's formal proposal to resolve five pending dockets, RP99-507 (Indicated Shippers' Complaint), RP00-336 (Order No. 637 Allocation and Pooling Issues only), RP99-139 (ONEOK Complaint), RP01-484 (Indicated Shippers/California Complaint), and RP01-48= 6 (Texas, New Mexico and Arizona Shippers' Complaint). We appreciate the suggestions received to date and believe that while an uncontested settlement may be unlikely, a sufficient nucleus is forming around the elements of this proposal that will lead to the filing of an Offer of Settlement and ultimate FERC approval as in the public interest. We encourage your active participation in this process. Note that while Advisory Staff present at the July 18 Technical Conference is aware conceptually that SRP will be distributing a settlement proposal, this proposal has not been distributed to the Advisory Staff. This proposa= l has been sent to Rick Miles, Director, Dispute Resolution Services, for informational purposes only at this time. Joel L. Greene Energy Advocates LLP 202-371-9889 202-371-9025 (fax) jlgreene@energyadvocates.com <<SRP EPNG Settle.cvr.doc>> <<SRP EPNG Capacity Proposal.06.26.doc>> <<Proceduralschedule.doc>> - SRP EPNG Settle.cvr.doc=20 - SRP EPNG Capacity Proposal.06.26.doc=20 - Proceduralschedule.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Information and Securities Trading; [EMail-Body]= To:KITCHEN, LOUISE - +1 713 853 3488 Enron Wholesale Services - Office of the Chairman From: Mark Frevert, Chairman & CEO Mark Haedicke, Managing Director & General Counsel Subject: Confidential Information and Securities Trading To keep pace with the fluid and fast-changing demands of our equity trading activities, Enron Wholesale Services (""EWS"") has recently revised its official Policies and Procedures Regarding Confidential Information and Securities Trading (""Policies and Procedures""). These revisions reflect two major developments: (1) our equity trading activities have been extended into the United Kingdom, and (2) in an effort to streamline the information flow process, the ""Review Team"" will play a more centralized role, so that the role of the ""Resource Group"" is no longer necessary.You are required to become familiar with, and to comply with, the Policies and Procedures. The newly revised Policies and Procedures are available for your review on LegalOnline, the new intranet website maintained by the Enron Wholesale Services Legal Department. Please click on the attached link to access LegalOnline: If you have already certified compliance with the Policies and Procedures during the 2001 calendar year, you need not re-certify at this time, although you are still required to to review and become familiar with the revised Policies and Procedures. If you have not certified compliance with the Policies and Procedures during the 2001 calendar year, then you must do so within two weeks of your receipt of this message. The LegalOnline site will allow you to quickly and conveniently certify your compliance on-line with your SAP Personal ID number. If you have any questions concerning the Policies or Procedures, please call Bob Bruce at extension 5-7780 or Donna Lowry at extension 3-1939. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= <<Concur Expense Document>> - May - Env Strat; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 06/07/2001 06:04 PM --------------------------- eserver@enron.com on 05/30/2001 02:15:36 PM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - May - Env Strat The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: Michael Terraso Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: May - Env Strat Report Total: $1,668.88 Amount Due Employee: $1,668.88 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://xms.enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California Refund Proceeding--Got some exhibits to
 prepare--Confidential Atty Client Work Product; [EMail-Body]= I met with Gary Fergus and we determined the need to prepare affidavits and/or exhibits as part of our August 15th showing in the Califronia refund case. Exhbits in a FERC case require supporting documents and a sponsor (witness). I am trying to contact various people on getting the data together but here are the parameters of the exhibits: Witness designations are preliminary. 1. EPMI's receivables from ISO/PX What it shows: ISO owes us $41.5 million and the PX $9.1 million plus any claims we want to make w.r.t. letters of credit with the PX Sponsor: Tracy Ngo (PX data) and Murray O'Neil (ISO data) (Tracy has agreed to prepare the exhibit but wants support from Murray's group on the ISO numbers.) 2. EPMI's ""receivables"" from ISO for the underscheduling penalty What it shows: ISO has yet to actually implement the underscheduling penalty but has been tracking it. According to information provided Chris Stockly, EPMI would receive $30 million of penalty revenues Sponsor: Chris Stokley or Murray O'Neil 3. Enron's PX credit receivables What it shows: PG&E and SCE collectively owe EES $500 million Sponsor: Steve Swain or ?? GAC [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Charlie Baker; [EMail-Body]= the price might be a bit stiff, particularly in light of the following: I don't think we need the DC grass tops component. we have an effective set of messages, contacts, consultants and lawyers. Perhaps we could use Charlie as a fresh set of eyes on that stuff, but I think that asking him to develop such an effort would be duplicative of what we have done with AAE, Paxson, Fleischman-Hillard, Divall, etc. I do think the other aspects of what he proposes would be useful, however, (and should be less resource intensive and at least a little less costly). Richard Shapiro@EES 08/21/2000 05:12 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Re: Charlie Baker What do you think? ---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES on 08/21/2000 05:07 PM --------------------------- Kelly Goss <kgoss@tiac.net> on 08/21/2000 04:16:06 PM Please respond to kgoss@deweysquare.com To: rshapiro@enron.com cc: Subject: Re: Charlie Baker Dear Mr. Shapiro: Attached is a memo from Charlie Baker regarding the FERC that he asked that I forward to you. If you have any questions, please call him at (617) 428-3412 or me at (617) 367-9929. Thank you. Sincerely, Kelly Goss Dewey Square Group - dsg e-mail to shapiro at enron 800.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: ENE candlestick chart; [EMail-Body]= Greetings from London. What do you think about P, TX, DVN? Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""sbigalow"" Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 2:46 PM To: Stuart III, William; Kaminski, Vince J; McFarland, Trena; James, Tracy; Branney, Theresa; Noble, Ted; Neville, Sue; Crenshaw, Shirley; Gonzalez, Selena; Davidson, Samantha T.; Lewis, William Patrick; Conner, Patrick; Mike Roberts; Fowler, Mike J; Cisneros, Michelle D.; Bradley, Michael W.; Slaughter, Mark; Bellard, Lyelle; Ferrell, Lee; Mccoy, Kelly; Weakly, John; Greene, John; Choi, John; Gualy, Jaime; Kendall, Heather; Hickerson, Gary; Lagrasta, Fred; Farhangnia, Farzad; Willis, Erin; Tipp, Eric; Scott, Eric; Boxall, Emily; Piekielniak, Elsa; Su, Ellen; Brown, Elaine; Maloney, Darren; Romain, Danielle; Breslau, Craig; Harper, Mike Subject: ENE candlestick chart - RESEARCH ENHANCEMENT GROUP - ENE.doc << File: RESEARCH ENHANCEMENT GROUP - ENE.doc >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Fw: Confidential - Decision tree on projects; [EMail-Body]= Fyi -------------------------- Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net) -----Original Message----- From: Mahan, Mariella <Mariella.Mahan@ENRON.com> To: Horton, Stanley <Stanley.Horton2@ENRON.com>; Hughes, James A. <James.A.= Hughes@ENRON.com>; Hayslett, Rod <Rod.Hayslett@ENRON.com>; Sommers, Jeffrey= E. <Jeffrey.E.Sommers@ENRON.com> Sent: Tue Nov 13 14:53:54 2001 Subject: Confidential - Decision tree on projects Something for us to talk about during our next staff meeting. There are three projects which have significant cash flow problems and thus= difficulties in meeting debt obligations: these are: SECLP, Panama and Gaz= a. In the past, as I suppose we have done in Dabhol, we have taken the pos= ition that we would not inject cash into these companies and would be prepa= red to face a default and possible acceleration of the loans. SECLP has be= en the biggest issue/problem. Panama is much less (a few million of floati= ng of our receivables from the company) would be sufficient to meet the cas= h crunch in April of this year. Note that, in Panama, the debt is fully gu= aranteed by the government and is non-recoursed to the operating company, B= LM. In the past, we have discussed letting the debt default, which would c= ause the bank to potentially seek complete payment and acceleration from th= e GoPanama. The reason: the vast majority of BLM's problems stem from acti= ons taken by the regulator that have effectively amended our PPA's with pri= vate parties; those actions resulted in significant loss of revenues, which= although today have stopped or have been limited, have left a ""mark"" on th= e company's liquidity position. =20 Now the question is: come April of 2002, should any of our actions in Panam= a or decisions related thereto (which we would have otherwise taken or made= ) be affected in any way by either the proposed merger or an effort by Enro= n to preserve efforts to re-establish investor/creditor confidence? The sa= me could go for SECLP and Gaza. This is simply an overall ""guidance"" question. Let's take it up during our= staff meeting next week, if that's ok with you. Many thanks, Mariella [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: ENE Officer Elections; [EMail-Body]= We should include David Oxley -- VP of human resources. From: Kelly Johnson/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/18/2001 11:13 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: ENE Officer Elections Steve: Please review the attached ENE Officer list for your direct reports and approve. Thank you. Kelly M. Johnson Enron Corp. Executive Assistant Tel: (713) 853-6485 Fax: (713) 853-2534 E-Mail: kelly.johnson@enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= WSP: Market Ripe for Manipulation...; [EMail-Body]= Cc list suppressed... Public opinion is the pendulum that swings law...dsg August 4, 2000 Deregulation Leaves Electricity Market Ripe for Manipulation by Power Firms By REBECCA SMITH and JOHN J. FIALKA Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL It's a market ripe for manipulation: surging demand for an indispensable commodity, weak oversight and a chaotic new set of rules amid a transition from heavy regulation to open competition. This is the state of the U.S. electricity business in the summer of 2000. And sure enough, there's growing evidence that some power companies are finding lucrative ways to exploit the system -- at consumers' expense. The tactics include manipulating wholesale electricity auctions, taking juice from transmission systems when suppliers aren't supposed to and denying weaker competitors access to transmission lines. None of this is illegal, and much of it might be considered basic competition. But as an electricity shortage plunges sweltering California into an energy crisis and fears of even worse shortages rattle the Northeast, the practices of power suppliers face more scrutiny than ever. (See related article.) Steamy Conditions A hot summer day last year shows one kind of manipulation. On July 28, 1999, wholesale electricity prices in the Middle Atlantic states hit $935 per megawatt hour. That was seven times what it costs to generate power at the most expensive plant in the region. An analysis of trading data from that day shows that PECO Energy Corp. and PPL Corp., the old Philadelphia Electric Co. and Pennsylvania Power & Light, made the most of steamy conditions. In the region's power market, deregulated in 1997, a new corporation called PJM Interconnection LLC runs the transmission system once operated piecemeal by eight utilities. It also operates a daily electricity auction that sorts the hourly bids of 540 generating plants. The cheapest plants are called on first, but when the weather is hot and demand is acute, higher offers are taken as well. To attract as many bidders as possible, the highest bid, each hour, sets the price for the entire market for that hour. Grid and Bear It Rise in average wholesale electricity prices at key transmission-interconnection points for the month of May from 1997 to 2000. TRANSMISSION-INTERCONNECTION POINT % CHANGE 1997-2000 Texas +293% +216 Tennessee Valley Authority +165 California-Oregon border +162 New York-West +138 Chicago area +130 New England +117 New York-East +101 Upper Midwest +99 Florida +89 Mid-Atlantic region +80* *Includes only years 1999-2000 Source: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, RDI Power What PECO and PPL did was offer much of their output at low prices so that the majority of their plants would be called into service. But knowing demand was so high, they offered power from their tiniest plants at vastly higher bids, in a way that often set the peak price for a number of hours. Consumers that day ended up paying millions of extra dollars for power. Cases like this show that during the transition to deregulation, ""there's a good argument the system has broken down,"" says William Massey, a commissioner at the Federal Energy Regulatory Agency. FERC, which polices the nation's bulk power markets, began the deregulation movement in 1996. It wasn't supposed to be this way. In the old days, utilities generated electricity and delivered it to customers in exclusive territories. To protect consumers from gouging, rates were regulated. But while supply had to be able to meet peak demand at all times, demand varied widely within regions, between regions and from one season to another. The result was tremendous reliability but also inefficiency and waste. Deregulation, now under way in half the country and functioning nationally at the wholesale level, allows new players -- some affiliated with utilities, some not -- to build power plants and sell electricity. Prices are supposed to be set by competitive markets. Risks are borne by investors, not ratepayers. At the same time, utilities are surrendering control of long-haul transmission lines to new nonprofit operators, like the one in the Middle Atlantic region, which are supposed to ensure fair access to the grid -- the multistate system of high voltage lines. Under this new regime, energy prices should have dropped as companies raced to compete with one another. But the massive U.S. energy infrastructure wasn't designed to serve as the backbone of a free market. On hot summer days, when there's little or no surplus electricity in the nation's most populous regions, generators can charge prices far in excess of their production costs and be confident they'll get tapped for service by grid operators who must keep the lights on at any cost. Utility holding companies that still control transmission lines have an added advantage: They can effectively lock out cheaper competitors. California Cuts Price Cap for Electricity Once Again (Aug. 2)Price Cap Is Set for Electricity That Is Sold in New England (July 27)PPL, KeySpan Say Earnings Surpassed Wall Street Targets (July 27)Energy Trading, Internet Operations Help Enron's Net Income Jump 30% (July 25)PG&E Posts 36% Rise in Net to $248 Million (July 21) The new regional grid operators, called independent system operators, or ISOs, eventually will be in charge of preventing manipulation. But as nongovernmental organizations, they won't have basic investigative tools, like subpoena powers or the ability to impose significant penalties. FERC, which does have those powers, rarely uses them, preferring to let the market discipline itself. A Strange Drop Sometimes it's difficult to know what constitutes an abuse of the market. In July 1999, engineers noticed that a substantial amount of power was being taken from the grid for which there was no explanation. They contacted the North American Electric Reliability Council, the industry group charged by Congress with overseeing the grid since the late 1960s. After a lengthy investigation, NERC determined that Cinergy Corp., a utility holding company, had surreptitiously taken enough power over a three-day period, about 9,600 megawatt hours, to light a small city for a month. Cincinnati-based Cinergy had underestimated power demands. Rather than buy electricity on the open market at ferociously high prices or cut power to Cincinnati, it quietly borrowed power from the system when demand was peaking and later replaced it in the cool of the night when demand wasn't so high. James E. Rogers, Cinergy's chief executive, received a letter from A.R. Garfield, the chairman of NERC's regional power-coordination center, accusing his company of showing ""blatant disregard"" for the rules and of using the grid ""as a supplemental resource without regard to the reliability or integrity of the system."" But Cinergy paid no fine. That's because it runs its own transmission ""control area"" and is trusted to enforce NERC's voluntary rules, even when it is the violator. Smaller utilities in Cinergy's area, by contrast, face contractual penalties of as much as $35,000 per megawatt for unilaterally borrowing from the grid, a practice known as ""leaning on the ties."" Dancing on the Edge? Mr. Garfield is still steamed about Cinergy's actions, which he said removed part of the system's essential reserve needed to avoid cascading blackouts, or a chain of uncontrollable outages that could darken whole sectors of the country. ""How fair is it that someone can dance on the edge like that and get away with it?"" he asks. Mr. Rogers points to old rules that permit utilities to temporarily borrow small amounts of power during emergencies. ""We were very careful to make sure, when we leaned on the ties ... we didn't bring the whole system down,"" he says. Nevertheless, he concedes, ""in a competitive world, those rules need to be changed."" The region's regulators have since gone to FERC for authority to charge ""borrowers"" for the market value of the electricity they take off the grid. Leaning on the ties is only one way fair competition is being frustrated on the country's transmission system, a vast web of connections that resembles the nation's highway system before the construction of the interstates. While there are plenty of routes to get electricity from outlying power plants directly to big cities, there are relatively few routes connecting regions. That makes it possible for some big companies to shut out competitors. A Snag in Transmission St. Louis-based Aquila Energy hit that snag when it tried to use a transmission corridor owned by New Orleans-based Entergy Corp. to move electricity to a buyer in East Texas. Entergy granted the request, initially, but then it canceled, saying it didn't have sufficient space on its lines. Aquila didn't buy it. After analyzing transmission-capacity data, the company argued to FERC that Entergy did have enough space on its lines and so was in effect breaking a rule that required it to provide transmission-line access when possible. Without access to Entergy's lines, Aquila was forced to compensate the buyer and lost nearly $300,000 on the deal. From whom did the Texas customer end up buying the power? A unit of Entergy -- and for a higher price than it would have paid Aquila. FERC said Entergy had been within its rights to restrict access in this case, because it had transmission problems. But FERC found that Entergy, on other occasions, had hoarded transmission capacity that should have been made available to the market. Entergy declines to comment. Such scenarios are costly for consumers, and they are among the reasons the electricity industry is enjoying flush times. In the second quarter just ended, companies ranging from AES Corp. in Arlington, Va., to Enron Corp. in Houston reported huge profit increases, some as much as 50%. To be sure, a lot of those profits are coming from extraordinary demand growth and a pickup in energy trading. But Sean Murphy, president of Southern Energy New England, a unit of Southern Cos., Atlanta, Ga., worries that the industry has gotten too greedy and risks retribution. ""Pigs get fat, but hogs get slaughtered,"" he says. Tremendous Volatility New federal data show that average wholesale power prices have more than doubled at 14 of 17 key pricing points across the country in the past three years. By May of this year, prices had risen across a broad range -- by 89% in Florida, for example, and by 294% in Texas. But even these increases mask the tremendous volatility that has struck all the major wholesale markets during the past year. In the case of the Midwest, where prices in July 1999 hit $9,000 per megawatt hour, it was as if a $1.89 gallon of gas suddenly sold for $567. Prices like these have prompted growing calls for investigations into whether electric companies are gouging their customers. Some consumer groups, lukewarm to deregulation in the first place, now are agitating for re-regulation. Residential electricity bills have doubled in San Diego, which is notable because it's the first city in the nation to be served by a utility that's buying all of its energy on the competitive market. Politicians are sounding the alarm in the Pacific Northwest. There, wholesale prices peaked at a record $1,300 per megawatt hour during the last week in June. Energy-intensive industries like mines and aluminum smelters are cutting back on production and temporarily laying off workers. ""We may be seeing too much opportunism in the market,"" says Montana Gov. Marc Racicot. Demands by Mr. Racicot and his counterpart in Washington, Gary Locke, were instrumental in prompting FERC to open a national investigation in late July into possible market abuses. A Six-Month Lag One big premise on which deregulation rests is that a free flow of information will let markets police themselves and operate efficiently. But a key tool for market monitoring, the data on utility Web sites used to book transmission orders, is often unreliable. There's a six-month lag on the release of bidding data, which are coded to mask the identities of bidders. What's more, the four FERC-controlled ISOs operating in California, the Middle Atlantic states, New England and New York don't have the authority to compel market participants to give them internal documents, like bilateral contracts, and other information they don't want to hand over. Without such documents, ""there's a lot more looking than finding,"" says Bill Museler, chief executive of the New York ISO. Even if the ISOs do find something problematic, there isn't much they can do about it. The tariffs, contracts and bylaws under which they operate generally prohibit them from releasing company-specific data and so exposing wrongdoers. And with the exception of California, the ISOs' own board meetings are closed to the public. ""The reality is, confidentiality rules protect the guilty,"" says Frank Wolak, a professor of economics at Stanford University and chairman of the California ISO's Market Surveillance Committee. ""And there are no codes of conduct to instill a sense of fair play."" That can be a huge problem on hot days. In California, an independent exchange runs a daily forward auction in which it tries to match the next day's anticipated demand to bids by generators. But this summer, generators often have offered less power than they know will be needed, so that they can submit higher bids later when the ISO is forced to pay stiffer prices for emergency power. On occasion, ISO engineers have had just 40 minutes to frantically phone around and nail down suppliers, knowing that if they fail they could be forced to begin rolling blackouts. The bidding strategy, while legal, ""undermines reliability and forces the ISO to do some real gymnastics,"" says Kellan Fluckiger, chief operations officer for the California ISO. Generators say they aren't to blame for the mad scramble. Utilities, buying power for their customers, often order less power than they really need for fear that a big order will drive up the overall market price to prohibitive levels. The only real recourse available to the ISOs is to rewrite the rules governing their local markets. But FERC is reluctant to let them meddle too often because generators are investing billions of dollars based on existing market rules. There's another reason, too, says Ron Rattey, a veteran FERC economist who in June wrote a 10-page internal memo criticizing the agency for not doing more to ferret out unfair conduct. ""Every single ISO has identified strategic abuses,"" he says. ""And every time the ISOs make adjustments to the rules, the market participants find new ways around them."" Write to Rebecca Smith at rebecca.smith@wsj.com and John J. Fialka at john.fialka@wsj.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= <<Concur Expense Document>> - May 2001; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/17/2001 11:50 AM --------------------------- eserver@enron.com on 05/16/2001 10:46:18 AM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - May 2001 The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: Michael Terraso Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: May 2001 Report Total: $5,773.63 Amount Due Employee: $5,773.63 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://xms.enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RED Index shows Texas, NY, and Maine advance on retreating
 Pennsylvania; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/19/2001 12:59 PM --------------------------- ""RED Index Team"" <distribution@caem.org> on 07/18/2001 01:01:03 PM Please respond to <netkin@caem.org> To: <Steven_J_Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: RED Index shows Texas, NY, and Maine advance on retreating Pennsylvania Note to Steven Kean The July Update to the Retail Energy Deregulation Index (RED Index), published twice a year by the Center for the Advancement of Energy Markets (CAEM) shows Texas, Maine, and New York are making the most measurable strides in promoting sustainable competition among electricity providers, as customers throughout Pennsylvania retreat to their default providers due to increasing wholesale prices. The RED Index, which is the only known tool that objectively ranks states by 22 attributes on how they are restructuring their power markets, today released the U.S. rankings for all 50 states and the District of Columbia, in a 187 page report. Key results included: 1. Pennsylvania 66 2. Texas 65 3. New York 64 4. Maine 62 17. California 34 ""These numbers underscore the importance of building a healthy foundation on which electric competition can grow,"" said Ken Malloy, CEO of the Center. ""While California's crisis has brought a lot of positive attention to Pennsylvania's model, many customers in the Keystone State are returning to their original utility suppliers. It underscores how important it is to put the right fundamentals in place if consumers and suppliers are to benefit over the long haul,"" Malloy said. In rankings that included all of North America, the province of Alberta actually would rank above all the states with a score of 68. The mid-year RED Index also found that 62% of states expressing an opinion indicated that their commission is not ""less likely to take action on energy restructuring as a result of the California crisis."" CAEM is an independent, nonprofit, think tank based in Washington, DC whose mission is to promote an effective transition from the monopoly to the competitive model of regulation. For information about obtaining a copy of the RED Index, go to www.caem.org. For more information, please contact: Nancy Etkin at 703-532-6887 or netkin@caem.org If you do not wish to receive announcements from CAEM, please put ""remove"" in the subject line in a reply to this email. 477 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: directions for June 21-22; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: VKaminski@aol.com@ENRON Sent: Monday, June 18, 2001 11:04 PM To: vkamins@enron.com Subject: Fwd: directions for June 21-22 Return-path: <VKaminski@aol.com> From: VKaminski@aol.com Full-name: VKaminski Message-ID: Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 01:01:46 EDT Subject: Fwd: directions for June 21-22 To: VKaminski@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10519 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-Path: <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com> Received: from rly-yc03.mx.aol.com (rly-yc03.mail.aol.com [172.18.149.35]) by air-yc03.mail.aol.com (v78_r3.8) with ESMTP; Fri, 15 Jun 2001 12:13:10 -0400 Received: from postmaster.enron.com (outbound5.enron.com [192.152.140.9]) by rly-yc03.mx.aol.com (v78_r3.8) with ESMTP; Fri, 15 Jun 2001 12:12:52 -0400 Received: from mailman.enron.com (mailman.enron.com [192.168.189.66]) by postmaster.enron.com with ESMTP id f5FGCn616777 for <vkaminski@aol.com>; Fri, 15 Jun 2001 11:12:49 -0500 (CDT) Received: from corp.enron.com ([192.168.110.110]) by mailman.enron.com (8.10.1/8.10.1/corp-1.06) with ESMTP id f5FGCmb07042 for <vkaminski@aol.com>; Fri, 15 Jun 2001 11:12:48 -0500 (CDT) Received: from nahou-mscnx04p.corp.enron.com (unverified) by corp.enron.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.1) with SMTP id for <vkaminski@aol.com>; Fri, 15 Jun 2001 11:12:48 -0500 Received: from nahou-msmbx03v.corp.enron.com ([192.168.110.41]) by nahou-mscnx04p.corp.enron.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.1600); Fri, 15 Jun 2001 11:12:47 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.4418.65 content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: RE: directions for June 21-22 Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 11:10:44 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=""iso-8859-1"" Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: directions for June 21-22 Thread-Index: From: ""Kaminski, Vince J"" <Vince.J.Kaminski@ENRON.com> To: ""Hill Huntington <hillh@stanford.edu>@ENRON"" Cc: <vkaminski@aol.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Jun 2001 16:12:47.0543 (UTC) FILETIME=[048AC470:01C0F5B6] X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) Hill, Thanks for the invitation to serve as a Chairman of one of the sessions. Unfortunately, I may be receiving frequent calls from the office that might interfere with my duties. See you next week. Vince > -----Original Message----- > From: Hill Huntington <hillh@stanford.edu>@ENRON > > ENRON@ENRON.com] > Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 6:11 PM > To: conference:;@ENRON; mansur@econ.Berkeley.EDU; bjscott@aep.com; > cholmes@utilicorp.com; jwcade@tva.gov; ddurack@cinergy.com; > JHughes@epri.com; > effarrow@stanford.edu; harris@gbn.com; kamat@ieor.berkeley.edu; > pmeagher@epri.com; sparks@mills.edu; rentrike@epri.com; > Subject: directions for June 21-22 > > If you have not yet registered for the June 21-22 conference, please > do so > to help our planning and to obtain contact information for you. > > I want to remind you that recommended conference attire is business > casual. > > If you do not have a Stanford parking permit (either by mail or at > your > hotel), please drive to the conference facility, park, and obtain one > at > the meeting room. Detailed directions can be found on the website but > here > is a summary from Highway 101 North & South: > > Take the Embarcadero Road exit west toward Stanford. At El > Camino > Real, Embarcadero turns into Galvez Road as it enters the > university. > Stay > in the left lane and continue toward the center of campus. At > the > four-way > stop, turn right onto Campus Drive. Take first left (Lasuen > Street) > and drive > to the end and park. Conference site is at this building. If > you do > not yet have > a parking permit, we will give you one there. > > I look forward to a productive and interesting meeting. > Hill > > > > > Hillard G. Huntington > EMF - an international forum on > energy and environmental markets Voice: (650) 723-1050 > 408 Terman Center Fax: (650) 725-5362 > Stanford University Email: hillh@stanford.edu > Stanford, CA 94305-4026 > > EMF Website: > [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Liberalisation of Italy's Energy Markets; [EMail-Body]= Any interest? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/21/2000 03:13 PM --------------------------- Marcus Mclaughlin <mmclaughlin@thecwcgroup.com> on 08/21/2000 11:47:21 AM To: ""'skean@enron.com'"" <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: Liberalisation of Italy's Energy Markets > Dear Mr. Kean, > > Following a telephone conversation with Jeffrey Skilling's office earlier, > I have pleasure in forwarding you a copy of the updated programme and a > priority booking form. Liberalisation of Italy's Energy Markets' promises > to be vital for anyone affiliated with Italian Energy and will be covering > key topics in response to the recent deregulation of the electricity and > natural gas markets in Italy. The main issues to be discussed include: > > * From state monopoly to open market: the state role in the new market > * Opportunities for international companies in the deregulated gas > markets > * European Union directives and cross-border regulations > * The changing gas market: supply and demand > * Convergence of gas and power > > (Please see the attached programme and priority booking form for more > information). > > If for some reason you are unable to attend, I'd be extremely grateful if > you could forward this on to anyone at Enron who you feel may find this of > interest. I look forward to hearing from you in the near future and > sincerely hope that your company will be participating in some shape or > form. > > In the meantime, please put 23rd/24th October in your diary and if you > have any questions at all, please don't hesitate to call me on +44 (0)20 > 7704 6521. > > Regards, > > Marcus Mack > > > <<WOP Fax1.doc>> <<draft prog 01.08 b.doc>> > Marcus McLaughlin > Sales Executive > The CWC Group > BDC - 52 Upper Street > London N1OQH > Tel: + 44 (0)20 7704 6276 > Fax: + 44 (0)20 7704 8440 > > > Website: http://www.thecwcgroup.com/ > - WOP Fax1.doc - draft prog 01.08 b.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call
 Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and
 Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted; [EMail-Body]= FYI, Attached is memo I prepared for Jim and Rick on the PNW refund case. -----Original Message----- From: Alvarez, Ray Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 7:22 AM To: Comnes, Alan; Walton, Steve; Mara, Susan; Lawner, Leslie; Cantrell, Rebecca W.; Fulton, Donna; Dasovich, Jeff; Nicolay, Christi L.; Steffes, James D.; 'jalexander@gibbs-bruns.com'; Allen, Phillip K.; Noske, Linda J.; Perrino, Dave; Black, Don; Frank, Robert; Miller, Stephanie; Tycholiz, Barry; Novosel, Sarah; Thome, Jennifer; Hall, Steve C. (Legal); Lindberg, Susan Subject: RE: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted [Alvarez, Ray] I will be unable to host the call this morning since I must attend a hearing in the CA refund proceeding. Please proceed with the call in my absence. Thanks! Ray PLEASE MARK YOUR CALENDAR Date: Every Thursday Time: 7:30 am Pacific, 9:30 am Central, and 10:30 am Eastern time Number: 1-888-271-0949 Host Code: 661877 (for Ray only) Participant Code: 936022 (for everyone else) The table of the on-going FERC issues and proceedings is available to all team members on the O drive. Please feel free to revise/add to/ update this table as appropriate. Proposed agenda for today : ISO settlement redesign and imbalance energy agreement FERC sponsored reliability meeting at CAISO offices CA and PAC NW refund proceeding status Please feel free to communicate any additional agenda items to the group . [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential - PAA - HW & TD; [EMail-Body]= Please accept the attached Personal Achievement Award request for Harry Woodson and Tangie Dykes. I have included both of them on the same request form since their recognition is for their contributions toward the ONEOK arbitration project. If you have any questions, please let me know. Rick [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Security Assessment Report; [EMail-Body]= I appreciate you pressing this issue. You should both be aware that Unocal(?) has been sued by the families of four employees who were shot in Pakistan a couple of years ago. Their claim is that the company did not provide adequate security and ignored official warnings of trouble in the region. To: Gabriel cc: David Frank Shawn Elaine Bill Donovan/EPSC/HOU/ECT@ECT, Melinda Winkler@ECT, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Re: Security Assessment Report Gabriel et al: Looks like the risks to Enron travelers to (and employees in) Colombia have increased. This is another indication that a 'travel policy' for travelers to Colombia should be in effect. What happened to the one we were discussing earlier? The steps outlined there would go a long way in improving the security of our travelers. Control Risks' report discusses responses to the media - be sure you have the approval of Enron's media people before making any response. The report also recommends suspending bidding on new projects - probably not viable advice, but reinforces the importance that additional security measures be built into all new projects from day one. Now that our name is in front of the Colombian public, we could see retaliation for various acts, not all of which we have control over. Recent US Government actions such as extraditing criminals to the US for trial and training Colombian anti-drug troops have done little to endear American businesses to the Colombian public, who see such actions as interfering with Colombia's right to govern themselves. These actions have significantly raised the risk of all American companies and their employees in Colombia. A meeting I had about two years ago with David Beddow of Control Risks in Bogota indicated that we could see some changes in the methods of attack in urban areas by FARC/ELN. With an elevated risk level, we should begin thinking about these threats. FARC seldom uses the car bomb method of attack because it generates little interest among the domestic or international media. FARC plans on using letter bombs mailed to select targets, i.e., head of an American-owned corporation who may have an office in Bogota. This method will generate headlines in the press and generate a fear of FARC among businessmen who may be targets. Control Risks' reported timetable for this change in FARC's tactics was to be three to five years, but now that our risk is higher, the timetable may well be moved up. On a related note - did you employ the security person we recommended? Please let me know how I can help you. Regards, Mike Hicks Gabriel 12/05/99 08:15 PM To: David Frank Shawn cc: Michael Hicks@ECT, Elaine Subject: Security Assessment Report FYI please find attached the ""Security Assessment Report "" carried out by Control Risk . Please let me have your feed back .GSS ---------------------- Forwarded by Gabriel on 12/05/99 08:24 PM --------------------------- Mark Carlson <MDCarlson@compuserve.com> on 12/03/99 12:17:03 PM To: Gabriel cc: Subject: Security Assessment Report Gabriel, Please find attached Control Risks (Bogota) initial Security/Risk Assessment of the issues/situation we discussed on Friday, November 26th. I've also included our Risk Assessment Matrix that summarizes the issues we've reviewed as part of our analysis. Once you've had the opportunity to review the attached documents we can further address the steps we discussed at breaKfast concerning Control Risks (Bogota) working more closely with Enron Colombia and our office dedicating on-call resources to suppport you in Colombia. Regards, Mark MD Carlson Deputy General Manager Control Risks Group Bogota, Colombia - Enron.doc - Enron Risk Assessment Matrix.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Legislative Status Report Week Ending 4/20; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 04/20/2001 05:43 PM ----- =09""Julee Malinowski-Ball"" <jmball@ns.net> =0904/20/2001 05:33 PM =09Please respond to ""Julee Malinowski-Ball"" =09=09=20 =09=09 To: ""Jan Smutny Jones"" <smutny@iepa.com>, ""Steven Kelley"" <steven@ie= pa.com>,=20 ""Katie Kaplan"" <kaplan@iepa.com> =09=09 cc: ""William Hall"" <wfhall2@duke-energy.com>, ""Tony Wetzel""=20 <twetzel@thermoecotek.com>, ""Tandy McMannes"" <mcmannes@aol.com>, ""Sue Mara""= =20 <smara@enron.com>, ""Steve Ponder"" <steve_ponder@fpl.com>, ""Steve Iliff""=20 <siliff@riobravo-gm.com>, ""Stephanie Newell""=20 ""Scott Sadler""=20 <sadlersa@earthlink.net>, ""Roger Pelote"" ""Richard Hyde"" <rwhyde@duke-energy.com>, ""Randy Hickok""=20 <rjhickok@duke-energy.com>, ""Rachel King"" <rachel.king@elpaso.com>, ""Paula= =20 Soos"" ""Nam Nguyen"" <nam.nguyen@powersrc.com>= ,=20 ""Marty McFadden"" ""Lynn Lednicky""=20 <lale@dynegy.com>, ""Larrea, John"" <John.g.Larrea@williams.com>, ""kent=20 Palmerton"" ""Ken Hoffman""=20 ""Kate Castillo"" <ccastillo@riobravo-gm.com>= ,=20 ""Kassandra Gough"" <kgough@calpine.com>, ""Jonathan Weisgall""=20 <jweisgall@aol.com>, ""John Stout"" ""Joe=20 Ronan"" <joer@calpine.com>, ""Joe Greco"" <jgreco@caithnessenergy.com>, ""Jim= =20 Willey"" <elliottsa@earthlink.net>, ""Jeff Dasovich"" <Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com= >,=20 ""Jack Pigott"" <jackp@calpine.com>, ""Jack Hawks"" <jack.hawks@gen.pge.com>,= =20 ""Hap Boyd"" <rboyd@enron.com>, ""Greg Blue"" <gtbl@dynegy.com>, ""Frazier=20 Blaylock"" <frayblay@aol.com>, ""Frank DeRosa""=20 ""Eric Eisenman""=20 <eric.eisenman@gen.pge.com>, ""Eileen Koch"" <eileenk@calpine.com>, ""Ed Tomeo= ""=20 <ed.tomeo@uaecorp.com>, ""Duane Nelson"" <dnelsen@msn.com>, ""Doug Fernley""=20 <fernley.doug@epenergy.com>, ""Dean Gosselin"" <dean_gosselin@fpl.com>, ""Davi= d=20 Parquet"" <dparque@ect.enron.com>, ""Curtis Kebler""=20 ""Curt Hatton"" <Curt.Hatton@gen.pge.com= >,=20 ""Craig Chancellor"" <craigc@calpine.com>, ""Cody Carter""=20 <cody.carter@williams.com>, ""Carolyn Baker"" <cabaker@duke-energy.com>, ""Bob= =20 Gates"" <bob.gates@enron.com>, ""Bob Escalante"" =20 ""Bob Ellery"" <bellery@spi-ind.com>, ""Bill Woods"" <billw@calpine.com>, ""Bill= =20 Carlson"" ""Alex Sugaoka""=20 <alex.sugaoka@UAECORP.COM>, ""Bob Szymanski"" ,=20 ""Chris Ellison"" <CTE@eslawfirm.com>, ""Andy Brown"" <ABB@eslawfirm.com>, ""Dou= g=20 Kerner"" <dkk@eslawfirm.com>, ""Jean Munoz"" <jmunoz@mcnallytemple.com> =09=09 Subject: Legislative Status Report Week Ending 4/20 Date: 4/20/01 To: Jan Smutny-Jones, Steven Kelly, Katie Kaplan Cc: IEP Board of Directors From: Julee Malinowski-Ball, Edson + Modisette RE: Legislative Status Report Week Ending 4/20 RECENT EVENTS: -- IEP with the help of Chris Ellison has been at the negotiating table mos= t of the week dealing with the most recent amendments to SB 28x. SB 28x (Sher/Battin) makes various changes to the siting process including many IEP-sponsored proposals. As you will recall, two new provisions were added to the bill at the last minute before going to the Assembly Floor dealing with both retrofit schedules and environmental dispatch of generating facilities. Per the direction from IEP member companies, IEP has decided not to negotiate on the environmental dispatch issue. If the provision remained in the bill, IEP would continue to push the Republicans to hold their opposed position. We were, however, given the authority to negotiate on the retrofit issue as long as we were only talking about facilities that already have retrofit requirements. I will be faxing out the agreed upon language which in essence says the ARB shall set a schedule for the completion of any mandated retrofits. It does not expand the authority of the air districts and ARB to mandate retrofits under existing law. The schedule would require completion of the retrofits by July 1, 2004 or such later date as the ISO determines is necessary to maintain reliability. With these amendments, including some clean-up language, SB 28x will be voted-on on the Assembly floor on Monday and go to the Senate for concurrence on Tuesday. The final version will include the following IEP-sponsored proposals: ? Conforming the timing of offsets for power plants to Clean Air Act requirements ? Substituting CEQA-style hearings for the trial-like proceedings of the CE= C ? Streamlining the permit process for the modernization of existing power plant sites ? Giving consideration to the positive environmental impacts of a proposed project. ? Improving the timeliness and coordination of state and local agency review. ? Extending the current deadlines for the expedited review process established in AB 970. Since SB 28x is only a first step in making changes to the siting process, IEP member should now be thinking about what is next. IEP proposals still on the table include: ? Permitting local agencies to make zoning changes or other decisions for power plants contingent upon CEC CEQA Compliance ? Giving deference to other state and regional agencies ? Easing the threshold for override of local land use requirements. ? Making the ISO responsible for determining interconnection requirements -- Bad news on the =01&California First=018 issue quickly followed the good= news. The CEC staff analysis which said the State can't require builders of new power plants to sell electricity here, even as a trade-off for expedited permitting, was countered by another staff analysis that says the state can= . Both documents cannot be obtained due to attorney-client privilege. This issue is coming to a head next week with a decision pending by the CEC to include a California First clause on the approval of an expedited AES power plant project. AB 60x (Hertzberg), which ties to the siting process the requirement that a developer enter into a contract to sell power to specified California entities, is still poised to be heard in the Senate Energy committee. IEP members company lobbyist should continue to lobby against this measure regardless of the CEC=01,s decision on AES, although our arguments are definitely strengthened if the addition of the clause at the CEC is denied. -- IEP has finalized negotiations with Senator Burton=01,s office on amendm= ents attempting to solve our problem with the eminent domain provision in SB 6x (Burton), which is the State Power Authority measure. Attached is a copy o= f the bill in PDF form. The agreed upon language, which clarifies that the Authority=01,s purpose is to supplement existing generation activities, can= be found on pages 6-7 (Section 3310), 13 (Section 3341.1) and 16-17 (Section3352). Considering the inflammatory remarks made by Senator Burton in the press lately regarding seizing generation assets, this was most likely the best we could get. -- The first of Senator Dunn=01,s hearings with the Senate Select Committee= to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Market occurred this week. This week and next week=01,s topics will be to go over previous investigati= ons into market power. The committee heard or will be hearing testimony from: Frank Wolak, Chairman Market Surveillance Committee, CAISO; Eric Hildebrandt, Manager Market Monitoring, CAISO; and, Elaine Howle, State Auditor. -- The Assembly Electricity Oversight Subcommittee met this week and focused on the issue of natural gas collusion. Testifying before the committee were representatives from Dynegy and El Paso, commenting on the rise of natural gas prices and whether illegal market manipulation and collusion occurred. The subcommittee plans on putting together a package o= f bills related to natural gas issues, which would be the culmination of the committee=01,s hearings over the last two months. This package will be up = for consideration first by the whole special Assembly Energy committee. -- Governor Davis came out this week supporting the construction of the Calpine Metcalf Energy Center, the 600-megawatt power plant proposed for th= e San Jose region. The Governor urged the CEC to approve the plant siting so that construction can begin. -- Two long-term contracting bills are scheduled for hearings next week. IEP counsel is currently reviewing AB 57 (Wright) and SB 997 (Morrow) and will comment on their provisions as soon as possible. -- Attached is the most recent legislative tracking reports, both the special session and regular session. Please let me know if you need copies of any of these bills. UPCOMING EVENTS: MONDAY, April 23rd Assembly Utilities and Commerce Committee AB 57 (Wright) =01) long-term contracting reasonableness review TUESDAY, April 24th Senate Energy Committee SB 997 (Morrow) =01) long-term contracting reasonableness review WEDNESDAY, April 25th Assembly Appropriations Committee AB 62x (Cohn) =01) California First AB 63x (Florez) =01) Sale of Kern Power Plant THURSDAY, April 26th Select Committee to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Market Informational hearing on the overview of investigations, studies, and reports regarding the energy crisis. MONDAY, April 30th Senate Appropriations Committee SB 1x (Soto) =01) excess profits tax Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee AB 128x (Corbett) =01) excess profits tax ON THE ASSEMBLY FLOOR SB 6x (Burton) =01) State Power Authority SB 28x (Sher/Battin) =01) siting --end-- Julee Malinowski-Ball Senior Associate Edson + Modisette 916-552-7070 FAX-552-7075 jmball@ns.net - 2001 Tracking Report.doc - 2001 Tracking Report.special session.doc - [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Report on POWER Conference; [EMail-Body]= I attended the U.C. Berkeley POWER (Program on Workable Energy Regulation) Conference on March 16. Here is a brief report on the relevant parts. Notably, the Lieff, Cabreser duo of Bill Bernstein and Barry Himmelstein were there, listening carefully. The program consisted of the presentation of 8 economic studies, followed by comments from two discussants, followed by audience questions/comments. The following is a list of the papers and the discussants who presented with slides, taken from the website of the U.C. Energy Institute, You can click on this to see the slides, in PDF format. The papers in green are not particularly relevant for our purposes, and I won't say more about them beyond the note in brackets. The presenter's name is in bold. ""Bidding Asymmetries in Multi-Unit Auctions: Implications of Bid Function Equilibria in the British Spot Market for Electricity"" by Greg Crawford, Duke University, Joe Crespo, NERA, and Helen Tauchen, University of North Carolina ""Pricing and Firm Conduct in California's Deregulated Electricity Market"" by Steve Puller, UC Berkeley Discussion by Anjali Sheffrin, California Independent System Operator ""Identification and Estimation of Cost Functions Using Observed Bid Data: An Application to Electricity Markets"" by Frank Wolak, Stanford University [A paper about economic ""tools"" to study power markets.] ""Forward Contracts and the Curse of Market Power"" by Jeffrey Lien , University of Maryland ""The Impact of Retail Rate Deregulation on Electricity Consumption in San Diego"" by James Bushnell and Erin Mansur, UC Berkeley [This looks at whether consumption declined with price increases. Not much.] ""Consumption and Home Energy Costs: How Prevalent is the 'Heat or Eat' Decision?"" by Julie Berry Cullen, University of Michigan, Leora Friedberg, University of Virginia, and Catherin Wolfram, UC Berkeley [A macro study on how consumers change overall spending patterns when they have to shell out more $$ for power.] ""A Quantitative Analysis of Pricing Behavior in California's Wholesale Electricity Market During Summer 2000"" by Paul Joskow, MIT, and Edward Kahn, Analysis Group ""Electricity Restructuring and the Cost of Pollution Reduction"" by Dallas Burtraw, Karen Palmer, Ranjit Bharvirkar, and Anthony Paul, Resources for the Future Before I discuss the specific papers and presenters, one big picture point needs to be made. There was an unchallenged consensus at this conference that the generators have exercised market power to the tune of billions of dollars. The focus was on how and how much, not whether. The good news is that I heard no evidence supporting any collusion theory; the thought was that generators are making independent output and pricing decisions knowing they could influence the market price given the auction rules and the completely inelastic demand. On the other hand, I would have to say that the economic work on the tacit collusion hypothesis in incomplete at best. The bad news is that the scale of potential overcharges is pretty staggering -- >$5 billion. The plaintiffs will be able to put together quite a damage study. Crespo, Bidding Asymmetries in UK: This is a marginally relevant paper examining whether bidders in the UK electricity auction markets behaved in a leader-follower mode, i.e., asymmetrically. Crespo's model shows that in a uniform price-setting auction with clearing price rules, a price setter will emerge and take all prices above marginal cost. Thus, above marginal cost pricing does not require coordination. Crespo (from NERA) appeared knowledgeable, but is not an inspiring speaker. His paper also got roughed up a bit in the audience questioning segment. Puller, Pricing and Firm Conduct in California's Deregulated Electricity Market: This is a very relevant paper, as it tries to determine whether market power (presumably) exercised in California was static or dynamic, meaning the product of individual firm decisionmaking (static) or tacit collusion (dynamic). The period studied was 4/98 to 12/99. Puller found evidence of static market power consistent with so-called ""Cournot pricing."" This theory posits that in an oligopoly firms will take their rivals' observed price/output decisions as a given and decide how to maximize profitability given that behavior. He then tried to determine whether any dynamic games were occurring, meaning a game where firms recognize their interdependence and try to follow a ""supergame trigger strategy"" in which firms try to induce favorable responses from rivals. It's quite complicated how he goes about this, but fundamentally he tries to correlate observed output decisions with how a firm at that time might have expected a change in its behavior to affect its future share of the market. With this methodology, Puller finds what he called ""weak evidence"" of forward-looking dynamic pricing for a brief time in 1998, but not otherwise. My impression was that the evidence for 1998 was very weak, and the logic used to arrive at this conclusion was also weak. Puller then went at this a second time with a theory that attempts to determine what a firm's ""supply function"" would look like if it was exercising static and dynamic market power, and then comparing this to an estimate of that firm's actual supply function. I found this even more speculative than the first theory. Nonetheless, the results are basically the same: evidence of static, but not dynamic market power. Puller took a lot of heat for the methodology of this paper during the questioning segment. He's not a dynamic speaker and does not appear to me to be a strong expert candidate. Anjali Sheffrin's commentary was very important. She is the Director of Market Analysis for CAISO. After general comments on Crespo and Puller, she launched in to a discussion of whether their models explained the California experience. This turned out to be a preview of the CAISO FERC filing of last week, in which they allege $5.5 billion in market power-related overcharges from May 200 to Feb. 2001. That filing and Sheffrin's report follow. They are essential reading. Sheffrin maintains that it was the absence of imports during this period that left the market power of the California generators unchecked. This permitted the in-state generators to engage in either economic or physical withholding of power. (Economic withholding is bidding a higher-than-needed supply curve; physical withholding is cutting output at the plant.) Her study was intended to (1) Identify individual firms engaging in market power activity, and (2) Analyze how each firms' actions set market clearing prices. She utilized full bidding data in CA ISO real time market for each hour between May and Nov 2000, defined and categorized bidding patterns and identified economic or physical withholding, and then calculated bid-cost mark-up and a monopoly rent. She found what she claimed was strong evidence of both types of withholding, but that economic withholding is the dominant bidding pattern used by the five large California generators. While Sheffrin's study does not name names, it claims that ""most of the five in-state suppliers and many of the [16] large importers displayed bidding patterns which were consistent with the exercise of market power."" Bernstein and Himmelstein were positively gleeful during this presentation. On the question of collusion, Sheffrin's study is not terribly illuminating. She maintains that ""the dominant bidding pattern is consistent with two characteristics of a supply function equilibrium model of oligopolist pricing."" I take that to mean Cournot, which is a static, non-collusive model. However, when you read her study, you'll see the picture is not entirely clear. Lien, The Curse of Market Power: This is only marginally relevant for us, as its thesis is that forward-looking supply contracts are better for both producers and society. Everyone seemed to agree -- and were confused why we needed a paper to prove it. Lien (U. Md.) is young and not expert material. Joskow and Kahn: (paper); (Kahn's slides). I'm sure many of you have already read this; everyone should. Prepared for SoCal Edison, it contends that 4 in-state generators (Reliant, Dynegy, AES/Williams, and Southern/Mirant) exercised market power by withholding capacity during the summer or 2000. J&K use publicly available data on loads, market prices and generation to (a) quantify combined effects of ""market fundamentals"" on market prices, (b) calculate ""price gap"" (difference between actual prices and ""competitive"" market benchmarks), (c) account for quantify effects of ISO's ancillary services requirements and forced outages, and then (d) calculate the ""output gap"" for high priced hours, meaning the difference between observed and maximum profitable levels of generation. They conclude that prices were far in excess of the competitive benchmark and that the 4 in-state generators could have produced more power at competitive prices but chose not to. Hence, market power was exercised. Kahn, the Analysis Group economist who presented, is a very colorful and rather undisciplined advocate of his position. He threw around allegations of conspiracy rather casually, but mostly to be funny. I couldn't tell whether he believed his study proved that; I don't think it even speaks to it. But Bernstein and Himmelstein applauded him when he finished, grinning ear to ear. Severin Borenstein, UC Berkeley and the conference director, was supposed to comment on J&K, but hardly did. He said that the generators would have been stupid not to exercise market power given the supply/demand conditions and the market rules, and argued that permitting long term contracts and requiring real-time residential pricing were the solutions to all of this. Borenstein was the best expert material I saw at this conference, and the fact he took a pass on the details of the J&K paper is puzzling to me. It made me wonder whether he already has a horse in this race, or perhaps is trying to ""stay above it all."" Hope this is useful. Regards, Dan Daniel M. Wall Latham & Watkins 505 Montgomery Street, Suite 1900 San Francisco, CA 94111-2562 Direct: (415) 395-8240 Main: (415) 391-0600 Fax: (415) 395-8095 dan.wall@lw.com This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or attorney work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. - 2001032214541122276.pdf.pdf - 2001032214585222924.pdf.pdf [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Out of the office; [EMail-Body]= Gretchen Bates/Mitchell Rosen (shared Marketing) 800-989-4427 Jim Coffey PEx use by marketers(312)407-7835 Move Hebert meeting from 15th [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Stand-alone Reliability Legislation; [EMail-Body]= I believe it is timely to discuss this again and I agree with Cynthia that stand alone legislation does nothing to address the essential transmission structural issues. I am open minded on the issue if someone can make a compelling case to support stand alone legislation, BUT my gut reaction is that it would be a serious mistake. Congress would happily put off dealing with this issue for years if it passes reliability only legislation. I think the legislation itself makes little or no progress on our issues and may even set us back on making progress at FERC and in other fora. I realize that if this gets going it may be hard to stop, but it would be such a cynically ineffective approach to the real reliability problems that we should help whomever we can to put a stop to it. If it gets through committee, I have no confidence in this Congress to actually amend it into something better and broader, so, again, I have difficulty seeing why we should go that route. I look forward to the discussion. Cynthia Sandherr@ENRON 07/17/2000 02:20 PM To: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON I cc: Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, dwatkiss@bracepatt.com, cingebretson@bracepatt.com, Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@ENRON, ed@buckham.com, Jeff Brown/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Re: Stand-alone Reliability Legislation Joe: thanks. Allison is arranging a brief (thirty minutes) Conference Call for sometime tomorrow so we can assure that we are all on the same page on this issue. Although we had supported the policy agreement, we had been on record to oppose for political reasons the bill's movement on a stand-alone basis since policing the grid does nothing to address the essential transmission structural changes the market is crying to have addressed in order to provide reliability. However, given Jeff Brown's efforts, the political need for inoculation and other political developments, it is timely to once again discuss Enron's position. I look forward to our call sometime tomorrow. Cynthia Joe Hartsoe 07/17/2000 03:09 PM To: Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Stand-alone Reliability Legislation FYI. Thoughts? JOE ---------------------- Forwarded by Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron on 07/17/2000 03:01 PM --------------------------- janderson <janderson@elcon.org> on 07/17/2000 12:34:47 PM To: jhartso@enron.com cc: myacker@elcon.org, dwatkiss@bracepatt.com Subject: Stand-alone Reliability Legislation Joe, It is my understanding that you were on the call for a short time this morning of the group dealing with reliability language. The discussion covered the chances of stand-alone reliability legislation. Where do you stand on this issue? As you are aware, ELCON has been opposed to any kind of stand-alone legislation -- including reliability. At first, we were not strongly opposed to the stand-alone reliability piece. However, we have become more opposed as time has passed and we have seen how the vertically-integrated recalcitrant utilities have been able dominate NERC and stifle any progressive market-oriented movement. We think things would be as bad -- if not worse -- with the stand-alone creation of NAERO. The establishment of NAERO -- alone -- would not be good for the development of markets. Given this, we are concerned about how things are going. However, we aren't doing much on our own since we would be very ineffective. We are open to ideas. John [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Black Mesa Pipeline Co; [EMail-Body]= fyi ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 12/17/99 08:32 AM --------------------------- Gary Fitch@ENRON on 12/16/99 09:55:24 AM To: Fred Rimington/NPNG/Enron@ENRON cc: Robert Hill/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Larry DeRoin/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Dave Rhodes/NPNG/Enron@ENRON (bcc: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES) Subject: Black Mesa Pipeline Co Cessna TU206G Pipeline Patrol Aircraft Fred, below is the report from my chief of Maintenance regarding the Black Mesa aircraft. In a nut shell, after reviewing this information, I feel it would be appropriate to contract for this service. The liabilities associated with it are not worth it when you consider it can be done, probably less than you are paying now, by a local provider and receive the same results. We would be more than happy to provide you with an approximate value for the aircraft and get you in touch with a broker to sell the TU206G. If you plan on continuing this operation with the Mesa owned aircraft, I suggest you put the responsibility in the hands of an aviation contractor who will be ultimately responsible to Mesa, not only with the upkeep of the aircraft, services/reports desired on patrol, but also the contracting of flight crews. If you desire, we will locate a contractor in Arizona to review the operation. I would expect the cost not to exceed $2,000-$3,000 at the most. Please call if you have any other questions or if you desire any additional help. ---------------------- Forwarded by Gary Fitch/HR/Corp/Enron on 12/16/99 09:12 AM --------------------------- Keith Jones 12/16/99 08:58 AM To: Gary Fitch/HR/Corp/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Black Mesa Pipeline Co Cessna TU206G Pipeline Patrol Aircraft Gary, I spoke with a Mr. Sil Perla, pipeline patrol manager for Black Mesa Pipeline Co., Tele 520-774-5076. As follows: Aircraft: 1977 Cessna TU206G ""Turbo Stationaire"" Six place single engine high wing aircraft Hours: ACTT 3270 Engine Time since new 350 hrs PropTime since overhaul 1725.0 hrs (O/H date unknown) Insp Program: 50/100 hr inspections and Annual Inspections. Approximately two 100 hr inspections per year average. Last Annual inspection completed July 1999. 1) No maintenance performed ""in-house"". All maintenance performed at Arizona Aircraftsman Inc., Presscott, Arizona. This facility is a Certified Repair Sation and a Cessna factory authorized service center. 2) Maintenance is scheduled by the pilots. Mr. Perla doesn't appear to get envolved in the scheduling of maintenance. I spoke with Mr. John Aderholt at Arizona Aircraftsman, Inc. and he said that the pilots schedule and deliver the aircraft for maintenance. I asked how AD's and SB's were tracked and he seemed to feel that they weren't. The only time AD's/SB's were checked was when the aircraft was in the maintenance facility. Mr. Perla said he was not familiar with Airworthiness Directives (AD's) and more or less confirmed this. Mr. AderholtArizona Aircraftsman said the aircraft was in very good condition and that it was a low time aircraft. He said they did very thorough inspections and that Black Mesa usually didn't have a problem with any needed repairs. 3) The aircraft is used twice a month and flies a 546 mile trip at 300 feet above ground level, VFR day only. The aircraft averages 20 - 40 hours per month. Mr. Aderholt mentioned that the aircraft had flown 50 hours since the Annual inspection in July this year. They occasionally will have a passenger but he said this is rare. If someone wants to fly along the patrol the aircraft will stop and drop someone off at a plant, etc., but again this is rare. 4) He uses ""rental pilots"" for the patrols. Currently he only has two he uses. One has over 2000 multi/single time and the other has over 23000 hours in a little of everything. The main ""go-to"" pilot is a gentleman named Rick Olsen; he's the 2000 + hr guy. Mr. Perla said they both qualify for insurance purposes. 5) The pilots will review the maintenance logs for currency and accuracy and the repair invoices for discrepancies and action taken. Mr. Perla didn't seem to get envolved in this. I further confirmed this through Arizona Aircraftsman; that Mr. Perla definately does not get envolved in the maintenance of the aircraft. He leaves it strictly to the pilots. There are only two repetative AD's on the airplane, both due each 100 hrs. Summary: Mr. Perla said he has been with Black Mesa for two or three years and that he was fairly new at this. My impression is that he doesn't get envolved with the particulars of aviation and therefore doesn't really have much input as far as the actual operation and maintenance of the aircraft is concerned. The aircraft itself is probably in very good condition and is a very reliable workhorse that can endure its fair share of rough usage. Although the aircraft is a simple and durable single engine aircraft; and its operation is relatively easy. I believe it would be prudent to conduct a thorough review of the aircraft and records. And establish a stable base of operations that is familiar with the legalities, and safe operation of a single engine aircraft. In my opinion it appears that no one is paying attention to the details! A few items in particular are: a) The prop overhaul date is unkown. The factory recommends an overhaul each five years. b) No one is responsible for AD's and SB's. Apparently they do not go to Mr. Perla, but to some other office. c) Other details like ELT battery dates, operation in accordance with FAR's etc. may not be monitered adequately. d) Mr. Perla mentioned that he is going to have some interior work and avionics upgrades next year. Assuming his limited knowledge of aviation, what assurances do we have of a legal and safe installation. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Invitation; [EMail-Body]= Deniese, Thanks for the invitation. I shall join you. Vince -----Original Message----- From: dph@swbell.net@ENRON Sent: Monday, July 02, 2001 4:35 PM To: vkamins@ect.enron.com Subject: Invitation Vince, Hope you can join us on the 11th...see attached. Regards, Deniese - Capp Coal Launch - Invitation from V. Viola2.doc << File: Capp Coal Launch - Invitation from V. Viola2.doc >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Starwood Draft; [EMail-Body]= A bit lengthy, but I think it looks fine. Peggy Mahoney@EES 08/30/2000 12:41 PM To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Paula Rieker/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cedric Burgher/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES, Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Kevin Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, NotesAdmin/EES@EES, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Bill Rapp/HOU/EES@EES, Rob Rice/HOU/EES@EES, Wendy Raleigh/HOU/EES@EES cc: Karen S Owens@ees@EES, Thomas E White/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Starwood Draft Attached is a draft of the Starwood press release with our initial changes in red. Please review and let me know your thoughts by end of day Thursday, Aug 31. It is clear that Starwood has several agendas with this release and, after talking with them, they would prefer not to cut any of their messages. Scheduled release date is Tuesday, Sept 5. Please feel free to call me to discuss. Also - I've attached a map of all their US owned, franchised and leased property locations. 87 of the properties are owned and there are approx. 400 total in the US. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Barton Subcommittee Passes Energy Bill Without Electricity
 Amendments; [EMail-Body]= Late tonight, the Barton Subcommittee passed an energy policy package (without any electricity provisions other than those related to conservation) on a bipartisan vote of 29-1. The subcommittee approved an amendment by Mrs. Wilson to conduct a national assessment and inventory of possible renewable energy projects. During consideration of the bill, several amendments of interest and concern to Enron were offered and withdrawn; they are likely to be offered when the full Energy and Commerce Committee meets to consider the package next Tuesday and Wednesday. The amendments in this category are: 1. Mr. Waxman has an amendment he called the ""blackout and price gouging prevention amendment"" that would require FERC to modify its June 19 price mitigation order within 15 days of enactment to impose cost-of-service based rates (with a rate of return of 15 percent) if an entity is found to be withholding power from the grid during an emergency. The cost-of-service rates would thereafter apply to all of the offending entity's sales in the Western U.S. Several of us were rounding up opponents to the amendment when it was clear he was going to offer it and before he decided to withdraw it until full committee. We will continue those efforts before the full committee vote. 2. Mr. Ganske has an amendment on net metering that he said would promote wind in Iowa and other renewables (he may wait until an electricity bill rather than full committee on this bill). 3. Mr. Shadegg has an amendment to exempt natural gas pipelines from the requirements of the National Registry of Historic Places. He said that currently this process holds up much needed pipeline expansions that are FERC approved. 4. Mr. Waxman has an amendment that would require the President to develop and implement a plan to achieve the greenhouse gas reductions called for in a UN agreement that President George Bush (""41"") agreed to in 1992 (reducing these emissions to 1990 levels). Chairman Barton indicated that the Subcommittee will take up an electric restructuring bill either later this month or early in September, depending on how long it takes to process this first energy package in the full committee and in the full House. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: 2001 Electric Market Forecasting Conference; [EMail-Body]= Lee, Thanks for your message. I am currently in London and shall contact you on my return to the States next week. I plan to attend your conference. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Amy A. Winter"" <amy@epis.com>@ENRON Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 12:30 AM To: Subject: 2001 Electric Market Forecasting Conference We hope to see you at this year's Electric Market Forecasting Conference. The purpose of this email is to recap the conference, give you the latest agenda, and to remind you of the approaching deadline for early registration. If you register by June 30th the early registration fee is only $399.00. I recommend that you reserve your room at Skamania Lodge as soon as possible. They go quickly. For more information see below and on the attachment. Or, go to our website at www.epis.com. The conference information is at We look forward to seeing you. Regards, Lee Barney Forecasting Challenges in Electricity Markets 2001 Electric Market Forecasting Conference Skamania Lodge, Washington ? September 12-14, 2001 [IMAGE] Today's electricity markets are more challenging to predict than ever. Discover the keys to managing risk in volatile energy markets. The conference venue is the beautiful Skamania Lodge in the scenic Columbia River Gorge--45 minutes East of Portland International Airport, Portland, Oregon. A mind expanding setting for an executive-and professional level exchange of information and strategies concerning North American energy markets. Navigating Today's Energy Markets The challenges of taming energy markets don't begin and end in California. Volatility and risk are present in every market region, forcing all participants to carefully examine the underlying factors and accurately assess their current and future market positions. For the 4th year, EPIS, Inc., developer of the AURORA? electric market model, has assembled a stimulating program of interest to any company exposed to energy market risks. This year's agenda includes a detailed look at the various energy trading regions in the U.S. and Canada - an exploration of market conditions and market dynamics. This year's conference will feature thoughtful exchanges on: Electric and Gas Markets - 2001 and Beyond U.S. Markets: Crisis in the West, Emerging Issues in the East and ERCOT Keys to U.S. Electric and Gas Forward Markets Issues in Canadian Markets Gas Hedging Strategies and Electric Markets Price and Volume Volatility in Turbulent Markets New Resources: When and Where to Develop? You'll hear from top-level speakers representing companies that have been there - Williams Energy Marketing, FPL Energy, NYMEX, ENRON, DTE Energy, Deutsche Bank and others. Plus there will be informative ""roll-up-your-sleeves"" sessions on applied forecasting techniques by Williams Energy Marketing, Pinnacle West, GenerSys, Southern California Edison. Register for Conference Register by sending the registration information on the attachment to EPIS by: Fax (503) 722-7130 MAIL 1800 Blankenship Rd., Suite 350, West Linn, OR 97068 Or register by phone at (503) 722-2023 x201. <<Agenda 2001 Electric Market Forecasting Conference.doc>> - ole0.bmp << File: ole0.bmp >> - Agenda 2001 Electric Market Forecasting Conference.doc << File: Agenda 2001 Electric Market Forecasting Conference.doc >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Enron Advertising; [EMail-Body]= Let's ask Jeff Hines(?), our opinion research guy, to put a few short questions together and send it out. We may also want to include a link so people can view the commercials again before answering. Also, I was talking with Beth Tilney today about our website (and the fact that every business unit now feels free to go do their own thing). We thought it would be a good idea to add this topic to the brand conference (perhaps as part of an existing segment). ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/02/2000 06:35 PM --------------------------- Mary Clark@ENRON 08/02/2000 05:49 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Re: Enron Advertising Steve, Notes has the capability to do a quick survey of employees. The beauty of doing it in Notes is that it is the body of the email message, so employees don't have to go somewhere else to participate. The response is much higher. In fact, Sarah and I have used it a couple of times this year and it was very effective. Susan Lopez of Corp. IT Houston is the contact (713-853-7947). Mary Steven J Kean@EES 08/02/2000 03:12 PM To: Mary Clark/Corp/Enron cc: Subject: Enron Advertising do we have a mechanism to survey employees? Can we do a ""scientific"" poll? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/02/2000 03:10 PM --------------------------- John Sherriff@ECT 08/02/2000 03:46 AM To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Enron Advertising Mark Thanks for the call a couple of weeks ago regarding our new ad campaign. The challenge as I understand it is that we have difficulty in quantifying the benefit and effectiveness of our ads. We can measure on a periodic basis what the CEO/CCO/CFO perception of Enron is on a periodic basis but this does not break down the impact of our PR efforts from an ad campaign. I understand this dilemma. But one thing that we could measure that is quite important to me is what our employees think about these ads. If all else fails these ads should make our employees proud to work for Enron - and this is something we should be able to measure on a consistent basis. I know you have an upcoming event in California where your organisation will talk about problems and challenges we have - so if you could consider this idea I would be very appreciative. And of course don't get to hooked on God's country while you are in Napa. Thanks! John [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Wimbledon update; [EMail-Body]= Yes, you are. Mark Palmer@ENRON 07/17/2000 09:32 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Wimbledon update I left Hannon a message that we PAID for the attention we got from Wimbledon. It came out of the advertising budget. We did Kevin a favor by trying to leverage our media budget to create new business for EBS. Am I looking at this the right way? Mark ---------------------- Forwarded by Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron on 07/17/2000 09:13 AM --------------------------- Kevin Hannon @ ENRON COMMUNICATIONS on 07/14/2000 04:36:19 PM To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Tod Lindholm/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Subject: Wimbledon update I appreciated Margaret's update here but I was looking for a bit more. Specifically I think we should determine a fair market value for the PR we received from the event overall and I would like to transfer pay that amount from Corp to EBS. I know that sounds a little agressive but if you think about it the analysts are very focused on EBS's streaming revenue, which has been tough to come by. Also it really is a net zero dollar amount to Enron at the end of the day but hopefully value creating to the stock price. Hope this is not a problem. ----- Forwarded by Kevin Hannon/Enron Communications on 07/14/00 04:22 PM ----- Margaret Allen@ENRON 07/12/00 09:53 AM To: Kevin Hannon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications cc: David Tagliarino/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Wimbledon update Hello Kevin, David Tagliarino mentioned that you were interested in capturing the overall exposure we received through the Wimbledon deal. I have summarized the main visibility we received. There were several more ""freebies"" in the end, but they are not accounted for in the following: We had a total of 40 thirty-second commercials that ran on NBC and TNT (the Turner Network). We also had 8-10 billboards which said ""This portion of Wimbledon was brought to you by Enron, a leading energy and broadband services company."" The broadcaster who announced the match also gave us plugs by saying, ""Watch this on the net at www.wimbledon.net, streamed by Enron."" There was a banner floating across the bottom of the page saying that as well. Additionally we received ad time and billboards on ESPN, CNNsi and several other networks. We had banners streaming on up to 10 websites, including www.msnbc.com, www.cnnsi.com and www.wimbledon.net. There was also a static banner on the Wimbledon Channel, no matter which site you watched it on (Wimbledon, CNNsi or MSNBC). All the banners took you to a jump page we created, located at www.enron.net/wimbledon. At Wimbledon we had 12 courtside seats and 24 grounds passes. I was also told that we had a small paid contract with FastTV.com to stream the archived site. We released a press release on our services with IBM, IMG, TWII and Wimbledon several days into the event; and EBS sent out an email to top clients/potential clients directing them to the site. Business Week is also releasing a profile on Enron in their upcoming eBiz section, which features the Wimbledon Club as a customer. Please let me know if you have any questions I can answer. Have a great day, Margaret [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California Power Crisis Update (No. 10); [EMail-Body]= We have been pulling together these weekly(sometimes more often) summaries for internal purposes. Would you find it helpful to be on the distribution list? Hope you are doing well. Look forward to touching base soon. ----- Forwarded by Suzanne on 03/28/2001 03:41 AM ----- Memorandum TO: Pru Sheppard BCC: Suzanne Nimocks FROM: Pru Sheppard B. Venki Venkateshwara DATE: March 27, 2001 California Power Crisis Update (No. 10) DEVELOPMENTS THIS WEEK, 3/23/2001 The weeks highlights include: ? Continued indications that the issue of market power and possible remedies for it is likely to remain a high profile issue in California and elsewhere (both retroactively and prospectively) ? An ironical situation with respect to QFs in which QF power under contract is effectively being released into the market at higher prices ? A court order requiring Reliant to continue to sell power to the ISO even if it is not being paid in a full and timely manner ? Another Stage 3 emergency and rolling blackouts Market power There are continued indications that the issue of market power will not be settled simply. This week there was a lengthy and politically influential front page story in the New York Times about FERCs passive approach to policing generators (Critics Say U.S. Energy Agency Is Weak in Oversight of Utilities). The story was by Jeff Gerth and Joseph Kahn. (Jeff Gerth's 1992 story on the Whitewater deal is viewed by journalists to have been the origin of what eventually became a multi-year investigation of Bill Clinton.) The key issues are familiar: ? Does market power exist to a degree that warrants remedies such as price caps, refunds, and so on? ? If so, what is the basis for asserting that market power exists and what is the remedy? (See the discussion in the New York Times article on the ""good hours"" vs. ""bad hours"" approach and the associated political decision not to deal with ""good hours""). ? Can market power be used as leverage to eventually settle generator bills in California at something less than 100 cents on the dollar. (The California ISO filed a complaint claiming $6 billion in overcharges this week.) The QF irony Through the 1990s, QF contracts were projected to be the source of stranded costs because they were priced ""way above market."" In recent months, in California, they look like a bargain (although some are not such great bargains because a portion of their price is tied to gas). You would think that the utilities would request QFs to maximize their output. But credit problems have created an ironical situation. The facts: ? PG&E and Edison have not been paying the QFs fully and promptly for some time. ? The QFs form a creditors committee and threaten to push PG&E and Edison into bankruptcy. (Some gas-fired QFs had to shut down because they did not have money to pay for the gas.) ? Last week's court decision allows MidAmerican/CalEnergy to essentially sell its power to others even though the QF contract ""dedicates"" the output to the purchasing utility. ? CalEnergy does so immediately, selling to El Paso. The Reliant Order A court ordered Reliant to continue to sell to the ISO, when requested, regardless of whether Reliant had been paid fully and promptly for past deliveries to the ISO. Reliant announced it will appeal the order. This is somewhat of a contrast to the QF situation except that the circumstances governing the 2 situations are probably different. The QF contracts pre-date the ISO and are with the utilities and most likely make no reference to providing power during emergencies. In fact, many QF contracts have the opposite provision: authority for the utility to cut takes during so-called ""light load"" periods. Stage 3 emergency and rolling blackouts--again There was another Stage 3 emergency in California ? with rolling blackouts this week. This prompted everyone to wonder why this was happening in March. Among the factors: ? Increased demand from summer-like temperatures ? Cutbacks in imports ? Loss of 1400 MW due to a transformer fire at an Edison plant ? Loss of about 3100 MW from QF plants that were forced to shutdown because they could not afford gas bills (VV) MARKET COMMENTARY (For easier printing of all the articles in this section use the file at the end of the section) Critics Say U.S. Energy Agency Is Weak in Oversight of Utilities By JEFF GERTH and JOSEPH KAHN 03/23/2001 The New York Times Page 1, Column 1 c. 2001 New York Times Company WASHINGTON, March 22 -- The pressure was intense when federal regulators met privately last month to debate remedies for soaring electricity prices in California. Officials of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the agency whose mandate is to ensure ''just and reasonable'' electricity rates nationwide, had evidence that a few companies had been selling electricity to California at prices far above the cost of generating it. The agency faced an imminent deadline to challenge those prices or let the companies possibly pocket hundreds of millions of dollars in unfair profits. An internal memorandum laid out two choices. The agency could audit and punish ''bad actors,'' the companies that were exploiting the market. Or it could identify ''bad hours,'' when electricity shortages were most acute and spiking prices were arguably nobody's fault, and order refunds for only the most exorbitant prices. ''It may be easier to identify bad hours than bad actors,'' the memorandum said. The commission took the easier way. It decided not to investigate reports of abuses by companies, but issued an order that could require them to refund to the state utilities up to $124 million collected during a relatively few ''bad hours'' in January and February. That is hundreds of millions of dollars less than California might have claimed, since the most potential overcharging occurred during ''good hours,'' when power was more plentiful but prices were often just as extreme. The order ignored those hours. Today, in a criticism of the agency's lack of aggressiveness, California regulators estimated that generators had charged $6.2 billion above competitive levels over 10 months. They urged the agency to dig deeper, hoping it would demand more refunds or other stiff remedies. But the agency's track record -- one of complacency in the eyes of state officials -- leaves California regulators skeptical that Washington will confront the big power producers. The small, obscure agency, tucked behind the rail yard of Union Station here, has largely soft-pedaled its role as the electricity industry's top cop, even though it has wide authority to keep power companies in line. To keep rates reasonable, it can impose price caps, strip companies of the right to charge market rates, force them to return excessive profits and even suspend deregulation altogether. Instead, the agency has largely left it to private companies to pry open the $250 billion electricity industry, which has historically been controlled by monopoly utilities and state officials. The agency's defenders, including its chairman, Curt Hebert Jr., a fierce advocate of unfettered markets, say that its largely hands-off approach reflects the delicate balancing of competing interests -- a commitment to protect consumers while not stifling market forces. But politicians, utility executives, energy economists and local regulators say California's rolling blackouts and skyrocketing electricity prices are the signs of a market running amok. They accuse the agency of standing aside as companies manipulate their way to windfall profits. The agency's critics, who include one of its own commissioners and numerous staff members, say that its enforcement mission has been blunted by free-market passions and the influence of industry insiders in its ranks. When the agency began its first national investigation of high electricity prices last year, it named a newly recruited industry insider, Scott Miller, to lead the effort. Mr. Miller and his colleagues said in their report that there was ''insufficient data'' in California to prove any profiteering by generating companies. Yet his own former employer, PG&E Energy Trading, was at the time a subject of a civil antitrust investigation by the Justice Department that focused on electricity market abuses in New England. The agency has given state regulators a lead role in monitoring local power markets. Yet even as these regulators have urged the agency to be more aggressive in investigating suspicions that companies have abused their power in California, New England, the Midwest and the mid-Atlantic, they have frequently been ignored or rebuffed. Critics say that the agency began deregulation before it was ready or willing to make sure the markets worked effectively. They accuse it of showing favoritism to industry -- allowing companies, for example, to ignore requirements to file detailed reports of market transactions that are critical to proving accusations of market abuses. ''We need to wake up to the fact that this is a dysfunctional market that is being gamed and manipulated by those who participate in it,'' said William Massey, a commissioner of the agency who has become one of its leading critics. The agency's inaction, the critics say, leads to ''gaming'' -- jockeying for profits that does not necessarily involve illegality -- and outright market manipulation. Consumers and utilities are the victims, paying billions of dollars more for electricity than if the markets were truly competitive. Agency officials acknowledge that enforcement of market rules to curb gaming and manipulation had not been a high priority in previous years. But they defended their recent California order as proof that they intend to keep markets free of abuse. They add that the agency is also pressuring two generators to refund almost $11 million for possibly manipulating the California market last spring. Agency officials and some outside analysts say that poorly conceived deregulation plans by states, a shortage of power plants, rising natural gas prices, and even the weather have had more impact on electricity prices than abuses by companies or any failings by the agency. They say the agency must balance the competing interests of generators, local regulators and utility companies if it is to keep deregulation on track. ''We're trying to craft a system that gives breathing room to develop a market, but not so much room that undue market power punishes consumers,'' Mr. Hebert said. Fight Over Deregulation Today's debate traces back to the 1930's, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt backed legislation to break up utility monopolies. The Federal Power Act of 1935 gave the Federal Power Commission a mandate to ensure ''just and reasonable'' electricity rates. The Federal Power Commission was abolished in 1977 and replaced by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, an independent agency with 1,200 employees that also oversees oil pipelines and the natural gas market. The president appoints the chairman and four commissioners -- two Democrats and two Republicans with staggered terms of five years. Two Republican seats are currently unfilled. The deregulation of the electricity markets began in the late 1980's, after the agency had begun opening the gas markets. By 1996, the commissioners issued a landmark order that forced utility companies to open their transmission lines to other utilities and electricity wholesalers. The commission and many private economists expected that by prying open protected markets, electricity prices would immediately fall. That possibility set off a deregulation frenzy, most prominently in California, New York, New England and the mid-Atlantic states. Generating companies rushed to expand in the new, borderless market. But the agency's balancing act has grown more difficult as electricity deregulation has spread nationwide. Congress has forced it to trim its staff in recent years. Officials complain that investigating abuses in electricity markets strains their resources. And as the California crisis has worsened, the commissioners have begun sparring publicly among themselves about what to do. This week, Mr. Massey, a Democratic commissioner, and Mr. Hebert (pronounced AY-bear), a Republican, sat side by side before a House panel and argued diametrically opposed positions. Mr. Hebert said high prices in California ''were sending the right signals to get supply there.'' Mr. Massey called the prices that generators were charging ''unlawful'' and said that his agency, by not reining them in, ''is simply not doing its job.'' The agency's leadership has been in flux for months. Congressional and industry officials in Washington say President Bush is considering replacing Mr. Hebert, whom he named to the top post less than two months ago, with Pat Wood, who runs the Texas public utility commission. A White House spokeswoman had no comment on the reports. Though Mr. Hebert's positions are not far from those of the Bush administration, his relations with California leaders may have made his position tenuous. Mr. Hebert, a Mississippian who is a close ally of the Senate majority leader, Trent Lott, has warred with California politicians who have proposed new solutions to the crisis there. Mr. Hebert, who has served as a commissioner since 1997, has often taken the most ideologically free-market position of any commissioner. He flatly rejects the idea of price caps on electricity as hopelessly ineffective and contrary to market forces. When Gov. Gray Davis outlined a plan to have the state buy transmission lines to relieve utility companies' debt, Mr. Hebert's response was dismissive. ''It's not in the interest of the American public,'' he pronounced. Even as new electricity markets opened in the summer of 1999, they started producing nasty shocks. The mid-Atlantic region experienced some early volatility. As the turmoil grew, economists began raising the alarm about a phenomenon called ''market power,'' the ability of energy traders in the new national market to sustain prices above the competitive level. Proving such abuses is difficult, because it requires comparing tens of thousands of separate electricity transactions with the costs of the generators that initiated them. Joseph Bowring, who heads the market monitoring unit of the nonprofit entity that operates the mid-Atlantic transmission system, said that power companies there had exercised some market power. But only the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, not local regulators, had the authority to collect the data to determine how much market power had been exercised and whether it had been abusive or not, he said. Mr. Bowring said he talked to agency officials about doing so. In the end, Mr. Bowring and several agency officials said, the agency chose not to investigate. The decision roiled some agency officials. Ron Rattey, a veteran agency economist, wrote a memorandum last June describing the staff as ''impotent in our ability to monitor, foster, and ensure competitive electric power markets.'' The staff, the memorandum said, did not even enforce a requirement that power companies file detailed quarterly reports listing essentially every sale they make. Such data would have been useful to Mr. Bowring. Local-Federal Clash Local regulators who want to ensure competitive prices often have to act on their own. Monitors in New England have intervened about 600 times since 1999 to correct prices they determined had been caused, at least in part, by market manipulation. The federal agency has sometimes chastised them for interfering too much. The industry, not surprisingly, shares that view. One vocal critic was Mr. Miller. Before the agency recruited him last July to head its division of energy markets, he was director of policy coordination for the national energy-trading unit of PG&E Corporation, the California holding company whose assets also include Pacific Gas and Electric, the California utility. Although the utility has lost billions of dollars during California's crisis, Mr. Miller's former unit has become one of the most profitable new energy traders nationwide. PG&E Energy Trading, by several estimates, is now the second-largest seller of electricity in New England. The company has had a rocky relationship with regulators. They intervened several times in 1999 and 2000 to retroactively cancel auctions they said produced excessive profits for PG&E and other companies. Mr. Miller denounced the practice, though he acknowledged in public testimony that his company sometimes charged ''very high'' prices when it could. ''One person's predatory pricing is another person's competitive advantage,'' Mr. Miller said at a public hearing on deregulation in Texas in 1999. New England regulators too often acted as ''judge, jury and executioner'' when overseeing the market, he said. One year later, Mr. Miller and his new colleagues at the federal agency got a chance to examine New England's problems from the regulators' perspective. Their Nov. 1 report attributed New England's frequent price gyrations to technical and regulatory flaws. As Mr. Miller's team was preparing its report, the Justice Department, whose threshold for stepping into possible industry wrongdoing is far higher than the agency's, began looking into whether price spikes in New England pointed to unlawful monopoly power or collusion, people contacted by the department during that inquiry said. One subject of the civil inquiry is possible price manipulation in one of New England's ancillary services markets, people contacted by the department said. They said the department was examining whether PG&E and two other companies tried to corner that market for several months early last year. PG&E confirmed that the Justice Department had contacted it, but denies wrongdoing and says it has cooperated with the department's requests. Mr. Miller has declined to comment on his role at PG&E or at the agency. His supervisors defended his work and said they had detected no conflict of interest between his work at PG&E and his duties at the agency. Those duties brought Mr. Miller to California last August. With electricity prices there soaring, he and his colleagues sat down with several utility executives at the agency's San Francisco office. One executive, Gary Stern, director of market monitoring for Southern California Edison, wanted the agency to stop what he suspected were market abuses by power generators. He provided a road map to help investigators figure out how power companies traded power contracts -- and whether they had manipulated the markets. But when Mr. Miller and his team approached 11 generators and marketers -- including his old employer -- a few weeks later, they did it their way. They asked eight questions, many of them imprecise, like: ''Describe your strategy for bidding generation resources into market.'' This question, Mr. Stern said in a recent interview, ''was equivalent to asking a suspected burglar how he spent his day.'' Some agency officials also thought the team should probe deeper. Mr. Rattey recommended that Mr. Miller seek the quarterly pricing reports that marketers were supposed to file. But his suggestion was not adopted, agency records show. Daniel Larcamp, Mr. Miller's supervisor, said ''there might have been more information that could have been obtained'' in the California inquiry. But he said the commission gave the staff only three months to finish, making it impossible to collect and analyze the reams of data involved. For Mr. Miller, agency documents show, the investigation was so time-consuming that he had no time to fill out the financial disclosure form required of new federal employees. Mr. Miller submitted his form in late January, after a reporter requested it. Agency lawyers approved the form, but only after he provided additional information about his job and compensation from PG&E. The lawyers said Mr. Miller's participation had been permissible because PG&E was not the subject of the investigation. When the staff report was issued on Nov. 1, it found high prices and problems in the design of the California market. But while the companies ''had the potential to exercise market power,'' the commission said, there was ''insufficient data'' to prove that they did. Some marketers saw the report as an exoneration. ''This has been looked at several times, most notably by the FERC and nobody has found any evidence of market manipulation and profiteering,'' Rob Doty, the chief financial officer of Dynegy Inc., told a reporter earlier this year. California Inquiry The agency has recently shown signs of wanting to apply pressure on generators. But its early efforts show how it is treading on new and uncertain turf. When the California crisis grew severe last December, the commission issued a refund order, a shot across the bow for generators charging high prices. It required them to submit detailed data any time they sold electricity in California for more than $150 per megawatt hour, considered at the time a fair estimate of the highest costs any of them faced. It also told generators that for the next several months, they could be forced to give refunds if the agency found that they had charged excessive prices. The commission also said that it would examine bidding practices and strategies for withholding generating capacity to ferret out any efforts to artificially raise prices. When the agency's own 60-day deadline for examining market data in January approached, however, it became clear that staff members had not made any detailed examination. Instead, staff members said, the agency scrambled to forge a last-minute compromise that would allow it to issue a statement opposing high prices in the state without a time-consuming investigation. During this scramble, a senior staff member, Kevin Kelly, suggested focusing on bad hours instead of bad actors. ''Our attempts to find illegal behavior or legal 'misbehavior' by sellers ('bad actors') always seems to fail,'' his memorandum said. It said that the agency could more easily blame high prices on acute shortages during the most critical hours. The suggestion won the day. The commission decided to limit its order to the hours when California declared a Stage 3 emergency, when supplies are critically low. Mr. Stern of Southern California Edison and several private-sector economists have attacked the economic logic of that order. They said that the commission has focused on times when prices might be legitimately high. The bigger worry: Generators can and often do sustain artificially high prices when supplies are not as tight, they say. Mr. Massey, the Democratic commissioner, dissented from the decision for those reasons. Because most high-priced transactions in January and February did not occur during bad hours, he argued, the commission effectively chose to bless as ''just and reasonable'' the hefty profits generators are making from the California crisis. ''The problem with my agency is that we're so carried away with the rhetoric of markets that we've gotten sloppy,'' Mr. Massey said. ''We're talking about electricity. It's the juice of the economy, so it's got to be available and reasonably priced.'' Williams defends pricing of electricity 03/23/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. TULSA, Okla. (AP) - Williams Cos. Inc. says it can justify the rates it charged for wholesale power, despite accusations from federal regulators that it sold over-priced electricity to California. Federal regulators claim Williams Energy Marketing and Trading Co., a unit of Tulsa-based Williams, owes California more than $40 million in refunds for power it sold to the state's Independent System Operator. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission says that Williams is one of several power providers responsible for $124 million in overcharges from transactions in January and February. The Independent System Operator, which manages the state's power grid, claims the state was overcharged $6.2 billion by 21 wholesale power providers, including Williams, between May and February. Williams says the rates it charged California were fair and were based on production costs and market conditions. ""Williams is confident that it performed within the guidelines established by the ISO,"" said Williams spokeswoman Paula Hall Collins. ""We felt like we had worked within the regulations set up by ISO."" According to the commission, power prices levied by Williams in January and February exceeded federal price ceilings based on the cost of natural gas and other market conditions. However, the price ceilings were established after the ISO accepted Williams' power prices, Collins said. The commission will review Williams' explanation and either accept the justification or order the company to pay refunds. Allegheny Energy makes big California connection 03/23/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. HAGERSTOWN, Md. (AP) - Allegheny Energy Inc. said Thursday it has agreed to sell $4.5 billion worth of power to California's electricity-purchasing agency over the next 10 years. The company said the contract call for Allegheny to provide up to 1,000 megawatts that the Hagerstown-based company has secured from western generating plants through its new energy trading division, Allegheny Energy Global Markets - formerly Merrill Lynch Global Energy Markets. ""This is a win-win for both the state of California and Allegheny Energy. It provides a long-term source of fixed-price energy and should help to stabilize prices in California,"" said Michael P. Morrell, president of the Allegheny Energy Supply division. Allegheny Energy is the parent of Allegheny Power, which delivers electric energy and natural gas to parts of Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia. Williams plans expansion of pipeline to help power Calif. 03/23/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. SALT LAKE CITY (AP) - The Williams Cos. plans to expands its Kern River pipeline, which runs through Utah, to provide more natural gas for generating plants in California. Williams' gas pipeline unit in Salt Lake City said Thursday that it plans to construct nearly 700 miles of additional pipeline that will run parallel to its existing Kern River line. Construction on the $1 billion project is expected to begin next year and is scheduled for completion in May 2003, said Kirk Morgan, director of business development for Kern River pipeline. ""Shippers are seeking more access to natural gas from the Rocky Mountain basin, where producers are aggressively stepping up production,"" Morgan said. The new pipeline is expected to deliver about 900 million cubic feet of natural gas per day to markets in Utah, Nevada and California. Most of the gas will be used for generating plants planned in California. If all of the pipeline's capacity were used to generate electricity, it could produce about 5,400 megawatts. ""That is enough to light around 4.5 million homes,"" Morgan said. The original Kern River line was completed in 1992. It enters Utah from Wyoming then crosses into the Salt Lake Valley near Bountiful. It turns south near the Salt Lake City International Airport then runs the length of the state before passing into southern Nevada and winding up near Bakersfield, Calif. It currently transports 700 million cubic feet of natural gas per day. Williams, based in Tulsa, Okla., recently filed an emergency application with federal regulators to install additional pumping stations on the line to increase its capacity by 135 million cubic feet per day. That $81 million pumping station project should be completed by July 1. During the 2002 construction period, the Kern River project will employ between 1,500 and 1,800 people. The company estimates annual property taxes it pays to Utah counties will increase from $3.5 million to about $7 million. Questar will be one of the customers on the new pipeline, Morgan said. The utility wants to supply additional gas to southern Utah cities, including St. George and Cedar City. ""Our own pipelines serving southern Utah are at full capacity so this is an opportunity to transport additional gas into those areas from company-owned supplies in Wyoming,"" said Questar Gas spokeswoman Audra Sorensen. Calif Energy Commission OKs 3 Pwr Plants Worth 2,076 MW 03/23/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) (This article was originally published Thursday) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- The California Energy Commission Wednesday approved three power plants worth 2,076 megawatts, two of which are scheduled to come on line by the end of 2002, a CEC spokesman said Thursday. The plants approved include BP Amoco PLC (BP) unit ARCO Western Energy's 500 megawatt Western Midway Sunset Project, slated to come on line in October 2002; Caithness Energy's 520 MW Blythe Power Plant, to come on line by Dec. 31, 2002; and Thermo Ecotek's 1,056 MW Mountainview Power Plant, scheduled to come on line in April 2003. All three of the new plants will be natural gas-fired combined-cycle plants. The $550 million Mountainview plant will be located in Southern California, near San Bernadino. The $300 million Western Midway-Sunset plant will be located in central Kern County, while the $250 million Blythe plant will be located in the city of Blythe in Riverside County. The latest approvals bring to 13 the total number of plants approved since April 1999 by the CEC, a spokesman said. Those plants will supply 8,405 MW to the state, which has seen rolling blackouts and spiking wholesale power prices in the last six months, in part due to lack of supply. -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872; jessica.berthold@dowjones.com Some CalEnergy Power Could Be Sold Outside Calif - CEO 03/23/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) (This article was originally published Thursday) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Some of CalEnergy Operating Corp's power could end up being sold outside of California, though that is not the company's intent, CalEnergy Chairman and CEO David Sokol said in a conference call Thursday. CalEnergy, an affiliate of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co, which is majority owned by Warren Buffett's Berkshire-Hathaway (BRKA), was given legal authority Thursday to suspend 270 megawatts of power delivery to Edison International (EIX) utility Southern California Edison and sell on the open market, because SoCal Edison has not paid its bills since November. CalEnergy stopped supplying power to SoCal Ed immediately following the court ruling. ""We stopped supplying power at 1 PM (PST) and have been selling to parties that will pay since then....We are selling it to marketers; our current marketing agent is El Paso Corp (EPG) and they will sell it for us,"" Sokol said. Sokol added that while it was his company's intention to have its power sold to California, that could not be guaranteed. ""We leave the energy selling to El Paso....We've directed them that we would like the power to stay in California but we can't stop them,"" from selling out of state, Sokol said. Wholesale prices on the open market are about $400-$500 a megawatt-hour, three times more than what the company had received under its contract with SoCal Ed. The court's ruling did not address the $45 million SoCal Ed still owes CalEnergy for November and December power, and Sokol said that his company's separate lawsuit on that matter sought to attach the utility's assets as payment for that debt. Sokol said the court's ruling had ""significant implications"" for the entire community of small, independent generators, known as qualifying facilities or QFs, who have not received payment from SoCal Ed. ""Edison's own lawyer said it best....that every QF in the state will begin to mitigate if the judge allowed us (to sell on the open market),"" Sokol said. Sokol said his company was prepared to push SoCal Ed into involuntary bankruptcy Friday if CalEnergy hadn't won the case, but said he couldn't speculate whether other QFs may be more or less inclined to do so as a result of the court outcome. A group of renewable power suppliers, owed more than $100 million from SoCal Ed, said late Wednesday they want state lawmakers to release them for their supply contracts with PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric and SoCal Ed until the utilities are restored to financial stability. The utilities claim close to $13 billion in undercollections due to an inability to pass high wholesale power costs to customers under a rate freeze. In a statement, SoCal Ed said it opposed CalEnergy's bid to suspend its QF contract because the utility believed Gov. Gray Davis and state regulators are close to resolving ""very legitimate financial concerns of CalEnergy and other QF suppliers."" SoCal Ed said it was concerned that CalEnergy's request to sell to third parties would lead to a major supply shortage in California. The utility said it has informed the QFs that it is working to resolve the issue without giving unfair advantage to one class of creditors. While many of the state's large power suppliers have been paid by on a forward basis for the power they sell into California, the QFs, which make up one-third of the state's total power supply, haven't been paid by SoCal Ed since November. PG&E has made partial payments to its QFs. -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872, jessica.berthold@dowjones.com (Jason Leopold contributed to this article.) California and the West Judge Frees Small Firm From Edison Contract KEN ELLINGWOOD; DAN MORAIN TIMES STAFF WRITERS 03/23/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-3 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company El CENTRO -- California's balance of electrical power shifted slightly Thursday when an Imperial County judge temporarily freed a small geothermal energy producer from its contract with Southern California Edison, allowing it to sell power on the open market. The ruling by Superior Court Judge Donal B. Donnelly could lead to a mass exodus by hundreds of small energy producers that have been selling power to the state's financially troubled utilities for months without getting paid. At the same time, it may have staved off plans by a group of the small generators to send Edison into involuntary bankruptcy as early as today. In Sacramento, energy legislation pushed by Gov. Gray Davis passed in the state Senate but foundered in the Assembly. The measure was intended to ensure that the state gets repaid for the electricity that it has been buying on behalf of Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric, which say they lack the cash and credit to purchase power. The bill also was supposed to guarantee that the small, alternative energy producers--which together provide nearly a third of the state's power--get paid. But Assembly Republicans opposed it, saying it hadn't been given sufficient scrutiny. The impact of the small producers was made clear in Imperial County, where Edison's failure to pay CalEnergy, the county's biggest property taxpayer, had outsize implications. CalEnergy had put county officials on notice that it was about to miss a $3.8-million property tax payment. The uncertainty had prompted the tiny Calipatria Unified School District to postpone a bond issue for badly needed school repairs. Among CalEnergy Chairman David Sokol's first acts after the judge's ruling Thursday was to promise Imperial County Supervisor Wally J. Leimgruber that the company would pay its property taxes on time. ""That is great news,"" Leimgruber said. Within hours of its court victory, CalEnergy had stopped transmitting geothermal power to Edison and begun selling it to El Paso Energy, a marketing company that purchased the energy at prevailing rates and resold it on the spot market. Some of the more than 700 other small energy producers in the state said they were considering similar action against Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric. ""We absolutely need the right to sell to third parties,"" said Dean Vanech, president of Delta Power, a New Jersey company that owns five small gas-fired plants in California and is owed tens of millions of dollars by Edison. Sokol praised the Imperial County judge and said his company simply wanted the authority to sell its power ""to a credit-worthy company that, in fact, pays for the power."" An Edison spokesman said the company was disappointed with the ruling, but sympathized with CalEnergy and other small producers because ""California's power crisis has placed [them] in financial distress, just as it has placed utilities in financial distress."" Edison expressed concern that the ruling would prompt CalEnergy and other small producers to sell their power out of state. Sokol said CalEnergy had specifically told El Paso Energy that it hoped its power would remain in California, ""but if someone wants to pay a higher price out of state, we can't stop them."" Sokol said that Edison still owes CalEnergy $140 million and that the company--along with seven other small producers--had been prepared to file a petition in federal bankruptcy court in Los Angeles today forcing the utility into involuntary bankruptcy. He said his company no longer intends to do so, and he believed--but wasn't certain--that the other companies would shelve their plans. Edison filed papers Thursday with the federal Securities and Exchange Commission showing that it owed $840 million to various small electricity producers, many of which rely on renewable energy sources such as geothermal steam, solar energy or wind. The alternative energy producers--and utilities--strenuously objected to the legislation considered in Sacramento on Thursday. The bill, spelling out how the utilities are to pay the state and the small producers, passed the Senate on a 27-9 vote, the exact two-thirds margin required. But it stalled in the Assembly on a 46-23 party-line vote, well short of two-thirds. ""When I was a citizen back in Lancaster, I heard these stories about pieces of legislation that were cooked up late at night, that . . . were cut and pasted together and were rammed through by the Legislature,"" Assemblyman George Runner (R-Lancaster) said. ""That's exactly what we have before us."" The alternative electricity generators, including oil companies, warned that they would lose money under the Davis proposal, while representatives of Edison and PG&E, which have amassed billions in debt in the worsening energy crisis, said the legislation would push them deeper into the hole. ""There isn't enough money,"" Edison attorney Ann Cohn testified at a Senate hearing on the bill Thursday. ""It is a very simple question: Dollars going out cannot be greater than dollars coming in."" The bill, AB 8X, combined several proposals. First, it sought to clarify earlier legislation by spelling out that Edison and PG&E must pay the state all money collected from consumers for electricity that the state has been buying. Additionally, the bill would turn over to the California Public Utilities Commission the thorny issue of how much to pay alternative energy producers for their electricity. Wind, solar and geothermal producers might agree to the prices offered by the administration. But most of the alternative energy producers, including Chevron and British Petroleum, use natural gas to generate electricity through ""cogeneration,"" a process of creating steam for both electric generation and heat. With natural gas prices high, they contend, they would lose money at the prices Davis is offering. * Ellingwood reported from El Centro, Morain from Sacramento. Times staff writers Mitchell Landsberg in Los Angeles and Jenifer Warren, Nancy Vogel and Carl Ingram in Sacramento contributed to this story. (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) Power Points Background The state Legislature approved electricity deregulation with a unanimous vote in 1996. The move was expected to lower power bills in California by opening up the energy market to competition. Relatively few companies, however, entered that market to sell electricity, giving each that did considerable influence over the price. Meanwhile, demand has increased in recent years while no major power plants have been built. These factors combined last year to push up the wholesale cost of electricity. But the state's biggest utilities--Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison--are barred from increasing consumer rates. So the utilities have accumulated billions of dollars in debt and, despite help from the state, have struggled to buy enough electricity. * Daily Developments * Overcharges by major electricity suppliers were estimated at $6.3 billion, up from the $5.5 billion first thought, California's power grid operator said. * Electricity producers denied that they have profiteered and argued that Cal-ISO's figures don't take into account all their costs. * A Superior Court judge's ruling Thursday freeing a small producer from its contract with Edison could lead to a mass exodus by small energy producers that have been selling to the utilities without getting paid. * Verbatim ""If these guys have such high costs ... how come they're making so much money?"" --Gary Stern, Edison's director of market monitoring and analysis, referring to power producers Complete package and updates at www.latimes.com/power Grid Operator Says California Paid Too Much for Power By Rebecca Smith and John R. Emshwiller Staff Reporters of The Wall Street Journal 03/23/2001 The Wall Street Journal A2 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) California's electric-grid operator said power suppliers may have overcharged the state and its utilities by $6.2 billion, or a total of 30%, in a 10-month period, and has asked federal regulators to step up their policing of electricity markets. Meanwhile, a California state judge handed down a decision involving small power producers that could result in more electricity being made available in the energy-starved state, but likely at greater cost to the state government. The $6.2 billion figure was contained in a market analysis by the California Independent System Operator filed yesterday with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The ISO says it isn't seeking a refund -- for the May through February period -- because its analysis lacked important market data. For example, it estimated costs for 21 suppliers based on published prices for natural gas, not on specific data showing what each generator actually paid for the fuel. ""We don't know how much gas actually was purchased at spot-market prices,"" said Anjali Sheffrin, the ISO's head of market analysis. Charles Robinson, general counsel for the ISO, said FERC needs to become ""more aggressive about market-power mitigation."" The ISO's filing, he said, was intended to push the agency in that direction, since FERC is responsible for policing deregulated electricity and natural-gas markets. He said that if the FERC doesn't act, the state of California may find ways to discipline the market, such as through the state attorney general's office. The attorney general has been investigating the state's electricity market for many months but hasn't brought any court action. Dynegy Inc., a big owner of power plants in California, said it will provide additional information to FERC supporting its position that the prices it has charged for power have been ""just and reasonable."" The Houston company was one of 13 energy suppliers that the FERC this month ordered to pay refunds totaling $124 million or ""show cause"" why it should be excused. Dynegy said the FERC analysis was flawed, because it used ""inaccurate"" prices for natural gas and pollution credits. While big power producers such as Dynegy came under attack, small power producers won a potentially significant victory in a state court in Southern California's Imperial County. A judge granted 10 geothermal plants operated by the CalEnergy Co. unit of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co., a unit of Berkshire Hathaway Inc., of Omaha, Neb., permission to suspend deliveries of electricity to Southern California Edison Co. and instead seek other buyers. These plants, known as ""qualifying facilities,"" are under long-term contract to Edison and other utilities but haven't been paid for months. Edison, a unit of Edison International, of Rosemead, Calif., says it has been unable to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in power bills to CalEnergy and others because it has been driven to the brink of insolvency by the state's failed utility-deregulation plan. While the CalEnergy case involves only about 320 megawatts of power, the repercussions could be far greater. Collectively, hundreds of qualifying facilities, or QFs, produce as much as 30% of California's electricity needs. QFs totaling 3,000 megawatts cut their production in recent weeks for lack of payment. This loss of output was a significant cause of the blackouts that hit California this week. Observers believe the CalEnergy court decision could give other QFs an opportunity to sell power in the open market, presumably to the state government that now is California's biggest energy buyer. An hour after the court decision yesterday, some 400 megawatts of power came back into the market, the ISO said. However, additional QF power sales on the open market could substantially increase the state's tab. Already, the state has allocated more than $4 billion for electricity purchases. Separately, Edison said in a Securities and Exchange Commission filing that its unpaid power bills could contribute to a write-off of as much as $2.7 billion for 2000. Because of uncertainty caused by the energy crisis, the company hasn't yet reported year-end earnings. Power regulators debate who should be exempted from blackouts By KAREN GAUDETTE Associated Press Writer 03/22/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - State power regulators said Thursday they are working to exempt all California hospitals, regardless of size, from rolling blackouts. The Public Utilities Commission met with representatives from hospitals and investor-owned utilities after Los Angeles lawyer David Huard filed an emergency motion with the PUC on behalf of more than 500 hospitals throughout the state. Under PUC rules, hospitals with more than 100 beds are exempt from losing electricity during power emergencies. But during rolling blackouts Monday, at least a dozen hospitals from Long Beach to Clearlake were forced to use their backup generators. Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison Co. say they blacked out those hospitals specifically because they have backup generators. Both utilities said the temporary blackouts were part of their overall efforts to spread the burden of blackouts over more of their customers. Linda Ziegler, director of business and regulatory planning for SoCal Edison, said the utility is following state law and will implement new guidelines if the PUC changes them. But hospitals say there is a 10-second lapse before emergency generators kick in, which could harm patients in the midst of delicate surgical procedures such as organ transplants or brain surgery. ""You wouldn't fly a plane with only your emergency backup systems in place,"" said Ann Mosher, a spokeswoman for California Pacific Medical Center in San Francisco. ""Backup generators are just that, they're not designed to keep the hospital up and running at full capacity."" Ziegler said that power still goes out for reasons beyond the energy crisis, from incidents like lightning or a knocked-down power pole. ""If it's a serious problem for the hospital it's certainly something they should be address just from an ongoing basis,"" she said. The exemption would cover all hospitals within the territory of the state's investor owned utilities PG&E, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas and Electric. Hospitals within the range of municipally owned utilities, such as the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, are separately regulated. For more than two decades, prisons, hospitals with more than 100 beds and emergency services such as fire and police departments have been classified as ""essential"" services, and are exempted from blackouts by order of state power regulators. After rolling blackouts began darkening the state in January, many other public service groups began seeking relief from power interruptions, including transit systems, schools and water districts. --- On the Net: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov Federal Judge Orders Reliant To Keep Selling Pwr To Calif 03/22/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP)--A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction Wednesday ordering a major electricity wholesaler to continue selling to California despite its fear that it will not get paid. U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said Californians were at risk of irreparable harm if Reliant Energy (REI) stopped selling power to the Independent System Operator, which oversees the state's power grid. The ISO buys last-minute power on behalf of utilities to fill gaps in supply. Damrell dismissed Reliant's attempt to force the state Department of Water Resources to back the ISO's purchases for the state's two biggest utilities. The state has been spending about $50 million a day on power for Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison, both denied credit by suppliers after amassing billions of dollars in debts. The judge said he had no authority to force the DWR to pay for that power. Gov. Gray Davis has said the state isn't responsible for purchasing the costly last-minute power ISO buys for Edison and PG&E, despite a law authorizing state power purchases on the utilities' behalf. ISO attorney Charles Robinson said the ruling gives ISO operators ""a tool to assist them in keeping the lights on in California."" ""Had the decision gone the other way, one could expect other generators to simply ignore emergency orders,"" Robinson said. Damrell's preliminary injunction will remain in effect until the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission rules on the matter. Damrell denied the ISO's request for preliminary injunctions against three other wholesalers - Dynegy Inc. (DYN), AES Corp. (AES) and Williams Cos. (WMB) - which agreed to continue selling to the ISO pending the FERC ruling. Spokesmen for Reliant, Dynegy, AES and Williams were out of the office Wednesday night and didn't immediately return calls from The Associated Press seeking comment on the ruling. The ISO went to court in February after a federal emergency order requiring the power sales expired. The judge then issued a temporary restraining order, requiring the sales, but dropped it after the suppliers agreed to continue sales to California pending his Wednesday ruling. The ISO said it would lose about 3,600 megawatts if the suppliers pulled out, enough power for about 2.7 million households. One megawatt is enough for roughly 750 homes. Grid officials said Reliant's share alone is about 3,000 megawatts. Reliant said the amount at issue actually is less than a fourth of that, because most of its output is already committed under long-term contracts. Reliant, which currently provides about 9% of the state's power, worries it won't get paid due to the financial troubles of PG&E and Edison. PG&E and Edison say that together they have lost about $13 billion since June due to soaring wholesale electricity costs that California's 1996 deregulation law bars them from passing onto customers. Calif Small Pwr Producers To Shut Plants If Rates Capped By Jason Leopold Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES 03/22/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Many of California's independent power producers late Wednesday threatened to take their small power plants offline this week if state lawmakers pass legislation that would cap the rates the generators charge for electricity they sell directly to the state's three investor-owned utilities. At issue is a bill that would repeal a section of the state's Public Utilities Code, which links the 688 so-called qualifying facilities' electricity rates to the monthly border price of natural gas. Lawmakers, however, are poised to pass the legislation. State regulators are then expected to approve a measure that would restructure the fluctuating rates the QFs charge PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric, Edison International (EIX) unit Southern California Edison, and Sempra Energy (SRE) unit San Diego Gas & Electric from $170 a megawatt-hour to $69-$79/MWh, regardless of the price of natural gas. Whereas each of the 688 QF contracts differed, largely because natural gas prices are higher in Southern California than Northern California, the state wants the QFs to sign a general contract with the utilities. The cogeneration facilities, which produce about 5,400 megawatts of electricity in the state, said the rates are too low and they won't sign new supply contracts with the utilities. ""For $79/MWh, natural gas would have to be $6 per million British thermal unit at the Southern California border,"" said Tom Lu, executive director of Carson-based Watson Cogeneration Company, the state's largest QF, generating 340 MW. ""Our current gas price at the border is $12.50."" Other gas-fired QFs said the state could face another round of rolling blackouts if lawmakers and state regulators pass the legislation, which is expected to be heard on the Senate floor Thursday, and allow it to be implemented by Public Utilities Commission next week. Lu, whose company is half-owned by BP Amoco PLC (BP) and is owed $100 million by SoCal Ed, said the proposals by the PUC and the Legislature ""will only make things worse."" David Fogarty, spokesman for Western States Petroleum Association, whose members supply California with more than 2,000 MW, said the utilities need to pay the QFs more than $1 billion for electricity that was already produced. State Loses 3,000 MW QF Output Due Of Financial Reasons The QFs represent about one-third, or 9,700 MW, of the state's total power supply. Roughly 5,400 MW are produced by natural gas-fired facilities. The rest is generated by wind, solar power and biomass. About 3,000 MW of gas-fired and renewable QF generation is offline in California because the power plant owners haven't been paid hundreds of millions of dollars from cash-strapped utilities SoCal Ed and PG&E for nearly four months. Several small power plant owners owed money by SoCal Ed have threatened to drag the utility into involuntary bankruptcy if the utility continues to default on payments and fails to agree to supply contracts at higher rates. The defaults have left many of the renewable and gas-fired QFs unable to operate their power plants because they can't afford to pay for the natural gas to run their units. Others continue to produce electricity under their contracts with the state's utilities but aren't being paid even on a forward basis. The California Independent System Operator, keeper of the state's electricity grid, said the loss of the QF generation was the primary reason rolling blackouts swept through the state Monday and Tuesday. Gov. Gray Davis, recognizing the potential disaster if additional QFs took their units offline, held marathon meetings with key lawmakers Monday and Tuesday to try and hammer out an agreement that would get the QFs paid on a forward basis and set rates of $79/MWh and $69/MWh for five and 10 year contracts. He also said he would direct the PUC to order the utilities to pay the QFs for power they sell going forward. ""After next week the QF problem will be behind us,"" Davis said Tuesday. ""We want to get the QFs paid...the QFs are dropping like flies...and when that happens the lights go out."" But this just makes the problem worse, said Assemblyman Dean Florez, D-Shafter, a member of the Assembly energy committee. ""I don't know how we are going to keep the lights on,"" Florez said in an interview. ""Many of these congenerators are in my district. They said if the legislation doesn't change they are going offline. This compounds the issue of rolling blackouts, especially now when we need every megawatt."" Davis, who didn't meet with people representing the QFs, said he was handing the QF issue to the PUC because lawmakers failed to pass legislation that would have set a five-year price for natural gas and allow the QFs to sign individual contracts with the utilities. In addition, SOCal Ed opposed the legislation, saying the rates should be below $50/MWh. Some renewable power producers said they aren't vehemently opposed to the new rate structure because it guarantees them a higher rate than what was originally proposed. QFs Want Third Party Supply Contracts John Wood, who represents the SoCal Ed Gas Fired Creditors Committee, one of a handful of groups that have formed since January to explore options on getting paid by the utilities, said his group of gas-fired QF creditors want to be released from their supply contracts and sell to third parties. ""Under our plan, we would be permitted to sell electricity to third parties (including the state Department of Water Resources) until a resolution to the crisis can be accomplished,"" wood said. Hal Dittmer, president of Sacramento-based Wellhead Electric in Sacramento, which is owed $8 million by PG&E, has 85 MW of gas-fired generation units offline. Under the state's plan, Dittmer said he risks going out of business. ""I can't buy natural gas for what I would be paid under this decision,"" he said. ""The state needs to quit kidding themselves that they don't need to raise electricity rates. All of this is being driven by an artificial construct that California can avoid raising rates."" -By Jason Leopold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3874; jason.leopold@dowjones.com Power Strain Eases but Concerns Mount Energy: Officials say summer prices will be high, and a state report shows that contracts with generators are far short of goals. DAN MORAIN; JENIFER WARREN TIMES STAFF WRITERS 03/22/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-3 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SACRAMENTO -- California's fragile electricity system stabilized Wednesday, but a Davis administration report suggested troubles ahead because the state could be forced to buy most of its power for the coming summer on the costly and volatile spot market. After two days of statewide blackouts, power plants that had been shut down were cranked up. Unseasonable heat tapered off. The operators of the statewide power grid relaxed their state of emergency. But plenty of ominous signs remained. Many small producers remained shut down, skeptical about Gov. Gray Davis' plan for utilities to pay them. State Controller Kathleen Connell issued a sharp warning about the high cost of the state's foray into the power business and announced that she will block an administration request that she transfer $5.6 billion into an account that could be tapped to pay for state purchases of electricity. And a report from the administration summarizing contracts between Davis and independent power generators showed that the state has signed contracts for only 2,247 megawatts of electricity, significantly less than the 6,000 to 7,000 megawatts previously claimed. While there are agreements in principle for the full amount, the report notes that generators can back out of the contracts for a variety of reasons, including the state's failure to sell bonds to finance power purchased by July 1. The Legislature has approved plans to sell $10 billion in bonds, but none have yet been issued. ""We are exposed enormously this summer,"" Senate Energy Committee chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) said after looking at the report. ""We owe the people the truth about how difficult this summer is going to be. We don't have a power fairy."" Perhaps most significant, the report suggests that the contracts fall significantly short of Davis' stated goal of buying no more than 5% of the state's summer needs on the spot electricity market, where prices can be many times those of long-term contracts. After reading the report, Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economist who studies the California electricity market, said the numbers suggested that the state's long-term contracts will cover less than half of what the state will need this summer. ""We're definitely short this summer, next summer and the summer of 2003,"" he said. California was forced to start buying electricity in December--at a cost of $50 million a day--because producers refused to sell to Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric. The two utilities amassed billions of dollars in debt when prices for wholesale power soared on the spot market. Vikram Budhraja, a consultant retained by Davis to negotiate deals with generators, said the report represents a ""work in progress."" He said the state may yet sign new contracts. However, Wolak said the contract figures confirm what he and others have been dreading: that summer is going to be rife with rolling blackouts unless serious steps to cut demand are taken immediately. Wolak and other experts say large industrial customers must be switched to real-time meters and pricing to persuade them to use the bulk of their energy at times of low demand. The head of the Energy Foundation, a San Francisco-based nonprofit that promotes sustainable sources of power, made the same proposal to Davis on Wednesday. ""The government need not ask customers to swelter in the dark this summer,"" foundation President Hal Harvey argued in a letter. He also proposed a crash campaign to boost sales of efficient appliances and lightbulbs. He said the state needs to take over the utilities' contracts with alternative energy providers to ensure they stay in business, and sign new contracts for 1,500 megawatts of new wind power--the cheapest, fastest and cleanest source of new supply. Davis had proposed a formula Tuesday to force private utilities to pay the alternative producers, some of which have not been paid since November. But some of them warned Wednesday that Davis' plan offers them little incentive to turn on their generators. Alternative energy producers supply more than a quarter of the electricity consumed in California. Many producers generate electricity from wind, sun and geothermal sources. But most of them generate power using natural gas--and the cost of natural gas has been soaring. Several natural gas users said Davis' plan, which caps rates, won't cover their fuel costs. Davis assumes that the price of natural gas will fall. But small generators say they don't have sufficient purchasing power or sophistication to gamble on future prices. The Public Utilities Commission is expected to approve Davis' proposal next week. It offers producers two choices: 7.9 cents a kilowatt-hour if they agree to supply power for five years, or 6.9 cents a kilowatt-hour over 10 years. ""The price of natural gas is higher than that,"" said Marty Quinn, executive vice president and chief operating officer of Ridgewood Power LLC, which owns three natural gas-fired co-generation plants. ""If we operate, we'll lose money."" Ridgewood is not operating, having been cut off by gas suppliers. The company sued PG&E last month seeking overdue payments and release from its contracts with the utility. A hearing is scheduled in El Centro today in another lawsuit filed by a small energy producer, an Imperial Valley geothermal producer that sued Edison for refusing to let it break its contract and sell on the open market. CalEnergy says Edison owes it about $140 million for energy sold since November. A company spokesman, Jay Lawrence, said CalEnergy was going ahead with its suit despite Davis' proposal. ""We've had promises before,"" he said. In other developments: * A federal judge in Sacramento on Wednesday ordered Reliant Energy of Houston, a major producer, to continue selling power to California during emergencies, despite the company's argument that it may not be fully reimbursed. The order will remain in effect for 60 days or until the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission decides a related case. * Connell said the state budget surplus has shrunk to $3.2 billion because the state has spent roughly $2.8 billion on electricity. She criticized the administration for withholding basic information about state finances, and said she will begin an audit on Monday of the Department of Water Resources, which is responsible for purchasing power. Davis' aides said Connell took her action because the Democratic governor endorsed one of Connell's foes this week in the race for Los Angeles mayor, former Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa. A Connell aide scoffed at the notion. * Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said she ""never has had a response"" from President Bush after writing him last month for an appointment to discuss the California energy crisis. In a wide-ranging lunch talk with reporters in Washington, she deplored the fact that ""huge, huge profits are being made"" in the California crisis, and said ""an appropriate federal role"" would be to guarantee a reliable source of power until the state can get nine new generators online. * Times staff writers Mitchell Landsberg in Los Angeles and Robert L. Jackson in Washington contributed to this report. (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) Power Points Daily Developments * Wholesale electricity suppliers overcharged by about $5.5 billion between May and last month, and that money should be refunded to taxpayers and utilities, according to a Cal-ISO report. * The state may have to buy most of its power for summer on the costly spot market, which could drive consumers' bills up, a Davis administration report concludes. * State Controller Kathleen Connell said she will block a request by the Davis administration for $5.6 billion for state purchases of electricity. Verbatim ""We owe the people the truth about how difficult this summer is going to be. We don't have a power fairy."" Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey), Senate Energy Committee chairwoman CPUC Must Address Rates In QF Repayment Order - SoCal Ed 03/21/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Any order from the California Public Utilities Commission requiring utilities to pay small, independent generators going forward must determine how that could be done within the existing rate structure, a spokesman for Edison International (EIX) utility Southern California Edison said Wednesday. The utility was responding to a PUC proposed decision that would require utilities to pay small generators, called qualifying facilities, $79 a megawatt hour within 15 days of electricity delivery. The decision will be voted March 27 by the CPUC. ""We're still reviewing (the decision) and should have more to say in a day or two. To the extent that the commission orders us to pay going forward of course we will. But it needs to address how we will pay the QFs,"" a SoCal Edison spokesman said. SoCal Edison and PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric Co. are struggling under nearly $13 billion in uncollected power costs due to an inability to pass high wholesale power costs to customers under a rate freeze. Gov. Gray Davis Tuesday blasted the utilities for not having paid their QF bills in full since December. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. has made some partial payments to QFs, but SoCal Edison has paid nothing. Together, they owe the QFs about $1 billion, but the order doesn't address that debt. An Edison executive said, in reaction to the governor's sharp comments, that the company simply doesn't have the money to pay creditors. ""The root problem here is there just isn't enough money in the current rate base to pay our bills,"" said Edison Senior Vice President of Public Affairs Bob Foster. ""We understand the financial distress (the QFs) face; we are facing financial distress ourselves."" The proposed PUC order would also require the state's investor-owned utilities to offer the small generators five- and 10-year contracts for power for $79/MWh and $69/MWh, respectively. The QFs ""may be able to live with"" the PUC proposal, but the five- and 10-year contract prices may be inadequate if natural gas prices at one of the California borders are high, said Jan Smutny-Jones, president of the Independent Energy Producers Association. Natural gas prices into California are currently higher than anywhere in the country. But some say the proposed decision may not be enough to prevent the QFs from filing involuntary bankruptcy proceedings against the utilities for the money they are still owed. ""There's still a lot of skepticism. To say our position has changed based on the CPUC decision or the governor's announcement is not accurate. A lot still has to happen,"" said Jay Lawrence, a spokesman for a renewable creditors committee. -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872; jessica.berthold@dowjones.com -0- 22/03/01 01-27G State Says It's Accelerating Plan to Buy Power Utilities' Grid Government: Talks with Edison are reported near completion, but agreement with heavily indebted PG&E has a way to go. RONE TEMPEST; DAN MORAIN TIMES STAFF WRITERS 03/21/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-22 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SACRAMENTO -- As blackouts hit California for a second day Tuesday, a key consultant to Gov. Gray Davis said negotiations to buy the power grid owned by the state's largest utilities ""are proceeding at an accelerated pace."" Wall Street consultant Joseph Fichera said talks with Southern California Edison could be wrapped up within days, although those with PG&E are much less advanced. The administration and PG&E have not reached even an agreement in principle, he said. PG&E, which has more debt than Edison, says its transmission lines are more extensive than those of its Southern California counterpart. The state wants to buy the utilities' transmission lines and other assets for about $7 billion to provide cash to the utilities, help stabilize the electricity supply and ease the power crunch that has plagued California for months. To research the grid purchase, Fichera said, the state has had to pore over 80,000 documents just to assess the utilities' liabilities. ""We are working at a good pace,"" said Fichera, chief executive of the New York firm Saber Partners. "" . . . If we get to a deal-breaker, it might be longer."" By making Fichera, who is also a consultant to the Texas Public Utilities Commission, available to reporters Tuesday, the Davis administration was clearly trying to reassure the public that progress is being made on the governor's plan to pull the state out of the crisis. Since mid-January, when the big utilities' credit failed and suppliers stopped selling to them, the state has spent nearly $3 billion buying electricity from a handful of large suppliers in Texas, Oklahoma, Georgia and North Carolina. Not a cent has gone to the hundreds of alternative energy suppliers in California who provide about a quarter of the state's electricity. The Monday and Tuesday blackouts occurred partly because many of the cash-strapped alternative suppliers, including solar, biomass and wind power units, cut their normal supply to the system in half. They say Edison and PG&E have not paid them since November; the utilities say they are out of cash. Assemblyman Fred Keeley (D-Boulder Creek) said the plight of the alternative suppliers has dragged on because of the complexity of dealing with ""almost 700 individual contractors."" Another delaying factor, said Keeley, who with state Sen. Jim Battin (R-La Quinta) worked for almost three months to come up with a legislative plan to lower the small producers' prices, was ""the huge enmity . . . manifested between the utilities and the qualifying facilities. These people just don't like each other."" This week's blackouts provided two painful lessons for the Davis administration: * When it comes to electricity, size doesn't matter--every kilowatt counts. During peak use, a small wind power facility in Riverside County can make the difference between full power and blackouts. * There is no such thing as a partial solution. Unless the whole energy equation is balanced, the parts don't work. For the Davis plan to work, several key elements need to come together or utility customers will almost certainly face rate increases above the 19% already set in motion * The cost of power purchased by the state must be reduced through long-term contracts with the big out-of-state producers. These contracts, the details of which the Davis administration has kept confidential, are still being negotiated by Davis consultant Vikram Budhraja of the Pasadena firm Electric Power Group. The administration says it has concluded 40 contracts with generators, about half of which have been signed. According to the most recent statistics released by the Department of Water Resources, which buys power for the state, current prices are still well above the rate state Treasurer Phil Angelides says is necessary for a planned $10-billion bond offering to succeed. The bonds, set for sale in May, will be used to reimburse the state for the money it will have spent by that time to buy electricity. The state is currently spending at a rate of $58 million a day to buy power. If prices stay high, the $10 billion in bonds will not cover the state's power purchases by the end of the summer. Angelides says he cannot proceed with bridge financing for the bonds until the Public Utilities Commission devises a formula to guarantee that a portion of utility bills will be dedicated to bond repayment. Angelides has estimated that, under the January law that put the state in the power buying business, the state must be reimbursed $2.5 billion annually, and that $1.3 billion is needed to service the debt. PUC Administrative Law Judge Joseph R. DeUlloa is expected to announce his ruling on the reimbursement rate later this week, leading to a PUC vote on the matter as early as next week. * The rates charged for electricity by the alternative producers, known as qualifying facilities, must be cut at least in half, down from an average of more than 17 cents per kilowatt-hour. In his news conference Tuesday, Davis said he will ask the PUC to set QF rates at 6.9 cents for 10-year contracts and 7.5 cents for five-year contracts. Meanwhile, PUC Chairman Loretta Lynch, a Davis appointee, said Tuesday that the commission will vote next week on a proposed order requiring Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric to pay the QFs for electricity in the future. Lynch said a recent PUC assessment showed that the utilities have enough cash on hand for that. ""We are trying to make sure the folks providing the power get paid,"" Lynch said. ""The qualified facilities have demonstrated that they haven't been paid and that it is impairing their ability to provide power."" The utilities contend that if they pay the small providers what they owe them, there will not be enough money left to pay other creditors. ""There is not enough money in the current rate structure to pay the [alternative producers], pay the [Department of Water Resources] and pay the utilities for their generation,"" said John Nelson, a spokesman for PG&E. * The utilities must sell to the state the power they produce themselves, mainly from hydro and nuclear sources, at a rate only slightly above the cost of producing it. This is tied to the ongoing negotiations between the Davis administration and the utilities to restore the near-bankrupt utilities to solvency. * Times staff writers Julie Tamaki, Miguel Bustillo and Tim Reiterman contributed to this report. Davis OKs Subsidy of Pollution Fees Smog: As part of secret deal to get long-term energy contracts, state would pay for some of the credits that allow excess power plant emissions. Critics renew call for full disclosure. DAN MORAIN TIMES STAFF WRITER 03/21/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-23 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SACRAMENTO -- As part of his closed-door negotiations to buy electricity, Gov. Gray Davis has agreed to relieve some generators from having to pay potentially millions of dollars in fees for emitting pollutants into the air, Davis said Tuesday. Davis announced two weeks ago that his negotiators had reached deals with 20 generators to supply $43 billion worth of power during the next 10 years. However, the Democratic governor has refused to release any of the contracts or detail various terms, contending that release of such information would hamper the state's ability to negotiate deals with other generators and therefore ultimately would raise prices Californians pay for electricity. Sources familiar with the negotiations, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the agreement reached with Dynegy Inc., a power company based in Houston, is one that includes language requiring that the state pay the cost of credits that allow emissions. Dynegy spokesman Steve Stengel declined to discuss the company's deal with the state. ""We couldn't get them to sign contracts; it was a sticking point,"" Davis said of the decision to pay the fees of some generators. ""We had to lock down some power so we were not totally dependent on the spot market."" The fees in question are part of an emission trading system known as RECLAIM. Under the system, companies are allotted a certain amount of allowable pollution. If their operations pollute more, companies are required to purchase credits on an open market. Currently the credits cost about $45 per pound of pollution--an amount that can lead to a bill of well over $10 million a year for a power plant. The South Coast Air Quality Management District, which regulates pollution in the Los Angeles Basin, is considering steps to significantly lower the cost of the system--a step that could considerably cut the state's potential cost, Davis said. Senate Energy Committee Chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) defended the decision to cover the power company's costs. ""It is a question of whether it brings down the price of power,"" she said. ""If it brings down the price of power, I don't have a problem with it."" Nevertheless, word that the contracts could bind the state to pay pollution fees caused some critics of Davis' policy to renew calls for Davis to reconsider the secrecy surrounding the power negotiations. The payment provision underscores the fact that the contracts involve more than merely the prices the state will pay for its megawatts, the critics note. ""The Legislature should have known about it,"" said Senate President Pro Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco). ""It is going to cost taxpayers money. It makes you wonder. . . . This was a policy issue that was never discussed with the Legislature."" V. John White, a lobbyist for the Sierra Club, who also represents alternative energy producers, called the contract proposal ""a horrible precedent."" ""Until we know exactly what the state has agreed to and how much of a subsidy this represents, we can't determine how serious the breach of principle this is,"" White said. Another critic of the secrecy of the negotiations, Terry Francke, general counsel for the California First Amendment Coalition, said the provision in question ""raises the possibility that there are other [concessions]"" that have not yet come to light. In the summer, when demand for power is highest, some generators probably will exceed pollution limits set by regional air quality management districts. To avert blackouts, state officials might ask the companies to keep plants running. In such cases, some sources familiar with aspects of the contracts said, the contract language could be interpreted to suggest that the state would cover any fines--although Davis said Tuesday the state will not cover the cost of fines. A recent Dynegy filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission underscores the rising cost of pollution-related measures. The company, which is partners with NRG Energy in three California plants in El Segundo, Long Beach and Carlsbad in San Diego County, said its ""aggregate expenditures for compliance with laws related to the regulation of discharge of materials into the environment"" rose to $14.3 million in 2000, from $3.6 million in 1999. A South Coast Air Quality Management spokesman said Dynegy's facilities appear to be fairly clean--although Sierra Club lobbyist White said Dynegy has been seeking a permit at one of its plants to burn fuel oil, which is dirtier than natural gas. Davis said he intends to ""make this information public,"" but he added that ""we do not want to put the public's interest in jeopardy by asking them to pay higher prices."" ""Nobody likes the notion that [the administration is] not being fully forthcoming,"" Davis said. ""But I also have a corollary responsibility that I don't stick these generators with a higher rate."" FERC ORDERS WILLIAMS ENERGY AND AES TO EXPLAIN THEIR REFUSAL TO MAKE CERTAIN RMR UNITS AVAILABLE TO CALIFORNIA ISO LAST YEAR 03/21/2001 Foster Electric Report 5 (c) Copyright 2001, Foster Associates, Inc. Following a preliminary, non-public investigation, FERC directed AES Southland Inc. and Williams Energy Marketing & Trading Co. (IN01-3) on March 14 to show cause why they did not violate section 205 of the Federal Power Act (FPA) by failing to provide power to the California ISO from two reliability must-run (RMR) generator units during a period in April and May 2000. The investigation responded to a matter referred by the Cal-ISO. If a violation is found, Williams Energy and AES could be required to refund excess profits of $10.9 million (as calculated by FERC) and face restrictions on their market-based rate authority for a year. The show cause order involves two generation units (Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2), owned and operated by AES. Williams Energy markets all output from the Alamitos and Huntington Beach plants, including the two units at issue here, pursuant to a tolling agreement filed with the Commission. The Cal-ISO designated the two units as RMR units that it could call on when necessary to provide energy and ancillary service essential to the reliability of the California transmission network. The Cal-ISO makes both a fixed payment to the RMR owner or operator to compensate for the RMR unit's availability and a variable payment for the RMR unit's output (if the unit is not otherwise participating in the market). Williams Energy and the Cal-ISO executed RMR agreements, filed as rate schedules with the Commission, allowing the Cal-ISO to dispatch units ""solely for purposes of meeting local reliability needs or managing intra-zonal congestion."" The ISO may dispatch a non-RMR unit if the designated RMR unit is not available. Under its RMR agreement with the ISO, Williams is paid the greater of its contract price or marginal cost for operating RMR units. However, if a non-RMR unit has to be dispatched because a designated RMR unit is unavailable, Williams will be paid its bid price, not the RMR contract price. During the April to May 2000 period, the Cal-ISO sought to dispatch both Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2 as RMR units to provide voltage support. However, according to the FERC order, Williams Energy refused to make Alamitos 4 available from April 25 through May 5, and to make Huntington Beach 2 available from May 6 through May 11, ""for reasons not directly related to the necessary and timely maintenance of the units."" Consequently, the Cal-ISO was forced to dispatch non-RMR units at a higher cost, namely, Williams Energy's bid price for service provided by the replacement units. By contrast, if the RMR units had not experienced outages and been available from April 25 through May 11, Williams Energy would have received either (1) the market revenues only from the respective units, which would have resulted in no payments for RMR output from the ISO to Williams Energy, or (2) Williams Energy's variable cost for operating the RMR units less the market revenues from the respective units' output. Accordingly, FERC observed, Williams Energy had ""a financial incentive to prolong any outages of Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2 in April and May 2000."" The bid price for the non-RMR units was at or near the Cal-ISO's then-effective bid cap of $750/MWh, FERC continued. Therefore, Williams Energy received payments from the Cal-ISO of more than $11.3 million, or about $10.3 million greater than the estimated average variable operating cost of the non-RMR units (approximately $63/MWh) during the period in question. This indicates a refund amount, including interest, of nearly $10.9 million. The information in this order and a non-public appendix, the Commission declared, suggests that AES declared outages at the two RMR units and maintained Huntington Beach 2 in a manner inconsistent with good utility practice, and that Williams Energy took action to extend the outage at Alamitos 4 and to make Huntington Beach 2 unavailable for ""pretextual reasons."" Based on this information coupled with Williams Energy's financial incentive not to make the Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2 units available, FERC found serious questions about whether (1) AES and Williams Energy violated applicable RMR contracts and tariffs on file with the Commission pursuant to FPA section 205 when they refused to make Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2 available for dispatch by the Cal-ISO; (2) whether Williams acted inconsistently with its market-based rate authority and the market monitoring information protocols of the Cal-ISO's tariff regarding the unavailability of the RMR units during the period at issue; and (3) whether AES violated a tolling agreement on file with the Commission pursuant to section 205. The Commission identified two remedies for these potential violations: a refund by Williams Energy and/or AES of revenues received greater than the amount that would have collected from the ISO if the RMR units had been available, and a condition on Williams Energy's market-based rate authority. Specifically, for a one-year period, if an RMR unit were not available when dispatched by the Cal-ISO, a non-RMR unit dispatched in its place would only receive payment according to the terms of the applicable RMR contract. In other words, Williams Energy would not receive the bid price for operation of the substitute, non- RMR unit. The Commission directed Williams Energy and AES to show cause, within 20 days, why they should not be found to have committed the above-described violations and why the specified remedies should not be imposed. Further, to ensure procurement of all relevant information, the Commission instituted a formal, non-public investigation into the operation, maintenance and sales of power from the Alamitos and Huntington Beach plants in 2000 and 2001. Calif Consumers Failing To Conserve Pwr Despite Blackouts 03/20/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- California consumers haven't been conserving enough electricity to relieve strain on the power grid and reduce demand in the state, a spokesman with the Independent System Operator said Tuesday. The ISO said that despite two straight days of statewide rolling blackouts, consumers aren't using less electricity, which means additional megawatts will be taken off the grid. As a result, blackouts could last longer and impact additional communities, the ISO said. ISO spokesman Pat Dorinson said Monday ""conservation in California is no longer an option,"" but consumers in the state aren't heeding the call to reduce consumption. Conservation efforts during rolling blackouts Monday and Tuesday were far less than Jan. 17 and Jan. 18, when blackouts swept through Northern California due to transmission constraints. Jim Detmers, the ISO's vice president of operation, said consumers saved the state about 1,000 megawatts of electricity, enough power for 1 million houses. The ISO said conservation efforts Monday were about 500 MW or less. ""We would be very happy if we saw the same amount this time,"" Detmers said. The state's Energy Commission said consumers think it's no longer important to save electricity until blackouts are imposed. ""People have been saving generally, but it isn't a big bump from hour to hour,"" a spokesman for the Energy Commission said. Gov. Gray Davis launched a massive conservation campaign this month, promising consumers a rebate on their summer electricity bill if they save at least 20% of electricity, compared with last summer. The governor said he believes conservation this summer will amount to possibly saving 5,000 MW and averting the chance of rolling blackouts. -By Jason Leopold; Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3874; jason.leopold@dowjones.com Gas Co.'s Success Opens Debate Southern California energy supplier has reaped millions of dollars in state incentives for keeping down its costs. Though consumers get a share of the windfall, regulators are asking whether they should get more of the bonus, which is expected to be huge this year, as a form of price relief. The natural gas provider says it deserves to keep its reward. TIM REITERMAN TIMES STAFF WRITER 03/18/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition C-1 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SAN FRANCISCO -- While consumers suffer soaring energy bills and the big electric utilities lurch toward insolvency, the news is not all dire at Southern California Gas Co. Through vigorous deal making, the Sempra Energy subsidiary has consistently beaten the volatile natural gas market during the last year, and the company stands to reap millions of dollars in savings through a state incentive program that rewards utilities for keeping costs down. For several years, the utility has been splitting the savings 50-50 with ratepayers whenever the company's gas costs fall slightly below market levels. Those savings, Gas Co. executives acknowledged, have shot to unprecedented heights during the state's power crisis. Now, in this climate of high consumer gas bills and runaway market prices, regulators are taking another look at the program. The question before the Public Utilities Commission: Should Gas Co. ratepayers, who endured huge bill increases this winter, get a bigger share of the savings? The total windfall under the incentive program has in some years exceeded $20 million. But the amount for the last 12 months is expected to multiply many times over, company executives said, partly because the Gas Co. has done so well in the wild market by selling, lending and trading gas as well as buying it. ""The recent market conditions . . . could possibly result in some unintended consequences that result in shared savings of benefits that may be more appropriately allocated entirely to ratepayers,"" the PUC's consumer protection arm, the Office of Ratepayer Advocates, reported Oct. 30, even before the latest upward market spirals. Gas Co. representatives express frustration, saying they have done what the state has requested under its gas-cost incentive program: Buy smarter, and pass the savings along to its 5 million residential and small-business customers. The company contends it has worked hard to keep bills down and should be rewarded for taking risks to obtain gas at the lowest possible cost. ""The PUC, every time we do well, raises the bar on us,"" said Jim Harrigan, director of gas acquisition. ""I don't necessarily agree with it."" By virtue of its purchasing power and storage and pipeline capacity, the Gas Co. has become a big player in the regional natural gas market. In the company's bustling trading room at its Los Angeles headquarters, 15 employees track price movements, pipeline supplies and even the weather via computer, while cutting deals and arranging gas shipments. Although the Gas Co. buys the commodity for its customers, the company also sells to marketers, other utilities and producers. State officials say the number of transactions by the company has risen steeply to 10,000 to 20,000 a year, including gas sales along California's border, where prices have rocketed. The PUC created the cost incentive program for the state's three major gas utilities--San Diego Gas & Electric Co. in 1993, Southern California Gas the next year and PG&E Corp.'s Pacific Gas & Electric Co. in 1997. Like Southern California Gas, SDG&E is a subsidiary of Sempra Energy. The program was designed to give utilities added motivation for obtaining gas at the best price for customers. It replaced lengthy and contentious reviews by the PUC, which assessed whether utilities had purchased gas at reasonable prices and sometimes ordered them to return millions of dollars to customers. An annual audit of the Gas Co. program and a staff evaluation requested by the PUC recently concluded that the program has achieved many of its goals, but it also proposed adjustments that would give customers a greater share of the rewards. ""These incentives were designed in less volatile times,"" said program supervisor Mark Pocta of the Office of Ratepayer Advocates, which conducted the audit. ""There is a question of how much should go to ratepayers and shareholders."" His office also plans to assess whether the Gas Co.'s trading had any negative effects on the gas market, resulting in diminished supplies or higher prices for other utilities and their customers. Under the program, the Gas Co. shares risks and rewards with its ratepayers, but since the program was launched, it has consistently produced awards. If the cost of gas is 0.5% or more below a benchmark based on monthly gas market indexes, the company and its customers split the savings 50-50. California's gas utilities are not allowed to profit on their raw commodity costs; they merely pass along those costs to ratepayers with no markup. The savings under the incentive program are automatically reflected in consumers' monthly gas bills but are not itemized. At the end of the year, the utilities request their share of the savings, and the PUC has routinely granted approval. Then the companies, and thus their shareholders, are paid through customer utility bills. The resulting bill increases typically have been modest, less than 1%. But as the awards increase, regulators say, the effect on customers will become more significant unless the present structure is changed. ""There's no question, when you start to talk about $100 million [or more in savings], and add [the company's award] into rates in a year, it will make a noticeable difference,"" said Los Angeles economist Jeff Leitzinger, president of Econ One, who has done consulting for the Gas Co. Still, he said, ratepayers should bear in mind that they already benefit from below-market gas and transportation costs. In the early years of the program, records show, the Gas Co.'s awards went from zero to $3.2 million, $10.6 million, $2 million and $7.7 million. Last year's award of $9.8 million is awaiting PUC approval. This year's proposed award, covering the period through the end of this month, has not yet been submitted by the Gas Co. But the utility has provided monthly figures and oral updates on a confidential basis to PUC officials, who declined to provide figures. Harrigan of the Gas Co. said the savings are expected to multiply ""many times over,"" largely because the company was well-equipped for the market fluctuations and tried to insulate its customers from high gas prices. ""Any trading company, especially one with assets like we have, has benefited from volatility in the market,"" he said. Harrigan said, however, that he does not believe the company's level of activity has adversely affected the market and that its trading pales in volume to that of unregulated energy companies. Anne Smith, the Gas Co.'s vice president of customer service and marketing, said the utility will not release figures for this year's incentive program until they are filed with the PUC in June. ""I don't want to interrupt that process,"" Smith said, noting that the PUC ultimately will determine the company's award. ""I think they need to focus on what [the Gas Co.] has done for the ratepayers. It has been immense."" Although the typical monthly gas bill has risen to $80 from $50 a year ago, Gas Co. customers tend to have lower rates than those of other California utilities. The company's gas procurement cost in February was 66 cents per therm, or 100 cubic feet. That's more than twice last year's cost but only about half what sister company SDG&E paid for its 740,000 customers in February. It's also much lower than the $1.09 per therm PG&E pays. ""We were as upset about the overall [gas price] increase as anyone else,"" Harrigan said. ""I would rather see the prices of a year ago, even though we managed to do a little better in the [recent] environment."" When it comes to keeping down costs, regulators say, the Gas Co. has advantages over other utilities in the marketplace. For one, the company has so much pipeline capacity at major gas basins that it purchases a relatively small portion of its needs--about 10% to 15%--at the California border, where prices in December briefly rose to the equivalent of $6 per therm, or 20 times those a year earlier. This presents opportunities. ""At the beginning of the month, they forecast a certain amount of gas they have to buy,"" said Pocta of the Office of Ratepayer Advocates. ""If they go out and buy and do not need to use as much because the weather is more moderate than expected, they can either inject the gas into storage or they can make sales at the border."" With gas price run-ups like those seen in the last year, Pocta said, ""there is a question: Should that benefit be shared, or flow entirely to ratepayers?"" Customers, he pointed out, may be entitled to additional benefits because they pay for the interstate and intrastate pipeline capacity and the gas storage that give the company the flexibility to make advantageous deals. ""By the same token, we want [the Gas Co.] . . . to go into the market and generate cost savings that can be passed on to the customers,"" he added. ""We want them to have incentives. The question is how to balance them."" Under deregulation, the Gas Co. adopted the nontraditional role of marketer, according to a PUC Energy Division report in January. The company makes gas sales at various locations. It engages in exchanges. It makes futures transactions to help stabilize costs. ""They look for ways to lower the gas cost,"" said Richard Myers, program supervisor at the Energy Division. ""Before they were lots more risk-averse. Now they feel they can take risks and make money for shareholders, and it is a benefit for ratepayers at the same time."" The incentive programs are tailored to individual utilities, so it is difficult to compare them. Records show that the shared savings at SDG&E, a much smaller utility, declined steadily from $9.2 million in the 1996-97 cycle to $560,000 in 1999-2000. Spokesman Ed Van Herik said the falloff largely represents a drop in gas purchases, especially as the company sold off its own gas-fired electricity-generating plants. He said the company does not yet know how much savings have accrued in the last year. In an annual report to the PUC in February, PG&E said it had no savings under the incentive program and thus it is not entitled to any award for the 1999-2000 cycle. The Utility Reform Network, a San Francisco-based consumer advocacy group, said it will closely watch the PUC's evaluation of the incentive program at the Gas Co. ""We want to make sure, given the dramatic changes in the gas market and prices, ratepayers are not left out of the [additional] benefits,"" TURN attorney Marcel Hawiger said. ""We'll look to see whether the mechanism should be changed."" Severin Borenstein, director of the Energy Institute at UC Berkeley, said the program should be changed to provide more incentive for utilities to enter long-term contracts that would smooth out volatility in the market. ""Unfortunately, under the system,"" he said, ""the only incentive is to beat the [spot] market."" Use this file to download and print all the articles in this section (See attached file: Dow Jones IMPLICATIONS FOR OTHER MARKETS (For easier printing of all the articles in this section use the file at the end of the section) New York: New York at the crossroads Wednesday, March 21, 2001 Energy Insight (Embedded image moved to file: pic24389.pcx) By Dave Todd dtodd@ftenergy.com U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham declared this week that the Big Apple is on the verge of being bitten hard by power cuts and rising energy prices. Delivering the keynote address at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's national energy summit in Washington Monday, Abraham said, ""California is not the only state facing a mismatch between supply and demand,"" what with ""electricity shortages predicted for New York City and Long Island this summer"" and low capacity margins threatening electricity reliability elsewhere across the country. But how likely is it that New Yorkers will face blackouts of the sort confronting Californians? Not very, says energy trade specialist Edward Krapels, managing director of Boston-based METIS Trading Advisors. Krapels, a consultant helping major Northeastern utilities, such as Consolidated Edison, design market-hedging programs, adamantly decried what he said are facile comparisons between conditions in New York and California, there being ""more differences than there are similarities"" between those two industrial cornerstones of the country's economy in respect to energy security management. ""First of all, New York has a more varied portfolio of energy generation sources than California,"" he said. California has hydro, nuclear and gas, but when it lost a lot of hydro, the state needed gas to pick up the slack, and the ""capacity just wasn't there."" In New York's case, the state has oil and coal still in the mix and its overall dependence on gas is much lower than California's, Krapels added. New York avoids making same mistakes Portfolio diversity is one pillar of any effective plan to help New York avoid the same errors made in redesigning California's marketplace. New York's Independent System Operator (ISO), in a new report warning that the state is at an ""energy crossroads"" in terms of its capacity adequacy in the immediate future, argues that a concerted effort is required to arrest declining in-state generation capacity reserve margins, and a strategy must be put in place, whether or not new generation comes on-line, in accordance with current anticipated scenarios. A measure of New York's essential difficulty is that, between 1995 and 2000, statewide demand for electricity grew 2,700 MW, while generating capacity expanded by only 1,060 MW. With no major new generating plants in downstate New York fully approved, the gap is expected to continue to widen. To avoid ""a replication of California's market meltdown"" the New York ISO calculates the state's daily generating capacity needs to grow by 8,600 MW by 2005, with more than half of that located in New York City and on Long Island. Expressing concern this may be too big a burden for the current bureaucratic process to bear, the ISO wants to see a state-appointed ombudsman named to help would-be merchant power plant investors plow through red tape. ""Increasing New York's generating capacity will also lessen the state's escalating and risky reliance on out-of-state sources of electricity,"" the ISO added. ""Since 1999, New York State has been unable to cover its reserve requirements from in-state sources."" Not everyone agrees with that analysis, insofar as it argues for circling the wagons inward. Some analysts believe the ultimate solution lies not in tying in more inwardly dedicated power, but in expanding the marketplace by breaking down inter-jurisdictional barriers. In any case, New York energy regulatory authorities and those responsible elsewhere in the U.S. Northeast, such as PJM (Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland) Interconnection and the New England Power Pool, are in vastly better shape in terms of ""cross-border"" cooperation than California and its neighbors in that efforts are being made among various authorities toward developing an integrated regional electricity market. In California, by contrast, the state's focus?for example, in the case of new gas-fired power plant development?has been to ensure dedicated supply to the California market alone, rather than on a regional marketplace. (Embedded image moved to file: pic05075.pcx) The New York ISO's new broad-based analysis of market-restructuring needs argues that the relatively stronger health of its reformed environment is ""due in large part to the ability of New York's utilities to enter into long-term power contracts."" What needs to be done most, it says, is to move aggressively to build some of the more than 29,000 MW of ""proposed new generation in the siting pipeline."" In the meantime, the 30,200 MW of electricity New Yorkers used on a peak day last summer shouldn't be eclipsed on too many days this coming summer (given early long-range weather forecasts). Demand, however, is expected to increase at an annual average rate of up to 1.4%. So while New York City, the rest of the state and adjacent parts might breathe easy this year, it could be a brief rest from the fray. Meanwhile, a 4% shortfall is still being planned for this summer that is not yet provided for, as authorities hurriedly seek to arrange new generation plants around Manhattan, on Long Island and even on barges offshore. One way or another, whether it is the weather or the politics of siting new energy facilities, it's going to be a hot time in the city. Long-term solutions hit brick wall Meanwhile, attempts at longer-term solutions continue to run into trouble. Last week, Connecticut state regulators came out against a proposal to run a new underwater cable under Long Island Sound that Hydro-Quebec subsidiary TransEnergie U.S. Ltd. wants to build to pump more juice into Long Island Power Authority's load pocket. Despite strong promises from TransEnergie to be diligent in avoiding damage to oyster beds in Long Island Sound, the proposal failed to convince authorities, who were persuaded the pipeline project could lead to diversion of electricity from Connecticut. In similar fashion, private companies wanting to build 10 small independent power plants and temporary generators offshore New York City are running into intense opposition from environmental groups and citizen orga nizations?some of whom have taken their cases to the state assembly in Albany. The David vs. Goliath nature of such controversies has further alerted energy companies to the difficulties of addressing complex energy supply issues that may ultimately devolve to people not wanting things in their backyard, regardless of what the alternative might mean to their fellow citizens or the greater public good. But suddenly, in New York, California's troubles?while still distant in their intensity? may not be so far away. By some estimates, this summer's bills for Consolidated Edison customers could be up as much as one third or more over last year's charges. Letting the time slip when it comes to building new infrastructure isn't going to make the pain go away. NEW YORK: NY-ISO REPORT SAYS STATE NEEDS 4,000 - 5,000 MW OF NEW GENERATION SOON TO AVOID SEVERE SHORTAGES; NY-ISO ALSO ASKS FERC TO EXTEND BID CAP AND TEMPORARY EMERGENCY PROCEDURES 03/21/2001 Foster Electric Report 2 (c) Copyright 2001, Foster Associates, Inc. Raising the specter of an East Coast version of the California crisis, the New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (NY-ISO) is warning of serious electricity shortages, air quality deterioration and stunted economic growth without immediate approval of between 4,000-5,000 MW of new generating capacity in the state. Of this amount, 2,000-3,000 MW is needed to serve New York City. Another 8,600 MW of new capacity will have to be built by 2005, the NY-ISO said in a recent report, Power Alert: New York's Energy Crossroads. ""New York is heading towards a very serious situation unless it acts immediately to get new supply sited within its borders,"" said NY-ISO president William Museler in a statement accompanying the report. ""This report is essentially a caution light at New York's energy crossroads."" Sources in the New York Public Service Commission have downplayed the NY-ISO's warning, asserting that a process for bringing on new generation is well underway, with more than 85 projects in the approval pipeline. In a related development, the NY-ISO asked FERC to approve a proposed tariff amendment (ER01-1517) extending existing bids caps in some of its markets until 10/31/02, and a separate and related amendment (ER01-1489) extending the NY-ISO's so-called temporary extraordinary procedures (TEP) that allow the ISO to make price adjustments and take other corrective actions if it finds evidence of market power abuse. The NY-ISO Report --The NY-ISO likened the situation in New York to that faced by California, where a relentless increase in demand has not been met with an equal increase in supply. The NY-ISO said that between 1995 and 2000, statewide demand for electricity rose by 2,700 MW, while generating capacity increased by only 1,060 MW. With no major new generating plants in downstate New York fully approved for construction at this time and generation demand in the state expected to grow around 1.3 percent annually for the next several years, the NY-ISO said this gap will continue to widen. The inevitable result of this trend is large rate increases for New York's power consumers. The NY-ISO's modeling suggests that ""by 2005, statewide prices are likely to be more than 20-25 percent lower in the case in which new plants are built than in the case where they are not."" In New York City, ""the price to consumers of electric power could be reduced by as much as 28 percent when compared to the case of no new supply or load management programs."" Besides large rate increases, the NY-ISO asserted that a failure to site and build new plants in New York will threaten power reliability in the state and lead to increasing reliance on out-of-state resources. The report said that if no new in-state generation comes on line in the next five years, the state's generation reserve margins will shrink from the current 14.9 percent above peak demand ""to a dangerously low 8.4 percent by 2005."" Pointing to California's situation, the report added that increased reliance on power imports ""can subject electrical suppliers and customers in New York to transmission restrictions and political and economic considerations beyond the control or influence of responsible New York State entities."" To avoid these harsh consequences, the NY-ISO said New York's new siting law, known as the Article X process, needs to be modified. Since the law was passed 18 months ago, the report noted that only two plants have been approved (both upstate) and neither has yet been built. The problem, according to the NY-ISO, is that the siting process ""requires the cooperation of multiple state agencies."" To expedite the process, the report suggested the ""clear designation of a lead agency and the adoption of an `ombudsman program' to expedite and coordinate the work of the agencies responsible for the Article X process must be made."" The NY-ISO added that an expedited approval process would improve the environment because older, more polluting power plants would be replaced by cleaner gas-fired units. On a more positive note, the NY-ISO reported that New York's restructured power market ""is far healthier than that in California, due in large part to the ability of New York `s utilities to enter long-term power contracts. The basic structure of the New York market will also reduce unwarranted price spikes and other market disruptions through mitigation programs which automatically correct price spikes due to market power abuses."" ""Nevertheless, California `s experience raises a caution flag for all New Yorkers,"" the report continued. ""The deregulated market in New York cannot achieve lower costs through competition without an increase in generating capacity similar in magnitude to the recommendations of this report, along with simultaneous efforts to institute greater conservation, better load management and alternative energy supply initiatives. Additionally, closer integration with regional suppliers of power is both inevitable and beneficial."" The report also recommended (1) accelerating conservation, real-time metering and price-sensitive load programs; and (2) upgrading the state's and the Northeast's transmission infrastructure. The Proposed Tariff Amendments -- New York's Article X siting process and continuing tight supplies were also cited in the NY-ISO's request to extend from 4/30/01 until 10/31/02 its $1,000/MWh bid caps. FERC first approved the 1,000/MWh bid caps in July 2000 (see REPORT No.197, pg.6), and subsequently extended them. The NY-ISO's board ""is sensitive to the Commission's concerns about undue intervention in energy markets,"" the filing related. ""Nevertheless, the NY-ISO is submitting this request because it believes that delays in New York state's `Article X' process for licensing and siting new generating capacity is inhibiting supply from increasing to match continued demand growth. . . . Moreover, although the NY-ISO proposes to implement several demand-side measures this summer, it is not yet clear whether they will make demand sufficiently price-responsive to avoid periods of high prices that would not occur if there were an efficient demand-side response."" Thus, the NY-ISO insisted that the requested extension is needed to provide more time for the development of additional generation and to gauge the effectiveness of the NY-ISO's proposed demand-side response mechanisms ""in order to avoid exposing consumers to price spikes that are not a product of the interplay of competitive market forces."" Other problems cited in the NY-ISO's filing which keep New York's power market from being fully competitive include continuing capacity and operating constraints at the state's Central-East interface, and questions over adequate gas supply. ""The NY-ISO remains acutely aware that taking steps to deal with price abnormalities can have undesirable consequences,"" the filing continued. ""Nevertheless, the NY-ISO believes that the $1,000/MWh cap that has been used in the PJM's markets since inception does not appear to have had an adverse impact there. . . . The permanent bid caps in PJM, and the interim bid caps in ISO New England (proposed for extension through the end of 2001) also make continuation of the NY-ISO's bid caps more important in order to maintain uniformity across the Northeastern markets. The NY-ISO also continues to believe that suppliers will not be materially harmed by the continuation of bid caps, which are likely to come into effect very rarely and are set at levels that prevent only artificially high run-ups in prices."" The NY-ISO's request to extend its TEP procedures (which also were previously extended) through 10/31/02 cited similar problems with New York's power markets, but claimed that the NY-ISO ""has made great strides"" toward eliminating market design and software flaws. ""The TEPs were, and remain, an indispensable tool for responding to and correcting market flaws and other instances where the markets are not operating as the NY-ISO and the Commission intended,"" the filing insisted. MASSACHUSETTS: Attorney general says summer poses electricity concerns By JOHN McELHENNY Associated Press Writer 03/19/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. BOSTON (AP) - The state's top consumer advocate warned that Massachusetts may see ""California-type"" electricity blackouts this summer when temperatures rise and residents turn on air conditioners and fans. ""It would be a mistake to feel this is a cold weather problem,"" said Attorney General Thomas Reilly in an interview with The Associated Press. ""Our major problem will come this summer."" State deregulation of the electric industry has been among the factors blamed for local power outages in California, and on Monday, California for the first time suffered rolling blackouts across the entire state. Massachusetts relaxed regulations on its own electric industry in 1998 to attract more companies to stir competition. But that hasn't happened yet, largely because the current high cost of oil and gas make it expensive to produce electricity. ""The promise of deregulation was that there was going to be competition,"" said Reilly, a Democrat. ""That competition in the wholesale market is not happening."" Hot summer weather drives up electricity use as residents turn on air conditioners and fans, and Reilly said a few particularly hot days could strain the grid that provides the region's power. A spokeswoman for the region's power grid said electricity use is expected to rise 1.5 to 2 percent this year, but the region should have enough power because of six new power plants that have begun generating electricity in the past 18 months. ""The situation is unlike California because we have new generation coming on line that is outpacing demand,"" said Ellen Foley, spokeswoman for ISO New England Inc., which manages the grid of 330 generators connected by 8,000 miles of high voltage transmission lines. Still, a particularly hot day and an unforeseen power generation breakdown could prompt ISO to ask residents to conserve electricity, a situation that arose once last summer, Foley said. In order to avoid any power outages and protect consumers, Reilly repeated calls for electric companies to build more power lines and to offer more options for new customers who have signed up since deregulation. Those customers typically pay more than long-term customers. Electric transmission companies should also be allowed to enter into two-year contracts with suppliers, instead of the six-month contracts many have now, to avoid short-term price spikes for consumers, Reilly said. The Attorney General's Office acts as an advocate for consumers. Michael Monahan, a spokesman for NSTAR, which provides electricity to more than 1 million customers, is upgrading some of its power lines and last year built a new line to Cape Cod, but currently has no lines under construction. ""I wholeheartedly concur with the attorney general that it's something we have to focus on,"" Monahan said, but he added, ""The indications I see are that we have an ample supply of electricity."" California's statewide outages were ordered on Monday after a transformer fire, high demand and a lack of electricity imports pushed power reserves to near zero. California partially deregulated its electric industry in 1996, two years before Massachusetts. --- On the Net: Attorney General's Office: http://www.ago.state.ma.us NSTAR: http://www.nstaronline.com ISO New England Inc.: http://www.iso-ne.com NEVADA: Discussion of bill stopping power plant sales to continue Wednesday By JOHN WILKERSON Associated Press Writer 03/19/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. CARSON CITY, Nev. (AP) - Lawmakers hit more delays Monday in trying to pass a measure that pulls the plug on the sale of Nevada power plants to avoid California-style energy problems. ""The goal of this bill is only stopping the divestiture of power plants and making sure it's constitutional,"" said Senate Commerce and Labor Chairman Randolph Townsend, R-Reno. ""And that's not as easy as it sounds."" Townsend's comment just before his committee began working on SB253 was prophetic - witnesses kept bringing up the need for more flexibility in the measure. Translation: Don't kill all deals by stopping Reno-based Sierra Pacific Power and Las Vegas-based Nevada Power from selling their Nevada power plants until June 2003 - and possibly until 2006. Pete Ernaut, a lobbyist for Reliant Energy which has been trying to buy a power plant, said unforeseen market changes could make a plant sale before 2003 a deal that would be in the public's interest. ""If you put a two-year moratorium on these plants, all these deals are going to go away,"" he said. ""When the cow leaves the barn, it's difficult to catch."" Townsend had hoped to wrap up committee work on SB253 on Monday. Now it's up for review again Wednesday in the Commerce and Labor Committee. Reliant isn't the only company trying to keep power plant purchases alive. Earlier this month, executives of Pinnacle West Energy told the committee that it's in the public's interest to allow Sierra Pacific Resources to sell its Harry Allen power plant. The Harry Allen plant produces about 72 megawatts out of the 2,900 megawatts of energy that Nevada utilities generate. Pinnacle has plans to expand that to 700 megawatts by 2004. Other provisions not strictly related to the plant divestitures, such as ways in which Sierra Pacific and Nevada Power can recover the cost of undoing the sales contracts, don't have to be included in SB253, Townsend said. Townsend said the other concerns dealing with the energy crisis and utility deregulation can be handled in later bills - but the power plant sale issue must be handled now. Nevada's PUC and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission had directed Sierra Pacific and Nevada Power to sell the plants as a condition of the companies' merger in 1999 under the parent company Sierra Pacific Resources. Critics of the plant sales say the plants generate about half the state's electricity - and if they're sold, the unregulated new owners could sell the power to other states and put Nevada into the energy dilemma California faces of shrinking supply and rising prices. The Southern Nevada Water Authority has presented an analysis stating that rate payers will save from $1.7 billion to $3.5 billion by July 2001 if the power plant sales are stopped. Nevada's Consumer Advocate's Office previously had projected a conservative estimate of $915 million in savings. MAINE: Panel of experts would review impact of energy deregulation By GLENN ADAMS Associated Press Writer 03/19/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. AUGUSTA, Maine (AP) - In the wake of rolling blackouts in California and rate spikes in their home state, Maine's top legislators proposed a study Monday into the effects of deregulation of the energy industry. ""Deregulation of electricity is a new idea and we still have a lot to learn,"" Senate President Michael Michaud said as he called for the analysis. A panel of industry insiders, elected officials and consumers would study issues such as what standard rate consumers can expect and the likelihood of energy shortfalls over the next three years, and whether Maine consumers are vulnerable to anti-competitive activities. In addition, the Blue Ribbon Commission would look into whether changes in Maine's deregulation law are needed to encourage more generating capacity, improve conservation and spur competition. The study is being proposed as consumers remain mindful of a power crisis in California that resulted from high wholesale energy costs, a consumer rate cap and too few power plants in that deregulated state. Maine's deregulation law is designed to avoid such pitfalls, said Rep. William Savage, D-Buxton, House chairman of the Legislature's Utilities Committee. Maine's law does not cap consumer prices, as California's does, and the state has more than enough generating facilities to meet the state's energy needs, Savage said. Since Maine's deregulation law took effect in March 2000, Bangor Hydro-Electric Co. rates have increased 19 percent. The Public Utilities Commission approved a residential standard rate increase as recently as last month. Federal energy regulators are reviewing their decision to allow steep fee increases for utilities and power wholesalers that fail to arrange enough capacity to meet customers' peak load. Gov. Angus King and all four members of Maine's congressional delegation oppose the hike. The PUC has approved standard rate increases for energy delivered by Central Maine Power Co. to medium-sized and large industrial users. On the other hand, some towns and school districts are saving money on energy through deals they can get in the deregulated market. In the meantime, legislation has been introduced in response to some of the changes that have occurred in Maine's deregulated energy industry. One would use some of the money from the sale of power-generating assets to offset an increase in rates paid by large industrial users, said Sen. Norman Ferguson, R-Hanover, Senate chairman of the Utilities Committee. Supporters of the utility study that was proposed Monday said they are not looking to make changes in Maine's deregulation law, but if it needs fixing it could be done during next year's session. The lawmakers' primary interest is to find out how trends in a new environment designed to encourage competition will affect consumers, and to try to identify what consumers can expect in the few years ahead. House Speaker Michael Saxl, D-Portland, said the Legislature ""has a fundamental public policy interest in making sure rate-payers and businesses are protected against exorbitant rate hikes."" Michaud, D-East Millinocket, said he's interested in finding out how future changes in electric prices and availability might affect businesses and consumers in northern Maine. ""The economy in my part of the state is the most vulnerable, and I want to make certain we are leaving no stone unturned in our effort to prevent any shocks to the economy in northern, western and eastern Maine,"" Michaud added. The commission would include House and Senate members from each party, a utility executive, and representatives of energy producers, providers, a large commercial consumer and individual consumers. OREGON: State Senate moves to combat energy crisis 03/16/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. SALEM, Ore. (AP) - In an attempt to avoid a California-like energy crisis, the Oregon Senate approved a bill Friday that would quicken the process of siting power plants that use gas and renewable resources. ""It's important for Oregon. It makes sure that energy will be available to everyone,"" said Sen. Lee Beyer, D-Springfield. The measure, SB843, would shorten the siting process for power plants that use gas and renewable resources, like wind, from a year and a half to a matter of months. The speeded-up process would be in effect for two years. ""If we can act now, we can actually start to solve power supply problems by this summer,"" said Sen. Jason Atkinson, R-Jacksonville California's strict regulations on the construction of new power plants has contributed to its current shortage and legislators took note. Beyer said though California was definitely a wake-up call, the measure is a reaction to the larger power picture in the Northwest. With low rainfall, hydroelectric generators will have trouble meeting demand, Beyer said. Gas-fired and wind plants could come online as soon as this fall and would provide relief. ""We are not in a position to sit back and do nothing about the energy crisis the Northwest and the country are experiencing,"" said Senate Minority Leader Kate Brown, D-Portland. Conservationists, however, caution that lawmakers should be careful not to rush to provide power at the expense of environmental standards. WISCONSIN: Two utilities to add 975 megawatts in plan to avoid energy crisis By The Associated Press 03/22/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. Plans of two state utilities to add 975 megawatts to Wisconsin's electric power grid as a way of avoiding an energy crisis similar to California's were questioned Thursday by a consumer advocate who said too many power plants may be in the works. ""Certainly nobody wants to see blackouts like you have in California but there is the danger Wisconsin could be overbuilding,"" said Steve Hiniker, executive director of the Citizens' Utility Board, which represents consumer interests in utility rate cases. He noted that plant construction costs ultimately are born by the utility customers. Alliant Energy Corp. announced its proposal Wednesday - in a filing with the state Public Service Commission - to spend $1 billion to build one coal and two gas-fired power plants. Alliant has proposed building a 500 megawatt coal-fired plant and a 100 megawatt natural-gas fired plant by 2006. It also wants to build a 200 megawatt natural gas-fired facility in 2011. Wisconsin has not built a coal-fired plant in more than two decades. Alliant has not determined the plants' locations. Also, Madison Gas & Electric, the state's smallest investor-owned utility, said Wednesday that it had signed deals to buy 175 megawatts of power from three generating plants in Wisconsin and Illinois. ""Three out of the four past summers, we've had public appeals for conservation due to shortages somewhere in the state. We need to take steps to avoid that, and the California situation makes that even more clear,"" said Alliant spokesman Chris Schoenherr. ""Getting more iron in the ground will give us more flexibility in the state to be able to react."" Alliant acknowledged the new plants will probably mean rate increases, but it was too early to say how much rates would go up. California's problems, which this week resulted in the first deliberate blackouts since World War II, stemmed from underestimating the state's power needs, forcing utilities to sell their power plants but not allowing them to secure long-term supply contracts, and freezing rates, among other things. But Wisconsin's situation is far different. The state has moved slower than California toward deregulation, and there has been no desire here to speed up the process in recent years as power reliability became a problem. The PSC estimates that Wisconsin will need an additional 3,000 megawatts of power over the next decade. Hiniker said Wisconsin needs to coordinate its planning to avoid overbuilding. The costs of new power plants are passed on to ratepayers, meaning electric bills will increase as new generation is added. In addition, coal-generated power plants are a major source of air pollution in the state. ""We don't have the advance planning that has kept Wisconsin from overbuilding in the past,"" said Hiniker. ""This is something the PSC should be doing."" MG&E's deals are: -A 10-year contract to buy 75 megawatts from Calpine Energy Services starting in May 2004. The power will come from the natural gas-fired plant Rock River Energy Center, near Beloit. Calpine Energy Services is a unit of San Jose, Calif.-based Calpine Energy Corp. The plant is being built by Northbrook, Ill.-based SkyGen Energy LLC, which Calpine bought last year from SkyGen President Michael Polsky and Wisvest Corp., a unit of Wisconsin Energy Corp. -A 10-year contract to buy 50 megawatts of power from the Rainy River Energy Corp. starting in May 2002. The power is coming from a natural gas-fired plant near Joliet, Ill. owned by LS Power Co. Rainy River is a unit of Duluth-based Minnesota Power Inc. -A five-year contract to buy 50 megawatts from an El Paso Merchant Energy plant near Cordova, Ill., in western Illinois. The owner of the natural gas facility is the Cordova Energy Center Co., which is a unit of Iowa-based MidAmerican Energy Holdings. Alliant also offered support in the Wednesday filing for a $7 billion plan of Milwaukee-based Wisconsin Energy, which includes five new power plants in Oak Creek and Pleasant Prairie. -- On the Net: CUB: http://www.wiscub.org/ Alliant Energy: http://www.alliant-energy.com Wisconsin Public Service Commission: http://www.psc.state.wi.us Wisconsin Energy: http://www.wisenergy.com/ Madison Gas & Electric: http://www.mge.com Use this file to download and print all the articles in this section (See attached file: Dow Jones If you wish to be removed from the distribution list for this update please contact Pru Sheppard - DC. All recipients of this message have been Bcc'd as part of industry best practice for broadcast emails. | This message may contain confidential and/or privileged | | information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to | | receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, | | disclose or take any action based on this message or any | | information herein. If you have received this message in | | error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail | | and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. | - Dow Jones - pic24389.pcx - pic05075.pcx - Dow Jones [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= meeting; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/13/2000 08:20 AM --------------------------- Michael A Sadler <msadler@ksu.edu> on 07/27/2000 03:49:00 PM To: skean@enron.com cc: Subject: meeting Dear Steven: Just to refresh your memory ... we met in June to discuss future job prospects at Enron. At that time, you had offered to get me in touch with someone in the Finance Division (?) at Enron to discuss similar topics. I am sorry to bother you with matters such as this, but I am still very interested in a position with Enron and would like to follow through on this offer, if you are still willing. As an aside, another contact gave me the name of Rob Bradley and suggested that I get in touch with him. I don't know if that is who you had in mind, or not. I am moving my wife to Houston next week, and will be available to meet any time from Friday, August 4 until Thursday, August 10. After that, I leave for a conference in Seattle, but will back in Houston for one day on Thursday, August 17th. As for my timetable (which at the time you had told me to keep you apprised of), I will continue in my position at K-State for the Fall semester. After that, I'm a free man. I have a couple of academic offers for temporary positions in the Spring, one at Rice and one at UT-Austin. The latter is very appealing, but would require my absence from home during the weeks. As such, I am still wide open beginning in January. In spite of the fact that I awoke at 3:30AM in order to get to the airport the day that I met Jim Steffes and you, I got a lot out of our meeting. I was very impressed with Enron and what you had to say, and am hopeful about future prospects with the company. I remain very interested in a future position at Enron, and perhaps in Public and Government Affairs (I hope I have that right). Thank you for everything. I hope that you had a nice vacation. Sincerely, Mike Sadler * Michael A. Sadler Assistant Professor Department of Economics Kansas State University 320 Waters Hall Manhattan, KS 66506 (785) 532-4574 (785) 532-6919 (fax) msadler@ksu.edu [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Enron Complaint; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/11/2001 08:46 AM --------------------------- From: Richard B Sanders/Enron@enronXgate on 07/11/2001 08:25 AM To: Karen Denne/ENRON@enronXgate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Mark Palmer/ENRON@enronXgate, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: FW: Enron Complaint -----Original Message----- From: ""Cindy Frederick"" <cfred@pkns.com>@ENRON Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 9:59 PM To: gfergus@brobeck.com; Sanders, Richard B. Subject: Enron Complaint Final version of Enron Complaint. Document is in Word Perfect 8. The information contained in this e-mail message and any accompanying documents is subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or the attorney work product rule and is confidential business information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or representative of the recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify Kathryn A. Pugh at kpugh@pkns.com and immediately delete this message from your system. - 288950_1.WPD [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= How about lunch?; [EMail-Body]= A typical utility luncheon. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 12/09/99 05:40 PM --------------------------- Enron Energy Services From: Michael Harris 12/09/99 05:03 PM Phone No: 713-345-7557 To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: How about lunch? - Lunch(1).jpg [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: London, New York, Houston, Financial Mathematics June/July 2001; [EMail-Body]= Joanna, You can keep the name as is. I don't want Zimin to be blamed for the flaws of my presentation. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Joanna Vidal"" <jvidal@riskwaters.com>@ENRON Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 10:10 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Re: London, New York, Houston, Financial Mathematics June/July 2001 Hello Vince! Hope you are well. Thank you for your presentations. Just one question, would you like me to change the name on the presentations from Vince to Zimin, or should I leave them as is? Please advise. Take care Joanna ----- Original Message ----- From: <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com> To: <jvidal@riskwaters.com> Cc: <Zimin.Lu@enron.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 10:26 AM Subject: RE: London, New York, Houston, Financial Mathematics June/July 2001 > Joanna, > > I am sending you, as promised, the copies of my presentation. > My associate, Zimin Lu, will speak in my place in New York. > > You may want to change the background in the July 9 PowerPoint > presentation for printing (you can do it with one Format/Background/Apply > to All) > command in order to make the copies look nicer. > > Please, confirm the receipt of the message and make sure > you can print the slides and they come out OK. I am leaving for a foreign > trip tomorrow > and it will be difficult to reach me. > > Vince > (See attached file: NY070901.ppt)(See attached file: NY071001.ppt) > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: ""Joanna Vidal"" <jvidal@riskwaters.com>@ENRON > ENRON@ENRON.com] > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 3:38 PM > To: ds64@cyrus.andrew.cmu.edu; Geman Helyette; vkamins@enron.com; > kaminski@aol.com; pnance@teknecon.com; > chris.harris@innogy.com; eronn@mail.utexas.edu; > sama@dynegy.com > Subject: Re: London, New York, Houston, Financial Mathematics June/July > 2001 > > > Dear Speakers, > > I understand how awfully busy you must all be at this time, but I would > appreciate a phone call or a quick email to confirm that you ahve or > have not, for that matter received the speaker packets I sent to you > May 2, 2001. please advise as soon as possible, that way, if yo have > not, for whatever received them, I will know what steps to take from > there. > > All the best. > > Sincerely, > > Joanna Vidal > > PS: My contact details are posted below. > > Joanna Vidal > Events Coordinator > Risk Waters Group > T: (212) 925 1864 ext. 197 > F: (212) 925 7585jvidal@riskwaters.com << File: > mailto:jvidal@riskwaters.com >> www.riskwaters.com << File: > http://www.riskwaters.com >> > [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Congratulations; [EMail-Body]= Thanks. Vince J Kaminski@ECT 01/11/2000 08:01 AM To: Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Congratulations Rick, I have just looked at the memo regarding promotions. Congratulations - well deserved. Vince [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Message from Clark C. Smith; [EMail-Body]= include on the distribution list and send out note about the Monday meeting. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/13/2001 07:36 PM --------------------------- ""Mollere, Shea"" <Shea.Mollere@ElPaso.com> on 05/11/2001 04:27:14 PM To: ""'skean@enron.com'"" <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: Message from Clark C. Smith As per our discussion, let's discuss this further next week. Clark C. Smith President El Paso North America 1001 Louisiana Houston, TX 77002 713/420-7575 713/420-7591 - FAX clark.smith@elpaso.com John Harrison (credit issues) CFO El Paso Merchant Energy Group 1001 Louisiana Houston, TX 77002 713/420-3230 713/420-3942 john.harrison@elpaso.com Rachael King Regional Director - Government Affairs - California El Paso Corporation 980 9th Street, Suite 1550 Sacramento, CA 95814 916/441-0446 916/441-0496 rachael.king@elpaso.com This email and any files transmitted with it from the ElPaso Corporation are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Thu evening; [EMail-Body]= Thanks. Confirmed. Vince -----Original Message----- From: On Behalf Of marek.musiela@bnpparibas.com Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 11:48 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Re: Thu evening Just to confirm the time and location for tonight: Marek has a table booked for 8:30pm at: Tamarind 20 Queen Street London W1X 7PJ Tel: 020 7629 3561 Rgds, Jody 28/06/2001 11:31 Internet Vince.J.Kaminski@ENRON.com - 28/06/2001 11:31 To: piotr.karasinski cc: Marek MUSIELA bcc: Subject: Thu evening Piotr, I can pick up my E-mail messages from here. You can E-mail me with the place and location for tonight. Vince This message and any attachments (the ""message"") is intended solely for the addressees and is confidential. If you receive this message in error, please delete it and immediately notify the sender. Any use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval. The internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS (and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message if modified. Ce message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le ""message"") sont etablis a l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires et sint confidentiels. Si vous recevez ce message par erreur, merci de le detruire et d'en avertir immediatement l'expediteur. Toute utilisation de ce message non conforme a sa destination, toute diffusion ou toute publication, totale ou partielle, est interdite, sauf autorisation expresse. L'internet ne permettant pas d'assurer l'integrite de ce message, BNP PARIBAS (et ses filiales) decline(nt) toute responsabilite au titre de ce message, dans l'hypothese ou il aurait ete modifie. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= <<Concur Expense Document>> - JB 003; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/13/2001 08:00 PM --------------------------- eserver@enron.com on 05/10/2001 02:36:34 PM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - JB 003 The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: John Brindle Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: JB 003 Report Total: $3,976.51 Amount Due Employee: $3,976.51 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://xms.enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Weekly Regulatory and Government Affairs Report; [EMail-Body]= print first attachment only ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/16/2000 10:15 AM ----- Janet Butler 10/13/2000 03:59 PM To: Daniel Allegretti/HOU/EES@EES, Tim Aron/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, nancy.bagot@enron.com, John Ballentine/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Martha Benner/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Eric Benson/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Donna Lynn Blair/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jack Boatman/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Theresa Branney/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Lorna Brennan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Bob Chandler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Bill Cordes/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Christi Culwell/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Mary Darveaux/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Larry DeRoin/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Rick Dietz/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Dari Dornan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, John Dushinske/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Sharon Farrell/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron, Lou Geiler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, John Goodpasture/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven Harris/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Glen Hass/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Robert Hayes/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Rod Hayslett/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Bambi Heckerman/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Theresa Hess/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Robert Hill/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Staci Holtzman/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Tamara Hopkins/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Stanley Horton/Corp/Enron@Enron, Lee Huber/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Martha Janousek/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Steven January/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Anne Jolibois/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeffrey Keeler/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Robert Kilmer/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Frazier King/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Steve Kirk/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Tim Kissner/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Laura Lantefield/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Linda L Lawrence/HOU/EES@EES, Blair Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron, Teb Lokey/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Phil Lowry/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Donna Martens/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Dorothy McCoppin/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Mike McGowan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Rockford Meyer/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Mary Kay Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, michael.moran@enron.com, Sheila Nacey/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Michel Nelson/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Ray Neppl/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Robert Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Ranelle Paladino/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Maureen Palmer/HOU/EES@EES, Zelda Paschal/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Geneva Patterson/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Maria Pavlou/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Eileen Peebles/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Keith Petersen/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Peggy Phillips/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Janet Place/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Tony Pryor/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Colleen Raker/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kathy Ringblom/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jenny Rub/Corp/Enron@Enron, Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James Saunders/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Lisa Sawyer/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Donna Scott/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Susan Scott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Dave Schafer/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Mike G Smith/NA/Enron@Enron, Louis Soldano/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Lon Stanton/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, James Studebaker/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Jim Talcott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Edith Debbie Thompson/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Denis Tu/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Michael Van Norden/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Stephen Veatch/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Donald Vignaroli/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jody Warner/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Kimberly Watson/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Amber White/HR/Corp/Enron@Enron, Julia White/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kim Wilkie/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jane.Wilson@enron.com, Michele Winckowski/ET&S/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Weekly Regulatory and Government Affairs Report Attached is the weekly report for week ending October 13. Also attached is the Order 637 Update. Lastly, is the notice for Electronic Filings. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FERC's Prospective Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for CA Wholesale
 Electric Markets; [EMail-Body]= fyi ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/26/2001 03:55 PM --------------------------- Ray Alvarez 04/25/2001 11:58 PM To: Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mike Swerzbin/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael M Driscoll/PDX/ECT@ECT, Matt Motley/PDX/ECT@ECT, Robert Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Diana Scholtes/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sean Crandall/PDX/ECT@ECT, Chris Mallory/PDX/ECT@ECT, Jeff Richter/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Alonso/PDX/ECT@ECT, Mark Fischer/PDX/ECT@ECT, Phillip Platter/HOU/ECT@ECT, Carla Hoffman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Christopher F Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT, Michael Etringer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steve C Hall/PDX/ECT@ECT, Christian Yoder/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tim Heizenrader/PDX/ECT@ECT, Stephen Swain/PDX/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON, Elliot Mainzer/PDX/ECT@ECT, Bill Williams III/PDX/ECT@ECT, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mike Grigsby/HOU/ECT@ECT, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Neil Bresnan/HOU/EES@EES, Jubran Whalan/HOU/EES@EES, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Jess Hewitt/HOU/EES@EES, Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT, John J Lavorato/Enron@EnronXGate, Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, rcarroll@bracepatt.com, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: FERC's Prospective Mitigation and Monitoring Plan for CA Wholesale Electric Markets The following report is comprised of what was discussed at the Commission meeting held tonight at approximately 7 PM EST and additional intelligence gathered from FERC staffers after the meeting by Joe Hartsoe: Physical Withholding -- To prevent physical withholding, the plan will require sellers with PGA's to offer all their available power in real time. All California generators, even those not subject to FERC price regulation, will be required to sell into the ISO's real time market as a condition of their use of the ISO's interstate transmission lines. Hydroelectric facilities will be exempted. (24-7 for 1yr) Price Mitigation - The plan will establish a single market clearing price auction for the real time market. During Stage 1, 2 and 3 emergencies in the ISO's real time market, each generator (other than hydro) with a participating generator agreement is required to offer all available power and bid its marginal cost based on the generator's heat curve, emission rates, gas costs and emission costs, plus $2 for O&M. The gas cost will be the average daily cost of gas for all delivery points in California; emissions are to be based on Cammon Fitzgerald(?). The gas cost and emissions will be published the day after, for use on the following day. A single market clearing price is determined in real time for all generators. Highest bid sets the clearing price. Each gas fired generator must file with FERC and the ISO, on a confidential basis, heat and emission rates for each generating unit. The ISO will use these rates to calculate a marginal cost for each generator, including maintenance and operating costs. In the event a generator submits a bid higher than the proxy price, the generator must, within 7 days of the end of each month, file a report with FERC and the ISO justifying its price. FERC has 60 days to review/act. No opportunity costs in real time. Marketers are in the same boat, as they must be prepared to justify bid at purchased cost based on specific purchases or portfolio with no opportunity cost. However, credit sleeves are permissible. Demand Response - Beginning June 1, only public utility load serving entities must submit demand side bids to curtail load and identify the load to be curtailed under those bids. FERC is attempting to break the demand curve. (24-7) Outages -- PGA generators will coordinate planned outages and report forced outages in accordance with the Commission Staff proposal adopted by FERC. Term - Order expires one year from date of issuance. RTO Filing - California ISO and two Utilities must make RTO filing by June 1 or Order lapses with no further effect. ISO Reporting - On September 14, 2001, ISO must file a status report on how things are working and how much generation has been built. Comments are due in 15 days. Quarterly reports thereafter. Revocation of Market Based Rate Authority and Refunds - The market based rate authority of all public utilities is conditioned on 1) no physical withhold of capacity, and 2) no inappropriate bidding behavior. Inappropriate bidding behavior includes bidding unrelated to known characteristics of the generation unit or without an input cost basis or bidding not based on unit behavior. An increased bid based on increased demand could apparently be inappropriate. In addition, ""hockey stick"" bids are expressly prohibited (i.e. bidding 95% at marginal cost and 5% at a much higher level). Limited 206 filing - Applies to sales in the WSCC, outside California. Refund conditions apply in real time spot markets when contingency within a control area falls below 7%. Control areas are not required to publish when this condition occurs. Apparently anything over marginal cost must be justified. All marketers and non-hydroelectric generators must offer to sell contractually and physically available capacity/energy to a location within WSCC. FERC is attempting to mirror the rules applied in California. Comments are due in 10 days on the 206 investigations. The refund effective date is 60 days from publication of the Order. Nox Limits in California -- Must sell requirements do not apply if a unit is prohibited from running by law. However, it appears that incurring fines does not overcome the must sell requirement- just include the fines as part of the price bid. Also if Nox is limited, may seek to show that generation would have been sold elsewhere or at different times for determining price. Surcharge to pay past amount due -- Comments are due in 30 days on 1) whether FERC should require the ISO to surcharge parties for payment into an escrow account to pay past costs and 2) the effect this surcharge would have on the PG&E bankruptcy filing. No mention was made at the meeting as to issue of exports of power from California. The Order is not finally drafted as of yet, and the status of the foregoing items could change upon issuance of the Final Order. We will keep you posted. RA [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: FERC's marketing affiliate conference; [EMail-Body]= I heard you were a big hit. Leslie Lawner 03/20/2001 08:45 AM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Shelley Corman/Enron@EnronXGate, Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: FERC's marketing affiliate conference Becky and I attended FERC's gas marketing affiliate conference last week. Non-affiliated competitors continue to build straw men and describe abuses with no real evidence to back them up (the funny money argument and capacity hoarding are two examples. The funny money argument assumes marketing affiliates will bid above market rates for capacity because they excess payment is going to the corporate bottom line. Hoarding capacity to drive up price may be an issue, but it is not a marketing affiliate issue, as anyone can do it). FERC staff did not seem terribly sympathetic to the points made, but at least one FERC staffer seemed to believe that one solution would be to require the pipelines to offer capacity in smaller blocks to let smaller entities put together bids. FERC also indicated they were in fact auditing compliance, but in a non-public way. There were some concerns voiced which I agree with and there is an opportunity to file additional comments on Apr. 30. I would like to put the following in these comments: Evidence of affiliate abuse/preference is just not there. The best folks can do is make up stuff. We welcome FERC monitoring if that is needed to bring confidence to the marketplace that abuse is not occurring. But the issue is really whether we do have a crisis of confidence or merely a bunch of disgruntled competitors who are just seeking to neutralize the affiliated competitors). The FERC rules and the information reported (with a caveat) under those rules are adequate for detection and enforcement and deterrence. That said, the definition of marketing affiliate should be expanded to include affiliated electric generators, who are siting plants along affiliate pipelines. The pipeline 637 reporting and internet systems should allow users to download and manipulate transportation related data, which is not currently the case. We also need to address a deal on Northern where ENA took capacity at a discount, albeit after other parties had an opportunity to match our bid. This was a deal brought up in the conference. Let me know how this sounds. Thanks. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Rick, Malcolm, Mark, Lyndon meet with Steve,  Dan to call in after
 his radio interview.; [EMail-Body]= General Staff Meeting [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Cheney Meeting Briefing Book; [EMail-Body]= You are awesome. Linda Robertson 04/13/2001 03:58 PM Sent by: Lora Sullivan To: Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Tori L Wells/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Carolyn Cooney/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lora Sullivan/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron, Carin Nersesian/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Cheney Meeting Briefing Book Attached is the Briefing Book for the 10:00 AM (EDT) Cheney meeting on Tuesday, April 17, 2001. We will be making additions to this book over the weekend, and a final document will be ready for Ken Lay and Steve Kean on Monday evening. By fax we are sending the attachment documents which were not available to us electronically. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: CONFIDENTIAL - Residential in CA; [EMail-Body]= Agreed. Trying to be too cute with our strategy is difficult. Look, about 4 years ago we pulled out of the market. I think that we need to simply accept that these customers are going back sooner or later. NPC won't even pick this up. Jim Paul Kaufman@ECT 04/13/2001 01:06 PM To: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich Subject: Re: CONFIDENTIAL - Residential in CA I like the idea, particularly if we can time any decision to turn the customers back so it falls after the failure to get some action out of Sacto (instead of after our earnings release). The only problem I see is that we would need a decision from the top that we're not going to turn the customers back if we get direct access (so we can end the debate). I don't think it helps us if we get lucky, get direct access back, then make a decision to return customers to the utility. Karen Denne@ENRON 04/13/2001 10:30 AM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Re: CONFIDENTIAL - Residential in CA Before any decision is made, I think we really need to weigh in with EES on the ramifications (both PR and legislative) of turning back 16,000 residential customers. I strongly believe that the public hit we will take will be far greater than our actual out-of-pocket losses. We will be crucified by the public, media, consumer groups, legislators, governor, attorney general, etc., and this action will reaffirm our reputation of packing up and leaving when it's not in our interest. The impact of this action would be exacerbated since it is on the heels of UC/CSU. I would also argue that this hurts our national dereg efforts. If we're advocating that competition and choice benefits consumers and then we turn around and pull out of a market and abandon customers when we're not ""profiting,"" we'll kill any chances we have of ever serving retail customers in California -- or in any other state. We look foolish advocating for direct access when we're not willing to serve our existing -- let alone future customers What about a preemptive strike that engages these 16,000 customers to weigh in on direct access -- i.e. a letter that says ""Enron may be forced to cancel its contract -- call/write/send the enclosed postcard to your legislator and tell them you want to keep your right to choose your energy service provider."" Our credibility is on the line. Before we take this action, we need to be cognizant of all the long-range strategic implications, and we need to seriously weigh the negative impact this will have on our corporate reputation, on our legislative abilities and on our commercial success going forward. kd James D Steffes 04/12/2001 09:05 PM To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES Subject: CONFIDENTIAL - Residential in CA In the meeting today, no decision was made about what to do with Enron's 16,000 residential customers. Each of the contracts gives a basic 30 day out right to Enron. That being said, I think that we have a short window to push for DA before any public action impacts us in Sacramento. I realize that the ultimate action (which I think is inevitable) makes it harder for our advocacy on DA, but real $ are flowing out of the company. EES will give us notice when a decision is reached. Thanks, Jim [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: CONFIDENTIAL - Residential in CA; [EMail-Body]= Were you on the call yesterday---I went ballistic. And where are you now!?! The calls underway. Karen Denne 04/13/2001 12:45 PM To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Re: CONFIDENTIAL - Residential in CA I get so worked up over this issue... I really think now is the time to speak up and dissent. Skilling told us at a floor meeting that as an organization we've made poor decisions in the past, and he believes it's because the people who disagreed with those decisions never spoke up. So help me out! From: Jeff Dasovich on 04/13/2001 12:34 PM Sent by: Jeff Dasovich To: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Re: CONFIDENTIAL - Residential in CA Amen. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Draft Letter to FERC by Consumer Groups; [EMail-Body]= Looks good. How about a point about the need to connect new generation=20 quickly. =09Sarah Novosel =0909/26/2000 09:55 PM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: skean@enron.com, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Sue Nord/NA/Enron@= Enron,=20 Margaret Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON,=20 mpalmer@enron.com, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff=20 Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: Draft Letter to FERC by Consumer Groups Below is my first rough draft of a letter that could be sent from consumers= =20 to FERC Chairman Hoecker. Due to technical difficulties, I could not attac= h=20 the letter in a separate document, so I copied the letter and have reprinte= d=20 it below. Having never been involved in this type of letter writing campaign, this wa= s=20 a bit of a stab in the dark for me, so I welcome everyone's comments. I am= =20 also working on a letter that could be sent by senior management or CEOs of= =20 high tech firms, but I wanted to get your feedback on this format before I= =20 went forward on the high tech letter. Let me know if you have any questions or comments. Sarah September 26, 2000 The Honorable James Hoecker Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, N.E. Washington, D.C. Re: Electric Power Industry Reform Dear Chairman Hoecker: We are consumers or represent consumers of electric power. We write to urg= e=20 you and your colleagues to take the initiative to address the intolerable= =20 shortages and extreme price volatility that have become all too common in t= he=20 electric power industry. It is imperative that the Federal Energy Regulato= ry=20 Commission proceed expeditiously with the reforms needed to support a=20 competitive and efficient power supply industry to ensure a reliable supply= =20 of power at the lowest possible cost to consumers. There are many actions you and your colleagues should take to ensure that t= he=20 power supply in the U.S. remains sufficient and is available at reasonable= =20 prices. For example, you and your colleagues should remove roadblocks in t= he=20 nation=01,s electricity gird. Under the current system, FERC regulations a= llow=20 many companies that own transmission systems to restrict access to their=20 transmission lines by competing electricity suppliers. The result of this= =20 policy is shortages, blackouts and skyrocketing prices. Like the interstat= e=20 highway system, FERC should allow electricity to move from one state to=20 another just as freely as motorists do. All electricity suppliers should= =20 have the same access to the transmission lines in order to transport power = to=20 where it is most needed. FERC should also discourage electricity suppliers=01, reliance on spot and= =20 short-term electricity markets for power supply. Instead, FERC should urge= =20 suppliers to purchase a portion of their power needs under long-term=20 contracts. Locking in electricity costs at fixed prices protects consumers= =20 from unexpected price swings that can be financially devastating. We strongly urge you and your colleagues to seize the initiative on these= =20 reforms. Consumers deserve a power supply industry that is both more=20 reliable and economical.=20 Very truly yours, [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Confidential Communication to my Attorney; [EMail-Body]= so, would we have an issue? -----Original Message----- From: Barrow, Cynthia Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 9:46 AM To: Cash, Michelle Subject: RE: Confidential Communication to my Attorney I think the issue is that if they only have one client then they could be considered employees from a 'discrim/coverage' standpoint. The issue is probably not in the area of insured plans but the qualified plans. The 410(b) is our adequate coverage test for the pension plan. Cb -----Original Message----- From: Cash, Michelle Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 9:39 AM To: Barrow, Cynthia Subject: RE: Confidential Communication to my Attorney who knows. I can't imagine that a customer would somehow owe insurance to the provider's employees. Michelle -----Original Message----- From: Barrow, Cynthia Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 9:37 AM To: Cash, Michelle Subject: RE: Confidential Communication to my Attorney God I hope not! However, we do include a portion of leased employees in our 410(b) tests for 'insurance'. I'd like to know who he talked with. -----Original Message----- From: Cash, Michelle Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 9:18 AM To: Barrow, Cynthia Subject: FW: Confidential Communication to my Attorney Cynthia, do you know anything about this type of requirement? Michelle -----Original Message----- From: ""Hoyt H. Thomas"" <hhth@earthlink.net>@ENRON Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 9:16 AM To: Cash, Michelle Cc: Booth, Khymberly; Tholan, Scott Subject: Confidential Communication to my Attorney Michelle, I was presented with some interesting information yesterday and I wanted to run it by you . . . I was not told this by an ERISA attorney but it was a person who works with Benefits frequently. The person told me that, if a company only had one customer, the company's employees had to be included in the control group of the customer for discrimination testing purposes on the benefits plans. It sounded a little iffy to me . . . could you verify? Thanks. Hoyt -- Hoyt H. Thomas 713.668.3122 713.201.1622 Mobile [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Market Maker Discussion; [EMail-Body]= Shirley, Please, put on my calendar. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Lee, Bob Sent: Friday, June 22, 2001 8:52 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J; Lu, Zimin; Bharati, Rakesh; De, Rabi; Huang, Alex; Shanbhogue, Vasant; Supatgiat, Chonawee; Barkley, Tom Cc: Kim, Jinbaek Subject: Market Maker Discussion The schedule for the remaining sessions to discuss papers on models for setting the bid-ask spread will be Friday, June 29 3:00-4:00PM Tuesday, July 3 2:00-3:00PM Friday, July 13 2:00-3:00PM Friday, July 27 2:00-3:00PM All in 19C2 The discussion topic is given in the presentation from June 20. On July 27 we will hear Jin's conclusions and recommendations for future work/direction. Bob Lee [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Moving foward at a good clip; [EMail-Body]= Call at 5:00 today (3:00 your time), if you can. -----Original Message----- From: Kevin Scott Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 12:59 PM To: Steve Kean Cc: Skilling, Jeff Subject: Moving foward at a good clip Steve Good news. As you indicated would happen, Kalen Pieper called me mid-week. We had a very good conversation about EES and Dave Delainey's leadership. She explored my views about doing business with government. Shortly thereafter, Dave's office called to invite me to Houston on Thursday July 26. Kay Chapman explained that Dave's schedule would keep him out of pocket until August 16. In order to move forward, Janet Dietrich will be meeting with me when I go to Houston next Thursday. (I must confess that after all the great things I have heard about the man, I do look forward to meeting Dave himself.) Is there a time next week that I can speak with you by phone to fine-tune my thinking / preparation for Thursday's meeting with Janet? Thank you for your all of your help. I am pleased and appreciative that things are moving forward at a good clip. Kevin Contact Information E-mail kevinscott@onlinemailbox.net Phone (213) 926-2626 Fax (707) 516-0019 Traditional Mail PO Box 21074 ?Los Angeles, CA 90021 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: RESPONSE NEEDED; [EMail-Body]= No charges. I think we should refer these to Carrie Robert and ask her to run down the people in the organization most likely to have an interest. In this case, I would get in touch with Andy Fastow, Ben Glissan or someone in the finance group in London. That way, we can make a better determination about the value of the relationship, make sure those who are interested in pitching them on doing bus. with Enron can be involved. Or, we can make a determination to decline. I think we decide who we want to let in then do it for free, rather than charging. MARY CLARK @ ENRON 04/17/2001 08:58 AM To: Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES cc: Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON@EES, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron@EES, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON@EES Subject: Re: RESPONSE NEEDED I'm not in favor of charging a fee; that takes the goodwill out of it. I'm open to discussion on how often we host these meetings, however. Elizabeth Tilney@EES 04/17/2001 08:29 AM To: Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: RESPONSE NEEDED I believe that Cindy and I can keep doing these and there is certainly a ""goodwill"" element here...and maybe that is the way to handle it. OR we might want to think about ""formalizing"" this, say once a quarter and sending out ""invitations"" and, maybe, charging for this????I think there are pros and cons on all sides of the charging issue.....maybe we should get together and discuss? Beth ---------------------- Forwarded by Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES on 04/17/2001 08:24 AM --------------------------- MARY CLARK @ ENRON 04/17/2001 08:23 AM To: Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: RESPONSE NEEDED Beth, we're a hot commodity. See a new request below to meet with us about innovation, culture, retaining talent. My team will coordinate this visit if you agree we should participate in this meeting. Mary ---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Clark/Corp/Enron on 04/17/2001 08:21 AM --------------------------- Karen Denne 04/17/2001 07:56 AM To: Mary Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Vance Meyer/NA/Enron@ENRON Subject: RESPONSE NEEDED Mary -- how do we route these requests? It seems like Beth and Cindy have been the point person for these visits, but I'm not sure how they'll react if we send the requests to them. Any ideas? thx. kd ---------------------- Forwarded by Karen Denne/Corp/Enron on 04/17/2001 07:51 AM --------------------------- From: Cindy Derecskey on 04/17/2001 05:18 AM To: Vance Meyer/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: RESPONSE NEEDED ----- Forwarded by Cindy Derecskey/Corp/Enron on 04/17/2001 05:17 AM ----- 04/17/2001 05:08 AM To: public-relations@enron.com cc: Subject: Fortune Study Awards Dear Sir/Madam, I am trying to find a contact within your organisation who could help me set up a meeting between a member of your Company and members of an Irish Bank who are extremely interested in sending a senior level delegation on a study visit to recognised leaders in certain fields, in particular the Innovativeness and Getting / Keeping Talent areas of the fortune survey. We recognise that you have won awards in these areas of the fortune survey and would like to contact someone in this field. I look forward to receiving your reply. Many thanks Elizabeth Book now for the 2001 Hay annual conference in Florence, http://www.icm.haygroup.com **** This e-mail and any attachments hereto are strictly confidential and intended solely for the addressee. It may contain information which is privileged. If you are not the intended addressee, you must not disclose, forward, copy or take any action in reliance of this e-mail or attachments. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete it and notify us as soon as possible. The anti-virus software used by Hay is updated regularly in an effort to minimise the possibility of viruses infecting our systems. However, you should be aware that there is no absolute guarantee that any files attached to this e-mail are virus free. Hay Management Consultants, 52 Grosvenor Gardens, London SW1W 0AU, Tel (44) (0)20 7881 7000, Fax (44) (0)20 7881 7100, http://www.haygroup.com, http://www.haypaynet.com, http://www.haygroup.co.uk Registered in England and Wales No. 763575 Registered office address as above **** [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Revised Enron Comments on NERC Bill; [EMail-Body]= Attached is revised draft of Enron comments on the NERC bill. The helpful editorial revisions came from Charles and Sarah. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential -Strategic Question; [EMail-Body]= Today's strong gas prices have opened a new window of opportunity for a pipeline to move Wyoming gas into the Ventura market and downstream. Currently, Trailblazer is conducting an open season to expand its facilities for service between Wyoming and Gage County, Nebraska. A number of our contacts in the Powder River (including ENA) are making decisions on Trailblazer capacity right now. When we invested in the Bighorn gas gathering project in December of 1999 we viewed a connection between Bighorn and Northern Border Pipeline (250miles) as a strategic advantage to be exploited in the future. Strong gas prices and the ramp of Powder River production are accelerating the feasibility of making a pipeline out of the Northern Powder River Basin a reality. While connecting the Powder River Basin to NBPL using an intrastate pipeline through Montana remains a real possibility, it also carries with it the negative baggage of NBPL being fully contracted through 2003 (and possibly beyond) with Canadian gas and a potential for Alaskan gas. In the short term this presents us with some problems getting shippers to sign up for transport on the new Montana intrastate. I would like you to think about the following concept . A new interstate pipeline named ""NBP-Dakota"" extending from the Recluse, Wyoming area to Ventura, Iowa and going into service in November of 2003. A tentative design and cost would be 24"" diameter, 1435 MAOP, 480 miles, with capex of approximately $270 million. Initial flow would be 300 mmcfd with expansion capability up to 490 mmcfd and an initial rate of just under 50 cents per mcf Recluse to Ventura. At today's Ventura price of $4.22 this could leave Powder River producers a margin of more than $2.00 an mcf. Using August, 1999, Ventura pricing of $2.64 the margin would be 64 cents. If we can build the pipeline at the cost projected, (NPNG has used Fort Union's actual construction costs for a 24 inch, 1440psi system - Enron Engineering would not even be in the same cost universe) ""NBP Dakota"" would be more competitive than sending the gas to NBPL via the Montana intrastate. I am of the opinion that future looping the Trailblazer system would come in as 3rd place to the other 2 routes. NBP Dakota would need to get started with an open season this fall to allow for a 2003 in-service date. THE QUESTION I need your opinion about using ""NBP Dakota"" for this opportunity rather than feeding more gas into NBPL in the northern Montana area. Strategically, are we willing to let NBPL carry the possible risk of decontracting after 2003 without support from the Powder River Basin ? For what it may be worth, I believe NBPL can handle that risk successfully without the Powder River volumes. I need to know your views on this as the Montana intrastate topic is coming up for discussion at the Bighorn Management Committee meeting later this summer. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Energy Policy Information; [EMail-Body]= Attached on the Cheney Report came via INGAA. For those in the DC office, I have already printed hard copies if you would like one in that form. These documents appear to be summaries and background materials on the Cheney report plus comparisons with the House Democrat's plan released yesterday. ---------------------- Forwarded by John Shelk/NA/Enron on 05/17/2001 09:51 AM --------------------------- ""Gay H. Friedmann"" <gfriedmann@INGAA.org> on 05/17/2001 09:35:40 AM To: ""'john.shelk@enron.com'"" <john.shelk@enron.com> cc: Subject: FW: Energy Policy Information -----Original Message----- From: Gay H. Friedmann Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 9:29 AM To: Anna Cochrane (E-mail); Becky Sczudlo (E-mail); Beverly K. Marshall (E-mail); Bob Weidner (E-mail); Brian Henneberry (E-mail); Brian J. Prenda (E-mail); Bruce McKay (E-mail); Bud Albright (E-mail); Charles N. Andreae III (E-mail); Claire Burum (E-mail); Curtis Burnett (E-mail); David Lynch (E-mail); David Mengebier (E-mail); Deborah Lawrence (E-mail); Denise Hamsher (E-mail); Glenn Jackson (E-mail); Gretchen Emling (E-mail); Heather Swift (E-mail); Holly Nichols (E-mail); Jeff Munk (E-mail); Joe Hartsoe (E-mail); Kathleen O'Leary (E-mail); Katie Woodruff (E-mail); Keith A. Tiggelaar (E-mail); Kerrill Scrivner (E-mail); Laureen Ross-McCalib (E-mail); Linda Robertson (E-mail); Lori Laudien (E-mail); Michael McMahon (E-mail); 'john.shelf@enron.com'; Rick Carter (E-mail); Rob Hall (E-mail); Robert Wood (E-mail); Thomas C. Briggs (E-mail); Thomas Hill (E-mail); Wayne Gable (E-mail) Cc: Martin E. Edwards; Terry D. Boss Subject: FW: Energy Policy Information Importance: High Enclosed is a copy of the briefing book prepared for the press and overview of the energy report.? The report is expected to be released at 11:45 this morning. ? - Overview.pdf - Energy_Plans_Comparison.doc - - energy_talkpoints_summary.doc - energy_q-a.doc - PIC06029.PCX [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California Lawmakers Vote to Limit Power Costs - WSJ; [EMail-Body]= They refer to expedited siting. What are the provisions? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/01/2000 08:27 AM --------------------------- From: Ann M Schmidt 09/01/2000 07:57 AM To: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Meredith Philipp/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: California Lawmakers Vote to Limit Power Costs - WSJ F.Y.I. California Lawmakers Vote to Limit Power Costs By Rebecca Smith 09/01/2000 The Wall Street Journal Page A4 (Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) California lawmakers voted to extend modest relief to San Diego residents burdened with high electricity bills and set the groundwork for faster construction of badly needed power plants. They stopped short, however, of passing legislation that would roll back retail power rates to levels seen prior to deregulation . Late Wednesday, lawmakers sent a bill to Gov. Gray Davis that limits to 6.5 cents per kilowatt hour the amount that small customers of San Diego Gas & Electric Co. can be charged. The utility is allowed to add power-delivery and other reasonable costs to that commodity price. The price, equivalent to a bulk power cost of $65 per megawatt hour, is far higher than the average price of power for 27 of the 31 months in which California's market has been deregulated. But in June and July, the average price of power obtained by the utility from a state-sanctioned energy auction rose to 12 cents and 10.5 cents, respectively, compared with the 2.3 cents and 2.8 cents charged in those months a year earlier. Passed directly through to customers,the resulting bills sparked a near mutiny. The rate-cap measure applies to residential and small commercial customers, as well as to schools and hospitals. In addition to the rate cap, which can be adjusted upward or downward by the California Public Utilities Commission until December 2002, the legislature earmarked $150 million of general-fund revenue, which can be used to subsidize San Diego power costs if they greatly exceed the 6.5-cents-per-kilowatt-hour rate. For now, the utility would be expected to make up any difference between revenue collected and the actual cost. Steve Baum, chairman of Sempra Energy, parent of San Diego Gas & Electric Co., said the rate-cap measure is ""deeply flawed"" because it limits the amount prices can rise but sets no floor. That means any shortfall could grow -- without a mechanism for customers to pay it down -- until the end of the rate-cap period, which could last until December 2002 or December 2003. Mr. Baum said Sempra stands to suffer an undercollection of perhaps $664 million, provided future prices approximate the New York Mercantile Exchange forward prices through December 2002. ""It's irreparably damaging to Sempra,"" he said because it ""creates tremendous uncertainty"" that makes it hard for the San Diego energy company to finance new projects such as a new transmission line. The legislature also appeared likely to approve a bill speeding up the permit process for the construction of new power plants, in part by beefing up staffs of regulatory agencies that review the plans. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Dinner for Summer Interns and Supervisors; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Crenshaw, Shirley Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 9:45 PM To: Mehendale, Bhalachandra; Kim, Jinbaek; Frantzeskakis, Kyriakos; Krishnarao, Pinnamaneni; Sud, Pravas; Parks, Russell; Kao, Candice; Cope, Eric; Xia, Zhendong; Kaminski, Vince J; Shanbhogue, Vasant; Raymond, Maureen; Kohli, Sandeep; Lu, Zimin; Lin, Martin Cc: Dupont, Anita Subject: FW: Dinner for Summer Interns and Supervisors Importance: High Hello everyone: Here is the update on the dinner for next Monday evening. Date: July 2, 2001 Where: Cavatore Italian Restaurant Address: 2120 Ella Blvd. Time: 6:30 PM Dress: Business Casual Who: Summer Interns and their Supervisors Directions: Take I-45 North to 610 West, go 610 West to the Ella Blvd exit. Exit at Ella Blvd and go back under the freeway continuing on Ella Blvd. The restaurant is approximately 6 blocks on the left (above address). If you need transportation, maybe we could get some car pools going. Let me know. Shirley [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Confidential Contact data and RFI; [EMail-Body]= Kevin I had the Capacity forecast column units mislabeled Here is the revised one. If you want, just have your NEEPOOL lead type over our forecast and re-send to us. We will not let this get out of our shop, and we will get you in on a block to buy. Thanks again Fred ----- Original Message ----- From: Presto, Kevin M. To: Fred W. Giffels <mailto:fgiffels@HGP-Inc.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 8:07 AM Subject: RE: Confidential Contact data and RFI Any nuclear specific info? Kevin Presto UBS Warburg Energy kevin.presto@ubswenergy.com Phone: 713-853-5035 Fax: 713-646-8272 -----Original Message----- From: Fred W. Giffels [mailto:fgiffels@HGP-Inc.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 7:04 AM To: Presto, Kevin M. Cc: Dan Salter Subject: Re: Confidential Contact data and RFI Confidential Kevin I know you would not bid the entire 1000Mwe, we are trying to come up with a proxy to assist in the bid, I am also trying to get you in with Mr.Green and the 150-200Mwe indicative would be great. I need it by Wednesday (2/13/02). Thanks for the return e-mail. Did you see the alert from the FBI yesterday and today ? Fred ----- Original Message ----- From: Presto, Kevin M. To: Fred W. Giffels <mailto:fgiffels@HGP-Inc.com> Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 5:50 PM Subject: RE: Confidential Contact data and RFI I'll get back with you on this within a couple of days. Do you want an indicative bid for 7x24 bus-bar energy (2, 5 and 10 years). We would not bid on the entire 1000 MW - maybe 150-200 MW. thanks for the info. Kevin Presto UBS Warburg Energy kevin.presto@ubswenergy.com Phone: 713-853-5035 Fax: 713-646-8272 -----Original Message----- From: Fred W. Giffels [mailto:fgiffels@HGP-Inc.com] Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 3:48 PM To: Presto, Kevin M. Cc: Dan Salter Subject: Confidential Contact data and RFI Kevin I just got the attached e-mail returned with your new address. Let me know if this one makes it thru Fred Confidential Kevin I know you are quite busy but I wonder if you could get your lead trader to look the following forecast for NEEPOOL. This may result in you getting the lead for a large block of the power so be conservative but have enough in there so it is a win win if you know what I mean. Have him fill in what he can. The client will be looking long 10 year, with maybe a series of 2 and 5 year deals. Should be putting out around 500 to 700 Mwe. Do not disclose the plant eh ? Call me at 864-370-0217 or 864-235-5607 or mobile 864-275-3193 Thanks Fred Visit our website at http://www.ubswarburg.com This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy version. This message is provided for informational purposes and should not be construed as a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any securities or related financial instruments. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Advisory board meeting; [EMail-Body]= While the more-open gas market may have more tools available than in electric markets, market solutions have been proposed as an alternative to legislated rate caps in the hard hit San Diego market. Gavin -- please send Irwin copies of the articles on the offers made in San Diego. Stelzer@aol.com on 08/25/2000 03:14:04 PM To: skean@enron.com cc: Subject: Advisory board meeting The WSJ report of 8-23 on the power/price situation in Con Ed's territory contains the following: ""And the tools to hedge prices, such as those that exist in other commodities markets, aren't fully developed yet for th fledgling deregulated electricity industry."" That might be worthy of comment in my talk. Anything I should see on the subject? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= <<Concur Expense Document>> - April 2001; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/28/2001 11:27 AM --------------------------- eserver@enron.com on 04/27/2001 11:53:15 AM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - April 2001 The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: Michael Terraso Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: April 2001 Report Total: $4,444.28 Amount Due Employee: $4,444.28 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://xms.enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: release draft; [EMail-Body]= revisions From: Mark Palmer on 06/07/2001 01:46 PM To: Paula Rieker/Corp/Enron@Enron, James A Hughes/Enron@EnronXGate, David Leboe/Enron@EnronXGate, Andrew S Fastow/Enron@EnronXGate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: release draft Please get back to me ASAP. Mark Palmer 34738 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: executives; [EMail-Body]= Jeff Shankman (COO of Enron Global Markets) is interested in going and would like to see the schedule. I told him you would send it to him. Jeff can also help us get our message across on the problems in California's power markets (Dasovich can fill you in). Also John ( Woody) Wodraska, managing director of Azurix is interested in attending. Please get in touch with him. I haven't heard from Stan yet. Susan M Landwehr 08/07/2000 10:26 PM To: Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES cc: Elizabeth Linnell/HOU/EES@EES, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@Enron, Carolyn Cooney/Corp/Enron@Enron Subject: executives Rick--just a reminder that I am not aware of anyone from the executive ranks that are interested in attending the democrat convention at this point. I believe that you and Steve Kean had asked the question about both conventions to those folks, but I wanted to make sure that we had covered the bases. Stan Horton is the president of INGAA this year, and they are having an event on Sunday the 13th, but I have not been made aware of whether he will be attending and whether he would be interested in partcipating in any of Enron's other events. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Privileged & Confidential -- Verification; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT on 09/18/2000 05:32 PM ----- ""Caren S. Sweetland"" <csweetland@Gibbs-Bruns.com> 09/18/2000 05:25 PM To: <Richard.B.Sanders@enron.com> cc: Subject: Privileged & Confidential -- Verification <<#92332 v1 - Verification - Interrogatories.wpd>> - #92332 v1 - Verification - Interrogatories.wpd [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message(due to missing attachment)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Knowledge Management Meeting; [EMail-Body]= calendar. Also, I would like you to set up a meeting with me, Cindy Olson, Beth Tilney, Kelly Kimberly, Mark koenig, Rick Causey, and Rick Buy. I was thinking the easiest way to get us all together would be to get a room at a restaurant for 6 or 6:30 some evening. I have contacted Beth and Cindy already, so they know what it is about, and I will leave messages for the others. I just need to check schedules for now. Also, I think it would be a good idea to have a get together after work once a month or so for the Public Affairs organization. Nothing fancy . . . Cadillac Bar or something similar. . . spouses and significant others invited. Talk it over with a couple of people in the group and let me know what you come up with. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/03/2000 06:47 PM --------------------------- Marie Hejka@ENRON on 08/02/2000 05:51:00 PM To: Maureen McVicker/HOU/EES@EES, Jo Ann Matson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Peggy McCurley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Amy Rios/HOU/ECT@ECT, Margarite Cunningham/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bobbie Power/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Melissa Becker/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Philippe A Bibi/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rick Buy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Causey/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeffrey McMahon/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Andrea Yowman/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Knowledge Management Meeting Good afternoon. Cindy Olson requested a meeting with the following attendees. Would you be so kind as to review their calendars and let me know if they are available during any of the suggested meeting times? Meeting Topic: Knowledge Management Meeting Purpose: Answer the following questions What is Knowledge Management? What Knowledge Management efforts are established at Enron? What is the value of a formal approach to Knowledge Management? What is essential to make a Knowledge Management effort at Enron a success? Is it time to formally establish a KM group? Is it time to inaugurate a person to formally direct Enron KM initiatives? Attendees: Melissa Becker Philippe Bibi Rick Buy Rick Causey Marie Hejka Steve Kean Jeff McMahon Cindy Olson Andrea Yowman Suggested Meeting Dates and Times: Thursday - August 17 10:00 -11:00 a.m. or 11:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. Friday - August 18 8:30 - 9:30 a.m. or 1:00 - 2:00 p.m. or 3:00 - 4:00 p.m. Monday - August 21 Open (except 11:00 a.m. - 1:00 p.m.) [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: PLEASE READ & RESPOND; [EMail-Body]= Yes. Contact either Gia or John and get the ball rolling. Thanks Michael Terraso 08/18/2000 04:20 PM To: Steven Kean cc: Maureen McVicker=20 Subject: PLEASE READ & RESPOND Steve, I received this note from Jeff Keeler who is on the government affai= rs=20 distribution list. Would you also want the EHS groups to work with Gia or= =20 John in developing value added documentation for this year's budget process= ? =20 Mike ---------------------- Forwarded by Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron on 08/18/2000= =20 04:14 PM --------------------------- =20 =09 =09 =09From: Jeffrey Keeler 08/18/2000 02:42 PM =09 To: Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron@ENRON cc: Stacey Bolton/HOU/EES@EES, Mary Schoen/NA/Enron@Enron=20 Subject: PLEASE READ & RESPOND Mike: here is a message from Steve Kean that is very relevant to the part= =20 of our call the other day in which we discussed the need to determine what= =20 EHS' (or Environmental Strategies') role should be in communicating with JI= m=20 Steffes' group and documenting the value we add. I will talk to Jim, but = I=20 am planning to have my group provide this information and meet the deadline= =20 in this memo. You may want to inquire with Steve as to whether others in= =20 EHS should participate as well. Jeff ---------------------- Forwarded by Jeffrey Keeler/Corp/Enron on 08/18/2000= =20 03:39 PM --------------------------- Steven J Kean@EES 08/18/2000 02:39 PM Sent by: Maureen McVicker@EES To: Govt Affairs (w/Assts), Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen=20 Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: =20 Subject: PLEASE READ & RESPOND Dear Colleagues, =20 On numerous occasions this past year, Enron Government Affairs (EGA) suppor= t=20 provided to commercial groups resulted in substantial increases in project= =20 economics and enhanced the overall value of many deals. The Regulatory Risk= =20 Analytics group has been tasked to help you quantify EGA=01,s portion of th= is=20 value added over the past year. For budgetary reasons, it is critical for= =20 every EGA member to participate in this exercise and document his/her share= =20 of significant value added. Please contact Gia Maisashvili or John Neslage= =20 to discuss the methodology for determining EGA=01,s value added as soon as= =20 possible. The contact information for Gia is (713) 853-4346, and for Joh= n=20 its (713) 853-6827. The dead line for this effort is Friday, September 1st Thank you for your cooperation [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Council of Shopping Centers, per Cynthia Sandherr.  In Chicago.
  John Scoblick doing this.; [EMail-Body]= Stan Broussard 3-5468 Cynthia Sandherr Subcommittee going to mark up on Oct 13 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Revised DeLay op ed; [EMail-Body]= I've made some changes (shown in bold). Bracketed text indicates a deletion . Jeannie Mandelker@ECT 08/18/2000 05:34 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES cc: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Revised DeLay op ed Steve -- great guidance. Cynthia -- hope we're in time. Jeff -- the fifth paragraph has some supply/demand figures for the early part of this week that I heard but can't track down the written source. Any suggestions? Please review and don't hesitate to call me this weekend. Best bet is home number -- 914-736-9504 or cell phone -- 914-318-1568. Jeannie [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: CONFIDENTIAL - Residential in CA; [EMail-Body]= Before any decision is made, I think we really need to weigh in with EES on the ramifications (both PR and legislative) of turning back 16,000 residential customers. I strongly believe that the public hit we will take will be far greater than our actual out-of-pocket losses. We will be crucified by the public, media, consumer groups, legislators, governor, attorney general, etc., and this action will reaffirm our reputation of packing up and leaving when it's not in our interest. The impact of this action would be exacerbated since it is on the heels of UC/CSU. I would also argue that this hurts our national dereg efforts. If we're advocating that competition and choice benefits consumers and then we turn around and pull out of a market and abandon customers when we're not ""profiting,"" we'll kill any chances we have of ever serving retail customers in California -- or in any other state. We look foolish advocating for direct access when we're not willing to serve our existing -- let alone future customers What about a preemptive strike that engages these 16,000 customers to weigh in on direct access -- i.e. a letter that says ""Enron may be forced to cancel its contract -- call/write/send the enclosed postcard to your legislator and tell them you want to keep your right to choose your energy service provider."" Our credibility is on the line. Before we take this action, we need to be cognizant of all the long-range strategic implications, and we need to seriously weigh the negative impact this will have on our corporate reputation, on our legislative abilities and on our commercial success going forward. kd James D Steffes 04/12/2001 09:05 PM To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES Subject: CONFIDENTIAL - Residential in CA In the meeting today, no decision was made about what to do with Enron's 16,000 residential customers. Each of the contracts gives a basic 30 day out right to Enron. That being said, I think that we have a short window to push for DA before any public action impacts us in Sacramento. I realize that the ultimate action (which I think is inevitable) makes it harder for our advocacy on DA, but real $ are flowing out of the company. EES will give us notice when a decision is reached. Thanks, Jim [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: 1.  London, June 28 - 29; 2.  Houston, July 16 - 17; [EMail-Body]= Shirley, Just Zimin and Vasant if they are free. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Crenshaw, Shirley Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 6:12 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: RE: 1. London, June 28 - 29; 2. Houston, July 16 - 17 Vince: Will it just be Ehud, you, Vasant and Zimin? Or will there be others? -----Original Message----- From: Kaminski, Vince J Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 12:08 PM To: Crenshaw, Shirley Subject: FW: 1. London, June 28 - 29; 2. Houston, July 16 - 17 Shirley, Can you get tickets for either night Ehud mentioned? Maybe Vasant and Zimin can join us? Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Ehud I. Ronn"" <eronn@mail.utexas.edu>@ENRON Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 11:08 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: 1. London, June 28 - 29; 2. Houston, July 16 - 17 Vince: Greetings. I write at this time for two reasons. First, w.r.t. 6/28 - 6/29 London, I remain uncertain whether you intend personally to attend and present at that EPRM Financial Math course. I wanted to advise you know that, in addition to the sightseeing/theatre we traditionally do at these events, we -- you, Duane Seppi, Peter Nance and I -- have been invited to dinner at the home of Klaus and Renee Toft Sat. evening 6/30. Second, w.r.t. the subsequent mid-July Houston training course, I write to remind you that at EPRM 2001 we discussed the possibility of jointly attending a baseball game at Enron Field 7/16 or 7/17. Per the Astros' schedule, it turns out the Cleveland Indians will be in town both nights for a 7:05 p.m. first-pitch start time at the Field. Let me know if either 7/16 or 7/17 works out from your perspective. Hope all is well. Best, Ehud Ehud I. Ronn Jack S. Josey Professor in Energy Studies Department of Finance McCombs School of Business University of Texas at Austin Austin, TX. 78712-1179 Voice: (512) 471-5853 FAX: (512) 471-5073 Internet: eronn@mail.utexas.edu [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= NXE Energy CNRS (French Agency) Confidential Executive Summary
 Report; [EMail-Body]= Attention: Mr. Kenneth L. Lay. Chairman & CEO, Enron Energy, Houston Dear Mr. Lay: Please find the attachment of the NXE Energy Executive Summary Report prepared by Dr. M. X. Francois, The Director of the Fluid Mechanics Laboratory of the French National Scientific Research Agency (CNRS). The Submission of this and all other information is of course confidential. The report combined with conversation's held with Dr. Francois recommends that because of the success of the ""Alpha"" Prototype testing we should proceed with an Industrial ""Beta"" model with certain modification's to the circuit piping system design, and insert a turbine and generator after completing sizing and a designed computer model. Again wishing you and Enron the best, NXE Energy David Taylor, Co-Founder & CSO Telephone (toll free) 877 696-0800 Cell Phone : 415 722 2846 - cogen_exec_sum4.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Patent attorney; [EMail-Body]= Larry, Thanks -----Original Message----- From: LawrenceLRTNMT@aol.com@ENRON Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 6:40 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Patent attorney Vince: I wanted to get back to you with a reply to your question about my recommendation on a patent attorney. I cannot give you a personal recommendation per se because, in the end, I opted not to hire an attorney to file my patent until I had decided whether I wanted to protect my work as a trade secret or as a patented commodity. I ultimately struck a compromise position by filing my own ""provisional patent application."" This establishes the date of my claim and gives me one year in which to finalize the patent? or not; it also provides patent pending protection from the date I filed it with the U. S. Patent and Trademark Office. In the process of investigating the options for safeguarding my intellectual property, however, I did talk to quite a number of patent attorneys. Of these, I think that perhaps David Richie might be the most appropriate for your son's software idea. He talked as though he had a particular specialty in software issues; he also struck me as competent and aggressive. He practices in the Silicon Valley and can be reached at telephone number (408) 282-1856. I suspect that he has already done so, but if not, your son might want to visit the internet site of the U. S. Patent Office. Basic information and forms can be downloaded from there. Two other, newer sites might also intrigue him-both deal with the protection, valuation and marketing of intellectual property, patents, etc. They are: pl-x.com (The Patent and License Exchange, Inc.) yet2come.com Hope this is helpful. Regards, Larry Thorne [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= <<Concur Expense Document>> - AMEX - 02/02/01; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/15/2001 10:07 AM ----- eserver@enron.com 03/14/2001 11:54 AM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - AMEX - 02/02/01 The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: Mark A. Palmer Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: AMEX - 02/02/01 Report Total: $8,222.28 Amount Due Employee: $8,222.28 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://nahou-wwxms01p [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= interim emergency approaches.DOC--sent on behalf of Adam Wenner; [EMail-Body]= What about the ""show cause"" order route? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/08/2000 08:38 AM --------------------------- ""Popow, Sandra K."" <spopow@velaw.com> on 08/07/2000 08:41:35 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, ""'snovosel@enron.com'"" <snovosel@enron.com> cc: ""Wenner, Adam"" <awenner@velaw.com> Subject: interim emergency approaches.DOC--sent on behalf of Adam Wenner <<interim emergency approaches.DOC>> - interim emergency approaches.DOC [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Enterprise Wide Risk; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Port, David Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 1:56 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J; Whalley, Greg Subject: Enterprise Wide Risk Here is an outline of the possible scope/impacts for the EWRM effort as discussed: <Embedded Microsoft PowerPoint Slide> <Embedded Microsoft PowerPoint Slide> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Confidential Information and Securities Trading; [EMail-Body]= i think i did this properly. any way you can check? rick -----Original Message----- From: Office of the Chairman - Enron Wholesale Services Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 10:16 AM To: BUY@mailman.enron.com; Buy, Rick Subject: Confidential Information and Securities Trading To:BUY, RICHARD Email:rick.buy@enron.com - 7138534739 Enron Wholesale Services - Office of the Chairman From: Mark Frevert, Chairman & CEO Mark Haedicke, Managing Director & General Counsel Subject: Confidential Information and Securities Trading To keep pace with the fluid and fast-changing demands of our equity trading activities, Enron Wholesale Services (""EWS"") has recently revised its official Policies and Procedures Regarding Confidential Information and Securities Trading (""Policies and Procedures""). These revisions reflect two major developments: (1) our equity trading activities have been extended into the United Kingdom, and (2) in an effort to streamline the information flow process, the ""Review Team"" will play a more centralized role, so that the role of the ""Resource Group"" is no longer necessary.You are required to become familiar with, and to comply with, the Policies and Procedures. The newly revised Policies and Procedures are available for your review on LegalOnline, the new intranet website maintained by the Enron Wholesale Services Legal Department. Please click on the attached link to access LegalOnline: If you have already certified compliance with the Policies and Procedures during the 2001 calendar year, you need not re-certify at this time, although you are still required to to review and become familiar with the revised Policies and Procedures. If you have not certified compliance with the Policies and Procedures during the 2001 calendar year, then you must do so within two weeks of your receipt of this message. The LegalOnline site will allow you to quickly and conveniently certify your compliance on-line with your SAP Personal ID number. If you have any questions concerning the Policies or Procedures, please call Bob Bruce at extension 5-7780 or Donna Lowry at extension 3-1939. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California CTC meeting in EB791 - Maureen Palmer; [EMail-Body]= Also invited Lou Pai, Dave Duran, Dave Parquet, Sean Holmes, John Henderson, Marty Sunde, Jim Fallon [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Job Description Revised; [EMail-Body]= I'm afraide this leaves too much room to manuever. Having duties related to setting legislative affairs strategy and developing a plan for contacts on the Hill, will give Cynthia the idea that she can run all aspects of those duties, not just those related specifically to her substantive area. I think it is also worth covering the heavy emphasis on teamwork and supporting, rather than directing, others in the organization. Richard Shapiro 08/02/2000 04:17 PM To: Gwendolyn Petteway/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Re: Job Description Revised Good to go. Gwendolyn Petteway@ENRON 08/02/2000 04:07 PM To: Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Job Description Revised See attached email with revised job description for Cynthia Sandherr. ---------------------- Forwarded by Gwendolyn Petteway/HR/Corp/Enron on 08/02/2000 04:04 PM --------------------------- Constance Charles 08/02/2000 04:03 PM To: Gwendolyn Petteway/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Job Description Revised [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: PJM RTO Order; [EMail-Body]= Great summary. I think the two main issues you raise are the right ones, but I have one other thought we should discuss internally. Do we want to create a set of incentives for the management of PJM that would entitle management to incentive compensation to the extent they meet certain goals -- eg relieving congestion on the grid, increasing throughput across the transmission system, expediting interconnection (measured in terms of actual interconnections not just applications approved), etc. This way we could create an organization that would have the incentive to make a workable and open transmission system. From: Sarah Novosel on 07/13/2001 07:57 AM To: Kevin M Presto/Enron@EnronXGate, Mark Dana Davis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Ader/HOU/EES@EES, Edward D Baughman/Enron@EnronXGate, Joe Gordon/Enron@EnronXGate, Janelle Scheuer/Enron@EnronXGate, mbrown9@enron.com, Mark Bernstein/HOU/EES@EES, John Llodra/Enron@EnronXGate, W David Duran/Enron@EnronXGate, George Wood/Enron@EnronXGate, Dave Perrino/SF/ECT@ECT, Paul J Broderick/Enron@EnronXGate, Jason Thompkins/Enron@EnronXGate, Mason Hamlin/Enron@EnronXGate, Robert Stalford/Enron@EnronXGate, Tom May/Enron@EnronXGate, Gautam Gupta/Enron@EnronXGate, Narsimha Misra/Enron@EnronXGate, Steve Montovano/NA/Enron@Enron, Garrett Tripp/Enron@EnronXGate, Berney C Aucoin/Enron@EnronXGate, Jason Thompkins/Enron@EnronXGate, Rob Wheeler/Enron@EnronXGate, Rogers Herndon/Enron@EnronXGate, Jim Meyn/Enron@EnronXGate, Aleck Dadson/Enron@EnronXGate, Daniel Allegretti/Enron@EnronXGate, Pearce W Hammond/HOU/EES@EES, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Howard Fromer/NA/Enron@Enron, Kathleen Sullivan/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tom Hoatson/Enron@EnronXGate, Thane Twiggs/Enron@EnronXGate, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Charles Decker/HOU/EES@EES, Nick Politis/Enron@EnronXGate, sscott3@enron.com, Aleck Dadson/Enron@EnronXGate, Lloyd Will/Enron@EnronXGate, Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON, Susan M Landwehr/NA/Enron@Enron, Charles Yeung/HOU/ECT@ECT, Andy Rodriquez/Enron@EnronXGate, John J Lavorato/Enron@EnronXGate, Louise Kitchen/Enron@EnronXGate, Greg Whalley/Enron@EnronXGate, susan.j.mara@enron.com, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Enron@EnronXGate, mpalmer@enron.com, Alan Comnes/Enron@EnronXGate, Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron, John Shelk/NA/Enron@Enron, Pat Shortridge/Corp/Enron@Enron, Chris Long/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mike Roan/ENRON@enronXgate, Kerry Stroup/NA/Enron@Enron, Janine Migden/Enron@EnronXGate, Dave Mangskau/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: PJM RTO Order Attached is a summary of the PJM RTO order. While it is somewhat lengthy, the order has a lot of good information in it that I wanted to share with the group, particularly the Commission's statements regarding the existing configuration of the northeast and the need to expand it. We are working on summaries of the New York and New England RTO orders and will have those out shortly. If you would like copies of the orders, just let us know. We expect the mediation proceeding to begin within the next week. We will keep you updated. Sarah [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RTO Legal Question; [EMail-Body]= I am working on an analysis of the details of the Barton draft RTO language. While it is highly objectionable and our goal is to kill it, to do so we need to respond to requests to be specific about why we don't like it. One of the more objectionable provisions says that FERC can't change the scope, governance, etc. of any RTO that has been ""approved"" under Order 2000 prior to enactment of the legislation. If this applies to PJM, the legislation would stop the Northeast-wide RTO in its tracks since several of you and PJM's Phil Harris testified last week that FERC has ""approved"" PJM. By contrast, committee staff and the section-by-section they distributed on the RTO legislative proposal say that to date FERC has NOT approved any RTOs under Order 2000. They say that the legislative language would not apply to any RTO as of this date because FERC approvals of PJM, Cal ISO and NePool have been approved under the ""ISO principles"" of Order 888. Your thoughts on the above would be helpful. Either way, I think we can argue that the provision shows why the Barton proposal is a retrenchment rather than an advancement on RTOs. If it does not apply to PJM and the others as they contend, there is no good reason to include it other than to ""freeze"" the process at FERC merely by having the legislation pending on the Hill, much less enacted into law. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: call to Sen Kinder; [EMail-Body]= Nice work Kerry and Barb. I think we should do the follow up work on setting a follow up meeting with the Senator. Ken left it open whether he would be available when the Sen is in Houston, so we have made no commitment in that regard. Janine Migden 04/27/2001 08:32 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan M Landwehr/NA/Enron@Enron, Kerry Stroup/NA/Enron@Enron, Barbara A Hueter/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: call to Sen Kinder Thanks Steve. That's great news. Just as an FYI, the memo that Ken worked from was prepared by Kerry Stroup and Barbara Hueter who are the leads on Missouri. As a follow-up, will Sen. Kinder be contacting Ken Lay directly or should Kerry and Barbara contact Sen. Kinder's office as the date gets closer to make arrangements? Please advise. Thanks, Janine Steven J Kean 04/26/2001 08:07 PM To: Susan M Landwehr/NA/Enron@Enron, Janine Migden/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: call to Sen Kinder Ken talked to Sen Kinder. He made the points you had prepared. Kinder agreed to shelve the legislation for this session. He said he had been hearing from several others, including Proctor and Gamble (which has a big facility in his district) that the legislation was not going to help competition develop in the state. He expressed willingness to work with us on a better package and also expressed interest in coming to Enron's offices. He is going to be in San Antonio in August and would like to come to Houston around that time. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Confidential - Mike Miller; [EMail-Body]= Elspeth, do we want to do a new agreement, or simply assume the obligations in the old one? If the former, I'd do a new agreement. If the latter, I believe I simply can do an assignment agreement, once I receive a copy of the current agreement. It also depends on the language in the old one, and whether we believe it protects ENA. So, we'd have to look at it. Sharon, do you have the file on this person? If so, let me know, and I will have someone come and pick it up. Thanks. Michelle Elspeth Inglis@ENRON on 04/14/2000 04:56:09 PM To: Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Confidential - Mike Miller Michelle when rolling over an employment contract from another Enron entity is it re-issued with same details but under ENA's name? thanks Elspeth ---------------------- Forwarded by Elspeth Inglis/Corp/Enron on 14/04/2000 16:54 --------------------------- David Oxley@ECT 13/04/2000 15:12 To: Elspeth Inglis/Corp/Enron@Enron cc: Cindy Skinner/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kathryn McLean/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Confidential - Mike Miller Mike will transfer to Delainey's new team (from CALME) effective April 24. He has an exec agreement which expires 12/31/01 which we will roll over. He will need RC chnaged effective above and also lets make sure he has a desk etc., Elspetrh please take lead on above (watch payroll in event the Soc Sec gets screwed up). David [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Note on liquidity; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Bharati, Rakesh Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 1:24 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J; Huson, Margaret Subject: Note on liquidity Attached is a brief note on liquidity with references to a couple of surveys which provide further information. My attempt was to write at a reasonable degree of simplicity while providing a general familiarity with the attendant issues. Please comment. Thanks. Also, Profs. Maureen O'Hara, Lawrence Glosten, Haim Mendelson, Joel Hasbrouck, Hans Stoll, Albert Kyle, Lawerence Harris, and Ananth Madhavan are some of the leading academics in the field. Rakesh [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= IEP News 5/29; [EMail-Body]= Today's IEP news ... Los Angeles Times, May 27, 2001 Sunday, Home Edition, Page 7, 615 words, ????The State; ?Who Let the Hot Dogs Out? Rhapsodic Lawmakers; Legislature: ????Speaking frankly, officials have used the wiener as an easily digestible ????metaphor for the state's energy crisis., JULIE TAMAKI, MIGUEL BUSTILLO, ????TIMES STAFF WRITERS, SACRAMENTO (Quotes Smutny on behalf of IEP) The San Francisco Chronicle, MAY 26, 2001, SATURDAY,, FINAL EDITION, NEWS;, ????Pg. A1, 835 words, Davis asks U.S. to limit firms' prices; ???RATE SWINGS: ????Governor argues 2 generators manipulated market, Lynda Gledhill, Sacramento (Quotes ??????? ???Smutny on ?behalf of IEP) The Wall Street Journal, Power Drain: The U.S. Energy Crisis, California Officials Say State Will ?? ???Enter A Recession Without Energy Price Caps By JOHN R. EMSHWILLER , Staff Reporter of THE ?? ???WALL STREET JOURNAL AP Online, May 29, 2001; Tuesday, 9:11 AM, Eastern Time, Domestic, ????non-Washington, general news item, 770 words, AP Top News at 9:10 a.m. EDT ????Tuesday, May 29, 2001, JEROME MINERVA The Dallas Morning News, May 29, 2001, Tuesday, DOMESTIC NEWS, K7523, 1046 ????words, Bush begins visit in hostile California, By G. Robert Hillman Los Angeles Times, May 29, 2001 Tuesday, Home Edition, Page 1, 1178 words, ????Governor to Stress Price Caps to Bush; Power: In a meeting today with the ????president, Davis will present a letter from economists backing cost controls ????and demand federal assistance., DAN MORAIN, JAMES GERSTENZANG, TIMES STAFF ????WRITERS Los Angeles Times, May 29, 2001 Tuesday, Home Edition, Page 1, 1541 words, ????THE ENERGY CRISIS; ; Kern County Basks in Role as State's Blackout-Buster; ????Electricity: Six new plants will bolster its status as energy center., ????MITCHELL LANDSBERG, TIMES STAFF WRITER, McKITTRICK, Calif. The New York Times, May 29, 2001, Tuesday, Late Edition - Final, Section A; ????Page 12; Column 1; National Desk, 1078 words, For Crucial California Trip, ????Bush Calibrates How Best to Handle State's Energy Crisis, By DAVID E. SANGER ????, LOS ANGELES, May 28 The Orange County Register, May 29, 2001, Tuesday, DOMESTIC NEWS, K7500, ????825 words, California's power crisis generating lots of heat, By John Howard The San Francisco Chronicle, MAY 29, 2001, TUESDAY,, FINAL EDITION, NEWS;, ????Pg. A1, 1291 words, Crisis no sweat to some offices; ???Many offices keep ????cool in crisis; ???Air conditioners blast in state's energy centers, Steve ????Rubenstein The San Francisco Chronicle, MAY 29, 2001, TUESDAY,, FINAL EDITION, NEWS;, ????Pg. A1, 1238 words, Bush facing Davis' heat over energy; ???In first visit ????to state as president, he'll hear governor's plea for help, Carla Marinucci, ????Lynda Gledhill USA TODAY, May 29, 2001, Tuesday,, FIRST EDITION, NEWS;, Pg. 3A, 426 words, ????Davis to urge Bush to back electricity price cap, Laurence McQuillan, LOS ????ANGELES The Washington Post, May 29, 2001, Tuesday, Final Edition, A SECTION; Pg. ????A02, 639 words, Energy Chief Moves To Aid California; Transmission Plan ????Precedes Bush Visit, Mike Allen, Washington Post Staff Writer, LOS ANGELES, ????May 28 The Washington Post, May 29, 2001, Tuesday, Final Edition, A SECTION; Pg. ????A03, 1936 words, It's Still Dawn for Solar Power in L.A.; Despite City ????Subsidies, Homeowners Hesitate to Install Expensive Alternative Energy ????Source, William Booth, Washington Post Staff Writer, LOS ANGELES The Washington Times, May 29, 2001, Tuesday, Final Edition, PART A; NATION; ????INSIDE POLITICS; Pg. A6, 1264 words, Greg Pierce; THE WASHINGTON TIMES The Washington Times, May 29, 2001, Tuesday, Final Edition, PART A; NATION; ????Pg. A4, 809 words, Bush faces tough sell on visit to California; ?Davis ????likely to be rebuffed on price caps, Joseph Curl; THE WASHINGTON TIMES, LOS ????ANGELES Chicago Tribune, May 29, 2001 Tuesday, NORTH SPORTS FINAL EDITION, News; ????Pg. 6; ZONE: N, 514 words, Bush backs WW II project, From Tribune news ????services., LOS ANGELES The Associated Press, May 29, 2001, Tuesday, BC cycle, 7:55 AM Eastern Time ????, Domestic News, 604 words, Bush announcing low-income aid, but no price ????caps, By SCOTT LINDLAW, Associated Press Writer, LOS ANGELES The Associated Press State & Local Wire, May 29, 2001, Tuesday, BC cycle, ????7:31 AM Eastern Time, State and Regional, 594 words, Stakes are high for ????Davis meeting with Bush, By GARY GENTILE, AP Business Writer, LOS ANGELES ABC NEWS, WORLD NEWS NOW (2:00 AM ET), May 28, 2001, Monday, 447 words, ????PRESIDENT BUSH VISITS CALIFORNIA WHERE POLITICIANS ARE CRITICAL OF HIS LACK ????OF ACTION FOR THEIR ENERGY CRISIS, DEREK McGINTY, JOSH GERSTEIN Los Angeles Times May 27, 2001 Sunday ?Home Edition SECTION: California; Part 2; Page 7; Metro Desk LENGTH: 615 words HEADLINE: The State; ; Who Let the Hot Dogs Out? Rhapsodic Lawmakers; Legislature: Speaking frankly, officials have used the wiener as an easily digestible metaphor for the state's energy crisis. BYLINE: JULIE TAMAKI, MIGUEL BUSTILLO, TIMES STAFF WRITERS DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Every crisis has its symbol. ??Watergate had Deep Throat. The S&L scandal had Charles Keating. O.J. did--or didn't--have a bloody glove. ??Here in the Capitol, the hot dog has become an unlikely metaphor for the state's energy crisis. ??In packed news conferences and heated Assembly floor debates, lawmakers from both parties have evoked images of the ordinary dog to help explain an extraordinary mess. ??The genesis of this statehouse trend is difficult to determine. Assemblyman Fred Keeley appears to be the first to have tossed the hot dog into the political fire. ??During a crucial Assembly discussion in January, the Boulder Creek Democrat recited the lyrics to a familiar Oscar Mayer jingle as a way of admitting that a controversial bill to have the state buy electricity to avoid blackouts was unpalatable, but necessary. ??""It's the dog kids love to bite,"" said Keeley of the jingle. ""Well, this is the bill people love to hate."" ??A bizarre, partisan hot dog duel ensued. Assemblyman John Campbell (R-Irvine) responded by likening the unpredictable financial consequences of the Keeley legislation to biting recklessly into mystery meat. ??""Before I bite into it I see what's on the outside, but I can't see the inside,"" Campbell said. ""If nobody can tell me what's on the inside, it may be bitter, it may be bad, it may make me sick."" ??Assemblywoman Carole Migden (D-San Francisco) angrily fired back, wanting to know why Campbell, a professed hot dog eater, was suddenly so critical of its unknown contents. ??""It's OK to eat a hot dog that's full of animal bones and hair,"" Migden said. ""That's a hot dog that's OK with you, but this kind of hot dog isn't."" ??Yet it was Senate leader John Burton who made it the key ingredient in a Capitol catch phrase. ??Burton described a plan to purchase the electrical power grid from the state's private utilities as a fair swap, saying: ""I give you a dollar, you give me a hot dog."" ??The sound-bite quickly took on a life of its own. With the cost of the energy crisis growing faster than the price of ballpark franks, critics doubted the public's appetite for a multibillion-dollar hot dog. ??""Do you really want a hot dog? That is the question,"" said Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of the Independent Energy Producers, a trade group for power generators. ??Not content to let a dog lie in its bun, lawmakers such as Assemblyman Bill Leonard (R-San Bernardino) kept the hot dog in public discourse. ??When Pacific Gas & Electric Co. filed for bankruptcy protection, Leonard was one of a chorus of legislators who questioned the merits of purchasing the remaining portion of the power lines, calling it ""not even half a hot dog."" ??Added Assemblyman Bill Campbell (R-Villa Park): ""It's like paying Mercedes prices for a broken down hot dog cart."" ??In recent weeks, the hot dog rhetoric appeared to have gone cold. Then Assemblyman Juan Vargas (D-San Diego) revived it. ??After enduring hours of testimony on details of the deal to purchase Edison's power lines, Vargas said his opinion of the dollar-equals-hot-dog deal had diminished. ??""They're trying to charge us for a hot dog,"" Vargas said of the utility, ""but it looks like we're only going to be getting a wienie."" ??Reliant Vice President John Stout also recently weighed in with his own hot dog analogy as he tried to explain why his company's income had jumped so much during the crisis. ??""If you have a hot dog stand and you go out and buy five to six more hot dog stands,"" Stout said, referring to his company's purchase of power plants, ""then naturally you would expect the operating income to go up."" ??Alas, the dog days of summer have yet to begin. LOAD-DATE: May 27, 2001 of 4 DOCUMENTS ?????????????????Copyright 2001 The Chronicle Publishing Co. ?????????????????????????The San Francisco Chronicle ????????????????????MAY 26, 2001, SATURDAY, FINAL EDITION SECTION: NEWS; Pg. A1 LENGTH: 835 words HEADLINE: Davis asks U.S. to limit firms' prices; RATE SWINGS: Governor argues 2 generators manipulated market SOURCE: Chronicle Sacramento Bureau BYLINE: Lynda Gledhill DATELINE: Sacramento BODY: Gov. Gray Davis pursued a new strategy yesterday to control wholesale electricity costs by demanding that federal regulators ban two generators from selling power in California at market rates, arguing that they have manipulated the market to their advantage. ???Meanwhile, the Davis administration lambasted a federal plan to implement temporary price controls, scheduled to go into effect Tuesday. State officials said the measures would do nothing to tame California's out-of-control costs for electricity. ???Davis, whose calls for broader price limits on wholesale electricity have been rejected repeatedly by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, is scheduled to meet with President Bush next week to ask Washington to do more to help California. ???""Federal regulators said that prices were 'unjust and unreasonable' nearly nine months ago, but they have been AWOL ever since,"" Davis said in a statement. ???The California Independent System Operator, managers of the state's electrical grid, asked energy regulators yesterday to revoke the authority they have given Williams Energy and AES Inc. to sell power at market-based rates. Instead, the Davis administration wants the companies to be forced to sell at cost-plus rates, which would ensure a reasonable but limited profit. ???""Market-based rate authority is not an entitlement,"" the ISO said in a filing with federal regulators. ???The ISO asked regulators to act by June 15, saying that any delay ""places California consumers and the state's economy at extreme peril."" ???Similar filings against other companies, such as Mirant, Duke and Reliant, are being considered, said Charles Robinson, general counsel for the ISO. ???Robinson said the ISO has a ""well developed"" record of price manipulation by the two companies. He said information previously given to federal regulators proved the prices charged to California were excessive. ???'GRANDSTANDING' ACCUSATION ???Aaron Thomas, a spokesman for Virginia-based AES, said the administration is grandstanding. ???""This is akin to the rhetoric the governor has used for the past several months,"" he said. ""We are well below the index FERC uses to establish concerns about market power. ???""As to this rhetoric about these companies abusing the marketplace -- check the facts. We lost money last year,"" Thomas said. ???A spokeswoman for Williams said the company would not comment because it had not seen the filing. ???Earlier this month, Oklahoma-based Williams agreed to pay $8 million to settle charges with FERC that the company was purposely withholding electricity from California's power market. The company admitted no wrongdoing, and officials said a full hearing would have cleared the company. ???If the regulatory commission denies the state's requests, or doesn't ""act in the time frame we believe is necessary to prevent harm,"" the state can appeal to a circuit court, Robinson said. ???BUSH VISIT POSTURING CHARGE ???Jan Smutny-Jones, head of the Independent Energy Producers Association, said the move is posturing by Davis ahead of Bush's visit. ???""This is an interesting welcome mat for President Bush,"" he said. ""Do we want a dialogue or a diatribe?"" ???In advance of Bush's visit, Vice President Dick Cheney said yesterday that nothing more can be done to help solve California's power problems this summer. ???He also rejected price controls, saying that previous efforts have contributed to a supply shortage. ???A spokesman for Davis rejected that notion and denied that the timing of yesterday's announcements were connected to the Bush-Davis meeting. ???Davis aides expressed hope that Bush's two new FERC commissioners, Pat Wood III, a close Bush ally expected to take over the chairmanship of the board, and Nora Mead Brownell, a state utility regulator in Pennsylvania, would hear California's pleas. The two new commissioners were confirmed yesterday by the U.S. Senate. ???Among the things Davis wants changed is the regulatory commission temporary price relief plan scheduled to take effect Tuesday. ???The regulators would limit wholesale prices during power alerts in California, when reserves drop below 7 percent of available capacity. ???Many state officials believe that doesn't go far enough. The state Assembly, in documents to be filed Tuesday, said price controls should cover all hours -- not just power emergencies. ???And there is a chance the controls will be in effect for just a few days. Under the regulatory commission plan, the state and the three investor-owned utilities must file a proposal to join a regional transmission organization by June 1. If they do not to do so, the price controls disappear. ???Davis administration officials expect to file another response dealing with the regional transmission organization by Friday, Robinson said. The Assembly filing rejects joining such an organization, which federal officials favor as a means to better manage and improve grid capacity in the West. E-mail Lynda Gledhill at lgledhill@sfchronicle.com. GRAPHIC: PHOTO, Vice President Dick Cheney said nothing more can be done to help solve California's power problems. / New York Times LOAD-DATE: May 26, 2001 May 29, 2001 Power Drain: The U.S. Energy Crisis California Officials Say State Will Enter A Recession Without Energy Price Caps By JOHN R. EMSHWILLER Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL On the eve of a meeting Tuesday between President George Bush and California Gov. Gray Davis, top advisers to the governor said the state could be pushed into recession unless the federal government imposes temporary price caps to contain soaring wholesale electricity costs. President Bush has consistently opposed price caps. The governor's team called a Memorial Day news conference to highlight what they saw as the dangers to the economy of the state, and possibly the nation, from the tens of billions of dollars being spent this year to purchase electricity. The governor's aides estimated that statewide, wholesale electricity purchases this year could hit $50 billion compared with about $7 billion in 1999. Some estimates for this year's power expenditures are even higher. If California were a separate nation, ""an energy shock of that magnitude would be expected to cause a significant recession,"" said Alan Blinder, a former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve, at the conference. While being part of a broader national economy could somewhat mitigate the impact, the higher power costs are ""a recipe for stagflation in California,"" added Mr. Blinder. ""Stagflation"" refers to stagnant economic conditions and inflation -- a condition that struck the nation when energy prices soared in the 1970s. Though the advisers painted perhaps the dreariest outlook yet to come from the governor's office, they said that the Davis plan for financing the state's electricity purchases remains intact. As reported, the state plans to sell about $12.5 billion in bonds later this year. The state has been purchasing electricity since January, when its failed utility-deregulation plan left California's two biggest utilities financially unable to continue buying power. If price caps were instituted, the state might have to borrow less money than anticipated or at least face a decreased danger of having to borrow more if the power situation gets worse, said Joseph Fichera, chief executive of New York-based Saber Partners LLC and an adviser to Mr. Davis. The governor plans to press his case for price caps over the next six to 18 months, as supplies are increased with new power plants due to come into operation, the advisers said. However, Mr. Bush and other federal officials have repeatedly said that they believe price caps would be counterproductive and discourage the building of new power plants. Write to John R. Emshwiller at john.emshwiller@wsj.com1 Copyright 2001 Associated Press AP Online ?????????????????May 29, 2001; Tuesday 9:11 AM, Eastern Time SECTION: Domestic, non-Washington, general news item LENGTH: 770 words HEADLINE: ?AP Top News at 9:10 a.m. EDT Tuesday, May 29, 2001 BYLINE: JEROME MINERVA BODY: ??NATO Won't Back U.S. Missile Plan ??BUDAPEST, Hungary (AP) ??NATO's top policy-making body stopped short of endorsing the Bush administration's plan for a national missile defense today, preparing to offer only to ''continue substantive consultations'' with Washington. The North Atlantic Council does not portray the possibility of missile attack as a common threat faced by allies, as the Bush administration had hoped, it said in a statement. Secretary of State Colin Powell had hoped to persuade skeptical NATO allies to be more supportive of U.S. missile defense plans. ??Pakistan Accepts India Offer to Talk ??ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) ??Pakistani military ruler Gen. Pervez Musharraf today accepted India's offer to hold peace talks on the disputed Kashmir region and other issues. ''I accept your invitation ... to visit India with great pleasure,'' Musharraf said in a letter to Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee. ''We wish to see a stable prosperous India at peace with its neighbors.'' Musharraf's letter came four days after Vajpayee broke a two-year lull in high-level talks between the two rival nuclear powers by inviting the Pakistani leader to India. ??Consumers' Spending, Incomes Rise ??WASHINGTON (AP) ??Consumers spent on services in April, but cut back on cars and other big-ticket items. Incomes also rose. The Commerce Department reported today that consumer spending rose by 0.4 percent in April, following a 0.2 percent increase the month before. April's rise marked the biggest increase since January. Consumer spending accounts for two-thirds of all economic activity and has been a main pillar propping up the country's fragile economy. Personal incomes rose 0.3 percent. ??Bush Won't Cap Electricity Prices ??LOS ANGELES (AP) ??President Bush says he won't force down soaring electricity prices that have cost California nearly $8 billion since January. The Republican president and embattled Democratic Gov. Gray Davis arranged a meeting today to talk about the state's energy crisis, but there was no indication they would break their stalemate. Bush opposes price limits on wholesale electricity that utilities buy, arguing they do nothing to address supply-and-demand issues at the heart of the crisis. ??Tornado Injures 18 in Colorado ??ELLICOTT, Colo. (AP) ??Dozens of residents of a sparsely populated town in southern Colorado spent the night in a church after a tornado crushed trailer homes, sprayed hail and injured 18 people. ''We just hit the floor in the living room and covered the kids and the tornado hit,'' said Trish Davidson, whose mobile home was lifted into the air and dropped 10 feet from its foundation. Davidson and about 30 other people spent last night in the basement of a church. Power was out to the church and much of the surrounding area. ??Israeli Motorist Killed ??JERUSALEM (AP) ??An Israeli motorist was killed in a West Bank drive-by shooting today as Israeli and Palestinian officials, after two rounds of U.S. mediation, spoke of resuming security talks aimed at reducing the violence. The motorist died of head wounds shortly after he was shot on by Palestinian gunmen from a passing car near the West Bank city of Nablus, the army said. Two Israeli settlers were shot and injured one seriously in another West Bank ambush last night. ??Record-Breaking DJ Still on Air ??JERSEY CITY, N.J. (AP) ??Now you can't get disc jockey Glenn Jones off the air. As of 6:30 a.m. EDT today, the DJ had been talking for about 93 hours, easily shattering the record for the longest continuous radio broadcast. And he was still talking. ''It's been a test of wills, a test of determination,'' Jones said. ''The first day was the hardest, but we're still going strong.'' Jones said he wanted to remain on the air until he hit the 100-hour mark, which would be about 1 p.m. EDT, and would then decide whether to continue. ??Nikkei Adds 36 Points ??TOKYO (AP) ??Tokyo stocks rose moderately today in light trading following holidays in the United States and Britain. The Nikkei Stock Average gained 36.12 points to close at 13,773.89. ??Agassi, Capriati Open With Wins ??PARIS (AP) ??Andre Agassi and Jennifer Capriati began their bids for a second consecutive Grand Slam title, winning in straight sets today on the second day of the French Open. Agassi, who won the French Open in 1999, beat Sweden's Thomas Johansson 6-2, 6-3, 7-6 (5). Capriati, seeded fourth, overcame seven double faults in defeating France's Emilie Loit 6-2, 7-5. Both Agassi and Capriati won Australian Open titles earlier this year. LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS ??????????????Copyright 2001 Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service ???????????????????????Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service Dallas Morning News 29, 2001, Tuesday SECTION: DOMESTIC NEWS KR-ACC-NO: ?K7523 LENGTH: 1046 words HEADLINE: Bush begins visit in hostile California BYLINE: By G. Robert Hillman BODY: ??LOS ANGELES _ President Bush landed in hostile territory Monday night, beginning his first presidential visit to California amid a pressing energy crisis that he says he cannot ease in the short term. ??""We welcome him to California,"" said California Gov. Gray Davis, a Democrat who has waged a long-distance war with the Republican president over the high cost and short supply of electricity in the nation's most populous state. ??""I hope he has an opportunity to talk firsthand to some of the people who are adversely impacted by the very high rates we're paying for electricity."" ??But the president's carefully scrubbed schedule for the next two days provides little time for such an opportunity, although he will confer privately with business leaders to discuss high-tech solutions to the state's energy problems. ??Arriving on a cross-country flight that touched down in Arizona for a Memorial Day tribute, Bush headed off to prepare for an early-morning stop Tuesday to promote energy conservation at the Marine Corps' Camp Pendleton and a luncheon address to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council. ??On Wednesday, he'll visit Sequoia National Park near Fresno, Calif., to launch a new drive to clean up and fix up national parks. ??He'll also meet privately Tuesday afternoon with Davis in what the Los Angeles Times characterized as a ""peace summit."" But no major shifts in policy are expected. White House aides suggest that the meeting will be a success if the governor even temporarily tempers his sometimes-harsh words for the administration. ??""The president's focus is going to be on solving problems. He's not interested in finger-pointing,"" White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said. ??""Whether people agree, or disagree, with the specifics of his energy plan, I think most Americans and most Californians are very pleased to see a president who is leading and taking action in addressing the issue head on."" ??However, recent public opinion polls show the president and the governor taking hits for the energy crisis in California. ??The Field Poll, finished a week ago, found that 54 percent of those surveyed believed Bush had handled the energy problems poorly, with Davis faring somewhat better at 38 percent. The margin of error for the 1,015 California interviews was 3.2 percentage points. ??An earlier survey by the Public Policy Institute of California found Davis' job approval rating plummeting, from 63 percent in January to 46 percent in May, as the state's energy troubles escalated. Bush's overall approval rating was higher at 57 percent, but still just as many of those surveyed gave him low marks for his handling of energy issues. That margin of error, for 2001 interviews, was 2 percentage points. ??In short, political analyst Sherry Bebitch Jeffe said, Bush's visit to the state _ in his 19th week as president, after already visiting more than half the other states _ is long overdue. ??""His not responding, or not being perceived to respond, to the short-term needs of California has allowed Davis' arguments to resonate _ that the federal government is uncaring, is insensitive,"" Jeffe said. ??In his national energy policy unveiled nearly two weeks ago, Bush offered a series of mostly long-term recommendations to conserve energy, find more of it and substantially upgrade and expand the nation's oil refineries and transmission systems for natural gas and electricity. ??Davis, complaining that Texas energy companies in particular are gouging Californians, has urged Bush to embrace price controls for wholesale electricity, but the president has steadfastly refused. Vice President Dick Cheney, who oversaw development of the White House energy policy, emphasized as recently as Friday that there's no quick fix on the way for California. ??""Long term, the answer is to build more power plants, and that's exactly what they're doing,"" Cheney told the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. ""But they're not going to have enough new capacity online this summer to avoid blackouts."" ??So the energy woes continue to fester in California. It's not just electricity and rolling blackouts. Gasoline prices of $2-and-more-a-gallon have become commonplace as well. ??""The gas bothers me more than the electric,"" said Tait Kmentt, who runs a legal process serving business in Irvine, Calif. ""Gas prices are killing me."" ??At $2.25-a-gallon for premium gasoline, he says, it costs him more than $40 to fill up his new Mercedes _ with no relief in sight. ??A newcomer to the state, Kmentt voted for Bush last fall and said he's glad the president is finally visiting California. But Kmentt cautioned, ""This will be a big test to see how concerned he is."" ??Kmentt said he understands the state's energy troubles are a ""huge problem that can't be fixed overnight,"" and right now he's blaming the power companies for the high price of electricity. ??""I just think the public is being lied to,"" he said. ??Still, this is not good news for Bush, who has been increasingly portrayed by Democrats as a Texas oilman still beholden to the industry. California, which he lost last fall to Al Gore by 12 percentage points, has become increasingly a political headache. ??Where his predecessor, Bill Clinton, seemed politically and personally comfortable, Bush is not, suggests Jeffe, a senior scholar in the School of Policy, Planning and Development at the University of Southern California. ??""An ego cannot be buoyed by losing the state by 12 points,"" she said. ""We are the state that was responsible for giving Al Gore his popular vote victory."" ??With the Senate now headed for Democratic control, Jeffe said, Bush's visit to California _ and others that will surely follow _ are essential to help Republicans hold their base in the House. ??If the energy crisis persists in California, further punishing its economy, the ripple effects will certainly spread, she said. ??""George Bush remembers the influence of the economy on the career of an incumbent president,"" Jeffe said, pointing to Bush's father, who was defeated by Clinton during an economic slump in 1992. ??""It took a while,"" she said, ""but people are beginning to get angry."" ??(c) 2001, The Dallas Morning News. ??Visit The Dallas Morning News on the World Wide Web at http://www.dallasnews.com/ JOURNAL-CODE: DA LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ??????????????????????May 29, 2001 Tuesday ?Home Edition SECTION: California; Part 2; Page 1; Metro Desk LENGTH: 1178 words HEADLINE: Governor to Stress Price Caps to Bush; Power: In a meeting today with the president, Davis will present a letter from economists backing cost controls and demand federal assistance. BYLINE: DAN MORAIN, JAMES GERSTENZANG, TIMES STAFF WRITERS BODY: ??Gov. Gray Davis will present a letter to President Bush today from top economists advocating wholesale electricity price controls, warning Monday that a failure by Bush to help California solve its energy crisis could signal to other regions that he may ignore their pleas. ??Bush, making his first trip to California, has set aside 20 minutes this afternoon to meet with Davis in Century City. In an interview with The Times, the Democratic governor vowed to repeat his request that the federal government move to cap wholesale power prices. Failure to act swiftly threatens the state and national economy, Davis said. ??""I want him to understand,"" Davis said, ""that if California has to pay 700 times more for electricity in 2001 than it did just two years ago, it could well drag our economy into a recession and could conceivably trigger a national recession. That is not good for anyone."" ??In the letter, 10 economists, including Cornell professor emeritus Alfred Kahn, a major proponent of airline deregulation, told of their ""deep concern"" about the failure of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to stabilize wholesale electricity prices in California. The economists faxed the letter to the White House on Friday afternoon, and provided the governor with a copy to present to Bush today. ??""FERC's failure to act now will have dire consequences for the state of California and will set back, potentially fatally, the diffusion of competitive electricity markets across the country,"" the economists, led by Frank Wolak of Stanford University, wrote. ""Moreover, this negative experience with electricity restructuring could delay or reverse current efforts to introduce competition into other formerly regulated industries."" ??Davis called the letter ""very significant validation of what we've been saying: The marketplace is not working and FERC has an obligation to act."" ??""We're not pleading for relief; we're entitled to it,"" Davis said. ??Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney repeatedly have said such controls never work. In California, caps might worsen the situation by limiting supply, they have argued, resulting in more blackouts this summer when demand for electricity is highest. ??The Bush-Davis meeting has had all the buildup of the political equivalent of a title fight: On one side, the Democratic governor of the nation's most populous state, which Bush lost by more than 1 million votes in November. On the other, the new president, coming off a roller coaster week of political defeat (the shift in control of the Senate) and victory (passage of his tax-cut plan), whose work in the Texas oil industry gives him a special history in the topic at hand. ??From afar, Davis has battled the Bush administration's energy policy. But, said Dan Bartlett, one of the president's chief communications advisors, ""The president has some interesting views on this topic as well, with some experience himself."" ??Bush's Energy secretary, Spencer Abraham, took steps Monday to increase electricity transmission capacity in California. He ordered the Western Area Power Administration, a division of the Energy Department that is responsible for marketing electricity from federal water projects in 15 Western states, to finish its planning for extra transmission capacity. ??At issue is so-called Path 15, an 84-mile stretch of power lines with insufficient capacity to carry the necessary load between Southern California and the northern part of the state, especially during peak hours. The central question is whether financing is available for a new transmission line. ??Davis lauded the action but said the president needs to do more. ??""If I have any advice to him of a political nature, it is take a chapter out of President Clinton's book. ??"" [Clinton] was very attentive to California, and as a result did better in 1996 than he did in '92. People felt he was here for us when we needed help. We need help."" ??Davis said that on a recent trip to Chicago, officials there worried that if Bush ""won't offer California some relief, he may not offer us relief,"" in a catastrophe. ??Among the facts and figures Davis intends to show the president is a chart showing that California paid $1.2 billion for electricity in the first quarter of 1999, $1.8 billion for the same period last year, and as much as $10.3 billion for electricity in the first three months of this year--at a time when conservation efforts had been taking hold and demand was down. ??""I hope the president will be as stunned as I am,"" said Davis, who is watching as the state spends more than $55 million a day to buy electricity that private utilities can no longer afford. ??Davis said that though he is trying to speed construction of power plants, encourage conservation, and return the private utilities to financial stability, the federal government has control over wholesale power prices. ??""Therein lies the final piece of this puzzle,"" Davis said. ""If it falls into place, we're on the way to putting this issue behind us. If it doesn't fall into place, it could create real economic havoc here and across the country."" ??Davis said that if Bush refuses to impose price controls, he should ""find some way to help us, consistent with his own belief."" ??""Turning a deaf ear not only won't be well received here,"" Davis said. ""It likely won't be received well elsewhere."" ??The state's energy crisis has posed a ticklish dilemma for Bush's busy travel schedulers: Had he visited earlier, it would have been awkward not to focus on energy issues. But until 11 days ago when a task force led by Cheney produced energy proposals, there would have been little Bush could say. ??Karen Hughes, the president's counselor, made it clear that regardless of the pressure, Bush will not yield on price caps. ??""We want to help. The president is very concerned about the energy situation and blackouts,"" she said. But limiting the wholesale price of energy would only discourage its production,"" Hughes said. ??California is the 30th state Bush has visited since taking office Jan. 20. His staff said the delay had to do not with energy issues but with politics and geography. ??With the administration focused in its first months on winning approval of the tax cut, the president's travels were largely dictated by that effort, his aides said. ??Besides, the president confided recently, even with Air Force One at the ready, it just takes too long to fly from Washington to California. ??Still, Hughes said, the president is not ignoring California. Condoleezza Rice, the president's national security advisor and a former Californian, sits next to Hughes every morning at the daily meeting of the White House senior staff, she said. ??What's more, the president ""has many friends in California,"" Hughes said, adding: ""Ernie has a home in California these days."" Ernie is the Bush family cat that is living with a friend in Brentwood while the First Family lives in the White House. ??* ??Times Staff Writer Massie Ritsch contributed to this story. LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ??????????????????????May 29, 2001 Tuesday ?Home Edition SECTION: Part A; Part 1; Page 1; Metro Desk LENGTH: 1541 words HEADLINE: THE ENERGY CRISIS; ; Kern County Basks in Role as State's Blackout-Buster; Electricity: Six new plants will bolster its status as energy center. BYLINE: MITCHELL LANDSBERG, TIMES STAFF WRITER DATELINE: McKITTRICK, Calif. BODY: ??You could think of this as California's own little slice of west Texas. ??Here in the scruffy brown hills of western Kern County, oil rigs grow more easily than trees, pickups are more common than cars, and chicken fried steak is the most popular dish at Mike and Annie's McKittrick Hotel. ??The hotel--which no longer offers lodging, just food and drink, and plenty of it--is bustling these days with the roustabout energy of a Lone Star construction camp. Just down the road, a mammoth electrical power plant is rising out of the sagebrush, its generators housed in four boxy buildings the size of airplane hangars. ??It is one of six new major gas-fired power plants expected to be built in Kern County over the next several years, an electrical construction boom unmatched anywhere in California. Kern, which already has a large surplus of electricity, is cementing its place as California's energy capital, assuming far more than its share of the burden in recharging the state's drained power supplies. ??Over the next several years, the county will add nearly 5,000 megawatts of power to the statewide grid. That is more than California now imports, on average, from out-of-state suppliers. It's enough to supply about five counties the size of Kern, which fills the dusty southern rim of the San Joaquin Valley and has a population of 662,000. ??In some parts of the state, a proposal to build a new power plant is a call to throw up the barricades. In recent months, intense community opposition has forced developers to pull back proposals to build major plants in South Gate and San Jose, although Gov. Gray Davis has tried to revive plans for the San Jose plant. ??You don't hear a lot of not-in-my-backyard talk in Kern County. ??""There should be power plants in everybody's backyard,"" said Paul Gipe, chairman of the Kern chapter of the Sierra Club, which did not oppose any of the new plants. ""If people are concerned about having too many power plants, they should think twice when they flip on the light switch."" ??New, natural gas-fired power plants, Gipe reasoned, are relatively clean and will not add significantly to the county's serious air pollution problems. Ideally, he said, they will allow the state to close some older, dirtier plants that cause considerably more environmental damage. ??If environmentalists don't oppose the plants, it's not too much of a leap to guess that some people might be positively thrilled about them. ??Just try, for instance, asking somebody in Taft, an oil center south of McKittrick. ""It's more money coming into Kern County--that's the way I look at it,"" said Pamela Dunlap, who runs a downtown thrift shop. ??An Economy Rooted in the Oil Industry ??She stood in the twilight outside her shop, on a street that embodies many of the most attractive attributes of small town Americana--with one small difference. Where some towns might have statues of their founders or war heroes in prominent public places, Taft has erected small oil rigs and other pieces of drilling machinery, a reminder of its economic roots. ??That Kern County has stepped up as California's blackout-buster is, perhaps, not surprising. ??To begin with, there's geography. Kern stands astride California's major north-south electrical transmission lines at precisely the spot at which they divide between the service areas of Pacific Gas & Electric, which serves Northern California, and Southern California Edison. That spot can be pinpointed as the Midway substation, a vast jungle of humming wires, transformers and circuit breakers that lies a short distance west of Interstate 5 in the town of Buttonwillow. ??Already, massive new circuit-breakers--they look like Frankenstein helmets sprouting 5-foot-long sparkplugs--are being erected at Midway to handle the power from two major plants that will be revving up in the coming months: PG&E National Energy's La Paloma plant, the one near McKittrick; and Edison Mission Energy's Sunrise plant, just south of Taft. ??The county is served by two major natural gas pipelines, which will be tapped to run the plants. In fact, Kern contains the state's largest known reservoirs of natural gas. ??Another of Kern's geographic advantages? ??""You look around, and you'll see there aren't a lot of people living around here,"" observed Stephen Whaley, who is overseeing construction of the Sunrise plant. In the surrounding hills, an orchard of oil rigs bobbed in the morning haze. Dirt roads cut crudely across the landscape, bisecting a crisscross of steam pipes, fuel lines and electrical wires. ??""This area is all about oil,"" Whaley said. Casting a glance at the modular 560-megawatt plant rising behind him, he added with a wry smile, ""You know, I guess you could look at this from the road, and you could make the argument that it improves the looks."" ??The Sunrise plant, a relatively simple single-cycle plant, is expected to fire up 320 megawatts of its total output by Aug. 1, a scant nine months after construction began. The other plants--more complex and efficient dual-cycle operations--will be opening over the next several years, assuming all receive final approval. ??The lack of major opposition to the plants is, of course, another reason developers see Kern County as a good place to build. The county has long had a more intimate relationship with energy--oil, gas, electricity--than most places. To people here, the link between a natural gas well and a lightbulb, or an oil derrick and a gas pedal, is neither theoretical nor especially threatening. They're comfortable with energy. ??Kern produces more crude oil than any other county in the United States outside Alaska. Property taxes from oil companies have helped build handsome new schools in Bakersfield, the county seat and largest city. The companies' big payrolls have helped populate elegant subdivisions with names that sound vaguely Houstonian: Seven Oaks, River Oaks, Landmark Estates. ??Which brings us to the Texas connection. ??It's hard to overlook it, in a county that runs on oil and cotton and boasts a country music scene to rival Austin's. Conversations in the finer Bakersfield restaurants are filled with references to trips to Texas, of colleagues in Midland and Odessa. A Bakersfield radio station was running a contest recently: The winners would be flown to a bull riding championship in Houston. ??Until December 1999, American Airlines offered direct jet service between Bakersfield and Dallas. It stopped after Occidental Petroleum moved its headquarters from Bakersfield to Houston. ??This is a county where President Bush received more support in the November election than he did in Texas, his home state. But then, Bush already had a Bakersfield connection: He lived there briefly as a child when his father, former President George Bush, worked in the Kern oil fields. ??""You look at the topography around Bakersfield, and the county's morals and ethics--that predominantly conservative attitude that we have around here--and you look at the oil, and you could be in Midland,"" said John Allen, the general manager of Occidental of Elk Hills, which is developing a power plant in tandem with Sempra Energy of San Diego. ??A lot of people in Kern County will tell you they don't mind being an energy farm for the state. It's a living, after all. ??""It's good to be working at home,"" said Joe Ryan, a Bakersfield pipe welder who has spent years on the road seeking the heavy construction work that seemed to have vanished in his hometown. Now he's working at the La Paloma plant, a 1,048-megawatt behemoth that will come online in phases beginning in December. ??About 800 people are at work on the plant, and several hundred more will be employed in the coming months. And after that plant is done, there will be others to build. ??""This is a good job here, I tell you what,"" said Ryan, 47, who has been banking his overtime on six 10-hour days a week--sometimes more. ??County Sees Itself as 'Part of the Solution' ??But there are some signs of simmering resentment, especially among county leadership. After all, if every other county produced just half the electricity that Kern generates, California wouldn't have an energy crisis. And people in Kern County are getting hit with the same spring-loaded electricity bills, the same rolling blackouts as everybody else. ??""I think the people of California are either going to be part of the solution or part of the problem,"" said Assemblyman Roy Ashburn (R-Bakersfield). ""And in Kern County, we have a long history of being part of the solution, especially when it comes to energy issues."" ??Elsewhere in the state, Ashburn sees ""a lot of arrogance--people who enjoy the benefits of a very high quality of life, enjoy the benefits of electric power for jobs and for their personal life, but with an exclusivity that it's someone else's problem to create that for them. We don't have that attitude in Kern County."" ??Power Buildup in Kern County ??Six new major gas-fired power plants are expected to be built in Kern County over the next several years, making the county the power capital of the state. ??* ??RELATED STORY ??Letter to Bush: Gov. Davis will ask for wholesale energy price caps. B1 GRAPHIC: PHOTO: Tom Romesberg, general manager of La Paloma plant being built in Kern County, stands next to the unit's cooling tower. PHOTOGRAPHER: AL SEIB / Los Angeles Times PHOTO: From rigs and pipelines like these near Taft, Kern pumps more crude oil than any other county in the U.S. outside Alaska. With several gas-fired power plants coming online in the next several years, the county will solidify its place as California's energy capital. PHOTOGRAPHER: AL SEIB / Los Angeles Times GRAPHIC: Power Buildup in Kern County, Los Angeles Times LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS ??????????????????Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company New York Times ?????????????????May 29, 2001, Tuesday, Late Edition - Final SECTION: Section A; Page 12; Column 1; National Desk LENGTH: 1078 words HEADLINE: For Crucial California Trip, Bush Calibrates How Best to Handle State's Energy Crisis BYLINE: ?By DAVID E. SANGER DATELINE: LOS ANGELES, May 28 BODY: ??Days after he suffered the biggest political setback of his four-month-old presidency and then won the tax cut that he staked his campaign upon, President Bush traveled tonight to California, carefully calibrating how to deal with the state's energy crisis. ??After Memorial Day celebrations in Washington and Mesa, Ariz., Mr. Bush began his first visit as president to the most populous state, which he lost by roughly 12 percentage points in November's election. The visit seems likely to showcase the clash between two very different energy strategies and political strategies. ???Mr. Bush will meet briefly on Tuesday with Gov. Gray Davis, who will insist, as he did again today, that the federal government impose price caps on wholesale electric power. ??The White House says Mr. Bush will refuse, again. He will argue that such caps would only discourage increased production of electric power. ""We think that's a mistake,"" Vice President Dick Cheney said on Friday, talking about why he rejected those options when he prepared the energy policy the administration made public 10 days ago. ??But Mr. Bush knows that how he handles the California energy crisis could prove critical to his political fortunes, especially now that his party's loss of control in the Senate seems bound to slow or derail passage of major elements of his energy plan. ??Moreover, the president can no longer argue that the best cure for high energy prices is a tax cut, because that is now legislative history. As one of his aides said this weekend, after Congress approved the $1.35 trillion tax cut that will be phased in over the next 10 years, ""we will have to turn now to the other arguments."" ??Most of those arguments involve urging the rest of the country not to follow California in a partial deregulation of the market, with disastrous results. ??Repeatedly Mr. Bush has chastised California's politicians, and by implication Mr. Davis himself, for ignoring politically unpalatable choices to avert the state's power-generating crisis. Ten days ago, standing in front of a hydroelectric plant in Pennsylvania, Mr. Bush used the state as Exhibit A for his argument about what happens when population rises, when over-regulation freezes the construction of new power plants and the stringing of new transmission lines, and when politicians fail to plan for the long term. ??""The problems in California shows that you cannot conserve your way to energy independence,"" Mr. Bush said then. ??At the same time, his aides were pointing to polls showing Mr. Davis's approval ratings plunging. They did not mention that Mr. Bush's ratings in the state were hardly any better. A series of recent polls show that roughly two-thirds of Californians believe Mr. Bush should be doing far more to help the state, though it is unclear exactly what kind of help they have in mind. ??So Mr. Bush's aides have been struggling for days to choreograph the two-day visit here, trying to find ways to differ with Mr. Davis without seeming callous about the problem or in conflict with the state. ??The betting is that Mr. Bush will focus on long-term solutions, in contrast to Mr. Davis's call for the quicker fix of price caps. ??The effort started today. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham issued an order of chiefly symbolic importance, saying his department would move quickly to determine whether investors were interested in financing and co-owning a new transmission line that could bring more power to the state. ??""The level of interest will be a factor in the decision to build the line later this year,"" the Energy Department said. It said that it would proceed with studies of how the land could be acquired, by eminent domain if necessary, and that it would speed ahead with environmental reviews. ??But Mr. Abraham left wide open the question of whether Washington would go ahead with the project even if no private financing was available. ??""The Bush administration is taking a leadership role in addressing a long-neglected problem in California's electricity transmission system,"" Mr. Abraham said. ""California's electricity problems developed over a period of years and cannot be solved overnight. However, we can move now on actions that will help avert the same types of problems from recurring year after year."" ??The statement was clearly intended as a prelude to the meeting with Mr. Davis, which will be closed to the press. So will a meeting with energy entrepreneurs. (Mr. Bush passed on Mr. Davis's suggestion of a forum with small-business owners and residents who have seen the lights go out.) ??Few expect Mr. Bush or Mr. Davis to change his mind about energy caps after their meeting. ??But for Mr. Bush it will not all be tough love. On Tuesday morning Mr. Bush is scheduled to travel to Camp Pendleton to repeat his call for the military and other federal users of power in California to flip off their switches whenever possible. But given his own comments, and Mr. Cheney's, about the limited utility of conservation, that order could strike some Californians as a little hollow. ??Later he will give a trade speech in Los Angeles, underscoring the message that if California hopes to remain the world's greatest exporter of high technology -- if it were a nation, California would be the world's sixth-largest economy -- it must find new ways to produce and deliver electricity. ??Already, leading Silicon Valley companies are threatening to build their next-generation chip fabrication plants elsewhere, probably in Texas, which has a surplus of generating capacity, a move that would further undermine Mr. Davis's stewardship. ??In fact, Mr. Bush's Texas roots will never be far from the political battlefield here. Mr. Davis has accused Texas energy companies of profiteering at California's expense. To press the case, he has hired two political operatives from the Clinton White House, Marc D. Fabiani and Chris Lehane, who are being paid tens of thousands of dollars a month to make the case for price caps. ??California's attorney general, Bill Lockyer, also a Democrat, suggested to The Wall Street Journal last week that some time in jail would be the best way to deal with one of Mr. Bush's biggest supporters -- Kenneth Lay, who heads the Enron Corporation and has sought to influence the selection of members of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. ??The comments may have been partly facetious, but they were not interpreted that way here. ??http://www.nytimes.com LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS ??????????????Copyright 2001 Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service ???????????????????????Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service ??????????????????????????The Orange County Register 29, 2001, Tuesday SECTION: DOMESTIC NEWS KR-ACC-NO: ?K7500 LENGTH: 825 words HEADLINE: California's power crisis generating lots of heat BYLINE: By John Howard BODY: ??SACRAMENTO, Calif. _ Detectives would seem to be tripping over each other to discover who did what to whom, and why, in California's energy crisis. ??While electricity may be scarce, investigations are plentiful. A dozen major probes are afoot, many overlap, and more loom. The atmosphere is heated, the rhetoric strong. State, federal and local investigators, along with court officers, financial experts and special investigators, are poring over thousands of pages of documents from government agencies and private companies. ??At the top of the swarming heap is the $10 million investigation mounted by the state Attorney General's Office to answer the core question: Did a handful of power sellers fix prices to bilk Californians of billions of dollars? ??But it's not just the government that is busy. The companies themselves _ which have categorically denied any wrongdoing _ are overwhelmed by the scrutiny. ??""We are supplying reams and reams of documents. ... It is a distraction from our day-to-day work, there's no question,"" said Tom Williams of North Carolina-based Duke Energy, which operates several power plants in California. ""It affects our employees and their families, this barrage of innuendo. I don't know what more we can do."" ??Accompanying the investigations are at least a half-dozen lawsuits against the companies by individuals. Like the probes, the suits contend the companies improperly manipulated the market. Legislative leaders, meanwhile, have sued the federal government, contending it has failed to protect consumers from price-gouging. ??""This all permeates our business in so many ways,"" said Gary Ackerman of the Western States Power Forum, a group that represents power sellers and buyers in the West. ""It even affects my ability to talk to the newspapers, because we're afraid statements may turn up later and be used as evidence. We're not sure what we're dealing with, whether a suit or even a grand jury if the (attorney general) decides to take criminal action, as he said he might."" ??The state's top prosecutor said that, indeed, criminal charges are a possibility. ??""There is an investigation under way that involves potential criminal conduct,"" said Sandra Michioku, a spokeswoman for Attorney General Bill Lockyer. It could be at least eight weeks before that probe is completed, she said. ??Other investigating agencies include the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the California Public Utilities Commission, the city attorneys' offices in Long Beach, Los Angeles and San Francisco; California's grid manager, the Independent System Operator; the obscure Electricity Oversight Board, which oversees the ISO; and the state Senate and Assembly. ??The state has even considered asking two more federal agencies, the Department of Energy and the Federal Trade Commission, to get into the act. Some offices are conducting multiple investigations. In the case of at least two agencies, the PUC and the Attorney General's Office, the investigations are being at least partly coordinated. Some agencies are examining the same issues. The PUC, the attorney general and ISO, for example, all are looking at whether power plants were shut down to drive up demand and prices. ??""There is a lot of overlap and there probably are problems of coordination,"" said Nettie Hoge of The Utility Reform Network of San Francisco, a grass-roots watchdog group. ??With so many agencies trying to extract information, Hoge said, even those who have done no wrong are concerned about talking freely because of the greater likelihood that proprietary information will leak to competitors. ??Others feel the overlap is beneficial. ??""When you're up against an industry as wealthy and powerful as the energy industry, it's probably better to double-team them,"" said Doug Heller of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights. ??Hoge believes that if any investigation is going to produce results, it will be Lockyer's, ""because the governor has thrown all the resources that way."" ??Investigators have requested mountains of paperwork. Transaction and maintenance documents, market reports, financial records, even e-mails _ all have been sought. ??Martin Wilson, a spokesman for Texas-based Reliant, contends the intensity of the probes could have negative long-term effect on California's business climate. ??""There is a climate of instability and uncertainty that makes companies rethink their decisions about investments (in California),"" he said. ??But for consumer groups, the goal of all these investigations is straightforward. ??""Certainly, we're really hopeful that these investigations will lead to refunds for customers,"" said TURN's Mindy Spatz. ""There is a widespread belief among people who follow these issues that widespread gaming and manipulation has occurred in the market."" ??(c) 2001, The Orange County Register (Santa Ana, Calif.). ??Visit the Register on the World Wide Web at http://www.ocregister.com/ JOURNAL-CODE: OC LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS ?????????????????Copyright 2001 The Chronicle Publishing Co. ?????????????????????????The San Francisco Chronicle ?????????????????????MAY 29, 2001, TUESDAY, FINAL EDITION SECTION: NEWS; Pg. A1 LENGTH: 1291 words HEADLINE: Crisis no sweat to some offices; Many offices keep cool in crisis; Air conditioners blast in state's energy centers SOURCE: Chronicle Staff Writer BYLINE: Steve Rubenstein BODY: Some very cool places to be during the dog days of spring and summer turn out to be the places with their fingers on California's air conditioning switch. ???If only the entire state could cram itself into the cavernous control room in Folsom of the Independent Systems Operator, where the air is a comfortable 69 degrees and receptionists wear sweaters at high noon -- when it's upwards of 90 degrees outside. ???Or the Pacific Gas and Electric Co. lobby in downtown San Francisco, where the air is an even chillier 65 degrees, which admittedly isn't much of a bounty, considering it's usually that cool outside anyway. ???Other cool places to be are the state Capitol, where legislators who promulgate energy edicts hang out, and the headquarters of the state Public Utilities Commission, where bureaucrats who promulgate energy edicts hang out. ???Armed with a high-tech digital thermometer, The Chronicle made the rounds of the energy crisis poohbahs, to make sure they are practicing what they are preaching. ???Some were, some weren't. Those that weren't blamed it all on that most familiar of modern scapegoats, the computer. ???Computers must be kept cool -- in the 60s for big mainframes and a bit more for the smaller units most folks use, though some can go into the 80s without hiccuping. So generally, people who work alongside the computers get to keep cool, by association, although it's the computer that counts. ???The ISO headquarters, located in an industrial park 20 miles east of Sacramento, is a delightfully cool and comfortable place when the outside temperature soars into the 90s and 100s. ???The reception area, the only room accessible to the outraged public, is a fairly stiff 76 degrees -- only two degrees cooler than the 78 degrees recommended by President Bush and the federal energy crisis czars and czarinas. ???But take a step past the lobby security doors and the temperature plummets. In the main hallway, the temperature is 73 degrees. And in the control room, where two dozen engineers and technicians sit at consoles and monitor the flow of California electricity on a giant diagram of state power lines so they can order blackouts for everyone else -- the temperature is 69 degrees. ???NO SWEATING AT ISO ???Some managers do not take off their sports coats and jackets. ???""We want these people to be comfortable,"" explained Tony Capasso, facilities manager for the ISO complex. ""We don't want these people sweating bullets in the middle of a crisis."" ???Inside the state Capitol, where legislators and the governor preach compliance with federal guidelines calling for 78-degree thermostats, the temperature dips into the high 60s. The coolest spots are the press briefing room and the treasurer's old office. ???GOVERNOR'S OFFICE ???The governor's suite is in the mid-70s, apparently because folks are often coming by with thermometers and it wouldn't do not to set an example. Press secretary Steve Maviglio said Governor Gray Davis is a practice-what-he-preaches kind of guy who keeps corridors dark, shades drawn, air conditioners idle. His personal secretary works in short sleeves, with a cheap plastic fan humming nearby. ???""It's so dark in the hall that we're always bumping into things,"" said one aide. ???Even so, the temperature in the governor's suite of offices is three degrees cooler than the 78 degrees recommended by President Bush -- not the first time the two men have failed to agree. ???THE LEGISLATURE ???The Assembly chamber is 71 degrees while the Senate chamber -- with 40 fewer legislators spewing forth -- is 73 degrees. But the Senate chamber has a southern exposure, one Capitol guide explained. ???""Hot air from the people sitting inside has nothing to do with it,"" he said. ???In San Francisco, the temperature inside cavernous City Hall dips in spots to the mid-60s. College student Jasmine Westbrook, who dropped by with her art class on a project to sketch the interior of the building, was doing her sketching while wearing a windbreaker to keep warm. ???""I want to stay comfortable,"" she said. ""It think it's supposed to be hotter in here, isn't it?"" ???The mayor's office, at 73 degrees, was eight degrees warmer than another office down the hall, even without the mayor sitting in it. ???63 AT THE PUC ???At the headquarters of the state Public Utilities Commission, which is supposed to be keeping an eye on the self-declared bankruptcy of the utility that mails out the bills, the lobby temperature is 63 degrees. ???Chief engineer David Omosheyin, eyeing The Chronicle's thermometer nervously, insisted the 63-degree reading was caused by the lobby's proximity to the front door, where the outside temperature at the moment was in the low 60s. He invited the thermometer to visit the upper floors, where the temperature was 70. ???As for San Francisco's federal buildings: Bush would probably not frown. ???His orders appeared to be followed during The Chronicle's visits, so much so that it was actually hotter inside than out. Though that wouldn't be hard, considering it was in the low 60s outside. And the places measured happened to be courtrooms and tax offices, where the body heat from anxiety alone could probably melt the paint some days. ???San Franciscans, Omosheyin said, are losing their perspective when it comes to things like electricity, energy alerts and rolling blackouts. In his native country of Nigeria, he said, the electricity runs sporadically, if at all. ???""There the power can go off for a week,"" he said. ""The world goes on. Here, people take a lot of things for granted, and electricity is one of them."" ???As for the offices of the places that report on such matters, they fared about the same. ???The Walnut Creek bureau of The Chronicle, where the sun sizzles into the 90s with regularity in the summer, is kept at 67 degrees because of all the computers. The main newsroom of The Chronicle is kept at 71 degrees, because of all the computers. But the reception room was 71 degrees, too, and there aren't any computers there, not a one. ???Some offices keeping their cool Place ????Outside ?temperature Control Room, California Independent Systems Operator (Folsom) ?????????????????69 ??????90 Governor's office, Capitol (Sacramento) ???75 ??????94 Press briefing room, Capitol (Sacramento) ?68 ??????94 Caltrans headquarters (Sacramento) ????????70 ??????94 Chronicle bureau newsroom (Walnut Creek) ??67 ??????90 Mayor's Office, San Francisco City Hall ???73 ??????63 Calif. Public Utilities Commission lobby (San Francisco) ???????????????????????????63 ??????63 State Building (San Francisco) ????????????69 ??????63 Courtroom, 19th floor, Federal Building (San Francisco) ???????????????????????????70 ??????63 Lobby, Pacific Gas and Electric headquarters (San Francisco) ??????????????65 ??????65 IRS office, Federal Building (San Francisco) ???????????????????????????69 ??????63 Main newsroom, San Francisco Chronicle (San Francisco) ???71 ??????64 ???E-mail Steve Rubenstein at srubenstein@sfchronicle.com. GRAPHIC: PHOTO (2):CHART: SEE END OF TEXT, (1) It's too warm for jackets in the chief clerk's office in the state Capitol building in Sacramento., (2) Jane Malison of Millbrae needed a fan while touring a warm section of the state Capitol, but other parts of the building are kept below 70 degrees. / Photos by Kat Wade/The Chronicle LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS ?????????????????Copyright 2001 The Chronicle Publishing Co. ?????????????????????????The San Francisco Chronicle ?????????????????????MAY 29, 2001, TUESDAY, FINAL EDITION SECTION: NEWS; Pg. A1 LENGTH: 1238 words HEADLINE: Bush facing Davis' heat over energy; In first visit to state as president, he'll hear governor's plea for help SOURCE: Chronicle Political Writers BYLINE: Carla Marinucci, Lynda Gledhill BODY: President Bush wasn't on California soil for more than five minutes yesterday when he was drawn into his first debate on the state's power crunch. ???Rep. Brad Sherman, a Democrat from Thousand Oaks who met Air Force One on the tarmac at Los Angeles International Airport along with a group of high school students, wasted no time button-holing the president for what appeared to be an animated conversation. ???""I brought up . . . the idea that after his meeting with our governor, I hoped he would be in favor of wholesale regulation (of energy prices),"" Sherman said later. ""He disagreed with me."" ???Sherman -- who two weeks ago suggested that the headline to the president's national energy policy should be ""Bush to California: Drop Dead"" -- didn't seem optimistic yesterday about Bush's 48-hour visit to the state. ""I think that the president's policies show either a lack of understanding of what's really going on in California, or a lack of concern,"" he said. ???That vignette underscored some of the challenges facing Bush, who arrived in California as protesters geared up and Democratic Gov. Gray Davis prepared to press him for federal action on the state's power troubles. ???Besides Sherman, Bush was greeted by a crowd of cheering Republicans, including Secretary of State Bill Jones and Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan, the former a declared GOP candidate for governor in 2002, the latter a rumored one. ???But today, Bush will sit down with the present governor, who lately has been blistering in his criticism of the president. ???""The last time I looked, California was still part of the United States of America,"" Davis told reporters this weekend. ""We have contributed disproportionately to the economic growth of this country. There's no reason why a president should not respond to a legitimate request from the chief executive of the largest state in the union."" ???In his first visit to California since just before the election, Bush plans to emphasize the energy crisis -- but will focus on it through the lens of his own energy plan. ???ENERGY SECRETARY ACTS ???Just hours before the president landed, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham ordered a speedup in planning to relieve a notoriously overloaded electricity transmission line in California. ???Abraham's holiday action was timed to provide a bit of positive news for Bush to announce in California. He ordered the Western Area Power Administration, a 15-state marketing arm of the Energy Department, to complete planning and seek outside financing to reduce the transmission bottleneck on California's Path 15, which connects the northern and southern parts of the state. ???This morning, Bush will visit the Marine Corps base at Camp Pendleton, near San Diego, to underscore his conservation order for a 10 percent cut in energy usage in federal buildings and military facilities. ???In Los Angeles, he will deliver a wide-ranging talk before the World Affairs Council and lead a discussion among business leaders about technological advances in energy conservation. ???Then, he will head to Fresno and Sequoia National Park to press his initiative to improve national parks. Along the way, protesters have vowed to provide a vocal commentary on Bush's energy and environmental policies. ???But the real drama of the trip will no doubt be the sit-down between Bush and Davis today. The governor pushed for a lengthy, open meeting with Bush that would include testimony from officials and consumers affected by the energy crisis. Bush's camp announced Friday the meeting would be 20 to 30 minutes -- in private. ???Davis plans to outline steps the state has taken to alleviate the energy crisis, and what it wants the federal government to do -- including implementing price caps on the wholesale cost of energy, cost-based pricing, and the possibility of ordering refunds. ???DAVIS THREATENING SUIT ???The governor has said he will consider suing the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission -- the agency charged with overseeing energy prices -- if it does not impose temporary price caps. ???And the state Legislature has already filed a suit, saying the commission has failed to stop what it has determined are ""unjust and unreasonable prices."" ???With California's energy woes worsening and a summer of rolling blackouts predicted, the Bush-Davis session holds potentially deep political pitfalls for both leaders, both of whom are suffering in state polls as a result of their handling of the energy crisis. ???Bush needs to demonstrate his concern for California, a state that gave a 12-point margin of victory to Al Gore in the presidential election. ???But even as Bush adviser Karen Hughes told state reporters this week that the president had arrived to show he cares, Vice President Dick Cheney again chastised state officials for delaying their response to the energy crisis ""because all of the action was potentially unpleasant."" ???And Cheney signaled that the administration would resist long-term price caps, saying, ""We think that's a mistake."" ???Such talk drew fire from Davis' senior political adviser, Garry South, who charged that Cheney's words demonstrated insensitivity to California's troubles and only underscored the perception of an ""all-oil, all-the-time ticket."" ???Davis, whose campaign for re-election next year will depend on his handling of the crisis, has stepped up his criticism of Bush and profit-hungry energy firms, particularly those from Texas, in recent weeks. ???And yesterday, signaling no letup, Davis' supporters made an unusual holiday conference call to again press his case for federal action. They argued that without immediate intervention from the Bush administration, the economy of California -- and potentially the entire nation -- was at risk. ???'THIS ENORMOUS SHOCK' ???""We have this enormous shock in prices that needs to be addressed and not ignored,"" said Joseph Fichero, head of Sabre Partners and a consultant to Davis. ???Alan Blinder, a Princeton economist and former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve, warned that energy woes in California alone would ""take almost a half a percent of the gross domestic product off of the national economy."" ???Blinder and others argue that short-term relief -- for about 6 to 12 months -- is necessary while new power plants are being built. ???""Most times and most places, I agree price caps are not the long-run solution, but they can be part of a short-term solution,"" Blinder said. ""There really is a case for temporary price caps to shield consumers and the California and national economy from the full force of the energy shock."" ???Limited new price caps approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on the sale of wholesale electricity begin today in California. But the temporary caps, which go into effect when the electricity reserves dip below 7.5 percent, have been lambasted by Davis as ineffective and inadequate. ???Political analysts say Bush's resistence on the issue could cost him in California -- and elsewhere. ???""(California) is probably an area where he is criticized more than any other region in the country,"" said Mark DiCamillo, director of the statewide Field Poll. ""Californians are looking to Bush for some relief -- and to the extent they don't get it, Bush may be in some jeopardy here.""Chronicle news services contributed to this report. / E-mail the writers at cmarinucci@sfchronicle.com and lgledhill@sfchronicle.com. GRAPHIC: PHOTO (2), (1) Rep. Brad Sherman (left), D-Thousand Oaks, buttonholed President Bush as he arrived at Los Angeles International Airport to discuss the state's energy crisis., (2) President Bush signed autographs for students from El Camino High School at Los Angeles airport. Bush is to meet with Gov. Davis today. / Photos by Carlos Avila Gonzalez/The Chronicle LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS 2001 Gannett Company, Inc. TODAY ?????????????????????May 29, 2001, Tuesday, FIRST EDITION SECTION: NEWS; Pg. 3A LENGTH: 426 words HEADLINE: Davis to urge Bush to back electricity price cap BYLINE: Laurence McQuillan DATELINE: LOS ANGELES BODY: LOS ANGELES -- California Gov. Gray Davis will urge President Bush today to back a 2-year cap on electricity costs as the best way to keep his power-starved state -- and possibly the U.S. economy -- from sinking into recession. ???The Democratic governor and Republican president, who have been sparring from afar over energy policy, will meet here to discuss their differences. The White House has said repeatedly that it opposes price caps as a way to deal with energy shortages in California. ??In an interview with USA TODAY, Davis said a limit on wholesale electricity costs is needed while the state attempts to build 15 new power plants. He said that would still allow a 30% profit margin. ??""While the president didn't create this problem, he is uniquely situated to solve it,"" Davis said. ""I'll make clear that he has an opportunity to relieve the pain and give California the breathing space to put more plants online."" ???Bush, making his first visit to California as president, unveiled a long-term energy policy this month that calls for increased production and, to a lesser extent, conservation. The president will promote conservation steps being taken by the federal government during a visit today to the Marine Corps base at Camp Pendleton. ??""The president believes that imposing price caps will only make the problem worse,"" White House spokesman Dan Bartlett said. ??Davis, whose popularity has plummeted as Californians cope with blackouts to offset electricity shortages, said his state's problems could hurt all Americans if they are not dealt with quickly. ""I'm asking for some form of relief that reduces the outrageous prices we're currently bearing,"" he said. ""Without that relief, lots of people will lose their businesses, and California could well be dragged into a recession. Since we're about one-eighth of the national economy, that doesn't bode well for America."" ???The California Public Utilities Commission has announced rate increases of up to 50% for businesses and 37% for homes. ??Bush has sidestepped California after losing the state by 12 percentage points to Democrat Al Gore last year in the presidential election. But with Democrats targeting several GOP House members in next year's elections, Republicans must go on the offensive or risk losing control of the closely divided House of Representatives. ??Davis, a possible presidential candidate in 2004, said he wants to avoid rancor with Bush: ""I'm saying, 'Look, we got into this in a bipartisan way. We should get out of it in a bipartisan way.' "" LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS 2001 The Washington Post Washington Post ?????????????????????May 29, 2001, Tuesday, Final Edition SECTION: A SECTION; Pg. A02 LENGTH: 639 words HEADLINE: Energy Chief Moves To Aid California; Transmission Plan Precedes Bush Visit BYLINE: Mike Allen, Washington Post Staff Writer DATELINE: LOS ANGELES, May 28 BODY: ???President Bush landed at ground zero of the nation's energy worries tonight, hours after Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham speeded up planning to relieve a notoriously overloaded electricity transmission line through California. ???Abraham's holiday action was timed to provide a bit of news for Bush to announce during his first presidential trip to California, where he is to hold a politically charged private meeting with Gov. Gray Davis (D) on Tuesday. Bush's aides said he will pledge to cooperate with California but will stick to his position that no action by the federal government can prevent the rolling blackouts expected this summer. ???Abraham ordered the Western Area Power Administration, a 15-state marketing arm of his department, to complete planning and seek outside financing for an increase in transmission capacity that he said would be ""a big step in the right direction, and a big step forward for Californians."" ???""California's electricity problems developed over a period of years and cannot be solved overnight,"" Abraham said in a news release. ""However, we can move now on actions that will help avert the same types of problems from recurring year after year."" Today's action is designed to reduce the bottleneck on California's Path 15, which connects the northern and southern parts of the state. ???Davis, who is seeking reelection next year, has seen his poll ratings plummet as electricity prices soared, utilities hit dire financial straits, and homes and businesses were surprised with blackouts. ???Bush has taken several steps to try to encourage additional power generation in the state but has maintained since before he took office that California's problems were created here -- through a troubled effort at electricity deregulation and public opposition to construction of additional power plants -- and would have to be solved here. ???Davis plans to use the meeting to lobby Bush once again to endorse a cap by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on the wholesale price of electricity. Again and again, the administration has said it will not take that step. ???""This administration does not, and will not, support energy price controls,"" Bush told a business audience in March. ""Price controls do not increase supply, and they do not encourage conservation. Price controls contributed to the gas lines of the 1970s. And the United States will not repeat the mistake again."" ???Davis energy advisers told reporters on a conference call today that without the cap, California energy costs could be $ 50 billion higher this year than two years ago. Alan S. Blinder, the Princeton University economist and former Federal Reserve Bank vice chairman, said on the call that California's energy crisis ""should be enough to get the attention of policymakers in Washington."" ???The visit by Bush, who flew here after making a Memorial Day speech at a fighter aircraft museum in Mesa, Ariz., is being carefully managed to avoid contact with the general public. After speaking to military families at Camp Pendleton on Tuesday morning, he plans to address a luncheon meeting of the Los Angeles World Affairs Council, which has sold out of tickets at $ 75 for members or $ 85 for guests. ???Afterward, Bush will hold a closed-door session with business people and then meet with Davis for 20 minutes. As Bush departs, Davis plans to make an immediate statement for cameras. ???Although Bush says he has taken more than a dozen steps to help California, Davis says price caps are essential, and has said he may sue the federal government in an effort to get them if Bush does not go along. ???""He has been helpful on a number of small matters, and I appreciate his assistance,"" Davis said during a telephone interview on Friday. ""But the big enchilada is the price of electricity."" LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS 2001 The Washington Post Washington Post ?????????????????????May 29, 2001, Tuesday, Final Edition SECTION: A SECTION; Pg. A03 LENGTH: 1936 words HEADLINE: It's Still Dawn for Solar Power in L.A.; Despite City Subsidies, Homeowners Hesitate to Install Expensive Alternative Energy Source BYLINE: William Booth, Washington Post Staff Writer DATELINE: LOS ANGELES BODY: ???One year ago this city announced its intent to become ""the Solar Capital of the World,"" with 100,000 roofs covered with solar electric panels by the end of the decade, an audacious goal to transform the homes of this smoggy but sunny metropolis into miniature power plants. ???To fulfill what is perhaps the nation's most ambitious solar campaign, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power began offering substantial ""buy down"" subsidies that would reimburse rate payers for half the price of each new solar energy system. For the average home, a photovoltaic package costs between $ 10,000 and $ 20,000, parts and labor included, before the rebate. ???How many have been installed? ???At last count, about 40. ???That leaves only 99,960 rooftops to go. ???The Bush administration, and especially Vice President Cheney, architect of its energy plan, have been criticized for skepticism regarding alternative energy sources. But a close examination of the Los Angeles solar experiment and a review of similar programs suggest the former oilmen in the White House have a point: Solar, at least, has not proven ready for prime time. ???For all of Los Angeles's good intentions, and for all of solar's many positive attributes, the problems of harnessing its power remain. Some of those challenges are economic and some technological; others are more mundane, but often ignored, such as finding a qualified contractor a homeowner can trust to drill dozens of holes in the roofs to mount the things. ???In a reprise of the 1980s, solar again is hot. The price of photovoltaics is dropping and interest is growing. Other states such as New York, Arizona, Florida and Washington are moving to join California in major efforts to wire homes to draw power from the sun. ???But as many Americans are beginning to understand, the delivery of energy is like a complex, interconnected assembly line, and the devil lurks in the details. ???The Los Angeles experiment tells the story shared by other locales. In L.A., for example, the city's lone solar panel manufacturer has not been able to supply enough systems to meet demand. ???The systems, too, are often oversold by solar proponents. In the real world, most do not pay for themselves in a few years, as some advocates claim, but take 20 years or more to return their initial cost in the form of reduced utility bills. ???Nor are the systems maintenance-free: At a minimum, the rooftop panels must be routinely cleaned of pollution, dust and leaves. ???They cannot be installed efficiently on homes without shade-free, south-facing roofs; the shadow from a neighbor's palm tree can frustrate the system's photovoltaic cells. ???Nor will the most common systems allow buyers to live ""off the grid,"" unless they want to purchase a large bank of batteries. Even with the batteries, homeowners probably would not be able to run their washing machines and air conditioners at the same time. ???""It is not an economic proposition at this point,"" conceded Terry Peterson, a solar expert at Electric Power Research Institute in Palo Alto, Calif. But one day, Peterson predicts, 100 years from now, solar energy will provide a substantial percentage of the world's energy needs. In a decade or two, the cost of solar will likely be competitive with other energy sources such as natural gas, nuclear or coal. ???But now? It is still a luxury item. ""Like buying a swimming pool,"" Peterson said. ???""I really like the idea of running my house with solar power,"" said Andrew Chin, a potential customer in Los Angeles who has been researching a purchase. ""But they're still pretty expensive, even with the rebates, and so I gotta ask myself, what am I doing this for,"" his conscience or his wallet. ""I'm thinking I might wait until they work the kinks out."" ???The most knowledgeable and experienced solar contractor in Los Angeles is probably Graham Owen, the founder, owner and single full-time employee of Go Solar Co. ???His installation of a one-kilowatt solar electric system on a home in the San Fernando Valley was the first to be awarded a rebate by the Los Angeles power department in March. ???How many systems has he installed as part of the rebate program? Three. ???But Owen is a true believer, and over the next year, he plans to cover hundreds of roofs with solar panels. On his shelf, Owen still has an unreturned library book, ""The Coming Age of Solar Energy,"" published in 1963, and checked out from his high school in Lennox Hills, Ill., in 1979. ""I guess we're still stuck in the coming age of solar energy,"" he said, smiling. He recalled that the buzz about solar water heaters in the 1980s led to disappointment with shoddy workmanship and less than spectacular energy savings. ???Until recently, there has been little widespread interest in solar electric power. Since 1998, the California Energy Commission has been pushing its own program to encourage homeowners to erect photovoltaic panels on their roofs, offering to subsidize about one-third of the cost. ???Across a state with a population of about 35 million, only 450 solar energy systems have been installed on homes. ???Then the California energy crisis struck, with its power interruptions and steep rate increases, and the phone calls began to overwhelm Owen's voice mail. ???""On days with rolling blackouts? I get a hundred calls, maybe more,"" Owen says. His Web site, www.solarexpert.com, is now receiving 3,000 hits a day. Customers are begging him to do jobs. ???The Los Angeles power department reports a similar surge in interest since the energy crisis began six months ago. ""Customer demand has shot through the roof,"" says Angelina Galiteva, executive director for strategic planning at the Department of Water and Power. She estimates that her department receives 1,000 calls on some days about its solar subsidy program. ???Yet while the reliability and cost of solar electric technologies continue to improve, solar power today accounts for only a sliver of the national pie chart of energy production -- less than 1 percent. The country produces about 300 megawatts of electricity with solar -- about the same amount produced by a single mid-sized traditional power plant. ???The current trend for photovoltaics is not to erect large centralized solar farms in the desert, an experiment that withered in the 1980s, but to pursue ""distributed generation"" or individual units on scattered rooftops. ???The problem has consistently been the cost of the solar panels, which has been too steep to justify them, except for customers who are committed environmentalists or techies who like the elegance of the systems. ???Los Angeles began its solar experiment after Sacramento legislators mandated that utilities spend about 3 percent of their revenue on efficiency, conservation and renewable energy. For solar, the power department committed $ 75 million over the next five years -- enough to subsidize panels on 7,500 homes. ???The power department will pay $ 5 for each watt of solar installed on a residence or business. Homeowners typically purchase a one-kilowatt or two- kilowatt (1,000 or 2,000 watts, respectively) solar electric system, meaning that the municipal utility would pay between $ 5,000 and $ 10,000 of the cost up front -- an enticing, tax-free offer. ???""For many years, I wanted to do solar, but it was so expensive,"" said LaWanda Geary in the San Fernando Valley, who in April had Owen install 32 panels for a two-kilowatt system on her sunny roof. ""The rebate really got me going. I don't know many times when the government offers to pay half of anything."" ???The systems that are eligible for rebates must be tied into a utility's electric power grid, meaning that during the day, when the sun is shining, the panels are adding a stream of electrons used by the home to run its lights and appliances. ???If there is a surplus of solar power, that electricity goes back into the power lines and is passed along to a neighbor, and the electric meter at the house actually runs backward. Homeowners, however, are not selling their excess electricity -- they're giving it away to the utility company. ???On cloudy days, and at night, the home is not being powered by solar energy, but getting its electricity the traditional way from the power lines. ???Calculations on savings vary. A two-kilowatt solar system can supply an average-sized home with 20 to 80 percent of its electrical needs, depending on how many lights, appliances and air conditioners are running, and how efficient they are. ???After the subsidy, and depending on how the system is paid for (in cash or with borrowed funds), a solar system can pay for itself in as little as six years and as much as 36 years. Owen assumes about 20 years. ???Potential solar clients, moreover, often mistakenly assume that going with the sun will take them off the grid, which is not possible without a large bank of batteries that costs several thousand dollars more. Because the solar panels are still wired to the power grid, if there is a blackout, the power in a solar house goes off, just like everyone else's. If uninterrupted power is needed, Owen suggests a diesel generator. ???Galiteva does cite one real advantage of solar: It reduces the electricity that must be purchased from power companies and protects, to some degree, a solar home from the full brunt of upwardly spiraling rate increases. Unfortunately for solar enthusiasts, the L.A. Department of Water and Power, which was not deregulated along with the three other major utilities in California, has perhaps the cheapest and most stable supply of electricity in the state, making the economic argument harder to make. ???To receive the full $ 5 per watt subsidy, the L.A. Department of Water and Power requires a homeowner to purchase solar panels from a manufacturer based in the city. The idea is not only to become the solar capital of the world but also to encourage local growth of an emerging industry and create jobs. ???One hitch is that no solar panel makers were located in Los Angeles. ???After lengthy negotiations, Siemens Solar Industries, based in Camarillo, Calif., an hour's drive to the north, announced in February that it would open a solar panel manufacturing plant in Los Angeles. But it is not a complete facility: The L.A. plant does only some final assembly and then the units must be returned to Camarillo for final testing and shipping. ???Tina Nickerson, a spokeswoman for Siemens Solar, estimates her company has sold ""a couple dozen"" to L.A. homeowners for the rebate program. But she, too, reports that the interest from consumers is sometimes overwhelming and that supply has been a problem. Most U.S.-manufactured units are shipped overseas to places such as Germany, Japan and Scandinavia, which have had generous subsidies in place for years. ???LaWanda Geary had to call Siemens herself to push them to deliver panels for her house -- and she was eligible for the rebate because of a stopgap compromise that allows to Siemens to ship solar panels from Camarillo until its L.A. plant is fully operational. ???Everyone involved concedes there have been bottlenecks. Siemens now says it has enough panels to begin to meet demand, and Owen and the city are hoping things will sort themselves out, especially if more solar manufacturers are drawn to Los Angeles. But proponents worry about what will happen when the subsidies run out. ???""Selling solar is now the easy part,"" Owen says. ""I could sell a hundred a week. It's getting them up on the roof that's the hard part."" LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS ????????????????Copyright 2001 News World Communications, Inc. Washington Times ?????????????????????May 29, 2001, Tuesday, Final Edition SECTION: PART A; NATION; INSIDE POLITICS; Pg. A6 LENGTH: 1264 words BYLINE: Greg Pierce; THE WASHINGTON TIMES BODY: ??TAKING YOUR MEDICINE ??Oakland Mayor Jerry Brown, who was once governor of California, likens current Gov. ?Gray Davis' handling of the electricity crisis to his own bungling of the medfly crisis. ??""Here's an analogy to the medfly crisis,"" Mr. ?Brown said in an interview with the Los Angeles Times' Douglas Foster. ?""When I first heard about the medfly, I said, 'Well, it's just a few flies, maybe they'll go away. ?Maybe they won't keep reproducing.' And the winter came, and they stopped reproducing. ?And then, somewhere around February or March, I learned about something called 'spring emergence.' As the ground got warmer, the larvae turned into flies and more medflies started appearing. It got out of hand, and ultimately I had to order malathion spraying. ?It would have been better had I taken forceful action at the first notice of the medfly."" ??Mr. ?Foster asked: ""Are you saying that the governor missed opportunities to act early, in the same way?"" ??Mr. ?Brown replied: ""There's an analogy there. ?I didn't want to spray because I knew the people in Santa Clara County didn't want to have helicopters spraying malathion over their homes. ?It didn't sound good. ?As governor, I wouldn't have wanted to see rate increases either. ?But sometimes you have to take your medicine early. ?It's less bitter than if you postpone it."" ??Mr. ?Davis served as Mr. ?Brown's chief of staff when the latter Democrat was governor. ??ENERGETIC CRITICISM ??President Bush's energy plan, already under fire from Democrats and environmentalists, is dismissed by National Review, the conservative magazine, as so much political posturing. ??""The hyperbolic attacks on the Bush plan by environmentalists (as an attempt to poison the air and kill the caribou) shouldn't trick conservatives into an exaggerated sense of its merit,"" the magazine says in an editorial in its current issue, dated June 11. ??""The basic thrust of the administration's thinking on energy is sound: a growing economy requires more energy, which in turn entails more production. But the Bush plan itself is a political document, meant to placate corporate interests, environmentalists, and everyone in between, and so is festooned with an embarrassment of subsidies and incentives that will, at best, prove an irrelevance. ??""As Jerry Taylor of the Cato Institute writes in this issue, the phantom energy crisis is already healing itself. ?Power plants are being built at a rate that outpaces Dick Cheney's benchmark of one plant a week. Altogether, almost 100,000 new daily megawatts of electrcity capacity are scheduled to be available nationwide by next year. ?This is twice the amount of electricity that California now uses on an average day. ?While Cheney has been sitting with his advisers around a White House conference table, investors and entrepreneurs have been digging, building, and refining his energy problem into oblivion. ?By the time all the Bush plan's tax credits have kicked in, there may well be an energy glut. ?All of this is thanks to the most efficient energy plan known to man: market pricing."" ??WRONG ON BOTH COUNTS ??""The buzz in the media after Sen. ?James Jeffords' switch put Democrats in control of the Senate was that President Bush must change his ways. ?He has to become more moderate. ?Why? ?Because only that will prevent more Republican defections and it's the president's one hope for getting his agenda through Congress. ?This is wrong on both counts,"" Fred Barnes writes in the Weekly Standard. ??""Bush and GOP congressional leaders bent over backwards to accommodate Jeffords and liberal Democrats on education, the senator's top priority. Jeffords bolted anyway. ?On taxes, Bush stuck with his conservative tax cut until nearly the end, when he compromised just enough to assure passage. Jeffords voted with him,"" Mr. ?Barnes said. ??""The truth about the impact of Jeffords' move is that no political earthquake has occurred. ?The Senate is ideologically unchanged. ?The swing votes in the Senate, including John McCain, are important, but they already were. ?There's no clear path to victory for the Bush agenda, after taxes and education, but that was always true. ?To pass a patients' bill of rights, a prescription-drug benefit, or missile defense, a bipartisan coalition of some sort will be essential. ??""Yes, there's one big change with Democrats taking over: judges. ?Bush will have a harder time getting conservative nominees through a Senate Judiciary Committee run by Patrick Leahy, perhaps the most partisan Democrat on Capitol Hill. ?One more downbeat side effect: Jeffords' announcement overshadowed Bush's tax-cut victory, denying him any political momentum he might have gotten from it."" ??INCOHERENT REBEL ??""Before liberals put James Jeffords on Mount Rushmore, can we please stop and note how he's already betrayed Democrats and his own avowed principles by deciding that his defection won't take effect until after President Bush's wrongheaded tax cut has been signed into law?"" syndicated columnist Matthew Miller writes. ??""Any traitor (I mean, 'man of conscience') worth his salt shoves the knife in to the hilt - otherwise, what's the point? ?Machiavellis throughout history have wisely advised that when you move against the king, you'd better finish him off,"" Mr. ?Miller said. ??""Yet Jeffords took pains to make sure his switch wouldn't derail the centerpiece of Bush's agenda, the very agenda that inspired Jeffords' move and which Jeffords had the power to stop via his action. ??""We are dealing, in other words, with a deeply incoherent rebel. ?This would be a private matter for Jeffords to sort out with his therapist were not his cowardice in this moment of 'courage' so consequential for the country."" ??THE LONELY VERMONTER ??""In the final analysis, Vermont Sen. ?James M. ?Jeffords was out of step with his party, making his departure appropriate, if politically inconvenient. ?Those who argue that it was the party out of step with Jeffords, some political analysts are saying, are those who wish the Republicans no good."" UPI political analyst Peter Roff writes. ??""The conservative, low-tax, minimal-government Republican Party enjoys national parity with the Democrats, something the Northeastern liberal GOP could not achieve. ?Jeffords is, in that regard, these observers say, out of step with victory. ?One GOP consultant went so far as to say, 'If the Republicans were doing better in New England, Jeffords would not have been so lonely. ?Why is it that the people from states where the GOP usually doesn't win think they can tell the rest of us how to run the party and what we all should believe? ?It doesn't make sense.' (spade) ??""There are those in the GOP who regret the loss of the majority that Jeffords' defection brings, but very few, if any, are mourning the loss of the lonely Vermonter,"" Mr. ?Roff said. ??LAST WORDS ??Brill's Content asked PR pros how they would handle Vice President Richard B. Cheney's heart problems. ??""It's inconceivable that Mr. ?Cheney can put in the kind of time we're led to believe he is without putting himself at risk,"" one public relations man, John Scanlon, told the magazine. ?""My recipe for controlling the situation would be photo-ops, access to his schedule, and a couple of exclusive articles. ?He's got to convince people he's fit for the job."" ??Unfortunately, Mr. ?Scanlon did not live to see his quote in the magazine's June issue, the New York Post reports. ?He died of a heart attack. ??* Greg Pierce can be reached at 202/636-3285 or by e-mail at gpierce@washingtontimes.com. LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS ????????????????Copyright 2001 News World Communications, Inc. Washington Times ?????????????????????May 29, 2001, Tuesday, Final Edition SECTION: PART A; NATION; Pg. A4 LENGTH: 809 words HEADLINE: Bush faces tough sell on visit to California; Davis likely to be rebuffed on price caps BYLINE: Joseph Curl; THE WASHINGTON TIMES DATELINE: LOS ANGELES BODY: ??LOS ANGELES - Twenty minutes - that's how long Gov. ?Gray Davis, who has accused the Bush administration of ignoring California's energy crisis, will have to sway President Bush in a meeting today to consider imposing federal price caps on wholesale power prices. ??His plea likely will fall on deaf ears. ??""That's simply not going to happen,"" said one senior Bush official. Both Mr. Bush and Vice President Richard B. ?Cheney, who on Friday again blamed the state government of California for the energy crunch, oppose cap measures. ??In his first visit to California since the presidential election, where he lost the state to former Vice President Al Gore by 54 percent to 41 percent, Mr. Bush hopes to sell his national energy policy to a vocal group of opponents. But the hue and cry has been muted of late since residents have battled rolling blackouts and sky-high gasoline prices. ??A new poll released Friday shows 59 percent of Californians, many of whom have been longtime foes of nuclear energy, now believe the non-polluting energy source may be the way to solve the state's problems. ??Mr. ?Davis' popularity has plummeted. ?The Democrat, facing re-election next year and often mentioned as a presidential candidate, is viewed as having ""poor job performance"" by 60 percent of Californians, according to a survey by the Public Policy Institute of California. ??In a small gesture to California, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham yesterday announced plans to increase transmission capacity in California, which he said would be a ""big step"" in easing rolling power blackouts. ??Abraham ordered the Western Area Power Administration - an Energy Department arm responsible for marketing electricity from federal water projects in 15 Western states - to wrap up planning for building extra transmission capacity. ??The governor has repeatedly blamed Mr. ?Bush, who took office four months ago, for the energy crunch in California. ?He points the finger of blame far outside the state's boundaries, primarily at Washington and Mr. Bush's home state. ??""The people that have dropped the ball are the federal government,"" Mr. Davis said last week. ?""They need to reimpose a price cap because we're being obscenely gouged by price gougers out of Texas and the Southwest. ?. . . There's a massive transfer of wealth going on from ordinary citizens in California to Texas."" ??Mr. ?Davis has also charged that utility companies are withholding power in order to drive up prices, a claim the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has investigated and dismissed. ??Mr. ?Bush and Mr. ?Cheney have often pointed out that California is second only to Rhode Island in conservation efforts, but the state is on the brink of an energy supply collapse. ??Still, despite the state's failure to build new power plants, Mr. Davis says California is entitled to a federal bailout approved by Mr. Bush. ??""I'm going to keep asking him to do it because we're part of America. The state, the last three years, has led American economic growth. ?. . . We're doing everything we can out here,"" he said. ??In the Democratic response to the president's weekly radio address, Mr. Davis accused the president, a former oil man, of being concerned only with the petroleum magnates. ??""With all due respect, I urge you to stand up to your friends in the energy business and exercise the federal government's exclusive responsibility to ensure that energy prices are reasonable,"" he said. ??Many analysts, however, blame the state's deregulation scheme and failure to construct adequate electrical generating capacity. ?The price wholesale power providers can charge utilities is not capped, but the fee those companies can charge users is capped - resulting in massive debt for providers. ??The state was slow to respond to increased demand, the analysts say, even though the state is building 10 new power plants, four of which will come on line this summer. ??In his national energy policy, Mr. ?Bush lays out 105 proposals that focus on increasing domestic supply, improving the nation's ability to move energy between regions and increased conservation. ?But the policy is geared more toward long-term solutions - such as decreasing America's reliance on foreign oil - than short-term relief for Californians and motorists nationwide. ??Mr. ?Cheney, who heads the president's energy task force and said Friday that California knew ""for more than a year"" about the impending energy shortage, has promoted nuclear power as essential to America's energy needs. ?He said that at least some of the 65 power plants that need to be built annually to meet future electricity demand ought to be nuclear. ??A poll by the Field Institute last week found many Californians now agree. Although nuclear energy produces 20 percent of the nation's energy, California has just two nuclear plants. GRAPHIC: Photo, Gov. ?Gray Davis LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS ????????????????????Copyright 2001 Chicago Tribune Company Tribune ???????????????May 29, 2001 Tuesday, NORTH SPORTS FINAL EDITION SECTION: News; Pg. 6; ZONE: N LENGTH: 514 words HEADLINE: Bush backs WW II project BYLINE: From Tribune news services. DATELINE: LOS ANGELES BODY: ??President Bush promised World War II veterans a Washington memorial that ""will stand for the ages"" and paid Memorial Day tribute to America's fallen soldiers before embarking on a three-day West Coast swing to try to ease his political problems in California. ??Bush landed at ground zero of the nation's energy worries Monday night, hours after Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham speeded up planning to relieve a notoriously overloaded electricity transmission line through California. ? ??Abraham's action was timed to provide a bit of news for Bush to announce during his first presidential trip to California, where he is to hold a politically charged private meeting with Democratic Gov. Gray Davis on Tuesday. Bush's aides said he will pledge to cooperate with California but will stick to his position that no action by the federal government can prevent the rolling blackouts that are expected this summer. ??Abraham ordered the Western Area Power Administration, a 15-state marketing arm of his department, to complete planning and seek outside financing for an increase in transmission capacity that he said would be ""a big step in the right direction, and a big step forward for Californians."" ??""California's electricity problems developed over a period of years and cannot be solved overnight,"" Abraham said in a news release. ""However, we can move now on actions that will help avert the same types of problems from recurring year after year."" Monday's action is designed to reduce the bottleneck on California's Path 15, which connects the northern and southern parts of the state. ??Davis, who is seeking re-election next year, has seen his poll ratings plummet as electricity prices soared, utilities hit dire financial straits and homes and businesses were surprised with blackouts. ??For most of Monday, however, Bush focused on U.S. veterans and the solemn ceremonies in two states honoring those who never returned from America's wars. ??""Their losses can be marked, but not measured,"" Bush said at the traditional Memorial Day ceremonies at Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia. ""We can never measure the full value of what was gained in their sacrifice. We live it every day, in the comforts of peace and the gifts of freedom."" ??Bush also laid a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknowns. ??Later he traveled to Mesa, Ariz., to pay tribute to veterans at the Champlin Fighter Aircraft Museum. He asked the crowd to observe a nationwide moment of silence at 3 p.m. Arizona time. ??""Any foe who might challenge our national resolve will be repeating the grave error of defeated adversaries,"" the president said. ??Bush opened the day at the White House, where he signed legislation to construct a World War II monument on the National Mall, a setting criticized by some. Bush said the monument between the Washington Monument and Lincoln Memorial ""will stand for the ages."" ??""I will make sure the monument gets built,"" the president told an audience of veterans in the yellow-curtained East Room, among them former Sen. Bob Dole (R-Kan.), who has supported the memorial. ??. GRAPHIC: PHOTOPHOTO (color): President Bush and Maj. Gen. James T. Jackson attend Monday's wreath-laying at Arlington National Cemetery's Tomb of the Unknowns. AP photo by Ron Edmonds. LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS Associated Press The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ???????????????????????May 29, 2001, Tuesday, BC cycle AM Eastern Time SECTION: Domestic News LENGTH: 604 words HEADLINE: Bush announcing low-income aid, but no price caps BYLINE: By SCOTT LINDLAW, Associated Press Writer DATELINE: LOS ANGELES BODY: ??President Bush traveled across the country to deliver news Gov. Gray Davis doesn't want to hear: He won't force down soaring electricity prices that have cost California nearly $8 billion since January. ??The Republican president and the embattled Democratic governor arranged a 20-meeting Tuesday to talk about California's energy crisis, but there was no indication they would break their stalemate. ??Bush opposes price limits on wholesale electricity that utilities buy, arguing they do nothing to address supply-and-demand issues at the heart of the crisis. ??Davis contends federal energy regulators are ignoring their mandate to ensure ""just and fair"" electricity prices. ??With no sign of a break in the deadlock, each side maneuvered for maximum advantage from Bush's first full day in California as president. ??Davis, in an interview Tuesday on ABC's ""Good Morning America,"" defended his record on licensing more power plants. ??""We've licensed 15 plants. Ten are under construction, four will be online this summer, four next summer, and by the end of 2003 we will have built our way out of this problem. But between now and then, we are getting gouged unbelievably,"" Davis said. ??The Bush administration timed positive energy announcements to coincide with the president's visit. ??At the Marine Corps base at Camp Pendleton, Bush was announcing the expansion of a program that provides federal money to help low-income residents pay for power. ??Bush was proposing $150 million, in addition to $300 million already budgeted for a component of the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, to provide special help to cash-strapped residents of California and certain Midwest areas such as Chicago, a senior administration aide said. ??Bush was also reminding state residents of his order that military facilities in the state cut peak-hour usage by 10 percent. ??To alleviate an electricity bottleneck on a crucial south-north transmission path, the Department of Energy announced that the Western Area Power Authority will try to raise money from a variety of private and public entities to finance a crucial additional lines. ??""The Bush administration is taking a leadership role in addressing a long-neglected problem in California's electricity transmission system,"" said Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham. ""California's electricity problems developed over a period of years and cannot be solved overnight. However, we can move now on actions that will help avert the same types of problems from recurring year after year."" ??Davis had a letter for Bush from top economists who maintain price caps are justified and necessary. ??Aides to the governor expressed amazement that Bush would travel all the way to California with no major announcement in hand, and predicted Davis would respond with ""polite rage."" ??Mindful of the national stage he commanded, Davis planned a news conference to air his grievances. And he convened a panel of families he said have been victimized by the energy crisis in the same hotel where Bush was staying. ??Davis wants Bush to pressure the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to impose stiff price caps. ??Tuesday, limited caps ordered last month by FERC go into effect in California, but only when electricity reserves fall below 7.5 percent in the state - a step Davis called inadequate. ??Protesters planned demonstrations in Los Angeles and at Camp Pendleton, in San Diego County. ??Bush also arranged a speech on energy and trade to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council and planned to president over a closed-door energy round-table discussion. GRAPHIC: AP Photos DSM106, KDJ102 LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ???????????????????????May 29, 2001, Tuesday, BC cycle AM Eastern Time SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 594 words HEADLINE: Stakes are high for Davis meeting with Bush BYLINE: By GARY GENTILE, AP Business Writer DATELINE: LOS ANGELES BODY: ??With California facing a summer of outages, Gov. Gray Davis was to meet President Bush to press for a federal cap on energy prices. ??But Davis wasn't expected to win any concessions during the 20-minute Tuesday meeting where he's expected to point to Texas energy makers. ??Davis has appeared on national news programs attacking Bush for opposing price controls on wholesale electricity, and suggesting the president has ignored price-gouging by Texas-based electricity generators. ??""The president did not create this problem, but he is uniquely situated to solve it,"" Davis said Monday. ""What I'm going to ask him to do, with all respect, is to enforce federal law. The money that leaves this state goes directly to energy companies in Texas and the Southwest."" ??If Bush refuses to administer price controls as expected, Davis can use that as ammunition in his sparring with the administration. ??Bush has blamed California officials for the state's power woes and said price controls won't solve shortages. Instead, they said, Bush plans to stress his efforts to conserve energy in federal buildings and will bring one or two new initiatives to the table. ??One of them commits the federal government to helping organize a consortium to build more power lines for the state. ??Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham directed the Western Area Power Administration, a federal agency, to take the first steps to clear the way for building more transmission capacity between southern and northern California. That would help relieve a transmission bottleneck in the central part of the state. ??While this will not help this summer, Abraham said in a statement the line improvements, when completed, ""will help avert the same types of problems from recurring year after year."" ??The stakes of the meeting are high for both politicians. ??Davis, who has been mentioned as a Democratic challenger to Bush in 2004, wants federal help to solve an energy crunch that threatens rolling outages this summer and has cost state taxpayers nearly $8 million since January - the price of buying power for two cash-starved private utilities. And his plan to rescue one of those companies reportedly is faltering. ??Leaders of both the state Senate and Assembly oppose a $3 billion-plus plan to bail out Southern California Edison by buying its power lines, the Los Angeles Times reported Monday. ??Bush, meanwhile, needs to mend fences in vote-heavy California. The Republican president lost badly here in November, and polls show most Californians dislike his handling of their energy crisis. ??Bush's Tuesday agenda was heavy on energy issues. At the Marine Corps base at Camp Pendleton, near San Diego, Bush was to highlight his order that federal agencies and installations cut back energy use. Then it was on to Los Angeles to discuss his energy plan in a speech to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council. ??Bush was confronted by the issue virtually as he stepped off the plane Monday in Los Angeles. Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Los Angeles, escorted the Academic Decathlon national championship team from El Camino Real High School in Woodland Hills to meet Bush. He told the president California needs regulation of electric generators. ??""The president seems to believe just by instinct that rate regulation reduces supply and also by instinct that all those in the energy industry are fair people who are not trying to game the system,"" Sherman said. ""Anyone who studies the facts in California knows that power is being withheld in order to drive up the price."" LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS ????????????????Copyright 2001 Burrelle's Information Services NEWS ??????????????????????SHOW: WORLD NEWS NOW (2:00 AM ET) 28, 2001, Monday TYPE: Newscast LENGTH: 447 words HEADLINE: PRESIDENT BUSH VISITS CALIFORNIA WHERE POLITICIANS ARE CRITICAL OF HIS LACK OF ACTION FOR THEIR ENERGY CRISIS ANCHORS: DEREK McGINTY REPORTERS: JOSH GERSTEIN BODY: ??DEREK McGINTY, co-anchor: ??When Air Force One touches down in California today it will mark President Bush's first visit to the Golden State since taking office. Now that fact has not been lost on Governor Gray Davis who has accused the president of ignoring his state's power crisis. ?As ABC's Josh Gerstein tells us, Mr. Bush's visit could have major ramifications for his presidency and his party. ??JOSH GERSTEIN reporting: ??(VO) Since taking office, President Bush has visited 28 states, but until this week he had not found time on his schedule to visit the nation's most populous state, California. ??Mr. DAN SCHNUR (GOP Political Consultant): Because the state is going through such extraordinary times right now because of the energy crisis, his absence has been much more noticeable, and the discussion about it's been much more heightened. ??GERSTEIN: (VO) Democrats have begun an aggressive effort to paint the president and other Republicans as obstacles to resolving the energy crisis. ??Offscreen Voice: (From TV Commercial) President Bush has offered no relief to hard-pressed rate payers. ??Text: ??""The President...believe(s) that the issue is mostly a California matter..."" ??GERSTEIN: (VO) On Tuesday, Mr. Bush meets with California Governor Gray Davis. ?He, and other Democrats, want the federal government to impose caps on wholesale prices for electricity. ??Representative ANNA ESHOO (Democrat, California): Our people are hurting. We're bleeding in the sand. ?We need a tourniquet, and the president is the one that can do this. ??GERSTEIN: (VO) During his trip, President Bush plans to highlight the federal government's conservation efforts, but aides say he will not endorse price caps. ??Mr. TUCKER ESKEW (Director, White House Media Affairs): The president believes that capping wholesale prices would do nothing to lower demand, or increase supply, the two fundamental solutions to any energy problem such as this. ??GERSTEIN: Holding the line against price caps may have political costs. Most analysts give Mr. Bush little chance of winning California in 2004, but Republican congressmen there face re-election next year. ?So far, five of them have endorsed some kind of limit on electricity pricing. ??Representative RANDY CUNNINGHAM (Republican, California): We're in an extreme emergency right now. ?It takes extreme measures. ??Unidentified Woman: We are in rolling blackouts. ??GERSTEIN: (VO) While electricity may be in very short supply in California this summer, the president and politicians of all stripes are likely to find there's more than enough voter anger to go around. ?Josh Gerstein, ABC News, the White House. LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Draft of California Contact List; [EMail-Body]= Steve ? This is a draft of the contact list I promised you.? There are still some typos in it.? I will clean them up and get send you a draft in the morning that is ready for circulation. ? This list is made?up of?people that I know?and trust.? By an large I have excluded sitting pubic officials.? In cases where a given organization has several useful contacts with similar knowledge, I have listed just one person for now. ? Give me a call at your convenience, and we can discuss this in great detail. ? Kevin 213-926-2626 - Kevin Scott - Key Contacts - Draft.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California Power Crisis Update (No. 10); [EMail-Body]= We have been pulling together these weekly(sometimes more often) summaries for internal purposes. Would you find it helpful to be on the distribution list? Hope you are doing well. Look forward to touching base soon. ----- Forwarded by Suzanne on 03/28/2001 03:41 AM ----- Memorandum TO: Pru Sheppard BCC: Suzanne Nimocks FROM: Pru Sheppard B. Venki Venkateshwara DATE: March 27, 2001 California Power Crisis Update (No. 10) DEVELOPMENTS THIS WEEK, 3/23/2001 The weeks highlights include: ? Continued indications that the issue of market power and possible remedies for it is likely to remain a high profile issue in California and elsewhere (both retroactively and prospectively) ? An ironical situation with respect to QFs in which QF power under contract is effectively being released into the market at higher prices ? A court order requiring Reliant to continue to sell power to the ISO even if it is not being paid in a full and timely manner ? Another Stage 3 emergency and rolling blackouts Market power There are continued indications that the issue of market power will not be settled simply. This week there was a lengthy and politically influential front page story in the New York Times about FERCs passive approach to policing generators (Critics Say U.S. Energy Agency Is Weak in Oversight of Utilities). The story was by Jeff Gerth and Joseph Kahn. (Jeff Gerth's 1992 story on the Whitewater deal is viewed by journalists to have been the origin of what eventually became a multi-year investigation of Bill Clinton.) The key issues are familiar: ? Does market power exist to a degree that warrants remedies such as price caps, refunds, and so on? ? If so, what is the basis for asserting that market power exists and what is the remedy? (See the discussion in the New York Times article on the ""good hours"" vs. ""bad hours"" approach and the associated political decision not to deal with ""good hours""). ? Can market power be used as leverage to eventually settle generator bills in California at something less than 100 cents on the dollar. (The California ISO filed a complaint claiming $6 billion in overcharges this week.) The QF irony Through the 1990s, QF contracts were projected to be the source of stranded costs because they were priced ""way above market."" In recent months, in California, they look like a bargain (although some are not such great bargains because a portion of their price is tied to gas). You would think that the utilities would request QFs to maximize their output. But credit problems have created an ironical situation. The facts: ? PG&E and Edison have not been paying the QFs fully and promptly for some time. ? The QFs form a creditors committee and threaten to push PG&E and Edison into bankruptcy. (Some gas-fired QFs had to shut down because they did not have money to pay for the gas.) ? Last week's court decision allows MidAmerican/CalEnergy to essentially sell its power to others even though the QF contract ""dedicates"" the output to the purchasing utility. ? CalEnergy does so immediately, selling to El Paso. The Reliant Order A court ordered Reliant to continue to sell to the ISO, when requested, regardless of whether Reliant had been paid fully and promptly for past deliveries to the ISO. Reliant announced it will appeal the order. This is somewhat of a contrast to the QF situation except that the circumstances governing the 2 situations are probably different. The QF contracts pre-date the ISO and are with the utilities and most likely make no reference to providing power during emergencies. In fact, many QF contracts have the opposite provision: authority for the utility to cut takes during so-called ""light load"" periods. Stage 3 emergency and rolling blackouts--again There was another Stage 3 emergency in California ? with rolling blackouts this week. This prompted everyone to wonder why this was happening in March. Among the factors: ? Increased demand from summer-like temperatures ? Cutbacks in imports ? Loss of 1400 MW due to a transformer fire at an Edison plant ? Loss of about 3100 MW from QF plants that were forced to shutdown because they could not afford gas bills (VV) MARKET COMMENTARY (For easier printing of all the articles in this section use the file at the end of the section) Critics Say U.S. Energy Agency Is Weak in Oversight of Utilities By JEFF GERTH and JOSEPH KAHN 03/23/2001 The New York Times Page 1, Column 1 c. 2001 New York Times Company WASHINGTON, March 22 -- The pressure was intense when federal regulators met privately last month to debate remedies for soaring electricity prices in California. Officials of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the agency whose mandate is to ensure ''just and reasonable'' electricity rates nationwide, had evidence that a few companies had been selling electricity to California at prices far above the cost of generating it. The agency faced an imminent deadline to challenge those prices or let the companies possibly pocket hundreds of millions of dollars in unfair profits. An internal memorandum laid out two choices. The agency could audit and punish ''bad actors,'' the companies that were exploiting the market. Or it could identify ''bad hours,'' when electricity shortages were most acute and spiking prices were arguably nobody's fault, and order refunds for only the most exorbitant prices. ''It may be easier to identify bad hours than bad actors,'' the memorandum said. The commission took the easier way. It decided not to investigate reports of abuses by companies, but issued an order that could require them to refund to the state utilities up to $124 million collected during a relatively few ''bad hours'' in January and February. That is hundreds of millions of dollars less than California might have claimed, since the most potential overcharging occurred during ''good hours,'' when power was more plentiful but prices were often just as extreme. The order ignored those hours. Today, in a criticism of the agency's lack of aggressiveness, California regulators estimated that generators had charged $6.2 billion above competitive levels over 10 months. They urged the agency to dig deeper, hoping it would demand more refunds or other stiff remedies. But the agency's track record -- one of complacency in the eyes of state officials -- leaves California regulators skeptical that Washington will confront the big power producers. The small, obscure agency, tucked behind the rail yard of Union Station here, has largely soft-pedaled its role as the electricity industry's top cop, even though it has wide authority to keep power companies in line. To keep rates reasonable, it can impose price caps, strip companies of the right to charge market rates, force them to return excessive profits and even suspend deregulation altogether. Instead, the agency has largely left it to private companies to pry open the $250 billion electricity industry, which has historically been controlled by monopoly utilities and state officials. The agency's defenders, including its chairman, Curt Hebert Jr., a fierce advocate of unfettered markets, say that its largely hands-off approach reflects the delicate balancing of competing interests -- a commitment to protect consumers while not stifling market forces. But politicians, utility executives, energy economists and local regulators say California's rolling blackouts and skyrocketing electricity prices are the signs of a market running amok. They accuse the agency of standing aside as companies manipulate their way to windfall profits. The agency's critics, who include one of its own commissioners and numerous staff members, say that its enforcement mission has been blunted by free-market passions and the influence of industry insiders in its ranks. When the agency began its first national investigation of high electricity prices last year, it named a newly recruited industry insider, Scott Miller, to lead the effort. Mr. Miller and his colleagues said in their report that there was ''insufficient data'' in California to prove any profiteering by generating companies. Yet his own former employer, PG&E Energy Trading, was at the time a subject of a civil antitrust investigation by the Justice Department that focused on electricity market abuses in New England. The agency has given state regulators a lead role in monitoring local power markets. Yet even as these regulators have urged the agency to be more aggressive in investigating suspicions that companies have abused their power in California, New England, the Midwest and the mid-Atlantic, they have frequently been ignored or rebuffed. Critics say that the agency began deregulation before it was ready or willing to make sure the markets worked effectively. They accuse it of showing favoritism to industry -- allowing companies, for example, to ignore requirements to file detailed reports of market transactions that are critical to proving accusations of market abuses. ''We need to wake up to the fact that this is a dysfunctional market that is being gamed and manipulated by those who participate in it,'' said William Massey, a commissioner of the agency who has become one of its leading critics. The agency's inaction, the critics say, leads to ''gaming'' -- jockeying for profits that does not necessarily involve illegality -- and outright market manipulation. Consumers and utilities are the victims, paying billions of dollars more for electricity than if the markets were truly competitive. Agency officials acknowledge that enforcement of market rules to curb gaming and manipulation had not been a high priority in previous years. But they defended their recent California order as proof that they intend to keep markets free of abuse. They add that the agency is also pressuring two generators to refund almost $11 million for possibly manipulating the California market last spring. Agency officials and some outside analysts say that poorly conceived deregulation plans by states, a shortage of power plants, rising natural gas prices, and even the weather have had more impact on electricity prices than abuses by companies or any failings by the agency. They say the agency must balance the competing interests of generators, local regulators and utility companies if it is to keep deregulation on track. ''We're trying to craft a system that gives breathing room to develop a market, but not so much room that undue market power punishes consumers,'' Mr. Hebert said. Fight Over Deregulation Today's debate traces back to the 1930's, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt backed legislation to break up utility monopolies. The Federal Power Act of 1935 gave the Federal Power Commission a mandate to ensure ''just and reasonable'' electricity rates. The Federal Power Commission was abolished in 1977 and replaced by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, an independent agency with 1,200 employees that also oversees oil pipelines and the natural gas market. The president appoints the chairman and four commissioners -- two Democrats and two Republicans with staggered terms of five years. Two Republican seats are currently unfilled. The deregulation of the electricity markets began in the late 1980's, after the agency had begun opening the gas markets. By 1996, the commissioners issued a landmark order that forced utility companies to open their transmission lines to other utilities and electricity wholesalers. The commission and many private economists expected that by prying open protected markets, electricity prices would immediately fall. That possibility set off a deregulation frenzy, most prominently in California, New York, New England and the mid-Atlantic states. Generating companies rushed to expand in the new, borderless market. But the agency's balancing act has grown more difficult as electricity deregulation has spread nationwide. Congress has forced it to trim its staff in recent years. Officials complain that investigating abuses in electricity markets strains their resources. And as the California crisis has worsened, the commissioners have begun sparring publicly among themselves about what to do. This week, Mr. Massey, a Democratic commissioner, and Mr. Hebert (pronounced AY-bear), a Republican, sat side by side before a House panel and argued diametrically opposed positions. Mr. Hebert said high prices in California ''were sending the right signals to get supply there.'' Mr. Massey called the prices that generators were charging ''unlawful'' and said that his agency, by not reining them in, ''is simply not doing its job.'' The agency's leadership has been in flux for months. Congressional and industry officials in Washington say President Bush is considering replacing Mr. Hebert, whom he named to the top post less than two months ago, with Pat Wood, who runs the Texas public utility commission. A White House spokeswoman had no comment on the reports. Though Mr. Hebert's positions are not far from those of the Bush administration, his relations with California leaders may have made his position tenuous. Mr. Hebert, a Mississippian who is a close ally of the Senate majority leader, Trent Lott, has warred with California politicians who have proposed new solutions to the crisis there. Mr. Hebert, who has served as a commissioner since 1997, has often taken the most ideologically free-market position of any commissioner. He flatly rejects the idea of price caps on electricity as hopelessly ineffective and contrary to market forces. When Gov. Gray Davis outlined a plan to have the state buy transmission lines to relieve utility companies' debt, Mr. Hebert's response was dismissive. ''It's not in the interest of the American public,'' he pronounced. Even as new electricity markets opened in the summer of 1999, they started producing nasty shocks. The mid-Atlantic region experienced some early volatility. As the turmoil grew, economists began raising the alarm about a phenomenon called ''market power,'' the ability of energy traders in the new national market to sustain prices above the competitive level. Proving such abuses is difficult, because it requires comparing tens of thousands of separate electricity transactions with the costs of the generators that initiated them. Joseph Bowring, who heads the market monitoring unit of the nonprofit entity that operates the mid-Atlantic transmission system, said that power companies there had exercised some market power. But only the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, not local regulators, had the authority to collect the data to determine how much market power had been exercised and whether it had been abusive or not, he said. Mr. Bowring said he talked to agency officials about doing so. In the end, Mr. Bowring and several agency officials said, the agency chose not to investigate. The decision roiled some agency officials. Ron Rattey, a veteran agency economist, wrote a memorandum last June describing the staff as ''impotent in our ability to monitor, foster, and ensure competitive electric power markets.'' The staff, the memorandum said, did not even enforce a requirement that power companies file detailed quarterly reports listing essentially every sale they make. Such data would have been useful to Mr. Bowring. Local-Federal Clash Local regulators who want to ensure competitive prices often have to act on their own. Monitors in New England have intervened about 600 times since 1999 to correct prices they determined had been caused, at least in part, by market manipulation. The federal agency has sometimes chastised them for interfering too much. The industry, not surprisingly, shares that view. One vocal critic was Mr. Miller. Before the agency recruited him last July to head its division of energy markets, he was director of policy coordination for the national energy-trading unit of PG&E Corporation, the California holding company whose assets also include Pacific Gas and Electric, the California utility. Although the utility has lost billions of dollars during California's crisis, Mr. Miller's former unit has become one of the most profitable new energy traders nationwide. PG&E Energy Trading, by several estimates, is now the second-largest seller of electricity in New England. The company has had a rocky relationship with regulators. They intervened several times in 1999 and 2000 to retroactively cancel auctions they said produced excessive profits for PG&E and other companies. Mr. Miller denounced the practice, though he acknowledged in public testimony that his company sometimes charged ''very high'' prices when it could. ''One person's predatory pricing is another person's competitive advantage,'' Mr. Miller said at a public hearing on deregulation in Texas in 1999. New England regulators too often acted as ''judge, jury and executioner'' when overseeing the market, he said. One year later, Mr. Miller and his new colleagues at the federal agency got a chance to examine New England's problems from the regulators' perspective. Their Nov. 1 report attributed New England's frequent price gyrations to technical and regulatory flaws. As Mr. Miller's team was preparing its report, the Justice Department, whose threshold for stepping into possible industry wrongdoing is far higher than the agency's, began looking into whether price spikes in New England pointed to unlawful monopoly power or collusion, people contacted by the department during that inquiry said. One subject of the civil inquiry is possible price manipulation in one of New England's ancillary services markets, people contacted by the department said. They said the department was examining whether PG&E and two other companies tried to corner that market for several months early last year. PG&E confirmed that the Justice Department had contacted it, but denies wrongdoing and says it has cooperated with the department's requests. Mr. Miller has declined to comment on his role at PG&E or at the agency. His supervisors defended his work and said they had detected no conflict of interest between his work at PG&E and his duties at the agency. Those duties brought Mr. Miller to California last August. With electricity prices there soaring, he and his colleagues sat down with several utility executives at the agency's San Francisco office. One executive, Gary Stern, director of market monitoring for Southern California Edison, wanted the agency to stop what he suspected were market abuses by power generators. He provided a road map to help investigators figure out how power companies traded power contracts -- and whether they had manipulated the markets. But when Mr. Miller and his team approached 11 generators and marketers -- including his old employer -- a few weeks later, they did it their way. They asked eight questions, many of them imprecise, like: ''Describe your strategy for bidding generation resources into market.'' This question, Mr. Stern said in a recent interview, ''was equivalent to asking a suspected burglar how he spent his day.'' Some agency officials also thought the team should probe deeper. Mr. Rattey recommended that Mr. Miller seek the quarterly pricing reports that marketers were supposed to file. But his suggestion was not adopted, agency records show. Daniel Larcamp, Mr. Miller's supervisor, said ''there might have been more information that could have been obtained'' in the California inquiry. But he said the commission gave the staff only three months to finish, making it impossible to collect and analyze the reams of data involved. For Mr. Miller, agency documents show, the investigation was so time-consuming that he had no time to fill out the financial disclosure form required of new federal employees. Mr. Miller submitted his form in late January, after a reporter requested it. Agency lawyers approved the form, but only after he provided additional information about his job and compensation from PG&E. The lawyers said Mr. Miller's participation had been permissible because PG&E was not the subject of the investigation. When the staff report was issued on Nov. 1, it found high prices and problems in the design of the California market. But while the companies ''had the potential to exercise market power,'' the commission said, there was ''insufficient data'' to prove that they did. Some marketers saw the report as an exoneration. ''This has been looked at several times, most notably by the FERC and nobody has found any evidence of market manipulation and profiteering,'' Rob Doty, the chief financial officer of Dynegy Inc., told a reporter earlier this year. California Inquiry The agency has recently shown signs of wanting to apply pressure on generators. But its early efforts show how it is treading on new and uncertain turf. When the California crisis grew severe last December, the commission issued a refund order, a shot across the bow for generators charging high prices. It required them to submit detailed data any time they sold electricity in California for more than $150 per megawatt hour, considered at the time a fair estimate of the highest costs any of them faced. It also told generators that for the next several months, they could be forced to give refunds if the agency found that they had charged excessive prices. The commission also said that it would examine bidding practices and strategies for withholding generating capacity to ferret out any efforts to artificially raise prices. When the agency's own 60-day deadline for examining market data in January approached, however, it became clear that staff members had not made any detailed examination. Instead, staff members said, the agency scrambled to forge a last-minute compromise that would allow it to issue a statement opposing high prices in the state without a time-consuming investigation. During this scramble, a senior staff member, Kevin Kelly, suggested focusing on bad hours instead of bad actors. ''Our attempts to find illegal behavior or legal 'misbehavior' by sellers ('bad actors') always seems to fail,'' his memorandum said. It said that the agency could more easily blame high prices on acute shortages during the most critical hours. The suggestion won the day. The commission decided to limit its order to the hours when California declared a Stage 3 emergency, when supplies are critically low. Mr. Stern of Southern California Edison and several private-sector economists have attacked the economic logic of that order. They said that the commission has focused on times when prices might be legitimately high. The bigger worry: Generators can and often do sustain artificially high prices when supplies are not as tight, they say. Mr. Massey, the Democratic commissioner, dissented from the decision for those reasons. Because most high-priced transactions in January and February did not occur during bad hours, he argued, the commission effectively chose to bless as ''just and reasonable'' the hefty profits generators are making from the California crisis. ''The problem with my agency is that we're so carried away with the rhetoric of markets that we've gotten sloppy,'' Mr. Massey said. ''We're talking about electricity. It's the juice of the economy, so it's got to be available and reasonably priced.'' Williams defends pricing of electricity 03/23/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. TULSA, Okla. (AP) - Williams Cos. Inc. says it can justify the rates it charged for wholesale power, despite accusations from federal regulators that it sold over-priced electricity to California. Federal regulators claim Williams Energy Marketing and Trading Co., a unit of Tulsa-based Williams, owes California more than $40 million in refunds for power it sold to the state's Independent System Operator. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission says that Williams is one of several power providers responsible for $124 million in overcharges from transactions in January and February. The Independent System Operator, which manages the state's power grid, claims the state was overcharged $6.2 billion by 21 wholesale power providers, including Williams, between May and February. Williams says the rates it charged California were fair and were based on production costs and market conditions. ""Williams is confident that it performed within the guidelines established by the ISO,"" said Williams spokeswoman Paula Hall Collins. ""We felt like we had worked within the regulations set up by ISO."" According to the commission, power prices levied by Williams in January and February exceeded federal price ceilings based on the cost of natural gas and other market conditions. However, the price ceilings were established after the ISO accepted Williams' power prices, Collins said. The commission will review Williams' explanation and either accept the justification or order the company to pay refunds. Allegheny Energy makes big California connection 03/23/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. HAGERSTOWN, Md. (AP) - Allegheny Energy Inc. said Thursday it has agreed to sell $4.5 billion worth of power to California's electricity-purchasing agency over the next 10 years. The company said the contract call for Allegheny to provide up to 1,000 megawatts that the Hagerstown-based company has secured from western generating plants through its new energy trading division, Allegheny Energy Global Markets - formerly Merrill Lynch Global Energy Markets. ""This is a win-win for both the state of California and Allegheny Energy. It provides a long-term source of fixed-price energy and should help to stabilize prices in California,"" said Michael P. Morrell, president of the Allegheny Energy Supply division. Allegheny Energy is the parent of Allegheny Power, which delivers electric energy and natural gas to parts of Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia. Williams plans expansion of pipeline to help power Calif. 03/23/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. SALT LAKE CITY (AP) - The Williams Cos. plans to expands its Kern River pipeline, which runs through Utah, to provide more natural gas for generating plants in California. Williams' gas pipeline unit in Salt Lake City said Thursday that it plans to construct nearly 700 miles of additional pipeline that will run parallel to its existing Kern River line. Construction on the $1 billion project is expected to begin next year and is scheduled for completion in May 2003, said Kirk Morgan, director of business development for Kern River pipeline. ""Shippers are seeking more access to natural gas from the Rocky Mountain basin, where producers are aggressively stepping up production,"" Morgan said. The new pipeline is expected to deliver about 900 million cubic feet of natural gas per day to markets in Utah, Nevada and California. Most of the gas will be used for generating plants planned in California. If all of the pipeline's capacity were used to generate electricity, it could produce about 5,400 megawatts. ""That is enough to light around 4.5 million homes,"" Morgan said. The original Kern River line was completed in 1992. It enters Utah from Wyoming then crosses into the Salt Lake Valley near Bountiful. It turns south near the Salt Lake City International Airport then runs the length of the state before passing into southern Nevada and winding up near Bakersfield, Calif. It currently transports 700 million cubic feet of natural gas per day. Williams, based in Tulsa, Okla., recently filed an emergency application with federal regulators to install additional pumping stations on the line to increase its capacity by 135 million cubic feet per day. That $81 million pumping station project should be completed by July 1. During the 2002 construction period, the Kern River project will employ between 1,500 and 1,800 people. The company estimates annual property taxes it pays to Utah counties will increase from $3.5 million to about $7 million. Questar will be one of the customers on the new pipeline, Morgan said. The utility wants to supply additional gas to southern Utah cities, including St. George and Cedar City. ""Our own pipelines serving southern Utah are at full capacity so this is an opportunity to transport additional gas into those areas from company-owned supplies in Wyoming,"" said Questar Gas spokeswoman Audra Sorensen. Calif Energy Commission OKs 3 Pwr Plants Worth 2,076 MW 03/23/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) (This article was originally published Thursday) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- The California Energy Commission Wednesday approved three power plants worth 2,076 megawatts, two of which are scheduled to come on line by the end of 2002, a CEC spokesman said Thursday. The plants approved include BP Amoco PLC (BP) unit ARCO Western Energy's 500 megawatt Western Midway Sunset Project, slated to come on line in October 2002; Caithness Energy's 520 MW Blythe Power Plant, to come on line by Dec. 31, 2002; and Thermo Ecotek's 1,056 MW Mountainview Power Plant, scheduled to come on line in April 2003. All three of the new plants will be natural gas-fired combined-cycle plants. The $550 million Mountainview plant will be located in Southern California, near San Bernadino. The $300 million Western Midway-Sunset plant will be located in central Kern County, while the $250 million Blythe plant will be located in the city of Blythe in Riverside County. The latest approvals bring to 13 the total number of plants approved since April 1999 by the CEC, a spokesman said. Those plants will supply 8,405 MW to the state, which has seen rolling blackouts and spiking wholesale power prices in the last six months, in part due to lack of supply. -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872; jessica.berthold@dowjones.com Some CalEnergy Power Could Be Sold Outside Calif - CEO 03/23/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) (This article was originally published Thursday) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Some of CalEnergy Operating Corp's power could end up being sold outside of California, though that is not the company's intent, CalEnergy Chairman and CEO David Sokol said in a conference call Thursday. CalEnergy, an affiliate of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co, which is majority owned by Warren Buffett's Berkshire-Hathaway (BRKA), was given legal authority Thursday to suspend 270 megawatts of power delivery to Edison International (EIX) utility Southern California Edison and sell on the open market, because SoCal Edison has not paid its bills since November. CalEnergy stopped supplying power to SoCal Ed immediately following the court ruling. ""We stopped supplying power at 1 PM (PST) and have been selling to parties that will pay since then....We are selling it to marketers; our current marketing agent is El Paso Corp (EPG) and they will sell it for us,"" Sokol said. Sokol added that while it was his company's intention to have its power sold to California, that could not be guaranteed. ""We leave the energy selling to El Paso....We've directed them that we would like the power to stay in California but we can't stop them,"" from selling out of state, Sokol said. Wholesale prices on the open market are about $400-$500 a megawatt-hour, three times more than what the company had received under its contract with SoCal Ed. The court's ruling did not address the $45 million SoCal Ed still owes CalEnergy for November and December power, and Sokol said that his company's separate lawsuit on that matter sought to attach the utility's assets as payment for that debt. Sokol said the court's ruling had ""significant implications"" for the entire community of small, independent generators, known as qualifying facilities or QFs, who have not received payment from SoCal Ed. ""Edison's own lawyer said it best....that every QF in the state will begin to mitigate if the judge allowed us (to sell on the open market),"" Sokol said. Sokol said his company was prepared to push SoCal Ed into involuntary bankruptcy Friday if CalEnergy hadn't won the case, but said he couldn't speculate whether other QFs may be more or less inclined to do so as a result of the court outcome. A group of renewable power suppliers, owed more than $100 million from SoCal Ed, said late Wednesday they want state lawmakers to release them for their supply contracts with PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric and SoCal Ed until the utilities are restored to financial stability. The utilities claim close to $13 billion in undercollections due to an inability to pass high wholesale power costs to customers under a rate freeze. In a statement, SoCal Ed said it opposed CalEnergy's bid to suspend its QF contract because the utility believed Gov. Gray Davis and state regulators are close to resolving ""very legitimate financial concerns of CalEnergy and other QF suppliers."" SoCal Ed said it was concerned that CalEnergy's request to sell to third parties would lead to a major supply shortage in California. The utility said it has informed the QFs that it is working to resolve the issue without giving unfair advantage to one class of creditors. While many of the state's large power suppliers have been paid by on a forward basis for the power they sell into California, the QFs, which make up one-third of the state's total power supply, haven't been paid by SoCal Ed since November. PG&E has made partial payments to its QFs. -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872, jessica.berthold@dowjones.com (Jason Leopold contributed to this article.) California and the West Judge Frees Small Firm From Edison Contract KEN ELLINGWOOD; DAN MORAIN TIMES STAFF WRITERS 03/23/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-3 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company El CENTRO -- California's balance of electrical power shifted slightly Thursday when an Imperial County judge temporarily freed a small geothermal energy producer from its contract with Southern California Edison, allowing it to sell power on the open market. The ruling by Superior Court Judge Donal B. Donnelly could lead to a mass exodus by hundreds of small energy producers that have been selling power to the state's financially troubled utilities for months without getting paid. At the same time, it may have staved off plans by a group of the small generators to send Edison into involuntary bankruptcy as early as today. In Sacramento, energy legislation pushed by Gov. Gray Davis passed in the state Senate but foundered in the Assembly. The measure was intended to ensure that the state gets repaid for the electricity that it has been buying on behalf of Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric, which say they lack the cash and credit to purchase power. The bill also was supposed to guarantee that the small, alternative energy producers--which together provide nearly a third of the state's power--get paid. But Assembly Republicans opposed it, saying it hadn't been given sufficient scrutiny. The impact of the small producers was made clear in Imperial County, where Edison's failure to pay CalEnergy, the county's biggest property taxpayer, had outsize implications. CalEnergy had put county officials on notice that it was about to miss a $3.8-million property tax payment. The uncertainty had prompted the tiny Calipatria Unified School District to postpone a bond issue for badly needed school repairs. Among CalEnergy Chairman David Sokol's first acts after the judge's ruling Thursday was to promise Imperial County Supervisor Wally J. Leimgruber that the company would pay its property taxes on time. ""That is great news,"" Leimgruber said. Within hours of its court victory, CalEnergy had stopped transmitting geothermal power to Edison and begun selling it to El Paso Energy, a marketing company that purchased the energy at prevailing rates and resold it on the spot market. Some of the more than 700 other small energy producers in the state said they were considering similar action against Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric. ""We absolutely need the right to sell to third parties,"" said Dean Vanech, president of Delta Power, a New Jersey company that owns five small gas-fired plants in California and is owed tens of millions of dollars by Edison. Sokol praised the Imperial County judge and said his company simply wanted the authority to sell its power ""to a credit-worthy company that, in fact, pays for the power."" An Edison spokesman said the company was disappointed with the ruling, but sympathized with CalEnergy and other small producers because ""California's power crisis has placed [them] in financial distress, just as it has placed utilities in financial distress."" Edison expressed concern that the ruling would prompt CalEnergy and other small producers to sell their power out of state. Sokol said CalEnergy had specifically told El Paso Energy that it hoped its power would remain in California, ""but if someone wants to pay a higher price out of state, we can't stop them."" Sokol said that Edison still owes CalEnergy $140 million and that the company--along with seven other small producers--had been prepared to file a petition in federal bankruptcy court in Los Angeles today forcing the utility into involuntary bankruptcy. He said his company no longer intends to do so, and he believed--but wasn't certain--that the other companies would shelve their plans. Edison filed papers Thursday with the federal Securities and Exchange Commission showing that it owed $840 million to various small electricity producers, many of which rely on renewable energy sources such as geothermal steam, solar energy or wind. The alternative energy producers--and utilities--strenuously objected to the legislation considered in Sacramento on Thursday. The bill, spelling out how the utilities are to pay the state and the small producers, passed the Senate on a 27-9 vote, the exact two-thirds margin required. But it stalled in the Assembly on a 46-23 party-line vote, well short of two-thirds. ""When I was a citizen back in Lancaster, I heard these stories about pieces of legislation that were cooked up late at night, that . . . were cut and pasted together and were rammed through by the Legislature,"" Assemblyman George Runner (R-Lancaster) said. ""That's exactly what we have before us."" The alternative electricity generators, including oil companies, warned that they would lose money under the Davis proposal, while representatives of Edison and PG&E, which have amassed billions in debt in the worsening energy crisis, said the legislation would push them deeper into the hole. ""There isn't enough money,"" Edison attorney Ann Cohn testified at a Senate hearing on the bill Thursday. ""It is a very simple question: Dollars going out cannot be greater than dollars coming in."" The bill, AB 8X, combined several proposals. First, it sought to clarify earlier legislation by spelling out that Edison and PG&E must pay the state all money collected from consumers for electricity that the state has been buying. Additionally, the bill would turn over to the California Public Utilities Commission the thorny issue of how much to pay alternative energy producers for their electricity. Wind, solar and geothermal producers might agree to the prices offered by the administration. But most of the alternative energy producers, including Chevron and British Petroleum, use natural gas to generate electricity through ""cogeneration,"" a process of creating steam for both electric generation and heat. With natural gas prices high, they contend, they would lose money at the prices Davis is offering. * Ellingwood reported from El Centro, Morain from Sacramento. Times staff writers Mitchell Landsberg in Los Angeles and Jenifer Warren, Nancy Vogel and Carl Ingram in Sacramento contributed to this story. (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) Power Points Background The state Legislature approved electricity deregulation with a unanimous vote in 1996. The move was expected to lower power bills in California by opening up the energy market to competition. Relatively few companies, however, entered that market to sell electricity, giving each that did considerable influence over the price. Meanwhile, demand has increased in recent years while no major power plants have been built. These factors combined last year to push up the wholesale cost of electricity. But the state's biggest utilities--Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison--are barred from increasing consumer rates. So the utilities have accumulated billions of dollars in debt and, despite help from the state, have struggled to buy enough electricity. * Daily Developments * Overcharges by major electricity suppliers were estimated at $6.3 billion, up from the $5.5 billion first thought, California's power grid operator said. * Electricity producers denied that they have profiteered and argued that Cal-ISO's figures don't take into account all their costs. * A Superior Court judge's ruling Thursday freeing a small producer from its contract with Edison could lead to a mass exodus by small energy producers that have been selling to the utilities without getting paid. * Verbatim ""If these guys have such high costs ... how come they're making so much money?"" --Gary Stern, Edison's director of market monitoring and analysis, referring to power producers Complete package and updates at www.latimes.com/power Grid Operator Says California Paid Too Much for Power By Rebecca Smith and John R. Emshwiller Staff Reporters of The Wall Street Journal 03/23/2001 The Wall Street Journal A2 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) California's electric-grid operator said power suppliers may have overcharged the state and its utilities by $6.2 billion, or a total of 30%, in a 10-month period, and has asked federal regulators to step up their policing of electricity markets. Meanwhile, a California state judge handed down a decision involving small power producers that could result in more electricity being made available in the energy-starved state, but likely at greater cost to the state government. The $6.2 billion figure was contained in a market analysis by the California Independent System Operator filed yesterday with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The ISO says it isn't seeking a refund -- for the May through February period -- because its analysis lacked important market data. For example, it estimated costs for 21 suppliers based on published prices for natural gas, not on specific data showing what each generator actually paid for the fuel. ""We don't know how much gas actually was purchased at spot-market prices,"" said Anjali Sheffrin, the ISO's head of market analysis. Charles Robinson, general counsel for the ISO, said FERC needs to become ""more aggressive about market-power mitigation."" The ISO's filing, he said, was intended to push the agency in that direction, since FERC is responsible for policing deregulated electricity and natural-gas markets. He said that if the FERC doesn't act, the state of California may find ways to discipline the market, such as through the state attorney general's office. The attorney general has been investigating the state's electricity market for many months but hasn't brought any court action. Dynegy Inc., a big owner of power plants in California, said it will provide additional information to FERC supporting its position that the prices it has charged for power have been ""just and reasonable."" The Houston company was one of 13 energy suppliers that the FERC this month ordered to pay refunds totaling $124 million or ""show cause"" why it should be excused. Dynegy said the FERC analysis was flawed, because it used ""inaccurate"" prices for natural gas and pollution credits. While big power producers such as Dynegy came under attack, small power producers won a potentially significant victory in a state court in Southern California's Imperial County. A judge granted 10 geothermal plants operated by the CalEnergy Co. unit of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co., a unit of Berkshire Hathaway Inc., of Omaha, Neb., permission to suspend deliveries of electricity to Southern California Edison Co. and instead seek other buyers. These plants, known as ""qualifying facilities,"" are under long-term contract to Edison and other utilities but haven't been paid for months. Edison, a unit of Edison International, of Rosemead, Calif., says it has been unable to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in power bills to CalEnergy and others because it has been driven to the brink of insolvency by the state's failed utility-deregulation plan. While the CalEnergy case involves only about 320 megawatts of power, the repercussions could be far greater. Collectively, hundreds of qualifying facilities, or QFs, produce as much as 30% of California's electricity needs. QFs totaling 3,000 megawatts cut their production in recent weeks for lack of payment. This loss of output was a significant cause of the blackouts that hit California this week. Observers believe the CalEnergy court decision could give other QFs an opportunity to sell power in the open market, presumably to the state government that now is California's biggest energy buyer. An hour after the court decision yesterday, some 400 megawatts of power came back into the market, the ISO said. However, additional QF power sales on the open market could substantially increase the state's tab. Already, the state has allocated more than $4 billion for electricity purchases. Separately, Edison said in a Securities and Exchange Commission filing that its unpaid power bills could contribute to a write-off of as much as $2.7 billion for 2000. Because of uncertainty caused by the energy crisis, the company hasn't yet reported year-end earnings. Power regulators debate who should be exempted from blackouts By KAREN GAUDETTE Associated Press Writer 03/22/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - State power regulators said Thursday they are working to exempt all California hospitals, regardless of size, from rolling blackouts. The Public Utilities Commission met with representatives from hospitals and investor-owned utilities after Los Angeles lawyer David Huard filed an emergency motion with the PUC on behalf of more than 500 hospitals throughout the state. Under PUC rules, hospitals with more than 100 beds are exempt from losing electricity during power emergencies. But during rolling blackouts Monday, at least a dozen hospitals from Long Beach to Clearlake were forced to use their backup generators. Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison Co. say they blacked out those hospitals specifically because they have backup generators. Both utilities said the temporary blackouts were part of their overall efforts to spread the burden of blackouts over more of their customers. Linda Ziegler, director of business and regulatory planning for SoCal Edison, said the utility is following state law and will implement new guidelines if the PUC changes them. But hospitals say there is a 10-second lapse before emergency generators kick in, which could harm patients in the midst of delicate surgical procedures such as organ transplants or brain surgery. ""You wouldn't fly a plane with only your emergency backup systems in place,"" said Ann Mosher, a spokeswoman for California Pacific Medical Center in San Francisco. ""Backup generators are just that, they're not designed to keep the hospital up and running at full capacity."" Ziegler said that power still goes out for reasons beyond the energy crisis, from incidents like lightning or a knocked-down power pole. ""If it's a serious problem for the hospital it's certainly something they should be address just from an ongoing basis,"" she said. The exemption would cover all hospitals within the territory of the state's investor owned utilities PG&E, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas and Electric. Hospitals within the range of municipally owned utilities, such as the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, are separately regulated. For more than two decades, prisons, hospitals with more than 100 beds and emergency services such as fire and police departments have been classified as ""essential"" services, and are exempted from blackouts by order of state power regulators. After rolling blackouts began darkening the state in January, many other public service groups began seeking relief from power interruptions, including transit systems, schools and water districts. --- On the Net: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov Federal Judge Orders Reliant To Keep Selling Pwr To Calif 03/22/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP)--A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction Wednesday ordering a major electricity wholesaler to continue selling to California despite its fear that it will not get paid. U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said Californians were at risk of irreparable harm if Reliant Energy (REI) stopped selling power to the Independent System Operator, which oversees the state's power grid. The ISO buys last-minute power on behalf of utilities to fill gaps in supply. Damrell dismissed Reliant's attempt to force the state Department of Water Resources to back the ISO's purchases for the state's two biggest utilities. The state has been spending about $50 million a day on power for Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison, both denied credit by suppliers after amassing billions of dollars in debts. The judge said he had no authority to force the DWR to pay for that power. Gov. Gray Davis has said the state isn't responsible for purchasing the costly last-minute power ISO buys for Edison and PG&E, despite a law authorizing state power purchases on the utilities' behalf. ISO attorney Charles Robinson said the ruling gives ISO operators ""a tool to assist them in keeping the lights on in California."" ""Had the decision gone the other way, one could expect other generators to simply ignore emergency orders,"" Robinson said. Damrell's preliminary injunction will remain in effect until the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission rules on the matter. Damrell denied the ISO's request for preliminary injunctions against three other wholesalers - Dynegy Inc. (DYN), AES Corp. (AES) and Williams Cos. (WMB) - which agreed to continue selling to the ISO pending the FERC ruling. Spokesmen for Reliant, Dynegy, AES and Williams were out of the office Wednesday night and didn't immediately return calls from The Associated Press seeking comment on the ruling. The ISO went to court in February after a federal emergency order requiring the power sales expired. The judge then issued a temporary restraining order, requiring the sales, but dropped it after the suppliers agreed to continue sales to California pending his Wednesday ruling. The ISO said it would lose about 3,600 megawatts if the suppliers pulled out, enough power for about 2.7 million households. One megawatt is enough for roughly 750 homes. Grid officials said Reliant's share alone is about 3,000 megawatts. Reliant said the amount at issue actually is less than a fourth of that, because most of its output is already committed under long-term contracts. Reliant, which currently provides about 9% of the state's power, worries it won't get paid due to the financial troubles of PG&E and Edison. PG&E and Edison say that together they have lost about $13 billion since June due to soaring wholesale electricity costs that California's 1996 deregulation law bars them from passing onto customers. Calif Small Pwr Producers To Shut Plants If Rates Capped By Jason Leopold Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES 03/22/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Many of California's independent power producers late Wednesday threatened to take their small power plants offline this week if state lawmakers pass legislation that would cap the rates the generators charge for electricity they sell directly to the state's three investor-owned utilities. At issue is a bill that would repeal a section of the state's Public Utilities Code, which links the 688 so-called qualifying facilities' electricity rates to the monthly border price of natural gas. Lawmakers, however, are poised to pass the legislation. State regulators are then expected to approve a measure that would restructure the fluctuating rates the QFs charge PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric, Edison International (EIX) unit Southern California Edison, and Sempra Energy (SRE) unit San Diego Gas & Electric from $170 a megawatt-hour to $69-$79/MWh, regardless of the price of natural gas. Whereas each of the 688 QF contracts differed, largely because natural gas prices are higher in Southern California than Northern California, the state wants the QFs to sign a general contract with the utilities. The cogeneration facilities, which produce about 5,400 megawatts of electricity in the state, said the rates are too low and they won't sign new supply contracts with the utilities. ""For $79/MWh, natural gas would have to be $6 per million British thermal unit at the Southern California border,"" said Tom Lu, executive director of Carson-based Watson Cogeneration Company, the state's largest QF, generating 340 MW. ""Our current gas price at the border is $12.50."" Other gas-fired QFs said the state could face another round of rolling blackouts if lawmakers and state regulators pass the legislation, which is expected to be heard on the Senate floor Thursday, and allow it to be implemented by Public Utilities Commission next week. Lu, whose company is half-owned by BP Amoco PLC (BP) and is owed $100 million by SoCal Ed, said the proposals by the PUC and the Legislature ""will only make things worse."" David Fogarty, spokesman for Western States Petroleum Association, whose members supply California with more than 2,000 MW, said the utilities need to pay the QFs more than $1 billion for electricity that was already produced. State Loses 3,000 MW QF Output Due Of Financial Reasons The QFs represent about one-third, or 9,700 MW, of the state's total power supply. Roughly 5,400 MW are produced by natural gas-fired facilities. The rest is generated by wind, solar power and biomass. About 3,000 MW of gas-fired and renewable QF generation is offline in California because the power plant owners haven't been paid hundreds of millions of dollars from cash-strapped utilities SoCal Ed and PG&E for nearly four months. Several small power plant owners owed money by SoCal Ed have threatened to drag the utility into involuntary bankruptcy if the utility continues to default on payments and fails to agree to supply contracts at higher rates. The defaults have left many of the renewable and gas-fired QFs unable to operate their power plants because they can't afford to pay for the natural gas to run their units. Others continue to produce electricity under their contracts with the state's utilities but aren't being paid even on a forward basis. The California Independent System Operator, keeper of the state's electricity grid, said the loss of the QF generation was the primary reason rolling blackouts swept through the state Monday and Tuesday. Gov. Gray Davis, recognizing the potential disaster if additional QFs took their units offline, held marathon meetings with key lawmakers Monday and Tuesday to try and hammer out an agreement that would get the QFs paid on a forward basis and set rates of $79/MWh and $69/MWh for five and 10 year contracts. He also said he would direct the PUC to order the utilities to pay the QFs for power they sell going forward. ""After next week the QF problem will be behind us,"" Davis said Tuesday. ""We want to get the QFs paid...the QFs are dropping like flies...and when that happens the lights go out."" But this just makes the problem worse, said Assemblyman Dean Florez, D-Shafter, a member of the Assembly energy committee. ""I don't know how we are going to keep the lights on,"" Florez said in an interview. ""Many of these congenerators are in my district. They said if the legislation doesn't change they are going offline. This compounds the issue of rolling blackouts, especially now when we need every megawatt."" Davis, who didn't meet with people representing the QFs, said he was handing the QF issue to the PUC because lawmakers failed to pass legislation that would have set a five-year price for natural gas and allow the QFs to sign individual contracts with the utilities. In addition, SOCal Ed opposed the legislation, saying the rates should be below $50/MWh. Some renewable power producers said they aren't vehemently opposed to the new rate structure because it guarantees them a higher rate than what was originally proposed. QFs Want Third Party Supply Contracts John Wood, who represents the SoCal Ed Gas Fired Creditors Committee, one of a handful of groups that have formed since January to explore options on getting paid by the utilities, said his group of gas-fired QF creditors want to be released from their supply contracts and sell to third parties. ""Under our plan, we would be permitted to sell electricity to third parties (including the state Department of Water Resources) until a resolution to the crisis can be accomplished,"" wood said. Hal Dittmer, president of Sacramento-based Wellhead Electric in Sacramento, which is owed $8 million by PG&E, has 85 MW of gas-fired generation units offline. Under the state's plan, Dittmer said he risks going out of business. ""I can't buy natural gas for what I would be paid under this decision,"" he said. ""The state needs to quit kidding themselves that they don't need to raise electricity rates. All of this is being driven by an artificial construct that California can avoid raising rates."" -By Jason Leopold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3874; jason.leopold@dowjones.com Power Strain Eases but Concerns Mount Energy: Officials say summer prices will be high, and a state report shows that contracts with generators are far short of goals. DAN MORAIN; JENIFER WARREN TIMES STAFF WRITERS 03/22/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-3 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SACRAMENTO -- California's fragile electricity system stabilized Wednesday, but a Davis administration report suggested troubles ahead because the state could be forced to buy most of its power for the coming summer on the costly and volatile spot market. After two days of statewide blackouts, power plants that had been shut down were cranked up. Unseasonable heat tapered off. The operators of the statewide power grid relaxed their state of emergency. But plenty of ominous signs remained. Many small producers remained shut down, skeptical about Gov. Gray Davis' plan for utilities to pay them. State Controller Kathleen Connell issued a sharp warning about the high cost of the state's foray into the power business and announced that she will block an administration request that she transfer $5.6 billion into an account that could be tapped to pay for state purchases of electricity. And a report from the administration summarizing contracts between Davis and independent power generators showed that the state has signed contracts for only 2,247 megawatts of electricity, significantly less than the 6,000 to 7,000 megawatts previously claimed. While there are agreements in principle for the full amount, the report notes that generators can back out of the contracts for a variety of reasons, including the state's failure to sell bonds to finance power purchased by July 1. The Legislature has approved plans to sell $10 billion in bonds, but none have yet been issued. ""We are exposed enormously this summer,"" Senate Energy Committee chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) said after looking at the report. ""We owe the people the truth about how difficult this summer is going to be. We don't have a power fairy."" Perhaps most significant, the report suggests that the contracts fall significantly short of Davis' stated goal of buying no more than 5% of the state's summer needs on the spot electricity market, where prices can be many times those of long-term contracts. After reading the report, Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economist who studies the California electricity market, said the numbers suggested that the state's long-term contracts will cover less than half of what the state will need this summer. ""We're definitely short this summer, next summer and the summer of 2003,"" he said. California was forced to start buying electricity in December--at a cost of $50 million a day--because producers refused to sell to Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric. The two utilities amassed billions of dollars in debt when prices for wholesale power soared on the spot market. Vikram Budhraja, a consultant retained by Davis to negotiate deals with generators, said the report represents a ""work in progress."" He said the state may yet sign new contracts. However, Wolak said the contract figures confirm what he and others have been dreading: that summer is going to be rife with rolling blackouts unless serious steps to cut demand are taken immediately. Wolak and other experts say large industrial customers must be switched to real-time meters and pricing to persuade them to use the bulk of their energy at times of low demand. The head of the Energy Foundation, a San Francisco-based nonprofit that promotes sustainable sources of power, made the same proposal to Davis on Wednesday. ""The government need not ask customers to swelter in the dark this summer,"" foundation President Hal Harvey argued in a letter. He also proposed a crash campaign to boost sales of efficient appliances and lightbulbs. He said the state needs to take over the utilities' contracts with alternative energy providers to ensure they stay in business, and sign new contracts for 1,500 megawatts of new wind power--the cheapest, fastest and cleanest source of new supply. Davis had proposed a formula Tuesday to force private utilities to pay the alternative producers, some of which have not been paid since November. But some of them warned Wednesday that Davis' plan offers them little incentive to turn on their generators. Alternative energy producers supply more than a quarter of the electricity consumed in California. Many producers generate electricity from wind, sun and geothermal sources. But most of them generate power using natural gas--and the cost of natural gas has been soaring. Several natural gas users said Davis' plan, which caps rates, won't cover their fuel costs. Davis assumes that the price of natural gas will fall. But small generators say they don't have sufficient purchasing power or sophistication to gamble on future prices. The Public Utilities Commission is expected to approve Davis' proposal next week. It offers producers two choices: 7.9 cents a kilowatt-hour if they agree to supply power for five years, or 6.9 cents a kilowatt-hour over 10 years. ""The price of natural gas is higher than that,"" said Marty Quinn, executive vice president and chief operating officer of Ridgewood Power LLC, which owns three natural gas-fired co-generation plants. ""If we operate, we'll lose money."" Ridgewood is not operating, having been cut off by gas suppliers. The company sued PG&E last month seeking overdue payments and release from its contracts with the utility. A hearing is scheduled in El Centro today in another lawsuit filed by a small energy producer, an Imperial Valley geothermal producer that sued Edison for refusing to let it break its contract and sell on the open market. CalEnergy says Edison owes it about $140 million for energy sold since November. A company spokesman, Jay Lawrence, said CalEnergy was going ahead with its suit despite Davis' proposal. ""We've had promises before,"" he said. In other developments: * A federal judge in Sacramento on Wednesday ordered Reliant Energy of Houston, a major producer, to continue selling power to California during emergencies, despite the company's argument that it may not be fully reimbursed. The order will remain in effect for 60 days or until the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission decides a related case. * Connell said the state budget surplus has shrunk to $3.2 billion because the state has spent roughly $2.8 billion on electricity. She criticized the administration for withholding basic information about state finances, and said she will begin an audit on Monday of the Department of Water Resources, which is responsible for purchasing power. Davis' aides said Connell took her action because the Democratic governor endorsed one of Connell's foes this week in the race for Los Angeles mayor, former Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa. A Connell aide scoffed at the notion. * Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said she ""never has had a response"" from President Bush after writing him last month for an appointment to discuss the California energy crisis. In a wide-ranging lunch talk with reporters in Washington, she deplored the fact that ""huge, huge profits are being made"" in the California crisis, and said ""an appropriate federal role"" would be to guarantee a reliable source of power until the state can get nine new generators online. * Times staff writers Mitchell Landsberg in Los Angeles and Robert L. Jackson in Washington contributed to this report. (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) Power Points Daily Developments * Wholesale electricity suppliers overcharged by about $5.5 billion between May and last month, and that money should be refunded to taxpayers and utilities, according to a Cal-ISO report. * The state may have to buy most of its power for summer on the costly spot market, which could drive consumers' bills up, a Davis administration report concludes. * State Controller Kathleen Connell said she will block a request by the Davis administration for $5.6 billion for state purchases of electricity. Verbatim ""We owe the people the truth about how difficult this summer is going to be. We don't have a power fairy."" Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey), Senate Energy Committee chairwoman CPUC Must Address Rates In QF Repayment Order - SoCal Ed 03/21/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Any order from the California Public Utilities Commission requiring utilities to pay small, independent generators going forward must determine how that could be done within the existing rate structure, a spokesman for Edison International (EIX) utility Southern California Edison said Wednesday. The utility was responding to a PUC proposed decision that would require utilities to pay small generators, called qualifying facilities, $79 a megawatt hour within 15 days of electricity delivery. The decision will be voted March 27 by the CPUC. ""We're still reviewing (the decision) and should have more to say in a day or two. To the extent that the commission orders us to pay going forward of course we will. But it needs to address how we will pay the QFs,"" a SoCal Edison spokesman said. SoCal Edison and PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric Co. are struggling under nearly $13 billion in uncollected power costs due to an inability to pass high wholesale power costs to customers under a rate freeze. Gov. Gray Davis Tuesday blasted the utilities for not having paid their QF bills in full since December. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. has made some partial payments to QFs, but SoCal Edison has paid nothing. Together, they owe the QFs about $1 billion, but the order doesn't address that debt. An Edison executive said, in reaction to the governor's sharp comments, that the company simply doesn't have the money to pay creditors. ""The root problem here is there just isn't enough money in the current rate base to pay our bills,"" said Edison Senior Vice President of Public Affairs Bob Foster. ""We understand the financial distress (the QFs) face; we are facing financial distress ourselves."" The proposed PUC order would also require the state's investor-owned utilities to offer the small generators five- and 10-year contracts for power for $79/MWh and $69/MWh, respectively. The QFs ""may be able to live with"" the PUC proposal, but the five- and 10-year contract prices may be inadequate if natural gas prices at one of the California borders are high, said Jan Smutny-Jones, president of the Independent Energy Producers Association. Natural gas prices into California are currently higher than anywhere in the country. But some say the proposed decision may not be enough to prevent the QFs from filing involuntary bankruptcy proceedings against the utilities for the money they are still owed. ""There's still a lot of skepticism. To say our position has changed based on the CPUC decision or the governor's announcement is not accurate. A lot still has to happen,"" said Jay Lawrence, a spokesman for a renewable creditors committee. -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872; jessica.berthold@dowjones.com -0- 22/03/01 01-27G State Says It's Accelerating Plan to Buy Power Utilities' Grid Government: Talks with Edison are reported near completion, but agreement with heavily indebted PG&E has a way to go. RONE TEMPEST; DAN MORAIN TIMES STAFF WRITERS 03/21/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-22 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SACRAMENTO -- As blackouts hit California for a second day Tuesday, a key consultant to Gov. Gray Davis said negotiations to buy the power grid owned by the state's largest utilities ""are proceeding at an accelerated pace."" Wall Street consultant Joseph Fichera said talks with Southern California Edison could be wrapped up within days, although those with PG&E are much less advanced. The administration and PG&E have not reached even an agreement in principle, he said. PG&E, which has more debt than Edison, says its transmission lines are more extensive than those of its Southern California counterpart. The state wants to buy the utilities' transmission lines and other assets for about $7 billion to provide cash to the utilities, help stabilize the electricity supply and ease the power crunch that has plagued California for months. To research the grid purchase, Fichera said, the state has had to pore over 80,000 documents just to assess the utilities' liabilities. ""We are working at a good pace,"" said Fichera, chief executive of the New York firm Saber Partners. "" . . . If we get to a deal-breaker, it might be longer."" By making Fichera, who is also a consultant to the Texas Public Utilities Commission, available to reporters Tuesday, the Davis administration was clearly trying to reassure the public that progress is being made on the governor's plan to pull the state out of the crisis. Since mid-January, when the big utilities' credit failed and suppliers stopped selling to them, the state has spent nearly $3 billion buying electricity from a handful of large suppliers in Texas, Oklahoma, Georgia and North Carolina. Not a cent has gone to the hundreds of alternative energy suppliers in California who provide about a quarter of the state's electricity. The Monday and Tuesday blackouts occurred partly because many of the cash-strapped alternative suppliers, including solar, biomass and wind power units, cut their normal supply to the system in half. They say Edison and PG&E have not paid them since November; the utilities say they are out of cash. Assemblyman Fred Keeley (D-Boulder Creek) said the plight of the alternative suppliers has dragged on because of the complexity of dealing with ""almost 700 individual contractors."" Another delaying factor, said Keeley, who with state Sen. Jim Battin (R-La Quinta) worked for almost three months to come up with a legislative plan to lower the small producers' prices, was ""the huge enmity . . . manifested between the utilities and the qualifying facilities. These people just don't like each other."" This week's blackouts provided two painful lessons for the Davis administration: * When it comes to electricity, size doesn't matter--every kilowatt counts. During peak use, a small wind power facility in Riverside County can make the difference between full power and blackouts. * There is no such thing as a partial solution. Unless the whole energy equation is balanced, the parts don't work. For the Davis plan to work, several key elements need to come together or utility customers will almost certainly face rate increases above the 19% already set in motion * The cost of power purchased by the state must be reduced through long-term contracts with the big out-of-state producers. These contracts, the details of which the Davis administration has kept confidential, are still being negotiated by Davis consultant Vikram Budhraja of the Pasadena firm Electric Power Group. The administration says it has concluded 40 contracts with generators, about half of which have been signed. According to the most recent statistics released by the Department of Water Resources, which buys power for the state, current prices are still well above the rate state Treasurer Phil Angelides says is necessary for a planned $10-billion bond offering to succeed. The bonds, set for sale in May, will be used to reimburse the state for the money it will have spent by that time to buy electricity. The state is currently spending at a rate of $58 million a day to buy power. If prices stay high, the $10 billion in bonds will not cover the state's power purchases by the end of the summer. Angelides says he cannot proceed with bridge financing for the bonds until the Public Utilities Commission devises a formula to guarantee that a portion of utility bills will be dedicated to bond repayment. Angelides has estimated that, under the January law that put the state in the power buying business, the state must be reimbursed $2.5 billion annually, and that $1.3 billion is needed to service the debt. PUC Administrative Law Judge Joseph R. DeUlloa is expected to announce his ruling on the reimbursement rate later this week, leading to a PUC vote on the matter as early as next week. * The rates charged for electricity by the alternative producers, known as qualifying facilities, must be cut at least in half, down from an average of more than 17 cents per kilowatt-hour. In his news conference Tuesday, Davis said he will ask the PUC to set QF rates at 6.9 cents for 10-year contracts and 7.5 cents for five-year contracts. Meanwhile, PUC Chairman Loretta Lynch, a Davis appointee, said Tuesday that the commission will vote next week on a proposed order requiring Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric to pay the QFs for electricity in the future. Lynch said a recent PUC assessment showed that the utilities have enough cash on hand for that. ""We are trying to make sure the folks providing the power get paid,"" Lynch said. ""The qualified facilities have demonstrated that they haven't been paid and that it is impairing their ability to provide power."" The utilities contend that if they pay the small providers what they owe them, there will not be enough money left to pay other creditors. ""There is not enough money in the current rate structure to pay the [alternative producers], pay the [Department of Water Resources] and pay the utilities for their generation,"" said John Nelson, a spokesman for PG&E. * The utilities must sell to the state the power they produce themselves, mainly from hydro and nuclear sources, at a rate only slightly above the cost of producing it. This is tied to the ongoing negotiations between the Davis administration and the utilities to restore the near-bankrupt utilities to solvency. * Times staff writers Julie Tamaki, Miguel Bustillo and Tim Reiterman contributed to this report. Davis OKs Subsidy of Pollution Fees Smog: As part of secret deal to get long-term energy contracts, state would pay for some of the credits that allow excess power plant emissions. Critics renew call for full disclosure. DAN MORAIN TIMES STAFF WRITER 03/21/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-23 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SACRAMENTO -- As part of his closed-door negotiations to buy electricity, Gov. Gray Davis has agreed to relieve some generators from having to pay potentially millions of dollars in fees for emitting pollutants into the air, Davis said Tuesday. Davis announced two weeks ago that his negotiators had reached deals with 20 generators to supply $43 billion worth of power during the next 10 years. However, the Democratic governor has refused to release any of the contracts or detail various terms, contending that release of such information would hamper the state's ability to negotiate deals with other generators and therefore ultimately would raise prices Californians pay for electricity. Sources familiar with the negotiations, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the agreement reached with Dynegy Inc., a power company based in Houston, is one that includes language requiring that the state pay the cost of credits that allow emissions. Dynegy spokesman Steve Stengel declined to discuss the company's deal with the state. ""We couldn't get them to sign contracts; it was a sticking point,"" Davis said of the decision to pay the fees of some generators. ""We had to lock down some power so we were not totally dependent on the spot market."" The fees in question are part of an emission trading system known as RECLAIM. Under the system, companies are allotted a certain amount of allowable pollution. If their operations pollute more, companies are required to purchase credits on an open market. Currently the credits cost about $45 per pound of pollution--an amount that can lead to a bill of well over $10 million a year for a power plant. The South Coast Air Quality Management District, which regulates pollution in the Los Angeles Basin, is considering steps to significantly lower the cost of the system--a step that could considerably cut the state's potential cost, Davis said. Senate Energy Committee Chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) defended the decision to cover the power company's costs. ""It is a question of whether it brings down the price of power,"" she said. ""If it brings down the price of power, I don't have a problem with it."" Nevertheless, word that the contracts could bind the state to pay pollution fees caused some critics of Davis' policy to renew calls for Davis to reconsider the secrecy surrounding the power negotiations. The payment provision underscores the fact that the contracts involve more than merely the prices the state will pay for its megawatts, the critics note. ""The Legislature should have known about it,"" said Senate President Pro Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco). ""It is going to cost taxpayers money. It makes you wonder. . . . This was a policy issue that was never discussed with the Legislature."" V. John White, a lobbyist for the Sierra Club, who also represents alternative energy producers, called the contract proposal ""a horrible precedent."" ""Until we know exactly what the state has agreed to and how much of a subsidy this represents, we can't determine how serious the breach of principle this is,"" White said. Another critic of the secrecy of the negotiations, Terry Francke, general counsel for the California First Amendment Coalition, said the provision in question ""raises the possibility that there are other [concessions]"" that have not yet come to light. In the summer, when demand for power is highest, some generators probably will exceed pollution limits set by regional air quality management districts. To avert blackouts, state officials might ask the companies to keep plants running. In such cases, some sources familiar with aspects of the contracts said, the contract language could be interpreted to suggest that the state would cover any fines--although Davis said Tuesday the state will not cover the cost of fines. A recent Dynegy filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission underscores the rising cost of pollution-related measures. The company, which is partners with NRG Energy in three California plants in El Segundo, Long Beach and Carlsbad in San Diego County, said its ""aggregate expenditures for compliance with laws related to the regulation of discharge of materials into the environment"" rose to $14.3 million in 2000, from $3.6 million in 1999. A South Coast Air Quality Management spokesman said Dynegy's facilities appear to be fairly clean--although Sierra Club lobbyist White said Dynegy has been seeking a permit at one of its plants to burn fuel oil, which is dirtier than natural gas. Davis said he intends to ""make this information public,"" but he added that ""we do not want to put the public's interest in jeopardy by asking them to pay higher prices."" ""Nobody likes the notion that [the administration is] not being fully forthcoming,"" Davis said. ""But I also have a corollary responsibility that I don't stick these generators with a higher rate."" FERC ORDERS WILLIAMS ENERGY AND AES TO EXPLAIN THEIR REFUSAL TO MAKE CERTAIN RMR UNITS AVAILABLE TO CALIFORNIA ISO LAST YEAR 03/21/2001 Foster Electric Report 5 (c) Copyright 2001, Foster Associates, Inc. Following a preliminary, non-public investigation, FERC directed AES Southland Inc. and Williams Energy Marketing & Trading Co. (IN01-3) on March 14 to show cause why they did not violate section 205 of the Federal Power Act (FPA) by failing to provide power to the California ISO from two reliability must-run (RMR) generator units during a period in April and May 2000. The investigation responded to a matter referred by the Cal-ISO. If a violation is found, Williams Energy and AES could be required to refund excess profits of $10.9 million (as calculated by FERC) and face restrictions on their market-based rate authority for a year. The show cause order involves two generation units (Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2), owned and operated by AES. Williams Energy markets all output from the Alamitos and Huntington Beach plants, including the two units at issue here, pursuant to a tolling agreement filed with the Commission. The Cal-ISO designated the two units as RMR units that it could call on when necessary to provide energy and ancillary service essential to the reliability of the California transmission network. The Cal-ISO makes both a fixed payment to the RMR owner or operator to compensate for the RMR unit's availability and a variable payment for the RMR unit's output (if the unit is not otherwise participating in the market). Williams Energy and the Cal-ISO executed RMR agreements, filed as rate schedules with the Commission, allowing the Cal-ISO to dispatch units ""solely for purposes of meeting local reliability needs or managing intra-zonal congestion."" The ISO may dispatch a non-RMR unit if the designated RMR unit is not available. Under its RMR agreement with the ISO, Williams is paid the greater of its contract price or marginal cost for operating RMR units. However, if a non-RMR unit has to be dispatched because a designated RMR unit is unavailable, Williams will be paid its bid price, not the RMR contract price. During the April to May 2000 period, the Cal-ISO sought to dispatch both Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2 as RMR units to provide voltage support. However, according to the FERC order, Williams Energy refused to make Alamitos 4 available from April 25 through May 5, and to make Huntington Beach 2 available from May 6 through May 11, ""for reasons not directly related to the necessary and timely maintenance of the units."" Consequently, the Cal-ISO was forced to dispatch non-RMR units at a higher cost, namely, Williams Energy's bid price for service provided by the replacement units. By contrast, if the RMR units had not experienced outages and been available from April 25 through May 11, Williams Energy would have received either (1) the market revenues only from the respective units, which would have resulted in no payments for RMR output from the ISO to Williams Energy, or (2) Williams Energy's variable cost for operating the RMR units less the market revenues from the respective units' output. Accordingly, FERC observed, Williams Energy had ""a financial incentive to prolong any outages of Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2 in April and May 2000."" The bid price for the non-RMR units was at or near the Cal-ISO's then-effective bid cap of $750/MWh, FERC continued. Therefore, Williams Energy received payments from the Cal-ISO of more than $11.3 million, or about $10.3 million greater than the estimated average variable operating cost of the non-RMR units (approximately $63/MWh) during the period in question. This indicates a refund amount, including interest, of nearly $10.9 million. The information in this order and a non-public appendix, the Commission declared, suggests that AES declared outages at the two RMR units and maintained Huntington Beach 2 in a manner inconsistent with good utility practice, and that Williams Energy took action to extend the outage at Alamitos 4 and to make Huntington Beach 2 unavailable for ""pretextual reasons."" Based on this information coupled with Williams Energy's financial incentive not to make the Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2 units available, FERC found serious questions about whether (1) AES and Williams Energy violated applicable RMR contracts and tariffs on file with the Commission pursuant to FPA section 205 when they refused to make Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2 available for dispatch by the Cal-ISO; (2) whether Williams acted inconsistently with its market-based rate authority and the market monitoring information protocols of the Cal-ISO's tariff regarding the unavailability of the RMR units during the period at issue; and (3) whether AES violated a tolling agreement on file with the Commission pursuant to section 205. The Commission identified two remedies for these potential violations: a refund by Williams Energy and/or AES of revenues received greater than the amount that would have collected from the ISO if the RMR units had been available, and a condition on Williams Energy's market-based rate authority. Specifically, for a one-year period, if an RMR unit were not available when dispatched by the Cal-ISO, a non-RMR unit dispatched in its place would only receive payment according to the terms of the applicable RMR contract. In other words, Williams Energy would not receive the bid price for operation of the substitute, non- RMR unit. The Commission directed Williams Energy and AES to show cause, within 20 days, why they should not be found to have committed the above-described violations and why the specified remedies should not be imposed. Further, to ensure procurement of all relevant information, the Commission instituted a formal, non-public investigation into the operation, maintenance and sales of power from the Alamitos and Huntington Beach plants in 2000 and 2001. Calif Consumers Failing To Conserve Pwr Despite Blackouts 03/20/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- California consumers haven't been conserving enough electricity to relieve strain on the power grid and reduce demand in the state, a spokesman with the Independent System Operator said Tuesday. The ISO said that despite two straight days of statewide rolling blackouts, consumers aren't using less electricity, which means additional megawatts will be taken off the grid. As a result, blackouts could last longer and impact additional communities, the ISO said. ISO spokesman Pat Dorinson said Monday ""conservation in California is no longer an option,"" but consumers in the state aren't heeding the call to reduce consumption. Conservation efforts during rolling blackouts Monday and Tuesday were far less than Jan. 17 and Jan. 18, when blackouts swept through Northern California due to transmission constraints. Jim Detmers, the ISO's vice president of operation, said consumers saved the state about 1,000 megawatts of electricity, enough power for 1 million houses. The ISO said conservation efforts Monday were about 500 MW or less. ""We would be very happy if we saw the same amount this time,"" Detmers said. The state's Energy Commission said consumers think it's no longer important to save electricity until blackouts are imposed. ""People have been saving generally, but it isn't a big bump from hour to hour,"" a spokesman for the Energy Commission said. Gov. Gray Davis launched a massive conservation campaign this month, promising consumers a rebate on their summer electricity bill if they save at least 20% of electricity, compared with last summer. The governor said he believes conservation this summer will amount to possibly saving 5,000 MW and averting the chance of rolling blackouts. -By Jason Leopold; Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3874; jason.leopold@dowjones.com Gas Co.'s Success Opens Debate Southern California energy supplier has reaped millions of dollars in state incentives for keeping down its costs. Though consumers get a share of the windfall, regulators are asking whether they should get more of the bonus, which is expected to be huge this year, as a form of price relief. The natural gas provider says it deserves to keep its reward. TIM REITERMAN TIMES STAFF WRITER 03/18/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition C-1 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SAN FRANCISCO -- While consumers suffer soaring energy bills and the big electric utilities lurch toward insolvency, the news is not all dire at Southern California Gas Co. Through vigorous deal making, the Sempra Energy subsidiary has consistently beaten the volatile natural gas market during the last year, and the company stands to reap millions of dollars in savings through a state incentive program that rewards utilities for keeping costs down. For several years, the utility has been splitting the savings 50-50 with ratepayers whenever the company's gas costs fall slightly below market levels. Those savings, Gas Co. executives acknowledged, have shot to unprecedented heights during the state's power crisis. Now, in this climate of high consumer gas bills and runaway market prices, regulators are taking another look at the program. The question before the Public Utilities Commission: Should Gas Co. ratepayers, who endured huge bill increases this winter, get a bigger share of the savings? The total windfall under the incentive program has in some years exceeded $20 million. But the amount for the last 12 months is expected to multiply many times over, company executives said, partly because the Gas Co. has done so well in the wild market by selling, lending and trading gas as well as buying it. ""The recent market conditions . . . could possibly result in some unintended consequences that result in shared savings of benefits that may be more appropriately allocated entirely to ratepayers,"" the PUC's consumer protection arm, the Office of Ratepayer Advocates, reported Oct. 30, even before the latest upward market spirals. Gas Co. representatives express frustration, saying they have done what the state has requested under its gas-cost incentive program: Buy smarter, and pass the savings along to its 5 million residential and small-business customers. The company contends it has worked hard to keep bills down and should be rewarded for taking risks to obtain gas at the lowest possible cost. ""The PUC, every time we do well, raises the bar on us,"" said Jim Harrigan, director of gas acquisition. ""I don't necessarily agree with it."" By virtue of its purchasing power and storage and pipeline capacity, the Gas Co. has become a big player in the regional natural gas market. In the company's bustling trading room at its Los Angeles headquarters, 15 employees track price movements, pipeline supplies and even the weather via computer, while cutting deals and arranging gas shipments. Although the Gas Co. buys the commodity for its customers, the company also sells to marketers, other utilities and producers. State officials say the number of transactions by the company has risen steeply to 10,000 to 20,000 a year, including gas sales along California's border, where prices have rocketed. The PUC created the cost incentive program for the state's three major gas utilities--San Diego Gas & Electric Co. in 1993, Southern California Gas the next year and PG&E Corp.'s Pacific Gas & Electric Co. in 1997. Like Southern California Gas, SDG&E is a subsidiary of Sempra Energy. The program was designed to give utilities added motivation for obtaining gas at the best price for customers. It replaced lengthy and contentious reviews by the PUC, which assessed whether utilities had purchased gas at reasonable prices and sometimes ordered them to return millions of dollars to customers. An annual audit of the Gas Co. program and a staff evaluation requested by the PUC recently concluded that the program has achieved many of its goals, but it also proposed adjustments that would give customers a greater share of the rewards. ""These incentives were designed in less volatile times,"" said program supervisor Mark Pocta of the Office of Ratepayer Advocates, which conducted the audit. ""There is a question of how much should go to ratepayers and shareholders."" His office also plans to assess whether the Gas Co.'s trading had any negative effects on the gas market, resulting in diminished supplies or higher prices for other utilities and their customers. Under the program, the Gas Co. shares risks and rewards with its ratepayers, but since the program was launched, it has consistently produced awards. If the cost of gas is 0.5% or more below a benchmark based on monthly gas market indexes, the company and its customers split the savings 50-50. California's gas utilities are not allowed to profit on their raw commodity costs; they merely pass along those costs to ratepayers with no markup. The savings under the incentive program are automatically reflected in consumers' monthly gas bills but are not itemized. At the end of the year, the utilities request their share of the savings, and the PUC has routinely granted approval. Then the companies, and thus their shareholders, are paid through customer utility bills. The resulting bill increases typically have been modest, less than 1%. But as the awards increase, regulators say, the effect on customers will become more significant unless the present structure is changed. ""There's no question, when you start to talk about $100 million [or more in savings], and add [the company's award] into rates in a year, it will make a noticeable difference,"" said Los Angeles economist Jeff Leitzinger, president of Econ One, who has done consulting for the Gas Co. Still, he said, ratepayers should bear in mind that they already benefit from below-market gas and transportation costs. In the early years of the program, records show, the Gas Co.'s awards went from zero to $3.2 million, $10.6 million, $2 million and $7.7 million. Last year's award of $9.8 million is awaiting PUC approval. This year's proposed award, covering the period through the end of this month, has not yet been submitted by the Gas Co. But the utility has provided monthly figures and oral updates on a confidential basis to PUC officials, who declined to provide figures. Harrigan of the Gas Co. said the savings are expected to multiply ""many times over,"" largely because the company was well-equipped for the market fluctuations and tried to insulate its customers from high gas prices. ""Any trading company, especially one with assets like we have, has benefited from volatility in the market,"" he said. Harrigan said, however, that he does not believe the company's level of activity has adversely affected the market and that its trading pales in volume to that of unregulated energy companies. Anne Smith, the Gas Co.'s vice president of customer service and marketing, said the utility will not release figures for this year's incentive program until they are filed with the PUC in June. ""I don't want to interrupt that process,"" Smith said, noting that the PUC ultimately will determine the company's award. ""I think they need to focus on what [the Gas Co.] has done for the ratepayers. It has been immense."" Although the typical monthly gas bill has risen to $80 from $50 a year ago, Gas Co. customers tend to have lower rates than those of other California utilities. The company's gas procurement cost in February was 66 cents per therm, or 100 cubic feet. That's more than twice last year's cost but only about half what sister company SDG&E paid for its 740,000 customers in February. It's also much lower than the $1.09 per therm PG&E pays. ""We were as upset about the overall [gas price] increase as anyone else,"" Harrigan said. ""I would rather see the prices of a year ago, even though we managed to do a little better in the [recent] environment."" When it comes to keeping down costs, regulators say, the Gas Co. has advantages over other utilities in the marketplace. For one, the company has so much pipeline capacity at major gas basins that it purchases a relatively small portion of its needs--about 10% to 15%--at the California border, where prices in December briefly rose to the equivalent of $6 per therm, or 20 times those a year earlier. This presents opportunities. ""At the beginning of the month, they forecast a certain amount of gas they have to buy,"" said Pocta of the Office of Ratepayer Advocates. ""If they go out and buy and do not need to use as much because the weather is more moderate than expected, they can either inject the gas into storage or they can make sales at the border."" With gas price run-ups like those seen in the last year, Pocta said, ""there is a question: Should that benefit be shared, or flow entirely to ratepayers?"" Customers, he pointed out, may be entitled to additional benefits because they pay for the interstate and intrastate pipeline capacity and the gas storage that give the company the flexibility to make advantageous deals. ""By the same token, we want [the Gas Co.] . . . to go into the market and generate cost savings that can be passed on to the customers,"" he added. ""We want them to have incentives. The question is how to balance them."" Under deregulation, the Gas Co. adopted the nontraditional role of marketer, according to a PUC Energy Division report in January. The company makes gas sales at various locations. It engages in exchanges. It makes futures transactions to help stabilize costs. ""They look for ways to lower the gas cost,"" said Richard Myers, program supervisor at the Energy Division. ""Before they were lots more risk-averse. Now they feel they can take risks and make money for shareholders, and it is a benefit for ratepayers at the same time."" The incentive programs are tailored to individual utilities, so it is difficult to compare them. Records show that the shared savings at SDG&E, a much smaller utility, declined steadily from $9.2 million in the 1996-97 cycle to $560,000 in 1999-2000. Spokesman Ed Van Herik said the falloff largely represents a drop in gas purchases, especially as the company sold off its own gas-fired electricity-generating plants. He said the company does not yet know how much savings have accrued in the last year. In an annual report to the PUC in February, PG&E said it had no savings under the incentive program and thus it is not entitled to any award for the 1999-2000 cycle. The Utility Reform Network, a San Francisco-based consumer advocacy group, said it will closely watch the PUC's evaluation of the incentive program at the Gas Co. ""We want to make sure, given the dramatic changes in the gas market and prices, ratepayers are not left out of the [additional] benefits,"" TURN attorney Marcel Hawiger said. ""We'll look to see whether the mechanism should be changed."" Severin Borenstein, director of the Energy Institute at UC Berkeley, said the program should be changed to provide more incentive for utilities to enter long-term contracts that would smooth out volatility in the market. ""Unfortunately, under the system,"" he said, ""the only incentive is to beat the [spot] market."" Use this file to download and print all the articles in this section (See attached file: Dow Jones IMPLICATIONS FOR OTHER MARKETS (For easier printing of all the articles in this section use the file at the end of the section) New York: New York at the crossroads Wednesday, March 21, 2001 Energy Insight (Embedded image moved to file: pic24389.pcx) By Dave Todd dtodd@ftenergy.com U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham declared this week that the Big Apple is on the verge of being bitten hard by power cuts and rising energy prices. Delivering the keynote address at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's national energy summit in Washington Monday, Abraham said, ""California is not the only state facing a mismatch between supply and demand,"" what with ""electricity shortages predicted for New York City and Long Island this summer"" and low capacity margins threatening electricity reliability elsewhere across the country. But how likely is it that New Yorkers will face blackouts of the sort confronting Californians? Not very, says energy trade specialist Edward Krapels, managing director of Boston-based METIS Trading Advisors. Krapels, a consultant helping major Northeastern utilities, such as Consolidated Edison, design market-hedging programs, adamantly decried what he said are facile comparisons between conditions in New York and California, there being ""more differences than there are similarities"" between those two industrial cornerstones of the country's economy in respect to energy security management. ""First of all, New York has a more varied portfolio of energy generation sources than California,"" he said. California has hydro, nuclear and gas, but when it lost a lot of hydro, the state needed gas to pick up the slack, and the ""capacity just wasn't there."" In New York's case, the state has oil and coal still in the mix and its overall dependence on gas is much lower than California's, Krapels added. New York avoids making same mistakes Portfolio diversity is one pillar of any effective plan to help New York avoid the same errors made in redesigning California's marketplace. New York's Independent System Operator (ISO), in a new report warning that the state is at an ""energy crossroads"" in terms of its capacity adequacy in the immediate future, argues that a concerted effort is required to arrest declining in-state generation capacity reserve margins, and a strategy must be put in place, whether or not new generation comes on-line, in accordance with current anticipated scenarios. A measure of New York's essential difficulty is that, between 1995 and 2000, statewide demand for electricity grew 2,700 MW, while generating capacity expanded by only 1,060 MW. With no major new generating plants in downstate New York fully approved, the gap is expected to continue to widen. To avoid ""a replication of California's market meltdown"" the New York ISO calculates the state's daily generating capacity needs to grow by 8,600 MW by 2005, with more than half of that located in New York City and on Long Island. Expressing concern this may be too big a burden for the current bureaucratic process to bear, the ISO wants to see a state-appointed ombudsman named to help would-be merchant power plant investors plow through red tape. ""Increasing New York's generating capacity will also lessen the state's escalating and risky reliance on out-of-state sources of electricity,"" the ISO added. ""Since 1999, New York State has been unable to cover its reserve requirements from in-state sources."" Not everyone agrees with that analysis, insofar as it argues for circling the wagons inward. Some analysts believe the ultimate solution lies not in tying in more inwardly dedicated power, but in expanding the marketplace by breaking down inter-jurisdictional barriers. In any case, New York energy regulatory authorities and those responsible elsewhere in the U.S. Northeast, such as PJM (Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland) Interconnection and the New England Power Pool, are in vastly better shape in terms of ""cross-border"" cooperation than California and its neighbors in that efforts are being made among various authorities toward developing an integrated regional electricity market. In California, by contrast, the state's focus?for example, in the case of new gas-fired power plant development?has been to ensure dedicated supply to the California market alone, rather than on a regional marketplace. (Embedded image moved to file: pic05075.pcx) The New York ISO's new broad-based analysis of market-restructuring needs argues that the relatively stronger health of its reformed environment is ""due in large part to the ability of New York's utilities to enter into long-term power contracts."" What needs to be done most, it says, is to move aggressively to build some of the more than 29,000 MW of ""proposed new generation in the siting pipeline."" In the meantime, the 30,200 MW of electricity New Yorkers used on a peak day last summer shouldn't be eclipsed on too many days this coming summer (given early long-range weather forecasts). Demand, however, is expected to increase at an annual average rate of up to 1.4%. So while New York City, the rest of the state and adjacent parts might breathe easy this year, it could be a brief rest from the fray. Meanwhile, a 4% shortfall is still being planned for this summer that is not yet provided for, as authorities hurriedly seek to arrange new generation plants around Manhattan, on Long Island and even on barges offshore. One way or another, whether it is the weather or the politics of siting new energy facilities, it's going to be a hot time in the city. Long-term solutions hit brick wall Meanwhile, attempts at longer-term solutions continue to run into trouble. Last week, Connecticut state regulators came out against a proposal to run a new underwater cable under Long Island Sound that Hydro-Quebec subsidiary TransEnergie U.S. Ltd. wants to build to pump more juice into Long Island Power Authority's load pocket. Despite strong promises from TransEnergie to be diligent in avoiding damage to oyster beds in Long Island Sound, the proposal failed to convince authorities, who were persuaded the pipeline project could lead to diversion of electricity from Connecticut. In similar fashion, private companies wanting to build 10 small independent power plants and temporary generators offshore New York City are running into intense opposition from environmental groups and citizen orga nizations?some of whom have taken their cases to the state assembly in Albany. The David vs. Goliath nature of such controversies has further alerted energy companies to the difficulties of addressing complex energy supply issues that may ultimately devolve to people not wanting things in their backyard, regardless of what the alternative might mean to their fellow citizens or the greater public good. But suddenly, in New York, California's troubles?while still distant in their intensity? may not be so far away. By some estimates, this summer's bills for Consolidated Edison customers could be up as much as one third or more over last year's charges. Letting the time slip when it comes to building new infrastructure isn't going to make the pain go away. NEW YORK: NY-ISO REPORT SAYS STATE NEEDS 4,000 - 5,000 MW OF NEW GENERATION SOON TO AVOID SEVERE SHORTAGES; NY-ISO ALSO ASKS FERC TO EXTEND BID CAP AND TEMPORARY EMERGENCY PROCEDURES 03/21/2001 Foster Electric Report 2 (c) Copyright 2001, Foster Associates, Inc. Raising the specter of an East Coast version of the California crisis, the New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (NY-ISO) is warning of serious electricity shortages, air quality deterioration and stunted economic growth without immediate approval of between 4,000-5,000 MW of new generating capacity in the state. Of this amount, 2,000-3,000 MW is needed to serve New York City. Another 8,600 MW of new capacity will have to be built by 2005, the NY-ISO said in a recent report, Power Alert: New York's Energy Crossroads. ""New York is heading towards a very serious situation unless it acts immediately to get new supply sited within its borders,"" said NY-ISO president William Museler in a statement accompanying the report. ""This report is essentially a caution light at New York's energy crossroads."" Sources in the New York Public Service Commission have downplayed the NY-ISO's warning, asserting that a process for bringing on new generation is well underway, with more than 85 projects in the approval pipeline. In a related development, the NY-ISO asked FERC to approve a proposed tariff amendment (ER01-1517) extending existing bids caps in some of its markets until 10/31/02, and a separate and related amendment (ER01-1489) extending the NY-ISO's so-called temporary extraordinary procedures (TEP) that allow the ISO to make price adjustments and take other corrective actions if it finds evidence of market power abuse. The NY-ISO Report --The NY-ISO likened the situation in New York to that faced by California, where a relentless increase in demand has not been met with an equal increase in supply. The NY-ISO said that between 1995 and 2000, statewide demand for electricity rose by 2,700 MW, while generating capacity increased by only 1,060 MW. With no major new generating plants in downstate New York fully approved for construction at this time and generation demand in the state expected to grow around 1.3 percent annually for the next several years, the NY-ISO said this gap will continue to widen. The inevitable result of this trend is large rate increases for New York's power consumers. The NY-ISO's modeling suggests that ""by 2005, statewide prices are likely to be more than 20-25 percent lower in the case in which new plants are built than in the case where they are not."" In New York City, ""the price to consumers of electric power could be reduced by as much as 28 percent when compared to the case of no new supply or load management programs."" Besides large rate increases, the NY-ISO asserted that a failure to site and build new plants in New York will threaten power reliability in the state and lead to increasing reliance on out-of-state resources. The report said that if no new in-state generation comes on line in the next five years, the state's generation reserve margins will shrink from the current 14.9 percent above peak demand ""to a dangerously low 8.4 percent by 2005."" Pointing to California's situation, the report added that increased reliance on power imports ""can subject electrical suppliers and customers in New York to transmission restrictions and political and economic considerations beyond the control or influence of responsible New York State entities."" To avoid these harsh consequences, the NY-ISO said New York's new siting law, known as the Article X process, needs to be modified. Since the law was passed 18 months ago, the report noted that only two plants have been approved (both upstate) and neither has yet been built. The problem, according to the NY-ISO, is that the siting process ""requires the cooperation of multiple state agencies."" To expedite the process, the report suggested the ""clear designation of a lead agency and the adoption of an `ombudsman program' to expedite and coordinate the work of the agencies responsible for the Article X process must be made."" The NY-ISO added that an expedited approval process would improve the environment because older, more polluting power plants would be replaced by cleaner gas-fired units. On a more positive note, the NY-ISO reported that New York's restructured power market ""is far healthier than that in California, due in large part to the ability of New York `s utilities to enter long-term power contracts. The basic structure of the New York market will also reduce unwarranted price spikes and other market disruptions through mitigation programs which automatically correct price spikes due to market power abuses."" ""Nevertheless, California `s experience raises a caution flag for all New Yorkers,"" the report continued. ""The deregulated market in New York cannot achieve lower costs through competition without an increase in generating capacity similar in magnitude to the recommendations of this report, along with simultaneous efforts to institute greater conservation, better load management and alternative energy supply initiatives. Additionally, closer integration with regional suppliers of power is both inevitable and beneficial."" The report also recommended (1) accelerating conservation, real-time metering and price-sensitive load programs; and (2) upgrading the state's and the Northeast's transmission infrastructure. The Proposed Tariff Amendments -- New York's Article X siting process and continuing tight supplies were also cited in the NY-ISO's request to extend from 4/30/01 until 10/31/02 its $1,000/MWh bid caps. FERC first approved the 1,000/MWh bid caps in July 2000 (see REPORT No.197, pg.6), and subsequently extended them. The NY-ISO's board ""is sensitive to the Commission's concerns about undue intervention in energy markets,"" the filing related. ""Nevertheless, the NY-ISO is submitting this request because it believes that delays in New York state's `Article X' process for licensing and siting new generating capacity is inhibiting supply from increasing to match continued demand growth. . . . Moreover, although the NY-ISO proposes to implement several demand-side measures this summer, it is not yet clear whether they will make demand sufficiently price-responsive to avoid periods of high prices that would not occur if there were an efficient demand-side response."" Thus, the NY-ISO insisted that the requested extension is needed to provide more time for the development of additional generation and to gauge the effectiveness of the NY-ISO's proposed demand-side response mechanisms ""in order to avoid exposing consumers to price spikes that are not a product of the interplay of competitive market forces."" Other problems cited in the NY-ISO's filing which keep New York's power market from being fully competitive include continuing capacity and operating constraints at the state's Central-East interface, and questions over adequate gas supply. ""The NY-ISO remains acutely aware that taking steps to deal with price abnormalities can have undesirable consequences,"" the filing continued. ""Nevertheless, the NY-ISO believes that the $1,000/MWh cap that has been used in the PJM's markets since inception does not appear to have had an adverse impact there. . . . The permanent bid caps in PJM, and the interim bid caps in ISO New England (proposed for extension through the end of 2001) also make continuation of the NY-ISO's bid caps more important in order to maintain uniformity across the Northeastern markets. The NY-ISO also continues to believe that suppliers will not be materially harmed by the continuation of bid caps, which are likely to come into effect very rarely and are set at levels that prevent only artificially high run-ups in prices."" The NY-ISO's request to extend its TEP procedures (which also were previously extended) through 10/31/02 cited similar problems with New York's power markets, but claimed that the NY-ISO ""has made great strides"" toward eliminating market design and software flaws. ""The TEPs were, and remain, an indispensable tool for responding to and correcting market flaws and other instances where the markets are not operating as the NY-ISO and the Commission intended,"" the filing insisted. MASSACHUSETTS: Attorney general says summer poses electricity concerns By JOHN McELHENNY Associated Press Writer 03/19/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. BOSTON (AP) - The state's top consumer advocate warned that Massachusetts may see ""California-type"" electricity blackouts this summer when temperatures rise and residents turn on air conditioners and fans. ""It would be a mistake to feel this is a cold weather problem,"" said Attorney General Thomas Reilly in an interview with The Associated Press. ""Our major problem will come this summer."" State deregulation of the electric industry has been among the factors blamed for local power outages in California, and on Monday, California for the first time suffered rolling blackouts across the entire state. Massachusetts relaxed regulations on its own electric industry in 1998 to attract more companies to stir competition. But that hasn't happened yet, largely because the current high cost of oil and gas make it expensive to produce electricity. ""The promise of deregulation was that there was going to be competition,"" said Reilly, a Democrat. ""That competition in the wholesale market is not happening."" Hot summer weather drives up electricity use as residents turn on air conditioners and fans, and Reilly said a few particularly hot days could strain the grid that provides the region's power. A spokeswoman for the region's power grid said electricity use is expected to rise 1.5 to 2 percent this year, but the region should have enough power because of six new power plants that have begun generating electricity in the past 18 months. ""The situation is unlike California because we have new generation coming on line that is outpacing demand,"" said Ellen Foley, spokeswoman for ISO New England Inc., which manages the grid of 330 generators connected by 8,000 miles of high voltage transmission lines. Still, a particularly hot day and an unforeseen power generation breakdown could prompt ISO to ask residents to conserve electricity, a situation that arose once last summer, Foley said. In order to avoid any power outages and protect consumers, Reilly repeated calls for electric companies to build more power lines and to offer more options for new customers who have signed up since deregulation. Those customers typically pay more than long-term customers. Electric transmission companies should also be allowed to enter into two-year contracts with suppliers, instead of the six-month contracts many have now, to avoid short-term price spikes for consumers, Reilly said. The Attorney General's Office acts as an advocate for consumers. Michael Monahan, a spokesman for NSTAR, which provides electricity to more than 1 million customers, is upgrading some of its power lines and last year built a new line to Cape Cod, but currently has no lines under construction. ""I wholeheartedly concur with the attorney general that it's something we have to focus on,"" Monahan said, but he added, ""The indications I see are that we have an ample supply of electricity."" California's statewide outages were ordered on Monday after a transformer fire, high demand and a lack of electricity imports pushed power reserves to near zero. California partially deregulated its electric industry in 1996, two years before Massachusetts. --- On the Net: Attorney General's Office: http://www.ago.state.ma.us NSTAR: http://www.nstaronline.com ISO New England Inc.: http://www.iso-ne.com NEVADA: Discussion of bill stopping power plant sales to continue Wednesday By JOHN WILKERSON Associated Press Writer 03/19/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. CARSON CITY, Nev. (AP) - Lawmakers hit more delays Monday in trying to pass a measure that pulls the plug on the sale of Nevada power plants to avoid California-style energy problems. ""The goal of this bill is only stopping the divestiture of power plants and making sure it's constitutional,"" said Senate Commerce and Labor Chairman Randolph Townsend, R-Reno. ""And that's not as easy as it sounds."" Townsend's comment just before his committee began working on SB253 was prophetic - witnesses kept bringing up the need for more flexibility in the measure. Translation: Don't kill all deals by stopping Reno-based Sierra Pacific Power and Las Vegas-based Nevada Power from selling their Nevada power plants until June 2003 - and possibly until 2006. Pete Ernaut, a lobbyist for Reliant Energy which has been trying to buy a power plant, said unforeseen market changes could make a plant sale before 2003 a deal that would be in the public's interest. ""If you put a two-year moratorium on these plants, all these deals are going to go away,"" he said. ""When the cow leaves the barn, it's difficult to catch."" Townsend had hoped to wrap up committee work on SB253 on Monday. Now it's up for review again Wednesday in the Commerce and Labor Committee. Reliant isn't the only company trying to keep power plant purchases alive. Earlier this month, executives of Pinnacle West Energy told the committee that it's in the public's interest to allow Sierra Pacific Resources to sell its Harry Allen power plant. The Harry Allen plant produces about 72 megawatts out of the 2,900 megawatts of energy that Nevada utilities generate. Pinnacle has plans to expand that to 700 megawatts by 2004. Other provisions not strictly related to the plant divestitures, such as ways in which Sierra Pacific and Nevada Power can recover the cost of undoing the sales contracts, don't have to be included in SB253, Townsend said. Townsend said the other concerns dealing with the energy crisis and utility deregulation can be handled in later bills - but the power plant sale issue must be handled now. Nevada's PUC and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission had directed Sierra Pacific and Nevada Power to sell the plants as a condition of the companies' merger in 1999 under the parent company Sierra Pacific Resources. Critics of the plant sales say the plants generate about half the state's electricity - and if they're sold, the unregulated new owners could sell the power to other states and put Nevada into the energy dilemma California faces of shrinking supply and rising prices. The Southern Nevada Water Authority has presented an analysis stating that rate payers will save from $1.7 billion to $3.5 billion by July 2001 if the power plant sales are stopped. Nevada's Consumer Advocate's Office previously had projected a conservative estimate of $915 million in savings. MAINE: Panel of experts would review impact of energy deregulation By GLENN ADAMS Associated Press Writer 03/19/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. AUGUSTA, Maine (AP) - In the wake of rolling blackouts in California and rate spikes in their home state, Maine's top legislators proposed a study Monday into the effects of deregulation of the energy industry. ""Deregulation of electricity is a new idea and we still have a lot to learn,"" Senate President Michael Michaud said as he called for the analysis. A panel of industry insiders, elected officials and consumers would study issues such as what standard rate consumers can expect and the likelihood of energy shortfalls over the next three years, and whether Maine consumers are vulnerable to anti-competitive activities. In addition, the Blue Ribbon Commission would look into whether changes in Maine's deregulation law are needed to encourage more generating capacity, improve conservation and spur competition. The study is being proposed as consumers remain mindful of a power crisis in California that resulted from high wholesale energy costs, a consumer rate cap and too few power plants in that deregulated state. Maine's deregulation law is designed to avoid such pitfalls, said Rep. William Savage, D-Buxton, House chairman of the Legislature's Utilities Committee. Maine's law does not cap consumer prices, as California's does, and the state has more than enough generating facilities to meet the state's energy needs, Savage said. Since Maine's deregulation law took effect in March 2000, Bangor Hydro-Electric Co. rates have increased 19 percent. The Public Utilities Commission approved a residential standard rate increase as recently as last month. Federal energy regulators are reviewing their decision to allow steep fee increases for utilities and power wholesalers that fail to arrange enough capacity to meet customers' peak load. Gov. Angus King and all four members of Maine's congressional delegation oppose the hike. The PUC has approved standard rate increases for energy delivered by Central Maine Power Co. to medium-sized and large industrial users. On the other hand, some towns and school districts are saving money on energy through deals they can get in the deregulated market. In the meantime, legislation has been introduced in response to some of the changes that have occurred in Maine's deregulated energy industry. One would use some of the money from the sale of power-generating assets to offset an increase in rates paid by large industrial users, said Sen. Norman Ferguson, R-Hanover, Senate chairman of the Utilities Committee. Supporters of the utility study that was proposed Monday said they are not looking to make changes in Maine's deregulation law, but if it needs fixing it could be done during next year's session. The lawmakers' primary interest is to find out how trends in a new environment designed to encourage competition will affect consumers, and to try to identify what consumers can expect in the few years ahead. House Speaker Michael Saxl, D-Portland, said the Legislature ""has a fundamental public policy interest in making sure rate-payers and businesses are protected against exorbitant rate hikes."" Michaud, D-East Millinocket, said he's interested in finding out how future changes in electric prices and availability might affect businesses and consumers in northern Maine. ""The economy in my part of the state is the most vulnerable, and I want to make certain we are leaving no stone unturned in our effort to prevent any shocks to the economy in northern, western and eastern Maine,"" Michaud added. The commission would include House and Senate members from each party, a utility executive, and representatives of energy producers, providers, a large commercial consumer and individual consumers. OREGON: State Senate moves to combat energy crisis 03/16/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. SALEM, Ore. (AP) - In an attempt to avoid a California-like energy crisis, the Oregon Senate approved a bill Friday that would quicken the process of siting power plants that use gas and renewable resources. ""It's important for Oregon. It makes sure that energy will be available to everyone,"" said Sen. Lee Beyer, D-Springfield. The measure, SB843, would shorten the siting process for power plants that use gas and renewable resources, like wind, from a year and a half to a matter of months. The speeded-up process would be in effect for two years. ""If we can act now, we can actually start to solve power supply problems by this summer,"" said Sen. Jason Atkinson, R-Jacksonville California's strict regulations on the construction of new power plants has contributed to its current shortage and legislators took note. Beyer said though California was definitely a wake-up call, the measure is a reaction to the larger power picture in the Northwest. With low rainfall, hydroelectric generators will have trouble meeting demand, Beyer said. Gas-fired and wind plants could come online as soon as this fall and would provide relief. ""We are not in a position to sit back and do nothing about the energy crisis the Northwest and the country are experiencing,"" said Senate Minority Leader Kate Brown, D-Portland. Conservationists, however, caution that lawmakers should be careful not to rush to provide power at the expense of environmental standards. WISCONSIN: Two utilities to add 975 megawatts in plan to avoid energy crisis By The Associated Press 03/22/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. Plans of two state utilities to add 975 megawatts to Wisconsin's electric power grid as a way of avoiding an energy crisis similar to California's were questioned Thursday by a consumer advocate who said too many power plants may be in the works. ""Certainly nobody wants to see blackouts like you have in California but there is the danger Wisconsin could be overbuilding,"" said Steve Hiniker, executive director of the Citizens' Utility Board, which represents consumer interests in utility rate cases. He noted that plant construction costs ultimately are born by the utility customers. Alliant Energy Corp. announced its proposal Wednesday - in a filing with the state Public Service Commission - to spend $1 billion to build one coal and two gas-fired power plants. Alliant has proposed building a 500 megawatt coal-fired plant and a 100 megawatt natural-gas fired plant by 2006. It also wants to build a 200 megawatt natural gas-fired facility in 2011. Wisconsin has not built a coal-fired plant in more than two decades. Alliant has not determined the plants' locations. Also, Madison Gas & Electric, the state's smallest investor-owned utility, said Wednesday that it had signed deals to buy 175 megawatts of power from three generating plants in Wisconsin and Illinois. ""Three out of the four past summers, we've had public appeals for conservation due to shortages somewhere in the state. We need to take steps to avoid that, and the California situation makes that even more clear,"" said Alliant spokesman Chris Schoenherr. ""Getting more iron in the ground will give us more flexibility in the state to be able to react."" Alliant acknowledged the new plants will probably mean rate increases, but it was too early to say how much rates would go up. California's problems, which this week resulted in the first deliberate blackouts since World War II, stemmed from underestimating the state's power needs, forcing utilities to sell their power plants but not allowing them to secure long-term supply contracts, and freezing rates, among other things. But Wisconsin's situation is far different. The state has moved slower than California toward deregulation, and there has been no desire here to speed up the process in recent years as power reliability became a problem. The PSC estimates that Wisconsin will need an additional 3,000 megawatts of power over the next decade. Hiniker said Wisconsin needs to coordinate its planning to avoid overbuilding. The costs of new power plants are passed on to ratepayers, meaning electric bills will increase as new generation is added. In addition, coal-generated power plants are a major source of air pollution in the state. ""We don't have the advance planning that has kept Wisconsin from overbuilding in the past,"" said Hiniker. ""This is something the PSC should be doing."" MG&E's deals are: -A 10-year contract to buy 75 megawatts from Calpine Energy Services starting in May 2004. The power will come from the natural gas-fired plant Rock River Energy Center, near Beloit. Calpine Energy Services is a unit of San Jose, Calif.-based Calpine Energy Corp. The plant is being built by Northbrook, Ill.-based SkyGen Energy LLC, which Calpine bought last year from SkyGen President Michael Polsky and Wisvest Corp., a unit of Wisconsin Energy Corp. -A 10-year contract to buy 50 megawatts of power from the Rainy River Energy Corp. starting in May 2002. The power is coming from a natural gas-fired plant near Joliet, Ill. owned by LS Power Co. Rainy River is a unit of Duluth-based Minnesota Power Inc. -A five-year contract to buy 50 megawatts from an El Paso Merchant Energy plant near Cordova, Ill., in western Illinois. The owner of the natural gas facility is the Cordova Energy Center Co., which is a unit of Iowa-based MidAmerican Energy Holdings. Alliant also offered support in the Wednesday filing for a $7 billion plan of Milwaukee-based Wisconsin Energy, which includes five new power plants in Oak Creek and Pleasant Prairie. -- On the Net: CUB: http://www.wiscub.org/ Alliant Energy: http://www.alliant-energy.com Wisconsin Public Service Commission: http://www.psc.state.wi.us Wisconsin Energy: http://www.wisenergy.com/ Madison Gas & Electric: http://www.mge.com Use this file to download and print all the articles in this section (See attached file: Dow Jones If you wish to be removed from the distribution list for this update please contact Pru Sheppard - DC. All recipients of this message have been Bcc'd as part of industry best practice for broadcast emails. | This message may contain confidential and/or privileged | | information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to | | receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, | | disclose or take any action based on this message or any | | information herein. If you have received this message in | | error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail | | and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. | - Dow Jones - pic24389.pcx - pic05075.pcx - Dow Jones [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: PRC MEMO from Skilling; [EMail-Body]= I think the memo needs some additional work. I have made a number of suggestion (highlighted on the attached). From: Karen Moore/ENRON@enronXgate on 04/30/2001 07:56 AM To: Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Oxley/ENRON@enronXgate, Andrea Yowman/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Gina Corteselli/ENRON@enronXgate, Robert K Jones/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: PRC MEMO from Skilling Attached is a draft of the PRC memo to go out from Jeff at the end of this week for your review. Karen Denne, Michelle Cash, and Gina Corteselli have reviewed the document and their comments/edits/suggestions have been made accordingly. Please have your responses to me no later than COB Wednesday, May 2, 2001. Thanks, Karen [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CA Legislative Analyst's Take on Governor's ""Solution""; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 02/28/2001 02:41 PM ----- Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 02/22/2001 02:57 PM To: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Angela Schwarz/HOU/EES@EES, Beverly Aden/HOU/EES@EES, Bill Votaw/HOU/EES@EES, Brenda Barreda/HOU/EES@EES, Carol Moffett/HOU/EES@EES, Cathy Corbin/HOU/EES@EES, Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT, Christina Liscano/HOU/EES@EES, Christopher F Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT, Craig H Sutter/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Debora Whitehead/HOU/EES@EES, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Dorothy Youngblood/HOU/ECT@ECT, Douglas Huth/HOU/EES@EES, Edward Sacks/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Eric Melvin/HOU/EES@EES, Erika Dupre/HOU/EES@EES, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Fran Deltoro/HOU/EES@EES, Frank W Vickers/HOU/ECT@ECT, Gayle W Muench/HOU/EES@EES, Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@ENRON, Gordon Savage/HOU/EES@EES, Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@ENRON, Iris Waser/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON, James W Lewis/HOU/EES@EES, James Wright/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Jeff Messina/HOU/EES@EES, Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Jess Hewitt/HOU/EES@EES, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kathy Bass/HOU/EES@EES, Kathy Dodgen/HOU/EES@EES, Ken Gustafson/HOU/EES@EES, Kevin Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Leasa Lopez/HOU/EES@EES, Leticia Botello/HOU/EES@EES, Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Marsha Suggs/HOU/EES@EES, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Meredith M Eggleston/HOU/EES@EES, Michael Etringer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael Mann/HOU/EES@EES, Michelle D Cisneros/HOU/ECT@ECT, mpalmer@enron.com, Neil Bresnan/HOU/EES@EES, Neil Hong/HOU/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Paula Warren/HOU/EES@EES, Richard L Zdunkewicz/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Leibert/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, Rita Hennessy/NA/Enron@ENRON, Robert Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Rosalinda Tijerina/HOU/EES@EES, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Scott Gahn/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES, Sharon Dick/HOU/EES@EES, skean@enron.com, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tanya Leslie/HOU/EES@EES, Tasha Lair/HOU/EES@EES, Ted Murphy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Terri Greenlee/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tony Spruiell/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Vladimir Gorny/HOU/ECT@ECT, Wanda Curry/HOU/EES@EES, William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kathryn Corbally/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jubran Whalan/HOU/EES@EES, triley@enron.com, Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert C Greg Wolfe/HOU/ECT@ECT, James Wright/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Dirk vanUlden/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Steve Walker/SFO/EES@EES, Jennifer Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES, Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES, Douglas Condon/SFO/EES@EES, wgang@enron.com, Scott Govenar <sgovenar@govadv.com>, Hedy Govenar <hgovenar@mail.acom2.com> @ ENRON, jklauber@llgm.com cc: Subject: CA Legislative Analyst's Take on Governor's ""Solution"" Ginger: Could you please forward this along to the Quinn-Gillespie folks---David Lugar in particular? Thanks very much. Others: Attached are excerpts from the California Leg Analyst's Report--an ""independent"" institution in Sacramento--on the electricity crisis, the plan thus far to address it, and the effect that the solution might have on the State's financial position. Also have attached URL to full report. Best, Jeff [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: McVeigh video really a virus; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: NW Security and Bug Patch Alert Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 4:52 PM To: vkamins@enron.com Subject: McVeigh video really a virus NETWORK WORLD NEWSLETTER: JASON MESERVE on SECURITY AND BUG PATCH ALERT 06/14/01 - Today's focus: McVeigh video really a virus Dear Wincenty Kaminski, In this issue: * Patches and alerts for SQL, Exchange, HP-UX and others * Viruses, including one that hits Apple Macs (for a change) * Hackers taunt EC with site defacement, plus other interesting reading Outsource for Success Enjoy management flexibility and the benefits of a secure, carrier-class environment with Sprint E|Solutions Web hosting and collocation services. Learn about these services and find out how outsourcing can help your company create a scalable and reliable way of maintaining a strong Web presence. Find out more during a free, one-hour Webcast on June 20 Brought to you by Sprint E|Solutions, Network World and ITWorld.com Today's focus: McVeigh video really a virus By Jason Meserve (write me at jmeserve@nww.com) You knew someone would take advantage of the recent execution of Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh to spread a virus. According to a number of computer security types, a purported video of the McVeigh execution circulating the 'Net is actually a virus that drops the SubSeven backdoor onto infected systems. For those who don't know, SubSeven can be used to take over control of the infected machine and be used in distributed denial-of-service attacks. The good news is that most updated antivirus scanners already detect this virus, so if your systems are up to date, you should be safe. For more on this, check out this wire story posted on DigitalMass.com: Today's bug patches and security alerts: * SQL security hole lets attackers take over A security flaw in Microsoft's SQL Server 7.0 and SQL Server 2000 Gold can allow an attacker to take control of a targeted server, the company said in a security bulletin late Tuesday night. Microsoft issued a patch for the flaw at the same time it released the bulletin. IDG News Service, 06/13/01 For a patch and more information from Microsoft: * Microsoft has third go at Exchange hole Microsoft has issued a third version of a patch intended to plug a security hole that could allow hackers access to mailboxes on Exchange Server Versions 5.5 and 2000. The second patch contained outdated files, Microsoft said in an updated security bulletin issued Wednesday. IDG News Service, 06/14/01 For a third try at getting the correct patch, click to: * HP warns of potential DoS vulnerability in kmmodreg Hewlett-Packard is warning its HP-UX operating system users of a potential denial-of-service vulnerability in the kmmodreg command, which is executed each time the system is booted. The problem with the package also could be used to increase privileges on the affected system. HP-UX users can download a patch for the kmmodreg problem by logging on to HP's IT Resource Center at: http://itrc.hp.com * Xinetd patch released by Linux OS vendors Many Linux vendors have released a patch for the xinetd package that fixes a flaw in the way the application deals with TCP WAIT commands. The problem prevents the linuxconf-web application from working properly. Another flaw in the xinetd package creates world-writeable files that can be used in a symlink attack. Linux-Mandrake users can download the new patch from: Red Hat users can get more information and links to patches from: Immunix OS 7.0-beta and 7.0 users can get the appropriate patch from: _imnx.i386.rpm * Linux-Mandrake patches tcpdump Linux-Mandrake has issued a patch for its tcpdump package that fixes a potential buffer overflow vulnerability. The flaw could be used in a remote attack on the tcpdump process. This patch also fixes a previous vulnerability that could allow a remote user to run arbitrary code on the affected system without root privileges. The new patch can be downloaded from: * Linux-Mandrake fixes imap flaw According to an alert from Linux-Mandrake, several flaws have been found in the UW-IMAP package that could allow an authenticated user to gain greater shell command access. This is particularly problematic for e-mail systems that do not normally provide shell access. Patches can be downloaded from: * Conectiva patches exim A printf vulnerability exists in exim, a mail transfer utility. The flaw in the code deals with the way exim check e-mail headers without protecting against a printf format attack. Conectiva users can download the appropriate patch from: * Red Hat issues patch for ispell According to an alert from Red Hat, the ispell program uses mktemp() to open temporary files, which makes it vulnerable to symlink attacks. For more information and to download a patch: * GnuPG patch available for Red Hat Linux users GnuPG, an open source version of PGP, contains a number of flaws that could leave a user's private key exposed. The problem is a format string vulnerability in GnuPG's code. For more information and links to the appropriate download: * Red Hat: LPRng fails to drop supplemental group membership According to an alert from Red Hat, LPRng fails to drop supplemental group membership at init time, though it does properly setuid and setgid. The result is that LPRng, and its children, maintain any supplemental groups that the process starting LPRng had at the time it started LPRng. This is a security risk. Download the appropriate patch from: Red Hat Linux 7.0: alpha: i386: Red Hat Linux 7.1: i386: * ScreamingMedia patches SiteWare vulnerability A flaw in ScreamingMedia's SiteWare Web server could allow a user to view all documents in the SiteWare Web hierarchy. A similar problem could allow any file to be retrieved from the system. More information and a patch can be found at: Today's round up of virus alerts: * Simpsons worm hits Macs When the Mac vs. PC wars start up, as they inevitably do, on Usenet or Web message boards or just around the office, Mac partisans always tout the dearth of viruses for their chosen computer as one of the main benefits in adopting Apple's operating system. And though, technically, there still may not be very many viruses for the Mac, a new Mac e-mail worm has recently been discovered and is making its way across iMacs and Powerbooks everywhere. IDG News Service, 06/11/01 * Virus hoax warns people to delete AOL Perhaps the greatest thrill for any prankster is to have his hoax taken as truth. Just such a thing has happened to Ray Owens, who runs a Web site called Joke A Day. Owens sent an e- mail to the 342,000 of his subscribers on June 5 (after an initial mailing on June 2 to another list) warning them of a new virus, called AOL.EXE. Warning your customers of a virus seems like a nice thing to do, except that AOL.EXE isn't a virus at all; it's the AOL application that provides Internet access to millions of people worldwide. IDG News Service, 06/11/01 * WM97/Myna-AR - A Word macro virus with no malicious payload. (Sophos) * XM97/Laroux-OC - This Excel macro virus spreads by creating a file called ""BINV.XLS"" in the XLSTART directory. (Sophos) * WM97/Opey-AU - This Word macro virus removes the macros section of the tools menu and disables the Visual Basic Editor. It also displays five different messages on five different dates. (Sophos) * XM97/Barisada-Y - An Excel macro virus that spreads via a file called ""KHM.XLS"" in the XLSTART directory. Unlike its predecessors, this one does not contain pop-up messages. (Sophos) * VBS/Lovelet-CE - Yet another variant of the infamous LoveLetter virus. This one comes with a subject line of ""News Email Beta Run1.01"" and a file attachment called ""NEWSEMAIL.VBS."" (Sophos) >From the interesting reading department: * Hackers taunt EC with site defacement Dutch hackers on Tuesday evening defaced SaferInternet.org, a Web site sponsored by the European Commission that promotes a safer Internet. Security at the site had been increased just last week after other hackers raised a red flag about possible vulnerabilities. IDG News Service, 06/13/01 * Microsoft plugs seven Telnet security holes in Windows 2000 If the Telnet service included with Microsoft's Windows 2000 operating system has looked suspiciously like Swiss cheese recently, that might be because it has seven security holes that need patching. Microsoft has acknowledged the holes and issued a patch late last week. IDG News Service, 06/11/01 * When private peering arrangements go bad: Cable & Wireless shuts out 14 ISPs, including PSINet Cable & Wireless likely didn't make any new friends on the Internet last week when it started enforcing its newly revised peering policy, cutting off service to more than a dozen ISPs. Network World, 06/11/01 * It's not lunch, but it's free While there may be no such thing as a free lunch, we do offer all of our newsletter archives for free. This newsletter's archive can be accessed at: To contact Jason Meserve: Jason Meserve is the Multimedia Editor of Network World Fusion and writes about streaming media, search engines and IP Multicast. Jason can be reached at mailto:jmeserve@nww.com. FEATURED READER RESOURCE Technology Primers Need background information on a specific technology? Check out the Technology Primer section of Network World Fusion: Covering a range of topics from ASPs and Convergence to Security and Gigabit Ethernet, the page offers links to the best resources from Network World and around the 'Net. Featuring overviews, tutorials, news, publications, forums and more, it's a one-stop guide to a host of technologies. SUBSCRIPTION SERVICES To subscribe or unsubscribe to any Network World e-mail newsletters, go to: To unsubscribe from promotional e-mail go to: To change your e-mail address, go to: Subscription questions? Contact Customer Service by replying to this message. Have editorial comments? Write Jeff Caruso, Newsletter Editor, at: mailto:jcaruso@nww.com For advertising information, write Jamie Kalbach, Fusion Sales Manager, at: mailto:jkalbach@nww.com Copyright Network World, Inc., 2001 ------------------------ This message was sent to: vkamins@enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re:; [EMail-Body]= help is on the way. We are going to establish some senior executive oversight as well as an executive director (probably someone who came through the program). Charlene is going to be moving into a commercial role (which was the original plan when she was brought into the organization). I'd be happy to talk to you in more detail when I get back to Houston. Jeffrey A Shankman@ECT 02/26/2001 10:21 AM To: Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Hi guys. I wanted to let you know that I am extremely concerned about the Associate/Analyst program, so much so that I feel all the work I have done, and all the time I have spent on the program has had little impact outside Wharton/Penn recruiting. In fact we won't get more than 1 associate from Wharton this year for a variety of internal and external reasons. This program has brought incredible talent into the organization, but we have lost a lot of momentum over the last two years. In as much as I would like to continue to support the program, I can't in its current form, and don't have time to fix what I thought we had been addressing. The entire program is disfunctional, and the commercial teams are not lending support to the program. I'd be very happy to spend a few minutes of your time (rather than blather on in an email) to give you both my overview of the program, and suggest changes and improvements. You know you have my support, but the current state of affairs down there has gotten me to my rope's end with the program. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: I've joined Charles River Associates; [EMail-Body]= Bill, Yes, one of the options I am looking at. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Balson, William"" <wbalson@crai.com>@ENRON Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 1:53 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: RE: I've joined Charles River Associates Have you considered joining a consultancy? -----Original Message----- From: Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com To: wbalson@crai.com Sent: 1/29/02 11:43 AM Subject: RE: I've joined Charles River Associates Bill, Lacima is relatively small, but they have two very competent and experienced principals: Chris Strickland and Les Clewlow. I am looking right now at a number of options. Hopefully, I shall make a decision within a few weeks. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Balson, William"" <wbalson@crai.com>@ENRON Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 1:30 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: RE: I've joined Charles River Associates Have you developed plans? I'd be interested in your evaluation of Lakima Group, whom I believe you've worked with. How big are they? -----Original Message----- From: Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com To: wbalson@crai.com Sent: 1/29/02 11:12 AM Subject: RE: I've joined Charles River Associates Bill, Delayed congratulations. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Balson, William"" <wbalson@crai.com>@ENRON Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 5:14 PM To: 'vkamins@enron.com' Subject: I've joined Charles River Associates Hi Vince - Its very sad to see what has happened. I hope you are doing OK under the circumstances. I wanted also to let you know that I'm transitioning to an advisory role at Opt4 since they are now in a more operational mode, rather than developmental. I've joined Charles River Associates in the Palo Alto office. What are your plans for the future? I would like to extend an invitation to get to know us better, and perhaps to collaborate if our interests coincide. When do you get back from vacation? Bill Balson Vice President Charles River Associates 285 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Direct: 650-847-2227 Cell: 650-823-2510 FAX: 650-325-2488 wbalson@crai.com This e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or its relevant affiliate and may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient (s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender or reply to Enron Corp. at and delete all copies of the message. This e-mail (and any attachments hereto) are not intended to be an offer (or an acceptance) and do not create or evidence a binding and enforceable contract between Enron Corp. (or any of its affiliates) and the intended recipient or any other party, and may not be relied on by anyone as the basis of a contract by estoppel or otherwise. Thank you. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Tax Valuations for YR2000; [EMail-Body]= FYI ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/03/2000 07:17 PM --------------------------- From: Gary Fitch@ENRON on 08/01/2000 02:03 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Bill Donovan/EPSC/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Tax Valuations for YR2000 Thanks Steve, actual savings prior to allocation was $782,375 I miss calculated when I sent the memo. Steven J Kean@EES 08/01/2000 09:11 AM To: Gary Fitch/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Re: Tax Valuations for YR2000 Congratulations! Gary Fitch@ENRON on 07/27/2000 12:02:47 PM To: Bill Donovan/EPSC/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Tax Valuations for YR2000 Bill, we hit a home run this morning with HCAD. They have agreed to take my reduced valuation on the Enron fleet. A reduction of $16,079,000 in taxable value. This results in savings of $482,375. That's not all, our allocation based on records for operations outside of the state of Texas resulted in additional savings of $1,559,638. Total savings to our 2000 budget will be $2,042,013. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= BIPAC Board meeting; [EMail-Body]= I wuold like to attend if my calendar is open ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 09/10/99 01:08 PM --------------------------- ""Payne, Jeanne"" <payne@bipac.org> on 09/10/99 10:17:25 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: BIPAC Board meeting Hi: Will you be attending the BIPAC Board Meeting and Annual Dinner on October 5th? If so, will you need hotel accommodations? I have a couple of rooms set aside if you do. Let me know. Thanks. Jeanne [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron's secret bid to save deregulation - PRIVATE MEETING Chairman
 pitches his; [EMail-Body]= Jeff Candidly, this wouldn't have been my approach (posh location, closed format, odd group, seemingly self-serving agenda). I read the article below as unsympatheticand almost mocking in its tonetoward Enron. It's noteworthy theBeverly Hills meeting was not covered in the Los Angeles papers. Instead, this article comes fromthe front page of the Bay Area's San Francisco Chronicle (Democratic bastion and home to both of California's United States Senators, power broker Willie Brown, Attorney General Bill Lockyer and the state's public utility commission). Consistent with myconcern about a ""coast-to-coast firestorm""engulfing Enron, the New York Times ran two articles today that were unsupportiveof the company. q Senator Calls for Hearings Into Energy Regulators' Moves By CHRISTOPHER MARQUIS Senator Dianne Feinstein called for hearings into possible improprieties between members of the F.E.R.C. and private energy interests. q Enron's Dispute With Utility in India Grows More Tangled By SARITHA RAI The dispute between the Enron Corporation and Indian federal and state government officials keeps getting messier. These follow the Times' tough piece on Ken Lay yesterday. Undoubtedly, the Washington Post will have to get into fray soon. My feeling is that just as with the ""business"" side, Enron's public policy strategy needs be well informed, sophisticated and comprehensive. I fear that anything less will fuel the potential of undesirable outcomes for Enron's reputation, leadership and shareholdervalue. Kevin 213-926-2626 PS - May I have a copy of the position paper that was circulated in the Beverly Hills meeting. The Gate www.sfgate.com Return to regular view Enron's secret bid to save deregulation PRIVATE MEETING: Chairman pitches his plan to prominent Californians Christian Berthelsen, Scott Winokur, Chronicle Staff Writers Saturday, May 26, 2001 ?2001 San Francisco Chronicle URL: Energy executive Kenneth Lay, head of powerful Enron Corp., quietly courted Arnold Schwarzenegger, Richard Riordan, Michael Milken and other luminaries this week in Beverly Hills to drum up support for his solution to California's energy crisis. His prescription called for more rate increases, an end to state and federal investigations and less rather than more regulation. Lay, a close friend of President Bush and one of his largest campaign contributors, hosted a private 90-minute meeting in a conference room at the Peninsula Hotel in Beverly Hills on Thursday. Among the participants were Milken, the former head of the Drexel Burnham Lambert investment banking firm who pleaded guilty to fraud charges in 1990 and who now runs a think tank based in Santa Monica; movie star Schwarzenegger; and Riordan, the mayor of Los Angeles. Schwarzenegger and Riordan have been courted recently as GOP gubernatorial candidates. One participant, who agreed to speak on the condition he not be identified, said the meeting appeared to be geared toward getting participants to support Lay's vision and then champion it to officials who are trying to solve the state's energy mess. PLAN TO RESCUE DEREGULATION The source said the timing and tone of the meeting suggested Lay is concerned that California will abandon its disastrous experiment with power markets by either re-regulating the system or creating a government authority to provide electricity. Gov. Gray Davis signed legislation last week to create and fund a state power authority that would build, buy and run power plants in California. ""They're trying to rescue deregulation,"" the source said of Enron executives. ""They think the whole state power authority is a bad idea."" At the meeting, Enron representatives circulated a four-page position paper titled ""Comprehensive Solution for California,"" which was obtained by The Chronicle. It said ratepayers should bear responsibility for the billions in debt incurred by the state's public utilities and that investigations of power price manipulation and political rhetoric are making matters worse. The paper made no mention of the possibility that much of the runaway electricity costs in California is due to market manipulation by power generators and traders -- a possibility given credibility in studies by regulators and economists. One of the talking points read: ""Get deregulation right this time -- California needs a real electricity market, not government takeovers."" Another point suggested giving consumers monetary rebates for conserving electricity. INVOLVED IN EARLY DAYS Lay has been an aggressive champion of deregulated electricity markets and was an early advocate in persuading California to begin its experiment with a competitive power market system. Lay has created a new kind of company in the process, one that essentially produces nothing but makes money as a middle-man, buying electricity from generators and selling it to consumers. During the first quarter of this year, Enron's revenues increased 281 percent to $50.1 billion. Asked about the purpose of the meeting, Karen Denne, a spokeswoman for Enron, said she would ""look into that"" and then did not return repeated telephone calls seeking comment. One participant said Denne was present at the meeting. D.C. CONNECTIONS Meanwhile, Lay's power in Washington is reported to have reached unprecedented heights. According to a story in yesterday's New York Times, Lay supplied the Bush administration with a list of candidates for jobs regulating the power industry and even interviewed one of them. The story also said Lay essentially threatened to seek the removal of the chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Curt Hebert, if he does not support Lay's desire to further deregulate the nation's electricity system. Lay denied the allegation. Also in attendance at this week's meeting were Bruce Karatz, chief executive of home builder Kaufman & Broad; Ray Irani, chief executive of Occidental Petroleum; and Kevin Sharer, chief executive of biotech giant Amgen. Among those who were invited but did not attend were former Los Angeles Lakers star Earvin ""Magic"" Johnson; supermarket magnate and Bill Clinton supporter Ron Burkle; and Dennis Tito, recently returned from the world's first civilian space trip. Milken, through a spokesman, confirmed that he attended the meeting, but declined to be interviewed. Schwarzenegger could not be reached for comment through a publicist, and Sharer did not return a call yesterday afternoon. A spokesman for Riordan, Peter Hidalgo, said the Los Angeles mayor attended, but was ""not intending to formulate any kind of policy position on this issue. His intent is to listen to all sides."" Attached to the Enron handout was a two-page open letter, addressed to Davis and the state Legislature, apparently prepared for those who support Lay's position and would be willing to sign their names to it. The source who participated in the meeting said those assembled appeared noncommittal and asked a number of questions of Lay, but did not agree to champion his agenda. E-mail the writers at cberthelsen@sfchronicle.com and Scott Winokur at swinokur@sfchronicle.com . ?2001 San Francisco Chronicle Page A - 1 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: Sac Bee, Wed, 6/6: Businesses vie for blackout exemptions:=20 The PUC must decide who should be spared, and the applicant list is very lo= ng Sac Bee, Wed, 6/6: PG&E, ISO agree to court order on power bills Sac Bee, Wed, 6/6: Peter Schrag: Turning up the heat in Houston and=20 Washington (Editorial) SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Is trading an insider's game? SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Daily energy costs for state fall in past weeks=20 SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Five tiers sought in proposed rate boost SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Port budget large, but power bills loom SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Continuous use urged for planned power plant=20 SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Rising energy prices threaten Poway troupe=20 SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Fair to use generators for midway attractions LA Times, Wed, 6/6: 'Hi, My Name Isn't Justice, Honey,' and Shame on Lockye= r =20 (Editorial) LA Times, Wed, 6/6: U.S. Probes Alleged Pact Not to Build New Plants Power:= =20 Justice officials focus on Southland operations of two firms, which deny=20 wrongdoing LA Times, Wed, 6/6: Natural Gas, Power Prices Drop Sharply Energy:=20 More conservation, mild weather are among factors keeping costs down, exper= ts=20 say LA Times, Wed, 6/6: The State Utility Averts $1 Billion in Costs Courts:=20 PG&E and Cal-ISO agree to recognize Department of Water Resources as=20 purchaser of the power SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: Dramatic drop in cost of electricity=20 LOWER BILLS: Cheaper fuel, milder weather credited SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: San Jose council gives green light to generating plant= =20 VOTE REVERSAL: Officials pressured to OK project SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: Developments in California's energy crisis SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: California conserves SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: L.A. power customers awash in cheap energy SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: PG&E doesn't want to pay for energy to avert blackouts Mercury News, Wed, 6/6: Metcalf plant gets preliminary approval=20 OC Register, Wed, 6/6: Feds probe AES, Williams Individual.com (PRnewswire), Wed, 6/6: Calpine Begins Construction of=20 Peaking Energy Center in Gilroy, Calif.=20 Individual.com (PRnewsire), Wed, 6/6: Reliant Urges FERC to Drop or Amend= =20 California Price Caps to Avoid Additional Shortages and More Blackouts Energy Insight, Wed, 6/6: Farm-fresh biopower --- Businesses vie for blackout exemptions: The PUC must decide who should be= =20 spared, and the applicant list is very long. By Carrie Peyton and Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writers (Published June 6, 2001)=20 Mixes for milkshakes and frozen coffees could spoil at ice cream parlors,= =20 sickening customers.=20 Seniors getting their hair done would have to leave their dryers and go hom= e=20 with wet heads, risking a chill.=20 Mall escalators could come to a sudden halt, endangering shoppers who lose= =20 their footing.=20 Those are among the health and safety risks cited by more than 10,000=20 businesses and government bodies asking state regulators to exempt them fro= m=20 rolling blackouts.=20 It is a list that mixes nursing homes and grocery stores, outpatient surgic= al=20 clinics and beauty salons, dialysis centers and country clubs.=20 ""A lot of people are treating this like a lottery,"" said Subodh Medhekar of= =20 Exponent Inc., the consulting firm sorting through exemption requests for t= he=20 state Public Utilities Commission.=20 For many, Medhekar said, the rationale seems to be "" 'I'm pretty sure I won= 't=20 get exempted, but what's the down side? Let's put in an application.' ""=20 Amid predictions that Californians could face dozens of rolling blackouts= =20 this summer, state regulators are trying to update a decades-old list of wh= o=20 should be spared if the lights go out.=20 The Alta Sierra County Club in Grass Valley should be among those whose pow= er=20 stays on, Sean O'Brien, the club's golf course superintendent, told=20 regulators in a nine-page application.=20 The country club telephones could go out, making it harder to phone for hel= p=20 if someone has a medical problem while golfing, he said in an interview.=20 And if the golf course's irrigation pumps shut down, it would lose the=20 ability to quell small blazes -- leaving it to rely on a fire station O'Bri= en=20 said is about one-quarter mile away.=20 Placerville Dialysis wants an exemption, too. As many as a dozen people the= re=20 can be having their blood pumped through an artificial kidney that cleans i= t=20 when their own kidneys no longer function properly.=20 ""When the power goes out, everything just stops,"" said manager Shirley=20 Carpenter. ""There is a way to manually return the blood by hand before it= =20 clots in the line. ... It would just be hectic.""=20 It takes about five minutes of manual pumping to fully disconnect someone= =20 from a dialysis machine, Carpenter said. And some patients can help by=20 operating their own pumps.=20 But, she said, ""I'm sure it would be kind of frightening to have your blood= =20 out in the line and the power off, and they're pretty much tied to the=20 machine.""=20 Pam Chin, a hairdresser at the Loomis Beauty Salon, said the owner sought a= n=20 exemption because people could get overheated if the air conditioning went= =20 out, and older customers getting their hair set could be chilled if the=20 dryers shut off.=20 With about half the state already exempt from rolling blackouts, the questi= on=20 of who else should stay connected has become a delicate one for utilities,= =20 regulators and legislators.=20 Carl Wood, the PUC commissioner who has taken the lead on blackout issues,= =20 estimates that fewer than 1,000 more utility customers can be exempted befo= re=20 they overload the rolling outage system designed to take stress off the=20 electric grid.=20 While about 6,000 customers are classified as ""essential"" by the state's tw= o=20 largest utilities, keeping them out of the blackout rotation also spares=20 about 5 million other customers who are served by the same circuits.=20 That multiplier effect will have to be weighed by the consulting firm, by= =20 utilities and eventually by PUC commissioners, who are scheduled to vote in= =20 early August on who should be added to existing standards.=20 The rules will apply to the state's investor-owned utilities, Pacific Gas a= nd=20 Electric Co., Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric Co.,= =20 but not to municipal utilities.=20 The Sacramento Municipal Utility District already rejected pleas for specia= l=20 exemptions from a medical lab, a veterinary hospital, nursing homes, medica= l=20 facilities, businesses and residents. SMUD believes they can weather=20 blackouts because they are not critical to public safety.=20 People have counted on having dependable electricity for so long that some= =20 have widely varying ideas of who can do without it safely, Medhekar said.= =20 Of the more than 500 Baskin Robbins ice cream parlors that dot California,= =20 only five are listed on the PUC Web site as applicants for exemptions.=20 The site cautions that its list of 9,239 electronic applicants hasn't been= =20 checked for duplicates -- or fiction. It includes hundreds of outlets of th= e=20 same drug store and supermarket chains, dozens of related nursing homes and= =20 more than 400 dentists. Another 1,200 commercial power users have applied b= y=20 fax.=20 Among those who have confirmed they want out of outages are the grocery=20 chains operated by West Sacramento-based Raley's, which said it took the=20 action as part of united effort with all California grocers, who are worrie= d=20 about food spoilage.=20 Others in the mix are Fairfield's Westfield Shoppingtown Solano, formerly t= he=20 Solano Mall, where officials sought the exemptions out of fear that shopper= s=20 would get injured if escalators came to a sudden halt.=20 The Yolo County Housing Authority asked for an exemption on behalf of its 7= 00=20 dwellings in the belief that the utilities offer exemptions for low-income= =20 Californians, Executive Director David Serena said.=20 Serena added that many of the authority's occupants are older or disabled a= nd=20 could be endangered by a blackout.=20 Chevron Corp. acknowledged it couldn't show that a blackout at its refineri= es=20 would present ""imminent danger to public health or safety,"" but it asked Go= v.=20 Gray Davis to support legislation exempting makers and transporters for=20 ""critical fuels,"" saying a refinery shutdown would cut into the state's=20 gasoline supply.=20 Some businesses acknowledged that their applications are a long shot.=20 ""It's probably a stretch,"" said Amanda Leveroni, who owns Bacio Catering Co= .=20 of Chico, about her request to the PUC. ""The public wouldn't be in danger.= =20 ""But we're a catering company -- somebody has planned for a year-plus for a= =20 wedding or some big event,"" she added. ""I would be in such a huge situation= .=20 I'd have to send out for pizza.""=20 The Bee's Carrie Peyton can be reached at (916) 321-1086 or=20 cpeyton@sacbee.com. PG&E, ISO agree to court order on power bills By Claire Cooper Bee Staff Writers (Published June 6, 2001)=20 SAN FRANCISCO -- Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and the operator of=20 California's power grid agreed Tuesday to a preliminary court order providi= ng=20 that the utility will continue to receive -- but not pay -- generators' bil= ls=20 for the state's purchases of the most expensive wholesale electricity.=20 The tab has been running at about $300 million a month.=20 The order, which U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali said he'll sign, will= =20 specify that the Independent System Operator will not procure power except= =20 for a ""creditworthy buyer who has agreed to pay the generator.""=20 In California, the only such potential buyer is the state Department of Wat= er=20 Resources. However, the department, which has avoided PG&E Co.'s bankruptcy= =20 proceedings by claiming sovereign immunity, will not be controlled by the= =20 agreement. Montali pointed out that the department still could demand=20 reimbursement from PG&E.=20 Under the agreement, the ISO will not press any claims against PG&E on beha= lf=20 of generators if they are not paid.=20 The proposed preliminary injunction was based on an April order by the=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which forbade the ISO from purchasing= =20 power on behalf of any non-creditworthy buyer, such as PG&E.=20 The ISO is appealing the FERC order. If the appeal succeeds, the injunction= =20 will end.=20 Peter Schrag: Turning up the heat in Houston and Washington (Published June 6, 2001)=20 Behind all the palaver about the predictable standoff at last week's energy= =20 ""summit"" between President Bush and Gov. Gray Davis, one major political=20 development was missed.=20 Put simply, in the past month the focus of the California energy crisis, an= d=20 maybe the onus as well, has moved east: from the state's (and Davis')=20 handling of the mess to the generating companies, energy marketers and gas= =20 pipeline companies that have richly profited from it, and thus to FERC, the= =20 do-next-to-nothing Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and the Bush=20 administration.=20 That wasn't all Davis' doing -- far from it -- though it's been at the hear= t=20 of his message about energy industry ""pirates"" and ""profiteers."" Bush's=20 misbegotten energy plan and the administration's political clumsiness also= =20 contributed mightily, not least by inadvertently giving Davis the chance to= =20 get media exposure he could only have dreamed about.=20 More important, there's the defection of Sen. James Jeffords from the=20 Republican Party and the resulting shift of control in the U.S. Senate, whe= re=20 the next chair of the Energy Committee will be Sen. Jeff Bingaman of New=20 Mexico, a co-sponsor of Sen. Dianne Feinstein's bill capping wholesale=20 electric rates for the next two years. And chairing the Committee on=20 Governmental Affairs will be Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, who's=20 already asked for an audit of energy prices.=20 Those changes will draw a lot more attention to recent studies showing that= a=20 handful of big generators -- Duke Power, Reliant, Mirant, Dynegy and the hu= ge=20 energy-marketing firm Enron -- have gamed the market to drive wholesale=20 prices to levels that, in the year 2000, sometimes reached 40 times the=20 prices of the year before.=20 The findings come not merely from economists at the California Independent= =20 System Operator, the agency that manages the state's grid, who estimate=20 overcharges resulting from market power at $6.2 billion for last year alone= .=20 They come also from Severin Borenstein and his colleagues at the University= =20 of California Energy Institute, who ""conservatively"" calculate the=20 overcharges at $4.5 billion; from Paul Joskow, a widely respected energy=20 economist at MIT; and from Edward Kahn, an economic analyst in San Francisc= o.=20 In a recent paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research,=20 Joskow and Kahn conclude that there's ""considerable evidence that the high= =20 prices experienced in the summer of 2000 reflect the withholding of supplie= s=20 from the market by suppliers [generators or marketers] exercising market=20 power."" That those high prices occurred not merely during peak usage but al= so=20 at off-hours, when no one had ever seen a price spike before, makes those= =20 spikes even more curious.=20 There is, in addition, the powerful suspicion that the huge increase in=20 natural gas prices that a subsidiary of El Paso Energy Co., now the largest= =20 gas company on Earth, was charging on the California side of the=20 California-Arizona border wasn't merely the result of an innocent imbalance= =20 between supply and demand.=20 None of that may be illegal. If there's no collusion, there are no violatio= ns=20 of antitrust laws. But it adds plenty of steam to the political argument. I= n=20 the 2000 election cycle alone, energy companies kicked in some $64 million = in=20 political contributions, 75 percent of it to Republicans. At a time when=20 those companies, many of them located in the same Houston neighborhood, are= =20 racking up astronomical profits and when their collective coziness with Bus= h=20 and the Republican Party is a lot more than rhetoric, their vulnerability t= o=20 a vigorous Senate investigation ought to be obvious.=20 The clincher is ""Blackout,"" a ""Frontline"" program that both symbolizes the= =20 shifting emphasis and reinforces it. (The program is scheduled to be aired = at=20 8 p.m. Friday on Sacramento cable Channel 7.) It isn't another recital of= =20 Californians worrying about their electric bills, or about the stupidity of= =20 the state's deregulation scheme or how Davis dithered in addressing the=20 crisis. It is about those generators and marketers in Houston and North=20 Carolina, men (and a few women) who regard themselves as the heroes of the= =20 new energy markets.=20 The piece is reported by Lowell Bergman, who in working for both ""Frontline= ""=20 and the New York Times has already broken major print stories about Duke=20 Power's secret approach to Davis offering unspecified energy refunds in=20 return for an end to state investigations and lawsuits. Bergman also report= ed=20 private conversations between Enron chairman Kenneth Lay, a major Bush=20 supporter, and FERC chairman Curt Hebert regarding the influence that Lay= =20 could exercise with Bush to allow Hebert to keep his chairmanship if Hebert= 's=20 supported certain decisions Enron badly wants.=20 None of these recent events is likely to end Davis' political woes, and the= y=20 may not produce the wholesale rate caps Feinstein wants and that most=20 economists think necessary -- or maybe any significant reduction in the=20 industry's predatory pricing. But they will surely help turn up the heat,= =20 both in Houston and Washington. Six months ago FERC found wholesale prices= =20 were not ""fair and reasonable"" as federal law requires, but did little abou= t=20 them. It will now have a lot more questions to answer.=20 Peter Schrag can be reached at Box 15779, Sacramento, CA 95852-0779, or at= =20 pschrag@sacbee.com. Is trading an insider's game?=20 Buying, selling of electricity is a growth business, but some say deck is= =20 stacked against consumers By Craig D. Rose=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 While Californians decry deregulation's failure to deliver a competitive=20 market, electricity wholesalers have quietly developed a vast and rapidly= =20 growing business of buying and selling power among themselves.=20 The deals take place on high-tech trading floors in Houston and elsewhere= =20 around the country, as well as on Internet-based trading systems.=20 Some experts say this electricity trading is a key mechanism for raising=20 consumer power prices, yet it's largely unregulated.=20 ""Electricity trading is like buying stock -- when you have ability to chang= e=20 the stock price,"" said Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economics profess= or=20 and member of the state grid operator's market surveillance group.=20 Energy companies say the buying and selling of contracts to deliver power= =20 provides risk management, allowing plant owners to presell their electricit= y,=20 lock in prices and avoid fluctuations. The rough and tumble of the free=20 market, they add, is the most efficient means of allocating a resource like= =20 electricity.=20 But industry critics say trading is far from a competitive market paradigm.= =20 In their view, it's a means of communication -- a way for energy insiders t= o=20 collude and raise prices under the guise of competition.=20 To be sure, the trading arms of major energy companies have emerged as star= s=20 in an industry where profit surges of 300 percent or 400 percent are not=20 uncommon.=20 The transactions, shrouded in secrecy, can leave ownership of a critical=20 commodity in unknown hands. Consider the case of power generated by AES=20 Corp.'s California plants.=20 In 1998, AES made a bold move. Immediately after purchasing power plants th= at=20 gave it control of 10 percent of the state's electric generating capacity,= =20 the company sold the output from its plants for the next 20 years to Willia= ms=20 Cos.=20 Williams did not sit on this treasure trove of electrons. The Tulsa, Okla.,= =20 company soon sold 80 percent of what it bought.=20 It is difficult to say who owns that power now. Some might be owned by Semp= ra=20 Trading, a sister company of SDG&E. Or some could be owned by Enron Corp.,= =20 the nation's biggest electricity trader.=20 A spokeswoman for Williams conceded that Williams itself may have repurchas= ed=20 some of the electricity it sold earlier. But trading companies closely guar= d=20 their positions.=20 This much can be said with certainty: Electricity that AES sold for less th= an=20 5 cents per kilowatt-hour to Williams changed hands perhaps 10 times in the= =20 wholesale market and emerged at times in recent months with a price tag for= =20 consumers that was 300 percent higher.=20 Williams' trading profits increased by 523 percent in the first quarter thi= s=20 year. Advance sales All this buying and selling creates curious confluences.=20 In their attempt to deflect criticism over high prices, generating companie= s=20 such as Duke Energy -- operator of the South Bay Power Plant in Chula and= =20 others in the state -- frequently note that they sell most of their=20 electricity far in advance. But they acknowledge less often that their=20 trading units may also be buying power, which could boost the company's=20 electricity inventory.=20 Duke was the fourth biggest electricity trader last year and cited its=20 trading activity as a prime contributor to its wholesale business profits,= =20 which soared 324 percent in the first quarter to $348 million.=20 It is a company's power traders who frequently direct plant operators to=20 increase or decrease the generation of power in response to market=20 conditions.=20 Energy companies have little option but to turn to trading for profits. One= =20 of the better kept secrets of electrical deregulation and its promise of=20 competition is that there is remarkably little competition in the productio= n=20 side of the business.=20 For one thing, electricity is a commodity; power from one company is=20 indistinguishable from that generated by others.=20 More important, nearly all modern plants generate power from turbines built= =20 by a handful of manufacturers. The result? Modern plants owned by different= =20 companies produce power at nearly identical cost.=20 ""The cost of power produced by modern plants is all within a mil=20 (one-thousandth of a dollar),"" said Michael Peevey, an adviser to Gov. Gray= =20 Davis and former president of Southern California Edison.=20 So the extraction of profit in the electricity business relies much more on= =20 trading. Traders' profits rise when prices are volatile -- plunging, or eve= n=20 better, rising sharply. Little regulation But despite the obvious temptation to manipulate the market, the burgeoning= =20 electricity trading business has remained largely unregulated.=20 The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission does require quarterly filings fro= m=20 energy traders, but these often provide incomplete information, or at least= =20 little that has been of concern to FERC.=20 In fact, although the trading of electricity grew more than a hundredfold= =20 from 1996 to 2000, FERC has taken no major enforcement action against a=20 trader. After the onset of the California crisis last year, FERC has acted= =20 once. That was against Williams, which agreed to pay $8 million without=20 admitting guilt to resolve an allegation that it withheld supply to pump up= =20 prices.=20 FERC's record of enforcement in the area of power trading stands in contras= t=20 to a long list of enforcement actions within other markets taken by the=20 Securities Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission= .=20 FERC has recently added staff to its market oversight operations. But Willi= am=20 Massey, a FERC commissioner, says the agency's effort is still inadequate.= =20 ""Electricity can be flipped, stripped and chopped up,"" Massey said. ""It's a= n=20 extraordinarily complicated market.=20 ""The sophisticated marketers and traders have simply moved past us. We're= =20 kind of horse and buggy in our approach and they're out there in rocket shi= ps=20 flying around ... The problem is that sophisticated traders don't necessari= ly=20 produce reasonable prices. They produce profits.""=20 Before deregulation, electricity trading was a low-key affair. Regulated=20 utilities dealt power back and forth on a reciprocal basis to fill=20 electricity shortfalls in their control areas. There was little trading for= =20 profit until the mid-1990s, after federal legislation and FERC rulings open= ed=20 the market.=20 Major traders include large energy companies, sister companies of=20 California's major utilities and Wall Street firms. Market volatility In many ways, the trading of power is similar to that of other commodities.= =20 But there are important differences. Because it cannot be stored and its us= e=20 is so fundamental, the price of electricity is the most volatile of all.=20 When supplies are tight, a single supplier can rapidly raise prices to=20 budget-busting levels, as evidenced by Duke Energy's recent admission that = it=20 charged California nearly $4,000 for a megawatt-hour of power, a quantity= =20 that probably sold hours earlier for one-tenth of that sum or less.=20 Wolak, the Stanford economist, and state Sen. Joseph Dunn, D-Garden Grove,= =20 who is investigating the state power market, say trading allows companies t= o=20 collude under the guise of competition. Instead of wringing out lowest cost= s,=20 the wholesale trading market serves to raise prices, they say.=20 ""As I trade to you and you trade to me, we communicate to each other what= =20 price we would like to get,"" said Wolak. ""It's not collusive. It's just=20 communicating price.""=20 Mark Palmer, a spokesman for Enron, the nation's biggest power trader, said= =20 California's problem is not the result of trading.=20 ""It's a result of shortages,"" Palmer said.=20 Underscoring its emphasis on trading, Enron's new headquarters tower in=20 downtown Houston rises from a six-story block of new trading floors,=20 including expanded space for electricity trading.=20 Enron also pioneered trading in cyberspace and its Enron Online site claims= =20 to be the most active computer-based trading market.=20 The Houston company argues that consumers won't fully benefit from power=20 trading and deregulation until they have greater choice in choosing their= =20 power supplier. And the company says FERC has not done enough to open acces= s=20 to transmission lines, which would allow traders to move power around the= =20 country. To that end, Enron has lobbied hard for President Bush's plan for = a=20 national electricity grid.=20 Palmer says the notion that the price of electricity rises each time it is= =20 traded is mistaken.=20 ""The market is always looking for the real price of a commodity,"" Palmer=20 said.=20 Dunn, the California state senator, says his investigation found a differen= t=20 function for trading. At a time when supply barely meets or falls short of= =20 demand, he noted, companies with electricity to sell have to worry only abo= ut=20 how high to set their price.=20 ""The trader is a pawn in the generator's game to drive up prices,"" said Dun= n.=20 ""Trading develops a level of trust. You, my alleged competitor, will bid in= =20 the same patterns and I will respond not in a competitive pattern but in a= =20 complimentary pattern.""=20 The state senator said his investigation found evidence that on several day= s,=20 energy companies appeared to test their ability to drive prices up, without= =20 being undercut by competitors.=20 This ability to drive up prices without competitive consequence is a key te= st=20 of market power, the technical term for manipulation or price fixing.=20 But Dunn also conceded that antitrust violations can be hard to prove in=20 court. He suggested that even if the trading behavior falls short of=20 antitrust violations, it remains anti-competitive and devastating for the= =20 California economy.=20 To Harry Trebing, a utility industry expert and professor emeritus at=20 Michigan State University, wholesale electricity trading is reminiscent of= =20 what took place in the 1920s and early '30s. Back then, utility companies= =20 created complex networks of holding companies that traded stock among=20 themselves, driving up prices in the process.=20 Undoing that scheme was a focus of President Franklin Roosevelt's=20 administration. Congress ended up barring national power companies and=20 tightening regulation of utilities, in an effort to counteract their tenden= cy=20 to create markets that work only for insiders.=20 ""The broad goals of trading are the same,"" Trebing said.=20 ""The goal is to maximize profits through raising prices.""=20 Daily energy costs for state fall in past weeks=20 By Ed Mendel=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO -- In some of the first good news of the electricity crisis, the= =20 Davis administration said yesterday that the daily cost of power purchased = by=20 the state for utility customers has dropped in recent weeks.=20 The price-drop news comes after an announcement that Californians conserved= =20 more energy than expected last month, 11 percent, and amid Davis=20 administration optimism that the Legislature may finally begin to move on a= =20 plan to keep Southern California Edison out of bankruptcy.=20 The developments, if they turn out to be a trend and not temporary, could b= e=20 among the first signs that Gov. Gray Davis' plan to end the electricity=20 crisis is beginning to work. But the administration isn't saying that.=20 ""We have had a few good days here lately,"" said S. David Freeman, a Davis= =20 power adviser. ""I don't think that I want to project.""=20 Some power-market watchers began to speculate last month that prices may ha= ve=20 peaked earlier this year. Platts, an energy information service, said=20 yesterday that spot prices for the natural gas used by power plants are=20 falling this month.=20 The governor's press secretary, Steve Maviglio, told reporters yesterday th= at=20 the daily amount spent on power is now ""well below"" $50 million, which was= =20 the average cost earlier this year.=20 A 12-day gap in the most recent notice to the Legislature that another $500= =20 million increment will be spent on power suggests that the daily average=20 during the last two weeks may have dropped down around $42 million.=20 Oscar Hidalgo, a spokesman for the state power purchasing agency, said that= =20 the average cost of power was under $40 million during the first four days = of=20 this month.=20 Maviglio attributed the lower cost to conservation, the phasing in of cheap= er=20 long-term power contracts, fewer power plants off-line for maintenance, and= =20 cooler weather.=20 However, he said, ""The average cost is still way over what we paid last=20 year.""=20 There was widespread skepticism in late April when the governor's consultan= ts=20 predicted that the $346 per megawatt-hour average paid by the state for=20 non-contracted power from April through June would drop to an average of $1= 95=20 from July through September.=20 ""We are still very comfortable with the projection that Mr. Fichera and=20 company estimated,"" Maviglio said, referring to Joseph Fichera of Saber=20 Partners in New York.=20 During a briefing on May 21, Fichera told reporters that the amount of powe= r=20 that the state would obtain under long-term contracts for May was expected = to=20 be about 43 percent of the total required, the so-called net short.=20 Fichera said contracts already signed were expected to cover 66 percent of= =20 the net short in June, 48 percent in July, and 42 percent in August. He sai= d=20 contracts that had been agreed on in principle could increase those amounts= =20 to 73 percent in June, 67 percent in July, and 60 percent in August.=20 ""We are still on target. There are risks,"" Fichera said yesterday, among th= em=20 extended hot weather and power plant outages. ""No one is popping the=20 champagne corks until Sept. 30.""=20 The governor's consultants based their forecast of power demand this summer= =20 on an estimate that Californians will reduce their electricity use by 7=20 percent.=20 The 11 percent reduction last month, as compared to May of last year, came= =20 before the sticker shock of rate hikes that begin this month for customers = of=20 Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric. And a $35 million ad campaign urging= =20 conservation has not hit full stride.=20 Maviglio said the administration plans to release some detailed information= =20 on Monday about the roughly $8 billion the state has spent buying power. Th= e=20 general fund will be repaid by a bond of up to $13.4 billion that ratepayer= s=20 will pay off over 15 years.=20 Legislative leaders have demanded detailed information about power purchase= s=20 before proceeding with the Edison plan. Assembly Democrats are working on a= =20 plan that de-emphasizes state purchase of the Edison transmission system an= d=20 would put most of the burden for paying off Edison's debt on businesses and= =20 large users, not residences. Five tiers sought in proposed rate boost=20 Conservation would be promoted, SDG&E says By Karen Kucher=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 A proposed rate increase for SDG&E customers to cover the high cost of=20 electricity should be imposed in five tiers to encourage conservation, the= =20 company is advising state utility regulators.=20 The more electricity a customer uses, the higher the rate would be.=20 SDG&E needs to raise its rates to bring in an additional $502 million=20 annually to pay the state for power purchases.=20 The state Public Utilities Commission is expected to rule on San Diego Gas = &=20 Electric's rate-increase proposal June 28.=20 The rate changes would remove a cap that has shielded most SDG&E customers= =20 from rising electricity prices for a year. The cap, enacted by state=20 lawmakers in September 2000 and retroactive to June 2000, set rates at 6.5= =20 cents per kilowatt-hour.=20 Higher rates would mean the average SDG&E residential and small-business=20 customer's electricity bills would go up by 18 percent. Large commercial=20 users' bills would average 29 percent more.=20 Public hearings on the issue will be held next Monday and Tuesday in San=20 Diego, El Cajon, Escondido and San Clemente. These sessions will focus on= =20 small-business and residential consumers. Hearings on large commercial user= s=20 were held last month.=20 Earlier this year, the PUC decided to allow the state's two largest=20 utilities, Pacific Gas and Electric and Southern California Edison, to char= ge=20 customers an extra $5.7 billion annually for electricity.=20 The state Department of Water Resources, which has been buying power for=20 SDG&E customers since February, asked SDG&E to generate a total of $915=20 million annually to cover the cost of electricity purchases.=20 With the proposed rate increases, SDG&E could do that.=20 Large commercial customers would pay about 30 percent of the overall increa= se=20 and residential and small-business customers would pay about 70 percent, sa= id=20 Ed Van Herik, a spokesman for the utility company.=20 If the increase can be tiered, as many as 60 percent of residential custome= rs=20 will see no rate increase if their electricity usage remains the same, Van= =20 Herik said.=20 But customers who use more than 130 percent of their baseline -- considered= =20 the minimum amount of electricity needed by a household -- will be billed a= t=20 increasingly higher rates.=20 Residential and small-business customers who use a lot of electricity could= =20 pay as much as 17.89 cents per kilowatt hour for some power they consume.= =20 Consumer advocate Michael Shames said he is concerned the utility's proposa= l=20 does not spread the increases evenly among different types of users. He als= o=20 called for more scrutiny of the state's request.=20 People should tell PUC officials ""that this increase should not be a carte= =20 blanche or blank check approval,"" said Shames, the head of Utility Consumer= s'=20 Action Network. ""The PUC needs to ensure that the rate increase requested b= y=20 the (state) is reasonable.""=20 The public hearings are scheduled for:=20 ?Monday, 1 p.m., San Diego Concourse, Copper Room, 200 C St., San Diego.=20 ?Monday, 7 p.m., El Cajon Community Center, 195 E. Douglas Ave., El Cajon.= =20 ?Tuesday, 1 p.m., Country Inn Hotel, 35 Via Pico Plaza, San Clemente.=20 ?Tuesday, 7 p.m., Center for the Arts, 340 N. Escondido Blvd., Escondido.= =20 Port budget large, but power bills loom=20 Slowing economy also cause for worry By Ronald W. Powell=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 The ""rock"" is rolling financially, but there are indications that the blues= =20 lurk on the horizon.=20 Officials of the San Diego Unified Port District -- headquartered in a=20 block-shaped building some employees call the rock -- are happy with a=20 projected 2001-2002 budget that is 5.1 percent larger than the current one.= =20 Total revenue is expected to reach $208.7 million, $10.2 million above what= =20 is expected in the fiscal year that ends June 30.=20 Port commissioners gave preliminary approval to the budget yesterday and ar= e=20 scheduled to take a final vote July 10.=20 But a slowing economy and surging electric bills are causes for concern.=20 Electricity costs are expected to rise from $5 million to $8.2 million in t= he=20 coming fiscal year.=20 ""As far as trends, we see a continuation of the growth we've experienced ov= er=20 the past five years,"" said Bruce Hollingsworth, the port's treasurer. ""But= =20 our percentage of growth will not rise as sharply.""=20 Port revenues have grown steadily since the 1997-1998 fiscal year, when $16= 3=20 million was generated.=20 The proposed budget calls for adding 24 employees to the port's 730-member= =20 work force. New hires will include three Harbor Police officers, 10 employe= es=20 in the aviation division and four in maritime services.=20 The port operates Lindbergh Field and administers nonmilitary tidelands alo= ng=20 San Diego Bay. It is landlord to more than 600 waterfront businesses and=20 operates two marine cargo terminals and one cruise ship terminal.=20 The budget calls for growth in each of the port's primary revenue centers:= =20 aviation, real estate and maritime services.=20 Passenger and cargo activity at Lindbergh Field is expected to generate $90= .7=20 million, or $5 million more than expected in the current year. Most of that= =20 increase is expected to come from parking-rate increases at the airport and= =20 at the port's long-term parking lot on Pacific Highway.=20 Rent from hotels and other businesses that are port tenants are expected to= =20 total $63.1 million, up $1.8 million from the current budget.=20 Increases in cargo and cruise ship traffic are expected to boost maritime= =20 income by $2.7 million, to a total of $18.4 million.=20 The port expects to spend $157 million on construction projects. They inclu= de=20 $8.5 million to relocate the General Services Department from Eighth Avenue= =20 and Harbor Drive in San Diego to National City and more than $5 million for= =20 paving and improvements at the 10th Avenue Marine Terminal.=20 Rent revenue could grow substantially in future years. Four hotel projects = on=20 port property have won approval or are seeking it.=20 Jim Bailey, president of Manchester Resorts, told commissioners yesterday= =20 that he expects to break ground on a second Hyatt tower of 750 rooms by Jun= e=20 26. Port officials said revenue from that hotel would bring in an additiona= l=20 $3.7 million a year. It is scheduled to open in the summer of 2003.=20 Hollingsworth, the treasurer, said that if all four hotels are built the po= rt=20 could receive as much as $15 million a year in new revenue.=20 Continuous use urged for planned power plant=20 Escondido facility originally proposed for peak demand By Jonathan Heller=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 ESCONDIDO -- A proposed power plant in southwest Escondido that initially w= as=20 expected to run only during times of peak electricity demand probably will = be=20 allowed to run full time.=20 A state energy official who recommended approval of the plant yesterday has= =20 said the plant could operate as often as the state deems necessary.=20 The California Energy Commission was scheduled to vote on the project today= .=20 CalPeak Power of San Diego has asked the commission to approve a 49-megawat= t=20 plant on Enterprise Street near Vineyard Avenue. Referred to as a ""peaker""= =20 plant, such facilities typically are designed to supply energy only during= =20 times of peak demand.=20 The state limits the number of hours some plants can operate to keep=20 pollution at a minimum. A 44-megawatt peaker plant being built on West=20 Mission Avenue in Escondido by Ramco Inc. will be allowed to operate no mor= e=20 than 16 hours per day.=20 That plant is permitted to emit up to 5 parts per million of nitrogen oxide= ,=20 although its actual emissions are expected to be slightly lower, said Dale= =20 Mesple, a Ramco consultant. Nitrogen oxide is a component of smog.=20 The CalPeak plant, if approved, would be restricted to 2 parts per million = of=20 nitrogen oxide.=20 It was generally assumed that the CalPeak plant would operate under similar= =20 time restrictions as the Ramco plant. The potential for air pollution was= =20 among the chief concerns of residents who spoke at the City Council hearing= s=20 on the Ramco project and at the energy commission hearings about the CalPea= k=20 plant.=20 But under the terms of approval recommended by Energy Commission Chairman= =20 William Keese, CalPeak's plant would be able to operate ""up to 8,760 hours= =20 per year, typically when the demand for electricity is high."" That number= =20 equals 24 hours a day.=20 The actual number of hours would depend on the requirements of the state's= =20 Independent System Operator, which manages the energy grid.=20 ""We certainly want to have the flexibility to run whenever we're needed,""= =20 said Mark Lyons, CalPeak's development director. ""Exactly how often we will= =20 run is anybody's guess.""=20 Escondido Councilwoman June Rady said she was frustrated by the possibility= =20 of the plant running full time. In Ramco's case, the city and the county Ai= r=20 Pollution Control District made it clear how often the plant could operate.= =20 CalPeak chose to bypass the city's permitting process and went through the= =20 state Energy Commission, which offers an expedited 21-day approval put in= =20 place by Gov. Gray Davis as an emergency measure.=20 ""I think Escondido has been absolutely ignored and there's a total lack of= =20 due process,"" Rady said. ""It boils down to an issue of local control.""=20 Although city officials objected to the commission pre-empting the city's= =20 land-use authority, the commission maintained that Davis' order gave it the= =20 final say on this type of project.=20 If the commission gives final approval today, the only remedy available to= =20 the city would be in court. At least three council members must vote to=20 initiate legal action.=20 Keese's recommended approval did take into account several city concerns=20 regarding landscaping. The CalPeak plant would be built near the entrance o= f=20 a planned high-tech business park, and city officials were worried the=20 plant's appearance might hinder the ability to attract high-quality tenants= =20 to the park.=20 Mayor Lori Holt Pfeiler said she was not surprised by the commission's=20 recommendation.=20 ""I expected they would want to approve the project, and that's why it was= =20 important for the city to weigh in with conditions we have in this=20 community,"" Pfeiler said.=20 Rising energy prices threaten Poway troupe=20 By Brian E. Clark=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 POWAY -- Rising electricity rates may extinguish the stage lights this summ= er=20 for the Poway Performing Arts Company.=20 ""I'm afraid that if SDG&E gets the price increase it's asking for -- from 6= .5=20 cents per kilowatt-hour to 8.9 cents -- that we'll go under,"" said Kathy=20 McCafferty, spokeswoman for the nonprofit theater.=20 The volunteer organization produces its plays in a building at a Poway Road= =20 shopping center. It held three fund-raising performances over the weekend,= =20 but officials were uncertain yesterday how much money was raised.=20 The group is not affiliated with the Poway Performing Arts Center and has= =20 been in business for 20 years.=20 McCafferty said the group built up a $2,000 surplus last summer before ener= gy=20 prices began to surge.=20 ""That $2,000 was a big reserve for us,"" she said. ""It seemed like a ton of= =20 money, but, boy, it went fast. And we're really energy-dependent. Our light= s=20 use a lot of power. And we're in Poway on the second floor of our building.= =20 It gets hot here, and we have to use air conditioning.""=20 But McCafferty acknowledged that the cost of power isn't the group's only= =20 problem.=20 In a recent letter to backers, President Nan Katona said the organization= =20 also needs new blood to keep operating.=20 ""The truth is that lack of funding is just a symptom of the deeper problem,= =20 which is lack of community support,"" she wrote. ""Ironically, audiences and= =20 reviewers recognize the Poway Performing Arts Company as one of the premier= =20 community arts theaters in San Diego.""=20 Katona said some new volunteers had stepped forward to take leadership role= s=20 in the theater company since she wrote her letter last month. But she said= =20 rising electricity prices could still bring the group down.=20 ""If our energy bills double or triple, we could be in dire straits,"" she=20 said. ""It could push us over the edge financially.""=20 McCafferty said it would be difficult for the theater to cut costs.=20 ""We can't run a much leaner operation,"" she said. ""If our power prices go u= p=20 again, we may still be forced out of business.""=20 The theater is at 13250 Poway Road, in the Lively Shopping Center. For more= =20 information, call (858) 679-8085.=20 Fair to use generators for midway attractions=20 By Michael Burge=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 DEL MAR -- The Del Mar Fair will generate its own electricity for thrill=20 rides on the midway this year instead of using energy from SDG&E.=20 ""In case there are planned or unplanned outages, we still will be operating= ,""=20 fairgrounds General Manager Timothy J. Fennell said.=20 Fennell decided to put the midway on generators because he didn't want the= =20 fairgrounds pulling power from the grid while county residents are coping= =20 with rolling blackouts at home and at work, he said.=20 And the fair does not want to take a chance that a rolling blackout will=20 leave some people stranded in rides high above the grounds, forcing an=20 evacuation.=20 The fairgrounds has been told it is exempt from rolling blackouts, but rath= er=20 than take such a risk it will rent 13 diesel-fuel generators and produce=20 electricity on the midway. The rest of the fairgrounds will use power from= =20 San Diego Gas & Electric Co.=20 Fairgrounds operations manager Larry Baumann estimated it would cost the=20 fairgrounds $20,000 more to generate its own electricity than to buy it fro= m=20 SDG&E.=20 Midway manager Donna Ruhm said it will be worth it.=20 ""Rides that require evacuation have to have backup power and they do,"" Ruhm= =20 said. ""Now our service won't be interrupted.""=20 It is not unusual for carnivals to generate their own power, and the=20 fairgrounds has done so in the past. Fair officials removed the generators = 10=20 to 15 years ago to reduce noise on the midway.=20 The fair opens June 15 and ends July 4.=20 While the rest of the fairgrounds is on the SDG&E grid, Baumann said backup= =20 generators can kick in during a typical 60-or 90-minute blackout, allowing= =20 the fair to operate without serious difficulty. Those generators are not=20 linked to the midway.=20 All the generators are licensed by the state and meet emission standards,= =20 fair officials said, so they do not expect the noise and odor to be=20 excessive.=20 The fairgrounds is taking the precaution of providing its own power despite= =20 the fact that it probably will not go dark during a rolling blackout.=20 ""SDG&E has assured me that .?.?. the fairgrounds and the racetrack will not= =20 be on the curtailment (blackout) list during the fair and the races,"" said= =20 Del Mar Fire Chief Jack Gosney.=20 The Del Mar Thoroughbred racing season begins July 18 and ends Sept. 5.=20 Gosney said SDG&E told him earlier this year that the fairgrounds was not= =20 subject to a forced outage because it shared a circuit with the Del Mar Fir= e=20 Station, which is a 911 dispatch center and exempt from a blackout. But he= =20 said recent research showed that the fairgrounds is on a separate circuit.= =20 Nonetheless, Gosney said, SDG&E is exempting the fairgrounds and racetrack= =20 during the busy summer season.=20 The fairgrounds paid $137,152.95 for its electricity usage from March 12 to= =20 April 10. It paid $51,845.39 for electricity during the same period last ye= ar. ?=20 Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 'Hi, My Name Isn't Justice, Honey,' and Shame on Lockyer=20 By TOM G. PALMER ?????Here's what California Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer said at a press=20 conference about Enron Corp. Chairman Kenneth Lay: ""I would love to=20 personally escort Lay to an 8-by-10 cell that he could share with a tattooe= d=20 dude who says, 'Hi, my name is Spike, honey.""'=20 ?????Here's why Lockyer should be removed from his office of public trust:= =20 First, because as the chief law enforcement officer of the largest state in= =20 the nation, he not only has admitted that rape is a regular feature of the= =20 state's prison system, but also that he considers rape a part of the=20 punishment he can inflict on others.=20 ?????Second, because he has publicly stated that he would like to personall= y=20 arrange the rape of a Texas businessman who has not even been charged with= =20 any illegal behavior.=20 ?????Lockyer's remarks reveal him to be an authoritarian thug, someone whol= ly=20 unsuited to holding an office of public trust.=20 ?????But his remarks do have one positive merit: They tell us what criminal= =20 penalties really entail.=20 ?????Contrary to some depictions of prisons as country clubs, they are=20 violent and terrible places. More and more politicians propose criminal=20 sanctions for more and more alleged misdeeds, and as a result ever more kin= ds=20 of behavior are sanctioned by criminal penalties, perhaps now even selling= =20 electricity. Those found guilty of such crimes are put into cages, where th= ey=20 are deprived of their liberty and dignity and, as Lockyer so clearly=20 acknowledged, raped and brutalized. What's worse, Lockyer has indicated tha= t=20 he believes that rape is an appropriate part of the system of punishments h= e=20 administers.=20 ?????Should it matter that Lay is a businessman? Imagine the outcry if the= =20 head of Enron were female. What would Lockyer's fellow Democrats have said = to=20 that?=20 ?????Should it matter that Lay is chairman of an electricity generator? Doe= s=20 the nature of his business justify threats to escort him to his own rape?= =20 Lockyer told the Los Angeles Times that he had singled out Enron's chairman= =20 because the Houston-based company is the world's largest energy trader.=20 ?????So apparently singling out a man for a heinous threat is OK because he= 's=20 the chairman of the world's largest energy trading company. That's accordin= g=20 to the man who, as a state senator, sponsored California's 1984 hate-crimes= =20 law. Evidently the crusader against intimidation on the basis of race,=20 religion and sexual orientation feels no hesitation at all about intimidati= ng=20 someone and threatening him with the brutal use of physical force simply=20 because he heads the world's largest energy trading company.=20 ?????Lockyer and Gov. Gray Davis seem to think that the best way to keep th= e=20 lights on is to threaten electricity producers with brute force, rather tha= n=20 to offer to pay competitive rates in competitive markets. Are energy=20 producers to blame for California's energy problems? No. Bad policies,=20 including rigid controls on retail prices of electricity, are the cause of= =20 the problem, not the people who generate energy. Scapegoating producers and= =20 threatening them with violence is an old ploy of authoritarians. California= ns=20 should not stand for it.=20 ?????An Enron spokesman said that Lockyer's chilling stated desire to arran= ge=20 the rape of Lay does not merit a response. The spokesman is wrong. Lockyer'= s=20 remarks merit public disgrace and removal from office. After all, rape is n= ot=20 a form of legal justice in America--is it?=20 - - - Tom G. Palmer Is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute in Washington. E-mai= l:=20 Palmert@cato.org Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 California ; Metro Desk=20 U.S. Probes Alleged Pact Not to Build New Plants Power: Justice officials= =20 focus on Southland operations of two firms, which deny wrongdoing. MYRON LEVIN; NANCY RIVERA BROOKS ?=20 06/06/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page B-1=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 The U.S. Department of Justice has launched an investigation into whether t= wo=20 companies that control a large swath of Southern California 's electricity= =20 supply agreed to limit power plant construction, potentially hindering=20 crucial energy production, according to federal records and interviews.=20 The civil antitrust probe of Williams Energy Services and AES Southland=20 represents the Justice Department's first foray into the activities of ener= gy=20 suppliers who have reaped huge profits in California 's price-shocked marke= t.=20 AES disclosed the investigation, which began last month, in a filing with t= he=20 Securities and Exchange Commission on Tuesday. In its papers, AES said the= =20 Justice Department is focusing on whether its agreement with Williams could= =20 constrain future power plant construction in Southern California .=20 The investigation comes at a time when the state is scrambling to get new= =20 generators built and running to avoid blackouts and economic problems.=20 The government alleges that AES and Williams agreed to limit the expansion = or=20 construction of new power plants near three facilities purchased by AES in= =20 1998 from Southern California Edison under the state's new deregulation pla= n.=20 The plants--in Long Beach, Huntington Beach and Redondo Beach--are owned by= =20 AES, but the electricity is sold by Williams. Under a 3-year-old deal, know= n=20 as a tolling agreement, Williams essentially rents out the capacity of the= =20 plants for annual payments to AES. Williams supplies natural gas to fire th= e=20 plants and sells the electricity under long-term contracts and in the costl= y=20 spot market.=20 Williams and AES have similar tolling agreements at plants in Pennsylvania= =20 and New Jersey. However, AES spokesman Aaron Thomas said the Justice=20 Department's investigative requests have focused only on agreements between= =20 Williams and AES in Southern California .=20 Thomas would say only that the agreement at the center of the investigation= =20 is simply a delineation of ""how expansion or repowerings are done at the=20 facilities.""=20 The three plants have a combined capacity of more than 3,900 megawatts,=20 enough to supply about 3 million homes. This summer, AES is bringing anothe= r=20 450 megawatts on line by reactivating two mothballed generators in Huntingt= on=20 Beach.=20 Paula Hall-Collins, a spokeswoman for Tulsa-based Williams Cos., said she= =20 believes that the investigation is unrelated to a recent inquiry by the=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission into whether AES and Williams=20 unnecessarily shut down plants to jack up prices. A portion of that=20 investigation was settled in April, when Williams, without admitting any=20 wrongdoing, agreed to pay about $8 million.=20 ""We've always maintained that we've operated within the law, and we're=20 certain the investigation by the DOJ will find we are operating legally,""= =20 Hall-Collins said.=20 Williams and AES are among the power plant owners and marketers that have= =20 been lambasted by Gov. Gray Davis because of gold-plated electricity prices= =20 that have pushed the state's biggest utilities to the edge of ruin and are= =20 steadily draining the state's budget surplus.=20 State officials are asking FERC to revoke the rights of AES and Williams to= =20 sell electricity at whatever price the market will bear. That right was=20 granted for three years, beginning in 1998 by federal regulators when=20 California 's $28-billion electricity market was opened to competition.=20 Under that plan, the rights of AES and Williams to sell into the market are= =20 the first to come up for renewal.=20 AES Southland and Williams Energy Services are both arms of large energy=20 companies--AES Corp. of Arlington, Va., and Williams Cos. of Tulsa, Okla. California ; Metro Desk=20 Natural Gas, Power Prices Drop Sharply Energy: More conservation, mild=20 weather are among factors keeping costs down, experts say. RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR; NANCY VOGEL ?=20 06/06/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page B-1=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 WASHINGTON -- The wholesale prices of electricity and natural gas in=20 California have fallen sharply in recent weeks, and experts said Tuesday th= at=20 the relief could be the harbinger of an energy turnaround.=20 Or it may be just a blip.=20 In the last couple of weeks, California power prices have plunged to the=20 lowest levels since April 2000, traders say, with electricity selling on so= me=20 days for less than $100 per megawatt-hour.=20 At night, when demand slackens, power sometimes sells for less than $20 per= =20 megawatt-hour. That is reminiscent of the days before prices went haywire= =20 last summer.=20 It is a drastically different scenario than the $500 to $800 the state paid= =20 during a spate of hot weather last month.=20 Meanwhile, wholesale natural gas prices at a bellwether pipeline junction o= n=20 the Southern California -Arizona border dipped last week to their lowest=20 levels since November, according to a publication that tracks the industry.= =20 Separately, Southern California Gas Co. and Pacific Gas & Electric Co.=20 reported June rate cuts for their residential gas customers of 16% and 38%,= =20 respectively.=20 Experts credited a combination of conservation, mild weather, a burst of=20 increased hydroelectric generation and lower natural gas prices for the dro= p=20 in electricity costs.=20 ""Conservation is starting to worry the generators, which is nice to see,""= =20 said Severin Borenstein, director of the University of California Energy=20 Institute in Berkeley. Californians used 11% less energy last month than in= =20 May 2000, according to the state Energy Commission.=20 ""I'm worried that if we don't push harder on conservation, [prices] won't= =20 stay down,"" Borenstein added.=20 On the natural gas side, experts said the price decline is due to replenish= ed=20 storage within California , a nationwide drop in the cost of the fuel and= =20 easing demand from power plants.=20 The number of shippers competing to get natural gas to the state has also= =20 increased, with the expiration of a controversial contract on the El Paso= =20 pipeline system last week.=20 But economists were reluctant to make sweeping predictions based on the=20 latest indicators.=20 ""It's hard to draw specific conclusions,"" said Bruce Henning, who tracks th= e=20 natural gas markets for Energy and Environmental Analysis Inc., an Arlingto= n,=20 Va., consulting firm.=20 How the summer turns out depends on the weather in the state, Henning said,= =20 adding, ""The weather represents the balance in the Southern California=20 market.""=20 Natural gas fuels most California power plants. With wholesale prices=20 recently averaging three to four times the rates charged elsewhere in the= =20 country, state and federal officials have despaired of chances for=20 controlling electricity costs.=20 Last Friday, however, the daily price for immediate delivery of natural gas= =20 in Topock, Ariz., a pipeline junction near the California border, dipped to= =20 $7.85 per million British thermal units.=20 According to Natural Gas Week, it was the first time since mid-November tha= t=20 the price at that location had fallen below $8 per million BTUs. One millio= n=20 BTUs is what a typical Southern California home uses in five or six days.= =20 Considered a bellwether for other pipeline systems serving California , the= =20 Topock price reached a record $56.54 per million BTUs on Dec. 8. It stood a= t=20 $9.36 per million BTUs at the close of business Tuesday, still below recent= =20 weekly averages.=20 Other industry publications have also picked up signals of price declines.= =20 Platts, the energy information division of McGraw-Hill Cos., reported Tuesd= ay=20 that the price for monthly gas delivery contracts to California fell 22% in= =20 June, following a nationwide trend.=20 But Henning said the drop in California prices is attributable to both lowe= r=20 prices around the country and a decline in the high markups for shipping ga= s=20 to California . Those markups, which far exceed the cost of transporting ga= s,=20 have drawn the attention of state and federal investigators.=20 Henning said the markups are declining as depleted storage levels in=20 California are replenished. ""Storage levels have been filling very rapidly,= =20 and that fact is reflected in prices coming down,"" he said.=20 The link between natural gas and electricity prices is a hotly debated=20 subject. Some experts say high-priced natural gas is driving up the cost of= =20 electricity . Others believe that record prices for power are raising the= =20 prices that generators are willing to pay for their fuel.=20 Electricity prices that range from $20 to $200 per megawatt-hour--instead o= f=20 the $150 to $500 per megawatt-hour paid in recent months--are great news fo= r=20 Gov. Gray Davis.=20 Average daily power prices in California for transactions through the=20 Automated Power Exchange have dropped from $149 per megawatt-hour last Frid= ay=20 to $110 per megawatt-hour Tuesday. The exchange is a private company that= =20 brings together electricity buyers and sellers and accounts for less than 1= 0%=20 of the state's market.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio said Tuesday that average daily power=20 purchases by the state have recently dipped below $50 million.=20 The state has sometimes had to pay more than $100 million a day since it=20 started buying power in January through the Department of Water Resources.= =20 The state stepped in because California 's two biggest utilities became too= =20 financially crippled to withstand the prices being charged by generators.= =20 Davis' plan to pay for past and future energy purchases with a $12.4-billio= n=20 bond issue hinges on an assumption that power prices will be driven down th= is=20 summer through long-term contracts, conservation and the construction of ne= w=20 power plants.=20 UC Berkeley's Borenstein said conservation efforts have not gone far enough= .=20 ""You walk into most buildings and you still need a sweater,"" he said. ""That= =20 ain't the way to hit the target.""=20 If Californians conserved an additional 10% off their peak usage on hot=20 afternoons, he said, ""we could really break the backs of the generators, we= =20 could really collapse the price.""=20 Prices tend to skyrocket in California 's electricity market on hot=20 afternoons, when demand soars and grid operators must scramble to purchase= =20 enough electricity . Cool weather, which reduces demand for air conditionin= g,=20 and conservation help keep the state from reaching such crisis situations.= =20 Borenstein said he believes generators are also asking less money for their= =20 electricity in part because of a federal order that took effect last month.= =20 The order limits the price power plant owners can charge when California 's= =20 supplies are strained.=20 Power sellers say there are more fundamental forces at work.=20 ""There's more supply relative to demand, which is softening prices,"" said= =20 Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum. ""The= =20 market is working, and it's providing cheaper wholesale power more quickly= =20 than any regulatory scheme could ever do.""=20 *=20 Times staff writer Dan Morain in Sacramento contributed to this story.=20 RELATED STORY=20 PG&E wins: The utility averted a $1-billion bill for power buys. B6=20 (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)=20 A Blip or a Trend?=20 Daily natural gas prices at the California border with Arizona--considered = a=20 bellwether of the state's costs--have been declining in the last two weeks.= =20 *=20 Natural gas price per 1 million Btu=20 $9.36=20 Source: Natural Gas Week California ; Metro Desk=20 The State Utility Averts $1 Billion in Costs Courts: PG&E and Cal-ISO agree= =20 to recognize Department of Water Resources as purchaser of the power. TIM REITERMAN ?=20 06/06/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page B-6=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 SAN FRANCISCO -- Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and the state's power grid=20 operator reached an agreement Tuesday that insulated PG&E at least=20 temporarily from more than $1 billion in power purchases the state made for= =20 its customers.=20 The California Independent System Operator sent $1.26 billion in invoices t= o=20 the utility for power purchases by the state Department of Water Resources= =20 for PG&E customers from January through March.=20 But the utility contended in Bankruptcy Court proceedings that it was not= =20 liable for such purchases and that continued purchases would cause annual= =20 losses of $4 billion.=20 After arguments before Judge Dennis Montali, PG&E and Cal-ISO agreed that t= he=20 Department of Water Resources, not PG&E, purchased the power. Cal-ISO had= =20 argued that it was making the purchases on PG&E's behalf.=20 ""PG&E wants to be a utility and have obligations to serve customers, but th= ey=20 don't want to pay for it,"" Cal-ISO general counsel Charles Robinson said=20 later.=20 If PG&E refuses to pay the invoices, Robinson said, Cal-ISO will send the= =20 bills to the Department of Water Resources, and officials there can decide= =20 whether to pursue claims in Bankruptcy Court. A spokesman for department,= =20 which has authorization to sell $13 billion in bonds for power purchases,= =20 said the agency will have no comment until the matter can be studied.=20 State agencies have stayed out of the bankruptcy proceedings, hoping to=20 preserve their immunity from suits in federal court.=20 The agreement will be submitted for Montali's approval Monday, but the judg= e=20 said it would not be binding on the department because no one represented t= he=20 agency in court.=20 PG&E's own production and contracts provide the majority of the power for i= ts=20 customers. But state legislation adopted this year allows the department to= =20 secure power contracts to serve customers of ailing utilities. When a=20 shortage threatens the power grid, the department purchases additional powe= r=20 through Cal-ISO on the spot electricity market.=20 PG&E filed for Chapter 11 protection from creditors on April 6, saying it w= as=20 $9 billion in debt.=20 Dramatic drop in cost of electricity=20 LOWER BILLS: Cheaper fuel, milder weather credited=20 David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL: .DTL=20 California electricity prices have plunged unexpectedly to their lowest lev= el=20 in more than a year, partly as the result of a simultaneous drop in prices= =20 for natural gas, which fuels most power plants.=20 Make no mistake: Gas and electricity prices could surge upward again in=20 months ahead.=20 But for the first time since California's energy markets went haywire last= =20 summer, industry experts are beginning to ask whether the state finally may= =20 have turned a corner in its battle with runaway power costs.=20 ""California is not yet out of the woods,"" said Kelley Doolan, who tracks=20 natural gas prices for energy market researcher Platts. ""But this is a very= =20 significant decrease in costs.""=20 Along with lower gas prices, the decline in electricity costs was attribute= d=20 by state and industry officials to milder weather, which reduces demand for= =20 power. They also credited recent conservation efforts by consumers and=20 better-than-expected runoff at dams for hydroelectric plants.=20 Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, an=20 energy-industry association, said these factors came together to produce th= e=20 lowest wholesale electricity prices since April 2000.=20 Electricity on the spot market could have been purchased yesterday for as= =20 little as $50 per megawatt hour, he noted, compared with more than $500=20 earlier this year.=20 ""If the weather stays this way, we could have reasonable prices all summer,= ""=20 Ackerman said. ""We may also have fewer blackouts.""=20 It is tempting for Californians to be suspicious of virtually any swing in= =20 energy prices. If power companies manipulated prices on the way up, as=20 critics have alleged, might they not be up to some trick as prices head in= =20 the opposite direction?=20 Nettie Hoge, executive director of The Utility Reform Network in San=20 Francisco, speculated that generators are allowing electricity prices to fa= ll=20 so they can discourage federal regulators from taking a more active role in= =20 the dysfunctional California market.=20 ""They're trying to take the heat off,"" she said.=20 Others cautioned that the lower prices may be nothing more than a statistic= al=20 blip.=20 ""This was just one month's decline,"" said Michael Shames, executive directo= r=20 of the Utility Consumers' Action Network in San Diego. ""We really have to s= ee=20 how this plays out in the future.""=20 Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis, said the governor was very= =20 encouraged by the lower energy prices. Davis announced Sunday that=20 California's power use was down 11 percent last month from a year before.= =20 ""We're not there yet,"" Maviglio said of whether an end to the state's power= =20 woes is in sight. ""But the trend is pointing in the right direction.""=20 WHITE ELEPHANT Yet this sudden drop in energy prices does have a dark side: California cou= ld=20 end up with a huge white elephant after spending about $40 billion in publi= c=20 funds on long-term power contracts.=20 The logic behind the contracts, which are at an average price of $69 per=20 megawatt hour over 10 years, is that the state expected to pay below-market= =20 rates for electricity for a number of years before prices came down and=20 California found itself paying above-market rates.=20 If current trends continue, though, California will find itself paying=20 consistently above-market rates much sooner than expected, making the long-= =20 term contracts a sweet deal for the same power companies that profited so= =20 handsomely during the state's darkest hours.=20 ""The contracts look really ugly right now,"" said Shames at the Utility=20 Consumers' Action Network. ""They may be way overpriced.""=20 Maviglio, the governor's spokesman, said it is too early to conclude that t= he=20 state did poorly negotiating dozens of long-term power contracts.=20 ""No one has a crystal ball on this,"" he said.=20 CUSTOMERS' BILLS TO DROP In any case, Pacific Gas and Electric Co. said yesterday that customers'=20 average gas bills will drop 26 percent this month to $26 and should stay ne= ar=20 that level all summer.=20 Platts, which monitors average monthly spot prices, found that the wholesal= e=20 price of gas at the California-Oregon border has tumbled nearly 42 percent= =20 since the beginning of May -- from $9.98 per million British thermal units = to=20 $5.81.=20 The wholesale gas price at the California-Arizona border fell 45 percent,= =20 from $11.91 to $6.50. This compares with a 25 percent monthly decline in=20 average natural gas prices nationwide.=20 However, California gas prices are still about 50 percent higher than they= =20 were a year ago, whereas national prices are now below year-ago levels for= =20 the first time since last spring.=20 While cooler weather nationwide helped push gas prices down overall, Doolan= =20 attributed the especially steep drop in California to a commensurate surge = in=20 prices last month related to fears of a long, hot summer of rolling=20 blackouts.=20 ""You had state officials all but promising rolling blackouts this summer,"" = he=20 said. ""That created enormous demand for electricity generation.=20 ""What has changed is that we've had weeks of mild weather,"" Doolan observed= .=20 ""The electricity generators have not come out of the woodwork buying up all= =20 the gas.""=20 This allowed utilities like PG&E to beef up gas inventories, which eased=20 demand and resulted in substantially lower prices, he said.=20 'BACK ON TRACK'=20 ""We're back on track to be completely full for winter,"" said Staci Homrig, = a=20 PG&E spokeswoman. ""That's a very good thing.""=20 Gas prices historically dip in the spring and summer and then rise again in= =20 the winter. PG&E is forecasting that customers' average gas bills could ris= e=20 to as high as $75 in December if current trends continue.=20 However, the precipitous drop in gas prices in recent weeks suggests that= =20 California's unusually high costs at last may be abating.=20 Individual power companies so far are reluctant to speculate on whether the= =20 drop in gas prices will have a lasting effect on electricity costs.=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 San Jose council gives green light to generating plant=20 VOTE REVERSAL: Officials pressured to OK project=20 Marshall Wilson, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL: .DTL=20 In a clear sign that the political landscape has shifted because of the=20 state's power crisis, the San Jose City Council gave a green light yesterda= y=20 for construction of a generating plant it had unanimously opposed in=20 November.=20 Yesterday's 10-to-1 vote came after months of mounting pressure for the cit= y=20 to reverse course and approve the controversial 600-megawatt Calpine plant = at=20 Coyote Valley.=20 That pressure -- increased by the occasional rolling blackout -- has come= =20 from nearly every corner of the state, from elected officials to high-tech= =20 businesses and labor unions worried the power crisis will drain away jobs,= =20 ruin the economy and lead to voter backlash over skyrocketing energy bills.= =20 Even the local branch of the NAACP and environmentalists pushed the council= =20 to approve the Calpine proposal -- despite overwhelming opposition from the= =20 plant's neighbors.=20 Council members did not hide their disdain yesterday for being forced to=20 reconsider their opposition to the so-called Metcalf Energy Center.=20 ""I'm holding my nose to vote for this thing,"" said Councilwoman Linda=20 LeZotte.=20 ""I'm just as unhappy as everybody else,"" Vice Mayor George Shirakawa said. = ""I=20 feel like no matter what happens, we can't win.""=20 GOVERNOR OFFERED HIS SUPPORT After the council's solid opposition in November, Calpine appealed to the= =20 California Energy Commission, which has the final say. The controversial=20 plant then received a huge boost in April when Gov. Gray Davis threw his=20 support behind it.=20 San Jose officials conceded yesterday that the energy commission was likely= =20 to override their opposition and grant approval within a few weeks. They sa= id=20 the commission's likely approval was stripping them of their power to decid= e=20 local land-use issues.=20 ""What I think has happened . . . is the governor and the Legislature at the= =20 state level have taken this out of our hands,"" said Councilwoman Pat Dando.= =20 ""I don't think there's any chance at all the California Energy Commission i= s=20 going to turn down the Metcalf Energy Center,"" Councilman Chuck Reed said.= =20 CONSTRUCTION MAY BEGIN SOON If given the go-ahead by the state, Calpine could begin construction as ear= ly=20 as next month. The natural-gas fired plant would generate electricity by=20 mid-2003, company spokesman Kenneth Arbeu said.=20 At the urging of Mayor Ron Gonzales, the council yesterday approved a new= =20 ""cooperation agreement"" with Calpine. The vote, with Councilman Forrest=20 Williams casting the lone nay, is preliminary while a final vote that is=20 scheduled for June 26.=20 Gonzales argued that the agreement did not amount to a flip-flop because it= =20 differs from what Calpine proposed in November.=20 The agreement approved by the council calls for increased monitoring of air= =20 pollution, the use of treated wastewater to cool the plant, which will redu= ce=20 discharges into San Francisco Bay, and a $6.5 million ""community benefits""= =20 package, with the bulk going toward parkland acquisition, Gonzales said.=20 ""This council has not changed its decision,"" he said. ""What we've done is= =20 change the facility.""=20 Critics, incensed that the city was buckling to outside pressure, vowed to= =20 change the council at the next election.=20 CONCERNS OVER HEALTH RISKS They raised concerns that boiled wastewater steam wafting over their homes= =20 from Calpine's plant could pose health risks. Jona Denz-Hamilton said more= =20 controls are needed to ensure the safety of neighbors like herself and her= =20 family and argued that new, cleaner-burning technologies should be installe= d=20 at the plant.=20 ""It's too great of a risk,"" she said.=20 Other critics said the state's energy woes will be solved and largely=20 forgotten by the time the plant opens in two years, while the Santa Teresa= =20 neighborhood will be stuck with pollution for decades.=20 Approval seemed a given at the start of the more than three-hour hearing.= =20 Much of the afternoon's debate focused around plans to extend a pipeline fo= r=20 treated wastewater to the new plant.=20 Critics said Calpine was receiving a sweet deal by paying only $10 million = of=20 the $50 million cost of extending the pipeline. Several council members ask= ed=20 for a more detailed report into the financing plan before the final vote is= =20 taken June 26.=20 Chronicle staff writer Bill Workman contributed to this report.=20 E-mail Marshall Wilson at ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 Developments in California's energy crisis=20 Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate1 053EDT0177.DTL=20 (06-06) 07:53 PDT (AP) --=20 Developments in California's energy crisis:=20 WEDNESDAY: * No power alerts Wednesday as reserves stay above 7 percent.=20 TUESDAY: * Gov. Gray Davis' administration says the state's electricity costs are=20 dropping substantially, even as it asks state legislators for another=20 half-billion dollars for power purchases. That brings to $8.2 billion the= =20 amount the state is paying for electricity on behalf of three financially= =20 strapped utilities.=20 Spokesman Steve Maviglio says the cost to the state treasury has dropped in= =20 the last few weeks well below the $50 million dollars the state had been=20 paying on a typical day. He credits cooler weather, conservation, more powe= r=20 plants online and more long-term contracts with helping drive down the cost= .=20 * A state Senate committee agrees to issue subpoenas to eight out-of-state= =20 electricity generators demanding they hand over documents on bidding, prici= ng=20 and other aspects of power sales in the state. The subpoenas would help a= =20 special Senate committee's investigation into whether the companies are=20 illegally profiteering from California's power crisis. The committee's=20 chairman says he expects the companies to resist, setting the stage for a= =20 court battle.=20 * Oil giant Chevron threatens to cut gasoline production in California unle= ss=20 it is exempted from rolling blackouts. The San Francisco Chronicle says it= =20 has a copy of a letter sent Friday from Chevron chairman David O'Reilly to= =20 Davis. In the letter, O'Reilly says the company will scale back gasoline=20 production at its Richmond and El Segundo plants, operating those refinerie= s=20 only with power produced by generators at the sites.=20 * New U.S. Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., supports Federal=20 Energy Regulatory Commission price caps. ""FERC must meet its obligation und= er=20 current law to ensure 'just and reasonable' prices for wholesale electricit= y=20 in the state of California. FERC has failed to meet this responsibility...,= ""=20 Daschle says in a letter to Davis. ""Unless FERC acts soon, Senator (Dianne)= =20 Feinstein's legislation should be taken up and passed to direct FERC to tak= e=20 action. I will support all necessary efforts to meet that goal.""=20 * House Subcommittee on Energy Policy, Natural Resources and Regulatory=20 Affairs Chairman Doug Ose, R-Sacramento, cites Electric Utility Week figure= s=20 that FERC's limited price caps helped cut California's power rates from $30= 0=20 to $108.47 per megawatt hour within an hour after taking effect last week.= =20 While he says more information is needed, Ose uses the figures to tout his= =20 pending bill to impose the price caps around the clock and to all Western= =20 states.=20 * Pacific Gas & Electric Co. asks U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali to= =20 stop the manager of the state's power grid from buying electricity for=20 utility or charging it for any electricity bought after the utility filed f= or=20 bankruptcy on April 6. Separately, the utility's creditors support its=20 request to the bankruptcy court to pay out $17.5 million in bonuses to the= =20 management team that guided the utility into bankruptcy.=20 * California Department of Water Resources reveals it is negotiating with= =20 municipal utilities to buy their surplus power. Department spokesman Oscar= =20 Hidalgo says talks began last week but no agreements are imminent.=20 * State lawmakers criticize a $3 million lobbying campaign by Southern=20 California Edison. The utility is telephoning shareholders to describe the= =20 dire consequences if the utility goes bankrupt. The call is then transferre= d=20 to the state Capitol so shareholders can implore lawmakers to support a=20 controversial plan to help the utility. Legislators and their staffers say= =20 the shareholders often are confused and scared their investments will be=20 degraded or wiped out.=20 * State Treasurer Phil Angelides joins an advocacy group for the poor in=20 urging the state's huge pension funds to use their economic power to levera= ge=20 power companies. The Pacific Institute for Community Organization says the= =20 two pension funds own at least $1.2 billion in stocks and bonds in most of= =20 the firms that sell electricity to California.=20 * The Assembly, by a 69-0 vote, approves a bill to spend $10 million on=20 environmental studies needed before Path 15, the inadequate transmission-li= ne=20 group between Northern and Southern California, can be expanded. The bill= =20 moves to the Senate.=20 * Pacific Gas and Electric announces a decrease in natural gas prices, down= =20 38 percent from May's rates and 66 percent lower than January's rates. The= =20 decline will bring the average residential gas bill to $26 when it goes int= o=20 effect June 7. Market analysts predict the rates will remain stable until= =20 December when demand is expected to increase with winter heating loads.=20 * No power alerts Tuesday as electricity reserves stay above 7 percent.=20 * Shares of Edison International closed at $10.05, down 53 cents. PG&E Corp= .=20 closed at $11.25, down 15 cents. Sempra Energy, the parent company of San= =20 Diego Gas & Electric, closes at $26.91, down 43 cents.=20 WHAT'S NEXT: * Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra, the parent compa= ny=20 of San Diego Gas and Electric Co., to buy the utility's transmission lines.= =20 THE PROBLEM: High demand, high wholesale energy costs, transmission glitches and a tight= =20 supply worsened by scarce hydroelectric power in the Northwest and=20 maintenance at aging California power plants are all factors in California'= s=20 electricity crisis.=20 Edison and PG&E say they've lost nearly $14 billion since June to high=20 wholesale prices the state's electricity deregulation law bars them from=20 passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs= =20 from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection= =20 April 6.=20 Electricity and natural gas suppliers, scared off by the two companies' poo= r=20 credit ratings, are refusing to sell to them, leading the state in January = to=20 start buying power for the utilities' nearly 9 million residential and=20 business customers. The state is also buying power for a third investor-own= ed=20 utility, San Diego Gas & Electric, which is in better financial shape than= =20 much larger Edison and PG&E but also struggling with high wholesale power= =20 costs.=20 The Public Utilities Commission has approved average rate increases of 37= =20 percent for the heaviest residential customers and 38 percent for commercia= l=20 customers, and hikes of up to 49 percent for industrial customers and 15=20 percent or 20 percent for agricultural customers to help finance the state'= s=20 multibillion-dollar power buys.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 California conserves=20 Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /06/E D86597.DTL=20 WHEN RAIN fails to fall from the sky, Californians know why there is a=20 drought. But when rolling blackouts suddenly appeared in the dead of winter= ,=20 many of us wondered who was responsible for and who has profited from what= =20 now seems like an artificially created power shortage in the state.=20 Our skepticism proved to be right. Windfall profits were reaped by=20 electricity generators while natural gas importers extracted prices far abo= ve=20 the national average.=20 Timid federal overseers exact only wrist-slap penalties on the offending=20 energy firms. The White House scoffs at temporary controls for a=20 malfunctioning market. California's state government has ended up as the bi= ll=20 payer for the sickly utilities, forking over $8 billion to generators. This= =20 number may hit $40 billion by year-end.=20 It's an infuriating tangle. All the more remarkable, then, that skeptical= =20 Californians have managed, within two months, to reduce their use of=20 electricity by 11 percent. The public's response to the governor's appeal f= or=20 energy conservation has exceeded expectations. Although many businesses hav= e=20 suffered enormous losses, ordinary people have made relatively painless=20 sacrifices. People turned off their lights, purchased energy-efficient=20 lightbulbs, used air conditioning less and shut off their computers when no= t=20 in use.=20 Despite this remarkable civic compliance, we still face an unconscionable= =20 lack of leadership. President Bush seems perfectly willing to allow Texas= =20 power companies to pummel the once-powerful California economy. He repeats = a=20 mantra about creating more supply -- which California is doing with 15 powe= r=20 plants under construction -- while ignoring the outsized sums paid to a=20 handful of energy generators.=20 At the same time, Gov. Gray Davis, who has given new meaning to the word=20 dithering, has failed to make the tough and transparent decisions. He delay= ed=20 an inevitable rise in power rates. Davis also dragged his feet in openly=20 announcing new power contracts that commit California to billions in spendi= ng=20 over the next decade.=20 To Davis' credit, he has urged California to conserve by laying out an $800= =20 million plan to cut power use and invest in energy-saving programs. The=20 message is getting out as higher rates take effect this month.=20 Despite a woefully unbalanced market and shortsighted leadership, the peopl= e=20 of California have demonstrated that if there is a will, there is a way.=20 Now it is time for our leaders to follow the wisdom of their constituents.= =20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 20=20 L.A. power customers awash in cheap energy=20 John Wildermuth, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /06/M N133438.DTL=20 Los Angeles -- These are flush times for the city's Department of Water and= =20 Power and the energy executives are loving every minute of it.=20 As are their customers.=20 Private power companies throughout California have been raising rates and= =20 warning customers about a long, hot summer filled with blackouts, but the= =20 city- owned DWP has been keeping prices stable and the lights on for 1.2=20 million Los Angeles customers.=20 ""Our customers are being really nice to us,"" said Angelina Galiteva, the=20 utility's strategic planning director. ""They love the DWP.""=20 Although Gov. Gray Davis' administration announced that the state had reduc= ed=20 its energy consumption 11 percent from a year ago, those in Los Angeles had= =20 cut back less than half that -- and polls show they view the energy situati= on=20 less seriously than other Californians.=20 Public utilities such as Los Angeles water and power have seen their revenu= es=20 increase during the energy crunch because they can sell their excess power = at=20 higher prices than ever before in a market tilted toward sellers.=20 The rest of the state doesn't always feel that same warm glow. Davis has=20 accused the DWP and other California public utilities of putting exorbitant= =20 price tags on the excess electricity they sell to the rest of the energy-= =20 starved state.=20 It's a charge Los Angeles utility executives deny, arguing that their exces= s=20 power is sold at cost plus 15 percent, which they say is a fair return for= =20 their customers.=20 ""Without our support, a million more homes (elsewhere in California) would= =20 have suffered rolling blackouts, which is a powerful message,"" Galiteva sai= d.=20 It wasn't supposed to be this way. When the power industry was deregulated = in=20 the late '90s, energy giants like Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern= =20 California Edison were expected to be the big winners. Now, PG&E is in=20 bankruptcy and Edison is a short step away.=20 ""When deregulation came, the experts said that the investor-owned utilities= =20 would become lean, mean machines that would be better able to operate in th= e=20 new environment,"" Galiteva said. ""But now public power has shown it can ser= ve=20 customers more efficiently at lower rates.""=20 While much of the state worries about electrical supply, Los Angeles=20 residents have been saved many of those concerns.=20 In a survey done last month by the Public Policy Institute of California, 4= 8=20 percent of the people in the Bay Area thought that electricity cost and=20 availability were the most important issues facing the state. In Los Angele= s,=20 however, only 33 percent put the energy crunch on top. When questioned abou= t=20 the size of the power problem and the effect it would have on the state's= =20 economy, Los Angeles residents were consistently less concerned than people= =20 elsewhere in California.=20 People in Los Angeles have been ""somewhat isolated"" from the energy crisis,= =20 concluded Mark Baldassare, who conducted the survey.=20 That doesn't mean the state's energy problems haven't had an effect. The DW= P=20 has seen a 3 percent to 5 percent reduction in some uses, which officials= =20 have dubbed ""sympathy conservation."" The utility also is offering its bigge= st=20 customers financial incentives to cut back on their power use.=20 ""Our average annual load growth is about 80 megawatts,"" Galiteva said. ""By= =20 this summer, we expect to have saved 40 megawatts through conservation. By= =20 December, we expect 60 megawatts in savings.""=20 The utility also is making a major attempt to create a conservation ethic= =20 among its customers. DWP's comfortable situation has made it possible to=20 offer them the carrot without the need to show them the stick.=20 ""Conservation no longer means doing without,"" Galiteva said. ""Beer can be= =20 just as cold with a superefficient refrigerator. Rooms can be just as brigh= t=20 with superefficient light bulbs.""=20 A ""Green Power"" program also is promoting the use of renewable energy=20 resources such as solar, wind and hydroelectric power. About 75,000 custome= rs=20 are paying an extra $3 per month to increase DWP's use of renewable power= =20 sources.=20 ""We're trying to give our customers a choice and a voice in determining the= =20 mix of power they use,"" Galiteva said. ""They know they can do (conservation= )=20 now or see it being mandated later.""=20 Los Angeles power officials -- and their customers -- know the DWP isn't=20 always going to continue as an island of tranquility in a sea of energy=20 turmoil. The utility's aging gas-fired plants have been affected by the=20 rising price of natural gas. Demand for energy continues to rise. In a deba= te=20 last month, both candidates for mayor of Los Angeles agreed that increases = in=20 local power bills are inevitable.=20 But the DWP has been supplying power to Los Angeles since 1916, and its=20 executives believe that the state's deregulation disaster has shown the=20 advantages of the city-owned utility.=20 ""It's nice to be the lean, mean, green efficient machine that no one ever= =20 expected us to become,"" Galiteva said.=20 E-mail John Wildermuth at ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 13=20 PG&E doesn't want to pay for energy to avert blackouts=20 DAVID KRAVETS, Associated Press Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 306EDT0102.DTL=20 (06-06) 00:06 PDT SAN FRANCISCO (AP) --=20 Pacific Gas & Electric Co. has told a bankruptcy judge it should not have t= o=20 pay for what could amount to billions of dollars in spot-market energy cost= s=20 to avert blackouts.=20 The company's position was one of two developments that emerged Tuesday as= =20 the bankrupt utility tries to cope with fallout from California's power=20 crisis. The other development saw a group of creditors that PG&E owes=20 billions endorse $17.5 million in bonuses for top managers at the utility.= =20 San Francisco-based PG&E filed for bankruptcy protection in April after=20 racking up an $8.9 billion debt which under state law it could not recoup= =20 from customers.=20 Tuesday's court dispute centered on who pays for energy bought at the last= =20 minute to avoid blackouts.=20 PG&E said an April federal regulatory decision requires that electricity ca= n=20 only be sold to those with the ability to pay electricity generators. The= =20 state is the only player with such ability, said PG&E attorney Jerome Faulk= ,=20 who argued that the utility shouldn't have to pay the $330 million in month= ly=20 spot-market energy bills.=20 Judge Dennis Montali said he may craft such an order. But he said the order= =20 would not preclude the state from suing PG&E to recover the cost.=20 In a separate but related development, a committee charged with devising a= =20 payment plan for those creditors owed billions by PG&E said it will sign of= f=20 on the utility's plan to pay $17.5 million in bonuses to PG&E's management= =20 team.=20 Attorney Allan Marks, who represents the committee, said such payments are= =20 normal during large bankruptcy cases. Under the agreement, which Montali wi= ll=20 consider at a June 18 hearing, the company must quickly produce a debt=20 payment plan that passes judicial muster.=20 The utility said it needs the bonuses for a ""management retention program.""= =20 Marks agreed. While the $17.5 million leaves less for creditors, without a= =20 financial incentive PG&E's key top brass may not be willing to cooperate wi= th=20 a payment plan, Marks said.=20 ""The main goal for the creditors' support here is to move the bankruptcy as= =20 quickly and smoothly as possible,"" Marks said.=20 The Utility Reform Network, a consumer watchdog group, says PG&E is simply= =20 rewarding managers of a failed business effort.=20 ""They're just showering money on the same people who got them in this mess,= ""=20 said TURN's Mike Florio.=20 The proposed bonuses would come on top of $50 million in bonuses and raises= =20 PG&E awarded just before the April 6 bankruptcy filing.=20 The case is In Re Pacific Gas & Electric Co., 01-30923 DM.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 Metcalf plant gets preliminary approval=20 Posted at 12:21 a.m. PDT Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 BY MIKE ZAPLER=20 Mercury News=20 As the San Jose City Council approached its 10-1 vote Tuesday to give an=20 initial nod to Calpine's big power plant in South San Jose, Councilwoman=20 Linda LeZotte perhaps captured the body's mood best.=20 ``I'm holding my nose to vote for this thing,'' she said. ``Without faultin= g=20 the mayor or his staff, quite frankly I think this deal stinks.''=20 Caught in what some members called a bind beyond their control, the council= =20 gave preliminary approval to an agreement negotiated by Mayor Ron Gonzales= =20 and Calpine on the company's proposed 600-megawatt Metcalf Energy Center.= =20 Councilman Forrest Williams, who represents the Santa Teresa neighborhood= =20 near the site, cast the lone vote against the deal.=20 The agreement is scheduled to come back before the council for a final vote= =20 on June 26, but Tuesday's vote effectively shifts the battle to the courts,= =20 where residents are expected to lodge a lawsuit in one final attempt to blo= ck=20 the plant.=20 Still, Councilwoman Pat Dando and some of her colleagues raised questions= =20 about the deal they said they want answered before the final vote. Their=20 issues could be incorporated into the final deal.=20 Many of the concerns focused on a $50 million recycled water pipeline=20 Gonzales agreed to have the city build to accommodate the project, $10=20 million of which would be reimbursed by Calpine over 30 years.=20 Pipeline possibility=20 Dando said that a private company, Great Oaks Water, may be willing to buil= d=20 the pipeline extension itself, saving the city the $50 million expense.=20 Officials at Great Oaks were unavailable Tuesday.=20 Council members peppered staff with other questions. Many were alarmed by= =20 claims of the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, which said that using treate= d=20 sewage water to cool the power plant could allow dangerous chemicals to see= p=20 into drinking water aquifers. An environmental services director said the= =20 recycled water meets federal specifications, but that there is no protocol= =20 for testing other chemicals not included in those standards.=20 Councilman Ken Yeager asked why Calpine should be allowed to spread a $3.9= =20 million water connection fee over 10 years -- an arrangement that would=20 mandate an amendment to city law.=20 LeZotte, meanwhile, said she wants to hold Calpine accountable to install= =20 ammonia-free technology at the plant. Ammonia is highly hazardous, and=20 residents say the use of the chemical to clean the plant is among their chi= ef=20 concerns.=20 The agreement requires the company to install technology to reduce or=20 eliminate the use ammonia when it becomes ``technologically and economicall= y=20 feasible.'' LeZotte said she wants a clear definition of ``feasible''=20 included in the deal.=20 Tuesday's vote marked a stark departure from the council's November vote to= =20 deny Metcalf. At the time, council members said a power plant was=20 inappropriate for the area, and many members said Tuesday that they still= =20 believe that.=20 Bowing to pressure=20 But with Gov. Gray Davis endorsing Metcalf in April and the California Ener= gy=20 Commission widely expected to override the city's denial this month, counci= l=20 members said they had no choice but to cut the best deal it could and allow= =20 the project to proceed.=20 That explanation, however, didn't sit well with residents of the Santa Tere= sa=20 neighborhood adjacent to the Metcalf site, one of whom accused Gonzales and= =20 the council of ``switching sides when the opposing team gets too close to t= he=20 goal line.''=20 Contact Mike Zapler at mzapler@sjmercury.com or at (408) 275-0140.=20 Feds probe AES, Williams=20 Antitrust investigation looks into allegations of manipulated energy prices= =20 through reduced power-plant construction.=20 June 6, 2001=20 By JAMES ROWLEY Bloomberg News=20 WASHINGTON - The U.S. Justice Department opened an antitrust investigation= =20 into California's electricity shortage by probing allegations that AES Corp= .=20 and Williams Energy Services Co. are limiting power-plant expansion to driv= e=20 up prices.=20 AES Corp., the biggest U.S. power-plant developer, disclosed the=20 investigation in a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.= =20 The Justice Department is looking into a supply-and-marketing agreement=20 between AES' California power-plant unit and a Williams unit that supplies= =20 natural gas.=20 Williams, owner of the second-largest U.S. natural-gas pipeline system, als= o=20 markets the power produced by AES' three electricity plants in the state.= =20 The department alleges the agreement limits expansion of generating capacit= y=20 near some AES plants.=20 AES said it was cooperating with the Justice Department investigation, whic= h=20 began last month, into possible violations of Section 1 of the Sherman=20 Antitrust Act.=20 That provision outlaws any restraint of trade that stifles competition.=20 A shortage of generating capacity in California has led to soaring wholesal= e=20 prices and rolling blackouts and prompted Pacific Gas & Electric, the state= 's=20 largest utility, to seek bankruptcy protection in April.=20 Aaron Thomas, a spokesman for AES, based in Arlington, Va., said the U.S.= =20 investigation started ""no more than a couple of weeks ago.""=20 Williams spokeswoman Paula Hall-Collins said the Tulsa, Okla.-based company= =20 is cooperating.=20 Gina Talamona, Justice Department spokeswoman, said the agency had no=20 immediate comment.=20 The investigation was opened several weeks after the Federal Energy=20 Regulatory Commission investigated AES plants in Long Beach and Huntington= =20 Beach, designated ""must run"" under the Federal Power Act, did not produce= =20 electricity for 10 days in April and May 2000. Williams agreed to pay the= =20 operator of California's electric grid $8 million to settle allegations tha= t=20 it overcharged for power.=20 FERC charged in March that the companies had a financial incentive to keep= =20 the units out of service to force the California Independent System Operato= r=20 to buy power from AES' plant in Redondo Beach at prices close to the=20 FERC-imposed cap of $750 per megawatt-hour.=20 AES said it was complying with a Justice Department demand for documents=20 about the agreement between its AES Southland LLC unit and Williams Energy= =20 Services Co. AES Southland, which operates the three power plants, was also= =20 asked to respond to interrogatories, the company said.=20 The Williams unit supplies the natural gas to fuel the AES plants and marke= ts=20 the power they produce.=20 AES and Williams jointly produce and sell about 4,000 megawatts in Californ= ia=20 -- 6 to 8 percent of the state's power -- enough electricity to light about= 3=20 million typical California homes.=20 AES shares dropped $2.05, to $42.54. Williams Cos. shares dropped $1, to=20 $38.20. Calpine Begins Construction of Peaking Energy Center in Gilroy, Calif.=20 June 6, 2001=20 SAN JOSE, Calif., June 5 /PRNewswire/ via NewsEdge Corporation -=20 Calpine Corporation (NYSE: CPN), the San Jose, Calif.-based independent pow= er=20 company, today announced that initial construction of 135 megawatts (mw) of= =20 peaking generation capacity will begin during this week adjacent to its=20 existing Gilroy Power Plant in Gilroy, Calif. Through an Application for=20 Certification (AFC) filed with the California Energy Commission (CEC) on=20 April 25, 2001, Calpine proposed to add three 45-mw simple-cycle gas turbin= e=20 peaking units in the first of a two-phase process. The California Energy=20 Commission approved the project on May 21, 2001.=20 ""Because the required natural gas, water and transmission infrastructure=20 exists at our Gilroy plant, it is an ideal site for the addition of peaking= =20 generation, allowing for rapid installation of needed capacity. The first= =20 three units are expected to begin generating electricity this September,""= =20 commented Bryan Bertacchi, Calpine Vice President - Western Region.=20 Upon completion the two-phase build out, the Gilroy Energy Center will be a= =20 270-mw, natural gas-fired, simple-cycle peaking generation facility located= =20 on approximately 9.5 acres at 1400 Pacheco Pass Highway in Gilroy. Commerci= al=20 operation of Phase One is scheduled for September 2001. An additional three= =20 45-mw gas turbine generators will be installed in Phase Two with full=20 build-out estimated for May 2002. Phase Two requires the filing of an=20 additional application with the CEC and is subject to a four-month review= =20 process.=20 Initial construction will begin this week with site and civil engineering= =20 activities occurring for approximately six weeks at which time the site wil= l=20 be cleared and leveled. Foundation work and the installation of generation= =20 equipment will follow shortly thereafter, and commissioning and testing wil= l=20 take place for a two to three week period prior to commercial operation in= =20 September 2001.=20 The Gilroy Energy Center web site has been created to host all information= =20 and updates related to this project. For additional information, please vis= it=20 www.gilroypower.com.=20 Calpine Corporation, based in San Jose, Calif., is dedicated to providing= =20 customers with reliable and competitively priced electricity. Calpine is=20 focused on clean, efficient, natural gas-fired generation and is the world'= s=20 largest producer of renewable geothermal energy. Calpine has launched the= =20 largest power development program in North America. To date, the company ha= s=20 approximately 32,200 megawatts of base load capacity and 7,200 megawatts of= =20 peaking capacity in operation, under construction, pending acquisitions and= =20 in announced development in 29 states and Canada. The company was founded i= n=20 1984 and is publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol= =20 CPN. For more information about Calpine, visit its Website at=20 www.calpine.com.=20 This news release discusses certain matters that may be considered=20 ""forward-looking"" statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the=20 Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities=20 Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, including statements regarding the intent= ,=20 belief or current expectations of Calpine Corporation (""the Company"") and i= ts=20 management. Prospective investors are cautioned that any such forward-looki= ng=20 statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve a number of= =20 risks and uncertainties that could materially affect actual results such as= ,=20 but not limited to, (i) changes in government regulations, including pendin= g=20 changes in California, and anticipated deregulation of the electric energy= =20 industry, (ii) commercial operations of new plants that may be delayed or= =20 prevented because of various development and construction risks, such as a= =20 failure to obtain financing and the necessary permits to operate or the=20 failure of third-party contractors to perform their contractual obligations= ,=20 (iii) cost estimates are preliminary and actual cost may be higher than=20 estimated, (iv) the assurance that the Company will develop additional=20 plants, (v) a competitor's development of a lower-cost generating gas-fired= =20 power plant, and (vi) the risks associated with marketing and selling power= =20 from power plants in the newly competitive energy market. Prospective=20 investors are also cautioned that the California energy environment remains= =20 uncertain. The Company's management is working closely with a number of=20 parties to resolve the current uncertainty, while protecting the Company's= =20 interests. Management believes that a final resolution will not have a=20 material adverse impact on the Company. Prospective investors are also=20 referred to the other risks identified from time to time in the Company's= =20 reports and registration statements filed with the Securities and Exchange= =20 Commission.=20 MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT - Click Here=20 SOURCE Calpine Corporation=20 CONTACT: media, Lisa Poelle, ext. 1285, or investors, Rick Barraza, ext.=20 1125, both of Calpine Corporation, 408-995-5115=20 Web site: http://www.gilroypower.com=20 Web site: http://www.calpine.com (CPN)=20 Reliant Urges FERC to Drop or Amend California Price Caps to Avoid Addition= al=20 Shortages and More Blackouts=20 June 6, 2001=20 HOUSTON, June 5 /PRNewswire/ via NewsEdge Corporation -=20 Reliant Energy (NYSE: REI) filed an emergency motion with the Federal Energ= y=20 Regulatory Commission (FERC) on Monday urging the agency to drop the=20 California price caps first applied May 29, or at a minimum, amend them to= =20 reflect the true costs they are attempting to control. The current price=20 caps, which send inaccurate market signals, are actually decreasing supply= =20 and increasing demand thus worsening an already dire situation.=20 ""FERC has been publicly dedicated to an open market from the beginning of t= he=20 California power crisis. We encourage FERC to reexamine these price caps an= d=20 continue that dedication,"" said Joe Bob Perkins, president and chief=20 operating officer, Reliant Energy Wholesale Group. ""Reliant is committed to= =20 helping keep the lights on in California this summer and wants to ensure th= at=20 if caps must remain part of the picture, they actually help increase supply= =20 and fix the problem.""=20 Although the price caps were first imposed less than a week ago, they have= =20 already begun to damage the market by decreasing supply. The price caps are= =20 creating a myriad of problems:=20 -- Creates Misleading Signals - The price cap methodology is misleading=20 the public on the actual cost of power. Reported ""dispatch"" costs in=20 Southern California during emergencies is far below what the actual=20 financial settlements will be under the FERC's final market mitigation=20 order. This confusion results from the ""proxy"" price used for=20 dispatch utilizing an extremely distorted blended fuel cost index.=20 This index averages gas costs in northern and southern parts of the=20 state, an impossibility in the actual market. This authorizes the=20 California Independent System Operator (ISO) to require that=20 generators dispatch power at reported market clearing prices well=20 below actual cost when back-up generation capacity begins to dip below=20 7.5 percent.=20 -- Depletes Power from Peaking Plants - The price caps distort dispatch=20 signals on peaking plants, which in some cases may be run only a few=20 days of the year because of emission regulations. The current FERC=20 price controls encourage the ISO to purchase power from emergency=20 peaking plants before it is really needed, even in the absence of a=20 stage three emergency. This depletes supplies that will, by law, run=20 out when blackout season intensifies later this summer. This power=20 from peaking units should only be purchased when blackouts are=20 imminent -- not in stage one or two emergencies.=20 -- Eliminates Price Signals for Retail Customers - Price caps remove=20 price signals for retail customers. Customers, particularly=20 industrial companies, which should be encouraged to curtail during=20 shortages, are not encouraged to conserve power when dispatched price=20 caps keep prices below the actual cost to produce electricity.=20 -- Discourages Supply from Out-of-State - Suppliers outside of=20 California, who are under no legal obligation to dispatch power during=20 an emergency in the state, are not encouraged to increase available=20 production when reported market clearing prices are below their cost=20 to produce. During times of emergencies, utilities across the Western=20 region are not likely to take on additional risks and costs if they=20 don't believe they will be fully compensated - a situation the current=20 price caps create.=20 MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT - Click Here=20 SOURCE Reliant Energy=20 CONTACT: Maxine Enciso of Ketchum Public Relations, Los Angeles,=20 310-444-1303, for Reliant Energy; or media, Richard Wheatley of Reliant=20 Energy, 713-207-5881=20 Photo: NewsCom: AP=20 Archive: http://photoarchive.ap.org PRN Photo Desk, 888-776-6555 or=20 212-782-2840=20 Company News On-Call: or fax,=20 800-758-5804, ext. 419090=20 Web site: http://www.reliantenergy.com (REI)=20 By Kathleen McFall kmcfall@ftenergy.com President George W. Bush's energy package encourages the use of biomass fue= ls=20 for both transportation purposes and electricity generation. ""They can=20 provide a reliable source of energy at a stable price, and they can also=20 generate income for farmers, landowners and others who harness them,"" his= =20 administration's report said.=20 Despite this warm and fuzzy language, however, the administration offered n= o=20 tangible funding for the fledgling biofuels industry=01*other than an exten= sion=20 of an existing ethanol tax credit that was not due to expire until 2007=01*= a=20 significant disappointment, and surprise, to advocates of renewable=20 transportation fuels. The report did recommend expanding tax credits for biomass energy projects = to=20 include forest-related and agriculture fuel sources and threw its weighty= =20 support at a new credit for electricity produced from biomass co-fired with= =20 coal. These recommendations are already included in the president's 2002=20 budget.=20 ""We are pleased that the administration included expansion of the biomass t= ax=20 credit and hope that, with congressional leadership, we will see this=20 expanded provision signed into law this year,"" said Katherine Hamilton,=20 co-director of the American Bioenergy Association (ABA).=20 Unlike other portions of the recommended energy policy, biomass energy=20 probably will not suffer under the recent change in Senate composition, giv= en=20 Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle's (D-S.D.) agricultural constituency and= =20 his previous support of the biofuels industry.=20 According to the National Energy Policy Development report, biomass account= s=20 for about 76% of non-hydropower renewable electricity generation,=20 representing a total of about 1.6% of total U.S. electricity supply.=20 Biopower advocates, however, envision an even greater market penetration in= =20 the coming decades and point to its environmental and ancillary advantages.= =20 For example, given that biomass combustion can be carbon dioxide-neutral (i= f=20 the growth and use cycle is managed sustainably), environmental groups=20 support an expanded role. Farmers with marginal lands that could grow bioma= ss=20 fuel could enjoy economic benefits. With large amounts of wood residue, the= =20 forest industry also stands to benefit from wider use of wood as a power=20 source.=20 Renewable energy offers a particular advantage to the lumber and paper=20 industry, and many analysts project that the industry may soon become a net= =20 seller of electricity.=20 ""In the lumber and paper industries, wood scraps are sometimes directly fed= =20 into boilers to produce steam for their manufacturing processes or to heat= =20 their buildings. For that reason, renewable energy offers a particular=20 advantage to the lumber and paper industry, and many analysts project that= =20 the industry may soon become a net seller of electricity,"" said the energy= =20 policy report.=20 Co-firing with coal Biomass=01*usually wood or wood residue=01*has traditionally been burned di= rectly=20 in the industrial sector for heat or on-site electricity generation.=20 According to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the existing 10 GW of=20 installed capacity are based on this direct-combustion technology.=20 For utilities and power-generating companies with coal-fired capacity,=20 however, biomass co-firing may represent one of the least-cost renewable=20 energy options, said the DOE. The process involves blending different=20 materials in varying amounts with coal.=20 Not only does mixing biomass with coal reduce emissions, it is likely to be= =20 cost-effective. Southern Co. estimates that a biomass plant alone could=20 generate power, depending on its location, at 4 to 11 cents/kWh. Given that= =20 the lower range of this corresponds to coal generation costs, there are=20 clearly circumstances where biomass-coal co-firing would be economically=20 attractive today. Plus, the environmental public relations benefit for=20 utilities with coal-fired capacity would be valuable.=20 Domestic biomass generation capacity could reach 20-30 GW by the year 2020 = by=20 co-firing at existing U.S. coal-fired power plants.=20 According to a recent report prepared by five National Laboratories, domest= ic=20 biomass generation capacity could reach 20-30 GW by the year 2020 by=20 co-firing at existing U.S. coal-fired power plants.=20 A recent report by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel for Climate= =20 Change (IPCC) also cites the potential of coal co-firing with biomass. The= =20 IPCC report concludes that co-firing in coal boilers results in the lowest= =20 cost and least technical risk of the examined approaches for biomass=20 conversion to electricity.=20 Working out the technical kinks Already, said the DOE, six power plants in the U.S. are currently co-firing= =20 coal and wood residue products on a regular basis. Another 10 plants have= =20 successfully tested co-firing over the last decade, and at least six more= =20 plants are now conducting or planning tests.=20 For example, Southern Co. is working with DOE, the Southern Research=20 Institute and the Electric Power Research Institute to study ways to grow a= nd=20 harvest switchgrass to blend with coal as a fuel for power generation.=20 Ideally suited for the southeastern U.S., switchgrass is a rugged grass tha= t=20 can be grown on marginal agricultural land. Reaching heights of up to 12=20 feet, it requires little fertilization and herbicide and can be harvested= =20 twice a year.=20 Harvesting methods, co-milling of switchgrass and pulverized coal,=20 pilot-scale co-firing tests, and a full-scale demonstration of co-firing at= =20 Alabama Power Co.'s Plant Gadsden are part of Southern Co.'s collaborative= =20 project.=20 The U.S. Agriculture Department is also taking a role in exploring the=20 potential of biomass and coal co-firing as a means to give farmers new=20 markets, especially for currently idle land. The agency recently authorized= =20 funding for three co-firing demonstration projects.=20 In Iowa, the Chariton Valley Biomass Project is a cooperative effort to=20 develop warm and cool season grasses (such as switchgrass) to co-fire with= =20 coal at Alliant Energy's Ottumwa Generating Station. The project is designe= d=20 to generate a sustained supply of 35 MW of biomass energy. Eventually, the= =20 grass could substitute for as much as 5% of the coal currently burned at th= e=20 plant.=20 In addition to reducing coal emissions, the Chariton Valley Biomass Project= =20 will support the local farm economy.=20 In addition to reducing coal emissions, the project will support the local= =20 farm economy because the grass and trees will come from acreage taken out o= f=20 production under the Agriculture Department's Conservation Reserve Program= =20 (CRP). CRP land is generally marginal land that the government subsidizes= =20 farmers to leave idle to both prevent erosion and protect commodity prices= =20 from product surpluses.=20 The Pennsylvania Switchgrass Energy and Conservation Project will produce= =20 switchgrass on CRP land for sale to a local cooperative's coal-fired=20 fluid-bed combustors.=20 In New York, the Agriculture Department project will fund willow biomass=20 crops and switchgrass on CRP acreage in the central and western part of the= =20 state. The primary markets for the willow biomass are two coal-burning powe= r=20 plants and a small university central heating facility.=20 Land conflicts, transportation may be obstacles As these pilot projects illustrate, biomass conversion efforts may have the= =20 most significant potential in rural areas. ""Since biomass is widely=20 distributed it has good potential to provide rural areas with a renewable= =20 source of energy. The challenge is to provide =01( conversion and delivery = of=20 bioenergy to the marketplace in the form of modern and competitive energy= =20 sources,"" said the IPCC report.=20 A potential drawback to co-firing is transportation. Transportation of=20 wood-based energy products is more costly, per unit of energy, than coal, f= or=20 example, and most analysts believe it will prove most economical to site=20 generation plants near biomass sources.=20 ""The generating plant or biorefinery must be located near to the resource t= o=20 minimize transport costs of the low-energy-density biomass as well as to=20 minimize impacts on air and water use,"" the IPCC report said. However, note= s=20 the report's authors, economies of scale may be significant enough to offse= t=20 the transport costs involved.=20 A potential drawback over the long term, however, for biomass conversion is= =20 land use conflicts. The IPCC report notes that by 2100, the global land=20 requirement to feed the growing world population will increase substantiall= y.=20 ""Up until this time there may well be sufficient land to supply all demands= =20 for food, fibre and energy, but at some stage after that, land-use conflict= s=20 could arise and before that, competition for water and irrigation may be a= =20 constraint.""=20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Enron and the Energy Services Issue Before The WTO; [EMail-Body]= I need you to run these items by Rick. I take full responsibility for approving the hiring of the Hills firm (and I look forward to meeting with you and Carla as we discussed), but remain hopeful we can use their services for something other than WTO. In the wake of Seattle, and as I have come to understand better what the WTO can and cannot do for us on the energy services front, I have come to the view that our talent and money would be better spent on other activities. My inclination is to do the bare minimum necessary to keep the machine going. If we have specifically committed to certain things, then let's follow through. If there are things we can avoid, let's avoid them. Specifically with respect to Fischer going to Geneva, Why not have him available by phone at all hours to provide assistance and mage that known to USG instead of underwriting additional travel. With respect to the Hills firm, can we use the retained time to help with the specific strategies we are now working out for the regions? These are the kinds of things we need to consider. Joe Hillings@ENRON 04/19/2000 04:13 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Enron and the Energy Services Issue Before The WTO Steve: This is a brief extension of our conversation yesterday afternoon putting in print some of the upcoming dates and possible committments for your consideration and decision. We have no exit strategy at this time and in order to follow your general instructions to withdraw gradually (I'm not quite certain that is possible at this stage) you need to know the following. The April meeting at the WTO in Geneva (Committee on Specific Committments) spent considerable time discussing how energy services would be considered in the WTO GATS (General Agreement on Trade and Services) . The USTR raised the issue, tabled the issue and guided the discussion. We did not send anyone to that session. As planned for several months, we issued the Rachel Thompson study which is completing its basic distribution now. There has already been considerable interest in the study and I fully expect it to generate discussion in the days ahead. I have sent you the correspondence from the Japanese Ministry. Tonight I am hosting a small dinner for the top staff person for the leading Japanese business organization affiliated with the CSI organization. He raised the issue of Japan's industry feeling energy services was going too fast too soon when Ken addressed the WTO Ministerial Forum last December in Seattle. Now he has told Bob Vastine, president of CSI that he was told later by his collegues that his statement was a misstatement. We'll hear more tonight. Later today, the ESC Executive Committee is meeting with the DOE to discuss how they can support energy services for the USTR who has lacked technical advisers since Donna Bobbich and Russ Profozich left DOE earlier this year. DOE has appointed a group to help USTR and this is an orientation meeting held at their request. Next week I have scheduled the first ESC full meeting since January to update members (now 50 since Schlumberger joined on Friday) on developments which is essentially a report by USTR Carol Balassa who is the responsible official handling energy services. She has given a couple of us a debriefing on what happened at the WTO meeting and a request to prepare more detailed information for the May 10 meeting in Geneva where she tells us that energy services will be even more involved in the discussion. We should have Bob Fisher go to that meeting to be of assistance. This is a decision point for you. We have made some other committments which are also decision points although the Helsinki meeting on June 18th has been agreed upon based on my feelings that when I discussed it (the SCO/FSN Showcase Europe) in Houston with you and Rick, you raised no objection which I took as agreeing that it should go forward. We have done this meeting annually where I have brought in someone from Enron companies to brief them and host them for dinner. These are the commercial people in the US embassies throughout Europe and the former Soviet Union. They are important points of contact for our commercial people. This year they want to have energy services in the WTO and as we would like them to exist in their territory. A few members of the ESC Executive Committee will do the former and Peter Styles the later. I have organized the dinner. Following that meeting is one that EC Trade staffer Uta Klinkers wants the ESC Executive Committee to put on in Brussels which is a joint meeting she is organizing with European energy industry representatives. This is a dialogue on energy services. The EU is an important player in the WTO and Uta, who recently met with the ESC Executive Committee in Washington is quite supportive of liberalized energy services. At the EC she reports directly to Commissioner Pascal Lamy. Rick's memo this week suggested we have Peter Styles do this briefing. Peter is not an American and is not affiliated with the ESC. Therefore, unless we participate, Europe's energy industry is not talking with US industry. If this is what you want, then I should tell Uta that we are unable to do the meeting. The last meeting is the presentation by Ken Lay at the OECD Forum 2000 on June 26 which I engineered with Doug Worth, Secretary General of the BIAC (Business Industry Affairs Committee) to the OECD. This is a major world conference and Ken is addressing e-commerce and services. Doug, an American and former head of the Washington IBM office wants to have Ken meet with OECD Commissioners in a smaller meeting to discuss trends for the future. I had planned to be there with Ken for the day, day and a half he will be in Paris. I introduced our company to the OECD several years ago and it has become increasingly involved in issues of interest to us. Well, these are the near-term items that require your fine hand if we are to proceed. A dramatic drop off at this time will have its effects and no one is likely to pick up our leadership. There is growing support for what has been accomplished and the USG plus others are now hooked on the energy services agenda. I cannot easily see an exit strategy that can do anything but cause criticism at this point. This is definately a longer term committment that I thought we had made when approval was given to hire the Hills firm. However, if you want to exit, other than pulling back from the Brussels meeting, I think the other meetings are firm committements at this point. These are some thoughts for your consideration and decision. Joe [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Dinner w/Prof. Frank Wolak & Vince Kaminski; [EMail-Body]= Tel. 650.833.1000 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= IEP in the News, and other headlines; [EMail-Body]= San Jose Mercury News, April 19, 2001, Thursday, SJ-POWER, 593 words, ????Testimony Indicates California Electricity Market Was Troubled in 1998, By ????Brandon Bailey (Quotes Smutny on behalf of IEP) The Associated Press State & Local Wire, April 19, 2001, Thursday, BC cycle ????, 9:55 AM Eastern Time, State and Regional, 930 words, Developments in ????California's energy crisis, By The Associated Press (Quotes Smutny on behalf of IEP) The Associated Press State & Local Wire, April 19, 2001, Thursday, BC cycle ????, 9:32 AM Eastern Time, State and Regional, 820 words, Legislators probe ????possible power, natural gas collusion, By DON THOMPSON, Associated Press ????Writer, SACRAMENTO (Quotes Smutny on behalf of IEP) The Associated Press State & Local Wire, April 18, 2001, Wednesday, BC ????cycle, State and Regional, 833 words, Legislators probe possible power, ????natural gas collusion, By DON THOMPSON, Associated Press Writer, SACRAMENTO ???(Quotes Smutny on behalf of IEP) The Associated Press State & Local Wire, April 18, 2001, Wednesday, BC ????cycle, State and Regional, 841 words, Developments in California's energy ????crisis, By The Associated Press (Quotes Smutny on behalf of IEP) Power bloc blasts seizure idea Producers say talk of bold action fuels crisis ???????By Steve Geissinger SACRAMENTO BUREAU ?-- Oakland Tribune (Quotes Smutny on behalf of IEP) Copley News Service, April 19, 2001, Thursday, State and regional, 780 ????words, Windfall-profits tax gets Davis' backing, Bill Ainsworth, SACRAMENTO Los Angeles Times, April 19, 2001, Thursday,, Home Edition, Page 3, 772 ????words, CAPITOL JOURNAL; ?CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; ??Price Caps Don't Fit in ????Cheney's Head for Figures, GEORGE SKELTON, SACRAMENTO Los Angeles Times, April 19, 2001, Thursday,, Home Edition, Page 3, 1373 ????words, CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; ??DAVIS BACKS SILICON VALLEY POWER PROJECT; ????ENERGY: GOVERNOR URGES QUICK APPROVAL OF SAN JOSE PLANT DESPITE OPPOSITION ????BY CITY AND A POWERFUL FIRM., JENIFER WARREN and TERENCE MONMANEY, TIMES ????STAFF WRITERS, SACRAMENTO The Orange County Register, April 19, 2001, Thursday, STATE AND REGIONAL ????NEWS, K7970, 275 words, Ex-energy chief leery of state buying power lines, ????By Kate Berry The San Francisco Chronicle, APRIL 19, 2001, THURSDAY,, FINAL EDITION, ????NEWS;, Pg. A18, 585 words, Alameda public utility rents four backup ????generators; ???Extra electricity will be used during summer rolling ????blackouts, Matthew Yi, Alameda The San Francisco Chronicle, APRIL 19, 2001, THURSDAY,, FINAL EDITION, ????NEWS;, Pg. A3, 845 words, Davis' gouging claims disputed; ???Officials say ????no link between PG&E bankruptcy, high prices, David Lazarus The San Francisco Chronicle, APRIL 19, 2001, THURSDAY,, FINAL EDITION, ????NEWS;, Pg. A3, 888 words, Davis backs San Jose power plant; ???He also ????acknowledges bailout for Edison will be uphill fight, Lynda Gledhill, ????Sacramento The Vancouver Sun, April 19, 2001 Thursday, 731 words, B.C. Hydro's credit ????to California firms exceeded 1999 guidelines, David Baines The Associated Press State & Local Wire, April 18, 2001, Wednesday, BC ????cycle, Business News, 348 words, Williams again target of overcharging ????allegations from federal regulators, TULSA, Okla. The Associated Press State & Local Wire, April 18, 2001, Wednesday, BC ????cycle, State and Regional, 332 words, Governor, congressman to fight ????proposals for national power deregulation policy, By MARGERY BECK, ????Associated Press Writer, LINCOLN, Neb. San Jose Mercury News, April 18, 2001, Wednesday, SJ-POWER-PLANT, 1038 ????words, California Governor May Back Energy Firm's Proposed Power Plant Scripps Howard News Service, April 18, 2001, Wednesday, DOMESTIC NEWS, 588 ????words, Davis says Edison agreement may need altering, EMILY BAZAR and KEVIN ????YAMAMURA, SACRAMENTO, Calif. San Jose Mercury News April 19, 2001, Thursday KR-ACC-NO: SJ-POWER LENGTH: 593 words HEADLINE: Testimony Indicates California Electricity Market Was Troubled in 1998 BYLINE: By Brandon Bailey BODY: ??SACRAMENTO, Calif.--California's electricity market was showing signs of trouble as far back as 1998, the year that it was officially opened to competition, members of a special legislative investigating committee were told Wednesday. ??Abnormal price spikes -- far higher than what should have occurred in a competitive market -- were showing up in August 1998, the committee was told by Frank Wolak, a Stanford economist and top advisor to the California Independent System Operator, which runs the state's transmission grid. ??Appearing on the first day of hearings called by a state Senate select committee to investigate alleged wholesale energy price manipulation, Wolak testified that the ISO's economic advisors repeatedly found signs that power suppliers were able to influence prices over the last three years -- even before wholesale prices soared skyhigh last summer. ??By controlling even a relatively small portion of power supply, just enough to make a difference in whether the state could meet consumers' needs, Wolak said, generators have been able to charge prices far higher than their costs. ??All told, the ISO has estimated, power suppliers collected more than $ 6 billion in unjustified profits last year. ??In his opinion, Wolak added, that violates the terms by which federal regulators allowed the suppliers to enter the state's newly deregulated market when it opened in 1998. ??The ISO is now filing petitions with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, asking that agency to revoke the generators' right to charge unregulated prices. ??But Wolak repeatedly told the committee that he had no evidence that the suppliers acted in collusion or that they had violated any federal anti-trust laws. ??When state Senator Joe Dunn, D-Garden Grove, pressed him on the point, Wolak insisted, ""I can't say yes, I can't say no. There's a lot of things that certainly look puzzling. It's hard without further information and analysis to say definitively, but there's lots of things to seem to be worth looking into."" ??Dunn, a former consumer attorney, is leading the Legislature's efforts to answer a question that a host of other state and federal officials have also posed: have California's electricity prices been the result of any illegal or unethical acts? ??Power suppliers and their representatives have repeatedly said the answer is no. They say their prices are the result of short supplies and natural market swings. ??""Eleven investigations into California's electricity market have been conducted or are currently under way,"" said a statement issued Wednesday by Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of the Independent Energy Producers Association. ""Not one has found or proven any wrongdoing by generators."" ??Dunn, however, said Wednesday's testimony was only the start of what he promised would be a vigorous investigation. He said the committee has already asked several power companies for records and other information and he hinted that subpoenas may be issued in the coming weeks. ??""We will try to figure out how to stop these high prices if they are unjustified,"" Dunn said at the beginning of the hearing. ??""We're not going to be looking for ways to finance these payments,"" he added. The state is now paying $ 70 million a day to buy power for California consumers, after major utilities wracked up billions in debts while buying power on the open market in recent months. ??----- ??To see more of the San Jose Mercury News, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.sjmercury.com JOURNAL-CODE: SJ LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 5 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ??????????????????????April 19, 2001, Thursday, BC cycle AM Eastern Time SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 930 words HEADLINE: Developments in California's energy crisis BYLINE: By The Associated Press BODY: ??Developments in California's energy crisis: ??THURSDAY: ??- The state remains free of power alerts as reserves stay above 7 percent. ??- Gov. Gray Davis meets with 25 members of the California congressional delegation at the Los Angeles International Airport to discuss the state's power crisis. ??- An Assembly committee continues hearings on the natural gas supply and possible price manipulation. ??-The Public Utilities Commission meets in San Francisco to decide whether to investigate if a key bloc of independent generators are purposely keeping their plants offline. ??WEDNESDAY: ??- Unchecked free-market forces drove up the price of natural gas to Southern California Edison by about $750 million over the last year, an industry consultant tells the Assembly Electricity Oversight Subcommittee. ??Meanwhile, the Senate's Select Committee to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Energy Market begins investigating whether electric generators artificially inflated power prices. ??An industry spokesman predicts the investigations will uncover nothing illegal. ??- The state offers financial backing to Houston-based Dynegy, which worried it would not be paid for power generated at its plants in California. Dynegy agrees to sell 300 megawatts of power from 17 small turbine generators in Carlsbad after receiving an offer from the California Department of Water Resources. ??- Gov. Gray Davis urges state regulators to approve the construction of a controversial 600-megawatt power plant in south San Jose to provide electricity to roughly 450,000 homes in the Silicon Valley. ??- The Democratic governor lobbies Senate Democrats to support his plan to pay $2.7 billion for the transmission lines owned by Southern California Edison. ??State spending on electricity has jumped by more than 50 percent since Pacific Gas and Electric Corp. declared bankruptcy April 6, thanks in part of surcharges tacked on by power generators worried they won't be repaid, Davis said. ??- The Senate Appropriations Committee sends the full Senate a bill creating a public power authority that would loan out up to $5 billion to build or buy power plants that would be required to sell electricity to consumers at low rates. ??- An Assembly committee advances a bill ending the exemption under which utility lobbyists do not have to follow the same reporting requirements as do other lobbyists. The bill now goes to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. ??- A Pacific Gas and Electric Corp. shareholder sues the company, claiming it misled shareholders by forecasting annual profits for two quarters last year when, the suit says, the company knew it was incurring losses. ??-Public Utilities Commission President Loretta Lynch issues a statement late Wednesday, saying inaction by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission forced Southern Caifornia Edison Co. to take a large write-off of debt. ""The company should not have to shoulder these liabilities and neither should its customers,"" Lynch says. ??- Edison International's stock closes at $11.40, down 48 cents, while stock in PG&E's parent closes up 14 cents at $9.04. ??- The state remains free of power alerts as reserves stay above 7 percent. ??WHAT'S NEXT: ??- The Assembly's Energy Oversight Subcommittee plans to resume hearings Thursday in its inquiry into California's highest-in-the-nation natural gas prices with testimony from gas companies. ??- Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra, the parent company of San Diego Gas and Electric Co., to buy the utility's transmission lines. Davis says he expects to have an agreement within two weeks. ??- The state Public Utilities Commission will decide Thursday whether to investigate why a key block of power generators is staying off-line despite regulators' order last month that they start getting paid by the state's utilities. Independent Energy Producers Executive Director Jan Smutny-Jones says the generators can't afford to operate because they are still owed more than a billion dollars, and because the PUC's rates don't cover their operating costs. ??PUC President Loretta Lynch also wants the commission to decide Thursday to investigate whether PG&E's April 6 bankruptcy protection filing is enough of a threat to the PUC's regulatory authority to prompt more PUC involvement in the bankruptcy proceedings. ??THE PROBLEM: ??High demand, high wholesale energy costs, transmission glitches and a tight supply worsened by scarce hydroelectric power in the Northwest and maintenance at aging California power plants are all factors in California's electricity crisis. ??Edison and PG&E say they've lost nearly $14 billion since June to high wholesale prices that the state's electricity deregulation law bars them from passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection April 6. ??Electricity and natural gas suppliers, scared off by the two companies' poor credit ratings, are refusing to sell to them, leading the state in January to start buying power for the utilities' nearly 9 million residential and business customers. The state is also buying power for a third investor-owned utility, San Diego Gas & Electric, which is in better financial shape than much larger Edison and PG&E but also struggling with high wholesale power costs. ??The Public Utilities Commission has raised rates up to 46 percent to help finance the state's multibillion-dollar power-buying. LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 5 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ??????????????????????April 19, 2001, Thursday, BC cycle AM Eastern Time SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 820 words HEADLINE: Legislators probe possible power, natural gas collusion BYLINE: By DON THOMPSON, Associated Press Writer DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Southern California Edison was charged about $750 million more this year for natural gas because of unchecked free-market forces, an industry consultant testified. ??Paul Carpenter told the Assembly Electricity Oversight Subcommittee on Wednesday the price spikes came after the El Paso Natural Gas Co. contracted first with Dynegy and later with its own marketing affiliate, El Paso Merchant Energy, to control the pipeline capacity. ??Officials with El Paso and other natural gas suppliers are expected to testify Thursday that they did not illegally manipulate the market. ??The California Public Utilities Commission estimated a year ago that overcharges by the companies that control natural gas flow drove up prices by $ 100 million a year to California gas and electricity customers. ??But PUC attorney Harvey Morris said that was before last summer's price spikes, which he blamed on natural gas suppliers using a ""monopoly"" to ""game the system."" ??""It's way worse than we could possibly have imagined,"" Morris said after testifying before the subcommittee. ""It's obviously way higher than $100 million."" ??Natural gas rates at the California border generally tracked national prices until November, when they spiked as high as 11 times higher than the price of natural gas elsewhere in the nation, Carpenter said. ??""I have never seen gas prices like this anywhere in the world,"" said Carpenter, who has been studying the energy market for 20 years for Cambridge, Mass.-based consultant The Brattle Group. The Brattle Group was hired by Edison to study the natural gas market. ??The committee is one of two legislative committees exploring whether illegal market manipulation in the electricity and natural gas markets has driven up California's energy costs. ??""This is a market that is plagued by the exercise of market power,"" Frank Wolak, chairman of the California Independent System Operator's Market Surveillance Committee, told the Senate Select Committee to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Energy Market. The ISO runs the state's power grid. ??However, ""there is no law against me saying, 'I'm not going to sell to you,""' Wolak said. Market manipulation only becomes illegal when there is collusion, Wolak said, and such evidence is hard to find. ??Electricity generators and natural gas suppliers say a severe supply and demand imbalance - not market manipulation - has led to higher prices. ??""Everybody's busy doing investigations. They're not interested in solving the problem,"" said Independent Energy Producers Executive Director Jan Smutny-Jones. ??Investigations ""are wasting everybody's time,"" Smutny-Jones said, adding that previous probes and lawsuits have uncovered no wrongdoing. He said the state's power problems came because state regulators denied utilities the chance to sign long-term energy contracts when they had the chance. ??""People have been playing by the rules,"" Smutny-Jones said. ??But the Senate committee's first witnesses are ISO officials who authored studies that claim the state paid more than $6 billion too much for power last year. ??Committee chair Joseph Dunn, D-Garden Grove, also has slated state Auditor Elaine Howell, who last month blamed buyers and sellers for skyrocketing electricity costs. Dunn also has scheduled future testimony from state, federal, academic and private investigators studying the power market. ??He invited five major generators to attend the committee's second hearing next week. All five - Reliant, Dynegy, Williams Energy, Duke Energy and Mirant - say they are eager to cooperate and clear their names, Dunn said. ??Dunn asked the five for a total of 86 specific documents. If the companies feel they cannot provide documents because of legal or confidentiality concerns, Dunn said he will subpoena them. ??Smutny-Jones said investigators appear to be growing desperate to blame the state's natural gas and electricity price hikes on illegal market manipulation instead of natural market forces. ??He cited Attorney General Bill Lockyer's announcement last week that any informant who helped prove wrongdoing would be entitled to a percentage of the state's recovery he estimated could range from $50 million to hundreds of millions of dollars. ??""If the state's offering a $50 million reward, they haven't found anything,"" Smutny-Jones said. ""I don't think you're going to find the fact that anybody did anything criminal here."" ??Assemblywoman Jenny Oropeza, D-Long Beach, said she believes otherwise after Wednesday's testimony: ""I think it is very clear there was some price manipulation going on."" ??But Assemblyman John Campbell, R-Irvine, isn't sure there was anything illegal. ??""There clearly are market forces at work, that's evident,"" Campbell said. ""Whether you make the jump to market manipulation ... I haven't seen conclusive evidence that leads me to make that jump."" LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 5 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ?????????????????????April 18, 2001, Wednesday, BC cycle SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 833 words HEADLINE: Legislators probe possible power, natural gas collusion BYLINE: By DON THOMPSON, Associated Press Writer DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Unchecked free-market forces drove up the price of natural gas to Southern California Edison by about $750 million over the last year, an industry consultant testified Wednesday. ??Paul Carpenter told the Assembly Electricity Oversight Subcommittee the price spikes came after the El Paso Natural Gas Co. contracted first with Dynegy and later with its own marketing affiliate, El Paso Merchant Energy, to control the pipeline capacity. ??The California Public Utilities Commission estimated a year ago that overcharges by the companies that control natural gas flow drove up prices by $ 100 million a year to California gas and electricity customers. ??But PUC attorney Harvey Morris said that was before last summer's price spikes, which he blamed on natural gas suppliers using a ""monopoly"" to ""game the system."" ??""It's way worse than we could possibly have imagined,"" Morris said after testifying before the subcommittee. ""It's obviously way higher than $100 million."" ??Natural gas rates at the California border generally tracked national prices until November, when they spiked as high as 11 times higher than the price of natural gas elsewhere in the nation, Carpenter said. ??""I have never seen gas prices like this anywhere in the world,"" said Carpenter, who has been studying the energy market for 20 years for Cambridge, Mass.-based consultant The Brattle Group. The Brattle Group was hired by Edison to study the natural gas market. ??Officials with El Paso and other natural gas suppliers have denied illegally manipulating the market. They are scheduled to testify Thursday. El Paso officials did not return telephone calls for comment Wednesday. ??The committee is one of two legislative committees exploring whether illegal market manipulation in the electricity and natural gas markets has driven up California's energy costs. ??""This is a market that is plagued by the exercise of market power,"" Frank Wolak, chairman of the California Independent System Operator's Market Surveillance Committee, told the Senate Select Committee to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Energy Market. The ISO runs the state's power grid. ??However, ""there is no law against me saying, 'I'm not going to sell to you,""' Wolak said. Market manipulation only becomes illegal when there is collusion, Wolak said, and such evidence is hard to find. ??Electricity generators and natural gas suppliers say a severe supply and demand imbalance - not market manipulation - has led to higher prices. ??""Everybody's busy doing investigations. They're not interested in solving the problem,"" said Independent Energy Producers Executive Director Jan Smutny-Jones. ??Investigations ""are wasting everybody's time,"" Smutny-Jones said, adding that previous probes and lawsuits have uncovered no wrongdoing. He said the state's power problems came because state regulators denied utilities the chance to sign long-term energy contracts when they had the chance. ??""People have been playing by the rules,"" Smutny-Jones said. ??But the Senate committee's first witnesses are ISO officials who authored studies that claim the state paid more than $6 billion too much for power last year. ??Committee chair Joseph Dunn, D-Garden Grove, also has slated state Auditor Elaine Howell, who last month blamed buyers and sellers for skyrocketing electricity costs. Dunn also has scheduled future testimony from state, federal, academic and private investigators studying the power market. ??He invited five major generators to attend the committee's second hearing next week. All five - Reliant, Dynegy, Williams Energy, Duke Energy and Mirant - say they are eager to cooperate and clear their names, Dunn said. ??Dunn asked the five for a total of 86 specific documents. If the companies feel they cannot provide documents because of legal or confidentiality concerns, Dunn said he will subpoena them. ??Smutny-Jones said investigators appear to be growing desperate to blame the state's natural gas and electricity price hikes on illegal market manipulation instead of natural market forces. ??He cited Attorney General Bill Lockyer's announcement last week that any informant who helped prove wrongdoing would be entitled to a percentage of the state's recovery he estimated could range from $50 million to hundreds of millions of dollars. ??""If the state's offering a $50 million reward, they haven't found anything,"" Smutny-Jones said. ""I don't think you're going to find the fact that anybody did anything criminal here."" ??Assemblywoman Jenny Oropeza, D-Long Beach, said she believes otherwise after Wednesday's testimony: ""I think it is very clear there was some price manipulation going on."" ??But Assemblyman John Campbell, R-Irvine, isn't sure there was anything illegal. ??""There clearly are market forces at work, that's evident,"" Campbell said. ""Whether you make the jump to market manipulation ... I haven't seen conclusive evidence that leads me to make that jump."" LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 5 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ?????????????????????April 18, 2001, Wednesday, BC cycle SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 841 words HEADLINE: Developments in California's energy crisis BYLINE: By The Associated Press BODY: ??Developments in California's energy crisis: ??WEDNESDAY: ??- Unchecked free-market forces drove up the price of natural gas to Southern California Edison by about $750 million over the last year, an industry consultant tells the Assembly Electricity Oversight Subcommittee. ??Meanwhile, the Senate's Select Committee to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Energy Market begins investigating whether electric generators artificially inflated power prices. ??An industry spokesman predicts the investigations will uncover nothing illegal. ??- The state offers financial backing to Houston-based Dynegy, which worried it would not be paid for power generated at its plants in California. Dynegy agrees to sell 300 megawatts of power from 17 small turbine generators in Carlsbad after receiving an offer from the California Department of Water Resources. ??- Gov. Gray Davis urges state regulators to approve the construction of a controversial 600-megawatt power plant in south San Jose to provide electricity to roughly 450,000 homes in the Silicon Valley. ??- The Democratic governor lobbies Senate Democrats to support his plan to pay $2.7 billion for the transmission lines owned by Southern California Edison. ??State spending on electricity has jumped by more than 50 percent since Pacific Gas and Electric Corp. declared bankruptcy April 6, thanks in part of surcharges tacked on by power generators worried they won't be repaid, Davis said. ??- The Senate Appropriations Committee sends the full Senate a bill creating a public power authority that would loan out up to $5 billion to build or buy power plants that would be required to sell electricity to consumers at low rates. ??- An Assembly committee advances a bill ending the exemption under which utility lobbyists do not have to follow the same reporting requirements as do other lobbyists. The bill now goes to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. ??- A Pacific Gas and Electric Corp. shareholder sues the company, claiming it misled shareholders by forecasting annual profits for two quarters last year when, the suit says, the company knew it was incurring losses. ??-Public Utilities Commission President Loretta Lynch issues a statement late Wednesday, saying inaction by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission forced Southern Caifornia Edison Co. to take a large write-off of debt. ""The company should not have to shoulder these liabilities and neither should its customers,"" Lynch says. ??- Edison International's stock closes at $11.40, down 48 cents, while stock in PG&E's parent closes up 14 cents at $9.04. ??- The state remains free of power alerts as reserves stay above 7 percent. ??WHAT'S NEXT: ??- The Assembly's Energy Oversight Subcommittee plans to resume hearings Thursday in its inquiry into California's highest-in-the-nation natural gas prices with testimony from gas companies. ??- Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra, the parent company of San Diego Gas and Electric Co., to buy the utility's transmission lines. Davis says he expects to have an agreement within two weeks. ??- The state Public Utilities Commission will decide Thursday whether to investigate why a key block of power generators is staying off-line despite regulators' order last month that they start getting paid by the state's utilities. Independent Energy Producers Executive Director Jan Smutny-Jones says the generators can't afford to operate because they are still owed more than a billion dollars, and because the PUC's rates don't cover their operating costs. ??PUC President Loretta Lynch also wants the commission to decide Thursday to investigate whether PG&E's April 6 bankruptcy protection filing is enough of a threat to the PUC's regulatory authority to prompt more PUC involvement in the bankruptcy proceedings. ??THE PROBLEM: ??High demand, high wholesale energy costs, transmission glitches and a tight supply worsened by scarce hydroelectric power in the Northwest and maintenance at aging California power plants are all factors in California's electricity crisis. ??Edison and PG&E say they've lost nearly $14 billion since June to high wholesale prices that the state's electricity deregulation law bars them from passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection April 6. ??Electricity and natural gas suppliers, scared off by the two companies' poor credit ratings, are refusing to sell to them, leading the state in January to start buying power for the utilities' nearly 9 million residential and business customers. The state is also buying power for a third investor-owned utility, San Diego Gas & Electric, which is in better financial shape than much larger Edison and PG&E but also struggling with high wholesale power costs. ??The Public Utilities Commission has raised rates up to 46 percent to help finance the state's multibillion-dollar power-buying. LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 Power bloc blasts seizure idea Producers say talk of bold action fuels crisis By Steve Geissinger SACRAMENTO BUREAU ?-- Oakland Tribune SACRAMENTO -- Outraged by a report in The Oakland Tribune that some lawmakers asked the governor to seize high-priced power contracts, a key industry group Tuesday warned the Davis administration and Legislature that such action would worsen the energy crisis. ""We're publicly saying . . . this kind of rhetoric will have dire consequences on both the reliability and cost of power in California for years to come,"" said Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of the Independent Energy Producers Association. ""It is the kind of rhetoric one would expect in Indonesia or the Philippines, not the sixth largest economy on the planet,"" he said in a teleconference. At the same time, Davis administration officials confirmed that seizing contracts of allegedly profiteering brokers is the most likely last-ditch move if options continue to narrow, ahead of the previously discussed concepts of seizing California power plants owned by out-of-state firms or passing a windfall profits tax. Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio pointed out the governor already seized power contracts on which California's investor-owned utilities were defaulting in early February. The state, trying to buy its way out of the energy crisis with no clear end in sight, lost a substantial measure of control over electricity prices and supplies to the courts with the recent bankruptcy filing by the Pacific Gas and Electric Co. Gov. Gray Davis, a Democrat, employed hard-sell tactics Tuesday in an effort to convince reluctant Democrats that their failure to embrace his plan to financially rescue teetering Southern California Edison could plunge that utility into bankruptcy, as well. While most Republicans are flatly opposed to the plan as misguided, Democrats, who hold a majority in the Legislature, worry it's a public bailout of an investor-owned utility and would hand the state control over only Edison's south-state piece of the strategic high-voltage transmission grid in California. Soaring wholesale power costs have financially shattered utilities, forcing the state into runaway, multibillion-dollar spending that helps keep the lights on but threatens the state budget. The manager of the state's power grid has accused generators and marketers of overcharging Californians more than $6 billion in recent months. Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg, D-Van Nuys, said Monday that members of both legislative houses were interested in seizure of California power plants' contracts with brokers, who sell to customers within or outside the state. Sen. Don Perata, D-Oakland, an outspoken critic of the Davis administration's handling of the crisis, said some lawmakers had asked the governor to use emergency or eminent domain powers to seize the overpriced contracts and were awaiting Davis' answer this week. Supporters of the move said seizure would allow the state to control where the power is sold and decrease price markups by eliminating the middleman. But myriad questions remain unanswered, including regulatory and interstate commerce issues as well as any state reimbursement of the brokers. Any move to seize power contracts would be overturned by the courts, said Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum. ""Instead of trying to do what's legally within their reach, they go to extreme measures that are on their very face unlawful and unconstitutional,"" Ackerman said. Moreover, industry officials said, seizure would not only chill industry investment in California's power system and lead to higher power costs but would be ironic since California has shunned lower-cost, long-term contracts, industry officials said. ""It would create a very unstable political, regulatory environment,"" Smutny-Jones said. ""It would have extremely adverse consequences for California in the long term."" Even so, the talk has worried the industry. Smutny-Jones said his clients are ""very, very troubled by this sudden turn in rhetoric."" ""I assume when senior members of the Legislature make pronouncements about potentially seizing contracts, it's designed to get our attention and we obviously take those things seriously,"" he said. The Independent Energy Producers group is ""in the process"" of contacting the Davis administration and lawmakers, said Smutny-Jones. ""You'll hear more about this."" Copyright 2001 Copley News Service Copley News Service April 19, 2001, Thursday SECTION: State and regional LENGTH: 780 words HEADLINE: Windfall-profits tax gets Davis' backing BYLINE: Bill Ainsworth DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Federal regulators' failure to stop what they described as anti-competitive practices in the natural-gas industry added $750 million to Southern California Edison's cost of electricity, a consultant estimated yesterday. ??The consultant, Paul Carpenter of the Brattle Group, spoke to an Assembly subcommittee investigating why California pays the highest natural-gas prices in the nation. Natural gas is a critical part of the electricity crisis because most of the state's generating plants run on natural gas. ??Natural-gas prices have soared throughout the nation, but the bench mark price paid at California's border has been double that paid at other bench mark locations throughout the nation for months, according to figures released by the Assembly Subcommittee on Energy Oversight. ??Next week, Carpenter plans to testify at hearings in Washington, D.C., on behalf of Southern California Edison and the California Public Utilities Commission, which are asking federal regulators to intervene. ??The giant utility and the state regulatory body contend that a sweetheart deal between El Paso Natural Gas and El Paso Merchant Energy gave the sister companies enough market power to artificially raise the price of natural gas that flows into Southern California from Texas. ??El Paso owns the major pipeline bringing natural gas from fields in New Mexico and Texas to Southern California. El Paso Merchant Energy is an unregulated sister company. ??Carpenter called the prices paid in Southern California ''simply unprecedented'' in the United States. He estimated that the sister companies manipulated the market enough to add $2.60 to the price of a million British thermal units of gas. ??In addition, he said, El Paso Merchant Energy owns part of 20 smaller power plants, ''qualifying facilities'' that get paid based on the price of natural gas in California. The higher natural-gas prices increase the company's revenues, Carpenter said. ??El Paso company officials are expected to testify in front of the Assembly subcommittee today, but in proceedings before the federal regulators they have denied any sweetheart deal. ??In a report they commissioned, the company blamed the higher natural-gas prices in Southern California on increased demand and constraints on pipeline capacity. ??Gov. Gray Davis, meanwhile, gave his strongest endorsement yet to a windfall-profits tax on generators as a Senate committee chaired by Joseph Dunn, D-Laguna Niguel, began a series of hearings to probe possible price gouging by generators. ??''I believe the Legislature would be well within its prerogative to insist that generators receive an appropriate reduction, whether it's 20 percent or any other number the Legislature hit upon,'' Davis said. ??Senate Democrats, Davis said, will form a special committee to help work on his plan for the state purchase of the transmission system of Southern California Edison for $2.76 billion, in exchange for state aid in paying off the utilities' debt. ??The governor said he told Senate Democrats, a number of whom are skeptical of the plan, that Edison's parent firm has agreed to back a $3 billion upgrade of the neighborhood distribution system retained by Edison and to return a $400 million tax refund to the utility. ??At the natural-gas hearing yesterday, state officials said that after El Paso Merchant Energy bought a significant part of the pipeline capacity from its sister company, it withheld natural gas to drive prices up. ??''Marketers have gamed the system and figured out how to hoard capacity and undermine competition,'' said Harvey Morris, an attorney for the California Public Utilities Commission. ??State regulators want the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which regulates natural gas, to open the market to more competitors. ??But the commission has repeatedly rejected similar complaints in the past. On March 28, FERC ruled that the affiliates did not arrange a sweetheart deal. ??''The fact that El Paso Merchant controls a large volume of capacity does not, in and of itself, render the El Paso contracts unjust, unreasonable or unduly discriminatory,'' FERC ruled. ??In other cases involving natural gas, federal regulators acknowledged that certain contract provisions allowed anti-competitive behavior, but they approved those contracts anyway. ??Lawmakers said they were puzzled by the federal regulators' lack of action. ??''It baffles me that we've found the problem anti-competitive behavior and market gaming, but there's no cure because federal regulators won't take action,'' said Assemblyman Juan Vargas, D-San Diego. Staff writer Ed Mendel contributed to this report. LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ????????????????????April 19, 2001, Thursday, Home Edition SECTION: Part A; Part 1; Page 3; Metro Desk LENGTH: 772 words HEADLINE: CAPITOL JOURNAL; CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; Price Caps Don't Fit in Cheney's Head for Figures BYLINE: GEORGE SKELTON DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Want price caps on wholesale electricity to staunch the bleeding of billions from California? Not going to happen, Vice President Dick Cheney insists. Don't waste your energy thinking about it. ??""Frankly, California is looked on by many folks as a classic example of the kinds of problems that arise when you do use price caps,"" Cheney said in a telephone interview Wednesday. ??The vice president was referring to another type of price cap--the infamous state cap on consumer rates that has left the private utilities billions short of enough revenue to pay their gouging wholesalers. What political leaders in California and the Northwest are pleading for from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is a regional cap on wholesale prices. ??Early last year, a megawatt-hour was selling wholesale in California for $ 30. By year's end, it had risen to an average $ 300, according to state officials. At peak, prices have soared to $ 1,500. Meanwhile, demand increased last year by less than 4%. In fact, demand last month was 9% less than in March 2000. ??This is the sorry news for ratepayers/ taxpayers: Californians paid $ 7.4 billion for electricity in 1999. This year, the tab--without price caps--is projected at $ 70 billion. Gov. Gray Davis disclosed Tuesday that his administration has been shelling out $ 73 million a day to buy electricity for the pauper utilities. ??The profits of power producers--many of them Texans and Bush backers--have risen 400%-500%-600%. ??* ??But none of this budges the Bush administration. ??Price caps, Cheney declares, may provide ""short-term political relief for the politicians. But they don't do anything to deal with the basic fundamental problem."" That problem is supply, he says; price caps discourage investment in new power plants and encourage consumption. ??Counters Garry South, Davis' political strategist: ""The notion by free market zanies that you have to let profits rise 500%-600% is ludicrous. Reasonable profits can be made without bankrupting the system. They're just trying to protect the profits of their friends in the energy business."" ??In truth, California is building power plants as fast as it can. But not enough new megawatts apparently will be online by summer to prevent blackouts--and the bleeding of billions more into the pockets of out-of-state profiteers. ??How about a temporary price cap? ??""Six months? Six years?"" Cheney replies. ""Once politicians can no longer resist the temptation to go with price caps, they usually are unable to ever muster the courage to end them . . . ??""I don't see that as a possibility . . . Any package you can wrap it in, any fancy rhetoric you can prop it up with, it does not solve the problem."" ??* ??The White House clearly understands it has a problem in California--a political problem. A problem with a Democratic-dominated state that voted overwhelmingly for Al Gore. And now a problem with that mythical headline--Bush to California: Drop Dead--which seems to be getting bigger each day. ??There have been several recent California: Drop Dead stories. One was in Sunday's New York Times--""Bush Devoting Scanty Attention to California."" Tuesday, the Sacramento Bee reported that when Cheney met with Northwest members of Congress to discuss West Coast energy, he barred Californians from the room. ??Cheney flatly denies it. ??But Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) says she has had trouble making contact with the Bush White House. She has sent two letters to President Bush asking for a meeting on energy. The first time, she got back a form letter with her name misspelled. On the second try, she got a group meeting with Cheney. ??""It was very disappointing,"" she says. ""He spoke about letting the free market work and drilling in Alaska . That's not going to help California in the short-term. We need price caps until we're able to fix this very broken market. . . ??""There seems no interest in really wanting to understand the California situation."" ??I asked Cheney whether he sensed an anti-California bias across the country? ""No more than there's an anti-Texas bias,"" he replied. ""I wouldn't get paranoid about it. ??""The fact is, California is one of the leading states in the nation. Often a trendsetter. . . . Well, we hope not to emulate your energy policy. Hopefully, we'll learn from that."" ??His message to California: ""There's no reason not to be optimistic. The energy crunch obviously is a significant problem. . . . But it too will pass."" ??While learning from California, the Bush White House also might take a refresher course in the free market Hoover administration. LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ????????????????????April 19, 2001, Thursday, Home Edition SECTION: Part A; Part 1; Page 3; Metro Desk LENGTH: 1373 words HEADLINE: CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; DAVIS BACKS SILICON VALLEY POWER PROJECT; ENERGY: GOVERNOR URGES QUICK APPROVAL OF SAN JOSE PLANT DESPITE OPPOSITION BY CITY AND A POWERFUL FIRM. BYLINE: JENIFER WARREN and TERENCE MONMANEY, TIMES STAFF WRITERS DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Attempting to show that no region in California is safe from sacrifice, Gov. Gray Davis on Wednesday called for quick state approval of a controversial power plant proposed for the Silicon Valley. ??The governor's action locks him in combat with the San Jose City Council, which has unanimously rejected the plant, and Cisco Systems, the computer networking giant that wants to build its worldwide headquarters on adjacent land. ??In praising the proposed plant as a model of low-polluting efficiency, Davis said all regions of California must share the pain as the state expands its power supply--a key step toward ending blackouts and reducing sky-high electricity prices. ??If approved, the plant would be the 14th licensed by the California Energy Commission since Davis took office. The 13th--a 510-megawatt plant near San Diego--was approved unanimously by the commission Wednesday with little controversy. ??Rushing to expand the state's overtaxed energy supply, the governor has recently cut in half the approval times for the licensing of some plants. Six are under construction, according to Davis, and three are scheduled to begin operation this summer. A fourth--the AES Corp. generator in Huntington Beach that is due to be restarted --could add more megawatts to the supply this summer. ??V. John White, an energy consultant in Sacramento, said the governor's newly active role as an advocate for power plants was a necessary step given the urgency of the supply shortage. ??""It's very rare, and I wouldn't want him to short-circuit the commission's review process,"" White said. ""But I think he's trying to reassure folks we're doing everything we can and not just sitting around in our hot tubs."" ??Davis urged the Energy Commission--a five-member panel dominated by his appointees--to stop talking about the project and grant it a license. If the commission does so, it will mark only the third time the panel has usurped a local government's authority over zoning. ??""We are all in this together,"" Davis said, flanked by a forest of electric transformers near the Capitol. ""We are one state, and we all have to make the sacrifices necessary to make up for the mistakes of the last 12 years, when no major power plants were built."" ??The governor said the plant's developers, Calpine Corp. and Bechtel Enterprises Holdings Inc., have made ""numerous concessions"" to San Jose officials, including an agreement to sell power exclusively in the region. ??He added that the $ 300-million plant--expected to supply about 450,000 homes--will be equipped with state-of-the-art systems that make it ""one of the cleanest plants to go up in the nation."" ??The commission's staff has recommended licensing the project, and some analysts said the governor's intervention--said to be unprecedented--should fuel momentum for approval. ??Commissioner Robert Laurie--one of two members who held evidentiary hearings on the project and is preparing a recommendation for the full commission--would not comment on the plant's prospects. But Laurie, an appointee of former Gov. Pete Wilson, insisted that the project would receive an impartial review. ??""I know the importance of independent decision-making,"" he said. ??San Jose officials say the Calpine project conflicts with the aesthetics of its site in a bucolic valley 15 miles south of downtown. On Wednesday, Mayor Ron Gonzales urged the Energy Commission to ""give serious attention"" to the city's concerns about the plant's potential impact on residents and the environment. ??""As the project has been designed and proposed to operate . . . it would present an unfair burden to our community,"" the mayor said. ??A spokeswoman for the Calpine/Bechtel partnership disagreed and characterized the plant as key to restoring energy stability in the Silicon Valley, a region heavily dependent on imported power. ??""This is the only project in the pipeline that can help Silicon Valley out of its predicament in the near future,"" said the spokeswoman, Lisa Poelle. ??She expressed hope that the governor's comments, which cap numerous meetings between the partnership staff and Davis aides, would encourage San Jose to soften its stance on the project. ??The 600-megawatt plant is proposed for a swath of open space currently leased to a rancher and occupied by grazing cattle. A preliminary ruling by Laurie and the other commissioner scrutinizing the project is expected by June. The full commission would take a final vote about a month later, and if a license were granted, the plant would begin operations sometime in 2003. ??From the beginning, the plant has been dogged by opposition, and the Energy Commission has held more than 20 hearings--an unusually large number--on its fate. ??On Wednesday, a spokesman for its heftiest foe, San Jose-based Cisco, said the company still has serious concerns about ""health and safety issues."" ??Cisco has strongly opposed the plant because the company wants to build a $ 1.3-billion headquarters for 20,000 employees nearby. In the past, Cisco officials have threatened to relocate to another state if the power plant is built. ??Company spokesman Steve Langdon said the firm's plans to build an industrial campus were not scuttled by the announcement Monday that it is cutting 8,500 workers from its payroll because of slumping sales of its Internet networking equipment. ??But he suggested that the plans were flexible enough to be scaled down for a smaller work force and that the campus may not house the company's headquarters. ??""It doesn't all get built at once,"" he said. ""We will build and occupy the site over time in phases as needed."" ??Another leading opponent of the power plant argued Wednesday that the Energy Commission lacks authority to override San Jose officials and license the project. The Santa Teresa Citizen Action Group, launched by homeowners near the site, says the commission may only take such a step if a better plant site hasn't been identified. ??The group charges that the commission is aware of other available sites, including one in an industrial part of the East Bay area, and lists eight other reasons the plant should not be built, among them the noise and emissions it would produce. ??The local Sierra Club chapter, however, has endorsed the plant largely on grounds that it would run cleaner than existing plants in the area. By offsetting emissions from those older plants, the new project would actually reduce air pollution, said Kurt Newick of the Sierra Club's Loma Prieta chapter. ??On another front, Davis continued to lobby legislators for support for his plan to rescue Southern California Edison from bankruptcy through purchase of the utility's transmission grid. ??Emerging from lunch with state Senate Democrats who are openly wary of the deal, Davis said he'd made progress to ""bridge some of the gaps."" It was the governor's third meeting in two days with lawmakers of both parties. ??Some of the toughest skeptics are members of his own party in the Senate. Many fear that the deal Davis struck with Edison will hand the utility too much at the expense of ratepayers, and some say bankruptcy might be a better option for the state's second-largest private utility. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. filed for bankruptcy April 6. ??To assuage concerns, Davis proposed that a special Senate committee be named to meet with his energy advisors as the administration and Edison finalize details of the deal before it goes to the Legislature for approval. ??Senate leader John Burton (D-San Francisco), who has called the Edison agreement ""problematic,"" said he may appoint such a committee but continued to suggest that an Edison bankruptcy might be acceptable. ??""Many of the Fortune 100 companies have gone into Chapter 11 bankruptcy and it ain't like the end of the world for anybody,"" Burton said. ??* ??Times staff writer Carl Ingram contributed to this story. ??Powering Up California ??Power plant projects recently licensed by the California Energy Commission and when they are expected to go online: ??* ??* Two of four turbines are expected to go online in December 2001; the other two are expected to go online in March 2002. ??Source: California Energy Commission GRAPHIC: PHOTO: (2 photos) Gov. Gray Davis urges California Energy Commission to approve Metcalf Energy Center, a 600-megawatt power plant planned for San Jose. Demonstrators greet Davis on his way to news conference in Sacramento. PHOTOGRAPHER: Associated Press PHOTO: (2 photos) Gov. Gray Davis urges California Energy Commission to approve Metcalf Energy Center, a 600-megawatt power plant planned for San Jose. Demonstrators greet Davis on his way to news conference in Sacramento. ?PHOTOGRAPHER: ROBERT DURELL / Los Angeles Times GRAPHIC: Powering Up California, Los Angeles Times LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS ??????????????Copyright 2001 Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service ???????????????????????Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service ??????????????????????????The Orange County Register 19, 2001, Thursday SECTION: STATE AND REGIONAL NEWS KR-ACC-NO: ?K7970 LENGTH: 275 words HEADLINE: Ex-energy chief leery of state buying power lines BYLINE: By Kate Berry BODY: ??ONTARIO, Calif. _ Former Energy Secretary Bill Richardson said Wednesday that he is ""uncomfortable"" with the state's $2.76 billion purchase of the transmission lines of Southern California Edison because it would derail future plans to fully deregulate the state's electricity market. ??""I'm leery of a state purchase,"" Richardson said at an economic conference in Ontario, adding that ""the jury is still out"" on a plan by Gov. Gray Davis to keep Edison out of bankruptcy. ??He called for a rescue of Pacific Gas and Electric, the San Francisco utility that filed for bankruptcy two weeks ago. ??In a half-hour speech, Richardson admonished the Bush administration for failing to take a more active role in the California crisis. He backs a one-year regional price cap to calm the volatile wholesale market. ??""In the Clinton administration, California was gold,"" he said. ""With the new administration, it's another ballgame."" ??Richardson also pushed for a bipartisan energy bill with Democratic themes including energy-efficiency standards, conservation and environmental regulations. ??""We need an energy policy for this country that embraces both parties' proposals,"" he said. ??Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham has sparred with Richardson by trying to rescind new energy-efficiency standards for air conditioners that were approved in the last 30 days of the Clinton administration. ??ARCHIVE PHOTOS available from NewsCom-PressLink: ??Richardson. ??KRT CALIFORNIA is a premium service of Knight Ridder/Tribune ??(c) 2001, The Orange County Register (Santa Ana, Calif.). ??Visit the Register on the World Wide Web at http://www.ocregister.com/ JOURNAL-CODE: OC LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS ?????????????????Copyright 2001 The Chronicle Publishing Co. ?????????????????????????The San Francisco Chronicle ???????????????????APRIL 19, 2001, THURSDAY, FINAL EDITION SECTION: NEWS; Pg. A18 LENGTH: 585 words HEADLINE: Alameda public utility rents four backup generators; Extra electricity will be used during summer rolling blackouts SOURCE: Chronicle Staff Writer BYLINE: Matthew Yi DATELINE: Alameda BODY: Alameda's public utility announced yesterday that it is leasing four portable diesel electrical generators to avoid the one woe of the state's energy crisis they haven't been able to duck so far -- rolling blackouts. ???The utility's move to provide a backup source of electricity for its customers is part of a trend among city-owned utilities to gear up for expected power shortages during the dog days of summer. ???Healdsburg, Santa Clara and Palo Alto -- all with their own electric grids -- are also initiating their own energy backup plans. ???The generators would kick in only during severe energy shortages when rolling blackouts are on the horizon. ???In Alameda, four generators -- each the size of a tractor trailer -- arrived last week and are ready to be fired up, Alameda Mayor Ralph Appezzato said yesterday. ???""We're going to be the masters of our destiny,"" he said. ???Alameda Power and Telecom is one of about 30 municipal utilities in California that opted not to deregulate with the rest of the state four years ago. Consequently, its customers' power rates are expected to be stable this year while Pacific Gas and Electric Co. customers face huge rate increases. ???But municipal utilities such as Alameda's are still part of the statewide power grid, which is managed by the Independent System Operator, and are subject to rolling blackouts like everybody else when the state's energy reserves dip below 1.5 percent. ???Each of Alameda's four diesel generators will produce 1.5 megawatts of power. Each megawatt can light up 1,000 homes, utility officials say. ???The units, leased at a total cost of $68,000 a month through the end of the year, are parked at Alameda Point. ???Their cost will be paid through the municipal utility's reserve fund and customers' power bills won't be affected, said Junona Jonas, the utility's general manager. ???""I think in the long run, we'll see more supply in the state, but until that happens, there will be communities that'll have to take these short-term drastic measures,"" Jonas said. ???The utility's spokesman, Matthew McCabe, said the diesel exhaust from the generators won't be an environmental factor. ???""Our environmental record is extremely important to us,"" McCabe said. ""The diesel generators are only for emergency backup. . . . Besides, these things are clean -- it's not like standing next to a diesel bus."" ???The city is also getting help from the U.S. Maritime Administration, which operates more than a dozen ships at the former Navy station in Alameda. When the juice is low, those ships will unplug from the port and use onboard generators, Jonas said. ???In the North Bay, Healdsburg officials are waiting for the arrival of two diesel generators. Combined, they are expected to produce 3.5 megawatts of power, which can account for about 20 percent of the city's expected summer peak load, said Bill Duarte, city utility director. ???""We're taking matters into our own hands,"" he said. ???Farther south, both Santa Clara and Palo Alto are considering leasing portable generators, officials said. ???Bill Reichmann, senior electric utility engineer at Santa Clara's Silicon Valley Power, said the utility is planning to lease eight generators, operating them in the southeastern end of town near the San Jose International Airport. ???Palo Alto's municipal utility also has recommended that the City Council approve renting two generators starting next month, said spokeswoman Rima Johnson.E-mail Matthew Yi at myi@sfchronicle.com. LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS ?????????????????Copyright 2001 The Chronicle Publishing Co. ?????????????????????????The San Francisco Chronicle ???????????????????APRIL 19, 2001, THURSDAY, FINAL EDITION SECTION: NEWS; Pg. A3 LENGTH: 845 words HEADLINE: Davis' gouging claims disputed; Officials say no link between PG&E bankruptcy, high prices SOURCE: Chronicle Staff Writer BYLINE: David Lazarus BODY: Officials on the front lines of California's energy mess yesterday challenged Gov. Gray Davis' assertion that the state is being gouged by power companies because of PG&E's bankruptcy filing. ???Such dissent from the governor's own subordinates could make it harder for Davis to gain support for his energy measures in the state Legislature. ???Despite Davis' latest claims, the Department of Water Resources, which is spending about $70 million a day buying power, said there is no evidence linking recent price increases to Pacific Gas and Electric Co. filing for bankruptcy protection on April 6. ???""It is a seller's market,"" said Viju Patel, executive manager of the Department of Water Resources' power systems department. ""The power companies do not need an excuse to raise prices."" ???Critics say Davis' penchant for secrecy on energy issues has come back to haunt him at a time when he needs all the allies he can find. ???""People aren't taking his words at face value,"" said Michael Shames, executive director of the Utility Consumers' Action Network in San Diego. ???Republican lawmakers -- and even some Democrats -- have challenged a number of the governor's initiatives, including a multibillion-dollar bailout scheme for Southern California Edison. ???Nevertheless, Davis reiterated his belief yesterday that recent electricity price increases are ""an aberration driven by the bankruptcy of PG&E."" ???He said California's spending on power jumped 40 percent in the week following PG&E's bankruptcy filing because generators say they face a greater risk of not being paid. ???""Nothing else in the equation has changed,"" said Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for the governor. ""Everything is the same except the bankruptcy."" ???However, power companies were quick to challenge this assertion. They insisted that PG&E's bankruptcy actually was seen as a positive development by those in the energy business. ???""If anything, PG&E provides some solace for traders because the bankruptcy provides an organized mechanism for recovery of payments,"" said Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, a Menlo Park energy-industry association. ???On the other hand, he acknowledged that power companies are becoming increasingly wary of the state of California's creditworthiness as an energy buyer. ???The Department of Water Resources already has spent nearly $5 billion buying electricity and has yet to recoup a dime from ratepayers. State regulators are still trying to come up with a way to apportion the limited revenues from power rates among the various parties in California's energy picture. ???Rating agency Fitch Inc. said yesterday it may cut the state's credit rating because of questions surrounding recovery of energy costs. ???""People are keeping an eye on things,"" Ackerman said. ""They're watching how California finances things."" ???If a premium on electricity sales to the state exists, he said it probably has been in place since the beginning of the year, well before PG&E's current woes. ???UCAN's Shames agreed. He said power companies added a ""risk premium"" to their California power sales late last year when it looked like the state's energy troubles were worsening. ???""PG&E's bankruptcy may have increased the uncertainty,"" Shames said, ""but we've been paying a risk premium for months now."" ???Richard Wheatley, a spokesman for Reliant Energy in Houston, insisted that his company's traders are not using questions about PG&E's or California's financial solvency as a fresh excuse for higher prices. ???""I haven't seen any evidence of it,"" he said. ???Mark Palmer, a spokesman for Houston's Enron Corp., laid blame for recent price increases on low rainfall throughout the West, which has cut output at hydroelectric facilities, as well as on California's chronic power shortage. ???""It's not that there's a premium on prices,"" he said. ""It's just supply and demand."" ???That said, Palmer acknowledged that California's firm insistance on blackouts being avoided at all costs leaves the state vulnerable to virtually any price generators choose to demand. ???""This means prices will be used to allocate a scarce resource,"" he said. ""There's no other way it could work."" ???Bottom line for consumers: It's going to be a long, hot summer, and electricity prices will soar even higher as demand surges. ???And despite the best efforts of state officials, a daily threat of blackouts remains a virtual certainty as California's beleaguered power grid is stretched to the breaking point. ???At the Department of Water Resources' command center in a Sacramento shopping mall, the state's team of electricity traders has moved onto a new, high-tech trading floor, where they negotiate power deals each day from the crack of dawn. ???The department's Patel said daily blackouts may be averted this summer after consumers see skyrocketing power prices reflected in their bills. ???""People will respond to these prices and they are going to conserve like never before,"" Patel predicted.E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com. GRAPHIC: PHOTO, Gov. Gray Davis urged the California Energy Commission to approve construction of the proposed 600-megawatt power plant. / Associated Press LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS ?????????????????Copyright 2001 The Chronicle Publishing Co. ?????????????????????????The San Francisco Chronicle ???????????????????APRIL 19, 2001, THURSDAY, FINAL EDITION SECTION: NEWS; Pg. A3 LENGTH: 888 words HEADLINE: Davis backs San Jose power plant; He also acknowledges bailout for Edison will be uphill fight SOURCE: Chronicle Sacramento Bureau BYLINE: Lynda Gledhill DATELINE: Sacramento BODY: Gov. Gray Davis urged the state Energy Commission yesterday to approve a controversial power plant in San Jose, saying California needs every megawatt it can harness. ???Davis' recommendation runs counter to the wishes of the San Jose City Council and Mayor Ron Gonzales, who have come out against the 600-megawatt Metcalf Energy Center in south San Jose's Coyote Valley. It also puts the governor at odds with one of his political allies, Cisco Systems chief John Chambers, whose company opposes the plant because it would be built near the tech firm's proposed new campus. ???Davis' announcement came the same day he all but admitted he lacks the support he needs in the state Senate for the deal he reached with Southern California Edison to restore the utility to financial health. Davis has portrayed that deal and construction of new power plants as essential to making California's energy market functional again. ???""I think when we have an opportunity to put more power on line we should seize it,"" Davis said. ""I believe we spend too much time talking about Metcalf. It's time to start building it."" ???The Energy Commission has been reviewing the proposal by Calpine Corp. and Bechtel Enterprises Inc. for months. The commission's staff recommended in October that the plant be built, and a final decision is expected by summer. If it is approved, the plant could come on line next year and provide enough electricity for 600,000 homes. ???None of the five commissioners could be reached yesterday. Three are Democrats appointed by Davis and two are Republicans appointed by former Gov. Pete Wilson. ???Gonzales and the rest of the City Council rejected the Metcalf plant in November. Until yesterday, Davis had sat on the sidelines as the energy crisis deepened and a long line of state and federal officials, including four of the five Assembly members from Silicon Valley, urged the commission to overturn the council's vote. ???Some neighborhood groups oppose the plant, along with computer networking giant Cisco, which hopes to build a 20,000-worker campus on a neighboring parcel. Cisco chief Chambers donated $50,000 to Davis in the first six months of last year. ???Cisco's reaction yesterday was restrained. ???""We have great respect for the governor and respect his decision,"" said Cisco spokesman Steve Langdon. ???However, Langdon added: ""We still have serious concerns about health and safety issues related to the proposed power plant."" ???Some neighbors were much angrier. ???""He's trying to act like he's the big, bad tough governor, and he's spineless,"" said Issa Ajlouny, who lives in the Santa Teresa neighborhood, less than a mile from the proposed plant. ""He knows the approval process isn't working in his favor, so he's trying to come out and act like a hero to the state of California. But he's nothing but backstabbing the city of San Jose on the environmental issues."" ???Supporters of the plant see the 14 acres of former junkyard as the perfect site -- right next to Pacific Gas and Electric Co.'s largest substation in the South Bay, close to major transmission lines and shielded from its neighbors by a 350-foot hill. ???But a housing development is also nearby, and residents fear the power plant will belch pollutants in an area already suffering from some of the worst air quality in the Bay Area. ???Mayor Gonzales continued to express his concern yesterday. ???""I would support clean power plants that will help us achieve greater energy self-sufficiency for San Jose residents and business,"" Gonzales said. ""As the Metcalf project has been designed and proposed to operate, however, it would present an unfair burden on our community."" ???That's not what Davis said, however, calling Metcalf ""one of the cleanest, most efficient plants in the country."" ???Davis praised the efforts of Calpine/Bechtel to work with the local community and said he was especially pleased that the venture had agreed to commit all the power to the local region. ???""The Silicon Valley is obviously the engine driving our economy, but they are very dependent on outside power,"" Davis said. ???Also in Sacramento yesterday, after an hourlong session with Senate Democrats -- the toughest legislative sell for Davis' proposed Edison deal -- the governor all but admitted his plan could not win enough votes for Senate approval. ???""I think he knew there weren't enough votes going in,"" said Sen. Don Perata, D-Oakland. ""But there may be a way of perfecting a deal people can at least think of supporting."" ???Senate Democrats have openly opposed Edison's deal, saying the only beneficiaries are Edison shareholders and power generators who would be paid every cent owed them by the utility -- at the expense of customers who would pay more to erase Edison's debt. ???Unlike his meeting with Assembly Democrats, after which Davis said he was encouraged, the governor said yesterday he wanted the Senate to appoint a special committee to iron out differences over the Edison deal. ???Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, D-San Francisco, said he was ""not aware a committee was being set up."" He said he favored an up-or-down vote on Davis' current proposal.Chronicle staff writers Greg Lucas, Alan Gathright and Maria Alicia Gaura contributed to this report. / E-mail Lynda Gledhill at lgledhill@sfchronicle.com. GRAPHIC: PHOTO, Gov. Gray Davis urged the California Energy Commission to approve construction of the proposed 600-megawatt power plant. / Associated Press LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS 2001 Pacific Press Ltd. Vancouver Sun ????????????????????April 19, 2001 Thursday FINAL EDITION SECTION: BUSINESS, Pg. F1 / Front LENGTH: 731 words HEADLINE: B.C. Hydro's credit to California firms exceeded 1999 guidelines BYLINE: David Baines SOURCE: Vancouver Sun BODY: ??A confidential document issued in late 1999 shows that B.C. Hydro's power-trading subsidiary, Powerex, set a credit limit of $100 million US for its California customers. ??However, by the end of 2000, Powerex had extended three times that amount of credit to those customers -- the California Independent System Operator and the California Power Exchange. With the California Power Exchange and Cal-ISO's major customer, Pacific Gas & Electric, under Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, repayment of this debt is now in doubt. ??Powerex spokesman Wayne Cousins noted that the document obtained by The Vancouver Sun, which is marked ""strictly confidential,"" was issued in November 1999. ??""That's an old copy of our risk-management policy,"" he said in an interview Wednesday. ??""Credit limits have changed since then based on careful assessment of several factors including market conditions, risks, maintaining long-standing relationships and helping California meet its electricity needs to prevent crisis situations. ??""Temporary revisions were only implemented after very diligent review incorporating the best market intelligence available, our own due diligence and on-going dialogue with appropriate market participants."" ??He refused to say when the credit limits for Cal-ISO and the California Power Exchange were increased. ??""That type of information is confidential. You have a copy that, I assume, was leaked in some way, but this is commercially confidential information."" ??He said the increase in credit limits helped B.C. Hydro achieve record net income of about $1 billion during the year ending March 31. This figures does not include any write-downs that may occur if Powerex determines that any of its customer accounts are not collectible. ??Cousins, however, was insistent that all debts will be collected: ""We continue to pursue monies owing and we expect to be paid for electricity we have sold."" ??He noted that Powerex suspended trades to all California entities on Dec. 8 unless those trades were fully secured by creditworthy customers. ??By that time, Cal-ISO and California had racked up an unpaid bill of about $ 300 million US, or $475 million Cdn -- about half the net income that Hydro has tentatively reported for the year ending March 31. ??The confidential document states that Powerex's policies and procedures are designed to control ""the risk of financial loss due to changes in market prices or volatility"" and ""the risk that a counterparty (customer) in a commodity transaction defaults on delivery and/or settlement."" ??It states that the amount of credit to be advanced to any customer depends on its credit rating. An ""AAA"" customer, for example, may be granted credit to a maximum of $20 million. ??Cal-ISO and California Power Exchange are not utilities, they are power pools. They purchase power from Powerex and other suppliers and re-sell it to utilities such as Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison. ??The pools are not rated, but are assigned specific credit limits. As of November 1999, Cal-ISO had a credit limit of $40 million US and the California Power Exchange $60 million US. ??The risk-management document notes that the credit-worthiness of these pools depends on that of its suppliers. ??""The Powerex credit-risk manager and the treasury manager are responsible for initially evaluating, and then monitoring, the credit-authorization policies and credit limits for each power pool in which Powerex trades,"" the document states. ""Significant alterations in the credit policies of a power pool will trigger a mandatory reappraisal of the power-pool credit limit."" ??California has been caught in a power vice in recent months. The problem dates back to 1996, when the state developed a plan to deregulate the electricity business. Competition was supposed to lower rates below a price cap that had been imposed. ??However, dry conditions cut the ability to generate hydro-electric power and a surge in the state's economy created unprecedented demand for electricity. Prices soared. ??The result was that the California utilities paid record prices for power, but weren't allowed to pass along the full cost to consumers. ??Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison, the state's two biggest utilities, now owe about $12 billion. ??dbaines@pacpress.southam.ca TYPE: Business LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ?????????????????????April 18, 2001, Wednesday, BC cycle SECTION: Business News LENGTH: 348 words HEADLINE: Williams again target of overcharging allegations from federal regulators DATELINE: TULSA, Okla. BODY: ??Federal regulators are once against targeting Williams for allegedly overcharging Californians for electricity. ??The Tulsa-based energy company was cited in a notice this week from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for allegedly overcharging California customers $25,574 in March. ??Two other companies were also cited in the notice from federal regulators Monday. ??Dynegy Power Marketing Inc. of Houston was cited for overcharging California customers $469,662, while Mirant California LLC, of Atlanta, was cited for overcharges of $92,620. ??The commission told Williams and the other two companies to either refund the money or justify their prices, which exceeded a price of $300 per megawatt hour that was set by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission because of the California's electricity shortage. ??Williams also was accused of excessive charges of $8 million in January and $ 21.6 million in February, for a total of $29.6 million. ??Williams spokeswoman Paula Hall-Collins said while the overpricing allegations against Williams in March were not as significant as in the other months, the process of justifying them will be the same as in previous months. ??""They determine the price that they feel is fair and justifiable, and then we come back and say why we charged what we did,"" she said. ??Hall-Collins said federal regulators haven't said whether they are satisfied with how Williams justified its alleged overcharges from previous months. ??Also in March, the commission accused Williams and AES Southland of generating less power to drive up electricity prices in May and June 2000, resulting in alleged overcharging of $10.8 million. ??Williams denies overcharging for electricity it provides. ??In other news, Williams Express Inc., a unit of Williams, announced Tuesday it was selling 198 MAPCO Express convenience stores to Israel-based Delek Group for $147 million. Most of the stores are in Tennessee and executives expect to close the deal by the end of May. ??Williams will keep 29 MAPCO stores in Alaska. LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ?????????????????????April 18, 2001, Wednesday, BC cycle SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 332 words HEADLINE: Governor, congressman to fight proposals for national power deregulation policy BYLINE: By MARGERY BECK, Associated Press Writer DATELINE: LINCOLN, Neb. BODY: ??Gov. Mike Johanns and Rep. Lee Terry, R-Neb., said Wednesday they will be working to make sure national leaders understand Nebraska's stance on a national energy policy. ??Nebraska's unique status as the only 100 percent public power state in the nation and its reliance on the corn-based fuel additive ethanol make the state's input in the development of national energy policy important, Johanns said. ??""Public power has worked very well for Nebraska consumers by providing low cost electricity,"" he said, adding that the deregulated state of California has suffered through weeks of rolling blackouts. ""We are committed to protecting public power in this environment of deregulation."" ??Terry said he has talked at length to the staff of Vice President Dick Cheney, who has been tapped to come up with a national energy policy draft. That draft will end up before the House Energy and Commerce Committee, on which Terry serves. ??""There will be a discussion about a national deregulation policy,"" Terry said. ??A national deregulation policy would threaten Nebraska's public power system, Terry and Johanns said. Terry said he plans to push for a states' rights exemption to any such policy. ??""It is absolutely necessary that Nebraska have a voice in that discussion,"" Terry said. ??Terry said he also has pleaded with the Bush administration not to grant a request from California to wave the Clean Air Act's gasoline oxygen requirement. ??Such a move is considered a death knell to ethanol, a clean-air fuel additive, because other states would be expected to follow suit in requesting - and receiving - similar waivers, thereby destroying ethanol's market. ??""They did not telegraph their position on the waiver,"" Terry said of White House, which is expected to decide on California's request this spring. ??Other energy concerns Nebraska leaders hope to address are rising heating costs and gasoline prices, which are expected to top $2 a gallon in Nebraska this summer. LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS ??????????????Copyright 2001 Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News 2001 San Jose Mercury News Jose Mercury News 18, 2001, Wednesday KR-ACC-NO: SJ-POWER-PLANT LENGTH: 1038 words HEADLINE: California Governor May Back Energy Firm's Proposed Power Plant BODY: ??Under intense pressure to increase California's energy supply, Gov. Gray Davis is expected to announce today his support for Calpine Corp.'s proposed South San Jose power plant -- a move that could ensure the state's most controversial power project is built. ??Davis said for months that he would not interfere in the environmental review of the proposed 600-megawatt power plant. But a source close to the governor said Davis has decided to use Calpine's Coyote Valley project to send a signal that California is ready to build more power plants and is ""open to business."" ??San Jose has strenuously opposed the power plant. But Davis' decision to urge the California Energy Commission to approve it would likely hold sway with the agency, which has authority over where plants are located but has almost never overridden local opposition. ??The commission -- three of whose five members were appointed by Davis -- is expected to complete its environmental review and make a decision early this summer. ??A spokesman for the governor declined to confirm the endorsement. But late Tuesday, the governor scheduled a press conference for this morning to make an ""important energy generation announcement."" ??San Jose Mayor Ron Gonzales declined to comment. But another of the plant's leading opponents pledged to keep fighting what would be the South Bay's largest power plant. ??An endorsement from Davis would cap a stunning turnaround for the project. ??Five months ago, Calpine's Metcalf Energy Center was unanimously rejected by the San Jose City Council, which decided that the power plant would be incompatible with the city's plans to develop high-tech campuses in North Coyote Valley. ??Some Calpine officials even considered giving up plans to build the power plant. ??But as California's energy woes intensified, the Metcalf plant increasingly became a poster child for the need for more power generation to reduce the skyrocketing cost of electricity and avoid rolling blackouts. Silicon Valley, one of the state's largest electricity consumers, produces only a fraction of the energy it uses. ??Despite fierce opposition from local residents concerned about the environmental effects of a large power plant, a steady stream of state and local organizations lined up behind the project, including the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group, the San Jose Silicon Valley Chamber of Commerce and the local chapters of the Sierra Club and American Lung Association. ??The California Assembly voted unanimously in February to urge the energy commission to override San Jose and license the power plant. ??And top officials and attorneys at the energy commission have been working for months to ensure that the project wins approval, a Mercury News investigation of the commission's environmental review of the project showed. The officials undermined negative environmental assessments of the Metcalf site and silenced commission analysts who said other sites would be better. ??The energy commissioners are weighing the staff's recommendation to approve the plant. ??Commissioner Robert A. Laurie, who oversaw hearings on the project, insisted at one hearing two months ago that the commission would complete an independent review. ??Although Davis has stressed his efforts to speed construction of new power plants, the governor insisted he would not take a position on the project. ??""The governor has repeatedly said he wants the process to play out,"" Davis press secretary Steve Maviglio said last week. ""The governor believes the energy commission should complete its review."" ??But there have been growing signs that Davis would throw his weight behind Calpine's project. ??A senior energy commission official said aides to the governor have been calling the commission for months to urge quick approval of the Metcalf plant. The governor's press secretary said no calls have been made. ??When Davis was looking for a backdrop to hold a press conference earlier this year to announce his plans to speed up approval of new power plants, he chose Calpine's new plant in Sutter. ??The company also has actively campaigned for the governor's support. ??Earlier this year, Calpine offered to sell the state cheaper power from the plant if it is approved. ??When Calpine and its development partner Bechtel Enterprises were looking for a lobbyist in Sacramento, the companies turned to Platinum Advisors, whose president, Darius Anderson, was finance chairman of Davis' 1998 gubernatorial campaign. ??The San Jose-based company gave the governor $ 19,000 last year, according to state campaign finance reports. ??Maviglio said the governor's ties to Calpine are no different from his relationship with Cisco Systems CEO John Chambers, who has opposed the power plant. Campaign finance reports show Chambers gave Davis $ 50,000 last year. ??Calpine officials said Tuesday they did not know of the governor's impending announcement. But they said they were not surprised. ""We've been working with the governor on a number of issues,"" said project manager Ken Abreu. ""Metcalf is just one of them."" ??Meanwhile, Calpine's opponents in San Jose City Hall and in the neighborhood nearest the proposed power plant appear more isolated than at any time since the contentious debate over the Metcalf site began more than two years ago. ??Mayor Gonzales refused to comment on Davis' planned announcement. ""I don't respond to rumors,"" said the mayor, who has helped lead opposition to Metcalf. ""I have not heard anything. If he makes a statement, I'll respond."" ??But one of Calpine's fiercest local opponents said the nearby Santa Teresa neighborhood will continue to fight. ""We have a strong case,"" said longtime South San Jose resident Issa Ajlouny. ""And we will win."" ??The Mercury News strives to avoid use of unnamed sources. When unnamed sources are used because information cannot otherwise be obtained, the newspaper generally requires more than one source to confirm the information. ??By Noam Levey and Mark Gladstone. Mike Zapler of the Mercury News contributed to this report. ??----- ??To see more of the San Jose Mercury News, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.sjmercury.com JOURNAL-CODE: SJ LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS 2001 Scripps Howard, Inc. Howard News Service 18, 2001, Wednesday SECTION: DOMESTIC NEWS LENGTH: 588 words HEADLINE: Davis says Edison agreement may need altering SOURCE: Scripps-McClatchy Western Service BYLINE: EMILY BAZAR and KEVIN YAMAMURA DATELINE: SACRAMENTO, Calif. BODY: ??Gov. Gray Davis indicated Wednesday that he may need to alter the agreement to purchase Southern California Edison's transmission lines if he wants legislators to approve the deal. ??Though the Democratic governor declined to discuss particulars, he said he asked Senate leaders to appoint a special committee dedicated to resolving disagreements between the administration and lawmakers. ??Many provisions of the memorandum of understanding, the document that lays out the terms of the Edison deal, must be approved by the Legislature and the state Public Utilities Commission. ??""There is a determination to try and solve this problem whether or not it means amending the MOU or trying a slightly different approach,"" Davis said after meeting with Senate Democrats. ??A spokesman for the utility declined to comment on the governor's statements. ??Davis announced the Edison agreement April 9, just three days after Pacific Gas & Electric Co. unexpectedly cut off transmission line negotiations with the governor and filed for bankruptcy protection. ??The deal would require the state to pay $2.76 billion for Edison's transmission lines, or 2.3 times book value. In addition, a portion of consumer electricity rates would be dedicated to paying off the remainder of the utility's debt, estimated at about $5 billion. ??Both Edison and PG&E stockpiled massive debt when wholesale electricity prices soared. Price caps prevented them from passing along the entire cost of electricity to consumers. ??Since the Edison deal was announced, however, legislators have been critical of certain provisions, suggesting that California consumers will receive little in return for relieving the utility of billions of dollars in debt. ??""It's clear that the deal, as is, could well be problematic,"" said Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, D-San Francisco. ""This has to do with what's in the bill, what's in it for the people of the state."" ??Lawmakers initially believed they would have little ability to change the agreement, and referred to it as a ""take it or leave it"" deal. ??In fact, the memorandum of understanding itself says the deal can be nullified ""in the event any law is passed, adopted or repealed ... (which) would materially impede or frustrate the ability of the Parties to effectuate all of the elements of the plan as a package."" ??But in his meeting with Senate Democrats, Davis indicated he may be willing to compromise. His goal, he said, is to keep Edison from following PG&E into bankruptcy. ??""We still have some work to do,"" Davis said. ""I think the appointment of a special Senate committee, assuming that happens, will let us work through the detail in an appropriate fashion."" ??Burton said he has not decided whether to appoint a committee. ??Other senators came out of the meeting guardedly optimistic that they could compromise with the governor. ??""It was obvious that there were concerns from members,"" said Sen. Don Perata, D-Alameda. ""He is open and ready to have the proposal perfected as it moves through the legislative process."" ??Sen. Jackie Speier, D-Hillsborough, said she hopes to amend the deal to ensure power generators are penalized for over-charging the utilities and the state for electricity. ??""The way it's presently crafted, (generators) are being rewarded,"" she said. ""They are getting a premium for selling electricity at a higher premium than ever conceived of by humankind."" ??(Contact Emily Bazar and Kevin Yamamura of the Sacramento Bee in California at http://www.sacbee.com.) LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 ??? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= EES Staff Meeting, in 791; [EMail-Body]= houston Bryson? 3-6424 -- Peggy Menchaca Kathleen Leslie Lawner - gas choice Fumo3 (4,8,11,12,20) Peco 15 ( 39235 Lauren Cox 9416377899 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Senate May Mark Up Electricity Title Next Week; [EMail-Body]= I have received confirmation from Senate staff that the Senate Democrats on the Energy Committee met this morning and tentatively decided to go along with Chairman Bingaman's desire to move up the mark up of the electricity title from later this month as earlier expected to next Thursday, Sept. 13. They are not sure they can do it all in one day. Acting on 9/13 as desired now depends on the reaction of the committee's Republicans. Not sure they will cooperate with moving quickly. I am on my way to the Senate for an RTO meeting and expect to obtain a copy of the draft electricity language implementing the Bingaman White Paper; the language was just distributed to committee members this afternoon, but I understand that Bingaman's staff had worked on it behind the scenes with Comr. Massey. Will advise once I have it hand. John [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= TW Gas Sales: PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE; [EMail-Body]= 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."" [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Depart 1:05/Arrive 2:41; [EMail-Body]= Meet with Commissioner Ebert in Biloxi - Confirmed 7/1/97 Contact is Paige - 601-436-4833 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CA PWR ISSUE; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/28/2000 07:31 AM --------------------------- Gavin Dillingham@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 08/25/2000 05:16 PM To: joe Hartsoe@ENRON, Sandra McCubbin@EES, Susan Mara@EES, Paul Kaufman@ECT, Karen Denne@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich@EES, Mark Palmer@ENRON, James D Steffes@EES, Richard Shapiro@EES, Elizabeth Linnell@EES, Jeannie Mandelker@ECT, filuntz@aol.com, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark A Schroeder@ENRON, Peter Styles@ECT, Litz@luntz.com cc: Subject: CA PWR ISSUE Mass. To Join N.Y., Calif In Market-based Elec Rates [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message(due to missing attachment)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Opinion Elite Survey; [EMail-Body]= Have we made this available to the Cheney team? From: Mark Palmer on 04/25/2001 04:02 PM To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Opinion Elite Survey Here's the Opinion Elite file. It looks very strong for our open access argument. Suggest we update the WH. Any other uses? I have the verbatims and cross tabs. We'll send a sanitized version (although there's not much I wouldn't want everybody to see) to some of the interviewees who requested it. Mark ----- Forwarded by Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron on 04/25/2001 03:08 PM ----- ""Nicole Fink"" <nicole@pos.org> 04/24/2001 03:49 PM To: mpalmer@enron.com, janel.Guerrero@enron.com, rSCHRIEFER@aol.com, aameece@quinngillespie.com, dlugar@quinngillespie.com, bandrews@quinngillespie.com cc: Subject: Opinion Elite Survey Enron Team: A draft of the key findings of the opinion elite survey is attached. We are sending out hard copies tonight so you should have them tomorrow morning. Thanks. The following section of this message contains a file attachment prepared for transmission using the Internet MIME message format. If you are using Pegasus Mail, or any another MIME-compliant system, you should be able to save it or view it from within your mailer. If you cannot, please ask your system administrator for assistance. ---- File information ----------- File: execsummary.PDF Date: 24 Apr 2001, 16:47 Size: 41949 bytes. Type: Unknown - execsummary.PDF [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Wharton-Tiger Team-2002; [EMail-Body]= Shirley, Please, set up a meeting. I am out on Tuesday: PRC all day. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Lebeau, Paul Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 3:38 PM To: Shankman, Jeffrey A.; Kaminski, Vince J; ',Christie.Patrick@enron.com' Cc: Burns, Jennifer; Crenshaw, Shirley Subject: FW: Wharton-Tiger Team-2002 Importance: High Jeff , Vince, & Christie, I was wanting to try and get together first part next week to discuss our possible participation with the ""Tiger Team"" Field Application Program at Wharton. Please let me know. Thanks -=- Paul LeBeau/Recruiter -----Original Message----- From: Warner, Traci Sent: Monday, July 02, 2001 12:34 PM To: Lebeau, Paul Subject: FW: Wharton-Tiger Team-2002 Importance: High I know you received this also - but wanted to check to see if you were going to coordinate with Christie Patrick on this TW -----Original Message----- From: FAP Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 3:48 PM To: 'twarner@enron.com'; 'paul.lebeua@enron.com' Cc: FAP Subject: FW: Wharton-Tiger Team-2002 Importance: High > -----Original Message----- > From: FAP > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 4:40 PM > To: 'vkamins@enron.com'; > ' [Lebeau, Paul] > Cc: FAP > Subject: Wharton-Tiger Team-2002 > Importance: High > > I am writing in anticipation of your participation in the Wharton School's > ""Tiger Team"" Field Application Program (FAP) for the Academic Year > 2001-2002. > We are in the process of making preparations for the upcoming ""Tiger Team"" > program. Last year we held focus groups to evaluate the quality of our > program. One suggestion of these groups was better facilitation of the > matching process between students and hosts. To achieve that end we > request your assistance. > > We are asking for a verbal commitment to host a Tiger project no later > than mid-July. No project scope needs be identified at that time, just a > commitment to work with the program. We have experienced high sponsor > demand and our resources are constrained. We don't want to reject projects > because we lack the necessary resources. And, we want to identify our > project hosts to students as early in the school year as possible. We feel > this will allow students to better integrate the FAP experience into their > recruiting efforts. It will also allow us to better match faculty > expertise (especially institutional) with hosts. > As an incentive to help us improve the FAP experience, we ask our > returning hosts for the same contribution as last year - $10,000. This > amount does not cover our variable costs, though we believe we offer hosts > great value in terms of product output and recruitment opportunities. > However, after July we will need to increase our requests for > contributions to help cover these costs. While we realize that it is often > difficult to forecast changes to operational, organizational and budgetary > requirements, we ask that you take this factor into consideration. Please > notify us of your decision to participate by email at > > I will forward you more detailed information and a calendar for the > academic year with critical dates and deadlines for hosts. As you will > see, we have ""moved-up"" our deadlines relative to last year to help us > better facilitate the host-student matching process. Our staff also asked > for extra time to allow faculty to have more input into the project's > scope earlier in the process. Our focus groups suggested both students and > hosts would benefit from this. Should you have any questions or concerns > before then, please feel free to contact me. > Thank you for your interest in helping the Wharton School achieve its > educational mission. I look forward to working with you in the future > > Sincerely, > > Donna Piazze > Program Director > Field Application Project > The Wharton School > Univ. of Pennsylvania > 215.573.8394 fax 215.573.5727 > > piazze@wharton.upenn.edu > [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Confidential - Notes from Portland Visit; [EMail-Body]= David, I will have this re-reviewed by Oregon counsel, but it was scrubbed about 18-24 months ago as being enforceable. Thanks. Michelle [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Energy & Power's Financial Mathematics to Energy Derivatives
 Seminar; [EMail-Body]= Eugenio, It's more or less the same. No big changes. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Perez, Eugenio Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 3:09 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Energy & Power's Financial Mathematics to Energy Derivatives Seminar As you remember, I went to the seminar last year. Do you think that it will be different enough this year to make it worthwhile to attend? Andrea and I look forward to seeing you on Monday. Regards, Eugenio [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= More great press!; [EMail-Body]= I can hardly believe Peggy Noonan wrote this. I'm a sucker for blatant heart string pulling. I love it. I'm misty. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/08/2000 12:39 PM --------------------------- ""Painter, Sally"" on 08/08/2000 10:45:04 AM Sent by: ""Russell, Rhonda"" To: ""'Adhoc Advisors'"" <Rhonda_Roo_00@yahoo.com> cc: Subject: More great press! > Great Press on Lieberman. See below. > > > > A 1960 Moment > Al Gore's selection of Joe Lieberman gives Democrats--and everyone > else--something to cheer about. > BY PEGGY NOONAN > Monday August 7, 2000 4:26 p.m. EDT > The choice of Joe Lieberman of Connecticut as Al Gore's running mate is so > smart, so clever, so good, so satisfying, so striking that it just may > turn > this election a bit on its head for a while. Certainly its most immediate > effect is going to be a successful Democratic convention next week in Los > Angeles, because now the Democrats, badly hit by their own form of Clinton > fatigue and acutely aware of the particular charmlessness of their > presidential candidate, have something to cheer about. They respect Joe > Lieberman. They think he has a center, a moral and ethical view of the > world. He is experienced and articulate. He is decent and intelligent. He > is > independent. The media love him. He is a regular co-star on Imus, and all > of > the columnists and reporters for the elite newspapers, and all of the > electronic pundits and anchors, know him and admire him. > But that is not what is most wonderful. What is most wonderful is that he > is > an Orthodox Jew. What does this mean? It means a lot of people who love > America more than they love parties or politics are happy that a big and > great breakthrough has occurred. A friend, a journalist who is politically > conservative and Jewish, e-mailed me to tell me he had been weeping all > morning, that he'd cried when he heard the news. Another friend, a > producer at a TV news show, called and told me she woke her father in > California to give him the news and they both got choked up. ""This is like > 1960,"" she said, and I said I know, and I got choked up. It is wonderful > when America is at her most American, and breaks down another barrier and > says ""What's in your heart is most important."" > If Joe Lieberman had been Joe Lee, and an Episcopalian, Al Gore would have > been smart to pick him. He would have been an obvious choice. The only > reason he would have hesitated over Mr. Lieberman is that he's Jewish. Mr. > Gore decided that was just fine. I think that I have never seen Al Gore do > such an elegant, intelligent and original thing. Well done, Mr. Gore. > I have to tell you, this really does feel like a 1960 moment to me. I was > a > little girl when a Catholic got chosen to run for president, and I had > gathered from the conversation of grownups that You Don't Elect Catholics > to the Presidency. When it happened, it's hard to describe how exciting > and > moving and idealism-inspiring it was. It gave a lot of people a lot of > joy. > It opened things up more. That was a good thing. So is this. > And because this is such a good thing, I hope everyone of whatever > politics > or persuasion sits back for a few days and feels good about it. Everyone > should be nice and not do any political bashing until . . . Friday. > However, I think it's okay and maybe even helpful to note the following. > Network producers are going to decide, in their bright and touchingly > uninformed minds, that the big opponents of the Lieberman choice will be > Christian conservatives. That's where they'll go for the negative sound > bites. But Christian conservatives love Joe Lieberman. They've been arm in > arm with him in the great cultural battles of the past decade. He was just > about the only Democrat who'd give them the time of day. He was on their > side. > The last time I saw Mr. Lieberman was last spring, in New York, at a > symposium on Hollywood and the culture. I moderated and introduced our > guests--Joe Lieberman and Bill Bennett, who are close friends and > co-warriors in the values battle. Lieberman and Bennett very frankly > talked > to the audience of producers and writers and network people and movie > stars about how to make television and film and music more decent, more > helpful. > This is how people on the right think of and have experienced Mr. > Lieberman--as a good guy with his head screwed on right. > Many conservative Christians--I think most conservative Christians--see > all > of those who love God as part of the same ""cultural minority."" > Conservative > Christians don't feel they have much in common, in terms of their > political > desires, with atheists and agnostics and leftist Episcopalian bishops and > such. But they think they have a great deal in common with Orthodox Jews. > They crowd around Rabbi Daniel Lapin when he speaks at a conservative > gathering; they crowd around Dennis Prager, Michael Medved, David Horowitz > and scores of others. One of the biggest heroes of conservative Christians > is an Orthodox Jew called Dr. Laura; the last time I saw her she was > wowing them at a born-again Christian assembly at the National Prayer > Breakfast last February. > A powerful and respected political officeholder told me Monday that > there's > ""no upside"" to the Lieberman choice. I told him there's no downside. He > was surprised and said, ""He can't even campaign on Saturdays!"" I said so > what, America would love to see a politician who actually put God first > one day a week. > I wish I'd added this: Remember Sandy Koufax? Joe Lieberman not > campaigning on Saturday is Sandy Koufax not pitching on Yom Kippur. There > were a lot of great sports moments in the 1950s and 1960s, but none > greater than the day in 1965 when Mr. Koufax put God before the World > Series. What a great guy, what a lesson for a generation of Christian and > Jewish kids. And Muslims and everyone else too. > Yes, it's good news for Hillary. It's great news for Hillary. It enlivens > part of her New York base, it says to New York Jews that the Democrats are > the party that did this great thing, it excites people--and may help them > forget, or at least not remember so vividly, that the Democratic > senatorial > candidate has, shall we say, a not fully satisfying relationship with New > York's Jews. A historic choice like the Mr. Lieberman can overwhelm a lot > of > previous bad static. > But let's not care about that for now. The headline is not ""Is It Good for > Hillary?"" The headline is: ""It Is Good for America."" It is a wonderful > country that does something like this, that takes a good man who is a > member of a small ethnic/religious minority to be one of its two major > vice > presidential candidates, and that greets that choice with resounding > hurrahs. > This is really a great day. We should all be happy. We really are a > maturing > democracy. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Transatlantic meetings; [EMail-Body]= fyi ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/09/2001 07:56 AM --------------------------- From: John on 07/09/2001 09:43 AM GDT Sent by: Kerry Ferrari/Enron@EUEnronXGate To: Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Raymond Bowen/ENRON@enronXgate, Michael Brown/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Rick Buy/ENRON@enronXgate, Richard Causey/ENRON@enronXgate, Wade David Cox/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, David W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES, James Derrick/ENRON@enronXgate, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES, Jim Fallon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Andrew S Fastow/ENRON@enronXgate, Mark Frevert/ENRON@enronXgate, Ben Glisan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kevin Hannon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Rod Hayslett/ENRON@enronXgate, Stanley Horton/ENRON@enronXgate, James A Hughes/ENRON@enronXgate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Koenig/ENRON@enronXgate, John J Lavorato/ENRON@enronXgate, Kenneth Lay/ENRON@enronXgate, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Danny McCarty/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Mike Mcconnell/ENRON@enronXgate, Mark Metts/Enron@EnronXGate, Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Cindy Olson/ENRON@enronXgate, Lou L Pai/HOU/EES@EES, Greg Piper/ENRON@enronXgate, Ken Rice/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Matthew Scrimshaw/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Jeffrey A Shankman/ENRON@enronXgate, Jeffrey Sherrick/ENRON@enronXgate, John Sherriff/ENRON@EUEnronXGate, Jeff Skilling/ENRON@enronXgate, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Greg Whalley/ENRON@enronXgate, Richard Lewis/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Joe Gold/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Matthew Scrimshaw/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Michael Mike Farmer/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Michael Brown/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Fernley Dyson/Enron@EUEnronXGate cc: Subject: Transatlantic meetings To the Executive Committee: Attached is a note that has been sent to our managers regarding off-site and team-building meetings. My impression is that our commendable efforts to build transatlantic synergies are resulting in too many get-togethers that require substantial travel. Our challenge is that such gatherings are far more costly and time-consuming for us to attend than our Houston colleagues might realize. Often, participating in these meetings takes an entire week for Enron Europe employees (especially if they are outside of Texas). Naturally, they may feel that this time of year (PRC time) is exactly the wrong time from a career perspective to miss this kind of gathering. These off-sites are sometimes scheduled at the end of a quarter, which compounds the difficulty; worse still are the times they occur at the end of Q2, since it also coincides and conflicts with the PRC process. I would appreciate your efforts to remind your managers to consider the travel time and costs (both direct and indirect) when inviting international employees to off-site meetings in the US. We appreciate the chance to be included in the broader Enron initiatives and to share ideas across organizations, but we are really trying to reinforce the message about managing expenses. Thanks! John Sherriff (Letter sent to all Enron Europe VPs and direct reports) We still have issues regarding Offsites and 'Team Building' exercises. In particular, we have recently had examples of departments failing to inform other key work groups when workplace absences are pending. In order to avoid misunderstandings, and to increase transparency, the following will apply with immediate effect: Any Offsite or 'Team Building' exercise which any group (both commercial and non-commercial, and including John and myself)intends to undertake must be communicated, in advance, to all department heads. Issue to be identified include: all participants who will out of the office, total costs of the exercise; and, where appropriate, work load coverage details. John and I are very supportive of team building exercises but we much prefer that they be conducted in the evenings or at weekends. To the extent that is not possible, we must absolutely avoid quarter ends and ensure all work is appropriately covered. Trips to Houston and especially resorts in the US are far more difficult to justify based on the substantial travel time and costs involved. So please pay particular attention to optimising our transatlantic travel. Please communicate this policy to your staff. Michael Brown [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= More Than Words; [EMail-Body]= Dear Jeff There aren't any ""corporate speak"" words that can express what I feel, so I will use plain English: I am thrilled that I will be working for you at Enron. I look forward to helping you and your team continue to transform Enron into the number one company in the world and into the best company in the world. I have sent my bio to Steve Kean and will send him my list of my preferred California contacts. By mid-week, I will send you a cleaned-up version of the suggestions I outlined in our meeting. I look forward to the next steps. It is an honor to be working with you again. I pledge to you my very best. Sincerely, [IMAGE] Contact Information E-mail kevinscott@onlinemailbox.net Phone (213) 926-2626 Fax (707) 516-0019 Traditional Mail PO Box 21074 ?Los Angeles, CA 90021 - image001.png - image002.gif [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: EES - RAC Deal Approval Meeting; [EMail-Body]= I understood the ""validation"" process to be a fairly flexible name applied to a wide variety of approaches. What we specifically discussed, and what scott s. left prepared and committed to do, involved looking at individual curves, the assumptions underlying them and some process (yet to be specifically determined) for addressing updates. We agreed to start with the top 20 curves and especially those which are involved in the upcoming deals. I think the confusion is in what the term validation means. In the ENA context it means one thing; in this context it means what we discussed (which was in Jim's memo and, as you'll recall, we went through point-by-point). Let's just get this done. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 04/18/2000 05:10 PM --------------------------- James D Steffes 04/18/2000 03:46 PM To: Scott Gahn/HOU/EES@EES cc: john David Gorte@ECT, Rick Buy@ECT, Scott Gahn@EES, Jeremy Blachman@EES, Scott Stoness@EES, Karen L Barbour@ECT, Steven J Kean@EES, Harry Kingerski@EES, Gia Vladimir Gorny/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: EES - RAC Deal Approval Meeting Scott -- We should talk about what was agreed to at the meeting. My discussions with others indicated that both (a) a curve validation process and (b) a deal-by-deal review would be undertaken. The deal-by-deal review is especially critical during the implementation of a structured curve validation process. In addition, even when the curve validation process is fully up and running, we should continue looking at major position impacts in new transactions. There are many curves to review. It seems reasonable to look at the critical rate curves as appropriate. Let me know. Jim Steffes Scott Gahn 04/15/2000 07:25 AM To: John cc: David Gorte@ECT, Rick Buy@ECT, Scott Gahn@EES, Jeremy Blachman@EES, Scott Stoness@EES, Karen L Barbour@ECT, Steven J Kean@EES, James D Steffes@EES, Harry Kingerski@EES, Gia Subject: Re: EES - RAC Deal Approval Meeting In the interest of clarity: It was agreed that ongoing curve validation consistent with that followed on wholesale curves would be instituted. It was further agreed that certain information would be provided by Scott Stoness to get this process going. Such ongoing validation should make the impractical deal-by-deal review described below both redundant and unnecessary. I assume the list below did not contemplate the type of curve validation process we discussed and agreed to at the meeting. To: David Gorte@ECT, Rick Buy@ECT, Scott Gahn@EES, Jeremy Blachman@EES, Scott Stoness@EES, Karen L Barbour@ECT cc: Steven J Kean@EES, James D Steffes@EES, Harry Kingerski@EES, Gia Subject: EES - RAC Deal Approval Meeting As mentioned in yesterday's meeting, below are Jim Steffes' comments relative to what information should be presented to Government Affairs when EES brings a deal to RAC. ---------------------- Forwarded by John Neslage/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 04/14/2000 02:53 PM --------------------------- James D Steffes@EES 04/09/2000 12:11 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/HOU/EES@EES, John Neslage cc: Marcia A Linton/HOU/EES@EES Subject: EES - RAC Deal Approval Meeting I received word late last week that Dave Gorte (works for Rick Buy) is setting up a meeting to discuss the process under which EES will have its deals considered by RAC. I think that we should argue that the following package of information be pre-assembled and provided to Govt Affairs when EES brings a deal to RAC: 1. List of each position by utility and by rate class within the deal 2. Regulated Rate forecasts by utility and by rate class for each position in the deal. Not just the ""scalars"" but also the absolute $/Mwh. 3. For each impacted position, the key assumptions contained within the curves - a. deregulation date (if any) b. stranded cost roll-off date (if any) c. standard offer end date (if any) d. other rate reduction dates and amounts (if any) 4. Revenue side or Cost side contract terms that impact the deal (for example, movement in pricing terms given some event) I also think that we should have at least 3 working days to review this package. If anyone can think of anything else that would ease our analysis, I would be game. Thanks. JDS [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Presidential Gala, May 22nd; [EMail-Body]= Stay in touch with linda ro the recommendation. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/13/2001 08:03 PM --------------------------- cordia@cordia.com on 05/10/2001 09:08:52 AM Please respond to cordia@cordia.com To: ""Steven J. Kean"" <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: Presidential Gala, May 22nd SK - Ginger & I have already forwarded some letters, etc. regarding the Gala to Linda R. mm To: Friends and Associates From: Lou Cordia Date: May 9, 2001 Re: Presidential Gala on May 22nd I hope you and/or your colleagues will join us in the first major event honoring President and Mrs. Bush on May 22, 2001 in Washington, D.C. Would you please consider buying a table for your office or tickets for individual colleagues? The reception and dinner is a gathering of government officials from the White House, U.S. Senate, U.S. House as well as as Governors and other state and local government leaders. Please use the attachments to - Purchase a table or ticket(s), and - Forward this e-mail to colleagues. The deadline to respond is May 18th! Please e-mail a reply back to me so that I do not bother you with follow-up emails or phone calls stating: - The number of tickets or a table that you will be purchasing, or - You already purchased your tickets or table, or - You will not be participating in the May 22nd event. For your use, I am attaching a (1) letter from the Co-Chairmen of the Gala, Jeff Marcus and Al Hoffman; (2) response form to fax or mail to the RNC; and (3) hyper-link to the Gala website to register online or join various membership groups of the RNC. I look forward to hearing from you. - HOFFMAN MARCUS LETTER & RESPONSE FORM2.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: SRP SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL - PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL FOR
 SETTLEM	ENT DISCUSSIONS ONLY; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: =09Joel Greene [mailto:IMCEANOTE= =20 Sent:=09Monday, July 30, 2001 11:11 AM To:=09agold@coral-energy.com; amy.sheridan@williams.com; barryp@bp.com; bbr= igham@sidrichgas.com; bealljp@texaco.com; bgray@cc.state.az.us; Bgray@EPEle= ctric.com; bjost@huberlaw.com; bwhitta@pnm.= com; carpentierd@dsmo.com; caschindler@hhla= w.com; cbrechte@apsc.com; cbulf@oneok.com; = coganja@aol.com; craigc@calpine.com; dani= el.collins@elpaso.com; daswanstrom@verner.com; Dave Huard Esq. (E-mail) (E-= mail); dbmcvick@srpnet.com; dfulton@enron.com; dga@sloverandloftus.com; djo= hn@jhenergy.com; dkirkla@pnm.com; dlh@jmbm.com; dlsmith@pplweb.com; dmcwash= @mshpc.com; douglas.porter@sce.com; dtom@btuwatch.com; Dwilliams@kmg.com; e= aro@dynegy.com; edward.mcmurtrie@swgas.com; elizabeth.herdes@elpaso.com; em= yerskerbal@shb.com; Fritz Kolb (E-mail); frl3@pge.com; gbaker@sempra.com; g= cvenz@duke-energy.com; gduede@apsc.com; glander@skippingstone.com; gsmith@j= henergy.com; haorndorff@aeraenergy.com; jab@cpuc.ca.gov; jalward@cc.state.a= z.us; Tholt, Jane M.; jay.golub@bakerbotts= .com; jcashin@epsa.org; jdoering@regroup.com; jeff.goforth@williams.com; je= rry.strange@elpaso.com; jgregg@mbolaw.com; jhmcgrew@brudergentile.com; jima= @pandaenergy.com; jmoriarty@fw-law.com; Joel Greene; jpa3@pge.com; jparker@= govmail.nv.state.us; jpfloom@gkrse-law.com; jpnevins@hhlaw.com; jrlilyestro= m@hhlaw.com; jrogers@btuwatch.com; jstaffier@sdsatty.com; jsuwara@sempra.co= m; judy.heineman@elpaso.com; kadaly@moheck.com; kaprice@srpnet.com; karilee= .ramaley@pinnaclewest.com; kathleen.royal@elpaso.com; kbedwards@gkrse-law.c= om; kbosley@reliant.com; kclark@jhenergy.com; com; klm@dwgp.com; larry.black@swgas.com; lhamilto@utilicorp.com; lindseyho= wdowning@dwt.com; lpadilla@gas.pemex.com; lwsmith@midcogen.com; mark.cook@e= lpaso.com; mark.minich@elpaso.com; mcregar@aeglobalmarkets.com; melissa.max= well@bakerbott.com; mfenton@pnm.com; Michael McElrath (E-mail); mike.langst= on@southernunion.com; millertr@bp.com; mmexal@giant.com; napedersen@jonesda= y.com; Norm Walker; Pat Anderson (E-mail); patricia.shelton@elpaso.com; pau= l.gendron@eng.pge.com; pcervin@br-inc.com; pckissel@gkrse-law.com; pete.fro= st@usa.conoco.com; pkeeler@br-inc.com; pmohler@hewm.com; pserrano@epelectri= c.com; racosta@epelectric.com; rcashdollar@apachenitro.com; Cantrell, Rebec= ca W.; redavis@sempra.com; rhewlett@aepnet.org; richard.derryberry@elpaso.c= om; rlacey@govmail.nv.state.us; robert.tomlinson@elpaso.com; rosa.jackson@e= lpaso.com; rpetti@ladwp.com; rrich@bracepatt.com; salleyoo@dwt.com; sally.t= urley@elpaso.com; sandrar@prestongates.com; sarah.tomalty@dynegy.com; sbree= n@czn.com; scmertz@aep.com; Scott Walton; sjf@cpuc.ca.gov; sjroyka@columbia= energygroup.com; slevine@brattle.com; Susan Ginsberg; susan.jones@eng.pge.c= om; tarpeysp@bp.com; tcarlson@apsc.com; tcubbage@cov.com; tdickers@westerng= as.com; vitagliano@gas.pemex.com; vrspurg@ppco.com; william.healy@elpaso.co= m; wlansinger@sempra.com Subject:=09SRP SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL - PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL FOR SETTLE= M=09ENT DISCUSSIONS ONLY Importance:=09High Attached are three documents (cover memo, draft settlement proposal, settlement procedures timeline) comprising SRP's formal proposal to resolve five pending dockets, RP99-507 (Indicated Shippers' Complaint), RP00-336 (Order No. 637 Allocation and Pooling Issues only), RP99-139 (ONEOK Complaint), RP01-484 (Indicated Shippers/California Complaint), and RP01-48= 6 (Texas, New Mexico and Arizona Shippers' Complaint). We appreciate the suggestions received to date and believe that while an uncontested settlement may be unlikely, a sufficient nucleus is forming around the elements of this proposal that will lead to the filing of an Offer of Settlement and ultimate FERC approval as in the public interest. We encourage your active participation in this process. Note that while Advisory Staff present at the July 18 Technical Conference is aware conceptually that SRP will be distributing a settlement proposal, this proposal has not been distributed to the Advisory Staff. This proposa= l has been sent to Rick Miles, Director, Dispute Resolution Services, for informational purposes only at this time. Joel L. Greene Energy Advocates LLP 202-371-9889 202-371-9025 (fax) jlgreene@energyadvocates.com <<SRP EPNG Settle.cvr.doc>> <<SRP EPNG Capacity Proposal.06.26.doc>> <<Proceduralschedule.doc>> - SRP EPNG Settle.cvr.doc=20 - SRP EPNG Capacity Proposal.06.26.doc=20 - Proceduralschedule.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Senate Staff Briefing, per Cynthia and Genevieve Murphy American
 Petroleum Institute 202-682-8410, fax 682-8294; [EMail-Body]= Dirkson Senate Office building, room 628, 3:00 - 4:00. Same sort of briefing as when you did the House Staff Briefing, same people will be presenting with you. Same people as last time, except Ricardo Byrd of Nat'l Assoc. of Neighborhoods, they'll try to find a replacement for him. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: California Power Issues Database; [EMail-Body]= Add Mona Petrochko, peggy mahoney and Rob Bradley Gavin Dillingham@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 08/25/2000 04:55 PM To: joe Hartsoe@ENRON, Sandra McCubbin@EES, Susan Mara@EES, Paul Kaufman@ECT, Karen Denne@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich@EES, Mark Palmer@ENRON, James D Steffes@EES, Richard Shapiro@EES, Elizabeth Linnell@EES, Jeannie Mandelker@ECT, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark A Schroeder@ENRON, Peter Styles@ECT cc: Subject: California Power Issues Database We have developed an intranet site/database for information tracking purposes for the California Power Issue. The intranet site will be placed on the home.enron.com webpage by Tuesday morning for all Enron employees to access. However, today, this comprehensive database is available to you for your California Power Issue needs. The database has been populated with the latest information that I have received concerning this topic and has been broken down in three categories: California Power Issues, National Power Issues and Secured Documents. It has then been broken down further into subcategories. The secured documents sections will only be accessible to those that are receiving this e-mail. Please let me know if you believe others should have access to this information. The secured document section contains all the information that I have received that Luntz Consulting has helped us develop, i.e. principals, statements, speeches and facts, as well as, talking points and other statements developed internally. These documents can be easily switched to open access to all Enron employees if you believe that these documents should not be restricted. To access the intranet site you must be logged on to the network and then go to this link: (It is best if you copy this link and paste it in your internet Explorer or Netscape browser.) Once you are at this site you will be able to access all articles and information that I have collected/received concerning the California Power Issue. You can navigate the site by using the links on the left hand side of the screen. While navigating this site, keep in mind that the actual interface will be changed before we go live on Tuesday morning. To access the secured documents, click on secured documents and type in your user name, which is the same as if you are logging onto the network, and then type in your password, which is the same as if you are logging onto the network. However, if you have difficulties entering this site, you will need to change your Lotus internet password. Which is very simple to do and which you will need to do regardless if you decide to use this site or not, it is all part of the current computer migration. To change your internet password, go to this link and then hit the edit person key. Go to the last field that says internet password and type in whatever password you would like, preferably your current network login password. (In the internet password section you will see a bunch of numbers and letters, delete those and enter your new network password.) There are still some bugs that will be worked out by Tuesday, but I thought since this is such a fast moving issue it was best to get this tool out so it could be used when needed. If you have any questions, please call me at 713-853-4382. Thanks, Gavin [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CA Supply Realities; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 02/28/2001 02:22 PM ----- James D Steffes 02/26/2001 08:52 AM To: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT, Christian Yoder/HOU/ECT@ECT, Christopher F Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT, Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, David W Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Elizabeth Sager/HOU/ECT@ECT, Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES, Eric Thode/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Gordon Savage/HOU/EES@EES, Greg Wolfe/HOU/ECT@ECT, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Jubran Whalan/HOU/EES@EES, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeffrey T Hodge/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John J Lavorato/Corp/Enron@Enron, John Kathryn Corbally/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Keith Holst/HOU/ECT@ect, Kristin Walsh/HOU/ECT@ECT, Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Marcia A Linton/NA/Enron@Enron, Mary Schoen/NA/Enron@Enron, mday@gmssr.com, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael Tribolet/Corp/Enron@Enron, Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Mike Grigsby/HOU/ECT@ECT, Neil Bresnan/HOU/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Robert C Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron, Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron, Robert Johnston/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES, Shelley Corman/Enron@EnronXGate, Steve C Hall/PDX/ECT@ECT, Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron, Travis McCullough/HOU/ECT@ECT, Vance Meyer/NA/Enron@ENRON, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Wendy Conwell/NA/Enron@ENRON, William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: CA Supply Realities For those that have not seen this analysis, attached please find a note from Mary Schoen detailing the serious physical shortage problems that may occur this Summer in CA. Jim ----- Forwarded by James D Steffes/NA/Enron on 02/26/2001 08:51 AM ----- Mary Schoen 02/22/2001 02:55 PM To: Neil Bresnan/HOU/EES@EES, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Jubran Whalan/HOU/EES@EES, Kristin Walsh/HOU/ECT@ECT, Clayton Seigle/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeffrey Keeler/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: CA Supply Realities Attached is a memo comparing the CEC's forecasted supply and a more realistic look at what additional resources might be available this summer. The bottom line is that: 1. The CEC significantly underestimates the outages that may occur this summer. They estimate in their 5,000 MW supply deficit for the summer that expected outages will be around 3,000MW. However, November and December saw significantly higher outage levels. (7,265 MWs) The FERC has investigated these outages and found no improprieties- just that the plants are overtaxed from running at higher than normal capacities. 2. There are a lot of uncertainties surrounding the 1,244 MWs of projected supply from rerating/restarting existing thermal and renewable projects. It is very unclear how much of this will be able to come on line by this summer, if at all. As evidenced by the e-mail I sent out this morning, local communities may be very opposed to restarting shut down units. In addition, these units are likely to be uneconomical. 3. In the existing resource pool, there are roughly 1,430 MWs of peaking or other generation units that are running up against their operating hour limitations from air quality regulations. The Governor has ordered the local air quality districts to address these restrictions, We are beginning to seem some movement; however, the US EPA has yet to weigh in on these relaxed standards. 4. The distributed generation/back-up generation capacity to make up some of the shortfall is still an unknown. While there has been some relaxing of the limitations on run hours for back-up generation at ""essential public services"" the increase in DG is expected from ""clean"" sources, not diesel emergency generators. 5. The CEC is doing everything it can to get 50+ MW peaking units on-line by this summer. They are promising a 21-day permit application approval process and are offering to pay half of the cost of offsets, for ""clean"" sources of generation in critical areas. Please let me know if you have any questions or need additional information. CEC's Summer Forecasted Peak Demand - Resource Balance: List of Peakers running into their operating hour limitations: Also available in hard copy format only: (please e-mail me your fax number if you'd like a copy) Table 1: Fully Executed CA ISO Summer Reliability Agreements (the ISO Peaking Facilities) Table 2: Summer 2001 Supply Options - Renewables Construction Status Summary Table 3: Summer 2001 Supply Options - Rerate of Non-CEC Projects Table 4: Summer 2001 Supply Options - CEC Rerate Status Summary Table 5: Idle Biomass Plants Potentially Capable of Restart Mary Schoen Environmental Strategies Enron Corp 713-345-7422 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: followup to telephone conversation of 3-7-01; [EMail-Body]= Excerpts by email are fine. Also, as I mentioned, I am very impressed with your background and accomplishments, but I would like to have you meet a couple of other people in my group before making a final offer. Thanks and stay warm! ""Kim, Amy"" <AKim@m-g.com> 03/09/2001 08:44 AM To: ""'skean@enron.com'"" <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: followup to telephone conversation of 3-7-01 Dear Mr. Kean: Thank you for your call. I am looking forward to working for you. I will be available as of June 1, 2001. I will have the writing samples and resume ready for you on Monday, March 1, 2001. Should I fax it to you? Also, my dissertation is quite lengthy. Would you like for me to forward you one chapter or just a couple pages? As discussed, I will be available to come down to Houston between March 30 and April 6, 2001. More snow (as in 6 inches) is expected today and tomorrow. I'm only 5'6"". Pretty soon I will be buried in it since it's snow upon snow. HELP!! I look forward to seeing you again. Regards, Amy [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= DeFazio; [EMail-Body]= fyi ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/11/2001 03:59 PM --------------------------- Linda Robertson 05/11/2001 03:16 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/Enron@EnronXGate, bandrews@quinngillespie.com cc: John Shelk/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: DeFazio Here's what John found. We will follow up with DeFazio. He is extremely liberal. His credibility is highly linked to his highly liberal positions. Most pundits will see this for what it is, given the source. But we will see him soon. ----- Forwarded by Linda Robertson/NA/Enron on 05/11/2001 04:12 PM ----- John Shelk 05/11/2001 04:11 PM To: Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: DeFazio's proposal is on the first page of his website. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Return of Confidential Materials; [EMail-Body]= Jeff. I have no docs on this transaction. Thus have nothing to destroy. Michelle -------------------------- Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net) [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Call to Bob Glynn; [EMail-Body]= Per our discussion this morning, below is a summary of items to discuss with Glynn: Adding Enron's ""negative CTC claim"" to the list of claims: PGE's filing included a list of top twenty creditors. Our negative CTC claim was apparently not taken into account in compiling that list. The list is nonbinding, however. PG&E will be required to file schedules of creditors on April 20. Our negative CTC claim should be on Schedule F (for unsecured claims). You may want to remind Glynn of your previous conversations and state our expectation that the negative CTC claim will appear (preferably as uncontested) in the April 20 filing. (Note: if PG&E does not include the claim we have an opportunity to file a proof of claim and ultimately the court determines the validity of the claim). Including Enron on the Creditors' Committee: PG&E may have the opportunity to influence representation on the creditors' committees. There are several reasons to suggest to Glynn that we be included: 1) we are a big creditor, 2) we could be helpful in crafting a broader solution, and 3) we are one of the real parties in interest behind the PX and ISO (who were listed as significant creditors but are really just ""passthroughs"" for the suppliers ... and PG&E likely would not want to have those political bodies serving on the creditors committee anyway). [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= SDG&E; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/25/2000 07:11 AM --------------------------- Christopher F Calger@ECT 08/24/2000 06:04 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: SDG&E Steve, SDG&E came out with the attached RFP for fixed price power. They are requesting proposals for several standard blocks through 12/03. Responses are due August 30. ENA/EPMI will be prepared to respond, if appropriate. In the meantime, we continue to price the full requirements residential structure and await any news from the governor's office/legislature. I can be reached at 503-464-3735. Regards, Chris [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: risk 2001 follow up; [EMail-Body]= Peter, Look forward to meeting you in Houston. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Peter Antoniadis Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 11:07 AM To: Vince Kaminski (E-mail) Subject: risk 2001 follow up Vince Thanks for dropping by the Algo booth yesterday. As discussed, I will call you shortly to arrange our follow up meeting in Houston. In the meantime, do not hesitate to call if you have any questions. Regards, Peter Antoniadis Algorithmics 416-217-4166 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Revised Electricity Emergency Authorities Memo; [EMail-Body]= This is a thorough and helpful analysis. But, have we considered the broader emergency powers the president might have (i.e. beyond the clean air act waivers requested by a governor)? It would seem that the importance of the defense business in California, the large number of military facilities, the public safety hazards of widespread blackouts, etc. ought to trigger some broader authority. Richard Shapiro 05/21/2001 05:26 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Revised Electricity Emergency Authorities Memo FYI ---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron on 05/21/2001 05:26 PM --------------------------- Linda Robertson 05/21/2001 03:03 PM To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Revised Electricity Emergency Authorities Memo Here's a first draft of the emergency powers memo Sarah put together with V&E. We are still awaiting one more section on the Federal Reserve's authority. As you will note, there is remarkable authority vested in the President, including eminent domain. Please note page 7, which read in combination with footnote #4 gives wide authority to the Federal government. Let's decide soon how we want to use this memo. Thanks. - 140855_1.DOC [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: NewPower Withdrawal Notes; [EMail-Body]= How about inserting the attached (after the explanation about the relationship between New Power and Enron)? Binky Davidson@EES 03/15/2001 05:35 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: NewPower Withdrawal Notes Mark Muller sends the attached for your information and comments. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Kissinger; [EMail-Body]= Sorry, I got overwhelmed by California. I have not talked to Ken yet and will be in Japan until Friday. Perhaps we can hook up then? From: Rebecca McDonald/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/11/2001 02:46 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Kissinger Steve, We never closed the loop on Kissinger. If you are around next week, why don't we talk and resolve what we want to do so that I can proceed? Does that work for you? Rebecca [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Tom DeLay CA Aug Dinner & Golf event; [EMail-Body]= Jeff, I spoke to Joannie this afternoon and asked for your e-mail to send this invitation. Here is the initial information on the event. We are expecting additional members of Congress to attend both events. If you have any questions or comment, please let me know. I have attached a word doc. as well: Tom DeLay / ARMPAC Guest Speaker - David Horowitz Four Seasons Aviara - Dinner & Golf Tournament The event will take place: Wednesday, August 15 Four Seasons Aviara (Northern San Diego, CA) Golf Lunch will start at 11am Tee times at 12:15pm An informal reception afterwards Limited to 40 people Cost is $5k per person Dinner Reception 6 to 6:45pm Dinner 7 to 8:30pm Speakers Tom DeLay and David Horowitz $1,500 per person, $2,500 per couple There are four levels of sponsorship: $100K, $50k, $25k and $15k. Contribution levels will also transfer from the dinner and/or Golf Tournament to the ARMPAC ""contributor sponsorship program."" Bill Gowan Election Day Consulting, LLC 1947 Camino Vida Roble, suite 104 Carlsbad, CA 92009 760 929.1203 electiondayconsulting.com - Aug 15 Golf dinner.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: PG&E PX Credit Calculation -- CONFIDENTIAL ATTY CLIENT WORK
 PRODUCT; [EMail-Body]= I assume that if an hourly PX market clearing price is mitigated per a FERC order it would affect variable ""HC"" in the formula laid out in the attachment. It is not clear to me which variable represents hourly ISO imbalance energy costs, but I assume its ""Est RT$"". If I am right, that variable would be affected by the mitigated market price (MMP) for CAISO imbalance energy. My comments are: The FERC is able to only order refunds to jurisdictional entities and, given appeals, it may take years before the full extent of thre refunds are known. Therefore there will be a significant difference between the change in the mitigated market price (MMP) as declared by FERC and the PX credit. That is, a 10% reduction in the MMP should not be construed as having a 10% effect on the PX credit, assuming it can be recalculated at all. Specifically, only some of the ""HC"" or ""Est RT$"" costs can be adjusted per FERC refund orders. Also, the PX credit is a tariffed rate. I do not believe the PU code allows for retroactive adjustments to tariffed rates unless there was an explicit cost tracking account (e.g. a balancing A/C). To my knowledge, no such account exists here. Finally, I do not see a relationship between MMPs and (1) block forward costs on any date and (2) PG&E and/or DWR's procurement costs for the net short position post January 19. So, those PX credit costs should be unaffected by any FERC refund order. Alan Comnes -----Original Message----- From: Steffes, James D. Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 7:22 AM To: Dasovich, Jeff; Tribolet, Michael; Curry, Wanda; Mellencamp, Lisa; Jan Paul Acton (E-mail); Swain, Steve; Mara, Susan; Comnes, Alan Subject: PG&E PX Credit Calculation Attached is a summary of PG&E's notes on how they calculate the PX Credit (until January 19, 2001 when they hardwired $150/mwh). We continue to try and get a handle on how the FERC Refund case will impact the PX Credit and Negative CTC. If anyone has any issues or comments, please let me know. Thanks. Jim << File: PG&E PX Credit Calculation.doc >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: Sac Bee, Wed, 6/6: Businesses vie for blackout exemptions:=20 The PUC must decide who should be spared, and the applicant list is very lo= ng Sac Bee, Wed, 6/6: PG&E, ISO agree to court order on power bills Sac Bee, Wed, 6/6: Peter Schrag: Turning up the heat in Houston and=20 Washington (Editorial) SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Is trading an insider's game? SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Daily energy costs for state fall in past weeks=20 SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Five tiers sought in proposed rate boost SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Port budget large, but power bills loom SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Continuous use urged for planned power plant=20 SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Rising energy prices threaten Poway troupe=20 SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Fair to use generators for midway attractions LA Times, Wed, 6/6: 'Hi, My Name Isn't Justice, Honey,' and Shame on Lockye= r =20 (Editorial) LA Times, Wed, 6/6: U.S. Probes Alleged Pact Not to Build New Plants Power:= =20 Justice officials focus on Southland operations of two firms, which deny=20 wrongdoing LA Times, Wed, 6/6: Natural Gas, Power Prices Drop Sharply Energy:=20 More conservation, mild weather are among factors keeping costs down, exper= ts=20 say LA Times, Wed, 6/6: The State Utility Averts $1 Billion in Costs Courts:=20 PG&E and Cal-ISO agree to recognize Department of Water Resources as=20 purchaser of the power SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: Dramatic drop in cost of electricity=20 LOWER BILLS: Cheaper fuel, milder weather credited SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: San Jose council gives green light to generating plant= =20 VOTE REVERSAL: Officials pressured to OK project SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: Developments in California's energy crisis SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: California conserves SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: L.A. power customers awash in cheap energy SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: PG&E doesn't want to pay for energy to avert blackouts Mercury News, Wed, 6/6: Metcalf plant gets preliminary approval=20 OC Register, Wed, 6/6: Feds probe AES, Williams Individual.com (PRnewswire), Wed, 6/6: Calpine Begins Construction of=20 Peaking Energy Center in Gilroy, Calif.=20 Individual.com (PRnewsire), Wed, 6/6: Reliant Urges FERC to Drop or Amend= =20 California Price Caps to Avoid Additional Shortages and More Blackouts Energy Insight, Wed, 6/6: Farm-fresh biopower --- Businesses vie for blackout exemptions: The PUC must decide who should be= =20 spared, and the applicant list is very long. By Carrie Peyton and Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writers (Published June 6, 2001)=20 Mixes for milkshakes and frozen coffees could spoil at ice cream parlors,= =20 sickening customers.=20 Seniors getting their hair done would have to leave their dryers and go hom= e=20 with wet heads, risking a chill.=20 Mall escalators could come to a sudden halt, endangering shoppers who lose= =20 their footing.=20 Those are among the health and safety risks cited by more than 10,000=20 businesses and government bodies asking state regulators to exempt them fro= m=20 rolling blackouts.=20 It is a list that mixes nursing homes and grocery stores, outpatient surgic= al=20 clinics and beauty salons, dialysis centers and country clubs.=20 ""A lot of people are treating this like a lottery,"" said Subodh Medhekar of= =20 Exponent Inc., the consulting firm sorting through exemption requests for t= he=20 state Public Utilities Commission.=20 For many, Medhekar said, the rationale seems to be "" 'I'm pretty sure I won= 't=20 get exempted, but what's the down side? Let's put in an application.' ""=20 Amid predictions that Californians could face dozens of rolling blackouts= =20 this summer, state regulators are trying to update a decades-old list of wh= o=20 should be spared if the lights go out.=20 The Alta Sierra County Club in Grass Valley should be among those whose pow= er=20 stays on, Sean O'Brien, the club's golf course superintendent, told=20 regulators in a nine-page application.=20 The country club telephones could go out, making it harder to phone for hel= p=20 if someone has a medical problem while golfing, he said in an interview.=20 And if the golf course's irrigation pumps shut down, it would lose the=20 ability to quell small blazes -- leaving it to rely on a fire station O'Bri= en=20 said is about one-quarter mile away.=20 Placerville Dialysis wants an exemption, too. As many as a dozen people the= re=20 can be having their blood pumped through an artificial kidney that cleans i= t=20 when their own kidneys no longer function properly.=20 ""When the power goes out, everything just stops,"" said manager Shirley=20 Carpenter. ""There is a way to manually return the blood by hand before it= =20 clots in the line. ... It would just be hectic.""=20 It takes about five minutes of manual pumping to fully disconnect someone= =20 from a dialysis machine, Carpenter said. And some patients can help by=20 operating their own pumps.=20 But, she said, ""I'm sure it would be kind of frightening to have your blood= =20 out in the line and the power off, and they're pretty much tied to the=20 machine.""=20 Pam Chin, a hairdresser at the Loomis Beauty Salon, said the owner sought a= n=20 exemption because people could get overheated if the air conditioning went= =20 out, and older customers getting their hair set could be chilled if the=20 dryers shut off.=20 With about half the state already exempt from rolling blackouts, the questi= on=20 of who else should stay connected has become a delicate one for utilities,= =20 regulators and legislators.=20 Carl Wood, the PUC commissioner who has taken the lead on blackout issues,= =20 estimates that fewer than 1,000 more utility customers can be exempted befo= re=20 they overload the rolling outage system designed to take stress off the=20 electric grid.=20 While about 6,000 customers are classified as ""essential"" by the state's tw= o=20 largest utilities, keeping them out of the blackout rotation also spares=20 about 5 million other customers who are served by the same circuits.=20 That multiplier effect will have to be weighed by the consulting firm, by= =20 utilities and eventually by PUC commissioners, who are scheduled to vote in= =20 early August on who should be added to existing standards.=20 The rules will apply to the state's investor-owned utilities, Pacific Gas a= nd=20 Electric Co., Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric Co.,= =20 but not to municipal utilities.=20 The Sacramento Municipal Utility District already rejected pleas for specia= l=20 exemptions from a medical lab, a veterinary hospital, nursing homes, medica= l=20 facilities, businesses and residents. SMUD believes they can weather=20 blackouts because they are not critical to public safety.=20 People have counted on having dependable electricity for so long that some= =20 have widely varying ideas of who can do without it safely, Medhekar said.= =20 Of the more than 500 Baskin Robbins ice cream parlors that dot California,= =20 only five are listed on the PUC Web site as applicants for exemptions.=20 The site cautions that its list of 9,239 electronic applicants hasn't been= =20 checked for duplicates -- or fiction. It includes hundreds of outlets of th= e=20 same drug store and supermarket chains, dozens of related nursing homes and= =20 more than 400 dentists. Another 1,200 commercial power users have applied b= y=20 fax.=20 Among those who have confirmed they want out of outages are the grocery=20 chains operated by West Sacramento-based Raley's, which said it took the=20 action as part of united effort with all California grocers, who are worrie= d=20 about food spoilage.=20 Others in the mix are Fairfield's Westfield Shoppingtown Solano, formerly t= he=20 Solano Mall, where officials sought the exemptions out of fear that shopper= s=20 would get injured if escalators came to a sudden halt.=20 The Yolo County Housing Authority asked for an exemption on behalf of its 7= 00=20 dwellings in the belief that the utilities offer exemptions for low-income= =20 Californians, Executive Director David Serena said.=20 Serena added that many of the authority's occupants are older or disabled a= nd=20 could be endangered by a blackout.=20 Chevron Corp. acknowledged it couldn't show that a blackout at its refineri= es=20 would present ""imminent danger to public health or safety,"" but it asked Go= v.=20 Gray Davis to support legislation exempting makers and transporters for=20 ""critical fuels,"" saying a refinery shutdown would cut into the state's=20 gasoline supply.=20 Some businesses acknowledged that their applications are a long shot.=20 ""It's probably a stretch,"" said Amanda Leveroni, who owns Bacio Catering Co= .=20 of Chico, about her request to the PUC. ""The public wouldn't be in danger.= =20 ""But we're a catering company -- somebody has planned for a year-plus for a= =20 wedding or some big event,"" she added. ""I would be in such a huge situation= .=20 I'd have to send out for pizza.""=20 The Bee's Carrie Peyton can be reached at (916) 321-1086 or=20 cpeyton@sacbee.com. PG&E, ISO agree to court order on power bills By Claire Cooper Bee Staff Writers (Published June 6, 2001)=20 SAN FRANCISCO -- Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and the operator of=20 California's power grid agreed Tuesday to a preliminary court order providi= ng=20 that the utility will continue to receive -- but not pay -- generators' bil= ls=20 for the state's purchases of the most expensive wholesale electricity.=20 The tab has been running at about $300 million a month.=20 The order, which U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali said he'll sign, will= =20 specify that the Independent System Operator will not procure power except= =20 for a ""creditworthy buyer who has agreed to pay the generator.""=20 In California, the only such potential buyer is the state Department of Wat= er=20 Resources. However, the department, which has avoided PG&E Co.'s bankruptcy= =20 proceedings by claiming sovereign immunity, will not be controlled by the= =20 agreement. Montali pointed out that the department still could demand=20 reimbursement from PG&E.=20 Under the agreement, the ISO will not press any claims against PG&E on beha= lf=20 of generators if they are not paid.=20 The proposed preliminary injunction was based on an April order by the=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which forbade the ISO from purchasing= =20 power on behalf of any non-creditworthy buyer, such as PG&E.=20 The ISO is appealing the FERC order. If the appeal succeeds, the injunction= =20 will end.=20 Peter Schrag: Turning up the heat in Houston and Washington (Published June 6, 2001)=20 Behind all the palaver about the predictable standoff at last week's energy= =20 ""summit"" between President Bush and Gov. Gray Davis, one major political=20 development was missed.=20 Put simply, in the past month the focus of the California energy crisis, an= d=20 maybe the onus as well, has moved east: from the state's (and Davis')=20 handling of the mess to the generating companies, energy marketers and gas= =20 pipeline companies that have richly profited from it, and thus to FERC, the= =20 do-next-to-nothing Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and the Bush=20 administration.=20 That wasn't all Davis' doing -- far from it -- though it's been at the hear= t=20 of his message about energy industry ""pirates"" and ""profiteers."" Bush's=20 misbegotten energy plan and the administration's political clumsiness also= =20 contributed mightily, not least by inadvertently giving Davis the chance to= =20 get media exposure he could only have dreamed about.=20 More important, there's the defection of Sen. James Jeffords from the=20 Republican Party and the resulting shift of control in the U.S. Senate, whe= re=20 the next chair of the Energy Committee will be Sen. Jeff Bingaman of New=20 Mexico, a co-sponsor of Sen. Dianne Feinstein's bill capping wholesale=20 electric rates for the next two years. And chairing the Committee on=20 Governmental Affairs will be Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, who's=20 already asked for an audit of energy prices.=20 Those changes will draw a lot more attention to recent studies showing that= a=20 handful of big generators -- Duke Power, Reliant, Mirant, Dynegy and the hu= ge=20 energy-marketing firm Enron -- have gamed the market to drive wholesale=20 prices to levels that, in the year 2000, sometimes reached 40 times the=20 prices of the year before.=20 The findings come not merely from economists at the California Independent= =20 System Operator, the agency that manages the state's grid, who estimate=20 overcharges resulting from market power at $6.2 billion for last year alone= .=20 They come also from Severin Borenstein and his colleagues at the University= =20 of California Energy Institute, who ""conservatively"" calculate the=20 overcharges at $4.5 billion; from Paul Joskow, a widely respected energy=20 economist at MIT; and from Edward Kahn, an economic analyst in San Francisc= o.=20 In a recent paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research,=20 Joskow and Kahn conclude that there's ""considerable evidence that the high= =20 prices experienced in the summer of 2000 reflect the withholding of supplie= s=20 from the market by suppliers [generators or marketers] exercising market=20 power."" That those high prices occurred not merely during peak usage but al= so=20 at off-hours, when no one had ever seen a price spike before, makes those= =20 spikes even more curious.=20 There is, in addition, the powerful suspicion that the huge increase in=20 natural gas prices that a subsidiary of El Paso Energy Co., now the largest= =20 gas company on Earth, was charging on the California side of the=20 California-Arizona border wasn't merely the result of an innocent imbalance= =20 between supply and demand.=20 None of that may be illegal. If there's no collusion, there are no violatio= ns=20 of antitrust laws. But it adds plenty of steam to the political argument. I= n=20 the 2000 election cycle alone, energy companies kicked in some $64 million = in=20 political contributions, 75 percent of it to Republicans. At a time when=20 those companies, many of them located in the same Houston neighborhood, are= =20 racking up astronomical profits and when their collective coziness with Bus= h=20 and the Republican Party is a lot more than rhetoric, their vulnerability t= o=20 a vigorous Senate investigation ought to be obvious.=20 The clincher is ""Blackout,"" a ""Frontline"" program that both symbolizes the= =20 shifting emphasis and reinforces it. (The program is scheduled to be aired = at=20 8 p.m. Friday on Sacramento cable Channel 7.) It isn't another recital of= =20 Californians worrying about their electric bills, or about the stupidity of= =20 the state's deregulation scheme or how Davis dithered in addressing the=20 crisis. It is about those generators and marketers in Houston and North=20 Carolina, men (and a few women) who regard themselves as the heroes of the= =20 new energy markets.=20 The piece is reported by Lowell Bergman, who in working for both ""Frontline= ""=20 and the New York Times has already broken major print stories about Duke=20 Power's secret approach to Davis offering unspecified energy refunds in=20 return for an end to state investigations and lawsuits. Bergman also report= ed=20 private conversations between Enron chairman Kenneth Lay, a major Bush=20 supporter, and FERC chairman Curt Hebert regarding the influence that Lay= =20 could exercise with Bush to allow Hebert to keep his chairmanship if Hebert= 's=20 supported certain decisions Enron badly wants.=20 None of these recent events is likely to end Davis' political woes, and the= y=20 may not produce the wholesale rate caps Feinstein wants and that most=20 economists think necessary -- or maybe any significant reduction in the=20 industry's predatory pricing. But they will surely help turn up the heat,= =20 both in Houston and Washington. Six months ago FERC found wholesale prices= =20 were not ""fair and reasonable"" as federal law requires, but did little abou= t=20 them. It will now have a lot more questions to answer.=20 Peter Schrag can be reached at Box 15779, Sacramento, CA 95852-0779, or at= =20 pschrag@sacbee.com. Is trading an insider's game?=20 Buying, selling of electricity is a growth business, but some say deck is= =20 stacked against consumers By Craig D. Rose=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 While Californians decry deregulation's failure to deliver a competitive=20 market, electricity wholesalers have quietly developed a vast and rapidly= =20 growing business of buying and selling power among themselves.=20 The deals take place on high-tech trading floors in Houston and elsewhere= =20 around the country, as well as on Internet-based trading systems.=20 Some experts say this electricity trading is a key mechanism for raising=20 consumer power prices, yet it's largely unregulated.=20 ""Electricity trading is like buying stock -- when you have ability to chang= e=20 the stock price,"" said Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economics profess= or=20 and member of the state grid operator's market surveillance group.=20 Energy companies say the buying and selling of contracts to deliver power= =20 provides risk management, allowing plant owners to presell their electricit= y,=20 lock in prices and avoid fluctuations. The rough and tumble of the free=20 market, they add, is the most efficient means of allocating a resource like= =20 electricity.=20 But industry critics say trading is far from a competitive market paradigm.= =20 In their view, it's a means of communication -- a way for energy insiders t= o=20 collude and raise prices under the guise of competition.=20 To be sure, the trading arms of major energy companies have emerged as star= s=20 in an industry where profit surges of 300 percent or 400 percent are not=20 uncommon.=20 The transactions, shrouded in secrecy, can leave ownership of a critical=20 commodity in unknown hands. Consider the case of power generated by AES=20 Corp.'s California plants.=20 In 1998, AES made a bold move. Immediately after purchasing power plants th= at=20 gave it control of 10 percent of the state's electric generating capacity,= =20 the company sold the output from its plants for the next 20 years to Willia= ms=20 Cos.=20 Williams did not sit on this treasure trove of electrons. The Tulsa, Okla.,= =20 company soon sold 80 percent of what it bought.=20 It is difficult to say who owns that power now. Some might be owned by Semp= ra=20 Trading, a sister company of SDG&E. Or some could be owned by Enron Corp.,= =20 the nation's biggest electricity trader.=20 A spokeswoman for Williams conceded that Williams itself may have repurchas= ed=20 some of the electricity it sold earlier. But trading companies closely guar= d=20 their positions.=20 This much can be said with certainty: Electricity that AES sold for less th= an=20 5 cents per kilowatt-hour to Williams changed hands perhaps 10 times in the= =20 wholesale market and emerged at times in recent months with a price tag for= =20 consumers that was 300 percent higher.=20 Williams' trading profits increased by 523 percent in the first quarter thi= s=20 year. Advance sales All this buying and selling creates curious confluences.=20 In their attempt to deflect criticism over high prices, generating companie= s=20 such as Duke Energy -- operator of the South Bay Power Plant in Chula and= =20 others in the state -- frequently note that they sell most of their=20 electricity far in advance. But they acknowledge less often that their=20 trading units may also be buying power, which could boost the company's=20 electricity inventory.=20 Duke was the fourth biggest electricity trader last year and cited its=20 trading activity as a prime contributor to its wholesale business profits,= =20 which soared 324 percent in the first quarter to $348 million.=20 It is a company's power traders who frequently direct plant operators to=20 increase or decrease the generation of power in response to market=20 conditions.=20 Energy companies have little option but to turn to trading for profits. One= =20 of the better kept secrets of electrical deregulation and its promise of=20 competition is that there is remarkably little competition in the productio= n=20 side of the business.=20 For one thing, electricity is a commodity; power from one company is=20 indistinguishable from that generated by others.=20 More important, nearly all modern plants generate power from turbines built= =20 by a handful of manufacturers. The result? Modern plants owned by different= =20 companies produce power at nearly identical cost.=20 ""The cost of power produced by modern plants is all within a mil=20 (one-thousandth of a dollar),"" said Michael Peevey, an adviser to Gov. Gray= =20 Davis and former president of Southern California Edison.=20 So the extraction of profit in the electricity business relies much more on= =20 trading. Traders' profits rise when prices are volatile -- plunging, or eve= n=20 better, rising sharply. Little regulation But despite the obvious temptation to manipulate the market, the burgeoning= =20 electricity trading business has remained largely unregulated.=20 The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission does require quarterly filings fro= m=20 energy traders, but these often provide incomplete information, or at least= =20 little that has been of concern to FERC.=20 In fact, although the trading of electricity grew more than a hundredfold= =20 from 1996 to 2000, FERC has taken no major enforcement action against a=20 trader. After the onset of the California crisis last year, FERC has acted= =20 once. That was against Williams, which agreed to pay $8 million without=20 admitting guilt to resolve an allegation that it withheld supply to pump up= =20 prices.=20 FERC's record of enforcement in the area of power trading stands in contras= t=20 to a long list of enforcement actions within other markets taken by the=20 Securities Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission= .=20 FERC has recently added staff to its market oversight operations. But Willi= am=20 Massey, a FERC commissioner, says the agency's effort is still inadequate.= =20 ""Electricity can be flipped, stripped and chopped up,"" Massey said. ""It's a= n=20 extraordinarily complicated market.=20 ""The sophisticated marketers and traders have simply moved past us. We're= =20 kind of horse and buggy in our approach and they're out there in rocket shi= ps=20 flying around ... The problem is that sophisticated traders don't necessari= ly=20 produce reasonable prices. They produce profits.""=20 Before deregulation, electricity trading was a low-key affair. Regulated=20 utilities dealt power back and forth on a reciprocal basis to fill=20 electricity shortfalls in their control areas. There was little trading for= =20 profit until the mid-1990s, after federal legislation and FERC rulings open= ed=20 the market.=20 Major traders include large energy companies, sister companies of=20 California's major utilities and Wall Street firms. Market volatility In many ways, the trading of power is similar to that of other commodities.= =20 But there are important differences. Because it cannot be stored and its us= e=20 is so fundamental, the price of electricity is the most volatile of all.=20 When supplies are tight, a single supplier can rapidly raise prices to=20 budget-busting levels, as evidenced by Duke Energy's recent admission that = it=20 charged California nearly $4,000 for a megawatt-hour of power, a quantity= =20 that probably sold hours earlier for one-tenth of that sum or less.=20 Wolak, the Stanford economist, and state Sen. Joseph Dunn, D-Garden Grove,= =20 who is investigating the state power market, say trading allows companies t= o=20 collude under the guise of competition. Instead of wringing out lowest cost= s,=20 the wholesale trading market serves to raise prices, they say.=20 ""As I trade to you and you trade to me, we communicate to each other what= =20 price we would like to get,"" said Wolak. ""It's not collusive. It's just=20 communicating price.""=20 Mark Palmer, a spokesman for Enron, the nation's biggest power trader, said= =20 California's problem is not the result of trading.=20 ""It's a result of shortages,"" Palmer said.=20 Underscoring its emphasis on trading, Enron's new headquarters tower in=20 downtown Houston rises from a six-story block of new trading floors,=20 including expanded space for electricity trading.=20 Enron also pioneered trading in cyberspace and its Enron Online site claims= =20 to be the most active computer-based trading market.=20 The Houston company argues that consumers won't fully benefit from power=20 trading and deregulation until they have greater choice in choosing their= =20 power supplier. And the company says FERC has not done enough to open acces= s=20 to transmission lines, which would allow traders to move power around the= =20 country. To that end, Enron has lobbied hard for President Bush's plan for = a=20 national electricity grid.=20 Palmer says the notion that the price of electricity rises each time it is= =20 traded is mistaken.=20 ""The market is always looking for the real price of a commodity,"" Palmer=20 said.=20 Dunn, the California state senator, says his investigation found a differen= t=20 function for trading. At a time when supply barely meets or falls short of= =20 demand, he noted, companies with electricity to sell have to worry only abo= ut=20 how high to set their price.=20 ""The trader is a pawn in the generator's game to drive up prices,"" said Dun= n.=20 ""Trading develops a level of trust. You, my alleged competitor, will bid in= =20 the same patterns and I will respond not in a competitive pattern but in a= =20 complimentary pattern.""=20 The state senator said his investigation found evidence that on several day= s,=20 energy companies appeared to test their ability to drive prices up, without= =20 being undercut by competitors.=20 This ability to drive up prices without competitive consequence is a key te= st=20 of market power, the technical term for manipulation or price fixing.=20 But Dunn also conceded that antitrust violations can be hard to prove in=20 court. He suggested that even if the trading behavior falls short of=20 antitrust violations, it remains anti-competitive and devastating for the= =20 California economy.=20 To Harry Trebing, a utility industry expert and professor emeritus at=20 Michigan State University, wholesale electricity trading is reminiscent of= =20 what took place in the 1920s and early '30s. Back then, utility companies= =20 created complex networks of holding companies that traded stock among=20 themselves, driving up prices in the process.=20 Undoing that scheme was a focus of President Franklin Roosevelt's=20 administration. Congress ended up barring national power companies and=20 tightening regulation of utilities, in an effort to counteract their tenden= cy=20 to create markets that work only for insiders.=20 ""The broad goals of trading are the same,"" Trebing said.=20 ""The goal is to maximize profits through raising prices.""=20 Daily energy costs for state fall in past weeks=20 By Ed Mendel=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO -- In some of the first good news of the electricity crisis, the= =20 Davis administration said yesterday that the daily cost of power purchased = by=20 the state for utility customers has dropped in recent weeks.=20 The price-drop news comes after an announcement that Californians conserved= =20 more energy than expected last month, 11 percent, and amid Davis=20 administration optimism that the Legislature may finally begin to move on a= =20 plan to keep Southern California Edison out of bankruptcy.=20 The developments, if they turn out to be a trend and not temporary, could b= e=20 among the first signs that Gov. Gray Davis' plan to end the electricity=20 crisis is beginning to work. But the administration isn't saying that.=20 ""We have had a few good days here lately,"" said S. David Freeman, a Davis= =20 power adviser. ""I don't think that I want to project.""=20 Some power-market watchers began to speculate last month that prices may ha= ve=20 peaked earlier this year. Platts, an energy information service, said=20 yesterday that spot prices for the natural gas used by power plants are=20 falling this month.=20 The governor's press secretary, Steve Maviglio, told reporters yesterday th= at=20 the daily amount spent on power is now ""well below"" $50 million, which was= =20 the average cost earlier this year.=20 A 12-day gap in the most recent notice to the Legislature that another $500= =20 million increment will be spent on power suggests that the daily average=20 during the last two weeks may have dropped down around $42 million.=20 Oscar Hidalgo, a spokesman for the state power purchasing agency, said that= =20 the average cost of power was under $40 million during the first four days = of=20 this month.=20 Maviglio attributed the lower cost to conservation, the phasing in of cheap= er=20 long-term power contracts, fewer power plants off-line for maintenance, and= =20 cooler weather.=20 However, he said, ""The average cost is still way over what we paid last=20 year.""=20 There was widespread skepticism in late April when the governor's consultan= ts=20 predicted that the $346 per megawatt-hour average paid by the state for=20 non-contracted power from April through June would drop to an average of $1= 95=20 from July through September.=20 ""We are still very comfortable with the projection that Mr. Fichera and=20 company estimated,"" Maviglio said, referring to Joseph Fichera of Saber=20 Partners in New York.=20 During a briefing on May 21, Fichera told reporters that the amount of powe= r=20 that the state would obtain under long-term contracts for May was expected = to=20 be about 43 percent of the total required, the so-called net short.=20 Fichera said contracts already signed were expected to cover 66 percent of= =20 the net short in June, 48 percent in July, and 42 percent in August. He sai= d=20 contracts that had been agreed on in principle could increase those amounts= =20 to 73 percent in June, 67 percent in July, and 60 percent in August.=20 ""We are still on target. There are risks,"" Fichera said yesterday, among th= em=20 extended hot weather and power plant outages. ""No one is popping the=20 champagne corks until Sept. 30.""=20 The governor's consultants based their forecast of power demand this summer= =20 on an estimate that Californians will reduce their electricity use by 7=20 percent.=20 The 11 percent reduction last month, as compared to May of last year, came= =20 before the sticker shock of rate hikes that begin this month for customers = of=20 Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric. And a $35 million ad campaign urging= =20 conservation has not hit full stride.=20 Maviglio said the administration plans to release some detailed information= =20 on Monday about the roughly $8 billion the state has spent buying power. Th= e=20 general fund will be repaid by a bond of up to $13.4 billion that ratepayer= s=20 will pay off over 15 years.=20 Legislative leaders have demanded detailed information about power purchase= s=20 before proceeding with the Edison plan. Assembly Democrats are working on a= =20 plan that de-emphasizes state purchase of the Edison transmission system an= d=20 would put most of the burden for paying off Edison's debt on businesses and= =20 large users, not residences. Five tiers sought in proposed rate boost=20 Conservation would be promoted, SDG&E says By Karen Kucher=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 A proposed rate increase for SDG&E customers to cover the high cost of=20 electricity should be imposed in five tiers to encourage conservation, the= =20 company is advising state utility regulators.=20 The more electricity a customer uses, the higher the rate would be.=20 SDG&E needs to raise its rates to bring in an additional $502 million=20 annually to pay the state for power purchases.=20 The state Public Utilities Commission is expected to rule on San Diego Gas = &=20 Electric's rate-increase proposal June 28.=20 The rate changes would remove a cap that has shielded most SDG&E customers= =20 from rising electricity prices for a year. The cap, enacted by state=20 lawmakers in September 2000 and retroactive to June 2000, set rates at 6.5= =20 cents per kilowatt-hour.=20 Higher rates would mean the average SDG&E residential and small-business=20 customer's electricity bills would go up by 18 percent. Large commercial=20 users' bills would average 29 percent more.=20 Public hearings on the issue will be held next Monday and Tuesday in San=20 Diego, El Cajon, Escondido and San Clemente. These sessions will focus on= =20 small-business and residential consumers. Hearings on large commercial user= s=20 were held last month.=20 Earlier this year, the PUC decided to allow the state's two largest=20 utilities, Pacific Gas and Electric and Southern California Edison, to char= ge=20 customers an extra $5.7 billion annually for electricity.=20 The state Department of Water Resources, which has been buying power for=20 SDG&E customers since February, asked SDG&E to generate a total of $915=20 million annually to cover the cost of electricity purchases.=20 With the proposed rate increases, SDG&E could do that.=20 Large commercial customers would pay about 30 percent of the overall increa= se=20 and residential and small-business customers would pay about 70 percent, sa= id=20 Ed Van Herik, a spokesman for the utility company.=20 If the increase can be tiered, as many as 60 percent of residential custome= rs=20 will see no rate increase if their electricity usage remains the same, Van= =20 Herik said.=20 But customers who use more than 130 percent of their baseline -- considered= =20 the minimum amount of electricity needed by a household -- will be billed a= t=20 increasingly higher rates.=20 Residential and small-business customers who use a lot of electricity could= =20 pay as much as 17.89 cents per kilowatt hour for some power they consume.= =20 Consumer advocate Michael Shames said he is concerned the utility's proposa= l=20 does not spread the increases evenly among different types of users. He als= o=20 called for more scrutiny of the state's request.=20 People should tell PUC officials ""that this increase should not be a carte= =20 blanche or blank check approval,"" said Shames, the head of Utility Consumer= s'=20 Action Network. ""The PUC needs to ensure that the rate increase requested b= y=20 the (state) is reasonable.""=20 The public hearings are scheduled for:=20 ?Monday, 1 p.m., San Diego Concourse, Copper Room, 200 C St., San Diego.=20 ?Monday, 7 p.m., El Cajon Community Center, 195 E. Douglas Ave., El Cajon.= =20 ?Tuesday, 1 p.m., Country Inn Hotel, 35 Via Pico Plaza, San Clemente.=20 ?Tuesday, 7 p.m., Center for the Arts, 340 N. Escondido Blvd., Escondido.= =20 Port budget large, but power bills loom=20 Slowing economy also cause for worry By Ronald W. Powell=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 The ""rock"" is rolling financially, but there are indications that the blues= =20 lurk on the horizon.=20 Officials of the San Diego Unified Port District -- headquartered in a=20 block-shaped building some employees call the rock -- are happy with a=20 projected 2001-2002 budget that is 5.1 percent larger than the current one.= =20 Total revenue is expected to reach $208.7 million, $10.2 million above what= =20 is expected in the fiscal year that ends June 30.=20 Port commissioners gave preliminary approval to the budget yesterday and ar= e=20 scheduled to take a final vote July 10.=20 But a slowing economy and surging electric bills are causes for concern.=20 Electricity costs are expected to rise from $5 million to $8.2 million in t= he=20 coming fiscal year.=20 ""As far as trends, we see a continuation of the growth we've experienced ov= er=20 the past five years,"" said Bruce Hollingsworth, the port's treasurer. ""But= =20 our percentage of growth will not rise as sharply.""=20 Port revenues have grown steadily since the 1997-1998 fiscal year, when $16= 3=20 million was generated.=20 The proposed budget calls for adding 24 employees to the port's 730-member= =20 work force. New hires will include three Harbor Police officers, 10 employe= es=20 in the aviation division and four in maritime services.=20 The port operates Lindbergh Field and administers nonmilitary tidelands alo= ng=20 San Diego Bay. It is landlord to more than 600 waterfront businesses and=20 operates two marine cargo terminals and one cruise ship terminal.=20 The budget calls for growth in each of the port's primary revenue centers:= =20 aviation, real estate and maritime services.=20 Passenger and cargo activity at Lindbergh Field is expected to generate $90= .7=20 million, or $5 million more than expected in the current year. Most of that= =20 increase is expected to come from parking-rate increases at the airport and= =20 at the port's long-term parking lot on Pacific Highway.=20 Rent from hotels and other businesses that are port tenants are expected to= =20 total $63.1 million, up $1.8 million from the current budget.=20 Increases in cargo and cruise ship traffic are expected to boost maritime= =20 income by $2.7 million, to a total of $18.4 million.=20 The port expects to spend $157 million on construction projects. They inclu= de=20 $8.5 million to relocate the General Services Department from Eighth Avenue= =20 and Harbor Drive in San Diego to National City and more than $5 million for= =20 paving and improvements at the 10th Avenue Marine Terminal.=20 Rent revenue could grow substantially in future years. Four hotel projects = on=20 port property have won approval or are seeking it.=20 Jim Bailey, president of Manchester Resorts, told commissioners yesterday= =20 that he expects to break ground on a second Hyatt tower of 750 rooms by Jun= e=20 26. Port officials said revenue from that hotel would bring in an additiona= l=20 $3.7 million a year. It is scheduled to open in the summer of 2003.=20 Hollingsworth, the treasurer, said that if all four hotels are built the po= rt=20 could receive as much as $15 million a year in new revenue.=20 Continuous use urged for planned power plant=20 Escondido facility originally proposed for peak demand By Jonathan Heller=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 ESCONDIDO -- A proposed power plant in southwest Escondido that initially w= as=20 expected to run only during times of peak electricity demand probably will = be=20 allowed to run full time.=20 A state energy official who recommended approval of the plant yesterday has= =20 said the plant could operate as often as the state deems necessary.=20 The California Energy Commission was scheduled to vote on the project today= .=20 CalPeak Power of San Diego has asked the commission to approve a 49-megawat= t=20 plant on Enterprise Street near Vineyard Avenue. Referred to as a ""peaker""= =20 plant, such facilities typically are designed to supply energy only during= =20 times of peak demand.=20 The state limits the number of hours some plants can operate to keep=20 pollution at a minimum. A 44-megawatt peaker plant being built on West=20 Mission Avenue in Escondido by Ramco Inc. will be allowed to operate no mor= e=20 than 16 hours per day.=20 That plant is permitted to emit up to 5 parts per million of nitrogen oxide= ,=20 although its actual emissions are expected to be slightly lower, said Dale= =20 Mesple, a Ramco consultant. Nitrogen oxide is a component of smog.=20 The CalPeak plant, if approved, would be restricted to 2 parts per million = of=20 nitrogen oxide.=20 It was generally assumed that the CalPeak plant would operate under similar= =20 time restrictions as the Ramco plant. The potential for air pollution was= =20 among the chief concerns of residents who spoke at the City Council hearing= s=20 on the Ramco project and at the energy commission hearings about the CalPea= k=20 plant.=20 But under the terms of approval recommended by Energy Commission Chairman= =20 William Keese, CalPeak's plant would be able to operate ""up to 8,760 hours= =20 per year, typically when the demand for electricity is high."" That number= =20 equals 24 hours a day.=20 The actual number of hours would depend on the requirements of the state's= =20 Independent System Operator, which manages the energy grid.=20 ""We certainly want to have the flexibility to run whenever we're needed,""= =20 said Mark Lyons, CalPeak's development director. ""Exactly how often we will= =20 run is anybody's guess.""=20 Escondido Councilwoman June Rady said she was frustrated by the possibility= =20 of the plant running full time. In Ramco's case, the city and the county Ai= r=20 Pollution Control District made it clear how often the plant could operate.= =20 CalPeak chose to bypass the city's permitting process and went through the= =20 state Energy Commission, which offers an expedited 21-day approval put in= =20 place by Gov. Gray Davis as an emergency measure.=20 ""I think Escondido has been absolutely ignored and there's a total lack of= =20 due process,"" Rady said. ""It boils down to an issue of local control.""=20 Although city officials objected to the commission pre-empting the city's= =20 land-use authority, the commission maintained that Davis' order gave it the= =20 final say on this type of project.=20 If the commission gives final approval today, the only remedy available to= =20 the city would be in court. At least three council members must vote to=20 initiate legal action.=20 Keese's recommended approval did take into account several city concerns=20 regarding landscaping. The CalPeak plant would be built near the entrance o= f=20 a planned high-tech business park, and city officials were worried the=20 plant's appearance might hinder the ability to attract high-quality tenants= =20 to the park.=20 Mayor Lori Holt Pfeiler said she was not surprised by the commission's=20 recommendation.=20 ""I expected they would want to approve the project, and that's why it was= =20 important for the city to weigh in with conditions we have in this=20 community,"" Pfeiler said.=20 Rising energy prices threaten Poway troupe=20 By Brian E. Clark=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 POWAY -- Rising electricity rates may extinguish the stage lights this summ= er=20 for the Poway Performing Arts Company.=20 ""I'm afraid that if SDG&E gets the price increase it's asking for -- from 6= .5=20 cents per kilowatt-hour to 8.9 cents -- that we'll go under,"" said Kathy=20 McCafferty, spokeswoman for the nonprofit theater.=20 The volunteer organization produces its plays in a building at a Poway Road= =20 shopping center. It held three fund-raising performances over the weekend,= =20 but officials were uncertain yesterday how much money was raised.=20 The group is not affiliated with the Poway Performing Arts Center and has= =20 been in business for 20 years.=20 McCafferty said the group built up a $2,000 surplus last summer before ener= gy=20 prices began to surge.=20 ""That $2,000 was a big reserve for us,"" she said. ""It seemed like a ton of= =20 money, but, boy, it went fast. And we're really energy-dependent. Our light= s=20 use a lot of power. And we're in Poway on the second floor of our building.= =20 It gets hot here, and we have to use air conditioning.""=20 But McCafferty acknowledged that the cost of power isn't the group's only= =20 problem.=20 In a recent letter to backers, President Nan Katona said the organization= =20 also needs new blood to keep operating.=20 ""The truth is that lack of funding is just a symptom of the deeper problem,= =20 which is lack of community support,"" she wrote. ""Ironically, audiences and= =20 reviewers recognize the Poway Performing Arts Company as one of the premier= =20 community arts theaters in San Diego.""=20 Katona said some new volunteers had stepped forward to take leadership role= s=20 in the theater company since she wrote her letter last month. But she said= =20 rising electricity prices could still bring the group down.=20 ""If our energy bills double or triple, we could be in dire straits,"" she=20 said. ""It could push us over the edge financially.""=20 McCafferty said it would be difficult for the theater to cut costs.=20 ""We can't run a much leaner operation,"" she said. ""If our power prices go u= p=20 again, we may still be forced out of business.""=20 The theater is at 13250 Poway Road, in the Lively Shopping Center. For more= =20 information, call (858) 679-8085.=20 Fair to use generators for midway attractions=20 By Michael Burge=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 DEL MAR -- The Del Mar Fair will generate its own electricity for thrill=20 rides on the midway this year instead of using energy from SDG&E.=20 ""In case there are planned or unplanned outages, we still will be operating= ,""=20 fairgrounds General Manager Timothy J. Fennell said.=20 Fennell decided to put the midway on generators because he didn't want the= =20 fairgrounds pulling power from the grid while county residents are coping= =20 with rolling blackouts at home and at work, he said.=20 And the fair does not want to take a chance that a rolling blackout will=20 leave some people stranded in rides high above the grounds, forcing an=20 evacuation.=20 The fairgrounds has been told it is exempt from rolling blackouts, but rath= er=20 than take such a risk it will rent 13 diesel-fuel generators and produce=20 electricity on the midway. The rest of the fairgrounds will use power from= =20 San Diego Gas & Electric Co.=20 Fairgrounds operations manager Larry Baumann estimated it would cost the=20 fairgrounds $20,000 more to generate its own electricity than to buy it fro= m=20 SDG&E.=20 Midway manager Donna Ruhm said it will be worth it.=20 ""Rides that require evacuation have to have backup power and they do,"" Ruhm= =20 said. ""Now our service won't be interrupted.""=20 It is not unusual for carnivals to generate their own power, and the=20 fairgrounds has done so in the past. Fair officials removed the generators = 10=20 to 15 years ago to reduce noise on the midway.=20 The fair opens June 15 and ends July 4.=20 While the rest of the fairgrounds is on the SDG&E grid, Baumann said backup= =20 generators can kick in during a typical 60-or 90-minute blackout, allowing= =20 the fair to operate without serious difficulty. Those generators are not=20 linked to the midway.=20 All the generators are licensed by the state and meet emission standards,= =20 fair officials said, so they do not expect the noise and odor to be=20 excessive.=20 The fairgrounds is taking the precaution of providing its own power despite= =20 the fact that it probably will not go dark during a rolling blackout.=20 ""SDG&E has assured me that .?.?. the fairgrounds and the racetrack will not= =20 be on the curtailment (blackout) list during the fair and the races,"" said= =20 Del Mar Fire Chief Jack Gosney.=20 The Del Mar Thoroughbred racing season begins July 18 and ends Sept. 5.=20 Gosney said SDG&E told him earlier this year that the fairgrounds was not= =20 subject to a forced outage because it shared a circuit with the Del Mar Fir= e=20 Station, which is a 911 dispatch center and exempt from a blackout. But he= =20 said recent research showed that the fairgrounds is on a separate circuit.= =20 Nonetheless, Gosney said, SDG&E is exempting the fairgrounds and racetrack= =20 during the busy summer season.=20 The fairgrounds paid $137,152.95 for its electricity usage from March 12 to= =20 April 10. It paid $51,845.39 for electricity during the same period last ye= ar. ?=20 Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 'Hi, My Name Isn't Justice, Honey,' and Shame on Lockyer=20 By TOM G. PALMER ?????Here's what California Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer said at a press=20 conference about Enron Corp. Chairman Kenneth Lay: ""I would love to=20 personally escort Lay to an 8-by-10 cell that he could share with a tattooe= d=20 dude who says, 'Hi, my name is Spike, honey.""'=20 ?????Here's why Lockyer should be removed from his office of public trust:= =20 First, because as the chief law enforcement officer of the largest state in= =20 the nation, he not only has admitted that rape is a regular feature of the= =20 state's prison system, but also that he considers rape a part of the=20 punishment he can inflict on others.=20 ?????Second, because he has publicly stated that he would like to personall= y=20 arrange the rape of a Texas businessman who has not even been charged with= =20 any illegal behavior.=20 ?????Lockyer's remarks reveal him to be an authoritarian thug, someone whol= ly=20 unsuited to holding an office of public trust.=20 ?????But his remarks do have one positive merit: They tell us what criminal= =20 penalties really entail.=20 ?????Contrary to some depictions of prisons as country clubs, they are=20 violent and terrible places. More and more politicians propose criminal=20 sanctions for more and more alleged misdeeds, and as a result ever more kin= ds=20 of behavior are sanctioned by criminal penalties, perhaps now even selling= =20 electricity. Those found guilty of such crimes are put into cages, where th= ey=20 are deprived of their liberty and dignity and, as Lockyer so clearly=20 acknowledged, raped and brutalized. What's worse, Lockyer has indicated tha= t=20 he believes that rape is an appropriate part of the system of punishments h= e=20 administers.=20 ?????Should it matter that Lay is a businessman? Imagine the outcry if the= =20 head of Enron were female. What would Lockyer's fellow Democrats have said = to=20 that?=20 ?????Should it matter that Lay is chairman of an electricity generator? Doe= s=20 the nature of his business justify threats to escort him to his own rape?= =20 Lockyer told the Los Angeles Times that he had singled out Enron's chairman= =20 because the Houston-based company is the world's largest energy trader.=20 ?????So apparently singling out a man for a heinous threat is OK because he= 's=20 the chairman of the world's largest energy trading company. That's accordin= g=20 to the man who, as a state senator, sponsored California's 1984 hate-crimes= =20 law. Evidently the crusader against intimidation on the basis of race,=20 religion and sexual orientation feels no hesitation at all about intimidati= ng=20 someone and threatening him with the brutal use of physical force simply=20 because he heads the world's largest energy trading company.=20 ?????Lockyer and Gov. Gray Davis seem to think that the best way to keep th= e=20 lights on is to threaten electricity producers with brute force, rather tha= n=20 to offer to pay competitive rates in competitive markets. Are energy=20 producers to blame for California's energy problems? No. Bad policies,=20 including rigid controls on retail prices of electricity, are the cause of= =20 the problem, not the people who generate energy. Scapegoating producers and= =20 threatening them with violence is an old ploy of authoritarians. California= ns=20 should not stand for it.=20 ?????An Enron spokesman said that Lockyer's chilling stated desire to arran= ge=20 the rape of Lay does not merit a response. The spokesman is wrong. Lockyer'= s=20 remarks merit public disgrace and removal from office. After all, rape is n= ot=20 a form of legal justice in America--is it?=20 - - - Tom G. Palmer Is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute in Washington. E-mai= l:=20 Palmert@cato.org Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 California ; Metro Desk=20 U.S. Probes Alleged Pact Not to Build New Plants Power: Justice officials= =20 focus on Southland operations of two firms, which deny wrongdoing. MYRON LEVIN; NANCY RIVERA BROOKS ?=20 06/06/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page B-1=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 The U.S. Department of Justice has launched an investigation into whether t= wo=20 companies that control a large swath of Southern California 's electricity= =20 supply agreed to limit power plant construction, potentially hindering=20 crucial energy production, according to federal records and interviews.=20 The civil antitrust probe of Williams Energy Services and AES Southland=20 represents the Justice Department's first foray into the activities of ener= gy=20 suppliers who have reaped huge profits in California 's price-shocked marke= t.=20 AES disclosed the investigation, which began last month, in a filing with t= he=20 Securities and Exchange Commission on Tuesday. In its papers, AES said the= =20 Justice Department is focusing on whether its agreement with Williams could= =20 constrain future power plant construction in Southern California .=20 The investigation comes at a time when the state is scrambling to get new= =20 generators built and running to avoid blackouts and economic problems.=20 The government alleges that AES and Williams agreed to limit the expansion = or=20 construction of new power plants near three facilities purchased by AES in= =20 1998 from Southern California Edison under the state's new deregulation pla= n.=20 The plants--in Long Beach, Huntington Beach and Redondo Beach--are owned by= =20 AES, but the electricity is sold by Williams. Under a 3-year-old deal, know= n=20 as a tolling agreement, Williams essentially rents out the capacity of the= =20 plants for annual payments to AES. Williams supplies natural gas to fire th= e=20 plants and sells the electricity under long-term contracts and in the costl= y=20 spot market.=20 Williams and AES have similar tolling agreements at plants in Pennsylvania= =20 and New Jersey. However, AES spokesman Aaron Thomas said the Justice=20 Department's investigative requests have focused only on agreements between= =20 Williams and AES in Southern California .=20 Thomas would say only that the agreement at the center of the investigation= =20 is simply a delineation of ""how expansion or repowerings are done at the=20 facilities.""=20 The three plants have a combined capacity of more than 3,900 megawatts,=20 enough to supply about 3 million homes. This summer, AES is bringing anothe= r=20 450 megawatts on line by reactivating two mothballed generators in Huntingt= on=20 Beach.=20 Paula Hall-Collins, a spokeswoman for Tulsa-based Williams Cos., said she= =20 believes that the investigation is unrelated to a recent inquiry by the=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission into whether AES and Williams=20 unnecessarily shut down plants to jack up prices. A portion of that=20 investigation was settled in April, when Williams, without admitting any=20 wrongdoing, agreed to pay about $8 million.=20 ""We've always maintained that we've operated within the law, and we're=20 certain the investigation by the DOJ will find we are operating legally,""= =20 Hall-Collins said.=20 Williams and AES are among the power plant owners and marketers that have= =20 been lambasted by Gov. Gray Davis because of gold-plated electricity prices= =20 that have pushed the state's biggest utilities to the edge of ruin and are= =20 steadily draining the state's budget surplus.=20 State officials are asking FERC to revoke the rights of AES and Williams to= =20 sell electricity at whatever price the market will bear. That right was=20 granted for three years, beginning in 1998 by federal regulators when=20 California 's $28-billion electricity market was opened to competition.=20 Under that plan, the rights of AES and Williams to sell into the market are= =20 the first to come up for renewal.=20 AES Southland and Williams Energy Services are both arms of large energy=20 companies--AES Corp. of Arlington, Va., and Williams Cos. of Tulsa, Okla. California ; Metro Desk=20 Natural Gas, Power Prices Drop Sharply Energy: More conservation, mild=20 weather are among factors keeping costs down, experts say. RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR; NANCY VOGEL ?=20 06/06/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page B-1=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 WASHINGTON -- The wholesale prices of electricity and natural gas in=20 California have fallen sharply in recent weeks, and experts said Tuesday th= at=20 the relief could be the harbinger of an energy turnaround.=20 Or it may be just a blip.=20 In the last couple of weeks, California power prices have plunged to the=20 lowest levels since April 2000, traders say, with electricity selling on so= me=20 days for less than $100 per megawatt-hour.=20 At night, when demand slackens, power sometimes sells for less than $20 per= =20 megawatt-hour. That is reminiscent of the days before prices went haywire= =20 last summer.=20 It is a drastically different scenario than the $500 to $800 the state paid= =20 during a spate of hot weather last month.=20 Meanwhile, wholesale natural gas prices at a bellwether pipeline junction o= n=20 the Southern California -Arizona border dipped last week to their lowest=20 levels since November, according to a publication that tracks the industry.= =20 Separately, Southern California Gas Co. and Pacific Gas & Electric Co.=20 reported June rate cuts for their residential gas customers of 16% and 38%,= =20 respectively.=20 Experts credited a combination of conservation, mild weather, a burst of=20 increased hydroelectric generation and lower natural gas prices for the dro= p=20 in electricity costs.=20 ""Conservation is starting to worry the generators, which is nice to see,""= =20 said Severin Borenstein, director of the University of California Energy=20 Institute in Berkeley. Californians used 11% less energy last month than in= =20 May 2000, according to the state Energy Commission.=20 ""I'm worried that if we don't push harder on conservation, [prices] won't= =20 stay down,"" Borenstein added.=20 On the natural gas side, experts said the price decline is due to replenish= ed=20 storage within California , a nationwide drop in the cost of the fuel and= =20 easing demand from power plants.=20 The number of shippers competing to get natural gas to the state has also= =20 increased, with the expiration of a controversial contract on the El Paso= =20 pipeline system last week.=20 But economists were reluctant to make sweeping predictions based on the=20 latest indicators.=20 ""It's hard to draw specific conclusions,"" said Bruce Henning, who tracks th= e=20 natural gas markets for Energy and Environmental Analysis Inc., an Arlingto= n,=20 Va., consulting firm.=20 How the summer turns out depends on the weather in the state, Henning said,= =20 adding, ""The weather represents the balance in the Southern California=20 market.""=20 Natural gas fuels most California power plants. With wholesale prices=20 recently averaging three to four times the rates charged elsewhere in the= =20 country, state and federal officials have despaired of chances for=20 controlling electricity costs.=20 Last Friday, however, the daily price for immediate delivery of natural gas= =20 in Topock, Ariz., a pipeline junction near the California border, dipped to= =20 $7.85 per million British thermal units.=20 According to Natural Gas Week, it was the first time since mid-November tha= t=20 the price at that location had fallen below $8 per million BTUs. One millio= n=20 BTUs is what a typical Southern California home uses in five or six days.= =20 Considered a bellwether for other pipeline systems serving California , the= =20 Topock price reached a record $56.54 per million BTUs on Dec. 8. It stood a= t=20 $9.36 per million BTUs at the close of business Tuesday, still below recent= =20 weekly averages.=20 Other industry publications have also picked up signals of price declines.= =20 Platts, the energy information division of McGraw-Hill Cos., reported Tuesd= ay=20 that the price for monthly gas delivery contracts to California fell 22% in= =20 June, following a nationwide trend.=20 But Henning said the drop in California prices is attributable to both lowe= r=20 prices around the country and a decline in the high markups for shipping ga= s=20 to California . Those markups, which far exceed the cost of transporting ga= s,=20 have drawn the attention of state and federal investigators.=20 Henning said the markups are declining as depleted storage levels in=20 California are replenished. ""Storage levels have been filling very rapidly,= =20 and that fact is reflected in prices coming down,"" he said.=20 The link between natural gas and electricity prices is a hotly debated=20 subject. Some experts say high-priced natural gas is driving up the cost of= =20 electricity . Others believe that record prices for power are raising the= =20 prices that generators are willing to pay for their fuel.=20 Electricity prices that range from $20 to $200 per megawatt-hour--instead o= f=20 the $150 to $500 per megawatt-hour paid in recent months--are great news fo= r=20 Gov. Gray Davis.=20 Average daily power prices in California for transactions through the=20 Automated Power Exchange have dropped from $149 per megawatt-hour last Frid= ay=20 to $110 per megawatt-hour Tuesday. The exchange is a private company that= =20 brings together electricity buyers and sellers and accounts for less than 1= 0%=20 of the state's market.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio said Tuesday that average daily power=20 purchases by the state have recently dipped below $50 million.=20 The state has sometimes had to pay more than $100 million a day since it=20 started buying power in January through the Department of Water Resources.= =20 The state stepped in because California 's two biggest utilities became too= =20 financially crippled to withstand the prices being charged by generators.= =20 Davis' plan to pay for past and future energy purchases with a $12.4-billio= n=20 bond issue hinges on an assumption that power prices will be driven down th= is=20 summer through long-term contracts, conservation and the construction of ne= w=20 power plants.=20 UC Berkeley's Borenstein said conservation efforts have not gone far enough= .=20 ""You walk into most buildings and you still need a sweater,"" he said. ""That= =20 ain't the way to hit the target.""=20 If Californians conserved an additional 10% off their peak usage on hot=20 afternoons, he said, ""we could really break the backs of the generators, we= =20 could really collapse the price.""=20 Prices tend to skyrocket in California 's electricity market on hot=20 afternoons, when demand soars and grid operators must scramble to purchase= =20 enough electricity . Cool weather, which reduces demand for air conditionin= g,=20 and conservation help keep the state from reaching such crisis situations.= =20 Borenstein said he believes generators are also asking less money for their= =20 electricity in part because of a federal order that took effect last month.= =20 The order limits the price power plant owners can charge when California 's= =20 supplies are strained.=20 Power sellers say there are more fundamental forces at work.=20 ""There's more supply relative to demand, which is softening prices,"" said= =20 Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum. ""The= =20 market is working, and it's providing cheaper wholesale power more quickly= =20 than any regulatory scheme could ever do.""=20 *=20 Times staff writer Dan Morain in Sacramento contributed to this story.=20 RELATED STORY=20 PG&E wins: The utility averted a $1-billion bill for power buys. B6=20 (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)=20 A Blip or a Trend?=20 Daily natural gas prices at the California border with Arizona--considered = a=20 bellwether of the state's costs--have been declining in the last two weeks.= =20 *=20 Natural gas price per 1 million Btu=20 $9.36=20 Source: Natural Gas Week California ; Metro Desk=20 The State Utility Averts $1 Billion in Costs Courts: PG&E and Cal-ISO agree= =20 to recognize Department of Water Resources as purchaser of the power. TIM REITERMAN ?=20 06/06/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page B-6=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 SAN FRANCISCO -- Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and the state's power grid=20 operator reached an agreement Tuesday that insulated PG&E at least=20 temporarily from more than $1 billion in power purchases the state made for= =20 its customers.=20 The California Independent System Operator sent $1.26 billion in invoices t= o=20 the utility for power purchases by the state Department of Water Resources= =20 for PG&E customers from January through March.=20 But the utility contended in Bankruptcy Court proceedings that it was not= =20 liable for such purchases and that continued purchases would cause annual= =20 losses of $4 billion.=20 After arguments before Judge Dennis Montali, PG&E and Cal-ISO agreed that t= he=20 Department of Water Resources, not PG&E, purchased the power. Cal-ISO had= =20 argued that it was making the purchases on PG&E's behalf.=20 ""PG&E wants to be a utility and have obligations to serve customers, but th= ey=20 don't want to pay for it,"" Cal-ISO general counsel Charles Robinson said=20 later.=20 If PG&E refuses to pay the invoices, Robinson said, Cal-ISO will send the= =20 bills to the Department of Water Resources, and officials there can decide= =20 whether to pursue claims in Bankruptcy Court. A spokesman for department,= =20 which has authorization to sell $13 billion in bonds for power purchases,= =20 said the agency will have no comment until the matter can be studied.=20 State agencies have stayed out of the bankruptcy proceedings, hoping to=20 preserve their immunity from suits in federal court.=20 The agreement will be submitted for Montali's approval Monday, but the judg= e=20 said it would not be binding on the department because no one represented t= he=20 agency in court.=20 PG&E's own production and contracts provide the majority of the power for i= ts=20 customers. But state legislation adopted this year allows the department to= =20 secure power contracts to serve customers of ailing utilities. When a=20 shortage threatens the power grid, the department purchases additional powe= r=20 through Cal-ISO on the spot electricity market.=20 PG&E filed for Chapter 11 protection from creditors on April 6, saying it w= as=20 $9 billion in debt.=20 Dramatic drop in cost of electricity=20 LOWER BILLS: Cheaper fuel, milder weather credited=20 David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL: .DTL=20 California electricity prices have plunged unexpectedly to their lowest lev= el=20 in more than a year, partly as the result of a simultaneous drop in prices= =20 for natural gas, which fuels most power plants.=20 Make no mistake: Gas and electricity prices could surge upward again in=20 months ahead.=20 But for the first time since California's energy markets went haywire last= =20 summer, industry experts are beginning to ask whether the state finally may= =20 have turned a corner in its battle with runaway power costs.=20 ""California is not yet out of the woods,"" said Kelley Doolan, who tracks=20 natural gas prices for energy market researcher Platts. ""But this is a very= =20 significant decrease in costs.""=20 Along with lower gas prices, the decline in electricity costs was attribute= d=20 by state and industry officials to milder weather, which reduces demand for= =20 power. They also credited recent conservation efforts by consumers and=20 better-than-expected runoff at dams for hydroelectric plants.=20 Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, an=20 energy-industry association, said these factors came together to produce th= e=20 lowest wholesale electricity prices since April 2000.=20 Electricity on the spot market could have been purchased yesterday for as= =20 little as $50 per megawatt hour, he noted, compared with more than $500=20 earlier this year.=20 ""If the weather stays this way, we could have reasonable prices all summer,= ""=20 Ackerman said. ""We may also have fewer blackouts.""=20 It is tempting for Californians to be suspicious of virtually any swing in= =20 energy prices. If power companies manipulated prices on the way up, as=20 critics have alleged, might they not be up to some trick as prices head in= =20 the opposite direction?=20 Nettie Hoge, executive director of The Utility Reform Network in San=20 Francisco, speculated that generators are allowing electricity prices to fa= ll=20 so they can discourage federal regulators from taking a more active role in= =20 the dysfunctional California market.=20 ""They're trying to take the heat off,"" she said.=20 Others cautioned that the lower prices may be nothing more than a statistic= al=20 blip.=20 ""This was just one month's decline,"" said Michael Shames, executive directo= r=20 of the Utility Consumers' Action Network in San Diego. ""We really have to s= ee=20 how this plays out in the future.""=20 Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis, said the governor was very= =20 encouraged by the lower energy prices. Davis announced Sunday that=20 California's power use was down 11 percent last month from a year before.= =20 ""We're not there yet,"" Maviglio said of whether an end to the state's power= =20 woes is in sight. ""But the trend is pointing in the right direction.""=20 WHITE ELEPHANT Yet this sudden drop in energy prices does have a dark side: California cou= ld=20 end up with a huge white elephant after spending about $40 billion in publi= c=20 funds on long-term power contracts.=20 The logic behind the contracts, which are at an average price of $69 per=20 megawatt hour over 10 years, is that the state expected to pay below-market= =20 rates for electricity for a number of years before prices came down and=20 California found itself paying above-market rates.=20 If current trends continue, though, California will find itself paying=20 consistently above-market rates much sooner than expected, making the long-= =20 term contracts a sweet deal for the same power companies that profited so= =20 handsomely during the state's darkest hours.=20 ""The contracts look really ugly right now,"" said Shames at the Utility=20 Consumers' Action Network. ""They may be way overpriced.""=20 Maviglio, the governor's spokesman, said it is too early to conclude that t= he=20 state did poorly negotiating dozens of long-term power contracts.=20 ""No one has a crystal ball on this,"" he said.=20 CUSTOMERS' BILLS TO DROP In any case, Pacific Gas and Electric Co. said yesterday that customers'=20 average gas bills will drop 26 percent this month to $26 and should stay ne= ar=20 that level all summer.=20 Platts, which monitors average monthly spot prices, found that the wholesal= e=20 price of gas at the California-Oregon border has tumbled nearly 42 percent= =20 since the beginning of May -- from $9.98 per million British thermal units = to=20 $5.81.=20 The wholesale gas price at the California-Arizona border fell 45 percent,= =20 from $11.91 to $6.50. This compares with a 25 percent monthly decline in=20 average natural gas prices nationwide.=20 However, California gas prices are still about 50 percent higher than they= =20 were a year ago, whereas national prices are now below year-ago levels for= =20 the first time since last spring.=20 While cooler weather nationwide helped push gas prices down overall, Doolan= =20 attributed the especially steep drop in California to a commensurate surge = in=20 prices last month related to fears of a long, hot summer of rolling=20 blackouts.=20 ""You had state officials all but promising rolling blackouts this summer,"" = he=20 said. ""That created enormous demand for electricity generation.=20 ""What has changed is that we've had weeks of mild weather,"" Doolan observed= .=20 ""The electricity generators have not come out of the woodwork buying up all= =20 the gas.""=20 This allowed utilities like PG&E to beef up gas inventories, which eased=20 demand and resulted in substantially lower prices, he said.=20 'BACK ON TRACK'=20 ""We're back on track to be completely full for winter,"" said Staci Homrig, = a=20 PG&E spokeswoman. ""That's a very good thing.""=20 Gas prices historically dip in the spring and summer and then rise again in= =20 the winter. PG&E is forecasting that customers' average gas bills could ris= e=20 to as high as $75 in December if current trends continue.=20 However, the precipitous drop in gas prices in recent weeks suggests that= =20 California's unusually high costs at last may be abating.=20 Individual power companies so far are reluctant to speculate on whether the= =20 drop in gas prices will have a lasting effect on electricity costs.=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 San Jose council gives green light to generating plant=20 VOTE REVERSAL: Officials pressured to OK project=20 Marshall Wilson, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL: .DTL=20 In a clear sign that the political landscape has shifted because of the=20 state's power crisis, the San Jose City Council gave a green light yesterda= y=20 for construction of a generating plant it had unanimously opposed in=20 November.=20 Yesterday's 10-to-1 vote came after months of mounting pressure for the cit= y=20 to reverse course and approve the controversial 600-megawatt Calpine plant = at=20 Coyote Valley.=20 That pressure -- increased by the occasional rolling blackout -- has come= =20 from nearly every corner of the state, from elected officials to high-tech= =20 businesses and labor unions worried the power crisis will drain away jobs,= =20 ruin the economy and lead to voter backlash over skyrocketing energy bills.= =20 Even the local branch of the NAACP and environmentalists pushed the council= =20 to approve the Calpine proposal -- despite overwhelming opposition from the= =20 plant's neighbors.=20 Council members did not hide their disdain yesterday for being forced to=20 reconsider their opposition to the so-called Metcalf Energy Center.=20 ""I'm holding my nose to vote for this thing,"" said Councilwoman Linda=20 LeZotte.=20 ""I'm just as unhappy as everybody else,"" Vice Mayor George Shirakawa said. = ""I=20 feel like no matter what happens, we can't win.""=20 GOVERNOR OFFERED HIS SUPPORT After the council's solid opposition in November, Calpine appealed to the= =20 California Energy Commission, which has the final say. The controversial=20 plant then received a huge boost in April when Gov. Gray Davis threw his=20 support behind it.=20 San Jose officials conceded yesterday that the energy commission was likely= =20 to override their opposition and grant approval within a few weeks. They sa= id=20 the commission's likely approval was stripping them of their power to decid= e=20 local land-use issues.=20 ""What I think has happened . . . is the governor and the Legislature at the= =20 state level have taken this out of our hands,"" said Councilwoman Pat Dando.= =20 ""I don't think there's any chance at all the California Energy Commission i= s=20 going to turn down the Metcalf Energy Center,"" Councilman Chuck Reed said.= =20 CONSTRUCTION MAY BEGIN SOON If given the go-ahead by the state, Calpine could begin construction as ear= ly=20 as next month. The natural-gas fired plant would generate electricity by=20 mid-2003, company spokesman Kenneth Arbeu said.=20 At the urging of Mayor Ron Gonzales, the council yesterday approved a new= =20 ""cooperation agreement"" with Calpine. The vote, with Councilman Forrest=20 Williams casting the lone nay, is preliminary while a final vote that is=20 scheduled for June 26.=20 Gonzales argued that the agreement did not amount to a flip-flop because it= =20 differs from what Calpine proposed in November.=20 The agreement approved by the council calls for increased monitoring of air= =20 pollution, the use of treated wastewater to cool the plant, which will redu= ce=20 discharges into San Francisco Bay, and a $6.5 million ""community benefits""= =20 package, with the bulk going toward parkland acquisition, Gonzales said.=20 ""This council has not changed its decision,"" he said. ""What we've done is= =20 change the facility.""=20 Critics, incensed that the city was buckling to outside pressure, vowed to= =20 change the council at the next election.=20 CONCERNS OVER HEALTH RISKS They raised concerns that boiled wastewater steam wafting over their homes= =20 from Calpine's plant could pose health risks. Jona Denz-Hamilton said more= =20 controls are needed to ensure the safety of neighbors like herself and her= =20 family and argued that new, cleaner-burning technologies should be installe= d=20 at the plant.=20 ""It's too great of a risk,"" she said.=20 Other critics said the state's energy woes will be solved and largely=20 forgotten by the time the plant opens in two years, while the Santa Teresa= =20 neighborhood will be stuck with pollution for decades.=20 Approval seemed a given at the start of the more than three-hour hearing.= =20 Much of the afternoon's debate focused around plans to extend a pipeline fo= r=20 treated wastewater to the new plant.=20 Critics said Calpine was receiving a sweet deal by paying only $10 million = of=20 the $50 million cost of extending the pipeline. Several council members ask= ed=20 for a more detailed report into the financing plan before the final vote is= =20 taken June 26.=20 Chronicle staff writer Bill Workman contributed to this report.=20 E-mail Marshall Wilson at ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 Developments in California's energy crisis=20 Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate1 053EDT0177.DTL=20 (06-06) 07:53 PDT (AP) --=20 Developments in California's energy crisis:=20 WEDNESDAY: * No power alerts Wednesday as reserves stay above 7 percent.=20 TUESDAY: * Gov. Gray Davis' administration says the state's electricity costs are=20 dropping substantially, even as it asks state legislators for another=20 half-billion dollars for power purchases. That brings to $8.2 billion the= =20 amount the state is paying for electricity on behalf of three financially= =20 strapped utilities.=20 Spokesman Steve Maviglio says the cost to the state treasury has dropped in= =20 the last few weeks well below the $50 million dollars the state had been=20 paying on a typical day. He credits cooler weather, conservation, more powe= r=20 plants online and more long-term contracts with helping drive down the cost= .=20 * A state Senate committee agrees to issue subpoenas to eight out-of-state= =20 electricity generators demanding they hand over documents on bidding, prici= ng=20 and other aspects of power sales in the state. The subpoenas would help a= =20 special Senate committee's investigation into whether the companies are=20 illegally profiteering from California's power crisis. The committee's=20 chairman says he expects the companies to resist, setting the stage for a= =20 court battle.=20 * Oil giant Chevron threatens to cut gasoline production in California unle= ss=20 it is exempted from rolling blackouts. The San Francisco Chronicle says it= =20 has a copy of a letter sent Friday from Chevron chairman David O'Reilly to= =20 Davis. In the letter, O'Reilly says the company will scale back gasoline=20 production at its Richmond and El Segundo plants, operating those refinerie= s=20 only with power produced by generators at the sites.=20 * New U.S. Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., supports Federal=20 Energy Regulatory Commission price caps. ""FERC must meet its obligation und= er=20 current law to ensure 'just and reasonable' prices for wholesale electricit= y=20 in the state of California. FERC has failed to meet this responsibility...,= ""=20 Daschle says in a letter to Davis. ""Unless FERC acts soon, Senator (Dianne)= =20 Feinstein's legislation should be taken up and passed to direct FERC to tak= e=20 action. I will support all necessary efforts to meet that goal.""=20 * House Subcommittee on Energy Policy, Natural Resources and Regulatory=20 Affairs Chairman Doug Ose, R-Sacramento, cites Electric Utility Week figure= s=20 that FERC's limited price caps helped cut California's power rates from $30= 0=20 to $108.47 per megawatt hour within an hour after taking effect last week.= =20 While he says more information is needed, Ose uses the figures to tout his= =20 pending bill to impose the price caps around the clock and to all Western= =20 states.=20 * Pacific Gas & Electric Co. asks U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali to= =20 stop the manager of the state's power grid from buying electricity for=20 utility or charging it for any electricity bought after the utility filed f= or=20 bankruptcy on April 6. Separately, the utility's creditors support its=20 request to the bankruptcy court to pay out $17.5 million in bonuses to the= =20 management team that guided the utility into bankruptcy.=20 * California Department of Water Resources reveals it is negotiating with= =20 municipal utilities to buy their surplus power. Department spokesman Oscar= =20 Hidalgo says talks began last week but no agreements are imminent.=20 * State lawmakers criticize a $3 million lobbying campaign by Southern=20 California Edison. The utility is telephoning shareholders to describe the= =20 dire consequences if the utility goes bankrupt. The call is then transferre= d=20 to the state Capitol so shareholders can implore lawmakers to support a=20 controversial plan to help the utility. Legislators and their staffers say= =20 the shareholders often are confused and scared their investments will be=20 degraded or wiped out.=20 * State Treasurer Phil Angelides joins an advocacy group for the poor in=20 urging the state's huge pension funds to use their economic power to levera= ge=20 power companies. The Pacific Institute for Community Organization says the= =20 two pension funds own at least $1.2 billion in stocks and bonds in most of= =20 the firms that sell electricity to California.=20 * The Assembly, by a 69-0 vote, approves a bill to spend $10 million on=20 environmental studies needed before Path 15, the inadequate transmission-li= ne=20 group between Northern and Southern California, can be expanded. The bill= =20 moves to the Senate.=20 * Pacific Gas and Electric announces a decrease in natural gas prices, down= =20 38 percent from May's rates and 66 percent lower than January's rates. The= =20 decline will bring the average residential gas bill to $26 when it goes int= o=20 effect June 7. Market analysts predict the rates will remain stable until= =20 December when demand is expected to increase with winter heating loads.=20 * No power alerts Tuesday as electricity reserves stay above 7 percent.=20 * Shares of Edison International closed at $10.05, down 53 cents. PG&E Corp= .=20 closed at $11.25, down 15 cents. Sempra Energy, the parent company of San= =20 Diego Gas & Electric, closes at $26.91, down 43 cents.=20 WHAT'S NEXT: * Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra, the parent compa= ny=20 of San Diego Gas and Electric Co., to buy the utility's transmission lines.= =20 THE PROBLEM: High demand, high wholesale energy costs, transmission glitches and a tight= =20 supply worsened by scarce hydroelectric power in the Northwest and=20 maintenance at aging California power plants are all factors in California'= s=20 electricity crisis.=20 Edison and PG&E say they've lost nearly $14 billion since June to high=20 wholesale prices the state's electricity deregulation law bars them from=20 passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs= =20 from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection= =20 April 6.=20 Electricity and natural gas suppliers, scared off by the two companies' poo= r=20 credit ratings, are refusing to sell to them, leading the state in January = to=20 start buying power for the utilities' nearly 9 million residential and=20 business customers. The state is also buying power for a third investor-own= ed=20 utility, San Diego Gas & Electric, which is in better financial shape than= =20 much larger Edison and PG&E but also struggling with high wholesale power= =20 costs.=20 The Public Utilities Commission has approved average rate increases of 37= =20 percent for the heaviest residential customers and 38 percent for commercia= l=20 customers, and hikes of up to 49 percent for industrial customers and 15=20 percent or 20 percent for agricultural customers to help finance the state'= s=20 multibillion-dollar power buys.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 California conserves=20 Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /06/E D86597.DTL=20 WHEN RAIN fails to fall from the sky, Californians know why there is a=20 drought. But when rolling blackouts suddenly appeared in the dead of winter= ,=20 many of us wondered who was responsible for and who has profited from what= =20 now seems like an artificially created power shortage in the state.=20 Our skepticism proved to be right. Windfall profits were reaped by=20 electricity generators while natural gas importers extracted prices far abo= ve=20 the national average.=20 Timid federal overseers exact only wrist-slap penalties on the offending=20 energy firms. The White House scoffs at temporary controls for a=20 malfunctioning market. California's state government has ended up as the bi= ll=20 payer for the sickly utilities, forking over $8 billion to generators. This= =20 number may hit $40 billion by year-end.=20 It's an infuriating tangle. All the more remarkable, then, that skeptical= =20 Californians have managed, within two months, to reduce their use of=20 electricity by 11 percent. The public's response to the governor's appeal f= or=20 energy conservation has exceeded expectations. Although many businesses hav= e=20 suffered enormous losses, ordinary people have made relatively painless=20 sacrifices. People turned off their lights, purchased energy-efficient=20 lightbulbs, used air conditioning less and shut off their computers when no= t=20 in use.=20 Despite this remarkable civic compliance, we still face an unconscionable= =20 lack of leadership. President Bush seems perfectly willing to allow Texas= =20 power companies to pummel the once-powerful California economy. He repeats = a=20 mantra about creating more supply -- which California is doing with 15 powe= r=20 plants under construction -- while ignoring the outsized sums paid to a=20 handful of energy generators.=20 At the same time, Gov. Gray Davis, who has given new meaning to the word=20 dithering, has failed to make the tough and transparent decisions. He delay= ed=20 an inevitable rise in power rates. Davis also dragged his feet in openly=20 announcing new power contracts that commit California to billions in spendi= ng=20 over the next decade.=20 To Davis' credit, he has urged California to conserve by laying out an $800= =20 million plan to cut power use and invest in energy-saving programs. The=20 message is getting out as higher rates take effect this month.=20 Despite a woefully unbalanced market and shortsighted leadership, the peopl= e=20 of California have demonstrated that if there is a will, there is a way.=20 Now it is time for our leaders to follow the wisdom of their constituents.= =20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 20=20 L.A. power customers awash in cheap energy=20 John Wildermuth, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /06/M N133438.DTL=20 Los Angeles -- These are flush times for the city's Department of Water and= =20 Power and the energy executives are loving every minute of it.=20 As are their customers.=20 Private power companies throughout California have been raising rates and= =20 warning customers about a long, hot summer filled with blackouts, but the= =20 city- owned DWP has been keeping prices stable and the lights on for 1.2=20 million Los Angeles customers.=20 ""Our customers are being really nice to us,"" said Angelina Galiteva, the=20 utility's strategic planning director. ""They love the DWP.""=20 Although Gov. Gray Davis' administration announced that the state had reduc= ed=20 its energy consumption 11 percent from a year ago, those in Los Angeles had= =20 cut back less than half that -- and polls show they view the energy situati= on=20 less seriously than other Californians.=20 Public utilities such as Los Angeles water and power have seen their revenu= es=20 increase during the energy crunch because they can sell their excess power = at=20 higher prices than ever before in a market tilted toward sellers.=20 The rest of the state doesn't always feel that same warm glow. Davis has=20 accused the DWP and other California public utilities of putting exorbitant= =20 price tags on the excess electricity they sell to the rest of the energy-= =20 starved state.=20 It's a charge Los Angeles utility executives deny, arguing that their exces= s=20 power is sold at cost plus 15 percent, which they say is a fair return for= =20 their customers.=20 ""Without our support, a million more homes (elsewhere in California) would= =20 have suffered rolling blackouts, which is a powerful message,"" Galiteva sai= d.=20 It wasn't supposed to be this way. When the power industry was deregulated = in=20 the late '90s, energy giants like Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern= =20 California Edison were expected to be the big winners. Now, PG&E is in=20 bankruptcy and Edison is a short step away.=20 ""When deregulation came, the experts said that the investor-owned utilities= =20 would become lean, mean machines that would be better able to operate in th= e=20 new environment,"" Galiteva said. ""But now public power has shown it can ser= ve=20 customers more efficiently at lower rates.""=20 While much of the state worries about electrical supply, Los Angeles=20 residents have been saved many of those concerns.=20 In a survey done last month by the Public Policy Institute of California, 4= 8=20 percent of the people in the Bay Area thought that electricity cost and=20 availability were the most important issues facing the state. In Los Angele= s,=20 however, only 33 percent put the energy crunch on top. When questioned abou= t=20 the size of the power problem and the effect it would have on the state's= =20 economy, Los Angeles residents were consistently less concerned than people= =20 elsewhere in California.=20 People in Los Angeles have been ""somewhat isolated"" from the energy crisis,= =20 concluded Mark Baldassare, who conducted the survey.=20 That doesn't mean the state's energy problems haven't had an effect. The DW= P=20 has seen a 3 percent to 5 percent reduction in some uses, which officials= =20 have dubbed ""sympathy conservation."" The utility also is offering its bigge= st=20 customers financial incentives to cut back on their power use.=20 ""Our average annual load growth is about 80 megawatts,"" Galiteva said. ""By= =20 this summer, we expect to have saved 40 megawatts through conservation. By= =20 December, we expect 60 megawatts in savings.""=20 The utility also is making a major attempt to create a conservation ethic= =20 among its customers. DWP's comfortable situation has made it possible to=20 offer them the carrot without the need to show them the stick.=20 ""Conservation no longer means doing without,"" Galiteva said. ""Beer can be= =20 just as cold with a superefficient refrigerator. Rooms can be just as brigh= t=20 with superefficient light bulbs.""=20 A ""Green Power"" program also is promoting the use of renewable energy=20 resources such as solar, wind and hydroelectric power. About 75,000 custome= rs=20 are paying an extra $3 per month to increase DWP's use of renewable power= =20 sources.=20 ""We're trying to give our customers a choice and a voice in determining the= =20 mix of power they use,"" Galiteva said. ""They know they can do (conservation= )=20 now or see it being mandated later.""=20 Los Angeles power officials -- and their customers -- know the DWP isn't=20 always going to continue as an island of tranquility in a sea of energy=20 turmoil. The utility's aging gas-fired plants have been affected by the=20 rising price of natural gas. Demand for energy continues to rise. In a deba= te=20 last month, both candidates for mayor of Los Angeles agreed that increases = in=20 local power bills are inevitable.=20 But the DWP has been supplying power to Los Angeles since 1916, and its=20 executives believe that the state's deregulation disaster has shown the=20 advantages of the city-owned utility.=20 ""It's nice to be the lean, mean, green efficient machine that no one ever= =20 expected us to become,"" Galiteva said.=20 E-mail John Wildermuth at ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 13=20 PG&E doesn't want to pay for energy to avert blackouts=20 DAVID KRAVETS, Associated Press Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 306EDT0102.DTL=20 (06-06) 00:06 PDT SAN FRANCISCO (AP) --=20 Pacific Gas & Electric Co. has told a bankruptcy judge it should not have t= o=20 pay for what could amount to billions of dollars in spot-market energy cost= s=20 to avert blackouts.=20 The company's position was one of two developments that emerged Tuesday as= =20 the bankrupt utility tries to cope with fallout from California's power=20 crisis. The other development saw a group of creditors that PG&E owes=20 billions endorse $17.5 million in bonuses for top managers at the utility.= =20 San Francisco-based PG&E filed for bankruptcy protection in April after=20 racking up an $8.9 billion debt which under state law it could not recoup= =20 from customers.=20 Tuesday's court dispute centered on who pays for energy bought at the last= =20 minute to avoid blackouts.=20 PG&E said an April federal regulatory decision requires that electricity ca= n=20 only be sold to those with the ability to pay electricity generators. The= =20 state is the only player with such ability, said PG&E attorney Jerome Faulk= ,=20 who argued that the utility shouldn't have to pay the $330 million in month= ly=20 spot-market energy bills.=20 Judge Dennis Montali said he may craft such an order. But he said the order= =20 would not preclude the state from suing PG&E to recover the cost.=20 In a separate but related development, a committee charged with devising a= =20 payment plan for those creditors owed billions by PG&E said it will sign of= f=20 on the utility's plan to pay $17.5 million in bonuses to PG&E's management= =20 team.=20 Attorney Allan Marks, who represents the committee, said such payments are= =20 normal during large bankruptcy cases. Under the agreement, which Montali wi= ll=20 consider at a June 18 hearing, the company must quickly produce a debt=20 payment plan that passes judicial muster.=20 The utility said it needs the bonuses for a ""management retention program.""= =20 Marks agreed. While the $17.5 million leaves less for creditors, without a= =20 financial incentive PG&E's key top brass may not be willing to cooperate wi= th=20 a payment plan, Marks said.=20 ""The main goal for the creditors' support here is to move the bankruptcy as= =20 quickly and smoothly as possible,"" Marks said.=20 The Utility Reform Network, a consumer watchdog group, says PG&E is simply= =20 rewarding managers of a failed business effort.=20 ""They're just showering money on the same people who got them in this mess,= ""=20 said TURN's Mike Florio.=20 The proposed bonuses would come on top of $50 million in bonuses and raises= =20 PG&E awarded just before the April 6 bankruptcy filing.=20 The case is In Re Pacific Gas & Electric Co., 01-30923 DM.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 Metcalf plant gets preliminary approval=20 Posted at 12:21 a.m. PDT Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 BY MIKE ZAPLER=20 Mercury News=20 As the San Jose City Council approached its 10-1 vote Tuesday to give an=20 initial nod to Calpine's big power plant in South San Jose, Councilwoman=20 Linda LeZotte perhaps captured the body's mood best.=20 ``I'm holding my nose to vote for this thing,'' she said. ``Without faultin= g=20 the mayor or his staff, quite frankly I think this deal stinks.''=20 Caught in what some members called a bind beyond their control, the council= =20 gave preliminary approval to an agreement negotiated by Mayor Ron Gonzales= =20 and Calpine on the company's proposed 600-megawatt Metcalf Energy Center.= =20 Councilman Forrest Williams, who represents the Santa Teresa neighborhood= =20 near the site, cast the lone vote against the deal.=20 The agreement is scheduled to come back before the council for a final vote= =20 on June 26, but Tuesday's vote effectively shifts the battle to the courts,= =20 where residents are expected to lodge a lawsuit in one final attempt to blo= ck=20 the plant.=20 Still, Councilwoman Pat Dando and some of her colleagues raised questions= =20 about the deal they said they want answered before the final vote. Their=20 issues could be incorporated into the final deal.=20 Many of the concerns focused on a $50 million recycled water pipeline=20 Gonzales agreed to have the city build to accommodate the project, $10=20 million of which would be reimbursed by Calpine over 30 years.=20 Pipeline possibility=20 Dando said that a private company, Great Oaks Water, may be willing to buil= d=20 the pipeline extension itself, saving the city the $50 million expense.=20 Officials at Great Oaks were unavailable Tuesday.=20 Council members peppered staff with other questions. Many were alarmed by= =20 claims of the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, which said that using treate= d=20 sewage water to cool the power plant could allow dangerous chemicals to see= p=20 into drinking water aquifers. An environmental services director said the= =20 recycled water meets federal specifications, but that there is no protocol= =20 for testing other chemicals not included in those standards.=20 Councilman Ken Yeager asked why Calpine should be allowed to spread a $3.9= =20 million water connection fee over 10 years -- an arrangement that would=20 mandate an amendment to city law.=20 LeZotte, meanwhile, said she wants to hold Calpine accountable to install= =20 ammonia-free technology at the plant. Ammonia is highly hazardous, and=20 residents say the use of the chemical to clean the plant is among their chi= ef=20 concerns.=20 The agreement requires the company to install technology to reduce or=20 eliminate the use ammonia when it becomes ``technologically and economicall= y=20 feasible.'' LeZotte said she wants a clear definition of ``feasible''=20 included in the deal.=20 Tuesday's vote marked a stark departure from the council's November vote to= =20 deny Metcalf. At the time, council members said a power plant was=20 inappropriate for the area, and many members said Tuesday that they still= =20 believe that.=20 Bowing to pressure=20 But with Gov. Gray Davis endorsing Metcalf in April and the California Ener= gy=20 Commission widely expected to override the city's denial this month, counci= l=20 members said they had no choice but to cut the best deal it could and allow= =20 the project to proceed.=20 That explanation, however, didn't sit well with residents of the Santa Tere= sa=20 neighborhood adjacent to the Metcalf site, one of whom accused Gonzales and= =20 the council of ``switching sides when the opposing team gets too close to t= he=20 goal line.''=20 Contact Mike Zapler at mzapler@sjmercury.com or at (408) 275-0140.=20 Feds probe AES, Williams=20 Antitrust investigation looks into allegations of manipulated energy prices= =20 through reduced power-plant construction.=20 June 6, 2001=20 By JAMES ROWLEY Bloomberg News=20 WASHINGTON - The U.S. Justice Department opened an antitrust investigation= =20 into California's electricity shortage by probing allegations that AES Corp= .=20 and Williams Energy Services Co. are limiting power-plant expansion to driv= e=20 up prices.=20 AES Corp., the biggest U.S. power-plant developer, disclosed the=20 investigation in a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.= =20 The Justice Department is looking into a supply-and-marketing agreement=20 between AES' California power-plant unit and a Williams unit that supplies= =20 natural gas.=20 Williams, owner of the second-largest U.S. natural-gas pipeline system, als= o=20 markets the power produced by AES' three electricity plants in the state.= =20 The department alleges the agreement limits expansion of generating capacit= y=20 near some AES plants.=20 AES said it was cooperating with the Justice Department investigation, whic= h=20 began last month, into possible violations of Section 1 of the Sherman=20 Antitrust Act.=20 That provision outlaws any restraint of trade that stifles competition.=20 A shortage of generating capacity in California has led to soaring wholesal= e=20 prices and rolling blackouts and prompted Pacific Gas & Electric, the state= 's=20 largest utility, to seek bankruptcy protection in April.=20 Aaron Thomas, a spokesman for AES, based in Arlington, Va., said the U.S.= =20 investigation started ""no more than a couple of weeks ago.""=20 Williams spokeswoman Paula Hall-Collins said the Tulsa, Okla.-based company= =20 is cooperating.=20 Gina Talamona, Justice Department spokeswoman, said the agency had no=20 immediate comment.=20 The investigation was opened several weeks after the Federal Energy=20 Regulatory Commission investigated AES plants in Long Beach and Huntington= =20 Beach, designated ""must run"" under the Federal Power Act, did not produce= =20 electricity for 10 days in April and May 2000. Williams agreed to pay the= =20 operator of California's electric grid $8 million to settle allegations tha= t=20 it overcharged for power.=20 FERC charged in March that the companies had a financial incentive to keep= =20 the units out of service to force the California Independent System Operato= r=20 to buy power from AES' plant in Redondo Beach at prices close to the=20 FERC-imposed cap of $750 per megawatt-hour.=20 AES said it was complying with a Justice Department demand for documents=20 about the agreement between its AES Southland LLC unit and Williams Energy= =20 Services Co. AES Southland, which operates the three power plants, was also= =20 asked to respond to interrogatories, the company said.=20 The Williams unit supplies the natural gas to fuel the AES plants and marke= ts=20 the power they produce.=20 AES and Williams jointly produce and sell about 4,000 megawatts in Californ= ia=20 -- 6 to 8 percent of the state's power -- enough electricity to light about= 3=20 million typical California homes.=20 AES shares dropped $2.05, to $42.54. Williams Cos. shares dropped $1, to=20 $38.20. Calpine Begins Construction of Peaking Energy Center in Gilroy, Calif.=20 June 6, 2001=20 SAN JOSE, Calif., June 5 /PRNewswire/ via NewsEdge Corporation -=20 Calpine Corporation (NYSE: CPN), the San Jose, Calif.-based independent pow= er=20 company, today announced that initial construction of 135 megawatts (mw) of= =20 peaking generation capacity will begin during this week adjacent to its=20 existing Gilroy Power Plant in Gilroy, Calif. Through an Application for=20 Certification (AFC) filed with the California Energy Commission (CEC) on=20 April 25, 2001, Calpine proposed to add three 45-mw simple-cycle gas turbin= e=20 peaking units in the first of a two-phase process. The California Energy=20 Commission approved the project on May 21, 2001.=20 ""Because the required natural gas, water and transmission infrastructure=20 exists at our Gilroy plant, it is an ideal site for the addition of peaking= =20 generation, allowing for rapid installation of needed capacity. The first= =20 three units are expected to begin generating electricity this September,""= =20 commented Bryan Bertacchi, Calpine Vice President - Western Region.=20 Upon completion the two-phase build out, the Gilroy Energy Center will be a= =20 270-mw, natural gas-fired, simple-cycle peaking generation facility located= =20 on approximately 9.5 acres at 1400 Pacheco Pass Highway in Gilroy. Commerci= al=20 operation of Phase One is scheduled for September 2001. An additional three= =20 45-mw gas turbine generators will be installed in Phase Two with full=20 build-out estimated for May 2002. Phase Two requires the filing of an=20 additional application with the CEC and is subject to a four-month review= =20 process.=20 Initial construction will begin this week with site and civil engineering= =20 activities occurring for approximately six weeks at which time the site wil= l=20 be cleared and leveled. Foundation work and the installation of generation= =20 equipment will follow shortly thereafter, and commissioning and testing wil= l=20 take place for a two to three week period prior to commercial operation in= =20 September 2001.=20 The Gilroy Energy Center web site has been created to host all information= =20 and updates related to this project. For additional information, please vis= it=20 www.gilroypower.com.=20 Calpine Corporation, based in San Jose, Calif., is dedicated to providing= =20 customers with reliable and competitively priced electricity. Calpine is=20 focused on clean, efficient, natural gas-fired generation and is the world'= s=20 largest producer of renewable geothermal energy. Calpine has launched the= =20 largest power development program in North America. To date, the company ha= s=20 approximately 32,200 megawatts of base load capacity and 7,200 megawatts of= =20 peaking capacity in operation, under construction, pending acquisitions and= =20 in announced development in 29 states and Canada. The company was founded i= n=20 1984 and is publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol= =20 CPN. For more information about Calpine, visit its Website at=20 www.calpine.com.=20 This news release discusses certain matters that may be considered=20 ""forward-looking"" statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the=20 Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities=20 Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, including statements regarding the intent= ,=20 belief or current expectations of Calpine Corporation (""the Company"") and i= ts=20 management. Prospective investors are cautioned that any such forward-looki= ng=20 statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve a number of= =20 risks and uncertainties that could materially affect actual results such as= ,=20 but not limited to, (i) changes in government regulations, including pendin= g=20 changes in California, and anticipated deregulation of the electric energy= =20 industry, (ii) commercial operations of new plants that may be delayed or= =20 prevented because of various development and construction risks, such as a= =20 failure to obtain financing and the necessary permits to operate or the=20 failure of third-party contractors to perform their contractual obligations= ,=20 (iii) cost estimates are preliminary and actual cost may be higher than=20 estimated, (iv) the assurance that the Company will develop additional=20 plants, (v) a competitor's development of a lower-cost generating gas-fired= =20 power plant, and (vi) the risks associated with marketing and selling power= =20 from power plants in the newly competitive energy market. Prospective=20 investors are also cautioned that the California energy environment remains= =20 uncertain. The Company's management is working closely with a number of=20 parties to resolve the current uncertainty, while protecting the Company's= =20 interests. Management believes that a final resolution will not have a=20 material adverse impact on the Company. Prospective investors are also=20 referred to the other risks identified from time to time in the Company's= =20 reports and registration statements filed with the Securities and Exchange= =20 Commission.=20 MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT - Click Here=20 SOURCE Calpine Corporation=20 CONTACT: media, Lisa Poelle, ext. 1285, or investors, Rick Barraza, ext.=20 1125, both of Calpine Corporation, 408-995-5115=20 Web site: http://www.gilroypower.com=20 Web site: http://www.calpine.com (CPN)=20 Reliant Urges FERC to Drop or Amend California Price Caps to Avoid Addition= al=20 Shortages and More Blackouts=20 June 6, 2001=20 HOUSTON, June 5 /PRNewswire/ via NewsEdge Corporation -=20 Reliant Energy (NYSE: REI) filed an emergency motion with the Federal Energ= y=20 Regulatory Commission (FERC) on Monday urging the agency to drop the=20 California price caps first applied May 29, or at a minimum, amend them to= =20 reflect the true costs they are attempting to control. The current price=20 caps, which send inaccurate market signals, are actually decreasing supply= =20 and increasing demand thus worsening an already dire situation.=20 ""FERC has been publicly dedicated to an open market from the beginning of t= he=20 California power crisis. We encourage FERC to reexamine these price caps an= d=20 continue that dedication,"" said Joe Bob Perkins, president and chief=20 operating officer, Reliant Energy Wholesale Group. ""Reliant is committed to= =20 helping keep the lights on in California this summer and wants to ensure th= at=20 if caps must remain part of the picture, they actually help increase supply= =20 and fix the problem.""=20 Although the price caps were first imposed less than a week ago, they have= =20 already begun to damage the market by decreasing supply. The price caps are= =20 creating a myriad of problems:=20 -- Creates Misleading Signals - The price cap methodology is misleading=20 the public on the actual cost of power. Reported ""dispatch"" costs in=20 Southern California during emergencies is far below what the actual=20 financial settlements will be under the FERC's final market mitigation=20 order. This confusion results from the ""proxy"" price used for=20 dispatch utilizing an extremely distorted blended fuel cost index.=20 This index averages gas costs in northern and southern parts of the=20 state, an impossibility in the actual market. This authorizes the=20 California Independent System Operator (ISO) to require that=20 generators dispatch power at reported market clearing prices well=20 below actual cost when back-up generation capacity begins to dip below=20 7.5 percent.=20 -- Depletes Power from Peaking Plants - The price caps distort dispatch=20 signals on peaking plants, which in some cases may be run only a few=20 days of the year because of emission regulations. The current FERC=20 price controls encourage the ISO to purchase power from emergency=20 peaking plants before it is really needed, even in the absence of a=20 stage three emergency. This depletes supplies that will, by law, run=20 out when blackout season intensifies later this summer. This power=20 from peaking units should only be purchased when blackouts are=20 imminent -- not in stage one or two emergencies.=20 -- Eliminates Price Signals for Retail Customers - Price caps remove=20 price signals for retail customers. Customers, particularly=20 industrial companies, which should be encouraged to curtail during=20 shortages, are not encouraged to conserve power when dispatched price=20 caps keep prices below the actual cost to produce electricity.=20 -- Discourages Supply from Out-of-State - Suppliers outside of=20 California, who are under no legal obligation to dispatch power during=20 an emergency in the state, are not encouraged to increase available=20 production when reported market clearing prices are below their cost=20 to produce. During times of emergencies, utilities across the Western=20 region are not likely to take on additional risks and costs if they=20 don't believe they will be fully compensated - a situation the current=20 price caps create.=20 MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT - Click Here=20 SOURCE Reliant Energy=20 CONTACT: Maxine Enciso of Ketchum Public Relations, Los Angeles,=20 310-444-1303, for Reliant Energy; or media, Richard Wheatley of Reliant=20 Energy, 713-207-5881=20 Photo: NewsCom: AP=20 Archive: http://photoarchive.ap.org PRN Photo Desk, 888-776-6555 or=20 212-782-2840=20 Company News On-Call: or fax,=20 800-758-5804, ext. 419090=20 Web site: http://www.reliantenergy.com (REI)=20 By Kathleen McFall kmcfall@ftenergy.com President George W. Bush's energy package encourages the use of biomass fue= ls=20 for both transportation purposes and electricity generation. ""They can=20 provide a reliable source of energy at a stable price, and they can also=20 generate income for farmers, landowners and others who harness them,"" his= =20 administration's report said.=20 Despite this warm and fuzzy language, however, the administration offered n= o=20 tangible funding for the fledgling biofuels industry=01*other than an exten= sion=20 of an existing ethanol tax credit that was not due to expire until 2007=01*= a=20 significant disappointment, and surprise, to advocates of renewable=20 transportation fuels. The report did recommend expanding tax credits for biomass energy projects = to=20 include forest-related and agriculture fuel sources and threw its weighty= =20 support at a new credit for electricity produced from biomass co-fired with= =20 coal. These recommendations are already included in the president's 2002=20 budget.=20 ""We are pleased that the administration included expansion of the biomass t= ax=20 credit and hope that, with congressional leadership, we will see this=20 expanded provision signed into law this year,"" said Katherine Hamilton,=20 co-director of the American Bioenergy Association (ABA).=20 Unlike other portions of the recommended energy policy, biomass energy=20 probably will not suffer under the recent change in Senate composition, giv= en=20 Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle's (D-S.D.) agricultural constituency and= =20 his previous support of the biofuels industry.=20 According to the National Energy Policy Development report, biomass account= s=20 for about 76% of non-hydropower renewable electricity generation,=20 representing a total of about 1.6% of total U.S. electricity supply.=20 Biopower advocates, however, envision an even greater market penetration in= =20 the coming decades and point to its environmental and ancillary advantages.= =20 For example, given that biomass combustion can be carbon dioxide-neutral (i= f=20 the growth and use cycle is managed sustainably), environmental groups=20 support an expanded role. Farmers with marginal lands that could grow bioma= ss=20 fuel could enjoy economic benefits. With large amounts of wood residue, the= =20 forest industry also stands to benefit from wider use of wood as a power=20 source.=20 Renewable energy offers a particular advantage to the lumber and paper=20 industry, and many analysts project that the industry may soon become a net= =20 seller of electricity.=20 ""In the lumber and paper industries, wood scraps are sometimes directly fed= =20 into boilers to produce steam for their manufacturing processes or to heat= =20 their buildings. For that reason, renewable energy offers a particular=20 advantage to the lumber and paper industry, and many analysts project that= =20 the industry may soon become a net seller of electricity,"" said the energy= =20 policy report.=20 Co-firing with coal Biomass=01*usually wood or wood residue=01*has traditionally been burned di= rectly=20 in the industrial sector for heat or on-site electricity generation.=20 According to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the existing 10 GW of=20 installed capacity are based on this direct-combustion technology.=20 For utilities and power-generating companies with coal-fired capacity,=20 however, biomass co-firing may represent one of the least-cost renewable=20 energy options, said the DOE. The process involves blending different=20 materials in varying amounts with coal.=20 Not only does mixing biomass with coal reduce emissions, it is likely to be= =20 cost-effective. Southern Co. estimates that a biomass plant alone could=20 generate power, depending on its location, at 4 to 11 cents/kWh. Given that= =20 the lower range of this corresponds to coal generation costs, there are=20 clearly circumstances where biomass-coal co-firing would be economically=20 attractive today. Plus, the environmental public relations benefit for=20 utilities with coal-fired capacity would be valuable.=20 Domestic biomass generation capacity could reach 20-30 GW by the year 2020 = by=20 co-firing at existing U.S. coal-fired power plants.=20 According to a recent report prepared by five National Laboratories, domest= ic=20 biomass generation capacity could reach 20-30 GW by the year 2020 by=20 co-firing at existing U.S. coal-fired power plants.=20 A recent report by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel for Climate= =20 Change (IPCC) also cites the potential of coal co-firing with biomass. The= =20 IPCC report concludes that co-firing in coal boilers results in the lowest= =20 cost and least technical risk of the examined approaches for biomass=20 conversion to electricity.=20 Working out the technical kinks Already, said the DOE, six power plants in the U.S. are currently co-firing= =20 coal and wood residue products on a regular basis. Another 10 plants have= =20 successfully tested co-firing over the last decade, and at least six more= =20 plants are now conducting or planning tests.=20 For example, Southern Co. is working with DOE, the Southern Research=20 Institute and the Electric Power Research Institute to study ways to grow a= nd=20 harvest switchgrass to blend with coal as a fuel for power generation.=20 Ideally suited for the southeastern U.S., switchgrass is a rugged grass tha= t=20 can be grown on marginal agricultural land. Reaching heights of up to 12=20 feet, it requires little fertilization and herbicide and can be harvested= =20 twice a year.=20 Harvesting methods, co-milling of switchgrass and pulverized coal,=20 pilot-scale co-firing tests, and a full-scale demonstration of co-firing at= =20 Alabama Power Co.'s Plant Gadsden are part of Southern Co.'s collaborative= =20 project.=20 The U.S. Agriculture Department is also taking a role in exploring the=20 potential of biomass and coal co-firing as a means to give farmers new=20 markets, especially for currently idle land. The agency recently authorized= =20 funding for three co-firing demonstration projects.=20 In Iowa, the Chariton Valley Biomass Project is a cooperative effort to=20 develop warm and cool season grasses (such as switchgrass) to co-fire with= =20 coal at Alliant Energy's Ottumwa Generating Station. The project is designe= d=20 to generate a sustained supply of 35 MW of biomass energy. Eventually, the= =20 grass could substitute for as much as 5% of the coal currently burned at th= e=20 plant.=20 In addition to reducing coal emissions, the Chariton Valley Biomass Project= =20 will support the local farm economy.=20 In addition to reducing coal emissions, the project will support the local= =20 farm economy because the grass and trees will come from acreage taken out o= f=20 production under the Agriculture Department's Conservation Reserve Program= =20 (CRP). CRP land is generally marginal land that the government subsidizes= =20 farmers to leave idle to both prevent erosion and protect commodity prices= =20 from product surpluses.=20 The Pennsylvania Switchgrass Energy and Conservation Project will produce= =20 switchgrass on CRP land for sale to a local cooperative's coal-fired=20 fluid-bed combustors.=20 In New York, the Agriculture Department project will fund willow biomass=20 crops and switchgrass on CRP acreage in the central and western part of the= =20 state. The primary markets for the willow biomass are two coal-burning powe= r=20 plants and a small university central heating facility.=20 Land conflicts, transportation may be obstacles As these pilot projects illustrate, biomass conversion efforts may have the= =20 most significant potential in rural areas. ""Since biomass is widely=20 distributed it has good potential to provide rural areas with a renewable= =20 source of energy. The challenge is to provide =01( conversion and delivery = of=20 bioenergy to the marketplace in the form of modern and competitive energy= =20 sources,"" said the IPCC report.=20 A potential drawback to co-firing is transportation. Transportation of=20 wood-based energy products is more costly, per unit of energy, than coal, f= or=20 example, and most analysts believe it will prove most economical to site=20 generation plants near biomass sources.=20 ""The generating plant or biorefinery must be located near to the resource t= o=20 minimize transport costs of the low-energy-density biomass as well as to=20 minimize impacts on air and water use,"" the IPCC report said. However, note= s=20 the report's authors, economies of scale may be significant enough to offse= t=20 the transport costs involved.=20 A potential drawback over the long term, however, for biomass conversion is= =20 land use conflicts. The IPCC report notes that by 2100, the global land=20 requirement to feed the growing world population will increase substantiall= y.=20 ""Up until this time there may well be sufficient land to supply all demands= =20 for food, fibre and energy, but at some stage after that, land-use conflict= s=20 could arise and before that, competition for water and irrigation may be a= =20 constraint.""=20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: ERisk iConference.htm  -- FYI; [EMail-Body]= Shirley, Please, register me for it. Vince -----Original Message----- From: De, Rabi Sent: Friday, June 08, 2001 9:02 AM To: Tamarchenko, Tanya; Mack, Iris; Shanbhogue, Vasant; Dhar, Amitava; Kaminski, Vince J Subject: ERisk iConference.htm -- FYI [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Joe Hirko farewell reception; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/01/2000 08:22 AM --------------------------- From: Ken Rice and Kevin Hannon@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS on 07/28/2000 03:10 PM Sent by: EBS Announcements@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS To: All EBS Employees Houston, Enron Executive Committee Members cc: Subject: Joe Hirko farewell reception As you are aware, Joe Hirko has announced that he will be leaving Enron. Joe will be in Houston next week, and we want to offer him our best wishes and give him a proper send-off. Please drop by the Energizer on Tuesday, August 1 any time between 2:30 and 4:00 p.m. for an open house in honor of Joe. Hope to see you there! [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Charts from Terry Thorn; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 01/06/2000 08:55 AM --------------------------- Linda F Jenkins@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 01/05/2000 03:42 PM To: Kenneth Lay@ENRON, Steven J Kean@EES cc: Subject: Charts from Terry Thorn Terry asked me to email these attachments to each of you. One is an organizational chart for his department and the other is a Global Affairs Activities Matrix. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: India And The WTO Services Negotiation; [EMail-Body]= fyi ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 09/08/99 03:49 PM --------------------------- Joe Hillings@ENRON 09/08/99 02:52 PM To: Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@Enron cc: Sanjay Terence H Ashok John Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Jeffrey Sherrick/Corp/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: India And The WTO Services Negotiation Sanjay: Some information of possible interest to you. I attended a meeting this afternoon of the Coalition of Service Industries, one of the lead groups promoting a wide range of services including energy services in the upcoming WTO GATTS 2000 negotiations. CSI President Bob Vastine was in Delhi last week and met with CII to discuss the upcoming WTO. CII apparently has a committee looking into the WTO. Bob says that he told them that energy services was among the CSI recommendations and he recalls that CII said that they too have an interest. Since returning from the meeting I spoke with Kiran Pastricha and told her the above. She actually arranged the meeting in Delhi. She asked that I send her the packet of materials we distributed last week in Brussels and London. One of her associates is leaving for India tomorrow and will take one of these items to Delhi. Joe Joe Hillings 09/08/99 11:57 AM To: Sanjay cc: Terence H Ashok John Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Jeffrey Sherrick/Corp/Enron@Enron (bcc: Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron) Subject: India And The WTO Services Negotiation Sanjay: First some information and then a request for your advice and involvment. A group of US companies and associations formed the US WTO Energy Services Coalition in late May and has asked the US Government to include ""energy services"" on their proposed agenda when the first meeting of the WTO GATTS 2000 ministerial convenes late this year in Seattle. Ken Lay will be among the CEO speakers. These negotiations are expected to last three years and cover a range of subjects including agriculture, textiles, e-commerce, investment, etc. This morning I visited with Sudaker Rao at the Indian Embassy to tell him about our coalition and to seek his advice on possible interest of the GOI. After all, India is a leader in data processing matters and has other companies including ONGC that must be interested in exporting energy services. In fact probably Enron and other US companies may be engaging them in India and possibly abroad. Sudaker told me that the GOI has gone through various phases of opposing the services round to saying only agriculture to now who knows what. He agrees with the strategy of our US WTO Energy Services Coalition to work with companies and associations in asking them to contact their government to ask that energy services be on their list of agenda items. It would seem to me that India has such an interest. Sudaker and I agree that you are a key person to advise us and possibly to suggest to CII or others that they make such a pitch to the GOI Minister of Commerce. I will ask Lora to send you the packet of materials Chris Long and I distributed in Brussels and London last week. I gave these materials to Sudaker today. Everyone tells us that we need some developing countries with an interest in this issue. They may not know what we are doing and that they are likely to have an opportunity if energy services are ultimately negotiated. Please review and advise us how we should proceed. We do need to get something done in October. Joe PS Terry Thorn is moderating a panel on energy services at the upcoming World Services Congress in Atlanta. The Congress will cover many services issues. I have noted in their materials that Mr. Alliwalia is among the speakers but not on energy services. They expect people from all over the world to participate. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Patent attorney; [EMail-Body]= FYI Dad -----Original Message----- From: LawrenceLRTNMT@aol.com@ENRON Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 6:40 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Patent attorney Vince: I wanted to get back to you with a reply to your question about my recommendation on a patent attorney. I cannot give you a personal recommendation per se because, in the end, I opted not to hire an attorney to file my patent until I had decided whether I wanted to protect my work as a trade secret or as a patented commodity. I ultimately struck a compromise position by filing my own ""provisional patent application."" This establishes the date of my claim and gives me one year in which to finalize the patent? or not; it also provides patent pending protection from the date I filed it with the U. S. Patent and Trademark Office. In the process of investigating the options for safeguarding my intellectual property, however, I did talk to quite a number of patent attorneys. Of these, I think that perhaps David Richie might be the most appropriate for your son's software idea. He talked as though he had a particular specialty in software issues; he also struck me as competent and aggressive. He practices in the Silicon Valley and can be reached at telephone number (408) 282-1856. I suspect that he has already done so, but if not, your son might want to visit the internet site of the U. S. Patent Office. Basic information and forms can be downloaded from there. Two other, newer sites might also intrigue him-both deal with the protection, valuation and marketing of intellectual property, patents, etc. They are: pl-x.com (The Patent and License Exchange, Inc.) yet2come.com Hope this is helpful. Regards, Larry Thorne [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= More great press!; [EMail-Body]= Did you see Peggy Noonan's article? Shapiro and I are getting misty eyed. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/08/2000 12:53 PM --------------------------- ""Painter, Sally"" on 08/08/2000 10:45:04 AM Sent by: ""Russell, Rhonda"" To: ""'Adhoc Advisors'"" <Rhonda_Roo_00@yahoo.com> cc: Subject: More great press! > Great Press on Lieberman. See below. > > > > A 1960 Moment > Al Gore's selection of Joe Lieberman gives Democrats--and everyone > else--something to cheer about. > BY PEGGY NOONAN > Monday August 7, 2000 4:26 p.m. EDT > The choice of Joe Lieberman of Connecticut as Al Gore's running mate is so > smart, so clever, so good, so satisfying, so striking that it just may > turn > this election a bit on its head for a while. Certainly its most immediate > effect is going to be a successful Democratic convention next week in Los > Angeles, because now the Democrats, badly hit by their own form of Clinton > fatigue and acutely aware of the particular charmlessness of their > presidential candidate, have something to cheer about. They respect Joe > Lieberman. They think he has a center, a moral and ethical view of the > world. He is experienced and articulate. He is decent and intelligent. He > is > independent. The media love him. He is a regular co-star on Imus, and all > of > the columnists and reporters for the elite newspapers, and all of the > electronic pundits and anchors, know him and admire him. > But that is not what is most wonderful. What is most wonderful is that he > is > an Orthodox Jew. What does this mean? It means a lot of people who love > America more than they love parties or politics are happy that a big and > great breakthrough has occurred. A friend, a journalist who is politically > conservative and Jewish, e-mailed me to tell me he had been weeping all > morning, that he'd cried when he heard the news. Another friend, a > producer at a TV news show, called and told me she woke her father in > California to give him the news and they both got choked up. ""This is like > 1960,"" she said, and I said I know, and I got choked up. It is wonderful > when America is at her most American, and breaks down another barrier and > says ""What's in your heart is most important."" > If Joe Lieberman had been Joe Lee, and an Episcopalian, Al Gore would have > been smart to pick him. He would have been an obvious choice. The only > reason he would have hesitated over Mr. Lieberman is that he's Jewish. Mr. > Gore decided that was just fine. I think that I have never seen Al Gore do > such an elegant, intelligent and original thing. Well done, Mr. Gore. > I have to tell you, this really does feel like a 1960 moment to me. I was > a > little girl when a Catholic got chosen to run for president, and I had > gathered from the conversation of grownups that You Don't Elect Catholics > to the Presidency. When it happened, it's hard to describe how exciting > and > moving and idealism-inspiring it was. It gave a lot of people a lot of > joy. > It opened things up more. That was a good thing. So is this. > And because this is such a good thing, I hope everyone of whatever > politics > or persuasion sits back for a few days and feels good about it. Everyone > should be nice and not do any political bashing until . . . Friday. > However, I think it's okay and maybe even helpful to note the following. > Network producers are going to decide, in their bright and touchingly > uninformed minds, that the big opponents of the Lieberman choice will be > Christian conservatives. That's where they'll go for the negative sound > bites. But Christian conservatives love Joe Lieberman. They've been arm in > arm with him in the great cultural battles of the past decade. He was just > about the only Democrat who'd give them the time of day. He was on their > side. > The last time I saw Mr. Lieberman was last spring, in New York, at a > symposium on Hollywood and the culture. I moderated and introduced our > guests--Joe Lieberman and Bill Bennett, who are close friends and > co-warriors in the values battle. Lieberman and Bennett very frankly > talked > to the audience of producers and writers and network people and movie > stars about how to make television and film and music more decent, more > helpful. > This is how people on the right think of and have experienced Mr. > Lieberman--as a good guy with his head screwed on right. > Many conservative Christians--I think most conservative Christians--see > all > of those who love God as part of the same ""cultural minority."" > Conservative > Christians don't feel they have much in common, in terms of their > political > desires, with atheists and agnostics and leftist Episcopalian bishops and > such. But they think they have a great deal in common with Orthodox Jews. > They crowd around Rabbi Daniel Lapin when he speaks at a conservative > gathering; they crowd around Dennis Prager, Michael Medved, David Horowitz > and scores of others. One of the biggest heroes of conservative Christians > is an Orthodox Jew called Dr. Laura; the last time I saw her she was > wowing them at a born-again Christian assembly at the National Prayer > Breakfast last February. > A powerful and respected political officeholder told me Monday that > there's > ""no upside"" to the Lieberman choice. I told him there's no downside. He > was surprised and said, ""He can't even campaign on Saturdays!"" I said so > what, America would love to see a politician who actually put God first > one day a week. > I wish I'd added this: Remember Sandy Koufax? Joe Lieberman not > campaigning on Saturday is Sandy Koufax not pitching on Yom Kippur. There > were a lot of great sports moments in the 1950s and 1960s, but none > greater than the day in 1965 when Mr. Koufax put God before the World > Series. What a great guy, what a lesson for a generation of Christian and > Jewish kids. And Muslims and everyone else too. > Yes, it's good news for Hillary. It's great news for Hillary. It enlivens > part of her New York base, it says to New York Jews that the Democrats are > the party that did this great thing, it excites people--and may help them > forget, or at least not remember so vividly, that the Democratic > senatorial > candidate has, shall we say, a not fully satisfying relationship with New > York's Jews. A historic choice like the Mr. Lieberman can overwhelm a lot > of > previous bad static. > But let's not care about that for now. The headline is not ""Is It Good for > Hillary?"" The headline is: ""It Is Good for America."" It is a wonderful > country that does something like this, that takes a good man who is a > member of a small ethnic/religious minority to be one of its two major > vice > presidential candidates, and that greets that choice with resounding > hurrahs. > This is really a great day. We should all be happy. We really are a > maturing > democracy. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Ross Perot's EMS company; [EMail-Body]= We can create significant mutual benefit by partnering with a firm which is focussed on developing IT systems for bulk power systems: We need to take our deregulation model to the next level of detail by having IT solutions which will support our view of how the market ought to work. The IT firm would benefit from our access to the policy makers (domestic and international) whose decisions will make the IT firm's systems either successful or obsolete. Call me if you would like to discuss. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 09/21/99 03:13 PM --------------------------- To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@Enron, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@Enron, Kevin M Presto/HOU/ECT@ECT, Shashi Patel/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stephen R Horn/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lloyd Will/HOU/ECT@ECT, John Zurita/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Ross Perot's EMS company To all--Steve Horn's Investment group has been approached to possibly invest in a company, Soft____, that makes EMS and tagging systems (which BPA is using and PGE may use). We met w/ Shashi Patel of Steve's group today and discussed that there are competitors out there, including OATI, Alstom ESCA (who are partnered with Ross Perot). Ross Perot has approached Enron about promoting its system in the Midwest ISO. We used this system for Enron control area's EMS. Ross Perot is going to contact Steve Kean to set up a meeting to show us his product. Also, Kevin Presto thinks that OATI would be a good investment. Steve Kean--Steve Horn and Shashi Patel are interested in being included in a presentation by Perot. Sarah and Joe--Can you think of any FERC regulatory constraints that would limit Enron's ability to invest in one of the software providers to utilities/RTOS? I couldn't think of any reason off hand. Thanks. ---------------------- Forwarded by Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT on 09/20/99 04:57 PM --------------------------- From: Christi L Nicolay 09/10/99 02:42 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@Enron, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Midwest ISO information (Transco?) Steve/Joe/Sarah--See the attached memo from Alstom ESCA to Kevin Presto. Alstom ESCA did the Enron control area's (ENSE) EMS system that we needed to comply with NERC policies. How should we proceed? Thanks. ---------------------- Forwarded by Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT on 09/10/99 02:10 PM --------------------------- Enron North America Corp. From: Kevin M Presto 09/10/99 01:30 PM To: Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Midwest ISO information... What are your thoughts? I recommend talking with Steve Kean and Joe Hartsoe ASAP to coordinate with the ESCA/OATI/Perot System consortium regarding the Midwest ISO. Dick George from ESCA mentioned that Ross Perot would like to make contact at a high level inside Enron to discuss the merits of Enron supporting a for-profit transco structure for the Midwest ISO. The ESCA/OATI/Perot System consortium is offering a system to the Midwest ISO that is designed to support a for-profit transco. The consortium's primary competitor (ABB) has a system that supports the more structured ISO environment (similar to California and PJM). ---------------------- Forwarded by Kevin M Presto/HOU/ECT on 09/10/99 01:05 PM --------------------------- ""dsgeorge"" <dsgeorge@earthlink.net> on 09/09/99 11:00:36 PM To: Kevin M Presto/HOU/ECT@ECT, ""Lloyd Will"" <LWill@hydro.mb.ca> cc: ""John Wulf"" <john.wulf@alstom.esca.com>, ""Brent Brobak"" <Brent@esca.com>, ""Laurence Ferry"" <laurence.ferry@esca.com>, ""JD Hammerly"" <jd.hammerly@esca.com> Subject: Midwest ISO information... Kevin and Lloyd, The Signatories of the Midwest ISO follow: Allegheny Power Ameren (formerly Union Electric and Central Illinois Public Service Company) CILCO Cinergy Commonwealth Edison Hoosier Energy Rural Electric Cooperative Illinois Power Kentucky Utilities Louisville Gas & Electric Northern States Power Wabash Valley Power Wisconsin Electric The status of the formation is anti-profit, i.e. a holding pattern is in place with a FERC Tariff request to carry over seven years. The view is that a for-profit-ISO goes completely against the grain and that only a mandate by FERC will get them to change. Given Entergy's fight with FERC even a mandate will be a hard fought court exercise. At present there are sixteen control areas therefore the system requirement with grandfathered contracts in each is odious. Nevertheless, the form ESCA and our partners Perot, OATI and Tenfold offer is a full-up system ready for a for-profit implementation. As you might expect the division of responsibilities on the proposal is Perot as Program Manager (their position with the California ISO again), OATI for Tagging and Congestion Management, Tenfold for Settlement and Billing, and finally ESCA for the EMS/Market Systems. We prefer a for-profit model as it betters our offering and provides more near-term opportunity. Discussions with the Perot, OATI and Tenfold partners concurred that sharing information with Enron and vice-versa would help all of us understand how each side may be able to position ourselves with the Midwest ISO. Mutual help and cooperation is to our partners, ESCA's and it would seem Enron's advantage. MIDWEST ISO BOARD OF DIRECTORS JAMES H. YOUNG, JR. - Chairman Former Senior Vice President, Business Development South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, Columbia, SC Address: 130 Aspen Trail Columbia, SC 29206 (803) 782-2943 Jim10@mindspring.com PAUL E. HANAWAY - Vice Chairman Former Commissioner, Rhode Island Public Utilities Commission Providence, RI Address: 231 Whites Ledge Lane Glen, NH 03838 P.O. Box 601 Glen, NH 03838 (603) 383-9374 (603) 383-6912 (FAX) phanaway@landmarknet.net WILLIAM O. ALBERTINI Former Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Bell Atlantic Corp. 698 Strafford Circle Strafford, PA 19087 (610) 293-1511 (610) 293-0392 (FAX) woakka@bellatlantic.net DAVID F. DEROSA, Ph.D. President, DeRosa Research and Trading, Inc. 495 White Oak Shade Road New Canaan, CT 06840 (203) 801-4340 (203) 801-4342 (FAX) derosa@derosa-research.com DONALD L. STOKLEY Former President and Chief Executive Officer Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia Address: 870 Highgreen Court Marietta, GA 30068 (770) 973-5385 (770) 933-7755 (Office) (770) 955-5092 (FAX) WILLIAM P. VITITOE Former Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President Washington Natural Gas Company, Seattle, WA Address: No. 1, Dodge Place Grosse Pointe, MI 48230 P.O. Box 36203 Grosse Pointe Farms, MI 48236 (313) 886-7071 (FAX rolls over) J. CLIFFORD DODD Chief Information Officer Ameritech Corporation Address: 2000 W. Ameritech Center Drive Mail Stop 4H-41 Hoffman Estates, Illinois 60196 (847) 248-4600 (847) 248-4602 (Lorelei Anderson, Admin. Asst.) (847) 248-7155 (FAX) KARL, ZORBIST - Secretary, Counsel and Interim President Blackwell Sanders Peper Martin LLP 2300 Main Street, Suite 1100 Kansas City, Missouri 64108 (816) 983-8171 (816) 983-8080 (FAX) kzobrist@bspmlaw.com Our proposal is due in about 60 days, therefore we would hope to start exchanging help with each other soon. Please let me know if you need more information? We appreciate your help. Thank you, Dick George ALSTOM ESCA [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential & Proprietaty - Udated PanNat Value; [EMail-Body]= Mark: Per my voice mail. Jeff ----- Forwarded by Jeffrey T Hodge/HOU/ECT on 06/07/2001 05:15 PM ----- Eric Boyt/ENRON@enronXgate 06/07/2001 04:32 PM To: Neal Gerstandt/ENRON@enronXgate cc: Eric Moon/ENRON@enronXgate, Jeffrey T Hodge/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Confidential & Proprietaty - Udated PanNat Value As requested... Value of Deal (based on 6/5/01 curves - July 2001 out) $156,243,990 Estimated ""Unwind"" costs $ 35,000,000 Total Est. Exposure to Duke's #1 Position $191,243,990 Exposure to Duke's #2 Position (No Transport) $ 56,483,885 Let either of us know if you have any additional questions. Regards, Eric [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Wolak report; [EMail-Body]= Sue: I'm so impressed that you know how to put the link on the email. I can't figure out how to do that, and I think that looks much more ""high tech"" than attaching a silly old report. Thanks for the link. We can take it from here. Sarah Susan J Mara 12/22/2000 11:31 AM To: Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Wolak report Call me computer illiterate. I could not figure out how to download the report off the web site, so here's the link. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE; Luntz Focus Groups; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/22/2000 04:47 PM --------------------------- ""Elizabeth A. VanDersarl"" <liz@luntz.com> on 08/22/2000 11:18:32 AM To: ""'skean@enron.com'"" <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: RE; Luntz Focus Groups Attached please find the edited deregulation speech. <<anti regulation speech.doc>> - anti regulation speech.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message(due to missing attachment)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Per Your Request; [EMail-Body]= This is a very good try. I think it comes off too defensive and too genera= l=20 (I just don't think the topic lends itself to the format). Here's what I= =20 think we should do: Jeff is filming a piece for etv about the stock price. = =20 We should perhaps use, and expand upon, those messages. This approach is= =20 more directed at the bottom line: why our stock price should go up. =09Sarah Palmer@ECT =0903/09/2001 03:14 PM =09=09 =09=09 To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON =09=09 cc: Mary Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON =09=09 Subject: Re: Per Your Request Thanks Steve. Here's an initial draft -- I've taken a very light ""eBizy""= =20 approach to delivering the message. Perhaps by having some fun with it we= =20 can look a little less defensive. Let me know if we're on track or pitiful= ly=20 way off. Thanks. Comparing Enron to Apples You may have noticed =01) or you may be asking why =01) industry analysts o= ften=20 compare Enron to Wall Street firms like Goldman Sachs or investment banks= =20 like Chase Manhattan. We thought it was time to sort out any confusion=20 between our businesses, just in case someone asks you to explain. Here's h= ow=20 we're different from those guys: w Enron provides physical delivery of energy products to customers =01) we = are=20 not just traders. Those guys mainly act as brokers and do not participate= =20 physically. w Enron proactively seeks to reform and create markets. Those guys simply= =20 participate and compete. w Enron extends its business model into new and deregulating markets,=20 enabling high growth rates. Those guys are in markets that generate less= =20 aggressive growth rates. w Enron owns physical assets that provide consistent cash flow, such as our= =20 pipelines. Those guys do not have them. And if that's not enough, we think our employees are so much cooler than=20 theirs. =09Steven J Kean@ENRON =0903/09/2001 01:06 PM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: Mary Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Palmer/HOU/ECT@ECT =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: Per Your Request Here are the message points ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/09/2001 01:05 PM ----- =09Yorleni Mendez =0903/08/2001 10:00 AM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: Per Your Request =09 =09 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Tax Review of California Assembly Bill No. 128; [EMail-Body]= fyi ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/10/2001 09:13 AM --------------------------- From: Matthew F Gockerman/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/09/2001 03:01 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Wes Colwell/ENRON@enronXgate, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Edward Coats/ENRON@enronXgate, Gavin Russo/ENRON@enronXgate, Stephen H Douglas/ENRON@enronXgate, Jeff Blumenthal/ENRON@enronXgate, Susan Musch/ENRON@enronXgate, Christian Yoder/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: Tax Review of California Assembly Bill No. 128 Attached please find a Tax Review of California Assembly Bill No. 128 (""AB 128X""). The Tax Review sets out the practical implication (increased cost to purchasers) and constitutional deficiencies of AB 128X. The third paragraph of the Tax Review details the mathematical computation of the tax and the resulting purchaser price increase. The computation sales price, $300/MWh, reflects the SP15 (Southern California) weighted average index price ($302.88), rounded to the nearest hundred, as reported in Megawatt Daily's May 8th MarketReport. However, it may be more effective to present the mathematical computation with a price closer to the proposed base price of $60/MWh. We are available to assist in presenting the computation utilizing whichever numbers you deem appropriate. The California Senate has passed SB 1X, Windfall Profits Tax on Electric Generators. We will forward a similar memorandum addressing SB 1X. We are available to address questions and/or comments. Thanks. Ed Coats - 713.853.6369 Steve Douglas - 713.853.0938 Gavin Russo - 713.853.6296 Matt Gockerman - 713.853.3979 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Fwd: FW:; [EMail-Body]= Return-path: <VKaminski@aol.com> From: VKaminski@aol.com Full-name: VKaminski Message-ID: Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 21:03:34 EST Subject: Fwd: FW: To: VKaminski@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10539 Return-path: <VKaminski@aol.com> From: VKaminski@aol.com Full-name: VKaminski Message-ID: Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 02:56:49 EST Subject: Fwd: FW: To: VKaminski@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10539 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-Path: <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com> Received: from rly-xf05.mx.aol.com (rly-xf05.mail.aol.com [172.20.105.229]) by air-xf01.mail.aol.com (v81.9) with ESMTP id MAILINXF110-1019180521; Fri, 19 Oct 2001 18:05:21 -0400 Received: from postmaster.enron.com (outbound5.enron.com [192.152.140.9]) by rly-xf05.mx.aol.com (v80.21) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINXF57-1019180459; Fri, 19 Oct 2001 18:04:59 -0400 Received: from corp.enron.com [192.168.110.110]) by postmaster.enron.com with ESMTP id f9JM4w304754 for <vkaminski@aol.com>; Fri, 19 Oct 2001 17:04:58 -0500 (CDT) Received: from nahou-mscnx04p.corp.enron.com (unverified) by corp.enron.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.1) with SMTP id for <vkaminski@aol.com>; Fri, 19 Oct 2001 17:04:58 -0500 Received: from NAHOU-MSMBX03V.corp.enron.com ([192.168.110.40]) by nahou-mscnx04p.corp.enron.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.2966); Fri, 19 Oct 2001 17:04:58 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.4712.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=""iso-8859-1"" Subject: FW: Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 16:34:52 -0500 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Thread-Index: From: ""Kaminski, Vince J"" <Vince.J.Kaminski@ENRON.com> To: ""Lin, Martin"" <Martin.Lin@ENRON.com> Cc: <vkaminski@aol.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Oct 2001 22:04:58.0864 (UTC) FILETIME=[17D6F700:01C158EA] X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) Martin, Lance What do you think? Vince > -----Original Message----- > From: ""Frank A. Wolak"" > Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 4:28 PM > To: Kaminski, Vince J > Subject: > > Vince, > > I've been hearing rumors that Enron has decided to endorse > the nodal pricing model as implemented in PJM. > I just wanted to warn you that I'm not sure > this is in Enron's long-term interest at all. Let me explain > why. Feel free to give me a call if you'd like to talk > more about this. > > First, let me say that I firmly believe in locational pricing > and specifically pricing congestion. However, the way that PJM > implements nodal pricing is to eliminate as much price volatility > and reduce the transparency of the market. Specifically, the > PJM tariff gives the ISO the ability to mitigate to cost plus a > %10 adder the bids of any market participant that the ISO deems > is out of merit in one of the three zones in region. (The fact > that a nodal market is talking about zones should give you cause for > alarm.) > Then the ISO takes this mitigated bid and re-runs its price-setting > software to compute new nodal prices. The way I have (somewhat > unfairly) decribed this price-setting process is that the > PJM ISO decides what prices it would like > for a given day and mitigates bids until it gets them. This is not > a transparent market, nor one where it makes any sense to buy > the risk management services that Enron provides. The > only price volatility you have to worry about in the PJM market is > that kind that comes about if they need imports into their control > area > to meet demand. Under these circumstances, you need to pay the > imports whatever is necessary to get them to come to your market. > > However, bear in mind FERC's desire to make a large RTO on the > East Coast. This will effectively mean little imports > to the East Coast RTO, so all bids can be mitigated at > the discretion of the ISO. Paying market-clearing prices to > cost-of-service > mitigated bids is just paying too much to eliminate price volatility. > It effectively kills off the development of risk management at > the wholesale and retail level. Power marketing becomes much less > profitable because retailers know you can always buy at cost-mitigated > prices. > > In short, the PJM model is not market. It is just an alternative > form of regulation that is politically attractive because it reduces > price volatility, but it is not good for consumers or traders because > they just > get a higher cost form of regulation than traditional cost-of-service > regulation. You pay market-clearing prices to cost-of-service > mitigated bids, but under regulation you could just pay > cost-of-service > prices and eliminate the infra-marginal profits to low cost > generators. > > As we discussed during our dinner, I think the two biggest sources > of benefits from re-structuring will come from getting the demand-side > involved in the market and from more efficient risk management. A > necessary condition for both of these to occur is prices that reflect > actual conditions in the market (including the extent of market power > exercised). Masking these signals dulls any incentive for market > participants to make the investment necessary to management. The PJM > model is just way to have a market in name without achieving any > significant benefits to consumers or energy traders. > > Frank This e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or its relevant affiliate and may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient (s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender or reply to Enron Corp. at and delete all copies of the message. This e-mail (and any attachments hereto) are not intended to be an offer (or an acceptance) and do not create or evidence a binding and enforceable contract between Enron Corp. (or any of its affiliates) and the intended recipient or any other party, and may not be relied on by anyone as the basis of a contract by estoppel or otherwise. Thank you. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Lockyer Fires Earthy Attack at Energy Exec; [EMail-Body]= Jeff =20 FYI - Strong and colorful words from a powerful man. =20 Given Lockyer's abilities, position and and ambition, I would advise build= ing bridges and mending fences while this is still at the taunting stage. = He wants your attention. Knowing him, I'd say that a direct and friendly= call from you or Ken today, followed by a meeting would go a long way. =20 Kevin 213-926-2626 =20 =20 [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] News Politics Entertainment music ,= movies , art , TV , restaurants [IMAGE] Business Travel Marketplace jo= bs , homes , cars , rentals , classifieds [IMAGE] Sports Commentary Shop= ping [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] California= [IMAGE] [IMAGE] TOP STORIES * Bishop Asked to Quit for Defying Churc= h * Wide-Ranging Debate Reveals Much Accord * Limit on New Sea Wall= s Urged MORE [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] STORIES BY DATE FOR THIS SECT= ION 5/23 | 5/22 | 5/21 | 5/20 | 5/19 | 5/18 | 5/17 [IMAGE] = DAILY SECTIONS Front Page ""A"" Section California [IMAGE] Business = Sports Calendar [IMAGE] So. Cal. Living Editorials,Letters, Op/Ed W= EEKLY SECTIONS Health Food [IMAGE] Tech Times [IMAGE] Highway 1 = SUNDAY SECTIONS Book Review Opinion Real Estate [IMAGE] Calendar Mag= azine Travel [IMAGE] TV Times Work Place [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [= IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Marketplace Find a home , car , rental , job ,= pet , merchandise , boat, plane or RV , classifieds Place an Ad [IMAG= E] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] L.A. Times Subscription Ser= vices Subscribe , Change of Address , Vacation Stops , Suspend Delivery = , College Discount , Gift Subscriptions , Mail Subscriptions , FAQ [IMAG= E] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Print Ads from the Newspape= r See this week's ads [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Print Edition , Oran= ge County , Valley , Ventura County , National , Community Papers [IMAG= E] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Books Columnists Crossword Education = Food Health Highway Horoscope Lottery Magazine Obituaries Readi= ng by Real Estate Religion Science So.Cal. Living Special Report= s Sunday Opinion Tech Times Times Poll Traffic Weather Workplace SI= TE MAP [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] SHOP 'TIL YOUR LAPTOP DROPS [IMA= GE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Shopping [IMAGE] Search Prod= ucts Stores [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] = =09[IMAGE]=09[IMAGE] Wednesday, May 23, 2001 | [IMAGE]Print this story [I= MAGE] Lockyer Fires Earthy Attack at Energy Exec By JENIFER WARREN, Ti= mes Staff Writer SACRAMENTO--In a dramatic escalation of energy cr= isis rhetoric, California Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer this week suggested the = chairman of a Houston-based power company should be locked in a prison cel= l with an amorous, tattooed inmate named Spike. Lockyer, who is inve= stigating whether energy firms have manipulated prices on the wholesale el= ectricity market, made the comment in an interview with the Wall Street Jo= urnal that appeared Tuesday. ""I would love to personally escort [En= ron Corp. Chairman Kenneth] Lay to an 8-by-10 cell that he could share wit= h a tattooed dude who says, 'Hi my name is Spike, honey,' "" Lockyer said. = Enron spokesman Mark Palmer called the comment ""counterproductive rh= etoric"" that ""does not merit a response."" But other industry repres= entatives denounced the remark as ""outrageous,"" especially because neither= Lockyer's office nor any investigative panel has filed charges against En= ron or other companies. ""You'd expect that the state's chief legal c= ounsel would file charges first and make public statements second,"" said G= ary Ackerman of the Western Power Trading Forum, an association of energy = producers and traders. ""We're very disappointed with his choice of words, = which don't exactly fit the profile of his office."" In an interview = Tuesday, Lockyer said he decided to ""ratchet up"" the commentary to ""put [e= nergy companies] on notice"" that ""we are not afraid of them and have the w= ill to prosecute."" ""What I'm trying to do is let these economic buc= caneers understand that if we catch them, they're going to be prosecuted,""= Lockyer said. ""Just because they're multimillionaires and run big corpora= tions, it doesn't provide them with immunity."" The attorney general = is investigating whether power company officials tried to maximize profits= through illegal manipulation of prices on the wholesale energy market. S= everal panels, including a state Senate committee and the California Publi= c Utilities Commission, are conducting similar probes. On Tuesday, L= ockyer announced that three power companies have agreed to turn over docum= ents subpoenaed months ago by his investigators. The attorney general went= to court to obtain the documents after the companies failed to meet a Mar= ch 19 deadline to hand them over. Lockyer said the forthcoming docu= ments would help his office as it sifts through mountains of evidence in s= earch of possible violations of antitrust or unfair business practice laws= . ""Evidence is accumulating that certainly infers illegal activity,""= Lockyer said. ""But we need to make sure it's compelling and clear enough = that you can convince a jury."" Lockyer said he singled out Enron's = chairman because the Houston company is the world's largest energy trader. = At least one observer found Lockyer's comments refreshingly candid.= Harry Snyder, a senior advocate of Consumers Union, said, ""Let Lockyer be= Lockyer."" * * * Times staff writer Dan Morain contributed to this s= tory. Search the archives of the Los Angeles Times for similar stories = about: Bill Lockyer , Enron Corp , Kenneth L Lay , Utilitiy Rates , En= ergy - California , Utilities - California , Electricity . You will not = be charged to look for stories, only to retrieve one. =09 News Politics Entertainment music , movies , art , TV , restaurants = [IMAGE] Business Travel Marketplace jobs , homes , cars , rentals , cla= ssifieds [IMAGE] Sports Commentary Shopping [IMAGE] =09[IMAGE]=09 G= et Copyright Clearance Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times Click for permi= ssion to reprint (PRC# 1.528.2001_000043205) =09 [IMAGE] =09 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Confidential - Don Black; [EMail-Body]= I'm fine with it. m [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= TW Gas Sales: PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE; [EMail-Body]= Julia and Steve--here are some questions I've sent to Darrell on the TW Cal. border line pack sales. I'd like him to pull in the right people to get me the answers so we will be prepared if we need to explain these events. Darrell--I thought I'd better let your bosses know that I've been putting more stuff on your already full plate. Thanks all. DF ---------------------- Forwarded by Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron on 03/06/2001 08:54 AM --------------------------- Drew Fossum 03/05/2001 04:23 PM To: Darrell Schoolcraft/ET&S/Enron@ENRON cc: Danny McCarty/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Steven Harris/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kevin Hyatt/Enron@EnronXGate Subject: TW Gas Sales: PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE 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."" [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: directions for June 21-22; [EMail-Body]= Hill, Thanks for the invitation to serve as a Chairman of one of the sessions. Unfortunately, I may be receiving frequent calls from the office that might interfere with my duties. See you next week. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Hill Huntington <hillh@stanford.edu>@ENRON Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 6:11 PM To: conference:;@ENRON; mansur@econ.Berkeley.EDU; bjscott@aep.com; cholmes@utilicorp.com; jwcade@tva.gov; ddurack@cinergy.com; JHughes@epri.com; effarrow@stanford.edu; harris@gbn.com; kamat@ieor.berkeley.edu; pmeagher@epri.com; sparks@mills.edu; rentrike@epri.com; Subject: directions for June 21-22 If you have not yet registered for the June 21-22 conference, please do so to help our planning and to obtain contact information for you. I want to remind you that recommended conference attire is business casual. If you do not have a Stanford parking permit (either by mail or at your hotel), please drive to the conference facility, park, and obtain one at the meeting room. Detailed directions can be found on the website but here is a summary from Highway 101 North & South: Take the Embarcadero Road exit west toward Stanford. At El Camino Real, Embarcadero turns into Galvez Road as it enters the university. Stay in the left lane and continue toward the center of campus. At the four-way stop, turn right onto Campus Drive. Take first left (Lasuen Street) and drive to the end and park. Conference site is at this building. If you do not yet have a parking permit, we will give you one there. I look forward to a productive and interesting meeting. Hill Hillard G. Huntington EMF - an international forum on energy and environmental markets Voice: (650) 723-1050 408 Terman Center Fax: (650) 725-5362 Stanford University Email: hillh@stanford.edu Stanford, CA 94305-4026 EMF Website: [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Fwd:; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 10/11/2000 02:23 PM ----- Susan J Mara@EES 10/11/2000 02:12 PM To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Fwd: ---------------------- Forwarded by Susan J Mara/SFO/EES on 10/11/2000 12:12 PM --------------------------- ""Daniel Douglass"" <douglass@ArterHadden.com> on 10/11/2000 12:54:40 PM To: <Barbara_Klemstine@apsc.com>, <Bob_Anderson@apses.com>, <berry@apx.com>, <dcazalet@apx.com>, <billr@calpine.com>, <jackp@calpine.com>, <glwaas@calpx.com>, <Ken_Czarnecki@calpx.com>, <cabaker@duke-energy.com>, <rjhickok@duke-energy.com>, <GTBL@dynegy.com>, <KEWH@dynegy.com>, <j_dasovi@ect.enron.com>, <rpelote@energy.twc.com>, <susan_j_mara@enron.com>, <curt.Hatton@gen.pge.com>, <foothill@lmi.net>, <camiessn@newwestenergy.com>, <jcgardin@newwestenergy.com>, <rsnichol@newwestenergy.com>, <rllamkin@seiworldwide.com>, <cfi1@tca-us.com> cc: Subject: Fwd: Attached are Frank Wolak's slides from his presentation at WPTF's meeting last Friday.? Greg Blue asked that I send these to the board, although I note that?a few?of you received them directly from Frank. ? Dan Received: from dymwsm07.mailwatch.com by ArterHadden.com; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:40:09 -0400 Received: from dymw0110.mailwatch.com (dymw0110.allegro.net [204.253.83.102]) by dymwsm07.mailwatch.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id e9AEaAL06385 for <Douglass@@arterhadden.com>; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:36:10 -0400 Received: from 204.253.83.71 by dymw0110.mailwatch.com with SMTP ( MailWatch 3.0(WSS) v4.3); Tue, 10 Oct 00 10:40:00 -0400 X-Server-Uuid: Received: from zia.stanford.edu (zia.Stanford.EDU [171.64.233.220]) by dymwsm09.mailwatch.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9AEaLH17504 for <Douglass@@arterhadden.com>; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:36:21 -0400 Received: from econ-wolak (econ-wolak.Stanford.EDU [171.64.233.175]) by zia.stanford.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id HAA04330; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 07:38:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: X-Sender: wolak@zia.stanford.edu (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 07:37:06 -0700 To: GTBL@dynegy.com, lyncorum@earthlink.net, william.freddo@neg.pge.com, rllamkin@seiworldwide.com, philm@SCDEnergy.com, mahoppe@calpx.com, BWoertz@caiso.com, Douglass@@arterhadden.com, foothill@lmi.net From: ""Frank A. Wolak"" <wolak@zia.stanford.edu> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-WSS-ID: 15FDF5CA563477-01-01 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; Here are my slides from the WPTF presentation as a .pdf file. Frank Wolak - wptf.pdf [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: California Amendments DEFEATED!; [EMail-Body]= Congrats Linda Robertson 07/19/2001 09:44 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, mark s palmer/enron@enronXgate@Enron cc: Subject: California Amendments DEFEATED! John Shelk will provide a more thorough report in a later Email, but I just wanted you to know that the Waxman price cap amendment was just defeated in full Committee markup and the Eshoo refund amendment was defeated. Both by sizable margins. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Dinner with Craig Goodman - Cancelled; [EMail-Body]= 202-333-3288 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: E memo; [EMail-Body]= ReaD THIS -----Original Message----- From: Stephens, Jeffery Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 2:26 PM To: gregory.schockling@bhlp.com Subject: FW: E memo -----Original Message----- From: John_Carmody@transalta.com Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 2:23 PM To: Stephens, Jeffery Subject: FW:E memo ----- Forwarded by John Carmody on 01/16/2002 03:21 PM ----- ""Carmody, Tom"" <TCarmody@util To: <john_carmody@transalta.com> icorp.com> cc: Subject: FW: 01/16/2002 10:57 AM > -----Original Message----- > > > Text of Letter to Enron's Chairman After Departure of Chief Executive > ollowing is the text of an unsigned letter written in August to Kenneth L. > Lay, the chairman of the Enron Corporation (news/quote > > after Jeffrey K. Skilling > resigned unexpectedly as chief executive on Aug. 14. Its author was later > identified as Sherron S. Watkins, a vice president for corporate > development at Enron. The House Energy and Commerce Committee released > excerpts of the letter on Monday and the full letter yesterday: > Has Enron become a risky place to work? For those of us who didn't get > rich over the last few years, can we afford to stay? > Skilling's abrupt departure will raise suspicions of accounting > improprieties and valuation issues. Enron has been very aggressive in its > accounting - most notably the Raptor transactions and the Condor vehicle. > We do have valuation issues with our international assets and possibly > some of our EES MTM positions. > The spotlight will be on us, the market just can't accept that Skilling is > leaving his dream job. I think that the valuation issues can be fixed and > reported with other good will write-downs to occur in 2002. How do we fix > the Raptor and Condor deals? They unwind in 2002 and 2003, we will have to > pony up Enron stock and that won't go unnoticed. > To the layman on the street, it will look like we recognized funds flow of > $800 million from merchant asset sales in 1999 by selling to a vehicle > (Condor) that we capitalized with a promise of Enron stock in later years. > Is that really funds flow or is it cash from equity issuance? > We have recognized over $550 million of fair value gains on stocks via our > swaps with Raptor. Much of that stock has declined significantly - Avici > by 98 percent from $178 million, to $5 million; the New Power Company by > 80 percent from $40 a share, to $6 a share. The value in the swaps won't > be there for Raptor, so once again Enron will issue stock to offset these > losses. Raptor is an LJM entity. It sure looks to the layman on the street > that we are hiding losses in a related company and will compensate that > company with Enron stock in the future. > I am incredibly nervous that we will implode in a wave of accounting > scandals. My eight years of Enron work history will be worth nothing on my > r?sum?, the business world will consider the past successes as nothing but > an elaborate accounting hoax. Skilling is resigning now for ""personal > reasons"" but I would think he wasn't having fun, looked down the road and > knew this stuff was unfixable and would rather abandon ship now than > resign in shame in two years. > Is there a way our accounting guru's can unwind these deals now? I have > thought and thought about a way to do this, but I keep bumping into one > big problem - we booked the Condor and Raptor deals in 1999 and 2000, we > enjoyed wonderfully high stock price, many executives sold stock, we then > try and reverse or fix the deals in 2001, and it's a bit like robbing the > bank in one year and trying to pay it back two years later. Nice try, but > investors were hurt, they bought at $70 and $80 a share looking for $120 a > share and now they're at $38 or worse. We are under too much scrutiny and > there are probably one or two disgruntled ""redeployed"" employees who know > enough about the ""funny"" accounting to get us in trouble. > What do we do? I know this question cannot be addressed in the > all-employee meeting, but can you give some assurances that you and Causey > will sit down and take a good hard objective look at what is going to > happen to Condor and Raptor in 2002 and 2003? > Summary of Alleged Issues: > > RAPTOR Entity was capitalized with LJM equity. That equity is at risk; > however, the investment was completely offset by a cash fee paid to LJM. > If the Raptor entities go bankrupt LJM is not affected, there is no > commitment to contribute more equity. > The majority of the capitalization of the Raptor entities is some form of > Enron N/P, restricted stock and stock rights. > Enron entered into several equity derivative transactions with the Raptor > entities locking in our values for various equity investments we hold. > As disclosed in 2000, we recognized $500 million of revenue from the > equity derivatives offset by market value changes in the underlying > securities. > This year, with the value of our stock declining, the underlying > capitalization of the Raptor entities is declining and credit is pushing > for reserves against our MTM positions. > To avoid such a write-down or reserve in quarter one 2001, we ""enhanced"" > the capital structure of the Raptor vehicles, committing more ENE shares. > My understanding of the third-quarter problem is that we must ""enhance"" > the vehicles by $250 million. > I realize that we have had a lot of smart people looking at this and a lot > of accountants including AA & Co. have blessed the accounting treatment. > None of that will protect Enron if these transactions are ever disclosed > in the bright light of day. (Please review the late 90's problems of Waste > Management (news/quote > > - where AA paid $130 million > plus in litigation re questionable accounting practices.) > The overriding basic principle of accounting is that if you explain the > ""accounting treatment"" to a man in the street, would you influence his > investing decisions? Would he sell or buy the stock based on a thorough > understanding of the facts? If so, you best present it correctly and/or > change the accounting. > My concern is that the footnotes don't adequately explain the > transactions. If adequately explained, the investor would know that the > ""entities"" described in our related party footnote are thinly capitalized, > the equity holders have no skin in the game, and all the value in the > entities comes from the underlying value of the derivatives (unfortunately > in this case, a big loss) AND Enron stock and N/P. Looking at the stock we > swapped, I also don't believe any other company would have entered into > the equity derivative transactions with us at the same prices or without > substantial premiums from Enron. In other words, the $500 million in > revenue in 2000 would have been much lower. How much lower? > Raptor looks to be a big bet if the underlying stocks did well, then no > one would be the wiser. If Enron stock did well, the stock issuance to > these entities would decline and the transactions would be less > noticeable. All has gone against us. The stocks, most notably Hanover, the > New Power Company and Avici are underwater to great or lesser degrees. > I firmly believe that executive management of the company must have a > clear and precise knowledge of these transactions and they must have the > transactions reviewed by objective experts in the fields of securities law > and accounting. I believe Ken Lay deserves the right to judge for himself > what he believes the probabilities of discovery to be and the estimated > damages to the company from those discoveries and decide one of two > courses of action: > 1. The probability of discovery is low enough and the estimated damage too > great; therefore we find a way to quietly and quickly reverse, unwind, > write down these positions/transactions. > 2. The probability of discovery is too great, the estimated damages to the > company too great; therefore, we must quantify, develop damage containment > plans and disclose. > I firmly believe that the probability of discovery significantly increased > with Skilling's shocking departure. Too many people are looking for a > smoking gun. > Summary of Raptor Oddities: > 1. The accounting treatment looks questionable. > a. Enron booked a $500 million gain from equity derivatives from a related > party. > b. That related party is thinly capitalized with no party at risk except > Enron. > c. It appears Enron has supported an income statement gain by a > contribution of its own shares. > One basic question: The related party entity has lost $500 million in its > equity derivative transactions with Enron. Who bears that loss? I can't > find an equity or debt holder that bears that loss. Find out who will lose > this money. Who will pay for this loss at the related party entity? > If it's Enron, from our shares, then I think we do not have a fact pattern > that would look good to the S.E.C. or investors. > 2. The equity derivative transactions do not appear to be at arms length. > a. Enron hedged New Power, Hanover and Avici with the related party at > what now appears to be the peak of the market. New Power and Avici have > fallen away significantly since. The related party was unable to lay off > this risk. This fact pattern is once again very negative for Enron. > b. I don't think any other unrelated company would have entered into these > transactions at these prices. What else is going on here? What was the > compensation to the related party to induce it to enter into such > transactions? > 3. There is a veil of secrecy around LJM and Raptor. Employees question > our accounting propriety consistently and constantly. This alone is cause > for concern. > a. Jeff McMahon was highly vexed over the inherent conflicts of LJM. He > complained mightily to Jeff Skilling and laid out five steps he thought > should be taken if he was to remain as treasurer. Three days later, > Skilling offered him the C.E.O. spot at Enron Industrial Markets and never > addressed the five steps with him. > b. Cliff Baxter complained mightily to Skilling and all who would listen > about the inappropriateness of our transactions with LJM. > c. I have heard one manager-level employee from the principal investments > group say, ""I know it would be devastating to all of us, but I wish we > would get caught. We're such a crooked company."" The principal investments > group hedged a large number of their investments with Raptor. These people > know and see a lot. Many similar comments are made when you ask about > these deals. Employees quote our C.F.O. as saying that he has a handshake > deal with Skilling that LJM will never lose money. > 4. Can the general counsel of Enron audit the deal trail and the money > trail between Enron and LJM/Raptor and its principals? Can he look at LJM? > At Raptor? If the C.F.O. says no, isn't that a problem? > Condor and Raptor Work: > 1. Postpone decision on filling office of the chair, if the current > decision includes C.F.O. and/or C.A.O. > 2. Involve Jim Derrick and Rex Rogers to hire a law firm to investigate > the Condor and Raptor transactions to give Enron attorney-client privilege > on the work product. (Can't use V & E due to conflict - they provided some > true sale opinions on some of the deals). > 3. Law firm to hire one of the big 6, but not Arthur Andersen or > PricewaterhouseCoopers due to their conflicts of interest: AA & Co. > (Enron); PWC (LJM). > 4. Investigate the transactions, our accounting treatment and our future > commitments to these vehicles in the form of stock, NP, etc., For > instance: In the third quarter we have a $250 million problem with Raptor > 3 (NPW) if we don't ""enhance"" the capital structure of Raptor 3 to commit > more ENE shares. By the way: in Q. 1 we enhanced the Raptor 3 deal, > committing more ENE shares to avoid a write-down. > 5. Develop cleanup plan: > a. Best case: Clean up quietly if possible. > b. Worst case: Quantify, develop P.R. and I.R. campaigns, customer > assurance plans (don't want to go the way of Salomon's trading shop), > legal actions, severance actions, disclosure. > 6. Personnel to quiz confidentially to determine if I'm all wet: > a. Jeff McMahon > b. Mark Koenig > c. Rick Buy > d. Greg Walley > To put the accounting treatment in perspective I offer the following: > 1. We've contributed contingent Enron equity to the Raptor entities. Since > it's contingent, we have the consideration given and received at zero. We > do, as Causey points out, include the shares in our fully diluted > computations of shares outstanding if the current economics of the deal > imply that Enron will have to issue the shares in the future. This impacts > 2002-2004 earnings-per- share projections only. > 2. We lost value in several equity investments in 2000, $500 million of > lost value. These were fair-value investments; we wrote them down. > However, we also booked gains from our price risk management transactions > with Raptor, recording a corresponding PRM account receivable from the > Raptor entities. That's a $500 million related party transaction - it's 20 > percent of 2000 IBIT, 51 percent of NI pretax, 33 percent of NI after tax. > 3. Credit reviews the underlying capitalization of Raptor, reviews the > contingent shares and determines whether the Raptor entities will have > enough capital to pay Enron its $500 million when the equity derivatives > expire. > 4. The Raptor entities are technically bankrupt; the value of the > contingent Enron shares equals or is just below the PRM account payable > that Raptor owes Enron. Raptor's inception-to-date income statement is a > $500 million loss. > 5. Where are the equity and debt investors that lost out? LJM is whole on > a cash-on- cash basis. Where did the $500 million in value come from? It > came from Enron shares. Why haven't we booked the transaction as $500 > million in a promise of shares to the Raptor entity and $500 million of > value in our ""economic interests"" in these entities? Then we would have a > write-down of our value in the Raptor entities. We have not booked the > latter, because we do not have to yet. Technically we can wait and face > the music in 2002-2004. > 6. The related party footnote tries to explain these transactions. Don't > you think that several interested companies, be they stock analysts, > journalists, hedge fund managers, etc., are busy trying to discover the > reason Skilling left? Don't you think their smartest people are poring > over that footnote disclosure right now? I can just hear the discussions - > ""it looks like they booked a $500 million gain from this related party > company and I think, from all the undecipherable half-page on Enron's > contingent contributions to this related party entity, I think the related > party entity is capitalized with Enron stock."" . . . . ""No, no, no, you > must have it all wrong, it can't be that, that's just too bad, too > fraudulent, surely AA & Co. wouldn't let them get away with that?"" ""Go > back to the drawing board, it's got to be something else. But find it!"" . > . . . ""Hey, just in case you might be right, try and find some insiders or > `redeployed' former employees to validate your theory."" > <<Previous | > | 2 > > > > Matt Haverty > Director > Strategic Investments > Aquila Energy Capital Corporation > Tel: 816-527-1971 > Fax: 816-527-4971 > www.aquila.com > > > [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= EES Associate and Analyst Mid-year 2001 PRC - SAVE THE DATE; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/22/2001 03:36 PM --------------------------- From: Teresa Bosien/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/18/2001 05:44 PM To: Meredith M Eggleston/HOU/EES@EES, Jeffrey R Golden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Troy Henry/HOU/EES@EES, Sean A Holmes/HOU/EES@EES, Robert Hurt/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Leibert/HOU/EES@EES, Cheryl Lipshutz/HOU/EES@EES, Michael Mann/HOU/EES@EES, Angela Schwarz/HOU/EES@EES, Richard L Zdunkewicz/HOU/EES@EES, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES, Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Hunter S Shively/ENRON@enronXgate, Kevin Garland/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Andrew S Fastow/ENRON@enronXgate, Joseph Deffner/ENRON@enronXgate, Mark Koenig/ENRON@enronXgate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Allison Horton/NA/Enron@ENRON, Billy Lemmons/ENRON@enronXgate, Ted C Bland/ENRON@enronXgate, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, James W Lewis/HOU/EES@EES, James M Wood/HOU/EES@EES cc: Kalen Pieper/HOU/EES@EES, Janie Bonnard/HOU/EES@EES, Judy Gray/HOU/EES@EES, Margo Terrell/HOU/EES@EES, Mickey Townsell/HOU/EES@EES Subject: EES Associate and Analyst Mid-year 2001 PRC - SAVE THE DATE SAVE THE DATE! The EES Associate and Analyst Mid-year 2001 PRC will be held on June 8, 2001. Details to follow. Terry Bosien HR Manager, Associate and Analyst Program ext. 35230 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Multi-talented Recruit; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/07/2001 11:42 AM ----- Jeff Baker@EES 03/07/2001 11:00 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Multi-talented Recruit Steve, I am an originator in Michael Mann's area of EES and was most recently with a consulting firm dealing with new business ventures. One of my former co-workers (Tony Ekonomou) has expressed an interest in adding value to Enron's endeavors based on his Political/Legal/Business background. He is presently enjoying the business development side of new business ventures, but can rely on his political or legal background if it meets a need. Kelly Noel Higgason of EES legal suggested I contact you directly to determine the opportunity to Enron of a person of this mulit-talented background. Your thoughts and direction would be appreciated. Regards. Jeff Baker [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Board of Directors Meeting - August 14, 2001; [EMail-Body]= calendar and meeting file ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/18/2001 07= :32 AM --------------------------- From:=09Kelly Johnson/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/16/2001 03:22 PM To:=09Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Raymond Bowen/ENRON@enronXgate, Michael = Brown/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Rick Buy/ENRON@enr= onXgate, Richard Causey/ENRON@enronXgate, Wade Cline/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRO= N_DEVELOPMENt, David Cox/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, James D= errick/ENRON@enronXgate, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES, Steve Elliott/Enron = Communications@Enron Communications, Jim Fallon/Enron Communications@Enron = Communications, Andrew S Fastow/ENRON@enronXgate, Mark Frevert/ENRON@enronX= gate, Ben Glisan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kevin Hannon/Enron Communications@Enron Commu= nications, Rod Hayslett/ENRON@enronXgate, Stanley Horton/ENRON@enronXgate, = James A Hughes/ENRON@enronXgate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Louise Kitch= en/ENRON@enronXgate, Mark Koenig/ENRON@enronXgate, John J Lavorato/ENRON@en= ronXgate, Kenneth Lay/ENRON@enronXgate, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Danny McCarty= /ET&S/Enron@Enron, Mike Mcconnell/ENRON@enronXgate, Rebecca McDonald/ENRON@= enronXgate, Jeffrey McMahon/ENRON@enronXgate, Mark Metts/Enron@EnronXGate, = Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Cindy Olson/ENRON@enronXgate, Lou L Pai/HOU/EES@= EES, Mark Pickering/Enron@EUEnronXgate, Greg Piper/ENRON@enronXgate, Ken Ri= ce/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Matthew Scrimshaw/Enron@EUEnr= onXGate, Jeffrey A Shankman/ENRON@enronXgate, Jeffrey Sherrick/ENRON@enronX= gate, John Sherriff/ENRON@EUEnronXGate, Jeff Skilling/ENRON@enronXgate, Mar= ty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Greg Whalley/ENRON@enronXgate cc:=09Jennifer Adams/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Beverly Ade= n/HOU/EES@EES, Julie Armstrong/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Connie Blackwood/ENRON@enr= onXgate, Vivianna Bolen/ENRON@enronXgate, Loretta Brelsford/ENRON@enronXgat= e, Jennifer Burns/ENRON@enronXgate, Alan Butler/EU/Enron@Enron, Kathy Campo= s/ENRON@enronXgate, Kay Chapman/HOU/EES@EES, Inez Dauterive/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bi= nky Davidson/HOU/EES@EES, Nicki Daw/ENRON@enronXgate, Sharon Dick/HOU/EES@E= ES, Kathy Dodgen/HOU/EES@EES, Kerry Ferrari/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Dolores Fis= her/Enron@EnronXGate, Rosalee Fleming/ENRON@enronXgate, Sue Ford/ENRON@enro= nXgate, Mrudula Stephanie Harri= s/ENRON@enronXgate, Linda Hawkins/ENRON@enronXgate, Kimberly Hillis/ENRON@e= nronXgate, Mary Joyce/ENRON@enronXgate, Samantha Lopez-Dias/EU/Enron@Enron,= Bridget Maronge/ENRON@enronXgate, Lucy Marshall/Enron Communications@Enron= Communications, Stephanie Mcginnis/ENRON@enronXgate, Kathy McMahon/ENRON@e= nronXgate, Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Owens/HOU/EES@EES, Jana L= Paxton/ENRON@enronXgate, Cathy Phillips/ENRON@enronXgate, ""Rijo, Leah"" <Le= Marsha Schiller/ENRON@enronXgate, Tammi= e Schoppe/ENRON@enronXgate, Sherri Sera/ENRON@enronXgate, Caron Stark/ENRON= @enronXgate, Sharon E Sullo/ENRON@enronXgate, Liz M Taylor/ENRON@enronXgate= , Lauren Urquhart/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Christina Valdez/ENRON@enronXgate, Ve= ronica Valdez/ENRON@enronXgate, Terry West/ENRON@enronXgate, Sharron Westbr= ook/ENRON@enronXgate, Joannie Williamson/ENRON@enronXgate, Teresa Wright/EN= RON@enronXgate=20 Subject:=09Board of Directors Meeting - August 14, 2001 =20 Kelly M. Johnson Enron Corp. Executive Assistant Tel: (713) 853-6485 Fax: (713) 853-2534 E-Mail: kelly.johnson@enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message(due to missing attachment)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Trip to California; [EMail-Body]= Frank, Sorry for a delay in responding to your message. As you can imagine, after Jeff Skilling's resignation, Greg Whalley will be tied up in a few additional stock analysts' presentations. We are still planning trips to California and New Mexico that we would like to combine and would like very much to meet and exchange opinions with you. Please, advise me about your availability during the next 2 - 3 weeks. Hopefully, we can reconcile our schedules and meet soon. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Frank A. Wolak"" Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 10:26 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Re: Trip to California Vince, August 16 would work for me. Dinner or meeting at my office would also work. Let me know what you'd like to do. Frank At 08:16 AM 08/06/2001 -0500, you wrote: >Frank, > >Greg Whalley and I are planning another trip to a California. >The trip is most likely to take place on the 16th - 17th of August >or a week later (23rd - 24th of August). Are you available for an >afternoon >meeting and / or dinner on Thursday, August 16 or August 23? > >We are very interested in your thoughts about the directions of the >power >markets across the US. > >Vince Kaminski > > > > >This e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or its relevant affiliate >and may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of >the intended recipient (s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by >others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or >authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender or >reply to Enron Corp. at and >delete all copies of the message. This e-mail (and any attachments hereto) >are not intended to be an offer (or an acceptance) and do not create or >evidence a binding and enforceable contract between Enron Corp. (or any of >its affiliates) and the intended recipient or any other party, and may not >be relied on by anyone as the basis of a contract by estoppel or >otherwise. Thank you. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: thanks; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: weidong tian <wdtian_2000@yahoo.com>@ENRON Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 1:33 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: thanks Dear Mr.Vince Kaminski, It was very nice to see you in my interview. Thank you very much for your time and questions. Through my interview process, I got to know Enron better and saw many excited things. I think my experience and skill would be a good fit for Enron and be able to make contribution with all my exposures. Thanks again for your attention. Best wishes Weidong Tian Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Beta Gamma Sigma; [EMail-Body]= Thanks for the invite. I would suggest Jean Ryall - who heads our Texas government/regulatory affairs team. She is certainly more familiar with the details (of which there will be many more after this legislative session and the conclusion of the pilot program). She is also a very good speaker (and can probably relate a few war stories to spice things up). From: Susan Skarness/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/04/2001 11:20 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Beta Gamma Sigma Steve, I am a member of Beta Gamma Sigma (BGS), the honor society for business programs accredited by AASCB - The International Association for Management Education. If you are not familiar with BGS, a member must be in the upper 5% of their class as a junior and the upper 10% as a senior and in graduate school to be nominated for induction into the society. In an effort to provide additional programs and benefits to alumni members, alumni chapters are being developed around the country. There are currently nine alumni chapters around the U.S. with a new one being formed in the Houston area. I am serving on a steering committee for the development of this Houston Area Alumni Chapter. Our primary reasons for starting a Houston Area Chapter include networking, professional affiliations, outreach to students, resources, learning opportunities, and providing scholarships. Our initial outreach to Beta Gamma Sigma members will be through a reception/dinner to be held in October 2001. We are currently looking at either October 16 or 18. All 6,200 Houston area members will be invited to participate, however, we expect attendance to be closer to 75-100 people. The ages, experiences, and business affiliation of the members will be very diverse, but all will have the common thread of business excellence. The details of this event are still being finalized; however, at our last meeting the discussion encompassed possible speakers and topics. Overwhelmingly the team decided on Electricity Deregulation in Texas, and since I work at Enron, I was asked to assist in locating a dynamic speaker. Cliff Baxter suggested that you would be an ideal speaker on this topic. Are you available and willing to address this group in October? If I can provide any additional information, please let me know. Thank you for your consideration, Steve. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Report on Energy and Commerce Status (Ignore Earlier E-Mail That
 Was Not Complete); [EMail-Body]= Confirming earlier indications, at about 3 pm EDT today, Chairman Tauzin convened the committee to issue a joint statement with Rep. Waxman and then recessed the committee subject to the call of the chair following the Memorial Day Week Recess. Congress will not return until the week of June 4, but staff level discussions will likely occur after the three-day weekend. Chairman Tauzin said that the committee is receiving conflicting information on the facts in California. He said it is better to take a little longer to get the facts straight and evaluate various options, rather than act quickly but in the wrong way. He did say he expects that the committee will come to a bipartisan agreement after the recess. Behind the scenes, we hear that Democrats appear not to want to reach an agreement, instead preferring to keep the issue alive. Republicans, on the other hand, want to spare their vulnerable West Coast Members another recorded vote against price caps. Thankfully, following our collective efforts yesterday, the discussion has moved off of the 80/20 long term contract requirement. Republicans are poised to offer the Ose bill as an alternative for discussion and amendment if an agreement is not reached. The Ose bill would extend FERC's pricing formula to 24/7 and throughout the West. Staff report that Members were far from agreement and that no one concept was embraced for further refinement. It does appear, however, that some Members, such as Rep. Mary Bono (R-CA) are pushing for some type of price mitigation that they can vote for. With Republicans increasingly worried about the political impact of the energy issue, we will need to continue our work next Tuesday, starting with an in-depth analysis of the Ose bill. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Hedging stratege for full requirement deal (slightly modified
 version); [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Huang, Alex Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 9:32 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J; Lu, Zimin; Kohli, Sandeep; Narongwanich, Wichai; Krishnarao, Pinnamaneni; Feng, Youyi Subject: Hedging stratege for full requirement deal (slightly modified version) [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Draft - Confidential - New Procedures to be introduced by ENA
 OTC for Exec Employment Agreements and Hiring of Commercial Staff below VP
 into ENA; [EMail-Body]= So I guess Dave doesn't want to send this out. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Computer Based Communications Training Initiative - Response
 Reminder for Feedback; [EMail-Body]= In my interview I stressed that a big part of the communication problem is the narrow and impermanent nature of the information about what's going on at Enron. Narrow because for every significant activity there are only a few who are in the loop and ""impermanent"" because very little information is committed to writing (most of it is exchanged in person or over the phone). This is, I believe, what lies at the heart of complaints about cross-department communication. We now have some solutions emerging -- software that enables more people to record and post information in HTML format on company intranet sites. I suspect that using such tools will face two obstacles: learning how to use them (ie there's a huge need for training) and making it part of our culture as a knowledge/learning organization Richard Amabile 08/18/2000 05:20 PM To: Mike McConnell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Gorte/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James Prentice/GPGFIN/Enron@ENRON, Jan Johnson/GPGFIN/Enron@ENRON, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sharon Butcher/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Gina Taylor/OTS/Enron@Enron, Mike Stewart/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Dave Schafer/OTS/Enron@ENRON, David A Terlip/Corp/Enron@Enron, Joe Kishkill/SA/Enron@Enron, Marie Hejka/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Craig Childers/HOU/EES@EES, Craig H Sutter/HOU/EES@EES, Kirk Kathleen A John Keith James C Ray Bennett/HOU/EES@EES, Joseph W George Wasaff/NA/Enron@Enron, Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT, Andrew S Fastow/HOU/ECT@ECT, Billy Lemmons/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Yeager@ees, Eric Thode/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Marie Hejka/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cynthia Barrow/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John Thompson/LON/ECT@ECT, Nigel Sellens/LON/ECT@ECT, David Oxley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Drew C Lynch/LON/ECT@ECT, Marla Barnard/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, robert.jones@enron.com, Kimberly Rizzi/HOU/ECT@ECT, Scott Janie willie.williams@enron.com, Scott Tim O'Rourke/Corp/Enron@Enron, Miguel Padron/SA/Enron@Enron, Gerry Chatham/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cindy Skinner/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ranendra cc: ksargent@cognitivearts.com Subject: Computer Based Communications Training Initiative - Response Reminder for Feedback This is a reminder that we would like your feedback/input on the items mentioned below regarding the Computer Based Communications Training Initiative. Please respond by the close of business Monday, August 21 otherwise we will need to move ahead with the responses received by that time. Dick Amabile ---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Amabile/HR/Corp/Enron on 08/18/2000 04:31 PM --------------------------- Richard Amabile 08/16/2000 02:40 PM To: Mike McConnell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Gorte/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James Prentice/GPGFIN/Enron@ENRON, Jan Johnson/GPGFIN/Enron@ENRON, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sharon Butcher/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Gina Taylor/OTS/Enron@Enron, Mike Stewart/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Dave Schafer/OTS/Enron@ENRON, David A Terlip/Corp/Enron@Enron, Joe Kishkill/SA/Enron@Enron, Richard Amabile/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Marie Hejka/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Craig Childers/HOU/EES@EES, Craig H Sutter/HOU/EES@EES, Kirk Kathleen A John Keith James C Richard Ray Bennett/HOU/EES@EES, Joseph W George Wasaff/NA/Enron@Enron, Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT, Andrew S Fastow/HOU/ECT@ECT, Billy Lemmons/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Diane Bazelides/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, Scott Yeager@ees, Eric Thode/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Marie Hejka/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cynthia Barrow/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John Thompson/LON/ECT@ECT, Nigel Sellens/LON/ECT@ECT, David Oxley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Drew C Lynch/LON/ECT@ECT, Marla Barnard/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, robert.jones@enron.com, Kimberly Rizzi/HOU/ECT@ECT, Scott Janie willie.williams@enron.com, Scott Tim O'Rourke/Corp/Enron@Enron, Miguel Padron/SA/Enron@Enron, Gerry Chatham/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cindy Skinner/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ranendra cc: ksargent@cognitivearts.com Subject: Computer Based Communications Training Initiative As agreed in our V&V meeting today I have attached two items for your review: 1. A list of those who have been interviewed or have been part of a focus group on this subject. The input from individuals on this list will be the basis for developing the 5-7 key scenarios that will be a part of the training. Please let me know if you feel we should include more people from your unit to insure that your unit's unique circumstances are appropriately taken into account. If so, let us know either their names or how you would like them to be identified. Some of the individuals on this list will be contacted as Subject Matter Experts to help provide real Enron contexts for the scenarios as they are further developed. 2. A list of the ""first draft"" objectives for the program and 10 possible scenarios. Since we will only be able to have a total of about 5-7 scenarios in the final version, identify the 5 - 7 on this list of high level scenario ideas that will have the most impact on improving communications and the most applicability to a range of managers across the Enron organization. Any other feedback you can provide on the objectives or scenarios would be greatly appreciated. We are seeking to move forward with the development of scenarios by the beginning of next week. Therefore, if you could provide your feedback on both of the items above by Friday, August 18th, it would be greatly appreciated. Dick Amabile [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Legal Analysis on AB 1890; [EMail-Body]= What do you think he'll add? Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 10/13/2000 11:01 AM To: skean@enron.com cc: Subject: Legal Analysis on AB 1890 I think it would be a good idea to have Ron Carroll in Watkiss' shop to do a parallel analysis to what we're going to have Mike Day do. Ron's very good and has done much work on these sortrs of issues. You comfortable with that? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron Mentions; [EMail-Body]= How important is this fight to us now (see attached article on ExIm)? ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/07/2001 10:41 AM ----- Ann M Schmidt 03/07/2001 08:19 AM To: Ann M Schmidt/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: (bcc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron) Subject: Enron Mentions Exporters Rush to Ex-Im Bank's Defense --- Lobby Campaign to Prevent Budget Cuts Seeks Help Of 100,000 Small Firms The Wall Street Journal, 03/07/01 Plots & Ploys The Wall Street Journal, 03/07/01 Dutch Gas Competition Grows Despite Sluggish Reforms Dow Jones Energy Service, 03/07/01 USA: Big U.S. exporters to fight Ex-Im Bank cuts - WSJ. Reuters English News Service, 03/07/01 Major U.S. Exporters Rush to Export-Import Bank's Defense Dow Jones Business News, 03/07/01 What's News United States The Globe and Mail, 03/07/01 Deal with state could take until 2002 to close Associated Press Newswires, 03/06/01 Sierra Pacific CEO Doubts SEC OK Of Enron Unit Buy-Report Dow Jones Energy Service, 03/06/01 Many Power Deals Announced by California Governor Still Not Final Dow Jones Business News, 03/06/01 US Natural Gas Prices Fall As Demand Slips In Most Areas Dow Jones Energy Service, 03/06/01 Economy Exporters Rush to Ex-Im Bank's Defense --- Lobby Campaign to Prevent Budget Cuts Seeks Help Of 100,000 Small Firms By Michael M. Phillips and Laura Heinauer Staff Reporters of The Wall Street Journal 03/07/2001 The Wall Street Journal A2 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) WASHINGTON -- Angry and confused that a Republican administration has targeted one of their favorite programs for big cuts, America's largest exporters are appealing for help from lawmakers. Boeing Co., Caterpillar Inc., Enron Corp., Halliburton Co. and others are launching an aggressive lobbying campaign on Capitol Hill to protect the Export-Import Bank from budget reductions; the White House labels the Ex-Im Bank as corporate welfare. ""The administration has fired its shot, and now we're firing ours,"" said Edmund B. Rice, president of the Coalition for Employment Through Exports, an industry group that is leading the effort. Since they got wind of the proposed cuts a few weeks ago, business lobbyists have been trying to rally sympathetic lawmakers. And executives at Boeing, Caterpillar and other big companies plan to contact some 100,000 smaller suppliers that benefit indirectly from the $12.6 billion of export loans, guarantees and insurance that Ex-Im Bank provided in the last fiscal year. Those small companies, the executives hope, will create a groundswell of support in Congress for the Ex-Im Bank. ""Companies large and small who have similar interests here are banding together to provide an educational effort so people understand the impact of this,"" said Chris Hansen, Boeing senior vice president for government relations. Corporate lobbyists also have dug up a speech that Vice President Dick Cheney, while chief executive of Halliburton, gave in 1997 praising the bank and scoffing at those who consider it a giveaway to big business. They plan to pass Mr. Cheney's comments to influential members of Congress this week. ""We'll be circulating them very broadly,"" Mr. Rice said. A spokeswoman for Mr. Cheney had no immediate comment. Ex-Im Bank officials aren't talking publicly, avoiding the appearance that they are battling the White House to overturn the proposed 25% cut in the bank's $865 million operating budget for the current fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30. But an Ex-Im official said the topic has come up in conversations between key lawmakers and Ex-Im Bank Chairman James A. Harmon, who is soon to be succeeded by Mel Sembler, a Bush campaign fund-raiser and a shopping-center developer. At first, business lobbyists assumed administration budgeteers were just looking for savings anywhere they could find it. Before President Bush released his spending plan last week, companies appealed to Mitchell Daniels, head of the White House budget office, in an attempt to keep the Ex-Im Bank cuts out of the final proposal. The Ex-Im Bank's corporate clients include some of the country's largest political contributors. Boeing, the bank's largest user, received $3.3 billion of financing last year. The Seattle aerospace company and its employees contributed $1.8 million to politicians and parties during the 2000 election cycle, 61% to Republicans, according to federal election data assembled by the Center for Responsive Politics. Caterpillar, a Peoria, Ill., maker of engines and heavy equipment that secured seven Ex-Im Bank deals last year, and its employees contributed more than $500,000 -- 96% to Republicans. Company officials deny they wanted to leverage donations to try to secure political support for the Ex-Im Bank. Many lobbyists have come to the conclusion that administration officials -- those of a libertarian persuasion -- oppose Ex-Im Bank as a form of welfare for corporations. Indeed, the White House budget plan criticized the bank's operations as unjustified public subsidies for companies. ""That makes it a much more serious issue,"" Mr. Rice said. ""We're concerned that the administration seems to be turning its attention in this direction."" Barring intervention from Mr. Cheney, business groups now have largely given up hope of convincing the White House to back down, planning instead to use their muscle to convince Congress to restore the Ex-Im Bank's funding. Bank officials and U.S. companies argue that, far from being a subsidy, the bank simply allows American companies to compete with European and Japanese firms that receive assistance from their own governments. ""In many markets in Asia and Africa, the bank is absolutely critical to our ability to sell American-made products,"" said Bill Lane, Caterpillar's Washington director for governmental affairs. --- Corporate Beneficiaries Top 10 recipients of Ex-Im Bank loans, guarantees and insurance for fiscal year 2000, as measured by amount of financing, in millions Boeing $3,335 Bechtel Group $1,075 Distributed Processing Systems $388 Willbros Group $387 United Technologies $334 Raytheon $156 General Electric $150 Halliburton $136 Enron $135 LSI Logic $120 Source: Ex-Im Bank Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. The Property Report Plots & Ploys By Peter Grant 03/07/2001 The Wall Street Journal B10 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) [What's Brewing in the Real Estate Market] No Problem, Houston CENTURY DEVELOPMENT is about to announce plans to break ground on downtown Houston's third major office development in less than three years. In another sign of the strength of the city's energy sector, Century is finalizing a headquarters deal with Reliant Resources Inc. to take more than two-thirds of the project's 850,000 square feet, says Edwin Murphy, a Century senior vice president. Two other towers also are underway. In 1999, Hines began building a 1.2 million square-foot tower for Enron Corp. and late last year Crescent Real Estate Equities broke ground on a 27-story tower that will be anchored by Ernst & Young. These three projects are the first major downtown office projects to get underway since 1986. The surge is part of a renaissance of downtown Houston, where new sports facilities, hotels, apartment buildings and restaurants have been mushrooming in recent years. ""The new amenities have kept people from leaving and enticed people to come back,"" says Michael Hassler, of CB Richard Ellis. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Dutch Gas Competition Grows Despite Sluggish Reforms By Germana Canzi Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES 03/07/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LONDON -(Dow Jones)- The Netherlands is emerging as an important testing ground for E.U. gas liberalization, as new trading hubs for competitive, short-term gas supplies from the U.K. and Norway emerge on the Belgian and German borders. However, much remains to be done. A group of large energy users and traders is preparing to confront Gasunie Thursday in a hearing organized by the regulator. The main issues of contention are the balancing system, which Gasunie conducts on an hourly basis, the extent to which transport tariffs are cost-focused and third-party access to storage facilities. The emergence of competition in the Dutch gas sector is mostly due to the initiative of new market entrants who, despite a difficult regulatory environment, have managed to develop a market for short-term gas virtually from scratch. If liquidity improves in these emerging hubs, the Netherlands could become an important transit country for freely tradeable gas supplies to other countries in northwest Europe, as well as being an important market in its own right. However, the difficulty of implementing transparent third-party access systems in the Netherlands and in neighboring Germany casts a dark cloud over recent progress in competition. Since December, Enron Europe Ltd. (U.ENE), Duke Energy Corp. (DUK), E.On AG (EON), RWE AG (G.RWE) and Electrabel SA (B.ELE) have been actively buying and selling gas, sourced in the U.K., the Netherlands and Norway, in a number of hubs between Emden in Germany and Emshaven and Oude Statenzijl in the Netherlands. David Gallagher, head of European gas trading at Enron in London, estimates that at least one trade a day of around 100,000 therms for a quarterly contract is done at the Oude Statenzijl hub, where the Gasunie pipeline system connects to the network of Wingas GmbH. An important element kick-starting short-term trading was the sale, in December 2000, of a 2 billion cubic meter a year Norwegian gas supply contract to five Dutch-based power generators. Robert van der Hoeven, head of fuel procurement at Electrabel, the owner of Dutch generator EPON, said his company uses most of the gas it imports from Norway for its plants in the Netherlands and trades the rest on a short-term basis in the Oude-Emden area. This pattern is common to the other Dutch-based parties to that contract. Trading in Dutch hubs received a further boost when Nederlandse Gasunie NV (N.NEG) decided, after months of wrangling with regulator DTe, to lower its transport tariffs by 6.5% from January 2001 and to unbundle its combined commodity and service tariff, the so-called CSS system, from July 2001. Gasunie now claims its pipeline system is fully open and transparent. To prove this, it says it has lost 30% of its customers in the eligible market, but that figure hasn't changed much since March 2000. Small wonder that critics say the switching figure doesn't necessarily indicate an ideal system of third-party access. According to energy consultants The Brattle Group, around half of the gas used by alternative suppliers goes through the 1 bcm/year Zebra pipeline from Zelzate to Zeeland, which was built by Dutch utilities a few years ago precisely because Gasunie refused to provide access on favorable terms. Shippers have complained that the hourly system used by Gasunie to balance the pipeline system raises the overall cost of shipping through its network significantly. Gasunie imposes a balancing charge which effectively forces shippers to pay for the extra gas brought into the system from storage sites, in addition to the capacity and transmission price. Critics say Gasunie has so far failed to unbundle these charges, although it agreed to do so in January. According to the Brattle Group, another controversial aspect of Gasunie's tariff system is that it is based on theoretical costs of constructing new pipelines rather than its actual costs. The DTe is also considering ways of reforming the storage system to make it competitive. BP PLC (U.BP) and Nederlandse Aardolie Maatschappij NV operate storage facilities and lease capacity to Gasunie through long-term contracts. The regulator is studying ways of allowing third parties access to storage facilities. Gasunie has so far shown little sign of negotiating more competitive tariffs with storage operators and passing on the benefits to customers, critics say. The growth of short-term trading in the Dutch gas market is also inevitably linked to its potential as a transit country for gas coming from the U.K.-Belgium gas interconnector and going towards the 82bcm-a-year German market. Market participants say liquidity at the Emden and Oude hubs has grown considerably since E.On and RWE started trading there earlier this year. However, the obstructive attitude of incumbents toward third-party access there has meant that so far most gas traded in the Netherlands has remained there. -By Germana Canzi, Dow Jones Newswires; +44 20 7842 9283; germana.canzi@dowjones.com Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. USA: Big U.S. exporters to fight Ex-Im Bank cuts - WSJ. 03/07/2001 Reuters English News Service (C) Reuters Limited 2001. NEW YORK, March 7 (Reuters) - America's largest exporters are launching an aggressive lobbying campaign on Capitol Hill to protect the Export-Import Bank from budget reductions, the Wall Street Journal reported in its online edition on Wednesday. The exporters, including Boeing Co. , Caterpillar Inc. , Enron Corp. , Halliburton Co. and others, are angry and confused that a Republican administration has targeted one of their favourite programmes for big cuts, the paper reported. Ex-Im Bank officials were not talking publicly, avoiding the appearance that they are battling the White House to overturn the proposed 25 percent cut in the bank's $865 million operating budget for the current fiscal year, which ends Sept 30, it said. The White House labels the Ex-Im Bank as corporate welfare. ""The administration has fired its shot, and now we're firing ours,"" Edmund Rice, president of the Coalition for Employment Through Exports, an industry group that is leading the effort, was quoted as saying by the paper. Executives at Boeing, Caterpillar and other big companies plan to contact some 100,000 smaller suppliers who benefit indirectly from the $12.6 billion of export loans, guarantees and insurance that Ex-Im Bank provided in the last fiscal year, the paper said. Those small companies, the executives hope, will create a groundswell of support in Congress for the Ex-Im Bank, it said. New York Newsroom (212) 859-1700. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Major U.S. Exporters Rush to Export-Import Bank's Defense 03/07/2001 Dow Jones Business News (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) WASHINGTON -- Angry and confused that a Republican administration has targeted one of their favorite programs for big cuts, America's largest exporters are appealing for help from lawmakers, Wednesday's Wall Street Journal reported. Boeing Co. (BA), Caterpillar Inc. (CAT), Enron Corp. (ENE), Halliburton Co. (HAL) and others are launching an aggressive lobbying campaign on Capitol Hill to protect the Export-Import Bank from budget reductions; the White House labels the Ex-Im Bank as corporate welfare. ""The administration has fired its shot, and now we're firing ours,"" said Edmund B. Rice, president of the Coalition for Employment Through Exports, an industry group that is leading the effort. Since they got wind of the proposed cuts a few weeks ago, business lobbyists have been trying to rally sympathetic lawmakers. And executives at Boeing, Caterpillar and other big companies plan to contact some 100,000 smaller suppliers that benefit indirectly from the $12.6 billion of export loans, guarantees and insurance that Ex-Im Bank provided in the last fiscal year. Those small companies, the executives hope, will create a groundswell of support in Congress for the Ex-Im Bank. Corporate lobbyists also have dug up a speech that Vice President Dick Cheney, while chief executive of Halliburton, gave in 1997 praising the bank and scoffing at those who consider it a giveaway to big business. They plan to pass Mr. Cheney's comments to influential members of Congress this week. A spokeswoman for Mr. Cheney had no immediate comment. Ex-Im Bank officials aren't talking publicly, avoiding the appearance that they are battling the White House to overturn the proposed 25% cut in the bank's $865 million operating budget for the current fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30. But an Ex-Im official said the topic has come up in conversations between key lawmakers and Ex-Im Bank Chairman James A. Harmon, who is soon to be succeeded by Mel Sembler, a Bush campaign fund-raiser and a shopping-center developer. Copyright (c) 2001 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Report on Business: The Wall Street Journal What's News United States Wall Street Journal 03/07/2001 The Globe and Mail Metro B10 ""All material Copyright (c) Bell Globemedia Publishing Inc. and its licensors. All rights reserved."" Boeing Co., Caterpillar Inc. and Enron Corp. are among the big U.S. exporters launching an aggressive lobbying campaign on Capitol Hill to protect the Export-Import Bank from budget reductions. The White House labels the Ex-Im Bank as corporate welfare. ""The administration has fired its shot, and now we're firing ours,"" said Edmund Rice, president of the Coalition for Employment Through Exports, an industry group leading the campaign. Since they got wind of the proposed cuts a few weeks ago, business lobbyists have been trying to rally sympathetic U.S. law makers. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Deal with state could take until 2002 to close By LESLIE GORNSTEIN AP Business Writer 03/06/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. LOS ANGELES (AP) - A tentative deal aimed at rescuing Southern California Edison from insolvency might not close in time to prevent the utility from begging creditors for more patience, Edison officials said Tuesday. The utility's tentative, $2.7 billion agreement to sell its power lines to the state could take until 2002 to be consummated, thanks to complicated legal issues and other paperwork, an Edison official told bondholders Tuesday. Once the deal is signed, Edison will try to borrow against the promised cash, but Edison International Chief Financial Officer Ted Craver admitted the utility might have to ask creditors to simply wait for their money until it has the $2.7 billion in hand. Energy suppliers owed money by Edison did not immediately return calls for comment Tuesday. At least four groups of suppliers have sued Edison for millions in unpaid bills going back months. Edison and fellow utility Pacific Gas & Electric have said they have lost $13 billion on the open power market thanks to soaring prices paired with state-imposed price caps. PG&E's parent company was able to recently borrow $1 billion to pay its stockholders and its debuts. It did not use any of that money to pay PG&E's bills. Edison's disclosure, meanwhile, shocked state officials. Steve Maviglio, spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis, initially declined to comment on the status of the Edison deal, but eventually said, regarding its closure, ""We're optimistic it will be sooner rather than later."" The pacing would have nothing to do with whether fellow utilities Sempra Energy and PG&E also sell their transmission lines to California, Craver said. Among the things that could delay the deal's closing is Edison's need to find landowners on whose property its lines were built to assure no legal agreements are being violated by the sale. Edison would also have to pin down exactly what it would be selling to the state - terms that might not be decided until after a deal has been inked, Craver said. ""Trust me,"" Craver said in a phone call after the conference. ""There are a lot of legal-type documents - stuff that you and I ... would think of as a bloody nightmare."" The disclosure comes at a time when an increasing number of power suppliers are suing the utility for millions in unpaid bills. Edison also disclosed Tuesday that two more lawsuits had landed in its lap - one by a group of wind-powered generators including Enron Wind, the other by two suppliers including New York-based Caithness Energy. Both suits were filed during the past five days, Edison Assistant General Counsel Barbara Reeves said. It was not immediately clear how much the complainants were seeking; neither Enron nor Caithness returned calls for comment. The two filings bring the total number of suits by renewable-energy suppliers against Edison to four, the utility said. The city of Long Beach and CalEnergy Operating Group, a geothermal supplier, have also sued for back payments. CalEnergy alone has said it is owed $45 million in November and December payments. The line sale, part of a multifaceted, tentative deal with the state that could save Edison from insolvency, could take anywhere from several months into next year, Craver said. The tentative deal, announced by Gov. Gray Davis Feb. 23, calls for the state to pay more than twice the book value for Edison's lines. It also would require Edison to sell cheap power to the state for a decade and for Edison to end its lawsuit against state regulators. The suit asserts that price caps imposed by the California Public Utilities Commission are illegal under federal law. Additionally, Edison's parent would have to return $420 million it collected from the utility over the past several years. The money was used to pay debt, buy back stock and pay dividends to investors. SCE, PG&E and Sempra have complained they are near bankruptcy because of soaring prices on the open market combined with the state-imposed price caps for consumers. Sempra and PG&E have yet to announce similar line-sale deals with the state, though they and the governor have said negotiations are ongoing. The total cost of the 26,000 miles of lines has been estimated at $4.5 billion to $7 billion. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Sierra Pacific CEO Doubts SEC OK Of Enron Unit Buy-Report 03/06/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Sierra Pacific Resources (SRP) CEO Walter Higgins said in an interview last week that he doubts the company's $3.1 billion acquisition of Enron Corp.'s (ENE) utility Portland General Electric will be approved by the federal Securities and Exchange Commission, the Las Vegas Sun reported Tuesday. The SEC must find that Sierra Pacific is in a strong financial position before it will approve the deal, but the company is currently weakened by having lost millions of dollars in fuel and purchased power costs, Higgins said in the report. A $311 million rate increase to cover those costs began March 1, but Higgins said that money would only pay back those expenses and wouldn't improve the company's stability to a level the SEC would find adequate, according to the report. The Public Utilities Commission can halt the rate hike and order refunds if it decides the hike isn't necessary. The PUC is holding hearings to determine the prudency of the hike, and members of the state's powerful casino and mining industries have filed to intervene. Sierra Pacific's plan to shore up its financial position through the sale of its 10 power plants, worth nearly $2 billion, may also be in jeopardy. The state Senate is considering a bill to block the sales, and Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn recently sent a letter to the PUC asking that it reconsider its order allowing electric utilities to sell assets. Financial analysts have said that not allowing Sierra Pacific's two utilities to sell their assets would have a ripple effect on the company's financial position. The asset sales are tied to low-priced power contracts, and if the sales are canceled, the low-priced power will be gone as well. ""If the divestiture is stopped...the state may be dealing with a much bigger rate increase,"" Steve Fleishman, Merrill Lynch utility analyst, told Dow Jones Newswires recently. Sierra Pacific is the parent company of electric utilities Sierra Pacific Power Co. and Nevada Power, which serve customers in the state's North and South, respectively. -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872, jessica.berthold@dowjones.com -0- 07/03/01 01-04G Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Many Power Deals Announced by California Governor Still Not Final By Jason Leopold 03/06/2001 Dow Jones Business News (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) Dow Jones Newswires LOS ANGELES -- Many of the long-term power-supply contracts announced by California Gov. Gray Davis this week remain under negotiation or are the subject of ongoing lawsuits, power suppliers said Tuesday. The lack of finality to the deals raises questions about the state's success in covering its power needs, particularly going into what is expected to be an unusually tight summer. Generators said privately they were surprised the governor went ahead with his announcement Monday, given that many of the contracts haven't been signed. David Freeman, general manager of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, who negotiated the contracts on behalf of the state, conceded that details remain to be worked out. ""This is not a done deal,"" Mr. Freeman said, adding that credit concerns are keeping generators from signing the deals. Gov. Davis announced Monday that California has secured 40 long-term contracts that will provide California with about 629 million megawatt hours of electricity over 10 years, at a price of more than $40 billion. A megawatt hour is roughly the amount of electricity needed to power 1,000 homes. Several of those forward deals, however, involve contracts originally held by Edison International (EIX) unit Southern California Edison and PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric at the California Power Exchange, previously the state's main power market. The governor seized those contracts earlier this year, just before the Power Exchange liquidated them to cover hundreds of millions of dollars in power bills the utilities had failed to pay. The contracts, which total about 1.3 million megawatt hours of electricity and have a market value of about $1 billion, according to market sources, have yet to be paid for or signed over to the state. Duke Energy Corp. (DUK), one of the suppliers that sold the contracts to Pacific Gas and SoCal Ed, has sued Gov. Davis for unlawfully commandeering those contracts. Although Duke has reached an interim settlement to continue providing power to the state Department of Water Resources until April 30, the company and the Davis administration still have to ""develop a comprehensive long-term settlement to pay for the power supply contracts,"" said Duke spokesman Tom Williams. The governor went ahead with the announcement, because the California Department of Water Resources believes it will be able to finalize and sign the contracts over the next several weeks, Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio said. Separately, several suppliers named in the governor's announcement Monday -- including Duke, Reliant Energy Inc. (REI), Mirant Corp. (MIR), Sempra Energy, Enron Corp. (ENE) and Avista Corp. (AVA) -- said they have yet to sign final agreements with the state, although negotiations were ongoing. ""We are working in good faith with the DWR toward a long-term contract,"" said Art Larson, spokesman for Sempra Energy Resources, a unit of Sempra. Mr. Larson said Sempra signed a terms of agreement with the water-resources department and expects to reach a final agreement over the next several weeks. Reliant said it has only signed a short-term contract with the state that expires in about two weeks. The company will only sign a long-term contract once it's paid more than $400 million owed by Pacific Gas and SoCal Ed, spokesman Richard Wheatley said. Mirant said it also won't sign contracts with the state until it's paid. Enron said it's reached agreement on terms with the state, but has some credit-related details to hammer out. ""Everything's been agreed to except for some credit technicalities,"" Enron spokesman Mark Palmer said. Meanwhile, small, independent power plants in California that are capable of generating 1,800 megawatts of power are shut down because their owners haven't been paid by the state's two main utilities, the California Independent System Operator said Tuesday. The decline in small-plant output has contributed to the state's power-supply problems the past two months. Partnerships involving El Paso Corp. (EPG), for example, shut down 350 megawatts of generation last weekend due to nonpayment, the company said Tuesday. SoCal Ed hasn't paid the owners of the smaller generators, known as ""qualifying facilities,"" since early December, which means the generators are still owed for electric production in October, while PG&E has paid only a small percentage of its qualifying facility bills since its last full payment in early January. The plants, one-third of which are powered by renewable sources like wind and solar power, meet almost 30% of California's electricity needs. Almost all of the closed generators are fueled by natural gas, and many haven't been able to pay their gas suppliers and have been cut off from their gas supply. The California Senate Energy Committee plans to vote on legislation to create a new pricing system for all qualifying facilities this week. The proposed bill would cut the prices to qualifying facilities from about 17 cents a kilowatt-hour the past eight months to about eight cents, depending on the price of five-year natural-gas contracts the generators can sign. The plants that run on renewable resources would be paid 5.4 cents a kilowatt-hour. -- Mark Golden contributed to this article. Write to Jason Leopold at jason.leopold@dowjones.com Copyright (c) 2001 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. US Natural Gas Prices Fall As Demand Slips In Most Areas 03/06/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) HOUSTON -(Dow Jones)- U.S. natural gas physical prices fell Tuesday as demand eased, except in the Northeast and Southeast areas of the country, traders said. Heavy snowstorms in the upper Northeast supported some pricing, as did cooler weather in Georgia, the Carolinas and the Florida panhandle. Some storage buying occurred in Texas ""if they could make it work,"" a trader said. ""It was a pretty uneventful day,"" a Gulf Coast trader said late Tuesday. Also, because of the snowstorm in the Northeast, traders had purchased gas ahead of time to make up for needed load, he said. A scheduled work outage on Enron's Transwestern San Juan lateral in New Mexico was completed, and the return of a power plant in California alleviated demand in the West, traders said. At the Arizona-California border hub, buyers paid around $13-$33 a million British thermal units, West Coast traders said, down as much as $15 from Monday. At PG&E Citygate, prices were mixed, with buyers paying $9.75-$10.65/MMBtu, down 25 cents on the bid, up 15 cents on the offer. In the Midwest, Chicago Citygate prices fell 7 cents-8 cents to a range of $5.42-$5.53/MMBtu. Alliance Pipeline into Chicago traded around $5.47-$5.52/MMBtu, down 4 cents to 9 cents from Monday. The Nymex April natural gas futures contract settled at $5.315/MMBtu, down 2.1 cents in a tight, range-bound, uneventful session that started late due to bad weather. Physical gas prices at the benchmark Henry Hub in south Louisiana ended in a range of $5.25-$5.30/MMBtu, down 2 cents-6 cents from Monday. Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line at Station 65 deals were made in a similar range of $5.26-$5.35/MMBtu, down 2 cents on the bid, unchanged on the offer. At Katy in East Texas, buyers paid $5.21-$5.30/MMBtu, down 5 cents-6 cents. At Waha, prices fell 9 cents-12 cents to a range of $5.15-$5.30/MMBtu. -By John Edmiston, Dow Jones Newswires; 713-547-9209; john.edmiston@dowjones.com Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Cal PUC Subpoenas - confidential attorney client communicatio n; [EMail-Body]= Mike, Richard, and Gary: What I was suggesting was that we would produce the limited items that we are proposing under the terms of the existing protective order (which are inadequate, but we are not giving up any of the crown jewels at this point) while conditioning our production on two points, first, that we reserve the right to seek stronger protection in the order (a la Williams' motion) for any subsequent materials we do agree to produce or which are compelled to be produced, and two, that the materials we are currently producing which are entitled to confidentiality (the trading data at a minimum) shall be subject to the most stringent protective order which the Commission issues in this proceeding, i.e., we get the benefit of any additional protections Williams can secure. I only suggest this so we can stay out of the limelight by not being one of the ""bad guy"" generators who are actively taking on the protective order, when we know that at least four generators are producing nothing until their motion is resolved, and one marketer (Coral/Shell Energy) has refused to produce transactional data and has objected to most of the document request. I have also recently learned that Calpine has gotten an extension until Oct. 13 and will try to delay and hold off producing much data. I will get getting a copy of Coral's objections to the commission shortly. Mike Day -----Original Message----- From: msmith1@enron.com [mailto:msmith1@enron.com] Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2000 2:19 PM To: MDay@GMSSR.com Cc: gfergus@brobeck.com; Richard.B.Sanders@enron.com Subject: RE: Cal PUC Subpoenas Does that mean we are satisfied with the PO as it stands now--that we are willing to live with it with no changes? Should we consider going for a stronger PO to be effective when we produce the second wave (recognizing that we are not all that concerned with the info we produce on the first wave on the 13th)? That way we can still appear reasonable in what we produce, keep the PUC engaged on our terms, and still go for the strongest PO possible. MBD <MDay@GMSSR.com> on 10/05/2000 03:21:47 PM To: ""'msmith1@enron.com'"" <msmith1@enron.com>, ""'Gary Fergus, Brobeck'"" <gfergus@brobeck.com>, <Richard.B.Sanders@enron.com> cc: Subject: RE: Cal PUC Subpoenas Williams, Southern, Reliant and AES have filed motions to make the protective order significantly stricter, and to stay the production of documents until the protective order issues are resolved. These generators are taking a much harder line. Counsel for Southern has advised me that some of the generators may challenge a large part of the data request on grounds of jurisdictional, burden, and trade secret intrusion. It seems to me that it may be best to let the generators fight for a stronger protective order, and not take their side at this time. We might well want to consider proposing a ""most favored nations clause"" in our letter to the CPUC tomorrow in order to take advantage of what ever tighter protective order is eventually agreed to. Generally, I feel the generators' stance will allow us to be right where we want to be, not out front leading the charge, not turning over everything right away, but instead making ""just enough"" of a production to avoid being the center of attention. I will forward the generators' pleadings to you as attachments to this e-mail. Gary, I believe, already has them. Mike Day -----Original Message----- From: msmith1@enron.com [mailto:msmith1@enron.com] Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2000 12:58 PM To: MDay@GMSSR.com Cc: MDay@GMSSR.com Subject: RE: Cal PUC Subpoenas Brings up another question--what is our current conventional wisdom about the protective order and do we plan to seek a stronger one? Thanks. MBD <MDay@GMSSR.com> on 10/05/2000 10:55:44 AM To: ""'Mike D Smith'"" <msmith1@enron.com>, MBD <MDay@GMSSR.com>, Richard B Sanders Mary Hain <Mary_Hain@enron.com> cc: James E Keller <jkeller@enron.com>, ""'gfergus@brobeck.com'"" <gfergus@brobeck.com> Subject: RE: Cal PUC Subpoenas We know that some generators, such as Reliant, are planning to turn over to the CPUC most of the data being requested, after trying to obtain a more restrictive protective order. Many other parties are just beginning to deal with the process and are only at the stage of asking for two week extensions. We are trying to gather additional data about other retail marketers. Mike Day -----Original Message----- From: Mike D Smith [mailto:msmith1@enron.com] Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2000 8:24 AM To: mday@gmssr.com; Richard B Sanders; Mary Hain Cc: James E Keller Subject: Cal PUC Subpoenas Do we have any information about what our competitors are doing in response to these subpoenas? I recall that the generators had been getting together to discuss response strategies and I wonder if anything like that is being done on the marketer side. Thanks. (See attached file: mo2mod.pdf) (See attached file: SpecApp.pdf) [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Luntz Focus Groups (1 of 4); [EMail-Body]= We don't have revised versions yet. when we do, we will probably only want to put some (not all) of the documents on the intranet. Gavin Dillingham@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 08/24/2000 02:06 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: RE: Luntz Focus Groups (1 of 4) Have we received the newly revised principles, facts and statements for the Luntz Focus Groups? I was hoping to place these on the California power issue database. Thanks, Gavin ---------------------- Forwarded by Gavin Dillingham/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 08/24/2000 02:05 PM --------------------------- Elizabeth Linnell@ENRON 08/21/2000 12:41 PM Sent by: Elizabeth Linnell@ENRON To: Gavin cc: Subject: RE: Luntz Focus Groups (1 of 4) ---------------------- Forwarded by Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron on 08/21/2000 12:41 PM --------------------------- Maureen McVicker 08/21/2000 11:43 AM To: Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: RE: Luntz Focus Groups (1 of 4) ---------------------- Forwarded by Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron on 08/21/2000 11:41 AM --------------------------- ""Elizabeth A. VanDersarl"" <liz@luntz.com> on 08/21/2000 09:11:34 AM To: ""'skean@enron.com'"" <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: RE: Luntz Focus Groups (1 of 4) Hi Steven, Attached is the first of four documents that we have prepared for the focus groups. All of the exercises are works in progress and I am sending them to you for comments. (Hopefully, we are on the right track.) As we discussed, I am happy to fly down to Houston tomorrow so that we can review these materials together. If, however, you feel that we can edit the exercises via email that's fine too. Just let me know which arrangement makes you the most sense to you. Hope all is well. Regards, Liz <<anti regulation speech.doc>> An anti-dereg speech is in the works. - anti regulation speech.doc ---------------------- Forwarded by Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron on 08/21/2000 12:41 PM --------------------------- Maureen McVicker 08/21/2000 11:43 AM To: Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: RE: Luntz Focus Groups (2 of 4) ---------------------- Forwarded by Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron on 08/21/2000 11:43 AM --------------------------- ""Elizabeth A. VanDersarl"" <liz@luntz.com> on 08/21/2000 09:15:16 AM To: ""'skean@enron.com'"" <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: RE: Luntz Focus Groups (2 of 4) Attached please find a sheet of facts regarding deregulation. <<Facts 2.doc>> - Facts 2.doc ---------------------- Forwarded by Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron on 08/21/2000 12:41 PM --------------------------- Maureen McVicker 08/21/2000 11:43 AM To: Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: RE: Luntz Focus Groups (3 of 4) ---------------------- Forwarded by Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron on 08/21/2000 11:43 AM --------------------------- ""Elizabeth A. VanDersarl"" <liz@luntz.com> on 08/21/2000 09:18:16 AM To: ""'skean@enron.com'"" <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: RE: Luntz Focus Groups (3 of 4) Attached please find a sheet of principles. We would like your suggestions for 3 or 4 more. <<Principles 2.doc>> - Principles 2.doc ---------------------- Forwarded by Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron on 08/21/2000 12:41 PM --------------------------- Maureen McVicker 08/21/2000 11:44 AM To: Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: RE: Luntz Focus Groups (4 of 4) ---------------------- Forwarded by Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron on 08/21/2000 11:43 AM --------------------------- ""Elizabeth A. VanDersarl"" <liz@luntz.com> on 08/21/2000 09:19:26 AM To: ""'skean@enron.com'"" <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: RE: Luntz Focus Groups (4 of 4) Attached please find a sheet of pro and con statements. <<Statements.doc>> - Statements.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= See natural gas price article below. Our buddy Paul Carpenter has turned o= n=20 us (not to mention that he seems to be talking nonsense). How about giving= =20 him a call? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/20/2001=20 02:58 PM --------------------------- Miyung Buster@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 04/20/2001 10:22 AM To: Ann M Schmidt/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bryan Seyfried/LON/ECT@ECT,=20 dg27@pacbell.net, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron, filuntz@aol.com, James = D=20 Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Janet Butler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeannie=20 Mandelker/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe=20 Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John =20 John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen=20 Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Margaret=20 Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark=20 Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Markus Fiala/LON/ECT@ECT, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@EC= T,=20 Mike Mona L=20 Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron, Nicholas O'Day/AP/Enron@Enron, Peggy=20 Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT, Richard=20 Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sandra=20 McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Stella=20 Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Sus= an=20 J Mara/NA/Enron@Enron, Mike Roan/ENRON@enronXgate, Alex=20 Parsons/EU/Enron@Enron, Andrew Morrison/LON/ECT@ECT, lipsen@cisco.com, Jane= l=20 Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Shirley A Hudler/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kathleen=20 Sullivan/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda=20 Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Lora Sullivan/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jennifer=20 Thome/NA/Enron@Enron, jkradin@marathon-com.com,=20 syamane@marathon-com.com,=20 ken@kdscommunications.com, hgovenar@govadv.com, sgovenar@govadv.com,=20 bhansen@lhom.com, Carin Nersesian/NA/Enron@Enron cc: =20 Subject: Energy Issues Please see the following articles: Sac Bee, Fri, 4/20: ""State might balk on power: But refusing to=20 pay 'ridiculous' prices could add to crisis"" Sac Bee, Fri, 4/20: ""SMUD directors vote to hike rates: A tentative=20 increase of 19% to 27% is blamed on rising energy costs"" Sac Bee, Fri, 4/20: ""Lieberman to Bush: Help California solve power woes"" SD Union, Fri, 4/20: ""Escondido calls a halt to power plant ideas"" SD Union, Fri, 4/20: ""Inflated natural-gas prices add to energy costs,=20 expert says"" SD Union (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""Davis, Congress members call for energy price= =20 controls"" SD Union (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""Regulators open investigation into alternative= =20 power providers"" SD Union (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""Attorney general taking two energy companies to= =20 court"" LA Times, Fri, 4/20: ""Legislators Unite Over Energy Price Issue"" SF Chron, Fri, 4/20: ""Small fry among big fish in PG&E bankruptcy=20 Some unlikely businesses are listed as creditors against utility"" SF Chron (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""Developments in California"" SF Chron (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""California utility wants to boost Mohave power= =20 plant production""=20 SF Chron (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""PG&E owes money to several small businesses,=20 unlikely creditors"" SF Chron, Fri, 4/20: ""Edison pushes lawmakers to accept deal"" Mercury News, Fri, 4/20: ""Who will pay the most for power?"" Mercury News, Fri, 4/20: ""Credit-raters put state on watch"" Mercury News, Fri, 4/20: ""Power company executives going without bonuses"" Mercury News, Fri, 4/20: ""Davis and US lawmakers call for price caps on=20 power"" Mercury News, Fri, 4/20: ""Generators cutting electric output; regulators= =20 want to find out why"" OC Register, Fri, 4/20: ""FERC remains an unlikely rescuer The federal agency hews to a hands-off policy on power rates"" OC Register, Fri, 4/20: ""Lawmakers seek bigger rollbacks, can't agree on= =20 caps"" OC Register, Fri, 4/20: ""Energy notebook Assembly urges federal regulation of natural gas"" OC Register, Fri, 4/20: ""Shed light on costs"" (Commentary) Individual.com (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""End To Deregulation of Nevada Power"" Individual.com (Business wire), Fri, 4/20: ""PG&E Co. Issues Statements On= =20 the=20 Increase in the State's Cost for Power"" Indivdual.com (PR/newswire), Fri, 4/20: ""J.D. Power and Associates Reports= /=20 Nationwide=20 Decline in Customer Satisfaction of Electric Utility Service Among=20 Midsize Businesses"" Individual.com (PR/newswire), Fri, 4/20: ""Calpine to Purchase 46 General= =20 Electric Gas Turbines Turbines in Place for 70,000-megawatt Program"" --- State might balk on power: But refusing to pay 'ridiculous' prices could ad= d=20 to crisis. By Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writer (Published April 20, 2001)=20 Adding to the risk of summertime blackouts, the state water department said= =20 Thursday it might not pay ""ridiculous"" prices for electricity even if that= =20 leaves California short of power.=20 The Department of Water Resources, which has been buying electricity for th= e=20 state's two beleaguered utilities since mid-January, wouldn't spell out wha= t=20 it considers ridiculous. But if prices get too high, the state might be=20 better off ordering blackouts or implementing proposed new conservation=20 programs designed at cutting usage on short notice, said Raymond Hart, the= =20 department's deputy director in charge of power purchases.=20 Gov. Gray Davis took a different view, saying: ""We will continue to keep th= e=20 lights on. When you're fighting a forest fire, you don't say, 'Let me see,= =20 how much is this going to cost me? Maybe I can't write the check, maybe I= =20 can't put the fire out.' You put the fire out and then worry about the cost= =20 later.""=20 But Davis' spokesman, Steve Maviglio, said the Governor's Office indeed is= =20 contemplating whether to refuse to buy power at any cost. ""At what point do= es=20 the state say, 'Enough is enough'? Those scenarios are certainly under=20 discussion,"" Maviglio said.=20 The water department until recently resisted buying all the power Southern= =20 California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. needed, refusing to=20 purchase electricity it deemed too costly. But lately it's had to relax tha= t=20 stance because of an order by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Har= t=20 said.=20 That April 6 order said power generators can no longer be forced to sell=20 electricity to uncreditworthy entities such as the Independent System=20 Operator, which manages the state's power grid. Because the ISO -- which ge= ts=20 its money from the utilities -- can no longer buy the power, the water=20 department is now buying all the electricity required by the utilities, Har= t=20 said. But he said the department could back off if prices get out of hand.= =20 ""If the prices just get ridiculous altogether, there's a policy call to be= =20 made, and we'll cross that bridge when we get there,"" Hart said.=20 The ISO has predicted that severe shortages could bring 34 days of rolling= =20 blackouts this summer. The potential refusal of the water department to buy= =20 ultra-expensive power could further strain the grid.=20 ""On a daily basis we're dealt a set of cards,"" said ISO spokesman Patrick= =20 Dorinson. ""It sounds like ... we're going to be handed another set of cards= ,=20 and we're going to have to try to maintain the reliability of the grid as= =20 best we can.""=20 Hart's comments came amid an increasingly rancorous debate between Davis an= d=20 PG&E over the water department's power expenditures. State spending shot up= =20 following PG&E's April 6 filing for bankruptcy protection.=20 Davis said generators began demanding a ""credit penalty"" from the water=20 department because of the PG&E bankruptcy proceedings. As a result, the=20 state's daily costs shot up last week to $73.2 million from $57.4 million i= n=20 the week before PG&E went bankrupt, the governor's office said.=20 Hart agreed, saying several generators raised their prices. ""Every time=20 there's a major hiccup in the market, such as PG&E bankruptcy or a staged= =20 alert by the ISO, there's a price run-up,"" Hart said.=20 But prices have settled down this week. After peaking at $345 a megawatt ho= ur=20 April 12, prices for north state power were at $243 on Thursday, just below= =20 what they were prior to the bankruptcy filing, according to the Enerfax new= s=20 service.=20 PG&E, however, said its bankruptcy filing had nothing to do with the state'= s=20 increased spending.=20 ""This claim is simply not accurate,"" the utility said in a memo to reporter= s.=20 Rather, the increased spending is due solely to the fact that the water=20 department is buying more units of electricity in the wake of the FERC orde= r,=20 PG&E said.=20 Regardless of the cause, the increased spending by the water department cou= ld=20 further strain the state's budget -- and complicate Davis' plan to finance= =20 the power purchases through a bond offering.=20 The state has committed $5.2 billion from its general fund for power=20 purchases since January. Those mounting purchases, along with PG&E's=20 bankruptcy filing and other energy crisis uncertainties, prompted a third= =20 Wall Street credit rating agency, Fitch, to place the state on a ""ratings= =20 watch"" this week, meaning the rating might be downgraded.=20 A downgrade could raise California's borrowing costs. All three of the=20 leading Wall Street credit agencies now have California on a ratings watch.= =20 Meanwhile, the state Public Utilities Commission on Thursday ordered an=20 investigation of why hundreds of cogenerators and other alternative energy= =20 providers haven't resumed production even though they've begun receiving=20 payments again from Edison and PG&E.=20 These generators, under contract to the utilities, provide more than 20=20 percent of the state's energy supply. Hundreds shut down, worsening=20 California's power situation, because they'd received little or no money fr= om=20 the utilities since November.=20 The PUC ordered Edison and PG&E to resume payments, starting this week, for= =20 new power deliveries.=20 But the generators say the payments aren't enough to get them back online.= =20 So PUC President Loretta Lynch said the commission will investigate whether= =20 to order Edison and PG&E to begin repaying them the hundreds of millions ow= ed=20 for past deliveries.=20 The Bee's Dale Kasler can be reached at (916) 321-1066 or dkasler@sacbee.co= m.=20 Emily Bazar of The Bee's Capitol Bureau contributed to this report.=20 --- SMUD directors vote to hike rates: A tentative increase of 19% to 27% is=20 blamed on rising energy costs. By Carrie Peyton Bee Staff Writer (Published April 20, 2001)=20 Ten years of stable electricity bills vanished in a single unanimous vote= =20 Thursday night as directors of Sacramento Municipal Utility District gave= =20 tentative approval to rate hikes ranging from 19 percent to 27 percent.=20 The new rates will go into effect immediately after a final vote, scheduled= =20 for May 3.=20 ""This is quite alarming to all of us,"" said director Peter Keat. But praisi= ng=20 the value of ""a community-owned electric company"" that provides everything= =20 from shade trees to public votes on rates, Keat said he saw no choice.=20 SMUD, which once hoped to lower electric bills this year or next as=20 deregulation took hold, was caught up in the spiraling wholesale costs that= =20 helped send Pacific Gas and Electric Co. into bankruptcy proceedings.=20 The price of natural gas, which fuels SMUD's cogeneration plants, has risen= =20 steeply.=20 Wholesale electricity, which SMUD buys to supplement power produced by its= =20 own plants, nearly tripled between October and January.=20 And the weather has been dismal. Rainfall and snowmelt that feed SMUD's=20 hydroelectric plants on the upper American River are about 53 percent of=20 normal to date.=20 But during a two-hour hearing, a small contingent of consumers asked the=20 board to reconsider.=20 ""I realize that rates have to go up, but this seems like a big percentage a= ll=20 at once,"" said Marian Ender.=20 Several criticized a 6 percent surcharge that until only a few days before= =20 had been proposed at 3 percent. Among them was Duy Tu, an engineering manag= er=20 at Intel who served on SMUD's advisory rate committee.=20 The increase ""cannot come at a worse time"" for Intel, he said, although he= =20 understands the need for it. He urged the board to act now to make more=20 electricity available in the future.=20 ""We are way too dependent on some external force to keep the lights on,"" Tu= =20 said.=20 Overall, a base rate increase averaging 16 percent will raise about $124=20 million annually for SMUD, and a special=20 6 percent surcharge will raise about $48 million in its first year. Most of= =20 the surcharge, scheduled to drop to 3 percent annually for two subsequent= =20 years, will go into an emergency fund.=20 ""We have to build back our savings account. It's been gutted,"" said directo= r=20 Susan Patterson.=20 The rate increases will fall most heavily on small commercial and large=20 industrial power users, although households with very low electricity bills= =20 will feel a sharp bite from the addition of a $5 monthly service fee.=20 The flat fee adds less than 10 percent to what was a ""typical"" residential= =20 SMUD bill of $67, but it's a 25 percent rate hike for someone whose monthly= =20 bill hovers around $20.=20 ""I just don't think that part is right,"" Ender said. ""We should only pay fo= r=20 usage.""=20 Tom Reavey took the board to task for ""unfair and unequitable"" rates that= =20 charge agriculture and small businesses less than what they cost SMUD to=20 serve, while charging homeowners and renters slightly more.=20 But board members defended going easier on rates for the pumps that run=20 farmers' wells and irrigation systems.=20 ""We all gain great benefits from living in a community that has nearby=20 agriculture,"" Keat said.=20 The new rates will apply throughout SMUD's service territory, which include= s=20 a narrow slice of southern Placer County and all but the southwestern tip o= f=20 Sacramento County. They will not=20 affect people who receive electric service from PG&E, which last month was= =20 granted a 29 percent hike by state regulators.=20 ""If you want to see a bunch of folks who are really facing some stark times= ,=20 it's PG&E customers,"" said board member Howard Posner.=20 While there is widespread speculation that PG&E's rate hikes are the first = of=20 many, Posner and other directors said they hoped Thursday's increases will = be=20 the last SMUD needs and that rates could decline in three to four years.=20 To boost conservation, both SMUD and PG&E are trying to craft rates that fa= ll=20 hardest on the heaviest household users.=20 SMUD's old residential rates were=20 divided into a baseline tier charged roughly 8 cents a kilowatt-hour in the= =20 summer and one higher tier billed at 12.7 cents a kilowatt-hour.=20 The new rates will start at 8.6 cents in the summer, rise to a middle tier = of=20 14.5 cents and top out at 16.2 cents for those who use more than 1,000=20 kilowatt-hours of electricity.=20 By comparison, PG&E has proposed to the state Public Utilities Commission= =20 that its residential rates be divided into four tiers, topping out at 27=20 cents per kilowatt-hour. A PUC decision is expected next month.=20 Under the new SMUD rate structure, including the surcharge, large industrie= s=20 will see their electric bills rise by an average of 27 percent, agricultura= l=20 rates will rise 22 percent, small commercial rates 27 percent and residenti= al=20 rates 19 percent.=20 Households that qualify for special low-income or life-support rates will p= ay=20 a smaller monthly customer charge of $3.50 and will not have to pay the=20 surcharge on their baseline electricity usage.=20 Information about qualifying for the reduced rates is available from SMUD a= t=20 (888) 742-7683.=20 The Bee's Carrie Peyton can be reached at (916) 321-1086 or=20 cpeyton@sacbee.com.=20 --- Lieberman to Bush: Help California solve power woes By Emily Bazar Bee Capitol Bureau (Published April 20, 2001)=20 On a brief visit to the capital Thursday, former Democratic vice presidenti= al=20 candidate Joe Lieberman called on President Bush to help rescue California= =20 from its deepening energy troubles.=20 After attending an early-morning prayer breakfast with legislators and Gov.= =20 Gray Davis, the U.S. senator from Connecticut met with them to discuss the= =20 federal government's role in easing California's electricity woes.=20 Lieberman, a potential Democratic presidential candidate in 2004, warned th= at=20 if the Bush administration does not act quickly in California, the rest of= =20 the nation will succumb to economic ripple effects.=20 ""No American leader can disengage from a problem that so profoundly affects= =20 our largest state,"" Lieberman told reporters after meeting with the=20 Democratic governor. ""I call on the president to get involved. ... We can't= =20 sit back in Washington and let California suffer.""=20 Sacramento was the last California stop for the senator, who has spent thre= e=20 days at fund-raisers and speaking engagements across the state.=20 In talks with lawmakers about the energy crisis, Lieberman told them he's= =20 strongly urging the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to impose temporar= y=20 caps on the wholesale price of electricity.=20 But the commission's chairman, Curt Hebert, is a fierce free-market advocat= e=20 who has long opposed price caps and has not indicated he will change his=20 mind.=20 If FERC doesn't act soon, Lieberman said he will support legislation=20 sponsored by Sen.=20 Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., to force FERC to impose temporary caps.=20 He expects Feinstein to introduce her legislation early next week.=20 Lieberman's first stop Thursday morning was the California Prayer Breakfast= ,=20 an annual springtime gathering of religious and political leaders.=20 At the breakfast, speakers told Davis they would pray for him as he navigat= es=20 the state's energy crisis. Before launching into a song from ""The Scarlet= =20 Pimpernel,"" singer Steve Amerson called on the governor to tell Californian= s=20 the truth throughout the ordeal.=20 Davis was solemn in his remarks, and his calm demeanor belied his behavior= =20 Tuesday, when he reportedly erupted in an obscene=20 tirade during a closed-door meeting with Senate Republicans.=20 ""I'm going to tell you the truth, Steve. We have a problem,"" Davis said to= =20 the singer. ""But God has provided a path out of that problem if we all do o= ur=20 part.""=20 The Bee's Emily Bazar can be reached at (916) 326-5540 or ebazar@sacbee.com= .=20 --- Escondido calls a halt to power plant ideas=20 Temporary step will give it time for overall planning By Jonathan Heller=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 April 19, 2001=20 ESCONDIDO -- After being inundated with proposals to build power plants in= =20 the past few months, the City Council yesterday called a timeout.=20 The council voted 3-2 to suspend consideration for 30 to 60 days of any=20 proposals to build energy generating facilities in the city. During that=20 period, city staff members will develop a comprehensive approval process th= at=20 will factor in the cumulative effects of such plants.=20 ""We need to step back and look at the direction we're going in,"" City=20 Councilwoman June Rady said.=20 The city has been juggling four power-plant proposals since January:=20 ?Sempra Energy Resources wants to build a 500-megawatt plant in the southwe= st=20 part of Escondido. It has not yet filed formal plans with the city Planning= =20 Department.=20 ?Ramco Inc. of San Diego has received approval to build a 44-megawatt plant= =20 on Mission Avenue in west Escondido.=20 ?CalPeak LLC of San Diego has filed plans to build a 49.5-megawatt plant on= =20 Enterprise Street, not far from the Ramco plant.=20 ?Another firm has expressed interest in building a 49.5-megawatt plant on= =20 city property on West Washington Avenue, but has not submitted plans yet.= =20 Yesterday's decision means that all the projects -- except the=20 already-approved Ramco plant -- are now on hold, and no new proposals can b= e=20 filed with the city.=20 The decision halts a mad dash by developers to bring power plants on line b= y=20 the summer to take advantage of special incentives offered by Gov. Gray=20 Davis.=20 Mayor Lori Holt Pfeiler and Councilwoman Marie Waldron opposed the move. Th= ey=20 said it would only delay much-needed solutions to the region's energy crisi= s,=20 which is expected to come to a head this summer.=20 ""If (plant developers) have a chance of getting power on line by the summer= ,=20 we should not be the ones to stand in the way,"" Pfeiler said.=20 Waldron argued that cities have to be more proactive at this time, not less= .=20 ""The governor is not solving the problem,"" Waldron said. ""It's up to local= =20 governments to try to do what they can.""=20 Joe Rowley, Sempra's project development director, said he doubted the=20 council's decision would upset his plans.=20 ""Our timetable is still not fully defined,"" Rowley said. ""Obviously there's= a=20 lot of work we have to do to get to the point where an application can be= =20 processed.""=20 Meanwhile, council members listened to two people who made impassioned plea= s=20 for the city to consider alternative power sources.=20 David Drake, a service architect for SAIC in La Jolla, urged the council to= =20 think about solar power. There is more than enough available land -- and=20 rooftop space -- to install enough solar panels to power the whole city, he= =20 said.=20 ""Escondido has 65 square miles,"" he said. ""But 2,500 acres could be employe= d=20 to power us forever without any reliance on imported energy.""=20 Local inventor Arnold Lund urged the council to consider energy generated= =20 from windmills.=20 The council also voted to work with San Marcos in exploring ways to seek=20 inexpensive, stable energy rates.=20 The hope is that the two cities can forge a deal with Sempra for cheaper=20 rates. Sempra officials have said they are willing to discuss possible rate= =20 deals with the city.=20 To buy power directly, a city has to adopt a special legal arrangement, suc= h=20 as forming a municipal utility district. San Diego Gas & Electric is the on= ly=20 energy service provider in the county that buys and sells power from the=20 regional energy grid.=20 San Marcos has formed a municipal utility district but has not signed any= =20 deals to buy power. It would be a more lengthy process for Escondido to for= m=20 such a district. San Marcos is a charter city and has more flexibility unde= r=20 the state Constitution. Escondido is a general-law city.=20 --- Inflated natural-gas prices add to energy costs, expert says=20 Windfall-profits tax gets Davis' backing By Bill Ainsworth=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 April 19, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO -- Federal regulators' failure to stop what they described as=20 anti-competitive practices in the natural-gas industry added $750 million t= o=20 Southern California Edison's cost of electricity, a consultant estimated=20 yesterday.=20 The consultant, Paul Carpenter of the Brattle Group, spoke to an Assembly= =20 subcommittee investigating why California pays the highest natural-gas pric= es=20 in the nation. Natural gas is a critical part of the electricity crisis=20 because most of the state's generating plants run on natural gas.=20 Natural-gas prices have soared throughout the nation, but the bench mark=20 price paid at California's border has been double that paid at other bench= =20 mark locations throughout the nation for months, according to figures=20 released by the Assembly Subcommittee on Energy Oversight.=20 Next week, Carpenter plans to testify at hearings in Washington, D.C., on= =20 behalf of Southern California Edison and the California Public Utilities=20 Commission, which are asking federal regulators to intervene.=20 The giant utility and the state regulatory body contend that a sweetheart= =20 deal between El Paso Natural Gas and El Paso Merchant Energy gave the siste= r=20 companies enough market power to artificially raise the price of natural ga= s=20 that flows into Southern California from Texas.=20 El Paso owns the major pipeline bringing natural gas from fields in New=20 Mexico and Texas to Southern California. El Paso Merchant Energy is an=20 unregulated sister company.=20 Carpenter called the prices paid in Southern California ""simply=20 unprecedented"" in the United States. He estimated that the sister companies= =20 manipulated the market enough to add $2.60 to the price of a million Britis= h=20 thermal units of gas.=20 In addition, he said, El Paso Merchant Energy owns part of 20 smaller power= =20 plants, ""qualifying facilities"" that get paid based on the price of natural= =20 gas in California. The higher natural-gas prices increase the company's=20 revenues, Carpenter said.=20 El Paso company officials are expected to testify in front of the Assembly= =20 subcommittee today, but in proceedings before the federal regulators they= =20 have denied any sweetheart deal.=20 In a report they commissioned, the company blamed the higher natural-gas=20 prices in Southern California on increased demand and constraints on pipeli= ne=20 capacity.=20 Gov. Gray Davis, meanwhile, gave his strongest endorsement yet to a=20 windfall-profits tax on generators as a Senate committee chaired by Joseph= =20 Dunn, D-Laguna Niguel, began a series of hearings to probe possible price= =20 gouging by generators.=20 ""I believe the Legislature would be well within its prerogative to insist= =20 that generators receive an appropriate reduction, whether it's 20 percent o= r=20 any other number the Legislature hit upon,"" Davis said.=20 Senate Democrats, Davis said, will form a special committee to help work on= =20 his plan for the state purchase of the transmission system of Southern=20 California Edison for $2.76 billion, in exchange for state aid in paying of= f=20 the utilities' debt.=20 The governor said he told Senate Democrats, a number of whom are skeptical = of=20 the plan, that Edison's parent firm has agreed to back a $3 billion upgrade= =20 of the neighborhood distribution system retained by Edison and to return a= =20 $400 million tax refund to the utility.=20 At the natural-gas hearing yesterday, state officials said that after El Pa= so=20 Merchant Energy bought a significant part of the pipeline capacity from its= =20 sister company, it withheld natural gas to drive prices up.=20 ""Marketers have gamed the system and figured out how to hoard capacity and= =20 undermine competition,"" said Harvey Morris, an attorney for the California= =20 Public Utilities Commission.=20 State regulators want the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which=20 regulates natural gas, to open the market to more competitors.=20 But the commission has repeatedly rejected similar complaints in the past. = On=20 March 28, FERC ruled that the affiliates did not arrange a sweetheart deal.= =20 ""The fact that El Paso Merchant controls a large volume of capacity does no= t,=20 in and of itself, render the El Paso contracts unjust, unreasonable or undu= ly=20 discriminatory,"" FERC ruled.=20 In other cases involving natural gas, federal regulators acknowledged that= =20 certain contract provisions allowed anti-competitive behavior, but they=20 approved those contracts anyway.=20 Lawmakers said they were puzzled by the federal regulators' lack of action.= =20 ""It baffles me that we've found the problem -- anti-competitive behavior an= d=20 market gaming, but there's no cure because federal regulators won't take=20 action,"" said Assemblyman Juan Vargas, D-San Diego. Staff writer Ed Mendel contributed to this report.=20 --- Davis, Congress members call for energy price controls=20 By Gary Gentile ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 April 19, 2001=20 LOS ANGELES =01) Gov. Gray Davis and a bipartisan group of the state's=20 congressional delegates agreed Thursday that the federal government must ac= t=20 to control the wholesale price of energy.=20 ""For us the big issue is how we address the unjust rates,"" said Rep. Mary= =20 Bono, R-Palm Springs. ""I believe we are up to it and will handle it as soon= =20 as we can.""=20 Davis met behind closed doors with 27 congressional representatives,=20 including Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., at the Sheraton Gateway Hotel ne= ar=20 Los Angeles International Airport. He said after the 90-minute meeting that= =20 the group discussed a threefold approach to the state's power crisis.=20 The strategy includes requiring federal agencies in the state, including=20 military facilities, to conserve energy this summer and asking the Federal= =20 Energy Regulatory Commission to find a way to control the wholesale price o= f=20 electricity and increase the flow of natural gas into California.=20 Davis repeated his criticism of federal regulators for not acting sooner to= =20 control the wholesale price of electricity and said he was hopeful the=20 state's congressional delegation could work together to find a bipartisan= =20 solution.=20 ""We agreed there has to be a mechanism to reduce the wholesale price of=20 electricity,"" Davis said. ""We have agreed to work cooperatively across part= y=20 lines to find ways we can reduce those costs. We're in this together. Party= =20 doesn't matter. Finding a solution does matters.""=20 ""To have the price of moving natural gas go up by a factor of 10 or more is= =20 absurd,"" said Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Los Angeles. ""So many of our colleagues= =20 are telling us it's California's fault, but California does not have the=20 authority to regulate these two items.""=20 The group also talked about easing environmental regulations during power= =20 emergencies to allow small companies and even military bases to run small= =20 generators.=20 ""If you have generators in the state, regardless of what they run on, becau= se=20 we're entering this emergency period in the summertime and will be short of= =20 power, you should be allowed to turn them on,"" said Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-E= l=20 Cajon.=20 Hunter said small generators could produce about 500 to 600 megawatts durin= g=20 a power emergency if exemptions to various clear air requirements could be= =20 made.=20 Officials discussed ways to allow FERC to control wholesale prices without= =20 violating ideological positions staked out by high-ranking Republican=20 officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney, who oppose price controls= =20 and favor free markets.=20 Rep Jane Harman, D-Torrance, said she would support a finding by FERC that= =20 power wholesalers should not be allowed to charge market rates, but rather= =20 rates more tightly pegged to the cost of generating power.=20 ""We're not talking about artificial caps,"" Harman said. ""We should insist= =20 that the FERC not renew their market-based rate authority. And if we go tha= t=20 route, it takes us to the same place and avoids the ideological fight.""=20 The meeting did not result in any specific proposals but participants prais= ed=20 the bipartisan nature of the talks and said it would result in a unified=20 approach in Washington.=20 ""We have a responsibility to make sure the federal government takes it's ro= le=20 seriously,"" said Rep Gary Condit, D-Modesto. ""We clearly understand what ou= r=20 assignment is today and I think we're going to work together in a bipartisa= n=20 way to get that done.""=20 --- Regulators open investigation into alternative power providers=20 By Michael Liedtke ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 April 19, 2001=20 SAN FRANCISCO =01) Hoping to prevent California's bleak power outlook from= =20 becoming even darker, state regulators Thursday launched an investigation= =20 into why alternative energy providers aren't producing more electricity.=20 With the action, the California Public Utilities Commission hopes to=20 determine if legitimate business reasons or ulterior motives underlie the= =20 reduced output by an independent group of small generators that provides mu= ch=20 of the state's energy.=20 These alternative generators =01) known in the industry as ""qualifying=20 facilities,"" or QFs =01) have been scaling back or shutting down as debts o= wed=20 by California's two largest utilities pile up. The QFs are owed an estimate= d=20 $700 million by bankrupt Pacific Gas and Electric and financially crippled= =20 Southern California Edison.=20 Some QFs say the unpaid bills have forced them to defer much-needed=20 maintenance, leading to more equipment breakdowns that reduce electricity= =20 output. Other QFs say they simply can't afford to keep operating.=20 The PUC is worried some QFs are trying to take advantage of the California= =20 crisis to get out of long-term contracts that require them to sell=20 electricity at prices far below the current market rate. Several QFs are=20 suing to get out of those contracts so they can cash in on the open market,= =20 said PUC Commissioner Carl Wood.=20 All the QFs want is to be paid for bills that date back as far as November,= =20 said Jack Raudy, a spokesman for the Renewable Energy Creditors Committee,= =20 which consists of 10 alternative power producers owed a combined $410=20 million. Those 10 generators produce about 3,000 megawatts =01) which Raudy= said=20 was enough electricity for 3 million homes.=20 ""We are outraged (by the PUC's investigation),"" Raudy said. ""We have heard = so=20 much rhetoric over the past five months and still haven't been paid a dime.= =20 That is what we are worried about.""=20 Raudy estimated his group is operating at about 95 percent of capacity.=20 After the temporary closure of several QFs contributed to rolling blackouts= =20 around the state last month, the PUC ordered PG&E and SoCal Edison to begin= =20 paying the generators for the energy purchased since March 27.=20 But the order has done nothing to help the QFs recover the past debts. The= =20 QFs are now in line in bankruptcy court with 30,000 creditors owed money by= =20 PG&E, which expects its unpaid bills to rise to $5.5 billion by the end of= =20 this month.=20 If the QFs get desperate enough, they may decide to push SoCal Edison into = an=20 involuntary bankruptcy case, Raudy said.=20 PUC Commissioner Geoffrey Brown defended the alternative energy providers= =20 during Thursday's hearing.=20 ""Any QFs that are not operating right now are doing so for financial reason= s,=20 not to game the system,"" he said.=20 California will need all the power that it can get from the QFs this summer= =20 when rolling blackouts threaten to become a daily occurrence.=20 Combined, the QFs account for about one-fourth of California's total power= =20 capacity, according to the PUC.=20 The QF output will become even more essential this summer because Californi= a=20 won't be able to import as much electricity from the Pacific Northwest as i= t=20 has in the past. A lack of rain has left the Pacific Northwest's=20 hydroelectric supply at its second-lowest level ever, and it could diminish= =20 to a record low if the recent drought continues.=20 ""We are not going to be able to look to the Pacific Northwest to meet our= =20 needs,"" Wood said after reviewing a new report on the hydroelectricity=20 supply.=20 The looming blackouts and electricity price increases caused by California'= s=20 energy crisis is exasperating businesses and households across the state.= =20 Fearing the frustration could boil over into terrorism, the PUC Thursday=20 installed metal detectors to screen everyone attending the agency's public= =20 meetings.=20 In other moves Thursday, the PUC tabled a scheduled vote on whether the=20 regulators should become more involved in PG&E's bankruptcy case. The San= =20 Francisco-based utility is challenging the PUC's authority in the case. The= =20 PUC now expects to take up the matter at a May 3 meeting.=20 --- Attorney general taking two energy companies to court=20 ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 April 19, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) Attorney General Bill Lockyer wants a judge to order two po= wer=20 generators to hand over documents he subpoenaed last month as part of his= =20 investigation into the state's electricity market.=20 Reliant Energy and Mirant Corp. failed to produce certain documents by Marc= h=20 19, despite assurances that the sensitive documents would be kept=20 confidential, Lockyer said Thursday.=20 Lockyer filed the request for a hearing in San Francisco Superior Court.=20 Lockyer says the companies are concerned the documents wouldn't be kept=20 confidential, even though he says they've been assured the sensitive=20 documents would not be released.=20 The attorney general is investigating allegations of price manipulation in= =20 the state's electricity market that may have led to soaring power costs.=20 Mirant spokesman Bill O'Neel said the company is cooperating with the=20 attorney general's office.=20 ""At this moment, we have our legal team working to pull together the=20 documentation the attorney general has requested,"" O'Neel said.=20 Mirant Thursday joined a complaint filed by Reliant last week in Los Angele= s=20 Superior Court. That petition seeks assurance that the attorney general wil= l=20 keep proprietary information confidential to prevent any competitive damage= ,=20 said Reliant spokesman Richard Wheatley.=20 ""We're committed to cooperating with the investigation that Attorney Genera= l=20 Lockyer is conducting,"" Wheatley said. ""It's the understanding of our=20 management that we do not have the proper assurance that the information wi= ll=20 be kept confidential.""=20 --- Legislators Unite Over Energy Price Issue=20 Power: Bipartisan congressional delegation called together by Davis says U.= S.=20 must step in to protect state from manipulation by suppliers.=20 By MITCHELL LANDSBERG and MIGUEL BUSTILLO, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????This may be the surest sign yet of the depth of California's energy=20 crisis: A bipartisan cross-section of the state's congressional delegation,= =20 brought together Thursday by Gov. Gray Davis, not only agreed about the=20 severity of the problem but also about the need for swift federal=20 intervention.=20 ?????""This meeting did not have the word 'Democrat' or 'Republican' used=20 once,"" Rep. Darrell E. Issa (R-Vista), said of the unusual spirit of=20 cooperation at the meeting near Los Angeles International airport. ?????Members of both parties said the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission= =20 must slash wholesale electricity prices so California utilities can once=20 again afford to buy power. Since January, the state government has been=20 buying electricity on their behalf, as skyrocketing wholesale prices put=20 Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern California Edison billions of dolla= rs=20 into debt and many power suppliers refused to sell to them; PG&E has since= =20 filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. ?????Although the Bush administration has said repeatedly that it is strong= ly=20 opposed to price caps, and FERC has refused to grant them, California=20 Republicans at the energy meeting said they are optimistic that the=20 administration will agree to some other form of price regulation. They=20 brushed aside the notion that such regulations might conflict with their=20 ideological belief in a free market. ?????""This is not a free-enterprise situation,"" Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Alpin= e)=20 said after the meeting. ""In fact, it's just the opposite."" ?????Specifically citing the huge disparity between natural gas prices=20 charged to California and those charged in other Western states, he said=20 California clearly has been the victim of unreasonably high energy costs.= =20 Under federal law, the FERC must regulate the prices of companies if it fin= ds=20 they are exerting ""market power"" to drive prices to unreasonable levels. ?????Executives from two Texas energy companies, meeting with legislators i= n=20 Sacramento, denied Thursday that they had caused natural gas prices in=20 California to artificially skyrocket by hoarding access to a critical=20 pipeline into the state. ?????After the extraordinary meeting in Los Los Angeles, Rep. Brad Sherman= =20 (D-Sherman Oaks) said the biggest disagreement between California Democrats= =20 and Republicans appeared to be their relative faith--or lack thereof--in th= e=20 ability of President Bush and his administration to help California. There= =20 has been much speculation that Bush, who lost California in November, has n= o=20 political motive to help the state. ?????""We Democrats,"" said Sherman, ""hope very much that our skepticism is= =20 proven wrong."" ?????Davis--who sat flanked by Democratic U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein and th= e=20 governor's newly appointed chief energy advisor, S. David Freeman--said he= =20 used the meeting mainly to discuss the importance of conservation by=20 Californians this summer and to ask the congressional delegation to pitch i= n.=20 Five Republicans and more than a dozen Democrats attended the gathering. ?????Feinstein said Thursday that she has asked for a third time to meet wi= th=20 Bush to discuss the energy situation. Meeting with Times reporters and=20 editors Wednesday, she described a recent meeting with Vice President Dick= =20 Cheney in which, she said, he ""ignored"" her appeal for federal assistance.= =20 ?????Feinstein has been among those critical of natural gas companies, sayi= ng=20 they appear to have constricted access to a California-bound pipeline to ru= n=20 up prices. ?????The Brattle Group, a respected consulting firm, alleged Wednesday befo= re=20 an Assembly committee that Dynegy Inc. and El Paso Natural Gas Co. had=20 manipulated the market by charging so much for the rights to their pipeline= =20 capacity that they had, in effect, withheld access to it. ?????That action, the experts said, directly forced companies trying to=20 deliver gas to California to look for alternatives, clogging other pipeline= s=20 and causing a surge in prices. ?????The explanation, El Paso executives said, was simple: Demand for gas= =20 soared in California because generators that use gas to make electricity=20 increased production last year in response to the energy crisis. ?????""We're not withholding capacity--no one is,"" said El Paso Merchant=20 Energy President Ralph Eads. ""With these prices, you want to sell every=20 molecule."" ?????In other developments Thursday: ?????* The agreement between Davis and Edison International to return its= =20 ailing utility arm to financial health is in ""deep trouble and could be=20 rejected by legislators,"" the Standard & Poor's credit rating agency said i= n=20 a note to clients, citing legislative and other sources. A rejection of the= =20 deal ""would be a humiliating setback for the governor,"" S&P said. ?????The agreement calls for, among other things, the sale of Edison's=20 transmission grid to the state for $2.76 billion and the sale of $2 billion= =20 in bonds--both designed to pay off the utility's huge electricity debt.=20 Edison agreed to several constraints, including the sale of electricity to= =20 the state at prices tied to the cost of producing power. ?????Since they returned Monday from a two-week recess, state legislators= =20 have been sharply critical of the Edison agreement and have indicated a=20 desire to tinker with aspects of the deal. Some lawmakers have said publicl= y=20 that a bankruptcy protection filing by Edison, like that of PG&E, might not= =20 be such a dire outcome. ?????But a senior Edison executive said it is ""way too early"" to give up on= =20 passage of the proposal, which legislators have not yet seen in official fo= rm. ?????""There is an education process to do here,"" the executive said of the= =20 highly detailed 38-page document. ""The legislators should be asking=20 questions. That is appropriate."" ?????* The Public Utilities Commission voted to investigate whether=20 alternative energy providers violated contractual agreements by withholding= =20 supplies from PG&E and Edison, which owe them hundreds of millions of dolla= rs. ?????The action, Commissioner Carl W. Wood said, was prompted in part by=20 lawsuits some providers have filed seeking release from their contracts wit= h=20 the cash-starved utilities. The producers of solar, wind and geothermal=20 energy account for more than 25% of California's electricity supply. ?????""The question is whether we will be able to rely on them in the long,= =20 hot days of summer,"" Wood said. ?????Jack Raudy of the Renewable Energy Creditors Committee said the PUC=20 needs to address the $700 million the producers are owed. ""All we have gott= en=20 is rhetoric from the governor, the PUC and the utilities,"" he said. ?????* An $850-million plan to entice Californians to conserve precious=20 megawatts appears to be running into roadblocks, compounding predictions by= =20 state officials of tighter than expected energy supplies in May and June. ?????Davis signed the conservation spending package last week, earmarking= =20 $242 million of the new funds for the Public Utilities Commission to=20 distribute to the state's investor-owned utilities to support existing=20 conservation programs. ?????But Barbara Hale, director of the PUC's Division of Strategic Planning= ,=20 said Thursday that since Pacific Gas & Electric Co. filed for bankruptcy=20 protection April 6, the utility has stopped releasing conservation funds. ?????Hale, testifying before a state Senate committee, said PG&E's=20 decision--coupled with the threat that Southern California Edison could=20 follow a similar route to U.S. Bankruptcy Court--has complicated her agency= 's=20 efforts. ?????PG&E spokeswoman Staci Homrig said her company plans to petition the= =20 Bankruptcy Court to have the conservation funds designated as a trust and= =20 separated from assets tied up in the bankruptcy proceedings. She said if th= e=20 court denies the request, PG&E would ask to be permitted to pay the expense= s=20 anyway. The process, she added, could take about a month--too long in the= =20 view of some legislators, given increasingly gloomy energy forecasts for la= te=20 spring and early summer. ?????Deputy Director Bob Therkelsen of the California Energy Commission sai= d=20 his agency had been counting on a number of small power producers to bolste= r=20 their output during that period. But he said some producers did not purchas= e=20 the necessary equipment because PG&E and Edison have failed to pay them in= =20 full for earlier electricity deliveries. ?????""It's not a huge amount,"" he said of the anticipated production=20 shortfall, ""but every little bit helps."" ---=20 ?????Landsberg reported from Los Angeles, Bustillo from Sacramento. Times= =20 staff writers Nancy Rivera Brooks in Los Angeles, Carl Ingram and Julie=20 Tamaki in Sacramento and Tim Reiterman in San Francisco contributed to this= =20 story. Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 --- Small fry among big fish in PG&E bankruptcy=20 Some unlikely businesses are listed as creditors against utility=20 Steve Rubenstein, Chuck Squatriglia, Chronicle Staff Writers Friday, April 20, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /20/M N185589.DTL=20 A San Francisco ice cream parlor, a karate studio and a costume shop are al= l=20 in the same boat, and that goes for a Divisadero Street psychiatrist, too.= =20 They're all in the fortunate position of having money coming to them.=20 And they're all in the tough spot of having that money owed by the sort-of= =20 bankrupt Pacific Gas and Electric Co.=20 Many of the 47,894 creditors that PG&E owes money to, according to a list= =20 filed with the bankruptcy judge, are banks, power companies, lawyers and th= e=20 like.=20 But a surprising number are businesses that, at first blush, might seem=20 unlikely to be power company creditors. Many businesses -- like the ACT=20 costume rental shop -- didn't know or had forgotten that PG&E had run up a= =20 tab.=20 And since the list didn't say how much they're owed, businesses had to gues= s.=20 ""How about that?"" said costume shop manager Callie Floor, when told she had= =20 PG&E money coming to her.=20 Floor, checking her books, said it looks like PG&E forgot to pay its $100= =20 bill to cover a costume rental for a corporate dress-up party in 1992.=20 ""We rent a lot of costumes for corporate events,"" she said. ""That's probabl= y=20 what it was.""=20 Psychiatrist Richard Lieberman says he does not know why or how much PG&E= =20 owes him.=20 ""But I'll take it,"" he said. ""PG&E has taken advantage of the consumer for = so=20 long. As far as I'm concerned, PG&E can go under and stay under.""=20 Of course, PG&E may wind up paying pennies on the dollar, if anything,=20 because that's how bankruptcies work. The notion is depressing, which=20 psychiatrists are used to.=20 KARATE STUDIO GETS HIT Karate master Scott Morton, whose Karate One studio on Van Ness Avenue is= =20 also a creditor, said karate is all about fairness and integrity, which PG&= E=20 seems to be even shorter on than cash.=20 ""I think the bankruptcy stinks,"" Morton said. ""All the money is going aroun= d=20 and around, it's all the same company.""=20 The karate studio conducted a self-defense class for about a dozen workers = at=20 PG&E headquarters. Morton, a black belt who does not take treachery lightly= ,=20 said he was ""pretty sure"" the check cleared, but maybe not.=20 NO BIG DEAL FOR SOME At Beauchamp's Welding and Repair in Petaluma, owner Dean Beauchamp wasn't= =20 concerned.=20 ""They don't owe us enough to worry about,"" he said. ""Less than $100, I'd=20 guess.""=20 Beauchamp's shop does small jobs for the big utility. ""They've been really= =20 good about sending us a check. Once in a great while, something will get=20 misplaced, and I guess that's how our name got on the list.""=20 Yolanda Fletcher, the owner of Red Shoes Slide Service, says the utility=20 probably owes her about $100 for preparing some photographs for a corporate= =20 slide show.=20 Larry Mitchell, proprietor of the award-winning Mitchell's Ice Cream shop o= n=20 San Jose Avenue, believes that PG&E may owe him $500 for a corporate ice=20 cream social.=20 ""That would cover the ice cream, the toppings, the dishes and the spoons,"" = he=20 said.=20 The utility's rocky road may be metaphorical, but an ice cream store's rock= y=20 road is the real thing, he said, and being owed $500 by a bankrupt company = is=20 not peaches and cream.=20 UNEXPECTED NAMES The list of creditors also includes such strange bedfellows as the San=20 Francisco Fire Department, the Yosemite Fund, The Chronicle and PG&E's own= =20 library petty cash fund. Perhaps the strangest bedfellow of all is the=20 perpetual PG&E foe known as TURN, or The Utility Reform Network, which stan= ds=20 to lose thousands of dollars in state-mandated legal fees from PG&E for its= =20 work as an ""intervener,"" or utility watchdog.=20 Among the utility's more sensible business partners is the Beale Street=20 sandwich shop a few steps from the main entrance to PG&E's headquarters=20 building in San Francisco.=20 Unlike the big banks and power companies that are on the hook for millions,= =20 proprietor Kenneth Chen does business with PG&E on a strictly pay-as-you-go= =20 business.=20 Chen, the owner of Cafe Leah at 25 Beale St., is often hired to send up a $= 40=20 tray of sandwiches to PG&E corporate officers. When he does so, he insists = on=20 cash up front because PG&E, who is the restaurant's landlord, insists on ca= sh=20 every month from Chen.=20 ""That's the way we've always done it, payment right away,"" he said. ""That w= ay=20 there's no hassle later on.""=20 E-mail Steve Rubenstein at srubenstein@sfchronicle.com and Chuck Squatrigli= a=20 at ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 --- Developments in California's energy crisis=20 The Associated Press Friday, April 20, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate1 004EDT0161.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 , , -- (04-20) 07:04 PDT Developments in California's energy crisis:=20 FRIDAY:< ?-- The state remains free of power alerts as reserves stay above = 7 percent. ?-- Southern California Edison plans a 1:30 p.m. conference call= with its ?creditors. ?-- Edison executives discuss the state's move to buy= thier transmission lines ?at a 9:30 a.m. briefing in Sacramento. ?< ?THURS= DAY:<=20 -- The Public Utility Commission launches an investigation into whether a k= ey=20 block of independent generators are purposely keeping their plants off line= .=20 -- The commission tables until May 3 a vote on whether the PUC should becom= e=20 more involved in Pacific Gas & Electric's bankruptcy case. The San=20 Francisco-based utility is challenging the PUC's authority in the case.=20 -- Texas-based natural gas companies defend themselves before an Assembly= =20 subcommittee against accusations they created a virtual monopoly on gas=20 flowing into California and used it to jack up prices sharply.=20 -- Attorney General Bill Lockyer says he will go to court to force two=20 electricity generators to hand over documents he subpoenaed as part of his= =20 probe of the state's electricity market.=20 -- Gov. Gray Davis and a bipartisan group of the state's congressional=20 delegates agree that the federal government must act to control the wholesa= le=20 price of energy, but offer no specific proposals.=20 -- The Assembly passes a resolution asking the federal government to regula= te=20 the price of natural gas, which has been deregulated since 1992. The Assemb= ly=20 also approves a bill to encourage natural gas exploration in the tidelands= =20 off Long Beach. Both measures go to the Senate.=20 -- The Senate approves a resolution asking Congress and the president to le= t=20 California use daylight-saving time year-round to help lower energy use. Th= e=20 measure now moves to the Assembly. A bill pending in Congress would give=20 Western states the authority to expand daylight-saving time.=20 -- The Electric Power Supply Association tells the Federal Energy Regulator= y=20 Commission that the California Independent System Operator, which runs the= =20 state's power grid, is not independent enough. The association alleges in a= =20 FERC filing that the ISO favors the state over electricity generators in it= s=20 actions and rule-making.=20 -- The California Energy Commission allows Pacific Gas & Electric Corp. to= =20 build a $350 million power plant in San Diego County capable of supplying= =20 electricity to 500,000 homes.=20 -- The Escondido City Council votes to suspend for 30 to 60 days its=20 consideration of proposals by developers trying to build plants before peak= =20 summer demand. The council wants to develop a comprehensive approval proces= s=20 that looks at the cumulative effect of such plants.=20 -- Edison International's stock closes at $10.98, down 42 cents, while stoc= k=20 in PG&E's parent closes down 31 cents at $8.73.=20 -- The state remains free of power alerts as reserves stay above 7 percent.= =20 <=20 WHAT'S NEXT:< ?-- Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra, = the parent ?company of San Diego Gas and Electric Co., to buy the utility's= transmission ?lines. Davis says he expects to have an agreement within two= weeks. ?-- An Assembly subcommittee meets Monday to discuss bills aimed at= improving ?California's natural gas market. ?-- Senate Select Committee to= Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale ?Energy Market continues i= ts investigation next week. ?< ?THE PROBLEM:<=20 High demand, high wholesale energy costs, transmission glitches and a tight= =20 supply worsened by scarce hydroelectric power in the Northwest and=20 maintenance at aging California power plants are all factors in California'= s=20 electricity crisis.=20 Edison and PG&E say they've lost nearly $14 billion since June to high=20 wholesale prices that the state's electricity deregulation law bars them fr= om=20 passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs= =20 from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection= =20 April 6.=20 Electricity and natural gas suppliers, scared off by the two companies' poo= r=20 credit ratings, are refusing to sell to them, leading the state in January = to=20 start buying power for the utilities' nearly 9 million residential and=20 business customers. The state is also buying power for a third investor-own= ed=20 utility, San Diego Gas & Electric, which is in better financial shape than= =20 much larger Edison and PG&E but also struggling with high wholesale power= =20 costs.=20 The Public Utilities Commission has raised rates up to 46 percent to help= =20 finance the state's multibillion-dollar power-buying.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 --- California utility wants to boost Mohave power plant production=20 Friday, April 20, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 926EDT0156.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 (04-20) 06:26 PDT BULLHEAD CITY, Ariz. (AP) -- With many opposed to allowin= g=20 Southern California Edison to increase power production at the Mohave=20 Generating Station, the City Council wants Nevada regulators to meet here.= =20 The plant Edison operates is located across the Colorado River in Laughlin,= =20 Nev. Edison is seeking a variance that would allow it to exceed the current= =20 cap of 70 percent of the plant's capacity and to do so for more than 20=20 hours.=20 ``We just want to do this in dire circumstances to avoid the rolling=20 blackouts (California has experienced recently),'' Edison spokesman Steve= =20 Hansen said.=20 Any is too much for former City Councilman Victor Urso.=20 ``That plant is one of the worst air pollution violators in the United Stat= es=20 already, and now they want variances to do even more damage,'' Urso said.= =20 Mohave County Supervisor Tom Sockwell, who presents the Bullhead City area,= =20 doesn't see it that way.=20 ``They'll only run it up to full power for very short periods, and we need= =20 that for the power shortages,'' Sockwell said this week. ``We've already go= t=20 pollution anyway, so what's another hour of a darker plume every now and=20 then?''=20 Rick Moore of the Flagstaff-based Grand Canyon Trust, which monitors the=20 plant's operation, said the plant exceeded its permissible emissions level= =20 1,200 times during the last calendar year. The trust sued, and the company= =20 was fined $180,000.=20 The City Council wants the Nevada Environmental Commission to meet in=20 Laughlin next month rather than in Carson City so members can hear local=20 opponents of Edison's request.=20 Hansen said the commission approved a variance last year but that the plant= =20 exceeded the emissions limit for only six minutes.=20 At peak capacity, the plant can produce 1,580 megawatts of electricity but = is=20 required to stay below that level because of air quality concerns=20 Edison owns 56 percent of the plant. The rest is owned by the Los Angeles= =20 Department of Water and Power (20 percent), Nevada Power (14 percent) and t= he=20 Salt River Project in Phoenix (10 percent).=20 Nevada Power has been trying to sell its share in the generating station to= =20 AES Corp. of Arlington, Va., has been trying to purchase both Edison's and= =20 Nevada Power's shares but has run into snags. The Nevada Public Utilities= =20 Commission approve the Nevada Power sale in October but suspended that=20 approval on Marcy 29 for at least 60 days. In January, the California Publi= c=20 Utilities Commission suspended sale of the Edison share and placed a=20 five-year moratorium on such sales about the same time.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 --- PG&E owes money to several small businesses, unlikely creditors=20 Friday, April 20, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 503EDT0125.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 (04-20) 02:03 PDT SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Several small fry are among the big= =20 fish in a pond full of creditors to which ailing Pacific Gas and Electric= =20 owes money.=20 A San Francisco ice cream parlor, a costume store, a psychiatrist's office= =20 and a karate studio are among a number of small businesses that should be= =20 receiving payments from the near bankrupt utility.=20 After checking her books, ACT Costume Shop manager Callie Floor was surpris= ed=20 to find that the utility owes her $100 for a costume rental for a corporate= =20 dress-up party in 1992.=20 Karate One Studio on Van Ness Avenue may be owed for a self-defense class i= t=20 conducted for about a dozen workers at PG&E headquarters.=20 Of course, PG&E may only have to pay pennies on the dollar to the small fry= ,=20 since that's how bankruptcies work.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 --- Edison pushes lawmakers to accept deal=20 David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday, April 20, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /20/M N190213.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 Although lawmakers are skeptical of the state's multibillion-dollar deal to= =20 acquire the power lines of Southern California Edison, the head of the=20 utility's parent company warned yesterday that failure to approve the accor= d=20 could lead to a ""long and costly"" bankruptcy.=20 But John Bryson, chief executive of Edison International, told The Chronicl= e=20 that he thought legislators would ""want to do the right thing"" by approving= =20 the multibillion-dollar agreement and preventing Edison from following=20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. into bankruptcy court.=20 Bankruptcy for California's two largest utilities could have severe=20 consequences for consumers. Financial analysts said a worsening of the=20 state's energy mess would increase the possibility of higher electricity=20 rates.=20 Nevertheless, lawmakers are unlikely to accept the Edison deal -- at least= =20 not in its present form.=20 ""We are going to go through this thing extensively,"" said state Senate=20 President Pro Tem John Burton, D-San Francisco. ""There are a lot of concern= s=20 about the valuation.""=20 Still, he said, legislative backing for the accord remains possible as long= =20 as Edison is open to amending some of the terms.=20 ""The Edison people are smart enough to know that the Legislature is going t= o=20 have its say,"" Burton said.=20 Indeed, sources familiar with the matter said Edison expected a certain=20 amount of tinkering with the deal and would not resist efforts to reach=20 common ground with lawmakers.=20 ""The Assembly members do not view bankruptcy as a favorable alternative,""= =20 said Assemblyman Herb Wesson, D-Los Angeles. ""There will be a big effort to= =20 try and work something out.""=20 Edison's Bryson seems eager at this point to present himself and his compan= y=20 as reasonable business partners who are willing to negotiate in good faith.= =20 This contrasts sharply with the state's relations with PG&E, which turned= =20 acrimonious after PG&E blindsided the governor with its bankruptcy filing.= =20 Each side blamed the other for the collapse of earlier negotiations.=20 ""We made the decision at an early stage that this was a massive problem for= =20 the state and that the best course was to find a practical solution that=20 would allow us to get on with operating our power system,"" Bryson said.=20 Bankruptcy, he said, ""is absolutely a last resort. It's a long and costly= =20 process.""=20 It is also the last thing Wall Street wants to see. On Wednesday, rating=20 agency Fitch Inc. joined Standard & Poor's and Moody's Investor Service in= =20 warning that California's credit rating could be lowered because of the=20 state's energy mess.=20 ""The state may be forced to issue junk bonds,"" said Carol Coale, an energy-= =20 industry analyst at Prudential Securities in New York. ""This could lead to = a=20 surcharge on electricity bills to guarantee the bonds.""=20 Bryson, not surprisingly, defended Edison's agreement with the governor as = a=20 prudent alternative to bankruptcy.=20 ""This is a very good deal for the state,"" he said. ""It is not a bailout.=20 Edison gives up a lot to make all this possible.""=20 Southern California Edison will sell its power lines to the state for $2.8= =20 billion. It also will provide low-cost power to California for 10 years and= =20 drop a federal lawsuit seeking full recovery of nearly $5 billion in past= =20 debt.=20 Critics say the state is paying far too much for Edison's transmission syst= em=20 -- more than two times book value -- and that the power lines are of little= =20 use unless PG&E's grid also can be acquired.=20 ""It's a multibillion-dollar ratepayer bailout of Edison,"" said Doug Heller,= a=20 spokesman for the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa=20 Monica. ""Edison gets off scot-free.""=20 Under the most likely scenario, lawmakers will seek to reduce the amount pa= id=20 for Edison's power lines and to increase the role of the California Public= =20 Utilities Commission in regulating the utility.=20 They also will try to come up with a workable contingency plan for the stat= e=20 if PG&E remains adamant in its refusal to sell off its part of the power=20 grid.=20 ""The deal on the table is still salvageable,"" said Michael Shames, executiv= e=20 director of the Utility Consumers' Action Network in San Diego. ""But Edison= =20 needs to understand that what it got from the governor is only a framework,= =20 not set in stone.""=20 For his part, Bryson signaled that plenty of room existed for give and take= =20 on the issue.=20 ""We're just at the initial stage,"" he said. ""We always have accepted the=20 notion that Edison is a California regulated utility and is subject to the= =20 laws of the Public Utilities Commission.""=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 4=20 --- Who will pay the most for power?=20 Posted at 9:46 p.m. PDT Thursday, April 19, 2001=20 JOHN=20 WOOLFOLK=20 AND MICHAEL=20 BAZELEY=20 Mercury News=20 State regulators last month announced an electric rate increase that would= =20 average a whopping three cents per kilowatt-hour, hit bills beginning in Ma= y=20 and punish power pigs while sparing energy misers.=20 Now, much of that is up in the air.=20 Higher rates are surely coming -- but not before June. And exactly which=20 consumers and businesses will pay how much is uncertain as regulators rush = to=20 forge a rate structure from a tangle of more than 20 proposals.=20 Their task has been complicated immeasurably by Gov. Gray Davis' decision t= o=20 weigh in with a competing rate plan and Pacific Gas & Electric Co.'s move= =20 into bankruptcy court.=20 ``Little details are moving billions of dollars around,'' said Nettie Hoge = of=20 the Utility Reform Network, a consumer advocacy group.=20 All the proposals assume a ``tiered'' structure that forces the heaviest=20 users of energy to pay the most. But key details yet to be decided mean=20 consumers could see their average rates go up anywhere from 7 percent to 30= =20 percent or more.=20 Among them:=20 ?How much of an overall increase? The Public Utilities Commission approved = a=20 three-cent per kilowatt-hour increase last month, which would boost utility= =20 revenue by $4.8 million. Davis' proposed increase -- left vague in his Apri= l=20 5 television address -- averages 2.8 cents for PG&E customers but only 2.3= =20 cents for customers of Southern California Edison.=20 ?What regions of the state will pay? The commission agreed to raise rates= =20 only for PG&E and Southern California Edison, but Davis would include the= =20 additional 1.2 million San Diego Gas & Electric customers.=20 ?Should heavier users of electricity subsidize those who are exempt from th= e=20 new rate increase? If so, those users will find themselves paying much more= =20 than any of the average increase figures being tossed about.=20 ?How will utilities bill customers retroactively for the increase? At the= =20 time of the PUC vote on March 27, commissioners said their increase would= =20 take effect immediately.=20 PUC vote May 14=20 Various plans are being presented this week to an administrative law judge= =20 working for the commission. The judge is expected to recommend a rate=20 structure to the PUC on May 4. Public hearings would follow May 7-11, and t= he=20 commission would vote on a plan May 14, condensing to a few weeks a process= =20 that normally lasts nearly a year.=20 Each of the major proposals before the commission assumes that residential= =20 customers using less than 130 percent of their baseline -- which is the=20 average basic level of use for each region of the state -- would be exempt= =20 from higher rates. That's mandated under a new law that allows the state to= =20 buy power. Customers already pay higher rates for exceeding their baseline.= =20 Each major proposal also sets new ``tiers'' with progressively higher rates= =20 for ``medium'' use at 130 to 200 percent of baseline and ``heavy'' use over= =20 200 percent of that level.=20 But that's where the similarities end.=20 Differences=20 The first distinction among the leading plans comes in the form of an=20 assumption: How many residential customers will avoid any increase because= =20 they don't exceed 130 percent of their baseline? Davis says more than half,= =20 commissioners say a little under half and PG&E says less than a third.=20 The second difference among the plans is a real difference: What happens to= =20 everyone else?=20 Under the plan by utilities commission President Loretta Lynch, medium PG&E= =20 users would see average bills rise 9 percent and heavy users would see bill= s=20 increase 36 percent.=20 Davis' plan says medium PG&E users would see average bills rise 11 percent= =20 while heavy users would pay 37 percent more. But the average total bill=20 increase for PG&E residential customers, including those who are exempt,=20 would be 20 percent under his plan and 24 percent under Lynch's, according = to=20 a statement on the governor's Web site.=20 Business customers would see proportionately greater increases, averaging 3= 0=20 percent under Lynch's proposal and 26 percent under Davis'.=20 The most consumer-friendly of the various proposals comes from=20 consumer-rights group TURN. They suggest an overall average residential=20 increase of 7.5 percent.=20 TURN's plan assumes utilities cannot charge other customers more to make up= =20 for the energy misers shielded from rate increases under state law.=20 PG&E disagrees with that interpretation. The utility wants other residentia= l=20 users to make up for any lost revenue from exempted customers through highe= r=20 rates. Under the utility's plan, residential customers would see an average= =20 rate increase of nearly 30 percent.=20 ``The proposal these folks are pushing rips the heart out of that law,'' sa= id=20 Matthew Freedman, staff attorney for TURN.=20 Another issue affecting consumers is how the utilities can bill for=20 electricity used in April and May, before the final plan is approved.=20 Utilities want surcharge=20 Utility officials have objected to making the rate structure retroactive.= =20 Instead, to recoup the revenue, they are proposing a flat surcharge that=20 everyone would pay, regardless of how much they use.=20 Edison proposes a higher surcharge added to bills for a shorter period of= =20 time -- in this case, June through August. PG&E officials are suggesting a= =20 smaller surcharge that would be spread out over 12 months.=20 ``It'll probably be something closer to the PG&E proposal,'' said Paul=20 Clanon, the commission's director of energy issues.=20 All the rate increase proposals stem from a commonly understood problem:=20 California's current, frozen rates don't generate enough money to cover the= =20 wholesale price of power. The PUC raised rates 10 percent -- or one cent pe= r=20 kilowatt-hour -- in January in an attempt to help, but that turned out to b= e=20 far from enough.=20 In March, the commission approved an additional three-cent increase. But=20 Davis followed quickly with an alternative proposal. The next day, PG&E fil= ed=20 for bankruptcy, raising the specter that a federal judge could order even= =20 higher rates.=20 Although the PUC has sole authority to raise rates under state law, Davis'= =20 proposal has complicated an already complex process. The governor appointed= =20 three of the five members of the commission, and his appointees seem inclin= ed=20 to show him deference. But Davis has been slow in filing the details of his= =20 plan, which has made it hard for the PUC to proceed. --- --- --- Credit-raters put state on watch=20 Posted at 9:41 p.m. PDT Thursday, April 19, 2001=20 BY JENNIFER BJORHUS=20 Mercury News=20 All three of the nation's influential judges of credit risk now have=20 California on a credit watch, saying they are deeply concerned about the=20 economic impact of the state's power crisis.=20 The Fitch credit rating agency made it unanimous Wednesday when it warned= =20 that the thickening electricity quagmire, as well as lower than expected ta= x=20 revenues in February and March, could mean broader risk for the state's=20 budget.=20 The announcement is a signal that Fitch, too, may downgrade its ratings on= =20 California's nearly $30 billion in public debt, a move which could cost=20 taxpayers millions.=20 The announcement comes as state lawmakers consider a bailout plan for=20 Southern California Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric Co. sits in bankruptcy a= nd=20 state officials bleed through the state's general fund as they buy expensiv= e=20 electricity for consumers.=20 Earlier this week, Gov. Gray Davis announced that the average bill for=20 electricity purchases has risen from $45.8 million a day in the last week o= f=20 March to $73 million a day.=20 Moody's Investors Service and Standard & Poor's have already issued their o= wn=20 credit warnings, although none of the three agencies has downgraded the=20 state's very good double-A credit rating.=20 Bond ratings are important yardsticks that bankers and investors use to pri= ce=20 municipal and corporate bonds. A downgrade would force California to offer= =20 bond buyers higher interest rates going forward, costing taxpayers.=20 The state was last at a lower A rating back in 1994.=20 Moody's changed California's Aa2 general obligation bond rating outlook fro= m=20 stable to negative on April 6, the day PG&E filed for bankruptcy. Standard = &=20 Poor's has had the state's AA rating outlook at negative since January, whe= n=20 the state began buying electricity for the utilities.=20 The deciding factor for Fitch, said Fitch vice chairman Claire Cohen, was t= he=20 disagreement over how the money from the new electricity rate increase will= =20 be spent.=20 The California Public Utilities Commission ruled in late March that money= =20 generated by higher electricity bills should go first to pay the state=20 Department of Water Resources, which has been buying electricity for the=20 utilities. PG&E has argued that if the state is paid first, there won't be= =20 any money left for the company.=20 The utility is formally challenging the PUC decision, and the move threaten= s=20 to hold up the estimated $12 billion to $14 billion of bonds the Department= =20 of Water Resources plans to issue to buy more electricity.=20 ``With that being appealed, you don't have a clean authorization,'' Cohen= =20 said. ``It signals to me that it could delay the financing process.''=20 A second concern is that the state isn't collecting as much in taxes as=20 expected, Cohen said. Tax collections for both February and March were belo= w=20 forecast. The amount of personal income tax the state collected in those=20 months fell short by $455 million, or 14 percent less than expected.=20 Cohen said she made her decision before hearing that the state's power cost= s=20 now exceed $70 million a day. Cohen and David Hitchcock, the California=20 analyst for Standard & Poor's, agreed those rising costs are a definite=20 concern.=20 ``It doesn't take much of a change in economic growth to make some of these= =20 projected fund balances disappear and so we're very worried about what the= =20 current economic activity is, particularly in Northern California with some= =20 of the problems with the high-tech area,'' Hitchcock told analysts and=20 investors last week in a conference call.=20 Other economy-watchers expressed concern.=20 Sandy Harrison, assistant director of the state Department of Finance, said= =20 the move reinforced the importance of solving the power problems soon.=20 Contact Jennifer Bjorhus at jbjorhus@sjmercury.com or (408) 920-5660.=20 --- --- -------------------- Power company executives going without bonuses=20 LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Senior executives at Southern California Edison and its= =20 parent company went without hundreds of thousands of dollars in bonuses in= =20 2000 because of California's power crisis.=20 Edison International's chairman and chief executive, John Bryson, was paid= =20 $950,000 in 2000, compared with salary and bonus totaling $2.16 million in= =20 1999.=20 Stephen Frank, the chairman and chief executive at Southern California=20 Edison, was paid $617,000 in 2000, compared with salary and bonus totaling= =20 $1.3 million in 1999, according to the company's proxy statement filed with= =20 the Securities and Exchange Commission.=20 The company also said Thursday it would not award merit increases to=20 executives in 2001 because of the continuing crisis.=20 In a similar statement released Tuesday, Pacific Gas and Electric Corp.=20 revealed it also withheld bonuses for its top two executives, although they= =20 did receive raises.=20 Edison and PG&E say they have lost nearly $14 billion since June to high=20 wholesale prices that the state's electricity deregulation law bars them fr= om=20 passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs= =20 from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection= =20 April 6.=20 Edison is continuing to work with state officials and its creditors. --- --- ----------------------- Davis and U.S. lawmakers call for price caps on power=20 LOS ANGELES -- Half of California's congressional delegation gathered with= =20 Gov. Gray Davis on Thursday to pressure the federal government to impose=20 energy price caps.=20 Limiting wholesale prices, they argued, is essential if the state is to ave= rt=20 the energy crisis threatening California's economy.=20 ``A big piece of this solution is federal. It's a four-letter word:=20 F-E-R-C,'' said U.S. Rep. Jane Harman, D-Redondo Beach, referring to the=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the agency that would have to approve= =20 price caps.=20 The governor has blamed FERC for allowing energy producers to charge=20 California stratospheric prices for electricity and natural gas.=20 The delegation met behind closed doors at an Los Angeles airport hotel, but= =20 Davis and several legislators met with reporters afterward.=20 ``The signal that has to come from FERC,'' Davis said, ``is, `You're chargi= ng=20 too much for electricity. The electricity is not worth driving California= =20 into an economic grave.'?''=20 Curt H,bert Jr., the FERC chairman, has argued that caps would encourage=20 generators to sell their power elsewhere and discourage them from building= =20 new plants in California.=20 The bipartisan group of lawmakers agreed with the governor that the state i= s=20 getting gouged on the open market.=20 ``There is an anti-free market enterprise mechanism in play here,'' said U.= S.=20 Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-El Cajon, noting that natural gas in parts of New=20 Mexico costs one-third what it does in California.=20 The generators maintain that they are charging fair prices that are the=20 simple result of supply and demand.=20 Rep. Mike Honda, D-San Jose, and Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, attended, bu= t=20 left before speaking with reporters. --- --- ------------------------- Generators cutting electric output; regulators want to find out why=20 Published Friday, April 20, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News=20 BY MICHAEL BAZELEY=20 Mercury News=20 State regulators launched an investigation Thursday into why some alternati= ve=20 energy providers are withholding electricity from the state's stressed powe= r=20 grid.=20 The California Public Utilities Commission in San Francisco said it wants t= o=20 determine whether the small power generators -- which provide about=20 one-fourth of the state's electrical power -- have legitimate business=20 reasons for scaling back their output.=20 Known as ``qualifying facilities,'' or QFs, many of the generators have bee= n=20 either scaling back output or shutting down entirely -- contending that the= =20 state's two largest utilities owe them $700 million.=20 ``The critical question is: Will we be able to rely on these facilities int= o=20 the high-demand summer months?'' PUC Commissioner Carl Wood said.=20 The financially strapped utilities, Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern= =20 California Edison, stopped paying the power generators several months ago.= =20 The PUC ordered the utilities to resume payments, and some generators start= ed=20 receiving payments this week.=20 But many generators are still hurting because of all the back payments they= =20 are owed, said Jack Raudy, a spokesman for the Renewable Energy Creditors= =20 Committee, which consists of 10 alternative power producers.=20 ``We're outraged,'' Raudy said.=20 Contact Michael Bazeley at mbazeley@sjmercury.com or (408) 920-5628.=20 --- --- --------------------- FERC remains an unlikely rescuer=20 The federal agency hews to a hands-off policy on power rates.=20 April 20, 2001=20 By DENA BUNIS The Orange County Register Washington - Californians who see federal re-regulation of the state's=20 crisis-bound energy market as an answer to the impending summer emergency= =20 better look for some other solution.=20 Even the possible short- term price fix that the Federal Energy Regulatory= =20 Commission may consider at its Wednesday meeting might be too little, too= =20 late.=20 Lobbyists, lawmakers and other FERC-watchers say they have seen a slight=20 shift in recent weeks among commission staff and at least one member. There= =20 is some willingness, they say, to consider some price controls, even though= =20 the Bush administration is adamantly opposed to such measures.=20 And many are looking to see if President George W. Bush's choices for the t= wo=20 vacancies on FERC will provide a margin for change.=20 But the commission's basic philosophy that open, unregulated markets are be= st=20 is not likely to change soon, members say.=20 ""I've been championing a revamping of FERC's antiquated standards for=20 determining market-based rates,'' Commissioner Richard Massey said Thursday= .=20 But with no success. "" My agency is not on the verge of turning on a dime o= n=20 this market-based pricing.""=20 The standards are a joke, Massey added, because the commission never turns= =20 down requests for such pricing authority. More than 600 power sellers have= =20 been given that authority, he said.=20 For a power company to be allowed to charge whatever the market will bear, = it=20 must show FERC, for example, that it doesn't have the power to manipulate t= he=20 market and drive prices up.=20 ""Any seller that can't pass our screen needs to fire their consultants and= =20 lawyers,'' Massey said.=20 While the overall philosophy remains consistent, FERC staff has proposed to= =20 the commission that a Stage 3 electricity emergency in California should=20 trigger cost-based rates, a form of price controls. Such triggers would be = in=20 place for one year, under the staff proposal.=20 The commission may decide Wednesday whether to accept that proposal. It has= =20 to make some decision by May 1 on how the market will be monitored from now= =20 on.=20 The theory behind controlling prices in Stage 3, says a FERC staff report, = is=20 that during such an emergency generators have the greatest opportunity to= =20 manipulate the market and drive prices up.=20 But generators have that power during Stage 2 and Stage 1 emergencies, says= =20 Les Starck, Southern California Edison Co.'s manager of federal regulatory= =20 affairs. Price caps during Stage 3 might avert the rolling blackouts=20 associated with that level of crisis, but they wouldn't do anything to stop= =20 generators from jacking up prices the rest of the time, he said.=20 And it is not clear how long it would take for such price controls to take= =20 effect, should the commission go along with the staff recommendation.=20 ""We're close because summer is approaching,'' Commissioner Linda Breathitt= =20 said Thursday. Breathitt, who had firmly opposed any form of price controls= ,=20 said in an interview last month that given the worsening crisis in Californ= ia=20 she was open to considering some short-term measures.=20 ""It's important to me that we address the summer,'' Breathitt said, but she= =20 said she could not predict what the commission would do Wednesday.=20 Even if an order is approved, Massey said, there could be delays while the= =20 power sellers file their costs with regulators and disputes over those=20 filings are handled.=20 Sen. Dianne Feinstein said Thursday such a move by the commission would be= =20 ""better than having no controls at all. There's no question that we're goin= g=20 to be in a Stage 3 emergency.''=20 Feinstein, D-Calif., and other Western lawmakers have been urging FERC to= =20 step in sooner and with price controls that extend beyond just the emergenc= y=20 period.=20 Waiting for Stage 3 to intervene ""is putting the whole grid at risk,'' said= =20 Roger Hamilton, a member of Oregon's Public Utility Commission. ""We have a= =20 real stability problem when you cut it that close.''=20 Feinstein says the future could well rest with the new commissioners,=20 particularly Patrick Wood, the head of the Texas PUC who many believe will= =20 replace Curt Heber as FERC chairman if he is confirmed by the Senate.=20 Even if Massey and Breathitt agree on broader price controls, as chairman,= =20 Heber could block consideration of such a move. It's unclear what stance Wo= od=20 would take as chairman.=20 ""The thing that deeply concerns me about Pat Wood is that he's from Texas,'= '=20 Feinstein said. ""What's reassuring is that it appears from my personal=20 discussion with him is that he appears to be pragmatic.''=20 But once again, timing could be a problem.=20 Bush has said he intends to nominate Wood and Nora Brownell, a member of th= e=20 Pennsylvania PUC, but has not formally sent their nominations to the Senate= .=20 ""The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is of vital importance right now,= =20 and to let the time go on without filling the spots makes no sense,''=20 Feinstein said.=20 ""Please, please, please, President Bush, process your nominees.''=20 --- --- Lawmakers seek bigger rollbacks, can't agree on caps=20 They promise to meet in Washington with a plan that would require federal= =20 agencies to conserve power this summer.=20 April 20, 2001=20 By DENA BUNIS The Orange County Register=20 Los Angeles - Gov. Gray Davis and a bipartisan sampling of the congressiona= l=20 delegation put politics aside Thursday and agreed something must be done=20 about runaway wholesale power prices in California.=20 ""We agreed that there has been unreasonable or unearned enrichment by the= =20 energy providers of natural gas and electricity"" said Rep. Darrell Issa,=20 R-Vista. ""And we agreed that there needs to be significantly greater=20 rollbacks than there already have been.""=20 The lawmakers did not, however, come to a consensus over the issue of price= =20 caps - something Davis and other Democrats, particularly Sen. Dianne=20 Feinstein, D-Calif., have been pushing the Federal Energy Regulatory=20 Commission to institute.=20 Davis met behind closed doors for 90 minutes with Feinstein and 27 of the 5= 2=20 House members at the Sheraton Gateway Hotel near LAX.=20 Participants from the Orange County delegation included Issa; Rep.=20 Christopher Cox, R-Newport Beach; Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Santa Ana; and Re= p.=20 Gary Miller, R-Diamond Bar.=20 They emerged with a promise to meet again soon, this time in Washington, an= d=20 with a four-pronged strategy to avert disaster this summer.=20 The strategy includes requiring federal agencies in the state, including=20 military facilities, to conserve energy this summer, and asking FERC to fin= d=20 a way to control the wholesale price of electricity and increase the flow o= f=20 natural gas into California.=20 Cox said much of the meeting was spent reviewing Davis' $850 million=20 conservation program.=20 Members promised to get the word out in their districts about conservation= =20 measures.=20 Cox said he expects emergency legislation dealing with the energy crisis to= =20 pass the Energy and Commerce Committee in the coming weeks.=20 That measure, he said, will include a direction to FERC to expand its=20 investigation of whether existing rates are just and reasonable.=20 --- --- ----------------------------- Energy notebook=20 Assembly urges federal regulation of natural gas=20 April 20, 2001=20 From Register news services=20 Sacramento - The California Assembly asked the federal government Thursday = to=20 regulate soaring natural gas prices once again.=20 A resolution passed 48-7 asked President George W. Bush, Congress and the= =20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to restore the regulation of natural g= as=20 that ended in 1992.=20 Natural gas rates at the California border have been as much as 11 times=20 higher than elsewhere in the nation since November, an industry consultant= =20 told an Assembly subcommittee Wednesday.=20 ""I think it's only rational in one of the biggest crises to befall this=20 country in the last 100 years. We're not seeing adequate action from the=20 federal government,"" said the author, Assemblyman Dennis Cardoza, D-Atwater= .=20 Republicans refused to vote for the resolution, complaining that it was an= =20 attack on the GOP Bush administration.=20 Top Edison officials forego bonus, take 45% pay cut=20 Rosemead - Edison International's top officers received no bonuses in 2000= =20 and generally took pay cuts of about 45 percent as the Southern California= =20 company's utility segment was forced to write off $4.2 billion spent buying= =20 overpriced power in the state's deregulated electricity market, according t= o=20 SEC disclosures the company filed Thursday.=20 Edison International Chief Executive Officer John E. Bryson received $1.62= =20 million in salary and other compensation, compared with $3.04 million last= =20 year. Southern California Edison CEO Stephen E. Frank received $760,000 in= =20 salary and other compensation, compared with $1.35 million last year. And= =20 Edison Mission Energy CEO Alan J. Fohrer received $584,000 in salary and=20 other compensation, compared with $922,000 last year.=20 Edison's compensation committee did give Bryson an incentive to pull the=20 company out of its quagmire, awarding stock options with a present-day valu= e=20 calculated at $7.26 million. But Bryson won't be able to profit from those= =20 options -- which vest over the next five years -- any time soon. The lowest= =20 price he can exercise the options at is $20 -- and Edison stock is trading = at=20 $11.=20 PUC seeks to shed light on meager energy alternatives=20 Sacramento - Hoping to prevent California's bleak power outlook from becomi= ng=20 even darker, state regulators Thursday launched an investigation into why= =20 alternative energy providers aren't producing more electricity.=20 With the action, the California Public Utilities Commission hopes to=20 determine if legitimate business reasons or ulterior motives underlie the= =20 reduced output by an independent group of small generators that provides mu= ch=20 of the state's energy.=20 These alternative generators - known in the industry as ""qualifying=20 facilities,"" or QFs - have been scaling back or shutting down as debts owed= =20 by California's two largest utilities pile up. The QFs are owed an estimate= d=20 $700 million by bankrupt Pacific Gas and Electric and financially crippled= =20 Southern California Edison.=20 In other developments:=20 California's Public Utilities Commission delayed until May 3 a decision on= =20 whether it will investigate how Pacific Gas & Electric's bankruptcy is goin= g=20 to affect customers.=20 Unbowed by Gov. Gray Davis' endorsement of Calpine's proposed power plant,= =20 San Jose officials said they may yet have the last word on the controversia= l=20 project. The city could sue the California Energy Commission or attempt to= =20 block the project by refusing to extend water and sewer lines or annex=20 several acres of needed land, they said.=20 PG&E Corp. won final approval to build a $350 million power plant in San=20 Diego County capable of supplying electricity to 500,000 homes.=20 The Escondido City Council has decided to take a break from considering a= =20 rush of proposals by developers trying to build plants before peak summer= =20 demand.=20 The council voted 3-2 Wednesday to suspend consideration for 30 to 60 days = of=20 any proposals to build energy plants in the city.=20 Register staff writers, The Associated Press and Knight Ridder Newspapers= =20 contributed to this report.=20 --- --- Friday, April 20, 2001=20 Shed light on costs=20 Unfortunately, California citizens will remain in the dark for at least=20 another month about the details of Gov. Gray Davis' long-term contracts wit= h=20 power producers. This is the sort of crisis the public needs to scrutinize and for which the= =20 Public Records Act was designed. At a Tuesday hearing in a Los Angeles County Superior Court in Pasadena on= =20 whether the documents should be released under the California Public Record= s=20 Act, Judge Michael J. Byrne said the case could better be heard in a Los=20 Angeles court. The case was brought by Judicial Watch, a Washington-based public interest= =20 law firm with its West Coast office in San Marino.=20 ""The case was reset for May 22 in a Los Angeles County Superior Court in th= e=20 city of Los Angeles although we're going to try to move it up a bit,""=20 Judicial Watch and General Counsel Larry Klayman told us.=20 Mr. Klayman remains hopeful. ""We're confident any judge who sees this will= =20 have to release the documents,"" he said. A similar but separate case, brought by several newspapers, will be heard M= ay=20 18 in a San Diego Superior Court.=20 ""This is a huge financial burden on the taxpayers without an opportunity fo= r=20 the taxpayers to scrutinize the terms,"" Hal Fuson, chairman of the governme= nt=20 affairs committee of the California Newspaper Publishers Association, told= =20 the San Diego Union-Tribune. ""The general climate surrounding the governor'= s=20 approach to this has been one of secrecy."" The governor's position is that releasing the details now could make it=20 harder for the state to get the best prices for electricity.=20 But given that the governor has mismanaged this crisis so far, it's clear= =20 that this is precisely the sort of crisis the public needs to scrutinize an= d=20 for which the Public Records Act was designed. The governor should end this legal wrangling and release the documents to= =20 which citizens are entitled.=20 --- --- ----------------------------- End To Deregulation of Nevada Power CARSON CITY, Nev. (AP) via NewsEdge Corporation - Gov. Kenny Guinn signed a bill Wednesday that would stop the sale of Nevada power plants, halt deregulation and bail out struggling utilities with a new rate system. The Senate and Assembly gave the measure final approval earlier in the day and rushed it to the governor. The bill was crafted to keep Nevada from suffering from a power crisis similar to California's. ``I must tell you this is a great relief,'' said Guinn, a former utility executive, as he signed the bill into law. ``Nothing can control escalating costs, but we're in the best position to protect ourselves.'' Legislators made a last-minute change to add language that ensured consumers would get a break on rates if utilities profit from sales of excess power to other states. Guinn said the bill takes care of the most pressing energy issues, but other deregulation-related bills are sure to follow. That includes a plan that would allow major power users, such as casinos and mines, to buy power on the open market. Legislators also are working on plans encouraging energy conservation and ensuring the poor can pay their utility bills. --- --- ----- PG&E Co. Issues Statements On the Increase in the State's Cost for Power SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 18, 2001 via NewsEdge Corporation - FROM: John Nelson, Director of the News Department Pacific Gas and Electric Company There seems to have been some confusion yesterday over the effect Pacific Gas and Electric Company's bankruptcy filing may have had on energy prices. I thought it might be helpful to provide a few useful facts and figures, to help you pin down the truth behind what may be driving the state's energy costs higher. Yesterday, Governor Davis claimed that the state was paying roughly $20 million more for electricity every day as a direct result of the bankruptcy filing by PG&amp;E. While it's understandable, even laudable, that the Governor would want to fully explain the downsides of utility bankruptcy, this claim is simply not accurate. The Governor should know better. Consider the facts: -- On January 19, the credit ratings of California's two largest investor-owned utilities -- PG&amp;E and SCE -- were downgraded to below investment grade by every major rating agency. Generators immediately raised concerns about continuing to sell power to such non-creditworthy entities. -- The state reacted by passing AB7x, which authorized the state Department of Water Resources to make $400 million in power purchases. Less than two weeks later, on February 1, the Governor signed AB1x, which authorized DWR to buy power on an ongoing basis at least through 2002, until the utilities could be restored to creditworthiness. The clear understanding in the legislative debate was that the DWR would purchase the full ""net open position"", which is the amount of additional generation needed, beyond what the utilities themselves own or have under contract, to meet customer demand. However, a few weeks later, in spite of the clear intent of state law, it was revealed that DWR was not buying the full net open position, and had no intention of doing so. It was only buying power that it considered ""reasonably priced"" and was leaving the ISO to buy whatever was necessary to keep the lights on -- an amount that most estimates place at 10- to 20-percent of the state's daily electricity need. -- The ISO, in turn, revealed its intention to attempt to pass along the costs of these last-minute, high-cost, spot-market purchases to the state's non-creditworthy utilities (despite existing FERC tariffs which precluded the ISO from doing so). PG&amp;E has estimated that its share of these costs was roughly $10 million a day; SCE has a similar estimate. (We don't know for sure, because we haven't seen the bill. The DWR won't say how much power it's buying, and at what cost, and neither will the ISO.) -- On February 14, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission informed the Independent System Operator that it could not force generators to sell to non-creditworthy entities (namely, both PG&amp;E and SCE). This order appeared to force the DWR to purchase the full net open after all. The ISO responded the next day with its own interpretation of the FERC order, saying the order was limited to ""emergency"" power only. The ISO also sought and obtained in federal court a temporary restraining order (issued by Judge Damrell), forcing generators to continue selling to it. -- On February 22, five power generators filed a complaint with FERC seeking to clarify that the ISO's interpretation of the February 14 order was contrary to FERC's intent. -- On April 5, the Ninth U.S. Court of Appeals reversed Judge Damrell's lower court order affecting one of the generators, Reliant, saying the generator was no longer required to sell electricity to the ISO without assurances of payment. Presumably this order would apply to other generators, if they sought such assurances. -- On April 6, PG&amp;E noted in the announcement of its Chapter 11 filing that one of the reasons for the decision was the ""financial exposure to unreimbursed wholesale energy procurement costs"" caused by the state's failure to assume the full procurement responsibility. -- On April 6, unrelated to PG&amp;E's bankruptcy filing, FERC issued an order responding to the generators' Feb. 22 complaint against the ISO. In this new order, FERC reaffirmed its February 14 order that the ISO could only buy power on behalf of creditworthy entities, meaning neither PG&amp;E nor SCE. -- On April 9 in remarks reported in the press, the Governor's office acknowledged the State's ""bill for energy purchases will increase by upward of $8 million a day after a ruling last week by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,"" once DWR started buying the full net open position, rather than force the ISO to try to bill the utilities. It seems likely that the $8 million was an estimate based on only one of the utilities' costs, not the combination of both. -- On April 11, the ISO discontinued its daily practice of publishing the total amount it spent on energy the day before. -- Despite the history, the state continues to try to avoid buying the full net open position. On April 13, in response to the FERC order -- NOT the PG&amp;E bankruptcy filing -- the ISO sent a ""murky"" notice to generators promising that ""any bid accepted by the ISO will be deemed to have the financial support of another Qualified Party or DWR as specified in this notice."" Generators were reportedly underwhelmed by the assurances contained in the letter. -- Yesterday, in response to the Governor's claim that bankruptcy was driving up the state's costs, Gary Ackerman, spokesman for the Western Power Trading Forum, said ""I don't believe, nor have I ever heard, of a bankruptcy surcharge being added to the cost of power.... If anything, I think that generators and marketers would take solace in the fact that bankruptcy brings order to an otherwise volatile situation."" What does it all mean? Clearly, the increase in the state's costs have come as a result of the DWR finally covering the state's energy needs, as promised in AB1x. This change in DWR's buying habits has come as a direct result of the February 14 and April 6 FERC orders that the ISO only sell to creditworthy entities. These orders were issued independent of PG&amp;E's bankruptcy filing and apply equally to PG&amp;E and SCE. Neither PG&amp;E nor SCE have been creditworthy since mid-January, when their credit ratings were reduced to below investment grade, and the DWR, ISO and Governor's office have been aware of the effect of the FERC order since mid-February. Some generators have suggested that California has been paying a credit penalty since December, when the utilities' deteriorating financial situation gave rise to payment concerns. There appears to be far more evidence that the state's coy approach to AB1x implementation has created far more uncertainty in the marketplace than has PG&amp;E's Chapter 11 filing. CONTACT: PG&amp;E Co. | News Department, 415/973-5930 --- --- ------------------- J.D. Power and Associates Reports/ Nationwide Decline in Customer=20 Satisfaction of Electric Utility Service Among Midsize Businesses Price and Value Performance Hit Hard Across Nation; Satisfaction in California Continues to Plummet AGOURA HILLS, Calif., April 19 /PRNewswire/ -- Midsize business customers, who are responsible for approximately fifteen percent of the nation's electricity consumption, are very critical of electricity prices, according= to the J.D. Power and Associates 2001 Electric Utility Midsize Business Custom= er Satisfaction Study(SM) released today. Consequently, the study's nationwid= e customer satisfaction index fell -- from 100 points in 2000 to 97 in 2001. (Photo: ) ""The entire country was affected by higher natural gas prices this winter, and with more states re-evaluating deregulation, midsize business customers are especially sensitive to electricity prices,"" said Jeffrey Conklin, seni= or director at J.D. Power and Associates. The 2001 study shows that average overall customer satisfaction with California's ""big three"" investor-owned utilities -- Pacific Gas and Electr= ic, San Diego Gas and Electric, and Southern California Edison -- fell an astonishing 14 index points among midsize businesses compared to the 2000 study. ""In California, electric utility satisfaction among midsize business customers has virtually fallen into the Pacific,"" said Alan Destribats, executive director of the utility practice at J.D. Power and Associates. The study finds that the chief determinants of satisfaction among electric utility midsize customers are a provider's company image, price and value, = and power quality and reliability. As expected, midsize business customers were extremely critical of performance in the areas of company image and price and value. Even outsid= e of California, satisfaction in the price and value component fell more than any other factor -- from an index score of 100 in 2000 to 93 in 2001. Power Quality and Reliability Utility performance in power quality and reliability is improving, with the national index increasing by 3 points. Although the number of interruptions and outages experienced was relatively the same in 2001 as it was in 2000, midsize businesses report much shorter outage durations, falli= ng from an average of seven hours for the longest outages in 2000 to four hour= s in 2001. Retail Competition ""Opening utility markets to competition has proven to be a difficult process and, so far, midsize business customers are giving the industry poo= r marks,"" said Destribats. The study shows that midsize business customers located in states with competition not only are less satisfied than are customers in other states, but they are also significantly less satisfied now than last year. The stu= dy also shows that more midsize businesses have switched electricity providers= . Of midsize businesses eligible to switch power suppliers, 9 percent have do= ne so, up from 5 percent in 2000. J.D. Power and Associates interviewed representatives from more than 7,200 midsize businesses, including manufacturers, retailers, business and consumer services firms, health care providers and other midsize businesses throughout the United States. Midsize business owners are defined as those who normally spend $1,500 to $25,000 per month on electricity. The study shows that midsize businesses are now spending an average of $4,827 per mon= th on electricity. The study shows that utilities in the south region of the United States consistently receive higher ratings across all factors of customer satisfaction. Likewise, these midsize business customers also report the lowest levels of monthly electricity expenditures, on average. Midsize businesses in North Carolina spend the least for electric usage ($3,885 per month on average), while those in New Hampshire, Nevada and Utah spend the most ($5,700 to $5,800 per month on average). The study also shows that midsize businesses in Alabama and Florida report the most service interruptions and outages within the past 12 months, and those in Washingto= n report the fewest. East Region PPL Utilities, serving east Pennsylvania, ranks highest in overall customer satisfaction with midsize businesses in the eastern United States. PPL Utilities ranked highest in the East Region in four of the six factors that comprise customer satisfaction, with its primary strength in price and value. Other solid performers in this region include Public Service Electr= ic and Gas, Allegheny Power and GPU Energy. Midwest Region LG&amp;E Energy, the parent company of Kentucky Utilities and Louisville Ga= s and Electric, ranks highest in overall customer satisfaction with midsize business electric service in the Midwest. LG&amp;E Energy midsize business customers give high ratings for power quality and reliability, customer service, and billing and payment. Alliant Energy, AEP-Midwest and Xcel Energy-NSP also rank high in midsize business customer satisfaction in the Midwest Region. South Region Southern Company ranks highest in overall customer satisfaction for midsize business electric service in the South Region and received the high= est customer satisfaction index score among all utilities included in the study= . Southern Company dominates all other electric utility service providers, achieving the highest ratings in the nation in five of the six components (2 in a tie). Other strong performers in the South Region include Duke Pow= er, Florida Power &amp; Light and Progress Energy (Carolina Power &amp; Light a= nd=20 Florida Power). West Region Sierra Pacific Resources ranks highest in overall customer satisfaction with midsize business electric service in the West Region. This utility significantly leads the region by rating highest in all six components (1 i= n a tie). The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power also ranks high in thi= s region. Headquartered in Agoura Hills, Calif., J.D. Power and Associates is a global marketing information services firm operating in key business sector= s including market research, forecasting, consulting, training and customer satisfaction. The firm's quality and satisfaction measurements are based o= n actual customer responses from millions of consumers annually. J.D. Power a= nd Associates press releases and media information can be accessed through the Internet at www.jdpa.com. Media e-mail contact: michael.greywitt@jdpa.com. This press release is provided for editorial use only. No advertising or other promotional use can be made of the information in this release or of other J.D. Power and Associates survey results without the express prior written consent of J.D. Power and Associates. SOURCE J.D. Power and Associates CONTACT: Michael P. Greywitt, 818-707-9526 or John Tews, 248-267-6800, both of J.D. Power and Associates Photo: NewsCom: AP Archive: http://photoarchive.ap.org PRN Photo Desk, 888-776-6555 or 201-369-3467 Web site: http://www.jdpa.com --- --- ----------------------------- Calpine to Purchase 46 General Electric Gas Turbines Turbines in Place for= =20 70,000-megawatt Program Turbines in Place for 70,000-megawatt Program SAN JOSE, Calif., April 19 /PRNewswire/ -- Calpine Corporation (NYSE: CPN), the nation's fastest growing independent power producer, announced today it will purchase 35 model 7FB and 11 model = 7FA gas-fired turbines from GE Power Systems. With this announcement, Calpine h= as firm orders in place for the delivery of 203 turbines. When operated in a combined-cycle application, this represents 50,000 megawatts of baseload capacity. The agreement marks the company's second large volume turbine acquisition from GE and is an important component of Calpine's five-year strategic plan= to have 70,000 megawatts of generation on line by the end of 2005. Calpine wil= l take delivery of 5 turbines in 2002, with the remainder of the contract to = be filled by the end of 2005. ""This purchase significantly strengthens Calpine's leadership position in project development,"" said Doug Kieta, senior vice president-construction f= or Calpine. ""Calpine's aggressive turbine procurement program also strengthens Calpine's first-mover advantage as we expand our development program and en= ter new electricity markets across the country."" ""GE Power Systems is pleased to provide Calpine today's technology of choice for power generation,"" said Delbert Williamson, President of GE Powe= r Systems Global Sales. ""Our FA technology is the most proven advanced technology available, and we're confident our evolutionary FB technology wh= ich has been designed using GE's Corporate-wide Six Sigma initiative will provi= de Calpine highly competitive power generation."" GE's current fleet of F technology gas turbines recently surpassed 3.8 million hours of operation around the globe. GE's 7FB turbine is an evolution of the current 7FA model and is designed for higher efficiency, lower life-cycle cost power generation. By employing this new technology, Calpine will continue to generate electricity competitively while consuming less natural gas and producing fewer emissions than a typical power plant o= f comparable size. GE Power Systems (http://www.gepower.com) is one of the world's leading suppliers of power generation technology, energy services and management systems with 2000 revenue of $15 billion. The business has the largest installed base of power generation equipment in the global energy industry. GE Power Systems provides equipment, service and management solutions acros= s the power generation, oil and gas, distributed power and energy rental industries. Based in San Jose, Calif., Calpine Corporation is dedicated to providing customers with reliable and competitively priced electricity. Calpine is focused on clean, efficient combined-cycle, natural gas-fired generation an= d is the nation's largest producer of renewable geothermal energy. To date, the company has approximately 31,200 megawatts of base load capacity and 6,800 megawatts of peaking capacity in operation, under construction and announced development in 28 states and Alberta, Canada. The company was founded in 1984 and is publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol CPN. For more information about Calpine, visit its Website at www.calpine.com. This news release discusses certain matters that may be considered ""forward-looking"" statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Excha= nge Act of 1934, as amended, including statements regarding the intent, belief = or current expectations of Calpine Corporation (the ""Company"") and its management. Prospective investors are cautioned that any such forward-looki= ng statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve a number of risks and uncertainties that could materially affect actual results such as= , but not limited to, (i) changes in government regulations and anticipated deregulation of the electric energy industry; (ii) commercial operations of new plants that may be delayed or prevented because of various development = and construction risks, such as a failure to obtain financing and the necessary permits to operate or the failure of third-party contractors to perform the= ir contractual obligations (iii) cost estimates are preliminary and actual cos= t may be higher than estimated, (iv) the assurance that the Company will deve= lop additional plants, (v) a competitor's development of a lower-cost generatin= g gas-fired power plant, (vi) receipt of regulatory approvals or (vii) the ri= sks associated with marketing and selling power from power plants in the newly competitive energy market. Prospective investors are also referred to the other risks identified from time to time in the Company's reports and registration statements filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. SOURCE Calpine Corporation CONTACT: press, Kent Robertson, 408-995-5115, ext. 1144, or investors, Rick Barraza, 408-995-5115, ext. 1125, both of Calpine Corporation Web site: http://www.gepower.com Web site: http://www.calpine.com (CPN) [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= POWER conference on electricity restructuring; [EMail-Body]= Hi Jeff: March seems a long ways away right now, but we are trying to put together the program for the sixth annual POWER Conference on Electricity Industry Restructuring, which will be March 16 in Berkeley. The conference is divided into 4 sessions, each with two papers. We would like to invite you to be a discussant in the fourth session (program below). It would involve just a 10 minute discussion of one or both papers and then participating in the Q&A. Would you be interested? Severin Severin Borenstein E.T. Grether Professor of Business Administration and Public Policy Director Haas School of Business U.C. Energy Institute University of California 2539 Channing Way Berkeley, CA 94720-1900 Berkeley, CA 94720-5180 (p) 510-642-3689 (p) 510-642-5145 (f) 707-885-2508 http://www.ucei.org Email: borenste@haas.berkeley.edu WWW: ------------------- Session #1 Greg Crawford (Duke) , Joe Crespo (UNC), and Helen Tauchen (UNC). ""Bidding Asymmetries in Multi-Unit Auctions: Implications of Bid Function Equilibria in the British Spot Market for Electricity."" Steven Puller (UC Berkeley). ""Pricing and Firm Conduct in California's Deregulated Electricity Market."" Discussants: Peter Carmton (U of Maryland), Anjali Sheffrin (California ISO) ----- Session #2 Frank Wolak (Stanford). ""Identification and Estimation of Cost Functions Using Observed Bid Data: An Application to Electricity Markets."" Jeffrey Lien (Maryland). ""Forward Contracts and the Curse of Market Power."" Discussants: Richard Green (University of Hull, UK), ----- Session #3 James Bushnell and Erin Mansur (UCEI), ""The Impact of Retail Price Deregulation on Electricity Consumption in San Diego"" Julie Berry Cullen (Michigan), Leora Friedberg (Virginia) and Catherine Wolfram (UC Berkeley). ""Consumption and Home Energy Costs: How Prevalent is the 'Heat or Eat' Decision?"" Discussants: ------ Session #4 Paul Joskow (MIT) and Edward Kahn (Analysis Group). ""A Quantitative Analysis of Pricing Behavior in California's Wholesale Electricity Market During Summer 2000."" Dallas Burtraw, Karen Palmer, Ranjit Bharvirkar, and Anthony Paul (Resources for the Future). ""Electricity Restructuring and the Cost of Pollution Reduction."" Discussants: [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Stelzer remarks at advisory board meeting; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/13/2000 08:18 AM --------------------------- Stelzer@aol.com on 09/11/2000 12:52:03 PM To: skean@enron.com cc: Subject: Stelzer remarks at advisory board meeting As promised, here are the notes from which I spoke on Friday. - Enron on Calif. crisis 9-7-00.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call
 Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and
 Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 05/04/2001 10:15 AM --------------------------- James D Steffes@ENRON 05/03/2001 05:44 AM To: Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Re: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted Please forward to anyone on your team that wants updates on Western wholesale matters (should also give you an opportunity to raise state matters if you want to discuss). Jim ---------------------- Forwarded by James D Steffes/NA/Enron on 05/03/2001 07:42 AM --------------------------- Ray Alvarez 05/02/2001 05:40 PM To: Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, jalexander@gibbs-bruns.com, Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Linda J Noske/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted Date: Every Thursday Time: 1:00 pm Pacific, 3:00 pm Central, and 4:00 pm Eastern time, Number: 1-888-271-0949, Host Code: 661877, (for Jim only), Participant Code: 936022, (for everyone else), Attached is the table of the on-going FERC issues and proceedings updated for use on tomorrow's conference call. It is available to all team members on the O drive. Please feel free to revise/add to/ update this table as appropriate. Proposed agenda for tomorrow: Power- Discussion of FERC market monitoring and mitigation order in EL00-95-12 and review of upcoming filings Gas- Response to subpoenas of SoCal Edison in RP00-241 and upcoming items Misc. I will be unable to participate in the call tomorrow as I will be attending the Senate Energy and Resource Committee Hearing on the elements of the FERC market monitoring and mitigation order. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Two Governor's Press Releases--More Courage from the Capitol; [EMail-Body]= Preempt me, please! Jeff Dasovich@EES 09/13/2000 06:22 PM To: Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Sandra McCubbin/SFO/EES@EES, Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES, Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, mpalmer@enron.com, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Two Governor's Press Releases--More Courage from the Capitol ---------------------- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES on 09/13/2000 06:18 PM --------------------------- ""Julee Malinowski-Ball"" <jmball@ns.net> on 09/13/2000 06:10:16 PM Please respond to ""Julee Malinowski-Ball"" <jmball@ns.net> To: ""Baker Carolyn (E-mail)"" <cabaker@duke-energy.com>, ""Bill Carlson (E-mail)"" ""Bill Woods (E-mail)"" <billw@calpine.com>, ""Curt Hatton (E-mail)"" <curt.hatton@gen.pge.com>, ""Curtis Kebler (E-mail)"" ""David Keane (E-mail)"" <dnke@dynegy.com>, ""David Parquet (E-mail)"" <dparque@ect.enron.com>, ""Duane Nelsen (E-mail)"" <duanenelsen@msn.com>, ""Ed Tomeo (E-mail)"" <ed.tomeo@uaecorp.com>, ""Edward Maddox (E-mail)"" ""Eileen Kock (E-mail)"" <eileenk@calpine.com>, ""Ellery Bob (E-mail)"" <bellery@spi-ind.com>, ""Escalante Bob (E-mail)"" <riobravogm@aol.com>, ""Frank DeRosa (E-mail)"" ""Greg Blue (E-mail)"" <gtbl@dynegy.com>, ""Hap Boyd (E-mail)"" <rboyd@enron.com>, ""Jack Pigott (E-mail)"" <jackp@calpine.com>, ""Jan Smunty-Jones (E-mail)"" <smutny@iepa.com>, ""Jim Willey (E-mail)"" <elliottsa@earthlink.net>, ""Joe Greco (E-mail)"" <joe.greco@uaecorp.com>, ""Joe Ronan (E-mail)"" <joer@calpine.com>, ""John Stout (E-mail)"" ""Jonathan Weisgall (E-mail)"" <jweisgall@aol.com>, ""Katie Kaplan (E-mail)"" <kaplan@iepa.com>, ""Kent Fickett (E-mail)"" <kfickett@usgen.com>, ""Lynn Lednicky (E-mail)"" <lale@dynegy.com>, ""Marty McFadden (E-mail)"" ""Paula Soos (E-mail)"" ""Robert Lamkin (E-mail)"" <rllamkin@seiworldwide.com>, ""Roger Pelote (E-mail)"" <rpelote@energy.twc.com>, ""Steve Ponder (E-mail)"" <steve_ponder@fpl.com>, ""Steven Kelly (E-mail)"" <steven@iepa.com>, ""Sue Mara (E-mail)"" <smara@enron.com>, ""Tony Wetzel (E-mail)"" <twetzel@thermoecotek.com>, ""Trond Aschehoug (E-mail)"" ""William Hall (E-mail)"" <wfhall2@duke-energy.com>, ""Richard Hyde (E-mail)"" <rwhyde@duke-energy.com>, ""Sandi McCubbin (E-mail)"" <smccubbi@ees.enron.com>, ""Stephanie Newell (E-mail)"" ""Jeff Dasovich (E-mail)"" <jdasovic@enron.com> cc: ""Karen Edson"" <kedson@ns.net> Subject: Two Governor's Press Releases GOVERNOR DAVIS PRESSES FERC FOR ACTION ON WHOLESALE POWER RATES: Calls on Federal Regulators to Reduce Prices, Issue Refunds GOVERNOR DAVIS NAMES KAHN CHAIR OF THE GOVERNOR'S CLEAN ENERGY GREEN TEAM OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR ---- PR00:238 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE September 12, 2000 GOVERNOR DAVIS PRESSES FERC FOR ACTION ON WHOLESALE POWER RATES Calls on Federal Regulators to Reduce Prices, Issue Refunds SAN DIEGO - At a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) hearing today in San Diego, Governor Gray Davis reiterated his call to federal regulators to intervene ""to the fullest extent possible"" to lower electricity prices in California. ""FERC bears responsibility to ensure that a workably competitive market exists before California consumers and California's economy are subjected to unconstrained, market-based electricity prices,"" said Governor Davis in a statement read by Energy Oversight Board Chairman Michael Kahn. ""Consequently, I renew my prior request that the Commission act with utmost speed to intervene to the fullest extent possible to restore wholesale prices to fair levels and to remedy harms that have resulted from the exercise of market power."" Governor Davis noted that he and state lawmakers have taken dramatic action in recent weeks to provide rate relief. ""While these actions should provide short-term rate predictability and longer-term benefits to customers in terms of improved supplies, the fundamental problem of exorbitant wholesale prices still exists and remains the responsibility of FERC to address,"" said the governor. ""No combination of state actions can substitute for federal action to ameliorate the problems of California's wholesale markets."" Governor Davis has taken the following actions in reaction to rising electricity prices in San Diego: On June 14, he called for emergency reduction of electricity use by all state facilities in the San Francisco Bay area in response to electricity emergency and rolling blackouts. On June 15, he called on chairpersons of the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to analyze the conditions that led to electricity shortages in the San Francisco Bay area the previous day, including a statewide perspective on the price and delivery of electricity. Report was completed, submitted to the governor and released on August 2. On July 27, 2000, Governor Davis called on federal and state regulators to take swift action to extend the caps on wholesale electric rates in California and provide San Diego ratepayers with million of dollars in refunds. In letters written by the governor to two state regulatory agencies and two California-based panels charged with overseeing California's power market, he called for a coordinated state effort to urge federal regulators to take strong measures to reduce power rates in both the short- and long-term. On August 2, 2000, Governor Davis issued three Executive Orders designed to reduce energy consumption by state government and speed up the time it takes new power generating facilities to win approval from state agencies. On August 9, 2000, Governor Davis called on the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to establish a two-year plan that would cut electricity rates by nearly half for residential and business customers of San Diego Gas & Electric. The governor also reached an agreement with the California Grocers Association that will save enough electricity to provide power to between 50,000 and 60,000 homes during periods of peak demand, as grocers agreed to reduce power consumption by 10 percent during Stage One emergencies. On August 10, 2000, Governor Davis wrote a letter to President Clinton urging him to expedite FERC's investigation to determine whether current electric rates in San Diego were unjust. On August 22, 2000, Governor Davis called on President Clinton to release emergency funds from the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) to the state to help low-income Californians pay their rapidly-rising electricity bills. On August 23, 2000, President Clinton responded to Governor Davis' request by releasing $2.6 million in emergency funds to help low-income Southern Californians cope with the surge in their electricity bills. The President also asked federal regulators to speed up their investigation into the operation of U.S. power markets and urged the Small Business Administration to use its credit programs to help small firms hurt by the price increases. On August 23, 2000, Governor Davis reached agreement with legislators on legislation to provide relief to San Diego ratepayers. The governor signed two bills into law on September 6, 2000. Please see attached letter (below). # # # SEPTEMBER 12, 2000 STATEMENT OF GOVERNOR GRAY DAVIS TO THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION CONCERNING ITS INVESTIGATION OF WHOLESALE PRICE ESCALATION IN CALIFORNIA The Summer of 2000 has confronted California with an electricity crisis that seriously threatens the safety, health and well being of citizens and businesses throughout the state. At the heart of the crisis is the extraordinary run up in prices for wholesale electric energy and ancillary services, accompanied by deteriorating service and reliability. In San Diego, electric customers' bills have more than doubled this summer, threatening permanent harm to businesses and the health and welfare of residential customers in the warm southern climate. All remaining California electric consumers are faced with similar prospects as their legislated rate freeze periods come to an end. In San Francisco we saw rolling blackouts for the first time in our history. As soon as the dimensions of the crisis became evident, I directed California regulators, including the Public Utilities Commission and the Electricity Oversight Board, and the Independent System Operator, to take immediate steps to identify and implement specific measures to mitigate the damage, including restoring price caps at Summer 1999 levels. I am happy to report that those measures have been adopted, although not without considerable resistance from self-interested parties. In recent weeks, I have worked with the California Legislature to enact further relief within the existing framework of options now available to the state. These include provisions to stabilize retail rates, expedite generation licensing where possible, implement targeted demand reduction and demand response and remove constraints in transmission and distribution systems. I have also established a task force comprised of key state officials which is developing measures to increase energy efficiency and alternative supplies and to expedite permitting by state agencies. While these actions should provide short-term rate predictability and longer-term benefits to customers in terms of improved supplies, the fundamental problem of exorbitant wholesale prices still exists and remains the responsibility of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to address. No combination of state actions can substitute for federal action to ameliorate the problems in California's wholesale markets. A joint report submitted to me on August 2nd by the Chairman of the California Electricity Oversight Board and the President of the California Public Utilities Commission concluded that exorbitant wholesale prices in California result from wholesale market dysfunction and the exercise of market power by sellers. Subsequent reports by the Market Analysis Department and the Market Surveillance Committee of the California Independent System Operator reach the same conclusions. Subsequent behavior of wholesale electric prices during August confirms their conclusions, and subjects California to further economic damage. While I remain hopeful that California wholesale markets may ultimately become competitive and become capable of serving the interests of consumers and the public, I cannot and will not accept the liabilities to California that result from the current situation for even a short period. I intend to take any and all steps necessary to restore economic stability to the electric service infrastructure of California. FERC bears the responsibility under its organic act to assure just and reasonable wholesale electric rates. FERC bears responsibility to ensure that a workably competitive market exists before California consumers and California's economy are subjected to unconstrained, market-based electricity prices. Consequently, I renew my prior request that the Commission act with utmost speed to intervene to the fullest extent possible to restore wholesale prices to fair levels and to remedy harms that have resulted from the exercise of market power. ### OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR ---- A00:245 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE September 12, 2000 GOVERNOR DAVIS NAMES KAHN CHAIR OF THE GOVERNOR'S CLEAN ENERGY GREEN TEAM SACRAMENTO - Governor Gray Davis today announced the appointment of Michael A. Kahn as chairman of the newly-created Governor's Clean Energy Green Team. The Team was created by Governor Davis' signing of AB 970 by Assemblywoman Denise Moreno Ducheny (D-San Diego) on Wednesday. Mr. Kahn, 51, of San Francisco, is the chairman of the California Electricity Oversight Board, and he also serves as vice-chair of the California Commission on Judicial Performance. He has been senior partner and head of litigation at Folger Levin & Kahn LLP since 1979. Mr. Kahn has held numerous state and federal government appointments and assignments over the last 15 years. Mr. Kahn is the author of several articles and reports on litigation practice and Supreme Court history. He is a magna cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa graduate of the University of California, Los Angeles. Mr. Kahn also earned master of arts and juris doctorate degrees from Stanford University, where he was an editor of the Law Review. After graduation, he served for a year as a law clerk to Judge Ben C. Duniway of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. The signing of AB 970 established the Governor's Clean Energy Green Team, which works to streamline the process of creating new power plants to ensure that an adequate supply of power will exist to make a deregulated marketplace work. The Team does this by working with local governments, identifying environmental impacts, developing recommendations for low interest financing programs for renewable energy and obtaining input on natural gas supply, emission offsets and water supply. Members do not receive a salary. This position does not require Senate confirmation. # # # Julee Malinowski-Ball Edson + Modisette Associate 925 L Street Suite 1490 Sacramento CA 95814 916-552-7070 FAX-552-7075 jmball@ns.net [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Sen. Murkowski to Address USAEE Conference, Sept. 25; [EMail-Body]= Cynthia, get back to Jeff on this. It doesn't look like a high priority to me, but I will absolutely defer to your judgment. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/14/2000 10:02 AM --------------------------- From: Jeffrey A Shankman @ ECT 09/13/2000 04:29 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Re: Sen. Murkowski to Address USAEE Conference, Sept. 25 FYI, Is this something we should look at? Jeff ---------------------- Forwarded by Jeffrey A Shankman/HOU/ECT on 09/13/2000 04:22 PM --------------------------- From: Jennifer Fraser on 09/13/2000 01:31 PM To: Jeffrey A Shankman/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Re: Sen. Murkowski to Address USAEE Conference, Sept. 25 No plans, but I thought you might be. We could always send someone. I can go if you want. To: Jennifer Fraser/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Re: Sen. Murkowski to Address USAEE Conference, Sept. 25 are you going? From: Jennifer Fraser 09/11/2000 04:17 PM To: Jeffrey A Shankman/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Sen. Murkowski to Address USAEE Conference, Sept. 25 ---------------------- Forwarded by Jennifer Fraser/HOU/ECT on 09/11/2000 04:17 PM --------------------------- WEFA Energy <WEFAEnergy@wefa.com> on 09/11/2000 03:30:14 PM To: cc: Subject: Sen. Murkowski to Address USAEE Conference, Sept. 25 Dear Colleague, On September 25, Senator Murkowski will be addressing this year's US Association for Energy Economics Conference. In addition, this year's Conference will offer unique insights on 5 market segments: Jim Sweeney, Stanford University, is chairing a half-day program on new transportation technologies and their implications for vehicle producers and fuel producers. Steve Warwick, Koch Energy, is chairing a half-day program on optimizing profitability in the fuel & power generation market. Steve Connors, MIT, is chairing a half-day program on exploiting the opportunities that are unfolding as the electric industry moves from Ratebase to Revenues. Louise Burke, NYMEX, is hosting a half-day program on the expansion of financial market instruments as a risk management tool in the power industry. Peter Davies, BP/Amoco, has invited notable energy industry speakers to discuss global developments in energy markets. These programs will bring leaders of the energy market together to discuss the dramatic transformation of the industry -- and how to profit from them. Please register today for the US Association for Energy Economics Conference to be held Sept. 25-27 in Philadelphia. We look forward to seeing you at the conference. You may register on the web at Sincerely, Mary Novak Program Chair, USAEE Conference 2000, Senior Vice President, WEFA Energy Services <<USAEE-IAEE 2000 Conference Program.pdf>> - USAEE-IAEE 2000 Conference Program.pdf [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Natural Gas Price Increase; [EMail-Body]= Please post and circulate to the team. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/27/2000 05:29 PM ----- Robert Neustaedter@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 09/19/2000 11:44 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro@EES, James D Steffes@EES, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Harry Kingerski@EES Subject: Natural Gas Price Increase As discussed in last Friday's meeting on strategies related to higher energy prices, Harry asked me to develop the attached projection of delivered gas prices for this winter. The projection is based upon EIA's monthly analysis of delivered gas prices for residential, commercial and industrial customers for selected states (Connecticut, Virginia, Illinois and Texas) for the 1999-2000 winter heating season (Nov-Mar). Assuming pipeline and LDC mark-ups remain constant, the delivered prices were adjusted for the NYMEX Henry Hub projection of wellhead prices for the 2000-2001 winter period. A national projection is also included. Because the commodity portion of the gas bill for residential customers is a smaller percent of the total bill compared to commercial and industrial customers, the increase for residential customers will be less pronounced than for commercial or industrial customers. In addition, LDC purchased gas cost mechanisms will moderate the effect of the price increase to some extent because monthly price increases are averaged out over an extended period (12 months in some cases). Furthermore, some state public utility commissions (e.g. Connecticut) are conducting meetings with LDCs to discuss looking for ways to lessen the impact of the projected increases. That being said, Nipsco recently announced residential prices are expected to increase 50-60% this winter over last winter (in line with the projection for Illinois). If you are interested in a similar projection for other states, or have comments with respect to the above let me know. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= TV News Clip; [EMail-Body]= Jeff At the end of last week, there was a very interesting TV news story on NBC KRON Channel 4 in San Francisco. You lead the story, which also includes Governor Davis, President Bush. What most catches my attention are the visuals and chant of the protestors during the Enron segment. The props and signs are very TV camera friendly. For instance, there is a larger then life mask of you and a mockup of a ""paycheck"" to you from the people of California. The chant rhymes with your name. From my perspective, this was no simple pie in the face. This protest was very organized and sophisticated. I think it would be prudent to gain more information about who was behind it and who was behind them. I tried sending you the video file in mpeg format, but at 8,400k it was too large to email. To see the news clip, you may double click this link After downloading, the video will play on a computer that has ""Real Player."" Kevin [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Baxter Press Release; [EMail-Body]= One minor edit Karen Denne 05/01/2001 07:07 PM To: Kenneth Lay/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cliff Baxter/Enron@EnronXGate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Baxter Press Release Attached is a draft press release announcing Cliff's resignation. This is scheduled to be issued tomorrow, following the distribution of the internal memo. Please let me know if you have any comments or changes. Thank you. Karen [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Follow-up; [EMail-Body]= Steve It was great to meet you in person. I am very excited about becoming part of the Enron team. Thank you for your time and insights over the phone and in Houston. I am attaching my bio. By Tuesday, I will send you the contact list that we discussed. Please call me if you have any thoughts or questions. Happy 40. Kevin Contact Information E-mail kevinscott@onlinemailbox.net Phone (213) 926-2626 Fax (707) 516-0019 Traditional Mail PO Box 21074 ?Los Angeles, CA 90021 - Resume of Kevin Scott.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Doctoral studies; [EMail-Body]= My message was sent before I finished it. I think it would be interesting to focus your attention on this interplay -- what policy changes have meant to companies (ie the winners and losers) and how explicit companies are about how government policy drives their business strategy in these industries. I also think it would be fascinating to compare regulators' visions for the industry they are restructuring with the reality after the fact. I believe you would find some similarities but also some substantial and interesting differences. Good luck with your studies. My best regards to Mike; I learned a great deal working for him. Rob Wilson@ENRON 07/24/2000 04:44 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Mike McGowan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON Subject: Doctoral studies Steve, Vince Kaminski suggested I contact you, I'm the Gov't Affairs rep for NNG in Omaha and begin a doctoral studies program this fall at NU. I plan a research emphasis in regulatory politics, specific to energy and telecom market convergence and the public interest. I'd welcome any advice or suggestions you have regarding other potential area's of research, based on your professional experience in the public policy arena. I appreciate any guidance, I'm in the earliest stages of forming my advisory committee and curriculum of study. My supervisor, Mike McGowan, sends his regards. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Energy risk management...(Enron mention); [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Chana, Kuldeep On Behalf Of Enron Media Cuttings@ENRON Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 7:15 AM To: Leboe, David; Shapiro, Richard; Brown, Michael - COO London; Thompson, John (London); Sherriff, John; Kaminski, Vince J; Gentle, Jackie Cc: Grant, Fiona Subject: Energy risk management...(Enron mention) Please find attached the following article/s: 'The volatility opportunity' - Enery & power Risk Management Kind Regards, Kuldeep Chana [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Interview Request; [EMail-Body]= Thanks for the referral. We definitely want to get our story out to these guys. Just for future reference, Meredith Phillipp is handling ""New Media"" for us. Thanks Janel Guerrero@ENRON 07/19/2000 05:52 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Interview Request Hi guys. My friend, Polly Traylor, is an editor at the Industry Standard in San Francisco. One of her colleagues -- Michelle Rafter -- sent me the email below requesting an interview for an Enron story she is working on. I have not spoken with this writer and am forwarding it to you for follow up. Hope all is well. Call me if you have any questions. ---------------------- Forwarded by Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron on 07/19/2000 05:48 PM --------------------------- ""Michelle V. Rafter"" <mvrafter@delta.net> on 07/19/2000 02:34:06 PM To: <Janel.Guerrero@enron.com> cc: Subject: Friend of Polly Traylors asking for a favor Hi Janel: My name is Michelle Rafter and I'm a writer for the Industry Standard. I work with Polly Traylor who suggested that I contact you for help. I'd like to talk to someone at Enron for a story I'm doing for the Standard on Internet CEOs, including CEOs or presidents who've led traditional companies into successful Internet ventures. I first need to identify who at Enron that person would be, i.e., who's most responsible for the success of the company's Internet ventures: Jeffrey Skilling (he got the most ink in BusinessWeek's story in this issue), Kenneth Lay, or the head of EnronOnline. Then I need to talk to someone who could help coordinate a phone interview with me (I'm in Los Angeles so this would be a phone interview). Can you give me some suggestions? Ideally, I'd love to do an interview this week, but have some flexibility. Thanks so much in advance for any help you can give. Michelle Rafter ?Michelle V. Rafter?Contributing Writer, The Industry Standard?LIVEWIRE columnist, Reuters?714.870.6722 /phone?707.248.5013 /efax?mvrafter@delta.net /email????? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Confidential Concern; [EMail-Body]= Valeria is looking into it. Michelle -----Original Message----- From: Oxley, David Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 4:13 PM To: Cash, Michelle Subject: FW: Confidential Concern Does OLER deal with these or should I go straight to Gilchrist? David -----Original Message----- From: McVicker, Maureen Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 3:36 PM To: Oxley, David Subject: FW: Confidential Concern Steve Kean asked me to forward this to you. -----Original Message----- From: Sera, Sherri On Behalf Of Office of the Chairman, Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 10:54 AM To: Fleming, Rosalee; Clark, Mary Cc: Butcher, Sharon; Walls Jr., Rob; Kean, Steven J. Subject: Confidential Concern I'm not sure I understand what has happened to this guy, but it's something that should be handled post haste. Thanks, SRS ---------------------- Forwarded by Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron on 07/25/2001 10:52 AM --------------------------- << OLE Object: Picture (Device Independent Bitmap) >> Anonymous From: Anonymous on 07/23/2001 02:08 PM To: cc: Subject: Confidential Concern << File: Ken Lay - Jeff Skilling.doc >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: EnTouch Newsletter; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Enron On Behalf Of ENA Public Relations@ENRON Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 11:11 PM To: En Touch Newsletter List@ENRON Subject: EnTouch Newsletter BUSINESS HIGHLIGHTS East Power Origination On Friday, June 15, the Development Review Committee for Deerfield Beach, Florida, unanimously approved the 510 megawatt peaking power plant proposed for their city. This approval followed on the heels of approval of the Developer's Agreement by the Deerfield Beach City Commission on Thursday, June 14. Enron Industrial Markets On Friday, June 8 Enron Industrial Markets closed transactions with Huntco Inc. under which EIM will provide inventory management services and will eventually provide more than 600,000 tons per year of hot-rolled, cold-rolled and galvanized steel products to Huntco Steel. The EIM project team developed a creative, 15-year structure that enhances Huntco's liquidity, reduces working capital requirements, and hedges their inventory position against directional price risk. In addition, EIM structured the acquisition of Huntco's cold mill and certain coil pickling operations. A special purpose vehicle funded by third party equity now owns the assets, which continue to be operated by Huntco under an O&M agreement. As part of the transaction, EIM purchased a 20-year call option on capacity at the cold mill located in Blytheville, Arkansas. These transactions with Huntco signal a fundamental change in the way steel is bought and sold in the United States. They give Enron immediate access to physical steel and position Enron geographically to serve the steel industry in a variety of ways. Consummation of the Huntco transactions would not have been possible without the contributions of multiple Enron groups who enhanced value to Enron while significantly mitigating risk. IN THE NEWS ""Mario Max Yzaguirre, a former Enron executive, was appointed Wednesday by Gov. Rick Perry to the state agency that is overseeing electricity deregulation in Texas. Yzaguirre was named to replace Judy Walsh on the three-member Public Utility Commission of Texas. Yzaguirre, of South Padre Island, recently resigned as president of Enron's Mexico operations. He formerly worked as a lawyer at Houston's Vinson and Elkins."" -- Houston Chronicle, June 14 WELCOME New Hires EIM - Linyue Xu ENA - Candice Kao, Jason Loup NEPCO - Victor Wirick, E.J. Mohr, John McCorkle, Mairvic MacDonald, Heather Coffey, Larry Brady, Cindy Olson, William King, Danny Wheeler, July Astengo, Tara An, Matthew Fontaine Transfers (to or within) ENA - LaDonna Finnels-Neal, Margaret Daffin, Michael Newlin, Jay Blaine, Diane Cook, Anrew Greer, Troy Denetsosie, Paulita Olvera, Patty Deas, Steven McCarrel, Mary Cilia, Bobbi Tessandori, Luis Mendez EIM - Monika Causholli, EGM - Felecia Russell, Sam Niness, Wayne Byargeon, Fotios Economou NEPCO - Robert Woolf, Gary Franke, Richard Stephens, John Taylor, Charles Clarkson, Albert Franch, Kerry Lockstedt, Danielle Shafer, Robin Carpenter, John Wilson, Charles Seal NUGGETS & NOTES Congratulations to Lisa and Tim McKone, director in Steel Origination. They are the proud parents of a healthy baby boy, William David McKone. He was born on Sunday, June 17th and weighed 9 lbs. 6 oz. Travel tip of the week: Enron has negotiated preferred rates at selected hotel in domestic and international cities. Please visit travel.enron.com and a search engine will assist you in finding hotels with preferred rates. If you are a frequent traveler to a specific city and your preferred hotel is not listed, please contact Tracey Ramsey and efforts will be made to negotiate a preferred rate with that hotel. Preferred Hotels - short list San Francisco Hilton & Towers $209 Holiday Inn - Financial District 169 Portland Portland Marriott 109 Riverplace Hotel 155 New York City Plaza Hotel 265 New York Palace 330 EnronOnline Statistics Below are the latest figures for EnronOnline as of June 21, 2001 * Total Life to Date Transactions > 1,105,000 * Life to Date Notional Value of Transactions > $660 billion LEGAL STUFF The information contained in this newsletter is confidential and proprietary to Enron Corp. and its subsidiaries. It is intended for internal use only and should not be disclosed. <Embedded Paintbrush Picture> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= IEP News 4/20; [EMail-Body]= AP Online, April 20, 2001; Friday, 7:57 AM, Eastern Time, Financial pages, ????238 words, Power Co. Executives Lose Bonuses, LOS ANGELES Contra Costa Times, April 20, 2001, Friday, STATE AND REGIONAL NEWS, K560, ????460 words, Energy officials accused of manipulating natural gas market ????defend actions, By Andrew La Mar Los Angeles Times, April 20, 2001, Friday,, Home Edition, Page 3, 715 words ????, CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; ??A U-TURN ON CAR TAX REBATES; ??LEGISLATION: ????STARTING JULY 1, FEE REDUCTION WILL BE FIGURED DIRECTLY INTO VEHICLE ????REGISTRATION BILLS, NOT REFUNDED BY MAIL., CARL INGRAM, TIMES STAFF WRITER, ????SACRAMENTO Los Angeles Times, April 20, 2001, Friday,, Home Edition, Page 3, 453 words ????, CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; ??LOCKYER ASKS JUDGE TO ORDER FIRMS TO RELEASE ????RECORDS, ROBERT J. LOPEZ and RICH CONNELL, TIMES STAFF WRITERS Los Angeles Times, April 20, 2001, Friday,, Home Edition, Page 3, 1426 ????words, CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; ??LEGISLATORS UNITE OVER ENERGY PRICE ISSUE; ????POWER: BIPARTISAN CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION CALLED TOGETHER BY DAVIS SAYS U. ????S. MUST STEP IN TO PROTECT STATE FROM MANIPULATION BY SUPPLIERS., MITCHELL ????LANDSBERG and MIGUEL BUSTILLO, TIMES STAFF WRITERS The Orange County Register, April 20, 2001, Friday, STATE AND REGIONAL NEWS ????, K497, 846 words, Federal energy commission considers price fix for state ????energy market, By Dena Bunis San Jose Mercury News, April 20, 2001, Friday, STATE AND REGIONAL NEWS, ????K512, 696 words, In response to power woes, rating agencies have California ????on credit watch, By Jennifer Bjorhus San Jose Mercury News, April 20, 2001, Friday, STATE AND REGIONAL NEWS, ????K520, 1069 words, Issues still remain on what power consumers will ????eventually pay, By John Woolfolk and Michael Bazeley The San Francisco Chronicle, APRIL 20, 2001, FRIDAY,, FINAL EDITION, NEWS;, ????Pg. A4, 765 words, Edison pushes lawmakers to accept deal, David Lazarus The Associated Press State & Local Wire, April 20, 2001, Friday, BC cycle, ????7:04 AM Eastern Time, State and Regional, 438 words, Most Edison executives ????going without bonuses, By GARY GENTILE, AP Business Writer, LOS ANGELES The Associated Press State & Local Wire, April 19, 2001, Thursday, BC cycle ????, State and Regional, 901 words, Top political aide discusses Bush's low-key ????style, By RON FOURNIER, AP White House Correspondent, WASHINGTON The Associated Press State & Local Wire, April 19, 2001, Thursday, BC cycle ????, State and Regional, 727 words, Utility commission staff says parent ????company profiting from energy sales, BOISE, Idaho The Associated Press State & Local Wire, April 19, 2001, Thursday, BC cycle ????, State and Regional, 820 words, Legislators probe possible power, natural ????gas collusion, By DON THOMPSON, Associated Press Writer, SACRAMENTO Copyright 2001 Associated Press AP Online April 20, 2001; Friday 7:57 AM, Eastern Time SECTION: Financial pages LENGTH: 238 words HEADLINE: ?Power Co. Executives Lose Bonuses DATELINE: LOS ANGELES BODY: ???Senior executives at Southern California Edison and its parent company went without hundreds of thousands of dollars in bonuses in 2000 because of California's power crisis. ??Edison International's chairman and chief executive, John Bryson, was paid $950,000 in 2000, compared with salary and bonus totaling $2.16 million in 1999. ??Stephen Frank, the chairman and chief executive at Southern California Edison, was paid $617,000 in 2000, compared with salary and bonus totaling $1.3 million in 1999, according to the company's proxy statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. ??The company also said Thursday it would not award merit increases to executives in 2001 because of the continuing crisis. ??In a similar statement released Tuesday, Pacific Gas and Electric Corp. revealed it also withheld bonuses for its top two executives, although they did receive raises. ??Edison and PG&E say they have lost nearly $14 billion since June to high wholesale prices that the state's electricity deregulation law bars them from passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection April 6. ??Edison is continuing to work with state officials and its ??reditors. ?????(PROFILE ?????(CO:Southern California Edison Co.; TS:SCE;) ?????(CO:Pacific Gas and Electric; TS:PCG; IG:ELC;) ?????) LOAD-DATE: April 20, 2001 of 78 DOCUMENTS ??????????????Copyright 2001 Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service ???????????????????????Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service Costa Times 20, 2001, Friday SECTION: STATE AND REGIONAL NEWS KR-ACC-NO: ?K560 LENGTH: 460 words HEADLINE: Energy officials accused of manipulating natural gas market defend actions BYLINE: By Andres LaMar BODY: ??SACRAMENTO _ Energy officials who are accused of manipulating California's market for natural gas defended their actions on Thursday and attributed the state's skyrocketing gas prices to increased demand, the weather and other factors. ??The explanation, however, drew skepticism from lawmakers in the wake of expert testimony alleging that one Texas firm, El Paso Natural Gas Co., had engineered a classic case of monopoly power by controlling the pipeline that delivers gas to the state. ??At the outset of the Thursday's hearing, Assemblyman Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, noted the huge run-up in the cost of natural gas, which went from $6.6 billion for the entire year of 1999 to $12.3 billion for sales in 2000 and to $7.9 billion for the first three months of this year. ??Steinberg zeroed in on the difference between California and other parts of the country. From March 2000 to February 2001, natural gas prices have risen 489 percent compared to a 266 percent increase in New Mexico and a 247 percent jump in Chicago. ??Steinberg asked Ralph Eads, the president of an El Paso Natural Gas Co. subsidiary, for an explanation. ??""The 275 percent difference you say is attributable completely to constraints on the pipeline and demand?"" Steinberg asked. ??""Yes,"" Eads replied. Eads said the state's energy crisis, which led power plants to run harder and longer, dramatically increased demand for natural gas over the summer and a winter with temperatures about 15 percent cooler than the year before exacerbated the problem. ??In another twist to California's deregulation nightmare, El Paso officials said they gained greater control of the pipeline after the Pacific Gas & Electric Co. relinquished the capacity four years ago. At that time, PG&E's movement of the gas and the prices it could charge were regulated by the Public Utilities Commission. ??In other developments at the Capitol on Thursday, lawmakers called on the federal government to re- regulate natural gas sales at the California border and U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., said federal regulators should impose price caps on California's wholesale electricity market. ??The Assembly held considerable debate on the resolution asking for re-regulation, with Democrats accusing President George W. Bush of doing nothing to come to the aid of California and Republicans defending the administration. ??""I'm learning an interesting lesson that all the problems of the world started after Jan. 21 and the inauguration of the new president,"" said Assemblyman Bill Leonard, R-San Bernardino. ??KRT CALIFORNIA is a premium service of Knight Ridder/Tribune ??(c) 2001, Contra Costa Times (Walnut Creek, Calif.). ??Visit the Contra Costa Times on the Web at http://www.cctimes.com/ JOURNAL-CODE: CC LOAD-DATE: April 20, 2001 of 78 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ?????????????????????April 20, 2001, Friday, Home Edition SECTION: Part A; Part 1; Page 3; Metro Desk LENGTH: 715 words HEADLINE: CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; A U-TURN ON CAR TAX REBATES; LEGISLATION: STARTING JULY 1, FEE REDUCTION WILL BE FIGURED DIRECTLY INTO VEHICLE REGISTRATION BILLS, NOT REFUNDED BY MAIL. BYLINE: CARL INGRAM, TIMES STAFF WRITER DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Gov. Gray Davis and the Legislature spun a U-turn Thursday and scrapped a costly program that requires motorists to first pay their car tax and then get a rebate in the mail. ??Starting July 1, the state Department of Motor Vehicles will send owners of approximately 26 million vehicles registration renewal bills already reduced by the amount of the vehicle license fee rebates. ??On a unanimous roll call, the Senate voted final approval and sent to Davis an ""urgency"" bill, SB 52, that repealed the rebate program, which the governor had previously fought for and defended. ??In addition to abolishing the rebates, the legislation reduces by 67.5% the amount motorists must pay for the upcoming year, the level that lawmakers and former Gov. Pete Wilson envisioned in 1998 when they began cutting the fee. It had been about 2% of a vehicle's market value. ??Davis immediately signed the repeal bill, saying only that the new law will ""expedite relief to taxpayers and greatly reduce administrative costs."" ??The governor's muted observation contrasted with his effusive support of the rebates last year, when he said Californians ""don't appreciate the fact that they're getting a rebate unless they see it in their hands."" ??At the time, Davis and the Legislature had the choice of simply cutting the car tax, which voters might not notice, or sending checks in the mail, which Davis felt would have a greater impact. ??The rebates, which began Jan. 1, were scheduled to continue through 2002, when Davis intends to run for reelection. In 2003, the license fee was to have fallen permanently, with no more rebates. ??""The whole rebate scheme was good only through the next gubernatorial election cycle,"" said Sen. Tom McClintock (R-Thousand Oaks), who supported reductions in the license fee but opposed the rebates. ??Until July 1, the DMV will continue to bill motorists for the full amount of their license fee, which includes a 35% reduction from last year. ??""Then we return to you an additional 32.5% rebate, making a total reduction of 67.5%,"" said DMV spokesman Bill Branch. Starting with license renewals on July 1, the DMV bills will include the full tax cut. ??A Senate analysis of the repeal bill noted that the current ""awkward system . . . effectively requires taxpayers to overpay their vehicle license fee and then await a rebate check from the state--a system that is, at best, difficult to explain."" ??But as the California economy tightened, the state's budget surplus shrank and taxpayers shelled out approximately $ 50 million a day to buy electricity, the costs of the rebate program threatened to become a political embarrassment to Davis. ??Projected administrative and postage costs of the rebate program alone were estimated at $ 22 million this year and another $ 22 million or so next year. ??Last year, state Sen. Joe Dunn (D-Santa Ana) and McClintock sought to eliminate the rebates and give drivers their full tax cuts when they register their vehicles. Under pressure from Davis, the bill failed. ??""It was killed behind the scenes at the insistence of the governor,"" McClintock said Thursday. ""He didn't want it on his desk."" ??This year, Dunn launched a similar bill, but his name was struck from it as the lead author in the Assembly and the name of Sen. Wes Chesbro (D-Arcata) was substituted. ??In a speech Thursday, Sen. Ross Johnson (R-Irvine) suggested that Davis' performance on the issue in an ""earlier time and a more just society"" would have resulted in his ""public flogging by representatives of taxpayers."" ??The repeal bill was passed 78 to 0 by the Assembly on Monday, and sent to Davis by the Senate on a 34-0 vote Thursday. ??If the rebates were to be abolished, the bill had to pass this week in order to take effect July 1, said Branch, the DMV spokesman. This is because motorists must be advised 60 days in advance that their registration renewals are due. ??""We have to reprogram all the computers. We have to print new bills and mail them by May 1 for the July 1 expiration,"" he said. ""It will be a little tight, but we will still make it."" ??Branch said that since the Jan. 1 start of rebates, checks totaling $ 454 million have been sent to 7.4 million vehicle owners at an extra administrative cost of $ 9.4 million. LOAD-DATE: April 20, 2001 of 78 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ?????????????????????April 20, 2001, Friday, Home Edition SECTION: Part A; Part 1; Page 3; Metro Desk LENGTH: 453 words HEADLINE: CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; LOCKYER ASKS JUDGE TO ORDER FIRMS TO RELEASE RECORDS BYLINE: ROBERT J. LOPEZ and RICH CONNELL, TIMES STAFF WRITERS BODY: ??California Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer, ratcheting up his investigation of possible civil and criminal violations by the state's power suppliers, is asking a San Francisco judge to order two firms to hand over confidential records. ??In a motion filed Thursday in Superior Court, Lockyer said Reliant Energy and Mirant Corp. have failed to comply with subpoenas for documents that were to be produced by March 19. ??Amid soaring electricity costs and rolling blackouts, the attorney general launched an investigation of possible manipulation of wholesale electricity prices that have skyrocketed to record levels and have financially crippled the state's major utilities. ??Dozens of other public and private power suppliers are complying with the subpoenas. ??But in an interview, Lockyer accused Reliant and Mirant of stonewalling investigators ""so they can keep enjoying these exorbitant profits and prices for as long as possible."" ??Ultimately, the companies will have to honor the subpoenas, he said. ""I'm going to pit bull them,"" he said. ""This is one we win."" ??Both companies say they have done nothing wrong and played by the rules of California's flawed electricity deregulation plan. ??A spokesman for Houston-based Reliant said Thursday the firm is seeking court action of its own to ensure that sensitive business information will not be shared with other public agencies or its competitors. ??Last week, Reliant asked a Los Angeles Superior Court judge to clarify the attorney general's obligation to keep proprietary information confidential. ??""We're glad to cooperate with his investigation to the extent we can,"" said Reliant spokesman Richard Wheatley. "" But we have not received sufficient assurances that Lockyer would keep the data confidential."" ??Lockyer called Reliant's court filing ""frivolous"" and ""propagandistic"" and insisted that adequate safeguards are in place. He reserves the right under state law to share information with other government agencies aiding in his investigation but has said he will keep sensitive business information from being made public. ??Atlanta-based Mirant demanded and received similar guarantees of confidentiality, Lockyer said. Mirant did not return phones calls Thursday. ??Lockyer did not discuss details of the probe or the kinds of information he's seeking. But based on the investigation so far, he said, ""it's beginning to get interesting."" ??Other records indicate that the attorney general has sought 91 categories of information about the power merchants' activities. They include the operation of power plants, trading information that may have been shared by private power suppliers and bidding strategies in the California market. LOAD-DATE: April 20, 2001 of 78 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ?????????????????????April 20, 2001, Friday, Home Edition SECTION: Part A; Part 1; Page 3; Metro Desk LENGTH: 1426 words HEADLINE: CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; LEGISLATORS UNITE OVER ENERGY PRICE ISSUE; ?POWER: BIPARTISAN CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION CALLED TOGETHER BY DAVIS SAYS U. S. MUST STEP IN TO PROTECT STATE FROM MANIPULATION BY SUPPLIERS. BYLINE: MITCHELL LANDSBERG and MIGUEL BUSTILLO, TIMES STAFF WRITERS BODY: ??This may be the surest sign yet of the depth of California's energy crisis: A bipartisan cross-section of the state's congressional delegation, brought together Thursday by Gov. Gray Davis, not only agreed about the severity of the problem but also about the need for swift federal intervention. ??""This meeting did not have the word 'Democrat' or 'Republican' used once,"" Rep. Darrell E. Issa (R-Vista), said of the unusual spirit of cooperation at the meeting near Los Angeles International airport. ??Members of both parties said the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission must slash wholesale electricity prices so California utilities can once again afford to buy power. Since January, the state government has been buying electricity on their behalf, as skyrocketing wholesale prices put Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern California Edison billions of dollars into debt and many power suppliers refused to sell to them; PG&E has since filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. ??Although the Bush administration has said repeatedly that it is strongly opposed to price caps, and FERC has refused to grant them, California Republicans at the energy meeting said they are optimistic that the administration will agree to some other form of price regulation. They brushed aside the notion that such regulations might conflict with their ideological belief in a free market. ??""This is not a free-enterprise situation,"" Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Alpine) said after the meeting. ""In fact, it's just the opposite."" ??Specifically citing the huge disparity between natural gas prices charged to California and those charged in other Western states, he said California clearly has been the victim of unreasonably high energy costs. Under federal law, the FERC must regulate the prices of companies if it finds they are exerting ""market power"" to drive prices to unreasonable levels. ??Executives from two Texas energy companies, meeting with legislators in Sacramento, denied Thursday that they had caused natural gas prices in California to artificially skyrocket by hoarding access to a critical pipeline into the state. ??After the extraordinary meeting in Los Los Angeles, Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Sherman Oaks) said the biggest disagreement between California Democrats and Republicans appeared to be their relative faith--or lack thereof--in the ability of President Bush and his administration to help California. There has been much speculation that Bush, who lost California in November, has no political motive to help the state. ??""We Democrats,"" said Sherman, ""hope very much that our skepticism is proven wrong."" ??Davis--who sat flanked by Democratic U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein and the governor's newly appointed chief energy advisor, S. David Freeman--said he used the meeting mainly to discuss the importance of conservation by Californians this summer and to ask the congressional delegation to pitch in. Five Republicans and more than a dozen Democrats attended the gathering. ??Feinstein said Thursday that she has asked for a third time to meet with Bush to discuss the energy situation. Meeting with Times reporters and editors Wednesday, she described a recent meeting with Vice President Dick Cheney in which, she said, he ""ignored"" her appeal for federal assistance. ??Feinstein has been among those critical of natural gas companies, saying they appear to have constricted access to a California-bound pipeline to run up prices. ??The Brattle Group, a respected consulting firm, alleged Wednesday before an Assembly committee that Dynegy Inc. and El Paso Natural Gas Co. had manipulated the market by charging so much for the rights to their pipeline capacity that they had, in effect, withheld access to it. ??That action, the experts said, directly forced companies trying to deliver gas to California to look for alternatives, clogging other pipelines and causing a surge in prices. ??The explanation, El Paso executives said, was simple: Demand for gas soared in California because generators that use gas to make electricity increased production last year in response to the energy crisis. ??""We're not withholding capacity--no one is,"" said El Paso Merchant Energy President Ralph Eads. ""With these prices, you want to sell every molecule."" ??In other developments Thursday: ??* The agreement between Davis and Edison International to return its ailing utility arm to financial health is in ""deep trouble and could be rejected by legislators,"" the Standard & Poor's credit rating agency said in a note to clients, citing legislative and other sources. A rejection of the deal ""would be a humiliating setback for the governor,"" S&P said. ??The agreement calls for, among other things, the sale of Edison's transmission grid to the state for $ 2.76 billion and the sale of $ 2 billion in bonds--both designed to pay off the utility's huge electricity debt. Edison agreed to several constraints, including the sale of electricity to the state at prices tied to the cost of producing power. ??Since they returned Monday from a two-week recess, state legislators have been sharply critical of the Edison agreement and have indicated a desire to tinker with aspects of the deal. Some lawmakers have said publicly that a bankruptcy protection filing by Edison, like that of PG&E, might not be such a dire outcome. ??But a senior Edison executive said it is ""way too early"" to give up on passage of the proposal, which legislators have not yet seen in official form. ??""There is an education process to do here,"" the executive said of the highly detailed 38-page document. ""The legislators should be asking questions. That is appropriate."" ??* The Public Utilities Commission voted to investigate whether alternative energy providers violated contractual agreements by withholding supplies from PG&E and Edison, which owe them hundreds of millions of dollars. ??The action, Commissioner Carl W. Wood said, was prompted in part by lawsuits some providers have filed seeking release from their contracts with the cash-starved utilities. The producers of solar, wind and geothermal energy account for more than 25% of California's electricity supply. ??""The question is whether we will be able to rely on them in the long, hot days of summer,"" Wood said. ??Jack Raudy of the Renewable Energy Creditors Committee said the PUC needs to address the $ 700 million the producers are owed. ""All we have gotten is rhetoric from the governor, the PUC and the utilities,"" he said. ??* An $ 850-million plan to entice Californians to conserve precious megawatts appears to be running into roadblocks, compounding predictions by state officials of tighter than expected energy supplies in May and June. ??Davis signed the conservation spending package last week, earmarking $ 242 million of the new funds for the Public Utilities Commission to distribute to the state's investor-owned utilities to support existing conservation programs. ??But Barbara Hale, director of the PUC's Division of Strategic Planning, said Thursday that since Pacific Gas & Electric Co. filed for bankruptcy protection April 6, the utility has stopped releasing conservation funds. ??Hale, testifying before a state Senate committee, said PG&E's decision--coupled with the threat that Southern California Edison could follow a similar route to U.S. Bankruptcy Court--has complicated her agency's efforts. ??PG&E spokeswoman Staci Homrig said her company plans to petition the Bankruptcy Court to have the conservation funds designated as a trust and separated from assets tied up in the bankruptcy proceedings. She said if the court denies the request, PG&E would ask to be permitted to pay the expenses anyway. The process, she added, could take about a month--too long in the view of some legislators, given increasingly gloomy energy forecasts for late spring and early summer. ??Deputy Director Bob Therkelsen of the California Energy Commission said his agency had been counting on a number of small power producers to bolster their output during that period. But he said some producers did not purchase the necessary equipment because PG&E and Edison have failed to pay them in full for earlier electricity deliveries. ??""It's not a huge amount,"" he said of the anticipated production shortfall, ""but every little bit helps."" ??* ??Landsberg reported from Los Angeles, Bustillo from Sacramento. Times staff writers Nancy Rivera Brooks in Los Angeles, Carl Ingram and Julie Tamaki in Sacramento and Tim Reiterman in San Francisco contributed to this story. LOAD-DATE: April 20, 2001 of 78 DOCUMENTS ??????????????Copyright 2001 Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service ???????????????????????Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service ??????????????????????????The Orange County Register 20, 2001, Friday SECTION: STATE AND REGIONAL NEWS KR-ACC-NO: ?K497 LENGTH: 846 words HEADLINE: Federal energy commission considers price fix for state energy market BYLINE: By Dena Bunis BODY: ??WASHINGTON _ Californians who see federal re-regulation of the state's crisis-bound energy market as an answer to the impending summer emergency better look for some other solution. ??Even the short-term price fix that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission may consider at its Wednesday meeting might be too little too late. ??Lobbyists, lawmakers and other FERC-watchers say they have seen a slight shift in recent weeks among commission staff and at least one member. There is some willingness, they say, to consider some price controls, even though the Bush administration is adamantly opposed to such measures. ??Many are looking to see if President Bush's choices for the two vacancies on FERC will provide a margin for change. ??But the commission's basic philosophy that open, unregulated markets are best is not likely to change soon, members say. ??""I've been championing a revamping of FERC's antiquated standards for determining market-based rates,"" Commissioner Richard Massey said Thursday. But with no success. "" My agency is not on the verge of turning on a dime on this market-based pricing."" ??The standards are a joke, Massey added, because the commission never turns down requests for such pricing authority. More than 600 power sellers have been given that authority, he said. ??For a power company to be allowed to charge whatever the market will bear, it must show FERC, for example, that it doesn't have the power to manipulate the market and drive prices up. ??""Any seller that can't pass our screen needs to fire their consultants and lawyers,"" Massey said. ??While the overall philosophy remains consistent, FERC staff has proposed to the commission that a Stage 3 electricity emergency in California should trigger cost-based rates, a form of price controls. Such triggers would be in place for one year, under the staff proposal. ??The commission may decide Wednesday whether to accept that proposal. It has to make some decision by May 1 on how the market will be monitored from now on. ??The theory behind controlling prices in Stage 3, says a FERC staff report, is that during such an emergency generators have the greatest opportunity to manipulate the market and drive prices up. ??But generators have that power during Stage 2 and Stage 1 emergencies, says Les Starck, Southern California Edison Co.'s manager of federal regulatory affairs. Price caps during Stage 3 might avert the rolling blackouts associated with that level of crisis, but they wouldn't do anything to stop generators from jacking up prices the rest of the time, he said. ??It is not clear how long it would take for such price controls to take effect, should the commission go along with the staff recommendation. ??""We're close because summer is approaching,"" Commissioner Linda Breathitt said Thursday. Breathitt, who had firmly opposed any form of price controls, said in an interview last month that given the worsening crisis in California she was open to considering some short-term measures. ??""It's important to me that we address the summer,"" Breathitt said, but said she wasn't able to predict what the commission would do Wednesday. ??Even if an order is approved, Massey said, there could be delays while the power sellers file their costs with regulators and disputes over those filings are handled. ??Sen. Dianne Feinstein said Thursday such a move by the commission would be ""better than having no controls at all. There's no question that we're going to be in a Stage 3 emergency."" ??Feinstein, D-Calif., and other Western lawmakers have been urging FERC to step in sooner and with price controls that extend beyond just the emergency period. ??Waiting for Stage 3 to intervene ""is putting the whole grid at risk,"" said Roger Hamilton, a member of Oregon's Public Utility Commission. ""We have a real stability problem when you cut it that close."" ??Feinstein says the future could well rest with the new commissioners, particularly Patrick Wood, the head of the Texas PUC who many believe will replace Curt Heber as FERC chairman if he is confirmed by the Senate. ??Even if Massey and Breathitt agree on broader price controls, as chairman, Heber could block consideration of such a move. It's unclear what stance Wood would take as chairman. ??""The thing that deeply concerns me about Pat Wood is that he's from Texas,"" Feinstein said. ""What's reassuring is that it appears from my personal discussion with him is that he appears to be pragmatic."" ??But once again, timing could be a problem. ??Bush has said he intends to nominate Wood and Nora Brownell, a member of the Pennsylvania PUC, but has not formally sent their nominations to the Senate. ??""The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is of vital importance right now, and to let the time go on without filling the spots makes no sense,"" Feinstein said. ""Please please please, President Bush, process your nominees."" ??KRT CALIFORNIA is a premium service of Knight Ridder/Tribune ??(c) 2001, The Orange County Register (Santa Ana, Calif.). ??Visit the Register on the World Wide Web at http://www.ocregister.com/ JOURNAL-CODE: OC LOAD-DATE: April 20, 2001 of 78 DOCUMENTS ??????????????Copyright 2001 Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service ???????????????????????Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service Jose Mercury News 20, 2001, Friday SECTION: STATE AND REGIONAL NEWS KR-ACC-NO: ?K512 LENGTH: 696 words HEADLINE: In response to power woes, rating agencies have California on credit watch BYLINE: By Jennifer Bjorhus BODY: ??SAN JOSE, Calif. _ All three of the nation's influential judges of credit risk now have California on credit watch, saying they are deeply concerned about the economic impact of the state's power crisis. ??The Fitch credit rating agency made it unanimous Wednesday when it warned that the thickening electricity quagmire, as well as lower than expected tax revenues in February and March, could spell broader risk for the state's budget. ??The announcement is a signal that Fitch, too, may downgrade its ratings on California's nearly $30 billion in public debt, a move which could cost taxpayers millions. ??The announcement comes as state lawmakers mull a bailout plan for Southern California Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric Co. sits in bankruptcy and state officials bleed through the state's general fund as they purchase expensive electricity for consumers. Earlier this week, Gov. Gray Davis announced that the average daily bill for electricity purchases has risen from $45.8 million a day in the last week of March, to $73 million a day. ??Moody's Investors Service and Standard & Poor's have already issued their own credit warnings, although none of the three agencies has actually downgraded the state's very good double-A credit rating. ??Bond ratings are important yardsticks that bankers and investors use to price municipal and corporate bonds. A downgrade would force California to offer bondbuyers higher interest rates going forward, costing taxpayers. ??The state was last at a lower A rating back in 1994. ??Moody's changed California's Aa2 general obligation bond rating outlook from stable to negative on April 6, the day Pacific Gas & Electric Co. filed for bankruptcy. Standard & Poor's has had the state's AA rating outlook at negative since January, when the state began buying electricity for the utilities. ??The deciding factor for Fitch, said Fitch vice chairman Claire Cohen, was the disagreement over how the money from the new electricity rate hike will be spent. ??The California Public Utilities Commission ruled in late March that money generated by higher electricity bills should go first to pay the state Department of Water Resources, which has been buying electricity for the utilities. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. has argued that if the state is paid first, there won't be any money left for it. ??The utility is formally challenging the PUC decision, and the move threatens to hold up the estimated $12 billion to $14 billion of bonds the Department of Water Resources plans to issue to buy more electricity. ??""With that being appealed you don't have a clean authorization,"" Cohen said. ""It signals to me that it could delay the financing process."" ??A second concern is that the state isn't collecting as much in taxes as expected, Cohen said. Tax collections for both February and March were below forecast. The amount of personal income tax the state collected in those months fell short by $455 million, or 14% less than expected. ??Cohen said she made her decision before hearing that the state's power costs now exceed $70 million a day. Cohen and David Hitchcock, the California analyst for Standard & Poors, agreed those rising costs are a definite concern. ??""It doesn't take much of a change in economic growth to make some of these projected fund balances disappear and so we're very worried about what the current economic activity is, particularly in Northern California with some of the problems with the high tech area,"" Hitchcock told analysts and investors last week in a conference call. ??State treasurer Phillip Angelides was traveling Thursday and couldn't be reached for comment. Other economy-watchers expressed concern. ??Sandy Harrison, assistant director of the state Dept. of Finance, said the move reinforced the importance of solving the current power problems soon. ??""It's important to note that the rating hasn't been lowered yet and does remain very strong,"" he said. ??KRT CALIFORNIA is a premium service of Knight Ridder/Tribune ??(c) 2001, San Jose Mercury News (San Jose, Calif.). ??Visit Mercury Center, the World Wide Web site of the Mercury News, at http://www.sjmercury.com/ JOURNAL-CODE: SJ LOAD-DATE: April 20, 2001 of 78 DOCUMENTS ??????????????Copyright 2001 Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service ???????????????????????Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service Jose Mercury News 20, 2001, Friday SECTION: STATE AND REGIONAL NEWS KR-ACC-NO: ?K520 LENGTH: 1069 words HEADLINE: Issues still remain on what power consumers will eventually pay BYLINE: By John Woolfolk and Michael Bazeley BODY: ??SAN JOSE, Calif. _ State regulators last month announced an electric rate increase that would average a whopping three cents per kilowatt hour, hit bills beginning in May and punish power pigs while sparing energy misers. ??Now, much of that is up in the air. ??Higher rates are surely coming _ but not before June. Exactly which consumers and businesses will pay how much is uncertain as regulators rush to forge a rate structure from a tangle of more than 20 proposals. ??Their task has been complicated immeasurably by Gov. Gray Davis' decision to weigh in with a competing rate plan and Pacific Gas & Electric's move into bankruptcy court. ??""Little details are moving billions of dollars around,"" said Nettie Hoge of consumer advocate group TURN. ??All the proposals assume a ""tiered"" structure that forces the heaviest users of energy to pay the most. But key details yet to be decided mean consumers could see their average rates go up anywhere from 7 percent to 30 percent or more. ??Among them: ??_How much of an overall increase? The Public Utilities Commission approved a 3-cent per kilowatt hour increase last month, which would boost utility revenue $4.8 million. Gov. Gray Davis' hike _ left vague in Davis' April 5 television address _ averages 2.8 cents for PG&E customers but only 2.3 cents for customers of Southern California Edison. ??_What regions of the state will pay? The commission agreed to raise rates only for Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison, but Davis would include the additional 1.2 million San Diego Gas & Electric customers. ??_Should heavier users of electricity subsidize those who are exempt from the new rate increase? If so, those users will find themselves paying much more than any of the average increase figures being tossed about. ??_How will utilities bill customers retroactively for the increase? At the time of the PUC vote on March 27, commissioner said their increase would take effect immediately. ??Various plans are being presented this week to an administrative law judge working for the commission. The judge is expected to recommend a rate structure to the PUC on May 4. Public hearings would follow May 7-11, and the commission would vote on a plan May 14, condensing to a few weeks a process that normally lasts nearly a year. ??Each of the major proposals before the commission assumes that residential customers using less than 130 percent of their baseline would be exempt from higher rates. That's mandated under a new law that allows the state to buy power. Customers already pay higher rates for exceeding their baseline, which is the average basic level of use for each region of the state. ??Each major proposal also sets new ""tiers"" with progressively higher rates for ""medium"" use at 130 to 200 percent of baseline and ""heavy"" use over 200 percent of that level. ??But that's where the similarities end. ??The first distinction among the leading plans comes in the form of an assumption: How many residential customers will avoid any increase because they don't exceed 130 percent of their baseline? Davis says more than half, commissioners say a little under half and PG&E says less than a third. ??The second difference among the plans is a real difference: What happens to everyone else? ??Under the plan by utilities commission President Loretta Lynch, medium PG&E users would see average bills rise 9 percent and heavy users would see bills increase 36 percent. ??Davis' plan says medium PG&E users would see average bills rise 11 percent while heavy users would pay 37 percent more. But the average total bill increase for PG&E residential customers, including those who are exempt, would be 20 percent under his plan and 24 percent under Lynch's, according to a statement on the governor's web site. ??Business customers would see proportionately greater increases, averaging 30 percent under Lynch's proposal and 26 percent under Davis'. ??The most consumer-friendly of the various proposals comes from consumer-rights group TURN. They suggest an overall average residential increase of just 7.5 percent. ??TURN's plan assumes utilities cannot charge other customers more to make up for the energy misers shielded from rate increases under state law. ??PG&E disagrees with that interpretation. The utility wants other residential users to make up for any lost revenue from exempted customers through higher rates. Under the utility's plan, residential customers would see an average rate hike of nearly 30 percent. ??""The proposal these folks are pushing rips the heart out of that law,"" said Matthew Freedman, staff attorney for TURN. ??Another issue affecting consumers is how the utilities can bill for electricity used in April and May, before the final plan is approved. ??Utility officials have objected to making the rate structure retroactive. Instead, to recoup the revenue, they are proposing a flat surcharge that everyone would pay, regardless of how much they use. ??Edison proposes a higher surcharge added to bills for a shorter period of time _ in this case, June through August. PG&E officials are suggesting a smaller surcharge that would be spread out over 12 months. ??""It'll probably be something closer to the PG&E proposal,"" Paul Clanon, the commission's director of energy issues. ??All the rate increase proposals stem from a commonly understood problem: California's current, frozen rates don't generate enough money to cover the wholesale price of power. The PUC raised rates 10 percent _ or 1 cent per kilowatt hour _ in January in an attempt to help, but that turned out to be far from enough. ??In March, the Commission approved an additional 3-cent increase. But Davis followed quickly with an alternative proposal. The next day, PG&E filed for bankruptcy, raising the specter that a federal judge could order even higher rates. ??Although the PUC has sole authority to raise rates under state law, Davis' proposal has complicated an already complex process. The governor appointed three of the five members of the commission, and his appointees seem inclined to show him deference. But Davis has been slow in filing the details of his plan, which has made it hard for the PUC to proceed. ??KRT CALIFORNIA is a premium service of Knight Ridder/Tribune ??(c) 2001, San Jose Mercury News (San Jose, Calif.). ??Visit Mercury Center, the World Wide Web site of the Mercury News, at http://www.sjmercury.com/ JOURNAL-CODE: SJ LOAD-DATE: April 20, 2001 of 78 DOCUMENTS ?????????????????Copyright 2001 The Chronicle Publishing Co. ?????????????????????????The San Francisco Chronicle ????????????????????APRIL 20, 2001, FRIDAY, FINAL EDITION SECTION: NEWS; Pg. A4 LENGTH: 765 words HEADLINE: Edison pushes lawmakers to accept deal SOURCE: Chronicle Staff Writer BYLINE: David Lazarus BODY: Although lawmakers are skeptical of the state's multibillion-dollar deal to acquire the power lines of Southern California Edison, the head of the utility's parent company warned yesterday that failure to approve the accord could lead to a ""long and costly"" bankruptcy. ???But John Bryson, chief executive of Edison International, told The Chronicle that he thought legislators would ""want to do the right thing"" by approving the multibillion-dollar agreement and preventing Edison from following Pacific Gas and Electric Co. into bankruptcy court. ???Bankruptcy for California's two largest utilities could have severe consequences for consumers. Financial analysts said a worsening of the state's energy mess would increase the possibility of higher electricity rates. ???Nevertheless, lawmakers are unlikely to accept the Edison deal -- at least not in its present form. ???""We are going to go through this thing extensively,"" said state Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, D-San Francisco. ""There are a lot of concerns about the valuation."" ???Still, he said, legislative backing for the accord remains possible as long as Edison is open to amending some of the terms. ???""The Edison people are smart enough to know that the Legislature is going to have its say,"" Burton said. ???Indeed, sources familiar with the matter said Edison expected a certain amount of tinkering with the deal and would not resist efforts to reach common ground with lawmakers. ???""The Assembly members do not view bankruptcy as a favorable alternative,"" said Assemblyman Herb Wesson, D-Los Angeles. ""There will be a big effort to try and work something out."" ???Edison's Bryson seems eager at this point to present himself and his company as reasonable business partners who are willing to negotiate in good faith. ???This contrasts sharply with the state's relations with PG&E, which turned acrimonious after PG&E blindsided the governor with its bankruptcy filing. Each side blamed the other for the collapse of earlier negotiations. ???""We made the decision at an early stage that this was a massive problem for the state and that the best course was to find a practical solution that would allow us to get on with operating our power system,"" Bryson said. ???Bankruptcy, he said, ""is absolutely a last resort. It's a long and costly process."" ???It is also the last thing Wall Street wants to see. On Wednesday, rating agency Fitch Inc. joined Standard & Poor's and Moody's Investor Service in warning that California's credit rating could be lowered because of the state's energy mess. ???""The state may be forced to issue junk bonds,"" said Carol Coale, an energy-industry analyst at Prudential Securities in New York. ""This could lead to a surcharge on electricity bills to guarantee the bonds."" ???Bryson, not surprisingly, defended Edison's agreement with the governor as a prudent alternative to bankruptcy. ???""This is a very good deal for the state,"" he said. ""It is not a bailout. Edison gives up a lot to make all this possible."" ???Southern California Edison will sell its power lines to the state for $2.8 billion. It also will provide low-cost power to California for 10 years and drop a federal lawsuit seeking full recovery of nearly $5 billion in past debt. ???Critics say the state is paying far too much for Edison's transmission system -- more than two times book value -- and that the power lines are of little use unless PG&E's grid also can be acquired. ???""It's a multibillion-dollar ratepayer bailout of Edison,"" said Doug Heller, a spokesman for the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa Monica. ""Edison gets off scot-free."" ???Under the most likely scenario, lawmakers will seek to reduce the amount paid for Edison's power lines and to increase the role of the California Public Utilities Commission in regulating the utility. ???They also will try to come up with a workable contingency plan for the state if PG&E remains adamant in its refusal to sell off its part of the power grid. ???""The deal on the table is still salvageable,"" said Michael Shames, executive director of the Utility Consumers' Action Network in San Diego. ""But Edison needs to understand that what it got from the governor is only a framework, not set in stone."" ???For his part, Bryson signaled that plenty of room existed for give and take on the issue. ???""We're just at the initial stage,"" he said. ""We always have accepted the notion that Edison is a California regulated utility and is subject to the laws of the Public Utilities Commission.""E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com. GRAPHIC: PHOTO, Gov. Gray Davis (left) and John Bryson, chairman of Edison International, announced a transmission line deal on April 9. Bryson said Edison may go into bankruptcy if the deal isn't approved. LOAD-DATE: April 20, 2001 of 78 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ???????????????????????April 20, 2001, Friday, BC cycle AM Eastern Time SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 438 words HEADLINE: Most Edison executives going without bonuses BYLINE: By GARY GENTILE, AP Business Writer DATELINE: LOS ANGELES BODY: ??Senior executives at Edison International and its subsidiary, Southern California Edison, went without hundreds of thousands of dollars in bonuses in 2000 because of California's power crisis. ??Edison International's chairman and chief executive, John Bryson, was paid $ 950,000 in 2000, compared with salary and bonus totaling $2.16 million in 1999. ??Stephen Frank, the chairman and chief executive at Southern California Edison, was paid $617,000 in 2000, compared with salary and bonus totaling $1.3 million in 1999, according to the company's proxy statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. ??The company also said Thursday it would not award merit increases to executives in 2001 because of the continuing crisis. ??In a similar proxy statement released Tuesday, Pacific Gas and Electric Corp. revealed it also withheld bonuses for its top two executives, although they did receive raises. ??Edison and PG&E say they've lost nearly $14 billion since June to high wholesale prices that the state's electricity deregulation law bars them from passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection April 6. ??Edison is continuing to work with state officials and its creditors. ??The utility said its board of directors decided to withhold bonuses to all but two key executives because the financial effects of the energy crisis have overshadowed all other aspects of company and individual performance. ??The two executives who did get bonuses earned them for their roles in preserving the viability of the companies during the crisis and for retention purposes, Edison said. ??Ted Craver, senior vice president, chief financial officer and treasurer at Edison International, was paid $375,000 in 2000 and received a $100,000 bonus. His total compensation in 1999 was $652,100. ??Harold Ray, executive vice president at Southern California Edison, received a salary of $390,000 in 2000 and a bonus of $50,000. His cash compensation in 1999 was $818,400. ??PG&E paid Chairman Robert D. Glynn Jr. $945,086 in salary and benefits during 2000, a 58 percent decrease from $2.26 million in the prior year, according to the company's proxy statement. ??Glynn, 57, received a 12.5 percent increase in his base salary but didn't get a bonus. ??Gordon R. Smith, who runs Pacific Gas and Electric, received a 14.5 percent raise in his base salary to $630,000 but didn't receive a bonus. In 1999, Smith's compensation package totaled $1.1 million. LOAD-DATE: April 20, 2001 of 78 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ??????????????????????April 19, 2001, Thursday, BC cycle SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 901 words HEADLINE: Top political aide discusses Bush's low-key style BYLINE: By RON FOURNIER, AP White House Correspondent DATELINE: WASHINGTON BODY: ??When 24 members of a Navy spy plane crew returned to the United States after 11-days in Chinese custody, President Bush was noticeably absent from their homecoming ceremonies. ??He also kept a low profile as the Senate shrank his tax-cut plan by $400 billion, and had little to say about riots in Cincinnati this month. ??Such is the silent style of the new president, says Bush's top political strategist, Karl Rove. ??""Every administration is marked in contrast to its predecessor. The previous administration felt compelled to dominate the evening news every day and the president said, 'I'm focused on getting the job done,""' Rove said Wednesday in an Associated Press interview. ??Running a low-key presidency sets Bush apart from former President Clinton, but the style has its critics. ??Some lawmakers, including members of his own party, said Bush could have saved more of his $1.6 trillion tax-cut plan if he had personally lobbied more lawmakers. ??Bush issued a statement expressing sympathy with police and protesters in Cincinnati, but ran the risk of looking detached. ??And Rove acknowledged that there was some discussion in the White House about Bush attending the U.S. crew's homecoming to reap the public relations reward for freeing the crew. ??But the president vetoed the idea, according to Rove, who quoted Bush as saying, ""I want it to be about them and I don't want to go through the discombobulation that it would require of them and their families for me to show up."" ??It is not hard to imagine Clinton commanding center stage during city riots, a budget battle or an international crisis, but Rove said, ""We intended to have a smaller profile than the previous administration."" ??Bush's ""attitude is that he's not going to be measured by whether or not he gets on the evening news but on whether or not he gets progress,"" Rove said during the 45-minute interview. ??He sat at a polished wood conference table in his West Wing office, his hands folded over a memo he had discretely turned upside down. Newspapers and a Starbucks coffee mug littered his desktop. Framed photos and artwork were propped against a chair, still awaiting hanging on his 89th day in the White House. ??A painting of a Texas landscape decorated one wall, allowing Bush's political strategist of eight years to ""go on vacation whenever I'm on the phone."" ??Rove is on the telephone a lot these days crafting strategies to pass the White House legislative agenda, maintain GOP control of Congress in 2002 and position the president for a re-election bid in 2004. ??Bush narrowly won the White House without California's 54 electoral votes, and Rove said the president could win re-election without the state ""but it's always nicer to carry the Golden State."" ??He said the state's electricity shortage will not hurt Bush's chances in 2004, adding that the administration has done ""virtually everything"" Gov. Gray Davis has requested. ??He suggested that the state caused its own problems by not building enough power plants and failing to follow the lead of other states, such as Bush's Texas, to establish sound energy policies before a crisis struck. ??""This has got a very human dimension to it,"" Rove said. ""It's one thing to talk about power supplies. It's another thing when you talk about how it affects their jobs, how it's affecting their livelihoods, how it's affecting the safety of their communities and the health of their families. This is a tough issue and it ought to be a wake up call for the entire country."" ??A White House task force headed by Vice President Dick Cheney is working on recommendations to address both short-term problems of soaring electricity and natural gas prices and longer-term energy supply problems, focusing on producing more domestic oil and gas and building more electric power plants. ??Rove said the administration will soon unveil new conservation measures aimed at helping California ease its shortages. ??He said Bush and his political team are bringing House Republicans from politically competitive states to the White House, where they discuss their districts' needs and, often, gain local media attention. ??Bush also plans to attend fund-raisers for House and Senate campaign committees, helping the party gear up for 2002 midterm elections in which control of Congress is at stake. ??Rove also said: ??-Bush will not seek broad authority to negotiate trade treaties anytime soon, allowing time to make the legislation more attractive to Democrats. ""You can only put so much into that pipe, and we've stuffed it,"" he said of Bush's crowded legislative agenda. The ""fast track"" authority is key to Bush's plans for a free trade zone stretching from Canada to Chile. That proposal is the focus of the three-day Summit of the Americas beginning Friday in Quebec City. ??-Americans will support Bush's environmental policies despite criticism of his decision to overturn some initiatives of the final days of the Clinton administration. Rove stopped short of accusing Clinton of setting Bush up for political troubles. ""I'm not certain I see a conspiracy there. I do think it's interesting"" that Clinton waited until the last moment to act. ??-Bush has not wavered since the campaign in his view that states should be able to opt out of minimum wage increases passed by Congress. ""We are not all one single labor market,"" Rove said. GRAPHIC: AP Photo WX109 LOAD-DATE: April 20, 2001 of 78 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ??????????????????????April 19, 2001, Thursday, BC cycle SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 727 words HEADLINE: Utility commission staff says parent company profiting from energy sales DATELINE: BOISE, Idaho BODY: ??IDACORP made $66 million in profits in the past year by buying electricity on the spot market and reselling it for a higher price to its subsidiary, Idaho Power Co., the staff for state utility regulators contends. ??The Idaho Public Utilities Commission staff said such profits should not come at the expense of Idaho Power ratepayers facing staggering electrical bills. ??In a report to commissioners posted on the agency's Internet site Wednesday, the staff recommended Idaho Power's proposed increases for residential and commercial customers be cut by about half. ??Idaho Power seeks rate increases over the coming year totaling $227.4 million. The regulatory staff recommends a $108.7 million increase. For residential customers, a requested 34-percent hike would be reduced to 16 percent. ??""This is not a final decision,"" said Jeff Beaman, a spokesman for IDACORP and Idaho Power. ""In many cases, the commissioners disagree with the staff."" ??The report noted there was nothing illegal about the transactions between Idaho Power and its sister company, Idaho Energy Systems. To change that, the staff urged commissioners to create a mechanism that forces Idaho Power to buy electricity at the same price Idaho Energy Systems pays for it. ??The report said Idaho Energy Systems, an unregulated subsidiary of IDACORP, repeatedly purchased electricity on the wholesale market and then sold it to Idaho Power for a profit. ??Idaho Power officials contend the recommended policy change could financially cripple the company. It already spent $161 million buying power on the open market and cannot recover the money unless the coming year's rate is increased. ??""The failure to recoup these funds could lead to liquidity problems,"" Beaman said, ""and that will hurt not only the company but our customers as well."" ??But IDACORP paid all of its salaried staff - including Idaho Power employees - a 15-percent bonus at the end of the last fiscal year because the company had achieved record profits of $139.9 million, 53 percent over the year before. ??Beaman said incentive payments have no impact on the rate request. ??Charging the higher rate between the two subsidiaries was the result of a commission order tying the price that Idaho Energy charges for wholesale electricity to the Mid-Columbia Index. The index has been pegged at unrealistic levels since the energy crisis erupted in California, and fluctuates constantly. ??""We are confident that the transactions were performed within the letter and spirit of the law, and have not been at the expense of ratepayers,"" Beaman said. ??Commission spokesman Gene Fadness said commissioners cannot comment on a case before them, but their ultimate decision can be appealed to the Idaho Supreme Court. ??The Public Utilities Commission staff also recommended: ??- Deferring $66.1 million of Idaho Power's rate request, without interest, until answers are available about the company's electricity deals. ??- Deferring another $45.8 million of the request until next year, when the commissioners would allow Idaho Power to collect 5-percent interest. That part of the hike was earmarked for wholesale power purchases this year - purchases that the staff believes will be much more expensive next year. ??- Cutting another $10.3 million from the increase request, contending it was an error by Idaho Power's Risk Management Committee that the company planned on passing on to ratepayers. ??- Implementing a low-interest loan program to encourage energy conservation by Idaho Power customers. ??- A two-year phase-in of any rate increase ultimately approved that is substantially over 20 percent. ??- Changing residential rates to a three-tiered system to encourage savings. ??Homeowners would pay 5.52 cents per kilowatt-hour for the first 800 kwh used, 6.12 cents per kwh for use between 800 kwh and 2,000 kwh, and 7.48 cents per kwh for use over 2,000 kwh. The current residential rate of 5.2 cents per kwh. ??The staff report also took Idaho Power to task, saying it was warned of the possibility of spiraling prices and power shortages as far back as 1995. ??But the company contends it did not want to build generating plants during the past decade because with electricity deregulation looming, nobody knew what independent power facilities were being considered. LOAD-DATE: April 20, 2001 of 78 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ??????????????????????April 19, 2001, Thursday, BC cycle SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 820 words HEADLINE: Legislators probe possible power, natural gas collusion BYLINE: By DON THOMPSON, Associated Press Writer DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Southern California Edison was charged about $750 million more this year for natural gas because of unchecked free-market forces, an industry consultant testified. ??Paul Carpenter told the Assembly Electricity Oversight Subcommittee on Wednesday the price spikes came after the El Paso Natural Gas Co. contracted first with Dynegy and later with its own marketing affiliate, El Paso Merchant Energy, to control the pipeline capacity. ??Officials with El Paso and other natural gas suppliers are expected to testify Thursday that they did not illegally manipulate the market. ??The California Public Utilities Commission estimated a year ago that overcharges by the companies that control natural gas flow drove up prices by $ 100 million a year to California gas and electricity customers. ??But PUC attorney Harvey Morris said that was before last summer's price spikes, which he blamed on natural gas suppliers using a ""monopoly"" to ""game the system."" ??""It's way worse than we could possibly have imagined,"" Morris said after testifying before the subcommittee. ""It's obviously way higher than $100 million."" ??Natural gas rates at the California border generally tracked national prices until November, when they spiked as high as 11 times higher than the price of natural gas elsewhere in the nation, Carpenter said. ??""I have never seen gas prices like this anywhere in the world,"" said Carpenter, who has been studying the energy market for 20 years for Cambridge, Mass.-based consultant The Brattle Group. The Brattle Group was hired by Edison to study the natural gas market. ??The committee is one of two legislative committees exploring whether illegal market manipulation in the electricity and natural gas markets has driven up California's energy costs. ??""This is a market that is plagued by the exercise of market power,"" Frank Wolak, chairman of the California Independent System Operator's Market Surveillance Committee, told the Senate Select Committee to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Energy Market. The ISO runs the state's power grid. ??However, ""there is no law against me saying, 'I'm not going to sell to you,""' Wolak said. Market manipulation only becomes illegal when there is collusion, Wolak said, and such evidence is hard to find. ??Electricity generators and natural gas suppliers say a severe supply and demand imbalance - not market manipulation - has led to higher prices. ??""Everybody's busy doing investigations. They're not interested in solving the problem,"" said Independent Energy Producers Executive Director Jan Smutny-Jones. ??Investigations ""are wasting everybody's time,"" Smutny-Jones said, adding that previous probes and lawsuits have uncovered no wrongdoing. He said the state's power problems came because state regulators denied utilities the chance to sign long-term energy contracts when they had the chance. ??""People have been playing by the rules,"" Smutny-Jones said. ??But the Senate committee's first witnesses are ISO officials who authored studies that claim the state paid more than $6 billion too much for power last year. ??Committee chair Joseph Dunn, D-Garden Grove, also has slated state Auditor Elaine Howell, who last month blamed buyers and sellers for skyrocketing electricity costs. Dunn also has scheduled future testimony from state, federal, academic and private investigators studying the power market. ??He invited five major generators to attend the committee's second hearing next week. All five - Reliant, Dynegy, Williams Energy, Duke Energy and Mirant - say they are eager to cooperate and clear their names, Dunn said. ??Dunn asked the five for a total of 86 specific documents. If the companies feel they cannot provide documents because of legal or confidentiality concerns, Dunn said he will subpoena them. ??Smutny-Jones said investigators appear to be growing desperate to blame the state's natural gas and electricity price hikes on illegal market manipulation instead of natural market forces. ??He cited Attorney General Bill Lockyer's announcement last week that any informant who helped prove wrongdoing would be entitled to a percentage of the state's recovery he estimated could range from $50 million to hundreds of millions of dollars. ??""If the state's offering a $50 million reward, they haven't found anything,"" Smutny-Jones said. ""I don't think you're going to find the fact that anybody did anything criminal here."" ??Assemblywoman Jenny Oropeza, D-Long Beach, said she believes otherwise after Wednesday's testimony: ""I think it is very clear there was some price manipulation going on."" ??But Assemblyman John Campbell, R-Irvine, isn't sure there was anything illegal. ??""There clearly are market forces at work, that's evident,"" Campbell said. ""Whether you make the jump to market manipulation ... I haven't seen conclusive evidence that leads me to make that jump."" LOAD-DATE: April 20, 2001 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Lynn Church - EPSA, in your office.; [EMail-Body]= (per Tim Brown 202-789-7200) [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Ken Lay/ Jeff Skilling visits; [EMail-Body]= I spoke with Jeff and he is not going to be available for the speech on the 26th. Do we pass or is there an alternative? Can we get done what we need to get done with Ken's visit the following week? Nicholas O'Day 08/31/2000 06:01 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: John Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Joseph P Hirl/AP/ENRON@ENRON, Mika Watanabe/AP/Enron, Takashi Kimura/AP/Enron@Enron Subject: Ken Lay/ Jeff Skilling visits Ken Lay Visit. Following discussions with the Prime Minister's office and a quick check with venues 31 October is firming up as the preferred date for a meeting with the Prime Minister and an office opening by the PM. Jeff Skilling Visit. The Nikkei and the Tokyo University have now made the decision to invite Mr Skilling to give the key note address at the symposium on 26 November in Tokyo. As mentioned, the symposium is the most prestigious conference on IT in Japan. While the conference itself receives significant media attention, the President of Nikkei has offered to interview Mr Skilling. This honour is usually reserved for Heads of State. The interview will be featured on the front page of the Nikkei and picked up by other major media services. kind regards Nicholas O'Day 08/29/2000 07:43 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: John Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Joseph P Hirl/AP/ENRON@ENRON, Mika Watanabe/AP/Enron, Takashi Kimura/AP/Enron Subject: Re: Ken Lay meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Ken Lay Visit. Balancing the need to push out the arrangement of high level meetings as far as possible with the desire to have a meeting with Prime Minister Mori prior to the US Presidential election, the week commencing 30 October would be the optimum time for a visit by Mr Lay. PM Mori is generally available in that week. We will get a preferred time from the PM's chief secretary first thing tomorrow morning Tokyo time. Jeff Skilling Visit. The boards of Nikkei and Tokyo University Institute of Advanced Studies have yet to make a decision on the key note speaker for the one day invitation only seminar to be held on 26 October. As mentioned, the boards will choose between the chairman of Cisco and Jeff Skilling. The conference is focused on the IT revolution and an invitation only event for approximately 600 of Japan's corporate leaders. The speaking panel and topics for discussion will be developed around the key note speaker. If Mr Skilling were to give the key note speech, it is likely that key senior Government Ministers would be asked to present at the seminar. Following the Prime Minister's commitment at the Okinawa summit of US$15billion expenditure in the region on IT infrastructure and education, Japan's focus on e-commerce is almost reaching fever pitch. There will be significant interest in the conference from senior levels of Government and the business community. Further, as you would expect with the involvement of the Nikkei, there is typically significant media coverage associated with the key note speaker's presentation. kind regards [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron Mentions - 11/09/01-11/10/01; [EMail-Body]= Rival to Buy Enron, Top Energy Trader, After Financial Fall The New York Times, 11/10/01 Regulators Struggle With a Marketplace Created by Enron The New York Times, 11/10/01 COMPANIES & FINANCE INTERNATIONAL - Dynegy agrees to $7.8bn rescue bid for = Enron. Financial Times, 11/10/01 COMPANIES & FINANCE - INTERNATIONAL - Accountancy put back under the spotli= ght. Financial Times, 11/10/01 LEX COLUMN - Layed to rest. Financial Times, 11/10/01 COMPANIES & FINANCE INTERNATIONAL - Company troubles leave Houston with a p= roblem. Financial Times, 11/10/01 Dynegy to acquire Enron in $8.9 billion stock deal / New giant moves out of= shadow Houston Chronicle, 11/10/01 The Nation Smaller Rival to Acquire Teetering Enron Power: Energy giant tha= t pressed for deregulation in California is on the brink of collapse. Los Angeles Times, 11/10/01 Dynegy to acquire Enron in $8.9 billion stock deal / New giant moves out of= shadow Houston Chronicle, 11/10/01 POWER PLAY / Lay opened energy firms to work in new markets Houston Chronicle, 11/10/01 POWER PLAY / Purchase elevates Watson's low profile Houston Chronicle, 11/10/01 Dyenegy to acquire Enron in $8.9 billion stock deal / Many fear `unique' pr= oblems Houston Chronicle, 11/10/01 Enron Accepts $8 Billion Buyout Offer From Dynegy; Energy Giant Was Forced = to Negotiating Table After Disclosing That It Had Overstated Earnings The Washington Post, 11/10/01 The Nation NEWS ANALYSIS A Visionary Fallen From Grace Los Angeles Times, 11/10/01 DYNEGY TIMELINE Houston Chronicle, 11/10/01 POWER PLAY / ENRON TIMELINE Houston Chronicle, 11/10/01 POWER PLAY / Enron had been a political heavyweight / Critics decried influ= ence of Ken Lay in White House Houston Chronicle, 11/10/01 POWER PLAY / Sale suddenly switches office outlook downtown Houston Chronicle, 11/10/01 POWER PLAY / Enron Field name may fall as quickly as energy empire Houston Chronicle, 11/10/01 Market forces: Worries over Royal Bank's Enron exposure The Guardian, 11/10/01 Dynegy snaps up Enron for $9.5bn The Times of London, 11/10/01 UK jobs on the line Daily Mail, 11/10/01 Dynegy to get prime downtown real estate in Enron deal Associated Press Newswires, 11/10/01 Enron India Pwr Unit Sale Faces Review After Dynegy Deal Dow Jones Energy Service, 11/10/01 Talks to salvage multibillion dollar Enron India project goes into third da= y Associated Press Newswires, 11/10/01 All eyes in electric industry on Texas as deregulation nears Associated Press Newswires, 11/10/01 Enron Says It's Too Soon to Quantify U.K. Job Cuts (Update1) Bloomberg, 11/10/01 Dynegy to Buy Enron for $23 Billion in Stock, Debt (Update9) Bloomberg, 11/09/01 Dynegy announces $8 billion deal to buy larger rival Enron Associated Press Newswires, 11/09/01 USA: UPDATE 3-Dynegy to acquire Enron for $9 bln. Reuters English News Service, 11/09/01 Enron not California's largest power supplier, but merger could affect pric= es Associated Press Newswires, 11/09/01 Dynegy-Enron merger could mean name change for Enron Field Associated Press Newswires, 11/09/01 Dynegy Buy Of Enron Valued At $23B-$24B With Debt Dow Jones News Service, 11/09/01 Chronology of Enron Corp.'s history Associated Press Newswires, 11/09/01 Fitch Takes Rating Action on Enron & Dynegy on Merger News Business Wire, 11/09/01 ChevronTexaco to Invest $2.5 Billion in Dynegy PR Newswire, 11/09/01 Business/Financial Desk; Section A Rival to Buy Enron, Top Energy Trader, After Financial Fall By ALEX BERENSON and ANDREW ROSS SORKIN 11/10/2001 The New York Times Page 1, Column 2 c. 2New York Times Company With its stock plunging and its finances in doubt, the world's largest ener= gy trader, the Enron Corporation, agreed to be acquired yesterday by the ri= val Dynegy Inc. for about $9 billion in stock and the assumption of $13 bil= lion in debt.=20 The deal is an extraordinary turnabout for Enron, a Houston-based company t= hat had been a driving force behind electricity deregulation nationwide. Its chairman, Kenneth L. Lay, a big contributor to the Republican Party, pr= ovided political influence, while its former chief executive, Jeffrey K. Sk= illing, helped create markets for the trading of electricity and natural ga= s. But last winter, when California's effort to deregulate the electricity = market led to soaring power prices and rolling blackouts, Enron was the sub= ject of much criticism and political anger.=20 Recent disclosures of discrepancies in Enron's financial statements and an = investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission caused the shares t= o plunge this week to their lowest level in a decade. As other companies be= came wary of doing business with it, Enron -- also facing a potential cash = squeeze -- apparently had little choice but to find a buyer, and a deal was= hastily cobbled together this week.=20 For critics who had complained about Enron's market power and its dominance= , the combination poses additional concerns. Dynegy's acquisition of Enron = will be reviewed by state and federal agencies, led by the Justice Departme= nt and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Analysts said today that t= hey expected scrutiny of the combined companies' holdings in California, wh= ere Dynegy owns power-generating plants and Enron accounts for much of the = trading of natural gas -- fuel for the state's electric power plants.=20 Buying Enron at a deep discount -- it has lost $60 billion in market value = this year -- could make Dynegy the dominant trader of electricity and natur= al gas. But the agreement carries big risks as well. Along with Enron's gas= pipelines and high-technology trading floor, Dynegy will take on Enron's s= ubstantial debt and a web of complex transactions that Enron has spun over = the last decade.=20 In addition to the $13 billion in debt that Enron carries on its books, it = has guaranteed at least $4 billion in off-balance sheet loans, and the hidd= en debt could total as much as $10 billion, said Carol Coale, a stock analy= st with Prudential Securities.=20 Charles L. Watson, Dynegy's chairman and chief executive, said yesterday th= at Dynegy could sort through Enron's tangled finances. ''We know the compan= y well,'' Mr. Watson said. ''It's not like we just started fresh. I'm confi= dent that it's as solid as we thought it was.''=20 The new company will combine Enron's 25,000-mile natural gas pipeline syste= m with the large number of power plants that Dynegy owns worldwide, as well= as Illinois Power, a Dynegy subsidiary that serves 650,000 customers in Il= linois. But its most important asset will be its trading desk. It will be t= he largest energy trader in the nation, trading more than twice as much pow= er and natural gas as its closest competitors.=20 Mr. Watson said the company did not expect to sell significant properties a= nd that the deal should pass regulatory scrutiny. ''There's really not a lo= t of overlap in assets,'' he said.=20 Mr. Watson and Steve Bergstrom, Dynegy's president, will hold those positio= ns in the new company, which will be called Dynegy and remain in Houston. M= r. Lay, who created Enron in the mid-1980's, will not have any role in the = combined company's daily operations. He has been asked to join its board bu= t has not provided an answer. ''The last three weeks haven't been a lot of = fun,'' he said.=20 In a statement announcing the agreement yesterday afternoon, Mr. Watson sai= d he was confident that the merger would produce a strong new company. ''En= ron is the ideal strategic partner for Dynegy,'' Mr. Watson said. ''We will= keep a strong balance sheet and straightforward financial structure as key= priorities.''=20 To shore up Enron's finances, Dynegy will immediately put $1.5 billion into= Enron through ChevronTexaco, the giant oil company, which already owns 27 = percent of Dynegy. Another billion dollars will be injected once the deal i= s completed.=20 Investors appeared comfortable yesterday that Dynegy could make the deal wo= rk. After falling $3, to $33, on Wednesday, when the companies first said t= hey were in discussions, Dynegy rose $5.76 on Thursday and yesterday to clo= se the week at $38.76.=20 ''On paper, it works,'' Ms. Coale of Prudential said. ''The combined compan= y would be the leading trader, the market leader in most of their businesse= s.'' Ms. Coale, who has a sell rating on Enron and a buy rating on Dynegy, = said she planned to keep her buy rating on Dynegy.=20 As it works to have the deal approved, Dynegy will have to persuade Enron's= traders to stay with the combined company. The pain of the stock's 90 perc= ent plunge this year will not be equally shared. Some Enron employees have = held onto their shares and seen their retirement accounts eviscerated. Mean= while, Mr. Lay, Mr. Skilling and other former and current executives sold h= undreds of millions of dollars in Enron stock in 2000 and this year.=20 The companies also have very different corporate cultures. Dynegy emphasize= s teamwork, while Enron is more competitive, said Ehud Ronn, director of th= e Center for Energy Finance Education and Research at the University of Tex= as. Even before the merger was announced, Enron had lost some of its employ= ees to other energy trading companies, Mr. Ronn said.=20 Some investors and analysts say that the problems with Enron's finances may= extend beyond the partnerships that have been the subject of Wall Street's= scrutiny the last month. James Chanos, a short-seller who has been one of = Enron's most vocal critics, said there was increasing evidence that Enron's= energy trading operations were not as profitable as the company had said. = ''There appears to be a culture at Enron of aggressively booking profits an= d deferring or obscuring losses,'' Mr. Chanos said.=20 On Thursday, Enron said in a filing with the S.E.C that it had overstated i= ts earnings by almost $600 million over the last five years. Mr. Chanos sai= d more restatements were possible, noting that the filing disclosed partner= ships had been used to hedge almost $1 billion in losses in 2000 and this y= ear. So far, the losses from those partnerships remain off Enron's financia= l statements, Mr. Chanos said.=20 Enron's stock had been under pressure for most of this year, as the company= ran up large losses with failed efforts to expand outside its core trading= operation. In August, Mr. Skilling resigned as chief executive, and Mr. La= y resumed control of daily operations.=20 Still, the company appeared financially sound until last month, when it dis= closed that its shareholders' equity, a measure of the company's value, dro= pped by $1.2 billion because of deals disclosed only hazily in its financia= l statements. The announcement unnerved investors, who wondered whether Enr= on had found ways to inflate its profits and move debt off its balance shee= t, and led the S.E.C. to begin an investigation.=20 Mr. Lay tried to reassure investors that Enron's finances were in order and= that its businesses remained strong. But the last three weeks have brought= a series of damaging revelations about partnerships that Enron formed with= some of its top executives, including its former chief financial officer, = Andrew S. Fastow.=20 With questions mounting, the major credit-rating agencies began to downgrad= e Enron's debt, putting additional pressure on the company. If Enron's debt= rating falls below investment grade, it would be forced to repay $3.3 bill= ion in loans that it had guaranteed.=20 To strengthen its balance sheet and bolster its stock, Enron turned to big = investors like Warren E. Buffett in search of billions of dollars of financ= ing. When the financing did not quickly appear, its stock fell further.=20 By this week, some major energy traders were refusing to extend credit to E= nron, worrying that the company would be unable to make good on its contrac= ts. The Mirant Corporation, an Atlanta-based power plant owner and electric= ity trader, sharply curtailed its trading with Enron this week. ''We're tra= ding with them on a very limited basis,'' said James Peters, a Mirant spoke= sman. ''It's not business as usual.''=20 On Wednesday, Enron's stock fell as low as $7 a share, its lowest level in = more than a decade. That day, news of the Enron and Dynegy talks leaked out= .=20 By late Wednesday, the boards of the two companies had tentatively agreed t= o a deal. But Dynegy refused to go ahead until it learned whether Enron's c= redit rating would remain investment grade and was comfortable with the eff= ect of the deal on its own rating. The deal moved forward yesterday after D= ynegy was assured Enron's debt was not in danger of being lowered to junk s= tatus soon after the deal was announced, according to company officials.=20 Dynegy and Enron had provided Standard & Poor's and Moody's Investors Servi= ce, the main credit agencies, with statements showing them what a combined = company might look like and asked the ratings agencies for an expedited rev= iew of the transaction, Mr. Watson said.=20 Under the deal, Enron shareholders will receive 0.2685 share of Dynegy stoc= k for each Enron share, or $9.80 based on Dynegy's closing price on Thursda= y. Enron's stock gained 22 cents yesterday, to $8.63.=20 ''I never thought our stock price would be at this level,'' Mr. Lay said ye= sterday.=20 Enron's shareholders will own only 36 percent of the combined company, and = Dynegy will name at least 11 members of the company's 14-member board.=20 If the deal falls apart, Enron or Dynegy will have to pay a breakup fee of = $350 million.=20 To protect Dynegy's and ChevronTexaco's cash infusion, the money will go to= an Enron unit that owns the Northern Natural Gas Pipeline. If the merger i= s not completed, Dynegy will have the right to buy the unit.=20 An army of bankers and lawyers advised the companies. Lehman Brothers Inc. = acted as financial adviser and Baker Botts and Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer &= Feld acted as counsel for Dynegy. J. P. Morgan & Company and Salomon Smith= Barney acted as financial advisers for Enron, and Vinson & Elkins and Weil= Gotshal & Manges acted as the company's counsel. Pillsbury Winthrop served= as counsel to ChevronTexaco. Chart: ''A Marriage of Strength and Weakness'' A merger of Enron and Dynegy= would bring together two of the country's biggest energy companies -- and = save Enron from potential collapse. Graph tracks the weekly closes of Enron= shares from 1999 through 2001. Top North American gas marketers SALES, OF = BILLION CUBIC FEET PER DAY* Enron: 24.6 Reliant: 13.2 Duke Energy: 12.8 BP:= 12.3 Mirant: 11.8 Dynegy: 10.9 Top North American power marketers SALES, O= F MILLION MEGAWATT HOURS* Enron: 212.5 American Electric Power: 134.5 Duke = Energy: 118.1 Reliant Resources: 86.1 PG&E National Energy Group: 73.2 Dyne= gy: 70.1 *Figures are for the 2nd quarter of 2001. (Sources: Bloomberg Fina= ncial Markets; Simmons & Co.; Natural Gas Week)(pg. C2)=20 Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 Business/Financial Desk; Section C Regulators Struggle With a Marketplace Created by Enron By JEFF GERTH with RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr. 11/10/2001 The New York Times Page 1, Column 2 c. 2001 New York Times Company WASHINGTON, Nov. 9 -- For years, the Enron Corporation used its political m= uscle to build the markets in which it thrived, pushing relentlessly on Cap= itol Hill and in bureaucratic backwaters to deregulate the nation's natural= gas and electricity businesses.=20 Its achievement, as one Enron executive said today, in creating a ''regulat= ory black hole'' fit nicely with what he called the company's ''core manage= ment philosophy, which was to be the first mover into a market and to make = money in the initial chaos and lack of transparency.'' Now, Wall Street's dissatisfaction with Enron's secretive ways has delivere= d the company into the arms of its much smaller Houston rival, Dynegy Inc.,= in a deal worth about $9 billion in stock and the assumption of $13 billio= n in debt. The combination of the two companies, energy experts and lawmake= rs said today, poses a novel set of challenges for regulators still struggl= ing to grasp the complexities of the marketplace that Enron invented.=20 ''We're in a supersonic-speed era of electronic trading with a horse-and-bu= ggy-era regulatory system to protect consumers,'' said Representative Edwar= d J. Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat who has devised legislation to close = the regulatory gap.=20 Dynegy's acquisition of Enron is expected to be reviewed by numerous state = and federal agencies, led by the Justice Department, the Federal Trade Comm= ission and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.=20 Analysts said today that sharp scrutiny would be given to the combined comp= anies' holdings in California, where Dynegy owns generating plants and Enro= n controls a large part of the market for trading natural gas -- the fuel f= or a big share of the state's electric power plants.=20 ''Dynegy would now have a greater ability to take the dominant position in = gas and raise the price of electricity,'' said Frank Wolak, a professor of = economics at Stanford University.=20 Mr. Wolak, a consultant to the Justice Department on a 1999 antitrust case = that led to limits on another merger of electricity and natural gas compani= es in Southern California, said he was skeptical that regulators were up to= the task of reviewing today's deal.=20 The transaction ''is something the Department of Justice needs to look at, = and they are going to have a hard time looking at,'' Mr. Wolak said. ''And = it's beyond the ability of the F.E.R.C. to look at.''=20 Pat Wood -- named chairman of the federal energy commission earlier this ye= ar with the backing of Kenneth L. Lay, the chairman of Enron -- acknowledge= d in an interview today that the agency had ''a long way to go'' in matchin= g the sophistication of the companies it regulates.=20 But he said that the commission had made great strides in grappling with th= e new risk management techniques pioneered by Enron, Dynegy and other energ= y companies. It is hiring more experts, he said, adopting more restrictive = rules on how much ''market power'' one party can control and requiring more= disclosure of certain energy transactions.=20 In an interview this evening, Charles L. Watson, the chairman of Dynegy, sa= id he did not believe that regulators reviewing the deal with Enron would r= equire the sale of any assets. ''We haven't really identified any pitfalls = that require any sort of asset divestiture,'' he said. ''There's not really= any overlap.''=20 A senior executive at one of Enron's largest energy-trading rivals disagree= d. ''I don't think this deal gets through unscathed,'' he said today. ''I'm= sure the Justice Department and the F.T.C. will look closely at the pretty= substantial concentration of market power these companies will have in the= energy-trading area.''=20 Enron is mainly a trader of natural gas and electricity -- indeed, the bigg= est player in both those markets -- and it also owns a network of gas pipel= ines. Dynegy processes and sells natural gas and generates and sells electr= icity. Each company owns a local electric utility, too: Dynegy owns Illinoi= s Power in Decatur, Ill., while Enron owns Portland General Electric in Por= tland, Ore., but last month announced plans to sell it to another Oregon ut= ility.=20 For a decade, as it transformed itself from a gas pipeline operator into th= e nation's biggest energy trader, Enron enjoyed unalloyed lobbying success = in Washington and the enthusiastic backing of Wall Street.=20 In the early months of the Bush administration, Mr. Lay -- whose company wa= s one of the biggest financial backers of George W. Bush's presidential cam= paign -- played a prominent, and some said unusual, role in helping the Whi= te House pick nominees to the federal energy commission. Enron executives m= et with Vice President Dick Cheney, whose energy task force backed many of = the deregulatory initiatives pushed by Mr. Lay.=20 Now, ''the company has become a pariah,'' an Enron executive said today. ''= The Bush administration doesn't want to have anything to do with us.''=20 The problems began with the energy crisis in California, where Enron's outs= poken defense of deregulation, even more than its electricity trading activ= ities, made the company a favorite whipping boy of politicians and consumer= advocates. In the financial markets, meanwhile, Enron's confusing disclosu= res, tolerated when its stock was soaring, drew disdain as the calming of t= he energy storms in California and other parts of the country beat the shar= es down, starting last spring.=20 ''Enron fell victim to their own inconsistencies on transparency,'' Mr. Wol= ak said. As California officials sought to understand why energy prices had= soared out of control, he said, Enron's ''view was that we want everybody'= s data, but if you want ours, get a subpoena.''=20 Energy executives and regulators said that sort of arrogance had long marke= d Enron's attitude about government oversight.=20 Electricity sales had for decades been the job of local utility companies, = operating as monopolies and selling power at regulated rates within their s= ervice areas. A few entrepreneurs, led by Mr. Lay, conceived a different mo= del in which power could be sold by generators or middlemen to big corporat= e users or utilities in faraway regions, at whatever price the market would= bear.=20 In the early 1990's, Congress -- under heavy lobbying by Enron -- passed le= gislation that began to open up electricity sales to marketers. Before long= , Enron became one of the first companies to receive government approval to= sell electricity at market rates. The market for interstate sales of natur= al gas had been freed up a few years earlier, and critics complained that t= raders like Enron were gleaning their profits by stoking volatility in gas = prices.=20 In the mid-1990's, independent gas producers backed legislation in Congress= to allow the creation of a co-operative marketing organization, which, the= y hoped, would have helped stabilize prices.=20 Raymond Plank, the chairman of the Apache Corporation, a gas producer based= in Houston, said that the big gas marketing and trading companies, includi= ng Enron, successfully lobbied to kill the plan, leaving prices as volatile= as ever.=20 ''It was a great concept,'' Mr. Plank said. ''We could have headed off the = problems we have today.''=20 Enron's final lobbying success came last year. With a strong push from the = company's lobbyists, Congress passed futures trading legislation that exemp= ted Internet energy trading platforms like EnronOnline, the industry leader= , from oversight by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Enron takes t= he other side of trades on its exchange. In traditional markets like the Ne= w York Mercantile Exchange, which remain subject to oversight, the exchange= acts as a middleman between buyers and sellers.=20 Under Mr. Watson, Dynegy has been less of a pathbreaker than Enron, and tho= ugh California politicians denounced it, too, as a profiteer during the ene= rgy crisis, most analysts say it has been less aggressive than Enron in bot= h its business practices and its lobbying.=20 Indeed, the rival energy-trading executive today predicted ''a huge culture= clash'' as the Houston neighbors merge. ''Blood will flow in Houston over = the integration of the trading operation,'' he said.=20 But regulators may find Dynegy easier to deal with.=20 Earlier this year, the federal energy commission asked for comments on whet= her it should tighten scrutiny of dealings between natural gas pipelines an= d energy-trading shops owned by the same company.=20 Enron wondered what all the bother was. ''Would stricter rules prevent real= affiliate abuse that current rules do not,'' it wrote in a regulatory fili= ng, ''or would they instead merely restrict the activities of some of the m= ore successful participants in the marketplace?''=20 Dynegy, by contrast, painted a grim picture and invited regulators to crack= down. ''Abuses abound,'' it said, ''because of financial windfalls, diffic= ulty of detection, lengthy investigations and increased complexity of the m= arket.'' Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 COMPANIES & FINANCE INTERNATIONAL - Dynegy agrees to $7.8bn rescue bid for = Enron. 11/10/2001 Financial Times (c) 2001 Financial Times Limited . All Rights Reserved THAL LARSEN.=20 Dynegy last night agreed a rescue bid of about $7.8bn for Enron, after the = rival energy group narrowly escaped having its credit ratings cut to junk s= tatus. If successful, the all-stock bid will allow Dynegy to take over a pioneer o= f energy trading that is many times its size in the electricity and gas mar= kets, while also providing urgently-needed liquidity to the fallen star.=20 Dynegy offered almost 0.27 of its own shares per Enron share. Dynegy's stoc= k closed at $38.76, up 6.2 per cent, yesterday, valuing the bid at $7.8bn, = or 21 per cent above Enron's closing price. Enron was up 2.6 per cent at $8= .63.=20 The combined company will also receive an immediate cash injection of $1.5b= n from ChevronTexaco, which owns 27 per cent of Dynegy, and a further $1bn = from ChevronTexaco when the deal closes.=20 The infusion is expected to avert a funding crisis caused by Enron's fallin= g trading volumes and its customers' demands for collateral which followed = a series of blows to its reputation.=20 Dynegy will use the $1.5bn infusion to acquire preferred stock collateralis= ed by Enron's pipeline assets; in return ChevronTexaco will be granted righ= ts over $1.5bn of Dynegy stock.=20 JP Morgan Chase and Citigroup demanded similar security for a $1bn loan ext= ended this month.=20 Moody's Investors Service cut its rating on Enron's senior unsecured debt y= esterday morning from Baa2 to Baa3 - just one notch above junk status. Any = deeper downgrade would have forced Enron to sell stock to cover about $3.3b= n of obligations, and could have deterred Dynegy. Moody's kept the ratings = under review for further downgrades, given ""the potential for increased mar= gin requirements from counterparties"".=20 However, the agency said it would treat a substantial capital injection as = ""a stabilising event"". The deal is likely to face intense regulatory scruti= ny, given the large share the combined companies would have in the energy m= arkets.=20 The bid represents a reversal of fortune for Enron, which will effectively = be humbled by its smaller Houston rival. However, some analysts expressed r= eservations, as Enron faces a Securities and Exchange Commission inquiry in= to off-balance sheet transactions, and a restatement of its accounts has ye= t to clear up questions about the true state of its financial dealings.=20 Carol Coale, of Prudential Securities, said: ""We believe that either Dynegy= had material exposure to Enron's trading contracts or that it is trying to= rescue its competitor by saving the liquidity in the commodities markets.""= =20 Reporting by Andrew Edgecliffe-Johnson and Robert Clow in New York, Sheila = McNulty in Houston and Peter Thal Larsen in London .. See Lex.=20 (c) Copyright Financial Times Ltd. All rights reserved.=20 http://www.ft.com. Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 COMPANIES & FINANCE - INTERNATIONAL - Accountancy put back under the spotli= ght. By ADRIAN MICHAELS and RICHARD WATERS. 11/10/2001 Financial Times (c) 2001 Financial Times Limited . All Rights Reserved Arthur Andersen, Enron's auditor, is understood to have approved the contro= versial off-balance sheet arrangements that lie at the heart of the energy = company's decision to overhaul its accounts earlier this week.=20 However, in at least one case the auditor may not have been given full info= rmation, while the involvement in the disputed transactions of four people = employed by Enron has only recently come to light. Andersen has already bee= n hit by lawsuits from Enron shareholders filed in Oregon and Harris County= , Texas - a popular venue among plaintiffs' lawyers given its history of bi= g jury awards. The legal actions are the latest blow to an auditing profession still reeli= ng in the aftermath of a series of accounting scandals that have blown up i= n recent years. On Wednesday, Waste Management said Andersen would pay $20m= to settle a suit brought by shareholders in the trash hauler alleging prof= essional malpractice. The Securities and Exchange Commission has already ag= reed a $7m settlement with Andersen over the alleged audit fraud.=20 The Enron actions could also turn out to be one of the first tests of new a= uditor independence rules set by the SEC. The energy company paid Andersen = $25m for its audit last year and $27m for other services.=20 An Andersen spokesman refused to comment on whether the auditor had vetted = the complex off-balance sheet arrangements used by Enron to manage its trad= ing risks and offload debt. However, he added: ""We do help companies unders= tand accounting rules and how to apply them.""=20 In a regulatory filing on Thursday, Enron indicated that its decision to re= state its accounts to include two off-balance companies was based on ""curre= nt information"", suggesting that full details had not been available before= .=20 However, a third accounting change was based on a new ""assessment"", Enron s= aid, raising questions about the auditor's earlier judgement.=20 Under the previous commissioner Arthur Levitt, the SEC attacked companies t= hat indulged in ""earnings management"" and accountants who suffered from con= flicts of interest between audit and consulting work. The accounting firms = say audit and consulting work can co-exist.=20 (c) Copyright Financial Times Ltd. All rights reserved.=20 http://www.ft.com. Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 LEX COLUMN - Layed to rest. 11/10/2001 Financial Times (c) 2001 Financial Times Limited . All Rights Reserved Being in the business, Dynegy should have a better idea than other possible= buyers of what it is taking on. Presumably it has been given a fuller and = franker explanation of Enron's off-balance-sheet mess than its investors, b= ut it can scarcely have been able to carry out what normally counts as due = diligence.=20 Moody's decision and S&P's indecision meant Enron kept its investment grade= and seems to have got the deal done. Do ratings agencies really provide in= dependent analysis at these times? If Dynegy injects $1.5bn of cash up fron= t, courtesy of Chevron Texaco and secured on the pipeline assets, that aver= ts the immediate crisis. An exchange ratio of 0.27 would value Enron's stoc= k at $8bn. At about $10.67 a share that is a 27 per cent premium, but more = pertinently compares with $34 on the eve of the October earnings call and $= 83 on New Year's Day. There are no rivals for this year's prize for shareho= lder value destruction. Others have gone, but did Ken Lay, Enron chief exec= utive, know what was going on? Whatever the answer, it reflects poorly on h= im. The merger raises antitrust questions. Dynegy might be a fifth of Enron's s= ize, but it is the second biggest energy trader. But while Enron has few fr= iends in the public markets it still has some in high places. Dynegy's offe= r puts a floor beneath Enron's share price. Paying bottom dollar provides s= ome insurance for its shareholders. As more emerges on the financial struct= ure and the state of the core trading business, the question is whether tho= se who declined the opportunity start to take an interest or pat themselves= on the back.=20 (c) Copyright Financial Times Ltd. All rights reserved.=20 http://www.ft.com. Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 COMPANIES & FINANCE INTERNATIONAL - Company troubles leave Houston with a p= roblem. By SHEILA MCNULTY. 11/10/2001 Financial Times (c) 2001 Financial Times Limited . All Rights Reserved COMPANIES & FINANCE INTERNATIONAL - Company troubles leave Houston with a p= roblem - Energy trader has played a vital role in its home city, writes She= ila McNulty.=20 When Sam Soliman, senior vice-president of Koch Industries, the second-larg= est privately held company in the US, remarked earlier this year on the bui= lding boom in downtown Houston, he could not help but be alarmed about the = city's prospects: ""I always get worried when I see a lot of new constructio= n."" He was right to be so circumspect. In a matter of months, three of Houston'= s corporate landmarks - Compaq Computer, Continental Airlines and Enron - h= ave come under pressure.=20 Compaq is in the process of being acquired by Hewlett-Packard; Continental = has had to lay off 12,000 employees; and energy trader Enron has gone from = being the leader of Houston's business community to its biggest liability.= =20 The fourth most populous city in the US is reeling from the latest demise a= mong its corporate citizens.=20 ""It's a body blow,"" says Charlie Savino, executive vice-president of the Gr= eater Houston Partnership, a business organisation.=20 Enron is not only one of the city's biggest employers; it has led the redev= elopment of downtown Houston, making it somewhere pleasant to live for the = first time in decades.=20 At the centre of its efforts is the Enron Field, which the company financed= to bring professional baseball - and its fans - back into the city centre.= =20 On the periphery are Enron's contributions to Houston's social development.= =20 The company matches all employee donations made to non-profit organisations= , for up to $15,000 per employee, per year.=20 It also makes donations to non-profit organisations for which its employees= offer their time.=20 Kenneth Lay, Enron chief executive, has long been the ""go-to guy"" to get so= mething done in Houston.=20 Enron's status brought Houston status; as the biggest energy trader in the = US, it made the city the centre of energy trading. EnronOnline, its interne= t trading platform, has drawn some of the brightest minds to the city to wo= rk on what has become the world's biggest web-based transaction system.=20 Enron was so secure in its standing that it was building a new 40-storey of= fice building adjoining its 50-storey tower.=20 Beside that, bulldozers and cranes have been putting the finishing touches = to a massive new parking garage.=20 Employees had just started to move into the new towers when a series of dis= closures about Enron's financial position began to undermine the company an= d send investors fleeing for cover.=20 Enron staff, once known for being both brilliant and arrogant enough to pro= ve it, are coping with their dramatic reversal in status in a wide variety = of ways.=20 As they left work yesterday, many brushed by in their smart-casual polo shi= rts and khakis, refusing to say a word about what was unfolding.=20 One man, looking exhausted, braved a grin and said: ""Just keep smiling. The= world goes on. Companies go through problems all the time, just like we do= in personal life.""=20 One woman felt she had to laugh at the irony: she moved to Enron last year = to protect herself from job losses in the more traditional energy businesse= s. At that time, Enron was considered the safest place to be in the industr= y.=20 That Dynegy, another Houston-based energy trader, has emerged as Enron's sa= viour is being received positively by staff, who praised its technology and= processes.=20 The Houston business community may be hoping that a merged group might be b= etter for the city than a stand-alone Enron, as a combined business would b= e bigger and stronger.=20 But John Olson, of Sanders Morris Harris, a local investment banking and se= curities firm in Houston, notes that a merger is likely to lead to job loss= es, as assets are sold and businesses are streamlined.=20 Already, he says, many Houston citizens, big holders of Enron's stock, had = lost out on its share slide. ""The ripple effects on the city will be immeas= urable,"" he says.=20 (c) Copyright Financial Times Ltd. All rights reserved.=20 http://www.ft.com. Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 NEWS Dynegy to acquire Enron in $8.9 billion stock deal / New giant moves out of= shadow LAURA GOLDBERG Staff 11/10/2001 Houston Chronicle 3 STAR 1 (Copyright 2001) Enron Corp., a mainstay of Houston's corporate landscape that helped turn t= he city into a global energy trading powerhouse, will disappear in a turn o= f events that would have been unthinkable a month ago.=20 In a deal that will unite two hometown rivals, Dynegy announced Friday even= ing it would buy the beaten-down Enron in a stock deal worth almost $8.9 bi= llion, plus the assumption of $12.8 billion in debt. The purchase will end Enron's reign as the world's largest energy trader, c= atapulting a company to the top that in many ways has been in Enron's shado= w.=20 ""This could be viewed as Dynegy being the savior of industry in rescuing En= ron, the largest energy trader, and restoring market liquidity,"" said Carol= Coale, a stock analyst with Prudential Securities in Houston, who follows = both companies.=20 A much bigger Dynegy - with annual revenues exceeding $200 billion and $90 = billion in assets including pipelines and power plants - will emerge with C= huck Watson, its current chairman and chief executive, keeping those roles = in the combined company.=20 Layoffs are expected, but executives said it was too early to say how many.= Dynegy has almost 1,600 employees in Houston; Enron has more than 7,000 he= re.=20 For Watson, the deal is all about growth.=20 ""It accelerates our strategy some three or four years,"" he said shortly aft= er the deal was announced. ""This is just a financial bonanza really for bot= h companies.""=20 This isn't the way Ken Lay, Enron's chairman and chief executive, ever thou= ght his years of work would turn out.=20 ""This would not have been my dream case,"" Lay said in an interview with the= Chronicle shortly after the deal was announced. ""I would not even have con= templated it three or four weeks ago.""=20 Lay has been offered a seat on the combined company's board, but hasn't dec= ided yet whether to take it. He won't have any management role once the dea= l closes.=20 He helped take Enron from a staid pipeline company created from a 1985 merg= er to a trading machine that wheels and deals in gas, electricity, financia= l contracts used to help companies manage risk and other commodities.=20 But Lay said he believed selling Enron was the best option for its sharehol= ders, employees and the city considering the company's current battered sta= te.=20 ""This is the best way to provide certainty to protect this wholesale market= ing and trading franchise which is so valuable,"" he said, adding that Enron= looked at two or three other alternatives as it tried to strengthen its ba= lance sheet and add cash into its operations.=20 Lay said it's not his preference to sell Enron and see its name disappear.= =20 ""It happens to be the best alternative,"" said Lay. ""I'm a realist. I knew w= hat needed to be done.""=20 Among Enron's troubles: The Securities and Exchange Commission is investiga= ting business deals Enron did with two investment partnerships run by its f= ormer chief financial officer, its credibility on Wall Street is close to z= ero, a pile of shareholder lawsuits and its credit rating, which it relies = on to successfully run its core trading business, has been lowered.=20 While other questions had hung over Enron earlier this year, the path to it= s end really began Oct. 16, when the company released third- quarter earnin= gs and reported significant financial losses related to the two investment = partnerships.=20 That set in motion a spiral of events leading to Friday's announcement.=20 Watson called Lay on Oct. 24 to see if he could do anything to help dispel = rumors that Dynegy had stopped trading with Enron.=20 That conversation led to a meeting at Lay's house three days later, at whic= h the two started talking about a deal.=20 As these things go, the deal came together quickly, especially with so many= question marks hanging over Enron.=20 ""I think it's important to understand that Ken and I have known each other = for some 20 years,"" Watson said. ""We have a good understanding of what they= do and how they do it. We knew that their franchise was solid.""=20 Under the terms of the deal, which is expected to close in six to nine mont= hs:=20 Enron shareholder's get 0.2685 share of Dynegy per Enron share. Based on Fr= iday's closing stock prices of $8.63 for Enron and $38.76 for Dynegy, Dyneg= y is paying $10.41 an Enron share - or a 21 percent premium. That's a far c= ry from late January when Enron's closing price hit $82 a share.=20 Dynegy will immediately inject $1.5 billion in Enron to help shore it up. D= ynegy will get that money from ChevronTexaco, which owns about 26 percent o= f Dynegy.=20 In return for that money, Dynegy will get preferred stock and other rights = in Enron's Northern Natural Gas pipeline system. Should the deal not close,= Dynegy has the right to buy all of Northern Natural Gas.=20 At the deal's closing, ChevronTexaco will provide another $1 billion to the= combined company.=20 Enron will have the right to designate at least three board members for the= combined company, which will have 14 board seats.=20 Steve Bergstrom, Dynegy's president, and Rob Doty, Dynegy's chief financial= officer, will keep those roles in the new company. Greg Whalley, currently= president and chief operating officer of Enron, will become an executive v= ice president at the combined company.=20 The deal contains a $350 million breakup fee that Dynegy would get if anoth= er suitor came in and Enron decided to take a better offer.=20 Watson also said the deal contains escape clauses to protect Dynegy should = it be necessary, but he doesn't expect any surprises.=20 ""We looked under the hood and guess what, it's just as strong as we thought= it was,"" he said.=20 The deal must be reviewed by a variety of government regulators, though Wat= son isn't expecting any antitrust problems.=20 Dynegy will talk to analysts and investors on a conference call Monday, att= empting to convince them of the deal's value. Dynegy expects the merger to = result in $400 million to $500 million in annual savings.=20 ""On paper, it looks good,"" said Coale, the analyst. ""We still remain concer= ned about the uncertainties that shroud Enron . . . The risks continue to b= e what we don't know about Enron. We just hope Chuck and his team do all th= e necessary due diligence, which is going to take more than a couple weeks.= ""=20 There are also concerns about merging two different cultures.=20 ""Looking at cultures, the two companies are very different,"" she said. ""Dyn= egy is a little bit of a fraternity. Chuck started this company and I'm sur= e he has a heartfelt emotion toward making things work at Dynegy. Enron is = a mercenary, aggressive, cutthroat culture.""=20 While both are energy traders, Enron has pursued a strategy of shedding ass= ets, while Dynegy has continued to make asset purchases.=20 At the start of the year, Enron was still heralded as an innovator for othe= rs to emulate. Since, a series of problems began chipping away at Enron's i= mage.=20 But such concerns were mostly pushed aside for as long as the company's sto= ck price performed well and its core energy trading business turned out hig= her and still-higher profits.=20 The company's woes became more serious and quickly multiplied after it made= troubling financial disclosures in its third-quarter earnings report Oct. = 16.=20 It disclosed that day it had taken a $35 million loss and reduced sharehold= ers equity by $1.2 billion related to ending business dealings with two inv= estment partnerships formerly run by Andrew Fastow, its chief financial off= icer.=20 The disclosures heightened Wall Street's ongoing concerns that Enron's fina= ncial reporting was too difficult to understand and skimped on details. It = also led to fears that Enron would be on the hook for billions of dollars r= elated to other financial vehicles.=20 Days later, Enron revealed that the SEC was investigating transactions betw= een Enron and the partnerships, called LJM Cayman and LJM2 Co-investment. I= t also replaced Fastow and has been hit with a growing number of shareholde= r lawsuits.=20 Then, the company's credit rating was downgraded, which raised questions ab= out its ability to manage its core energy trading business.=20 As Wall Street's questions grew, Enron retreated into silence, leaving anal= ysts and investors to speculate on worst-case scenarios, which fed fears th= at company was facing a cash-crunch and caused investors to keep dumping th= e stock.=20 That in turn, led some of Enron's trading partners to shift business elsewh= ere and raise their credit requirements to do business with Enron, which in= turn, raised even more fears.=20 Thursday, Enron said it is restating its finances as far back as 1997 to in= clude losses related to a number of complex partnerships it created.=20 . . .=20 DEAL AT-A-GLANCE=20 Company name: Dynegy.=20 Key players: Chuck Watson, Dynegy's current chairman and CEO, will remain c= hairman and CEO. Enron Corp.'s CEO and Chairman Ken Lay has been offered a = seat on Dynegy's board.=20 The trade: 0.2685 share of Dynegy for each share of Enron Corp.=20 Value of the deal: $8.85 billion in stock and $12.8 billion in Enron debt.= =20 Dynegy's close Friday: $38.76=20 Enron's close Friday: $8.63 a share.=20 Status of Enron Field name: Unknown. However, Dynegy registered the name ww= w.dynegyfield.com on Thursday.=20 . . .=20 MORE STORIES=20 Enron Corp. paid $100 million to put its name on the Houston Astros' new do= wntown home. Now that the energy giant is being bought, the name may soon b= e history.=20 The sale of Enron Corp. will likely punish Houston's downtown office market= , emptying more office space at a time when several new buildings are going= up.=20 ""Never make predictions, especially about the future,"" Ken Lay once wrote i= n an essay concerning the world's energy needs. Enron's chief executive mig= ht be taking those words to heart today.=20 Dynegy's Chuck Watson has always maintained a low profile, prompting some p= eople to label him as the most influential Houstonian you've never heard of= .=20 See these stories and more in Business.=20 . . .=20 The companies=20 Profiles of two Houston energy giants that announced their merger Friday:= =20 DYNEGY=20 Headquarters: Houston=20 Chairman and CEO: Chuck Watson=20 Revenues in 2000: $29.4 billion=20 Employees: 6,000 worldwide=20 Electricity sales (2000): 137.7 million megawatt hours=20 Gas sales (2000): 10.9 billion cubic feet per day=20 Business segments: Dynegy Marketing and Trade; Dynegy Midstream Services, I= llinois Power; Subsidiary, Dynegy Global Communications=20 History: The company traces its roots to 1984 when the investment banking f= irm Morgan Stanley, the law firm Akin, Gump Strauss, Hauer & Feld and six n= atural gas pipelines teamed up to create a natural gas marketing firm calle= d U.S. Natural Gas Clearinghouse Ltd. Chuck Watson joined the company in 19= 85 and the operation was revamped, the pipeline partners bought out, and th= e name shortened to Natural gas Clearinghouse. In 1995, the company purchas= ed Trident NGL Holdings, quadrupling its liquids business. The company went= public for the first time under the new name NGC Corp. that same year. In = 1996, NGC merged with Chevron's gas and gas liquids business. The firm purc= hased its first power plants with the acquisition of Destec in 1997 and cha= nged its name to Dynegy in 1998 to reflect expansion beyond natural gas. Th= e company has continued to grow through acquisitions.=20 . . .=20 ENRON=20 Headquarters: Houston=20 Chairman and CEO: Ken Lay=20 Revenues in 2000: $100.8 billion=20 Employees: 20,000 worldwide=20 Electricity sales (2000): 590.2 million megawatt hours=20 Gas sales (2000): 28.3 billion cubic feet per day=20 Core areas: Enron Wholesale Services; Enron Energy Services; Enron Transpor= tation Services=20 History: The company was formed in 1985 as a result of the merger of Housto= n Natural Gas and InterNorth, a natural gas company based in Omaha, Neb. Th= e deal integrated several pipeline systems to create the first nationwide n= atural gas pipeline system. In 1986, Ken Lay, CEO of Houston Natural gas, w= as named chairman and CEO, and the name ""Enron"" was chosen. In 1989, Enron = began trading natural gas commodities through its GasBank, a precursor to t= oday's wholesale trading business. Enron made its first electricity trade i= n 1994 and eventually became the world's biggest marketer of electricity an= d gas. Photo: 1. Ken Lay, chairman and CEO of Enron Corp., listens at a Friday new= s conference as Chuck Watson, chairman and CEO of Dynegy, discusses his com= pany's acquisition of Enron (color); Graphs: 2. Deal At-A-Glance (b/w, text= ); 3. More Stores (b/w, text); 4. The companies (b/w, p. 16, text)=20 Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 BUSINESS POWER PLAY / Lay opened energy firms to work in new markets MICHAEL DAVIS Staff 11/10/2001 Houston Chronicle 3 STAR 3 (Copyright 2001) THE famous baseball manager Casey Stengel was smart to advise, ""Never make = predictions, especially about the future,"" Ken Lay once wrote in an essay o= n world energy needs.=20 Lay might be taking those words to heart today. As the chairman of Enron Corp. predicted not long ago, ""We can see some ver= y significant growth with several years to come.""=20 Once considered one of the shining stars of the energy business, Lay has wa= tched the company he helped create melt down around him in a matter of week= s.=20 And as of Friday, he was left to ponder an offer to serve as a member of th= e board for the new company formed from Enron and its chief rival - no long= er a chairman or a chief executive.=20 Perhaps that's the way he wants it.=20 When he turned over the chief executive's post at Enron to Jeffrey Skilling= earlier this year, it seemed like the first move of his orderly exit from = the company he had helped create in the mid-1980s.=20 Eleven months later, Skilling is gone and Lay has had to preside over the d= eath of Enron.=20 What had begun as a stodgy natural gas pipeline company had been molded and= expanded by the two men into a diversified financial giant with its hands = in countless markets from oil and natural gas to water and broadband.=20 It seemed Lay, 58, who is an economist by profession, had also cemented his= reputation as an elder statesman in the energy industry, the man who had o= pened the business world's eyes to the array of possibilities that energy c= ompanies could explore for growth away from their traditional roles.=20 With the implosion of Enron in the past month, Lay's legacy now seems tarni= shed. The man who was once referred to as an ""energetic messiah"" has been f= orced to sell off his creation in a fire sale to rival Dynegy in a hastily = arranged deal. Lay's approach is reflected in the design of the building En= ron is constructing across from its existing tower on Smith Street. Looking= down on the massive trading floor are two offices built for Lay and Skilli= ng.=20 The offices were considered symbolic of the company's openness and its phil= osophy of melding executives with the rank and file. Lay reportedly spurned= the express elevator to ride to his 50th-floor office to spend more time w= ith employees.=20 That sort of hands-on approach Lay brought to the company may be another ca= sualty, analysts said.=20 ""I would be surprised if he had much of a role in running things from a day= -to-day perspective,"" said Brian Youngberg, energy analyst with Edward Jone= s in St. Louis. ""I think Dynegy will be running the ship and plug in some E= nron executives.""=20 As the dust settles on Enron, the question is being raised as to whether th= e company became too big for one or two men to run in a hands-on fashion.= =20 ""Ken Lay helped build Enron from being just a pipeline company, but over ti= me the company got so big and complex that it was too hard for one or two s= enior executives to completely oversee things and to know fully what was go= ing on in the operating companies,"" Youngberg said.=20 Raised on a farm in Missouri, Lay is well-known not just as chairman of Enr= on but as a former undersecretary of the Interior Department and one of the= people who has helped shape Houston's destiny in the past 20 years. He is = considered instrumental in keeping Major League Baseball in Houston by supp= orting the construction of Enron Field.=20 But his lasting legacy will likely be as one of the key people who helped c= reate the huge natural gas futures market in the United States, which was n= onexistent as recently as the late 1980s. He also will be remembered as the= man who led others to view the energy business as one integrated market an= d not individual fiefdoms.=20 ""Ken Lay really did educate his peers to understand the broadness of his bu= siness,"" said Amy Jaffe, a senior energy analyst with Rice University's Jam= es A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy. ""Whether his retirement is und= er positive or negative circumstances, he has left a huge legacy on the ind= ustry.""=20 Jaffe sees Lay as the person who got oil and gas executives to break out of= the old mentality and explore new technologies such as fuel cells and wind= power. He also was a leading proponent of natural gas and power deregulati= on.=20 He will leave Enron a wealthy man, although much less so since the company'= s stock nose-dived. His current contract pays him a base salary of $1.4 mil= lion a year and a bonus of $7 million. It was due to expire in December 200= 3.=20 This is not the first time Lay has had to rescue Enron. In 1987, Enron was = rocked by the disclosure that rogue traders at its Enron Oil Co. had left t= he company holding the bag for about $1 billion in trading liabilities. Bef= ore disclosing it to the market, the company worked the trading loss down t= o about $142 million.=20 ""We learned a lot, certainly in a bad way,"" Lay said of the incident in an = interview earlier this year. ""We put in place probably the best risk manage= ment and control system, not just in our business, but in any industry.""=20 Some see irony in the fact that Dynegy CEO Chuck Watson will likely prevail= over Lay despite Lay's almost cult status among business leaders and busin= ess school professors.=20 ""Chuck Watson was underrated in his role in forming the natural gas market = in the United States. He was the man who realized the enormous potential of= the natural gas market,"" Jaffe said. ""It's true that Enron came in with a = lot of advertising and built up a big position, but maybe there is some poe= tic justice that the man who really started the natural gas clearinghouse c= ould wind back up as the dominant player in the industry.""=20 ...=20 THE PLAYERS=20 1985-present: Enron Corp., various top management posts, currently chairman= and CEO 1984-1985: Houston Natural Gas Corp., chairman and CEO 1981-1984 T= ransco Energy Co., president and chief operating officer Board memberships:= Compaq Computer Corp., Eli Lilly & Co. and Trust Company of the West Educa= tion: University of Missouri, master's degree, economics, 1965: doctorate, = economics, Membership: Energy Advisory Board secretary; National Petroleum = Council member Photo: Ken Lay=20 Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 BUSINESS POWER PLAY / Purchase elevates Watson's low profile GREG HASSELL Staff 11/10/2001 Houston Chronicle 2 STAR 3 (Copyright 2001) AS the chairman of a company that employs 6,700 workers and rakes in annual= revenues of $29.4 billion, Chuck Watson is hardly an anonymous executive i= n Houston.=20 But the head of Dynegy Inc. has always maintained a low profile, prompting = some people to label him as the most influential Houstonian you've never he= ard of. He steers clear of the political arena and the limelight of the cit= y's big social soirees. He doesn't live in River Oaks, but lives in the sam= e neighborhood near Champion's Forest where he's lived for years. When they donated $1 million worth of land for the relocation of his church= , Windwood Presbyterian, Watson and his wife, Kim, tried to donate anonymou= sly.=20 ""We talked about that a lot, and they reluctantly agreed that it wouldn't t= ake a rocket scientist to figure out who in this congregation would be able= to do something like that,"" Senior Pastor Kevin Rudolph said.=20 When fellow church member Merle Davidson recently offered to let Watson dri= ve a luxurious new Bentley for a weekend, Watson readily agreed.=20 ""He enjoyed the car,"" said Davidson, general manager of Post Oak Motor Cars= . ""But when I asked him, `Should I order you one?' he shook his head.""=20 ""I don't know if I could drive such a high-profile car,"" Watson said.=20 It's not that Watson objects to a fancy ride; he drives a top-of- the-line = Mercedes. But he's not a showboat and isn't comfortable attracting attentio= n to himself.=20 ""He doesn't act like a big shot,"" said Tilman Fertitta, the chairman of Lan= dry's Restaurants, who likes driving a Bentley and zipping around in a heli= copter. ""Chuck's not all caught up in the Houston hustle-and-bustle thing.""= =20 Like it or not, Watson is about to step out in a big way. If Dynegy complet= es the acquisition of Enron for $8.85 billion in stock, Watson will become = captain of Houston's largest company. He will step right into the center of= the city's business stage, taking from Enron Chairman Ken Lay the mantle o= f most powerful businessman in a city where commerce and the deal have alwa= ys come first.=20 Those who know Watson say he should have little trouble adapting to his hig= her profile and is ready for the many demands that will inexorably follow.= =20 ""Chuck is a guy who knows what he wants and goes and gets it,"" Fertitta sai= d. ""He is not intimidated.""=20 In fact, when longtime friend Steve Patterson read about Enron's nose-dive = and the collapse of its stock, he instinctively knew Watson would close in = on a deal.=20 ""I thought: `You know what, Chuck will try to buy Enron. It just fits. It's= the big bold move that Chuck would try to make,' "" said Patterson, senior = vice president of the Houston Texans football team. Watson owns 15 percent = of the Texans, the largest chunk outside of the piece owned by club founder= Bob McNair. Watson also owns the Houston Aeros hockey team.=20 Like Enron Chairman Ken Lay, Watson was a pioneer in the deregulation of th= e energy business. He was one of the early innovative forces that shaped th= e world of trading electricity and swapping natural gas.=20 Watson was born 51 years ago on the Great Lakes naval base north of Chicago= . His father worked for the Navy, which moved the young Watson clan around = early and often. Chuck Watson had attended more than 20 schools in nine sta= tes when he graduated from Oklahoma State University in 1972 with a degree = in economics.=20 After a 13-year career at Conoco, Watson joined a fledgling company called = U.S. Natural Gas Clearinghouse in 1985. NGC was a consortium of gas pipelin= es that had the backing of a financial- services company and a local law fi= rm, but conflicts among the partners hamstrung the little company.=20 Watson would not join the company until it was overhauled and most of the q= uarreling partners were bought out. Watson's vision was to buy the gas and = take title to it, aggregate big volumes and leverage that to make bigger de= als and negotiate better rates from the pipelines that moved the gas around= .=20 In short, the company moved beyond being a broker and became a wholesale st= ore for natural gas.=20 ""He is a visionary in the energy business,"" said Bob McNair, a longtime fri= end who founded Cogen Technologies and later sold the company to Enron for = $1.1 billion. ""Chuck will come across as this relaxed, country person. Not = some sophisticate. But that is disarming. He is very creative, and he is ve= ry smart.""=20 While NGC initially concentrated on gathering, moving and trading natural g= as, the business has broadened along with the quickening pace of energy der= egulation. Now called Dynegy, short for Dynamic Energy, the company has evo= lved into an outfit that sells power directly to commercial and industrial = users of electricity and natural gas. It also has built a communications di= vision to capitalize on increasing demand for high-speed communication serv= ices.=20 Last year the company recorded an astounding 230 percent rise in net income= , as well as a 91 percent jump in operating revenues. Dynegy's stock climbe= d 218 percent last year.=20 ""The success of Dynegy is a tremendous story,"" Patterson said. ""It is amazi= ng the growth and the value he has been able to achieve.""=20 According to some of those who've have done business with him, Watson is no= t just bright, he is extraordinarily tough.=20 ""He is a very aggressive person, a tough negotiator. He bores in,"" said Geo= rge Mitchell, founder of Mitchell Energy and the man who carved The Woodlan= ds out of the piney forest.""He is a very confident person. Unlike Ken Lay, = who is a smoother type personality who works with people, Watson is going t= o do it his way. They are both very good business people, but they are very= different.""=20 While willing to give power to his subordinates, Watson is a hands- on CEO = who is unmistakably Dynegy's commanding force.=20 ""Chuck is very, very intense . . . He burns,"" said former Houston Mayor Bob= Lanier. ""In negotiations, he gets down and learns all the details himself.= ""=20 How tough Watson is willing to be came to light in his contentious dealings= with Houston Rockets owner Les Alexander. Watson owned the master lease to= the Summit, later renamed the Compaq Center, which committed the Rockets t= o playing there through 2003. Eager to break the deal, Alexander tried nego= tiating and litigating his way out of the lease, all to no avail.=20 The battle deepened as the two men competed unsuccessfully to get a NHL hoc= key team in Houston and feuded over how a hockey team would share in the re= venues of a new stadium proposed for downtown.=20 Angered at the deal Alexander was able to get for the Rockets, at the expen= se of a hockey franchise, Watson spent about $100,000 out of his own pocket= to help defeat the stadium referendum. It was his one overtly political ac= t here, and some say it was the decisive blow to Alexander's aspirations.= =20 ""There are a lot of people I'd much rather have a contest with,"" Lanier sai= d of Watson.=20 Alexander and Watson were later able to settle their differences, and Watso= n supported the second arena referendum, which passed. A basketball arena i= s now under construction downtown.=20 ""I'm not surprised to see Chuck Watson make an aggressive move like this,"" = Alexander said Friday evening. ""He understands the industry as well as anyo= ne; and therefore, he's in the best position to assess the risk and take ad= vantage of the opportunity.""=20 Like most opportunities, the deal also represents a sizable risk. Taking ov= er Enron is a huge reach for Dynegy, which will try to swallow a company th= at was five times bigger when measured by revenues.=20 Watson will need all of his shrewdness and ferocity to untangle the mess th= at is Enron and merge two operations that were each, in their own way, tryi= ng to reinvent the energy business.=20 ""I have some concerns for my friend,"" McNair confessed. ""It is a tremendous= challenge. I know he'll handle it well, but this will be a very demanding = business.""=20 ...=20 The Players=20 1989-present: Dynegy, chairman and CEO=20 1985: NGC, Dynegy's predecessor, president=20 1972-1985: Conoco, various positions=20 Other: Board member, Baker Hughes; Vice Chairman, Houston Texans=20 Education: Oklahoma State University, business and economics=20 Membership: National Petroleum Council, Interstate Natural Gas Association = of America board member, Edison Electric Institute board member, Natural Ga= s Council founding member Photo: Chuck Watson=20 Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 NEWS Dyenegy to acquire Enron in $8.9 billion stock deal / Many fear `unique' pr= oblems L.M. SIXEL Staff 11/10/2001 Houston Chronicle 3 STAR 1 (Copyright 2001) People who worked for Enron Corp. walked with a special swagger, they knew = they were a part of something special, something unique, one employee said = Friday.=20 But today, it seems as if that something special has evaporated. As rumors and news about the Dynegy buyout leaked out Friday, many of those= who gathered around the base of the Enron Tower to smoke were worried abou= t their fate.=20 Several worried about their job prospects during a time when the economy ap= pears to be sinking into a recession and job losses are mounting across the= nation.=20 Others were concerned that Enron is such an innovator and their jobs so uni= que that they'll have a hard time finding an equivalent job somewhere else.= =20 Many were angry that company officials had made the financial missteps that= got the company into its precarious situation.=20 And others were just unnerved by the uncertainty.=20 ""See you Monday hopefully, bro,"" shouted one Enron employee to another acro= ss its tree-lined plaza.=20 Once the buyout was announced late Friday afternoon and it became clear lay= offs would be coming, one employee seemed to feel a bit better.=20 ""It's a relief to know what's going on,"" she said, asking not to be identif= ied. And, like many, the employee who works on Enron's trading floor was no= t just thinking of her job. Like so many others, her retirement account was= mostly invested in Enron stock.=20 The employee, who asked not to be identified, said she figured her retireme= nt account, lost about $100,000 in value over the past few weeks as Enron s= tock plummeted in value.=20 She even encouraged her college-age children to invest their college funds = in Enron stock. It's all gone now, she said, and that was money they'd need= in the next two years.=20 Jamie Lynn, a 29-year-old coordinator of gas logistics, figured that he los= t close to $400,000 in stock options. But others employees lost millions, h= e said.=20 ""It makes me sick to my stomach,"" Lynn said.=20 While the money losses hurt, he is also feeling badly because he loved his = job - and company - so much.=20 ""People walked around downtown with a swagger,"" he said. ""They were proud t= o say they worked at Enron.""=20 Lynn can't imagine finding another company with such an exciting culture an= d with such exciting challenges.=20 ""I don't want this company to be owned by someone else,"" he said.=20 But if it had to be sold, he was hoping Shell Oil Co. would be the buyer. S= hell isn't in any of the same lines of business as Enron and they'd have to= depend on Enron employees to keep the place running.=20 While Lynn is lucky because he is already being recruited by other companie= s, other employees were not as upbeat about their opportunities. Several in= formation technology employees such as programmers and software designers w= ere especially worried.=20 The general market for information technology isn't very good right now and= they worried whether Dynegy would need their services.=20 ""Maybe I'll have to pack up and go back home,"" said a software developer fr= om India who is working at Enron on a visa.=20 A programmer discussed her prospects while she waited for a bus. She's prep= aring for a layoff and luckily, has been savingmoney to tide her over in ca= se she lost her job.=20 Other information technology professionals were more upbeat.=20 A systems integrator said he has no doubts that he'll be picked up by Dyneg= y because it needs to know how to run Enron's complicated computer systems.= Besides, he said, he has been recruited by Dynegy several times and said h= e was in a good position to cash in on connections.=20 Others were not as optimistic. Tears filled one employee's eyes as she wait= ed for a ride. Others were too upset to comment. Part of that stemmed from = the feeling that senior executives ran the company arrogantly and for their= own self-interests.=20 When the deal was announced, employees began to turn their minds to more im= mediate details, such as severance packages.=20 In the past, Enron has been generous, an employee said.=20 ""Let's hope that tradition continues,"" she added.=20 . . .=20 DEAL AT-A-GLANCE=20 Company name: Dynegy.=20 Key players: Chuck Watson, Dynegy's current chairman and CEO, will remain c= hairman and CEO. Enron Corp.'s CEO and Chairman Ken Lay has been offered a = seat on Dynegy's board.=20 The trade: 0.2685 share of Dynegy for each share of Enron Corp.=20 Value of the deal: $8.85 billion in stock and $12.8 billion in Enron debt.= =20 Dynegy's close Friday: $38.76=20 Enron's close Friday: $8.63 a share.=20 Status of Enron Field name: Unknown. However, Dynegy registered the name ww= w.dynegyfield.com on Thursday.=20 . . .=20 MORE STORIES=20 Enron Corp. paid $100 million to put its name on the Houston Astros' new do= wntown home. Now that the energy giant is being bought, the name may soon b= e history.=20 The sale of Enron Corp. will likely punish Houston's downtown office market= , emptying more office space at a time when several new buildings are going= up.=20 ""Never make predictions, especially about the future,"" Ken Lay once wrote i= n an essay concerning the world's energy needs. Enron's chief executive mig= ht be taking those words to heart today.=20 Dynegy's Chuck Watson has always maintained a low profile, prompting some p= eople to label him as the most influential Houstonian you've never heard of= .=20 See these stories and more in Business.=20 . . .=20 The companies=20 Profiles of two Houston energy giants that announced their merger Friday:= =20 DYNEGY=20 Headquarters: Houston=20 Chairman and CEO: Chuck Watson=20 Revenues in 2000: $29.4 billion=20 Employees: 6,000 worldwide=20 Electricity sales (2000): 137.7 million megawatt hours=20 Gas sales (2000): 10.9 billion cubic feet per day=20 Business segments: Dynegy Marketing and Trade; Dynegy Midstream Services, I= llinois Power; Subsidiary, Dynegy Global Communications=20 History: The company traces its roots to 1984 when the investment banking f= irm Morgan Stanley, the law firm Akin, Gump Strauss, Hauer & Feld and six n= atural gas pipelines teamed up to create a natural gas marketing firm calle= d U.S. Natural Gas Clearinghouse Ltd. Chuck Watson joined the company in 19= 85 and the operation was revamped, the pipeline partners bought out, and th= e name shortened to Natural gas Clearinghouse. In 1995, the company purchas= ed Trident NGL Holdings, quadrupling its liquids business. The company went= public for the first time under the new name NGC Corp. that same year. In = 1996, NGC merged with Chevron's gas and gas liquids business. The firm purc= hased its first power plants with the acquisition of Destec in 1997 and cha= nged its name to Dynegy in 1998 to reflect expansion beyond natural gas. Th= e company has continued to grow through acquisitions.=20 . . .=20 ENRON=20 Headquarters: Houston=20 Chairman and CEO: Ken Lay=20 Revenues in 2000: $100.8 billion=20 Employees: 20,000 worldwide=20 Electricity sales (2000): 590.2 million megawatt hours=20 Gas sales (2000): 28.3 billion cubic feet per day=20 Core areas: Enron Wholesale Services; Enron Energy Services; Enron Transpor= tation Services=20 History: The company was formed in 1985 as a result of the merger of Housto= n Natural Gas and InterNorth, a natural gas company based in Omaha, Neb. Th= e deal integrated several pipeline systems to create the first nationwide n= atural gas pipeline system. In 1986, Ken Lay, CEO of Houston Natural gas, w= as named chairman and CEO, and the name ""Enron"" was chosen. In 1989, Enron = began trading natural gas commodities through its GasBank, a precursor to t= oday's wholesale trading business. Enron made its first electricity trade i= n 1994 and eventually became the world's biggest marketer of electricity an= d gas. Photo: Photo: 1. Ken Lay, chairman and CEO of Enron Corp., listens at a Fri= day news conference as Chuck Watson, chairman and CEO of Dynegy, discusses = his company's acquisition of Enron (color); Graphs: 2. Deal At-A-Glance (b/= w, text); 3. More Stores (b/w, text); 4. The companies (b/w, p. 16, text)= =20 Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 Financial Desk The Nation Smaller Rival to Acquire Teetering Enron Power: Energy giant tha= t pressed for deregulation in California is on the brink of collapse. NANCY RIVERA BROOKS; THOMAS S. MULLIGAN; NANCY VOGEL TIMES STAFF WRITERS 11/10/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-1 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company Enron Corp., the once-highflying energy giant whose aggressive efforts to p= rofit from California's energy deregulation made it a target of consumer an= d political backlash, on Friday agreed to be saved from possible financial = collapse through a proposed acquisition by rival Dynegy Inc.=20 The roughly $7.7-billion deal is a stunning plot twist for Houston-based En= ron, which was vilified in California as it was being glorified on Wall Str= eet. In only the last month, a series of disturbing financial revelations p= ushed to the edge of ruin this once-powerful company, whose top executives = had lectured California on its energy foibles and who influenced the direct= ion of national energy policy. Enron muscled its way to the top of the energy heap using aggressive and, i= n the end, financially suspect strategies that proved its undoing.=20 Now, the company that late last year had a market value of $63 billion is w= orth one-tenth that and has agreed to be swallowed by a cross-town competit= or one-quarter its size. Enron's proud and influential chairman and chief e= xecutive, Kenneth L. Lay, who became a focus of bitter attacks by Californi= a politicians and regulators, would lose his job, as would many others at E= nron.=20 Even the name would disappear. The combined company would be called Dynegy = Inc. if the deal receives all the necessary regulatory and shareholder appr= ovals.=20 California officials took no joy in Enron's fate Friday, though there was p= erhaps some sense of retribution from its many critics in the state.=20 ""This is basically a rogue corporation,"" said Sen. Steve Peace (D-El Cajon)= , an outspoken critic of Enron for years who dealt with the company as he c= haired the committee that hammered out the legislative portion of Californi= a's landmark electricity deregulation plan in 1996. ""It has from the beginn= ing been a rogue corporation which answered in its mind to a higher law--a = fundamental belief that there are laws of economics that supersede the law = of the land.""=20 A Failed Experiment=20 Steve Maviglio, spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis, said that although Enron was= never a major force in California's doomed electricity market, it was outs= poken in support of deregulation.=20 ""In a sense, their experiment was much like California's experiment--a fail= ure,"" he said.=20 Said Harvey Rosenfield, president of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consum= er Rights in Santa Monica: ""Nothing could better illustrate the disaster of= deregulation than the fact that one of its biggest proponents, which reape= d the reward of deregulation, is suffering the consequences.""=20 Enron is the world's largest energy trader, handling one of four energy dea= ls in the United States through its online trading operation, EnronOnline. = Since it reported a surprising third-quarter loss on Oct. 16, partly tied t= o shadowy investment vehicles, Enron has endured a huge loss of investor co= nfidence, which brought on a massive cash crunch and some shrinkage of its = trading business.=20 Under the deal announced Friday, Dynegy, invited in two weeks ago after Enr= on fell short in its efforts to line up new financing, would immediately he= lp Enron by pouring $1.5 billion in cash into the company. The money would = be provided by ChevronTexaco Corp., the San Francisco oil company that owns= nearly 27% of Dynegy.=20 Enron shareholders would get 0.2685 Dynegy share for each Enron share, whic= h values the company at about $7.7 billion based on Friday's stock close. D= ynegy shares surged $2.26 to close at $38.76 per share on the New York Stoc= k Exchange; Enron added 22 cents to close at $8.63 per share, still off 89%= year to date.=20 If the deal closes in six to nine months, as the parties expect, Dynegy and= ChevronTexaco would invest $1 billion additionally in the combined company= .=20 ""This is just a financial bonanza really for both companies,"" said Charles = L. Watson, Dynegy chairman and chief executive, who will head the combined = company. Watson said the merger would immediately add to Dynegy's earnings.= =20 Even so, the repercussions of Enron's fall from grace could be far-reaching= . Coming on the heels of California's energy crisis, Enron's troubles may s= low the country's march toward energy deregulation, which Lay and Enron cha= mpioned for years as a potential boon to consumers and the economy in gener= al.=20 But the deal announced Friday will prevent an even worse outcome, energy ex= perts said: the threatened collapse of Enron, which would clog up for a tim= e the business of buying and selling electricity, natural gas and oil. That= could interfere with delivery of energy around the country, they said.=20 ""This is an encouraging development for the energy industry,"" said Stephen = Baum, chairman of Sempra Energy, the San Diego-based parent of Southern Cal= ifornia Gas and San Diego Gas & Electric. ""The Enron-Dynegy combination wil= l create a credit-worthy counter-party which will help preserve order in th= e marketplace. It also will reinforce confidence in the energy trading busi= ness going forward.""=20 But some in the industry are less pleased.=20 Raymond Plank, chairman of Apache Corp., a Houston-based natural gas explor= ation and development firm, said he is considering a motion to the Federal = Trade Commission against the proposed merger.=20 ""There are issues of concentration in a combination of the largest energy t= rader, Enron, and the fifth-largest, Dynegy,"" Plank said. ""California shoul= d be particularly concerned because Dynegy owns power plants there and Enro= n has pipelines and other interests.""=20 Troubles Mount as Stock Plunges=20 The swagger that was Enron is long gone. Consider:=20 * Enron's brash chief executive, Jeffrey K. Skilling, touted only months ag= o as one of the young stars of American business, abruptly resigned in Augu= st, citing personal reasons. Enron's stock already had fallen from its high= of nearly $90 per share as investments in water and telecommunications tur= ned sour, a fact that contributed to Skilling's departure.=20 * The Securities and Exchange Commission has launched an investigation of E= nron's controversial dealings with a number of limited partnerships, some o= rganized and run by Enron managers, including Enron Chief Financial Officer= Andrew S. Fastow, who was ousted last month.=20 * In an extraordinary confession Thursday, Enron announced that it had over= stated profit by $586 million, or 20%, during the last five years. The earl= ier financial statements reported to Wall Street and the investing public, = Enron said, ""should not be relied upon.""=20 * The company also fired its treasurer and a corporate lawyer, both of whom= it said were investors in one of the limited partnerships. Yet some analys= ts questioned whether, even in its admission of accounting trickery, Enron = wasn't still holding something back.=20 * Credit-rating agencies, which already have downgraded Enron's bonds to ba= rely above ""junk"" status, continue to pore over Enron's books. Analysts hav= e said a further downgrade to the level of junk, or below investment grade,= could precipitate a crisis akin to a run on a bank and threaten Enron's su= rvival while the merger is pending.=20 With its stock crumbling and trading partners leery about its ability to pa= y its debts, Enron was forced to walk hat in hand down Houston's Energy All= ey to negotiate a saving takeover by Dynegy, the rival once jokingly dismis= sed as ""Enron Lite.""=20 In the trading markets where Enron still holds a leading but increasingly v= ulnerable position, other players already are stepping up to grab a bigger = share of the business. Even if Enron's trading operation survives more or l= ess intact, under the wing of a Dynegy or some other company, experts said = it may never regain its former level of dominance.=20 ""Enron has been a very innovative shop, willing to spend considerably to es= tablish new markets,"" said analyst Andre Meade of Commerzbank Securities in= New York. ""If that culture is not kept, everyone loses.""=20 Skilling and mentor Lay had worked for a decade to create both a new kind o= f company and a new set of markets for it to play.=20 In large part, they succeeded. Enron transformed itself from a traditional = gas pipeline company into a high-tech global trader of everything from elec= tricity to pollution credits to aluminum. The company's overarching strateg= y was to pare its physical assets to the minimum to get the maximum profit = bang from its intellectual capital: the ranks of MBAs and PhDs that filled = its Houston trading floor.=20 Rather than maintain its own expensive gas fields and power plants--which i= t relegated to stodgy utilities and oil companies--Enron would handle every= thing by contract, relying on a network of suppliers to obtain, store and d= eliver the goods while the company focused on squeezing out the best price.= =20 Dynegy, in contrast, has invested in such energy assets, including three po= wer plants in Southern California. It uses those assets to back its trading= operation, which is much smaller than Enron's.=20 Enron pulled off a migration from the ""dirty"" extreme of the oil patch, the= asset-intensive domain of drillers and explorers, to the ""clean"" end, wher= e all the deals are done on a computer screen. It also was a migration from= lower profit margins and lower risk to high margins and high risk.=20 Shannon B. Burchett, chief executive of Risk Limited Corp., an energy-orien= ted strategic-management consultancy in Dallas, compared Enron to the inves= tment bank Salomon Bros., where he used to work in the former PhiBro commod= ities unit.=20 Enron, Burchett said, embodies ""a Wall Street culture that happens to be in= Houston.""=20 Wall Street certainly ""got it,"" or thought it did.=20 Accounting Rules Pushed to the Limit=20 At Enron's zenith last year, when its stock peaked near $90 a share and it = was pushing into esoteric markets for weather derivatives and fiber-optic b= andwidth, Enron seemed to be a one-company wave of the future.=20 Enron's aggressiveness, brainpower and willingness to back radical new idea= s with serious capital helped it acquire an aura that in some ways was its = undoing, analysts said.=20 Investors accorded Enron's stock a price-to-earnings valuation that was con= sistently higher than those of its peers, reflecting the view that its cutt= ing-edge business model could consistently deliver faster-growing profit th= an its competitors.=20 To keep profits arcing ever upward to justify the outsize valuation, Enron = began pushing the accounting rules as hard as it pushed competitors in the = trading arena. It acknowledged as much in its statement Thursday, conceding= that the operations of three of the limited partnerships should have been = consolidated with Enron's own financial statements instead of being held se= parate.=20 By raising capital and running deals through the limited partnerships, Enro= n could keep large amounts of debt and certain volatile assets off its own = balance sheet, while simultaneously booking profit from the partnerships' t= ransactions, analyst Meade said.=20 Deals Backed by Costly Guarantees=20 One risky aspect of some of Enron's deals through the partnerships was what= Meade called a ""double-trigger guarantee,"" under which Enron would pledge = a cash payout if either its bond rating fell below investment grade or its = stock declined below a certain price.=20 The guarantees must have seemed a cheap way to sweeten a deal when Enron's = stock was flying high, but they came back to haunt the company later, when = it had to pay cash to make good on its obligations, Meade said.=20 Other energy-trading companies use similar devices, but Enron carried it to= an extreme and disclosed too little detail to make the process understanda= ble to investors, he said.=20 Enron's magic, like that of the Internet-stock phenomenon, had never been e= asy to understand in the first place. The company had a reputation among an= alysts for providing scanty financial detail and hard-to-grasp explanations= of some of its dealings.=20 But as long as the reported profit kept climbing, Enron kept getting the be= nefit of the doubt.=20 M. Carol Coale, a respected Houston-based analyst for Prudential Securities= , ruefully recalled a time last winter when she told Enron she could find ""= no positive catalyst for the stock"" and was considering downgrading her inv= estment opinion.=20 Skilling telephoned Coale and asked her to hold off, promising her that the= re was unspecified good news on the horizon that would justify her faith.= =20 ""I believed him,"" Coale said last week in an interview in Houston. She held= her rating steady at that time but has since downgraded Enron to an outrig= ht ""sell.""=20 Instead of Skilling's promised good news, questions mounted during the spri= ng, and Enron's stock continued a steady decline. Coale and other analysts = were troubled that a large proportion of Enron's earnings seemed to come no= t from its core trading operations but from unusual transactions involving = the company's own stock or that of affiliates.=20 In California, Enron played a key role as chief cheerleader for electricity= deregulation and a key energy middleman in the state. As wholesale electri= city prices soared and the state plunged into its energy crisis late last y= ear, Enron and other out-of-state electricity generators and traders became= favorite targets of California politicians and regulators, who said the co= mpanies were manipulating the market and charging too much for power.=20 But significantly, California was not a directly successful territory for E= nron.=20 Markets in water did not develop as Enron subsidiary Azurix envisioned. And= Enron's plans for selling electricity to retail customers were deferred ev= en as deregulation took effect in 1998 because the state's deregulation for= mulas didn't allow room for retail competition.=20 Lay complained about California frequently and met with the governor to try= to influence the state's moves to repair its energy problems. In an interv= iew in his Houston office in January--overlooking Enron's new headquarters = building, which is still under construction as the company's name disappear= s--Lay said he and other Enron executives had objected to the way Californi= a regulation was set up.=20 ""We objected more vehemently than anyone. We opposed the concept of the poo= l,"" he said, referring to the now-defunct California Power Exchange, in whi= ch most of the state's power was bought and sold in an hourly market. ""What= competitive market in the world has a pool? We don't buy our groceries thr= ough a centralized PX.""=20 Enron also backed away from building a small power plant in California last= year when the state imposed price caps.=20 One of the loudest complaints by Davis and other California officials was t= hat generators of electricity were playing ""games"" to get higher prices.=20 They criticized Enron severely, too, even though it was not a major generat= or, because the level of its worldwide trading operations--buying and selli= ng contracts worth billions of dollars in electric power every day--gave En= ron immense sway over pricing and supplies of electricity. They also believ= e that Enron and Lay helped play a part in the reluctance of federal regula= tors for several months to place restraints on the California marketplace.= =20 CEO's Future Role Uncertain=20 ""Millions of people in California businesses lost money because this rogue = company succeeded in controlling the government of the United States,"" said= state Sen. Peace, one of the architects of the state's deregulation plan.= =20 ""Ken Lay was a mystic,"" Peace said. ""Whatever he said had to make sense bec= ause he was Ken Lay. It was hero worship.=20 ""Many of the people working as economists at the Federal Energy Regulatory = Commission worshiped Ken Lay. As a consequence, the things Enron promoted a= nd pushed for were never challenged, intellectually and otherwise.""=20 Lay, who has been asked to sit on the board of the combined company, said F= riday that he had not yet decided whether to accept.=20 He described his time building Enron as ""a very long ride. It's been a very= good ride for the most part.=20 ""I have to say the last few weeks have not been very much fun,"" he said.=20 *=20 Rivera Brooks reported from Los Angeles and Mulligan from Houston and New Y= ork. Times staff writer James Flanigan in Los Angeles contributed to this r= eport.=20 *=20 RELATED STORY=20 Fallen CEO: Enron's Lay is a brilliant man defeated by arrogance, associate= s say. A22=20 RELATED STORY=20 Energy crisis: Power firms have seen their fortunes dim in recent months. S= unday Business C1 PHOTO: Dynegy Chairman and Chief Executive Charles L. Watson, right, announ= ces the merger, with Enron Chairman Kenneth L. Lay.; ; PHOTOGRAPHER: Associ= ated Press; PHOTO: ""This is just a financial bonanza really for both compan= ies,"" says Charles L. Watson, Dynegy chairman and chief executive.; ; PHOTO= GRAPHER: Associated Press=20 Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 NEWS Dynegy to acquire Enron in $8.9 billion stock deal / New giant moves out of= shadow LAURA GOLDBERG Staff 11/10/2001 Houston Chronicle 2 STAR 1 (Copyright 2001) Enron Corp., a mainstay of Houston's corporate landscape that helped turn t= he city into a global energy trading powerhouse, will disappear in a turn o= f events that would have been unthinkable a month ago.=20 In a deal that will unite two hometown rivals, Dynegy announced Friday even= ing it would buy the beaten-down Enron in a stock deal worth almost $8.9 bi= llion, plus the assumption of $12.8 billion in debt. The purchase will end Enron's reign as the world's largest energy trader, c= atapulting a company to the top that in many ways has been in Enron's shado= w.=20 ""This could be viewed as Dynegy being the savior of industry in rescuing En= ron, the largest energy trader, and restoring market liquidity,"" said Carol= Coale, a stock analyst with Prudential Securities in Houston, who follows = both companies.=20 A much bigger Dynegy - with annual revenues exceeding $200 billion and $90 = billion in assets - will emerge with Chuck Watson, its current chairman and= chief executive, keeping those roles in the combined company.=20 Layoffs are expected, but executives said it was too early to say how many.= Dynegy has almost 1,600 employees in Houston; Enron has more than 7,000 he= re.=20 For Watson, the deal is all about growth.=20 ""It accelerates our strategy some three or four years,"" he said shortly aft= er the deal was announced. ""This is just a financial bonanza really for bot= h companies.""=20 This isn't the way Ken Lay, Enron's chairman and chief executive, ever thou= ght his years of work would turn out.=20 ""This would not have been my dream case,"" Lay said in an interview with the= Chronicle shortly after the deal was announced. ""I would not even have con= templated it three or four weeks ago.""=20 Lay has been offered a seat on the combined company's board, but hasn't dec= ided yet whether to take it. He won't have any management role once the dea= l closes.=20 He helped take Enron from a staid pipeline company created from a 1985 merg= er to a trading machine that wheels and deals in electricity gas, electrici= ty, financial contracts used to help companies manage risk and other commod= ities.=20 But Lay said he believed selling Enron was the best option for its sharehol= ders, employees and the city considering the company's current battered sta= te.=20 ""This is the best way to provide certainty to protect this wholesale market= ing and trading franchise which is so valuable,"" he said, adding that Enron= looked at two or three other alternatives as it tried to strengthen its ba= lance sheet and add cash to into its operations.=20 Lay said it's not his preference to sell Enron and see its name disappear.= =20 ""It happens to be the best alternative,"" said Lay. ""I'm a realist. I knew w= hat needed to be done.""=20 Among Enron's troubles: The Securities and Exchange Commission is investiga= ting business deals Enron did with two investment partnerships run by its f= ormer chief financial officer, its credibility on Wall Street is close to z= ero, a pile of shareholder lawsuits and its credit rating, which it relies = on to successfully run its core trading business, has been lowered.=20 While other questions had hung over Enron earlier this year, the path to it= s end really began Oct. 16, when the company released third- quarter earnin= gs and reported significant financial losses related to the two investment = partnerships.=20 That set in a motion a spiral of events leading to Friday's announcement.= =20 Watson called Lay on Oct. 24 to see if he could do anything to help dispel = rumors that Dynegy had stopped trading with Enron.=20 That conversation led to a meeting at Lay's house days later, at which the = two started talking about a deal.=20 As these things go, the deal came together quickly, especially with so many= question marks hanging over Enron.=20 ""I think it's important to understand that Ken and I have known each other = for some 20 years,"" Watson said. ""We have a good understanding of what they= do and how they do it. We knew that their franchise was solid.""=20 The recent talks, Watson said, focused on really understanding Enron's core= business and how it could merge with Dynegy.=20 Added Lay: ""Good deals come together fast. Bad deals take a little longer.""= =20 Under the terms of the deal, which is expected to close in six to nine mont= hs:=20 Enron shareholder's get 0.2685 share of Dynegy per Enron share.=20 Dynegy will immediately inject $1.5 billion in Enron to help shore it up. D= ynegy will get that money from ChevronTexaco, which owns about 26 percent o= f Dynegy.=20 In return for that money, Dynegy will get preferred stock and other rights = in Enron's Northern Natural Gas pipeline system. Should the deal not close,= Dynegy has the right to buy all of Northern Natural Gas.=20 At the deal's closing, ChevronTexaco will provide another $1 billion to the= combined company.=20 Also at the closing, Dynegy's current shareholders will own about 64 percen= t of the combined company, with Enron's current shareholder's owning about = 36 percent.=20 Enron will have the right to designate at least three board members for the= combined company, which will have 14 board seats.=20 Steve Bergstrom, Dynegy's president, and Rob Doty, Dynegy's chief financial= officer, will keep those roles in the new company. Greg Whalley, currently= president and chief operating officer of Enron, will became an executive v= ice president at the combined company.=20 The deal contains $350 million breakup free that Dynegy would get it anothe= r suitor came in and Enron decided to take a better offer.=20 Watson also said the deal contains escape clauses to protect Dynegy should = it be necessary, but he doesn't expect any surprises.=20 ""We looked under the hood and guess what, it's just as strong as we thought= it was,"" he said.=20 Dynegy will talk to analysts and investors on a conference call Monday, att= empting to convince them of the deal's value.=20 ""On paper, it looks good,"" said Coale, the analyst. ""We still remain concer= ned about the uncertainties that shroud Enron . . . The risks continue to b= e what we don't know about Enron. We just hope Chuck and his team do all th= e necessary due diligence, which is going to take more than a couple weeks.= ""=20 There are also concerns about merging two different cultures.=20 ""Looking at cultures, the two companies are very different,"" she said. ""Dyn= egy is a little bit of a fraternity. Chuck started this company and I'm sur= e he has a heartfelt emotion toward making things work at Dynegy. Enron is = a mercenary, aggressive, cutthroat culture.""=20 At the start of the year, Enron was still heralded as an innovator for othe= rs to emulate. Since, a series of problems began chipping away at Enron's i= mage.=20 But such concerns were mostly pushed aside for as long as the company's sto= ck price performed well and its core energy trading business turned out hig= her and still-higher profits.=20 The company's woes became more serious and quickly multiplied after it made= troubling financial disclosures in its third-quarter earnings report Oct. = 16.=20 It disclosed that day it had taken a $35 million loss and reduced sharehold= ers equity by $1.2 billion related to ending business dealings with two inv= estment partnerships formerly run by Andrew Fastow, its chief financial off= icer.=20 The disclosures heightened Wall Street's ongoing concerns that Enron's fina= ncial reporting was too difficult to understand and skimped on details. It = also led to fears that Enron would be on the hook for billions of dollars r= elated to other financial vehicles.=20 Days later, Enron revealed that the SEC was investigating transactions betw= een Enron and the partnerships, called LJM Cayman and LJM2 Co-investment. I= t also replaced Fastow and has been hit with a growing number of shareholde= r lawsuits.=20 Then, the company's credit rating was downgraded, which raised questions ab= out its ability to manage its core energy trading business.=20 As Wall Street's questions grew, Enron retreated into silence, leaving anal= ysts and investors to speculate on worst-case scenarios, which fed fears th= at company was facing a cash-crunch and caused investors to keep dumping th= e stock.=20 That in turn, led some of Enron's trading partners to shift business elsewh= ere and raise their credit requirements to do business with Enron, which in= turn, raised even more fears about a cash- crunch and the company's short-= term stability.=20 Thursday, Enron said it is restating its finances as far back as 1997 to in= clude losses related to a number of complex partnerships it created.=20 . . .=20 DEAL AT-A-GLANCE=20 Company name: Dynegy.=20 Key players: Chuck Watson, Dynegy's current chairman and CEO, will remain c= hairman and CEO. Enron Corp.'s CEO and Chairman Ken Lay has been offered a = seat on Dynegy's board.=20 The trade: 0.2685 share of Dynegy for each share of Enron Corp.=20 Value of the deal: $8.85 billion in stock and $12.8 billion in Enron debt.= =20 Dynegy's close Friday: $38.76=20 Enron's close Friday: $8.63 a share.=20 Status of Enron Field name: Unknown. However, Dynegy registered the name ww= w.dynegyfield.com on Thursday.=20 . . .=20 MORE STORIES=20 Enron Corp. paid $100 million to put its name on the Houston Astros' new do= wntown home. Now that the energy giant is being bought, the name may soon b= e history.=20 The sale of Enron Corp. will likely punish Houston's downtown office market= , emptying more office space at a time when several new buildings are going= up.=20 ""Never make predictions, especially about the future,"" Ken Lay once wrote i= n an essay concerning the world's energy needs. Enron's chief executive mig= ht be taking those words to heart today.=20 Dynegy's Chuck Watson has always maintained a low profile, prompting some p= eople to label him as the most influential Houstonian you've never heard of= .=20 See these stories and more in Business.=20 . . .=20 The companies=20 Profiles of two Houston energy giants that announced their merger Friday:= =20 DYNEGY Headquarters: Houston=20 Chairman and CEO: Chuck Watson=20 Revenues in 2000: $29.4 billion=20 Employees: 6,000 worldwide=20 Electricity sales (2000): 137.7 million megawatt hours=20 Gas sales (2000): 10.9 billion cubic feet per day=20 Business segments: Dynegy Marketing and Trade; Dynegy Midstream Services, I= llinois Power; Subsidiary, Dynegy Global Communications=20 History: The company traces its roots to 1984 when the investment banking f= irm Morgan Stanley, the law firm Akin, Gump Strauss, Hauer & Feld and six n= atural gas pipelines teamed up to create a natural gas marketing firm calle= d U.S. Natural Gas Clearinghouse Ltd. Chuck Watson joined the company in 19= 85 and the operation was revamped, the pipeline partners bought out, and th= e name shortened to Natural gas Clearinghouse. In 1995, the company purchas= ed Trident NGL Holdings, quadrupling its liquids business. The company went= public for the first time under the new name NGC Corp. that same year. In = 1996, NGC merged with Chevron's gas and gas liquids business. The firm purc= hased its first power plants with the acquisition of Destec in 1997 and cha= nged its name to Dynegy in 1998 to reflect expansion beyond natural gas. Th= e company has continued to grow through acquisitions.=20 . . .=20 ENRON Headquarters: Houston=20 Chairman and CEO: Ken Lay=20 Revenues in 2000: $100.8 billion=20 Employees: 20,000 worldwide=20 Electricity sales (2000): 590.2 million megawatt hours=20 Gas sales (2000): 28.3 billion cubic feet per day=20 Core areas: Enron Wholesale Services; Enron Energy Services; Enron Transpor= tation Services=20 History: The company was formed in 1985 as a result of the merger of Housto= n Natural Gas and InterNorth, a natural gas company based in Omaha, Neb. Th= e deal integrated several pipeline systems to create the first nationwide n= atural gas pipeline system. In 1986, Ken Lay, CEO of Houston Natural gas, w= as named chairman and CEO, and the name ""Enron"" was chosen. In 1989, Enron = began trading natural gas commodities through its GasBank, a precursor to t= oday's wholesale trading business. Enron made its first electricity trade i= n 1994 and eventually became the world's biggest marketer of electricity an= d gas. Photo: 1. Ken Lay, chairman and CEO of Enron Corp., listens glumly at a Fri= day news conference as Chuck Watson, chairman and CEO of Dynegy, discusses = his company's acquisition of Enron (color); 2. DEAL AT-A- GLANCE (text); 3.= MORE STORIES (text); 4. The companies (b/w, p. 16, text)=20 Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 Financial Enron Accepts $8 Billion Buyout Offer From Dynegy; Energy Giant Was Forced = to Negotiating Table After Disclosing That It Had Overstated Earnings Peter Behr Washington Post Staff Writer 11/10/2001 The Washington Post FINAL E01 Copyright 2001, The Washington Post Co. All Rights Reserved Embattled Enron Corp. yesterday accepted a buyout offer valued at about $8 = billion from crosstown rival Dynegy Inc. If the deal is completed, it would= end Houston-based Enron's reign as the leader in the huge energy trading m= arkets that set the prices of power and natural gas in the nation.=20 Its cash dwindling and its credit rating hammered, Enron was forced to the = negotiating table after its recent disclosures that its obligations to a co= mplex web of partnerships involving company officials had caused the tradin= g powerhouse to overstate its earnings and obscure its total debt obligatio= ns. Four top Enron officials have resigned or been replaced since July and,= once Dynegy takes control, Enron's chairman and chief executive, Kenneth L= ay, will also leave the company. Lay said yesterday that he had not decided= whether to accept Dynegy's offer to serve on the combined company's board. ""It's been a good ride for a long time,"" Lay said in a conference call last= night. ""The last three weeks haven't been a whole lot of fun.""=20 The final deal was announced after the close of stock trading. Enron's shar= es -- which had fallen from $33 to $8 after the disclosures -- ended the da= y slightly higher, at $8.63. Dynegy's stock closed at $38.76, up $2.26.=20 Dynegy offered all stock for the Enron shares, so the total value of the de= al will fluctuate with Dynegy's stock price. Dynegy also said it would assu= me about $13 billion in Enron debt, bringing the total value of the transac= tion to around $21 billion.=20 Dynegy's rescue of Enron will begin with an immediate cash infusion of $1.5= billion, which will be supplied by ChevronTexaco Corp., a major Dynegy sto= ckholder. ChevronTexaco will invest another $1 billion in Dynegy after the = acquisition has passed regulatory review and is completed, which executives= said they expect will take six to nine months as Enron tries to unscramble= the complex partnerships that are now under investigation by the Securitie= s and Exchange Commission.=20 The takeover agreement gives Dynegy an escape clause permitting it to cance= l the purchase if Enron winds up with heavy regulatory fines or legal judgm= ents from shareholder suits tied to its handling of the partnerships.=20 Chuck Watson, Dynegy's chairman and chief executive, said in the conference= call that a close scrutiny over the past two weeks of Enron's financial co= ndition convinced him that the company's trading and pipeline businesses we= re solid. ""We looked under the hood, and guess what? It looked just as stro= ng as we thought it was."" Watson said he did not think more damaging disclo= sures were forthcoming from Enron.=20 Until the partnership mess, Enron was the nation's dominant energy trader, = and it had front-door political connections to the White House. Lay, its lo= ngtime chairman, raised more then $100,000 for the presidential election ca= mpaign of his friend George W. Bush. Enron rode the growth of energy tradin= g markets beginning in the mid-1990s, as first natural gas, and then electr= ic power sales were deregulated at the wholesale level. Its revenues leaped= from $9.2 billion in 1995 to $100.8 billion last year.=20 During those heady times, the Houston company could choose which questions = to answer about its dealings with related partnerships and its Byzantine bo= okkeeping.=20 ""It was always very difficult to get information,"" said Louis B. Gagliardi,= an analyst with John S. Herold Inc. ""They would always rebuff you.""=20 Until this fall, the muscular company seemed too big to stumble, said inves= tment manager David Coxe, with Harris Insight Equity Fund in Chicago.=20 Coxe bought 78,000 shares of Enron at $40 a share in August, after wrestlin= g with the decision for months, he said. Then Jeffrey Skilling, Enron's chi= ef executive and strategic mastermind, unexpectedly resigned. The stock, wh= ich had been as high as $90 in August 2000, pitched downward.=20 ""Enron seemed so indispensable to the nation's energy markets that I though= t it inconceivable it could implode,"" Coxe said. ""That's how I got sucked i= n.""=20 Enron's fall is ""classic hubris,"" Coxe said: a Greek tragedy striking someo= ne who chose to defy the gods -- ""in this case, the rules of the system.""= =20 Among the rules that Enron now acknowledges it didn't follow were the accou= nting standards that applied to the complex partnerships it created. The pu= rpose of the partnerships, Enron said, was to reduce the risks of investmen= ts in Internet transmission systems and to sell power plants and other asse= ts it no longer wanted.=20 The accounting errors were described in a 20-page SEC filing Enron made Thu= rsday. The errors resulted in a $1.2 billion reduction in the value of shar= eholders' equity. The company also said it had overstated its earnings by $= 586 million since 1997.=20 Enron created partnerships that would buy major assets -- such as a power p= lant -- that Enron wanted to sell, or in other cases, assets such as fiber-= optic cable networks that Enron intended to run but did not want to have on= its balance sheet.=20 The partnerships had outside investors, but the general partner of two of t= hem was Enron's own chief financial officer, Andrew Fastow. He earned $30 m= illion in fees from managing two of the largest partnerships, according to = the SEC document.=20 Enron added to the capital of these partnerships by pledging its stock, or = securities convertible into stock. Some of those stock transactions should = have been counted as loans, resulting in the $1.2 billion drop in sharehold= er equity, Enron now says.=20 Investors are asking why Enron's auditor, Arthur Andersen LLP, did not insi= st that these transactions be handled that way in the first place. Enron's = SEC filing mentions but does not explain some ""proposed audit adjustments"" = over the past four years that were overruled.=20 Even though, as Enron now acknowledges, it created an information barrier, = masking critical information and violating standard accounting rules, many = financial analysts who were recommending the stock to investors were not pu= shing hard enough to punch through that barrier, some analysts acknowledge.= =20 ""It was so complicated that everybody was afraid to raise their hands and s= ay, 'I don't understand it,' "" Gagliardi said.=20 The questions are now coming, from a new committee reporting to Enron's boa= rd that will investigate how the company's financial reporting was handled;= from the SEC; and, eventually, from teams of lawyers representing aggrieve= d shareholders.=20 Lay indicated yesterday he had not been aware until recently that Enron emp= loyees other than Fastow had profited from the partnership activity. Enron = directors had approved Fastow's management of the partnerships, but Fastow = quit the partnerships in July and was then replaced as chief financial offi= cer.=20 Enron this week fired Treasurer Ben Glisan and Kristina Mourdant, an Enron = division lawyer, who it said had invested in partnerships that were tied to= one of the major partnerships headed by Fastow. The Enron report to the SE= C describes a central role in these transactions played by Michael J. Koppe= r, an associate of Fastow who left Enron in July to take over Fastow's fina= ncial interests in the partnership, the company said.=20 Enron will hold a conference call next week to discuss what it has uncovere= d about outside partnership investments. Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 Financial Desk The Nation NEWS ANALYSIS A Visionary Fallen From Grace JAMES FLANIGAN TIMES STAFF WRITER 11/10/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-22 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company A year ago, Enron Corp. Chairman Kenneth L. Lay was on top of the energy wo= rld. As a leading fund-raiser, contributor and energy advisor to the Bush a= dministration, he played a key role in shaping the new president's energy p= olicy. As head of the world's largest energy trading company, he had an eno= rmous influence on the price of energy in California and across the nation.= Enron's highflying stock helped him cash out $123 million in stock options= last year alone.=20 On Friday, with Enron being saved from financial collapse by agreeing to be= acquired by rival Dynegy Inc., Lay's career and reputation are in shambles= . Under the merger, he will be stripped of a management job. His integrity = is tattered, with Enron's controversial financial dealings under federal in= vestigation. Enron investors and employees are chagrined and outraged becau= se the company's stock lost 80% of its value in recent weeks. The rapid rise and fall of Lay, 58, is a story of how a brilliant man with = innovative ideas and a grand scheme to transform the world's energy markets= was overcome with arrogance, associates and critics say. Under Lay, Enron = stretched the limits of the law and took risks that nearly caused its finan= cial collapse, they say. That in turn could have resulted in a widespread d= isruption in energy supplies.=20 ""Enron's behavior casts doubt on the integrity of our financial markets. It= is a very serious matter,"" said Edward R. Muller, an energy investor and f= ormer president of Edison International's Mission Energy subsidiary.=20 ""Nobody denies he's smart, but it's a question of integrity,"" said Raymond = Plank, chief executive of Apache Corp. and an associate of Lay's in Houston= 's vibrant oil and gas industry.=20 Lay and longtime partner Jeffrey K. Skilling, who served briefly as Enron's= chief executive before resigning abruptly in August, rose to prominence in= the last decade through the use of innovative financial techniques designe= d to exploit a reduction in government regulation of energy.=20 Lay transformed world energy industries through his vision of new, market-d= riven ways to finance natural gas and electricity production and transmissi= on.=20 The financial markets that Lay and his Enron associates created had an enor= mous effect on California's disastrous experiment in electricity deregulati= on. Critics say his influence was excessive and misguided.=20 ""Ken Lay was a mystic,"" said state Sen. Steve Peace (D-El Cajon), an outspo= ken critic of Enron. ""Whatever he said had to make sense because he was Ken= Lay. It was hero worship. Many of the people working as economists at the = Federal Energy Regulatory Commission worshiped Ken Lay. As a consequence, t= he things Enron promoted and pushed for were never challenged, intellectual= ly and otherwise.""=20 Lay, who has a doctorate in economics, had modest beginnings as the son of = a poor country preacher who did farm labor on the side to raise money for h= is children's education. In the Navy in the late 1960s, Lay was assigned to= the Defense Department because of his economic acumen. ""He allocated Penta= gon dollars more efficiently in purchasing for the military,"" said Mark Pal= mer, chief spokesman for Enron.=20 Lay worked for Exxon and other energy firms in the 1970s, amid soaring oil = prices, gasoline shortages and still-regulated natural gas. He headed Houst= on Natural Gas, a predecessor firm of Enron, in the 1980s as falling prices= for oil and natural gas presented grave problems for Houston's energy indu= stries.=20 When the federal government allowed pipelines to carry the gas of any produ= cer, Lay turned Enron into a foremost firm in the new, deregulated industry= . Still, Enron almost went bankrupt in the late 1980s, with natural gas in = oversupply and prices falling.=20 It was then that Skilling, a McKinsey & Co. consultant, suggested to Lay th= at the firm trade long-term contracts for gas, promising to deliver the com= modity to customers at fixed prices, buying and selling contracts of varyin= g maturities ""the way mortgage companies deal with mortgages,"" in Skilling'= s words.=20 The innovation started Enron's rapid growth and rise to prominence as the e= mbodiment of a new kind of energy company. In the 1990s, the federal govern= ment called for deregulation of electricity.=20 Lay saw opportunities. He and Skilling created a market for contracts in el= ectricity in 1994, and by 1996 Enron was the world's leading firm doing suc= h business.=20 Lay's central idea was that, by creating a market of millions of buyers and= sellers constantly taking positions, power supplies could be allocated eff= iciently and prices lowered. Lay liked to lecture, in an avuncular way, abo= ut the new economics of energy trading.=20 ""Technology is changing, and there's a lot more value in flexibility and op= tionality. Just about in every industry, you can make them a lot more effic= ient when you have more optionality,"" Lay said in an interview in January i= n his Houston offices overlooking the sparkling new Enron headquarters buil= ding, which still is under construction.=20 As Enron's business profile grew, so did Lay's political influence. He serv= ed as an energy advisor to both Bush administrations and headed Texas fund-= raising for George W. Bush's presidential campaign. Lay raised $100,000 for= the Bush-Cheney campaign, and with his wife, Linda, Lay contributed anothe= r $100,000 to help finance the inaugural gala this year.=20 As the administration prepared its energy plan, Lay gained national stature= as a preacher of market economics applied to electricity.=20 ""There's no way you can centralize a command-control environment and make t= he best decisions to have an efficient, low-cost, reliable electricity indu= stry,"" Lay said.=20 His sermon was intended for California, which suffered sharply higher price= s for electricity last winter, to the point that private utilities fell int= o or near bankruptcy and the state budget incurred a cost of $12 billion, w= hich Sacramento now is trying to recover through the sale of revenue bonds.= =20 Because Enron, trading billions of dollars a day in power contracts worldwi= de, had an immense effect on electricity prices, Lay's preaching grated on = state officials. Driven to intemperance, state Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer said= in May that he'd like to ""escort"" Lay to a prison cell.=20 But more than economic philosophy was behind Lay's goading of California. T= he state's debacle gave energy deregulation a bad name and chilled deregula= tion moves by many other states.=20 That in turn reduced growth prospects for Enron. The promise of continued g= rowth in deregulation had helped make Enron a Wall Street darling. Its stoc= k price, at one point nearly $90 a share versus less than $10 now, pushed u= p the value of Enron stock options, held by almost all employees but owned = in great amounts by Lay, Skilling and other company officers.=20 Lay cashed in last year, converting options for a gain of $123 million, whi= le Skilling gained $62 million by converting his options. As they cashed in= , Enron was encountering other problems. Attempts to set up trading markets= in water and broadband Internet transmission were floundering. A major pow= er plant venture in India was in grave economic and political trouble.=20 But in the last month, Enron revealed that it had reduced the firm's equity= value by more than $1 billion due to write-offs in a hitherto hidden partn= ership.=20 Revelations then cascaded. The firm had 33 such partnerships, which had bil= lions of dollars in debt for which Enron was liable. Lay and Skilling piled= up debt in hidden partnerships, analysts explain, because the firm needed = huge amounts of debt to support its greatly expanding levels of trading in = electricity, natural gas and other commodities.=20 But the firm could not support such debt and still retain its credit rating= , growth rate and high stock price. After weeks of gamely protesting that t= he business was sound and that he personally took offense at investment ana= lysts' suggestions of impropriety, Lay fell silent.=20 *=20 Times staff writer Nancy Vogel in Sacramento contributed to this report. PHOTO: With the takeover of his once-soaring firm, Enron chief Kenneth Lay'= s career is in tatters.; ; PHOTOGRAPHER: Reuters=20 Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 BUSINESS DYNEGY TIMELINE 11/10/2001 Houston Chronicle 3 STAR 3 (Copyright 2001) Natural Gas Clearinghouse is formed by the investment banking firm Morgan S= tanley and the law firm Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld. Six natural gas = pipelines got together to create the gas marketing firm.=20 The U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission begins the long process of de= regulating the natural gas business, which ultimately created huge markets = for the company and competitors such as Enron. NGC introduces its ""energy store"" concept, looking to create a one- stop sh= opping outlet for all energy products and services.=20 NGC makes initial public offering.=20 NGC acquires Trident NGLs.=20 NGC merges with the natural gas business unit of Chevron Corp. and Chevron'= s Warren Petroleum Co. subsidiary.=20 In February, NGC announces a deal to expand its ""energy store"" with the pur= chase of Destec Energy's interest in 20 U.S. power plants for $1.27 billion= . The Destec deal is the company's first purchase of power-generation asset= s.=20 ""With deregulation right around the corner, we have been aggressively looki= ng to acquire major power-generation assets to complement the expertise tha= t we already have in our power marketing,"" Watson said.=20 NGC's stock trades around $22 per share in late February when the company d= iscloses that excessive high-cost inventories of natural gas liquids, or NG= Ls, would cut operating income by $40 million. The price plunged to the mid= teens before partially recovering to about $18. Watson says NGC has put com= munications and information- reporting systems in place to alert management= to developing problems much earlier than they learned of the NGL-related p= roblems.=20 In May, NGC is honored as the Chronicle 100 company of the year for its ste= llar 1996 results.=20 NGC buys Southern California Edison Assets.=20 In March, Chuck Watson and Bob McNair team up to put in the winning bid of = $530,000 for the grand champion steer, named Rowdy. The pair pay the record= price days after joining city officials on a trip to help lobby for an NFL= team.=20 In June, NGC adopts a new name - Dynegy - a word created by merging dynamic= and energy. ""The name NGC no longer captures who we are and who we have be= come,"" says Watson, the company's chief executive. The company will have th= ree logos, all derived from the Chinese tangram, a collection of seven red,= yellow and blue geometic shapes that can be arranged in any number of comb= inations.=20 In December, a Dynegy joint venture announces the purchase of a power plant= and other assets from San Diego Gas & Electric.=20 In June, Dynegy agrees to a $2 billion takeover with Illinova, an Illinois = electric and gas company that would give the energy marketing company elect= ric plants and lines located in major Midwest markets. This deal, the large= st in the company's history to date, brought one company trying to move bey= ond the traditional utility business together with a trading company moving= into that business.=20 In October, Watson, who owns the Houston Aeros hockey team, announces he wo= uld help fund the campaign against the downtown arena. The arena measure is= later defeated, but was approved in a new vote the next year after Watson = agrees to support it.=20 In February, Dynegy sells natural gas pipelines and processing plants for $= 308 million in cash. It is part of a planned $600 million asset sale to red= uce its debts as Dynegy closed its $2 billion merger with Illinois utility = Illinova.=20 In August, Dynegy agrees to buy two power plants in the Hudson River Valley= region of New York from CH Energy and two other utilities for $903 million= . The deal marks Dynegy's expansion into the Northeast power market.=20 Dynegy branches into the broadband, Internet and telecommunications busines= ses by buying privately held Extant for $151.3 million in cash and stock.= =20 In July, Dynegy says it will spend about $590 million to buy natural gas st= orage facilities in the United Kingdom in a deal that will serve as the cor= nerstone of its European energy network. It will buy BG Storage, a wholly o= wned subsidiary of BG Group. The deal is part of Dynegy's strategy to repli= cate in Europe the energy delivery network it has built in the United State= s.=20 In September, after 17 years in business, Dynegy launches its first ad camp= aign. The spots, released in conjunction with the PGA Tour Championship, em= phasize the firm is passionate about what it does.=20 On Nov. 9, Dynegy announces plans to purchase Enron Corp. Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 BUSINESS POWER PLAY / ENRON TIMELINE 11/10/2001 Houston Chronicle 3 STAR 4 (Copyright 2001) Houston Natural Gas merges with Omaha, Neb.-based InterNorth to create the = company that would eventually be named Enron Corp. The deal integrated seve= ral pipeline systems to create the first nationwide natural gas pipeline sy= stem.=20 Ken Lay, who had been chief executive officer of Houston Natural Gas, is na= med chairman and chief executive officer. The company chooses the name Enro= n after rejecting Interon. Enron discovers that oil traders in New York have overextended the company'= s accounts by almost $1 billion. The company ultimately works this loss dow= n to $142 million. This leads to Enron developing a myriad of services to h= elp reduce the risk of price swings for everything from gas to advertising = space.=20 Enron opens its first overseas offices in England to take advantage of the = country's privatization of its power industry. The company's major strategy= shift - to pursue unregulated markets in addition to its regulated pipelin= e business - is revealed to executives in a gathering that became known as = the ""Come to Jesus"" meeting.=20 Jeffrey Skilling joins the company and Enron launches its Gas Bank, a progr= am under which buyers of natural gas can lock in long- term supplies at fix= ed prices. The company also begins to offer financing for oil and gas produ= cers.=20 Enron acquires Transportadora de Gas del Sur, Enron's first pipeline presen= ce in South America and the start of a push to expand on the continent.=20 Enron's Teesside power plant in England begins operation, one of the first = big successes for the company's international strategy.=20 Enron makes its first electricity trade, beginning what will turn out to be= one of the company's biggest profit centers in the next few years.=20 Enron Europe establishes a trading center in London, marking the company's = entry into European wholesale markets. Europe is now considered one of the = company's prime growth markets.=20 Construction begins on the first phase of the Dabhol power plant in India. = The $2 billion project would be plagued with political problems throughout = its construction. Enron puts its stake in the project up for sale in 2001.= =20 In December, Skilling is elected president and chief operating officer and = will continue in his role as chairman and CEO of Enron Capital & Trade Reso= urces.=20 To expand its electricity business, Enron buys Portland General Electric Co= rp., the utility serving the Portland, Ore., area. In 2001, Enron agrees to= sell Portland General Electric to Northwest Natural Gas Co. for about $1.9= billion.=20 Enron Energy Services is formed to provide energy management services to co= mmercial and industrial customers.=20 Enron acquires Wessex Water in the United Kingdom, which forms the basis fo= r its water subsidiary Azurix.=20 Enron forms its broadband services unit. The first phase of the Dabhol proj= ect begins operations. One-third of Azurix is sold to the public in an init= ial public offering. After an early rise, shares fall sharply as the year g= oes on and the problems facing the company become apparent. Enron Online, t= he company's commodity trading Internet site, is formed. It quickly becomes= the largest e-business site in the world. Enron Energy Services turns its = first profit in the fourth quarter.=20 Rebecca Mark resigns from her position as Azurix chairwoman and the company= announces a plan to take the troubled water subsidiary private.=20 Annual revenues reach $100 billion, more than double the year before, refle= cting the growing importance of trading.=20 Enron Field is opened in downtown Houston. In addition to buying the naming= rights, Enron Chairman Ken Lay helped raise financial support for the cons= truction project.=20 The Energy Financial Group ranks Enron the sixth-largest energy company in = the world, based on market capitalization.=20 Enron and strategic investors, IBM and America Online, launch The New Power= Co. to provide electric service in a deregulated market.=20 In February, Jeff Skilling takes over as chief executive officer. Ken Lay r= emains as chairman.=20 In March, Enron and Blockbuster call off deal to bring movies into homes ov= er the Internet.=20 In April, Enron discloses it is owed $570 million by bankrupt California ut= ility Pacific Gas & Electric Co.=20 In August, Skilling unexpectedly resigns for personal reasons. Lay takes ba= ck the CEO job. Wall Street starts cranking up its requests for Enron to pr= ovide more detailed financial information about its performance.=20 In October, Enron releases third-quarter earnings, with $1.01 billion in ch= arges, including $35 million related to investment partnerships formerly he= aded by Andrew Fastow, Enron's chief financial officer. Fastow is replaced = as CFO. The Securities and Exchange Commission launches a formal investigat= ion into the partnerships.=20 In November, Enron restates earnings for 1997 through 2000 and the first th= ree quarters of this year.=20 On Friday, Dynegy announces it wants to merge with Enron. Enron's stock clo= ses at $8.63 per share, an 89 percent drop since the beginning of the year. Mug: Jeffrey Skilling=20 Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 BUSINESS POWER PLAY / Enron had been a political heavyweight / Critics decried influ= ence of Ken Lay in White House DAVID IVANOVICH, Houston Chronicle Washington Bureau Staff 11/10/2001 Houston Chronicle 3 STAR 4 (Copyright 2001) WASHINGTON - Until a few weeks ago, Enron Corp. was the star of the Washing= ton lobbyist corps.=20 Enron Chairman Ken Lay was known to have the ear of his longtime friend and= political ally President Bush. Vice President Dick Cheney had unveiled a national energy strategy very muc= h to Enron's liking, while one of the company's favorite electricity regula= tors, Texas' Pat Wood III, had been installed as the new head of the Federa= l Energy Regulatory Commission.=20 Critics feared the Houston-based energy and trading giant exerted far too m= uch influence, both in Congress and in the Bush White House.=20 Now, after the company's implosion, Enron's legendary political might is ev= aporating as well, political observers say.=20 ""Just a matter of weeks or months ago, Enron was still the 800- pound goril= la,"" said Steven Weiss, a spokesman for the Washington- based Center for Re= sponsive Politics, a political watchdog group. ""It was getting into any mee= ting it wanted to.=20 ""Relationships are still existent, and Bush is unlikely to completely ignor= e Ken Lay. But one would have to think the amount of influence that Ken Lay= could exert now pales in comparison to the influence he could have exerted= just a month or more ago.""=20 Now that Dynegy has agreed to take over Enron, the companies' role in gover= nment will be determined by Chuck Watson, Dynegy's chief executive officer.= =20 While Enron has been such a player in Washington, Dynegy is less known insi= de the Capital Beltway. But that's not to say Dynegy has no political pull = on Capitol Hill.=20 ""Ken Lay certainly can get meetings with senators, but so can Chuck Watson,= "" a Senate staffer said.=20 While Dynegy may be attracted to Enron's energy trading whiz, the company m= ay be desirous of Enron's political expertise as well. While Watson has had= a presence on the national stage, his role in Houston's stadium votes show= s he is hardly allergic to politics.=20 Enron's recent troubles, however, may leave a stain. With the Securities an= d Exchange Commission conducting an investigation into some of the company'= s business dealings, many politicians are likely to be wary.=20 ""Politicians, perhaps better than anyone else, can smell a rotten egg,"" Wei= ss said. ""Who would want it reported in the newspaper that they are associa= ted with a company that is under investigation?""=20 Enron's lobbyist in Washington, Linda Robertson, could not be reached for c= omment.=20 A setback among Washington's elite would be a novel experience for Lay and = other Enron officials. In a city where access is everything, Lay has proved= - time and again - his political savvy.=20 A one-time energy policy-maker for Richard Nixon, Lay successfully champion= ed deregulation of the natural gas pipeline industry and has led the effort= to open up the electricity markets as well.=20 A Republican, Lay served as co-chair of the host committee for the GOP's na= tional convention in Houston in 1992, when his friend George Bush the elder= was nominated for a second term. And yet there was Lay a few years later, = playing golf with the elder Bush's political nemesis, Bill Clinton, and adv= ising the Democratic administration on energy.=20 The company has excelled at snatching up political heavyweights as they lea= ve public office. Enron has attracted the likes of former Secretary of Stat= e James Baker III and one-time Clinton White House chief of staff Thomas ""M= ack"" McLarty.=20 Enron's stable of political lobbyists became a who's who of Washington insi= ders, from former Christian Coalition head Ralph Reed to one-time Energy Re= gulatory Commission Chairwoman Elizabeth ""Betsy"" Moler.=20 And by all accounts, Enron - and Lay especially - rank among the most munif= icent contributors to George W. Bush's political career. Lay's name was men= tioned repeatedly as Bush drew up his Cabinet, and while he did not join th= e government, he played a role in helping craft Bush's energy strategy.=20 Lay and other Enron officials spent $2.1 million lobbying Congress and the = White House last year, the Center for Responsive Politics reported.=20 In fact, 71 senators and 188 House members have received contributions from= Lay and other Enron officials, the watchdog group found.=20 Questions about Lay's influence over the Federal Energy Regulatory Commissi= on sparked an investigation last summer by Congress' General Accounting Off= ice.=20 Curt Hebert, then the commission chairman, accused Lay of trying to prod hi= m into changing his position on an issue of key concern to Enron, open acce= ss by independent electricity generators to the power lines owned by utilit= ies, in exchange for Lay's political support.=20 The GAO found no evidence of wrongdoing by either party. Three months after= the dispute became public, Hebert resigned from the commission. He was suc= ceeded by Wood, whom Enron officials had championed as ""smart, hard-working= , fair.""=20 Just one month ago, Enron's political muscle appeared undiminished. Enron h= eld a conference in Washington on energy policy during the first week of Oc= tober, attracting the likes of Wood, Senate Energy Committee Chairman Jeff = Bingaman, D-N.M., and former Energy Department Secretary James Schlesinger.= =20 Since the start of the company's free-fall, Enron officials have been less = on Capitol Hill, although that may have merely reflected the city's preoccu= pation with the war on terrorism and the anthrax scare. Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 BUSINESS POWER PLAY / Sale suddenly switches office outlook downtown RALPH BIVINS Staff 11/10/2001 Houston Chronicle 3 STAR 1 (Copyright 2001) THE sale of Enron Corp. is going to punish Houston's downtown office market= - emptying more office space at a time when several buildings are going up= .=20 Enron and its purchaser, Dynegy, are both hefty users of downtown office sp= ace, and with staff cutbacks likely, they will need a lot less of it. Enron's 40-story office tower, which is under construction on Smith Street,= is expected to be completed next year.=20 ""If they do go through with the deal, that building is not going to be the = Enron building. It's going to become the Dynegy building,"" said office brok= er Sanford Criner of the Trione & Gordon realty firm.=20 Dynegy, which leases 700,000 square feet in the Wells Fargo Plaza at 1000 L= ouisiana, would jump at the chance to operate in the new trading floors at = the new Enron Center South, according to a number of downtown office broker= s.=20 ""There's no question Dynegy has been looking to get a major league trading = floor for a long time,"" Criner said. ""They definitely covet the Enron tradi= ng floor.""=20 The new 1.2 million-square-foot Enron tower is a palace of energy trading t= echnology with miles of telecommunications cable running throughout.=20 The building's matching pair of sweeping staircases were intended to lead t= o the corporate dens of Enron Chairman Ken Lay and former CEO Jeff Skilling= but probably will be used by Dynegy Chairman Chuck Watson.=20 John Sousa, a spokesman for Dynegy, said Thursday that the firm's current W= ells Fargo space is good and it was too soon to speculate about things like= office space.=20 ""We're satisfied with our current location,"" Sousa said.=20 A number of office brokers, however, suggest Dynegy would move over to the = Enron building and attempt to sublease at least some of the space in Wells = Fargo Plaza.=20 Enron's importance to the Houston office market extends beyond the new buil= ding. The company occupies about 3 million of the 42 million square feet of= office space available downtown, if every small building is counted.=20 Enron occupies its existing 1.25 million-square-foot headquarters building = at 1400 Smith, 500,000 square feet of space in Three Allen Center, 60,000 s= quare feet in the 500 Jefferson building, and 40,000 square feet in the 600= Jefferson building.=20 Enron has already moved a few employees into its new building, which had be= en slated to be fully occupied by next summer.=20 ""This has some real implications,"" said George Carpenter of Carpenter Realt= y. ""Who knows, when the dust settles, where this thing is heading?""=20 TrizecHahn, which owns the Cullen Center and Allen Center properties, had b= een expecting Enron to move out of at least a portion of those buildings wh= en the new Enron Center South building was complete.=20 ""We're bullish on Houston,"" said TrizecHahn spokesman Rick Matthews. ""It's = likely to remain a core market for us.""=20 Enron's shrinkage will come on top of several other moves that will empty d= owntown office space.=20 ""It's going to be a blood bath next year,"" said one Houston office broker w= ho asked that his name not be used.=20 About 500,000 square feet of space will become vacant next year in the Chev= ron Tower, according to Trione & Gordon. A number of Chevron employees will= be moving into the Texaco Heritage Plaza building as a result of the Chevr= on and Texaco merger.=20 Halliburton, another huge downtown office tenant, will be moving out of dow= ntown to new buildings in the Westchase area in the next few years, leaving= behind a large hole of vacant space at 601 Jefferson.=20 While the demand for office space is beginning to fall, the supply is about= to increase.=20 The 5 Houston Center, a 27-story structure that will be complete next year,= will open with a significant number of signed tenants. But as major corpor= ate tenants such as Ernst & Young, Jenkens & Gilchrist and Jackson Walker m= ove into the building, they will leave behind vacant space in others.=20 Century Development's 1000 Main building is scheduled to be finished in 200= 3. The 783,000-square-foot project, which will have Reliant Resources as it= s main tenant, still has more than 200,000 square feet of space to lease, a= ccording to Trione & Gordon.=20 And even more space will be coming onto the market when the 32- story Calpi= ne Center office tower is completed at 717 Texas Ave. in 2003.=20 With these changes, the health of the downtown office market has gone from = being robust to sickly in a short period of time.=20 ""The Central Business District is going to be going through some rough time= s,"" said Bob Parsley, chief executive officer of Colliers International rea= lty firm.=20 Class A space - the most expensive, prime office space - in downtown is now= over 97 percent occupied, a very high rate that encouraged developers to s= tart new office towers.=20 The looming downturn in the office market is not expected to be nearly as b= ad as the crash of the 1980s, but there could be some painful times ahead f= or downtown landlords.=20 ""There are going to be some big blocks of space in downtown Houston,"" said = Candace Baggett, president of the Calibre Group realty firm.=20 . . .=20 Location of Enron's operations and Dynegy's headquarters=20 1. Enron headquarters, 1400 Smith 1.25 million square feet.=20 2. Enron Center South (under construction) 1.2 million square feet.=20 3. Three Allen Center 500,000 square feet leased by Enron=20 4. 600 Jefferson 40,000 square feet leased by Enron=20 5. 500 Jefferson 60,000 square feet leased by Enron=20 6. Dynegy headquarters Wells Fargo Plaza 700,000 square feet.=20 7. Enron Field Opened 2000 Map: 1. Location of Enron's operations and Dynegy's headquarters (color, te= xt); Photos: 2. Enron employees kept their cell phones in use outside the c= ompany's downtown offices Friday afternoon. Dynegy's purchase of Enron deal= s a blow to the city's office space market. Enron's shrinkage will come on = top of several other moves that will empty downtown office space (p. 4)=20 Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 BUSINESS POWER PLAY / Enron Field name may fall as quickly as energy empire RALPH BIVINS Staff 11/10/2001 Houston Chronicle 3 STAR 1 (Copyright 2001) BASEBALL history is written fast these days.=20 As Enron Corp., the massive Houston energy-trading company, is to be bought= out by Dynegy, the name Enron Field may go with it. Enron paid big money - $100 million - to put its name on the retractable-ro= of stadium downtown. It cost a lot to get the name, but it gave Enron a lot= of marketing firepower and put the company's name on the lips of millions = of Astros fans.=20 If Dynegy completes the acquisition of Enron Corp. as expected, Dynegy also= may get the naming rights to the Astros' stadium.=20 With the name ""Enron"" fading in the merger, it appears possible the 42,000-= seat baseball stadium would take the Dynegy name.=20 ""If they do something with the company, that name goes with it,"" said Pam G= ardner, president of business operations for the Houston Astros.=20 Dynegy Chairman Chuck Watson said Friday that no decision has been made abo= ut renaming the baseball stadium.=20 However, Dynegy did register the domain name dynegyfield.com with Verisign,= an Internet domain name registrar, on Thursday.=20 Enron Field would not be the first sports facility to undergo a name change= .=20 The Compaq Center, home of the Houston Rockets, took the Compaq name in 199= 7 after being called The Summit for many years. And the name may be up in t= he air again as Compaq Computer Corp. contemplates a merger with Hewlett-Pa= ckard.=20 The stadium for the St. Louis Rams football team was renamed Dome at Americ= as Center, after American Airlines bought former namesake TWA airlines.=20 ""It's not catastrophic if you have to change the name of the arena,"" said D= ean Bonham of Bonham Group, a sports marketing consulting firm.=20 Sometimes trying to change the name of a stadium can be hard, said Kurt Hun= zeker, editor of Team Marketing Report, a sports business newsletter. The o= riginal name for a stadium can be adopted into fan's vocabulary, and the se= condary names for stadiums don't always stick.=20 Many baseball fans in Cincinnati have had a hard time adjusting to calling = Riverfront Stadium by its new name of Cinergy Field, Hunzeker said.=20 Sometimes the media refuse to cooperate with the name changes because of tr= adition or a simple refusal to give into commercialism. The Denver Post, fo= r example, has refused to adopt the new name of Invesco Field at Mile High = Stadium.=20 The deal for a new football stadium for the Houston Texans is similar to th= e arrangement with Enron Field, said Steve Patterson, senior vice president= of the Texans.=20 The Texans' field will be called Reliant Stadium. If Reliant Energy is boug= ht out by another company, however, the acquiring company will have the rig= ht to change the name of the stadium, Patterson said. Photo: Enron Field, seen on opening night in March 2000, could have a new n= ame next season (color)=20 Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 Market forces: Worries over Royal Bank's Enron exposure NEIL HUME 11/10/2001 The Guardian Copyright (C) 2001 The Guardian; Source: World Reporter (TM) Executives at Royal Bank of Scotland are among those keeping their fingers = crossed that the urgent talks to save the debt-stricken energy trading grou= p Enron are successful.=20 In recent days it has emerged that Britain's second biggest bank by market = capitalisation is a lender to the US group. At the moment it is not clear how much money the Edinburgh bank has lent to= Enron and whether any of it is secured, but speculation in the market plac= e suggests that the figure could run into millions. It seems RBoS was invol= ved in one of the credit facilities arranged for Enron, which needs billion= s of dollars of new money to keep it afloat.=20 Royal Bank was yesterday keeping very quiet about the size of the exposure,= but worries about the Enron situation were enough to push the shares down = 44p to pounds 16.70 on a bad day for the banking sector. Elsewhere, Barclay= s fell 88p to pounds 21.12, HSBC lost 9.5p to 792.5p, and Lloyds TSB dipped= 17.5p to 713p as investors decided it was time to take some profits.=20 On the other side of Atlantic, Enron was locked in talks with rival Dynegy = over a $7bn (pounds 4.81bn) rescue takeover.=20 With Wall Street giving up strong gains overnight, as investors decided to = book profits after the recent strong run, London's top stocks started the d= ay on the back foot. Leading shares then trimmed a 50-point deficit as buye= rs emerged for heavyweight oil stocks Shell , 6p higher at 514.5p, and BP ,= 9p stronger at 565p after Saudi Arabia suggested the mood was shifting tow= ards a production cut of 1.5m barrels at next week's Opec meeting. News tha= t Russian oil companies are considering a cut also helped.=20 That was as good as it got. With Wall Street failing to provide a lead, the= FTSE 100 drifted back, eventually closing 33.9 points lower at 5,244.2. Ho= wever, dealers were not too downhearted by the performance, pointing to the= index's 115-point advance over the week.=20 Cash rich Cable & Wireless took the FTSE 100's wooden spoon, sliding 18.25p= to 330p with dealers attributing its weakness to the re-emergence of talk = that it is poised to make a big acquisition. Opinion was divided over the p= otential target. Most dealers plumped for Colt Telecom , which has been lin= ked with C&W in recent weeks. Sure enough the shares responded, ending the = day 10.5p better at 158p.=20 Others reckoned C&W had its eye on Energis and had approached 30% sharehold= er National Grid with a view to buying its stake. Whatever the truth of tha= t rumour, analysts think Energis would be a better bolt-on acquisition for = C&W than Colt. Energis shares eased a penny to 89p.=20 Invensys , the industrial controls group, firmed 4.25p to 78.75p on hopes t= hat a positive outlook statement will accompany Thursday's interim results.= The figures will also provide analysts with their first chance to quiz new= chief executive Rick Haythornthwaite on his plans to turn around the heavi= ly indebted company.=20 Among the mid caps, Carphone Warehouse underperformed, falling 2.5p to 109p= , as worries resurfaced about the demand for mobile phones in the Christmas= trading period .=20 Joint broker CSFB caused the trouble. With the outlook uncertain CSFB said = it had taken the precaution of lowering its pretax profits forecast to a ""w= orst case scenario"" pounds 55m. Its previous estimate was pounds 67.3m. CSF= B tried play down the significance of the downgrade, arguing that Carphone = was likely to outperform its rivals in the next month, but many traders int= erpreted it as an attempt to lower the City's expectations.=20 Furniture group MFI was heading in the other direction, improving 10.5p to = 130p after house broker Deutsche Bank raised hopes that Wednesday's trading= update could impress. The German investment bank believes business has bee= n good at MFI in recent months and the company is on course to meet its pre= tax profit forecast of pounds 63.5m.=20 In an otherwise dull tech sector, Autonomy , the intelligent software group= advanced 14.75p to 313p. Traders heard talk that the company had secured a= couple of big contracts that were put on hold after September's terrorist = attacks.=20 There was also a flurry of interest in Debenhams , the department store gro= up, on speculation that the company will be tipped in a weekend newspaper. = The shares finished 23p higher at 395p.=20 In the smaller companies world, retail investors were chasing Redbus Interh= ouse , the web-hosting company run by John Porter, the multi-millionaire Te= sco heir and son of Dame Shirley Porter.=20 Dealers said the investors were betting that Monday's third quarter figures= would top expectations. Given the over capacity in the web-hosting market = and the fact Redbus admitted with interim results in September that demand = had fallen, most traders took the view that this was a bold and potentially= foolhardy gamble.=20 Elsewhere, those retail investors suckered into Character Group , the toy a= nd games maker, when its shares hit 30p late on Thursday were nursing losse= s.=20 Before the market opened, the company said that while one of its division p= roduced a range of Harry Potter gift products it was not an official Potter= licensee. Character, which had almost doubled in the previous session, she= d 6.75p to 24.25p.=20 There was also some pain for shareholders of Brammer , the industrial servi= ces group, which fell 61.5p to 256p after warning full-year pretax profits = would be 25% lower than last year.=20 Engineering group Senior gained 0.25p to 29.5p after a stock overhang was c= leared. Traders believe the shares could enjoy a good run next week, especi= ally as bid rumours are floating around. Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 Business Dynegy snaps up Enron for $9.5bn Chris Ayres in New York 11/10/2001 The Times of London News International Final 5 60 (Copyright Times Newspapers Ltd, 2001) Enron, the troubled US energy company with close ties to President Bush, wa= s yesterday bought for $9.5 billion (Pounds 6.5 billion) by its smaller riv= al Dynegy.=20 The move brings to a close one of the most spectacular Wall Street downfall= s of recent years. Shareholders in Enron, who have seen more than $60 billi= on wiped off the value of the company this year, will get about 0.27 of a D= ynegy share for every share they own in Enron, valuing the deal at $10.41 p= er Enron share. The deal comes amid a Securities & Exchange Commission investigation into E= nron's controversial business practices. The struggling company also admitt= ed on Thursday that it had overstated its profits by nearly $586 million an= d understated its debt by $2.6 billion over the past four years.=20 As part of the deal, ChevronTexaco, which owns 27 per cent of Dynegy, will = invest $2.5 billion in the merged company. Shares of Dynegy gained $2.26 to= close at $38.76. Enron shares rose 22 cents to $8.63. The announcement on = the merger of the two Houston-based companies came after the US markets clo= sed.=20 Before the deal was announced, Enron saw its credit rating cut by Moody's t= o a notch above ""junk"" status. Meanwhile, Enron's exit from a $2.9 billion = power plant project in India was blocked by the Bombay High Court.=20 Fears also heightened yesterday that US energy traders were beginning to by= pass Enron's Internet-based energy trading systems because of concern over = the company's ability to settle transactions and pay back collateral. So fa= r, Enron's trading operations have remained immune from the disasters to hi= t the company on Wall Street.=20 The past few weeks have seen the departure of Enron's finance director, And= rew Fastow, and its treasurer, Ben Glisan. The company's chief executive, J= effrey Skilling, resigned in August.=20 However, some analysts expressed scepticism at the merger. Carole Coale, an= analyst with Prudential Securities, said she was puzzled as to ""why Dynegy= 's management would want to take on the uncertainties and potential liabili= ties associated with a merger with Enron"".=20 Enron is America's biggest buyer and seller of natural gas and one of the c= ountry's ten largest companies with revenues last year of more than $100 bi= llion. Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 UK jobs on the line 11/10/2001 Daily Mail Associated Newspapers Ltd. 1ST 81 (Copyright 2001) UP TO 4,000 UK jobs are at risk as US energy group Enron seeks a 5.5bn resc= ue from rival Dynegy. Enron owns Wessex Water, two power plants on Teeside = and runs the world's biggest energy-trading operation. Those are the jobs b= elieved to be most at risk.=20 US regulators are investigating off-balance sheet deals allegedly struck by= former finance director Andrew Fastow, who has since left the company. Enron's managing director and chief counsel were sacked earlier this week f= or their roles in the affair. Enron took a 685m charge, prompting a 90pc fa= ll in its share price. This week, it restated four- year profits down by 22= pc to 405m.=20 Rating agency Moody's downgraded Enron's debt to its lowest investment grad= e, warning another cut could follow. Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 Dynegy to get prime downtown real estate in Enron deal By PAM EASTON Associated Press Writer 11/10/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. HOUSTON (AP) - Enron Corp. Chairman Kenneth Lay envisioned the four trading= floors within his company's newly constructed silver glass tower - that wa= s to be its new world headquarters - as an energy trading center much like = the Chicago Mercantile Exchange.=20 ""They are pretty spectacular,"" Enron spokeswoman Karen Denne said of the tr= ading floors following the announcement of Dynegy Inc.'s plans to buy Enron= for about $8 billion in stock late Friday. ""It is a huge state-of-the-art = trading floor. They are really neat."" But the trading platforms likely won't be Enron's for long.=20 If the proposed deal between the two Houston-based energy trading companies= is approved, the $200 million, 40-story building will be among Dynegy's ne= w assets in the purchase of its much larger rival. The ornate building, com= plete with metal sunshades and fins that deflect the sun and lower energy c= osts, is scheduled for completion sometime next summer.=20 ""The last three weeks haven't been a whole lot of fun,"" Lay said during a p= ress conference about the merger Friday at Dynegy's headquarters just a few= blocks away from where an oval shaped skybridge encircles Smith Street.=20 The enclosed, air conditioned bridge connects what was to be Enron's new he= adquarters with its current building on the opposite side of the street.=20 Enron had long-term plans to complete its urban campus with a third tower a= fter building a second tower in 1999, the first major office building proje= ct in downtown Houston in more than a decade.=20 Lay and his former chief executive officer, Jeff Skilling, were to have sev= enth-floor offices overlooking the trading floors. Two curved grand stairwa= ys connect the offices to the floors below.=20 But Enron's future started changing shortly after Skilling's surprise resig= nation in August.=20 Last month Enron reported major losses in third quarter earnings. The compa= ny's stock then tumbled 80 percent in the past three weeks as investors gre= w increasingly concerned that serious financial problems were being hidden = from shareholders through business partnerships now under investigation by = the Securities and Exchange Commission.=20 A day after Lay expressed his confidence in his chief financial officer And= rew Fastow, who managed those partnerships, Fastow was ousted in an attempt= to regain investor confidence.=20 It didn't work, and Skilling has since been called to testify before the SE= C about the partnerships.=20 Then Dynegy stepped in, and one Houston company came to the rescue of anoth= er, Prudential Securities Inc. analyst Carol Coale said.=20 ""Enron needed Dynegy. They needed a rescuer,"" Coale said. ""The run on Enron= stock was similar to a run on a bank. Once things start to capitulate it c= an run right down into liquidity.""=20 While Dynegy says its too early to discuss layoffs, what happens to the nam= e of the Houston Astros' Enron Field or the future uses for Enron's buildin= gs, University of Houston economist Barton Smith doubted the company will l= et the prime real estate go unused.=20 ""At one time Ken Lay and his family had a vision of Houston having an energ= y exchange and I think that vision is going to continue,"" Smith said. ""This= brings Dynegy, which was a relatively small player, in as a pretty strong = force.""=20 Smith said reductions in philanthropic giving are likely. Enron has contrib= uted to many Texas schools, including the University of Houston, Rice Unive= rsity, the University of Texas and Southern Methodist University.=20 While the company's philanthropy has gained fans in Texas, many in Californ= ia, plagued by power shortages earlier this year, still resent Enron for it= s outspoken support of deregulation.=20 ""The principles of karma seem to be working here,"" said Harvey Rosenfield, = founder of a California consumer advocacy group. ""Here Enron was one of the= chief proponents of deregulation and took advantage of it and benefitted e= normously and now is reaping the consequences.""=20 Texas economists say ripple effects of the Dynegy-Enron merger on Houston's= economy will be minimal, even if the combination forces layoffs.=20 ""There are some recessionary pressures going on in the United States, but H= ouston is probably in a better position than any city I know of to dampen t= hose pressures,"" said Mark Baxter, director of the Maguire Energy Institute= at Southern Methodist University. ""The Houston market is unique in that as= pect.""=20 But Michelle Michot Foss, director of the Energy Institute at the Universit= y of Houston, said the nation's fourth-largest city isn't immune to a weake= ning national economy.=20 ""We do have a three-pronged problem in town, which is Continental, Compaq a= nd Enron,"" she said. ""But there is no way this is as bad as (the oil bust y= ears of) 1986 and 1987.""=20 Houston-based Continental Airlines has cut 12,000 jobs and reduced its flig= ht schedule in the wake of Sept. 11's attacks in New York, Washington D.C. = and Pennsylvania. Meanwhile, Hewlett-Packard is attempting to buy Compaq, a= lso based in Houston, which could result in additional layoffs from the com= puter maker.=20 ""The whole debacle with Enron has been very unfortunate,"" Smith said. ""Enro= n, in some ways, was the icon of Houston with the merger of Compaq. Now it = looks as if it's going to be Dynegy.""=20 ---=20 On the Net: Enron Corp.: http://www.enron.com.=20 Dynegy Inc.: http://dynegy.com. Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 Enron India Pwr Unit Sale Faces Review After Dynegy Deal 11/10/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) SINGAPORE -(Dow Jones)- The sale of Enron Corp's (ENE) 65% controlling equi= ty stake in the troubled Indian Dabhol Power Company will face a ""review"" i= f Dynegy Inc's (DYN) $8 billion rescue bid for Enron is approved by regulat= ors, an Indian banking executive said Saturday.=20 The executives were attending talks held in Singapore to assesses potential= buyers for Enron's stake in DPC. ""Once this merger is through, we will have to take a review of the entire m= atter,"" P.P. Vora, chairman and managing director of Industrial Development= Bank of India (P.IDB), told Dow Jones Newswires.=20 Vora didn't say whether Dynegy would retain or sell Enron's controlling sta= ke in the DPC if a merger was approved. He declined to comment on the speci= fics of the review.=20 Domestic Indian lenders have provided $1.4 billion of the project's total p= rojected cost of $2.9 billion. IDBI's exposure is in the excess of 20 billi= on rupees ($1=3DINR48.03), and the bank runs the risk of going deep into th= e red if the project goes bust.=20 The two-day closed door meeting in Singapore - originally scheduled to wrap= up Friday - ended inconclusively Saturday. Talks revolved around two poten= tial buyers of Enron's stake in the DPC; Tata Power Co. Ltd. (P.TPW) and BS= ES Ltd. (P.BSX) - heavyweights in the Indian power sector.=20 Enron wants to sell its controlling equity stake in the $2.9 billion projec= t due to payment defaults by the plant's sole customer - the Maharashtra St= ate Electricity Board - and the Indian federal government's failure to hono= r payment guarantees.=20 A Bombay-based analyst with a leading Indian brokerage agreed that the issu= es surrounding the sale of Enron's stake in the DPC would have to reevaluat= ed ""from scratch.""=20 ""Some post-takeover 'cleaning-up' in the merged entity will be expected. Dy= negy really need to see what their energy interests are and whether India w= ill figure in them,"" the analyst said.=20 The analyst doubted Dynegy would take over Enron's stake in the DPC itself = in an attempt to revive it. ""Prima facie, it appears unlikely. It (Dynegy) = has not really got into independent power projects outside the U.S.,"" the a= nalyst said.=20 Indian media reports over the past two months have said Enron wants $1 bill= ion for its stake in Dabhol.=20 However, commentators say Enron may have to sell at a discount given the co= mpany's deepening financial woes. A discounted sale would remain the case f= or Dynegy ""without a doubt"" post-takeover, the analyst said.=20 DPC officials were unavailable for comment at the time of writing.=20 Indian banking executives remained tight-lipped on the outcome of the Singa= pore talks, but described negotiations as ""very fruitful"" and ""successful.""= =20 ""There was full cooperation from all sides. Certainly, we have moved forwar= d, but there's no decision (on a buyer for Enron's stake) as yet,"" said IDB= I Executive Director A.K. Doda. ""I'm hopeful if we go through these routes = it'll lead somewhere.""=20 The IDBI's Vora said all concerned parties had ""no immediate"" plans to hold= any further talks.=20 Asked whether Tata Power was the frontrunner, as many analysts believe, Dod= a said: ""That's their guess.""=20 Analysts said Tata Power and BSES wouldn't necessarily be out of the runnin= g after the Dynegy-Enron merger. ""I think Dynegy will be relatively more wi= lling to diversify DPC and that wouldn't change the equation vis-a-vis Tata= and BSES,"" he said. ""Overall, it's positive.""=20 Dabhol is India's largest single foreign investment. MSEB holds a 15% stake= , while General Electric Co. (GE) and Bechtel (X.BTL) own 10% each.=20 DPC's domestic lenders include ICICI Ltd. (P.ICC), Industrial Development B= ank of India (P.IDB), IFCI Ltd. (P.ICI) and State Bank of India (P.SBI).=20 Loans by foreign lenders, including ABN Amro, Bank of America Corp. and Cit= igroup Inc., however, are backed by government guarantees, while domestic l= enders' loans are not.=20 -By Sri Jegarajah, Dow Jones Newswires; 65-415-4066; sri.jegarajah@dowjones= .com Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 Talks to salvage multibillion dollar Enron India project goes into third da= y 11/10/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. SINGAPORE (AP) - Talks in Singapore to assess possible buyers for U.S.-base= d Enron Corp.'s controlling stake in the troubled Indian Dabhol Power Compa= ny have been extended into an unscheduled third day, an Indian banking exec= utive involved in the negotiations said Saturday.=20 The two-day closed-door meeting - originally scheduled to wrap up Friday - = is focusing on two potential buyers of Houston-based Enron's 65 percent sta= ke in the power company. Tata Power Co. and BSES Ltd. - two of India's largest private power compani= es - are the only contenders vying to buy Enron's stake in Dabhol.=20 ""Talks will carry on today (Saturday),"" said A.K. Doda, executive director = of the Industrial Development Bank of India. ""It's going to take a little m= ore time.""=20 Senior Indian banking sources told Dow Jones Newswire that the talks are ""i= ntense,"" but ""positive,"" with negotiations continuing past midnight local t= ime.=20 Dabhol managing director K. Wade Cline, officials from both prospective buy= ers and a consortium of Indian lenders to the Dabhol project are involved i= n the talks.=20 The Dabhol Power Company owns a 2,184 megawatt power plant in the western I= ndian state of Maharashtra. The company is embroiled in a bitter power supp= ly dispute with the state government over allegedly ""unaffordable"" power ta= riffs.=20 Enron wants to sell its controlling equity stake in the dlrs 2.9 billion pr= oject due to payment defaults by the plant's sole customer - the Maharashtr= a State Electricity Board - and the Indian federal government's failure to = honor payment guarantees.=20 Dabhol is India's biggest-ever single foreign investment. The Maharashtra S= tate Electricity Board holds a 15 percent stake, while General Electric Co.= and Bechtel Group Inc. own 10 percent each.=20 Domestic lenders have provided dlrs 1.4 billion of the project's total proj= ected cost of dlrs 2.9 billion.=20 Loans by foreign lenders, including ABN Amro, Bank of America Corp. and Cit= igroup Inc. are backed by government guarantees.=20 (dj/hp-ss) Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 All eyes in electric industry on Texas as deregulation nears By DAVID KOENIG AP Business Writer 11/10/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. DALLAS (AP) - Electric deregulation was a fabulous failure in California, r= esulting in skyrocketing rates, accusations of price-gouging and fears of w= idespread power blackouts.=20 The flop has made consumers elsewhere suspicious about giving up their regu= lated monopoly utilities for competition among power companies. Regulators and industry officials are turning their attention to Texas, whe= re deregulation is scheduled to begin Jan. 1 after a rocky test program.=20 ""People are looking to Texas as the next iteration of retail competition. A= lot of states have pulled back after the California experience,"" says Bret= t Perlman, a member of the Public Utility Commission. ""If Texas is successf= ul, Texas will become the model for the nation.""=20 Ken Malloy, president of a pro-deregulation think tank called the Center fo= r the Advancement of Energy Markets, called Texas the state to watch.=20 ""California obviously created a domino effect,"" leading other states to del= ay deregulation, Malloy said. ""A lot of people are placing a lot of hope on= Texas.""=20 Texas officials say that unlike California, which must import much of its p= ower, Texas imports little and has built more than 50 new power plants sinc= e 1995, providing an important cushion.=20 Texas also made it easier for power generators and resellers to negotiate l= ong-term contracts, which officials say will help lock in lower prices. And= Texas provides more-digestible price information, making it easier for con= sumers to comparison-shop, they say.=20 California officials warn that Texans may be a little too smug.=20 They spot trouble already in Texas, including California-style price spikes= in some spot markets for electricity - a clear sign, they say, that power = companies are learning how to maximize profits by forcing prices up.=20 ""There are things that can be done by people who own the power to create a = shortage, and if they see an opportunity to make money doing that they will= ,"" said John Rozsa, an aide to state Sen. Steve Peace, who was heavily invo= lved in California's deregulation debate.=20 California officials accuse the power companies - many of them Texas-based = - of withholding supplies or clogging transmission lines to drive prices hi= gher. They say the same techniques could be used in Texas.=20 Supporters and opponents of deregulation do agree that the stakes will be h= igh in Texas for power companies and consumers.=20 ""If the wheels fall off, it would be hard to put it back together,"" says Bo= b Manning, an executive with San Antonio-based H-E-B Grocery Co., which hop= es to cut its $40 million annual electricity bill through deregulation by a= t least 6 percent.=20 The idea behind electric deregulation is simple and powerful. Instead of fo= rcing residents and businesses to buy their power from a monopoly such as T= XU Electric or Reliant, let them choose among several competing companies.= =20 In theory, competition should cause prices to fall, as it did for air trave= l and long-distance phone service. That's what the Texas Legislature though= t when it voted in 1999 to let utility customers pick a new power company b= eginning Jan. 1, 2002.=20 Power traders led by Enron Corp. lobbied heavily for deregulation, figuring= they could profit by gaining a chunk of the utilities' business even thoug= h Enron produces little power itself.=20 To prepare for deregulation, the Legislature approved a seven-month pilot p= rogram in which a few commercial and residential customers would be able to= switch. Soon, glaring problems emerged.=20 The trial program was delayed three times. When it finally began this summe= r, the state's main power grid struggled to switch customers to their new p= ower company. Prices for backup power used on hot summer days temporarily j= umped 100-fold.=20 Through it all, the Public Utility Commission and the power companies and t= heir allies have insisted the pilot program was serving its purpose of high= lighting potential problems.=20 ""Anytime you buy a new home there are a whole bunch of things you need to g= et fixed before you move in,"" Perlman said this week. ""We're going down tha= t punch list, and I think we'll be ready on Jan. 1.""=20 The unresolved issues, he said, include how utilities such as TXU and Relia= nt will pass on the cost of fuel to their customers, who were guaranteed a = 6 percent rate cut on Jan. 1.=20 In addition to the technical setbacks, deregulation suffered a blow when Sh= ell Energy, a unit of the Anglo-Dutch energy giant, pulled out of Texas aft= er signing up 40,000 customers. Suddenly one of the biggest players and a p= otent competitor to TXU and Reliant had vanished.=20 Shell has said that doing business in Texas became uneconomical after other= states delayed deregulation.=20 ""That was a bit bizarre, because they had spent a lot of money to attract c= ustomers,"" said Brian Lloyd, a top PUC official on pricing issues. ""But if = they don't want to be here, we don't want them.""=20 Lloyd and other PUC officials are confident that as deregulation catches on= , other power companies will move in to Texas, ensuring strong competition.= =20 Already, however, deregulation will be delayed beyond Jan. 1 because of a l= ack of competition and questions about power-transmission in a section of s= outheast Texas served by Entergy Corp. and in a stretch of northeast Texas = served by Southwestern Electric Power Co.=20 Last month, Consumers Union, AARP and other groups asked the PUC to delay c= ompetition everywhere in Texas because of computer glitches and billing pro= blems during the pilot program.=20 Deregulation advocates worry that residential customers will simply stay wi= th their old electric utility, causing new competitors to fail.=20 The PUC is likely to push ahead after receiving a final round of comments n= ext week from electric companies and officials of the main power grid, call= ed the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, or ERCOT.=20 Along with the power traders, large commercial customers - like the H-E-B G= rocery chain - figure to be winners.=20 ""A grocery store is an energy hog,"" Manning said. ""We have a lot of refrige= rators that run 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. We help (the power compani= es') bottom line.""=20 Perlman, the PUC member, predicted deregulation will start on time but said= that making it trouble-free was the most important goal to build consumer = confidence.=20 ""A year from now, no one will remember whether the market opened on Jan. 1 = or Jan. 15 or March 15,"" he said.=20 End advance Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 Enron Says It's Too Soon to Quantify U.K. Job Cuts (Update1) 2001-11-10 07:24 (New York) Enron Says It's Too Soon to Quantify U.K. Job Cuts (Update1) (Adds detail on U.K. operations, Dynegy transaction, lenders, from fifth paragraph.) London, Nov. 10 (Bloomberg) -- Dynegy Inc.'s $23 billion acquisition of Enron Corp. is at too early a stage for either company to know how many U.K. jobs will be eliminated, an Enron spokesman said, after a newspaper reported 4,000 are at risk. Dynegy's acquisition of the biggest energy trader, announced yesterday, ``is still a long way off from closing,'' said Enron spokesman Alex Parsons. ``It's too early to know what the impact will be on U.K. jobs,'' he said. The Daily Mail newspaper, which didn't cite sources, said today that 4,000 jobs are at risk, mainly at Enron's Wessex water unit, in southwest England, two power plants on Teeside, in northeast England, and at its energy trading operation. It employs 5,400 people in Europe, mostly in the U.K., said Parsons. Dynegy said yesterday it would save as much as $500 million a year by ``winding down'' Enron's business outside of trading and pipelines and cutting costs. Enron decided to sell after its shares plunged 90 percent this year amid investors' concerns about the accuracy of its financial statements. The company had said in October it planned to eliminate as many as 500 jobs in Europe, or almost as much as 10 percent of the workforce there, to reduce costs. Offset Risk The company, which owns generation in the U.K. to offset risk in its power trading operations, said in August two workers died and two others were seriously injured in an explosion and fire at Teeside power station, which it operates and partly owns. Enron owns Wessex Water as part of its Azurix water unit. It spent $2.8 billion in 1998 for Wessex, from which Azurix emerged. Enron sold Azurix shares to the public in 1999, and then bought back the company this year after the unit failed in its strategy of buying up water companies and winning large projects. In August, Enron agreed to sell Azurix's North American business to American Water Works Inc. for $150 million. The Dynegy transaction is expected to close in 2002's third quarter. The new company will have $90 billion in assets, Dynegy said. Dynegy's stockholders, including ChevronTexaco, will have 64 percent of the new company. Enron's holders will own the rest. The merger will face opposition from consumer groups, especially in California, where energy traders such as Dynegy and Enron were blamed for soaring electricity prices that left the state's biggest utility bankrupt and the second-largest fighting for a government bailout. Other companies may yet be caught in the fallout from Enron's situation. Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc is a lender to Enron, the Guardian newspaper reported today, without citing sources. It's unclear how much the U.K.'s No. 3 bank by assets lent Enron, though it may be as high as several million pounds, the paper said. It's not clear if the loans are secured, it said. Royal Bank was involved in setting up a credit facility for Enron, the newspaper said, adding this helped push down the company's share price by 2.6 percent yesterday. --Mathieu Robbins in the London newsroom (+44 20) 7673 2097 Dynegy to Buy Enron for $23 Billion in Stock, Debt (Update9) 2001-11-09 23:23 (New York) Dynegy to Buy Enron for $23 Billion in Stock, Debt (Update9) (Adds advisers in last paragraph.) Houston, Nov. 9 (Bloomberg) -- Dynegy Inc. agreed to buy Enron Corp. for at least $23 billion in stock and assumed debt, ending a financial crisis that threatened to bankrupt Enron and disrupt U.S. power and natural-gas markets. Investors will get 0.2685 of a Dynegy share for each Enron share, or $10.41 based on Dynegy's closing price today. The stock portion of the transaction is valued at $8 billion to $9 billion, Dynegy Chief Financial Officer Robert Doty said. Dynegy said it will assume about $15 billion in Enron debt. Enron, the largest energy trader, decided to sell after its shares plunged 90 percent this year and a federal investigation of accounting irregularities limited its ability to finance operations. Enron's collapse would have caused upheaval in energy markets, where the company does one-quarter of all gas and power trades, traders say. ``Without someone stepping in to play the role Enron plays, people (would) have a difficult time executing transactions,'' said Daniel Gordon, president of Allegheny Energy Inc.'s trading unit. ChevronTexaco Corp., the second-biggest U.S. oil company and owner of 26 percent of Dynegy, will provide Enron with $1.5 billion immediately. ChevronTexaco will give Dynegy $1 billion after the merger closes. Dynegy Chief Executive Officer Charles Watson, who led a company that has put as much emphasis on building power plants as on energy trading, will take over a larger rival that Chairman and CEO Kenneth Lay had focused on trading. Earnings Reduced Lay's strategy boosted Enron's reported revenue to $100.7 billion in 2000, almost four times Dynegy's and more than 20 times what Enron generated in 1995. At its peak in December 2000, Enron stock was valued at more than $69 billion. In recent months, Enron shares plummeted as investors began to question the accuracy of Enron's financial statements, saying it was unclear whether the company was using affiliated partnerships to move debt off its books and hide losses. Yesterday the company restated its earnings for the past four years, lowering them by more than $500 million to include losses from partnerships it once kept off its books. After the merger announcement, Standard & Poor's Investors Service said it may lower Dynegy's debt rating. It cut Enron's to ``BBB-,'' one notch above junk. Watson, Dynegy President Stephen Bergstrom and CFO Doty will keep their positions at the combined company. Greg Whalley, the president and chief operating officer of Enron, will be an executive vice president. Lay said he won't be an active manager in the new company. Lay has not discussed a severance package with him, Watson said. $200 Billion in Revenue Dynegy said it will have annual revenue of more than $200 billion, more than 22,000 megawatts of electric generating capacity and 25,000 miles of pipeline after the merger. The company will save as much as $500 million a year by ``winding down'' Enron's business outside of trading and pipelines and cutting costs, Dynegy said. The announcement of the merger came after the close of stock market trading, though the two companies had acknowledged they were in talks. Shares of Dynegy rose $2.26, or 6 percent, to $38.76. Enron rose 22 cents to $8.63. ChevronTexaco rose $1.90 to $89.49. Enron's 6.4 percent bonds, which mature in 2006, jumped to about 76 cents on the dollar, up from 69 cents, traders said. The combination is expected to be ``strongly accretive'' to earnings, Dynegy said. It projected earnings of $3.40 to $3.50 a share next year. It had been expected to earn $2.57, the average estimate of analysts surveyed by Thomson Financial/First Call. Third Quarter Closing The transaction is expected to close in 2002's third quarter. The new company will have $90 billion in assets, Dynegy said. Dynegy's stockholders, including ChevronTexaco, will have 64 percent of the new company. Enron's holders will own the rest. ``Dynegy is taking out a competitor, acquiring some attractive assets and they're doing it at an incredible price,'' said Joseph Correnti, an analyst at Wayne Hummer Investments who doesn't own shares of either company. Enron will pay a $350 million breakup fee if the transaction collapses. The two Houston-based companies began negotiations a week ago as it became apparent that Enron needed cash to stay in business. Watson said he approached Lay. ``I simply called Ken to see if there was anything we could do to straighten'' out rumors of a cash crunch at Enron, Watson said. ``That next Saturday, Ken was gracious enough to invite me over to his home.'' Dynegy agreed to the terms after Moody's Investors Service maintained an investment grade rating on Enron today, eliminating a stumbling block in negotiations. Cash Crunch Moody's announcement removed the threat that a junk rating would force Enron to repay early $3.3 billion in bonds. Enron has been battling a cash crunch and a loss of investor confidence because of questions about partnerships started by its senior executives. Enron fired Chief Financial Officer Andrew Fastow in October as a Securities and Exchange Commission investigation focused in on partnerships he headed and helped create. Enron estimated Fastow made $30 million through partnerships affiliated with the company. The SEC began the investigation after Enron reduced third- quarter earnings by more than $1 billion and said dealings with two partnerships had lowered shareholder equity by $1.2 billion. ``Clearly, (the partnerships) created quite a perception problem for the company, and maybe more serious problems than that,'' Lay said on a conference call after the buyout announcement. ``We'll see over time.'' California Opposition The merger will face opposition from consumer groups, especially in California, where energy traders such as Dynegy and Enron were blamed for soaring electricity prices that left the state's biggest utility bankrupt and the second-largest fighting for a government bailout. ``We will petition the state attorney general and federal authorities to block this merger,'' said Doug Heller of the California-based Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights. ``This would further tighten the grip that the unregulated power industry has over California, and it's the grip of the energy cartel that has choked California for the last year and a half.'' Energy trading markets ``are relatively fragmented'' so there should be no antitrust problems, even though Enron and Dynegy are big companies, said Robert Burka, a Washington-based antitrust attorney with Foley & Lardner. ``Enron may well not be a healthy company going forward'' if the merger isn't approved, Burka said. EnronOnline The combination of the two companies will leave Watson with control of EnronOnline, an Internet energy and commodities trading site that has done more than $880 billion in trades since it was created in November 1999. ``It's not perfectly capturing the value of Enron, but if you're on the board at Enron at this point, you take it and move on,'' said Correnti of Wayne Hummer Investments. The total value of the stock portion of the transaction could rise, depending how many Enron shares need to be converted in the stock swap. An Enron spokesman said the company had 913 million shares on a fully diluted basis, though a person familiar with the talks said Enron's stock price is so low that many common share equivalents won't be converted, leaving the number at 743 million shares. Lehman Brothers Inc. is Dynegy's financial adviser on the transaction. Salomon Smith Barney Inc. and J.P. Morgan & Co. are advising Enron. --Margot Habiby in Houston (713) 353-4872 Dynegy announces $8 billion deal to buy larger rival Enron By JUAN A. LOZANO Associated Press Writer 11/09/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. HOUSTON (AP) - Energy marketer Dynegy Inc. announced Friday that it will bu= y its much larger rival, the once mighty but now troubled Enron Corp., for = $8 billion in stock. Dynegy also will assume a hefty $15 billion in Enron d= ebt.=20 The announcement came after Enron's stock price plummeted about 80 percent = over the past three weeks because of concerns that the company wasn't revea= ling serious financial problems to shareholders. Under the deal, ChevronTexaco Corp., which owns more than a quarter of Dyne= gy, would quickly provide about $1.5 billion. ChevronTexaco also would cont= ribute an additional $1 billion upon completion of the deal, the companies = said.=20 ""With its market-making capabilities, earnings power and proven strategic a= pproach to wholesale markets, Enron is the ideal strategic partner for Dyne= gy,"" Dynegy chairman and chief executive officer Chuck Watson said in annou= ncing the purchase.=20 Watson made it clear that he would not tolerate the sort of financial pract= ices that prompted explosive disclosures by Enron this week - including an = admission that more than half a billion dollars in debt had been kept off t= he company's books.=20 ""As a combined company, we will focus on leveraging our core skill sets and= , as always, we will keep a strong balance sheet and straightforward financ= ial structure as key priorities,"" Watson said.=20 Enron is the country's top buyer and seller of natural gas, and the No. 1 w= holesale power marketer. The company operates a 25,000-mile gas pipeline sy= stem, and also markets and trades metals, paper, coal, chemicals, and fiber= -optic bandwidth.=20 Dynegy controls nearly 15,000 megawatts of power generating capacity throug= h investments in power projects, and sells the energy in wholesale markets = and through utilities.=20 At a news conference, Watson said company officials who negotiated the deal= came away convinced that Enron was worth buying despite its recent trouble= s.=20 ""We looked under the hood and, guess what, it's just as strong as we though= t it was,"" Watson said.=20 Under the terms of the deal, Enron shareholders will receive .2685 Dynegy s= hare for each share of Enron common stock, valuing each Enron share at $10.= 41. Enron has about 775 million common shares, said spokeswoman Karen Denne= .=20 That represents a 21 percent premium above Enron's closing price of $8.63 F= riday on the New York Stock Exchange - but still just a fraction of their 5= 2-week high of $84.87. Dynegy's shares climbed $2.26, or 6 percent, to clos= e at $38.76 on the NYSE.=20 In after hours trading on the NYSE, Enron shares shot up 15.6 percent, or $= 1.35, to $9.98. Dynegy shares were unchanged.=20 Dynegy's stockholders will own approximately 64 percent of the new company,= with Enron's stockholders holding the remainder.=20 The boards of both companies have unanimously approved the transaction, whi= ch is expected to close next summer. The deal is expected to save the combi= ned company between $400 and $500 million annually because of continued eli= mination of ""non-core"" Enron holdings and lower operating costs. Watson sai= d it was too soon to say if the deal would result in job cuts. Enron has ab= out 20,000 employees, while Dynegy's work force is about 6,000.=20 Watson will remain as chairman and chief executive of the combined company,= which will retain the Dynegy Inc. name. Dynegy's Steve Bergstrom will cont= inue as president.=20 Enron chairman and chief executive Kenneth L. Lay will no longer have a rol= e in day-to-day management of the company, but has been offered a seat on t= he combined company's board and will help shepherd the merger through.=20 Dynegy said that Greg Whalley, the current president and chief operating of= ficer of Enron, will become an executive vice president of the new Dynegy. = He said the merger sets the best course for Enron.=20 ""Few of the options we considered for our core business going forward provi= ded us with the earning potential and immediate synergies that a merger wit= h Dynegy could deliver,"" Whalley said. ""Together with Enron's recently anno= unced bank commitments, this cash infusion gives Enron immediate liquidity,= which we believe will enable the company to maintain its investment grade = credit rating.""=20 The merger was announced a day after Enron acknowledged it overstated earni= ngs by about 20 percent over the past four years and kept large amounts of = debt off its balance sheets through business partnerships now under investi= gation by the Securities and Exchange Commission.=20 Analysts said the merger rescues Enron, but leaves Dynegy in uncharted terr= itory - with the outcome of the SEC investigation completely unknown. ""Ther= e is still a shroud hanging over Enron that now moves over to Dynegy,"" said= Carol Coale, an analyst with Prudential Securities.=20 Early Friday, Moody's Investors Service downgraded Enron's debt ratings to = one level above junk bond status and said the company's long-term debt rati= ngs remain under review for further downgrade.=20 In an SEC filing, Enron said financial statements from 1997 through the fir= st half of 2001 ""should not be relied upon"" and that outside businesses run= by Enron officials during that period should have been included in the com= pany's earnings reports.=20 The revised statements reduced Enron's profits for those years by $586 mill= ion, from $2.89 billion to $2.31 billion. The revisions also increased the = company's debt each of the four years, reaching $10.86 billion - $628 milli= on more than previously reported - by the end of 2000.=20 Keeping the debt off its balance sheets likely ensured Enron could maintain= a strong credit rating to support expansion of its core businesses - whole= sale trading of natural gas and electricity.=20 But the company's stock price started dropping 10 months ago when its high-= speed Internet unit foundered and Enron had trouble collecting money from p= ower customers in India.=20 The stock price began to free fall after Enron announced a $618 million thi= rd quarter loss, and news of the SEC investigation surfaced.=20 Enron responded by firing its chief financial officer and scrambled to get = cash and increase credit lines in an attempt to regain investor confidence,= but investors dumped Enron shares and sent its stock plummeting.=20 The ousted chief financial officer, Andrew Fastow, ran some of the partners= hips under investigation by the SEC.=20 Jeff Skilling, Enron's former chief executive who left in August, has been = called to testify before the SEC, although it's unclear when.=20 ---=20 On the Net:=20 http://www.enron.com=20 http://www.dynegy.com AP Graphic DYNEGY ENRON=20 Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 USA: UPDATE 3-Dynegy to acquire Enron for $9 bln. 11/09/2001 Reuters English News Service (C) Reuters Limited 2001. (Adds new material from news conference, new analyst comments)=20 By Andrew Kelly HOUSTON, Nov. 9 (Reuters) - Dynegy Inc. agreed on Friday to acquire rival E= nron Corp. for some $9 billion in stock, underlining the dramatic reversal = of fortunes for the Houston-based energy trading giant that was valued last= year at nearly $80 billion.=20 Enron's stock fell sharply in the past month due to investors' concerns abo= ut murky transactions that sparked an investigation by U.S. regulators and = damaging downgrades by credit rating agencies.=20 ""It's an unbelievable ending to an unbelievable story,"" said Fulcrum Global= Partners analyst Michael Barbis. ""The company that created the industry is= gone - it's all Dynegy now.""=20 The merged company will retain the Dynegy name. It will have annual revenue= s of more than $200 billion and assets worth $90 billion, including more th= an 22,000 megawatts of electricity generating capacity and 25,000 miles of = natural gas pipelines.=20 It will be North America's biggest marketer and trader of natural gas and e= lectricity, positions previously held by Enron.=20 Dynegy will control the new 14-member board, holding 11 of its seats, and t= he top executive positions.=20 ChevronTexaco Corp. , a 26.5 percent stakeholder in Dynegy, will provide an= immediate infusion of $1.5 billion to keep Enron's core trading operations= afloat and a further $1 billion when the deal closes. It will get three bo= ard seats.=20 DYNEGY'S WATSON FIRMLY IN CONTROL=20 The deal puts Chuck Watson, Dynegy's pioneering chairman and chief executiv= e who has long labored under Enron's shadow, firmly in charge of the new co= mpany.=20 ""It is a great deal for Dynegy and, under the circumstances, as a good of a= deal as Enron could get,"" said UBS Warburg analyst Ron Barone.=20 Watson will remain chairman and chief executive of the merged company, whil= e Dynegy's president, Steve Bergstrom, and chief financial officer, Rob Dot= y, will retain those positions.=20 Greg Whalley, president and chief operating officer of Enron, will become a= n executive vice president and will join Watson, Bergstrom and Doty in the = Office of the Chairman.=20 Barbis said that after Enron saw its stock fall 75 percent over the last mo= nth, cutting its market capitalization by $19 billion, the company was left= in a weak negotiating position. ""At the end of the day they had no choice,= "" he said.=20 Dynegy will swap 0.2685 shares of its own stock for each Enron share, valui= ng Houston-based Enron at $10.41 per share, a premium of 21 percent over Fr= iday's closing price of $8.63.=20 The price is far below a lofty high of $90.56 set on Aug. 23, 2000, when En= ron was riding a wave of investor enthusiasm.=20 Dynegy stockholders will own about 64 percent and Enron stockholders will o= wn about 36 percent of the merged company.=20 REGULATORS PROBE ENRON DEALS=20 Enron had been struggling to overcome a plummeting stock price and credit r= atings in the past month following disclosures of off-balance sheet deals n= ow under investigation by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.=20 Enron chairman and chief executive Ken Lay told a news conference in Housto= n that he would have preferred Enron to retain its independence but that th= is had become impossible in the face of a ""consistent barrage of really neg= ative articles"".=20 ""The last three weeks haven't been a whole lot of fun,"" said Lay, adding th= at he had not yet decided whether to take up Watson's offer of a seat on th= e merged company's board.=20 Watson said the agreement with Enron includes ""escape clauses"" that would a= llow Dynegy to back out of the deal if any further undisclosed problems wer= e to emerge, but he said he was confident that this would not happen.=20 ""You know, we looked under the hood and guess what? It's just as strong as = we though it was,"" he said.=20 Watson said he did not expect the merger to run into serious regulatory obs= tacles.=20 ""Regulatory agencies realize that a speedy resolution is important to keep = stability in the U.S. energy market. This has got to be resolved,"" said UBS= Warburg analyst Barone.=20 Dynegy said it expects the new company to earn $3.40 to $3.50 per share in = 2002, an increase of 35 percent, or 90 cents to 95 cents per share, for cur= rent Dynegy shareholders, before taking into account expected synergies and= cost savings.=20 Dynegy estimates annual pretax savings of $400 million to $500 million as a= result of the sale or winding down of non-core businesses in the Enron por= tfolio and other measures.=20 Watson said he did not yet know how many jobs might be cut as a result of c= ombining the two companies.=20 The merger still requires approval by regulators and both sets of sharehold= ers but is expected to close by the end of the third quarter of 2002.=20 Lehman Brothers was financial advisor to Dynegy. J.P. Morgan Chase and Salo= mon Smith Barney, a unit of Citigroup, were financial advisors to Enron. Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 Enron not California's largest power supplier, but merger could affect pric= es By KAREN GAUDETTE Associated Press Writer 11/09/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - When Houston-based Dynegy Inc. announced Friday that i= t had bought Enron, its larger rival for $7.8 billion shares of stock, some= energy traders predicted fluctuating power prices in the coming months thr= oughout the West as the market settles into a new hierarchy with one fewer = provider.=20 ""The fragility of the system is such that a small perturbation can turn eve= rything upside down very easily,"" said Gary Ackerman, executive director of= the Western Power Trading Forum, of which Enron is a member. ""A week ago I= don't think many people would have even contemplated this."" The loss of Houston-based Enron will ""make prices more jumpy and more uncer= tain and it's going to take the market some time to calm down,"" Ackerman sa= id. Should the Northwest have a chilly winter, prices could spike with fewe= r sellers in the market, he said.=20 And that in turn could affect California's pocketbook, though the state buy= s a negligible amount of electricity from Enron, said Oscar Hidalgo, spokes= man for the state Department of Water Resources, which buys electricity for= the customers of two financially ailing utilities. Hidalgo said the state = had a long-term contract with Enron earlier this year though the marketer o= pted out of it after a month.=20 ""They have indicated to us that we were somewhat of a credit risk for them,= like many generators at the time,"" Hidalgo said.=20 Earlier this year, Enron attempted to cancel its contract as electricity an= d natural gas provider to California's two public university systems, which= spent more than $170 million combined last year on the fuels. It was uncle= ar Friday what would happen to those contracts.=20 Enron's reach in California goes beyond keeping the lights on.=20 The state's retirement pension fund owns 3 million shares of Enron stock - = about 1 percent of its total investments - said CalPERS spokeswoman Pat Mac= ht. The CalPERS board will meet next week to discuss the situation, she sai= d.=20 ""I can only say at this point that we were as surprised and shocked as the = rest of the world was about what has been going on there and we're assessin= g our options,"" Macht said.=20 Enron Corp.'s outspoken support for deregulation of the country's electrici= ty markets sparked resentment in California as rolling blackouts swept thro= ugh earlier this year, although the energy marketer is not one of Californi= a's largest power providers.=20 Some felt the financial downfall of the nation's top buyer and seller of na= tural gas and major electricity seller was justified.=20 ""The principles of karma seem to be working here,"" said Harvey Rosenfield, = founder of the Santa Monica, Calif.-based consumer advocacy group the Found= ation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights. ""Here Enron was one of the chief pr= oponents of deregulation and took advantage of it and benefitted enormously= and now is reaping the consequences.""=20 Earlier this year, California Attorney General Bill Lockyer subpoenaed Enro= n's electricity trading records as he sought to prove the state was the vic= tim of price gouging which led officials to spend more than $9 billion buyi= ng electricity for the customers of two financially troubled utilities. Enr= on repeatedly denied all accusations of market manipulation.=20 Enron, the nation's top buyer and seller of natural gas and the top wholesa= le marketer in the United States, had become one of the nation's 10 largest= companies, recording revenue of $100.8 billion in 2000. Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 Dynegy-Enron merger could mean name change for Enron Field By KRISTEN HAYS Associated Press Writer 11/09/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. HOUSTON (AP) - The Houston Astros' stadium won't be nicknamed ""Home Run Fie= ld"" much longer.=20 Houston-based energy marketer Dynegy Inc. announced Friday that it will buy= Enron Corp., the $100 million namesake of the Astros' ballpark. The compan= ies will operate independently until the deal closes, possibly next summer. The new company will keep Dynegy's name and lose Enron's - and Houston's $2= 51 million ballpark could see the same change, Astros owner Drayton McLane = Jr. said.=20 McLane said the team's 30-year naming rights agreement with Enron allows an= other company to give the ballpark a new name in case of a merger. The Astr= os have the right to approve or reject a change.=20 ""We want to work with (Dynegy chairman and chief executive) Chuck Watson an= d we look forward to working with Dynegy,"" McLane said.=20 Watson said the ballpark name wasn't an issue as the companies hammered out= the merger agreement this week.=20 ""Quite honestly, it has not come up,"" Watson said Friday. ""This is about tw= o strong companies going forward. It is something we will have to deal with= in the months coming up.""=20 Since opening before the 2000 season, Enron Field has become known as one o= f the best parks for hitters in the majors. There have been 496 homers hit = in Enron the past two years, 19 percent more than in Astros road games.=20 Coincidentally, Houston's other company-named sports facility also is in qu= estion. The corporate namesake of the Compaq Center basketball/hockey arena= , Compaq Computer Corp., is being bought by Hewlett-Packard Co.=20 Enron Field wouldn't be the first venue to change names because of a merger= or other corporate decision by the naming-rights owner.=20 CoreStates Arena, home to the Philadelphia 76ers and the Philadelphia Flyer= s, became First Union Arena when First Union Corp. acquired CoreStates Fina= ncial Corp. in 1998.=20 Marine Midland Arena in Buffalo, N.Y., became HSBC Arena last year because = Marine Midland in 1999 changed its name to HSBC Bank USA as part of a globa= l branding strategy.=20 Such changes are inevitable when 61 major league sports facilities bear cor= porate names in an age of many mergers and acquisitions, said Dean Bonham o= f the Bonham Group in Denver, a sports and entertainment marketing firm.=20 ""Mergers and acquisitions had no effect on the sports industry just 10 year= s ago,"" he said. ""Today they can have a significant affect on the community= beyond the direct impact on the company itself.""=20 Enron chairman and chief executive Ken Lay, who said Friday he had been inv= ited to serve on the new company's board of directors, helped create Enron = Field before buying its name.=20 By 1996 McLane had determined it was time to move from the once-futuristic = though aging Astrodome, and threatened to sell part of the team and move to= Virginia unless a new ballpark was built in Houston.=20 That year Lay put together a consortium that provided a $34.7 million no-in= terest loan to buy the land in downtown Houston and subsidize the 42,000-se= at ballpark's construction costs.=20 Enron also manages the ballpark's mechanical and electrical equipment and e= nergy services which officials said would earn up to $200 million over 30 y= ears. McLane said Dynegy likely would continue that deal. Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 Dynegy Buy Of Enron Valued At $23B-$24B With Debt By Michael Rieke and Erwin Seba Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES 11/09/2001 Dow Jones News Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) HOUSTON -(Dow Jones)- Asked what kind of bargain Dynegy Inc. (DYN) got in b= uying Enron Corp. (ENE), Enron Chairman and Chief Executive Ken Lay said to= ld a Friday evening press conference, ""A big one.""=20 Dynegy will convert 850 million shares of Enron stock to its own shares in = a deal valued at $23 billion-$24 billion with assumption of debt. Dynegy Chairman Chuck Watson told the media that the deal wasn't something = that was ""stitched together"" in the last two weeks.=20 Watson had called Lay on Oct. 24 to tell him that Dynegy didn't have any qu= alms about being a counterparty in energy deals with Enron and to ask if th= ere was anything Dynegy could do to help.=20 At the time, Enron's share price was under pressure due transactions it had= done with its former chief financial officer Andrew Fastow. The company ha= d just taken a $1.2 billion reduction in shareholder equity when it closed = out transactions and the Securities and Exchange Commission had just launch= ed an investigation of the deals.=20 The next Saturday Lay invited Watson to his home and they started discussin= g a merger, Watson said.=20 Three or four weeks ago he didn't expect such a transaction to occur, Lay s= aid. But he began to realize that Enron needed to strengthen its balance sh= eet quickly, improve liquidity and focus on its core businesses.=20 Enron was in control of its destiny until the merger was done, Lay said. En= ron could have stayed independent and revitalized the balance sheet with pr= ivate investments, but Dynegy was showing interest in a merger.=20 ""As we looked at the alternatives, it fairly quickly became apparent to us = to do this deal with Dynegy was the best option,"" he said.=20 Enron looked at the shareholder lawsuits filed against the company and at t= he exposure from the SEC investigation, he said. It then determined a worst= -case scenario, which was then built into the economics of the deal.=20 Neither Watson nor Lay wanted to get into specifics involving the transacti= ons Enron done with the partnerships run by Fastow. Enron will discuss thos= e deals more thoroughly in a conference call in the middle of next week.=20 In explaining his company's demise, Lay blamed a series of negative news st= ories, combined with management's ignorance of the facts concerning the par= tnership transactions.=20 ""You can always second-guess everything, but it has been a fairly consisten= t barrage of really negative articles that's been very tough to beat...back= ,"" he said.=20 Due diligence for the deal was relatively easy to do because the two compan= ies already knew each other so well, said Watson. The two Houston-based com= panies have been competing in the energy business for about 15 years.=20 After examining Enron's books and businesses, ""it became clear the value de= gradation in Enron had nothing to do with the core businesses,"" said Watson= .=20 Watson said it is too soon to think about the possibility of layoffs result= ing from the merger. Enron has more than 7,000 employees in Houston compare= d with 1,600 Dynegy employees. Worldwide Enron has 20,000 employees and Dyn= egy has 6,000 employees.=20 Watson has asked Lay to join Dynegy's board of directors. Lay said he would= decide whether to accept that spot as the deal gets close to closing.=20 Watson doesn't expect any regulatory problems associated with the merger. T= he deal must be approved by regulators in the U.S. and in Europe, where bot= h companies have operations. Regulatory approval should take six to nine mo= nths.=20 There is an escape clause in the merger deal. Dynegy will get $350 million = if the deal falls apart.=20 Although the combined companies will be a huge player in the energy busines= s, Watson doesn't expect regulators to require any sale of assets.=20 Enron will go ahead with its plans to sell $4 billion in assets. It has a d= eal to sell its electric utility, Portland General Electric, for $3 billion= including assumption of debt. The deal with Northwest Natural Gas Co. (NWN= ) will include $1.55 billion in cash, $200 million in Northwest Natural pre= ferred stock and $50 million in common stock.=20 Enron is also planning to sell another $850 million-$900 million in foreign= assets.=20 Each company will continue to operate its own electronic energy trading pla= tform. Enron operates EnronOnline and Dynegy operates DynegyDirect.=20 EnronOnline is the most successful online business, doing $3 billion-$4 bil= lion a day in energy transactions in the last 30 days.=20 Dynegy started its online trading platform last year. It did $10 billion of= business in the third quarter of this year.=20 ""This is a financial bonanza for both companies,"" Watson said. ""This is goo= d for Dynegy. This is good for Enron. It's also good for our employees and = it's good for our stockholders.""=20 -By Michael Rieke, Dow Jones Newswires, 713-547-9207; michael.rieke@wsj.com= ; and Erwin Seba, 713-547-9214, erwin.seba@dowjones.com Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 Chronology of Enron Corp.'s history 11/09/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. HOUSTON (AP) - A look at the history of Enron Corp.:=20 July 1985 - Houston Natural Gas merges with InterNorth, a natural gas compa= ny based in Omaha, Neb., to form the modern-day Enron, an interstate and in= trastate natural gas pipeline company with approximately 37,000 miles of pi= pe. 1989 - Enron begins trading natural gas commodities. Over the years, the co= mpany becomes the largest natural gas merchant in North America and the Uni= ted Kingdom.=20 June 1994 - Enron North America trades its first electron. Enron goes on to= become the largest marketer of electricity in the U.S.=20 January 1997 - Enron unveils a new logo and its first global advertising ca= mpaign. The company also acquires Zond Corp., a leading developer of wind e= nergy power. The acquisition results in the formation of Enron Renewable En= ergy Corp.=20 August 1997 - Enron announces its first commodity transaction using weather= derivative products. Enron goes on to market coal, pulp, paper, plastics, = metals and bandwidth.=20 April 1999 - Enron agrees to pay $100 million over 30 years for the naming = rights to Houston's new ballpark, Enron Field. The Astros also sign a 30-ye= ar facilities management contract Enron Energy Services.=20 June 1999 - Enron Energy Services transacts its first billion-dollar deal w= ith Suiza Foods.=20 November 1999 - Enron launches EnronOnline, the first global Web-based comm= odity trading site.=20 January 2000 - In a Fortune survey, Enron was named ""The Most Innovative Co= mpany in America"" for the fifth consecutive year and is ranked No. 24 among= the ""100 Best Companies to Work for in America.""=20 March 2000 - The Energy Financial Group ranks Enron the 6th largest energy = company in the world.=20 May 2000 - Enron and strategic investors, IBM and America Online, launch Th= e New Power Company, the first national energy service provider for residen= tial and small businesses in deregulated U.S. energy markets.=20 August 2001 - Enron chief executive officer Jeff Skilling resigns after run= ning the company for just six months. Chairman and former CEO Ken Lay resum= es his position atop Enron.=20 October 16, 2001 - Enron reports a $638 million third-quarter loss and disc= loses a $1.2 billion reduction in shareholder equity, partly related to par= tnerships run by chief financial officer Andrew Fastow.=20 Oct. 22, 2001 - Enron acknowledges Securities and Exchange Commission inqui= ry into a possible conflict of interest related to the company's dealings w= ith those partnerships.=20 Oct. 24, 2001 - Enron ousts Fastow.=20 Oct. 27, 2001 - Enron taps into more than $3 billion in credit in an effort= to boost confidence of investors and customers.=20 Oct. 31, 2001 - Enron announces the SEC inquiry has been upgraded to a form= al investigation. Enron creates special committee headed by University of T= exas law school dean William Powers to respond to the investigation.=20 Nov. 1, 2001 - Enron secures $1 billion in new financing, using its natural= gas and pipeline assets as collateral.=20 Nov. 6, 2001 - Enron's stock price drops below $10 a share - down from a 52= -week high of $84.87 on Dec. 28, 2000 - after reports the financially troub= led energy trader was seeking additional financing to shore up confidence.= =20 Nov. 8, 2001 - Enron files documents with SEC revising its financial statem= ents for past five years to account for $586 million in losses.=20 Nov. 9, 2001 - Dynegy Inc. announces an agreement to buy its much larger ri= val Enron for $7.8 billion in stock. Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 Fitch Takes Rating Action on Enron & Dynegy on Merger News 11/09/2001 Business Wire (Copyright (c) 2001, Business Wire) NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Nov. 9, 2001--Fitch revises the Rating Watch on = Enron Corp.'s outstanding securities to Evolving from Negative where they w= ere placed on Oct. 25, 2001.=20 A Rating Watch Evolving means the ratings may be raised, lowered, or mainta= ined. In addition, the long-term credit ratings of Dynegy Inc. (DYN) and Dy= negy Holdings Inc. (DYNH) are placed on Rating Watch Negative. A Rating Wat= ch Negative means that the ratings may be lowered or affirmed. The outstand= ing `F2' rated commercial paper programs for DYN and DYNH are not affected. The rating actions follow Dynegy's announcement that it has reached a defin= itive agreement to acquire Enron Corp. in a stock-for-stock transaction und= er which Enron shareholders will receive a fixed amount of DYN shares. Fitc= h does not anticipate the rating of the combined company dropping below the= mid-`BBB' range based on its preliminary assessment.=20 The transaction carries significant financial support from ChevronTexaco Co= rp. (CVX), a 27% stakeholder in DYN, which has committed to provide up to $= 2.5 billion of new equity to DYN. The CVX equity commitment includes a $1.5= billion cash injection to occur over the next several days, which in turn = will immediately be contributed by DYN to Enron to provide interim liquidit= y support. This upfront capital contribution will be structured as a prefer= red stock investment with an option to buy 100% of the common stock in Nort= hern Natural Gas Co. (NNG). The remaining $1.0 billion of equity will be fu= nded at closing. In addition, CVX has options to contribute up to $1 billio= n of additional equity at specified amounts and retains its rights to maint= ain its current economic interest in the merged entity. The transaction is = expected to close within six to nine months and will require several regula= tory approvals, including the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Fed= eral Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), and Hart-Scott Rodino.=20 Fitch is revising its Rating Watch on Enron's outstanding debt securities t= o Evolving based on conditions of the transaction which address several maj= or concerns, the most time sensitive being liquidity. The $1.5 billion equi= ty infusion improves Enron's liquidity position, which now appears adequate= to fund Enron's cash needs through the first quarter of 2002 under expecte= d business conditions. However, Enron faces significant refinancing risk. E= nron's fully drawn $1.75 billion 364-day committed bank credit facility is = up for renewal in April 2002 and the $2.4 billion of outstanding Osprey Tru= st notes are expected to be repaid by mid-2002. Relating to Osprey, Fitch e= stimates that trust asset sale proceeds will not be adequate to fully fund = maturing Osprey debt. Therefore, Enron will potentially need to provide mor= e than $500 million to pay off the notes. Fitch will closely monitor Enron'= s cash position through the merger period.=20 Fitch anticipates that the surviving company's rating would move to the mid= -`BBB' range assuming the successful execution of its interim plans to dele= verage its capital structure and the completion of the merger. If the merge= r were to terminate, Fitch believes Enron's ability to manage its business = would be severely impaired and would expect to downgrade its securities to = highly speculative grade. Termination provisions to the merger agreement ad= d an element of uncertainty to completing the merger. If the transaction we= re terminated, DYN would have the option to own NNG, removing both a valuab= le property and stable cash flow source from Enron's credit profile.=20 The Rating Watch Negative status for DYN and DYNH reflects some uncertainty= over the ultimate outcome of its post-merger credit profile. While the pro= posed transaction structure will not require incremental debt financing, DY= N will likely assume many of the difficulties which continue to plague Enro= n including the need to sell underperforming emerging market assets, the on= going SEC investigations of certain Enron sponsored partnerships, and poten= tial litigation arising from several shareholder suits filed against Enron.= While Enron management is actively working to reduce debt and exit problem= businesses, it is possible that not all outstanding issues will be resolve= d within the transaction approval timeframe.=20 A positive consideration for DYN is the structure of the merger agreement w= hich contains a series of out provisions enabling it to terminate the merge= r upon occurrence of specific material adverse changes including Enron liti= gation exposure in excess of specified levels or a drop in Enron's senior u= nsecured credit rating below investment grade. In addition, Dynegy's upfron= t capital contribution is protected by the underlying value of NNG. Based o= n these provisions, Fitch would not expect to change Dynegy's current long-= term ratings in the event the transaction became unwound.=20 Other positives resulting from the merger include: improved management cred= ibility through Dynegy's assumption of senior executive positions and board= of directors control; the reduction of leverage at the new company from Ch= evronTexaco's equity commitment; the aggressive downsizing and exiting of n= on-core operations; potential cost savings through the merger, conservative= ly estimated at $500 million annually; and the market strength of the merge= d company, particularly as it relates to Enron's and Dynegy Holdings' North= American wholesale marketing and trading franchises.=20 The following ratings are impacted by today's rating action: Enron -- `BBB-' senior unsecured debt; -- `BB' subordinated debt; -- `B+' preferred stock; -- `F3' commercial paper. Northern Natural Gas Co. Transwestern Pipeline Co. -- `BBB-' senior unsecured debt. Dynegy Inc. -- `BBB' implied senior unsecured debt rating. Dynegy Holdings Inc. -- outstanding `BBB+' senior notes. Dynegy Capital Trust I -- outstanding `BBB' trust preferred securities. CONTACT: Fitch, New York Ralph Pellecchia, 212/908-0586 Robert Grossman, 21= 2/908-0535 Hugh Welton, 212/908-0746=20 18:40 EST NOVEMBER 9, 2001=20 Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 ChevronTexaco to Invest $2.5 Billion in Dynegy 11/09/2001 PR Newswire (Copyright (c) 2001, PR Newswire) Supports Dynegy's Merger with Enron;=20 ChevronTexaco Holds Warrants to Increase Investment=20 SAN FRANCISCO, Nov. 9 /PRNewswire/ -- ChevronTexaco Corp. (NYSE: CVX) today= announced that it has committed $2.5 billion of new equity in Dynegy Inc. = (NYSE: DYN) in support of Dynegy's planned merger with Enron (NYSE: ENE). ChevronTexaco, which currently owns approximately 26 percent of Dynegy's ou= tstanding common stock, immediately will invest $1.5 billion in convertible= preferred shares in Dynegy in order to fund Dynegy's equity infusion into = Enron. The $1 billion balance of ChevronTexaco's equity purchase of Dynegy = common stock would be made upon the closing of the Dynegy-Enron merger. The= se investments will be made at a significant discount to Dynegy's closing p= rice today.=20 Following the closing of the merger, which is subject to regulatory reviews= and Enron and Dynegy shareholder approval, ChevronTexaco would hold approx= imately 26 percent of Dynegy's outstanding common stock, and would maintain= its three seats on the Dynegy Board of Directors.=20 Under terms of its agreement with Dynegy, ChevronTexaco will be granted war= rants to purchase an additional $1.5 billion of Dynegy common stock over a = period of up to three years from the completion of the merger. ""Our equity = interest in Dynegy is highly complementary to our larger portfolio of asset= s and activities, and reflects our strategy to participate in the growing e= nergy convergence marketplace, including wholesale and retail marketing, an= d trading of energy products and services,"" said David J. O'Reilly, chairma= n and chief executive officer of ChevronTexaco. ""Our relationship with Dyne= gy has proven to be highly beneficial for both companies, and we are optimi= stic we will continue to see comparable or better performance in the future= .=20 ""This additional investment in Dynegy, which is expected to be immediately = accretive to ChevronTexaco, underscores our belief in the long-term value p= otential of this sector. We have additional upside through our warrants. We= have confidence in the Dynegy leadership team, headed by Chuck Watson, to = bring a disciplined management approach to this complex business and to bui= ld a larger and more profitable company through this merger. We are also ho= peful that the combination of Dynegy and Enron will restore market and cred= it confidence in this important energy sector,"" O'Reilly continued.=20 In the event that the merger between Dynegy and Enron is not completed, Che= vronTexaco can redeem its convertible preferred shares for $1.5 billion in = cash or convert to common shares. In the latter event, ChevronTexaco would = own an approximate 36 percent equity interest in Dynegy.=20 ""We believe this expanded investment offers us an opportunity to create gre= ater value and provide significant upside potential for ChevronTexaco share= holders as Dynegy strengthens its leadership position in this sector,"" O'Re= illy said. ""Through our membership on the Dynegy board, we will continue ou= r active role in the strategic direction of the company.""=20 Private Securities Litigation Reform Act Safe Harbor Statement=20 Except for the historical and present factual information contained herein,= the matters set forth in this press release, including statements as to th= e creation of greater value for stockholders, expected benefits of the merg= er of Dynegy and Enron, and other statements identified by words such as ""a= nticipates,"" ""expects,"" ""projects,"" ""plans,"" and similar expressions are fo= rward-looking statements within the meaning of the ""safe harbor"" provisions= of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-loo= king statements are not guarantees and are subject to risks and uncertainti= es that may cause actual results to differ materially, including the possib= ility that the anticipated benefits from the merger and ChevronTexaco's inv= estment in Dynegy cannot be fully realized, the possibility that costs or d= ifficulties related to the merger will be greater than expected, and the im= pact of competition and other risk factors relating to our industry as deta= iled from time to time in ChevronTexaco's periodic reports filed with the S= EC.=20 MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT - Click Here=20 /CONTACT: media, Fred Gorell, +1-415-894-4443, or investors, Pierre Breber,= +1-415-894-9376, both of ChevronTexaco Corp./ 18:39 EST=20 Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron projects with OPIC financing; [EMail-Body]= OPIC information. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/02/2000 06:33 PM --------------------------- From: John Hardy@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 08/02/2000 03:43 PM To: Steven J Kean@EES cc: Subject: Enron projects with OPIC financing Steve Here are the projcts which have OPIC financing: Batangas, Philippines - closed Dabhol I - closed Dabhol II - closed Trakya, Turkey - closed Accro, Venezuela - closed. Projects in process: Cuiaba I - Board approval received, Financially closed, awaiting disbursement (projected August 15,2000) Guatemala PQ - Board approval received, Not yet financially closed. Gaza - Board approval received, Not yet financially closed, [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Risk Matrix; [EMail-Body]= FYI. I had started an informal discussion group to work on political/regulatory risk.. I included Jane, Jim Bouillian, and Scott Gahn. Jane sent me the atached as an example of how her group approaches issues in the acquisition context. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 03/10/99 06:03 PM --------------------------- From: ""Jane Wilson/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT"" AT ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@CCMAIL on 01/14/99 12:41 PM To: Steven J Kean, James L Bouillion, Scott Gahn, Richard Shapiro cc: Subject: Risk Matrix Subject: Risk Matrix Attached is a sample draft risk matrix that my group does on a regular basis in the process of regulatory due diligence. (See attached file: Guatemalariskmetrix.doc) - Guatemalariskmetrix.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Fenosa and Enron to Invest $550 Million in Dominican Republic; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/10/2000 02:53 PM ----- Ann M Schmidt 10/10/2000 11:55 AM To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Meredith Philipp/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mary Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Laura Schwartz/Corp/Enron@Enron, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Fenosa and Enron to Invest $550 Million in Dominican Republic Fenosa and Enron to Invest $550 Million in Dominican Republic 10/10/0 12:43 (New York) Fenosa and Enron to Invest $550 Million in Dominican Republic Madrid, Oct. 10 (Bloomberg) -- Union Electrica Fenosa SA, Spain's third-biggest power company, and Enron Corp., the world's largest energy trader, will invest together in the Dominican Republic, kicking off the alliance by building a $550 million power plant and re-gasification facility. The partners will build a natural-gas-fired power station whose 500-megawatt capacity will represent 30 percent of the country's current electricity demand, said Fenosa in a note, confirmed with the company. The generator will run on liquefied natural gas when it starts operating in 2002, switching to fuel from the re- gasification plant when it starts operating in 2003. Fenosa has had an alliance with International Power Plc, formerly National Power Plc, since 1998. That alliance focuses on Europe, the U.S. and Australia, a Fenosa spokeswoman said today. Enron was the first U.S. utility to receive licenses to buy, sell and import electricity in Spain, after the government started opening energy markets to competition in 1998. It's also licensed to market natural gas. The Texas-based utility is building a gas-fired power plant in southern Spain, has a wind turbine factory near Toledo, and plans another windmill factory in Catalonia. --Brooke Nelson in the Madrid bureau (34 91) 700-9600 or b.nelson@bloomberg.net /ph Story illustration: UNF SM <Equity> COMP D to chart Fenosa's performance against the IBEX index. TOP NRG DJ Union Fenosa/Enron -2: Construction To Begin 2001 >E.FEN 10/10/0 12:40 (New York) MADRID (Dow Jones)--Spanish electricity company Union Electrica Fenosa SA (E.FEN) said late Tuesday it has reached an agreement with U.S. energy company Enron (ENE) to invest in energy infrastructure projects in the Dominican Republic. In a release, Fenosa said the deal involves the construction of a combined-cycle power plant with a 500MW potency, which will use natural gas from a regasification plant on the island nation. The 500MW potency is equivalent to 30% of the Caribbean island's electricity demand. The deal also includes a complimentary project, Fenosa said. This is the construction of a regasification plant on the republic's coastline, with a capacity for treating gas equivalent to the consumption of various groups of combined-cycle plants with a potency of 1300MW. The investment for these two projects is seen at around $550 million, of which $100 million could come from Dominican companies, Fenosa said. Fenosa and Enron estimate that construction of the two projects will begin in early 2001, with the power plant coming online in 2002. It will operate with combustible liquid until 2003, at which time the regasification plant comes online. (MORE) DOW JONES NEWS 10-10-00 12:40 PM- - 12 40 PM EDT 10-10-00 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California Truck Wreck on 2/28 Involving Cummings and an Ex-EOTT
 Driver; CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED ATTORNEY/CLIENT COMMUNICATION AND
 ATTORNEY'S WORK PRODUCT; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Michael Burke/Houston/Eott on 03/01/2000 08:16 AM --------------------------- Steve Duffy 02/29/2000 02:16 PM To: Susan Ralph, Bob Jacobs, Scott Clark/Bakersfield/Eott@Eott, Michael Burke, Gary Fuller/Bakersfield/Eott@Eott, Dana Gibbs, Lori Maddox/Houston/Eott@Eott, Cutty Cunningham/Houston/Eott@Eott, Mary Ellen Coombe/Houston/Eott@Eott, Walt Zimmerman, Mike Frank/Houston/Eott@Eott, Molly Sample, Edward Attanasio cc: Scott Vonderheide/Corp/Enron@Enron Subject: California Truck Wreck on 2/28 Involving Cummings and an Ex-EOTT Driver; CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED ATTORNEY/CLIENT COMMUNICATION AND ATTORNEY'S WORK PRODUCT I believe most of you have seen the background/facts on this unfortunate accident in which (1) an ex-EOTT employee (Hildebrand) was killed and (2) a tank load of crude oil was emptied into a California river. The oil belonged to Tosco. We had/have a contract to haul this oil for Tosco and were performing through Cummings. We outsourced our crude oil hauling function in California to Cummings and other companies last year, and many of our former crude drivers went to work for Cummings and these companies. The oil has gone into navigable waters and has reached the Pacific Ocean (during spawning season). This incident is on the front page of today's L.A. Times Metro Section. ACCORDING TO ED ATTANASIO, NEITHER EOTT NOR ENRON IS MENTIONED IN THE TIMES COVERAGE. It is quite possible that Tosco will seek indemnity from us (in connection with this incident) under the terms of our hauling contract with them. The liabilities here for Tosco could be very significant. Ed Attanasio is monitoring this situation closely. We need to be sensitive to this situation for a number of reasons. Someone may tie EOTT or Enron to this incident, for the reasons above, and because of the L.A. Times exposure, we could receive media calls about this matter. Scott Vonderheide has been alerted in this regard. At this juncture, we need to decide where to refer any calls we receive on this matter. Until further notice, I would advise that any and all such calls be referred to Cutty Cunningham . Cutty, I think your response to any such calls should be that we did not own the truck or the oil, or employ the driver. We should otherwise state that we are investigating the matter and have no further comment at this time. Also, Lori and Molly, we will need to decide very soon whether this matter will have any 10K significance. At the appropriate time, we should see what Baird thinks. We will look to Cummings and their insurance carriers to indemnify us----and be responsible for any claims against us by Tosco-----but we are still trying to ascertain the value of any such indemnity from Cummings and/ or its carriers. We don't have enough information at this time to speculate on the magnitude of any exposure we may have in this matter. Ed Attanasio needs to confer with Susan Ralph and advise on this ASAP. Please advise if there are any questions. Thanks. SWD [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Meet with Choice Team team Diane, Mark, Luke, Vicki, Harry, Jane,
 Klauberg, Rick, Jim, Robin Ross, Jay Flaherty, Dan Clearfield, Amy Leader
 in 6C2; [EMail-Body]= Call 800-998-2462, pin code #629012 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Fwd:; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Susan J Mara/SFO/EES on 10/11/2000 12:12 PM --------------------------- ""Daniel Douglass"" <douglass@ArterHadden.com> on 10/11/2000 12:54:40 PM To: <Barbara_Klemstine@apsc.com>, <Bob_Anderson@apses.com>, <berry@apx.com>, <dcazalet@apx.com>, <billr@calpine.com>, <jackp@calpine.com>, <glwaas@calpx.com>, <Ken_Czarnecki@calpx.com>, <cabaker@duke-energy.com>, <rjhickok@duke-energy.com>, <GTBL@dynegy.com>, <KEWH@dynegy.com>, <j_dasovi@ect.enron.com>, <rpelote@energy.twc.com>, <susan_j_mara@enron.com>, <curt.Hatton@gen.pge.com>, <foothill@lmi.net>, <camiessn@newwestenergy.com>, <jcgardin@newwestenergy.com>, <rsnichol@newwestenergy.com>, <rllamkin@seiworldwide.com>, <cfi1@tca-us.com> cc: Subject: Fwd: Attached are Frank Wolak's slides from his presentation at WPTF's meeting last Friday.? Greg Blue asked that I send these to the board, although I note that?a few?of you received them directly from Frank. ? Dan Received: from dymwsm07.mailwatch.com by ArterHadden.com; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:40:09 -0400 Received: from dymw0110.mailwatch.com (dymw0110.allegro.net [204.253.83.102]) by dymwsm07.mailwatch.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id e9AEaAL06385 for <Douglass@@arterhadden.com>; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:36:10 -0400 Received: from 204.253.83.71 by dymw0110.mailwatch.com with SMTP ( MailWatch 3.0(WSS) v4.3); Tue, 10 Oct 00 10:40:00 -0400 X-Server-Uuid: Received: from zia.stanford.edu (zia.Stanford.EDU [171.64.233.220]) by dymwsm09.mailwatch.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9AEaLH17504 for <Douglass@@arterhadden.com>; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:36:21 -0400 Received: from econ-wolak (econ-wolak.Stanford.EDU [171.64.233.175]) by zia.stanford.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id HAA04330; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 07:38:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: X-Sender: wolak@zia.stanford.edu (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 07:37:06 -0700 To: GTBL@dynegy.com, lyncorum@earthlink.net, william.freddo@neg.pge.com, rllamkin@seiworldwide.com, philm@SCDEnergy.com, mahoppe@calpx.com, BWoertz@caiso.com, Douglass@@arterhadden.com, foothill@lmi.net From: ""Frank A. Wolak"" <wolak@zia.stanford.edu> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-WSS-ID: 15FDF5CA563477-01-01 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; Here are my slides from the WPTF presentation as a .pdf file. Frank Wolak - wptf.pdf [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Philippe; [EMail-Body]= Yes, Phillippe left to join a firm in New York -- I don't know who. ""Christopher Culberson"" <cmculbe@us.ibm.com> on 06/26/2001 02:42:53 PM To: skean@enron.com cc: Subject: Philippe Steven, I hear Philippe is leaving for Putnam, any truth to this? I've been unable to contact him directly. Thanks in advance. Best Regards, Chris M. Culberson cmculbe@us.ibm.com (281) 556-8104 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Firsst article attached refers to the 1946 Nebraska case I mentioned to you= =20 in DC ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/02/2001 10:36 AM ----- =09Miyung Buster@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT =0903/02/2001 10:04 AM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: Ann M Schmidt/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bryan Seyfried/LON/ECT@ECT,=20 dcasse@whwg.com, dg27@pacbell.net, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron,=20 filuntz@aol.com, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Janet=20 Butler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeannie Mandelker/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff=20 Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John=20 John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT,=20 Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lysa=20 Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Margaret Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark=20 Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Markus=20 Fiala/LON/ECT@ECT, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT, Mike= =20 Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron= ,=20 Nicholas O'Day/AP/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Peggy=20 Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT, Richard=20 Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EE= S,=20 Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Stella=20 Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Sus= an=20 J Mara/NA/Enron@Enron, Mike Roan/ENRON@enronXgate, Alex=20 Parsons/EU/Enron@Enron, Andrew Morrison/LON/ECT@ECT, lipsen@cisco.com, Jane= l=20 Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Shirley A Hudler/HOU/ECT@ECT =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: Energy Issues Please see the following articles: Oakland Trib 2/28: ""Energy buyout foes say dump grid plan"" San Diego Union 2/28: ""Energy chief 'open' to plan on transmission line=20 buyout"" SF Chron, 2/28: ""Energy Experts Belie Davis' Rosy Prediction Summer expected to be crunch time"" Riverside Press 3/1: ""PUC to mull baseline level for electricity"" Orange Co. Register 3/1: ""Electricity notebook"" Contra Costa Times 3/1: ""PUC chief defends actions in crisis"" LA Times 3/2: ""Cal-ISO Says Suppliers Overcharged"" Sac Bee 3/2: Power profits targeted: Generators urged to forgive some of=20 utilities' debts (Steve Kean quoted) Energy Insight 3/2: ""California Energy Island Won't Work"" SF Chron 3/2: Ex-Regulator Urges Temporary Federal Price Caps on Power SF Chron 3/2: PG&E to Pay Creditors Only 15% / Smaller suppliers outraged= =20 over plan --- --- ------------------ Energy buyout foes say dump grid plan Davis critics point to federal veto disclosure=20 By Steve Geissinger SACRAMENTO BUREAU=20 SACRAMENTO -- Foes of Gov. Gray Davis' plan to buy power lines said Tuesday= =20 the 11th-hour disclosure of federal veto power over the stalled deal shows= =20 the effort should be abandoned altogether.=20 But Davis, who spent the day lobbying federal officials in Washington, D.C.= ,=20 said he's confident the Bush administration will support his plan to purcha= se=20 California's high-voltage transmission grid as part of a deal to rescue=20 teetering utilities.=20 Critics of the plan to ease the energy crisis, however, aren't so sure that= =20 Bush's Republican administration, which favors market-driven strategies ove= r=20 government intervention, will support the Democratic governor's proposal.= =20 Moreover, Republican legislators here said, the last-minute revelation that= =20 the plan would need the approval of federal regulators is further evidence= =20 that it is misdirected, overly complex and will take too long to implement.= =20 ""It means much more time will be required and time is something that=20 especially a lot of the creditors of the utilities do not have,"" said=20 Assembly Republican leader Bill Campbell of Villa Park.=20 ""I think this means we have to look at an alternative deal,"" Campbell said.= =20 Dan Nelson, a spokesman for Senate Republican leader James Brulte of Rancho= =20 Cucamonga, said Republicans generally oppose state purchase of power lines= =20 from utility companies as part of a plan to rescue them from financial=20 difficulty.=20 They instead support acquisition of some other asset from the utilities, su= ch=20 as stock warrants, in exchange for state assistance with their financial=20 woes.=20 Foes say the grid purchase would saddle the state with an antiquated networ= k=20 that could prove costly to maintain while supporters contend it could lead = to=20 quick improvements in a bottlenecked system overdue for repairs.=20 Word that Davis' plan to buy transmission lines would need federal approval= =20 surprised some legislators, their aides said. Open government advocates hav= e=20 harshly criticized the administration for secrecy surrounding much of the= =20 governor's energy crisis relief efforts.=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Chairman Curtis Hebert disclosed=20 recently in Washington that his board has authority over the deal, which he= =20 called ""nationalization"" that is ""against the best interests of the America= n=20 public.""=20 Following that disclosure, Democratic legislative leaders backing Davis' pl= an=20 said they hope to maneuver around the need for commission approval.=20 California can perhaps circumvent the potential hitch by relying in part on= a=20 1946 case involving the state of Nebraska that did not require federal=20 approval, according to Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, D-San Francisc= o.=20 Nevertheless, Davis, in Washington for a national governors meeting, said h= e=20 presented a nine-page proposal to U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham and= =20 expects a response by the end of the week.=20 ""He wants this problem solved and he's been very supportive,"" Davis said.= =20 ""He's recommended approval on every request I've made and I believe he will= =20 support our proposal.""=20 Abraham's office did not return calls seeking comment.=20 The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission that will likely weigh the fate of= =20 the plan, however, is independent of Abraham's office. Even so, Abraham is= =20 part of an energy policy team appointed by Bush, and Davis views Abraham's= =20 support of the proposal as a potential key to a federal nod.=20 Davis' history with the commission won't help his efforts. He and the=20 commission have been at odds for months over the governor's campaign to=20 impose tough wholesale price caps in the West.=20 The latest complications in the plan to rescue utilities came amid a=20 continuing deadlock in secret negotiations between the state and the Pacifi= c,=20 Gas and Electric Co., which is reluctant to sell its high-voltage=20 transmission lines.=20 Davis announced Friday that California's other major investor-owned utility= ,=20 Southern California Edison, had agreed on the basic framework of a deal tha= t=20 includes the sale of its transmission grid to the state for $2.8 billion.= =20 The utilities, trapped between high wholesale costs and lower=20 government-frozen retail rates, have been pushed to the brink of bankruptcy= =20 as they amassed nearly $13 billion in debt.=20 When the utilities could no longer buy enough power, the state began=20 brokering billions of dollars in emergency and long-term power deals to=20 thwart rolling blackouts.=20 Then Davis and legislators began developing strategies to ease the energy= =20 crisis, including increased conservation, construction of new generation=20 plants and ways to prevent utility bankruptcies.=20 Under Davis' plan to rescue utilities, the state would help fiscally restor= e=20 the companies with bonds in exchange for acquisition of their 26,000 miles = of=20 transmission grids. The state would upgrade the aging grid and then lease t= he=20 lines back to the utilities to operate. --- Energy chief 'open' to plan on transmission line buy out By Toby Eckert=20 COPLEY NEWS SERVICE=20 February 28, 2001=20 WASHINGTON -- Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham is ""open"" to California's pl= an=20 to take over utility transmission lines in the state, but stopped short of= =20 endorsing the proposal, saying he needed to study it further, Gov. Gray Dav= is=20 said yesterday.=20 ""From the tone of his remarks, I think his comments will be positive, and I= =20 hope by the end of the week he will be able to endorse the proposal or at= =20 least endorse a modified proposal that is satisfactory to us,"" Davis said= =20 after meeting with Abraham privately at the Department of Energy.=20 A spokesman for Abraham said he ""couldn't characterize (Abraham's) reaction= =20 one way or the other."" But he said Abraham was ""open to taking a look at th= e=20 material the governor provided"" and would follow up with Davis.=20 In his effort to drum up federal support for the buyout plan, Davis also=20 invoked a name that resonates throughout the halls of power in Washington:= =20 Alan Greenspan.=20 Davis said the Federal Reserve Board chairman ""in a general way thinks it= =20 makes sense to acquire transmission lines to make the capacity improvements= =20 that have not been done over the past 15 years.""=20 Greenspan and Davis informally talked about the power crisis this week, aid= es=20 to Davis said. Greenspan's comments could not be confirmed independently.= =20 Davis was in Washington for the four-day winter meeting of the National=20 Governors Association. But he also used the occasion to try to convince the= =20 new Bush administration -- and the media -- that his plans to solve=20 California's power woes are sound.=20 The governor spent about an hour briefing Abraham on the tentative agreemen= t=20 the state struck last week to acquire Southern California Edison's=20 transmission system for $2.76 billion. The state is trying to negotiate=20 similar deals with San Diego Gas and Electric and Pacific Gas and Electric = as=20 a condition for helping the utilities pay off about $13 billion in debt the= y=20 have accumulated because of soaring wholesale power costs.=20 The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission probably will have to sign off on= =20 any purchase plans, and FERC Chairman Curtis Hebert has made comments=20 indicating he is skeptical of the idea. But Davis believes he can overcome= =20 possible opposition at FERC if Abraham backs the plans.=20 Davis also said he and Abraham had ""some creative talks about how we might = be=20 able to find more megawatts for this summer"" and assigned staff members to= =20 work on that ""on a daily basis."" He did not elaborate on the ideas, saying= =20 there may be some details forthcoming ""in about two to three weeks.""=20 The governor will continue his East Coast sales pitch for the transmission= =20 line purchase -- and other elements of his plan to solve the power crisis -= -=20 in a meeting with Wall Street analysts and bond-raters today.=20 Davis and legislators also have pursued long-term power contracts with ener= gy=20 suppliers to wean the state from the open market, which became wildly=20 expensive last year.=20 Mirant Corp., which operates power plants in Northern California, said=20 yesterday that it has agreed to shift contracts from the defunct California= =20 Power Exchange to the Department of Water Resources, which is the state's= =20 electricity buyer.=20 The contracts amount to about 1,000 megawatts of power over the next 10=20 months. Last week, Mirant agreed to sell 750 megawatts to the state next=20 month. On a typical winter day, the maximum demand on the grid managed by t= he=20 state Independent System Operator, about 75 percent of the total state=20 network, is about 30,000 megawatts.=20 Davis' visit to Washington came against the backdrop of a muted federal=20 response to California's power crisis. The Bush administration, which favor= s=20 open power markets, has said it is largely up to state officials to solve t= he=20 problem, rejecting calls by Davis for more aggressive action like caps on= =20 wholesale power costs.=20 But the Democratic governor praised the Republican president publicly on=20 several occasions. He cited the administration's temporary extension of=20 federal orders that kept electricity and gas flowing to the state during=20 emergency shortages and its agreement to speed up federal review of new pow= er=20 plants.=20 ""Secretary Abraham and the Bush administration in general have been=20 wonderfully responsive to my requests. I cannot thank them enough,"" Davis= =20 said yesterday.=20 Other California Democrats have been less charitable toward President Bush.= =20 ""I think the president is going in the wrong direction on this issue,"" said= =20 Rep. Bob Filner, D-San Diego, a staunch advocate of wholesale price control= s.=20 ""A hands-off approach by the federal government, as the president has=20 suggested, is not going to solve this problem."" --- Energy Experts Belie Davis' Rosy Prediction Summer expected to be crunch time=20 Greg Lucas, Sacramento Bureau Chief Wednesday,?February 28, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 Sacramento -- Gov. Gray Davis' optimistic assessment that California may be= =20 on the ""back side"" of its energy crisis flies in the face of what many ener= gy=20 companies and other experts predict.=20 California's real test will come this summer when electricity usage sharply= =20 increases, and unless everything breaks the way Davis hopes, predictions ar= e=20 that large chunks of the state will be in the dark.=20 ""We're not on the back side of this crisis. This problem is far, far bigger= =20 than the governor is suggesting,"" said Gary Ackerman, executive director fo= r=20 the Western Power Trading Forum in Menlo Park.=20 ""To characterize the problem that way shows a recklessness that feeds on th= e=20 popular notion we don't have an energy crisis. We do. We have a very seriou= s=20 one that's going to hit us as temperatures and loads go up,"" Ackerman said.= =20 The Democratic governor's comments were made Monday in Washington, D.C.,=20 during an East Coast visit aimed at getting Washington and Wall Street=20 support for his energy plan.=20 He admitted more hard work is needed, but said the state is on the ""back si= de=20 of the crisis"" because lawmakers have passed bills needed to help lower=20 electricity prices.=20 ""Does that mean we're home free?"" Davis asked yesterday. ""No.""=20 But he again repeated that the state is on the back side of the crisis.=20 That is contrary to predictions by the Independent System Operator, which= =20 oversees the state's power market.=20 On any given day in June, the ISO estimates, the state will fall 6,815=20 megawatts short of demand. That would put nearly 7 million homes in the dar= k,=20 if it happens.=20 In July, the expected shortage is 4,685 megawatts. In August, it's 5,297=20 megawatts. That's if California has a normal summer. If it's hotter than=20 normal, the shortage grows.=20 The ISO's estimates tend to be conservative and do not include Davis'=20 conservation goal.=20 But even if a 10 percent reduction were achieved in June that would save=20 roughly 5,000 megawatts, the state would still be short 1,800 megawatts.=20 And there are other variables.=20 Depending on the snowpack and reservoir levels, hydroelectric plants may no= t=20 be able to run at full bore, which would also worsen the situation.=20 ""That is something the governor cannot spin his way out of,"" said Sen. Tom= =20 McClintock, R-Northridge.=20 Davis said a combination of new power plants and energy conservation will= =20 help the state get through this summer.=20 The clock is running. The ISO predicts shortages of 3,030 megawatts in May = -=20 - just two months away.=20 ""The real electricity crisis is going to be this summer, and I don't think= =20 we've made enough progress there,"" said Severin Borenstein, director of the= =20 University of California Energy Institute.=20 California won't be able to build its way out of the energy crisis by quick= ly=20 approving and building new power plants, Borenstein said.=20 The ISO's demand estimates already factor in the new power plants set to co= me=20 online this summer.=20 ""Unless we have a very mild summer and have lots of rainfall between then a= nd=20 now,"" Borenstein said, ""we are going to face some serious shortages.""=20 Like Davis, Borenstein says California needs to do more to conserve energy.= =20 Unlike Davis, he favors raising prices on big power consumers to give them = an=20 incentive to cut back.=20 But the Democratic governor may be sending Californians a mixed message.=20 By telling them the worst is over, he could undercut his plan by making=20 people believe more conservation is unnecessary.=20 Excluding what lies ahead, there are also plenty of energy issues left=20 unresolved right now.=20 Although Davis has reached a tentative deal with Southern California Edison= =20 on purchasing its share of the state's transmission system for $2.7 billion= =20 -- no such deal exists with either Pacific Gas & Electric or San Diego Gas = &=20 Electric.=20 Some alternative energy producers, like co-generation plants, are shutting= =20 down because the cash-poor utilities haven't paid them for several months. = No=20 cash means no fuel to run the turbines that make the juice.=20 Generators like Duke Energy and Reliant Energy aren't convinced the crisis= =20 has passed.=20 For starters, both companies are owed in excess of $700 million for=20 electricity bought by PG&E and Edison but never paid for.=20 ""There are a lot of issues still out there such as how much power your stat= e=20 will require this summer, whether there is enough generation on the ground = or=20 available commercially to handle the load if there is a significant spike i= n=20 demand,"" said Richard Wheatley, a Reliant spokesman.=20 Harvey Rosenfield, head of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights,= =20 has a slightly different take on whether the worst is over.=20 ""We've said all along it's a crisis inspired by the greed of the utilities= =20 and the energy companies,"" Rosenfield said.=20 ""Now that taxpayers are paying $1 billion every three weeks to buy=20 electricity and the ratepayers are going to pay between $13 billion and $20= =20 billion, the companies are happy and the crisis is over. What more could th= ey=20 want?"" --- PUC to mull baseline level for electricity It's been a decade since amounts were set. They vary by region, season and= =20 whether a home is heated with gas or electricity. By Robert T. Garrett The Press-Enterprise SACRAMENTO Inland-area residents who want a higher ""baseline quantity"" of lower-priced= =20 electricity each month will get a chance to plead their case in the next fe= w=20 weeks.=20 The state Public Utilities Commission will examine by early April whether t= he=20 monthly usage limits that trigger higher rates for residential customers ar= e=20 set too low, PUC President Loretta Lynch said Wednesday.=20 Baseline amounts are set by the PUC and vary by geographic region, season a= nd=20 whether a home is heated with gas or electricity.=20 ""It's been over a decade since the baselines were set,"" Lynch told the=20 Sacramento Press Club. "". . . I think it's about time for us to look at wha= t=20 these baselines are in the 21st century.""=20 Lynch, an appointee of Gov. Davis, declined to say whether the commission= =20 will make permanent a 9-percent rate hike imposed in early January on=20 residential customers of Southern California Edison, which serves much of t= he=20 Inland Empire.=20 With Edison and Pacific Gas Electric collapsing financially, the PUC impose= d=20 the rate hike -- and increases of up to 17 percent for Edison's large=20 business customers -- for 90 days.=20 The ""temporary surcharge"" will be lifted in early April unless the PUC vote= s=20 to keep it in effect.=20 Davis has said he hopes his plan to rescue the state's ailing utilities and= =20 avoid rolling blackouts can be carried out without further rate hikes.=20 Davis was in New York City on Wednesday, where the plan drew a tepid respon= se=20 from Wall Street.=20 Meanwhile, the unexpected shutdown of four Western power plants for repairs= ,=20 combined with scheduled maintenance at several in-state plants, forced=20 California grid officials to declare a Stage 2 alert.=20 Wall Street analysts who met privately with Davis in New York called his=20 moves a good step toward solving the energy crisis, but said more must be= =20 done.=20 ""He talked about a lot of short-term measures to alleviate problems for thi= s=20 summer, but he hasn't communicated a long-term fix,"" said Lawrence J.=20 Makovich, senior director of Cambridge Energy Research Associates.=20 Lynch said Wednesday that she and others on the PUC should have recognized= =20 sooner that utility deregulation wasn't working.=20 As part of its review of the January rate hikes, the PUC will invite public= =20 comments on baselines, Lynch said.=20 She said she plans to examine the baselines for each climate zone. In=20 Edison's service area, for instance, there are six.=20 Lynch also said the PUC would look at whether baselines are fair and=20 effective, and whether similar incentives to conserve energy should be buil= t=20 into the rates of businesses.=20 If the commission adopts ""incentives for businesses,"" she said, it has to= =20 make sure it doesn't set the baseline quantities too low for industrial=20 sectors such as agriculture and biotechnology. State Sen. Jim Battin, R-La= =20 Quinta, said Lynch's proposed review of the fairness of baselines in the=20 different climate zones ""could be encouraging.""=20 But he said he thinks businesses will oppose having baselines applied to=20 them.=20 Battin has waged a battle against baselines, which he calls ""social=20 engineering"" and which were mandated by a state law passed in the 1980s.=20 In the Inland area, the baseline system works like this:=20 In Temecula and Corona an ""all-electric"" home -- meaning one that is heated= =20 by electricity -- this summer will pay 12 cents a kilowatt for the first 30= 4=20 kilowatts used each month; for each additional kilowatt consumed, Edison wi= ll=20 charge 14 cents.=20 In Moreno Valley, Hemet, Rialto and most of Redlands, owners of=20 ""all-electric"" homes will pay Edison the lower rate for 514 kilowatts per= =20 month this summer.=20 In the Coachella Valley, in both summer and winter, Edison charges the=20 higher, 14-cent rate only for monthly consumption above 1,299 kilowatts.=20 Those with gas heating in their homes get different baseline allowances tha= n=20 do those with electric heating.=20 --- Electricity notebook=20 State, Calpine sign $8.3 billion in pacts.=20 March 1, 2001=20 Calpine Corp., a San Jose-based power plant owner, signed two contracts=20 valued at up to $8.3 billion to sell electricity to the California Departme= nt=20 of Water Resources for 10 to 20 years.=20 The contracts with the DWR, which buys electricity for the state's=20 two-biggest utilities, will provide 1,500 megawatts, or enough to light 1.5= =20 million homes, the company said.=20 Calpine signed one $5.2 billion, 10-year contract to sell 1,000 megawatts= =20 from new power plants. Deliveries are expected to begin July 1, with 200=20 megawatts. The full amount of power won't be available until July 2002.=20 A $3.1 billion contract calls for Calpine to provide power for 20 years.=20 Deliveries are expected to begin in August with 90 megawatts and to increas= e=20 to 495 megawatts in August 2002.=20 The contract also allows the state to buy up to 2,000 hours during peak=20 periods from 11 new generating units, once they are built.=20 In February, Calpine signed a 10-year contract valued at $4.6 billion with= =20 the DWR to supply 1,000 megawatts. A megawatt is enough to light 1,000 home= s.=20 Separately, Duke Energy Corp. said it is in discussions with the DWR on=20 long-term power supply contracts.=20 The Gas Co. agrees=20 to buy gas for PG&E=20 The Gas Co. said Wednesday that it reached an agreement with Pacific Gas &= =20 Electric Co. to buy natural gas for the troubled utility for the next month= .=20 PG&E, which is near bankruptcy, has said it is running out of gas supplies= =20 and is unable to buy more because creditors are hesitant to sell to it.=20 PG&E had asked the state Public Utilities Commission to force The Gas Co.,= =20 which serves all of Orange County, to step in and buy gas for PG&E on an=20 emergency basis.=20 The Gas Co. said the agreement with PG&E includes a guarantee that The Gas= =20 Co. will be paid out of the money received from PG&E customer bills. Unpaid= =20 balances cannot exceed $16.5 million, said Gas Co. spokeswoman Denise King. --- PUC chief defends actions in crisis Loretta Lynch blames the energy crunch on the failure of deregulation;=20 credit-rating firm says state will continue to feel its effects=20 By Andrew LaMar and Mike Taugher TIMES STAFF WRITERS=20 SACRAMENTO -- Loretta Lynch, who has faced close scrutiny as president of t= he=20 state Public Utilities Commission, defended her handling of the electricity= =20 crisis Wednesday and said she wishes the agency had recognized sooner that= =20 deregulation was not working.=20 Appearing before reporters at a luncheon, the 38-year-old attorney offered = a=20 harsh assessment of deregulation and said California has not faced the same= =20 degree of uncertainty since the 1920s.=20 ""From my perspective, the system that we created was built on a theory and = a=20 hope and a promise, and that promise is unrealized and the theory was fault= y=20 and so therefore the hope remains unfulfilled,"" Lynch said. ""I'm from=20 Independence, Mo.; you have got to show me how we're going to get to the=20 nirvana of the plan for deregulation.""=20 Lynch said the PUC is working feverishly on three things:=20 To advise the Legislature on scores of energy bills.=20 To legally defend its decision to keep rates frozen on two utility companie= s.=20 To prepare to decide whether to extend or increase a 9 percent electricity= =20 rate hike approved in January.=20 Meanwhile, the Wall Street credit-rating firm Standard & Poor's issued a=20 report on the dangers of the energy crisis that said California will feel i= ts=20 effects ""throughout 2001 and beyond.""=20 Damage has been contained to the state's utilities, which are nearly broke,= =20 and the state treasury, which S&P said is insulated from credit problems=20 because of its ample reserves and ability to borrow.=20 But S&P analysts said the combination of the energy crisis and a nationwide= =20 economic slowdown could restrict the state's ability to deal with budgetary= =20 issues that could come up if the economy continues to slow. Also, it could= =20 strap the budgets of cities, counties and other local governments if the=20 state decides to cut payments to them.=20 ""In addition to the overall economic slowing that is clearly evident=20 nationally, the utility crisis has hit California at a time when the=20 technology sector, the growth of which has played a significant role in the= =20 state's economy over the past several years, is undergoing a significant=20 retraction,"" S&P warned.=20 As for Lynch, she challenged several popular assumptions as myths. First, s= he=20 said, deregulation failed on its own, not because politicians cut it short.= =20 Second, she said, the PUC did not stop utilities from arranging long-term= =20 contracts to buy electricity, as they have claimed.=20 And, the defense of the PUC's rate freeze in court is not a losing=20 proposition, she said.=20 ""It is true that the utilities came to the commission and to me personally = in=20 October and said 'End the rate freeze. We are hurting.'"" Lynch said. ""When = we=20 looked at the request, it really did put us between a rock and a hard place= ,=20 and that's a rock and a hard place we remain in today.'""=20 But Lynch said if the PUC had lifted the rate freeze, ""we would have, by=20 administrative fiat, plunged the rest of California into the price volatili= ty=20 that San Diego experienced this summer.""=20 As it is, the commission is studying the market value of the assets Souther= n=20 California Edison and PG&E were supposed to sell under the terms of=20 deregulation. Once the commission sets the market value, it can determine= =20 whether the utilities are eligible to raise rates.=20 In other developments Wednesday:=20 Power generator Calpine Corp. announced two long-term electricity contracts= =20 that will require energy-starved California to pay up to $8.3 billion to ke= ep=20 the lights on in as many as 1.5 million homes.=20 With the latest agreements, San Jose-based Calpine has three separate=20 long-term electricity contracts with the state Department of Water Resource= s,=20 which is shopping for deals that will spread the soaring cost of power over= =20 several years=20 Environmentalists urged Gov. Gray Davis to upgrade his proposal to obtain= =20 development rights for scenic acreage owned by the state's beleaguered=20 utilities, saying the state should obtain the properties outright.=20 As part of a utility bailout package, the governor has recommended Edison a= nd=20 PG&E turn over development rights to more than 88,000 acres, including scen= ic=20 parcels in the Sierra, and 26,000 miles of high voltage transmission lines,= =20 among other considerations.=20 A Republican assemblyman attacked Davis for comments he made in Washington,= =20 D.C., on Tuesday. The governor said the deals he is negotiating with utilit= y=20 companies to buy their transmission lines would complete the legislative=20 fixes needed and ""it means we are basically on the downside of the problem.= ""=20 But Assemblyman Tony Strickland, R-Thousand Oaks, questioned whether there= =20 would be enough power this summer or if federal regulators would approve th= e=20 state purchase of transmission lines.=20 ""It's irresponsible to call this crisis nearly over,"" Strickland said. ""The= re=20 are still way too many unknowns."" --- -------------- Cal-ISO Says Suppliers Overcharged=20 Power: State report calls for a refund of $562 million above 'reasonable'= =20 prices. Generators deny gouging.=20 By NANCY VOGEL and JENIFER WARREN, Times Staff Writers ?????SACRAMENTO--Wholesale electricity suppliers overcharged California's= =20 utilities more than $500 million during December and January, an amount tha= t=20 the federal government should demand be refunded, according to a=20 no-holds-barred state report released Thursday. ?????The report by the California Independent System Operator, which overse= es=20 the flow of electricity in the state, said power suppliers charged $11=20 billion during those two months alone--more than they did for all of 1999. ?????Studying various market dynamics, the agency concluded that there was = a=20 ""prima facie case"" that the unnamed generators and marketers had charged $5= 62=20 million above ""just and reasonable"" prices, warranting further investigatio= n=20 and federal hearings into the appropriateness of refunds. ?????The state report is the most accusatory of a number of studies=20 undertaken to determine why wholesale electricity prices have soared in=20 California since last summer, throwing the state's biggest utilities into= =20 financial crisis and dashing hopes for lower consumer rates under=20 deregulation. ?????The study also provides new ammunition to members of California's=20 congressional delegation, who have unsuccessfully been pressing the Federal= =20 Energy Regulatory Commission to impose price ceilings on wholesale=20 electricity costs. ?????Generators defended their operating practices and rejected the=20 allegation that they had raked in unfairly large profits in December and=20 January. ?????""We have played by the rules, acted ethically and legally in all our= =20 operations,"" said Richard Wheatley, a spokesman for Houston-based Reliant= =20 Energy, which owns power plants capable of supplying more than 3 million=20 homes. ""We have nothing to hide."" ?????Gary Ackerman, executive direcor of the Western Power Trading Forum,= =20 said the Cal-ISO report does not account for less tangible factors that ten= d=20 to drive up prices, such as political and financial uncertainties. ?????""Those are the things my people take into account when deciding whethe= r=20 to sell into California,"" said Ackerman. He noted that, in the second week = of=20 December, a period analyzed in the Cal-ISO report, electricity prices were= =20 higher in the Pacific Northwest than in California. ?????The report, he said, ""provides some reasonable questions which will be= =20 responded to by my members, under FERC authority."" ?????Cal-ISO officials stressed Thursday that they are not accusing any=20 seller of inflating prices but are simply asking for federal action to=20 restrain costs. ?????""We have not seen prices come down to what we feel are justifiable=20 levels,"" said Anjali Sheffrin, director of market analysis for Cal-ISO. ?????Although federal energy commission officials on Thursday refused to=20 comment on the study, many experts predicted that refunds would not be=20 forthcoming. ?????Since July, when Gov. Gray Davis first asked the federal commission to= =20 give San Diego Gas & Electric customers refunds for electricity costs that= =20 doubled and in some cases tripled, the agency has refused to order power=20 sellers to give back some of their profits to California utilities and=20 consumers. ?????The commission, charged by Congress with assuring ""just and reasonable= ""=20 wholesale electricity rates, has also resisted imposing firm price caps on= =20 California's electricity market. In November, the commission called that=20 market ""dysfunctional"" and vulnerable to manipulation by power sellers, but= =20 the agency has so far failed to document or punish specific cases of such= =20 anti-competitive behavior. ?????""The real question is what is FERC going to do with all of this?"" said= =20 Gary Stern, chief of market analysis for Southern California Edison, once o= ne=20 of the two biggest buyers of electricity in California. ""Based on past=20 history, we think they're probably going to say they don't see wrongdoing= =20 that provides a reason for refund."" ?????Determining rebates could prove a logistical nightmare for federal=20 regulators and Cal-ISO, Stern said, but the data exist to show how much it= =20 cost power plant owners to generate electricity and what price they charged= . ?????Given that Edison and PG&E have defaulted on payments of hundreds of= =20 millions to power sellers, Stern said, a rebate order wouldn't lead to=20 reimbursement for individual utility customers. Instead, it could help the= =20 utilities eliminate some of their debt to generators and marketers. ?????Edison and PG&E have been pushed nearly to bankruptcy by high wholesal= e=20 costs, which they could not pass on to their customers because of a=20 state-imposed rate freeze.=20 ?????Last week, Davis announced that Edison had agreed in principle to stat= e=20 financial help in exchange for its transmission lines. Negotiations with PG= &E=20 continue. ?????The Folsom-based Cal-ISO drew its conclusions after reviewing=20 electricity purchases made between Dec. 8, 2000, and Jan. 31, 2001. ?????To calculate the cost of producing electricity in those months, Cal-IS= O=20 analysts assumed power plant owners were buying natural gas from the spot= =20 market, where prices soared this winter, and were running old, inefficient= =20 plants. They also assumed relatively high prices for air emission credits i= n=20 Southern California and added a 10% buffer to the operating costs. ?????Cal-ISO officials then compared these costs with the prices sellers we= re=20 paid. Their report did not name the individual sellers, which range from th= e=20 province of British Columbia to the publicly owned Los Angeles Department o= f=20 Water and Power to private companies. ?????Several lawmakers praised the report as long overdue. ?????""It's about time,"" said state Sen. Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey),=20 chairwoman of the Senate Energy Committee. She said that the desire among= =20 some legislators to seize power plants and take other drastic actions stems= =20 from the sense that ""there's no one willing to enforce the provisions of th= e=20 federal power act regarding just and reasonable rates. ?????""The utilities are doing a great job looking out for their shareholder= s,=20 but who is looking out for ratepayers?"" she asked. ?????Consumer advocacy groups applauded Cal-ISO's action and said the=20 agency's evidence of overcharges underscored the need for hard price caps o= r=20 a tax on generator profits. ?????""It's certainly not news to us that the generators are charging=20 excessive wholesale prices,"" said Mindy Spatt, spokeswoman for the Utility= =20 Reform Network of San Francisco. ""If there had been a real price cap, this= =20 investigation would not be necessary.""=20 ?????California's congressional delegation has pushed hard in recent months= =20 for legislation that would impose temporary price controls on wholesale pow= er=20 supplies in the West. On Wednesday, a bipartisan team met with Curtis Heber= t,=20 chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and came away=20 discouraged by Hebert's opposition to price caps. ?????The federal commission has imposed a so-called ""soft cap"" of $150 per= =20 megawatt-hour in California's electricity market. When sellers ask a higher= =20 price they must explain why it is necessary.=20 ?????Within 60 days, the commission can launch a review of those bids that= =20 could lead to refunds. So far, the federal panel has ordered none. On=20 Thursday, Cal-ISO asked the commission to extend the two-month deadline in= =20 its examination of the purchases made during December and January. * * * ?????Times staff writer Nancy Rivera Brooks in Los Angeles contributed to= =20 this story. --- Power profits targeted: Generators urged to forgive some of utilities' debt= s By Stuart Leavenworth and Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writers (Published March 2, 2001)=20 They are cocky and defiant, and unabashedly rich. Over the past year, the= =20 companies that generate and trade much of California's electricity have mad= e=20 multimillion-dollar profits off the state's power crunch.=20 Yet pressure is mounting for these power producers to return some of their= =20 profits, or at least forgive some debts they are owed by the state's troubl= ed=20 utilities:=20 A spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis said Thursday that at least two energy=20 companies have volunteered to forgive some debt, a development that could= =20 give Davis leverage over other suppliers.=20 Also Thursday, the state's Independent System Operator declared that some= =20 power merchants may have overcharged the state and utilities by as much as= =20 $562 million in December and January. ISO officials asked federal regulator= s=20 to confirm their findings and seek refunds from the generators.=20 Several key lawmakers say any deal to rescue Pacific Gas and Electric Co. a= nd=20 Southern California Edison must include debt forgiveness by generators and= =20 other creditors.=20 ""They have to get a haircut like anyone else,"" said state Sen. Debra Bowen,= =20 the powerful chair of the Senate Energy Committee. ""I'm not saying they hav= e=20 to walk around like Jesse Ventura, but they can't continue to walk around= =20 like Don King, either.""=20 So far, most generators adamantly refuse to discuss debt forgiveness, sayin= g=20 their electricity prices are reasonable.=20 Steven Kean, executive vice president of Enron Corp., said he didn't see ""a= ny=20 reason"" to forgive any debts. A spokeswoman for Mirant Corp. said company= =20 officials expect full payment.=20 Richard Wheatley, a spokesman for Reliant Energy Inc., said lawmakers urgin= g=20 debt relief are engaged in wishful thinking.=20 ""The more they discuss it, the more they hope it might turn into reality,""= =20 said Wheatley, whose company is owed $300 million. ""From our perspective,= =20 it's not open to negotiation.""=20 But Bowen and others say generators, bondholders and other utility creditor= s=20 have some good reasons to budge.=20 If Edison and PG&E go bankrupt, Bowen says, the generators might have to wa= it=20 years to get even partial payment. That's because they are unsecured=20 creditors -- meaning they don't hold any collateral to secure payment of=20 their debts.=20 ""It is not very hard to figure out from a dollars and cents standpoint,"" sa= id=20 Bowen, D-Marina Del Rey, who has been talking to some of the generators abo= ut=20 debt forgiveness. ""If you are owed 100 bucks, would you rather get $90=20 several months from now, or would you rather take your chances with=20 bankruptcy attorneys and get $50 three years from now?""=20 Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Davis, said the governor ""has received a=20 couple of unsolicited offers"" from generators willing to forgive debts as= =20 part of a deal. Maviglio declined to name the companies, but said, ""It is a= ll=20 part of the ongoing negotiations.""=20 The game of cat and mouse comes as Davis and lawmakers try to gain leverage= =20 over five companies -- AES Corp., Duke Energy Corp., Dynegy Inc., Mirant an= d=20 Reliant -- that bought power plants from the California-based utilities in= =20 the early days of the state's foray into deregulation.=20 Because of that divesture, much of California's power is controlled by=20 out-of-state generators and their trading subsidiaries, or by independent= =20 brokers such as Enron, the country's biggest electricity marketer.=20 In recent months, at least five class-action lawsuits have accused these=20 companies of manipulating and inflating electricity prices, either by=20 intentionally shutting down plants or by buying natural gas cheaply and usi= ng=20 it to generate electricity sold at a several-hundred-percent markup.=20 On Thursday, the nonprofit corporation that manages most of the state's=20 electric grid revealed data that could support claims of price gouging.=20 In a filing with federal regulators, the Independent System Operator said t= he=20 wholesalers overcharged the ISO by $562 million for spot-market purchases i= n=20 December and January.=20 The ISO's findings are based on federal price caps that say any bids above = a=20 certain level be justified in writing. The ISO calculated the suppliers'=20 costs, threw in a 10 percent profit margin -- and concluded that the=20 generators had sold scads of power at unreasonable prices.=20 The state's grid managers want the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to= =20 seek refunds from the generators if regulators confirm that overcharging to= ok=20 place. But some doubt the FERC will act, given its past reluctance to set= =20 price controls or interfere in California's energy markets.=20 ""I don't think they have a whole lot of chance with FERC,"" said Severin=20 Borenstein, director of the University of California Energy Institute.=20 Federal officials, he said, ""are likely to bend over backward to excuse the= =20 prices.""=20 Wholesalers also doubted the ISO report would lead anywhere, saying it left= =20 out significant, legitimate costs of selling electricity to California.=20 Suppliers had the right to charge a ""credit premium"" as the risks of=20 nonpayment began rising, said Gary Ackerman of the Western Power Trading=20 Forum. Not only did the ISO become an uncreditworthy buyer -- because it go= t=20 its money from Edison and PG&E -- but the whole political climate in=20 California added to the wholesalers' risks, Ackerman said.=20 Whether or not the ISO filing prompts action from federal regulators, it=20 could help lawmakers pressure the generators.=20 State Sen. Joe Dunn, D-Santa Ana, said he wants to sort out how much of the= =20 debts piled up by PG&E and Edison since last summer were the result of=20 electricity prices that could be deemed ""unjust and unreasonable"" under=20 federal and state laws.=20 ""Since every regulatory body has concluded those costs were unjust and=20 unreasonable, a portion, if not a very significant part of that past debt= =20 ought to be forgiven,"" Dunn said.=20 Some analysts say state leaders can't push the generators too far, since th= ey=20 depend on energy companies to build new power plants -- a supply boost that= =20 theoretically would lower energy prices.=20 Dunn acknowledges that is a concern, but says the Legislature also can't=20 afford to ignore charges that generators have gouged utilities and=20 ratepayers.=20 ""That is the game of chicken we are in now,"" Dunn said. ""And up to this=20 point, it is only the state that has blinked.""=20 The issue of debt forgiveness could become moot if Davis can't strike a dea= l=20 with PG&E and San Diego Gas & Electric to buy their transmission systems.= =20 Last week, Davis announced a tentative agreement to acquire Edison's power= =20 lines for $2.7 billion and is reportedly close to coming to terms with SDG&= E.=20 But PG&E has so far rejected the governor's overtures, and on Thursday it= =20 added to a litany of financial woes. The San Francisco-based company=20 defaulted on another $1.21 billion worth of payments to electricity=20 suppliers. It did, however, make partial payments totaling $228 million to= =20 the ISO, which bought power from the wholesalers on the utility's behalf, a= nd=20 to a group of cogenerators and alternative energy providers.=20 If talks with the state break down, one of PG&E's alternatives would be=20 bankruptcy court, where a judge would determine how its assets would be=20 divided among creditors. An alternative scenario has one or all of the=20 generators going to court to force PG&E into bankruptcy, but Bowen, for one= ,=20 is doubtful that will happen anytime soon.=20 ""If they (the generators) thought they would come out better in a bankruptc= y,=20 we would be there already,"" said Bowen, whose committee would have to appro= ve=20 any rescue plan for the utilities.=20 ""So that means they have to give. Everyone has to give.""=20 Emily Bazar of The Bee Capitol Bureau contributed to this report.=20 Thursday's developments A Davis spokesman says the governor has received ""unsolicited offers"" from= =20 some generators willing to forgive debts but declines to name them.=20 In a filing with federal regulators, the Independent System Operator says= =20 some wholesalers overcharged the ISO by $562 million for spot-market=20 purchases in December and January.=20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. pays 16 percent of a $1.44 billion bill to=20 wholesale power suppliers, defaulting on $1.21 billion of the debt but payi= ng=20 $228 million.=20 State declares Stage 2 alert but downgrades it to a ""warning"" at mid-mornin= g.=20 Calpine Corp. becomes the latest wholesaler to sign long-term supply=20 contracts with the Department of Water Resources, agreeing to two deals=20 totaling $8.3 billion -- a 10-year contract for $5.2 billion and a 20-year= =20 contract for $3.1 billion. Last month, Calpine signed a deal worth $4.6=20 billion.=20 --- Friday, March 2, 2001=20 By Rick Stouffer=20 rstouffer@ftenergy.com=20 ""=01(No state is an island, entire of itself; every state is a piece of the= =20 continent, a part of the main=01("" -John Donne California Gov. Gray Davis has seemingly hit on a plan that he thinks will= =20 solve his state's energy problems:=20 Acquire some 32,000 miles of transmission lines for between $8 billion and= =20 $10 billion to keep the bankruptcy wolf away from the state's three=20 investor-owned utilities. Create a public power authority to buy, build and operate power plants,=20 financed with up to $5 billion in state bonds. Not raise customer rates to pay for at least $10 billion in bonds used to p= ay=20 for power.=20 Sounds great, doesn't it? Something for everyone=01*no more pain=01*sounds= =20 suspiciously like California's original deregulation plan=01*itself a misno= mer;=20 California wasn't deregulated, it was restructured.=20 Energy 'island' won't work But Davis's efforts to, in effect, create the electrical island of Californ= ia=20 will not work, many say. The governor's control of transmission doesn't sol= ve=20 the immediate demand-supply conundrum.=20 And creation of the fancy-sounding California Consumer Power and Conservati= on=20 Financing Authority to buy, build and operate power plants could drive=20 private developers out of the Golden State=01*who wants to compete against = the=20 ultimate government-subsidized entity?=20 ""Davis is, in effect, nationalizing the power industry in California,"" said= =20 Jonathan Gottlieb, a partner in Washington, D.C., law firm Baker & McKenzie= 's=20 North American Utility and Energy Products Group. ""Command and control=20 economies have been collapsing around the world=01*except in California.""= =20 The problems with the California power industry are numerous and beaten to= =20 death by the media. It appears everything went wrong that could go wrong=01= *all=20 at once=01*Murphy's Law in the absurd.=20 Just as numerous as the problems, are the number of entities which can be= =20 fingered as having a hand in the debacle.=20 All that said, Gov. Davis feels he has the magic bullet which will make=20 everything right: take over much of the system, force those=20 out-of-state-based generators to act ""responsibly,"" bail out the incumbent= =20 utilities and not raise customer rates.=20 But has anyone looked longer term than the next few months concerning the= =20 consequences of Davis' moves? Anyone stop to think what happens if and when= =20 the state does take control?=20 Who runs the state-owned system?=20 ""With the transmission-lines buy, you have a mechanism which gives the=20 utilities cash to pay off the debt incurred in buying wholesale power,"" sai= d=20 Craig Pirrong, a commodity markets expert and professor in the Olin School = of=20 Business at Washington University in St. Louis.=20 ""But now there are operational questions,"" Pirrong continued. ""Is the state= =20 the most efficient entity to operate and maintain the wires system?""=20 Good question. ""You have to find someone to run the system once you take it= =20 over,"" said William Hogan, a professor in Harvard University's John F.=20 Kennedy School of Government. ""So you either contract or hire utility=20 employees.""=20 There is precedent, obviously, for government-owned and operated utilities.= =20 In the United States, more than 2,000 municipals operate today, while=20 internationally a number of state-run utilities are in operation, for examp= le=20 Electricit, de France. But government ownership of utilities appears to be = on=20 the way out across the world, the experts say.=20 ""Look what's happening worldwide,"" said Adrian Moore, executive director of= =20 the Los Angeles-based free market think tank Reason Public Policy Institute= .=20 ""Over the last seven or eight years, billions of dollars worth of utility= =20 privatizations have taken place. Germany and Italy, for example, are sellin= g=20 off huge tranches of their national utilities.""=20 Municipal utilities tout their lower costs per customer, but those figures= =20 are deceptive, some industry watchers believe.=20 ""There are a lot of tax advantages and hidden subsidies in municipal=20 utilities that mask the real cost,"" said economist Murray Weidenbaum, schol= ar=20 in residence at the Jones Graduate School of Management at Rice University = in=20 Houston, Texas, and the former first chairman of President Reagan's Council= =20 of Economic Advisers. ""If you move to a state-run utility, you can almost= =20 guarantee costs will go up over time,"" Moore said.=20 Politics taking precedence With state control of California's transmission lines, many experts see=20 politics taking precedence over economics=01*or need=01*when decisions are = made=20 concerning where to build new lines.=20 ""You can see gamesmanship and lobbying taking precedence, moving away from= =20 economic drivers toward political drivers,"" Washington University's Pirrong= =20 said.=20 On the generation side, many of the same problems associated with assuming= =20 command of the wires could occur.=20 Generators including Mirant Corp. and Duke Energy already publicly expresse= d=20 concerns with the wires acquisition; specifically, will they be shut out of= =20 access to get their power to market?=20 ""I can see politically that they've got to get something out of this to sel= l=20 the plan to consumers, but we need to make sure we aren't discriminated=20 against,"" Mirant President Marce Fuller said during the recent Cambridge=20 Energy Research Associates energy conference in Houston.=20 Discrimination against incumbents could occur, but what about bias against= =20 potential generators? With the establishment of the Consumer Power and=20 Conservation Financing Board, what private company would want to bid agains= t=20 the sixth largest economy in the world?=20 ""With the government involved, companies would be reluctant to build new=20 plants without a government contract, because the government is subsidizing= =20 construction,"" said Harvard's Hogan.=20 ""Where's the state's comparative advantage in building new plants?""=20 Washington University's Pirrong asked.=20 FERC must weigh-in There is another major player in California's ascension to wires=20 owner-operator: the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The Federa= l=20 Power Act puts FERC right in the middle of the California takeover, said=20 Baker & McKenzie's Gottlieb.=20 ""FERC Chairman Curtis Hebert has used the word 'nationalization' publicly t= o=20 describe what California is proposing, and has said he has definite concern= s=20 about the proposal,"" Gottlieb said. ""I don't think FERC can say no to the= =20 California takeover, but they could weigh it down with conditions.""=20 One of those conditions may be a trade-off: FERC will approve California's= =20 takeover of transmission wires, in exchange for the state giving control of= =20 the lines to multi-state regional transmission organizations.=20 A 'quick' fix could take months No one, including Davis, sees this plan happening quickly. In a presentatio= n=20 Wednesday to analysts in New York, the governor admitted it would take up t= o=20 four more weeks to reach agreement with PG&E Corp./Pacific Gas & Electric C= o.=20 for its wires. He also admitted he cannot win enough Republicans to pass th= e=20 bill with the two-thirds majority needed for immediate implementation. Bill= s=20 in California passed with a simple majority must wait 90 days before going= =20 into effect.=20 Thus, the entire process may not be over for at least another six weeks, an= d=20 even then the Davis plan could face a ballot initiative. But for the sake o= f=20 argument, assume Gov. Davis gets his way and takes control of the=20 investor-owned utilities' wires and begins building and buying plants. Wher= e=20 does such a massive undertaking leave the Golden State in three to five=20 years?=20 ""All things add up to a pretty grim situation,"" said the Reason Public Poli= cy=20 Institute's Moore. ""Five years from now just because the state is purchasin= g=20 power, we will have prices higher than the U.S. average. That will be=20 exacerbated by the state owning the wires and building the plants.""=20 ""I'm very dubious; the government-run utility in the long-run will be very= =20 expensive,"" Harvard's Hogan concurred.=20 Baker & McKenzie's Gottlieb sees the California screen test as providing th= e=20 impetus for a huge infrastructure build-out nationwide. One recent survey= =20 found that some $20 billion in plant financings within the United States ar= e=20 projected for just the first three months of 2001=01*compared to $24 billio= n for=20 all of 1999.=20 A textbook case According to economist Weidenbaum, the California energy debacle answers th= e=20 question ""does the government deregulate as badly as it regulates,"" with a= =20 huge exclamation point.=20 ""California is a textbook dramatization of the shortcomings of government= =20 involvement with business,"" Weidenbaum said. ""You now have Chapter Two in= =20 that book; we already have Chapter One.""=20 The English poet Donne said: ""And therefore never send to know for whom the= =20 bell tolls; it tolls for thee.""=20 In California, that ""bell"" is clanging.=20 --- Ex-Regulator Urges Temporary Federal Price Caps on Power Carolyn Lochhead, Chronicle Washington Bureau=20 ? Friday,?March 2, 2001=20 Washington -- Federal energy regulators should intervene more forcefully in= =20 California's energy crisis, a former Reagan-appointed regulator said=20 yesterday,=20 while other experts feared the financial effects could balloon into another= =20 savings-and-loan bailout disaster.=20 Independent regulatory experts speaking at a high-profile panel on the ener= gy=20 crunch also said Gov. Gray Davis may be whistling in the dark in his=20 assurances that the power crisis will be largely resolved by summer.=20 ""I think there is a fairly compelling argument that something needs to be= =20 done,"" said Elizabeth Moler, appointed to the Federal Energy Regulatory=20 Commission by President Ronald Reagan and named chairwoman by President Bil= l=20 Clinton.=20 Moler, speaking to the Brookings Institution and the American Enterprise=20 Institute Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, said some form of temporary= =20 federal intervention on wholesale prices is needed, so long as it does not= =20 discourage investment in new generation capacity.=20 Davis and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., have urged federal regulators to= =20 impose temporary price controls to give the state breathing room.=20 The chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Curt Hebert, is= =20 strongly opposed to price caps, saying they would discourage investment and= =20 delay resolution of the crisis. California needs to lift the electricity ra= te=20 freeze on consumers to encourage conservation and restore the finances of t= he=20 bankrupt investor-owned utilities, Hebert has argued.=20 But Moler faulted federal regulators and the California Public Utilities=20 Commission, both of which oversaw the state's deregulation plan, for allowi= ng=20 the problem to fester.=20 ""The signs were there in June that something needed to happen,"" Moler said,= =20 noting that electricity deregulation is complex and always needs adjustment= s.=20 ""I'd like to think I would have been reading the market monitoring reports,= ""=20 Moler said. ""I'd like to think I would have been on the airplane to San=20 Francisco every other week, and on the other weeks, the CPUC would have bee= n=20 on a plane to Washington.""=20 Moler also faulted state PUC members for blaming the crisis on their=20 predecessors. ""I'm pretty amazed the CPUC is still blaming Dan Fessler,"" th= e=20 former chairman, Moler said. ""He's been gone for three years.""=20 Moler noted that the state's plan to take over the utilities' transmission= =20 lines needs federal regulatory approval, which Hebert indicated he opposes,= =20 comparing the move to ""nationalization.""=20 Davis' assertions this week to Washington policymakers and Wall Street=20 analysts that he has the crisis under control were also viewed dubiously.= =20 Noting that peak California power demand will rise to 45,000 megawatts in t= he=20 summer from 30,000 in the winter, Robert Litan, director of the Joint Cente= r=20 for Regulatory Studies, said, ""You do your own math. If you think the probl= em=20 is bad now, you ain't seen nothing yet.""=20 Litan said the state's partial electricity deregulation was a giant gamble= =20 that freed wholesale prices would stay below fixed retail prices, but the b= et=20 went bad and now state taxpayers are paying the cost.=20 ""I used to study S&Ls, and what California is doing sounds a lot like what= =20 the federal government did for 10 years, which was pray and hope that the= =20 problem goes away,"" he said.=20 California is paying roughly $1.5 billion a month for electricity while sta= te=20 officials try to craft a long-term solution.=20 Paul Joskow, director of the Center for Energy and Environmental Policy=20 Research at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said state and feder= al=20 policymakers must devise a long-term blueprint that encourages investment i= n=20 new generation and offers price stability to consumers.=20 ""I haven't seen any long-term plan yet for where they are going in=20 California,"" Joskow said. "". . . I think the governor owes that to the=20 citizens of California, because now we're going from week to week, and you= =20 know as well as I do what it's going to be six months from now.""=20 E-mail Carolyn Lochhead at clochhead@sfchronicle.com.=20 ?=20 ? Printer-friendly version=20 ? Email this article to a friend=20 02/16/2001 - California governor proposes state power line purchase .=20 02/09/2001 - Removal of Rate Caps Urged.=20 02/08/2001 - Developments in California's power crisis .=20 02/04/2001 - Davis Neglected Key Strategy In Power Crisis.=20 >>more related articles...=20 --- NEWS=20 PG&E to Pay Creditors Only 15% / Smaller suppliers outraged over plan David Lazarus 03/02/2001=20 The San Francisco Chronicle=20 FINAL=20 Page A1=20 (Copyright 2001)=20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. said yesterday it would pay only about 15 cent= s=20 on the dollar for its outstanding power bills, sparking outrage among small= er=20 creditors, who accused the utility of driving them out of business.=20 In a filing to securities regulators, PG&E revealed it would pay just $228= =20 million of about $1.4billion due for recent electricity purchases.=20 ""How would you feel if your boss gave you just 15 percent of your paycheck= =20 and said he'll get back to you for the rest?"" asked Bob Judd, director of t= he=20 California Biomass Energy Alliance, representing operators of 28 wood-fired= =20 plants statewide.=20 PG&E's filing marks a turning point in California 's energy crisis. It is n= ow=20 possible that not only will the state's largest utility go under, but it=20 could take a number of power generators with it.=20 PG&E, now in talks with the governor on a possible financial bailout, is=20 telling creditors to be thankful for whatever they get. If the utility=20 declares bankruptcy, all parties know, many creditors may receive nothing.= =20 Still, time is running out for Ridgewood Power, a New Jersey company with 1= 4=20 plants in California . It already has had to shut down three facilities in= =20 PG&E's service area because it can no longer afford to keep them running.= =20 'NOWHERE NEAR'=20 ""The amount of money PG&E is giving us is nowhere near what we need to pay= =20 our natural gas suppliers,"" said Martin Quinn, Ridgewood's chief operating= =20 officer. ""We could restart the plants tomorrow if we could be released from= =20 our PG&E contracts and sell to another buyer.""=20 He added that his company would ask federal regulators to nullify its=20 contracts with PG&E so Ridgewood could bid for alternative power contracts= =20 being offered by California state officials.=20 PG&E's larger creditors reacted more cautiously to word that the utility=20 would pay only a fraction of its outstanding bills.=20 ""We have to study the consequences and see,"" said Richard Wheatley, a=20 spokesman for Houston's Reliant Energy, which formed a creditors' committee= =20 last month with other leading electricity providers. ""We don't know how muc= h=20 of the money we'll get.""=20 Reliant and other major creditors are grappling with how much leeway to gra= nt=20 PG&E on its unpaid bills before deciding to cut their losses and push the= =20 cash-strapped utility into bankruptcy.=20 'VERY CONCERNED'=20 ""We are very concerned about the credit issue,"" said Steve Stengel, a=20 spokesman for Houston's Dynegy Inc., another member of the creditors'=20 committee. ""But we are still interested in finding a comprehensive solution= =20 to California 's energy situation.""=20 That may depend on the outcome of current talks Gov. Gray Davis is holding= =20 with PG&E and Southern California Edison to purchase the utilities'=20 transmission lines as part of a multibillion-dollar bailout package.=20 PG&E and Edison are saddled with nearly $13 billion in debt as a result of= =20 ill-conceived efforts to deregulate the state's electricity market.=20 The announcement of partial payments was not a complete surprise to PG&E's= =20 creditors. The utility's chief financial officer, Kent Harvey, told investo= rs=20 in a conference call last month that PG&E would prefer to ""make partial=20 payments than no payments at all.""=20 PG&E has defaulted on more than $730 million in short-term debt payments=20 since January amid growing concerns that the utility will file for bankrupt= cy=20 protection.=20 In response, three California counties have formed their own creditors'=20 committee to recoup investments in PG&E's short-term debt, also known as=20 commercial paper.=20 The three -- Santa Cruz, Riverside and Siskiyou counties -- are inviting=20 other public agencies to join forces in seeking compensation from PG&E for= =20 the defaulted payments.=20 The prospect of PG&E filing for bankruptcy has diminished somewhat in recen= t=20 weeks as Davis and Sacramento lawmakers scrambled to come up with proposals= =20 to rescue California 's utilities from financial ruin.=20 Although Edison has said it is prepared to sell its power lines to the stat= e=20 for nearly $3 billion, PG&E so far has refused to follow suit.=20 However, as The Chronicle reported yesterday, the utility retained outside= =20 counsel this week to offer advice on a possible sale of its power lines,=20 increasing the likelihood that a deal may be in the works.=20 SUITS ALLEGE MISMANAGEMENT=20 Separately, PG&E said yesterday it had been hit with a pair of lawsuits=20 seeking almost $3 billion in restitution for financial mismanagement.=20 One suit charges the utility's parent company, PG&E Corp., with violating i= ts=20 fiduciary duties by forcing the utility to repurchase shares from the=20 corporation for $2.3 billion.=20 The other alleges that PG&E Corp. collected nearly $3 billion from the=20 utility under a tax-sharing arrangement but paid only $2.3 billion to the= =20 government.=20 The lawsuits were filed in San Francisco Superior Court by Richard D. Wilso= n.=20 No other information about the plaintiff was immediately available.=20 ----------- Refund RequestedElectricity generators overcharged the state by= =20 more than a half-billion dollars in two months and should be forced to retu= rn=20 the money, power officials said yesterday.=20 The California Independent System Operator said in a filing with the Federa= l=20 Energy Regulatory Commission that generators appeared to have charged $555= =20 million more than what was reasonable.=20 It was unclear how any refunds might be passed on to consumers. About=20 two-thirds of all power purchases in the spot market were over price caps= =20 established by FERC, said Eric Hildebrandt, an ISO manager of market=20 monitoring. The cap was $250 per megawatt hour in December and $150 per=20 megawatt hour in January.=20 The ISO is requesting that FERC order a refund for ""excessive"" costs.=20 Source: Chronicle Sacramento Bureau=20 Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.=20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Part 4, revised; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 02/28/2001 02:49 PM ----- BTC <BCragg@GMSSR.com> 02/15/2001 09:36 PM To: ""'Alan.Comnes@enron.com'"" <Alan.Comnes@enron.com>, ""'Chris.H.Foster@enron.com'"" <Chris.H.Foster@enron.com>, ""'Christian.Yoder@enron.com'"" <Christian.Yoder@enron.com>, <Cynthia.Sandherr@enron.com>, ""'dleff@enron.com'"" <dleff@enron.com>, <David.W.Delainey@enron.com>, ""'dbenevid@enron.com'"" <dbenevid@enron.com>, ""'dblack@enron.com'"" <dblack@enron.com>, ""'Elizabeth.Sager@enron.com'"" <Elizabeth.Sager@enron.com>, ""'etilney@enron.com'"" <etilney@enron.com>, ""'Eric.Thode@enron.com'"" <Eric.Thode@enron.com>, ""'gsavage@enron.com'"" <gsavage@enron.com>, ""'Greg.Wolfe@enron.com'"" <Greg.Wolfe@enron.com>, ""'Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com'"" <Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com>, ""'Jeffrey.T.Hodge@enron.com'"" <Jeffrey.T.Hodge@enron.com>, ""'JKLAUBER@LLGM.COM'"" <JKLAUBER@LLGM.COM>, ""'Joe.Hartsoe@enron.com'"" <Joe.Hartsoe@enron.com>, ""'John.J.Lavorato@enron.com'"" <John.J.Lavorato@enron.com>, ""'John.Neslage@enron.com'"" <John.Neslage@enron.com>, ""'jwhalan@enron.com'"" <jwhalan@enron.com>, <Kathryn.Corbally@enron.com>, ""'Keith.Holst@enron.com'"" <Keith.Holst@enron.com>, ""'Kristin.Walsh@enron.com'"" <Kristin.Walsh@enron.com>, ""'Leslie.Lawner@enron.com'"" <Leslie.Lawner@enron.com>, ""'Linda.Robertson@enron.com'"" <Linda.Robertson@enron.com>, ""'Marcia.A.Linton@enron.com'"" <Marcia.A.Linton@enron.com>, ""'Margaret.Carson@enron.com'"" <Margaret.Carson@enron.com>, ""'Mark.Palmer@enron.com'"" <Mark.Palmer@enron.com>, ""'msunde@enron.com'"" <msunde@enron.com>, ""'Mary.Hain@enron.com'"" <Mary.Hain@enron.com>, ""'Mary.Schoen@enron.com'"" <Mary.Schoen@enron.com>, <Michael.Tribolet@enron.com>, ""'msmith1@enron.com'"" <msmith1@enron.com>, ""'Mike.Grigsby@enron.com'"" <Mike.Grigsby@enron.com>, ""'nbresnan@enron.com'"" <nbresnan@enron.com>, ""'Paul.Kaufman@enron.com'"" <Paul.Kaufman@enron.com>, ""'Phillip.K.Allen@enron.com'"" <Phillip.K.Allen@enron.com>, ""'Richard.Shapiro@enron.com'"" <Richard.Shapiro@enron.com>, ""'Rob.Bradley@enron.com'"" <Rob.Bradley@enron.com>, ""'Robert.Badeer@enron.com'"" <Robert.Badeer@enron.com>, ""'Robert.Frank@enron.com'"" <Robert.Frank@enron.com>, ""'Robert.Johnston@enron.com'"" <Robert.Johnston@enron.com>, ""'Sandra.McCubbin@enron.com'"" <Sandra.McCubbin@enron.com>, ""'sstoness@enron.com'"" <sstoness@enron.com>, ""'Shelley.Corman@enron.com'"" <Shelley.Corman@enron.com>, ""'Steve.C.Hall@enron.com'"" <Steve.C.Hall@enron.com>, ""'Steve.Walton@enron.com'"" <Steve.Walton@enron.com>, ""'Steven.J.Kean@enron.com'"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com>, ""'Susan.J.Mara@enron.com'"" <Susan.J.Mara@enron.com>, ""'Tim.Belden@enron.com'"" <Tim.Belden@enron.com>, ""'Tom.Briggs@enron.com'"" <Tom.Briggs@enron.com>, ""'Vance.Meyer@enron.com'"" <Vance.Meyer@enron.com>, ""'vsharp@enron.com'"" <vsharp@enron.com>, ""'Harry.Kingerski@enron.com'"" <Harry.Kingerski@enron.com>, ""'James.D.Steffes@enron.com'"" <James.D.Steffes@enron.com> cc: MBD <MDay@GMSSR.com>, JMB <JBennett@GMSSR.com>, ""'Scott Govenar, Enron lobbyist'"" <sgovenar@govadv.com>, ""'Samuel.Wehn@enron.com'"" <Samuel.Wehn@enron.com>, ""'bogilby@mdbe.com'"" <bogilby@mdbe.com> Subject: Part 4, revised Attached is a revised version of Mike Day's draft of Part 4 of the legislative package, on expedited permitting of new and expanded electric generating capacity. I have tried to incorporate the thoughtful comments provided to me by Sam Wehn of ENA and Barry Ogilby of McCutcheon (outside counsel). Since Mike will soon be off on a family vacation, please direct any comments or questions to me at 415-765-8413 or bcragg@gmssr.com. <<PART4.DOC>> - X21095.DOC [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: A&M - Bush Library Foundation & School of Public Policy; [EMail-Body]= Let's talk. While there is always some value in these things it is ususally quite small and consumes more valuable resources in trying to capture the benefit than the benefit itself. From: Michael B Rosen@ECT on 07/13/2001 08:44 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: A&M - Bush Library Foundation & School of Public Policy Steve- We have been approached by the Texas A&M/George Bush Presidential Library Foundation and School of Public Policy to endow additional funds. Enron had made an original contribution to the library foundation back in 1998 totaling $250K over five years. I am working with Community Relations and A/A Recruiting to evaluate the latest request and to discuss where Enron may have interest or find leverage for our Government Affairs, Recruiting, or PR efforts. The Foundation is willing to work with us to establish whatever type of program(s) and/or participatory involvement we would like. We have discussed an Enron speaker series, classroom lectures, advisory committee seats and the likes. I have already had a chance to run this by Rick Shapiro and Rob Bradley. Although Rick was noncommittal regarding his team's time for speaking or lecturing, he seemed supportive of the effort. Rob has already been participating in some speaking opportunities there, and supported expanded efforts. What are your thoughts on contribution levels (another $250K was suggested by CR) and any specific program or relationship opportunities regarding the Library Center or School of Public Policy. Please grab me for quick conversation when you have time. Thanks. Mike [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= In Phoenix, AZ to talk to Catholic Diocene Physical Plant Managers
 -; [EMail-Body]= Lay the groundwork and educate them about what's going on around the country from a regulatory standpoint, sensitize them to coming opportunities. Also, Steve Barth will be there to talk about creative products / services we can offer. 1:00 - 2:30 presentation, then q&a, then cocktails and dinner sponsored by Enron. Per Gary von Fischer 614-792-6010 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FERC ""Linda Breathitt"" Strategy Contact; [EMail-Body]= Zausner is kind of a mixed bag. I think he's strong intellectually and has some influence, but I don't trust him to keep our strategy and contacts confidential. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/26/2000 04:47 PM ----- Cynthia Sandherr 09/25/2000 03:16 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron, Chris Long/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: FERC ""Linda Breathitt"" Strategy Contact Today, I spoke with EPSA's outside counsel, Andy Zausner, about having his firm's Senior Counsel former Senator Wendell Ford (D-Ky, 1974-98) assist us with our FERC ""Linda Breathitt"" Strategy. Former Senator Ford knew Linda's father well plus has dinner with Linda every several weeks or so. There probably isn't anyone in Washington closer to Linda than Wendell as he has known her since she was a child. Andy is expecting either Steve's or Rick's phone call to further discuss the Senator's involvement. Andy did discuss in general that he wasn't certain whether his client, EPSA, would go along with the strategy but he thought, overall, it was a possibility. Andy's direct number is 202-828-2259. I know Andy and Wendell very well and would like to be helpful as you wish. However, at this point, I thought an EPSA board member (i.e. Steve or Rick) should follow up. thanks. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Annual Meeting Q&A; [EMail-Body]= Currently an announcement is scheduled for mid may so there may be more public information available then. In the meantime, I would answer the question as follows: Enron will continue to focus its attention on the commercial, light manufacturing and industrial end user markets. Enron continues to explore opportunities to serve the residential market and we believe that the market presents opportunities that were not available even a couple of years ago (for example, the rising acceptance of online purchasing by consumers presents low cost customer acquisition and account management possibilities that didn't exist when Enron last moved into residential markets). We believe, however, that the residential market opportunity is best pursued through a separate entity outside of Enron Mary Clark@ENRON 04/20/2000 02:31 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Maureen McVicker/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Annual Meeting Q&A Steve, we need to include a potential question in the Q&A document that addresses if Enron will get back into the residential business (i.e. Resco). Could you provide an answer to this question. I need by end of biz Monday. Thanks. Mary [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Rice Happy Hour; [EMail-Body]= Steve will be in a Managing Director PRC that day - not sure if he will be out in time for a 5:30 event. Maureen From: Lexi Elliott/ENRON@enronXgate on 06/21/2001 01:39 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Rice Happy Hour Steve: I am considering scheduling a Rice team/intern happy hour on July 24 (5:30 - 7:00). Would you be available on this date or should I try to reschedule? Thank you! lexi 3-4585 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: DEnron Engineering and Operational Services - DRAFT
 Announcement; [EMail-Body]= Drop the first comma in the first sentence of the third paragraph. Otherwise good to go. Mark Frevert/ENRON@enronXgate Sent by: Nicki Daw/ENRON@enronXgate 03/16/2001 08:42 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT, David W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Liz M Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kay Chapman/HOU/EES@EES, Kathy Dodgen/HOU/EES@EES, Barbara Keith Dodson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Brian Stanley/EU/Enron@ENRON Subject: DEnron Engineering and Operational Services - DRAFT Announcement Please find attached draft announcement for your review and comment. I would like to release this on Monday (March 19th). Thanks Mark [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: United India - strictly confidential and privileged; [EMail-Body]= I got your copy kicked back to me for some reason. ---------------------- Forwarded by Michelle Blaine/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 01/31/2001 09:01 AM --------------------------- Michelle Blaine 01/31/2001 08:53 AM To: Ken cc: ""Williams, Justin"" @ ENRONRichard Sanders, Bruce Robert C Subject: RE: United India - strictly confidential and privileged I think Justin answered your question about governing law and the first arbitration hearing and I am going to find out from Atul about whether Indian law governs these policies since Indian law requires us to have an Indian fronting policy. On another issue that came up on the call this morning Ken, I was asking Justin about governing law specifically because I wanted to know if there was any law (India or English) requiring insurers to disclose information regarding risk to the insured, so we could cite some law perhaps to compel Beachcrofts to hand over the Liburdi report. For example, the Texas insurance code has evolved from a vague ""duty of good faith & fair dealing"" standard in some instances to specific laws preventing insurers from doing certain things detrimental to the insured. Justin tells me English law, in this regard, consists only of precedential case law, but it still could be helpful. Because of the commercial risk (outside the ambit of arbitration in the instance) it might be worthwhile to consider going into the London Commercial Court to seek some sort of extraordinary relief to prevent United India from withholding this information which is critical to running these machines. If, in fact, there truly is a 50% chance of failure in these machines, yet they won't share that evidence with us, this is a commercial risk DPC can't afford, regardless of coverage and apart from the arbitration. (I'm wearing my commercial hat instead of my legal hat today). Although Justin expressed concern about jurisdiction, United India did us the favor of bringing suit in London Commercial Court earlier, and thus having availed itself to the courts and having Peter Hirst's emphatic witness statement that makes a compelling case for the court to take jurisdiction, I think it is worth considering if they continue to refuse to give us the report in response to Justin's latest correspondence. I don't think we can afford to sit on our hands on this one. Why don't you and Neil kick this around, (since you don't have enough to do already). Cheers, Michelle Ken Blades 01/30/2001 08:42 PM To: Michelle cc: ""Williams, Justin"" @ ENRON Subject: RE: United India - strictly confidential and privileged I assume governing law is an issue that would be raised at the initial procedural hearing. If this is something that we're serious about then we ought to get after it immediately. Michelle Blaine 01/30/2001 11:15 PM To: ""Williams, Justin"" @ ENRON cc: Ken Subject: RE: United India - strictly confidential and privileged No wonder I couldn't remember the governing law! Yes that is a good idea to determine which law is more favorable to our position. Let's mention that to Ken tomorrow as we may want to have Atul Rajadhyaksha look at that for us. I think originally we discussed that notion but its been a long time ago. Thanks Justin, Michelle ""Williams, Justin"" on 01/30/2001 09:11:26 AM To: ""'Michelle.Blaine@enron.com'"" <Michelle.Blaine@enron.com> cc: ""Heneghan, Diane"" Subject: RE: United India - strictly confidential and privileged Michelle, I know the problem about cases and clauses running together! The position on the insurance is that it does not specify a governing law. On an application of English private international law (ie conflict of laws rules) there is uncertainty whether it would be English or Indian law. At para 42 of Hirst's statement, he says that the contracts are impliedly subject to English law (based on London as the arbitration forum?). Certainly, my preference in terms of certainty would be English law. However, it is possible there could be an advantage to Indian substantive law and once we get UI's statement of claim, we should give thought to whether it would be worthwhile getting Indian law input on whether there could be advantage in arguing Indian law. I will ask Diane to add this to the ""to do"" list! Justin -----Original Message----- From: Michelle.Blaine@enron.com Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 4:55 PM To: Subject: Re: United India - strictly confidential and privileged Looks good to me Justin. Justin is there any law that governs an insurer's duty to disclose information regarding the risk insured? What law governs the insurance contract? ( I should know that ,but all my cases and arbitration clauses are beginning to run together in my mind...). ""Williams, Justin"" on 01/30/2001 05:45:31 AM To: ""'Michelle.Blaine@enron.com'"" <Michelle.Blaine@enron.com> cc: ""'Ken.Blades@enron.com'"" <Ken.Blades@enron.com> Subject: United India - strictly confidential and privileged Michelle, I attach a revised version of the Liburdi request/quantum letter to Beachcrofts, amended to take in some points made by Ken as to the agreement on quantum. It would be great if you were able to look through this today and let me have your comments in order that I can get it out. Do give me a call if you need to discuss. Justin Justin Williams Linklaters, London a member firm of Linklaters & Alliance Tel: (+44) 20 7456 4334 Fax: (+44) 20 7456 3929 http://www.linklaters.com Go to - for free litigation and arbitration advice This message is confidential. It may also be privileged or otherwise protected by work product immunity or other legal rules. If you have received it by mistake please let us know by reply and then delete it from your system; you should not copy the message or disclose its contents to anyone. (See attached file: [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Barton Subcommittee Approves California Bill; Price Caps Defeated; [EMail-Body]= The Energy and Air Quality Subcommittee meet for almost six hours today and approved an amended version of H.R. 1647, Chairman Barton's emergency legislation to aid California, by a 17-13 party line vote. The full Energy and Commerce Committee may take it up as early as next week (probably Thursday, May 17th). The Subcommittee DEFEATED an amendment by Rep. Waxman (D-CA) to impose wholesale price caps for 18 months. The amendment was defeated 12-20 with all Republicans voting against, including the three from California and Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR), who while seen as the last to decide to oppose the price cap amendment, was the most forceful and articulate in opposition to the amendment. Also voting ""NO"" were Democratic Reps. Ralph Hall (D-TX) and Chris John (D-TX), with which we had met in recent days. The final vote tracked our whip count going into the meeting. Rep. Albert Wynn (D-MD) offered and withdrew an amendment to delete the ""negawatts"" provision. There was bipartisan criticism that while the concept made sense, there were potential problems in terms of possible games playing, including end users being able to sell power while not actualy reducing their normal power levels. Another member said that electric coops that are required to sell at cost could have customers then go out and resell that power and make a lot of money. Several Members said businesses could shut down, put workers out of work and become energy marketers and make more money. Chairman Barton made a forceful defense of negawatts. While the amendment to strike was deleted, we will need to respond to these criticisms and shore this up before full committee next week. There will be another attempt to delete at full committee unless these concerns are addressed in an amended version. Ranking Democrat Rick Boucher (D-VA) offered and withdrew an amendment to reinstate FERC maximum prices for the secondary transmission market, thus reversing the Feb. 2000 FERC order. This woudl last for 18 months. Chairman Barton said he agreed with Boucher that there is a problem with what appear to be high gas transmission rates to California, but he disagrees with the proposed remedy. He pledged to work with Boucher before Full Committee mark-up. We are obtaining a copy of this amendment and should analyze it ASAP for its potential impact on Enron operations. Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) offered and withdrew an amendment to impose a series of new tests to be administered by FERC all with the goal of discouraging spot market transactions, or at least what he would define as excessive use of the spot market, and at the same time encourage ""deep bilateral mechanisms."" The mechanisms included a ""market balance test"" that would say only sellers with a commitment to the long term market could sell in the spot market at unregulated rates and ""spot market circuit breakers"" that would be triggered when reserves are low in a given market. Chairman Barton said he likes the concept of a spot market circuit breaker, but felt that the amendment was too complicated to be evaluated today. We will also pursue an analysis of this amendment since it will likely be offered again in some form. Mr. Markey also offered and withdrew a ""net metering"" proposal that would establish federal interconnection standards for individual consumers who would want to use fuel cells and other renewable technology to put power onto the system. It was interesting that those who opposed negawatts spoke favorably of net metering even though they are complementary. The subcommittee by voice vote adopted a Walden Amendment to strike the section of the bill that would have required an RTO if 10 of the western governors approved it. The debate was pro-RTO but the rationale for deleting the provision is that one is already being formed and Members from those states did not want to upset the work already under way. A series of other amendments on other matters were offered and withdrawn, none of which relate to our activities. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Report on Senate Energy Hearing Today; [EMail-Body]= Earlier today, the Senate Energy Committee held the first of two days of hearings on Chairman Bingaman's ""white paper"" on electricity and the electricity provisions of other pending bills. The hearings will continue tomorrow with all of the five FERC commissioners as witnesses plus private sector witnesses. Today's hearing went well from our perpective, with support for Super RTOs and general support for expanding the grid both physically and from an access view point voiced by Senators and witnesses. Sen. Craig Thomas even said four RTOs were too many -- there should be one national RTO to run a national grid. Today's witnesses represented the Dept. of Energy, EPSA, EEI, NRECA, APPA, IBEW union, Alliance to Save Energy, ELCON, NERC, NARUC, NASUCA and the State of New Mexico. We will provide a more detailed analysis after completing a review of the lengthy written testimony, but a summary of the DOE testimony and the first panel of private sector witnesses follows. 1. DOE said they are working on electricity legislative language. Should be done soon. Chairman Bingaman said they needed to get it done in time for the Committee to consider it when the Committee takes up electricity as early as the second week in September. Deputy Sec. Blake implied that their proposal was or would soon be shared with other Administration agencies for review. 2. In response to questions, Blake said that legislative action on jurisdiction questions (fed v. state) would be ""useful"" but he stressed that they view any new legislation as clarifying that FERC has authority they feel already exists. He said that while states have an important role to play, Congress must recongize the interstate character of the market and the need for open access to the interstate grid. (In response to a question, Blake later said that FERC had largely addressed the access issue or would do so.) 3. On reliability, he was given a chance to say that DOE supports th NERC ""consensus"" language, but instead repeated that the Administration favors ""enforceable reliability standards"" but wants to work with the Committee on the exact language. I took this as confirmation of what we have heard informally from DOE in terms of key players there not being enamored of the NERC ""consensus"" approach, at least as it exists in its old, long form. 4. Sens. Craig and Cantwell pushed Blake on why the Administration has not fully supported BPA's request for a debt limit increase to finance expansion of the BPA grid. Blake said they support the BPA expansion projects, but that OMB feels BPA has enough borrowing authority through 2003. This did not sit well with Craig and Cantwell. I spoke with Sen. Craig in the hall, following up on a conversation I had with him the other evening about BPA, and he stressed that he is committed to getting BPA the debt limit it needs. As you know, commercial has asked us to help BPA given matters pending between Enron and BPA. 5. On the first private sector panel, even John Rowe, the Co-CEO of Exelon and past EEI chairman (testifying for his company and EEI), said several times that there should be strong RTOs that each cover a wide idea. He said his board voted yesterday to sell its transmission assets IF a strong, independent operator could be found. Rowe also said that RTOs should be ""encouraged"" (implying not mandatory?). The APPA witness was strong on RTOs, saying that all entities will be part of RTOs even without legislation. NRECA said that co-ops would oppose federal jurisdiction over them and that they favor voluntary RTOs. EPSA made the usual case for competition, open access, RTOs, etc. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Software; [EMail-Body]= Helyette, Thanks for your message. I am in London right now and I shall attend the RISK conference this week. Stinson Gibner left Enron and I have another person in charge of software. I hope to close the loop in the next few days. Vince -----Original Message----- From: GemanIX@aol.com@ENRON Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2001 2:18 PM To: vkamins@enron.com Cc: VKaminski@aol.com Subject: Software Dear Vince, Your collaborator had kindly sent me a new contract proposal 5 weeks ago.He was supposed to have it checked by your lawyers but I never heard from him again. I have been approached by 2 major software companies and may sign some kind of agreement with one of them. I believe it would be better to finalize our project before it becomes a subset of a huge machinery. Will you be in London on June 28? I fly to the States on July 6,will be in New York on the 8&9 and in Houston on the 15&16 of July Hoping to see you or get some news Helyette [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Texas eComm 5.3.01 ePanel; [EMail-Body]= Jean - please get in touch with Greg. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/20/2001=20 03:15 PM --------------------------- From: Greg Piper/ENRON@enronXgate on 04/19/2001 12:13 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Philippe A Bibi/ENRON@enronXgate=20 Subject: FW: Texas eComm 5.3.01 ePanel Enron is a member of the Texas eCommerce Association and they asked if we= =20 would provide a panelist this Thursday night the 3rd for the Texas=20 deregulation panel. =20 First, do you want anyone from your organization answering questions about= =20 Texas deregulation on this or any panel? If it is OK with you if this sort= =20 of thing is done, who would the person be from your organization and can th= ey=20 do it next Thursday? Sorry about the short notice, I just found out today. I have not agreed to= =20 anyone, I said I would talk to you and try. Your thoughts? GP -----Original Message----- From: Colleen Headley NRO N@ENRON.com]=20 Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 12:00 PM To: Piper, Greg Cc: tina.spillar@enron.com; Gary Thompson Subject: Texas eComm 5.3.01 ePanel Greg, I just talked to Gary and he said you guys had a terrific meeting. We are so glad to have Enron as a Cornerstone Member and look forward to=20 working with you as one of our Advisory Board members. As Gary mentioned, we are having our Houston ePanel on Thursday, May 3. =20 Thanks so much for working on getting us the right person from Enron to be = a=20 panelist. The details of the event are as follows: 5.3.01 ePanel=02! eEnergy: Evolving Trends in the Deregulation of the Electric Industry The U.S. electric industry is undergoing a sea change in the way it deliver= s=20 electricity to millions of households and businesses nationwide. The $220= =20 billion industry, which has been called the last great government-sanctione= d=20 monopoly, is slowly but surely being deregulated and opened to competition,= =20 giving consumers the power to choose their electricity provider in much the= =20 same way they choose telephone carriers. Deregulation, now scheduled to occur on January 1, 2002, is coming to Texas= =20 and with it comes the power of choice for most Texans. Just like you can=20 choose your phone or cable provider, you will soon be able to choose your= =20 electric provider.=20 Panelists include: Waters Davis, President, Reliant Energy Retail Services Brett Perlman, Commissioner, Public Utilities Commission of Texas Time: 4:45 =01) 5:15 Private reception =01) panelists, Texas eComm Members and me= dia 5:30 =01) 6:00 Check-In 6:00 =01) 7:15 ePanel Discussion 7:15 - Networking Also, We were planning on hosting this event at Dynegy, however they are=20 unable to accommodate our request due to scheduling conflicts that were=20 unforseen. We were hoping that Enron would consider hosting the event and= =20 allow us to use your auditorium in light of this new development. Please l= et=20 me know if this is a possibility. Thanks for your consideration. Colleen Colleen Headley Program Director Texas eCommerce Association 512.305.0435 =20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Eron-Algo meeting; [EMail-Body]= Shirley, I shall be on vacation July 5, 6 and 9. It's Thu, Fri and Monday. Please, reschedule a meeting with Peter. Vince P.S. Anita might have already contacted Peter on Friday when you were on vacation. -----Original Message----- From: Peter Antoniadis Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 12:57 PM To: Vince Kaminski (E-mail) Subject: Eron-Algo meeting Importance: High Vince As I mentioned in my voice message I would very much appreciate if we can re-schedule our meeting from July 3rd to either Thursday July 5th or Friday July 6th. Any time during those days will work for me. My apologize, but I forgot that I'm to attend my fianc?s fathers 70th birthday on the 2nd in Montreal Let me know if you can accommodate either days. Best regards, Peter 416-217-4166 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Enron Support of a Standards Setting Organization; [EMail-Body]= I have reviewed the SSO principles -- look good to me. Thanks for sending them to look at. -----Original Message----- From: Yeung, Charles Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 11:41 AM To: Shelk, John; Novosel, Sarah Cc: Steffes, James D.; Bestard, Jose; Rodriquez, Andy Subject: Enron Support of a Standards Setting Organization John and Sarah In the aftermath of the NERC BOT resolutions last week that wraps in business practices under the NERC purview, we are being asked by Nevius and Gent if we are in support of NERC becoming the SSO. I have drafted a response that outlines what we need from an SSO. We are not indicating if we support NERC or GISB/EISB - but are seeking the resolution of key fundamentals of an SSO before we sign on. Per Jim's request, please take a look at the words and let me know if you have any concerns. I plan to send this to EPSA so they can borrow some of the language for a letter that the EPSA-NAERO working group agreed to send to NERC. I also will send it to Dave Nevius under Jose and my signature. << File: Enron Principles on Electric SSO.doc >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Ed Segner's Staff meeting, in 50M Dining Room; [EMail-Body]= Jordan Mintz 3-7897 Bob Foster 818 302 9210 Kevin Beasley 3-7807 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: request to CERA; [EMail-Body]= Your understanding was correct. In light of recent changes in the California regulatory environment (eg the recent rate order) I don't think it makes sense for us to distribute the document at this time, so you can ignore the request. Thanks Peter Augustini <paugustini@CERA.com> 03/29/2001 06:18 PM To: ""'skean@enron.com'"" <skean@enron.com> cc: David Gibbons <dgibbons@CERA.com> Subject: request to CERA Steve: Thanks for your note, sorry I missed you. From your message I think there may be some miscommunication between your PR guys and us. We understood that your PR people wanted to reprint the Op-ed and redistribute it to as-yet-undetermined people, along with various Enron material. They also wanted to post it on Enron's public web site. But your message seemed to indicate you just want to post the op-ed on your intranet - for educational use only for your internal folks. If this is correct, we would have no problem with it. In fact, we have posted the op-ed on the CERA web page - which is theoretically available to every Enron employee for internal use only. If you want you could just post a link to the CERA web site so your people could get direct access to all our research on the topic. If I misunderstood you, and you do want to redistribute the piece to third-parties -- that is a much bigger issue because it involves our intellectual property and branding issues. Obviously, we would need to talk some more about this. I hope this helps. On a somewhat-related note, we are also getting sucked more and more into the California vortex, and being asked to help in areas that are not our traditional business, such as expert witness testimony and policy issues. While we are not afraid to take a point of view (as you know!) we must maintain a neutral and independent posture. This is sometimes a difficult path to navigate, but we are exploring two areas that may also interest Enron: 1. We have examined Joskow and FERC's analysis on the price gouging issue and we believe there are several major flaws in their methodologies. We are considering how best to broadcast our assessment, without impinging on our core business, or becoming an expert witness. We think a workshop, similar to the Monday event at CERAWeek could work, where we would present our findings and issue a report. 2. We are also looking into the economic impact of power outages in the West - especially linked to the overall fragile state of the US economy. This would be a collaborative effort with a major economic forecasting firm or university. Again the reults would go to our clients, but could be released to a wider audience, and a workshop might help highlight the release. Please let us know if either topic would be of interest to Enron. We would need to raise funding from various clients to help underwrite the effort , but the work would be CERA's independent research and we would stand fully behind it. Hope all is well. ...Peter . [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Kari Dohn 916.445.0114; [EMail-Body]= TASK ASSIGNMENT Task Priority: 2 Task Due On: Task Start Date: [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: CONFIDENTIAL - Residential in CA; [EMail-Body]= I get so worked up over this issue... I really think now is the time to speak up and dissent. Skilling told us at a floor meeting that as an organization we've made poor decisions in the past, and he believes it's because the people who disagreed with those decisions never spoke up. So help me out! From: Jeff Dasovich on 04/13/2001 12:34 PM Sent by: Jeff Dasovich To: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Re: CONFIDENTIAL - Residential in CA Amen. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: All-Employee Meeting Report; [EMail-Body]= We have got to do better at this. IR did a webcast of the annual meeting that from all reports had a minimum of glitches. Can we use the same technology? Courtney Votaw 03/13/2001 09:10 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Mary Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Erin Rice/Corp/Enron@Enron Subject: All-Employee Meeting Report I have attached a success report of the streaming communications vehicles we used for the All Employee meeting on Feb. 21, 2001. The report includes information about the following: Video Teleconference Audio and Video quality; Viewing employees IP-TV Statistics; Successes of the locations streamed Video Requests Quantity by location and group To improve access and increase the employee's viewing experience at future meetings, we are working with the IP-TV technical team to find solutions to the problems that occurred in February. From the employee feedback we received, we will plan to send slides in advance to the video teleconference locations. Please let me know if you have any questions regarding this report. Thanks, Courtney [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= COMPENSATION; [EMail-Body]= could you look into this for me? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/10/2001 10:27 AM --------------------------- Richard Shapiro 04/10/2001 09:57 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: COMPENSATION Regarding voicemail I left you regading my current compensation, I do not intend to bug you about this, but at some point, I would appreciate knowing whether my base compensation ( and stock compensation given recent price movements ) are set at the appropriate level, in relationship to peers in public affairs, company, and externally. Thanks. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= UC/CSU press release; [EMail-Body]= fyi ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/08/2001 01:21 PM --------------------------- From: Max Eberts@EES on 07/06/2001 07:01 PM To: Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES, Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Robert C Williams/Enron@EnronXGate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Tom Riley/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange cc: Subject: UC/CSU press release Here is the approved press release. UC/CSU added a few more details concerning the extension of the contract. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: HPL Closing; [EMail-Body]= fyi - Jade Eaton is one of Lara's contacts at DOJ ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/02/2001 01:12 PM ----- Lara Leibman@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS 02/28/2001 03:23 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON Subject: Re: HPL Closing Steve, Thanks for forwarding. Actually, Brian sent it to me on Monday, and I followed up with Ann and Barbara. I have not spoken with Brian yet because I am waiting for a green/red light from Barbara as far as Jade Eaton is concerned. Barbara and I spoke at length yesterday and she is concerned about the counterparty's reaction to a meeting with DOJ (even an informal one). She plans to get back to me though with regard to whether they want me to get involved at this stage. I spoke to Rick as well so he is up-to-date with the current status. I'll let you know if anything further develops. Thanks again. Lara Steven J Kean@ENRON 02/28/01 02:13 PM To: Lara Leibman/Enron Communications@Enron Communications cc: Subject: HPL Closing ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 02/28/2001 02:12 PM ----- Brian Redmond@ECT 02/26/2001 02:57 PM To: John J Lavorato/Enron@EnronXGate, Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT, David W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Sally Beck/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Oxley/Enron@EnronXGate, Wes Colwell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tim DeSpain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joseph Deffner/Enron@EnronXGate, Anne C Koehler/HOU/ECT@ECT, Barbara N Gray/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jim Coffey/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ann Ballard/enron@enronxgate, Jim Schwieger/HOU/ECT@ECT, Thomas A Martin/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Allen/NA/Enron@Enron, Tommy Yanowski/Enron@EnronXGate, Philippe A Bibi/Enron@EnronXGate, Patrick Wade/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tanya Rohauer/Enron@EnronXGate, Fran L Mayes/Enron@EnronXGate, Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT@ECT, Carolyn Gilley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert L Hall/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Ranabir Dutt/Enron@EnronXGate, Tom Shelton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steve HPL Schneider/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kenneth W Kaase/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: HPL Closing Please find the attached status update for the HPL transaction. If you have any questions please contact me. Thanks, Brian [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Another List; [EMail-Body]= fyi ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/03/2001 05:26 PM --------------------------- Karen Denne 04/03/2001 09:12 AM To: Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, bhansen@lhom.com, hgovenar@govadv.com, sgovenar@govadv.com, Ksmith@kdscommunications.com, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Another List Attached is the list compiled by Marathon of ""influentials"" in each of our priority legislative districts (this week, we're only focusing on Burton, Bowen, Hertzberg, Keeley and Cox). Please review the list and let me know ASAP if you know anyone on the list and would be willing to make calls. Thanks. kd - List of targeted legislators April 2 2001.xls [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California; [EMail-Body]= Please send the economist piece around. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/01/2000 07:16 AM --------------------------- Mark Schroeder@ECT 09/01/2000 06:09 AM To: Gavin cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: California I may have missed it in your many e-mails, but if you had not seen it, The Economist of 26 August has an excellent piece on the lessons of California (p. 16 of European edition). California botched it, Pennsylvania did better, and California's problems are no reason to shrink from deregulation. mcs [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Wabash Valley called re: AEP filing; [EMail-Body]= let's bring him in Christi L Nicolay@ECT 10/02/2000 12:29 PM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Brown/NA/Enron@Enron, Janine Migden/DUB/EES@EES, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@Enron, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@Enron, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Kerry Stroup/DUB/EES@EES, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Wabash Valley called re: AEP filing Don Morton, general counsel of Wabash Valley Power Association, a co-op in AEP's area, called me about Enron's protest of AEP's market based rates filing. Wabash has filed an appeal in the DC Circuit of AEP/CSW merger (its brief is due 11/20). He thinks FERC is out of control and not carrying on its duties. Wabash is also preparing a protest of the Alliance compliance filing (due this Friday 10/6) on the following grounds: Filing is really a continuation of pancaking Does not want FERC to approve on a ""conditional"" basis (expecting Alliance to be a true RTO)--Wabash thinks that Alliance simply creates a larger profit center for AEP's transmission system Mr. Morton also had some specific OASIS problem examples that happened to Wabash that involved preferential treatment for AEP. I told him to call or email Scott Miller for the investigation. Mr. Morton and Wabash CEO, Ed Martin, would like to come to Houston to visit with Enron about our concerns and about the possibility of making some joint filings. His number is 317-481-2815. Please let me know if I should set something up or if someone else would like to talk with him directly. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Chairman's Speech; [EMail-Body]= Re-read your reply. Just wondering what it means to possibly add a provision, which I understand is a ""may"" -- dealing with FERC's authority to change existing RTOs. Depending on what that means, it could seriously hamstring FERC's efforts for a 4-5 RTO model as sought and we support, by not letting FERC change ""existing RTOs"" (particularly if that includes pending, but not approved) to change. For example, would the language under consideration block a Northeast RTO of PJM, NY and NE since PJM is ""existing"" and NY has filed? What would be the rationale for such a serious limitation on FERC's authority? Thanks. -----Original Message----- From: Black, Andy Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 5:53 PM To: Shelk, John Subject: RE: Chairman's Speech He spoke yesterday to that group. I do expect participation in an RTO to be mandatory, but there may be provisions dealing with FERC authority to change existing RTOs. -----Original Message----- From: Shelk, John [ Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 5:42 PM To: Black, Andy Subject: Chairman's Speech Ran into a fellow Texas company lobbyist who said that the Chairman today is speaking to EEI CEO Conference you mentioned and he was going to release the bill or at least say the bill would include mandatory RTOs. Just checking out the rumor. Thanks. John This e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or its relevant affiliate and may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient (s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender or reply to Enron Corp. at and delete all copies of the message. This e-mail (and any attachments hereto) are not intended to be an offer (or an acceptance) and do not create or evidence a binding and enforceable contract between Enron Corp. (or any of its affiliates) and the intended recipient or any other party, and may not be relied on by anyone as the basis of a contract by estoppel or otherwise. Thank you. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Granite Update; [EMail-Body]= What are our chances of final approval at FERC at the JUly meeting. Jeff still thinks this is a third quarter close. Do we have any chance of making that happen? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 04/12/2000 06:59 PM --------------------------- Paul Kaufman@ECT 04/12/2000 09:02 AM To: Mitchell Taylor/Corp/Enron@ENRON, awalia@ei.enron.com, Ann Ballard/Corp/Enron@ENRON, kfullenweider@velaw.com, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES cc: Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@Enron Subject: Granite Update Attached is the April 12 update. Also attached is an electronic copy of a prior update faxed last week. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Mark Frevert's column for ENA's Exchange Magazine; [EMail-Body]= I think it looks fine; will defer to Jeff's edits. Jeannie Mandelker@ECT 09/21/2000 05:05 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES, Yvette Parker/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Mark Frevert's column for ENA's Exchange Magazine Steve, this is the column I mentioned to you Monday. We do a column under Mark's name for ENA's customer magazine, Exchange. This month's topic is California. I'd like you to read it and see if we are getting the message right. Jeff, please let me know if there are errors. Once we get your comments, we'll show it to Mark. Thanks, Jeannie [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Interview Candidate; [EMail-Body]= Shirley, Please, bring Uriel for an interview. We can arrange it with Molly. Usual suspects: VK, ZL, KP, VS, TT, BL Vince -----Original Message----- From: Lee, Bob Sent: Monday, July 02, 2001 11:37 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Cc: Lu, Zimin; Crenshaw, Shirley Subject: Interview Candidate Vince Here is Uri Scott's resume. He would be a valuable addition to the Research Group. Bob Lee [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= See natural gas price article below. Our buddy Paul Carpenter has turned o= n=20 us (not to mention that he seems to be talking nonsense). How about giving= =20 him a call? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/20/2001=20 02:58 PM --------------------------- Miyung Buster@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 04/20/2001 10:22 AM To: Ann M Schmidt/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bryan Seyfried/LON/ECT@ECT,=20 dg27@pacbell.net, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron, filuntz@aol.com, James = D=20 Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Janet Butler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeannie=20 Mandelker/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe=20 Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John =20 John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen=20 Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Margaret=20 Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark=20 Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Markus Fiala/LON/ECT@ECT, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@EC= T,=20 Mike Mona L=20 Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron, Nicholas O'Day/AP/Enron@Enron, Peggy=20 Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT, Richard=20 Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sandra=20 McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Stella=20 Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Sus= an=20 J Mara/NA/Enron@Enron, Mike Roan/ENRON@enronXgate, Alex=20 Parsons/EU/Enron@Enron, Andrew Morrison/LON/ECT@ECT, lipsen@cisco.com, Jane= l=20 Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Shirley A Hudler/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kathleen=20 Sullivan/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda=20 Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Lora Sullivan/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jennifer=20 Thome/NA/Enron@Enron, jkradin@marathon-com.com,=20 syamane@marathon-com.com,=20 ken@kdscommunications.com, hgovenar@govadv.com, sgovenar@govadv.com,=20 bhansen@lhom.com, Carin Nersesian/NA/Enron@Enron cc: =20 Subject: Energy Issues Please see the following articles: Sac Bee, Fri, 4/20: ""State might balk on power: But refusing to=20 pay 'ridiculous' prices could add to crisis"" Sac Bee, Fri, 4/20: ""SMUD directors vote to hike rates: A tentative=20 increase of 19% to 27% is blamed on rising energy costs"" Sac Bee, Fri, 4/20: ""Lieberman to Bush: Help California solve power woes"" SD Union, Fri, 4/20: ""Escondido calls a halt to power plant ideas"" SD Union, Fri, 4/20: ""Inflated natural-gas prices add to energy costs,=20 expert says"" SD Union (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""Davis, Congress members call for energy price= =20 controls"" SD Union (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""Regulators open investigation into alternative= =20 power providers"" SD Union (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""Attorney general taking two energy companies to= =20 court"" LA Times, Fri, 4/20: ""Legislators Unite Over Energy Price Issue"" SF Chron, Fri, 4/20: ""Small fry among big fish in PG&E bankruptcy=20 Some unlikely businesses are listed as creditors against utility"" SF Chron (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""Developments in California"" SF Chron (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""California utility wants to boost Mohave power= =20 plant production""=20 SF Chron (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""PG&E owes money to several small businesses,=20 unlikely creditors"" SF Chron, Fri, 4/20: ""Edison pushes lawmakers to accept deal"" Mercury News, Fri, 4/20: ""Who will pay the most for power?"" Mercury News, Fri, 4/20: ""Credit-raters put state on watch"" Mercury News, Fri, 4/20: ""Power company executives going without bonuses"" Mercury News, Fri, 4/20: ""Davis and US lawmakers call for price caps on=20 power"" Mercury News, Fri, 4/20: ""Generators cutting electric output; regulators= =20 want to find out why"" OC Register, Fri, 4/20: ""FERC remains an unlikely rescuer The federal agency hews to a hands-off policy on power rates"" OC Register, Fri, 4/20: ""Lawmakers seek bigger rollbacks, can't agree on= =20 caps"" OC Register, Fri, 4/20: ""Energy notebook Assembly urges federal regulation of natural gas"" OC Register, Fri, 4/20: ""Shed light on costs"" (Commentary) Individual.com (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""End To Deregulation of Nevada Power"" Individual.com (Business wire), Fri, 4/20: ""PG&E Co. Issues Statements On= =20 the=20 Increase in the State's Cost for Power"" Indivdual.com (PR/newswire), Fri, 4/20: ""J.D. Power and Associates Reports= /=20 Nationwide=20 Decline in Customer Satisfaction of Electric Utility Service Among=20 Midsize Businesses"" Individual.com (PR/newswire), Fri, 4/20: ""Calpine to Purchase 46 General= =20 Electric Gas Turbines Turbines in Place for 70,000-megawatt Program"" --- State might balk on power: But refusing to pay 'ridiculous' prices could ad= d=20 to crisis. By Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writer (Published April 20, 2001)=20 Adding to the risk of summertime blackouts, the state water department said= =20 Thursday it might not pay ""ridiculous"" prices for electricity even if that= =20 leaves California short of power.=20 The Department of Water Resources, which has been buying electricity for th= e=20 state's two beleaguered utilities since mid-January, wouldn't spell out wha= t=20 it considers ridiculous. But if prices get too high, the state might be=20 better off ordering blackouts or implementing proposed new conservation=20 programs designed at cutting usage on short notice, said Raymond Hart, the= =20 department's deputy director in charge of power purchases.=20 Gov. Gray Davis took a different view, saying: ""We will continue to keep th= e=20 lights on. When you're fighting a forest fire, you don't say, 'Let me see,= =20 how much is this going to cost me? Maybe I can't write the check, maybe I= =20 can't put the fire out.' You put the fire out and then worry about the cost= =20 later.""=20 But Davis' spokesman, Steve Maviglio, said the Governor's Office indeed is= =20 contemplating whether to refuse to buy power at any cost. ""At what point do= es=20 the state say, 'Enough is enough'? Those scenarios are certainly under=20 discussion,"" Maviglio said.=20 The water department until recently resisted buying all the power Southern= =20 California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. needed, refusing to=20 purchase electricity it deemed too costly. But lately it's had to relax tha= t=20 stance because of an order by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Har= t=20 said.=20 That April 6 order said power generators can no longer be forced to sell=20 electricity to uncreditworthy entities such as the Independent System=20 Operator, which manages the state's power grid. Because the ISO -- which ge= ts=20 its money from the utilities -- can no longer buy the power, the water=20 department is now buying all the electricity required by the utilities, Har= t=20 said. But he said the department could back off if prices get out of hand.= =20 ""If the prices just get ridiculous altogether, there's a policy call to be= =20 made, and we'll cross that bridge when we get there,"" Hart said.=20 The ISO has predicted that severe shortages could bring 34 days of rolling= =20 blackouts this summer. The potential refusal of the water department to buy= =20 ultra-expensive power could further strain the grid.=20 ""On a daily basis we're dealt a set of cards,"" said ISO spokesman Patrick= =20 Dorinson. ""It sounds like ... we're going to be handed another set of cards= ,=20 and we're going to have to try to maintain the reliability of the grid as= =20 best we can.""=20 Hart's comments came amid an increasingly rancorous debate between Davis an= d=20 PG&E over the water department's power expenditures. State spending shot up= =20 following PG&E's April 6 filing for bankruptcy protection.=20 Davis said generators began demanding a ""credit penalty"" from the water=20 department because of the PG&E bankruptcy proceedings. As a result, the=20 state's daily costs shot up last week to $73.2 million from $57.4 million i= n=20 the week before PG&E went bankrupt, the governor's office said.=20 Hart agreed, saying several generators raised their prices. ""Every time=20 there's a major hiccup in the market, such as PG&E bankruptcy or a staged= =20 alert by the ISO, there's a price run-up,"" Hart said.=20 But prices have settled down this week. After peaking at $345 a megawatt ho= ur=20 April 12, prices for north state power were at $243 on Thursday, just below= =20 what they were prior to the bankruptcy filing, according to the Enerfax new= s=20 service.=20 PG&E, however, said its bankruptcy filing had nothing to do with the state'= s=20 increased spending.=20 ""This claim is simply not accurate,"" the utility said in a memo to reporter= s.=20 Rather, the increased spending is due solely to the fact that the water=20 department is buying more units of electricity in the wake of the FERC orde= r,=20 PG&E said.=20 Regardless of the cause, the increased spending by the water department cou= ld=20 further strain the state's budget -- and complicate Davis' plan to finance= =20 the power purchases through a bond offering.=20 The state has committed $5.2 billion from its general fund for power=20 purchases since January. Those mounting purchases, along with PG&E's=20 bankruptcy filing and other energy crisis uncertainties, prompted a third= =20 Wall Street credit rating agency, Fitch, to place the state on a ""ratings= =20 watch"" this week, meaning the rating might be downgraded.=20 A downgrade could raise California's borrowing costs. All three of the=20 leading Wall Street credit agencies now have California on a ratings watch.= =20 Meanwhile, the state Public Utilities Commission on Thursday ordered an=20 investigation of why hundreds of cogenerators and other alternative energy= =20 providers haven't resumed production even though they've begun receiving=20 payments again from Edison and PG&E.=20 These generators, under contract to the utilities, provide more than 20=20 percent of the state's energy supply. Hundreds shut down, worsening=20 California's power situation, because they'd received little or no money fr= om=20 the utilities since November.=20 The PUC ordered Edison and PG&E to resume payments, starting this week, for= =20 new power deliveries.=20 But the generators say the payments aren't enough to get them back online.= =20 So PUC President Loretta Lynch said the commission will investigate whether= =20 to order Edison and PG&E to begin repaying them the hundreds of millions ow= ed=20 for past deliveries.=20 The Bee's Dale Kasler can be reached at (916) 321-1066 or dkasler@sacbee.co= m.=20 Emily Bazar of The Bee's Capitol Bureau contributed to this report.=20 --- SMUD directors vote to hike rates: A tentative increase of 19% to 27% is=20 blamed on rising energy costs. By Carrie Peyton Bee Staff Writer (Published April 20, 2001)=20 Ten years of stable electricity bills vanished in a single unanimous vote= =20 Thursday night as directors of Sacramento Municipal Utility District gave= =20 tentative approval to rate hikes ranging from 19 percent to 27 percent.=20 The new rates will go into effect immediately after a final vote, scheduled= =20 for May 3.=20 ""This is quite alarming to all of us,"" said director Peter Keat. But praisi= ng=20 the value of ""a community-owned electric company"" that provides everything= =20 from shade trees to public votes on rates, Keat said he saw no choice.=20 SMUD, which once hoped to lower electric bills this year or next as=20 deregulation took hold, was caught up in the spiraling wholesale costs that= =20 helped send Pacific Gas and Electric Co. into bankruptcy proceedings.=20 The price of natural gas, which fuels SMUD's cogeneration plants, has risen= =20 steeply.=20 Wholesale electricity, which SMUD buys to supplement power produced by its= =20 own plants, nearly tripled between October and January.=20 And the weather has been dismal. Rainfall and snowmelt that feed SMUD's=20 hydroelectric plants on the upper American River are about 53 percent of=20 normal to date.=20 But during a two-hour hearing, a small contingent of consumers asked the=20 board to reconsider.=20 ""I realize that rates have to go up, but this seems like a big percentage a= ll=20 at once,"" said Marian Ender.=20 Several criticized a 6 percent surcharge that until only a few days before= =20 had been proposed at 3 percent. Among them was Duy Tu, an engineering manag= er=20 at Intel who served on SMUD's advisory rate committee.=20 The increase ""cannot come at a worse time"" for Intel, he said, although he= =20 understands the need for it. He urged the board to act now to make more=20 electricity available in the future.=20 ""We are way too dependent on some external force to keep the lights on,"" Tu= =20 said.=20 Overall, a base rate increase averaging 16 percent will raise about $124=20 million annually for SMUD, and a special=20 6 percent surcharge will raise about $48 million in its first year. Most of= =20 the surcharge, scheduled to drop to 3 percent annually for two subsequent= =20 years, will go into an emergency fund.=20 ""We have to build back our savings account. It's been gutted,"" said directo= r=20 Susan Patterson.=20 The rate increases will fall most heavily on small commercial and large=20 industrial power users, although households with very low electricity bills= =20 will feel a sharp bite from the addition of a $5 monthly service fee.=20 The flat fee adds less than 10 percent to what was a ""typical"" residential= =20 SMUD bill of $67, but it's a 25 percent rate hike for someone whose monthly= =20 bill hovers around $20.=20 ""I just don't think that part is right,"" Ender said. ""We should only pay fo= r=20 usage.""=20 Tom Reavey took the board to task for ""unfair and unequitable"" rates that= =20 charge agriculture and small businesses less than what they cost SMUD to=20 serve, while charging homeowners and renters slightly more.=20 But board members defended going easier on rates for the pumps that run=20 farmers' wells and irrigation systems.=20 ""We all gain great benefits from living in a community that has nearby=20 agriculture,"" Keat said.=20 The new rates will apply throughout SMUD's service territory, which include= s=20 a narrow slice of southern Placer County and all but the southwestern tip o= f=20 Sacramento County. They will not=20 affect people who receive electric service from PG&E, which last month was= =20 granted a 29 percent hike by state regulators.=20 ""If you want to see a bunch of folks who are really facing some stark times= ,=20 it's PG&E customers,"" said board member Howard Posner.=20 While there is widespread speculation that PG&E's rate hikes are the first = of=20 many, Posner and other directors said they hoped Thursday's increases will = be=20 the last SMUD needs and that rates could decline in three to four years.=20 To boost conservation, both SMUD and PG&E are trying to craft rates that fa= ll=20 hardest on the heaviest household users.=20 SMUD's old residential rates were=20 divided into a baseline tier charged roughly 8 cents a kilowatt-hour in the= =20 summer and one higher tier billed at 12.7 cents a kilowatt-hour.=20 The new rates will start at 8.6 cents in the summer, rise to a middle tier = of=20 14.5 cents and top out at 16.2 cents for those who use more than 1,000=20 kilowatt-hours of electricity.=20 By comparison, PG&E has proposed to the state Public Utilities Commission= =20 that its residential rates be divided into four tiers, topping out at 27=20 cents per kilowatt-hour. A PUC decision is expected next month.=20 Under the new SMUD rate structure, including the surcharge, large industrie= s=20 will see their electric bills rise by an average of 27 percent, agricultura= l=20 rates will rise 22 percent, small commercial rates 27 percent and residenti= al=20 rates 19 percent.=20 Households that qualify for special low-income or life-support rates will p= ay=20 a smaller monthly customer charge of $3.50 and will not have to pay the=20 surcharge on their baseline electricity usage.=20 Information about qualifying for the reduced rates is available from SMUD a= t=20 (888) 742-7683.=20 The Bee's Carrie Peyton can be reached at (916) 321-1086 or=20 cpeyton@sacbee.com.=20 --- Lieberman to Bush: Help California solve power woes By Emily Bazar Bee Capitol Bureau (Published April 20, 2001)=20 On a brief visit to the capital Thursday, former Democratic vice presidenti= al=20 candidate Joe Lieberman called on President Bush to help rescue California= =20 from its deepening energy troubles.=20 After attending an early-morning prayer breakfast with legislators and Gov.= =20 Gray Davis, the U.S. senator from Connecticut met with them to discuss the= =20 federal government's role in easing California's electricity woes.=20 Lieberman, a potential Democratic presidential candidate in 2004, warned th= at=20 if the Bush administration does not act quickly in California, the rest of= =20 the nation will succumb to economic ripple effects.=20 ""No American leader can disengage from a problem that so profoundly affects= =20 our largest state,"" Lieberman told reporters after meeting with the=20 Democratic governor. ""I call on the president to get involved. ... We can't= =20 sit back in Washington and let California suffer.""=20 Sacramento was the last California stop for the senator, who has spent thre= e=20 days at fund-raisers and speaking engagements across the state.=20 In talks with lawmakers about the energy crisis, Lieberman told them he's= =20 strongly urging the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to impose temporar= y=20 caps on the wholesale price of electricity.=20 But the commission's chairman, Curt Hebert, is a fierce free-market advocat= e=20 who has long opposed price caps and has not indicated he will change his=20 mind.=20 If FERC doesn't act soon, Lieberman said he will support legislation=20 sponsored by Sen.=20 Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., to force FERC to impose temporary caps.=20 He expects Feinstein to introduce her legislation early next week.=20 Lieberman's first stop Thursday morning was the California Prayer Breakfast= ,=20 an annual springtime gathering of religious and political leaders.=20 At the breakfast, speakers told Davis they would pray for him as he navigat= es=20 the state's energy crisis. Before launching into a song from ""The Scarlet= =20 Pimpernel,"" singer Steve Amerson called on the governor to tell Californian= s=20 the truth throughout the ordeal.=20 Davis was solemn in his remarks, and his calm demeanor belied his behavior= =20 Tuesday, when he reportedly erupted in an obscene=20 tirade during a closed-door meeting with Senate Republicans.=20 ""I'm going to tell you the truth, Steve. We have a problem,"" Davis said to= =20 the singer. ""But God has provided a path out of that problem if we all do o= ur=20 part.""=20 The Bee's Emily Bazar can be reached at (916) 326-5540 or ebazar@sacbee.com= .=20 --- Escondido calls a halt to power plant ideas=20 Temporary step will give it time for overall planning By Jonathan Heller=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 April 19, 2001=20 ESCONDIDO -- After being inundated with proposals to build power plants in= =20 the past few months, the City Council yesterday called a timeout.=20 The council voted 3-2 to suspend consideration for 30 to 60 days of any=20 proposals to build energy generating facilities in the city. During that=20 period, city staff members will develop a comprehensive approval process th= at=20 will factor in the cumulative effects of such plants.=20 ""We need to step back and look at the direction we're going in,"" City=20 Councilwoman June Rady said.=20 The city has been juggling four power-plant proposals since January:=20 ?Sempra Energy Resources wants to build a 500-megawatt plant in the southwe= st=20 part of Escondido. It has not yet filed formal plans with the city Planning= =20 Department.=20 ?Ramco Inc. of San Diego has received approval to build a 44-megawatt plant= =20 on Mission Avenue in west Escondido.=20 ?CalPeak LLC of San Diego has filed plans to build a 49.5-megawatt plant on= =20 Enterprise Street, not far from the Ramco plant.=20 ?Another firm has expressed interest in building a 49.5-megawatt plant on= =20 city property on West Washington Avenue, but has not submitted plans yet.= =20 Yesterday's decision means that all the projects -- except the=20 already-approved Ramco plant -- are now on hold, and no new proposals can b= e=20 filed with the city.=20 The decision halts a mad dash by developers to bring power plants on line b= y=20 the summer to take advantage of special incentives offered by Gov. Gray=20 Davis.=20 Mayor Lori Holt Pfeiler and Councilwoman Marie Waldron opposed the move. Th= ey=20 said it would only delay much-needed solutions to the region's energy crisi= s,=20 which is expected to come to a head this summer.=20 ""If (plant developers) have a chance of getting power on line by the summer= ,=20 we should not be the ones to stand in the way,"" Pfeiler said.=20 Waldron argued that cities have to be more proactive at this time, not less= .=20 ""The governor is not solving the problem,"" Waldron said. ""It's up to local= =20 governments to try to do what they can.""=20 Joe Rowley, Sempra's project development director, said he doubted the=20 council's decision would upset his plans.=20 ""Our timetable is still not fully defined,"" Rowley said. ""Obviously there's= a=20 lot of work we have to do to get to the point where an application can be= =20 processed.""=20 Meanwhile, council members listened to two people who made impassioned plea= s=20 for the city to consider alternative power sources.=20 David Drake, a service architect for SAIC in La Jolla, urged the council to= =20 think about solar power. There is more than enough available land -- and=20 rooftop space -- to install enough solar panels to power the whole city, he= =20 said.=20 ""Escondido has 65 square miles,"" he said. ""But 2,500 acres could be employe= d=20 to power us forever without any reliance on imported energy.""=20 Local inventor Arnold Lund urged the council to consider energy generated= =20 from windmills.=20 The council also voted to work with San Marcos in exploring ways to seek=20 inexpensive, stable energy rates.=20 The hope is that the two cities can forge a deal with Sempra for cheaper=20 rates. Sempra officials have said they are willing to discuss possible rate= =20 deals with the city.=20 To buy power directly, a city has to adopt a special legal arrangement, suc= h=20 as forming a municipal utility district. San Diego Gas & Electric is the on= ly=20 energy service provider in the county that buys and sells power from the=20 regional energy grid.=20 San Marcos has formed a municipal utility district but has not signed any= =20 deals to buy power. It would be a more lengthy process for Escondido to for= m=20 such a district. San Marcos is a charter city and has more flexibility unde= r=20 the state Constitution. Escondido is a general-law city.=20 --- Inflated natural-gas prices add to energy costs, expert says=20 Windfall-profits tax gets Davis' backing By Bill Ainsworth=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 April 19, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO -- Federal regulators' failure to stop what they described as=20 anti-competitive practices in the natural-gas industry added $750 million t= o=20 Southern California Edison's cost of electricity, a consultant estimated=20 yesterday.=20 The consultant, Paul Carpenter of the Brattle Group, spoke to an Assembly= =20 subcommittee investigating why California pays the highest natural-gas pric= es=20 in the nation. Natural gas is a critical part of the electricity crisis=20 because most of the state's generating plants run on natural gas.=20 Natural-gas prices have soared throughout the nation, but the bench mark=20 price paid at California's border has been double that paid at other bench= =20 mark locations throughout the nation for months, according to figures=20 released by the Assembly Subcommittee on Energy Oversight.=20 Next week, Carpenter plans to testify at hearings in Washington, D.C., on= =20 behalf of Southern California Edison and the California Public Utilities=20 Commission, which are asking federal regulators to intervene.=20 The giant utility and the state regulatory body contend that a sweetheart= =20 deal between El Paso Natural Gas and El Paso Merchant Energy gave the siste= r=20 companies enough market power to artificially raise the price of natural ga= s=20 that flows into Southern California from Texas.=20 El Paso owns the major pipeline bringing natural gas from fields in New=20 Mexico and Texas to Southern California. El Paso Merchant Energy is an=20 unregulated sister company.=20 Carpenter called the prices paid in Southern California ""simply=20 unprecedented"" in the United States. He estimated that the sister companies= =20 manipulated the market enough to add $2.60 to the price of a million Britis= h=20 thermal units of gas.=20 In addition, he said, El Paso Merchant Energy owns part of 20 smaller power= =20 plants, ""qualifying facilities"" that get paid based on the price of natural= =20 gas in California. The higher natural-gas prices increase the company's=20 revenues, Carpenter said.=20 El Paso company officials are expected to testify in front of the Assembly= =20 subcommittee today, but in proceedings before the federal regulators they= =20 have denied any sweetheart deal.=20 In a report they commissioned, the company blamed the higher natural-gas=20 prices in Southern California on increased demand and constraints on pipeli= ne=20 capacity.=20 Gov. Gray Davis, meanwhile, gave his strongest endorsement yet to a=20 windfall-profits tax on generators as a Senate committee chaired by Joseph= =20 Dunn, D-Laguna Niguel, began a series of hearings to probe possible price= =20 gouging by generators.=20 ""I believe the Legislature would be well within its prerogative to insist= =20 that generators receive an appropriate reduction, whether it's 20 percent o= r=20 any other number the Legislature hit upon,"" Davis said.=20 Senate Democrats, Davis said, will form a special committee to help work on= =20 his plan for the state purchase of the transmission system of Southern=20 California Edison for $2.76 billion, in exchange for state aid in paying of= f=20 the utilities' debt.=20 The governor said he told Senate Democrats, a number of whom are skeptical = of=20 the plan, that Edison's parent firm has agreed to back a $3 billion upgrade= =20 of the neighborhood distribution system retained by Edison and to return a= =20 $400 million tax refund to the utility.=20 At the natural-gas hearing yesterday, state officials said that after El Pa= so=20 Merchant Energy bought a significant part of the pipeline capacity from its= =20 sister company, it withheld natural gas to drive prices up.=20 ""Marketers have gamed the system and figured out how to hoard capacity and= =20 undermine competition,"" said Harvey Morris, an attorney for the California= =20 Public Utilities Commission.=20 State regulators want the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which=20 regulates natural gas, to open the market to more competitors.=20 But the commission has repeatedly rejected similar complaints in the past. = On=20 March 28, FERC ruled that the affiliates did not arrange a sweetheart deal.= =20 ""The fact that El Paso Merchant controls a large volume of capacity does no= t,=20 in and of itself, render the El Paso contracts unjust, unreasonable or undu= ly=20 discriminatory,"" FERC ruled.=20 In other cases involving natural gas, federal regulators acknowledged that= =20 certain contract provisions allowed anti-competitive behavior, but they=20 approved those contracts anyway.=20 Lawmakers said they were puzzled by the federal regulators' lack of action.= =20 ""It baffles me that we've found the problem -- anti-competitive behavior an= d=20 market gaming, but there's no cure because federal regulators won't take=20 action,"" said Assemblyman Juan Vargas, D-San Diego. Staff writer Ed Mendel contributed to this report.=20 --- Davis, Congress members call for energy price controls=20 By Gary Gentile ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 April 19, 2001=20 LOS ANGELES =01) Gov. Gray Davis and a bipartisan group of the state's=20 congressional delegates agreed Thursday that the federal government must ac= t=20 to control the wholesale price of energy.=20 ""For us the big issue is how we address the unjust rates,"" said Rep. Mary= =20 Bono, R-Palm Springs. ""I believe we are up to it and will handle it as soon= =20 as we can.""=20 Davis met behind closed doors with 27 congressional representatives,=20 including Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., at the Sheraton Gateway Hotel ne= ar=20 Los Angeles International Airport. He said after the 90-minute meeting that= =20 the group discussed a threefold approach to the state's power crisis.=20 The strategy includes requiring federal agencies in the state, including=20 military facilities, to conserve energy this summer and asking the Federal= =20 Energy Regulatory Commission to find a way to control the wholesale price o= f=20 electricity and increase the flow of natural gas into California.=20 Davis repeated his criticism of federal regulators for not acting sooner to= =20 control the wholesale price of electricity and said he was hopeful the=20 state's congressional delegation could work together to find a bipartisan= =20 solution.=20 ""We agreed there has to be a mechanism to reduce the wholesale price of=20 electricity,"" Davis said. ""We have agreed to work cooperatively across part= y=20 lines to find ways we can reduce those costs. We're in this together. Party= =20 doesn't matter. Finding a solution does matters.""=20 ""To have the price of moving natural gas go up by a factor of 10 or more is= =20 absurd,"" said Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Los Angeles. ""So many of our colleagues= =20 are telling us it's California's fault, but California does not have the=20 authority to regulate these two items.""=20 The group also talked about easing environmental regulations during power= =20 emergencies to allow small companies and even military bases to run small= =20 generators.=20 ""If you have generators in the state, regardless of what they run on, becau= se=20 we're entering this emergency period in the summertime and will be short of= =20 power, you should be allowed to turn them on,"" said Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-E= l=20 Cajon.=20 Hunter said small generators could produce about 500 to 600 megawatts durin= g=20 a power emergency if exemptions to various clear air requirements could be= =20 made.=20 Officials discussed ways to allow FERC to control wholesale prices without= =20 violating ideological positions staked out by high-ranking Republican=20 officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney, who oppose price controls= =20 and favor free markets.=20 Rep Jane Harman, D-Torrance, said she would support a finding by FERC that= =20 power wholesalers should not be allowed to charge market rates, but rather= =20 rates more tightly pegged to the cost of generating power.=20 ""We're not talking about artificial caps,"" Harman said. ""We should insist= =20 that the FERC not renew their market-based rate authority. And if we go tha= t=20 route, it takes us to the same place and avoids the ideological fight.""=20 The meeting did not result in any specific proposals but participants prais= ed=20 the bipartisan nature of the talks and said it would result in a unified=20 approach in Washington.=20 ""We have a responsibility to make sure the federal government takes it's ro= le=20 seriously,"" said Rep Gary Condit, D-Modesto. ""We clearly understand what ou= r=20 assignment is today and I think we're going to work together in a bipartisa= n=20 way to get that done.""=20 --- Regulators open investigation into alternative power providers=20 By Michael Liedtke ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 April 19, 2001=20 SAN FRANCISCO =01) Hoping to prevent California's bleak power outlook from= =20 becoming even darker, state regulators Thursday launched an investigation= =20 into why alternative energy providers aren't producing more electricity.=20 With the action, the California Public Utilities Commission hopes to=20 determine if legitimate business reasons or ulterior motives underlie the= =20 reduced output by an independent group of small generators that provides mu= ch=20 of the state's energy.=20 These alternative generators =01) known in the industry as ""qualifying=20 facilities,"" or QFs =01) have been scaling back or shutting down as debts o= wed=20 by California's two largest utilities pile up. The QFs are owed an estimate= d=20 $700 million by bankrupt Pacific Gas and Electric and financially crippled= =20 Southern California Edison.=20 Some QFs say the unpaid bills have forced them to defer much-needed=20 maintenance, leading to more equipment breakdowns that reduce electricity= =20 output. Other QFs say they simply can't afford to keep operating.=20 The PUC is worried some QFs are trying to take advantage of the California= =20 crisis to get out of long-term contracts that require them to sell=20 electricity at prices far below the current market rate. Several QFs are=20 suing to get out of those contracts so they can cash in on the open market,= =20 said PUC Commissioner Carl Wood.=20 All the QFs want is to be paid for bills that date back as far as November,= =20 said Jack Raudy, a spokesman for the Renewable Energy Creditors Committee,= =20 which consists of 10 alternative power producers owed a combined $410=20 million. Those 10 generators produce about 3,000 megawatts =01) which Raudy= said=20 was enough electricity for 3 million homes.=20 ""We are outraged (by the PUC's investigation),"" Raudy said. ""We have heard = so=20 much rhetoric over the past five months and still haven't been paid a dime.= =20 That is what we are worried about.""=20 Raudy estimated his group is operating at about 95 percent of capacity.=20 After the temporary closure of several QFs contributed to rolling blackouts= =20 around the state last month, the PUC ordered PG&E and SoCal Edison to begin= =20 paying the generators for the energy purchased since March 27.=20 But the order has done nothing to help the QFs recover the past debts. The= =20 QFs are now in line in bankruptcy court with 30,000 creditors owed money by= =20 PG&E, which expects its unpaid bills to rise to $5.5 billion by the end of= =20 this month.=20 If the QFs get desperate enough, they may decide to push SoCal Edison into = an=20 involuntary bankruptcy case, Raudy said.=20 PUC Commissioner Geoffrey Brown defended the alternative energy providers= =20 during Thursday's hearing.=20 ""Any QFs that are not operating right now are doing so for financial reason= s,=20 not to game the system,"" he said.=20 California will need all the power that it can get from the QFs this summer= =20 when rolling blackouts threaten to become a daily occurrence.=20 Combined, the QFs account for about one-fourth of California's total power= =20 capacity, according to the PUC.=20 The QF output will become even more essential this summer because Californi= a=20 won't be able to import as much electricity from the Pacific Northwest as i= t=20 has in the past. A lack of rain has left the Pacific Northwest's=20 hydroelectric supply at its second-lowest level ever, and it could diminish= =20 to a record low if the recent drought continues.=20 ""We are not going to be able to look to the Pacific Northwest to meet our= =20 needs,"" Wood said after reviewing a new report on the hydroelectricity=20 supply.=20 The looming blackouts and electricity price increases caused by California'= s=20 energy crisis is exasperating businesses and households across the state.= =20 Fearing the frustration could boil over into terrorism, the PUC Thursday=20 installed metal detectors to screen everyone attending the agency's public= =20 meetings.=20 In other moves Thursday, the PUC tabled a scheduled vote on whether the=20 regulators should become more involved in PG&E's bankruptcy case. The San= =20 Francisco-based utility is challenging the PUC's authority in the case. The= =20 PUC now expects to take up the matter at a May 3 meeting.=20 --- Attorney general taking two energy companies to court=20 ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 April 19, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) Attorney General Bill Lockyer wants a judge to order two po= wer=20 generators to hand over documents he subpoenaed last month as part of his= =20 investigation into the state's electricity market.=20 Reliant Energy and Mirant Corp. failed to produce certain documents by Marc= h=20 19, despite assurances that the sensitive documents would be kept=20 confidential, Lockyer said Thursday.=20 Lockyer filed the request for a hearing in San Francisco Superior Court.=20 Lockyer says the companies are concerned the documents wouldn't be kept=20 confidential, even though he says they've been assured the sensitive=20 documents would not be released.=20 The attorney general is investigating allegations of price manipulation in= =20 the state's electricity market that may have led to soaring power costs.=20 Mirant spokesman Bill O'Neel said the company is cooperating with the=20 attorney general's office.=20 ""At this moment, we have our legal team working to pull together the=20 documentation the attorney general has requested,"" O'Neel said.=20 Mirant Thursday joined a complaint filed by Reliant last week in Los Angele= s=20 Superior Court. That petition seeks assurance that the attorney general wil= l=20 keep proprietary information confidential to prevent any competitive damage= ,=20 said Reliant spokesman Richard Wheatley.=20 ""We're committed to cooperating with the investigation that Attorney Genera= l=20 Lockyer is conducting,"" Wheatley said. ""It's the understanding of our=20 management that we do not have the proper assurance that the information wi= ll=20 be kept confidential.""=20 --- Legislators Unite Over Energy Price Issue=20 Power: Bipartisan congressional delegation called together by Davis says U.= S.=20 must step in to protect state from manipulation by suppliers.=20 By MITCHELL LANDSBERG and MIGUEL BUSTILLO, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????This may be the surest sign yet of the depth of California's energy=20 crisis: A bipartisan cross-section of the state's congressional delegation,= =20 brought together Thursday by Gov. Gray Davis, not only agreed about the=20 severity of the problem but also about the need for swift federal=20 intervention.=20 ?????""This meeting did not have the word 'Democrat' or 'Republican' used=20 once,"" Rep. Darrell E. Issa (R-Vista), said of the unusual spirit of=20 cooperation at the meeting near Los Angeles International airport. ?????Members of both parties said the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission= =20 must slash wholesale electricity prices so California utilities can once=20 again afford to buy power. Since January, the state government has been=20 buying electricity on their behalf, as skyrocketing wholesale prices put=20 Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern California Edison billions of dolla= rs=20 into debt and many power suppliers refused to sell to them; PG&E has since= =20 filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. ?????Although the Bush administration has said repeatedly that it is strong= ly=20 opposed to price caps, and FERC has refused to grant them, California=20 Republicans at the energy meeting said they are optimistic that the=20 administration will agree to some other form of price regulation. They=20 brushed aside the notion that such regulations might conflict with their=20 ideological belief in a free market. ?????""This is not a free-enterprise situation,"" Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Alpin= e)=20 said after the meeting. ""In fact, it's just the opposite."" ?????Specifically citing the huge disparity between natural gas prices=20 charged to California and those charged in other Western states, he said=20 California clearly has been the victim of unreasonably high energy costs.= =20 Under federal law, the FERC must regulate the prices of companies if it fin= ds=20 they are exerting ""market power"" to drive prices to unreasonable levels. ?????Executives from two Texas energy companies, meeting with legislators i= n=20 Sacramento, denied Thursday that they had caused natural gas prices in=20 California to artificially skyrocket by hoarding access to a critical=20 pipeline into the state. ?????After the extraordinary meeting in Los Los Angeles, Rep. Brad Sherman= =20 (D-Sherman Oaks) said the biggest disagreement between California Democrats= =20 and Republicans appeared to be their relative faith--or lack thereof--in th= e=20 ability of President Bush and his administration to help California. There= =20 has been much speculation that Bush, who lost California in November, has n= o=20 political motive to help the state. ?????""We Democrats,"" said Sherman, ""hope very much that our skepticism is= =20 proven wrong."" ?????Davis--who sat flanked by Democratic U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein and th= e=20 governor's newly appointed chief energy advisor, S. David Freeman--said he= =20 used the meeting mainly to discuss the importance of conservation by=20 Californians this summer and to ask the congressional delegation to pitch i= n.=20 Five Republicans and more than a dozen Democrats attended the gathering. ?????Feinstein said Thursday that she has asked for a third time to meet wi= th=20 Bush to discuss the energy situation. Meeting with Times reporters and=20 editors Wednesday, she described a recent meeting with Vice President Dick= =20 Cheney in which, she said, he ""ignored"" her appeal for federal assistance.= =20 ?????Feinstein has been among those critical of natural gas companies, sayi= ng=20 they appear to have constricted access to a California-bound pipeline to ru= n=20 up prices. ?????The Brattle Group, a respected consulting firm, alleged Wednesday befo= re=20 an Assembly committee that Dynegy Inc. and El Paso Natural Gas Co. had=20 manipulated the market by charging so much for the rights to their pipeline= =20 capacity that they had, in effect, withheld access to it. ?????That action, the experts said, directly forced companies trying to=20 deliver gas to California to look for alternatives, clogging other pipeline= s=20 and causing a surge in prices. ?????The explanation, El Paso executives said, was simple: Demand for gas= =20 soared in California because generators that use gas to make electricity=20 increased production last year in response to the energy crisis. ?????""We're not withholding capacity--no one is,"" said El Paso Merchant=20 Energy President Ralph Eads. ""With these prices, you want to sell every=20 molecule."" ?????In other developments Thursday: ?????* The agreement between Davis and Edison International to return its= =20 ailing utility arm to financial health is in ""deep trouble and could be=20 rejected by legislators,"" the Standard & Poor's credit rating agency said i= n=20 a note to clients, citing legislative and other sources. A rejection of the= =20 deal ""would be a humiliating setback for the governor,"" S&P said. ?????The agreement calls for, among other things, the sale of Edison's=20 transmission grid to the state for $2.76 billion and the sale of $2 billion= =20 in bonds--both designed to pay off the utility's huge electricity debt.=20 Edison agreed to several constraints, including the sale of electricity to= =20 the state at prices tied to the cost of producing power. ?????Since they returned Monday from a two-week recess, state legislators= =20 have been sharply critical of the Edison agreement and have indicated a=20 desire to tinker with aspects of the deal. Some lawmakers have said publicl= y=20 that a bankruptcy protection filing by Edison, like that of PG&E, might not= =20 be such a dire outcome. ?????But a senior Edison executive said it is ""way too early"" to give up on= =20 passage of the proposal, which legislators have not yet seen in official fo= rm. ?????""There is an education process to do here,"" the executive said of the= =20 highly detailed 38-page document. ""The legislators should be asking=20 questions. That is appropriate."" ?????* The Public Utilities Commission voted to investigate whether=20 alternative energy providers violated contractual agreements by withholding= =20 supplies from PG&E and Edison, which owe them hundreds of millions of dolla= rs. ?????The action, Commissioner Carl W. Wood said, was prompted in part by=20 lawsuits some providers have filed seeking release from their contracts wit= h=20 the cash-starved utilities. The producers of solar, wind and geothermal=20 energy account for more than 25% of California's electricity supply. ?????""The question is whether we will be able to rely on them in the long,= =20 hot days of summer,"" Wood said. ?????Jack Raudy of the Renewable Energy Creditors Committee said the PUC=20 needs to address the $700 million the producers are owed. ""All we have gott= en=20 is rhetoric from the governor, the PUC and the utilities,"" he said. ?????* An $850-million plan to entice Californians to conserve precious=20 megawatts appears to be running into roadblocks, compounding predictions by= =20 state officials of tighter than expected energy supplies in May and June. ?????Davis signed the conservation spending package last week, earmarking= =20 $242 million of the new funds for the Public Utilities Commission to=20 distribute to the state's investor-owned utilities to support existing=20 conservation programs. ?????But Barbara Hale, director of the PUC's Division of Strategic Planning= ,=20 said Thursday that since Pacific Gas & Electric Co. filed for bankruptcy=20 protection April 6, the utility has stopped releasing conservation funds. ?????Hale, testifying before a state Senate committee, said PG&E's=20 decision--coupled with the threat that Southern California Edison could=20 follow a similar route to U.S. Bankruptcy Court--has complicated her agency= 's=20 efforts. ?????PG&E spokeswoman Staci Homrig said her company plans to petition the= =20 Bankruptcy Court to have the conservation funds designated as a trust and= =20 separated from assets tied up in the bankruptcy proceedings. She said if th= e=20 court denies the request, PG&E would ask to be permitted to pay the expense= s=20 anyway. The process, she added, could take about a month--too long in the= =20 view of some legislators, given increasingly gloomy energy forecasts for la= te=20 spring and early summer. ?????Deputy Director Bob Therkelsen of the California Energy Commission sai= d=20 his agency had been counting on a number of small power producers to bolste= r=20 their output during that period. But he said some producers did not purchas= e=20 the necessary equipment because PG&E and Edison have failed to pay them in= =20 full for earlier electricity deliveries. ?????""It's not a huge amount,"" he said of the anticipated production=20 shortfall, ""but every little bit helps."" ---=20 ?????Landsberg reported from Los Angeles, Bustillo from Sacramento. Times= =20 staff writers Nancy Rivera Brooks in Los Angeles, Carl Ingram and Julie=20 Tamaki in Sacramento and Tim Reiterman in San Francisco contributed to this= =20 story. Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 --- Small fry among big fish in PG&E bankruptcy=20 Some unlikely businesses are listed as creditors against utility=20 Steve Rubenstein, Chuck Squatriglia, Chronicle Staff Writers Friday, April 20, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /20/M N185589.DTL=20 A San Francisco ice cream parlor, a karate studio and a costume shop are al= l=20 in the same boat, and that goes for a Divisadero Street psychiatrist, too.= =20 They're all in the fortunate position of having money coming to them.=20 And they're all in the tough spot of having that money owed by the sort-of= =20 bankrupt Pacific Gas and Electric Co.=20 Many of the 47,894 creditors that PG&E owes money to, according to a list= =20 filed with the bankruptcy judge, are banks, power companies, lawyers and th= e=20 like.=20 But a surprising number are businesses that, at first blush, might seem=20 unlikely to be power company creditors. Many businesses -- like the ACT=20 costume rental shop -- didn't know or had forgotten that PG&E had run up a= =20 tab.=20 And since the list didn't say how much they're owed, businesses had to gues= s.=20 ""How about that?"" said costume shop manager Callie Floor, when told she had= =20 PG&E money coming to her.=20 Floor, checking her books, said it looks like PG&E forgot to pay its $100= =20 bill to cover a costume rental for a corporate dress-up party in 1992.=20 ""We rent a lot of costumes for corporate events,"" she said. ""That's probabl= y=20 what it was.""=20 Psychiatrist Richard Lieberman says he does not know why or how much PG&E= =20 owes him.=20 ""But I'll take it,"" he said. ""PG&E has taken advantage of the consumer for = so=20 long. As far as I'm concerned, PG&E can go under and stay under.""=20 Of course, PG&E may wind up paying pennies on the dollar, if anything,=20 because that's how bankruptcies work. The notion is depressing, which=20 psychiatrists are used to.=20 KARATE STUDIO GETS HIT Karate master Scott Morton, whose Karate One studio on Van Ness Avenue is= =20 also a creditor, said karate is all about fairness and integrity, which PG&= E=20 seems to be even shorter on than cash.=20 ""I think the bankruptcy stinks,"" Morton said. ""All the money is going aroun= d=20 and around, it's all the same company.""=20 The karate studio conducted a self-defense class for about a dozen workers = at=20 PG&E headquarters. Morton, a black belt who does not take treachery lightly= ,=20 said he was ""pretty sure"" the check cleared, but maybe not.=20 NO BIG DEAL FOR SOME At Beauchamp's Welding and Repair in Petaluma, owner Dean Beauchamp wasn't= =20 concerned.=20 ""They don't owe us enough to worry about,"" he said. ""Less than $100, I'd=20 guess.""=20 Beauchamp's shop does small jobs for the big utility. ""They've been really= =20 good about sending us a check. Once in a great while, something will get=20 misplaced, and I guess that's how our name got on the list.""=20 Yolanda Fletcher, the owner of Red Shoes Slide Service, says the utility=20 probably owes her about $100 for preparing some photographs for a corporate= =20 slide show.=20 Larry Mitchell, proprietor of the award-winning Mitchell's Ice Cream shop o= n=20 San Jose Avenue, believes that PG&E may owe him $500 for a corporate ice=20 cream social.=20 ""That would cover the ice cream, the toppings, the dishes and the spoons,"" = he=20 said.=20 The utility's rocky road may be metaphorical, but an ice cream store's rock= y=20 road is the real thing, he said, and being owed $500 by a bankrupt company = is=20 not peaches and cream.=20 UNEXPECTED NAMES The list of creditors also includes such strange bedfellows as the San=20 Francisco Fire Department, the Yosemite Fund, The Chronicle and PG&E's own= =20 library petty cash fund. Perhaps the strangest bedfellow of all is the=20 perpetual PG&E foe known as TURN, or The Utility Reform Network, which stan= ds=20 to lose thousands of dollars in state-mandated legal fees from PG&E for its= =20 work as an ""intervener,"" or utility watchdog.=20 Among the utility's more sensible business partners is the Beale Street=20 sandwich shop a few steps from the main entrance to PG&E's headquarters=20 building in San Francisco.=20 Unlike the big banks and power companies that are on the hook for millions,= =20 proprietor Kenneth Chen does business with PG&E on a strictly pay-as-you-go= =20 business.=20 Chen, the owner of Cafe Leah at 25 Beale St., is often hired to send up a $= 40=20 tray of sandwiches to PG&E corporate officers. When he does so, he insists = on=20 cash up front because PG&E, who is the restaurant's landlord, insists on ca= sh=20 every month from Chen.=20 ""That's the way we've always done it, payment right away,"" he said. ""That w= ay=20 there's no hassle later on.""=20 E-mail Steve Rubenstein at srubenstein@sfchronicle.com and Chuck Squatrigli= a=20 at ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 --- Developments in California's energy crisis=20 The Associated Press Friday, April 20, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate1 004EDT0161.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 , , -- (04-20) 07:04 PDT Developments in California's energy crisis:=20 FRIDAY:< ?-- The state remains free of power alerts as reserves stay above = 7 percent. ?-- Southern California Edison plans a 1:30 p.m. conference call= with its ?creditors. ?-- Edison executives discuss the state's move to buy= thier transmission lines ?at a 9:30 a.m. briefing in Sacramento. ?< ?THURS= DAY:<=20 -- The Public Utility Commission launches an investigation into whether a k= ey=20 block of independent generators are purposely keeping their plants off line= .=20 -- The commission tables until May 3 a vote on whether the PUC should becom= e=20 more involved in Pacific Gas & Electric's bankruptcy case. The San=20 Francisco-based utility is challenging the PUC's authority in the case.=20 -- Texas-based natural gas companies defend themselves before an Assembly= =20 subcommittee against accusations they created a virtual monopoly on gas=20 flowing into California and used it to jack up prices sharply.=20 -- Attorney General Bill Lockyer says he will go to court to force two=20 electricity generators to hand over documents he subpoenaed as part of his= =20 probe of the state's electricity market.=20 -- Gov. Gray Davis and a bipartisan group of the state's congressional=20 delegates agree that the federal government must act to control the wholesa= le=20 price of energy, but offer no specific proposals.=20 -- The Assembly passes a resolution asking the federal government to regula= te=20 the price of natural gas, which has been deregulated since 1992. The Assemb= ly=20 also approves a bill to encourage natural gas exploration in the tidelands= =20 off Long Beach. Both measures go to the Senate.=20 -- The Senate approves a resolution asking Congress and the president to le= t=20 California use daylight-saving time year-round to help lower energy use. Th= e=20 measure now moves to the Assembly. A bill pending in Congress would give=20 Western states the authority to expand daylight-saving time.=20 -- The Electric Power Supply Association tells the Federal Energy Regulator= y=20 Commission that the California Independent System Operator, which runs the= =20 state's power grid, is not independent enough. The association alleges in a= =20 FERC filing that the ISO favors the state over electricity generators in it= s=20 actions and rule-making.=20 -- The California Energy Commission allows Pacific Gas & Electric Corp. to= =20 build a $350 million power plant in San Diego County capable of supplying= =20 electricity to 500,000 homes.=20 -- The Escondido City Council votes to suspend for 30 to 60 days its=20 consideration of proposals by developers trying to build plants before peak= =20 summer demand. The council wants to develop a comprehensive approval proces= s=20 that looks at the cumulative effect of such plants.=20 -- Edison International's stock closes at $10.98, down 42 cents, while stoc= k=20 in PG&E's parent closes down 31 cents at $8.73.=20 -- The state remains free of power alerts as reserves stay above 7 percent.= =20 <=20 WHAT'S NEXT:< ?-- Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra, = the parent ?company of San Diego Gas and Electric Co., to buy the utility's= transmission ?lines. Davis says he expects to have an agreement within two= weeks. ?-- An Assembly subcommittee meets Monday to discuss bills aimed at= improving ?California's natural gas market. ?-- Senate Select Committee to= Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale ?Energy Market continues i= ts investigation next week. ?< ?THE PROBLEM:<=20 High demand, high wholesale energy costs, transmission glitches and a tight= =20 supply worsened by scarce hydroelectric power in the Northwest and=20 maintenance at aging California power plants are all factors in California'= s=20 electricity crisis.=20 Edison and PG&E say they've lost nearly $14 billion since June to high=20 wholesale prices that the state's electricity deregulation law bars them fr= om=20 passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs= =20 from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection= =20 April 6.=20 Electricity and natural gas suppliers, scared off by the two companies' poo= r=20 credit ratings, are refusing to sell to them, leading the state in January = to=20 start buying power for the utilities' nearly 9 million residential and=20 business customers. The state is also buying power for a third investor-own= ed=20 utility, San Diego Gas & Electric, which is in better financial shape than= =20 much larger Edison and PG&E but also struggling with high wholesale power= =20 costs.=20 The Public Utilities Commission has raised rates up to 46 percent to help= =20 finance the state's multibillion-dollar power-buying.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 --- California utility wants to boost Mohave power plant production=20 Friday, April 20, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 926EDT0156.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 (04-20) 06:26 PDT BULLHEAD CITY, Ariz. (AP) -- With many opposed to allowin= g=20 Southern California Edison to increase power production at the Mohave=20 Generating Station, the City Council wants Nevada regulators to meet here.= =20 The plant Edison operates is located across the Colorado River in Laughlin,= =20 Nev. Edison is seeking a variance that would allow it to exceed the current= =20 cap of 70 percent of the plant's capacity and to do so for more than 20=20 hours.=20 ``We just want to do this in dire circumstances to avoid the rolling=20 blackouts (California has experienced recently),'' Edison spokesman Steve= =20 Hansen said.=20 Any is too much for former City Councilman Victor Urso.=20 ``That plant is one of the worst air pollution violators in the United Stat= es=20 already, and now they want variances to do even more damage,'' Urso said.= =20 Mohave County Supervisor Tom Sockwell, who presents the Bullhead City area,= =20 doesn't see it that way.=20 ``They'll only run it up to full power for very short periods, and we need= =20 that for the power shortages,'' Sockwell said this week. ``We've already go= t=20 pollution anyway, so what's another hour of a darker plume every now and=20 then?''=20 Rick Moore of the Flagstaff-based Grand Canyon Trust, which monitors the=20 plant's operation, said the plant exceeded its permissible emissions level= =20 1,200 times during the last calendar year. The trust sued, and the company= =20 was fined $180,000.=20 The City Council wants the Nevada Environmental Commission to meet in=20 Laughlin next month rather than in Carson City so members can hear local=20 opponents of Edison's request.=20 Hansen said the commission approved a variance last year but that the plant= =20 exceeded the emissions limit for only six minutes.=20 At peak capacity, the plant can produce 1,580 megawatts of electricity but = is=20 required to stay below that level because of air quality concerns=20 Edison owns 56 percent of the plant. The rest is owned by the Los Angeles= =20 Department of Water and Power (20 percent), Nevada Power (14 percent) and t= he=20 Salt River Project in Phoenix (10 percent).=20 Nevada Power has been trying to sell its share in the generating station to= =20 AES Corp. of Arlington, Va., has been trying to purchase both Edison's and= =20 Nevada Power's shares but has run into snags. The Nevada Public Utilities= =20 Commission approve the Nevada Power sale in October but suspended that=20 approval on Marcy 29 for at least 60 days. In January, the California Publi= c=20 Utilities Commission suspended sale of the Edison share and placed a=20 five-year moratorium on such sales about the same time.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 --- PG&E owes money to several small businesses, unlikely creditors=20 Friday, April 20, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 503EDT0125.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 (04-20) 02:03 PDT SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Several small fry are among the big= =20 fish in a pond full of creditors to which ailing Pacific Gas and Electric= =20 owes money.=20 A San Francisco ice cream parlor, a costume store, a psychiatrist's office= =20 and a karate studio are among a number of small businesses that should be= =20 receiving payments from the near bankrupt utility.=20 After checking her books, ACT Costume Shop manager Callie Floor was surpris= ed=20 to find that the utility owes her $100 for a costume rental for a corporate= =20 dress-up party in 1992.=20 Karate One Studio on Van Ness Avenue may be owed for a self-defense class i= t=20 conducted for about a dozen workers at PG&E headquarters.=20 Of course, PG&E may only have to pay pennies on the dollar to the small fry= ,=20 since that's how bankruptcies work.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 --- Edison pushes lawmakers to accept deal=20 David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday, April 20, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /20/M N190213.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 Although lawmakers are skeptical of the state's multibillion-dollar deal to= =20 acquire the power lines of Southern California Edison, the head of the=20 utility's parent company warned yesterday that failure to approve the accor= d=20 could lead to a ""long and costly"" bankruptcy.=20 But John Bryson, chief executive of Edison International, told The Chronicl= e=20 that he thought legislators would ""want to do the right thing"" by approving= =20 the multibillion-dollar agreement and preventing Edison from following=20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. into bankruptcy court.=20 Bankruptcy for California's two largest utilities could have severe=20 consequences for consumers. Financial analysts said a worsening of the=20 state's energy mess would increase the possibility of higher electricity=20 rates.=20 Nevertheless, lawmakers are unlikely to accept the Edison deal -- at least= =20 not in its present form.=20 ""We are going to go through this thing extensively,"" said state Senate=20 President Pro Tem John Burton, D-San Francisco. ""There are a lot of concern= s=20 about the valuation.""=20 Still, he said, legislative backing for the accord remains possible as long= =20 as Edison is open to amending some of the terms.=20 ""The Edison people are smart enough to know that the Legislature is going t= o=20 have its say,"" Burton said.=20 Indeed, sources familiar with the matter said Edison expected a certain=20 amount of tinkering with the deal and would not resist efforts to reach=20 common ground with lawmakers.=20 ""The Assembly members do not view bankruptcy as a favorable alternative,""= =20 said Assemblyman Herb Wesson, D-Los Angeles. ""There will be a big effort to= =20 try and work something out.""=20 Edison's Bryson seems eager at this point to present himself and his compan= y=20 as reasonable business partners who are willing to negotiate in good faith.= =20 This contrasts sharply with the state's relations with PG&E, which turned= =20 acrimonious after PG&E blindsided the governor with its bankruptcy filing.= =20 Each side blamed the other for the collapse of earlier negotiations.=20 ""We made the decision at an early stage that this was a massive problem for= =20 the state and that the best course was to find a practical solution that=20 would allow us to get on with operating our power system,"" Bryson said.=20 Bankruptcy, he said, ""is absolutely a last resort. It's a long and costly= =20 process.""=20 It is also the last thing Wall Street wants to see. On Wednesday, rating=20 agency Fitch Inc. joined Standard & Poor's and Moody's Investor Service in= =20 warning that California's credit rating could be lowered because of the=20 state's energy mess.=20 ""The state may be forced to issue junk bonds,"" said Carol Coale, an energy-= =20 industry analyst at Prudential Securities in New York. ""This could lead to = a=20 surcharge on electricity bills to guarantee the bonds.""=20 Bryson, not surprisingly, defended Edison's agreement with the governor as = a=20 prudent alternative to bankruptcy.=20 ""This is a very good deal for the state,"" he said. ""It is not a bailout.=20 Edison gives up a lot to make all this possible.""=20 Southern California Edison will sell its power lines to the state for $2.8= =20 billion. It also will provide low-cost power to California for 10 years and= =20 drop a federal lawsuit seeking full recovery of nearly $5 billion in past= =20 debt.=20 Critics say the state is paying far too much for Edison's transmission syst= em=20 -- more than two times book value -- and that the power lines are of little= =20 use unless PG&E's grid also can be acquired.=20 ""It's a multibillion-dollar ratepayer bailout of Edison,"" said Doug Heller,= a=20 spokesman for the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa=20 Monica. ""Edison gets off scot-free.""=20 Under the most likely scenario, lawmakers will seek to reduce the amount pa= id=20 for Edison's power lines and to increase the role of the California Public= =20 Utilities Commission in regulating the utility.=20 They also will try to come up with a workable contingency plan for the stat= e=20 if PG&E remains adamant in its refusal to sell off its part of the power=20 grid.=20 ""The deal on the table is still salvageable,"" said Michael Shames, executiv= e=20 director of the Utility Consumers' Action Network in San Diego. ""But Edison= =20 needs to understand that what it got from the governor is only a framework,= =20 not set in stone.""=20 For his part, Bryson signaled that plenty of room existed for give and take= =20 on the issue.=20 ""We're just at the initial stage,"" he said. ""We always have accepted the=20 notion that Edison is a California regulated utility and is subject to the= =20 laws of the Public Utilities Commission.""=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 4=20 --- Who will pay the most for power?=20 Posted at 9:46 p.m. PDT Thursday, April 19, 2001=20 JOHN=20 WOOLFOLK=20 AND MICHAEL=20 BAZELEY=20 Mercury News=20 State regulators last month announced an electric rate increase that would= =20 average a whopping three cents per kilowatt-hour, hit bills beginning in Ma= y=20 and punish power pigs while sparing energy misers.=20 Now, much of that is up in the air.=20 Higher rates are surely coming -- but not before June. And exactly which=20 consumers and businesses will pay how much is uncertain as regulators rush = to=20 forge a rate structure from a tangle of more than 20 proposals.=20 Their task has been complicated immeasurably by Gov. Gray Davis' decision t= o=20 weigh in with a competing rate plan and Pacific Gas & Electric Co.'s move= =20 into bankruptcy court.=20 ``Little details are moving billions of dollars around,'' said Nettie Hoge = of=20 the Utility Reform Network, a consumer advocacy group.=20 All the proposals assume a ``tiered'' structure that forces the heaviest=20 users of energy to pay the most. But key details yet to be decided mean=20 consumers could see their average rates go up anywhere from 7 percent to 30= =20 percent or more.=20 Among them:=20 ?How much of an overall increase? The Public Utilities Commission approved = a=20 three-cent per kilowatt-hour increase last month, which would boost utility= =20 revenue by $4.8 million. Davis' proposed increase -- left vague in his Apri= l=20 5 television address -- averages 2.8 cents for PG&E customers but only 2.3= =20 cents for customers of Southern California Edison.=20 ?What regions of the state will pay? The commission agreed to raise rates= =20 only for PG&E and Southern California Edison, but Davis would include the= =20 additional 1.2 million San Diego Gas & Electric customers.=20 ?Should heavier users of electricity subsidize those who are exempt from th= e=20 new rate increase? If so, those users will find themselves paying much more= =20 than any of the average increase figures being tossed about.=20 ?How will utilities bill customers retroactively for the increase? At the= =20 time of the PUC vote on March 27, commissioners said their increase would= =20 take effect immediately.=20 PUC vote May 14=20 Various plans are being presented this week to an administrative law judge= =20 working for the commission. The judge is expected to recommend a rate=20 structure to the PUC on May 4. Public hearings would follow May 7-11, and t= he=20 commission would vote on a plan May 14, condensing to a few weeks a process= =20 that normally lasts nearly a year.=20 Each of the major proposals before the commission assumes that residential= =20 customers using less than 130 percent of their baseline -- which is the=20 average basic level of use for each region of the state -- would be exempt= =20 from higher rates. That's mandated under a new law that allows the state to= =20 buy power. Customers already pay higher rates for exceeding their baseline.= =20 Each major proposal also sets new ``tiers'' with progressively higher rates= =20 for ``medium'' use at 130 to 200 percent of baseline and ``heavy'' use over= =20 200 percent of that level.=20 But that's where the similarities end.=20 Differences=20 The first distinction among the leading plans comes in the form of an=20 assumption: How many residential customers will avoid any increase because= =20 they don't exceed 130 percent of their baseline? Davis says more than half,= =20 commissioners say a little under half and PG&E says less than a third.=20 The second difference among the plans is a real difference: What happens to= =20 everyone else?=20 Under the plan by utilities commission President Loretta Lynch, medium PG&E= =20 users would see average bills rise 9 percent and heavy users would see bill= s=20 increase 36 percent.=20 Davis' plan says medium PG&E users would see average bills rise 11 percent= =20 while heavy users would pay 37 percent more. But the average total bill=20 increase for PG&E residential customers, including those who are exempt,=20 would be 20 percent under his plan and 24 percent under Lynch's, according = to=20 a statement on the governor's Web site.=20 Business customers would see proportionately greater increases, averaging 3= 0=20 percent under Lynch's proposal and 26 percent under Davis'.=20 The most consumer-friendly of the various proposals comes from=20 consumer-rights group TURN. They suggest an overall average residential=20 increase of 7.5 percent.=20 TURN's plan assumes utilities cannot charge other customers more to make up= =20 for the energy misers shielded from rate increases under state law.=20 PG&E disagrees with that interpretation. The utility wants other residentia= l=20 users to make up for any lost revenue from exempted customers through highe= r=20 rates. Under the utility's plan, residential customers would see an average= =20 rate increase of nearly 30 percent.=20 ``The proposal these folks are pushing rips the heart out of that law,'' sa= id=20 Matthew Freedman, staff attorney for TURN.=20 Another issue affecting consumers is how the utilities can bill for=20 electricity used in April and May, before the final plan is approved.=20 Utilities want surcharge=20 Utility officials have objected to making the rate structure retroactive.= =20 Instead, to recoup the revenue, they are proposing a flat surcharge that=20 everyone would pay, regardless of how much they use.=20 Edison proposes a higher surcharge added to bills for a shorter period of= =20 time -- in this case, June through August. PG&E officials are suggesting a= =20 smaller surcharge that would be spread out over 12 months.=20 ``It'll probably be something closer to the PG&E proposal,'' said Paul=20 Clanon, the commission's director of energy issues.=20 All the rate increase proposals stem from a commonly understood problem:=20 California's current, frozen rates don't generate enough money to cover the= =20 wholesale price of power. The PUC raised rates 10 percent -- or one cent pe= r=20 kilowatt-hour -- in January in an attempt to help, but that turned out to b= e=20 far from enough.=20 In March, the commission approved an additional three-cent increase. But=20 Davis followed quickly with an alternative proposal. The next day, PG&E fil= ed=20 for bankruptcy, raising the specter that a federal judge could order even= =20 higher rates.=20 Although the PUC has sole authority to raise rates under state law, Davis'= =20 proposal has complicated an already complex process. The governor appointed= =20 three of the five members of the commission, and his appointees seem inclin= ed=20 to show him deference. But Davis has been slow in filing the details of his= =20 plan, which has made it hard for the PUC to proceed. --- --- --- Credit-raters put state on watch=20 Posted at 9:41 p.m. PDT Thursday, April 19, 2001=20 BY JENNIFER BJORHUS=20 Mercury News=20 All three of the nation's influential judges of credit risk now have=20 California on a credit watch, saying they are deeply concerned about the=20 economic impact of the state's power crisis.=20 The Fitch credit rating agency made it unanimous Wednesday when it warned= =20 that the thickening electricity quagmire, as well as lower than expected ta= x=20 revenues in February and March, could mean broader risk for the state's=20 budget.=20 The announcement is a signal that Fitch, too, may downgrade its ratings on= =20 California's nearly $30 billion in public debt, a move which could cost=20 taxpayers millions.=20 The announcement comes as state lawmakers consider a bailout plan for=20 Southern California Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric Co. sits in bankruptcy a= nd=20 state officials bleed through the state's general fund as they buy expensiv= e=20 electricity for consumers.=20 Earlier this week, Gov. Gray Davis announced that the average bill for=20 electricity purchases has risen from $45.8 million a day in the last week o= f=20 March to $73 million a day.=20 Moody's Investors Service and Standard & Poor's have already issued their o= wn=20 credit warnings, although none of the three agencies has downgraded the=20 state's very good double-A credit rating.=20 Bond ratings are important yardsticks that bankers and investors use to pri= ce=20 municipal and corporate bonds. A downgrade would force California to offer= =20 bond buyers higher interest rates going forward, costing taxpayers.=20 The state was last at a lower A rating back in 1994.=20 Moody's changed California's Aa2 general obligation bond rating outlook fro= m=20 stable to negative on April 6, the day PG&E filed for bankruptcy. Standard = &=20 Poor's has had the state's AA rating outlook at negative since January, whe= n=20 the state began buying electricity for the utilities.=20 The deciding factor for Fitch, said Fitch vice chairman Claire Cohen, was t= he=20 disagreement over how the money from the new electricity rate increase will= =20 be spent.=20 The California Public Utilities Commission ruled in late March that money= =20 generated by higher electricity bills should go first to pay the state=20 Department of Water Resources, which has been buying electricity for the=20 utilities. PG&E has argued that if the state is paid first, there won't be= =20 any money left for the company.=20 The utility is formally challenging the PUC decision, and the move threaten= s=20 to hold up the estimated $12 billion to $14 billion of bonds the Department= =20 of Water Resources plans to issue to buy more electricity.=20 ``With that being appealed, you don't have a clean authorization,'' Cohen= =20 said. ``It signals to me that it could delay the financing process.''=20 A second concern is that the state isn't collecting as much in taxes as=20 expected, Cohen said. Tax collections for both February and March were belo= w=20 forecast. The amount of personal income tax the state collected in those=20 months fell short by $455 million, or 14 percent less than expected.=20 Cohen said she made her decision before hearing that the state's power cost= s=20 now exceed $70 million a day. Cohen and David Hitchcock, the California=20 analyst for Standard & Poor's, agreed those rising costs are a definite=20 concern.=20 ``It doesn't take much of a change in economic growth to make some of these= =20 projected fund balances disappear and so we're very worried about what the= =20 current economic activity is, particularly in Northern California with some= =20 of the problems with the high-tech area,'' Hitchcock told analysts and=20 investors last week in a conference call.=20 Other economy-watchers expressed concern.=20 Sandy Harrison, assistant director of the state Department of Finance, said= =20 the move reinforced the importance of solving the power problems soon.=20 Contact Jennifer Bjorhus at jbjorhus@sjmercury.com or (408) 920-5660.=20 --- --- -------------------- Power company executives going without bonuses=20 LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Senior executives at Southern California Edison and its= =20 parent company went without hundreds of thousands of dollars in bonuses in= =20 2000 because of California's power crisis.=20 Edison International's chairman and chief executive, John Bryson, was paid= =20 $950,000 in 2000, compared with salary and bonus totaling $2.16 million in= =20 1999.=20 Stephen Frank, the chairman and chief executive at Southern California=20 Edison, was paid $617,000 in 2000, compared with salary and bonus totaling= =20 $1.3 million in 1999, according to the company's proxy statement filed with= =20 the Securities and Exchange Commission.=20 The company also said Thursday it would not award merit increases to=20 executives in 2001 because of the continuing crisis.=20 In a similar statement released Tuesday, Pacific Gas and Electric Corp.=20 revealed it also withheld bonuses for its top two executives, although they= =20 did receive raises.=20 Edison and PG&E say they have lost nearly $14 billion since June to high=20 wholesale prices that the state's electricity deregulation law bars them fr= om=20 passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs= =20 from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection= =20 April 6.=20 Edison is continuing to work with state officials and its creditors. --- --- ----------------------- Davis and U.S. lawmakers call for price caps on power=20 LOS ANGELES -- Half of California's congressional delegation gathered with= =20 Gov. Gray Davis on Thursday to pressure the federal government to impose=20 energy price caps.=20 Limiting wholesale prices, they argued, is essential if the state is to ave= rt=20 the energy crisis threatening California's economy.=20 ``A big piece of this solution is federal. It's a four-letter word:=20 F-E-R-C,'' said U.S. Rep. Jane Harman, D-Redondo Beach, referring to the=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the agency that would have to approve= =20 price caps.=20 The governor has blamed FERC for allowing energy producers to charge=20 California stratospheric prices for electricity and natural gas.=20 The delegation met behind closed doors at an Los Angeles airport hotel, but= =20 Davis and several legislators met with reporters afterward.=20 ``The signal that has to come from FERC,'' Davis said, ``is, `You're chargi= ng=20 too much for electricity. The electricity is not worth driving California= =20 into an economic grave.'?''=20 Curt H,bert Jr., the FERC chairman, has argued that caps would encourage=20 generators to sell their power elsewhere and discourage them from building= =20 new plants in California.=20 The bipartisan group of lawmakers agreed with the governor that the state i= s=20 getting gouged on the open market.=20 ``There is an anti-free market enterprise mechanism in play here,'' said U.= S.=20 Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-El Cajon, noting that natural gas in parts of New=20 Mexico costs one-third what it does in California.=20 The generators maintain that they are charging fair prices that are the=20 simple result of supply and demand.=20 Rep. Mike Honda, D-San Jose, and Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, attended, bu= t=20 left before speaking with reporters. --- --- ------------------------- Generators cutting electric output; regulators want to find out why=20 Published Friday, April 20, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News=20 BY MICHAEL BAZELEY=20 Mercury News=20 State regulators launched an investigation Thursday into why some alternati= ve=20 energy providers are withholding electricity from the state's stressed powe= r=20 grid.=20 The California Public Utilities Commission in San Francisco said it wants t= o=20 determine whether the small power generators -- which provide about=20 one-fourth of the state's electrical power -- have legitimate business=20 reasons for scaling back their output.=20 Known as ``qualifying facilities,'' or QFs, many of the generators have bee= n=20 either scaling back output or shutting down entirely -- contending that the= =20 state's two largest utilities owe them $700 million.=20 ``The critical question is: Will we be able to rely on these facilities int= o=20 the high-demand summer months?'' PUC Commissioner Carl Wood said.=20 The financially strapped utilities, Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern= =20 California Edison, stopped paying the power generators several months ago.= =20 The PUC ordered the utilities to resume payments, and some generators start= ed=20 receiving payments this week.=20 But many generators are still hurting because of all the back payments they= =20 are owed, said Jack Raudy, a spokesman for the Renewable Energy Creditors= =20 Committee, which consists of 10 alternative power producers.=20 ``We're outraged,'' Raudy said.=20 Contact Michael Bazeley at mbazeley@sjmercury.com or (408) 920-5628.=20 --- --- --------------------- FERC remains an unlikely rescuer=20 The federal agency hews to a hands-off policy on power rates.=20 April 20, 2001=20 By DENA BUNIS The Orange County Register Washington - Californians who see federal re-regulation of the state's=20 crisis-bound energy market as an answer to the impending summer emergency= =20 better look for some other solution.=20 Even the possible short- term price fix that the Federal Energy Regulatory= =20 Commission may consider at its Wednesday meeting might be too little, too= =20 late.=20 Lobbyists, lawmakers and other FERC-watchers say they have seen a slight=20 shift in recent weeks among commission staff and at least one member. There= =20 is some willingness, they say, to consider some price controls, even though= =20 the Bush administration is adamantly opposed to such measures.=20 And many are looking to see if President George W. Bush's choices for the t= wo=20 vacancies on FERC will provide a margin for change.=20 But the commission's basic philosophy that open, unregulated markets are be= st=20 is not likely to change soon, members say.=20 ""I've been championing a revamping of FERC's antiquated standards for=20 determining market-based rates,'' Commissioner Richard Massey said Thursday= .=20 But with no success. "" My agency is not on the verge of turning on a dime o= n=20 this market-based pricing.""=20 The standards are a joke, Massey added, because the commission never turns= =20 down requests for such pricing authority. More than 600 power sellers have= =20 been given that authority, he said.=20 For a power company to be allowed to charge whatever the market will bear, = it=20 must show FERC, for example, that it doesn't have the power to manipulate t= he=20 market and drive prices up.=20 ""Any seller that can't pass our screen needs to fire their consultants and= =20 lawyers,'' Massey said.=20 While the overall philosophy remains consistent, FERC staff has proposed to= =20 the commission that a Stage 3 electricity emergency in California should=20 trigger cost-based rates, a form of price controls. Such triggers would be = in=20 place for one year, under the staff proposal.=20 The commission may decide Wednesday whether to accept that proposal. It has= =20 to make some decision by May 1 on how the market will be monitored from now= =20 on.=20 The theory behind controlling prices in Stage 3, says a FERC staff report, = is=20 that during such an emergency generators have the greatest opportunity to= =20 manipulate the market and drive prices up.=20 But generators have that power during Stage 2 and Stage 1 emergencies, says= =20 Les Starck, Southern California Edison Co.'s manager of federal regulatory= =20 affairs. Price caps during Stage 3 might avert the rolling blackouts=20 associated with that level of crisis, but they wouldn't do anything to stop= =20 generators from jacking up prices the rest of the time, he said.=20 And it is not clear how long it would take for such price controls to take= =20 effect, should the commission go along with the staff recommendation.=20 ""We're close because summer is approaching,'' Commissioner Linda Breathitt= =20 said Thursday. Breathitt, who had firmly opposed any form of price controls= ,=20 said in an interview last month that given the worsening crisis in Californ= ia=20 she was open to considering some short-term measures.=20 ""It's important to me that we address the summer,'' Breathitt said, but she= =20 said she could not predict what the commission would do Wednesday.=20 Even if an order is approved, Massey said, there could be delays while the= =20 power sellers file their costs with regulators and disputes over those=20 filings are handled.=20 Sen. Dianne Feinstein said Thursday such a move by the commission would be= =20 ""better than having no controls at all. There's no question that we're goin= g=20 to be in a Stage 3 emergency.''=20 Feinstein, D-Calif., and other Western lawmakers have been urging FERC to= =20 step in sooner and with price controls that extend beyond just the emergenc= y=20 period.=20 Waiting for Stage 3 to intervene ""is putting the whole grid at risk,'' said= =20 Roger Hamilton, a member of Oregon's Public Utility Commission. ""We have a= =20 real stability problem when you cut it that close.''=20 Feinstein says the future could well rest with the new commissioners,=20 particularly Patrick Wood, the head of the Texas PUC who many believe will= =20 replace Curt Heber as FERC chairman if he is confirmed by the Senate.=20 Even if Massey and Breathitt agree on broader price controls, as chairman,= =20 Heber could block consideration of such a move. It's unclear what stance Wo= od=20 would take as chairman.=20 ""The thing that deeply concerns me about Pat Wood is that he's from Texas,'= '=20 Feinstein said. ""What's reassuring is that it appears from my personal=20 discussion with him is that he appears to be pragmatic.''=20 But once again, timing could be a problem.=20 Bush has said he intends to nominate Wood and Nora Brownell, a member of th= e=20 Pennsylvania PUC, but has not formally sent their nominations to the Senate= .=20 ""The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is of vital importance right now,= =20 and to let the time go on without filling the spots makes no sense,''=20 Feinstein said.=20 ""Please, please, please, President Bush, process your nominees.''=20 --- --- Lawmakers seek bigger rollbacks, can't agree on caps=20 They promise to meet in Washington with a plan that would require federal= =20 agencies to conserve power this summer.=20 April 20, 2001=20 By DENA BUNIS The Orange County Register=20 Los Angeles - Gov. Gray Davis and a bipartisan sampling of the congressiona= l=20 delegation put politics aside Thursday and agreed something must be done=20 about runaway wholesale power prices in California.=20 ""We agreed that there has been unreasonable or unearned enrichment by the= =20 energy providers of natural gas and electricity"" said Rep. Darrell Issa,=20 R-Vista. ""And we agreed that there needs to be significantly greater=20 rollbacks than there already have been.""=20 The lawmakers did not, however, come to a consensus over the issue of price= =20 caps - something Davis and other Democrats, particularly Sen. Dianne=20 Feinstein, D-Calif., have been pushing the Federal Energy Regulatory=20 Commission to institute.=20 Davis met behind closed doors for 90 minutes with Feinstein and 27 of the 5= 2=20 House members at the Sheraton Gateway Hotel near LAX.=20 Participants from the Orange County delegation included Issa; Rep.=20 Christopher Cox, R-Newport Beach; Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Santa Ana; and Re= p.=20 Gary Miller, R-Diamond Bar.=20 They emerged with a promise to meet again soon, this time in Washington, an= d=20 with a four-pronged strategy to avert disaster this summer.=20 The strategy includes requiring federal agencies in the state, including=20 military facilities, to conserve energy this summer, and asking FERC to fin= d=20 a way to control the wholesale price of electricity and increase the flow o= f=20 natural gas into California.=20 Cox said much of the meeting was spent reviewing Davis' $850 million=20 conservation program.=20 Members promised to get the word out in their districts about conservation= =20 measures.=20 Cox said he expects emergency legislation dealing with the energy crisis to= =20 pass the Energy and Commerce Committee in the coming weeks.=20 That measure, he said, will include a direction to FERC to expand its=20 investigation of whether existing rates are just and reasonable.=20 --- --- ----------------------------- Energy notebook=20 Assembly urges federal regulation of natural gas=20 April 20, 2001=20 From Register news services=20 Sacramento - The California Assembly asked the federal government Thursday = to=20 regulate soaring natural gas prices once again.=20 A resolution passed 48-7 asked President George W. Bush, Congress and the= =20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to restore the regulation of natural g= as=20 that ended in 1992.=20 Natural gas rates at the California border have been as much as 11 times=20 higher than elsewhere in the nation since November, an industry consultant= =20 told an Assembly subcommittee Wednesday.=20 ""I think it's only rational in one of the biggest crises to befall this=20 country in the last 100 years. We're not seeing adequate action from the=20 federal government,"" said the author, Assemblyman Dennis Cardoza, D-Atwater= .=20 Republicans refused to vote for the resolution, complaining that it was an= =20 attack on the GOP Bush administration.=20 Top Edison officials forego bonus, take 45% pay cut=20 Rosemead - Edison International's top officers received no bonuses in 2000= =20 and generally took pay cuts of about 45 percent as the Southern California= =20 company's utility segment was forced to write off $4.2 billion spent buying= =20 overpriced power in the state's deregulated electricity market, according t= o=20 SEC disclosures the company filed Thursday.=20 Edison International Chief Executive Officer John E. Bryson received $1.62= =20 million in salary and other compensation, compared with $3.04 million last= =20 year. Southern California Edison CEO Stephen E. Frank received $760,000 in= =20 salary and other compensation, compared with $1.35 million last year. And= =20 Edison Mission Energy CEO Alan J. Fohrer received $584,000 in salary and=20 other compensation, compared with $922,000 last year.=20 Edison's compensation committee did give Bryson an incentive to pull the=20 company out of its quagmire, awarding stock options with a present-day valu= e=20 calculated at $7.26 million. But Bryson won't be able to profit from those= =20 options -- which vest over the next five years -- any time soon. The lowest= =20 price he can exercise the options at is $20 -- and Edison stock is trading = at=20 $11.=20 PUC seeks to shed light on meager energy alternatives=20 Sacramento - Hoping to prevent California's bleak power outlook from becomi= ng=20 even darker, state regulators Thursday launched an investigation into why= =20 alternative energy providers aren't producing more electricity.=20 With the action, the California Public Utilities Commission hopes to=20 determine if legitimate business reasons or ulterior motives underlie the= =20 reduced output by an independent group of small generators that provides mu= ch=20 of the state's energy.=20 These alternative generators - known in the industry as ""qualifying=20 facilities,"" or QFs - have been scaling back or shutting down as debts owed= =20 by California's two largest utilities pile up. The QFs are owed an estimate= d=20 $700 million by bankrupt Pacific Gas and Electric and financially crippled= =20 Southern California Edison.=20 In other developments:=20 California's Public Utilities Commission delayed until May 3 a decision on= =20 whether it will investigate how Pacific Gas & Electric's bankruptcy is goin= g=20 to affect customers.=20 Unbowed by Gov. Gray Davis' endorsement of Calpine's proposed power plant,= =20 San Jose officials said they may yet have the last word on the controversia= l=20 project. The city could sue the California Energy Commission or attempt to= =20 block the project by refusing to extend water and sewer lines or annex=20 several acres of needed land, they said.=20 PG&E Corp. won final approval to build a $350 million power plant in San=20 Diego County capable of supplying electricity to 500,000 homes.=20 The Escondido City Council has decided to take a break from considering a= =20 rush of proposals by developers trying to build plants before peak summer= =20 demand.=20 The council voted 3-2 Wednesday to suspend consideration for 30 to 60 days = of=20 any proposals to build energy plants in the city.=20 Register staff writers, The Associated Press and Knight Ridder Newspapers= =20 contributed to this report.=20 --- --- Friday, April 20, 2001=20 Shed light on costs=20 Unfortunately, California citizens will remain in the dark for at least=20 another month about the details of Gov. Gray Davis' long-term contracts wit= h=20 power producers. This is the sort of crisis the public needs to scrutinize and for which the= =20 Public Records Act was designed. At a Tuesday hearing in a Los Angeles County Superior Court in Pasadena on= =20 whether the documents should be released under the California Public Record= s=20 Act, Judge Michael J. Byrne said the case could better be heard in a Los=20 Angeles court. The case was brought by Judicial Watch, a Washington-based public interest= =20 law firm with its West Coast office in San Marino.=20 ""The case was reset for May 22 in a Los Angeles County Superior Court in th= e=20 city of Los Angeles although we're going to try to move it up a bit,""=20 Judicial Watch and General Counsel Larry Klayman told us.=20 Mr. Klayman remains hopeful. ""We're confident any judge who sees this will= =20 have to release the documents,"" he said. A similar but separate case, brought by several newspapers, will be heard M= ay=20 18 in a San Diego Superior Court.=20 ""This is a huge financial burden on the taxpayers without an opportunity fo= r=20 the taxpayers to scrutinize the terms,"" Hal Fuson, chairman of the governme= nt=20 affairs committee of the California Newspaper Publishers Association, told= =20 the San Diego Union-Tribune. ""The general climate surrounding the governor'= s=20 approach to this has been one of secrecy."" The governor's position is that releasing the details now could make it=20 harder for the state to get the best prices for electricity.=20 But given that the governor has mismanaged this crisis so far, it's clear= =20 that this is precisely the sort of crisis the public needs to scrutinize an= d=20 for which the Public Records Act was designed. The governor should end this legal wrangling and release the documents to= =20 which citizens are entitled.=20 --- --- ----------------------------- End To Deregulation of Nevada Power CARSON CITY, Nev. (AP) via NewsEdge Corporation - Gov. Kenny Guinn signed a bill Wednesday that would stop the sale of Nevada power plants, halt deregulation and bail out struggling utilities with a new rate system. The Senate and Assembly gave the measure final approval earlier in the day and rushed it to the governor. The bill was crafted to keep Nevada from suffering from a power crisis similar to California's. ``I must tell you this is a great relief,'' said Guinn, a former utility executive, as he signed the bill into law. ``Nothing can control escalating costs, but we're in the best position to protect ourselves.'' Legislators made a last-minute change to add language that ensured consumers would get a break on rates if utilities profit from sales of excess power to other states. Guinn said the bill takes care of the most pressing energy issues, but other deregulation-related bills are sure to follow. That includes a plan that would allow major power users, such as casinos and mines, to buy power on the open market. Legislators also are working on plans encouraging energy conservation and ensuring the poor can pay their utility bills. --- --- ----- PG&E Co. Issues Statements On the Increase in the State's Cost for Power SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 18, 2001 via NewsEdge Corporation - FROM: John Nelson, Director of the News Department Pacific Gas and Electric Company There seems to have been some confusion yesterday over the effect Pacific Gas and Electric Company's bankruptcy filing may have had on energy prices. I thought it might be helpful to provide a few useful facts and figures, to help you pin down the truth behind what may be driving the state's energy costs higher. Yesterday, Governor Davis claimed that the state was paying roughly $20 million more for electricity every day as a direct result of the bankruptcy filing by PG&amp;E. While it's understandable, even laudable, that the Governor would want to fully explain the downsides of utility bankruptcy, this claim is simply not accurate. The Governor should know better. Consider the facts: -- On January 19, the credit ratings of California's two largest investor-owned utilities -- PG&amp;E and SCE -- were downgraded to below investment grade by every major rating agency. Generators immediately raised concerns about continuing to sell power to such non-creditworthy entities. -- The state reacted by passing AB7x, which authorized the state Department of Water Resources to make $400 million in power purchases. Less than two weeks later, on February 1, the Governor signed AB1x, which authorized DWR to buy power on an ongoing basis at least through 2002, until the utilities could be restored to creditworthiness. The clear understanding in the legislative debate was that the DWR would purchase the full ""net open position"", which is the amount of additional generation needed, beyond what the utilities themselves own or have under contract, to meet customer demand. However, a few weeks later, in spite of the clear intent of state law, it was revealed that DWR was not buying the full net open position, and had no intention of doing so. It was only buying power that it considered ""reasonably priced"" and was leaving the ISO to buy whatever was necessary to keep the lights on -- an amount that most estimates place at 10- to 20-percent of the state's daily electricity need. -- The ISO, in turn, revealed its intention to attempt to pass along the costs of these last-minute, high-cost, spot-market purchases to the state's non-creditworthy utilities (despite existing FERC tariffs which precluded the ISO from doing so). PG&amp;E has estimated that its share of these costs was roughly $10 million a day; SCE has a similar estimate. (We don't know for sure, because we haven't seen the bill. The DWR won't say how much power it's buying, and at what cost, and neither will the ISO.) -- On February 14, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission informed the Independent System Operator that it could not force generators to sell to non-creditworthy entities (namely, both PG&amp;E and SCE). This order appeared to force the DWR to purchase the full net open after all. The ISO responded the next day with its own interpretation of the FERC order, saying the order was limited to ""emergency"" power only. The ISO also sought and obtained in federal court a temporary restraining order (issued by Judge Damrell), forcing generators to continue selling to it. -- On February 22, five power generators filed a complaint with FERC seeking to clarify that the ISO's interpretation of the February 14 order was contrary to FERC's intent. -- On April 5, the Ninth U.S. Court of Appeals reversed Judge Damrell's lower court order affecting one of the generators, Reliant, saying the generator was no longer required to sell electricity to the ISO without assurances of payment. Presumably this order would apply to other generators, if they sought such assurances. -- On April 6, PG&amp;E noted in the announcement of its Chapter 11 filing that one of the reasons for the decision was the ""financial exposure to unreimbursed wholesale energy procurement costs"" caused by the state's failure to assume the full procurement responsibility. -- On April 6, unrelated to PG&amp;E's bankruptcy filing, FERC issued an order responding to the generators' Feb. 22 complaint against the ISO. In this new order, FERC reaffirmed its February 14 order that the ISO could only buy power on behalf of creditworthy entities, meaning neither PG&amp;E nor SCE. -- On April 9 in remarks reported in the press, the Governor's office acknowledged the State's ""bill for energy purchases will increase by upward of $8 million a day after a ruling last week by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,"" once DWR started buying the full net open position, rather than force the ISO to try to bill the utilities. It seems likely that the $8 million was an estimate based on only one of the utilities' costs, not the combination of both. -- On April 11, the ISO discontinued its daily practice of publishing the total amount it spent on energy the day before. -- Despite the history, the state continues to try to avoid buying the full net open position. On April 13, in response to the FERC order -- NOT the PG&amp;E bankruptcy filing -- the ISO sent a ""murky"" notice to generators promising that ""any bid accepted by the ISO will be deemed to have the financial support of another Qualified Party or DWR as specified in this notice."" Generators were reportedly underwhelmed by the assurances contained in the letter. -- Yesterday, in response to the Governor's claim that bankruptcy was driving up the state's costs, Gary Ackerman, spokesman for the Western Power Trading Forum, said ""I don't believe, nor have I ever heard, of a bankruptcy surcharge being added to the cost of power.... If anything, I think that generators and marketers would take solace in the fact that bankruptcy brings order to an otherwise volatile situation."" What does it all mean? Clearly, the increase in the state's costs have come as a result of the DWR finally covering the state's energy needs, as promised in AB1x. This change in DWR's buying habits has come as a direct result of the February 14 and April 6 FERC orders that the ISO only sell to creditworthy entities. These orders were issued independent of PG&amp;E's bankruptcy filing and apply equally to PG&amp;E and SCE. Neither PG&amp;E nor SCE have been creditworthy since mid-January, when their credit ratings were reduced to below investment grade, and the DWR, ISO and Governor's office have been aware of the effect of the FERC order since mid-February. Some generators have suggested that California has been paying a credit penalty since December, when the utilities' deteriorating financial situation gave rise to payment concerns. There appears to be far more evidence that the state's coy approach to AB1x implementation has created far more uncertainty in the marketplace than has PG&amp;E's Chapter 11 filing. CONTACT: PG&amp;E Co. | News Department, 415/973-5930 --- --- ------------------- J.D. Power and Associates Reports/ Nationwide Decline in Customer=20 Satisfaction of Electric Utility Service Among Midsize Businesses Price and Value Performance Hit Hard Across Nation; Satisfaction in California Continues to Plummet AGOURA HILLS, Calif., April 19 /PRNewswire/ -- Midsize business customers, who are responsible for approximately fifteen percent of the nation's electricity consumption, are very critical of electricity prices, according= to the J.D. Power and Associates 2001 Electric Utility Midsize Business Custom= er Satisfaction Study(SM) released today. Consequently, the study's nationwid= e customer satisfaction index fell -- from 100 points in 2000 to 97 in 2001. (Photo: ) ""The entire country was affected by higher natural gas prices this winter, and with more states re-evaluating deregulation, midsize business customers are especially sensitive to electricity prices,"" said Jeffrey Conklin, seni= or director at J.D. Power and Associates. The 2001 study shows that average overall customer satisfaction with California's ""big three"" investor-owned utilities -- Pacific Gas and Electr= ic, San Diego Gas and Electric, and Southern California Edison -- fell an astonishing 14 index points among midsize businesses compared to the 2000 study. ""In California, electric utility satisfaction among midsize business customers has virtually fallen into the Pacific,"" said Alan Destribats, executive director of the utility practice at J.D. Power and Associates. The study finds that the chief determinants of satisfaction among electric utility midsize customers are a provider's company image, price and value, = and power quality and reliability. As expected, midsize business customers were extremely critical of performance in the areas of company image and price and value. Even outsid= e of California, satisfaction in the price and value component fell more than any other factor -- from an index score of 100 in 2000 to 93 in 2001. Power Quality and Reliability Utility performance in power quality and reliability is improving, with the national index increasing by 3 points. Although the number of interruptions and outages experienced was relatively the same in 2001 as it was in 2000, midsize businesses report much shorter outage durations, falli= ng from an average of seven hours for the longest outages in 2000 to four hour= s in 2001. Retail Competition ""Opening utility markets to competition has proven to be a difficult process and, so far, midsize business customers are giving the industry poo= r marks,"" said Destribats. The study shows that midsize business customers located in states with competition not only are less satisfied than are customers in other states, but they are also significantly less satisfied now than last year. The stu= dy also shows that more midsize businesses have switched electricity providers= . Of midsize businesses eligible to switch power suppliers, 9 percent have do= ne so, up from 5 percent in 2000. J.D. Power and Associates interviewed representatives from more than 7,200 midsize businesses, including manufacturers, retailers, business and consumer services firms, health care providers and other midsize businesses throughout the United States. Midsize business owners are defined as those who normally spend $1,500 to $25,000 per month on electricity. The study shows that midsize businesses are now spending an average of $4,827 per mon= th on electricity. The study shows that utilities in the south region of the United States consistently receive higher ratings across all factors of customer satisfaction. Likewise, these midsize business customers also report the lowest levels of monthly electricity expenditures, on average. Midsize businesses in North Carolina spend the least for electric usage ($3,885 per month on average), while those in New Hampshire, Nevada and Utah spend the most ($5,700 to $5,800 per month on average). The study also shows that midsize businesses in Alabama and Florida report the most service interruptions and outages within the past 12 months, and those in Washingto= n report the fewest. East Region PPL Utilities, serving east Pennsylvania, ranks highest in overall customer satisfaction with midsize businesses in the eastern United States. PPL Utilities ranked highest in the East Region in four of the six factors that comprise customer satisfaction, with its primary strength in price and value. Other solid performers in this region include Public Service Electr= ic and Gas, Allegheny Power and GPU Energy. Midwest Region LG&amp;E Energy, the parent company of Kentucky Utilities and Louisville Ga= s and Electric, ranks highest in overall customer satisfaction with midsize business electric service in the Midwest. LG&amp;E Energy midsize business customers give high ratings for power quality and reliability, customer service, and billing and payment. Alliant Energy, AEP-Midwest and Xcel Energy-NSP also rank high in midsize business customer satisfaction in the Midwest Region. South Region Southern Company ranks highest in overall customer satisfaction for midsize business electric service in the South Region and received the high= est customer satisfaction index score among all utilities included in the study= . Southern Company dominates all other electric utility service providers, achieving the highest ratings in the nation in five of the six components (2 in a tie). Other strong performers in the South Region include Duke Pow= er, Florida Power &amp; Light and Progress Energy (Carolina Power &amp; Light a= nd=20 Florida Power). West Region Sierra Pacific Resources ranks highest in overall customer satisfaction with midsize business electric service in the West Region. This utility significantly leads the region by rating highest in all six components (1 i= n a tie). The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power also ranks high in thi= s region. Headquartered in Agoura Hills, Calif., J.D. Power and Associates is a global marketing information services firm operating in key business sector= s including market research, forecasting, consulting, training and customer satisfaction. The firm's quality and satisfaction measurements are based o= n actual customer responses from millions of consumers annually. J.D. Power a= nd Associates press releases and media information can be accessed through the Internet at www.jdpa.com. Media e-mail contact: michael.greywitt@jdpa.com. This press release is provided for editorial use only. No advertising or other promotional use can be made of the information in this release or of other J.D. Power and Associates survey results without the express prior written consent of J.D. Power and Associates. SOURCE J.D. Power and Associates CONTACT: Michael P. Greywitt, 818-707-9526 or John Tews, 248-267-6800, both of J.D. Power and Associates Photo: NewsCom: AP Archive: http://photoarchive.ap.org PRN Photo Desk, 888-776-6555 or 201-369-3467 Web site: http://www.jdpa.com --- --- ----------------------------- Calpine to Purchase 46 General Electric Gas Turbines Turbines in Place for= =20 70,000-megawatt Program Turbines in Place for 70,000-megawatt Program SAN JOSE, Calif., April 19 /PRNewswire/ -- Calpine Corporation (NYSE: CPN), the nation's fastest growing independent power producer, announced today it will purchase 35 model 7FB and 11 model = 7FA gas-fired turbines from GE Power Systems. With this announcement, Calpine h= as firm orders in place for the delivery of 203 turbines. When operated in a combined-cycle application, this represents 50,000 megawatts of baseload capacity. The agreement marks the company's second large volume turbine acquisition from GE and is an important component of Calpine's five-year strategic plan= to have 70,000 megawatts of generation on line by the end of 2005. Calpine wil= l take delivery of 5 turbines in 2002, with the remainder of the contract to = be filled by the end of 2005. ""This purchase significantly strengthens Calpine's leadership position in project development,"" said Doug Kieta, senior vice president-construction f= or Calpine. ""Calpine's aggressive turbine procurement program also strengthens Calpine's first-mover advantage as we expand our development program and en= ter new electricity markets across the country."" ""GE Power Systems is pleased to provide Calpine today's technology of choice for power generation,"" said Delbert Williamson, President of GE Powe= r Systems Global Sales. ""Our FA technology is the most proven advanced technology available, and we're confident our evolutionary FB technology wh= ich has been designed using GE's Corporate-wide Six Sigma initiative will provi= de Calpine highly competitive power generation."" GE's current fleet of F technology gas turbines recently surpassed 3.8 million hours of operation around the globe. GE's 7FB turbine is an evolution of the current 7FA model and is designed for higher efficiency, lower life-cycle cost power generation. By employing this new technology, Calpine will continue to generate electricity competitively while consuming less natural gas and producing fewer emissions than a typical power plant o= f comparable size. GE Power Systems (http://www.gepower.com) is one of the world's leading suppliers of power generation technology, energy services and management systems with 2000 revenue of $15 billion. The business has the largest installed base of power generation equipment in the global energy industry. GE Power Systems provides equipment, service and management solutions acros= s the power generation, oil and gas, distributed power and energy rental industries. Based in San Jose, Calif., Calpine Corporation is dedicated to providing customers with reliable and competitively priced electricity. Calpine is focused on clean, efficient combined-cycle, natural gas-fired generation an= d is the nation's largest producer of renewable geothermal energy. To date, the company has approximately 31,200 megawatts of base load capacity and 6,800 megawatts of peaking capacity in operation, under construction and announced development in 28 states and Alberta, Canada. The company was founded in 1984 and is publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol CPN. For more information about Calpine, visit its Website at www.calpine.com. This news release discusses certain matters that may be considered ""forward-looking"" statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Excha= nge Act of 1934, as amended, including statements regarding the intent, belief = or current expectations of Calpine Corporation (the ""Company"") and its management. Prospective investors are cautioned that any such forward-looki= ng statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve a number of risks and uncertainties that could materially affect actual results such as= , but not limited to, (i) changes in government regulations and anticipated deregulation of the electric energy industry; (ii) commercial operations of new plants that may be delayed or prevented because of various development = and construction risks, such as a failure to obtain financing and the necessary permits to operate or the failure of third-party contractors to perform the= ir contractual obligations (iii) cost estimates are preliminary and actual cos= t may be higher than estimated, (iv) the assurance that the Company will deve= lop additional plants, (v) a competitor's development of a lower-cost generatin= g gas-fired power plant, (vi) receipt of regulatory approvals or (vii) the ri= sks associated with marketing and selling power from power plants in the newly competitive energy market. Prospective investors are also referred to the other risks identified from time to time in the Company's reports and registration statements filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. SOURCE Calpine Corporation CONTACT: press, Kent Robertson, 408-995-5115, ext. 1144, or investors, Rick Barraza, 408-995-5115, ext. 1125, both of Calpine Corporation Web site: http://www.gepower.com Web site: http://www.calpine.com (CPN) [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Monthly Billing - Detail Class 845 / s100061.xls; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/07/2000 07:55 AM --------------------------- EIS Billing@ENRON 08/04/2000 03:30 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Monthly Billing - Detail Class 845 / s100061.xls Year 2000 changes: Phone charges: Phones are being charged to the person's company and cost center where possible, otherwise rent as before. The description will start with People\ or Room\ unless it was entered manually at the source. Data connections: One connection is being charged for each room instead of one connection for each port in a room. Attached are spreadsheets with the detail supporting the expenses for telephones, data ports, EDI, Enterprise LAN, Enterprise Help Desk, video conferencing, Internet access, email, and other services provided to Enron business units by Enron Information Services. EIS billings for items attached to the room, such as phones and data ports, and people specific services for contractors, such as LAN ID's and AT&T calling cards, are billed to the same company and cost center as room rent in EB or 3AC. For Omaha, EIS uses a phone database maintained by Tammy Anderson for this purpose. People specific services for employees are billed to the company and cost center corresponding to the employee's HR company and department. Video conference usage, data circuits, Ardmore usage, EDI, and web site billings are based on a company and cost center furnished by the person requesting the service. EIS bills services on a one month lag. We take a snapshot of the Corporate Administrative Services rent file for each room in EB and 3AC, of the Omaha phone database for each room in Omaha, and of the HR company and department for each employee. This snapshot is taken at the end of each month for use as a source for billing information. Please examine these billings for accuracy. If our billings are incorrect, generally speaking either the rent should be corrected by contacting Corporate Administrative Services or the person should be moved to the correct HR department by contacting your HR representative. If the room number is incorrect on the phone or long distance billings, this may be corrected by sending the room number along with the telephone number to Notes Mail ID ""Move-Team"". [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: FW: Jim Bannantine on eSpeak - March 23; [EMail-Body]= Kelly raised this concern too. The system is set up so that questions do not appear unless we let them -- i.e. we can screen questions and answer only those we choose. Even with that feature, though, I think we should skip this one (or just reschedule for a later date). I'll contact Jim by separate e-mail. J Mark Metts@ENRON 03/21/2000 04:29 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: FW: Jim Bannantine on eSpeak - March 23 Can we get this killed or redirected? This seems very dangerous. ---------------------- Forwarded by J Mark Metts/NA/Enron on 03/21/2000 04:28 AM --------------------------- ""Joor, William E., III"" <wjoor@velaw.com> on 03/20/2000 05:39:54 PM To: ""Metts, Mark (Enron)"" <mmetts@enron.com> cc: Subject: FW: Jim Bannantine on eSpeak - March 23 I'm afraid I have to concur with Boyd. William E. Joor III Vinson & Elkins L.L.P. 3600 First City Tower 1001 Fannin Houston, Texas 77002-6760 Tel: 713-758-2582 Fax: 713-615-5201 wjoor@velaw.com +++++++++++++++++++++++ CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE +++++++++++++++++++++++ The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged. This email is intended to be reviewed by only the individual or organization named above. If you are not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination or copying of this email and its attachments, if any, or the information contained herein is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system. Thank You -----Original Message----- From: Carano, Boyd (Enron) Sent: Monday, March 20, 2000 9:07 AM To: Joor, William E., III Subject: Jim Bannantine on eSpeak - March 23 FYI. I gotta tell you that under the circumstances the timing of this event just amazes me. Hope all is well. Boyd ---------------------- Forwarded by Boyd Carano/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 03/20/2000 06:10 PM --------------------------- Julie Ramos 03/20/2000 06:02 PM To: Sao Paulo Brazil - Office Staff, Rio de Janeiro Brazil - Office Staff, Buenos Aires Argentina - Office Staff, Salvador Brazil - Office Staff, Enron South America - Houston Staff, Santa Cruz Bolivia - Office Staff, Cuiaba Brazil - Office Staff cc: Sarah Palmer Subject: Jim Bannantine on eSpeak - March 23 (Embedded image moved to file: pic13277.pcx) The eThink Team Join Jim Bannantine, on eSpeak, Thursday, March 23 at 11:00 am (Houston); 2:00 pm (Buenos Aires and Sao Paulo ), and 1:00 pm (Cuiaba and Santa Cruz) to learn more about Enron's current South America Strategy. Jim will be holding an ""open-mike"" forum so you can ask him questions and share your ideas and opinions. If you prefer you can pre-submit your questions at eSpeak right now at the following address ethink.enron.com ! Please keep your questions short and simple! this will increase the opportunity for your question to be answered. eThink: Invest Your MInd Venham conversar com Jim Bannantine no eSpeak, Quinta-feira, dia 23 de mar?o, .s 11:00 horas (Houston); 14:00 horas (Buenos Aires e S?o Paulo) e 13:00 horas (Bolivia ) para ficar melhor informado sobre a estrat,gias atual da Enron Am,rica do Sul. Jim estar? comandando um ""bate-papo on line"" e voc poder? fazer perguntas e?partilhar suas id,ias e opini?es.??Voc pode, tamb,m, fazer suas perguntas desde j? acessando o seguinte endere?o endere?o ethink.enron.com. Por favor, elabore perguntas curtas e diretas. Isto aumentar? a possibilidade de sua pergunta ser respondida. eThink: Invest Your Mind - pic13277.pcx [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= LEAK; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 04/20/2000 09:16 AM --------------------------- Steven J Kean 04/20/2000 08:20 AM To: Paula Rieker/Corp/Enron, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron cc: Kelly Kimberly/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT Subject: LEAK ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 04/20/2000 08:19 AM --------------------------- Kelly Kimberly@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 04/20/2000 07:28 AM To: steven j kean cc: Keith Miceli Subject: LEAK A TV program in Brazil this morning announced that an investment bank has been hired to help Enron sell Elektro. Attached are the latest statement and Q and As. Who in IR needs to see this? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Confidential - Decision tree on projects; [EMail-Body]= 2 meetings on monday 8 & 9:30 in 49C2 and 2 on friday, 9 & 10 in 49C2. -----Original Message----- From: Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 3:40 PM To: Hayslett, Rod Subject: RE: Confidential - Decision tree on projects Rod: I have been meaning to ask you, what staff meetings should I be attending and when are they held? -----Original Message----- From: ""Hayslett, Rod"" COMMUNICATIONS Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 3:15 PM To: kevin.howard@enron.net Subject: Fw: Confidential - Decision tree on projects Fyi -------------------------- Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net) -----Original Message----- From: Mahan, Mariella <Mariella.Mahan@ENRON.com> To: Horton, Stanley <Stanley.Horton2@ENRON.com>; Hughes, James A. <James.A.Hughes@ENRON.com>; Hayslett, Rod <Rod.Hayslett@ENRON.com>; Sommers, Jeffrey E. <Jeffrey.E.Sommers@ENRON.com> Sent: Tue Nov 13 14:53:54 2001 Subject: Confidential - Decision tree on projects Something for us to talk about during our next staff meeting. There are three projects which have significant cash flow problems and thus difficulties in meeting debt obligations: these are: SECLP, Panama and Gaza. In the past, as I suppose we have done in Dabhol, we have taken the position that we would not inject cash into these companies and would be prepared to face a default and possible acceleration of the loans. SECLP has been the biggest issue/problem. Panama is much less (a few million of floating of our receivables from the company) would be sufficient to meet the cash crunch in April of this year. Note that, in Panama, the debt is fully guaranteed by the government and is non-recoursed to the operating company, BLM. In the past, we have discussed letting the debt default, which would cause the bank to potentially seek complete payment and acceleration from the GoPanama. The reason: the vast majority of BLM's problems stem from actions taken by the regulator that have effectively amended our PPA's with private parties; those actions resulted in significant loss of revenues, which although today have stopped or have been limited, have left a ""mark"" on the company's liquidity position. Now the question is: come April of 2002, should any of our actions in Panama or decisions related thereto (which we would have otherwise taken or made) be affected in any way by either the proposed merger or an effort by Enron to preserve efforts to re-establish investor/creditor confidence? The same could go for SECLP and Gaza. This is simply an overall ""guidance"" question. Let's take it up during our staff meeting next week, if that's ok with you. Many thanks, Mariella [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Jeff Skillings' letter from Tom DeLay re: RNSEC; [EMail-Body]= Sherrie and Rosie: Jeff and Ken both received notes from Tom Delay about designating portions of their contributions for use in Texas. Mr. DeLay would like them to make that designation using the letter below (note that it will need to be modified to be from each individually rather than a joint letter). It is, of course, up to Ken and Jeff whether to make the designation. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 07/24/2000 06:53 PM --------------------------- Cynthia Sandherr@ENRON 07/24/2000 12:15 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Elizabeth Linnell/HOU/EES@EES, Carolyn Cooney/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Jeff Skillings' letter from Tom DeLay re: RNSEC Steve: Per your voicemail, attached is the written response suggested by Congressman DeLay's fundraiser. We cannot, per his suggested text, write one letter on behalf of both Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling (due to bundling rules we should write two separate letters) and we should put it on personal stationery and not corporate letterhead. Please let Carolyn or I know if you need anything further on this. Thanks, Cynthia WRobold1@aol.com on 07/24/2000 12:23:08 PM To: Ccooney@enron.com cc: Warren@buckham.com Subject: (no subject) Carolyn and Cynthia, You should write this letter on your letter head and direct it to Joe Jaso and copy Tom DeLay, Jim Ellis, and myself. All funds where money could be left in the State of Texas from corporate and personal should be included. Dear Joe: Enron, Mr. Ken Lay and Mr. Skilling are requesting that their contribution be matched per our understanding from the fax and verbal communications from Warren RoBold. This totals $100,000 between both individuals and the Corporation for the RNSEC matching funds program. We want these funds matched in time for the Texas State deadlines. It was our intention from the onset of this program to have our funds go to this account. The various points of contact from the RNC caused some minor confusion so checks went to Texas instead of DC. This is very important to Mr. Lay and Mr. Shilling. Let us know if we need to request these funds returned and new checks written and mailed to you at your DC address. You may call me if you have any questions. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Information and Securities Trading; [EMail-Body]= To:JONES, TANA Email:tana.jones@enron.com - 7138533399 ? Enron Wholesale Services - Office of the Chairman ? From:??Mark Frevert, Chairman & CEO ??????Greg Whalley, President & COO ??????Mark Haedicke, Managing Director & General Counsel ? Subject:??Confidential Information and Securities Trading ? Enron Wholesale Services ('EWS') maintains official Policies and Procedures Regarding Confidential Information and Securities Trading ('Policies and Procedures'), which have been revised as of November 15, 2000 to reflect the new EWS structure. These policies and procedures are intended to allow us simultaneously to pursue our diverse businesses and to protect confidential information, our reputation for integrity, and EWS and its employees from legal liability. ? You are required to become familiar with, and to comply with, the Policies and Procedures. The newly revised Policies and Procedures are available for your review on LegalOnline, the new intranet website maintained by the Enron Wholesale Services Legal Department. Please click on the attached link to access LegalOnline: ? ? You must certify your compliance with the Policies and Procedures within two weeks of your receipt of this message. The LegalOnline site will allow you to quickly and conveniently certify your compliance on-line with your SAP Personal ID number. If you have any questions concerning the Policies or Procedures, please call Lance Schuler at extension 3-5419, Mark Haedicke at extension 3-6544, Alan Aronowitz at extension 3-3214, Bob Bruce at extension 5-7780 or Donna Lowry at extension 3-1939. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call
 Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and
 Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted; [EMail-Body]= FYI Item: Rob Gramlich, formerly with FERC, PJM, and, most recently, PG&E NEG will be taking a position as Chief Economic Advisor for Chair Pat Wood, effective I October. For what its worth, Belden, Gramlich, and I all worked together in the mid-90s. (I hired Rob as a research assistant in 1994 when I was a scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab.) Alan Comnes -----Original Message----- From: Comnes, Alan Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 2:13 PM To: Alvarez, Ray; Walton, Steve; Mara, Susan; Lawner, Leslie; Cantrell, Rebecca W.; Fulton, Donna; Dasovich, Jeff; Nicolay, Christi L.; Steffes, James D.; 'jalexander@gibbs-bruns.com'; Allen, Phillip K.; Noske, Linda J.; Perrino, Dave; Black, Don; Frank, Robert; Miller, Stephanie; Tycholiz, Barry; Novosel, Sarah; Thome, Jennifer; Hall, Steve C. (Legal); Lindberg, Susan Subject: RE: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted Another agenda item I got a call today from Bob Pease, Attorney with Market Oversight and Enforcement at FERC, 202-208-0131, to invite Enron to a meeting called by Chairman Wood at the CAISO offices on 24-25 Sep 01. The purpose of the meeting is to try to get the FERC, CAISO, DWR and other market participants to work out issues related to reliability that have arisen in recent months. Issues include those that that affect operations and reliability such as the must-offer requirements, ramping, etc. He was not clear as to whether they would address creditworthiness issues. From the FERC staff ""non-decisional"" employees will attend. He invited solutions/proposals in advance of the meeting. Enron needs to decide who to send. Alan Comnes -----Original Message----- From: Alvarez, Ray Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 8:31 AM To: Comnes, Alan; Walton, Steve; Mara, Susan; Lawner, Leslie; Cantrell, Rebecca W.; Fulton, Donna; Dasovich, Jeff; Nicolay, Christi L.; Steffes, James D.; 'jalexander@gibbs-bruns.com'; Allen, Phillip K.; Noske, Linda J.; Perrino, Dave; Black, Don; Frank, Robert; Miller, Stephanie; Tycholiz, Barry; Novosel, Sarah; Thome, Jennifer; Hall, Steve C. (Legal); Lindberg, Susan Subject: RE: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted PLEASE MARK YOUR CALENDAR Date: Every Thursday Time: 7:30 am Pacific, 9:30 am Central, and 10:30 am Eastern time Number: 1-888-271-0949 Host Code: 661877 (for Ray only) Participant Code: 936022 (for everyone else) The table of the on-going FERC issues and proceedings is available to all team members on the O drive. Please feel free to revise/add to/ update this table as appropriate. Proposed agenda for tomorrow: CAISO filed Amendment No. 40 which would suspend the use of preliminary invoices and disbursements. CA refund proceeding status. Please feel free to communicate any additional agenda items to the group . [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Demand buy-down proposal; [EMail-Body]= The e-copy. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 06/07/2001 03:44 PM --------------------------- Richard Shapiro 05/17/2001 04:34 PM To: Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Arora/Enron@EnronXGate cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Demand buy-down proposal As we discussed....... as much flesh as we can put on this by midday tommorrow would be quite helpful. I would think there are significant aggregation opportunities available to us once this is implemented. Let me know what else you need from me. Thanks. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Next NERC Reliability Meeting on Legislation -- August 9th; [EMail-Body]= See NERC memo below that was just received. They have scheduled what they hope will be the final meeting to ""resolve"" the reliability legislation next week -- August 9th. Of course, this is awfully presumptuous in that it assumes that the model to be worked off of is the NERC model (even the shortened one), and not the PJM model that others prefer to use. We need to decide whether we suggest any changes to the shortened NERC version, even those we know they would not take just to show a willingness to offer specific comments as we promised at the last meeting, or simply ""agree to disagree."" ---------------------- Forwarded by John Shelk/NA/Enron on 08/02/2001 05:09 PM --------------------------- ""David Cook"" on 08/02/2001 05:06:14 PM Sent by: owner-rlc@nerc.com To: <rlc@nerc.com> cc: Subject: revisions to reliability language Reliability legislation coalition I have attached a memo outlining the edits that NERC would make in the 7/19 discussion draft. My memo does not take account of the suggestions that have been circulated in the last day or so. I've also attached a marked-up version of the 7/19 draft indicating our changes. I propose that we meet in Washington on Thursday, August 9, at 10:00 a.m., with the goal of coming to closure on reliability legislation that is shorter and less detailed than the language in the pending bills, but that still preserves the essence of an industry self-regulatory organization. I am working on a location and expect to provide that information tomorrow. I know that scheduling this meeting may be difficult for some and that schedules are already full, but schedules will become even more difficult later in the month. I take as our deadline having new language for the Hill during the August recess. Thank you in advance for your continuing efforts to bring this new model for reliability into existence. David Cook General Counsel NERC office: 609-452-8060 cell: 609-915-3063 david.cook@nerc.net <<Edits to 7-19 discussion draft.doc>> <<Discussion draft, 071901 (dnc comments).DOC>> - Edits to 7-19 discussion draft.doc - Discussion draft, 071901 (dnc comments).DOC [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CONFIDENTIAL AND LEGALLY PRIVILEGED; [EMail-Body]= CONFIDENTIAL AND LEGALLY PRIVILEGED Vicki Many thanks for your assistance yesterday. Clinton Energy Management Services, Inc. because it holds a current power marketing certificate is an entity which we would like to move to being a direct subsidiary of Enron Corp. to take effect today. This is considered to be an essential part of restructuring to meet our current and future needs. While the day to day control will remain where it is and all the efforts assign contracts and other work should progress as planned, since the value to Enron Corp. is the power marketing certificate nothing should be done to jeopardize this. In addition we will be changing the charter and will need copies of the existing charter to effect those changes required. Please call me if you need to discuss this further. Kind regards, Marcus [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Confidential - Decision tree on projects; [EMail-Body]= This staff meeting is monday at 9:30 in 3AC. -----Original Message----- From: =09Mahan, Mariella =20 Sent:=09Tuesday, November 13, 2001 2:54 PM To:=09Horton, Stanley; Hughes, James A.; Hayslett, Rod; Sommers, Jeffrey E. Subject:=09Confidential - Decision tree on projects Something for us to talk about during our next staff meeting. There are three projects which have significant cash flow problems and thus= difficulties in meeting debt obligations: these are: SECLP, Panama and Gaz= a. In the past, as I suppose we have done in Dabhol, we have taken the pos= ition that we would not inject cash into these companies and would be prepa= red to face a default and possible acceleration of the loans. SECLP has be= en the biggest issue/problem. Panama is much less (a few million of floati= ng of our receivables from the company) would be sufficient to meet the cas= h crunch in April of this year. Note that, in Panama, the debt is fully gu= aranteed by the government and is non-recoursed to the operating company, B= LM. In the past, we have discussed letting the debt default, which would c= ause the bank to potentially seek complete payment and acceleration from th= e GoPanama. The reason: the vast majority of BLM's problems stem from acti= ons taken by the regulator that have effectively amended our PPA's with pri= vate parties; those actions resulted in significant loss of revenues, which= although today have stopped or have been limited, have left a ""mark"" on th= e company's liquidity position. =20 Now the question is: come April of 2002, should any of our actions in Panam= a or decisions related thereto (which we would have otherwise taken or made= ) be affected in any way by either the proposed merger or an effort by Enro= n to preserve efforts to re-establish investor/creditor confidence? The sa= me could go for SECLP and Gaza. This is simply an overall ""guidance"" question. Let's take it up during our= staff meeting next week, if that's ok with you. Many thanks, Mariella [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Department Meeting; [EMail-Body]= depelschen children's home dinner [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: ""The"" Bullet; [EMail-Body]= looks good Richard Shapiro 05/01/2001 06:39 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: ""The"" Bullet Let's discuss. ---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron on 05/01/2001 06:39 PM --------------------------- Richard Shapiro 05/01/2001 06:11 PM To: cc: Subject: ""The"" Bullet It is critical to our nation's energy future to achieve robust competition in wholesale power markets in order to ensure that electricity can move most effectively from where it is produced to where it is most needed. To that end, this Administration will strongly encourage the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission( FERC) to actively exercise jurisdiction over all aspects of electricity transmission in interstate commerce and place all uses of the grid under the same rates, terms, and conditions. This jurisdiction must also be extended by Congress to cover non-FERC jurisdictional power authorities. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Confidential Attorney Client Privilege - Attorney Work Product; [EMail-Body]= The letter looks fine. Eric H's letter was addressed to ""market participants."" Can we get EPSA or WPTF to file this letter? Alan C. Mary Hain 01/25/2001 04:58 PM To: Christian Yoder/HOU/ECT@ECT, steve.c.hall@enron.com, Richard Sanders, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe@Enron, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James E Keller/HOU/EES@EES, Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Richter/HOU/ECT@ECT, gfergus@brobeck.com, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Greg Wolfe@ECT, Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro cc: Subject: Confidential Attorney Client Privilege - Attorney Work Product I have drafted the attached letter denying the Cal ISO's request to send it (and the EOB) EPMI and EES' cost information for transactions over the FERC's cost cap. Since I believe we are on very firm ground, my initial inclination was to send no response to the ISO's letter, so there would be nothing to quote in the press. However, I drafted this letter at Alan's suggestion for purposes of discussion. We should decide whether to send a letter before distributing this draft more widely in-house to discuss how to parse the message. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Meeting Notice - California Document Production Issues; [EMail-Body]= calendar ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/06/2001 01:04 PM --------------------------- From: Mark E on 07/06/2001 12:22 PM Sent by: Janette Elbertson/ENRON@enronXgate To: David W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, John J Lavorato/ENRON@enronXgate, Richard B Sanders/Enron@enronXgate, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Greg Whalley/ENRON@enronXgate, Robert C Williams/ENRON@enronXgate cc: Kay Chapman/HOU/EES@EES, Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Kimberly Hillis/ENRON@enronXgate, Twanda Sweet/ENRON@enronXgate, Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron, Kathy Dodgen/HOU/EES@EES, Liz M Taylor/ENRON@enronXgate, Jan Cooley/ENRON@enronXgate, Jessica Ramirez/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: Meeting Notice - California Document Production Issues There will be a meeting on Monday, July 9, from 10:00 a.m. to Noon in EB3321 to discuss the referenced issues. Thank you. Janette Elbertson Enron Wholesale Services Legal Department - EB3326 Telephone: (713) 853-7906 Fax: (713) 646-2600 e-mail address: janette.elbertson@enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Lou Pai's staff meeting, 25C3.; [EMail-Body]= ELCON commercial practices group[ [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Information and Securities Trading; [EMail-Body]= To:WILLIAMS, WILLIAM Email:bwillia5@enron.com - 503-464-3730 Enron Wholesale Services - Office of the Chairman From: Mark Frevert, Chairman & CEO Mark Haedicke, Managing Director & General Counsel Subject: Confidential Information and Securities Trading To keep pace with the fluid and fast-changing demands of our equity trading activities, Enron Wholesale Services (""EWS"") has recently revised its official Policies and Procedures Regarding Confidential Information and Securities Trading (""Policies and Procedures""). These revisions reflect two major developments: (1) our equity trading activities have been extended into the United Kingdom, and (2) in an effort to streamline the information flow process, the ""Review Team"" will play a more centralized role, so that the role of the ""Resource Group"" is no longer necessary.You are required to become familiar with, and to comply with, the Policies and Procedures. The newly revised Policies and Procedures are available for your review on LegalOnline, the new intranet website maintained by the Enron Wholesale Services Legal Department. Please click on the attached link to access LegalOnline: If you have already certified compliance with the Policies and Procedures during the 2001 calendar year, you need not re-certify at this time, although you are still required to to review and become familiar with the revised Policies and Procedures. If you have not certified compliance with the Policies and Procedures during the 2001 calendar year, then you must do so within two weeks of your receipt of this message. The LegalOnline site will allow you to quickly and conveniently certify your compliance on-line with your SAP Personal ID number. If you have any questions concerning the Policies or Procedures, please call Bob Bruce at extension 5-7780 or Donna Lowry at extension 3-1939. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Confidential information; [EMail-Body]= FYI Leslie ----- Forwarded by Leslie Hansen/HOU/ECT on 11/20/2000 03:24 PM ----- Leslie Hansen 11/20/2000 03:20 PM To: Nanette Crist <NCrist@prebon.com>@ENRON cc: Subject: Re: Confidential information Nanette: Attached please find a clean and red-lined version of the NDA. Let me know if it's acceptable and I will have it executed and sent to you. Leslie [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Confidential - Termination Proceedings; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Garrity, Vicki [mailto:vgarrity@iso-ne.com] Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 8:15 AM To: Fowler, Leonard - NGRID Cc: Lindberg, Susan; Allegretti, Daniel; Belval, Paul - DBH; Bacon, Roger - MMWEC; Gerity, Patrick - DB&H; Doot, David - DBH; Pitre, Becky Subject: Confidential - Termination Proceedings <<Enron Energy Marketing 12-3-01 Termination Letter.doc>> <<Enron Energy Services 12-3-01 Termination Letter.doc>> <<Enron Power Marketing 12-3-01 Termination Letter.doc>> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message(due to missing attachment)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: ENE Officer Elections; [EMail-Body]= No. We have reallocated some of the responsibilities, but Cindy has a significant part of the HR organization and continues to manage Community Relations, so her title is accurate. Thanks From: Kelly Johnson/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/19/2001 01:06 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: RE: ENE Officer Elections Thanks, Steve. Do we need to change Cindy Olson's title? Let me know. -----Original Message----- From: Kean, Steven Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 1:03 PM To: Johnson, Kelly Subject: Re: ENE Officer Elections We should include David Oxley -- VP of human resources. From: Kelly Johnson/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/18/2001 11:13 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: ENE Officer Elections Steve: Please review the attached ENE Officer list for your direct reports and approve. Thank you. << File: KEAN.doc >> Kelly M. Johnson Enron Corp. Executive Assistant Tel: (713) 853-6485 Fax: (713) 853-2534 E-Mail: kelly.johnson@enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Greenpeace letters to Enron Europe concerning our position on
 Kyoto; [EMail-Body]= I think Jeff should be the point person on putting the response together on this (and future air and climate change position inquiries). Jeff - please make sure you get the comments of all involved. Jeffrey Keeler 04/17/2001 05:02 PM To: Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Kelly Kimberly/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Lauren Iannarone/NY/ECT@ECT, Catherine McKalip-Thompson/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Lisa Jacobson/ENRON@enronXgate, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Re: Greenpeace letters to Enron Europe concerning our position on Kyoto All: I would like to discuss how we might respond to this letter from Greenpeace, if at all. The letter is attached way at the bottom of this e-mail, and was received in several Enron European offices as a copy of what was sent to Jeff Skilling and other CEOs of major companies. I have not confirmed our receipt of such a letter from any of you, but am assuming it was delivered. I think we could respond in a very positive, constructive manner to Greenpeace, based on the statements we've already documented and the strategies we are developing. Lisa Jacobson and I are currently working on developing some tighter climate change and clean air ""messages"" that we can use in multiple areas ASAP -- upcoming Ken Lay speeches and interactions with the Administration, revising the Statement for the 2001 Corporate Responsibility Report, Enron Business articles and other internal uses, responses to environmental group inquiries and shareholder meeting Q&A, and use in everyday speeches and advocacy work. The Greenpeace questions are tricky, and set up no-win answers for the most part. I doubt they will get any direct answers to questions like: ""Does your company support President Bush in his opposition to the protocol?"" In my opinion, we can respond to Greenpeace without directly responding to these types of questions. Addressing Kyoto directly is a slippery slope -- its best to stick with the solution-oriented approach we've always taken. For this reason, I was a bit concerned to see in the e-mail chain below a characterization of Mark Palmer's statement on Kyoto (given to Jackie Gentile in London) -- ""Enron has always taken the view that the Kyoto protocol was not a workable solution to dealing with CO2 emissions. However it is not the principles behind Kyoto that we take issue with, rather it is the vehicle that has been devised to deliver the results."" I believe it is dangerous to make such statements for a number of reasons -- Greenpeace would absolutely beat us over the head with it, Friends of the Earth could step up its shareholder initiatives, etc. Also, this sets you up for a number of follow up questions that I don't think we have answers to, like: What about Kyoto is not workable? What would make it workable and would we help make it workable? If not Kyoto, what is Enron's preferred ""vehicle?"" I'd really rather stay with a constructive, solution-oriented approach and avoid reference to Kyoto altogether. I will talk with Kate Bauer in Enron Europe about this, but I think we need to decide on a global, corporate-wide response to Greenpeace. I would be happy to set up a quick conference call on the subject, or just field comments by e-mail -- whatever works best. Thoughts? Jeffrey Keeler Director, Environmental Strategies Enron Washington DC office - (202) 466-9157 Cell Phone (203) 464-1541 Lauren Iannarone@ECT 04/17/2001 11:20 AM To: Jeffrey.Keeler@enron.com cc: Subject: Re: Greenpeace letters to Enron Europe concerning our position on Kyoto FYI: I defer to you on this but assume we are in a good position to respond to Greenpeace. I assume you will discuss with Kate and Peter - let me know - thanks ---------------------- Forwarded by Lauren Iannarone/NY/ECT on 04/17/2001 11:37 AM --------------------------- Peter.Styles@enron.com on 04/17/2001 09:42:40 AM To: Kate.Bauer@enron.com cc: lauren.goldblatt@enron.com, kelly_kimberly@enron.net, Fiona.Grant@enron.com, Jackie.Gentle@enron.com, Stacey.Bolton@enron.com, Nailia.Dindarova@enron.com Subject: Re: Greenpeace letters to Enron Europe concerning our position on Kyoto Thanks Kate. Please keep Nailia Dindarova in my Brussels office and me copied on responses since I will be co-ordinating any pronouncements on this topic in Europe in policymakers' circles. For them neither the negativity nor the vagueness of the words you quote below (on which Mark and Jackie already know my views!) will be adequate. Kate Bauer@ENRON 17/04/2001 15:36 To: lauren.goldblatt@enron.com cc: kelly_kimberly@enron.net, Fiona Grant/LON/ECT@ECT, Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT@ECT, Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Greenpeace letters to Enron in the Netherlands and Spain re our position on Kyoto Lauren Further to my telephone message today, I would be grateful for your view on the approach we should be taking to the issue of Greenpeace sending letters to our European offices re: Kyoto. Several of our offices (Spain, Belgium, Netherlands) have received a local language version of the letter originally sent to Jeff Skilling, and other CEOs, on 5 April 2001. The email chain below gives an indication of what is in circulation. Greenpeace is expecting a response within the next week. Jackie Gentle has made me the point of contact in the PR department for this issue. We have discussed this issue briefly and we would support issuing an initial statement to acknowledge receipt of the letters, perhaps followed by a standardised, corporate- approved letter, but would like to ensure our approach is supported, and consistent with any actions, by Corporate. As some of the countries in which we operate have tangible ""green"" focused projects e.g. we have acquired a wind project in The Netherlands, it may be appropriate to allow such countries to personalise their response in local language. If we follow up an initial acknowledgement with a fuller response to Greenpeace's questions, I suggest we consider the following issues raised recently by Jackie Gentle: ""In response to several requests for clarification, I have spoken with Mark Palmer who has provided the following information on Enron's stance regarding Kyoto: Enron has always taken the view that the Kyoto protocol was not a workable solution to dealing with CO2 emissions. However it is not the principles behind Kyoto that we take issue with, rather it is the vehicle that has been devised to deliver the results. We firmly believe that there is work to be done in reducing greenhouse gases and Enron has put in place a number of programs that have measurably reduced carbon dioxide as well as SO2 and Oxides of Nitrogen (Nox) By way of example .... emissions trading programs have been put in place where these can be implemented Enron is one of the largest developers of natural gas-fired power plants which produce about 50 percent less carbon dioxide than coal or oil-fired plants demand-side management programs through EES to reduce energy usage the Catalytica program focus on renewable-related projects At the current time there is no formal statement from Enron Corp on the Kyoto issue."" Before we proceed, I would be grateful if you could contact me to share your views on this. Many thanks. Best regards Kate Kate Bauer Manager Public Relations and Communications ext: 32495 ---------------------- Forwarded by Kate Bauer/EU/Enron on 17/04/2001 14:14 --------------------------- Nailia Dindarova@ECT 17/04/2001 13:28 To: Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Eva Hoeffelman/LON/ECT@ECT, Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT@ECT, Julie Green/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Fiona Grant/LON/ECT@ECT, Andrew Morrison/LON/ECT@ECT, Hans-mart Groen/Enron@EUEnronXgate, Ross Sankey/LON/ECT@ECT, Kate Bauer/EU/Enron@Enron, Paul Hennemeyer/LON/ECT@ECT, Teun Van Biert/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Greenpeace letters to Enron in the Netherlands and Spain re our position on Kyoto (Document link: Kate Bauer) We have now recieved a letter from Greenpeace Belgium here in the Brussels office (please see attached). (See attached file: Greenpeace Belgium_Letter April 13 2001.tif) Peter Styles 17/04/2001 11:59 To: Stacey Bolton/Corp/Enron@Enron, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Nailia Dindarova/LON/ECT@ECT, Alfredo Huertas/LON/ECT@ECT, Teun Van Biert/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Greenpeace letters to Enron in the Netherlands and Spain re our position on Kyoto As I was saying in my e-mail a few minutes ago...................... ---------------------- Forwarded by Peter Styles/LON/ECT on 17/04/2001 12:01 --------------------------- Eva Hoeffelman 17/04/2001 12:52 To: Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT@ECT, Axel_Pothof@nl.bm.com cc: Julie Green/LON/ECT@ECT, Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Fiona Grant/LON/ECT@ECT, Andrew Morrison/LON/ECT@ECT, Hans-mart Groen/Enron@EUEnronXgate, Ross Sankey/LON/ECT@ECT, Kate Bauer/EU/Enron@Enron, Paul Hennemeyer/LON/ECT@ECT, Teun Van Biert/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Greenpeace letter to Enron in the Netherlands re our position on Kyoto Please find below the Greenpeace letter our Dutch office received today (as has our Spanish office). Their deadline for our answers to their questions is before 26 April. I am asking our PR agency in the NL to translate the letter asap. In the mean time, I will wait for direction on our official corporate response on this issue and then discuss suitability or possible adaptation for the Dutch market or for this letter in particular. I have advised Hans-Mart to make sure all employees in the Dutch office do not reply to any calls or queries re the above ubject and to refer them to me. Thanks Eva ---------------------- Forwarded by Eva Hoeffelman/LON/ECT on 04/17/2001 11:36 AM --------------------------- London Fax System2 04/17/2001 11:26 AM To: Eva Hoeffelman/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: New fax received (Likely sender: +31 0 206541966). You have received a new fax from +31 0 206541966 The image contains 1 page(s). - Greenpeace Belgium_Letter April 13 2001.tif [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Alhamd's Presentations; [EMail-Body]= Offer him the job. Rob Bradley@ENRON 07/25/2000 12:40 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Andrew Miles/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Alhamd's Presentations FYI--go to the Internet Strategy one for what you need. I am pretty sure he will work out with me and Jeff--you can pull the trigger and hire him with my concurrence if you feel comfortable enough. - Rob ---------------------- Forwarded by Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron on 07/26/2000 12:33 AM --------------------------- Alhamd Alkhayat @ ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 07/25/2000 12:25 PM To: Rob Bradley@ENRON cc: Subject: Alhamd's Presentations Rob, I think the meeting with Steve went great. He asked me to forward you some presentations that I have made, and that you would pass them on to him. They are here in reverse chrono order. Pass my regards and enjoy your vacation. Cheers Hamd [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: PRC cluster descriptors - draft; [EMail-Body]= I think this is a fine attempt, but I continue to believe that a pure relative ranking offers the most flexibility and is more like the way the process works in practice. A separate list of desired behaviors, criteria etc can be used to guide discussion but I believe the ranking itself should remain purely relative. Gina Corteselli 09/14/2000 06:04 PM To: Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, David Oxley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: PRC cluster descriptors - draft All; Aattached are a draft of the PRC cluster descriptors which we discussed several weeks back. I has sent a first draft to Michelle and Dick, and both had some suggestions which I have tried to incorporate. I am still awaiting Dick and Michelle's impressions of the below, but also look forward to your impressions and input. Likewise I would appreciate your input on whether or not we need to change the ratings on the feedback forms to numerical ratings 1-5 to mimic the clusters. look forward to hearing from you, Many thanks, Gina ---------------------- Forwarded by Gina Corteselli/Corp/Enron on 09/14/2000 05:54 PM --------------------------- Gina Corteselli 09/14/2000 05:03 PM To: dick@jeannerett.com cc: Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: descriptors again Dick; here is another try at the descriptors. I tried to apply the information you provided and to describe qualities of an employee's performance . I'm not sure whether this is any better, but would appreciate your input. What I am finding most challenging writing descriptors which are interchangeable with all levels and job groups within the company. The behaviors these describe and measure need to be general in nature so that they can apply to a VP and an admin assistant, as well as to all four Peer Groups within Enron. Likewise, I would appreciate your thoughts on the necessity/value of changing the feedback forms to reflect the same numerical ratings. presently the feedback forms use the same descriptors as the cluster (i.e. Superior - Issues). In your opinion should these also be 1-5 ratings with one = to highest and 5= to lowest in scale? I look forward to hearing your thoughts and impressions. You may either e-mail me or call me on 713 345-3377. Many thanks in advance, Gina 1 = Relative to his/her peers, this employee is a visionary who identifies new ideas and methods, inspires and motivates others by example, embodies Enron's vision and values, and demonstrates a mastery of the business and technical skills necessary to excel in his/her position. 2 = Relative to his/her peers this employee drives change, demonstrates vision and values, displays resourcefulness when faced with unexpected challenges, and comprehends and effectively uses the business and technical skills required to perform his/her job. 3 = Relative to his/her peers this employee supports innovation and improvement, understands Enron's vision and values, and continues to develop the core skills and business/technical skills necessary to satisfy the requirements of his/her position. 4 = Relative to his/her peers this employee accepts change, demonstrates some independent thinking and can apply resources and business and technical skills to adequately perform his/her job. 5 = Relative to his/her peers this employee has difficulty accepting change, lacks resourcefulness, offers minimal contribution and does not demonstrate the skills or knowledge to fulfill the responsibilities of the position This employee must make changes or termination is likely. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: pipeline aftermath; [EMail-Body]= In case you had not heard, Lou Pai has done some fundraising for Franks and both he and his(Lou's) sister know him fairly well. Keep it in mind if at some point we need to get in to see him. From: Jeffrey Keeler 08/23/2000 03:44 PM To: Clayton Seigle/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron@ENRON, David L Johnson/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Allison Navin/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Re: pipeline aftermath Clayton: Here are some preliminary answers to your questions (and I have copied GPG and Government Affairs folks as well to share this information): 1) I am currently assessing the situation regarding pipeline safety legislation. This week has been very quiet on Capitol Hill as all of the members are back in the states on August recess running for re-election and it is a big vacation week for staff...but here's what I am hearing: As you may or may not know, we have been been very active this year trying to temper pipeline safety legislation that was fairly reactionary in the wake of last summer's liquid pipeline accident in Bellingham, WA. SENATE: In June, Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Slade Gorton (R-WA) led the charge to pass a pipeline safety bill (S. 2438) out of the Senate Commerce Committee, and that bill is awaiting floor action in the Senate. Because of the hasty way in which S. 2438 was drafted and passed, there was a realization by both Republicans and Democrats in the Senate that the bill could not make it to the floor for a vote until some serious changes were made -- mostly things that were deal breakers for industry. Enron and El Paso were leading the charge and we had a number of Senators backing our efforts to negotiate changes, including Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-MS), Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), John Breaux (D-LA), and Sam Brownback (R-KS). From what I've learned since the accident, these Senators are not changing their strategy and are still asking for the same improvements. Fortunately, most of the changes we were looking to make were fairly technical and not the types of things that would be seriously compromised by the accident. Industy was already in the position of having to accept a number of things they never would have if not for he Bellingham incident...the El Paso incident just reinforces those. The biggest potential effect I see from the El Paso accident is an increased effort to pass something before the Congress adjourns in early October. The New Mexico Senators are already calling for a floor vote on the McCain/Gorton legislation, and I there will certainly be greater pressure on leaders to wrap up negotiations, get agreement from all sides on a bill, and move it unanimously through a vote on the Senate floor. HOUSE: The House is moving a bit more slowly, but again, I'd expect the El Paso situation to expedite things somewhat. There were several bills introduced in the House that were not moving anywhere, including an identical copy of the McCain legislation introduced by Rep. Bob Franks (R-NJ). Franks is now anxious to move legislation, as he is running for Senate and would love to take credit for helping out on an issue of national visibility. Before the accident, House Tranportation Committee leaders on both the Democrat and Republican side were working on a ""consensus"" bill that they could introduce in early September and move quickly through the Committee and to the House floor. I'm told that negotiations on that legislation are moving forward and a draft bill will be produced shortly. Unlike our experience in the Senate, we have had significant input into the bill in advance, and expect something that we can live with -- and something more reasonable than the McCain bill. With that said, there may be an effort to expand the bill in a few areas because of the El Paso accident, so we'll have to see what kind of hand we're dealt in the next few weeks. Overall, I'd expect pipeline safety legislation to be given higher priority when Congress returns after Labor Day. In the absence of this accident, I would have given it slim odds of passing in the few short weeks until adjournment, with appropriations bills taking up most of Congress' precious time. Now there will be greater pressure to come to consensus and move bills through by an expedited process, so that everyone running for election in November can show that they've done something about this terrible tragedy. With that said, there's still not that much time to get legislation through, so I'd say that there's still a chance it may not get done this year. If I had to attach a number to it, I'd say that the El Paso accident improves the chances of legislation going all the way to probably 50-60%. 2) Gas supply to California: I'll have to do some more checking in this area and get back to you. All I've heard so far is that the safety questions that remain may slow the speed of restarting flow on the line, notwithstanding that El Paso thinks it can have things running again fairly quickly. I'm sure the power crunch in California will put some counter-pressure on, but I just don't have good intelligence on this yet. With all this said, I'm on vacation this week and parts of next week finishing up some leave I've taken for the birth of our new baby daughter, so I may not have an additional report for you until early to mid next week. If you have questions, please respond by e-mail, or leave a message on my voice mail at 202-466-9157. Regards, Jeff Keeler From: Cynthia Sandherr 08/23/2000 09:48 AM Sent by: Allison Navin To: Clayton Seigle/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Jeffrey Keeler/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Re: pipeline aftermath Jeff Keeler in our office handles pipeline safety issues and I am copying him on this e-mail so that he may reply to you directly. Also, Cynthia is out of the office through the end of the week but will be reachable tomorrow and Friday. Thanks. Allison Clayton Seigle@ECT 08/22/2000 06:29 PM To: Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: pipeline aftermath Hi Cynthia: The commercial officers here are very concerned with the El Paso pipeline explosion in New Mexico. We would love to get some input from your group on the following questions if possible: 1. What is the status of pipeline safety legislation on the Hill, and what is the outlook for action between now and the end of the year? 2. What are people from California saying about the added pressure on gas supplies, and what are people from New Mexico saying about restarting the flow of gas while safety questions remain? These questions come straight from the top, and any information you could provide would be very helpful. Please write me back or call and let me know if/when you think we might be able to get some initial answers. Thanks very much! Clay [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= API Question; CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED ATTORNEY/CLIENT
 COMMUNICATION & ATTORNEY'S WORK PRODUCT; [EMail-Body]= Stan: V&E wrote/masterminded the partnership agreement for our MLP. It is complicated and has been amended several times. In view of these factors, V&E should tell us whether we can use the $2.5 million of cash from the insurance recovery to retroactively reclaim a portion of the 4th quarter API's. In particular, Baird should give us this opinion since he has handled the partnership agreement since day one. Baird is gone on vacation for the next week. He is planning to give us an answer within a few days of his return. He will give the matter serious thought, but what we are asking is pretty aggressive. His associate, Carlos Pena, has reviewed the partnership agreement and his first take on the question is that we cannot revise the available cash for the fourth quarter in this way. But the matter requires far more thought than this----and Bob will also need to talk with Lori (also gone on vacation) to come up with a meaningful answer for us. I will stay after this, but in light of the above, it will probably be early July b/f we get V&E's final position on this. If this won't do, please let me know and I'll explore other avenues of getting an answer out of V&E. Thanks. SWD [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Houston City Officials Reception - July 31st; [EMail-Body]= We don't know yet. He has been invited and we expect most will show up, but we won't know until they do. Enron Energy Services From: Karen Owens 07/20/2000 09:04 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Re: Houston City Officials Reception - July 31st Is Gordon Quan attending? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Department meeting conference call.  800-283-1805, in Rick's name.; [EMail-Body]= Gordon Weil Dave Marquart Richard Tabors [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Dinner next week with Piotr; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: ""Karasinski, Piotr [FI]"" Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 8:48 AM To: VKaminski@aol.com Cc: vkamins@enron.com; Karasinski, Piotr [FI] Subject: RE: Dinner next week with Piotr Ups ..., masz racje, spotkanie z Kolakowskim jest jutro ... ... na kolacje pojdziemy w czwartek ... Piotr -----Original Message----- From: marek.musiela@bnpparibas.com Sent: 25 June 2001 14:31 To: VKaminski@aol.com Cc: vkamins@enron.com; piotr.karasinski@ssmb.com Subject: Re: Dinner next week with Piotr Piotr i Vince, Czwartek wieczorem jest OK i dla mnie. Piotr, to spotkanie jest w czwartek czy we wtorek. Tak czy inaczej chetnie bym poszedl. Probowalem dzwonic ale bez rezultatu. Jesli bedziesz dzwonil na mobile to dzwon na moj 3band 07909533069. Marek 23/06/2001 22:48 Internet VKaminski@aol.com - 23/06/2001 22:48 To: Marek MUSIELA cc: piotr.karasinski bcc: Subject: Dinner next week with Piotr Marek, I shall be in London next week. What about a dinner next week with Piotr? Wednesday, Thursday or Friday works for me. Vince P.S. Please, carbon copy to my work address (vkamins@enron.com) This message and any attachments (the ""message"") is intended solely for the addressees and is confidential. If you receive this message in error, please delete it and immediately notify the sender. Any use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval. The internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS (and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message if modified. Ce message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le ""message"") sont etablis a l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires et sint confidentiels. Si vous recevez ce message par erreur, merci de le detruire et d'en avertir immediatement l'expediteur. Toute utilisation de ce message non conforme a sa destination, toute diffusion ou toute publication, totale ou partielle, est interdite, sauf autorisation expresse. L'internet ne permettant pas d'assurer l'integrite de ce message, BNP PARIBAS (et ses filiales) decline(nt) toute responsabilite au titre de ce message, dans l'hypothese ou il aurait ete modifie. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Final Colorado Springs, CO Itinerary; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/11/2001 05:18 PM --------------------------- From: Christina Grow/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/11/2001 03:11 PM To: Stanley Horton/ENRON@enronXgate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Cindy Stark/ENRON@enronXgate, Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Final Colorado Springs, CO Itinerary SK - I printed these out & put them in the meeting folder. And sent a copy to Melissa. mm Attached is the final copy of the Colorado Springs, CO itinerary and a copy of the most current INGAA agenda. Please call if you have any questions. Have a safe and fun trip. Christina Grow Enron Corp. Investor Relations 713.853.6021 Christina.Grow@enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: DOE on Reliability; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Novosel, Sarah Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 2:37 PM To: Shelk, John; Steffes, James D.; Yeung, Charles; Robertson, Linda Cc: 'dsalvosa@epsa.org'; 'aspring@epsa.org' Subject: RE: DOE on Reliability Thanks John. You need to forward this message to Jim and Rick also -----Original Message----- From: Shelk, John Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 12:58 PM To: Steffes, James D.; Yeung, Charles; Novosel, Sarah; Robertson, Linda Cc: 'dsalvosa@epsa.org'; 'aspring@epsa.org' Subject: DOE on Reliability According to Platt's Electric Power Daily (Fri. Aug. 24), the Administration is ""leaning toward"" putting the reliability function with FERC and the RTOs, NOT the NERC approach we oppose. We will check on this independently. We have certainly encouraged them in the direction they are now leaning toward. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= House and Senate Energy Hearings Today on California/Western
 Electric Situation; [EMail-Body]= I attended both the House and Senate energy committee hearings today. House hearing was in the Barton Subcommittee (Energy & Air Quality). Senate hearing was on last week's FERC order on a ""soft price cap"" and related issues. The House witnesses were dominated by California officials: Cal Energy Commission, Cal Air Resources Board, Chairman of Gov Davis Generation Implementation Task Force. In addition, there were witnesses from the Western Area Power Admin and Bonneville PA. The Senate witnesses were the three FERC commissioners. HIghlights Chairman Barton said it is still his intention to try to mark up the Barton bill, H.R. 1647 next week (many on and off the Subcommittee doubt this will happen; we are gathering political intelligence on those prospects and will report back with more information and conclusions once that is done); Chairman Barton also said he may go to California next week. There was considerable emphasis at both hearings about the alleged role that higher natural gas prices into California play in the electric power rate increases; several witnesses focused on difference in alleged transportation costs for similar differences between California and non-CA states; FERC at the Senate hearing said that today the commission announced a staff technical conference for later this month on all aspects of the natural gas market as it relates to California; a House member from Southern Illinois coal country attacked California for using only natural gas in its new power plants. The House witnesses, primarily BPA but also the California witnesses, attacked the negawatt provision in sec. 102 of the Barton bill; the criticism was that BPA would be forced to purchase power on the open market at a high price since it is short, sell it to the DSIs under contract; let the DSI sell it at market rates and capture the difference; BPA witness said that thus sec. 102 would make it difficult if not impossible to implement their strategy to avoid as much as a 200 percent rate increase on 10/1/01; BPA testimony will make it tough for Members of Congress from that service region to support sec. 102. Both hearings also touched on how difficult it would be to actually devise a price cap; at the House hearing, none of those advocating a price cap among the witnesses could answer excellent questions about exactly how this could be done; the witnesses just said ""cost plus a reasonable profit"" and said leave the details to FERC; at afternoon Senate hearing, Chairman Hebert had the staff bring in 15 boxes from one FP&L case to show how a price cap would take too long to bring any relief to California this summer; he said last week's soft price cap is much better. Also on the price cap, Rep. Walden (R-OR) got the Cal Energy Comm chair to admit that if the price caps had been in place earlier, California would NOT have taken the conservation and new generation steps that it has taken recently. The interplay among the FERC commissioners was much more contentious than it was a House hearing on Tuesday, although it could have been worse; when Senate Chairman Murkowski (R-AK) said that ""help is on the way"" in the form of the nominees for the two vacancies, Sen. Dorgan (D-ND) made a comment that suggested that the confirmation process will not be smooth; the same concern came from the interplay among the Senators, which was also somewhat contentious at times. Please advise if you have any questions or would like further details. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: ISO Market Stabilization Plan; [EMail-Body]= Thanks for taking the lead on this. Note Tim's question about handicapping the liklihood of approval. Prices will move in the West based on these odds. We need to have a better view than anyone else. Ray Alvarez 04/13/2001 01:19 PM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON Subject: Re: ISO Market Stabilization Plan Tim, although there's always a ""chance"" my impression is that the FERC won't buy the ban on exports, as this would appear to run afoul of the Commerce Clause and certainly goes counter to everything that FERC hopes to accomplish with their own Order 888 and 2000 initiatives. I am less certain about the direction FERC will go on pricing, since even the staff has recognized stumbling blocks in their own recommendation and offers possible variants. The ISO has not submitted revised tariff sheets for approval yet, so it is unlikely they would try to implement their own plan in the near term. If they try to do so without FERC approval, possible legal avenues might include the filing of a complaint at FERC, asking for fast track processing (this ""fast"" is measured in weeks, not days) and/or seeking injunctive relief in court (faster), which can be hard to obtain but not impossible, depending entirely on the circumstances. Will keep you posted if I learn anything new on this. Ray James D Steffes 04/12/2001 11:21 PM To: Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron Subject: Re: ISO Market Stabilization Plan Ray -- Can you please take the lead in responding to Tim re: FERC v. state actions? Sue -- Any info on whether the ISO would do this unilaterally? Jim To: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: ISO Market Stabilization Plan The recent plan filed at FERC is horrible. The two most aggregious parts are the cost based standing bids and the ban on exports. I know that we are commenting on this proposal. I am also looking for intellegence on whether the ISO proposal has any chance of getting approved by FERC. If it is not approved by FERC, what can the Californians do? California has ignored FERC before. If they attempt to unilaterally implement changes what is the likelihood that the Feds step in to intervene? If you hear anything on this matter please keep me posted. The proposed plan will have a huge impact on the California market and we need as much advance notice as possible. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Technical Corner for today; [EMail-Body]= Sam, We can use a piece written by Rakesh on liquidity. I shall ask him to send it to you. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Smith, William Sent: Monday, July 02, 2001 8:51 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Technical Corner for today Good Morning, Vince! I spoke with Iris last week about something she had submitted to you. It's about the various models that we've created in the department. She said that it goes into details we may not want to publicize, but that it might be adaptable for the newsletter. There's an introductory section, a models section, and recommendations for the future. I would suggest that we run the introduction, amend the models section to eliminate anything we don't want to say, and omit the final portion. If you are agreeable, I can use all or part of the introduction in today's issue and split up the rest. It would give us a breather while others are finishing their submissions. What do you think? Sam [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: ticket; [EMail-Body]= Another question. What about a Continental flight to Amsterdam and from Amsterdam to Warsaw? I can also fly Continental through Rome or London, as long as I don't have to change airports. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Urszula Sobczyk <urszula@pacbell.net>@ENRON Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 1:50 PM To: vkamins@enron.com Subject: re: ticket Dzien dobry Panu, Na wylot 04 lipca z IAH do Warszawy i powrot 09 lipca (8 lipca nie bylo miejsca) cena wynosi $1680.26. Bardzo prosze o kontakt czy jest Pan zainteresowany. Pozdrawiam, Urszula [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Special Comp Committee Meeting Notice - May 1st; [EMail-Body]= calendar ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/20/2001 03:00 PM --------------------------- Kelly Johnson 04/20/2001 09:47 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mary Joyce/Enron@EnronXGate cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Teresa Wright/Enron@EnronXGate Subject: Special Comp Committee Meeting Notice - May 1st Attached is a notice of special meeting of the Compensation and Management Development Committee on May 1st at 3:00 p.m. until 5:00 p.m. This meeting is addition to the April 30th meeting. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: news/updates; [EMail-Body]= I am attaching the FERC order and staff recommendations. The order provides for $69 million in ""potential"" refunds (either pay up or provide cost justification). Enron was not named as one of the 13 overcharging parties, but PGE was ($3.18 million). It's not over yet, though. The order deals only with Jan 01 and promises further orders regarding Dec 00 and benchmark prices through April 01. The prices used to determine refunds were fairly high ($273/mwh based on gas prices, emissions costs and an assumed heat rate of over 16000). With respect to sales to California, we have concluded at least one short term sale and have talked with Cal Dept of Water Resources about longer term deals, but we were still struggling with credit issues, last I heard. I'm copying Jeff Dasovich because I'm sure he has more up to date information. Mark Schroeder@ECT 03/11/2001 02:11 PM To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: news/updates In the press, I saw two news stories that I wondered if we (Enron) had any role/hand in, and what was the offical ""spin"" in both cases. 1) The FERC Order requiring something like 55-65 million dollars in refunds by generators (or did it include traders) for overcharging in California in December, if I recall my facts/news stories correctly, and 2) the reports of 40 companies entering into 10-year contracts with California (touted by Davis). Was Enron a contracting party? Do we think this is a good solution (I think I know the answer, but defer to your lead on this, so we stay on your message)? thanks mcs [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Kenneth Lay, Chairman Enron; [EMail-Body]= Thanks. Yes, I did know about the conference. Ken has a copy of the study and made reference to it several times during our visits to Sac. a couple of weeks ago. It's nice to occasionally see some rational thinking in California. I look forward to catching up with you when I get back to town. <Carol_Benter@mckinsey.com> on 05/16/2001 09:27:00 AM To: skean@enron.com cc: Suzanne_Nimocks@mckinsey.com Subject: Re: Kenneth Lay, Chairman Enron ----- Forwarded by Carol on 05/16/2001 09:32 AM ----- Suzanne Nimocks To: Steve_Kean@enron.com 05/16/2001 cc: 06:39 AM Subject: Re: Kenneth Lay, Chairman Enron Hope you are keeping your head above water. I wanted to let you know about this request. As you know, we did work for the Bay Area Council. I don't know if you will be joining Ken on this, but I did send you a copy of the report a couple of weeks ago. I did not send one to Ken, but will. Let me know if you need any additional copies. ----- Forwarded by Suzanne on 05/16/2001 06:41 AM ----- Lenny Mendonca 05/15/2001 To: ""Alana O'Brien"" 07:22 PM <Aobrien@bayareacouncil.org> cc: Michael Cunningham ""Paul Lee (E-mail)"" <Paul_Lee@mckinsey.com>, ""Sean Randolph (E-mail)"" <sean@bayeconfor.org>, ""Tony Sugalski (E-mail)"" <Tony_Sugalski@mckinsey.com>, JACQUI MIRANDA, (bcc: Suzanne Subject: Re: Kenneth Lay, Chairman Enron (Document link: Suzanne Nimocks) Good idea. Jacqui knows my calendar Lenny Mendonca phone: 415-954-5161 fax 415-675-4990 ""Alana O'Brien"" <Aobrien@bayareac To: ""Lenny Mendonca (E-mail)"" ouncil.org> ""Tony Sugalski 05/15/2001 09:06 (E-mail)"" <Tony_Sugalski@mckinsey.com>, ""Paul Lee AM (E-mail)"" <Paul_Lee@mckinsey.com> cc: ""Sean Randolph (E-mail)"" <sean@bayeconfor.org>, Michael Cunningham Subject: Kenneth Lay, Chairman Enron 200 Pine Street, Suite 300 * San Francisco, CA 94104-2702 Phone (415) 981-6600 * Fax (415) 981-6408 Info@bayareacouncil.org Lenny, Tony and Paul, We have been contacted by Janet Yamane of Marathon Communications inviting the Bay Area Council to sponsor a meeting with Bay Area CEOs and Kenneth Lay, Chairman of Enron, who will be visiting California this week to discuss energy and on. She offered 5/17 am but added that if that wasn't available that another time could be scheduled further on. Sunne wanted your opinion on this request. Fred Furlong, Federal Reserve Bank is not available 5/17 am. So that date really won't work. Please advise. Alana Alana O'Brien Vice President - Operations & Event Management 415-981-6600 | This message may contain confidential and/or privileged | | information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to | | receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, | | disclose or take any action based on this message or any | | information herein. If you have received this message in | | error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail | | and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. | [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Dinner; [EMail-Body]= Steve, I am in London this week. Let's connect when you come back. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""sbigalow"" Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 2:51 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Dinner Good Morning, I am going to upstate New York for two weeks , leaving this Saturday. Do you want to grab a dinner this week? Mike said he was open Wednesday. I'll Buy. Steve [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: trip to Houston; [EMail-Body]= I'd like to get about 30 minutes with Mark, just to catch up. Mark Schroeder@ECT 07/27/2000 07:47 AM To: Elizabeth Linnell/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Maureen McVicker/HOU/EES@EES, Beverley Ashcroft/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: trip to Houston I expect to be in Houston next Monday from 1300, until Tuesday around 1500. If any of you wish to meet, please have Maureen work with Beverley toput something in the diary. Elizabeth - if you do not mind, I think if we just sit down for a few hours, this will be the best way to assure that Iget you timely and accurate budget info, so can we book something? thanks mcs [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Strengthening Enron as it grows; [EMail-Body]= Jeff I have prepared the attached chart for you. It captures the ideas we discussed last week. Please call when you have a chance. I look forward to talking with you. Kevin 213-926-2626 - STRENGTHENING ENRON AS IT GROWS.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Translation - Nikkan Kogyo 5/21 (Enron Mentioned); [EMail-Body]= I think we need to keep the pressure on. I liked the way our basic message= =20 was evolving over the course of last week. As you pointed out, the Japanes= e=20 utilities view us as just another annoying US company who is going to come= =20 in, bang its head against the wall for a few months and then leave. We nee= d=20 to continue to reinforce the message that not only are we not going away, w= e=20 are starting other businesses here to keep us going while we continue to=20 agitate for reform in the electricity sector. Nicholas O'Day 05/21/2001 04:37 AM To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT@ECT, Vance=20 Meyer/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Mika=20 Watanabe/AP/Enron@Enron=20 Subject: Translation - Nikkan Kogyo 5/21 (Enron Mentioned) To date, reports on Enron's role in California have been limited to a repri= nt=20 of a Sacramento Bee article appearing in the Denki Shimbun - a limited=20 circulation publication sponsored by the Japanese utilities. Last Friday Mr= =20 Ohta, President of Chubu Electric and Chairman of the Federation of Electri= c=20 Power Companies, made some uninformed comments at a regular energy press cl= ub=20 briefing about Enron's commitment to its Californian customers . Ohta will = be=20 retiring from both positions in two weeks.=20 In the past both Chubu Electric and the Federation of Electric Power=20 Companies have distanced themselves from Mr Ohta's public comments which ar= e=20 generally considered to be ultra conservative and unsupported by facts. As = a=20 result, we have tended to ignore his comments. However, on this occasion I= =20 think we need to set the record straight on Enron's role in California. I= =20 would welcome your thoughts on whether we should let the comments pass or= =20 respond. Over the past few months we have received various statements from Houston= =20 (for both internal and external consumption) explaining Enron's role in=20 California. Most recently (May 10) we received from Peggy Mahoney (via Vanc= e)=20 an EES statement dated 1 February entitled ""Media Statement about EES=20 Resourcing California Customers"". It would be helpful if there is a=20 comprehensive statement that has recently been put together that we could= =20 distribute here. If not, we can put something together here tomorrow and=20 email it across to you for approval, with the aim of getting something out= =20 Wednesday. As an aside, we had a record 3,766 visitors to the EJ website last Friday,= =20 the day the Brattle paper appeared on the website. kind regards =20 ---------------------- Forwarded by Nicholas O'Day/AP/Enron on 05/21/2001= =20 05:38 PM --------------------------- Tom Fitzgibbon 05/21/2001 04:15 PM To: ""Michael.Grimes"" <Michael.Grimes@enron.com>, ""Nicholas.O'Day""=20 <Nicholas.O'Day@enron.com>, ""makiko.imai"" <makiko.imai@enron.com>,=20 ""Rousseau.Anai"" <Rousseau.Anai@enron.com>, ""Mika.Watanabe""=20 <Mika.Watanabe@enron.com>, ""Jeremy.Thirsk"" <Jeremy.Thirsk@enron.com>,=20 ""Morten.E.Pettersen"" ""Joseph.P.Hirl""=20 <Joseph.P.Hirl@enron.com>, ""Jonathan.Whitehead""=20 ""eva.hoeffelman"" <eva.hoeffelman@enron.com>= ,=20 Carey Sloan <sloan@21stenergy.com>, ""stefan.niesler""=20 <stefan.niesler@enron.com>, ""Akiko.Higaki"" <Akiko.Higaki@enron.com>,=20 ""katy.lomax"" <katy.lomax@enron.com>, ""brian.stanley""=20 <brian.stanley@enron.com>, ""andy.foote"" <andy.foote@enron.com>, ""ed.cattiga= n""=20 <ed.cattigan@enron.com>, ""tom.fitzgibbon"" <tom.fitzgibbon@enron.com>, skean= =20 <skean@enron.com>, ""mark.palmer"" <mark.palmer@enron.com>, ""vance.meyer""=20 <vance.meyer@enron.com>, ""karen.denne"" <karen.denne@enron.com>,=20 ""Ann.M.Schmidt"" <Ann.M.Schmidt@enron.com>, ""jackie.gentle""=20 <jackie.gentle@enron.com> cc: =20 Subject: Translation - Nikkan Kogyo 5/21 (Enron Mentioned) Please find attached translation of the article ""Scathing Comment at Press= =20 Conference by Hiroji Ota, Chairman of The Federation of Electric Power=20 Companies of Japan Thumbs-Up for Bush=01,s New Policy, and Thumbs-Down for = Enron=01, s Proposals"" from Nikkan Kogyo Shinbum dated May 21. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= 3125A - meeting with Van der Walde, Hartsoe, Watkiss, per Lucy
 Marshall; [EMail-Body]= OK for you to join them late [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Letter to residential customers; [EMail-Body]= Is there anything we can tell them about the rates they should expect from the utility? I think that will be the biggest concern and we can reduce backlash if we can provide them some information. Peggy Mahoney@EES 05/22/2001 06:37 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Max Eberts/HOU/EES@EES, Elizabeth Ivers/Enron@EnronXGate, Mark Koenig/Enron@EnronXGate, Paula Rieker/Enron@EnronXGate, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES, Diann Huddleson/HOU/EES@EES, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, David W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Kenneth Lay/Enron@EnronXGate, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Letter to residential customers Attached is a draft of the letter we'd like to send to our 16,000 residential customers on Friday. Please review and let me know your comments by 12 noon on Wednesday. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential --CFTC Chair; [EMail-Body]= what do you think? ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 02/13/2001 02:55 PM ----- Richard Shapiro 02/12/2001 09:49 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: CFTC Chair Let's discuss. ---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron on 02/12/2001 09:48 AM --------------------------- From: Lisa Yoho on 02/12/2001 07:37 AM PST To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: CFTC Chair Rick -- Let's discuss when you have a minute. Thanks, Lisa ----- Forwarded by Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron on 02/12/2001 07:36 AM ----- Chris Long 02/12/2001 07:23 AM To: Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Lora Sullivan/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Allison Navin/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: CFTC Chair Jim Newsome is currently the Interim Chair of the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). He was appointed in 1998 to term which expires in June 2001. Commissioner Newsome visited Enron in 1999 and will again visit Enron to meet with Jeff Skilling (also EnronOnLine executives) on March 6, 2001. The CFTC has 5 Commissioners. Commissioners Newsome and Spears are Republicans and Commissioners Erickson and Holum are Democrats, with one opening. If Newsome becomes Chair, then there will be two open seats. If Newsome if passed over, there will only be open seat. Commissioner Newsome has the support of Majority Trent Lott. He is well liked in industry because of his free market philosophy and belief in competition and deregulation. While not a technical expert, he is a ""known quantity"" at the Commission. Newsome played a major role in the Commodities Futures Modernization Act (CFMA) which became law last Congress. This law brought legal certainty and modernization to the commodity trading community. With Newsome, industry is consulted before regulations are issued. Industry generally believes that Commission Newsome is the right candidate to oversee the CFMA rulekmaking which is currently underway. The other candidate for the position was former North Carolina Senator Lauch Faircloth whose nomination was being championed by Senator Phil Gramm (R-TX). We have learned that Faircloth has lost interest, because he would have to divest sizeable interest in agriculture holdings. The concern now is that because this is a third tier appointment, unknown candidates will suddenly appear without industry input. A quick nomination and confirmation of Commissioner Newsome as Chairman is recommended by many in the industry. Do you think it appropriate to have Ken Lay raise this nomination with the transition team? Commisioner Newsome's bio: For more information on the CFTC: http://www.cftc.gov/ [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Senate Banking Hearing; [EMail-Body]= Thanks, Chris. Rick - see the witness list below, in case you want to try to get some points through to these witnesses. Chris Long 09/25/2000 04:14 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Amy Fabian/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Senate Banking Hearing Steve: I got the copy of the letter on independent auditor from Ken Lay to SEC Chairman Levitt. I suggest we transmit the letter to the Senate Banking Subcommittee on Securities in preparation for their hearing noted below. I will prepare a cover letter for transmission. Let me know if this acceptable. ---------------------- Forwarded by Chris Long/Corp/Enron on 09/25/2000 05:04 PM --------------------------- From: Allison Navin 09/25/2000 04:35 PM To: Chris Long/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Senate Banking Hearing This hearing will be held on Thursday, September 28. Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee SEC Audit Rule Securities Subcommittee hearing on the proposed rule issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to restrict the types of services independent public auditors may provide to audit clients. Witnesses: Arthur Levitt,, SEC chairman; John biggs, chairman, president and CEO, TIAA-CREF; Barry Melancon, president, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants; Shaun O'Malley, chairman public oversight board, Panel on Audit Effectiveness; Rick Antle, professor of accounting, Yale University School of Management Location: 538 Dirksen Senate Office Building. 9:20 a.m. Contact: 202-224-7391 [Link] Revised [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: extra books; [EMail-Body]= Hi Julie, Rice asked me to teach another course on energy derivatives and I plan to use the book as the main source. You can inform them that they should keep the books in stock and probably order a few more copies. I am in London right now and will stay here for a few more days. Swamped with work as usual. I was on the road for the last 2 weeks. The tropical storm unleashed the fury on my neighborhood (20 inches in one night) but we survived without major problems. The only problem I had was an overflowing swimming pool (it took 45 minutes to go from a comfortable slack to a full condition). Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Julie"" <julie@lacimagroup.com>@ENRON Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 11:21 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: extra books Vince, Hope you are well. We've been in contact with Rice University's bookshop and they informed us that they have a few books left over from the course. We told them originally that if they didn't sell them all we would take them back. We would rather have them sent over to you as complimentary copies if that's OK with you? What's new? Busy summer so far? Hope that the storm didn't cause you any problems. Julie [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California Lawmakers Vote to Limit Power Costs - WSJ; [EMail-Body]= Look at this. Baum finally speaks up -- way too late. Can somebody tell me what SDG&E's energy rate was pre-dereg? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/01/2000 08:24 AM --------------------------- From: Ann M Schmidt 09/01/2000 07:57 AM To: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Meredith Philipp/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: California Lawmakers Vote to Limit Power Costs - WSJ F.Y.I. California Lawmakers Vote to Limit Power Costs By Rebecca Smith 09/01/2000 The Wall Street Journal Page A4 (Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) California lawmakers voted to extend modest relief to San Diego residents burdened with high electricity bills and set the groundwork for faster construction of badly needed power plants. They stopped short, however, of passing legislation that would roll back retail power rates to levels seen prior to deregulation . Late Wednesday, lawmakers sent a bill to Gov. Gray Davis that limits to 6.5 cents per kilowatt hour the amount that small customers of San Diego Gas & Electric Co. can be charged. The utility is allowed to add power-delivery and other reasonable costs to that commodity price. The price, equivalent to a bulk power cost of $65 per megawatt hour, is far higher than the average price of power for 27 of the 31 months in which California's market has been deregulated. But in June and July, the average price of power obtained by the utility from a state-sanctioned energy auction rose to 12 cents and 10.5 cents, respectively, compared with the 2.3 cents and 2.8 cents charged in those months a year earlier. Passed directly through to customers,the resulting bills sparked a near mutiny. The rate-cap measure applies to residential and small commercial customers, as well as to schools and hospitals. In addition to the rate cap, which can be adjusted upward or downward by the California Public Utilities Commission until December 2002, the legislature earmarked $150 million of general-fund revenue, which can be used to subsidize San Diego power costs if they greatly exceed the 6.5-cents-per-kilowatt-hour rate. For now, the utility would be expected to make up any difference between revenue collected and the actual cost. Steve Baum, chairman of Sempra Energy, parent of San Diego Gas & Electric Co., said the rate-cap measure is ""deeply flawed"" because it limits the amount prices can rise but sets no floor. That means any shortfall could grow -- without a mechanism for customers to pay it down -- until the end of the rate-cap period, which could last until December 2002 or December 2003. Mr. Baum said Sempra stands to suffer an undercollection of perhaps $664 million, provided future prices approximate the New York Mercantile Exchange forward prices through December 2002. ""It's irreparably damaging to Sempra,"" he said because it ""creates tremendous uncertainty"" that makes it hard for the San Diego energy company to finance new projects such as a new transmission line. The legislature also appeared likely to approve a bill speeding up the permit process for the construction of new power plants, in part by beefing up staffs of regulatory agencies that review the plans. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Contact; [EMail-Body]= Contact Dave Parquet and Jeff Dasovich in our San Fran. office. Dave has worked on Enron's proposals to San Diego and Jeff has been supporting him from a gov't/reg affairs standpoint. From: Michael Kenneally@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS on 09/08/2000 10:51 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Re: Contact Steve: Chris Holmes recommended I contact you concerning the attached inquiry. I recently met with a federal representative from San Diego who had asked if I could send him any information on Enron's ability to hedge energy prices. After a summer of rolling brown outs and soaring prices, he is looking for ways to avoid the scenario in the future. Could you recommend the best avenue for responding to this request? I appreciate you assistance in this matter. Regards, Michael x 35868 ----- Forwarded by Michael Kenneally/Enron Communications on 09/08/00 10:46 AM ----- Chris Holmes@EES 08/16/00 06:46 AM To: Michael Kenneally/Enron Communications@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS@ENRON cc: Subject: Re: Contact glad to hear you are in a good place-- I suggest you call Steve Kean's office, regulatory affairs as they would like the contact with the Cong. office-- they will in turn follow-up, . Best to you and the family. Drop by sometime,. I am in room 1212. chris From: Michael Kenneally@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS on 08/15/2000 04:15 PM To: Chris Holmes/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Contact Hello Chris: I hope you and your family are doing well. I am sorry to have fallen out of touch. I was thinking of you recently wen speaking with a Congressional representative from San Diego. After a summer of rolling brown outs and increasing prices from the utilities, he was searching for an energy solution. Who would be the best contact within EES or ENA to explore the possibilities for the city of San Diego? I look forward to hearing from you. Best regards, Michael [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: UC-CSU-Enron press release; [EMail-Body]= Is there an alternative quote we could use instead of the reference to ""stabilizing"" in the California market? I think I know what we mean but most outside readers would see the situation as unstable. Perhaps we could reference the continued availability of direct access or renewed interest in Enron's offerings? To: Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES, Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Robert C Williams/Enron@EnronXGate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: UC-CSU-Enron press release Attached is a draft of the UC-CSU-Enron press release concerning the settlement agreement. Please review and let me know of any revisions or suggestions. We would like for this to go out tomorrow if possible. We're still waiting for a quote from CSU. I'll make sure you see that as well. Thank you. Max [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Houston; [EMail-Body]= I'm checking. Melissa loves talking about Houston real estate (one of the many quirks I love her for). I'll find out when she can do it. Ricardo Charvel 03/12/2001 01:00 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Houston Steve, As you might have expected, Elsa already had a to do list, a budget, information on schools, etc. I really did not have to discuss about moving to Houston. The conversation was more around when and how. On Friday I have to be in Houston for an EBS meeting on Mexico. I am planning to arrive there on Thursday morning to talk to Rick, to Dan Reck and to Shawn Cumberland. I also need to find out about relocation and visas , etc. I am writing you to thank you for your generosity in your advice and for helping me and encouraging me in making this important decision. I am also wirting because I am taking your word on Melissa's knowledge of the real estate market inside the loop. Elsa is coming with me on Thursday morning and we would like to see if it is possible for us to meet with Melissa on Thursday, Friday or Saturday for advice and orientation. (Of course you would be welcome to the real estate working session!!) Please let me know. Thanks again, Ricardo [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Video for Management Conference; [EMail-Body]= I'd love to but I'll be in London Marge Nadasky@ECT 10/11/2000 12:01 PM To: Robert Horton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Frevert/NA/Enron@Enron, Andrew S Fastow/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ken Rice/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Kevin Hannon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Karen S Owens@ees@EES, Thomas E White/HOU/EES@EES, John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cliff Baxter/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Cindy Stark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Owens/HOU/EES@EES, Bridget Maronge/HOU/ECT@ECT, Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Dorothy Dalton/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Carol Ann Brown/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Jennifer Burns/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan Skarness/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joannie Williamson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Judy G Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Bobbie Power/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Video for Management Conference You recently received an e-mail from Terrie James regarding a video we are working on for the upcoming Management Conference. We have been able to lock in a date and time to do this taping on Thursday, October 19th, from 4-6 p.m. We are still working on the location for this taping, but plan on this taking place in close proximity to the Enron Building. Can you please let me know if you will be available to participate in this group session? If not, we will be following up with some individual taping the week of the 23rd. If you have questions, feel free to contact Terrie James on Ext. 37727, or myself on Ext. 36631. Marge Nadasky [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Protecting Confidential Information; [EMail-Body]= The exciting cocktail of credit derivatives and Enron Online raises significant novel legal risks for Enron. As most of you will by now know, probably the most significant risk would arise in a situation where Enron has confidential information about a reference entity and wrongfully uses that information in pricing the credit derivative on that entity. This could well result in legal proceeding against Enron. In practice, an allegation of misuse of confidential information can be very difficult indeed to defend without adequate procedures in place to safeguard that information. In fact, Enron's credit trading will, as you know, rely strictly on publicly available financial information and will not involve the use of confidential information, unless the reference entity has specifically consented. Nevertheless, to avoid the appearance of impropriety, we are taking additional steps to consider confidentiality agreements we have in place with potential reference entities before deciding whether or not we will quote prices on such entities. Against this background is the ever-present risk of ""insider dealing"". This crime - which in the UK carries a maximum prison sentence of 7 years and an unlimited fine - is committed where a person (or member of their family etc) deals in the securities (shares, bonds or derivatives on them) of a listed company on the basis of unpublished (confidential) price-sensitive information. We do not expect at this time to deal in publicly traded bonds as part of EnronCredit.com, but insider dealing is relevant to the conduct of Enron staff and could affect other parts of our business. In addition, SFA rules in the UK require the safeguarding of confidential information, the misuse of which is a serious disciplinary matter. In order to ensure the success of this new business and that confidential information is not misused either by Enron or its staff, we are now introducing important new policies and procedures in Europe and in the US. These procedures have been drawn up specifically for your credit trading group by lawyers in London, Houston and New York and are attached. Please familiarise yourself, and any future member of the group, with these procedures. Once you have read and understood the attached procedures each one of you is required to confirm this to me in writing (or by note mail). Please note that similar procedures have been distributed to the key business heads in Europe who may have confidential information about reference entities (similar procedures are being disrtibuted to US business heads). This requires them to safeguard confidential information and to abide by the Restriced List procedure described below. Nevertheless, you should treat your group as being within a Chinese Wall and see it as your personal responsibility not to solicit or accept from anyone in Enron information about reference entities which may be confidential. Thank you for your co-operation in implementing these important new procedures. I look forward to receiving your confirmation mentioned above (which is also described in the procedures). Best regards Paul [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Gov Geringer meeting; [EMail-Body]= I'd prefer to skip. How big of a problem would that be? From: Susan M Landwehr on 05/14/2001 03:09 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT Subject: Gov Geringer meeting Steve/RIck ---as you may be aware, Governor Geringer personally asked Ken Lay to come to the kick off meeting of the Wyoming Energy Task Force, a group that was created by legislative mandate last month. The meeting is on May 30th in Cheyenne. Mr. Lay told the Governor that he would not be able to make it on that date, but promised that a senior Enron exectutive would be there. I spoke with Governor Geringer's staff person again this past week and was hoping that Paul Kaufman could be the senior executive, but no such luck (unless you give Paul a huge new title!). In talking with Maureen I understand that you have a previous conflict Steve, but I am hoping that you can review your calendar to see if you could make an adjustment in order to meet the request of the Governor. Your speech would be in the morning--I've been told about 9 o clock or so---which would allow for you to leave by noonish. I [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= HERE ARE MY SLIDES, I ASKED TIM TO SEND A SET OF HIS BY E MAIL TOO; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/10/2001 10:26 AM --------------------------- Margaret Carson 04/10/2001 10:04 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: HERE ARE MY SLIDES, I ASKED TIM TO SEND A SET OF HIS BY E MAIL TOO Steve Here are my slides and a copy of the text regards Margaret [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FYI From Marty Sunde: Request for Ken to contact Chancellor Reed,
 California State University System; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/10/2001 09:28 AM --------------------------- From: Carol Moffett@EES on 05/09/2001 08:49 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: FYI From Marty Sunde: Request for Ken to contact Chancellor Reed, California State University System FYI.... ---------------------- Forwarded by Carol Moffett/HOU/EES on 05/09/2001 08:48 AM --------------------------- Enron Energy Services From: Marty Sunde 05/09/2001 08:16 AM Phone No: 713 853-7797 Phone 888-953-9478 SkyTel Pager EB 889 To: Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Tom Riley/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Lamar Frazier/HOU/EES@EES, David W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES (bcc: Carol Moffett/HOU/EES) Subject: Request for Ken to contact Chancellor Reed, California State University System Rosalee, I have left Ken a voicemail request but thought I would follow up with a note to you that might help clarify the request. As Ken knows, Enron Energy Services recently won a STAY by the 9th Circuit Court of an order by a lower court to require us to provide electricity service to the UC/CSU systems directly versus via using PG&E and SCE service. The formal court hearing of the appeal is still scheduled for 60 to 90 days from now. We would like Ken to phone Charlie Reed, Chancellor of CSU, and solicit Charlie's support for Enron, CSU, and the UC system to get back together to attempt to work out a commercial resolution to these issues. We believe that sponsorship and support coming from the most senior executives' offices will help bring the parties together. Additionally, if CSU and UC are interested in working out a settlement, we would like to solicit their joint request for a delay in the court calendar. This would allow both teams to focus on a commercial resolution versus splitting their focus between a settlement and preparing briefs for the appeal appearance. We would like to see a delay request of one month, as long as the setttlement discussions progress. A desirable way to kick off settlement discussions would be to ask Ken to have lunch with the Head of UC , Charlie Reed of CSU, and perhaps one business lead (in this case, this could be me). I am not sure that Ken's schedule could accomadate that, but I thought I would ask. If timing is bad for a meeting like this, we can find a different alternative. I will follow up with a phone call to you. Hope this helps. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CAISO Notice - Congestion Reform Proposal - Apendix B; [EMail-Body]= Market Participants: As part of the Congestion Management Reform Proposal, the ISO has posted Appendix B ""Locational Price Dispersion Study"" on the ISO web site at . Please be aware that the file is very large (the Word version is 5.1 mb and the PDF version is somewhat smaller at 4.3 mb) so it will take a while to download. Byron Woertz Director, Client Relations [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Security question; [EMail-Body]= Dear guys Having been out of the office for a couple of days, I've found myself the victim of theft (again). This time my desk drawer key has been stolen from its ""hiding place"" under my telephone. I *always* lock my drawers and keep the key in the same place, but on arriving in the office today I found the drawers unlocked, and the key missing. Although there's nothing sensitive on or around my desk, I'm concerned about the security implications of someone sniffing around the office in this manner. I also found the papers on my desk extensively reshuffled last week. Last year, in our old office, I had my only two real options books stolen from among the many and varied books on my desk. That couldn't have been a random theft, and I fear this isn't either. I can't understand who'd be so interested in a Research guy's belongings! Can we ask security to check their surveillance footage for any suspicious activity around my desk? Cheers, Steve [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Response to voice mail; [EMail-Body]= fyi ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/21/2000 07:53 AM --------------------------- Joseph P Hirl 08/16/2000 05:39 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Response to voice mail Steve, Thanks for your voice mail the other day. Your memo certainly helped in better understanding the situation. Locally, we have not seen any additional articles on CA or on dereg, but will let you know if we do. I will also take onboard your other comments. I speak with Mark tomorrow to go over Nick's review. thanks, Joe [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: EBR Mtg and Pre-Mtgs.; [EMail-Body]= You should plan to be there. Michael Terraso 09/22/2000 06:12 PM To: Steven Kean cc: Subject: EBR Mtg and Pre-Mtgs. Steve, am I not to attend the meeting with Lay and Skilling on Oct 4? Mike ---------------------- Forwarded by Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron on 09/22/2000 06:05 PM --------------------------- Maureen McVicker 09/22/2000 03:27 PM To: John Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Marcia A Linton/NA/Enron@Enron, Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron@ENRON cc: Helen Cindy Derecskey/Corp/Enron@Enron, Beverley Ashcroft/LON/ECT@ECT, Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron, Marcia A Linton/NA/Enron@Enron, Laura Glenn/OTS/Enron@ENRON Subject: EBR Mtg and Pre-Mtgs. CONFIRMATION OF THE FOLLOWING MEETINGS: There will be 2 pre-meetings prior to the EBR with Lay & Skilling PRE-MEETINGS Attendees for both Pre-Meetings: Hardy (via phone), Kean, Linnell, Palmer, Schroeder, Shapiro, Steffes, Terraso DATE: Friday, Sept. 29 TIME: 8:30 a.m. (will last approx. 1 hour) PLACE: EB 4701 CALL IN #: 713-853-3233 PASSCODE: 6500 DATE: Monday, Oct. 2 TIME: 8:30 a.m. (will last approx. 2 hours) PLACE: EB 4701 CALL IN #: 713-853-3233 PASSCODE: 6000 EBR MEETING W/ LAY & SKILLING Attendees: Lay, Skilling, Kean, Palmer, Schroeder, Shapiro, Steffes DATE: Wednesday, Oct. 4 TIME: 9:30 a.m. (will last approx. 2 hours) PLACE: EB 5005 If you have any questions, please give me a call at 3-1808. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Form 4 Reminder for April; [EMail-Body]= do I need to do anything? I believe the only transaction I had was related to a set of shares which were released to me earlier in the year. Some of the shares were sold at that time to pay the income tax on the distribution. We discussed this before and my recollection is I did not have to make a filing. Could you confirm by e-mail? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 04/20/2000 11:50 AM --------------------------- Rebecca Carter@ENRON 04/20/2000 09:58 AM Sent by: Kelly Johnson@ENRON To: Kenneth Lay/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Joseph W rebecca Ken Harrison/Enron@Gateway, Cliff Baxter/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Frevert/LON/ECT@ECT, Joe Hirko/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Stanley Horton/Corp/Enron@Enron, Ken Rice/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Lou L Pai/HOU/EES@EES, Rick Buy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Causey/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James Derrick/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Andrew S Fastow/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mike McConnell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeffrey McMahon/HOU/ECT@ECT, J Mark Metts/NA/Enron@Enron, Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Pam Marsha Lindsey/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, Dolly Henrici/Enron@Gateway, Susan Skarness/HOU/ECT@ECT, Nicki Daw/LON/ECT@ECT, Nancy Young/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Cindy Stark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Dorothy Dalton/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Karen Owens/HOU/EES@EES, Karen K Heathman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sharron Westbrook/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Stephanie Harris/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bridget Maronge/HOU/ECT@ECT, Maureen McVicker/HOU/EES@EES, Joannie Williamson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cathy Phillips/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sue Ford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dolores Fisher/NA/Enron@Enron, Bobbie Power/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Form 4 Reminder for April please open the attached document. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= http://www.stanford.edu/~wolak/; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Kaminski, Vince J Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 12:46 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Ross Malme, in your office.; [EMail-Body]= Sue Mara Lance McCarthy 37141 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Dereg Articles; [EMail-Body]= yes Mark Palmer@ENRON 09/26/2000 08:51 AM To: Steven J Kean@EES, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Dereg Articles Should we ask the guy that did the deal with Champion Paper to write a response? ----- Forwarded by Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron on 09/26/2000 08:49 AM ----- Ann M Schmidt 09/26/2000 08:14 AM To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Meredith Philipp/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Dereg Articles F.Y.I. Metropolitan Desk; Section B Debate on Need for New Power Plants Ignores Conservation By KIRK JOHNSON 09/26/2000 The New York Times Page 1, Column 2 c. 2000 New York Times Company New Yorkers heard a lot this summer about why their electricity bills were going up and why a new generation of power plants was needed, and the message centered on one word: demand. Millions of new air-conditioners, computers and other gadgets are humming, blinking and draining electricity from the power pool, utility executives and state energy officials said over and over again. The 40 percent jump in electricity rates that many in the region were assessed in August was only a hint of what could lie ahead, those officials suggested, if residents did not accept more power plants in their neighborhoods. What the public was not told was that the people framing the argument for building power plants have an abiding interest in selling more electricity. Nor was the public told that the means already existed to dampen demand and reduce the amount of new power needed, if the political will could be exerted. Before New York's energy markets were deregulated, beginning in 1998, the state required companies like Consolidated Edison to reduce demand in the system -- through energy efficiency measures, for example -- if that choice was cheaper than building a new plant. Under deregulation , that requirement has been lost. In an open market, every participant wants to sell more energy, and the government agencies in New York and other deregulated states that once compelled companies to think of alternatives have become silent or powerless. ''The reliability problems and price spikes in the last two years have led to a simplistic set of solutions: build more power plants,'' said Richard Cowart, director of the Regulatory Assistance Project, a nonprofit energy policy institute in Montpelier, Vt., that works with state regulators and utilities. On the new playing field, Mr. Cowart and other experts said, the incentives are all one-sided. Power generating companies have no motive to encourage people to use less energy or to use it more efficiently because the most money is to be made when demand is at its peak. And electricity delivery companies make more money by sending more electricity through their wires. ''The incentive to sell more electricity is overwhelming,'' Mr. Cowart said. Certainly, demand for electricity is rising in New York and across the country, and most experts agree that some added generating capacity is needed. And New York State's top electricity official, Maureen O. Helmer, chairwoman of the Public Service Commission, has emphasized in her recent speeches that conservation and efficiency measures must be part of the solution to rising demand. The problem, environmental groups and energy analysts say, is that in an arena in which government has taken a step back through deregulation , it is harder for regulators to make those opinions count. Given the tone of the debate in New York and the sharp jump in prices this summer, it would be easy for the public to think that the region's energy situation is worse than it actually is. Most long-term projections for the region say that demand will increase less in New York State and New York City than in the nation as a whole during the next 10 to 15 years. New York, it turns out, is not an energy hog. The most recent official long-term projection for New York, called the State Energy Plan, issued in late 1998, said the state could get by with only a very modest expansion in generating capacity for the next 10 years, or no expansion at all if the levels of electricity that utilities are required to hold in reserve could be modified. The rate of growth in demand is also slowing down, not accelerating. Within the territory served by Consolidated Edison, which includes all of New York City and its northern suburbs, peak demand, the highest single moment of energy use on the heaviest day of the year, rose by 1.7 percent a year from the mid-1990's to the end of the decade. In the new century, that growth rate is expected to be 1.2 percent a year. ''It will be more modest,'' one senior Con Ed official said. The main implication of those projections, economists and energy analysts say, is that most of the increased capacity proposed for New York City may not be needed at all, at least to meet new demand. In the Con Ed service area, meeting a 1.2 percent growth in demand through new supply alone would require an increased capacity of 500 to 750 megawatts over the next five years. Developers and power plant builders have proposed a total increase six to eight times greater than that in the next three years alone. ''No one plant can make the argument that it's really needed,'' said Ashok Gupta, an energy economist at the Natural Resources Defense Council, a private conservation group. ''Like malls, power plants are now being built for market share.'' Predicting energy demand is notoriously difficult. In the early 1970's, for example, the accepted wisdom was that energy use would continue to grow at the rapid pace that it had in the 1960's. Academics and utility industry officials said the country might need 1,000 nuclear plants by the turn of the century. But the oil shocks of the mid-1970's and early 1980's forced the introduction of energy-efficiency measures that made those forecasts worthless. Energy use as a percentage of the nation's economy, called energy intensity, began declining and has done so ever since. Some energy officials have said the problem of rising prices and the overwhelming focus on supply is the result of a still-new electricity market that is not yet functioning as intended. Theorists who had envisioned competition as the door to a golden age of consumer choice had predicted that companies specializing in demand reduction -- they sell ways to cut energy use through technology or better management -- would compete with companies selling supply. But that has not happened yet. Part of Con Ed's prediction of more modest growth in demand in coming years is based on the expectation that demand-management companies will emerge within the next few years, company officials said. But state regulatory officials also made the political decision in the late 1990's to reduce spending for conservation and efficiency measures. The state, which once led the region in financing for alternatives to new supply -- an effort that included television commercials urging people to think about saving energy -- now spends about a third as much per capita as most states in the Northeast, including Connecticut and New Jersey, according to figures from the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. Last month, a report filed with the State Public Service Commission recommended an increase in financing for the efficiency program. The report was produced by representatives of the electricity industry, working alongside consumer and environmental groups. But the state's utilities, including New York State Electric and Gas, Niagara Mohawk and Con Ed, refused to support the final report because they were unhappy with its conclusions. '' Deregulation undermined the role of utilities in promoting energy efficiency,'' said Edward A. Smeloff, the executive director of the Pace Law School Energy Project, a research and advocacy group that helped write the report. As electricity companies have become more conscious of the bottom line under deregulation , Mr. Smeloff said, demand-reduction programs have become a threat to profits. For utilities that buy most of their power from other companies, moving more electricity through the wires has become the primary way to increase profits, Mr. Smeloff said. ''That's the business,'' he added. Utility officials say that much of their demand problems come down to one hour each year, that moment of peak demand when consumers are using the most electricity. To a great degree, planning revolves around the need to have adequate supply for that crucial moment so as to avoid blackouts. But experts like Mr. Smeloff say the tools already exist to dampen those peaks, and reduce prices to consumers as well, if only a constituency existed to push for the changes. Many business and residential energy uses are routine and could be postponed for a few hours to dampen load on peak days, a plan that efficiency experts say would be particularly easy in New York City commercial buildings where energy use is centrally controlled and monitored. In England, one electricity provider created lower rates for consumers who ran appliances like washing machines and dishwashers in off-peak hours. The program became so popular that power use in the middle of the night went up significantly during the discount-pricing window. Environmentalists also worry that increasing power capacity beyond the real demand in New York could create a kind of self-fueling spiral. If too many new plants are built, they say, prices will probably fall, encouraging people to use more electricity, while at the same time reducing incentives to save energy or use more efficient products. In New York and elsewhere in the country, much of the growth in demand is being driven by the spread of air-conditioning, especially from people buying extra units to cool more parts of their homes. Last year, Con Ed began a kind of visual history project in which employees began regularly photographing 90 apartment buildings in New York City and counting the number of window air-conditioners. In one year, the total went up by 5 percent. Some energy experts say more air-conditioning could further increase the spurts in demand that could in turn lead to more power plants, which many scientists say are prime sources of the greenhouse gases blamed for global warming. ''We have hotter summers because of greenhouse gases and more greenhouse gases because of more air-conditioning,'' said Joseph Romm, the executive director of the Center for Energy and Climate Solutions, a nonprofit consulting institute based in Virginia. ''It would certainly be ironic if people decided that the solution was more power plants.'' Chart: ''LEDGER: Efficiency Plans'' While New York State makes plans to increase its electric power supply, it is doing less to promote the efficient use of existing power. Graph tracks spending for efficiency programs since 1992. SPENDING PER CAPITA CONNECTICUT: $33.33 MASSACHUSETTS: $32.69 NEW JERSEY: $29.18 RHODE ISLAND: $17.00 NEW YORK: $9.67 (Sources: Natural Resources Defense Council; New York State Energy Research and Development Authority)(pg. B6) Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Natural Gas in the 21st Century:  The Shape of Things to Come; [EMail-Body]= Ken Lay speaking, and James J. Hoecker [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: FW: Follow up -- Council of Energy Advisors; [EMail-Body]= I doubt that this is worth the trouble (i.e. running it through a conflict of interest check, ensuring no liability for actions taken on the advice, etc). From: Sherri Sera/ENRON@enronXgate on 06/21/2001 10:13 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Joannie Williamson/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: FW: Follow up -- Council of Energy Advisors Steve, we have no record of receiving the original invitation, but is this anything you would recommend? Please advise. Thanks, SRS -----Original Message----- From: <mobrien@glgroup.com>@ENRON Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 10:07 AM To: sreinar@enron.com Subject: Follow up -- Council of Energy Advisors Dear Jeffrey, I would like to follow up on the email regarding a personal invitation to join the Council of Energy Advisors that I recently sent you. I wanted to see if there are any additional questions I can answer. To reiterate, the Council is an organization of top engineers, corporate representatives, and energy experts that we pay(e.g. $250/hr) to consult via phone and email for our client base of more than 90 investment managers. I feel that your background and expertise would be an asset to the Council. Please feel free to register online at (just a quick 5-minute form). Also, you can learn more about our work at www.thecouncils.com. Thanks for your consideration, I look forward to working with you. Again, please contact me anytime if if you have any remaining questions. Best regards, Matt ================== Matthew O'Brien Gerson Lehrman Group Council of Energy Advisors 11 E. 44th St., 11th floor New York, NY 10017 (212) 838-6900 ext. 265 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail contains information that is privileged and confidential and subject to legal restrictions and penalties regarding its unauthorized disclosure or use. You are prohibited from copying, distributing or otherwise using this information if you are not the intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail and delete this e-mail and its attachments from your system. Thank you. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: Sac Bee, Fri, 5/4: ""Expect prices to shoot up, analysts say"" Sac Bee, Fri, 5/4: ""GOP: Shrink plan for bonds"" Sac Bee, Fri, 5/4: ""FERC chief defends plan for state"" Sac Bee, Fri, 5/4: ""PG&E to judge: ISO, $1 billion tab will drain us"" Sac Bee, Fri, 5/4: ""Jack Sirard: PG&E's woes a warning to utility investor= s"" SD Union (AP), Fri, 5/4: ""Legislature sends power authority bill to govern= or"" LA Times, Fri, 5/4: ""GOP Tries to Force Its Dramatically Different Energy Plan on Governor"" LA Times, Fri, 5/4: ""Secretary of Energy, Davis Meet on U.S. Plan to Boost Conservation"" LA Times, Fri, 5/4: ""PG&E Seeks Relief From High-Priced Power Purchases"" LA Times, Fri, 5/4: ""SDG&E Blackout Plan Would Pay Firms to Use Generators= "" SF Chron, Fri, 5/4: ""Been there, done that=20 Bay Area finds little new in Bush's ideas "" SF Chron, Fri, 5/4: ""Bush calls power supply the solution=20 He says conservation useful but secondary "" SF Chron (AP), Fri, 5/4: ""SDG&E unveils plan to contend with rolling=20 blackouts"" SF Chron (AP), Fri, 5/4: ""California crisis brings new talk of energy=20 conservation""=20 SF Chron (AP), Fri, 5/4: ""Developments in California's energy crisis"" SF Chron, Fri, 5/4: ""Energy at a glance"" SF Chron, Fri, 5/4: ""Ships would help during blackouts=20 Ready reserve fleet has power to provide""=20 SF Chron, Fri, 5/4: ""PG&E chairman wants to keep power lines"" Mercury News, Fri, 5/4: ""Bush shifts policy on conservation after meeting= =20 with GOP"" Mercury News, Fri, 5/4: ""Senate plans public power"" Mercury News, Fri, 5/4: ""All Caps Hed"" OC Register, Fri, 5/4: ""Energy notebook Vote delayed on $12 billion state bond for power"" OC Register, Fri, 5/4: ""US conservation order called Bush's best effort"" Individual.com (Bridgenews), Fri, 5/4: ""[B] POWER UPDATE/ Bush directs fed= s to save energy in California"" Individual.com (AP), Fri, 5/4: ""Judge Dismisses $10B PG&E Suit"" Individual.com (Business wire), Fri, 5/4: ""Bankruptcy Update/ PG&E Files= =20 Motion to Require CAISO to Follow Federal Law"" --- Expect prices to shoot up, analysts say By Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writer (Published May 4, 2001)=20 Gov. Gray Davis' plan for solving the energy crisis relies partly on a=20 striking assumption: that the state's power expenditures will drop=20 dramatically this summer.=20 But energy-market analysts believe Davis is underestimating the cost of=20 electricity and say the state should brace for a significant run-up in pric= es=20 during what is likely to be a summer of chronic shortages.=20 In particular, analysts question Davis' prediction the state will pay an=20 average of $195 a megawatt-hour on the spot market from July to September, = a=20 44 percent reduction from the projected average price for April through Jun= e.=20 ""One hundred and ninety-five dollars? Boy, I wish it were true,"" said Sever= in=20 Borenstein of the University of California Energy Institute. ""My estimate i= s=20 substantially higher.""=20 Yet Davis' advisers are sticking by their projection of the state's power= =20 costs, released Monday to a skeptical Legislature by private consultants to= =20 the governor. They say the lower cost estimates reflect expected increases = in=20 supplies, the projected impact of California's new conservation program and= =20 the state's growing ability to wean itself from the ultra-expensive spot=20 market and buy much of its power through cheaper long-term contracts.=20 Prices may rise, but spending by the state will decline, starting this=20 summer, they insist.=20 ""This is a very credible plan,"" said Joseph Fichera, a Wall Street financie= r=20 advising the governor. ""We have done things to mitigate our exposure (to th= e=20 spot market).""=20 The credibility of the projections is crucial to the state's plan to sell $= 10=20 billion worth of bonds -- a key element of Davis' rescue plan. The bonds=20 would compensate the state for past and future power purchases made on beha= lf=20 of moribund Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric Co., wi= th=20 ratepayers ultimately footing the bill. Davis expects the state to spend=20 $18.7 billion on power by June 2002.=20 But if electricity costs go higher than Davis expects, the strain on the=20 state's budget could worsen, complicating the bond sale. Republican=20 lawmakers, wary of higher costs and distrustful of Davis' projections, have= =20 been threatening to block the sale.=20 Higher-than-expected costs also would increase the likelihood of blackouts;= =20 Davis acknowledged last week that the state might stop purchasing electrici= ty=20 at times when prices go out of sight.=20 And many private-sector experts believe prices will surely rise.=20 ""I see no reason, given what's happened the past six months, that the next= =20 six months is going to be dramatically different,"" said Keith Bailey, chief= =20 executive of generator Williams Cos., which sells power to California.=20 One great unknown is the impact of a ""price mitigation"" plan approved last= =20 week by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Price caps would kick in= =20 when California's power reserves are less than 7 percent of demand -- the= =20 so-called ""power alert"" days.=20 Bailey said the plan would have ""a very real effect,"" but state officials= =20 called it inadequate. ""More holes than Swiss cheese,"" Davis said this week.= =20 In Washington, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and other Western senators= =20 tore into FERC Chairman Curtis Hebert Jr. at a hearing on the price=20 mitigation plan. Feinstein wondered aloud why the FERC didn't simply=20 establish a firm ceiling on prices.=20 As it stands now, California officials have been spending upward of $50=20 million a day for Edison and PG&E; the tab can fluctuate wildly from day to= =20 day as prices shoot up and down. On Thursday, prices in California ranged= =20 between $214 and $240 a megawatt-hour, depending on location, for peak-time= =20 power, according to industry newsletter Enerfax Daily.=20 Because summertime demand is typically about 50 percent higher than it is i= n=20 spring, most analysts expect prices to rise. California electricity futures= =20 prices, considered by many to be a decent gauge of where prices are going,= =20 are trading at $375 a megawatt-hour for July and $525 for August, Enerfax= =20 said.=20 ""I would trust the traders,"" said Gary Ackerman of the Western Power Tradin= g=20 Forum, an association of power generators. ""They've been right more often= =20 than the Davis administration.""=20 The Northwest drought, robbing California of cheap hydropower, is a key=20 reason many analysts believe costs won't drop.=20 ""What it all adds up to is much less imported hydroelectric power than we'r= e=20 used to,"" said Arthur O'Donnell, editor of the California Energy Markets=20 newsletter.=20 But Davis' consultants say new power is coming from other sources this=20 summer, easing prices. New power plants, scheduled to begin operations this= =20 summer, will add 4,500 megawatts of power to California's energy-starved=20 grid, Davis said.=20 O'Donnell, though, said the new plants won't provide immediate relief. ""Pow= er=20 plants, in their start-up phase, frequently have problems,"" he said.=20 Another unknown quantity is the fate of hundreds of cogenerators, wind farm= s=20 and other alternative-energy providers that deliver more than 20 percent of= =20 the state's electricity under contract to the utilities.=20 After going months without payment from PG&E and Edison, scores of these=20 producers shut down in February and March, depriving the state of an=20 estimated 3,000 megawatts of power and contributing mightily to two days of= =20 blackouts in March.=20 About 800 megawatts of power returned to service in April, after PG&E and= =20 Edison were ordered to resume paying the generators, the two utilities said= .=20 And Fichera said more will come back starting June 1, when their contracts= =20 say they must operate or face financial penalties.=20 But some generators say they won't produce full throttle this summer. Anger= ed=20 at a new payment schedule that substantially cuts their income, they'll run= =20 ""the absolute bare minimum"" to fulfill their contracts, said Hal Dittmer of= =20 Wellhead Electric Co., a small generator that's been shut down.=20 Representatives of the small generators met with Davis on Thursday, with=20 Davis agreeing to work with them on the possibility of increasing their=20 payments, said generators' attorney Jerry Bloom.=20 Davis, meanwhile, also is betting that energy usage will fall. Recently=20 approved rate hikes will create ""sticker shock"" that will cut demand 3=20 percent, Fichera said. The state's conservation program will contribute an= =20 additional 4 percent, he said.=20 ""If we buy less than what (generators) expect, prices drop,"" Davis said.=20 Above all, the state has completed or is in final negotiations on a slew of= =20 long-term contracts with major generators -- deals that will substantially= =20 cut the state's dependence on the spot market and reduce its overall power= =20 bill, said Ron Nichols of Navigant Consulting Inc., which developed the=20 power-cost estimates for Davis.=20 The Bee's Dale Kasler can be reached at (916) 321-1066 or dkasler@sacbee.co= m.=20 David Whitney of The Bee's Washington Bureau contributed to this report.=20 GOP: Shrink plan for bonds By John Hill Bee Capitol Bureau (Published May 4, 2001)=20 The state should bite the bullet and use $5 billion of its surplus to pay f= or=20 electricity instead of borrowing the money and prolonging the fiscal agony,= =20 Assembly Republicans said Thursday.=20 Paying up front is preferable to a Democratic plan that would ""saddle=20 electric customers with higher utility rates to pay the state back with=20 interest,"" said Assemblyman Bill Leonard of San Bernardino, one of 30 membe= rs=20 of the Assembly Republican Caucus.=20 But the caucus's plan drew fire from state Treasurer Phil Angelides, a=20 Democrat in charge of putting together the bond deal. He said a GOP block o= f=20 the bond deal would cut into this year's spending for education and=20 transportation and ""take the state toward fiscal insolvency.""=20 Angelides said the Republican stance will force the Legislature to pass the= =20 bill authorizing bonds with a simple majority, needing no GOP votes but=20 requiring a 90-day wait for the bill to become law. By that time, he said,= =20 the state will be perilously close to running out of money.=20 ""It is to me, from a business perspective, one of the most irresponsible ac= ts=20 I've witnessed,"" he said.=20 The Assembly Republican plan calls for the state to sell $8 billion in bond= s,=20 instead of the $12.5 billion proposed by Gov. Gray Davis. This move would= =20 relieve pressure for more electricity rate increases, Leonard said.=20 The Republicans would make up the difference by taking $5 billion from the= =20 state's general fund. That's money the Democratic governor proposed in=20 January would go to one-time expenditures on a variety of projects, from=20 clean beaches to housing, as well as new spending on schools.=20 The Republican plan calls for rate rebates for people whose electric=20 utilities are publicly owned, such as the Sacramento Municipal Utility=20 District. Some argue that these ratepayers are getting a bad deal because= =20 their tax money is subsidizing ratepayers whose utilities are in financial= =20 trouble.=20 It also includes past Republican proposals that have stagnated in the=20 Legislature, such as allowing residential customers to make deals with=20 independent electricity providers and encouraging quick building of power= =20 plants.=20 Although the Republicans are in the minority, they wield leverage in the=20 energy debate because a bill that would authorize a bond sale requires a=20 two-thirds vote. At least five of the 30 Assembly Republicans would have to= =20 vote for it.=20 The Republicans say they are uncomfortable with the size of the bond deal= =20 proposed by Davis, which combined with other energy bond sales could top $2= 0=20 billion. ""It's too much to swallow,"" said James Fisfis, a spokesman for the= =20 caucus.=20 Fisfis said the plan represents a preliminary response to Democratic=20 proposals -- a ""starting point in negotiations and a vision of Republicans= =20 and what they would do if they were governing.""=20 ""We don't want those phony messages that everything's fine and hunky-dory,= =20 and it's not,"" he said. ""This is a time for financial restraint.""=20 The Republican proposal blasts as ""expensive gimmickry"" a plan by Angelides= =20 to get a $4.1 billion bridge loan from three major lenders to keep the stat= e=20 flush until the bonds are sold.=20 Angelides said such loans are routine when California and other states sell= =20 bonds. The loan in this case, he said, provides ""momentum"" for what's likel= y=20 to be the biggest bond sale in U.S. history. ""It's three of the most powerf= ul=20 investment banks in the country side by side with us, signalling to the wor= ld=20 marketplace that they believe in this transaction,"" he said.=20 The fees to the investment banks of several million dollars represent a=20 fraction of one day of the state's power costs, he said.=20 Legislative Analyst Elizabeth Hill said the proposal would require all $2.3= =20 billion in one-time expenditures in the governor's budget to be axed, as we= ll=20 as $2.7 billion of proposed year-to-year spending.=20 In addition, state revenues for the fiscal year starting July 1 appear to b= e=20 lower than anticipated, so the Republican plan might force even more cuts,= =20 she said.=20 The Republican caucus plan came the same day that Secretary of State Bill= =20 Jones, the lone Republican statewide officeholder and a GOP candidate for= =20 governor next year, released his own ideas on the energy crisis.=20 Jones, in a letter to Vice President Dick Cheney, said the state ""is on the= =20 brink of fiscal insolvency"" because of Davis' efforts to buy power.=20 Instead of selling bonds or negotiating to buy the utility companies'=20 transmission lines or other assets, the state should ask power generators t= o=20 forgive some of the nearly $14 billion they're owed in exchange for immedia= te=20 payment, Jones said.=20 In addition, the state should offer low-interest loans to utilities to help= =20 them repay their debt, using the power lines as collateral. Finally, he sai= d,=20 the utilities' parent companies should help reduce the debt.=20 While Jones said the Davis plan is ""socializing the delivery of power,"" the= =20 state Senate on Thursday sent the governor a bill that will likely drive th= e=20 state further into the energy business by allowing a public power authority= =20 to run its own power plants.=20 The authorizing bill, SB 6x by state Senate President Pro Tem John Burton,= =20 D-San Francisco, passed the Senate on a 24-14 party-line vote.=20 The agency would have access to $5 billion in bond money with which it coul= d=20 build, run and seize power facilities and institute conservation programs.= =20 The Bee's John Hill can be reached at (916) 326-5543 or jhill@sacbee.com.= =20 Kevin Yamamura of The Bee Capitol Bureau contributed to this report.=20 FERC chief defends plan for state=20 By David Whitney and David Westphal Bee Washington Bureau (Published May 4, 2001)=20 WASHINGTON -- The chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission=20 sternly defended the panel's new plan for controlling California electricit= y=20 prices Thursday amid mounting criticism that it is too little and too late = to=20 do much good.=20 The criticism came from Democrats and one Republican, Oregon Sen. Gordon=20 Smith, at a hastily arranged hearing of the Senate Energy and Natural=20 Resources Committee that was intended to be a forum for FERC Chairman Curt= =20 Hebert Jr. to dispel concerns that the plan won't protect consumers from=20 price-gouging electricity marketers.=20 The order, approved last week by a 2-1 vote, is supposed to dampen prices= =20 without rigid price controls by ordering generators to sell all the power= =20 they produce and setting a benchmark price based on the highest-cost,=20 least-efficient plant operating during periods of emergency shortages.=20 ""FERC is acting,"" Hebert said. ""FERC is acting responsibly. ... We're doing= =20 what we can do.""=20 But the commission's lone dissenter on last week's order, William Massey,= =20 charged that the measures to control skyrocketing prices would be in effect= =20 only during power emergencies when supplies were tightest. And while that= =20 might be as much as 40 percent or 45 percent of the time during the long ho= t=20 summer, he said, that still leaves most of the time when power marketers ar= e=20 free to sell at whatever price they can get.=20 ""I have no confidence that prices will be fair and just at all times this= =20 summer,"" Massey said.=20 Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., continued on that theme. She produced what= =20 was described as a ""megawatt laundering"" blueprint she had received detaili= ng=20 how FERC's order could be used to trade power back and forth between=20 marketers to bid up wholesale prices in a way that would be outside FERC=20 monitoring.=20 The contentious hearing came as the FERC is about to publish notice in the= =20 Federal Register to expand the price monitoring plan to Oregon, Washington= =20 and other Western states.=20 But Smith said he thought the commission was misreading the political=20 firestorm brewing throughout the West if it thought its plan would quell=20 outrage over rising prices.=20 ""Are you aware of the head of steam that is building up?"" asked Smith, who= =20 said prices in his region are 10 or 12 times what they were a year ago. ""Th= is=20 is unsustainable, for this administration, for this Congress.""=20 Smith and Feinstein have introduced legislation that would temporarily cap= =20 wholesale power rates at the cost of production plus a fixed profit margin.= =20 Feinstein, who was more supportive of the FERC order after its release last= =20 week, said after the hearing that she now believes it is flawed by too many= =20 loopholes and problems.=20 ""I can't understand why they are doing this,"" she said.=20 Meanwhile, one of California's biggest power customers, the U.S. military,= =20 vowed Thursday to reduce its peak-hours electricity use by 10 percent this= =20 summer as President Bush expressed new concern about the state's looming=20 season of blackouts.=20 ""We're worried about blackouts that may occur this summer and we want to be= =20 part of any solutions,"" said Bush, who gave federal officials 30 days to=20 implement electricity-reducing plans.=20 Gov. Gray Davis welcomed the president's comments, but said the plan falls= =20 short. ""Surely the federal government can do more and match California's 20= =20 percent savings at all state buildings,"" he said.=20 Vice President Dick Cheney, in a speech earlier this week, spoke dismissive= ly=20 of conservation efforts in the 1970s, and warned that the nation won't be= =20 able to ""simply conserve or ration our way out of the situation we're in.""= =20 But Bush spoke repeatedly Thursday of the importance of conserving. ""We've= =20 got to do both,"" he said. ""We must conserve, but we've also got to find new= =20 sources of energy.""=20 The administration set no target for reducing federal power use, but=20 recommended actions such as turning off escalators and raising thermostats = to=20 78 degrees when state reserves fall below 5 percent.=20 ""We're not trying to pick a figure arbitrarily out of the sky,"" said Energy= =20 Secretary Spencer Abraham.=20 Earlier, in a letter to Congress, Davis excoriated federal inaction on=20 soaring electricity rates as he prepared to meet in Sacramento with Abraham= =20 on Thursday evening.=20 ""With all our actions in California, it is a travesty that on the one issue= =20 over which the federal government has exclusive jurisdiction -- wholesale= =20 energy prices -- it has utterly failed to discharge its responsibility,""=20 Davis said.=20 The Bee's David Whitney can be reached at (202) 383-0004 or=20 dwhitney@mcclatchydc.com.=20 PG&E to judge: ISO, $1 billion tab will drain us By Claire Cooper Bee Legal Affairs Writer (Published May 4, 2001)=20 SAN FRANCISCO -- Pacific Gas and Electric Co. asked a federal bankruptcy=20 judge Thursday to bar the operator of California's power grid from buying= =20 electricity for the utility or collecting almost $1 billion now due for pas= t=20 wholesale purchases.=20 PG&E's bankruptcy estate would be depleted by paying the high prices passed= =20 on by the California Independent System Operator, the utility said in askin= g=20 U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali to issue an injunction.=20 PG&E filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization April 6. The utility's= =20 corporate parent, San Francisco-based PG&E Corp., is not part of the=20 bankruptcy proceedings.=20 The ISO buys electricity from independent wholesalers to supplement whateve= r=20 power the utilities can send to the grid, matching supply with demand on a= =20 daily basis. Throughout the past year it has provided as much as 30 percent= =20 of the state's electricity and as little as 10 percent on any given day, sa= id=20 ISO spokesman Patrick Dorinson.=20 ISO Vice President Elena Schmid said Thursday that the ISO stopped buying= =20 electricity for PG&E after being told to do so April 6 by the Federal Energ= y=20 Regulatory Commission because the utility no longer was creditworthy.=20 But the PG&E legal complaint said the ISO continued making purchases throug= h=20 April 30 at an average cost almost six times as high as the frozen retail= =20 rates that PG&E can charge its customers.=20 Even with an upcoming rate increase, said the complaint, PG&E could lose $2= 28=20 million a month if it depended on the ISO for 25 percent of its electricity= .=20 Since mid-January, the California Department of Water Resources also has be= en=20 buying electricity for PG&E and Southern California Edison, under AB 1x,=20 legislation that authorized state power purchases and rate increases if=20 necessary to repay the state.=20 PG&E said in the complaint that the state water department has limited its= =20 purchases to power it can buy at rates it deems reasonable, leaving it to t= he=20 ISO to obtain ""at extremely high rates"" the remainder of the electricity PG= &E=20 needed to balance supply and demand.=20 PG&E has been able to generate or has contracts for between 50 percent and = 60=20 percent of its retail electricity demand.=20 PG&E spokesman Ron Low said the DWR has been buying about 85 percent of the= =20 balance, but the company doesn't know how much the ISO is buying until it= =20 receives the bills.=20 ISO's Schmid said no decision had been reached concerning the effect of the= =20 bankruptcy proceedings on PG&E's outstanding billion-dollar bill for=20 electricity purchases in January and February.=20 ""We're certainly going to live by whatever terms the Bankruptcy Court puts = on=20 it,"" she said.=20 Two weeks ago, ISO advised PG&E that ISO's January and February invoices, t= o=20 the extent they conflicted with the bankruptcy process, were submitted only= =20 for record-keeping purposes.=20 But PG&E said ISO still plans to hold the company responsible for the bills= .=20 A hearing has been set for June 4.=20 The Bee's Claire Cooper can be reached at (415) 551-7701 or=20 ccooper@sacbee.com.=20 Jack Sirard: PG&E's woes a warning to utility investors (Published May 4, 2001)=20 Q: Like so many other investors, I bailed out of my Pacific Gas and Electri= c=20 shares. I am now looking at Con Ed. It looks fairly priced with a great=20 yield. Would it be wise to take the money I got from PG&E and buy Con Ed?= =20 My biggest concern is that Con Ed could suffer a fate similar to the one th= at=20 devastated PG&E. What do you think?=20 --Robert A., Carmichael=20 A: Consolidated Edison (ticker symbol ED) is one of the nation's largest=20 investor-owned energy companies. The company provides a wide range of=20 energy-related services to customers in New York, New Jersey and=20 Pennsylvania.=20 For the three months ended March 31, revenues increased 24 percent to $2.89= =20 billion while its net income declined 5 percent to $179.1 million.=20 The company's stock closed Thursday at $36.26, near its 52-week high of=20 $39.50 and well above its low of $29.61. The company pays a generous annual= =20 dividend of $2.20 a share, giving it a current yield of 6.04 percent.=20 Last week the company said it would spend $483 million this year as part of= a=20 program to prepare for the summer of 2001, enhance reliability and improve= =20 infrastructure. And over the next five years, Con Ed plans to invest $2.4= =20 billion to upgrade its electric delivery system, which serves New York City= =20 and Westchester County.=20 You're certainly right to be concerned about any utility's plans to deal wi= th=20 the energy crisis.=20 Here's what I found about Con Ed. The company sold most of its power plants= =20 and, like California utilities, failed to lock in multiyear contracts with= =20 suppliers to protect its customers against rising wholesale prices. But Con= =20 Ed can pass wholesale electricity price increases through to consumers. Las= t=20 summer, a spike in wholesale prices briefly pushed Con Ed electric rates up= =20 43 percent and that could happen again this summer.=20 Value Line says Con Ed stock is expected to lag the market but says=20 income-oriented investors might want to build a stake. The company has been= =20 increasing its dividend slowly but surely over the years. If you buy the=20 stock, keep a close eye on it. Utilities, unfortunately, no longer can be= =20 bought and tucked away.=20 Q: Our gross income is $100,000 a year and, other than our house payment, w= e=20 have no outstanding debt except a car payment of $250 a month. We have abou= t=20 $175,000 in investments including our stocks, mutual funds and 401(k), whic= h=20 we are adding about $1,000 a month to.=20 We have two kids, age 10 and 12, and hope to retire from our jobs with the= =20 state in about seven years at age 53 to 55 and convert our investments to 2= 5=20 percent CDs, 25 percent bond funds, 25 percent stocks and 25 percent mutual= =20 funds. What do you think?=20 --Jim R., Sacramento=20 A: After looking at the stocks (down 74 percent) and mutual funds (down 51= =20 percent) that you have bought on your own, I'd suggest that you need=20 professional help with your investing. Admittedly, you have taken a hit by= =20 being heavily invested in technology components. By comparison, your 401(k)= =20 is down only 23 percent.=20 Instead of being concerned about how to invest once you retired, if I were= =20 you, I'd focus my attention on whether I had enough money to retire. Becaus= e=20 you and your spouse both work for the state, your retirement benefits shoul= d=20 be solid, but I think you need to get a professional review of your financi= al=20 situation to see if all the numbers add up. At first glance, it doesn't loo= k=20 to me that they do.=20 You're at the age when you need to have a financial game plan in place that= =20 can pay for college for the children and your own retirement. In your case = --=20 as with many others -- spending some time and money now with a professional= =20 will pay off in the future.=20 The Bee's Jack Sirard can be reached at (916)321-1041 or jsirard@sacbee.com= =20 Legislature sends power authority bill to governor=20 By Audrey Cooper ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 May 3, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) California is poised to enter the power business after the = state=20 Senate approved the creation of a public power authority and sent its bill = to=20 Gov. Gray Davis Thursday.=20 A power authority, supporters said, will give the state more control over i= ts=20 wholesale electricity market by building and operating its own power plants= .=20 State-owned plants could charge lower prices, and building new plants could= =20 increase supply and ease wholesale prices.=20 If signed by the Davis, the bill creates a California Consumer Power and=20 Conservation Financing Authority that could issue up to $5 billion in reven= ue=20 bonds to pay for power plants, natural gas storage and additional pipelines= =20 and conservation programs.=20 Davis has said he supports creating a public power authority similar to one= =20 in New York. The New York authority has 10 power plants, 1,400 miles of=20 transmission lines and produces about 25 percent of the state's power.=20 Nebraska also has a power authority, which created a market in which=20 residents pay 22 percent less than the national average, said Sen. John=20 Burton, D-San Francisco, who wrote the bill.=20 A Davis spokesman said Thursday that although the governor has supported th= e=20 concept of a power authority, he has not decided whether or not to sign the= =20 legislation.=20 The authority would be run by the state treasurer and four other members=20 appointed by the governor.=20 Opponents of the plan, most of them Republicans, have said an authority=20 thrusts the state into a power market in which it doesn't belong and could= =20 obstruct private interests' efforts to build and operate power plants.=20 The new board would also be able to seize plants by eminent domain, a power= =20 the governor also has under an emergency order issued in January.=20 Sen. Steve Peace, D-El Cajon, said California needs the authority because t= he=20 1996 deregulation law didn't create real competition and the Federal Energy= =20 Regulatory Commission refuses to control rising wholesale prices.=20 The state's deregulation is ""the economic equivalent to the World Wrestling= =20 Federation,"" Peace said. ""The wrestlers follow a script and the referee,=20 FERC, ensures it is entertaining. It is not real competition.""=20 The authority won't help the state escape blackouts this summer, but will= =20 help restore reliable and affordable electricity in the future, said consum= er=20 advocate Harvey Rosenfield with the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer=20 Rights.=20 ""The agency is California's key to survival and independence from the energ= y=20 cartel,"" he said.=20 Davis and state lawmakers are also considering purchasing Southern Californ= ia=20 Edison's transmission system, which would be governed by a separate public= =20 authority. Negotiations with San Diego Gas & Electric Co. are continuing. T= he=20 Legislature would have to approve those buys.=20 The authority's main power would be over generator construction, said=20 Stanford University economist Frank Wolak. Energy companies would likely be= =20 hired to build the plants, something the companies are already pursuing.=20 ""As far as operating power plants, we're not as good as these other guys=20 are,"" he said.=20 However, the authority may speed the siting of power plants, an approval=20 process mostly anchored in state agencies. Centering the approval process i= n=20 the state government could speed the process, he said.=20 Richard Sklar, the governor's new energy czar, said the goal of the state's= =20 power authority will be to balance the energy market in California and keep= =20 private companies from controlling the prices.=20 ""The power authority is a sensible long-term strategy,"" Sklar said. ""It's n= ot=20 a bad idea for the state, if the private sector will not build it, to build= =20 plants so supply won't fall short of demand and this game won't be able to = be=20 played.""=20 Opponents said California should create total deregulation of the electrici= ty=20 market, not a government solution.=20 The 24-14 vote on the bill, written by San Francisco Democratic Sen. John= =20 Burton, was split down party lines.=20 Some of the most ""feared words in the English language are 'I'm from the=20 government and I'm here to help you,'"" said Sen. Bill Morrow, R-Oceanside.= =20 The state Assembly passed the bill last week in a 47-28 vote split along=20 party lines.=20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. spokesman Ron Low declined comment on the=20 legislation. Officials from San Diego Gas and Electric Co. didn't return=20 calls seeking comment.=20 ?? Read Burton's SB6X www.leginfo.ca.gov=20 GOP Tries to Force Its Dramatically Different Energy Plan on Governor=20 By MIGUEL BUSTILLO, Times Staff Writer=20 ?????SACRAMENTO--Republican lawmakers are trying to force Gov. Gray Davis= =20 into a dramatically different exit strategy for the energy crisis: writing= =20 off the $5 billion the state has already spent on electricity and borrowing= =20 billions less to finance future power purchases. ?????GOP lawmakers are holding up emergency legislation needed to replenish= =20 the budget for power costs, because they don't think the Democratic=20 governor's plan to get California out of the power business will work. They= =20 say the plan is full of dangerously optimistic assumptions, such as estimat= es=20 that 90% of the state's alternative energy producers will be generating=20 electricity this summer--only two-thirds are now--and that Californians wil= l=20 use 7% less electricity. ?????Although Republicans don't control either house, the emergency=20 legislation requires a two-thirds vote, which gives the GOP significant swa= y. ?????The plan from the Republican leadership would commit taxpayer money fo= r=20 the first time to an electricity problem that has only affected customers o= f=20 private utilities. Because the plan is sure to draw strong opposition from= =20 politicians in Los Angeles and other areas served by public power agencies,= =20 Republicans have included a complex, $1.5-billion proposal to provide refun= ds=20 to those served by municipal utilities. ?????By blocking the emergency legislation, Republicans may stop state=20 Treasurer Phil Angelides from securing a $4.13-billion loan to repay state= =20 coffers for electricity purchases--a failure that would reduce the money=20 available to Davis for his next budget and possibly delay his plan to resol= ve=20 the energy crisis. Angelides needs the bill to guarantee repayment for the= =20 loan. ?????If Angelides does not obtain legislative approval by Monday, he will= =20 miss a Tuesday deadline lenders had given him to close the loan. That would= =20 clearly leave Davis with less money for new education, police and=20 road-building programs as he begins planning his next budget this month. ?????Moreover, failure to pass the bill could delay a record bond issue tha= t=20 Davis promised would replenish the budget and shield it from further energy= =20 drains by summer. And it could harm sagging confidence on Wall Street that= =20 California can deliver on its plans to manage the energy crisis, Angelides= =20 said. ?????California's credit rating has already been downgraded by one credit= =20 agency, Standard & Poor's, largely because of concerns about the effect of= =20 electricity purchases on state finances. ?????Negotiations Are Continuing ?????""The Republicans appear to be digging in and playing a dangerous game = of=20 financial roulette with the state. This is really ludicrous to me,"" Angelid= es=20 said. ""Standard & Poor's has already downgraded us. The other credit rating= =20 agencies are watching. I just don't understand what the Republicans are=20 thinking."" ?????Said Assembly Republican leader Dave Cox (R-Fair Oaks): ""We're not=20 prepared to give the governor a blank check."" ?????Democrats threatened Thursday to test the Republicans' resolve by=20 bringing the bill to a vote in the Assembly, but backed down. Negotiations= =20 among legislative leaders continue. ?????To avoid widespread blackouts, the state government entered the=20 electricity-buying business in January after the private utilities became t= oo=20 burdened with debt to continue purchasing power on the expensive wholesale= =20 market. ?????Under a plan approved by the Legislature and signed into law by Davis,= =20 the state budget is to be repaid for the power purchases through a massive= =20 municipal bond issue, expected to be the largest in American history. The= =20 bonds, in turn, are to be paid off by utility ratepayers through a slice of= =20 their monthly bills. ?????However, the plan was based on the premise that the state would quickl= y=20 bring down power costs by entering into long-term contracts with suppliers-= -a=20 scenario that has yet to materialize. ?????In fact, California's power costs have gone up since January. Lawmaker= s=20 initially estimated that $10 billion in bonds would allow the budget to be= =20 repaid and cover future power purchases. Davis is now proposing $12.5 billi= on=20 in bonds--and higher electric bills--to finance the state's costs until 200= 3. ?????Republicans are convinced that it will not be enough. They say the=20 Angelides bridge loan is not needed because the state has money in various= =20 funds that could cover power purchases well into the fall. ?????They also confess to political considerations. Republican legislators= =20 believe that by allowing Angelides to obtain his loan now, they will be=20 powerless to oppose further borrowing later. The loan Angelides set up with= =20 J.P. Morgan Chase and several other financial services companies is to be= =20 repaid with the bond issue. If the loan is not repaid by the end of the=20 summer, the interest rate will rise dramatically, a situation that would ma= ke=20 it hard for the minority Republicans to oppose more bonds. ?????The strong GOP views were shaped in part by Democratic state Controlle= r=20 Kathleen Connell, who met with Republican legislators earlier this week and= =20 shared a highly critical appraisal of Davis' plan. ?????Connell told the Republicans that the governor's strategy was based on= a=20 series of assumptions about electricity market conditions in California thi= s=20 summer that, in her view, are highly improbable. ?????""It is almost impossible for all these hypothetical situations=20 envisioned in their scenario to occur at once,"" Connell said. ?????But even if all the assumptions came to pass, she predicted that=20 California would still need to secure another source of financing by next= =20 spring to continue energy purchases. Davis administration officials have=20 rebutted her claim. ?????""I am deeply troubled by this incremental approach to this financing= =20 that is long-term in nature and is going to burden the state for many years= ,""=20 Connell said, in what appeared to be a reference to Davis' reputation as a= =20 plodder.=20 ?????Using Surplus to Pay for Electricity ?????Republicans, who have traditionally been opposed to financing public= =20 programs with large bond issues, contend that Davis needs to reevaluate his= =20 plan. By proposing to essentially forget the $5 billion the state has spent= =20 so far on power, they are advocating using up the state's projected budget= =20 surplus on electricity costs, even if it means cutting new government=20 programs. ?????""If Gov. Davis continues down this path, he could bankrupt the state,""= =20 said Assemblyman Dennis Mountjoy (R-Monrovia). ""That would have a far great= er=20 impact on education."" ?????Democrats, who strongly believe that the surplus should be invested in= =20 roads, schools and to meet other long-term future needs, are unlikely to ev= er=20 support the idea. Lawmakers are already discussing outflanking the=20 Republicans by drafting a bill to repay the budget on a nonemergency basis,= =20 which would only require a majority vote. ?????That, however, would probably delay the financing until at least Augus= t,=20 since nonemergency measures do not take effect for 90 days--giving Californ= ia=20 only about six weeks to cut the largest municipal bond deal ever before sta= te=20 coffers begin to empty, according to Angelides. ?????There is another potential consequence: Many of the long-term contract= s=20 the Davis administration has reached to purchase electricity contain clause= s=20 that may make them void if the state does not obtain financing by July. ?????""This is a very dangerous game,"" Angelides said. ?????In other electricity developments Thursday: ?????* Over Republican objections, Democrats in the state Senate approved a= nd=20 sent to Davis a far-reaching bill that would put state government in the=20 business of operating its own power plants and selling electricity at cheap= er=20 rates than private companies. The bill, SB 6x by Senate leader John Burton= =20 (D-San Francisco), would create a state power authority with the ability to= =20 finance, buy, own and build generation plants and sell the energy at=20 cost-based rates. ?????on likened the proposed government body to the New York Power Authorit= y,=20 approved by GOP Gov. George Pataki, which brought about a 10% reduction in= =20 rates. ?????The difference from the current situation is that ""the people of=20 California, the ratepayers, would benefit, and not the corporate officers a= nd=20 not the shareholders"" of private energy companies, Burton said. ?????But Republicans attacked the power authority as ""more government"" that= =20 would impose itself on an enterprise better suited for private operators wi= th=20 years of expertise. ?????""This is a horrific mistake and one that California ratepayers will be= =20 paying for many years to come,"" said state Sen. Tom McClintock (R-Thousand= =20 Oaks.) ?????* California Secretary of State Bill Jones, a GOP gubernatorial hopefu= l,=20 released his plan to address the electricity crisis, criticizing Davis'=20 efforts as a state takeover of the power industry. ?????Jones called on the utilities' parent companies to help bail out their= =20 troubled subsidiaries and said creditors should accept lower payments on ba= ck=20 debts. He also called for creation of a state-federal emergency management= =20 plan to deal with any blackouts this summer. Jones made his three-page=20 proposal in a letter to Vice President Dick Cheney, head of the Bush=20 administration's energy task force. ---=20 ?????Times staff writers Carl Ingram in Sacramento and Mark Z. Barabak in L= os=20 Angeles contributed to this story. Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 Secretary of Energy, Davis Meet on U.S. Plan to Boost Conservation=20 Crisis: Federal buildings and military bases, accounting for 1.5% of state'= s=20 usage, will cut back.=20 By RICHARD SIMON and DAN MORAIN, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????SACRAMENTO--In a visit meant to underscore the Bush administration's= =20 heightened concern about the California electricity crisis, Secretary of=20 Energy Spencer Abraham met Thursday with Gov. Gray Davis in Sacramento to= =20 discuss federal energy conservation plans. ?????""I think we have an approach that can result in significant savings,""= =20 Abraham told Davis. The energy secretary said he was in California ""to gaug= e=20 what we can do to add to what California is already doing."" ?????The trip came after President Bush revealed plans for a series of=20 conservation measures for federal buildings and military bases nationwide.= =20 Those facilities in California account for 1.5% of the state's total energy= =20 use. Today, Abraham is scheduled to meet with federal officials in San=20 Francisco to work out details of the nationwide program for more than 500,0= 00=20 federal buildings. ?????After meeting with Abraham at the White House earlier Thursday, Bush= =20 said: ""We're worried about blackouts that may occur this summer, and we wan= t=20 to be a part of any solutions. This administration is deeply concerned abou= t=20 California and its citizens."" ?????Defending his response to the California crisis, Bush said, ""As I said= =20 from the very beginning of my administration, we'll work to help California= =20 in any way we can."" ?????Also Thursday, Davis met with alternative energy producers in an attem= pt=20 to persuade them to continue operations, despite being owed more than $1=20 billion by California's private utilities. ?????Alternative energy producers, including oil companies that generate=20 electricity as a byproduct of their operations, account for about 27% of th= e=20 electricity consumed in California. Several have stopped producing after th= e=20 utilities could no long afford to pay soaring prices for their power. ?????Davis assigned S. David Freeman and former Assemblyman Richard Katz, a= =20 Davis appointee to a state water board, to be in charge of negotiations.=20 Davis said he hoped that the talks could be completed within a week. ?????And in a sign that major energy companies may get more involved in the= =20 California crisis, Kenneth Lay, CEO of the Houston-based energy giant Enron= =20 Corp., met Thursday with Davis, Assembly Speaker Bob Hertzberg (D-Sherman= =20 Oaks) and Senate President Pro Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco). ?????Meanwhile, Bush on Thursday directed federal agencies to ""take=20 appropriate actions to conserve energy use at their facilities."" ?????In California, such measures could include setting thermostats to 78= =20 degrees, lowering lighting and turning off escalators during Stage 2 and=20 Stage 3 power emergencies, administration officials said. Those occur when= =20 the state's electricity reserves fall below 5% and 1.5%, respectively, and= =20 can trigger interruptions in service. ?????Bush did not set an energy-saving target. But the Defense Department,= =20 one of the state's single largest energy consumers--using about 1% of peak= =20 demand--pledged to reduce peak use by 10% this summer and an additional 5% = by=20 summer 2002. That would make available 200 megawatts, officials said, enoug= h=20 to provide electricity to about 150,000 homes during the summer. ?????The federal government accounts for about 1.5% of total energy use=20 across the country, making it one of the nation's largest energy consumers,= =20 according to the Energy Department. ?????Bush also offered to make available to the state power-generating unit= s=20 owned by the federal government. ?????But his efforts failed to mollify Democratic critics, who renewed call= s=20 for the administration to impose price controls on wholesale electricity. ?????""The generating companies are gouging California consumers while the= =20 president turns his back on us,"" Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) said in a=20 statement. ?????Rep. Sam Farr (D-Carmel), leader of the California Democratic=20 congressional delegation, sent a letter to Vice President Dick Cheney=20 protesting Democrats' exclusion from Cheney's meeting this week with=20 California GOP lawmakers. ?????""As we head into the high summer demand months, it is unfortunate that= =20 you have decided to keep Democrats in the dark about the administration's= =20 plans to deal with the crisis,"" Farr said. ?????Bush's conservation initiative comes after Cheney, who is heading a ta= sk=20 force on national energy policy, was assailed by some critics for emphasizi= ng=20 production over conservation. ?????""Conservation has got to be an integral part of making sure we've got = a=20 reasonable energy policy,"" Bush said Thursday. ""But what the vice president= =20 was saying is we can't conserve our way to energy independence, nor can we= =20 conserve our way to having enough energy available. We've got to do both. W= e=20 must conserve, but we've also got to find new sources of energy."" ?????David M. Nemtzow, president of the Alliance to Save Energy, called the= =20 directive an ""emergency answer to a long-term problem."" ?????""We need to fix the underlying problem by investing in energy-efficien= t=20 lighting, cooling and controls,"" he said. ""We hope that this crisis will=20 encourage the president to increase the budget for energy management rather= =20 than cut it by 48% as previously proposed."" ?????Political analysts said the effort was driven by concerns for not only= =20 electrons but also elections. ?????""It's all about political conservation,"" said Marshall Wittmann, senio= r=20 fellow at the conservative Hudson Institute. ?????Thomas E. Mann, senior fellow at the nonpartisan Brookings Institution= ,=20 agreed: ""The administration has come to the view that just because they can= 't=20 win California in a presidential election doesn't mean the Republican Party= =20 can afford to kiss off the largest state in the Union."" ?????Analysts speculated that the administration came under pressure from= =20 California Republicans in Congress who worried about perceptions that the= =20 White House was not being aggressive enough in responding to the crisis. ?????As federal officials search for ways that California can avoid blackou= ts=20 this summer, a Woodland Hills-based advocacy group, More Power to You, has= =20 suggested that the Navy hook its nuclear-powered ships to the state power= =20 grid to provide energy while in port. ?????The Navy has nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and submarines in San= =20 Diego and Washington state. ?????But Navy officials said it is not technologically feasible to use the= =20 nuclear reactors aboard the ships to provide power for the grid because mos= t=20 of that power goes directly to the propulsion systems. ?????Even to ""capture"" power not used for propulsion would require extensiv= e=20 construction on shore and retrofitting aboard ship, officials said. Also,= =20 using ships to provide onshore power could disrupt training and deployment= =20 schedules, they said. ---=20 ?????Times staff writer Tony Perry contributed to this report. Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 PG&E Seeks Relief From High-Priced Power Purchases=20 Bankruptcy: Utility asks judge to order grid operator to stop buying=20 electricity on its behalf at prices beyond its means.=20 By TIM REITERMAN, Times Staff Writer=20 ?????SAN FRANCISCO--Pacific Gas & Electric Co. asked a federal bankruptcy= =20 judge Thursday to order the state's power grid operator to stop buying=20 electricity for its customers on the sky-high spot market, unless the utili= ty=20 can recover the full cost. ?????The move represents PG&E's latest attempt in Bankruptcy Court to get= =20 relief from actions that the company says are driving it deeper into debt. ?????PG&E asked Judge Dennis Montali to enjoin the California Independent= =20 System Operator from making the company pay the costs of power purchased on= =20 the utility's behalf. The company said it recently received a $1-billion bi= ll=20 for such purchases in January and February. ?????""By purchasing wholesale power at a cost higher than the retail rates= =20 and sending us the bill, [Cal-ISO] . . . could be reducing the value of our= =20 assets by hundreds of millions of dollars a month,"" said PG&E spokesman Ron= =20 Low. ?????In its motion, the company argued that Cal-ISO is violating bankruptcy= =20 law by requiring the utility to pay more for power than it can collect from= =20 state-regulated rates frozen under California's deregulation plan. PG&E sai= d=20 Cal-ISO's actions would force the utility to seek credit on onerous terms. ?????The motion also contended Cal-ISO is violating an April 6 order by the= =20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission that said the grid operator could only= =20 buy power on behalf of credit-worthy entities. ?????That same day, PG&E sought Chapter 11 protection from creditors, sayin= g=20 it was $9 billion in debt. It later filed a motion seeking to halt an=20 accounting change ordered by the California Public Utilities Commission,=20 which the company says is prolonging the rate freeze and preventing it from= =20 recouping the cost of power. ?????Elena Schmid, Cal-ISO's vice president of corporate and strategic=20 development, said she has not seen the motion and could not fully comment. ?????But she said Cal-ISO has been discussing billings with PG&E in hopes o= f=20 determining which payments fall within the FERC ruling and which are subjec= t=20 to the bankruptcy case. ?????""We will live by the FERC ruling and whatever constraints the Bankrupt= cy=20 Court places on us,"" Schmid said. ""We have indicated to them (PG&E) that we= =20 are sending the bill . . . and they should treat it as information, until w= e=20 can work it through."" ?????PG&E listed Cal-ISO as one of its biggest creditors, with $1.1 million= =20 owed for power purchased from third parties. Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 SDG&E Blackout Plan Would Pay Firms to Use Generators=20 Utilities: Program in which large customers produce their own power is=20 forecast to cut demand by as much as 50 megawatts, save $1.6 billion.=20 By NANCY RIVERA BROOKS, Times Staff Writer=20 ?????San Diego Gas & Electric unveiled a novel plan Thursday to pay custome= rs=20 to fire up their backup generators when blackouts threaten. ?????The utility said the program could cut demand on the power grid by 50= =20 megawatts--enough to serve about 37,500 homes--allowing it to avoid or=20 minimize blackouts this summer in San Diego and southern Orange County. ?????""California needs an infusion of new power supplies, but in the interi= m,=20 we hope this unique program will help shield San Diego from some of the=20 devastating effects of rolling blackouts this summer, including the increas= ed=20 risks to public safety and health,"" SDG&E President Debra L. Reed said. ?????The Rolling Blackout Reduction Program, as the Sempra Energy subsidiar= y=20 has dubbed it, would cost $15 million to implement but could save the regio= n=20 as much as $1.6 billion in lost revenue, reduced productivity and property= =20 damage, the utility has estimated. ?????Energy experts are forecasting a dark summer for California, with=20 blackout totals ranging between 20 hours and 1,100 hours. The California=20 Independent System Operator, which runs the electricity transmission grid f= or=20 most of the state, has said residents face 34 days of rotating outages if= =20 they use the same amount of electricity this summer as they did last summer= . ?????The state and utilities have been working feverishly to develop progra= ms=20 that will reduce electricity use this summer. ?????SDG&E, Edison International's Southern California Edison and PG&E=20 Corp.'s Pacific Gas & Electric have programs that grant large customers low= er=20 electricity rates in exchange for cutting electricity use when Cal-ISO=20 declares a Stage 2 emergency as power reserves dip below 5%. But=20 participation in those programs has dropped sharply because of repeated pow= er=20 interruptions. ?????SDG&E's ""interruptible"" program represents 49 megawatts of demand, hal= f=20 of what it was in October, spokesman Ed Van Herik said. ?????The new SDG&E program, which must be approved by the California Public= =20 Utilities Commission, would kick in whenever Cal-ISO declares a Stage 3=20 emergency, indicating that power reserves are down to 1.5% of demand and th= at=20 rolling blackouts are imminent. ?????SDG&E hopes to sign up 50 megawatts of backup generation, representing= =20 about 40 large commercial and industrial customers, but believes customers= =20 capable of generating a total of 200 megawatts may be eligible for the=20 program, Van Herik said. ?????""We found a lot of customers are interested in this program,"" he said.= =20 ""This is an opportunity for San Diego to become involved."" ?????During a Stage 3 order, program participants would be asked to start= =20 their backup generators and then reduce the electricity they receive from= =20 SDG&E by the same amount. ?????Participants would be paid a monthly fee of $7 per kilowatt of=20 generation capacity. On top of that, they would receive 35 cents for every= =20 kilowatt-hour of power they generate for their own use. That price is about= =20 what power plant owners have been commanding in California's pricey=20 electricity market. ?????""We think the fees we are proposing are fair,"" Van Herik said. ""These= =20 aren't people who are in the generation business, and undoubtedly there wil= l=20 be wear and tear on equipment and increased personnel and fuel costs."" ?????The program, which SDG&E wants to implement by June 1, would operate i= n=20 compliance with air pollution regulations, the utility said. Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 Been there, done that=20 Bay Area finds little new in Bush's ideas=20 Joe Garofoli, Bob Egelko, Matthew Yi, Chronicle Staff Writers Friday, May 4, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL: .DTL=20 Californians who have been sweating for months to cut their home energy usa= ge=20 20 percent didn't blink yesterday at President Bush's suggestion that feder= al=20 offices conserve half that much.=20 Sure, some might nod off at their desks this summer, when thermostats at=20 federal buildings will be set at 78 degrees during power shortages. And som= e=20 will get an aerobic workout, when the escalators at those same buildings ar= e=20 turned off.=20 But civilians and federal employees alike yawned at yesterday's conservatio= n=20 suggestions such as ""unplug unused coffee pots"" after doing everything shor= t=20 of burning their shoelaces for wattage during the past few months.=20 Conservation tips are so December to any Californian worth his baseline.=20 ""I don't think it's frustrating to (us) because most people know what's goi= ng=20 on, that we're in an energy crisis,"" said Ansara Johnson, 40, revenue offic= er=20 at the Internal Revenue Service in Oakland.=20 The Bush administration may be setting the pace in the moving-stair=20 department, however. BART, whose escalators don't run so great in the best = of=20 times, said yesterday it is looking at operating escalators with an automat= ic=20 stop-start system to save power this summer. The escalators would be dorman= t=20 until passengers activated them.=20 ""It is kind of ironic, considering we just spent $20 million to fix the=20 escalators,"" BART spokesman Ron Rodriguez said.=20 Just don't turn them off during peak hours, Ingrid Severson pleaded while= =20 pulling her massage chair onto an escalator at the 12th Street BART station= =20 in downtown Oakland.=20 ""That would suck,"" said the 23-year-old massage therapist. ""There are certa= in=20 things that shouldn't be sacrificed.""=20 San Francisco International Airport already is turning off escalators durin= g=20 down times, though the long, long moving sidewalks are going to keep going = no=20 matter what, spokesman Ron Wilson said.=20 Those with customers to serve, however, embraced the Bush energy plan as=20 warmly as a meter-reader.=20 While federal employees will be working up a sweat this summer hiking up=20 stairs to work, shoppers at Concord's Sunvalley Mall will be coolly cruisin= g=20 down the moving stairs to Victoria's Secret.=20 ""We have no plans to shut down our escalators,"" said Sunvalley general=20 manager Tom McCracken. ""How else would people get from floor to floor?""=20 FASHION VICTIMS The new guidelines could have an unintended effect. They may provoke a=20 fashion revolution among federal employees, not a group traditionally known= =20 for its couture choices.=20 It's not their fault. There's only so much you can do with postal blue or= =20 judicial black. But with Bush's directive that thermostats be set at 78=20 degrees, many employees said, something has to change. Like their wardrobes= .=20 Start with the long-suffering post office sales associates -- the clerks=20 behind the counter -- whom government regulations have shackled in long woo= l-=20 blend pants.=20 ""I still have not heard a clear-cut reason why we're not allowed to wear=20 shorts and the mail carriers are,"" said Steve Wellington, a postal sales=20 associate in Concord. The former postal union leader said the=20 shorts-vs.-pants debate has been a hot one for a long time.=20 ""Look at these pants,"" Wellington said, offering a visitor a touch of his= =20 trousers. ""These get real warm in the summer.""=20 While postal officials were happy to point out that their San Francisco=20 offices have used 17 percent less electricity than last year, they wouldn't= =20 touch the shorts issue. ""I don't think we need to comment on that,"" said=20 Horace Hinshaw, a spokesman for the U.S. Postal Service.=20 JUDGES GET EXEMPTION Then there are judges. Attorneys and court employees said the bench needs t= o=20 take the lead in the casual attire revolution. Ditch those heavy black robe= s=20 in favor of, say, a black polo shirt.=20 ""Black really magnifies the heat,"" said Napa attorney Paul Carey. ""They=20 should allow judges to wear lighter colors, like yellow or chartreuse. If t= he=20 judges would allow it, every attorney I know would love to wear a T-shirt,= =20 shorts and sandals into court.""=20 However, there was one indication that judges may be thermostat-exempt, at= =20 least at the Phillip Burton Federal Building, a 20-story tower at 450 Golde= n=20 Gate Ave. in San Francisco that houses federal courts and numerous agencies= .=20 A contractor who was working yesterday to install new thermostat controls i= n=20 the building said two areas were excluded: computer rooms, to protect the= =20 equipment, and courtrooms.=20 ""That was the mandate,"" said Erik Ahrens, vice president of Syserco, which= =20 has a contract for heating and vent control. ""Courtrooms are on separate=20 units. ""=20 At the Ronald V. Dellums Federal Building in downtown Oakland, lights alrea= dy=20 have been dimmed in hallways, and workers have been encouraged to turn off= =20 unneeded lights and computers since early this year. Cynthia Mackey, 38, a= =20 revenue officer for the Internal Revenue Service, wasn't happy to hear the= =20 thermostat would be going up.=20 ""Oh, no. I guess I'll just work at home,"" where Mackey said the thermostat = is=20 set at 68 degrees. ""If it's set at 78, and with all the employees and all t= he=20 computers, it would be hot.""=20 Then it will be time to change -- habits and clothes.=20 E-mail the reporters at jgarofoli@sfchronicle.com, begelko@sfchronicle.com = or=20 myi@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 Bush calls power supply the solution=20 He says conservation useful but secondary=20 Marc Sandalow, Washington Bureau Chief Friday, May 4, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL: .DTL=20 Even as he ordered a new conservation effort in California, President Bush= =20 insisted yesterday that finding new sources of energy -- not cutting back o= n=20 consumption -- is the long-term answer to the nation's energy woes.=20 ""You cannot conserve your way to energy independence,"" Bush said. ""We can d= o=20 a better job in conservation, but we darn sure have to do a better job of= =20 finding more supply.""=20 Bush's comments, his most extensive to date on California's energy crisis,= =20 called on all federal managers to conserve energy ""to the maximum extent=20 consistent with the effective discharge of public responsibilities.""=20 As part of that effort, the Defense Department -- one of California's large= st=20 consumers of energy -- announced plans to curtail electrical use by at leas= t=20 10 percent by this summer.=20 ""This administration is deeply concerned about California and its citizens,= ""=20 Bush said after a meeting with his top energy advisers. ""We're worried abou= t=20 blackouts that may occur this summer, and we want to be a part of any=20 solution. ""=20 While touting the value of conservation, Bush repeatedly identified the=20 limits to that approach. In response to questions from reporters, Bush made= =20 clear that he would not be confused with former President Jimmy Carter, who= =20 donned a cardigan sweater and preached the virtues of conservation two=20 decades ago.=20 ""It is naive for the American people and its leaders . . . to say that we c= an=20 be OK from an energy perspective by only focusing on conservation,"" Bush=20 said. ""We've got to find additional supplies of energy.""=20 Bush has called for oil drilling in Alaska, as well as exploratory drilling= =20 in other parts of the West. Members of his administration also have touted= =20 the expanded use of coal and have floated the idea of building new nuclear= =20 power plants.=20 SUPPLY-SIDE PLAN There have been repeated signals that the comprehensive energy plan being= =20 developed by a White House task force -- which is expected to be released i= n=20 two weeks -- will focus less on conservation than on boosting energy=20 supplies.=20 Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, speaking to reporters after meeting with= =20 the president, said conservation plays an important role in helping=20 California through its immediate crisis. Yet developing new sources of ener= gy=20 is important to prevent the rest of the nation from experiencing California= 's=20 shortages.=20 ""We have a crisis and an emergency this summer (in California) that will=20 result in 30 to 35 days of blackouts,"" Abraham said from the White House=20 driveway. ""We don't have the time between now and those occasions to develo= p=20 new (energy) sources sufficient to meet the challenge.""=20 By the middle of the month, the White House will release ""a national energy= =20 plan that will be more comprehensive and more far reaching, that will offer= a=20 new vision that addresses Americans long-term supply security,"" Abraham sai= d.=20 MEETING WITH DAVIS The energy secretary traveled to Sacramento last night where he planned to= =20 meet with Gov. Gray Davis and other state officials. He is scheduled to hol= d=20 a public conservation event this morning in San Francisco and to discuss wi= th=20 federal officials how they can reduce energy consumption.=20 An action plan distributed by the Department of Energy calls for federal=20 workers across the country to develop conservation plans within the next 30= =20 days.=20 In addition, it calls for specific actions during Stage 2 or Stage 3 power= =20 emergencies, when supplies are within 5 percent of demand. Some experts war= n=20 that California will be in such a state for much of the summer.=20 Among the steps called for in an energy emergency are setting thermostats i= n=20 federal buildings no lower than 78 degrees, turning off escalators and=20 hallway lights, and unplugging coffee pots, computers and any nonessential= =20 appliances.=20 The plan suggests that employees be notified when temperatures might be war= m,=20 so they can wear more casual clothing to make the heat more bearable.=20 Meanwhile, the Pentagon announced it will reduce its consumption during pea= k=20 demand hours by 10 percent, and perhaps by as much as 15 percent by next=20 summer. It will also hook up wind generation facilities at Edwards Air Forc= e=20 Base.=20 Paul Wolfowitz, deputy secretary of defense, said the steps will save the= =20 state's power grid about 200 megawatts of power, enough electricity for 200= ,=20 000 homes.=20 Energy officials have explored many options, including the use of nuclear= =20 submarines to provide energy during shortages and firing up the generators = on=20 the Navy's mothball fleet in Suisun Bay, near Benicia. Both ideas have been= =20 rejected as unfeasible, energy officials said.=20 Democrats cheered Bush's call for conservation, though several said it did= =20 not go far enough.=20 IRONIC PRAISE ""I am very happy the president and Secretary Abraham recognized that=20 conservation matters,"" said Richard Sklar, Gov. Davis' top energy adviser.= =20 ""We thank the president for catching up with the train.""=20 Republican governors meeting in San Jose suggested that Davis could do more= =20 on his own and in concert with other Western states to help California ease= =20 its energy crunch.=20 It's time, Montana Gov. Judy Martz argued, that California ""met its=20 responsibility to build an adequate power supply and stop looking to=20 Washington for a bailout.""=20 Others, however, called on Bush to go further and impose price caps on=20 wholesale electricity prices to guarantee a steady flow of electricity and= =20 keep prices down for consumers.=20 Chronicle staff writers Lynda Gledhill and Bill Workman contributed to this= =20 report. / E-mail Marc Sandalow at msandalow@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 SDG&E unveils plan to contend with rolling blackouts=20 Friday, May 4, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 957EDT0155.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 (05-04) 06:57 PDT SAN DIEGO (AP) -- San Diego Gas & Electric has unveiled a= =20 plan that would pay customers who fire up their emergency generators when= =20 rolling blackouts loom.=20 The utility is seeking approval from the state Public Utilities Commission = to=20 place about 40 companies under contract to generate a total of 50 megawatts= =20 during statewide power alerts. The backup power would be enough to serve=20 about 37,500 homes.=20 ``These businesses would actually be sharing their backup generation with t= he=20 San Diego region,'' Debra Reed, president of SDG&E, said Thursday.=20 The Rolling Blackout Reduction Program would cost the utility an estimated= =20 $15 million to implement, but could save the regions as much as $1.6 billio= n=20 in lost revenue, property damage and reduced productivity caused by=20 blackouts, utility officials said.=20 The California Independent System Operator, which manages the transmission= =20 grid for most of the state, has estimated that residents face up to 200 hou= rs=20 of blackouts over 30 to 35 days this summer due to high demand and=20 insufficient energy supplies.=20 The use of emergency generators will lead to more air pollution, but Reed= =20 said the ``social benefit'' of the trade-off would be worth it, because=20 residents and businesses would not have to deal with the safety risks and= =20 hazards of blackouts.=20 SDG&E officials want the Public Utilities Commission to act on its request= =20 within a week and hope to have the program in effect by June 1.=20 The program would go into effect whenever Cal-ISO declares a Stage 3=20 emergency, which indicates that power reserves are down to 1.5 percent and= =20 rolling blackouts are imminent. Program participants would be asked to star= t=20 their emergency generators and then reduce the electricity they receive fro= m=20 SDG&E by the same amount.=20 Participants would be paid a monthly fee of $7 per kilowatt of generation= =20 capacity, plus receive an additional 35 cents for every kilowatt-hour of=20 power generated for their own use.=20 ``We think the fees we are proposing are fair,'' said SDG&E spokesman Ed Va= n=20 Herik. ``These aren't people who are in the generation business, and=20 undoubtedly there will be wear and tear on equipment and increased personne= l=20 and fuel costs.''=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 California crisis brings new talk of energy conservation.=20 DEB RIECHMANN, Associated Press Writer Friday, May 4, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 945EDT0153.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 (05-04) 06:45 PDT WASHINGTON (AP) -- In the 1970s, energy conservation was= =20 Jimmy Carter in a cardigan telling people to bundle up and turn down the=20 heat. Today, it's about using energy-efficient fluorescent bulbs,=20 computerized thermostats and motion sensors.=20 To many Americans, California's energy crisis is a problem isolated on the= =20 West Coast. Yet it has resurrected interest in conservation that hasn't bee= n=20 heard since gas lines and the OPEC oil embargo more than two decades ago.= =20 President Bush on Thursday ordered federal agencies to cut power use in=20 California where rolling blackouts have catapulted the debate over future= =20 energy supplies to the top of the national agenda.=20 Bush's conservation message came just days after Vice President Dick Cheney= ,=20 who claims the whole nation could face blackouts like those in California= =20 unless it finds more oil, natural gas and coal, said America cannot ``simpl= y=20 conserve or ration our way out of the situation we're in.''=20 Environmentalists maintain the Bush administration is using California's=20 electricity crisis -- largely due to a failed attempt at electricity=20 deregulation -- to push through a broader energy plan to drill for oil and= =20 natural gas in now off-limits areas of Alaska and the West. Hardly any powe= r=20 plants run on oil, they note.=20 And energy-conservation groups say if everybody made better use of the ener= gy=20 already being generated, America would not need many of the 1,300-plus powe= r=20 plants that Bush and Cheney say demand will require over the next 20 years.= =20 Nobody will have to sit in the dark, they say, if it were made easier for= =20 Americans to use less energy through more fuel efficient light bulbs, motor= s,=20 automobiles, office buildings and homes.=20 ``In today's world we are not asking people to not use their (air=20 conditioning) -- that is not today's message of conservation,'' said Rozann= e=20 Weissman, a spokeswoman for the Alliance to Save Energy, a Washington-based= =20 nonprofit group. ``What we need to do is look at using our energy more=20 efficiently and using today's technologies to help do it for us.''=20 According to the alliance:=20 --If each household in the United States replaced four regular 100-watt bul= bs=20 with energy-efficient compact fluorescent bulbs, the output of 30=20 medium-sized power plants (each with a 300-megawatt capacity) would not be= =20 needed.=20 --If the Bush administration's new efficiency standards for air conditioner= s=20 and heat pumps improved energy use by 30 percent instead of 20 percent, the= =20 output of 138 of these power plants would not been needed during peak use= =20 times.=20 Americans could even unplug idle appliances -- TVs, VCRs, cable boxes, CD= =20 players and microwaves -- when they go out of town. Some of these appliance= s=20 continue to consume energy when switched off. The power keeps display clock= s=20 lighted and memory chips and remote controls working. The alliance says the= se=20 electric leaks cost consumers more than $3 billion a year.=20 Conservation does help, according to Alexandra von Meier, director of the= =20 Environmental Technology Center at Sonoma State University in California. S= he=20 told a House energy subcommittee on Thursday that residential and commercia= l=20 buildings use about 35 percent of the energy -- electricity and fuels -- in= =20 the United States.=20 ``This amount of energy can be cut in half, if not more, by implementing th= e=20 things we already know about how to make buildings more energy efficient an= d,=20 at the same time, more comfortable,'' she said, explaining how Venetian=20 blinds hung on the outside of the technology center keeps the glass from=20 transferring heat.=20 Howard Geller, former executive director of the American Council for an=20 Energy Efficient Economy, told the committee about an Energy Department stu= dy=20 in November 2000 that said increasing energy efficiency throughout the=20 economy could cut national energy use by at least 10 percent by 2010 and by= =20 20 percent in 2020.=20 ``Even though the United States is much more energy-efficient today than it= =20 was 25 years ago, there is still enormous potential for additional=20 cost-effective energy savings,'' said Geller.=20 Associated Press reporter H. Josef Hebert contributed to this report.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 Developments in California's energy crisis=20 The Associated Press Friday, May 4, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 410EDT0127.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 , , -- (05-04) 01:10 PDT Developments in California's energy crisis:=20 FRIDAY:< ?--No power stage alerts are reported as of early Friday morning. = ?THURSDAY:<=20 -- Gov. Gray Davis meets with representatives of the qualifying facilities = in=20 Sacramento to discuss their concerns and the possibility of getting their= =20 plants online during all peak periods.=20 -- The state Senate sends a bill to the governor that would create a state= =20 public power authority. Supporters say the bill will ease the energy crisis= =20 by allowing the state to build and buy power plants that could provide=20 cheaper wholesale electricity.=20 -- State Treasurer Phil Angelides says Assembly Republicans are ``holding= =20 their own state hostage'' by not approving a bill to authorize up to $12.5= =20 billion in bonds for power purchases. Republicans put their own plan forwar= d=20 Wednesday, saying they'd rather use $5 billion of the state's surplus and= =20 finance less.=20 -- Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham travels to the Capitol to discuss the= =20 state's power woes with Davis. Abraham meets with state Republican leaders = in=20 San Francisco following the meeting with the governor.=20 -- The new special counsel to the Senate Select Committee to Investigate=20 Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Energy Market says ``it is likely there= =20 was some criminal activity'' in driving up electricity prices. Laurence=20 Drivon, a private plaintiff's attorney from Stockton, will work for the=20 committee for free, spending about four days a week on the job initially. H= is=20 review of thousands of power-related documents leads him to believe there w= as=20 criminal collusion; he would not elaborate.=20 -- The San Joaquin County District Attorney is joining the Senate Select=20 Committee in its power investigation. Supervising Deputy District Attorney= =20 Franklin Stephenson says three experienced investigators will help the=20 committee decide if there was illegal price-fixing, antitrust violations, o= r=20 theft of public funds by public or private electric generators.=20 -- Pacific Gas and Electric Co. asks a federal bankruptcy judge to stop the= =20 state's power grid manager from charging the utility for expensive,=20 last-minute electricity. PG&E has applied for bankruptcy protection and say= s=20 that the ISO's bills ``could be reducing the value of the company's assets = by=20 potentially hundreds of millions of dollars per month.''=20 -- Secretary of State Bill Jones, a Republican candidate for governor,=20 proposes a utility rescue plan that would take the state out of the=20 electricity business. The plan calls for utility creditors to accept=20 less-than-full payments; more cash flow from the utilities' parent companie= s;=20 and low-interest state loans to help the utilities pay off their debts.=20 -- The California Association of Health Care Facilities says it expects the= =20 state Public Utilities Commission to exempt nursing homes from blackouts. T= he=20 group says many nursing home residents depend on electric life support=20 machines. A PUC decision is expected by May 14.=20 -- The California Immigrant Welfare Collaborative said they are worried tha= t=20 state's power purchases could threaten two assistance programs that pay for= =20 food stamps and cash benefits. The programs, which help recent immigrants,= =20 expire Sept. 30 unless they get renewed during budget negotiations.=20 -- The state auditor will look into the California Energy Commission's=20 process for siting new power plants and allowing defunct plants to return t= o=20 service. The audit was requested by Assemblyman Jay La Suer, R-La Mesa, and= =20 is expected in August.=20 -- Edison International stock closes at $9.28, down 9 cents. PG&E Corp.=20 dropped 10 cents to close at $8.86.=20 -- The state remains free of power alerts as electricity reserves stay abov= e=20 7 percent.=20 WHAT'S NEXT:< -- The governor meets Wednesday with the CEOs of several major energy=20 suppliers to discuss the money their owed by the state's two largest=20 utilities, the state's creditworthiness and how wholesalers can help the=20 state during the energy crisis. Davis says he won't be discussing any of th= e=20 investigations into price manipulation in the wholesale market.=20 -- Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra, the parent=20 company of San Diego Gas and Electric Co., to buy the utility's transmissio= n=20 lines.=20 THE PROBLEM:< High demand, high wholesale energy costs, transmission glitches and a tight= =20 supply worsened by scarce hydroelectric power in the Northwest and=20 maintenance at aging California power plants are all factors in California'= s=20 electricity crisis.=20 Edison and PG&E say they've lost nearly $14 billion since June to high=20 wholesale prices the state's electricity deregulation law bars them from=20 passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs= =20 from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection= =20 April 6.=20 Electricity and natural gas suppliers, scared off by the two companies' poo= r=20 credit ratings, are refusing to sell to them, leading the state in January = to=20 start buying power for the utilities' nearly 9 million residential and=20 business customers. The state is also buying power for a third investor-own= ed=20 utility, San Diego Gas & Electric, which is in better financial shape than= =20 much larger Edison and PG&E but also struggling with high wholesale power= =20 costs.=20 The Public Utilities Commission has raised rates as much as 46 percent to= =20 help finance the state's multibillion-dollar power buys.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 Energy at a glance=20 Friday, May 4, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /04/M N225908.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 In other energy-related developments yesterday:=20 STATE POWER AUTHORITY On a partisan vote, the Legislature sent Gov. Davis a bill creating a state= =20 public power authority that can sell as much as $5 billion in bonds to buil= d=20 or buy power plants, beef up conservation and renewable energy programs and= =20 retrofit older plants to make them less polluting. Davis is expected to sig= n=20 the bill by state Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, D-San Francisco, ne= xt=20 week.=20 STATE SENATE INVESTIGATION A special Senate committee investigating allegations of antitrust violation= s=20 and price-fixing by electricity generators announced that Larry Drivon, a= =20 Stockton trial lawyer, would serve as the committee's general counsel. Driv= on=20 said that from documents he has seen, there is ""some indication there very= =20 well may have been criminal aspects to this.""=20 PG&E COMPLAINTS PG&E, usually the target of complaints about electricity bills, made its ow= n=20 gripe about high bills to a federal bankruptcy judge yesterday. PG&E said t= he=20 California Independent System Operator, which manages the state's power gri= d,=20 charged the utility nearly $1 billion for power that the ISO bought above= =20 retail prices in January and February and reduced the assets available in= =20 bankruptcy. The company asked the judge to tell the ISO to back off. ISO=20 spokeswoman Lorie O'Donnelly said her agency has stopped buying power for= =20 PG&E -- a task now handled by the state -- and will await the outcome of th= e=20 bankruptcy proceedings to see how much of its bill it can collect.=20 ALTERNATIVE ENERGY Gov. Davis met with producers of alternative energy, such as solar panels a= nd=20 wind farms, a third of whom have shuttered their operations because the=20 utilities they have contracts with have paid them pennies on the dollar sin= ce=20 November. The generators going offline have contributed to recent rolling= =20 blackouts. Davis said the meeting's purpose was to resolve any remaining=20 disputes between the energy producers and the utilities so more electricity= =20 can be produced this summer. The participants said they made progress and= =20 agreed to meet again next week.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 17=20 Ships would help during blackouts=20 Ready reserve fleet has power to provide=20 Carl Nolte, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday, May 4, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /04/M N182291.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 San Francisco -- A fleet of 13 gray government cargo ships tied up on the S= an=20 Francisco waterfront and at Alameda is ready and able to provide emergency= =20 electric power if rolling blackouts hit this summer.=20 ""We'd be more than willing to help,"" said Capt. Frank Johnston, Western=20 region administrator for the U.S. Maritime Administration, which manages th= e=20 ships. The vessels are part of the country's ready reserve fleet, have crew= s=20 aboard 24 hours a day and are prepared to sail anywhere in the world on fiv= e=20 days' notice.=20 The offer comes a day after the Bush administration suggested using ships i= n=20 the so-called mothball fleet in Suisun Bay near Benicia to provide power.= =20 However, the officer in charge of the old ships there said yesterday he=20 thought his vessels could not make much of a contribution.=20 ""Nobody has contacted us about that,"" said Joseph Pecoraro, superintendent = of=20 the reserve fleet.=20 Unlike the ready reserve ships, the mothball vessels are neither modern nor= =20 set to sail anytime soon.=20 Pecoraro said the equipment on most of the ships has not been used in years= .=20 To use them to supply civilian power, he said, ""is not real simple.""=20 ""It's feasible,"" he said, but probably not practical.=20 On the other hand, using the ready reserve ships also has some drawbacks --= =20 crewing the ships, paying for fuel, and more seriously, the amount of=20 pollution produced by running the ship's diesel generators.=20 Johnston said the ships meet Environmental Protection Agency standards, but= =20 some environmental activists have grave misgivings. ""Nothing could be a=20 bigger disaster for air quality,"" said Russell Long, executive director of= =20 the Bluewater Network in San Francisco, which has been highly critical of a= ir=20 pollution caused by marine engines. ""These are very highly polluting engine= s.=20 They produce a hundred times more pollution per kilowatt hour than modern= =20 generators,"" he said.=20 Long says EPA standards for ships ""are pathetic.""=20 ""Ships are the worst polluters on the planet.""=20 Several of the ready reserve ships are in highly visible berths in San=20 Francisco. One of them, the cargo ship Cape Henry, is at Pier 27 at the foo= t=20 of Telegraph Hill, and another, the Cape Orlando, is at Pier 50, on the=20 southern waterfront, not far from Pacific Bell Park. The ship is visible fr= om=20 the stands and is a kind of floating backdrop to the right-field wall.=20 Nine of the ships are tied up at the former Alameda Naval Air Station, but= =20 any or all of them could be easily moved.=20 The ships have civilian crews, but are often confused with Navy ships becau= se=20 they are painted battleship gray. They are intended for use in time of=20 international crisis or other incident.=20 All of them have the capacity to generate electricity. Johnston said he was= =20 not sure exactly how much power his ships could supply, but it would be=20 enough for emergency services.=20 ""We could supply fire stations, or police stations, or hospitals, or the 91= 1=20 network,"" he said. ""There are all kinds of possibilities and we are more th= an=20 willing to consider any proposal,"" Johnston said.=20 ""It is better to plan now than to wait until the power goes out and then wo= rk=20 by flashlight,"" he said.=20 Johnston said he did not have the authority to conclude an agreement with= =20 local officials himself, but he would be glad ""to run a plan up the flagpol= e=20 in Washington.""=20 Power from ships has been used in the past in emergency situations. Many=20 years ago, said Capt. Patrick Moloney, executive director of the California= =20 Pilot Commission, power from the aircraft carrier Saratoga was used to supp= ly=20 the city of Tacoma, Wa., during an emergency.=20 However, he said, because of the complexity of connecting ship's power with= =20 the civilian grid, such applications are rare. ""It is a nice idea,"" he said= ,=20 ""but ships are not configured for it.""=20 E-mail Carl Nolte at cnolte@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 19=20 PG&E chairman wants to keep power lines=20 David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday, May 4, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /04/B U162707.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. may be more amenable to selling off its dams= =20 rather than its power lines if required to part with assets as part of the= =20 utility's bankruptcy proceedings, PG&E Chairman Robert Glynn said yesterday= .=20 In a meeting with Chronicle editors and writers, Glynn stressed that he sti= ll=20 hopes to get through the bankruptcy process without selling any of PG&E's= =20 resources to pay off creditors.=20 ""But if there is an asset to be sold, it's not clear that the power lines i= s=20 it,"" he said. ""Our hydro assets actually have a higher value.""=20 Glynn's comments may signal challenges down the road for Gov. Gray Davis'= =20 efforts to acquire the transmission systems of all three of California's=20 investor-owned utilities.=20 Southern California Edison already has agreed to sell its lines to the stat= e=20 for $2.7 billion. A similar accord is expected to be reached with San Diego= =20 Gas & Electric.=20 However, critics have said Davis would be purchasing a white elephant if he= =20 manages to buy only about a third of the statewide electricity grid. Withou= t=20 PG&E's lines, the Edison and San Diego systems would be of lesser value.=20 Glynn noted that he had tentatively agreed to sell off PG&E's power lines f= or=20 an undisclosed sum before the utility's negotiations with the state collaps= ed=20 in March.=20 ""But I've said pretty clearly that I don't want to sell off any part of our= =20 business,"" he said.=20 Glynn defended his decision to file for bankruptcy by saying it was the mos= t=20 efficient way to restore cash-strapped PG&E to credit-worthiness. The utili= ty=20 has racked up about $9 billion in debt because of runaway wholesale power= =20 prices.=20 ""The company's got to be able to pay its bills,"" Glynn said. ""We expect to= =20 pay all of our valid debts.""=20 He said PG&E will submit a proposed reorganization plan to the bankruptcy= =20 court in San Francisco by early August. That plan may include aspects of th= e=20 bailout accord reached between Davis and Edison.=20 ""If an element of it makes sense for us, we would be comfortable including= =20 it,"" Glynn said.=20 He said it appears likely that an average 40 percent rate increase already= =20 approved by state regulators will cover current energy purchases and that n= o=20 further rate hikes may be required.=20 Under this plan, the current average monthly PG&E electricity bill of $60= =20 will rise by about $18.=20 However, Glynn said the need for higher power bills will not be clear until= =20 the Public Utilities Commission decides how it will divide existing rates= =20 between PG&E and the state Department of Water Resources, which is spending= =20 about $50 million a day to keep California's lights on.=20 ""If the state wants to take all the money, then a solution does not exist,""= =20 he said.=20 Glynn said that despite recent progress in getting Californians to conserve= =20 energy, he believes the only way the state will solve its long-term power= =20 woes will be to build more generating facilities.=20 ""It is my personal belief that it's not possible to conserve our way back t= o=20 a stable supply-and-demand balance,"" he said. ""We've got to get back to the= =20 point where we have enough supply to meet demand every day of the year.""=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?B - 1=20 Bush shifts policy on conservation after meeting with GOP=20 Posted at 10:06 p.m. PDT Thursday, May 3, 2001=20 BY JIM PUZZANGHERA=20 Mercury News Washington Bureau=20 WASHINGTON -- On Monday, Vice President Dick Cheney used a major speech to= =20 largely dismiss energy conservation as an outdated notion from the 1970s. O= n=20 Thursday, President George W. Bush announced a major initiative to force=20 federal facilities in California and nationwide to conserve energy to try t= o=20 avoid blackouts.=20 What happened in those three days?=20 The impetus for the shift appears to have been a one-hour meeting Tuesday= =20 between Cheney and 18 Republican members of Congress from California on=20 Capitol Hill.=20 An energy conservation plan for federal agencies was brought up by=20 congressional Republicans, according to two participants. And the political= =20 ramifications on the party of appearing to do nothing to ease the crisis we= re=20 discussed . No Democrats were invited, even though they outnumber Republica= ns=20 in the state's congressional delegation 32 to 20 and the meeting was suppos= ed=20 to look at federal help for the California crisis.=20 Some California Republicans have been griping that the White House has not= =20 been showing enough concern for the state as it continues to struggle throu= gh=20 its energy crisis. Bush, who lost California by 1.3 million votes in=20 November, and top members of his administration have consistently stressed= =20 that the crisis is largely California's to solve.=20 ``I think there was a need for the administration to begin to weigh in on= =20 this thing especially because there's been so much finger-pointing. Democra= ts=20 have been trying to divert the real blame away from'' Gov. Gray Davis, said= =20 Rep. George Radanovich, R-Fresno, who attended the meeting. ``I mentioned t= o=20 the vice president that politically speaking we don't want that to happen. = We=20 want the blame to rest where it deserves to rest, with the governor. And th= ey=20 need to be concerned about that for politics in California.''=20 Damage control=20 Democrats, like Rep. Sam Farr, D-Salinas, said Thursday it's obvious the=20 White House got the message and the conservation plan is an attempt at dama= ge=20 control.=20 The president is ``worried the blackouts may be known as the `Bush Blackout= s'=20 and he wants them to be known as the `Davis Blackouts,'? '' said Farr, head= =20 of the state's Democratic congressional delegation. He wrote to Cheney on= =20 Thursday expressing ``extreme disappointment'' that the vice president had= =20 excluded Democrats from the Tuesday meeting. Despite several requests, Farr= =20 and his Democratic colleagues have yet to meet with Cheney or any other top= =20 administration officials on the issue.=20 Bush on Thursday denied there was any change in policy.=20 ``What the vice president and I understand is that you cannot conserve your= =20 way to energy independence,'' Bush said Thursday after meeting with Energy= =20 Secretary Spencer Abraham and Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz. ``We= =20 can do a better job in conservation, but we darn sure have to do a better j= ob=20 of finding more supply.''=20 A task force headed by Cheney is finalizing a national energy plan that is= =20 expected to put is major emphasis on increasing supply through more drillin= g=20 for oil and natural gas and greater use of coal and nuclear power.=20 Bush emphasized that ``this administration is deeply concerned about=20 California and its citizens'' as he instructed federal agencies to reduce= =20 their energy usage during Stage 2 or 3 power emergencies in California. The= =20 directive will extend to other states that find themselves facing blackouts= =20 this summer, such as those in the Pacific Northwest and the Northeast.=20 Steps to conserve=20 Among the measures, administration officials said, will be turning up=20 thermostats to 78 degrees, darkening interior hallways and pre-cooling=20 buildings at night. Wolfowitz said the Defense Department expected to reduc= e=20 its usage in California by 10 percent over last year and plans to hook up a= n=20 idle wind-powered generating facility at Edwards Air Force Base. All told,= =20 the Defense Department hopes to make about 200 megawatts of power available= =20 to the state this summer through reduced usage and added generation.=20 The presidential directive follows one issued by former President Clinton= =20 late last year to federal facilities in California and the Pacific Northwes= t=20 to conserve energy. The Bush administration said its move was more extensiv= e=20 because it directs all facilities nationwide to conserve and requires=20 agencies to report back their actions within 30 days.=20 Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Huntington Beach, said he and others at Tuesday's= =20 meeting urged that Bush travel to California. Bush has yet to visit the sta= te=20 despite traveling extensively through the country during his first three=20 months.=20 ``We suggested the president come out, the vice president come out, and any= =20 members of the administration come out so that the people know we're=20 engaged,'' Rohrabacher said.=20 California clearly was the main impetus for the Bush directive, and the=20 president dispatched Abraham to California on Thursday to discuss the plan= =20 with Davis and the regional heads of federal agencies. Dan Schnur, a=20 Republican consultant, said that was a good move for the White House.=20 ``Substantively, the Bush administration has been doing the right things, b= ut=20 because they haven't been out here making their case in person, it makes it= =20 much tougher for their case to be heard.,'' Schnur said. ``After the=20 Northridge earthquake, Clinton had half his Cabinet out here. None of them= =20 had anything official to do, but you couldn't turn around without seeing on= e=20 of them on local television talking about Clinton's commitment to rebuildin= g=20 after the earthquake.''=20 Abraham said the White House has responded to nearly every request the stat= e=20 made regarding the electricity crisis. But the administration has not=20 delivered the regionwide caps on electricity prices officials from Californ= ia=20 and the Pacific Northwest have pressed for.=20 The administration even looked into bringing nuclear submarines or aircraft= =20 carriers to the California coast and hooking up their generators to the=20 state's electricity grid. The idea was scrapped after federal officials=20 realized only a small amount of power could be supplied and that safety=20 issues could not be overcome, Abraham said.=20 Contact Jim Puzzanghera at (202) 383-6043 or at jpuzzanghera@krwashington.c= om Senate plans public power=20 Published Friday, May 4, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News=20 BY AUDREY COOPER=20 Associated Press=20 SACRAMENTO -- California is poised to enter the power business after the=20 state Senate on Thursday approved creation of a public power authority and= =20 sent its bill to Gov. Gray Davis.=20 A power authority, supporters said, will give the state more control over i= ts=20 wholesale electricity market by building and operating its own power plants= .=20 State-owned plants could charge lower prices, and building new plants could= =20 increase supply and ease wholesale prices.=20 If signed by Davis, the bill would create a California Consumer Power and= =20 Conservation Financing Authority that could issue up to $5 billion in reven= ue=20 bonds to pay for power plants, natural gas storage and additional pipelines= =20 and conservation programs.=20 Also Thursday, state Treasurer Phil Angelides blasted a Republican plan to= =20 use $5 billion of the state's surplus toward buying power, rather than=20 financing the entire amount with $12.5 billion in bonds.=20 Lawmakers ``are playing a dangerous game of financial roulette, putting in= =20 jeopardy the state's fiscal integrity and solvency,'' Angelides said.=20 Angelides has been pushing the Legislature to pass a bill that spells out a= =20 limit on the bonds by May 8. The bonds must be approved by then so the stat= e=20 can get a bridge loan to replenish the state's general fund until the bonds= =20 are sold.=20 In a letter to Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg late Wednesday, the=20 Republicans laid out an alternative plan. The bonds are to repay the state= =20 for $5 billion in power purchased since January for customers of Pacific Ga= s=20 & Electric Co., Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric. Th= e=20 remainder of the bond issue would pay for future power for those customers.= =20 Assembly Republican Leader Dave Cox, Sacramento, said taxpayers have the=20 surplus funds and should use that to get out of the crisis, rather than=20 financing the total bill.=20 ``There's no need for the bridge loan,'' Cox said. ``This is about fiscal= =20 responsibility, not borrowing money you don't have to borrow. The state of= =20 California needs to tighten its belt, just like California ratepayers and= =20 taxpayers had to.''=20 Davis has not decided whether to sign the power authority bill, the spokesm= an=20 said. But Davis has said he supports creating an authority similar to one i= n=20 New York. The New York authority has 10 power plants and 1,400 miles of=20 transmission lines and produces about 25 percent of the state's power.=20 The 24-14 vote on the bill was split down party lines. ALL CAPS HED=20 Published Friday, May 4, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News=20 Developments Thursday in California's energy crisis:=20 The state Senate sends a bill to the governor that would create a state=20 public power authority to build and buy power plants.=20 Secretary of State Bill Jones, a Republican candidate for governor, propose= s=20 a utility rescue plan that would take the state out of the electricity=20 business.=20 State Treasurer Phil Angelides says Assembly Republicans are ``holding thei= r=20 own state hostage'' by not approving a bond-authorization bill for power=20 purchases.=20 Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham meets in the Capitol with Gov. Gray Davis. Source:?Associated Press=20 Energy notebook=20 Vote delayed on $12 billion state bond for power.=20 May 4, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO - California lawmakers delayed voting on a $12 billion bond sale= =20 for power purchases after Republicans proposed to reduce the size of the sa= le=20 and use part of the state's surplus to cut electric rates.=20 Assembly Republican leader Dave Cox of Sacramento proposed reducing the bon= d=20 sale to $8 billion and using $5 billion of California's budget surplus to c= ut=20 rates for consumers.=20 California began buying power for its cash-strapped utilities this year and= =20 has spent $5.6 billion so far. The state expects to spend about $15.1 billi= on=20 on power this year, according to a report released this week by Gov. Gray= =20 Davis.=20 Lawyer hired to probe possible price-gouging=20 SACRAMENTO - A lawyer who won big verdicts against Ford Motor Co. and the= =20 Roman Catholic Church was appointed Wednesday to lead a state Senate=20 investigation into possible price-gouging and antitrust violations by=20 electricity producers.=20 Laurence Drivon, a Stockton lawyer, has taken a temporary leave from his=20 practice and will work in the office of Sen. Joe Dunn, D-Santa Ana.=20 Dunn chairs the committee that is looking into why California's energy pric= es=20 have skyrocketed, what legislative action must be taken to remedy the=20 problem, and whether there is any proof of criminal misconduct on the part = of=20 the power producers.=20 Drivon is credited as co-counsel for $295 million verdict in a 1999 case=20 against Ford for a rollover accident that killed three passengers in a 1978= =20 Bronco. Drivon also won a $30 million verdict against the Roman Catholic=20 Diocese of Stockton in 1998 after he showed the church knew a parish priest= =20 had molested two children but failed to intervene.=20 Dunn also announced the formation of a statewide coalition of district=20 attorneys to look into the allegations.=20 PG&E wants ISO to cease trying to bill it for power=20 SAN FRANCISCO - Pacific Gas & Electric Co. has asked a federal bankruptcy= =20 judge to stop the state's power grid manager from charging the utility for= =20 expensive last-minute electricity it has bought.=20 California's largest utility filed the motion Thursday, asking that the=20 Independent System Operator ""comply with bankruptcy law ... and stop billin= g=20 the utility for wholesale power purchased.""=20 The utility is barred from repaying debts incurred before its bankruptcy=20 filing without permission from U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali. PG&E= =20 also wants to stop paying the bill for any future ISO buys on its behalf.= =20 Jones floats plan to try to rescue utilities, state=20 SACRAMENTO - Saying power purchases will drive California deeply into debt,= =20 Secretary of State Bill Jones proposed a utility rescue plan Thursday that= =20 would take the state out of the electricity business.=20 ""The state of California must get out of the power business immediately to= =20 avoid mortgaging our children's future,"" said Jones, a Republican candidate= =20 for governor.=20 ""If the governor doesn't change course, it will take decades for California= 's=20 budget and economy to recover.""=20 Jones' four-part plan calls for:=20 Utility creditors to accept less than full payment in exchange for immediat= e=20 partial compensation.=20 A ""significant infusion"" of cash from the utilities' parent companies to he= lp=20 pay off the debts.=20 The utilities to accept less than full payment for money they owe themselve= s=20 for power they generated and sold to themselves at high prices through the= =20 state power pool.=20 The state would make low-interest loans to the utilities to cover the rest = of=20 their debts.=20 Instead of the state buying the utilities' transmission lines, as Davis has= =20 proposed, the utilities would retain them as loan collateral.=20 PG&E suit for $10 billion from ratepayers dismissed=20 SAN FRANCISCO - A federal judge has dismissed as premature a lawsuit filed= =20 against the state's Public Utilities Commission by California's largest=20 utility, Pacific Gas & Electric Co., that sought $10 billion from Californi= a=20 ratepayers.=20 PG&E had asked the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles to overrule PUC=20 decisions that the utility was not entitled to the money, which the utility= =20 spent buying electricity on the increasingly expensive wholesale market.=20 District Judge Ronald S.W. Lew dismissed the suit Wednesday, saying ""PG&E's= =20 claims are not yet ripe for review."" He said PG&E may refile once the=20 commission's interim orders become final, and a PG&E statement afterwards= =20 said that ""allows us to continue to pursue the merits of the case.""=20 State weighed connecting power grid to nuclear ships=20 SAN DIEGO - California officials considered tapping nuclear-powered warship= s=20 to supplement power during peak demand this summer, but dropped the idea=20 after deciding it wasn't worth the effort, Pentagon officials said Thursday= .=20 Linking nuclear-powered submarines and aircraft carriers to the state power= =20 grid is possible but would yield little electricity for the extensive=20 modifications that would be required, Pentagon spokesman Rear Adm. Craig=20 Quigley said.=20 ""It would not be much of an advantage ... to go through that engineering,""= =20 Quigley said.=20 Davis to ask generators for profit concessions=20 SACRAMENTO - Gov. Gray Davis asked the chief executives of the largest U.S.= =20 energy producers and traders to meet with him next week, when he will ask= =20 them to forgo some profit from selling power in the state.=20 The meeting is set for Wednesday in Sacramento.=20 The Associated Press, Bloomberg News and Register staff writer Kimberly Kin= dy=20 contributed to this report.=20 U.S. conservation order called Bush's best effort=20 The energy chief says there's not enough time for other action.=20 May 4, 2001=20 By DENA BUNIS The Orange County Register=20 WASHINGTON - President George W. Bush's order that federal agencies conserv= e=20 every megawatt they can is the best way he can help California live through= a=20 hot summer of expected blackouts, the nation's energy chief said Thursday.= =20 ""We have a crisis and an emergency this summer that could result in 30 to 3= 5=20 days of some form of blackouts taking place in California,'' Energy Secreta= ry=20 Spencer Abraham said after a White House meeting of the president's energy= =20 team. ""We don't have time between now and those occasions to develop new-= =20 generation sources sufficient to meet that challenge.''=20 Bush's order directs all agencies to report to Abraham within 30 days on=20 their plans for conserving power during peak demand and particularly in=20 California during electricity emergencies.=20 ""We're worried about blackouts that may occur this summer,'' Bush said afte= r=20 his meeting. ""And we want to be a part of any solutions.""=20 When California reaches a Stage 2 emergency, which means electricity reserv= es=20 fall below 5 percent, federal facilities will implement a conservation plan= =20 that includes setting thermostats at 78 degrees. Other measures under=20 consideration include installing more efficient lighting, closing off=20 unneeded space, and doing some work at off-peak times.=20 Off the table, Abraham said, were suggestions that the federal government= =20 transfer power to the state from nuclear submarines or aircraft carriers.= =20 They would yield little power and the potential for safety problems was=20 great.=20 Federal power usage amounts to a little less than 2 percent of California's= =20 electricity needs. About 1 percent of that is at military installations.=20 Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said his department's goal is a 10= =20 percent reduction in electricity use this summer and an additional 5 percen= t=20 by next summer.=20 ""We are going to do our part to try to mitigate the energy shortage through= a=20 combination of conservation, power generation an investment in energy=20 efficient methods,'' Wolfowitz said.=20 Abraham said there is no firm figure for nonmilitary conservation.=20 He flew to California on Thursday afternoon, another effort to blunt=20 criticism of the administration's inaction during the crisis.=20 He met with Gov. Gray Davis and was to meet today in San Francisco with=20 federal officials to talk about the conservation plan.=20 Davis on Wednesday had criticized the impending order as not enough. The=20 state has cut usage by 20 percent.=20 ""Every time we take an action there's someone somewhere who says we should = do=20 something different,'' Abraham said. ""We think this is the most constructiv= e=20 action we can take in this time.''=20 And while Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said of the president's action= =20 that ""every little bit helps,'' she and other Western senators Thursday=20 continued to criticize federal regulators for not going further to curb=20 prices.=20 ""This is unsustainable politically for this administration, for this=20 Congress,"" said Republican Sen. Gordon Smith of Oregon. Smith and Feinstein= =20 have authored a bill to allow much deeper price controls than those approve= d=20 by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission last week.=20 On the long-range front, Bush met with Mexican President Vicente Fox on=20 Thursday. They talked generally about the U.S. importing energy from Mexico= =20 and Canada, countries with large oil and gas reserves. [B] POWER UPDATE/ Bush directs feds to save energy in California (BridgeNews) May 3, 1952 GMT/1552 ET TOP STORIES: Bush directs federal government to save energy in California Washington, May 3 (AP) - President Bush on Thursday ordered all federal agencies in California to cut power use, saying ""we want to be a part of a= ny solutions"" to an energy crunch that could cripple the largest state. ( Story .19646 ) Air emissions exemptions in House energy bill criticized Santa Fe, N.M., May 3 (BridgeNews) - Legislation to temporarily exempt new power plants from air emissions limits isn't needed because state and feder= al regulations are flexible enough to allow for maximum output, Michael Kenney= ,=20 an executive of the California Air Resources Board, said Thursday, testifying before a U.S. House Energy and Air Quality subcommittee. Others argued provisions of the bill allowing businesses to generate and sell their own= =20 power are harmful to the environment and unfair to certain consumers. ( Story .19200 ) Pacificorp calls for region-wide US West power price cap Santa Fe, N.M., May 3 (BridgeNews) - Pacificorp wants region-wide price caps in U.S. western power markets with all market participants under the s= ame price mitigation rules, a company representative told a U.S. House energy subcommittee Thursday. The company is one of the few investor-owned utiliti= es outside of California to adopt such a position. ( Story .18379 ) Repeats: Duke Energy: Will pay to end Calif. power price probe Santa Fe, N.M., May 2 (BridgeNews) - Duke Energy North America said Wednesday it will build new generation in California, sell power on a=20 long-term basis, forgive some unpaid bills by state utilities and repay alleged overcharges for wholesale power if all investigations into alleged price-gouging by state and federal authorities are resolved at the same tim= e. Duke admitted no wrongdoing. ( Story .16332 ) OF INTEREST: --AMERICAS-- US Northeast real-time power prices high on warm weather Toms River, N.J., May 3 (BridgeNews) - Real time power prices in the Northeast U.S. were relatively strong early Thursday as above-normal temperatures swept through the region. However, most daily prices slipped a= s lower temperatures are forecast to move in on Friday. ( Story .17034 ) Calif. Gov. Davis says 50 Mw power plant licensed for summer New York, May 3 (BridgeNews) - California Governor Gray Davis announced Wednesday the licensing on a 50 Mw King City power project. This makes the fifth summer reliability power plant that has been permitted under the California Energy Commission's expedited emergency review process. ( Story .18775 ) FOCUS: Natgas distributors ready for possible summer price spike New York, May 3 (BridgeNews) - Local distribution companies (LDCs) do not plan to get caught short if warmer temperatures drive up the price of natur= al gas this summer. LDCs say they are ready for the possibility and are using various strategies, including hedging gas costs and entering into long-term supply pacts, to avoid having to buy in an extremely volatile spot market. ( Story .18313 ) Fund companies see US energy policy benefiting power sector New York, May 3 (BridgeNews) - As the U.S. flirts with an energy shortage and dramatic fuel and power price hikes, mutual funds are salivating over t= he prospects for companies like Duke Energy Corp., Calpine Corp., and Dynegy I= nc. Alternative energy companies like Capstone Turbine Corp. and Ballard Power Systems Inc., however, are being left out in the cold as federal energy pol= icy has shifted from emphasizing conservation to feeding supply. ( Story .15998 ) FULL: Allegheny Energy unit closes buy of Midwest gas-fired oprs New York, May 3 (BridgeNews) - Allegheny Energy Inc.'s Allegheny Energy Supply Co. LLC unit completed the acquisition of 1,710 megawatts of natural gas-fired merchant generating capacity in three Midwest states from Enron Corp.'s Enron North America. --Rajesh S. Kurup, BridgeNews ( Story .17696 ) US Press: Bush to order energy conservation at Calif. govt buildings New York, May 3 (BridgeNews) - President George Bush is expected Thursday to order federal office buildings in California to conserve energy this sum= mer as a way of helping to address the state's power crises and deflect critici= sm that the administration's energy policy is focusing solely on increased production, the New York Times reported Thursday. ( Story .16906 ) --EUROPE-- Nuclear reactor shut down in central Russia due to minor glitch Moscow, May 3 (BridgeNews) - A nuclear reactor was automatically shut down Thursday at the Balakovo nuclear power plant in Central Russia due to a min= or glitch in its electricity system, state utility Rosenergoatom said. The electricity fault presented no threat to the plant's safe operation and the radiation level at the site remained normal, Rosenergoatom added. ( Story .12186 ) Shell Q1 adj profits up 23% at $3.855 bln, beating forecasts London, May 3 (BridgeNews) - Royal Dutch/Shell on Thursday reported adjusted earnings on a current cost of supplies (CCS) basis for the first quarter of 2001 of $3.86 billion, up 23% from $3.13 billion for the same quarter last year. Net income for the quarter was $3.89 billion, up 17% fro= m $3.34 billion in the three months of 2000, the company said. The figures we= re above the top end of analysts' forecasts, which had pointed to adjusted CCS earnings of between $3.1-3.6 billion. ( Story .12297 ) FOCUS: Scottish Power rides west U.S. crisis; no clues on S. Water London, May 3 (BridgeNews) - Scottish Power is focussing on consolidating its position in the U.S. since its purchase of Pacificorp and amid the ongo= ing power crisis in the Western U.S., chief executive Ian Russell told reporter= s=20 at a conference Thursday. Russell said that Scottish Power had not yet made a decision on the future of Southern Water and would not be drawn into speculation over the likelihood of a sale to Italy's Enel. ( Story .16660 ) --ASIA/PACIFIC-- Taiwan to accept bids for new power plants around May-end Taipei, May 3 (BridgeNews) - Taiwan authorities plans to open a new round of bidding around the end of May for independent power producers (IPPs) to generate a total of 4,200 megawatts (MW) of electricity commencing in 2007-2009, an official at the Energy Commission under the Ministry of Econo= mic Affairs (MOEA) said Thursday. The invitation for IPP projects will be the fourth of its kind. ( Story .10571 ) SPOT NEWS LINKS: THE MARKETS: US FUTURES: UK FUTURES .1908 NY Natural Gas Pre-Opg .1795 IPE Nat Gas Review .1906 NY Natural Gas Review .1794 IPE Nat Gas Midday .1747 NY Natural Gas US/CANADA CASH NATURAL GAS UK/EUROPE CASH NATURAL GAS .1894 Henry Hub natural gas .1807 UK Spot Gas .1884 US/Canada Spot Natural Gas US CASH ELECTRICITY UK/EUROPE CASH ELECTRICITY .8575 California PX: Next day .1892 UK Power Index 0.0 .8576 .8577 WSCC Forwards (AM/PM) .1889 Nordic Power Market .8585 .8586 PJM Forwards (AM/PM) .1890 Spanish Power Market .8593 .8594 Cinergy Forwards (AM/PM) .1844 UK EFA Power Market .8597 .8598 Entergy Forwards (AM/PM) CANADA CASH ELECTRICITY .8601 .8602 ERCOT Forwards (AM/PM) .5637 Canadian Power Market .8603 New England Forwards .8587 .8600 TVA Forwards (AM/PM) OTHER .1873 US Nuclear Plants Operating Status .2029 BRIDGE CALENDAR: US POWER: Key events to watch .2030 US Utility Deregulation Digest .1704 US Utility M&amp;A Digest SYMBOL LINKS: Click below for adamb chart in Athena NATURAL GAS NYMEX - IPE - NYMEX ELECTRICITY Palo Verde electricity - COB electricity- Cinergy electricity - Entergy electricity - PJM electricity - BridgeNews Send comments to gennews@bridge.com Judge Dismisses $10B PG&E Suit By KAREN GAUDETTE Associated Press Writer SAN FRANCISCO (AP) via NewsEdge Corporation - A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed against the California Public Utilities Commission by the state's largest utility, which sought $10 billion from ratepayers. PG&amp;E had asked the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles to overrule PUC decisions that the utility was not entitled to the money, which the utility spent buying electricity on the increasingly expensive wholesale market. In dismissing the lawsuit Wednesday, Judge Ronald S.W. Lew said ``PG&amp;E's claims are not yet ripe for review,'' meaning the case wasn't ready for trial. Steve Maviglio, spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis, declared the decision a win for California ratepayers. ``PG&amp;E was banking on winning this case and using it as one of their excuses for not negotiating with the governor. It appears at least for now they failed,'' Maviglio said. But because the case was dismissed on procedural grounds rather than merit, PG&amp;E said the door was left open for the utility to refile its action once the commission makes final its interim orders on PG&amp;E's requested rate increase. ``The court determined that our lawsuit was premature because the CPUC had not yet finalized its various decisions on PG&amp;E's request for recovery of its costs to purchase wholesale power,'' PG&amp;E said in a statement. ``Today's action allows us to continue to pursue the merits of the case on a timely basis.'' A similar federal case filed by Southern California Edison is on hold, said company spokeswoman Clara Potes-Fellow. Edison, the state's second-largest utility, would drop that case as part of a rescue plan negotiated by Davis, which also includes the state buying the utility's transmission lines for $2.7 billion. Since last June, the two utilities say they have lost more than $14 billion. California's 1996 deregulation law froze electricity prices for customers of the state's three investor-owned utilities. When prices rose to record levels over the past year, PG&amp;E was unable to recoup the higher costs from its customers' bills. The undercollection, along with a failed deal to sell its transmission lines to the state, drove PG&amp;E to file for federal Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on April 6, the company argued. On Wednesday, the parent company, PG&amp;E Corp., reported a first-quarter loss of $951 million, or $2.62 per share. The first-quarter loss follows a fourth-quarter loss of $4.1 billion that also stemmed from continuing costs in California's power crisis. Bankruptcy Update/ PG&E Files Motion to Require CAISO to Follow Federal Law SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 3, 2001 via NewsEdge Corporation - Pacific Gas and Electric Company has filed a motion in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court asking the court to direct the California Independent System Operator (CAISO) to comply with bankruptcy law, its Tariff, and a recent Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) ruling, and stop billing the utility for wholesale power purchased. Pacific Gas and Electric Company's motion, which includes a request for a preliminary injunction, asks the court to enjoin the CAISO from requiring the utility to pay costs the CAISO has incurred and continues to incur to purchase wholesale power on its behalf, unless the utility can fully recover these costs. Bankruptcy law imposes an automatic stay to prevent parties from making certain claims or taking certain actions that would interfere with the estate or property of the estate of a Chapter 11 debtor. By purchasing power at costs higher than existing retail prices, and then sending the bill to the utility, the CAISO is violating the automatic stay provision and could be reducing the value of the company's assets by potentially hundreds of millions of dollars per month, depending on the average retail rate, the wholesale price, and the amount of power purchased by the CAISO. Recently, the CAISO sent Pacific Gas and Electric Company a bill for January and February spot market purchases that totaled nearly $1 billion. The action alleges that requiring the utility to pay more than it can collect in its existing generation-related rates would be improper under federal Bankruptcy Code because it is not in the best interest of the estate, would be an unauthorized post-petition use of Pacific Gas and Electric Company's property, and would force the utility to undertake credit on onerous terms. In addition, on April 6, 2001, FERC ordered the CAISO to comply with its February 14 order, in which FERC ordered that the CAISO could only buy power on behalf of creditworthy entities. Both Pacific Gas and Electric Company and Southern California Edison Company are no longer creditworthy companies. By continuing to purchase power on behalf of Pacific Gas and Electric Company, the CAISO is in violation of its own Tariff, FERC orders, and federal law. CONTACT: Pacific Gas and Electric Company | News Department,= =20 415/973-5930 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Chili Cook Off at Rice University; [EMail-Body]= calendar ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/28/2000 05:43 PM ----- =09Lexi Elliott =0909/27/2000 01:12 PM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Brad Alford/ECP/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark = Dana=20 Davis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Courtney/HOU/ECT@ECT, Derryl=20 Cleaveland/NA/Enron@ENRON, Brian O'Rourke/Enron Communications@Enron=20 Communications, Ding Yuan/Corp/Enron@Enron, Larry Abbott/OTS/Enron@ENRON, M= o=20 Bawa/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Chris Loehr/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jo= hn=20 King/HOU/ECT@ECT, Alejandro =20 Ethan Schultz/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Hans Oliver=20 Pereira/HOU/EES@EES, Posey Martinez/HOU/ECT@ECT, Anthony=20 Sexton/NA/Enron@Enron, Jennifer N Stewart/NA/Enron@Enron =09=09 cc: Ashley Baxter/Corp/Enron@Enron, Donna Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT =09=09 Subject: Chili Cook Off at Rice University Dear Rice Team: This event is scheduled for October 5th. Would any of you like to volunteer= =20 to participate? Any chefs out there??? Thanks! lexi ---------------------- Forwarded by Lexi Elliott/NA/Enron on 09/27/2000 12:= 37=20 PM --------------------------- Heidi Glantzberg <heidilee@rice.edu> on 09/27/2000 11:26:41 AM To: Recipient List Suppressed:; cc: =20 Subject: Chili Cook Off at Rice University Dust off your best recipe! Round up the ingredients! And lasso the most student votes! Rice University's 9th Annual Recruiter Chili Cook-Off Thursday, Oct. 5th Ray Courtyard, Student Center 4pm-6pm If you haven't done so already, make sure to fax over your form for our annual Recruiter Chili Cook-Off. This is a great opportunity to meet with students in an informal setting. The students taste your chili and then they vote for the best. It's held 2 hours before the Rice vs. Fresno game. There will be free hotdogs, sodas, and beer for everyone. A zydeco band will provide the entertainment and each company will be given 4 complimentary football tickets for the 6pm game. It's a lot of fun! Don't miss out! Some of our past winners include: Andersen Consulting, Enron, DSC Communications, and CSC Consulting -- =06?=06?=06?=06? Heidi Lee Glantzberg Career Programs Manager CAREER SERVICES CENTER RICE UNIVERSITY 6100 S. Main Street, MS - 521 Houston, TX 77005 713-348-4055 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW:; [EMail-Body]= Liz, FYI. This is the person at Stanford Greg would like to meet. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Frank A. Wolak"" Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 11:13 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Vince, I'll be out of the country for the next two weeks, but should be back September 3 and will be in the office all that week. Frank [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: Sac Bee, Wed, 6/6: Businesses vie for blackout exemptions:=20 The PUC must decide who should be spared, and the applicant list is very lo= ng Sac Bee, Wed, 6/6: PG&E, ISO agree to court order on power bills Sac Bee, Wed, 6/6: Peter Schrag: Turning up the heat in Houston and=20 Washington (Editorial) SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Is trading an insider's game? SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Daily energy costs for state fall in past weeks=20 SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Five tiers sought in proposed rate boost SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Port budget large, but power bills loom SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Continuous use urged for planned power plant=20 SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Rising energy prices threaten Poway troupe=20 SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Fair to use generators for midway attractions LA Times, Wed, 6/6: 'Hi, My Name Isn't Justice, Honey,' and Shame on Lockye= r =20 (Editorial) LA Times, Wed, 6/6: U.S. Probes Alleged Pact Not to Build New Plants Power:= =20 Justice officials focus on Southland operations of two firms, which deny=20 wrongdoing LA Times, Wed, 6/6: Natural Gas, Power Prices Drop Sharply Energy:=20 More conservation, mild weather are among factors keeping costs down, exper= ts=20 say LA Times, Wed, 6/6: The State Utility Averts $1 Billion in Costs Courts:=20 PG&E and Cal-ISO agree to recognize Department of Water Resources as=20 purchaser of the power SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: Dramatic drop in cost of electricity=20 LOWER BILLS: Cheaper fuel, milder weather credited SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: San Jose council gives green light to generating plant= =20 VOTE REVERSAL: Officials pressured to OK project SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: Developments in California's energy crisis SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: California conserves SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: L.A. power customers awash in cheap energy SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: PG&E doesn't want to pay for energy to avert blackouts Mercury News, Wed, 6/6: Metcalf plant gets preliminary approval=20 OC Register, Wed, 6/6: Feds probe AES, Williams Individual.com (PRnewswire), Wed, 6/6: Calpine Begins Construction of=20 Peaking Energy Center in Gilroy, Calif.=20 Individual.com (PRnewsire), Wed, 6/6: Reliant Urges FERC to Drop or Amend= =20 California Price Caps to Avoid Additional Shortages and More Blackouts Energy Insight, Wed, 6/6: Farm-fresh biopower --- Businesses vie for blackout exemptions: The PUC must decide who should be= =20 spared, and the applicant list is very long. By Carrie Peyton and Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writers (Published June 6, 2001)=20 Mixes for milkshakes and frozen coffees could spoil at ice cream parlors,= =20 sickening customers.=20 Seniors getting their hair done would have to leave their dryers and go hom= e=20 with wet heads, risking a chill.=20 Mall escalators could come to a sudden halt, endangering shoppers who lose= =20 their footing.=20 Those are among the health and safety risks cited by more than 10,000=20 businesses and government bodies asking state regulators to exempt them fro= m=20 rolling blackouts.=20 It is a list that mixes nursing homes and grocery stores, outpatient surgic= al=20 clinics and beauty salons, dialysis centers and country clubs.=20 ""A lot of people are treating this like a lottery,"" said Subodh Medhekar of= =20 Exponent Inc., the consulting firm sorting through exemption requests for t= he=20 state Public Utilities Commission.=20 For many, Medhekar said, the rationale seems to be "" 'I'm pretty sure I won= 't=20 get exempted, but what's the down side? Let's put in an application.' ""=20 Amid predictions that Californians could face dozens of rolling blackouts= =20 this summer, state regulators are trying to update a decades-old list of wh= o=20 should be spared if the lights go out.=20 The Alta Sierra County Club in Grass Valley should be among those whose pow= er=20 stays on, Sean O'Brien, the club's golf course superintendent, told=20 regulators in a nine-page application.=20 The country club telephones could go out, making it harder to phone for hel= p=20 if someone has a medical problem while golfing, he said in an interview.=20 And if the golf course's irrigation pumps shut down, it would lose the=20 ability to quell small blazes -- leaving it to rely on a fire station O'Bri= en=20 said is about one-quarter mile away.=20 Placerville Dialysis wants an exemption, too. As many as a dozen people the= re=20 can be having their blood pumped through an artificial kidney that cleans i= t=20 when their own kidneys no longer function properly.=20 ""When the power goes out, everything just stops,"" said manager Shirley=20 Carpenter. ""There is a way to manually return the blood by hand before it= =20 clots in the line. ... It would just be hectic.""=20 It takes about five minutes of manual pumping to fully disconnect someone= =20 from a dialysis machine, Carpenter said. And some patients can help by=20 operating their own pumps.=20 But, she said, ""I'm sure it would be kind of frightening to have your blood= =20 out in the line and the power off, and they're pretty much tied to the=20 machine.""=20 Pam Chin, a hairdresser at the Loomis Beauty Salon, said the owner sought a= n=20 exemption because people could get overheated if the air conditioning went= =20 out, and older customers getting their hair set could be chilled if the=20 dryers shut off.=20 With about half the state already exempt from rolling blackouts, the questi= on=20 of who else should stay connected has become a delicate one for utilities,= =20 regulators and legislators.=20 Carl Wood, the PUC commissioner who has taken the lead on blackout issues,= =20 estimates that fewer than 1,000 more utility customers can be exempted befo= re=20 they overload the rolling outage system designed to take stress off the=20 electric grid.=20 While about 6,000 customers are classified as ""essential"" by the state's tw= o=20 largest utilities, keeping them out of the blackout rotation also spares=20 about 5 million other customers who are served by the same circuits.=20 That multiplier effect will have to be weighed by the consulting firm, by= =20 utilities and eventually by PUC commissioners, who are scheduled to vote in= =20 early August on who should be added to existing standards.=20 The rules will apply to the state's investor-owned utilities, Pacific Gas a= nd=20 Electric Co., Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric Co.,= =20 but not to municipal utilities.=20 The Sacramento Municipal Utility District already rejected pleas for specia= l=20 exemptions from a medical lab, a veterinary hospital, nursing homes, medica= l=20 facilities, businesses and residents. SMUD believes they can weather=20 blackouts because they are not critical to public safety.=20 People have counted on having dependable electricity for so long that some= =20 have widely varying ideas of who can do without it safely, Medhekar said.= =20 Of the more than 500 Baskin Robbins ice cream parlors that dot California,= =20 only five are listed on the PUC Web site as applicants for exemptions.=20 The site cautions that its list of 9,239 electronic applicants hasn't been= =20 checked for duplicates -- or fiction. It includes hundreds of outlets of th= e=20 same drug store and supermarket chains, dozens of related nursing homes and= =20 more than 400 dentists. Another 1,200 commercial power users have applied b= y=20 fax.=20 Among those who have confirmed they want out of outages are the grocery=20 chains operated by West Sacramento-based Raley's, which said it took the=20 action as part of united effort with all California grocers, who are worrie= d=20 about food spoilage.=20 Others in the mix are Fairfield's Westfield Shoppingtown Solano, formerly t= he=20 Solano Mall, where officials sought the exemptions out of fear that shopper= s=20 would get injured if escalators came to a sudden halt.=20 The Yolo County Housing Authority asked for an exemption on behalf of its 7= 00=20 dwellings in the belief that the utilities offer exemptions for low-income= =20 Californians, Executive Director David Serena said.=20 Serena added that many of the authority's occupants are older or disabled a= nd=20 could be endangered by a blackout.=20 Chevron Corp. acknowledged it couldn't show that a blackout at its refineri= es=20 would present ""imminent danger to public health or safety,"" but it asked Go= v.=20 Gray Davis to support legislation exempting makers and transporters for=20 ""critical fuels,"" saying a refinery shutdown would cut into the state's=20 gasoline supply.=20 Some businesses acknowledged that their applications are a long shot.=20 ""It's probably a stretch,"" said Amanda Leveroni, who owns Bacio Catering Co= .=20 of Chico, about her request to the PUC. ""The public wouldn't be in danger.= =20 ""But we're a catering company -- somebody has planned for a year-plus for a= =20 wedding or some big event,"" she added. ""I would be in such a huge situation= .=20 I'd have to send out for pizza.""=20 The Bee's Carrie Peyton can be reached at (916) 321-1086 or=20 cpeyton@sacbee.com. PG&E, ISO agree to court order on power bills By Claire Cooper Bee Staff Writers (Published June 6, 2001)=20 SAN FRANCISCO -- Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and the operator of=20 California's power grid agreed Tuesday to a preliminary court order providi= ng=20 that the utility will continue to receive -- but not pay -- generators' bil= ls=20 for the state's purchases of the most expensive wholesale electricity.=20 The tab has been running at about $300 million a month.=20 The order, which U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali said he'll sign, will= =20 specify that the Independent System Operator will not procure power except= =20 for a ""creditworthy buyer who has agreed to pay the generator.""=20 In California, the only such potential buyer is the state Department of Wat= er=20 Resources. However, the department, which has avoided PG&E Co.'s bankruptcy= =20 proceedings by claiming sovereign immunity, will not be controlled by the= =20 agreement. Montali pointed out that the department still could demand=20 reimbursement from PG&E.=20 Under the agreement, the ISO will not press any claims against PG&E on beha= lf=20 of generators if they are not paid.=20 The proposed preliminary injunction was based on an April order by the=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which forbade the ISO from purchasing= =20 power on behalf of any non-creditworthy buyer, such as PG&E.=20 The ISO is appealing the FERC order. If the appeal succeeds, the injunction= =20 will end.=20 Peter Schrag: Turning up the heat in Houston and Washington (Published June 6, 2001)=20 Behind all the palaver about the predictable standoff at last week's energy= =20 ""summit"" between President Bush and Gov. Gray Davis, one major political=20 development was missed.=20 Put simply, in the past month the focus of the California energy crisis, an= d=20 maybe the onus as well, has moved east: from the state's (and Davis')=20 handling of the mess to the generating companies, energy marketers and gas= =20 pipeline companies that have richly profited from it, and thus to FERC, the= =20 do-next-to-nothing Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and the Bush=20 administration.=20 That wasn't all Davis' doing -- far from it -- though it's been at the hear= t=20 of his message about energy industry ""pirates"" and ""profiteers."" Bush's=20 misbegotten energy plan and the administration's political clumsiness also= =20 contributed mightily, not least by inadvertently giving Davis the chance to= =20 get media exposure he could only have dreamed about.=20 More important, there's the defection of Sen. James Jeffords from the=20 Republican Party and the resulting shift of control in the U.S. Senate, whe= re=20 the next chair of the Energy Committee will be Sen. Jeff Bingaman of New=20 Mexico, a co-sponsor of Sen. Dianne Feinstein's bill capping wholesale=20 electric rates for the next two years. And chairing the Committee on=20 Governmental Affairs will be Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, who's=20 already asked for an audit of energy prices.=20 Those changes will draw a lot more attention to recent studies showing that= a=20 handful of big generators -- Duke Power, Reliant, Mirant, Dynegy and the hu= ge=20 energy-marketing firm Enron -- have gamed the market to drive wholesale=20 prices to levels that, in the year 2000, sometimes reached 40 times the=20 prices of the year before.=20 The findings come not merely from economists at the California Independent= =20 System Operator, the agency that manages the state's grid, who estimate=20 overcharges resulting from market power at $6.2 billion for last year alone= .=20 They come also from Severin Borenstein and his colleagues at the University= =20 of California Energy Institute, who ""conservatively"" calculate the=20 overcharges at $4.5 billion; from Paul Joskow, a widely respected energy=20 economist at MIT; and from Edward Kahn, an economic analyst in San Francisc= o.=20 In a recent paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research,=20 Joskow and Kahn conclude that there's ""considerable evidence that the high= =20 prices experienced in the summer of 2000 reflect the withholding of supplie= s=20 from the market by suppliers [generators or marketers] exercising market=20 power."" That those high prices occurred not merely during peak usage but al= so=20 at off-hours, when no one had ever seen a price spike before, makes those= =20 spikes even more curious.=20 There is, in addition, the powerful suspicion that the huge increase in=20 natural gas prices that a subsidiary of El Paso Energy Co., now the largest= =20 gas company on Earth, was charging on the California side of the=20 California-Arizona border wasn't merely the result of an innocent imbalance= =20 between supply and demand.=20 None of that may be illegal. If there's no collusion, there are no violatio= ns=20 of antitrust laws. But it adds plenty of steam to the political argument. I= n=20 the 2000 election cycle alone, energy companies kicked in some $64 million = in=20 political contributions, 75 percent of it to Republicans. At a time when=20 those companies, many of them located in the same Houston neighborhood, are= =20 racking up astronomical profits and when their collective coziness with Bus= h=20 and the Republican Party is a lot more than rhetoric, their vulnerability t= o=20 a vigorous Senate investigation ought to be obvious.=20 The clincher is ""Blackout,"" a ""Frontline"" program that both symbolizes the= =20 shifting emphasis and reinforces it. (The program is scheduled to be aired = at=20 8 p.m. Friday on Sacramento cable Channel 7.) It isn't another recital of= =20 Californians worrying about their electric bills, or about the stupidity of= =20 the state's deregulation scheme or how Davis dithered in addressing the=20 crisis. It is about those generators and marketers in Houston and North=20 Carolina, men (and a few women) who regard themselves as the heroes of the= =20 new energy markets.=20 The piece is reported by Lowell Bergman, who in working for both ""Frontline= ""=20 and the New York Times has already broken major print stories about Duke=20 Power's secret approach to Davis offering unspecified energy refunds in=20 return for an end to state investigations and lawsuits. Bergman also report= ed=20 private conversations between Enron chairman Kenneth Lay, a major Bush=20 supporter, and FERC chairman Curt Hebert regarding the influence that Lay= =20 could exercise with Bush to allow Hebert to keep his chairmanship if Hebert= 's=20 supported certain decisions Enron badly wants.=20 None of these recent events is likely to end Davis' political woes, and the= y=20 may not produce the wholesale rate caps Feinstein wants and that most=20 economists think necessary -- or maybe any significant reduction in the=20 industry's predatory pricing. But they will surely help turn up the heat,= =20 both in Houston and Washington. Six months ago FERC found wholesale prices= =20 were not ""fair and reasonable"" as federal law requires, but did little abou= t=20 them. It will now have a lot more questions to answer.=20 Peter Schrag can be reached at Box 15779, Sacramento, CA 95852-0779, or at= =20 pschrag@sacbee.com. Is trading an insider's game?=20 Buying, selling of electricity is a growth business, but some say deck is= =20 stacked against consumers By Craig D. Rose=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 While Californians decry deregulation's failure to deliver a competitive=20 market, electricity wholesalers have quietly developed a vast and rapidly= =20 growing business of buying and selling power among themselves.=20 The deals take place on high-tech trading floors in Houston and elsewhere= =20 around the country, as well as on Internet-based trading systems.=20 Some experts say this electricity trading is a key mechanism for raising=20 consumer power prices, yet it's largely unregulated.=20 ""Electricity trading is like buying stock -- when you have ability to chang= e=20 the stock price,"" said Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economics profess= or=20 and member of the state grid operator's market surveillance group.=20 Energy companies say the buying and selling of contracts to deliver power= =20 provides risk management, allowing plant owners to presell their electricit= y,=20 lock in prices and avoid fluctuations. The rough and tumble of the free=20 market, they add, is the most efficient means of allocating a resource like= =20 electricity.=20 But industry critics say trading is far from a competitive market paradigm.= =20 In their view, it's a means of communication -- a way for energy insiders t= o=20 collude and raise prices under the guise of competition.=20 To be sure, the trading arms of major energy companies have emerged as star= s=20 in an industry where profit surges of 300 percent or 400 percent are not=20 uncommon.=20 The transactions, shrouded in secrecy, can leave ownership of a critical=20 commodity in unknown hands. Consider the case of power generated by AES=20 Corp.'s California plants.=20 In 1998, AES made a bold move. Immediately after purchasing power plants th= at=20 gave it control of 10 percent of the state's electric generating capacity,= =20 the company sold the output from its plants for the next 20 years to Willia= ms=20 Cos.=20 Williams did not sit on this treasure trove of electrons. The Tulsa, Okla.,= =20 company soon sold 80 percent of what it bought.=20 It is difficult to say who owns that power now. Some might be owned by Semp= ra=20 Trading, a sister company of SDG&E. Or some could be owned by Enron Corp.,= =20 the nation's biggest electricity trader.=20 A spokeswoman for Williams conceded that Williams itself may have repurchas= ed=20 some of the electricity it sold earlier. But trading companies closely guar= d=20 their positions.=20 This much can be said with certainty: Electricity that AES sold for less th= an=20 5 cents per kilowatt-hour to Williams changed hands perhaps 10 times in the= =20 wholesale market and emerged at times in recent months with a price tag for= =20 consumers that was 300 percent higher.=20 Williams' trading profits increased by 523 percent in the first quarter thi= s=20 year. Advance sales All this buying and selling creates curious confluences.=20 In their attempt to deflect criticism over high prices, generating companie= s=20 such as Duke Energy -- operator of the South Bay Power Plant in Chula and= =20 others in the state -- frequently note that they sell most of their=20 electricity far in advance. But they acknowledge less often that their=20 trading units may also be buying power, which could boost the company's=20 electricity inventory.=20 Duke was the fourth biggest electricity trader last year and cited its=20 trading activity as a prime contributor to its wholesale business profits,= =20 which soared 324 percent in the first quarter to $348 million.=20 It is a company's power traders who frequently direct plant operators to=20 increase or decrease the generation of power in response to market=20 conditions.=20 Energy companies have little option but to turn to trading for profits. One= =20 of the better kept secrets of electrical deregulation and its promise of=20 competition is that there is remarkably little competition in the productio= n=20 side of the business.=20 For one thing, electricity is a commodity; power from one company is=20 indistinguishable from that generated by others.=20 More important, nearly all modern plants generate power from turbines built= =20 by a handful of manufacturers. The result? Modern plants owned by different= =20 companies produce power at nearly identical cost.=20 ""The cost of power produced by modern plants is all within a mil=20 (one-thousandth of a dollar),"" said Michael Peevey, an adviser to Gov. Gray= =20 Davis and former president of Southern California Edison.=20 So the extraction of profit in the electricity business relies much more on= =20 trading. Traders' profits rise when prices are volatile -- plunging, or eve= n=20 better, rising sharply. Little regulation But despite the obvious temptation to manipulate the market, the burgeoning= =20 electricity trading business has remained largely unregulated.=20 The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission does require quarterly filings fro= m=20 energy traders, but these often provide incomplete information, or at least= =20 little that has been of concern to FERC.=20 In fact, although the trading of electricity grew more than a hundredfold= =20 from 1996 to 2000, FERC has taken no major enforcement action against a=20 trader. After the onset of the California crisis last year, FERC has acted= =20 once. That was against Williams, which agreed to pay $8 million without=20 admitting guilt to resolve an allegation that it withheld supply to pump up= =20 prices.=20 FERC's record of enforcement in the area of power trading stands in contras= t=20 to a long list of enforcement actions within other markets taken by the=20 Securities Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission= .=20 FERC has recently added staff to its market oversight operations. But Willi= am=20 Massey, a FERC commissioner, says the agency's effort is still inadequate.= =20 ""Electricity can be flipped, stripped and chopped up,"" Massey said. ""It's a= n=20 extraordinarily complicated market.=20 ""The sophisticated marketers and traders have simply moved past us. We're= =20 kind of horse and buggy in our approach and they're out there in rocket shi= ps=20 flying around ... The problem is that sophisticated traders don't necessari= ly=20 produce reasonable prices. They produce profits.""=20 Before deregulation, electricity trading was a low-key affair. Regulated=20 utilities dealt power back and forth on a reciprocal basis to fill=20 electricity shortfalls in their control areas. There was little trading for= =20 profit until the mid-1990s, after federal legislation and FERC rulings open= ed=20 the market.=20 Major traders include large energy companies, sister companies of=20 California's major utilities and Wall Street firms. Market volatility In many ways, the trading of power is similar to that of other commodities.= =20 But there are important differences. Because it cannot be stored and its us= e=20 is so fundamental, the price of electricity is the most volatile of all.=20 When supplies are tight, a single supplier can rapidly raise prices to=20 budget-busting levels, as evidenced by Duke Energy's recent admission that = it=20 charged California nearly $4,000 for a megawatt-hour of power, a quantity= =20 that probably sold hours earlier for one-tenth of that sum or less.=20 Wolak, the Stanford economist, and state Sen. Joseph Dunn, D-Garden Grove,= =20 who is investigating the state power market, say trading allows companies t= o=20 collude under the guise of competition. Instead of wringing out lowest cost= s,=20 the wholesale trading market serves to raise prices, they say.=20 ""As I trade to you and you trade to me, we communicate to each other what= =20 price we would like to get,"" said Wolak. ""It's not collusive. It's just=20 communicating price.""=20 Mark Palmer, a spokesman for Enron, the nation's biggest power trader, said= =20 California's problem is not the result of trading.=20 ""It's a result of shortages,"" Palmer said.=20 Underscoring its emphasis on trading, Enron's new headquarters tower in=20 downtown Houston rises from a six-story block of new trading floors,=20 including expanded space for electricity trading.=20 Enron also pioneered trading in cyberspace and its Enron Online site claims= =20 to be the most active computer-based trading market.=20 The Houston company argues that consumers won't fully benefit from power=20 trading and deregulation until they have greater choice in choosing their= =20 power supplier. And the company says FERC has not done enough to open acces= s=20 to transmission lines, which would allow traders to move power around the= =20 country. To that end, Enron has lobbied hard for President Bush's plan for = a=20 national electricity grid.=20 Palmer says the notion that the price of electricity rises each time it is= =20 traded is mistaken.=20 ""The market is always looking for the real price of a commodity,"" Palmer=20 said.=20 Dunn, the California state senator, says his investigation found a differen= t=20 function for trading. At a time when supply barely meets or falls short of= =20 demand, he noted, companies with electricity to sell have to worry only abo= ut=20 how high to set their price.=20 ""The trader is a pawn in the generator's game to drive up prices,"" said Dun= n.=20 ""Trading develops a level of trust. You, my alleged competitor, will bid in= =20 the same patterns and I will respond not in a competitive pattern but in a= =20 complimentary pattern.""=20 The state senator said his investigation found evidence that on several day= s,=20 energy companies appeared to test their ability to drive prices up, without= =20 being undercut by competitors.=20 This ability to drive up prices without competitive consequence is a key te= st=20 of market power, the technical term for manipulation or price fixing.=20 But Dunn also conceded that antitrust violations can be hard to prove in=20 court. He suggested that even if the trading behavior falls short of=20 antitrust violations, it remains anti-competitive and devastating for the= =20 California economy.=20 To Harry Trebing, a utility industry expert and professor emeritus at=20 Michigan State University, wholesale electricity trading is reminiscent of= =20 what took place in the 1920s and early '30s. Back then, utility companies= =20 created complex networks of holding companies that traded stock among=20 themselves, driving up prices in the process.=20 Undoing that scheme was a focus of President Franklin Roosevelt's=20 administration. Congress ended up barring national power companies and=20 tightening regulation of utilities, in an effort to counteract their tenden= cy=20 to create markets that work only for insiders.=20 ""The broad goals of trading are the same,"" Trebing said.=20 ""The goal is to maximize profits through raising prices.""=20 Daily energy costs for state fall in past weeks=20 By Ed Mendel=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO -- In some of the first good news of the electricity crisis, the= =20 Davis administration said yesterday that the daily cost of power purchased = by=20 the state for utility customers has dropped in recent weeks.=20 The price-drop news comes after an announcement that Californians conserved= =20 more energy than expected last month, 11 percent, and amid Davis=20 administration optimism that the Legislature may finally begin to move on a= =20 plan to keep Southern California Edison out of bankruptcy.=20 The developments, if they turn out to be a trend and not temporary, could b= e=20 among the first signs that Gov. Gray Davis' plan to end the electricity=20 crisis is beginning to work. But the administration isn't saying that.=20 ""We have had a few good days here lately,"" said S. David Freeman, a Davis= =20 power adviser. ""I don't think that I want to project.""=20 Some power-market watchers began to speculate last month that prices may ha= ve=20 peaked earlier this year. Platts, an energy information service, said=20 yesterday that spot prices for the natural gas used by power plants are=20 falling this month.=20 The governor's press secretary, Steve Maviglio, told reporters yesterday th= at=20 the daily amount spent on power is now ""well below"" $50 million, which was= =20 the average cost earlier this year.=20 A 12-day gap in the most recent notice to the Legislature that another $500= =20 million increment will be spent on power suggests that the daily average=20 during the last two weeks may have dropped down around $42 million.=20 Oscar Hidalgo, a spokesman for the state power purchasing agency, said that= =20 the average cost of power was under $40 million during the first four days = of=20 this month.=20 Maviglio attributed the lower cost to conservation, the phasing in of cheap= er=20 long-term power contracts, fewer power plants off-line for maintenance, and= =20 cooler weather.=20 However, he said, ""The average cost is still way over what we paid last=20 year.""=20 There was widespread skepticism in late April when the governor's consultan= ts=20 predicted that the $346 per megawatt-hour average paid by the state for=20 non-contracted power from April through June would drop to an average of $1= 95=20 from July through September.=20 ""We are still very comfortable with the projection that Mr. Fichera and=20 company estimated,"" Maviglio said, referring to Joseph Fichera of Saber=20 Partners in New York.=20 During a briefing on May 21, Fichera told reporters that the amount of powe= r=20 that the state would obtain under long-term contracts for May was expected = to=20 be about 43 percent of the total required, the so-called net short.=20 Fichera said contracts already signed were expected to cover 66 percent of= =20 the net short in June, 48 percent in July, and 42 percent in August. He sai= d=20 contracts that had been agreed on in principle could increase those amounts= =20 to 73 percent in June, 67 percent in July, and 60 percent in August.=20 ""We are still on target. There are risks,"" Fichera said yesterday, among th= em=20 extended hot weather and power plant outages. ""No one is popping the=20 champagne corks until Sept. 30.""=20 The governor's consultants based their forecast of power demand this summer= =20 on an estimate that Californians will reduce their electricity use by 7=20 percent.=20 The 11 percent reduction last month, as compared to May of last year, came= =20 before the sticker shock of rate hikes that begin this month for customers = of=20 Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric. And a $35 million ad campaign urging= =20 conservation has not hit full stride.=20 Maviglio said the administration plans to release some detailed information= =20 on Monday about the roughly $8 billion the state has spent buying power. Th= e=20 general fund will be repaid by a bond of up to $13.4 billion that ratepayer= s=20 will pay off over 15 years.=20 Legislative leaders have demanded detailed information about power purchase= s=20 before proceeding with the Edison plan. Assembly Democrats are working on a= =20 plan that de-emphasizes state purchase of the Edison transmission system an= d=20 would put most of the burden for paying off Edison's debt on businesses and= =20 large users, not residences. Five tiers sought in proposed rate boost=20 Conservation would be promoted, SDG&E says By Karen Kucher=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 A proposed rate increase for SDG&E customers to cover the high cost of=20 electricity should be imposed in five tiers to encourage conservation, the= =20 company is advising state utility regulators.=20 The more electricity a customer uses, the higher the rate would be.=20 SDG&E needs to raise its rates to bring in an additional $502 million=20 annually to pay the state for power purchases.=20 The state Public Utilities Commission is expected to rule on San Diego Gas = &=20 Electric's rate-increase proposal June 28.=20 The rate changes would remove a cap that has shielded most SDG&E customers= =20 from rising electricity prices for a year. The cap, enacted by state=20 lawmakers in September 2000 and retroactive to June 2000, set rates at 6.5= =20 cents per kilowatt-hour.=20 Higher rates would mean the average SDG&E residential and small-business=20 customer's electricity bills would go up by 18 percent. Large commercial=20 users' bills would average 29 percent more.=20 Public hearings on the issue will be held next Monday and Tuesday in San=20 Diego, El Cajon, Escondido and San Clemente. These sessions will focus on= =20 small-business and residential consumers. Hearings on large commercial user= s=20 were held last month.=20 Earlier this year, the PUC decided to allow the state's two largest=20 utilities, Pacific Gas and Electric and Southern California Edison, to char= ge=20 customers an extra $5.7 billion annually for electricity.=20 The state Department of Water Resources, which has been buying power for=20 SDG&E customers since February, asked SDG&E to generate a total of $915=20 million annually to cover the cost of electricity purchases.=20 With the proposed rate increases, SDG&E could do that.=20 Large commercial customers would pay about 30 percent of the overall increa= se=20 and residential and small-business customers would pay about 70 percent, sa= id=20 Ed Van Herik, a spokesman for the utility company.=20 If the increase can be tiered, as many as 60 percent of residential custome= rs=20 will see no rate increase if their electricity usage remains the same, Van= =20 Herik said.=20 But customers who use more than 130 percent of their baseline -- considered= =20 the minimum amount of electricity needed by a household -- will be billed a= t=20 increasingly higher rates.=20 Residential and small-business customers who use a lot of electricity could= =20 pay as much as 17.89 cents per kilowatt hour for some power they consume.= =20 Consumer advocate Michael Shames said he is concerned the utility's proposa= l=20 does not spread the increases evenly among different types of users. He als= o=20 called for more scrutiny of the state's request.=20 People should tell PUC officials ""that this increase should not be a carte= =20 blanche or blank check approval,"" said Shames, the head of Utility Consumer= s'=20 Action Network. ""The PUC needs to ensure that the rate increase requested b= y=20 the (state) is reasonable.""=20 The public hearings are scheduled for:=20 ?Monday, 1 p.m., San Diego Concourse, Copper Room, 200 C St., San Diego.=20 ?Monday, 7 p.m., El Cajon Community Center, 195 E. Douglas Ave., El Cajon.= =20 ?Tuesday, 1 p.m., Country Inn Hotel, 35 Via Pico Plaza, San Clemente.=20 ?Tuesday, 7 p.m., Center for the Arts, 340 N. Escondido Blvd., Escondido.= =20 Port budget large, but power bills loom=20 Slowing economy also cause for worry By Ronald W. Powell=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 The ""rock"" is rolling financially, but there are indications that the blues= =20 lurk on the horizon.=20 Officials of the San Diego Unified Port District -- headquartered in a=20 block-shaped building some employees call the rock -- are happy with a=20 projected 2001-2002 budget that is 5.1 percent larger than the current one.= =20 Total revenue is expected to reach $208.7 million, $10.2 million above what= =20 is expected in the fiscal year that ends June 30.=20 Port commissioners gave preliminary approval to the budget yesterday and ar= e=20 scheduled to take a final vote July 10.=20 But a slowing economy and surging electric bills are causes for concern.=20 Electricity costs are expected to rise from $5 million to $8.2 million in t= he=20 coming fiscal year.=20 ""As far as trends, we see a continuation of the growth we've experienced ov= er=20 the past five years,"" said Bruce Hollingsworth, the port's treasurer. ""But= =20 our percentage of growth will not rise as sharply.""=20 Port revenues have grown steadily since the 1997-1998 fiscal year, when $16= 3=20 million was generated.=20 The proposed budget calls for adding 24 employees to the port's 730-member= =20 work force. New hires will include three Harbor Police officers, 10 employe= es=20 in the aviation division and four in maritime services.=20 The port operates Lindbergh Field and administers nonmilitary tidelands alo= ng=20 San Diego Bay. It is landlord to more than 600 waterfront businesses and=20 operates two marine cargo terminals and one cruise ship terminal.=20 The budget calls for growth in each of the port's primary revenue centers:= =20 aviation, real estate and maritime services.=20 Passenger and cargo activity at Lindbergh Field is expected to generate $90= .7=20 million, or $5 million more than expected in the current year. Most of that= =20 increase is expected to come from parking-rate increases at the airport and= =20 at the port's long-term parking lot on Pacific Highway.=20 Rent from hotels and other businesses that are port tenants are expected to= =20 total $63.1 million, up $1.8 million from the current budget.=20 Increases in cargo and cruise ship traffic are expected to boost maritime= =20 income by $2.7 million, to a total of $18.4 million.=20 The port expects to spend $157 million on construction projects. They inclu= de=20 $8.5 million to relocate the General Services Department from Eighth Avenue= =20 and Harbor Drive in San Diego to National City and more than $5 million for= =20 paving and improvements at the 10th Avenue Marine Terminal.=20 Rent revenue could grow substantially in future years. Four hotel projects = on=20 port property have won approval or are seeking it.=20 Jim Bailey, president of Manchester Resorts, told commissioners yesterday= =20 that he expects to break ground on a second Hyatt tower of 750 rooms by Jun= e=20 26. Port officials said revenue from that hotel would bring in an additiona= l=20 $3.7 million a year. It is scheduled to open in the summer of 2003.=20 Hollingsworth, the treasurer, said that if all four hotels are built the po= rt=20 could receive as much as $15 million a year in new revenue.=20 Continuous use urged for planned power plant=20 Escondido facility originally proposed for peak demand By Jonathan Heller=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 ESCONDIDO -- A proposed power plant in southwest Escondido that initially w= as=20 expected to run only during times of peak electricity demand probably will = be=20 allowed to run full time.=20 A state energy official who recommended approval of the plant yesterday has= =20 said the plant could operate as often as the state deems necessary.=20 The California Energy Commission was scheduled to vote on the project today= .=20 CalPeak Power of San Diego has asked the commission to approve a 49-megawat= t=20 plant on Enterprise Street near Vineyard Avenue. Referred to as a ""peaker""= =20 plant, such facilities typically are designed to supply energy only during= =20 times of peak demand.=20 The state limits the number of hours some plants can operate to keep=20 pollution at a minimum. A 44-megawatt peaker plant being built on West=20 Mission Avenue in Escondido by Ramco Inc. will be allowed to operate no mor= e=20 than 16 hours per day.=20 That plant is permitted to emit up to 5 parts per million of nitrogen oxide= ,=20 although its actual emissions are expected to be slightly lower, said Dale= =20 Mesple, a Ramco consultant. Nitrogen oxide is a component of smog.=20 The CalPeak plant, if approved, would be restricted to 2 parts per million = of=20 nitrogen oxide.=20 It was generally assumed that the CalPeak plant would operate under similar= =20 time restrictions as the Ramco plant. The potential for air pollution was= =20 among the chief concerns of residents who spoke at the City Council hearing= s=20 on the Ramco project and at the energy commission hearings about the CalPea= k=20 plant.=20 But under the terms of approval recommended by Energy Commission Chairman= =20 William Keese, CalPeak's plant would be able to operate ""up to 8,760 hours= =20 per year, typically when the demand for electricity is high."" That number= =20 equals 24 hours a day.=20 The actual number of hours would depend on the requirements of the state's= =20 Independent System Operator, which manages the energy grid.=20 ""We certainly want to have the flexibility to run whenever we're needed,""= =20 said Mark Lyons, CalPeak's development director. ""Exactly how often we will= =20 run is anybody's guess.""=20 Escondido Councilwoman June Rady said she was frustrated by the possibility= =20 of the plant running full time. In Ramco's case, the city and the county Ai= r=20 Pollution Control District made it clear how often the plant could operate.= =20 CalPeak chose to bypass the city's permitting process and went through the= =20 state Energy Commission, which offers an expedited 21-day approval put in= =20 place by Gov. Gray Davis as an emergency measure.=20 ""I think Escondido has been absolutely ignored and there's a total lack of= =20 due process,"" Rady said. ""It boils down to an issue of local control.""=20 Although city officials objected to the commission pre-empting the city's= =20 land-use authority, the commission maintained that Davis' order gave it the= =20 final say on this type of project.=20 If the commission gives final approval today, the only remedy available to= =20 the city would be in court. At least three council members must vote to=20 initiate legal action.=20 Keese's recommended approval did take into account several city concerns=20 regarding landscaping. The CalPeak plant would be built near the entrance o= f=20 a planned high-tech business park, and city officials were worried the=20 plant's appearance might hinder the ability to attract high-quality tenants= =20 to the park.=20 Mayor Lori Holt Pfeiler said she was not surprised by the commission's=20 recommendation.=20 ""I expected they would want to approve the project, and that's why it was= =20 important for the city to weigh in with conditions we have in this=20 community,"" Pfeiler said.=20 Rising energy prices threaten Poway troupe=20 By Brian E. Clark=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 POWAY -- Rising electricity rates may extinguish the stage lights this summ= er=20 for the Poway Performing Arts Company.=20 ""I'm afraid that if SDG&E gets the price increase it's asking for -- from 6= .5=20 cents per kilowatt-hour to 8.9 cents -- that we'll go under,"" said Kathy=20 McCafferty, spokeswoman for the nonprofit theater.=20 The volunteer organization produces its plays in a building at a Poway Road= =20 shopping center. It held three fund-raising performances over the weekend,= =20 but officials were uncertain yesterday how much money was raised.=20 The group is not affiliated with the Poway Performing Arts Center and has= =20 been in business for 20 years.=20 McCafferty said the group built up a $2,000 surplus last summer before ener= gy=20 prices began to surge.=20 ""That $2,000 was a big reserve for us,"" she said. ""It seemed like a ton of= =20 money, but, boy, it went fast. And we're really energy-dependent. Our light= s=20 use a lot of power. And we're in Poway on the second floor of our building.= =20 It gets hot here, and we have to use air conditioning.""=20 But McCafferty acknowledged that the cost of power isn't the group's only= =20 problem.=20 In a recent letter to backers, President Nan Katona said the organization= =20 also needs new blood to keep operating.=20 ""The truth is that lack of funding is just a symptom of the deeper problem,= =20 which is lack of community support,"" she wrote. ""Ironically, audiences and= =20 reviewers recognize the Poway Performing Arts Company as one of the premier= =20 community arts theaters in San Diego.""=20 Katona said some new volunteers had stepped forward to take leadership role= s=20 in the theater company since she wrote her letter last month. But she said= =20 rising electricity prices could still bring the group down.=20 ""If our energy bills double or triple, we could be in dire straits,"" she=20 said. ""It could push us over the edge financially.""=20 McCafferty said it would be difficult for the theater to cut costs.=20 ""We can't run a much leaner operation,"" she said. ""If our power prices go u= p=20 again, we may still be forced out of business.""=20 The theater is at 13250 Poway Road, in the Lively Shopping Center. For more= =20 information, call (858) 679-8085.=20 Fair to use generators for midway attractions=20 By Michael Burge=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 DEL MAR -- The Del Mar Fair will generate its own electricity for thrill=20 rides on the midway this year instead of using energy from SDG&E.=20 ""In case there are planned or unplanned outages, we still will be operating= ,""=20 fairgrounds General Manager Timothy J. Fennell said.=20 Fennell decided to put the midway on generators because he didn't want the= =20 fairgrounds pulling power from the grid while county residents are coping= =20 with rolling blackouts at home and at work, he said.=20 And the fair does not want to take a chance that a rolling blackout will=20 leave some people stranded in rides high above the grounds, forcing an=20 evacuation.=20 The fairgrounds has been told it is exempt from rolling blackouts, but rath= er=20 than take such a risk it will rent 13 diesel-fuel generators and produce=20 electricity on the midway. The rest of the fairgrounds will use power from= =20 San Diego Gas & Electric Co.=20 Fairgrounds operations manager Larry Baumann estimated it would cost the=20 fairgrounds $20,000 more to generate its own electricity than to buy it fro= m=20 SDG&E.=20 Midway manager Donna Ruhm said it will be worth it.=20 ""Rides that require evacuation have to have backup power and they do,"" Ruhm= =20 said. ""Now our service won't be interrupted.""=20 It is not unusual for carnivals to generate their own power, and the=20 fairgrounds has done so in the past. Fair officials removed the generators = 10=20 to 15 years ago to reduce noise on the midway.=20 The fair opens June 15 and ends July 4.=20 While the rest of the fairgrounds is on the SDG&E grid, Baumann said backup= =20 generators can kick in during a typical 60-or 90-minute blackout, allowing= =20 the fair to operate without serious difficulty. Those generators are not=20 linked to the midway.=20 All the generators are licensed by the state and meet emission standards,= =20 fair officials said, so they do not expect the noise and odor to be=20 excessive.=20 The fairgrounds is taking the precaution of providing its own power despite= =20 the fact that it probably will not go dark during a rolling blackout.=20 ""SDG&E has assured me that .?.?. the fairgrounds and the racetrack will not= =20 be on the curtailment (blackout) list during the fair and the races,"" said= =20 Del Mar Fire Chief Jack Gosney.=20 The Del Mar Thoroughbred racing season begins July 18 and ends Sept. 5.=20 Gosney said SDG&E told him earlier this year that the fairgrounds was not= =20 subject to a forced outage because it shared a circuit with the Del Mar Fir= e=20 Station, which is a 911 dispatch center and exempt from a blackout. But he= =20 said recent research showed that the fairgrounds is on a separate circuit.= =20 Nonetheless, Gosney said, SDG&E is exempting the fairgrounds and racetrack= =20 during the busy summer season.=20 The fairgrounds paid $137,152.95 for its electricity usage from March 12 to= =20 April 10. It paid $51,845.39 for electricity during the same period last ye= ar. ?=20 Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 'Hi, My Name Isn't Justice, Honey,' and Shame on Lockyer=20 By TOM G. PALMER ?????Here's what California Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer said at a press=20 conference about Enron Corp. Chairman Kenneth Lay: ""I would love to=20 personally escort Lay to an 8-by-10 cell that he could share with a tattooe= d=20 dude who says, 'Hi, my name is Spike, honey.""'=20 ?????Here's why Lockyer should be removed from his office of public trust:= =20 First, because as the chief law enforcement officer of the largest state in= =20 the nation, he not only has admitted that rape is a regular feature of the= =20 state's prison system, but also that he considers rape a part of the=20 punishment he can inflict on others.=20 ?????Second, because he has publicly stated that he would like to personall= y=20 arrange the rape of a Texas businessman who has not even been charged with= =20 any illegal behavior.=20 ?????Lockyer's remarks reveal him to be an authoritarian thug, someone whol= ly=20 unsuited to holding an office of public trust.=20 ?????But his remarks do have one positive merit: They tell us what criminal= =20 penalties really entail.=20 ?????Contrary to some depictions of prisons as country clubs, they are=20 violent and terrible places. More and more politicians propose criminal=20 sanctions for more and more alleged misdeeds, and as a result ever more kin= ds=20 of behavior are sanctioned by criminal penalties, perhaps now even selling= =20 electricity. Those found guilty of such crimes are put into cages, where th= ey=20 are deprived of their liberty and dignity and, as Lockyer so clearly=20 acknowledged, raped and brutalized. What's worse, Lockyer has indicated tha= t=20 he believes that rape is an appropriate part of the system of punishments h= e=20 administers.=20 ?????Should it matter that Lay is a businessman? Imagine the outcry if the= =20 head of Enron were female. What would Lockyer's fellow Democrats have said = to=20 that?=20 ?????Should it matter that Lay is chairman of an electricity generator? Doe= s=20 the nature of his business justify threats to escort him to his own rape?= =20 Lockyer told the Los Angeles Times that he had singled out Enron's chairman= =20 because the Houston-based company is the world's largest energy trader.=20 ?????So apparently singling out a man for a heinous threat is OK because he= 's=20 the chairman of the world's largest energy trading company. That's accordin= g=20 to the man who, as a state senator, sponsored California's 1984 hate-crimes= =20 law. Evidently the crusader against intimidation on the basis of race,=20 religion and sexual orientation feels no hesitation at all about intimidati= ng=20 someone and threatening him with the brutal use of physical force simply=20 because he heads the world's largest energy trading company.=20 ?????Lockyer and Gov. Gray Davis seem to think that the best way to keep th= e=20 lights on is to threaten electricity producers with brute force, rather tha= n=20 to offer to pay competitive rates in competitive markets. Are energy=20 producers to blame for California's energy problems? No. Bad policies,=20 including rigid controls on retail prices of electricity, are the cause of= =20 the problem, not the people who generate energy. Scapegoating producers and= =20 threatening them with violence is an old ploy of authoritarians. California= ns=20 should not stand for it.=20 ?????An Enron spokesman said that Lockyer's chilling stated desire to arran= ge=20 the rape of Lay does not merit a response. The spokesman is wrong. Lockyer'= s=20 remarks merit public disgrace and removal from office. After all, rape is n= ot=20 a form of legal justice in America--is it?=20 - - - Tom G. Palmer Is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute in Washington. E-mai= l:=20 Palmert@cato.org Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 California ; Metro Desk=20 U.S. Probes Alleged Pact Not to Build New Plants Power: Justice officials= =20 focus on Southland operations of two firms, which deny wrongdoing. MYRON LEVIN; NANCY RIVERA BROOKS ?=20 06/06/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page B-1=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 The U.S. Department of Justice has launched an investigation into whether t= wo=20 companies that control a large swath of Southern California 's electricity= =20 supply agreed to limit power plant construction, potentially hindering=20 crucial energy production, according to federal records and interviews.=20 The civil antitrust probe of Williams Energy Services and AES Southland=20 represents the Justice Department's first foray into the activities of ener= gy=20 suppliers who have reaped huge profits in California 's price-shocked marke= t.=20 AES disclosed the investigation, which began last month, in a filing with t= he=20 Securities and Exchange Commission on Tuesday. In its papers, AES said the= =20 Justice Department is focusing on whether its agreement with Williams could= =20 constrain future power plant construction in Southern California .=20 The investigation comes at a time when the state is scrambling to get new= =20 generators built and running to avoid blackouts and economic problems.=20 The government alleges that AES and Williams agreed to limit the expansion = or=20 construction of new power plants near three facilities purchased by AES in= =20 1998 from Southern California Edison under the state's new deregulation pla= n.=20 The plants--in Long Beach, Huntington Beach and Redondo Beach--are owned by= =20 AES, but the electricity is sold by Williams. Under a 3-year-old deal, know= n=20 as a tolling agreement, Williams essentially rents out the capacity of the= =20 plants for annual payments to AES. Williams supplies natural gas to fire th= e=20 plants and sells the electricity under long-term contracts and in the costl= y=20 spot market.=20 Williams and AES have similar tolling agreements at plants in Pennsylvania= =20 and New Jersey. However, AES spokesman Aaron Thomas said the Justice=20 Department's investigative requests have focused only on agreements between= =20 Williams and AES in Southern California .=20 Thomas would say only that the agreement at the center of the investigation= =20 is simply a delineation of ""how expansion or repowerings are done at the=20 facilities.""=20 The three plants have a combined capacity of more than 3,900 megawatts,=20 enough to supply about 3 million homes. This summer, AES is bringing anothe= r=20 450 megawatts on line by reactivating two mothballed generators in Huntingt= on=20 Beach.=20 Paula Hall-Collins, a spokeswoman for Tulsa-based Williams Cos., said she= =20 believes that the investigation is unrelated to a recent inquiry by the=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission into whether AES and Williams=20 unnecessarily shut down plants to jack up prices. A portion of that=20 investigation was settled in April, when Williams, without admitting any=20 wrongdoing, agreed to pay about $8 million.=20 ""We've always maintained that we've operated within the law, and we're=20 certain the investigation by the DOJ will find we are operating legally,""= =20 Hall-Collins said.=20 Williams and AES are among the power plant owners and marketers that have= =20 been lambasted by Gov. Gray Davis because of gold-plated electricity prices= =20 that have pushed the state's biggest utilities to the edge of ruin and are= =20 steadily draining the state's budget surplus.=20 State officials are asking FERC to revoke the rights of AES and Williams to= =20 sell electricity at whatever price the market will bear. That right was=20 granted for three years, beginning in 1998 by federal regulators when=20 California 's $28-billion electricity market was opened to competition.=20 Under that plan, the rights of AES and Williams to sell into the market are= =20 the first to come up for renewal.=20 AES Southland and Williams Energy Services are both arms of large energy=20 companies--AES Corp. of Arlington, Va., and Williams Cos. of Tulsa, Okla. California ; Metro Desk=20 Natural Gas, Power Prices Drop Sharply Energy: More conservation, mild=20 weather are among factors keeping costs down, experts say. RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR; NANCY VOGEL ?=20 06/06/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page B-1=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 WASHINGTON -- The wholesale prices of electricity and natural gas in=20 California have fallen sharply in recent weeks, and experts said Tuesday th= at=20 the relief could be the harbinger of an energy turnaround.=20 Or it may be just a blip.=20 In the last couple of weeks, California power prices have plunged to the=20 lowest levels since April 2000, traders say, with electricity selling on so= me=20 days for less than $100 per megawatt-hour.=20 At night, when demand slackens, power sometimes sells for less than $20 per= =20 megawatt-hour. That is reminiscent of the days before prices went haywire= =20 last summer.=20 It is a drastically different scenario than the $500 to $800 the state paid= =20 during a spate of hot weather last month.=20 Meanwhile, wholesale natural gas prices at a bellwether pipeline junction o= n=20 the Southern California -Arizona border dipped last week to their lowest=20 levels since November, according to a publication that tracks the industry.= =20 Separately, Southern California Gas Co. and Pacific Gas & Electric Co.=20 reported June rate cuts for their residential gas customers of 16% and 38%,= =20 respectively.=20 Experts credited a combination of conservation, mild weather, a burst of=20 increased hydroelectric generation and lower natural gas prices for the dro= p=20 in electricity costs.=20 ""Conservation is starting to worry the generators, which is nice to see,""= =20 said Severin Borenstein, director of the University of California Energy=20 Institute in Berkeley. Californians used 11% less energy last month than in= =20 May 2000, according to the state Energy Commission.=20 ""I'm worried that if we don't push harder on conservation, [prices] won't= =20 stay down,"" Borenstein added.=20 On the natural gas side, experts said the price decline is due to replenish= ed=20 storage within California , a nationwide drop in the cost of the fuel and= =20 easing demand from power plants.=20 The number of shippers competing to get natural gas to the state has also= =20 increased, with the expiration of a controversial contract on the El Paso= =20 pipeline system last week.=20 But economists were reluctant to make sweeping predictions based on the=20 latest indicators.=20 ""It's hard to draw specific conclusions,"" said Bruce Henning, who tracks th= e=20 natural gas markets for Energy and Environmental Analysis Inc., an Arlingto= n,=20 Va., consulting firm.=20 How the summer turns out depends on the weather in the state, Henning said,= =20 adding, ""The weather represents the balance in the Southern California=20 market.""=20 Natural gas fuels most California power plants. With wholesale prices=20 recently averaging three to four times the rates charged elsewhere in the= =20 country, state and federal officials have despaired of chances for=20 controlling electricity costs.=20 Last Friday, however, the daily price for immediate delivery of natural gas= =20 in Topock, Ariz., a pipeline junction near the California border, dipped to= =20 $7.85 per million British thermal units.=20 According to Natural Gas Week, it was the first time since mid-November tha= t=20 the price at that location had fallen below $8 per million BTUs. One millio= n=20 BTUs is what a typical Southern California home uses in five or six days.= =20 Considered a bellwether for other pipeline systems serving California , the= =20 Topock price reached a record $56.54 per million BTUs on Dec. 8. It stood a= t=20 $9.36 per million BTUs at the close of business Tuesday, still below recent= =20 weekly averages.=20 Other industry publications have also picked up signals of price declines.= =20 Platts, the energy information division of McGraw-Hill Cos., reported Tuesd= ay=20 that the price for monthly gas delivery contracts to California fell 22% in= =20 June, following a nationwide trend.=20 But Henning said the drop in California prices is attributable to both lowe= r=20 prices around the country and a decline in the high markups for shipping ga= s=20 to California . Those markups, which far exceed the cost of transporting ga= s,=20 have drawn the attention of state and federal investigators.=20 Henning said the markups are declining as depleted storage levels in=20 California are replenished. ""Storage levels have been filling very rapidly,= =20 and that fact is reflected in prices coming down,"" he said.=20 The link between natural gas and electricity prices is a hotly debated=20 subject. Some experts say high-priced natural gas is driving up the cost of= =20 electricity . Others believe that record prices for power are raising the= =20 prices that generators are willing to pay for their fuel.=20 Electricity prices that range from $20 to $200 per megawatt-hour--instead o= f=20 the $150 to $500 per megawatt-hour paid in recent months--are great news fo= r=20 Gov. Gray Davis.=20 Average daily power prices in California for transactions through the=20 Automated Power Exchange have dropped from $149 per megawatt-hour last Frid= ay=20 to $110 per megawatt-hour Tuesday. The exchange is a private company that= =20 brings together electricity buyers and sellers and accounts for less than 1= 0%=20 of the state's market.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio said Tuesday that average daily power=20 purchases by the state have recently dipped below $50 million.=20 The state has sometimes had to pay more than $100 million a day since it=20 started buying power in January through the Department of Water Resources.= =20 The state stepped in because California 's two biggest utilities became too= =20 financially crippled to withstand the prices being charged by generators.= =20 Davis' plan to pay for past and future energy purchases with a $12.4-billio= n=20 bond issue hinges on an assumption that power prices will be driven down th= is=20 summer through long-term contracts, conservation and the construction of ne= w=20 power plants.=20 UC Berkeley's Borenstein said conservation efforts have not gone far enough= .=20 ""You walk into most buildings and you still need a sweater,"" he said. ""That= =20 ain't the way to hit the target.""=20 If Californians conserved an additional 10% off their peak usage on hot=20 afternoons, he said, ""we could really break the backs of the generators, we= =20 could really collapse the price.""=20 Prices tend to skyrocket in California 's electricity market on hot=20 afternoons, when demand soars and grid operators must scramble to purchase= =20 enough electricity . Cool weather, which reduces demand for air conditionin= g,=20 and conservation help keep the state from reaching such crisis situations.= =20 Borenstein said he believes generators are also asking less money for their= =20 electricity in part because of a federal order that took effect last month.= =20 The order limits the price power plant owners can charge when California 's= =20 supplies are strained.=20 Power sellers say there are more fundamental forces at work.=20 ""There's more supply relative to demand, which is softening prices,"" said= =20 Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum. ""The= =20 market is working, and it's providing cheaper wholesale power more quickly= =20 than any regulatory scheme could ever do.""=20 *=20 Times staff writer Dan Morain in Sacramento contributed to this story.=20 RELATED STORY=20 PG&E wins: The utility averted a $1-billion bill for power buys. B6=20 (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)=20 A Blip or a Trend?=20 Daily natural gas prices at the California border with Arizona--considered = a=20 bellwether of the state's costs--have been declining in the last two weeks.= =20 *=20 Natural gas price per 1 million Btu=20 $9.36=20 Source: Natural Gas Week California ; Metro Desk=20 The State Utility Averts $1 Billion in Costs Courts: PG&E and Cal-ISO agree= =20 to recognize Department of Water Resources as purchaser of the power. TIM REITERMAN ?=20 06/06/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page B-6=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 SAN FRANCISCO -- Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and the state's power grid=20 operator reached an agreement Tuesday that insulated PG&E at least=20 temporarily from more than $1 billion in power purchases the state made for= =20 its customers.=20 The California Independent System Operator sent $1.26 billion in invoices t= o=20 the utility for power purchases by the state Department of Water Resources= =20 for PG&E customers from January through March.=20 But the utility contended in Bankruptcy Court proceedings that it was not= =20 liable for such purchases and that continued purchases would cause annual= =20 losses of $4 billion.=20 After arguments before Judge Dennis Montali, PG&E and Cal-ISO agreed that t= he=20 Department of Water Resources, not PG&E, purchased the power. Cal-ISO had= =20 argued that it was making the purchases on PG&E's behalf.=20 ""PG&E wants to be a utility and have obligations to serve customers, but th= ey=20 don't want to pay for it,"" Cal-ISO general counsel Charles Robinson said=20 later.=20 If PG&E refuses to pay the invoices, Robinson said, Cal-ISO will send the= =20 bills to the Department of Water Resources, and officials there can decide= =20 whether to pursue claims in Bankruptcy Court. A spokesman for department,= =20 which has authorization to sell $13 billion in bonds for power purchases,= =20 said the agency will have no comment until the matter can be studied.=20 State agencies have stayed out of the bankruptcy proceedings, hoping to=20 preserve their immunity from suits in federal court.=20 The agreement will be submitted for Montali's approval Monday, but the judg= e=20 said it would not be binding on the department because no one represented t= he=20 agency in court.=20 PG&E's own production and contracts provide the majority of the power for i= ts=20 customers. But state legislation adopted this year allows the department to= =20 secure power contracts to serve customers of ailing utilities. When a=20 shortage threatens the power grid, the department purchases additional powe= r=20 through Cal-ISO on the spot electricity market.=20 PG&E filed for Chapter 11 protection from creditors on April 6, saying it w= as=20 $9 billion in debt.=20 Dramatic drop in cost of electricity=20 LOWER BILLS: Cheaper fuel, milder weather credited=20 David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL: .DTL=20 California electricity prices have plunged unexpectedly to their lowest lev= el=20 in more than a year, partly as the result of a simultaneous drop in prices= =20 for natural gas, which fuels most power plants.=20 Make no mistake: Gas and electricity prices could surge upward again in=20 months ahead.=20 But for the first time since California's energy markets went haywire last= =20 summer, industry experts are beginning to ask whether the state finally may= =20 have turned a corner in its battle with runaway power costs.=20 ""California is not yet out of the woods,"" said Kelley Doolan, who tracks=20 natural gas prices for energy market researcher Platts. ""But this is a very= =20 significant decrease in costs.""=20 Along with lower gas prices, the decline in electricity costs was attribute= d=20 by state and industry officials to milder weather, which reduces demand for= =20 power. They also credited recent conservation efforts by consumers and=20 better-than-expected runoff at dams for hydroelectric plants.=20 Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, an=20 energy-industry association, said these factors came together to produce th= e=20 lowest wholesale electricity prices since April 2000.=20 Electricity on the spot market could have been purchased yesterday for as= =20 little as $50 per megawatt hour, he noted, compared with more than $500=20 earlier this year.=20 ""If the weather stays this way, we could have reasonable prices all summer,= ""=20 Ackerman said. ""We may also have fewer blackouts.""=20 It is tempting for Californians to be suspicious of virtually any swing in= =20 energy prices. If power companies manipulated prices on the way up, as=20 critics have alleged, might they not be up to some trick as prices head in= =20 the opposite direction?=20 Nettie Hoge, executive director of The Utility Reform Network in San=20 Francisco, speculated that generators are allowing electricity prices to fa= ll=20 so they can discourage federal regulators from taking a more active role in= =20 the dysfunctional California market.=20 ""They're trying to take the heat off,"" she said.=20 Others cautioned that the lower prices may be nothing more than a statistic= al=20 blip.=20 ""This was just one month's decline,"" said Michael Shames, executive directo= r=20 of the Utility Consumers' Action Network in San Diego. ""We really have to s= ee=20 how this plays out in the future.""=20 Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis, said the governor was very= =20 encouraged by the lower energy prices. Davis announced Sunday that=20 California's power use was down 11 percent last month from a year before.= =20 ""We're not there yet,"" Maviglio said of whether an end to the state's power= =20 woes is in sight. ""But the trend is pointing in the right direction.""=20 WHITE ELEPHANT Yet this sudden drop in energy prices does have a dark side: California cou= ld=20 end up with a huge white elephant after spending about $40 billion in publi= c=20 funds on long-term power contracts.=20 The logic behind the contracts, which are at an average price of $69 per=20 megawatt hour over 10 years, is that the state expected to pay below-market= =20 rates for electricity for a number of years before prices came down and=20 California found itself paying above-market rates.=20 If current trends continue, though, California will find itself paying=20 consistently above-market rates much sooner than expected, making the long-= =20 term contracts a sweet deal for the same power companies that profited so= =20 handsomely during the state's darkest hours.=20 ""The contracts look really ugly right now,"" said Shames at the Utility=20 Consumers' Action Network. ""They may be way overpriced.""=20 Maviglio, the governor's spokesman, said it is too early to conclude that t= he=20 state did poorly negotiating dozens of long-term power contracts.=20 ""No one has a crystal ball on this,"" he said.=20 CUSTOMERS' BILLS TO DROP In any case, Pacific Gas and Electric Co. said yesterday that customers'=20 average gas bills will drop 26 percent this month to $26 and should stay ne= ar=20 that level all summer.=20 Platts, which monitors average monthly spot prices, found that the wholesal= e=20 price of gas at the California-Oregon border has tumbled nearly 42 percent= =20 since the beginning of May -- from $9.98 per million British thermal units = to=20 $5.81.=20 The wholesale gas price at the California-Arizona border fell 45 percent,= =20 from $11.91 to $6.50. This compares with a 25 percent monthly decline in=20 average natural gas prices nationwide.=20 However, California gas prices are still about 50 percent higher than they= =20 were a year ago, whereas national prices are now below year-ago levels for= =20 the first time since last spring.=20 While cooler weather nationwide helped push gas prices down overall, Doolan= =20 attributed the especially steep drop in California to a commensurate surge = in=20 prices last month related to fears of a long, hot summer of rolling=20 blackouts.=20 ""You had state officials all but promising rolling blackouts this summer,"" = he=20 said. ""That created enormous demand for electricity generation.=20 ""What has changed is that we've had weeks of mild weather,"" Doolan observed= .=20 ""The electricity generators have not come out of the woodwork buying up all= =20 the gas.""=20 This allowed utilities like PG&E to beef up gas inventories, which eased=20 demand and resulted in substantially lower prices, he said.=20 'BACK ON TRACK'=20 ""We're back on track to be completely full for winter,"" said Staci Homrig, = a=20 PG&E spokeswoman. ""That's a very good thing.""=20 Gas prices historically dip in the spring and summer and then rise again in= =20 the winter. PG&E is forecasting that customers' average gas bills could ris= e=20 to as high as $75 in December if current trends continue.=20 However, the precipitous drop in gas prices in recent weeks suggests that= =20 California's unusually high costs at last may be abating.=20 Individual power companies so far are reluctant to speculate on whether the= =20 drop in gas prices will have a lasting effect on electricity costs.=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 San Jose council gives green light to generating plant=20 VOTE REVERSAL: Officials pressured to OK project=20 Marshall Wilson, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL: .DTL=20 In a clear sign that the political landscape has shifted because of the=20 state's power crisis, the San Jose City Council gave a green light yesterda= y=20 for construction of a generating plant it had unanimously opposed in=20 November.=20 Yesterday's 10-to-1 vote came after months of mounting pressure for the cit= y=20 to reverse course and approve the controversial 600-megawatt Calpine plant = at=20 Coyote Valley.=20 That pressure -- increased by the occasional rolling blackout -- has come= =20 from nearly every corner of the state, from elected officials to high-tech= =20 businesses and labor unions worried the power crisis will drain away jobs,= =20 ruin the economy and lead to voter backlash over skyrocketing energy bills.= =20 Even the local branch of the NAACP and environmentalists pushed the council= =20 to approve the Calpine proposal -- despite overwhelming opposition from the= =20 plant's neighbors.=20 Council members did not hide their disdain yesterday for being forced to=20 reconsider their opposition to the so-called Metcalf Energy Center.=20 ""I'm holding my nose to vote for this thing,"" said Councilwoman Linda=20 LeZotte.=20 ""I'm just as unhappy as everybody else,"" Vice Mayor George Shirakawa said. = ""I=20 feel like no matter what happens, we can't win.""=20 GOVERNOR OFFERED HIS SUPPORT After the council's solid opposition in November, Calpine appealed to the= =20 California Energy Commission, which has the final say. The controversial=20 plant then received a huge boost in April when Gov. Gray Davis threw his=20 support behind it.=20 San Jose officials conceded yesterday that the energy commission was likely= =20 to override their opposition and grant approval within a few weeks. They sa= id=20 the commission's likely approval was stripping them of their power to decid= e=20 local land-use issues.=20 ""What I think has happened . . . is the governor and the Legislature at the= =20 state level have taken this out of our hands,"" said Councilwoman Pat Dando.= =20 ""I don't think there's any chance at all the California Energy Commission i= s=20 going to turn down the Metcalf Energy Center,"" Councilman Chuck Reed said.= =20 CONSTRUCTION MAY BEGIN SOON If given the go-ahead by the state, Calpine could begin construction as ear= ly=20 as next month. The natural-gas fired plant would generate electricity by=20 mid-2003, company spokesman Kenneth Arbeu said.=20 At the urging of Mayor Ron Gonzales, the council yesterday approved a new= =20 ""cooperation agreement"" with Calpine. The vote, with Councilman Forrest=20 Williams casting the lone nay, is preliminary while a final vote that is=20 scheduled for June 26.=20 Gonzales argued that the agreement did not amount to a flip-flop because it= =20 differs from what Calpine proposed in November.=20 The agreement approved by the council calls for increased monitoring of air= =20 pollution, the use of treated wastewater to cool the plant, which will redu= ce=20 discharges into San Francisco Bay, and a $6.5 million ""community benefits""= =20 package, with the bulk going toward parkland acquisition, Gonzales said.=20 ""This council has not changed its decision,"" he said. ""What we've done is= =20 change the facility.""=20 Critics, incensed that the city was buckling to outside pressure, vowed to= =20 change the council at the next election.=20 CONCERNS OVER HEALTH RISKS They raised concerns that boiled wastewater steam wafting over their homes= =20 from Calpine's plant could pose health risks. Jona Denz-Hamilton said more= =20 controls are needed to ensure the safety of neighbors like herself and her= =20 family and argued that new, cleaner-burning technologies should be installe= d=20 at the plant.=20 ""It's too great of a risk,"" she said.=20 Other critics said the state's energy woes will be solved and largely=20 forgotten by the time the plant opens in two years, while the Santa Teresa= =20 neighborhood will be stuck with pollution for decades.=20 Approval seemed a given at the start of the more than three-hour hearing.= =20 Much of the afternoon's debate focused around plans to extend a pipeline fo= r=20 treated wastewater to the new plant.=20 Critics said Calpine was receiving a sweet deal by paying only $10 million = of=20 the $50 million cost of extending the pipeline. Several council members ask= ed=20 for a more detailed report into the financing plan before the final vote is= =20 taken June 26.=20 Chronicle staff writer Bill Workman contributed to this report.=20 E-mail Marshall Wilson at ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 Developments in California's energy crisis=20 Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate1 053EDT0177.DTL=20 (06-06) 07:53 PDT (AP) --=20 Developments in California's energy crisis:=20 WEDNESDAY: * No power alerts Wednesday as reserves stay above 7 percent.=20 TUESDAY: * Gov. Gray Davis' administration says the state's electricity costs are=20 dropping substantially, even as it asks state legislators for another=20 half-billion dollars for power purchases. That brings to $8.2 billion the= =20 amount the state is paying for electricity on behalf of three financially= =20 strapped utilities.=20 Spokesman Steve Maviglio says the cost to the state treasury has dropped in= =20 the last few weeks well below the $50 million dollars the state had been=20 paying on a typical day. He credits cooler weather, conservation, more powe= r=20 plants online and more long-term contracts with helping drive down the cost= .=20 * A state Senate committee agrees to issue subpoenas to eight out-of-state= =20 electricity generators demanding they hand over documents on bidding, prici= ng=20 and other aspects of power sales in the state. The subpoenas would help a= =20 special Senate committee's investigation into whether the companies are=20 illegally profiteering from California's power crisis. The committee's=20 chairman says he expects the companies to resist, setting the stage for a= =20 court battle.=20 * Oil giant Chevron threatens to cut gasoline production in California unle= ss=20 it is exempted from rolling blackouts. The San Francisco Chronicle says it= =20 has a copy of a letter sent Friday from Chevron chairman David O'Reilly to= =20 Davis. In the letter, O'Reilly says the company will scale back gasoline=20 production at its Richmond and El Segundo plants, operating those refinerie= s=20 only with power produced by generators at the sites.=20 * New U.S. Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., supports Federal=20 Energy Regulatory Commission price caps. ""FERC must meet its obligation und= er=20 current law to ensure 'just and reasonable' prices for wholesale electricit= y=20 in the state of California. FERC has failed to meet this responsibility...,= ""=20 Daschle says in a letter to Davis. ""Unless FERC acts soon, Senator (Dianne)= =20 Feinstein's legislation should be taken up and passed to direct FERC to tak= e=20 action. I will support all necessary efforts to meet that goal.""=20 * House Subcommittee on Energy Policy, Natural Resources and Regulatory=20 Affairs Chairman Doug Ose, R-Sacramento, cites Electric Utility Week figure= s=20 that FERC's limited price caps helped cut California's power rates from $30= 0=20 to $108.47 per megawatt hour within an hour after taking effect last week.= =20 While he says more information is needed, Ose uses the figures to tout his= =20 pending bill to impose the price caps around the clock and to all Western= =20 states.=20 * Pacific Gas & Electric Co. asks U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali to= =20 stop the manager of the state's power grid from buying electricity for=20 utility or charging it for any electricity bought after the utility filed f= or=20 bankruptcy on April 6. Separately, the utility's creditors support its=20 request to the bankruptcy court to pay out $17.5 million in bonuses to the= =20 management team that guided the utility into bankruptcy.=20 * California Department of Water Resources reveals it is negotiating with= =20 municipal utilities to buy their surplus power. Department spokesman Oscar= =20 Hidalgo says talks began last week but no agreements are imminent.=20 * State lawmakers criticize a $3 million lobbying campaign by Southern=20 California Edison. The utility is telephoning shareholders to describe the= =20 dire consequences if the utility goes bankrupt. The call is then transferre= d=20 to the state Capitol so shareholders can implore lawmakers to support a=20 controversial plan to help the utility. Legislators and their staffers say= =20 the shareholders often are confused and scared their investments will be=20 degraded or wiped out.=20 * State Treasurer Phil Angelides joins an advocacy group for the poor in=20 urging the state's huge pension funds to use their economic power to levera= ge=20 power companies. The Pacific Institute for Community Organization says the= =20 two pension funds own at least $1.2 billion in stocks and bonds in most of= =20 the firms that sell electricity to California.=20 * The Assembly, by a 69-0 vote, approves a bill to spend $10 million on=20 environmental studies needed before Path 15, the inadequate transmission-li= ne=20 group between Northern and Southern California, can be expanded. The bill= =20 moves to the Senate.=20 * Pacific Gas and Electric announces a decrease in natural gas prices, down= =20 38 percent from May's rates and 66 percent lower than January's rates. The= =20 decline will bring the average residential gas bill to $26 when it goes int= o=20 effect June 7. Market analysts predict the rates will remain stable until= =20 December when demand is expected to increase with winter heating loads.=20 * No power alerts Tuesday as electricity reserves stay above 7 percent.=20 * Shares of Edison International closed at $10.05, down 53 cents. PG&E Corp= .=20 closed at $11.25, down 15 cents. Sempra Energy, the parent company of San= =20 Diego Gas & Electric, closes at $26.91, down 43 cents.=20 WHAT'S NEXT: * Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra, the parent compa= ny=20 of San Diego Gas and Electric Co., to buy the utility's transmission lines.= =20 THE PROBLEM: High demand, high wholesale energy costs, transmission glitches and a tight= =20 supply worsened by scarce hydroelectric power in the Northwest and=20 maintenance at aging California power plants are all factors in California'= s=20 electricity crisis.=20 Edison and PG&E say they've lost nearly $14 billion since June to high=20 wholesale prices the state's electricity deregulation law bars them from=20 passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs= =20 from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection= =20 April 6.=20 Electricity and natural gas suppliers, scared off by the two companies' poo= r=20 credit ratings, are refusing to sell to them, leading the state in January = to=20 start buying power for the utilities' nearly 9 million residential and=20 business customers. The state is also buying power for a third investor-own= ed=20 utility, San Diego Gas & Electric, which is in better financial shape than= =20 much larger Edison and PG&E but also struggling with high wholesale power= =20 costs.=20 The Public Utilities Commission has approved average rate increases of 37= =20 percent for the heaviest residential customers and 38 percent for commercia= l=20 customers, and hikes of up to 49 percent for industrial customers and 15=20 percent or 20 percent for agricultural customers to help finance the state'= s=20 multibillion-dollar power buys.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 California conserves=20 Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /06/E D86597.DTL=20 WHEN RAIN fails to fall from the sky, Californians know why there is a=20 drought. But when rolling blackouts suddenly appeared in the dead of winter= ,=20 many of us wondered who was responsible for and who has profited from what= =20 now seems like an artificially created power shortage in the state.=20 Our skepticism proved to be right. Windfall profits were reaped by=20 electricity generators while natural gas importers extracted prices far abo= ve=20 the national average.=20 Timid federal overseers exact only wrist-slap penalties on the offending=20 energy firms. The White House scoffs at temporary controls for a=20 malfunctioning market. California's state government has ended up as the bi= ll=20 payer for the sickly utilities, forking over $8 billion to generators. This= =20 number may hit $40 billion by year-end.=20 It's an infuriating tangle. All the more remarkable, then, that skeptical= =20 Californians have managed, within two months, to reduce their use of=20 electricity by 11 percent. The public's response to the governor's appeal f= or=20 energy conservation has exceeded expectations. Although many businesses hav= e=20 suffered enormous losses, ordinary people have made relatively painless=20 sacrifices. People turned off their lights, purchased energy-efficient=20 lightbulbs, used air conditioning less and shut off their computers when no= t=20 in use.=20 Despite this remarkable civic compliance, we still face an unconscionable= =20 lack of leadership. President Bush seems perfectly willing to allow Texas= =20 power companies to pummel the once-powerful California economy. He repeats = a=20 mantra about creating more supply -- which California is doing with 15 powe= r=20 plants under construction -- while ignoring the outsized sums paid to a=20 handful of energy generators.=20 At the same time, Gov. Gray Davis, who has given new meaning to the word=20 dithering, has failed to make the tough and transparent decisions. He delay= ed=20 an inevitable rise in power rates. Davis also dragged his feet in openly=20 announcing new power contracts that commit California to billions in spendi= ng=20 over the next decade.=20 To Davis' credit, he has urged California to conserve by laying out an $800= =20 million plan to cut power use and invest in energy-saving programs. The=20 message is getting out as higher rates take effect this month.=20 Despite a woefully unbalanced market and shortsighted leadership, the peopl= e=20 of California have demonstrated that if there is a will, there is a way.=20 Now it is time for our leaders to follow the wisdom of their constituents.= =20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 20=20 L.A. power customers awash in cheap energy=20 John Wildermuth, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /06/M N133438.DTL=20 Los Angeles -- These are flush times for the city's Department of Water and= =20 Power and the energy executives are loving every minute of it.=20 As are their customers.=20 Private power companies throughout California have been raising rates and= =20 warning customers about a long, hot summer filled with blackouts, but the= =20 city- owned DWP has been keeping prices stable and the lights on for 1.2=20 million Los Angeles customers.=20 ""Our customers are being really nice to us,"" said Angelina Galiteva, the=20 utility's strategic planning director. ""They love the DWP.""=20 Although Gov. Gray Davis' administration announced that the state had reduc= ed=20 its energy consumption 11 percent from a year ago, those in Los Angeles had= =20 cut back less than half that -- and polls show they view the energy situati= on=20 less seriously than other Californians.=20 Public utilities such as Los Angeles water and power have seen their revenu= es=20 increase during the energy crunch because they can sell their excess power = at=20 higher prices than ever before in a market tilted toward sellers.=20 The rest of the state doesn't always feel that same warm glow. Davis has=20 accused the DWP and other California public utilities of putting exorbitant= =20 price tags on the excess electricity they sell to the rest of the energy-= =20 starved state.=20 It's a charge Los Angeles utility executives deny, arguing that their exces= s=20 power is sold at cost plus 15 percent, which they say is a fair return for= =20 their customers.=20 ""Without our support, a million more homes (elsewhere in California) would= =20 have suffered rolling blackouts, which is a powerful message,"" Galiteva sai= d.=20 It wasn't supposed to be this way. When the power industry was deregulated = in=20 the late '90s, energy giants like Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern= =20 California Edison were expected to be the big winners. Now, PG&E is in=20 bankruptcy and Edison is a short step away.=20 ""When deregulation came, the experts said that the investor-owned utilities= =20 would become lean, mean machines that would be better able to operate in th= e=20 new environment,"" Galiteva said. ""But now public power has shown it can ser= ve=20 customers more efficiently at lower rates.""=20 While much of the state worries about electrical supply, Los Angeles=20 residents have been saved many of those concerns.=20 In a survey done last month by the Public Policy Institute of California, 4= 8=20 percent of the people in the Bay Area thought that electricity cost and=20 availability were the most important issues facing the state. In Los Angele= s,=20 however, only 33 percent put the energy crunch on top. When questioned abou= t=20 the size of the power problem and the effect it would have on the state's= =20 economy, Los Angeles residents were consistently less concerned than people= =20 elsewhere in California.=20 People in Los Angeles have been ""somewhat isolated"" from the energy crisis,= =20 concluded Mark Baldassare, who conducted the survey.=20 That doesn't mean the state's energy problems haven't had an effect. The DW= P=20 has seen a 3 percent to 5 percent reduction in some uses, which officials= =20 have dubbed ""sympathy conservation."" The utility also is offering its bigge= st=20 customers financial incentives to cut back on their power use.=20 ""Our average annual load growth is about 80 megawatts,"" Galiteva said. ""By= =20 this summer, we expect to have saved 40 megawatts through conservation. By= =20 December, we expect 60 megawatts in savings.""=20 The utility also is making a major attempt to create a conservation ethic= =20 among its customers. DWP's comfortable situation has made it possible to=20 offer them the carrot without the need to show them the stick.=20 ""Conservation no longer means doing without,"" Galiteva said. ""Beer can be= =20 just as cold with a superefficient refrigerator. Rooms can be just as brigh= t=20 with superefficient light bulbs.""=20 A ""Green Power"" program also is promoting the use of renewable energy=20 resources such as solar, wind and hydroelectric power. About 75,000 custome= rs=20 are paying an extra $3 per month to increase DWP's use of renewable power= =20 sources.=20 ""We're trying to give our customers a choice and a voice in determining the= =20 mix of power they use,"" Galiteva said. ""They know they can do (conservation= )=20 now or see it being mandated later.""=20 Los Angeles power officials -- and their customers -- know the DWP isn't=20 always going to continue as an island of tranquility in a sea of energy=20 turmoil. The utility's aging gas-fired plants have been affected by the=20 rising price of natural gas. Demand for energy continues to rise. In a deba= te=20 last month, both candidates for mayor of Los Angeles agreed that increases = in=20 local power bills are inevitable.=20 But the DWP has been supplying power to Los Angeles since 1916, and its=20 executives believe that the state's deregulation disaster has shown the=20 advantages of the city-owned utility.=20 ""It's nice to be the lean, mean, green efficient machine that no one ever= =20 expected us to become,"" Galiteva said.=20 E-mail John Wildermuth at ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 13=20 PG&E doesn't want to pay for energy to avert blackouts=20 DAVID KRAVETS, Associated Press Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 306EDT0102.DTL=20 (06-06) 00:06 PDT SAN FRANCISCO (AP) --=20 Pacific Gas & Electric Co. has told a bankruptcy judge it should not have t= o=20 pay for what could amount to billions of dollars in spot-market energy cost= s=20 to avert blackouts.=20 The company's position was one of two developments that emerged Tuesday as= =20 the bankrupt utility tries to cope with fallout from California's power=20 crisis. The other development saw a group of creditors that PG&E owes=20 billions endorse $17.5 million in bonuses for top managers at the utility.= =20 San Francisco-based PG&E filed for bankruptcy protection in April after=20 racking up an $8.9 billion debt which under state law it could not recoup= =20 from customers.=20 Tuesday's court dispute centered on who pays for energy bought at the last= =20 minute to avoid blackouts.=20 PG&E said an April federal regulatory decision requires that electricity ca= n=20 only be sold to those with the ability to pay electricity generators. The= =20 state is the only player with such ability, said PG&E attorney Jerome Faulk= ,=20 who argued that the utility shouldn't have to pay the $330 million in month= ly=20 spot-market energy bills.=20 Judge Dennis Montali said he may craft such an order. But he said the order= =20 would not preclude the state from suing PG&E to recover the cost.=20 In a separate but related development, a committee charged with devising a= =20 payment plan for those creditors owed billions by PG&E said it will sign of= f=20 on the utility's plan to pay $17.5 million in bonuses to PG&E's management= =20 team.=20 Attorney Allan Marks, who represents the committee, said such payments are= =20 normal during large bankruptcy cases. Under the agreement, which Montali wi= ll=20 consider at a June 18 hearing, the company must quickly produce a debt=20 payment plan that passes judicial muster.=20 The utility said it needs the bonuses for a ""management retention program.""= =20 Marks agreed. While the $17.5 million leaves less for creditors, without a= =20 financial incentive PG&E's key top brass may not be willing to cooperate wi= th=20 a payment plan, Marks said.=20 ""The main goal for the creditors' support here is to move the bankruptcy as= =20 quickly and smoothly as possible,"" Marks said.=20 The Utility Reform Network, a consumer watchdog group, says PG&E is simply= =20 rewarding managers of a failed business effort.=20 ""They're just showering money on the same people who got them in this mess,= ""=20 said TURN's Mike Florio.=20 The proposed bonuses would come on top of $50 million in bonuses and raises= =20 PG&E awarded just before the April 6 bankruptcy filing.=20 The case is In Re Pacific Gas & Electric Co., 01-30923 DM.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 Metcalf plant gets preliminary approval=20 Posted at 12:21 a.m. PDT Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 BY MIKE ZAPLER=20 Mercury News=20 As the San Jose City Council approached its 10-1 vote Tuesday to give an=20 initial nod to Calpine's big power plant in South San Jose, Councilwoman=20 Linda LeZotte perhaps captured the body's mood best.=20 ``I'm holding my nose to vote for this thing,'' she said. ``Without faultin= g=20 the mayor or his staff, quite frankly I think this deal stinks.''=20 Caught in what some members called a bind beyond their control, the council= =20 gave preliminary approval to an agreement negotiated by Mayor Ron Gonzales= =20 and Calpine on the company's proposed 600-megawatt Metcalf Energy Center.= =20 Councilman Forrest Williams, who represents the Santa Teresa neighborhood= =20 near the site, cast the lone vote against the deal.=20 The agreement is scheduled to come back before the council for a final vote= =20 on June 26, but Tuesday's vote effectively shifts the battle to the courts,= =20 where residents are expected to lodge a lawsuit in one final attempt to blo= ck=20 the plant.=20 Still, Councilwoman Pat Dando and some of her colleagues raised questions= =20 about the deal they said they want answered before the final vote. Their=20 issues could be incorporated into the final deal.=20 Many of the concerns focused on a $50 million recycled water pipeline=20 Gonzales agreed to have the city build to accommodate the project, $10=20 million of which would be reimbursed by Calpine over 30 years.=20 Pipeline possibility=20 Dando said that a private company, Great Oaks Water, may be willing to buil= d=20 the pipeline extension itself, saving the city the $50 million expense.=20 Officials at Great Oaks were unavailable Tuesday.=20 Council members peppered staff with other questions. Many were alarmed by= =20 claims of the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, which said that using treate= d=20 sewage water to cool the power plant could allow dangerous chemicals to see= p=20 into drinking water aquifers. An environmental services director said the= =20 recycled water meets federal specifications, but that there is no protocol= =20 for testing other chemicals not included in those standards.=20 Councilman Ken Yeager asked why Calpine should be allowed to spread a $3.9= =20 million water connection fee over 10 years -- an arrangement that would=20 mandate an amendment to city law.=20 LeZotte, meanwhile, said she wants to hold Calpine accountable to install= =20 ammonia-free technology at the plant. Ammonia is highly hazardous, and=20 residents say the use of the chemical to clean the plant is among their chi= ef=20 concerns.=20 The agreement requires the company to install technology to reduce or=20 eliminate the use ammonia when it becomes ``technologically and economicall= y=20 feasible.'' LeZotte said she wants a clear definition of ``feasible''=20 included in the deal.=20 Tuesday's vote marked a stark departure from the council's November vote to= =20 deny Metcalf. At the time, council members said a power plant was=20 inappropriate for the area, and many members said Tuesday that they still= =20 believe that.=20 Bowing to pressure=20 But with Gov. Gray Davis endorsing Metcalf in April and the California Ener= gy=20 Commission widely expected to override the city's denial this month, counci= l=20 members said they had no choice but to cut the best deal it could and allow= =20 the project to proceed.=20 That explanation, however, didn't sit well with residents of the Santa Tere= sa=20 neighborhood adjacent to the Metcalf site, one of whom accused Gonzales and= =20 the council of ``switching sides when the opposing team gets too close to t= he=20 goal line.''=20 Contact Mike Zapler at mzapler@sjmercury.com or at (408) 275-0140.=20 Feds probe AES, Williams=20 Antitrust investigation looks into allegations of manipulated energy prices= =20 through reduced power-plant construction.=20 June 6, 2001=20 By JAMES ROWLEY Bloomberg News=20 WASHINGTON - The U.S. Justice Department opened an antitrust investigation= =20 into California's electricity shortage by probing allegations that AES Corp= .=20 and Williams Energy Services Co. are limiting power-plant expansion to driv= e=20 up prices.=20 AES Corp., the biggest U.S. power-plant developer, disclosed the=20 investigation in a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.= =20 The Justice Department is looking into a supply-and-marketing agreement=20 between AES' California power-plant unit and a Williams unit that supplies= =20 natural gas.=20 Williams, owner of the second-largest U.S. natural-gas pipeline system, als= o=20 markets the power produced by AES' three electricity plants in the state.= =20 The department alleges the agreement limits expansion of generating capacit= y=20 near some AES plants.=20 AES said it was cooperating with the Justice Department investigation, whic= h=20 began last month, into possible violations of Section 1 of the Sherman=20 Antitrust Act.=20 That provision outlaws any restraint of trade that stifles competition.=20 A shortage of generating capacity in California has led to soaring wholesal= e=20 prices and rolling blackouts and prompted Pacific Gas & Electric, the state= 's=20 largest utility, to seek bankruptcy protection in April.=20 Aaron Thomas, a spokesman for AES, based in Arlington, Va., said the U.S.= =20 investigation started ""no more than a couple of weeks ago.""=20 Williams spokeswoman Paula Hall-Collins said the Tulsa, Okla.-based company= =20 is cooperating.=20 Gina Talamona, Justice Department spokeswoman, said the agency had no=20 immediate comment.=20 The investigation was opened several weeks after the Federal Energy=20 Regulatory Commission investigated AES plants in Long Beach and Huntington= =20 Beach, designated ""must run"" under the Federal Power Act, did not produce= =20 electricity for 10 days in April and May 2000. Williams agreed to pay the= =20 operator of California's electric grid $8 million to settle allegations tha= t=20 it overcharged for power.=20 FERC charged in March that the companies had a financial incentive to keep= =20 the units out of service to force the California Independent System Operato= r=20 to buy power from AES' plant in Redondo Beach at prices close to the=20 FERC-imposed cap of $750 per megawatt-hour.=20 AES said it was complying with a Justice Department demand for documents=20 about the agreement between its AES Southland LLC unit and Williams Energy= =20 Services Co. AES Southland, which operates the three power plants, was also= =20 asked to respond to interrogatories, the company said.=20 The Williams unit supplies the natural gas to fuel the AES plants and marke= ts=20 the power they produce.=20 AES and Williams jointly produce and sell about 4,000 megawatts in Californ= ia=20 -- 6 to 8 percent of the state's power -- enough electricity to light about= 3=20 million typical California homes.=20 AES shares dropped $2.05, to $42.54. Williams Cos. shares dropped $1, to=20 $38.20. Calpine Begins Construction of Peaking Energy Center in Gilroy, Calif.=20 June 6, 2001=20 SAN JOSE, Calif., June 5 /PRNewswire/ via NewsEdge Corporation -=20 Calpine Corporation (NYSE: CPN), the San Jose, Calif.-based independent pow= er=20 company, today announced that initial construction of 135 megawatts (mw) of= =20 peaking generation capacity will begin during this week adjacent to its=20 existing Gilroy Power Plant in Gilroy, Calif. Through an Application for=20 Certification (AFC) filed with the California Energy Commission (CEC) on=20 April 25, 2001, Calpine proposed to add three 45-mw simple-cycle gas turbin= e=20 peaking units in the first of a two-phase process. The California Energy=20 Commission approved the project on May 21, 2001.=20 ""Because the required natural gas, water and transmission infrastructure=20 exists at our Gilroy plant, it is an ideal site for the addition of peaking= =20 generation, allowing for rapid installation of needed capacity. The first= =20 three units are expected to begin generating electricity this September,""= =20 commented Bryan Bertacchi, Calpine Vice President - Western Region.=20 Upon completion the two-phase build out, the Gilroy Energy Center will be a= =20 270-mw, natural gas-fired, simple-cycle peaking generation facility located= =20 on approximately 9.5 acres at 1400 Pacheco Pass Highway in Gilroy. Commerci= al=20 operation of Phase One is scheduled for September 2001. An additional three= =20 45-mw gas turbine generators will be installed in Phase Two with full=20 build-out estimated for May 2002. Phase Two requires the filing of an=20 additional application with the CEC and is subject to a four-month review= =20 process.=20 Initial construction will begin this week with site and civil engineering= =20 activities occurring for approximately six weeks at which time the site wil= l=20 be cleared and leveled. Foundation work and the installation of generation= =20 equipment will follow shortly thereafter, and commissioning and testing wil= l=20 take place for a two to three week period prior to commercial operation in= =20 September 2001.=20 The Gilroy Energy Center web site has been created to host all information= =20 and updates related to this project. For additional information, please vis= it=20 www.gilroypower.com.=20 Calpine Corporation, based in San Jose, Calif., is dedicated to providing= =20 customers with reliable and competitively priced electricity. Calpine is=20 focused on clean, efficient, natural gas-fired generation and is the world'= s=20 largest producer of renewable geothermal energy. Calpine has launched the= =20 largest power development program in North America. To date, the company ha= s=20 approximately 32,200 megawatts of base load capacity and 7,200 megawatts of= =20 peaking capacity in operation, under construction, pending acquisitions and= =20 in announced development in 29 states and Canada. The company was founded i= n=20 1984 and is publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol= =20 CPN. For more information about Calpine, visit its Website at=20 www.calpine.com.=20 This news release discusses certain matters that may be considered=20 ""forward-looking"" statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the=20 Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities=20 Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, including statements regarding the intent= ,=20 belief or current expectations of Calpine Corporation (""the Company"") and i= ts=20 management. Prospective investors are cautioned that any such forward-looki= ng=20 statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve a number of= =20 risks and uncertainties that could materially affect actual results such as= ,=20 but not limited to, (i) changes in government regulations, including pendin= g=20 changes in California, and anticipated deregulation of the electric energy= =20 industry, (ii) commercial operations of new plants that may be delayed or= =20 prevented because of various development and construction risks, such as a= =20 failure to obtain financing and the necessary permits to operate or the=20 failure of third-party contractors to perform their contractual obligations= ,=20 (iii) cost estimates are preliminary and actual cost may be higher than=20 estimated, (iv) the assurance that the Company will develop additional=20 plants, (v) a competitor's development of a lower-cost generating gas-fired= =20 power plant, and (vi) the risks associated with marketing and selling power= =20 from power plants in the newly competitive energy market. Prospective=20 investors are also cautioned that the California energy environment remains= =20 uncertain. The Company's management is working closely with a number of=20 parties to resolve the current uncertainty, while protecting the Company's= =20 interests. Management believes that a final resolution will not have a=20 material adverse impact on the Company. Prospective investors are also=20 referred to the other risks identified from time to time in the Company's= =20 reports and registration statements filed with the Securities and Exchange= =20 Commission.=20 MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT - Click Here=20 SOURCE Calpine Corporation=20 CONTACT: media, Lisa Poelle, ext. 1285, or investors, Rick Barraza, ext.=20 1125, both of Calpine Corporation, 408-995-5115=20 Web site: http://www.gilroypower.com=20 Web site: http://www.calpine.com (CPN)=20 Reliant Urges FERC to Drop or Amend California Price Caps to Avoid Addition= al=20 Shortages and More Blackouts=20 June 6, 2001=20 HOUSTON, June 5 /PRNewswire/ via NewsEdge Corporation -=20 Reliant Energy (NYSE: REI) filed an emergency motion with the Federal Energ= y=20 Regulatory Commission (FERC) on Monday urging the agency to drop the=20 California price caps first applied May 29, or at a minimum, amend them to= =20 reflect the true costs they are attempting to control. The current price=20 caps, which send inaccurate market signals, are actually decreasing supply= =20 and increasing demand thus worsening an already dire situation.=20 ""FERC has been publicly dedicated to an open market from the beginning of t= he=20 California power crisis. We encourage FERC to reexamine these price caps an= d=20 continue that dedication,"" said Joe Bob Perkins, president and chief=20 operating officer, Reliant Energy Wholesale Group. ""Reliant is committed to= =20 helping keep the lights on in California this summer and wants to ensure th= at=20 if caps must remain part of the picture, they actually help increase supply= =20 and fix the problem.""=20 Although the price caps were first imposed less than a week ago, they have= =20 already begun to damage the market by decreasing supply. The price caps are= =20 creating a myriad of problems:=20 -- Creates Misleading Signals - The price cap methodology is misleading=20 the public on the actual cost of power. Reported ""dispatch"" costs in=20 Southern California during emergencies is far below what the actual=20 financial settlements will be under the FERC's final market mitigation=20 order. This confusion results from the ""proxy"" price used for=20 dispatch utilizing an extremely distorted blended fuel cost index.=20 This index averages gas costs in northern and southern parts of the=20 state, an impossibility in the actual market. This authorizes the=20 California Independent System Operator (ISO) to require that=20 generators dispatch power at reported market clearing prices well=20 below actual cost when back-up generation capacity begins to dip below=20 7.5 percent.=20 -- Depletes Power from Peaking Plants - The price caps distort dispatch=20 signals on peaking plants, which in some cases may be run only a few=20 days of the year because of emission regulations. The current FERC=20 price controls encourage the ISO to purchase power from emergency=20 peaking plants before it is really needed, even in the absence of a=20 stage three emergency. This depletes supplies that will, by law, run=20 out when blackout season intensifies later this summer. This power=20 from peaking units should only be purchased when blackouts are=20 imminent -- not in stage one or two emergencies.=20 -- Eliminates Price Signals for Retail Customers - Price caps remove=20 price signals for retail customers. Customers, particularly=20 industrial companies, which should be encouraged to curtail during=20 shortages, are not encouraged to conserve power when dispatched price=20 caps keep prices below the actual cost to produce electricity.=20 -- Discourages Supply from Out-of-State - Suppliers outside of=20 California, who are under no legal obligation to dispatch power during=20 an emergency in the state, are not encouraged to increase available=20 production when reported market clearing prices are below their cost=20 to produce. During times of emergencies, utilities across the Western=20 region are not likely to take on additional risks and costs if they=20 don't believe they will be fully compensated - a situation the current=20 price caps create.=20 MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT - Click Here=20 SOURCE Reliant Energy=20 CONTACT: Maxine Enciso of Ketchum Public Relations, Los Angeles,=20 310-444-1303, for Reliant Energy; or media, Richard Wheatley of Reliant=20 Energy, 713-207-5881=20 Photo: NewsCom: AP=20 Archive: http://photoarchive.ap.org PRN Photo Desk, 888-776-6555 or=20 212-782-2840=20 Company News On-Call: or fax,=20 800-758-5804, ext. 419090=20 Web site: http://www.reliantenergy.com (REI)=20 By Kathleen McFall kmcfall@ftenergy.com President George W. Bush's energy package encourages the use of biomass fue= ls=20 for both transportation purposes and electricity generation. ""They can=20 provide a reliable source of energy at a stable price, and they can also=20 generate income for farmers, landowners and others who harness them,"" his= =20 administration's report said.=20 Despite this warm and fuzzy language, however, the administration offered n= o=20 tangible funding for the fledgling biofuels industry=01*other than an exten= sion=20 of an existing ethanol tax credit that was not due to expire until 2007=01*= a=20 significant disappointment, and surprise, to advocates of renewable=20 transportation fuels. The report did recommend expanding tax credits for biomass energy projects = to=20 include forest-related and agriculture fuel sources and threw its weighty= =20 support at a new credit for electricity produced from biomass co-fired with= =20 coal. These recommendations are already included in the president's 2002=20 budget.=20 ""We are pleased that the administration included expansion of the biomass t= ax=20 credit and hope that, with congressional leadership, we will see this=20 expanded provision signed into law this year,"" said Katherine Hamilton,=20 co-director of the American Bioenergy Association (ABA).=20 Unlike other portions of the recommended energy policy, biomass energy=20 probably will not suffer under the recent change in Senate composition, giv= en=20 Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle's (D-S.D.) agricultural constituency and= =20 his previous support of the biofuels industry.=20 According to the National Energy Policy Development report, biomass account= s=20 for about 76% of non-hydropower renewable electricity generation,=20 representing a total of about 1.6% of total U.S. electricity supply.=20 Biopower advocates, however, envision an even greater market penetration in= =20 the coming decades and point to its environmental and ancillary advantages.= =20 For example, given that biomass combustion can be carbon dioxide-neutral (i= f=20 the growth and use cycle is managed sustainably), environmental groups=20 support an expanded role. Farmers with marginal lands that could grow bioma= ss=20 fuel could enjoy economic benefits. With large amounts of wood residue, the= =20 forest industry also stands to benefit from wider use of wood as a power=20 source.=20 Renewable energy offers a particular advantage to the lumber and paper=20 industry, and many analysts project that the industry may soon become a net= =20 seller of electricity.=20 ""In the lumber and paper industries, wood scraps are sometimes directly fed= =20 into boilers to produce steam for their manufacturing processes or to heat= =20 their buildings. For that reason, renewable energy offers a particular=20 advantage to the lumber and paper industry, and many analysts project that= =20 the industry may soon become a net seller of electricity,"" said the energy= =20 policy report.=20 Co-firing with coal Biomass=01*usually wood or wood residue=01*has traditionally been burned di= rectly=20 in the industrial sector for heat or on-site electricity generation.=20 According to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the existing 10 GW of=20 installed capacity are based on this direct-combustion technology.=20 For utilities and power-generating companies with coal-fired capacity,=20 however, biomass co-firing may represent one of the least-cost renewable=20 energy options, said the DOE. The process involves blending different=20 materials in varying amounts with coal.=20 Not only does mixing biomass with coal reduce emissions, it is likely to be= =20 cost-effective. Southern Co. estimates that a biomass plant alone could=20 generate power, depending on its location, at 4 to 11 cents/kWh. Given that= =20 the lower range of this corresponds to coal generation costs, there are=20 clearly circumstances where biomass-coal co-firing would be economically=20 attractive today. Plus, the environmental public relations benefit for=20 utilities with coal-fired capacity would be valuable.=20 Domestic biomass generation capacity could reach 20-30 GW by the year 2020 = by=20 co-firing at existing U.S. coal-fired power plants.=20 According to a recent report prepared by five National Laboratories, domest= ic=20 biomass generation capacity could reach 20-30 GW by the year 2020 by=20 co-firing at existing U.S. coal-fired power plants.=20 A recent report by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel for Climate= =20 Change (IPCC) also cites the potential of coal co-firing with biomass. The= =20 IPCC report concludes that co-firing in coal boilers results in the lowest= =20 cost and least technical risk of the examined approaches for biomass=20 conversion to electricity.=20 Working out the technical kinks Already, said the DOE, six power plants in the U.S. are currently co-firing= =20 coal and wood residue products on a regular basis. Another 10 plants have= =20 successfully tested co-firing over the last decade, and at least six more= =20 plants are now conducting or planning tests.=20 For example, Southern Co. is working with DOE, the Southern Research=20 Institute and the Electric Power Research Institute to study ways to grow a= nd=20 harvest switchgrass to blend with coal as a fuel for power generation.=20 Ideally suited for the southeastern U.S., switchgrass is a rugged grass tha= t=20 can be grown on marginal agricultural land. Reaching heights of up to 12=20 feet, it requires little fertilization and herbicide and can be harvested= =20 twice a year.=20 Harvesting methods, co-milling of switchgrass and pulverized coal,=20 pilot-scale co-firing tests, and a full-scale demonstration of co-firing at= =20 Alabama Power Co.'s Plant Gadsden are part of Southern Co.'s collaborative= =20 project.=20 The U.S. Agriculture Department is also taking a role in exploring the=20 potential of biomass and coal co-firing as a means to give farmers new=20 markets, especially for currently idle land. The agency recently authorized= =20 funding for three co-firing demonstration projects.=20 In Iowa, the Chariton Valley Biomass Project is a cooperative effort to=20 develop warm and cool season grasses (such as switchgrass) to co-fire with= =20 coal at Alliant Energy's Ottumwa Generating Station. The project is designe= d=20 to generate a sustained supply of 35 MW of biomass energy. Eventually, the= =20 grass could substitute for as much as 5% of the coal currently burned at th= e=20 plant.=20 In addition to reducing coal emissions, the Chariton Valley Biomass Project= =20 will support the local farm economy.=20 In addition to reducing coal emissions, the project will support the local= =20 farm economy because the grass and trees will come from acreage taken out o= f=20 production under the Agriculture Department's Conservation Reserve Program= =20 (CRP). CRP land is generally marginal land that the government subsidizes= =20 farmers to leave idle to both prevent erosion and protect commodity prices= =20 from product surpluses.=20 The Pennsylvania Switchgrass Energy and Conservation Project will produce= =20 switchgrass on CRP land for sale to a local cooperative's coal-fired=20 fluid-bed combustors.=20 In New York, the Agriculture Department project will fund willow biomass=20 crops and switchgrass on CRP acreage in the central and western part of the= =20 state. The primary markets for the willow biomass are two coal-burning powe= r=20 plants and a small university central heating facility.=20 Land conflicts, transportation may be obstacles As these pilot projects illustrate, biomass conversion efforts may have the= =20 most significant potential in rural areas. ""Since biomass is widely=20 distributed it has good potential to provide rural areas with a renewable= =20 source of energy. The challenge is to provide =01( conversion and delivery = of=20 bioenergy to the marketplace in the form of modern and competitive energy= =20 sources,"" said the IPCC report.=20 A potential drawback to co-firing is transportation. Transportation of=20 wood-based energy products is more costly, per unit of energy, than coal, f= or=20 example, and most analysts believe it will prove most economical to site=20 generation plants near biomass sources.=20 ""The generating plant or biorefinery must be located near to the resource t= o=20 minimize transport costs of the low-energy-density biomass as well as to=20 minimize impacts on air and water use,"" the IPCC report said. However, note= s=20 the report's authors, economies of scale may be significant enough to offse= t=20 the transport costs involved.=20 A potential drawback over the long term, however, for biomass conversion is= =20 land use conflicts. The IPCC report notes that by 2100, the global land=20 requirement to feed the growing world population will increase substantiall= y.=20 ""Up until this time there may well be sufficient land to supply all demands= =20 for food, fibre and energy, but at some stage after that, land-use conflict= s=20 could arise and before that, competition for water and irrigation may be a= =20 constraint.""=20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= External Affairs Meeting in 50M03, conference bridge 853-3233
 passcode 3000, you are the host; [EMail-Body]= Reporter(WSJ) Ed Dardis UW - Mary Clark Clarence [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Inquiry; [EMail-Body]= Steve I hope this email finds you well. ?Don't know if you remember me exactly; however, I worked at Enron for 4 years, working closely with the Associate/Analyst Program under Charlene Jackson. ?I had to spread my wings a bit and flew to Reliant Energy to further enhance my career. As a former Enron employee, I know Enron-candidate material! ?I would like to submit, confidentially of course, a resume on AJ McCormac. ?AJ is currently the Executive Director for Workforce Planning (HR) here at Reliant. ?She is very interested in opportunities at Enron and has the ""right stuff"" to compliment your strategic direction and objectives for Human Resources. ?I am confident that after just a few minutes with AJ you will quickly recognize her superior expertise. Realizing how expensive executive search firms can be, advice from a Enron fan is free. Thank you for your time and consideration. ?If you would like to contact her directly here at Reliant, her number 713-207-7162. Ginger Gamble 713-207-8824 (See attached file: AJ Confidential Resume 9-21-00.doc) (See attached file: AJ Confidential Resume 9-21-00.doc) - AJ Confidential Resume 9-21-00.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Lobbying Questionnaire Clarification; [EMail-Body]= can you fill this out for me? ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/02/2001 12:31 PM ----- Tara Rafter 03/02/2001 10:58 AM To: Joe Allen/NA/Enron@Enron, Scott Bolton/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Stacey Bolton/NA/Enron@Enron, Roy Boston/HOU/EES@EES, Hap Boyd/EWC/Enron@Enron, Jeff Brown/NA/Enron@Enron, Margaret Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Wiley Cauthen/GCO/Enron@ENRON, Carolyn Cooney/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Shelley Corman/Enron@EnronXGate, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Tom Delaney/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Linda Fitzgerrell/GCO/Enron@ENRON, Howard Fromer/NA/Enron@Enron, Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, John Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Nancy Hetrick/NA/Enron@Enron, Jean Ryall/NA/Enron@ENRON, Robert Hemstock/CAL/ECT@ECT, Alberto Levy/SA/Enron@Enron, Ron McNamara/NA/Enron@Enron, Mike Roan/ENRON@enronXgate, Thane Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ricardo Charvel/NA/Enron@Enron, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Stella Vinio Floris/Corp/Enron@Enron, Xi Xi/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Tracy Cooper/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Dan Staines/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kathleen Sullivan/NA/Enron@ENRON, Kerry Stroup/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Marcie Milner/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Allison Navin/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lora Sullivan/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Stephen D Burns/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Robert Gloria Patrick Keene/NA/Enron@Enron, Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Barbara A Hueter/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Ingersoll/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeffrey Keeler/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Robin Kittel/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan M Landwehr/NA/Enron@Enron, Donald Lassere/NA/Enron@Enron, Rochelle Lessner/ENRON@enronxgate, Chris Long/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Dave Mangskau/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kathleen E Magruder/HOU/EES@EES, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Becky L Merola/TNPC/EES@EES, FRED MILLER/ENRON@enronxgate, Mary Kay Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Steve Montovano/NA/Enron@Enron, Bill Moore/NA/Enron@Enron, Sue Nord/NA/Enron@Enron, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lou L Pai/HOU/EES@EES, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Christie Patrick/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron, Scott Marchris Robinson/NA/Enron@Enron, Thomas S Reichelderfer/DUB/EES@EES, Fred Rimington/NPNG/Enron@ENRON, Frank Rishe/NA/Enron@Enron, Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Gavin Russo/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Dave Schafer/NA/Enron@ENRON, Richard Scarborough/Corp/Enron@Enron, Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lon Stanton/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Terence H Kathleen Wagner/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan Charles Yeung/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Lobbying Questionnaire Clarification It has come to my attention that there has been some confusion regarding the Lobbying Questionnaire that I sent out on Feb. 20, 2001 and which is due on March 9, 2001. Please note that it is NOT necessary to gather your expenses attributable to your lobbying activities rather I just need an allocation of your time/hours spent engaging in such activity during the year 2000. I apologize for any confusion. Thank you - Tara Rafter [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: EES Organizational Announcement; [EMail-Body]= I'm putting in for Chairman and CEO of rationalizations and euphemisms. Richard Shapiro@EES 08/28/2000 01:59 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: =20 Subject: EES Organizational Announcement With the proliferation of business units, I would like to nominate myself = to=20 be President and COO of Enron Global Political Origination Services. Why t= he=20 proiferation? Only way to hand out promotions? ---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES on 08/28/2000= =20 01:55 PM --------------------------- Office of the Chairman From: Office of the Chairman@ENRON on 08/28/2000 10:19 AM To: All Enron Worldwide cc: =20 Subject: EES Organizational Announcement Enron Energy Services has created explosive growth in the retail energy=20 business. To advance EES=01, leadership position and to rapidly expand the= =20 reach of its energy management services, the company is forming four new=20 business groups and promoting several key individuals. EES continues to see an ever-increasing demand for energy management servic= es=20 in North America, with interest coming from a growing number of customer=20 classes. EES North America, headed by Marty Sunde, President and CEO, has= =20 been established to bring outsourcing, commodity and mid-market solutions t= o=20 industrial and commercial customers in North America. Harold Buchanan and= =20 Jeremy Blachman have been named co-Chief Operating Officers of the group. EES Europe is responsible for energy outsourcing across Europe, as well as= =20 rapidly growing mid-market business (Enron Direct, Enron Directo) and heavy= =20 industrial business (ETOL). Matthew Scrimshaw, President and CEO will lead= =20 this group. As EES and Enron=01,s customer base grows, world class execution capabiliti= es=20 and customer relationship management skills are required to maximize value.= =20 Global Energy Services, headed by Dan Leff, President and CEO, is being=20 established to manage execution, delivery, operations & maintenance, accoun= t=20 / customer management and contract value enhancement of Enron=01,s asset an= d=20 energy outsourcing activities worldwide. This group will include Enron=20 Facility Services (EFS), led by Joe Earle, President & CEO and Operational= =20 Energy Corporation (OEC), led by Mark Dobler, Vice President. EES continues to see additional opportunities for business that will benefi= t=20 from the growth of its energy outsourcing business. To manage and develop= =20 these new business opportunities, EES New Business Ventures has been=20 created. Mark Muller, President and CEO will lead this group. All four new business leaders will report directly to EES=01, Office of the= =20 Chairman, Lou Pai, who will continue as Chairman, and Tom White, who will= =20 continue as Vice Chairman. In addition, Kevin Hughes, Vice President and= =20 Chief Accounting Officer, Vicki Sharp, Managing Director and General Counse= l,=20 and Beth Tilney, Managing Director of Marketing, HR and Customer Satisfacti= on=20 will continue to report to the Office of the Chairman. Please join us in congratulating these individuals. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= White House To Support FERC Action Today; [EMail-Body]= According to this morning's Washington Post, the Bush Administration will support the expected FERC action today of extending the existing California price mitigation regime to 10 other Western states and to all days/all hours, not just during California emergencies (stages 1, 2 and 3). This action comes only a day before FERC and other witnesses will testify on the Feinstein/Smith price cap legislation before the Senate Energy Committee, Gov. Davis and FERC will testify before the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee on Wednesday, and the House Financial Services Committee joins the fray with a hearing on the California energy situation on Wednesday. The latter committee will probably base its jurisdiction over some aspect of energy policy on a number of factors, including its jurisdiction over presidential economic emergency powers. The committee staff has in the past expressed interest in derivatives and other financial aspects of energy trading and markets. We are checking now to quietly determine whether these issues will be on Wednesday's agenda. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Skilling's office; [EMail-Body]= Skilling [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message(due to missing attachment)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= WPTF Friday Crazy About U Burrito; [EMail-Body]= THE FRIDAY BURRITO=20 Ben Zycher from the RAND Corporation used the following line in his talk at= =20 the WPTF General Meeting in Phoenix a few weeks ago. The story takes place = in=20 the good ol' days of the Soviet Union when Brezhnev was Premier.? Brezhnev= =20 and the rest of the Politburo one fine May Day were watching the tanks and= =20 missiles pass by the Kremlin Wall, when Leonid noticed in the middle of the= =20 parade a truck carrying a group of civilians.? He turned to Dmitri Ustinov,= =20 the Defense Minister, and asked, ""Who are they?""? Ustinov replied, ""Those a= re=20 our economists.? You just wouldn't believe their destructive potential.""=20 This is appropriate for our time and our situation.? The economists descend= ed=20 upon us when the California market was designed, but we know not from where= .?=20 Aliens?? Since weaving conspiracy theories is a popular past time in=20 Sacramento (""We just know they are gouging us, them bullies""), I believe th= at=20 one must do the same by following the money.? I'm not talking about the=20 campaign contributions in Gray Davis' pocket. The most money has gone from= =20 power sales in California to the Canadian Province of British Columbia.? It= =20 was a plot the Canadians hatched. I mean, look at Governor Davis.? He looks= =20 kind of BC-ish.? Skinny and lanky, wimpy hair, and a hesitation in his=20 speech. He talks their language: a mix of misspelled French (""meet me at th= e=20 centre""), English, and Eh(?).? One night in 1996, the BC government secretl= y=20 sent us some economists by the truckload to destroy California.? The=20 utilities probably paid for the bus tickets.? I happen to know that Frank= =20 Wolak, Chair of the ISO Market Surveillance Committee once lectured at a=20 University in Vancouver, B.C..? What more evidence do you need?? The BC=20 Government sent us cheap hydro power, sold at inflated market prices so tha= t=20 they could do what the citizens of California wanted to do with their budge= t=20 largess =01( build roads, schools, and hospitals. They didn't think we coul= d=20 figure out their plot, but we did.? Now is the time for California to=20 counter-attack.? We'll send them some of our politicians, a bipartisan grou= p=20 including a few who can add, and some of our select energy thugs from the= =20 CPUC and the Blind Oversight Board.=20 Speaking of times and situations, there was a time when discussing the ISO,= =20 words such as ""communist"" and ""Nazi"" were only uttered, by my pal, Carl=20 Imparato,.? We would shake our heads, and chuckle at Carl's extremism.? We= =20 aren't laughing now.? The descriptors seem to arise again and again in poli= te=20 conversation by a wider circle of people.? I watch with utter amusement=20 (because the alternative is retching breakfast) at the demagoguery of the I= SO=20 Governing Board, the Market Despair Team, the Governor's office, and some= =20 members of the California Legislature. Like an audience watching a tragedy= =20 from hell, we scream aloud, ""These people are crazy!""? And indeed, they are= .?=20 Mr. President is not helping us at all by continuing to wrangle over who ge= ts=20 the musical Chair at FERC =01( Bubba Curt or Bubba Patrick.? Listen to us, = Mr.=20 President.? Let Bubba Curt keep the reigns for a year or two, and let Bubba= =20 Patrick take a seat at the table.? We need someone with a shockproof BS=20 detector.? Someone who can honestly field a motion to dismiss the Californi= a=20 ISO.? The time is long overdue to shoot this horse in the head.=20 Not all is evil.? This week in Houston, the resource capital of California,= I=20 visited the trading floor folks at Dynegy, before attending the WTPF Board= =20 meeting.? The coolest thing I saw, besides all the neat gadgets on each=20 trader's desk, was the coffee machine.? Brother Jolly Hayden showed me how = to=20 use it.? You pick the type of coffee you want.? The contents of the coffee= =20 are in a shot-glass sized plastic tub with a foil top.? I picked Venezuelan= =20 #6 Decaffeinated Waxy Crude.? The tub is placed inside the brewing machine,= =20 and the start button is pushed.? Presto, coffee drips from the spout into a= =20 waiting cup.? I asked Jolly, ""How did the hot water get mixed into the grou= nd=20 beans?""? He removed the tub from the machine and showed me a pin prick hole= =20 made in the foil top, and another that was made at the bottom.? Is that nea= t,=20 or what?=20 I would like to buy a brewing machine just like the Dynegy coffee machine,= =20 but a little larger.? I would set up a booth in Sacramento, on the corner o= f=20 11th and ""L"", and bark out to passing members of the Legislature, ""Free spa= ce=20 shuttle. Come and see life on other planets.""? They would jump at the chanc= e=20 to visit other planets.? I would seat them in the machine, push the start= =20 button, and voila.? Dripping out would be the essence of democracy.? Don't= =20 worry about the holes needed at the top and the bottom.? They are already= =20 there, and quite enlarged.=20 Back to my day at Dynegy.? Trade floors might seem similar across companies= ,=20 but the small differences speak to the management style embraced by the cre= w=20 and its leaders.? Each electric trading desk, for various parts of the=20 country, is set up a little bit differently.? For example, some desks have = a=20 person doing asset-backed trading, but some don't.? When I arrived at 6 a.m= .,=20 Houston time, the Eastern desk was busy in its trade day.? The Western folk= s=20 hadn't arrived, yet.? Later, I sat with Randy LeForce of the Western desk.?= =20 ""Captain LeForce, to you"", he told me.? He could talk big because Dave=20 Francis, who sits next to Randy, and hangs witty quotes from the ceiling=20 above his head (""Even a blind pig could make money in this market""), was on= =20 vacation.? As the pace of the trading gathered steam, Randy kept an eye on= =20 all the different people working the Western trading desk.? The Captain=20 worked it like a maestro.=20 During my visit, some Dynegy folks came up to me, introduced themselves, an= d=20 said how much they enjoyed the Friday Burrito.? I'll tell you what.? There= =20 are few things in life that give me as much satisfaction.? Complete strange= rs=20 who tell you that something you do makes them feel good, well, it doesn't g= et=20 any better than that.? Garrison Keillor, the well-known author of Lake=20 Woebegone Days, and NPR radio entertainer once said a writer should have an= =20 audience.? Not everyone in the world should be in the audience, but an=20 audience nonetheless of some people.? I now know what he means.? And the=20 people I met on the trading floor felt like they knew me, and shared with m= e=20 their thoughts and opinions on a lot of things.?? Often they asked me, ""Are= =20 those California people really that crazy?""=20 Since last week, you might have noticed the pace at the FERC has picked up,= =20 somewhat.? Last Friday the FERC issued an Order on possible refunds for=20 alleged overcharges by parties selling to the ISO last January.? That was= =20 news worthy.? Then, on Wednesday, the FERC issued an Order to remove barrie= rs=20 to additional electric generation in the West.? The Order admits that it=20 won't change the dire situation in the West, but these are steps in the rig= ht=20 direction.? The FERC also issued on Wednesday a show-cause order to AES and= =20 Williams regarding the maintenance of RMR units that were called by the ISO= =20 in April and May of 2000.? That is a serious case that we must watch=20 closely.? Also this week, the California Senate kicked off its own=20 investigation (this will be the tenth such investigation of the California= =20 markets to uncover alleged price manipulation).? The Senate Committee will= =20 have subpoena rights, and if I understand it correctly, they plan to subpoe= na=20 individuals.? Sounds like a Kangaroo Court and a Three-Ring Circus, to me.= =20 Thursday, Secretary Abraham stated in a congressional hearing that the West= =20 would certainly experience power outages this summer. Finally, an LA Times= =20 reporter asked me if I had heard that a small QF company had filed for=20 seizure of SCE property to satisfy an outstanding debt.? That would be step= =20 one of the bankruptcy cha-cha.? All in all, a typical week among crazy=20 people.=20 Let's see what else we can talk about.=20 Things in the People's Republic of California=20 ?@@@ PUC Updates Utility Liabilities=20 ?@@@ Be a Source for Energy Price Update=20 ?@@@ BPA Misquoted in the WSJ=20 Things FERC=20 ?@@@ Market Monitoring Proposal=20 Letters=20 Jobs and People=20 Odds & Ends (_!_)=20 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=20 Things in the People's Republic of California=20 ?@@@ PUC Updates Utility Liabilities=20 My favorite regulator, the California PUC, issued an Order in the Utilities= '=20 Rate Stabilization case to re-open the record on utility audits.? Although= =20 the text of the order is unremarkable, the data tables bring up to date, as= =20 of March 8, the outstanding liabilities of PG&E and SCE.=20 The PG&E commercial paper obligation due as of March 8 increased by $354=20 million since January 31, for a total default amount of $790 million.? QF= =20 purchases increased by $280 million for the same five-week period, now=20 totaling $651 million.? The ISO payments increased $934 million, now totali= ng=20 $1.5 billion, and the direct access charge backs for negative PX credits=20 increased $214 million, now totaling $433 million.? PG&E's total default=20 amount is now $3.3 billion excluding amounts yet to be collected from PG&E= =20 customers for DWR purchases.=20 The SCE balance is as follows: The commercial paper obligation that is due = as=20 of March 8 increased by $260 million since January 31, for a total default= =20 amount of $401 million. SCE defaulted on a significant amount of long-term= =20 debt principal and interest, roughly $249 million.? QF purchase defaults=20 increased by $354 million for the same five-week period, now totaling $835= =20 million.? The ISO obligations decreased $1.1 million, and the direct access= =20 charge backs for negative PX credits increased $21 million, now totaling $2= 5=20 million.? SCE's total default amount is now $1.7 billion excluding amounts= =20 yet to be collected from SCE customers for DWR purchases.=20 There is little question that the QFs are taking it on the chin, big time.?= =20 In the last five weeks, between January 31 and March 8, the defaulted=20 payments to the QF owners from both utilities has increased $630 million.?= =20 The total QF default for both utilities as of March 8 stands at $1.5=20 billion.? Does anyone wonder why 1500 MW of QF capacity has shut down in=20 California?? Without these payments being made very soon, I would expect th= e=20 amount of shut down QF capacity to easily double, or more.? Why would these= =20 projects produce without the promise of being paid?=20 Things in the People's Republic of California=20 ?@@@ Be a Source for Energy Price Update=20 Art O'Donnell, editor and associate publisher of the well-known and widely= =20 read California Energy Market (CEM), is looking for traders willing to=20 participate in his survey in exchange for receiving an advanced copy.? The= =20 Survey is a regular feature in CEM. The information collected by Art is=20 matched against the responses of the other people he interviews and some=20 posted sources (Pricewaterhouse Coopers; BPA=01,s daily offerings, for=20 instance).? It is written up in narrative form. The report goes out twice= =20 weekly, once on Wednesday afternoon/evening via e-mail as a courtesy to the= =20 respondents (because the week is pretty much done by then), and a rewrite o= n=20 Friday that is e-mailed around 10 am, posted on the newsdata.com Web site,= =20 and published in the newsletter for general consumption. The Friday report= =20 also features a brief story about natural gas markets in the West=20 The WPTF Board of Directors has allowed me to publicize this offering, and = to=20 explain that if your company is interested in participating, the informatio= n=20 you provide to Art would be protected as confidential.? In Art's words, ""Th= e=20 price survey is =01( unlike some attempts at creating a tradable index numb= er=20 (e.g. McGraw-Hill=01,s Power Markets Week index or the Dow Jones indices), = is=20 more of a narrative about the state of the market d a pulse reading as=20 opposed to a blood pressure number or an EKG. As such, I do not ask traders= =20 and schedulers for precise dollar figures or volumes associated with specif= ic=20 trades, but rather questions like, 'What=01,s Mid-Columbia going for today?= What=20 about off-peak? How has that changed since this morning? Oh yeah, why is=20 that? Anything else I should know?'""=20 The WPTF Board asked Art to explain how the information he collects would b= e=20 protected since so many marketers and generators are under State data=20 subpoenas.? Art replied, ""The Constitution of the State of California=20 provides for a blanket immunity against government intrusions for news=20 gathering from confidential sources and unpublished information, something= =20 which we believe in strongly at Energy NewsData Corporation and which we ar= e=20 willing to go to jail to protect. So if, for instance, the Attorney General= =20 tried to subpoena me or anyone from my staff about power price information,= =20 we would 1) refuse to divulge anything other than the already published=20 accounts, 2) send back a copy of the Constitution, 3) contact the attorneys= =20 for the Society of Professional Journalists, and 4) start preparing a benef= it=20 party to raise legal fees. ""=20 If you would like to participate in Art's survey, please e-mail him at=20 aod@newsdata.com.=20 Things in the People's Republic of California=20 ?@@@ BPA Misquoted in the WSJ=20 In last week's Burrito, I referred to a Wall Street Journal article that=20 portrayed a BPA trader as admonishing the DWR for accepting bids over marke= t=20 prices.? I was surprised when I received the following e-mail from BPA's=20 David Mills.? His message to me copied a letter he sent to DWR's Ray Hart,= =20 explaining what he meant as opposed to what he was quoted as saying.=20 Dear Ray:=20 ?=20 As per our telephone discussion, I just wanted to reiterate a few things=20 re:the Wall Street Journal article and the quotes attributed to me.? At no= =20 time during the interview with Ms Smith did I state that I thought that=20 CDWR's offers were out of line with the prevailing market price in Californ= ia=20 or that your traders should check that price before entering the market.? T= he=20 reporter was quite interested in the price difference between California an= d=20 the MidC price here in the Northwest and when I asked I told her that=20 currently that price delta was roughly $50-$100 MWhr, with MidC being lower= =20 than the CA prices.? I did not indicate to the reporter that I thought that= =20 CDWR was paying more than the California market price and was simply trying= =20 to make a comparison of price relativity between California and the=20 Northwest.? Lastly, BPA has, on occasion, charged extra-regional entities= =20 less than the prevailing market price but has only done so to remain=20 consistent with our own pricing strategies.=20 ?=20 ?I apologize for any misconceptions or miscommunications that may have=20 resulted from this and look forward to a continuing working relationship=20 between CDWR and BPA.=20 ?=20 Things FERC=20 ?@@@ Market Monitoring Proposal=20 FERC Staff issued a report with ""Recommendations on Prospective Market=20 Monitoring and Mitigation for the California Wholesale Electric Power=20 Market.""? WPTF members are taking this proposal very seriously, and we inte= nd=20 to provide comments on March 22.? If you are interested in a copy of the=20 report, go to General members are able to participate along with the Board members and=20 other general members working on our response.? We have retained the servic= es=20 of Dr. Ben Zycher of the RAND Corporation to help us draft the policy=20 issues.? He will be working with our counsel, Dan Douglass of Arter & Hadde= n=20 to craft our reply.=20 In short, our submission will point out the flaws in FERC's proposed=20 methodology, and demonstrate the shortcomings of narrowly limiting the=20 definition of producer marginal cost to operating variable cost.? Further,= =20 excluding measures of credit worthiness are an important missing variable i= n=20 the FERC analysis.? Next week, I will include a short summary of our respon= se=20 in the Burrito.=20 Letters=20 I received a note from one of our legal beagles that drop me a line every n= ow=20 and then.? I don't have the facts of the case to which this person refers,= =20 but I hope the sender provides us with an update if a judgement should occu= r.=20 ""Universal Studios wants FERC to find that Universal owes no penalty to SCE= =20 for not interrupting its interruptible load (under a CPUC rate schedule)=20 because SCE did not adhere to the FERC requirement in the Dec 15 order to= =20 schedule 95% of its load in the day ahead market ...... according to=20 Universal, if SCE had done so, then it would have had to provide Universal= =20 power at below its cost.? SCE didn't and Universal; got interrupted and now= =20 Universal owes $$$$$$$$$$$$$.""? Does anyone else know about this filing?=20 Lind Guerry, veteran of the PX halcyon days, wrote, ""Hi Gary.? Hope you're= =20 having a nice day.? Just wanted to let you know that I'm really enjoying th= e=20 Burrito, and am so glad you're sending it to my home email.? I really got a= =20 kick out of the ""Ten Reasons....""? It's hard to believe that our wonderful= =20 state is in such incompetent hands, isn't it?? And not only are they=20 incompetent, they continue to remain so, with such regularity, you could=20 probably make a killing marketing their incompetence as a laxative.? Do you= =20 think if we tried to do that, we'd get accused of exercising market power?= =20 Think of the power we'd wield, as the holder of the largest amount of=20 incompetence!! ""?=20 Lind, we need a product name for the laxative idea.? Any ideas? How about= =20 Sane Away?=20 Jobs and People=20 The folks at Dynegy sent me a couple of job postings.? If your company has= =20 similar posting or job openings, or if you are reader looking for a new gig= ,=20 drop me a line.? After all, it's free.=20 Position Description:=20 Dynegy's position has responsibility for the development of transmission an= d=20 power markets in a geographic region of the U.S.? Duties are driven primari= ly=20 by federal, regional, and state activities to restructure and deregulate th= e=20 electric power industry, and the need for industry participants to develop= =20 and implement market structures, policies, and regulations that promote=20 liquid and competitive transmission and power markets.? Significant activit= y=20 within a region to reshape the structure and operation of the transmission= =20 grid is resulting from FERC Order 2000, which directs the establishment of= =20 Regional Transmission Organizations. Extensive travel (40%-60%, and higher = at=20 times) is highly probable. Primary goals of this position are to:1) Create= =20 more liquid and competitive transmission and power markets;? 2) Maximize th= e=20 value of Dynegy's positions and assets by working closely with the trading= =20 and power groups to develop?? and implement commercial strategies that crea= te=20 and capture significant business opportunities; and 3) Provide timely and= =20 accurate information, market intelligence, and recommendations to clients. = 4)=20 Maximize the value of Dynegy's positions and assets by working closely with= =20 the trading and power groups to develop and implement commercial strategies= =20 that create and capture significant business opportunities; and=20 recommendations to clients.=20 Interested parties should contact Jolly Hayden at jjha@ngccorp.com.=20 Odds & Ends (_!_)=20 First, I would like to welcome WPTF's newest general member, Wellhead=20 Electric.? Hal Dittmer is the founder and president of Wellhead.? I have=20 known Hal for a couple of years, first as a client for my over priced=20 consulting services, and later as a friend and source of all kinds of usefu= l=20 information.? Wellhead is one of those QF owners who are owed a boatload of= =20 money.? However, Hal's company is developing some new projects, and he is= =20 looking for prospective power buyers.? Hence, his interest in WPTF is=20 obvious. Wellhead is WPTF's 31st member.=20 Well, the Dynegy gang has been a source of comfort and joy to me this week.= ?=20 They couldn't let me leave their abode without stuffing a song in my pocket= =20 that is a tribute to their creative skills.? Timely too.? Sing it to the tu= ne=20 of ""California Dreaming"", by the Mamas and the Papas.=20 ISO California=20 (to the tune of Hotel California) On a dark Western highway=20 No wind in my hair=20 No rain for the hydro=20 No NOX in the air=20 Up ahead in the distance=20 I saw a flickering sight=20 The load grew heavy and the lights grew dim=20 No relief in the night=20 So we stood in the darkness=20 Down at the Taco Bell=20 And I was thinking to myself=20 This could be Heaven or this could be Hell=20 We lit up a candle=20 No power in the Bay=20 There were voices down the corridor=20 I thought I heard them say? =01(=20 Welcome to the ISO California=20 Such a lovely place=20 Such a lovely place=20 Such a lovely face=20 Powering up for the ISO California=20 What a nice surprise=20 What a nice surprise=20 Bring your alibis? =01(=20 Its mind is policy twisted=20 Can=01,t stop consumption trends=20 Got a lot of NIMBY boys=20 Cisco calls friends=20 How we sweat in the courthouse=20 Sweet summer sweat=20 Without the AC=20 We try to forget=20 So I called up the Gov=01,nor=20 Please energize this line=20 He said=20 We haven=01,t built a new plant here since 1969=20 Last thing I remember=20 We were running for the door=20 We had to find the passage back to the place we were before=20 Relax said Judge Damrell=20 California=01,s programmed to receive=20 Go belly up any time you like=20 But your power can never leave=20 ?=20 [refrain]=20 =3D=20 Don't refrain.? Have a great weekend, y'all.=20 gba=20 ? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Catch Up; [EMail-Body]= Joe, Here it is david_cox@enron.net karen.owens@enron.com Gail ,evidently left Enron. Haven't seen her in ages. BTW, P. Bibi resigned. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Joseph T Pokalsky Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 7:34 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Re: Catch Up Too bad. It would be good to catch up. Do you know the emails for: David Cox, Karen Owens, Gail Bennett? I couldn't find an e-mail directory on Enron's web site. Have a great trip, enjoy London. Thanks. On Tue, 19 Jun 2001 17:16:13 -0500 Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com writes: > Joe, > > I could not find the issue. I think I have dumped all the copies of > the > publication. > I am in London next week. > > Vince > > -----Original Message----- > From: Joseph T Pokalsky > > com+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com] > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 3:14 PM > To: Kaminski, Vince J > Subject: Catch Up > > Vince: > > I haven't heard but I guess that you weren't able to find the > article on > my going to Southern. I may be in town the 26 and 27th of next > week. > Will you be around? Do you want to meet up for bkfst or lunch? > Thanks. > > > Joseph T. Pokalsky > Energy Vertical Analysis, LLC > Office: 404-350-8562 > Cell: 404-456-5173 > Fax: 413-691-5614 > Joseph T. Pokalsky Energy Vertical Analysis, LLC Office: 404-350-8562 Cell: 404-456-5173 Fax: 413-691-5614 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California Power Issues Database; [EMail-Body]= One more -- Nick O'Day in Tokyo ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/28/2000 08:42 AM --------------------------- Gavin Dillingham@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 08/28/2000 08:30 AM To: Mona L Petrochko@EES, Peggy Mahoney@EES, Rob Bradley@ENRON cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: California Power Issues Database Steve Kean wanted me to forward you the information on the California Issues Database that was developed for the current California power problem. Attached are the instructions on how to use the site. You will have access to the secured part of the site by the end of the day, Monday, August 26th. Thanks, Gavin ---------------------- Forwarded by Gavin Dillingham/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 08/28/2000 08:27 AM --------------------------- Gavin Dillingham 08/25/2000 04:55 PM To: joe Hartsoe@ENRON, Sandra McCubbin@EES, Susan Mara@EES, Paul Kaufman@ECT, Karen Denne@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich@EES, Mark Palmer@ENRON, James D Steffes@EES, Richard Shapiro@EES, Elizabeth Linnell@EES, Jeannie Mandelker@ECT, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark A Schroeder@ENRON, Peter Styles@ECT cc: Subject: California Power Issues Database We have developed an intranet site/database for information tracking purposes for the California Power Issue. The intranet site will be placed on the home.enron.com webpage by Tuesday morning for all Enron employees to access. However, today, this comprehensive database is available to you for your California Power Issue needs. The database has been populated with the latest information that I have received concerning this topic and has been broken down in three categories: California Power Issues, National Power Issues and Secured Documents. It has then been broken down further into subcategories. The secured documents sections will only be accessible to those that are receiving this e-mail. Please let me know if you believe others should have access to this information. The secured document section contains all the information that I have received that Luntz Consulting has helped us develop, i.e. principals, statements, speeches and facts, as well as, talking points and other statements developed internally. These documents can be easily switched to open access to all Enron employees if you believe that these documents should not be restricted. To access the intranet site you must be logged on to the network and then go to this link: (It is best if you copy this link and paste it in your internet Explorer or Netscape browser.) Once you are at this site you will be able to access all articles and information that I have collected/received concerning the California Power Issue. You can navigate the site by using the links on the left hand side of the screen. While navigating this site, keep in mind that the actual interface will be changed before we go live on Tuesday morning. To access the secured documents, click on secured documents and type in your user name, which is the same as if you are logging onto the network, and then type in your password, which is the same as if you are logging onto the network. However, if you have difficulties entering this site, you will need to change your Lotus internet password. Which is very simple to do and which you will need to do regardless if you decide to use this site or not, it is all part of the current computer migration. To change your internet password, go to this link and then hit the edit person key. Go to the last field that says internet password and type in whatever password you would like, preferably your current network login password. (In the internet password section you will see a bunch of numbers and letters, delete those and enter your new network password.) There are still some bugs that will be worked out by Tuesday, but I thought since this is such a fast moving issue it was best to get this tool out so it could be used when needed. If you have any questions, please call me at 713-853-4382. Thanks, Gavin [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: CONFIDENTIAL Personnel issue; [EMail-Body]= Lizzette. Would you mind getting with Diane on the isue of online harassment prevention training? We have been looking into that form of delivering training. Diane has info from Littler on its proposed training. I think that the costs may be high, but I would like your evaluation of The product. Would you mind taking the lead on this? Obviously, this is not an issue with huge time sensitivity. Thanks. Michelle -------------------------- Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net) [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: California Update p.2; 5/29/01; [EMail-Body]= Thanks. Talked to Rob. He's going to find out timing and cost to do a bigger American Ass. of Economist number on Wolak & Co., while I work the manifesto gang. Best, Jeff [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Fwd: Successful purchase of NBER Paper; [EMail-Body]= Return-Path: <Gregory_Gordon@ssrn.com> Received: from rly-xd03.mx.aol.com (rly-xd03.mail.aol.com [172.20.105.168]) by air-xd05.mail.aol.com (v77.14) with ESMTP; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 10:57:06 -0500 Received: from zeus.ssrn.com (zeus.ssrn.com [38.202.236.235]) by rly-xd03.mx.aol.com (v77.27) with ESMTP; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 10:56:51 -0500 Received: from ssrn.com ([38.202.236.235]) by zeus.ssrn.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-61092U100L2S100V35) with SMTP id com; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 10:56:50 -0500 Subject: Successful purchase of NBER Paper Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 10:56:49 -0500 From: Gregory_Gordon@ssrn.com (Gregory_Gordon) To: <vkaminski@aol.com> CC: Message-ID: X-Mailer: Unknown Dear Wincenty Kaminski: Thank you for your purchase at Social Science Research Network. Your credit card has been charged $ 5.00. This charge will appear on your statement as Social Science Electronic Publishing, our parent company. The confirmation number for this transaction is NBER_103397 and a summary of your order is below. If you have any questions about this charge please email Mailto:NBERSupport@ssrn.com for assistance. If you have any comments or suggestions about how SSRN can improve this service, please let me know at Thank you, Gregory Gordon President ORDER INFORMATION Diagnosing Market Power in California's Restructured Wholesale Electricity Market NBER Collection Borenstein / Bushnell / Wolak BILLING INFORMATION Wincenty Kaminski 1400 Smith Houston, TX 77002 USA 713 853 3848 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron's Matching Gift Program; [EMail-Body]= Tim -- Cindy manages this program. Mary -- please give some thought to how we might solicit employee views on this. Cindy -- I believe we already allow matching of donations to quasi-religious organizations: religious schools, for example, and perhaps relief organizations like Catholic Relief Services? I think that if we want to consider extending it we should probably discuss it in a smaller group than the e-speak forum -- the Enron Foundation Board perhaps? This could become controversial, though (recall the Planned Parenthood debate and the periodic attempts of shareholders to add restrictions through the proxy mechanism). ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/01/2000 07:32 AM --------------------------- Timothy J Detmering@ECT 07/31/2000 05:52 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Enron's Matching Gift Program Here is one I just know you will like to spend time on. I want to try to convince us to change our matching gift program to allow matching of gifts to religious organizations. My suggestion: hold a discussion on eThink, and the let employees cast a vote. Please advise. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CPUC Hearing in SD on 9/8; [EMail-Body]= In light of the Commerce Committee Hearing and the FERC Hearing on the 11th and 12th, wanted to provide a quick synopsis of the CPUC Hearing in SD. It was the same quasi-legislative format as the previous hearing. Speakers were invited by the Commission and only the ALJ and the Commissioners could cross-examine the witnesses. Commissioners Lynch and Wood presided. Michael Kahn, chairman of the Electricity Oversight Board was there and participated in some cross-examination as well. Speakers were: ISO: Kellan Fluckiger, COO Anjali Sheffrin, Director of Market Analysis Frank Wolak, Chairman of Market Surveillance Committee Cal PX: David Jermain, former VP, Compliance, Audits & Reg. Affairs Seth Wilson, South Coast Air Quality Management District: Carol Coy, Deputy Executive Director CPUC: Harvey Morris, Principal Attorney SDG&E: Donald Garber ISO's main message was that many factors contribute to the high prices in the wholesale market: 1. Demand growth over past two years at or around 5% (98-99, 99-00) 2. Lack of generation additions in entire west 3. Reduced imports of electricity from NW, due to low hydro and policy to retain water in spring. 4. Natural Gas price increases over 1999, at almost 2x's 1999 levels in August 5. Nox emissions trading at or around $40/pound 6. Increased underscheduling from June-August ISO has concluded that the reduction in the price caps (from $500 to $250) have increased the overall cost of electricity, with the highest total cost/MWh ($180) experienced in August, relative to $167/MWh in June and $118 in July. Reason given is that the caps have reduced markup (could be interpreted as generator profit) in peak hours, but supply costs have been driven up in lower load hours. While ISO staff said they will seek an extension of its authority from FERC to be set price caps, also raised concerns about the affect any further reductions would have on the market. They conclude that such a reduction would deter new investment, preclude generators from recovering fixed costs of production, and increase dependence on OOM purchases (as a result of lower imports). ISO staff will make a proposal to the ISO Board, October 6, to do the following: 1. File for extension of price cap authority to FERC. 2. Request FERC to institute mandatory forward contract requirement on generators for a significant portion of their capacity. 3. CPUC should allow full peak requirements to be forward contracted and hedged by UDCs 4. CPUC and state should promote price responsive demand programs 5. Maintain sufficient planning reserves. ISO Staff also stated that: 1. Need to create disincentive for underscheduling for load and generation a. Charge OOM cost to underscheduled load b. Charge replacement reserve cost to underscheduled generation c. Additional charge for real-time market transactions 2. Attract and expedite new resources MARKET POWER: While the Commissioners spent the majority of the day picking apart the underlying reasons for the rise in prices, the conclusion of the hearing was President Lynch asking the ISO and PX to name names on who has been exerting market power. Both the PX and the ISO said that it would be impossible to determine from the information they have. Secondly, the analysis they have done show that no single market participant is consistently exhibiting the ability (opportunity) to exercise market power. Therefore, at one point or another, nearly every market participant has market power. Wolak suggested that in order to reduce the amount of market power in peak periods, require forward contracting OR increase profit incentives in off-peak period, where generators many times sell below short-run marginal costs. No further quasi-legislative hearings are planned. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Questions for Executive Business Review- URGENT; [EMail-Body]= I share your perceptions of Jose, though I don't have as much contact as you do. I know also from some recent discussions with Rick (who has also had a fair amount of contact with Jose) that he has very positive views on Jose's work. I think we should make a concerted effort to get the feedback and have a good discussion about Jose at year end to ensure that he is properly ranked. James M Bannantine@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 10/03/2000 07:13 PM To: Steven J Kean@EES cc: Subject: Re: Questions for Executive Business Review- URGENT ---------------------- Forwarded by James M Bannantine/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 10/03/2000 06:13 PM --------------------------- Delivery Failure Report Your document: Re: Questions for Executive Business Review- URGENT was not delivered to: Steven J Kean@EES because: User Steven J Kean (Steven J Kean@enron.com) not listed in public Name & Address Book What should you do? You can resend the undeliverable document to the recipients listed above by choosing the Resend button or the Resend command on the Actions menu. Once you have resent the document you may delete this Delivery Failure Report. If resending the document is not successful you will receive a new failure report Unless you receive other Delivery Failure Reports, the document was successfully delivered to all other recipients. EI-NHUB01/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, EESHOU-HUB/EES, EESHOU-HUB/EES, EI-NHUB01/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, EDC_NMAIL01/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT ________________________ To: Steven J Kean@EES cc: From: James M Bannantine/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT Date: 10/03/2000 10:18:08 AM Subject: Re: Questions for Executive Business Review- URGENT This is a good summary of the scope of Jose's responsibilities and the value he manages. This obviously takes a lot of my time as well because of its importance, in some ways like you or Stan Horton, in terms of drivers of my P&L. However, Jose manages this pretty much on his own without much involvement from Houston (it is a local effort by its nature), which was the point I was making at the PRC. He has a good grasp of the commercial, regulatory and political elements of all of this and keeps them all balanced well. He is methodical and systematic (which can also be perceived as not especially dynamic), and English is really his second language, which may have hurt him in the PRC. He is on the job I would wager as much as 80 hours a week. Do we have anyone at his level with as much or more responsibility elsewhere in the company? ---------------------- Forwarded by James M Bannantine/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 10/03/2000 10:11 AM --------------------------- Jose Bestard 10/03/2000 09:05 AM To: James M cc: Subject: Re: Questions for Executive Business Review- URGENT FYI- For Steve Kean to prepare for their Executive Business Review with Jeff Skilling and Ken Lay on this Wednesday, Oct 4th ---------------------- Forwarded by Jose Bestard/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 10/03/2000 09:03 AM --------------------------- Jose Bestard 10/02/2000 11:02 PM To: John cc: Gia James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: Questions for Executive Business Review- URGENT John. 1) I am attaching a power point file of the key issues we are following in the regulatory group as of now. I highlighted a few to further discuss. See below. 2) I am enclosing the descriptors for the items I highlighted. Jose From: John Neslage on 10/02/2000 10:13 AM To: Jose Gisele S Braz/SA/Enron@Enron cc: Gia James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Questions for Executive Business Review- URGENT Jose: Jim Steffes, Gia Maisashvili and I are helping Rick Shapiro and Steve Kean prepare for their Executive Business Review with Jeff Skilling and Ken Lay on this Wednesday, Oct 4th. Some of the ""success stories"" that we want to include have originated in your region, and we want to be sure that we have the proper information on each of the listed activities. We need to talk today because of the time sensitivity involved here - I will give you a call this morning. Thanks, Jose- John Regulatory Risk Management - Firm Numbers Elektro EBIDTA Recovery $50,000,000 Cuiaba Bolivian Natural Gas Export Permit $91,000,000 Transredes Deferred Account $100,000,000 Transredes Administrative Rule 411/99 + 412/99 $21,600,000 Puerto Suarez Brazilian Electricity Import Permit $150,000,000 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Observations on the Hearings this Week; [EMail-Body]= We're in the process of developing a strategy to take us through the next few months. But while the (otherwise perishable) thoughts are still fresh in my mind from the hearings on Monday and Tuesday, I wanted to throw out some observations for discussion in the days/weeks ahead. OBSERVATION--The pressure to finger somebody for ""price gouging"" is increasing. The administration is hell bent on finding a ""fall guy."" The price spikes pose real political risks for Davis and he and his folks need and want an easy way out. His press release following the hearing renewed the call for ""refunds."" On my panel, Loretta Lynch asked Reliant and Duke to supply her with the details of the contracts they cut to sell their power forward to marketers. And Carl Wood's remarks were extreme. At the Barton hearing, a liberal democrat (Filner) and a conservative Republican (Hunter) locked arms in calling for refunds. Bilbray joined the ""gouging"" band wagon. The utilities repeatedly called on FERC to do a ""real"" investigation, with hearings, testimony, data discovery---the works. On the positive side, the FERC commissioners lauded Wolak, his analysis, and his remarks on the panel. Wolak said somewhat emphatically that the nature of California's market structure makes it impossible to single out a single participant as the culprit. He also stated that just everyone's just acting in their own self-interest, responding to the screwed incentives embedded in the structure. IMPLICATION--It seems prudent for Enron to understand better its risks of getting fingered. In the best case, the clamoring for a ""refund"" subsides. In which case, the only cost to Enron is the internal cost incurred to understand better the risks of getting fingered. In the medium case, investigations find that Enron (like others) ""played by the rules,"" but the rules stunk, and Enron profited at the expense of California consumers. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= slashing price caps; [EMail-Body]= Hey -- you're talking about our future President! I am soooo looking forward to my next Biennial Resource Planning proceeding. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/03/2000 07:03 PM --------------------------- Richard Shapiro 08/02/2000 10:55 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: slashing price caps ---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES on 08/02/2000 10:55 AM --------------------------- ""Foster, Gary"" <GFoster@Antigenics.com> on 08/02/2000 09:39:50 AM To: ""Jeff Dasovich (E-mail)"" <jdasovic@enron.com>, ""Sue Mara (E-mail)"" <smara@enron.com>, ""'mona.petrochko@enron.com'"" <mona.petrochko@enron.com> cc: ""'richard.shapiro@enron.com'"" <richard.shapiro@enron.com> Subject: slashing price caps I'm so glad that our guy, Grey Davis, was elected so that he can un-do what little advancement was made in that horrible idea of letting markets work. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS PROPOSAL; [EMail-Body]= And another..... ----- Forwarded by Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT on 05/22/2001 09:45 AM ----- ""Joseph Iza"" <josephiza9@yahoo.com> 05/19/2001 07:37 PM To: cc: Subject: CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS PROPOSAL URGENT BUSINESS PROPOSAL This letter may come to you as a surprise since it is coming from someone you have not met before. However, we decided to contact you based on a satisfactory information we had about your business person as regard business information concerning your country and the safety of our funds in a steady economy such as that of your country compared to our country Nigeria Africa. I am a civil adviser currently working with the monitoring committee overseeing the winding up of the petroleum trust fund(PTF). Myself and my close and trusted colleagues need your assistance in the transfer of US$25 million into any reliable Account you may nominate overseas.This fund was generated from over-invoicing of contracts executed by the PTF under the administration of the past military government. These were discovered while we were reviewing the PTF accounts. From our discoveries, these contracts have been executed and the contractors in question were all paid. The difference of US$25,000,000 being the over-invoiced amount is the funds, we want your corporate entity to help us receive. What we want from you is a good and reliable company or personal Account into which we shall transfer this fund.Details should include the following: 1. Name of Bank 2. Address of Bank with Fax & Tel. No.3. Account Number4. Beneficiary/Signatory to Account (Account Name) Upon the Successful crediting of your account. The fund will be shared as follows: 1. 20% for you and your assistance 2. 75% for myself & my Colleagues 3. 5% for contingency expenses. Please after your first reply through e-mail I will want us to continue further communication by fax and telephone for confidential purpose. We wish to assure you that your involvement should you decide to assist us, will be well protected, and also, this business, proposal is 100% risk free as we have put a whole lot into it. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation while we look forward to a mutually benefiting business relationship with you.When replying to my e-mail kindly include your telephone, fax number and mobile telephone numbers preferably extremely private numbers where we can reach you any time of the day. Please be aware that a high level of confidentiality and trust is required in this business. My private telephone 234 1 7754653 and my fax number is 234 1 7593270. Best Regards, Dr. Joseph Iza. tel:234 1 7754653 fax:234 1 7593270 Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: MEC; [EMail-Body]= Start with Joe hillings in DC To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: MEC Steve, What are your thoughts on public subsidies/tax breaks for MEC? Who should I contact to discuss the possibilites for some tax advantages on new facilities? Thanks, Mark [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron Japan Office Opening Ceremony; [EMail-Body]= I would like to do this, but I have a speaking engagement the next day -- do the time zones work out so that I can do both or do I need to find a sub for the nov 1 speech? ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/29/2000 07:49 AM ----- Joseph P Hirl 09/28/2000 08:09 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT, Paul Chivers/LON/ECT@ECT, Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT@ECT, Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Philippe A Bibi/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT, Alan Aronowitz/HOU/ECT@ECT, Gary Hickerson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom McKeever/EU/Enron@Enron, Jeremy Thirsk/SIN/ECT@ECT, ken-rice@enron.net, Kevin Hannon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Anthony Duenner/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, mike.mcconnell@enron.com, Jeffrey A Shankman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Frevert/NA/Enron@Enron, rebecca.mcdonald@enron.com, jmcmahon@enron.com, Jim Fallon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Enron Japan Office Opening Ceremony To commemorate the launch of our business activities and the opening of our office operations in Tokyo, Enron Japan requests the honor of your presence at a grand opening ceremony and reception. Please mark your calendars, as we are scheduled to celebrate this new venture on Tuesday, October 31, 2000, 6:30 to 8:30 p.m., Hotel Okura, Akebono Room, in Tokyo. We are delighted to welcome the Prime Minister of Japan, Mr. Yoshiro Mori, who is currently scheduled to join Ken Lay in the traditional Japanese inauguration ceremony. Dignitaries from Japanese government, key political figures and corporate leaders are invited to attend the event. You will receive an official invitation in due course, but in the meantime it would be very helpful if you could confirm by e-mail whether you expect to attend. Please respond to Mika.Watanabe@enron.com. We look forward to welcoming you in Tokyo as we celebrate the grand opening of Enron Japan. Yours sincerely, Joseph P. Hirl Otemachi 1st Square Bldg. President and CEO West 11th Floor Enron Japan Corp. 1-5-1 Otemachi, Chiyoda-ku Tokyo 100-0004 Tel. 81-3-5219-4500 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Privileged and Confidential - Catalytica; [EMail-Body]= I've finished marking up the drafts, and thought perhaps a few thoughts would give you some insight into the reasons for my revisions . Unfortunately, I was engaged in discussions about the course to pursue in light of Arthur Anderson's comments until almost 10pm, when I lost my typing help, so not much headway was made in inputting the changes last night. My secretary is supposed to be in early ( it is now nearly 8:00 and she still isn't in ! ), and I will enlist whatever other help I can get to turn these documents around. For those not involved in the discussions last night, Roger advised us that Arthur Anderson had changes to the Xonon Technology Implementation Agreement designed to make clear ENA had no primary or secondary obligations under the XTIA. The principal change suggested by AA - the deletion of the last sentence of the BOLD language in Section 2.2 - removed the obligation for ENA to pick up any obligations under the agreement owed by West LB in excess of the ""Cap"". Note that this same change applies in the Agreement in Principle related to the purchase of turbines. XTIA Revision 4G. AA's change did not appear to address comprehensively the principle AA espoused, ie, clarifying ENA had no primary or secondary obligations under the agreements. After much discussion and some consideration, I decided to prepare alternative markups of the XTIA - one that attempts to meet the AA directive while preserving a level of comfort for GE. I attempted this by increasing the limit on West LB's liability in Article 10 to $20 million from $9.9 million so that GE's recourse against West LB is the same as it had against West LB and ENA in the prior drafts, and by obligating West LB, in the default provisions, to pony up for an ENA default. I also extensively modified the Section 2.2 language ( taken verbatim from the LM 6000 deal ) to eliminate the limited recourse provisions favoring West LB, and in doing so made it easier to conclude that references to ENA in the agreement are references to ENA acting in an agency, and not its individual capacity. This notion is still pretty vague in the revision because I did not want to create too much discomfort in GE, since ENA explicitly acting in an agency capacity would mean there was no recourse against it ( since ultimate recourse would lie with the principal, West LB). Roger suggested I delete the limit on ENA's liability in Article 10 to remove the implication it had any, which I did ( and which means we have no upside protection if we are construed to have obligations under the XTIA. The upshot is that in my opinion the 4g revision goes as far as possible toward placating AA while still retaining a possibility of selling it to GE. The sheer number of changes required by the substance of AA's comment, however, is bound to be disconcerting to GE at this stage of negotiations, particularly when GE's expectation was for a markup incorporating the new business terms agreed yesterday afternoon (calling for payment of the Development Funds to be completed by September 30,2000, with the possibility of a refund of a portion of the Development Fund Payment if the December 31 Milestone is not timely completed) and some clean ups/clarifications. Note that in both revision 4g and 4ga, Section4.3 now provides that the Xonon credit created is only exercisable by CCSI on and after December 31,2000, so that the credit amount can reflect the deduction of any Milestone 4 refund amount paid by GE if it does not complete that Milestone on time. I think the dollar value of the credit should be adjusted downward if a portion of the Development Funds paid on September 30 are in fact refunded in December. We need to make sure to make provision in the Acquisition and Development Agreement that any Milestone 4 refund received by West LB is paid over to ENA, since West LB will have been repaid its advances on September 30,2000. XTIA Revision 4GA . This alternate revision to the XTIA takes a minimalist approach, and incorporates only the new business terms, some minor clean up/clarifications, and the AA change to Section 2.2 and the change to Article 10 ( to remove a cap for ENA's laibility) suggested by Roger. It seems to me it does not address meaningfully the AA admonition that ENA may not have primary or secondary liability under the XTIA if it wants to stay outside of the rigors of FAS 97-10. However, it has the singular advantage of looking a lot like what GE and West LB expect to see in the revision. Option Repurchase Agreement. This revision was complicated by the possible refund of the a portion of the Development Funds by GE if it failed to complete Milestone 4 by December 31,2000 ( an attempt to retain some accountability for GE's performance given that it is being paid for that Milestone on September 30 to satisfy CCSI ). Because the option repurchase must occur on or before September 30, it isn't clear what will happen December 31, so its hard to figure out what to pay if the contract is not cancelled by September 30 or what the credits are worth on that date. Since CCSI is the direct recipient of the credits under the XTIA, I first thought ENA could hang onto $2.1 million ( the amount formerly allocated to Milestone 4 before its payment obligation was collapsed into Milestone 3) by deducting the refund from the amount payable to CCSI on the option repurchase date and leaving CCSI to bear the risk of GE's repayment of any refund in order to make CCSI whole. If GE did meet the Milestone on time and so did not pay the refund amount directly to CCSI, I thought ENA could always make CCSI whole by paying the $2.1 million in December when the refund matter was decided. That approach- subtracting the refund amount from the September 30 payment to CCSI- was decidedly unsatisfactory since the option repurchase formula could result - depending on the Milestones paid on the option repurchase date - in a negative payment to CCSI for the option. What I settled on in this draft was to go ahead and pay CCSI the amount of the premiums it has paid to September 30 plus $200,000 if the turbine contract has not been cancelled on September 30. This would include repayment to CCSI on September 30 of premiums paid by CCSI under the spark spread on September 30. Assuming CCSI made all its premium payments and West LB made all of its Development Fund advances, ENA would have received $9.9 million from CCSI by September 30, paid out $9.9 million plus interest to West LB by September 30, and purchased the spark spread from CCSI for $10.1 million. If the turbine contract is not cancelled but GE has to pay the refund, I think the $2.1 million ought to go to West LB or its designee (ENA). If we cancel the turbine contract and do not go forward with Pastoria, the dollar amount of the credits vested in CCSI and exercisable after December 31,2000, are equal to the Development Funds advanced less the refund amount. Since the document now reads that the $2.1 refund amount goes back to West LB or its designee, if GE pays the refund and CCSI is holding a Xonon credit of only $7.8 million,it seems to me it will be necessary to pay the refund over to CCSI instead of ENA in order to make up for the fact that it paid $9.9 in premium and only received $7.8 in credit in September. This quick ""liquidation"" of $2.1 of the credit seems to be an ancillary benefit to CCSI occasioned by GE's refund. We could provide in the agreements that GE makes this payment directly to CCSI or we can continue to have the right to receive the payment from GE under the XTIA and the obligation to pay it to CCSI under the Repurchase Agreement. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= EEI Conference Series on RTOs and Markets: Mark Your Calendars; [EMail-Body]= Should we (or ESCA) start looking for opportunities like this now to get the word out? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/21/2000 07:30 AM --------------------------- ""Christina Forbes"" <CFORBES@eei.org> on 08/18/2000 02:54:52 PM To: <Anthony.Duenner@enron.com>, <chris.gaffney@enron.com>, <dallegre@enron.com>, <ddorman@enron.com>, <dfossum@enron.com>, <eaafedt@enron.com>, <fbay@enron.com>, <fking@enron.com>, <jhartso@enron.com>, <JKeller@enron.com>, <jsteffe@enron.com>, <julia.murray@enron.com>, <Lhuber@enron.com>, <mary.hain@enron.com>, <meyer@enron.com>, <mpavlou@enron.com>, <rfrank@enron.com>, <scorman@enron.com>, <scovino@enron.com>, <skean@enron.com>, <snovose@enron.com>, <stweed@enron.com> cc: Subject: EEI Conference Series on RTOs and Markets: Mark Your Calendars EEI is pleased to announce a three-conference series addressing RTOs and electricity market design. * RTOs and Market Design: How to Get Electricity Markets to Work. September 28 and 29, Hilton Washington Embassy Row. Current draft agenda attached. This conference features a star-studded cast of speakers addressing market design issues from all around the country, Keynote by Commissioner William Massey. * RTOs: The October Filings November 2 and 3, Washington D.C. (hotel information to come). Team leaders from each of the RTOs under development that must file in October will present their RTO plans. EEI will have summaries of all of the major filings available. This conference will give everyone a chance to be on the same page as to what the RTO filings propose and to learn what is being developed around the country. * RTOs: The January Filings February 8 and 9, Washington, D.C. (hotel information to come). Team leaders from each of the approved ISOs that will file in January will present their RTO plans. EEI will have summaries of all of the major filings available. This conference will complete the initial tour of the RTO plans, nationwide. These three conferences will give you the information you need to understand tomorrow's electric business and a chance to network with leaders in the industry. For further information and conference registration materials, email Judy Mastin, jmastin@eei.org. We hope to see you there, Christina C. Forbes Director, Federal Commercial and Regulatory Policy Edison Electric Institute P 202 508 5104 F 202 508 5445 cforbes@eei.org - RTOMktDesAgenda.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW:; [EMail-Body]= Greg, I am forwarding you a message from Frank Wolak. One thought: we can ask Frank for help in promoting the free market agenda. He is very highly regarded in the academic community. Vince P.S. You will receive, or have received already, an invitation form the UofT at Austin to serve as a keynote speaker at the conference on energy finance and energy risk management they organize in Feb of 2002. Given our relationship with different department of UT, and the number of students from the Business School we hire every year, I recommend that you accept the invitation. -----Original Message----- From: Kaminski, Vince J Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 10:14 AM To: '""Frank A. Wolak"" Cc: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: RE: Frank, Thanks for your message. I shall forward your comments to Greg. I agree with you that it's in the best interest of Enron and of the industry to invest in education of the public regarding the benefits that free energy markets produce for the society. What I don't understand is that this message has to be repeated over and over again, given all the evidence that the economic history of the 20th century produced. The problem is that it's a long-term effort that requires a lot of patience and a significant investment of time and human capital. I think that the academic community can play an important role in shaping public opinion and in explaining the logic of deregulation process. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Frank A. Wolak"" Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 10:42 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Vince, I meant to send this article to Greg as an example of why I think it is in his own financial interest to both explain to Wall Street and the public how these markets work and how Enron makes them work better, but the events of September 11 occurred, and I don't have Greg's e-mail address. Wall Street and shareholders can't properly value what you are doing unless they understand what your are doing and why you are doing it. I can't tell you how many reporters have called and asked me to comment on all of the ""terrible"" things Enron has done. I then have to explain to them how markets work and debunk all of these ""terrible"" things. I'm probably very naive, but I think just explaining to investors how these markets work would add value to Enron's stock, because people would then see the economic sense in many of things it is doing. I'll stop pestering you and Greg about this, but I'm very concerned that you may win the battle for competitive energy markets, but lose the war because the public at large doesn't see where or how they can benefit from Enron's market-making innovations. Frank SEP 09, 2001 A Self-Inflicted Wound Aggravates Angst Over Enron By ALEX BERENSON Something is rotten with the state of Enron. Or so Wall Street suspects. On Jan. 1, shares in Enron (news/quote), the giant energy trading company in Houston, stood at $83.13. On Friday, Enron closed at $31.57, down 9.7 percent for the week and 62 percent for the year. The slide has destroyed more than $38 billion in shareholder value. In part, the company's problems are beyond its control, a result of the collapse in natural gas prices this year and investor fears of a coming glut in electricity. But the deepest wound at Enron is self-inflicted. Heavy insider selling, indecipherable accounting practices and a stream of executive departures have combined to create a growing credibility gap between the company and Wall Street. ""The stock is trading under a cloud,"" says James S. Chanos, the president of Kynikos Associates, a hedge fund in New York. Mr. Chanos began betting against Enron early this year and says he thinks that the company's shares remain overvalued. Enron's problems came to a head on Aug. 14, when it announced that Jeffrey K. Skilling, the chief executive, had quit for personal reasons. With his resignation, Mr. Skilling joined a half-dozen other top Enron managers who have decided this year to pursue other opportunities. Still, the news came as a surprise because Mr. Skilling was named to his post only in February. Under the best of circumstances, the unexpected departure of a chief executive rattles Wall Street. But hard-headed investors can usually comfort themselves by toting up the sales and profits that the dearly departed pooh-bah has left behind. Executives come and go, but numbers are forever. Unfortunately, Enron's books offer investors little succor. The complexity of the company's businesses and the way it reports its results make understanding Enron's financial statements essentially impossible. Over the last decade, Enron has transformed itself from a simple natural gas pipeline company into the world's largest trader of electricity and gas. Last year, about three-quarters of the company's cash flow came out of the company's wholesale services division, which includes its trading operations. But Enron keeps to itself the details of the trades it makes. Are they short-term or long-term? Is the company hedged, or does it make ""directional bets"" on the prices of the commodities it trades? The answers are crucial, because they determine how much risk Enron has taken to make its money. Big profits are nice. Big profits that come from big, risky trades are a recipe for big, unexpected write-offs. Enron also makes a habit of selling assets and securities to closely related companies in ""related party"" transactions. The company says that the deals are comparable to those it makes with independent buyers and that they have been approved by its board and outside auditors. But related-party deals can provide a convenient way for public companies to shift losses to private affiliates. And Enron's disclosure about its related-party deals, including billions of dollars in asset swaps with a partnership that until recently was controlled by the company's chief financial officer, is notably sketchy. In the good old days, like last year, companies could get away with the unlikeliest of accounting gimmicks, as long as their revenue and profit numbers looked good. But Wall Street has become more demanding, as Enron is learning to its chagrin. Mark Palmer, a spokesman for Enron, says the company is aware of investors' concerns. ""We've got credibility issues on the street, no question,"" Mr. Palmer says. ""We're looking at a lot of ways to give our investors more information."" Sooner would be better than later. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= PG&E Credit Exposure; [EMail-Body]= Ken will be making a call to Bob Glynn at PG&E. Please give the attached to Ken before the call. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/02/2001 12:33 PM ----- Debbie R Brackett@ECT 03/02/2001 10:46 AM To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: William S Bradford/Enron@EnronXGate, Rick Buy/Enron@EnronXGate Subject: PG&E Credit Exposure Steve, Per your request, I've attached a summary of credit exposure with PG&E as of close of business on February 28th. We are investigating an increase in our overall position as a result of basis movement in the west over the past few days. Please feel free to give me a call at 35856 if I can provide futher information. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Folder to safely pass information to Arthur Andersen; [EMail-Body]= Please read and follow below: Thanks ---------------------- Forwarded by Jeffrey C Gossett/HOU/ECT on 04/10/2001 09:01 AM --------------------------- From: Beth Apollo/ENRON@enronXgate on 04/10/2001 08:52 AM To: Shona Wilson/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeffrey C Gossett/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stacey W White/HOU/ECT@ECT, D Todd Hall/ENRON@enronXgate, Sheri Thomas/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brenda F Herod/ENRON@enronXgate, cc: Sally Beck/HOU/ECT@ECT, Georgeanne Hodges/ENRON@enronXgate, Vanessa Schulte/ENRON@enronXgate, Bob M Hall/NA/Enron@Enron, Leslie Reeves/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brent A Price/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: Confidential Folder to safely pass information to Arthur Andersen We have become increasingly concerned about confidential information (dpr/position info, curves, validations/stress tests, etc) being passed to Arthur Andersen for audit purposes over the Web to their Arthur Andersen email addresses. (necessary now they no longer have access to Enron's internal email system) Please use the folder described below when passing any info (that you would have concerns about if it was picked up by a third party) via the shared drive that has been set up for this specific purpose. Note: AA should also use the shared drive to pass info back if there are questions, or the data needs updating. We should also consider the sensitivity of audit findings and special presentations if they are being distributed electronically. Please pass this note to others in your groups who have the need to pass info back and forth. Details on how to access for those who will use this method to pass info: A secured folder has been set up on the ""o"" drive under Corporate called Arthur_Andersen Please post all confidential files in this folder rather than emailing the files to their company email address. If you need access to this folder, submit an eRequest through the IT Central site: Arthur Andersen will be able to retrieve these files for review with their terminal server access at the Three Allen Center location. Please contact Vanessa Schulte if you have any problems or questions Beth Apollo [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Fwd: Portland Consultant's Investigation Finds California Has
 Capacity for Electricity Needs; [EMail-Body]= FYI Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 08:53:16 -0500 From: ""Tracey Bradley"" <tbradley@bracepatt.com> To: ""Deanna King"" <dking@bracepatt.com>, ""Paul Fox"" <pfox@bracepatt.com>, ""Ronald Carroll"" <rcarroll@bracepatt.com> Subject: Portland Consultant's Investigation Finds California Has Capacity for Electricity Needs Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Disposition: inline FYI - It sounds like this consultant's findings are being questioned by many in the industry, including by the CAISO. Portland, Ore.-Based Firm Says California Has Capacity for Electricity Needs Dan McSwain , North County Times, Escondido, Calif. ( October 17, 2000 ) Oct. 13--PORTLAND, Ore.--A private investigation of state power markets has come to the conclusion that California had plenty of electricity generating capacity this summer. The state enjoyed a 32 percent reserve margin even as wholesale prices soared and the state's power manager declared 36 separate ""power emergencies"" because California was thought to be in the grips of a critical shortage, according to the investigation. The author of the investigation's preliminary report, Portland-based economist and utility industry consultant Robert McCullough, said at a conference of analysts, power traders and electricity industry regulators Thursday that he has found evidence that generators and trading companies manipulated the production of power from June through August to create a false shortage and push up prices. The Encina power plant in Carlsbad provides a stark example: it ran at well below its full capacity for much of June, even though wholesale power prices ---- and consumer electricity bills ---- shot to well above the generating plant's cost of production. The actual production of electricity by the plants was determined by an analysis of data from the Environmental Protection Agency, which monitors emissions. ""We are seeing a lot of under-generation,"" McCullough said. ""This is market power in action."" Market power is a term used by economists to describe the ability of market participants -- in this case suppliers -- to influence prices. Many of the industry experts present at the conference Thursday reaffirmed their belief that supply shortages were very real this summer, and contributed to high prices, but several participants said deregulation has reduced the amount of market information that is available to analysts. Mainstream economists have questioned the accuracy of data from federal agencies, including the EPA. Conventional explanations for the low energy production observed in San Diego County are scant. Encina's operators, a joint venture of energy giants Dynegy Inc. and NRG Energy Inc. called Cabrillo Power, confirmed that the power plant had no abnormal maintenance problems. The San Diego Regional Air Quality Board said Wednesday that the power plant was well within its state-mandated pollution limits. But David Lloyd, the corporate secretary of Cabrillo, denied that the Encina plant has been used to game the San Diego County power markets. ""That can't possibly be right,"" Lloyd said of McCullough's analysis. ""In North County, we were right on the ragged edge of being off (an emergency shutdown because of heavy output). ""Without knowing the specific details of time and which units were on or off, I can't comment,"" Lloyd said. ""We certainly don't want to be accused of anything wrongful,"" he said. ""We don't have that much power in California, and for us to be shutting down in California to push up the price somewhere else doesn't make sense for us. We want to run all we can when the prices are high."" Electricity prices have soared to record levels since May, resulting in a doubling and tripling of power bills this summer for the 1.2 million customers of San Diego Gas & Electric Co. and causing an estimated $5 billion in losses for Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric. State lawmakers have intervened on behalf of San Diego County consumers with a retail rate cap, but the law in turn created a looming IOU that could grow beyond $300 million if high wholesale prices persist. No fewer than five private, state and federal investigations are under way to assess the competitiveness of power markets in the interconnected Western states. The investigations also seek to answer charges that the companies which produce and trade electricity have either figured out how to exploit deregulated markets to outmaneuver regulators or have engaged in outright manipulation in order to increase profits. Inquiries by the California Public Utilities Commission, Electricity Oversight Board and attorney general, along with a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission investigation, were launched in July and August. Staff investigators of the state and federal commissions said this week that they are still in the process of issuing subpoenas and gathering market data. McCullough was hired in late May by the Seattle city utility and a consortium of large industrial power consumers in the Pacific Northwest to investigate the price spikes. His effort is thought to be the first to complete an exhaustive analysis of state and federal information that tracks the amount of electricity that was available and compares it to the amount of power that was actually used. Chief among McCullough's findings was that demand for power was lower this summer than what was forecasted by the Western Systems Coordinating Council, a federal agency that is charged with ensuring the stability of the vast web of power transmission lines that connect California to 13 other Western states, British Columbia and northern Mexico. McCullough provided a copy of his preliminary findings Tuesday to the North County Times, and the initial reaction of the state's energy community was one of deep skepticism. ""EPA data is notoriously unreliable,"" said Frank Wolak, a Stanford professor and the chairman of the market surveillance committee of the California Independent System Operator, the agency that manages the state grid and which has paid enormous sums for emergency power this summer. To gauge the actual output of power plants that burn fossil fuel, McCullough used emissions data from the EPA. ""Greed would get the best of anybody,"" Wolak said. ""I found a lot of hours where in-state generators were exceeding nameplate capacity. These guys were cranking it out."" Wolak, in a study of power markets for the system operator, did conclude, however, that exercise of market power by power generators and traders was the major cause of higher prices this summer. At the conference in Portland, most of the panelists did not openly criticize McCullough's analysis, but implicitly disputed his conclusions by attributing higher prices and the presumed exercise of market power to a very real shortage of electricity generating capacity among the Western states. Low hydroelectric production in the Pacific Northwest and high temperatures in the Southwest were blamed for limiting California's ability to import electricity. Others said state and federal regulators, along with market participants themselves, won't really know what happened until more experts look at hard market information that is in short supply. Ron Eachus, the chairman of the Oregon Public Utilities Commission, said market information is routinely withheld from regulators, the public and buyers of electricity, but is shared among power generators and trading companies. ""If the market is sharing it with themselves, but not us, I don't buy that,"" Eachus said. Tim Belden is the vice president of West Trading for Enron North America, the largest marketer and trader of electricity in the world. Enron takes the unique stand that more information which has been labeled ""proprietary"" by companies, such as when a plant is being run and how much the electricity is selling for, should be made available instantly to the markets. ""Is there a smoking gun out there or are market participants behaving rationally?"" Belden said. ""California is characterized by secret, black box market models that nobody understands,"" he said. ""If you've got nothing to hide, release the data."" ----- To see more of the North County Times, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.nctimes.com (c) 2000, North County Times, Escondido, Calif. Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News. SRE, SCE.Q, PCG, [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Job well done; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/29/2001 08:05 AM ----- Peter E Weidler 03/26/2001 08:16 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Job well done Your DC team - Hillings and then Briggs were instrumental in pressuring the Bolivian Government to pass new transportation regulations. It looks like the regulations are 90 % ok - and better than the old ones. - your team got the right pressure points and applied them well. Thanks Pete [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Power of Communication Program; [EMail-Body]= More info. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/31/2000 02:33 PM --------------------------- Elizabeth Tilney@EES 08/31/2000 08:57 AM Sent by: Ruth Ann Brown@EES To: Karen S Owens@ees@EES, Thomas E White/HOU/EES@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Cris Kinsler/HOU/EES@EES, Ray Bennett/HOU/EES@EES, Chris Reedy/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Karen Owens/HOU/EES@EES, Judy G Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Kathy Dodgen/HOU/EES@EES, Carol Moffett/HOU/EES@EES, Kathryn Greer/HOU/EES@EES, Bobbie Power/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Beverly Aden/HOU/EES@EES, Sharon Dick/HOU/EES@EES, Leasa Lopez/HOU/EES@EES, Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Power of Communication Program Please see the attached from Beth Tilney. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California's dim bulbs; [EMail-Body]= You may have seen this when it first came out a while back ... but it's worth a rerun. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 06/13/2001 01:49 PM --------------------------- From: Ann M Schmidt on 06/13/2001 01:49 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: California's dim bulbs California's dim bulbs P J O Rourke 04/01/2001 Regulation 64 Copyright (c) 2001 Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. Copyright Cato Institute Spring 2001 THE FINAL WORD CALIFORNIA IS IN THE MIDST OF AN ENORmous stupidity crisis. Californians have been sitting in the dark because ... they didn't turn the lights on. They say they're short of electricity. Yes, they are. Between 1988 and 1998, California's electricity consumption increased by 15 percent. Meanwhile California's capacity to generate electricity shrank by five percent, even as the state hesitated to build new power lines to tap into neighboring states' power supplies. Californians didn't want dams across their rivers, derricks on their ocean, power lines across their borders, or fossil fuel smoke in their sky. These might interfere with all the smart things Californians do, such as hang-glide. California was going to rely on ""negawatts"" - dramatic power conservation. (But California regulators put price controls on electricity that lowered prices, and even Californians weren't dumb enough to skip a bargain.) And California was going to rely on alternative power generation. With all the puffery from Silicon Valley dot.com start-ups, wind farms wouldn't be a problem. And doesn't Gwyneth Paltrow's star shine bright enough to operate a solar panel? But it turns out that alternative power generation is an alternative, mostly, to generating power. Californians are people who insist on growing their own vegetables, but they won't dig up the pretty lawn, won't plant anything for fear of getting dirty, and they use fragrant bath salts from The Body Shop instead of smelly compost. Let them make their crudites with crab grass. President Bush was wrong to grant an extension of executive orders requiring out-of-state utilities to supply power to California. And everyone is wrong to listen to Californians whine about electricity deregulation. There never was any deregulation. The California Public Utilities Commission merely changed its regulations, which apparently weren't stupid enough to meet Golden State standards. Under California's 1996 re-regulation plan, electric companies sold their generating plants and became distributors. They were required to buy their power on the wholesale spot market and forbidden to enter into any long-term power supply contracts. Retail electricity prices were lowered by 10 percent and frozen at the new rate until March 2002. This is like requiring A&P to sell you porterhouse at $2 a pound, no matter what the price of beef on the hoof. Imagine how many steaks there would be, and how many supermarkets. Go to one of those boarded-up grocery stores, purchase a phantom T-bone, screw it into a ceiling fixture, and try to light your house. You're in California. Californians devised a system of electricity sales that ignored every dimension of the free market. (Interesting that the ""Information Economy"" is centered in a place that's immune to information.) The free market is a yardstick, and Californians got smacked with it. Mideast oil jitters, cold weather, natural gas price spikes, and the plain unpredictable freedom of the free market caused wholesale electricity costs to rise and California utilities to go $12 billion into the red. California's governor Gray Davis responded with the full force of bikini beach brain. In a January 8 speech to the state legislature, Davis proposed creating a state agency to buy generating plants and build new ones. He threatened to expropriate power generators and transmission grids. He called for laws to allow criminal prosecution of wholesale suppliers who withheld electricity from California markets. And he said the state's universities and community colleges would build co-generating plants and become energy independent. (With gas produced by the cafeteria food?) Gray Davis sounded like Joseph Stalin with the IQ of Keanu Reeves. ""Everyone should understand that there are other, more drastic measures that I am prepared to take if I have to,"" Davis declaimed. ""Take"" is the key word. Grabby Californians tried to regulate themselves into some cheap electricity. Hoggish California power companies went along because the stateimposed retail price ceiling was also a retail price floor. According to the Los Angeles Times, during the first 28 months of the scheme, Pacific Gas and Electric and California Edison made $20 billion from the legally required mark-up between wholesale and retail electric prices. Californians want to snatch that money back. ""Consumer advocates around California... said it did not matter that the utilities were returning investments to their shareholders,"" reported the January 31 Washington Post. ""They took the money and ran,"" said state senator John Burton. As opposed to Californians, who took the electricity and roller-bladed? Now the juice and the jack are both gone, and the California legislature has had to pass a bill authorizing $10 billion to try to clean up the mess. But the Californians could still pull a scam. The bill mandates long-term power contracts at rates that are way above what future prices should be. The hope, one guesses, is that Congress, or the President, or somebody will let the state skip out on those contracts once the costs are lower. It would be wrong to call Californians stupid. They're sleazy, too. R J. O'Rourke is the Cato Institute's H. L. Mencken Research Fellow and is foreign affairs desk chief for Rolling Stone. He is author of several bestselling books, including Parliament of Whores, Give War a Chance, Age and Guile, and Eat the Rich. Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: PJM Stip; [EMail-Body]= Can we also get something in the stip that limits the market making activity or at least promises a reexamination of the scope of the market making activity after some period of time. Also, can we strengthen the language to give us something beyond simply a right to file -- which is a right we have anyway. James D Steffes 03/16/2001 03:34 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: PJM Stip Attached is the proposed Stip to allow PJM to move forward as an RTO. In the Stip, we argue that PJM should be approved by FERC but condition our acceptance on a FERC process to unify the Northeast markets. My only comment is to delete the final WHEREAS paragraph on congestion management. While our ability to later stop PJM from being an RTO is limited, I believe that this gives us the ability to drive a consolidation of the Northeast markets - which is one of the goals of the East Power desk. In addition, I think that the overall direction of PJM in commercializing its software is a good activity for our interest - even if we don't want everything in their package. Sarah is out until Monday when we need to get back with PJM. Jim ----- Forwarded by James D Steffes/NA/Enron on 03/16/2001 03:24 PM ----- Sarah Novosel 03/16/2001 11:33 AM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: PJM Stip Here's Craig's address: glazec@pjm.com, [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= US Conference of Mayors, and Association of Counties - In
 Washington DC; [EMail-Body]= Vista Hotel,1400 M Street 202-429-1799 202-728-0530 Panel discussion - Bill Darcy is the other panelist, will give overview and do a defensive speech. You can discuss opportunities and give offensive speech. He doesn't know how many people to expect, but will introduce you to some of the big people there. He'll be passing out an outline of his point of view; you can use overheads, handouts, whatever you like. Time is not yet set. **CANCELLED** [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: New document in PSerc Document Archive archive; [EMail-Body]= Dennis, Thanks. I have seen some of the papers you mentioned but missed one about discriminative auctions. Vince Kaminski -----Original Message----- From: =09""Dennis Ray"" <djray@engr.wisc.edu>@ENRON [mailto:IMCEANOTES-+22Den= Sent:=09Monday, July 02, 2001 8:48 AM To:=09Lawrence Jones; Kaminski, Vince J Cc:=09Cunningham, Lance Subject:=09New document in PSerc Document Archive archive Dear Mr. Kaminski, =20 I don't know if you've seen this, but I thought it may be of interest to = you. A new document has been added to PSerc Document Archive: Western States Power Crisis: White Paper EPRI You can view this document by going There are a number of documents from PSERC researchers that have also been= uploaded toour website (www.p << File: >> serc.wisc.edu << File: = http://www.pserc.wisc.edu >> ). You can find the documents in the Publicat= ions << File: >> folders. = You may be particularly interested in the following new additions:Testing = the Performance of Uniform Price and Discriminative Auctions << File: http= >> . = This paper reports on a series of laboratory experiments to assess the pe= rformance of different electric power markets with respect to price volati= lity and average market prices.An Engineering Approach to Monitoring Market= Power in Restructured Markets for Electricity << File: http://www.pserc.w= >> . This paper exp= lores the potential for using an engineering approach to measure the exist= ence of market power in the real-time operations of a power grid and gives = the results of two experiments designed to test the exercise of market po= wer. We've also updated the descriptive information about PSERC. That informati= on is in the General Information About PSERC << File: http://www.pserc.wi= >> folder. I am sorry you weren't able to join us at our last Industrial Advisory Boa= rd meeting. You and others from ENRON are certainly invited to our next me= eting which will be December 5-7, 2001 in College Station, TX, hosted by T= exas A&M and TXU. We'll send you more information when it is available. Dennis ----- Dennis Ray, Ph.D. Executive Director Power Systems Engineering Research Center 608-265-3808 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= <<Concur Expense Document>> - March 2001 AMEX; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/15/2001 07:59 PM --------------------------- eserver@enron.com on 04/09/2001 02:41:04 PM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - March 2001 AMEX The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: Mark A. Palmer Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: March 2001 AMEX Report Total: $6,539.82 Amount Due Employee: $6,539.82 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://xms.enron.com ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/15/2001 07:59 PM --------------------------- eserver@enron.com on 04/10/2001 01:45:03 PM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - General Expenses The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: John Hardy Jr Jr. Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: General Expenses Report Total: $2,240.10 Amount Due Employee: $2,240.10 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://xms.enron.com ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/15/2001 07:59 PM --------------------------- eserver@enron.com on 04/13/2001 02:35:43 PM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - JS3/31/01 The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: James Steffes Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: JS3/31/01 Report Total: $2,796.30 Amount Due Employee: $2,796.30 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://xms.enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Neptune -- merchant transmission; [EMail-Body]= Ed, I am sure I shall screw up sooner or later (given my aging brain and amount of work). This guy will have to change his name to Ed Krapels to stay employed. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Edward Krapels"" <ekrapels@esaibos.com>@ENRON Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 11:02 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: RE: Neptune -- merchant transmission Vince, I think this other guy used to be named John Smith but changed his name to Vince Kaminski to get a job in the power sector! Ed -----Original Message----- From: Kaminski, Vince J Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 12:38 PM To: ekrapels@esaibos.com Cc: vkaminski@aol.com Subject: RE: Neptune -- merchant transmission Ed, I am still here. Kaminski is a very popular Polish name. My next stage in life, when it happens , is a small cottage close to a beach, not another corporate job. Vince > -----Original Message----- > From: ""Edward Krapels"" <ekrapels@esaibos.com>@ENRON > > m+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com] > Sent: Friday, June 22, 2001 3:08 PM > To: Kaminski, Vince J > Subject: RE: Neptune -- merchant transmission > > Vince, > > Are you still there? I've noticed a Vincent F Kaminski who is manager > of > planning at Alleghany... > > Ed > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kaminski, Vince J > Sent: Monday, June 04, 2001 12:31 PM > To: ekrapels@esaibos.com > Subject: RE: Neptune -- merchant transmission > > > Hello Ed, > > It sounds very interesting. I forwarded your messages > to two members of my group who work on the problems related > to transmission (a key to the power markets successful > growth). > > I shall share with you their reaction. > > I hope everything is going well. > > Vince > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: ""Edward Krapels"" <ekrapels@esaibos.com>@ENRON > > > > > m+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com] > > Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 5:12 AM > > To: Vincent Kaminski \(E-mail\) > > Subject: Neptune -- merchant transmission > > > > Dear Vince, > > > > Greetings from Boston... In the last year, I've been associated with > > the > > Neptune merchant transmission project... check it out at > > www.NeptuneRTS.com. > > We filed with FERC last week and I'm sending you the Wall Street > > Journal and > > Megawatt Daily articles on it. > > > > Have you seen any good analytical work on merchant transmission? I'm > > in a > > dialogue with Paul Joskow and others on this issue but as always > would > > appreciate your thoughts. > > > > All the best, > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > Edward N. Krapels, PhD > > Director > > ESAI Power and Gas Services > > tel 781 245 2036 > > cell 617 899 4948 > > ekrapels@esaibos.com > > www.esai.com > > > > > > - winmail.dat << File: winmail.dat >> > > - winmail.dat << File: winmail.dat >> - winmail.dat << File: winmail.dat >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= EES; [EMail-Body]= Please set up some time with Linda. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/17/2001 11:39 AM --------------------------- Norm Spalding@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 05/16/2001 02:26 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Linda Uselman/HOU/EES@EES Subject: EES Steve, I'm not sure if you remember me, but I was the gentleman that talked to you at the Floor Meeting on April 18th for ETS personnel. If you remember, I mentioned that some of our engineering people had transferred to EES last year and that now they all want back due to the mass confusion in that organization such as billings being done on Excel spreadsheets, no one being allowed to talk to other groups, etc. etc. Today, one of these employees, Linda Uselman, paid me a visit to inform me of her resignation from EES. I mentioned to Linda about my discussion with you and she said she would very much like to share with you what is going on in EES. Linda was one of our best employees. While we hated to see her go to EES, we thought this was for the good of Enron. Now we see that everyone lost on this deal. Thanks, Norm [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Pro Regulation speech; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/22/2000 04:51 PM --------------------------- ""Elizabeth A. VanDersarl"" <liz@luntz.com> on 08/22/2000 10:47:36 AM To: ""'skean@enron.com'"" <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: RE: Pro Regulation speech Steve, Attached please find the pro-regulation speech. We have a studio reserved between 4 and 5 PM today. If it's possible to get comments on the speeches before the conference call, we would really appreciate it. I'll forward the edited deregulation speech to you shortly. Thanks, Liz <<Pro-Regulation speech.doc>> - Pro-Regulation speech.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Request for Comments; [EMail-Body]= Have you solicited comments fromo EES? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/15/2000 08:00 AM --------------------------- Enron Energy Services From: Ginger Dernehl 08/14/2000 11:41 AM Phone No: 713 853-7751 To: Government Affairs cc: Information & Administration, Regulatory Risk Analysis & Competitive Analysis Subject: Request for Comments Please see the attached e:mail below from Nancy Hetrick and respond directly to her. thanks gngr ---------------------- Forwarded by Ginger Dernehl/HOU/EES on 08/14/2000 11:40 AM --------------------------- Nancy Hetrick 08/14/2000 11:15 AM To: Ginger Dernehl/HOU/EES@EES cc: Jeff Brown/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Request for Comments Ginger, would you please forward the following request to the State Goverment Affairs group for me. Thanks. Attached for your review and comments is the second group of recommended practices worked on by the UBP group. The Suppliers that have participated in the UBP plan to submit joint comments to this report and I would like to be able to incorporate any comments that individuals in Enron's State Government Affairs Group may have into the overall Supplier comments. In order to meet the deadline for comments, I need to receive your comments no later than noon, August 28th. The best way to submit these comments is by red-lining the actual document. You can also review and download the entire UBP report, including the finalized chapters and the chapters ""out for comments"", on Please feel free to contact me (712-366-3399 or pager 888-912-1426) if you have any questions. Thanks for your time and consideration. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Financial Times article; [EMail-Body]= Mark also forwarded a voicemail from Doty. Doty goes into great length about his discussions with Gramm (both of them) and professes to have not only a good relationship but also the support of the Senator. At this point, any reason not to get the letter prepared for Ken's signature? ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/02/2001 09:49 AM ----- Mark Metts/Enron@EnronXGate 04/02/2001 08:10 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Chris Long/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: FW: Financial Times article As a follow-up to Chris's question about Jim Doty and Wendy Gramm. -----Original Message----- From: Sent: Monday, April 02, 2001 7:51 AM To: mmetts@enron.com Subject: FW: Financial Times article Mark: This is the article I mentioned in my voice mail. For the record, I have said early and often, that the inter-agency disputes among the financial regulatory agencies (which the Administration of George H.W. Bush inherited and did not create, by the way), are unacceptable and must be avoided. The Dems, of course, love to get this sort of thing going, as it enables them to hold hearings on the need for further legislation to re-regulate. The fact that this President's father came to the White House in the denouement of a multi-billion dollar savings and loan crisis which he did not create is also usually forgotten. As I said in my voicemail and as the attached article confirms, I think there is no substance to the rumor that Sen. Gramm would be opposed to my nomination. As one of the few who contributed generously to his own Presidential Exploratory Committee in 1995-6, I think I stand in pretty well with the Senator and we would work well together. After our last meeting, I think he would feel the same way. > -----Original Message----- > From: Jordan, Jon > Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 1:13 PM > To: Doty, James > Subject: Financial Times article > > Jim: > > As you may already have read, below is an article that was published in > the Financial Times today mentioning your prospects. > > > > > I have heard that internally, the Staff is all pushing for you. > > > Jon B. Jordan > Baker Botts L.L.P. > The Warner > 1299 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. > Washington, D.C. 20004-2400 > 202-639-7743 (direct) > jon.jordan@bakerbotts.com > > [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: EPMI protests AEP's continuation of MBRs; [EMail-Body]= Isn't our primary problem with AEP's internal merchant function rather than with the marketing affiliate (I realize we have problems with the affiliate too)? Can we protest continued market based rate authority for AEP until they have surrendered native load priority? Christi L Nicolay@ECT 09/25/2000 09:16 AM To: David W Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ben Jacoby/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ozzie Pagan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Raymond Bowen/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: EPMI protests AEP's continuation of MBRs On 9/21, EPMI filed a protest (Below) against AEP/CSW's 3 year update request to continue market based rates for power marketing. The filing includes examples of discriminatory behavior on OASIS (for ATCs, etc.) that potentially benefitted AEP's marketing side. EPMI has already protested Entergy's request for continuation of MBRs earlier this year, and plans to protest other large utility-based power marketer MBR filings this fall. Let me know if you would like the list. Thanks. ---------------------- Forwarded by Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT on 09/25/2000 08:58 AM --------------------------- ""Susan Buchheit"" <sbuchheit@bracepatt.com> on 09/25/2000 09:05:19 AM To: <christi.l.nicolay@enron.com> cc: Subject: AEP filing ** High Priority ** Christi - Attached is the final filing in word. I also sent you a hard copy on Friday. - aep.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Legislative Status Report Week Ending 2/23; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 02/28/2001 02:40 PM ----- =09Jeff Dasovich =09Sent by: Jeff Dasovich =0902/23/2001 06:16 PM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Angela Schwarz/HOU/EES@EES, Beverly=20 Aden/HOU/EES@EES, Bill Votaw/HOU/EES@EES, Brenda Barreda/HOU/EES@EES, Carol= =20 Moffett/HOU/EES@EES, Cathy Corbin/HOU/EES@EES, Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT,= =20 Christina Liscano/HOU/EES@EES, Christopher F Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT, Craig H=20 Sutter/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Debora Whitehead/HOU/EES@EES,=20 Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Dorothy=20 Youngblood/HOU/ECT@ECT, Douglas Huth/HOU/EES@EES, Edward=20 Sacks/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Eric Melvin/HOU/EES@EES, Erika Dupre/HOU/EES@EES,= =20 Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Fran Deltoro/HOU/EES@EES, Frank W=20 Vickers/HOU/ECT@ECT, Gayle W Muench/HOU/EES@EES, Ginger=20 Dernehl/NA/Enron@ENRON, Gordon Savage/HOU/EES@EES, Harold G=20 Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@ENRON, Iris Waser/HOU/EES@EE= S,=20 James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON, James W Lewis/HOU/EES@EES, James=20 Wright/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Jeff Messina/HOU/EES@EE= S,=20 Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Jess Hewitt/HOU/EES@EES, Joe=20 Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kathy=20 Bass/HOU/EES@EES, Kathy Dodgen/HOU/EES@EES, Ken Gustafson/HOU/EES@EES, Kevi= n=20 Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Leasa Lopez/HOU/EES@EES, Leticia Botello/HOU/EES@EES,= =20 Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Marsha Suggs/HOU/EES@EES, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EE= S,=20 Meredith M Eggleston/HOU/EES@EES, Michael Etringer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael=20 Mann/HOU/EES@EES, Michelle D Cisneros/HOU/ECT@ECT, mpalmer@enron.com, Neil= =20 Bresnan/HOU/EES@EES, Neil Hong/HOU/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Paula= =20 Warren/HOU/EES@EES, Richard L Zdunkewicz/HOU/EES@EES, Richard=20 Leibert/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, Rita=20 Hennessy/NA/Enron@ENRON, Robert Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES,= =20 Rosalinda Tijerina/HOU/EES@EES, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah=20 Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Scott Gahn/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES= ,=20 Sharon Dick/HOU/EES@EES, skean@enron.com, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tany= a=20 Leslie/HOU/EES@EES, Tasha Lair/HOU/EES@EES, Ted Murphy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Terri= =20 Greenlee/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tony Spruiell/HOU/EES@EES,= =20 Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Vladimir Gorny/HOU/ECT@ECT, Wanda Curry/HOU/EES@EE= S,=20 William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kathryn Corbally/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jubran= =20 Whalan/HOU/EES@EES, triley@enron.com, Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert= C=20 Greg Wolfe/HOU/ECT@ECT, James= =20 Wright/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Dirk vanUlden/Western= =20 Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Steve Walker/SFO/EES@EES, Jennifer=20 Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES, Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES, Douglas=20 Condon/SFO/EES@EES, wgang@enron.com, Scott Govenar <sgovenar@govadv.com>,= =20 Hedy Govenar <hgovenar@mail.acom2.com> @ ENRON, jklauber@llgm.com =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: Legislative Status Report Week Ending 2/23 ----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 02/23/2001 06:15 PM ----- =09""Julee Malinowski-Ball"" <jmball@ns.net> =0902/23/2001 05:59 PM =09Please respond to ""Julee Malinowski-Ball"" =09=09=20 =09=09 To: ""Jan Smutny Jones"" <smutny@iepa.com>, ""Steven Kelley"" <steven@ie= pa.com>,=20 ""Katie Kaplan"" <kaplan@iepa.com> =09=09 cc: ""William Hall"" <wfhall2@duke-energy.com>, ""Tony Wetzel""=20 <twetzel@thermoecotek.com>, ""Sue Mara"" <smara@enron.com>, ""Steven Kelley""= =20 <steven@iepa.com>, ""Steve Ponder"" <steve_ponder@fpl.com>, ""Steve Iliff""=20 <siliff@riobravo-gm.com>, ""Stephanie Newell""=20 ""Ross Ain"" <rain@caithnessenergy.com>= ,=20 ""Roger Pelote"" <roger.pelote@williams.com>, ""Robert Lamkin""=20 <rllamkin@seiworldwide.com>, ""Richard Hyde"" <rwhyde@duke-energy.com>, ""Rand= y=20 Hickok"" <rjhickok@duke-energy.com>, ""Paula Soos""=20 ""Nam Nguyen"" <nam.nguyen@powersrc.com>, ""Mar= ty=20 McFadden"" ""Lynn Lednicky""=20 <lale@dynegy.com>, ""Larrea, John"" <John.g.Larrea@williams.com>, ""kent=20 Palmerton"" ""Ken Hoffman""=20 ""Kate Castillo"" <ccastillo@riobravo-gm.com>= ,=20 ""Kassandra Gough"" <kgough@calpine.com>, ""Jonathan Weisgall""=20 <jweisgall@aol.com>, ""John Stout"" ""Joe=20 Ronan"" <joer@calpine.com>, ""Jim Willey"" <elliottsa@earthlink.net>, ""Jeff=20 Dasovich"" <Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com>, ""Jack Pigott"" <jackp@calpine.com>, ""Ja= ck=20 Hawks"" <jack.hawks@gen.pge.com>, ""Hap Boyd"" <rboyd@enron.com>, ""Greg Blue""= =20 <gtbl@dynegy.com>, ""Frank DeRosa"" ""Eric= =20 Eisenman"" <eric.eisenman@gen.pge.com>, ""Eileen Koch"" <eileenk@calpine.com>,= =20 ""Ed Tomeo"" <ed.tomeo@uaecorp.com>, ""Duane Nelson"" <dnelsen@msn.com>, ""Doug= =20 Fernley"" <fernley.doug@epenergy.com>, ""Dean Gosselin""=20 <dean_gosselin@fpl.com>, ""David Parquet"" <dparque@ect.enron.com>, ""Curtis= =20 Kebler"" ""Curt Hatton""=20 <Curt.Hatton@gen.pge.com>, ""Craig Chancellor"" <craigc@calpine.com>, ""Cody= =20 Carter"" <cody.carter@williams.com>, ""Carolyn Baker""=20 <cabaker@duke-energy.com>, ""Bob Gates"" <bob.gates@enron.com>, ""Bob Escalant= e""=20 <rescalante@riobravo-gm.com>, ""Bob Ellery"" <bellery@spi-ind.com>, ""Bill=20 Woods"" <billw@calpine.com>, ""Bill Carlson""=20 ""Joe Greco""=20 <jgreco@caithnessenergy.com>, ""Theo Pathos"" <theo@ppallc.com>, ""Chuck Cole""= =20 <ccole@advocation-inc.com>, ""Anne Kelly"" <kelly@hnks.com>, ""Bev Hansen""=20 <bhansen@lhom.com>, ""Cary Rudman"" <cjrudman@softcom.net>, ""Delany Hunter""= =20 ""DJ Smith"" ""Hedy Govenar"" <hgovenar@govadv.com>, ""Jamie Parker"" <jparker@hmot.com>,=20 ""Marie Moretti"" ""Maureen OHaren""=20 <Oharen@HMOT.com>, ""Mike Monagan"" <mrmonagan@aol.com>, ""Phil Isenberg""=20 <Isenberg@HMOT.com>, ""Robert Ross"" <robbiz@cwo.com>, ""Ron Tom""=20 <thackbarth@govadv.com>, ""Scott Govenar"" <sgovenar@govadv.com>, ""Susan=20 McCabe"" ""Andy Brown"" <ABB@eslawfirm.com>,= =20 ""Chris Ellison"" <CTE@eslawfirm.com>, ""Doug Kerner"" <runwithmee@aol.com>,=20 ""Dave Modisette"" <dmodis@ns.net> =09=09 Subject: Legislative Status Report Week Ending 2/23 Date: 2/23/01 To: Jan Smutny-Jones, Steven Kelly, Katie Kaplan Cc: IEP Board of Directors From: Julee Malinowski-Ball, Edson + Modisette RE: Legislative Status Report Week Ending 2/23 RECENT EVENTS: -- The week started off on a very positive note. Monday was a holiday! Tuesday, however, inevitably came along to spoil all the fun with last minute committee hearing announcements for some significant bills. -- SB 39x (Speier) was heard this week in the Senate Energy Committee. Thi= s measure would define owners or operators of any electric generating facilit= y as a public utility subject to the state=01,s jurisdiction. The bill also places the CPUC in the role of determining scheduled maintenance outages fo= r generation units. Although the bill goes much further, the author=01,s onl= y intention is to give the CPUC a role in coordinating power plant outages, but seems to not understand the implications of doing it in the manner outlined in the bill. IEP opposed the bill and testified to that end along with CMTA, the State Chamber of Commerce, Enron, WSPA, and the California Cogeneration Council. The usual cast of consumer groups supported the bill= . Of particular note during the hearing was the hostility shown to the opposition by the Chair of the Committee, Senator Bowen. The message from the opposition clearly was ignored by the majority of the members as it passed out of the committee on a party-line vote. IEP is currently reassessing its strategy on this particular issue because this is not the only bill that proposes similar changes. -- The Assembly Natural Resources Committee, chaired by Asm. Howard Wayne, was scheduled this week to hear two siting bills. The first was AB 34x (La Suer), which would make various changes to the CEC siting process, includin= g some IEP-sponsored language. IEP has a support if amended position on the bill which has some technical and policy problems, but workable. Last minute amendments offered by Asm. Keeley forced Asm. La Suer to postpone a hearing on the bill until next Monday (2/26). However, because the Keeley amendments basically gut the current language and turn it into a study bill= , La Suer is unlikely to accept them and, according to the negative committee analysis, the committee is unlikely to approve the measure in its current form. AB 36x (Wright), on the other hand, passed the Natural Resources committee with only one =01&no=018 vote. AB 36x would provide expedited siting for a repower project, as defined. However, despite IEP=01,s efforts to get the = bill amended, the current language would help few, if any, repower projects. Th= e author has agreed to continue working with us, the environmental community and the CEC to develop language that works for everyone. IEP=01,s major is= sue at this point is that is should actually work. The measure was double referred to the Assembly Energy Costs and Availability Committee and will b= e heard there next. -- The negotiated language on the QF issue finally has a vehicle, SB 47x (Battin). All stakeholders are not united in their complete support for th= e measure. IEP has may need some additional changes but will be mobilizing members on Monday to educate Senators on the bill and support the measure i= n the Senate Energy Committee when it is scheduled for a hearing. Both SCE and WSPA also have some outstanding issues, but only WSPA so far will be opposing the bill. -- SB 6x (Burton), which would establish and state power and financing authority, passed off the Senate Floor 24 to 14 this week and is headed to the Assembly Energy Costs and Availability Committee next. IEP met with Senator Burton=01,s staff this week to talk about amendments to SB 6x relat= ing to limiting the Authority=01,s eminent domain powers. Staff was open to wh= at we had to say but we have little confidence our recommendations will move forward with the bill. Regardless, IEP will continue to push for amendment= s on the Assembly side. -- SB 33x (Burton), which would require the Governor=01,s plan to purchase = the IOU=01,s transmission to be approved first by the Legislature, is still awaiting consideration on the Senate floor. -- The Governor had another press conference today to provide a status on the negotiations between the state and the three IOUs regarding the purchas= e of the utilities=01, transmission system. Reuters is saying there the Gove= rnor has a deal with SCE to purchase its share of the power grid for $2.76 billion. Negotiations are still going on with PG&E and SDG&E. More information on press conference can be found on the Governor=01,s web site. -- Attached is the most recent legislative tracking report which includes all the special session bills introduced through yesterday. Please let me know if you need copies of any of these bills. UPCOMING EVENTS: MONDAY, February 26th Assembly Natural Resources Committee 1:45 pm, Room 447. AB 34x (La Suer) =01) makes various changes to the siting process. Assembly Energy Costs and Availability Committee 1:30 pm, Room 4202. AB 38x (Jackson) =01) relates to loan guarantees for renewable energy joint venture agreements. Senate Environmental Quality Committee 1:30 pm, Room 4203. SB 28x (Sher/Battin) =01) makes various changes to the siting process. WEDNESDAY, February 28th Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee 1:30 pm, Room 126 AB 45x (Kelley) =01) expands the MIC for certain energy production. --end-- Julee Malinowski-Ball Senior Associate Edson + Modisette 916-552-7070 FAX-552-7075 jmball@ns.net - 2001 Tracking Report.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FWD: News Article; [EMail-Body]= At the end of the article there is a presidential straw poll. It shows Bush with only a 6 point lead among oil and gas industry executives and analysts. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/22/2000 07:39 AM ----- Karen Denne 09/21/2000 09:23 PM To: Ann M Schmidt/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Meredith Philipp/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: FWD: News Article fyi ---------------------- Forwarded by Karen Denne/Corp/Enron on 09/21/2000 09:17 PM --------------------------- From: Jeff Dasovich@EES on 09/21/2000 07:59 PM To: mpalmer@enron.com, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: FYI. Energy Is Hot By Christopher Edmonds Special to TheStreet.com 9/20/00 12:47 PM ET URL: HOUSTON -- Up and to the right. That could be the theme of the eighth annual Dain Rauscher Wessels energy conference this week in America's self-proclaimed oil capital. Between the whispers in the hallways and the bullish presentations from an overflowing barrel of oil, gas and power companies, you might think you were in the corridors of some Silicon Valley conference of yesteryear. But, no, this is all about energy, and energy is hot. With oil hanging around $37 per barrel and natural gas solidly above $5 per million BTU, oil, gas and power stocks have caught fire. To illustrate, take a look at the chart of the Philadelphia Stock Exchange Oil Service Sector Index, or OSX: Up and to the right. And, a great deal of the price gain is rational. As the price of the commodities increases, profits follow. That should mean positive earnings from a plethora of oil and gas companies. While new Securities and Exchange Commission regulations have stifled the more explicit (now illicit) preannouncements at conferences like this, regulations can't cap all the enthusiasm from rising commodity prices. For example, Kenneth Lay, chairman of energy powerhouse Enron (ENE:NYSE), said at the conference he is very comfortable with analysts' estimates, hinting the numbers are conservative. ""We should meet or exceed analysts' expectations for the quarter and the year."" Others followed suit. Bradley Fischer, president of CMS Energy Oil and Gas (CMS:NYSE), (profiled here earlier ), said his company will post ""record production and record income this year,"" because the fundamentals of the oil and gas business are as good as they have been in his career. ""I've been in this business 28 years. The first 10 were good and the last 18 have been difficult. Now, I'm looking for the good times to roll."" And this from Diana Naylor, senior vice president at independent power producer Calpine (CPN:NYSE), when reacting to analysts' estimates in the coming year. ""We look to be making that number and look to increase that [guidance on earnings] shortly."" Even the oil drillers and equipment companies are celebrating. Nabors Industries (NBR:AMEX), owner of the largest land-drilling fleet, thinks analysts are significantly underestimating its potential. Dain Rauscher estimates Nabors will earn 83 cents per share this year and $1.65 next year -- numbers Chairman and CEO Eugene Isenberg called conservative. He presented calculations suggesting the company could earn $3.27 in the middle of the oil cycle and has the ability to earn $6.81 in the coming years. ""The probability of this happening is very high,"" he said. All because of $37 per barrel oil and $5 gas? While there is little question that third- and fourth-quarter earnings should be strong, there is growing concern that the oil and gas stock rally has been overdone. Not only have stocks tracked the rise in commodity prices but the once-beleaguered sector has also seen earnings multiples expand significantly. That is a warning sign to at least one analyst. While the going is good, the rapid price rise isn't sustainable. Oil stocks stocks ""will peak in the next several weeks and trade sideways, probably for the rest of the year,"" said Jim Wicklund, head of energy research at Dain Rauscher, adding that there may be added selling pressure as funds try to lock in gains before the end of the year. ""Stock [price pressure] will also be impacted by portfolio managers' bonus structure."" And Wicklund warned that what he sees as the inevitable moderation in oil prices will put pressure on the stocks into the new year. ""Right or wrong, stock prices are slaves to commodity prices."" If Wicklund is correct, the next move could be down and to the left. The Peoples Court One of the clever and unique features of the Dain Rauscher Wessels energy conference is the annual investor poll. This year, nearly 400 investors responded to the on-site survey and, while the results aren't scientific, they are likely instructive. Power to the People - Investors Speak Dain Rauscher Wessels Energy Conference Survey Results Prediction for price of oil (per barrel) on 12/31/2000$32.70 Prediction for price of oil (per barrel) on 12/31/200127.70 Average price of oil in 200128.80 Price of Natural Gas (per MM BTU) on 12/31/20005.50 Price of Natural Gas (per MM BTU) on 12/31/20014.60 Closing Price of Oil Stock Index (OSX) on 12/31/2000137.90 Closing Price of Oil Stock Index (OSX) on 12/31/2001147.00 Will the OSX outperform the S&P 500 in 2000Yes - 93.7%, No - 6.3% Will the OSX outperform the S&P 500 in 2001Yes - 67.7%, No - 32.3% Favorite Merger PartnersChevron with Texaco, Unocal or Phillips - 35% Top Energy Stocks for the Next YearKey Energy, ExxonMobil, Enron Presidential Straw PollBush 53%, Gore 47% Source: Dain Rauscher Wessels Investors see oil prices moderating a little between now and December and further into next year. However, survey participants do not see the same pattern for natural gas, with estimates for gas prices remaining well above $4.50 through next year. And what may at first appear to be good news for George W. Bush probably isn't. A six-point lead looks nice, but remember -- we're on his home turf, Texas, among his brethren in the oil business. For W., that may suggest down and to the left as well. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Thanks for your time this morning.; [EMail-Body]= Aruna No address was attached. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Aruna Inalsingh@Reval"" Sent: Monday, July 02, 2001 8:34 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Thanks for your time this morning. Hi Vince -- It was a pleasure speaking to you this morning. Please find below my address, to which you can send the information on the energy commodities market. I'll look forward to following up with you, once I have a chance to digest the information. Regards, Aruna [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Congressman Ose loved your letter to Sen. Dunn; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/12/2001 10:48 AM --------------------------- From: Tom Briggs on 07/12/2001 10:43 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Congressman Ose loved your letter to Sen. Dunn [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Ken Lay's Meeting with Fox; [EMail-Body]= Jon -- Ricardo Charvel is pulling together the briefing for Ken, so please share the EBS activities/ agenda with him. Thanks ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/02/2000 03:03 PM --------------------------- Ken Rice@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS 08/02/2000 02:13 PM To: Jon Thomsen/Enron Communications@Enron Communications cc: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Ken Lay's Meeting with Fox Jon Ken Lay is going to be attending a multi CEO meeting with President - elect Fox on August 24. They will be discussing a number of issues regarding energy, telecom, commerce ... etc. He needs a one page briefing sheet on our activities in Mexico sometime in the next week or so. Please put together something and work through Steve Kean's group to give Ken the info. Thanks Ken [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Fwd: Decision 00-08-037 (Signed 8/21/00); [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/24/2000 05:30 PM --------------------------- Bruno Gaillard@EES 08/24/2000 01:45 PM To: Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES, Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES, Sandra McCubbin/SFO/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Marcie Milner/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Hain@Enron, Harry Kingerski/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Thane Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Fwd: Decision 00-08-037 (Signed 8/21/00) Attached is the final Duque decision. It is the clean version of the draft I faxed on 8/21. ---------------------- Forwarded by Bruno Gaillard/SFO/EES on 08/24/2000 11:40 AM --------------------------- ""Daniel Douglass"" <douglass@ArterHadden.com> on 08/23/2000 09:38:31 PM To: <JBarthrop@electric.com>, <mnelson@electric.com>, <rschlanert@electric.com>, <Bruno_Gaillard@enron.com>, <kmagrude@enron.com>, <mpetroch@enron.com>, <susan_j_mara@enron.com>, <athomas@newenergy.com>, <Jeff.Hanson@phaser.com>, <anchau@shellus.com>, <andrew.madden@utility.com>, <ben.reyes@utility.com>, <chris.king@utility.com>, <david.bayless@utility.com> cc: Subject: Fwd: Decision 00-08-037 (Signed 8/21/00) In case you didn't receive the final version of the decision voted out on Monday approving the Duque ""rate stabilization plan,"" here it is.? The Wood and Lynch dissents will be sent separately. ? Dan Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 17:25:38 -0400 From: ""White, Ann"" <abw@cpuc.ca.gov> Subject: Decision 00-08-037 (Signed 8/21/00) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; ? ? - Ivy.gif - [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Bill Massey; [EMail-Body]= I believe we should back Massey as well. Who do we weigh in with now? Joe Hartsoe@ENRON 08/15/2000 08:27 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Bill Massey Steve/Rick/Jim --- Talked to John Anderson yesterday. He had just gotten off the phone with Massey. Massey believes Linda B. is spending time at the White House lobbying to be Chair. Have we decided whether to back either and if so which? I would prefer backing Massey. Thoughts? JOE 202.466.9150 ---------------------- Forwarded by Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron on 08/15/2000 09:13 AM --------------------------- janderson <janderson@elcon.org> on 08/14/2000 03:05:28 PM To: jhartso@enron.com cc: Subject: Bill Massey Joe, As you are probably aware, Jim Hoecker is considering leaving FERC relatively soon. The President will then name a new Chairman. Bill Massey is quite interested in receiving the nomination. Please call to discuss. John [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Ken Lay meeting with Japanese Prime Minister; [EMail-Body]= Rosie -- please check Ken's calendar. This would be a great one to do if we can squeeze it in. Nick -- congrats on what looks like a great new opportunity to make progress. I am in all week and would love to talk to you and Joe. If we can't otherwise make schedules work, call me at home after hours Houston time (713-621-6550). Nicholas O'Day 08/27/2000 10:49 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Ken Lay meeting with Japanese Prime Minister ---------------------- Forwarded by Nicholas O'Day/AP/Enron on 08/28/2000 12:48 PM --------------------------- Nicholas O'Day 08/28/2000 12:28 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Joseph P Hirl/AP/ENRON Subject: Ken Lay meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Steve, Over the last month the Japanese regulators and Government have come to the realization that the electricity deregulation initiatives implemented in March of this year have not stimulated competition in the manner in which they had expected. MITI and the Government are currently examining why the initiatives implemented in March are falling short of expectations and looking to move the 2003 review forward to next year. There are currently two multi party committees looking at the energy sector. The ruling Liberal Democratic Party also has one committee looking at energy. In addition, MITI is in the process of forming a new advisory group comprising academics to consider the next stage of deregulation. As you are aware, we have been working the regulatory aspects through MITI and the US Government for some time now with a degree of success - in fact, the majority of our 12 month goals have been achieved. Recently, with the addition of Kimura, we have increased our level of contact with senior political figures in Japan. Both MITI and the USG continue to seek Enron's views on issues relating to the current deregulation process and the way Enron wants to see electricity deregulation. We have recently addressed the parliamentary Deregulation Committee which reports to the Prime Minister and regularly provide educational presentations to MITI on issues relevant to deregulation. Further, senior political figures are now recognizing that Enron can assist in the deregulation process in a positive way. What we appear to have in Japan in the electricity sector is a reasonably clean slate and the opportunity to have a major say in how things should be structured in the future. Ken Lay's links with the Republican Presidential campaign has received media attention in Japan and it is believed in Government circles here that he will receive a cabinet position if Gov. Bush is elected. As a result, Mr Lay currently carries a great deal of weight in senior Government circles in Japan. In the period prior to the Presidential election, we have an ideal opportunity to get our message across at the highest levels of the Japanese Government through Mr Lay. A meeting between Mr Lay and Prime Minister and other senior Government members would significantly increase Enron's profile in Japan and assist in conveying our vision for the next phase of deregulation. If Mr Lay were to visit Japan, possibly in late October or early November, we would also look at coordinating the Tokyo office opening with the visit and arrange a number of high level commercial meetings. Prime Minister Mori and the US Ambassador have already expressed an interest in attending the office opening. Both Joe Hirl and I would like to speak with you further about the above. When would be a convenient time? kind regards [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: Bay City News, Wed 3/21: ""Blackouts Not Expected=20 Today"" Dow Jones Newswire, Wed 3/21: ""Calif State Controller:General Fund Surplus = Dn=20 To $3.2B"" CBS.MarketWatch.com, Wed 3/21: ""Davis says regulators will act to pay QFs Electricity providers insist they need to be paid"" Long Beach Press, Wed 3/21: ""Rash power bill may need fix"" SF Chron, Wed 3/21: ""PUC considers rewarding producers that sign long-term= =20 contracts"" Sac Bee, Thurs, 3/22: ""State claims $5.5 billion overcharge: Refunds by=20 wholesale generators sought"" Sac Bee, Thurs, 3/22: ""Power solution eludes Davis: Lawmakers grow edgy as= =20 crisis drags on"" Sac Bee, Thurs., 3/22: "" Legislators learn some details of power contracts= "" San Diego Union, Thurs, 3/22: ""Federal judge orders major power wholesaler= =20 to sell to California"" San Diego Union, Thurs., 3/22: ""Controller: State's power spending imperil= s=20 its financial health"" San Diego Union, Wed, 3/21: ""Governor says utilities must pay in advance f= or=20 some power"" LA Times, Thurs, 3/22: ""Energy Overcharge of $5.5 Billion Is Alleged"" LA Times, Thurs, 3/22: ""Power Strain Eases but Concerns Mount"" LA Times, Thurs, 3/22: Graphics: Overcharges Alleged=20 San Fran Chron, Thurs, 3/22: ""Net Complex A Dilemma For San Jose=20 SERVER FARM: Plant would tax grid"" San Fran Chron, Thurs, 3/22: ""Contracts Won't Meet Summer Demands=20 DETAILS: 2004 before full impact felt"" Mercury News, Thurs, 3/22: ""California overcharged $5.5 bln for wholesale= =20 power"" Orange Cty Register, Thurs, 3/22: Commentary: ""If the Power Goes Off"" =20 Orange Cty Register, Thurs, 3/22: Commentary: ""Socialized Electricity"" San Fran Chron, Thurs, 3/22: ""Bush's Energy Policy Will Backfire,=20 Feinstein Warns / She wants federal price controls now"" Dow Jones Newswires, Thurs, 3/22: ""Reliant Still In Power Pact Talks With= =20 Calif. DWR"" Dow Jones Newswires, Thurs, 3/22: ""CPUC Must Address Rates In QF Repayment= =20 Order - SoCal Ed"" Dow Jones Newswires, Thurs, 3/22: ""Calif Small Pwr Producers To Shut Plant= s=20 If Rates Capped"" --- --- Blackouts Not Expected=20 Today Bay City News=20 Following two consecutive days of rolling blackouts, California's power=20 picture looks much brighter today, but conservation is still needed.=20 The California Independent System Operator is urging consumers to continue= =20 conservation measures during today's Stage One Electrical Emergency.=20 ""The conservation efforts of Californians, particularly Tuesday evening, we= re=20 significant and helped to reduce the duration and impact of yesterday's=20 blackouts,'' according to officials. ""The California ISO asks customers to= =20 continue their voluntary reductions during this time of tight supply.""=20 More than 11,500 megawatts of in-state generation remain unavailable with= =20 power plants completing repairs and needed maintenance. However, several=20 generating units returned to service today and the level of imported power= =20 has increased, boosting the supply.=20 ""The ISO is cautiously optimistic that customer outages will be avoided=20 today,'' according to officials.=20 Today's Stage One alert is in effect through midnight tonight.=20 Stage One Emergencies are declared when power reserves fall below 7 percent= .=20 Stage Two kicks in when reserves fall below 5 percent. Stage Three is=20 initiated when reserves drop to below 1.5 percent. --- Calif State Controller:General Fund Surplus Dn To $3.2B 03/21/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- California State Controller Kathleen Connell=20 Wednesday said the state's general fund surplus has dropped to $3.2 billion= =20 from $8.5 billion in January, mostly because of electricity purchases made = by=20 the state's Department of Water Resources, a press release said.=20 Connell also denied Gov. Gray Davis' request to transfer an additional $5.6= =20 billion from the general fund to the Special Fund for Economic Uncertaintie= s,=20 the release said. Connell noted that, given the rapid depletion of the general fund on power= =20 purchases, the state would need to borrow $2.4 billion in order to tranfer= =20 the $5.6 billion from the general fund to the special fund.=20 ""We started this year with a generous budget surplus. The energy crisis has= =20 taken much of that away, and this transfer on top of the electricity=20 purchases would put the fund at risk,"" Connell said.=20 Connell called on Davis to ensure that the CDWR completes by the end of May= =20 2001 the revenue bond sales that will be used to buy power and repay the=20 general fund.=20 She also asked that the CDWR notify her of all power purchases made and=20 contracts negotiated thus far and requested that she be told within 7 days = of=20 any purchases and contracts negotiated in the future.=20 Connell also said she wanted to be told within 24 hours of any power buys= =20 that exceed $55 million and asked that the Department of Finance be directe= d=20 to prepare new general fund cash flow estimates for the next 30 and 60 days= ,=20 and for the end of the fiscal year.=20 The state's Department of Water Resources has been buying power since Janua= ry=20 in lieu of Edison International (EIX) utility Southern California Edison an= d=20 PG&E Corp (PCG) utility Pacific Gas and Electric Co, because suppliers=20 refused to sell to the nearly-bankrupt utilities.=20 -By Jessica Berthold; Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872;=20 Gov. Davis' office said, in response to Connell's comments, that the state= =20 budget was solid and the economy remained strong.=20 ""We will be getting the money back we've paid for energy and it should have= =20 no significant effect on the state's finances from the Wall Street=20 perspective,"" said Davis press secretary Steve Maviglio.=20 -By Jessica Berthold; Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872;=20 jessicaberthold@dowjones.com --- -------- Davis says regulators will act to pay QFs Electricity providers insist they need to be paid By Russ Britt, CBS.MarketWatch.com=20 Last Update: 9:45 PM ET Mar 20, 2001 LOS ANGELES (CBS.MW) - California Gov. Gray Davis said regulators will act= =20 Tuesday on a plan to guarantee that independent power generators are paid. Independent power producers provide about 30 percent of California's=20 electricity from a variety of sources including wind, solar and other=20 sources. Because many of the companies, known as Qualifying Facilities, or= =20 QFs, haven't been paid they've begun to withhold power, contributing to=20 blackouts in the state Monday and Tuesday.=20 ""We are anxious to pay the QFs because they're falling like flies,"" Davis= =20 said at a news conference late Tuesday. ""If they don't get paid, the lights= =20 will go out."" Davis said the state's PUC order will require the state's nearly bankrupt= =20 utilities to enter five-year contracts with the QFs at rates of 7.9 cents p= er=20 kilowatt hour, or 10-year contracts for lower rates. The structure is simil= ar=20 to rates Davis claims he was able to negotiate for long-term power contract= s=20 from out-of-state generators. --- Rash power bill may need fix By Will Shuck From our Sacramento Bureau SACRAMENTO Even as lawmakers lament the slow pace of solving California's= =20 energy crisis, the cost of haste has cropped up in their first major act, a= =20 multibillion dollar measure that put the state in the power-buying business= .=20 AB1X, the highly touted bill that put California in the power-buying=20 business, may have been so rashly crafted that it will take another piece o= f=20 legislation to fix it, an influential senator said Tuesday.=20 At issue is vague wording that makes it unclear when and to what extent=20 Southern California Edison and other utilities have to repay the state for= =20 buying power.=20 State Sen. Debra Bowen, chairwoman of the Senate Energy, Utilities and=20 Communications Committee, said the bill apparently has left room for utilit= y=20 lawyers to argue that their companies needn't repay the state until they ha= ve=20 covered other costs.=20 But Bowen, a Redondo Beach Democrat who represents downtown and western Lon= g=20 Beach, said ""the legislative intent is crystal clear"" that the state wanted= =20 to be repaid directly for supplying about a third of the power utility=20 companies deliver to their customers.=20 ""We need a cleanup bill"" to set the matter straight, she said.=20 Although AB1X illustrates the flaws that come with speed, Bowen said, the= =20 Legislature can't afford to delay.=20 ""I think we are much too slow in our response,"" she said. ""But that has to = be=20 balanced against things we've done in a tearing hurry and then have had to= =20 fix later.""=20 No matter what the Legislature does in the coming weeks, she said, Californ= ia=20 is in for a tough summer, and only determined conservation efforts will put= =20 much of a dent in a precarious supply-demand equation. --- PUC considers rewarding producers that sign long-term contracts=20 Greg Lucas, Lynda Gledhill, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau Wednesday, March 21, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 Sacramento -- Some cash-strapped producers of wind, solar and other=20 alternative forms of energy will get long-delayed financial relief under a= =20 proposed order by state regulators, Gov. Gray Davis said yesterday evening.= =20 A proposed order by the Public Utilities Commission is designed to reward= =20 energy producers who sign long-term contracts with utilities at lower rates= .=20 Alternative energy producers that voluntarily enter such contracts, which= =20 would start on April 1, would be paid within 15 days, said Davis, who=20 requested the order. Those that do not would have to wait until the utiliti= es=20 that buy their power return to solvency.=20 Davis blasted Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern California Edison for= =20 not paying the alternative generators -- know as qualified facilities, or= =20 ""QFs"" -- even though the companies have been collecting money through rates= .=20 ""It is wrong and irresponsible of the utilities to pocket and withhold the= =20 money designed to compensate the QFs,"" Davis said. ""It's immoral and has to= =20 stop.""=20 Alternative producers -- ranging from massive co-generation facilities at o= il=20 refineries to tiny biomass plants -- produce about a third of the state's= =20 supply of electricity. But many are shutting down because utilities have no= t=20 paid them since November.=20 The loss of some 3,000 megawatts from tapped-out alternative energy produce= rs=20 contributed to the blackouts that snarled California yesterday and Monday,= =20 according to the Independent System Operator, which manages the state's pow= er=20 grid.=20 The PUC's proposed order -- which will be considered at the board's Tuesday= =20 meeting -- offers the generators a choice of agreeing to a five-year contra= ct=20 at $79 per megawatt or a 10-year deal at $69 per megawatt, Davis said.=20 The order does not address the more than $1 billion already owed to the mor= e=20 than 600 alternative energy producers around the state. Davis said to favor= =20 one creditor over another in past debt could bring on bankruptcy proceeding= s=20 from other creditors.=20 The Legislature would also need to act to make the order work.=20 ""It is critical to keep these facilities up and online,"" said Sen. Debra=20 Bowen, D-Marina del Ray, who estimates that Edison has $1.5 billion in cash= =20 on hand, and PG&E $2.5 billion. ""The utilities owe it to the people of the= =20 state to pay them.""=20 Edison said yesterday that it opposed any attempt to place alternative=20 producers ahead of their other creditors.=20 But Tom Higgins, a senior vice president for Edison International, which ow= es=20 alternative producers some $835 million, said his company was talking to th= e=20 governor's office about possible payment structures.=20 Alternative energy producers, particularly those that use high-priced natur= al=20 gas to fire their generators, say that without an immediate infusion of cas= h=20 they must close their plants.=20 ""We've been obsessed with the health of the utilities and (have) forgotten= =20 the health of everyone else,"" said V. John White, legislative director of t= he=20 Clean Power Campaign, which lobbies for alternative energy producers.=20 CalEnergy Operating Corp., which operates eight geothermal plants in the=20 Imperial Valley producing 268 megawatt hours for Edison has sued the utilit= y=20 asking to be paid and to be temporarily released from their contract with= =20 Edison which has paid them nothing since November.=20 CalEnergy has a court hearing tomorrow on its Edison contract. Edison owes= =20 the company $75 million, and the debt increases by $1 million a day.=20 ""We've lived up to our end of the bargain but Edison hasn't. We're now not = in=20 a position to make a property tax payment on April 10 and we're the largest= =20 employer in the county,"" said Vince Signorotti, CalEnergy's property manage= r.=20 Unlike Edison, PG&E is paying its creditors 15 cents on the dollar.=20 ""We have offered over the past five days to prepay for future power not yet= =20 delivered to keep as many of them operating as possible, but the state need= s=20 to decide how its going to divvy up the limited money under the frozen=20 rates,"" said John Nelson, a PG&E spokesman.=20 The PUC's sudden attempt to recast the rates paid to alternative generators= =20 comes after several months of inaction, partly a result of waiting for=20 legislative negotiations on the issue to conclude. Those negotiations=20 eventually failed to move forward.=20 --- State claims $5.5 billion overcharge: Refunds by wholesale generators sough= t By Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writer (Published March 22, 2001)=20 In its boldest attempt yet to extract refunds from wholesale power=20 generators, the state's grid operator accused the generators Wednesday of= =20 overcharging Californians by $5.5 billion for electricity since last May.= =20 The state's Independent System Operator, which manages the state's=20 transmission grid, plans to tell a federal regulatory agency today that pow= er=20 generators consistently took advantage of their stranglehold on the=20 California market to ratchet up prices.=20 The federal agency, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, recently=20 threatened to order generators to refund $134.8 million for overcharges,=20 mostly covering January and February. But those refunds amounted to just a= =20 fraction of what the grid operator was seeking. The ISO, which has been=20 complaining about market abuses for several months, says FERC must do more.= =20 ""We're happy that (FERC) took this first step, but we think there's a long= =20 way to go,"" said Anjali Sheffrin, the ISO's director of market analysis. ""A= s=20 far as I'm concerned, it's been too little, too late. ... The refunds they= =20 have acted on (so far) have been minimal.""=20 She said the report covers five major power suppliers and 16 other power=20 importers.=20 FERC Commissioner William L. Massey said it would be improper for him to=20 comment on a report that has not yet been filed. But when told of the $5.5= =20 billion total, Massey told the Los Angeles Times: ""That doesn't shock me in= =20 any way.""=20 ""Prices over the past 10 months in California have greatly exceeded the=20 federal standards of just and reasonable prices, and I think they have=20 exceeded the standards by possibly billions of dollars,"" he said.=20 However, most FERC critics are skeptical that the federal agency, which is = a=20 strong believer in letting free markets run their course, would order a=20 refund anywhere near as large as $5.5 billion -- even though it has found= =20 that California prices at times have been ""unjust and unreasonable.""=20 The big power generators, saying their charges were reasonable, are disputi= ng=20 the $134.8 million refunds proposed so far and have vowed to fight the ISO'= s=20 latest effort.=20 If the ISO were to prevail, the $5.5 billion in refunds could go a long way= =20 toward remedying California's energy mess.=20 They could help restore the financial health of Pacific Gas and Electric Co= .=20 and Southern California Edison, which have nearly been bankrupted by the=20 prices charged by the power generators. They also could ease the strain on= =20 the state treasury, which is spending billions to purchase electricity for= =20 Californians because PG&E and Edison can't.=20 Sheffrin said her department studied sales made by the power generators to= =20 ISO, which makes last-minute power purchases to balance supply with demand,= =20 and the California Power Exchange, the now-bankrupt entity where most of=20 California's wholesale electricity was bought and sold until December.=20 She said the study made ""very generous"" allowances for natural gas expenses= ,=20 costly air-pollution credits and other factors, including the scarcity of= =20 electricity. The result was $5.5 billion worth of charges ""in excess of=20 competitive costs,"" she said.=20 In many cases, the companies used their market clout to submit bids that we= re=20 ""way beyond their costs,"" she said.=20 ""It was insufficient competition,"" Sheffrin said. ""They got away with a lot= .""=20 She said the refund request isn't just a shot in the dark. FERC, she noted,= =20 ""has already found that prices in the California wholesale energy market ha= ve=20 been unreasonable. We took it upon ourselves ... to show FERC how they got = to=20 be so high.""=20 FERC proposed refunds totaling $124 million for January and February sales,= =20 declaring that generators' prices were too high.=20 In a separate case the federal agency, for the first time, accused two=20 generators last week of taking plants offline to force prices up.=20 --- Power solution eludes Davis: Lawmakers grow edgy as crisis drags on=20 By Emily Bazar and Amy Chance Bee Capitol Bureau (Published March 22, 2001)=20 Gov. Gray Davis likes to compare the state's energy crisis to a complicated= =20 ""three-cornered"" billiard shot.=20 But as California plunged into another round of power blackouts this week,= =20 Davis has yet to line up the angle on an ultimate solution.=20 The state's short-term power bill is nearing $4.2 billion, and legislators= =20 are balking at the administration's requests for additional money.=20 Getting even the least controversial pieces of the puzzle through the=20 Legislature is taking weeks longer than expected.=20 While the Democratic governor has insisted secrecy about details of his pow= er=20 purchases is necessary to protect the state's bargaining position, other=20 state officials are complaining vigorously about the lack of information.= =20 And critical deals the governor hoped to reach with energy suppliers and=20 utility companies are proving difficult to close.=20 ""I think we all got lulled into a little complacency a few weeks ago. All= =20 these things seemed to be going along, and the governor was making all thes= e=20 warm and fuzzy comments,"" said Assemblyman John Campbell, R-Irvine.=20 ""But it only takes one deal to go sideways and we're all blacked out,"" he= =20 added. ""The governor is running around basically saying, 'Trust me.' I'm no= t=20 sure he's deserving of the trust at this point.""=20 Davis and his aides insist they are working around the clock on plans to=20 boost power generation, encourage conservation and reach an agreement with= =20 utilities that will keep them out of bankruptcy.=20 The utility plan, they say, is the equivalent of a large corporate merger= =20 that simply can't be accomplished overnight. Davis notes that earlier=20 deregulation efforts might have benefitted from a little more time.=20 Although the state has reached a broad ""agreement in principle"" with Southe= rn=20 California Edison to obtain its power transmission lines in exchange for he= lp=20 paying off its debts, a final, detailed deal has not been reached. The=20 initial agreement with Edison was announced Feb. 23.=20 And the governor has yet to achieve a tentative agreement with Pacific Gas= =20 and Electric Co., which is driving a harder bargain over price and other=20 elements of a potential rescue plan.=20 Joseph Fichera, one of several consultants receiving more than $11 million= =20 from the administration for advice on the energy crisis, said many people= =20 don't realize the complexity of the deal they're brokering.=20 In their bid to achieve a public takeover of the investor-owned utilities'= =20 transmission lines, he said, negotiators have to pore over thousands of=20 documents related to the transmission lines alone.=20 ""We are doing what is normal in a transaction of this magnitude, which is= =20 investigate, document, circulate, redocument, agree, move forward,"" said=20 Fichera, an investment banker with Saber Partners in New York City. ""The=20 governor has put a 'I want this yesterday' fire"" under his negotiating team= .=20 The negotiator, however, declined to say when he expects final agreements t= o=20 be reached with the companies.=20 ""It could be days, it could be weeks,"" he said.=20 There were signs, meanwhile, of trouble brewing on another front: the giant= =20 bond sale the state must make to repay the money it has spent so far on=20 electricity and to finance future long-term contracts for energy.=20 State Treasurer Phil Angelides said Wednesday the utilities are appealing a= =20 ruling by the state Public Utilities Commission that essentially ensures th= e=20 state will be repaid, a move that he said threatens to delay the sale=20 indefinitely.=20 ""If the utilities have decided to adopt a scorched earth policy until they= =20 get what they need and want, then it will be a significant problem,""=20 Angelides said.=20 PG&E spokesman Ron Low said the governor is simply placing too many demands= =20 on a rate structure that doesn't compensate the utilities for their current= =20 costs.=20 ""Political rhetoric is not going to change the math,"" he said.=20 In the Legislature, lawmakers are growing grumpier. Most were taken by=20 surprise Monday when blackouts were ordered across the state, weeks before= =20 summer temperatures were expected to set in and strain the power system.=20 ""I'm more worried than ever,"" said Assemblyman Bill Leonard, R-San=20 Bernardino. ""A lot of the elements we thought we had a handle on in January= =20 are unraveling.""=20 A deal the governor said had been worked out weeks ago between the state an= d=20 more than 600 small alternative energy suppliers collapsed last week.=20 The alternative generators have not been paid by the utilities for months,= =20 and state leaders attempted to bargain down the price utilities pay those= =20 generators for power.=20 But administration officials complained privately that lawmakers instead=20 sweetened the pot for the suppliers to the point that the measure no longer= =20 helped solve the overall financial situation pushing the utilities toward= =20 bankruptcy. Under a proposal announced Tuesday by Davis, the Legislature=20 would authorize the PUC to require the utilities to pay the alternative=20 suppliers at prices more closely resembling the original deal.=20 But the governor ran into immediate opposition, as some suppliers said said= =20 he would not pay them enough to cover their fuel costs.=20 ""We would go from not being paid, to losing money,"" said Hal Dittmer of=20 Wellhead Electric, a Sacramento-based supplier that has been shut down for= =20 more than a month. ""Almost everybody who burns natural gas is going to shut= =20 down. (Davis) got it wrong.""=20 Democrats outside the Davis administration, meanwhile, are complaining abou= t=20 the amount of money the state Department of Water Resources is spending on= =20 expensive, last-minute power purchases. Within a week, $4.2 billion will ha= ve=20 been committed.=20 State Sen. Steve Peace, D-El Cajon, chairman of the joint Legislative Budge= t=20 Committee, is warning the Davis administration that he will block additiona= l=20 funds for last-minute purchases of power until the PUC makes progress=20 recovering money that already has been spent. He intends to hold a hearing = on=20 the issue this morning.=20 On Wednesday, state Controller Kathleen Connell told Davis she will refuse = to=20 make a routine budget transfer he had requested, saying she is concerned th= at=20 there is ""no outside check and balance"" on the money the administration is= =20 spending to buy electricity on the spot market.=20 As the statewide elected official who pays the state's bills, Connell said= =20 she has yet to receive information from the Department of Water Resources= =20 about how much it is spending.=20 ""We really need an accounting as to the total amount of liability they have= =20 accumulated,"" she said. ""I understand they're in an emergency situation ...= =20 but it begins to imperil the state's ability to manage its cash flow.""=20 Meanwhile, a bill to provide $1 billion for conservation programs, aimed at= =20 reducing power needs this summer, also has languished for several weeks in= =20 the state Senate. While Davis has focused his attention elsewhere, Republic= an=20 lawmakers have opposed the measure as too expensive. Democrats argue that= =20 each two-week delay prevents the state from saving as much energy as one=20 ""peaker"" plant will produce this summer. Peaker plants are designed to help= =20 meet the peaks of electricity demand.=20 ""I'm the eternal optimist, but we have to keep working on all fronts,"" said= =20 Sen. Byron Sher, D-Palo Alto, who hopes to take his energy conservation bil= l=20 up for a vote in the Senate again today. ""It's a formidable challenge.""=20 Bee staff writer Dale Kasler contributed to this report.=20 --- Legislators learn some details of power contracts By John Hill Bee Capitol Bureau (Published March 22, 2001)=20 The veil of secrecy surrounding the state's electricity contracts lifted=20 Wednesday -- a little.=20 Gov. Gray Davis gave state legislators a report laying out some of the=20 details of long-term contracts designed to help the state pull out of its= =20 energy crisis. But the report left legislators and others clamoring for mor= e.=20 ""The information raises more questions,"" said Assemblyman George Runner,=20 R-Lancaster. ""I liken it to watching a parade through a knothole in a fence= .=20 You get to look at one float, but you're not sure about what's coming up an= d=20 what you've missed.""=20 Davis had previously disclosed that the state had signed or was close to=20 signing 40 long-term contracts, at an average price over 10 years of $69 pe= r=20 megawatt-hour.=20 The contracts are part of the state's strategy for trying to avoid a fiscal= =20 shellacking in the energy spot market while making sure there's enough=20 electricity to avoid more blackouts.=20 Davis also previously disclosed that the contracts were for an average of= =20 about 9,000 megawatts a year, and that the total cost exceeded $40 billion.= =20 But Davis has resisted telling more, saying the state would jeopardize its= =20 ability to get the best prices if electricity generators knew what their=20 counterparts were getting.=20 On Wednesday, the governor's office released a March 15 report from S. Davi= d=20 Freeman, general manager of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, = to=20 the state Department of Water Resources. The state agency has been given th= e=20 responsibility of making power purchases, and Freeman was brought in to lea= d=20 the negotiations.=20 As of March 15, the state had signed 19 contracts with seven suppliers for= =20 periods ranging from 14 months to 20 years, with many for three or five=20 years, the report says. Some of the contracts are for electricity to meet t= he=20 state's everyday power demand, while others are only for times of peak use,= =20 such as hot summer days.=20 The state had ""agreements in principle"" for an additional 25 contracts.=20 Runner said he has been told that two of these contracts have since been=20 finalized.=20 The amount of power provided reaches a peak in 2004 of more than 10,000=20 megawatts. As the long-term contracts start to expire around then, the stat= e=20 is hoping that demand can be met with new contracts or spot purchases at=20 prices expected to be much cheaper.=20 The report says nine more long-term contracts were under discussion.=20 Some of the contracts are with power generators, while others are with=20 marketers who may get the power from a number of sources.=20 In some cases, the state may supply the natural gas used to generate the=20 electricity, or power costs may be pegged to the going rate for the fuel.= =20 Some suppliers can cancel if the state fails to sell bonds by a certain dat= e=20 to cover power costs or fails to maintain an investment grade credit rating= .=20 Some depend on the construction of power plants, but Freeman said they were= =20 firm commitments.=20 ""We were pretty careful not to put a hope and a dream in the portfolio,"" he= =20 said.=20 More contracts will have to be signed to meet summer demand, and these=20 agreements will probably be more expensive, the report says.=20 One item not in Freeman's report was a secret deal to relieve several major= =20 generators from having to pay for polluting the air beyond allowable limits= .=20 The long-term power contracts include language that would have the state pa= y=20 the costs of ""pollution credits"" that allow power plants to exceed their=20 permitted levels of smog-forming pollutants, the governor's office confirme= d=20 Wednesday. Spokesman Steve Maviglio said that several generators are being= =20 relieved from having to pay those costs.=20 V. John White, a Sierra Club lobbyist close to the negotiations, said Dyneg= y=20 Inc., which has power plants in El Segundo, Encina and Long Beach, is one o= f=20 them. Dynegy officials did not return calls to The Bee on Wednesday.=20 Freeman said that generators were demanding hefty premiums for having to de= al=20 with air quality regulators in the summer and he figured it would be cheape= r=20 just to pay for the pollution credits.=20 In other energy-related developments:=20 With more power plants back online, grid operators dropped down to a Stage = 1=20 electricity alert. The state Independent System Operator was expecting=20 supplies to gradually increase over the next few days.=20 The state Public Utilities Commission issued a revised draft decision that= =20 would impose the prices outlined Tuesday by Davis for power produced by=20 alternative energy companies -- $79 a megawatt-hour for five-year contracts= =20 or $69 a megawatt-hour for 10 years. The proposal is scheduled for a PUC vo= te=20 March 27.=20 A federal judge ruled that one of the nation's major electricity generators= =20 must continue supplying California with emergency power.=20 In imposing an injunction on Reliant Energy Services Inc., U.S. District=20 Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. noted the ""rolling blackouts (that have) darkene= d=20 the California landscape"" and said the loss of Reliant's production ""poses = an=20 imminent threat.""=20 Bee staff writers Carrie Peyton, Chris Bowman and Denny Walsh contributed t= o=20 this report.=20 --- Federal judge orders major power wholesaler to sell to California=20 By Don Thompson ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 21, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction Wednesday= =20 ordering a major electricity wholesaler to continue selling to California= =20 despite its fear that it will not get paid.=20 U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said Californians were at risk of= =20 irreparable harm if Reliant Energy Services stopped selling power to the=20 Independent System Operator, which oversees the state's power grid. The ISO= =20 buys last-minute power on behalf of utilities to fill gaps in supply to try= =20 to fend off blackouts.=20 Damrell dismissed Reliant's attempt to force the state Department of Water= =20 Resources to back the ISO's purchases for the state's two biggest utilities= .=20 The state has been spending about $50 million a day on power for Pacific Ga= s=20 and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison, both denied credit by=20 suppliers after amassing billions of dollars in debts.=20 Controller: State's power spending imperils its financial health=20 Governor says utilities must pay in advance for some power=20 ?=20 The judge said he had no authority to force the DWR to pay for that power.= =20 Gov. Gray Davis has said the state isn't responsible for purchasing the=20 costly last-minute power ISO buys for Edison and PG&E, despite a law=20 authorizing state power purchases on the utilities' behalf.=20 ISO attorney Charles Robinson said the ruling gives ISO operators ""a tool t= o=20 assist them in keeping the lights on in California.""=20 ""Had the decision gone the other way, one could expect other generators to= =20 simply ignore emergency orders,"" Robinson said.=20 Damrell's preliminary injunction will remain in effect until the Federal=20 Energy Regulatory Commission rules on the matter.=20 Damrell denied the ISO's request for preliminary injunctions against three= =20 other wholesalers, Dynegy, AES and Williams, who agreed to continue selling= =20 to the ISO pending the FERC ruling.=20 The ISO went to court in February after a federal emergency order requiring= =20 the power sales expired. The judge then issued a temporary restraining orde= r,=20 requiring the sales, but dropped it after the suppliers agreed to continue= =20 sales to California, pending his Wednesday ruling.=20 The ISO said it would lose about 3,600 megawatts if the suppliers pulled ou= t,=20 enough power for about 2.7 million households. One megawatt is enough for= =20 roughly 750 homes.=20 Grid officials said Reliant's share alone is about 3,000 megawatts. Reliant= =20 said the amount at issue actually is less than a fourth of that, because mo= st=20 of the power is committed under long-term contracts.=20 Reliant, which provides about 9 percent of the state's power, worries it=20 won't get paid due to the financial troubles of PG&E and Edison.=20 PG&E and Edison say that together they have lost about $13 billion since Ju= ne=20 due to soaring wholesale electricity costs that California's 1996=20 deregulation law bars them from passing onto customers.=20 At the same time, the state has faced a tight electricity supply, due in pa= rt=20 to California power plant shutdowns for maintenance and to a tight=20 hydroelectric supply in the Pacific Northwest.=20 Managers of the state power grid imposed rolling blackouts across the state= =20 Monday and Tuesday as supply fell short of demand. Wednesday, cooling=20 temperatures and the completion of repairs at several power plants allowed= =20 the state to avoid blackouts.=20 State Controller Kathleen Connell said Wednesday that the energy crunch als= o=20 imperils California's financial health.=20 Connell said the state's power-buying on behalf of Edison and PG&E is is=20 gutting its budget surplus. Since the state started making emergency power= =20 buys in January, the surplus has fallen from $8.5 billion to about $3.2=20 billion, she said.=20 Connell ordered an audit of the state's power-buying, saying Davis is=20 withholding key financial information from her office and the Legislature.= =20 She is refusing a request by Davis and the Legislature to transfer $5.6=20 billion into a ""rainy day fund"" she said was set up to impress Wall Street = as=20 the state prepares to issue $10 billion in revenue bonds to cover its=20 power-buying.=20 Transferring the money would leave the state general fund $2.4 billion in= =20 debt, Connell said.=20 Sandy Harrison, spokesman for the state Department of Finance, and Keely=20 Bosler of the Legislative Analyst's Office, said such transfers are routine= =20 and required by law.=20 They put the state's budget surplus at $5.6 billion.=20 ""The law says she has to do it. The law does not give her the power to dema= nd=20 that kind of audit information,"" Harrison said.=20 He said the state's budget isn't in danger because it will be repaid with t= he=20 $10 billion in long-term debt.=20 Wells Fargo & Co. chief economist Sung Won Sohn said he sees little progres= s=20 in efforts to fix the state's power problems and end state electricity=20 purchases.=20 ""If we're going to pour money into a bottomless pit, I would worry about th= e=20 state's finances,"" he said. ""At some point we're going to run out of money.= ""=20 The controller's criticism of fellow Democrat Davis won support from Assemb= ly=20 Republicans and Secretary of State Bill Jones, a Republican considering=20 challenging Davis next year.=20 Jones said he wants to announce his own plan to solve the state's energy=20 woes, but can't unless Davis releases more financial details.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio dismissed the criticism.=20 ""Political grandstanding doesn't generate one more kilowatt of energy for= =20 California in this time of emergency,"" he said.=20 Maviglio said the administration has released the financial information it= =20 can without jeopardizing negotiations for long-term power contracts with=20 wholesalers.=20 --- Controller: State's power spending imperils its financial health=20 By Don Thompson ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 21, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) California's power-buying on behalf of two strapped utiliti= es is=20 gutting its budget surplus and putting the state at financial risk, the sta= te=20 controller said Wednesday.=20 The surplus dropped from $8.5 billion in January, when the state began buyi= ng=20 electricity for Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison= ,=20 to $3.2 billion now, Kathleen Connell estimates.=20 Connell ordered an audit of the state's power-buying, saying Gov. Gray Davi= s=20 is withholding key financial information from her office and the Legislatur= e.=20 Wednesday marked the first time in three days the state avoided rolling=20 blackouts. Power grid officials credited cooling temperatures and the=20 completion of repairs at several power plants.=20 Connell said the energy crunch now imperils the state's budget as well as i= ts=20 electric grid.=20 California has been spending about $45 million a day =01) $4.2 billion so f= ar =01)=20 to buy power for Edison and PG&E, both denied credit by electricity=20 wholesalers.=20 The two utilities, California's largest, say they are nearly $14 billion in= =20 debt due to soaring wholesale power costs the state's deregulation law bloc= ks=20 them from recovering from customers.=20 Meanwhile, the state has faced high natural gas costs and a tight power=20 supply driven in part by power plant repairs in California and scarce=20 hydroelectric power in the Pacific Northwest.=20 Standard & Poor's has put the state on a credit watch due to its power=20 purchases and chastised Davis, the Legislature and state regulators for not= =20 taking more aggressive steps to assure the utilities can pay their bills.= =20 On Wednesday, Connell said she is refusing a request by Davis and the=20 Legislature to transfer $5.6 billion into a ""rainy day fund"" she said was s= et=20 up to impress Wall Street as the state prepares to issue $10 billion in=20 revenue bonds to cover its power-buying.=20 Transferring the money would leave the state general fund $2.4 billion in= =20 debt, Connell said.=20 Sandy Harrison, spokesman for the state Department of Finance, and Keely=20 Bosler of the Legislative Analyst's Office, said such transfers are routine= =20 and required by law.=20 They put the state's budget surplus at $5.6 billion.=20 ""The law says she has to do it. The law does not give her the power to dema= nd=20 that kind of audit information,"" Harrison said.=20 He said the state's budget isn't in danger because it will be repaid with t= he=20 $10 billion in long-term debt.=20 Connell said the scope of the proposed transfer is unprecedented and amount= s=20 to a ""shell game"" that disguises the power purchases' impact on the state= =20 budget.=20 Wells Fargo & Co. chief economist Sung Won Sohn said he sees little progres= s=20 in efforts to fix the state's power problems and end state electricity=20 purchases.=20 ""If we're going to pour money into a bottomless pit, I would worry about th= e=20 state's finances,"" he said. ""At some point we're going to run out of money.= ""=20 The controller's criticism of fellow Democrat Davis won support from Assemb= ly=20 Republicans and Secretary of State Bill Jones, a Republican considering=20 challenging Davis next year.=20 Jones said he wants to announce his own plan to solve the state's energy=20 woes, but can't unless Davis releases more financial details. He said his= =20 plan may involve giving the utilities low-interest loans with their=20 transmission lines held as collateral.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio dismissed the criticism.=20 ""Political grandstanding doesn't generate one more kilowatt of energy for= =20 California in this time of emergency,"" he said.=20 Maviglio said the administration has released the financial information it= =20 can without jeopardizing negotiations for long-term power contracts with=20 wholesalers.=20 --- Governor says utilities must pay in advance for some power=20 By Jennifer Coleman ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 21, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) The state's two largest utilities will be ordered to pay=20 environmentally friendly power generators in advance, a move Gov. Gray Davi= s=20 hopes will bring a quick end to the power blackouts that darkened Californi= a=20 this week.=20 The statewide blackouts that stretched from San Diego to Oregon on Monday a= nd=20 Tuesday were caused in part by the failure of Southern California Edison an= d=20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. to pay millions of dollars they owe ""qualifyin= g=20 facilities"" or QFs, Davis said.=20 Such suppliers use cogeneration =01) steam from manufacturing plus natural = gas =01)=20 or solar, wind and other renewable energy to generate electricity. This wee= k=20 California lost about half the power those generators normally provide.=20 Controller: State's power spending imperils its financial health=20 ?=20 Several of them said they hadn't been paid by Edison and PG&E in weeks and= =20 can't afford to keep operating their plants.=20 Davis accused the utilities of taking in money from customers while failing= =20 to pay the QFs. The state has been spending about $45 million a day since= =20 January to buy power for customers of Edison and PG&E, which are so=20 credit-poor that suppliers refuse to sell to them.=20 ""It's wrong and irresponsible of the utilities to pocket this money and not= =20 pay the generators,"" the governor said at a Capitol news conference Tuesday= =20 evening. ""They've acted irresponsibly and immorally and it has to stop.""=20 PG&E called the governor's statements ""inappropriate and unjustified,"" addi= ng=20 that it was negotiating a payment plan with the QFs. Edison said it is inte= nt=20 on paying creditors and working with the California Public Utilities=20 Commission to pay QFs for future power sales.=20 Controller Kathleen Connell warned Wednesday that the state's $2=20 billion-a-month power purchases are jeopardizing California's budget.=20 The state's budget surplus dropped from $8.5 billion in January, when the= =20 power purchases began, to $3.2 billion now, Connell estimates. She blamed= =20 Davis for withholding key financial information, and ordered an audit of th= e=20 state's power spending starting next week.=20 She blocked a request by the Legislature and Davis administration to transf= er=20 $5.6 billion from the state's general fund into a special ""rainy day"" fund,= =20 saying that would have left the general fund $2.4 billion in debt.=20 The Legislative Analyst's Office said such transfers are routine; Connell= =20 agreed, but said the size of the transfer is unprecedented.=20 ""We started this year with a generous budget surplus,"" Connell said. ""The= =20 energy crisis has taken much of that away and this transfer on top of the= =20 electricity purchases would put the fund at risk.""=20 Meanwhile, keepers of the state's power grid were optimistic California wou= ld=20 get through Wednesday without another day of rolling blackouts. Two plants= =20 down for repairs returned to service.=20 Several power plants that were taken down for repairs are also expected com= e=20 online by the end of the week, reducing the likelihood of blackouts, said J= im=20 Detmers, ISO vice president.=20 Power may flow to homes and businesses, but it could soon cost consumers=20 more, said Assemblyman Fred Keeley, one of the Legislature's leaders on=20 energy issues.=20 ""I think it's intellectually appropriate and honest to tell people as soon = as=20 it's apparent"" that a rate increase is warranted, the Boulder Creek Democra= t=20 said Tuesday, indicating that time had come.=20 He estimated that the state Public Utilities Commission may soon have to=20 raise rates by about 15 percent to cover the state's costs and its utilitie= s'=20 bills.=20 ""My sense is that people will appreciate having some certainty and being ab= le=20 to plan for it,"" he said. ""They don't have to like it but I think they'll= =20 appreciate it.""=20 Davis said he is confident the utilities and the state can pay their bills= =20 without further rate increases for Edison and PG&E customers.=20 In the meantime, the Independent System Operator, keeper of the grid, is=20 counting on continued conservation by residents and businesses to avoid mor= e=20 blackouts. Conservation accounted for about 300 megawatts in savings during= =20 Tuesday's peak usage, enough to power 300,000 homes.=20 Roughly a half-million homes and businesses were affected by Tuesday's=20 blackouts, which snarled traffic and plunged schools and businesses into=20 darkness across the state.=20 The outages began at 9:30 a.m. and continued in 90-minute waves until about= 2=20 p.m., when the ISO lifted its blackout order. They were blamed for at least= =20 one serious traffic accident.=20 Two cars collided at an intersection in the Los Angeles suburb of South El= =20 Monte where the traffic lights were out. Two people were seriously hurt, sa= id=20 California Highway Patrol Officer Nick Vite.=20 In San Francisco's Chinatown, souvenir shops normally bustling with visitor= s=20 were forced to shut down. Nearby, irritated customers waited for a bank to= =20 reopen.=20 The blackouts, like Monday's, were caused by a combination of problems,=20 including unseasonably warm weather, reduced electricity imports from the= =20 Pacific Northwest and numerous power plants being shut down for repairs.=20 Adding to those troubles, the state lost about 3,100 megawatts from the QF= =20 plants.=20 Senate Energy Committee Chairwoman Debra Bowen, D-Marina del Rey, estimated= =20 Tuesday that Edison has amassed more than $1 billion and PG&E more than $2= =20 billion that they have not paid to generators.=20 Davis said the PUC planned to issue an order next week directing the=20 utilities to pre-pay their future QF bills.=20 PG&E said its prepayments hinge on an upcoming PUC decision on whether the= =20 utility's rates are sufficient to pay its bills and cover the state's power= =20 purchases on its behalf, which amount to $4.2 billion since early January.= =20 Edison and PG&E say they have lost more than $13 billion since last June to= =20 climbing wholesale electricity prices, which the state's 1996 deregulation= =20 law prevents them from passing on to ratepayers.=20 --- Energy Overcharge of $5.5 Billion Is Alleged=20 Power: Money should be refunded to taxpayers and utilities, the state grid= =20 operator says, citing evidence of market manipulation. Suppliers deny the= =20 accusation.=20 By TIM REITERMAN and NANCY RIVERA BROOKS, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????Wholesale electricity suppliers overcharged California by about $5.5= =20 billion between May and last month, and that money should be refunded to th= e=20 state's taxpayers and financially strapped utilities, the state power grid= =20 operator said Wednesday. ?????Generators engaged in market manipulation and consistent patterns of= =20 bidding far above costs in the deregulated energy market, the California=20 Independent System Operator found in a study of pricing data. The findings= =20 support the widespread belief that these suppliers reaped massive additiona= l=20 revenue by manipulating the market. ?????Spokesmen for the companies denied the accusation. ?????The study, prepared for a filing with federal regulators today, is=20 central to Cal-ISO's efforts to seek reimbursement for what it considers=20 excessive charges by electricity suppliers during the state's energy crisis= . ?????""This might be the first time we told them the total impact and=20 magnitude [of the overcharging],"" said Anjali Sheffrin, Cal-ISO's director = of=20 market analysis. ""We think the entire amount deserves consideration for=20 refunds."" ?????Using confidential bidding data on tens of thousands of electricity=20 sales, Cal-ISO found that five companies that together supply about 30% of= =20 the power delivered to customers of the state's investor-owned utilities=20 engaged in two types of behavior that tended to push up prices: ?????* They effectively withheld supplies by bidding at excessive prices,= =20 even though they could have made some money selling more electricity. ?????* Less frequently, they had power generation available but did not bid= =20 at all. ?????The study concluded that energy suppliers commonly offered their=20 electricity at twice their cost. For example, Sheffrin said, the average=20 markup in August was 100% during peak hours. ?????A spokeswoman at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which=20 oversees wholesale electricity pricing across the country, declined to=20 comment Wednesday, saying, ""This is part of an ongoing proceeding."" ?????FERC member William L. Massey, who has considered previous commission= =20 actions on refunds to be inadequate, said it would be improper for him to= =20 comment on a report that has not yet been filed. But when told of the=20 $5.5-billion total, Massey said: ""That doesn't shock me in any way."" ?????""Prices over the past 10 months in California have greatly exceeded th= e=20 federal standards of just and reasonable prices, and I think they have=20 exceeded the standards by possibly billions of dollars,"" he said. ?????Cal-ISO, which oversees grid operations and an emergency energy market= ,=20 previously detailed $550 million in alleged overcharges for December and=20 January and asked FERC for refunds. But the commission has proposed refunds= =20 of only a tiny fraction of that amount. ?????The study covered five major in-state power suppliers--Reliant Energy,= =20 Dynegy, Williams/AES, Duke Energy and Mirant, formerly Southern Energy--plu= s=20 16 power importers, all of which deliver power to customers of Pacific Gas = &=20 Electric Co., Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric Co. ?????""All [21] overcharged, but some excessively and some by moderate=20 amounts,"" Sheffrin said. ?????Cal-ISO's public filing will quantify the alleged overcharging by each= =20 company, but the companies will be identified only by a number. The code wi= ll=20 be provided to FERC, Sheffrin said, and Cal-ISO lawyers will determine how= =20 much information about the companies will be made public. ?????State, U.S. Investigations ?????California electricity markets and the companies that buy and sell pow= er=20 in the state have been the subject of several investigations by state and= =20 federal authorities since wholesale electricity prices first skyrocketed in= =20 May. ?????Electricity suppliers have repeatedly denied manipulating the Californ= ia=20 market in any way, whether through above-cost bidding in spot markets or=20 through physical withholding of electricity to drive up prices. ?????Reliant Energy is cooperating with FERC's requests for more data and i= s=20 confident the commission will conclude that prices charged by Reliant were= =20 justified, said Joe Bob Perkins, president of the Houston-based company. ?????Perkins also bitterly disputed charges that Reliant has shut down unit= s=20 so that it can earn bigger profits on the power sold by the remaining plant= s.=20 These charges have been leveled against all of the power-plant owners in th= e=20 state. ?????Reliant Vice President John Stout said Cal-ISO's calculations typicall= y=20 don't include such fixed costs as salaries, taxes and the interest on bonds= =20 they sold to finance their power plants, which they acquired under terms of= =20 the state's landmark 1996 deregulation law. ?????In addition, he said, many high-priced power days have resulted from= =20 buyers bidding against each other for scarce supplies rather than sellers= =20 charging excessive amounts--like a house price being driven far above the= =20 listing price in a hot real estate market. ?????Williams Energy Services, a trading company that markets most of the= =20 power produced by plants owned by AES, also says it will be exonerated by= =20 FERC once the commission examines documentation being submitted, said Paula= =20 Hill-Collins, spokeswoman for the Tulsa, Okla., company. ?????""FERC has the obligation to investigate when these accusations are=20 made,"" Hill-Collins said. ""This is just a process of justification, not=20 necessarily proof of guilt."" ?????Williams/AES was recently ordered by FERC to prove that it did not tak= e=20 generating units out of service last year to drive up electricity prices, o= r=20 refund $10.8 million to California utilities. ?????During the period studied, suppliers sold electricity in the Californi= a=20 Power Exchange to Southern California Edison, PG&E and San Diego Gas &=20 Electric Co. and in a backup market for last-minute electricity operated by= =20 Cal-ISO. But sky-high prices plunged Edison and PG&E deeply into debt, and= =20 most suppliers stopped selling to them in January, forcing the state=20 Department of Water Resources to step in as the primary electricity buyer f= or=20 the three big utilities' 27 million customers. ?????The Cal-ISO study, first summarized at an energy conference last week = at=20 UC Berkeley but not otherwise publicized, concluded that the companies=20 exercised so-called market power to pump up electricity prices. ?????Severin Borenstein, director of the Energy Institute at Berkeley, said= =20 Cal-ISO's study is consistent with his research examining pricing practices= =20 in 2000. ?????""We found several billion dollars . . . in departures from competitive= =20 pricing,"" he said. ""When the market was tight this summer, they were able t= o=20 push up prices, and they did."" ?????The early warning signs of electricity price spikes, the study found,= =20 appeared in May after two years of relatively stable prices of $30 to $40 p= er=20 megawatt-hour under deregulation. Prices went up during the summer, dipped = in=20 September and October with lower demand, then took off in November and=20 December as weather turned cold and the price of natural gas, which is used= =20 to generate much of the state's electricity, reached record levels. ?????""There were plant outages, and demand and supply became close,"" Sheffr= in=20 said. ""Whatever price they bid had to be taken, and market power asserted= =20 itself."" ?????Cal-ISO found that $3 billion of the alleged overcharges occurred=20 between May and November. ?????On Friday, federal regulators ordered six wholesale power suppliers to= =20 refund $55 million to California if they cannot justify prices charged in= =20 February. The refund was limited to power sold that month in excess of $430= =20 per megawatt-hour during Stage 3 power alerts, when supplies are so tight= =20 that rolling blackouts are threatened. (One megawatt-hour is enough=20 electricity to supply 750 typical homes for an hour.) ?????The previous week, FERC ordered 13 suppliers to justify or refund $69= =20 million for power sold in January at prices above $273 per megawatt-hour. ?????Massey opposed the potential refunds as too low because they were=20 limited to hours in which a Stage 3 power emergency was in place and becaus= e=20 the benchmark price set for each month was too high--combining to exempt mo= re=20 than 70,000 transactions from scrutiny. ?????""We're still looking for our lost wallet under the lamppost, which is= =20 Stage 3 alerts,"" said Massey, one of three commissioners on the five-member= =20 board (two seats are vacant). ?????Generators ""have been given the free and clear,"" he said. ?????""These tinkling little refunds they have come out with recently are=20 almost a joke,"" said Cal-ISO board member Mike Florio, senior attorney at t= he=20 Utility Reform Network. ?????Resisting Price Caps ?????Cal-ISO contends that the last 10 months have proved that generators c= an=20 no longer be allowed to receive electricity prices that are dictated by wha= t=20 the market will bear. ?????""FERC granted market-based rate authority on each of these suppliers'= =20 own showing that they could not manipulate prices, yet their actions have= =20 shown the contrary,"" Sheffrin said. ""We feel FERC needs to look at the=20 premise of allowing these generators to continue selling at market-based=20 rates."" ?????The commission is responsible for ensuring just and reasonable=20 electricity rates. Although it has called California's power market=20 dysfunctional and vulnerable to manipulation, the agency has resisted setti= ng=20 firm price caps sought by California's congressional delegation. ?????Chairman Curt L. Hebert Jr. strongly opposes caps, while Massey wants = to=20 use caps across the West as a ""temporary timeout."" ?????Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, in a New York news conference=20 Wednesday, reiterated his opposition to electricity price caps as a way to= =20 cope with California's energy crisis. ?????""If we put price caps in place, there will be more blackouts, and=20 they'll be worse,"" Abraham said. ?????Cal-ISO is filing its market study as part of its comments on FERC sta= ff=20 recommendations on ways to thwart market manipulation. FERC's proposal=20 includes strict coordination of power plant outages by Cal-ISO with reporti= ng=20 of suspicious closures to FERC, and generator-by-generator bid caps tied to= =20 costs. ---=20 ?????Reiterman reported from San Francisco, Rivera Brooks from Los Angeles.= =20 Times staff writer Thomas S. Mulligan in New York contributed to this story= . --- --- Power Strain Eases but Concerns Mount=20 Energy: Officials say summer prices will be high, and a state report shows= =20 that contracts with generators are far short of goals.=20 By DAN MORAIN and JENIFER WARREN, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????SACRAMENTO--California's fragile electricity system stabilized=20 Wednesday, but a Davis administration report suggested troubles ahead becau= se=20 the state could be forced to buy most of its power for the coming summer on= =20 the costly and volatile spot market. ?????After two days of statewide blackouts, power plants that had been shut= =20 down were cranked up. Unseasonable heat tapered off. The operators of the= =20 statewide power grid relaxed their state of emergency. ?????But plenty of ominous signs remained. Many small producers remained sh= ut=20 down, skeptical about Gov. Gray Davis' plan for utilities to pay them. ?????State Controller Kathleen Connell issued a sharp warning about the hig= h=20 cost of the state's foray into the power business and announced that she wi= ll=20 block an administration request that she transfer $5.6 billion into an=20 account that could be tapped to pay for state purchases of electricity. ?????And a report from the administration summarizing contracts between Dav= is=20 and independent power generators showed that the state has signed contracts= =20 for only 2,247 megawatts of electricity, significantly less than the 6,000 = to=20 7,000 megawatts previously claimed. ?????While there are agreements in principle for the full amount, the repor= t=20 notes that generators can back out of the contracts for a variety of reason= s,=20 including the state's failure to sell bonds to finance power purchased by= =20 July 1. The Legislature has approved plans to sell $10 billion in bonds, bu= t=20 none have yet been issued. ?????""We are exposed enormously this summer,"" Senate Energy Committee=20 chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) said after looking at the report.= =20 ""We owe the people the truth about how difficult this summer is going to be= .=20 We don't have a power fairy."" ?????Perhaps most significant, the report suggests that the contracts fall= =20 significantly short of Davis' stated goal of buying no more than 5% of the= =20 state's summer needs on the spot electricity market, where prices can be ma= ny=20 times those of long-term contracts. ?????After reading the report, Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economist= =20 who studies the California electricity market, said the numbers suggested= =20 that the state's long-term contracts will cover less than half of what the= =20 state will need this summer. ?????""We're definitely short this summer, next summer and the summer of=20 2003,"" he said. ?????California was forced to start buying electricity in December--at a co= st=20 of $50 million a day--because producers refused to sell to Southern=20 California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric. The two utilities amassed=20 billions of dollars in debt when prices for wholesale power soared on the= =20 spot market. ?????Vikram Budhraja, a consultant retained by Davis to negotiate deals wit= h=20 generators, said the report represents a ""work in progress."" He said the=20 state may yet sign new contracts. ?????However, Wolak said the contract figures confirm what he and others ha= ve=20 been dreading: that summer is going to be rife with rolling blackouts unles= s=20 serious steps to cut demand are taken immediately. ?????Wolak and other experts say large industrial customers must be switche= d=20 to real-time meters and pricing to persuade them to use the bulk of their= =20 energy at times of low demand. ?????The head of the Energy Foundation, a San Francisco-based nonprofit tha= t=20 promotes sustainable sources of power, made the same proposal to Davis on= =20 Wednesday. ?????""The government need not ask customers to swelter in the dark this=20 summer,"" foundation President Hal Harvey argued in a letter. ?????He also proposed a crash campaign to boost sales of efficient applianc= es=20 and lightbulbs. He said the state needs to take over the utilities' contrac= ts=20 with alternative energy providers to ensure they stay in business, and sign= =20 new contracts for 1,500 megawatts of new wind power--the cheapest, fastest= =20 and cleanest source of new supply. ?????Davis had proposed a formula Tuesday to force private utilities to pay= =20 the alternative producers, some of which have not been paid since November.= =20 But some of them warned Wednesday that Davis' plan offers them little=20 incentive to turn on their generators. ?????Alternative energy producers supply more than a quarter of the=20 electricity consumed in California. ?????Many producers generate electricity from wind, sun and geothermal=20 sources. But most of them generate power using natural gas--and the cost of= =20 natural gas has been soaring. Several natural gas users said Davis' plan,= =20 which caps rates, won't cover their fuel costs. ?????Davis assumes that the price of natural gas will fall. But small=20 generators say they don't have sufficient purchasing power or sophisticatio= n=20 to gamble on future prices. ?????The Public Utilities Commission is expected to approve Davis' proposal= =20 next week. It offers producers two choices: 7.9 cents a kilowatt-hour if th= ey=20 agree to supply power for five years, or 6.9 cents a kilowatt-hour over 10= =20 years. ?????""The price of natural gas is higher than that,"" said Marty Quinn,=20 executive vice president and chief operating officer of Ridgewood Power LLC= ,=20 which owns three natural gas-fired co-generation plants. ""If we operate,=20 we'll lose money."" ?????Ridgewood is not operating, having been cut off by gas suppliers. The= =20 company sued PG&E last month seeking overdue payments and release from its= =20 contracts with the utility. ?????A hearing is scheduled in El Centro today in another lawsuit filed by = a=20 small energy producer, an Imperial Valley geothermal producer that sued=20 Edison for refusing to let it break its contract and sell on the open marke= t.=20 CalEnergy says Edison owes it about $140 million for energy sold since=20 November. ?????A company spokesman, Jay Lawrence, said CalEnergy was going ahead with= =20 its suit despite Davis' proposal. ""We've had promises before,"" he said. ?????In other developments: ?????* A federal judge in Sacramento on Wednesday ordered Reliant Energy of= =20 Houston, a major producer, to continue selling power to California during= =20 emergencies, despite the company's argument that it may not be fully=20 reimbursed. The order will remain in effect for 60 days or until the U.S.= =20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission decides a related case. ?????* Connell said the state budget surplus has shrunk to $3.2 billion=20 because the state has spent roughly $2.8 billion on electricity. She=20 criticized the administration for withholding basic information about state= =20 finances, and said she will begin an audit on Monday of the Department of= =20 Water Resources, which is responsible for purchasing power. ?????Davis' aides said Connell took her action because the Democratic=20 governor endorsed one of Connell's foes this week in the race for Los Angel= es=20 mayor, former Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa. A Connell aide scoffed= =20 at the notion. ?????* Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said she ""never has had a response""= =20 from President Bush after writing him last month for an appointment to=20 discuss the California energy crisis. ?????In a wide-ranging lunch talk with reporters in Washington, she deplore= d=20 the fact that ""huge, huge profits are being made"" in the California crisis,= =20 and said ""an appropriate federal role"" would be to guarantee a reliable=20 source of power until the state can get nine new generators online. ---=20 ?????Times staff writers Mitchell Landsberg in Los Angeles and Robert L.=20 Jackson in Washington contributed to this report. --- --- ------------------------ --- --- ------------------------ Net Complex A Dilemma For San Jose=20 SERVER FARM: Plant would tax grid=20 David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Thursday, March 22, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /22/M N236772.DTL=20 San Jose, while trying to block construction of a new power plant, is set t= o=20 approve a vast computer complex that could overwhelm California's already= =20 strained power grid.=20 City officials gave preliminary approval last week to what would be the=20 world's largest ""server farm."" The sprawling facility to handle Internet=20 traffic would drain about 150 megawatts of power from the state electricity= =20 grid.=20 If granted final authorization on April 3, the $1.2 billion project would a= dd=20 the equivalent of about 150,000 homes to California's power system, which w= as=20 hit this week by rolling blackouts as demand for juice outstripped availabl= e=20 supply.=20 The server-farm issue highlights a vexing dilemma for the state.=20 On the one hand, Gov. Gray Davis is calling for widespread conservation to= =20 help California overcome its current troubles. On the other, no one wants t= o=20 curtail growth of the high-tech industry, which is an engine for economic= =20 vitality.=20 ""San Jose will make a lot of money from this project,"" said Craig Breon,=20 executive director of the Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society. ""But to not= =20 help the state out of its energy situation, there's a fair amount of=20 hypocrisy going on.""=20 The server farm would be owned by U.S. DataPort, a San Jose data-management= =20 firm. As planned, it would occupy 10 buildings on more than 170 acres in th= e=20 city's Alviso area.=20 Total projected energy use would be 180 megawatts. About 30 megawatts would= =20 be generated by a small on-site facility, and the rest would have to be=20 provided by Pacific Gas and Electric Co.=20 ""We're confident that the DataPort project will be approved because it's ve= ry=20 important to San Jose and to the local economy,"" said San Jose Mayor Ron=20 Gonzales.=20 But PG&E already is saying that its power cupboard is bare. The utility ""do= es=20 not have sufficient existing electric infrastructure"" to meet U.S. DataPort= 's=20 needs, it said in a recent letter to San Jose officials.=20 John Mogannam, U.S. DataPort's senior vice president of operations, counter= ed=20 that it could take as long as five years for the server farm to grow big=20 enough to require the full 150 megawatts from the state grid.=20 ""Hopefully, by then the whole energy crisis will pass by, and we won't have= a=20 problem,"" he said.=20 Mogannam stressed the positive aspects of the project, such as its ability = to=20 handle about 15 percent of global Internet traffic, the 700 jobs it would= =20 create, and the $70 million over 10 years it would generate for San Jose in= =20 property and utility taxes.=20 ""That's why the city likes it,"" he said.=20 Indeed, San Jose officials are so enamored with such developments that they= =20 have all but turned a deaf ear to warnings that the server farm will=20 exacerbate California's already dire power shortage.=20 Andrew Crabtree, the city's senior planner, said the planning commission ha= d=20 barely touched the question of energy supply when it approved the server fa= rm=20 last week.=20 ""It wasn't incumbent on the commission to solve the state's energy-supply= =20 problems,"" he said.=20 Rather, San Jose city planners focused on the environmental ramifications o= f=20 the proposed facility, including air pollution from diesel generators and t= he=20 impact on nearby wildlife.=20 How it would affect dozens of burrowing owls in the area was a key topic of= =20 discussion.=20 ""We all recognized that there's a power shortage,"" Crabtree said. ""But we= =20 couldn't do anything about that with this project.""=20 Except to make things tougher, of course.=20 Server farms run 24 hours a day, seven days a week. They are an aspect of t= he=20 high-tech boom that was never foreseen by energy experts, and which are now= a=20 major contributor to California's surging electricity demand.=20 A server farm essentially is a large building filled with computers. Each= =20 computer handles the Web site or Internet traffic for hundreds of corporate= =20 clients that do not have the technical resources to look after such things= =20 in- house.=20 Most server farms consume between 10 and 60 megawatts of power. At 180=20 megawatts, the U.S. DataPort facility is billed as the most extensive data= =20 center on the planet.=20 ""There won't be another this size anywhere in the world,"" said Mogannam, th= e=20 company's senior vice president. ""This will be the biggest.""=20 With such a vast scale, however, comes additional concerns. For example, al= l=20 that hardware will generate huge amounts of heat, requiring powerful air=20 conditioners running around the clock to keep things cool.=20 Patrick Dorinson, a spokesman for the Independent System Operator, which=20 oversees California's electricity network, said server farms had ""a big=20 impact"" on the state's tight energy supply.=20 ""We have an economy that's increasingly based on delivery of information,"" = he=20 observed. ""We certainly need to make sure we're building adequate generatio= n=20 and transmission to get it there.""=20 As it stands, no major power plants have been built in California for the= =20 past 12 years, while dozens of server farms have sprung up throughout the= =20 state.=20 The Yankee Group, a Boston consulting firm, estimates that the amount of=20 space taken up by server farms nationwide rose to 9 million square feet fro= m=20 1999 to 2000.=20 By 2003, it expects that figure to increase to 25 million square feet, or= =20 enough room for more than a hundred 10-story office buildings.=20 San Francisco may be the exception. Supervisor Sophie Maxwell proposed=20 interim zoning controls last week that would require server farms to receiv= e=20 special permission from City Hall to operate.=20 San Jose, for its part, has no such reservations. It does, however, draw th= e=20 line at big, fat power plants in the backyard of the city's leading corpora= te=20 citizen.=20 Gonzales is spearheading opposition to a proposed 600-megawatt generating= =20 facility in Coyote Valley because of its proximity to a residential area at= =20 the site of a planned Cisco Systems office complex.=20 ""There's plenty of opportunities to generate power in the city,"" he said.= =20 ""This project is just in the wrong site.""=20 The matter is now in the hands of the California Energy Commission, which i= s=20 expected to issue a ruling by May.=20 Cisco, critics say, twisted the mayor's arm to fight the plant because it d= id=20 not want a generating facility in its neighborhood. The area will be home t= o=20 thousands of well-heeled tech workers.=20 ""It's politics,"" said Breon at the Audubon Society. ""City officials are=20 making political decisions rather than good planning decisions.""=20 Ted Smith, executive director of the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, a=20 grassroots organization, is calling for a moratorium on construction of all= =20 new server farms in the South Bay until sufficient power can be found to ke= ep=20 them running.=20 ""Until they figure out how to build these things without draining the=20 electricity grid even dryer it is, they shouldn't build them,"" he said.=20 ""The Internet industry is creating unintended consequences that will really= =20 screw up our future,"" Smith added. ""They are so busy focusing on next=20 quarter's profits that they don't stop and think about the consequences."" .= =20 .=20 SOME FAST FACTS ABOUT 'SERVER FARMS' .=20 -- What are they? ""Server farms"" are facilities dedicated exclusively to=20 housing powerful computers for Internet use.=20 -- Who uses them? Companies and individuals pay server farms to maintain=20 their Web sites, handle Net traffic and store vast amounts of data --=20 functions that otherwise would require extensive hardware and technical=20 support.=20 -- Why do they use them? As Internet use explodes, server farms play an=20 increasingly vital role in managing data and keeping information moving.=20 -- What's the problem? Server farms drain considerable amounts of electrici= ty=20 to keep running.=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 --- Contracts Won't Meet Summer Demands=20 DETAILS: 2004 before full impact felt=20 Lynda Gledhill, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau Thursday, March 22, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /22/M N230640.DTL=20 Sacramento -- Long-term power contracts negotiated by the state won't cover= =20 California's entire demand for electricity until 2004, according to newly= =20 released details about the agreements.=20 The information suggests that California might have to scrounge for=20 electricity on the high-priced spot market for a couple more years even as = it=20 continues to push conservation efforts and construction of more generating= =20 plants.=20 Details of the agreements released by Gov. Gray Davis' administration show= =20 that the contracts will provide for just over a third of the state's demand= =20 for power this year. Energy secured by the contracts will grow to meet the= =20 expected demand in three years.=20 Short-term purchases of power have at least temporarily depleted the state'= s=20 budget surplus and have raised the possibility of sharp rate increases=20 sometime in the future for electricity customers.=20 Davis administration officials are banking on the hope that conservation=20 efforts and increased generating capacity will cover the shortfall along wi= th=20 purchases of electricity on the spot market.=20 ""We're facing an extreme challenge still this summer,"" said Severin=20 Borenstein, head of the University of California at Berkeley Energy=20 Institute. ""Signing contracts doesn't create more electricity.""=20 The information released did not include the names of companies that the=20 state has signed contracts with or the purchase prices.=20 The sketchy details did not satisfy frustrated lawmakers, who said many=20 questions remain, especially how much the state will end up paying under th= e=20 terms of the contracts.=20 ""The fundamental question is how much is it costing the state of California= =20 to keep the lights on,"" said Assemblyman Tony Strickland, R-Thousand Oaks.= =20 ""What we really need is total disclosure.""=20 The state started buying power in January, after generators began refusing = to=20 provide electricity to the state's investor-owned utilities. Pacific Gas an= d=20 Electric Co. and Southern California Edison say they have more than $13=20 billion in past debt.=20 The state has been spending $49 million a day on power purchases since Jan.= =20 17, according to documents obtained by The Chronicle last week.=20 Those documents said the average price of the contracts across 10 years is= =20 $69 per megawatt hour, including summer peak. The five-year average price i= s=20 $79 per megawatt hour.=20 According to one chart provided by the governor's office yesterday, the=20 long-term contracts will fall about 35 million megawatt hours short in 2002= .=20 Based on the average price per megawatt hour the state has been paying sinc= e=20 January, that could end up costing between $6.6 billion and $13 billion.=20 The law creating the state purchasing authority allowed purchases up to $10= =20 billion and extends until 2003.=20 The governor's office said 21 contracts have been signed and another 23=20 agreements that have been reached but not yet signed.=20 Several generators have said that they will not sign contracts with the sta= te=20 until the back debt by the utilities has been taken care of.=20 ""We have some real potential problems,"" said Senate President Pro Tem John= =20 Burton, D-San Francisco.=20 Strickland and several media outlets, including The Chronicle, have filed= =20 public information requests to get more information about the prices of the= =20 contracts from the administration.=20 Releasing the information would jeopardize the negotiations for future=20 contracts, said Steve Maviglio, Davis' spokesman.=20 Lawmakers, also frustrated by the lack of information given out by the Davi= s=20 administration, were not given notice that the information was coming, and= =20 many said it was lost in their mail pile.=20 The cover letter was on Los Angeles Department of Water and Power letterhea= d,=20 not that of the administration. The letter was written by S. David Freeman,= =20 head of the Los Angeles system who was on leave for the month of February t= o=20 help the state negotiate the contracts.=20 Assemblyman George Runner, R-Lancaster, said the ""ambiguity of the=20 information raises more questions than it answers.""=20 ""It's like watching a parade through a peephole,"" he said. ""He's showing us= =20 another float, but I don't know what the parade looks like.""=20 Blaming the state's purchases of electricity, Controller Kathleen Connell= =20 said yesterday that the state's cash on hand had fallen from $8.5 billion i= n=20 January to $3.2 billion. Connell ordered an audit of the state's power=20 buying.=20 Connell said she would block a transfer sought by the Davis administration = of=20 $5.6 billion from the general fund to the state's emergency reserve account= ,=20 claiming it would lead to a ''serious cash flow crisis.""=20 The transfer, however, is not related to the energy crisis. The sum=20 represents a routine rollover of unspent money from the previous fiscal yea= r.=20 State law requires that money to be sent to a special reserve account for= =20 emergencies.=20 Davis officials acknowledged that $3.7 billion in energy purchases have had= =20 an impact on state coffers, but they say the state will be repaid once bond= s=20 are issued in the coming weeks. They also said the state typically has its= =20 lowest cash reserves at this time of year. That changes in mid-April when a= =20 flood of income tax revenue pours in.=20 ""The transfer has nothing to do with energy purchases,"" said Sandy Harrison= ,=20 a spokesman for the Department of Finance.=20 ""It's not helpful to ratepayers, taxpayers and people who want their lights= =20 to stay on to have the issue muddied with this sort of inaccurate innuendo,= ""=20 Harrison said.=20 In other developments yesterday:=20 -- After two days of statewide rolling blackouts, power grid managers avoid= ed=20 outages. Demand was lower because of cooler temperatures around the state a= nd=20 supply increased as several power plants completed repairs.=20 -- A federal judge in Sacramento ordered a major power generator to continu= e=20 supplying power to California. Reliant Energy Services Inc. had insisted th= at=20 it should not be forced to sell to debt-heavy utilities unless the state=20 guaranteed the bills.=20 Chronicle staff writer Greg Lucas contributed to this story. / E-mail Lynda= =20 Gledhill at lgledhill@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 --- --- ----------------- California overcharged $5.5 bln for wholesale power=20 SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- Electricity wholesalers overcharged California= =20 $5.5 billion over the past 10 months, according to a report by managers of= =20 the state's power grid.=20 The five companies, among other things, frequently offered electricity at= =20 prices double what it cost them to produce, concludes the California=20 Independent System Operator study, which was published Thursday in the Los= =20 Angeles Times.=20 ``All overcharged, but some excessively and some by moderate amounts,'' sai= d=20 Anjali Sheffrin, the ISO's director of market analysis.=20 The Times said the ISO planned to file the study with federal regulators=20 Thursday and are demanding that the money be paid back.=20 The companies denied the allegations, adding they expect the Federal Energy= =20 Regulatory Commission will determine their prices were justified.=20 The commission has recently stepped up its scrutiny of power companies'=20 behavior during California's power crisis, asking suppliers to justify $124= =20 million in sales during the first two months of the year or refund the mone= y.=20 Critics claim thousands of additional questionable sales are not being=20 challenged.=20 The ISO study alleges the wholesalers manipulated the market by bidding at= =20 excessive prices, effectively withholding supplies, or by not bidding at al= l=20 when they had generation capability available.=20 California has been spending about $45 million a day -- $4.2 billion since= =20 January -- to purchase power for Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern= =20 California Edison. Both utilities, the state's largest, have been cut off b= y=20 electricity wholesalers because their credit is almost worthless.=20 State Controller Kathleen Connell said Wednesday that the state's=20 power-buying is gutting its budget surplus. Since the state started making= =20 emergency power buys, the surplus has fallen from $8.5 billion to about $3.= 2=20 billion, she said.=20 A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction Wednesday ordering a major= =20 electricity wholesaler, Reliant Energy Services, to continue selling to=20 California despite its fear that it will not be paid.=20 U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said Californians were at risk of= =20 irreparable harm if Reliant stopped selling power to the ISO, which buys it= =20 at the last minute on behalf of utilities to bolster supplies and try to fe= nd=20 off rolling blackouts.=20 Such blackouts hit the state twice this week. On Wednesday, cooling=20 temperatures and the completion of repairs at several power plants allowed= =20 the state to avoid blackouts.=20 Standard & Poor's has put the state on a credit watch due to its power=20 purchases and chastised Gov. Gray Davis, the Legislature and state regulato= rs=20 for not taking more aggressive steps to make sure the utilities can pay the= ir=20 bills.=20 Edison and PG&E say they are nearly $14 billion in debt due to soaring=20 wholesale power costs. The state's deregulation law blocks them from=20 recovering the costs from customers.=20 Connell ordered an audit of the state's power-buying, saying Davis is=20 withholding key financial information from her office and the Legislature.= =20 She said she would refuse to transfer $5.6 billion into a ``rainy day fund'= '=20 she said was set up to impress Wall Street as the state prepares to issue $= 10=20 billion in revenue bonds to cover its power buys. Transferring the money=20 would leave the state general fund $2.4 billion in debt, Connell said.=20 She called the scope of the proposed transfer unprecedented and said it=20 amounted to a ``shell game'' that disguises the power purchases' effect on= =20 the state budget.=20 Sandy Harrison, spokesman for the state Department of Finance, and Keely=20 Bosler, of the Legislative Analyst's Office, said such transfers are routin= e=20 and required by law. They put the state's budget surplus at $5.6 billion.= =20 ``The law says she has to do it. The law does not give her the power to=20 demand that kind of audit information,'' Harrison said.=20 Harrison said the state's budget isn't in danger because it will be repaid= =20 with the revenue bonds.=20 Connell's criticism of Davis, a fellow Democrat, won support from Assembly= =20 Republicans and Secretary of State Bill Jones, a Republican who may challen= ge=20 Davis next year.=20 Jones said he wants to announce his own plan to solve the state's energy=20 woes, but can't unless Davis releases more financial details.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio dismissed the criticism.=20 ``Political grandstanding doesn't generate one more kilowatt of energy for= =20 California in this time of emergency,'' he said.=20 Maviglio said the administration has released the financial information it= =20 can without jeopardizing negotiations for long-term power contracts with=20 wholesalers. --- --- ---------------------------- If the power goes off=20 Thursday, March 22, 2001=20 For most of us, rolling power blackouts are a nuisance. For some people, it= =20 could mean life or death.=20 ""In Laguna Hills, cancer patient Ruben Marquez said the blackout interrupte= d=20 and prolonged his dialysis treatment. He was unharmed,"" the Register report= ed=20 on Monday's blackouts, which hit about 1.2 million Californians, including= =20 100,000 Orange County homes and businesses.=20 What can people do to prevent disaster?=20 ""They and their families should have a backup plan,"" Rebecca Long,=20 spokesperson for the Orange County Red Cross, told us.=20 ""The Red Cross recommends in general that you plan for this as you would fo= r=20 any disaster, making sure you have battery-operated radios and flashlights.= =20 We do not recommend candles for an emergency,"" because of the fire hazard.= =20 She recommended a Web site: www.prepare.org People with special health needs, such as electric-powered respirators and= =20 oxygen machines, also should register with the power company. ""There's a whole classification"" for such persons with health needs, Southe= rn=20 California Edison spokesperson Clara Potes-Fellow told us. ""The list is for us to alert them that the power could be discontinued. The= y=20 arrange to have power through other means, batteries or generators. We=20 recommend that they have a battery backup of eight hours. Therefore, if the= =20 rotating outages are one hour, they will have plenty."" Even though the power company has such people's names, she said, ""we don't= =20 inform them in advance because we have just minutes from when the Independe= nt=20 System Operator,"" which directs where the electrons go, orders Edison to=20 implement a power outage on the grid Edison owns. ""By the time it took to= =20 call people, the outage would be over."" What's the problem at the ISO? ""We notify as best we can,"" Pat Dorinson, IS= O=20 director of communications, told us.=20 ""The object is to keep the lights on. Sometimes it's just a moment's notice= ""=20 before a blackout. ""It makes [giving more notice] pretty difficult. We're= =20 looking into ways to make the system better.""=20 In the meantime, citizens will have to keep taking precautions. We can't help noting that free market pricing, instead of politically-drive= n=20 prices, would much more likely make electricity available, albeit at higher= =20 prices.=20 We would expect, too, there would be hardship allowances, donations and=20 level-pay plans to accommodate various types of needs. --- Socialized electricity=20 Thursday, March 22, 2001=20 Government control of state power won't add one watt for consumers' use TOM MCCLINTOCK Sen. McClintock, R-Thousand Oaks, represents the 19th state Senate District= =20 in the state Legislature.=20 In a city where bad ideas never die, Sacramento is once again host to a=20 variety of plans for the government takeover of California's power system.= =20 The private sector, it is said, has done such a terrible job of providing= =20 electricity that government must now step in to save the day. Thus, the=20 Legislature is awash in proposals to spend billions of dollars of public=20 money to acquire existing power facilities. Fifteen billion dollars has=20 already been authorized for this purpose, and an additional $10 billion is= =20 pending in the Senate.=20 Meanwhile, Gov. Davis is losing about a $1.5 billion a month day-trading in= =20 the electricity market. The irony is that after the expenditure of as much = as=20 $25 billion for ""public power,'' not a single inch will have been added to= =20 the transmission lines, nor a single watt to the generating capacity of=20 California. The root of California's crisis is a catastrophic shortage of electricity. = In=20 a shortage, prices rise or blackouts occur. To reduce prices and avoid=20 blackouts, the only permanent solution is to increase the supply. Merely=20 changing the ownership of existing facilities leaves Californians with=20 exactly the same shortage, only billions of dollars the poorer for it.=20 Government takeover advocates argue that at least a government power=20 authority will protect consumers against price gouging and poor management.= =20 Unfortunately, government power authorities don't insulate against price=20 gouging. The biggest price gouger in this entire crisis has been the Los=20 Angeles Department of Water and Power, which was generating electricity for= =20 $51 per megawatt hour and selling it back to California ratepayers for as= =20 much as $1,400.=20 Nor does a government takeover assure better management. Just a few years= =20 ago, the LADWP was buried in $7 billion in debt. The Sacramento Municipal= =20 Utilities District was a managerial laughing stock, having squandered=20 hundreds of millions of dollars for a nuclear plant it barely used. ""Say what you will,'' the government takeover advocates reply, ""when push= =20 came to shove, the municipal utility districts of California are in great= =20 shape, while the private utilities are a basket case.'' But one needs to lo= ok=20 at the reason. Ever since the state reorganized the electricity market in= =20 1996, the municipal utility districts were allowed to trade in a free marke= t,=20 while the private utilities were forced to buy power exclusively in a=20 Soviet-style power exchange where the highest bid during an hour set all=20 prices. The municipal utilities were able to retain their generators. Government=20 forced the private utilities to sell theirs. The municipal utilities were= =20 able to enter into long-term contracts. Government prevented the private=20 utilities from doing the same thing. The municipal utilities were able to= =20 negotiate the lowest prices available for power. Government forced the=20 private utilities to pay the outlandish prices on the government's power=20 exchange. The municipal utilities were allowed to adjust their rates to=20 reflect the actual cost of power to consumers. Government forced the privat= e=20 utilities to sell at astronomical losses. The final argument is simply an ideological one: that power is just too=20 important to be left in private hands. Really? Food is a great deal more=20 important and private hands have kept this nation well fed for centuries.= =20 Picturing the Department of Motor Vehicles running the local supermarket=20 should sober even the most euphoric of the government takeover advocates. California's Independent System Operator is predicting a 6,000-megawatt=20 shortfall this summer. When there is no electricity on the transmission=20 lines, it really won't matter who owns them. During the hottest hours of th= e=20 hottest days of the year, when as many as 6 million homes are without=20 electricity, it may begin to dawn on most people that socialism doesn't wor= k=20 any better in California than it did in the Soviet Union. --- --- ------- NEWS=20 Bush's Energy Policy Will Backfire, Feinstein Warns / She wants federal pri= ce=20 controls now Carolyn Lochhead 03/22/2001=20 The San Francisco Chronicle=20 FINAL=20 Page A.3=20 (Copyright 2001)=20 Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., warned yesterday that when blackouts=20 intensify in California this summer, the pressure will intensify on the Bus= h=20 administration to explain why it rejected price controls on wholesale=20 electricity.=20 ""If by this summer California is, as anticipated, facing these blackouts, a= nd=20 the federal government won't help, I don't think the American people are=20 going to be very pleased,"" Feinstein told California reporters.=20 Asked if help means the cost-based price controls Feinstein is pushing, she= =20 said, ""Right now, yes.""=20 Feinstein said California Democrats will begin to escalate their criticism = of=20 the administration, predicting that support will build among Western senato= rs=20 for her legislation to impose price caps on wholesale electricity in exchan= ge=20 for lifting the rate cap on California consumers.=20 If it passes, she said, ""the administration is really going to have to face= =20 whether they're going to help or not help.""=20 Feinstein said House Democrats from the West Coast also told her they expec= t=20 that White House inaction on price caps would help them gain seats in 2002.= =20 But she refused to speculate on the political fallout from the energy crisi= s=20 against Democrats in California .=20 Feinstein characterized Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham's adamant argument= s=20 against price controls as ""recalcitrant,"" saying his statement to a Senate= =20 committee last week ""essentially said California 's on its own.""=20 She speculated that because "" California is dominantly Democratic, even=20 somebody like me that works across party lines is beginning to wonder if th= is=20 isn't an unnecessarily barbed stick at California .""=20 White House spokesman Ken Lisaius disputed the charge, saying the Bush=20 administration is doing all it can, but can't control that demand is=20 outstripping supply.=20 ""The federal government cannot prevent blackouts, but can only help at the= =20 margins in situations like this,"" Lisaius said. ""The only thing that can=20 prevent blackouts is reduced demand, increased supply and good weather.""=20 Abraham has twice in the last week argued strongly against price controls,= =20 including the cost-based ones Feinstein advocates, saying they could increa= se=20 blackouts by discouraging power sales into the Western electricity grid.=20 He also said many power providers, including the federal Bonneville Power= =20 Administration in the home district of Sen. Gordon Smith, the Oregon=20 Republican co-sponsoring Feinstein's bill, would be exempt from federal pri= ce=20 caps. Feinstein disputed that, but Smith's office agreed.=20 Abraham argued that price controls would not work in part because roughly= =20 half the Western electricity market would be exempt, including federal powe= r=20 marketing authorities such as Bonneville, rural electric cooperatives and= =20 municipal utilities such as the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power.= =20 On another front, House Republicans omitted from their budget projected=20 revenues from opening part of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil an= d=20 gas exploration.=20 A Budget Committee spokeswoman said Chairman Jim Nussle, R-Iowa, determined= =20 that the $1 billion in revenues from the wildlife refuge the Bush=20 administration included in its budget were not needed and that there was ""n= o=20 reason to put in something that controversial, that some of our members don= 't=20 even like, when you don't have to.""=20 But Rep. Gary Miller, R-Diamond Bar (Los Angeles County) said House=20 Republicans ""are not backing off at all"" from opening the wildlife refuge t= o=20 drilling. ""Our goal is to get it passed in the House,"" he said, saying the= =20 Budget Committee omitted the revenue projections because the drilling has n= ot=20 yet been approved.=20 PHOTO; Caption: Sen. Dianne Feinstein wants to cap wholesale electricity=20 costs and end caps on con- sumer rates.=20 --- ------ Reliant Still In Power Pact Talks With Calif. DWR=20 By Christina Cheddar 03/22/2001=20 Dow Jones News Service=20 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)=20 Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES=20 =20 (This report was originally published late Wednesday.)=20 =20 NEW YORK -(Dow Jones)- Reliant Energy Inc. (REI) remains in discussions wit= h=20 the California Department of Water Resources to sign long-term power=20 contracts.=20 However, issues regarding the creditworthiness of the agency remain, said J= oe=20 Bob Perkins, president of Reliant's Wholesale Division.=20 ""We want to be part of the solution,"" Perkins said. At the same time, Relia= nt=20 is trying to protect itself from incurring additional unpaid accounts=20 receivable, he said.=20 The DWR has been buying power on behalf of California 's financially troubl= ed=20 utilities. However, Reliant has yet to sign a formal agreement with the=20 agency because Reliant is concerned it won't be paid.=20 During a conference call Wednesday, Perkins said he couldn't comment on a= =20 lawsuit between Reliant and the California Independent System Operator=20 because he didn't know how it was progressing.=20 Further court action on the case is expected Wednesday.=20 The lawsuit stems from Reliant's desire not to be required to sell power to= =20 California if the state won't guarantee payment. The Houston energy company= =20 is concerned that it won't be paid for power being bought by the ISO on=20 behalf of Edison International's (EIX) Southern California Edison unit and= =20 PG&E Corp.'s (PCG) Pacific Gas & Electric Co. unit.=20 To date, Reliant is owed ""some $370 million"" from unpaid power sales to the= =20 utilities.=20 Much of Perkins' presentation centered on how the power crisis in Californi= a=20 emerged.=20 Using data from research firm Cambridge Energy Research Associates, the=20 company discussed the imbalance between California 's power demand and its= =20 power supply.=20 Looking ahead to the summer, it isn't a question of whether rolling blackou= ts=20 will occur, but ""how many and how severe,"" Perkins said.=20 Low hydroelectric availability, loss of imported power, warm weather, deman= d=20 growth and plant outages could lead to a worst-case scenario in California = ,=20 he said, adding that some estimates predict California could experience 1,1= 00=20 hours of power outages this summer.=20 The skyrocketing power prices in the region are a reflection of the power= =20 market's imbalance, he said.=20 Reliant submitted only ""economically sound"" bids for power, Perkins said. H= e=20 expects the company can document why it charged the prices it did as requir= ed=20 by regulators.=20 ""We have been very rigorous and very disciplined in what we have submitted,= ""=20 Perkins said.=20 He added that retail customer price increases are one way of sending a sign= al=20 to consumers to lower consumption. He cited studies that show a 20% retail= =20 price increase could reduce consumption by 2,000 megawatts. A megawatt is= =20 enough power to serve roughly 1,000 homes.=20 -By Christina Cheddar, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-5166;=20 --- ------ CPUC Must Address Rates In QF Repayment Order - SoCal Ed 03/22/2001=20 Dow Jones Energy Service=20 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)=20 (This article was originally published Wednesday)=20 =20 LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Any order from the California Public Utilities=20 Commission requiring utilities to pay small, independent generators going= =20 forward must determine how that could be done within the existing rate=20 structure, a spokesman for Edison International (EIX) utility Southern=20 California Edison said Wednesday.=20 The utility was responding to a PUC proposed decision that would require=20 utilities to pay small generators, called qualifying facilities, $79 a=20 megawatt hour within 15 days of electricity delivery. The decision will be= =20 voted March 27 by the CPUC.=20 ""We're still reviewing (the decision) and should have more to say in a day = or=20 two. To the extent that the commission orders us to pay going forward of=20 course we will. But it needs to address how we will pay the QFs,"" a SoCal= =20 Edison spokesman said.=20 SoCal Edison and PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric Co. are=20 struggling under nearly $13 billion in uncollected power costs due to an=20 inability to pass high wholesale power costs to customers under a rate=20 freeze.=20 Gov. Gray Davis Tuesday blasted the utilities for not having paid their QF= =20 bills in full since December. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. has made some=20 partial payments to QFs, but SoCal Edison has paid nothing. Together, they= =20 owe the QFs about $1 billion, but the order doesn't address that debt.=20 An Edison executive said, in reaction to the governor's sharp comments, tha= t=20 the company simply doesn't have the money to pay creditors.=20 ""The root problem here is there just isn't enough money in the current rate= =20 base to pay our bills,"" said Edison Senior Vice President of Public Affairs= =20 Bob Foster. ""We understand the financial distress (the QFs) face; we are=20 facing financial distress ourselves.""=20 The proposed PUC order would also require the state's investor-owned=20 utilities to offer the small generators five- and 10-year contracts for pow= er=20 for $79/MWh and $69/MWh, respectively.=20 The QFs ""may be able to live with"" the PUC proposal, but the five- and=20 10-year contract prices may be inadequate if natural gas prices at one of t= he=20 California borders are high, said Jan Smutny-Jones, president of the=20 Independent Energy Producers Association. Natural gas prices into Californi= a=20 are currently higher than anywhere in the country.=20 But some say the proposed decision may not be enough to prevent the QFs fro= m=20 filing involuntary bankruptcy proceedings against the utilities for the mon= ey=20 they are still owed.=20 ""There's still a lot of skepticism. To say our position has changed based o= n=20 the CPUC decision or the governor's announcement is not accurate. A lot sti= ll=20 has to happen,"" said Jay Lawrence, a spokesman for a renewable creditors=20 committee.=20 -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872;=20 --- ------ Calif Small Pwr Producers To Shut Plants If Rates Capped By Jason Leopold 03/22/2001=20 Dow Jones Energy Service=20 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)=20 Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES=20 =20 (This article was originally published earlier Thursday.)=20 =20 LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Many of California 's independent power producers= =20 late Wednesday threatened to take their small power plants offline this wee= k=20 if state lawmakers pass legislation that would cap the rates the generators= =20 charge for electricity they sell directly to the state's three investor-own= ed=20 utilities.=20 At issue is a bill that would repeal a section of the state's Public=20 Utilities Code, which links the 688 so-called qualifying facilities'=20 electricity rates to the monthly border price of natural gas.=20 Lawmakers, however, are poised to pass the legislation.=20 State regulators are then expected to approve a measure that would=20 restructure the fluctuating rates the QFs charge PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit=20 Pacific Gas & Electric , Edison International (EIX) unit Southern Californi= a=20 Edison, and Sempra Energy (SRE) unit San Diego Gas & Electric from $170 a= =20 megawatt-hour to $69-$79/MWh, regardless of the price of natural gas.=20 Whereas each of the 688 QF contracts differed, largely because natural gas= =20 prices are higher in Southern California than Northern California , the sta= te=20 wants the QFs to sign a general contract with the utilities.=20 The cogeneration facilities, which produce about 5,400 megawatts of=20 electricity in the state, said the rates are too low and they won't sign ne= w=20 supply contracts with the utilities.=20 ""For $79/MWh, natural gas would have to be $6 per million British thermal= =20 unit at the Southern California border,"" said Tom Lu, executive director of= =20 Carson-based Watson Cogeneration Company, the state's largest QF, generatin= g=20 340 MW. ""Our current gas price at the border is $12.50.""=20 Other gas-fired QFs said the state could face another round of rolling=20 blackouts if lawmakers and state regulators pass the legislation, which is= =20 expected to be heard on the Senate floor Thursday, and allow it to be=20 implemented by Public Utilities Commission next week.=20 Lu, whose company is half-owned by BP Amoco PLC (BP) and is owed $100 milli= on=20 by SoCal Ed, said the proposals by the PUC and the Legislature ""will only= =20 make things worse.""=20 David Fogarty, spokesman for Western States Petroleum Association, whose=20 members supply California with more than 2,000 MW, said the utilities need = to=20 pay the QFs more than $1 billion for electricity that was already produced.= =20 =20 State Loses 3,000 MW QF Output Due Of Financial Reasons=20 =20 The QFs represent about one-third, or 9,700 MW, of the state's total power= =20 supply. Roughly 5,400 MW are produced by natural gas-fired facilities. The= =20 rest is generated by wind, solar power and biomass.=20 About 3,000 MW of gas-fired and renewable QF generation is offline in=20 California because the power plant owners haven't been paid hundreds of=20 millions of dollars from cash-strapped utilities SoCal Ed and PG&E for near= ly=20 four months.=20 Several small power plant owners owed money by SoCal Ed have threatened to= =20 drag the utility into involuntary bankruptcy if the utility continues to=20 default on payments and fails to agree to supply contracts at higher rates.= =20 The defaults have left many of the renewable and gas-fired QFs unable to=20 operate their power plants because they can't afford to pay for the natural= =20 gas to run their units. Others continue to produce electricity under their= =20 contracts with the state's utilities but aren't being paid even on a forwar= d=20 basis.=20 The California Independent System Operator, keeper of the state's electrici= ty=20 grid, said the loss of the QF generation was the primary reason rolling=20 blackouts swept through the state Monday and Tuesday.=20 Gov. Gray Davis, recognizing the potential disaster if additional QFs took= =20 their units offline, held marathon meetings with key lawmakers Monday and= =20 Tuesday to try and hammer out an agreement that would get the QFs paid on a= =20 forward basis and set rates of $79/MWh and $69/MWh for five and 10 year=20 contracts. He also said he would direct the PUC to order the utilities to p= ay=20 the QFs for power they sell going forward.=20 ""After next week the QF problem will be behind us,"" Davis said Tuesday. ""We= =20 want to get the QFs paid...the QFs are dropping like flies...and when that= =20 happens the lights go out.""=20 But this just makes the problem worse, said Assemblyman Dean Florez,=20 D-Shafter, a member of the Assembly energy committee.=20 ""I don't know how we are going to keep the lights on,"" Florez said in an=20 interview. ""Many of these congenerators are in my district. They said if th= e=20 legislation doesn't change they are going offline. This compounds the issue= =20 of rolling blackouts, especially now when we need every megawatt.""=20 Davis, who didn't meet with people representing the QFs, said he was handin= g=20 the QF issue to the PUC because lawmakers failed to pass legislation that= =20 would have set a five-year price for natural gas and allow the QFs to sign= =20 individual contracts with the utilities. In addition, SOCal Ed opposed the= =20 legislation, saying the rates should be below $50/MWh.=20 Some renewable power producers said they aren't vehemently opposed to the n= ew=20 rate structure because it guarantees them a higher rate than what was=20 originally proposed.=20 =20 QFs Want Third Party Supply Contracts=20 =20 John Wood, who represents the SoCal Ed Gas Fired Creditors Committee, one o= f=20 a handful of groups that have formed since January to explore options on=20 getting paid by the utilities, said his group of gas-fired QF creditors wan= t=20 to be released from their supply contracts and sell to third parties.=20 ""Under our plan, we would be permitted to sell electricity to third parties= =20 (including the state Department of Water Resources) until a resolution to t= he=20 crisis can be accomplished,"" wood said.=20 Hal Dittmer, president of Sacramento-based Wellhead Electric in Sacramento,= =20 which is owed $8 million by PG&E, has 85 MW of gas-fired generation units= =20 offline.=20 Under the state's plan, Dittmer said he risks going out of business.=20 ""I can't buy natural gas for what I would be paid under this decision,"" he= =20 said. ""The state needs to quit kidding themselves that they don't need to= =20 raise electricity rates. All of this is being driven by an artificial=20 construct that California can avoid raising rates.""=20 =20 -By Jason Leopold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3874;=20 jason.leopold@dowjones.com=20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: AP Wires, Thurs 3/22: ""Report: Power wholesalers overcharged California $5.= 5=20 billion"" Dow Jones Newswires, Thurs 3/22: ""Reliant To Appeal Fed Judge Ruling To Sel= l=20 Pwr To Calif"" Sac Bee, Thurs 3/22: ""Federal judge orders major power wholesaler to sell t= o=20 California"" San Jose Mercury News Thurs, 3/22: ""State falling short on pacts that provi= de=20 low-cost energy"" Contra Costa Times, Thurs 3/22: ""Crisis saps state surplus"" Sac Bee. Fri, 3/23: ""Bill to pay small energy firms stalls"" Sac Bee, Fri., 3/23: ""House panel ends energy hearings -- will it step in? Sac Bee, Fri, 3/23: ""Dan Walters: Crisis deepens: politicos panic"" San Diego Union, Fri., 3/23: ""Report says power wholesalers overcharged=20 state $6 billion"" San Diego Union, Fri, 3/23: ""Disappearing state surplus sparks alarm"" San Diego Union, Fri., 3/23: ""Outages darken economic outlook in state, so= me=20 say"" San Diego Union, Fri., 3/23: ""Out-of-state generators question power=20 regulators' authority "" San Diego Union, Fri., 3/23: ""Allegheny Energy makes big California=20 connection"" LA Times, Fri, 3/23: ""Judge Frees Small Firm From Edison Contract "" SF Chron, Fri, 3/23: ""Lodi Defies Order for Blackouts=20 Utility tells PG&E to 'pay the bills' "" SF Chron, Fri, 3/23: ""Coming Down to the Wire=20 State legislators battle over alternative energy bills"" SF Chron, Fri, 3/23: ""Grid Operators Push to Prevent Overcharging=20 They say regulators must be aggressive to stop billing abuses""=20 Mercury News, Fri., 3/23: ""State's bill for energy could double this year"" Mercury News, Fri., 3/23: ""Plan for alternate power plants stalls"" --- --- Report: Power wholesalers overcharged California $5.5 billion=20 DON THOMPSON, Associated Press Writer Thursday, March 22, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 (03-22) 11:41 PST SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- Electricity wholesalers have= =20 overcharged California more than $5 billion since May by manipulating the= =20 energy market, according to a report prepared for power grid managers.=20 The Independent System Operator will file the findings with federal=20 regulators and ask for a refund, ISO spokesman Patrick Dorinson said.=20 The state auditor also said Thursday that the state's 1996 deregulation law= =20 encouraged both buyers and sellers of electricity to ``manipulate wholesale= =20 prices to their advantage'' by underestimating supply and demand.=20 The auditor's report lays out what it calls ``a complex combination'' of=20 deficiencies and misjudgments it says led to the state's power problems.=20 According to the ISO report, five in-state power suppliers and 16 importers= =20 frequently offered electricity at prices higher than it cost them to produc= e=20 -- effectively withholding supplies -- or didn't bid at all when they were= =20 able to generate power.=20 ISO Director of Market Analysis Anjali Sheffrin presented the findings at a= =20 conference in Berkeley last week.=20 The companies have denied overcharging California and have said they expect= =20 the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission will determine their prices were= =20 justified.=20 The commission has recently stepped up scrutiny of power companies' behavio= r=20 during California's power crisis, asking suppliers to justify $124 million = in=20 sales during the first two months of the year or refund the money. Critics= =20 claim thousands of additional questionable sales are not being challenged.= =20 California has been spending about $45 million a day -- $4.2 billion since= =20 January -- to purchase power for Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern= =20 California Edison. Both utilities, the state's largest, have been cut off b= y=20 electricity wholesalers because their credit is almost worthless.=20 Edison and PG&E say they are nearly $14 billion in debt due to soaring=20 wholesale power costs. The state's deregulation law blocks them from=20 recovering the costs from customers.=20 State Controller Kathleen Connell said Wednesday that the state's=20 power-buying is gutting its budget surplus.=20 Since the state started making emergency power buys, the surplus has fallen= =20 from $8.5 billion to about $3.2 billion, she said.=20 Connell ordered an audit of the power buys, saying Gov. Gray Davis is=20 withholding key financial information from her office and the Legislature.= =20 She said she would refuse to transfer $5.6 billion into a ``rainy day fund'= '=20 she said was set up to impress Wall Street as the state prepares to issue $= 10=20 billion in revenue bonds to cover its power buys.=20 Transferring the money would leave the state general fund $2.4 billion in= =20 debt, Connell said.=20 Sandy Harrison, spokesman for the state Department of Finance, and Keely=20 Bosler, of the Legislative Analyst's Office, said such transfers are routin= e=20 and required by law.=20 ``The law says she has to do it. The law does not give her the power to=20 demand that kind of audit information,'' Harrison said.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio said the administration has released the=20 financial information it can without jeopardizing negotiations for long-ter= m=20 power contracts with wholesalers.=20 Also Wednesday, a federal judge ordered a major wholesaler, Reliant Energy= =20 Services, to continue selling power to California despite its fear that it= =20 will not be paid.=20 The ISO buys power from companies like Reliant on behalf of utilities in=20 attempts to fend off rolling blackouts like those that hit the state this= =20 week and during two days in January.=20 --- Reliant To Appeal Fed Judge Ruling To Sell Pwr To Calif 03/22/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Reliant Energy Inc. (REI) said Thursday it will= =20 immediately file with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco in= =20 response to a federal judge's ruling late Wednesday that the company contin= ue=20 selling power to California regardless of whether it is paid.=20 U.S. District Court Judge Frank Damrell granted California's Independent=20 System Operator, which makes last minute power purchases in the spot market= ,=20 a preliminary injunction against Reliant, saying Californians were at risk = of=20 irreparable harm if Reliant stopped selling power to the state. The ISO, manager of the state's electricity grid, said the judge's ruling= =20 will allow the agency to keep the lights on in California.=20 Reliant, which is owed more than $300 million from the state's cash-strappe= d=20 utilities, supplies California with about 3,000 megawatts of electricity fr= om=20 power plants it owns in the state.=20 Reliant spokesman Richard Wheatley said the state Department of Water=20 Resources, the agency that buys California's bulk power needs on behalf of= =20 PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric, Edison International (EIX) un= it=20 Southern California Edison and Sempra Energy (SRE) unit San Diego Gas &=20 Electric, should back the ISO's last minute power purchases.=20 In a filing with the Securities and Commission, Reliant said it is owed $10= 8=20 million by the DWR for last minute power purchases the ISO made during the= =20 six weeks prior to the agreement Reliant made with the DWR.=20 Damrell dismissed Reliant's claim, saying he does not have the authority to= =20 force the DWR to pay for that power.=20 ""We're going to immediately appeal Judge Damrell's order,"" Wheatley said.= =20 ""Clearly the judge understands the implications of his order. We are requir= ed=20 to do business with creditworthy entities. Unfortuantely the judge did not= =20 force the ISO to post a surety bond, which would allowed us to do business= =20 with the ISO.""=20 Gov. Gray Davis has said the state is not responsible for the last minute= =20 power purchases the ISO makes, despite a law passed authorizing the DWR to= =20 buy power on behalf of the utilities.=20 Wheatley added that the company will also seek relief on the issue at the= =20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Damrell's ruling remains in effect=20 until the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission rules on the matter.=20 Separately, Wheatley said a short-term power supply contract that Reliant= =20 signed with the DWR expired Monday and the DWR has not renewed the contract= .=20 A spokesman for the DWR would not comment on the issue.=20 -By Jason Leopold; Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3874;=20 jason.leopold@dowjones.com --- --- ----------------------- Federal judge orders major power wholesaler to sell to California Updated: March 21, 2001 - 8:23 p.m.=20 A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction Wednesday ordering a major= =20 electricity wholesaler to continue selling to California despite its fear= =20 that it will not get paid.=20 U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said Californians were at risk of= =20 irreparable harm if Reliant Energy Services stopped selling power to the=20 Independent System Operator, which oversees the state's power grid. The ISO= =20 buys last-minute power on behalf of utilities to fill gaps in supply to try= =20 to fend off blackouts.=20 Damrell dismissed Reliant's attempt to force the state Department of Water= =20 Resources to back the ISO's purchases for the state's two biggest utilities= .=20 The state has been spending about $50 million a day on power for Pacific Ga= s=20 and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison, both denied credit by=20 suppliers after amassing billions of dollars in debts. The judge said he had no authority to force the DWR to pay for that power.= =20 Gov. Gray Davis has said the state isn't responsible for purchasing the=20 costly last-minute power ISO buys for Edison and PG&E, despite a law=20 authorizing state power purchases on the utilities' behalf.=20 ISO attorney Charles Robinson said the ruling gives ISO operators ""a tool t= o=20 assist them in keeping the lights on in California.""=20 ""Had the decision gone the other way, one could expect other generators to= =20 simply ignore emergency orders,"" Robinson said.=20 Damrell's preliminary injunction will remain in effect until the Federal=20 Energy Regulatory Commission rules on the matter.=20 Damrell denied the ISO's request for preliminary injunctions against three= =20 other wholesalers, Dynegy, AES and Williams, who agreed to continue selling= =20 to the ISO pending the FERC ruling.=20 Spokesmen for Reliant, Dynegy, AES and Williams were out of the office=20 Wednesday night and didn't immediately return calls from The Associated Pre= ss=20 seeking comment on the ruling.=20 The ISO went to court in February after a federal emergency order requiring= =20 the power sales expired. The judge then issued a temporary restraining orde= r,=20 requiring the sales, but dropped it after the suppliers agreed to continue= =20 sales to California, pending his Wednesday ruling.=20 The ISO said it would lose about 3,600 megawatts if the suppliers pulled ou= t,=20 enough power for about 2.7 million households. One megawatt is enough for= =20 roughly 750 homes.=20 Grid officials said Reliant's share alone is about 3,000 megawatts. Reliant= =20 said the amount at issue actually is less than a fourth of that, because mo= st=20 of the power is committed under long-term contracts.=20 Reliant, which provides about 9 percent of the state's power, worries it=20 won't get paid due to the financial troubles of PG&E and Edison.=20 PG&E and Edison say that together they have lost about $13 billion since Ju= ne=20 due to soaring wholesale electricity costs that California's 1996=20 deregulation law bars them from passing onto customers.=20 At the same time, the state has faced a tight electricity supply, due in pa= rt=20 to California power plant shutdowns for maintenance and to a tight=20 hydroelectric supply in the Pacific Northwest.=20 Managers of the state power grid imposed rolling blackouts across the state= =20 Monday and Tuesday as supply fell short of demand. Wednesday, cooling=20 temperatures and the completion of repairs at several power plants allowed= =20 the state to avoid blackouts. State Controller Kathleen Connell said Wednesday that the energy crunch als= o=20 imperils California's financial health. Connell said the state's power-buying on behalf of Edison and PG&E is is=20 gutting its budget surplus. Since the state started making emergency power= =20 buys in January, the surplus has fallen from $8.5 billion to about $3.2=20 billion, she said.=20 Connell ordered an audit of the state's power-buying, saying Davis is=20 withholding key financial information from her office and the Legislature.= =20 She is refusing a request by Davis and the Legislature to transfer $5.6=20 billion into a ""rainy day fund"" she said was set up to impress Wall Street = as=20 the state prepares to issue $10 billion in revenue bonds to cover its=20 power-buying.=20 Transferring the money would leave the state general fund $2.4 billion in= =20 debt, Connell said.=20 Sandy Harrison, spokesman for the state Department of Finance, and Keely=20 Bosler of the Legislative Analyst's Office, said such transfers are routine= =20 and required by law.=20 They put the state's budget surplus at $5.6 billion.=20 ""The law says she has to do it. The law does not give her the power to dema= nd=20 that kind of audit information,"" Harrison said.=20 He said the state's budget isn't in danger because it will be repaid with t= he=20 $10 billion in long-term debt.=20 Wells Fargo & Co. chief economist Sung Won Sohn said he sees little progres= s=20 in efforts to fix the state's power problems and end state electricity=20 purchases.=20 ""If we're going to pour money into a bottomless pit, I would worry about th= e=20 state's finances,"" he said. ""At some point we're going to run out of money.= "" The controller's criticism of fellow Democrat Davis won support from Assemb= ly=20 Republicans and Secretary of State Bill Jones, a Republican considering=20 challenging Davis next year.=20 Jones said he wants to announce his own plan to solve the state's energy=20 woes, but can't unless Davis releases more financial details.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio dismissed the criticism. ""Political grandstanding doesn't generate one more kilowatt of energy for= =20 California in this time of emergency,"" he said.=20 Maviglio said the administration has released the financial information it= =20 can without jeopardizing negotiations for long-term power contracts with=20 wholesalers.=20 Also Wednesday, a report by Davis' chief power negotiator appears to show= =20 that as much as 75 percent of the state's power purchases will have to be o= n=20 the expensive short-term market this summer, said Sen. Debra Bowen, D-Marin= a=20 del Rey, chairwoman of the Senate Energy Committee.=20 ""The prices may be phenomenol,"" she said, particularly given predicted=20 hydroelectric shortages due to drought in the Pacific Northwest.=20 The report by David Freeman, who is negotiating the state's long-term power= =20 contracts, shows California has finalized 19 contracts and has 25 agreement= s=20 in principle. Freeman said DWR is continuing to negotiate other contracts. Bowen said FERC should impose short-term price caps or let generators to=20 charge enough to make a reasonable profit ""or we could be subject to enormo= us=20 price-gouging this summer.""=20 -- Associated Press --- State falling short on pacts that provide low-cost energy=20 Published Thursday, March 22, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News=20 BY CHRIS O'BRIEN AND JOHN WOOLFOLK=20 Mercury News=20 The state has signed low-cost contracts for just a third of the energy it= =20 needs this year, raising the prospect that California could be forced to bu= y=20 much of its electricity this summer on the expensive spot market.=20 A spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis conceded Wednesday that the state will be i= n=20 trouble without more contracts, but insisted California will meet its needs= =20 through conservation and additional long-term deals for cheap electricity.= =20 The state, according to a report released Wednesday, has fallen far short o= f=20 the governor's goal of filling almost all its electricity needs through suc= h=20 deals. In fact, the state has lined up contracts for about half the amount= =20 Davis had projected earlier this month.=20 If the state has to rely heavily on the volatile spot market, where the pri= ce=20 of electricity this summer could reach five times the state's contract pric= e,=20 pressure could mount to raise the cap on the electricity rates consumers pa= y.=20 But Steven Maviglio, the governor's spokesman, said, ``The governor has sai= d=20 he's committed to work this in the existing rate structure, so that's the= =20 plan.''=20 In the report sent to state lawmakers, the state Department of Water=20 Resources indicated that it had secured just more than 20 million=20 megawatt-hours for this year, leaving it far short of the 60 million=20 megawatt-hours needed.=20 ``This is just a progress report,'' Maviglio said. ``They did all this in= =20 three weeks, which is pretty amazing when you think about it, and we have a= =20 lot more to do.''=20 The state got into the power buying business in January, supplying it to th= e=20 state's nearly bankrupt utilities.=20 The state negotiated long-term contracts with generators to supply that pow= er=20 at a reduced rate. Based on the report, the state will pay an average of $6= 8=20 per megawatt-hour over the next 10 years -- significantly less than in=20 December when prices spiked higher than $300 per megawatt-hour but not as l= ow=20 as the $55 Davis hoped to reach.=20 Most of this power, however, won't be delivered until 2004. From 2004 to=20 2006, the Department of Water Resources estimates, it has enough power unde= r=20 contract. Until then, the amount falls short.=20 In 2001, it appears the state has about one-third of the power it needs. Th= e=20 gap closes to about half in 2002 and two-thirds in 2003.=20 At a news conference in Los Angeles two weeks ago, Davis said the state wou= ld=20 have to buy only 30 to 45 percent of the power it needs this summer on the= =20 open market.=20 At the time, critics said with only two-thirds of the power under contract,= a=20 rate increase was almost inevitable. Even Davis' chief negotiator, S. David= =20 Freeman, offered a bleak assessment for the summer, saying that all availab= le=20 electricity has already been sold.=20 ``We'll be subject to extremely high prices,'' said Frank Wolak, a Stanford= =20 professor who sits on a market committee for the Independent System Operato= r,=20 the agency that runs the state power grid.=20 Wolak said there are two main hopes for avoiding a price increase this=20 summer: Federal officials could cap the wholesale price, a step they've=20 resisted, or Californians can conserve an unprecedented amount of power. --- --- ----------------------- Crisis saps state surplus POWER CRISIS=20 Controller moves to block a transfer of funds, saying the $8.5 billion=20 surplus has been cut more than half since January=20 By Mike Taugher TIMES STAFF WRITER=20 The energy crisis has bled California's once-touted budget surplus by more= =20 than half since taxpayers began buying electricity two months ago, leading = a=20 top state finance official Wednesday to order an audit of the power purchas= es=20 and block Gov. Gray Davis' plan to transfer funds into a reserve account.= =20 A booming economy last year produced a budget surplus that totaled $8.5=20 billion in January. But that figure now stands at about $3.2 billion,=20 according to Controller Kathleen Connell.=20 ""We started this year with a generous budget surplus,"" Connell said in a=20 statement announcing her decision to block what Davis administration=20 officials described as a routine transfer of surplus money. ""The energy=20 crisis has taken much of that away, and this transfer on top of the=20 electricity purchases would put the fund at risk.""=20 Meanwhile, the Davis administration released a report by David Freeman, the= =20 governor's chief negotiator on power purchases, on the progress of executin= g=20 long-term agreements meant to stabilize the power buys.=20 According to the report, only about 40 percent of the electricity needed fr= om=20 the open market this year has been lined up. That means the state could be= =20 forced to continue buying a substantial amount of power on the highly=20 expensive spot market and further drain its coffers.=20 And a key regulatory panel is scheduled next week to issue a ruling that=20 would determine how quickly state funds will be replenished when it decides= =20 what portion of electric bill payments should be allocated to the state=20 treasury, a decision that could include a rate increase to fully repay=20 taxpayers without further crippling the state's two largest electric=20 utilities.=20 The Public Utilities Commission also will consider whether it will force th= e=20 utilities to pay alternative energy producers, whose shutdowns this week=20 contributed to blackouts.=20 Connell's action underscores a growing nervousness over the sheer volume of= =20 money that is being poured into energy buys, despite the fact that state=20 officials plan to replenish the treasury with up to $10 billion in loans th= at=20 will be repaid by electricity consumers.=20 The state has committed to spending $4.2 billion to date to keep lights on= =20 since taxpayers were forced in mid-January to take over electricity buys fr= om=20 the financially crippled utilities, Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern= =20 California Edison. Tax money is going out at a clip of about $50 million a= =20 day.=20 High prices already have brought PG&E and Edison to the brink of bankruptcy= ,=20 and now the state's surplus is at risk, according to Connell.=20 In addition to requesting an audit and announcing her intention to delay th= e=20 transfer to the reserve account, Connell said she wanted the administration= =20 to send her office more information about the electricity purchases.=20 Davis' representatives questioned Connell's authority in trying to block th= e=20 funds transfer, which they called a routine accounting procedure, and accus= ed=20 her of making political hay.=20 ""It is not helpful to the taxpayers or ratepayers or the people who just wa= nt=20 to keep the lights on, it isn't helpful to have the situation muddied like= =20 this,"" said Sandy Harrison, a Finance Department spokesperson. ""We're sorry= =20 it came up in this manner.""=20 Connell and the administration have butted heads in recent weeks. The=20 controller wants to post details of the state's electricity purchases on he= r=20 Web site, a plan that have been delayed under pressure from Davis because o= f=20 the governor's concerns that releasing those details will allow power=20 generators and traders to sell at higher prices.=20 Harrison said administration officials believe Connell lacks the authority= =20 either to block the funds transfer to a reserve account or to audit the sta= te=20 water resources department.=20 Two days of widespread blackouts this week show how vulnerable the power gr= id=20 is to financial glitches. Although several factors combined to produce the= =20 blackouts, state power officials say the outages could have been avoided if= =20 the utilities were paying their bills to alternative energy producers.=20 Many of those producers, including clean-burning natural gas power plants,= =20 wind, solar and geothermal energy developers, shut down enough production t= o=20 spell the difference between grid reliability and blackouts Monday and=20 Tuesday.=20 Davis called the utilities' failure to pay bills to those producers, known = as=20 qualifying facilities, ""immoral."" The QFs were either unable to buy gas fro= m=20 their suppliers or were frustrated with the utilities' failure to pay them.= =20 ""The utilities hoarded billions of dollars since November without paying an= y=20 money out,"" said Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio. ""They've got the money --= =20 we're pulling the trigger to make them pay it.""=20 The utilities, however, say they are doing all they can to conserve enough= =20 cash to continue operating. Together, they owe the QFs about $1.5 billion.= =20 Next week, the PUC is scheduled to consider whether to force the utilities = to=20 heed Davis' demand to pay the QFs, and it might also decide how much of=20 ratepayers' bill payments will be used to refund taxpayers for power buys.= =20 PG&E says that under a formula proposed by the administration, the water=20 resources department would receive about 40 percent of the money collected= =20 from ratepayers for power purchases.=20 The rest of that money, about $240 million, would have to be divided among= =20 QFs, existing power contracts, operating PG&E's nuclear and hydroelectric= =20 plants, and what hour-by-hour purchases the utility still must make on the= =20 spot market, according to PG&E spokesman John Nelson.=20 ""There isn't enough to do that,"" he said.=20 That is making it increasingly likely that electric bills will be hiked,=20 according to a growing chorus of officials and experts.=20 Unless rates are raised, Nelson said, the only entity that can absorb a lac= k=20 of payment or a partial payment is the state treasury. Cutting off any othe= rs=20 will lead to electricity becoming unavailable and more blackouts, he said.= =20 ""If they do it under existing rates -- given that the existing pool of mone= y=20 is not enough -- who doesn't get paid or who gets a partial payment?"" Nelso= n=20 said. ""What's the only entity left with wiggle room? The state.""=20 Rate hikes are also a sticking point in negotiations to bail out the=20 utilities through purchase of their transmission lines and other assets,=20 Maviglio said.=20 ""They want rate increases of significant magnitude, and we're not going=20 there,"" he said.=20 WE CAN TRIM STORY HERE IF NECESSARY, BUT KEEP TAGLINES AT BOTTOM=20 About one-third the electricity needed by the customers of California's thr= ee=20 major utility companies is produced by the companies themselves, one-third= =20 comes from alternative producers who use environmentally friendly technique= s=20 and one-third is bought on the open market.=20 The state stepped in to buy the one-third needed from the open market after= =20 the utility companies ran out of cash and credit in January to make the=20 purchases themselves.=20 But that electricity has proven to be enormously expensive, and Davis has= =20 planned to lower those prices by committing to long-term purchases.=20 Freeman's report on the progress of those long-term purchases, dated March = 15=20 but released this week, said the state has finalized 19 contracts with seve= n=20 suppliers and reached 25 additional agreements.=20 Mike Taugher covers the environment and energy. Reach him at 925-943-8324 o= r=20 mtaugher@cctimes.com.=20 Staff writer Andrew LaMar contributed to this story. --- --- ----------------------- Bill to pay small energy firms stalls By Kevin Yamamura, Dale Kasler and Jim Sanders Bee Staff Writers (Published March 23, 2001)=20 A quickly melded proposal that would assure payments for alternative energy= =20 suppliers whose money woes contributed to power blackouts this week stalled= =20 Thursday in a divided Legislature.=20 The state Senate passed the bill, AB 8x, but with Republicans balking, it w= as=20 rejected in the Assembly along party lines. Assembly leaders said they may= =20 try again today.=20 For most of Thursday, lawmakers scrutinized legislation they had overhauled= =20 the night before to include Gov. Gray Davis' plan to force utilities to pay= =20 solar, wind and small gas-fired suppliers. Such providers, called ""qualifie= d=20 facilities,"" or QFs, provide more than 20 percent of California's=20 electricity, and their shutdowns were partly to blame for rolling blackouts= =20 Monday and Tuesday.=20 Under the Democratic governor's plan, the state Public Utilities Commission= =20 would determine prices at which alternative generators may sell power, but= =20 legislation is needed to authorize the PUC action.=20 Lawmakers faced time pressures Thursday. They wanted to pass the bill quick= ly=20 so the PUC could act next week and legislators could embark Monday on an=20 annual three-day lobbying trip in Washington, D.C.=20 Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg, D-Sherman Oaks, said the Republicans'=20 rejection of AB 8x could jeopardize more than $4 billion the state has spen= t=20 or allocated for electricity during the energy crisis.=20 Hertzberg said producers of alternative energy, which are owed more than $1= =20 billion, have threatened to drag debt-ridden utilities into involuntary=20 bankruptcy if the Legislature failed to pass the measure.=20 ""They said it, and I believe it,"" Hertzberg said. If such bankruptcies occu= r,=20 he added, the state with its multibillion-dollar debt would become ""just=20 another creditor in a pile of creditors.""=20 But Assembly Republican leader Bill Campbell of Villa Park said the=20 finger-pointing is unfair. Passage of AB 8x would not necessarily prevent= =20 bankruptcies, he said.=20 One alternative energy provider won a crucial court ruling Thursday that=20 staved off, at least for a while, threats by some creditors to haul one or= =20 both big utilities into bankruptcy court for nonpayment of bills.=20 CalEnergy Co. Inc. won the right to sell its geothermal power, which was=20 contracted to Southern California Edison, on the open market. CalEnergy sai= d=20 it is owed $45 million by Edison.=20 If the Imperial County judge hadn't ruled in CalEnergy's favor, the company= =20 and seven other QFs ""were fully prepared"" to file an involuntary bankruptcy= =20 petition against Edison this morning, said David Sokol, chief executive of= =20 CalEnergy's parent, MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co. of Des Moines, Iowa.=20 ""That is currently off the table.""=20 An involuntary bankruptcy proceeding would take California's energy crisis= =20 into uncharted territory, although a bankruptcy judge would have the leeway= =20 to reject the filing.=20 Freed from its contract with Edison, CalEnergy will move to sell its=20 electricity ""to people who will pay for it,"" Sokol said.=20 Besides calming the bankruptcy movement temporarily, the ruling also could= =20 prompt other alternative energy providers -- hundreds of which have shut do= wn=20 because of nonpayment by Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. -- to foll= ow=20 CalEnergy's example and find other buyers for their electricity, said Gary= =20 Ackerman of the Western Power Trading Forum, an association of generators.= =20 Assembly Republicans said they felt the Senate's decision to package three= =20 important energy issues into a single bill was an attempt to ramrod=20 legislation through both houses.=20 ""We have to stand and say no,"" Campbell said during floor debate.=20 Besides determining alternative generator payments, the bill would change a= n=20 earlier law by capping the value of bonds the state may sell for power=20 purchases at $10 billion. It also would extend to large businesses an=20 existing rate cap in the San Diego Gas and Electric Co. service area.=20 And it would earmark a portion of rates paid by utility customers to fund t= he=20 state's ongoing power purchases. Within a week, the state will have spent= =20 $4.2 billion on power since January.=20 Without the bill, some legislators fear, Pacific Gas and Electric and=20 Southern California Edison would be reimbursed before the state.=20 ""They have got (some) gall to go to the PUC and say they're going to go to= =20 court to keep our money -- to keep our money to pay off their creditors,""= =20 said Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, D-San Francisco.=20 Most of the bill's controversy, however, centered on how the PUC would trea= t=20 gas-fired alternative generators.=20 The commission issued a revised draft decision Wednesday that would impose= =20 prices for qualifying facilities at $79 a megawatt-hour for five-year=20 contracts or $69 a megawatt-hour for 10 years.=20 But those producers that use natural gas -- representing about two-thirds o= f=20 the alternative energy providers in California -- spent Thursday arguing th= at=20 Davis' plan to rescue them would all but guarantee that they would go out o= f=20 business instead.=20 The plan -- ordering Edison and PG&E to pay them a fixed price for their=20 power -- would set rates well below the cost of natural gas, they said.=20 Democratic lawmakers tried to assure such producers that the PUC would set= =20 prices that make business sense, even obtaining a letter to that effect fro= m=20 Loretta Lynch, who heads the commission.=20 Davis has vowed to fine Edison and PG&E if they don't pay alternative=20 producers for future deliveries. But Sokol said his company isn't convinced= =20 that Edison will pay.=20 Calling Edison a ""confrontive, in-your-face, nasty organization,"" Sokol sai= d=20 the utility was ""sitting on $2 billion"" and not paying its bills. Edison, i= n=20 a Securities and Exchange Commission filing Thursday, said its debts outwei= gh=20 its cash reserves by $722 million.=20 The Senate sent the Assembly two other bills that deal specifically with=20 supply and demand. The first, SB 5x, would spend about $1 billion on energy= =20 conservation and low-income assistance programs. The other, SB 28x, would= =20 streamline siting procedures for power plant construction.=20 In separate energy-related matters Thursday, the Assembly approved:=20 AB 21x, which would allow businesses, industries or other electrical=20 customers to negotiate private contracts with energy providers.=20 Nine energy bills designed to generate or save 665 megawatts of electricity= =20 -- including 345 megawatts this summer. One megawatt is enough electricity = to=20 light about 1,000 homes.=20 The state put power emergencies behind it, after dropping out of a Stage 1= =20 alert late Wednesday. The California Independent System Operator, which=20 manages the state's power transmission grid, was predicting no further aler= ts=20 this week. It expected cooling temperatures and a regular dropoff in=20 electricity use on Fridays to lessen demand, at the same time that more pow= er=20 plants were returning to service.=20 Bee staff writer Carrie Peyton contributed to this report.=20 --- House panel ends energy hearings -- will it step in? By David Whitney Bee Washington Bureau (Published March 23, 2001)=20 WASHINGTON -- A key House panel wrapped up a series of hearings on the=20 California electricity crisis Thursday and now will decide whether to come = to=20 the state's aid with legislation.=20 But the panel's Texas chairman made clear that West Coast price controls=20 won't be on the table.=20 ""Caps will not be in anything I am submitting,"" said Rep. Joe Barton,=20 chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee's energy and air qualit= y=20 subcommittee.=20 Some form of federal controls to hold down escalating wholesale prices this= =20 summer because of power shortages has been the most frequent appeal of=20 witnesses who testified before the panel during roughly 30 hours of hearing= s=20 over five days.=20 Such controls have been sought by the governors of California, Oregon and= =20 Washington. As power shortages are forecast for other regions, states like= =20 New York also have appealed for temporary price controls to halt gouging.= =20 But the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which is responsible for=20 enforcing reasonable wholesale rates under the Federal Power Act, has refus= ed=20 to impose them, and the Bush administration is bolstering that decision by= =20 opposing any legislation that would compel such action.=20 Barton, in a brief hallway interview, declined to say what other legislativ= e=20 remedies he might propose to address the worsening California situation.=20 He said he expects to submit a list of ideas to the White House today, and= =20 after receiving comment on it, sit down with other committee Republicans an= d=20 Democrats next week to see if any legislation is in order.=20 ""If we are going to do anything to help California or the West this summer,= =20 we have to make it law within the next month or six weeks,"" Barton said.=20 Even the panel's senior Democrat, Virginia Rep. Rick Boucher, was urging a= =20 ""careful and deliberate approach"" to the California crisis, which he said w= as=20 largely of the state's own making.=20 There are steps Congress might take to provide some help to the West, such = as=20 more money for conservation and relaxed federal regulation of air quality= =20 standards. That would permit older, more polluting generators to operate=20 through a long, hot summer when electricity demand could exceed supply by= =20 about 3,000 megawatts, roughly the amount needed to power 3 million homes.= =20 But Alan Lloyd, chairman of the California Air Resources Board, said power= =20 production already is being maximized without sacrificing air quality.=20 ""Simply put, no essential electricity generation has been curtailed due to= =20 air emission limitations,"" he said. ""California's programs to protect publi= c=20 health are not major factors in the electricity shortages experienced to=20 date.""=20 The concern is that as shortages turn into more rolling blackouts, wholesal= e=20 prices will jump even higher and steadily bleed the economies of California= =20 and the West Coast.=20 William L. Massey, the lone member of the energy regulatory commission who= =20 supports price controls, said at a Tuesday hearing that without them the We= st=20 Coast faces economic catastrophe this summer.=20 It was evident from the comments of some Republicans that they think their= =20 party could capitalize politically from a difficult summer.=20 ""If they had a bad summer, it could show up in the polls,"" said Rep. Charli= e=20 Norwood, R-Ga. ""And sometimes that's not a bad idea.""=20 One of the most dramatic exchanges during the weeklong hearings came Thursd= ay=20 with S. David Freeman, the former general manager of the Sacramento Municip= al=20 Utility District who now heads the Los Angeles Department of Water and Powe= r.=20 He recently was named Gov. Gray Davis' chief negotiator with power generato= rs=20 for long-term contracts to stabilize future deliveries.=20 ""Don't feel sorry for California,"" Freeman said. ""We're going to come out o= f=20 this stronger than ever.""=20 But Freeman said it will be a year or two before all the fixes are in place= ,=20 and in the meantime the region desperately needs Congress' help to force th= e=20 FERC into controlling wholesale prices, which witnesses said are likely to= =20 rise from $7 billion last year to as much as $70 billion or more this year.= =20 ""We recognize that the current administration and various legislators have= =20 their own opinion as to the California situation,"" Freeman said. ""But my=20 personal plea is that if the federal government is not going to help us, th= e=20 least it should do is refrain from legislation that attempts to tell us wha= t=20 to do.""=20 Barton perked up at that idea.=20 ""Leave California alone, huh?"" Barton said. ""That might be a good motto.""= =20 --- --------------------- Dan Walters: Crisis deepens: politicos panic (Published March 23, 2001)=20 That choking sound you hear is California's political class shifting into= =20 near-panic mode as it realizes that the energy crisis is on the verge of=20 becoming a full-scale meltdown, with utilities forced into bankruptcy and= =20 consumers hammered by severe and prolonged power blackouts and soaring=20 electricity bills.=20 The Legislature, which had been content to allow Gov. Gray Davis to handle= =20 the crisis on his own, suddenly came to life Thursday, jolted by this week'= s=20 unexpected rolling blackouts and threats by creditors to force the utilitie= s=20 into bankruptcy court. Lawmakers quickly fashioned a basketful of legislati= on=20 aimed -- or so they hope -- at increasing power supplies, promoting=20 conservation and relieving the financial pressure on utilities and=20 electricity generators. But it may be too little, too late -- and Davis and= =20 other politicians are already pointing fingers of blame, aware that a=20 political price will be paid if the apocalypse strikes.=20 While Davis chants his mantra that he inherited a fatally flawed utility=20 deregulation scheme from predecessor Pete Wilson, Republicans are blaming= =20 Davis for moving too slowly after the crisis first surfaced last summer, an= d=20 even some of Davis' fellow Democrats are distancing themselves from the=20 governor.=20 ""Deregulation was a product of a Republican governor, a Republican author a= nd=20 a Republican PUC (Public Utilities Commission) that was unduly impatient,""= =20 Davis said at one point this week as the Capitol buzzed with private=20 negotiations and public posturing.=20 A day later, however, state Controller Kathleen Connell, a Democrat, issued= a=20 warning that Davis' power purchases, running at $50 million a day, had=20 already drawn down state budget reserves by nearly two-thirds, and she=20 refused to authorize additional transfers. It was a direct shot by Connell = at=20 Davis, an old rival, and came just a day after the governor had endorsed a= =20 Connell foe, Antonio Villaraigosa, in the duel for mayor of Los Angeles.=20 Other Democrats didn't join Connell's direct challenge to Davis, but there= =20 is, nevertheless, a growing concern among Democratic legislators that the= =20 power purchases are costing many billions of dollars more than the governor= =20 had projected and could place the state budget in jeopardy. They're nervous= =20 because Davis has refused to reveal, even to legislators, exactly how much= =20 power the state is buying each day and how much it is paying.=20 From the few details that have been disclosed, it's clear that the state is= =20 spending about $1.5 billion a month, which would wipe out the state's=20 reserves by midsummer. It's also becoming increasingly clear that Davis=20 probably can't make good on his promise to avoid major consumer rate=20 increases, unless the state is willing to plunge deeply and semi-permanentl= y=20 into debt to underwrite wholesale costs, or unless federal authorities orde= r=20 huge refunds from power suppliers.=20 Rates in areas served by private utilities have risen only slightly while t= he=20 costs, first to utilities and later to the state, soared. Data from the=20 administration and utilities, when collated, indicate that the state is in= =20 line to collect just 20 cents for every dollar it's spending on power=20 purchases, and the gap will increase as summer heat drives up demand.=20 Privately, some economists say that private utility rates will have to rise= =20 33 percent to 50 percent to cover costs of current power supplies, plus=20 utilities' past debts to generators and the state's purchase of the=20 utilities' transmission system, if that deal is made final.=20 ""It's ultimately going to break down, and the ratepayer is going to pay for= =20 it one way or the other,"" Republican Sen. Jim Battin said during one of=20 Thursday's many committee hearings on utility legislation. No one disagreed= =20 with him.=20 DAN WALTERS' column appears daily, except Saturday. Mail: P.O. Box 15779,= =20 Sacramento, CA 95852; phone (916) 321-1195; fax: (781) 846-8350 E-mail: dwalters@sacbee.com Recent columns: --- Report says power wholesalers overcharged state $6 billion=20 By Don Thompson ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 22, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) Electricity wholesalers have overcharged California more th= an=20 $6.2 billion by manipulating the energy market, according to a report by an= =20 economist working for power grid managers.=20 The Independent System Operator planned to file the findings with federal= =20 regulators Thursday, and ask for a refund, said ISO spokesman Patrick=20 Dorinson.=20 In a related development, the state auditor said Thursday that the state's= =20 1996 deregulation law encouraged both buyers and sellers of electricity to= =20 ""manipulate wholesale prices to their advantage"" by underestimating both=20 supply and demand.=20 Disappearing state surplus sparks alarm=20 Outages darken economic outlook in state, some say=20 Out-of-state generators question power regulators' authority=20 Allegheny Energy makes big California connection=20 Enron stock slides despite earnings reassurance=20 California's electricity crisis at-a-glance=20 ?=20 The auditor's report lays out what it calls ""a complex combination"" of=20 deficiencies and misjudgments it says led to the state's power problems.=20 The ISO's filing came a day after the state controller complained that a=20 relentless energy crisis is jeopardizing California's financial future.=20 Since May, the companies manipulated the market by bidding at excessive=20 prices, effectively withholding supplies or by not bidding at all when they= =20 had generation capability available, according to the ISO study.=20 ISO Director of Market Analysis Anjali Sheffrin presented the findings at a= n=20 energy conference at the University of California, Berkeley, last week.=20 The companies have denied overcharging California and have said they expect= =20 the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission will determine their prices were= =20 justified.=20 In a burst of activity after weeks of delay, both houses of the Legislature= =20 approved bills Thursday designed to ease the energy crisis.=20 The state Senate approved measures to encourage energy conservation and spe= ed=20 up power plant construction.=20 Topping that, the Assembly sent the Senate 14 energy-related bills, includi= ng=20 $455 million in loans and grants to encourage energy efficiency and=20 conservation and alternative energy projects by this summer.=20 One of the Assembly bills would require new energy plants approved by the= =20 state to sell their power within California before they offer it to other= =20 states.=20 ""The (California) Energy Commission says for every day we delay this bill= =20 there are 20 megawatts that could be saved that we're not saving,"" said sta= te=20 Sen. Byron Sher, D-Stanford, as senators voted 28-10 to send his conservati= on=20 measure to the Assembly.=20 Senators also approved another Sher bill speeding up the siting of power=20 plants. It went to the Assembly on a 37-1 vote.=20 Meanwhile, a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction Wednesday orderi= ng=20 one of the companies named in the ISO filing, Reliant Energy Services, to= =20 continue selling to California despite its fear that it will not be paid.= =20 U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said Californians were at risk of= =20 irreparable harm if Reliant stopped selling power to the ISO, which buys at= =20 the last minute on behalf of utilities to bolster supplies and try to fend= =20 off blackouts.=20 Such blackouts struck the state twice this week, shutting off power to=20 hundreds of thousands of people from San Diego to Oregon, snarling traffic= =20 and shutting down businesses.=20 The state remained free of any power alerts Thursday morning, as power=20 reserves stayed above 7 percent.=20 Damrell dismissed Reliant's attempt to force the state Department of Water= =20 Resources to back the ISO's purchases for the state's two biggest utilities= ,=20 Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric Co.=20 The judge said he had no authority to force the DWR to pay for that power.= =20 The utilities have been denied credit after amassing billions of dollars in= =20 debt paying high prices for power that the state's energy deregulation law= =20 prevents them from passing on to consumers.=20 Gov. Gray Davis has said the state isn't responsible for purchasing the=20 costly last-minute power the ISO buys for Edison and PG&E, despite a law=20 authorizing state power purchases on the utilities' behalf.=20 ISO attorney Charles Robinson said the ruling gives ISO operators ""a tool t= o=20 assist them in keeping the lights on in California.""=20 ""Had the decision gone the other way, one could expect other generators to= =20 simply ignore emergency orders,"" Robinson said.=20 Damrell's preliminary injunction will remain in effect until the Federal=20 Energy Regulatory Commission rules on the matter.=20 In another development Wednesday, state Controller Kathleen Connell=20 complained that the energy crunch is imperiling California's financial=20 health.=20 Connell said the state's power buying on behalf of Edison and PG&E is gutti= ng=20 its budget surplus. Since the state started making emergency power buys in= =20 January, the surplus has fallen from $8.5 billion to about $3.2 billion, sh= e=20 said.=20 Connell ordered an audit of the state's power buying, saying Davis is=20 withholding key financial information from her office and the Legislature.= =20 She is also refusing a request by Davis and the Legislature to transfer $5.= 6=20 billion into a ""rainy day fund"" she said was set up to impress Wall Street = as=20 the state prepares to issue $10 billion in revenue bonds to cover its power= =20 buying.=20 Transferring the money would leave the state general fund $2.4 billion in= =20 debt, Connell said.=20 Sandy Harrison, spokesman for the state Department of Finance, and Keely=20 Bosler of the Legislative Analyst's Office, said such transfers are routine= =20 and required by law.=20 They put the state's budget surplus at $5.6 billion.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio dismissed the criticism.=20 ""Political grandstanding doesn't generate one more kilowatt of energy for= =20 California in this time of emergency,"" he said.=20 Connell is a candidate for mayor of Los Angeles in next month's election.= =20 The ISO study, meanwhile, covered five major in-state power suppliers =01)= =20 Reliant, Dynegy, Williams/AES, Duke Energy and Mirant, as well as 16 power= =20 importers. All deliver power to customers of Edison, PG&E and San Diego Gas= &=20 Electric Co., the state's three largest investor-owned utilities.=20 ""All overcharged, but some excessively and some by moderate amounts,"" said= =20 ISO's Sheffrin.=20 According to the report, the overcharging took place beginning last May, wh= en=20 the energy crisis began, and continued through last month.=20 During that time, according to the report, energy suppliers commonly offere= d=20 their electricity at twice the amount it cost them to produce.=20 FERC member William L. Massey said he wasn't shocked to hear the amount=20 overcharged added up to more than $5 billion.=20 ""Prices over the past 10 months in California have greatly exceeded the=20 federal standards of just and reasonable prices, and I think they have=20 exceeded the standards by possibly billions of dollars,"" he said.=20 Chuck Griffin, spokesman for Atlanta-based Mirant said the company would=20 justify their charges to FERC officials.=20 ""I think we're missing sometimes just how basic the problem is in Californi= a.=20 Supply and demand are out of whack and some basic rules of economics kick i= n=20 when that happens,"" he said.=20 --- ------------- Disappearing state surplus sparks alarm=20 Controller puts hold on transfer of $5.6 billion to reserve funds By Karen Kucher and Ed Mendel=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITERS=20 March 22, 2001=20 The state's general fund surplus has dropped to $3.2 billion from $8.5=20 billion since January largely because California's power purchases are=20 devouring the money, state controller Kathleen Connell said yesterday.=20 Connell said she wants to see more documentation about state power spending= =20 before approving the transfer of $5.6 billion from the general fund to a=20 special reserve fund requested by Gov. Gray Davis.=20 Connell said the state would have to borrow $2.4 billion to cover the=20 transfer.=20 Report says power wholesalers overcharged California $5.5 billion=20 Outages darken economic outlook in state, some say=20 Out-of-state generators question power regulators' authority=20 Allegheny Energy makes big California connection=20 Enron stock slides despite earnings reassurance=20 California's electricity crisis at-a-glance=20 ?=20 ""We started this year with a generous budget surplus. The energy crisis has= =20 taken much of that away, and this transfer on top of the electricity=20 purchases would put the (general) fund at risk,"" Connell said in a statemen= t.=20 Her action came on a day when state power supplies improved. After two days= =20 of forced outages this week, no rolling blackouts were ordered yesterday.= =20 Several power plants came back on line and imports from the Pacific Northwe= st=20 provided enough electricity to meet demand yesterday, said Stephanie=20 McCorkle, a spokeswoman with the California Independent System Operator,=20 which manages most of the state's power grid.=20 ""Gradually more (electricity) generation comes on every day,"" McCorkle said= .=20 ""By Monday, we should see somewhere around 2,200 megawatts back in service= =20 that was not on this Monday. That's if no other generation falls off.""=20 Meanwhile, Connell's move took some by surprise.=20 A spokesman for the state Department of Finance said Connell is denying a= =20 routine transfer that is required by law. ""It was just a routine accounting= =20 measure that we didn't anticipate becoming controversial,"" Sandy Harrison= =20 said.=20 Connell announced the denial of the transfer a day after Davis endorsed one= =20 of her opponents, former Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa, in the race= =20 for Los Angeles mayor.=20 Connell, who monitors California's cash flow, said she was ""deeply concerne= d=20 about putting the state's general fund in a deficit situation in light of t= he=20 energy crisis.""=20 About two months ago, the state began spending about $50 million a day to b= uy=20 power after Pacific Gas and Electric and Southern California Edison nearly= =20 went bankrupt. It is also purchasing power for customers of San Diego Gas a= nd=20 Electric.=20 The Davis administration said earlier this week it soon will begin spending= =20 an additional $500 million on power purchases, bringing the total to $4.2= =20 billion.=20 As that staggering sum continues to grow, the state won a court battle with= =20 an electricity supplier yesterday. A federal judge in Sacramento sided with= =20 the state and ordered the wholesaler to continue selling to California=20 despite its fear that it will not get paid.=20 Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said Californians were at risk of irreparable ha= rm=20 if Reliant Energy Services stopped selling power to the Independent System= =20 Operator. The ISO acquires last-minute power on behalf of utilities to fill= =20 gaps in supply to try to fend off blackouts.=20 Damrell dismissed Reliant's attempt to force the state Department of Water= =20 Resources to back the ISO's purchases for the state's two biggest utilities= .=20 The judge said he had no authority to force the DWR to pay for the power.= =20 Davis has said the state isn't responsible for purchasing the costly=20 last-minute power the ISO buys for Edison and PG&E, despite a law authorizi= ng=20 state power purchases on the utilities' behalf.=20 Meanwhile, those who manage the power grid say the forecast for power=20 supplies this week looks good, although conditions can change quickly.=20 ISO managers continue to stress the importance of conservation. Utility=20 customers across the state conserved about 900 megawatts of power Tuesday,= =20 which kept blackouts from being ordered that night.=20 As the power crisis worsened this week, ISO managers wished aloud that they= =20 still could rely on business customers to shut down in exchange for lower= =20 energy rates.=20 Such ""interruptible"" customers saved as much as 2,100 megawatts last spring= ,=20 a figure that dropped to about 1,700 last summer and 1,400 at the end of th= e=20 year. But in January, the state Public Utilities Commission told utilities= =20 they could no longer impose fines on business customers who refuse to shut= =20 down when asked.=20 ISO managers realize the program was harming businesses with frequent=20 interruptions of service -- but they still miss having that option, McCorkl= e=20 said.=20 ""It would have made an enormous difference, but at the same time we=20 understand the impact it was having on businesses,"" McCorkle said. --- -------------- Outages darken economic outlook in state, some say=20 By Dean Calbreath? UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 March 22, 2001=20 Until this week, the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce was predicting= =20 that the county was well-insulated from the growing threat of economic=20 recession.=20 But that was before the lights went out in the chamber's downtown=20 headquarters Monday.=20 Working by window light in his darkened office, chamber economist Kelly=20 Cunningham rapidly erased his previous projections for 3.5 percent growth f= or=20 San Diego County. Cunningham now feels the local economy could fall into a= =20 recession thanks to its shaky supply of energy.=20 Report says power wholesalers overcharged California $5.5 billion=20 Disappearing state surplus sparks alarm=20 Out-of-state generators question power regulators' authority=20 Allegheny Energy makes big California connection=20 Enron stock slides despite earnings reassurance=20 California's electricity crisis at-a-glance=20 ?=20 ""Blackouts are very disruptive to the economy,"" Cunningham said. ""A busines= s=20 can absorb rising energy prices by cutting costs or raising its own prices.= =20 But an energy shutoff is much less predictable. It cuts into productivity.""= =20 Those sentiments are being echoed throughout California, as business leader= s=20 and economists worry that rolling blackouts will darken the state's=20 previously glowing economy.=20 At the University of California Los Angeles, for instance, leading financia= l=20 theorists will meet April 4 to discuss the question ""Can California grow in= =20 the dark?"" Although the topic was chosen before the recent string of power= =20 outages, the blackouts have given the issue new urgency.=20 ""These blackouts are not just a single episode,"" said UCLA economist Tom=20 Lieser. ""They are a bridge to what will happen this summer. If we don't fal= l=20 into a recession in the second half of the year, we will fall pretty close.= ""=20 Tapan Munroe, an economist formerly with Pacific Gas and Electric, this wee= k=20 crossed out his projection for 2 percent statewide growth. After blackouts= =20 rolled toward his consulting offices in the Bay Area city of Moraga, Munroe= =20 decided the state will be lucky if it manages zero growth.=20 ""I'm a pretty optimistic guy by nature, but this has been sobering,"" Munroe= =20 said. ""On Tuesday, one restaurant alone in San Francisco lost $20,000.=20 Multiply that by all of the businesses that lost power in the state and=20 you've got a serious problem.""=20 Two days of blackouts in San Diego County have hurt businesses large and=20 small. Among the industries under threat is the local biotechnology sector,= =20 which requires a steady supply of electricity to power areas of laboratorie= s=20 that must remain temperature-controlled and sterile.=20 Continued blackouts ""could have a huge impact, not only in dollars, but=20 multiple millions of dollars,"" said Tom Oster, vice president of operations= =20 for BioCom, the leading trade organization for the more than 200 biotechs i= n=20 San Diego County.=20 Idun Pharmaceuticals, a biotech near La Jolla Village Drive that has 67=20 employees, had its power cut for about 40 minutes Tuesday. Though the compa= ny=20 has a back-up generator, some segments of its laboratories and lab equipmen= t=20 were not supported by it. Chemists also had to turn off some sensitive lab= =20 equipment to avoid the possibility of a damaging power surge once the=20 blackout was over.=20 ""We're not in a position as a small company to back up the whole facility,""= =20 said Steven Mento, Idun's chief executive. ""We haven't done a survey yet to= =20 determine whether we had losses, either in experiments or equipment damaged= =20 -- but we're hoping because the blackout was so short that damage will be= =20 minimal.""=20 Mento said rolling blackouts, coupled with continuing high energy costs,=20 could cripple many small biotechs -- and even take a bite out of bigger, mo= re=20 established companies.=20 ""We generate new compounds in controlled environments on a daily basis, and= =20 when power goes off you can lose samples because of contamination and other= =20 issues,"" Mento said. ""We are fortunate that our losses would be in having t= o=20 repeat an experiment -- but this could be really critical for companies wit= h=20 drug manufacturing and issues of quality control.""=20 The wireless firms along Sorrento Valley have not been immune from blackout= s.=20 The lights went out at Qualcomm early this week, although executives declin= ed=20 to comment about the impact.=20 No blackouts hit the big shipbuilding operations on the waterfront this wee= k.=20 But the National Steel and Shipbuilding Co. -- one of San Diego's largest= =20 employers -- already experienced a voluntary loss of power this year, its= =20 first since World War II. Since the shipyard does not have its own power=20 supply, NASSCO executives fear the effect of unplanned outages.=20 ""Our average payroll totals half a million dollars a day,"" said NASSCO=20 spokesman Jim Scott. ""When you have a day's work disrupted, that can be=20 pretty serious. We're currently in discussions about the possibility of=20 buying from independent power suppliers, or setting up a power plant of our= =20 own.""=20 Small businesses, which constitute the bulk of employment in San Diego=20 County, were hurt by disruptions as well -- costing them vital revenue at a= =20 time when their power bills have skyrocketed.=20 At Fantastic Sam's, a hair salon in Chula Vista, Angelica Alcala estimated= =20 that business dropped 60 percent when the blackouts hit Tuesday. Among othe= r=20 things, Alcala had to alter her planned haircuts because she was relying on= =20 scissors instead of electric clippers.=20 At the Family Fun Center in El Cajon, the management gave vouchers or refun= ds=20 to the 15 or so video-game players who were in the midst of killing aliens = or=20 fighting ninja warriors as the power went down.=20 Papa John's Pizza estimates that it may have lost several thousand dollars = in=20 business after six stores were blacked out Monday and four others lost powe= r=20 Tuesday. Brian Mills, who runs 23 Papa John's stores in the county, said hi= s=20 main concern was shutting down the computers so they would not be damaged b= y=20 a power surge when the electricity was restored.=20 Paul Ecke III, a member of the West Coast advisory panel for the Federal=20 Reserve, said the potential impact of the energy crisis ""is worse than any= =20 downturn in the stock market.""=20 Ecke, who runs the Paul Ecke Ranch flower operation in Encinitas, said the= =20 crisis could be particularly harmful for the state's agricultural sector,= =20 since farmers need electricity to pump water and natural gas to heat=20 greenhouses.=20 ""What I'm really worried about is the energy thing is going to cast a shado= w=20 on California,"" he said. ""If you're a business person thinking about moving= =20 to California right now, you're probably not going to do it because you're= =20 not sure you're going to have your lights on this summer.""=20 Besides the disruption to businesses, the energy crisis is also hurting the= =20 pocketbooks of hourly workers who have been sent home during the crisis.=20 Under state law, employers are free to send hourly workers home without pay= =20 during such emergencies, although salaried workers must still be paid.=20 Susan Kemp, an attorney with the California Chamber of Commerce, said there= =20 are ways of minimizing the impact on hourly workers.=20 ""You have to look at what time it is when the blackout occurs and how long= =20 you think it's going to last,"" Kemp said. ""If it's around a meal time, you= =20 might send the workers out for a longer meal period if you think it's going= =20 to be an hour or hour and a half delay.""=20 But the potential for losing wages doesn't sit well with the hourly workers= .=20 ""When you get sent home early and lose your wages, you have even less money= =20 to pay your inflated energy bills,"" said an hourly worker who was sent home= =20 during Monday's blackout.=20 --- ---------- Out-of-state generators question power regulators' authority=20 By Karen Gaudette ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 22, 2001=20 SAN FRANCISCO =01) At least three major out-of-state electricity generators= are=20 challenging the authority of the California Public Utilities Commission to= =20 investigate whether they deliberately reduced power supplies to drive up=20 prices.=20 The PUC has asked for power plant maintenance records as it tries to=20 determine whether Duke Energy, Dynegy Inc., Mirant Corp. and other=20 wholesalers have manipulated the energy market at California's expense.=20 At issue is who ultimately controls oversight of in-state plants that provi= de=20 most of California's electricity. The plants, once owned by the state's=20 largest utilities, were sold off as part of the state's 1996 attempt at=20 deregulation.=20 Report says power wholesalers overcharged California $5.5 billion=20 Disappearing state surplus sparks alarm=20 Outages darken economic outlook in state, some say=20 Allegheny Energy makes big California connection=20 Enron stock slides despite earnings reassurance=20 California's electricity crisis at-a-glance=20 ?=20 PUC President Loretta Lynch said the public deserves to know whether=20 generators have unnecessarily taken plants off-line to create artificial=20 shortages, forcing the utilities and now state bureaucrats to buy much high= er=20 priced power on the spot energy market.=20 ""What I do know is we have historically high levels of outages across the= =20 board,"" Lynch told The Associated Press. ""Dynegy and Duke have been fightin= g=20 the PUC in the PUC's quest to obtain documents about these outages.""=20 The PUC has the authority to regulate facilities within its borders, she=20 added. ""It doesn't matter where the headquarters of the company is.""=20 Duke, based in North Carolina, says it does matter =01) and that since it a= nd=20 other wholesalers aren't headquartered in California, the PUC can't require= =20 it to turn over the maintenance records.=20 ""We have not given them proprietary information because they do not regulat= e=20 us,"" said Duke's spokesman, Tom Williams.=20 Dynegy did not return calls for comment Wednesday.=20 The PUC also faces a new challenge in the legislature. A bill sponsored by= =20 Assemblywoman Carole Migden, D-San Francisco, which would have granted the= =20 PUC greater inspection authority over out-of-state generators, was amended= =20 this month to grant the authority to Independent System Operator instead.= =20 The ISO has managed the delivery of energy through most of the state's powe= r=20 grid but historically has done little regulating and has had no policing=20 authority.=20 This board, created during the state's 1996 attempt at deregulation, was=20 redesigned in January. Now it has a five-member board appointed by Davis,= =20 replacing a 26-member ISO board composed of utility executives, marketers,= =20 power plant owners and others.=20 The latest version of Migden's bill requires wholesalers to report monthly = to=20 the ISO about any plants that are off-line or working at reduced capacity,= =20 and gives the ISO power to audit these reports.=20 But because the ISO board historically has made key decisions behind closed= =20 doors and is exempt from certain open-government regulations, government=20 watchdogs are outraged by the switch.=20 ""The PUC's been no friend of ratepayers, but at least under the constitutio= n=20 and state law they're required to conduct their process in the open and the= =20 public can intervene,"" said Harvey Rosenfield of the Foundation for Taxpaye= r=20 and Consumer Rights.=20 Davis ordered last month that the ISO take the lead among state agencies to= =20 ensure adequate energy supplies. Alan LoFaso, an aide to Migden, said the= =20 amendment follows Davis' lead.=20 Both LoFaso and the governor's spokesman, Steve Maviglio, downplayed the=20 change. ""I don't know if we have a preference"" as to which state agency get= s=20 the authority to continue the probe, Maviglio said.=20 The challenge by Duke Energy, Houston-based Dynegy Inc. and Mirant Corp. of= =20 Atlanta came in filings March 12 asking for a rehearing of the PUC's Februa= ry=20 resolution reasserting its legal authority to ""examine the books, accounts,= =20 memoranda, contracts and records"" of generators selling energy to utilities= =20 already subject to PUC regulation.=20 Those utilities include Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern Californi= a=20 Edison Co., which have been nearly bankrupted buying power from wholesalers= ,=20 as well as the financially troubled San Diego Gas and Electric -- Allegheny Energy makes big California connection=20 ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 22, 2001=20 HAGERSTOWN, Md. =01) Allegheny Energy Inc. said Thursday it has agreed to s= ell=20 $4.5 billion worth of power to California's electricity-purchasing agency= =20 over the next 10 years.=20 The company said the contract call for Allegheny to provide up to 1,000=20 megawatts that the Hagerstown-based company has secured from western=20 generating plants through its new energy trading division, Allegheny Energy= =20 Global Markets =01) formerly Merrill Lynch Global Energy Markets.=20 ""This is a win-win for both the state of California and Allegheny Energy. I= t=20 provides a long-term source of fixed-price energy and should help to=20 stabilize prices in California,"" said Michael P. Morrell, president of the= =20 Allegheny Energy Supply division.=20 --- ----------- Judge Frees Small Firm From Edison Contract=20 By KEN ELLINGWOOD and DAN MORAIN, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????EL CENTRO--California's balance of electrical power shifted slightly= =20 Thursday when an Imperial County judge temporarily freed a small geothermal= =20 energy producer from its contract with Southern California Edison, allowing= =20 it to sell power on the open market. ?????The ruling by Superior Court Judge Donal B. Donnelly could lead to a= =20 mass exodus by hundreds of small energy producers that have been selling=20 power to the state's financially troubled utilities for months without=20 getting paid. ?????At the same time, it may have staved off plans by a group of the small= =20 generators to send Edison into involuntary bankruptcy as early as today. ?????In Sacramento, energy legislation pushed by Gov. Gray Davis passed in= =20 the state Senate but foundered in the Assembly. The measure was intended to= =20 ensure that the state gets repaid for the electricity that it has been buyi= ng=20 on behalf of Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric, which say they lack the cas= h=20 and credit to purchase power. The bill also was supposed to guarantee that= =20 the small, alternative energy producers--which together provide nearly a=20 third of the state's power--get paid. But Assembly Republicans opposed it,= =20 saying it hadn't been given sufficient scrutiny. ?????The impact of the small producers was made clear in Imperial County,= =20 where Edison's failure to pay CalEnergy, the county's biggest property=20 taxpayer, had outsize implications. CalEnergy had put county officials on= =20 notice that it was about to miss a $3.8-million property tax payment. The= =20 uncertainty had prompted the tiny Calipatria Unified School District to=20 postpone a bond issue for badly needed school repairs. ?????Among CalEnergy Chairman David Sokol's first acts after the judge's=20 ruling Thursday was to promise Imperial County Supervisor Wally J. Leimgrub= er=20 that the company would pay its property taxes on time. ?????""That is great news,"" Leimgruber said. ?????Within hours of its court victory, CalEnergy had stopped transmitting= =20 geothermal power to Edison and begun selling it to El Paso Energy, a=20 marketing company that purchased the energy at prevailing rates and resold = it=20 on the spot market. ?????Some of the more than 700 other small energy producers in the state sa= id=20 they were considering similar action against Edison and Pacific Gas &=20 Electric. ?????""We absolutely need the right to sell to third parties,"" said Dean=20 Vanech, president of Delta Power, a New Jersey company that owns five small= =20 gas-fired plants in California and is owed tens of millions of dollars by= =20 Edison. ?????Sokol praised the Imperial County judge and said his company simply=20 wanted the authority to sell its power ""to a credit-worthy company that, in= =20 fact, pays for the power."" ?????An Edison spokesman said the company was disappointed with the ruling,= =20 but sympathized with CalEnergy and other small producers because=20 ""California's power crisis has placed [them] in financial distress, just as= =20 it has placed utilities in financial distress."" ?????Edison expressed concern that the ruling would prompt CalEnergy and=20 other small producers to sell their power out of state. Sokol said CalEnerg= y=20 had specifically told El Paso Energy that it hoped its power would remain i= n=20 California, ""but if someone wants to pay a higher price out of state, we=20 can't stop them."" ?????Sokol said that Edison still owes CalEnergy $140 million and that the= =20 company--along with seven other small producers--had been prepared to file = a=20 petition in federal bankruptcy court in Los Angeles today forcing the utili= ty=20 into involuntary bankruptcy. He said his company no longer intends to do so= ,=20 and he believed--but wasn't certain--that the other companies would shelve= =20 their plans. ?????Edison filed papers Thursday with the federal Securities and Exchange= =20 Commission showing that it owed $840 million to various small electricity= =20 producers, many of which rely on renewable energy sources such as geotherma= l=20 steam, solar energy or wind. ?????The alternative energy producers--and utilities--strenuously objected = to=20 the legislation considered in Sacramento on Thursday. The bill, spelling ou= t=20 how the utilities are to pay the state and the small producers, passed the= =20 Senate on a 27-9 vote, the exact two-thirds margin required. But it stalled= =20 in the Assembly on a 46-23 party-line vote, well short of two-thirds. ?????""When I was a citizen back in Lancaster, I heard these stories about= =20 pieces of legislation that were cooked up late at night, that . . . were cu= t=20 and pasted together and were rammed through by the Legislature,"" Assemblyma= n=20 George Runner (R-Lancaster) said. ""That's exactly what we have before us."" ?????The alternative electricity generators, including oil companies, warne= d=20 that they would lose money under the Davis proposal, while representatives = of=20 Edison and PG&E, which have amassed billions in debt in the worsening energ= y=20 crisis, said the legislation would push them deeper into the hole. ?????""There isn't enough money,"" Edison attorney Ann Cohn testified at a=20 Senate hearing on the bill Thursday. ""It is a very simple question: Dollars= =20 going out cannot be greater than dollars coming in."" ?????The bill, AB 8X, combined several proposals. First, it sought to clari= fy=20 earlier legislation by spelling out that Edison and PG&E must pay the state= =20 all money collected from consumers for electricity that the state has been= =20 buying. ?????Additionally, the bill would turn over to the California Public=20 Utilities Commission the thorny issue of how much to pay alternative energy= =20 producers for their electricity. ?????Wind, solar and geothermal producers might agree to the prices offered= =20 by the administration. But most of the alternative energy producers,=20 including Chevron and British Petroleum, use natural gas to generate=20 electricity through ""cogeneration,"" a process of creating steam for both=20 electric generation and heat. With natural gas prices high, they contend,= =20 they would lose money at the prices Davis is offering. ---=20 ?????Ellingwood reported from El Centro, Morain from Sacramento. Times staf= f=20 writers Mitchell Landsberg in Los Angeles and Jenifer Warren, Nancy Vogel a= nd=20 Carl Ingram in Sacramento contributed to this story. --- ------------------- Lodi Defies Order for Blackouts=20 Utility tells PG&E to 'pay the bills'=20 Alan Gathright, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday, March 23, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /23/M N171303.DTL=20 Let history show that the rebellion against rolling blackouts started when= =20 the Central Valley town of Lodi defied PG&E and refused to unplug its=20 customers this week.=20 Like several cities that own their own utilities, Lodi saw the energy crunc= h=20 looming last fall and spent millions for long-term power contracts in an=20 attempt to avoid blackouts.=20 Now, Lodi and a Northern California municipal utility cooperative that=20 includes Palo Alto, Santa Clara and Alameda are telling Pacific Gas and=20 Electric Co. that it's unfair to force their customers to endure blackouts= =20 triggered by the near-bankrupt utility's failure to pay its debts.=20 ""The problem is not paying bills, so pay the bills,"" said Alan Vallow,=20 director of the utility serving Lodi's 58,000 residents. ""I won't arbitrari= ly=20 screw my customers . . . so 5,000 PG&E customers can turn on their lights= =20 somewhere else.""=20 When PG&E relayed an order from state power regulators Monday and Tuesday f= or=20 Lodi to black out some of its customers, a strategy intended to keep the=20 West's power grid from collapsing, Lodi said no.=20 So far, other cities in the Northern California Power Agency say they will= =20 continue to participate in rotating outages.=20 But in a letter last Friday to PG&E, members of the agency and four other= =20 utility districts, including Sacramento's, warned they didn't believe long-= =20 standing agreements that allow them to use PG&E transmission lines to conne= ct=20 to the grid obliged them to endure rolling blackouts because of ""PG&E's=20 failure to pay its power obligations.""=20 They say the agreements require them to reduce power demand only in respons= e=20 to natural disasters or malfunctions damaging power lines or plants.=20 The agencies asked for a meeting with PG&E President Gordon Smith before=20 anticipated summer blackouts hit, ""to develop a more rational program for= =20 allocation of risks associated with (power demand) load shedding before you= =20 call on us to participate in load shedding again.""=20 REFUSING TO SHARE BURDEN PG&E officials accused Lodi of selfishly refusing to share the burden of th= e=20 statewide energy crisis.=20 ""It is regrettable that after reaping the benefits of the (power grid)=20 interconnection contract for many years, Lodi is suddenly unwilling to bear= =20 their share of the burden of the statewide energy crisis,"" said PG&E=20 spokesman Ron Low. ""When cities like Lodi do not follow the (state=20 Independent System Operator's) order to curtail power, it hurts all of=20 California and jeopardizes the entire power grid.""=20 Low also disagreed with accusations that this week's blackouts were trigger= ed=20 by PG&E's failure to pay its bills, noting that the ISO stated that 12,000= =20 megawatts of power were offline because of plant maintenance.=20 But ISO spokeswoman Lisa Szot confirmed assertions by the municipal utiliti= es=20 that power generators had kept an additional 3,000 megawatts offline becaus= e=20 they feared PG&E couldn't pay.=20 Lodi's Vallow said he was legally obliged to serve city customers. Lodi=20 residents are facing rate increases of as much as 15 percent under a power= =20 contract that the city secured in hopes of avoiding blackouts. The contract= =20 required Lodi to pay a $10 million premium above its typical $23 million=20 annual energy bill.=20 'THAT'S NOT FAIR'=20 ""I've been hearing (PG&E say), 'Gee, that's not fair. Where's the equity if= =20 everybody is doing rolling blackouts and you're not?' "" Vallow said. ""Well,= I=20 put my customers at financial risk to the tune of $10 million. And if they'= re=20 not going to get to use that power they paid for, then by God, give us that= =20 money back.""=20 Vallow said he was willing to sell PG&E some of Lodi's power surplus, knowi= ng=20 Lodi might not be paid.=20 ""But I'm not willing to turn off 5,000 customers, so 5,000 customers=20 somewhere else can turn their lights on,"" Vallow said. ""The objective here,= =20 people, is to keep as many lights on as possible.""=20 Other city-owned utilities, while annoyed with the rolling blackouts, aren'= t=20 going as far as Lodi.=20 WEATHERING BLACKOUTS ""I certainly understand the frustrations of utilities like Lodi and actuall= y=20 share those frustrations in many cases,"" said John Roukema, assistant=20 director of Santa Clara's utility.=20 But he stressed that his agency had been able to weather blackouts without= =20 hurting residents or small business, because 17 major industrial power user= s=20 had agreed to curtail demand during energy alerts.=20 ""The prudent thing to do at this time is to continue to do our share and=20 participate in rolling blackouts, because a single problem could cause a=20 catastrophic failure in the statewide system,"" Roukema said.=20 In Alameda, residents endured blackouts this week despite the fact that cit= y=20 has secured reliable power supplies, said Matt McCabe, spokesman for Alamed= a=20 Power & Telecom.=20 ""It was in the best of interests of Alamedans to maintain the stability and= =20 integrity of the grid,"" he said. ""Now, if it becomes evident that the syste= m=20 is being jeopardized for financial reasons, then we should not have to=20 subject Alamedans to rolling blackouts.""=20 In Palo Alto, which also had blackouts this week, utility officials told th= e=20 City Council they were expecting a 30 to 40 percent rate hike this spring t= o=20 pay new contracts guaranteeing a stable power supply, said Councilman Bern= =20 Beecham. The city hopes to avoid giving customers the double whammy of rate= =20 boosts and more blackouts with a program that gets industrial users to cut= =20 demand voluntarily during alerts.=20 ""When there's not enough generating capacity in the state to protect the=20 integrity of the grid, that is in fact everybody's problem,"" Beecham said,= =20 but that doesn't mean Palo Alto is willing to endure blackouts to prop up= =20 PG&E's ailing finances.=20 ""We need to have some very frank discussions with PG&E about mutual=20 obligations,"" Beecham said.=20 Energy Tips=20 With Californians facing electricity and natural gas shortages, PG&E has=20 several tips to help conserve both:=20 -- Set the furnace thermostat at 68 degrees or lower, health permitting.=20 -- Wash only full loads in a dishwasher. If operating instructions allow,= =20 turn dishwasher off before the drying cycle and let dishes dry naturally.= =20 -- Use low-wattage or fluorescent lights.=20 -- Fix defective plumbing and dripping faucets, which waste water and=20 increase the gas or electric bill for heating the water.=20 -- Plug gaps around pipes, ducts, fans and vents that go through walls,=20 ceilings and floors.=20 -- Keep furnaces clean, and clean or replace the filter regularly.=20 -- Turn heaters down when using a fireplace, and close the damper when not= =20 using the fireplace.=20 -- On sunny days, open drapes on windows facing south and let the sun shine= =20 in. At night, close the drapes to retain indoor heat.=20 Source: www.pge.com=20 E-mail Alan Gathright at ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 --- Coming Down to the Wire=20 State legislators battle over alternative energy bills=20 Greg Lucas, Robert Salladay, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau Friday, March 23, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /23/M N113351.DTL=20 Sacramento -- After several weeks of slow to no progress in attacking the= =20 state's energy mess, the Legislature erupted yesterday into a frenzy of=20 energy activity.=20 The sudden action on a series of energy bills -- including one to let=20 businesses buy power directly from generators -- stemmed initially from the= =20 fear of bad publicity lawmakers might receive for a planned three-day junke= t=20 next week to Washington, D.C.=20 When a key bill bogged down in the Assembly late yesterday, Speaker Bob=20 Hertzberg, D-Sherman Oaks, announced the trip was canceled.=20 Another reason for the flurry of action was recognition that time is runnin= g=20 out.=20 Several alternative energy producers -- like wind farms and biomass plants = -=20 - said they were one day away from forcing the state's two biggest utilitie= s=20 into bankruptcy because they were owed more than $1 billion.=20 The Legislature's action and a court ruling that could free alternative=20 producers from unpaid contracts.=20 ""This is triage, members of the Senate,"" said Sen. Jim Costa, D-Fresno. ""Th= is=20 is crisis activity we're engaged in.""=20 The Senate approved a bill aimed at helping state regulators get cash to so= me=20 alternative energy producers. Most of them have been paid little or nothing= =20 since November by the utilities they sell electricity to.=20 Senators passed a bill to help the Public Utilities Commission order=20 utilities to pay solar, wind and other alternative energy producers who sig= n=20 lower-priced contracts with the utilities.=20 The bill failed in the Assembly because of GOP opposition, fanned in part b= y=20 price concerns by the oil industry, a major co-generation producer. The=20 Assembly is set to meet again today to try again pass the bill, which the P= UC=20 needs to issue its final order.=20 The PUC's proposed order offers the first hint of financial relief for=20 hundreds of alternative energy producers, known as ''qualified facilities"" = in=20 the energy industry, who have been paid just pennies on the dollar by cash-= =20 strapped Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison.=20 Lack of payments has caused many alternative generators to shutter their=20 operations.=20 The PUC's proposal, which will be considered at the commission's meeting=20 Tuesday, offers generators a choice of agreeing to a five-year contract at= =20 $79 per megawatt or a 10-year deal at $69 per megawatt, Davis said. The goi= ng=20 rate now is about $150 a megawatt hour.=20 The order does not address money already owed to the more than 600=20 alternative energy producers.=20 Under the order, utilities would have to pay any generator who signed the n= ew=20 contracts within two weeks.=20 But PG&E said it might not be able to afford do that.=20 Operators of co-generation facilities say the contracts contemplated by the= =20 PUC don't cover their cost of producing energy because the sale price no=20 longer would be pegged to the the price of natural gas.=20 In a significant court decision affecting generators, one geothermal energy= =20 supplier in Imperial County won a lawsuit yesterday against Edison allowing= =20 the company to escape a contract requiring it to sell electricity to the=20 utility.=20 A superior court judge said CalEnergy, operator of the geothermal plant,=20 could suspend deliveries to Edison and sell the 268 megawatt hours it=20 generated on the open market.=20 CalEnergy is owed $75 million by the utility.=20 The court victory may ease mounting pressure from some qualified facilities= ,=20 including CalEnergy, to drive one or both of the utilities into involuntary= =20 bankruptcy.=20 The Assembly and Senate, meanwhile, rushed through a series of bills aimed = at=20 increasing energy conservation, and rushing the building of new power plant= s.=20 Most significant for bigger residential and commercial utility customers is= a=20 measure passed by the Assembly to allow energy customers to buy power=20 directly from generators.=20 That right was eliminated in January when the state began buying power for= =20 the cash-strapped utilities.=20 The bill approved unanimously yesterday would impose a yet to be determined= =20 exit fee on customers who leave the power grid to help cover the state's=20 financial exposure.=20 Tell Us What You Think=20 Can you save 20 percent on your energy use? Gov. Gray Davis' administration= =20 is offering rebates for Californians who save on power starting in June, an= d=20 if you've got a strategy for conserving, The Chronicle wants to hear it.=20 We'll be writing about the hardest-working energy savers in a future story.= =20 To get involved, write to the Energy Desk, San Francisco Chronicle, 901=20 Mission St., San Francisco, CA 94103; or e-mail energysaver@sfchronicle.com= .=20 E-mail the reporters at glucas@sfchronicle.com and bsalladay@sfchronicle.co= m.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 14=20 --- State's bill for energy could double this year=20 Posted at 9:34 p.m. PST Thursday, March 22, 2001=20 BY=20 STEVE=20 JOHNSON=20 AND=20 JOHN=20 Warning that California is imperiled by the prices it is paying for=20 electricity, a report Thursday said the state's annual power tab could wind= =20 up being 10 times what it was two years ago.=20 At the current rate of spending, the report estimated that the total=20 electricity bill in California this year could hit $70 billion, which is mo= re=20 than twice what it was last year and about 10 times what was paid in 1999 a= nd=20 1998.=20 ``The California electricity market has gone from being `dysfunctional' to= =20 precipitating a crisis,'' according to the report from the Independent Syst= em=20 Operator.=20 It added that the price being charged ``threatens any semblance of just and= =20 reasonable consumer rates, the financial viability of California's=20 investor-owned utilities, the financial stability of California, of its=20 neighboring states and of the nation.''=20 While power suppliers denied any wrongdoing, the report said the state=20 appears to have been hit with ``excess'' charges totaling $6.87 billion sin= ce=20 May, based on an assessment of the typical operating costs of power plant= =20 owners. Out of that total, $6.2 billion appeared to be excessive charges=20 during times when power was not in particularly short supply, the agency=20 said.=20 The cost of power has become a growing concern now that the state has stepp= ed=20 in to buy it on behalf of Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern Californi= a=20 Edison, which claim to be so strapped for cash that they are on the verge o= f=20 bankruptcy.=20 In making public the report, which was sent to the Federal Energy Regulator= y=20 Commission, officials at the Independent System Operator were careful not t= o=20 accuse any power companies of price gouging. While the prices appeared to b= e=20 unreasonable, they said, the state needs to learn more about the specific= =20 operating costs of power plant operators before they could determine whethe= r=20 California was cheated.=20 The officials said they were considering asking the federal agency, which= =20 oversees power wholesalers, to order the suppliers to make refunds. In the= =20 past two weeks, the federal agency has warned a number of suppliers that th= ey=20 may have to refund $135 million in apparent overcharges during January and= =20 February.=20 But many experts question whether the federal agency is serious about=20 demanding such refunds, so California officials also are reviewing the=20 possibility of suing the suppliers or seeking criminal charges against some= =20 of them. ``We're working very closely with a number of agencies to review t= he=20 information we currently have to determine what remedies may be available,'= '=20 said Charles Robinson, the Independent System Operator's general counsel.= =20 The report's suspicions were partly bolstered by another study made public= =20 Thursday by the state auditor. It said California's market structure=20 encouraged bidding gamesmanship by both utilities and power sellers ``in an= =20 effort to manipulate wholesale prices to their advantage.'' But it stopped= =20 short of accusing power generators of profiting illegally.=20 ``There's clearly some evidence of market abuse,'' said state Auditor Elain= e=20 Howle. Even so, she added, ``that's not to say it's anything illegal. We=20 hired consultants, they looked at some of the bidding, and they weren't=20 comfortable going that far.''=20 Although no power companies were named in either report, officials with=20 several suppliers insisted they have done nothing wrong.=20 ``We've conducted our business legally and ethically,'' said Richard=20 Wheatley, spokesman for Reliant Energy, which runs five major California=20 power plants. ``The ISO report appears to be nothing more than just another= =20 attempt to put blame at someone else's doorstep, when there's been very=20 little action out of Sacramento to resolve the problems in the California= =20 marketplace.''=20 Duke Energy spokesman Jeremy Dreier said the company, which runs plants in= =20 Moss Landing and Morro Bay, sold most of its power last year and this year = in=20 relatively low-cost, long-term contracts, and was among the first to offer= =20 such deals to the state. He added that Duke increased production from its= =20 aging plants to meet surging demand.=20 ``The fact that we were among the first to bring long-term contracts to the= =20 table speaks volumes about how we're trying to serve this market,'' Dreier= =20 said.=20 John Sousa of Dynegy Inc., which co-owns three major California plants, add= ed=20 that ``given the market conditions, the rates we charged were just and=20 reasonable.''=20 --- Plan for alternate power plants stalls=20 Posted at 10:03 p.m. PST Thursday, March 22, 2001=20 BY DION NISSENBAUM AND JENNIFER BJORHUS=20 Mercury News=20 SACRAMENTO -- The state's prospects for plugging a critical electricity gap= =20 dimmed Thursday when the state Assembly rejected a rescue plan for=20 alternative power companies and a state judge ruled that one such firm coul= d=20 stop selling energy in California.=20 Both actions threaten the plan Gov. Gray Davis announced just Tuesday to ke= ep=20 these companies running and stave off more blackouts. With the state's=20 troubled utilities failing to pay for their electricity, many alternative= =20 energy plants have been shutting down.=20 The dual blows came on a day when tempers flared in the Capitol as lawmaker= s=20 jarred by back-to-back blackouts launched bipartisan attacks on Pacific Gas= &=20 Electric Co. and Southern California Edison, which aren't paying wind, sola= r,=20 biomass, geothermal and small gas-fired plants for their electricity.=20 After Republicans shot down the measure meant to keep alternative energy=20 companies in business, Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg, D-Van Nuys, warne= d=20 that the restless companies might act on their threat to force the utilitie= s=20 into bankruptcy.=20 ``They said it, and I understood them to mean it,'' he said.=20 The failure overshadowed a burst of action in Sacramento where lawmakers=20 approved a host of other measures. The Senate approved two key bills: one= =20 that would spend more than $1 billion to encourage Californians to conserve= =20 energy and one that would make it easier to build power plants. The Assembl= y=20 approved 14 incremental bills.=20 Six votes short=20 But the Assembly fell six votes short of passing a hastily prepared bill=20 meant to help prop up the nearly 700 alternative energy companies, many of= =20 which are now idle.=20 Those closings sapped California of energy this week and helped cause two= =20 days of rolling blackouts -- the first since January.=20 In response, Davis and lawmakers cobbled together a plan to set new, lower= =20 rates for alternative power and to fine the utilities if they refuse to pay= =20 these companies, which supply up to a third of the state's power.=20 But Republicans refused to back the measure and said it contained too many= =20 complex parts that needed more time to analyze.=20 ``Everyone in this room knows that this piece of legislation has not had a= =20 good look,'' said Assemblyman George Runner, R-Lancaster.=20 Assemblyman Fred Keeley, D-Santa Cruz, castigated the Republicans and=20 implored them to accept an imperfect solution.=20 ``Ladies and gentlemen: Welcome to the NFL,'' he said. ``Welcome to the wor= ld=20 where large, complex issues don't have a simple solution.''=20 Approval is needed before state regulators at the Public Utilities Commissi= on=20 can vote on the fine points of the plan. That was supposed to happen Tuesda= y.=20 Much of the criticism focused on concerns raised by power plants that use= =20 natural gas to produce energy. Administrators from those plants said the=20 Davis price caps would make it impossible for them to break even.=20 The derailment came hours after the measure narrowly won approval in the=20 state Senate.=20 Hertzberg plans to search for a compromise today and canceled plans for the= =20 Assembly's annual trip to Washington.=20 Thursday's actions were highlighted by angry attacks on the utilities by=20 frustrated lawmakers.=20 ``I hope they do go bankrupt,'' shouted Senate President pro tem John Burto= n,=20 D-San Francisco, during a debate on the energy crisis. ``Let them go belly= =20 up. I don't care any more.''=20 Legal decision adds twist=20 The legislative failure was compounded by a legal decision in Southern=20 California that further complicated the picture.=20 A Superior Court judge in Imperial County cleared the way for CalEnergy=20 Operating Corp. to break its contract with Edison and sell its 268 megawatt= s=20 of power on the open market. The judge concluded that Edison had breached i= ts=20 contract by failing to pay CalEnergy since November.=20 That ruling could pave the way for hundreds of others to follow suit and=20 drain off power California needs to prevent blackouts.=20 ``It's not good,'' said V. John White, director of the Center for Energy=20 Efficiency and Renewable Technologies. ``This is potentially going to chang= e=20 the dynamics of the situation, and probably not for the better.''=20 Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of the Independent Energy Producers=20 Association, said it was unclear whether other companies would sue.=20 ``I think this is a very significant development,'' he said. ``We're sort o= f=20 at a period where the industry's reaching the end of the rope.''=20 The ruling did have one silver lining: CalEnergy Chairman David Sokol said= =20 his company and seven others had planned to force Edison into bankruptcy if= =20 they lost in court.=20 But he also warned, ``You stick a sharp stick in enough people's eyes, and= =20 they get pretty tired of it.''=20 The situation with generators supplying PG&E isn't as dire since the compan= y=20 has been making partial payments.=20 Kent Burton, senior vice president for Covanta Energy Corp. in New Jersey,= =20 said, ``They've tried to be responsive.''=20 Mercury News Staff Writer Mark Gladstone contributed to this report. Contac= t=20 Dion Nissenbaum at dnissenbaum@sjmercury.com or (916) 441-4603 or Jennifer= =20 Bjorhus at jbjorhus@sjmercury.com or (408) 920-5660. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: CPUC Subpoena - Conference call TODAY!; [EMail-Body]= I won't be on the call, but will fax my comments to you this am Twanda Sweet@ECT 10/06/2000 09:51 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, msmith1@enron.com, david_aamodt@pgn.com, mday@gmssr.com, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT, gfergus@brobeck.com cc: Subject: CPUC Subpoena - Conference call TODAY! Please be advised that there will be a conference call today at 11:30a.m. central standard time to discuss the draft response to CPUC. The dial in number is 800-998-2462 (passcode 4672956). If you have any questions, please call me at 713-853-5587. Thanks. Richard Twanda Sweet Enron North America Corp. EB3821 (713) 853-9402 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Confidential Attorney Client Work Product; [EMail-Body]= I hope you have seen this. Obviously since you are a director you have a keen interest in this. -----Original Message----- From: Leite, Francisco Pinto Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 6:23 PM To: Lagrasta, Fred; Miller, Don (Asset Mktg) Cc: Mellencamp, Lisa Subject: Confidential Attorney Client Work Product With respect to the segregation of funds in Mexico to pay for potential labor liabilities as requested by John Lavorato, below is my proposed plan. 1 - We obtain a legal opinion from Mexican counsel explaining the legal obligation of any Mexican company to pay for labor liabilities and summarizing the possible liabilities for directors in case such liabilities are not paid for. 2- The shareholders of Enron Servicios pass a resolution memorializing the desire to comply with Mexican law and resolving to open a segregated bank account to pay for any and all possible labor liabilities. This bank account can only be accessed by any two directors of Enron Servicios signing jointly (this is my suggestion and can obviously be different). 3 - Our lawyers in Mexico will open the account and funds will be transferred forthwith. 4 - The resolution and the bank account will not be public record and no employee should know about these funds (we need to see how we can send funds to this bank account without any Mexico employee's signature) Purpose: (i) Document our legal obligations in accordance with mexican law and the reason why the shareholders of the company wish to segregate funds and (ii) make sure nobody besides the directors can access these funds. If the segregation of funds is ever challenged by ENE or ENA's creditors, we will have the legal background and justification for the segregation. If this is okay with you, I will have the various resolutions and proxies ready for signature tomorrow and the account could probably be open and funded by Thursday. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. Thanks Note: Lisa, I will fill you in tomorrow Francisco Pinto-Leite Enron Americas 1400 Smith Street, EB 3888 Houston, TX 77002-7361 Tel: 713-345-7942 Fax:713-646-3490 fleite@enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Bob Iveson and Karl Stahlkopf (EPRI), in your office. - Confirmed; [EMail-Body]= cc:Mail to Bruce Stram and Tim Vail sent 6/23. Tim Vail is confirmed, Bruce will be here until 10:00. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Update Day 1 Second Session FERC CA Settlement; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 01/04/2001 10:28 AM ----- Susan J Mara 01/04/2001 12:40 AM To: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Angela Schwarz/HOU/EES@EES, Beverly Aden/HOU/EES@EES, Bill Votaw/HOU/EES@EES, Brenda Barreda/HOU/EES@EES, Carol Moffett/HOU/EES@EES, Cathy Corbin/HOU/EES@EES, Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT, Christina Liscano/HOU/EES@EES, Christopher F Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT, Craig H Sutter/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Debora Whitehead/HOU/EES@EES, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Dorothy Youngblood/HOU/ECT@ECT, Douglas Huth/HOU/EES@EES, Edward Sacks/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Eric Melvin/HOU/EES@EES, Erika Dupre/HOU/EES@EES, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Fran Deltoro/HOU/EES@EES, Frank W Vickers/HOU/ECT@ECT, Gayle W Muench/HOU/EES@EES, Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@ENRON, Gordon Savage/HOU/EES@EES, Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@ENRON, Iris Waser/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON, James W Lewis/HOU/EES@EES, James Wright/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Jeff Messina/HOU/EES@EES, Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Jess Hewitt/HOU/EES@EES, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kathy Bass/HOU/EES@EES, Kathy Dodgen/HOU/EES@EES, Ken Gustafson/HOU/EES@EES, Kevin Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Leasa Lopez/HOU/EES@EES, Leticia Botello/HOU/EES@EES, Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Marsha Suggs/HOU/EES@EES, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Meredith M Eggleston/HOU/EES@EES, Michael Etringer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael Mann/HOU/EES@EES, Michelle D Cisneros/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mike M Smith/HOU/EES@EES, mpalmer@enron.com, Neil Bresnan/HOU/EES@EES, Neil Hong/HOU/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Paula Warren/HOU/EES@EES, Richard L Zdunkewicz/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Leibert/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, Rita Hennessy/NA/Enron@ENRON, Robert Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Rosalinda Tijerina/HOU/EES@EES, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Scott Gahn/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES, Sharon Dick/HOU/EES@EES, skean@enron.com, Tanya Leslie/HOU/EES@EES, Tasha Lair/HOU/EES@EES, Ted Murphy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Terri Greenlee/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tony Spruiell/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Vladimir Gorny/HOU/ECT@ECT, Wanda Curry/HOU/EES@EES, William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, gfergus@brobeck.com, rcarroll@bracepatt.com, Kathryn Corbally/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Update Day 1 Second Session FERC CA Settlement In the Room Conference attended by all in-state generators, a few munies, the IOUs and a few others. One attorney from CPUC, but on phone. Barbara Barkovich attended for CA Large Consumers. Nader sent someone. No other consumers. One other ESP -- Strategic Energy (only operates in San Diego). Judge reports that only 6 offers have been submitted to FERC for sales to the IOUs (note; Enron submitted one of the offers). The offers total 2000 MW. The prices are quite divergent. He expresses concern at the little offered. Generators suggest that more could be offered if FERC could be more flexible on terms (FERC required 24/7 offers). IOUs and others press judge to seek offers from others not present (e.g., BPA, other marketers, SW utilities), but judge does not offer to do so. Barkovich says can't throw large customers into non-core market now. Everyone agrees that we are all looking for a blended wholesale rate (part existing gen, part OFs, part forward contract and part spot) that meshes with the IOUs' ability to recover the costs in rates -- so tied to CPUC rate increase. Discussion of CPUC PD -- not enough Enron able to take low profile. SDG&E suggested terminating the settlement talks at FERC, saying nothing could be achieved. Not much happens until 4:30 pm, when judge blows up -- judge directed epithets at SDG&E and SCE. SCE had refused to cooperate from the beginning. Out of the Room Separate talks between PG&E and SDG&E and some of the generators. Late in the day, Judge meets with IOUs. Parties agree informally that forum does not work well given lack of CPUC involvement, but some believe that FERC is only hope for a workable resolution. Next Steps -- The Judge Speaks Judge asked everyone to consider how to ""Share the Pain"" for Thursday's meeting and said not to expect any ""win:win"" scenario. His view is that FERC is better than the CA legislature or bankruptcy court. His focus will be on Wolak proposal to share the pain, as submitted in 12/1/00 comments to FERC -- forces all sellers to CA to sell most of its supply (either generation or marketer offers) as cost-based rates in forward contracts, or lose ability to sell at market-based rates. Generators oppose this, I believe. Enron planning to continue low profile but to discuss options with ENA. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: CA Price caps; [EMail-Body]= I'm afraid we have our work cut out for us. We have been working the proces at the state and federal level in the past couple of weeks. I continue to believe (hope) Susan J Mara 08/11/2000 11:56 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: CA Price caps I heard you've been raising a ruckus about our activities on the price caps -- asking us to do more. Thanks. I feel as if I have been a voice in the wilderness for the past six months when I was trying to get people to pay attention to the bad things happening in CA and warning that the problems (mainly a threat of reregulation) will spread elsewhere. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Reliability and Security Arguments (RTOs); [EMail-Body]= This responds to Charles's voice mail and the RTO conference calls that Janel has been on where we have discussed responding to those who say the heightened interest in security is a reason NOT to do large RTOs. Jim Steffes is the EPSA witness on reliability and other issues at a Barton subcommittee hearing next Wed., Oct. 10th. While the written testimony filed for the Sept. 11 hearing that was canceled is still operative, Jim's oral remarks can be whatever he wishes. Also, even if he does not raise it in his opening statement, the issue will no doubt come up by others or in Q&A. Thus -- any talking points need to be ready by Tuesday for this hearing. Does not have to be anything fancy or hand-out quality. Just something for Jim to consider using. Charles, I do not recall any specific articles on what NERC said, but Sarah Novosel said she would check since she thought there was something like what you raised in your voice mail. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= NYTimes.com Article: The Real Wolf; [EMail-Body]= This article from NYTimes.com has been sent to you by vkaminski@aol.com. /-------------------- advertisement -----------------------\ Looking for better IT solutions? Toshiba is uniting digital, mobile and network innovations in a bold new vision of Information Technology for today and tomorrow. Take a closer look at life in the new Digital Age. And imagine how good IT can be. Visit Toshiba.com for more details. The Real Wolf RECKONINGS By PAUL KRUGMAN ecently I received a letter from an economist I respect, chiding me for my ""Naderite"" columns on the California energy crisis. He just didn't believe that market manipulation by power companies could possibly be an important issue; it sounded too much to him like the sort of thing one hears from knee-jerk leftists, who blame greedy capitalists for every problem, be it third-world poverty or high apartment rents. The left has cried ""Wolf!"" so many times that sensible people have learned to discount such claims. But now a bona fide wolf has arrived, whose predatory behavior is doing terrible damage to our most populous state =01* and nobody will believe it. True, California would be heading for a summer of power shortages even if it had never deregulated. And even if there was workable competition in the wholesale electricity market, prices in that market would spike during periods of peak demand, transferring billions of dollars from either taxpayers or consumers to the generators. But the evidence is now overwhelming that there isn't workable competition in California's power market, and that the actions of generators ""gaming the system"" have greatly magnified the crisis. The key fact is that California has somehow remained in a state of more or less continuous power shortage and very high wholesale prices regardless of the level of demand. A rash of outages has kept the electricity market conveniently =01* and very profitably =01* short of supply even during periods of low demand, when there ought to be lots of excess capacity. As Frank Wolak, the Stanford economist who also advises the state's power grid, has pointed out, an outage at a power plant is a lot like an employee calling in sick. You can't tell directly whether he is really sick or has chosen to take the day off for other reasons, but you can look for circumstantial evidence. And such evidence has convinced Mr. Wolak that ""generators use forced outages strategically to withhold capacity from the market"" =01* a view shared by a growing number of other researchers. Which brings us to the latest move by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. On Wednesday, the commission apparently decided to offer California some relief, and put new price caps in place on the California electricity market. I say ""apparently"" because the more you look at the plan the less likely it seems to be any help at all. Indeed, the measure was passed on a 2-to-1 vote, with William Massey =01* the one commissioner who has been sympathetic to calls for price controls =01* voting against it on the grounds that it would be ineffectual. What's wrong with FERC's plan? First, it caps prices only in emergency conditions =01* ignoring the fact that electricity prices have stayed at hard- to-explain levels even when there is no emergency. In effect, the plan is laid out as if the electricity market were really competitive, in spite of all the evidence that it is not. Second, even those emergency price caps are full of loopholes, offering extensive opportunities for what Mr. Wolak calls ""megawatt laundering"" =01* selling power to affiliated companies that for one reason or another are exempted from the price controls (for example, the controls do not apply to ""imports"" from neighboring states), then selling it back into the California market. Severin Borenstein of the University of California Energy Institute adds that because the allowed price depends on the cost of generation at the least efficient plant, generators will have a clear incentive to produce inefficiently: ""I predict we will find some plants we never heard of before that are suddenly operating again, and they will be pretty inefficient."" The general verdict seems to be that this is not a serious plan. There are serious proposals to mitigate the crisis out there =01* indeed, last fall Mr. Wolak submitted a proposal that was well received by other experts =01* but FERC has ignored all of them. The charitable interpretation is that FERC still doesn't get it, that it just can't bring itself to believe that this time the wolf is real. The uncharitable interpretation is that last week's action was meant to fail. The Medley Report, an online newsletter, calls the FERC plan ""a grand exercise in posturing without substance . . . a very clever temporary move by the Bush administration to deflect any political fallout"" from the looming disaster. Whatever the explanation, the plain fact is that FERC and the administration have yet to offer California any significant relief. &en=3D6a9 00f004b3b1abf Visit NYTimes.com for complete access to the most authoritative news coverage on the Web, updated throughout the day. Become a member today! It's free! http://www.nytimes.com?eta HOW TO ADVERTISE For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters or other creative advertising opportunities with The New York Times on the Web, please contact Alyson Racer at alyson@nytimes.com or visit our online media kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo For general information about NYTimes.com, write to help@nytimes.com. Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Summary of Today's FERC Order; [EMail-Body]= This morning the FERC had its meeting to discuss events in California and = =20 the FERC=01,s response to them. The following is a summary of the remarks o= f=20 the four Commissioners and the major points of what has been ordered:=20 ? Major features ? 1.? Proposes to replace ISO and PX boards with independent, non-stakeholde= r=20 boards. 2.? Continued significant role for the presidents of PX/ISO, who should be= =20 made voting members. 3.? Elimination of mandated buy-sell requirement for the IOUs (although no= =20 explanation as to whether this requires CPUC action). Over-reliance on spo= t=20 markets has been problematical. 4.? As an independent exchange, the PX will be free to design the products= =20 desired by the market. 5.? The proposed price modification measure will be a temporary measure.= =20 Single price for all offers below $150. However, no bid above $150 will se= t=20 the price for all generators. A seller can bid anything it wants. Allowing = =20 generators to receive their as-bid price will allow high-cost generators to= =20 participate in the market. However, the generator will be required to=20 provide confidential reports to FERC explaining the necessity for bids ove= r=20 $150 through 12/31/02. 6.? The order requires forward scheduling of 95% of an scheduling =20 coordinator=01,s schedule, with a penalty applied for deviations which exce= ed 5%=20 As an incentive, the proceeds of the penalties go to the schedulers who=20 comply with the tolerance band. 7.? Rejects the purchase price caps proposed by the ISO. The order would= =20 eliminate the ISO=01,s price cap authority. 8.? Beginning 1/1/01, the prospect of refunds will be available. =20 ? Commissioner Hebert ? Due to a technical problem when I called in, I heard only part of his =20 remarks. He announced that he will have a separate concurrence in the order= ,=20 but is troubled by some of its features. The $150 cap is questionable,=20 whether described as a ""Soft cap"" or as a ""hard cap."" His concern is that it will clearly discourage new investment in generatio= n.=20 He therefore recommended that the $150 cap should be escalated on a regula= r=20 basis (perhaps every six months) until it reaches at least $250.=20 ? He points out that the ISO and PX are required to make RTO filings to FERC = =20 on 1/16/01. These filings should address the major aspects of the Order=20 issued today.=20 ? Hebert also questioned the issue of refunds, alleging that it was =20 ""disingenuous"" to suggests that refunds were a possible remedy.=20 ? Commissioner Breathitt=20 ? Breathitt announced almost all of the foregoing major points of the orderT= he=20 order is based on a market approach. ""In choosing our market-based approac= h,=20 it is our goal to guide the markets to self-correct and not re-institute= =20 command and control regulation.? ""We have all worked too hard, too long, t= o=20 have this result."" ? Commissioner Massey ? Sixty-five years ago, the Congress decreed that prices had to be just and = =20 reasonable.? There is no exception for market-based approaches. He will =20 concur, as the order does find that prices have been unjust and=20 unreasonable. The order does insure that prices should return to being jus= t=20 and reasonable. Cited Frank Wolak as proposing there ought to be an 18-24= =20 month forward product designed which the CPUC will years ago federal law= =20 dictated that prices had to be just and reasonable. The $150 is a ""soft cap"" and allows a generator to bid above it, but if it= =20 does, it will not set the price which other generators receive. He invites = =20 comments on this issue.=20 With regard to retroactive refunds, the Office of the General Counsel has= =20 prepared a legal memorandum which concludes that the FERC probably does not= =20 have authority to order refunds retroactively for any date before October 2= , =20 2000. Invites comments on this issue.=20 California needs new generation and transmission and the siting authority= =20 belongs to the state. California must do its part to ensure that customers= =20 do, in fact, benefit from competitive markets that ensure just and=20 reasonable prices.=20 He is not yet confident that the Commission has taken all necessary steps.= =20 ? Chairman Hoecker ? He strongly supports the order.=20 Comments are due in three weeks. This is no time to pull punches. He cited= =20 the San Diego hearings as indicating that California markets were,? ""out o= f=20 synch with the needs of the digital economy.""? For FERC regulators who are= =20 used to corporate struggles among utilities and other large companies, ""th= is=20 was a real eye-opener.""=20 Average citizens had no warning this was going to happen and they had no= =20 competitive alternatives. It was unfair to them and, ""there is plenty of = =20 responsibility for this meltdown to go around.""=20 ""If I was a senior citizen in San Diego living on a fixed income, or a sma= ll=20 business owner living on a small profit margin, or a school administrator = =20 dealing with a tight budget, the doubling of my bill would make me want my= =20 money back, or to at least ensure that this won=01,t happen again in the= =20 future."" Many who expected this order, expected ""a lynching and the transfer of lar= ge=20 amounts of money. They want us to round up the bad guys who manipulated th= e=20 market and order the disgorgement of their ill-gotten gains. As our legal= =20 opinion indicates, that=01,s not going to happen.""? Today=01,s order offer= s a=20 thoughtful way back to a rational basis for buying and selling power in th= e=20 West. We are not ignoring actual or undue discrimination or actual abuses of =20 market power. The order makes better market monitoring going forward a =20 fundamental part of FERC=01,s proposal.? If evidence of such behavior is = =20 brought forward, FERC will act on that information. ""However, we can=01,t d= elay =20 work on a market fix while searching for the culpable parties.""=20 Hoecker believes that, ""strong federal action is both warranted and =20 important at this moment.""? ""The bulk power grid must be made to work =20 efficiently across the entire West.""=20 ""Competition is at risk, make no mistake about that. In view of the =20 California experience, several states are reconsidering or shelving plans t= o =20 implement competition.""? Legislators will want to retain the possibility of= =20 returning to the old days of vertically-integrated utilities.? ""The =20 California experience has been instructive, but not helpful=01(to the=20 meandering implementation of competition throughout the nation.""=20 The state=01,s markets have not been ""mistakenly federalized"" as alleged b= y=20 some. The markets are regional. California=01,s access to interstate power = =20 supplies is critical, as was made evident by recent events. If we do things= =20 right, California will not be a federal enclave designed to satisfy our=20 market predilections, it will be a workable and competitive market that=20 benefits consumers.=20 ""This is a strong order. It needs to be a strong order. We expect to have = a=20 strong order in December, and the public needs it.""=20 A copy of these notes are attached if you need to distribute them to anyon= e=20 in your organizations. - November 1 2000 Meeting Notes.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Antics Oh, Behave!.htm; [EMail-Body]= Jeff =20 Today's LA Times editorial revived the Lockyer quote. It is remarkable (a= nd troubling for Enron) that Lockyer's political peers / rivals have not t= aken him to task for his outrageous remark; nor have the major newspapers= . In Today's editorial, the usually conservative LA Times refers to Locky= er as having ""boosted the rhetoric a notch."" (I'd hate to witness two or = three notches.) =20 This lack of criticism could foreshadow a contagious attitude that powerfu= l Enron is in fact the one to blame (facts be damned). Given Enron's high= profile policy and fundraising ties to the Bush administration and Govern= or Gray Davis' war with President Bush and Texas energy companies, there c= ould be more turbulence ahead. Fasten your seatbelts and be on the ready= . =20 Kevin 213-926-2626 =20 [IMAGE] [IMAGE][IMAGE] =09[IMAGE] [IMAGE]=09 [IMAGE] =09Home | Discussions | Print Edition | Archives | Site Map = | Home Delivery | Advertise | Feedback | Help [IMAGE]=09 =09[IMAGE]=09 [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] News Politics Entertainment music ,= movies , art , TV , restaurants [IMAGE] Business Travel Marketplace jo= bs , homes , cars , rentals , classifieds [IMAGE] Sports Commentary Shop= ping [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Editorials= , Letters, Op-Ed [IMAGE] [IMAGE] TOP STORIES * We Aren't That Despera= te * Energy Crisis as Political Payback * Hand-Held Cell Phones, Dr= iving Don't Mix MORE [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] STORIES BY DATE FOR TH= IS SECTION 5/25 | 5/24 | 5/23 | 5/22 | 5/21 | 5/19 [IMAGE] = DAILY SECTIONS Front Page ""A"" Section California [IMAGE] Business = Sports Calendar [IMAGE] So. Cal. Living Editorials,Letters, Op/Ed W= EEKLY SECTIONS Health Food [IMAGE] Tech Times [IMAGE] Highway 1 = SUNDAY SECTIONS Book Review Opinion Real Estate [IMAGE] Calendar Mag= azine Travel [IMAGE] TV Times Work Place [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [= IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Marketplace Find a home , car , rental , job ,= pet , merchandise , boat, plane or RV , classifieds Place an Ad [IMAG= E] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] L.A. Times Subscription Ser= vices Subscribe , Change of Address , Vacation Stops , Suspend Delivery = , College Discount , Gift Subscriptions , Mail Subscriptions , FAQ [IMAG= E] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Print Ads from the Newspape= r See this week's ads [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Print Edition , Oran= ge County , Valley , Ventura County , National , Community Papers [IMAG= E] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Books Columnists Crossword Education = Food Health Highway Horoscope Lottery Magazine Obituaries Readi= ng by Real Estate Religion Science So.Cal. Living Special Report= s Sunday Opinion Tech Times Times Poll Traffic Weather Workplace SI= TE MAP [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] SHOP 'TIL YOUR LAPTOP DROPS [IMA= GE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Shopping [IMAGE] Search Prod= ucts Stores [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] = =09[IMAGE]=09[IMAGE] Friday, May 25, 2001 | [IMAGE]Print this story [IMAGE= ] [IMAGE] Energy Antics: Oh, Behave! Admit it: The only comic re= lief in this energy crisis has been watching our leaders go at suppliers a= nd each other like pro wrestlers or Jerry Springer guests. In his St= ate of the State address last January, Gov. Gray Davis accused the big pri= vate electric power generators of legalized highway robbery and threatened= to seize their plants if necessary. Then he really got angry, calling the= m ""the biggest snakes in the world."" This past week, Atty. Gen. Bill Locky= er boosted the rhetoric a notch by declaring he would like to personally e= scort the chairman of Enron Corp. ""to an 8-by-10 cell that he could share = with a tattooed dude who says, 'Hi, my name is Spike, honey.""' Meanwhile, = President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have blamed California for c= ausing its own problems with a ""harebrained"" deregulation scheme and mocke= d the state's power purchases and conservation programs. It's been fun. No= w it's time for our leaders to act like adults. Davis and Bush alwa= ys will have their political differences, but the economies of both the st= ate and the nation are endangered by California's energy situation. These = leaders need to work together as cooperatively as possible, starting next = week when Bush makes his first visit to California as president. Da= vis wrote Bush Wednesday offering to meet with him during his California v= isit. Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer said the president looks forward to dis= cussing energy and other issues. Good start. Let's hope the conversation i= s civil and that the civility spreads. No matter how much California= has been abused by the power companies, and it absolutely has, the state = still needs them to help solve the crisis caused by shortages of electric = power generation this year and next. Usually, the biggest targets of offi= cial and public wrath are the investor-owned utilities such as Southern Ca= lifornia Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric Co. But not this time because, = in the view of the state, the utilities have been bled dry by the power ge= nerators' stratospheric prices. The state had to take over the purchase of= power when the generators refused to extend any more credit to Edison and= PG&E. Legal recourse should be pursued, but the threatening rhetoric need= s to subside. State lawmakers are right to be upset with the White = House for refusing to use its authority to set reasonable temporary wholes= ale price controls. And Davis is justifiably upset with Bush and with Chen= ey, who said the only solution was to build more power plants--ignoring th= e fact that the state is building 10 plants now, with five more on the way= , and that the only way to control wholesale power rates is for Washington= to cap them. If the state hadn't bought the power, the generators w= ould have let the lights go out. Davis needs to deliver that message, quie= tly and persuasively, while Bush is in California. And Bush needs to liste= n respectfully, like an adult. [IMAGE]Search the archives of the Los A= ngeles Times for similar stories. You will not be charged to look for stor= ies, only to retrieve one. =09 News Politics Entertainment music , movies , art , TV , restaurants = [IMAGE] Business Travel Marketplace jobs , homes , cars , rentals , cla= ssifieds [IMAGE] Sports Commentary Shopping [IMAGE] =09[IMAGE]=09 = Copyright ? 2001 Los Angeles Times=09 Software, Videos/DVD's, Music and Other Free Stuff!!! =09 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Ed Segner's Staff meeting, in 50M Dining Room; [EMail-Body]= Ralph Reed--get back to him (second week of Oct) [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California Update; [EMail-Body]= Please detach the attachment, combine it with the articles Gavin Dillingham sent me and attach to an e-mail to Robert Zoellick and Irwin Stelzer with this message from me: Attached is some background information on the ""reregulation"" crisis in California. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/09/2000 02:53 PM --------------------------- Enron Energy Services From: Frank Wanderski 08/09/2000 09:05 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: California Update Steve, I understand that you are developing a campaign for California, considering all of media attention that has been placed on this state. I publish a weekly deregulation report and it contains some information that may prove useful. The report is attached. Frank [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Presentation by Dayne Zimmerman in EB 19C2; [EMail-Body]= Shirley, Please add to my calendar. Vince -----Original Message----- From: =09Dupont, Anita =20 Sent:=09Thursday, June 14, 2001 10:28 AM To:=09Alex Huang (E-mail); Amitava Dhar (E-mail); Anguel Grigorov (E-mail);= Chonawee Supatgiat (E-mail); Christopher Pernoud (E-mail); Dayne Zimmerman= (E-mail); Elena Chilkina (E-mail); Frantzeskakis, Kyriakos; Gonzales, Alex= ander R.; Gwyn Koepke (E-mail); Iris Mack (E-mail); Jaesoo Lew (E-mail); Ja= son Sokolov (E-mail); Jinbaek Kim; Jose Marquez (E-mail); Joseph Hrgovcic (= E-mail); Kenneth Parkhill (E-mail); Kevin G. Moore (E-mail); Krishna Krishn= arao (E-mail); Lance Cunningham (E-mail); Leann Walton (E-mail); Lin, Marti= n; Mehendale, Bhalachandra; Mike A. Roberts Jr. (E-mail); Mitra Mujica (E-m= ail); Nelson Neale (E-mail); Osman Sezgen (E-mail); Pamela Davis (E-mail); = Parks, Russell; Paulo Issler (E-mail); Praveen Mellacheruvu (E-mail); Rabi = De (E-mail); Rakesh Bharati (E-mail); Robert Lee (E-mail); Roman Zadorozhny= (E-mail); Sam Smith (E-mail); Sandeep Kohli (E-mail); Seksan Kiatsupaibul = (E-mail); Sevil Yaman (E-mail); Shane Green (E-mail); Shirley Crenshaw (E-m= ail); Sofya Tamarchenko (E-mail); Stephen Bennett (E-mail); Sud, Pravas; Ta= nya Tamarchenko (E-mail); Tom Barkley (E-mail); Tom Halliburton (E-mail); V= asant Shanbhogue (E-mail); Vince J Kaminski (E-mail); Wichai Narongwanich (= E-mail); Wooddy, Sarah; Xia, Zhendong; Youyi Feng (E-mail); Zimin Lu (E-mai= l) Subject:=09Presentation by Dayne Zimmerman in EB 19C2 On Tuesday, June 19, 2001, in EB 19C2 at 2:00 PM, Dayne Zimmerman will be p= resenting ""A Brief Overview of COM"" . Please let Anita know if you will be= attending so we can arrange for the appropriate number of chairs. Thanks. Regards, Anita DuPont for Krishna Krishnarao Enron Research Group 713-853-0329 EB 1969 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: PG&E PX Credit Calculation -- CONFIDENTIAL ATTY CLIENT WORK
 PRODUCT; [EMail-Body]= Except that my understanding of the SCE model is that the CTC structure will continue beyond 3/31/02 (and may then apply for PG&E). I agree that if you were to go to a bottom's up, it would require the CPUC to put in place a surcharge for remaining stranded costs (non-generation, for example QFs) and a second surcharge for Negative CTC ""overpayment"". Key question is who will pay the Negative CTC ""overpayment""? On trying to understand the PX Credit algorithim, my concern is that to understand how much the ""overpayment"" was during Oct - Feb, we need to understand how costs hit the structure during that time period. Otherwise we don't know what form or amount of discount is required in the Settlement talks. Jim -----Original Message----- From: Comnes, Alan Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 7:24 PM To: Steffes, James D. Subject: RE: PG&E PX Credit Calculation -- CONFIDENTIAL ATTY CLIENT WORK PRODUCT After 3/31/02, the CTC should no longer be a function of the PX credit, no? So a customer's CTC payments should not be affected by refunds. If refunds are distributed prospectively, we do not need to really know the PX credt algorithm and can instead simply estimate PG&E's expected refunds, divide it by total load, and assume that the PX credit will be depressed by that amount. This is more akin to a lower shopping credit than a higher CTC. -----Original Message----- From: Steffes, James D. Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 4:32 PM To: Comnes, Alan Subject: RE: PG&E PX Credit Calculation -- CONFIDENTIAL ATTY CLIENT WORK PRODUCT Alan -- The only way to collect the ""overpayment"" is to artificially reduce the PX Credit going forward to thereby allow for more CTC. Jim -----Original Message----- From: Comnes, Alan Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 6:15 PM To: Steffes, James D. Subject: RE: PG&E PX Credit Calculation -- CONFIDENTIAL ATTY CLIENT WORK PRODUCT I am not sure I understand your second paragraph. If PG&E reduces going-forward procurement costs to reflect FERC-ordered refunds, I do not understand why it would affect already-issued CTC charges. The cost of power would be cheaper going forward. -----Original Message----- From: Steffes, James D. Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 3:24 PM To: Comnes, Alan; Dasovich, Jeff; Tribolet, Michael; Curry, Wanda; Mellencamp, Lisa; 'Jan Paul Acton (E-mail)'; Swain, Steve; Mara, Susan Cc: Alvarez, Ray Subject: RE: PG&E PX Credit Calculation -- CONFIDENTIAL ATTY CLIENT WORK PRODUCT Thanks for the thoughts. I fully agree on BF costs and DWR costs. I believe that you are right on Est RT$ = CAISOM Imbalance, but I need to check. On the question of retroactive ratemaking, it is my understanding that you are correct. PG&E probably won't rebill, but will need to put in place an adjustment to the going forward PX Credit to ""collect"" the overpayment of Negative CTC. All of this means that the impact of the FERC refund is less than 100c on the $ for the Negative CTC. Jim -----Original Message----- From: Comnes, Alan Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 4:35 PM To: Steffes, James D.; Dasovich, Jeff; Tribolet, Michael; Curry, Wanda; Mellencamp, Lisa; 'Jan Paul Acton (E-mail)'; Swain, Steve; Mara, Susan Cc: Alvarez, Ray Subject: RE: PG&E PX Credit Calculation -- CONFIDENTIAL ATTY CLIENT WORK PRODUCT I assume that if an hourly PX market clearing price is mitigated per a FERC order it would affect variable ""HC"" in the formula laid out in the attachment. It is not clear to me which variable represents hourly ISO imbalance energy costs, but I assume its ""Est RT$"". If I am right, that variable would be affected by the mitigated market price (MMP) for CAISO imbalance energy. My comments are: The FERC is able to only order refunds to jurisdictional entities and, given appeals, it may take years before the full extent of thre refunds are known. Therefore there will be a significant difference between the change in the mitigated market price (MMP) as declared by FERC and the PX credit. That is, a 10% reduction in the MMP should not be construed as having a 10% effect on the PX credit, assuming it can be recalculated at all. Specifically, only some of the ""HC"" or ""Est RT$"" costs can be adjusted per FERC refund orders. Also, the PX credit is a tariffed rate. I do not believe the PU code allows for retroactive adjustments to tariffed rates unless there was an explicit cost tracking account (e.g. a balancing A/C). To my knowledge, no such account exists here. Finally, I do not see a relationship between MMPs and (1) block forward costs on any date and (2) PG&E and/or DWR's procurement costs for the net short position post January 19. So, those PX credit costs should be unaffected by any FERC refund order. Alan Comnes -----Original Message----- From: Steffes, James D. Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 7:22 AM To: Dasovich, Jeff; Tribolet, Michael; Curry, Wanda; Mellencamp, Lisa; Jan Paul Acton (E-mail); Swain, Steve; Mara, Susan; Comnes, Alan Subject: PG&E PX Credit Calculation Attached is a summary of PG&E's notes on how they calculate the PX Credit (until January 19, 2001 when they hardwired $150/mwh). We continue to try and get a handle on how the FERC Refund case will impact the PX Credit and Negative CTC. If anyone has any issues or comments, please let me know. Thanks. Jim << File: PG&E PX Credit Calculation.doc >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Andre LeGAllo; [EMail-Body]= Any problem? please advise Don. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 09/10/99 01:15 PM --------------------------- From: Don Hawkins AT ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@CCMAIL on 09/10/99 12:56 PM To: Steven J Kean@EES cc: Andre LeGallo/EPSC/HOU/ECT Subject: Andre LeGAllo Steve, it is my understanding from Andre he will be retiring in early December. Prior to his retirement, I would like to use Andre to assist Asset Operations in completing Crisis Management Simulation training at the TGS asset in Argentina in November and at the San Juan Gas and ProCaribe assets in Puerto Rico and the Ventane asset in Venezuela. The Puerto Rico and Ventane simulations have yet to be scheduled but need to be completed prior to year end. Asset Operations will outsource crisis simulation training commencing in January of 2000 but to complete this years objectives, Andre's assistance is necessary. As has currently been the practice, Asset Operations will pick up the expenses for his time and efforts. If you have questions, please advise. Don [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Star Wars Event - Monday, 6/11/01; [EMail-Body]= Thanks, I will attend. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Coleman, Jacqueline Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 4:16 PM To: Blachman, Jeremy; Causey, Richard; Deffner, Joseph; DiMichele, Richard; Donahue, Jeff; Fastow, Andrew; Glisan, Ben; Hannon, Kevin; Hayslett, Rod; Kaminski, Vince J; Kean, Steven; Koenig, Mark; Kopper, Michael; Leff, Dan; Mcconnell, Mike; McDonald, Rebecca; McMahon, Jeffrey; Muench, Gayle; Murray, Julia; Olson, Cindy; Paige, Barbara; Redmond, Brian; Rieker, Paula; Saltiel, Robert; Shankman, Jeffrey A.; Shelby, Rex; Taylor, Mitch; Tilney, Elizabeth; White, Leesa Cc: Coleman, Jacqueline Subject: FW: Star Wars Event - Monday, 6/11/01 Importance: High << File: Star Wars 6.11.01.ppt >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Weekly Retail Meeting, EB 27C1; [EMail-Body]= Slade Gorton -- Craig Gannett meeting Christa Donahue (PFI in North Carolina -- 2024672778) Greg Piper Carol Dillon 503-464-8536 Kathleen -- Providence Gas (Mike McCall) Linda Clemmons -- MIT forum at MIT Bob Foster 818 302 9210 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Job candidates for Enron; [EMail-Body]= Thanks for the note. I am forwarding it on to our analyst and associate recruiting program leaders. We may have already filled the summer spots (we also cut down the number a bit this year to ensure a higher quality experience), but we will be out looking for a large number of permanent hires in the Fall. Severin Borenstein <borenste@Haas.Berkeley.EDU> 03/31/2001 06:00 PM To: Steve Kean <skean@enron.com> cc: James Bushnell <jimb@IEOR.Berkeley.EDU> Subject: Job candidates for Enron Dear Steve: Jim Bushnell and I are teaching a course called ""Energy Market Strategies and Policies"" this semester. The course is cross-listed between the Haas School of Business and the Energy & Resources Group at UC Berkeley. The syllabus for the course is attached. We have 43 graduate students in the course, most pursuing a masters degree in business or energy & resources, though there are also a few PhD students. These are very smart students -- many of whom already have experience in the energy industries -- and we believe the course puts them in a position to immediately contribute to any energy-related organization that they would join. Many of these students are interested in either summer or permanent employment starting as early as May. If Enron has openings that you would like to advertise to these students, please send me the job description (or the URL for it)and I can forward it to the class list. Jim and I think this is a very strong class, and many of the students are interested in making a career in either the business or the public policy side of the energy industry. We're hoping to provide the connections to help make sure they find the best job matches possible. Sincerely, Severin Severin Borenstein E.T. Grether Professor of Business Administration and Public Policy Director Haas School of Business U.C. Energy Institute University of California 2539 Channing Way Berkeley, CA 94720-1900 Berkeley, CA 94720-5180 (p) 510-642-3689 (p) 510-642-5145 (f) 707-885-2508 http://www.ucei.org Email: borenste@haas.berkeley.edu WWW: - EnergyMarketsSyllabus.pdf [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= <<Concur Expense Document>> - Elizabeth Linnell; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/07/2001 10:48 AM --------------------------- eserver@enron.com on 05/04/2001 04:36:32 PM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - Elizabeth Linnell The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: Elizabeth Linnell Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: Elizabeth Linnell Report Total: $776.46 Amount Due Employee: $776.46 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://xms.enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: FW: Confidential A&A PRC Results; [EMail-Body]= I had not seen it yet. Do you have my other employees rankings? Since they reccomend that the PRC Representative be involved in providing feedback, would you like to do that next week when you are here? Mark Barry Tycholiz/ENRON@enronXgate 08/02/2001 10:18 AM To: Mark Whitt/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: FW: Confidential A&A PRC Results I assume you received this information already and I know that we have not discussed Tyrell being ranked here. The #1 spot was tightly held by only a few people ( in the americas and as such everyone was moved down... Although the forced ranking creates problems at time, I am satisfied that Ty's ranking is appropriate... let's discuss, BT -----Original Message----- From: Bosien, Teresa Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 6:19 PM To: Tycholiz, Barry Subject: Confidential A&A PRC Results Below are the final PRC rankings for the Analysts and /or Associates who were assigned to you for the mid-year PRC process. Please communicate these results to the appropriate supervisor. PRC reviews with the Analysts and Associates should be completed by early August, and the signed evaluation forms should be returned to me at EB3539b. The Program recommends that if asked, the supervisor should provide the actual ranking to the Analyst or Associate. In addition, we recommend that the PRC representative be involved in providing feedback to the Analyst or Associate. Name PRC Level BU Hire Date Supervisor Ranking Promotion Harrison, Tyrell G Analyst-2 ENA 2/1/1999 Mr. Mark Whitt 2 No Polsky, Philip D. Associate ENA 8/7/2000 Mr. Barry L Tycholiz 3 No Thank you for your participation in this important process. Terry Bosien Human Resource Manager Associate & Analyst Program 713/853-5230 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Ken Lay's email to Sen. Brulte; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 02/28/2001 02:48 PM ----- =09Jeff Dasovich =09Sent by: Jeff Dasovich =0902/16/2001 08:49 AM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON,=20 MDay@GMSSR.com, Hedy Govenar <hgovenar@mail.acom2.com> @ ENRON, Scott Goven= ar=20 <sgovenar@govadv.com>, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, James D=20 Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard=20 Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, skean@enron.com, mpalmer@enron.com, Karen=20 Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, BTC <BCragg@GMSSR.com> =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: Ken Lay's email to Sen. Brulte =09 Greetings All: First, I am apologizing in advance for any typos in this email. Schedule i= s=20 very tight, but I wanted to make sure that everyone had it first thing this= =20 morning, with some back-up info that I've included below. Attached is the email that was sent to Ken Lay's office yesterday evening f= or=20 delivery to Sen. Brulte. It's of course confidential. Few points: I don't have Bev's email, so if you could please forward to her, that would= =20 be appreciated. As we discussed (Jim, Mike, Bev, Scott, Hedy) on our lengthy call on=20 Wednesday, I'm assuming that the plan is still to ""wallpaper"" Sacramento wi= th=20 our proposed legislation. This email does not contain the legislation. Mike sent the ""final"" version= s=20 of our legislation out yesterday, except for the siting piece, which I=20 believe Brian Cragg of Mike's office is finalizing today. You'll note that we promise Senator Brulte in the email that we'll deliver = to=20 his office today the proposed legislation. Again, based on our call on=20 Wednesday, I'm assuming that we would simultaneously release the proposed= =20 legislation to the rest of the world at the same time. When we spoke on Wednesday, we decided that the Sacramento team would=20 determine to whom we would circulate the proposed legislation at the same= =20 time that we deliver the Senator Brulte. I'm assuming that you folks will= =20 handle that end of things. Please let us know at your convenience to whom= =20 you've decided to circulate. This email does, however, include a ""summary"" of our proposed legislation. = =20 But I'm not certain that the summary included in this email is the=20 appropriate language to distribute ""to the world,"" or if we'll need instead= =20 to tailor some new language. I think we all agreed that we need a ""one=20 pager"" to accompany the legislative package so that we can communicate the= =20 package effectively. We also discussed the need to quickly develop a coalition to support our=20 proposals. We didn't finalize that plan. Perhaps the Sacramento team coul= d=20 propose a plan to do that. Perhaps we could start with our friends in the= =20 Direct Access coalition? We also talked about the need at this point to engage in PR and to get the = PR=20 machinery activated, also with the goal of effectively communicating our=20 legislative package/message. We're in a meeting with folks today where we= =20 can discuss getting that side of things going and Karen Denne has contacted= =20 Marathon and they're pondering some things that we can do in the near term. You'll note that there's a considerable amount of information about the DWR= =20 credit issue. As I recollect, we discussed the issue in depth on the call.= =20 You note that attached to the email is a ""legislative fix"" to AB1X that cou= ld=20 solve the credit issue and an attached set of ""taking points"" related to a= =20 second alternative to solving the credit issue: a PUC order clarifying tha= t=20 DWR will get its money for power purchase costs. Note also that Steve Kean reminded me that we've got to continue to push to= =20 get the utilities out of the merchant function. Accordingly, I've put a=20 brief paragraph on that issue in the note to Brulte in the last section=20 (legislative solution) under the topic ""create a real competitive retail=20 market in California."" To the best of my knowledge, we don't have=20 legislative language on that piece yet, and it seems that we'll need to=20 discuss it in considerably more depth before doing so. If you have any questions about any of the materials in the email, please= =20 don't hesitate to contact me or Jim or Sandi to discuss. I can be best=20 reached to day by pager at 888.916.7184. =20 Thanks to all for helping pull this together. Best, Jeff ----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 02/16/2001 08:27 AM ----- =09Jeff Dasovich =09Sent by: Jeff Dasovich =0902/15/2001 06:11 PM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: jdasovic@enron.com, skean@enron.com, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@En= ron,=20 James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject:=20 Steve: Here's a substantially more cleaned-version, with attachments. There's a= =20 hard copy on your chair. Best, Jeff ----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 02/15/2001 05:57 PM ----- =09Jeff Dasovich =09Sent by: Jeff Dasovich =0902/15/2001 05:56 PM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: jdasovic@enron.com =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject:=20 Jim: It was a pleasure speaking with you yesterday. Based on our conversation,= =20 this email includes the following: An Enron contact to discuss developing small-scale generation on Tribal lan= ds. Our views on the impediments to distributed generation and suggestions on h= ow=20 to remove those impediments. A description of the credit issues that continue to impede DWR=01,s ability= to=20 sign contracts with power suppliers, and options to resolve them. Two=20 possible options for addressing the credit issue are 1) a California PUC=20 order clarifying that DWR will recover its power purchase costs through=20 rates, and 2) an amendment to AB1X designed to accomplish the same goal. I= =20 have attached talking points regarding the California PUC order and propose= d=20 amendments to AB1X. We believe that an amendment to AB1X is the preferable= =20 option. Our assessment of the supply/demand picture in California. Our suggestions for a legislative package designed to solve both the near-= =20 and long-term electricity crisis in California. We will deliver to your=20 office tomorrow detailed legislative language. In those materials we will= =20 also identify existing bills that we believe can easily accommodate our=20 proposed language. I hope that the information is useful. Please do not hesitate to contact m= e=20 if you would like to discuss these materials further, or if there is anythi= ng=20 else that I can do to assist you. Regards, Ken Contact Information to Discuss Interest Expressed by Native American Tribes= =20 in Installing Small-scale Generation on Tribal Lands David Parquet, Vice-President Enron North America 101 California Street, Suite 1950 San Francisco, CA 94111 Phone: 415.782.7820 Fax: 415.782.7851 2. Key Barriers to Distributed Generation Excessive and Unnecessary Utility Stand-by Charges Solution: The executive orders issued by the Governor on February 14th took= a=20 step in the right direction. Utility stand-by charges have always been=20 designed by the utilities to protect their monopoly position, extract=20 monopoly prices from customers, or both. But there is no reason to limit t= he=20 elimination of these charges to generation facilities that are less than=20 1MW. These limits will only lengthen unnecessarily the time it takes for= =20 California to close the significant gap between supply and demand and reduc= e=20 the risk of black outs this summer. We would propose lifting the cap by=20 offering amendments to SB27X, which is designed to facilitate development o= f=20 distributed generation. =20 Excessive delays and costs related to interconnecting facilities with=20 investor-owned and municipal utilities Solution: The Governor=01,s executive order regarding interconnection is = a=20 step in the right direction=01*D-D-26-01 requires utilities to complete=20 interconnection studies within 7 days. California should ensure that this= =20 requirement applies to all generation facilities, including distributed=20 generation. In addition, the financial conflicts the utilities face when= =20 interconnecting generation facilities are simply too powerful to overcome= =20 through executive orders or other regulations. To the greatest extent=20 possible, California should shift control over interconnection away from th= e=20 utility and place that control with the California ISO. This could be=20 accomplished through amendments to SB 27X. Permitting and Air Quality Issues Developers of distributed (i.e., =01&on-site=018) generation that is 50 MWs= or=20 greater must receive certification from the California Energy Commission an= d=20 therefore face all of the impediments to development that large-scale=20 generation faces. =20 Solution: California should ensure that the executive orders (D-22-01 thru= =20 D-26-01) issued by the Governor to expedite plant siting and maximize plant= =20 output apply equally to smaller scale, =01&distributed generation=018 facil= ities.=20 In addition, distributed generation that is less than 50 MWs continues to= =20 face local opposition. The State should ensure that local, parochial=20 interests cannot block otherwise beneficial distributed generation projects= . =20 These objectives could be accomplished through amendments to SB27X. 3. Credit Concerns Regarding Authority Granted to DWR in AB1X to Purchase= =20 Electricity on Behalf of the Utilities=20 Enron responded to the RFP issued by DWR to enter into power contracts with= =20 suppliers. Enron is in active discussions with DWR to establish contract terms with th= e=20 goal of entering into a power purchase agreement as soon as possible. However, ambiguities contained in AB1X have created significant credit risk= =20 concerns that need to be resolved in order to finalize contract terms. We understand that the lion=01,s share of counterparties share Enron=01,s c= redit=20 risk concerns. Enron has proposed several options for resolving the credit risk issues and= =20 is working with DWR to arrive at a solution that is mutually agreeable to= =20 both sides and that might serve as a template for power purchase agreements= =20 going forward. Summary of the Source of the Credit Risk Issue Ambiguous Ratemaking Authority The language in AB1X is ambiguous as to whether DWR has any authority to=20 charge California ratepayers for the costs of purchasing power. From our= =20 analysis of the bill, the language in AB1X appears to leave intact the=20 California PUC=01,s exclusive jurisdiction over ratemaking in California. = As=20 such, suppliers have no assurance that the PUC will agree to include in rat= es=20 adequate charges to cover DWR=01,s costs of power purchases. Ambiguous Regulatory Authority Regarding Contract =01&Prudence=018 The language in AB1X leaves open the possibility that the California Public= =20 Utilities Commission could determine that power purchases made by DWR are= =20 =01&imprudent.=018 On the basis of such a finding, the CPUC could then ref= use to=20 allow DWR to collect from ratepayers the costs associated with its power=20 purchases. Consequently, suppliers have no assurance that the PUC will agr= ee=20 to include in rates the charges to cover the costs of power contracts that= =20 DWR has entered into with suppliers. =20 Ambiguous Language Regarding the Ratemaking Mechanism that Will Be Used to= =20 Recover DWR=01,s Costs of Power Purchases In addition to the ambiguity regarding ratemaking and regulatory authority= =20 noted above, the language in the bill is equally ambiguous with respect to= =20 the specific ratemaking =01&mechanics=018 that AB1X directs the PUC to empl= oy to=20 permit DWR to recover its power purchase costs. Based on our analysis, it i= s=20 extremely difficult to determine how the PUC would design the rates to ensu= re=20 DWR recovers its power purchase costs. Moreover, as currently drafted, it = is=20 difficult to determine whether AB1X would even permit the PUC to include in= =20 rates all of the charges necessary to fully recover DWR=01,s power purchase= =20 costs. Again, this ambiguity raises significant credit risk concerns since= =20 suppliers have little assurance that DWR will have the ability to recover= =20 from ratepayers the costs of purchasing power. Options to Resolve Concerns Regarding Credit Risk=20 We have been working diligently with DWR officials to resolve the credit ri= sk=20 issues. We have identified three options: Amend AB1X The amendments, which are attached to this email, would clarify that a) the= =20 PUC would accept as =01&prudent and reasonable=018 all purchase costs incur= red by=20 DWR, and b) the PUC is obligated to include in rates the charges necessary = to=20 ensure that DWR fully recovers its costs of power purchases. This is the= =20 preferred option, though we understand that the there may be some political= =20 challenges standing in the way of amending AB1X. (See attached file=20 entitled, =01&AmendAB1X.doc=018.) Clarify the Ambiguities in AB1X through an Order Issued by the PUC, and=20 through Contract Language This is the option that we are currently working with DWR officials to=20 implement. However, it is more complicated and could take significantly mo= re=20 time to implement than the ""legislative"" fix. We have attached electronic= =20 copies of the talking points related to the order that the California PUC= =20 would need to issue under this option. (See attached file entitled,=20 Make Use of Other Instruments Designed to Address Credit Risk As indicated in our letter responding to DWR=01,s RFP, we are willing to ac= cept=20 other forms of credit from DWR. Those options include a letter of credit,= =20 cash prepayment, or an acceptable form of collateral. DWR officials have= =20 indicated to us that DWR prefers to pursue the second options. That is, DWR= =20 prefers to clarify the ambiguities in AB1X through a PUC order and through= =20 contract amendments. 4. California=01,s Supply-demand Picture Heading into Summer 2001 Both the California Energy Commission and Cambridge Energy Research=20 Associates (CERA), a private sector energy think tank, have issued reports= =20 showing that California faces a severe supply-demand imbalance. They diffe= r=20 only on how much and how soon additional supply will be made available. Al= l=20 credible sources agree that supply will be very tight throughout the Summer= =20 of 2001 and that unless a solution is found immediately, blackouts are=20 likely. =20 CEC and CERA both forecast that California will be short of supply this=20 summer by approximately 5,000 MW. These numbers are in line with our=20 estimates. California=01,s supply base currently has a 6% capacity margin,= well=20 below the average 15-20%, which is recommended for reliable system operatio= n=20 in the West. Since the West relies more heavily upon hydroelectric power= =20 than other regions, reserves are particularly important, owing to the=20 unpredictability of the weather and the dry year the West has experienced t= o=20 date. In the event of a low rain and snow period, the system must possess t= he=20 flexibility to respond to the reduced availability of power supply. =20 California=01,s very low reserve margin makes it especially susceptible to = this=20 requirement. =20 Other reasons for reduced supply for the Summer of 2001 include the early= =20 draw-down of reservoirs in the continual effort to manage California's seve= re=20 supply-demand gap; emissions restrictions on existing plants; and a reduced= =20 number of customers who can be curtailed under their contracts with the=20 utilities. Cambridge Energy Research Associates asserts that at the curren= t=20 pace of siting, permitting and construction, adequate supplies will not be= =20 added to correct the market imbalance until 2003 at the earliest. CERA predicts that California is likely to face approximately 20 hours of= =20 rolling black outs this summer. The CEC paints a considerably more=20 optimistic scenario, betting that California will bring an additional 5,000= =20 MWs on line to meet peaking summer demand. It is our view that California= =20 should view the CEC's ""rosy scenario"" with considerable skepticism. 5. Suggested Package of Legislative Proposals Designed to Solve California= =01,s=20 Electricity Crisis This email offers an overview of our proposed legislative solution. We wil= l=20 deliver to your office tomorrow specific legislative language and existing= =20 bills that we believe can accommodate our proposals. As we have suggested throughout the crisis, any solution to California's=20 crisis must focus on four issues: Increase supply Decrease demand Establish a truly competitive retail electricity market Return California=01,s Investor-owned utilities to solvency Increase supply--Legislative vehicle: SB28X (Sher) To site and construct a power plant in Texas takes approximately 2 years. = =20 Enron and others have completed the entire process in other states in less= =20 than a year. In California, it takes about six years, or longer. The Governor=01,s executive orders and Senator Sher=01,s siting reform legi= slation=20 are steps in the right direction. Our suggested amendments can improve tho= se=20 efforts by further addressing the difficulties that project developers face= =20 in securing air emission reduction credits to meet the air permit=20 requirements included in the CEC's certification requirements. Enron=01,s= =20 proposal seeks to streamline the process for 1) obtaining credits and 2)=20 transfering credits between air districts. In addition, it creates an=20 innovative emissions reduction bank to allow project sponsors to fund=20 emissions in advance of obtaining certification, and permits the affected a= ir=20 districts to use those funds to finance projects that will produce the=20 required reductions in pollution emissions. Decrease demand=01*Legislative Vehicle: AB31X (Wright) Because of the delay in getting a solution in place in California, closing= =20 the supply-demand gap through energy conservation and efficiency offers the= =20 best chance of avoiding blackouts this summer. This can be accomplished mo= st=20 effectively and quickly in two ways: Buy-down demand California is tapping into an enormous amount of money from the General Fun= d=20 to finance DWR=01,s power purchases. California could likely reduce demand= more=20 economically by running an auction to determine the payments businesses wou= ld=20 be willing to receive to reduce their demand for a sustained period (e.g.,= =20 through the summer months). DWR could easily run an on-line auction to=20 determine the price it could pay for these demand reductions. To=20 participate, businesses would be required to have the metering equipment=20 necessary to monitor and verify that they are actually achieving the=20 reductions. Enron has developed an on-line auction software package, =01&D= eal=20 Bench,=018 that it would be willing to contribute to the effort. Use Price Signals to Incent Voluntary Curtailment To be successful, customers need access to the following key elements: An internet based hour-ahead price posting system to track the market price= =20 for hour-ahead power in real time.=20 Real-time metering systems for baseline demand and voluntarily curtailment= =20 verification. Settlement process that allows for market clearing prices of energy to be= =20 paid for load reduction (=01&Negawatts=018). The potential benefits of an effective demand response program would includ= e: =01&creation=018 of additional summer peaking capacity in California, parti= cularly=20 in the short term, without requiring construction of additional generation= =20 resources. reduction of peak or super-peak load on the over-stressed California=20 electric system, thus potentially reducing the overall cost of electricity = in=20 the state. fostering of demand elasticity without subjecting customers to the full ris= k=20 of hourly market price volatility by passing market price signals to=20 customers and allowing them to voluntarily shed load and be compensated for= =20 responding.=20 We estimate that we could generate a summer 2001 on-peak demand response in= =20 excess of 400 MW during certain high cost hours, and a demand response for= =20 summer 2002 on-peak hours that could exceed 1000 MW. We further estimate= =20 that the market response to this program from all ESPs could be 2 to 3 time= s=20 that amount. We recommend that the State of California provide rebates=20 directly to customers to fund the installation of advanced metering and=20 control systems that would support load curtailment implementation. Establish a truly competitive retail electricity market=01*Legislative vehi= cle:=20 SB27X The only customers who were protected from price volatility in San Diego we= re=20 customers who chose Direct Access and signed fixed price deals with energy= =20 service providers. Ironically, AB1X takes that important option away from= =20 customers and businesses. It is critical that AB1X be amended to remove th= e=20 prohibition against Direct Access. Enron's legislative proposal would give customers freedom to enter into a= =20 direct access transaction, while simultaneously addressing the Department o= f=20 Water Resources' concerns about stranded power costs that might result from= =20 customer migration. =20 In addition, California will only achieve a competitive retail market when= =20 the utility is removed completely from the procurement function. Procureme= nt=20 is not a utility core competency, as evidenced by the dire financial=20 condition in which the utilities now find themselves. California should=20 therefore begin immediately to phase the utility out of the procurement=20 function entirely, with the goal of having all customers served by a=20 non-utility provider within 36 months. To execute the transition, Californ= ia=20 should hold a series of competitive solicitations over the 36-month period = in=20 which competing service providers would bid for the right to serve segments= =20 of utility load. Return California=01,s Investor-owned utilities to solvency=01*Legislative = vehicle:=20 AB18X Utility bankruptcy will not increase supply and it will not decrease demand= . =20 In short, bankruptcy does nothing to solve California=01,s supply-demand=20 imbalance. In addition, bankruptcy increases the likelihood that consumers= =20 and businesses will bear the significant financial risks of having Californ= ia=20 State government assume the role of =01&electricity buyer=018 for an extend= ed=20 period of time. Finally, bankruptcy will undermine both investor confidenc= e=20 in California's energy markets and the private sector's willingness to=20 participate in that market. California can return the utilities to financial solvency by implementing a= =20 series of staged rate increases. California should design those rate=20 increases with the dual goal of returning the utilities to solvency without= =20 =01&shocking=018 the economy or household budgets For example, California c= ould=20 amortize the recovery of the utilities=01, past debt over a 5-10 year perio= d. =20 In addition, the magnitude of the rate increase can be reduced in two ways:= =20 First, the utilities could absorb some portion of their existing debt in=20 recognition of the risk they accepted when they agreed to the structure of = AB=20 1890. Second, California can =01&net=018 the revenues the utilities have r= eceived=20 from selling electricity into the Power Exchange against the debts they hav= e=20 accrued due to the retail price cap. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= One more for Mark Metts; [EMail-Body]= Am I taking care of you or what?? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 02/20/2000 05:30 PM --------------------------- Lynn Dunphy@ECT 02/18/2000 01:48 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: One more for Mark Metts Steve - One more person for Mark Metts to consider... Neerav Nanavaty was caught up in the APACHI restructuring, and apparently they were unable to promote him to Manager. (Our lists indicated that he would have been promoted in March). Cheers! Lynn [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Invitation to Corporate Responsibility Task Force Meeting; [EMail-Body]= Let me know when and where. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/13/2000=20 08:01 AM --------------------------- Michael Terraso 09/12/2000 07:43 PM To: Steven Kean cc: =20 Subject: Invitation to Corporate Responsibility Task Force Meeting fyi mike ---------------------- Forwarded by Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron on 09/12/2000= =20 07:37 PM --------------------------- Joseph W Sutton@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 09/12/2000 09:47 AM Sent by: Pam Benson@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT To: James M Cliff=20 Baxter/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sanjay =20 Rick Buy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Causey@ENRON, Diomedes=20 Christodoulou/SA/Enron@Enron, David W Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT, Andrew S=20 Fastow@ECT, Mark Frevert/NA/Enron@Enron, David=20 Stanley Horton@ENRON, Larry L=20 Mike McConnell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rebec= ca=20 J Mark Metts/NA/Enron@Enron,= =20 James L Cindy=20 Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lou L Pai@EES, Jeffrey Sherrick/Corp/Enron@ENRON,= =20 Michael Terraso@ENRON, Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: James Derrick/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kelly Kimberly@Enron Communications, Ma= rk=20 Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kenneth Lay@ENRON, Ken Rice@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS,= =20 Paula Rieker/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, John=20 Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Rob Walls/NA/Enron@Enron, Pam=20 Jana Mills/HOU/ECT@ECT=20 Subject: Invitation to Corporate Responsibility Task Force Meeting As part of our commitment to responsible business practices around the worl= d,=20 we have recently launched a Corporate Responsibility function at Enron. Th= e=20 further development, implementation and ultimate success of this effort wil= l=20 depend upon the participation and coordination of the business units and=20 regions. To that end, we are launching a Corporate Responsibility task force, which = I=20 will chair. The roles of this task force will include developing and=20 coordinating social and environmental policies, strategy, and information= =20 among the Enron business units; monitoring alignment of business activities= =20 with corporate responsibility goals; and providing a forum for business uni= ts=20 to share issues and develop a consistent strategy. Kelly Kimberly, Senior= =20 Vice President of Corporate Responsibility, and also of Marketing=20 Communication and Public Relations for Enron Broadband Services, will lead= =20 the overall corporate responsibility initiative. Additionally, because of= =20 their interest and experience working on these issues, Paula Rieker, Mark= =20 Schroeder and Rob Walls have already volunteered to represent their=20 respective business units on the task force. As a leader at Enron, I am seeking your participation, support and=20 leadership. I am asking the head of each business unit or major corporate= =20 function to either participate personally or designate a VP-or-higher level= =20 individual to serve as a member of the task force. I look forward to your= =20 organization=01,s participation. The first task force meeting will be in Houston from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m= . =20 Please choose one of the dates listed below, note your designee, and respon= d=20 to Stacy Walker by Tuesday, September 19, by fax at 713-646-3248, or by pho= ne=20 at 713-853-3583. Additional details, such as an agenda and a meeting=20 location, will follow. October 3 _____ October 25 _____ October 4 _____ Designee _________________________ Thanks. Joe [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Dates for Emerson Meeting; [EMail-Body]= I'm suggesting that we make progress on it before we agree to a CEO summit Nate Ellis@EES 03/02/2001 02:01 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: RE: Dates for Emerson Meeting Agreed. It's great that these guys want to sell us product, but what's in it for Enron? I'm already pushing that point with Emerson and will continue to do so. I definitely want to bring it up at the CEO summit. Thanks for your input, Steve. Nate From: Steven J Kean@ENRON on 03/02/2001 01:16 PM To: Nate Ellis/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: RE: Dates for Emerson Meeting I think I can recommend that the time be set aside, but it would be helpful if we pointed out to Emerson that it must be clear that there is a clear opportunity for Enron before we schedule the meeting. Maybe you could use this to get some progress on a bundled outsource deal. Nate Ellis@EES 02/28/2001 03:05 PM To: Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Michael Mann/HOU/EES@EES, Troy Henry/HOU/EES@EES cc: Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES, Micah Hatten/HOU/EES@EES, Joannie Williamson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: RE: Dates for Emerson Meeting Gentlemen: Situation: Emerson is aggressively seeking at least a three hour time slot for a meeting with Jeff Skilling in April or May 2001. Mr. Skilling's office is hesitant to allocate more than two hours without your recommendation. Emerson is being persistent. The key players from Emerson are David Farr, newly appointed CEO, and James Berges, President and effectively the leader of Emerson's strategic development effort. It is anticipated that both would attend the meeting. Emerson execs want to (i) get to know Mr. Skilling and other senior management, (ii) discuss mutual business opportunities, and (iii) hold a discussion about the transformation of Enron from a pipeline company to its current form. The last point has to do with Emerson's continuing self-transformation effort and how Enron achieved its transformation. I need your advice and recommendation. Please respond by e-mail or telephone (x5-4040). Background: Emerson initiated this latest round of contact with Enron in November 2000, when Mike Train and Mark Proudfoot, both Emerson VPs of Corporate Development, visited the Enron building hosted by Steve Kean. I met them at that time. Since that initial meeting, Emerson has aggressively pursued a business joint venture as preferred supplier with Martin Wenzel and the distributed power business, I believe with promising results. My sense is that Emerson is uniquely positioned as EES' partner in that business. I am waiting to receive an update from Martin. Emerson is also interested in becoming a preferred supplier for EES's DSM business. While we generally support that idea, we are pressing Emerson to reciprocate by becoming a customer of our bundled outsource business. Emerson is highly decentralized, and our efforts to date have been unsuccessful. I want to use the meeting as an opportunity to press Emerson to consider a proposal from EES's bundled outsource business. Please let me know your recommendation on this matter. Thanks, Nate ---------------------- Forwarded by Nate Ellis/HOU/EES on 02/28/2001 02:21 PM --------------------------- ""Train, Mike [CORP/STL]"" <Mike.Train@emrsn.com> on 02/27/2001 08:51:23 PM To: ""'Nate Ellis'"" <nellis2@enron.com> cc: Subject: RE: Dates Nate, Thanks for the note - - I have dropped some ideas to Thad to follow up on during my absence from the office. I am a little nervous about having only two hours - - is it possible to get a larger block of time to get to know each other better and talk through some of the mutual business opportunities? Mike (from Hong Kong) -----Original Message----- From: Nate Ellis [mailto:nellis2@enron.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 6:16 PM To: mike.train@emrsn.com Subject: Dates ---------------------- Forwarded by Nate Ellis/HOU/EES on 02/27/2001 06:14 PM --------------------------- Nate Ellis 02/26/2001 04:28 PM To: thad.ewald@emrsn.com cc: Subject: Dates Skilling's calendar is amazingly full! Let's shoot for one of the following. Let's schedule it ASAP. March is unavailable for a two-hour meeting. Monday, April 2nd: 12:00p to 2:00p Tuesday, April 3rd: 9:00a to 11:00a Wednesday, May 2nd: 10:00a to 12:00p or 1:00p to 3:00p Thursday, May 3rd: 10:00a to 12:00p or 1:00p to 3:00p Call or e-mail when you have a suggestion. Nate [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= ENA-Government Affairs Meeting; [EMail-Body]= calendar ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/03/2000 06:45 PM --------------------------- Enron Energy Services From: Ginger Dernehl 08/03/2000 08:49 AM Phone No: 713 853-7751 To: Kay Chapman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kimberly Hillis/HOU/ECT@ect, Felicia Doan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Debra Davidson/PDX/ECT@ECT, Ana Alcantara/HOU/ECT@ECT, Maureen McVicker/HOU/EES@EES, Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Marcia A Linton/HOU/EES@EES, Christy Chapman/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: David W Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT, John J Lavorato/Corp/Enron@Enron, Kevin M Presto/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rodney Malcolm/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/ECT@ECT, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES Subject: ENA-Government Affairs Meeting This e:mail serves as confirmation of the date and time for the meeting mentioned below. Please see details below. Date: August 10, 2000 Time: 3:00-5:00pm (CDT) Location: EB47C1 Number: 1-800-998-2462 Pass Code 4485103 Thanks ladies for all your help in scheduling this. I really appreciate it!!!! Note to Lysa Akin: Lysa, I understand this date and time was not good for Paul, but if the opportunity arises for him to call in at some point and time, that would be great. gngr ---------------------- Forwarded by Ginger Dernehl/HOU/EES on 08/03/2000 08:26 AM --------------------------- Enron Energy Services From: Ginger Dernehl 08/01/2000 01:55 PM Phone No: 713 853-7751 To: Kay Chapman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kimberly Hillis/HOU/ECT@ect, Felicia Doan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Debra Davidson/PDX/ECT@ECT, Ana Alcantara/HOU/ECT@ECT, Maureen McVicker/HOU/EES@EES, Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Marcia A Linton/HOU/EES@EES cc: (bcc: Ginger Dernehl/HOU/EES) Subject: ENA-Government Affairs Meeting Rick Shapiro & Jim Steffes would like to schedule a meeting with the following people re:Coordinating Government Affairs activiteis with ENA's business goals: David Delaney John Lavorato Kevin Presto Tim Belden Rodney Malcolm Janet Dietrich Steve Kean Paul Kaufman My guess is that we will have to schedule something for late afternoon because of the trading schedule. See below and respond to me with any/all of the dates and times that will work. Thursday, August 10 3:00pm-5:00pm Friday, August 11 3:00pm-5:00pm Friday, August 18 3:30pm-5:00pm Thanks and I wait patiently for your responses. gngr [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Thank you; [EMail-Body]= thanks for your help in preparing for the Texas hearing. I think Texas legislators are viewing the California experience in the proper context and I think I was at least marginally articulate on the emissions issues as well. thanks again. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Information and Securities Trading; [EMail-Body]= To:HAEDICKE, MARK - 7138536544 ? Enron Wholesale Services - Office of the Chairman ? From:??Mark Frevert, Chairman & CEO ??????Greg Whalley, President & COO ??????Mark Haedicke, Managing Director & General Counsel ? Subject:??Confidential Information and Securities Trading ? Enron Wholesale Services ('EWS') maintains official Policies and Procedures Regarding Confidential Information and Securities Trading ('Policies and Procedures'), which have been revised as of November 15, 2000 to reflect the new EWS structure. These policies and procedures are intended to allow us simultaneously to pursue our diverse businesses and to protect confidential information, our reputation for integrity, and EWS and its employees from legal liability. ? You are required to become familiar with, and to comply with, the Policies and Procedures. The newly revised Policies and Procedures are available for your review on LegalOnline, the new intranet website maintained by the Enron Wholesale Services Legal Department. Please click on the attached link to access LegalOnline: ? ? You must certify your compliance with the Policies and Procedures within two weeks of your receipt of this message. The LegalOnline site will allow you to quickly and conveniently certify your compliance on-line with your SAP Personal ID number. If you have any questions concerning the Policies or Procedures, please call Lance Schuler at extension 3-5419, Mark Haedicke at extension 3-6544, Alan Aronowitz at extension 3-3214, Bob Bruce at extension 5-7780 or Donna Lowry at extension 3-1939. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Task Force conf call -- 9:30; [EMail-Body]= 202-287-1321 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Sara Woody and Elena Chilkina; [EMail-Body]= Anne, For the time being it's fine. She will soon become an associate. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Labbe, Anne Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 9:37 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: RE: Sara Woody and Elena Chilkina Vince, Thanks. However, should Elena's title remain as admin coordinator? Please advise. -----Original Message----- From: Kaminski, Vince J Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 8:08 AM To: Roberts, Mike A. Cc: Labbe, Anne Subject: FW: Sara Woody and Elena Chilkina FYI Vince Anne, Mike will call you regarding Sarah. -----Original Message----- From: Labbe, Anne Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 3:35 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Sara Woody and Elena Chilkina Vince, As I mentioned in my voice mail, Mike Roberts going to hire Sara Woody, a recent MBA grad from Rice, into his group. However, when we were talking about this position, Mike compared Sara to Elena. Elena's title is admin coordinator, and I know that Sara should not have this title, and honestly do not think that Elena should also. Admin coordinator's do primarily administrative work. I suggest that you compare Elena and Sarah's duties/ level to other Sr. Spec. in your group such as Kenneth Parkhill and Sevil to determine if they are equivalent, or if their scope of responsibilities and experience is not as broad. If the latter is the case, we could place both Sara and Elena in a specialist job group ( the salary range is 33-66K). Please advise. Thanks, Anne [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Astros; [EMail-Body]= Yes, please. From: Elizabeth Linnell on 05/16/2001 12:02 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Astros I noticed that several groups within your overall organization charged tickets or our suite to their cost centers this month. I know of the business purpose for a couple, but not all. Let me know if you're interested in this info and I'll get more data from Greg. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 02/28/2001 02:19 PM ----- Miyung Buster@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 02/26/2001 09:03 AM To: Ann M Schmidt/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bryan Seyfried/LON/ECT@ECT, dcasse@whwg.com, dg27@pacbell.net, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron, filuntz@aol.com, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Janet Butler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeannie Mandelker/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Margaret Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Markus Fiala/LON/ECT@ECT, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT, Mike Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron, Nicholas O'Day/AP/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Stella Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@Enron, Mike Roan/ENRON@enronXgate, Alex Parsons/EU/Enron@Enron, Andrew Morrison/LON/ECT@ECT, lipsen@cisco.com, Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Energy Issues Riverside Press 2/23: ""Power line plan has new foes"" Contra Costa Times, 2/23: ""GOP in a fix over power crisis"" Sac Bee, Fri 2/23: ""Davis says State has tentative deal for Edison grid"" SF Chron 2/23: ""Utilities Search for Long-Term Fix During Breather..."" SJ Mercury 2/23: ""State's Energy Price Tag Increases"" LA Times 2/23: ""Paying for power still a big question"" Long Beach Press 2/23: ""Lowenthal returns utility money"" Sac Bee 2/23: Columnist Dan Walters: ""A power grab by politicians"" SF Chron, 2/23: ""Discount Urged Near Power Plants"" Sac Bee 2/23: ""At last, power alerts are lifted..."" Sac Bee 2/23: ""Davis' deadlines on energy much easier set than met"" SF Chron, 2/23: ""GOP Sees Power Crisis as Davis' Achilles' Heel"" Contra Costa Times 2/23: ""Pressure Is on Utilities to Accept Grid Sale"" SF Chron 2/23: ""Energy Firms Won't Pay All of Monster Debt PUC reverses, taxpayers could foot the bill "" San Diego Union, 2/23: ""Small electric producers OK big price cut"" Power line plan has new foes La Cresta residents vow to keep electricity equipment out of the Cleveland Forest and a wilderness area. By Thomas Buckley The Press-Enterprise LAKE ELSINORE A new group has raised its objections to Lake Elsinore's proposed hydroelectric plant and the power lines that might carry its electricity to San Diego County. On Thursday, the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District board set aside for further study later this month a motion by Director Gary Kelley to ensure that both the lines and the actual power plant that make up a $450 million proposal from Enron North America proceed together. But residents of La Cresta, a mountaintop community near where the lines might run, did not care whether the plant and lines happened together. Many of them do not want the lines to be there at all. ""We are resolved to keep power lines out of the Cleveland National Forest and the San Mateo Wilderness Area,"" said La Cresta resident Bill Stockmar. ""Our constituents and the local residents impacted by the proposed project are outraged and respectfully demand immediate intervention to stop this project at the planning level."" As it stands now, the power lines from the hydroelectric plant would run from Temescal Canyon to Camp Pendleton along the ridge line of the Elsinore Mountains just west of the lake. Those lines could run in a narrow strip of forest land just west of the La Cresta community. Enron project manager Rob Bakondy said the final determination of where the lines might run is not set, but he said the power lines could be built at least a year before the plant itself. Besides serving the hydroelectric plant, the power lines could be used to replace lines San Diego Gas and Electric wants to build through Murrieta and Temecula to bring power to San Diego. The water district also announced it is considering financing and building the lines itself. District General Manager John Rossi said Wednesday that it was too early to say exactly how the lines would be built, but that the district's building or owning the lines, or both, in cooperation with Enron is ""one possibility."" Board President Kris Anderson said it is too early to tell whether it would benefit the district to become so directly involved in the project. But he said the district would be able to borrow the approximately $50 million needed to build the lines at a lower interest rate than a private company could get. That difference, Anderson said, could mean extra dollars for the district. How Governor Davis' proposal to purchase thousands of miles of transmission lines from the ailing utilities will affect the project is not yet clear, said Enron spokeswoman Kathy Russeth. The timing of the construction of the project, if it is approved by state and federal regulators, will not be finally known until a contract between Enron and the water district has been agreed upon. That is expected to happen by the end of May. GOP in a fix over power crisis Leaders seek solutions that won't undercut past support for deregulation By Daniel Borenstein TIMES POLITICAL EDITOR California Republican Party leaders are trying desperately to politicize the state's electricity crisis by blaming Gray Davis, but it seems that the harder they try the more popular the Democratic governor becomes. The latest GOP push will come today when party leaders, meeting in Sacramento for the start of their three-day state convention, hold a hastily organized workshop on energy. ""We should be explaining to California that Gray Davis was asleep at the switch last year,"" said one of the scheduled speakers, Republican strategist Dan Schnur. ""But that message can only work if it's coupled with a proposal for an alternative solution."" So far, that hasn't happened. For all the complaints about Davis, Republicans are moving even slower. Looking to 2002, when Davis will stand for re-election, the GOP has run radio ads attacking the governor for delays. But the party has yet to distinguish itself with a solid plan of its own. ""If Republicans are able in the next couple of months to articulate a clear plan, which is different from the Democratic plan, yes, we can use it as a political message,"" said Stuart DeVeaux, spokesman for the California Republican Party. ""Are Republicans in Sacramento going to come up with a plan that articulates a future for our energy problem? I'm not telling you it's going to be revealed this weekend. It's my hope it will be articulated this weekend."" Republicans are caught in an ideological quagmire. Pushing for re-regulation of electricity conflicts with the party's basic tenet of less government interference. Conversely, arguing for full deregulation puts Republicans at odds with a solid majority of Californians. A Los Angeles Times poll taken Feb. 14-15 found that 60 percent of Californians want to go back to a regulated electricity industry, while 25 percent are opposed. The GOP problem is exacerbated because there is no easy policy solution to the energy mess, said Jack Pitney, government professor at Claremont McKenna College. ""It's difficult to see how we get out of this situation without considerable cost. If there were a silver bullet, somebody would have found it by now."" Republicans have attacked Davis for his plan to buy power lines from private utilities. ""Everybody agrees there's $1 billion or $2 billion in deferred maintenance,"" said GOP consultant Sal Russo, another speaker at the party's convention today. ""We need to be in this business like a hole in the head."" But the Times poll found that Californians, by a 52-36 margin, favor the idea. Moreover, Davis' job approval rating has climbed this year. In January, 49 percent approved and 25 percent disapproved. In February, it was up to 57-26. Californians give Davis better marks for handling the electricity crisis than they give President Bush. Republicans are going to have difficult time laying the political blame on Davis. ""It's 'Murder on the Orient Express.' Everybody did it,"" Pitney said. ""Although you can make a case that Davis was slow in reacting, no one can seriously pin him with the primary blame for the problem."" The deregulation bill passed the Legislature in 1996 with the strong support of both parties and a Republican governor, Pete Wilson. Senate Minority Leader Jim Brulte, R-Rancho Cucamonga, is considered one of the Republican Party's top strategists. He was also one of the leading proponents of the deregulation bill. For all of those reasons, Garry South, Davis' political strategist, said he does not fear a GOP attack on electricity. ""If the Republicans want to get into a full-out firefight over how this mess came about, I'm more than willing to play. They don't have a very good story to tell."" For now, Davis' political strength is stable. But the 2002 primary elections are still more than a year away, and the general election is a political eternity from now. ""If this isn't resolved, there is nothing to guarantee that there won't be a voter backlash against the government,"" said political analyst Sherry Bebitch Jeffe. ""And right now the government in California is the Democratic Party."" That's the message the Republicans want to drive home. But if they can't come up with their own alternative, they might have a hard time playing the blame game. Davis says state has tentative deal for Edison grid Updated: Feb. 23, 2001 - 4:42 p.m. LOS ANGELES -- After a week of intense closed-door negotiations with utility representatives, Gov. Gray Davis said Friday he had reached an ""agreement in principle"" with Southern California Edison to buy the utility's power lines for an estimated $2.7 billion. The deal also requires Edison International, the parent company of Edison, to sell cheap power to the state for a decade. ""This is the framework of a good, balanced deal,"" Davis said. ""It's not a final deal. There's a lot of work to be done, But we're making progress."" The governor said he did not expect customer rates to increase as a result of the deal. Edison did not immediately return calls seeking comment. The state has been in talks for a week to buy a total of 26,000 miles of transmission lines from Edison, Pacific Gas and Electric and Sempra Energy, which operates San Diego Gas & Electric. The total cost of the lines could range from $4.5 billion to $7 billion. The effort is intended to help restore the financial health of the state's two largest utilities, PG&E and Edison, both of which are near bankruptcy. The $2.7 billion price for the Edison lines amounts to 2.3 times the estimated book value, Davis said. The utilities say they have lost nearly $13 billion since June, trapped between soaring wholesale power prices and state-imposed rate caps for consumers. The tentative plan announced by Davis would allow Edison to issue bonds for a substantial portion of its losses. Davis said the state is making good progress in its talks with Sempra and ""some progress"" with PG&E. Thursday, Davis said he will not sign off on any grid buyout without all three utilities' participation. ""I do not believe we can make a satisfactory arrangement without 60 percent of the transmission grid, and that would require cooperation with PG&E,"" he said Friday. PG&E spokesman Ron Low said Thursday night that talks had ended with no resolution that day. ""These are complicated problems that will not be solved overnight,"" Low said. ""There are clearly some issues where we are very far apart."" Still, PG&E chief executive officer Robert Glynn Jr. said Friday the meeting with Davis was a ""milestone in the resolution of California's energy crisis"" and said he was willing to meet further to discuss the utility's proposal. ""Each utility's issues and opportunities in this crisis are different, and we believe that PG&E has proposed a detailed solution that balances ratepayer and shareholder interests,"" Glynn said in a statement issued Friday before the governor's news conference. The company said it would have no further comment. The tentative agreement also calls for: Edison parent Edison International to make payments to the utility of about $420 million. Edison International to commit the entire output of its Sunrise Mission power project at low, cost-based rates for 10 years. Davis said that arrangement could save ratepayers $500 million over the next two years. Edison to provide cost-based rates from generating plants it owns for another 10 years. Edison to drop its lawsuit against the California Public Utilities Commission claiming that imposed rate caps were illegal under federal law. ""This entire transaction, which I believe is fair and balanced for both sides, will be accomplished within the existing rate structure,"" Davis said. ""We will not be asking any more of consumers to allow this transaction to come to pass."" Davis said negotiations will continue in the coming days. Consumer advocate Harvey Rosenfield called the governor's plan ""an outrageous giveaway"" and predicted that if lawmakers didn't halt it, voters would revolt. ""The most outrageous part of this isn't even paying 2.3 times what the lines are worth, but then allowing the parent companies that siphoned off billions of dollars to pay only the tax payment they already owe,"" Rosenfield said. The Public Utilities Commission already regulates how much the utilities can charge for power their own plants generate, Rosenfield said. --By Leslie Gornstein, Associated Press Writer - Utilities Search for Long-Term Fix During Breather State purchase of power lines under discussion Friday,?February 23, 2001 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle Sacramento -- A break in the weather and a break in the energy crisis coincided yesterday, as California enjoyed its first day in more than a month without a power alert. With the short-term picture for power improving, representatives of the state's three troubled utilities met separately with Gov. Gray Davis and his staff to work on a longer-range fix for the power crisis that would include state purchase of the firms' transmission lines. Trouble loomed in at least one set of talks, however, as Pacific Gas and Electric Co. said it was ""very far"" from reaching a deal. The California Independent System Operator, which coordinates the flow of electricity through the state's power grid, removed all power alerts at about 9 a.m. yesterday. Spokeswoman Lorie O'Donley said that with springtime approaching and weather improving, and with some power plants coming back to full output from maintenance, the overall picture is brightening. ""We're optimistic,"" she said. ""We're coming into the spring season, the majority of generators have had their maintenance completed. But everything is dependent on the weather and temperature."" The last day California had no power alerts was Jan. 13. Since then, there have been two days of rolling blackouts in Northern California and many other days of Stage 3 alerts -- when power reserves dip below 1.5 percent of available capacity. The mildest alert, Stage 1, is declared when reserves are between 5 and 7 percent of capacity. The supply of power has been helped by warmer temperatures in other Western states, cutting demand there, and by an increase in generators on line in California, O'Donley said. Last week, when the state was still in Stage 3 alerts, 10,500 megawatts were offline in California. Yesterday, there were 8,200 megawatts offline, a difference that provides enough power for a couple million homes. O'Donley warned that the supply picture in California is still tight, and conservation still necessary. But the focus of attention was turning to Sacramento and Davis' talks with the utilities. Davis announced a plan last week for the state to purchase 26,000 miles of utility-owned transmission lines in exchange for backing bonds that allow the utilities to repay the almost $13 billion in debt they say they owe. While Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas and Electric have indicated willingness to sell their lines, PG&E has refused to comment on the proposal. It is not clear if PG&E is unwilling to sell or simply trying to strike a harder bargain. The utility had accumulated more debt than its Southern California counterparts, and also owns the largest part of the transmission line grid. Talks between Davis' staff and PG&E did not start until late yesterday afternoon, and indications were that they were more difficult than negotiations involving the other two utilities. ""They're just on a different page,"" Michael Peevey, the former Edison president who is Davis' chief negotiator, told Bloomberg News. PG&E spokesman Ron Low said, ""These are difficult problems that cannot be solved overnight. There are clearly some areas where we are very far apart."" Davis hopes to make an announcement with at least one of the utilities before leaving today for the four-day National Governors Association meeting in Washington, D.C. The union that represents some 11,000 PG&E employees, meanwhile, called on Davis to negotiate state ownership of two power plants under construction in which PG&E holds large stakes. Jack McNally, business manager of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 1245, in Walnut Creek told Davis in a letter that a transmission line takeover would be a ""grand experiment"" fraught with danger. Acquiring the two prospective power plants, in Kern and San Diego counties, would do more to address energy shortages than taking over transmission lines that need hundreds of millions of dollars in maintenance, union officials said. Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio countered that state acquisition of transmission lines ""would not affect one union job,"" as the state would simply lease the grid back to the utilities. Maviglio predicted union jobs would increase with investment in new capacity and system upgrades. Chronicle staff writers Patrick Hoge and Robert Salladay contributed to this report. State's energy price tag increases Published Friday, Feb. 23, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News BY DION NISSENBAUM Mercury News Sacramento Bureau SACRAMENTO -- California's energy crisis took another big bite out of the state budget Thursday when finance aides to Gov. Gray Davis announced that the cost of buying energy may top $3 billion by mid-March. In a move that raised new alarms for lawmakers, the governor's finance team for the third time this month asked for $500 million to buy electricity in the coming weeks while Davis tries to work out a deal to bail out the state's near-bankrupt utilities. That, combined with money spent last month to buy energy, could drain the state coffers of $3 billion by St. Patrick's Day. The request for more cash came on the same day that California spent its first day in weeks without an official energy emergency and Davis held critical talks with the heads of Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and San Diego Gas & Electric Co. The talks are aimed at rescuing the two companies and Southern California Edison from financial collapse. While Davis had expressed hope last week of working out a deal by today, sources said that an agreement still remains elusive. Until a compromise can be hammered out, the state is being forced to pay upward of $50 million a day from the general fund to buy electricity. State leaders expect that the money will eventually be repaid to the general fund under a $10 billion bond package. But lawmakers are growing increasingly concerned about the short-term impact on the state fiscal plan. Assemblywoman Carole Migden, D-San Francisco, said the latest request for more money could create ``greater concern and anxiety'' among lawmakers and added that the energy crisis was going to make it harder to fund other programs, such as support for abused children. ``It's going to be a bleak year for other budget priorities,'' said Migden, who is chairwoman of the powerful Assembly Appropriations Committee. Earlier this week, the state's independent financial analyst warned that the energy crisis could eat into state money the governor wants to spend on other things such as the environment and public safety. While lawmakers have so far bitten their tongues about the growing power price tag, Migden said the Legislature might be hesitant to allow the costs to go any higher. ``I can't imagine another infusion after this being required,'' Migden said. ``I think this has to be the last request because we're going to hit fundamental core programs.'' Waiting for bailout plan California stepped in to buy the energy last month after PG&E and Southern California Edison lost the financial wherewithal to do it themselves. At the time, state leaders reluctantly agreed to buy the energy for a short period of time as part of a larger plan for California to sign long-term contracts with power generators. But those negotiations have failed to produce much energy so far, and Davis said earlier this week that the power producers are hesitant to sign any deals until California agrees to a bailout plan for the utilities. On Thursday, one power producer -- Williams Cos. -- announced that it had signed a 10-year contract with the state to provide up to 1,400 megawatts of power to California. In a bid to work out the bailout plan, Davis and his advisers met Thursday and were to meet again today with top executives from all three electric utilities in financial trouble. The Democratic governor wants to buy 26,000 miles of high voltage transmission lines owned by the three companies in exchange for helping the utilities pay off $13 billion in debts. The utilities are being asked to protect thousands of acres of wilderness lands they own, hang onto power plants that provide the state with its cheapest electricity, and drop explosive lawsuits that could allow the companies to dramatically raise customer rates. But sources said talks have bogged down on the transmission line deal, which PG&E has been reluctant to accept. Alternative energy helps out While talks slogged along in the governor's office, state lawmakers announced that another key piece of the puzzle needed to solve the energy crisis was falling into place. State Sen. Jim Battin, R-Palm Desert, and Assemblyman Fred Keeley, D-Santa Cruz, said that alternative energy producers had agreed to dramatically lower their prices in a deal that could save California $3 billion to $4 billion. Those energy producers, nearly 700 wind, solar and natural gas-fired plants, provide about a third of the state's energy. Paying for power still a big question POWER CRISIS PG&E doesn't like the plan the PUC proposed to collect electricity costs By Mike Taugher TIMES STAFF WRITER Three weeks after Gov. Gray Davis signed into law the state's centerpiece for stabilizing energy costs, big differences remain over how the solutions will be implemented and who will pay for them. The plan, outlined in legislation known as AB1X, was intended first to stop the financial bleeding of California's two largest utilities by asking the state to buy enough unsecured power to keep the lights on. Next, the state would enter long-term contracts for less expensive power that would eventually lessen the need for more costly, last-minute electricity. But the state has balked at buying the entire portfolio of last-minute electricity that is needed, and a disagreement emerged Thursday over what portion of consumers' bills should be used to reimburse state coffers. Meanwhile, progress on completing contracts has been slow, although two were signed Thursday. A spokesman for Davis said more contracts for relatively low-cost power would be signed once the state bought the utilities' transmission lines and other assets, because then the utilities could pay their past-due bills. The governor said last week that he expected a deal with the utilities by today, but that might not happen. ""Clearly, there's been challenges getting long-term contracts, but we've turned the corner,"" said Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio. ""We've got three in the bank and 10 more once we get these deals (with the utilities) done."" Also Thursday, the Public Utilities Commission was poised to allow the state to collect the entire amount that customers pay specifically for electricity. But Pacific Gas & Electric Co. said it is entitled to deduct other costs from customers' payments before reimbursing the state. That would reduce payments from PG&E to the state by about half, according to the company. The PUC proposal was in response to a request from the state Department of Water Resources that it be allowed to start collecting money so that energy companies would be more willing to sell power to the agency. The two Republican-appointed commissioners of the PUC blocked the move, which needed four of five commissioners' approval to reach the agenda. ""DWR's (action) is exacerbating a problem AB1X was meant to alleviate,"" said Commissioner Richard Bilas. ""It is pushing the utilities closer to bankruptcy."" PG&E spokesman John Nelson said the proposal brought by PUC President Loretta Lynch would have been unfair to the utilities because AB1X allows them to deduct expenses for buying electricity and generating energy at their own power plants before reimbursing the state. ""All of those costs need to be paid going forward. Otherwise, you still leave the utilities to bleed,"" Nelson said. That stance appeared to be at odds with the office of Assemblyman Fred Keeley, the Boulder Creek Democrat who wrote AB1X. ""For PG&E to think it can keep money for electrons it never even owned is astounding to us,"" said Guy Phillips, a Keeley aide. While nothing has gone smoothly, Phillips and others expressed optimism that the state's biggest effort to date to fix the energy crisis would work. ""We think those will be sorted out,"" said Phillips, who acknowledged there has been much confusion about what lawmakers intended in AB1X. For example, Keeley's office said lawmakers wanted the water resources agency to make up the entire amount of electricity that the state's two largest utilities had not secured ahead of time. The high cost of this last-minute electricity -- and the utilities' heavy reliance on it -- is what drove PG&E and Southern California Edison to the brink of bankruptcy. But the water agency has balked at buying electricity offered at prices it calls ""unreasonable."" While state officials have refused to say how much electricity it has left to utilities to purchase, the state is paying about $55 million a day to keep electricity flowing. And that amounts to about 90 percent of the electricity purchased on behalf of the utilities on the same day it is needed, according to Phillips. The state's reluctance to buy all of the so-called real-time electricity has led to fears that the utilities will continue to run up debt and that power companies will not collect money owed to them. That dispute has landed in federal court, where a Sacramento judge is forcing three major power suppliers and a marketing company to continue selling power in the state. If a settlement is not reached today, U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell is expected to decide whether to extend his order, to modify it or to drop it. Staff writer Andrew LaMar contributed to this story. Lowenthal returns utility money By Will Shuck From our Sacramento Bureau SACRAMENTO Assemblyman Alan Lowenthal, D-Long Beach, this week joined a small group of legislators who returned campaign contributions to California utility companies and other energy firms. He sent $5,000 back to Southern California Edison and $500 to Sempra Energy, parent company of Southern California Gas. It was a small portion of the more than Lowenthal $500,000 Lowenthal had raised in 2000 for his re-election campaign. He said he returned the money, as did nine other Assembly members, at the urging of the consumer advocacy group Global Exchange. ""We think it's fantastic that he has recognized that in the eyes of the public there is a very serious potential conflict of interest,"" said group spokeswoman Medea Benjamin. ""We applaud him for wanting to ensure the integrity of the legislative process."" While Benjamin says it's critical that lawmakers not be tainted by energy money during the state's power crisis, others wonder where the line should be drawn. ""In the real world of politics it costs money to run for office and you have to get that money somewhere,"" said Paul Schmidt, a political science professor at Cal State Long Beach. ""To say that you can only make decisions on things involving individuals that haven't given you any money would result in paralysis of government."" Benjamin and other consumer advocates say the power crisis calls for special consideration. ""There are not many cases in which they're actually voting whether a company will survive with billions of dollars of taxpayer money or go bankrupt, as they're doing with the utility companies,"" Benjamin said. Lowenthal agreed. ""I thought it was an appropriate request,"" he said. ""These are unique circumstances, and I just think it's in the public's best interest that I return that money."" Dan Walters: A power grab by politicians (Published Feb. 23, 2001) Slowly, but inexorably, control over the generation, acquisition and distribution of electric power in California is being shifted from professional utility managers and independent regulators into the hands of politicians. The 1996 utility ""deregulation"" scheme enacted by the Legislature was an initial foray into politicization. Legislation granting the governor more control over the makeup of the Public Utilities Commission was another. But the current power supply/price crisis has led to even more direct political influence over -- or interference with -- electric service. One hastily enacted bill, for example, gives the governor direct control of the now-misnamed ""Independent System Operator,"" which operates the statewide power grid. More political intrusion is in the works, from a state takeover of the intercity power transmission grid to the creation of a state power authority that would buy, generate and sell electricity directly. And while local public utilities function well, a state power agency might operate on the whims of professional politicians. The Legislature, for example, wants appointments to the board that would direct a state power authority, and big state power projects would be subject to the same kind of pork-barrel mentality that distorts other public works appropriations. Where power plants were to be built, or where high-voltage lines would be strung, might well depend on who could, and could not, bring political influence to bear, rather than what the system needed to work efficiently. Clues to the potential pitfalls of a state-operated power system are found in the approaches of Capitol politicians to the current crisis. There is, for example, the unspoken goal of avoiding big power rate boosts until after the November 2002 election -- even if it means running up billions of dollars in debts to do it. Would future rates charged by a state power authority be raised or lowered to enhance the prospects of the dominant party or an incumbent governor? There's no evidence in past performances to indicate they wouldn't be. And then there's the knotty question of who would get vital power supplies in the event of shortages -- a situation that is already looming and could become worse in future months. Emergency legislation already gives the state the right to sell power as it pleases, without competitive bidding or even public notice. There's nothing, really, to prevent politically influential power customers such as big industrial enterprises from cutting their own supply deals with politically directed state officials. And whose juice would be cut off if shortages mean blackouts? Approximately 45 percent of current power customers are effectively exempt from rolling blackouts because they are connected to circuits (called ""blocks"") that also include vital services, such as hospitals, fire and police agencies, water supply systems and communications centers. The Capitol, not surprisingly, is in one of those noninterruptible blocks. With the threat of further blackouts looming, legislation is being drafted to designate which customers will suffer and which will not -- thus taking that authority out of the hands of utilities and regulators. And that, in turn, is generating pressure from lobbyists from all sorts of interest groups to place their clients on protected lists. Should farmers be cut off, or biotechnology facilities, or computer chip plants, or schools? When politicians control any process or system, one can be certain that they will always make expedient political decisions, regardless of the long-term or wider consequences. Thus, we may someday regret allowing the Capitol's self-serving politicians to get their hands on our electric power system. Discount Urged Near Power Plants Senator urges electricity rate break for neighbors of generators Friday,?February 23, 2001 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle As California officials propose building 32 new ""peaker"" power plants across the state by July, one legislator from plant-rich eastern Contra Costa County thinks residents should get a discount on their power bill for having a generator in their backyard. The proposed bill would provide a little payback for residents of state Sen. Tom Torlakson's district, which is home to a half-dozen plants and has three more in the construction pipeline. Under the bill introduced yesterday by Torlakson, D-Antioch, people living within a 20-mile circle around a power plant would receive a 20 percent discount on their electricity bill and be exempt from blackouts. The legislation was partially inspired by San Jose officials' rejecting a proposal to build a 600-megawatt power plant in the Coyote Valley, as well as Gov. Gray Davis' plan to build 5,000 megawatts of new generating capacity by July 1. ""It's a question of fairness,"" Torlakson said. ""People in communities who are shouldering the burden for having plants in their backyard should get some benefit from it."" Torlakson said consumers who lived in communities without plants could pick up the tab for the discounts. ""But the utilities would have to figure that out within their rate system,"" he said. A PG&E spokesman said yesterday that the company does not comment on pending legislation. While consumer advocates, environmentalists and power generators were lukewarm to the proposal yesterday, many admit that the state has not thought about how to -- of even if they have to -- offer communities a little incentive to approve a power plant within their borders. However, the state has allocated $30 million for plants that get online by July 1. ""As far as incentives, I'd think most communities would see the value of the employment they'd get and the increase to the tax base,"" said Larry Hamlin, the governor's recently appointed project manager for the plant-building campaign. A spokesman for California's Environmental Protection Agency, which permits plants, said the plan might be a ""worthwhile idea for making power plants more palatable to Californians."" Michael Shames, head of Utility Consumer Action Network in San Diego said the bill was attacking a ""not in my back yard"" problem that doesn't exist. ""Many San Diego communities are clamoring for plants in the hope that they would bring stability to the market,"" he said. James Peters of Mirent, the Atlanta-based company formerly known as Southern Energy, said the plan wouldn't encourage generators to build the number of plants needed to solve the energy crisis. Already, communities like Pittsburg have cut deals with power generators before letting them build. In exchange for letting the Calpine Corp. build two large plants in town, Pittsburg received the lifetime option to purchase 100 megawatts of power at below-market rates. Next week, a Pittsburg group is going to begin gathering signatures demanding that city leaders use the estimated 26 megawatts it would take to light residences and businesses to give local residents a break on bills. The group will hold an organizational meeting at 7 p.m. Tuesday at the Los Medanos Community Hospital, 2311 Loveridge Rd. in Pittsburg. At last, power alerts are lifted: Enjoy respite because crisis far from resolved, experts say By Carrie Peyton Bee Staff Writer (Published Feb. 23, 2001) As oddly as it arrived, California's electric emergency lifted Thursday morning. At 9 a.m., the Independent System Operator, which controls most of California's grid, ended a Stage 1 alert. It was the first time since Jan. 13 that the state hadn't been under a power emergency, declared when low supplies threaten grid stability. The alerts included 32 straight days of Stage 3 emergencies, the black clouds that gather before rotating outages. The clouds cleared on a day when predicted peak use was low -- but not the lowest it has been for the last five weeks. Many power plants were back on line after repairs -- but more plants had been operating during at least one Stage 3 day. So what happened? A little luck, a little planning and maybe a little group psychology, said those who have closely watched recent gyrations of the state's electric roller coaster. ""It is a roll of the dice,"" said Gary Ackerman, head of the Western Power Trading Forum, which represents plant owners and marketers. ""If it continues for the next three or four weeks I wouldn't be too surprised. That'll be our respite. Enjoy it."" The end of a 40-day string of emergencies could mean a few more lights in store aisles or a little less worry about running an electric furnace. Some speculated it might also mean lower wholesale prices. But major changes are not likely in the steady rain of conservation calls that have fallen on Californians since the north state was twice plunged into rotating blackouts last month. ""I hope people don't just go back to wasteful ways,"" said Mike Florio of The Utility Reform Network, a consumer group. Now that the emergencies have dissipated, ""we don't have to talk about imposing hardships on people, but prudent use of energy is an idea we're going to have to live with for a long time,"" he said. At the ISO, longer days and slightly warmer weather was credited with decreasing peak demand for electricity. Supplies are up within the state, and power imports from the Pacific Northwest have risen significantly, said Jim Detmers, who manages grid operations. Plus, in one of the biggest changes, the state Department of Water Resources has begun getting more power supplies lined up at least a day in advance, he said. Since the department stepped in to buy power on behalf of cash-strapped utilities, it has often managed to line up about 70 percent to 75 percent of what the state needed to supplement utility-controlled supplies, according to Detmers. That meant grid operators had to scramble to buy the rest on very short notice. But starting last Friday, the state began to schedule about 90 percent of its purchases at least one day in advance. ""The operators are able to enter a day with a lot more confidence about being able to make it,"" Detmers said. ""You don't have to search to find those megawatts at the last minute."" Closely in sync with increased purchases by the state, the ISO dropped from a Stage 3 emergency to Stage 2 on Friday, and then slid to a Stage 1 Wednesday. The stages are based on how much reserve power is left for unexpected crises; a Stage 3 is declared when reserves slip below 1.5 percent. For their part, power buyers at the water resources department weren't sure what has made the difference over the past few days. ""It's certainly not that people are lining up to sell us power at cheap prices,"" said Jim Spence, the department's director of emergency operations. ""We're just buying whatever we can, and it turned out that it was easier to make ends meet."" He said he couldn't make any prediction about how long that would last. The string of power emergencies has been unpredictable from the start, erupting in winter, when California's hunger for electricity traditionally declines and supplies are usually so flush that plants close for tune-ups. Consumer advocates and power traders blamed finances for the emergencies, rather than a fundamental lack of supply, as fears of utility bankruptcies triggered a descent into market chaos and high-stakes political maneuvering. But basic supply shortages are expected to move to the forefront by summer, when temperatures rise and demand soars. Meanwhile, the brief respite -- whatever the reason -- brought palpable relief to those charged with keeping the power grid stable. ""When we found out yesterday during the board meeting that we were only in Stage 1, we broke out in applause,"" said Florio, who sits on the five-member ISO board. The change also could be good news for consumers, who may one day be paying higher rates for the wholesale electricity now being purchased by the state. ""Getting out of a Stage 3 typically means prices are going to ease,"" Florio said. ""When you're even in a Stage 1, that's a signal to everybody, 'They're short, that means we can hold them up now.' "" Davis' deadlines on energy much easier set than met By Emily Bazar Bee Staff Writer (Published Feb. 23, 2001) Exactly one week ago, Gov. Gray Davis sounded hopeful, optimistic even, when he predicted that the state and its debt-ridden utilities would forge an agreement by today on a plan to save the companies from financial doom. Problem is, it won't work out that way. Negotiations between state officials and the investor-owned utilities have produced no comprehensive agreement to announce today. Davis' predictions during the energy crisis have been wrong before. For weeks, he has set deadlines for agreements and legislative action that haven't been met. On deadline days, even when there's little substantive progress to report, Davis often holds news conferences anyway -- many of them on Friday afternoons after financial markets close. The Democratic governor's office scheduled an ""announcement"" for today in Los Angeles, even though one utility representative said agreement is far away. Davis' actions have fueled speculation that he's trying to force consensus by setting artificial deadlines and putting a spin on the news, and tarnishing the state's credibility in the process. ""I can't see how you would negotiate such a complex deal, like the purchase of the transmission grid, in such a short period of time. It doesn't seem realistic,"" said Gary Ackerman of the Western Power Trading Forum, an association of wholesale generators. ""I guess the people I represent have turned it off. They have stopped listening. They hear it and say, 'OK, sure. Here's another photo op.' "" Last Friday, Davis told a gathering of reporters that state officials and the utilities would agree by today on a rescue plan for the utilities. ""I believe we'll have agreement before next week is out, on exactly what should go in a piece of legislation,"" he said at the time. ""And hopefully, that legislation will be passed by the end of the following week."" Legislative veterans said his comments were ill-advised and unrealistic. Davis met into the night Thursday with top officials of Pacific Gas and Electric Co., but no agrement was reached. ""These are complicated problems that will not be solved overnight,"" said PG&E spokesman Ron Low. ""On some issues, we are very far away from agreement."" Sources said PG&E has been unwilling to negotiate sale of its transmission lines, which Davis has said is a necessary component of a deal. More progress was reported with the two other near-bankrupt companies -- San Diego Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison -- although sources said talks with them were far from concluded. Davis has been setting specific deadlines for himself and the Legislature for months: In November, the governor promised to present a comprehensive ""plan"" by Dec. 1 to stave off a full-blown energy crisis, but ended up offering only a modest slate of proposals. Davis called Feb. 12 a ""drop dead"" date by which he hoped to cement a deal between lawmakers and the utilities. There's no deal yet. Davis told reporters that he and the state's legislative leaders would reach a ""consensus agreement"" on the proposal to take to utilities by last Friday. It didn't happen; he made the announcement alone. Leon Panetta, a White House chief of staff under former President Clinton, said it's important that the governor set deadlines because the nature of politics is to delay. However, he cautioned against missing deadlines. ""You have to be careful that you keep the deadlines you establish, because the more that you establish and not meet, the more that begins to lose its value as a political tool,"" Panetta said. The governor can't continue to indefinitely set deadlines without facing consequences, cautioned Steven Fetter, managing director of the Global Power Group at Fitch, a credit-rating agency based in New York. At some point, he warned, creditors and power suppliers may push the utilities into involuntary bankruptcy, which would trigger an official deadline that can't be ignored. The dispute would be tied up in court at a judge's discretion. ""Eventually, there is going to be a real deadline,"" Fetter said. ""The problem is it's probably not a deadline that will be set by Gov. Davis. It's a deadline that will be set by the banks and the (electricity) suppliers."" In several cases when deadlines haven't been met, Davis has held a news conference regardless, unveiling little new information and scant detail. On Jan. 26, for instance, the governor promoted the broad framework of a plan to save the utilities rather than a detailed plan that had been anticipated. One prong of the plan: ""Aggressively promote energy efficiency, conservation and demand reduction among consumers, businesses and public entities."" Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio said that the governor continues to set deadlines because it's important to show that the state is making progress, particularly to Wall Street. He added that it's not the governor's fault the deadlines have been missed. ""Many of the dates have been blown away by factors no one has been able to foresee or have control over: court decisions, actions by creditors, weather, you name it,"" Maviglio said. ""The governor sets deadlines that continue to move the ball forward and he has been successful at doing that."" Many of these announcements came after 2 p.m. on Fridays, triggering suggestions that the governor has attempted to spin the facts and manipulate the markets. Timing announcements after the close of East Coast financial markets is commonly used by politicians who don't want to send stocks soaring or tumbling by making an announcement, Panetta said. ""You want people to evaluate what's happening so there isn't a panic reaction to a news flash going over the wire,"" he said. But market analysts say that ever since PG&E and Edison stocks plummeted in early January, the governor's statements haven't significantly affected their performance. ""There has been so much news that has been so negative for the companies that I don't think it makes much of a difference,"" said Ed Schuller, a senior vice president for the full-service brokerage firm Sutro & Co. ""It's beyond that point now."" GOP Sees Power Crisis as Davis' Achilles' Heel Republicans line up to run for governor Friday,?February 23, 2001 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle Democratic Gov. Gray Davis, politically wounded by the state's power woes, has become the target of a growing pack of Republicans looking to turn him out of office. ""Four months ago, Davis looked on track to get re-elected by a voice vote,"" said Dan Schnur, a GOP strategist. ""But the energy crisis has exposed vulnerabilities that have encouraged others to look at the (2002 governor's) race."" The governor's backers, however, are confident California voters will recognize Davis is dealing with a problem that has been brewing for years, through previous Republican administrations. ""If the Republicans want to have a full-out firefight over who brought this (energy crisis) down, we're ready for it,"" said Garry South, the governor's top political adviser. ""It's a fight they can't win."" With the primary election still more than a year away, no one but Davis is a sure bet to leap into the contest, but at least three names will be circulating when California Republicans meet in Sacramento this weekend for their state convention. Secretary of State Bill Jones, Los Angeles investor Bill Simon Jr. and actor Arnold Schwarzenegger all have made noises about challenging Davis, but so far their incipient campaigns have been more talk than action. Simon's effort might be the farthest along, but he also has the longest way to travel. A political unknown, the 49-year-old Simon runs his family's investment company and has been active in a number of charitable organizations in Southern California. Simon, whose father was treasury secretary under President Richard Nixon, has brought in veteran GOP consultant Sal Russo to study a possible run for governor. ""Bill Simon feels we need a governor who's prepared to lead and not one who's focused on fund-raising or the next political office,"" Russo said in a jab at Davis. Simon was an assistant U.S. attorney in New York, but founded William E. Simon & Sons with his brother and late father in 1988. The $2 billion private investment firm owns a number of companies and has also invested heavily in South of Market real estate in San Francisco. Wealthy political outsiders don't have an enviable record in recent California elections. Republican Michael Huffington spent $29 million to lose a 1994 Senate race to Dianne Feinstein. Darrell Issa dropped around $13 million in a losing race for the 1998 GOP Senate nomination. Al Checchi spent about $38 million of his own money to lose the Democratic primary to Davis in 1998. While Simon likely would be spending plenty of his own money on a governor's bid, he's working to get outside support, both political and financial, before committing to the race, Russo said. With the state's problems mounting and the economy increasingly shaky, the time may be ripe for a political unknown, he added. ""When things start going bad, people are willing to look outside for a new face, someone who will get things done,"" Russo said. Jones is anything but a political outsider. A veteran legislator from the Fresno area, he is now serving his second and last term as California's secretary of state. He managed to hang onto his job during the GOP's 1998 electoral debacle, which cost the party every other constitutional office. While Jones has long talked about a run for governor, he's still playing coy. ""We have not made any decision and probably won't make one until early March,"" said Rob Lapsley, one of Jones' top advisers. ""Right now we're putting together information for Bill to make a decision."" While Jones' role as the state's top GOP officeholder makes him an obvious choice to challenge Davis, he's made a number of political enemies over the years, many of them in his own party. His surprise decision last year to switch his support from George W. Bush to Arizona Sen. John McCain in California's presidential primary won him no fans among Bush supporters and could hurt his attempts to raise money for a gubernatorial bid. Money is a major problem for Jones, who listed $118,000 in his campaign fund last month, compared with nearly $26 million for Davis. Some of his opponents have suggested that fund-raising woes may force Jones to run for an office other than governor. ""Right now, we're focused on the governor's race,"" Lapsley insisted. The real Republican wild card is Schwarzenegger, the movie action hero who would be instantly recognized by nearly every California voter. While Schwarzenegger's publicist told The Chronicle last month that he had no plans to get involved in next year's governor's race, the Austrian-born star was on the telephone to a Los Angeles Times columnist days later, talking about his love for politics and his political ambitions. Fame, however, has its drawbacks, as the 53-year-old Schwarzenegger has found. An article in Premiere magazine entitled ""Arnold the Barbarian"" accused him of groping women on movie sets and generally boorish behavior, while the supermarket tabloids have him on the cover this week, suggesting that his marriage to Maria Shriver is on the rocks. South, Davis' political adviser, gleefully sent copies of the Premiere article to reporters across the state, suggesting that ""the piece lays out a real 'touching' story -- if you get what I mean."" Whoever ends up with the GOP nomination still will face an uphill battle against Davis, a popular governor and a ""take no prisoners"" campaigner. ""I've been predicting since Day One that the GOP would find some moneybags candidate to throw against Gray,"" South said. ""That's why we've kept our political and fund-raising operation going since election day."" Pressure Is on Utilities to Accept Grid Sale Energy: Gov. Davis wants accord today, but Edison executive says company might prefer bankruptcy. By DAN MORAIN and NANCY VOGEL, Times Staff Writers ?????SACRAMENTO--His credibility at risk and California's energy future on the line, Gov. Gray Davis on Thursday turned up the heat on the state's utilities to accept today a series of tentative rescue accords that would put the companies' transmission systems into public hands. ?????How far the utilities are willing to bend to the governor's intensified pressure was unclear late Thursday. Given Davis' mandate, a top executive of Southern California Edison said his company is now being forced to seriously contemplate whether it might fare better in Bankruptcy Court. ?????""We are weighing two very unpalatable alternatives,"" he said. ?????Two alternatives facing the utilities are either to sell their electrical transmission systems to the state at a price they consider too low or gamble in Bankruptcy Court that they could hang onto their valuable assets. ?????After nearly a week of negotiations, Davis administration officials said they hoped to announce today a partial deal that would calm the utilities' jittery creditors and help subdue California's runaway electricity market. ?????State officials said Thursday they were close to agreements with Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric but remained at odds with the state's biggest utility, Pacific Gas & Electric, which has balked at giving up its transmission grid. ?????""These are complex issues that cannot be resolved overnight,"" said PG&E spokesman Ron Lowe. ""There are clearly some areas where we are very far apart."" ?????On Thursday, Edison Chairman John Bryson conferred with members of his utility's board of directors. But by evening, the company's top executives still had not decided whether to acknowledge that an agreement is near. ?????Although the utility has begun to contemplate the protections of bankruptcy, it is unclear when, or if, such a dramatic action would occur. ?????Davis is believed to be offering roughly $7 billion for the utilities' transmission grids. The companies could use the cash to restructure their debt, which resulted from the utilities' inability to pass along their soaring wholesale electricity costs to ratepayers. ?????Davis has significant political and fiscal reasons for wanting to make an announcement today. He is scheduled to arrive in Washington for the National Governor's Assn. conference this weekend, meet with U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham on Sunday, and attend the Democratic Governors Assn. annual fund-raising dinner Monday night. ?????Davis, a prodigious fund-raiser, is chairman of the Democratic Governors Assn., and the dinner is expected to raise more than $5 million. Of that amount, Davis' political organization raised in excess of $1 million, said Garry South, his chief political advisor. ?????Any progress Davis can cite could help improve his national political standing. But his aides say it's especially important to be able to show at least a semblance of an agreement when he travels to New York on Wednesday to confer with Wall Street analysts. ?????On Thursday, those analysts reacted exuberantly to early hints from the governor's office that settlements with the utilities might be announced. ?????The recently anemic stocks of Edison International and PG&E Corp. soared on the New York Stock Exchange on a day when most utility stocks closed lower. ?????Edison jumped $1.50 per share, or 11.15%, to close at $14.95 while PG&E gained $1.49, or 11.41%, to $14.55 per share. ?????""That suggests that someone thinks something good is happening in Sacramento,"" said analyst James D. von Riesemann of Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co. ?????But some analysts fear investor enthusiasm might be hasty. ?????""I'm concerned that the governor's optimism may not coincide with all the parties at the table and it may not coincide with the Legislature,"" said Paul Patterson, utility analyst at Credit Suisse First Boston Corp. ?????Davis met Thursday with Steve Baum, chairman of Sempra, the parent company of SDG&E. Administration officials are confident that an agreement can be reached. But the San Diego company is the smallest of the state's three major private utilities, and its debt is far smaller--$605 million, compared to the combined $12.7 billion that Edison and PG&E say they have amassed. ?????""[Baum] is willing to listen,"" said Sempra spokesman Doug Kline. "" . . . We're on the record as stating that we are willing to consider the sale of those [transmission] assets if it helps solve the crisis."" ?????PG&E executives had been scheduled to start meeting with Davis at 11 a.m. Thursday. But in what was seen a slight against PG&E, Davis' aides did not summon negotiators for the Northern California utility, including company Chairman Robert Glynn, until after 3:30. ?????Although the parties continued to wrangle over details, there was progress Thursday on the sidelines. ?????State officials announced they had signed a long-term contract for a relatively small amount of electricity with a major energy supplier--an achievement that was perhaps more symbolic than substantive. ?????Tulsa-based Williams Cos. said it had agreed to a 10-year deal to sell power to the Department of Water Resources. By April, the company will provide at least 175 megawatts--enough electricity to supply 175,000 homes--at times of the day when demand for electricity soars. Such peak supplies will increase through next summer and reach 900 megawatts by 2006, according to Williams. ?????The agreement is only the second such long-term contract since Davis signed a bill Feb. 1 putting the Department of Water Resources into the power-buying business for many years to come. ?????At least 10 other power suppliers have reached understandings with the state, Davis said Wednesday. But those companies refuse to sign deals, the governor said, until the state finds a way to help California's two biggest utilities pay off their billion-dollar debts. ?????""As soon as we revitalize the utilities,"" the governor said, ""I think you'll see a lot of movement on long-term contracts."" ?????Another small but important piece of the state's energy plan emerged Thursday when legislation was introduced by Sen. Jim Battin (R-La Quinta) to slash the rates paid to alternative energy producers--a move expected to shave $3 billion or more in annual costs charged to the big private utilities. Reducing the amount paid to producers of renewable energy such as solar, wind and biomass power is considered a crucial step in keeping expected consumer rate hikes down. ?????And, after 40 days of dangerously low electricity supplies, the state got a reprieve Thursday morning when grid officials lifted the state's ""electrical emergency"" status for the first time since Jan. 13. ?????So far, the state has spent nearly $2 billion buying electricity on behalf of the utilities, according to the Department of Finance, which informed the Legislature on Thursday that it will release another $500 million for electricity purchases. --- ?????Times staff writers Nancy Rivera Brooks, Nancy Cleeland and Mitchell Landsberg in Los Angeles and Julie Tamaki and Jenifer Warren in Sacramento contributed to this story. Energy Firms Won't Pay All of Monster Debt PUC reverses, taxpayers could foot the bill Christian Berthelsen, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday,?February 23, 2001 Under a ruling yesterday by state regulators, California taxpayers could be on the hook for hundreds of millions of dollars in power purchases the state has made in behalf of two troubled utilities. The California Public Utilities Commission voted unanimously to absolve Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison of responsibility for any costs above the revenue they collect from ratepayers. The ruling reversed a position taken earlier by the commission, which had said the utilities were responsible for making up the difference between the state's costs and their own revenue. John Tremaine, a PG&E spokesman, said the funding needed to make up the difference could come in the form of a surcharge imposed on customers who use 130 percent of the baseline amount of electricity. That is one option under a bill passed last month by the Legislature, he said. But Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis, said the governor does not believe the money will come from ratepayers' electric bills. The costs, Maviglio said, could be covered by the $10 billion bond measure the state recently issued to cover power purchases. As California tries to resolve its power crisis, state officials are working out the precise way that should be done. Under the state's deregulation plan approved in 1996, the utilities have been forced to absorb skyrocketing wholesale electricity costs while being prevented by law from passing the increases on to customers through higher rates. Since the California Department of Water Resources began buying power last month, details showing how it will be repaid, how much or by whom have not been established. Yesterday's PUC decision was an attempt to begin setting the repayment criteria. A precise accounting of how much money is at stake is impossible to determine at this point, officials said, because PG&E declines to release ratepayer revenue figures, and the state is refusing to say exactly how much it has spent buying power. Officials estimate the state will spend $2.3 billion by the beginning of March and Davis authorized the expenditure of $500 million more yesterday. The state's Department of Water Resources became the buyer of record on Jan. 17 when the two utilities' credit was so damaged that they were no longer able to buy power. Both utilities had opposed the commission's previous position that they be responsible for all power costs. The PUC's shift yesterday was summed up by Commissioner Richard Bilas, who said he could not support holding the utilities responsible for the revenue shortfall. ""The DWR is not about to go bankrupt; the utilities are,"" he said. Yet consumer advocates downplayed the commission's ruling yesterday. Nettie Hoge, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, said the ruling only dealt with the narrow issue of who has to account for the revenue shortfall, and did not reach an overarching decision about who, ultimately, will be financially responsible for it. ""This is not a huge deal,"" she said. The state has been buying the lion's share of its power in the real-time market run by the Independent System Operator since the demise of the longer- term California Power Exchange, said Jesus Arredondo, a spokesman for the exchange. The state has been paying premium prices because it is buying in a market that was designed to handle last-minute emergencies. The governor's office has been seeking cheaper, long-term power contracts with only modest results. Small electric producers OK big price cut By Ed Mendel STAFF WRITER February 23, 2001 SACRAMENTO -- Legislators said yesterday that small generators who produce about 30 percent of the state's power have agreed to cut their power prices in half, an important step toward easing the electricity crisis. Negotiations continued on what Gov. Gray Davis has called the final step: the state purchase of the transmission systems of the three investor-owned utilities in exchange for paying off their huge debt. Meanwhile, the amount that the state is spending to buy power for the customers of the utilities grows. Officials gave notice that an additional $500 million will be needed in 10 days, bringing the total to $2.6 billion. But for the first time in nearly six weeks the state did not declare an alert yesterday due to power shortages. More power was available from other states, and some power plants that had been shut down for maintenance resumed operation. Two legislators, Sen. Jim Battin, R-Palm Desert, and Assemblyman Fred Keeley, D-Boulder Creek, said they introduced legislation that sharply reduces the prices paid to small generators after weeks of difficult negotiations. ""Ultimately, this bill will reduce the cost of energy to the state and its ratepayers by billions of dollars,"" said Battin, who represents eastern San Diego County. About half of the small generators use ""renewable"" technologies such as solar, wind, geothermal and biomass. The rest is ""co-generation,"" when fuel is used for industrial purposes and electricity is generated as a by-product. The small generators have grown to produce nearly a third of California's power under a two-decade-old federal ""qualifying facilities"" program, which requires utilities to buy their power. Battin and Keeley said that under the bill, SB 47X, the average price for these QF contracts could drop from the current 17 cents per kilowatt-hour to about 8 to 8.5 cents per kilowatt-hour. ""We believe that the rates are at least that low, if not lower,"" said Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of the Independent Energy Producers, which represents small and large generators. The small generators support the bill because it will give them a stable price for five years, avoiding ups and downs and the possibility that state regulators might make a more unfavorable price cut. Much of the current price formula is based on the price of natural gas at the California border, which has soared this winter. The legislation spreads the price bench mark over a five-year period. ""We encourage the Legislature to take quick action to approve SB 47X as quickly as possible to help stabilize the electricity crisis,"" Smutny-Jones said. He said one of the side agreements to the legislation is the creation of a portfolio of long-term contracts to purchase natural gas for some co-generators, lowering their production costs. The legislation was applauded as ""a major step forward"" by a group of small generators who formed a creditors committee last week and threatened to take the utilities into bankruptcy. ""We call on the Legislature and the governor to act on it immediately,"" said Chris Thompson, a spokesman for the group. Thompson said Southern California Edison continues to collect money from ratepayers, as the state buys power for its customers, but is not paying anything to the small non-polluting generators. A spokesman for a geothermal generator in El Centro, which filed a lawsuit seeking $45 million from Edison for power provided since November, welcomed the legislation for giving generators stability and ratepayers cheaper power. But Vince Signorotti, a spokesman for CalEnergy, said it would be ""premature"" to consider dropping the lawsuit. Battin and Keeley said that payment of the small generators depends on the governor's attempt to negotiate the purchase of the transmission systems of Edison, Pacific Gas and Electric, and San Diego Gas and Electric in exchange for payment of their debt. As part of the governor's plan, the utilities would agree to provide low-cost power for five to 10 years from their generators, which provide about a third of the state's power. Davis aides are attempting to negotiate long-term contracts with generators for the remaining third of the power required by the state, sharply reducing the cost of buying power on the expensive spot market. But the governor said this week that many generators are reluctant to sign long-term contracts until they know how the utilities will pay their debt for previous power purchases. The state called off all power alerts yesterday for the first time since mid-January, rescinding a Stage 1 alert declared Wednesday. Grid operators made the change after increased power supplies became available. ""The supply situation this week has gradually been improving,"" said Lorie O'Donley, a spokeswoman with the California Independent System Operator, which manages most of the state's power supplies. However, she said the improvements shouldn't deter consumers from conservation. ""It is good news to be out of electrical emergencies but we just want to remind everybody that we are looking at a long-term power supply situation here,"" she said. ""And the high-demand summer is just around the corner. So we would ask that people continue with their conservation efforts."" In San Francisco yesterday, state power regulators decided unanimously that the Department of Water Resources is responsible for buying any power that cash-strapped utilities are unable to generate or buy on their own -- no matter what price wholesalers are charging. But the PUC voted 3-2 against taking action that would have allowed the DWR to receive a portion of ratepayer revenues from the utilities to help cover the cost of buying electricity. The state, through the DWR, was authorized by a recent law to buy power for the utilities. Edison and PG&E have such low credit ratings that no power companies will sell to them. SDG&E's rating is much better, but its debt also was mounting. The DWR purchases that portion of electricity beyond what the utilities provide through their own generating plants and through existing long-term contracts. But the DWR has refused to buy power beyond a certain price. That means more last-minute power purchases on the expensive spot market. The utilities and the state had disagreed over how the DWR will be reimbursed -- whether through state bonds or ratepayer dollars -- and the extent of its power-buying role. The author of the bill authorizing the long-term contracts, Assemblyman Keeley, said the legislation's intent was to fully cover the one-third of the power that utilities purchased on the spot market, either through extended contracts or through the state ISO. Staff writer Karen Kucher and The Associated Press contributed to this report. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: 18/7 - 7:00 p.m. - Update: Emergency; [EMail-Body]= fyi ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/19/2001=20 08:37 AM --------------------------- From: Michael Terraso/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/18/2001 07:17 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: =20 Subject: FW: 18/7 - 7:00 p.m. - Update: Emergency Steve, fyi Mike Terraso -----Original Message-----=20 From: Hawkins, Don=20 Sent: Wed 7/18/2001 5:29 PM=20 To: Lowry, Phil; Terraso, Michael=20 Cc:=20 Subject: FW: 18/7 - 7:00 p.m. - Update: Emergency FYI,=20 Don=20 =01;-----Original Message-----=20 From: =01; Steve [=20 =01;=20 On Behalf Of Steve Hopper/TRANSREDES@ENRON Sent:=01;=01; Wednesday, July 18, 2001 4:24 PM=20 To:=01;=01;=01;=01; Hopper, Steve=20 Cc:=01;=01;=01;=01; nick.tombs@shell.com.br; r; Weidler,=20 Peter E; Henshaw, Tony; Gonzalez, Fernando; Farmer, Doug; Berg, Jan van den= ;=20 Naphan, John; Vega, John; Callau, Juan; Hawkins, Don; Khan, Nasim; Powell,= =20 Laine; NLIMBREI@shell.com.br; Re: 18/7 - 7:00 p.m. - Update: Emergen= cy=20 We have completed the inspection of the GAA line to LaPaz, and everything= =20 looks OK.=01; We'll reinitiate gas flow tonight.=01; OSSA II should be comp= leted=20 tomorrow.=01; Army personnel continues to be patrolling the area, but thing= s=20 remain pretty calm, despite several areas in the country that are under=20 roadblock by protesters. I'm going to keep things in emergency status until at least tomorrow, afte= r=20 today's roadblocks are lifted.=01; Will advise of any developments. Steve=20 Steve Hopper=20 07/17/2001 07:02 PM=20 =20 To:=01;=01;=01;=01; nick.tombs@shell.com.br, r, Peter E=20 Weidler/Enron@EnronXGate=20 cc:=01;=01;=01;=01; Tony Fernando=20 Doug Farmer/TRANSREDES@TRANSREDES, Jan van= =20 den Berg/TRANSREDES@TRANSREDES, John Naphan/TRANSREDES@TRANSREDES, John=20 Vega/TRANSREDES@TRANSREDES, Juan Callau/TRANSREDES@TRANSREDES, Don=20 Hawkins/Enron@EnronXGate, Nasim H Khan/TRANSREDES@TRANSREDES, Laine A=20 17/7 - 7:00 p.m. - Update: Emergency= =20 The situation continues to be stable.=01; CLHB has reinitated LPG operatio= ns to=20 LaPaz, but continue their inspection.=01; TR will not reinitiate gas or cru= de=20 export operations until we have completed our inspection.=01; We have forme= d=20 joint teams with CLHB and Army personnel to perform the inspection.=01; It = could=20 take as long as 48 hours, but we'll have a better estimate after we get a= =20 progress report in the morning.=01;=01; All crews available systemwide are= =20 mobilizing for inspection of the entire system, but for now our priority=20 continues to be the lines in the altiplano.=01; The three stations in the= =20 altiplano have been shut down, bled off, and locked.=01; Other supervisors= =20 throughout the system have been advised and are on alert. Government and regulator continue to be supportive of our shut-down and=20 inspection action plan.=01; We have developed a contingency plan with COBEE= (the=20 regional electricity distributor) under which they will redistribute energy= =20 out of spare capacity in Cochabamba to LaPaz=01; - this should cover LaPaz'= s=20 electricity needs during the duration of time we need to complete our=20 inspection.=01; The only other significant consumer is a large cement plant= in=20 LaPaz.=01; We've agreed that they will slow down their operations, and prov= ide=20 only small, local supplies (industrial concrete demand will be shut-in). We did not send a press release on the issue, although we have received=20 inquiries - our response is that we are concerned about the risk to Bolivia= ns=20 this action presented, and we are performing an inspection on the system.= =01; We=20 are avoiding mention of gas stoppage to LaPaz at this time, due to the=20 volatility of the issue in LaPaz.=01; Government (VMEH, SIRESE) has agreed = with=20 the message. We expect that with the cement plant and power plant off-line, line pack= =20 should be sufficient to keep commercial demand satisfied for a few days.=01= ; In=20 either event, we are working with the local gas distributor to prepare a=20 notice for LaPaz newspapers instructing gas consumers in the area how to=20 safely shut-down and restart their equipment in the event that it becomes= =20 necessary. The most likely scenario as of now is that Edwin Morales - a local=20 revolutionary tied to the coca trade - is behind the action.=01; Morales ha= s had=20 contact in the past with the Raul Rocha bunch out of Chuquina (Oruro), so= =20 we're still not sure whether this was an act against TR and/or the industry= ,=20 or if it is against government.=01; Morales has just joined forces with ano= ther=20 rebel out of Cochabamba and is planning nationwide road blocks for tomorrow= .=01;=20 Their agenda is national - they've never isolated TR or our industry as a= =20 whole, although Chaco in the north have been targeted in the past, probably= =20 because they have a field in the middle of Morales' stronghold.=01; The=20 political situation here is tenuous with Banzer out and various political= =20 interests looking to fill the leadership void.=01; We're watching this situ= ation=20 closely.=01; The local Army brigade has committed to staying on vigilance f= or at=20 least the next few days - once we're comfortable with the operational=20 situation, we'll discuss a longer-term solution. Steve=20 ---------------------- Forwarded by Steve Hopper/TRANSREDES on 07/17/2001= =20 06:37 PM Steve Hopper=20 07/17/2001 03:53 PM=20 =20 To:=01;=01;=01;=01; nick.tombs@shell.com.br, r, Peter E=20 Weidler/Enron@EnronXGate=20 cc:=01;=01;=01;=01;=01;=20 Emergency=20 =01;=01;=01;=01;=01;=01;=01; =01;=01;=01;=01;=01;=01;=01; At 1:45 p.m. today, a CLHB line walker discovered a bomb on their LPG line= =20 in the Altiplano 14 km from out SicaSica station.=01; Our OSSA II (crude ex= ports=20 to Chile) and GAA (gas to LaPaz) share the same ROW, and would likely have= =20 been taken out with the bomb.=01; We understand that the bomb, which had a= =20 manual fuse, did not go off, but had been lit and failed to explode.=01; Th= e=20 Army has been mobilized to diffuse the bomb, and we consider the immediate= =20 threat neutralized. However, given that we have now seen several attempts in the last 10 days = of=20 sabotage against our lines, I have declared a state of EMERGENCY, and will= =20 notify the Enron Crisis team. We have shut all Altiplano pipeline operations down, and have mobilized a= =20 joint CLHB/TR/Army team to perform vigilance on the entire altiplano=20 network.=01; The immediate result of this is that lights will likely start = to go=20 out in LaPaz within the next few hours - the GAA line is their primary powe= r=20 fuel supply.=01; I've notified all relevant government authorities of the= =20 situation, and so far am getting support.=01; I've also asked the Embassy t= o=20 look into the situation, with the understanding that if this is the result = of=20 an organized movement, they might have access to intelligence that could be= =20 helpful. Additionally, we've shut down all non-critical maintenance operations=20 throughtout the rest of the system, and are directing spare personnel to=20 perform vigilance on the remainder of the system as quickly as possible.=01= ;=20 Until and unless we have information that this threat goes beyond the=20 altiplano, we will continue operations, with all stations on alert.=01; We = will=20 kick off the the total system inspection within the next few hours, as soon= =20 as our people complete the overall plan. I will keep you posted as things develop.=20 Steve=20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Argentina FX and CPI curves, dated 6/20/01; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: =09Koepke, Gwyn =20 Sent:=09Tuesday, June 26, 2001 12:32 AM To:=09Kaminski, Vince J Subject:=09FW: Argentina FX and CPI curves, dated 6/20/01 Vince, FYI. We will provide updates to the Argentine situation in the GMM, on whi= ch RAC is copied each week. Also, we wrote the attached report for our int= ernal purposes along with the forecast below. =20 Gwyn =20 -----Original Message----- From: =09Koepke, Gwyn =20 Sent:=09Wednesday, June 20, 2001 7:45 PM To:=09Hudler, Cindy; Shahi, Pushkar; Stuart III, William; Mujica, Mitra; Ra= ymond, Maureen Subject:=09Argentina FX and CPI curves, dated 6/20/01 Cindy, Please find attached the Argentine peso and CPI forecast. It should be noted that a vote is pending in the Argentine Congress (had be= en expected today) to adjust the convertibility law in Argentina to allow a= basket of euros and U.S. dollars in equal weights (once parity is reached = for euro-dollar) that would replace the existing one-for-one peso to US dol= lar currency board. The economy ministry took a first step toward this new= basket regime by introducing this week a dual-exchange rate system for the= traded sector that allows Argentine exporters to benefit from the weaker e= uro by receiving export earnings in line with a mixed basket of 50% euros a= nd 50% US dollars. At today's spot rates, this implies an 8% depreciation = of the peso vis-a-vis the basket. An 8% devaluation at this juncture does = not gain the kind of competitiveness needed by Argentine exporters to help = boost economy when a major trading partner, Brazil, has depreciated 21% vis= -a-vis the USD since the beginning of this year. Initial reports indicate = that consumer and corporate borrowers, however, would still pay debt servic= e at the dollar peg exchange rate (one-for-one). =20 With such a change in currency regime as being contemplated in the Argentin= e Congress, investor confidence could wane if the plan is approved and as t= he implications of the new plan are interpreted by the market and as the su= stainability of the existing currency board arrangement outside the export = sector is analyzed. A loss of investor confidence will put additional pres= sure on the peso, pressure which has not existed previous to this new annou= ncement by economy chief Cavallo, especially now that the government's debt= swap (exchanging short-term goverment paper for longer-term bonds) has bee= n successfully executed. As a consequence, although our forecast attached = below assumes a one-for-one peso peg to the US dollar at this point to allo= w the quarterly revaluations to be completed in a timely fashion, this curv= e is subject to change upon knowledge of the Congressional vote and an anal= ysis of the details announced with the vote as to the mechanics of this new= basket regime for exporters and for the economy as a whole. Gwyn Koepke and Maureen Raymond-Castaneda =20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Confidential -- Comments on draft petition from UC attorney; [EMail-Body]= Here are comments I've received. Thought I would pass them along -----Original Message----- From: Dian M. Grueneich Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 2:05 PM To: Sue Mara Subject: Confidential Sue: Attached is a note regarding the draft you sent me re potential litigation over the CPUC Direct Access suspension. Feel free to share it with the attorneys preparing the filings. If you or anyone has any questions, just let me know. (I've also attached the UC/CSU Aug. 31 comments so you can cite them in paragraph 15 of the Petition, if you wish.) I am having a conference call tomorrow (Tuesday) with the UC/CSU legal team on energy issues and I've added the litigation as an agenda item. I'll give you a status update tomorrow afternoon. Dian Grueneich Grueneich Resource Advocates tel: (415) 834-2300 fax: (415) 834-2310 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Board of Directors Meeting - August 14, 2001; [EMail-Body]= calendar and meeting file ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/18/2001 07:32 AM --------------------------- From: Kelly Johnson/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/16/2001 03:22 PM To: Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Raymond Bowen/ENRON@enronXgate, Michael Brown/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Rick Buy/ENRON@enronXgate, Richard Causey/ENRON@enronXgate, Wade David Cox/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, James Derrick/ENRON@enronXgate, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES, Steve Elliott/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Jim Fallon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Andrew S Fastow/ENRON@enronXgate, Mark Frevert/ENRON@enronXgate, Ben Glisan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kevin Hannon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Rod Hayslett/ENRON@enronXgate, Stanley Horton/ENRON@enronXgate, James A Hughes/ENRON@enronXgate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Louise Kitchen/ENRON@enronXgate, Mark Koenig/ENRON@enronXgate, John J Lavorato/ENRON@enronXgate, Kenneth Lay/ENRON@enronXgate, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Danny McCarty/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Mike Mcconnell/ENRON@enronXgate, Rebecca McDonald/ENRON@enronXgate, Jeffrey McMahon/ENRON@enronXgate, Mark Metts/Enron@EnronXGate, Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Cindy Olson/ENRON@enronXgate, Lou L Pai/HOU/EES@EES, Mark Pickering/Enron@EUEnronXgate, Greg Piper/ENRON@enronXgate, Ken Rice/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Matthew Scrimshaw/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Jeffrey A Shankman/ENRON@enronXgate, Jeffrey Sherrick/ENRON@enronXgate, John Sherriff/ENRON@EUEnronXGate, Jeff Skilling/ENRON@enronXgate, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Greg Whalley/ENRON@enronXgate cc: Jennifer Adams/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Beverly Aden/HOU/EES@EES, Julie Armstrong/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Connie Blackwood/ENRON@enronXgate, Vivianna Bolen/ENRON@enronXgate, Loretta Brelsford/ENRON@enronXgate, Jennifer Burns/ENRON@enronXgate, Alan Butler/EU/Enron@Enron, Kathy Campos/ENRON@enronXgate, Kay Chapman/HOU/EES@EES, Inez Dauterive/HOU/ECT@ECT, Binky Davidson/HOU/EES@EES, Nicki Daw/ENRON@enronXgate, Sharon Dick/HOU/EES@EES, Kathy Dodgen/HOU/EES@EES, Kerry Ferrari/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Dolores Fisher/Enron@EnronXGate, Rosalee Fleming/ENRON@enronXgate, Sue Ford/ENRON@enronXgate, Mrudula Stephanie Harris/ENRON@enronXgate, Linda Hawkins/ENRON@enronXgate, Kimberly Hillis/ENRON@enronXgate, Mary Joyce/ENRON@enronXgate, Samantha Lopez-Dias/EU/Enron@Enron, Bridget Maronge/ENRON@enronXgate, Lucy Marshall/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Stephanie Mcginnis/ENRON@enronXgate, Kathy McMahon/ENRON@enronXgate, Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Owens/HOU/EES@EES, Jana L Paxton/ENRON@enronXgate, Cathy Phillips/ENRON@enronXgate, ""Rijo, Leah"" Marsha Schiller/ENRON@enronXgate, Tammie Schoppe/ENRON@enronXgate, Sherri Sera/ENRON@enronXgate, Caron Stark/ENRON@enronXgate, Sharon E Sullo/ENRON@enronXgate, Liz M Taylor/ENRON@enronXgate, Lauren Urquhart/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Christina Valdez/ENRON@enronXgate, Veronica Valdez/ENRON@enronXgate, Terry West/ENRON@enronXgate, Sharron Westbrook/ENRON@enronXgate, Joannie Williamson/ENRON@enronXgate, Teresa Wright/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: Board of Directors Meeting - August 14, 2001 Kelly M. Johnson Enron Corp. Executive Assistant Tel: (713) 853-6485 Fax: (713) 853-2534 E-Mail: kelly.johnson@enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: EBS Article for eBiz; [EMail-Body]= See attached From: Karen Denne/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/12/2001 08:33 PM To: Jim Fallon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Ken Rice/Enron Communications@Enron Communications cc: Mark Palmer/ENRON@enronXgate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Kelly Kimberly/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Subject: EBS Article for eBiz Jim and Ken -- Attached is an article for eBiz (our biweekly online newsletter), which we are scheduled to launch at 7:30 a.m. Friday. Kelly Kimberly has reviewed it, but has asked that you view the article as well. Since only EBS employees received your memo about the restructuring -- and the rest of the employees did not receive any communication -- it is extremely important to provide information through this vehicle. Please let me know of your approval or if you have any questions. Thank you. Karen x39757 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: washington contacts; [EMail-Body]= I talked with Scott Tholan and he immediately understood your concerns. I don't think there is anything else you need to do right now. Let me know, though, if there are requests for information you consider inappropriate. From: Cynthia Sandherr 09/14/2000 11:53 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Chris Long/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: washington contacts Steve: As discussed, I spoke with Clay and raised the points we discussed. Thus, I'm a bit surprised to receive this ""cover"" type memo. To be clear with you, as I was with Clay (he repeated back my message verbatim so I feel he understood the issue), the issue is not maintaining excellent relationships, rather the issue is inappropriate requests for insider information. By the way, the Administration meeting which set off the problem, Clay stated he doesn't remember where that information came from. I have followed up with DOE and the Hill as discussed. Please let me know if we need to do anything further. thanks. ---------------------- Forwarded by Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron on 09/14/2000 12:57 PM --------------------------- Clayton Seigle@ECT 09/14/2000 11:41 AM To: Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Scott Tholan/Corp/Enron@Enron, Robert Johnston/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: washington contacts Dear Cynthia: Just wanted to follow up with you from our conversation this morning. Our office completely understands that maintaining excellent relations with your government contacts is the highest priority. We therefore understand the need to cease inquiries on current issues. We would never suggest taking any actions that could even be construed as improper, and we are continuously ensuring that our own work adheres to this principle. We regret any difficulties that have arisen as a result of your making inquiries on our behalf. We will ensure that similar problems do not arise in any future cooperative efforts between our offices. Thanks again for your assistance. Best regards, Clay Seigle Enron North America [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: From Michael L. Kirby, Esq.; [EMail-Body]= Bonnie: Please forward to Michael Kirby. I think the draft looks good. Could you also prepare a draft of the letter we discussed yesterday to convey the proposal to the committee? ""Bonnie Hugyez"" <blh@pkns.com> on 07/17/2001 12:34:20 AM To: <mmolland@brobeck.com>, <mark.e.haedicke@enron.com>, <skean@enron.com>, <breasoner@gibbs-bruns.com>, <mtuohey@velaw.com> cc: Subject: From Michael L. Kirby, Esq. Attached is a draft Nonwaiver Agreement per our telephone conferences of yesterday after the meetings with Senator Dunn. I am available in my office for a conference call to discuss this. The information contained in this e-mail message and any accompanying documents is subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or the attorney work product rule and is confidential business information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or representative of the recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify Kathryn A. Pugh at kpugh@pkns.com and immediately delete this message from your system. - 289271_1.WPD [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= HR Functional - Mid-Year 2001 PRC; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/17/2001 04:08 PM --------------------------- Andrea Yowman 04/16/2001 08:37 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: HR Functional - Mid-Year 2001 PRC ---------------------- Forwarded by Andrea Yowman/Corp/Enron on 04/16/2001 08:37 PM --------------------------- Andrea Yowman 04/16/2001 08:33 PM To: Kalen Pieper/HOU/EES@EES, Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES, David Oxley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Drew C Lynch/LON/ECT@ECT, Robert Jones/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Marla Barnard/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Gary P Smith/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Andrea Yowman/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sarah A Davis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cynthia Barrow/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Elyse Kalmans/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Suzanne Brown/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brad Coleman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Melissa Becker/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Joyce/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON, steve kean cc: Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kriste Sullivan/Enron@EnronXGate, Sharon Butcher/Enron@EnronXGate, Hilda Kathy McMahon/NA/Enron@Enron, Jo Ann Matson/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: HR Functional - Mid-Year 2001 PRC As we prepare for the Mid-Year PRC process, please reserve Tuesday June 5, 2001(all day) on your calendar for the HR Functional PRC meeting. Since we will review exempt level employees only, please extend this information to those employees who will be representing others. In preparing for the logistics of the meeting, please let me know if you will conference in. All efforts will be made to secure video conferencing. Details are forthcoming. Please give me a call at 31477 should you have questions. Thanks. ay [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Dow Jones: Enron, Bush's Biggest Contributor; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/27/2000 05:26 PM ----- Cindy Derecskey 09/25/2000 10:25 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Dow Jones: Enron, Bush's Biggest Contributor ----- Forwarded by Cindy Derecskey/Corp/Enron on 09/25/2000 10:23 AM ----- Andrew Morrison@ECT 09/25/2000 09:38 AM To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT@ECT, Cindy Derecskey/Corp/Enron@Enron Subject: Dow Jones: critical article re Enron Mark This came up on the wire over the week-end - apparently it is based on a previously released story, so you may have already seen it. You are quoted mid-way through re Houston emissions. Tx Andrew Meet Enron, Bush's biggest contributor Pratap Chatterjee 09/01/2000 The Progressive 23 Copyright (c) 2000 Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. Copyright Progressive Incorporated Sep 2000 Early last October, members of the ninth grade girls' track team and the boys' football team at suburban Houston's Deer Park High School's north campus returned from practice reporting severe breathing problems. That day, Deer Park registered 251 parts of ozone per billion, more than twice the federal standard, and Houston surpassed Los Angeles as the smoggiest city in the United States. One of the biggest contributors to Deer Park's pollution is a plant owned by Enron, Houston's wealthiest company. Enron and its executives are also the single largest contributors ($550,000 and counting) to the political ambitions of Texas Governor George W Bush, Republican candidate for President of the United States. Kenneth Lay, the chief executive of Enron, has personally given at least $250,000 in soft money to Bush's political campaigns. He is also one of the ""Pioneers""-a Bush supporter who has collected $100,000 in direct contributions of $1,000 or less. What is Enron? And what does it get in return for this largesse? Enron is the largest buyer and seller of natural gas in the country. Its 1999 revenues of $40 billion make it the eighteenth largest company in the United States. Enron invests in energy projects in countries around the world, including Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Mozambique, and the Philippines. The company has recently expanded onto the Internet, buying and selling a dizzying array of products ranging from pulp and paper to petrochemicals and plastics, as well as esoteric products like clean air credits that utilities purchase to meet emission limits. Texas activists say that the tight connection between Bush and Lay bodes ill if Bush is elected. Andrew Wheat, from Texans for Public Justice, a campaign finance advocacy group in Austin, compares the symbiotic relationship between Enron and the governor to ""cogeneration""-a process used by utilities to harness waste heat vented by their generators to produce more power. ""In a more sinister form of cogeneration, corporations are converting economic into political power,"" he says. ""A Bush election fueled by Enron dollars could ignite in the public policy arena, and consumers would get burned."" And so may people in the Third World. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have both criticized Enron for colluding with police who brutally suppressed protests at the company's giant power plant in western India. The plant's operating firm is called the Dabhol Power Company. From 1992 to 1998, Enron owned 80 percent of it, with General Electric and Bechtel each holding a 10 percent share. (In 1998, the Indian state electricity board bought a 30 percent share of the company, which reduced Enron's stake to 50 percent.) For years, the plant has been the site of many nonviolent protests. ""The project has met with opposition from local people and activists from elsewhere in India on the grounds of its social, economic, and environmental impact,"" Amnesty wrote in a July 1997 report. ""Protesters and activists have been subjected to harassment, arbitrary arrest, preventive detention under the ordinary criminal law, and ill treatment. Amnesty International considers those who have been subjected to arrest and temporary periods of imprisonment as a result of undertaking peaceful protest to be prisoners of conscience, imprisoned solely for exercising their right to freedom of expression."" Amnesty's report found that ""women, who have been at the forefront of local agitation, appear to have been a particular target."" Just before dawn on June 3, 1997, police stormed the homes of several women. ""The policemen forcibly opened the door and dragged me out of the house into the police van parked on the road. (While dragging me) the police kept beating me on my back with batons. The humiliation meted out to the other members of my family was similar to the way I was humiliated. . . . My one-and-a-half year-old daughter held on to me but the police kicked her away,"" says Sugandha Vasudev Bhalekar-a twenty-four-year-old housewife who was three months pregnant at the time of her arrest, according to Amnesty's report. Amnesty found that another pregnant woman was beaten and several other women sustained injuries, including bruising, abrasions, and lacerations on arms and legs. Amnesty said the police involved in suppressing protests included ""the Special Reserve Police [SRP] on the site of the company."" It added: ""The involvement of the SRP in the harassment of protesters indicates the need for the three U.S. multinationals participating in the joint venture to take steps to ensure that all the management and staff of the DPC [Dabhol Power Company)-in particular, any security staff subcontracted to, seconded to, or employed by the company-are trained in human rights and are fully accountable for their actions. A January 1999 investigation by Human Rights Watch came to a stronger conclusion. ""Human Rights Watch believes that the Dabhol Power Corporation and its parent company Enron are complicit in these human rights violations,"" it said. ""The company, under provisions of law, paid the abusive state forces for the security they provided to the company. These forces, located adjacent to the project site, were only stationed there to deal with protests. In addition, contractors (for DPC) engaged in a pattern of harassment, intimidation, and attacks on individuals opposed to the Dabhol Power project. . . . The Dabhol Power Corporation refused to acknowledge that its contractors were responsible for criminal acts and did not adequately investigate, condemn, or cease relationships with these individuals."" Enron denies any wrongdoing. ""While we respect the mission of Human Rights Watch, we do not feel that its report on the Dabhol Power project is accurate,"" says an Enron spokesperson. ""The report refers to peaceful protests, when, in fact, the reason the police were positioned near our site is that there have been many acts of violence against our employees and contractors. Dabhol Power Company has worked hard to promote positive relations with the community. Unfortunately, the good relationship we have built with a large percentage of the community was not reflected in the report. Enron is committed to providing energy and communications services while preserving the human rights of citizens and our workers."" Enron has also raised a stink in Bolivia with its involvement in the Cuiaba Integrated Energy Project. The project is run by Transredes, Bolivia's hydrocarbon transport company, which came into being in 1997 after Bolivia privatized its oil sector under the influence of the World Bank. A joint venture of Enron and Shell owns 50 percent of Transredes. On January 31, 2000, a Transredes oil pipeline erupted and dumped an estimated 10,000 barrels of refined crude oil and gasoline into the Desaguadero River, which supports indigenous communities such as the Uru Muratos. ""This problem is Transredes's number one priority, and we are committed to continue to work hard to mitigate the short- and long-term social and environmental impact,"" wrote Steve Hopper, president of Transredes, in a letter addressed ""To the People of Bolivia"" on February 7. Facing starvation from the Loss of their life-sustaining waterfowl and fish, the Uru Muratos left their ancestral lands at the southern shores of Lake Poopo in April and marched eighty-five miles to the city of Oruro to ask for government help. ""We subsequently reached an agreement with them to provide certain levels of relief and assistance,"" says Keith Miceli, general manager for public relations for Enron, South America. In its actions overseas, Enron has made a practice of taking advantage of corporate welfare. And it has enlisted George W Bush in this effort. For example, in March 1997, Lay wrote a letter to Bush that was subsequently released to the press under Texas open records laws, asking him to contact every member of the Texas delegation in Congress to explain how ""export credit agencies of the United States are critical to U.S. developers like Enron, who are pursuing international projects in developing countries."" These agencies include the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), which provides political risk coverage and financial support to U.S. companies investing abroad. ""OPIC provided financing or insurance coverage worth almost $300 million for Enron's foreign projects just last year, according to government records,"" The New York Times reported. ""Enron officials have in the past asked Mr. Bush to help lobby lawmakers to appropriate funds of OPIC, as well as for the Export-Import Bank, another federal agency that aids American companies abroad."" Enron received $200 million in political risk insurance for the Dabhol project in 1996. And it received $200 million in insurance from OPIC in 1999 for its Bolivian project. The Enron Methanol plant in Pasadena, Texas, lies in the Houston Ship Channel area, the nation's largest concentration of petrochemical plants just east of the city. The plant has won special concessions from Governor Bush, allowing the company to pollute without a permit, as well as giving it immunity from prosecution for violating some environmental standards. Plants like this in Texas cumulatively emit twice as much nitrogen oxide, a key ingredient of smog, as do all the nine million cars in Texas put together. Only 7 percent of the more than 3,500 tons of nitrogen oxide emitted by the Enron Methanol plant in 1997 would have been permitted had Enron not gotten away with this under the ""grandfather clause"" of the 1971 Texas Clean Air Act, which allows plants built before 1971 to continue their polluting practices. Bush extended this clause under the 1999 Clean Air Responsibility Enterprise (CARE) program that his office drew up in a series of secret meetings with representatives of the top polluters in the state, as Molly Ivins reported. CARE waives permit requirements for plants that volunteer to cut emissions. The CARE program is backed up by an act that Bush signed in May 1995 giving sweeping protections to polluters that perform internal environmental or safety audits. The law makes these audit documents confidential and allows polluters to escape responsibility for environmental violations. To date, Enron has conducted five such audits and filed for immunity from prosecution for violations of the law, according to the Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission (TNRCC), the state equivalent of the Environmental Protection Agency. Tamara Maschini, who lives about five miles from the Enron plant, is one of the founders of a local environmental group called Clean Air Clear Lake. ""Whole families in this neighborhood have asthma because of the pollution from plants like Enron,"" she says. Mark Palmer, head of public relations for Enron, says that the company's contribution to local pollution is minimal. ""If the grandfather clause was canceled right now, we would benefit the most of any of the companies in Texas because our nitrogen oxide emissions add up to less than half a percent of the total,"" he says. Last year, the Bush campaign borrowed Enron's corporate jets eight times to fly aides around the country, more times than any of the thirty-four other companies that made their company aircraft available to the Presidential hopeful. And Lay often acts as George W. Bush's chaperone. On April 7, 2000, he played host to Bush and his father, the former President, at the Houston Astros' first home game of the season. The game was held in the baseball team's brand new stadium-Enron Field-which was built with the help of a $100 million donation from Enron. (The company got free advertising, a tax break, and a $200 million contract to supply power to the stadium in return.) Less than three weeks later, Lay joined candidate Bush in Washington, D.C., for a Republican fundraiser that topped all previous records by bringing in a staggering $21.3 million, easily the biggest one-night haul for any political party in history. ""Ken Lay is a noted business leader in Texas who has long been active in Republican politics,"" says Ray Sullivan, a spokesman for the Bush campaign. ""He is chair of the Governor's Business Council. But the governor has his own agenda based on what he believes is best for Texas and for the country."" For his part, Lay tries to put his contributions in a favorable light. ""When I make contributions to a candidate, it is not for some special favor, it's not even for access-although I'll be the first to admit it probably helps access,"" he told The New York Times. ""It is because I'm supporting candidates I strongly believe in personally."" In January 1999, Enron pitched in $50,000 to help pay for Bush's inaugural bash in Austin, Texas, after he won reelection for governor. Today, the polls show that George W Bush has a better than even chance of winning the Presidential election. If he does, it is very likely Ken Lay will be pitching in for another inaugural bash. Pratap Chatterjee works for the on-line magazine ""Corporate Watch, "" which ran an earlier version of this story. The magazine can be reached at www. corpwatch. org. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Humberto (Beto) Kuhn, resume; [EMail-Body]= Maureen - please forward on to Barry when you get his e-mail address. Barry - I don't know Humberto personally, but looking over his resume, I thought he might be a fit in your organization. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/24/2001 03:00 PM --------------------------- ""Humberto Kuhn"" <BetoKuhn@msn.com> on 05/21/2001 11:17:21 AM To: <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: Humberto (Beto) Kuhn, resume Dear Steve:? With sincere and advance thanks, and pursuant to your recent conversation with my brother, George, I attach a copy of?the short version?of my resume.? I have a longer detailed version, as well as numerous references, that I will be pleased to furnish you.? In addition, I am at your disposal at any time that?you or any others at ENRON should wish to meet with me.? Again,?my thanks for your assistance and guidance. ? Kind regards, ? ? Beto Kuhn Cell:? 713/ 906-8463 Res:? 713/ 467-3974 - RESUME HGK,Short Form 05-01.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CAISO NOTICE: Freedom of Information Request of confidential atta
	chments to the DMA report filed with FERC on March 1, 2001; [EMail-Body]= So, why did the ISO make the attachments confidential if it does not believe that they are confidential. If the attachments are to be released, they should be released to everyone. How do we make that happen? Sue Mara Enron Corp. Tel: (415) 782-7802 Fax:(415) 782-7854 ----- Forwarded by Susan J Mara/NA/Enron on 05/11/2001 12:57 PM ----- ""Grant, Colleen"" <CGrant@caiso.com> 05/11/2001 11:56 AM Please respond to ""Sole, Jeanne"" To: ISO Market Participants CIPANTS@caiso.com> cc: Subject: CAISO NOTICE: Freedom of Information Request of confidential atta chments to the DMA report filed with FERC on March 1, 2001 Market Participants: The CA ISO has been informed of a Freedom of Information Request received by FERC for the confidential attachments to the DMA report filed with FERC on March 1, 2001 (attached). The CA ISO does not believe the attachments are confidential under the CA ISO Tariff and provides this notice as a courtesy only. Market Participant interested in commenting on the request should submit their comments to the FERC directly and should not rely on the CA ISO to communicate to FERC any concerns they may have regarding the request. The deadline for a response by the CA ISO is May 18. Jeanne M. Sol, Regulatory Counsel California ISO (916) 608-7144 The Foregoing e-Mail Communication (Together With Any Attachments Thereto) Is Intended For The Designated Recipient(s) Only. Its Terms May Be Confidential And Protected By Attorney/Client Privilege or Other Applicable Privileges. Unauthorized Use, Dissemination, Distribution, Or Reproduction Of This Message Is Strictly Prohibited. - Swidler OEA.pdf [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Presentation to faculty and students at Berkeley; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/20/2000 09:18 AM ----- Vince J Kaminski@ECT 09/18/2000 01:26 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Charlene Jackson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Celeste Roberts/HOU/ECT@ECT, Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ashley Baxter/Corp/Enron@Enron Subject: Presentation to faculty and students at Berkeley Steve, I am a lead recruiter at the University of California at Berkeley for Enron Analyst/Associate program. I contacted several friends who work at Berkeley and received an invitation from one of them to make a presentation at the weekly Faculty Seminar of the Dept. of Industrial Engineering and Operations Research. The students and faculty members from the business school will be also invited. Berkeley in general, and Department of Industrial Engineering and Operations Research in particular, are important centers of academic research on electricity markets (S. Oren works very closely with Severin Borenstein). My presentation will focus on the Analyst/Associate program. I shall also have an opportunity to discuss the power markets in California (I expect many questions) before many experts who are very important to shaping public opinion and regulatory agenda. Please, let me know who in you group could help me in preparing this presentation and in presenting Enron's point of view in a more effective way. Vince FYI. The name of my friend who invited me: Shmuel S. Oren, Professor Dept. of Industrial Engineering and Operations Research 4117 Etcheverry Hall University of California Berkeley, CA 94720-1777 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Letter to Lynch from Us Describing Info ISO should release sooner; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/09/2000 10:45 AM ----- Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 10/02/2000 05:53 PM To: skean@enron.com, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Letter to Lynch from Us Describing Info ISO should release sooner [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Enron's PaineWebber Service; [EMail-Body]= Thanks for getting on top of this. Please get the word out to the HR team leaders as soon as you know more. From: Aaron Brown/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/13/2001 11:36 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mary Joyce/ENRON@enronXgate cc: Subject: Enron's PaineWebber Service Rocky Emery, the Dowd family, Kim Bowden, and another 15 or so employees of UBSPaineWebber (our stock tracking provider...options, restricted stock, etc) left yesterday evening without any warning. They went to 1st Union. I've set up a meeting at 2pm today for us to go over to UBSPW and make sure they understand the special needs of Enron and to make sure our service will not be affected. I am reviewing the contract in place between PW and Enron to understand the affects of this move by Emery and his staff on the agreement. Also, I'm going to see about getting 2 providers of the stock tracking service from the following list: (in case this happens again, we'll have a solid back-up immediately) UBSPaineWEbber (our current provider) 1st Union (where Rocky Emery went) Solomon Smith Barney (way ahead of the competition from a technology standpoint...and has done the two provider thing before) Prudential (another option with internal connections) let me know if you think I should include any others or would like to discuss. Thanks, Aaron [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE:; [EMail-Body]= Frank, Thanks for your message. We are confirming a meeting in your office at 4:00 p.m., Tuesday, next week. What about a dinner at 7:00? Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Frank A. Wolak"" Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 9:26 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: RE: Vince, 4 pm on September 4 and I'd be happy to go to dinner. Frank At 08:33 AM 8/23/01 -0500, you wrote: >Frank, > >Thanks for your message. > >What about a meeting on Tuesday, September the 4th. >We could meet at your office, let's say at 4 p.m. We would be delighted if >you >could join us for dinner later in the evening on the same day. > > >Vince > > -----Original Message----- > From: ""Frank A. Wolak"" > >Eedu+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com] > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 11:13 AM > To: Kaminski, Vince J > Subject: > > Vince, > > I'll be out of the country for the next > two weeks, but should be back September 3 > and will be in the office all that week. > > Frank > > > >This e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or its relevant affiliate >and may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of >the intended recipient (s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by >others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or >authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender or >reply to Enron Corp. at and >delete all copies of the message. This e-mail (and any attachments hereto) >are not intended to be an offer (or an acceptance) and do not create or >evidence a binding and enforceable contract between Enron Corp. (or any of >its affiliates) and the intended recipient or any other party, and may not >be relied on by anyone as the basis of a contract by estoppel or >otherwise. Thank you. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Peer Group Mapping; [EMail-Body]= I saw your e-mail response. Did it go to Oxley too? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/24/2001 02:07 PM --------------------------- From: David W Delainey@EES on 05/24/2001 01:26 PM Sent by: Kay Chapman@EES To: David W Delainey/HOU/EES, Philippe A Bibi/HOU/ECT, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT, Raymond Bowen/HOU/ECT, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT, Rick Buy/Enron@EnronXGate, Wes Colwell/Enron@EnronXGate, David Cox/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES, W David Duran/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jim Fallon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Ben Glisan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joe Gold/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT, James A Hughes/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael Kopper/HOU/ECT@ECT, John J Lavorato/Corp/Enron, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Jeffrey McMahon/Enron@EnronXGate, Rob Milnthorp/CAL/ECT@ECT, Matthew Scrimshaw/LON/ECT@ECT, Jeffrey A Shankman/HOU/ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES cc: Kenneth Lay/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cliff Baxter/HOU/ECT, James Derrick/Corp/Enron, Ken Rice/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stanley Horton/Corp/Enron@Enron, Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Richard Causey/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kevin Hannon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Andrew S Fastow/HOU/ECT, Mark Frevert/NA/Enron, Lou L Pai/HOU/EES@EES, David Oxley/HOU/ECT, Drew C Lynch/LON/ECT@ECT, Robert W Jones/Enron@EnronXGate, Mary Joyce/Enron@EnronXGate, Marla Barnard/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Kalen Pieper/HOU/EES@EES, Gary P Smith/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Cindy Skinner/HOU/ECT, Andrea Yowman/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Gina Corteselli/Corp/Enron, Elspeth Inglis/Corp/Enron Subject: Peer Group Mapping On May 10, 2001, a memo was sent out regarding ""Peer Group Mapping"". This mapping is intended to illustrate from a functional view point where each activity was placed at Year End 2000 VP PRC. Please refer to the attached original memo, if you have not responded to David Oxley and have any comments please respond to him by May 25, 2001. Dave Delainey Following my note last week please find attached the consolidated peer group mapping for all business units. This mapping is intended to illustrate from a functional view point where each activity was placed at Year End 2000 VP PRC. We were considering moving to a 3 Peer Group Structure however it as agreed at the last PRC Committee Meeting to stay with the current structure since the data had been cleaned and everyone felt generally comfortable where most activities had been placed with the exception of just 2 or 3. It was agreed that we should concentrate on resolving these rather than undertaking an organization wide remapping excercise to consolidate to 3 Peer Groups. All functions/activities within the business units should now be reflected on the acttached. The actions points from this excercise are: 1 to review and agree the attached mapping 2 consider and comment on highlighted groups that we have discussed in previous PRC meetings and ask for your comments or objections to moving them as indicated on the attachment. 3 invite your comments or questions on any other function that you consider questionable or requiring further explanation. Please return your comments to David Oxley by Friday May 25. To have this discussion now will save lengthy discussions in the final VP/MD PRC Meetings. Definitions of the peer groups are also attached for your ease of reference. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron Advertising; [EMail-Body]= do we have a mechanism to survey employees? Can we do a ""scientific"" poll? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/02/2000 03:10 PM --------------------------- John Sherriff@ECT 08/02/2000 03:46 AM To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Enron Advertising Mark Thanks for the call a couple of weeks ago regarding our new ad campaign. The challenge as I understand it is that we have difficulty in quantifying the benefit and effectiveness of our ads. We can measure on a periodic basis what the CEO/CCO/CFO perception of Enron is on a periodic basis but this does not break down the impact of our PR efforts from an ad campaign. I understand this dilemma. But one thing that we could measure that is quite important to me is what our employees think about these ads. If all else fails these ads should make our employees proud to work for Enron - and this is something we should be able to measure on a consistent basis. I know you have an upcoming event in California where your organisation will talk about problems and challenges we have - so if you could consider this idea I would be very appreciative. And of course don't get to hooked on God's country while you are in Napa. Thanks! John [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Confidential Agreement; [EMail-Body]= Jerry: Here is the latest ""CA"" with everyone's changes. I feel that this is pretty close to the best we can offer in terms of the stand-still and non-solicitation agreements. Enron usually does not get into stand-still agreements, so doing this one was a big step for Enron. Look forward to talking to you tomorrow morning. Thanks for your patience. Again, this is a draft copy for discussions purposes only. Regards, Ben [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Speaking Engagement; [EMail-Body]= MARC Conference, per Iowa Commissioner Emmett George 8:30 Sue Landwehr will meet you at the hotel for breakfast 10:30 - 12:00 Power Supply and Transmission Lunch at 12:00 at conference Irene Baeg 515-281-8644 Afternoon fly to DC [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Further information regarding Gov Thompson; [EMail-Body]= Sue Landwehr in government affairs spoke to a member of the Thompson administration who indicated that the governor may be interested in talking to you about Amtrak. Specifically, ECT has been working with Amtrak for quite some time on an electricity [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RESUME; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/15/2001 07:59 PM --------------------------- From: Leslie Lawner on 04/13/2001 02:35 PM To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: RESUME I am sending you the resume of Jennifer Salisbury who is Energy Sec. here in NM and I think she is great! She is looking to move back into the private sector, and if we have an opening or can help her with one, that would be wonderful. Thanks. ----- Forwarded by Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron on 04/13/01 02:29 PM ----- ""Salisbury, Jennifer"" <JSalisbury@state.nm.us> 04/13/01 01:24 PM To: ""'llawner@enron.com'"" <llawner@enron.com> cc: Subject: RESUME <<jenbio revised_.doc>> Leslie -- Thanks a million for getting back to me so quickly. Yes, I'd be willing to relocate. I'm more interested in how challenging the work would/could be (and the level of pay) then where I am physically located. Attached is my resume. Feel free to send it to the headhunter who called you and/or to anyone you think might be interested at Enron. Jennifer PS I had never talked to Schaefer before the Boise meeting. He was not very impressive and I agree with your assessment that you will not be able to persuade him on the price cap issue. - jenbio revised_.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Gary von Fischer; [EMail-Body]= 10:45 meet with Cliff Baxter [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Section 29 White Paper; [EMail-Body]= Jeff - Chris is on point on this issue. He and Dan Reck have already spoken. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/14/2000 10:07 AM --------------------------- From: Jeffrey A Shankman @ ECT 09/13/2000 12:51 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Section 29 White Paper I forgot to whom I should direct this sort of thing. Can you let me know? Thanks. Jeff ---------------------- Forwarded by Jeffrey A Shankman/HOU/ECT on 09/13/2000 12:44 PM --------------------------- From: George McClellan 09/12/2000 12:49 PM To: Daniel Reck/HOU/ECT@ECT, Matthew Arnold/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Jordan Mintz/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Mcquade/HOU/ECT@ECT, Scott Pack/NA/Enron@Enron, Michael F Moran/NA/Enron@Enron, Mike McConnell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeffrey A Shankman/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Section 29 White Paper I think my 9 - year old daughter could have written the attached white paper. Listed below are the members of the pro-synfuel lobby group. They would like us to join as well. Not sure what we gain - any ideas? ---------------------- Forwarded by George McClellan/HOU/ECT on 09/12/2000 06:37 PM --------------------------- ""Charles Coignard"" on 09/12/2000 11:40:42 AM To: <george.mcclellan@enron.com> cc: Subject: Section 29 White Paper George, ? Pursuant to your conversation with Jim Treptow, I have attached the latest draft of the white paper regarding Section 29 tax credits.? I also faxed a hard copy to your office in Houston. ? The current committed participants in the group are: TECO Energy Drummond Coal Sales GE Capital Headwaters, Inc. (Covol Technologies) Magellan Resources Group (Pace Carbon Fuels, LLC) Meridian Investments PG&E National Energy Group WPS Resource Corp. SCANA ? The prospective participants are: AIG DQE DTE Koch Industries ? CP&L and Florida Progress/Electric Fuels have decided not to join the group and work on the issue independently. ? Thanks, Charlie Coignard Pace Carbon Fuels, LLC 703-488-9242 - Sec29 white paper 091100.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Southeast RTO: Southern's Load; [EMail-Body]= The Barton discussion draft says that FERC's hands would be tied and that they would have to approve a proposed RTO, as to size and scope, if the proposed RTO owns or has operational control over transmission facilities that serve at least 40,000 MW of load. Southern's CEO testified in Congress recently that their load is over 35,000. I assume the 40,000 MW minimum would permit the SeTrans proposal to meet the proposed statutory minimum since it is Southern plus a few munis, as I understand it. Is this correct? Who would know how many RTOs there would be if each were just over the 40,000 MW minimum? I assume it is much more than 4-5 RTOs -- if so, this is a good contrast to use in our Hill efforts. Thanks. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re:; [EMail-Body]= On the advice of my much esteemed spouse, I would like to express great interest in this group. Thanks ""Gilbert R. Whitaker, Jr."" <grwhit@rice.edu> on 02/18/2000 04:09:37 PM To: skean@enron.com cc: Subject: Steve - I made a mistake in my earlier email. Our Council of Overseers does not yet have a written charter. However, it really is a key advisory group to the Jones School. gil [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Regulatory Roundtable, in 49C2; [EMail-Body]= PFI -- Clement TVA 2024672778 Christa Donahue Cong BURR NC 202 383 2260 Maya Weber Mcgraw Hill Martin Wenzel [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Telephone Interview with The Enron Corp. Research Group; [EMail-Body]= Since several of you will be out on the 6th, we have moved the telephone interview for Marshall Yan to Tuesday, the 5th at 1:00 pm. Thanks! Shirley ---------------------- Forwarded by Shirley Crenshaw/HOU/ECT on 11/29/2000= =20 03:22 PM --------------------------- ""Jingming 'Marshall' Yan"" <jmyan@stanford.edu> on 11/29/2000 03:16:16 PM To: Shirley.Crenshaw@enron.com cc: =20 Subject: Re: Telephone Interview with The Enron Corp. Research Group Ms. Crenshaw, Tuesday the 5th is ok with me. I will talk to you then. Marshall On Wed, 29 Nov 2000 Shirley.Crenshaw@enron.com wrote: > > Hi Marshall: > > I have some unfortunate news. Several of the interviewers will be > traveling > next week and they have had to schedule their return on Wednesday the > 6th. Would you be able to do the telephone interview on Tuesday, the > 5th instead? The same time 1:00 PM Houston time. > > Please let me know as soon as possible. > > Sorry for the change! > > Regards, > > Shirley Crenshaw > > > > > > > > > ""Jingming 'Marshall' Yan"" <jmyan@stanford.edu> on 11/28/2000 11:30:20 PM > > To: Shirley.Crenshaw@enron.com > cc: > Subject: Re: Telephone Interview with The Enron Corp. Research Group > > > Ms. Crenshaw, > > Thank you for the arrangement. I will talk to you then. > > Marshall > > On Tue, 28 Nov 2000 Shirley.Crenshaw@enron.com wrote: > > > > > Marshall: > > > > Thanks for responding so quickly. I have scheduled the following > > interview: > > > > Wednesday, December 6 - 1:00 PM Houston time. It will last approximate= ly > > 1 hour. We will call you at (605) 497-4045 unless otherwise instructed= . > > > > If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at > 713/853-5290. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Shirley Crenshaw > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ""Jingming 'Marshall' Yan"" <jmyan@stanford.edu> on 11/28/2000 12:59:55 P= M > > > > To: Shirley.Crenshaw@enron.com > > cc: Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com > > Subject: Re: Telephone Interview with The Enron Corp. Research Group > > > > > > Ms. Crenshaw, > > > > Thank you very much for the message. I am very interested in the > > opportunity to talk to personnel from the Research Group at Enron. > Between > > the two days you suggest, I prefer Wednesday 12/6. Considering the > > two-hour time difference between California and Texas, 11:00 am Pacific > > time (1:00 pm your time) seems to be a good slot. However, I am open mo= st > > of the day on 12/6 so if some other time slot is prefered on your end, > > please let me know. > > > > Thanks again. I look forward to talking to you and your > > colleagues. > > > > Jingming > > > > On Tue, 28 Nov 2000 Shirley.Crenshaw@enron.com wrote: > > > > > Good afternoon Jingming: > > > > > > Professor Wolak forwarded your resume to the Research Group, and > > > they would like to conduct a telephone interview with you, sometime > next > > > week, at your convenience. The best days would be Tuesday, 12/5 or > > > Wednesday, 12/6. > > > > > > Please let me know which day and what time would be best for you and > > > they will call you. Let me know the telephone number that you wish t= o > be > > > contacted at. > > > > > > The interviewers would be: > > > > > > Vince Kaminski Managing Director and Head of Research > > > Vasant Shanbhogue Vice President, Research > > > Lance Cunningham Manager, Research > > > Alex Huang Manager, Research > > > > > > Look forward to hearing from you. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > Shirley Crenshaw > > > Administrative Coordinator > > > Enron Research Group. > > > 713-853-5290 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jingming ""Marshall"" Yan jmyan@leland.stanford.edu > > Department of Economics (650)497-4045 (H) > > Stanford University (650)725-8914 (O) > > Stanford, CA 94305 358C, Economics Bldg > > > > If one seeks to act virtuously and attain it, then what is > > there to repine about? -- Confucius > > > > _?OO??OOo? ?T=15xO-?? -- =14??<o=15 O""?> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jingming ""Marshall"" Yan jmyan@leland.stanford.edu > Department of Economics (650)497-4045 (H) > Stanford University (650)725-8914 (O) > Stanford, CA 94305 358C, Economics Bldg > > If one seeks to act virtuously and attain it, then what is > there to repine about? -- Confucius > > _?OO??OOo? ?T=15xO-?? -- =14??<o=15 O""?> > > > > > > > Jingming ""Marshall"" Yan jmyan@leland.stanford.edu Department of Economics (650)497-4045 (H) Stanford University (650)725-8914 (O) Stanford, CA 94305 358C, Economics Bldg If one seeks to act virtuously and attain it, then what is there to repine about? -- Confucius _?OO??OOo? ?T=15xO-?? -- =14??<o=15 O""?> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Thank You; [EMail-Body]= Tim I enjoyed meeting with you too. As I mentioned, I thought your answers were thoughtful, well stated, and accurate. In our line of work it helps to triangulate using others' insights and I found yours particularly useful. ""Richards, Tim J (CORP)"" on 08/02/2000 09:01:46 AM To: ""'rshapiro@enron.com'"" <rshapiro@enron.com>, ""'skean@enron.com'"" <skean@enron.com> cc: ""'Kelshaw, Lisbeth'"" Subject: Thank You Dear Steve and Rick, Thank you very much for inviting me to Houston yesterday to discuss Enron's Federal Government Affairs position. Your vision of the role for the Enron Washington office fits closely with my views on what a best-in-class Washington operation should offer, and it was helpful to learn more about Enron and its business units. Enron is clearly an exciting place to work, and the fact that public policy is so vital to the company's future makes the Washington position particularly attractive. It was a real pleasure to meet you yesterday, and I look forward to hearing from you again. Sincerely, Tim Richards Timothy J. Richards GE International Law & Policy 1299 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW; 1100W Washington, DC 20004 Phone: 202-637-4407 Home: 202-882-3385 Fax: 202-637-4300 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= President's Energy Plan -- Text of Key Electricity Recommendations; [EMail-Body]= Below is the exact wording of the recommendations in the Cheney energy report released today as the recommendations relate to electricity issues. ""The NEPD Group recommends that the President direct the Secretary of Energy to propose comprehensive electricity legislation that promotes competition, protects consumers, enhances reliability, promotes renewable energy, improves efficiency, repeals the Public Utility Holding Company Act, and reforms the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act."" ""The NEPD Group recommends that the President encourage FERC to use its existing statutory authority to promote competition and encourage investment in transmission facilities."" More details to follow. We expect to have the full report document shortly. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Schoenemann Resume; [EMail-Body]= Presly, FYI Vince -----Original Message----- From: Magee, Molly Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 5:23 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: RE: Schoenemann Resume Thank you, Vince. I might have a job opening for a manager of public relations within the next week or so, and I would be happy to pass his resume along to the hiring manager. I'll also give it to the other recruiters in case they are aware of other positions. Hope all is well with you, Molly -----Original Message----- From: Kaminski, Vince J Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 11:14 AM To: Magee, Molly Subject: FW: Schoenemann Resume Molly, This is the resume of my friend who is interested in a job with Enron. He is a very capable and hard working person. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""pschoenemann"" Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 2:38 AM To: vkamins@enron.com Subject: Schoenemann Resume Per your request. Thanks. Presly - Mar Comm Spec 2001.doc << File: Mar Comm Spec 2001.doc >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Some Background on California Gas Price Spikes--The Other Side
 of the Story; [EMail-Body]= Could you coordinate with Cindy Stark on the meeting with Massey in a couple of weeks? Stan has asked me if I would like to attend. I would, but don't know when exactly it is scheduled for. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/30/2001 07:41 AM --------------------------- Stanley Horton 04/26/2001 04:53 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Shelley Corman/Enron@EnronXGate, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: Some Background on California Gas Price Spikes--The Other Side of the Story I agree. I suggest the following. Joe, we need you to go give a pitch to Massey's assistats about what is going on. Next Jerry Halvorsen has scheduled a lunch with Massey in two weeks. He has invited me to attend. What do you think? Steven J Kean 04/26/2001 03:09 PM To: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Shelley Corman/Enron@EnronXGate cc: Stanley Horton/Corp/Enron@Enron, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Some Background on California Gas Price Spikes--The Other Side of the Story We need to communicate with Massey before he gets completely carried away blaming the interstate pipeline business for gas price spikes. We need to get him the information regarding Cal LDCs failure to fill storage and their opposition to additional pipeline construction in the state. Shelley -- could you forward copies of the LDC filings to the group. Should Joe or I (or both) try to see massey when I am in town next week? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/26/2001 02:07 PM --------------------------- From: Jeff Dasovich on 04/24/2001 06:57 PM Sent by: Jeff Dasovich To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, skean@enron.com, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enro@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Some Background on California Gas Price Spikes--The Other Side of the Story Last week, I distributed a presentation that the Brattle Group gave before the California Inquisition (i.e., legislative gas oversight committee looking into the gas price spikes at the Cal border). The Brattle Group is a consulting firm that Edison has long used to beat up on SoCalGas (recall that Edison used to be a big gas customer when it owned power plants). Edison ""arranged"" for the Brattle Group to be the star witness at the Cal Leg gas hearing. Their job was to set up El Paso and Dynegy for the hit at hearings that took place the following day. Their message was simple (and simplistic): El Paso and Dynegy have market power. They have used the market power to drive up basis and thus the price of gas at the border (to ""obscene"" levels). That, in turn, has driven up electricity prices. Ken Lay is giving a gas talk tomorrow, and Rob Bradley asked that I provide the alternative view to the Edison/Brattle rant, in the event that he gets any questions on the topic. It's attached. Apologies, it's quick and dirty, but it provides the basics. Obviously no need for us to defend El Paso or Dynegy, but might be useful to offer a more rationale explanation than the one that the California Legislature is peddling. Finally, we were also fingered somewhat as culprits at the hearing (the California PUC FERC lawyer claimed that ENA and TW colluded to drive up basis when ENA controlled a portion of the capacity), but the overriding goal of the hearing was to go after EP and Dynegy. Best, Jeff [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Confidential - GSS Organization Value to ETS; [EMail-Body]= Rod, Stan is/was reviewing selected ""corp."" services, and one of those selected was GSS. I requested that Morris provide some persepective on GSS. Please review and forward to Stan, if appropriate. -----Original Message----- From: Brassfield, Morris Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 10:05 AM To: Saunders, James Subject: Confidential - GSS Organization Value to ETS Here are my thoughts on the value the GSS (Global Strategic Sourcing) brings to ETS: I believe totally in the concept of strategically sourcing our materials and services for ETS, which is the concept that GSS was founded under, while still within the ETS organization. Basically the value that GSS has brought to the bottom line during the last year has been minimal to ETS. The reasons for that statement, in my opinion, are: The materials and services that ETS purchase are basic and routine. Most of those materials and service providers were identified and sourced during 1999 and 2000. ETS is reaching the point where we need fewer providers, not more. New items identified are normally rolled into one of our already sourced NPA's. Almost all large dollar items are bid out (three bids and a buy). GSS's involvement and commitment to the deal ends with the contract signing. ETS P&SM organization and our Contracts services group deals with the actual execution and the ringing of the cash register. If the GSS organization went away tomorrow, we would need the following expertise brought over from their group: (currently this group is close to 75 people.)(and very highly paid individuals) Two (2) negotiators - Contract Managers Two (2) analysts Two (2) contract administrators The administration of the following services would need to be shifted to the ISC: iBuyit System Catalog system (part of iBuyit) iPayit system We would need to re-assess the value of the contract with SourceNet and whether we continue down that path or implement our own A/P department. This would take very few staff adds to make that happen. Let me know if you need any further detail. Morris (713) 503-1409 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Tuscany; [EMail-Body]= Any of the following would be great (prop ref no.): TUS-020-02 (the last one on your list) TUS-030-01 TUS-030-06 TUS-005-02 I would prefer one with a tennis court in the complex. Go ahead and book. Thanks! ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 02/21/2000 10:49 AM --------------------------- Maureen McVicker 02/18/2000 03:30 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: FW: Tuscany SK - I forwarded this to you in case you want to look at the websites this weekend. mm ---------------------- Forwarded by Maureen McVicker/HOU/EES on 02/18/2000 03:30 PM --------------------------- Jane Blizzard <jane@travelpark.com> on 02/18/2000 02:34:38 PM To: ""'MMCVICKE@ENRON.COM'"" <MMCVICKE@ENRON.COM> cc: Subject: FW: Tuscany Maureen, Please see if Steve likes any of these......we need to grab 1 pretty soon! Jane Blizzard jane@travelpark.com 713 860 1116 direct line 713 650 7022 fax 1221 Lamar Suite 718 Houston, Texas 77010 > ---------- > From: Francesca > Sent: Friday, February 18, 2000 12:39 PM > To: 'Jane Blizzard' > Subject: RE: Tuscany > > Hello Jane, > As last choices I can offer the following properties: > > > > This is an independent house at only 15 minutes driving from Siena. Note: > it > is booked the week of June 24th. > > > > > > This is an apartment, similar in decor to Pastore, very nice pool and > location. > > > > > > This is a property that I strongly suggest as it is an independent villa > with pool, excellent for a family with children. The price is a little > higher and the furniture are modern, but the privacy is guarantied! > > > > > > This is an independent house near San Gimignano. The pool is shared with > the > main villa. > > Please, be advised that our rentals are from Saturday to Saturday (in this > case from June 17 to July 1). > > Hope to hear from you soon. > > Francesca Tosolini > Booking Agent > VillaNet > 12600 SE 38th Street, Suite 202 > Bellevue, WA 98006 > Phone: 425 653 7801 > Fax: 425 653 3866 > Email: francesca@rentavilla.com > Website: www.rentavilla.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jane Blizzard [mailto:jane@travelpark.com] > Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2000 10:15 AM > To: 'Francesca Tosolini' > Subject: RE: Tuscany > > > Emanuel has been helping me. We have new dates June 20 - July 1. Emanuel > has > not found anything wonderful for me yet.........Pastore was taken the day > before we put in our request! > Please help us!!! > > Jane Blizzard > jane@travelpark.com > 713 860 1116 direct line > 713 650 7022 fax > 1221 Lamar Suite 718 > Houston, Texas 77010 > > > [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California Update--0717.01; [EMail-Body]= fyi ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/18/2001 07:15 AM --------------------------- From: Jeff Dasovich on 07/17/2001 07:31 PM Sent by: Jeff Dasovich To: skean@enron.com, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Harry Kingerski/Enron@EnronXGate, Leslie Lawner/Enron@EnronXGate, Michael Tribolet/ENRON@enronXgate, Kristin Walsh/Enron@EnronXGate, Karen Denne/Enron@EnronXGate, mpalmer@enron.com, Janel Guerrero/Enron@EnronXGate, Paul Kaufman/Enron@EnronXGate, Susan M Landwehr/Enron@EnronXGate, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: California Update--0717.01 What people know: Hertzberg (et al's) bill (82XX)was heard in an ""informational"" hearing today and still sits in the Assembly Energy Committee. It will be heard again tomorrow (perhaps beginning at 10 AM) , at which time parties will have a chance to support/oppose and ask for amendments. Most, including us, oppose unless significantly amended. The Wright (D) -Richman (R) bill (83XX)was heard in an ""informational"" hearing today and still sits in the Assembly Energy Committee. It will be heard again tomorrow, at which time parties will have a chance to support/oppose and ask for amendments. From our perspective, this is the best bill out there yet, though it still has serious problems---it isn't available electronically yet, but should be tomorrow, and I'll distribute then. The chances of the joint D-R bill being successful are slim, however, since it's up against the Speakers competing bill. There is talk that the Speaker will try to negotiate with Wright/Richman tonight and include any agreement in his bill (82XX). The original version of the Governor's MOU bill sits in the Senate. Most believe that Burton will put it up for a vote this week and it will fail. The Senate's version of the MOU (Sher-Peace-Kuehl) (78XX)came out today. It will likely be heard in the committee tomorrow or the next day. Notably, it kills Direct Access completely and makes Edison shareholders responsible for that portion of Edison's debt owed to suppliers. In short, a very bad bill. Burton's 18XX, which would de-link the bond issuance (to pay back the General Fund) from the DWR contracts is likely to pass the Senate tomorrow or the next day. Many--including Enron--support the bill (though we are supporting it behind the scenes). What people don't know: Whether there's the time or the will in the Assembly and Senate to achieve by Friday a single, comprehensive bill that can be sent to the governor for his signature. Whether the Legislature would postpone its month-long recess if the Legislature hasn't finished a bill by Friday (most folks think they will not postpone). Whether it's true that, irrespective of the energy issue, the Legislature will fail to get the budget completed by Friday and therefore have to postpone their recess anyway, in which case they might continue to work on the energy legislation at the same time. Odds-makers still say it's better than 50-50 that the Legislature does not get the Edison bills done by Friday and leaves on on its 30-day vacation. Best, Jeff Sacramento is one goofy place. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= I would like to help you succeed with this challenge.; [EMail-Body]= Jeff The attached ""Rough & Tumble"" is an electronic clipping service targeted at California politicos and policy wonks. It carried the LA Times version of the Lockyer comments a couple days ago. Today, it has the NY Times article on Ken Lay. It's pretty clear that in the near-term, Enron and it's leadership are at risk of being engulfed in a political firestorm which bounces from coast to coast, gaining strength each step of the way. However, it is the long-term challenge that draws my attention. From my research to date, I am left with the strong impression that the Enron's capacity for acquiring, distilling and assessing business information is much stronger than it's abilities with public policy information. Ken Lay, you and your team have shaped a innovative and entrepreneurial company rooted in agile arbitrage of business knowledge. Like Goldman Sachs, it is hard for the ""man on the street"" to understand precisely what Enron does. However, because of your presence in businesses that play out daily in homes, schools and small businesses, Enron will be scrutinized in a way the Goldman couldn't imagine in it's worst nightmares. From my perspective, the success of Enron's business model demands a sure footing in both business and public policy. Going forward, these two areas of expertise need become intertwined to assure the success of the highly sophisticated, ethical, innovative and insightful global corporation known as Enron. I would like to help you succeed with this challenge. I look forward to our discussions. Kevin 213-926-2626 Advertisers make this site possible. There were 30,693 page views last week. [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE][IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Click to contactRough & Tumble Advertise Here Background Info [IMAGE] KEY SITES Cal ISO Energy Status Capitol Report Capitol Public Radio [IMAGE] Usual Suspects Cal Voter Foundation FEC Info California FPPC L A Times Poll Political Access California Channel Cal Legislative Analyst Cal State Auditor Assignmenteditor Refdesk.com Poynter.org MORE RESOURCES [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Page2 Editorials Archive Advertise Here Contact Info Updated Friday, May 25, 2001 8:54 Pacific Time Companies pushed up price of power -- After months of investigation, state regulators say they have evidence suggesting that power companies have deliberately driven up wholesale electricity prices. Now they must decide whether those companies have done anything illegal. State Attorney General Bill Lockyer said Thursday he believes the evidence ``strongly suggests'' power companies acted illegally to drive up prices. He has said that he would love to put top energy executives in jail. Brandon Bailey and Chris O'Brien in the San Jose Mercury -- 5/25/01 Davis blackout warnings -- a significant policy change aimed at minimizing business and consumer disruptions, Gov. Gray Davis ordered state officials Thursday to enact a three-tier blackout warning system. Forecasts of blackouts will be issued 48 hours beforehand, Davis said. General areas will be identified in warnings issued 24 hours before likely outages. Precise locations will be announced an hour before the power is cut, he said. Dan Morain and Nancy Vogel in the Los Angeles Times Greg Lucas and Lynda Gledhill in the San Francisco Chronicle Noam Levey and Dion Nissenbaum in the San Jose Mercury John Hill in the Sacramento Bee Ed Mendel in the San Diego Union Robert Garrett in the Riverside Press Michael Coit in the Santa Rosa Press -- 5/25/01 Davis' popularity plunges in poll -- With California's energy crisis mounting, Democratic Gov. Gray Davis has suffered a precipitous fall in his job approval rating and image among state residents, according to a Field Poll released yesterday. For the first time since his November 1998 election, more Californians have an unfavorable view of Davis' performance than favorable. Carla Marinucci in the San Francisco Chronicle Hallye Jordan in the San Jose Mercury John Marelius in the San Diego Union -- 5/25/01 Poll puts Riordan, Davis in tight race -- Californians' assessment of Gov. Gray Davis has plummeted drastically as he has struggled to handle the state energy crisis, placing outgoing Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan in a virtual dead heat with him for the 2002 governor's race, according to a Field Poll released Thursday. Though Riordan has given no clear indication that he intends to run for governor, 42 percent of registered voters said they would support the Republican mayor should he challenge Davis, the Democratic incumbent. Forty-three percent said they would vote for Davis. Emily Bazar in the Sacramento Bee -- 5/25/01 California to gain from GOP's loss -- A single party switch in the Senate on Thursday handed California's Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer new clout with key leadership roles likely on issues ranging from military base closings to environmental cleanups. Vermont Sen. James Jeffords' announcement that he was quitting the Republican Party to be an independent affiliated with Democrats set up a takeover in which the Democrats, with a de facto 51-49 majority, will assume all Senate leadership posts and committee chairs. Bill Hillburg in the Los Angeles Daily News -- 5/25/01 PUC and 'baseline' rates -- Nine days after structuring the largest electricity rate increase in California history, state regulators on Thursday launched a reexamination of the unpopular baselines used to determine how much each residential customer will pay. If the indicators are revised upward, as most expect, that would grant some customers relief from the rate hike but could necessitate future ones to generate enough revenue for power purchases. Tim Reiterman in the Los Angeles Times Michael Bazeley in the San Jose Mercury Carrie Peyton in the Sacramento Bee -- 5/25/01 Enron Bush -- Curtis H?bert Jr., Washington's top electricity regulator, said he had barely settled into his new job this year when he had an unsettling telephone conversation with Kenneth L. Lay, the head of the nation's largest electricity trader, the Enron Corporation. Mr. H?bert, chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, said that Mr. Lay, a close friend of President Bush's, offered him a deal: If he changed his views on electricity deregulation, Enron would continue to support him in his new job. Lowell Bergman and Jeff Gerth in the New York Times -- 5/25/01 Lockyer comes out swinging at oilman Davis has plenty of company in depths of poll -- The reaction from Gov. Gray Davis' camp to yesterday's poll showing him in the dumper was quick and blunt. ""Tell me something I don't already know,"" adviser Paul Maslin said after being hit with the news that the latest Field Poll showed Davis' job rating down 18 points since January. ""None of this is news to us,"" Maslin said. Matier & Ross in the San Francisco Chronicle -- 5/25/01 Water and power -- The California Public Utilities Commission authorized an increase in American States Water Co.'s rates at the Bear Valley Electric customer service area of its Southern California Water Co. unit to recover $2.4 million in deferred electric power costs. The amount will be recovered from customers over a five-year period. Sam Favate; Dow Jones Newswires -- 5/25/01 Muni power -- Gov. Davis said he received a pledge Thursday from municipal utility officials that their agencies will sell excess power to the state at prices much lower than in the past. Despite simmering resentment at subjecting their customers to rolling blackouts, the muni officials promised Davis they will keep cooperating with the state. Municipal utility customers, including those in the Modesto, Turlock and Merced irrigation districts, will continue to face power blackouts, officials said afterward. Jim Miller in the Modesto Bee -- 5/25/01 Edison merit raises -- Southern California Edison, which is struggling to stay out of bankruptcy, will hand out $19 million in merit raises to its 12,000 employees today, but top executives will forgo the raises because of the company's financial woes. Edison has doled out hefty merit raises in the past. But this year, the company will pay the minimum under its variable compensation program, which rewards employees for meeting certain company goals. Kate Berry in the Orange County Register -- 5/25/01 Cities with own utilities ask FERC to bar blackouts -- More than 15 California cities that have municipal utilities, including Anaheim, are asking federal regulators to exempt them from electricity blackouts ordered by the state's Independent System Operator. The city of Vernon was first to ask the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to rule that the ISO cannot force it to participate in California's rolling blackouts to serve demand in other areas. Vernon's utility argued that it was ridiculous to subject its customers to blackouts when it had enough power to keep the lights on. Amy Strahan Butler in the Orange County Register -- 5/25/01 Utility tax windfall -- As electricity rates rise, consumers will get hit with a double whammy because of an obscure utility bill tax that many California cities have quietly been collecting for years. A member of the state Board of Equalization charges that some cities will reap windfalls from the utility user tax, and he is backing a grass-roots movement to slash or repeal it. Few local governments are hurrying to forfeit the money, saying that they need it to pay their own higher energy bills. Wendy Thermos in the Los Angeles Times -- 5/25/01 An air of discontent over diesel backups -- Gov. Gray Davis said yesterday that he may ask companies to run their emergency generators during Stage 3 electricity alerts as a way to stave off blackouts. And when blackouts do occur, thousands of tractor-trailer-size generators will whir to life, powering elevators and lights, hospital equipment, even assembly lines. But that prospect has created major concerns. Most of those industrial- strength generators run on diesel oil, a highly polluting fuel. Because they were intended for emergency use, generators have escaped most environmental regulations. What's more, they are likely to be called into service on the hottest, smoggiest days of the year. Carolyn Said in the San Francisco Chronicle -- 5/25/01 Power price controls -- The House Energy and Commerce Committee delayed consideration of a major energy bill Thursday as Republicans and Democrats met privately to explore a possible compromise placing price controls on soaring wholesale electric rates on the West Coast. The negotiations hinted at a possible watershed change in the Republicans' staunch opposition to price controls. An earlier effort to include such controls in the bill turned contentious and was defeated on a mostly partisan vote in subcommittee. Les Blumenthal in the Sacramento Bee -- 5/25/01 For seniors, the heat can kill, doctors warn -- As summer slouches toward Sacramento amid a drumbeat of calls to conserve electricity, doctors and advocates for the elderly are sounding a counter-theme. Heat can kill. And most often, it kills seniors. Year after year, heat waves around the United States are deadlier than hurricanes or floods, tornadoes or earthquakes, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Carrie Peyton and Nancy Weaver Teichert in the Sacramento Bee -- 5/25/01 Outages could be fatal for disabled -- Around the clock, an electric pump supplies supplementary oxygen to 66-year-old Benny Pritchett's diseased lungs. Pritchett worries that a rolling blackout might kill him. ""The electricity goes out, I'm a dead man,"" said the San Bernardino apartment dweller and former chain-smoker. ""I've got a (back-up) oxygen tank. It lasts two hours. When it runs out, I'm dead."" Rolling blackouts aren't expected to last much more than an hour, say Southern California Edison officials, but their Web site recommends that any customer dependent on electrically operated life-support equipment buy an emergency generator. Richard Brooks in the Riverside Press -- 5/25/01 Gasoline prices -- Average gasoline prices statewide are nearly $2 a gallon, and the Los Angeles region has once again been dubbed the nation's hub of traffic congestion. So, what's a good Southern Californian to do? Plan a road trip. Hugo Martin in the Los Angeles Times -- 5/25/01 Offshore drilling -- A federal advisory panel Thursday urged the Bush administration to identify the five most promising areas to drill for natural gas in coastal waters off California and other states, which have been off limits to drilling for nearly 20 years. Citing the nation's unmet energy needs, the advisory group to Interior Secretary Gale A. Norton suggested that locating the top reservoirs of natural gas would help determine if there ""are grounds and support for a limited lifting of"" moratoriums on offshore drilling. The ban now covers 610 million acres of ocean off the Pacific, Atlantic and Gulf coasts. Kenneth Weiss in the Los Angeles Times -- 5/25/01 Judge demands straight answers from El Paso Corp. -- An irate judge threatened yesterday to subpoena the president of a Texas energy firm accused of manipulating California natural gas prices, saying he couldn't get straight answers out of another high-ranking company executive. The eruption by Curtis Wagner Jr., the administrative law judge presiding over a federal probe of alleged market manipulation by El Paso Corp., prompted the company to schedule voluntary testimony by President William Wise today in Washington, D.C. Bernadette Tansey in the San Francisco Chronicle -- 5/25/01 El Paso executive and collusion -- The head of a Texas energy conglomerate personally endorsed a deal between two subsidiaries accused of manipulating the natural gas market in Southern California to drive up prices, a senior official of the firm testified Thursday. The testimony in a trial-like hearing before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission raised questions about whether top officials of Houston-based El Paso Corp. violated FERC rules requiring arm's-length dealings within a corporate family. The admission by El Paso executive Ralph Eads marked a shift from his previous testimony and was elicited through sharp questioning by an angry judge who threatened to subpoena Eads' boss. Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar in the Los Angeles Times -- 5/25/01 Riverside no blackouts -- Southern California Edison won't immediately challenge Riverside's decision against using rolling blackouts to save energy this summer, a spokesman said Thursday. Edison doesn't care how the city of Riverside curtails its energy use as long as the city makes the required cuts during a statewide power shortage, Edison spokesman Steve Hansen said. Dan Lee in the Riverside Press -- 5/25/01 Energy crisis hits muni bonds -- Investors fled the California municipal bond market last month, taking with them a net $3.5 billion, their departure prompted in part by the state's energy crisis and taxes, a fund analysis firm said Thursday. The withdrawals in April marked the worst such outflow in years, and it comes as the state is preparing this August to issue a record $13.4 billion in bonds to bail out utilities. Loretta Kalb in the Sacramento Bee -- 5/25/01 With a perfectly negative crisis record, Davis desperate for a win -- So far, Gov. Gray Davis has amassed an unblemished record in his handling of the energy crisis. Not one major aspect of the situation has moved in the positive direction Davis said -- and clearly hoped -- it would, to wit: Dan Walters in the Sacramento Bee -- 5/25/01 Hot days don't cut the power -- A combination of factors kept the state's beleaguered system out of the red this time. The heat wave didn't hit all areas of the state at the same time, and cooler weather in the Pacific Northwest got power flowing from that region to California again. Also, there have been no new power-plant malfunctions, and many of the smaller generating facilities that were AWOL a few weeks ago, when the last blackouts hit, are operating again. A huge potential contributor to blackout avoidance -- but one that's difficult to quantify -- is conservation. Jack Katzanek in the Riverside Press -- 5/25/01 Long Beach Boeing layoffs -- Reflecting a sagging market for 100-seat jetliners, the Boeing Co. will lay off about 600 employees this year at its commercial factory in Long Beach, the company confirmed Thursday. That decision followed an internal study by Boeing that was completed earlier this year, said spokesman Warren Lamb, who did not elaborate. Ian Hanigan in the Long Beach Press -- 5/25/01 Hahn -- His job is to both prosecute and defend. And with that tricky mandate, Los Angeles City Atty. James Kenneth Hahn for 16 years has led a law office that, in sheer numbers, would rank among the biggest in the country. With some 450 attorneys, responsibility for both criminal and civil cases, and an annual budget of $70 million, the office, like the city it serves, is big, diverse, complex. But a review of Hahn's record suggests that his performance has been mixed--deliberate and plodding, pragmatic and obstinate. Greg Krikorian and Patrick McGreevey in the Los Angeles Times -- 5/25/01 Villaraigosa and Hahn and housing -- It doesn't fire up voters like a stump speech on crime, schools or traffic congestion. But the sheer magnitude of the city's housing shortage has placed it squarely--albeit quietly--on the agendas of both candidates running for mayor of Los Angeles. Eight years of a widely criticized lack of mayoral attention to the housing problem combined with a high concentration of low-wage workers has earned Los Angeles a reputation as one of the most unaffordable, overcrowded metropolitan centers in the country, plagued by low home ownership rates and slum conditions. Lee Romney in the Los Angeles Times -- 5/25/01 Villaraigosa and Hahn annd crime and gangs -- Mayoral candidates Antonio Villaraigosa and City Attorney James Hahn continued Thursday to compare their plans to deal with crime as they near the June 5 runoff election. Hahn, filing papers in court to seek injunctions against two Wilmington gangs, touted his efforts over the past several years to control gang activity throughout the city. ""The root of the violence is drugs and ... for turf and control,"" Hahn said of the two gangs -- but which, he added, applies to most gangs in the city. Rick Orlov in the Los Angeles Daily News -- 5/25/01 Dean Andal -- State Board of Equalization member Dean Andal is expected to announce today that he plans to run for state controller next year. The 41-year-old Republican from Stockton said he will run on a platform that includes lowering utility taxes paid by residents and businesses in Los Angeles, which are 10% and 12.5%, respectively. The story is in the Los Angeles Times -- 5/25/01 Jim Rogan -- President Bush on Thursday nominated former Congressman James Rogan to be undersecretary of commerce for intellectual property and director of the U.S. Trademark Office. The job pays $130,200 a year. Bush's selection of Rogan, which will require confirmation by the Senate, could be a positive sign for Hollywood, which has been lobbying for increased enforcement of copyright laws, including a crackdown on Internet piracy. Bill Hillburg in the Los Angeles Daily News -- 5/25/01 Living wage -- While attorneys speculated on the constitutionality of Santa Monica's newly approved living wage law, hotel housekeeper Blanca Mendez was just hoping Thursday that she can benefit if a raise to $10.50 an hour goes into effect next summer at large downtown and beach-side businesses. ""It would be fantastic,"" said Mendez, who now earns $8.50 an hour after seven years at the Streamline Moderne-style Shangri-La Hotel near the ocean. ""The economy is very difficult; everything is getting expensive, like gas, like energy."" Oscar Johnson and Ofelia Casillas in the Los Angeles Times -- 5/25/01 9 tribes' casino plans put on hold -- Gov. Gray Davis won't approve any more agreements with Indian tribes to allow casinos until the federal courts resolve a legal challenge to California's Indian gaming law. So far, the governor's moratorium on new Indian gaming compacts, announced in a letter to nine California tribes, doesn't appear to affect three Sonoma County tribes that have announced plans for casinos. But it could delay the progress of the nine other tribes that have asked the governor to negotiate gaming agreements, including the Round Valley tribe in Mendocino County. Steve Hart in the Santa Rosa Press -- 5/25/01 Charity foundations growth -- California's charitable foundation assets--which were relatively modest as recently as two decades ago--are now growing at a rate faster than those in the rest of the country, according to a study by the new USC Center on Philanthropy and Public Policy. In 1978, California held 8% of national foundation assets; in 1998 it accounted for 14%, the study said. During the same period, the state's share of foundation grants grew from 7% to 11% of total giving nationwide, it said. ""California is catching up and jumping forward,"" said Marcia K. Sharp, a research fellow at the USC Center on Philanthropy and Public Policy, and a co-author of the study. Anne-Marie O'Connor in the Los Angeles Times -- 5/25/01 Documents seized in S.F. minority contract probe are inadmissible -- In a potential blow to prosecutors, a U.S. judge said that federal investigators violated a San Francisco city official's privacy rights when they searched her office looking for evidence of fraud in a city minority contracting program. The FBI seized hundreds of pages of records from the San Francisco Human Rights Commission office of chief contract compliance officer Zula Jones in August 1999. Chuck Finnie and Lance Williams in the San Francisco Chronicle -- 5/25/01 Feinstein fast-tracks water storage plans -- California can't forestall a water crisis without building more storage facilities, Sen. Dianne Feinstein said yesterday in responding to environmental critics of her bill to reauthorize the CalFed ecosystem restoration program. Eric Brazil in the San Francisco Chronicle Michael Gardner in the San Diego Union -- 5/25/01 Californians' recycling efforts hit skids -- Californians are recycling a lower percentage of redeemable plastic, glass and aluminum beverage containers than they have in more than a decade, the state Department of Conservation reported Thursday. While officials note the recycling drop is partially due to an increasing number of products available for redemption, they also point to research suggesting consumers' habits may be slipping. Ed Fletcher in the Sacramento Bee -- 5/25/01 UC admissions policy -- A UC Berkeley request to be exempted from a University of California admissions policy is creating concern among administrators and faculty who object to looking at one campus in isolation. Instead, they said, the Berkeley request probably should be folded into a systemwide review of admissions already under way. Tanya Schevitz in the San Francisco Chronicle -- 5/25/01 Irvine cash crop: business -- Irvine One of the largest commercial developments in the county could be built in the next five to seven years, replacing checkered fields of strawberries and other crops. The 670 acres of fields and a scattering of industrial buildings just outside Irvine's northeastern border is large enough to host 12 Disneylands, but The Irvine Co. has other plans. Laura Corbin, Jennifer Hieger and Elizabeth Aguilera in the Orange County Register -- 5/25/01 Like a Rolling Tone -- It looked like a scene from the hotel karaoke lounge, where the microphone-hogging guy won't stop belting Tom Jones tunes and a few cocktail-sipping patrons keep their eyes glued to their drinks in embarrassment. But it was official state business at the state Capitol on Thursday when members of the Assembly attempted to pay tribute to Bob Dylan on his 60th birthday by feebly singing along with his 1973 recording of ""Forever Young."" Lesli A. Maxwell in the Fresno Bee -- 5/25/01 Joe Lockhart -- Barely six months after joining Oracle Corp. as a communications consultant to chief executive Larry Ellison, former White House press secretary Joe Lockhart has left the database software firm. Both sides yesterday denied a rift between the two men and blamed Lockhart's frequent trips from his home in Washington, D.C., to Oracle's Redwood Shores headquarters for the departure. Kelly Zito in the San Francisco Chronicle -- 5/25/01 More.. Page2 Editorials Archive Advertise Here Contact Info Copyright ? 2001 Rough & Tumble [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= address; [EMail-Body]= JOSEPH KOOTHRAPPALLY (713) 853-6819 jkoothr@enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: MEC; [EMail-Body]= I think it would be useful to verify their view that they are really only 2-3 years from commercial production. Ideally, we could get that confirmation from someone familiar with the technology but without any financial interest in its success. Their technology pitch sounded good, but I don't know enough to recognize the potential shortcomings. I want to feel comfortable that you all feel this is real, then I would be happy to have me and my team spend some time with them. To: Rex Shelby/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Mike McConnell, Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, Philippe A Bibi/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Kenneth Lay/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Fabricio Soares/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: MEC Thank you for participating in yesterday's meeting. We spoke with Harvey and Jim after the meeting and they took to speed to market comments to heart. There is an opportunity for Enron to participate with MEC in the early development of their company, but it seems the one thing they want is the one thing we also want, people. I would appreciate your thoughts and comments on the possiblity of creating a small team that could work directly with MEC as part of a potential investment and strategic relationship. Given our resource constraints, this would most likely be part of the organization that sees the greatest strategic impact from MEC's development. Mark x37408 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: FW: EEO Letter; [EMail-Body]= Sorry for the delay (I had major e-mail problems). The memo looks good; let's get it out. From: Sandra Lighthill/ENRON@enronXgate on 06/21/2001 05:43 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Rick Johnson/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: FW: EEO Letter Steve, As you know, we have developed a memo to be signed by Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling reaffirming our EEO, Harassment Prevention and Fair Treatment policies for 2001. The final version is attached for your review, and if acceptable, to obtain the needed signatures. The memo has been reviewed by Cindy, the Legal Department and the OLER group. Once signatures have been obtained, return the signed memo to me so that our group can begin the distribution and posting of the memo to all US employees. Please call me at x37921 if you have any questions. The signed memo can be sent to me at EB1669c. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Regards, Sandra [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CONFIDENTIAL - DO NOT DISTRIBUTE; [EMail-Body]= Steve, I only have the following suggestion for the Office of the Chairman paragraph: ""Dave is forming an Office of the Chairman in EES. Joining Dave, in the Office of the Chairman, will be Marty Sunde, as President, Global Marketing Services and Dan Leff, as President, Global Energy Services. Dan and Marty have been instrumental in the development and execution of the successful EES business model. In addition, Janet Dietrich will join the Office of the Chairman as Chief Operating Officer. Currently, Janet is Managing Director in Enron Americas where she had successfully led both trading and origination organizations."" Regards Delainey ---------------------- Forwarded by David W Delainey/HOU/ECT on 02/06/2001 07:12 PM --------------------------- From: Steven J Kean@ENRON on 02/06/2001 04:41 PM Sent by: Maureen McVicker@ENRON To: Kenneth Lay/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Frevert/NA/Enron@Enron, David W Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/ECT@ECT, Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Philippe A Bibi/HOU/ECT@ECT, Karen S Owens@ees, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, John J Lavorato/Enron@EnronXGate cc: Subject: CONFIDENTIAL - DO NOT DISTRIBUTE CONFIDENTIAL - DO NOT DISTRIBUTE Steve Kean would like your comments on this email as soon as possible. Thanks. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FYI - California Conference Call, 800-749-9927, ask for Maureen
 Palmer; [EMail-Body]= Diane Russell Saunders (Polaroid) RFP for fuel oil and no.6 (617) 386-7301 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= UC/CSU press release; [EMail-Body]= fyi ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/08/2001 01:21 PM --------------------------- From: Max Eberts@EES on 07/06/2001 07:01 PM To: Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES, Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Robert C Williams/Enron@EnronXGate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Tom Riley/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange cc: Subject: UC/CSU press release Here is the approved press release. UC/CSU added a few more details concerning the extension of the contract. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Privileged & Confidential -- Verification; [EMail-Body]= Thanks for your help. Linda J Noske 09/18/2000 05:52 PM To: Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Re: Privileged & Confidential -- Verification Richard, I got the fax confirmation back that it went through. I put it in your in-box since you were with the interviewee. Linda Richard B Sanders 18/09/00 05:32 PM To: Linda J Noske/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Privileged & Confidential -- Verification ----- Forwarded by Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT on 09/18/2000 05:32 PM ----- ""Caren S. Sweetland"" <csweetland@Gibbs-Bruns.com> 09/18/2000 05:25 PM To: <Richard.B.Sanders@enron.com> cc: Subject: Privileged & Confidential -- Verification <<#92332 v1 - Verification - Interrogatories.wpd>> - #92332 v1 - Verification - Interrogatories.wpd [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= NewPower Withdrawal Notes; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/18/2001 08:03 PM ----- Binky Davidson@EES 03/15/2001 05:35 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: NewPower Withdrawal Notes Mark Muller sends the attached for your information and comments. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW:; [EMail-Body]= What do you make of this? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/22/2001 03:46 PM --------------------------- From: Sherri Sera/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/21/2001 02:57 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: FW: Should have pointed out to look at last sentence of letter. Jeff seemed particularly concerned about it. Rob Walls has been in charge of an ongoing investigation/inquiry, so may be able to shed some light on it. SRS -----Original Message----- From: Brelsford, Loretta Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 10:11 AM To: Walls Jr., Rob Cc: Fleming, Rosalee; Sera, Sherri Subject: FW: Rob, I read parts of the attached letter to Rebecca this morning....she asked that I forward to you to investigate. Loretta -----Original Message----- From: amit Patil Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 5:12 AM To: McDonald, Rebecca Cc: Lay, Kenneth Subject: Do You Yahoo!? For regular News updates go to http://in.news.yahoo.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: Oakland Trib Wed 3/7: ""Breakthrough made in rescue of PG&E"" Bakersfield Californian, Wed 3/7: ""El Paso Energy closes six valley power plants"" Contra Costa Times, Wed 3/7: ""Still undecided: Who'll pay DWR for electricity"" SF Chron, Wed 3/7: ""State Taxpayers In Dark on Details Of Energy Deal"" Sac Bee, Wed 3/7: ""Lawmakers pitch fixes for region's energy woes"" Orange Co. Register, Wed 3/7: ""Power plan called wrong"" LA Times - Wed 3/7: ""Bill to Cut Some Power Prices Stalls"" Sac Bee, Wed 3/7: ""PG&E could face mutiny on outages: SMUD, others may balk if utility orders summer blackouts"" SF Chron, Wed 3/7: ""PUC to Decide Fate Of Utility Workers PG&E, Edison want to trim costs by laying off thousands, cutting service"" San Jose Mercury, Wed 3/7: ""Power prices could soar during the summer"" SF Chron, Wed 3/7: ""Power Plant Plans Cause Conflicts East county residents blast supervisors"" Contra Costa Times Wed 3/7: ""Supervisors set search for power plant sites"" Sac Bee, Wed 3/7: ""Peter Schrag: California's $90 billion infrastructure gap"" Contra Costa Times, Wed 3/7: ""PG&E power plan debated at hearing"" SF Chron, Thurs. 3/8: State OKs 'Peaker' Power Plant at SFO / Temporary generator could be sending electricity to 50,000 homes by August WSJ, Thurs. 3/8: Crossed Wires: Major Kinks Emerge In Gov. Davis's Plan To Power California --- State's Outlays for Electricity May Be Hard to Recover Without Rate Increases --- Betting on Long-Term Deals ------------------------ Breakthrough made in rescue of PG&E State ready to pay $7 billion for lines By Steve Geissinger SACRAMENTO BUREAU SACRAMENTO -- Signaling a breakthrough in secret energy crisis talks, the Davis administration disclosed Tuesday it may announce the framework of a pact to rescue the teetering Pacific Gas and Electric Co. next week. ""Things are going very well,"" said Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis. The state appears to be poised to pay at least $7 billion -- and possibly billions more -- for PG&E's high-voltage transmission lines as part of a deal to financially renovate the north-state utility, according to sources familiar with the negotiations. But consumer advocates insisted that even the $7 billion price is too much to pay. And experts warned that a deal with PG&E will be more complex than with other utilities. PG&E representatives declined comment, in keeping with their policy on the talks, even though the Davis administration said an announcement could come as early as next week or the following week. The new timetable for an announcement was substantially sooner than in Davis' original forecast. Until late last week, PG&E was still resisting the sale of its power grid despite the fact that Davis had announced the framework of an agreement with Southern California Edison. Davis expects to soon announce a similar deal with the San Diego Gas and Electric Co. However, any such deal still would need federal approval. The investor-owned utilities, trapped between high wholesale costs and lower, regulated retail rates, amassed nearly $13 billion in debts and were unable to buy electricity this winter. With the onset of rolling blackouts, the state began brokering billions of dollars in emergency short- and long-term power purchases. Davis' strategy to ease the energy price and supply crisis includes bolstering both conservation and generation while fiscally refurbishing the nearly bankrupt utilities. As part of the rescue deal, the utilities would have to drop legal actions seeking dramatically higher electricity bills, environmentally shield wildlands they own, sell power from their generators to Californians for the next decade and secure help with their debts from their parent companies. Together with the cash infusion from the sale of their power 26,000-mile power grids, the utilities would be allowed to sell bonds to raise funds and use customer money to pay them off. The state would upgrade the high-voltage lines and lease them back to the utilities for operation. In a reflection of the negotiations with the three utilities, a Davis administration official said the deal with PG&E is proving to be more complex than with the other firms. Though PG&E finally agreed late last week to sell its transmission grid, the utility apparently wants more than the $7 billion that Davis has offered, according to sources. The figure is more than twice the book amount, or the value placed on the system for purposes of accounting. And that's the markup that lured Edison into an agreement to sell its smaller portion of the transmission grid for $2.8 billion. But PG&E, which fears an erosion of its economic base, may be asking as much as $10 billion. Due to complexities in the state's 1996 deregulation of the industry, PG&E is more likely to lose revenue than Edison as a result of selling its transmission lines, according to experts. Big customers might be able to bypass the utility's remaining local distribution lines, thereby eroding its customer base. Therefore the utility may view bankruptcy, and sale of its transmission lines to the highest bidder, as a potentially attractive alternative to selling its share of the grid to the state at too low a price. ---- El Paso Energy closes six valley power plants Filed: 03/07/2001 By CHIP POWER, Californian staff writer e-mail: ppower@bakersfield.com El Paso Energy, citing non-payment from Pacific Gas & Electric Co., said it has shut down six cogeneration plants this week. The smaller plants produced about 175 megawatts of electricity and are located primarily in the San Joaquin Valley, said company spokesman Mel Scott. A megawatt can supply power to 1,000 homes. At least 10 plants have closed in the past two weeks as a result of non-payment, according to the state Independent System Operator, which manages most of the state's electrical distribution. The El Paso Energy plants are operated with various partners and had not been compensated for December, January and February deliveries, said Scott. He said he did not know the total amount due but said the plants would be closed until PG&E's credit worthiness is improved. A cogeneration plant, common in oil fields, simultaneously produces heat energy and electrical or mechanical power from the same fuel in the same facility. Typically, it produces electricity and steam, which can be deployed to enhance oil recovery. Kern County is the state's leading oil-producing county. El Paso owns or has interests in more than 40,000 miles of interstate and intrastate pipeline connecting the nation's principal natural gas supply regions to the five largest consuming regions in the United States, namely the Gulf Coast, California, the Northeast, the Midwest and the Southeast. El Paso closed up 99 cents on Tuesday, or 1.4 percent, at $71.49. The Houston-based company's stock price has ranged between $36.31 and $75.30 in the last 52 weeks. ---- Still undecided: Who'll pay DWR for electricity By Karen Gaudette ASSOCIATED PRESS SAN FRANCISCO -- The price tag is $3.2 billion and counting for electricity bought by the state Department of Water Resources for the customers of two nearly bankrupt utilities. Pacific Gas and Electric Co., Southern California Edison and the state disagree over how the DWR eventually will be reimbursed for its purchases on the expensive last-minute power market. So do the state power regulators, who have the final call over who gets the money when. Under a recent law, the DWR went into the electricity-buying business to help keep the two utilities from sinking further into their $13 billion debt. The state plans to retrieve the money by selling $10 billion in revenue bonds. The utilities continue to collect ratepayer dollars on that electricity, which the bill's author, Assemblyman Fred Keeley, D-Boulder Creek, says is meant to help them begin paying down their debt. In a recent letter, however, DWR officials requested that the state Public Utilities Commission order that a portion of that money be diverted to the state. But after the utilities subtract the costs of generating electricity, payments to environmentally friendly power plants and other expenses, there is no money left from ratepayer dollars to give to the DWR without sinking further into debt, PG&E spokesman Ron Low said Tuesday. If it passed along money to the DWR, ""our undercollection would grow by about $2.4 billion by the end of the year,"" Low said. The commission, unable to agree on the best course of action, left the issue untouched at its last meeting but expects to revisit the issue when it meets this morning. Commissioner Richard Bilas is proposing an alternate plan that would have the DWR set its own revenue requirements that would be passed on to ratepayers. The PUC also is expected to respond to complaints from laid-off workers and customers that layoffs by utilities to cut costs have been hurting service. Commissioner Carl Wood warned at the last meeting that failure to provide safe and reliable service could mean fines for the utilities. Representatives from electrical workers unions, the PUC and the utilities were to discuss the issue Tuesday afternoon. ""I don't think we believe that utilities can find a way out of their problems by laying off workers,"" said Mindy Spatt, a spokeswoman with the Utility Reform Network. ""We think consumers deserve safe and reliable service, and we think they deserve it at a reasonable price."" ---- State Taxpayers In Dark on Details Of Energy Deal David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, March 7, 2001 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle Few people would purchase a car simply because the dealer said, ''Trust me, it's a great deal.'' Yet Gov. Gray Davis essentially is telling Californians just that about dozens of long-term power contracts. Because of confidentiality agreements with power companies, the governor has revealed only scant details about the state's multibillion-dollar contracts for electricity over the next 10 years. ""Gov. Davis has our money, and we can't see how he's spending it,"" said Doug Heller, a spokesman for the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa Monica. ""We've been locked out of the room."" Neither Davis nor power companies would divulge specific details about the price, duration or scope of individual contracts. Each cited secrecy clauses that the governor's office said had been desired by both sides. What consumers do know is this: -- California has signed 40 contracts and tentative accords, valued at about $40 billion, to secure enough power to light 9 million homes over the next decade. -- The average purchase price of each deal is $69 per megawatt hour -- well above the $30 to $40 charged by power generators before California's energy market went haywire last summer. -- If, as is widely expected, wholesale power prices fall in years ahead, the state nevertheless will be locked into paying above-market rates for electricity. But it is not known which generator agreed to part with the most power at the cheapest level or the full range of the prices in concocting the $69 average. Moreover, it is unclear how shrewdly the state negotiated with taxpayer money in securing power on behalf of cash-strapped utilities. ""These agreements are the bedrock of our long-term energy policy,"" Davis said Monday in announcing the deals. The governor's office defended the murky nature of the contracts yesterday. ""It's a business transaction in which private corporate information is included,"" said Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Davis. ""That's the kind of information that never gets revealed."" While additional elements of the contracts will be publicized in coming months, he said, the contracts themselves will remain a secret. ""You'll never see all the details,"" Maviglio said. This did not sit well with many observers. ""It's a breach of public trust,"" said Daniel Bacon, a San Francisco attorney specializing in business law. ""A public servant spending public money shouldn't be able to keep the spending secret."" But Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, an energy-industry association in Menlo Park, called confidentiality agreements ""a necessary evil in transactions like this."" He explained that no power company would agree to a long-term contract if rival firms could learn the terms of the accord. The company would be losing too much of its competitive edge in the marketplace, Ackerman said. At the same time, he noted that secrecy allowed the buyer -- in this case, California taxpayers -- to secure more favorable terms with individual sellers. A high price with one generator would not necessarily be sought by all power providers. Still, the fact that public funds are being used makes confidentiality in this case a different matter than, say, Cisco Systems' quietly negotiating to take over yet another tech rival. ""The public is in a very awkward position,"" said Michael Shames, executive director of the Utility Consumers' Action Network in San Diego. ""It has to rely on the good word and expertise of the governor, and he has yet to demonstrate that he has expertise or good word in this field."" Shames likened consumers to passengers in a plane being flown by a pilot without a license to fly. ""But what choice do we have?"" he asked. ""I don't see many other options available right now."" There's the rub. No matter how bad a deal California may have cut to help meet its energy demands, the alternative -- blackouts, disruptions, economic catastrophe -- is far, far worse. On the other hand, it already appears that the new contracts will not shield Californians from the threat of daily outages this summer, when demand surges. Davis said only about 60 percent of the state's summertime electricity needs so far had been met. Part of the reason is that many power companies already have contracted for their output this year. Duke Energy said this was why it would not begin its nine-year contract with California until 2002, while Williams Cos. said it would only gradually increase the amount of available wattage in its 10-year contract. Both companies, meanwhile, will continue to profit this summer by selling into the volatile ""spot"" market, where wholesale power went for as much as $1, 500 per megawatt hour last year. ""You can't sell all your power into long-term contracts,"" said Paula Hall- Collins, a Williams spokeswoman. ""You save some for the spot market."" Consumer groups worry that consumers will be hammered again this summer with sky-high power prices, and then get nailed down the road by contracts for above-market rates. ""If we could look at the terms of the deals, we'd see that California is being gouged for 10 years,"" said Heller of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights. ""But the governor doesn't want us to see that."" Ackerman of the Western Power Trading Forum said the state had gotten the best rates it could under current market conditions. ""California went for long-term contracts when everyone else moved in as well,"" he said. ""Californians are paying a price for not acting sooner."" ---- Lawmakers pitch fixes for region's energy woes By David Whitney Bee Washington Bureau (Published March 7, 2001) WASHINGTON -- California members of Congress pleaded for everything from wholesale price caps to extending daylight-saving time an extra hour to help the region cope this summer with its persistent electricity shortage, but none of the ideas seemed to catch fire at a House hearing Tuesday. ""People will die in California because of this crisis,"" Rep. Brad Sherman, a Los Angeles-area Republican, warned the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Sherman testified that his idea for saving lives is to extend daylight-saving time by an extra hour, so that there would be more daylight at the end of the day when power consumption surges. ""One of the peak demand periods for electricity occurs between 5 p.m. and 8 p.m., when the sun sets and people come home from work,"" Sherman testified. ""If people come home and it is light out, there is less of an inclination to turn a light on."" Sherman said the state Legislature has called for congressional approval for states to be given authority to extend daylight-saving time, and he cited analyses by the California Energy Commission and other agencies suggesting that it could cut power consumption by 1 percent to 2 percent. Sherman, who was one of about a dozen California lawmakers presenting their views on the energy squeeze, drew no questions from committee leaders about what his legislation might do to everything from airline schedules to television programming if West Coast states didn't agree on the same time standard. Most of the committee's questioning was on the more popular idea proposed by several California and Western lawmakers, primarily Democrats, to require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to impose caps on wholesale electricity prices that have gone wild because of a regional power shortage. Rep. Bob Filner, D-San Diego, charged that the price spiral has little to do with power shortages but a lot to do with a ""small cartel"" of generators bilking ratepayers. Rep. Jay Inslee, D-Wash., said he brought up the idea of regional price caps with President Bush, who was initially skeptical. But Inslee said that Bush warmed to the idea after being told that protections could be built into the caps so as not to discourage construction of new power plants. Upon hearing that, Inslee said, Bush invited him to meet with the president's Cabinet-level task force led by Vice President Dick Cheney on a national energy strategy. But Inslee said he can't get the group to meet with him. ""It's very disappointing,"" Inslee said. Tuesday's hearing was part of a series the panel is holding on the California crisis, so far without any emerging consensus on what, if anything, Congress should do. ---- Power plan called wrong Wall Street analysts say the governor's approach to the problem avoids the issue that caused the imbalance. March 7, 2001 By DON THOMPSON The Associated Press SACRAMENTO California's scramble to insulate consumers from the soaring price of electricity may add to the state's power problems this summer, Wall Street analysts said Tuesday. Gov. Gray Davis' emphasis on buying utilities' transmission lines and negotiating long-term power contracts to help ease their debts skirts the deep imbalance between wholesale and market rates that led to the state's power problems in the first place, they said. ""In the long run, it doesn't solve anything,"" said Michael Worms, an industry analyst for Gerard Klauer Mattison & Co. ""In the long run, you need to send the right price signals to consumers, which will create its own conservation signals. Unfortunately, customers were shielded from that in California."" Davis said Monday that the state's first contracts to buy electricity for two financially struggling utilities will provide only about two-thirds of the power needed on a typical summer day, forcing Californians to cut power use at least 10 percent to avoid blackouts. Since early January, the state has been buying one- third of the power Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. customers need. The two utilities, denied credit by suppliers, say they have lost nearly $14 billion due to soaring wholesale electricity prices that the state's industry-deregulation law says they cannot pass on to consumers. The keepers of the state power grid had enough electricity Tuesday to avoid declaring an electricity alert, but have faced an almost-daily scramble for weeks due to a tight supply and high wholesale prices. Several wholesale and retail rate proposals are circulating. Among them: Free-market advocates such as Worms want an immediate end to the deregulation-imposed retail rate freeze on Edison and PG&E that will expire next year. Davis wants a Western price cap of $100 per megawatt hour on power generators he says have been prof iteering from California's short energy supply. The Bush administration and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission are cool to that idea. In December, FERC imposed a ""soft cap"" of $150 per megawatt hour on wholesale rates in the state and required suppliers to justify any higher prices they charge. Consumer groups such as The Utility Reform Network, or TURN, want regulated rates for residential and small-business customers, but free-market rates for large industrial customers, which sought deregulation in the first place. TURN also advocates a tiered rate structure, with higher rates for consumers who use more than a reasonable amount of electricity each month. Assembly Republicans say electricity and natural-gas prices will fall naturally if the state increases supply, mainly by making it easier to build plants and pipelines. ""Right now, you're sort of sitting partially with regulation and part with the free market,"" said Paul Fremont, an analyst with Jefferies & Co. ""Both these systems work. It's sort of that in-between system that you have in Califor nia that doesn't appear to be working."" The system discourages generators from building new power plants because they aren't guaranteed a profit, and it doesn't do enough to discourage power use by consumers because the price they pay doesn't reflect the true cost of power, Fremont said. ""I don't think people here have much faith in the market, and why should they?"" countered TURN's Mindy Spatt. ""I think there are probably better ways of encouraging consumers to conserve than by gouging them."" Davis insists the crisis can be resolved without raising rates for Edison and PG&E customers beyond ""the existing rate structure."" In January, state regulators imposed temporary rate hikes of 7 to 15 percent on Edison and PG&E customers. The Legislature and Davis extended the increases for up to a decade to help pay back the estimated $10 billion in power buying the state expects to do for Edison and PG&E over the next several years, and finance its purchase of the power lines owned by the two companies and San Diego Gas & Electric. Rates were already scheduled to increase next year for Edison and PG&E customers. Under the 1996 deregulation law, the pair's ratepayers saw a 10 percent rate reduction, but only until early 2002. That rate cut will likely expire as planned, Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio has said. Davis wants those rates to cover not only the traditional cost of generating, transporting and distributing power, but the added cost of paying off the two utilities' massive debt and buying their transmission lines, said Assemblyman Fred Keeley, D-Boulder Creek, the Assembly's chief power negotiator. Yet Davis has indirectly addressed the rate imbalance by signing legislation that will let regulators raise consumer rates if necessary, Keeley said. The governor and lawmakers are in effect spreading out rate increases over a decade by using long-term revenue bonds to buy power for the nearly bankrupt utilities, said Severin Borenstein, director of the University of California Energy Institute. ""At some point we have to deal with the reality that all of the power that we buy has to be paid for by somebody - it's either going to come from taxpayers or it's going to come from ratepayers,"" Bor enstein said. ""Raising rates now would get us a lot of conservation."" Davis also wants financial incentives for conservation and power-plant construction in time to make a difference this summer. ""Our mouths were agape"" at the rapid timetable, Keeley said. Legislators are rushing to pass those incentives by month's end, he said, allowing three months for consumers and suppliers to act before the heat of summer. Among bills considered Tuesday, the Senate Energy Committee approved legislation to accelerate the siting of power plants. It also was considering a proposal to restructure rates for generators that use renewable energy to provide about 30 percent of the state's electricity. ---- Bill to Cut Some Power Prices Stalls Energy: Democrats balk at varying payment levels for alternative generators. By DAN MORAIN, JULIE TAMAKI, Times Staff Writers SACRAMENTO--Legislation aimed at cutting prices for more than a fourth of the power consumed in California stalled Tuesday, as Democrats questioned why a few alternative energy generators--some of them campaign donors--stood to receive higher payments than others. Lawmakers working to unravel California's energy mess have been negotiating for weeks in an effort to cut the price paid to more than 600 generators of alternative power by more than half, to below 8 cents a kilowatt-hour. Those alternative generators' contracts with utilities have shot up in recent months because of a rise in the price of natural gas. The cash-strapped corporations have suspended or made partial payments to the generators over the last few months, causing many to shut down or reduce their outputs. But even as the lawmakers reached agreement that pushed the average price to near the 8-cent level per kilowatt-hour, some generators would have received higher prices under the bill by state Sen. Jim Battin (R-La Quinta). Some of the generators that stood to benefit had donated to Battin's campaigns. One--Windtec Inc.--gave Battin a $20,000 campaign donation in 1999. Others contributed from $3,000 and $5,000 last year. Battin acknowledged that he has received campaign contributions from some wind power generators but said there is no connection between the donations and the bill's provisions. ""It is illegal, it is unethical and it's not how I do business,"" he said. Battin noted that 25% of the state's alternative energy producers are in his district. As Democrats on the Senate Energy Committee blocked the bill, Battin warned that some alternative energy producers might react to the delay by trying to force Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric into bankruptcy. ""We will be the cause of bankruptcy,"" Battin said. That prompted Energy Committee Chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) to retort: ""I'm really tired of being threatened with bankruptcy."" Alternative energy producers, including those that use wind, solar power, biomass and other means, produce 27% of the energy used in California. They sell the electricity to the utilities, which in turn transmit it to retail consumers. But with the utilities facing multibillion-dollar debts, the alternative energy producers under contract with Edison have not been paid since November. Scores of alternative energy producers supported the measure. Edison International and the San Francisco-based consumer group, the Utility Reform Network, opposed it. Michael Florio of the Utility Reform group said the deal could result in higher consumer prices; an Edison representative said the same thing. Battin and Assemblyman Fred Keeley (D-Boulder Creek) worked out an arrangement with many of the generators. Keeley took the lead in the early negotiations, and then turned to Battin to introduce the legislation, SB 47X. Rather convoluted language would have allowed higher payments to a select few generators that produce electricity from wind and biomass. Most of California's wind suppliers, for instance, would have received about 6 cents per kilowatt-hour. But a handful of them, about half a dozen wind farms--mostly in the Palm Springs area represented by Battin--would have received 7.8 cents. Battin contends that other wind producers receive additional payments that boost them to the same level as Windtec and others that would get the higher payments. ""They get the same deal,"" Battin said of the handful of generators that would benefit from the provisions he added to the bill. In California's overall energy market, the amount of money that would have flowed to the favored generators is minor. But the added prices that would have been paid to the generators would have translated to at least $19 million in the next five years, to be absorbed by Southern California Edison customers, according to one analysis. Also Tuesday, more details were disclosed about another leg of the state's effort to escape from the energy crunch--the deals with large power generators to supply electricity to California for as long as 10 years. Those arrangements were announced by Gov. Gray Davis Monday as ""the bedrock"" of California's energy policy. But some consumer advocates warned that the deals could lock the state into excessively high-priced contracts. S. David Freeman, the general manager of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power and Davis' negotiator, said that the state guarded against that by varying the time spans of its deals. About 6,000 megawatts are expected to be available this summer, about one-third of the energy needed by the state, Freeman said. The amount of power under contract swells until more than 9,000 megawatts are contracted in 2004, half of the needed amount, before dipping to 8,000 megawatts in 2010. ""What we're doing here is what everybody said had to be done,"" Freeman said. ""We deliberately bought 50% so we'd have a good mix between long-term contracts, which may turn out to be somewhat higher or somewhat lower than the spot market,"" and purchases on the spot market. ---- PG&E could face mutiny on outages: SMUD, others may balk if utility orders summer blackouts By Carrie Peyton Bee Staff Writer (Published March 7, 2001) Sacramento's electric utility wants out of a deal that imposes rolling blackouts locally on PG&E's command. So do a lot of other utilities. They've been writing letters, lobbying lawmakers and launching informal talks with Pacific Gas and Electric Co. to get off the hook before summer. Who dodges the blackout bullet ""is going to play out as a political hot button"" around the state, said George Fraser, head of the Northern California Power Agency, a coalition of municipal utilities. In Sacramento, the next volley is expected soon, with the Sacramento Municipal Utility District reportedly poised to notify PG&E that it will no longer black out homes and businesses on the larger utility's command. ""We are absolutely trying to fight off the requirement for rolling blackouts for the Sacramento area,"" said Linda Davis, one of seven elected members of the SMUD board of directors. Saying they don't want to be dragged down by somebody else's problems, two Southern California utilities have written grid operators asking to be exempted from any blackouts caused by PG&E's or Southern California Edison's financial woes. But in PG&E's view, ""California is in an energy crisis (and) ... we're all in this together,"" said spokesman John Nelson. The maneuvering comes amid bleak forecasts for power supplies this summer. Although Gov. Gray Davis has said conservation, new power plants and moderate weather could avert blackouts, officials at the Independent System Operator, which runs much of California's grid, expect frequent rotating outages. One consulting firm, Cambridge Energy Research Associates, predicts 20 hours of rolling blackouts during July and August, and about 200 hours of especially intense calls for voluntary cutbacks. Before blackouts hit, the jockeying over just whose lights, air conditioners and assembly lines will be shut down is growing. The outcome could affect millions of people statewide. The state Public Utilities Commission is probing rolling blackout programs run by the for-profit utilities it regulates, including PG&E and Edison. A PUC analysis has suggested that PG&E's program, which currently exempts about 40 percent of its customers, should spread the burden more broadly. For example, it said, 1.9 million homes and businesses are spared just because they share a circuit with a customer deemed ""essential."" But not-for-profit utilities such as SMUD, which answer to their own elected boards or city councils, have other worries. Many have already lined up their power supplies for summer. Some have raised rates or are considering raising rates. Some have taken extra conservation steps. They think those preparations ought to give them leverage to ease blackout clauses in their contracts with PG&E. SMUD general manager Jan Schori ""is going to use every avenue ... any avenue, to put pressure on,"" including lobbying the ISO, the governor and others, said utility director Davis. The Northern California Power Agency, a joint-powers authority that owns and operates power plants for municipal utilities, has begun informal negotiations with PG&E to change blackout rules, according to Fraser, its top executive. It is preparing to write PG&E, asking that its members be exempted from outages altogether. Failing that, it wants them to face fewer outages or to be compensated for cutting off power, he said. At SMUD, the utility board has met in closed session to discuss exactly what it is required to do during electric emergencies, under terms of the interconnection contract that links SMUD's lines to PG&E's. ""The contracts are being inspected with a fine-tooth comb,"" said SMUD director Howard Posner. Schori declined to comment on any specifics. Sources indicated that the main option being considered is notifying PG&E that because of changed circumstances, SMUD believes it no longer is required to routinely comply with outage requests. Other options being explored include re-negotiating existing agreements with PG&E. Posner said that ever since two days of rolling blackouts in January, constituents have been asking him, "" 'Why are we participating when we're not the problem?' And I don't have a good answer to that."" Several directors said SMUD has already spent a lot of money -- and is considering 16 percent rate increases -- to ensure that it has enough electricity under contract to meet its customers' summer demands. They believe PG&E should do the same. ""We're almost like a David against Goliath here,"" said board vice president Genevieve Shiroma. ""The huge investor-owned utilities next door have severe problems that they need to get under control."" In addition, SMUD plans to argue that because it can cut usage through its ""Peak Corps"" program, which remotely turns off air conditioners at volunteer households, it has already done its part without rotating outages, director Davis said. PG&E believes the interconnection agreements that govern smaller utilities' ties to its transmission lines have ""benefits and burdens to both sides,"" said Nelson. ""It wouldn't be fair or good policy for just one provision to be altered without taking a look at how that affects the entire contract,"" he said. Interconnection contracts generally have clauses that require utilities to help each other out to avert greater emergencies. Sometimes reducing demand -- called load shedding -- can be the only way to stabilize the electric grid in the seconds after a major power plant or transmission line fails. ""It's been around in the electrical fabric forever,"" said Jim Pope, head of Silicon Valley Power, Santa Clara's city-run utility. In addition to legal requirements, ""you have a moral obligation so you don't bring the system to collapse."" Like other city-run utilities, Silicon Valley Power has a contract with PG&E that requires it to shed load during an electric emergency. But its contract allows it to work with big users to reduce their demand, so no one has to be completely shut off. Such agreements, formed long before deregulation when PG&E ran the north state's grid, now are complicated by the 1997 creation of the state Independent System Operator. The ISO today runs pieces of the grid owned by PG&E, Edison, and San Diego Gas & Electric Co. If it believes power use is about to surge past supply, potentially triggering a grid collapse across the western United States, the ISO notifies the three utilities that they have to shed a certain number of megawatts. The big utilities meet that requirement two ways. They cut circuits to some of their own customers, and they tell smaller, connected utilities to cut a proportionate share. In Northern California, about 80 percent of the outages are borne by PG&E customers and the rest by customers of SMUD and other municipal utilities and irrigation districts. ""In one sense, we are all in this together. If SMUD were in danger of going down, we would hope others would help us out,"" said SMUD's Posner. ""But that's if we're in danger from circumstances beyond our control, not from mismanagement or lack of financial wherewithal."" It is unclear what penalties, if any, a utility would face for violating an interconnection agreement. In the long run, the issue would be fought either in the courts or before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, grid officials said. As a practical matter, in the seconds when the risk to the grid is greatest, if one utility refused to shed load, the ISO would probably solve to problem by calling on PG&E, Edison or others who are willing to make deeper cutbacks, they said. ---- PUC to Decide Fate Of Utility Workers PG&E, Edison want to trim costs by laying off thousands, cutting service Bernadette Tansey, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, March 7, 2001 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle State regulators are set to decide today whether debt-ridden Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison can conserve cash by laying off thousands of workers and letting service standards slip. Union officials who protested the layoffs before the California Public Utilities Commission warn that if the cuts go through, neighborhoods hit by power outages could stay dark for hours, and more customers could face busy signals when they call about their bills. An administrative law judge agreed, advising the commission in February to order the utilities to restore 725 positions already cut and block the elimination of an additional 2,125 jobs. Judge John Wong said PG&E and Edison have acknowledged the layoffs will not substantially improve their shaky financial condition, which arose from skyrocketing wholesale electricity costs the utilities could not pass on to consumers under a rate cap. ""The savings would barely make a dent,"" Wong said in his draft decision. The two companies together claim that their debt from power purchases amounts to more than $13 billion. PG&E says it has saved $18 million from the first wave of 325 layoffs. Wong's recommendation is already running into resistance on the PUC. Commissioner Richard Bilas said the five-member panel should not be micromanaging the utilities in a time of crisis. Bilas has proposed an alternate ruling that would allow the utilities to make the cuts, but provide for PUC monitoring of service in case the commission wants to step in later. ""We're in a situation where the utilities are not collecting the revenues they need to operate, and yet we may be guilty of not letting them cut expenses where they can cut expenses,"" Bilas said. PG&E spokesman Jon Tremayne said savings from the layoffs are helping to keep electricity running and gas flowing. ""It keeps cash in our accounts so we can keep doing day-to-day business,"" Tremayne said. In addition to the 325 positions dropped so far, PG&E is proposing to cut an additional 675 during the next three to six months. The cuts affect temporary and contract workers who read meters, handle new service hookups and replace equipment. PG&E has no plans to eliminate permanent positions. The company is struggling to keep up with a higher workload at its call center as customers deluge the lines with inquiries about their rising bills and the effects of deregulation. Calls to PG&E ballooned from 1.3 million in January 2000 to 2.3 million in January 2001. Bilas advocates granting PG&E's request to temporarily relax standards requiring the utility to respond swiftly to customer calls and to read customers' meters once a month. PG&E wants to read meters bimonthly and send bills based on the estimated use between readings. Discrepancies could be corrected later. Wong called those measures unacceptable. He said customers need to know immediately if their efforts to conserve power are working. Wong also said the utilities' own experts have said the workforce reductions will lengthen the time required to restore power after nonemergency equipment failure. Eric Wolfe, communications director for the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 1245, said some customers have already been left without power overnight because PG&E is trying to avoid the use of overtime on nonemergency power outages. ""It hurts a lineman to walk away from the job leaving a customer without power,"" Wolfe said. Tremayne said PG&E is trying to minimize overtime costs, but denied the company has allowed customers to go without power out of financial concerns. He said crews were pulled out when darkness and falling trees made the work too dangerous. ---- Power prices could soar during the summer Posted at 10:35 p.m. PST Tuesday, March 6, 2001 BY STEVE JOHNSON Mercury News Unless Gov. Gray Davis arranges significantly more long-term electricity contracts or persuades people to turn off a lot more lights, California's unpredictable spot market for power could wreak havoc this summer. Even with the 40 long-term deals announced by Davis on Monday, experts interviewed Tuesday said, up to 43 percent of the state's daily needs may have to come from this highly volatile market, in which power is bought within a day of need. That could could prove hugely expensive, because some spot market energy has cost five to six times what it would under the long-term contracts. It's widely expected that consumers ultimately would have to pay that tab, which could amount to billions of dollars. And because that power won't be locked up in contracts, there is no guarantee it will be available when it's needed, which could lead to blackouts, according to a recent report to the California Independent System Operator, which oversees three-fourths of the state's power grid. ``The situation in California could reach catastrophic proportions,'' the report concluded, adding that unless things change dramatically, ``it is a virtual certainty that peak demand will go unmet during many hot summer days.'' Steven Maviglio, Davis' press secretary, conceded Tuesday that the spot market could be troublesome. ``It's a major concern,'' he said, which is why the state is trying to line up more power contracts, speed up power plant construction and promote conservation. During the normally hot month of August, peak daily demand for power in the Independent System Operator's territory is expected to hit about 47,700 megawatts -- enough for nearly 48 million homes. The state's three main utility firms generate about 8,200 megawatts and have long-term contracts from wind, solar and other energy sources for about 11,700 megawatts more. That totals about 20,000 megawatts. Add in the 7,000 megawatts of long-term power that Davis has announced for this summer, and the state is still nearly 21,000 megawatts short. Costly proposition If all that power has to be obtained on the spot market, the price could be high. On Friday, last-minute purchases on the market averaged $411 per megawatt-hour, compared to about $150 per megawatt-hour for all power obtained by the Independent System Operator and $69 per megawatt-hour on average under Davis' long-term contracts. It's possible that not all 21,000 megawatts would have to be purchased on the market. Assuming Davis is successful in getting people to save 10 percent -- which could prove difficult -- conservation could reduce peak demand by nearly 5,000 megawatts. California also might be able to trade for another 5,000 megawatts with the federal government's Bonneville Power Administration and a hydroelectric operator in British Columbia, said Arthur O'Donnell, editor of California Energy Markets, a trade publication. Under such deals, those two outfits often send that much power to California when they don't need it and California returns the same amount or more when its demand is low. But O'Donnell said it wasn't clear whether 5,000 megawatts would be available this summer, because ``they still haven't gotten the snowpack they need in the Pacific Northwest,'' which could limit that region's generating capacity. Still falling short Even if those hydropower imports are available and conservation works as Davis hopes, it's likely California would still require the spot market for 11,000 megawatts to meet the August demand. That's more than 20 percent of the state's overall power needs. ``All of the surrounding states are buying probably less than 5 percent, at most, of their energy on the spot market,'' said Frank Wolak, a Stanford economist, who monitors electricity prices for the Independent System Operator. He worries about how much that power could cost and is disturbed that state officials haven't adequately addressed the issue. ``No one has any idea what they are going to do, and that is part of the problem,'' he said. Officials at Pacific Gas & Electric Co. are particularly concerned. They fear that their company -- which is nearing bankruptcy -- could get stuck for much of the spot market purchases by the Independent System Operator, which has threatened to bill the utilities for the cost. Fearing the annual bill for that power could hit $2.4 billion this year, PG&E wants the tab sent to the Department of Water Resources, which also is buying power on the spot market for the state. But the Department of Water Resources has objected to that idea and the matter is expected to be heard today by the California Public Utilities Commission. ``We're looking for clarity on a number of issues'' regarding how the spot market will work ``and certainly that's one of them,'' said Thomas Hannigan, the water agency's director. ``I don't think anybody knows the answer of who's going to pay for it,'' added PG&E spokesman John Nelson. But Nettie Hoge, executive director of the Utility Reform Network in San Francisco, said she suspects consumers ultimately will foot the bill. The unfortunate likelihood about spot market purchases is that ``ratepayers are responsible for all of it eventually,'' Hoge said. ``It's a very big problem.'' ---- Power Plant Plans Cause Conflicts East county residents blast supervisors Jason B. Johnson, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, March 7, 2001 Industry dreams of building new power plants in east Contra Costa's hills are prompting an angry reaction among residents and elected officials who say they don't want more plants. The conflict was sparked by a vote by county supervisors yesterday to aggressively explore possible sites for new power plants throughout the county. The measure by Supervisors Mark DeSaulnier and Federal Glover, which passed on a 4-to-0 vote, directs the county administrator and Department of Community Development to compile a report on possible sites within 45 days. Supervisor Donna Gerber abstained after criticizing the plan for potentially repeating the same mistakes that plagued the state's energy deregulation effort by not considering how much energy the state, region and county will need in future years, and how much power is slated to come online. Gerber said alternative power sources, such as solar, should also be examined. A site drawing much attention is on top of a deposit of natural gas near the Concord Naval Weapons Station off Highway 4. The owners of 70 acres of land near the station recently formed a company, Golden State Power Co., to pursue construction of at least one small peaker plant and a much larger facility capable of producing 600 megawatts. The site could hold up to three small 50-megawatt peaker plants, and a larger 15-acre natural gas plant, said Steve Thomas, managing partner with Golden State. No land use applications have been filed. Thomas said 30 acres could be kept as open space to form a buffer around the project. ""Both (facilities) are state of the art,"" said Thomas. ""We believe that the site is ideal."" But east county residents at yesterday's meeting blasted the supervisorial measure and the power plant proposal, complaining that more plants could put people's health at risk. The region already is home to six power plants. ""We're going to get a good dose of poor air quality and (negative) health conditions from this,"" said Concord resident Evelyn Frietas. ""I think we need to stop and think about what we're doing to our quality of life."" Dan Torres said the home he bought in 1995 at a new Bay Point development would be alarmingly close to the proposed Golden State site. ""It will be dragging emissions over our home,"" said Torres. ""I didn't buy a home on that hill to be surrounded by power plants."" There are six power plants in operation in east Contra Costa. Pittsburg already has two power plants, and two more under construction. City Council members Frank Aiello and Yvonne Beals said the Antioch-Pittsburg area has done more than its share of energy production. Aiello said Pittsburg will soon produce enough energy to power three million homes in California. ""When is enough, enough?"" asked Aiello. ""Pittsburg has shouldered responsibility for a land-fill and two more power plants. At some point you have to say enough."" Beals said that while power plants have added millions to the city's general fund, the negatives of additional plants could outweigh the benefits. ""I don't think that Pittsburg or east county should be the dumping ground for energy for California,"" said Beals. ---- Supervisors set search for power plant sites The board also heard from the potential developers of a 650-megawatt plant between Bay Point and Concord By Thomas Peele TIMES STAFF WRITER MARTINEZ -- Contra Costa County supervisors took tentative steps Tuesday toward allowing the construction of at least one small power plant before summer, ordering that its staff identify potential sites in unincorporated areas within seven weeks. The board voted 4-0 to search for locations. Third District Supervisor Donna Gerber abstained, saying her colleagues lacked a ""comprehensive context'' to identify sites. ""I think the board knows just enough to be dangerous,'' she said. Gerber said the county should examine the potential for additional power plants within its borders but not investigate individual sites yet. But Fourth District Supervisor Mark DeSaulnier said the action was necessary because of the energy crisis and because of Gov. Gray Davis' call for local governments to help speed the construction of so-called ""peaker plants"" before July and August. ""I wouldn't do this except under an emergency,"" DeSaulnier said after the vote. ""There are unusual circumstances. We're not talking about putting this in a residential area."" Fifth District Supervisor Federal Glover backed DeSaulnier, but said he hoped for a location outside his heavily industrialized East County district. ""There's a lot of concern in East County as to the number of plants,"" he said. DeSaulnier said, though, that the only logical place for a small plant remains the ""industrial belt'' stretching along the waterfront from West County to Antioch. He declined to provide specifics, but said the only other potential site outside the industrial areas was the Concord Naval Weapons Station property. But he quickly added that he believes the U.S. Department of Defense ""would never go for it."" Also, DeSaulnier said he could not rule out the county building the plant itself and entering the electricity-selling market during peak demand times. Board Chairwoman Gayle Uilkema called that idea extremely premature and unlikely. ""That's a very powerful decision. I do not think we are ready,'' she said. The California Energy Commission listed the Equilon refinery in Martinez as one of 32 potential ""peaker plant"" sites in the state last week. Peaker plants kick in during peak usage times. Davis called for their quick construction before the height of summer and its energy demand for air conditioning. Plants that generate as much as 50,000 megawatts don't need Energy Commission approval. DeSaulnier said he believed a peaker plant could be built about a month after final approval. Supervisors also heard from the potential developers of a 650-megawatt plant between Bay Point and Concord. Walnut Creek commercial real estate developer Steve Thomas announced his intentions for the site north of Highway 4 last week. Construction could take two years. Eric Hasseltine, a consultant representing Thomas and what he described as a ""brand new"" company for the site, the Golden State Power Co., told supervisors that if they intended to speed peaker plant construction they should do what they can to expedite the larger plant. The Thomas site could house a peaker plant until the proposed larger one goes online. A large natural gas line passes under the site. DeSaulnier seemed cautious about the larger proposal, which he had described last week as ""a good site."" Uilkema, too, said she knew too little about it to comment. A resident who lives near the Thomas property asked the board to ""build it (the larger plant) closer to where you have industrial areas. You have to carefully consider the people"" who live nearby, said Dan Torres, 39. Evelyn Freitas of Concord said she lives downwind of the proposed site. ""Our air quality is going to be worse then it is now,"" she said. Gerber played on the environmental issues, saying the county already ranks second statewide to Los Angeles in volume of hazardous materials and amount of electrical generation. ---- Peter Schrag: California's $90 billion infrastructure gap (Published March 7, 2001) By now, California's surreal energy mess has grown from a crisis to a condition. It may not be quite as permanent as, say, death and taxes, but it's still something that could get a whole lot worse before it gets better. Until there's more realistic pricing, no gubernatorial pea-under-the-shell buyout scheme will solve it. Beyond the energy crisis, however, and in many ways similar to it, California faces a whole range of other infrastructure problems -- in transportation, in water resources and sewer systems, in school and university buildings -- that seem, once again, to be all but forgotten. The Business Roundtable has estimated the need at roughly $90 billion, though no number can possibly be exact. What's certain is that after a burst of high-level investment in public facilities during the 1950s and 1960s, California's annual capital investment has sunk precipitously -- from an annual $150 per capita in the 1960s, according to a set of recent studies for PPIC, the Public Policy Institute of California, to about $30 in the 1990s. But you probably don't need to tell anyone driving Bay Area or Los Angeles freeways or looking at the ubiquitous portable classrooms, those dreary brown boxes that house a fourth of our public school students. Ever since passage of Proposition 13 in 1978, we have been flying the flag of deferred maintenance. As in the state's electricity crisis, however, there's no way California can effectively address those problems merely by building or bonding itself out of them. In highway construction, in developing water resources, in finding enough university space to accommodate the Tidal Wave II of students, managing demand is likely to be as crucial to any solution as new construction. In the energy market -- and in electricity particularly -- it's been a familiar principle ever since David Roe of the Environmental Defense Fund first persuaded Pacific Gas and Electric that a dollar invested in conservation may be worth as much as the same investment in new generation. But in most other sectors of California's infrastructure, state and local, it's a lesson still to be learned. There have been scattered attempts to encourage conservation and reduce demand -- significant reduction in water use, for example, through the installation of low-flow faucets and low-flush toilets; some reduction in traffic by using rush-hour diamond lanes or by adjusting highway or (as in New York) bridge tolls to levels of congestion. But as pointed out by David Dowall, an urban economist at Berkeley, state policy-makers have not really begun to ""consider how demand management strategies can be applied to infrastructure service areas,"" or how the more efficient use of facilities and more realistic pricing -- highway tolls, say, or parking fees -- ""can reduce demand for scarce infrastructure resources."" In any case, says Dowall in one of the PPIC reports, we should pick which major projects we will build not just according to per capita estimates of how much we need, but according to how much consumers are willing to pay for them. To avoid hurting the poor, congestion-related highway tolls and other tariffs can be rebated on the basis of income. University fees can be means-tested. In California, they also could be adjusted to encourage summer school classes and other off-peak uses, rather than (as in the past) making UC summer courses more expensive. Given the political and economic uncertainties, there's no way to know how far such demand management can be taken. But there's not much doubt that, as Dowall and others point out, the state's infrastructure planning is a jumble of uncoordinated agency agendas and wish lists. The Legislature last year passed a bill, AB 1473, by Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg, that requires the governor, beginning next year, to submit an annual five-year infrastructure plan for state agencies and public schools, along with recommendations on how to fund it. In addition, Gov. Gray Davis' infrastructure commission is expected to recommend better coordination of infrastructure and land-use planning when it issues its report this spring. That would be a start. As California State Treasurer Phil Angelides has pointed out, the state desperately needs to start joint planning -- regional planning -- for housing, roads and other resources to reduce the need for long commutes; to preserve open space; and to bring jobs to where people live and housing to where the jobs are. That would itself reduce demand for more freeway lanes and, equally important, improve the quality of life. At present, most planning for housing, roads, water systems and other facilities rarely recognizes the regional impact of local decisions. In the East Bay, slow-growth forces push well-intended initiatives that would force more development into Tracy or Modesto and further tax the transportation systems to Silicon Valley. In city after city, there are beggar-thy-neighbor efforts to grab yet another shopping mall that produces a little extra sales tax revenue for the city that gets it, and that often compounds traffic and revenue problems in adjacent communities. In higher education we divide bond proceeds evenly among UC, the California State University and the community colleges even though the community colleges serve eight times as many students as UC. We plan road projects according to county, not regional, priorities. It is all done according to antiquated political and fiscal formulas that often no longer make sense. We don't just need better capital planning; we need a whole new planning system. ---- PG&E power plan debated at hearing A PUC meeting on the utility's capacity expansion project for the Tri-Valley follows weeks of protest from officials, residents Power upgrade in valley debated By Megan Long TIMES STAFF WRITER SAN FRANCISCO -- Dublin officials and the developer of a Livermore subdivision faced questions Tuesday about their opposition to alternative routes of PG&E's controversial Tri-Valley power upgrade plan -- and answered by restating their long-standing objections. Tuesday's cross-examination came during the third and likely final week of the California Public Utility Commission's evidentiary hearings on the utility's $91 million Tri-Valley 2002 Capacity Increase Project. It has followed weeks of protests of PG&E's upgrade plans by officials and residents of Livermore, Pleasanton, Dublin and San Ramon. And before the questioning started, Dublin Vice Mayor Janet Lockhart reiterated concerns about an alternative route deemed ""environmentally superior"" that would place a substation just 1,000 feet north of Interstate 580 between Tassajara and Fallon roads. She said that would undermine the results of a 15-year process to plan the eastern development of the city. ""It's extremely important to the residents of our community to follow a plan we worked hard to produce,"" she said. Dublin officials favor PG&E's proposed placement of the station three miles north of the freeway, away from new high-tech company offices and housing developments. Besides the Dublin substation, the project calls for construction of a substation in North Livermore, expansion of the Pleasanton substation and installation of 23.5 miles of new lines. In response to questions from PUC Administrative Law Judge Michelle Cooke, Dublin's public works director, Lee Thompson, confirmed that the Lin family, the owner of the property where the alternative substation would go, wasn't interested in selling the land to PG&E. Cooke also asked Thompson to define a ""discretionary permit,"" which is how city officials said they might treat a permit for a substation. Lee said that type of permit is one the city has the right to approve or not depending on the project's impact. Eddie Peabody, Dublin's community development director, testified that the zoning for the Lin property accommodates uses such as commercial business, research and development and light manufacturing. It would not, he said, be appropriate for a power substation. He said parcels within the East Dublin area that could host a station would include those zoned for public and semi-public uses, including land recently bought by Oracle and Sun Microsystems for new campuses. While Dublin officials testified that one buyer of land in that area paid $86 per square foot, others suggested land prices would be inflated to help make a PG&E land buy look prohibitively expensive. An executive of Centex Homes, the developer of new houses near Isabel Avenue and Concannon Boulevard, objected to an alternative route that would place high-voltage transmission lines overhead along Isabel and Stanley Boulevard. David Barclay, president of Centex's Northern California division, said that the 80-foot to 150-foot towers would have a severe visual impact on residents of the Prima tract. Ed O'Neill, a lawyer for the Kottinger Ranch Homeowners Association, pointed out that existing distribution lines on 50-foot poles on Isabel already mar the view for residents. The Foley family has been ranching on land south of Pleasanton city limits for years, said their attorney Kennedy Richardson. The utility's project would place overhead lines and a transmission station on rolling hills that the family envisions as one day being public open space with limited development, Richardson said. Lawyers for Pleasanton, Livermore, Kottinger Ranch and Centex are scheduled to cross-examine a PG&E engineer today about the project's routing. That testimony should be the most controversial of the hearings. Judge Cooke is expected to recommend an alignment by July to the PUC, which will make the final decision. ---- NEWS State OKs 'Peaker' Power Plant at SFO / Temporary generator could be sending electricity to 50,000 homes by August Marshall Wilson 03/08/2001 The San Francisco Chronicle FINAL Page A.20 (Copyright 2001) State energy officials yesterday approved plans to build a temporary electrical plant at San Francisco International Airport that should generate enough juice to power 50,000 homes by August. Meeting in Sacramento, the Energy Commission voted 4-0 to give the green light to the gas-fired plant. It will operate during peak summer and winter demand to help the state avoid Stage 3 power alerts and rolling blackouts. Texas-based El Paso Merchant Energy Co. won approval under a new state law mandating speedy, four-month reviews of so-called ""peaker"" plants. It was the only one of seven applications statewide to win approval. The other proposals were withdrawn for various reasons. The 51-megawatt plant, formally called the United Golden Gate Power Project, is scheduled to be built at the northwest corner of the airport near the United Airlines maintenance center. Within the next few weeks El Paso plans to apply to build a 571- megawatt, $400 million plant in the same area, company spokesman Jesse Frederick said. It would undergo a separate review by state energy officials. The small ""peaker"" plant approved yesterday is to generate electricity beginning around Aug. 1 for up to three years. After the end of three years, the plant would be closed or converted to a cleaner-burning system. Under state law, a temporary ""peaker"" plant is permitted to spew more air pollution than a permanent plant. El Paso's temporary plant is to be built next to a co-generation plant operated by United Airlines. It would use existing connections for natural gas and water supplies and tap into existing power transmission lines. Electricity generated by the plant would be pumped into the state's electrical grid, Energy Commission spokesman Gary Fay said. It would also serve as a backup for San Francisco Airport in case of a blackout. No one spoke against the proposed plant at yesterday's commission meeting. The proposal, however, has been criticized by area residents and environmentalists worried about air pollution. Scott Buschman, a professional photographer and San Bruno resident, said yesterday it was unjust that state officials 100 miles away in Sacramento approved a Texas company's proposal to put a power plant on land owned by San Francisco. ""The fact that they approved it without considering the public's concerns, foremost air quality, is very disturbing,"" he said. Fay said the plant complies with clean-air standards. Answering the criticism about the location of yesterday's deliberation, he said three hearings and several workshops were held in communities near the airport. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. ---- Crossed Wires: Major Kinks Emerge In Gov. Davis's Plan To Power California --- State's Outlays for Electricity May Be Hard to Recover Without Rate Increases --- Betting on Long-Term Deals By Wall Street Journal staff reporters Rebecca Smith, Mitchel Benson and John R. Emshwiller 03/08/2001 The Wall Street Journal A1 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- Earlier this year, Gov. Gray Davis made what may be the biggest bet in the history of the nation's biggest state: that he could tame an out-of-control electricity market and avoid devastating blackouts without busting the state's budget, antagonizing its consumers or derailing his own political career. His wager is still on the table, but the assumptions that underlie it are looking increasingly shaky these days. The governor has already spent around $2 billion of public money buying hugely expensive wholesale power, taking over the role formerly played by the state's near-bankrupt electric utilities. And California will probably be obliged to spend billions more before its electricity market stabilizes and those utilities are restored to some semblance of financial health. Under the governor's plan, California aims to recoup the money it is using to buy electricity by issuing $10 billion in bonds. That way it would still have a healthy budget surplus to finance new spending on roads, schools and other public services. But there's a potentially big obstacle to this plan. The state Legislature, worried about racking up billions in new debt, has put limits on the size of any bond offering. In broad terms, the Legislature's action would allow the state to borrow only four times as much as it can recover annually from utility customers. Right now that doesn't appear to be much. Under the current rate structure, essentially set in place by California's flawed 1996 electricity-deregulation plan, consumers pay far less for power than the cost of acquiring it on the wholesale market. Preliminary estimates submitted by utilities last month to the California Public Utilities Commission show the state's share of the proceeds from electricity sales this year could be as little as $241 million -- not enough to support even $1 billion in bond sales under the Legislature's formula. That would leave the state on the hook for much of the money it has already paid for power -- not to mention the billions more Gov. Davis will need to spend. That, in turn, raises the prospect that California's economy and its credit rating both could deteriorate significantly. But state finance officials say that, based on their own projections, they will be able to extract enough money to support a $10 billion bond issue. Walking a careful line between fiscal prudence and political survival, Mr. Davis and others in his administration are scrambling to come up with ways to get around the legislative restrictions without raising rates for consumers. ""If I wanted to raise rates, I could solve this problem in 20 minutes,"" Mr. Davis says. The governor says he believes that the state can obtain enough affordable power through long-term power-supply contracts to avoid the need for a big rate increase. The billions of dollars the state hopes to borrow would be used to help pay for power until electricity prices drop, as they are expected to do when new power plants come online over the next few years. The Davis administration fears that what may be its only other option -- a big increase in retail electric rates -- could prompt angry consumer groups to seek new electricity laws through a statewide ballot initiative during next year's election. That's when Mr. Davis is expected to run for a second term as governor. But trying to save California without rate increases is forcing Mr. Davis to make some colossal gambles with the state's money. State officials estimate that in the next several months, California will need to spend as much as $6 billion on power purchases -- equivalent to the state's entire fiscal surplus. Mr. Davis is also looking to spend several billion more to buy the transmission assets of three investor-owned utilities in order to restore two of them to credit-worthiness. He also has announced plans to spend several hundred million dollars more on conservation programs designed to reduce demand while new power plants are being built in the state. In order to limit the state's financial exposure in the meantime, the governor and his aides have, in some cases, ignored state law. They have threatened appointed officials who have stood in the way. And they have sharply restricted the flow of information to the public. None of those steps is expected to do much to reduce state spending on power in the coming months. In a few weeks, power usage is expected to begin a sharp seasonal rise as Californians switch on their air conditioners with the coming of warmer weather. By various estimates, demand during peak periods this summer could outstrip supply by 10%, or several thousand megawatts. That could produce more rolling blackouts like the ones that hit Northern California earlier this year. It is also likely to put strong upward pressure on wholesale electricity prices. Steven Zimmerman, managing director of Standard & Poor's Corp., says Mr. Davis and his aides don't ""have a lot of time"" to put a cap on the state's financial exposure to the crisis. The credit-rating agency has put the state on credit watch for a possible downgrade, which would affect the value of all of California's outstanding public debt. Moody's Investor Service Inc. is also concerned. It said in a recent report that the power crisis could soon ""seriously threaten the health"" of the state's economy. Mr. Davis, a Democrat and career politician, was dealt a bad hand when he took office in 1999. The deregulation plan that sparked the state's electricity crisis was enacted under his predecessor, Republican Pete Wilson. But Mr. Davis was slow to react to early signs of trouble this past summer and alarms sounded by members of the state Legislature. By the time Mr. Davis finally sprang into action earlier this year, a troublesome power-supply squeeze had escalated into a crisis. In a Jan. 17 declaration of emergency, the governor designated the state Department of Water Resources to take the utilities' place as the daily buyer of huge quantities of electricity. His hope: that by making the state the dominant player in California's power sector, he would ease electricity producers' concerns about getting paid and give the state enough clout to negotiate lower long-term power prices. Earlier this week, Mr. Davis announced final or tentative agreements with 20 power suppliers to furnish the state with a total of 8,900 megawatts for periods of as long as 20 years. But the supply situation remains extremely uncertain for this summer, when demand probably will top 45,000 megawatts. If the state can secure enough power under contract and push down demand through aggressive conservation, it might be able to squeak through the summer season. If not, it will be forced to keep buying huge amounts of costly power in the cash market. Under deregulation, retail electric rates were frozen for several years, while wholesale-power costs were free to fluctuate. When the plan was conceived, wholesale prices were low and expected to go lower. However, a combination of unexpected growth in power demand and a lack of new generating capacity helped produce a supply squeeze. Average wholesale prices more than tripled last year from 1999. And in January those prices were up 10-fold from a year earlier. By then, California's two biggest investor-owned utilities -- the Pacific Gas & Electric unit of PG&E Corp. and the Southern California Edison subsidiary of Edison International -- faced imminent financial collapse. They had racked up billions of dollars in wholesale power bills they couldn't afford to pay. As generators began shying away from selling to the two utilities, the Clinton administration forced them to sell power into the California market, an order left in place during the first weeks of the Bush administration. Still, northern California was hit by rolling blackouts on several days in early January. Since then, the DWR, which does some electricity trading as an adjunct to its main mission of managing the state's giant system of aqueducts and reservoirs, has had to learn the ins and outs of power markets on the run. It hasn't been easy. David Mills, trading-floor manager for the federal Bonneville Power Administration, says the water agency has at times offered to pay $50 to $100 per megawatt hour more than the available market price. ""They agree to prices that make you wonder,"" says Mr. Mills, whose organization markets electricity from federal dams in the Pacific Northwest. ""You'd at least think they'd check to see what the prevailing price is before throwing out their offer."" Mr. Mills says that ""to cut California some slack,"" he occasionally has instructed his traders to sell at prices lower than the DWR had offered to pay. Ray Hart, the water agency deputy director responsible for the power purchasing, says he isn't aware of any cases in which the DWR has overpaid. He says his team has been ""extremely successful by all measures."" Ultimately, the DWR's trading acumen is far less important than the overall arithmetic of power supply and demand in California. With the price of natural gas that feeds many of the region's generating plants at near record levels and some suppliers reluctant to sell into the troubled California market, wholesale electric prices remain stubbornly high and, in recent days, have again been rising. The Legislature has advanced the DWR about $3 billion from the state's general fund for power purchases. Under emergency legislation passed by the Legislature and signed by Mr. Davis on Feb. 1, the general fund is to be reimbursed from a planned bond sale later this year. But under terms of the emergency law, the water agency would have to wrest $2.5 billion a year in revenue from retail electricity rates in order to sell the $10 billion worth of bonds sought by Mr. Davis. Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg, a Southern California Democrat, says the formula was created to ensure that there would be a way to repay the bonds without draining the state's coffers. ""We didn't want to just open our wallets,"" he says. According to the language of the Feb. 1 law, the water agency gets what's left of revenue collected from ratepayers after the utilities pay certain of their own power-supply bills and other expenses. And, in their filings with the PUC last month, the utilities reckoned, under their worst-case scenarios, that there would be only $241 million available to the DWR this year. State officials are quietly pushing the PUC to rejigger the formula so that the water department gets more money -- even though that would clash with terms of the Feb. 1 law. Robert Miyashiro, deputy director of the Department of Finance, says the emergency law was ""drafted poorly"" and has led people to believe the DWR ""only gets the leftover money."" He predicts there will be ""cleanup legislation."" At the request of the Davis administration, the PUC is considering a plan to use a different revenue-sharing formula than the one in the state law. The proposed new formula was written ""in close consultation"" with Mr. Davis's Finance Department, says PUC President Loretta Lynch, who supports the initiative and is hoping to rush it through. The effort has drawn some opposition. Commissioner Richard Bilas at a recent PUC meeting questioned the legality of the commission attempting to change a formula set by the Legislature. PG&E is even more emphatic, since the DWR's extra money could come at the utility's expense. The formula ""threatens to undo the very financial protections for the utilities that [the new law] attempted to provide,"" the utility said in a recent filing with the PUC. As politicians and regulators wrestle with that issue, the Davis administration has taken a step to reduce the outflow of state cash that also seems to conflict with the Feb. 1 law. It was widely assumed that the law required the DWR to buy any electricity the state needed to keep its lights on. However, on many occasions, the DWR has refused to buy power on the grounds that it was too expensive, citing a portion of the new law that urges the agency to hold down costs. The task of covering any remaining shortfall has passed to the California Independent System Operator, which manages the state's energy grid and is charged with buying power when necessary to avert shortages. However, the ISO doesn't have any power-purchasing money of its own, and the major parties it would normally bill are PG&E and Edison, whose inability to pay their power bills was the reason the state started buying electricity in the first place. Amid criticism of its stance from generators, utilities and Wall Street, the DWR says it has started covering more of the utilities' electricity costs. The water agency is now buying 95% to 99% of what California needs in a given day, says the agency's Mr. Hart. But increased buying only adds to the uncertainty about the eventual tab. The state's legislative analyst, Elizabeth Hill, recently recommended that lawmakers hold off considering more than $2 billion in state spending on items ranging from college construction to beach cleanups because of continuing questions about the financial impact of the electricity crisis. Like others, Ms. Hill complains that the governor's office and state agencies haven't been forthcoming with information. Indeed, the DWR refuses to say precisely how much power it is purchasing and at what prices, though it has on several occasions gone back to the Legislature for more money. State officials say that data on its purchasing activities would give suppliers an advantage in continuing electricity-supply contract talks. State Controller Kathleen Connell, who is running for mayor of Los Angeles in an April election, recently announced plans to post state power-spending information on her department's Web site. But within 24 hours, Ms. Connell suspended that plan after discussions with senior Davis administration officials. ""I feel very strongly that this information should be publicly released,"" says Ms. Connell. ""I just don't want to do anything that would weaken the state's effectiveness in negotiating."" In an effort to more tightly control events, the governor obtained legislative approval to abolish the 26-member ISO board, which was made up of everyone from utility executives to representatives of consumer groups. He then appointed a new five-member board. To ensure a quick transition, the California attorney general threatened the old board members with fines of as much as $5,000 each if they didn't immediately relinquish their positions. All did. ""I was offended"" at the ""heavy-handed"" treatment, says Karen Johanson, a former ISO board member. One of the first acts of the ISO's new board was to close a meeting about the electricity crisis. The former ISO board routinely held such meetings in public. ISO attorneys say the meeting was largely designed as a private briefing for new board members and that the organization is committed to keeping its deliberations as open as possible. The Wall Street Journal and other news organizations have unsuccessfully challenged the closure in Sacramento state court. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Firsst article attached refers to the 1946 Nebraska case I mentioned to you= =20 in DC ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/02/2001 10:36 AM ----- =09Miyung Buster@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT =0903/02/2001 10:04 AM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: Ann M Schmidt/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bryan Seyfried/LON/ECT@ECT,=20 dcasse@whwg.com, dg27@pacbell.net, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron,=20 filuntz@aol.com, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Janet=20 Butler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeannie Mandelker/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff=20 Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John=20 John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT,=20 Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lysa=20 Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Margaret Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark=20 Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Markus=20 Fiala/LON/ECT@ECT, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT, Mike= =20 Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron= ,=20 Nicholas O'Day/AP/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Peggy=20 Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT, Richard=20 Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EE= S,=20 Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Stella=20 Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Sus= an=20 J Mara/NA/Enron@Enron, Mike Roan/ENRON@enronXgate, Alex=20 Parsons/EU/Enron@Enron, Andrew Morrison/LON/ECT@ECT, lipsen@cisco.com, Jane= l=20 Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Shirley A Hudler/HOU/ECT@ECT =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: Energy Issues Please see the following articles: Oakland Trib 2/28: ""Energy buyout foes say dump grid plan"" San Diego Union 2/28: ""Energy chief 'open' to plan on transmission line=20 buyout"" SF Chron, 2/28: ""Energy Experts Belie Davis' Rosy Prediction Summer expected to be crunch time"" Riverside Press 3/1: ""PUC to mull baseline level for electricity"" Orange Co. Register 3/1: ""Electricity notebook"" Contra Costa Times 3/1: ""PUC chief defends actions in crisis"" LA Times 3/2: ""Cal-ISO Says Suppliers Overcharged"" Sac Bee 3/2: Power profits targeted: Generators urged to forgive some of=20 utilities' debts (Steve Kean quoted) Energy Insight 3/2: ""California Energy Island Won't Work"" SF Chron 3/2: Ex-Regulator Urges Temporary Federal Price Caps on Power SF Chron 3/2: PG&E to Pay Creditors Only 15% / Smaller suppliers outraged= =20 over plan --- --- ------------------ Energy buyout foes say dump grid plan Davis critics point to federal veto disclosure=20 By Steve Geissinger SACRAMENTO BUREAU=20 SACRAMENTO -- Foes of Gov. Gray Davis' plan to buy power lines said Tuesday= =20 the 11th-hour disclosure of federal veto power over the stalled deal shows= =20 the effort should be abandoned altogether.=20 But Davis, who spent the day lobbying federal officials in Washington, D.C.= ,=20 said he's confident the Bush administration will support his plan to purcha= se=20 California's high-voltage transmission grid as part of a deal to rescue=20 teetering utilities.=20 Critics of the plan to ease the energy crisis, however, aren't so sure that= =20 Bush's Republican administration, which favors market-driven strategies ove= r=20 government intervention, will support the Democratic governor's proposal.= =20 Moreover, Republican legislators here said, the last-minute revelation that= =20 the plan would need the approval of federal regulators is further evidence= =20 that it is misdirected, overly complex and will take too long to implement.= =20 ""It means much more time will be required and time is something that=20 especially a lot of the creditors of the utilities do not have,"" said=20 Assembly Republican leader Bill Campbell of Villa Park.=20 ""I think this means we have to look at an alternative deal,"" Campbell said.= =20 Dan Nelson, a spokesman for Senate Republican leader James Brulte of Rancho= =20 Cucamonga, said Republicans generally oppose state purchase of power lines= =20 from utility companies as part of a plan to rescue them from financial=20 difficulty.=20 They instead support acquisition of some other asset from the utilities, su= ch=20 as stock warrants, in exchange for state assistance with their financial=20 woes.=20 Foes say the grid purchase would saddle the state with an antiquated networ= k=20 that could prove costly to maintain while supporters contend it could lead = to=20 quick improvements in a bottlenecked system overdue for repairs.=20 Word that Davis' plan to buy transmission lines would need federal approval= =20 surprised some legislators, their aides said. Open government advocates hav= e=20 harshly criticized the administration for secrecy surrounding much of the= =20 governor's energy crisis relief efforts.=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Chairman Curtis Hebert disclosed=20 recently in Washington that his board has authority over the deal, which he= =20 called ""nationalization"" that is ""against the best interests of the America= n=20 public.""=20 Following that disclosure, Democratic legislative leaders backing Davis' pl= an=20 said they hope to maneuver around the need for commission approval.=20 California can perhaps circumvent the potential hitch by relying in part on= a=20 1946 case involving the state of Nebraska that did not require federal=20 approval, according to Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, D-San Francisc= o.=20 Nevertheless, Davis, in Washington for a national governors meeting, said h= e=20 presented a nine-page proposal to U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham and= =20 expects a response by the end of the week.=20 ""He wants this problem solved and he's been very supportive,"" Davis said.= =20 ""He's recommended approval on every request I've made and I believe he will= =20 support our proposal.""=20 Abraham's office did not return calls seeking comment.=20 The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission that will likely weigh the fate of= =20 the plan, however, is independent of Abraham's office. Even so, Abraham is= =20 part of an energy policy team appointed by Bush, and Davis views Abraham's= =20 support of the proposal as a potential key to a federal nod.=20 Davis' history with the commission won't help his efforts. He and the=20 commission have been at odds for months over the governor's campaign to=20 impose tough wholesale price caps in the West.=20 The latest complications in the plan to rescue utilities came amid a=20 continuing deadlock in secret negotiations between the state and the Pacifi= c,=20 Gas and Electric Co., which is reluctant to sell its high-voltage=20 transmission lines.=20 Davis announced Friday that California's other major investor-owned utility= ,=20 Southern California Edison, had agreed on the basic framework of a deal tha= t=20 includes the sale of its transmission grid to the state for $2.8 billion.= =20 The utilities, trapped between high wholesale costs and lower=20 government-frozen retail rates, have been pushed to the brink of bankruptcy= =20 as they amassed nearly $13 billion in debt.=20 When the utilities could no longer buy enough power, the state began=20 brokering billions of dollars in emergency and long-term power deals to=20 thwart rolling blackouts.=20 Then Davis and legislators began developing strategies to ease the energy= =20 crisis, including increased conservation, construction of new generation=20 plants and ways to prevent utility bankruptcies.=20 Under Davis' plan to rescue utilities, the state would help fiscally restor= e=20 the companies with bonds in exchange for acquisition of their 26,000 miles = of=20 transmission grids. The state would upgrade the aging grid and then lease t= he=20 lines back to the utilities to operate. --- Energy chief 'open' to plan on transmission line buy out By Toby Eckert=20 COPLEY NEWS SERVICE=20 February 28, 2001=20 WASHINGTON -- Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham is ""open"" to California's pl= an=20 to take over utility transmission lines in the state, but stopped short of= =20 endorsing the proposal, saying he needed to study it further, Gov. Gray Dav= is=20 said yesterday.=20 ""From the tone of his remarks, I think his comments will be positive, and I= =20 hope by the end of the week he will be able to endorse the proposal or at= =20 least endorse a modified proposal that is satisfactory to us,"" Davis said= =20 after meeting with Abraham privately at the Department of Energy.=20 A spokesman for Abraham said he ""couldn't characterize (Abraham's) reaction= =20 one way or the other."" But he said Abraham was ""open to taking a look at th= e=20 material the governor provided"" and would follow up with Davis.=20 In his effort to drum up federal support for the buyout plan, Davis also=20 invoked a name that resonates throughout the halls of power in Washington:= =20 Alan Greenspan.=20 Davis said the Federal Reserve Board chairman ""in a general way thinks it= =20 makes sense to acquire transmission lines to make the capacity improvements= =20 that have not been done over the past 15 years.""=20 Greenspan and Davis informally talked about the power crisis this week, aid= es=20 to Davis said. Greenspan's comments could not be confirmed independently.= =20 Davis was in Washington for the four-day winter meeting of the National=20 Governors Association. But he also used the occasion to try to convince the= =20 new Bush administration -- and the media -- that his plans to solve=20 California's power woes are sound.=20 The governor spent about an hour briefing Abraham on the tentative agreemen= t=20 the state struck last week to acquire Southern California Edison's=20 transmission system for $2.76 billion. The state is trying to negotiate=20 similar deals with San Diego Gas and Electric and Pacific Gas and Electric = as=20 a condition for helping the utilities pay off about $13 billion in debt the= y=20 have accumulated because of soaring wholesale power costs.=20 The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission probably will have to sign off on= =20 any purchase plans, and FERC Chairman Curtis Hebert has made comments=20 indicating he is skeptical of the idea. But Davis believes he can overcome= =20 possible opposition at FERC if Abraham backs the plans.=20 Davis also said he and Abraham had ""some creative talks about how we might = be=20 able to find more megawatts for this summer"" and assigned staff members to= =20 work on that ""on a daily basis."" He did not elaborate on the ideas, saying= =20 there may be some details forthcoming ""in about two to three weeks.""=20 The governor will continue his East Coast sales pitch for the transmission= =20 line purchase -- and other elements of his plan to solve the power crisis -= -=20 in a meeting with Wall Street analysts and bond-raters today.=20 Davis and legislators also have pursued long-term power contracts with ener= gy=20 suppliers to wean the state from the open market, which became wildly=20 expensive last year.=20 Mirant Corp., which operates power plants in Northern California, said=20 yesterday that it has agreed to shift contracts from the defunct California= =20 Power Exchange to the Department of Water Resources, which is the state's= =20 electricity buyer.=20 The contracts amount to about 1,000 megawatts of power over the next 10=20 months. Last week, Mirant agreed to sell 750 megawatts to the state next=20 month. On a typical winter day, the maximum demand on the grid managed by t= he=20 state Independent System Operator, about 75 percent of the total state=20 network, is about 30,000 megawatts.=20 Davis' visit to Washington came against the backdrop of a muted federal=20 response to California's power crisis. The Bush administration, which favor= s=20 open power markets, has said it is largely up to state officials to solve t= he=20 problem, rejecting calls by Davis for more aggressive action like caps on= =20 wholesale power costs.=20 But the Democratic governor praised the Republican president publicly on=20 several occasions. He cited the administration's temporary extension of=20 federal orders that kept electricity and gas flowing to the state during=20 emergency shortages and its agreement to speed up federal review of new pow= er=20 plants.=20 ""Secretary Abraham and the Bush administration in general have been=20 wonderfully responsive to my requests. I cannot thank them enough,"" Davis= =20 said yesterday.=20 Other California Democrats have been less charitable toward President Bush.= =20 ""I think the president is going in the wrong direction on this issue,"" said= =20 Rep. Bob Filner, D-San Diego, a staunch advocate of wholesale price control= s.=20 ""A hands-off approach by the federal government, as the president has=20 suggested, is not going to solve this problem."" --- Energy Experts Belie Davis' Rosy Prediction Summer expected to be crunch time=20 Greg Lucas, Sacramento Bureau Chief Wednesday,?February 28, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 Sacramento -- Gov. Gray Davis' optimistic assessment that California may be= =20 on the ""back side"" of its energy crisis flies in the face of what many ener= gy=20 companies and other experts predict.=20 California's real test will come this summer when electricity usage sharply= =20 increases, and unless everything breaks the way Davis hopes, predictions ar= e=20 that large chunks of the state will be in the dark.=20 ""We're not on the back side of this crisis. This problem is far, far bigger= =20 than the governor is suggesting,"" said Gary Ackerman, executive director fo= r=20 the Western Power Trading Forum in Menlo Park.=20 ""To characterize the problem that way shows a recklessness that feeds on th= e=20 popular notion we don't have an energy crisis. We do. We have a very seriou= s=20 one that's going to hit us as temperatures and loads go up,"" Ackerman said.= =20 The Democratic governor's comments were made Monday in Washington, D.C.,=20 during an East Coast visit aimed at getting Washington and Wall Street=20 support for his energy plan.=20 He admitted more hard work is needed, but said the state is on the ""back si= de=20 of the crisis"" because lawmakers have passed bills needed to help lower=20 electricity prices.=20 ""Does that mean we're home free?"" Davis asked yesterday. ""No.""=20 But he again repeated that the state is on the back side of the crisis.=20 That is contrary to predictions by the Independent System Operator, which= =20 oversees the state's power market.=20 On any given day in June, the ISO estimates, the state will fall 6,815=20 megawatts short of demand. That would put nearly 7 million homes in the dar= k,=20 if it happens.=20 In July, the expected shortage is 4,685 megawatts. In August, it's 5,297=20 megawatts. That's if California has a normal summer. If it's hotter than=20 normal, the shortage grows.=20 The ISO's estimates tend to be conservative and do not include Davis'=20 conservation goal.=20 But even if a 10 percent reduction were achieved in June that would save=20 roughly 5,000 megawatts, the state would still be short 1,800 megawatts.=20 And there are other variables.=20 Depending on the snowpack and reservoir levels, hydroelectric plants may no= t=20 be able to run at full bore, which would also worsen the situation.=20 ""That is something the governor cannot spin his way out of,"" said Sen. Tom= =20 McClintock, R-Northridge.=20 Davis said a combination of new power plants and energy conservation will= =20 help the state get through this summer.=20 The clock is running. The ISO predicts shortages of 3,030 megawatts in May = -=20 - just two months away.=20 ""The real electricity crisis is going to be this summer, and I don't think= =20 we've made enough progress there,"" said Severin Borenstein, director of the= =20 University of California Energy Institute.=20 California won't be able to build its way out of the energy crisis by quick= ly=20 approving and building new power plants, Borenstein said.=20 The ISO's demand estimates already factor in the new power plants set to co= me=20 online this summer.=20 ""Unless we have a very mild summer and have lots of rainfall between then a= nd=20 now,"" Borenstein said, ""we are going to face some serious shortages.""=20 Like Davis, Borenstein says California needs to do more to conserve energy.= =20 Unlike Davis, he favors raising prices on big power consumers to give them = an=20 incentive to cut back.=20 But the Democratic governor may be sending Californians a mixed message.=20 By telling them the worst is over, he could undercut his plan by making=20 people believe more conservation is unnecessary.=20 Excluding what lies ahead, there are also plenty of energy issues left=20 unresolved right now.=20 Although Davis has reached a tentative deal with Southern California Edison= =20 on purchasing its share of the state's transmission system for $2.7 billion= =20 -- no such deal exists with either Pacific Gas & Electric or San Diego Gas = &=20 Electric.=20 Some alternative energy producers, like co-generation plants, are shutting= =20 down because the cash-poor utilities haven't paid them for several months. = No=20 cash means no fuel to run the turbines that make the juice.=20 Generators like Duke Energy and Reliant Energy aren't convinced the crisis= =20 has passed.=20 For starters, both companies are owed in excess of $700 million for=20 electricity bought by PG&E and Edison but never paid for.=20 ""There are a lot of issues still out there such as how much power your stat= e=20 will require this summer, whether there is enough generation on the ground = or=20 available commercially to handle the load if there is a significant spike i= n=20 demand,"" said Richard Wheatley, a Reliant spokesman.=20 Harvey Rosenfield, head of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights,= =20 has a slightly different take on whether the worst is over.=20 ""We've said all along it's a crisis inspired by the greed of the utilities= =20 and the energy companies,"" Rosenfield said.=20 ""Now that taxpayers are paying $1 billion every three weeks to buy=20 electricity and the ratepayers are going to pay between $13 billion and $20= =20 billion, the companies are happy and the crisis is over. What more could th= ey=20 want?"" --- PUC to mull baseline level for electricity It's been a decade since amounts were set. They vary by region, season and= =20 whether a home is heated with gas or electricity. By Robert T. Garrett The Press-Enterprise SACRAMENTO Inland-area residents who want a higher ""baseline quantity"" of lower-priced= =20 electricity each month will get a chance to plead their case in the next fe= w=20 weeks.=20 The state Public Utilities Commission will examine by early April whether t= he=20 monthly usage limits that trigger higher rates for residential customers ar= e=20 set too low, PUC President Loretta Lynch said Wednesday.=20 Baseline amounts are set by the PUC and vary by geographic region, season a= nd=20 whether a home is heated with gas or electricity.=20 ""It's been over a decade since the baselines were set,"" Lynch told the=20 Sacramento Press Club. "". . . I think it's about time for us to look at wha= t=20 these baselines are in the 21st century.""=20 Lynch, an appointee of Gov. Davis, declined to say whether the commission= =20 will make permanent a 9-percent rate hike imposed in early January on=20 residential customers of Southern California Edison, which serves much of t= he=20 Inland Empire.=20 With Edison and Pacific Gas Electric collapsing financially, the PUC impose= d=20 the rate hike -- and increases of up to 17 percent for Edison's large=20 business customers -- for 90 days.=20 The ""temporary surcharge"" will be lifted in early April unless the PUC vote= s=20 to keep it in effect.=20 Davis has said he hopes his plan to rescue the state's ailing utilities and= =20 avoid rolling blackouts can be carried out without further rate hikes.=20 Davis was in New York City on Wednesday, where the plan drew a tepid respon= se=20 from Wall Street.=20 Meanwhile, the unexpected shutdown of four Western power plants for repairs= ,=20 combined with scheduled maintenance at several in-state plants, forced=20 California grid officials to declare a Stage 2 alert.=20 Wall Street analysts who met privately with Davis in New York called his=20 moves a good step toward solving the energy crisis, but said more must be= =20 done.=20 ""He talked about a lot of short-term measures to alleviate problems for thi= s=20 summer, but he hasn't communicated a long-term fix,"" said Lawrence J.=20 Makovich, senior director of Cambridge Energy Research Associates.=20 Lynch said Wednesday that she and others on the PUC should have recognized= =20 sooner that utility deregulation wasn't working.=20 As part of its review of the January rate hikes, the PUC will invite public= =20 comments on baselines, Lynch said.=20 She said she plans to examine the baselines for each climate zone. In=20 Edison's service area, for instance, there are six.=20 Lynch also said the PUC would look at whether baselines are fair and=20 effective, and whether similar incentives to conserve energy should be buil= t=20 into the rates of businesses.=20 If the commission adopts ""incentives for businesses,"" she said, it has to= =20 make sure it doesn't set the baseline quantities too low for industrial=20 sectors such as agriculture and biotechnology. State Sen. Jim Battin, R-La= =20 Quinta, said Lynch's proposed review of the fairness of baselines in the=20 different climate zones ""could be encouraging.""=20 But he said he thinks businesses will oppose having baselines applied to=20 them.=20 Battin has waged a battle against baselines, which he calls ""social=20 engineering"" and which were mandated by a state law passed in the 1980s.=20 In the Inland area, the baseline system works like this:=20 In Temecula and Corona an ""all-electric"" home -- meaning one that is heated= =20 by electricity -- this summer will pay 12 cents a kilowatt for the first 30= 4=20 kilowatts used each month; for each additional kilowatt consumed, Edison wi= ll=20 charge 14 cents.=20 In Moreno Valley, Hemet, Rialto and most of Redlands, owners of=20 ""all-electric"" homes will pay Edison the lower rate for 514 kilowatts per= =20 month this summer.=20 In the Coachella Valley, in both summer and winter, Edison charges the=20 higher, 14-cent rate only for monthly consumption above 1,299 kilowatts.=20 Those with gas heating in their homes get different baseline allowances tha= n=20 do those with electric heating.=20 --- Electricity notebook=20 State, Calpine sign $8.3 billion in pacts.=20 March 1, 2001=20 Calpine Corp., a San Jose-based power plant owner, signed two contracts=20 valued at up to $8.3 billion to sell electricity to the California Departme= nt=20 of Water Resources for 10 to 20 years.=20 The contracts with the DWR, which buys electricity for the state's=20 two-biggest utilities, will provide 1,500 megawatts, or enough to light 1.5= =20 million homes, the company said.=20 Calpine signed one $5.2 billion, 10-year contract to sell 1,000 megawatts= =20 from new power plants. Deliveries are expected to begin July 1, with 200=20 megawatts. The full amount of power won't be available until July 2002.=20 A $3.1 billion contract calls for Calpine to provide power for 20 years.=20 Deliveries are expected to begin in August with 90 megawatts and to increas= e=20 to 495 megawatts in August 2002.=20 The contract also allows the state to buy up to 2,000 hours during peak=20 periods from 11 new generating units, once they are built.=20 In February, Calpine signed a 10-year contract valued at $4.6 billion with= =20 the DWR to supply 1,000 megawatts. A megawatt is enough to light 1,000 home= s.=20 Separately, Duke Energy Corp. said it is in discussions with the DWR on=20 long-term power supply contracts.=20 The Gas Co. agrees=20 to buy gas for PG&E=20 The Gas Co. said Wednesday that it reached an agreement with Pacific Gas &= =20 Electric Co. to buy natural gas for the troubled utility for the next month= .=20 PG&E, which is near bankruptcy, has said it is running out of gas supplies= =20 and is unable to buy more because creditors are hesitant to sell to it.=20 PG&E had asked the state Public Utilities Commission to force The Gas Co.,= =20 which serves all of Orange County, to step in and buy gas for PG&E on an=20 emergency basis.=20 The Gas Co. said the agreement with PG&E includes a guarantee that The Gas= =20 Co. will be paid out of the money received from PG&E customer bills. Unpaid= =20 balances cannot exceed $16.5 million, said Gas Co. spokeswoman Denise King. --- PUC chief defends actions in crisis Loretta Lynch blames the energy crunch on the failure of deregulation;=20 credit-rating firm says state will continue to feel its effects=20 By Andrew LaMar and Mike Taugher TIMES STAFF WRITERS=20 SACRAMENTO -- Loretta Lynch, who has faced close scrutiny as president of t= he=20 state Public Utilities Commission, defended her handling of the electricity= =20 crisis Wednesday and said she wishes the agency had recognized sooner that= =20 deregulation was not working.=20 Appearing before reporters at a luncheon, the 38-year-old attorney offered = a=20 harsh assessment of deregulation and said California has not faced the same= =20 degree of uncertainty since the 1920s.=20 ""From my perspective, the system that we created was built on a theory and = a=20 hope and a promise, and that promise is unrealized and the theory was fault= y=20 and so therefore the hope remains unfulfilled,"" Lynch said. ""I'm from=20 Independence, Mo.; you have got to show me how we're going to get to the=20 nirvana of the plan for deregulation.""=20 Lynch said the PUC is working feverishly on three things:=20 To advise the Legislature on scores of energy bills.=20 To legally defend its decision to keep rates frozen on two utility companie= s.=20 To prepare to decide whether to extend or increase a 9 percent electricity= =20 rate hike approved in January.=20 Meanwhile, the Wall Street credit-rating firm Standard & Poor's issued a=20 report on the dangers of the energy crisis that said California will feel i= ts=20 effects ""throughout 2001 and beyond.""=20 Damage has been contained to the state's utilities, which are nearly broke,= =20 and the state treasury, which S&P said is insulated from credit problems=20 because of its ample reserves and ability to borrow.=20 But S&P analysts said the combination of the energy crisis and a nationwide= =20 economic slowdown could restrict the state's ability to deal with budgetary= =20 issues that could come up if the economy continues to slow. Also, it could= =20 strap the budgets of cities, counties and other local governments if the=20 state decides to cut payments to them.=20 ""In addition to the overall economic slowing that is clearly evident=20 nationally, the utility crisis has hit California at a time when the=20 technology sector, the growth of which has played a significant role in the= =20 state's economy over the past several years, is undergoing a significant=20 retraction,"" S&P warned.=20 As for Lynch, she challenged several popular assumptions as myths. First, s= he=20 said, deregulation failed on its own, not because politicians cut it short.= =20 Second, she said, the PUC did not stop utilities from arranging long-term= =20 contracts to buy electricity, as they have claimed.=20 And, the defense of the PUC's rate freeze in court is not a losing=20 proposition, she said.=20 ""It is true that the utilities came to the commission and to me personally = in=20 October and said 'End the rate freeze. We are hurting.'"" Lynch said. ""When = we=20 looked at the request, it really did put us between a rock and a hard place= ,=20 and that's a rock and a hard place we remain in today.'""=20 But Lynch said if the PUC had lifted the rate freeze, ""we would have, by=20 administrative fiat, plunged the rest of California into the price volatili= ty=20 that San Diego experienced this summer.""=20 As it is, the commission is studying the market value of the assets Souther= n=20 California Edison and PG&E were supposed to sell under the terms of=20 deregulation. Once the commission sets the market value, it can determine= =20 whether the utilities are eligible to raise rates.=20 In other developments Wednesday:=20 Power generator Calpine Corp. announced two long-term electricity contracts= =20 that will require energy-starved California to pay up to $8.3 billion to ke= ep=20 the lights on in as many as 1.5 million homes.=20 With the latest agreements, San Jose-based Calpine has three separate=20 long-term electricity contracts with the state Department of Water Resource= s,=20 which is shopping for deals that will spread the soaring cost of power over= =20 several years=20 Environmentalists urged Gov. Gray Davis to upgrade his proposal to obtain= =20 development rights for scenic acreage owned by the state's beleaguered=20 utilities, saying the state should obtain the properties outright.=20 As part of a utility bailout package, the governor has recommended Edison a= nd=20 PG&E turn over development rights to more than 88,000 acres, including scen= ic=20 parcels in the Sierra, and 26,000 miles of high voltage transmission lines,= =20 among other considerations.=20 A Republican assemblyman attacked Davis for comments he made in Washington,= =20 D.C., on Tuesday. The governor said the deals he is negotiating with utilit= y=20 companies to buy their transmission lines would complete the legislative=20 fixes needed and ""it means we are basically on the downside of the problem.= ""=20 But Assemblyman Tony Strickland, R-Thousand Oaks, questioned whether there= =20 would be enough power this summer or if federal regulators would approve th= e=20 state purchase of transmission lines.=20 ""It's irresponsible to call this crisis nearly over,"" Strickland said. ""The= re=20 are still way too many unknowns."" --- -------------- Cal-ISO Says Suppliers Overcharged=20 Power: State report calls for a refund of $562 million above 'reasonable'= =20 prices. Generators deny gouging.=20 By NANCY VOGEL and JENIFER WARREN, Times Staff Writers ?????SACRAMENTO--Wholesale electricity suppliers overcharged California's= =20 utilities more than $500 million during December and January, an amount tha= t=20 the federal government should demand be refunded, according to a=20 no-holds-barred state report released Thursday. ?????The report by the California Independent System Operator, which overse= es=20 the flow of electricity in the state, said power suppliers charged $11=20 billion during those two months alone--more than they did for all of 1999. ?????Studying various market dynamics, the agency concluded that there was = a=20 ""prima facie case"" that the unnamed generators and marketers had charged $5= 62=20 million above ""just and reasonable"" prices, warranting further investigatio= n=20 and federal hearings into the appropriateness of refunds. ?????The state report is the most accusatory of a number of studies=20 undertaken to determine why wholesale electricity prices have soared in=20 California since last summer, throwing the state's biggest utilities into= =20 financial crisis and dashing hopes for lower consumer rates under=20 deregulation. ?????The study also provides new ammunition to members of California's=20 congressional delegation, who have unsuccessfully been pressing the Federal= =20 Energy Regulatory Commission to impose price ceilings on wholesale=20 electricity costs. ?????Generators defended their operating practices and rejected the=20 allegation that they had raked in unfairly large profits in December and=20 January. ?????""We have played by the rules, acted ethically and legally in all our= =20 operations,"" said Richard Wheatley, a spokesman for Houston-based Reliant= =20 Energy, which owns power plants capable of supplying more than 3 million=20 homes. ""We have nothing to hide."" ?????Gary Ackerman, executive direcor of the Western Power Trading Forum,= =20 said the Cal-ISO report does not account for less tangible factors that ten= d=20 to drive up prices, such as political and financial uncertainties. ?????""Those are the things my people take into account when deciding whethe= r=20 to sell into California,"" said Ackerman. He noted that, in the second week = of=20 December, a period analyzed in the Cal-ISO report, electricity prices were= =20 higher in the Pacific Northwest than in California. ?????The report, he said, ""provides some reasonable questions which will be= =20 responded to by my members, under FERC authority."" ?????Cal-ISO officials stressed Thursday that they are not accusing any=20 seller of inflating prices but are simply asking for federal action to=20 restrain costs. ?????""We have not seen prices come down to what we feel are justifiable=20 levels,"" said Anjali Sheffrin, director of market analysis for Cal-ISO. ?????Although federal energy commission officials on Thursday refused to=20 comment on the study, many experts predicted that refunds would not be=20 forthcoming. ?????Since July, when Gov. Gray Davis first asked the federal commission to= =20 give San Diego Gas & Electric customers refunds for electricity costs that= =20 doubled and in some cases tripled, the agency has refused to order power=20 sellers to give back some of their profits to California utilities and=20 consumers. ?????The commission, charged by Congress with assuring ""just and reasonable= ""=20 wholesale electricity rates, has also resisted imposing firm price caps on= =20 California's electricity market. In November, the commission called that=20 market ""dysfunctional"" and vulnerable to manipulation by power sellers, but= =20 the agency has so far failed to document or punish specific cases of such= =20 anti-competitive behavior. ?????""The real question is what is FERC going to do with all of this?"" said= =20 Gary Stern, chief of market analysis for Southern California Edison, once o= ne=20 of the two biggest buyers of electricity in California. ""Based on past=20 history, we think they're probably going to say they don't see wrongdoing= =20 that provides a reason for refund."" ?????Determining rebates could prove a logistical nightmare for federal=20 regulators and Cal-ISO, Stern said, but the data exist to show how much it= =20 cost power plant owners to generate electricity and what price they charged= . ?????Given that Edison and PG&E have defaulted on payments of hundreds of= =20 millions to power sellers, Stern said, a rebate order wouldn't lead to=20 reimbursement for individual utility customers. Instead, it could help the= =20 utilities eliminate some of their debt to generators and marketers. ?????Edison and PG&E have been pushed nearly to bankruptcy by high wholesal= e=20 costs, which they could not pass on to their customers because of a=20 state-imposed rate freeze.=20 ?????Last week, Davis announced that Edison had agreed in principle to stat= e=20 financial help in exchange for its transmission lines. Negotiations with PG= &E=20 continue. ?????The Folsom-based Cal-ISO drew its conclusions after reviewing=20 electricity purchases made between Dec. 8, 2000, and Jan. 31, 2001. ?????To calculate the cost of producing electricity in those months, Cal-IS= O=20 analysts assumed power plant owners were buying natural gas from the spot= =20 market, where prices soared this winter, and were running old, inefficient= =20 plants. They also assumed relatively high prices for air emission credits i= n=20 Southern California and added a 10% buffer to the operating costs. ?????Cal-ISO officials then compared these costs with the prices sellers we= re=20 paid. Their report did not name the individual sellers, which range from th= e=20 province of British Columbia to the publicly owned Los Angeles Department o= f=20 Water and Power to private companies. ?????Several lawmakers praised the report as long overdue. ?????""It's about time,"" said state Sen. Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey),=20 chairwoman of the Senate Energy Committee. She said that the desire among= =20 some legislators to seize power plants and take other drastic actions stems= =20 from the sense that ""there's no one willing to enforce the provisions of th= e=20 federal power act regarding just and reasonable rates. ?????""The utilities are doing a great job looking out for their shareholder= s,=20 but who is looking out for ratepayers?"" she asked. ?????Consumer advocacy groups applauded Cal-ISO's action and said the=20 agency's evidence of overcharges underscored the need for hard price caps o= r=20 a tax on generator profits. ?????""It's certainly not news to us that the generators are charging=20 excessive wholesale prices,"" said Mindy Spatt, spokeswoman for the Utility= =20 Reform Network of San Francisco. ""If there had been a real price cap, this= =20 investigation would not be necessary.""=20 ?????California's congressional delegation has pushed hard in recent months= =20 for legislation that would impose temporary price controls on wholesale pow= er=20 supplies in the West. On Wednesday, a bipartisan team met with Curtis Heber= t,=20 chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and came away=20 discouraged by Hebert's opposition to price caps. ?????The federal commission has imposed a so-called ""soft cap"" of $150 per= =20 megawatt-hour in California's electricity market. When sellers ask a higher= =20 price they must explain why it is necessary.=20 ?????Within 60 days, the commission can launch a review of those bids that= =20 could lead to refunds. So far, the federal panel has ordered none. On=20 Thursday, Cal-ISO asked the commission to extend the two-month deadline in= =20 its examination of the purchases made during December and January. * * * ?????Times staff writer Nancy Rivera Brooks in Los Angeles contributed to= =20 this story. --- Power profits targeted: Generators urged to forgive some of utilities' debt= s By Stuart Leavenworth and Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writers (Published March 2, 2001)=20 They are cocky and defiant, and unabashedly rich. Over the past year, the= =20 companies that generate and trade much of California's electricity have mad= e=20 multimillion-dollar profits off the state's power crunch.=20 Yet pressure is mounting for these power producers to return some of their= =20 profits, or at least forgive some debts they are owed by the state's troubl= ed=20 utilities:=20 A spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis said Thursday that at least two energy=20 companies have volunteered to forgive some debt, a development that could= =20 give Davis leverage over other suppliers.=20 Also Thursday, the state's Independent System Operator declared that some= =20 power merchants may have overcharged the state and utilities by as much as= =20 $562 million in December and January. ISO officials asked federal regulator= s=20 to confirm their findings and seek refunds from the generators.=20 Several key lawmakers say any deal to rescue Pacific Gas and Electric Co. a= nd=20 Southern California Edison must include debt forgiveness by generators and= =20 other creditors.=20 ""They have to get a haircut like anyone else,"" said state Sen. Debra Bowen,= =20 the powerful chair of the Senate Energy Committee. ""I'm not saying they hav= e=20 to walk around like Jesse Ventura, but they can't continue to walk around= =20 like Don King, either.""=20 So far, most generators adamantly refuse to discuss debt forgiveness, sayin= g=20 their electricity prices are reasonable.=20 Steven Kean, executive vice president of Enron Corp., said he didn't see ""a= ny=20 reason"" to forgive any debts. A spokeswoman for Mirant Corp. said company= =20 officials expect full payment.=20 Richard Wheatley, a spokesman for Reliant Energy Inc., said lawmakers urgin= g=20 debt relief are engaged in wishful thinking.=20 ""The more they discuss it, the more they hope it might turn into reality,""= =20 said Wheatley, whose company is owed $300 million. ""From our perspective,= =20 it's not open to negotiation.""=20 But Bowen and others say generators, bondholders and other utility creditor= s=20 have some good reasons to budge.=20 If Edison and PG&E go bankrupt, Bowen says, the generators might have to wa= it=20 years to get even partial payment. That's because they are unsecured=20 creditors -- meaning they don't hold any collateral to secure payment of=20 their debts.=20 ""It is not very hard to figure out from a dollars and cents standpoint,"" sa= id=20 Bowen, D-Marina Del Rey, who has been talking to some of the generators abo= ut=20 debt forgiveness. ""If you are owed 100 bucks, would you rather get $90=20 several months from now, or would you rather take your chances with=20 bankruptcy attorneys and get $50 three years from now?""=20 Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Davis, said the governor ""has received a=20 couple of unsolicited offers"" from generators willing to forgive debts as= =20 part of a deal. Maviglio declined to name the companies, but said, ""It is a= ll=20 part of the ongoing negotiations.""=20 The game of cat and mouse comes as Davis and lawmakers try to gain leverage= =20 over five companies -- AES Corp., Duke Energy Corp., Dynegy Inc., Mirant an= d=20 Reliant -- that bought power plants from the California-based utilities in= =20 the early days of the state's foray into deregulation.=20 Because of that divesture, much of California's power is controlled by=20 out-of-state generators and their trading subsidiaries, or by independent= =20 brokers such as Enron, the country's biggest electricity marketer.=20 In recent months, at least five class-action lawsuits have accused these=20 companies of manipulating and inflating electricity prices, either by=20 intentionally shutting down plants or by buying natural gas cheaply and usi= ng=20 it to generate electricity sold at a several-hundred-percent markup.=20 On Thursday, the nonprofit corporation that manages most of the state's=20 electric grid revealed data that could support claims of price gouging.=20 In a filing with federal regulators, the Independent System Operator said t= he=20 wholesalers overcharged the ISO by $562 million for spot-market purchases i= n=20 December and January.=20 The ISO's findings are based on federal price caps that say any bids above = a=20 certain level be justified in writing. The ISO calculated the suppliers'=20 costs, threw in a 10 percent profit margin -- and concluded that the=20 generators had sold scads of power at unreasonable prices.=20 The state's grid managers want the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to= =20 seek refunds from the generators if regulators confirm that overcharging to= ok=20 place. But some doubt the FERC will act, given its past reluctance to set= =20 price controls or interfere in California's energy markets.=20 ""I don't think they have a whole lot of chance with FERC,"" said Severin=20 Borenstein, director of the University of California Energy Institute.=20 Federal officials, he said, ""are likely to bend over backward to excuse the= =20 prices.""=20 Wholesalers also doubted the ISO report would lead anywhere, saying it left= =20 out significant, legitimate costs of selling electricity to California.=20 Suppliers had the right to charge a ""credit premium"" as the risks of=20 nonpayment began rising, said Gary Ackerman of the Western Power Trading=20 Forum. Not only did the ISO become an uncreditworthy buyer -- because it go= t=20 its money from Edison and PG&E -- but the whole political climate in=20 California added to the wholesalers' risks, Ackerman said.=20 Whether or not the ISO filing prompts action from federal regulators, it=20 could help lawmakers pressure the generators.=20 State Sen. Joe Dunn, D-Santa Ana, said he wants to sort out how much of the= =20 debts piled up by PG&E and Edison since last summer were the result of=20 electricity prices that could be deemed ""unjust and unreasonable"" under=20 federal and state laws.=20 ""Since every regulatory body has concluded those costs were unjust and=20 unreasonable, a portion, if not a very significant part of that past debt= =20 ought to be forgiven,"" Dunn said.=20 Some analysts say state leaders can't push the generators too far, since th= ey=20 depend on energy companies to build new power plants -- a supply boost that= =20 theoretically would lower energy prices.=20 Dunn acknowledges that is a concern, but says the Legislature also can't=20 afford to ignore charges that generators have gouged utilities and=20 ratepayers.=20 ""That is the game of chicken we are in now,"" Dunn said. ""And up to this=20 point, it is only the state that has blinked.""=20 The issue of debt forgiveness could become moot if Davis can't strike a dea= l=20 with PG&E and San Diego Gas & Electric to buy their transmission systems.= =20 Last week, Davis announced a tentative agreement to acquire Edison's power= =20 lines for $2.7 billion and is reportedly close to coming to terms with SDG&= E.=20 But PG&E has so far rejected the governor's overtures, and on Thursday it= =20 added to a litany of financial woes. The San Francisco-based company=20 defaulted on another $1.21 billion worth of payments to electricity=20 suppliers. It did, however, make partial payments totaling $228 million to= =20 the ISO, which bought power from the wholesalers on the utility's behalf, a= nd=20 to a group of cogenerators and alternative energy providers.=20 If talks with the state break down, one of PG&E's alternatives would be=20 bankruptcy court, where a judge would determine how its assets would be=20 divided among creditors. An alternative scenario has one or all of the=20 generators going to court to force PG&E into bankruptcy, but Bowen, for one= ,=20 is doubtful that will happen anytime soon.=20 ""If they (the generators) thought they would come out better in a bankruptc= y,=20 we would be there already,"" said Bowen, whose committee would have to appro= ve=20 any rescue plan for the utilities.=20 ""So that means they have to give. Everyone has to give.""=20 Emily Bazar of The Bee Capitol Bureau contributed to this report.=20 Thursday's developments A Davis spokesman says the governor has received ""unsolicited offers"" from= =20 some generators willing to forgive debts but declines to name them.=20 In a filing with federal regulators, the Independent System Operator says= =20 some wholesalers overcharged the ISO by $562 million for spot-market=20 purchases in December and January.=20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. pays 16 percent of a $1.44 billion bill to=20 wholesale power suppliers, defaulting on $1.21 billion of the debt but payi= ng=20 $228 million.=20 State declares Stage 2 alert but downgrades it to a ""warning"" at mid-mornin= g.=20 Calpine Corp. becomes the latest wholesaler to sign long-term supply=20 contracts with the Department of Water Resources, agreeing to two deals=20 totaling $8.3 billion -- a 10-year contract for $5.2 billion and a 20-year= =20 contract for $3.1 billion. Last month, Calpine signed a deal worth $4.6=20 billion.=20 --- Friday, March 2, 2001=20 By Rick Stouffer=20 rstouffer@ftenergy.com=20 ""=01(No state is an island, entire of itself; every state is a piece of the= =20 continent, a part of the main=01("" -John Donne California Gov. Gray Davis has seemingly hit on a plan that he thinks will= =20 solve his state's energy problems:=20 Acquire some 32,000 miles of transmission lines for between $8 billion and= =20 $10 billion to keep the bankruptcy wolf away from the state's three=20 investor-owned utilities. Create a public power authority to buy, build and operate power plants,=20 financed with up to $5 billion in state bonds. Not raise customer rates to pay for at least $10 billion in bonds used to p= ay=20 for power.=20 Sounds great, doesn't it? Something for everyone=01*no more pain=01*sounds= =20 suspiciously like California's original deregulation plan=01*itself a misno= mer;=20 California wasn't deregulated, it was restructured.=20 Energy 'island' won't work But Davis's efforts to, in effect, create the electrical island of Californ= ia=20 will not work, many say. The governor's control of transmission doesn't sol= ve=20 the immediate demand-supply conundrum.=20 And creation of the fancy-sounding California Consumer Power and Conservati= on=20 Financing Authority to buy, build and operate power plants could drive=20 private developers out of the Golden State=01*who wants to compete against = the=20 ultimate government-subsidized entity?=20 ""Davis is, in effect, nationalizing the power industry in California,"" said= =20 Jonathan Gottlieb, a partner in Washington, D.C., law firm Baker & McKenzie= 's=20 North American Utility and Energy Products Group. ""Command and control=20 economies have been collapsing around the world=01*except in California.""= =20 The problems with the California power industry are numerous and beaten to= =20 death by the media. It appears everything went wrong that could go wrong=01= *all=20 at once=01*Murphy's Law in the absurd.=20 Just as numerous as the problems, are the number of entities which can be= =20 fingered as having a hand in the debacle.=20 All that said, Gov. Davis feels he has the magic bullet which will make=20 everything right: take over much of the system, force those=20 out-of-state-based generators to act ""responsibly,"" bail out the incumbent= =20 utilities and not raise customer rates.=20 But has anyone looked longer term than the next few months concerning the= =20 consequences of Davis' moves? Anyone stop to think what happens if and when= =20 the state does take control?=20 Who runs the state-owned system?=20 ""With the transmission-lines buy, you have a mechanism which gives the=20 utilities cash to pay off the debt incurred in buying wholesale power,"" sai= d=20 Craig Pirrong, a commodity markets expert and professor in the Olin School = of=20 Business at Washington University in St. Louis.=20 ""But now there are operational questions,"" Pirrong continued. ""Is the state= =20 the most efficient entity to operate and maintain the wires system?""=20 Good question. ""You have to find someone to run the system once you take it= =20 over,"" said William Hogan, a professor in Harvard University's John F.=20 Kennedy School of Government. ""So you either contract or hire utility=20 employees.""=20 There is precedent, obviously, for government-owned and operated utilities.= =20 In the United States, more than 2,000 municipals operate today, while=20 internationally a number of state-run utilities are in operation, for examp= le=20 Electricit, de France. But government ownership of utilities appears to be = on=20 the way out across the world, the experts say.=20 ""Look what's happening worldwide,"" said Adrian Moore, executive director of= =20 the Los Angeles-based free market think tank Reason Public Policy Institute= .=20 ""Over the last seven or eight years, billions of dollars worth of utility= =20 privatizations have taken place. Germany and Italy, for example, are sellin= g=20 off huge tranches of their national utilities.""=20 Municipal utilities tout their lower costs per customer, but those figures= =20 are deceptive, some industry watchers believe.=20 ""There are a lot of tax advantages and hidden subsidies in municipal=20 utilities that mask the real cost,"" said economist Murray Weidenbaum, schol= ar=20 in residence at the Jones Graduate School of Management at Rice University = in=20 Houston, Texas, and the former first chairman of President Reagan's Council= =20 of Economic Advisers. ""If you move to a state-run utility, you can almost= =20 guarantee costs will go up over time,"" Moore said.=20 Politics taking precedence With state control of California's transmission lines, many experts see=20 politics taking precedence over economics=01*or need=01*when decisions are = made=20 concerning where to build new lines.=20 ""You can see gamesmanship and lobbying taking precedence, moving away from= =20 economic drivers toward political drivers,"" Washington University's Pirrong= =20 said.=20 On the generation side, many of the same problems associated with assuming= =20 command of the wires could occur.=20 Generators including Mirant Corp. and Duke Energy already publicly expresse= d=20 concerns with the wires acquisition; specifically, will they be shut out of= =20 access to get their power to market?=20 ""I can see politically that they've got to get something out of this to sel= l=20 the plan to consumers, but we need to make sure we aren't discriminated=20 against,"" Mirant President Marce Fuller said during the recent Cambridge=20 Energy Research Associates energy conference in Houston.=20 Discrimination against incumbents could occur, but what about bias against= =20 potential generators? With the establishment of the Consumer Power and=20 Conservation Financing Board, what private company would want to bid agains= t=20 the sixth largest economy in the world?=20 ""With the government involved, companies would be reluctant to build new=20 plants without a government contract, because the government is subsidizing= =20 construction,"" said Harvard's Hogan.=20 ""Where's the state's comparative advantage in building new plants?""=20 Washington University's Pirrong asked.=20 FERC must weigh-in There is another major player in California's ascension to wires=20 owner-operator: the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The Federa= l=20 Power Act puts FERC right in the middle of the California takeover, said=20 Baker & McKenzie's Gottlieb.=20 ""FERC Chairman Curtis Hebert has used the word 'nationalization' publicly t= o=20 describe what California is proposing, and has said he has definite concern= s=20 about the proposal,"" Gottlieb said. ""I don't think FERC can say no to the= =20 California takeover, but they could weigh it down with conditions.""=20 One of those conditions may be a trade-off: FERC will approve California's= =20 takeover of transmission wires, in exchange for the state giving control of= =20 the lines to multi-state regional transmission organizations.=20 A 'quick' fix could take months No one, including Davis, sees this plan happening quickly. In a presentatio= n=20 Wednesday to analysts in New York, the governor admitted it would take up t= o=20 four more weeks to reach agreement with PG&E Corp./Pacific Gas & Electric C= o.=20 for its wires. He also admitted he cannot win enough Republicans to pass th= e=20 bill with the two-thirds majority needed for immediate implementation. Bill= s=20 in California passed with a simple majority must wait 90 days before going= =20 into effect.=20 Thus, the entire process may not be over for at least another six weeks, an= d=20 even then the Davis plan could face a ballot initiative. But for the sake o= f=20 argument, assume Gov. Davis gets his way and takes control of the=20 investor-owned utilities' wires and begins building and buying plants. Wher= e=20 does such a massive undertaking leave the Golden State in three to five=20 years?=20 ""All things add up to a pretty grim situation,"" said the Reason Public Poli= cy=20 Institute's Moore. ""Five years from now just because the state is purchasin= g=20 power, we will have prices higher than the U.S. average. That will be=20 exacerbated by the state owning the wires and building the plants.""=20 ""I'm very dubious; the government-run utility in the long-run will be very= =20 expensive,"" Harvard's Hogan concurred.=20 Baker & McKenzie's Gottlieb sees the California screen test as providing th= e=20 impetus for a huge infrastructure build-out nationwide. One recent survey= =20 found that some $20 billion in plant financings within the United States ar= e=20 projected for just the first three months of 2001=01*compared to $24 billio= n for=20 all of 1999.=20 A textbook case According to economist Weidenbaum, the California energy debacle answers th= e=20 question ""does the government deregulate as badly as it regulates,"" with a= =20 huge exclamation point.=20 ""California is a textbook dramatization of the shortcomings of government= =20 involvement with business,"" Weidenbaum said. ""You now have Chapter Two in= =20 that book; we already have Chapter One.""=20 The English poet Donne said: ""And therefore never send to know for whom the= =20 bell tolls; it tolls for thee.""=20 In California, that ""bell"" is clanging.=20 --- Ex-Regulator Urges Temporary Federal Price Caps on Power Carolyn Lochhead, Chronicle Washington Bureau=20 ? Friday,?March 2, 2001=20 Washington -- Federal energy regulators should intervene more forcefully in= =20 California's energy crisis, a former Reagan-appointed regulator said=20 yesterday,=20 while other experts feared the financial effects could balloon into another= =20 savings-and-loan bailout disaster.=20 Independent regulatory experts speaking at a high-profile panel on the ener= gy=20 crunch also said Gov. Gray Davis may be whistling in the dark in his=20 assurances that the power crisis will be largely resolved by summer.=20 ""I think there is a fairly compelling argument that something needs to be= =20 done,"" said Elizabeth Moler, appointed to the Federal Energy Regulatory=20 Commission by President Ronald Reagan and named chairwoman by President Bil= l=20 Clinton.=20 Moler, speaking to the Brookings Institution and the American Enterprise=20 Institute Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, said some form of temporary= =20 federal intervention on wholesale prices is needed, so long as it does not= =20 discourage investment in new generation capacity.=20 Davis and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., have urged federal regulators to= =20 impose temporary price controls to give the state breathing room.=20 The chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Curt Hebert, is= =20 strongly opposed to price caps, saying they would discourage investment and= =20 delay resolution of the crisis. California needs to lift the electricity ra= te=20 freeze on consumers to encourage conservation and restore the finances of t= he=20 bankrupt investor-owned utilities, Hebert has argued.=20 But Moler faulted federal regulators and the California Public Utilities=20 Commission, both of which oversaw the state's deregulation plan, for allowi= ng=20 the problem to fester.=20 ""The signs were there in June that something needed to happen,"" Moler said,= =20 noting that electricity deregulation is complex and always needs adjustment= s.=20 ""I'd like to think I would have been reading the market monitoring reports,= ""=20 Moler said. ""I'd like to think I would have been on the airplane to San=20 Francisco every other week, and on the other weeks, the CPUC would have bee= n=20 on a plane to Washington.""=20 Moler also faulted state PUC members for blaming the crisis on their=20 predecessors. ""I'm pretty amazed the CPUC is still blaming Dan Fessler,"" th= e=20 former chairman, Moler said. ""He's been gone for three years.""=20 Moler noted that the state's plan to take over the utilities' transmission= =20 lines needs federal regulatory approval, which Hebert indicated he opposes,= =20 comparing the move to ""nationalization.""=20 Davis' assertions this week to Washington policymakers and Wall Street=20 analysts that he has the crisis under control were also viewed dubiously.= =20 Noting that peak California power demand will rise to 45,000 megawatts in t= he=20 summer from 30,000 in the winter, Robert Litan, director of the Joint Cente= r=20 for Regulatory Studies, said, ""You do your own math. If you think the probl= em=20 is bad now, you ain't seen nothing yet.""=20 Litan said the state's partial electricity deregulation was a giant gamble= =20 that freed wholesale prices would stay below fixed retail prices, but the b= et=20 went bad and now state taxpayers are paying the cost.=20 ""I used to study S&Ls, and what California is doing sounds a lot like what= =20 the federal government did for 10 years, which was pray and hope that the= =20 problem goes away,"" he said.=20 California is paying roughly $1.5 billion a month for electricity while sta= te=20 officials try to craft a long-term solution.=20 Paul Joskow, director of the Center for Energy and Environmental Policy=20 Research at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said state and feder= al=20 policymakers must devise a long-term blueprint that encourages investment i= n=20 new generation and offers price stability to consumers.=20 ""I haven't seen any long-term plan yet for where they are going in=20 California,"" Joskow said. "". . . I think the governor owes that to the=20 citizens of California, because now we're going from week to week, and you= =20 know as well as I do what it's going to be six months from now.""=20 E-mail Carolyn Lochhead at clochhead@sfchronicle.com.=20 ?=20 ? Printer-friendly version=20 ? Email this article to a friend=20 02/16/2001 - California governor proposes state power line purchase .=20 02/09/2001 - Removal of Rate Caps Urged.=20 02/08/2001 - Developments in California's power crisis .=20 02/04/2001 - Davis Neglected Key Strategy In Power Crisis.=20 >>more related articles...=20 --- NEWS=20 PG&E to Pay Creditors Only 15% / Smaller suppliers outraged over plan David Lazarus 03/02/2001=20 The San Francisco Chronicle=20 FINAL=20 Page A1=20 (Copyright 2001)=20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. said yesterday it would pay only about 15 cent= s=20 on the dollar for its outstanding power bills, sparking outrage among small= er=20 creditors, who accused the utility of driving them out of business.=20 In a filing to securities regulators, PG&E revealed it would pay just $228= =20 million of about $1.4billion due for recent electricity purchases.=20 ""How would you feel if your boss gave you just 15 percent of your paycheck= =20 and said he'll get back to you for the rest?"" asked Bob Judd, director of t= he=20 California Biomass Energy Alliance, representing operators of 28 wood-fired= =20 plants statewide.=20 PG&E's filing marks a turning point in California 's energy crisis. It is n= ow=20 possible that not only will the state's largest utility go under, but it=20 could take a number of power generators with it.=20 PG&E, now in talks with the governor on a possible financial bailout, is=20 telling creditors to be thankful for whatever they get. If the utility=20 declares bankruptcy, all parties know, many creditors may receive nothing.= =20 Still, time is running out for Ridgewood Power, a New Jersey company with 1= 4=20 plants in California . It already has had to shut down three facilities in= =20 PG&E's service area because it can no longer afford to keep them running.= =20 'NOWHERE NEAR'=20 ""The amount of money PG&E is giving us is nowhere near what we need to pay= =20 our natural gas suppliers,"" said Martin Quinn, Ridgewood's chief operating= =20 officer. ""We could restart the plants tomorrow if we could be released from= =20 our PG&E contracts and sell to another buyer.""=20 He added that his company would ask federal regulators to nullify its=20 contracts with PG&E so Ridgewood could bid for alternative power contracts= =20 being offered by California state officials.=20 PG&E's larger creditors reacted more cautiously to word that the utility=20 would pay only a fraction of its outstanding bills.=20 ""We have to study the consequences and see,"" said Richard Wheatley, a=20 spokesman for Houston's Reliant Energy, which formed a creditors' committee= =20 last month with other leading electricity providers. ""We don't know how muc= h=20 of the money we'll get.""=20 Reliant and other major creditors are grappling with how much leeway to gra= nt=20 PG&E on its unpaid bills before deciding to cut their losses and push the= =20 cash-strapped utility into bankruptcy.=20 'VERY CONCERNED'=20 ""We are very concerned about the credit issue,"" said Steve Stengel, a=20 spokesman for Houston's Dynegy Inc., another member of the creditors'=20 committee. ""But we are still interested in finding a comprehensive solution= =20 to California 's energy situation.""=20 That may depend on the outcome of current talks Gov. Gray Davis is holding= =20 with PG&E and Southern California Edison to purchase the utilities'=20 transmission lines as part of a multibillion-dollar bailout package.=20 PG&E and Edison are saddled with nearly $13 billion in debt as a result of= =20 ill-conceived efforts to deregulate the state's electricity market.=20 The announcement of partial payments was not a complete surprise to PG&E's= =20 creditors. The utility's chief financial officer, Kent Harvey, told investo= rs=20 in a conference call last month that PG&E would prefer to ""make partial=20 payments than no payments at all.""=20 PG&E has defaulted on more than $730 million in short-term debt payments=20 since January amid growing concerns that the utility will file for bankrupt= cy=20 protection.=20 In response, three California counties have formed their own creditors'=20 committee to recoup investments in PG&E's short-term debt, also known as=20 commercial paper.=20 The three -- Santa Cruz, Riverside and Siskiyou counties -- are inviting=20 other public agencies to join forces in seeking compensation from PG&E for= =20 the defaulted payments.=20 The prospect of PG&E filing for bankruptcy has diminished somewhat in recen= t=20 weeks as Davis and Sacramento lawmakers scrambled to come up with proposals= =20 to rescue California 's utilities from financial ruin.=20 Although Edison has said it is prepared to sell its power lines to the stat= e=20 for nearly $3 billion, PG&E so far has refused to follow suit.=20 However, as The Chronicle reported yesterday, the utility retained outside= =20 counsel this week to offer advice on a possible sale of its power lines,=20 increasing the likelihood that a deal may be in the works.=20 SUITS ALLEGE MISMANAGEMENT=20 Separately, PG&E said yesterday it had been hit with a pair of lawsuits=20 seeking almost $3 billion in restitution for financial mismanagement.=20 One suit charges the utility's parent company, PG&E Corp., with violating i= ts=20 fiduciary duties by forcing the utility to repurchase shares from the=20 corporation for $2.3 billion.=20 The other alleges that PG&E Corp. collected nearly $3 billion from the=20 utility under a tax-sharing arrangement but paid only $2.3 billion to the= =20 government.=20 The lawsuits were filed in San Francisco Superior Court by Richard D. Wilso= n.=20 No other information about the plaintiff was immediately available.=20 ----------- Refund RequestedElectricity generators overcharged the state by= =20 more than a half-billion dollars in two months and should be forced to retu= rn=20 the money, power officials said yesterday.=20 The California Independent System Operator said in a filing with the Federa= l=20 Energy Regulatory Commission that generators appeared to have charged $555= =20 million more than what was reasonable.=20 It was unclear how any refunds might be passed on to consumers. About=20 two-thirds of all power purchases in the spot market were over price caps= =20 established by FERC, said Eric Hildebrandt, an ISO manager of market=20 monitoring. The cap was $250 per megawatt hour in December and $150 per=20 megawatt hour in January.=20 The ISO is requesting that FERC order a refund for ""excessive"" costs.=20 Source: Chronicle Sacramento Bureau=20 Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.=20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= DOE Task Force Meeting - Plymouth MA- Not going; [EMail-Body]= Bob Silvanik -- Council of State Governments annual meeting in Dec 8 (CEO panel including Skilling and Hydro Qubecs Kayee? Panel runs 10:45 - 12:15. (606)244-8250 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Venezuela FX and inflation forecasts, June 2001; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Koepke, Gwyn Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 12:28 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: FW: Venezuela FX and inflation forecasts, June 2001 Vince, FYI, Gwyn -----Original Message----- From: Koepke, Gwyn Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 3:13 PM To: Hudler, Cindy Cc: Shahi, Pushkar; Stuart III, William; Raymond, Maureen Subject: Venezuela FX and inflation forecasts, June 2001 Cindy, Please find attached the FX and CPI forecasts for Venezuela. Gwyn Koepke and Maureen Raymond-Castaneda [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: EES Video; [EMail-Body]= I am interested, but it's probably more important that Jeff Dasovich and Sandi Mccubbin (in our SF office) know, so that they can keep the politicos informed (and keep them from doing something stupid). Thanks Enron Energy Services From: Harold G Buchanan 08/03/2000 07:53 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Kim Frumkin/HOU/EES@EES, James M Wood/HOU/EES@EES, Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES Subject: EES Video Steve - I just saw your video and it is great - I think it will be released Wednesday on our web site and will be available to a very large group - Your comments will put the issues in SD in perspective. We have a team of six now calling the market in SD. If you'd like us to review our market plan in SD with you let me know. Thanks again for your time. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Schoenemann Resume; [EMail-Body]= Molly, This is the resume of my friend who is interested in a job with Enron. He is a very capable and hard working person. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""pschoenemann"" Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 2:38 AM To: vkamins@enron.com Subject: Schoenemann Resume Per your request. Thanks. Presly - Mar Comm Spec 2001.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: London, New York, Houston, Financial Mathematics June/July 2001; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: ""Joanna Vidal"" <jvidal@riskwaters.com>@ENRON Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 12:58 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Re: London, New York, Houston, Financial Mathematics June/July 2001 Please, your presentation looks great. Take care and hope to meet you in Houston. Have a nice holiday. ----- Original Message ----- From: <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com> To: <jvidal@riskwaters.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 1:49 PM Subject: RE: London, New York, Houston, Financial Mathematics June/July 2001 > Joanna, > > You can keep the name as is. > I don't want Zimin to be blamed for the flaws of my presentation. > > Vince > > -----Original Message----- > From: ""Joanna Vidal"" <jvidal@riskwaters.com>@ENRON > ENRON@ENRON.com] > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 10:10 AM > To: Kaminski, Vince J > Subject: Re: London, New York, Houston, Financial Mathematics June/July > 2001 > > Hello Vince! > > Hope you are well. Thank you for your presentations. Just one > question, > would you like me to change the name on the presentations from Vince to > Zimin, or should I leave them as is? > > Please advise. > > Take care > > Joanna > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com> > To: <jvidal@riskwaters.com> > Cc: <Zimin.Lu@enron.com> > Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 10:26 AM > Subject: RE: London, New York, Houston, Financial Mathematics June/July > 2001 > > > > Joanna, > > > > I am sending you, as promised, the copies of my presentation. > > My associate, Zimin Lu, will speak in my place in New York. > > > > You may want to change the background in the July 9 PowerPoint > > presentation for printing (you can do it with one > Format/Background/Apply > > to All) > > command in order to make the copies look nicer. > > > > Please, confirm the receipt of the message and make sure > > you can print the slides and they come out OK. I am leaving for a > foreign > > trip tomorrow > > and it will be difficult to reach me. > > > > Vince > > (See attached file: NY070901.ppt)(See attached file: NY071001.ppt) > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: ""Joanna Vidal"" <jvidal@riskwaters.com>@ENRON > > > > ENRON@ENRON.com] > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 3:38 PM > > To: ds64@cyrus.andrew.cmu.edu; Geman Helyette; > vkamins@enron.com; > > kaminski@aol.com; pnance@teknecon.com; > > chris.harris@innogy.com; eronn@mail.utexas.edu; > > sama@dynegy.com > > Subject: Re: London, New York, Houston, Financial Mathematics > June/July > > 2001 > > > > > > Dear Speakers, > > > > I understand how awfully busy you must all be at this time, but I > would > > appreciate a phone call or a quick email to confirm that you ahve > or > > have not, for that matter received the speaker packets I sent to > you > > May 2, 2001. please advise as soon as possible, that way, if yo > have > > not, for whatever received them, I will know what steps to take > from > > there. > > > > All the best. > > > > Sincerely, > > > > Joanna Vidal > > > > PS: My contact details are posted below. > > > > Joanna Vidal > > Events Coordinator > > Risk Waters Group > > T: (212) 925 1864 ext. 197 > > F: (212) 925 7585jvidal@riskwaters.com << File: > > mailto:jvidal@riskwaters.com >> www.riskwaters.com << File: > > http://www.riskwaters.com >> > > > > [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Two Requests re: May 22-23 Forum; [EMail-Body]= I will need an LCD projector and a computer (or connections for my computer) so that I can show the presentation. Thanks. ""Heidi VanGenderen"" <hvg@carbon.cudenver.edu> on 04/24/2001 04:16:43 PM Please respond to <hvg@carbon.cudenver.edu> To: <hvg@carbon.cudenver.edu> cc: Subject: Two Requests re: May 22-23 Forum Greetings: Thank you for joining us for the May 22-23, 2001 Forum on Securing the Energy Future of the Western United States here in Denver. If you require any audio visual aids for your presentations (overhead projector, LCD, etc.), please respond to this e-mail ASAP. Please remember that you will be asked to remain within the time limits outlined in the memo to speakers/discussants from Marshall Kaplan and David Olsen. We are compiling a series of articles on western state power problems and possible options to overcome problems for distribution to all Forum participants. We welcome your submission of any recent article or articles, or their citations and/or web page references, that you have found interesting and useful. These might address subjects such as power challenges; alternate policies with respect to supply and demand management; financing power related infrastructure; use of innovative technology with respect to energy management and efficiency; or the convergence of power, environmental and carbon emission reduction policies. If you have an article or articles to submit for inclusion in the Forum Notebook, please convey it electronically by responding to this e-mail, or fax or mail it as noted in the signature concluding this message by no later than May 4th. If you are intending to write out your remarks to the Forum, we would also welcome receiving those in advance of the Forum for inclusion in the materials provided to participants. Please feel free to contact us with any questions or comments. Thanks for your attention to these requests. We look forward to seeing you at the Forum on May 22nd. Sincerely, Heidi VanGenderen, Senior Associate Wirth Chair in Environmental and Community Development Policy Institute for Policy Research and Implementation University of Colorado-Denver 1445 Market Street, Suite 350 Denver, CO 80202-1727 Tel - 303-820-5676 Fax - 303-534-8774 Marshall Kaplan Tel - 303-820-5605 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Draft of California Contact List; [EMail-Body]= Please respond to kevinscott Steve This is a draft of the contact list I promised you. There are still some typos in it. I will clean them up and get send you a draft in the morning that is ready for circulation. This list is made up of people that I know and trust. By an large I have excluded sitting pubic officials. In cases where a given organization has several useful contacts with similar knowledge, I have listed just one person for now. Give me a call at your convenience, and we can discuss this in great detail. Kevin 213-926-2626 - Kevin Scott - Key Contacts - Draft.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FINAL; [EMail-Body]= Attached is the final letter. Please note - there was a small change at the top of page 2. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron Mentions; [EMail-Body]= See last story attached. Congratulations, it looks like you are shaking th= ings up in typical Enron fashion. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/14/2001 03= :41 PM --------------------------- From:=09Ann M Schmidt on 07/13/2001 05:13 PM To:=09 cc:=09 (bcc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron) Subject:=09Enron Mentions Wisconsin Gas to Purchase Nine Mile Line From Northern Natural Gas PR Newswire, 07/13/01 Commodities Review: LME Copper Hit By Another Stock Rise Dow Jones Commodities Service, 07/13/01 LME Base Metals: Copper Pressured Down By Stock Build Dow Jones Commodities Service, 07/13/01 UK: Telecoms, drugs drive FTSE 100 rally, Vodafone leads. Reuters English News Service, 07/13/01 Futures Contract Covering Coal Debuts in New York (Correct) Bloomberg, 07/13/01 Enron: Panacea or Pariah? Modern Metals, July 2001 Wisconsin Gas to Purchase Nine Mile Line From Northern Natural Gas 07/13/2001 PR Newswire (Copyright (c) 2001, PR Newswire) Line Will Enhance Competition in Southeast Wisconsin and Use Existing=20 Facilities=20 MILWAUKEE, July 13 /PRNewswire/ -- Wisconsin Gas, Northern Natural Gas and = Guardian Pipeline announced today that Wisconsin Gas has signed an agreemen= t with Northern Natural Gas (NNG) to purchase a nine mile, high pressure na= tural gas pipeline in Walworth and Waukesha counties. The purchase price is= $5 million. The proposed transaction will require approval from federal an= d state regulators. The pipe, known as the Eagle line, is located southeast= of the Kettle Moraine Forest near Eagle, Wis. The existing line has been part of the NNG interstate transmission system. = Under the new ownership, the line will become part of the Wisconsin Gas dis= tribution system and will interconnect with Guardian Pipeline as well as th= e NNG system.=20 ""Northern Natural Gas is pleased to be a part of a creative, cost-effective= solution to provide additional gas service to southeastern Wisconsin,"" sai= d Dave Neubauer, vice president of business development and marketing, Nort= hern Natural Gas. ""This transaction enables Wisconsin Gas and its customers= to obtain natural gas supplies from Guardian or NNG. Providing reliable, e= conomical choices for consumers will benefit all of the parties involved.""= =20 ""We saw this as an opportunity to minimize environmental impact and still r= ealize the benefits of increased competition in the natural gas market,"" sa= id James Schott, senior vice president, Wisconsin Gas. ""The purchase of the= Eagle line will enable Wisconsin Gas to further our goal of providing cost= -efficient natural gas service to our customers.""=20 As a result of the purchase Guardian Pipeline, the 141-mile interstate pipe= line from Joliet, Ill. to Ixonia, Wis., will no longer build an 8.5-mile la= teral to Eagle. The lateral was part of the originally certified Guardian P= ipeline. This portion of the line would have generally run parallel to the = current Northern Natural pipeline.=20 ""This sale is a win-win situation for Guardian and consumers,"" said George = Hass, project manager of Guardian Pipeline. ""The Eagle line purchase by Wis= consin Gas saves Guardian time and resources by taking away the need to bui= ld the 8.5-mile lateral and allows all three companies to create a better e= nvironment for competition in the natural gas marketplace.""=20 The existing gate stations at LaGrange and Eagle will remain in-service for= regulation purposes. Odorization and measurement will take place at a new = gate station that will be constructed at the interconnect with Guardian. Th= is new gate station will be called the Bluff Creek station and will be loca= ted near Whitewater. The Bluff Creek gate station will be constructed durin= g the construction of Guardian Pipeline.=20 Northern Natural Gas, a subsidiary of Enron Corp., with a market area capac= ity of about 4.3 Bcf/d, provides natural gas transportation services to uti= lity customers in the upper Midwestern United States through its approximat= ely 16,000 miles of pipeline.=20 Guardian Pipeline is a partnership of three Midwestern energy companies: CM= S Energy, based in Dearborn, Mich.; Wisconsin Energy, headquartered in Milw= aukee, Wis.; and Viking Gas Transmission Co., a wholly owned subsidiary of = Xcel Energy Inc., and located in St. Paul, Minn.=20 Wisconsin Electric-Wisconsin Gas, the principal utility subsidiary of Wisco= nsin Energy Corp. (NYSE: WEC), serves more than one million electric custom= ers and more than 960,000 natural gas customers throughout Wisconsin and Mi= chigan's Upper Peninsula. Visit our company's Web site at www.WE-WG.com. Le= arn about Wisconsin Energy Corp. by visiting www.WisconsinEnergy.com=20 MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT - Click Here=20 /CONTACT: Media only: Kelly Farr of CMS Energy, 313-436-9253; or Megan McCa= rthy of Wisconsin Energy, 414-221-4444; or Gina Taylor of Northern Natural = Gas, 713-853-7681/ 17:01 EDT=20 Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 Commodities Review: LME Copper Hit By Another Stock Rise By Mark Long and Steve McGrath Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES 07/13/2001 Dow Jones Commodities Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LONDON -(Dow Jones)- Copper futures traded in London fell Friday, as a furt= her influx of stocks into official warehouses put the copper market under p= ressure and dragged down the rest of the base metal complex.=20 Three-month copper traded on the London Metal Exchange ended $6 down from T= hursday's late kerb close at $1,554.50 a metric ton. An increase of 7,475 tons of copper into LME warehouses Friday brought tota= l stocks up to a 12-month high of 550,300 tons. This pressured prices in ea= rly trade down to test $1,550/ton support, although prices recovered slight= ly in later trade.=20 Unconfirmed market talk said Enron is behind much of the week's stock rise,= in an effort to ease nearby supply tightness and to alleviate the large sh= ort positions it is thought to have built up on the July-for-a-week spread,= which is currently showing a $6-$8/ton backwardation. The July futures con= tract will switch over to cash Monday.=20 Enron declined to comment on the market talk Friday.=20 A backwardation is a pricing structure in which deliveries to be made in th= e near future are more expensive then those set for a more distant delivery= . The opposite situation is called contango.=20 ""The spreads are still tight. The major longs are still reluctant to lend, = with no signs of that (tightness) dissipated,"" said Kevin Norrish, an analy= st with Barclays Capital in London.=20 Dealers and analysts said they expect further stock increases next week.=20 The entire base metals complex ignored Thursday's 237-point rally in the Do= w Jones Industrial Average, dealers said.=20 ""Copper has been sensitive to moves in the stock market, but not this time,= "" Norrish said. In fact, now it appears that base metals markets ignore equ= ities markets when they rally, but follow stocks down when they slump, he a= dded.=20 European Grain Futures See Profit-Taking, But More Gains Expected=20 European grain and oilseed futures were hit by a bout of profit-taking and = pre-weekend position-squaring Friday, after rising to long-time highs, brok= ers said.=20 However, world and domestic crop concerns, the strength of the dollar and g= eneral bullish sentiment will carry the markets to fresh highs short term, = they said.=20 On the London International Financial Futures and Options Exchange, the ben= chmark November feed wheat contract ended just 25 pence up at GBP82/ton, af= ter hitting a new two-year high of GBP83/ton in early trade.=20 Meanwhile, Matif November rapeseed futures fell EUR2.75 on the day to EUR26= 5/ton, after hitting a three-year high of EUR271/ton in early trade.=20 The U.K. wheat crop and the French rapeseed crop are forecast to be well do= wn on last year, and wheat and canola crops in some other major producing c= ountries are also expected to fall.=20 Meanwhile, the strength of the dollar is allowing European grain and oilsee= d traders to up prices and still remain competitive against U.S. imports an= d dollar-denominated grains on the world market.=20 -By Mark Long and Steve McGrath, Dow Jones Newswires; 44-20-7842-9358; mark= .long@dowjones.com Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 LME Base Metals: Copper Pressured Down By Stock Build 07/13/2001 Dow Jones Commodities Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LONDON -(Dow Jones)- London Metal Exchange three-month copper ended Friday'= s late kerb lower compared with Thursday, pressured by another stock build,= dealers said.=20 (LME three-month metals prices in dollars a metric ton at 1600 GMT, with th= e previous late kerb close in parentheses. Comex copper at 1641 GMT in cent= s a pound, with the previous close in parentheses.) Copper 1,554.50 (1,560.= 50) Tin 4,452.50 (4,502.50)=20 Aluminum 1,452.25 (1,458.50) Zinc 871.50 (877.50)=20 Nickel 5,925.00 (6,012.50) Lead 462.50 (465.00)=20 Comex Sep Copper 70.75 (70.80) An increase of 7,475 tons of copper Friday brought total stocks up to a 12-= month high of 550,300 tons. This pressured prices in early trade down to te= st $1,550/ton support before rising slightly to close at $1,554.50/ton, dow= n from Thursday's close of $1,560.50/ton.=20 Unconfirmed market talk said Enron is behind much of the week's stock rise,= in an effort to ease nearby supply tightness and to alleviate the large sh= ort positions it is thought to have built up on the July-for-a-week spread,= which is currently showing a $6-$8/ton backwardation. The July futures con= tract will switch over to cash Monday.=20 Enron declined to comment on the market talk.=20 A backwardation is a pricing structure in which deliveries to be made in th= e near future are more expensive then those set for a more distant delivery= . The opposite situation is called contango.=20 ""The spreads are still tight. The major longs are still reluctant to lend, = with no signs of that (tightness) dissipated,"" said Kevin Norrish, an analy= st with Barclays Capital in London.=20 Dealers and analysts said they expect further stock increases next week.=20 The entire base metals complex ignored Thursday's 237-point rally in the Do= w Jones Industrial Average, dealers said.=20 ""Copper has been sensitive to moves in the stock market, but not this time,= "" Norrish said. In fact, now it appears that base metals markets ignore equ= ities markets when they rally, but follow stocks down when they slump, he a= dded.=20 Aluminum also ended the late kerb lower Friday.=20 News of the restart of some smelters has dampened sentiment, despite a stoc= k drawdown of around 8,000 tons since the end of last week, dealers said.= =20 ""The stock drawdowns are fairly small percentage-wise,"" said Standard Bank = analyst Robin Bhar, adding that they would need to be much larger to signif= icantly improve market sentiment.=20 ""A test of $1,435/ton cannot be ruled out, though we would expect forward b= uying to prevent a break below this level for the time being,"" Barclays sai= d in a market report.=20 Zinc continued its slump, falling to a seven-and-a-half-year low, mainly on= technicals.=20 Technicals also hurt nickel, which rose slightly after breaking $5,900/ton = support but still closed at its lowest level since April.=20 Nickel's fall was ""just on some speculative liquidation and short selling, = mostly chart-based,"" Bhar said.=20 -By Mark Long, Dow Jones Newswires; +44-20-7842-9356; mark.long@dowjones.co= m Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 UK: Telecoms, drugs drive FTSE 100 rally, Vodafone leads. By Camila Reed 07/13/2001 Reuters English News Service (C) Reuters Limited 2001. LONDON, July 13 (Reuters) - Britain's largest companies raced higher at the= close on Friday fired by telecoms and drug stocks as they bounced back fro= m Wednesday's 16-week low.=20 Index heavyweights Vodafone and GlaxoSmithKline provided 27 of the day's 55= -point gain, while technology firms wobbled. However, the telecoms giant su= rged 4.1 percent to 157-1/4p. The FTSE 100 finished 55.4 points or one percent firmer at 5,537.0, having = jumped 1.66 percent on Thursday after seven consecutive losing sessions, wi= th gainers outnumbering losers by three to one.=20 Stocks steamed higher and refused to be derailed by sluggish U.S. retail sa= les figures for June, which showed only a meagre rise, and a weaker Wall St= reet, but volumes were thin at 1.4 billion shares.=20 By London's 1530 GMT finish the blue chip Dow Jones industrial average was = down five points, while the tech-laden Nasdaq Composite Index was flat, hav= ing streaked up in the previous session.=20 Mike Lenhoff and Simon Rubinsohn at money managers Gerrard said that the UK= equity market was deeply oversold and long-term this presented a buying op= portunity for UK equities.=20 DRUGS SEE-SAW=20 Drugs reversed an earlier decline with Nycomed Amersham among the day's top= performers, up nearly four percent at 536-1/2p and AstraZeneca rising over= one percent.=20 Mining giant Anglo American moved into the FTSE 100 top ten gainers with a = three percent rise, as investors sought refuge in mining stocks as a cyclic= al play.=20 Another major gainer was British business services firm Hays Plc up 3.4 per= cent. The shares leapt on market talk that Germany's Deutsche Post was look= ing to make a bid for it, dealers said.=20 Both Deutsche Post and Hays declined to comment.=20 Firmer crude prices gave support to the oil sector. BP rose 0.6 percent to = 572 pence and Shell also added 0.6 percent to 581-1/2p lifting the index by= four points.=20 FTSE MIXED PICTURE=20 But dealers and analysts said it would be a mixed picture going forward wit= h the market scrutinising data for signs of a sustained economic recovery o= r a lapse in consumer confidence.=20 ""This week we had a really bloody day on Wednesday and then the opposite on= Thursday, so we're going to be on a rollercoaster still. It's very fragile= but it does show the potential of the market,"" said Foreign & Colonial dir= ector of UK equities David Manning.=20 ""It's not only the holiday period, it's also that the market can make you l= ook an idiot one day to the next. In that sort of circumstance the temptati= on is to do very little,"" he said.=20 ABN Amro strategist Gareth Williams said the market would make modest progr= ess over the next month or so, with moves downward quite likely although th= e trend would be upwards over the course of the year.=20 TECHS DIP=20 Thursday's 5.3-percent rally in the Nasdaq failed to bring any cheer to UK = technology shares. Logica and Colt Telecom slid four percent, while microch= ip designer ARM fell 3.9 percent to 223 pence trimming Thursday's 13 percen= t jump.=20 The techMARK index of technology shares rose 0.98 percent to 1,602.87.=20 Elsewhere on the downside, UK holiday operator Airtours lost nearly 10 perc= ent of its value after Swiss peer Kuoni issued a profit warning.=20 Among second liners, Baltimore Technologies closed up 3.3 percent. It initi= ally rallied 22 percent after the Irish Internet security firm said it rece= ived an approach from an unlisted British-based company for an all-paper de= al to combine the companies.=20 The FTSE 250 Mid-cap index finished 5.1 points stronger at 6,163.8.=20 Among small-caps, Paladin Resources' shares jumped 10 percent after the UK = oil explorer said that major shareholder U.S. oil giant Enron had sold the = whole of its 40-million-share stake via HSBC bank for 44 pence a share.=20 Britain's Litho Supplies Plc slumped 42.5 percent after the company, which = supplies printing and graphic arts products, said that sales in the first s= ix months of 2001 were on target, but profits would likely be below expecta= tions due to tough market conditions and pressure on margins. Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =09 Futures Contract Covering Coal Debuts in New York (Correct) 2001-07-13 08:48 (New York) Futures Contract Covering Coal Debuts in New York (Correct) (Corrects location of FirstEnergy Corp. in 10th paragraph of story that moved yesterday.) New York, July 12 (Bloomberg) -- The New York Mercantile Exchange today began trading a futures contract for low-sulfur coal, a fuel that President George W. Bush said will play a major role in meeting electricity demand over the next two decades. The contract's debut came after prices for coal, considered the dirtiest of power-plant fuels, doubled in the past year, as demand from power plants outstripped mine production. Coal for September delivery opened at $42 a ton and settled at $40.75, as 98 contracts were traded, exchange officials said. ``We had a big run-up in coal prices this past winter,'' said Andy Ozley, who buys coal for Atlanta-based Mirant Corp.'s six coal plants in New York, Illinois, Maryland and Virginia. ``This contract affords us a way to mitigate our exposure'' to large price swings. The Bush administration said in an energy policy report this spring that coal would be the dominant fuel for electricity generation through 2020. Bush gave an added boost to the fuel when he retreated from a campaign pledge to restrict carbon dioxide emissions, implicated in global warming. Coal plants are responsible for a third of the nation's carbon dioxide emissions. They also produce sulfur dioxide, which causes acid rain, and nitrogen oxides, which cause smog. The Nymex started the futures contract to give mining companies and utilities a way to hedge their risks in the $33 billion coal market. Producers such as Peabody Energy Corp. and Arch Coal Inc., whose shares have soared in the past year, have said they would trade the futures. New Plants Last year's quadrupling of prices for natural gas -- a cleaner-burning power-plant fuel -- prompted many generators to ramp up output from their coal plants. Utility coal stockpiles dwindled, and prices have risen to their highest levels since at least 1989. So far this year, more than a dozen companies have announced plans to build coal-fired plants, including Kansas City, Missouri- based Kansas City Power & Light Co. and Portland, Oregon-based PacifiCorp. Although coal is used to produce 52 percent of the nation's electricity, few plants were built during the 1990s because of the high costs of building them and the difficulty of complying with federal and local environmental regulations. Demand for coal has eased in recent weeks as below-normal temperatures in the U.S. Midwest and Northeast reduced demand for air conditioning, said Jim Parks, who buys coal for six power plants in Ohio and Pennsylvania as director of fuels at Akron, Ohio-based FirstEnergy Corp. ``The summer's been pretty mild so far -- you haven't seen any big heat waves'' in regions with the most coal generation, he said. Big Sandy The Nymex futures contract calls for the delivery of 1,550 tons of low-sulfur coal to the mouth of the Big Sandy River near Huntington, West Virginia. From there, the fuel would be loaded onto Ohio River barges and shipped to power plants in the U.S. and possibly Europe. The new contract is tailored to producers in Appalachian states that account for about 40 percent of U.S. production, including West Virginia, Kentucky and Pennsylvania, the No. 2, 3 and 4 coal producers. The industry lacks a futures contract for coal from Western states that account for 47 percent of the nation's production, including the No. 1 producer, Wyoming. Avoiding the Past The exchange, which earns commissions on trades, hopes coal futures will avoid the fate of other contracts it has started over the past few years. Its six electricity futures contracts have fizzled, as has its Middle East sour crude oil contract, which debuted in May 2000. ``I said yesterday, if you traded 100 to 200 contracts, that would be a really a good day,'' said Chris Casale, vice president of energy trading at Dynegy Inc. in Houston, which trades coal and buys the fuel for its six power plants in New York and Illinois. ``It came out sort of on target.'' Most of today's trading was originated by large energy marketing companies, he said, although he declined to say whether Dynegy traded any contracts. Enron Corp., the largest energy trader, and Duke Energy Corp., the largest U.S.-based utility holding company, have said they would trade coal futures. Exchange officials have said the coal market has the potential to reach 5,000 trades a day after a year of trading. The Nymex's 17-year-old crude oil futures contract averages about 66,700 trades a day, and its 11-year-old natural gas contract averages about 33,500. Wary of Coal ``The coal market is still lacking liquidity,'' said Anthony McAuley, a floor broker at ABN Amro Inc., who said he bought five coal contracts for a client at $42 a ton -- the market's first transaction. ``You probably need to see a little more participation'' from industry coal buyers and sellers for the market to take off. Independent floor traders, known as locals, are wary of trading coal futures without assurances that the industry will be active as well. ``Floor traders lost millions'' in electricity futures when some were caught with high-priced contracts and nobody in the industry to sell them to, he said. ``Because of that, people are a little bit tentative about coal,'' said Tom Schiff, an independent crude oil trader. ``We're here to help make liquidity but we can't tackle all the risk.'' =09=09=09 =09=09=09 =09=09 Modern Metals, July 2001 Giant energy concern now turns its atten= tion to steel. The company's aggressive posture has begged controversy. Ind= ustry reactions vary from hand-wringing to open arms. Still others characte= rize Enron as a ""non-event."" By Michelle Martinez Arjona, Editor-in-Chief, = and Paul Hohl, Contributing Editor These days, saying the word ""Enron"" in = a room full of metals executives is like screaming ""fire"" in a crowded thea= ter. For most in the steel industry, the idea of a futures market is enough= to raise a few eyebrows. But when a major market maker with annual revenue= s of 10 times the market cap of the U.S. steelmaking industry stakes a clai= m (for 2000 alone, Enron logged revenues of $101 billion--that's with a ""b""= ), a lot more than eyebrows are likely to be raised. After a bold presentat= ion from Jeff McMahon, president and CEO of Enron Industrial Markets, at th= e SSCI annual convention in May (in which he accused steel mills of treatin= g their service center customers as ""annoyances""), industry leaders rushed = to understand this latest market contender. Friend or foe? Competitor or p= artner? These are just a couple of the questions surrounding Enron's aggres= sive push into the metals industry. Judging from the service center and mil= l executives Modern Metals queried, there are as many answers as there are = opinions in the industry. Reactions ranged from fear to acceptance to downr= ight resentment. At least one mill was reticent to discuss Enron at all--st= ill others seemed to meet the issue with unaffected shrugs. If the saying i= s true that all publicity is good publicity, the buzz that Enron has genera= ted would make even a Hollywood spin doctor envious. What's the hubbub? Alt= hough products such as natural gas and energy--Enron's major business platf= orm--have been traded as commodities for years, until Enron's appearance a = formal forward market for steel has never existed. According to McMahon, th= e absence of a liquid and transparent market has resulted in ""uninformed in= vestment decisions"" that have exacerbated the current oversupply situation,= and left companies exposed to the hazards of price volatility. Enron's an= swer is to offer a variety of financial hedging products along with forward= contracts in hot-rolled, cold-rolled and galvanized (plate and long produc= ts are soon to follow), locking in prices for as many as five years out. En= ron contends that it can act as a ""risk intermediary"" in steel transactions= , ensuring healthier profit margins and lowering the cost of capital. Certa= in grades of steel are commodities, McMahon insists, and as such should be = bought and sold on a commodity market basis, instead of the strategic relat= ionships that now exist between the mills and consumers. Enron has been off= ering steel online, and via phone and fax, since November of last year. ""Be= fore you add capacity, before you make an investment decision, you'll be ab= le to see a three, five, maybe even a 10-year forward price of steel,"" McMa= hon stated, ""and if you want to hedge that investment you can do that."" The= company plans to buy steel at a floating price and then sell it to steel c= onsumers at a fixed rate, making money on the spread. In February, Greg Her= mans, VP of steel trading at Enron, reported to AMM that it was offering U.= S.-made 10-gauge, 48-in. wide hot-rolled for April delivery in Chicago for = $225 a ton. Hermans said Enron was buying the same product for April delive= ry at $215 a ton. Eventually, Enron sees the development of four different= marketplaces: the Northeast, the Midwest (or Chicago area), the Gulf Coast= (or Houston area), and the West Coast. Enron will hedge against spot price= spikes through equity and physical holdings in domestic mills. The company= closed on Huntco's Arkansas-based cold-rolling mill in June. ""It's a big p= ortfolio,"" McMahon said. ""We wanted to put together a portfolio of supply a= nd demand. In some cases, we'll own assets--hopefully we'll own some term c= ontracts with domestic mills. To the extent that imports are a part of the = equation, we'll be a part of that market. We may purchase capacity from som= ebody, not necessarily the assets, but toll slab through a hot strip mill. = All of those combined is how we do our business."" Steel mills can benefit, = McMahon said, by entering into a multi-year ""physical off take"" with Enron,= thus giving steel mills a degree of certain volume and on product specific= ation. Enron would guarantee purchase of a specified amount of tonnage, and= use a floating price or a floor price to guard against market shocks. Whet= her mills would be willing to divert capacity to the commodity grades being= bought and sold by Enron remains uncertain. At least one mill executive pr= ivately said no . . . at least for now. Nucor president, CEO and vice chair= man, Dan DiMicco also sees little value in Enron's proposal. ""What we need = to have is stable pricing at levels where the most efficient mills can make= a good return on their capital and further invest in new technologies and = equipment,"" he stated. ""I define true value as helping the industry to beco= me stronger. It doesn't do any good to maintain a lack of price volatility = at $200 a ton."" Keith Busse, CEO at Steel Dynamics, echoed that sentiment i= n a recent New Steel article. ""If you're trying to get volatility out at $3= 20 [per ton], great,"" he said. ""But at $230, you want to stick your fingers= down your throat."" For the service centers Service centers, McMahon sugges= ted, could benefit immediately. ""The only way [distributors] are able to he= dge themselves is to go out and buy inventory,"" he explained. ""That takes c= apital, and cash, and space. We can offer a financial product that gives th= e exact same protection, but doesn't require any of the above. ""We can hold= those inventories and price the steel at the time of delivery to the servi= ce centers,"" he continued, ""so their 4- or 5- percent net margins are somew= hat certain."" ""I do think that Enron is providing a service for the industr= y . . . "" commented Dave Lerman, CEO of Steel Warehouse, South Bend, Indian= a. But he pointed out that ""how [it] moves forward will be interesting. If = they just move forward with hedge instruments . . . that's independent of w= hether you run your business well by having a good supplier that matches up= with the demands of your customers. I think [Enron] will be a good thing f= or some people and a non-event for others."" Beyond hedging, McMahon pointed= out, firm and enforceable contracts could become a key benefit to service = centers. As one Midwestern distributor source commented, ""One of the terrib= le things that happens in our business is that end users demand long-term p= ricing, beyond what anybody can foresee. When they anticipate the market is= going up, or that it has hit a low point, they push harder for it--as any = one would. But historically, they don't honor the deals."" In a down market= , he explained, customers demand lower prices. Noncompliance can result in = orders, but no releases, and a ""don't call us, we'll call you"" attitude fro= m customers. The consequence for service centers, he said, are price reduct= ions on the way down and on the way up. ""If Enron brings integrity to both = sides of this market,"" he concluded, ""that would be a very big plus for the= steel industry."" But integrity, another Midwest service center exec counte= red, has got nothing to do with it. In his estimation, Enron is like a prof= iteering carpetbagger, ""trying to make a buck in between the producer and t= he user. That's all we need right now,"" he declared, ""somebody trying to sq= ueeze out a few more dollars."" But, he recognized, ""we're all going to have= to deal with it."" Don McNeeley, president and CEO of Chicago Tube & Iron, = indicated that some good could come of a heavy-hitter like Enron introducin= g new ideas into the industry, but acknowledged that people might be offend= ed by somebody picking the so-called ""low-hanging fruit"" of the steel marke= t in the current economy. ""What do you think the mills are going to do when= you come to them for just the peripheral items?"" he queried. ""My concern w= ould be that the price would go up on [those items]."" McNeeley also questio= ned the wisdom of distributors relinquishing control of their inventories. = ""In distribution, 60 percent of our net worth is inventory, 30 percent is a= ccounts receivable, and 10 percent is plant property and equipment,"" he rel= ated. ""Our single largest asset is our inventory. If a distribution company= surrenders control of its inventory to a third party, does not that distri= butor, in effect, surrender its own sovereignty?"" Only just begun Questions= abound regarding Enron's role as a physical supplier of steel as well. As = one Minnesota-based service center exec put it, ""are they ready to deal wit= h problems?"" Although Enron has expressed interest in being a physical supp= lier, Dave Lerman explained, ""I think that's going to be a lot more difficu= lt to implement."" Enron would have to consider specific qualities, coil siz= es, nuances of chemistry, surface quality, and formability. ""Most customers= require better than standard tolerances,"" he pointed out. ""These are all i= ssues that might complicate commodity sales."" Delivery is another issue. As= a physical supplier, Enron has virtually guaranteed just-in-time delivery,= but as one service center source said, ""the guarantee is good when the mat= erial shows up at my door. What happens if it doesn't show up? I disappoint= a customer. What good does it do to sue [Enron] if I've lost a customer?"" = Mill executives have questioned whether Enron is a potential competitor. ""T= hey see Enron as someone likely to buy foreign steel in order to deliver it= to a U.S. customer,"" said Chuck Bradford, principal of Bradford Research a= nd a long-time industry observer. He cautioned against seeing Enron as too = much of a physical supplier, speculating that the future of Enron, similar = to the LME, will be in hedging. ""You may see some [physical transactions] t= o start with,"" Bradford predicted, ""just to get the ball rolling. But I don= 't see that as the way the market will develop."" McMahon has been consisten= t in saying that Enron has little interest in becoming a steel manufacturer= . The real value, he said, is in a transparent, liquid market. ""We know the= products work, we know the market wants them. Can any one particular mill = or mills prevent that? We don't think so,"" he said. ""It's not an 'if', it's= a 'when'."" The jury is still out on just how soon that ""when"" will come, a= nd what those effects will be for the steel industry. And for all of the de= bate surrounding the issue, it seems a bit soon to be hitting the panic but= ton. As Don McNeeley recounted, ""I can recall similar controversy over a sp= eech a guy gave about 15-17 years ago. That guy's name was Ken Iverson, and= he had this concept called a mini-mill. Look at it now."" =09 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California Update--0717.01; [EMail-Body]= fyi ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/18/2001 07:15 AM --------------------------- From: Jeff Dasovich on 07/17/2001 07:31 PM Sent by: Jeff Dasovich To: skean@enron.com, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Harry Kingerski/Enron@EnronXGate, Leslie Lawner/Enron@EnronXGate, Michael Tribolet/ENRON@enronXgate, Kristin Walsh/Enron@EnronXGate, Karen Denne/Enron@EnronXGate, mpalmer@enron.com, Janel Guerrero/Enron@EnronXGate, Paul Kaufman/Enron@EnronXGate, Susan M Landwehr/Enron@EnronXGate, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: California Update--0717.01 What people know: Hertzberg (et al's) bill (82XX)was heard in an ""informational"" hearing today and still sits in the Assembly Energy Committee. It will be heard again tomorrow (perhaps beginning at 10 AM) , at which time parties will have a chance to support/oppose and ask for amendments. Most, including us, oppose unless significantly amended. The Wright (D) -Richman (R) bill (83XX)was heard in an ""informational"" hearing today and still sits in the Assembly Energy Committee. It will be heard again tomorrow, at which time parties will have a chance to support/oppose and ask for amendments. From our perspective, this is the best bill out there yet, though it still has serious problems---it isn't available electronically yet, but should be tomorrow, and I'll distribute then. The chances of the joint D-R bill being successful are slim, however, since it's up against the Speakers competing bill. There is talk that the Speaker will try to negotiate with Wright/Richman tonight and include any agreement in his bill (82XX). The original version of the Governor's MOU bill sits in the Senate. Most believe that Burton will put it up for a vote this week and it will fail. The Senate's version of the MOU (Sher-Peace-Kuehl) (78XX)came out today. It will likely be heard in the committee tomorrow or the next day. Notably, it kills Direct Access completely and makes Edison shareholders responsible for that portion of Edison's debt owed to suppliers. In short, a very bad bill. Burton's 18XX, which would de-link the bond issuance (to pay back the General Fund) from the DWR contracts is likely to pass the Senate tomorrow or the next day. Many--including Enron--support the bill (though we are supporting it behind the scenes). What people don't know: Whether there's the time or the will in the Assembly and Senate to achieve by Friday a single, comprehensive bill that can be sent to the governor for his signature. Whether the Legislature would postpone its month-long recess if the Legislature hasn't finished a bill by Friday (most folks think they will not postpone). Whether it's true that, irrespective of the energy issue, the Legislature will fail to get the budget completed by Friday and therefore have to postpone their recess anyway, in which case they might continue to work on the energy legislation at the same time. Odds-makers still say it's better than 50-50 that the Legislature does not get the Edison bills done by Friday and leaves on on its 30-day vacation. Best, Jeff Sacramento is one goofy place. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re:; [EMail-Body]= Mark has some editorial changes to the letter if there is still time ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/04/2000 03:41 PM ----- Mark.Schroeder@enron.com 10/04/2000 10:39 AM To: Steven.J.Kean@enron.com cc: Subject: Re: Two suggestions: I think the word ""forgoing"" should be ""foregoing"", and I do not see the need for us to say what the Chinese Government decided, as opposed to saying: ""Subsequently, we understand the Chinese Government decided . . . "" mcs From: Steven J Kean@ENRON on 04/10/2000 10:30 Sent by: Steven J Kean@ENRON To: Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Kelly Kimberly/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: FYI ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/04/2000 10:29 AM ----- John Ambler@ENRON_D To: Rosalee Fleming@ENRON EVELOPMENT cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer@ENRON, Kelly Kimberly@Enron 10/03/2000 Communications, Lauren Goldblatt@ECT 03:26 PM Subject: Rosie, On September 25, 2000 the Tibetan Government-in-exile wrote Dr. Lay at the Beijing office address requesting that Enron cancel its participation in the Sebei-Lanzhou pipeline. We faxed a copy of this communication to you a few minutes ago. We have drafted the attached proposed response. Rebecca McDonald concurs with the approach in this letter, which has been reviewed by the addressees of this message. Your assistance in appropriately formatting and printing the letter for signature would be appreciated. Please let me know if you have any questions or need assistance. Thanks, John (See attached file: Tibet Letter from Ken Lay 092800.doc) - Tibet Letter from Ken Lay 092800.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Birhtday; [EMail-Body]= Kevin, Thanks. I am becoming an old man. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Moore, Kevin G. Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 7:10 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Birhtday Happy Belated Birthday , Hope you had a Wonderful Birthday , and I wish you many many more. Have A Great Day , Vince ..... Kevin Moore [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Fiber Optic Public Lands Right-of-Way Status; [EMail-Body]= great news! Keep up the good work. Stephen D Burns To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES cc: Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Scott Bolton/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Donald Lassere/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Sue Nord/NA/Enron@Enron, Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Chris Long/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Fiber Optic Public Lands Right-of-Way Status The fat lady hasn't quite sung yet, but I thought it would be a good idea to give you a readout on the current status of the BLM/USFS fiber optic right-of-way issue. In a nutshell, our strategy seems to have worked and we've won all the concessions we sought. As you'll recall these were: a) to get the BLM to withdraw any ""interim"" policies, the first of which split fiber cables into 144 different ROW certifications, and a later version that re-packaged the issue, mandating that ROW certificates be issued each time a fiber owner subleases or sells capacity on its line, with a retroactivity clause that added extra sting; b) to get the Forest Service to retract its May 2nd memorandum which changed its fiber optic ROW policy from published fee schedules to individual ""comparable"" assessments (the first such assessment, which compared ROW fees in urban centers in downtown Portland and Seattle to Oregon forest lands, increased the cost of a segment of our FTV fiber build 150 fold); c) to block both agencies from implementing any proposed or final rule in FY 2001; and d) to create an open rule making process that involves all interested stakeholders, including Enron. Thanks to the considerable pressure we orchestrated from Congress and the Administration, BLM Director Fry and USFS Chief Dombeck have backed away from points a and b above, and have agreed to points c and d. The language we inserted in the Interior Appropriations Bill, which has been agreed to by the Conferees, forces both agencies to revert back to the published fee schedules, prevents them from implementing any new policies in FY 2001, and forces them to work with industry and to come up with a common policy for future rent determination. The reference in the opening sentence to gravitationally-challenged women is because the issue still hasn't quite closed. The Interior Appropriations Bill may very well be vetoed. But since our issue was settled at the staff level, and is now off the table, we're likely to remain safe from being re-examined and challenged. In fact, any changes would likely only increase the strength of our hand: some members of our coalition are trying to insert even more detailed language in the report that prescribes exactly how the agencies will proceed to determine the new rental fee schedules over the next 18 months. Through outside consultants, we've had a series of constructive discussions with the agencies over the past two weeks that have forged agreements on timing and specific ways forward. Details are forthcoming, but Enron would be involved closely in the process. The agencies were clearly surprised by the clout we wielded, and are now more than willing to negotiate. But the bottom line, again, is that we have stopped both agencies from implementing their costly interim policies or launching a rule making process either now (which they originally intended to do) or in the coming fiscal year. And by engaging key Members of Congress and the White House, and organizing and leading the 20-member Fiber Optic Public Land Right-of-Way Coalition, we've succeeded in branding Enron as a leader in the communications field. Steve [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= 1:00 - 3:00 p.m. Jonathan Sallet meeting, 1801 Pennsylvania Ave @
 18th & H; [EMail-Body]= Washington, DC. (Suite 419) you will need to dial x3360 (Louisa Asmar is his assistant) and she will meet you in the lobby area and take you upstairs. Jim and Rick will meet you there. 3:30 Meet with Dan Albert in Senator Bingaman's office (D-NM) - Hart Senate Office Building, Room 703. Cynthia will meet you there. 4:00 - Meet with Representative Pallone, #420 Cannon House Office Building. Cynthia will accompany you, Rick and Jim will meet you there. Car will be waiting to take you to the airport. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Flatscreens approval; [EMail-Body]= I approve. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/20/2000 11:24 AM ----- Elizabeth Linnell Sent by: Elizabeth Linnell 09/20/2000 10:51 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Flatscreens approval Steve - Please forward to Eileen Buerkert with your approval. Eileen - Per our discussion, please make sure these are the black flatscreens. Thanks! ----- Forwarded by Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron on 09/20/2000 10:50 AM ----- Eileen Buerkert 09/08/2000 12:01 PM To: Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Enron IT Purchasing@Enron, Hank Zhang/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Donna Ruff/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Andy Sikes/Corp/Enron@Enron, Shauncy Mathews/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: PO Approval needed Elizabeth, Because of the dollar amount of this PO, I need to have an email approval from your senior director. Could you forward this to the appropriate party (if it's not you) and have him/her email me back with a note saying ""approved"" on it? I will fax this immediately after I receive that. Thank you!! Eileen Buerkert IT Sourcing and Procurement 713-345-6272 ----- Forwarded by Eileen Buerkert/NA/Enron on 09/08/2000 12:00 PM ----- PURCHASE ORDER FORM PO No. 20090208 Master Request: Order Date: 09/08/2000 WO #: CO #: 0011 SAP Cost Center #: 100062 Ordered By: Eileen Buerkert Phone #: 713 345-6272 Vendor: COMPAQ DIRECT Fax #: 317-228-8780 Contact: TAMMY RAY Phone #: 800-535-2563 Date Required: Payment Terms: NET 30 DAYS FOB Point: Ship To: ENRON CORP PO # 20090208 1400 SMITH ROOM 523 HOUSTON TX 77002 ATTN: LYN MALINA 713 853-1840 Note: Please include all ship to information on any packages. We will not accept packages without an ENRON PO#. Bill To: ENRON CORP P O BOX 3767 HOUSTON TX 77253 ATTN: FELICIA SALEWSKY 713 853-3895 Quantity Ordered: Item Number: Description: Mfgr: Unit Price: Price: 14 104741-001 15IN TFT 5010 OPAL COMPAQ $922.00 $12908.00 Amount: $12908.00 Local Sales Tax Applies? Sales Tax (8.25%): $1064.91 Total: $13972.91 Notes: PLEASE ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF THIS PO BY SIGNING AND FAXING TO Eileen Buerkert @ 713 646-2450 ENRON CORP COMPAQ DIRECT Revision History: Eileen Buerkert 09/08/2000 12:00:29 PM [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Request for Confidential Information by the GAO; [EMail-Body]= To All California Power Exchange Participants: Notice is hereby provided pursuant to Section 19.3.4 of the California Power Exchange Tariff that the United States General Accounting Office (GAO), as part of the ongoing investigation of California markets, has requested the same information to be provided to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Such information may be confidential under Section 19.3.2 of the Tariff. The manner in which the GAO will treat such confidential information is outlined in the attached letter. The GAO states that it has authority under 31 U.S.C. 717 to evaluate programs or activities of the Federal Government, in this case, deregulation of the electricity markets initiated by FERC. The GAO has requested the California Power Exchange to provide such information no later than Thursday, October 5, 2000. If you desire to assert a claim of privilege or confidentiality pursuant to legal authority, the California Power Exchange will include your written assertion of that claim together with its submittal to the GAO, provided that it is timely received. Your written statement should be directed to the GAO as follows: Mr. Jim Wells Director, Energy Resources, and Science Issues United States General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548 You may deliver your statement to the California Power Exchange as follows: Karen Koyano California Power Exchange 1000 S. Fremont Avenue Unit 20 Alhambra, CA 91801 626.537.3173 facsimile Any written statement must be received by Ms. Koyano no later than Wednesday, October 4, 2000, 5:00 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time, to be included with any information delivered to the GAO. You are also free to take any other legal action you may deem appropriate in the circumstances of this investigation. Thank you. (See attached file: GAO Letter 9-22-00.doc) - GAO Letter 9-22-00.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Contribution to Sacramento Women's Campaign Fund; [EMail-Body]= Let's process this request. I think it's justified. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 04/18/2000 05:29 PM --------------------------- Richard Shapiro 04/17/2000 09:33 AM To: Sandra McCubbin/SFO/EES@EES cc: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Re: Contribution to Sacramento Women's Campaign Fund Please call on Wednesday to discuss so we can bring to closure. Thanks. Sandra McCubbin 04/11/2000 06:16 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Re: Contribution to Sacramento Women's Campaign Fund I am in complete agreement with you..this was for a total of $150 and was given at the request of a powerful woman senator, who is the sponsor of this program..if it had been for more money I would have not have contributed, but the 17 women members that were there are of importance to us. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: The Governors' Natural Gas Summit: Responding to the Challenge; [EMail-Body]= Yes, thanks. Lay is going to be giving the keynote. It may be a hard story to assemble: the gas market is deregulated and structured pretty much the way we would like to see it done in both gas and power markets, yet we still have high prices. It's a bit of a stretch to blame it all on OPEC. I'm interested in any views you may have. David Haug@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 09/01/2000 10:30 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: The Governors' Natural Gas Summit: Responding to the Challenge I assume you are involved in this but just in case... - - -DLH ---------------------- Forwarded by David Haug/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 09/01/2000 10:27 PM --------------------------- Daniel Yergin <DanielYergin@CERA.com> on 08/31/2000 03:14:59 PM To: ""'David.Haug@Enron.com'"" <David.Haug@Enron.com> cc: Subject: The Governors' Natural Gas Summit: Responding to the Challenge Mr. David Haug Chairman and CEO Enron Caribbean Basin Dear Mr. Haug: I am writing to bring your attention to an important and timely event that will be held on September 20th at the Hyatt Regency Columbus, in Columbus, Ohio - ""The Governors' Natural Gas Summit: Responding to the Challenge."" This event is convened by the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission (IOGCC).? Co-chaired by Alaska Governor Tony Knowles, IOGCC Chairman and Ohio Governor Bob Taft, with the participation of other governors, this forum promises to be an outstanding exchange of ideas among leaders of government, energy producers, transporters, distributors, and end-users on the subject of the current and long-term outlook for natural gas resources and markets in North America. A very distinguished group of speakers is assembling, including senior government officials and senior executives of companies critically involved in the energy value chain. Primary Goals of the Summit include: * Exploring and clearly communicating the current dynamics of the natural gas market * Informing the industry and the public about the current and future supply potential for gas * Providing governmental and industry leaders with an opportunity to discuss natural gas in the context of national energy policy, with the input of interested State Governors. The Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission (IOGCC) and the governors have asked CERA to help organize the Summit and has invited senior CERA staff to moderate panel discussions on the Natural Gas Marketplace and the Supply Response for North America. In addition, I will be providing an opening framework for participants and contributing to the wrap-up of the Summit at the close of the day with the governors.? We are very pleased to be working with the governors and with the IOGCC and its executive director, Christine Hansen. We hope that you can join us for this important event, and encourage you to view the Summit agenda on the IOGCC Web-site at: [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: AP Wire services, Tues 3/20: ""Calif. Officials Order Blackouts"" Dow Jones News, Tues 3/20: ""California Panel to Order Utilities to Make $1= =20 Billion in Back Payments"" SF Chron, 3/20: ""As Davis Seeks Money, Lawmakers Want Answers=20 Members of both parties angry at lack of dialogue"" Fresno Bee, Tues 3/20: ""Jones rips state on energy crisis "" Sac Bee, Wed., 3/21: ""Day 2 -- Battling blackouts: Payment plan sought to= =20 restart small plants"" Sac Bee, Wed., 3/21: ""Hospitals take hit, seek power guarantee"" Sac Bee, Wed., 3/21: ""Lodi still won't pull the plug"" San Diego Union, Tues., 3/20: ""Blackouts hit for second day; break seen=20 Wednesday"" San Diego Union, Tues., 3/20: ""State power regulators working on energy=20 rescue""=20 San Diego Union, Tues., 3/20: ""Federal regulators scored for not ordering= =20 more California refunds"" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: ""Second Day of Blackouts Disrupts 500,000 Home and= =20 Businesses"" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: ""Fragile Supply Network Apt to Fail"" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: ""Elevator Anxiety is Riding High"" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: ""State says it's accelerating plan to buy Power=20 Utilities' Grid"" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: ""L.A., Long Beach File Suits Over Gas Companies'=20 Prices "" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: ""Davis OKs Subsidy of Pollution Fees"" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: ""As Losses Mount, Companies work around outages"" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: Commentary: ""A Blackout on Answers"" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: Commentary: ""Rolling Blackouts: Blatant Extortion"" SF Chron, Wed., 3/21: ""Utilities' Demand Blocks Bailout=20 NEGOTIATIONS HIT SNAG: PG&E, Edison want end to price freeze if they sell= =20 transmission lines to state"" SF Chron, Wed., 3/21: ""Utilities' Demand Blocks Bailout=20 BLACKOUTS ROLL ON: Weather, increased consumption blamed"" SF Chron, Wed., 3/21: ""Manners Go Out the Window=20 Pedestrians in peril as drivers turn darkened S.F. streets into free-for-al= l"" SF Chron, Tues., 3/20: ""Historic Blackouts in State=20 Bay Area learns to cope"" SF Chron., Tues., 3/20: ""Second day of rolling blackouts in power-starved= =20 California"" Mercury News., Wed., 3/21: ""Bay Area Residents Learning to roll with=20 Blackouts"" Orange County, Wed., 3/21: ""Powerless, Again"" Orange County, Wed., 3/21: ""The iceman shunneth effects of hourlong blacko= ut"" Orange County, Wed., 3/21: ""Traffic officials are seeing red over blackout= s"" Orange County, Wed., 3/21: ""Alternative power producers cut back or shut= =20 down as payments from big utilities lag"" Orange County, Wed., 3/21: ""O.C. saves its energy -- for blaming others"" Orange County, Wed., 3/21: ""Blackout readiness on agenda"" Dow Jones Energy News, Wed., 3/21: ""Calif To Order Utils To Pay Small=20 Generators Up Front-Gov"" Dow Jones Energy News., Wed., 3/21: ""PG&E Says It Is Negotiating With=20 Qualifying Facilities"" Energy Insight, Wed., 3/21: ""New York at the Crossroads"" --- Calif. Officials Order Blackouts=20 By PAUL CHAVEZ, Associated Press Writer=20 LOS ANGELES (AP) - State power managers ordered rolling blackouts across=20 California for a second straight day Tuesday as demand for electricity agai= n=20 exceeded supply.=20 The same factors that collided to strap California's power supply on Monday= =20 hit again, officials with the Independent System Operator said. Those inclu= de=20 reduced electricity imports from the Pacific Northwest, numerous power plan= ts=20 offline for repairs and higher-than-expected demand because of warm=20 temperatures.=20 A two-unit Southern California plant that the ISO hoped would be working=20 Tuesday had not been fixed. One of its units might go online at noon to hel= p=20 the situation, the ISO's Jim Detmers said.=20 In addition, hydroelectric power imports from the Northwest were 800=20 megawatts lower than Monday, he said. The ISO oversees most of the state's= =20 power grid.=20 --- California Panel to Order Utilities to Make $1 Billion in Back Payments By Jason Leopold 03/20/2001 Dow Jones Business News (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) Dow Jones Newswires=20 LOS ANGELES -- The California Public Utilities Commission will order Edison= =20 International's Southern California Edison and PG&E Corp.'s Pacific Gas &= =20 Electric unit to pay small power generators that are qualified utilities=20 about $1 billion in past-due payments in order to keep the plant owners fro= m=20 dragging the utilities into an involuntary bankruptcy proceedings, and to= =20 also ensure the generation units keep pumping out electricity, people=20 familiar with the matter told Dow Jones Newswires late Monday. Gov. Gray Davis, state Sen. Debra Bowen, and Assemblymembers Fred Keeley an= d=20 Robert Hertzberg, all Democrats, spent most of the day y trying to hammer o= ut=20 an agreement with the so-called qualifying facilities, alternative power=20 producers that use the wind, sun, steam and biomass to generate electricity= =20 for the state, on supply contracts and past payments the utilities failed t= o=20 make.=20 The qualifying facilities, which represent about one-third of the state's= =20 total power supply and signed contracts to sell power directly to the=20 utilities under a government mandate, would then agree to sign power-supply= =20 contracts with the utilities for a period of five to 10 years for about $79= a=20 megawatt hour for the first five years and about $61 a megawatt hour=20 thereafter, two sources involved in the negotiations said.=20 The PUC is expected to issue a draft resolution on the issue sometime this= =20 week, one source said.=20 The lawmakers wouldn't comment on the details of their talks Monday.=20 Representatives with SoCal Ed (EIX) and PG&E (PCG) said they were unaware= =20 Gov. Davis and his administration were meeting on the issue.=20 The utilities are more than $13 billion in debt and have failed to make=20 payments on their qualifying-facilities contracts since November. PG&E has= =20 paid some of its qualified facilities just a fraction of what they are owed= .=20 Legislation To Restructure QF Rates Stalls In Senate Energy Committee=20 Mr. Keeley had recently drafted legislation, along with state Sen. Jim=20 Battin, a Republican from Palm Desert, that would have restructured the rat= es=20 the qualified facilities charge the utilities, from $170 a megawatt hour to= =20 $80 a megawatt hour for five years.=20 The bill, SB47X, stalled in the Senate Energy Committee, of which Ms. Bowen= =20 chairs. SoCal Ed opposed the legislation, saying the rates were still too= =20 high. A utility spokesman said the qualified-facilities rates should be=20 reduced to under $50 a megawatt hour.=20 But the lawmakers and the governor is trying to avoid the need for=20 legislation, largely because there isn't much support in both houses for su= ch=20 a bill and the chance that it won't be passed in time to keep the qualified= =20 facilities from dragging the utilities into involuntary bankruptcy=20 proceedings, the legislative source said.=20 The PUC will take over the issue from the Legislature, the source said.=20 Monday, about 3,000 megawatts of qualified-facilities generation went offli= ne=20 because the companies that operate the power plants can no longer afford to= =20 buy natural gas used to fuel the plants due to the utilities' failure to pa= y=20 money owed to the companies, said Jim Detmers, vice president of operations= =20 for the state's Independent System Operator.=20 The outages triggered a major shortfall in the state which resulted in near= ly=20 eight hours of statewide rolling blackouts Monday.=20 Many owners of the qualified-facilities said without immediate relief, they= =20 would likely force SoCal Ed, and possibly PG&E, into involuntary bankruptcy= ,=20 perhaps as soon as Thursday.=20 One such facility, CalEnergyOperating Co., wants to be freed temporarily fr= om=20 its contract with the utility and be allowed to sell its electricity to thi= rd=20 parties until the utility is able to pay its bills. CalEnergy is an affilia= te=20 of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co., which is majority owned by Warren=20 Buffet's Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRKA).=20 The company sued SoCal Ed last month, and the case is scheduled to be heard= =20 Thursday in Imperial County Superior Court. If a judge delivers an=20 unfavorable ruling, CalEnergy and other unsecured creditors would drag SoCa= l=20 Ed into involuntary bankruptcy, three executives with the companies involve= d=20 said.=20 CalEnergy is said to be organizing a bankruptcy petition now circulating=20 among six of Southern California Edison's independent power suppliers and= =20 could file the petition very quickly if it fails in its suit Thursday, said= =20 executives with three of the six companies.=20 Write to Jason Leopold at jason.leopold@dowjones.com=20 Copyright (c) 2001 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.=20 All Rights Reserved --- --- As Davis Seeks Money, Lawmakers Want Answers=20 Members of both parties angry at lack of dialogue=20 Lynda Gledhill, Greg Lucas, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau Tuesday, March 20, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 Sacramento -- The Legislature has warned it may block further state purchas= es=20 of electricity as lawmakers' frustration with Gov. Gray Davis' handling of= =20 the energy crisis increases.=20 A test may come soon because Davis asked yesterday for another $500 million= =20 to continue buying power.=20 Sen. Steve Peace, D-El Cajon, chairman of the Joint Legislative Budget=20 Committee, wrote to Davis' Finance Department on Friday that the committee= =20 might deny further spending requests ""in the absence any discernable=20 progress"" from the Public Utilities Commission to ensure that the state wou= ld=20 get its money back.=20 Members of the committee, both Republican and Democratic, said they support= ed=20 Peace's call for more oversight of the spending, given the lack of=20 information from Davis on details of the state's power purchases.=20 ""He's been holding things close to the chest, and that bothers me,"" said Se= n.=20 John Vasconcellos, D-Santa Clara. ""I want to know a lot more.""=20 Sen. Dick Ackerman, R-Fullerton, said the administration ""has been=20 stonewalling us about how much is being spent, and how much power we're=20 getting for it. When the state is spending that kind of money, at a minimum= ,=20 legislators should know for what.""=20 The state had spent $2.6 billion on electricity through March 11. Davis'=20 request for more money would put the state at the $3 billion mark by the=20 middle of April. The state is spending an average of $49 million a day.=20 The money is supposed to be paid back through the rates collected from=20 utilities' customers. It is up to the PUC to decide how to divide that mone= y=20 among the state, the utilities and the utilities' debtors. The commission i= s=20 scheduled to take up the issue at its March 27 meeting.=20 The problem is that there appear to be more demands on the money than there= =20 is money to go around.=20 The utilities have said they need the money to pay off some of their=20 creditors. Among those looking for cash are alternative-power generators th= at=20 were selling electricity to Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern=20 California Edison. Half of them have shut down because they have not been= =20 paid.=20 Earlier this month, the PUC granted the Department of Water Resources, whic= h=20 has been purchasing electricity for the state, the power to recoup its full= =20 costs through rates.=20 It's unclear whether that can be accomplished without raising electricity= =20 prices, though Davis has insisted he can solve the crisis without boosting= =20 rates.=20 Lawmakers said they approved the bill that allowed the state to buy power i= n=20 the belief such purchases would be a stopgap until the Davis administration= =20 could sign long-term contracts with power suppliers. However, only about 19= =20 contracts have been signed to date, out of 42 agreements. If all the=20 contracts are signed, they will account for about 70 percent of the power= =20 California is expected to need.=20 ""It was our expectation some of these contracts would kick in,"" said=20 Assemblywoman Carole Migden, D-San Francisco. ""This was designed to only be= =20 bridge money to avert a power disaster. We should hold firm and come up wit= h=20 a plan.=20 ""I recall about three weeks ago when we first asked about one of these $500= =20 million letters,"" Migden said. ""We said maybe this one is necessary, but=20 there won't be carte blanche approval of any future requests. I'm pleased= =20 Sen. Peace is taking that approach.""=20 To Assemblyman George Runner, R-Lancaster, Peace's letter was ""another way= =20 for the Legislature to send a message we need to be in this loop. We're jus= t=20 getting a small little dribble of information, which just creates more=20 questions.""=20 A spokesman for the Department of Finance said officials hoped to work with= =20 the committee members about their concerns.=20 --- --- Jones rips state on energy crisis=20 Secretary of state hints that he'll take on Davis in 2002.=20 By John Ellis=20 The Fresno Bee (Published March 20, 2001)=20 Officially, he's Bill Jones, secretary of state for California. Unofficiall= y,=20 he's Bill Jones, 2002 gubernatorial candidate.=20 The evidence is right there between the lines -- in the subtleties of his= =20 speeches, their subject matter, and the way Jones carries himself when he's= =20 in public.=20 Monday was no different, as Jones addressed a Rotary Club luncheon in Fresn= o=20 full of people who are assuming -- though nothing is official -- that the= =20 Fresno native will soon announce his intention to challenge Gov. Davis next= =20 year.=20 ""Bill, they call me governor,"" Chas Looney, a former Rotary Club district= =20 governor, quipped to Jones. ""I look forward to the day we all can call you= =20 governor.""=20 Jones then proceeded to deliver a speech to a packed house in the DoubleTre= e=20 Hotel that touched on his accomplishments as secretary of state, but quickl= y=20 moved to his main topic: California's crumbling infrastructure and how the= =20 energy crisis is affecting the state.=20 Always in the background but never mentioned by name was Davis. Jones was= =20 careful to hew to the Rotary rule that speeches steer clear of partisan=20 politics.=20 Still, Jones looked, sounded and acted like a candidate for governor, and= =20 near the end of his speech he promised his decision would come soon.=20 The Fresno Republican's speech began by highlighting his work in passing th= e=20 ""Three Strikes and You're Out"" initiative in 1994.=20 Jones also talked of his efforts to remove 2 million inactive California=20 voters from the rolls.=20 But it was clearly the energy crisis and its ramifications -- an issue=20 Republicans feel they can pin on Davis and the Democratic-controlled=20 Legislature -- that was the centerpiece of the speech.=20 Today, the energy crisis is being driven, he said, by a lack of power plant= =20 construction. And while billions go to solve the crisis, he said, the state= =20 faces $100 billion in unmet infrastructure needs -- everything from school= =20 repair to road repair.=20 ""Doesn't that scare you?"" Jones asked.=20 He then recounted the warning signs -- ignored by the state, he said -- of= =20 the looming energy crisis.=20 He cited the initial warnings that the deregulation bill was flawed, last= =20 summer's request by Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric to allow forward=20 contracting and the Republican request for a special session to deal with t= he=20 energy crisis. All ignored, Jones said.=20 Now, Edison and PG&E are near bankruptcy and the state finds itself steppin= g=20 up as a creditor. ""And the solution now becomes California getting into the= =20 energy business,"" he said. ""Or, even carrying it to a greater degree, not= =20 just in the short term to buy power to keep the lights on. I'm talking abou= t=20 basically socializing the energy business.""=20 Jones said he prefers low-interest loans to Edison and PG&E, taking the=20 electric grid as collateral.=20 ""I just do not believe in California getting into something it does not kno= w=20 how to do -- has never done before -- on top of all of our other=20 obligations,"" he said.=20 ""It really worries me that California will not be able to endure that type = of=20 obligation.""=20 Jones said polls now show increasing numbers of residents saying the state = is=20 headed in the wrong direction.=20 ""I feel obligated to speak out and say there is a better way,"" Jones said. --- --- Day 2 -- Battling blackouts: Payment plan sought to restart small plants By Dale Kasler and Carrie Peyton Bee Staff Writers (Published March 21, 2001)=20 Blackouts rolled across California for a second straight day Tuesday,=20 snarling traffic, darkening businesses and sending state officials scrambli= ng=20 to craft a payment plan to revive the wind farms and other critically neede= d=20 small energy producers that have shut down because of financial woes.=20 On a day when another 570,000 customers lost power, Gov. Gray Davis said th= e=20 Public Utilities Commission and the Legislature would move promptly to orde= r=20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison to start paying= =20 those small energy producers for their electricity. Davis said the two=20 utilities will face ""considerable fines"" if they don't pay up.=20 But several of the producers, known as ""qualifying facilities,"" said they= =20 doubted Davis' plan would go far enough to get them back in operation. And = it=20 wasn't clear whether the plan would keep the increasingly impatient=20 alternative producers from hauling one or both of the big utilities into=20 bankruptcy court, as some have threatened.=20 The shortage of power from the qualifying facilities -- plus a near-record= =20 heat wave (downtown Sacramento topped off at 83 degrees, one degree short o= f=20 the 84 degree record set in 1960), a lack of hydropower and other problems = --=20 prompted the state's Independent System Operator to order a second day of= =20 blackouts starting mid-morning. But the blackouts hit only about half as ma= ny=20 Californians as Monday's, with late afternoon conservation efforts helping= =20 balance supply with demand.=20 The blackouts, usually about an hour long, hit about 7,600 Sacramento=20 Municipal Utility District customers in Elk Grove and south Sacramento=20 County. PG&E customers in suburban counties were affected as well.=20 The order darkened shops in San Francisco's Chinatown and was blamed for a= =20 crash that left two motorists seriously injured in the Los Angeles suburb o= f=20 South El Monte. A Sun Microsystems Inc. factory in Newark had to close for= =20 several hours.=20 Most Californians took the blackouts in stride, though. Elk Grove High Scho= ol=20 students filed outside to play hacky sack. Coffee shop patrons in Davis=20 milled outdoors, enjoying the unseasonably warm weather.=20 Yet the blackout order was met with outright defiance by one municipal=20 utility. The city of Lodi refused to cut power to its residents Monday or= =20 Tuesday, saying it shouldn't have to suffer because of the financial crisis= =20 afflicting PG&E and Edison.=20 The outlook for today and the near future was brighter, as several big powe= r=20 plants came back on line after repairs. ISO officials also praised=20 Californians' conservation efforts, which had faltered in the morning but= =20 came on strong in the afternoon, helping to prevent further blackouts. By= =20 evening the grid was in a relatively mild Stage 2 power alert.=20 But the second day of blackouts -- plus an increasing threat of utility=20 bankruptcy -- pushed Davis to the brink. The governor cobbled together a=20 payment plan to rescue the qualifying facilities -- some 600 wind farms,=20 geothermal plants and other alternative-energy generators whose production= =20 has become increasingly vital in recent days.=20 Under Davis' plan, the Legislature and the PUC would order PG&E and Edison = to=20 pay the qualifying facilities for power delivered after April 1. The=20 utilities are required to buy power from the qualifying facilities under a= =20 1978 federal law designed to bring cheaper and cleaner forms of electricity= =20 to market.=20 Davis said the PUC would release a proposed order late Tuesday that would= =20 require the utilities to pay the qualifying facilities $79 a megawatt hour= =20 for five-year contracts or $69 for 10-year contracts. The Legislature also= =20 would have to pass a law authorizing the PUC to issue such an order.=20 But the situation was far from resolved late Tuesday, and PG&E and Edison= =20 were likely to oppose at least portions of Davis' plan.=20 Edison is willing only to make ""some kind of partial payments going forward= ,""=20 said Thomas Higgins, a senior vice president with parent company Edison=20 International. ""We have a limited amount of resources available to us in=20 rates, ... and that's the constraining factor.""=20 PG&E, which has been making partial payments to the qualifying facilities,= =20 said it could pay them in advance, in full, for future power deliveries.=20 But PG&E said such payments would eat up half the $400 million it has=20 available each month to buy power -- and unless it gets a rate hike, there= =20 wouldn't be enough to pay the qualifying facilities and cover other expense= s,=20 including the cost of reimbursing the state Department of Water Resources f= or=20 the power the agency is buying on behalf of the troubled utility.=20 PG&E's proposal could represent a challenge of sorts to state officials:=20 Accept less money for the water department, or raise rates.=20 State officials ""need to resolve who they want to see paid,"" PG&E spokesman= =20 John Nelson said. ""There is a limited pool of money.""=20 For his part, Davis insisted that the water department would be first in li= ne=20 to be paid, and he said the PUC will issue a proposed order to that effect.= =20 ""We are getting paid before anybody else,"" Davis said.=20 Hundreds of qualifying facilities are out of commission because PG&E and=20 Edison haven't paid them. The situation has robbed the state of several=20 thousand badly needed megawatts and is a key reason blackouts have been=20 ordered. In normal times the facilities produce more than 20 percent of=20 California's electricity.=20 Some of the qualifying facilities have been threatening to haul one or both= =20 of California's beleaguered utilities into bankruptcy court unless they get= =20 paid soon, saying a bankruptcy filing might be the only way they can save= =20 their businesses.=20 ""You've got to take care of the QF problem or the whole thing blacks out,""= =20 said Jerry Bloom, a lawyer representing one group of qualifying facilities.= =20 ""(State officials) are starting to understand.""=20 One thing that was fairly certain about Davis' still-sketchy payment plan: = It=20 wouldn't cover PG&E and Edison's existing debt to the qualifying facilities= ,=20 estimated at more than $1.48 billion.=20 In their current financial state, the utilities say they can't afford to pa= y=20 the existing debt. In addition, paying the debt would create a major=20 complication: Other creditors, including the big power generators, would=20 surely haul Edison and PG&E into bankruptcy court on the grounds that they= =20 weren't being treated fairly.=20 ""You can't give preferential payment treatment to one class of creditors ov= er=20 another,"" PG&E's Nelson said. ""You virtually assure that (the other=20 creditors) have to file an involuntary bankruptcy proceeding against you.""= =20 But without full payment, it wasn't clear how many of the qualifying=20 facilities would be able to restart.=20 Executives at several plants -- the ones that run on natural gas -- said=20 they're not sure their gas suppliers will deliver unless the existing debts= =20 are cleared up.=20 ""We need to convince a gas company to supply us,"" said Ed Tomeo of UAE Ener= gy=20 Operations Corp., which had to shut off its 40-megawatt Kern County plant= =20 Tuesday. ""We're a company that already owes millions of dollars for gas=20 supplies. How do you coax them to sell you millions more?""=20 ""It's wishful thinking ... that the gas suppliers are going to sell us gas,= ""=20 Robert Swanson of Ridgewood Power said.=20 I>Bee Capitol Bureau Chief Amy Chance and staff writers Stuart Leavenworth,= =20 Bill Lindelof, Pamela Martineau and the Associated Press contributed to thi= s=20 report. --- --- Lodi still won't pull the plug By Carrie Peyton Bee Staff Writer=20 (Published March 21, 2001) In a growing rebellion against blackouts, the city of Lodi has twice refuse= d=20 to cut power to its residents despite an order from Pacific Gas and Electri= c=20 Co.=20 The small city-run electric system is among many disgruntled utilities,=20 including the Sacramento Municipal Utility District, that believe their=20 contractual pledges to cut back during emergencies were never meant for tim= es=20 like this.=20 ""It's been a philosophical debate up to this point. Now I guess we've drawn= a=20 line in the sand,"" said Lodi utility director Alan Vallow.=20 PG&E said it is reviewing its interconnection contract, the agreement that= =20 links Lodi to the grid through PG&E-owned high-voltage lines, to determine= =20 what action it will take next.=20 ""It's unfortunate that while the city of Lodi has received the benefit of= =20 this agreement for years, they are unwilling to bear the burden of this=20 statewide energy shortage,"" said PG&E's Jon Tremayne.=20 One utility coalition, the Northern California Power Agency, believes that= =20 PG&E has already violated that agreement by not lining up enough power for= =20 customers.=20 The agency wrote PG&E on Friday saying that its members -- municipal=20 utilities and irrigation districts -- believe they aren't required to=20 participate in blackouts prompted by financial disputes.=20 And SMUD, which has been considering dropping out of future blackouts, will= =20 be watching the response to Lodi, said SMUD board President Larry Carr.=20 Some SMUD directors say they're ready to go to court to force the issue. So= =20 is Lodi, population 58,000, said Vallow.=20 ""I've heard an Edison executive describe this as a natural disaster akin to= =20 an earthquake. That's crap. This is a man-made event,"" he said.=20 Lodi said it will still help in genuine emergencies, such as fires or toppl= ed=20 transmission lines. But it decided that on Monday and Tuesday that wasn't t= he=20 case.=20 ""You have 3,000 megawatts of QFs (qualifying facilities) offline because=20 their bills haven't been paid. Well, guess what? Somebody ought to pay thos= e=20 ... bills,"" Vallow said. --- --- Blackouts hit for second day; break seen Wednesday=20 By Audrey Cooper ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 20, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) Rolling blackouts hit California for a second straight day= =20 Tuesday, closing souvenir shops in San Francisco's Chinatown, snarling=20 traffic and plunging schools and offices around the state into darkness.=20 Roughly a half-million homes and businesses from San Diego to the Oregon=20 border faced outages, blamed on the same factors that collided to force=20 blackouts Monday =01) unseasonably warm weather, reduced electricity import= s=20 from the Pacific Northwest, numerous power plants offline for repairs and= =20 less power provided by cash-strapped alternative-energy plants.=20 Five rounds of outages in San Diego affected about 74,000 customers. State= =20 power grid officials expected to have enough electricity to avoid further= =20 outages through at least Wednesday, although the supply remained tight.=20 State power regulators working on energy rescue=20 Federal regulators scored for not ordering more California refunds=20 ?=20 Gov. Gray Davis blamed the blackouts in part on the failure of Southern=20 California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. to pay millions of dolla= rs=20 they owe ""qualifying facilities,"" power suppliers that use cogeneration =01= )=20 steam from manufacturing plus natural gas =01) or solar, wind and other=20 renewable energy to generate electricity.=20 State power grid officials say California this week has lost about half the= =20 electricity QFs normally provide. Several cogeneration plants say they=20 haven't been paid by Edison and PG&E for weeks and can't afford to buy=20 natural gas to fuel their plants.=20 Davis said the utilities are taking in money from customers but still faili= ng=20 to pay the QFs. The state has been spending about $45 million a day since= =20 January to buy power for customers of Edison and PG&E, which are so=20 credit-poor that suppliers refuse to sell to them.=20 ""It's wrong and irresponsible of the utilities to pocket this money and not= =20 pay the generators,"" Davis said at a Capitol news conference Tuesday evenin= g.=20 ""They've acted irresponsibly and immorally and it has to stop.""=20 Southern California Edison officials said in a written statement that the= =20 utility is intent on paying creditors and working with the PUC to pay QFs f= or=20 future power sales. PG&E representatives were out of the office late Tuesda= y=20 night and didn't immediately return calls from The Associated Press seeking= =20 comment.=20 John Harrison of the Northwest Power Planning Council, a consortium that=20 monitors power use in several Western states, said blackouts on the first d= ay=20 of spring are an ominous sign of what lies ahead this summer.=20 ""We're in trouble,"" he said. ""We will likely be able to meet our needs this= =20 summer, but there won't be much to send to California.""=20 Tuesday's outages began at 9:30 a.m. PST and continued in 90-minute waves= =20 until about 2 p.m., when the Independent System Operator lifted its blackou= t=20 order.=20 Grid officials credited an influx of power from the Glen Canyon hydroelectr= ic=20 plant on the Utah-Arizona border.=20 The blackouts were blamed for at least one serious traffic accident.=20 Two cars collided at an intersection without traffic lights in the Los=20 Angeles suburb of South El Monte, leaving two people with serious injuries,= =20 California Highway Patrol Officer Nick Vite said.=20 Ventura Foods in Industry sent its employees out for an early lunch after= =20 blackouts shut down its phones and computers.=20 ""This is mild weather for this time of year. I don't know what's going to= =20 happen in the summer,"" manager Frank Hynes said. ""This is going to have a= =20 serious impact on the state's economy. They can't just keep shutting people= =20 down.""=20 Statewide, demand was higher than expected because of warm spring weather.= =20 Temperatures reached record highs across California on Monday, including th= e=20 80s and low 90s in Southern California. They were expected to be somewhat= =20 lower Tuesday but still in the 70s and 80s.=20 The ISO hoped demand would start to subside and conservation would kick in,= =20 but that did not happen Tuesday morning.=20 ""We have not seen the kind of conservation we saw back in January,"" when th= e=20 first blackouts hit, ISO spokesman Patrick Dorinson said. ""If we don't have= =20 conservation efforts, that just means that's more power we have to take off= =20 the grid.""=20 In San Francisco's Chinatown, souvenir shops normally bustling with visitor= s=20 were forced to shut down. Nearby, irritated customers waited for a bank to= =20 reopen.=20 ""It's no good for anybody =01) stores or businesses or people,"" said Yin Su= n=20 Chan, among those in line.=20 PG&E, the state's largest utility, accounted for most of the customers=20 affected.=20 At least 438,000 PG&E residential and business customers were affected as o= f=20 early afternoon, spokesman Ron Low said.=20 Edison cut power to about 50,000 customers. Edison was ordered to cut less= =20 power than PG&E and saved some due to conservation programs, including one= =20 that lets the utility shut off air conditioning for 118,500 residential and= =20 business customers when the power supply is tight.=20 About 73,400 San Diego Gas & Electric customers were hit by the blackouts.= =20 Los Angeles, whose municipal utility is not on the grid that serves most of= =20 California, wasn't included in the blackout order.=20 More than 1 million homes and businesses statewide experienced outages=20 Monday.=20 California's power crisis is expected to get even worse this summer, when= =20 temperatures soar and residents crank their air conditioning.=20 Natural gas supplies are tight, water supplies are down and the state is=20 spending tens of millions of dollars each day to buy electricity for Edison= =20 and PG&E, who say they are nearly bankrupt due to high wholesale power cost= s.=20 Edison and PG&E say they have lost more than $13 billion since last June to= =20 climbing wholesale electricity prices the state's 1996 deregulation law=20 prevents them from recouping from ratepayers.=20 Adding to the problems, the state this week lost about 3,100 megawatts from= =20 QFs. One megawatt is enough power to serve about 750 households.=20 The plants say they are owed about $1 billion for past sales to PG&E and=20 Edison.=20 PG&E said it is offering to prepay the QFs starting next month to get them= =20 back in operation. Negotiations were expected to continue Wednesday.=20 California Co-Generation Council attorney Jerry Bloom said he supports=20 proposals that will get the Qfs paid, but the promise of future payments ma= y=20 not be enough.=20 PG&E and Bloom said the utility's prepayments hinge on an upcoming Public= =20 Utilities Commission decision on whether the utility's rates are sufficient= =20 to pay its bills and cover the state's power purchases on its behalf, which= =20 amount to $4.2 billion since early January.=20 Davis said the PUC planned to issue a draft order late Tuesday directing th= e=20 utilities to pay their future QF bills.=20 It plans to take action on that order next Tuesday, Davis said. The=20 Legislature plans to approve a bill in the meantime giving the PUC the=20 authority to issue such an order and fine the utilities if they fail to=20 comply, he said.=20 Davis said he is confident the utilities and the state can pay their bills= =20 without further rate increases for Edison and PG&E customers.=20 --- --- State power regulators working on energy rescue=20 By Karen Gaudette ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 20, 2001=20 SAN FRANCISCO =01) State power regulators continue to delay the release of= =20 guidelines that will determine a portion of the money the Department of Wat= er=20 Resources can recoup from financially troubled utilities for electricity it= =20 has bought on their customers' behalf.=20 These guidelines will help the water department determine whether it must= =20 raise consumer power rates to reimburse the state for the more than $3=20 billion it has committed to buying electricity.=20 Assemblyman Fred Keeley, D-Boulder Creek, said Tuesday that the Public=20 Utilities Commission would likely have to raise rates by 15 percent to cove= r=20 the state's costs and the utilities' bills.=20 The PUC guidelines were most recently delayed by a letter from DWR Director= =20 Thomas Hannigan asking that the water department receive a percentage of=20 ratepayer money collected by the utilities equal to the percentage of=20 electricity it provides to utilities.=20 The DWR currently buys around 40 percent of the power used by Pacific Gas a= nd=20 Electric Co., Southern California Edison Co. and San Diego Gas and Electric= .=20 Under the DWR's proposal the utilities would have to hand over 40 percent o= f=20 the money they continue to collect from ratepayers.=20 The DWR would then also receive whatever money remains after the utilities= =20 subtract their own generation and long-term contract costs, the letter said= .=20 That amount would become the ""California Procurement Adjustment"" =01) an am= ount=20 that will help the state retrieve money spent on power purchases and help= =20 establish the size of state revenue bonds that are currently estimated to= =20 total $10 billion.=20 The state plans to issue the bonds in May to help pay off the more than $3= =20 billion Gov. Gray Davis' administration has committed to power purchases=20 since January to help the utilities climb out of debt.=20 Ron Low, a spokesman with PG&E, said the utility objects to paying the DWR= =20 such a large sum, claiming it would interfere with efforts to pay its=20 ""qualifying facilities"" =01) power plants that use the sun, wind, biomass o= r=20 natural gas to generate about one third of the state's electricity.=20 The nearly bankrupt utilities owe the QFs more than $1 billion for=20 electricity they have produced since November, said Jan Smutney-Jones,=20 executive director of the Independent Energy Producers.=20 Hannigan also said in the letter the DWR intends to use its authority to=20 raise consumer electricity rates to recoup any money not reimbursed through= =20 the CPA and other means.=20 The Public Utilities Commission expected to release the guidelines last wee= k,=20 but was delayed by debates over legislation that would slash the rates of= =20 environmentally friendly power plants under contract to provide electricity= =20 to the investor-owned utilities.=20 Without knowing how much ratepayer money the utilities need to pay these=20 ""qualifying facilities"" for future electricity, it's unknown how much money= =20 they'll have on hand to pay the DWR.=20 In a written statement, PUC Administrative Law Judge Joseph DeUlloa said th= at=20 he would issue a temporary decision on the CPA ""as soon as is practical.""= =20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison Co. say they ha= ve=20 lost more than $13 billion since last June to climbing wholesale electricit= y=20 prices that the state's 1996 deregulation law prevents them from recouping= =20 from ratepayers.=20 --- --- Federal regulators scored for not ordering more California refunds=20 By H. Josef Hebert ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 20, 2001=20 WASHINGTON =01) House Democrats asked federal energy regulators Tuesday why= they=20 are not going more aggressively after alleged overcharges for wholesale=20 electricity in California and ordering more refunds.=20 The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has asked suppliers to justify $12= 4=20 million in sales during the first two months of the year or refund the mone= y,=20 but critics charge that thousands of additional questionable sales are not= =20 being challenged.=20 The three commissioners testifying at a hearing of the House Commerce=20 subcommittee on energy, were asked why they limited their refund demands to= =20 only power sales that occurred during so-called Stage 3 alerts of acute pow= er=20 shortages in California.=20 ""It appears to me a price is unreasonable when it is unreasonable,"" and not= =20 just during a power alert, said Rep. Rick Boucher of Virginia, the panels'= =20 ranking Democrat.=20 The commission last week ordered six power generators to justify some 1,000= =20 transactions during February in the California market whenever the price wa= s=20 above $430 per megawatt hour and occurred during a Stage 3 emergency alert.= =20 But the lawmakers were told Tuesday that 56 percent of another 14,168=20 transactions, occurring outside a Stage 3 emergency, also exceeded the $430= =20 trigger, but are not being questioned.=20 ""The line was drawn to limit the scope of the refund,"" said agency=20 commissioner William Massey, a Democrat, who strongly opposed the refund=20 actions because he said they were too limited.=20 Chairman Curtis Hebert, a Republican, defended the way the commission decid= e=20 on what transactions to challenge saying that it sought to replicate market= =20 conditions as they existed at the time of the sales.=20 ""We deserve a better explanation,"" retorted Boucher.=20 Massey said that agency's investigation of overcharges for January also=20 failed to consider thousands of transactions that exceeded the refund trigg= er=20 because they did not occur during Stage 3 supply emergencies.=20 Managers of California's electricity grid, state regulators and utilities= =20 have accused the agency of refusing to aggressively investigate price gougi= ng=20 by wholesalers who have charged from $150 to $565 per megawatt hour, as muc= h=20 as 20 times what prices were in 1999.=20 While Hebert and commissioner Linda Breathitt defended the commissioners=20 attempt to investigate whole electricity prices, Massey has been highly=20 critical.=20 What message does the agency's scrutiny of prices send to the power=20 companies? he was asked.=20 ""It makes clear FERC is going to be looking for the wallet under the lamp= =20 post with the lights shining =01) and nowhere else,"" replied Massey.=20 Meanwhile, Massey and his two fellow commissioners, also disagreed sharply = on=20 whether the energy agency should impose temporary price controls on the=20 wholesale power market in the West to dampen further expected price increas= es=20 this summer.=20 Massey said he fears ""a disasters in the making"" if some price restraints a= re=20 not imposed by FERC, which regulates wholesale electricity sales. ""We need = a=20 temporary time out,"" he said.=20 But Massey is in the minority on the commission. Both Hebert and Breathitt= =20 are against price caps, arguing they will have long-term detrimental impact= =20 on power supply.=20 The Bush administration has made its opposition to interfering in the=20 wholesale markets well known for weeks. Vice President Dick Cheney's task= =20 force is to unveil an energy plan in about a month that is expected to lean= =20 heavily on energy production.=20 --- --- Second Day of Blackouts Disrupts 500,000 Homes and Businesses=20 Power: Grid operators say the shortage should ease in the next few days, bu= t=20 officials see a grim summer.=20 By MITCHELL LANDSBERG and ERIC BAILEY, Times Staff Writers=20 A traffic signal that stopped working during Tuesday's rolling blackouts le= d=20 to this collision be tween a car and a truck at an intersection in El Monte= .=20 The outages ran from 9:30 a.m. to 2 p.m. AP ?????Electricity blackouts rolled through California for a second straight= =20 day Tuesday, disrupting business in one of the world's most technologically= =20 advanced economies and leaving schoolchildren groping in the dark. ?????Jinxed by a combination of bad luck and bad decisions, utilities were= =20 forced to cut off power to more than half a million homes and businesses fr= om=20 San Diego to the Oregon border. ?????By day's end, there was some good news from the operators of the=20 statewide power grid, who said the situation had eased and appeared likely = to=20 improve for the next few days. And Gov. Gray Davis announced a proposed=20 solution to one vexing problem: the utilities' failure to pay the state's= =20 small, alternative power generators, many of whom have stopped producing=20 power as a result. ?????Davis called the utilities ""shameful"" for failing to pay, and praised= =20 the alternative power generators, which include solar, wind and geothermal= =20 energy producers, as ""good corporate citizens"" who produced power although= =20 they weren't being paid. ?????""We are anxious to pay the [small producers], who are dropping like=20 flies,"" Davis said. ?????Despite the progress, it was hard for some people to look on the brigh= t=20 side after enduring outages that took place when the state's hunger for pow= er=20 was almost 50% less than at its summer peak. ?????""This is a taste, almost like an appetizer, of a really unpalatable me= al=20 that's going to be served up this summer,"" said Michael Shames of the Utili= ty=20 Consumers' Action Network in San Diego, himself a victim of a rolling=20 blackout that hit his office in San Diego early Tuesday. ?????Power officials have warned that this could be a grim summer in=20 California, since demand for electricity sharply rises when people turn on= =20 air conditioners. The state has been struggling to meet its power needs in= =20 recent months because of rising prices and a flawed deregulation plan that= =20 has left the two biggest private utilities on the brink of bankruptcy. Stat= e=20 leaders have so far failed to agree on a comprehensive plan to solve the=20 problems. Wally Quirk teaches a business class in a borrowed classroom Tuesday at=20 Sonoma State after the state's rolling blackouts cut the power to his usual= =20 classroom, which does not have any windows. SCOTT MANCHESTER / The Press Democrat ?????The latest round of blackouts began about 9:30 a.m. Tuesday when the= =20 California Independent System Operator, which runs the statewide grid,=20 determined that the demand for electricity was 500 megawatts more than the= =20 supply--an imbalance that meant the state was short on the power needed to= =20 supply electricity to about 375,000 homes. ?????Grid operators blamed a confluence of events, including warmer weather= ;=20 outages at several major power plants, including one unit of the San Onofre= =20 nuclear power station; a reduction in imports from the Pacific Northwest, a= nd=20 the shutdown of many alternative energy producers. Similar blackouts Monday= =20 were the first since January. ?????The situation improved somewhat by late Tuesday morning, with some=20 supplies restored and Californians conserving energy, and Cal-ISO was able = to=20 halt the rolling blackouts at 2 p.m. ?????Once again, customers of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power= =20 were spared, although the municipally owned utility said its electrical=20 surplus was smaller than usual. The DWP, like Southern California Edison, w= as=20 affected by an outage at the huge Mohave power plant in Nevada, as well as = by=20 planned outages at several of its facilities. ?????As in the past, by far the biggest impact was felt by customers served= =20 by Pacific Gas & Electric, the state's largest utility, which cut power to= =20 438,000 homes and businesses. ?????Edison cut power to 47,462 customers in about 40 cities, but eventuall= y=20 was able to avoid blackouts by shutting off the air conditioners of some of= =20 the 118,500 customers who participate in a voluntary cutoff program. ?????San Diego Gas & Electric cut power to 73,400 customers. ?????Innovative Ways of Coping ?????As on Monday, most people took the outages in stride, as an annoying b= ut=20 ultimately unavoidable inconvenience. ?????In Palmdale, four schools lost power during one of the hourlong=20 blackouts, but teachers and students pressed on in the sunlight pouring=20 through windows and skylights. At Barrel Springs Elementary, Principal Cruz= =20 Earls said the biggest problem came when students had to go to the bathroom= :=20 Hand in hand, they made their way through darkened hallways with flashlight= s. ?????All in all, it wasn't a terrible experience. Then again, the weather= =20 wasn't that hot Tuesday, with a high of 79 in Palmdale, so the shutdown of= =20 air conditioners wasn't much of a hardship. ""I don't want to think about th= e=20 conditions this could create in May or June,"" Earls said. ?????Businesses of all kinds complained about the lack of warning for the= =20 outages--and sometimes found innovative ways to get around the problem. ?????Rattled by news reports of Monday's rolling blackouts, El Burrito=20 Mexican Food Products in the city of Industry started its Tuesday shift at = 2=20 a.m. to beat the clock in the event of an outage. That hunch paid off.=20 Workers had just finished cooking and packaging the last batches of salsa a= nd=20 masa when the lights went out at 10:20 a.m. ?????Company owner Mark Roth said the firm will continue working odd hours = to=20 avoid further outages. But he isn't buying the line from the utilities that= =20 they can't provide advance warning because of concerns about looting and=20 rioting. ?????""We're ready to do whatever it takes to get through this thing,"" he=20 said. ""But they've got to give us some notification."" ?????At Big O Tires in Elk Grove, just south of Sacramento, owner Daniel Cr= um=20 had his 14 workers take an early lunch break or head to the warehouse to=20 reorganize the goods. Without electricity, they couldn't repair brakes or= =20 align front ends. ?????""I'd never let them be idle,"" said Crum. ?????At least two minor traffic accidents were blamed on the outages. ?????The blackouts resulted from a convergence of factors. ?????Demand was slightly higher than expected, probably because of=20 unseasonably warm weather. Supplies were tighter than usual, in part becaus= e=20 of several outages, including that at the Mohave plant, half of which was= =20 brought back on line by the end of the day. ?????The San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station was still limping along=20 without power from one of its two 1,100-megawatt units, which was shut down= =20 Feb. 3 after a half-hour fire in a nonnuclear part of the plant. Edison,=20 which operates San Onofre, initially estimated the unit would be out for=20 several weeks but recently said ""extensive damage"" to parts of the turbine= =20 will keep the unit out of commission until mid-June. ?????Shipments from the drought-stricken Pacific Northwest, which generates= =20 most of its electricity from large dams, were also down. ?????""Each time we take a measurement, we're closer to the all-time record= =20 for the driest year,"" said Dulcy Mahar, spokeswoman for the Bonneville Powe= r=20 Administration, the network of federal dams that provides the region with= =20 much of its electricity. ""We've been doing what we can, but we simply don't= =20 have power to sell."" ?????Finally, there was the problem of the small and alternative energy=20 producers, which have shut down plants because they haven't been paid by th= e=20 private utilities since November. Those outages have cost the state about= =20 3,000 megawatts of electricity, enough for about 2.3 million homes. ?????""You're seeing the system freeze up,"" said David Sokol, chairman and C= EO=20 of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co., which runs eight geothermal plants in t= he=20 Imperial Valley through its subsidiary, CalEnergy. His company hasn't shut= =20 down yet, but Sokol said smaller companies couldn't continue to sell their= =20 energy to utilities for free. ?????""Why should we fund Edison?"" he asked. ""That's just ridiculous."" ?????A Choice of 2 Rate Plans ?????Davis joined lawmakers in the Capitol on Tuesday to outline his plan t= o=20 get the producers running again. He said utilities have had no right to=20 collect money from ratepayers and then not use the funds to repay the small= =20 producers. The state has spent billions to buy power from large conventiona= l=20 producers on behalf of the utilities but has refused to pick up the tab for= =20 alternative energy. ?????""The utilities acted in a shameful manner by putting money in their=20 pockets that was designed to pay the [small producers],"" Davis said. ?????The plan outlined by Davis would allow the generators to choose betwee= n=20 two rate plans. They could decide to be paid 7.9 cents per kilowatt-hour ov= er=20 five years or 6.9 cents a kilowatt-hour over 10 years. ?????The utilities must begin paying the generators the new rates beginning= =20 April 1 or face fines, Davis said. ?????The question of how the companies will get paid the about $1.5 billion= =20 they are owed remains unresolved. That issue will be decided in coming week= s=20 as Davis' negotiators continue to work on rescue plans for the state's=20 financially hobbled private utilities. ?????PG&E spokesman Ron Low said the state's largest utility did not take= =20 kindly to Davis' criticism, and noted that the governor's plan is similar t= o=20 a proposal that PG&E made last week to producers. ?????Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of a trade group that includes so= me=20 of the small generators, described the plan as a positive step. ?????""The governor got it right in that it's not acceptable for small power= =20 producers to continue to generate and not be paid,"" Smutny-Jones said. ""But= =20 we'll need to see what the order says; the devil will truly be in the=20 details."" ?????Grid operators said the state's overall energy situation eased by midd= ay=20 Tuesday because of repairs at the Mohave plant and another large plant at= =20 Ormond Beach, and because the Western Area Power Administration came up wit= h=20 300 megawatts of electricity from Glen Canyon Dam. ?????Also, grid spokesman Patrick Dorinson said conservation savings spiked= =20 upward after earlier complaints that Californians weren't conserving. ?????""We saw the people of California probably conserve 900 megawatts today= ,""=20 he said. ""That was probably the difference."" ---=20 ?????Times staff writers Andrew Blankstein, Jose Cardenas, Marla Dickerson,= =20 Noaki Schwartz, Nicholas Riccardi, Doug Smith, Rebecca Trounson and Richard= =20 Winton in Los Angeles, Miguel Bustillo and Julie Tamaki in Sacramento, Mari= a=20 La Ganga in San Francisco, Stanley Allison, Matt Ebnet, Scott Martelle,=20 Dennis McLellan, Monte Morin, Jason Song, Mai Tran and Nancy Wride in Orang= e=20 County, and Richard Simon in Washington contributed to this story. --- --- Fragile Supply Network Apt to Fail=20 By JENIFER WARREN and ERIC BAILEY, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????A lot of people were caught off guard by the blackouts that swept over= =20 California this week. Debra Bowen wasn't one of them. ?????As chairwoman of the state Senate Energy Committee, she is=20 intimately--and painfully--familiar with the state's energy supply. And she= =20 is willing to share a secret: It's a fragile system, capable of collapse at= =20 any time. ?????That knowledge keeps Bowen awake at night, particularly with the=20 approach of summer, when power demand surges as Californians get reacquaint= ed=20 with their air conditioners. ?????""I sound a bit less like Chicken Little today, don't I?"" Bowen said=20 Tuesday, as chunks of the state once again were forcibly darkened. ""I know = a=20 lot of people don't feel we have a problem. But we have a very, very big=20 problem."" ?????With the recent slowdown in Stage 3 emergencies, a sense of calm had= =20 settled over the energy debate, and even some legislators were speaking wit= h=20 guarded optimism about the hot months ahead. ?????On Tuesday, however, a creeping sense of doom was almost palpable amon= g=20 energy watchers, and previous supply forecasts--which predict that the stat= e=20 may yet escape summer blackouts--were being given a second look. ?????""The outages of the last two days are something that Californians are= =20 going to have to get used to for July and August,"" said Michael Zenker,=20 California director of Cambridge Energy Research Associates. The=20 Massachusetts consulting firm is predicting about 20 hours of blackouts thi= s=20 summer. ?????At the California Independent System Operator, which manages 75% of th= e=20 statewide power grid, officials said the energy cushion the state had in=20 recent weeks was, in some ways, a phantom caused by heavy imports of power. ?????Cal-ISO spokesman Patrick Dorinson said people may have been deluded= =20 into a false state of comfort: ""Maybe there is a tendency to think things= =20 have improved,"" he said. In fact, they haven't. ?????More than anything, this week's events illustrate the delicate balance= =20 of factors that keep California illuminated, from the multitude of supply= =20 sources to the weather. ?????Temperatures were higher than usual. Alternative-energy suppliers--who= =20 haven't been paid in months by the cash-strapped utilities--cut their outpu= t.=20 Suppliers in the Northwest--which faces a drought--slashed exports. Equipme= nt=20 breakdowns and maintenance at power plants--much of it unanticipated--took= =20 13,000 megawatts offline. A utility-run program that gives businesses=20 discounts in exchange for cutting power during emergencies is all but dead. ?????""The fragility of the system is such that a small perturbation can tur= n=20 everything upside down very easily,"" said Gary Ackerman, executive director= =20 of the Western Power Trading Forum, a group of electricity generators and= =20 traders. ?????One factor receiving particular attention is the dip in supply caused = by=20 unscheduled maintenance. To help officials predict available supply,=20 generators provide an annual maintenance plan that is updated regularly. ?????In addition, however, facilities sometimes shut down for unexpected=20 reasons: leaking tubes, burnt-out transformers, cracked turbines and faulty= =20 feed pumps. At one point Tuesday, about 8,200 megawatts were unavailable=20 because of unscheduled shutdowns. That's enough to supply about 6 million= =20 households, and up from 5,700 megawatts a week ago. ?????The huge 1,400-megawatt Mohave power plant near Laughlin, Nev., which= =20 supplies Southern California Edison and the Los Angeles Department of Water= =20 and Power, was felled Monday by a transformer problem. That was enough to= =20 push the state into blackouts. ?????A growing number of skeptics, however, question whether those reasons= =20 are always valid, accusing generators of withholding power to shrink supply= =20 and drive up prices. ?????""There's no way to verify it, so you've got to take their word for it,= ""=20 said Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economist who studies California's= =20 electricity market. ""And given that it's very profitable for these things t= o=20 occur, you start to wonder if they're creating an artificial scarcity."" ?????Tom Williams of Duke Energy said the Houston-based company is working= =20 hard to keep its California power plants, which are capable of producing=20 3,351 megawatts of electricity, in operation after months of near-continuou= s=20 operation. ?????""It's like riding a moped across the country,"" he said. ""They're just= =20 not meant to run this hard."" ?????Last week, the state Senate formed a committee to investigate charges = of=20 market manipulation by power suppliers. The chairman, state Sen. Joe Dunn= =20 (D-Santa Ana), says the issue of unscheduled plant shutdowns is on his agen= da. ?????""The problem is: How does one prove that a particular outage was part = of=20 a deliberate strategy to deprive the state of kilowatts, rather than a resu= lt=20 of normal business operations?"" Dunn said. ---=20 ?????Times staff writer Nancy Rivera Brooks contributed to this story. --- --- Elevator Anxiety Is Riding High=20 Emergencies: Workers in skyscrapers worry about blackouts trapping them in= =20 their buildings. Some take the risk in stride; others make plans to take th= e=20 stairs.=20 By JOHN M. GLIONNA and JOE MOZINGO, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????SAN FRANCISCO--In Susan Clifton's highly placed opinion, sunny Tuesday= =20 would have been a picture-perfect day to work atop one of the tallest=20 buildings in San Francisco, a scenic city littered with soaring skyscrapers= . ?????But Clifton--like many other high-rise office dwellers in blackout-pro= ne=20 parts of California--couldn't help but feel some high anxiety at the prospe= ct=20 of being stranded by electrical outages that were sweeping across the state= =20 for a second day. ?????""I think about it all the time,"" said Clifton, a 21-year-old=20 receptionist at Deutsche Bank's offices on the 48th floor of a tower in the= =20 city's financial district who recently moved from rural Virginia. ""The way = I=20 see it, Californians take a lot of things on faith, working atop tall=20 buildings with all these earthquakes and power outages."" ?????For Long Beach office worker Dave Suhada, the anxiety has taken the fo= rm=20 of elevator phobia: a fear of getting stuck on an 80-degree day crammed in = a=20 pod of sweating, heavy-breathing humans, with no way out. ?????""I'm just eyeing the buttons to see which one I could push as fast as = I=20 can if the power goes out,"" he said.=20 ?????For 20-year-old Lisa Riley, it means entering the elevator each day in= =20 her Long Beach office building with a prayer. ""I just could not get stuck f= or=20 an hour and a half,"" she said, nodding nervously. Often she now opts for th= e=20 stairs. ?????In San Francisco, emergency services officials say that most of the=20 city's office buildings are equipped with backup generators to run elevator= s=20 and security equipment in the event of a blackout. ?????Fire Department spokesman Pete House said the city has 19 trucks with= =20 experts trained to extricate people trapped in elevators. Firefighters=20 handling blackout-related emergencies rescued a person trapped in a downtow= n=20 building Tuesday and handled five elevator mishaps Monday. ?????Christopher Stafford didn't get caught inside an elevator Monday, but= =20 suffered the next-worst thing: being stranded in his 15th-floor apartment= =20 after the power failed when he went home for lunch. ?????So the 41-year-old real estate worker trooped down the stairs to the= =20 lobby and even made some new friends along the way, helping a few elderly= =20 women who were struggling down the stairs. ?????""It was a pain,"" he acknowledged. ""But I have to tell you: I really li= ke=20 my panoramic view, so it's worth the hassle."" ?????Nowadays, Sherrie Tellier makes sure her cellular phone is in hand whe= n=20 she gets in the elevator. She got trapped once before, and the emergency=20 phone didn't work. It's amazing, she said, how small an elevator seems when= =20 you can't get out. ""It's like a broom closet.Now there's a sigh of relief= =20 every time the door opens."" ?????Some high-rise office workers said Tuesday that they preferred not to= =20 think about the perils of going without power and being vulnerable and=20 isolated so high up. ?????But on the 42nd floor of San Francisco's Transamerica Tower, Sasha=20 Monpere wasn't fazed by the chance that during a blackout, her building's= =20 backup generators wouldn't kick in. ?????""Hey, I'm young and I'm healthy. I can always walk down the stairs,""= =20 said the 29-year-old receptionist. ""I've done the Statue of Liberty. It can= 't=20 be any worse than that. And walking down 42 flights is a lot easier than=20 walking up all those stairs."" ?????Likewise with Phil Ip, who works on the 52nd--and top--floor of San=20 Francisco's tallest skyscraper. The 25-year restaurant veteran says he has= =20 the utmost faith in modern technology. ?????""We're safe, even up here,"" said Ip, assistant general manager of the= =20 Carnelian Room, a restaurant atop the Bank of America building. ""You should= =20 see the engineer's room in this building. It's like a big steamship. They'r= e=20 equipped for anything that could happen."" ?????One floor below, Cheryl Martin hears every day about people's fear of= =20 heights. In the year since she began answering phones in a law office, she= =20 has often escorted clients afraid of express elevators that shudder and ris= e=20 so fast that passengers' ears pop from the altitude gain. ?????""Everybody, and I mean everybody, asks, 'So, what happens during a pow= er=20 outage?' "" she said. ?????Rory Thompson said he believes in karma and is sure that if the rollin= g=20 blackouts come calling, his office will be spared. In July 1993, Thompson's= =20 building was the site of an incident known as the 101 California St.=20 massacre, in which gunman Gian Luigi Ferri killed eight people and wounded= =20 six before killing himself. ?????""This building has already had its bad day,"" he said. ""They say that t= he=20 day after a crash is the safest day to ride an airline. So I'll take my=20 chances with the rolling blackouts."" --- State Says It's Accelerating Plan to Buy Power Utilities' Grid=20 Government: Talks with Edison are reported near completion, but agreement= =20 with heavily indebted PG&E has a way to go.=20 By RONE TEMPEST and DAN MORAIN, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????SACRAMENTO--As blackouts hit California for a second day Tuesday, a ke= y=20 consultant to Gov. Gray Davis said negotiations to buy the power grid owned= =20 by the state's largest utilities ""are proceeding at an accelerated pace."" ?????Wall Street consultant Joseph Fichera said talks with Southern=20 California Edison could be wrapped up within days, although those with PG&E= =20 are much less advanced.=20 ?????The administration and PG&E have not reached even an agreement in=20 principle, he said. PG&E, which has more debt than Edison, says its=20 transmission lines are more extensive than those of its Southern California= =20 counterpart. ?????The state wants to buy the utilities' transmission lines and other=20 assets for about $7 billion to provide cash to the utilities, help stabiliz= e=20 the electricity supply and ease the power crunch that has plagued Californi= a=20 for months. To research the grid purchase, Fichera said, the state has had = to=20 pore over 80,000 documents just to assess the utilities' liabilities. ?????""We are working at a good pace,"" said Fichera, chief executive of the= =20 New York firm Saber Partners. "" . . . If we get to a deal-breaker, it might= =20 be longer."" ?????By making Fichera, who is also a consultant to the Texas Public=20 Utilities Commission, available to reporters Tuesday, the Davis=20 administration was clearly trying to reassure the public that progress is= =20 being made on the governor's plan to pull the state out of the crisis. ?????Since mid-January, when the big utilities' credit failed and suppliers= =20 stopped selling to them, the state has spent nearly $3 billion buying=20 electricity from a handful of large suppliers in Texas, Oklahoma, Georgia a= nd=20 North Carolina. Not a cent has gone to the hundreds of alternative energy= =20 suppliers in California who provide about a quarter of the state's=20 electricity. ?????The Monday and Tuesday blackouts occurred partly because many of the= =20 cash-strapped alternative suppliers, including solar, biomass and wind powe= r=20 units, cut their normal supply to the system in half. They say Edison and= =20 PG&E have not paid them since November; the utilities say they are out of= =20 cash. ?????Assemblyman Fred Keeley (D-Boulder Creek) said the plight of the=20 alternative suppliers has dragged on because of the complexity of dealing= =20 with ""almost 700 individual contractors."" ?????Another delaying factor, said Keeley, who with state Sen. Jim Battin= =20 (R-La Quinta) worked for almost three months to come up with a legislative= =20 plan to lower the small producers' prices, was ""the huge enmity . . .=20 manifested between the utilities and the qualifying facilities. These peopl= e=20 just don't like each other."" ?????This week's blackouts provided two painful lessons for the Davis=20 administration: ?????* When it comes to electricity, size doesn't matter--every kilowatt=20 counts. During peak use, a small wind power facility in Riverside County ca= n=20 make the difference between full power and blackouts. ?????* There is no such thing as a partial solution. Unless the whole energ= y=20 equation is balanced, the parts don't work. ?????For the Davis plan to work, several key elements need to come together= =20 or utility customers will almost certainly face rate increases above the 19= %=20 already set in motion: ?????* The cost of power purchased by the state must be reduced through=20 long-term contracts with the big out-of-state producers. ?????These contracts, the details of which the Davis administration has kep= t=20 confidential, are still being negotiated by Davis consultant Vikram Budhraj= a=20 of the Pasadena firm Electric Power Group. The administration says it has= =20 concluded 40 contracts with generators, about half of which have been signe= d. ?????According to the most recent statistics released by the Department of= =20 Water Resources, which buys power for the state, current prices are still= =20 well above the rate state Treasurer Phil Angelides says is necessary for a= =20 planned $10-billion bond offering to succeed. ?????The bonds, set for sale in May, will be used to reimburse the state fo= r=20 the money it will have spent by that time to buy electricity. The state is= =20 currently spending at a rate of $58 million a day to buy power. If prices= =20 stay high, the $10 billion in bonds will not cover the state's power=20 purchases by the end of the summer. ?????Angelides says he cannot proceed with bridge financing for the bonds= =20 until the Public Utilities Commission devises a formula to guarantee that a= =20 portion of utility bills will be dedicated to bond repayment. Angelides has= =20 estimated that, under the January law that put the state in the power buyin= g=20 business, the state must be reimbursed $2.5 billion annually, and that $1.3= =20 billion is needed to service the debt. ?????PUC Administrative Law Judge Joseph R. DeUlloa is expected to announce= =20 his ruling on the reimbursement rate later this week, leading to a PUC vote= =20 on the matter as early as next week. ?????* The rates charged for electricity by the alternative producers, know= n=20 as qualifying facilities, must be cut at least in half, down from an averag= e=20 of more than 17 cents per kilowatt-hour. In his news conference Tuesday,=20 Davis said he will ask the PUC to set QF rates at 6.9 cents for 10-year=20 contracts and 7.5 cents for five-year contracts. ?????Meanwhile, PUC Chairman Loretta Lynch, a Davis appointee, said Tuesday= =20 that the commission will vote next week on a proposed order requiring=20 Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric to pay the QFs for=20 electricity in the future. Lynch said a recent PUC assessment showed that t= he=20 utilities have enough cash on hand for that. ?????""We are trying to make sure the folks providing the power get paid,""= =20 Lynch said. ""The qualified facilities have demonstrated that they haven't= =20 been paid and that it is impairing their ability to provide power."" ?????The utilities contend that if they pay the small providers what they o= we=20 them, there will not be enough money left to pay other creditors. ?????""There is not enough money in the current rate structure to pay the=20 [alternative producers], pay the [Department of Water Resources] and pay th= e=20 utilities for their generation,"" said John Nelson, a spokesman for PG&E. ?????* The utilities must sell to the state the power they produce=20 themselves, mainly from hydro and nuclear sources, at a rate only slightly= =20 above the cost of producing it. This is tied to the ongoing negotiations=20 between the Davis administration and the utilities to restore the=20 near-bankrupt utilities to solvency. ---=20 ?????Times staff writers Julie Tamaki, Miguel Bustillo and Tim Reiterman=20 contributed to this report. --- L.A., Long Beach File Suits Over Gas Companies' Prices=20 Energy: Separate actions allege a conspiracy and gouging. Suppliers blame= =20 rising demand and a fluctuating market.=20 By TINA DAUNT and DAN WEIKEL, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????Seeking damages that could reach ""into the billions of dollars,"" the= =20 cities of Los Angeles and Long Beach on Tuesday filed separate lawsuits=20 alleging that a coalition of gas companies illegally conspired to eliminate= =20 competition, drive up natural gas prices and discourage the construction of= =20 electricity generating plants in California. ?????Officials from the two cities alleged that Southern California Gas Co.= ,=20 San Diego Gas & Electric and El Paso Natural Gas Co. violated the state's= =20 antitrust law and engaged in unfair and fraudulent business practices that= =20 caused gas prices to skyrocket. ?????The cities are the first California municipalities to take action=20 against the gas companies. A number of similar lawsuits filed by antitrust= =20 attorneys, state regulators and private citizens are pending elsewhere. ?????The energy companies deny any impropriety. They contend that Californi= a=20 is the victim of its own soaring electricity demand and overreliance on=20 fluctuating spot markets for natural gas. ?????""The conspiracy theories that have been promoted have no basis in=20 reality,"" said Denise King, spokeswoman for Southern California Gas' parent= =20 company, Sempra Energy, which also was named in the suits. ""Southern=20 California Gas continues to look out for the best interest of its customers= ."" ?????The lawsuits filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court accuse the=20 companies of conspiring to manipulate the price of natural gas by agreeing = to=20 kill pipeline projects that would have brought ample supplies of cheaper=20 natural gas to Southern California. ?????They allege that executives for the energy companies made the pact=20 during a meeting in a Phoenix hotel room five years ago to discuss=20 ""opportunities"" arising from the state's newly deregulated electricity mark= et. ?????""The fulfillment of the illicit plan has had devastating effects on=20 Southern California gas consumers,"" according to Los Angeles' suit. ""Gas=20 prices in the Southern California market have skyrocketed, and the Southern= =20 California gas consumers are paying the highest prices in the nation."" ?????In recent months, natural gas prices have tripled across the nation fo= r=20 a number of reasons, including a shortage of supplies to meet demands for= =20 home heating. Prices have increased far more in California, where natural g= as=20 is a central factor in the state's energy crisis. The state relies on the= =20 clean-burning fuel to generate half its electrical power. ?????""This not only led to price-gouging of all natural gas consumers, from= =20 homeowners to government to industry, but it contributed to the current=20 electrical power crisis in California,"" said City Atty. James K. Hahn, a=20 mayoral candidate who urged the City Council to pursue the case. ?????Chris Garner, Long Beach's utility director, said that since November,= =20 the average residential bill for gas in Long Beach has more than doubled, t= o=20 $175 a month. Some customers, he said, have seen rate increases of 500%. ?????""The people of Long Beach are being gouged by energy conglomerates who= =20 are artificially manipulating the supply of natural gas and reaping excess= =20 profits at the expense of the public,"" said City Attorney Robert Shannon. ?????Holding a special meeting, the Los Angeles City Council voted 12 to 0= =20 Tuesday to file the suit. ?????""If the allegations are true, they are extremely serious,"" said=20 Councilman Mike Feuer, who is a candidate to succeed Hahn as city attorney.= =20 ""And there appears to be some important evidence that substantiates the=20 allegations in the complaint, which means that this lawsuit is, I think, mo= re=20 than a viable lawsuit."" ?????Councilman Mark Ridley-Thomas added: ""We cannot tolerate this and we= =20 must use the full weight of the law to try to correct it."" ?????A growing number of lawsuits around the state are targeting California= 's=20 natural gas suppliers. El Paso Corp., which owns the main pipeline=20 transporting out-of-state gas to Southern California, has been targeted=20 repeatedly by utility companies, state regulators and antitrust attorneys.= =20 ?????Some of the first antitrust lawsuits were filed against Sempra Energy = in=20 December. They were brought by Continental Forge Co., a Compton-based=20 aluminum forging business, and Andrew and Andrea Berg, who own a business i= n=20 San Diego. ?????The cities' lawsuits request that the defendant companies be barred fr= om=20 such conduct in the future, and they seek civil penalties and damages. ?????Shannon estimates that Long Beach could collect more than $100 million= =20 in damages, including triple penalties for antitrust violations. ?????""We are filing this for our citizens,"" Shannon said. ""They include the= =20 poor, the elderly, people living on fixed incomes and small business owners= ."" ?????The Los Angeles suit was filed on behalf of all Californians. Official= s=20 place damage estimates ""in the billions.""=20 ?????Hahn, however, warned council members that it could take the city a ye= ar=20 or more to resolve the suit. ?????""Lawsuits take time,"" Hahn said. ""We are hopeful we can enter into=20 meaningful discovery to disclose what's been going on."" --- Davis OKs Subsidy of Pollution Fees=20 Smog: As part of secret deal to get long-term energy contracts, state would= =20 pay for some of the credits that allow excess power plant emissions. Critic= s=20 renew call for full disclosure.=20 By DAN MORAIN , Times Staff Writer=20 ?????SACRAMENTO--As part of his closed-door negotiations to buy electricity= ,=20 Gov. Gray Davis has agreed to relieve some generators from having to pay=20 potentially millions of dollars in fees for emitting pollutants into the ai= r,=20 Davis said Tuesday. ?????Davis announced two weeks ago that his negotiators had reached deals= =20 with 20 generators to supply $43 billion worth of power during the next 10= =20 years. ?????However, the Democratic governor has refused to release any of the=20 contracts or detail various terms, contending that release of such=20 information would hamper the state's ability to negotiate deals with other= =20 generators and therefore ultimately would raise prices Californians pay for= =20 electricity. ?????Sources familiar with the negotiations, speaking on condition of=20 anonymity, said the agreement reached with Dynegy Inc., a power company bas= ed=20 in Houston, is one that includes language requiring that the state pay the= =20 cost of credits that allow emissions. Dynegy spokesman Steve Stengel declin= ed=20 to discuss the company's deal with the state. ?????""We couldn't get them to sign contracts; it was a sticking point,"" Dav= is=20 said of the decision to pay the fees of some generators. ""We had to lock do= wn=20 some power so we were not totally dependent on the spot market."" ?????The fees in question are part of an emission trading system known as= =20 RECLAIM. Under the system, companies are allotted a certain amount of=20 allowable pollution. If their operations pollute more, companies are requir= ed=20 to purchase credits on an open market. Currently the credits cost about $45= =20 per pound of pollution--an amount that can lead to a bill of well over $10= =20 million a year for a power plant. ?????The South Coast Air Quality Management District, which regulates=20 pollution in the Los Angeles Basin, is considering steps to significantly= =20 lower the cost of the system--a step that could considerably cut the state'= s=20 potential cost, Davis said. ?????Senate Energy Committee Chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey)=20 defended the decision to cover the power company's costs. ?????""It is a question of whether it brings down the price of power,"" she= =20 said. ""If it brings down the price of power, I don't have a problem with it= ."" ?????Nevertheless, word that the contracts could bind the state to pay=20 pollution fees caused some critics of Davis' policy to renew calls for Davi= s=20 to reconsider the secrecy surrounding the power negotiations. The payment= =20 provision underscores the fact that the contracts involve more than merely= =20 the prices the state will pay for its megawatts, the critics note. ?????""The Legislature should have known about it,"" said Senate President Pr= o=20 Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco). ""It is going to cost taxpayers money. It= =20 makes you wonder. . . . This was a policy issue that was never discussed wi= th=20 the Legislature."" ?????V. John White, a lobbyist for the Sierra Club, who also represents=20 alternative energy producers, called the contract proposal ""a horrible=20 precedent."" ?????""Until we know exactly what the state has agreed to and how much of a= =20 subsidy this represents, we can't determine how serious the breach of=20 principle this is,"" White said. ?????Another critic of the secrecy of the negotiations, Terry Francke,=20 general counsel for the California First Amendment Coalition, said the=20 provision in question ""raises the possibility that there are other=20 [concessions]"" that have not yet come to light. ?????In the summer, when demand for power is highest, some generators=20 probably will exceed pollution limits set by regional air quality managemen= t=20 districts. ?????To avert blackouts, state officials might ask the companies to keep=20 plants running. In such cases, some sources familiar with aspects of the=20 contracts said, the contract language could be interpreted to suggest that= =20 the state would cover any fines--although Davis said Tuesday the state will= =20 not cover the cost of fines. ?????A recent Dynegy filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission=20 underscores the rising cost of pollution-related measures. The company, whi= ch=20 is partners with NRG Energy in three California plants in El Segundo, Long= =20 Beach and Carlsbad in San Diego County, said its ""aggregate expenditures fo= r=20 compliance with laws related to the regulation of discharge of materials in= to=20 the environment"" rose to $14.3 million in 2000, from $3.6 million in 1999. ?????A South Coast Air Quality Management spokesman said Dynegy's facilitie= s=20 appear to be fairly clean--although Sierra Club lobbyist White said Dynegy= =20 has been seeking a permit at one of its plants to burn fuel oil, which is= =20 dirtier than natural gas. ?????Davis said he intends to ""make this information public,"" but he added= =20 that ""we do not want to put the public's interest in jeopardy by asking the= m=20 to pay higher prices."" ?????""Nobody likes the notion that [the administration is] not being fully= =20 forthcoming,"" Davis said. ""But I also have a corollary responsibility that = I=20 don't stick these generators with a higher rate."" --- As Losses Mount, Companies Work Around Outages=20 By MARLA DICKERSON,JERRY HIRSCH and NANCY CLEELAND, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????As blackouts moved from theory to reality, many Southern California=20 businesses spent Day 2 assessing their losses and digging in for what they= =20 expect to be a long, hot summer. ?????An hour without electricity may be an inconvenience for most residents= .=20 But for manufacturers and many other businesses, even a brief loss of power= =20 can generate tens of thousands in losses. ?????Whether shaping metal or making salsa, businesses of all kinds=20 complained Tuesday about the lack of warning of impending outages, even as= =20 they sought sometimes creative ways to work around the loss of power. ?????Rattled by news reports of Monday's rolling blackouts, Industry-based = El=20 Burrito Mexican Food Products started its Tuesday shift at 2 a.m. Workers h= ad=20 just finished cooking and packaging the last batches of salsa and masa when= =20 the lights went out at 10:20 a.m. ?????""We dodged a bullet,"" said El Burrito founder Mark Roth. ""Losing a day= 's=20 production of salsa would have cost me $15,000 to $20,000."" ?????But other companies weren't so fortunate. ?????Long Beach-based Delco Machine & Gear was still totaling up its losses= =20 from Monday's blackout, which amounted to at least $30,000 in lost wages an= d=20 production, said Nick Campanelli, vice president of manufacturing. The=20 company, a division of Florida-based B/E Aerospace Inc., makes parts for th= e=20 aerospace industry. The sudden loss of power caused its sophisticated metal= =20 cutting and grinding machines to crash, ruining precision parts in producti= on. ?????But the losses don't end there. He said employees will need to spend= =20 hours resetting the equipment. Campanelli is particularly irked that the=20 company received no warning. ?????""Five minutes' notice,"" he fumed. ""That's all I needed."" ?????Although businesses such as Campanelli's typically receive no warning= =20 that they are about to lose power, insurance companies count the rolling=20 blackouts as ""planned events,"" a determination that in most cases=20 disqualifies a business from making a claim. ?????""I know it must be frustrating for businesses who have the power go of= f=20 suddenly, but these outages are planned by the grid operators,"" said Pete= =20 Moraga of the Insurance Information Network of California. ""That means it= =20 would not be a covered peril in a traditional business insurance policy."" ?????Typically, business insurance covers loss of profit and damage from=20 unforeseen events such as fires or windstorms. The component of the policy= =20 that covers interruptions in business kicks in after a given amount of time= =20 elapses, usually 24 to 48 hours. ?????Business polices can be written to include unusual coverages, Moraga= =20 said, but he has never heard of a policy that covers losses from a rolling= =20 blackout. ?????Some companies are taking measures not to get caught in a situation=20 where a blackout can hurt them. ?????The region's largest steel supplier shut down for two hours Monday aft= er=20 Southern California Edison called to warn of tight supplies. ?????""We just can't take a chance,"" said Lourenco Goncalvez, president of= =20 California Steel Industries Inc. in San Bernardino County. ""We have a lot o= f=20 safety issues. People could get hurt."" ?????Goncalvez said the plant has multiple 20-ton and 25-ton overhead crane= s=20 that operate with electromagnetic devices, which would fail if they lost=20 power suddenly. Falling materials could injure workers below, he said. ""We= =20 have been asking to be exempt from rolling blackouts,"" he said. ?????Goncalvez said he couldn't put a price on the lost production at the= =20 24-hour plant and said he worried more about the long term. ?????""Two hours is nothing,"" he said. ""My concern is this thing will start = to=20 happen almost every day. If it will be like this all summer, you can be sur= e=20 it will have dramatic consequences for the entire economy. . . . We're goin= g=20 to have a shortage of steel products in California. Maybe the government do= es=20 not consider this is serious. We'll see."" ?????At Sport Chalet, a La Canada Flintridge-based chain of 22 sporting goo= ds=20 stores in Southern California, an administrative assistant monitors the sta= te=20 power situation, hoping to warn any stores that are in danger of losing=20 power, said Craig Levra, the company's chief executive. ?????Levra said the assistant was assigned the monitoring duties last year,= =20 when rolling blackouts were still only a threat. ?????The chain put in place an emergency plan--similar to what it would do = in=20 a major earthquake. Backup power will kick on emergency lights and allow th= e=20 cash registers to complete transactions. Employees are instructed to escort= =20 customers from the building safely, Levra said. ?????Other businesses, however, have plans to remain open during the 60- to= =20 90-minute blackouts. ?????When power went out at two Cheesecake Factory restaurants in Orange=20 County on Monday afternoon, the eateries switched to serving cold dishes su= ch=20 as sandwiches and salads, said Howard Gordon, senior vice president of the= =20 Calabasas Hills-based chain. ?????The restaurants had enough backup power to operate emergency lights an= d=20 cash registers. Large windows provided the rest of the light, Gordon said. ?????So far, the 99 Cents Only Stores chain has missed the shotgun pattern = of=20 the blackouts. But with nearly 100 stores in California, company President= =20 Eric Schiffer believes it is only a matter of time before the lights go out= =20 at one of its outlets. ?????Though the stores have some backup power, the chain has systems in pla= ce=20 to operate without it. Its cash registers can open mechanically, Schiffer= =20 said. Because an item sells for a multiple of 99 cents, sales clerks are=20 equipped with ""blackout sheets"" that calculate a customer's tab, including= =20 tax. All the clerk has to do is count the number of items in the shopping= =20 cart and check the tables on the sheet. ?????This week's power crunch has been exacerbated by the fact that so-call= ed=20 interruptible electricity customers no longer face large penalties if they= =20 decline to shut down their operations when supplies get critically low. ?????The Public Utilities Commission suspended the fines in January to ease= =20 the burden on about 1,400 businesses that found themselves bearing the brun= t=20 of the crisis to prevent rolling blackouts in the rest of the state. ?????According to Edison, about 10% of its interruptible customers are=20 complying with requests to curtail electricity usage during crunch time. Bu= t=20 Scott Keller isn't among them. ?????The owner of Chino-based STC Plastics Inc. said he was forced to shut= =20 down more than 20 times since September, costing him as much as $10,000 in= =20 lost production per day. He ignored requests Monday and Tuesday to curtail= =20 usage and said he doesn't feel a twinge of remorse. ?????""If I'm shut down, I can't pay my workers,"" he said. ""I'd feel more=20 guilty about that."" ?????But this is one area where insurance eventually might help. Moraga sai= d=20 some carriers are developing plans that would cover penalties for continuin= g=20 to use power after they have been asked by a utility to cut back. --- Wednesday, March 21, 2001=20 A Blackout on Answers=20 Davis needs to do a better job in communicating to Californians about the= =20 electricity crisis. In the absence of that, cynicism grows.=20 ?????The oil shocks of the 1970s, from the Arab oil embargo to the Iran-Ira= q=20 war, were dead simple compared with the California power shortage. Then, th= e=20 problem was a lack of imported oil and the chief symptom was long lines and= =20 high prices at gas stations. Politicians urged conservation: Turn down the= =20 heat, drive fewer miles, buy more efficient cars. People understood the cau= se=20 of the crisis and the benefit of their actions. Today it's a different stor= y=20 and a damnably complicated one that gives consumers no place--or actually,= =20 too many places--to focus their anger.=20 ?????The last two days of rolling blackouts, including previously exempt=20 Southern California, have not reduced power demand, or at least not enough.= =20 Consumers are suspicious: Are out-of-state power companies holding back=20 production? Did utilities really not have enough money to pay alternative= =20 energy producers--the little guys who, combined, could produce enough power= =20 to prevent the blackouts? And what happened to long-term power contracts, t= he=20 state-bargained deal that was supposed to stabilize the crisis?=20 ?????The frustrations are vast, and there are too many gaps in the story. I= f=20 it's just a pack of thieves creating an artificial shortage, as even some= =20 consumer organizations charge, why should anyone sacrifice to conserve? Tha= t,=20 in a nutshell, is the problem that Gov. Gray Davis, the state Legislature a= nd=20 the Public Utilities Commission face.=20 ?????Davis, for one, has to level with the public and stop acting as if he= =20 can fix the crisis. He has proved he can't, at least not without reductions= =20 in usage and, most likely, rate increases. If Davis, who is notoriously=20 averse to delivering bad news, had leveled with the public about the=20 fragility of the current system, the last two days of blackouts statewide= =20 (except in places with full municipal power, like Los Angeles) might not ha= ve=20 come as such a shock.=20 ?????The Legislature tried and failed earlier to solve the alternative ener= gy=20 producers' nonpayment problems with a very complicated bill. Tuesday night,= =20 Davis and legislators announced a simpler plan that would set lower, more= =20 flexible rates for alternative power but also force the utilities to pay fo= r=20 future purchases.=20 ?????Which leads to the utilities themselves. With the state shelling out= =20 billions for power from the major generators, how could Southern California= =20 Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric still not have the cash flow to pay the= =20 alternative producers? That motley collection of biomass, solar, wind and= =20 cogeneration companies has been shutting down for nonpayment--some of them= =20 because natural gas suppliers have cut them off. PG&E has made some payment= s,=20 but SCE has paid zilch, though a spokesman says it hopes to strike a deal t= o=20 start paying this week.=20 ?????Without enough honest information, conspiracy scenarios fill the holes= .=20 Bad news is better than no news, something Davis seems not to quite realize= .=20 By today or Thursday, the weather will cool and some plants taken down for= =20 repair will come back online. The blackouts may cease but the crisis will b= e=20 just as deep as it was Monday and Tuesday. It is up to Davis to do a better= =20 job of persuasively explaining why. Otherwise, the cynicism grows.=20 --- Wednesday, March 21, 2001=20 Rolling Blackouts: Blatant Extortion=20 ?????* Re ""Rolling Blackouts Hit Southland for First Time as Production=20 Falls,"" March 20:=20 ?????So here we are, 22 years after the notorious gas shortage, having=20 another gun held to our head by an opportunistic energy consortium. Back in= =20 1979, we all had to wait in long lines just to pay more for gasoline. Now, = we=20 have to face food in our freezers thawing and simmering in our homes during= =20 hot summer days, just to earn the honor of paying more for electricity.=20 ?????Of course, as soon as the rates are up and the environmental concerns= =20 are shoved aside, watch how plentiful power will be. When is somebody in=20 government going to stand up for the consumer and stop this blatant form of= =20 extortion?=20 ?????JOHN JOHNSON=20 ?????Agoura Hills=20 * * * ?????So customers of PG&E and Edison are ""shielded from soaring wholesale= =20 prices""? Some shield: turning off all our power without so much as a moment= 's=20 notice, endangering lives and disrupting businesses just to keep our=20 electricity prices unreasonably low. Let's lift the rate caps to get the=20 lights back on. And if I need to be shielded from soaring prices, I'll turn= =20 my own lights off.=20 ?????ANDREW LOWD=20 ?????Claremont=20 * * * ?????This state needs adequate, reliable electricity to run a diverse=20 economy. Both political parties and business interests are at fault. This= =20 crisis demands top priority, aimed at lasting solutions.=20 ?????The most immediate solution is fast-tracking of added generating=20 capacity. Freeway bridges were rebuilt in record time after the Northridge= =20 quake, so we know it can be done. That is the type of effort that is needed= ,=20 immediately.=20 ?????Since Democrats hold the governorship and control both state legislati= ve=20 houses, they are in the driver's seat. If the lights go out, the Democrats = go=20 out. If this state government can't solve the problem, we need a new=20 government that can.=20 ?????STEVE ANDERSON=20 ?????Huntington Beach=20 * * * ?????The alleged energy crisis in California is entirely contrived to relax= =20 environmental pollution standards and to raise energy rates. It's curious= =20 that the L.A. Department of Water and Power, which was not deregulated, is= =20 not currently experiencing an energy crisis. PG&E and Edison are both part = of=20 national and multinational corporations. Why should utility customers have = to=20 pay for their economic problems or gross mismanagement?=20 ?????Several power plants were taken off-line for ""routine maintenance,""=20 which may not have been so routine. Energy is a vital necessity; if these= =20 companies can't provide it at a reasonable, affordable rate then they shoul= d=20 be replaced by companies that can, be taken over by the government, or=20 de-deregulated. There is an abundance of solar energy in California, of whi= ch=20 only a small fraction is being utilized. There is no shortage of energy in= =20 California, only a shortage of intelligence, will and honest politicians.= =20 ?????CHARLES B. EDELMAN=20 ?????Los Angeles=20 --- Utilities' Demand Blocks Bailout=20 NEGOTIATIONS HIT SNAG: PG&E, Edison want end to price freeze if they sell= =20 transmission lines to state David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, March 21, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /21/M N114450.DTL=20 California's near-bankrupt utilities are demanding that higher electric rat= es=20 be a part of any deal to sell the state their power lines, The Chronicle ha= s=20 learned.=20 A rate increase -- perhaps of more than 50 percent, according to earlier=20 industry estimates -- would certainly draw a firestorm of protest from=20 consumer groups and force Gov. Gray Davis to backtrack from earlier pledges= =20 that rates would remain unchanged.=20 Nevertheless, sources close to negotiations on the deal said Pacific Gas an= d=20 Electric Co. and Southern California Edison are attempting to make higher= =20 rates a condition for agreeing to a bailout scheme in which they would sell= =20 the state their transmission systems and some land.=20 The sources said the talks hit a new snag this week when state officials=20 realized that fine print sought by the companies could require the Public= =20 Utilities Commission to pass along all of the utilities' costs to ratepayer= s.=20 The sources said this would end a rate freeze that shields consumers from= =20 runaway wholesale electricity prices.=20 The inclusion of potential rate increases in the talks reflects the growing= =20 complexity of a deal originally intended by Davis to stabilize the finances= =20 of PG&E and Edison so banks would resume loans to the cash-strapped=20 utilities.=20 The negotiations subsequently have expanded to involve a state purchase of= =20 the utilities' transmission networks and acquisition of utility-owned land,= =20 including spectacular coastal property near PG&E's Diablo Canyon nuclear=20 power plant.=20 Now they also have embraced further deregulation of California's=20 dysfunctional electricity market.=20 ""Clearly, one of the terms being discussed is the regulatory environment,""= =20 said Joseph Fichera, head of Saber Partners, a New York investment bank tha= t=20 is advising Davis in the talks.=20 ""The past situation has not worked well,"" he added. ""The utilities want som= e=20 certainty about their future.""=20 TENTATIVE DEAL WITH EDISON To date, the governor has announced a tentative agreement with Edison for t= he=20 state to buy the utility's power lines for almost $3 billion. Discussions= =20 with PG&E for a similar accord have dragged on for weeks.=20 An Edison official, asking that his name be withheld, acknowledged yesterda= y=20 that an end to the rate freeze is an expected result of the power- line sal= e.=20 ""Once the details of the pact are complete, dominoes will fall,"" the offici= al=20 said. ""One of the dominoes is the rate freeze.""=20 A PG&E spokesman declined to comment.=20 In fact, both Edison and PG&E have been aggressively seeking an end to the= =20 rate freeze for months.=20 The two utilities have a lawsuit pending in federal court demanding that th= e=20 PUC immediately raise rates so the utilities can recover almost $13 billion= =20 in debt accrued as a result of the freeze.=20 ""They have been trying a lot of things to get the rate freeze ended in=20 various forms,"" said Carl Wood, who sits on the PUC. ""Adding it to the=20 present talks is consistent with past behavior.""=20 Wall Street has taken note that the negotiations no longer appear to be=20 making progress.=20 Paul Patterson, an energy industry analyst at Credit Suisse First Boston,= =20 told clients on Monday that the discussions ""may have lost some momentum in= =20 recent days."" He did not give a reason.=20 For his part, the governor sounded unusually cautious about the course of t= he=20 talks when asked late last week if a breakthrough was imminent.=20 SECRET STICKING POINTS ""We are going to take the transmission systems and the land that's deeded,= =20 and we will work out an agreement,"" Davis said at an appearance in San Jose= .=20 ""But there are a number of sticking points in the talks with PG&E that I'm= =20 not going to reveal.""=20 One of those sticking points apparently is an insistence that the sale of= =20 utility assets include a long-sought lifting of the rate freeze.=20 Sources said lawyers from both PG&E and Edison had inserted the related ter= ms=20 into draft accords affecting each utility, and that the full impact of the= =20 additions was not realized by state officials until this week.=20 One source said the language was just convoluted enough to slip beneath the= =20 radar screen of state negotiators. But the upshot, once the words had been= =20 parsed, was that the PUC effectively would lose control over power rates.= =20 CREDITWORTHINESS ON THE TABLE In Edison's case, the terms of the tentative deal include the governor aski= ng=20 the PUC ""to support the creditworthiness"" of the utility.=20 ""This would ensure that future investments in both utility distribution and= =20 utility generation plants are provided fair returns of and on capital,=20 consistent with current authorized returns and capital structure provisions= ,""=20 it says.=20 Sources said the provision could be interpreted as a guarantee from the sta= te=20 that Edison would be permitted to recoup all outstanding costs from=20 ratepayers.=20 ""There may be some assumptions about this language that the rate freeze end= s=20 if it is adopted,"" the Edison official said, adding that he saw no reason t= o=20 disagree with such assumptions.=20 But Fichera, Davis' adviser in the talks, insisted that nothing is set in= =20 stone, and that the negotiations are proceeding without a hitch.=20 ""This is a very complex transaction,"" he said. ""God and the devil are in th= e=20 details.""=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 --- --- Utilities' Demand Blocks Bailout=20 BLACKOUTS ROLL ON: Weather, increased consumption blamed=20 David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, March 21, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /21/M N156508.DTL=20 Hundreds of thousands of Californians went without electricity for a second= =20 day yesterday as unusually warm weather and a high number of idle power=20 plants prompted blackouts throughout the state.=20 State officials said electricity usage rose yesterday even though condition= s=20 were largely unchanged from a day before. They surmised that fewer=20 Californians were conserving power.=20 ""We need people to really focus on that,"" implored Patrick Dorinson, a=20 spokesman for the Independent System Operator, manager of the state's power= =20 grid. ""The more people can do, the better it will be.""=20 Rolling blackouts were ordered by the ISO about 9:30 a.m. and were suspende= d=20 at 2 p.m. after several plants that had been down for repairs returned to= =20 service. Additional power also was obtained from a plant in Arizona.=20 Utilities estimated that about 560,000 customers were affected yesterday,= =20 compared with more than 1 million a day earlier.=20 This week's blackouts marked the first time that people in Los Angeles shar= ed=20 the pain with those in San Francisco. Blackouts in January were confined to= =20 the northern part of the state.=20 FEWER AFFECTED IN SOUTH However, Southern California Edison's burden was considerably lighter=20 yesterday than that of Pacific Gas and Electric Co.=20 Karen Shepard-Grimes, a spokeswoman for the Southern California utility, sa= id=20 only about 50,000 customers went without power, compared with nearly 440, 0= 00=20 for PG&E.=20 Affected areas in the south included Palm Springs, Santa Monica, Long Beach= =20 and Pomona.=20 ""We're not in the business of turning customers' lights off,"" Shepard- Grim= es=20 said. ""We're in the business of keeping lights on.""=20 In PG&E's case, things were tougher because low rainfall means that less=20 power is currently available from dams throughout the Pacific Northwest.=20 Ron Low, a spokesman for the utility, said blackouts were experienced by PG= &E=20 customers from Eureka to Bakersfield.=20 ""Our goal was to carry out the ISO's order with minimal impact on customers= ,=20 "" he said.=20 For its part, San Diego Gas & Electric said about 75,000 customers were=20 darkened.=20 Yesterday's blackouts began with PG&E customers in Block 12 and halted midw= ay=20 through Block 14. Customers in each block -- defined by power circuits rath= er=20 than geography -- typically will lose power for about 90 minutes before the= =20 service interruption ""rolls"" elsewhere.=20 Some cutoffs can last more than two hours, however, because of technical=20 problems switching individual blocks on and off.=20 NEXT UP: BLOCK 14 If additional blackouts are ordered today, they will commence with the=20 remaining portion of Block 14 customers. (PG&E customers can determine thei= r=20 block by looking at the bottom left-hand corner of their monthly bill.)=20 The ISO's Dorinson said it is hoped that cooler weather and increased=20 generation will help avert further cutoffs this week.=20 ""Units are coming back into service that have been out,"" he said. ""That wil= l=20 help a great deal.""=20 Roughly 15,000 megawatts of generating capacity was offline yesterday,=20 including half of the alternative-energy plants, which are unable to afford= =20 natural gas to run their turbines.=20 Many of the plant owners say they have not been paid by PG&E and Edison sin= ce=20 November. They are asking federal regulators for permission to sell their= =20 electricity elsewhere.=20 At the same time, one of two units at the Mohave Generating Station in Neva= da=20 damaged in a fire Monday returned to service yesterday, easing the load on= =20 California's grid.=20 The plant, partly owned by Edison, is not expected to return to full output= =20 until tomorrow.=20 PROBING SHUTDOWNS Nearly a third of California's generating capacity is currently down for=20 scheduled or unexpected maintenance. State regulators are investigating=20 whether some plant owners might be deliberately shutting down to drive pric= es=20 higher or reduce operating costs.=20 Loretta Lynch, president of the Public Utilities Commission, on Monday call= ed=20 the number of idle plants ""highly suspicious.""=20 Dorinson at the ISO said that about 12,000 megawatts of mainstream capacity= =20 was offline yesterday, compared with roughly 10,000 megawatts last year at= =20 this time.=20 --=20 Tell Us What You Think=20 Can you save 20 percent on your energy usage? Gov. Gray Davis is offering= =20 rebates for Californians who save on power starting in June, and if you've= =20 got a strategy for conserving, The Chronicle wants to hear it. We'll be=20 writing about the hardest-working energy savers in a future story. To get= =20 involved, Write to the Energy Desk, San Francisco Chronicle, 901 Mission St= .,=20 San Francisco, 94103; or e-mail --=20 THE ENERGY CRUNCH -- Blackouts: About 560,000 Californians, including 440,000 in Northern=20 California, lost electricity yesterday for 90 minutes at a time.=20 -- Areas affected: Blackouts hit parts of blocks 12 and 14 and all of block= =20 13 yesterday. In the event of further blackouts, the remainer of block 14= =20 would be next, followed by block 1.=20 -- Outlook: Officials say blackouts are less likely today as temperatures a= re=20 expected to cool and power plants that have been offline for maintenance=20 resume generating electricity.=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 --- --- Manners Go Out the Window=20 Pedestrians in peril as drivers turn darkened S.F. streets into free-for-al= l=20 Steve Rubenstein, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, March 21, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /21/M N173178.DTL=20 Nobody got plowed into yesterday at Fifth and Howard streets in San=20 Francisco. Many came close.=20 The power outage that darkened the traffic lights at the frenetic South of= =20 Market intersection for more than an hour also darkened the souls of untold= =20 numbers of drivers, sending motoring manners into the toilet.=20 The law says motorists are supposed to treat an intersection with=20 nonfunctioning traffic lights as a four-way stop. That means everyone stops= ,=20 then takes turns -- one by one -- creeping through the intersection.=20 Tell that to the two people in motorized wheelchairs who were nearly creame= d=20 by two eastbound SUVs.=20 Or to the young Swedish couple who had traveled halfway around the globe,= =20 only to scamper through the intersection barely ahead of an office supply= =20 truck.=20 Or to the New Jersey tourist, who proclaimed that California drivers during= =20 power outages were proof positive that the Chaos Theory lives and breathes.= =20 Some motorists stopped and took turns, but many didn't. Some sped into the= =20 intersection immediately behind the vehicle in front, without themselves=20 stopping at the white line. Some sailed through with a rolling stop and a= =20 warning honk. Some blasted through without stopping or honking.=20 ""I'm scared to death,"" said Brian Walters of Dorchester, N.J., after making= =20 it across Howard Street. ""This is organized madness. I subscribe to the Cha= os=20 Theory, and this is what it looks like.""=20 Sydney Freedman, a tourist from Sydney, walked briskly across the darkened= =20 crossroads, smiling grimly.=20 ""I'll chance it,"" he said.=20 He looked back and saw a woman in a motorized wheelchair nearly get squishe= d=20 by a westbound Chevy.=20 ""You have to be authoritative in this town when you cross the street,"" he= =20 said. ""Especially that lady.""=20 Therese Anderson and Andreas Sandstrom, from Sweden, raced across as quickl= y=20 as their backpacks would allow.=20 ""In this country, everyone is in such a hurry,"" said Anderson.=20 ""Everybody drives like a madman,"" added Sandstrom. ""They say, 'I want to be= =20 home right now, and I don't care what happens to anyone else.' ""=20 The couple paused to gaze in wonder at the intersection, learning more abou= t=20 America in five minutes than a pile of guidebooks could tell them.=20 ""This intersection,"" said Sandstrom, ""reminds you not to take life for=20 granted.""=20 A few minutes later, Parking Control Officer Tom Butz arrived in his meter= =20 minder wagon and pulled his orange vest and whistle from the saddlebag. He= =20 strode brave and true into the center of the bullring, planted himself=20 between the whizzing cars and began waving his arms as if conducting ""The= =20 Rite of Spring.""=20 ""I'm all by myself,"" he said. ""I know it's a little risky. I'd better keep = my=20 angels with me.""=20 At that moment, the angels were on duty in Menlo Park, where a blacked-out= =20 intersection at El Camino Real and Santa Cruz Avenue backed up traffic so f= ar=20 that it stretched into neighboring Atherton.=20 ""It's a large intersection and traffic is slow anyway, but now it is severe= ly=20 impacted,"" said Police Sgt. Terri Molakides. ""We don't get any warning=20 either. When the power is out, the power is out. It's not like we can make= =20 any plans.""=20 In general, motorists seemed more likely to obey the four-way-stop rule on= =20 the Peninsula and in the East Bay than in San Francisco.=20 In San Mateo County, some police departments have stopped trying to make=20 advance plans to cover darkened intersections. San Mateo Police Sgt. Kevin= =20 Rafaelli said putting up signs and posting officers sometimes caused proble= ms=20 rather than solving them.=20 ""If people just follow the law (and) stop at the intersection, they can=20 handle it better than we do if we're out there,"" he said. ""People are sort = of=20 getting used to it and are dealing with it.""=20 In Berkeley and Emeryville, motorists stopped one at a time at temporary st= op=20 signs, with no apparent problems. At University Avenue and Sacramento Stree= t=20 in Berkeley, Officer Matt Meredith said motorists were behaving themselves.= =20 That wasn't the case a while back, when a driver who didn't stop at an=20 intersection during a blackout was broadsided by someone who did, Meredith= =20 said.=20 ""The thing to remember is to stop and look,"" he said.=20 TRAFFIC TIPS To avoid a collisions during blackouts, the California Highway Patrol offer= s=20 this advice to motorists:=20 -- Treat any intersection with inoperative traffic lights as a four-way sto= p.=20 Each vehicle must stop when arriving at the white limit line, then proceed= =20 only when safe, taking turns.=20 -- If two vehicles arrive at the intersection at the same time, the motoris= t=20 on the left must yield to the motorist on the right.=20 -- Never insist on taking the right of way, even if you are entitled to it.= =20 -- Follow the directions of a police officer or traffic control officer,=20 whose directions take precedence over lights or signs.=20 Chronicle staff writers Henry K. Lee and Matthew B. Stannard contributed to= =20 this report. / E-mail Steve Rubenstein at ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 8=20 --- --- Historic Blackouts in State=20 Bay Area learns to cope=20 Jonathan Curiel, George Raine, Justino Aguila, and Matthew B. St Tuesday, March 20, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /20/M N219412.DTL=20 Today's rolling blackouts caused concern throughout the Bay Area, including= =20 Colma, where the sudden lack of power apparently caused a fire.=20 A light fixture at the Home Depot store in Colma caught fire around 10:45 a= .=20 m., 15 minutes after Pacific Gas and Electric Co. ordered blackouts for the= =20 area. No one was hurt.=20 ""I was in the back of the store when the power outage started,"" said Dave= =20 Cole, a consultant from Pacifica who was shopping for bolts and screws. ""We= =20 lost maybe 90 percent of the lights, then maybe 10 percent of the lights ca= me=20 up. Then I heard a guy saying, 'Get a ladder, get a ladder!'=20 ""One of the lights on the ceiling had caught on fire, and a couple of peopl= e=20 were getting ladders and fire extinguishers.""=20 Store managers whisked everyone out of the store, and Colma firefighters=20 arrived to make sure the blaze was extinguished.=20 At 11 a.m., Cole was waiting to get back into the store, which was still=20 closed.=20 ""I need my bolts,"" he said.=20 Elsewhere, the San Francisco Fire Department had to rescue people stuck in = an=20 elevator at 2001 Embarcadero North, said fire department spokesman Pete=20 Howes.=20 Scores of residents and businesses near the Embarcadero, including the Levi= =20 Strauss & Co. headquarters, were affected by the blackout.=20 At Levi Strauss this morning, Phil Marineau, the president and chief=20 executive officer, led his 1,300 employees by example, using only minimal= =20 lighting for a meeting in his office at 10 a.m.=20 Employees were sent e-mails minutes after PG&E's 9:30 a.m. notification tha= t=20 a blackout was possible. The e-mails said workers should frequently save wo= rk=20 on their computers, and that they should remain in the building and stand b= y=20 for further instructions.=20 Emergency lighting in hallways and stairwells were operated by generators.= =20 All elevators descended to the ground floor but one remained operating,=20 through a generator.=20 ""Worked nicely,"" said Jeff Beckman, a company spokesman.=20 Yesterday -- the first day that rolling blackouts returned -- Shannon=20 Cashman's home in Walnut Creek was a difficult place to be.=20 Cashman's 4-year-old daughter, Madison, suffers from a brain defect that=20 stops her from breathing during sleep. The girl depends on a ventilator tha= t=20 runs on electricity.=20 Recently hospitalized and with a weakened immune system, Madison badly need= ed=20 a nap yesterday afternoon. But when the Cashmans' power went out about noon= ,=20 it meant reading and coloring instead of rest for the girl and a little mor= e=20 anxiety than normal for her mother.=20 ""If this was a major earthquake or something like that and we couldn't use= =20 the ventilator, we'd take her to the hospital,"" said the 33-year-old Cashma= n.=20 ""Otherwise, we'll just wait for the power to come back on.""=20 In a stroke of irony yesterday, the lights went out and computer screens we= nt=20 dark at the San Francisco offices of the state Public Utilities Commission,= =20 the agency some people blame for the energy crisis and others look to for t= he=20 solution.=20 At a Petco animal store in Redwood City, nocturnal leopard geckos that=20 weren't familiar with the state's power woes thought it was night and awoke= =20 from their routine daytime slumber.=20 The geckos clung to the glass of their cages as manager Sally Daine and her= =20 employees misted lizards and watched frozen mealworms melt.=20 ""The worst thing is some of the reptiles need heat, but it's so hot, I don'= t=20 think it will matter,"" she said.=20 At Auto Pride Car Wash a few blocks away, Dan Giudici watched as the team o= f=20 employees he supervised washed cars the old-fashioned way -- with buckets a= nd=20 hoses. The company's big mechanical car wash went unused.=20 Customers didn't seem to mind the manual wash, said Giudici, who was chargi= ng=20 half-price. But he was running out of towels.=20 Even those who hoped they were immune to power problems were affected.=20 Palo Alto runs its own utility, but the electricity began winking out about= =20 12:30 p.m.=20 The city depends on a distribution line of the state grid, so it is=20 vulnerable to blackouts, said Linda Clerkson, public relations manager for= =20 Palo Alto Utilities. In addition, the city relies on PG&E for some of its= =20 power, she said.=20 Businesses were caught by surprise.=20 ""Well, at least it happened in a better time than the morning,"" said Nick= =20 Badiee, owner of the Lytton Roasting Co. coffee house. ""My toaster went out= =20 and the coffee began getting cold, so I lost three or four people who walke= d=20 out the door. I'm not angry, yet, but I would say I am concerned.""=20 For one Milwaukee woman visiting San Francisco, the blackout was an=20 unexpected lesson in the problems of electricity deregulation.=20 Cindy Wilburth, a financial consultant who advises Wisconsin utilities, cam= e=20 to the Bay Area for vacation but left yesterday with important research for= =20 her job.=20 ""This has been a huge learning lesson for Wisconsin,"" Wilburth said as she= =20 waited for a bus outside the powerless Comfort Inn by the Bay in Cow Hollow= .=20 Wilburth said her state and others that once eyed deregulation are now=20 backing off.=20 ""It just makes me realize how we've gotten ourselves in a pinch in a free= =20 economy,"" she said.=20 As she mused about the predicament in which the state has found itself, her= =20 friend was just thankful to get out of here.=20 ""I love the cold, compared to this,"" said Cindy Stuckey of Milwaukee. ""At= =20 least I know I can stay in my home, secure and warm.""=20 Across the street, at the Travelodge By the Bay, Rolando Gutierrez had=20 already lost three guests just an hour into the blackout.=20 ""This is the richest state and this is a rich city -- plenty of people want= =20 to come here,"" he said. ""We shouldn't be suffering these blackouts.""=20 Chronicle staff writers Jaxon Van Derbeken, Mark Martin, Henry K. Lee,=20 Michael McCabe, Bernadette Tansey and Marshall Wilson contributed to this= =20 report.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 --- --- Bay Area residents learning to roll with blackouts=20 Posted at 9:58 p.m. PST Tuesday, March 20, 2001=20 JOHN=20 WOOLFOLK=20 AND STEVE=20 JOHNSON=20 Mercury News=20 As rolling blackouts swept the state for a second straight day Tuesday,=20 Californians already seasoned by droughts and earthquakes were learning to= =20 live with yet another upheaval: periodic power outages.=20 Blackouts are still a novelty in Southern California -- hit for the second= =20 time Tuesday -- but they're almost routine for Bay Area residents who have= =20 seen four days of outages this year and now expect many more as temperature= s=20 rise. Toting flashlights, avoiding certain roads and even shutting off thei= r=20 coveted hot tubs, they're adjusting to life in California's new Dark Age.= =20 ? ? Karen T. Borchers--Mercury News When the lights went out at Grant Elementary School in San Jose on Tuesday= =20 morning, teacher Renee Johnson took her second-grade students out to the la= wn=20 to read to them. Marjorie Meagher now looks at her clock before taking the elevator she need= s=20 to get around her two-story San Jose home, fearing she'll get stuck during= =20 rolling blackouts.=20 ``They tend to happen on the hour or half-hour, so I try not to use it=20 then,'' said Meagher, 74, who is disabled. ``I'm very careful. My own=20 personal fear is getting stranded in the elevator.''=20 From 750,000 to about 1 million customers lost power for an hour or so in= =20 stages Tuesday as a rash of power plant outages and record temperatures in= =20 San Jose and elsewhere triggered a critical shortage.=20 As was the case Monday, when 1.2 million to 1.8 million customers were=20 affected, Tuesday's outages were split between the northern and southern=20 parts of the state. Blackouts began at 9:30 a.m. and lasted until 2 p.m. wh= en=20 authorities obtained extra power from other Western states. Outages were=20 considered less likely today.=20 But people are preparing anyway. Like low-flow toilets and earthquake kits,= =20 flashlights and generators may be emerging as another fact of life in the= =20 Golden State.=20 In San Francisco's Inner Sunset district, Han Yong Park had the satisfied= =20 smile of a well-prepared man having bought a portage generator for his Park= 's=20 Farmers Market five months ago.=20 Tuesday morning, the generator churned loudly on the sidewalk, positioned= =20 between the tomatoes and green beans. Inside, clerks tallied purchases on= =20 electric cash registers.=20 Park motioned down the street, where neon signs were dark and some=20 restaurants closed. ``No one else in the area has a generator,'' he said.= =20 Energy officials say such equipment will come in handy this summer. Power= =20 supplies are expected to be so strained that Californians should expect man= y=20 more rolling blackouts.=20 ``I don't want to kid anybody,'' said Patrick Dorinson, spokesman for the= =20 California Independent System Operator, which manages the power grid for mo= st=20 of the state. ``Supplies are very, very tight. When you look at such a big= =20 state and such a large shortfall, I think we have to prepare ourselves. It'= s=20 very possible that going into this spring and summer we're going to see som= e=20 very difficult days.''=20 Combination of factors=20 The multiple causes that conspired to darken California on Tuesday=20 underscored the difficulty officials face in keeping the lights on.=20 The thermometer shot to record-breaking levels at some locations in the Bay= =20 Area, driving up power demand. San Jose hit 83, compared with an average 66= =20 degrees for March 20, and breaking the record high of 80 set in 1960.=20 What's more, 12,000 megawatts of power were unavailable because plants had= =20 shut down for maintenance or because cash-strapped utilities haven't paid= =20 them.=20 And consumer conservation has been spotty. While state energy officials say= =20 conservation rose from 5 percent in January to 8 percent in February, grid= =20 managers said this week Californians weren't saving enough energy. They eve= n=20 revised their estimate of how much homes a megawatt can power, down from=20 1,000 homes to 750 to reflect greater consumption.=20 Improved conservation later in the day helped stave off a second wave of=20 outages, they said.=20 Many shrug off the threat of rolling blackouts.=20 ``I think I've gotten used to it,'' said Mary Carlson, 58, of San Jose, who= =20 took her granddaughter for a walk and read the paper during blackouts in=20 January. ``I just go with the flow. I'm not going to get too excited about= =20 it. If they turn the power off, it's no big thing.''=20 Erica Finn, secretary at Acacia Glass in San Francisco, said she wasn't too= =20 upset when blackouts shut down the credit card machines, electric sanders a= nd=20 phones. She bought coffee, pulled a chair into the sun and popped Madonna= =20 into her portable CD player.=20 ``I have to brush up on my tan, and get paid for it,'' she said.=20 But for others, the consequences are potentially serious.=20 At a Palo Alto dental office, the blackouts interrupted root canals for thr= ee=20 patients. Dentists Darrell Dang, Robert McWilliams and Kurtis Finley insert= ed=20 temporary fillings by hand, rescheduled the procedures, and went to lunch.= =20 The receptionist used a cell phone to cancel the afternoon's appointments,= =20 frustrated that there's no way to prevent a repeat of Tuesday's fiasco if t= he=20 blackouts continue.=20 A new routine=20 Others have taken everyday steps to cope with the threat of losing power.= =20 Stephen O'Reilly, a 34-year-old San Jose engineer who often drives to see= =20 clients, said he avoids side streets because blackouts could darken signal= =20 lights and tie up intersections.=20 ``I used to take back roads to avoid traffic, but I'm trying to use the=20 freeways more because there are no lights,'' said O'Reilly, adding that he'= s=20 shut down his electric hot tub to help conserve power.=20 At Pasta Primavera in San Mateo, manager Chris Harris has stocked up on=20 candles and has plans to buy a generator for his restaurant. When blackouts= =20 arrived just before the lunch crowd Tuesday and cut power to ventilation=20 fans, he even considered revising his menu, replacing smoke-producing chick= en=20 and shrimp with simple marinaras and alfredos.=20 ``I don't know if you'd want to dine with the smell of smoke,'' Harris said= =20 as customers trickled into his darkened restaurant on Fourth Avenue. ``If= =20 this is going to continue through the summer, it's going to affect our=20 pockets.''=20 San Francisco International Airport, which agreed months ago to shut down i= ts=20 massive air conditioners to save power during shortages, is now routinely= =20 stuffy.=20 On Tuesday the temperature reached a steamy 85 degrees inside the airport's= =20 North Terminal, which serves most of United Airlines' flights.=20 ``It's become uncomfortable if not intolerable,'' said Ron Wilson, airport= =20 spokesman. ``It's like getting in a car that's been left in the sun all day= .=20 It's much hotter inside. .?.?. We've turned on the fans but they're just=20 moving the hot air.''=20 Hospitals cut off=20 Several hospitals complained they lost power Tuesday, saying they thought= =20 they were exempt. PG&E said hospitals with sufficient backup generation to= =20 power themselves can be turned off. But state regulators said they could no= t=20 confirm that statement, and hospital officials scoffed at the suggestion.= =20 ``Every hospital has backup power generation, but it only covers 30 to 40= =20 percent of the hospital,'' said Roger Richter, a senior vice president with= =20 the Hospital Council.=20 Nonetheless, hospitals are coping with the situation.=20 ``Our patients are concerned, for sure,'' said Jackie Floyd, head nurse at= =20 the Satellite Dialysis Center South in San Jose, which lost power. ``But=20 while it's a pain, we can handle the blackouts. We're kind of getting the= =20 idea here that this a problem and we have to adjust.''=20 But while Californians may be adjusting, they're not at all pleased.=20 ``I'm frustrated with this power thing,'' said Ana Rivera, who manages the= =20 Wash Club in San Francisco, where washers and dryers had stopped mid-cycle.= =20 ``Who do you blame? No one wants to accept blame.'' Sara Neufeld, Ann Marimow, Kim Vo, Frank Sweeney, Barbara Feder, Aaron Davi= s,=20 Gil Duran, and Dave Beck contributed to this report.=20 --- --- Powerless, again=20 Outages were lighter after generators came back online and conservation=20 efforts kicked in. Blackouts may be averted today.=20 March 21, 2001=20 By TONY SAAVEDRA, JOHN HOWARD, CHRIS KNAP and JEFF COLLINS The Orange County Register=20 The Ridgewood Power methane-burning plant at the Olinda Alpha landfill in= =20 Brea is producing 3.3 megawatts, down from five, because Edison owes it $1.= 5=20 million and cranking up to full power is no longer a priority Photo: H. Lorren Au Jr. / The Register ? ? A second day of statewide blackouts ratcheted up the frustration level=20 Tuesday on the streets of Orange County and in Sacramento, as consumers=20 demanded solutions from politicians unable to give them.=20 There was a bit of good news, though: Blackouts may be averted for the rest= =20 of the week after temperatures moderated, two stalled generators came back= =20 online and conservation efforts kicked into gear.=20 ?=20 Some Orange County residents took the blackouts in stride. In Mission Viejo= ,=20 above, the West Coast Football Club's under-16 boys team scrimmages under= =20 gas-powered lights Tuesday. The club has been running to conserve energy=20 Photo: Kevin Sullivan / The Register ? ? Consumers were able to save 900 megawatts - enough to light about 675,000= =20 homes - by cutting power usage, said Patrick Dorinson, spokesman for the=20 Independent System Operator, which oversees 75 percent of the state's=20 electricity grid. That helped the ISO halt the blackouts Tuesday afternoon.= =20 ""Californians are back on the conservation trail, and we appreciate it,""=20 Dorinson said.=20 Power regulators Tuesday morning predicted there would be twice as many=20 outages as Monday, when more than 1 million consumers statewide lost power = in=20 one-hour to 90-minute increments.=20 Luis Pagan, an assistant at the Santa Ana Animal Shelter, waits out the=20 blackout Tuesday with one of the shelter's dogs up for adoption Photo: Paul E. Rodriguez / The Register ? ? Beginning at 9:30 a.m. Tuesday, blackouts tangled intersections in Costa=20 Mesa, forced Huntington Beach students to study by flashlight and stilled= =20 cash registers in Santa Ana. About a half-million homes and businesses were= =20 unplugged statewide before 2 p.m. Power was restored to most of Southern=20 California by 11:30 a.m. Outages affected more than 9,200 consumers in Oran= ge=20 County.=20 The ISO had expected more severe outages to hit at the peak hour of 7 p.m.,= =20 but was able to keep the lights on as downed power plants came back online= =20 and imports from other states increased.=20 While outages were lighter than Monday, the blackouts aggravated consumers= =20 who doubted that Gov. Gray Davis, lawmakers and electricity officials are= =20 doing enough to keep the power flowing in California.=20 ?=20 Zulema Avarez, left, and Erica Ramirez said they were caught off-guard when= =20 the power went out, so they closed the fashion store in Santa Ana where the= y=20 work Photo: Paul E. Rodriguez / The Register ? ? ""I think this is insane,"" said Charlee Lang, 63, of Costa Mesa. ""Gray Davis= =20 didn't do his job for a long time; he didn't get serious until November. We= =20 need to demand immediate action be taken.""=20 Bill Brannick, 65, of Costa Mesa, added: ""There's a lot of complicity here= =20 and we're just innocent victims.""=20 Davis, in a Sacramento news conference, said he inherited California's fail= ed=20 experiment with electricity deregulation, enacted in 1996 under former Gov.= =20 Pete Wilson.=20 ""I think a fair assessment of this situation is that we were dealt a pretty= =20 bad hand here,"" Davis said. ""No (new power) plant was approved in the 12=20 years prior to my being governor.""=20 With summer peak demand expected to be 16,000 megawatts higher than Monday= =20 and Tuesday, more days of blackouts are forecast for coming months. Though= =20 Davis has signed long-term contracts to provide California with reliable=20 energy, the deals haven't yet taken effect. Some suppliers won't start=20 providing electricity until the state reaches a so-far elusive agreement to= =20 help the utilities pay off billions in debt by buying their transmission=20 lines.=20 Assembly Republican Leader Bill Campbell, R-Villa Park, said that the effor= t=20 to resolve the ""state's energy crisis was floundering in the midst of unpai= d=20 bills, stalled negotiations and rolling blackouts.""=20 Tuesday began with 29 percent of California's power supply off line, mostly= =20 from generating plants suddenly down for unscheduled maintenance. About 3,0= 00=20 megawatts was missing from so-called qualifying facilities, or small power= =20 producers who have not been paid $1.8 billion by cash-strapped utilities an= d=20 say they can't afford to operate. Davis said he would ask the PUC to order= =20 utilities to begin paying the qualifying facilities for any energy supplied= =20 beginning April 1, but the payments would not apply to the outstanding debt= .=20 Some smaller producers threatened to force Edison into involuntary bankrupt= cy=20 if they are not paid soon.=20 Blackouts began Tuesday two hours earlier than on Monday, as the ISO called= =20 on utilities to dump 500 megawatts. It was only the second day of blackouts= =20 for Southern California, but the fourth for Northern California since=20 January.=20 The Disney Resort, which includes Disneyland and the new California=20 Adventure, voluntarily cut back one megawatt of electricity on Monday and= =20 again Tuesday, said Anaheim Public Utilities.=20 All of the reductions were in backstage areas not seen by guests, said Disn= ey=20 spokeswoman Chela Castano-Lenahan.=20 In other workplaces, people tried to make do.=20 Flashlight beams bobbed in aisles at a Target in Santa Ana, where the power= =20 stopped at 10:30 a.m. Workers escorted customers, who continued shopping an= d=20 made their purchases at battery-powered cash registers. Customers were=20 eventually asked to leave when the batteries ran low.=20 ""Oh well; no soda, no sunglasses,"" said one woman as she headed back to her= =20 car.=20 The Metro Pointe shopping center in Costa Mesa also went dark.=20 ""I was in the middle of making a reservation when everything went out,"" sai= d=20 Peggy Thomas, a sales executive for Travel of America, along South Coast=20 Drive. ""All of us here went, 'Oh no, it's happened to us.' ""=20 Said one Costa Mesa police officer, as he headed for his motorcycle and a= =20 blackout-related fender bender: ""You can thank the governor for that one.""= =20 At Hawes Elementary School in Huntington Beach, Principal Marie Smith was= =20 demonstrating to her third-grade class what would happen in a blackout. But= =20 before she could flip off the light switch, the power died.=20 The kids thought she was joking.=20 Register staff writers Tiffany Montgomery, Sarah Tully Tapia, Nancy Luna, J= im=20 Radcliffe, Binh Ha Hong, Theresa Salinas, Eric Johnson and Danielle Herubin= =20 and the Associated Press contributed to this report.=20 --- --- The iceman shunneth effects of hourlong blackout=20 March 21, 2001=20 By JIM RADCLIFFE The Orange County Register=20 Ken Ackerman, owner of ABC Ice House in Laguna Niguel, checks on his frozen= =20 inventory during Tuesday morning's rolling blackout. The ice managed to=20 endure the hourlong power outage Photo: Jebb Harris / The Register ? ? Ken Ackerman didn't sweat much when a blackout struck his Laguna Niguel ice= =20 business at 10:30 a.m. Tuesday.=20 The walk-in freezer at ABC Ice House held 8 tons of ice. And for an hour, t= he=20 temperature in there rose from 20 degrees to 45 degrees.=20 But very little melted.=20 Ackerman said most refrigerators can handle blackouts as long as outages ar= e=20 less than two hours.=20 ""I think people are going to get used to one-hour blackouts and realize it'= s=20 not a problem,'' Ackerman said.=20 The blackouts actually were profitable for Ackerman.=20 An Irvine laboratory struck by a power outage bought 100 pounds of dry ice = to=20 preserve human tissue.=20 More blackouts through the summer could be a boon for the ice business - or= a=20 bust.=20 It could mean more ice sales -- or that his supplier has trouble filling hi= s=20 orders.=20 ""It's going to be an interesting summer,'' Ackerman said.=20 ""I have no idea if we'll make more or less.''=20 Traffic will be the biggest problem if blackouts continue, Ackerman said.= =20 On Monday, a nearby Costco that had lost power ordered 200 pounds of ice to= =20 keep its refrigerated goods cold.=20 But dead traffic lights and congested roads made it impossible to deliver t= he=20 ice before the outage ended. Costco canceled the sale.=20 ""We pride ourselves on getting our deliveries made in an hour,"" Ackerman=20 said.=20 --- --- Traffic officials are seeing red over blackouts=20 Battery backups are planned by several cities to aid confused drivers.=20 March 21, 2001=20 By HEATHER LOURIE The Orange County Register=20 Traffic backs up Tuesday at Crown Valley Parkway at Forbes Road in Laguna= =20 Niguel as drivers had to navigate their own way Photo: Jebb Harris / The Register ? ? Toby Tran approached an Aliso Viejo intersection and wasn't sure what to do= .=20 Ahead of him, the traffic signal was dark, a casualty of the rolling=20 blackouts that struck Orange County on Monday and Tuesday.=20 So Tran kept driving, smacking into an oncoming car at the corner of Aliso= =20 Creek and Enterprise.=20 ""It just happened,"" a shaken Tran, 29, said from his Aliso Viejo home. ""I= =20 tried to stop and I couldn't. There was no light. Nothing.""=20 Tran's accident Monday afternoon, and several others like it, underscore on= e=20 of the most significant dangers looming in the threat of future blackouts.= =20 Traffic signals that fade to black when the power goes out, instead of=20 converting to flashing red, make wrecks far more likely because drivers=20 become confused and frustrated, traffic engineers and experts said Tuesday.= =20 ""I didn't know what to do,"" said Tran, who was on his way to a high school= =20 jogging track. ""Luckily I'm alive, but I'm very scared.""=20 On Day 2 of Southern California's power outages, worried city officials=20 across Orange County hunted for ways to respond to paralyzed intersections= =20 when state regulators pull the plug.=20 ""We need to be ready,"" said Hamid Bahadori, traffic engineer in the city of= =20 Orange. ""This thing is only going to get worse in July and August.""=20 One popular idea: installing emergency battery-backup units at traffic=20 signals to keep lights flashing red during blackouts. Several Orange County= =20 cities, including Irvine, Laguna Niguel and Orange, are already moving to= =20 install the devices as early as this summer.=20 ""In our minds, (a flashing light) is a vast improvement over a blacked-out= =20 signal,"" said Dave Rogers, Laguna Niguel traffic engineer. On Tuesday night= ,=20 his city was expected to approve the purchase of the battery packs for all = 74=20 of its traffic signals.=20 ""Timing, in this case, seems to be everything,"" Rogers said. ""A lot of citi= es=20 had contemplated it. We just took it that extra step.""=20 John Thai, an Anaheim traffic engineer, cautioned that cities need to do=20 adequate research and testing before they launch into such projects.=20 ""There is nothing that is foolproof,"" Thai said. ""All this is new territory= .""=20 Some cities are also considering rolling out temporary stop signs and sendi= ng=20 police officers to more intersections.=20 Although the state's vehicle code requires motorists to treat dead traffic= =20 signals like a four-way stop, motorists often blow through the intersection= s,=20 police said.=20 ""It's dangerous,"" said Tustin police Lt. Mike Shanahan, after several=20 near-wrecks in his city during Monday's outages. ""People are not very good = at=20 reacting to changes in their conditions.=20 ""Flashing red is something that catches your eye. It's a warning that=20 something is amiss, but the absence of all lights is worse.""=20 RELATED STORIES=20 =01=07 How to contact your Representatives =01=07 'Current' events =01=07 The iceman shunneth effects of hourlong blackout =01=07 Powerless, again =01=07 Alternative power producers cut back or shut down as payments from b= ig=20 utilities lag =01=07 O.C. saves its energy -- for blaming others =01=07 Blackout readiness on agenda --- --- Alternative power producers cut back or shut down as payments from big=20 utilities lag=20 That is a factor in blackouts=20 March 21, 2001=20 By HANH KIM QUACH The Orange County Register=20 Every megawatt of electricity counts in this deregulated energy market -=20 including the five megawatts generated from the Olinda Alpha landfill in=20 Brea.=20 The methane-burning plant is producing only 3.3 megawatts now because=20 Southern California Edison owes it $1.5 million and cranking up to full pow= er=20 is no longer a priority, said Martin Quinn, executive vice president of=20 Ridgewood Power, which runs the plant.=20 ""We're doing maintenance now when we ordinarily wouldn't do it. Because we'= re=20 not being paid, it was a good time to cut back,'' Quinn said.=20 That scenario has been playing out across the state in the past two weeks a= nd=20 was a major factor in Monday's and Tuesday's blackouts.=20 Those who provide electricity through alternative means - burning methane o= r=20 wood chips, or using cleaner-burning technology with traditional fossil fue= ls=20 - are not being paid for what they sell to the big utilities. So they eithe= r=20 can't afford to produce energy or see little incentive to do so.=20 On Monday, their absence from the statewide electricity grid created a=20 1,300-megawatt shortfall -- enough to power 1.3 million homes.=20 Taking that much power offline meant that any burp in the system would put= =20 the state under the minimum amount of electricity needed to avoid blackouts= .=20 When one conventional Southern California plant went down because of a=20 transformer fire Monday, the blackouts began.=20 ""If all of California's (alternative) generators were operating yesterday a= nd=20 today, rolling blackouts would have been avoided,'' Quinn said Tuesday.=20 Within the next couple of weeks, as the weather warms and alternative energ= y=20 producers continue to try and operate without money, California could see= =20 twice as many of those producers go offline, further increasing the potenti= al=20 for blackouts, said Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of Independent=20 Energy Producers.=20 The alternative energy producers, which provide about a third of the state'= s=20 energy, are deemed so crucial that Gov. Gray Davis wants the Public Utiliti= es=20 Commission to order the utilities to pay them. As drafted, though, the orde= r=20 would only include payment on future sales; it doesn't address existing deb= t.=20 The Legislature has been working since January to halve the rates that=20 alternative producers charge utilities and to require utilities to pay for= =20 November's energy by April 1. But that bill is still moving through the=20 Legislature.=20 Small plants threaten Edison with bankruptcy=20 Smutny-Jones said that if the small generators are not paid promptly, sever= al=20 will attempt to force Edison into bankruptcy, probably within a week.=20 Unlike the large natural-gas generators that have been paid by the state=20 Department of Water Resources, alternative energy producers are locked into= =20 contracts with utilities. Collectively, Pacific Gas & Electric and Edison o= we=20 alternative energy producers about $1 billion.=20 PG&E has paid about 15 cents for each dollar it owes.=20 ""Obviously, they're a source of generation, and looking at how much load ou= r=20 customers need, they're a source that has provided energy,'' said Jon=20 Tremayne, Pacific Gas & Electric spokesman. ""We've been trying, in good=20 faith, to make payments on energy.''=20 But Edison has not paid any money. Edison's alternative energy director, La= rs=20 Bergmann, said the company will not pay until larger reforms are made in ho= w=20 the producers' rates are calculated.=20 But the company recognizes that its nonpayment is causing problems.=20 ""To the extent that there are hundreds of megawatts that are idled here, it= =20 just exacerbates the (energy) problem. ... They're facing similar problems = to=20 what we faced - they don't have sufficient (income) coming in the door,''= =20 Bergmann said.=20 Plants go into mothball mode=20 Millenium Energy in Kern County is owed $40 million total by PG&E and Ediso= n.=20 On March 1, the company shut down both of its coal and petroleum coke-burni= ng=20 plants and doesn't plan to bring them back up until it is paid.=20 Millenium's plants, which use a special technology to reduce emissions,=20 generate 150 megawatts of energy.=20 ""We've gone into mothball mode; our machinery just sits there on cold=20 standby,'' said President Mike Hawkins. ""We've been delivering free electro= ns=20 to the system in the hope that the system would resolve itself. But we can'= t=20 do that anymore.""=20 One biomass plant in Lassen County has scaled back from 31 megawatts to=20 eight. Burney Forest Power burns wood chips to produce energy and has only = a=20 couple weeks' supply of chips left.=20 ""When you don't even know what you'll get paid, it's hard to say, 'Let's go= =20 out and get a bunch of fuel,''' said Milt Schultz, the plant's general=20 manager.=20 ""The sad thing is, (the state) really can't afford to lose us.''=20 --- --- O.C. saves its energy -- for blaming others=20 March 21, 2001=20 By RICHARD CHANG The Orange County Register=20 Darkened stores were forced to turn away customers, as stock manager=20 Bridgette Kelly, left, does here at a Linens 'n Things in Costa Mesa. The= =20 store closed for 45 minutes Tuesday morning Photo: Michael Kitada / The Orange County Register ? ? Orange County residents are making efforts, large and small, to conserve=20 electricity as they face rolling blackouts and surging energy bills.=20 Reactions to the early spring crisis - with blackouts throughout the state= =20 Monday and Tuesday - are ranging from confusion to rage.=20 Many residents have taken practical steps, such as turning off lights they'= re=20 not using, waiting until off-peak hours to do their laundry and opening=20 windows instead of using air conditioning.=20 ""My house is full of Philips energy-saving light bulbs,"" said Ray Rutledge,= =20 48, of Buena Park. ""Our light bill has dropped 7 1/2 percent. We use=20 low-voltage outdoor lighting. We've got an energy-saving thermostat. It's s= et=20 back to 65 (degrees) in the wintertime.""=20 Kim Wilson, who lives in an unincorporated area of Orange County near Santa= =20 Ana and Tustin, said he has cut down on lighting in his house and has reduc= ed=20 by half the time his pool cleaner runs. Still, his energy bill remains abou= t=20 $400 a month.=20 ""I don't know what ... to do,"" Wilson, 57, said. ""We've cut back.""=20 Wilson added that he is not pleased with the way government or the energy= =20 companies have handled the crisis.=20 ""I think it's disgusting. It's such political garbage. Who was it that made= =20 these decisions? Who got us into it?""=20 'TRYING TO CONSERVE'=20 Jenny Hann, 60, of Costa Mesa said her workplace has devised an emergency= =20 plan for conservation and future blackouts.=20 ""We're definitely trying to conserve as much as we can,"" the bank=20 administrator said. Hann expressed frustration with the energy companies.= =20 ""When you see these executives that have been running the show and the mone= y=20 they're making, it's bothersome,"" she said.=20 Jennifer Souto, 27, of Tustin said even though she's a stay-at-home mother,= =20 she keeps the lights off all day. She doesn't use her air conditioning,=20 either.=20 Souto said she was locked out of her house for 90 minutes Monday because a= =20 blackout cut power to her garage door. She says she's not sure who to blame= .=20 Paul Finch, 38, of Westminster blames Edison and Gov. Gray Davis.=20 ""I don't believe info I get from Edison or from our illustrious governor,""= =20 Finch said. ""There's more to it than how they've represented it.""=20 --- --- Blackout readiness on agenda=20 O.C. companies braced for outages Tuesday in different ways. Not all were= =20 struck, but they felt the effects.=20 March 21, 2001=20 By TAMARA CHUANG The Orange County Register=20 In case of a power failure Tuesday, the Fluor Corp. in Aliso Viejo stocked= =20 elevators with homemade blackout kits, filled with cookies, flashlights and= =20 bottles of water.=20 ""They're in the elevators, although we've been told not to use the=20 elevators,"" said Lori Serrato, a company spokeswoman. ""We're using the=20 stairwells, waiting for our time of darkness.""=20 Tales of anxious preparation were more common than actual blackouts for=20 Orange County businesses Tuesday.=20 Edison told some companies, as special power users who've agreed to cut bac= k=20 when asked, to expect to do so. Conexant Systems Inc. got a warning from=20 Edison and immediately shut down air conditioning and equipment not in use,= =20 and stopped production. The blackout never came.=20 Kingston Technology Co., when notified by Edison on Tuesday morning,=20 broadcast the warning on the company intercom. The company also e-mailed=20 employees a guide explaining the blackout.=20 ""It's already affected productivity. We've been busy getting all our e-mail= s=20 out before it happens,"" said Heather Jardin, a spokeswoman for the Fountain= =20 Valley computer memory maker.=20 Kingston still had power by day's end, but in an emergency, the company's= =20 manufacturing plants revert to Kingston's own power generators, Jardin said= .=20 Heart valve maker Edwards Lifesciences turned on its backup generators=20 Tuesday morning, ""because of the potential for there to be a blackout in ou= r=20 area,"" said company spokesman Scott Nelson. But (as of 3:30 p.m.) the=20 blackout didn't materialize, Nelson said.=20 At the regional office in Irvine, Verizon Wireless implemented conservation= =20 efforts, such as motion sensors that shut off lights after 30 minutes of=20 inactivity, and separate heating and air conditioning units on all floors.= =20 Some of the company's cell sites in Orange County and Los Angeles did lose= =20 power Monday and Tuesday, but they automatically switched to backup battery= =20 sources.=20 Other companies - PacifiCare, ICN Pharmaceuticals, Beckman Coulter and=20 Allergan - said they took precautions, turning out some hallway lights and= =20 communicating safety procedures to employees.=20 Disneyland, Ingram Micro in Santa Ana and Western Digital Corp. in Lake=20 Forest all were prepared.=20 But none reported blackouts by day's end.=20 Some county businesses did get hit.=20 Businesses along the 900 block of South Coast Drive - including 14 stores a= t=20 the Metro Point shopping center in Costa Mesa - went dark about 10:20 a.m.= =20 ""All of a sudden it was dark,"" said Henry Gonzalez, manager of Boudin Baker= y.=20 ""We ran out of coffee. We couldn't bake anything. We tried to accommodate a= s=20 best as we can.""=20 Other stores simply closed during the blackout, frustrating shoppers.=20 ""We walked over to (Marshalls) and it was dark and there was a sign on the= =20 door that said 'Due to the blackout, we're closed,'"" said shopper Roberta= =20 Allison, a West Virginia tourist. ""Don't they warn people here? Do they jus= t=20 whack the power off?""=20 Marshalls employees escorted customers out of the store when the power went= =20 out. Other stores, including Nordstrom Rack and Best Buy, were not affected= .=20 Across the street from the center, employees spilled out of office building= s=20 cheering and waving their hands in victory as power outages forced them to= =20 halt work.=20 ""Lots of people just walked out of the office to run errands,"" said Amy=20 Bateman, a loan officer at Capital Funding Group in Costa Mesa.=20 She said her office building, at 940 South Coast Drive, went dark for about= =20 70 minutes. Like dozens of others in the building, she was working at her= =20 desk when the computers and lights went dark.=20 ""We've just been sitting around. We can't do anything,"" said Bateman.=20 The blackout hit other businesses on Monday.=20 Buy.com employees spent their hour without power using their wireless=20 Blackberry pagers to answer and send e-mail.=20 The Crazy Horse Steakhouse in Irvine lost power after the lunch rush, said= =20 Donna Mulkey, the restaurant's manager. Since the broilers remained hot, th= e=20 cooks kept cooking and the customers kept eating. When they finished, waite= rs=20 calculated the bills by hand.=20 At Broadcom Corp. in Irvine, the power went out just before Rep. Christophe= r=20 Cox was to tour the facility.=20 ""It struck me as particularly ironic,"" Cox told members of the House=20 subcommittee on energy and air quality Tuesday, that Broadcom's co-founder,= =20 Henry Samueli, ""spent the hour before the meeting using a letter opener to= =20 open his paper mail and sitting by the window so he could get some sunlight= =20 to read.""=20 Cox, R-Newport Beach, told the panel, which was holding a hearing on=20 California's electricity crisis, that ""the entire company could not functio= n=20 during this period of time and the same was true for more than a million=20 people,"" he said. ""It's a Third World experience in California.""=20 Register reporters Chris Farnsworth, Dena Bunis, Bernard Wolfson, Nancy Lun= a,=20 Eric Johnson, Elizabeth Aguilera and Jennifer Hieger contributed to this=20 story.=20 --- --- Calif To Order Utils To Pay Small Generators Up Front-Gov 03/21/2001=20 Dow Jones Energy Service=20 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)=20 SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP)-- California regulators will order the state's two= =20 largest utilities to pay small, independent power generators in advance, a= =20 move Gov. Gray Davis hopes will bring a quick end to the blackouts that=20 darkened California this week.=20 Davis accused PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Edison= =20 International (EIX) unit Southern California Edison of taking in money from= =20 customers while failing to pay the generators, known as qualifying=20 facilities, which produce up to one-third of the state's power. As a result= ,=20 he said, the utilities are partly responsible for this week's blackouts.=20 ""It's wrong and irresponsible of the utilities to pocket this money and not= =20 pay the generators,"" the governor said at a Capitol news conference Tuesday= =20 evening. ""They've acted irresponsibly and immorally and it has to stop.""=20 The state lost about 3,100 megawatts, or enough electricity to power 3.1=20 million homes, on Tuesday from alternative energy plants that say they can'= t=20 afford to keep operating because the utilities haven't paid their bills in= =20 weeks. The utilities, which are near bankruptcy, owe the QFs about $1=20 billion. Pacific Gas & Electric has made partial payments.=20 As reported by Dow Jones Newswires, Southern California Edison met with=20 representatives of the governor Tuesday to discuss plans to begin making=20 partial payments to the QFs. Pacific Gas & Electric , which called Davis'= =20 statements ""inappropriate and unjustified,"" said it has informed the QFs an= d=20 the governor's office that it plans to begin paying the QFs in full going= =20 forward.=20 Davis said the PUC planned to issue an order next week directing the=20 utilities to prepay future bills to the QFs.=20 Edison and PG&E say they have lost more than $13 billion since last June to= =20 climbing wholesale electricity prices, which the state's 1996 deregulation= =20 law prevents them from passing on to ratepayers. California has been spendi= ng=20 about $45 million a day since January to buy power for the utilities'=20 customers, but hasn't included QF-generated power in its purchases.=20 Keepers of the state's power grid were cautiously optimistic that Californi= a=20 might get through Wednesday without another day of rolling blackouts after= =20 two idle plants were returned to service. A Stage 1 power alert, the mildes= t=20 of three forms of alerts, was called around 6 a.m. Wednesday as power=20 reserves fell to around 7 percent.=20 About a half-million customers were hit by Tuesday's blackouts, which snarl= ed=20 traffic and plunged schools and businesses into darkness from San Diego to= =20 the Oregon border. Tuesday's outages began at 9:30 a.m. and continued in=20 90-minute waves until about 2 p.m., when the ISO lifted its blackout order.= =20 They were blamed for at least one serious traffic accident.=20 The blackouts were caused by a combination of problems, including=20 unseasonably warm weather, reduced electricity imports from the Pacific=20 Northwest, numerous power plants being shut down for repairs and the loss o= f=20 power from QFs.=20 Meanwhile, a leading lawmaker on energy issues said the PUC may soon have t= o=20 raise rates by about 15% to cover the state's costs and its utilities' bill= s.=20 ""My sense is that people will appreciate having some certainty and being ab= le=20 to plan for it,"" said Assemblyman Fred Keeley. ""They don't have to like it,= =20 but I think they'll appreciate it.""=20 Davis has said he is confident the utilities and the state can pay their=20 bills without further rate increases.=20 --- --- PG&E Says It Is Negotiating With Qualifying Facilities 03/21/2001=20 Dow Jones Energy Service=20 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)=20 (This article was originally published Tuesday)=20 =20 LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas and Electric Co= .=20 said Tuesday it is offering small generators, or ""qualifying facilities"",= =20 prepayment of $200 million per month so they will have the funds to return = to=20 the state power grid.=20 But high level sources at the qualifying facilities who are involved in the= =20 negotiations said PG&E's proposal is incomplete and doesn't address the iss= ue=20 of past due payments.=20 The sources said PG&E had discussions with some qualifying facility operato= rs=20 last week regarding the plan and it wasn't accepted at that time.=20 About 3,000 megawatts of power from qualifying facilities, or QFs, have bee= n=20 off the state's grid since Monday because the generators weren't being paid= =20 by utilities and couldn't afford to continue operating. The QFs unavailable= =20 power was partly responsible for Monday and Tuesday's statewide rolling=20 blackouts.=20 Also Tuesday, California Gov. Gray Davis will hold a press conference to=20 discuss progress made in negotiations with the QFs to revise their contract= s=20 with the state's two nearly-bankrupt utilities so that the utilities pay le= ss=20 for power.=20 Edison International (EIX) unit Southern California Edison also said Tuesda= y=20 it intends to make partial payments on an ongoing basis to some QFs.=20 Edison executives met with Gov. Gray Davis' negotiating team Tuesday to=20 discuss how and when SoCal Ed can begin to make payments, and a spokesman= =20 said they hope to have a plan in a matter of days.=20 Pacific Gas & Electric Co. has made partial payments of about $51 million t= o=20 the QFs it contracts with, but owes much more. Edison owes the QFs hundreds= =20 of millions of dollars and hasn't paid the QFs since November. Together, th= e=20 two utilities owe QFs about $1 billion.=20 PG&E said it has been collecting about $400 million per month from ratepaye= rs=20 to pay QFs and other generators with which it has bilateral contracts, the= =20 state grid operator for spot power purchases, and costs of its own=20 generation.=20 The average combined bill for those costs exceeds $1.4 billion per month,= =20 PG&E said.=20 ""This mismatch between revenues and costs requires tough choices. Since the= re=20 isn't enough money in rates to cover all these costs, the Public Utilities= =20 Commission decision on how this $400 million will be allocated going forwar= d=20 will determine our ability to make advance payments to QFs,"" said Gordon R.= =20 Smith, the utility's president and CEO.=20 The PUC is responsible for implementing the legislation which allows the=20 state to buy power and will decide how much of utilities' ratepayer revenue= =20 will go to the state for power purchases and how much will go to the=20 utilities.=20 For several weeks, a number of QFs have taken their generating units offlin= e=20 because they can no longer afford to buy fuel needed to run their units.=20 QFs supply California with one-third of its total power supply.=20 PG&E and SoCal Ed have almost $13 billion in purchased power undercollectio= ns=20 because they cannot collect full costs from customers protected by a=20 state-mandated rate freeze.=20 -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872;=20 -(Jason Leopold contributed to this article.)=20 --- -------------------- Wednesday, March 21, 2001=20 By Dave Todd=20 dtodd@ftenergy.com=20 U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham declared this week that the Big Apple= =20 is on the verge of being bitten hard by power cuts and rising energy prices= . Delivering the keynote address at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's national= =20 energy summit in Washington Monday, Abraham said, ""California is not the on= ly=20 state facing a mismatch between supply and demand,"" what with ""electricity= =20 shortages predicted for New York City and Long Island this summer"" and low= =20 capacity margins threatening electricity reliability elsewhere across the= =20 country. But how likely is it that New Yorkers will face blackouts of the= =20 sort confronting Californians?=20 Not very, says energy trade specialist Edward Krapels, managing director of= =20 Boston-based METIS Trading Advisors. Krapels, a consultant helping major=20 Northeastern utilities, such as Consolidated Edison, design market-hedging= =20 programs, adamantly decried what he said are facile comparisons between=20 conditions in New York and California, there being ""more differences than= =20 there are similarities"" between those two industrial cornerstones of the=20 country's economy in respect to energy security management.=20 ""First of all, New York has a more varied portfolio of energy generation=20 sources than California,"" he said. California has hydro, nuclear and gas, b= ut=20 when it lost a lot of hydro, the state needed gas to pick up the slack, and= =20 the ""capacity just wasn't there."" In New York's case, the state has oil and= =20 coal still in the mix and its overall dependence on gas is much lower than= =20 California's, Krapels added.=20 New York avoids making same mistakes Portfolio diversity is one pillar of any effective plan to help New York=20 avoid the same errors made in redesigning California's marketplace. New=20 York's Independent System Operator (ISO), in a new report warning that the= =20 state is at an ""energy crossroads"" in terms of its capacity adequacy in the= =20 immediate future, argues that a concerted effort is required to arrest=20 declining in-state generation capacity reserve margins, and a strategy must= =20 be put in place, whether or not new generation comes on-line, in accordance= =20 with current anticipated scenarios.=20 A measure of New York's essential difficulty is that, between 1995 and 2000= ,=20 statewide demand for electricity grew 2,700 MW, while generating capacity= =20 expanded by only 1,060 MW. With no major new generating plants in downstate= =20 New York fully approved, the gap is expected to continue to widen. To avoid= =20 ""a replication of California's market meltdown"" the New York ISO calculates= =20 the state's daily generating capacity needs to grow by 8,600 MW by 2005, wi= th=20 more than half of that located in New York City and on Long Island.=20 Expressing concern this may be too big a burden for the current bureaucrati= c=20 process to bear, the ISO wants to see a state-appointed ombudsman named to= =20 help would-be merchant power plant investors plow through red tape.=20 ""Increasing New York's generating capacity will also lessen the state's=20 escalating and risky reliance on out-of-state sources of electricity,"" the= =20 ISO added. ""Since 1999, New York State has been unable to cover its reserve= =20 requirements from in-state sources.""=20 Not everyone agrees with that analysis, insofar as it argues for circling t= he=20 wagons inward. Some analysts believe the ultimate solution lies not in tyin= g=20 in more inwardly dedicated power, but in expanding the marketplace by=20 breaking down inter-jurisdictional barriers. In any case, New York energy= =20 regulatory authorities and those responsible elsewhere in the U.S. Northeas= t,=20 such as PJM (Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland) Interconnection and the New= =20 England Power Pool, are in vastly better shape in terms of ""cross-border""= =20 cooperation than California and its neighbors in that efforts are being mad= e=20 among various authorities toward developing an integrated regional=20 electricity market. In California, by contrast, the state's focus=01*for=20 example, in the case of new gas-fired power plant development=01*has been t= o=20 ensure dedicated supply to the California market alone, rather than on a=20 regional marketplace.=20 The New York ISO's new broad-based analysis of market-restructuring needs= =20 argues that the relatively stronger health of its reformed environment is= =20 ""due in large part to the ability of New York's utilities to enter into=20 long-term power contracts.""=20 What needs to be done most, it says, is to move aggressively to build some = of=20 the more than 29,000 MW of ""proposed new generation in the siting pipeline.= ""=20 In the meantime, the 30,200 MW of electricity New Yorkers used on a peak da= y=20 last summer shouldn't be eclipsed on too many days this coming summer (give= n=20 early long-range weather forecasts). Demand, however, is expected to increa= se=20 at an annual average rate of up to 1.4%.=20 So while New York City, the rest of the state and adjacent parts might=20 breathe easy this year, it could be a brief rest from the fray. Meanwhile, = a=20 4% shortfall is still being planned for this summer that is not yet provide= d=20 for, as authorities hurriedly seek to arrange new generation plants around= =20 Manhattan, on Long Island and even on barges offshore.=20 One way or another, whether it is the weather or the politics of siting new= =20 energy facilities, it's going to be a hot time in the city.=20 Long-term solutions hit brick wall Meanwhile, attempts at longer-term solutions continue to run into trouble.= =20 Last week, Connecticut state regulators came out against a proposal to run = a=20 new underwater cable under Long Island Sound that Hydro-Quebec subsidiary= =20 TransEnergie U.S. Ltd. wants to build to pump more juice into Long Island= =20 Power Authority's load pocket. Despite strong promises from TransEnergie to= =20 be diligent in avoiding damage to oyster beds in Long Island Sound, the=20 proposal failed to convince authorities, who were persuaded the pipeline=20 project could lead to diversion of electricity from Connecticut.=20 In similar fashion, private companies wanting to build 10 small independent= =20 power plants and temporary generators offshore New York City are running in= to=20 intense opposition from environmental groups and citizen organizations=01*s= ome=20 of whom have taken their cases to the state assembly in Albany.=20 The David vs. Goliath nature of such controversies has further alerted ener= gy=20 companies to the difficulties of addressing complex energy supply issues th= at=20 may ultimately devolve to people not wanting things in their backyard,=20 regardless of what the alternative might mean to their fellow citizens or t= he=20 greater public good.=20 But suddenly, in New York, California's troubles=01*while still distant in = their=20 intensity=01* may not be so far away. By some estimates, this summer's bill= s for=20 Consolidated Edison customers could be up as much as one third or more over= =20 last year's charges.=20 Letting the time slip when it comes to building new infrastructure isn't=20 going to make the pain go away.=20 =20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California Power Crisis Update (No. 10); [EMail-Body]= We have been pulling together these weekly(sometimes more often) summaries for internal purposes. Would you find it helpful to be on the distribution list? Hope you are doing well. Look forward to touching base soon. ----- Forwarded by Suzanne on 03/28/2001 03:41 AM ----- Memorandum TO: Pru Sheppard BCC: Suzanne Nimocks FROM: Pru Sheppard B. Venki Venkateshwara DATE: March 27, 2001 California Power Crisis Update (No. 10) DEVELOPMENTS THIS WEEK, 3/23/2001 The weeks highlights include: ? Continued indications that the issue of market power and possible remedies for it is likely to remain a high profile issue in California and elsewhere (both retroactively and prospectively) ? An ironical situation with respect to QFs in which QF power under contract is effectively being released into the market at higher prices ? A court order requiring Reliant to continue to sell power to the ISO even if it is not being paid in a full and timely manner ? Another Stage 3 emergency and rolling blackouts Market power There are continued indications that the issue of market power will not be settled simply. This week there was a lengthy and politically influential front page story in the New York Times about FERCs passive approach to policing generators (Critics Say U.S. Energy Agency Is Weak in Oversight of Utilities). The story was by Jeff Gerth and Joseph Kahn. (Jeff Gerth's 1992 story on the Whitewater deal is viewed by journalists to have been the origin of what eventually became a multi-year investigation of Bill Clinton.) The key issues are familiar: ? Does market power exist to a degree that warrants remedies such as price caps, refunds, and so on? ? If so, what is the basis for asserting that market power exists and what is the remedy? (See the discussion in the New York Times article on the ""good hours"" vs. ""bad hours"" approach and the associated political decision not to deal with ""good hours""). ? Can market power be used as leverage to eventually settle generator bills in California at something less than 100 cents on the dollar. (The California ISO filed a complaint claiming $6 billion in overcharges this week.) The QF irony Through the 1990s, QF contracts were projected to be the source of stranded costs because they were priced ""way above market."" In recent months, in California, they look like a bargain (although some are not such great bargains because a portion of their price is tied to gas). You would think that the utilities would request QFs to maximize their output. But credit problems have created an ironical situation. The facts: ? PG&E and Edison have not been paying the QFs fully and promptly for some time. ? The QFs form a creditors committee and threaten to push PG&E and Edison into bankruptcy. (Some gas-fired QFs had to shut down because they did not have money to pay for the gas.) ? Last week's court decision allows MidAmerican/CalEnergy to essentially sell its power to others even though the QF contract ""dedicates"" the output to the purchasing utility. ? CalEnergy does so immediately, selling to El Paso. The Reliant Order A court ordered Reliant to continue to sell to the ISO, when requested, regardless of whether Reliant had been paid fully and promptly for past deliveries to the ISO. Reliant announced it will appeal the order. This is somewhat of a contrast to the QF situation except that the circumstances governing the 2 situations are probably different. The QF contracts pre-date the ISO and are with the utilities and most likely make no reference to providing power during emergencies. In fact, many QF contracts have the opposite provision: authority for the utility to cut takes during so-called ""light load"" periods. Stage 3 emergency and rolling blackouts--again There was another Stage 3 emergency in California ? with rolling blackouts this week. This prompted everyone to wonder why this was happening in March. Among the factors: ? Increased demand from summer-like temperatures ? Cutbacks in imports ? Loss of 1400 MW due to a transformer fire at an Edison plant ? Loss of about 3100 MW from QF plants that were forced to shutdown because they could not afford gas bills (VV) MARKET COMMENTARY (For easier printing of all the articles in this section use the file at the end of the section) Critics Say U.S. Energy Agency Is Weak in Oversight of Utilities By JEFF GERTH and JOSEPH KAHN 03/23/2001 The New York Times Page 1, Column 1 c. 2001 New York Times Company WASHINGTON, March 22 -- The pressure was intense when federal regulators met privately last month to debate remedies for soaring electricity prices in California. Officials of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the agency whose mandate is to ensure ''just and reasonable'' electricity rates nationwide, had evidence that a few companies had been selling electricity to California at prices far above the cost of generating it. The agency faced an imminent deadline to challenge those prices or let the companies possibly pocket hundreds of millions of dollars in unfair profits. An internal memorandum laid out two choices. The agency could audit and punish ''bad actors,'' the companies that were exploiting the market. Or it could identify ''bad hours,'' when electricity shortages were most acute and spiking prices were arguably nobody's fault, and order refunds for only the most exorbitant prices. ''It may be easier to identify bad hours than bad actors,'' the memorandum said. The commission took the easier way. It decided not to investigate reports of abuses by companies, but issued an order that could require them to refund to the state utilities up to $124 million collected during a relatively few ''bad hours'' in January and February. That is hundreds of millions of dollars less than California might have claimed, since the most potential overcharging occurred during ''good hours,'' when power was more plentiful but prices were often just as extreme. The order ignored those hours. Today, in a criticism of the agency's lack of aggressiveness, California regulators estimated that generators had charged $6.2 billion above competitive levels over 10 months. They urged the agency to dig deeper, hoping it would demand more refunds or other stiff remedies. But the agency's track record -- one of complacency in the eyes of state officials -- leaves California regulators skeptical that Washington will confront the big power producers. The small, obscure agency, tucked behind the rail yard of Union Station here, has largely soft-pedaled its role as the electricity industry's top cop, even though it has wide authority to keep power companies in line. To keep rates reasonable, it can impose price caps, strip companies of the right to charge market rates, force them to return excessive profits and even suspend deregulation altogether. Instead, the agency has largely left it to private companies to pry open the $250 billion electricity industry, which has historically been controlled by monopoly utilities and state officials. The agency's defenders, including its chairman, Curt Hebert Jr., a fierce advocate of unfettered markets, say that its largely hands-off approach reflects the delicate balancing of competing interests -- a commitment to protect consumers while not stifling market forces. But politicians, utility executives, energy economists and local regulators say California's rolling blackouts and skyrocketing electricity prices are the signs of a market running amok. They accuse the agency of standing aside as companies manipulate their way to windfall profits. The agency's critics, who include one of its own commissioners and numerous staff members, say that its enforcement mission has been blunted by free-market passions and the influence of industry insiders in its ranks. When the agency began its first national investigation of high electricity prices last year, it named a newly recruited industry insider, Scott Miller, to lead the effort. Mr. Miller and his colleagues said in their report that there was ''insufficient data'' in California to prove any profiteering by generating companies. Yet his own former employer, PG&E Energy Trading, was at the time a subject of a civil antitrust investigation by the Justice Department that focused on electricity market abuses in New England. The agency has given state regulators a lead role in monitoring local power markets. Yet even as these regulators have urged the agency to be more aggressive in investigating suspicions that companies have abused their power in California, New England, the Midwest and the mid-Atlantic, they have frequently been ignored or rebuffed. Critics say that the agency began deregulation before it was ready or willing to make sure the markets worked effectively. They accuse it of showing favoritism to industry -- allowing companies, for example, to ignore requirements to file detailed reports of market transactions that are critical to proving accusations of market abuses. ''We need to wake up to the fact that this is a dysfunctional market that is being gamed and manipulated by those who participate in it,'' said William Massey, a commissioner of the agency who has become one of its leading critics. The agency's inaction, the critics say, leads to ''gaming'' -- jockeying for profits that does not necessarily involve illegality -- and outright market manipulation. Consumers and utilities are the victims, paying billions of dollars more for electricity than if the markets were truly competitive. Agency officials acknowledge that enforcement of market rules to curb gaming and manipulation had not been a high priority in previous years. But they defended their recent California order as proof that they intend to keep markets free of abuse. They add that the agency is also pressuring two generators to refund almost $11 million for possibly manipulating the California market last spring. Agency officials and some outside analysts say that poorly conceived deregulation plans by states, a shortage of power plants, rising natural gas prices, and even the weather have had more impact on electricity prices than abuses by companies or any failings by the agency. They say the agency must balance the competing interests of generators, local regulators and utility companies if it is to keep deregulation on track. ''We're trying to craft a system that gives breathing room to develop a market, but not so much room that undue market power punishes consumers,'' Mr. Hebert said. Fight Over Deregulation Today's debate traces back to the 1930's, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt backed legislation to break up utility monopolies. The Federal Power Act of 1935 gave the Federal Power Commission a mandate to ensure ''just and reasonable'' electricity rates. The Federal Power Commission was abolished in 1977 and replaced by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, an independent agency with 1,200 employees that also oversees oil pipelines and the natural gas market. The president appoints the chairman and four commissioners -- two Democrats and two Republicans with staggered terms of five years. Two Republican seats are currently unfilled. The deregulation of the electricity markets began in the late 1980's, after the agency had begun opening the gas markets. By 1996, the commissioners issued a landmark order that forced utility companies to open their transmission lines to other utilities and electricity wholesalers. The commission and many private economists expected that by prying open protected markets, electricity prices would immediately fall. That possibility set off a deregulation frenzy, most prominently in California, New York, New England and the mid-Atlantic states. Generating companies rushed to expand in the new, borderless market. But the agency's balancing act has grown more difficult as electricity deregulation has spread nationwide. Congress has forced it to trim its staff in recent years. Officials complain that investigating abuses in electricity markets strains their resources. And as the California crisis has worsened, the commissioners have begun sparring publicly among themselves about what to do. This week, Mr. Massey, a Democratic commissioner, and Mr. Hebert (pronounced AY-bear), a Republican, sat side by side before a House panel and argued diametrically opposed positions. Mr. Hebert said high prices in California ''were sending the right signals to get supply there.'' Mr. Massey called the prices that generators were charging ''unlawful'' and said that his agency, by not reining them in, ''is simply not doing its job.'' The agency's leadership has been in flux for months. Congressional and industry officials in Washington say President Bush is considering replacing Mr. Hebert, whom he named to the top post less than two months ago, with Pat Wood, who runs the Texas public utility commission. A White House spokeswoman had no comment on the reports. Though Mr. Hebert's positions are not far from those of the Bush administration, his relations with California leaders may have made his position tenuous. Mr. Hebert, a Mississippian who is a close ally of the Senate majority leader, Trent Lott, has warred with California politicians who have proposed new solutions to the crisis there. Mr. Hebert, who has served as a commissioner since 1997, has often taken the most ideologically free-market position of any commissioner. He flatly rejects the idea of price caps on electricity as hopelessly ineffective and contrary to market forces. When Gov. Gray Davis outlined a plan to have the state buy transmission lines to relieve utility companies' debt, Mr. Hebert's response was dismissive. ''It's not in the interest of the American public,'' he pronounced. Even as new electricity markets opened in the summer of 1999, they started producing nasty shocks. The mid-Atlantic region experienced some early volatility. As the turmoil grew, economists began raising the alarm about a phenomenon called ''market power,'' the ability of energy traders in the new national market to sustain prices above the competitive level. Proving such abuses is difficult, because it requires comparing tens of thousands of separate electricity transactions with the costs of the generators that initiated them. Joseph Bowring, who heads the market monitoring unit of the nonprofit entity that operates the mid-Atlantic transmission system, said that power companies there had exercised some market power. But only the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, not local regulators, had the authority to collect the data to determine how much market power had been exercised and whether it had been abusive or not, he said. Mr. Bowring said he talked to agency officials about doing so. In the end, Mr. Bowring and several agency officials said, the agency chose not to investigate. The decision roiled some agency officials. Ron Rattey, a veteran agency economist, wrote a memorandum last June describing the staff as ''impotent in our ability to monitor, foster, and ensure competitive electric power markets.'' The staff, the memorandum said, did not even enforce a requirement that power companies file detailed quarterly reports listing essentially every sale they make. Such data would have been useful to Mr. Bowring. Local-Federal Clash Local regulators who want to ensure competitive prices often have to act on their own. Monitors in New England have intervened about 600 times since 1999 to correct prices they determined had been caused, at least in part, by market manipulation. The federal agency has sometimes chastised them for interfering too much. The industry, not surprisingly, shares that view. One vocal critic was Mr. Miller. Before the agency recruited him last July to head its division of energy markets, he was director of policy coordination for the national energy-trading unit of PG&E Corporation, the California holding company whose assets also include Pacific Gas and Electric, the California utility. Although the utility has lost billions of dollars during California's crisis, Mr. Miller's former unit has become one of the most profitable new energy traders nationwide. PG&E Energy Trading, by several estimates, is now the second-largest seller of electricity in New England. The company has had a rocky relationship with regulators. They intervened several times in 1999 and 2000 to retroactively cancel auctions they said produced excessive profits for PG&E and other companies. Mr. Miller denounced the practice, though he acknowledged in public testimony that his company sometimes charged ''very high'' prices when it could. ''One person's predatory pricing is another person's competitive advantage,'' Mr. Miller said at a public hearing on deregulation in Texas in 1999. New England regulators too often acted as ''judge, jury and executioner'' when overseeing the market, he said. One year later, Mr. Miller and his new colleagues at the federal agency got a chance to examine New England's problems from the regulators' perspective. Their Nov. 1 report attributed New England's frequent price gyrations to technical and regulatory flaws. As Mr. Miller's team was preparing its report, the Justice Department, whose threshold for stepping into possible industry wrongdoing is far higher than the agency's, began looking into whether price spikes in New England pointed to unlawful monopoly power or collusion, people contacted by the department during that inquiry said. One subject of the civil inquiry is possible price manipulation in one of New England's ancillary services markets, people contacted by the department said. They said the department was examining whether PG&E and two other companies tried to corner that market for several months early last year. PG&E confirmed that the Justice Department had contacted it, but denies wrongdoing and says it has cooperated with the department's requests. Mr. Miller has declined to comment on his role at PG&E or at the agency. His supervisors defended his work and said they had detected no conflict of interest between his work at PG&E and his duties at the agency. Those duties brought Mr. Miller to California last August. With electricity prices there soaring, he and his colleagues sat down with several utility executives at the agency's San Francisco office. One executive, Gary Stern, director of market monitoring for Southern California Edison, wanted the agency to stop what he suspected were market abuses by power generators. He provided a road map to help investigators figure out how power companies traded power contracts -- and whether they had manipulated the markets. But when Mr. Miller and his team approached 11 generators and marketers -- including his old employer -- a few weeks later, they did it their way. They asked eight questions, many of them imprecise, like: ''Describe your strategy for bidding generation resources into market.'' This question, Mr. Stern said in a recent interview, ''was equivalent to asking a suspected burglar how he spent his day.'' Some agency officials also thought the team should probe deeper. Mr. Rattey recommended that Mr. Miller seek the quarterly pricing reports that marketers were supposed to file. But his suggestion was not adopted, agency records show. Daniel Larcamp, Mr. Miller's supervisor, said ''there might have been more information that could have been obtained'' in the California inquiry. But he said the commission gave the staff only three months to finish, making it impossible to collect and analyze the reams of data involved. For Mr. Miller, agency documents show, the investigation was so time-consuming that he had no time to fill out the financial disclosure form required of new federal employees. Mr. Miller submitted his form in late January, after a reporter requested it. Agency lawyers approved the form, but only after he provided additional information about his job and compensation from PG&E. The lawyers said Mr. Miller's participation had been permissible because PG&E was not the subject of the investigation. When the staff report was issued on Nov. 1, it found high prices and problems in the design of the California market. But while the companies ''had the potential to exercise market power,'' the commission said, there was ''insufficient data'' to prove that they did. Some marketers saw the report as an exoneration. ''This has been looked at several times, most notably by the FERC and nobody has found any evidence of market manipulation and profiteering,'' Rob Doty, the chief financial officer of Dynegy Inc., told a reporter earlier this year. California Inquiry The agency has recently shown signs of wanting to apply pressure on generators. But its early efforts show how it is treading on new and uncertain turf. When the California crisis grew severe last December, the commission issued a refund order, a shot across the bow for generators charging high prices. It required them to submit detailed data any time they sold electricity in California for more than $150 per megawatt hour, considered at the time a fair estimate of the highest costs any of them faced. It also told generators that for the next several months, they could be forced to give refunds if the agency found that they had charged excessive prices. The commission also said that it would examine bidding practices and strategies for withholding generating capacity to ferret out any efforts to artificially raise prices. When the agency's own 60-day deadline for examining market data in January approached, however, it became clear that staff members had not made any detailed examination. Instead, staff members said, the agency scrambled to forge a last-minute compromise that would allow it to issue a statement opposing high prices in the state without a time-consuming investigation. During this scramble, a senior staff member, Kevin Kelly, suggested focusing on bad hours instead of bad actors. ''Our attempts to find illegal behavior or legal 'misbehavior' by sellers ('bad actors') always seems to fail,'' his memorandum said. It said that the agency could more easily blame high prices on acute shortages during the most critical hours. The suggestion won the day. The commission decided to limit its order to the hours when California declared a Stage 3 emergency, when supplies are critically low. Mr. Stern of Southern California Edison and several private-sector economists have attacked the economic logic of that order. They said that the commission has focused on times when prices might be legitimately high. The bigger worry: Generators can and often do sustain artificially high prices when supplies are not as tight, they say. Mr. Massey, the Democratic commissioner, dissented from the decision for those reasons. Because most high-priced transactions in January and February did not occur during bad hours, he argued, the commission effectively chose to bless as ''just and reasonable'' the hefty profits generators are making from the California crisis. ''The problem with my agency is that we're so carried away with the rhetoric of markets that we've gotten sloppy,'' Mr. Massey said. ''We're talking about electricity. It's the juice of the economy, so it's got to be available and reasonably priced.'' Williams defends pricing of electricity 03/23/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. TULSA, Okla. (AP) - Williams Cos. Inc. says it can justify the rates it charged for wholesale power, despite accusations from federal regulators that it sold over-priced electricity to California. Federal regulators claim Williams Energy Marketing and Trading Co., a unit of Tulsa-based Williams, owes California more than $40 million in refunds for power it sold to the state's Independent System Operator. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission says that Williams is one of several power providers responsible for $124 million in overcharges from transactions in January and February. The Independent System Operator, which manages the state's power grid, claims the state was overcharged $6.2 billion by 21 wholesale power providers, including Williams, between May and February. Williams says the rates it charged California were fair and were based on production costs and market conditions. ""Williams is confident that it performed within the guidelines established by the ISO,"" said Williams spokeswoman Paula Hall Collins. ""We felt like we had worked within the regulations set up by ISO."" According to the commission, power prices levied by Williams in January and February exceeded federal price ceilings based on the cost of natural gas and other market conditions. However, the price ceilings were established after the ISO accepted Williams' power prices, Collins said. The commission will review Williams' explanation and either accept the justification or order the company to pay refunds. Allegheny Energy makes big California connection 03/23/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. HAGERSTOWN, Md. (AP) - Allegheny Energy Inc. said Thursday it has agreed to sell $4.5 billion worth of power to California's electricity-purchasing agency over the next 10 years. The company said the contract call for Allegheny to provide up to 1,000 megawatts that the Hagerstown-based company has secured from western generating plants through its new energy trading division, Allegheny Energy Global Markets - formerly Merrill Lynch Global Energy Markets. ""This is a win-win for both the state of California and Allegheny Energy. It provides a long-term source of fixed-price energy and should help to stabilize prices in California,"" said Michael P. Morrell, president of the Allegheny Energy Supply division. Allegheny Energy is the parent of Allegheny Power, which delivers electric energy and natural gas to parts of Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia. Williams plans expansion of pipeline to help power Calif. 03/23/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. SALT LAKE CITY (AP) - The Williams Cos. plans to expands its Kern River pipeline, which runs through Utah, to provide more natural gas for generating plants in California. Williams' gas pipeline unit in Salt Lake City said Thursday that it plans to construct nearly 700 miles of additional pipeline that will run parallel to its existing Kern River line. Construction on the $1 billion project is expected to begin next year and is scheduled for completion in May 2003, said Kirk Morgan, director of business development for Kern River pipeline. ""Shippers are seeking more access to natural gas from the Rocky Mountain basin, where producers are aggressively stepping up production,"" Morgan said. The new pipeline is expected to deliver about 900 million cubic feet of natural gas per day to markets in Utah, Nevada and California. Most of the gas will be used for generating plants planned in California. If all of the pipeline's capacity were used to generate electricity, it could produce about 5,400 megawatts. ""That is enough to light around 4.5 million homes,"" Morgan said. The original Kern River line was completed in 1992. It enters Utah from Wyoming then crosses into the Salt Lake Valley near Bountiful. It turns south near the Salt Lake City International Airport then runs the length of the state before passing into southern Nevada and winding up near Bakersfield, Calif. It currently transports 700 million cubic feet of natural gas per day. Williams, based in Tulsa, Okla., recently filed an emergency application with federal regulators to install additional pumping stations on the line to increase its capacity by 135 million cubic feet per day. That $81 million pumping station project should be completed by July 1. During the 2002 construction period, the Kern River project will employ between 1,500 and 1,800 people. The company estimates annual property taxes it pays to Utah counties will increase from $3.5 million to about $7 million. Questar will be one of the customers on the new pipeline, Morgan said. The utility wants to supply additional gas to southern Utah cities, including St. George and Cedar City. ""Our own pipelines serving southern Utah are at full capacity so this is an opportunity to transport additional gas into those areas from company-owned supplies in Wyoming,"" said Questar Gas spokeswoman Audra Sorensen. Calif Energy Commission OKs 3 Pwr Plants Worth 2,076 MW 03/23/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) (This article was originally published Thursday) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- The California Energy Commission Wednesday approved three power plants worth 2,076 megawatts, two of which are scheduled to come on line by the end of 2002, a CEC spokesman said Thursday. The plants approved include BP Amoco PLC (BP) unit ARCO Western Energy's 500 megawatt Western Midway Sunset Project, slated to come on line in October 2002; Caithness Energy's 520 MW Blythe Power Plant, to come on line by Dec. 31, 2002; and Thermo Ecotek's 1,056 MW Mountainview Power Plant, scheduled to come on line in April 2003. All three of the new plants will be natural gas-fired combined-cycle plants. The $550 million Mountainview plant will be located in Southern California, near San Bernadino. The $300 million Western Midway-Sunset plant will be located in central Kern County, while the $250 million Blythe plant will be located in the city of Blythe in Riverside County. The latest approvals bring to 13 the total number of plants approved since April 1999 by the CEC, a spokesman said. Those plants will supply 8,405 MW to the state, which has seen rolling blackouts and spiking wholesale power prices in the last six months, in part due to lack of supply. -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872; jessica.berthold@dowjones.com Some CalEnergy Power Could Be Sold Outside Calif - CEO 03/23/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) (This article was originally published Thursday) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Some of CalEnergy Operating Corp's power could end up being sold outside of California, though that is not the company's intent, CalEnergy Chairman and CEO David Sokol said in a conference call Thursday. CalEnergy, an affiliate of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co, which is majority owned by Warren Buffett's Berkshire-Hathaway (BRKA), was given legal authority Thursday to suspend 270 megawatts of power delivery to Edison International (EIX) utility Southern California Edison and sell on the open market, because SoCal Edison has not paid its bills since November. CalEnergy stopped supplying power to SoCal Ed immediately following the court ruling. ""We stopped supplying power at 1 PM (PST) and have been selling to parties that will pay since then....We are selling it to marketers; our current marketing agent is El Paso Corp (EPG) and they will sell it for us,"" Sokol said. Sokol added that while it was his company's intention to have its power sold to California, that could not be guaranteed. ""We leave the energy selling to El Paso....We've directed them that we would like the power to stay in California but we can't stop them,"" from selling out of state, Sokol said. Wholesale prices on the open market are about $400-$500 a megawatt-hour, three times more than what the company had received under its contract with SoCal Ed. The court's ruling did not address the $45 million SoCal Ed still owes CalEnergy for November and December power, and Sokol said that his company's separate lawsuit on that matter sought to attach the utility's assets as payment for that debt. Sokol said the court's ruling had ""significant implications"" for the entire community of small, independent generators, known as qualifying facilities or QFs, who have not received payment from SoCal Ed. ""Edison's own lawyer said it best....that every QF in the state will begin to mitigate if the judge allowed us (to sell on the open market),"" Sokol said. Sokol said his company was prepared to push SoCal Ed into involuntary bankruptcy Friday if CalEnergy hadn't won the case, but said he couldn't speculate whether other QFs may be more or less inclined to do so as a result of the court outcome. A group of renewable power suppliers, owed more than $100 million from SoCal Ed, said late Wednesday they want state lawmakers to release them for their supply contracts with PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric and SoCal Ed until the utilities are restored to financial stability. The utilities claim close to $13 billion in undercollections due to an inability to pass high wholesale power costs to customers under a rate freeze. In a statement, SoCal Ed said it opposed CalEnergy's bid to suspend its QF contract because the utility believed Gov. Gray Davis and state regulators are close to resolving ""very legitimate financial concerns of CalEnergy and other QF suppliers."" SoCal Ed said it was concerned that CalEnergy's request to sell to third parties would lead to a major supply shortage in California. The utility said it has informed the QFs that it is working to resolve the issue without giving unfair advantage to one class of creditors. While many of the state's large power suppliers have been paid by on a forward basis for the power they sell into California, the QFs, which make up one-third of the state's total power supply, haven't been paid by SoCal Ed since November. PG&E has made partial payments to its QFs. -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872, jessica.berthold@dowjones.com (Jason Leopold contributed to this article.) California and the West Judge Frees Small Firm From Edison Contract KEN ELLINGWOOD; DAN MORAIN TIMES STAFF WRITERS 03/23/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-3 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company El CENTRO -- California's balance of electrical power shifted slightly Thursday when an Imperial County judge temporarily freed a small geothermal energy producer from its contract with Southern California Edison, allowing it to sell power on the open market. The ruling by Superior Court Judge Donal B. Donnelly could lead to a mass exodus by hundreds of small energy producers that have been selling power to the state's financially troubled utilities for months without getting paid. At the same time, it may have staved off plans by a group of the small generators to send Edison into involuntary bankruptcy as early as today. In Sacramento, energy legislation pushed by Gov. Gray Davis passed in the state Senate but foundered in the Assembly. The measure was intended to ensure that the state gets repaid for the electricity that it has been buying on behalf of Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric, which say they lack the cash and credit to purchase power. The bill also was supposed to guarantee that the small, alternative energy producers--which together provide nearly a third of the state's power--get paid. But Assembly Republicans opposed it, saying it hadn't been given sufficient scrutiny. The impact of the small producers was made clear in Imperial County, where Edison's failure to pay CalEnergy, the county's biggest property taxpayer, had outsize implications. CalEnergy had put county officials on notice that it was about to miss a $3.8-million property tax payment. The uncertainty had prompted the tiny Calipatria Unified School District to postpone a bond issue for badly needed school repairs. Among CalEnergy Chairman David Sokol's first acts after the judge's ruling Thursday was to promise Imperial County Supervisor Wally J. Leimgruber that the company would pay its property taxes on time. ""That is great news,"" Leimgruber said. Within hours of its court victory, CalEnergy had stopped transmitting geothermal power to Edison and begun selling it to El Paso Energy, a marketing company that purchased the energy at prevailing rates and resold it on the spot market. Some of the more than 700 other small energy producers in the state said they were considering similar action against Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric. ""We absolutely need the right to sell to third parties,"" said Dean Vanech, president of Delta Power, a New Jersey company that owns five small gas-fired plants in California and is owed tens of millions of dollars by Edison. Sokol praised the Imperial County judge and said his company simply wanted the authority to sell its power ""to a credit-worthy company that, in fact, pays for the power."" An Edison spokesman said the company was disappointed with the ruling, but sympathized with CalEnergy and other small producers because ""California's power crisis has placed [them] in financial distress, just as it has placed utilities in financial distress."" Edison expressed concern that the ruling would prompt CalEnergy and other small producers to sell their power out of state. Sokol said CalEnergy had specifically told El Paso Energy that it hoped its power would remain in California, ""but if someone wants to pay a higher price out of state, we can't stop them."" Sokol said that Edison still owes CalEnergy $140 million and that the company--along with seven other small producers--had been prepared to file a petition in federal bankruptcy court in Los Angeles today forcing the utility into involuntary bankruptcy. He said his company no longer intends to do so, and he believed--but wasn't certain--that the other companies would shelve their plans. Edison filed papers Thursday with the federal Securities and Exchange Commission showing that it owed $840 million to various small electricity producers, many of which rely on renewable energy sources such as geothermal steam, solar energy or wind. The alternative energy producers--and utilities--strenuously objected to the legislation considered in Sacramento on Thursday. The bill, spelling out how the utilities are to pay the state and the small producers, passed the Senate on a 27-9 vote, the exact two-thirds margin required. But it stalled in the Assembly on a 46-23 party-line vote, well short of two-thirds. ""When I was a citizen back in Lancaster, I heard these stories about pieces of legislation that were cooked up late at night, that . . . were cut and pasted together and were rammed through by the Legislature,"" Assemblyman George Runner (R-Lancaster) said. ""That's exactly what we have before us."" The alternative electricity generators, including oil companies, warned that they would lose money under the Davis proposal, while representatives of Edison and PG&E, which have amassed billions in debt in the worsening energy crisis, said the legislation would push them deeper into the hole. ""There isn't enough money,"" Edison attorney Ann Cohn testified at a Senate hearing on the bill Thursday. ""It is a very simple question: Dollars going out cannot be greater than dollars coming in."" The bill, AB 8X, combined several proposals. First, it sought to clarify earlier legislation by spelling out that Edison and PG&E must pay the state all money collected from consumers for electricity that the state has been buying. Additionally, the bill would turn over to the California Public Utilities Commission the thorny issue of how much to pay alternative energy producers for their electricity. Wind, solar and geothermal producers might agree to the prices offered by the administration. But most of the alternative energy producers, including Chevron and British Petroleum, use natural gas to generate electricity through ""cogeneration,"" a process of creating steam for both electric generation and heat. With natural gas prices high, they contend, they would lose money at the prices Davis is offering. * Ellingwood reported from El Centro, Morain from Sacramento. Times staff writers Mitchell Landsberg in Los Angeles and Jenifer Warren, Nancy Vogel and Carl Ingram in Sacramento contributed to this story. (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) Power Points Background The state Legislature approved electricity deregulation with a unanimous vote in 1996. The move was expected to lower power bills in California by opening up the energy market to competition. Relatively few companies, however, entered that market to sell electricity, giving each that did considerable influence over the price. Meanwhile, demand has increased in recent years while no major power plants have been built. These factors combined last year to push up the wholesale cost of electricity. But the state's biggest utilities--Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison--are barred from increasing consumer rates. So the utilities have accumulated billions of dollars in debt and, despite help from the state, have struggled to buy enough electricity. * Daily Developments * Overcharges by major electricity suppliers were estimated at $6.3 billion, up from the $5.5 billion first thought, California's power grid operator said. * Electricity producers denied that they have profiteered and argued that Cal-ISO's figures don't take into account all their costs. * A Superior Court judge's ruling Thursday freeing a small producer from its contract with Edison could lead to a mass exodus by small energy producers that have been selling to the utilities without getting paid. * Verbatim ""If these guys have such high costs ... how come they're making so much money?"" --Gary Stern, Edison's director of market monitoring and analysis, referring to power producers Complete package and updates at www.latimes.com/power Grid Operator Says California Paid Too Much for Power By Rebecca Smith and John R. Emshwiller Staff Reporters of The Wall Street Journal 03/23/2001 The Wall Street Journal A2 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) California's electric-grid operator said power suppliers may have overcharged the state and its utilities by $6.2 billion, or a total of 30%, in a 10-month period, and has asked federal regulators to step up their policing of electricity markets. Meanwhile, a California state judge handed down a decision involving small power producers that could result in more electricity being made available in the energy-starved state, but likely at greater cost to the state government. The $6.2 billion figure was contained in a market analysis by the California Independent System Operator filed yesterday with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The ISO says it isn't seeking a refund -- for the May through February period -- because its analysis lacked important market data. For example, it estimated costs for 21 suppliers based on published prices for natural gas, not on specific data showing what each generator actually paid for the fuel. ""We don't know how much gas actually was purchased at spot-market prices,"" said Anjali Sheffrin, the ISO's head of market analysis. Charles Robinson, general counsel for the ISO, said FERC needs to become ""more aggressive about market-power mitigation."" The ISO's filing, he said, was intended to push the agency in that direction, since FERC is responsible for policing deregulated electricity and natural-gas markets. He said that if the FERC doesn't act, the state of California may find ways to discipline the market, such as through the state attorney general's office. The attorney general has been investigating the state's electricity market for many months but hasn't brought any court action. Dynegy Inc., a big owner of power plants in California, said it will provide additional information to FERC supporting its position that the prices it has charged for power have been ""just and reasonable."" The Houston company was one of 13 energy suppliers that the FERC this month ordered to pay refunds totaling $124 million or ""show cause"" why it should be excused. Dynegy said the FERC analysis was flawed, because it used ""inaccurate"" prices for natural gas and pollution credits. While big power producers such as Dynegy came under attack, small power producers won a potentially significant victory in a state court in Southern California's Imperial County. A judge granted 10 geothermal plants operated by the CalEnergy Co. unit of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co., a unit of Berkshire Hathaway Inc., of Omaha, Neb., permission to suspend deliveries of electricity to Southern California Edison Co. and instead seek other buyers. These plants, known as ""qualifying facilities,"" are under long-term contract to Edison and other utilities but haven't been paid for months. Edison, a unit of Edison International, of Rosemead, Calif., says it has been unable to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in power bills to CalEnergy and others because it has been driven to the brink of insolvency by the state's failed utility-deregulation plan. While the CalEnergy case involves only about 320 megawatts of power, the repercussions could be far greater. Collectively, hundreds of qualifying facilities, or QFs, produce as much as 30% of California's electricity needs. QFs totaling 3,000 megawatts cut their production in recent weeks for lack of payment. This loss of output was a significant cause of the blackouts that hit California this week. Observers believe the CalEnergy court decision could give other QFs an opportunity to sell power in the open market, presumably to the state government that now is California's biggest energy buyer. An hour after the court decision yesterday, some 400 megawatts of power came back into the market, the ISO said. However, additional QF power sales on the open market could substantially increase the state's tab. Already, the state has allocated more than $4 billion for electricity purchases. Separately, Edison said in a Securities and Exchange Commission filing that its unpaid power bills could contribute to a write-off of as much as $2.7 billion for 2000. Because of uncertainty caused by the energy crisis, the company hasn't yet reported year-end earnings. Power regulators debate who should be exempted from blackouts By KAREN GAUDETTE Associated Press Writer 03/22/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - State power regulators said Thursday they are working to exempt all California hospitals, regardless of size, from rolling blackouts. The Public Utilities Commission met with representatives from hospitals and investor-owned utilities after Los Angeles lawyer David Huard filed an emergency motion with the PUC on behalf of more than 500 hospitals throughout the state. Under PUC rules, hospitals with more than 100 beds are exempt from losing electricity during power emergencies. But during rolling blackouts Monday, at least a dozen hospitals from Long Beach to Clearlake were forced to use their backup generators. Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison Co. say they blacked out those hospitals specifically because they have backup generators. Both utilities said the temporary blackouts were part of their overall efforts to spread the burden of blackouts over more of their customers. Linda Ziegler, director of business and regulatory planning for SoCal Edison, said the utility is following state law and will implement new guidelines if the PUC changes them. But hospitals say there is a 10-second lapse before emergency generators kick in, which could harm patients in the midst of delicate surgical procedures such as organ transplants or brain surgery. ""You wouldn't fly a plane with only your emergency backup systems in place,"" said Ann Mosher, a spokeswoman for California Pacific Medical Center in San Francisco. ""Backup generators are just that, they're not designed to keep the hospital up and running at full capacity."" Ziegler said that power still goes out for reasons beyond the energy crisis, from incidents like lightning or a knocked-down power pole. ""If it's a serious problem for the hospital it's certainly something they should be address just from an ongoing basis,"" she said. The exemption would cover all hospitals within the territory of the state's investor owned utilities PG&E, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas and Electric. Hospitals within the range of municipally owned utilities, such as the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, are separately regulated. For more than two decades, prisons, hospitals with more than 100 beds and emergency services such as fire and police departments have been classified as ""essential"" services, and are exempted from blackouts by order of state power regulators. After rolling blackouts began darkening the state in January, many other public service groups began seeking relief from power interruptions, including transit systems, schools and water districts. --- On the Net: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov Federal Judge Orders Reliant To Keep Selling Pwr To Calif 03/22/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP)--A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction Wednesday ordering a major electricity wholesaler to continue selling to California despite its fear that it will not get paid. U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said Californians were at risk of irreparable harm if Reliant Energy (REI) stopped selling power to the Independent System Operator, which oversees the state's power grid. The ISO buys last-minute power on behalf of utilities to fill gaps in supply. Damrell dismissed Reliant's attempt to force the state Department of Water Resources to back the ISO's purchases for the state's two biggest utilities. The state has been spending about $50 million a day on power for Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison, both denied credit by suppliers after amassing billions of dollars in debts. The judge said he had no authority to force the DWR to pay for that power. Gov. Gray Davis has said the state isn't responsible for purchasing the costly last-minute power ISO buys for Edison and PG&E, despite a law authorizing state power purchases on the utilities' behalf. ISO attorney Charles Robinson said the ruling gives ISO operators ""a tool to assist them in keeping the lights on in California."" ""Had the decision gone the other way, one could expect other generators to simply ignore emergency orders,"" Robinson said. Damrell's preliminary injunction will remain in effect until the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission rules on the matter. Damrell denied the ISO's request for preliminary injunctions against three other wholesalers - Dynegy Inc. (DYN), AES Corp. (AES) and Williams Cos. (WMB) - which agreed to continue selling to the ISO pending the FERC ruling. Spokesmen for Reliant, Dynegy, AES and Williams were out of the office Wednesday night and didn't immediately return calls from The Associated Press seeking comment on the ruling. The ISO went to court in February after a federal emergency order requiring the power sales expired. The judge then issued a temporary restraining order, requiring the sales, but dropped it after the suppliers agreed to continue sales to California pending his Wednesday ruling. The ISO said it would lose about 3,600 megawatts if the suppliers pulled out, enough power for about 2.7 million households. One megawatt is enough for roughly 750 homes. Grid officials said Reliant's share alone is about 3,000 megawatts. Reliant said the amount at issue actually is less than a fourth of that, because most of its output is already committed under long-term contracts. Reliant, which currently provides about 9% of the state's power, worries it won't get paid due to the financial troubles of PG&E and Edison. PG&E and Edison say that together they have lost about $13 billion since June due to soaring wholesale electricity costs that California's 1996 deregulation law bars them from passing onto customers. Calif Small Pwr Producers To Shut Plants If Rates Capped By Jason Leopold Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES 03/22/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Many of California's independent power producers late Wednesday threatened to take their small power plants offline this week if state lawmakers pass legislation that would cap the rates the generators charge for electricity they sell directly to the state's three investor-owned utilities. At issue is a bill that would repeal a section of the state's Public Utilities Code, which links the 688 so-called qualifying facilities' electricity rates to the monthly border price of natural gas. Lawmakers, however, are poised to pass the legislation. State regulators are then expected to approve a measure that would restructure the fluctuating rates the QFs charge PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric, Edison International (EIX) unit Southern California Edison, and Sempra Energy (SRE) unit San Diego Gas & Electric from $170 a megawatt-hour to $69-$79/MWh, regardless of the price of natural gas. Whereas each of the 688 QF contracts differed, largely because natural gas prices are higher in Southern California than Northern California, the state wants the QFs to sign a general contract with the utilities. The cogeneration facilities, which produce about 5,400 megawatts of electricity in the state, said the rates are too low and they won't sign new supply contracts with the utilities. ""For $79/MWh, natural gas would have to be $6 per million British thermal unit at the Southern California border,"" said Tom Lu, executive director of Carson-based Watson Cogeneration Company, the state's largest QF, generating 340 MW. ""Our current gas price at the border is $12.50."" Other gas-fired QFs said the state could face another round of rolling blackouts if lawmakers and state regulators pass the legislation, which is expected to be heard on the Senate floor Thursday, and allow it to be implemented by Public Utilities Commission next week. Lu, whose company is half-owned by BP Amoco PLC (BP) and is owed $100 million by SoCal Ed, said the proposals by the PUC and the Legislature ""will only make things worse."" David Fogarty, spokesman for Western States Petroleum Association, whose members supply California with more than 2,000 MW, said the utilities need to pay the QFs more than $1 billion for electricity that was already produced. State Loses 3,000 MW QF Output Due Of Financial Reasons The QFs represent about one-third, or 9,700 MW, of the state's total power supply. Roughly 5,400 MW are produced by natural gas-fired facilities. The rest is generated by wind, solar power and biomass. About 3,000 MW of gas-fired and renewable QF generation is offline in California because the power plant owners haven't been paid hundreds of millions of dollars from cash-strapped utilities SoCal Ed and PG&E for nearly four months. Several small power plant owners owed money by SoCal Ed have threatened to drag the utility into involuntary bankruptcy if the utility continues to default on payments and fails to agree to supply contracts at higher rates. The defaults have left many of the renewable and gas-fired QFs unable to operate their power plants because they can't afford to pay for the natural gas to run their units. Others continue to produce electricity under their contracts with the state's utilities but aren't being paid even on a forward basis. The California Independent System Operator, keeper of the state's electricity grid, said the loss of the QF generation was the primary reason rolling blackouts swept through the state Monday and Tuesday. Gov. Gray Davis, recognizing the potential disaster if additional QFs took their units offline, held marathon meetings with key lawmakers Monday and Tuesday to try and hammer out an agreement that would get the QFs paid on a forward basis and set rates of $79/MWh and $69/MWh for five and 10 year contracts. He also said he would direct the PUC to order the utilities to pay the QFs for power they sell going forward. ""After next week the QF problem will be behind us,"" Davis said Tuesday. ""We want to get the QFs paid...the QFs are dropping like flies...and when that happens the lights go out."" But this just makes the problem worse, said Assemblyman Dean Florez, D-Shafter, a member of the Assembly energy committee. ""I don't know how we are going to keep the lights on,"" Florez said in an interview. ""Many of these congenerators are in my district. They said if the legislation doesn't change they are going offline. This compounds the issue of rolling blackouts, especially now when we need every megawatt."" Davis, who didn't meet with people representing the QFs, said he was handing the QF issue to the PUC because lawmakers failed to pass legislation that would have set a five-year price for natural gas and allow the QFs to sign individual contracts with the utilities. In addition, SOCal Ed opposed the legislation, saying the rates should be below $50/MWh. Some renewable power producers said they aren't vehemently opposed to the new rate structure because it guarantees them a higher rate than what was originally proposed. QFs Want Third Party Supply Contracts John Wood, who represents the SoCal Ed Gas Fired Creditors Committee, one of a handful of groups that have formed since January to explore options on getting paid by the utilities, said his group of gas-fired QF creditors want to be released from their supply contracts and sell to third parties. ""Under our plan, we would be permitted to sell electricity to third parties (including the state Department of Water Resources) until a resolution to the crisis can be accomplished,"" wood said. Hal Dittmer, president of Sacramento-based Wellhead Electric in Sacramento, which is owed $8 million by PG&E, has 85 MW of gas-fired generation units offline. Under the state's plan, Dittmer said he risks going out of business. ""I can't buy natural gas for what I would be paid under this decision,"" he said. ""The state needs to quit kidding themselves that they don't need to raise electricity rates. All of this is being driven by an artificial construct that California can avoid raising rates."" -By Jason Leopold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3874; jason.leopold@dowjones.com Power Strain Eases but Concerns Mount Energy: Officials say summer prices will be high, and a state report shows that contracts with generators are far short of goals. DAN MORAIN; JENIFER WARREN TIMES STAFF WRITERS 03/22/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-3 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SACRAMENTO -- California's fragile electricity system stabilized Wednesday, but a Davis administration report suggested troubles ahead because the state could be forced to buy most of its power for the coming summer on the costly and volatile spot market. After two days of statewide blackouts, power plants that had been shut down were cranked up. Unseasonable heat tapered off. The operators of the statewide power grid relaxed their state of emergency. But plenty of ominous signs remained. Many small producers remained shut down, skeptical about Gov. Gray Davis' plan for utilities to pay them. State Controller Kathleen Connell issued a sharp warning about the high cost of the state's foray into the power business and announced that she will block an administration request that she transfer $5.6 billion into an account that could be tapped to pay for state purchases of electricity. And a report from the administration summarizing contracts between Davis and independent power generators showed that the state has signed contracts for only 2,247 megawatts of electricity, significantly less than the 6,000 to 7,000 megawatts previously claimed. While there are agreements in principle for the full amount, the report notes that generators can back out of the contracts for a variety of reasons, including the state's failure to sell bonds to finance power purchased by July 1. The Legislature has approved plans to sell $10 billion in bonds, but none have yet been issued. ""We are exposed enormously this summer,"" Senate Energy Committee chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) said after looking at the report. ""We owe the people the truth about how difficult this summer is going to be. We don't have a power fairy."" Perhaps most significant, the report suggests that the contracts fall significantly short of Davis' stated goal of buying no more than 5% of the state's summer needs on the spot electricity market, where prices can be many times those of long-term contracts. After reading the report, Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economist who studies the California electricity market, said the numbers suggested that the state's long-term contracts will cover less than half of what the state will need this summer. ""We're definitely short this summer, next summer and the summer of 2003,"" he said. California was forced to start buying electricity in December--at a cost of $50 million a day--because producers refused to sell to Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric. The two utilities amassed billions of dollars in debt when prices for wholesale power soared on the spot market. Vikram Budhraja, a consultant retained by Davis to negotiate deals with generators, said the report represents a ""work in progress."" He said the state may yet sign new contracts. However, Wolak said the contract figures confirm what he and others have been dreading: that summer is going to be rife with rolling blackouts unless serious steps to cut demand are taken immediately. Wolak and other experts say large industrial customers must be switched to real-time meters and pricing to persuade them to use the bulk of their energy at times of low demand. The head of the Energy Foundation, a San Francisco-based nonprofit that promotes sustainable sources of power, made the same proposal to Davis on Wednesday. ""The government need not ask customers to swelter in the dark this summer,"" foundation President Hal Harvey argued in a letter. He also proposed a crash campaign to boost sales of efficient appliances and lightbulbs. He said the state needs to take over the utilities' contracts with alternative energy providers to ensure they stay in business, and sign new contracts for 1,500 megawatts of new wind power--the cheapest, fastest and cleanest source of new supply. Davis had proposed a formula Tuesday to force private utilities to pay the alternative producers, some of which have not been paid since November. But some of them warned Wednesday that Davis' plan offers them little incentive to turn on their generators. Alternative energy producers supply more than a quarter of the electricity consumed in California. Many producers generate electricity from wind, sun and geothermal sources. But most of them generate power using natural gas--and the cost of natural gas has been soaring. Several natural gas users said Davis' plan, which caps rates, won't cover their fuel costs. Davis assumes that the price of natural gas will fall. But small generators say they don't have sufficient purchasing power or sophistication to gamble on future prices. The Public Utilities Commission is expected to approve Davis' proposal next week. It offers producers two choices: 7.9 cents a kilowatt-hour if they agree to supply power for five years, or 6.9 cents a kilowatt-hour over 10 years. ""The price of natural gas is higher than that,"" said Marty Quinn, executive vice president and chief operating officer of Ridgewood Power LLC, which owns three natural gas-fired co-generation plants. ""If we operate, we'll lose money."" Ridgewood is not operating, having been cut off by gas suppliers. The company sued PG&E last month seeking overdue payments and release from its contracts with the utility. A hearing is scheduled in El Centro today in another lawsuit filed by a small energy producer, an Imperial Valley geothermal producer that sued Edison for refusing to let it break its contract and sell on the open market. CalEnergy says Edison owes it about $140 million for energy sold since November. A company spokesman, Jay Lawrence, said CalEnergy was going ahead with its suit despite Davis' proposal. ""We've had promises before,"" he said. In other developments: * A federal judge in Sacramento on Wednesday ordered Reliant Energy of Houston, a major producer, to continue selling power to California during emergencies, despite the company's argument that it may not be fully reimbursed. The order will remain in effect for 60 days or until the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission decides a related case. * Connell said the state budget surplus has shrunk to $3.2 billion because the state has spent roughly $2.8 billion on electricity. She criticized the administration for withholding basic information about state finances, and said she will begin an audit on Monday of the Department of Water Resources, which is responsible for purchasing power. Davis' aides said Connell took her action because the Democratic governor endorsed one of Connell's foes this week in the race for Los Angeles mayor, former Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa. A Connell aide scoffed at the notion. * Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said she ""never has had a response"" from President Bush after writing him last month for an appointment to discuss the California energy crisis. In a wide-ranging lunch talk with reporters in Washington, she deplored the fact that ""huge, huge profits are being made"" in the California crisis, and said ""an appropriate federal role"" would be to guarantee a reliable source of power until the state can get nine new generators online. * Times staff writers Mitchell Landsberg in Los Angeles and Robert L. Jackson in Washington contributed to this report. (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) Power Points Daily Developments * Wholesale electricity suppliers overcharged by about $5.5 billion between May and last month, and that money should be refunded to taxpayers and utilities, according to a Cal-ISO report. * The state may have to buy most of its power for summer on the costly spot market, which could drive consumers' bills up, a Davis administration report concludes. * State Controller Kathleen Connell said she will block a request by the Davis administration for $5.6 billion for state purchases of electricity. Verbatim ""We owe the people the truth about how difficult this summer is going to be. We don't have a power fairy."" Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey), Senate Energy Committee chairwoman CPUC Must Address Rates In QF Repayment Order - SoCal Ed 03/21/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Any order from the California Public Utilities Commission requiring utilities to pay small, independent generators going forward must determine how that could be done within the existing rate structure, a spokesman for Edison International (EIX) utility Southern California Edison said Wednesday. The utility was responding to a PUC proposed decision that would require utilities to pay small generators, called qualifying facilities, $79 a megawatt hour within 15 days of electricity delivery. The decision will be voted March 27 by the CPUC. ""We're still reviewing (the decision) and should have more to say in a day or two. To the extent that the commission orders us to pay going forward of course we will. But it needs to address how we will pay the QFs,"" a SoCal Edison spokesman said. SoCal Edison and PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric Co. are struggling under nearly $13 billion in uncollected power costs due to an inability to pass high wholesale power costs to customers under a rate freeze. Gov. Gray Davis Tuesday blasted the utilities for not having paid their QF bills in full since December. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. has made some partial payments to QFs, but SoCal Edison has paid nothing. Together, they owe the QFs about $1 billion, but the order doesn't address that debt. An Edison executive said, in reaction to the governor's sharp comments, that the company simply doesn't have the money to pay creditors. ""The root problem here is there just isn't enough money in the current rate base to pay our bills,"" said Edison Senior Vice President of Public Affairs Bob Foster. ""We understand the financial distress (the QFs) face; we are facing financial distress ourselves."" The proposed PUC order would also require the state's investor-owned utilities to offer the small generators five- and 10-year contracts for power for $79/MWh and $69/MWh, respectively. The QFs ""may be able to live with"" the PUC proposal, but the five- and 10-year contract prices may be inadequate if natural gas prices at one of the California borders are high, said Jan Smutny-Jones, president of the Independent Energy Producers Association. Natural gas prices into California are currently higher than anywhere in the country. But some say the proposed decision may not be enough to prevent the QFs from filing involuntary bankruptcy proceedings against the utilities for the money they are still owed. ""There's still a lot of skepticism. To say our position has changed based on the CPUC decision or the governor's announcement is not accurate. A lot still has to happen,"" said Jay Lawrence, a spokesman for a renewable creditors committee. -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872; jessica.berthold@dowjones.com -0- 22/03/01 01-27G State Says It's Accelerating Plan to Buy Power Utilities' Grid Government: Talks with Edison are reported near completion, but agreement with heavily indebted PG&E has a way to go. RONE TEMPEST; DAN MORAIN TIMES STAFF WRITERS 03/21/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-22 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SACRAMENTO -- As blackouts hit California for a second day Tuesday, a key consultant to Gov. Gray Davis said negotiations to buy the power grid owned by the state's largest utilities ""are proceeding at an accelerated pace."" Wall Street consultant Joseph Fichera said talks with Southern California Edison could be wrapped up within days, although those with PG&E are much less advanced. The administration and PG&E have not reached even an agreement in principle, he said. PG&E, which has more debt than Edison, says its transmission lines are more extensive than those of its Southern California counterpart. The state wants to buy the utilities' transmission lines and other assets for about $7 billion to provide cash to the utilities, help stabilize the electricity supply and ease the power crunch that has plagued California for months. To research the grid purchase, Fichera said, the state has had to pore over 80,000 documents just to assess the utilities' liabilities. ""We are working at a good pace,"" said Fichera, chief executive of the New York firm Saber Partners. "" . . . If we get to a deal-breaker, it might be longer."" By making Fichera, who is also a consultant to the Texas Public Utilities Commission, available to reporters Tuesday, the Davis administration was clearly trying to reassure the public that progress is being made on the governor's plan to pull the state out of the crisis. Since mid-January, when the big utilities' credit failed and suppliers stopped selling to them, the state has spent nearly $3 billion buying electricity from a handful of large suppliers in Texas, Oklahoma, Georgia and North Carolina. Not a cent has gone to the hundreds of alternative energy suppliers in California who provide about a quarter of the state's electricity. The Monday and Tuesday blackouts occurred partly because many of the cash-strapped alternative suppliers, including solar, biomass and wind power units, cut their normal supply to the system in half. They say Edison and PG&E have not paid them since November; the utilities say they are out of cash. Assemblyman Fred Keeley (D-Boulder Creek) said the plight of the alternative suppliers has dragged on because of the complexity of dealing with ""almost 700 individual contractors."" Another delaying factor, said Keeley, who with state Sen. Jim Battin (R-La Quinta) worked for almost three months to come up with a legislative plan to lower the small producers' prices, was ""the huge enmity . . . manifested between the utilities and the qualifying facilities. These people just don't like each other."" This week's blackouts provided two painful lessons for the Davis administration: * When it comes to electricity, size doesn't matter--every kilowatt counts. During peak use, a small wind power facility in Riverside County can make the difference between full power and blackouts. * There is no such thing as a partial solution. Unless the whole energy equation is balanced, the parts don't work. For the Davis plan to work, several key elements need to come together or utility customers will almost certainly face rate increases above the 19% already set in motion * The cost of power purchased by the state must be reduced through long-term contracts with the big out-of-state producers. These contracts, the details of which the Davis administration has kept confidential, are still being negotiated by Davis consultant Vikram Budhraja of the Pasadena firm Electric Power Group. The administration says it has concluded 40 contracts with generators, about half of which have been signed. According to the most recent statistics released by the Department of Water Resources, which buys power for the state, current prices are still well above the rate state Treasurer Phil Angelides says is necessary for a planned $10-billion bond offering to succeed. The bonds, set for sale in May, will be used to reimburse the state for the money it will have spent by that time to buy electricity. The state is currently spending at a rate of $58 million a day to buy power. If prices stay high, the $10 billion in bonds will not cover the state's power purchases by the end of the summer. Angelides says he cannot proceed with bridge financing for the bonds until the Public Utilities Commission devises a formula to guarantee that a portion of utility bills will be dedicated to bond repayment. Angelides has estimated that, under the January law that put the state in the power buying business, the state must be reimbursed $2.5 billion annually, and that $1.3 billion is needed to service the debt. PUC Administrative Law Judge Joseph R. DeUlloa is expected to announce his ruling on the reimbursement rate later this week, leading to a PUC vote on the matter as early as next week. * The rates charged for electricity by the alternative producers, known as qualifying facilities, must be cut at least in half, down from an average of more than 17 cents per kilowatt-hour. In his news conference Tuesday, Davis said he will ask the PUC to set QF rates at 6.9 cents for 10-year contracts and 7.5 cents for five-year contracts. Meanwhile, PUC Chairman Loretta Lynch, a Davis appointee, said Tuesday that the commission will vote next week on a proposed order requiring Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric to pay the QFs for electricity in the future. Lynch said a recent PUC assessment showed that the utilities have enough cash on hand for that. ""We are trying to make sure the folks providing the power get paid,"" Lynch said. ""The qualified facilities have demonstrated that they haven't been paid and that it is impairing their ability to provide power."" The utilities contend that if they pay the small providers what they owe them, there will not be enough money left to pay other creditors. ""There is not enough money in the current rate structure to pay the [alternative producers], pay the [Department of Water Resources] and pay the utilities for their generation,"" said John Nelson, a spokesman for PG&E. * The utilities must sell to the state the power they produce themselves, mainly from hydro and nuclear sources, at a rate only slightly above the cost of producing it. This is tied to the ongoing negotiations between the Davis administration and the utilities to restore the near-bankrupt utilities to solvency. * Times staff writers Julie Tamaki, Miguel Bustillo and Tim Reiterman contributed to this report. Davis OKs Subsidy of Pollution Fees Smog: As part of secret deal to get long-term energy contracts, state would pay for some of the credits that allow excess power plant emissions. Critics renew call for full disclosure. DAN MORAIN TIMES STAFF WRITER 03/21/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-23 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SACRAMENTO -- As part of his closed-door negotiations to buy electricity, Gov. Gray Davis has agreed to relieve some generators from having to pay potentially millions of dollars in fees for emitting pollutants into the air, Davis said Tuesday. Davis announced two weeks ago that his negotiators had reached deals with 20 generators to supply $43 billion worth of power during the next 10 years. However, the Democratic governor has refused to release any of the contracts or detail various terms, contending that release of such information would hamper the state's ability to negotiate deals with other generators and therefore ultimately would raise prices Californians pay for electricity. Sources familiar with the negotiations, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the agreement reached with Dynegy Inc., a power company based in Houston, is one that includes language requiring that the state pay the cost of credits that allow emissions. Dynegy spokesman Steve Stengel declined to discuss the company's deal with the state. ""We couldn't get them to sign contracts; it was a sticking point,"" Davis said of the decision to pay the fees of some generators. ""We had to lock down some power so we were not totally dependent on the spot market."" The fees in question are part of an emission trading system known as RECLAIM. Under the system, companies are allotted a certain amount of allowable pollution. If their operations pollute more, companies are required to purchase credits on an open market. Currently the credits cost about $45 per pound of pollution--an amount that can lead to a bill of well over $10 million a year for a power plant. The South Coast Air Quality Management District, which regulates pollution in the Los Angeles Basin, is considering steps to significantly lower the cost of the system--a step that could considerably cut the state's potential cost, Davis said. Senate Energy Committee Chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) defended the decision to cover the power company's costs. ""It is a question of whether it brings down the price of power,"" she said. ""If it brings down the price of power, I don't have a problem with it."" Nevertheless, word that the contracts could bind the state to pay pollution fees caused some critics of Davis' policy to renew calls for Davis to reconsider the secrecy surrounding the power negotiations. The payment provision underscores the fact that the contracts involve more than merely the prices the state will pay for its megawatts, the critics note. ""The Legislature should have known about it,"" said Senate President Pro Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco). ""It is going to cost taxpayers money. It makes you wonder. . . . This was a policy issue that was never discussed with the Legislature."" V. John White, a lobbyist for the Sierra Club, who also represents alternative energy producers, called the contract proposal ""a horrible precedent."" ""Until we know exactly what the state has agreed to and how much of a subsidy this represents, we can't determine how serious the breach of principle this is,"" White said. Another critic of the secrecy of the negotiations, Terry Francke, general counsel for the California First Amendment Coalition, said the provision in question ""raises the possibility that there are other [concessions]"" that have not yet come to light. In the summer, when demand for power is highest, some generators probably will exceed pollution limits set by regional air quality management districts. To avert blackouts, state officials might ask the companies to keep plants running. In such cases, some sources familiar with aspects of the contracts said, the contract language could be interpreted to suggest that the state would cover any fines--although Davis said Tuesday the state will not cover the cost of fines. A recent Dynegy filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission underscores the rising cost of pollution-related measures. The company, which is partners with NRG Energy in three California plants in El Segundo, Long Beach and Carlsbad in San Diego County, said its ""aggregate expenditures for compliance with laws related to the regulation of discharge of materials into the environment"" rose to $14.3 million in 2000, from $3.6 million in 1999. A South Coast Air Quality Management spokesman said Dynegy's facilities appear to be fairly clean--although Sierra Club lobbyist White said Dynegy has been seeking a permit at one of its plants to burn fuel oil, which is dirtier than natural gas. Davis said he intends to ""make this information public,"" but he added that ""we do not want to put the public's interest in jeopardy by asking them to pay higher prices."" ""Nobody likes the notion that [the administration is] not being fully forthcoming,"" Davis said. ""But I also have a corollary responsibility that I don't stick these generators with a higher rate."" FERC ORDERS WILLIAMS ENERGY AND AES TO EXPLAIN THEIR REFUSAL TO MAKE CERTAIN RMR UNITS AVAILABLE TO CALIFORNIA ISO LAST YEAR 03/21/2001 Foster Electric Report 5 (c) Copyright 2001, Foster Associates, Inc. Following a preliminary, non-public investigation, FERC directed AES Southland Inc. and Williams Energy Marketing & Trading Co. (IN01-3) on March 14 to show cause why they did not violate section 205 of the Federal Power Act (FPA) by failing to provide power to the California ISO from two reliability must-run (RMR) generator units during a period in April and May 2000. The investigation responded to a matter referred by the Cal-ISO. If a violation is found, Williams Energy and AES could be required to refund excess profits of $10.9 million (as calculated by FERC) and face restrictions on their market-based rate authority for a year. The show cause order involves two generation units (Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2), owned and operated by AES. Williams Energy markets all output from the Alamitos and Huntington Beach plants, including the two units at issue here, pursuant to a tolling agreement filed with the Commission. The Cal-ISO designated the two units as RMR units that it could call on when necessary to provide energy and ancillary service essential to the reliability of the California transmission network. The Cal-ISO makes both a fixed payment to the RMR owner or operator to compensate for the RMR unit's availability and a variable payment for the RMR unit's output (if the unit is not otherwise participating in the market). Williams Energy and the Cal-ISO executed RMR agreements, filed as rate schedules with the Commission, allowing the Cal-ISO to dispatch units ""solely for purposes of meeting local reliability needs or managing intra-zonal congestion."" The ISO may dispatch a non-RMR unit if the designated RMR unit is not available. Under its RMR agreement with the ISO, Williams is paid the greater of its contract price or marginal cost for operating RMR units. However, if a non-RMR unit has to be dispatched because a designated RMR unit is unavailable, Williams will be paid its bid price, not the RMR contract price. During the April to May 2000 period, the Cal-ISO sought to dispatch both Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2 as RMR units to provide voltage support. However, according to the FERC order, Williams Energy refused to make Alamitos 4 available from April 25 through May 5, and to make Huntington Beach 2 available from May 6 through May 11, ""for reasons not directly related to the necessary and timely maintenance of the units."" Consequently, the Cal-ISO was forced to dispatch non-RMR units at a higher cost, namely, Williams Energy's bid price for service provided by the replacement units. By contrast, if the RMR units had not experienced outages and been available from April 25 through May 11, Williams Energy would have received either (1) the market revenues only from the respective units, which would have resulted in no payments for RMR output from the ISO to Williams Energy, or (2) Williams Energy's variable cost for operating the RMR units less the market revenues from the respective units' output. Accordingly, FERC observed, Williams Energy had ""a financial incentive to prolong any outages of Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2 in April and May 2000."" The bid price for the non-RMR units was at or near the Cal-ISO's then-effective bid cap of $750/MWh, FERC continued. Therefore, Williams Energy received payments from the Cal-ISO of more than $11.3 million, or about $10.3 million greater than the estimated average variable operating cost of the non-RMR units (approximately $63/MWh) during the period in question. This indicates a refund amount, including interest, of nearly $10.9 million. The information in this order and a non-public appendix, the Commission declared, suggests that AES declared outages at the two RMR units and maintained Huntington Beach 2 in a manner inconsistent with good utility practice, and that Williams Energy took action to extend the outage at Alamitos 4 and to make Huntington Beach 2 unavailable for ""pretextual reasons."" Based on this information coupled with Williams Energy's financial incentive not to make the Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2 units available, FERC found serious questions about whether (1) AES and Williams Energy violated applicable RMR contracts and tariffs on file with the Commission pursuant to FPA section 205 when they refused to make Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2 available for dispatch by the Cal-ISO; (2) whether Williams acted inconsistently with its market-based rate authority and the market monitoring information protocols of the Cal-ISO's tariff regarding the unavailability of the RMR units during the period at issue; and (3) whether AES violated a tolling agreement on file with the Commission pursuant to section 205. The Commission identified two remedies for these potential violations: a refund by Williams Energy and/or AES of revenues received greater than the amount that would have collected from the ISO if the RMR units had been available, and a condition on Williams Energy's market-based rate authority. Specifically, for a one-year period, if an RMR unit were not available when dispatched by the Cal-ISO, a non-RMR unit dispatched in its place would only receive payment according to the terms of the applicable RMR contract. In other words, Williams Energy would not receive the bid price for operation of the substitute, non- RMR unit. The Commission directed Williams Energy and AES to show cause, within 20 days, why they should not be found to have committed the above-described violations and why the specified remedies should not be imposed. Further, to ensure procurement of all relevant information, the Commission instituted a formal, non-public investigation into the operation, maintenance and sales of power from the Alamitos and Huntington Beach plants in 2000 and 2001. Calif Consumers Failing To Conserve Pwr Despite Blackouts 03/20/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- California consumers haven't been conserving enough electricity to relieve strain on the power grid and reduce demand in the state, a spokesman with the Independent System Operator said Tuesday. The ISO said that despite two straight days of statewide rolling blackouts, consumers aren't using less electricity, which means additional megawatts will be taken off the grid. As a result, blackouts could last longer and impact additional communities, the ISO said. ISO spokesman Pat Dorinson said Monday ""conservation in California is no longer an option,"" but consumers in the state aren't heeding the call to reduce consumption. Conservation efforts during rolling blackouts Monday and Tuesday were far less than Jan. 17 and Jan. 18, when blackouts swept through Northern California due to transmission constraints. Jim Detmers, the ISO's vice president of operation, said consumers saved the state about 1,000 megawatts of electricity, enough power for 1 million houses. The ISO said conservation efforts Monday were about 500 MW or less. ""We would be very happy if we saw the same amount this time,"" Detmers said. The state's Energy Commission said consumers think it's no longer important to save electricity until blackouts are imposed. ""People have been saving generally, but it isn't a big bump from hour to hour,"" a spokesman for the Energy Commission said. Gov. Gray Davis launched a massive conservation campaign this month, promising consumers a rebate on their summer electricity bill if they save at least 20% of electricity, compared with last summer. The governor said he believes conservation this summer will amount to possibly saving 5,000 MW and averting the chance of rolling blackouts. -By Jason Leopold; Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3874; jason.leopold@dowjones.com Gas Co.'s Success Opens Debate Southern California energy supplier has reaped millions of dollars in state incentives for keeping down its costs. Though consumers get a share of the windfall, regulators are asking whether they should get more of the bonus, which is expected to be huge this year, as a form of price relief. The natural gas provider says it deserves to keep its reward. TIM REITERMAN TIMES STAFF WRITER 03/18/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition C-1 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SAN FRANCISCO -- While consumers suffer soaring energy bills and the big electric utilities lurch toward insolvency, the news is not all dire at Southern California Gas Co. Through vigorous deal making, the Sempra Energy subsidiary has consistently beaten the volatile natural gas market during the last year, and the company stands to reap millions of dollars in savings through a state incentive program that rewards utilities for keeping costs down. For several years, the utility has been splitting the savings 50-50 with ratepayers whenever the company's gas costs fall slightly below market levels. Those savings, Gas Co. executives acknowledged, have shot to unprecedented heights during the state's power crisis. Now, in this climate of high consumer gas bills and runaway market prices, regulators are taking another look at the program. The question before the Public Utilities Commission: Should Gas Co. ratepayers, who endured huge bill increases this winter, get a bigger share of the savings? The total windfall under the incentive program has in some years exceeded $20 million. But the amount for the last 12 months is expected to multiply many times over, company executives said, partly because the Gas Co. has done so well in the wild market by selling, lending and trading gas as well as buying it. ""The recent market conditions . . . could possibly result in some unintended consequences that result in shared savings of benefits that may be more appropriately allocated entirely to ratepayers,"" the PUC's consumer protection arm, the Office of Ratepayer Advocates, reported Oct. 30, even before the latest upward market spirals. Gas Co. representatives express frustration, saying they have done what the state has requested under its gas-cost incentive program: Buy smarter, and pass the savings along to its 5 million residential and small-business customers. The company contends it has worked hard to keep bills down and should be rewarded for taking risks to obtain gas at the lowest possible cost. ""The PUC, every time we do well, raises the bar on us,"" said Jim Harrigan, director of gas acquisition. ""I don't necessarily agree with it."" By virtue of its purchasing power and storage and pipeline capacity, the Gas Co. has become a big player in the regional natural gas market. In the company's bustling trading room at its Los Angeles headquarters, 15 employees track price movements, pipeline supplies and even the weather via computer, while cutting deals and arranging gas shipments. Although the Gas Co. buys the commodity for its customers, the company also sells to marketers, other utilities and producers. State officials say the number of transactions by the company has risen steeply to 10,000 to 20,000 a year, including gas sales along California's border, where prices have rocketed. The PUC created the cost incentive program for the state's three major gas utilities--San Diego Gas & Electric Co. in 1993, Southern California Gas the next year and PG&E Corp.'s Pacific Gas & Electric Co. in 1997. Like Southern California Gas, SDG&E is a subsidiary of Sempra Energy. The program was designed to give utilities added motivation for obtaining gas at the best price for customers. It replaced lengthy and contentious reviews by the PUC, which assessed whether utilities had purchased gas at reasonable prices and sometimes ordered them to return millions of dollars to customers. An annual audit of the Gas Co. program and a staff evaluation requested by the PUC recently concluded that the program has achieved many of its goals, but it also proposed adjustments that would give customers a greater share of the rewards. ""These incentives were designed in less volatile times,"" said program supervisor Mark Pocta of the Office of Ratepayer Advocates, which conducted the audit. ""There is a question of how much should go to ratepayers and shareholders."" His office also plans to assess whether the Gas Co.'s trading had any negative effects on the gas market, resulting in diminished supplies or higher prices for other utilities and their customers. Under the program, the Gas Co. shares risks and rewards with its ratepayers, but since the program was launched, it has consistently produced awards. If the cost of gas is 0.5% or more below a benchmark based on monthly gas market indexes, the company and its customers split the savings 50-50. California's gas utilities are not allowed to profit on their raw commodity costs; they merely pass along those costs to ratepayers with no markup. The savings under the incentive program are automatically reflected in consumers' monthly gas bills but are not itemized. At the end of the year, the utilities request their share of the savings, and the PUC has routinely granted approval. Then the companies, and thus their shareholders, are paid through customer utility bills. The resulting bill increases typically have been modest, less than 1%. But as the awards increase, regulators say, the effect on customers will become more significant unless the present structure is changed. ""There's no question, when you start to talk about $100 million [or more in savings], and add [the company's award] into rates in a year, it will make a noticeable difference,"" said Los Angeles economist Jeff Leitzinger, president of Econ One, who has done consulting for the Gas Co. Still, he said, ratepayers should bear in mind that they already benefit from below-market gas and transportation costs. In the early years of the program, records show, the Gas Co.'s awards went from zero to $3.2 million, $10.6 million, $2 million and $7.7 million. Last year's award of $9.8 million is awaiting PUC approval. This year's proposed award, covering the period through the end of this month, has not yet been submitted by the Gas Co. But the utility has provided monthly figures and oral updates on a confidential basis to PUC officials, who declined to provide figures. Harrigan of the Gas Co. said the savings are expected to multiply ""many times over,"" largely because the company was well-equipped for the market fluctuations and tried to insulate its customers from high gas prices. ""Any trading company, especially one with assets like we have, has benefited from volatility in the market,"" he said. Harrigan said, however, that he does not believe the company's level of activity has adversely affected the market and that its trading pales in volume to that of unregulated energy companies. Anne Smith, the Gas Co.'s vice president of customer service and marketing, said the utility will not release figures for this year's incentive program until they are filed with the PUC in June. ""I don't want to interrupt that process,"" Smith said, noting that the PUC ultimately will determine the company's award. ""I think they need to focus on what [the Gas Co.] has done for the ratepayers. It has been immense."" Although the typical monthly gas bill has risen to $80 from $50 a year ago, Gas Co. customers tend to have lower rates than those of other California utilities. The company's gas procurement cost in February was 66 cents per therm, or 100 cubic feet. That's more than twice last year's cost but only about half what sister company SDG&E paid for its 740,000 customers in February. It's also much lower than the $1.09 per therm PG&E pays. ""We were as upset about the overall [gas price] increase as anyone else,"" Harrigan said. ""I would rather see the prices of a year ago, even though we managed to do a little better in the [recent] environment."" When it comes to keeping down costs, regulators say, the Gas Co. has advantages over other utilities in the marketplace. For one, the company has so much pipeline capacity at major gas basins that it purchases a relatively small portion of its needs--about 10% to 15%--at the California border, where prices in December briefly rose to the equivalent of $6 per therm, or 20 times those a year earlier. This presents opportunities. ""At the beginning of the month, they forecast a certain amount of gas they have to buy,"" said Pocta of the Office of Ratepayer Advocates. ""If they go out and buy and do not need to use as much because the weather is more moderate than expected, they can either inject the gas into storage or they can make sales at the border."" With gas price run-ups like those seen in the last year, Pocta said, ""there is a question: Should that benefit be shared, or flow entirely to ratepayers?"" Customers, he pointed out, may be entitled to additional benefits because they pay for the interstate and intrastate pipeline capacity and the gas storage that give the company the flexibility to make advantageous deals. ""By the same token, we want [the Gas Co.] . . . to go into the market and generate cost savings that can be passed on to the customers,"" he added. ""We want them to have incentives. The question is how to balance them."" Under deregulation, the Gas Co. adopted the nontraditional role of marketer, according to a PUC Energy Division report in January. The company makes gas sales at various locations. It engages in exchanges. It makes futures transactions to help stabilize costs. ""They look for ways to lower the gas cost,"" said Richard Myers, program supervisor at the Energy Division. ""Before they were lots more risk-averse. Now they feel they can take risks and make money for shareholders, and it is a benefit for ratepayers at the same time."" The incentive programs are tailored to individual utilities, so it is difficult to compare them. Records show that the shared savings at SDG&E, a much smaller utility, declined steadily from $9.2 million in the 1996-97 cycle to $560,000 in 1999-2000. Spokesman Ed Van Herik said the falloff largely represents a drop in gas purchases, especially as the company sold off its own gas-fired electricity-generating plants. He said the company does not yet know how much savings have accrued in the last year. In an annual report to the PUC in February, PG&E said it had no savings under the incentive program and thus it is not entitled to any award for the 1999-2000 cycle. The Utility Reform Network, a San Francisco-based consumer advocacy group, said it will closely watch the PUC's evaluation of the incentive program at the Gas Co. ""We want to make sure, given the dramatic changes in the gas market and prices, ratepayers are not left out of the [additional] benefits,"" TURN attorney Marcel Hawiger said. ""We'll look to see whether the mechanism should be changed."" Severin Borenstein, director of the Energy Institute at UC Berkeley, said the program should be changed to provide more incentive for utilities to enter long-term contracts that would smooth out volatility in the market. ""Unfortunately, under the system,"" he said, ""the only incentive is to beat the [spot] market."" Use this file to download and print all the articles in this section (See attached file: Dow Jones IMPLICATIONS FOR OTHER MARKETS (For easier printing of all the articles in this section use the file at the end of the section) New York: New York at the crossroads Wednesday, March 21, 2001 Energy Insight (Embedded image moved to file: pic24389.pcx) By Dave Todd dtodd@ftenergy.com U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham declared this week that the Big Apple is on the verge of being bitten hard by power cuts and rising energy prices. Delivering the keynote address at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's national energy summit in Washington Monday, Abraham said, ""California is not the only state facing a mismatch between supply and demand,"" what with ""electricity shortages predicted for New York City and Long Island this summer"" and low capacity margins threatening electricity reliability elsewhere across the country. But how likely is it that New Yorkers will face blackouts of the sort confronting Californians? Not very, says energy trade specialist Edward Krapels, managing director of Boston-based METIS Trading Advisors. Krapels, a consultant helping major Northeastern utilities, such as Consolidated Edison, design market-hedging programs, adamantly decried what he said are facile comparisons between conditions in New York and California, there being ""more differences than there are similarities"" between those two industrial cornerstones of the country's economy in respect to energy security management. ""First of all, New York has a more varied portfolio of energy generation sources than California,"" he said. California has hydro, nuclear and gas, but when it lost a lot of hydro, the state needed gas to pick up the slack, and the ""capacity just wasn't there."" In New York's case, the state has oil and coal still in the mix and its overall dependence on gas is much lower than California's, Krapels added. New York avoids making same mistakes Portfolio diversity is one pillar of any effective plan to help New York avoid the same errors made in redesigning California's marketplace. New York's Independent System Operator (ISO), in a new report warning that the state is at an ""energy crossroads"" in terms of its capacity adequacy in the immediate future, argues that a concerted effort is required to arrest declining in-state generation capacity reserve margins, and a strategy must be put in place, whether or not new generation comes on-line, in accordance with current anticipated scenarios. A measure of New York's essential difficulty is that, between 1995 and 2000, statewide demand for electricity grew 2,700 MW, while generating capacity expanded by only 1,060 MW. With no major new generating plants in downstate New York fully approved, the gap is expected to continue to widen. To avoid ""a replication of California's market meltdown"" the New York ISO calculates the state's daily generating capacity needs to grow by 8,600 MW by 2005, with more than half of that located in New York City and on Long Island. Expressing concern this may be too big a burden for the current bureaucratic process to bear, the ISO wants to see a state-appointed ombudsman named to help would-be merchant power plant investors plow through red tape. ""Increasing New York's generating capacity will also lessen the state's escalating and risky reliance on out-of-state sources of electricity,"" the ISO added. ""Since 1999, New York State has been unable to cover its reserve requirements from in-state sources."" Not everyone agrees with that analysis, insofar as it argues for circling the wagons inward. Some analysts believe the ultimate solution lies not in tying in more inwardly dedicated power, but in expanding the marketplace by breaking down inter-jurisdictional barriers. In any case, New York energy regulatory authorities and those responsible elsewhere in the U.S. Northeast, such as PJM (Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland) Interconnection and the New England Power Pool, are in vastly better shape in terms of ""cross-border"" cooperation than California and its neighbors in that efforts are being made among various authorities toward developing an integrated regional electricity market. In California, by contrast, the state's focus?for example, in the case of new gas-fired power plant development?has been to ensure dedicated supply to the California market alone, rather than on a regional marketplace. (Embedded image moved to file: pic05075.pcx) The New York ISO's new broad-based analysis of market-restructuring needs argues that the relatively stronger health of its reformed environment is ""due in large part to the ability of New York's utilities to enter into long-term power contracts."" What needs to be done most, it says, is to move aggressively to build some of the more than 29,000 MW of ""proposed new generation in the siting pipeline."" In the meantime, the 30,200 MW of electricity New Yorkers used on a peak day last summer shouldn't be eclipsed on too many days this coming summer (given early long-range weather forecasts). Demand, however, is expected to increase at an annual average rate of up to 1.4%. So while New York City, the rest of the state and adjacent parts might breathe easy this year, it could be a brief rest from the fray. Meanwhile, a 4% shortfall is still being planned for this summer that is not yet provided for, as authorities hurriedly seek to arrange new generation plants around Manhattan, on Long Island and even on barges offshore. One way or another, whether it is the weather or the politics of siting new energy facilities, it's going to be a hot time in the city. Long-term solutions hit brick wall Meanwhile, attempts at longer-term solutions continue to run into trouble. Last week, Connecticut state regulators came out against a proposal to run a new underwater cable under Long Island Sound that Hydro-Quebec subsidiary TransEnergie U.S. Ltd. wants to build to pump more juice into Long Island Power Authority's load pocket. Despite strong promises from TransEnergie to be diligent in avoiding damage to oyster beds in Long Island Sound, the proposal failed to convince authorities, who were persuaded the pipeline project could lead to diversion of electricity from Connecticut. In similar fashion, private companies wanting to build 10 small independent power plants and temporary generators offshore New York City are running into intense opposition from environmental groups and citizen orga nizations?some of whom have taken their cases to the state assembly in Albany. The David vs. Goliath nature of such controversies has further alerted energy companies to the difficulties of addressing complex energy supply issues that may ultimately devolve to people not wanting things in their backyard, regardless of what the alternative might mean to their fellow citizens or the greater public good. But suddenly, in New York, California's troubles?while still distant in their intensity? may not be so far away. By some estimates, this summer's bills for Consolidated Edison customers could be up as much as one third or more over last year's charges. Letting the time slip when it comes to building new infrastructure isn't going to make the pain go away. NEW YORK: NY-ISO REPORT SAYS STATE NEEDS 4,000 - 5,000 MW OF NEW GENERATION SOON TO AVOID SEVERE SHORTAGES; NY-ISO ALSO ASKS FERC TO EXTEND BID CAP AND TEMPORARY EMERGENCY PROCEDURES 03/21/2001 Foster Electric Report 2 (c) Copyright 2001, Foster Associates, Inc. Raising the specter of an East Coast version of the California crisis, the New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (NY-ISO) is warning of serious electricity shortages, air quality deterioration and stunted economic growth without immediate approval of between 4,000-5,000 MW of new generating capacity in the state. Of this amount, 2,000-3,000 MW is needed to serve New York City. Another 8,600 MW of new capacity will have to be built by 2005, the NY-ISO said in a recent report, Power Alert: New York's Energy Crossroads. ""New York is heading towards a very serious situation unless it acts immediately to get new supply sited within its borders,"" said NY-ISO president William Museler in a statement accompanying the report. ""This report is essentially a caution light at New York's energy crossroads."" Sources in the New York Public Service Commission have downplayed the NY-ISO's warning, asserting that a process for bringing on new generation is well underway, with more than 85 projects in the approval pipeline. In a related development, the NY-ISO asked FERC to approve a proposed tariff amendment (ER01-1517) extending existing bids caps in some of its markets until 10/31/02, and a separate and related amendment (ER01-1489) extending the NY-ISO's so-called temporary extraordinary procedures (TEP) that allow the ISO to make price adjustments and take other corrective actions if it finds evidence of market power abuse. The NY-ISO Report --The NY-ISO likened the situation in New York to that faced by California, where a relentless increase in demand has not been met with an equal increase in supply. The NY-ISO said that between 1995 and 2000, statewide demand for electricity rose by 2,700 MW, while generating capacity increased by only 1,060 MW. With no major new generating plants in downstate New York fully approved for construction at this time and generation demand in the state expected to grow around 1.3 percent annually for the next several years, the NY-ISO said this gap will continue to widen. The inevitable result of this trend is large rate increases for New York's power consumers. The NY-ISO's modeling suggests that ""by 2005, statewide prices are likely to be more than 20-25 percent lower in the case in which new plants are built than in the case where they are not."" In New York City, ""the price to consumers of electric power could be reduced by as much as 28 percent when compared to the case of no new supply or load management programs."" Besides large rate increases, the NY-ISO asserted that a failure to site and build new plants in New York will threaten power reliability in the state and lead to increasing reliance on out-of-state resources. The report said that if no new in-state generation comes on line in the next five years, the state's generation reserve margins will shrink from the current 14.9 percent above peak demand ""to a dangerously low 8.4 percent by 2005."" Pointing to California's situation, the report added that increased reliance on power imports ""can subject electrical suppliers and customers in New York to transmission restrictions and political and economic considerations beyond the control or influence of responsible New York State entities."" To avoid these harsh consequences, the NY-ISO said New York's new siting law, known as the Article X process, needs to be modified. Since the law was passed 18 months ago, the report noted that only two plants have been approved (both upstate) and neither has yet been built. The problem, according to the NY-ISO, is that the siting process ""requires the cooperation of multiple state agencies."" To expedite the process, the report suggested the ""clear designation of a lead agency and the adoption of an `ombudsman program' to expedite and coordinate the work of the agencies responsible for the Article X process must be made."" The NY-ISO added that an expedited approval process would improve the environment because older, more polluting power plants would be replaced by cleaner gas-fired units. On a more positive note, the NY-ISO reported that New York's restructured power market ""is far healthier than that in California, due in large part to the ability of New York `s utilities to enter long-term power contracts. The basic structure of the New York market will also reduce unwarranted price spikes and other market disruptions through mitigation programs which automatically correct price spikes due to market power abuses."" ""Nevertheless, California `s experience raises a caution flag for all New Yorkers,"" the report continued. ""The deregulated market in New York cannot achieve lower costs through competition without an increase in generating capacity similar in magnitude to the recommendations of this report, along with simultaneous efforts to institute greater conservation, better load management and alternative energy supply initiatives. Additionally, closer integration with regional suppliers of power is both inevitable and beneficial."" The report also recommended (1) accelerating conservation, real-time metering and price-sensitive load programs; and (2) upgrading the state's and the Northeast's transmission infrastructure. The Proposed Tariff Amendments -- New York's Article X siting process and continuing tight supplies were also cited in the NY-ISO's request to extend from 4/30/01 until 10/31/02 its $1,000/MWh bid caps. FERC first approved the 1,000/MWh bid caps in July 2000 (see REPORT No.197, pg.6), and subsequently extended them. The NY-ISO's board ""is sensitive to the Commission's concerns about undue intervention in energy markets,"" the filing related. ""Nevertheless, the NY-ISO is submitting this request because it believes that delays in New York state's `Article X' process for licensing and siting new generating capacity is inhibiting supply from increasing to match continued demand growth. . . . Moreover, although the NY-ISO proposes to implement several demand-side measures this summer, it is not yet clear whether they will make demand sufficiently price-responsive to avoid periods of high prices that would not occur if there were an efficient demand-side response."" Thus, the NY-ISO insisted that the requested extension is needed to provide more time for the development of additional generation and to gauge the effectiveness of the NY-ISO's proposed demand-side response mechanisms ""in order to avoid exposing consumers to price spikes that are not a product of the interplay of competitive market forces."" Other problems cited in the NY-ISO's filing which keep New York's power market from being fully competitive include continuing capacity and operating constraints at the state's Central-East interface, and questions over adequate gas supply. ""The NY-ISO remains acutely aware that taking steps to deal with price abnormalities can have undesirable consequences,"" the filing continued. ""Nevertheless, the NY-ISO believes that the $1,000/MWh cap that has been used in the PJM's markets since inception does not appear to have had an adverse impact there. . . . The permanent bid caps in PJM, and the interim bid caps in ISO New England (proposed for extension through the end of 2001) also make continuation of the NY-ISO's bid caps more important in order to maintain uniformity across the Northeastern markets. The NY-ISO also continues to believe that suppliers will not be materially harmed by the continuation of bid caps, which are likely to come into effect very rarely and are set at levels that prevent only artificially high run-ups in prices."" The NY-ISO's request to extend its TEP procedures (which also were previously extended) through 10/31/02 cited similar problems with New York's power markets, but claimed that the NY-ISO ""has made great strides"" toward eliminating market design and software flaws. ""The TEPs were, and remain, an indispensable tool for responding to and correcting market flaws and other instances where the markets are not operating as the NY-ISO and the Commission intended,"" the filing insisted. MASSACHUSETTS: Attorney general says summer poses electricity concerns By JOHN McELHENNY Associated Press Writer 03/19/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. BOSTON (AP) - The state's top consumer advocate warned that Massachusetts may see ""California-type"" electricity blackouts this summer when temperatures rise and residents turn on air conditioners and fans. ""It would be a mistake to feel this is a cold weather problem,"" said Attorney General Thomas Reilly in an interview with The Associated Press. ""Our major problem will come this summer."" State deregulation of the electric industry has been among the factors blamed for local power outages in California, and on Monday, California for the first time suffered rolling blackouts across the entire state. Massachusetts relaxed regulations on its own electric industry in 1998 to attract more companies to stir competition. But that hasn't happened yet, largely because the current high cost of oil and gas make it expensive to produce electricity. ""The promise of deregulation was that there was going to be competition,"" said Reilly, a Democrat. ""That competition in the wholesale market is not happening."" Hot summer weather drives up electricity use as residents turn on air conditioners and fans, and Reilly said a few particularly hot days could strain the grid that provides the region's power. A spokeswoman for the region's power grid said electricity use is expected to rise 1.5 to 2 percent this year, but the region should have enough power because of six new power plants that have begun generating electricity in the past 18 months. ""The situation is unlike California because we have new generation coming on line that is outpacing demand,"" said Ellen Foley, spokeswoman for ISO New England Inc., which manages the grid of 330 generators connected by 8,000 miles of high voltage transmission lines. Still, a particularly hot day and an unforeseen power generation breakdown could prompt ISO to ask residents to conserve electricity, a situation that arose once last summer, Foley said. In order to avoid any power outages and protect consumers, Reilly repeated calls for electric companies to build more power lines and to offer more options for new customers who have signed up since deregulation. Those customers typically pay more than long-term customers. Electric transmission companies should also be allowed to enter into two-year contracts with suppliers, instead of the six-month contracts many have now, to avoid short-term price spikes for consumers, Reilly said. The Attorney General's Office acts as an advocate for consumers. Michael Monahan, a spokesman for NSTAR, which provides electricity to more than 1 million customers, is upgrading some of its power lines and last year built a new line to Cape Cod, but currently has no lines under construction. ""I wholeheartedly concur with the attorney general that it's something we have to focus on,"" Monahan said, but he added, ""The indications I see are that we have an ample supply of electricity."" California's statewide outages were ordered on Monday after a transformer fire, high demand and a lack of electricity imports pushed power reserves to near zero. California partially deregulated its electric industry in 1996, two years before Massachusetts. --- On the Net: Attorney General's Office: http://www.ago.state.ma.us NSTAR: http://www.nstaronline.com ISO New England Inc.: http://www.iso-ne.com NEVADA: Discussion of bill stopping power plant sales to continue Wednesday By JOHN WILKERSON Associated Press Writer 03/19/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. CARSON CITY, Nev. (AP) - Lawmakers hit more delays Monday in trying to pass a measure that pulls the plug on the sale of Nevada power plants to avoid California-style energy problems. ""The goal of this bill is only stopping the divestiture of power plants and making sure it's constitutional,"" said Senate Commerce and Labor Chairman Randolph Townsend, R-Reno. ""And that's not as easy as it sounds."" Townsend's comment just before his committee began working on SB253 was prophetic - witnesses kept bringing up the need for more flexibility in the measure. Translation: Don't kill all deals by stopping Reno-based Sierra Pacific Power and Las Vegas-based Nevada Power from selling their Nevada power plants until June 2003 - and possibly until 2006. Pete Ernaut, a lobbyist for Reliant Energy which has been trying to buy a power plant, said unforeseen market changes could make a plant sale before 2003 a deal that would be in the public's interest. ""If you put a two-year moratorium on these plants, all these deals are going to go away,"" he said. ""When the cow leaves the barn, it's difficult to catch."" Townsend had hoped to wrap up committee work on SB253 on Monday. Now it's up for review again Wednesday in the Commerce and Labor Committee. Reliant isn't the only company trying to keep power plant purchases alive. Earlier this month, executives of Pinnacle West Energy told the committee that it's in the public's interest to allow Sierra Pacific Resources to sell its Harry Allen power plant. The Harry Allen plant produces about 72 megawatts out of the 2,900 megawatts of energy that Nevada utilities generate. Pinnacle has plans to expand that to 700 megawatts by 2004. Other provisions not strictly related to the plant divestitures, such as ways in which Sierra Pacific and Nevada Power can recover the cost of undoing the sales contracts, don't have to be included in SB253, Townsend said. Townsend said the other concerns dealing with the energy crisis and utility deregulation can be handled in later bills - but the power plant sale issue must be handled now. Nevada's PUC and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission had directed Sierra Pacific and Nevada Power to sell the plants as a condition of the companies' merger in 1999 under the parent company Sierra Pacific Resources. Critics of the plant sales say the plants generate about half the state's electricity - and if they're sold, the unregulated new owners could sell the power to other states and put Nevada into the energy dilemma California faces of shrinking supply and rising prices. The Southern Nevada Water Authority has presented an analysis stating that rate payers will save from $1.7 billion to $3.5 billion by July 2001 if the power plant sales are stopped. Nevada's Consumer Advocate's Office previously had projected a conservative estimate of $915 million in savings. MAINE: Panel of experts would review impact of energy deregulation By GLENN ADAMS Associated Press Writer 03/19/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. AUGUSTA, Maine (AP) - In the wake of rolling blackouts in California and rate spikes in their home state, Maine's top legislators proposed a study Monday into the effects of deregulation of the energy industry. ""Deregulation of electricity is a new idea and we still have a lot to learn,"" Senate President Michael Michaud said as he called for the analysis. A panel of industry insiders, elected officials and consumers would study issues such as what standard rate consumers can expect and the likelihood of energy shortfalls over the next three years, and whether Maine consumers are vulnerable to anti-competitive activities. In addition, the Blue Ribbon Commission would look into whether changes in Maine's deregulation law are needed to encourage more generating capacity, improve conservation and spur competition. The study is being proposed as consumers remain mindful of a power crisis in California that resulted from high wholesale energy costs, a consumer rate cap and too few power plants in that deregulated state. Maine's deregulation law is designed to avoid such pitfalls, said Rep. William Savage, D-Buxton, House chairman of the Legislature's Utilities Committee. Maine's law does not cap consumer prices, as California's does, and the state has more than enough generating facilities to meet the state's energy needs, Savage said. Since Maine's deregulation law took effect in March 2000, Bangor Hydro-Electric Co. rates have increased 19 percent. The Public Utilities Commission approved a residential standard rate increase as recently as last month. Federal energy regulators are reviewing their decision to allow steep fee increases for utilities and power wholesalers that fail to arrange enough capacity to meet customers' peak load. Gov. Angus King and all four members of Maine's congressional delegation oppose the hike. The PUC has approved standard rate increases for energy delivered by Central Maine Power Co. to medium-sized and large industrial users. On the other hand, some towns and school districts are saving money on energy through deals they can get in the deregulated market. In the meantime, legislation has been introduced in response to some of the changes that have occurred in Maine's deregulated energy industry. One would use some of the money from the sale of power-generating assets to offset an increase in rates paid by large industrial users, said Sen. Norman Ferguson, R-Hanover, Senate chairman of the Utilities Committee. Supporters of the utility study that was proposed Monday said they are not looking to make changes in Maine's deregulation law, but if it needs fixing it could be done during next year's session. The lawmakers' primary interest is to find out how trends in a new environment designed to encourage competition will affect consumers, and to try to identify what consumers can expect in the few years ahead. House Speaker Michael Saxl, D-Portland, said the Legislature ""has a fundamental public policy interest in making sure rate-payers and businesses are protected against exorbitant rate hikes."" Michaud, D-East Millinocket, said he's interested in finding out how future changes in electric prices and availability might affect businesses and consumers in northern Maine. ""The economy in my part of the state is the most vulnerable, and I want to make certain we are leaving no stone unturned in our effort to prevent any shocks to the economy in northern, western and eastern Maine,"" Michaud added. The commission would include House and Senate members from each party, a utility executive, and representatives of energy producers, providers, a large commercial consumer and individual consumers. OREGON: State Senate moves to combat energy crisis 03/16/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. SALEM, Ore. (AP) - In an attempt to avoid a California-like energy crisis, the Oregon Senate approved a bill Friday that would quicken the process of siting power plants that use gas and renewable resources. ""It's important for Oregon. It makes sure that energy will be available to everyone,"" said Sen. Lee Beyer, D-Springfield. The measure, SB843, would shorten the siting process for power plants that use gas and renewable resources, like wind, from a year and a half to a matter of months. The speeded-up process would be in effect for two years. ""If we can act now, we can actually start to solve power supply problems by this summer,"" said Sen. Jason Atkinson, R-Jacksonville California's strict regulations on the construction of new power plants has contributed to its current shortage and legislators took note. Beyer said though California was definitely a wake-up call, the measure is a reaction to the larger power picture in the Northwest. With low rainfall, hydroelectric generators will have trouble meeting demand, Beyer said. Gas-fired and wind plants could come online as soon as this fall and would provide relief. ""We are not in a position to sit back and do nothing about the energy crisis the Northwest and the country are experiencing,"" said Senate Minority Leader Kate Brown, D-Portland. Conservationists, however, caution that lawmakers should be careful not to rush to provide power at the expense of environmental standards. WISCONSIN: Two utilities to add 975 megawatts in plan to avoid energy crisis By The Associated Press 03/22/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. Plans of two state utilities to add 975 megawatts to Wisconsin's electric power grid as a way of avoiding an energy crisis similar to California's were questioned Thursday by a consumer advocate who said too many power plants may be in the works. ""Certainly nobody wants to see blackouts like you have in California but there is the danger Wisconsin could be overbuilding,"" said Steve Hiniker, executive director of the Citizens' Utility Board, which represents consumer interests in utility rate cases. He noted that plant construction costs ultimately are born by the utility customers. Alliant Energy Corp. announced its proposal Wednesday - in a filing with the state Public Service Commission - to spend $1 billion to build one coal and two gas-fired power plants. Alliant has proposed building a 500 megawatt coal-fired plant and a 100 megawatt natural-gas fired plant by 2006. It also wants to build a 200 megawatt natural gas-fired facility in 2011. Wisconsin has not built a coal-fired plant in more than two decades. Alliant has not determined the plants' locations. Also, Madison Gas & Electric, the state's smallest investor-owned utility, said Wednesday that it had signed deals to buy 175 megawatts of power from three generating plants in Wisconsin and Illinois. ""Three out of the four past summers, we've had public appeals for conservation due to shortages somewhere in the state. We need to take steps to avoid that, and the California situation makes that even more clear,"" said Alliant spokesman Chris Schoenherr. ""Getting more iron in the ground will give us more flexibility in the state to be able to react."" Alliant acknowledged the new plants will probably mean rate increases, but it was too early to say how much rates would go up. California's problems, which this week resulted in the first deliberate blackouts since World War II, stemmed from underestimating the state's power needs, forcing utilities to sell their power plants but not allowing them to secure long-term supply contracts, and freezing rates, among other things. But Wisconsin's situation is far different. The state has moved slower than California toward deregulation, and there has been no desire here to speed up the process in recent years as power reliability became a problem. The PSC estimates that Wisconsin will need an additional 3,000 megawatts of power over the next decade. Hiniker said Wisconsin needs to coordinate its planning to avoid overbuilding. The costs of new power plants are passed on to ratepayers, meaning electric bills will increase as new generation is added. In addition, coal-generated power plants are a major source of air pollution in the state. ""We don't have the advance planning that has kept Wisconsin from overbuilding in the past,"" said Hiniker. ""This is something the PSC should be doing."" MG&E's deals are: -A 10-year contract to buy 75 megawatts from Calpine Energy Services starting in May 2004. The power will come from the natural gas-fired plant Rock River Energy Center, near Beloit. Calpine Energy Services is a unit of San Jose, Calif.-based Calpine Energy Corp. The plant is being built by Northbrook, Ill.-based SkyGen Energy LLC, which Calpine bought last year from SkyGen President Michael Polsky and Wisvest Corp., a unit of Wisconsin Energy Corp. -A 10-year contract to buy 50 megawatts of power from the Rainy River Energy Corp. starting in May 2002. The power is coming from a natural gas-fired plant near Joliet, Ill. owned by LS Power Co. Rainy River is a unit of Duluth-based Minnesota Power Inc. -A five-year contract to buy 50 megawatts from an El Paso Merchant Energy plant near Cordova, Ill., in western Illinois. The owner of the natural gas facility is the Cordova Energy Center Co., which is a unit of Iowa-based MidAmerican Energy Holdings. Alliant also offered support in the Wednesday filing for a $7 billion plan of Milwaukee-based Wisconsin Energy, which includes five new power plants in Oak Creek and Pleasant Prairie. -- On the Net: CUB: http://www.wiscub.org/ Alliant Energy: http://www.alliant-energy.com Wisconsin Public Service Commission: http://www.psc.state.wi.us Wisconsin Energy: http://www.wisenergy.com/ Madison Gas & Electric: http://www.mge.com Use this file to download and print all the articles in this section (See attached file: Dow Jones If you wish to be removed from the distribution list for this update please contact Pru Sheppard - DC. All recipients of this message have been Bcc'd as part of industry best practice for broadcast emails. | This message may contain confidential and/or privileged | | information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to | | receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, | | disclose or take any action based on this message or any | | information herein. If you have received this message in | | error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail | | and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. | - Dow Jones - pic24389.pcx - pic05075.pcx - Dow Jones [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Final Colorado Springs, CO Itinerary; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/11/2001 05:18 PM --------------------------- From: Christina Grow/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/11/2001 03:11 PM To: Stanley Horton/ENRON@enronXgate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Cindy Stark/ENRON@enronXgate, Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Final Colorado Springs, CO Itinerary SK - I printed these out & put them in the meeting folder. And sent a copy to Melissa. mm Attached is the final copy of the Colorado Springs, CO itinerary and a copy of the most current INGAA agenda. Please call if you have any questions. Have a safe and fun trip. Christina Grow Enron Corp. Investor Relations 713.853.6021 Christina.Grow@enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= IEP News 5/29; [EMail-Body]= Today's IEP news ... Los Angeles Times, May 27, 2001 Sunday, Home Edition, Page 7, 615 words, ????The State; ?Who Let the Hot Dogs Out? Rhapsodic Lawmakers; Legislature: ????Speaking frankly, officials have used the wiener as an easily digestible ????metaphor for the state's energy crisis., JULIE TAMAKI, MIGUEL BUSTILLO, ????TIMES STAFF WRITERS, SACRAMENTO (Quotes Smutny on behalf of IEP) The San Francisco Chronicle, MAY 26, 2001, SATURDAY,, FINAL EDITION, NEWS;, ????Pg. A1, 835 words, Davis asks U.S. to limit firms' prices; ???RATE SWINGS: ????Governor argues 2 generators manipulated market, Lynda Gledhill, Sacramento (Quotes ??????? ???Smutny on ?behalf of IEP) The Wall Street Journal, Power Drain: The U.S. Energy Crisis, California Officials Say State Will ?? ???Enter A Recession Without Energy Price Caps By JOHN R. EMSHWILLER , Staff Reporter of THE ?? ???WALL STREET JOURNAL AP Online, May 29, 2001; Tuesday, 9:11 AM, Eastern Time, Domestic, ????non-Washington, general news item, 770 words, AP Top News at 9:10 a.m. EDT ????Tuesday, May 29, 2001, JEROME MINERVA The Dallas Morning News, May 29, 2001, Tuesday, DOMESTIC NEWS, K7523, 1046 ????words, Bush begins visit in hostile California, By G. Robert Hillman Los Angeles Times, May 29, 2001 Tuesday, Home Edition, Page 1, 1178 words, ????Governor to Stress Price Caps to Bush; Power: In a meeting today with the ????president, Davis will present a letter from economists backing cost controls ????and demand federal assistance., DAN MORAIN, JAMES GERSTENZANG, TIMES STAFF ????WRITERS Los Angeles Times, May 29, 2001 Tuesday, Home Edition, Page 1, 1541 words, ????THE ENERGY CRISIS; ; Kern County Basks in Role as State's Blackout-Buster; ????Electricity: Six new plants will bolster its status as energy center., ????MITCHELL LANDSBERG, TIMES STAFF WRITER, McKITTRICK, Calif. The New York Times, May 29, 2001, Tuesday, Late Edition - Final, Section A; ????Page 12; Column 1; National Desk, 1078 words, For Crucial California Trip, ????Bush Calibrates How Best to Handle State's Energy Crisis, By DAVID E. SANGER ????, LOS ANGELES, May 28 The Orange County Register, May 29, 2001, Tuesday, DOMESTIC NEWS, K7500, ????825 words, California's power crisis generating lots of heat, By John Howard The San Francisco Chronicle, MAY 29, 2001, TUESDAY,, FINAL EDITION, NEWS;, ????Pg. A1, 1291 words, Crisis no sweat to some offices; ???Many offices keep ????cool in crisis; ???Air conditioners blast in state's energy centers, Steve ????Rubenstein The San Francisco Chronicle, MAY 29, 2001, TUESDAY,, FINAL EDITION, NEWS;, ????Pg. A1, 1238 words, Bush facing Davis' heat over energy; ???In first visit ????to state as president, he'll hear governor's plea for help, Carla Marinucci, ????Lynda Gledhill USA TODAY, May 29, 2001, Tuesday,, FIRST EDITION, NEWS;, Pg. 3A, 426 words, ????Davis to urge Bush to back electricity price cap, Laurence McQuillan, LOS ????ANGELES The Washington Post, May 29, 2001, Tuesday, Final Edition, A SECTION; Pg. ????A02, 639 words, Energy Chief Moves To Aid California; Transmission Plan ????Precedes Bush Visit, Mike Allen, Washington Post Staff Writer, LOS ANGELES, ????May 28 The Washington Post, May 29, 2001, Tuesday, Final Edition, A SECTION; Pg. ????A03, 1936 words, It's Still Dawn for Solar Power in L.A.; Despite City ????Subsidies, Homeowners Hesitate to Install Expensive Alternative Energy ????Source, William Booth, Washington Post Staff Writer, LOS ANGELES The Washington Times, May 29, 2001, Tuesday, Final Edition, PART A; NATION; ????INSIDE POLITICS; Pg. A6, 1264 words, Greg Pierce; THE WASHINGTON TIMES The Washington Times, May 29, 2001, Tuesday, Final Edition, PART A; NATION; ????Pg. A4, 809 words, Bush faces tough sell on visit to California; ?Davis ????likely to be rebuffed on price caps, Joseph Curl; THE WASHINGTON TIMES, LOS ????ANGELES Chicago Tribune, May 29, 2001 Tuesday, NORTH SPORTS FINAL EDITION, News; ????Pg. 6; ZONE: N, 514 words, Bush backs WW II project, From Tribune news ????services., LOS ANGELES The Associated Press, May 29, 2001, Tuesday, BC cycle, 7:55 AM Eastern Time ????, Domestic News, 604 words, Bush announcing low-income aid, but no price ????caps, By SCOTT LINDLAW, Associated Press Writer, LOS ANGELES The Associated Press State & Local Wire, May 29, 2001, Tuesday, BC cycle, ????7:31 AM Eastern Time, State and Regional, 594 words, Stakes are high for ????Davis meeting with Bush, By GARY GENTILE, AP Business Writer, LOS ANGELES ABC NEWS, WORLD NEWS NOW (2:00 AM ET), May 28, 2001, Monday, 447 words, ????PRESIDENT BUSH VISITS CALIFORNIA WHERE POLITICIANS ARE CRITICAL OF HIS LACK ????OF ACTION FOR THEIR ENERGY CRISIS, DEREK McGINTY, JOSH GERSTEIN Los Angeles Times May 27, 2001 Sunday ?Home Edition SECTION: California; Part 2; Page 7; Metro Desk LENGTH: 615 words HEADLINE: The State; ; Who Let the Hot Dogs Out? Rhapsodic Lawmakers; Legislature: Speaking frankly, officials have used the wiener as an easily digestible metaphor for the state's energy crisis. BYLINE: JULIE TAMAKI, MIGUEL BUSTILLO, TIMES STAFF WRITERS DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Every crisis has its symbol. ??Watergate had Deep Throat. The S&L scandal had Charles Keating. O.J. did--or didn't--have a bloody glove. ??Here in the Capitol, the hot dog has become an unlikely metaphor for the state's energy crisis. ??In packed news conferences and heated Assembly floor debates, lawmakers from both parties have evoked images of the ordinary dog to help explain an extraordinary mess. ??The genesis of this statehouse trend is difficult to determine. Assemblyman Fred Keeley appears to be the first to have tossed the hot dog into the political fire. ??During a crucial Assembly discussion in January, the Boulder Creek Democrat recited the lyrics to a familiar Oscar Mayer jingle as a way of admitting that a controversial bill to have the state buy electricity to avoid blackouts was unpalatable, but necessary. ??""It's the dog kids love to bite,"" said Keeley of the jingle. ""Well, this is the bill people love to hate."" ??A bizarre, partisan hot dog duel ensued. Assemblyman John Campbell (R-Irvine) responded by likening the unpredictable financial consequences of the Keeley legislation to biting recklessly into mystery meat. ??""Before I bite into it I see what's on the outside, but I can't see the inside,"" Campbell said. ""If nobody can tell me what's on the inside, it may be bitter, it may be bad, it may make me sick."" ??Assemblywoman Carole Migden (D-San Francisco) angrily fired back, wanting to know why Campbell, a professed hot dog eater, was suddenly so critical of its unknown contents. ??""It's OK to eat a hot dog that's full of animal bones and hair,"" Migden said. ""That's a hot dog that's OK with you, but this kind of hot dog isn't."" ??Yet it was Senate leader John Burton who made it the key ingredient in a Capitol catch phrase. ??Burton described a plan to purchase the electrical power grid from the state's private utilities as a fair swap, saying: ""I give you a dollar, you give me a hot dog."" ??The sound-bite quickly took on a life of its own. With the cost of the energy crisis growing faster than the price of ballpark franks, critics doubted the public's appetite for a multibillion-dollar hot dog. ??""Do you really want a hot dog? That is the question,"" said Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of the Independent Energy Producers, a trade group for power generators. ??Not content to let a dog lie in its bun, lawmakers such as Assemblyman Bill Leonard (R-San Bernardino) kept the hot dog in public discourse. ??When Pacific Gas & Electric Co. filed for bankruptcy protection, Leonard was one of a chorus of legislators who questioned the merits of purchasing the remaining portion of the power lines, calling it ""not even half a hot dog."" ??Added Assemblyman Bill Campbell (R-Villa Park): ""It's like paying Mercedes prices for a broken down hot dog cart."" ??In recent weeks, the hot dog rhetoric appeared to have gone cold. Then Assemblyman Juan Vargas (D-San Diego) revived it. ??After enduring hours of testimony on details of the deal to purchase Edison's power lines, Vargas said his opinion of the dollar-equals-hot-dog deal had diminished. ??""They're trying to charge us for a hot dog,"" Vargas said of the utility, ""but it looks like we're only going to be getting a wienie."" ??Reliant Vice President John Stout also recently weighed in with his own hot dog analogy as he tried to explain why his company's income had jumped so much during the crisis. ??""If you have a hot dog stand and you go out and buy five to six more hot dog stands,"" Stout said, referring to his company's purchase of power plants, ""then naturally you would expect the operating income to go up."" ??Alas, the dog days of summer have yet to begin. LOAD-DATE: May 27, 2001 of 4 DOCUMENTS ?????????????????Copyright 2001 The Chronicle Publishing Co. ?????????????????????????The San Francisco Chronicle ????????????????????MAY 26, 2001, SATURDAY, FINAL EDITION SECTION: NEWS; Pg. A1 LENGTH: 835 words HEADLINE: Davis asks U.S. to limit firms' prices; RATE SWINGS: Governor argues 2 generators manipulated market SOURCE: Chronicle Sacramento Bureau BYLINE: Lynda Gledhill DATELINE: Sacramento BODY: Gov. Gray Davis pursued a new strategy yesterday to control wholesale electricity costs by demanding that federal regulators ban two generators from selling power in California at market rates, arguing that they have manipulated the market to their advantage. ???Meanwhile, the Davis administration lambasted a federal plan to implement temporary price controls, scheduled to go into effect Tuesday. State officials said the measures would do nothing to tame California's out-of-control costs for electricity. ???Davis, whose calls for broader price limits on wholesale electricity have been rejected repeatedly by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, is scheduled to meet with President Bush next week to ask Washington to do more to help California. ???""Federal regulators said that prices were 'unjust and unreasonable' nearly nine months ago, but they have been AWOL ever since,"" Davis said in a statement. ???The California Independent System Operator, managers of the state's electrical grid, asked energy regulators yesterday to revoke the authority they have given Williams Energy and AES Inc. to sell power at market-based rates. Instead, the Davis administration wants the companies to be forced to sell at cost-plus rates, which would ensure a reasonable but limited profit. ???""Market-based rate authority is not an entitlement,"" the ISO said in a filing with federal regulators. ???The ISO asked regulators to act by June 15, saying that any delay ""places California consumers and the state's economy at extreme peril."" ???Similar filings against other companies, such as Mirant, Duke and Reliant, are being considered, said Charles Robinson, general counsel for the ISO. ???Robinson said the ISO has a ""well developed"" record of price manipulation by the two companies. He said information previously given to federal regulators proved the prices charged to California were excessive. ???'GRANDSTANDING' ACCUSATION ???Aaron Thomas, a spokesman for Virginia-based AES, said the administration is grandstanding. ???""This is akin to the rhetoric the governor has used for the past several months,"" he said. ""We are well below the index FERC uses to establish concerns about market power. ???""As to this rhetoric about these companies abusing the marketplace -- check the facts. We lost money last year,"" Thomas said. ???A spokeswoman for Williams said the company would not comment because it had not seen the filing. ???Earlier this month, Oklahoma-based Williams agreed to pay $8 million to settle charges with FERC that the company was purposely withholding electricity from California's power market. The company admitted no wrongdoing, and officials said a full hearing would have cleared the company. ???If the regulatory commission denies the state's requests, or doesn't ""act in the time frame we believe is necessary to prevent harm,"" the state can appeal to a circuit court, Robinson said. ???BUSH VISIT POSTURING CHARGE ???Jan Smutny-Jones, head of the Independent Energy Producers Association, said the move is posturing by Davis ahead of Bush's visit. ???""This is an interesting welcome mat for President Bush,"" he said. ""Do we want a dialogue or a diatribe?"" ???In advance of Bush's visit, Vice President Dick Cheney said yesterday that nothing more can be done to help solve California's power problems this summer. ???He also rejected price controls, saying that previous efforts have contributed to a supply shortage. ???A spokesman for Davis rejected that notion and denied that the timing of yesterday's announcements were connected to the Bush-Davis meeting. ???Davis aides expressed hope that Bush's two new FERC commissioners, Pat Wood III, a close Bush ally expected to take over the chairmanship of the board, and Nora Mead Brownell, a state utility regulator in Pennsylvania, would hear California's pleas. The two new commissioners were confirmed yesterday by the U.S. Senate. ???Among the things Davis wants changed is the regulatory commission temporary price relief plan scheduled to take effect Tuesday. ???The regulators would limit wholesale prices during power alerts in California, when reserves drop below 7 percent of available capacity. ???Many state officials believe that doesn't go far enough. The state Assembly, in documents to be filed Tuesday, said price controls should cover all hours -- not just power emergencies. ???And there is a chance the controls will be in effect for just a few days. Under the regulatory commission plan, the state and the three investor-owned utilities must file a proposal to join a regional transmission organization by June 1. If they do not to do so, the price controls disappear. ???Davis administration officials expect to file another response dealing with the regional transmission organization by Friday, Robinson said. The Assembly filing rejects joining such an organization, which federal officials favor as a means to better manage and improve grid capacity in the West. E-mail Lynda Gledhill at lgledhill@sfchronicle.com. GRAPHIC: PHOTO, Vice President Dick Cheney said nothing more can be done to help solve California's power problems. / New York Times LOAD-DATE: May 26, 2001 May 29, 2001 Power Drain: The U.S. Energy Crisis California Officials Say State Will Enter A Recession Without Energy Price Caps By JOHN R. EMSHWILLER Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL On the eve of a meeting Tuesday between President George Bush and California Gov. Gray Davis, top advisers to the governor said the state could be pushed into recession unless the federal government imposes temporary price caps to contain soaring wholesale electricity costs. President Bush has consistently opposed price caps. The governor's team called a Memorial Day news conference to highlight what they saw as the dangers to the economy of the state, and possibly the nation, from the tens of billions of dollars being spent this year to purchase electricity. The governor's aides estimated that statewide, wholesale electricity purchases this year could hit $50 billion compared with about $7 billion in 1999. Some estimates for this year's power expenditures are even higher. If California were a separate nation, ""an energy shock of that magnitude would be expected to cause a significant recession,"" said Alan Blinder, a former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve, at the conference. While being part of a broader national economy could somewhat mitigate the impact, the higher power costs are ""a recipe for stagflation in California,"" added Mr. Blinder. ""Stagflation"" refers to stagnant economic conditions and inflation -- a condition that struck the nation when energy prices soared in the 1970s. Though the advisers painted perhaps the dreariest outlook yet to come from the governor's office, they said that the Davis plan for financing the state's electricity purchases remains intact. As reported, the state plans to sell about $12.5 billion in bonds later this year. The state has been purchasing electricity since January, when its failed utility-deregulation plan left California's two biggest utilities financially unable to continue buying power. If price caps were instituted, the state might have to borrow less money than anticipated or at least face a decreased danger of having to borrow more if the power situation gets worse, said Joseph Fichera, chief executive of New York-based Saber Partners LLC and an adviser to Mr. Davis. The governor plans to press his case for price caps over the next six to 18 months, as supplies are increased with new power plants due to come into operation, the advisers said. However, Mr. Bush and other federal officials have repeatedly said that they believe price caps would be counterproductive and discourage the building of new power plants. Write to John R. Emshwiller at john.emshwiller@wsj.com1 Copyright 2001 Associated Press AP Online ?????????????????May 29, 2001; Tuesday 9:11 AM, Eastern Time SECTION: Domestic, non-Washington, general news item LENGTH: 770 words HEADLINE: ?AP Top News at 9:10 a.m. EDT Tuesday, May 29, 2001 BYLINE: JEROME MINERVA BODY: ??NATO Won't Back U.S. Missile Plan ??BUDAPEST, Hungary (AP) ??NATO's top policy-making body stopped short of endorsing the Bush administration's plan for a national missile defense today, preparing to offer only to ''continue substantive consultations'' with Washington. The North Atlantic Council does not portray the possibility of missile attack as a common threat faced by allies, as the Bush administration had hoped, it said in a statement. Secretary of State Colin Powell had hoped to persuade skeptical NATO allies to be more supportive of U.S. missile defense plans. ??Pakistan Accepts India Offer to Talk ??ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) ??Pakistani military ruler Gen. Pervez Musharraf today accepted India's offer to hold peace talks on the disputed Kashmir region and other issues. ''I accept your invitation ... to visit India with great pleasure,'' Musharraf said in a letter to Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee. ''We wish to see a stable prosperous India at peace with its neighbors.'' Musharraf's letter came four days after Vajpayee broke a two-year lull in high-level talks between the two rival nuclear powers by inviting the Pakistani leader to India. ??Consumers' Spending, Incomes Rise ??WASHINGTON (AP) ??Consumers spent on services in April, but cut back on cars and other big-ticket items. Incomes also rose. The Commerce Department reported today that consumer spending rose by 0.4 percent in April, following a 0.2 percent increase the month before. April's rise marked the biggest increase since January. Consumer spending accounts for two-thirds of all economic activity and has been a main pillar propping up the country's fragile economy. Personal incomes rose 0.3 percent. ??Bush Won't Cap Electricity Prices ??LOS ANGELES (AP) ??President Bush says he won't force down soaring electricity prices that have cost California nearly $8 billion since January. The Republican president and embattled Democratic Gov. Gray Davis arranged a meeting today to talk about the state's energy crisis, but there was no indication they would break their stalemate. Bush opposes price limits on wholesale electricity that utilities buy, arguing they do nothing to address supply-and-demand issues at the heart of the crisis. ??Tornado Injures 18 in Colorado ??ELLICOTT, Colo. (AP) ??Dozens of residents of a sparsely populated town in southern Colorado spent the night in a church after a tornado crushed trailer homes, sprayed hail and injured 18 people. ''We just hit the floor in the living room and covered the kids and the tornado hit,'' said Trish Davidson, whose mobile home was lifted into the air and dropped 10 feet from its foundation. Davidson and about 30 other people spent last night in the basement of a church. Power was out to the church and much of the surrounding area. ??Israeli Motorist Killed ??JERUSALEM (AP) ??An Israeli motorist was killed in a West Bank drive-by shooting today as Israeli and Palestinian officials, after two rounds of U.S. mediation, spoke of resuming security talks aimed at reducing the violence. The motorist died of head wounds shortly after he was shot on by Palestinian gunmen from a passing car near the West Bank city of Nablus, the army said. Two Israeli settlers were shot and injured one seriously in another West Bank ambush last night. ??Record-Breaking DJ Still on Air ??JERSEY CITY, N.J. (AP) ??Now you can't get disc jockey Glenn Jones off the air. As of 6:30 a.m. EDT today, the DJ had been talking for about 93 hours, easily shattering the record for the longest continuous radio broadcast. And he was still talking. ''It's been a test of wills, a test of determination,'' Jones said. ''The first day was the hardest, but we're still going strong.'' Jones said he wanted to remain on the air until he hit the 100-hour mark, which would be about 1 p.m. EDT, and would then decide whether to continue. ??Nikkei Adds 36 Points ??TOKYO (AP) ??Tokyo stocks rose moderately today in light trading following holidays in the United States and Britain. The Nikkei Stock Average gained 36.12 points to close at 13,773.89. ??Agassi, Capriati Open With Wins ??PARIS (AP) ??Andre Agassi and Jennifer Capriati began their bids for a second consecutive Grand Slam title, winning in straight sets today on the second day of the French Open. Agassi, who won the French Open in 1999, beat Sweden's Thomas Johansson 6-2, 6-3, 7-6 (5). Capriati, seeded fourth, overcame seven double faults in defeating France's Emilie Loit 6-2, 7-5. Both Agassi and Capriati won Australian Open titles earlier this year. LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS ??????????????Copyright 2001 Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service ???????????????????????Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service Dallas Morning News 29, 2001, Tuesday SECTION: DOMESTIC NEWS KR-ACC-NO: ?K7523 LENGTH: 1046 words HEADLINE: Bush begins visit in hostile California BYLINE: By G. Robert Hillman BODY: ??LOS ANGELES _ President Bush landed in hostile territory Monday night, beginning his first presidential visit to California amid a pressing energy crisis that he says he cannot ease in the short term. ??""We welcome him to California,"" said California Gov. Gray Davis, a Democrat who has waged a long-distance war with the Republican president over the high cost and short supply of electricity in the nation's most populous state. ??""I hope he has an opportunity to talk firsthand to some of the people who are adversely impacted by the very high rates we're paying for electricity."" ??But the president's carefully scrubbed schedule for the next two days provides little time for such an opportunity, although he will confer privately with business leaders to discuss high-tech solutions to the state's energy problems. ??Arriving on a cross-country flight that touched down in Arizona for a Memorial Day tribute, Bush headed off to prepare for an early-morning stop Tuesday to promote energy conservation at the Marine Corps' Camp Pendleton and a luncheon address to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council. ??On Wednesday, he'll visit Sequoia National Park near Fresno, Calif., to launch a new drive to clean up and fix up national parks. ??He'll also meet privately Tuesday afternoon with Davis in what the Los Angeles Times characterized as a ""peace summit."" But no major shifts in policy are expected. White House aides suggest that the meeting will be a success if the governor even temporarily tempers his sometimes-harsh words for the administration. ??""The president's focus is going to be on solving problems. He's not interested in finger-pointing,"" White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said. ??""Whether people agree, or disagree, with the specifics of his energy plan, I think most Americans and most Californians are very pleased to see a president who is leading and taking action in addressing the issue head on."" ??However, recent public opinion polls show the president and the governor taking hits for the energy crisis in California. ??The Field Poll, finished a week ago, found that 54 percent of those surveyed believed Bush had handled the energy problems poorly, with Davis faring somewhat better at 38 percent. The margin of error for the 1,015 California interviews was 3.2 percentage points. ??An earlier survey by the Public Policy Institute of California found Davis' job approval rating plummeting, from 63 percent in January to 46 percent in May, as the state's energy troubles escalated. Bush's overall approval rating was higher at 57 percent, but still just as many of those surveyed gave him low marks for his handling of energy issues. That margin of error, for 2001 interviews, was 2 percentage points. ??In short, political analyst Sherry Bebitch Jeffe said, Bush's visit to the state _ in his 19th week as president, after already visiting more than half the other states _ is long overdue. ??""His not responding, or not being perceived to respond, to the short-term needs of California has allowed Davis' arguments to resonate _ that the federal government is uncaring, is insensitive,"" Jeffe said. ??In his national energy policy unveiled nearly two weeks ago, Bush offered a series of mostly long-term recommendations to conserve energy, find more of it and substantially upgrade and expand the nation's oil refineries and transmission systems for natural gas and electricity. ??Davis, complaining that Texas energy companies in particular are gouging Californians, has urged Bush to embrace price controls for wholesale electricity, but the president has steadfastly refused. Vice President Dick Cheney, who oversaw development of the White House energy policy, emphasized as recently as Friday that there's no quick fix on the way for California. ??""Long term, the answer is to build more power plants, and that's exactly what they're doing,"" Cheney told the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. ""But they're not going to have enough new capacity online this summer to avoid blackouts."" ??So the energy woes continue to fester in California. It's not just electricity and rolling blackouts. Gasoline prices of $2-and-more-a-gallon have become commonplace as well. ??""The gas bothers me more than the electric,"" said Tait Kmentt, who runs a legal process serving business in Irvine, Calif. ""Gas prices are killing me."" ??At $2.25-a-gallon for premium gasoline, he says, it costs him more than $40 to fill up his new Mercedes _ with no relief in sight. ??A newcomer to the state, Kmentt voted for Bush last fall and said he's glad the president is finally visiting California. But Kmentt cautioned, ""This will be a big test to see how concerned he is."" ??Kmentt said he understands the state's energy troubles are a ""huge problem that can't be fixed overnight,"" and right now he's blaming the power companies for the high price of electricity. ??""I just think the public is being lied to,"" he said. ??Still, this is not good news for Bush, who has been increasingly portrayed by Democrats as a Texas oilman still beholden to the industry. California, which he lost last fall to Al Gore by 12 percentage points, has become increasingly a political headache. ??Where his predecessor, Bill Clinton, seemed politically and personally comfortable, Bush is not, suggests Jeffe, a senior scholar in the School of Policy, Planning and Development at the University of Southern California. ??""An ego cannot be buoyed by losing the state by 12 points,"" she said. ""We are the state that was responsible for giving Al Gore his popular vote victory."" ??With the Senate now headed for Democratic control, Jeffe said, Bush's visit to California _ and others that will surely follow _ are essential to help Republicans hold their base in the House. ??If the energy crisis persists in California, further punishing its economy, the ripple effects will certainly spread, she said. ??""George Bush remembers the influence of the economy on the career of an incumbent president,"" Jeffe said, pointing to Bush's father, who was defeated by Clinton during an economic slump in 1992. ??""It took a while,"" she said, ""but people are beginning to get angry."" ??(c) 2001, The Dallas Morning News. ??Visit The Dallas Morning News on the World Wide Web at http://www.dallasnews.com/ JOURNAL-CODE: DA LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ??????????????????????May 29, 2001 Tuesday ?Home Edition SECTION: California; Part 2; Page 1; Metro Desk LENGTH: 1178 words HEADLINE: Governor to Stress Price Caps to Bush; Power: In a meeting today with the president, Davis will present a letter from economists backing cost controls and demand federal assistance. BYLINE: DAN MORAIN, JAMES GERSTENZANG, TIMES STAFF WRITERS BODY: ??Gov. Gray Davis will present a letter to President Bush today from top economists advocating wholesale electricity price controls, warning Monday that a failure by Bush to help California solve its energy crisis could signal to other regions that he may ignore their pleas. ??Bush, making his first trip to California, has set aside 20 minutes this afternoon to meet with Davis in Century City. In an interview with The Times, the Democratic governor vowed to repeat his request that the federal government move to cap wholesale power prices. Failure to act swiftly threatens the state and national economy, Davis said. ??""I want him to understand,"" Davis said, ""that if California has to pay 700 times more for electricity in 2001 than it did just two years ago, it could well drag our economy into a recession and could conceivably trigger a national recession. That is not good for anyone."" ??In the letter, 10 economists, including Cornell professor emeritus Alfred Kahn, a major proponent of airline deregulation, told of their ""deep concern"" about the failure of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to stabilize wholesale electricity prices in California. The economists faxed the letter to the White House on Friday afternoon, and provided the governor with a copy to present to Bush today. ??""FERC's failure to act now will have dire consequences for the state of California and will set back, potentially fatally, the diffusion of competitive electricity markets across the country,"" the economists, led by Frank Wolak of Stanford University, wrote. ""Moreover, this negative experience with electricity restructuring could delay or reverse current efforts to introduce competition into other formerly regulated industries."" ??Davis called the letter ""very significant validation of what we've been saying: The marketplace is not working and FERC has an obligation to act."" ??""We're not pleading for relief; we're entitled to it,"" Davis said. ??Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney repeatedly have said such controls never work. In California, caps might worsen the situation by limiting supply, they have argued, resulting in more blackouts this summer when demand for electricity is highest. ??The Bush-Davis meeting has had all the buildup of the political equivalent of a title fight: On one side, the Democratic governor of the nation's most populous state, which Bush lost by more than 1 million votes in November. On the other, the new president, coming off a roller coaster week of political defeat (the shift in control of the Senate) and victory (passage of his tax-cut plan), whose work in the Texas oil industry gives him a special history in the topic at hand. ??From afar, Davis has battled the Bush administration's energy policy. But, said Dan Bartlett, one of the president's chief communications advisors, ""The president has some interesting views on this topic as well, with some experience himself."" ??Bush's Energy secretary, Spencer Abraham, took steps Monday to increase electricity transmission capacity in California. He ordered the Western Area Power Administration, a division of the Energy Department that is responsible for marketing electricity from federal water projects in 15 Western states, to finish its planning for extra transmission capacity. ??At issue is so-called Path 15, an 84-mile stretch of power lines with insufficient capacity to carry the necessary load between Southern California and the northern part of the state, especially during peak hours. The central question is whether financing is available for a new transmission line. ??Davis lauded the action but said the president needs to do more. ??""If I have any advice to him of a political nature, it is take a chapter out of President Clinton's book. ??"" [Clinton] was very attentive to California, and as a result did better in 1996 than he did in '92. People felt he was here for us when we needed help. We need help."" ??Davis said that on a recent trip to Chicago, officials there worried that if Bush ""won't offer California some relief, he may not offer us relief,"" in a catastrophe. ??Among the facts and figures Davis intends to show the president is a chart showing that California paid $1.2 billion for electricity in the first quarter of 1999, $1.8 billion for the same period last year, and as much as $10.3 billion for electricity in the first three months of this year--at a time when conservation efforts had been taking hold and demand was down. ??""I hope the president will be as stunned as I am,"" said Davis, who is watching as the state spends more than $55 million a day to buy electricity that private utilities can no longer afford. ??Davis said that though he is trying to speed construction of power plants, encourage conservation, and return the private utilities to financial stability, the federal government has control over wholesale power prices. ??""Therein lies the final piece of this puzzle,"" Davis said. ""If it falls into place, we're on the way to putting this issue behind us. If it doesn't fall into place, it could create real economic havoc here and across the country."" ??Davis said that if Bush refuses to impose price controls, he should ""find some way to help us, consistent with his own belief."" ??""Turning a deaf ear not only won't be well received here,"" Davis said. ""It likely won't be received well elsewhere."" ??The state's energy crisis has posed a ticklish dilemma for Bush's busy travel schedulers: Had he visited earlier, it would have been awkward not to focus on energy issues. But until 11 days ago when a task force led by Cheney produced energy proposals, there would have been little Bush could say. ??Karen Hughes, the president's counselor, made it clear that regardless of the pressure, Bush will not yield on price caps. ??""We want to help. The president is very concerned about the energy situation and blackouts,"" she said. But limiting the wholesale price of energy would only discourage its production,"" Hughes said. ??California is the 30th state Bush has visited since taking office Jan. 20. His staff said the delay had to do not with energy issues but with politics and geography. ??With the administration focused in its first months on winning approval of the tax cut, the president's travels were largely dictated by that effort, his aides said. ??Besides, the president confided recently, even with Air Force One at the ready, it just takes too long to fly from Washington to California. ??Still, Hughes said, the president is not ignoring California. Condoleezza Rice, the president's national security advisor and a former Californian, sits next to Hughes every morning at the daily meeting of the White House senior staff, she said. ??What's more, the president ""has many friends in California,"" Hughes said, adding: ""Ernie has a home in California these days."" Ernie is the Bush family cat that is living with a friend in Brentwood while the First Family lives in the White House. ??* ??Times Staff Writer Massie Ritsch contributed to this story. LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ??????????????????????May 29, 2001 Tuesday ?Home Edition SECTION: Part A; Part 1; Page 1; Metro Desk LENGTH: 1541 words HEADLINE: THE ENERGY CRISIS; ; Kern County Basks in Role as State's Blackout-Buster; Electricity: Six new plants will bolster its status as energy center. BYLINE: MITCHELL LANDSBERG, TIMES STAFF WRITER DATELINE: McKITTRICK, Calif. BODY: ??You could think of this as California's own little slice of west Texas. ??Here in the scruffy brown hills of western Kern County, oil rigs grow more easily than trees, pickups are more common than cars, and chicken fried steak is the most popular dish at Mike and Annie's McKittrick Hotel. ??The hotel--which no longer offers lodging, just food and drink, and plenty of it--is bustling these days with the roustabout energy of a Lone Star construction camp. Just down the road, a mammoth electrical power plant is rising out of the sagebrush, its generators housed in four boxy buildings the size of airplane hangars. ??It is one of six new major gas-fired power plants expected to be built in Kern County over the next several years, an electrical construction boom unmatched anywhere in California. Kern, which already has a large surplus of electricity, is cementing its place as California's energy capital, assuming far more than its share of the burden in recharging the state's drained power supplies. ??Over the next several years, the county will add nearly 5,000 megawatts of power to the statewide grid. That is more than California now imports, on average, from out-of-state suppliers. It's enough to supply about five counties the size of Kern, which fills the dusty southern rim of the San Joaquin Valley and has a population of 662,000. ??In some parts of the state, a proposal to build a new power plant is a call to throw up the barricades. In recent months, intense community opposition has forced developers to pull back proposals to build major plants in South Gate and San Jose, although Gov. Gray Davis has tried to revive plans for the San Jose plant. ??You don't hear a lot of not-in-my-backyard talk in Kern County. ??""There should be power plants in everybody's backyard,"" said Paul Gipe, chairman of the Kern chapter of the Sierra Club, which did not oppose any of the new plants. ""If people are concerned about having too many power plants, they should think twice when they flip on the light switch."" ??New, natural gas-fired power plants, Gipe reasoned, are relatively clean and will not add significantly to the county's serious air pollution problems. Ideally, he said, they will allow the state to close some older, dirtier plants that cause considerably more environmental damage. ??If environmentalists don't oppose the plants, it's not too much of a leap to guess that some people might be positively thrilled about them. ??Just try, for instance, asking somebody in Taft, an oil center south of McKittrick. ""It's more money coming into Kern County--that's the way I look at it,"" said Pamela Dunlap, who runs a downtown thrift shop. ??An Economy Rooted in the Oil Industry ??She stood in the twilight outside her shop, on a street that embodies many of the most attractive attributes of small town Americana--with one small difference. Where some towns might have statues of their founders or war heroes in prominent public places, Taft has erected small oil rigs and other pieces of drilling machinery, a reminder of its economic roots. ??That Kern County has stepped up as California's blackout-buster is, perhaps, not surprising. ??To begin with, there's geography. Kern stands astride California's major north-south electrical transmission lines at precisely the spot at which they divide between the service areas of Pacific Gas & Electric, which serves Northern California, and Southern California Edison. That spot can be pinpointed as the Midway substation, a vast jungle of humming wires, transformers and circuit breakers that lies a short distance west of Interstate 5 in the town of Buttonwillow. ??Already, massive new circuit-breakers--they look like Frankenstein helmets sprouting 5-foot-long sparkplugs--are being erected at Midway to handle the power from two major plants that will be revving up in the coming months: PG&E National Energy's La Paloma plant, the one near McKittrick; and Edison Mission Energy's Sunrise plant, just south of Taft. ??The county is served by two major natural gas pipelines, which will be tapped to run the plants. In fact, Kern contains the state's largest known reservoirs of natural gas. ??Another of Kern's geographic advantages? ??""You look around, and you'll see there aren't a lot of people living around here,"" observed Stephen Whaley, who is overseeing construction of the Sunrise plant. In the surrounding hills, an orchard of oil rigs bobbed in the morning haze. Dirt roads cut crudely across the landscape, bisecting a crisscross of steam pipes, fuel lines and electrical wires. ??""This area is all about oil,"" Whaley said. Casting a glance at the modular 560-megawatt plant rising behind him, he added with a wry smile, ""You know, I guess you could look at this from the road, and you could make the argument that it improves the looks."" ??The Sunrise plant, a relatively simple single-cycle plant, is expected to fire up 320 megawatts of its total output by Aug. 1, a scant nine months after construction began. The other plants--more complex and efficient dual-cycle operations--will be opening over the next several years, assuming all receive final approval. ??The lack of major opposition to the plants is, of course, another reason developers see Kern County as a good place to build. The county has long had a more intimate relationship with energy--oil, gas, electricity--than most places. To people here, the link between a natural gas well and a lightbulb, or an oil derrick and a gas pedal, is neither theoretical nor especially threatening. They're comfortable with energy. ??Kern produces more crude oil than any other county in the United States outside Alaska. Property taxes from oil companies have helped build handsome new schools in Bakersfield, the county seat and largest city. The companies' big payrolls have helped populate elegant subdivisions with names that sound vaguely Houstonian: Seven Oaks, River Oaks, Landmark Estates. ??Which brings us to the Texas connection. ??It's hard to overlook it, in a county that runs on oil and cotton and boasts a country music scene to rival Austin's. Conversations in the finer Bakersfield restaurants are filled with references to trips to Texas, of colleagues in Midland and Odessa. A Bakersfield radio station was running a contest recently: The winners would be flown to a bull riding championship in Houston. ??Until December 1999, American Airlines offered direct jet service between Bakersfield and Dallas. It stopped after Occidental Petroleum moved its headquarters from Bakersfield to Houston. ??This is a county where President Bush received more support in the November election than he did in Texas, his home state. But then, Bush already had a Bakersfield connection: He lived there briefly as a child when his father, former President George Bush, worked in the Kern oil fields. ??""You look at the topography around Bakersfield, and the county's morals and ethics--that predominantly conservative attitude that we have around here--and you look at the oil, and you could be in Midland,"" said John Allen, the general manager of Occidental of Elk Hills, which is developing a power plant in tandem with Sempra Energy of San Diego. ??A lot of people in Kern County will tell you they don't mind being an energy farm for the state. It's a living, after all. ??""It's good to be working at home,"" said Joe Ryan, a Bakersfield pipe welder who has spent years on the road seeking the heavy construction work that seemed to have vanished in his hometown. Now he's working at the La Paloma plant, a 1,048-megawatt behemoth that will come online in phases beginning in December. ??About 800 people are at work on the plant, and several hundred more will be employed in the coming months. And after that plant is done, there will be others to build. ??""This is a good job here, I tell you what,"" said Ryan, 47, who has been banking his overtime on six 10-hour days a week--sometimes more. ??County Sees Itself as 'Part of the Solution' ??But there are some signs of simmering resentment, especially among county leadership. After all, if every other county produced just half the electricity that Kern generates, California wouldn't have an energy crisis. And people in Kern County are getting hit with the same spring-loaded electricity bills, the same rolling blackouts as everybody else. ??""I think the people of California are either going to be part of the solution or part of the problem,"" said Assemblyman Roy Ashburn (R-Bakersfield). ""And in Kern County, we have a long history of being part of the solution, especially when it comes to energy issues."" ??Elsewhere in the state, Ashburn sees ""a lot of arrogance--people who enjoy the benefits of a very high quality of life, enjoy the benefits of electric power for jobs and for their personal life, but with an exclusivity that it's someone else's problem to create that for them. We don't have that attitude in Kern County."" ??Power Buildup in Kern County ??Six new major gas-fired power plants are expected to be built in Kern County over the next several years, making the county the power capital of the state. ??* ??RELATED STORY ??Letter to Bush: Gov. Davis will ask for wholesale energy price caps. B1 GRAPHIC: PHOTO: Tom Romesberg, general manager of La Paloma plant being built in Kern County, stands next to the unit's cooling tower. PHOTOGRAPHER: AL SEIB / Los Angeles Times PHOTO: From rigs and pipelines like these near Taft, Kern pumps more crude oil than any other county in the U.S. outside Alaska. With several gas-fired power plants coming online in the next several years, the county will solidify its place as California's energy capital. PHOTOGRAPHER: AL SEIB / Los Angeles Times GRAPHIC: Power Buildup in Kern County, Los Angeles Times LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS ??????????????????Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company New York Times ?????????????????May 29, 2001, Tuesday, Late Edition - Final SECTION: Section A; Page 12; Column 1; National Desk LENGTH: 1078 words HEADLINE: For Crucial California Trip, Bush Calibrates How Best to Handle State's Energy Crisis BYLINE: ?By DAVID E. SANGER DATELINE: LOS ANGELES, May 28 BODY: ??Days after he suffered the biggest political setback of his four-month-old presidency and then won the tax cut that he staked his campaign upon, President Bush traveled tonight to California, carefully calibrating how to deal with the state's energy crisis. ??After Memorial Day celebrations in Washington and Mesa, Ariz., Mr. Bush began his first visit as president to the most populous state, which he lost by roughly 12 percentage points in November's election. The visit seems likely to showcase the clash between two very different energy strategies and political strategies. ???Mr. Bush will meet briefly on Tuesday with Gov. Gray Davis, who will insist, as he did again today, that the federal government impose price caps on wholesale electric power. ??The White House says Mr. Bush will refuse, again. He will argue that such caps would only discourage increased production of electric power. ""We think that's a mistake,"" Vice President Dick Cheney said on Friday, talking about why he rejected those options when he prepared the energy policy the administration made public 10 days ago. ??But Mr. Bush knows that how he handles the California energy crisis could prove critical to his political fortunes, especially now that his party's loss of control in the Senate seems bound to slow or derail passage of major elements of his energy plan. ??Moreover, the president can no longer argue that the best cure for high energy prices is a tax cut, because that is now legislative history. As one of his aides said this weekend, after Congress approved the $1.35 trillion tax cut that will be phased in over the next 10 years, ""we will have to turn now to the other arguments."" ??Most of those arguments involve urging the rest of the country not to follow California in a partial deregulation of the market, with disastrous results. ??Repeatedly Mr. Bush has chastised California's politicians, and by implication Mr. Davis himself, for ignoring politically unpalatable choices to avert the state's power-generating crisis. Ten days ago, standing in front of a hydroelectric plant in Pennsylvania, Mr. Bush used the state as Exhibit A for his argument about what happens when population rises, when over-regulation freezes the construction of new power plants and the stringing of new transmission lines, and when politicians fail to plan for the long term. ??""The problems in California shows that you cannot conserve your way to energy independence,"" Mr. Bush said then. ??At the same time, his aides were pointing to polls showing Mr. Davis's approval ratings plunging. They did not mention that Mr. Bush's ratings in the state were hardly any better. A series of recent polls show that roughly two-thirds of Californians believe Mr. Bush should be doing far more to help the state, though it is unclear exactly what kind of help they have in mind. ??So Mr. Bush's aides have been struggling for days to choreograph the two-day visit here, trying to find ways to differ with Mr. Davis without seeming callous about the problem or in conflict with the state. ??The betting is that Mr. Bush will focus on long-term solutions, in contrast to Mr. Davis's call for the quicker fix of price caps. ??The effort started today. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham issued an order of chiefly symbolic importance, saying his department would move quickly to determine whether investors were interested in financing and co-owning a new transmission line that could bring more power to the state. ??""The level of interest will be a factor in the decision to build the line later this year,"" the Energy Department said. It said that it would proceed with studies of how the land could be acquired, by eminent domain if necessary, and that it would speed ahead with environmental reviews. ??But Mr. Abraham left wide open the question of whether Washington would go ahead with the project even if no private financing was available. ??""The Bush administration is taking a leadership role in addressing a long-neglected problem in California's electricity transmission system,"" Mr. Abraham said. ""California's electricity problems developed over a period of years and cannot be solved overnight. However, we can move now on actions that will help avert the same types of problems from recurring year after year."" ??The statement was clearly intended as a prelude to the meeting with Mr. Davis, which will be closed to the press. So will a meeting with energy entrepreneurs. (Mr. Bush passed on Mr. Davis's suggestion of a forum with small-business owners and residents who have seen the lights go out.) ??Few expect Mr. Bush or Mr. Davis to change his mind about energy caps after their meeting. ??But for Mr. Bush it will not all be tough love. On Tuesday morning Mr. Bush is scheduled to travel to Camp Pendleton to repeat his call for the military and other federal users of power in California to flip off their switches whenever possible. But given his own comments, and Mr. Cheney's, about the limited utility of conservation, that order could strike some Californians as a little hollow. ??Later he will give a trade speech in Los Angeles, underscoring the message that if California hopes to remain the world's greatest exporter of high technology -- if it were a nation, California would be the world's sixth-largest economy -- it must find new ways to produce and deliver electricity. ??Already, leading Silicon Valley companies are threatening to build their next-generation chip fabrication plants elsewhere, probably in Texas, which has a surplus of generating capacity, a move that would further undermine Mr. Davis's stewardship. ??In fact, Mr. Bush's Texas roots will never be far from the political battlefield here. Mr. Davis has accused Texas energy companies of profiteering at California's expense. To press the case, he has hired two political operatives from the Clinton White House, Marc D. Fabiani and Chris Lehane, who are being paid tens of thousands of dollars a month to make the case for price caps. ??California's attorney general, Bill Lockyer, also a Democrat, suggested to The Wall Street Journal last week that some time in jail would be the best way to deal with one of Mr. Bush's biggest supporters -- Kenneth Lay, who heads the Enron Corporation and has sought to influence the selection of members of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. ??The comments may have been partly facetious, but they were not interpreted that way here. ??http://www.nytimes.com LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS ??????????????Copyright 2001 Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service ???????????????????????Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service ??????????????????????????The Orange County Register 29, 2001, Tuesday SECTION: DOMESTIC NEWS KR-ACC-NO: ?K7500 LENGTH: 825 words HEADLINE: California's power crisis generating lots of heat BYLINE: By John Howard BODY: ??SACRAMENTO, Calif. _ Detectives would seem to be tripping over each other to discover who did what to whom, and why, in California's energy crisis. ??While electricity may be scarce, investigations are plentiful. A dozen major probes are afoot, many overlap, and more loom. The atmosphere is heated, the rhetoric strong. State, federal and local investigators, along with court officers, financial experts and special investigators, are poring over thousands of pages of documents from government agencies and private companies. ??At the top of the swarming heap is the $10 million investigation mounted by the state Attorney General's Office to answer the core question: Did a handful of power sellers fix prices to bilk Californians of billions of dollars? ??But it's not just the government that is busy. The companies themselves _ which have categorically denied any wrongdoing _ are overwhelmed by the scrutiny. ??""We are supplying reams and reams of documents. ... It is a distraction from our day-to-day work, there's no question,"" said Tom Williams of North Carolina-based Duke Energy, which operates several power plants in California. ""It affects our employees and their families, this barrage of innuendo. I don't know what more we can do."" ??Accompanying the investigations are at least a half-dozen lawsuits against the companies by individuals. Like the probes, the suits contend the companies improperly manipulated the market. Legislative leaders, meanwhile, have sued the federal government, contending it has failed to protect consumers from price-gouging. ??""This all permeates our business in so many ways,"" said Gary Ackerman of the Western States Power Forum, a group that represents power sellers and buyers in the West. ""It even affects my ability to talk to the newspapers, because we're afraid statements may turn up later and be used as evidence. We're not sure what we're dealing with, whether a suit or even a grand jury if the (attorney general) decides to take criminal action, as he said he might."" ??The state's top prosecutor said that, indeed, criminal charges are a possibility. ??""There is an investigation under way that involves potential criminal conduct,"" said Sandra Michioku, a spokeswoman for Attorney General Bill Lockyer. It could be at least eight weeks before that probe is completed, she said. ??Other investigating agencies include the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the California Public Utilities Commission, the city attorneys' offices in Long Beach, Los Angeles and San Francisco; California's grid manager, the Independent System Operator; the obscure Electricity Oversight Board, which oversees the ISO; and the state Senate and Assembly. ??The state has even considered asking two more federal agencies, the Department of Energy and the Federal Trade Commission, to get into the act. Some offices are conducting multiple investigations. In the case of at least two agencies, the PUC and the Attorney General's Office, the investigations are being at least partly coordinated. Some agencies are examining the same issues. The PUC, the attorney general and ISO, for example, all are looking at whether power plants were shut down to drive up demand and prices. ??""There is a lot of overlap and there probably are problems of coordination,"" said Nettie Hoge of The Utility Reform Network of San Francisco, a grass-roots watchdog group. ??With so many agencies trying to extract information, Hoge said, even those who have done no wrong are concerned about talking freely because of the greater likelihood that proprietary information will leak to competitors. ??Others feel the overlap is beneficial. ??""When you're up against an industry as wealthy and powerful as the energy industry, it's probably better to double-team them,"" said Doug Heller of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights. ??Hoge believes that if any investigation is going to produce results, it will be Lockyer's, ""because the governor has thrown all the resources that way."" ??Investigators have requested mountains of paperwork. Transaction and maintenance documents, market reports, financial records, even e-mails _ all have been sought. ??Martin Wilson, a spokesman for Texas-based Reliant, contends the intensity of the probes could have negative long-term effect on California's business climate. ??""There is a climate of instability and uncertainty that makes companies rethink their decisions about investments (in California),"" he said. ??But for consumer groups, the goal of all these investigations is straightforward. ??""Certainly, we're really hopeful that these investigations will lead to refunds for customers,"" said TURN's Mindy Spatz. ""There is a widespread belief among people who follow these issues that widespread gaming and manipulation has occurred in the market."" ??(c) 2001, The Orange County Register (Santa Ana, Calif.). ??Visit the Register on the World Wide Web at http://www.ocregister.com/ JOURNAL-CODE: OC LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS ?????????????????Copyright 2001 The Chronicle Publishing Co. ?????????????????????????The San Francisco Chronicle ?????????????????????MAY 29, 2001, TUESDAY, FINAL EDITION SECTION: NEWS; Pg. A1 LENGTH: 1291 words HEADLINE: Crisis no sweat to some offices; Many offices keep cool in crisis; Air conditioners blast in state's energy centers SOURCE: Chronicle Staff Writer BYLINE: Steve Rubenstein BODY: Some very cool places to be during the dog days of spring and summer turn out to be the places with their fingers on California's air conditioning switch. ???If only the entire state could cram itself into the cavernous control room in Folsom of the Independent Systems Operator, where the air is a comfortable 69 degrees and receptionists wear sweaters at high noon -- when it's upwards of 90 degrees outside. ???Or the Pacific Gas and Electric Co. lobby in downtown San Francisco, where the air is an even chillier 65 degrees, which admittedly isn't much of a bounty, considering it's usually that cool outside anyway. ???Other cool places to be are the state Capitol, where legislators who promulgate energy edicts hang out, and the headquarters of the state Public Utilities Commission, where bureaucrats who promulgate energy edicts hang out. ???Armed with a high-tech digital thermometer, The Chronicle made the rounds of the energy crisis poohbahs, to make sure they are practicing what they are preaching. ???Some were, some weren't. Those that weren't blamed it all on that most familiar of modern scapegoats, the computer. ???Computers must be kept cool -- in the 60s for big mainframes and a bit more for the smaller units most folks use, though some can go into the 80s without hiccuping. So generally, people who work alongside the computers get to keep cool, by association, although it's the computer that counts. ???The ISO headquarters, located in an industrial park 20 miles east of Sacramento, is a delightfully cool and comfortable place when the outside temperature soars into the 90s and 100s. ???The reception area, the only room accessible to the outraged public, is a fairly stiff 76 degrees -- only two degrees cooler than the 78 degrees recommended by President Bush and the federal energy crisis czars and czarinas. ???But take a step past the lobby security doors and the temperature plummets. In the main hallway, the temperature is 73 degrees. And in the control room, where two dozen engineers and technicians sit at consoles and monitor the flow of California electricity on a giant diagram of state power lines so they can order blackouts for everyone else -- the temperature is 69 degrees. ???NO SWEATING AT ISO ???Some managers do not take off their sports coats and jackets. ???""We want these people to be comfortable,"" explained Tony Capasso, facilities manager for the ISO complex. ""We don't want these people sweating bullets in the middle of a crisis."" ???Inside the state Capitol, where legislators and the governor preach compliance with federal guidelines calling for 78-degree thermostats, the temperature dips into the high 60s. The coolest spots are the press briefing room and the treasurer's old office. ???GOVERNOR'S OFFICE ???The governor's suite is in the mid-70s, apparently because folks are often coming by with thermometers and it wouldn't do not to set an example. Press secretary Steve Maviglio said Governor Gray Davis is a practice-what-he-preaches kind of guy who keeps corridors dark, shades drawn, air conditioners idle. His personal secretary works in short sleeves, with a cheap plastic fan humming nearby. ???""It's so dark in the hall that we're always bumping into things,"" said one aide. ???Even so, the temperature in the governor's suite of offices is three degrees cooler than the 78 degrees recommended by President Bush -- not the first time the two men have failed to agree. ???THE LEGISLATURE ???The Assembly chamber is 71 degrees while the Senate chamber -- with 40 fewer legislators spewing forth -- is 73 degrees. But the Senate chamber has a southern exposure, one Capitol guide explained. ???""Hot air from the people sitting inside has nothing to do with it,"" he said. ???In San Francisco, the temperature inside cavernous City Hall dips in spots to the mid-60s. College student Jasmine Westbrook, who dropped by with her art class on a project to sketch the interior of the building, was doing her sketching while wearing a windbreaker to keep warm. ???""I want to stay comfortable,"" she said. ""It think it's supposed to be hotter in here, isn't it?"" ???The mayor's office, at 73 degrees, was eight degrees warmer than another office down the hall, even without the mayor sitting in it. ???63 AT THE PUC ???At the headquarters of the state Public Utilities Commission, which is supposed to be keeping an eye on the self-declared bankruptcy of the utility that mails out the bills, the lobby temperature is 63 degrees. ???Chief engineer David Omosheyin, eyeing The Chronicle's thermometer nervously, insisted the 63-degree reading was caused by the lobby's proximity to the front door, where the outside temperature at the moment was in the low 60s. He invited the thermometer to visit the upper floors, where the temperature was 70. ???As for San Francisco's federal buildings: Bush would probably not frown. ???His orders appeared to be followed during The Chronicle's visits, so much so that it was actually hotter inside than out. Though that wouldn't be hard, considering it was in the low 60s outside. And the places measured happened to be courtrooms and tax offices, where the body heat from anxiety alone could probably melt the paint some days. ???San Franciscans, Omosheyin said, are losing their perspective when it comes to things like electricity, energy alerts and rolling blackouts. In his native country of Nigeria, he said, the electricity runs sporadically, if at all. ???""There the power can go off for a week,"" he said. ""The world goes on. Here, people take a lot of things for granted, and electricity is one of them."" ???As for the offices of the places that report on such matters, they fared about the same. ???The Walnut Creek bureau of The Chronicle, where the sun sizzles into the 90s with regularity in the summer, is kept at 67 degrees because of all the computers. The main newsroom of The Chronicle is kept at 71 degrees, because of all the computers. But the reception room was 71 degrees, too, and there aren't any computers there, not a one. ???Some offices keeping their cool Place ????Outside ?temperature Control Room, California Independent Systems Operator (Folsom) ?????????????????69 ??????90 Governor's office, Capitol (Sacramento) ???75 ??????94 Press briefing room, Capitol (Sacramento) ?68 ??????94 Caltrans headquarters (Sacramento) ????????70 ??????94 Chronicle bureau newsroom (Walnut Creek) ??67 ??????90 Mayor's Office, San Francisco City Hall ???73 ??????63 Calif. Public Utilities Commission lobby (San Francisco) ???????????????????????????63 ??????63 State Building (San Francisco) ????????????69 ??????63 Courtroom, 19th floor, Federal Building (San Francisco) ???????????????????????????70 ??????63 Lobby, Pacific Gas and Electric headquarters (San Francisco) ??????????????65 ??????65 IRS office, Federal Building (San Francisco) ???????????????????????????69 ??????63 Main newsroom, San Francisco Chronicle (San Francisco) ???71 ??????64 ???E-mail Steve Rubenstein at srubenstein@sfchronicle.com. GRAPHIC: PHOTO (2):CHART: SEE END OF TEXT, (1) It's too warm for jackets in the chief clerk's office in the state Capitol building in Sacramento., (2) Jane Malison of Millbrae needed a fan while touring a warm section of the state Capitol, but other parts of the building are kept below 70 degrees. / Photos by Kat Wade/The Chronicle LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS ?????????????????Copyright 2001 The Chronicle Publishing Co. ?????????????????????????The San Francisco Chronicle ?????????????????????MAY 29, 2001, TUESDAY, FINAL EDITION SECTION: NEWS; Pg. A1 LENGTH: 1238 words HEADLINE: Bush facing Davis' heat over energy; In first visit to state as president, he'll hear governor's plea for help SOURCE: Chronicle Political Writers BYLINE: Carla Marinucci, Lynda Gledhill BODY: President Bush wasn't on California soil for more than five minutes yesterday when he was drawn into his first debate on the state's power crunch. ???Rep. Brad Sherman, a Democrat from Thousand Oaks who met Air Force One on the tarmac at Los Angeles International Airport along with a group of high school students, wasted no time button-holing the president for what appeared to be an animated conversation. ???""I brought up . . . the idea that after his meeting with our governor, I hoped he would be in favor of wholesale regulation (of energy prices),"" Sherman said later. ""He disagreed with me."" ???Sherman -- who two weeks ago suggested that the headline to the president's national energy policy should be ""Bush to California: Drop Dead"" -- didn't seem optimistic yesterday about Bush's 48-hour visit to the state. ""I think that the president's policies show either a lack of understanding of what's really going on in California, or a lack of concern,"" he said. ???That vignette underscored some of the challenges facing Bush, who arrived in California as protesters geared up and Democratic Gov. Gray Davis prepared to press him for federal action on the state's power troubles. ???Besides Sherman, Bush was greeted by a crowd of cheering Republicans, including Secretary of State Bill Jones and Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan, the former a declared GOP candidate for governor in 2002, the latter a rumored one. ???But today, Bush will sit down with the present governor, who lately has been blistering in his criticism of the president. ???""The last time I looked, California was still part of the United States of America,"" Davis told reporters this weekend. ""We have contributed disproportionately to the economic growth of this country. There's no reason why a president should not respond to a legitimate request from the chief executive of the largest state in the union."" ???In his first visit to California since just before the election, Bush plans to emphasize the energy crisis -- but will focus on it through the lens of his own energy plan. ???ENERGY SECRETARY ACTS ???Just hours before the president landed, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham ordered a speedup in planning to relieve a notoriously overloaded electricity transmission line in California. ???Abraham's holiday action was timed to provide a bit of positive news for Bush to announce in California. He ordered the Western Area Power Administration, a 15-state marketing arm of the Energy Department, to complete planning and seek outside financing to reduce the transmission bottleneck on California's Path 15, which connects the northern and southern parts of the state. ???This morning, Bush will visit the Marine Corps base at Camp Pendleton, near San Diego, to underscore his conservation order for a 10 percent cut in energy usage in federal buildings and military facilities. ???In Los Angeles, he will deliver a wide-ranging talk before the World Affairs Council and lead a discussion among business leaders about technological advances in energy conservation. ???Then, he will head to Fresno and Sequoia National Park to press his initiative to improve national parks. Along the way, protesters have vowed to provide a vocal commentary on Bush's energy and environmental policies. ???But the real drama of the trip will no doubt be the sit-down between Bush and Davis today. The governor pushed for a lengthy, open meeting with Bush that would include testimony from officials and consumers affected by the energy crisis. Bush's camp announced Friday the meeting would be 20 to 30 minutes -- in private. ???Davis plans to outline steps the state has taken to alleviate the energy crisis, and what it wants the federal government to do -- including implementing price caps on the wholesale cost of energy, cost-based pricing, and the possibility of ordering refunds. ???DAVIS THREATENING SUIT ???The governor has said he will consider suing the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission -- the agency charged with overseeing energy prices -- if it does not impose temporary price caps. ???And the state Legislature has already filed a suit, saying the commission has failed to stop what it has determined are ""unjust and unreasonable prices."" ???With California's energy woes worsening and a summer of rolling blackouts predicted, the Bush-Davis session holds potentially deep political pitfalls for both leaders, both of whom are suffering in state polls as a result of their handling of the energy crisis. ???Bush needs to demonstrate his concern for California, a state that gave a 12-point margin of victory to Al Gore in the presidential election. ???But even as Bush adviser Karen Hughes told state reporters this week that the president had arrived to show he cares, Vice President Dick Cheney again chastised state officials for delaying their response to the energy crisis ""because all of the action was potentially unpleasant."" ???And Cheney signaled that the administration would resist long-term price caps, saying, ""We think that's a mistake."" ???Such talk drew fire from Davis' senior political adviser, Garry South, who charged that Cheney's words demonstrated insensitivity to California's troubles and only underscored the perception of an ""all-oil, all-the-time ticket."" ???Davis, whose campaign for re-election next year will depend on his handling of the crisis, has stepped up his criticism of Bush and profit-hungry energy firms, particularly those from Texas, in recent weeks. ???And yesterday, signaling no letup, Davis' supporters made an unusual holiday conference call to again press his case for federal action. They argued that without immediate intervention from the Bush administration, the economy of California -- and potentially the entire nation -- was at risk. ???'THIS ENORMOUS SHOCK' ???""We have this enormous shock in prices that needs to be addressed and not ignored,"" said Joseph Fichero, head of Sabre Partners and a consultant to Davis. ???Alan Blinder, a Princeton economist and former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve, warned that energy woes in California alone would ""take almost a half a percent of the gross domestic product off of the national economy."" ???Blinder and others argue that short-term relief -- for about 6 to 12 months -- is necessary while new power plants are being built. ???""Most times and most places, I agree price caps are not the long-run solution, but they can be part of a short-term solution,"" Blinder said. ""There really is a case for temporary price caps to shield consumers and the California and national economy from the full force of the energy shock."" ???Limited new price caps approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on the sale of wholesale electricity begin today in California. But the temporary caps, which go into effect when the electricity reserves dip below 7.5 percent, have been lambasted by Davis as ineffective and inadequate. ???Political analysts say Bush's resistence on the issue could cost him in California -- and elsewhere. ???""(California) is probably an area where he is criticized more than any other region in the country,"" said Mark DiCamillo, director of the statewide Field Poll. ""Californians are looking to Bush for some relief -- and to the extent they don't get it, Bush may be in some jeopardy here.""Chronicle news services contributed to this report. / E-mail the writers at cmarinucci@sfchronicle.com and lgledhill@sfchronicle.com. GRAPHIC: PHOTO (2), (1) Rep. Brad Sherman (left), D-Thousand Oaks, buttonholed President Bush as he arrived at Los Angeles International Airport to discuss the state's energy crisis., (2) President Bush signed autographs for students from El Camino High School at Los Angeles airport. Bush is to meet with Gov. Davis today. / Photos by Carlos Avila Gonzalez/The Chronicle LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS 2001 Gannett Company, Inc. TODAY ?????????????????????May 29, 2001, Tuesday, FIRST EDITION SECTION: NEWS; Pg. 3A LENGTH: 426 words HEADLINE: Davis to urge Bush to back electricity price cap BYLINE: Laurence McQuillan DATELINE: LOS ANGELES BODY: LOS ANGELES -- California Gov. Gray Davis will urge President Bush today to back a 2-year cap on electricity costs as the best way to keep his power-starved state -- and possibly the U.S. economy -- from sinking into recession. ???The Democratic governor and Republican president, who have been sparring from afar over energy policy, will meet here to discuss their differences. The White House has said repeatedly that it opposes price caps as a way to deal with energy shortages in California. ??In an interview with USA TODAY, Davis said a limit on wholesale electricity costs is needed while the state attempts to build 15 new power plants. He said that would still allow a 30% profit margin. ??""While the president didn't create this problem, he is uniquely situated to solve it,"" Davis said. ""I'll make clear that he has an opportunity to relieve the pain and give California the breathing space to put more plants online."" ???Bush, making his first visit to California as president, unveiled a long-term energy policy this month that calls for increased production and, to a lesser extent, conservation. The president will promote conservation steps being taken by the federal government during a visit today to the Marine Corps base at Camp Pendleton. ??""The president believes that imposing price caps will only make the problem worse,"" White House spokesman Dan Bartlett said. ??Davis, whose popularity has plummeted as Californians cope with blackouts to offset electricity shortages, said his state's problems could hurt all Americans if they are not dealt with quickly. ""I'm asking for some form of relief that reduces the outrageous prices we're currently bearing,"" he said. ""Without that relief, lots of people will lose their businesses, and California could well be dragged into a recession. Since we're about one-eighth of the national economy, that doesn't bode well for America."" ???The California Public Utilities Commission has announced rate increases of up to 50% for businesses and 37% for homes. ??Bush has sidestepped California after losing the state by 12 percentage points to Democrat Al Gore last year in the presidential election. But with Democrats targeting several GOP House members in next year's elections, Republicans must go on the offensive or risk losing control of the closely divided House of Representatives. ??Davis, a possible presidential candidate in 2004, said he wants to avoid rancor with Bush: ""I'm saying, 'Look, we got into this in a bipartisan way. We should get out of it in a bipartisan way.' "" LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS 2001 The Washington Post Washington Post ?????????????????????May 29, 2001, Tuesday, Final Edition SECTION: A SECTION; Pg. A02 LENGTH: 639 words HEADLINE: Energy Chief Moves To Aid California; Transmission Plan Precedes Bush Visit BYLINE: Mike Allen, Washington Post Staff Writer DATELINE: LOS ANGELES, May 28 BODY: ???President Bush landed at ground zero of the nation's energy worries tonight, hours after Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham speeded up planning to relieve a notoriously overloaded electricity transmission line through California. ???Abraham's holiday action was timed to provide a bit of news for Bush to announce during his first presidential trip to California, where he is to hold a politically charged private meeting with Gov. Gray Davis (D) on Tuesday. Bush's aides said he will pledge to cooperate with California but will stick to his position that no action by the federal government can prevent the rolling blackouts expected this summer. ???Abraham ordered the Western Area Power Administration, a 15-state marketing arm of his department, to complete planning and seek outside financing for an increase in transmission capacity that he said would be ""a big step in the right direction, and a big step forward for Californians."" ???""California's electricity problems developed over a period of years and cannot be solved overnight,"" Abraham said in a news release. ""However, we can move now on actions that will help avert the same types of problems from recurring year after year."" Today's action is designed to reduce the bottleneck on California's Path 15, which connects the northern and southern parts of the state. ???Davis, who is seeking reelection next year, has seen his poll ratings plummet as electricity prices soared, utilities hit dire financial straits, and homes and businesses were surprised with blackouts. ???Bush has taken several steps to try to encourage additional power generation in the state but has maintained since before he took office that California's problems were created here -- through a troubled effort at electricity deregulation and public opposition to construction of additional power plants -- and would have to be solved here. ???Davis plans to use the meeting to lobby Bush once again to endorse a cap by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on the wholesale price of electricity. Again and again, the administration has said it will not take that step. ???""This administration does not, and will not, support energy price controls,"" Bush told a business audience in March. ""Price controls do not increase supply, and they do not encourage conservation. Price controls contributed to the gas lines of the 1970s. And the United States will not repeat the mistake again."" ???Davis energy advisers told reporters on a conference call today that without the cap, California energy costs could be $ 50 billion higher this year than two years ago. Alan S. Blinder, the Princeton University economist and former Federal Reserve Bank vice chairman, said on the call that California's energy crisis ""should be enough to get the attention of policymakers in Washington."" ???The visit by Bush, who flew here after making a Memorial Day speech at a fighter aircraft museum in Mesa, Ariz., is being carefully managed to avoid contact with the general public. After speaking to military families at Camp Pendleton on Tuesday morning, he plans to address a luncheon meeting of the Los Angeles World Affairs Council, which has sold out of tickets at $ 75 for members or $ 85 for guests. ???Afterward, Bush will hold a closed-door session with business people and then meet with Davis for 20 minutes. As Bush departs, Davis plans to make an immediate statement for cameras. ???Although Bush says he has taken more than a dozen steps to help California, Davis says price caps are essential, and has said he may sue the federal government in an effort to get them if Bush does not go along. ???""He has been helpful on a number of small matters, and I appreciate his assistance,"" Davis said during a telephone interview on Friday. ""But the big enchilada is the price of electricity."" LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS 2001 The Washington Post Washington Post ?????????????????????May 29, 2001, Tuesday, Final Edition SECTION: A SECTION; Pg. A03 LENGTH: 1936 words HEADLINE: It's Still Dawn for Solar Power in L.A.; Despite City Subsidies, Homeowners Hesitate to Install Expensive Alternative Energy Source BYLINE: William Booth, Washington Post Staff Writer DATELINE: LOS ANGELES BODY: ???One year ago this city announced its intent to become ""the Solar Capital of the World,"" with 100,000 roofs covered with solar electric panels by the end of the decade, an audacious goal to transform the homes of this smoggy but sunny metropolis into miniature power plants. ???To fulfill what is perhaps the nation's most ambitious solar campaign, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power began offering substantial ""buy down"" subsidies that would reimburse rate payers for half the price of each new solar energy system. For the average home, a photovoltaic package costs between $ 10,000 and $ 20,000, parts and labor included, before the rebate. ???How many have been installed? ???At last count, about 40. ???That leaves only 99,960 rooftops to go. ???The Bush administration, and especially Vice President Cheney, architect of its energy plan, have been criticized for skepticism regarding alternative energy sources. But a close examination of the Los Angeles solar experiment and a review of similar programs suggest the former oilmen in the White House have a point: Solar, at least, has not proven ready for prime time. ???For all of Los Angeles's good intentions, and for all of solar's many positive attributes, the problems of harnessing its power remain. Some of those challenges are economic and some technological; others are more mundane, but often ignored, such as finding a qualified contractor a homeowner can trust to drill dozens of holes in the roofs to mount the things. ???In a reprise of the 1980s, solar again is hot. The price of photovoltaics is dropping and interest is growing. Other states such as New York, Arizona, Florida and Washington are moving to join California in major efforts to wire homes to draw power from the sun. ???But as many Americans are beginning to understand, the delivery of energy is like a complex, interconnected assembly line, and the devil lurks in the details. ???The Los Angeles experiment tells the story shared by other locales. In L.A., for example, the city's lone solar panel manufacturer has not been able to supply enough systems to meet demand. ???The systems, too, are often oversold by solar proponents. In the real world, most do not pay for themselves in a few years, as some advocates claim, but take 20 years or more to return their initial cost in the form of reduced utility bills. ???Nor are the systems maintenance-free: At a minimum, the rooftop panels must be routinely cleaned of pollution, dust and leaves. ???They cannot be installed efficiently on homes without shade-free, south-facing roofs; the shadow from a neighbor's palm tree can frustrate the system's photovoltaic cells. ???Nor will the most common systems allow buyers to live ""off the grid,"" unless they want to purchase a large bank of batteries. Even with the batteries, homeowners probably would not be able to run their washing machines and air conditioners at the same time. ???""It is not an economic proposition at this point,"" conceded Terry Peterson, a solar expert at Electric Power Research Institute in Palo Alto, Calif. But one day, Peterson predicts, 100 years from now, solar energy will provide a substantial percentage of the world's energy needs. In a decade or two, the cost of solar will likely be competitive with other energy sources such as natural gas, nuclear or coal. ???But now? It is still a luxury item. ""Like buying a swimming pool,"" Peterson said. ???""I really like the idea of running my house with solar power,"" said Andrew Chin, a potential customer in Los Angeles who has been researching a purchase. ""But they're still pretty expensive, even with the rebates, and so I gotta ask myself, what am I doing this for,"" his conscience or his wallet. ""I'm thinking I might wait until they work the kinks out."" ???The most knowledgeable and experienced solar contractor in Los Angeles is probably Graham Owen, the founder, owner and single full-time employee of Go Solar Co. ???His installation of a one-kilowatt solar electric system on a home in the San Fernando Valley was the first to be awarded a rebate by the Los Angeles power department in March. ???How many systems has he installed as part of the rebate program? Three. ???But Owen is a true believer, and over the next year, he plans to cover hundreds of roofs with solar panels. On his shelf, Owen still has an unreturned library book, ""The Coming Age of Solar Energy,"" published in 1963, and checked out from his high school in Lennox Hills, Ill., in 1979. ""I guess we're still stuck in the coming age of solar energy,"" he said, smiling. He recalled that the buzz about solar water heaters in the 1980s led to disappointment with shoddy workmanship and less than spectacular energy savings. ???Until recently, there has been little widespread interest in solar electric power. Since 1998, the California Energy Commission has been pushing its own program to encourage homeowners to erect photovoltaic panels on their roofs, offering to subsidize about one-third of the cost. ???Across a state with a population of about 35 million, only 450 solar energy systems have been installed on homes. ???Then the California energy crisis struck, with its power interruptions and steep rate increases, and the phone calls began to overwhelm Owen's voice mail. ???""On days with rolling blackouts? I get a hundred calls, maybe more,"" Owen says. His Web site, www.solarexpert.com, is now receiving 3,000 hits a day. Customers are begging him to do jobs. ???The Los Angeles power department reports a similar surge in interest since the energy crisis began six months ago. ""Customer demand has shot through the roof,"" says Angelina Galiteva, executive director for strategic planning at the Department of Water and Power. She estimates that her department receives 1,000 calls on some days about its solar subsidy program. ???Yet while the reliability and cost of solar electric technologies continue to improve, solar power today accounts for only a sliver of the national pie chart of energy production -- less than 1 percent. The country produces about 300 megawatts of electricity with solar -- about the same amount produced by a single mid-sized traditional power plant. ???The current trend for photovoltaics is not to erect large centralized solar farms in the desert, an experiment that withered in the 1980s, but to pursue ""distributed generation"" or individual units on scattered rooftops. ???The problem has consistently been the cost of the solar panels, which has been too steep to justify them, except for customers who are committed environmentalists or techies who like the elegance of the systems. ???Los Angeles began its solar experiment after Sacramento legislators mandated that utilities spend about 3 percent of their revenue on efficiency, conservation and renewable energy. For solar, the power department committed $ 75 million over the next five years -- enough to subsidize panels on 7,500 homes. ???The power department will pay $ 5 for each watt of solar installed on a residence or business. Homeowners typically purchase a one-kilowatt or two- kilowatt (1,000 or 2,000 watts, respectively) solar electric system, meaning that the municipal utility would pay between $ 5,000 and $ 10,000 of the cost up front -- an enticing, tax-free offer. ???""For many years, I wanted to do solar, but it was so expensive,"" said LaWanda Geary in the San Fernando Valley, who in April had Owen install 32 panels for a two-kilowatt system on her sunny roof. ""The rebate really got me going. I don't know many times when the government offers to pay half of anything."" ???The systems that are eligible for rebates must be tied into a utility's electric power grid, meaning that during the day, when the sun is shining, the panels are adding a stream of electrons used by the home to run its lights and appliances. ???If there is a surplus of solar power, that electricity goes back into the power lines and is passed along to a neighbor, and the electric meter at the house actually runs backward. Homeowners, however, are not selling their excess electricity -- they're giving it away to the utility company. ???On cloudy days, and at night, the home is not being powered by solar energy, but getting its electricity the traditional way from the power lines. ???Calculations on savings vary. A two-kilowatt solar system can supply an average-sized home with 20 to 80 percent of its electrical needs, depending on how many lights, appliances and air conditioners are running, and how efficient they are. ???After the subsidy, and depending on how the system is paid for (in cash or with borrowed funds), a solar system can pay for itself in as little as six years and as much as 36 years. Owen assumes about 20 years. ???Potential solar clients, moreover, often mistakenly assume that going with the sun will take them off the grid, which is not possible without a large bank of batteries that costs several thousand dollars more. Because the solar panels are still wired to the power grid, if there is a blackout, the power in a solar house goes off, just like everyone else's. If uninterrupted power is needed, Owen suggests a diesel generator. ???Galiteva does cite one real advantage of solar: It reduces the electricity that must be purchased from power companies and protects, to some degree, a solar home from the full brunt of upwardly spiraling rate increases. Unfortunately for solar enthusiasts, the L.A. Department of Water and Power, which was not deregulated along with the three other major utilities in California, has perhaps the cheapest and most stable supply of electricity in the state, making the economic argument harder to make. ???To receive the full $ 5 per watt subsidy, the L.A. Department of Water and Power requires a homeowner to purchase solar panels from a manufacturer based in the city. The idea is not only to become the solar capital of the world but also to encourage local growth of an emerging industry and create jobs. ???One hitch is that no solar panel makers were located in Los Angeles. ???After lengthy negotiations, Siemens Solar Industries, based in Camarillo, Calif., an hour's drive to the north, announced in February that it would open a solar panel manufacturing plant in Los Angeles. But it is not a complete facility: The L.A. plant does only some final assembly and then the units must be returned to Camarillo for final testing and shipping. ???Tina Nickerson, a spokeswoman for Siemens Solar, estimates her company has sold ""a couple dozen"" to L.A. homeowners for the rebate program. But she, too, reports that the interest from consumers is sometimes overwhelming and that supply has been a problem. Most U.S.-manufactured units are shipped overseas to places such as Germany, Japan and Scandinavia, which have had generous subsidies in place for years. ???LaWanda Geary had to call Siemens herself to push them to deliver panels for her house -- and she was eligible for the rebate because of a stopgap compromise that allows to Siemens to ship solar panels from Camarillo until its L.A. plant is fully operational. ???Everyone involved concedes there have been bottlenecks. Siemens now says it has enough panels to begin to meet demand, and Owen and the city are hoping things will sort themselves out, especially if more solar manufacturers are drawn to Los Angeles. But proponents worry about what will happen when the subsidies run out. ???""Selling solar is now the easy part,"" Owen says. ""I could sell a hundred a week. It's getting them up on the roof that's the hard part."" LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS ????????????????Copyright 2001 News World Communications, Inc. Washington Times ?????????????????????May 29, 2001, Tuesday, Final Edition SECTION: PART A; NATION; INSIDE POLITICS; Pg. A6 LENGTH: 1264 words BYLINE: Greg Pierce; THE WASHINGTON TIMES BODY: ??TAKING YOUR MEDICINE ??Oakland Mayor Jerry Brown, who was once governor of California, likens current Gov. ?Gray Davis' handling of the electricity crisis to his own bungling of the medfly crisis. ??""Here's an analogy to the medfly crisis,"" Mr. ?Brown said in an interview with the Los Angeles Times' Douglas Foster. ?""When I first heard about the medfly, I said, 'Well, it's just a few flies, maybe they'll go away. ?Maybe they won't keep reproducing.' And the winter came, and they stopped reproducing. ?And then, somewhere around February or March, I learned about something called 'spring emergence.' As the ground got warmer, the larvae turned into flies and more medflies started appearing. It got out of hand, and ultimately I had to order malathion spraying. ?It would have been better had I taken forceful action at the first notice of the medfly."" ??Mr. ?Foster asked: ""Are you saying that the governor missed opportunities to act early, in the same way?"" ??Mr. ?Brown replied: ""There's an analogy there. ?I didn't want to spray because I knew the people in Santa Clara County didn't want to have helicopters spraying malathion over their homes. ?It didn't sound good. ?As governor, I wouldn't have wanted to see rate increases either. ?But sometimes you have to take your medicine early. ?It's less bitter than if you postpone it."" ??Mr. ?Davis served as Mr. ?Brown's chief of staff when the latter Democrat was governor. ??ENERGETIC CRITICISM ??President Bush's energy plan, already under fire from Democrats and environmentalists, is dismissed by National Review, the conservative magazine, as so much political posturing. ??""The hyperbolic attacks on the Bush plan by environmentalists (as an attempt to poison the air and kill the caribou) shouldn't trick conservatives into an exaggerated sense of its merit,"" the magazine says in an editorial in its current issue, dated June 11. ??""The basic thrust of the administration's thinking on energy is sound: a growing economy requires more energy, which in turn entails more production. But the Bush plan itself is a political document, meant to placate corporate interests, environmentalists, and everyone in between, and so is festooned with an embarrassment of subsidies and incentives that will, at best, prove an irrelevance. ??""As Jerry Taylor of the Cato Institute writes in this issue, the phantom energy crisis is already healing itself. ?Power plants are being built at a rate that outpaces Dick Cheney's benchmark of one plant a week. Altogether, almost 100,000 new daily megawatts of electrcity capacity are scheduled to be available nationwide by next year. ?This is twice the amount of electricity that California now uses on an average day. ?While Cheney has been sitting with his advisers around a White House conference table, investors and entrepreneurs have been digging, building, and refining his energy problem into oblivion. ?By the time all the Bush plan's tax credits have kicked in, there may well be an energy glut. ?All of this is thanks to the most efficient energy plan known to man: market pricing."" ??WRONG ON BOTH COUNTS ??""The buzz in the media after Sen. ?James Jeffords' switch put Democrats in control of the Senate was that President Bush must change his ways. ?He has to become more moderate. ?Why? ?Because only that will prevent more Republican defections and it's the president's one hope for getting his agenda through Congress. ?This is wrong on both counts,"" Fred Barnes writes in the Weekly Standard. ??""Bush and GOP congressional leaders bent over backwards to accommodate Jeffords and liberal Democrats on education, the senator's top priority. Jeffords bolted anyway. ?On taxes, Bush stuck with his conservative tax cut until nearly the end, when he compromised just enough to assure passage. Jeffords voted with him,"" Mr. ?Barnes said. ??""The truth about the impact of Jeffords' move is that no political earthquake has occurred. ?The Senate is ideologically unchanged. ?The swing votes in the Senate, including John McCain, are important, but they already were. ?There's no clear path to victory for the Bush agenda, after taxes and education, but that was always true. ?To pass a patients' bill of rights, a prescription-drug benefit, or missile defense, a bipartisan coalition of some sort will be essential. ??""Yes, there's one big change with Democrats taking over: judges. ?Bush will have a harder time getting conservative nominees through a Senate Judiciary Committee run by Patrick Leahy, perhaps the most partisan Democrat on Capitol Hill. ?One more downbeat side effect: Jeffords' announcement overshadowed Bush's tax-cut victory, denying him any political momentum he might have gotten from it."" ??INCOHERENT REBEL ??""Before liberals put James Jeffords on Mount Rushmore, can we please stop and note how he's already betrayed Democrats and his own avowed principles by deciding that his defection won't take effect until after President Bush's wrongheaded tax cut has been signed into law?"" syndicated columnist Matthew Miller writes. ??""Any traitor (I mean, 'man of conscience') worth his salt shoves the knife in to the hilt - otherwise, what's the point? ?Machiavellis throughout history have wisely advised that when you move against the king, you'd better finish him off,"" Mr. ?Miller said. ??""Yet Jeffords took pains to make sure his switch wouldn't derail the centerpiece of Bush's agenda, the very agenda that inspired Jeffords' move and which Jeffords had the power to stop via his action. ??""We are dealing, in other words, with a deeply incoherent rebel. ?This would be a private matter for Jeffords to sort out with his therapist were not his cowardice in this moment of 'courage' so consequential for the country."" ??THE LONELY VERMONTER ??""In the final analysis, Vermont Sen. ?James M. ?Jeffords was out of step with his party, making his departure appropriate, if politically inconvenient. ?Those who argue that it was the party out of step with Jeffords, some political analysts are saying, are those who wish the Republicans no good."" UPI political analyst Peter Roff writes. ??""The conservative, low-tax, minimal-government Republican Party enjoys national parity with the Democrats, something the Northeastern liberal GOP could not achieve. ?Jeffords is, in that regard, these observers say, out of step with victory. ?One GOP consultant went so far as to say, 'If the Republicans were doing better in New England, Jeffords would not have been so lonely. ?Why is it that the people from states where the GOP usually doesn't win think they can tell the rest of us how to run the party and what we all should believe? ?It doesn't make sense.' (spade) ??""There are those in the GOP who regret the loss of the majority that Jeffords' defection brings, but very few, if any, are mourning the loss of the lonely Vermonter,"" Mr. ?Roff said. ??LAST WORDS ??Brill's Content asked PR pros how they would handle Vice President Richard B. Cheney's heart problems. ??""It's inconceivable that Mr. ?Cheney can put in the kind of time we're led to believe he is without putting himself at risk,"" one public relations man, John Scanlon, told the magazine. ?""My recipe for controlling the situation would be photo-ops, access to his schedule, and a couple of exclusive articles. ?He's got to convince people he's fit for the job."" ??Unfortunately, Mr. ?Scanlon did not live to see his quote in the magazine's June issue, the New York Post reports. ?He died of a heart attack. ??* Greg Pierce can be reached at 202/636-3285 or by e-mail at gpierce@washingtontimes.com. LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS ????????????????Copyright 2001 News World Communications, Inc. Washington Times ?????????????????????May 29, 2001, Tuesday, Final Edition SECTION: PART A; NATION; Pg. A4 LENGTH: 809 words HEADLINE: Bush faces tough sell on visit to California; Davis likely to be rebuffed on price caps BYLINE: Joseph Curl; THE WASHINGTON TIMES DATELINE: LOS ANGELES BODY: ??LOS ANGELES - Twenty minutes - that's how long Gov. ?Gray Davis, who has accused the Bush administration of ignoring California's energy crisis, will have to sway President Bush in a meeting today to consider imposing federal price caps on wholesale power prices. ??His plea likely will fall on deaf ears. ??""That's simply not going to happen,"" said one senior Bush official. Both Mr. Bush and Vice President Richard B. ?Cheney, who on Friday again blamed the state government of California for the energy crunch, oppose cap measures. ??In his first visit to California since the presidential election, where he lost the state to former Vice President Al Gore by 54 percent to 41 percent, Mr. Bush hopes to sell his national energy policy to a vocal group of opponents. But the hue and cry has been muted of late since residents have battled rolling blackouts and sky-high gasoline prices. ??A new poll released Friday shows 59 percent of Californians, many of whom have been longtime foes of nuclear energy, now believe the non-polluting energy source may be the way to solve the state's problems. ??Mr. ?Davis' popularity has plummeted. ?The Democrat, facing re-election next year and often mentioned as a presidential candidate, is viewed as having ""poor job performance"" by 60 percent of Californians, according to a survey by the Public Policy Institute of California. ??In a small gesture to California, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham yesterday announced plans to increase transmission capacity in California, which he said would be a ""big step"" in easing rolling power blackouts. ??Abraham ordered the Western Area Power Administration - an Energy Department arm responsible for marketing electricity from federal water projects in 15 Western states - to wrap up planning for building extra transmission capacity. ??The governor has repeatedly blamed Mr. ?Bush, who took office four months ago, for the energy crunch in California. ?He points the finger of blame far outside the state's boundaries, primarily at Washington and Mr. Bush's home state. ??""The people that have dropped the ball are the federal government,"" Mr. Davis said last week. ?""They need to reimpose a price cap because we're being obscenely gouged by price gougers out of Texas and the Southwest. ?. . . There's a massive transfer of wealth going on from ordinary citizens in California to Texas."" ??Mr. ?Davis has also charged that utility companies are withholding power in order to drive up prices, a claim the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has investigated and dismissed. ??Mr. ?Bush and Mr. ?Cheney have often pointed out that California is second only to Rhode Island in conservation efforts, but the state is on the brink of an energy supply collapse. ??Still, despite the state's failure to build new power plants, Mr. Davis says California is entitled to a federal bailout approved by Mr. Bush. ??""I'm going to keep asking him to do it because we're part of America. The state, the last three years, has led American economic growth. ?. . . We're doing everything we can out here,"" he said. ??In the Democratic response to the president's weekly radio address, Mr. Davis accused the president, a former oil man, of being concerned only with the petroleum magnates. ??""With all due respect, I urge you to stand up to your friends in the energy business and exercise the federal government's exclusive responsibility to ensure that energy prices are reasonable,"" he said. ??Many analysts, however, blame the state's deregulation scheme and failure to construct adequate electrical generating capacity. ?The price wholesale power providers can charge utilities is not capped, but the fee those companies can charge users is capped - resulting in massive debt for providers. ??The state was slow to respond to increased demand, the analysts say, even though the state is building 10 new power plants, four of which will come on line this summer. ??In his national energy policy, Mr. ?Bush lays out 105 proposals that focus on increasing domestic supply, improving the nation's ability to move energy between regions and increased conservation. ?But the policy is geared more toward long-term solutions - such as decreasing America's reliance on foreign oil - than short-term relief for Californians and motorists nationwide. ??Mr. ?Cheney, who heads the president's energy task force and said Friday that California knew ""for more than a year"" about the impending energy shortage, has promoted nuclear power as essential to America's energy needs. ?He said that at least some of the 65 power plants that need to be built annually to meet future electricity demand ought to be nuclear. ??A poll by the Field Institute last week found many Californians now agree. Although nuclear energy produces 20 percent of the nation's energy, California has just two nuclear plants. GRAPHIC: Photo, Gov. ?Gray Davis LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS ????????????????????Copyright 2001 Chicago Tribune Company Tribune ???????????????May 29, 2001 Tuesday, NORTH SPORTS FINAL EDITION SECTION: News; Pg. 6; ZONE: N LENGTH: 514 words HEADLINE: Bush backs WW II project BYLINE: From Tribune news services. DATELINE: LOS ANGELES BODY: ??President Bush promised World War II veterans a Washington memorial that ""will stand for the ages"" and paid Memorial Day tribute to America's fallen soldiers before embarking on a three-day West Coast swing to try to ease his political problems in California. ??Bush landed at ground zero of the nation's energy worries Monday night, hours after Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham speeded up planning to relieve a notoriously overloaded electricity transmission line through California. ? ??Abraham's action was timed to provide a bit of news for Bush to announce during his first presidential trip to California, where he is to hold a politically charged private meeting with Democratic Gov. Gray Davis on Tuesday. Bush's aides said he will pledge to cooperate with California but will stick to his position that no action by the federal government can prevent the rolling blackouts that are expected this summer. ??Abraham ordered the Western Area Power Administration, a 15-state marketing arm of his department, to complete planning and seek outside financing for an increase in transmission capacity that he said would be ""a big step in the right direction, and a big step forward for Californians."" ??""California's electricity problems developed over a period of years and cannot be solved overnight,"" Abraham said in a news release. ""However, we can move now on actions that will help avert the same types of problems from recurring year after year."" Monday's action is designed to reduce the bottleneck on California's Path 15, which connects the northern and southern parts of the state. ??Davis, who is seeking re-election next year, has seen his poll ratings plummet as electricity prices soared, utilities hit dire financial straits and homes and businesses were surprised with blackouts. ??For most of Monday, however, Bush focused on U.S. veterans and the solemn ceremonies in two states honoring those who never returned from America's wars. ??""Their losses can be marked, but not measured,"" Bush said at the traditional Memorial Day ceremonies at Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia. ""We can never measure the full value of what was gained in their sacrifice. We live it every day, in the comforts of peace and the gifts of freedom."" ??Bush also laid a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknowns. ??Later he traveled to Mesa, Ariz., to pay tribute to veterans at the Champlin Fighter Aircraft Museum. He asked the crowd to observe a nationwide moment of silence at 3 p.m. Arizona time. ??""Any foe who might challenge our national resolve will be repeating the grave error of defeated adversaries,"" the president said. ??Bush opened the day at the White House, where he signed legislation to construct a World War II monument on the National Mall, a setting criticized by some. Bush said the monument between the Washington Monument and Lincoln Memorial ""will stand for the ages."" ??""I will make sure the monument gets built,"" the president told an audience of veterans in the yellow-curtained East Room, among them former Sen. Bob Dole (R-Kan.), who has supported the memorial. ??. GRAPHIC: PHOTOPHOTO (color): President Bush and Maj. Gen. James T. Jackson attend Monday's wreath-laying at Arlington National Cemetery's Tomb of the Unknowns. AP photo by Ron Edmonds. LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS Associated Press The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ???????????????????????May 29, 2001, Tuesday, BC cycle AM Eastern Time SECTION: Domestic News LENGTH: 604 words HEADLINE: Bush announcing low-income aid, but no price caps BYLINE: By SCOTT LINDLAW, Associated Press Writer DATELINE: LOS ANGELES BODY: ??President Bush traveled across the country to deliver news Gov. Gray Davis doesn't want to hear: He won't force down soaring electricity prices that have cost California nearly $8 billion since January. ??The Republican president and the embattled Democratic governor arranged a 20-meeting Tuesday to talk about California's energy crisis, but there was no indication they would break their stalemate. ??Bush opposes price limits on wholesale electricity that utilities buy, arguing they do nothing to address supply-and-demand issues at the heart of the crisis. ??Davis contends federal energy regulators are ignoring their mandate to ensure ""just and fair"" electricity prices. ??With no sign of a break in the deadlock, each side maneuvered for maximum advantage from Bush's first full day in California as president. ??Davis, in an interview Tuesday on ABC's ""Good Morning America,"" defended his record on licensing more power plants. ??""We've licensed 15 plants. Ten are under construction, four will be online this summer, four next summer, and by the end of 2003 we will have built our way out of this problem. But between now and then, we are getting gouged unbelievably,"" Davis said. ??The Bush administration timed positive energy announcements to coincide with the president's visit. ??At the Marine Corps base at Camp Pendleton, Bush was announcing the expansion of a program that provides federal money to help low-income residents pay for power. ??Bush was proposing $150 million, in addition to $300 million already budgeted for a component of the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, to provide special help to cash-strapped residents of California and certain Midwest areas such as Chicago, a senior administration aide said. ??Bush was also reminding state residents of his order that military facilities in the state cut peak-hour usage by 10 percent. ??To alleviate an electricity bottleneck on a crucial south-north transmission path, the Department of Energy announced that the Western Area Power Authority will try to raise money from a variety of private and public entities to finance a crucial additional lines. ??""The Bush administration is taking a leadership role in addressing a long-neglected problem in California's electricity transmission system,"" said Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham. ""California's electricity problems developed over a period of years and cannot be solved overnight. However, we can move now on actions that will help avert the same types of problems from recurring year after year."" ??Davis had a letter for Bush from top economists who maintain price caps are justified and necessary. ??Aides to the governor expressed amazement that Bush would travel all the way to California with no major announcement in hand, and predicted Davis would respond with ""polite rage."" ??Mindful of the national stage he commanded, Davis planned a news conference to air his grievances. And he convened a panel of families he said have been victimized by the energy crisis in the same hotel where Bush was staying. ??Davis wants Bush to pressure the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to impose stiff price caps. ??Tuesday, limited caps ordered last month by FERC go into effect in California, but only when electricity reserves fall below 7.5 percent in the state - a step Davis called inadequate. ??Protesters planned demonstrations in Los Angeles and at Camp Pendleton, in San Diego County. ??Bush also arranged a speech on energy and trade to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council and planned to president over a closed-door energy round-table discussion. GRAPHIC: AP Photos DSM106, KDJ102 LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ???????????????????????May 29, 2001, Tuesday, BC cycle AM Eastern Time SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 594 words HEADLINE: Stakes are high for Davis meeting with Bush BYLINE: By GARY GENTILE, AP Business Writer DATELINE: LOS ANGELES BODY: ??With California facing a summer of outages, Gov. Gray Davis was to meet President Bush to press for a federal cap on energy prices. ??But Davis wasn't expected to win any concessions during the 20-minute Tuesday meeting where he's expected to point to Texas energy makers. ??Davis has appeared on national news programs attacking Bush for opposing price controls on wholesale electricity, and suggesting the president has ignored price-gouging by Texas-based electricity generators. ??""The president did not create this problem, but he is uniquely situated to solve it,"" Davis said Monday. ""What I'm going to ask him to do, with all respect, is to enforce federal law. The money that leaves this state goes directly to energy companies in Texas and the Southwest."" ??If Bush refuses to administer price controls as expected, Davis can use that as ammunition in his sparring with the administration. ??Bush has blamed California officials for the state's power woes and said price controls won't solve shortages. Instead, they said, Bush plans to stress his efforts to conserve energy in federal buildings and will bring one or two new initiatives to the table. ??One of them commits the federal government to helping organize a consortium to build more power lines for the state. ??Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham directed the Western Area Power Administration, a federal agency, to take the first steps to clear the way for building more transmission capacity between southern and northern California. That would help relieve a transmission bottleneck in the central part of the state. ??While this will not help this summer, Abraham said in a statement the line improvements, when completed, ""will help avert the same types of problems from recurring year after year."" ??The stakes of the meeting are high for both politicians. ??Davis, who has been mentioned as a Democratic challenger to Bush in 2004, wants federal help to solve an energy crunch that threatens rolling outages this summer and has cost state taxpayers nearly $8 million since January - the price of buying power for two cash-starved private utilities. And his plan to rescue one of those companies reportedly is faltering. ??Leaders of both the state Senate and Assembly oppose a $3 billion-plus plan to bail out Southern California Edison by buying its power lines, the Los Angeles Times reported Monday. ??Bush, meanwhile, needs to mend fences in vote-heavy California. The Republican president lost badly here in November, and polls show most Californians dislike his handling of their energy crisis. ??Bush's Tuesday agenda was heavy on energy issues. At the Marine Corps base at Camp Pendleton, near San Diego, Bush was to highlight his order that federal agencies and installations cut back energy use. Then it was on to Los Angeles to discuss his energy plan in a speech to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council. ??Bush was confronted by the issue virtually as he stepped off the plane Monday in Los Angeles. Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Los Angeles, escorted the Academic Decathlon national championship team from El Camino Real High School in Woodland Hills to meet Bush. He told the president California needs regulation of electric generators. ??""The president seems to believe just by instinct that rate regulation reduces supply and also by instinct that all those in the energy industry are fair people who are not trying to game the system,"" Sherman said. ""Anyone who studies the facts in California knows that power is being withheld in order to drive up the price."" LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 of 98 DOCUMENTS ????????????????Copyright 2001 Burrelle's Information Services NEWS ??????????????????????SHOW: WORLD NEWS NOW (2:00 AM ET) 28, 2001, Monday TYPE: Newscast LENGTH: 447 words HEADLINE: PRESIDENT BUSH VISITS CALIFORNIA WHERE POLITICIANS ARE CRITICAL OF HIS LACK OF ACTION FOR THEIR ENERGY CRISIS ANCHORS: DEREK McGINTY REPORTERS: JOSH GERSTEIN BODY: ??DEREK McGINTY, co-anchor: ??When Air Force One touches down in California today it will mark President Bush's first visit to the Golden State since taking office. Now that fact has not been lost on Governor Gray Davis who has accused the president of ignoring his state's power crisis. ?As ABC's Josh Gerstein tells us, Mr. Bush's visit could have major ramifications for his presidency and his party. ??JOSH GERSTEIN reporting: ??(VO) Since taking office, President Bush has visited 28 states, but until this week he had not found time on his schedule to visit the nation's most populous state, California. ??Mr. DAN SCHNUR (GOP Political Consultant): Because the state is going through such extraordinary times right now because of the energy crisis, his absence has been much more noticeable, and the discussion about it's been much more heightened. ??GERSTEIN: (VO) Democrats have begun an aggressive effort to paint the president and other Republicans as obstacles to resolving the energy crisis. ??Offscreen Voice: (From TV Commercial) President Bush has offered no relief to hard-pressed rate payers. ??Text: ??""The President...believe(s) that the issue is mostly a California matter..."" ??GERSTEIN: (VO) On Tuesday, Mr. Bush meets with California Governor Gray Davis. ?He, and other Democrats, want the federal government to impose caps on wholesale prices for electricity. ??Representative ANNA ESHOO (Democrat, California): Our people are hurting. We're bleeding in the sand. ?We need a tourniquet, and the president is the one that can do this. ??GERSTEIN: (VO) During his trip, President Bush plans to highlight the federal government's conservation efforts, but aides say he will not endorse price caps. ??Mr. TUCKER ESKEW (Director, White House Media Affairs): The president believes that capping wholesale prices would do nothing to lower demand, or increase supply, the two fundamental solutions to any energy problem such as this. ??GERSTEIN: Holding the line against price caps may have political costs. Most analysts give Mr. Bush little chance of winning California in 2004, but Republican congressmen there face re-election next year. ?So far, five of them have endorsed some kind of limit on electricity pricing. ??Representative RANDY CUNNINGHAM (Republican, California): We're in an extreme emergency right now. ?It takes extreme measures. ??Unidentified Woman: We are in rolling blackouts. ??GERSTEIN: (VO) While electricity may be in very short supply in California this summer, the president and politicians of all stripes are likely to find there's more than enough voter anger to go around. ?Josh Gerstein, ABC News, the White House. LOAD-DATE: May 29, 2001 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CONFIDENTIAL Attached file; [EMail-Body]= This is the negative CTC claim. Transmission and other charges we owe have been set off; ie this is a net amount and the gross CTC is much larger- on the order of $900MM. Decision to use or not is not final in Enron; keep confidential. The potential witness would be Wanda Curry. Thanks, Ray ---------------------- Forwarded by Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron on 08/10/2001 06:30 PM --------------------------- From: Wanda Curry/ENRON@enronXgate on 08/10/2001 12:40 PM CDT To: Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Attached file [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: WeatherNet; [EMail-Body]= I think this is a very interesting idea. Please get with Bill D. and make sure he gets a description of what we would need to do to physically accomodate the station and make sure he's comfortable with it before we go ahead. Laura Schwartz 03/05/2001 12:52 PM To: Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Elyse Kalmans/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: WeatherNet As part of our agreement with the Channel 2 WeatherNet program we were given the option to have a weather station at the Enron building. This would be an additional $5,000 on top of our commitment. I brought the idea to Gary Taylor and Todd Kimberlain in weather and they thought it would be a great idea to serve as the weather tracking spot in downtown Houston. They have agreed to pay the $5K for the equipment and installation. So now, in addition to Channel 2 mentioning ""WetherNet, brought to you by Enron,"" everytime they talk about the weather in downtown Houston, they will mention the current temp. at the Enron building. If you have any questions, please call me at ext. 34535. Laura [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGDE - Draft FERC Brief on Settlement
 Process; [EMail-Body]= My suggestions are attached. Take the gloves off. James D Steffes 07/06/2001 10:04 PM To: Jeffrey T Hodge/Enron@EnronXGate, Robert C Williams/Enron@EnronXGate cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Alan Comnes/Enron@EnronXGate, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron, Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron, Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, dwatkiss@bracepatt.com Subject: ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGDE - Draft FERC Brief on Settlement Process The attached is a rough draft of a potential filing Enron would make in to Judge Wagner in the Settlement process (it is unclear if this would remain confidential per the gag order). Please provide Ray Alvarez your comments. This would be filed as early as Monday am. Jim [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= On Market Power in California; [EMail-Body]= fyi. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/30/2001=20 07:43 AM --------------------------- Rosalee Fleming on 04/26/2001 04:00:22 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: =20 Subject: On Market Power in California Ken wanted you to have a copy ---------------------- Forwarded by Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron on 04/26/200= 1=20 03:51 PM --------------------------- Willliam Hogan <William_Hogan@harvard.edu> on 04/25/2001 06:34:08 AM To: ER:; cc: =20 Subject: On Market Power in California FYI.? The complete version of the following paper is available on my web pa= ge=20 at: www.whogan.com ????????ON THE EXERCISE OF MARKET POWER THROUGH STRATEGIC WITHHOLDING IN CALIFORNIA Scott Harvey and William W. Hogan April 24, 2001 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Beginning in June of 2000, the shock of unexpectedly high prices in the=20 California electricity market convinced everyone of the need for policies t= o=20 correct the apparent market failures.? The public debate and policy=20 discussions have been dominated by a focus on market power as a principal= =20 problem amenable to regulatory solution.? However, design of effective=20 policies to moderate prices or mitigate their effects depends on the=20 diagnosis of the underlying causes.? High prices attributable largely to an= =20 exercise of market power in electric generation would point to particular= =20 market participants and behaviors that could be targeted for regulatory=20 action.? By contrast, high prices attributable to bad electricity market=20 design would indicate a need for changes in the design.? High prices=20 attributable to higher fuel prices, environmental constraints and capacity= =20 shortages, on the other hand, would prompt actions to address the cost of= =20 fuel and environmental limitations and indicate that retail loads should=20 receive the appropriate price signal for conservation. Suppliers could affect market prices by strategically withholding some=20 capacity in order to profit on the capacity actually sold in the market.? B= ut=20 charging high prices during periods of scarcity is not classified as=20 exercising market power if there is no strategic withholding of supply.?=20 Likewise, refusing to supply without being paid is not an exercise of marke= t=20 power.? Although the potential for withholding exists for many suppliers, t= he=20 focus of attention has been on the exercise of market power by thermal=20 generators in California. On its face, the experience of extremely high prices suggests that the=20 exercise of market power could be important.? But at the same time the data= =20 show that there have been profound changes in the California market such th= at=20 the thermal generators have actually increased their production more than= =20 demand has grown.? If anything, thermal generators that hit annual output= =20 limits produced too much rather than too little in the summer of 2000.?=20 Furthermore, the widespread impacts of higher electricity prices throughout= =20 the western market, both on and off peak,? indicate that if the exercise of= =20 market power is important it is occurring to an extent and through channels= =20 unprecedented in this or other electricity markets.? In short, this is a=20 complicated story, and there is ample room for further investigation of the= =20 data and diagnosis of causes. Examination of the major analyses of the exercise of market power reveals= =20 that the estimated magnitude of the possible strategic withholding of=20 electric generation is small enough to make it important to verify the=20 simplifying assumptions.? If strategic withholding were large and pervasive= ,=20 then the real details of the California electricity market could be ignored= .?=20 But it is by now apparent that the evidence is not clear, and any finding o= f=20 the presence or absence of strategic withholding of generation in the=20 California electricity market could turn on the simplifying assumptions use= d=20 in the analysis of the data.? For example, annual limits on production=20 dictate that plants should not run in many hours when prices are higher tha= n=20 direct incremental costs; hence, examinations of output decisions for=20 individual hours or months are necessarily incomplete.? The variation in re= al=20 time conditions is large enough to produce significant reductions in output= =20 compared to the expectations given day-ahead prices; hence, with capacity= =20 constraints average optimal production is necessarily less than optimal=20 production at average prices.? Limits on the ramping rate of generation=20 units, start-up costs, minimum load costs and other operational=20 inflexibilities imply that a dispatch day is not just twenty-four separate= =20 hours and must be analyzed chronologically, recognizing these factors.? And= =20 so on.? Accounting for such effects can reverse the implications of the=20 previous evidence.? Unfortunately, the real details are neither simple nor= =20 incidental. It is difficult to conduct a study of market power based solely on publicly= =20 available data.? A fuller analysis would require data available only to the= =20 California Independent System Operator, and has not been done.? Many factor= s=20 contributed to higher electricity prices in California, and the market powe= r=20 theme is only, at most, part of the story.? The import of the previous=20 analyses is not to prove that market power has been exercised in the=20 California electricity market but, rather, to suggest that it might be=20 important.? The import of the sensitivity analysis here is not to prove tha= t=20 market power has not been exercised in the electricity market? but, rather,= =20 to suggest that it is unlikely to be the dominant factor and may not even b= e=20 significant.? With the available data in the public domain, and the special= =20 complications introduced by the California market design, the margin of err= or=20 in estimating the extent of the possible exercise of market power through= =20 strategic withholding of electric generation is of the same order of=20 magnitude as the effect being measured.? On balance, to date the publicly= =20 available data provides no reason for the Federal Energy Regulatory=20 Commission to change its conclusion that there is no evidence of strategic= =20 withholding nor any proof that no strategic withholding has occurred. By contrast, there is general agreement that the California electricity=20 market design is =01&seriously flawed.=018? Furthermore, there is evidence = that the=20 policy responses that have been adopted in California have accelerated an= =20 already serious market collapse.? Hence, without dismissing the possibility= =20 of the exercise of market power, the principal policy focus should be on=20 fashioning workable solutions for the other more serious problems in market= =20 design that relate to the underlying causes of the market meltdown. Separate from market power mitigation, California should pay its bills, rai= se=20 incremental prices to retail customers, and move as quickly as possible to= =20 operating a coordinated and efficient market with consistent pricing for al= l=20 that includes unit commitment, day-ahead scheduling, and real-time=20 balancing.? Although not a panacea, these steps would address immediate=20 problems and set the stage for longer-term initiatives to expand generation= =20 capacity, transmission infrastructure, and the reach of an efficient market= =20 to the western interconnected grid. William W. Hogan John F. Kennedy School of Government Harvard University 79 John F. Kennedy Street Cambridge, MA 02138 617-495-1317 (o) 617-495-1635 (f) william_hogan@harvard.edu web page: www.whogan.com or [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: DRAFT Letter to Bingaman - COMMENTS DUE COB MONDAY; [EMail-Body]= Attached is the draft EPSA position letter on the Bingaman bill that came out of yesterday's EPSA Leg. Affairs Committee meeting yesterday afternoon. It expresses strong support for the transmission/open access provisions, while noting six areas needing improvement, including the two we have noted most especially -- market-based rate authority and transparency. I think the letter looks fine, but we have any comments or changes we need to get them to EPSA on Monday. Please advise if you have any concerns about the letter. -----Original Message----- From: Jodi Empol [mailto:jempol@epsa.org] Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 1:38 PM To: undisclosed-recipients Subject: DRAFT Letter to Bingaman - COMMENTS DUE COB MONDAY We have attached a draft of a letter to Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM). This letter, which was discussed in yesterday's Legislative Affairs Committee Meeting/Call, supports the general transmission/RTO thrust of Bingaman's electricity legislation and points out some parts that need to be changed. Please review this letter and send us any comments you may have by 6 PM EDT ON MONDAY, September 17th. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Your corner on the intranet; [EMail-Body]= I think you are right. I thought we were going to do both. Elizabeth Tilney@EES 06/13/2001 04:51 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mary Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Your corner on the intranet You know I love this idea , BUT I still think we need to let Ken personally address the ""shots"" he has taken. It is just not the same to have Jeff say it is okay that the AG of California wants to put Ken in a cell with Spike! I strongly believe we need to give Ken a forum too, as he has been at the center of alot of the recent noise. I still believe a video with both of them is the right way to go...The State of Enron. I think Jeff's Corner is a great idea too...can't we do both? Ok, I have said this enough..I will go away quietly now and let the experts decide...Beth ---------------------- Forwarded by Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES on 06/13/2001 04:44 PM --------------------------- Mary Clark@ENRON 06/13/2001 01:42 PM To: Jeff Skilling/Enron@EnronXGate cc: Sherri Sera/Enron@EnronXGate, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron (bcc: Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES) Subject: Your corner on the intranet Jeff -- Our Internal Communications group is continuing to look for ways to communicate with employees in a timely manner about hot topics that are of interest to them. We're also looking to increase your exposure with employees. We have a new idea, which Sherri discussed briefly with you a couple of weeks ago. It's called ""Jeff's Corner"" and it will be a regular video message that will be posted on the intranet -- which can be accessed by 99.9% of our employees. This is how it will work. We will tape a 2-3 minute video of you talking about what's top of mind at that moment. The tone and style will be like your floor meetings (one of your best employee venues), casual and conversational. We suggest the first topic be ""The State of Enron."" There is a lot of talk among employees about the cheap shots we've taken as a company and by you and Ken, about the decline in our stock price and about the widespread re-deployment efforts. These recent events are beginning to affect morale. Employees are concerned and want to be assured that we're on the right side, that they will have jobs, that Enron will be here next year. You've helped reassure them about these things at recent floor meetings; however, that is only a small part of our global work force. Having your own corner on the intranet will have a farther reach, and we have the capability to do this in-house at very low cost. We recommend making this a regular communication feature at least monthly, although since this would only involve a few minutes of your time, you could even tape a message to employees weekly. The nice thing about this medium is we have the ability to respond immediately to current events, and having you speak to employees gives the message credibility. Future topics could address new cost saving procedures, update on Dabhol, the PRC, reasons behind an organizational announcement, The Pulse survey, etc. We'd like this to be a forum where you can talk about topics you'd like to discuss. I've checked with the technical team, and we have the capability do this now. I will check your calendar with Sherri. Let me know if you have any questions. Mary [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Interesting Idea for Enron?; [EMail-Body]= Interesting idea, but hard to see any near term benefit. I would decline. Amy Lee@ENRON 08/02/2000 09:30 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Stacy Walker/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Subject: Interesting Idea for Enron? Steve - Cindy and I discussed this and we agree there is no interest to move forward from a Community Relations/HR standpoint. We wanted to pass this along to you to see if you had any interest. Thanks! amy ---------------------- Forwarded by Amy Lee/Corp/Enron on 08/02/2000 09:22 PM --------------------------- Stacy Walker @ ENRON COMMUNICATIONS 08/01/2000 04:43 PM To: Amy Lee/Corp/Enron@Enron cc: Kelly Kimberly/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Subject: Interesting Idea for Enron? Hi, Amy - Kelly Kimberly got this letter from a woman she knows who works at Harvard, in the Kennedy School of Government, for an initiative called Women Waging Peace. Enron is a supporter of WWP, and Joe Sutton is on their corporate cabinet. What do you think about her idea below, and Enron's involvement, if any? Please feel free to pass this along to others who you think might want to consider it, or who might be more appropriate to consider it. Thanks, Stacy x3-3583 I have an interesting idea that I wanted to share with you. Just last week here at the Kennedy School, I met with a woman named Susan Bird, who sits on the Women's Leadership Board of the Kennedy School. She is the Founder and President of Women.future in New York City, NY. She headed the launch of the organization (part of which was held here at KSG, the main body of which was held in NYC and telecast to KSG). It was a masterfully conceived and brilliantly orchestrated three-phase global event for businesswomen. I imagine you heard about it. Susan told me last week that one of her current, burning interests is in how women business leaders (corporate leadership across the private and public sectors) can change and influence public policy. She wants to create a public venue, invite women business leaders, and discuss the central question, ""If we assume that today's global problems require more and more from the business world, would these problems look any different if women business leaders/owners were involved?"" Susan and I wonder if this is something Enron (and/or potentially other corporate sponsors) would like formally to sponsor. Furthermore, Susan's company could video this executive forum, streamline the video, and link it to the Women Waging Peace Website. My sense is that it's a win-win for everyone. I told her that I would contact you and discuss the possibility. Would love to hear your thoughts first, before I engage in further conversation with Susan. If this is something in which Enron is interested, I could easily arrange a phone conversation among Swanee, Susan, you, and me in the near future to discuss the idea in greater depth. I am available for a conversation about the idea anytime, and I can be reached directly at (617) 495-8330. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Next Corporate Policy Committee Offsite; [EMail-Body]= I think wholesale will be well covered. Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp. From: Sherri Sera 04/26/2001 02:51 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: RE: Next Corporate Policy Committee Offsite How much of an issue is this? So far, Mark is the only one that has responded with a conflict. Please advise. Thanks, SRS ---------------------- Forwarded by Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron on 04/26/2001 02:52 PM --------------------------- From: Nicki Daw/ENRON@enronXgate on 04/26/2001 02:41 PM To: Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: RE: Next Corporate Policy Committee Offsite Mark will be in Sydney, Australia at this time. FYI, he leaves for a loooong trip on May 12th and will not be back in the office until May 24th, and even then only for 1 day. He'll be back in the office properly on June 5th (I know this is much more info than you need, but it might be useful!) Nicki -----Original Message----- From: Sera, Sherri Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 14:29 To: Lay, Kenneth; Baxter, Cliff; Causey, Richard; Derrick Jr., James; Andrew S Fastow/HOU/ECT@ENRON; Kean, Steven; Frevert, Mark; Whalley, Greg; Delainey, David; Sherriff, John; Pai, Lou; Hannon, Kevin; Rice, Ken; Horton, Stan Cc: Fleming, Rosalee; Skarness, Susan; Westbrook, Sharron; Harris, Stephanie J; Bridget Maronge/HOU/ECT@ENRON; McVicker, Maureen; Daw, Nicki; Taylor, Liz; Chapman, Kay; Urquhart, Lauren; Owens, Karen; Brown, Carol Ann; Dalton, Dorothy; Stark, Cindy; Williamson, Joannie; Sera, Sherri Subject: Next Corporate Policy Committee Offsite The next corporate policy committee offsite is scheduled to take place on Monday, May 21, frm 8:30 a.m. to 1:00 p.m., location to be determined. Please mark your calendars and let me know immediately if you have a conflict with this date and time. Thanks, SRS [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE:; [EMail-Body]= Natasha, Thanks. I left my package and all the forms in Houston. I shall be glad to fill out the form tomorrow at the conference. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Natasha Knight"" Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 11:14 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Cc: Faltinsen, Stig Subject: RE: Dear Mr Kaminski, Thank you for your guest nomination. We will be happy to register your guest, simply complete the required speaker guest registration form you would have received with your speaker pack, noting the relevant discount. We will then be able to confirm the booking with your guest and provide a pro forma invoice. We look forward to welcoming you and Mr Falstinsen to our event, Kind regards Natasha Knight Customer Services-Manager Conferences & Training Risk Conferences DL: +44 (0) 20 7484 9868 Fax: +44 (0) 20 7484 9800 -----Original Message----- From: Kaminski, Vince J Sent: 27 June 2001 10:49 To: nknight@riskwaters.com Cc: Faltinsen, Stig Subject: I would like to nominate Dr. Stig Faltinsen from Enron Europe as my guest at the London ""Understanding and Applying Financial Mathematics to Energy Derivatives"" conference, London, June 28-29. Vince - winmail.dat << File: winmail.dat >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Fw: CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION; [EMail-Body]= The CAISO recently filed Amendment 30, which would provide the CAISO with the authority to engage in forward contracts/purchasing, etc. to meet reliability requirements. This filing is in response to the language in the FERC San Diego Order which suggested that the FERC believes the CAISO should have this authority. Clearly, this raises issues about the role of the CAISO in the forward markets as a policy matter, but FERC is likely to approved this authority anyway. The CAISO Board is addressing this matter as part of its Comprehensive Market Reform Project. The CAISO Board at the September 7 meeting deferred the issues of the 2-day ahead market (as well as the policy matter of the CAISO buying forward) until the October meeting. However, later during Executive Session, the CAISO Board apparently approved Amendment 30. At this point in time, IEP is not planning on responding to Amendment 30. This position is primarily driven by limited funds in the Restructuring/Transmission Task Force account and, given the forces aligned in support, taking this issue up seem problematic. Please let me know if anyone differs with this assessment and would like to see IEP comment (recognizing that funds would be required to accomplish this). ----- Original Message ----- From: Andy Brown <ABB@eslawfirm.com> To: Steven Kelly (E-mail) <steven@iepa.com>; Katie Kaplan (E-mail) <kaplan@iepa.com>; <smutny@iepa.com> Cc: Douglas Kerner <DKK@eslawfirm.com>; Chris Ellison <CTE@eslawfirm.com>; Eric Janssen <EricJ@eslawfirm.com> Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 3:55 PM Subject: CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION > Attached is a memo which briefly describes CAISO's Amendment 30 and a > potential response approach for IEP. The filing will be due October 2, > which effectively means that we must decide what IEP wants to say by the > 27th, if the ""final draft"" is to be circulated to interested membership > before filing. ABB > > - 000918_IEP_mmo_CAISO_AM30.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Information and Securities Trading; [EMail-Body]= To:TAYLOR, MARK Email:mark.taylor@enron.com - 7138537459 Enron Wholesale Services - Office of the Chairman From: Mark Frevert, Chairman & CEO Mark Haedicke, Managing Director & General Counsel Subject: Confidential Information and Securities Trading To keep pace with the fluid and fast-changing demands of our equity trading activities, Enron Wholesale Services (""EWS"") has recently revised its official Policies and Procedures Regarding Confidential Information and Securities Trading (""Policies and Procedures""). These revisions reflect two major developments: (1) our equity trading activities have been extended into the United Kingdom, and (2) in an effort to streamline the information flow process, the ""Review Team"" will play a more centralized role, so that the role of the ""Resource Group"" is no longer necessary.You are required to become familiar with, and to comply with, the Policies and Procedures. The newly revised Policies and Procedures are available for your review on LegalOnline, the new intranet website maintained by the Enron Wholesale Services Legal Department. Please click on the attached link to access LegalOnline: If you have already certified compliance with the Policies and Procedures during the 2001 calendar year, you need not re-certify at this time, although you are still required to to review and become familiar with the revised Policies and Procedures. If you have not certified compliance with the Policies and Procedures during the 2001 calendar year, then you must do so within two weeks of your receipt of this message. The LegalOnline site will allow you to quickly and conveniently certify your compliance on-line with your SAP Personal ID number. If you have any questions concerning the Policies or Procedures, please call Bob Bruce at extension 5-7780 or Donna Lowry at extension 3-1939. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Greening the Enron Building Mtg; [EMail-Body]= fyi ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/25/2001 06:47 PM ----- Stacey Bolton 03/23/2001 09:56 AM To: Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Jean Ryall/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeffrey Keeler/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Schoen/NA/Enron@Enron, Catherine McKalip-Thompson/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Subject: Greening the Enron Building Mtg Wanted to give you brief feedback on our efforts to become the 1st Fortune 500 Company that has a 100% green headquarters. We've established a company-wide team and a working plan going forward, which includes: 1. EES commodity team is going to run the numbers for energy commodity for facilities and give them a proposal by end of next week. While facilities will not be part of the TX pilot, EES can arrange a financial deal for them w/ an option of going physical on 1/1/02. EES commodity team will also let the group know of the offer, in order to structure the REC deal. Depending upon the savings that EES can offer to Facilities, we will determine any ""headroom"" for REC purchases. Note: It is not necessary for Facilities to sign a commodity deal w/ EES in order for the ""greening"" of the building to go forward. The RECs can be purchased and retired irrespective of the commodity deal with EES. HOWEVER, it would be optimum for Facilities to sign on w/ EES and use the cost savings toward purchase of the RECs. Facilities stated intent to do the latter. 2. Michael Payne and Mike Curry are going to be working on determining a cost for the RECs. Michael initially projected $250,000 per year for the requisite number of RECs to retire commensurate w/ the demand of the building. This was at a cost of $8 per REC, which I believe is quite high. I think they'll go for a $1-4 dollar range, bringing the cost down to a max of $125,000. There's several ways to slice this end. We can provide some of the RECs from the EWC facility and buy other RECs from the market in order to minimize the cost impact of the REC purchases. 3. Next Thursday we will be able to get more of an exact figure on the premium cost for the RECs (ie how much over the cost savings will the RECs cost). We will then need to decide the following: a. Would Corp/EHS being will to pitch in to cover any additional cost for the RECs; b. Pitching the idea to Skilling for buyoff, and payment for the RECs; c. Possibly getting buyoff from the business units since this could change what they are currently paying for power. 4. We discussed all of the above with Peggy Mahoney, and she asked us to take a stab at a comprehensive press release announcing all of the bells and whistles on the new building and our being the 1st Fortune 500 company to go 100% green in our headquarters. Catherine McKalip Thompson is working on the first draft. We need to determine if we can get the ""best"" press for this commitment (i.e. stories in the WSJ and NY Times). We determined that the message would need to be targeted, specifying the terms of our commitment....i.e. Enron makes a commitment for 3 years to provide 100% green for its headquarters in Houston, making it the first Fortune 500 company to....... The goal is to have a final plan and decision by April 20th when Steve speaks to high level executives at a prelude to Earth Day NY on the topic of Energy Shock--Crisis or Opportunity: Building Economics and the Environment. Mike, we'll definitely need your continued support and assistance, particularly if this goes to Skilling. I'll keep you posted on the progress. Stacey ----- Forwarded by Stacey Bolton/NA/Enron on 03/22/2001 03:14 PM ----- Stacey Bolton 03/22/2001 10:14 AM To: Scott Gahn/HOU/EES@EES, James M Wood/HOU/EES@EES, Greg Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Ring/HOU/EES@EES, Steve Woods/EPSC/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael Mike Curry/Enron@EnronXGate, Stan Dowell/HOU/EES@EES, Catherine McKalip-Thompson/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES cc: Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron@ENRON Subject: Greening the Enron Building Mtg The meeting is confirmed for today at 2:00 p.m. in 50 M03. There are a couple of folks dialing in, and the number is 800-991-9019, passcode: 6775293#. I look forward to our discussion. ----- Forwarded by Stacey Bolton/NA/Enron on 03/22/2001 10:05 AM ----- Stacey Bolton 03/16/2001 05:04 PM To: Scott Gahn/HOU/EES@EES, James M Wood/HOU/EES@EES, Greg Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Ring/HOU/EES@EES, Steve Woods/EPSC/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Michael Mike Curry/Enron@EnronXGate cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Jeffrey Keeler/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Catherine McKalip-Thompson/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Subject: Greening the Enron Building Mtg You are invited to a meeting next Thursday (3/22) afternoon at 2:00 to discuss energy commodity and renewable energy credits for the Enron Building, Center and Stadium. There are a few efforts that are going on simultaneously and I thought it would be a good idea for all of us to meet and get on the same page. As many of you might know, Enron Wind (Michael Payne) and ENA (Mike Curry) have a great proposal to retire renewable energy credits from our Enron Wind facility to match the consumption of the building and stadium (details attached below). If this proposal goes forward, Enron would be the 1st Fortune 500 company to ""go green"" in its headquarters building. Couple this w/ our energy star award, and we have GREAT environmental messaging. We'd like to highlight this announcement on Earth Day (April 22nd). The facilities folks are interested in switching from Reliant to EES for actual commodity. It makes sense to work strategically together on win-win proposal that will not only make sense economically, but that we can use in our messaging. The focus of the meeting is to discuss the various proposals, and steps for moving forward. The meeting will be in EB50MO3 from 2:00-3:00. Please let me know if you or someone from your group can attend. Stacey Bolton Environmental Strategies Enron Corp 3-9916 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= UC-CSU-Enron press release; [EMail-Body]= I know we got a lot of grief on the Hill when we had our fight with UC/CSU. Now we have settled and this release will go out (with some modification) today. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/06/2001 07:23 AM --------------------------- From: Max Eberts@EES on 07/05/2001 07:25 PM To: Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES, Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Robert C Williams/Enron@EnronXGate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: UC-CSU-Enron press release Attached is a draft of the UC-CSU-Enron press release concerning the settlement agreement. Please review and let me know of any revisions or suggestions. We would like for this to go out tomorrow if possible. We're still waiting for a quote from CSU. I'll make sure you see that as well. Thank you. Max [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= The Dutch power market situation: STRICTLY PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL -
 ATTORNEY - CLIENT PRIVILEDGE; [EMail-Body]= Richard, Following our coversation of yesterday, I set out for you below the following: 1. An explanation (in draft) of the Dutch power market and the events leading up to the current market ""squeeze"" by certain players, which we have produced and discussed for our external lawyers. 2. A schematic of arguments which we produced for external lawyers before Christmas just relating to the mis-application of capacity by TenneT. 3. A copy of our e-mail to Clifford Chance of last Wednesday summarising the issues in order of priority for their advice. Please note that, purely on the swap element of this jigsaw, we are attempting to arrange a conference with a Queen's Counsel for next Monday afternoon. Hence, it may be better for our meeting (with Jeff patched-in) to take place next Tuesday - clearly the advice on all the elements involved (as set out in 3) in toto will not be complete until we have had the conference with the QC. I am due to receive tomorrow, however, from Clifford Chance their legal strategy report on all the other issues raised in my e-mail (item 3) and shall forward you a copy on receipt. Kind regards Mark ---------------------- Forwarded by Mark Elliott/LON/ECT on 26/01/2000 19:01 --------------------------- Mark Elliott 19/01/2000 15:11 To: cc: ed.patton@cliffordchance.com, Joe Gold/LON/ECT@ECT, Roy Poyntz/LON/ECT@ECT, Ross Sankey/LON/ECT@ECT, Teun Van Biert/LON/ECT@ECT, Dirk Van Vuuren/LON/ECT@ECT, Stephen Asplin/LON/ECT@ECT, Andreas Lorenz/LON/ECT@ECT, Reuben Maltby/LON/ECT@ECT, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT, Jeffrey T Hodge/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: URGENT: SECOND E-MAIL FOLLOWING CLIFFORD CHANCE MEETING IN AMSTERDAM - Dutch txn - Year 2000 - Issues to work up into a legal strategy: STRICTLY PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEY - CLIENT PRIVILEDGE Tjepco, Following our useful meeting with yourself and your colleagues yesterday in Amsterdam, I now set out below the various issues, in what we consider to be the order of priority, relating to Dutch transmission for the Year 2000 upon which we need your, and your colleagues', advice with respect to framing an entire coordinated legal strategy (e.g., time-lines / scales, coordination between actions, ?Nma v Courts or both, costs liabilities of Enron to defendants if we lose) for Enron so as to apply the maximum, effective, legal pressure on the various parties and to effect a resolution to such issues as quickly as possible - the longer the current situation persists the more money Enron will lose - whilst at the same time allowing us to weigh up the ""cost - benefit"" analysis of all the various scenarios. Please note the following when planning our legal strategy: - Enron Capital & Trade Resources Limited (""ECTRL"") (an English incorporated company) is our company which has entered into physical electricty sales contracts to supply certain Dutch Distribution Companies. The physical supply contracts are governed by Dutch law and are subject either to ICC arbitration in either Paris, Rotterdam or the Hague or the NAI in Rotterdam or the Hague (dependant upon the counterparty). - ECTRL is also a Participant on the APX. - Enron Capital & Trade Resources International Corp. (""ECTRIC"") (a company incorporated in Delaware, U.S.) is the Enron entity which, as principal, enters into financial swaps, arranged through Enron Europe Finance & Trading Limted (""EEFT"") (an English incorporated company which is regulated by the SFA), with, among others, Dutch Distribution companies. The swap contracts have all been documented on a ""Deemed"" ISDA basis (representative confirms have already been sent to you on this aspect). Clearly although the first three issues are ""TOP PRIORITY"", the Secondary Priority Issues are not far behind them and so we should be obliged to receive your consolidated written report on all the issues on or before Wednesday, 26th January, as we discussed yesterday. When providing that report, please also let us have at the same time estimates of your fees for the whole of your team (incl. London and the US) (""ball-parks"" are fine at present) broken down into: - fees for Clifford Chance's preliminary advice, including the written strategy report; - fees for Clifford Chance prosecuting the Sep take-or-pay issues; - fees for Clifford Chance prosecuting the APX issues; - fees for Clifford Chance prosecuting any actions / defences / counterclaims on the swaps and / or physical contracts. Fee estimates for Clifford Chance prosecuting any of the Secondary Priority issues can come later. Please also pay particular attention to how we might obtain evidence to the appropriate standard of market rigging on the APX etc., conspiracy, etc, re defence / counterclaim to any non-payment by Enron on the Swaps (see Points 2 + 3 below). 1. IMMEDIATE PRIORITY - Query: What Court actions do we have against TenneT and / or SEP re allocation of capacity by TenneT to SEP for Yr 2000 in November 1999? Issue 1 - Miss-allocation by TenneT of 1500 MW of cross-border capacity by TenneT to SEP (first step in allocation which defined quota of balance of cross-border capacity available to the market) Issue 2 - Unlawful speculative reservation or other unlawful reservation of capacity by SEP (e.g. re non take-or-pay elements). Issue 3 - Unlawful retention and / or unlawful application of capacity by SEP once granted capacity by TenneT (blocking of essential facilities, i.e., generation, to other parties) Resolution required: The quickest way possible to deny Sep right to use TenneT capacity for non-take or pay elements (nb relevant take or pay is energy component ie obligation to import at border cf take or pay on ""virtual"" capacity) as soon as possible The quickest way possible to have that capacity released to the APX in accordance with existing ""use it or lose it"" principle or TenneT to allocate to term market under ""weekly"" contract category established by DTE as soon as possible. Evidence: Herkstroter report (implied), 1999 despatch regime (implied), general market ""consensus"", electricity plans?, DTE consultation paper on transmission (reference to virtual power plants), EZ/DTE advice which limited reservation to take or pay (hence only needed if some parts were non take or pay). Current despatch levels on term deals (imply Sep taking 1500 MW). Query method of putting all of this in evidence, ""discovery"" etc. (PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS IS ALREADY INCLUDED AS AN ISSUE IN THE EXISTING NMA COMPLAINT AGAINST TENNET (NOT SEP AT PRESENT) IN RESPECT OF ITS ALLOCATION PROCESS ON COMPETITION GROUNDS COMMENCED THROUGH LOEFF CLAEYS IN DEC 1999). Points to note : (1) Initial Clifford Chance view - Summary proceedings against TenneT & Sep. Time-line needed of when to commence, length of time to get to Court, ? best methodology of getting Sep contracts before the Court, etc (2) Query value of Clifford Chance initial letter to TenneT and / or Sep requesting confirmation that all Sep contracts are full take-or-pay. 2. IMMEDIATE PRIORITY - Query: Preparation of Draft proceedings against the APX Issue 1 - Drafting of summary proceedings by ECTRL as a Participant against APX for failing to enforce & to compel them to enforce the APX Rules on ensuring firm cross-border capacity pre-bid & to prevent market manipulation. Note failure of APX to enforce its Rules causes losses both to: (a) ECTRL on its physical sales onto APX from Germany (and Belgium) by virtue of other parties preventing legitimate level of sales by ECTRL by breaching APX rules Art 12.1 etc. (b) ECTRL on its physical supply contracts (as prices on the APX are artificially higher than contracted supply price); plus (c) ECTRIC on swaps - ECTRIC shorted APX floating price to certain APX Participants whom we believe are now manipulating the APX, causing artificially high prices, hence securing more profit out of the swaps. Issue 2 - Query availability of shareholder (10%) action by ECTRL (in concert with others) as shareholders of the Exchange against APX for mis-management in failing to enforce APX Rules leading to (a) damage to certain Participants and / or (b) damage to APX's prospects as a main European power exchange. Resolution required / Tactics: (1) APX has published certain cross-border transmission contract ""audit"" requirements which are to come into effect on 20.1.2000 (copy will faxed shortly) - we query effectiveness of this ""compromise"" approach plus there isnothing specific mentioned re other manipulative conduct (e.g., ""crossing""). Hence, Issue 1 above required to be done as, if APX measures fail, then we may need to file suit quickly to bring matters to a head. (2) IMPORTANT - Irrespective of whether or not APX audit prevents manipulation etc., need to consider taking appropriate actions againstAPX or others in any event asap in order to flush out evidence re manipulation / conspiracy among certain Participants re any defence / counterclaims to any non-payment on swaps etc - see 3 below. (3) Query benefit at this stage of shareholder letter to APX ""setting scene"" for mis-management corporate action Points to note: Time-line needed of when to commence, length of time to get to Court., etc, plus, re (2) above, ? best methodology of gathering sufficient evidence in due time for defence / counterclaims on swap issues - see 3 below. 3. IMMEDIATE PRIORITY - Query: Do we have any legitimate grounds for non-performing on our swap contracts / physical contracts, and what should be our strategy re this (e.g., pre-emptive actions or defensive actions / counterclaims)? Note: certain counterparties to contracts with Enron are causing loss to Enron by, what we believe, is market manipulation of APX, collusion to lock-up market etc. Certain other parties to such contracts with Enron we do not believe are party to such conduct. Losses to Enron are however occurring as follows: (a) to ECTRL on its physical sales onto APX from Germany (and Belgium) by virtue of other parties preventing legitimate level of sales by ECTRL by breaching APX rules Art 12.1 etc. (b) to ECTRL on its physical supply contracts (as prices on the APX are artificially higher than contracted supply price); plus (c) ECTRIC on swaps - ECTRIC shorted APX floating price to certain APX Participants whom we believe are now manipulating the APX, causing artificially high prices, hence securing more profit out of the swaps. Issue 1 - Can ECTRIC legitimately withhold payments on the swaps? - Query: availability of pre-emptive damages or other forms of action(s) against swap counterparties - Query: best jurisdiction (esp. re swaps - English, Dutch US)? Resolution needed: need to obtain from a strategic perspective best jurisdiction(s) and best course and causes of action on a pre-emptivebasis as far as possible - to avoid claims of forum shopping and bring maximum pressure; plus advice needed on whether we should take pre-emptive action or to defend and / or counterclaim if we get sued if we do not perform on swaps or physical contracts. Initial Clifford Chance view: None / no suitable pre-emptive action available to Enron - defences / counterclaims only. All proceedings likely to be in England and subject to contracts' governing law (English) (under Art 17 Brussels' convention + Dutch conflict of laws principles). Highly unlikley that any U.S. action by Enron practically possible - U.S. courts will consider forum shopping (unless can show that Dutch counterparty has ""minimum contacts in the US"" (?means in detail?) - even then, U.S. courts unlikely to give any appropriate relief - query enforcement problems in any event. Clifford Chance's initial ""gut reaction"" is to withhold payment - wait for counterparty to sue which would probably be by way of summary judgement (approx 2 - 3 months to get court in England). If so, to defeat summary proceedings thus delaying matters to full trial, ECTRIC would then need to establish prima facie case for either defence on breach of implied term (v. difficult indeed but ""gut reaction"" is that London Commercial Court could be swayed by an argument that actual counterparty has acted in bad faith, e.g., manipulated mkt - fairly untested area) and / or counterclaim for conspiracy to defraud (for which need to establish prima facie case of conspiracy between counterparty and others to rig the mkt, etc). Notes: (1) Need to thoroughly investigate all options here (approx 70 % of losses could be on the swaps) (2) Need to consider evidence re mkt rigging / conspiracy to defraud, practically whether this could effectively be brough to light by any actions against APX - see Issue (2) of Point 2 APX above - the ""race"" between timescales of summary judgment in England versus any actions against APX under Dutch law to flush out evidence . Any additional ways of securing appropriate evidence to the relevant standard of proof (whether through crt actions or otherwise) - whether in the UK, US or in the Netherlands - and timescales? E.g., availability of putting people on the ""Witness Stand"" in the Netherlands (3) Queries re Clifford Chance initial view: (a) Repercussions - action by counterparty not by way of summary judgment but by way of filing insolvency petition under Section 123 IA 1986 (b) Any views altered re amenability of commercial crt if (i) Enron knew last year that APX could be manipulated + if Enron itself had enterd into similar, but smaller-scale, manipulation for short period last year? (4) Check: Ability of Dutch counterparties to swaps to speculate rather than hedge by way of OTC Derivatives and any good faith/integrity issues re' parties use of speculative cf hedging swaps combined with deliberate and systematic market manipulation by swap counterparts. (5) Query: Any SFA repercussions for EEFT? Issue 2 - Liability of ECTRL under physical supply contracts. - Does 20% liability cap on physical contracts work if ECTRL fails intentionally to deliver? - Does consequential losses exclusion on phyiscal contracts work if ECTRL fails to deliver? - Strategy (i.e., should we fail to deliver, pay undisputed amount of bill and dispute rest of bill and let counterparty take us to arbitration? OR, can this have any adverse repercussions re any other opart of our legal strategy?) 4. SECONDARY PRIORITY - Query: What actions do we have against TenneT to recoup our losses re allocation of capacity by TenneT for Yr 2000 in November 1999? Issue 1 - Misapplication in law of capacity (i.e. 800 MW) by TenneT to Market parties (e.g., Enron) after Sep allocation : allocation favoured incumbents based on market share - this caused a new entrant such as Enron loss. Issue 2 - General unreasonable behaviour / lack of good faith of TenneT Misleading market with early rules; addition of extra unfounded rules post 19 Nov (in reasonable knowledge that market parties had already acted on earlier information from TenneT). 1,2 Jan 2000 : closing Dutch market to imports (query whether this was also for the UCTE system support activities; suspect not) in an unreasonable fashion ie changed procedures when it had no need so to do. The normal procedures whereby TenneT curtailed in the event of a problem on the day would have been sufficient to maintain system stability. Disingenous allocation of 2300 MW in off-peak capacity (night) at the same time as indicating to the market that no more than 1000 or 1200 MW was expected by TenneT to be available for use due to Sep's plant despatch regime. Reasonable action would have been to allocate no more than the 1000 MW to Sep and the market on a term basis with any additional capacity available on a given day treated as (uncertain) spot capacity and allocated to the APX. Lack of checking and/or other disingenuity re' failure properly to check Sep take or pay obligations. Lack of transparency of information eg French grid problems result in cut of 300 MW available to APX. No assistance from TenneT either to provide guidance as to the real extent or duration of the problem or to take reasonable steps to mitigate the problem by eg co-operating with market parties aiming to put in place offsetting transit arrangements to alleviate the congestion. PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS IS ALREADY SUBJECT TO THE SAME EXISTING NMA COMPLAINT ON COMPETION GROUNDS REFERRED TO IN 1. ABOVE COMMENCED THROUGH LOEFF CLAEYS IN DEC 1999. Resolution required: Damages against TenneT Evidence: Herkstroter report (implied), 1999 despatch regime (implied), general market ""consensus"", electricity plans?, DTE consultation paper on transmission (reference to virtual power plants), EZ/DTE advice which limited reservation to take or pay (hence only needed if some parts were non take or pay). Current despatch levels on term deals (imply Sep taking 1500 MW). Sep newspaper quotes (intent to use 1500 MW day and night) - intended block on capacity and refusal to contemplate change to superpeak pricing. Query method of putting all of this in evidence, discovery etc. 5. SECONDARY PRIORITY - Query: ability of Enron to claim damages against APX for losses suffered owing to failure of APX to enforce its Rules and to allow gaming, etc. Note failure of APX to enforce / have enforced its Rules causes losses both to: (a) ECTRL on its physical sales onto APX from Germany (and Belgium) by virtue of other parties preventing legitimate level of sales by ECTRL by breaching APX rules Art 12.1 etc. (b) ECTRL on its physical supply contracts (as prices on the APX are artificially higher than contracted supply price); plus (c) ECTRIC on swaps - ECTRIC shorted APX floating price to certain APX Participants whom we believe are now manipulating the APX, causing artificially high prices, hence securing more profit out of the swaps.] Resolution required: Damages against the APX 6. SECONDARY PRIORITY - Query: Actions against APX Participants for manipulating the APX DAM causing losses to Enron Note manipulation of APX DAM by certain Participants causes losses both to: (a) ECTRL on its physical sales onto APX from Germany (and Belgium) by virtue of others parties preventing legitimate level of sales by ECTRL by breaching APX rules Art 12.1 etc. (b) ECTRL on its physical supply contracts (as prices on the APX are artificially higher than contracted supply price); plus (c) ECTRIC on swaps - ECTRIC shorted APX floating price to certain APX Participants whom we believe are now manipulating the APX, causing artificially high prices, hence securing more profit out of the swaps. Resolution required: What action can we take against APX Participants (i) to prevent them further manipulating APX and (ii) claiming our losses against them on both ECTRL's physical supply contracts and ECTRIC's swaps? In particular: Query: availability of injunction / summary proceedings against APX Participants to prevent them from manipulating APX DAM 7. SECONDARY PRIORITY - Query : Actions against SEP (a) Plant despatch : see below re' collusive behaviour. (b) Protocol : Sep refusing to contemplate changes to superpeak charges (which in no way bear reasonable relation to supply/demand or electricity production costs). Query : availability to Enron of injunctive and/or other relief against Sep for (a) unlawful application and retention (eg query damages action against Sep) and /or (b) nature plant despatch and / or (c) conduct re Protocol. Evidence : Herkstroter report (implied), 1999 despatch regime (implied), general market ""consensus"", electricity plans?, DTE consultation paper on transmission (reference to virtual power plants), EZ/DTE advice which limited reservation to take or pay (hence only needed if some parts were non take or pay). Current despatch levels on term deals (imply Sep taking 1500 MW). Sep newspaper quotes (intent to use 1500 MW day and night) - intended block on capacity and refusal to contemplate change to superpeak pricing. Query method of putting all of this in evidence, discovery etc. 5. Query: Actions available to Enron against Parties for collusive behaviour Supply market actions Deliberate and systematic attempts by certain parties (predominantly large Dutch distcos) to deny new entrants ability to access capacity/energy at reaonable prices by virtue of a) withholding capacity within NL ie Protocol and b) breaching APX rules (gaming) in such a fashion as to block legitimate access for those parties with foreign txn to sell legitimate volumes on APX consistent with APX rules. Effect of withholding capacity from market compounded by (collusive) actions to manipulate APX prices by strategic bidding. - Protocol: Collusive behaviour suspected by Dutch Distcos re locking parties out of re-contracting and use of Protocol to disadvantage of new market entrants (e.g., see EnergieNed letter: ?? now in public domain + note transcript of Wed 12.1.00 Arnhem Court case on Protocol re intent of parties to keep market short) - APX - Art 25.3 APX DAM Regs - collusion by certain APX Participants suspected re rigging APX prices - Art 12.1 APX DAM Regs - collusion suspected by certain APX Participants re failing to ensure that parties have firm cross-border capacity prior to making bids on to APX Sep/TenneT - Import allocation : collusion to fudge take or pay issue? - Plant despatch by Sep : collusion to ensure that Sep can despatch plants in such a fashion as to minimise possible imports? Note : burden and standard of proof of collusive behaviour and ability and means to obtain discovery of such behaviour. Some evidence exists from ENECO court case (transcript of Arnhem case public?) plus EnergieNed letter pls taped APX participants meeting of 10 Jan 2000 (public or accessible to Enron as participant?). Kind regards Mark [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: FW: Follow up -- Council of Energy Advisors; [EMail-Body]= I doubt that this is worth the trouble (i.e. running it through a conflict of interest check, ensuring no liability for actions taken on the advice, etc). From: Sherri Sera/ENRON@enronXgate on 06/21/2001 10:13 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Joannie Williamson/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: FW: Follow up -- Council of Energy Advisors Steve, we have no record of receiving the original invitation, but is this anything you would recommend? Please advise. Thanks, SRS -----Original Message----- From: <mobrien@glgroup.com>@ENRON Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 10:07 AM To: sreinar@enron.com Subject: Follow up -- Council of Energy Advisors Dear Jeffrey, I would like to follow up on the email regarding a personal invitation to join the Council of Energy Advisors that I recently sent you. I wanted to see if there are any additional questions I can answer. To reiterate, the Council is an organization of top engineers, corporate representatives, and energy experts that we pay(e.g. $250/hr) to consult via phone and email for our client base of more than 90 investment managers. I feel that your background and expertise would be an asset to the Council. Please feel free to register online at (just a quick 5-minute form). Also, you can learn more about our work at www.thecouncils.com. Thanks for your consideration, I look forward to working with you. Again, please contact me anytime if if you have any remaining questions. Best regards, Matt ================== Matthew O'Brien Gerson Lehrman Group Council of Energy Advisors 11 E. 44th St., 11th floor New York, NY 10017 (212) 838-6900 ext. 265 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail contains information that is privileged and confidential and subject to legal restrictions and penalties regarding its unauthorized disclosure or use. You are prohibited from copying, distributing or otherwise using this information if you are not the intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail and delete this e-mail and its attachments from your system. Thank you. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= <<Concur Expense Document>> - RS041001; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/20/2001 03:09 PM --------------------------- eserver@enron.com on 04/19/2001 04:04:09 PM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - RS041001 The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: Richard Shapiro Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: RS041001 Report Total: $10,108.31 Amount Due Employee: $10,108.31 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://xms.enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Canary Wharf - Update for Executive Committee; [EMail-Body]= Maybe we should knock down the walls of those cavernous offices on the top= =20 floor. Mark Frevert@ENRON 07/24/2000 06:17 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark=20 Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: =20 Subject: Canary Wharf - Update for Executive Committee Just a quick update on our real estate escapades. Regards . Mark ---------------------- Forwarded by Mark Frevert/NA/Enron on 07/24/2000 06:= 09=20 AM --------------------------- Fernley Dyson@ECT 07/24/2000 05:33 AM To: John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark Frevert/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT@ECT, Jon Chapman/LON/ECT@ECT=20 Subject: Canary Wharf - Update for Executive Committee John - as requested. You may wish to 'top and tail' this. Enron continues to expand aggressively in Europe. Forty Grosvenor Place, o= ur=20 European Headquarters, continues to accommodate this expansion, but the lon= g=20 lead times involved in obtaining premises in London require us to evaluate= =20 the future accommodation requirements of the business now.=20 We are considering a number of scenarios, and have reviewed all currently= =20 available sites within a 25 mile radius of Central London. Ideally we would= =20 be looking to accommodate all Enron employees in one building, and we requi= re=20 significant swing capacity to expand or contract the space available=20 depending on our business requirements. One of the options currently available is a site being developed by Canary= =20 Wharf in London's Docklands. We have been looking to secure an option on th= is=20 site so that we may properly evaluate the opportunity and consult with our= =20 employees. On Friday 21 July we agreed non-binding Heads of Terms with Canary Wharf fo= r=20 the letting of 1.5m sq. ft. This was a prerequisite to obtaining exclusivit= y=20 whereby we have until 30 September to negotiate contractual terms or walk= =20 away from the deal. We will continue to evaluate other options, and there is clearly no=20 commitment to conclude a deal with Canary Wharf. An announcement was made to employees at the all staff update last Thursday= =20 (attached). Media speculation has forced Canary Wharf to issue a London Stock Exchange= =20 Announcement confirming that we have agreed outline terms on a potential=20 letting and that discussions continue. ---------------------- Forwarded by Fernley Dyson/LON/ECT on 24/07/2000 10:= 41=20 --------------------------- =20 =09 =09Enron Information Technology =09 =09From: Enron Europe General Announcement 21/07= /2000=20 15:22 =09 Please respond to Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT To: ECT London cc: =20 Subject: Newsletter: EuroFlash!! =20 Yesterday morning during the all-employee staff update, Fernley Dyson, on= =20 behalf of John Sherriff, provided staff with an update on the impact Enron= =01,s=20 rapid growth in Europe is having on our overall space needs at Enron House.= =20 It was acknowledged that this is an important subject and one about which= =20 many employees have a lot of questions.=20 The message was clear. In the day to day decision-making process about Enr= on=01, s commercial activities, it is critical to understand what options are=20 available and to keep as many avenues open as possible. In turn, it is=20 equally important to take this same approach when looking at Enron=01,s fut= ure=20 office space requirements. What is the bottom line? Looking to the future, the preference would be for all London-based employe= es=20 to be housed in a single location. One of the options under consideration is Canary Wharf, but we must stress= =20 that no decision has been taken at this time. We are currently evaluating all the options available to us in the London= =20 property market. If we are to move to a new building, it will not occur before 2003. We will be seeking input and feedback from employees as part of the=20 decision-making process. We are committed to keeping the channels of communication open and to provi= de=20 information to employees on a timely basis.=20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Town Hall Los Angeles; [EMail-Body]= mo - calendar Rob - fyi, upcoming speech ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/04/2001 03:04 PM --------------------------- From: Janel Guerrero on 05/03/2001 02:30 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Town Hall Los Angeles Steve, Here's an update from Karen regarding the letter to Ken/LA event you put on my desk. ----- Forwarded by Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron on 05/03/2001 02:29 PM ----- Karen Denne 05/03/2001 08:14 AM To: jkradin@marathon-com.com, syamane@marathon-com.com, cc: Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Town Hall Los Angeles I've got Ken Lay tentatively scheduled to speak to Town Hall Los Angeles on Tuesday, Aug. 7. They were thrilled to hear that Ken had an interest in speaking to the group, and Jim McNulty with Parsons immediately recognized Ken and wants him to speak about the ""big energy picture,"" given Enron's global perspective. They've got a pretty heavy energy calendar in the next few months: May 16 - Phil Angelides June 19 - John Bryson July 11 - Steve Ledbetter July 26 - Loretta Lynch You may want to attend these luncheons just to see what these four have to say. I've asked if Warren Olney could do the interview w/ Ken, and Adrian Medawar said she'd call him. Sandra -- would you check with LABA to see if we could do that meeting the same trip (either before or after Town Hall). Great job lining this one up -- thank you! See you in San Fran. kd [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: RTO Orders - Grid South, SE Trans, SPP and Entergy; [EMail-Body]= I'm still a junkie .... please email copies of the orders. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Re"" Gas Volatility & Storage"" conference; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Luke Eleftheriou <lukee@infocastinc.com>@ENRON Sent: Monday, June 18, 2001 11:00 AM To: igc@intlgas.com; Kaminski, Vince J; shameek.konar@accenture.com Subject: Re"" Gas Volatility & Storage"" conference Dear Sirs, We are indeed very pleased that you shall be joining us for the above-mentioned conference. In order to ensure an accurate speaker list in-house, we would appreciate it very much if you would please forward me the following full-contact information at your earliest convenience. First name Last name Title Full company name Full address Tel # Fax # Email address We thank you for joining us once again. We look forward to receiving your full contact information. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Luke Eleftheriou Conference Manager (818)888-4445, x:12 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= ATTORNEY/CLIENT COMMUNICATION//////CONFIDENTIAL and Privileged; [EMail-Body]= Article II of the NONCOMPETITION AGREEMENT entered in connection with the sale of HPL to AEP (which closed as of June 1,2001) provides: ""ENA [for 3 months post-close] will not solicit, negotiate or enter into any contract, agreement or arrangement for the purchase of natural gas on the HPL Pipeline from any Person which is a supplier or producer of natural gas connected to the HPL Facilities; provided, however, nothing herein shall be construed or interpreted as prohibiting ENA from entering into any such contract, agreement or arrangement which is less than one month in duration and involves or is related to an Enron Online transaction."" This is not the most clearly drafted provision as it was the subject of much negotiation....and was significantly narrowed from the original scope proposed by AEP. Thus, please consult with me prior to entering into any solicitation, agreement or arrangement which might arguably be covered by our limited covenant not to compete on the supply side for 3 months. There are many aspects of the post-close transition which will require cooperation between Enron and AEP/HPL and thus, it behoves us to carefully weigh the risks and rewards of ""stepping too close to or over the line"". Further,although a technical reading of the non-competition agreement only applies to ENA, no ENA UPSTREAM deals which would violate this covenant if there were to be done as ENA should be done without clearance from Brian Redmond and me. Please communicate this restriction to those who report to you and have need to be aware of this limited restriction. Sincerely BNG Dan J Hyvl 06/07/2001 04:59 PM To: Barbara N Gray/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Jeffrey T Hodge/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: ONEOK Energy Marketing and Trading Company Barbara, This appears to be supply deal for deliveries at Katy that would be subject to the 90 day non-compete. Sandi is in the process of getting me a copy of the non-compete so that I can determine if this deal is covered. Do you have any thoughts. ----- Forwarded by Dan J Hyvl/HOU/ECT on 06/07/2001 04:56 PM ----- Richard Deming/ENRON@enronXgate 06/07/2001 02:22 PM To: Dan J Hyvl/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: ONEOK Energy Marketing and Trading Company Dan, Please find below details of Phy Gas deals with GTC agreements: Deal Date: 6/06/01 Deal No: VF1896 / 835431 Buyer: ENA Seller: ONEOK Energy Marketing and Trading Company Start Date: 7/01/01 End Date: 6/30/02 Firm Volume: 10,000 / day Price: HOU.SHIP-LGPKG.IF.M.I minus USD 0.03000 Delivery Point: Exxon Katy - Katy Tailgate Please let me know if you need any more details. Thanks, Richard x54886 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Jim Noles Named CEO of Enron Wind; [EMail-Body]= Congratulations! ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 07/17/2000 08:18 AM --------------------------- Office of the Chairman From: Office of the Chairman@ENRON on 07/14/2000 06:58 PM To: All Enron Worldwide cc: Subject: Jim Noles Named CEO of Enron Wind We are pleased to announce that Jim Noles, president and chief operating officer of Enron Wind, will assume the additional role of chief executive officer, effective immediately. Jim will continue to be based in Houston. Jim joined Enron Wind as its president in May of this year. Prior to that appointment, Jim was managing director for Enron's Operations Support Group of Global Asset Operations and provided operations and maintenance oversight and technical assistance to Enron's worldwide facilities. Previously, Jim worked with Enron International's Asset Management team where he formed the North American Asset Management Group to provide operation and maintenance services to Enron North America's electricity generation peaker plants that entered into service in 1999. Jim joined Enron in 1995 as vice president of Enron Development Corp. to head up its Middle East Regional Development team. Prior to joining Enron, Jim was an international marketer for TRW's Systems Integration Group with responsibilities in the Middle East. Jim served in the U.S. Army for 25 years, culminating his career as a Brigadier General. His education includes a bachelor's degree from the University of North Alabama and a master's of public administration from the University of Alabama. Jim has a solid track record in development, sales, operations, and leadership and has had a positive impact on Enron Wind's growth and profitability in the short period since joining the company. Please join us in congratulating Jim on his promotion and new responsibilities. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Congressional Hearing in S.D. on the 11th; [EMail-Body]= Could you work with Allison to get the needed information to cathy. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/31/2000 05:27 PM --------------------------- Jeff Dasovich@EES 08/31/2000 05:15 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Sandra McCubbin/SFO/EES@EES, Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES, Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Congressional Hearing in S.D. on the 11th Cathy Van Way called asking my view on some names she'd been given to invite to the hearing. (I continue to cajole Jessie Knight to appear.) During the call, she mentioned that the committee intends to invite Steve Kean and that she needed someone to email here Steve's vitals so that they could write a letter inviting him. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Senate passes Alper/Davis Bill 30-0; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/01/2000 07:55 AM --------------------------- Mona L Petrochko@EES 08/29/2000 04:38 PM To: Douglas Condon/SFO/EES@EES, Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES, James M Wood/HOU/EES@EES, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Greg Cordell, Roger Yang, Edward Hamb/HOU/EES@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Karen Denne@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, West GA, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mary Hain@Enron Subject: Senate passes Alper/Davis Bill 30-0 AB 265 passed through the Senate a few minutes ago. It now must go to the Assembly, where there is still a lot of uncertainty about what changes the Assembly will want to the bill. We still haven't seen the latest ""republican"" language. Also, AB 265 is double joined to AB 970, controversial siting bill. To the extent one or the other fails, they both fail. AB 265 (Davis/Alpert) has: 1. a 6.5 cent/kWh energy rate cap through 2002, with potential extension through 2003. 2. Applicable to residential, small commercial (up to 100 kW) 3. Opt-in provision for large industrial/agricultural customers at 6.5 cents with an annual true-up 4. Use of revenues from utility generation assets (including PPA) to offset undercollections. 5. Reasonableness review for San Diego G&E Will update with more information as available. No news about SCE. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Notice of CPUC gas infrastructure workshop; [EMail-Body]= fyi ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/25/2001 06:08 PM ----- Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 03/24/2001 04:26 PM To: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Angela Schwarz/HOU/EES@EES, Beverly Aden/HOU/EES@EES, Bill Votaw/HOU/EES@EES, Brenda Barreda/HOU/EES@EES, Carol Moffett/HOU/EES@EES, Cathy Corbin/HOU/EES@EES, Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT, Christina Liscano/HOU/EES@EES, Craig H Sutter/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Debora Whitehead/HOU/EES@EES, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Dorothy Youngblood/HOU/ECT@ECT, Douglas Huth/HOU/EES@EES, Edward Sacks/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Eric Melvin/HOU/EES@EES, Erika Dupre/HOU/EES@EES, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Fran Deltoro/HOU/EES@EES, Gayle W Muench/HOU/EES@EES, Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@ENRON, Gordon Savage/HOU/EES@EES, Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@ENRON, Iris Waser/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON, James W Lewis/HOU/EES@EES, James Wright/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Jeff Messina/HOU/EES@EES, Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Jess Hewitt/HOU/EES@EES, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kathy Bass/HOU/EES@EES, Kathy Dodgen/HOU/EES@EES, Ken Gustafson/HOU/EES@EES, Kevin Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Leasa Lopez/HOU/EES@EES, Leticia Botello/HOU/EES@EES, Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Marsha Suggs/HOU/EES@EES, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Meredith M Eggleston/HOU/EES@EES, Michael Etringer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael Mann/HOU/EES@EES, Michelle D Cisneros/HOU/ECT@ECT, mpalmer@enron.com, Neil Bresnan/HOU/EES@EES, Neil Hong/HOU/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Paula Warren/HOU/EES@EES, Richard L Zdunkewicz/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Leibert/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, Rita Hennessy/NA/Enron@ENRON, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Rosalinda Tijerina/HOU/EES@EES, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Scott Gahn/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES, Sharon Dick/HOU/EES@EES, skean@enron.com, Tanya Leslie/HOU/EES@EES, Tasha Lair/HOU/EES@EES, Ted Murphy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Terri Greenlee/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tony Spruiell/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Vladimir Gorny/HOU/ECT@ECT, Wanda Curry/HOU/EES@EES, William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kathryn Corbally/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jubran Whalan/HOU/EES@EES, triley@enron.com, Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert C Greg Wolfe/HOU/ECT@ECT, James Wright/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Dirk vanUlden/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Steve Walker/SFO/EES@EES, Jennifer Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES, Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES, Douglas Condon/SFO/EES@EES, wgang@enron.com, Scott Govenar <sgovenar@govadv.com>, Hedy Govenar <hgovenar@govadv.com> @ ENRON, jklauber@llgm.com, Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES, John Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Eric Letke/DUB/EES@EES, Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, gfergus@brobeck.com, Michael Tribolet/ENRON@enronXgate, Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Notice of CPUC gas infrastructure workshop FYI. ----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 03/24/2001 04:25 PM ----- - Notice for gas infrastructure workshop.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message(due to missing attachment)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Department meeting conference call.  800-283-1805, in Rick's name.; [EMail-Body]= Paul Jacarty Andy Keleman Jack Heath Jeff Brockmeyer 1-800-348-4825 2760 -- Andy Fastow Janine Migden [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Draft of Organizational Announcement; [EMail-Body]= The other memo will follow shortly from Maureen. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 06/12/2001 09:07 AM --------------------------- From: Sherri Sera/ENRON@enronXgate on 06/11/2001 04:51 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: FW: Draft of Organizational Announcement Steve, Kevin Garland sent this to me hoping to get Jeff's approval to send it out from the office of the chairman. Would it make sense to incorporate it into the memo you're working on? Please advise. Thanks, SRS -----Original Message----- From: Garland, Kevin Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 3:28 PM To: Sera, Sherri Subject: FW: Draft of Organizational Announcement Announcing the Formation of One Corporate Equity Investing Unit To better develop and manage equity investment opportunities related to our core businesses, Enron has formed one corporate equity investment unit. This new unit, Enron Principal Investments, will combine the existing investment units of ENA, EBS and Enron Investment Partners. Additionally, the Enron Special Asset Group will also become part of Enron Principal Investments. The strategy of Enron Principal Investments will be to work with all the business units of Enron to identify, execute, and manage equity investments, which leverage Enron's unique and proprietary knowledge. These investments may be in the form of venture capital, LBO's, traditional private equity and distressed debt positions. Kevin Garland will serve as Managing Director, overseeing all activities of Enron Principal Investments. Gene Humphrey, Michael Miller, Dick Lydecker, and their groups, will join Kevin and his group to form Enron Principal Investments. This new business unit will report to an investment committee, consisting of Greg Whalley, Ken Rice and Dave Delainey. Please join me in congratulating and supporting Kevin, Gene, Michael, Dick and the other members of this group in this effort. Jeff Skilling [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FINAL; [EMail-Body]= Attached is the final letter. Please note - there was a small change at the top of page 2. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Highlands Forum Wrap-up; [EMail-Body]= Thank you. I enjoyed the discussion very much. The DoD has significant challenges, but if the group participating in the meeting was any indication, they have some first rate people working on those challenges. If I can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to call. ""Dick O'Neill"" <rpon@bellatlantic.net> on 07/02/2001 11:27:16 AM Please respond to <rpon@bellatlantic.net> To: <skean@enron.com> cc: <Maureen.McVicker@enron.com>, <Ursula.Brenner@enron.com> Subject: Highlands Forum Wrap-up Dear Steve: just a brief note to say thank you again for your excellent presentation at last week's Highlands Forum. I believe that your remarks, along with those of Goran Lindahl, Dick Foster, and Phil Condit of Boeing, have caused a significant stir in the preparation for the congressionally mandated Quadrennial Defense Review and the Secretary's transformation planning. I also can tell you that the feedback from participants regarding your briefing has been terrific. We are reviewing all the material this week to begin the process of re-creating the session on the Secretary's webpage for the Forum, and I will be going over the video and audio clips for posting. Recognizing that your slides were proprietary, it would be most valuable if we could post as much of your powerpoint briefing as possible--whatever you feel comfortable with sharing. Whatever that turns out to be, if your staff could email that to me, I will make sure that only that, and not the original that you sent to me, gets posted. I am not sure where the senior leadership of the DoD will be going in the coming months, however, I know that the discussion of your experience at Enron and the experiences of your panel mates will have an influence. A more formal letter of thanks will be forthcoming, but for now, thank you again for joining us and helping to make this a memorable and most important Highlands Forum. Best regards, Dick Dick O'Neill The Highlands Group http://www.highlandsgroup.net 301-469-7400 301-469-5878 fax [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: PRC reviewers; [EMail-Body]= Steve, No problem. I shall spend Friday working on reviews. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Leppard, Steve Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 10:57 AM Subject: PRC reviewers Hi My reviewers have already been nominated, but I wonder if I could solicit some ""unsolicited feedback"" from you? Many thanks, Steve [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Monday's follow-up meeting on cost control; [EMail-Body]= I am calling Rob Walls to see if he can attend. Carol Ann Brown@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS 03/30/2001 02:49 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Monday's follow-up meeting on cost control Steve, Should Jim Derrick be invited to Monday's cost control meeting? I asked Kevin and he told me to ask you. Suzanne Brown came by today and said that his name was brought up at last week's meeting. Sincerely, Carol Brown Office of the Chairman Enron Broadband Services, Inc. 713.853.7974 713.853.9469 - fax carol_brown@enron.net [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Errata to SRP Settlement Proposal - Privileged and Confidential F
	or Settlement Purposes Only; [EMail-Body]= In our July 30, 2001 document entitled ""Receipt Capacity Allocation Proposal Prepared By Salt River Project"" there is an inadvertent error. Section I.F. properly states that the numbers used in this proposal would be updated with peak figures through the last season prior to additional capacity being placed into service by El Paso. Consistent with that, Section II.A., in describing the CD and FR Entitlement Methodology, should read as follows: II.A. A total ""peak day entitlement"" is established for each FR customer by summing its highest (peak) single day takes during the period January 1, 1997 through the end of the last season prior to additional capacity being placed into service by El Paso, at each of its D-Code points (eg. DAPSPHX, DSWGPHX, etc.). (footnotes 1 and 2 unchanged) Please make this change to your document. We apologize for the error. Joel Greene Energy Advocates LLP 202-371-9889 202-371-9025 (fax) jlgreene@energyadvocates.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Rich Products; [EMail-Body]= looks good Peggy Mahoney 07/24/2000 06:20 PM To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cedric Burgher/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Paula Rieker/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Karen S Owens@ees@EES, Kevin Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES, Dave S Laipple/DUB/EES@EES, James E Keller/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Rich Products Please review the attached draft news release about our agreement with Rich Products and let me know if you have any comments by 5pm Tuesday, July 25. We are scheduled to release on Wednesday, July 26. If you have any questions, please call me at x57034. Rich Products is a major US food manufacturer headquartered in Buffalo, NY. The company ranked #122 in Forbes Private 500 and has sales around $1.5 billion. Rich Products is owned and operated by the founding Rich family. Products manufactured include frozen meats, bakery products and non-dairy creamers. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Online Niche Players Capitalize on Natural-Gas Shortage, Bypass
 Utilities; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/11/2000 01:17 PM ----- =09""IssueAlert"" <IssueAlert@scientech.com> =0910/11/2000 06:30 AM =09=09=20 =09=09 To:=20 =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: Online Niche Players Capitalize on Natural-Gas Shortage, By= pass=20 Utilities http://www.consultrci.com SCIENTECH's E-commerce InfoGrid uncovers the efforts of energy-related=20 companies in the ever-growing field of electronic commerce. A sample can=20 be viewed at: SCIENTECH IssueAlert, October 11, 2000 Online Niche Players Capitalize on Natural-Gas Shortage, Bypass Utilities By: Will McNamara, Director, Electric Industry Analysis SmartEnergy, a Con Edison competitor, is offering New York and Westchester= =20 consumers price protection with the ability to lock-in today's natural-gas= =20 rates for a period of one year. In a separate announcement, myHomeKey.com= =20 announced that it will offer energy savings packages designed to reduce=20 energy consumption and lower rates for customers in the face of rising=20 energy costs. ANALYSIS: As reports continue to accumulate that a natural-gas shortage=20 will send prices skyrocketing this winter (see my IssueAlert from Oct.=20 9 on the subject), the most common response from electric utilities has=20 been to warn their customers that they will see higher rates over the next= =20 few months. I can point to several examples. Minneapolis-based Xcel Energy= =20 announced a few weeks back that its natural-gas customers could face heatin= g=20 bills that are 35 to 50 percent higher than their bills last winter. Domini= on=20 East Ohio has warned its residential customers that they can expect to=20 pay about $70 more per month for natural gas from November through January.= =20 And the warnings are coming not only in the Midwest and Northeast=01*where= =20 low winter temperatures drive up energy bills every year=01*but in the West= =20 as well. In California, PG&E warns that its customers can expect to see=20 their winter bills increase by about $25, to an average bill of $75 (compar= ed=20 to $50 last winter). These are just a few examples of utility companies=20 across the United States playing damage control, trying to minimize the=20 customer outrage when customers suddenly see their bills double or triple. Along with their warnings, these utilities give reasons=01*perhaps seen as= =20 excuses by the public=01*for the rising cost of energy. There is a shortage= =20 of natural gas across the country, brought about by a drop-off in productio= n.=20 It was an unusually hot summer, which depleted supplies for energy. Demand= =20 in general has grown to surprising levels. Meanwhile, start-up online companies that many of us have not even heard=20 of are using the rise in natural-gas prices as a golden marketing=20 opportunity,=20 and attempting to take business away from traditional utility companies.=20 SmartEnergy is a perfect example. In existence just since April 1999, =20 SmartEnergy offers electricity and natural gas to residential and small=20 business customers. According to EnergyGuide.com, for an average home in=20 New York City, SmartEnergy's natural-gas rates typically have run about=20 $189 per month, compared Con Edison's $140. Under its new promotion,=20 SmartEnergy's=20 plan for natural gas guarantees that New York City and Westchester gas=20 customers who sign on with their service now will be locked into current=20 natural-gas rates for the next 12 months. This promotion comes at an ideal= =20 time for those who opt to switch, as natural-gas prices should begin their= =20 projected sharp increase over the next few weeks. Based on recent forecasts= ,=20 SmartEnergy is claiming that Con Edison customers who make the switch can= =20 expect to save up to 40 percent on their energy through the winter months.= =20 The start-up company also is offering 500 United Airlines Mileage Plus=20 Reward Miles credit and $25 sign-up bonus to entice customers away from=20 Con Edison.=20 Based on the available information about SmartEnergy, it is unclear how=20 the online provider will be able to guarantee the 40-percent reduction=20 in natural-gas rates. I would presume that SmartEnergy has entered into=20 some hedging strategies to minimize its risk in the event that natural-gas= =20 prices remain high into the next year. Any prudent provider would have=20 a hedging strategy to protect itself, and locking itself into 12-month=20 contracts without its own contracts for obtaining natural gas at spot marke= t=20 prices would certainly raise questions about the future of SmartEnergy.=20 In addition, SmartEnergy will have difficulty in recruiting customers away= =20 from Con Edison and other utility providers. Many customers still have=20 reservations about signing on with an online company that they do not know.= =20 There will be some customers who jump at the chance to lock in current=20 rates for 12 months, but many others will stick with the company that they= =20 know even if their rates increase. I did a quick search around Con Edison's Website to see if it might be=20 offering an alternative offer to retain its customers, but could find nothi= ng=20 that the utility is doing to specifically address the projected increase=20 in natural-gas prices this winter. Con Edison does offer a level billing=20 program in which customers receive a consistent bill amount each month,=20 alleviating fluctuation in their bills. Yet, as a utility company, Con=20 Edison has a standard offer of service that regulators closely monitor.=20 It is possible that Con Edison could request changes to the standard offer= =20 service, which would likely need to be approved by the New York Public=20 Service Commission. The PSC could agree, or determine that the competitive= =20 offers by providers such as Smart Energy are a positive result of=20 deregulation.=20 In addition, Con Edison could be hampered by fuel contracts that may not=20 allow it much flexibility with regard to lowering its rates. Overall, Con= =20 Edison probably does not have a lot of flexibility regarding the rates=20 it can charge customers, thereby making this offer from SmartEnergy difficu= lt=20 to beat. The other online start-up taking advantage of natural-gas prices is=20 myHomeKey.com,=20 which made a recent promise to reduce home heating, oil, natural-gas, and= =20 electricity rates. The marketing route that this online start-up is taking= =20 is energy efficiency=01*teaching households how to more effectively use the= ir=20 energy and, hopefully, save money as a result. Energy is not the only servi= ce=20 of the myHomeKey.com; it is also involved in home maintenance and repair,= =20 appliances, home monitoring and moving services. Yet, I learned that=20 myHomeKey.com=20 just recently launched co-branded sites with KeySpan Corp. and TXU Energy= =20 Services to ""provide millions of local customers"" with the ability to check= =20 energy efficiency in their homes. What's important to note about these two developments is the advantage=20 that online energy providers have over traditional utilities. As utilities= =20 try to disengage themselves from regulatory-bound rate structures, online= =20 companies have the freedom and flexibility to offer attractive products=20 and billing options to customers in deregulated states. There are the onlin= e=20 providers that we know about, such as Utility.com and Essential.com.=20 Utility.com=20 has not yet started to sell natural gas, although it has established a=20 partnership with Sempra Energy in which Sempra Energy Trading will sell=20 natural gas in deregulated markets via the Utility.com Web site. Utility.co= m=20 plans to start selling natural gas by the end of this year, but it has=20 not developed any marketing campaign in this regard. Essential.com continue= s=20 to open up its service across the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast regions. Yet,= =20 on a weekly basis, new start-up online energy providers surface, eager=20 to grab their own share of the retail market.=20 I also wonder where The New Power Company is in all of this rush to=20 capitalize=20 on the marketing opportunities surrounding the rise in natural-gas prices.= =20 It would seem like a natural for TNPC to make a big splash with its own=20 marketing efforts, as it already promises lower prices for both natural=20 gas and electricity. In any event, as the natural-gas shortage may become= =20 a public relations nightmare for utility companies across the country,=20 it conversely could work to the advantage of the more agile online provider= s Read about SCIENTECH's new PowerHitter interview with Jeff Sterba, Chairman= =20 and CEO of the Public Service Company of New Mexico at:=20 http://www.consultrci.com=20 SCIENTECH is pleased to provide you with your free, daily IssueAlert. Let= =20 us know if we can help you with in-depth analyses or any other SCIENTECH=20 information products including e-commerce and telecom in the electric utili= ty=20 industry. If you would like to refer a colleague to receive our free, daily= =20 IssueAlerts, please reply to this email and include their full name and=20 email address or register directly at: Sincerely, Will McNamara Director, Electric Industry Analysis wmcnamara@scientech.com Feedback regarding SCIENTECH's IssueAlert should be sent to=20 wmcnamara@scientech.com SCIENTECH's IssueAlerts are compiled based on independent analysis by=20 SCIENTECH=20 consultants. The opinions expressed in SCIENTECH's IssueAlerts are not=20 intended to predict financial performance of companies discussed or to=20 be the basis for investment decisions of any kind. SCIENTECH's sole purpos= e=20 in publishing its IssueAlerts is to offer an independent perspective=20 regarding=20 the key events occurring in the energy industry, based on its long-standing= =20 reputation as an expert on energy and telecommunications issues. Copyright 2000. SCIENTECH, Inc. If you do not wish to receive any further IssueAlerts from SCIENTECH, pleas= e=20 reply to this message and in the body of the email type ""remove."" [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Committee on Energy and Commerce Hearing Notices; [EMail-Body]= FYI -- see hearing notices below for two hearings in the Barton Subcommittee next week -- Tues. Sept. 11 on siting, rates and reliability and Fri. Sept. 14 on RTOs, open access and federal jurisdiction. We will contact EPSA since they have been asked to provide a witness for these hearings. Will work with our internal and external team on messages to get to subcommittee members before each hearing. John -----Original Message----- From: Energy and Commerce Press Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 9:13 AM To: Energy and Commerce News Subject: Committee on Energy and Commerce Hearing Notices The Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations has scheduled a hearing for Tuesday, September 11, 2001, at 10:00 a.m., in 2123 Rayburn House Office Building. The hearing is entitled ""A Review of Federal Bioterrorism Preparedness Programs from a Public Health Perspective."" Witnesses will be by invitation only. The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality has scheduled a hearing on Tuesday, September 11, 2001, at 2:00 p.m., in 2322 Rayburn House Office Building. This hearing is entitled ""Electric Transmission Policy: Siting, Incentive Rates, and Reliability."" Witnesses will be by invitation only. The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality has scheduled a hearing on Friday, September 14, 2001, at 9:30 a.m., in 2123 Rayburn House Office Building. This hearing is entitled ""Electric Transmission Policy: Regional Transmission Organizations, Open Access, and Federal Jurisdiction."" Witnesses will be by invitation only. For the latest scheduling information, please visit The audio of all Committee hearings are broadcast via the Internet. The Committee's webcasting capacity is limited, so please visit 15 minutes prior to the beginning of the event. The free Real Player is also required. ( <http://www.real.com>) Please note that Committee markups are not currently broadcast. The House Committee on Energy and Commerce W.J. ""Billy"" Tauzin, Chairman (202) 225-2927 http://www.house.gov/commerce You are currently subscribed to commerce_news5 as: john.shelk@enron.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron Expatriates in India; [EMail-Body]= John Brindle, David Cromley and others in the Corporate Business Controls group (formerly part of EBS) have been working over the last several weeks to make sure that we can get our people out of Dabhol if there are threats to their safety. While no plan is perfectly reliable (particularly during monsoon season) we believe that we are as ready as we can be. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 06/13/2001 08:00 AM --------------------------- From: David Cromley@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS on 06/12/2001 09:18 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Enron Expatriates in India Steve, I wanted to give you the latest figures on Enron expatriates in India. There are currently 19 Enron expatriate employees based in India, accompanied by six dependants. In addition, Enron has responsibility for 15 expatriate contractors working for DPC and Lingtec, primarily at Dabhol. The total of 40 expatriates for whom Enron is directly responsible is broken down by location as follows: 21 in Mumbai, 16 at Dabhol, and three in Baroda. By company, they are broken down as follows: Enron India - eight plus three dependants; EOGIL - nine plus one dependant; EBS - one plus two dependants; DPC - seven; and Lingtec - nine. These figures are likely to continue to trend downward; Jane Wilson's departure on Friday, for example, will reduce the Enron India expatriate presence to seven plus three dependants. We are confident that the evacuation plan now in place provides the best possible prospect of successfully evacuating all of these expatriates in the event of danger. As a contingency, the plan also includes the evacuation of all 137 expatriates working at the Dabhol site, although a large-scale evacuation from Dabhol is more problematic, especially now that the monsoon season has started. A coordinated plan was needed since the limited number of available helicopters meant that the evacuation plans drawn up by individual contractors such as Bechtel were all drawing upon the same resources. As you know, Enron's security situation in India remains stable. We are in the final stages of implementing security upgrades for our employees and offices there. Dave [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Southern, Regulators clash in Power grid fight; [EMail-Body]= Very interesting article. -----Original Message----- From: Nersesian, Carin Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 4:21 PM To: Robertson, Linda; Shelk, John; Shortridge, Pat Subject: Southern, Regulators clash in Power grid fight Atlanta Journal and Constitution October 10, 2001, Wednesday Copyright 2001 Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News Copyright 2001 The Atlanta Journal and Constitution Atlanta Journal and Constitution October 10, 2001, Wednesday KR-ACC-NO: AT-ENERGY LENGTH: 718 words HEADLINE: Southern Co., Regulators Clash in Power-Grid Fight BYLINE: By Matthew C. Quinn BODY: Southern Co. appears to be on the verge of losing a big-money power struggle over control of its four-state electricity transmission system. But both sides in the tug-of-war offer different takes on which result would help consumers and which would hurt them. At issue are long-distance transmission lines, mounted on huge steel towers, that carry electricity across state lines to towns and cities. Atlanta-based Southern Co. has invested $ 3 billion in its 26,000-mile system, but federal regulators want it to cede control to a larger agency that covers eight states. The matter is coming to a head now after three years of wrangling. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission wants to carve up the country into four regional transmission organizations, or RTOs, for the Southeast, Northeast, Midwest and West. Under such a plan, local utilities like Southern would be unable to stop competing power shipments from out-of-state suppliers. Regional transmission organizations ""yield significant customer savings,"" said FERC Chairman Pat Wood III. Commission spokeswoman Barbara Connors said lower rates will result when barriers to competitively priced electricity from outside the region are dropped and transmission costs reduced. But there are sharp differences of opinion on that score. Andy Dearman, Southern Co.'s chief transmission officer, cites estimates that a super-regional agency could cost more than $ 100 million to establish, and he says those costs could be passed on to consumers in the form of higher rates. According to Georgia Power Co., a Southern Co. subsidiary, transmission costs already account for about 6.5 percent of Georgia electricity bills. There's also a question of reliability when a new system is established, Dearman saud. ""It impacts the ability to keep the lights on,"" he said. Some state regulators, who stand to lose regulatory control, see a Washington power grab. ""We've got low prices and a reliable system,"" said Georgia Public Service Commissioner Stan Wise, who sees a back-door move toward utility deregulation of the sort that has failed with electricity in California and been severely tested with natural gas in Georgia. ""Don't tell me about the new system when I've got blood on my face from the last battle,"" Wise said. ""There are some parallels that make us squirm."" PSC Chairman Lauren ""Bubba"" McDonald wrote President Bush following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks urging a delay. ""This is not the time to consider or implement any change to the management of the nation's transmission grid,"" he said. But the federal commission has only toughened its position. Wood, a Texan recently named chairman by Bush, said last month he wants to use the commission's authorities as a ""stick"" to force reluctant utilities into line. Wood would deny utilities that refuse to join a ""new world"" of regional power grids by Dec. 15 the authority to charge deregulated prices and delay merger approvals for those firms. The commission plans a series of workshops in Washington next week for what Wood called the ""brightest minds available"" in the utility field to brainstorm over transmission reorganization plans. Southern Co. is sending a representative. Companies like Enron Corp., the Texas-based national energy suppler, are pressing for RTOs as the first step toward a national transmission grid -- a concept favored by the Bush administration. Prodded by federal regulators, Southern Co. in June agreed to dilute its control over the 26,000-mile system by joining with public power agencies in five states to form a larger, 39,000-mile transmission agency to be operated by an outside company. But a federal mediator rejected the plan. The issue has also split Southern Co. from onetime subsidiary Mirant Corp., an independent power company with plans to expand into the Southeast. Large regional grids are ""more cost-effective and reliable"" than the present territorial hodgepodge, said Mirant spokesman Buddy Eller. By encouraging development of new and cleaner power plants, the environment would benefit too, he added. But Wise called such predictions ""totally unproven."" Carin Nersesian Legislative Coordinator Enron Corp. 202-466-9144 202-828-3372 (fax) [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron Energy Services: With Dereg Under Fire,Enron Calif Elec
 Business Heats Up; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/15/2000 07:32 AM --------------------------- Peggy Mahoney@EES 09/14/2000 06:09 PM To: James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, James M Wood/HOU/EES@EES, Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES, Tom Riley/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Greg Cordell/HOU/EES@EES, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Chris Hendrix/HOU/EES@EES, Gary Mirich/HOU/EES@EES, George Waidelich/SFO/EES@EES, Ronald G Mentan/SFO/EES@EES, Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES cc: Subject: Enron Energy Services: With Dereg Under Fire,Enron Calif Elec Business Heats Up FYI - not sure if you guys saw this! Still looking for a corporate customer to go on record. Peggy ---------------------- Forwarded by Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES on 09/14/2000 06:06 PM --------------------------- Enron Energy Services From: Christopher Smith 09/14/2000 11:54 AM To: Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Enron Energy Services: With Dereg Under Fire,Enron Calif Elec Business Heats Up FYI ---------------------- Forwarded by Christopher Smith/HOU/EES on 09/14/2000 11:54 AM --------------------------- on 09/14/2000 12:41:56 PM Please respond to nobody@mail1.djnr.com To: 190852@mailman.enron.com cc: Subject: Enron Energy Services: With Dereg Under Fire,Enron Calif Elec Business Heats Up With Dereg Under Fire,Enron Calif Elec Business Heats Up By Jason Leopold 09/14/2000 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- While federal regulators try to find a way to stabilize soaring wholesale electricity prices in California, Enron Corp. (ENE) has been quietly striking up deals with some suburban communities to sell them fixed-price power at a lower rate. In the past month, the Houston-based electricity service provider entered into long-term fixed-rate contracts with the city of Roseville and is negotiating similar deals with the cities of San Marcos and Chula Vista. Both of those cities currently get their power from San Diego Gas & Electric Co, a unit of Sempra Energy Inc. (SRE), and pay market rates for electricity. Enron has also struck a deal with Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide Inc. (HOT), one of the world's largest hospitality companies, to sell the company electricity at a fixed rate for the next 10 years. The company has four hotels in California, three of which buy their power from SDG&E. Sources close to the matter said Enron has contracted to sell the hotel power at about 6 cents per kilowatt-hour, compared with the 22.5 cents/KWh Starwood said it was charged by SDG&E in August. Neither company would disclose the terms of the deal. But Starwood said it expects to reduce its energy costs by more than $200 million over the next 10 years. Enron, the largest trader of electricity and natural gas in the U.S., will purchase power to cover such contracts on the wholesale markets and use its experience to manage the risks, while paying a fee to utilities like SDG&E for use of their distribution networks. ""That really is our core strength,"" said Harold Buchanan, chief operating officer for Enron Energy Services North America. ""We understand how to manage those risks."" High Rates Driving Industrial Customers, Cities To Switch The growing interest in fixed-price supply contracts is fueling a comeback of sorts for Enron. The Houston-based company had tried to break into California's retail power market just after deregulation, even spending nearly $1 million to advertise the venture during the Super Bowl. But Enron gave up trying to win residential customers in 1998, citing disappointing response and lower-than-expected profits. That was when deregulation and competitive power markets were full of promise. Oddly enough, now that deregulation is coming under attack in California, soaring power prices are building demand for Enron's services. The company is fielding calls from large industrial customers in San Diego that have seen their utility bills triple in the past three months and are interested in signing long-term fixed-rate contracts, Buchanan said. ""Overall, what Enron can provide is reliability pricing in San Diego that's written in stone,"" Buchanan said. ""It's far cheaper than what they're paying now with the utilities."" A number of large industrial customers negotiating with Enron declined to comment. The city of Roseville, near Sacramento, entered into a $114 million contract with Enron last month to purchase 50 megawatts of electricity for five years at $49 per megawatt-hour. Furthermore, the city has started talks with Enron about building and operating a 750-megawatt natural gas-fired power plant that city officials expect will contribute to lower costs for the purchase of electricity. Mayor Harry Crabb said the plant could protect residents from the price spikes that have plagued customers of SDG&E since June. San Marcos, in San Diego County, is proposing to switch electricity service for its 10,000 residents to Enron from SDG&E - a move the City Council said could shave about $12 million a year off the city's power bill. Enron has said it would offer the city terms nearly identical to those it offered Roseville. An SDG&E spokesman said last week that the utility supports such arrangements, saying they're one way deregulation is supposed to work. Enron offered earlier this summer to sell power to SDG&E itself for four years at a fixed rate of 5.5 cents/KWh, but the utility said the price was too high. California Gov. Gray Davis signed legislation two weeks ago to cap electricity rates for SDG&E's customers at 6.5 cents/KWh. -By Jason Leopold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3874; jason.leopold@dowjones.com Folder Name: Enron Energy Services Relevance Score on Scale of 100: 80 To review or revise your folder, visit http://www.djinteractive.com or contact Dow Jones Customer Service by e-mail at custom.news@bis.dowjones.com or by phone at 800-369-7466. (Outside the U.S. and Canada, call 609-452-1511 or contact your local sales representative.) Copyright (c) 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Energy bill saved for next year; [EMail-Body]= FYI. -----Original Message----- From: Nersesian, Carin Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 3:30 PM To: Robertson, Linda; Shelk, John; Shortridge, Pat Subject: Energy bill saved for next year Tuesday November 27 12:50 PM ET Energy Bill Saved For Next Year By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - Senate action on energy legislation, and a likely confrontation over whether to allow oil drilling in an Arctic wildlife refuge, is being put off until early next year. Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., said Tuesday he is committed to bringing an energy bill up for floor debate within the first weeks after Congress returns in January. Daschle has said that other pressing matters such as economic recovery, national security in light of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and remaining government spending bills, leave no time to deal with energy this year. It is ``not only my expectation, but my commitment that we will take the bill up during that first work period'' next year, meaning before the Senate's recess for Presidents' Day in mid-February. Congress is expected to recess in mid-December and return in January. Senate Republicans have accused Daschle of blocking consideration of energy legislation to avoid a heated debate over development of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska. A number of Democrats have vowed to filibuster any attempt to open the refuge to oil companies, which has been a key element of President Bush's domestic energy development strategy. ``It's a great concern to me and a number of senators that we are not going to be able to consider energy policy for our country before the end of the year, especially in view of the fact that we see now continuing uncertainty about what is going to be done by OPEC countries,'' said GOP leader Trent Lott of Mississippi. Republicans have argued that legislation is needed to spur domestic energy development and ease U.S. reliance on oil imports including those from the Persian Gulf. Democrats have maintained that most of the provisions in an energy bill will be aimed at long-term measures and should not be rushed through in the final weeks of the session. Amid talk of an energy crisis, the House last summer passed a fairly broad energy bill. But its plans to follow with a series of measures aimed specifically at the electricity industry, a key part of a comprehensive energy blueprint, were sidetracked by the events of Sept. 11. Since then, energy prices across the board from oil and natural gas to gasoline and electric power have declined dramatically with plenty of supplies, easing the crisis atmosphere that prevailed less than a year ago. Carin Nersesian Legislative Coordinator Enron Corp. 202-466-9144 (ph.) 202-828-3372 (fax) [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Meeting w/Sempra; [EMail-Body]= sounds good. I think we should not talk about the conversations with the governor . . . I'd rather not prompt them to go to the gov (presumably to object to the gov talking to us without talking to them at the same time). Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 10/11/2000 02:54 PM To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, skean@enron.com, Sandra McCubbin/SFO/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES, mpalmer@enron.com, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Meeting w/Sempra FYI. Recently, Chris Calger has asked me to set up a meeting with Sempra. ENA's seeking deals with the two big CA gas IOUs (PG&E and SoCalGas) that would give ENA access to their assets. In short, ENA wants to offer a complete outsource deal for the IOUs' core gas load (i.e., rez and small commercial customers). ENA would take responsibility for providing service for delivery at the city gate and in return would manage all of core's assets (upstream of the city gate). We're meeting with Sempra's ""Chief Regulatory Office"" (Bill Reed) and Sempra's CFO next Thursday to discuss. Given the fact that Sempra's primarily focused on electricity, the plan is to lead off the meeting with a couple of electricity solutions as a bridge to the gas offer. For electricity, the plan has two pieces: 1) a commodity offer that beats the 6.5 cent cap (i.e., nothing fancy) and 2) ""Deal Bench"" services with the intent of establishing a procurement mechanism for SDG&E that the California PUC could pre-approve (thereby eliminating some of the immense regulatory risk SDG&E now faces). Wanted to run this by folks to gauge reactions. We'll distribute the slides we're putting together as soon as they're drafted--hopefully by COB Friday. Best, Jeff [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Update - Jeff Skilling Conference Call with John Q Anderson; [EMail-Body]= Jim -- Will focus on the funding source as one of the issues in the drafts. I assume we would want FERC to have to approve their budget, correct? When you say ""not industry funding"" -- where else would it come from? I assume we don't want to allow the ""piper to call the tune"" so to speak based on who pays the bill? My recollection is that in the NERC version of the bill they ""walled off"" the funding in a manner we would find objectionable, but let me double check that fact. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGDE - Draft FERC Brief on Settlement
 Process; [EMail-Body]= My suggestions are attached. Take the gloves off. James D Steffes 07/06/2001 10:04 PM To: Jeffrey T Hodge/Enron@EnronXGate, Robert C Williams/Enron@EnronXGate cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Alan Comnes/Enron@EnronXGate, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron, Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron, Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, dwatkiss@bracepatt.com Subject: ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGDE - Draft FERC Brief on Settlement Process The attached is a rough draft of a potential filing Enron would make in to Judge Wagner in the Settlement process (it is unclear if this would remain confidential per the gag order). Please provide Ray Alvarez your comments. This would be filed as early as Monday am. Jim [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Lay/Skilling Talking Points for Bush Admin Meetings and Calls; [EMail-Body]= To add to what Rick said, I would add that effective DSM requires that price signals be sent to customers AND customers have the ability to repond -- even Mr. I See Market Power Under Every Bush, Dr. Frank Wolak, has as one of his key solutions -- competitive retail markets. Sue Mara Enron Corp. Tel: (415) 782-7802 Fax:(415) 782-7854 Richard Shapiro 04/04/2001 11:07 AM To: Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Janine Migden/NA/Enron@Enron, Jean Ryall/NA/Enron@ENRON, Aleck Dadson/TOR/ECT@ECT, Ricardo Charvel/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jose Steve Montovano/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: Lay/Skilling Talking Points for Bush Admin Meetings and Calls I think these are quite good...the missing piece, I would argue, that we need to include is a talking point on the need for FERC to focus significant resources on the identification and elimination of market power in electricity markets and the need to encourage the development of distributed generation and more effective demand - side response mechanisms , partly in response to market power concerns. This is a huge issue in getting wholesale electricity markets to work effectively, i.e; to create discernable consumer welfare benefits.... and we ( Enron ) need to talk about this this issue and concern and talk about it frequently and w/ the same passion we talk about the need for open markets. Linda Robertson 04/04/2001 12:09 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Lay/Skilling Talking Points for Bush Admin Meetings and Calls Steve, per our conversation yesterday in Houston, what do you think of these TPs? To be used by both Ken and Jeff in conversations and meetings with the Bush Administration. - Skilling Talking Points.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: ticket; [EMail-Body]= 6011 3000 5062 8237 12/02 -----Original Message----- From: Urszula Sobczyk <urszula@pacbell.net>@ENRON Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 6:37 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Re: ticket Our phone number is 1-800-801-1055. Urszula Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com wrote: > What are the hours for Conti vs. Air France? I am the ofice for another 45 > minutes. > Your phone number? > > Vince > > -----Original Message----- > From: Urszula Sobczyk <urszula@pacbell.net>@ENRON > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 5:56 PM > To: Kaminski, Vince J > Subject: Re: ticket > > Dzien Dobry ponownie, > Na wszystkie te polaczenia ceny wychodzi ok. $1700.00. > Jedyne co to wylot 04 lipca z IAH przez Chicago do Warszawy - LOT, > powrot 09 lipca, Warszawa - JFK, JFK > przez DFW (Dallas) do Houston. Cena wychodz $1107.10. Bardzo prosze o > kontakt. > Urszula > > Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com wrote: > > > Another question. What about a Continental flight to Amsterdam and > from > > Amsterdam to Warsaw? > > > > I can also fly Continental through Rome or London, as long as I don't > have > > to change airports. > > > > Vince > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Urszula Sobczyk <urszula@pacbell.net>@ENRON > > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 1:50 PM > > To: vkamins@enron.com > > Subject: re: ticket > > > > Dzien dobry Panu, > > Na wylot 04 lipca z IAH do Warszawy i powrot 09 lipca (8 lipca nie > bylo > > miejsca) cena wynosi $1680.26. > > Bardzo prosze o kontakt czy jest Pan zainteresowany. > > Pozdrawiam, > > Urszula [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Confidential - Decision tree on projects; [EMail-Body]= Thanks. You got the message correct. We will not accept a firesale price = but if the price is fair we are sellers. It is a tough message to deliver = but people need to hear the truth. I appreciate your efforts in arranging= the floor meeting. Any news on Eco? -----Original Message----- From: =09Mahan, Mariella =20 Sent:=09Thursday, November 15, 2001 4:53 PM To:=09Horton, Stanley Subject:=09RE: Confidential - Decision tree on projects Hi Stan, I am sorry this took so long to reply to but I was out of the office yester= day with my little one on a field trip. =20 Here is the feedback (combined with my own appreciation of how people feel)= and some very humble suggestions that I hope will help. During the EGAS session, people felt very good about being able to air out = their concerns and about getting ""official information"" as to the proposed = merger and implications on the company. Some times, even if no new informa= tion is provided, people simply feel better because an effort is made to co= mmunicate with them. People appreciated your open-ness and the frank-ness = with which you addressed some of the tougher questions regarding long term = employment viability or security. On the other hand, people read a message= into the statements regarding the fact that retention packages will be dev= eloped for key individuals. They read that if they didn't get a retention = package they should be looking for a job because they are not key. Perhaps= , bluntly, that is exactly what the message is but now you have many people= spending their time trying to figure out the ""definition of key individual= ."" People like to feel important (non-core is, for them, non-important) an= d absent that they worry about every little thing - many of these no one ca= n help or mitigate. Finally, people took comfort in the comment regarding = how long it might take for all to be sold (i.e,. approx. 3 years) and under= stood and felt better that no fire sale will take place. =20 My biggest recommendations are: -=09We need to keep up our communication efforts; people feel important and= feel better if folks make an effort to communicate; Pete and I (and other= s) need to work on =09communicating further with each of our teams and on m= otivating them to support the company during these tough times but both you= and Jim should continue to =09update people as often as possible. -=09We need to move quickly to identify our key people so that we can be ef= fective about retention efforts; my own view is that you start with the fi= eld; those are your =09most critical individuals because they are running t= he asset. =20 -=09We need to continue to deliver the message that the merger is a good th= ing and that it is not simply another ""life"" bought out by Enron (i.e., man= y people felt and still =09feel that there is still a chance Enron might ma= ke on its own and would pay the breakage fee to get out of the Dynegy deal = - this may be more hope than belief but =09that is the case). A key distinction that I noted in the meeting today was that it sounds as t= hough we will move forward very aggressively to sell all of the EGAS assets= . There is no longer the attitude or position that: if the asset has good = earnings and good cashflow, then what's the hurry. The message today (and = forgive me if I mis-read it) was: we will put together a corp. development = group that will be focused on selling EGAS assets even if they are performi= ng assets - cash is still king and will continue to be until the merger. Hope this helps and THANK YOU very much for taking the time to talk to us. Mariella=20 -----Original Message----- From: =09Horton, Stanley =20 Sent:=09Wednesday, November 14, 2001 7:47 AM To:=09Mahan, Mariella Subject:=09RE: Confidential - Decision tree on projects We will discuss at the next Staff meeting. Thanks for bringing it up. Any= feedback from the floor meeting yesterday would be appreciated. -----Original Message----- From: =09Mahan, Mariella =20 Sent:=09Tuesday, November 13, 2001 2:54 PM To:=09Horton, Stanley; Hughes, James A.; Hayslett, Rod; Sommers, Jeffrey E. Subject:=09Confidential - Decision tree on projects Something for us to talk about during our next staff meeting. There are three projects which have significant cash flow problems and thus= difficulties in meeting debt obligations: these are: SECLP, Panama and Gaz= a. In the past, as I suppose we have done in Dabhol, we have taken the pos= ition that we would not inject cash into these companies and would be prepa= red to face a default and possible acceleration of the loans. SECLP has be= en the biggest issue/problem. Panama is much less (a few million of floati= ng of our receivables from the company) would be sufficient to meet the cas= h crunch in April of this year. Note that, in Panama, the debt is fully gu= aranteed by the government and is non-recoursed to the operating company, B= LM. In the past, we have discussed letting the debt default, which would c= ause the bank to potentially seek complete payment and acceleration from th= e GoPanama. The reason: the vast majority of BLM's problems stem from acti= ons taken by the regulator that have effectively amended our PPA's with pri= vate parties; those actions resulted in significant loss of revenues, which= although today have stopped or have been limited, have left a ""mark"" on th= e company's liquidity position. =20 Now the question is: come April of 2002, should any of our actions in Panam= a or decisions related thereto (which we would have otherwise taken or made= ) be affected in any way by either the proposed merger or an effort by Enro= n to preserve efforts to re-establish investor/creditor confidence? The sa= me could go for SECLP and Gaza. This is simply an overall ""guidance"" question. Let's take it up during our= staff meeting next week, if that's ok with you. Many thanks, Mariella [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: EBS Article for eBiz; [EMail-Body]= See attached From: Karen Denne/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/12/2001 08:33 PM To: Jim Fallon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Ken Rice/Enron Communications@Enron Communications cc: Mark Palmer/ENRON@enronXgate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Kelly Kimberly/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Subject: EBS Article for eBiz Jim and Ken -- Attached is an article for eBiz (our biweekly online newsletter), which we are scheduled to launch at 7:30 a.m. Friday. Kelly Kimberly has reviewed it, but has asked that you view the article as well. Since only EBS employees received your memo about the restructuring -- and the rest of the employees did not receive any communication -- it is extremely important to provide information through this vehicle. Please let me know of your approval or if you have any questions. Thank you. Karen x39757 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Senator Feinstein; [EMail-Body]= yes Linda Robertson 03/01/2001 07:47 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Senator Feinstein Apologized that she could not meet with Steve yesterday. She would like to have this meeting. She asked that we schedule this for your next trip to DC. I think we should do this meeting soon. Do you want me to get on her calendar and then build a day of meetings around her meeting? Or wait until you are otherwise back in town? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Duchesne - Melissa called and cancelled.; [EMail-Body]= Put FH on AAE retainer Bd Meeting on Sun in Bd Rm at 8:00am Mary Kay -- posi'n on TW: ROW issues; call Leslie [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: P+ pricing/hedging; [EMail-Body]= Zimin, I shall be in California on Thu. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Lu, Zimin Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 1:43 PM To: Issler, Paulo; Lee, Bob; White, Bill; Schroeder Jr., Don Cc: Crenshaw, Shirley; Kaminski, Vince J Subject: P+ pricing/hedging A meeting is scheduled with Bill White and Don Schroeder at 4:00pm at 19C2. Bill and Don would like to talk about P+ pricing / hedging issues and NYMEX calendar spread option model that Pavel built before his departure. Please review the P+ model and the doc prepared by Stinson. Let us talk on Thursday. Zimin Shirley, Could you secure the meeting room from 4-5pm on Thursday ? And mark that on Vince's calender if possible. Thanks. << File: Adjust Vol2 test.xls >> -----Original Message----- From: Gibner, Stinson Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 5:34 PM To: Lu, Zimin; Kaminski, Vince J Subject: << File: PPlus.doc >> This is an early draft document and should be revised, but does explain the spread option structure. --Stinson [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGDE - Draft FERC Brief on Settlement
 Process; [EMail-Body]= see below. Federal price limits backfire=20 Some generators withhold power rather than abide by rate caps=20 David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, July 4, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /04/M N186091.DTL=20 Officials in California and Nevada, after months of lobbying for federal=20 regulators to cap Western power prices, warned yesterday that the newly=20 imposed limits have had the unintended consequence of increasing a threat o= f=20 blackouts in the two states.=20 The warnings were issued as California came within minutes of rolling=20 blackouts yesterday afternoon, and one day after the first-ever rolling=20 blackouts in Las Vegas forced energy-hungry casinos to shut off fountains a= nd=20 reduce air conditioning.=20 The two states are asking the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to take = a=20 closer look at the so-called price mitigation plan and come up with revisio= ns=20 that would deter power companies from withholding electricity during=20 shortages.=20 ""We need some clarity to this order,"" said Oscar Hidalgo, a spokesman for t= he=20 California Department of Water Resources, which is spending billions of=20 dollars to keep the state's lights on.=20 ""Generators need to be held accountable,"" he said.=20 The crux of the problem is that price limits kick in during shortages, yet= =20 power companies say these caps force them to sell power at below-market rat= es=20 during periods of high demand.=20 Some companies have responded by holding back power rather than face the=20 expense of shipping electricity from state to state. Each mile that=20 electricity must be transmitted adds to the overall cost.=20 ""No one's going to pay for transmission if the cost is near the caps,"" said= =20 Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, an=20 energy-industry association in Menlo Park.=20 Ackerman said several companies in his organization decided that there was = no=20 economic advantage to offering power in regional markets when price control= s=20 are in effect.=20 ""This means individual regions like California or Las Vegas could end up no= t=20 having enough,"" Ackerman said. ""It increases the threat of blackouts.""=20 BLACKOUT ALERT CANCELED California authorities issued a blackout alert at 1:45 p.m. yesterday when= =20 power reserves dipped to dangerously low levels. They canceled the alert=20 about an hour later, after finding additional supplies.=20 ""Everyone in the West is fighting for megawatts,"" said Stephanie McCorkle, = a=20 spokeswoman for the California Independent System Operator, which oversees= =20 the state's power network.=20 The Golden State's latest brush with lights-out conditions came a day after= =20 Nevada experienced its own rolling blackouts for the first time, prompting= =20 heavy power users such as the MGM Grand and Caesars Palace to dim their=20 lights.=20 Don Soderberg, chairman of the Nevada Public Utilities Commission, said tha= t=20 the sudden power emergency took state authorities by surprise and that they= =20 are investigating to see what role the federal price limits may have had in= =20 exacerbating Monday's shortage.=20 ""We're looking very closely at this,"" he said. ""There seems to be a potenti= al=20 for unintended consequences.""=20 Specifically, Soderberg said Nevada is focusing on operators of older, less= -=20 efficient plants who would find profit margins shrinking, if not vanishing,= =20 under capped prices.=20 ""We're going to see how the caps might have played into this,"" he said.=20 The federal ceiling in 10 Western states, excluding California, is about $9= 2=20 per megawatt hour. In California, a 10 percent surcharge is added because o= f=20 the state's credit risk, bringing the price to just over $101.=20 Ackerman at the Western Power Trading Forum said regional price controls ha= ve=20 extended California's power crisis to neighboring states.=20 ""California sneezed and the rest of the region caught the virus,"" he said.= =20 'LAWYERS LOOKING FOR LOOPHOLES'=20 California and Nevada officials, however, said that they still have faith= =20 that price limits can stabilize Western electricity markets but that federa= l=20 regulators may have to tweak the system so that power companies cannot=20 withhold output.=20 ""The generators have banks of lawyers looking for loopholes (in the plan),""= =20 said Hidalgo at the Department of Water Resources.=20 Unfortunately, it may take some time for the regulators to revisit an issue= =20 that they took up only with the greatest reluctance. For months, federal=20 regulators refused to impose price controls, preferring instead to let supp= ly=20 and demand determine costs.=20 Hidalgo said that when it appeared that power companies were throttling bac= k=20 on output Monday, California officials immediately dialed the hot line numb= er=20 provided by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in case of emergencies= .=20 ""No one answered,"" he said. ""They were closed.""=20 State officials tried again yesterday, and this time were told that the=20 commission would look into the matter. They were not given a time frame for= =20 when the commission might come up with a response.=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 Out-of-state generators pull plug over uncertainty on price controls By Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writer (Published July 3, 2001)=20 Confused by the federal government's new controls on electricity prices,=20 generators withheld so much power from California on Monday that the state= =20 was nearly plunged into rolling blackouts, state officials said.=20 The confusion began when the state's electric grid operators declared a Sta= ge=20 1 power alert in the early afternoon, triggering the price caps for the fir= st=20 time since they went into effect June 21.=20 Out-of-state generators pulled about 1,500 megawatts of electricity off the= =20 table at midafternoon, enough to power about 1.1 million homes, because of= =20 uncertainty about how much they could charge under the new Federal Energy= =20 Regulatory Commission pricing system, said Oscar Hidalgo, spokesperson for= =20 the state Department of Water Resources. The department buys electricity fo= r=20 the state's financially distressed utilities.=20 ""They didn't understand what they were going to be paid; there was confusio= n=20 over the FERC order,"" Hidalgo said. ""We saw 1,500 megawatts disappear.""=20 The problem was exacerbated by a heat wave across the West, which forced=20 California to compete with other states for scarce electricity, he said.=20 Rolling blackouts hit southern Nevada.=20 Most California officials credit the FERC system, which is based on a=20 variable price cap, with reining in what had been a runaway wholesale power= =20 market. But power generators have complained that the price caps, by limiti= ng=20 profits, could discourage the production of critically needed electricity.= =20 And as Monday's episode suggested, even the uncertainty about where the cap= =20 will fall could lead to unexpected shortages.=20 ""That's the risk that you run (with price controls),"" said Arthur O'Donnell= ,=20 editor of the newsletter California Energy Markets. ""People want any kind o= f=20 certainty at all.""=20 Hidalgo said the state avoided blackouts only because of last-minute import= s=20 from the Bonne=0F'ville Power Administration, the federal agency that marke= ts=20 government-produced hydroelectric power in the Pacific Northwest. The state= =20 went into a Stage 2 power alert, the next-to-last level before blackouts ar= e=20 ordered. The alert was canceled in late afternoon.=20 The blackouts would have been the first in California since May 8.=20 FERC imposed a round-the-clock ceiling on power throughout the West. The=20 price fluctuates and is tied to the production costs of the least-efficient= =20 plant operating in California during a ""power alert"" declared by the=20 Independent System Operator, which runs the state's power-transmission grid= .=20 When there's no alert, prices can't exceed 85 percent of the cap that was= =20 established during the latest alert.=20 Until Monday, the maximum price held steady at about $101 a megawatt-hour i= n=20 California. But when the ISO declared a Stage 1 power alert in early=20 afternoon, signifying that reserve supplies had dwindled to less than 7=20 percent of demand, confusion set in, Hidalgo and others said.=20 Because of a steep drop in the price of natural gas, which fuels many=20 California power plants, suppliers knew the cap would fall. But no one knew= =20 by how much until the price was posted by the ISO.=20 The ceiling for California fell to about $77 at 3 p.m. but was back up to $= 98=20 in two hours, according to the ISO. Those prices include the 10 percent=20 premium that sellers can charge California because FERC said there's a cred= it=20 risk in selling to the state.=20 O'Donnell said it's likely suppliers will pull back from the market every= =20 time the ISO declares a power alert.=20 In-state generators have to operate their plants if summoned by the ISO. Bu= t=20 out-of-state suppliers can withhold supplies, and on Monday it was the=20 out-of-staters that were pulling back, Hidalgo said.=20 The Bee's Dale Kasler can be reached at (916) 321-1066 or dkasler@sacbee.co= m.=20 Power Sales Halted by New Pricing Curbs=20 Electricity: Confused suppliers, unsure what they will be paid, refuse to= =20 sell to state, which asks FERC for a ruling but doesn't get it.=20 By NANCY VOGEL, Times Staff Writer=20 ?????SACRAMENTO--Confusion over new federal price restrictions prompted=20 several electricity sellers to back away from sales to California on Monday= =20 afternoon, pushing the state closer to blackouts, energy officials said. ?????The state lost sales that would have provided enough electricity to=20 supply more than 1 million homes, said Ray Hart, deputy director of the=20 California Department of Water Resources, which has been buying much of the= =20 state's electricity since January. ?????At least five companies producing or marketing power ""are telling us= =20 that since they don't know what they're going to get paid, they're not goin= g=20 to take the risk, and so they're not going to sell the energy,"" Hart said. ?????The electricity sales fell through after power consumption soared in= =20 summer heat and grid operators were forced to declare a Stage 1 emergency,= =20 meaning reserves had dipped below 7%. It was the first such emergency since= =20 May 31. ?????Under a June 19 order by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission=20 intended to bring down wholesale electricity markets across the West, a pow= er=20 emergency in California triggers the setting of a new price limit that=20 applies to power plant owners from Washington to Arizona.=20 ?????The new price is supposed to be based upon whatever it costs to run th= e=20 most inefficient, expensive power plant selling electricity to California= =20 grid operators during the first full hour of a Stage 1 emergency. ?????But much uncertainty remains about exactly how and when the new price = is=20 supposed to be established under the commission's order, and that apparentl= y=20 drove away sellers, Hart said. ?????Shortly after the state issued the Stage 1 alert at 1:30 p.m., putting= =20 the old price limit of $90 per megawatt-hour in question, companies that ha= d=20 committed to provide the state electricity hour by hour Monday afternoon=20 backed out, Hart said. The companies include TransAlta Energy Marketing of= =20 Oregon, Constellation Power of Baltimore and Sempra Energy Trading, a unit = of=20 the San Diego-based energy conglomerate. ?????Forced to dip even deeper into the state's power reserves and declare = a=20 Stage 2 emergency, water agency officials called the federal energy=20 commission's hotline for clarification about what the new price should be a= nd=20 when it should take effect. They got no answer. ?????Hart said commission officials reached at home promised to try to=20 clarify their order today. One outstanding question is what obligations pow= er=20 suppliers have to deliver electricity to California in an emergency. ?????Both buyers and sellers in the market agree that the new price, when i= t=20 is set, will probably be lower than $90 per megawatt-hour because the price= =20 of natural gas, the main fuel in California power plants, has dropped latel= y. ?????Temperatures soared several degrees higher Monday than grid operators= =20 had anticipated. But they said they expected to avoid rolling blackouts in= =20 part because the Bonneville Power Administration in Portland, Ore., had=20 agreed to provide several hundred megawatts of Pacific Northwest hydropower= =20 each hour in exchange for a return of electricity from California later thi= s=20 summer. ?????""Bonneville is giving us emergency power to get us through,"" Hart said= .=20 Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 James D Steffes 07/06/2001 10:04 PM To: Jeffrey T Hodge/Enron@EnronXGate, Robert C Williams/Enron@EnronXGate cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda=20 Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Alan Comnes/Enron@EnronXGate, Jeff=20 Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron, Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron= ,=20 Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON,=20 dwatkiss@bracepatt.com=20 Subject: ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGDE - Draft FERC Brief on Settlement Proces= s The attached is a rough draft of a potential filing Enron would make in to= =20 Judge Wagner in the Settlement process (it is unclear if this would remain= =20 confidential per the gag order). Please provide Ray Alvarez your comments. This would be filed as early as= =20 Monday am. Jim [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Merger on FERC's Agenda; [EMail-Body]= Wow! Was this expected? Sarah Novosel@ENRON 07/19/2000 03:52 PM To: ""Fullenweider, Keith"" <KFullenweider@velaw.com> cc: J Mark Metts/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mitchell Taylor/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Ann Ballard/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, ""'rshapir@enron.com'"" <rshapir@enron.com>, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Adam"" <awenner@velaw.com>, jrutkows@llgm.com, ""'mmelnyk@llgm.com'"" <mmelnyk@llgm.com>, ""'sbehrend@llgm.com'"" <sbehrend@llgm.com>, ""'mike@tonkon.com'"" <mike@tonkon.com>, JAY DUDLEY/ENRON, Pamela Lesh/ENRON, Subject: Merger on FERC's Agenda The Sierra/PGE merger is on FERC's agenda for FERC's July 26 meeting. Please call me if you have any questions. We'll keep you posted. Sarah ""Fullenweider, Keith"" <KFullenweider@velaw.com> on 11/29/99 06:12:51 PM To: J Mark Metts/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mitchell Taylor/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Ann Ballard/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, ""'rshapir@enron.com'"" <rshapir@enron.com>, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, ""McWilliams, Douglas E."" <dmcwilliams@velaw.com>, ""Wenner, Adam"" <awenner@velaw.com>, ""Bruner, Becky"" <bbruner@velaw.com>, ""Decker, John"" <jdecker@velaw.com>, ""'jrutkows@llgm.com'"" <jrutkows@llgm.com>, ""'mmelnyk@llgm.com'"" <mmelnyk@llgm.com>, ""'jklauber@llgm.com'"" <jklauber@llgm.com>, ""'sbehrend@llgm.com'"" <sbehrend@llgm.com>, ""'mike@tonkon.com'"" <mike@tonkon.com> Subject: FW: Granite Update Attached is an update memo from Paul Kaufman on state issues. -----Original Message----- From: Lysa Akin [mailto:lakin@ect.enron.com] Sent: Monday, November 29, 1999 5:37 PM To: Fullenweider, Keith Subject: Granite Update ---------------------- Forwarded by Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT on 11/29/99 03:36 PM --------------------------- (Embedded Paul Kaufman image moved 11/24/99 10:35 AM to file: (Embedded image moved to file: pic07276.pcx) pic11800.pcx) Sent by: Lysa Akin To: kfullenweider@velaw.com cc: Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Keith - Please forward the attachment to our distribution list for the PGE transaction. Also, please make sure that Steve Kean & Rick Shapiro are on the distribution list. Please call me at (503) 464-7927 if you have any questions. Lysa Akin Ass't. to Paul Kaufman (See attached file: Granite Update.doc) - pic11800.pcx - pic07276.pcx - Granite Update.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Job Titles and Job Banding; [EMail-Body]= Thanks for your message. I do think we need to talk this through. In the meantime, though, let's not make anymore VPs until this is resolved. As I said in my original message, I am not looking to undo what has been done, but to make sure we don't do it again unless the process is followed. I understand that there are significant title differences across the regions we operate. In fact, one of the people in my organization who did not make VP is Dennis Vegas, who has done an extraordinary job in Latin America. Notwithstanding his regional focus (and the significance of a VP title in his region) he was put through the company wide process and he, David Haug, and I submit, everyone else on the Exec Comm, understood that every new VP would go through the same process regardless of regional assignment (with the exception of certain joint venture companies). But, I maintain that we need some consistency in the VP title in particular -- i.e. that it remain an Enron-wide title, granted only through the PRC process. Though I don't personally feel this way, for many people in the organization the VP title means something separate from the compensation structure; it implies something like ""making partner"" in a legal or consulting firm. Making that cut should not vary based on where you live or what region you support. I also understand the point about needing a certain title for external purposes. In my organization we are dealing with very title-conscious elected officials and media. I can make the case for every one of my directors and senior directors that they would be more effective externally if they carried a more senior title, regardless of any change in compensation. As an executive committee, we elected to make such an exception only for ""legacy"" title holders -- i.e. people who had previously made VP outside the process. Everyone in my organization To: Cindy Olson@ENRON, Steven J Kean@EES cc: Sanjay Subject: Job Titles and Job Banding From reading the e-mails on the issue regarding Regional Vice President at Enron India, it sounds like there will be more discussion on this issue. I know that issues like this generally come up at the Enron ExCom level. There are a few issues that need to be kept in mind, and although Cindy and I have discussed these in the past, I have not had an opportunity to pursue them further (but would be happy to help out on this). I have noticed these not only in India but also in the other international settings where I have worked for Enron during the past several years. 1. International job titles and domestic job titles do not correlate. For example, in India, the title ""Director"" implies a very senior person within the organization (well above VP), whereas in the Enron domestic world, it is a position below VP. ""Managing Director"" within Enron is below the most senior levels, but in India a MD is the Ken Lay equivalent. For this reason, I cannot use Managing Director in my title or on my business card, although this is my title for Enron Houston purposes. 2. Job titles are much more important in an international setting than in a domestic setting. For example, in Houston, we have people at the director (and probably manager) level who lead deal teams and bring deals to successful closing. In an international setting, particularly India, to get to the decision-makers in your counterpart organization, an officer title of VP or above is very often required. To a certain degree, this is form over substance, but that's what works over here. 3. To solve some of these problems, Enron should consider doing what some other international companies have done (and I think Cindy and her team may already be working on this). A job banding study should be done and based on responsibilities, everyone globally should be placed in a band. It would not be a title band of VP or director or manager, but rather a band with a non-title classification. I hate to suggest a band with numbers, such as 1 through 15, because that sounds way too much like the government, but something like that would work. Once this is done, communication is made to employees that the band is what is key in determining their compensation and level within the organization. Then, the business units can rely on their particular market dynamics or on what their competition is doing to determine job titles. Thus if the Global Origination group needs to have a title of Senior Trader and EECC needs a title of Project Leader and Enron India needs a Regional Vice President, all can be accomplished while keeping these same people at a consistent level for global Enron purposes. I will be happy to discuss this further with any of you. Plus, I will volunteer to participate in finding a solution that works for all of Enron while taking into account the specifc business unit and/or global function needs. Wade [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California Power Crisis; [EMail-Body]= Attached is the document I mentioned. You will get a separate e-mail from Karen Denne which will include the invitation and the invited for the Thursday meeting. My contact information: Steven J Kean EVP and Chief of Staff Enron Corp 713.853.1586 skean@enron.com pager: 888.906.9761 Asst Maureen McVicker 713.853.1808 I will be in Japan most of next week, but my office can reach me. Thanks [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Visit to Enron by Three Eisenhower Exchange Fellows (EEF) from
 India; [EMail-Body]= I will be out of the country on Wednesday Johan Zaayman@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 10/10/2000 02:50 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Michael Terraso@ENRON cc: John Subject: Visit to Enron by Three Eisenhower Exchange Fellows (EEF) from India Steve, Jim, Mike: You may be aware that Enron officials have in the past met with international opinion leaders visiting the US as part of the Eisenhower Exchange Fellowship (EEF) program. The EEF is an international leadership exchange program that promotes international understanding and productivity through the exchange of information, ideas, and perspectives among emerging leaders throughout the world. Ken Lay is a member of the EEF Board of Trustees. Enron will be hosting three EEF visitors from India on Wednesday, October 18, 2000: Mr. Sanjeev Ahluwalia, Secretary of the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission; Mr. Sreenivasan Jain, Newscaster, New Delhi TV; and Mr. Jawed Usmani, Joint Secretary, Office of the Prime Minister. I am preparing a day program at Enron for the three persons, two of whom - Sanjeev Ahluwalia and Jawed Usmani - are interested in learning more about the US regulatory environment. Mr. Ahluwalia also wants to learn more about US environmental policy in both local and global contexts (please refer to attached bios for more details). I would be grateful if either Steve or Jim could meet with the above persons for 30-45 minutes to discuss regulatory issues. Similarly, if Mike could be available to meet with Mr. Ahluwalia re environmental issues. Please let me know if you are available either between 10:00 - 12:00 noon or 3:30 - 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, October 18, 2000. If you are unavailable, it would be appreciated if one of your other colleagues could assist in this regard. Many thanks, Johan - AHLUWALIA bio.doc - CV1.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: OH Energy Summit -- Summary of comments; [EMail-Body]= Barbara-- Very helpful and encouraging report. Sounds like the Gov. and the Consumers Counsel are with us on RTOs. Would they be willing to write their own letters, I assume separately, to the Ohio congressional delegation? There are several Ohio members on the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Is the Consumers Counsel a Democrat (that would help since there are three Ohio Democrats on the committee -- Brown, Strickland and Sawyer?). Even if he is a Republican, support from within the state would help a great deal. Thanks. John -----Original Message----- From: Hueter, Barbara A. Sent: Mon 10/1/2001 7:56 PM To: Migden, Janine; Stroup, Kerry; Shapiro, Richard; Steffes, James D.; Nord, Sue; Landwehr, Susan M.; Robertson, Linda; Shelk, John; Roan, Michael; Nicolay, Christi L.; Fulton, Donna Cc: Subject: OH Energy Summit -- Summary of comments Kerry and I attended the Ohio Energy Summit today in Columbus. Overall, the message on RTOs and restructuring was very positive. Gov. Taft and Chairman Schriber strongly endorsed FERC's recent moves regarding RTO's. Also, all talk on restructuring is to move forward and not backwards towards re-regulation. There was also consensus on adopting a national energy policy -- and many speakers linked a national energy policy to national security. Following is a brief summary of comments from various speakers: Senator Voinvich: Supports Congress passing a national energy policy by the end of the year. His concerns include: need to develop nuclear energy -- said he and Sen. Lander are working on a bill; impact of high energy prices on low income consumers and small businesses b/c we are too reliant on natural gas (did not offer any alternatives to heating w/ gas); the need to harmonize energy and environmental policies (business and environmentalists need to come to the table); very opposed to Sen. Jefford's multi-emissions bill - called it a ""threat to Ohio's economy"" - said he is working with others on a compromise; new source review problem needs to be fixed; and if new ambient air standards go into effect then entire state of OH will be out of compliance. Governor Taft: Announced that he is forming a Federal Energy Policy Group to build consensus in Ohio on promoting the development of wholesale markets that will lead to strong retail markets. PUCO Chair Schriber will chair this group. The Governor's staff learned this at the same time the rest of us did. I have asked Tom Winters to follow through with the governor's office to find out what their plans are. I told him we likely would be interested in having a spot in the group. He is going to look into this further and get back to me. The Governor announced that transmission issues, particularly RTOs are his highest priority. He also announced the Smart Community Challenge Awards for communities that decrease energy use. Also, October is officially Ohio Energy Month. Senate President Finan: His comments focussed on the state making efforts to promote use of Ohio coal, burning it cleanly and helping companies afford the environmental technologies so they can burn Ohio coal. Speaker Pro Tem Cates: Did not say much other than a coherent energy policy is absolutely necessary. Consumers Counsel Tongren: Took credit for success of municipal aggregation. Wants to work with federal government on energy policy. Laid out questions he has for state and national energy policy. Rob thanked FERC for their work last week on RTOs Allen Hill, CEO of DPL: Said he was very encouraged by FERCs aggressive agenda and that it is important to get RTOs in place and operational as soon as possible. He supports a national energy policy. Says industry needs environmental certainty. Said SB3 will survive b/c it was based on consensus. Ohio needs to finish rules on supplier defaults. Jerry Jordan, President, Ind. Petroleum Producers Assocation: Urged Ohio to stick to the effort of electric restructuring. He reviewed the history of gas restructuring in Ohio and illustrated how the industry evolved and that it took time. Tim Timken, Jr., President National Association of Manufacturer's: Came out strongly in favor of FERC moving forward aggressively on RTOs. Niel Ellerbrook, CEO, Vectren: PUCO should look at monthly GCR adjustments. Tom Catania, VP Govt. Affairs, Whirlpool Corporation: He is member of NAM, US Chamber and Business Roundtable. Very pro-restructuring. Pushed tax credits and exemptions for consumers who purchase energy efficient appliances. Jim Rogers, CEO, Cinergy: Comments focused on supply and demand balance in ECAR. Said major factor that is pushing prices up is environment. Spoke against Sen. Jeffords bill. Environment is Cinergy's biggest priority. Said that Ohio should stay the course on competition. FERC Commissioner Nora Mead Brownell: During our conversation with her, she suggested that we work with Ethan Brown at NGA on the task force with DOE. Chairman Schriber is getting involved in this effort as well. I will work with Sue Landwehr on this. Finally, Governor Taft recently hired a staffer for his Washington office to focus on energy issues. Her name is Sara Sleighter. She used to work for the PUCO and as an aide in the Ohio House. Sara left the PUCO when her husband accepted a position as Rep. Tiber's chief of staff in DC. Sara is very willing to sit down with Enron to talk about our issues. I will contact John Shelk separately to discuss. (Christi -- Sara said you were very helpful to her during the SE RTO mediation -- at that time she worked for APPA's law firm.) If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 614-396-4359. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Feinstein Legislation; [EMail-Body]= Jeff -- Per below, Jim thought you might be able to help with this if Sue is on vacation. Linda and I met with Sen. Feinstein's chief of staff last week and I will be calling her energy person this week to meet next week. Thanks. John -----Original Message----- From: Steffes, James D. Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 8:25 AM To: Shelk, John; Dasovich, Jeff; Mara, Susan Subject: FW: Feinstein Legislation John - I think that Sue is still on vacation. Jeff may be able to help. Jim -----Original Message----- From: Shelk, John Sent: Friday, August 24, 2001 2:33 PM To: Mara, Susan Cc: Steffes, James D.; Robertson, Linda Subject: RE: Feinstein Legislation Sue -- Just checking to see if there is any new word from IEP on the draft Feinstein legislation you had sent earlier. I have quietly alerted others in town -- such as EPSA and INGAA. NGSA -- the group that represents the natural gas producers -- is aware and sending comments to her this week. We have heard conflicting reports about whether she still intends to pursue the legislation -- at least on a stand alone basis -- and how much of a priority should will place on it in relation to other energy issues. I intend to call her energy staffer next week to sit down before the Senate Energy Committee resumes votes in September. Any news on this issue would be helpful. Thanks in advance. -----Original Message----- From: Mara, Susan Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 3:16 PM To: Shelk, John; Steffes, James D. Subject: RE: Feinstein Legislation Sorry. I've been swamped trying to save direct access for the ingrates in CA. I'll get it right out to you by fax. -----Original Message----- From: Shelk, John Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 6:51 AM To: Steffes, James D.; Mara, Susan Subject: RE: Feinstein Legislation Sue -- Jim forwarded your e-mail on the Feinstein legislation (draft). While she has talked about her interests conceptually in various hearings and meetings, we have not yet seen draft legislative language or more details. If you have draft language or more details (which it sounded like from your e-mail), please forward and we can discuss. Thanks for your assistance. John -----Original Message----- From: Steffes, James D. Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 6:42 AM To: Shelk, John; Mara, Susan Subject: FW: Feinstein Legislation John - Can you please get with Sue? thx -----Original Message----- From: Mara, Susan Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 1:48 AM To: Robertson, Linda Cc: Shapiro, Richard; Steffes, James D.; Alvarez, Ray; Dasovich, Jeff Subject: Feinstein Legislation I assume you're all over this, Linda. On the off chance that you haven't seen it. Feinstein is asking IEP for comments on her draft legislation that would increase regulation of natural gas, define what just and reasonable rates would be and increase refund power on the electric side. I think we would have some concerns with her proposal. If you want to pass along our comments to IEP, just get them to me. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Information and Securities Trading; [EMail-Body]= I couldn't open link. I s this something new for me to sign or have I already complied? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/11/2001 01:19 PM --------------------------- Office of the Chairman - Enron Wholesale Services on 07/11/2001 10:15:47 AM Please respond to To: KEAN@mailman.enron.com, STEVEN <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: Confidential Information and Securities Trading To:KEAN, STEVEN Email:skean@enron.com - 7138531586 Enron Wholesale Services - Office of the Chairman From: Mark Frevert, Chairman & CEO Mark Haedicke, Managing Director & General Counsel Subject: Confidential Information and Securities Trading To keep pace with the fluid and fast-changing demands of our equity trading activities, Enron Wholesale Services (""EWS"") has recently revised its official Policies and Procedures Regarding Confidential Information and Securities Trading (""Policies and Procedures""). These revisions reflect two major developments: (1) our equity trading activities have been extended into the United Kingdom, and (2) in an effort to streamline the information flow process, the ""Review Team"" will play a more centralized role, so that the role of the ""Resource Group"" is no longer necessary.You are required to become familiar with, and to comply with, the Policies and Procedures. The newly revised Policies and Procedures are available for your review on LegalOnline, the new intranet website maintained by the Enron Wholesale Services Legal Department. Please click on the attached link to access LegalOnline: If you have already certified compliance with the Policies and Procedures during the 2001 calendar year, you need not re-certify at this time, although you are still required to to review and become familiar with the revised Policies and Procedures. If you have not certified compliance with the Policies and Procedures during the 2001 calendar year, then you must do so within two weeks of your receipt of this message. The LegalOnline site will allow you to quickly and conveniently certify your compliance on-line with your SAP Personal ID number. If you have any questions concerning the Policies or Procedures, please call Bob Bruce at extension 5-7780 or Donna Lowry at extension 3-1939. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Management Conference - Save the Date; [EMail-Body]= looks fine From: Terrie James/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/19/2001 04:31 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Cindy Olson/ENRON@enronXgate cc: Sherri Sera/ENRON@enronXgate, Marge Nadasky/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: Management Conference - Save the Date Steve and Cindy, Attached is the electronic ""Save the Date"" memo for the Management Conference. We are preparing to send it out next week. Please let me know if you have any comments or concerns on the e-mail. As for distribution, we've worked with HR on the distribution list for VPs; but will circle back with David Oxley's team to ensure we have the most up-to-date list. Since some VPs in redeployment will most likely find positions within Enron by November, I don't plan to exclude them from the distribution ... unlike United Way, where we are not soliciting employees in redeployment for a contribution. I look forward to any feedback. Terrie James Senior Director, Public Relations Enron Broadband Services (ph) 713.853.7727 (fax) 713.646.3248 terrie.james@enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Gray Davis meeting; [EMail-Body]= I think the meeting is on Wednesday, but if you can be there (Sacremento, I expect) you should. As I mentioned in my voicemail, I think the meeting will not be particularly substantive; more likely it is a photo op for the governor to show how tough he is on the pirate generators. Based on your message below, should we still plan to send somebody? I still think we should if we can manage the legal risk. Mike: would you be able to attend as well? From: Richard B Sanders@ECT on 05/06/2001 10:45 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Gray Davis meeting As I indicated in my VM, I will be in LA early Tues morning. Would you like to talk about the isuues before your meeting--or would you like me to go? ----- Forwarded by Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT on 05/06/2001 10:43 AM ----- ""Shohet, Jeff"" <jshohet@graycary.com> 05/04/2001 10:48 AM To: ""Doron Ezickson"" <dezickson@mwe.com>, ""Gary Fergus"" <gfergus@brobeck.com>, ""Gerald L. McMahon"" <mcmahon@scmv.com>, ""James Ransom"" ""Jean Frizzell"" <jfrizzell@gibbs-bruns.com>, ""Jeffrey Davidson"" ""Jennifer A. Hein"" <jennifer.hein@neg.pge.com>, ""Jennifer Costa"" <jennifer.costa@neg.pge.com>, ""John Hershberger"" <hershberger@scmv.com>, ""Laura H. Roppe"" <roppe@scmv.com>, ""Mary Lou Peters"" <marylou.peters@msdw.com>, ""Michael A. Leone"" <leone@scmv.com>, ""Michael J. Weaver"" <mike.weaver@lw.com>, ""Michael L. Kirby"" <mlk@pkns.com>, ""Mike D. Smith"" <msmith1@enron.com>, ""Richard B. Sanders"" ""Robert Williams"" ""Robin Gibbs (Mr.)"" <sbishop@gibbs-bruns.com>, ""Stephen A. Herman"" <steve.herman@neg.pge.com>, ""Sydne Michel"" ""Tanya Murphy"" <tanya.murphy@neg.pge.com>, ""Tony Richardson"" cc: Subject: Gray Davis meeting Williams, Reliant, Enron, Duke, AES, Dynegy, Mirant and Sempra have been invited to a meeting with the Governor. The press release provides: ""The agenda will include ""unpaid debts, credit and the supply of power."" Williams is concerned about attending such a meeting of competitors without the presence of antitrust counsel even under the sponsorship of the Governor (who presumably acts as both the sovereign and on behalf of the buyer(s)). We are looking into the Sovereign immunity and Noerr-Pennington issues to determine how best to protect any such group discussions from challenge or as evidence in any of the pending cases. Are any of your clients also concerned about this and are you also looking into these issues? Williams would like to have a joint defense protected conference call (perhaps later today if possible) to discuss this meeting and consider whether antitrust counsel is needed for the group or if each participant should attend with its own counsel. Please let me have your thoughts and whether one of you (or other counsel) is interested and available to participate in a conference call. Thanks/ Jeffrey M. Shohet Gray Cary Ware & Freidenrich Phone: (619) 699-2743 Fax: (619) 236-1048 Mobile: (619) 933-2743 email: jshohet@GrayCary.com [INFO] -- Content Manager: NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. To contact our email administrator directly, send to postmaster@graycary.com Thank you. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Request for Confidential Information by the GAO; [EMail-Body]= We need another request for confidentiality. Please call me. ---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Hain/HOU/ECT on 10/02/2000 08:48 AM --------------------------- To: Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Request for Confidential Information by the GAO ---------------------- Forwarded by Tim Belden/HOU/ECT on 09/29/2000 06:31 PM --------------------------- Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp. From: 09/29/2000 03:53 PM To: cc: Subject: Request for Confidential Information by the GAO To All California Power Exchange Participants: Notice is hereby provided pursuant to Section 19.3.4 of the California Power Exchange Tariff that the United States General Accounting Office (GAO), as part of the ongoing investigation of California markets, has requested the same information to be provided to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Such information may be confidential under Section 19.3.2 of the Tariff. The manner in which the GAO will treat such confidential information is outlined in the attached letter. The GAO states that it has authority under 31 U.S.C. 717 to evaluate programs or activities of the Federal Government, in this case, deregulation of the electricity markets initiated by FERC. The GAO has requested the California Power Exchange to provide such information no later than Thursday, October 5, 2000. If you desire to assert a claim of privilege or confidentiality pursuant to legal authority, the California Power Exchange will include your written assertion of that claim together with its submittal to the GAO, provided that it is timely received. Your written statement should be directed to the GAO as follows: Mr. Jim Wells Director, Energy Resources, and Science Issues United States General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548 You may deliver your statement to the California Power Exchange as follows: Karen Koyano California Power Exchange 1000 S. Fremont Avenue Unit 20 Alhambra, CA 91801 626.537.3173 facsimile Any written statement must be received by Ms. Koyano no later than Wednesday, October 4, 2000, 5:00 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time, to be included with any information delivered to the GAO. You are also free to take any other legal action you may deem appropriate in the circumstances of this investigation. Thank you. (See attached file: GAO Letter 9-22-00.doc) - GAO Letter 9-22-00.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Next NERC Reliability Meeting on Legislation -- August 9th; [EMail-Body]= I don't know that NERC has ""given up"" on Enron. The timing of next week's meeting to ""resolve"" the legislation reflects the legislative realities that the committees of jurisdiction in Congress will take up the realibility legislation, along with other electricity issues, as early as the second week of September. In fact, congressional staff in the Senate and House are drafting legislative language on electricity issues during the August recess. They have pressed the ""coalition"" for a final work product. I gathered that at least some of what Jeff'spresentation to the NERC board would be about concerns matters beyond the legislation as such, but since they go to the NERC board's operation and independence, may go to our comfort level with NERC as the standards setting organization. Given the issues and concerns that have been addressed and communicated to NERC, and our preference for the PJM model (as Jeff told John Q. Anderson in the conference call), I think NERC got the information it wanted to get out of the call even though it didn't like the answers: i.e., whether Sarah and I have been faithfully representing Enron's position, whether Enron supports an ""SRO"" type organization; and whether there is anything they can do to get us on board. Perhaps we should have another conference call early next week so that Sarah and I have our guidance from everyone going into the August 9th meeting. For one thing, we need to determine if we are in any position to provide detailed comments on the ""shortened NERC"" version at the August 9th meeting or whether we do not wish to engage them on what specific changes it would take to get us on board. My sense is that since we have to deal with the players in the room on other issues, our overall position will be strengthened if we have some specific comments to make to explain our decision not to support NERC's version, even the shortened one. Don't get me wrong -- we have plenty of good reasons not to, I just wasn't sure how ""engaged"" we wanted to be in identifying changes that would bring us on board since I gather our opposition is more fundamental (no Western deference, budget concerns, independence issues, etc.). From: Charles Yeung/ENRON@enronXgate on 08/03/2001 11:57 AM To: John Shelk/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/ENRON@enronXgate, James D Steffes/ENRON@enronXgate cc: Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: RE: Next NERC Reliability Meeting on Legislation -- August 9th John We are concerned how this meeting impacts what transpired between John Q Anderson and Jeff Skilling on the conference call on Thursday. David Cook was on the call as well and we do not understand the sudden urgency for NERC to reach closure. Has NERC given up on Enron? As we understand it, John Q Anderson agreed to give Jeff an opportunity to present present before the NERC Board some ke y issues for Enron before trying to finalize any NERC legislation proposal. Does this meeting next week preclude that presentation from occurring? Or will there be willingness to alter the language significantly enough to appease the Enron concerns next week? Charles Yeung -----Original Message----- From: Shelk, John Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 5:13 PM To: Shapiro, Richard; Steffes, James D.; Yeung, Charles Cc: Robertson, Linda; Novosel, Sarah Subject: Next NERC Reliability Meeting on Legislation -- August 9th See NERC memo below that was just received. They have scheduled what they hope will be the final meeting to ""resolve"" the reliability legislation next week -- August 9th. Of course, this is awfully presumptuous in that it assumes that the model to be worked off of is the NERC model (even the shortened one), and not the PJM model that others prefer to use. We need to decide whether we suggest any changes to the shortened NERC version, even those we know they would not take just to show a willingness to offer specific comments as we promised at the last meeting, or simply ""agree to disagree."" ---------------------- Forwarded by John Shelk/NA/Enron on 08/02/2001 05:09 PM --------------------------- ""David Cook"" on 08/02/2001 05:06:14 PM Sent by: owner-rlc@nerc.com To: <rlc@nerc.com> cc: Subject: revisions to reliability language Reliability legislation coalition I have attached a memo outlining the edits that NERC would make in the 7/19 discussion draft. My memo does not take account of the suggestions that have been circulated in the last day or so. I've also attached a marked-up version of the 7/19 draft indicating our changes. I propose that we meet in Washington on Thursday, August 9, at 10:00 a.m., with the goal of coming to closure on reliability legislation that is shorter and less detailed than the language in the pending bills, but that still preserves the essence of an industry self-regulatory organization. I am working on a location and expect to provide that information tomorrow. I know that scheduling this meeting may be difficult for some and that schedules are already full, but schedules will become even more difficult later in the month. I take as our deadline having new language for the Hill during the August recess. Thank you in advance for your continuing efforts to bring this new model for reliability into existence. David Cook General Counsel NERC office: 609-452-8060 cell: 609-915-3063 david.cook@nerc.net <<Edits to 7-19 discussion draft.doc>> <<Discussion draft, 071901 (dnc comments).DOC>> - Edits to 7-19 discussion draft.doc << File: Edits to 7-19 discussion draft.doc >> - Discussion draft, 071901 (dnc comments).DOC << File: Discussion draft, 071901 (dnc comments).DOC >> <Embedded Picture (Device Independent Bitmap)> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Ken Lay Statement to Employees on Bush CO2 Policy; [EMail-Body]= The revised statement looks good to me. Catherine McKalip-Thompson@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS 03/23/2001 12:30 PM To: Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@Enron, Jeffrey Keeler/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Ann M Schmidt/Corp/Enron@Enron, Lauren Iannarone/NY/ECT@ECT@ENRON, Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: Ken Lay Statement to Employees on Bush CO2 Policy Rob, After reviewing both Lauren's and Jeff's comments, I have little to add. I would, however, replace the last part of Jeff's sentence in the first paragraph with ""and there is a need to take a comprehensive look at strategies for reducing CO2 emissions more broadly, in ways that make economic and environmental sense"" to avoid mentioning the Kyoto Protocol directly. And, I'd like to reiterate Lauren's suggestion that the article should direct employees to our climate change policy statement in last year's EHS Report and that Lay encourages them to research and reflect on the issue and communicate their thoughts. Thanks, Catherine Catherine McKalip-Thompson Manager, Environmental Responsibility Enron Corp. 101 California Street, Suite 1950 San Francisco, CA 94111 Tel: 415.782.7842 Fax: 415.782.7854 Jeffrey Keeler@ENRON 03/23/01 08:35 AM To: Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Ann M Schmidt/Corp/Enron@Enron, Lauren Iannarone/NY/ECT@ECT, Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Catherine McKalip-Thompson/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Subject: Re: Ken Lay Statement to Employees on Bush CO2 Policy Rob: Here are my edits below, in bold. Sorry to re-write so much -- but I believe this is consistent with Steve's conversation with Ken, and with the media interviews he has given to date, as well as our advocacy on multipollutant and climate change. Jeff Jeffrey Keeler Director, Environmental Strategies Enron Washington DC office - (202) 466-9157 Cell Phone (203) 464-1541 Rob Bradley 03/23/2001 10:14 AM To: Jeffrey Keeler/Corp/Enron cc: Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Lauren Iannarone/NY/ECT@ECT, Ann M Schmidt/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Ken Lay Statement to Employees on Bush CO2 Policy (KEELER EDITS) Here is my draft for Ken in response to Ann's eBiz request. Comments welcome ""The President, after a good deal of study and soul searching, decided not to support mandatory controls on carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from power plants as part of a multipollutant clean air strategy. His decision was based on some very important factors -- the nation's energy markets are experiencing unprecedented supply and price challenges that any CO2 mandate could exacerbate; and U.S. regulation of CO2 in the near-term could be ill-advised because the Kyoto protocol on global treatment of greenhouse gas emissions is unworkable in its current form. ""I was somewhat concerned that the message sent by the Bush administration would polarize the debate over how the U.S. should treat CO2 emissions in the long term, as his statement did provoke a very negative ""anti-environment"" reaction by many concerned individuals and organizations. Because this is an important issue to all parties on all sides of the debate, I believe that the administration should convene an ongoing process to carefully examine global climate change and all the long-term economic, scientific, and social impacts of action regulate CO2 emissions."" ""The President's position on CO2 notwithstanding, Enron continue to be a private sector leader in offering real solutions towards reducing greenhouse gas emissions in a rapidly expanding energy market. We are well-positioned through our experience with low-carbon fuels for electric generation (natural gas and wind in particular), our focus on new power generation and tecnologies, our leadership position in promoting efficiency through Enron Energy Services' energy outsourcing business, and our expertise in emissions trading and risk management."" ""A multipollutant appraoch to reducing power plant emissions makes a lot of sense from and environmental and energy policy standpoint. Enron will continue to work with the Bush administration and Congress toward structuring a program that can achieve environmental goals while providing incentives to build cleaner, more efficient generation, promoting a broad mix of fuels and tecnologies, and giving industry the flexibility and economic incentives to make reductions in a market-based, cost-effective way. If we're able to make meaningful reductions in 3 pollutants -- NOx, SO2 and mercury -- and we do it in a way that promotes efficiency and new technology, we'll make progress on CO2 whether it is regulated or not."" In the meantime, I will remain active in the global climate change debate to position Enron as a constructive player in the public policy arena and as an industry leader in promoting market-driven solutions to the world's energy and environmental problems. ----- Forwarded by Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron on 03/22/2001 05:55 PM ----- Rosalee Fleming 03/22/2001 11:16 AM To: Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Tori L Wells/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: eBiz Story Rob, will you please draft a quote for Ken on these issues. ---------------------- Forwarded by Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron on 03/22/2001 11:06 AM --------------------------- Ann M Schmidt 03/22/2001 11:04 AM To: Kenneth Lay/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: eBiz Story Hi Mr. Lay, I am a Specialist in Corp. PR, under Karen Denne, and write for our internal eBiz publication. I am working on a story about the recent issue with respect to carbon dioxide emissions and Enron's position compared to President Bush's as well as the coal industry. I know that Bush's viewpoint on this issue is not to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from coal-burning power plants. I also understand he based his decision in large part due to a recent Department of Energy report that warns that such a policy would lead to an even more dramatic shift from coal to natural gas for electric power generation and significantly higher electricity prices causing problems similar to California. I wondered if you would mind adding first hand knowledge for employees. A quote from you about this issue would be great. I would also be interested in giving employees some of your reasons for being in favor of controlling CO2 such as your idea for a credit trading system for CO2. Thank you for your time and please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Ann Schmidt (x54694) [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: CONFIDENTIAL Information Request for Henry Bath US; [EMail-Body]= I am not aware of any. -------------------------- Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net) [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= EPSA Meeting On RTO Legislation; [EMail-Body]= We had a positive result in the EPSA Legislative Affairs Committee meeting yesterday afternoon. The EPSA staff draft of a letter to Barton on his RTO discussion proposal will be significantly strengthened and EPSA staff will start by incorporating the comments I sent over earlier in the week. The original draft said the Barton RTO language only needed ""technical corrections."" EPSA staff reiterated that some member co. or cos. think Barton's draft could have been worse. My reply was this ""logic"" was like saying we should be grateful he shot us in the head instead of hanging us -- one method may be more ""humane"" but either way we are ""dead"" (OK, the analogy may be too rough -- but it made the point.) (I subsequently confirmed that Reliant is the ""soft"" member -- their rep. told me they ""support the discussion draft although they wouldn't object if it is strengthened."") A stronger EPSA letter with more specific reasons why we oppose the Barton discussion draft will be circulated among EPSA members today or Monday, with the goal of sending the letter first thing Tuesday when Congress returns. Some wanted a general letter requesting a meeting, and deferring specific comments until the meeting. I pointed out that Barton is speaking to subcommittee members right now and that we needed to copy them on a more detailed letter ASAP so they hear from us before Barton gets to them. We will make the same contacts ourselves. In fact, we have already started. Spoke to Reps. Chip Pickering and Rep. Greg Walden, both subcommittee Republicans, this week (did same with staff to Rep. John Shimkus). Key task when House staff return to work on Tuesday will be finding out where Ranking Member Rick Boucher is on the Barton RTO draft. Barton implied at a conference earlier this week that he and Boucher are in agreement on RTOs. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: CONFIDENTIAL AND LEGALLY PRIVILEGED; [EMail-Body]= Marcus, David roland will be point person on this. I assuming you are getting bankruptcy, etc advise and there will be consideration, etc. , corporate formalities will be followed, etc. From: Marcus Nettelton/ENRON@enronXgate on 10/31/2001 11:29 AM To: Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES cc: Mark E Haedicke/Enron@EnronXGate Subject: CONFIDENTIAL AND LEGALLY PRIVILEGED CONFIDENTIAL AND LEGALLY PRIVILEGED Vicki Many thanks for your assistance yesterday. Clinton Energy Management Services, Inc. because it holds a current power marketing certificate is an entity which we would like to move to being a direct subsidiary of Enron Corp. to take effect today. This is considered to be an essential part of restructuring to meet our current and future needs. While the day to day control will remain where it is and all the efforts assign contracts and other work should progress as planned, since the value to Enron Corp. is the power marketing certificate nothing should be done to jeopardize this. In addition we will be changing the charter and will need copies of the existing charter to effect those changes required. Please call me if you need to discuss this further. Kind regards, Marcus [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CalPX Told To Release Confidential Trade Data To ..; [EMail-Body]= CalPX Told To Release Confidential Trade Data To State 09/22/2000 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones&Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- California's Electricity Oversight Board has ordered the state's Power Exchange to hand over confidential information to the board regarding the trading activities of utilities, generation companies and other market participants who traded power at the exchange since June, according to a copy of a subpoena obtained by Dow Jones Newswires. The subpoena marks the first time the state will gain access and learn how each company traded power in the day-of, day-ahead and block forward markets. Moreover, the EOB subpoena requests the CalPX release the names of the participants who traded power at the exchange since June to better understand how and why the participants conduct business in the various markets at the exchange. The CalPX has until Wednesday to hand over ""aggregate supply and demand curves, individual firm bid dates, final schedules for each firm by generating unit, injection point and take out point,"" from June 1 through September and continue supplying trading data through Nov. 1. In addition, the subpoena requests ""block forward trade positions by firm for June, July, August and September"" and that this information continue to be supplied through October and November. The subpoena is part of the state's ongoing investigation into California's troubled deregulated electricity market, which has resulted in high wholesale power prices in San Diego, landmark legislative action and accusations of collusion, price gouging and market power. Gov. Gray Davis ordered an investigation in June, when power prices soared to near record levels and rolling blackouts wreaked havoc in the Bay Area. The CalPX said it will comply with the EOB request and that a subpoena to access the confidential information is required according to the rules of the exchange. But the EOB will be required to protect the confidentiality of each trade it gains insight into as well as the identities of the participants who traded. If the trading activities of a company or other participant is leaked or becomes public it could have a devastating affect on the company and the EOB would be held liable, according to the CalPX. The CalPX said it must notify each and every participant who traded power in its various markets to alert them of the EOB subpoena. -By Jason Leopold; Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3874; jason.leopold@dowjones.com Folder Name: Utilities, Electric: Retail Wheeling Relevance Score on Scale of 100: 53 To review or revise your folder, visit Dow Jones CustomClips or contact Dow Jones Customer Service by e-mail at custom.news@bis.dowjones.com or by phone at 800-369-7466. (Outside the U.S. and Canada, call 609-452-1511 or contact your local sales representative.) Copyright (c) 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Dedicated eSpeak Room; [EMail-Body]= A ""dedicated room"" isn't as bad as it sounds. It would not be in use full time and the only equipment requirements are 4 screens (which one of the team rooms can accomodate) and a network connection (which the team rooms already have). Let me know what you think. Also: I talked to Salisha about Lara's move and it's ok with me (I think we were originally concerned that she wanted space we were setting aside for graphics, but she is actually moving deeper into her group (and next to her files)). ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 12/17/99 08:40 AM --------------------------- Sarah Palmer@ECT 12/15/99 05:26 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Marie Hejka/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Dedicated eSpeak Room Steve and Mark: eSpeak is gaining tremendous momentum to become the communication vehicle for Enron's business units. In the first quarter of 2000, we estimate at least one eSpeak session per week -- and growing. Jeff and Joe have personally committed to an Office of the Chairman eSpeak event every two weeks. Cliff Baxter, Cindy Olson and Tom Gros are scheduled for January events. We are in the process of scheduling Ken Lay, Ken Rice, Kevin Hannon, Marty Sunde and Joe Hillings. As eSpeak events currently take place in different locations, there is an incredible amount of time and energy required to set up and test the equipment and infrastructure for each event. It is crucial to have a dedicated eSpeak room. Preferably this room should be on the 47th floor where the eThink team can train executives in advance and conduct each eSpeak session. The ideal and most efficient scenario would be to set up the equipment (four terminals) in an office space on 47, where the equipment will be secure and the Public Affairs group can still use the office as extra work space. We request your authorization to move forward. As we are moving into new space, this is the perfect time to dedicate a room. Please feel free to call me at x39843 or Marie at x39698. Sincerely, The eThink Team [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Revised list of PRC Reps; [EMail-Body]= Make sure this is consistent with the lists we put in the memo. thanks ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/09/2001 12:46 PM ----- Charlene Jackson 03/09/2001 12:11 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Stanley_Horton@Enron.com@Eott cc: Subject: Revised list of PRC Reps Attached is the document reflecting the changes in the PRC Reps pursuant to our conversation yesterday afternoon. Please call if you need any additional information. Charlene 3-9233 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= New York with Mark Koenig.; [EMail-Body]= Joanie is booking a dinner in NY for this night. 9:00 shuttle to DC [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Agreement; [EMail-Body]= This follows up on your voice mail message regarding the status of the Confidentiality Agreement in light of renewed discussions between the two companies. Attached is the latest draft of the Confidentiality Agreement which was transmitted to you on May 13. Please call me with any comments or questions. <<Confidential AGrement with Enron which was sent to Ben Rogers on 51200 - this version is a clean version accepting all blacklined changes from 59437v3.DOC>> - Confidential AGrement with Enron which was sent to Ben Rogers on 51200 - this version is a clean version accepting all blacklined changes from 59437v3.DOC [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= TX Legislative Materials; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/07/2000 07:57 AM --------------------------- From: Carolyn Green@AZURIX on 08/04/2000 02:58 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, John Wodraska/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, Amanda K Martin/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX cc: Kathleen Sullivan/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX Subject: TX Legislative Materials These are the preliminary materials I put together over the past few months on Texas water issues. Greg Characklis is most knowledgeable about both the issues and the politics, so he can provide briefing/guidance for both my replacement and Kathleen Magruder's replacement. ----- Forwarded by Carolyn Green/HOU/AZURIX on 08/04/00 02:51 PM ----- Carolyn Green 07/31/00 11:31 AM To: Greg Characklis/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX cc: Subject: TX Legislative Materials Here's what I have. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Folder to safely pass information to  Arthur Andersen; [EMail-Body]= We have become increasingly concerned about confidential information (dpr/position info, curves, validations/stress tests, etc) being passed to Arthur Andersen for audit purposes over the Web to their Arthur Andersen email addresses. (necessary now they no longer have access to Enron's internal email system) Please use the folder described below when passing any info (that you would have concerns about if it was picked up by a third party) via the shared drive that has been set up for this specific purpose. Note: AA should also use the shared drive to pass info back if there are questions, or the data needs updating. We should also consider the sensitivity of audit findings and special presentations if they are being distributed electronically. Please pass this note to others in your groups who have the need to pass info back and forth. Details on how to access for those who will use this method to pass info: A secured folder has been set up on the ""o"" drive under Corporate called Arthur_Andersen Please post all confidential files in this folder rather than emailing the files to their company email address. If you need access to this folder, submit an eRequest through the IT Central site: Arthur Andersen will be able to retrieve these files for review with their terminal server access at the Three Allen Center location. Please contact Vanessa Schulte if you have any problems or questions Beth Apollo [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: London, New York, Houston, Financial Mathematics June/July 2001; [EMail-Body]= Thanks, The same to you. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Joanna Vidal"" <jvidal@riskwaters.com>@ENRON Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 12:58 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Re: London, New York, Houston, Financial Mathematics June/July 2001 Please, your presentation looks great. Take care and hope to meet you in Houston. Have a nice holiday. ----- Original Message ----- From: <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com> To: <jvidal@riskwaters.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 1:49 PM Subject: RE: London, New York, Houston, Financial Mathematics June/July 2001 > Joanna, > > You can keep the name as is. > I don't want Zimin to be blamed for the flaws of my presentation. > > Vince > > -----Original Message----- > From: ""Joanna Vidal"" <jvidal@riskwaters.com>@ENRON > ENRON@ENRON.com] > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 10:10 AM > To: Kaminski, Vince J > Subject: Re: London, New York, Houston, Financial Mathematics June/July > 2001 > > Hello Vince! > > Hope you are well. Thank you for your presentations. Just one > question, > would you like me to change the name on the presentations from Vince to > Zimin, or should I leave them as is? > > Please advise. > > Take care > > Joanna > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com> > To: <jvidal@riskwaters.com> > Cc: <Zimin.Lu@enron.com> > Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 10:26 AM > Subject: RE: London, New York, Houston, Financial Mathematics June/July > 2001 > > > > Joanna, > > > > I am sending you, as promised, the copies of my presentation. > > My associate, Zimin Lu, will speak in my place in New York. > > > > You may want to change the background in the July 9 PowerPoint > > presentation for printing (you can do it with one > Format/Background/Apply > > to All) > > command in order to make the copies look nicer. > > > > Please, confirm the receipt of the message and make sure > > you can print the slides and they come out OK. I am leaving for a > foreign > > trip tomorrow > > and it will be difficult to reach me. > > > > Vince > > (See attached file: NY070901.ppt)(See attached file: NY071001.ppt) > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: ""Joanna Vidal"" <jvidal@riskwaters.com>@ENRON > > > > ENRON@ENRON.com] > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 3:38 PM > > To: ds64@cyrus.andrew.cmu.edu; Geman Helyette; > vkamins@enron.com; > > kaminski@aol.com; pnance@teknecon.com; > > chris.harris@innogy.com; eronn@mail.utexas.edu; > > sama@dynegy.com > > Subject: Re: London, New York, Houston, Financial Mathematics > June/July > > 2001 > > > > > > Dear Speakers, > > > > I understand how awfully busy you must all be at this time, but I > would > > appreciate a phone call or a quick email to confirm that you ahve > or > > have not, for that matter received the speaker packets I sent to > you > > May 2, 2001. please advise as soon as possible, that way, if yo > have > > not, for whatever received them, I will know what steps to take > from > > there. > > > > All the best. > > > > Sincerely, > > > > Joanna Vidal > > > > PS: My contact details are posted below. > > > > Joanna Vidal > > Events Coordinator > > Risk Waters Group > > T: (212) 925 1864 ext. 197 > > F: (212) 925 7585jvidal@riskwaters.com << File: > > mailto:jvidal@riskwaters.com >> www.riskwaters.com << File: > > http://www.riskwaters.com >> > > > > [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Mtg w/Bob Gee; [EMail-Body]= I think this is a great initiative, but it is critically important that any announcement of the panel makes it crystal clear that the objective of the group is to come up with standards to facilitiate competition. We will do nothing but waste time if it becomes a negotiation over competition. the best and politically easiest time to make that objective clear is in the original announcement, not after the group gets underway. Can we get in touch with DOE to make sure they pick this up? Cynthia Sandherr@ENRON 07/18/2000 05:03 PM To: Jeff Brown/HOU/EES@EES cc: Stanley Horton/Corp/Enron@Enron, Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Janine Migden/DUB/EES@EES, Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES Subject: Re: Mtg w/Bob Gee Jeff: I have followed up with other DOE politicals who advised they will meet this Thursday with Bob Gee to finalize and approve his speech to NARUC on Monday, July 24th. It is looking positive that he may be positioned to make the announcement Monday. However, DOE will likely need to revisit some folks on the current Blue Ribbon Reliability Panel in order to replace some of the utility transmission-only focused members with others who focus on business practices plus add additional people to represent the internet like APX, Altra, and HoustonStreet.Com. (these are Steve Kean's suggestions.) Too, I have been cautioned about referring to the Blue Ribbon Reliability Panel as a model since their timeline was slow, but rather suggest the TVA Blue Ribbon Panel model since they were able to issue a report after only four meetings. I have asked for this issue to be brought to Secretary Richardson's attention and advised this will be done this week. I have also discussed this with John Anderson of ELCON who is supportive. Jeff Brown@EES 07/18/2000 12:45 PM To: Stanley Horton/Corp/Enron@Enron, Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES cc: Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Janine Migden/DUB/EES@EES, Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES Subject: Mtg w/Bob Gee Cynthia and I met with Bob Gee regarding a potential role for DOE in creating a national standards board. Bob appeared comfortable with establishing a ""Blue Ribbon"" panel, similar to the reliability panel, to address this issue. In fact, Bob suggested that the reliability panel, which includes a balance of key stakeholders, could be re-tasked with this issue. We recommended that the focus of any panel should be on the structure (governance, segments, executive committees) and scope of the organization (retail, wholesale, gas, electric). Bob plans to follow-up with us next week. Jeff [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Final Research PRC; [EMail-Body]= Steve, It will be my pleasure. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Leppard, Steve Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 4:10 AM To: Herbelot, Olivier; Lewis, Richard; Clarke, Niamh; Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Final Research PRC Hi all The current PRC is the last on which I'll be assessed as a Research guy, so I'd like to ask if you'd be prepared to act as reviewers for me? Thanks, Steve [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California Power Crisis Update (No. 10); [EMail-Body]= We have been pulling together these weekly(sometimes more often) summaries for internal purposes. Would you find it helpful to be on the distribution list? Hope you are doing well. Look forward to touching base soon. ----- Forwarded by Suzanne on 03/28/2001 03:41 AM ----- Memorandum TO: Pru Sheppard BCC: Suzanne Nimocks FROM: Pru Sheppard B. Venki Venkateshwara DATE: March 27, 2001 California Power Crisis Update (No. 10) DEVELOPMENTS THIS WEEK, 3/23/2001 The weeks highlights include: ? Continued indications that the issue of market power and possible remedies for it is likely to remain a high profile issue in California and elsewhere (both retroactively and prospectively) ? An ironical situation with respect to QFs in which QF power under contract is effectively being released into the market at higher prices ? A court order requiring Reliant to continue to sell power to the ISO even if it is not being paid in a full and timely manner ? Another Stage 3 emergency and rolling blackouts Market power There are continued indications that the issue of market power will not be settled simply. This week there was a lengthy and politically influential front page story in the New York Times about FERCs passive approach to policing generators (Critics Say U.S. Energy Agency Is Weak in Oversight of Utilities). The story was by Jeff Gerth and Joseph Kahn. (Jeff Gerth's 1992 story on the Whitewater deal is viewed by journalists to have been the origin of what eventually became a multi-year investigation of Bill Clinton.) The key issues are familiar: ? Does market power exist to a degree that warrants remedies such as price caps, refunds, and so on? ? If so, what is the basis for asserting that market power exists and what is the remedy? (See the discussion in the New York Times article on the ""good hours"" vs. ""bad hours"" approach and the associated political decision not to deal with ""good hours""). ? Can market power be used as leverage to eventually settle generator bills in California at something less than 100 cents on the dollar. (The California ISO filed a complaint claiming $6 billion in overcharges this week.) The QF irony Through the 1990s, QF contracts were projected to be the source of stranded costs because they were priced ""way above market."" In recent months, in California, they look like a bargain (although some are not such great bargains because a portion of their price is tied to gas). You would think that the utilities would request QFs to maximize their output. But credit problems have created an ironical situation. The facts: ? PG&E and Edison have not been paying the QFs fully and promptly for some time. ? The QFs form a creditors committee and threaten to push PG&E and Edison into bankruptcy. (Some gas-fired QFs had to shut down because they did not have money to pay for the gas.) ? Last week's court decision allows MidAmerican/CalEnergy to essentially sell its power to others even though the QF contract ""dedicates"" the output to the purchasing utility. ? CalEnergy does so immediately, selling to El Paso. The Reliant Order A court ordered Reliant to continue to sell to the ISO, when requested, regardless of whether Reliant had been paid fully and promptly for past deliveries to the ISO. Reliant announced it will appeal the order. This is somewhat of a contrast to the QF situation except that the circumstances governing the 2 situations are probably different. The QF contracts pre-date the ISO and are with the utilities and most likely make no reference to providing power during emergencies. In fact, many QF contracts have the opposite provision: authority for the utility to cut takes during so-called ""light load"" periods. Stage 3 emergency and rolling blackouts--again There was another Stage 3 emergency in California ? with rolling blackouts this week. This prompted everyone to wonder why this was happening in March. Among the factors: ? Increased demand from summer-like temperatures ? Cutbacks in imports ? Loss of 1400 MW due to a transformer fire at an Edison plant ? Loss of about 3100 MW from QF plants that were forced to shutdown because they could not afford gas bills (VV) MARKET COMMENTARY (For easier printing of all the articles in this section use the file at the end of the section) Critics Say U.S. Energy Agency Is Weak in Oversight of Utilities By JEFF GERTH and JOSEPH KAHN 03/23/2001 The New York Times Page 1, Column 1 c. 2001 New York Times Company WASHINGTON, March 22 -- The pressure was intense when federal regulators met privately last month to debate remedies for soaring electricity prices in California. Officials of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the agency whose mandate is to ensure ''just and reasonable'' electricity rates nationwide, had evidence that a few companies had been selling electricity to California at prices far above the cost of generating it. The agency faced an imminent deadline to challenge those prices or let the companies possibly pocket hundreds of millions of dollars in unfair profits. An internal memorandum laid out two choices. The agency could audit and punish ''bad actors,'' the companies that were exploiting the market. Or it could identify ''bad hours,'' when electricity shortages were most acute and spiking prices were arguably nobody's fault, and order refunds for only the most exorbitant prices. ''It may be easier to identify bad hours than bad actors,'' the memorandum said. The commission took the easier way. It decided not to investigate reports of abuses by companies, but issued an order that could require them to refund to the state utilities up to $124 million collected during a relatively few ''bad hours'' in January and February. That is hundreds of millions of dollars less than California might have claimed, since the most potential overcharging occurred during ''good hours,'' when power was more plentiful but prices were often just as extreme. The order ignored those hours. Today, in a criticism of the agency's lack of aggressiveness, California regulators estimated that generators had charged $6.2 billion above competitive levels over 10 months. They urged the agency to dig deeper, hoping it would demand more refunds or other stiff remedies. But the agency's track record -- one of complacency in the eyes of state officials -- leaves California regulators skeptical that Washington will confront the big power producers. The small, obscure agency, tucked behind the rail yard of Union Station here, has largely soft-pedaled its role as the electricity industry's top cop, even though it has wide authority to keep power companies in line. To keep rates reasonable, it can impose price caps, strip companies of the right to charge market rates, force them to return excessive profits and even suspend deregulation altogether. Instead, the agency has largely left it to private companies to pry open the $250 billion electricity industry, which has historically been controlled by monopoly utilities and state officials. The agency's defenders, including its chairman, Curt Hebert Jr., a fierce advocate of unfettered markets, say that its largely hands-off approach reflects the delicate balancing of competing interests -- a commitment to protect consumers while not stifling market forces. But politicians, utility executives, energy economists and local regulators say California's rolling blackouts and skyrocketing electricity prices are the signs of a market running amok. They accuse the agency of standing aside as companies manipulate their way to windfall profits. The agency's critics, who include one of its own commissioners and numerous staff members, say that its enforcement mission has been blunted by free-market passions and the influence of industry insiders in its ranks. When the agency began its first national investigation of high electricity prices last year, it named a newly recruited industry insider, Scott Miller, to lead the effort. Mr. Miller and his colleagues said in their report that there was ''insufficient data'' in California to prove any profiteering by generating companies. Yet his own former employer, PG&E Energy Trading, was at the time a subject of a civil antitrust investigation by the Justice Department that focused on electricity market abuses in New England. The agency has given state regulators a lead role in monitoring local power markets. Yet even as these regulators have urged the agency to be more aggressive in investigating suspicions that companies have abused their power in California, New England, the Midwest and the mid-Atlantic, they have frequently been ignored or rebuffed. Critics say that the agency began deregulation before it was ready or willing to make sure the markets worked effectively. They accuse it of showing favoritism to industry -- allowing companies, for example, to ignore requirements to file detailed reports of market transactions that are critical to proving accusations of market abuses. ''We need to wake up to the fact that this is a dysfunctional market that is being gamed and manipulated by those who participate in it,'' said William Massey, a commissioner of the agency who has become one of its leading critics. The agency's inaction, the critics say, leads to ''gaming'' -- jockeying for profits that does not necessarily involve illegality -- and outright market manipulation. Consumers and utilities are the victims, paying billions of dollars more for electricity than if the markets were truly competitive. Agency officials acknowledge that enforcement of market rules to curb gaming and manipulation had not been a high priority in previous years. But they defended their recent California order as proof that they intend to keep markets free of abuse. They add that the agency is also pressuring two generators to refund almost $11 million for possibly manipulating the California market last spring. Agency officials and some outside analysts say that poorly conceived deregulation plans by states, a shortage of power plants, rising natural gas prices, and even the weather have had more impact on electricity prices than abuses by companies or any failings by the agency. They say the agency must balance the competing interests of generators, local regulators and utility companies if it is to keep deregulation on track. ''We're trying to craft a system that gives breathing room to develop a market, but not so much room that undue market power punishes consumers,'' Mr. Hebert said. Fight Over Deregulation Today's debate traces back to the 1930's, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt backed legislation to break up utility monopolies. The Federal Power Act of 1935 gave the Federal Power Commission a mandate to ensure ''just and reasonable'' electricity rates. The Federal Power Commission was abolished in 1977 and replaced by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, an independent agency with 1,200 employees that also oversees oil pipelines and the natural gas market. The president appoints the chairman and four commissioners -- two Democrats and two Republicans with staggered terms of five years. Two Republican seats are currently unfilled. The deregulation of the electricity markets began in the late 1980's, after the agency had begun opening the gas markets. By 1996, the commissioners issued a landmark order that forced utility companies to open their transmission lines to other utilities and electricity wholesalers. The commission and many private economists expected that by prying open protected markets, electricity prices would immediately fall. That possibility set off a deregulation frenzy, most prominently in California, New York, New England and the mid-Atlantic states. Generating companies rushed to expand in the new, borderless market. But the agency's balancing act has grown more difficult as electricity deregulation has spread nationwide. Congress has forced it to trim its staff in recent years. Officials complain that investigating abuses in electricity markets strains their resources. And as the California crisis has worsened, the commissioners have begun sparring publicly among themselves about what to do. This week, Mr. Massey, a Democratic commissioner, and Mr. Hebert (pronounced AY-bear), a Republican, sat side by side before a House panel and argued diametrically opposed positions. Mr. Hebert said high prices in California ''were sending the right signals to get supply there.'' Mr. Massey called the prices that generators were charging ''unlawful'' and said that his agency, by not reining them in, ''is simply not doing its job.'' The agency's leadership has been in flux for months. Congressional and industry officials in Washington say President Bush is considering replacing Mr. Hebert, whom he named to the top post less than two months ago, with Pat Wood, who runs the Texas public utility commission. A White House spokeswoman had no comment on the reports. Though Mr. Hebert's positions are not far from those of the Bush administration, his relations with California leaders may have made his position tenuous. Mr. Hebert, a Mississippian who is a close ally of the Senate majority leader, Trent Lott, has warred with California politicians who have proposed new solutions to the crisis there. Mr. Hebert, who has served as a commissioner since 1997, has often taken the most ideologically free-market position of any commissioner. He flatly rejects the idea of price caps on electricity as hopelessly ineffective and contrary to market forces. When Gov. Gray Davis outlined a plan to have the state buy transmission lines to relieve utility companies' debt, Mr. Hebert's response was dismissive. ''It's not in the interest of the American public,'' he pronounced. Even as new electricity markets opened in the summer of 1999, they started producing nasty shocks. The mid-Atlantic region experienced some early volatility. As the turmoil grew, economists began raising the alarm about a phenomenon called ''market power,'' the ability of energy traders in the new national market to sustain prices above the competitive level. Proving such abuses is difficult, because it requires comparing tens of thousands of separate electricity transactions with the costs of the generators that initiated them. Joseph Bowring, who heads the market monitoring unit of the nonprofit entity that operates the mid-Atlantic transmission system, said that power companies there had exercised some market power. But only the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, not local regulators, had the authority to collect the data to determine how much market power had been exercised and whether it had been abusive or not, he said. Mr. Bowring said he talked to agency officials about doing so. In the end, Mr. Bowring and several agency officials said, the agency chose not to investigate. The decision roiled some agency officials. Ron Rattey, a veteran agency economist, wrote a memorandum last June describing the staff as ''impotent in our ability to monitor, foster, and ensure competitive electric power markets.'' The staff, the memorandum said, did not even enforce a requirement that power companies file detailed quarterly reports listing essentially every sale they make. Such data would have been useful to Mr. Bowring. Local-Federal Clash Local regulators who want to ensure competitive prices often have to act on their own. Monitors in New England have intervened about 600 times since 1999 to correct prices they determined had been caused, at least in part, by market manipulation. The federal agency has sometimes chastised them for interfering too much. The industry, not surprisingly, shares that view. One vocal critic was Mr. Miller. Before the agency recruited him last July to head its division of energy markets, he was director of policy coordination for the national energy-trading unit of PG&E Corporation, the California holding company whose assets also include Pacific Gas and Electric, the California utility. Although the utility has lost billions of dollars during California's crisis, Mr. Miller's former unit has become one of the most profitable new energy traders nationwide. PG&E Energy Trading, by several estimates, is now the second-largest seller of electricity in New England. The company has had a rocky relationship with regulators. They intervened several times in 1999 and 2000 to retroactively cancel auctions they said produced excessive profits for PG&E and other companies. Mr. Miller denounced the practice, though he acknowledged in public testimony that his company sometimes charged ''very high'' prices when it could. ''One person's predatory pricing is another person's competitive advantage,'' Mr. Miller said at a public hearing on deregulation in Texas in 1999. New England regulators too often acted as ''judge, jury and executioner'' when overseeing the market, he said. One year later, Mr. Miller and his new colleagues at the federal agency got a chance to examine New England's problems from the regulators' perspective. Their Nov. 1 report attributed New England's frequent price gyrations to technical and regulatory flaws. As Mr. Miller's team was preparing its report, the Justice Department, whose threshold for stepping into possible industry wrongdoing is far higher than the agency's, began looking into whether price spikes in New England pointed to unlawful monopoly power or collusion, people contacted by the department during that inquiry said. One subject of the civil inquiry is possible price manipulation in one of New England's ancillary services markets, people contacted by the department said. They said the department was examining whether PG&E and two other companies tried to corner that market for several months early last year. PG&E confirmed that the Justice Department had contacted it, but denies wrongdoing and says it has cooperated with the department's requests. Mr. Miller has declined to comment on his role at PG&E or at the agency. His supervisors defended his work and said they had detected no conflict of interest between his work at PG&E and his duties at the agency. Those duties brought Mr. Miller to California last August. With electricity prices there soaring, he and his colleagues sat down with several utility executives at the agency's San Francisco office. One executive, Gary Stern, director of market monitoring for Southern California Edison, wanted the agency to stop what he suspected were market abuses by power generators. He provided a road map to help investigators figure out how power companies traded power contracts -- and whether they had manipulated the markets. But when Mr. Miller and his team approached 11 generators and marketers -- including his old employer -- a few weeks later, they did it their way. They asked eight questions, many of them imprecise, like: ''Describe your strategy for bidding generation resources into market.'' This question, Mr. Stern said in a recent interview, ''was equivalent to asking a suspected burglar how he spent his day.'' Some agency officials also thought the team should probe deeper. Mr. Rattey recommended that Mr. Miller seek the quarterly pricing reports that marketers were supposed to file. But his suggestion was not adopted, agency records show. Daniel Larcamp, Mr. Miller's supervisor, said ''there might have been more information that could have been obtained'' in the California inquiry. But he said the commission gave the staff only three months to finish, making it impossible to collect and analyze the reams of data involved. For Mr. Miller, agency documents show, the investigation was so time-consuming that he had no time to fill out the financial disclosure form required of new federal employees. Mr. Miller submitted his form in late January, after a reporter requested it. Agency lawyers approved the form, but only after he provided additional information about his job and compensation from PG&E. The lawyers said Mr. Miller's participation had been permissible because PG&E was not the subject of the investigation. When the staff report was issued on Nov. 1, it found high prices and problems in the design of the California market. But while the companies ''had the potential to exercise market power,'' the commission said, there was ''insufficient data'' to prove that they did. Some marketers saw the report as an exoneration. ''This has been looked at several times, most notably by the FERC and nobody has found any evidence of market manipulation and profiteering,'' Rob Doty, the chief financial officer of Dynegy Inc., told a reporter earlier this year. California Inquiry The agency has recently shown signs of wanting to apply pressure on generators. But its early efforts show how it is treading on new and uncertain turf. When the California crisis grew severe last December, the commission issued a refund order, a shot across the bow for generators charging high prices. It required them to submit detailed data any time they sold electricity in California for more than $150 per megawatt hour, considered at the time a fair estimate of the highest costs any of them faced. It also told generators that for the next several months, they could be forced to give refunds if the agency found that they had charged excessive prices. The commission also said that it would examine bidding practices and strategies for withholding generating capacity to ferret out any efforts to artificially raise prices. When the agency's own 60-day deadline for examining market data in January approached, however, it became clear that staff members had not made any detailed examination. Instead, staff members said, the agency scrambled to forge a last-minute compromise that would allow it to issue a statement opposing high prices in the state without a time-consuming investigation. During this scramble, a senior staff member, Kevin Kelly, suggested focusing on bad hours instead of bad actors. ''Our attempts to find illegal behavior or legal 'misbehavior' by sellers ('bad actors') always seems to fail,'' his memorandum said. It said that the agency could more easily blame high prices on acute shortages during the most critical hours. The suggestion won the day. The commission decided to limit its order to the hours when California declared a Stage 3 emergency, when supplies are critically low. Mr. Stern of Southern California Edison and several private-sector economists have attacked the economic logic of that order. They said that the commission has focused on times when prices might be legitimately high. The bigger worry: Generators can and often do sustain artificially high prices when supplies are not as tight, they say. Mr. Massey, the Democratic commissioner, dissented from the decision for those reasons. Because most high-priced transactions in January and February did not occur during bad hours, he argued, the commission effectively chose to bless as ''just and reasonable'' the hefty profits generators are making from the California crisis. ''The problem with my agency is that we're so carried away with the rhetoric of markets that we've gotten sloppy,'' Mr. Massey said. ''We're talking about electricity. It's the juice of the economy, so it's got to be available and reasonably priced.'' Williams defends pricing of electricity 03/23/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. TULSA, Okla. (AP) - Williams Cos. Inc. says it can justify the rates it charged for wholesale power, despite accusations from federal regulators that it sold over-priced electricity to California. Federal regulators claim Williams Energy Marketing and Trading Co., a unit of Tulsa-based Williams, owes California more than $40 million in refunds for power it sold to the state's Independent System Operator. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission says that Williams is one of several power providers responsible for $124 million in overcharges from transactions in January and February. The Independent System Operator, which manages the state's power grid, claims the state was overcharged $6.2 billion by 21 wholesale power providers, including Williams, between May and February. Williams says the rates it charged California were fair and were based on production costs and market conditions. ""Williams is confident that it performed within the guidelines established by the ISO,"" said Williams spokeswoman Paula Hall Collins. ""We felt like we had worked within the regulations set up by ISO."" According to the commission, power prices levied by Williams in January and February exceeded federal price ceilings based on the cost of natural gas and other market conditions. However, the price ceilings were established after the ISO accepted Williams' power prices, Collins said. The commission will review Williams' explanation and either accept the justification or order the company to pay refunds. Allegheny Energy makes big California connection 03/23/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. HAGERSTOWN, Md. (AP) - Allegheny Energy Inc. said Thursday it has agreed to sell $4.5 billion worth of power to California's electricity-purchasing agency over the next 10 years. The company said the contract call for Allegheny to provide up to 1,000 megawatts that the Hagerstown-based company has secured from western generating plants through its new energy trading division, Allegheny Energy Global Markets - formerly Merrill Lynch Global Energy Markets. ""This is a win-win for both the state of California and Allegheny Energy. It provides a long-term source of fixed-price energy and should help to stabilize prices in California,"" said Michael P. Morrell, president of the Allegheny Energy Supply division. Allegheny Energy is the parent of Allegheny Power, which delivers electric energy and natural gas to parts of Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia. Williams plans expansion of pipeline to help power Calif. 03/23/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. SALT LAKE CITY (AP) - The Williams Cos. plans to expands its Kern River pipeline, which runs through Utah, to provide more natural gas for generating plants in California. Williams' gas pipeline unit in Salt Lake City said Thursday that it plans to construct nearly 700 miles of additional pipeline that will run parallel to its existing Kern River line. Construction on the $1 billion project is expected to begin next year and is scheduled for completion in May 2003, said Kirk Morgan, director of business development for Kern River pipeline. ""Shippers are seeking more access to natural gas from the Rocky Mountain basin, where producers are aggressively stepping up production,"" Morgan said. The new pipeline is expected to deliver about 900 million cubic feet of natural gas per day to markets in Utah, Nevada and California. Most of the gas will be used for generating plants planned in California. If all of the pipeline's capacity were used to generate electricity, it could produce about 5,400 megawatts. ""That is enough to light around 4.5 million homes,"" Morgan said. The original Kern River line was completed in 1992. It enters Utah from Wyoming then crosses into the Salt Lake Valley near Bountiful. It turns south near the Salt Lake City International Airport then runs the length of the state before passing into southern Nevada and winding up near Bakersfield, Calif. It currently transports 700 million cubic feet of natural gas per day. Williams, based in Tulsa, Okla., recently filed an emergency application with federal regulators to install additional pumping stations on the line to increase its capacity by 135 million cubic feet per day. That $81 million pumping station project should be completed by July 1. During the 2002 construction period, the Kern River project will employ between 1,500 and 1,800 people. The company estimates annual property taxes it pays to Utah counties will increase from $3.5 million to about $7 million. Questar will be one of the customers on the new pipeline, Morgan said. The utility wants to supply additional gas to southern Utah cities, including St. George and Cedar City. ""Our own pipelines serving southern Utah are at full capacity so this is an opportunity to transport additional gas into those areas from company-owned supplies in Wyoming,"" said Questar Gas spokeswoman Audra Sorensen. Calif Energy Commission OKs 3 Pwr Plants Worth 2,076 MW 03/23/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) (This article was originally published Thursday) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- The California Energy Commission Wednesday approved three power plants worth 2,076 megawatts, two of which are scheduled to come on line by the end of 2002, a CEC spokesman said Thursday. The plants approved include BP Amoco PLC (BP) unit ARCO Western Energy's 500 megawatt Western Midway Sunset Project, slated to come on line in October 2002; Caithness Energy's 520 MW Blythe Power Plant, to come on line by Dec. 31, 2002; and Thermo Ecotek's 1,056 MW Mountainview Power Plant, scheduled to come on line in April 2003. All three of the new plants will be natural gas-fired combined-cycle plants. The $550 million Mountainview plant will be located in Southern California, near San Bernadino. The $300 million Western Midway-Sunset plant will be located in central Kern County, while the $250 million Blythe plant will be located in the city of Blythe in Riverside County. The latest approvals bring to 13 the total number of plants approved since April 1999 by the CEC, a spokesman said. Those plants will supply 8,405 MW to the state, which has seen rolling blackouts and spiking wholesale power prices in the last six months, in part due to lack of supply. -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872; jessica.berthold@dowjones.com Some CalEnergy Power Could Be Sold Outside Calif - CEO 03/23/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) (This article was originally published Thursday) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Some of CalEnergy Operating Corp's power could end up being sold outside of California, though that is not the company's intent, CalEnergy Chairman and CEO David Sokol said in a conference call Thursday. CalEnergy, an affiliate of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co, which is majority owned by Warren Buffett's Berkshire-Hathaway (BRKA), was given legal authority Thursday to suspend 270 megawatts of power delivery to Edison International (EIX) utility Southern California Edison and sell on the open market, because SoCal Edison has not paid its bills since November. CalEnergy stopped supplying power to SoCal Ed immediately following the court ruling. ""We stopped supplying power at 1 PM (PST) and have been selling to parties that will pay since then....We are selling it to marketers; our current marketing agent is El Paso Corp (EPG) and they will sell it for us,"" Sokol said. Sokol added that while it was his company's intention to have its power sold to California, that could not be guaranteed. ""We leave the energy selling to El Paso....We've directed them that we would like the power to stay in California but we can't stop them,"" from selling out of state, Sokol said. Wholesale prices on the open market are about $400-$500 a megawatt-hour, three times more than what the company had received under its contract with SoCal Ed. The court's ruling did not address the $45 million SoCal Ed still owes CalEnergy for November and December power, and Sokol said that his company's separate lawsuit on that matter sought to attach the utility's assets as payment for that debt. Sokol said the court's ruling had ""significant implications"" for the entire community of small, independent generators, known as qualifying facilities or QFs, who have not received payment from SoCal Ed. ""Edison's own lawyer said it best....that every QF in the state will begin to mitigate if the judge allowed us (to sell on the open market),"" Sokol said. Sokol said his company was prepared to push SoCal Ed into involuntary bankruptcy Friday if CalEnergy hadn't won the case, but said he couldn't speculate whether other QFs may be more or less inclined to do so as a result of the court outcome. A group of renewable power suppliers, owed more than $100 million from SoCal Ed, said late Wednesday they want state lawmakers to release them for their supply contracts with PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric and SoCal Ed until the utilities are restored to financial stability. The utilities claim close to $13 billion in undercollections due to an inability to pass high wholesale power costs to customers under a rate freeze. In a statement, SoCal Ed said it opposed CalEnergy's bid to suspend its QF contract because the utility believed Gov. Gray Davis and state regulators are close to resolving ""very legitimate financial concerns of CalEnergy and other QF suppliers."" SoCal Ed said it was concerned that CalEnergy's request to sell to third parties would lead to a major supply shortage in California. The utility said it has informed the QFs that it is working to resolve the issue without giving unfair advantage to one class of creditors. While many of the state's large power suppliers have been paid by on a forward basis for the power they sell into California, the QFs, which make up one-third of the state's total power supply, haven't been paid by SoCal Ed since November. PG&E has made partial payments to its QFs. -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872, jessica.berthold@dowjones.com (Jason Leopold contributed to this article.) California and the West Judge Frees Small Firm From Edison Contract KEN ELLINGWOOD; DAN MORAIN TIMES STAFF WRITERS 03/23/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-3 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company El CENTRO -- California's balance of electrical power shifted slightly Thursday when an Imperial County judge temporarily freed a small geothermal energy producer from its contract with Southern California Edison, allowing it to sell power on the open market. The ruling by Superior Court Judge Donal B. Donnelly could lead to a mass exodus by hundreds of small energy producers that have been selling power to the state's financially troubled utilities for months without getting paid. At the same time, it may have staved off plans by a group of the small generators to send Edison into involuntary bankruptcy as early as today. In Sacramento, energy legislation pushed by Gov. Gray Davis passed in the state Senate but foundered in the Assembly. The measure was intended to ensure that the state gets repaid for the electricity that it has been buying on behalf of Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric, which say they lack the cash and credit to purchase power. The bill also was supposed to guarantee that the small, alternative energy producers--which together provide nearly a third of the state's power--get paid. But Assembly Republicans opposed it, saying it hadn't been given sufficient scrutiny. The impact of the small producers was made clear in Imperial County, where Edison's failure to pay CalEnergy, the county's biggest property taxpayer, had outsize implications. CalEnergy had put county officials on notice that it was about to miss a $3.8-million property tax payment. The uncertainty had prompted the tiny Calipatria Unified School District to postpone a bond issue for badly needed school repairs. Among CalEnergy Chairman David Sokol's first acts after the judge's ruling Thursday was to promise Imperial County Supervisor Wally J. Leimgruber that the company would pay its property taxes on time. ""That is great news,"" Leimgruber said. Within hours of its court victory, CalEnergy had stopped transmitting geothermal power to Edison and begun selling it to El Paso Energy, a marketing company that purchased the energy at prevailing rates and resold it on the spot market. Some of the more than 700 other small energy producers in the state said they were considering similar action against Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric. ""We absolutely need the right to sell to third parties,"" said Dean Vanech, president of Delta Power, a New Jersey company that owns five small gas-fired plants in California and is owed tens of millions of dollars by Edison. Sokol praised the Imperial County judge and said his company simply wanted the authority to sell its power ""to a credit-worthy company that, in fact, pays for the power."" An Edison spokesman said the company was disappointed with the ruling, but sympathized with CalEnergy and other small producers because ""California's power crisis has placed [them] in financial distress, just as it has placed utilities in financial distress."" Edison expressed concern that the ruling would prompt CalEnergy and other small producers to sell their power out of state. Sokol said CalEnergy had specifically told El Paso Energy that it hoped its power would remain in California, ""but if someone wants to pay a higher price out of state, we can't stop them."" Sokol said that Edison still owes CalEnergy $140 million and that the company--along with seven other small producers--had been prepared to file a petition in federal bankruptcy court in Los Angeles today forcing the utility into involuntary bankruptcy. He said his company no longer intends to do so, and he believed--but wasn't certain--that the other companies would shelve their plans. Edison filed papers Thursday with the federal Securities and Exchange Commission showing that it owed $840 million to various small electricity producers, many of which rely on renewable energy sources such as geothermal steam, solar energy or wind. The alternative energy producers--and utilities--strenuously objected to the legislation considered in Sacramento on Thursday. The bill, spelling out how the utilities are to pay the state and the small producers, passed the Senate on a 27-9 vote, the exact two-thirds margin required. But it stalled in the Assembly on a 46-23 party-line vote, well short of two-thirds. ""When I was a citizen back in Lancaster, I heard these stories about pieces of legislation that were cooked up late at night, that . . . were cut and pasted together and were rammed through by the Legislature,"" Assemblyman George Runner (R-Lancaster) said. ""That's exactly what we have before us."" The alternative electricity generators, including oil companies, warned that they would lose money under the Davis proposal, while representatives of Edison and PG&E, which have amassed billions in debt in the worsening energy crisis, said the legislation would push them deeper into the hole. ""There isn't enough money,"" Edison attorney Ann Cohn testified at a Senate hearing on the bill Thursday. ""It is a very simple question: Dollars going out cannot be greater than dollars coming in."" The bill, AB 8X, combined several proposals. First, it sought to clarify earlier legislation by spelling out that Edison and PG&E must pay the state all money collected from consumers for electricity that the state has been buying. Additionally, the bill would turn over to the California Public Utilities Commission the thorny issue of how much to pay alternative energy producers for their electricity. Wind, solar and geothermal producers might agree to the prices offered by the administration. But most of the alternative energy producers, including Chevron and British Petroleum, use natural gas to generate electricity through ""cogeneration,"" a process of creating steam for both electric generation and heat. With natural gas prices high, they contend, they would lose money at the prices Davis is offering. * Ellingwood reported from El Centro, Morain from Sacramento. Times staff writers Mitchell Landsberg in Los Angeles and Jenifer Warren, Nancy Vogel and Carl Ingram in Sacramento contributed to this story. (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) Power Points Background The state Legislature approved electricity deregulation with a unanimous vote in 1996. The move was expected to lower power bills in California by opening up the energy market to competition. Relatively few companies, however, entered that market to sell electricity, giving each that did considerable influence over the price. Meanwhile, demand has increased in recent years while no major power plants have been built. These factors combined last year to push up the wholesale cost of electricity. But the state's biggest utilities--Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison--are barred from increasing consumer rates. So the utilities have accumulated billions of dollars in debt and, despite help from the state, have struggled to buy enough electricity. * Daily Developments * Overcharges by major electricity suppliers were estimated at $6.3 billion, up from the $5.5 billion first thought, California's power grid operator said. * Electricity producers denied that they have profiteered and argued that Cal-ISO's figures don't take into account all their costs. * A Superior Court judge's ruling Thursday freeing a small producer from its contract with Edison could lead to a mass exodus by small energy producers that have been selling to the utilities without getting paid. * Verbatim ""If these guys have such high costs ... how come they're making so much money?"" --Gary Stern, Edison's director of market monitoring and analysis, referring to power producers Complete package and updates at www.latimes.com/power Grid Operator Says California Paid Too Much for Power By Rebecca Smith and John R. Emshwiller Staff Reporters of The Wall Street Journal 03/23/2001 The Wall Street Journal A2 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) California's electric-grid operator said power suppliers may have overcharged the state and its utilities by $6.2 billion, or a total of 30%, in a 10-month period, and has asked federal regulators to step up their policing of electricity markets. Meanwhile, a California state judge handed down a decision involving small power producers that could result in more electricity being made available in the energy-starved state, but likely at greater cost to the state government. The $6.2 billion figure was contained in a market analysis by the California Independent System Operator filed yesterday with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The ISO says it isn't seeking a refund -- for the May through February period -- because its analysis lacked important market data. For example, it estimated costs for 21 suppliers based on published prices for natural gas, not on specific data showing what each generator actually paid for the fuel. ""We don't know how much gas actually was purchased at spot-market prices,"" said Anjali Sheffrin, the ISO's head of market analysis. Charles Robinson, general counsel for the ISO, said FERC needs to become ""more aggressive about market-power mitigation."" The ISO's filing, he said, was intended to push the agency in that direction, since FERC is responsible for policing deregulated electricity and natural-gas markets. He said that if the FERC doesn't act, the state of California may find ways to discipline the market, such as through the state attorney general's office. The attorney general has been investigating the state's electricity market for many months but hasn't brought any court action. Dynegy Inc., a big owner of power plants in California, said it will provide additional information to FERC supporting its position that the prices it has charged for power have been ""just and reasonable."" The Houston company was one of 13 energy suppliers that the FERC this month ordered to pay refunds totaling $124 million or ""show cause"" why it should be excused. Dynegy said the FERC analysis was flawed, because it used ""inaccurate"" prices for natural gas and pollution credits. While big power producers such as Dynegy came under attack, small power producers won a potentially significant victory in a state court in Southern California's Imperial County. A judge granted 10 geothermal plants operated by the CalEnergy Co. unit of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co., a unit of Berkshire Hathaway Inc., of Omaha, Neb., permission to suspend deliveries of electricity to Southern California Edison Co. and instead seek other buyers. These plants, known as ""qualifying facilities,"" are under long-term contract to Edison and other utilities but haven't been paid for months. Edison, a unit of Edison International, of Rosemead, Calif., says it has been unable to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in power bills to CalEnergy and others because it has been driven to the brink of insolvency by the state's failed utility-deregulation plan. While the CalEnergy case involves only about 320 megawatts of power, the repercussions could be far greater. Collectively, hundreds of qualifying facilities, or QFs, produce as much as 30% of California's electricity needs. QFs totaling 3,000 megawatts cut their production in recent weeks for lack of payment. This loss of output was a significant cause of the blackouts that hit California this week. Observers believe the CalEnergy court decision could give other QFs an opportunity to sell power in the open market, presumably to the state government that now is California's biggest energy buyer. An hour after the court decision yesterday, some 400 megawatts of power came back into the market, the ISO said. However, additional QF power sales on the open market could substantially increase the state's tab. Already, the state has allocated more than $4 billion for electricity purchases. Separately, Edison said in a Securities and Exchange Commission filing that its unpaid power bills could contribute to a write-off of as much as $2.7 billion for 2000. Because of uncertainty caused by the energy crisis, the company hasn't yet reported year-end earnings. Power regulators debate who should be exempted from blackouts By KAREN GAUDETTE Associated Press Writer 03/22/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - State power regulators said Thursday they are working to exempt all California hospitals, regardless of size, from rolling blackouts. The Public Utilities Commission met with representatives from hospitals and investor-owned utilities after Los Angeles lawyer David Huard filed an emergency motion with the PUC on behalf of more than 500 hospitals throughout the state. Under PUC rules, hospitals with more than 100 beds are exempt from losing electricity during power emergencies. But during rolling blackouts Monday, at least a dozen hospitals from Long Beach to Clearlake were forced to use their backup generators. Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison Co. say they blacked out those hospitals specifically because they have backup generators. Both utilities said the temporary blackouts were part of their overall efforts to spread the burden of blackouts over more of their customers. Linda Ziegler, director of business and regulatory planning for SoCal Edison, said the utility is following state law and will implement new guidelines if the PUC changes them. But hospitals say there is a 10-second lapse before emergency generators kick in, which could harm patients in the midst of delicate surgical procedures such as organ transplants or brain surgery. ""You wouldn't fly a plane with only your emergency backup systems in place,"" said Ann Mosher, a spokeswoman for California Pacific Medical Center in San Francisco. ""Backup generators are just that, they're not designed to keep the hospital up and running at full capacity."" Ziegler said that power still goes out for reasons beyond the energy crisis, from incidents like lightning or a knocked-down power pole. ""If it's a serious problem for the hospital it's certainly something they should be address just from an ongoing basis,"" she said. The exemption would cover all hospitals within the territory of the state's investor owned utilities PG&E, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas and Electric. Hospitals within the range of municipally owned utilities, such as the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, are separately regulated. For more than two decades, prisons, hospitals with more than 100 beds and emergency services such as fire and police departments have been classified as ""essential"" services, and are exempted from blackouts by order of state power regulators. After rolling blackouts began darkening the state in January, many other public service groups began seeking relief from power interruptions, including transit systems, schools and water districts. --- On the Net: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov Federal Judge Orders Reliant To Keep Selling Pwr To Calif 03/22/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP)--A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction Wednesday ordering a major electricity wholesaler to continue selling to California despite its fear that it will not get paid. U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said Californians were at risk of irreparable harm if Reliant Energy (REI) stopped selling power to the Independent System Operator, which oversees the state's power grid. The ISO buys last-minute power on behalf of utilities to fill gaps in supply. Damrell dismissed Reliant's attempt to force the state Department of Water Resources to back the ISO's purchases for the state's two biggest utilities. The state has been spending about $50 million a day on power for Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison, both denied credit by suppliers after amassing billions of dollars in debts. The judge said he had no authority to force the DWR to pay for that power. Gov. Gray Davis has said the state isn't responsible for purchasing the costly last-minute power ISO buys for Edison and PG&E, despite a law authorizing state power purchases on the utilities' behalf. ISO attorney Charles Robinson said the ruling gives ISO operators ""a tool to assist them in keeping the lights on in California."" ""Had the decision gone the other way, one could expect other generators to simply ignore emergency orders,"" Robinson said. Damrell's preliminary injunction will remain in effect until the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission rules on the matter. Damrell denied the ISO's request for preliminary injunctions against three other wholesalers - Dynegy Inc. (DYN), AES Corp. (AES) and Williams Cos. (WMB) - which agreed to continue selling to the ISO pending the FERC ruling. Spokesmen for Reliant, Dynegy, AES and Williams were out of the office Wednesday night and didn't immediately return calls from The Associated Press seeking comment on the ruling. The ISO went to court in February after a federal emergency order requiring the power sales expired. The judge then issued a temporary restraining order, requiring the sales, but dropped it after the suppliers agreed to continue sales to California pending his Wednesday ruling. The ISO said it would lose about 3,600 megawatts if the suppliers pulled out, enough power for about 2.7 million households. One megawatt is enough for roughly 750 homes. Grid officials said Reliant's share alone is about 3,000 megawatts. Reliant said the amount at issue actually is less than a fourth of that, because most of its output is already committed under long-term contracts. Reliant, which currently provides about 9% of the state's power, worries it won't get paid due to the financial troubles of PG&E and Edison. PG&E and Edison say that together they have lost about $13 billion since June due to soaring wholesale electricity costs that California's 1996 deregulation law bars them from passing onto customers. Calif Small Pwr Producers To Shut Plants If Rates Capped By Jason Leopold Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES 03/22/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Many of California's independent power producers late Wednesday threatened to take their small power plants offline this week if state lawmakers pass legislation that would cap the rates the generators charge for electricity they sell directly to the state's three investor-owned utilities. At issue is a bill that would repeal a section of the state's Public Utilities Code, which links the 688 so-called qualifying facilities' electricity rates to the monthly border price of natural gas. Lawmakers, however, are poised to pass the legislation. State regulators are then expected to approve a measure that would restructure the fluctuating rates the QFs charge PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric, Edison International (EIX) unit Southern California Edison, and Sempra Energy (SRE) unit San Diego Gas & Electric from $170 a megawatt-hour to $69-$79/MWh, regardless of the price of natural gas. Whereas each of the 688 QF contracts differed, largely because natural gas prices are higher in Southern California than Northern California, the state wants the QFs to sign a general contract with the utilities. The cogeneration facilities, which produce about 5,400 megawatts of electricity in the state, said the rates are too low and they won't sign new supply contracts with the utilities. ""For $79/MWh, natural gas would have to be $6 per million British thermal unit at the Southern California border,"" said Tom Lu, executive director of Carson-based Watson Cogeneration Company, the state's largest QF, generating 340 MW. ""Our current gas price at the border is $12.50."" Other gas-fired QFs said the state could face another round of rolling blackouts if lawmakers and state regulators pass the legislation, which is expected to be heard on the Senate floor Thursday, and allow it to be implemented by Public Utilities Commission next week. Lu, whose company is half-owned by BP Amoco PLC (BP) and is owed $100 million by SoCal Ed, said the proposals by the PUC and the Legislature ""will only make things worse."" David Fogarty, spokesman for Western States Petroleum Association, whose members supply California with more than 2,000 MW, said the utilities need to pay the QFs more than $1 billion for electricity that was already produced. State Loses 3,000 MW QF Output Due Of Financial Reasons The QFs represent about one-third, or 9,700 MW, of the state's total power supply. Roughly 5,400 MW are produced by natural gas-fired facilities. The rest is generated by wind, solar power and biomass. About 3,000 MW of gas-fired and renewable QF generation is offline in California because the power plant owners haven't been paid hundreds of millions of dollars from cash-strapped utilities SoCal Ed and PG&E for nearly four months. Several small power plant owners owed money by SoCal Ed have threatened to drag the utility into involuntary bankruptcy if the utility continues to default on payments and fails to agree to supply contracts at higher rates. The defaults have left many of the renewable and gas-fired QFs unable to operate their power plants because they can't afford to pay for the natural gas to run their units. Others continue to produce electricity under their contracts with the state's utilities but aren't being paid even on a forward basis. The California Independent System Operator, keeper of the state's electricity grid, said the loss of the QF generation was the primary reason rolling blackouts swept through the state Monday and Tuesday. Gov. Gray Davis, recognizing the potential disaster if additional QFs took their units offline, held marathon meetings with key lawmakers Monday and Tuesday to try and hammer out an agreement that would get the QFs paid on a forward basis and set rates of $79/MWh and $69/MWh for five and 10 year contracts. He also said he would direct the PUC to order the utilities to pay the QFs for power they sell going forward. ""After next week the QF problem will be behind us,"" Davis said Tuesday. ""We want to get the QFs paid...the QFs are dropping like flies...and when that happens the lights go out."" But this just makes the problem worse, said Assemblyman Dean Florez, D-Shafter, a member of the Assembly energy committee. ""I don't know how we are going to keep the lights on,"" Florez said in an interview. ""Many of these congenerators are in my district. They said if the legislation doesn't change they are going offline. This compounds the issue of rolling blackouts, especially now when we need every megawatt."" Davis, who didn't meet with people representing the QFs, said he was handing the QF issue to the PUC because lawmakers failed to pass legislation that would have set a five-year price for natural gas and allow the QFs to sign individual contracts with the utilities. In addition, SOCal Ed opposed the legislation, saying the rates should be below $50/MWh. Some renewable power producers said they aren't vehemently opposed to the new rate structure because it guarantees them a higher rate than what was originally proposed. QFs Want Third Party Supply Contracts John Wood, who represents the SoCal Ed Gas Fired Creditors Committee, one of a handful of groups that have formed since January to explore options on getting paid by the utilities, said his group of gas-fired QF creditors want to be released from their supply contracts and sell to third parties. ""Under our plan, we would be permitted to sell electricity to third parties (including the state Department of Water Resources) until a resolution to the crisis can be accomplished,"" wood said. Hal Dittmer, president of Sacramento-based Wellhead Electric in Sacramento, which is owed $8 million by PG&E, has 85 MW of gas-fired generation units offline. Under the state's plan, Dittmer said he risks going out of business. ""I can't buy natural gas for what I would be paid under this decision,"" he said. ""The state needs to quit kidding themselves that they don't need to raise electricity rates. All of this is being driven by an artificial construct that California can avoid raising rates."" -By Jason Leopold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3874; jason.leopold@dowjones.com Power Strain Eases but Concerns Mount Energy: Officials say summer prices will be high, and a state report shows that contracts with generators are far short of goals. DAN MORAIN; JENIFER WARREN TIMES STAFF WRITERS 03/22/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-3 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SACRAMENTO -- California's fragile electricity system stabilized Wednesday, but a Davis administration report suggested troubles ahead because the state could be forced to buy most of its power for the coming summer on the costly and volatile spot market. After two days of statewide blackouts, power plants that had been shut down were cranked up. Unseasonable heat tapered off. The operators of the statewide power grid relaxed their state of emergency. But plenty of ominous signs remained. Many small producers remained shut down, skeptical about Gov. Gray Davis' plan for utilities to pay them. State Controller Kathleen Connell issued a sharp warning about the high cost of the state's foray into the power business and announced that she will block an administration request that she transfer $5.6 billion into an account that could be tapped to pay for state purchases of electricity. And a report from the administration summarizing contracts between Davis and independent power generators showed that the state has signed contracts for only 2,247 megawatts of electricity, significantly less than the 6,000 to 7,000 megawatts previously claimed. While there are agreements in principle for the full amount, the report notes that generators can back out of the contracts for a variety of reasons, including the state's failure to sell bonds to finance power purchased by July 1. The Legislature has approved plans to sell $10 billion in bonds, but none have yet been issued. ""We are exposed enormously this summer,"" Senate Energy Committee chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) said after looking at the report. ""We owe the people the truth about how difficult this summer is going to be. We don't have a power fairy."" Perhaps most significant, the report suggests that the contracts fall significantly short of Davis' stated goal of buying no more than 5% of the state's summer needs on the spot electricity market, where prices can be many times those of long-term contracts. After reading the report, Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economist who studies the California electricity market, said the numbers suggested that the state's long-term contracts will cover less than half of what the state will need this summer. ""We're definitely short this summer, next summer and the summer of 2003,"" he said. California was forced to start buying electricity in December--at a cost of $50 million a day--because producers refused to sell to Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric. The two utilities amassed billions of dollars in debt when prices for wholesale power soared on the spot market. Vikram Budhraja, a consultant retained by Davis to negotiate deals with generators, said the report represents a ""work in progress."" He said the state may yet sign new contracts. However, Wolak said the contract figures confirm what he and others have been dreading: that summer is going to be rife with rolling blackouts unless serious steps to cut demand are taken immediately. Wolak and other experts say large industrial customers must be switched to real-time meters and pricing to persuade them to use the bulk of their energy at times of low demand. The head of the Energy Foundation, a San Francisco-based nonprofit that promotes sustainable sources of power, made the same proposal to Davis on Wednesday. ""The government need not ask customers to swelter in the dark this summer,"" foundation President Hal Harvey argued in a letter. He also proposed a crash campaign to boost sales of efficient appliances and lightbulbs. He said the state needs to take over the utilities' contracts with alternative energy providers to ensure they stay in business, and sign new contracts for 1,500 megawatts of new wind power--the cheapest, fastest and cleanest source of new supply. Davis had proposed a formula Tuesday to force private utilities to pay the alternative producers, some of which have not been paid since November. But some of them warned Wednesday that Davis' plan offers them little incentive to turn on their generators. Alternative energy producers supply more than a quarter of the electricity consumed in California. Many producers generate electricity from wind, sun and geothermal sources. But most of them generate power using natural gas--and the cost of natural gas has been soaring. Several natural gas users said Davis' plan, which caps rates, won't cover their fuel costs. Davis assumes that the price of natural gas will fall. But small generators say they don't have sufficient purchasing power or sophistication to gamble on future prices. The Public Utilities Commission is expected to approve Davis' proposal next week. It offers producers two choices: 7.9 cents a kilowatt-hour if they agree to supply power for five years, or 6.9 cents a kilowatt-hour over 10 years. ""The price of natural gas is higher than that,"" said Marty Quinn, executive vice president and chief operating officer of Ridgewood Power LLC, which owns three natural gas-fired co-generation plants. ""If we operate, we'll lose money."" Ridgewood is not operating, having been cut off by gas suppliers. The company sued PG&E last month seeking overdue payments and release from its contracts with the utility. A hearing is scheduled in El Centro today in another lawsuit filed by a small energy producer, an Imperial Valley geothermal producer that sued Edison for refusing to let it break its contract and sell on the open market. CalEnergy says Edison owes it about $140 million for energy sold since November. A company spokesman, Jay Lawrence, said CalEnergy was going ahead with its suit despite Davis' proposal. ""We've had promises before,"" he said. In other developments: * A federal judge in Sacramento on Wednesday ordered Reliant Energy of Houston, a major producer, to continue selling power to California during emergencies, despite the company's argument that it may not be fully reimbursed. The order will remain in effect for 60 days or until the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission decides a related case. * Connell said the state budget surplus has shrunk to $3.2 billion because the state has spent roughly $2.8 billion on electricity. She criticized the administration for withholding basic information about state finances, and said she will begin an audit on Monday of the Department of Water Resources, which is responsible for purchasing power. Davis' aides said Connell took her action because the Democratic governor endorsed one of Connell's foes this week in the race for Los Angeles mayor, former Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa. A Connell aide scoffed at the notion. * Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said she ""never has had a response"" from President Bush after writing him last month for an appointment to discuss the California energy crisis. In a wide-ranging lunch talk with reporters in Washington, she deplored the fact that ""huge, huge profits are being made"" in the California crisis, and said ""an appropriate federal role"" would be to guarantee a reliable source of power until the state can get nine new generators online. * Times staff writers Mitchell Landsberg in Los Angeles and Robert L. Jackson in Washington contributed to this report. (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) Power Points Daily Developments * Wholesale electricity suppliers overcharged by about $5.5 billion between May and last month, and that money should be refunded to taxpayers and utilities, according to a Cal-ISO report. * The state may have to buy most of its power for summer on the costly spot market, which could drive consumers' bills up, a Davis administration report concludes. * State Controller Kathleen Connell said she will block a request by the Davis administration for $5.6 billion for state purchases of electricity. Verbatim ""We owe the people the truth about how difficult this summer is going to be. We don't have a power fairy."" Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey), Senate Energy Committee chairwoman CPUC Must Address Rates In QF Repayment Order - SoCal Ed 03/21/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Any order from the California Public Utilities Commission requiring utilities to pay small, independent generators going forward must determine how that could be done within the existing rate structure, a spokesman for Edison International (EIX) utility Southern California Edison said Wednesday. The utility was responding to a PUC proposed decision that would require utilities to pay small generators, called qualifying facilities, $79 a megawatt hour within 15 days of electricity delivery. The decision will be voted March 27 by the CPUC. ""We're still reviewing (the decision) and should have more to say in a day or two. To the extent that the commission orders us to pay going forward of course we will. But it needs to address how we will pay the QFs,"" a SoCal Edison spokesman said. SoCal Edison and PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric Co. are struggling under nearly $13 billion in uncollected power costs due to an inability to pass high wholesale power costs to customers under a rate freeze. Gov. Gray Davis Tuesday blasted the utilities for not having paid their QF bills in full since December. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. has made some partial payments to QFs, but SoCal Edison has paid nothing. Together, they owe the QFs about $1 billion, but the order doesn't address that debt. An Edison executive said, in reaction to the governor's sharp comments, that the company simply doesn't have the money to pay creditors. ""The root problem here is there just isn't enough money in the current rate base to pay our bills,"" said Edison Senior Vice President of Public Affairs Bob Foster. ""We understand the financial distress (the QFs) face; we are facing financial distress ourselves."" The proposed PUC order would also require the state's investor-owned utilities to offer the small generators five- and 10-year contracts for power for $79/MWh and $69/MWh, respectively. The QFs ""may be able to live with"" the PUC proposal, but the five- and 10-year contract prices may be inadequate if natural gas prices at one of the California borders are high, said Jan Smutny-Jones, president of the Independent Energy Producers Association. Natural gas prices into California are currently higher than anywhere in the country. But some say the proposed decision may not be enough to prevent the QFs from filing involuntary bankruptcy proceedings against the utilities for the money they are still owed. ""There's still a lot of skepticism. To say our position has changed based on the CPUC decision or the governor's announcement is not accurate. A lot still has to happen,"" said Jay Lawrence, a spokesman for a renewable creditors committee. -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872; jessica.berthold@dowjones.com -0- 22/03/01 01-27G State Says It's Accelerating Plan to Buy Power Utilities' Grid Government: Talks with Edison are reported near completion, but agreement with heavily indebted PG&E has a way to go. RONE TEMPEST; DAN MORAIN TIMES STAFF WRITERS 03/21/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-22 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SACRAMENTO -- As blackouts hit California for a second day Tuesday, a key consultant to Gov. Gray Davis said negotiations to buy the power grid owned by the state's largest utilities ""are proceeding at an accelerated pace."" Wall Street consultant Joseph Fichera said talks with Southern California Edison could be wrapped up within days, although those with PG&E are much less advanced. The administration and PG&E have not reached even an agreement in principle, he said. PG&E, which has more debt than Edison, says its transmission lines are more extensive than those of its Southern California counterpart. The state wants to buy the utilities' transmission lines and other assets for about $7 billion to provide cash to the utilities, help stabilize the electricity supply and ease the power crunch that has plagued California for months. To research the grid purchase, Fichera said, the state has had to pore over 80,000 documents just to assess the utilities' liabilities. ""We are working at a good pace,"" said Fichera, chief executive of the New York firm Saber Partners. "" . . . If we get to a deal-breaker, it might be longer."" By making Fichera, who is also a consultant to the Texas Public Utilities Commission, available to reporters Tuesday, the Davis administration was clearly trying to reassure the public that progress is being made on the governor's plan to pull the state out of the crisis. Since mid-January, when the big utilities' credit failed and suppliers stopped selling to them, the state has spent nearly $3 billion buying electricity from a handful of large suppliers in Texas, Oklahoma, Georgia and North Carolina. Not a cent has gone to the hundreds of alternative energy suppliers in California who provide about a quarter of the state's electricity. The Monday and Tuesday blackouts occurred partly because many of the cash-strapped alternative suppliers, including solar, biomass and wind power units, cut their normal supply to the system in half. They say Edison and PG&E have not paid them since November; the utilities say they are out of cash. Assemblyman Fred Keeley (D-Boulder Creek) said the plight of the alternative suppliers has dragged on because of the complexity of dealing with ""almost 700 individual contractors."" Another delaying factor, said Keeley, who with state Sen. Jim Battin (R-La Quinta) worked for almost three months to come up with a legislative plan to lower the small producers' prices, was ""the huge enmity . . . manifested between the utilities and the qualifying facilities. These people just don't like each other."" This week's blackouts provided two painful lessons for the Davis administration: * When it comes to electricity, size doesn't matter--every kilowatt counts. During peak use, a small wind power facility in Riverside County can make the difference between full power and blackouts. * There is no such thing as a partial solution. Unless the whole energy equation is balanced, the parts don't work. For the Davis plan to work, several key elements need to come together or utility customers will almost certainly face rate increases above the 19% already set in motion * The cost of power purchased by the state must be reduced through long-term contracts with the big out-of-state producers. These contracts, the details of which the Davis administration has kept confidential, are still being negotiated by Davis consultant Vikram Budhraja of the Pasadena firm Electric Power Group. The administration says it has concluded 40 contracts with generators, about half of which have been signed. According to the most recent statistics released by the Department of Water Resources, which buys power for the state, current prices are still well above the rate state Treasurer Phil Angelides says is necessary for a planned $10-billion bond offering to succeed. The bonds, set for sale in May, will be used to reimburse the state for the money it will have spent by that time to buy electricity. The state is currently spending at a rate of $58 million a day to buy power. If prices stay high, the $10 billion in bonds will not cover the state's power purchases by the end of the summer. Angelides says he cannot proceed with bridge financing for the bonds until the Public Utilities Commission devises a formula to guarantee that a portion of utility bills will be dedicated to bond repayment. Angelides has estimated that, under the January law that put the state in the power buying business, the state must be reimbursed $2.5 billion annually, and that $1.3 billion is needed to service the debt. PUC Administrative Law Judge Joseph R. DeUlloa is expected to announce his ruling on the reimbursement rate later this week, leading to a PUC vote on the matter as early as next week. * The rates charged for electricity by the alternative producers, known as qualifying facilities, must be cut at least in half, down from an average of more than 17 cents per kilowatt-hour. In his news conference Tuesday, Davis said he will ask the PUC to set QF rates at 6.9 cents for 10-year contracts and 7.5 cents for five-year contracts. Meanwhile, PUC Chairman Loretta Lynch, a Davis appointee, said Tuesday that the commission will vote next week on a proposed order requiring Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric to pay the QFs for electricity in the future. Lynch said a recent PUC assessment showed that the utilities have enough cash on hand for that. ""We are trying to make sure the folks providing the power get paid,"" Lynch said. ""The qualified facilities have demonstrated that they haven't been paid and that it is impairing their ability to provide power."" The utilities contend that if they pay the small providers what they owe them, there will not be enough money left to pay other creditors. ""There is not enough money in the current rate structure to pay the [alternative producers], pay the [Department of Water Resources] and pay the utilities for their generation,"" said John Nelson, a spokesman for PG&E. * The utilities must sell to the state the power they produce themselves, mainly from hydro and nuclear sources, at a rate only slightly above the cost of producing it. This is tied to the ongoing negotiations between the Davis administration and the utilities to restore the near-bankrupt utilities to solvency. * Times staff writers Julie Tamaki, Miguel Bustillo and Tim Reiterman contributed to this report. Davis OKs Subsidy of Pollution Fees Smog: As part of secret deal to get long-term energy contracts, state would pay for some of the credits that allow excess power plant emissions. Critics renew call for full disclosure. DAN MORAIN TIMES STAFF WRITER 03/21/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-23 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SACRAMENTO -- As part of his closed-door negotiations to buy electricity, Gov. Gray Davis has agreed to relieve some generators from having to pay potentially millions of dollars in fees for emitting pollutants into the air, Davis said Tuesday. Davis announced two weeks ago that his negotiators had reached deals with 20 generators to supply $43 billion worth of power during the next 10 years. However, the Democratic governor has refused to release any of the contracts or detail various terms, contending that release of such information would hamper the state's ability to negotiate deals with other generators and therefore ultimately would raise prices Californians pay for electricity. Sources familiar with the negotiations, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the agreement reached with Dynegy Inc., a power company based in Houston, is one that includes language requiring that the state pay the cost of credits that allow emissions. Dynegy spokesman Steve Stengel declined to discuss the company's deal with the state. ""We couldn't get them to sign contracts; it was a sticking point,"" Davis said of the decision to pay the fees of some generators. ""We had to lock down some power so we were not totally dependent on the spot market."" The fees in question are part of an emission trading system known as RECLAIM. Under the system, companies are allotted a certain amount of allowable pollution. If their operations pollute more, companies are required to purchase credits on an open market. Currently the credits cost about $45 per pound of pollution--an amount that can lead to a bill of well over $10 million a year for a power plant. The South Coast Air Quality Management District, which regulates pollution in the Los Angeles Basin, is considering steps to significantly lower the cost of the system--a step that could considerably cut the state's potential cost, Davis said. Senate Energy Committee Chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) defended the decision to cover the power company's costs. ""It is a question of whether it brings down the price of power,"" she said. ""If it brings down the price of power, I don't have a problem with it."" Nevertheless, word that the contracts could bind the state to pay pollution fees caused some critics of Davis' policy to renew calls for Davis to reconsider the secrecy surrounding the power negotiations. The payment provision underscores the fact that the contracts involve more than merely the prices the state will pay for its megawatts, the critics note. ""The Legislature should have known about it,"" said Senate President Pro Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco). ""It is going to cost taxpayers money. It makes you wonder. . . . This was a policy issue that was never discussed with the Legislature."" V. John White, a lobbyist for the Sierra Club, who also represents alternative energy producers, called the contract proposal ""a horrible precedent."" ""Until we know exactly what the state has agreed to and how much of a subsidy this represents, we can't determine how serious the breach of principle this is,"" White said. Another critic of the secrecy of the negotiations, Terry Francke, general counsel for the California First Amendment Coalition, said the provision in question ""raises the possibility that there are other [concessions]"" that have not yet come to light. In the summer, when demand for power is highest, some generators probably will exceed pollution limits set by regional air quality management districts. To avert blackouts, state officials might ask the companies to keep plants running. In such cases, some sources familiar with aspects of the contracts said, the contract language could be interpreted to suggest that the state would cover any fines--although Davis said Tuesday the state will not cover the cost of fines. A recent Dynegy filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission underscores the rising cost of pollution-related measures. The company, which is partners with NRG Energy in three California plants in El Segundo, Long Beach and Carlsbad in San Diego County, said its ""aggregate expenditures for compliance with laws related to the regulation of discharge of materials into the environment"" rose to $14.3 million in 2000, from $3.6 million in 1999. A South Coast Air Quality Management spokesman said Dynegy's facilities appear to be fairly clean--although Sierra Club lobbyist White said Dynegy has been seeking a permit at one of its plants to burn fuel oil, which is dirtier than natural gas. Davis said he intends to ""make this information public,"" but he added that ""we do not want to put the public's interest in jeopardy by asking them to pay higher prices."" ""Nobody likes the notion that [the administration is] not being fully forthcoming,"" Davis said. ""But I also have a corollary responsibility that I don't stick these generators with a higher rate."" FERC ORDERS WILLIAMS ENERGY AND AES TO EXPLAIN THEIR REFUSAL TO MAKE CERTAIN RMR UNITS AVAILABLE TO CALIFORNIA ISO LAST YEAR 03/21/2001 Foster Electric Report 5 (c) Copyright 2001, Foster Associates, Inc. Following a preliminary, non-public investigation, FERC directed AES Southland Inc. and Williams Energy Marketing & Trading Co. (IN01-3) on March 14 to show cause why they did not violate section 205 of the Federal Power Act (FPA) by failing to provide power to the California ISO from two reliability must-run (RMR) generator units during a period in April and May 2000. The investigation responded to a matter referred by the Cal-ISO. If a violation is found, Williams Energy and AES could be required to refund excess profits of $10.9 million (as calculated by FERC) and face restrictions on their market-based rate authority for a year. The show cause order involves two generation units (Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2), owned and operated by AES. Williams Energy markets all output from the Alamitos and Huntington Beach plants, including the two units at issue here, pursuant to a tolling agreement filed with the Commission. The Cal-ISO designated the two units as RMR units that it could call on when necessary to provide energy and ancillary service essential to the reliability of the California transmission network. The Cal-ISO makes both a fixed payment to the RMR owner or operator to compensate for the RMR unit's availability and a variable payment for the RMR unit's output (if the unit is not otherwise participating in the market). Williams Energy and the Cal-ISO executed RMR agreements, filed as rate schedules with the Commission, allowing the Cal-ISO to dispatch units ""solely for purposes of meeting local reliability needs or managing intra-zonal congestion."" The ISO may dispatch a non-RMR unit if the designated RMR unit is not available. Under its RMR agreement with the ISO, Williams is paid the greater of its contract price or marginal cost for operating RMR units. However, if a non-RMR unit has to be dispatched because a designated RMR unit is unavailable, Williams will be paid its bid price, not the RMR contract price. During the April to May 2000 period, the Cal-ISO sought to dispatch both Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2 as RMR units to provide voltage support. However, according to the FERC order, Williams Energy refused to make Alamitos 4 available from April 25 through May 5, and to make Huntington Beach 2 available from May 6 through May 11, ""for reasons not directly related to the necessary and timely maintenance of the units."" Consequently, the Cal-ISO was forced to dispatch non-RMR units at a higher cost, namely, Williams Energy's bid price for service provided by the replacement units. By contrast, if the RMR units had not experienced outages and been available from April 25 through May 11, Williams Energy would have received either (1) the market revenues only from the respective units, which would have resulted in no payments for RMR output from the ISO to Williams Energy, or (2) Williams Energy's variable cost for operating the RMR units less the market revenues from the respective units' output. Accordingly, FERC observed, Williams Energy had ""a financial incentive to prolong any outages of Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2 in April and May 2000."" The bid price for the non-RMR units was at or near the Cal-ISO's then-effective bid cap of $750/MWh, FERC continued. Therefore, Williams Energy received payments from the Cal-ISO of more than $11.3 million, or about $10.3 million greater than the estimated average variable operating cost of the non-RMR units (approximately $63/MWh) during the period in question. This indicates a refund amount, including interest, of nearly $10.9 million. The information in this order and a non-public appendix, the Commission declared, suggests that AES declared outages at the two RMR units and maintained Huntington Beach 2 in a manner inconsistent with good utility practice, and that Williams Energy took action to extend the outage at Alamitos 4 and to make Huntington Beach 2 unavailable for ""pretextual reasons."" Based on this information coupled with Williams Energy's financial incentive not to make the Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2 units available, FERC found serious questions about whether (1) AES and Williams Energy violated applicable RMR contracts and tariffs on file with the Commission pursuant to FPA section 205 when they refused to make Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2 available for dispatch by the Cal-ISO; (2) whether Williams acted inconsistently with its market-based rate authority and the market monitoring information protocols of the Cal-ISO's tariff regarding the unavailability of the RMR units during the period at issue; and (3) whether AES violated a tolling agreement on file with the Commission pursuant to section 205. The Commission identified two remedies for these potential violations: a refund by Williams Energy and/or AES of revenues received greater than the amount that would have collected from the ISO if the RMR units had been available, and a condition on Williams Energy's market-based rate authority. Specifically, for a one-year period, if an RMR unit were not available when dispatched by the Cal-ISO, a non-RMR unit dispatched in its place would only receive payment according to the terms of the applicable RMR contract. In other words, Williams Energy would not receive the bid price for operation of the substitute, non- RMR unit. The Commission directed Williams Energy and AES to show cause, within 20 days, why they should not be found to have committed the above-described violations and why the specified remedies should not be imposed. Further, to ensure procurement of all relevant information, the Commission instituted a formal, non-public investigation into the operation, maintenance and sales of power from the Alamitos and Huntington Beach plants in 2000 and 2001. Calif Consumers Failing To Conserve Pwr Despite Blackouts 03/20/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- California consumers haven't been conserving enough electricity to relieve strain on the power grid and reduce demand in the state, a spokesman with the Independent System Operator said Tuesday. The ISO said that despite two straight days of statewide rolling blackouts, consumers aren't using less electricity, which means additional megawatts will be taken off the grid. As a result, blackouts could last longer and impact additional communities, the ISO said. ISO spokesman Pat Dorinson said Monday ""conservation in California is no longer an option,"" but consumers in the state aren't heeding the call to reduce consumption. Conservation efforts during rolling blackouts Monday and Tuesday were far less than Jan. 17 and Jan. 18, when blackouts swept through Northern California due to transmission constraints. Jim Detmers, the ISO's vice president of operation, said consumers saved the state about 1,000 megawatts of electricity, enough power for 1 million houses. The ISO said conservation efforts Monday were about 500 MW or less. ""We would be very happy if we saw the same amount this time,"" Detmers said. The state's Energy Commission said consumers think it's no longer important to save electricity until blackouts are imposed. ""People have been saving generally, but it isn't a big bump from hour to hour,"" a spokesman for the Energy Commission said. Gov. Gray Davis launched a massive conservation campaign this month, promising consumers a rebate on their summer electricity bill if they save at least 20% of electricity, compared with last summer. The governor said he believes conservation this summer will amount to possibly saving 5,000 MW and averting the chance of rolling blackouts. -By Jason Leopold; Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3874; jason.leopold@dowjones.com Gas Co.'s Success Opens Debate Southern California energy supplier has reaped millions of dollars in state incentives for keeping down its costs. Though consumers get a share of the windfall, regulators are asking whether they should get more of the bonus, which is expected to be huge this year, as a form of price relief. The natural gas provider says it deserves to keep its reward. TIM REITERMAN TIMES STAFF WRITER 03/18/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition C-1 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SAN FRANCISCO -- While consumers suffer soaring energy bills and the big electric utilities lurch toward insolvency, the news is not all dire at Southern California Gas Co. Through vigorous deal making, the Sempra Energy subsidiary has consistently beaten the volatile natural gas market during the last year, and the company stands to reap millions of dollars in savings through a state incentive program that rewards utilities for keeping costs down. For several years, the utility has been splitting the savings 50-50 with ratepayers whenever the company's gas costs fall slightly below market levels. Those savings, Gas Co. executives acknowledged, have shot to unprecedented heights during the state's power crisis. Now, in this climate of high consumer gas bills and runaway market prices, regulators are taking another look at the program. The question before the Public Utilities Commission: Should Gas Co. ratepayers, who endured huge bill increases this winter, get a bigger share of the savings? The total windfall under the incentive program has in some years exceeded $20 million. But the amount for the last 12 months is expected to multiply many times over, company executives said, partly because the Gas Co. has done so well in the wild market by selling, lending and trading gas as well as buying it. ""The recent market conditions . . . could possibly result in some unintended consequences that result in shared savings of benefits that may be more appropriately allocated entirely to ratepayers,"" the PUC's consumer protection arm, the Office of Ratepayer Advocates, reported Oct. 30, even before the latest upward market spirals. Gas Co. representatives express frustration, saying they have done what the state has requested under its gas-cost incentive program: Buy smarter, and pass the savings along to its 5 million residential and small-business customers. The company contends it has worked hard to keep bills down and should be rewarded for taking risks to obtain gas at the lowest possible cost. ""The PUC, every time we do well, raises the bar on us,"" said Jim Harrigan, director of gas acquisition. ""I don't necessarily agree with it."" By virtue of its purchasing power and storage and pipeline capacity, the Gas Co. has become a big player in the regional natural gas market. In the company's bustling trading room at its Los Angeles headquarters, 15 employees track price movements, pipeline supplies and even the weather via computer, while cutting deals and arranging gas shipments. Although the Gas Co. buys the commodity for its customers, the company also sells to marketers, other utilities and producers. State officials say the number of transactions by the company has risen steeply to 10,000 to 20,000 a year, including gas sales along California's border, where prices have rocketed. The PUC created the cost incentive program for the state's three major gas utilities--San Diego Gas & Electric Co. in 1993, Southern California Gas the next year and PG&E Corp.'s Pacific Gas & Electric Co. in 1997. Like Southern California Gas, SDG&E is a subsidiary of Sempra Energy. The program was designed to give utilities added motivation for obtaining gas at the best price for customers. It replaced lengthy and contentious reviews by the PUC, which assessed whether utilities had purchased gas at reasonable prices and sometimes ordered them to return millions of dollars to customers. An annual audit of the Gas Co. program and a staff evaluation requested by the PUC recently concluded that the program has achieved many of its goals, but it also proposed adjustments that would give customers a greater share of the rewards. ""These incentives were designed in less volatile times,"" said program supervisor Mark Pocta of the Office of Ratepayer Advocates, which conducted the audit. ""There is a question of how much should go to ratepayers and shareholders."" His office also plans to assess whether the Gas Co.'s trading had any negative effects on the gas market, resulting in diminished supplies or higher prices for other utilities and their customers. Under the program, the Gas Co. shares risks and rewards with its ratepayers, but since the program was launched, it has consistently produced awards. If the cost of gas is 0.5% or more below a benchmark based on monthly gas market indexes, the company and its customers split the savings 50-50. California's gas utilities are not allowed to profit on their raw commodity costs; they merely pass along those costs to ratepayers with no markup. The savings under the incentive program are automatically reflected in consumers' monthly gas bills but are not itemized. At the end of the year, the utilities request their share of the savings, and the PUC has routinely granted approval. Then the companies, and thus their shareholders, are paid through customer utility bills. The resulting bill increases typically have been modest, less than 1%. But as the awards increase, regulators say, the effect on customers will become more significant unless the present structure is changed. ""There's no question, when you start to talk about $100 million [or more in savings], and add [the company's award] into rates in a year, it will make a noticeable difference,"" said Los Angeles economist Jeff Leitzinger, president of Econ One, who has done consulting for the Gas Co. Still, he said, ratepayers should bear in mind that they already benefit from below-market gas and transportation costs. In the early years of the program, records show, the Gas Co.'s awards went from zero to $3.2 million, $10.6 million, $2 million and $7.7 million. Last year's award of $9.8 million is awaiting PUC approval. This year's proposed award, covering the period through the end of this month, has not yet been submitted by the Gas Co. But the utility has provided monthly figures and oral updates on a confidential basis to PUC officials, who declined to provide figures. Harrigan of the Gas Co. said the savings are expected to multiply ""many times over,"" largely because the company was well-equipped for the market fluctuations and tried to insulate its customers from high gas prices. ""Any trading company, especially one with assets like we have, has benefited from volatility in the market,"" he said. Harrigan said, however, that he does not believe the company's level of activity has adversely affected the market and that its trading pales in volume to that of unregulated energy companies. Anne Smith, the Gas Co.'s vice president of customer service and marketing, said the utility will not release figures for this year's incentive program until they are filed with the PUC in June. ""I don't want to interrupt that process,"" Smith said, noting that the PUC ultimately will determine the company's award. ""I think they need to focus on what [the Gas Co.] has done for the ratepayers. It has been immense."" Although the typical monthly gas bill has risen to $80 from $50 a year ago, Gas Co. customers tend to have lower rates than those of other California utilities. The company's gas procurement cost in February was 66 cents per therm, or 100 cubic feet. That's more than twice last year's cost but only about half what sister company SDG&E paid for its 740,000 customers in February. It's also much lower than the $1.09 per therm PG&E pays. ""We were as upset about the overall [gas price] increase as anyone else,"" Harrigan said. ""I would rather see the prices of a year ago, even though we managed to do a little better in the [recent] environment."" When it comes to keeping down costs, regulators say, the Gas Co. has advantages over other utilities in the marketplace. For one, the company has so much pipeline capacity at major gas basins that it purchases a relatively small portion of its needs--about 10% to 15%--at the California border, where prices in December briefly rose to the equivalent of $6 per therm, or 20 times those a year earlier. This presents opportunities. ""At the beginning of the month, they forecast a certain amount of gas they have to buy,"" said Pocta of the Office of Ratepayer Advocates. ""If they go out and buy and do not need to use as much because the weather is more moderate than expected, they can either inject the gas into storage or they can make sales at the border."" With gas price run-ups like those seen in the last year, Pocta said, ""there is a question: Should that benefit be shared, or flow entirely to ratepayers?"" Customers, he pointed out, may be entitled to additional benefits because they pay for the interstate and intrastate pipeline capacity and the gas storage that give the company the flexibility to make advantageous deals. ""By the same token, we want [the Gas Co.] . . . to go into the market and generate cost savings that can be passed on to the customers,"" he added. ""We want them to have incentives. The question is how to balance them."" Under deregulation, the Gas Co. adopted the nontraditional role of marketer, according to a PUC Energy Division report in January. The company makes gas sales at various locations. It engages in exchanges. It makes futures transactions to help stabilize costs. ""They look for ways to lower the gas cost,"" said Richard Myers, program supervisor at the Energy Division. ""Before they were lots more risk-averse. Now they feel they can take risks and make money for shareholders, and it is a benefit for ratepayers at the same time."" The incentive programs are tailored to individual utilities, so it is difficult to compare them. Records show that the shared savings at SDG&E, a much smaller utility, declined steadily from $9.2 million in the 1996-97 cycle to $560,000 in 1999-2000. Spokesman Ed Van Herik said the falloff largely represents a drop in gas purchases, especially as the company sold off its own gas-fired electricity-generating plants. He said the company does not yet know how much savings have accrued in the last year. In an annual report to the PUC in February, PG&E said it had no savings under the incentive program and thus it is not entitled to any award for the 1999-2000 cycle. The Utility Reform Network, a San Francisco-based consumer advocacy group, said it will closely watch the PUC's evaluation of the incentive program at the Gas Co. ""We want to make sure, given the dramatic changes in the gas market and prices, ratepayers are not left out of the [additional] benefits,"" TURN attorney Marcel Hawiger said. ""We'll look to see whether the mechanism should be changed."" Severin Borenstein, director of the Energy Institute at UC Berkeley, said the program should be changed to provide more incentive for utilities to enter long-term contracts that would smooth out volatility in the market. ""Unfortunately, under the system,"" he said, ""the only incentive is to beat the [spot] market."" Use this file to download and print all the articles in this section (See attached file: Dow Jones IMPLICATIONS FOR OTHER MARKETS (For easier printing of all the articles in this section use the file at the end of the section) New York: New York at the crossroads Wednesday, March 21, 2001 Energy Insight (Embedded image moved to file: pic24389.pcx) By Dave Todd dtodd@ftenergy.com U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham declared this week that the Big Apple is on the verge of being bitten hard by power cuts and rising energy prices. Delivering the keynote address at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's national energy summit in Washington Monday, Abraham said, ""California is not the only state facing a mismatch between supply and demand,"" what with ""electricity shortages predicted for New York City and Long Island this summer"" and low capacity margins threatening electricity reliability elsewhere across the country. But how likely is it that New Yorkers will face blackouts of the sort confronting Californians? Not very, says energy trade specialist Edward Krapels, managing director of Boston-based METIS Trading Advisors. Krapels, a consultant helping major Northeastern utilities, such as Consolidated Edison, design market-hedging programs, adamantly decried what he said are facile comparisons between conditions in New York and California, there being ""more differences than there are similarities"" between those two industrial cornerstones of the country's economy in respect to energy security management. ""First of all, New York has a more varied portfolio of energy generation sources than California,"" he said. California has hydro, nuclear and gas, but when it lost a lot of hydro, the state needed gas to pick up the slack, and the ""capacity just wasn't there."" In New York's case, the state has oil and coal still in the mix and its overall dependence on gas is much lower than California's, Krapels added. New York avoids making same mistakes Portfolio diversity is one pillar of any effective plan to help New York avoid the same errors made in redesigning California's marketplace. New York's Independent System Operator (ISO), in a new report warning that the state is at an ""energy crossroads"" in terms of its capacity adequacy in the immediate future, argues that a concerted effort is required to arrest declining in-state generation capacity reserve margins, and a strategy must be put in place, whether or not new generation comes on-line, in accordance with current anticipated scenarios. A measure of New York's essential difficulty is that, between 1995 and 2000, statewide demand for electricity grew 2,700 MW, while generating capacity expanded by only 1,060 MW. With no major new generating plants in downstate New York fully approved, the gap is expected to continue to widen. To avoid ""a replication of California's market meltdown"" the New York ISO calculates the state's daily generating capacity needs to grow by 8,600 MW by 2005, with more than half of that located in New York City and on Long Island. Expressing concern this may be too big a burden for the current bureaucratic process to bear, the ISO wants to see a state-appointed ombudsman named to help would-be merchant power plant investors plow through red tape. ""Increasing New York's generating capacity will also lessen the state's escalating and risky reliance on out-of-state sources of electricity,"" the ISO added. ""Since 1999, New York State has been unable to cover its reserve requirements from in-state sources."" Not everyone agrees with that analysis, insofar as it argues for circling the wagons inward. Some analysts believe the ultimate solution lies not in tying in more inwardly dedicated power, but in expanding the marketplace by breaking down inter-jurisdictional barriers. In any case, New York energy regulatory authorities and those responsible elsewhere in the U.S. Northeast, such as PJM (Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland) Interconnection and the New England Power Pool, are in vastly better shape in terms of ""cross-border"" cooperation than California and its neighbors in that efforts are being made among various authorities toward developing an integrated regional electricity market. In California, by contrast, the state's focus?for example, in the case of new gas-fired power plant development?has been to ensure dedicated supply to the California market alone, rather than on a regional marketplace. (Embedded image moved to file: pic05075.pcx) The New York ISO's new broad-based analysis of market-restructuring needs argues that the relatively stronger health of its reformed environment is ""due in large part to the ability of New York's utilities to enter into long-term power contracts."" What needs to be done most, it says, is to move aggressively to build some of the more than 29,000 MW of ""proposed new generation in the siting pipeline."" In the meantime, the 30,200 MW of electricity New Yorkers used on a peak day last summer shouldn't be eclipsed on too many days this coming summer (given early long-range weather forecasts). Demand, however, is expected to increase at an annual average rate of up to 1.4%. So while New York City, the rest of the state and adjacent parts might breathe easy this year, it could be a brief rest from the fray. Meanwhile, a 4% shortfall is still being planned for this summer that is not yet provided for, as authorities hurriedly seek to arrange new generation plants around Manhattan, on Long Island and even on barges offshore. One way or another, whether it is the weather or the politics of siting new energy facilities, it's going to be a hot time in the city. Long-term solutions hit brick wall Meanwhile, attempts at longer-term solutions continue to run into trouble. Last week, Connecticut state regulators came out against a proposal to run a new underwater cable under Long Island Sound that Hydro-Quebec subsidiary TransEnergie U.S. Ltd. wants to build to pump more juice into Long Island Power Authority's load pocket. Despite strong promises from TransEnergie to be diligent in avoiding damage to oyster beds in Long Island Sound, the proposal failed to convince authorities, who were persuaded the pipeline project could lead to diversion of electricity from Connecticut. In similar fashion, private companies wanting to build 10 small independent power plants and temporary generators offshore New York City are running into intense opposition from environmental groups and citizen orga nizations?some of whom have taken their cases to the state assembly in Albany. The David vs. Goliath nature of such controversies has further alerted energy companies to the difficulties of addressing complex energy supply issues that may ultimately devolve to people not wanting things in their backyard, regardless of what the alternative might mean to their fellow citizens or the greater public good. But suddenly, in New York, California's troubles?while still distant in their intensity? may not be so far away. By some estimates, this summer's bills for Consolidated Edison customers could be up as much as one third or more over last year's charges. Letting the time slip when it comes to building new infrastructure isn't going to make the pain go away. NEW YORK: NY-ISO REPORT SAYS STATE NEEDS 4,000 - 5,000 MW OF NEW GENERATION SOON TO AVOID SEVERE SHORTAGES; NY-ISO ALSO ASKS FERC TO EXTEND BID CAP AND TEMPORARY EMERGENCY PROCEDURES 03/21/2001 Foster Electric Report 2 (c) Copyright 2001, Foster Associates, Inc. Raising the specter of an East Coast version of the California crisis, the New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (NY-ISO) is warning of serious electricity shortages, air quality deterioration and stunted economic growth without immediate approval of between 4,000-5,000 MW of new generating capacity in the state. Of this amount, 2,000-3,000 MW is needed to serve New York City. Another 8,600 MW of new capacity will have to be built by 2005, the NY-ISO said in a recent report, Power Alert: New York's Energy Crossroads. ""New York is heading towards a very serious situation unless it acts immediately to get new supply sited within its borders,"" said NY-ISO president William Museler in a statement accompanying the report. ""This report is essentially a caution light at New York's energy crossroads."" Sources in the New York Public Service Commission have downplayed the NY-ISO's warning, asserting that a process for bringing on new generation is well underway, with more than 85 projects in the approval pipeline. In a related development, the NY-ISO asked FERC to approve a proposed tariff amendment (ER01-1517) extending existing bids caps in some of its markets until 10/31/02, and a separate and related amendment (ER01-1489) extending the NY-ISO's so-called temporary extraordinary procedures (TEP) that allow the ISO to make price adjustments and take other corrective actions if it finds evidence of market power abuse. The NY-ISO Report --The NY-ISO likened the situation in New York to that faced by California, where a relentless increase in demand has not been met with an equal increase in supply. The NY-ISO said that between 1995 and 2000, statewide demand for electricity rose by 2,700 MW, while generating capacity increased by only 1,060 MW. With no major new generating plants in downstate New York fully approved for construction at this time and generation demand in the state expected to grow around 1.3 percent annually for the next several years, the NY-ISO said this gap will continue to widen. The inevitable result of this trend is large rate increases for New York's power consumers. The NY-ISO's modeling suggests that ""by 2005, statewide prices are likely to be more than 20-25 percent lower in the case in which new plants are built than in the case where they are not."" In New York City, ""the price to consumers of electric power could be reduced by as much as 28 percent when compared to the case of no new supply or load management programs."" Besides large rate increases, the NY-ISO asserted that a failure to site and build new plants in New York will threaten power reliability in the state and lead to increasing reliance on out-of-state resources. The report said that if no new in-state generation comes on line in the next five years, the state's generation reserve margins will shrink from the current 14.9 percent above peak demand ""to a dangerously low 8.4 percent by 2005."" Pointing to California's situation, the report added that increased reliance on power imports ""can subject electrical suppliers and customers in New York to transmission restrictions and political and economic considerations beyond the control or influence of responsible New York State entities."" To avoid these harsh consequences, the NY-ISO said New York's new siting law, known as the Article X process, needs to be modified. Since the law was passed 18 months ago, the report noted that only two plants have been approved (both upstate) and neither has yet been built. The problem, according to the NY-ISO, is that the siting process ""requires the cooperation of multiple state agencies."" To expedite the process, the report suggested the ""clear designation of a lead agency and the adoption of an `ombudsman program' to expedite and coordinate the work of the agencies responsible for the Article X process must be made."" The NY-ISO added that an expedited approval process would improve the environment because older, more polluting power plants would be replaced by cleaner gas-fired units. On a more positive note, the NY-ISO reported that New York's restructured power market ""is far healthier than that in California, due in large part to the ability of New York `s utilities to enter long-term power contracts. The basic structure of the New York market will also reduce unwarranted price spikes and other market disruptions through mitigation programs which automatically correct price spikes due to market power abuses."" ""Nevertheless, California `s experience raises a caution flag for all New Yorkers,"" the report continued. ""The deregulated market in New York cannot achieve lower costs through competition without an increase in generating capacity similar in magnitude to the recommendations of this report, along with simultaneous efforts to institute greater conservation, better load management and alternative energy supply initiatives. Additionally, closer integration with regional suppliers of power is both inevitable and beneficial."" The report also recommended (1) accelerating conservation, real-time metering and price-sensitive load programs; and (2) upgrading the state's and the Northeast's transmission infrastructure. The Proposed Tariff Amendments -- New York's Article X siting process and continuing tight supplies were also cited in the NY-ISO's request to extend from 4/30/01 until 10/31/02 its $1,000/MWh bid caps. FERC first approved the 1,000/MWh bid caps in July 2000 (see REPORT No.197, pg.6), and subsequently extended them. The NY-ISO's board ""is sensitive to the Commission's concerns about undue intervention in energy markets,"" the filing related. ""Nevertheless, the NY-ISO is submitting this request because it believes that delays in New York state's `Article X' process for licensing and siting new generating capacity is inhibiting supply from increasing to match continued demand growth. . . . Moreover, although the NY-ISO proposes to implement several demand-side measures this summer, it is not yet clear whether they will make demand sufficiently price-responsive to avoid periods of high prices that would not occur if there were an efficient demand-side response."" Thus, the NY-ISO insisted that the requested extension is needed to provide more time for the development of additional generation and to gauge the effectiveness of the NY-ISO's proposed demand-side response mechanisms ""in order to avoid exposing consumers to price spikes that are not a product of the interplay of competitive market forces."" Other problems cited in the NY-ISO's filing which keep New York's power market from being fully competitive include continuing capacity and operating constraints at the state's Central-East interface, and questions over adequate gas supply. ""The NY-ISO remains acutely aware that taking steps to deal with price abnormalities can have undesirable consequences,"" the filing continued. ""Nevertheless, the NY-ISO believes that the $1,000/MWh cap that has been used in the PJM's markets since inception does not appear to have had an adverse impact there. . . . The permanent bid caps in PJM, and the interim bid caps in ISO New England (proposed for extension through the end of 2001) also make continuation of the NY-ISO's bid caps more important in order to maintain uniformity across the Northeastern markets. The NY-ISO also continues to believe that suppliers will not be materially harmed by the continuation of bid caps, which are likely to come into effect very rarely and are set at levels that prevent only artificially high run-ups in prices."" The NY-ISO's request to extend its TEP procedures (which also were previously extended) through 10/31/02 cited similar problems with New York's power markets, but claimed that the NY-ISO ""has made great strides"" toward eliminating market design and software flaws. ""The TEPs were, and remain, an indispensable tool for responding to and correcting market flaws and other instances where the markets are not operating as the NY-ISO and the Commission intended,"" the filing insisted. MASSACHUSETTS: Attorney general says summer poses electricity concerns By JOHN McELHENNY Associated Press Writer 03/19/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. BOSTON (AP) - The state's top consumer advocate warned that Massachusetts may see ""California-type"" electricity blackouts this summer when temperatures rise and residents turn on air conditioners and fans. ""It would be a mistake to feel this is a cold weather problem,"" said Attorney General Thomas Reilly in an interview with The Associated Press. ""Our major problem will come this summer."" State deregulation of the electric industry has been among the factors blamed for local power outages in California, and on Monday, California for the first time suffered rolling blackouts across the entire state. Massachusetts relaxed regulations on its own electric industry in 1998 to attract more companies to stir competition. But that hasn't happened yet, largely because the current high cost of oil and gas make it expensive to produce electricity. ""The promise of deregulation was that there was going to be competition,"" said Reilly, a Democrat. ""That competition in the wholesale market is not happening."" Hot summer weather drives up electricity use as residents turn on air conditioners and fans, and Reilly said a few particularly hot days could strain the grid that provides the region's power. A spokeswoman for the region's power grid said electricity use is expected to rise 1.5 to 2 percent this year, but the region should have enough power because of six new power plants that have begun generating electricity in the past 18 months. ""The situation is unlike California because we have new generation coming on line that is outpacing demand,"" said Ellen Foley, spokeswoman for ISO New England Inc., which manages the grid of 330 generators connected by 8,000 miles of high voltage transmission lines. Still, a particularly hot day and an unforeseen power generation breakdown could prompt ISO to ask residents to conserve electricity, a situation that arose once last summer, Foley said. In order to avoid any power outages and protect consumers, Reilly repeated calls for electric companies to build more power lines and to offer more options for new customers who have signed up since deregulation. Those customers typically pay more than long-term customers. Electric transmission companies should also be allowed to enter into two-year contracts with suppliers, instead of the six-month contracts many have now, to avoid short-term price spikes for consumers, Reilly said. The Attorney General's Office acts as an advocate for consumers. Michael Monahan, a spokesman for NSTAR, which provides electricity to more than 1 million customers, is upgrading some of its power lines and last year built a new line to Cape Cod, but currently has no lines under construction. ""I wholeheartedly concur with the attorney general that it's something we have to focus on,"" Monahan said, but he added, ""The indications I see are that we have an ample supply of electricity."" California's statewide outages were ordered on Monday after a transformer fire, high demand and a lack of electricity imports pushed power reserves to near zero. California partially deregulated its electric industry in 1996, two years before Massachusetts. --- On the Net: Attorney General's Office: http://www.ago.state.ma.us NSTAR: http://www.nstaronline.com ISO New England Inc.: http://www.iso-ne.com NEVADA: Discussion of bill stopping power plant sales to continue Wednesday By JOHN WILKERSON Associated Press Writer 03/19/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. CARSON CITY, Nev. (AP) - Lawmakers hit more delays Monday in trying to pass a measure that pulls the plug on the sale of Nevada power plants to avoid California-style energy problems. ""The goal of this bill is only stopping the divestiture of power plants and making sure it's constitutional,"" said Senate Commerce and Labor Chairman Randolph Townsend, R-Reno. ""And that's not as easy as it sounds."" Townsend's comment just before his committee began working on SB253 was prophetic - witnesses kept bringing up the need for more flexibility in the measure. Translation: Don't kill all deals by stopping Reno-based Sierra Pacific Power and Las Vegas-based Nevada Power from selling their Nevada power plants until June 2003 - and possibly until 2006. Pete Ernaut, a lobbyist for Reliant Energy which has been trying to buy a power plant, said unforeseen market changes could make a plant sale before 2003 a deal that would be in the public's interest. ""If you put a two-year moratorium on these plants, all these deals are going to go away,"" he said. ""When the cow leaves the barn, it's difficult to catch."" Townsend had hoped to wrap up committee work on SB253 on Monday. Now it's up for review again Wednesday in the Commerce and Labor Committee. Reliant isn't the only company trying to keep power plant purchases alive. Earlier this month, executives of Pinnacle West Energy told the committee that it's in the public's interest to allow Sierra Pacific Resources to sell its Harry Allen power plant. The Harry Allen plant produces about 72 megawatts out of the 2,900 megawatts of energy that Nevada utilities generate. Pinnacle has plans to expand that to 700 megawatts by 2004. Other provisions not strictly related to the plant divestitures, such as ways in which Sierra Pacific and Nevada Power can recover the cost of undoing the sales contracts, don't have to be included in SB253, Townsend said. Townsend said the other concerns dealing with the energy crisis and utility deregulation can be handled in later bills - but the power plant sale issue must be handled now. Nevada's PUC and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission had directed Sierra Pacific and Nevada Power to sell the plants as a condition of the companies' merger in 1999 under the parent company Sierra Pacific Resources. Critics of the plant sales say the plants generate about half the state's electricity - and if they're sold, the unregulated new owners could sell the power to other states and put Nevada into the energy dilemma California faces of shrinking supply and rising prices. The Southern Nevada Water Authority has presented an analysis stating that rate payers will save from $1.7 billion to $3.5 billion by July 2001 if the power plant sales are stopped. Nevada's Consumer Advocate's Office previously had projected a conservative estimate of $915 million in savings. MAINE: Panel of experts would review impact of energy deregulation By GLENN ADAMS Associated Press Writer 03/19/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. AUGUSTA, Maine (AP) - In the wake of rolling blackouts in California and rate spikes in their home state, Maine's top legislators proposed a study Monday into the effects of deregulation of the energy industry. ""Deregulation of electricity is a new idea and we still have a lot to learn,"" Senate President Michael Michaud said as he called for the analysis. A panel of industry insiders, elected officials and consumers would study issues such as what standard rate consumers can expect and the likelihood of energy shortfalls over the next three years, and whether Maine consumers are vulnerable to anti-competitive activities. In addition, the Blue Ribbon Commission would look into whether changes in Maine's deregulation law are needed to encourage more generating capacity, improve conservation and spur competition. The study is being proposed as consumers remain mindful of a power crisis in California that resulted from high wholesale energy costs, a consumer rate cap and too few power plants in that deregulated state. Maine's deregulation law is designed to avoid such pitfalls, said Rep. William Savage, D-Buxton, House chairman of the Legislature's Utilities Committee. Maine's law does not cap consumer prices, as California's does, and the state has more than enough generating facilities to meet the state's energy needs, Savage said. Since Maine's deregulation law took effect in March 2000, Bangor Hydro-Electric Co. rates have increased 19 percent. The Public Utilities Commission approved a residential standard rate increase as recently as last month. Federal energy regulators are reviewing their decision to allow steep fee increases for utilities and power wholesalers that fail to arrange enough capacity to meet customers' peak load. Gov. Angus King and all four members of Maine's congressional delegation oppose the hike. The PUC has approved standard rate increases for energy delivered by Central Maine Power Co. to medium-sized and large industrial users. On the other hand, some towns and school districts are saving money on energy through deals they can get in the deregulated market. In the meantime, legislation has been introduced in response to some of the changes that have occurred in Maine's deregulated energy industry. One would use some of the money from the sale of power-generating assets to offset an increase in rates paid by large industrial users, said Sen. Norman Ferguson, R-Hanover, Senate chairman of the Utilities Committee. Supporters of the utility study that was proposed Monday said they are not looking to make changes in Maine's deregulation law, but if it needs fixing it could be done during next year's session. The lawmakers' primary interest is to find out how trends in a new environment designed to encourage competition will affect consumers, and to try to identify what consumers can expect in the few years ahead. House Speaker Michael Saxl, D-Portland, said the Legislature ""has a fundamental public policy interest in making sure rate-payers and businesses are protected against exorbitant rate hikes."" Michaud, D-East Millinocket, said he's interested in finding out how future changes in electric prices and availability might affect businesses and consumers in northern Maine. ""The economy in my part of the state is the most vulnerable, and I want to make certain we are leaving no stone unturned in our effort to prevent any shocks to the economy in northern, western and eastern Maine,"" Michaud added. The commission would include House and Senate members from each party, a utility executive, and representatives of energy producers, providers, a large commercial consumer and individual consumers. OREGON: State Senate moves to combat energy crisis 03/16/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. SALEM, Ore. (AP) - In an attempt to avoid a California-like energy crisis, the Oregon Senate approved a bill Friday that would quicken the process of siting power plants that use gas and renewable resources. ""It's important for Oregon. It makes sure that energy will be available to everyone,"" said Sen. Lee Beyer, D-Springfield. The measure, SB843, would shorten the siting process for power plants that use gas and renewable resources, like wind, from a year and a half to a matter of months. The speeded-up process would be in effect for two years. ""If we can act now, we can actually start to solve power supply problems by this summer,"" said Sen. Jason Atkinson, R-Jacksonville California's strict regulations on the construction of new power plants has contributed to its current shortage and legislators took note. Beyer said though California was definitely a wake-up call, the measure is a reaction to the larger power picture in the Northwest. With low rainfall, hydroelectric generators will have trouble meeting demand, Beyer said. Gas-fired and wind plants could come online as soon as this fall and would provide relief. ""We are not in a position to sit back and do nothing about the energy crisis the Northwest and the country are experiencing,"" said Senate Minority Leader Kate Brown, D-Portland. Conservationists, however, caution that lawmakers should be careful not to rush to provide power at the expense of environmental standards. WISCONSIN: Two utilities to add 975 megawatts in plan to avoid energy crisis By The Associated Press 03/22/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. Plans of two state utilities to add 975 megawatts to Wisconsin's electric power grid as a way of avoiding an energy crisis similar to California's were questioned Thursday by a consumer advocate who said too many power plants may be in the works. ""Certainly nobody wants to see blackouts like you have in California but there is the danger Wisconsin could be overbuilding,"" said Steve Hiniker, executive director of the Citizens' Utility Board, which represents consumer interests in utility rate cases. He noted that plant construction costs ultimately are born by the utility customers. Alliant Energy Corp. announced its proposal Wednesday - in a filing with the state Public Service Commission - to spend $1 billion to build one coal and two gas-fired power plants. Alliant has proposed building a 500 megawatt coal-fired plant and a 100 megawatt natural-gas fired plant by 2006. It also wants to build a 200 megawatt natural gas-fired facility in 2011. Wisconsin has not built a coal-fired plant in more than two decades. Alliant has not determined the plants' locations. Also, Madison Gas & Electric, the state's smallest investor-owned utility, said Wednesday that it had signed deals to buy 175 megawatts of power from three generating plants in Wisconsin and Illinois. ""Three out of the four past summers, we've had public appeals for conservation due to shortages somewhere in the state. We need to take steps to avoid that, and the California situation makes that even more clear,"" said Alliant spokesman Chris Schoenherr. ""Getting more iron in the ground will give us more flexibility in the state to be able to react."" Alliant acknowledged the new plants will probably mean rate increases, but it was too early to say how much rates would go up. California's problems, which this week resulted in the first deliberate blackouts since World War II, stemmed from underestimating the state's power needs, forcing utilities to sell their power plants but not allowing them to secure long-term supply contracts, and freezing rates, among other things. But Wisconsin's situation is far different. The state has moved slower than California toward deregulation, and there has been no desire here to speed up the process in recent years as power reliability became a problem. The PSC estimates that Wisconsin will need an additional 3,000 megawatts of power over the next decade. Hiniker said Wisconsin needs to coordinate its planning to avoid overbuilding. The costs of new power plants are passed on to ratepayers, meaning electric bills will increase as new generation is added. In addition, coal-generated power plants are a major source of air pollution in the state. ""We don't have the advance planning that has kept Wisconsin from overbuilding in the past,"" said Hiniker. ""This is something the PSC should be doing."" MG&E's deals are: -A 10-year contract to buy 75 megawatts from Calpine Energy Services starting in May 2004. The power will come from the natural gas-fired plant Rock River Energy Center, near Beloit. Calpine Energy Services is a unit of San Jose, Calif.-based Calpine Energy Corp. The plant is being built by Northbrook, Ill.-based SkyGen Energy LLC, which Calpine bought last year from SkyGen President Michael Polsky and Wisvest Corp., a unit of Wisconsin Energy Corp. -A 10-year contract to buy 50 megawatts of power from the Rainy River Energy Corp. starting in May 2002. The power is coming from a natural gas-fired plant near Joliet, Ill. owned by LS Power Co. Rainy River is a unit of Duluth-based Minnesota Power Inc. -A five-year contract to buy 50 megawatts from an El Paso Merchant Energy plant near Cordova, Ill., in western Illinois. The owner of the natural gas facility is the Cordova Energy Center Co., which is a unit of Iowa-based MidAmerican Energy Holdings. Alliant also offered support in the Wednesday filing for a $7 billion plan of Milwaukee-based Wisconsin Energy, which includes five new power plants in Oak Creek and Pleasant Prairie. -- On the Net: CUB: http://www.wiscub.org/ Alliant Energy: http://www.alliant-energy.com Wisconsin Public Service Commission: http://www.psc.state.wi.us Wisconsin Energy: http://www.wisenergy.com/ Madison Gas & Electric: http://www.mge.com Use this file to download and print all the articles in this section (See attached file: Dow Jones If you wish to be removed from the distribution list for this update please contact Pru Sheppard - DC. All recipients of this message have been Bcc'd as part of industry best practice for broadcast emails. | This message may contain confidential and/or privileged | | information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to | | receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, | | disclose or take any action based on this message or any | | information herein. If you have received this message in | | error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail | | and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. | - Dow Jones - pic24389.pcx - pic05075.pcx - Dow Jones [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Issues with Exotica Library; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Rajan, Karthik Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 6:39 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J; Yang, Sean; Stock, Steve Subject: RE: Issues with Exotica Library Vince/Sean, I will talk to you Zimin/ Tom tonight at their home number and get the passwords as well as the security feature. I will drop by your (Sean) desk first thing tomorrow. Sorry for the delay. Karthik. -----Original Message----- From: Kaminski, Vince J Sent: Mon 1/28/2002 11:27 AM To: Yang, Sean; Rajan, Karthik; Stock, Steve Cc: Subject: Re: Issues with Exotica Library Karthik, If you cannot find the answer, please call Zimin. I shall call him at home tonight as well. Vince kaminski [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: 2001 budget; [EMail-Body]= I do support the change. Let me know what I can do to help. You are correct: this is the way we handle regulatory counsel in other regions, particularly the US. What Derrick and I have agreed with regard to counsel selection is: gov't/reg affairs picks the counsel we want to use and he retains a veto, which has rarely if ever been exercised. Once we have retained counsel we will use that counsel on other regulatory projects unless the legal department starts to have a problem with the firm (eg because they represent someone against us in litigation). Again, I don't recall this ever being an issue. It seems to work: outside counsel gets the message that we will look dimly on any firm that squares off against us and we select the most qualified counsel on our issues. Mark Schroeder@ECT 09/01/2000 06:18 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: 2001 budget You should be receiving today a copy of my draft budget proposed for Enron Europe for 2001. I understand from Nick that they are doing their own budget for Enron Japan, which I will see only after the fact. MOST IMPORTANTLY, you will see that I am budgetting to pay a substantial sum for legal fees. I will be proposing to John Sherriff, Michael Brown (our new COO and former General Counsel, which will make my proposal doubly problematic), and to Mark Evans (current General Counsel) that I pay/manage our outside regulatory counsel. We can discuss (rather than do a lengthy e-mail), but having this function managed by Legal (and Houston/Jim Derrick rejecting our choice of counsel in important cases), is increasingly a problem. I believe this will mirror what you do in the USA, e.g., Dan Watkiss, and hope that I can count on your support for this change. thansk mcs [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Priviliged and Confidential communication to my attorney Re:
 Henry Bath LA; [EMail-Body]= Privileged and Confidential This email contains legal advice Hoyt and Melissa, I am assuming that we are discussing contract personnel who provide some sort of services for MG/RW. It looks like there may be some key personnel we want to employ, but that there are many whom we don't want to hire. I am not really familiar with the specific facts here. The question of a joint employer arises when a company treats its contract personnel like its own -- by setting compensation, controlling their activities, engaging in etc. decisions, and other ways in which an employer treats its own employees. So, if the plan is to have workers doing the same thing, with one as a contractor, and one as an employee, there could be some issues, particularly if they share a supervisor. Unfortunately, that often is the case with contract personnel. If there are distinctions among the various responsibilities of these workers -- and like workers are treated similarly -- the risk may be reduced. It is cleanest, however, to use all of these workers through the contracting agency for a while (assume we don't want to hire them all, which is the other alternative). Then, the company may want to make selected offers to people who may be in a managerial role or have some other distinction from the bulk of the contract workers. I would like additional information on this situation before reaching a definitive conclusion. So, let's try to discuss it. I am booked until about 11 this morning, but am available after that. Michelle Hoyt Thomas@ENRON 08/08/2000 04:21 PM To: Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Melissa Laing/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Priviliged and Confidential communication to my attorney Re: Henry Bath LA Michelle, I guess emails will get to you sooner if I remember to add you to the addressee list! Sorry. Hoyt ---------------------- Forwarded by Hoyt Thomas/NA/Enron on 08/08/2000 04:20 PM --------------------------- Hoyt Thomas 08/08/2000 02:01 PM To: Melissa Laing/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Priviliged and Confidential communication to my attorney Re: Henry Bath LA Melissa, my concern is that we may get hit with what is called a ""co-employment suit"" in the US. This is where an agency employee claims that he/she was treated like an employee, therefore he/she should get employee benefits (vs. benefits from the agency company, which are probably weak). Since we did a share purchase of MG, if the agency employees filed a suit against MG claiming that they are really employees, I think that we would have to defend it. I am not an attorney, but I am going to send this to Michelle Cash, who can advise us on the position we should take. I would think that if we single out certain employees to become Enron employees and the remainder stay as agency employees, this would enhance the legal position of the agency employees (versus everyone staying as an agency employee). Michelle, can you help us with this one? Thanks. Melissa, I also think we should minimize distribution on this discussion . . . Enron Europe From: Melissa Laing @ ECT 08/08/2000 10:57 AM To: Hoyt Thomas/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Jeanie Slone/LON/ECT@ECT, Melanie Doyle/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Henry Bath LA Hi Hoyt, I have today spoken to Ed Dablin regarding Henry Bath LA. We discussed how the employees seem to feel that they are Enron employees, although they are infact agency workers. Ed confirmed that Martha and half a dozen other employees quite clearly should become Enron employees and should get applicable benefits. The other employees (who are mainly manual employees) he does not feel should become Enron employees and should remain as agency staff. He realises that the original granting of Share Options has slightly ""muddied the water"" with regard to whether these employees are employees of Enron or the agency. He was not involved with the original decision to grant these employees Share Options. We discussed the issues (in broad terms, as I could not remember all of the specific issues) and he is aware that making a limited number of individuals Enron employees, whilst the others remain agency workers, is not an easy thing to do. However, this is his ideal scenario. How viable is it that we can do this for him? He also made the point that Martha is the most senior executive in Henry Bath Inc. and is one of his most valuable employees. Regards Melissa [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Condor Website; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 10/15/99 07:24 AM --------------------------- Mary McCann@ENRON 10/14/99 06:53 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Condor Website Thank you for your suggestions during our phone conversation the other day. We took each into consideration when completing the ""Condor Information"" website. As of this afternoon, the website is up and running. You can access it at We are also planning to send the letter we discussed out beginning today. If you have questions, please contact me. Kind regards, Mary M. McCann Manager, Corporate Communications Enron Wind Corp. 13000 Jameson Road Tehachapi, CA 93561 Phone: (661) 823-6732 Fax: (661) 823-6464 E-Mail: mmcann@enron.com Website: www.wind.enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: ORG CHART; [EMail-Body]= I do not. Enron Energy Services From: Deborah DeFforge 07/18/2000 08:34 AM Phone No: 713.853.9474 713.646.2621 - Facsimile EB1293 To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: ORG CHART Do either of you have an updated org chart depicting EES, ENA and EBS? Thank you! d2 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Information and Securities Trading; [EMail-Body]= To:GILBERT-SMITH, DOUGLAS - 7138539310 Enron Wholesale Services - Office of the Chairman From: Mark Frevert, Chairman & CEO Mark Haedicke, Managing Director & General Counsel Subject: Confidential Information and Securities Trading To keep pace with the fluid and fast-changing demands of our equity trading activities, Enron Wholesale Services (""EWS"") has recently revised its official Policies and Procedures Regarding Confidential Information and Securities Trading (""Policies and Procedures""). These revisions reflect two major developments: (1) our equity trading activities have been extended into the United Kingdom, and (2) in an effort to streamline the information flow process, the ""Review Team"" will play a more centralized role, so that the role of the ""Resource Group"" is no longer necessary.You are required to become familiar with, and to comply with, the Policies and Procedures. The newly revised Policies and Procedures are available for your review on LegalOnline, the new intranet website maintained by the Enron Wholesale Services Legal Department. Please click on the attached link to access LegalOnline: If you have already certified compliance with the Policies and Procedures during the 2001 calendar year, you need not re-certify at this time, although you are still required to to review and become familiar with the revised Policies and Procedures. If you have not certified compliance with the Policies and Procedures during the 2001 calendar year, then you must do so within two weeks of your receipt of this message. The LegalOnline site will allow you to quickly and conveniently certify your compliance on-line with your SAP Personal ID number. If you have any questions concerning the Policies or Procedures, please call Bob Bruce at extension 5-7780 or Donna Lowry at extension 3-1939. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron Mentions; [EMail-Body]= Please forward to Advisory Committee ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/20/2000 09:47 AM ----- Ann M Schmidt 09/18/2000 08:59 AM To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Meredith Philipp/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mary Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Enron Mentions Manager's Journal: Heir to Greatness By Gary Hamel 09/18/2000 The Wall Street Journal A38 (Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) Sometime in the next few months, the board of General Electric will anoint a successor to the world's most celebrated corporate leader. Running GE may be, as Jack Welch claims, the best job in the world, but his successor may find it to be one of the toughest as well -- not because anything is going wrong at GE, but because so much is going right, and has been for so long. Mr. Welch's successor will inherit a company that is already stupendously valuable, that has already shed most of its unwanted pounds, and has already set a string of performance records. How do you do better than that? This is more than a rhetorical question for GE's next chairman. Pity, for a moment, a few other heirs to greatness. Doug Ivester was gone just 25 months after following the legendary Roberto Goizueta at Coca-Cola. Dale Morrison lasted less than four years at Campbell Soup after taking over from cost-cutter extraordinaire David Johnson. British Airway's Bob Ayling got pushed out after he had struggled unsuccessfully to fill the shoes of Colin Marshall. And Durk Jager prematurely stepped down as Procter & Gamble's chairman after failing to live up to the lofty standards set by earlier P&G leaders. Pretenders None of the pretenders succeeded in building greatness on top of greatness. In three of these cases, the board brought back a recently retired CEO or chairman to shore up investor confidence. Sadly, Goizueta, who died in October 1997, could not reprise his earlier success at Coca-Cola. GE's next chairman will have to exceed Mr. Welch's near-mythic accomplishments if GE is to continue to fly high. Like Cisco, Intel, Wal-Mart, Nokia and any other company that is exploring the outer atmosphere, GE must struggle ever harder to resist the laws that threaten to flatten the arc of success: the law of large numbers, the law of diminishing returns, and the law of averages. -- The law of large numbers: Over the past decade GE's market value has multiplied eleven-fold -- to more than $560 billion from $50 billion at the end of 1990. Sustaining such a breathtaking pace of value growth gets progressively harder as a company gets bigger. As the most valuable company on the planet, GE would need to grow its market cap to nearly $3 trillion over the next five years to match the 42% compounded annual growth rate it has achieved over the past half-decade. One way of escaping the law of large numbers is to divide big things into small things. One option for GE would be to spin out its low-growth businesses as separate companies. Over the past five years, profits in two sectors -- appliances and plastics -- were essentially flat. Holding these businesses may generate a positive return on invested capital, but no investor would keep them inside a growth portfolio. Why should GE? If GE's next chairman can't muster the courage to leave the dawdlers behind, perhaps he -- or she -- should spin out the stars. Of the eight large business segments for which GE reports results, two -- GE Capital and NBC -- account for nearly 50% of GE's five-year profit growth. Sure, GE Capital has benefited from its parent's dirt-cheap cost of capital, but from an investor's point of view, these advantages may be more than offset by the drag of laggardly earnings growth in other GE businesses. Looking beyond capital and broadcasting, there are probably a dozen other high-growth candidates for spin-outs in GE's other sectors. Mr. Welch's successor shouldn't be afraid to disassemble GE. After all, the goal is not to make GE the ""world's most valuable company,"" but to make its shareholders the world's most richly rewarded. Shareholders don't care whether GE's stock appreciates or whether it's the stock of companies that GE has disgorged. Breaking up is hard to do. But Mr. Welch's successor may find that turning GE into the world's first $3 trillion company is even harder. -- The law of diminishing returns: Even the most successful strategies lose their potency over time. For most of Mr. Welch's tenure, GE's strategies of choice have been cost cutting and acquisitions. From its unflinching approach to downsizing in the mid-1980s, to its more recent dedication to e-business, Mr. Welch's GE has been imaginative and unrelenting in excising waste. At the same time, GE's top line has been buoyed up by a tidal wave of acquisitions -- more than 300 in the past three years, many outside the U.S. The payoff to all this cutting and deal making has been steadily accelerating earnings growth. Net earnings grew 10.8% in 1996, 12.7% in 1997, 13.3% in 1998 and 15.3% in 1999. Looking forward, power dieting and binge buying may not be enough to keep GE's earnings escalator rising ever skyward. There are already signs that GE may be nearing the asymptotic end of the efficiency curve. Between 1981 and 1990, GE's revenue per employee increased by 187%. Yet over the last decade, revenue per employee grew by a more modest 55%, and has been essentially flat since 1996. And while operating margins in GE's manufacturing businesses have been steadily improving, GE's net profit margin, after all adjustments, has remained pretty much unchanged over the past five years. What about acquisitions? While industry consolidation still has a way to run, particularly outside the U.S., it seems inevitable that it will become harder and harder for GE to find under-priced, under-managed fixer-uppers. After all, at the current furious pace of corporate coupling, the U.S. would be left with a single company by 2010. That leaves ""e."" E-commerce will drive new efficiencies into GE's business processes, but GE is not alone in striving to e-enable its businesses. E-commerce is rapidly becoming an information technology arms race -- with competitors making tit-for-tat investments to reap tit-for-tat efficiency gains. And while efficiency-besotted CEOs are counting on the Internet to shrink procurement costs, savvy customers will be just as creative in using the Net to beat down prices. Whether GE's enthusiasm for all things ""e"" produces long-lasting, peer-beating profit growth remains to be seen. GE's next chairman may want to borrow a lesson or two from Enron, which has been voted America's most innovative company five years running and displaced GE as the ""best managed company"" in Fortune magazine's last ""most admired"" survey. Forty percent of Enron's $63 billion market value comes from businesses the company wasn't even in three years ago -- all of them are homegrown. Forget acquisitions. With GE's powerful brand, global reach and fearsome capacity for execution, there's no reason GE shouldn't surpass Enron as a business-building champ. It is entirely reasonable to expect that GE could create 10 to 20 new businesses over the next few years -- with each adding an average of $5 billion to GE's market value. Sooner or later GE is going to need an entirely new genre of wealth-creating strategies -- and a much more aggressive commitment to internally generated new business development may well be the most promising candidate. -- The law of averages: Over the past five years, GE's price/earnings ratio has tripled, from just over 16 to more than 48. The company is currently selling at a 65% premium to the market average P/E. But being a standout performer for more than a few years at a time is a daunting challenge for any company, large or small. It seems that no company can forever escape the steady tug of mediocrity. At the end of 1999, the Standard & Poor's 500 included 326 companies that had been in the index for the entire decade. Fifty-five of these companies, among them GE, managed to deliver top quartile shareholder returns in as many as four years out of the previous 10. GE's top quartile results came in 1996, 1997, 1998 and 1999. If GE's new chairman manages to extend this streak for another four years, GE will set a new world record, for none of the 326 S&P veterans achieved top quartile returns in as many as eight years out of 10 during the '90s, and only four companies -- Oracle, Home Depot, Intel and Cisco -- cleared the bar seven years out of 10. If GE can fire up the entrepreneurial spirit in each of its employees, it just might beat the odds. Like most large companies, GE seems to be reluctant to encourage employees to start new businesses by giving them equity stakes in new ventures. While this isn't the only way to build businesses, it's one that can't be ignored in a world where talented employees are often lured away by the promise of a big chunk of equity in a start-up. GE already invests in start-ups via GE Equity -- to the tune of $1.5 billion in 1999. Last year GE also repurchased $1.9 billion of its own stock. One wonders just what kind of new wealth GE's own employees might have been able to create if they had been backed by this kind of capital? To have any hope of escaping Mr. Welch's shadow, and matching his success, GE's next chairman will have to keep a simple truth in mind: If you're trying to achieve unprecedented ends, you're going to need unprecedented means. A break-up, a few major spin-outs, a bottom-to-top initiative focused on making GE as good at creating bold new businesses as it is at improving existing businesses, an absolute commitment to doubling or tripling GE's internal growth rate -- these are all potential candidates for the next big thing at GE. Maybe, just maybe, GE will continue to fly high with its current success recipes. One could argue that as long as there are companies around the world that aren't as well-managed as GE, Mr. Welch's magnificent buy-and-improve engine will have plenty of fuel. Or that GE's Web-smitten executives will discover Net advantages no one else has yet dreamed of. After 20 years under Mr. Welch, GE is habituated to meeting new challenges. Moreover, GE has a long history of organizational and managerial innovation -- it was among the first to decentralize along business unit lines, embrace disciplined strategic planning, delayer its hierarchical organization, and commit itself to becoming Webified from stem to stern. Like the Internet, GE is diverse, global, flat, meritocratic and non-hierarchical. Maybe all of this will help GE to become one of the first companies to marry the rule-busting, business-building ethos of the ""new economy"" with the ""old economy"" virtues of scale, efficiency and quality. If GE succeeds, there will be no more talk of new economy and old economy, for GE will have managed to create a perfect synthesis of old and new. And the most perfectly developed specimen of the industrial age will have become the archetype for the post-industrial corporation -- a company that uses its size and operational excellence to crush the upstarts, and its industry-transforming innovation to constantly surprise the old farts. This is a worthy, and necessary, aspiration for the next leader of America's pre-eminent corporation. Mr. Hamel is chairman of Strategos, a consulting company based in Menlo Park, Calif. He is author of ""Leading the Revolution"" (Harvard Business School Press, 2000). Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Spiraling energy costs creating near-crisis situation The heat is on consumers Monday, September 17, 2000 By DAVID IVANOVICH Copyright 2000 Houston Chronicle Washington Bureau Abreast of the Market S&P Index Seemed Tranquil This Year, but... By E.S. Browning Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal 09/18/2000 The Wall Street Journal C1 (Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) Amid the storm that has swept the Nasdaq Composite Index this year, the Standard & Poor's 500-stock index looks like a sea of tranquility. Since Jan. 1, it has gone almost exactly nowhere, starting the year at 1469.25 and closing Friday at 1465.81. But beneath the quiet surface, a furious battle is raging among the S&P's components, with some of last year's losers becoming this year's winners. Some of the most amazing performers are the natural-gas companies, which are up about 70% as a group so far this year. ""The natural-gas index looks like an Internet stock from a year ago,"" says Richard Bernstein, chief quantitative strategist at Merrill Lynch. El Paso Energy is up 70% so far this year. KeySpan Energy is up almost 60%. On top of its stock gain, KeySpan offers something some investors aren't familiar with: a 5% dividend. Now the big question is, should investors be plowing their money into the recent winners, which also include drug stocks, brokerage-firm stocks and bank stocks? Or is their surge a flash in the pan that will evaporate as investors get over their jitters in the fall? Higher oil prices helped send utility stocks up on Friday, and most other stocks down. The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 1.45%, or 160.47 points, to 10927.00, leaving the blue-chip index down 2.62%, or 293.65 points, for the week. The Nasdaq Composite Index was down 2.01% on the day and 3.6% on the week. The Dow Jones Utility Average, however, rose 1.52%, or 5.94 points, on Friday to a record 397.04, leaving it up 2.78% on the week. The S&P 500, still the broadest of the major market indexes, dropped 1% on Friday. But it is just 4% off its record of 1527.46, set March 24. In contrast, the technology-heavy Nasdaq index is down 24% from its March 10 high. Within the S&P 500, though, there have been some dramatic moves. Utilities are up an astounding 40%, just in the time since the S&P peaked on March 24, according to Ned Davis Research. Financials and drug stocks are up about 16% each -- again, since the S&P hit a record. Communications stocks, on the other hand, have fallen 25% in that period. The S&P 500's big tech stocks are down more than 19%. Some analysts think the move that is under way is broader than a sector rotation. Some of the least-wanted stocks of 1999 have become desirable this year. As huge stocks, such as Qualcomm and Yahoo!, have sagged, smaller, once-neglected S&P companies, such as Reebok and Allied Waste, have soared. The switch can be seen in an index called the Value Line Arithmetic Index. That index tracks about 1,700 companies and doesn't give any extra weight to the ones with a larger market value. It is a closer reflection of the average company, rather than the biggest companies. So far this year, it is up 13%, eclipsing the S&P 500. The S&P 500 is weighted according to its members' market value, which means that it is dominated by the larger stocks. The Value Line index's strength compared with the S&P 500 is a clear indication that some of the smaller stocks are making a comeback, at least for now. Some of the gains do seem to reflect special circumstances. Utilities have been helped by an explosion in natural-gas prices and by a search for stable investments in a turbulent stock market. Many banks and brokerage firms have benefited from takeover speculation: Merrill Lynch is up 66% so far this year; Lehman Brothers is up 69%. If takeover expectations fade, the brokerage stocks risk a slide. And energy companies depend on oil and gas prices, which can make them volatile. Natural-gas bulls note, however, that natural-gas prices are expected to remain high for some time, which could keep propelling that group ahead. ""Very few people thought energy prices would remain this high for as long as they have,"" notes Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette investment strategist Thomas Galvin. ""So you still have people underweighted both areas, energy and utilities."" That means that there still are plenty of skeptics out there. If gas prices stay high, the stocks have room to rise as skeptics are won over. But the real trick during the coming months may not be to be in the right sector, but to be in the right stock, both men say. At a time when the economy is slowing and earnings growth will be more difficult, ""you probably want higher-quality stocks, because they have more stable earnings,"" Mr. Bernstein says. When tech stocks or utility stocks are in favor, it is enough to buy a stock from the group and your stock will go up. Now investors need to be more selective. ""El Paso and Duke Energy are extremely well managed,"" says Mr. Galvin, ""as is Enron. But the rising tide in utilities has lifted all boats, and not all utilities are well enough managed to take advantage of all opportunities."" The key is choosing the stocks that will withstand the more difficult times to come, and that won't be easy. People who bought Intel or Oracle at the start of this year probably feel as if it wasn't that bad a year for tech. Both, despite a recent sag, still are up almost 40% this year. Those who chose Microsoft or Dell, however, took a bath: Microsoft is down 45% since the year began, and Dell is down almost 30%. Mr. Galvin thinks tech stocks will stage a fourth-quarter rally, as investors look for companies that can continue to build profits in a slowing economy. He points out that analysts expect tech to post 38% earnings growth next year, only a bit less than this year's 41%. But benefiting from any rally would require picking the stocks that will have the good earnings. Another way of looking at the uncertain future, says Bob Bissell, president of Wells Capital Management, is that there could be some unexpected events. Companies whose stock prices have fallen could be acquired, or forced to restructure, which could provide a payoff for investors. ""I am thinking of companies like AT&T,"" he says. ""Something has got to give there. The stock is down to the low 30s,"" 47% down from its 52-week high of 61. ""Something has got to happen. Do you fragment the company?"" He also points to midcap stocks, another of the year's strongest performers. ""I call the category `the forgotten prince,' "" he says. The S&P Midcap 400 index is doing even better than the Value Line index, up 22% since the year began. Some midcap companies deserve to be forgotten, of course. But the index also contains some smaller banks that could be takeover targets, and it has some fast-growing tech companies too. ""It is getting stronger as the technological revolution moves companies rapidly from smallcap to midcap,"" Mr. Bissell says. --- Friday's Market Activity Soaring energy prices knocked market averages sharply lower. American Express lost $1.50 to $59.31, Chase Manhattan dropped 1.66 to 49, and General Electric, which has an exposure to the group through its financial-services operations, gave up 2.13 to 56.69. The group also suffered from a cooling in takeover speculation. Lehman Brothers, for example, fell 8 to 142.50, Goldman Sachs lost 4.25 to 124.75 and Bear Stearns gave up 4.75 to 65. Higher oil prices helped Exxon Mobil rise 3.60 to 88.88. It reached a 52-week high, its first since Dec. 9, while Amerada Hess climbed 4.56 to 73.25, and touched a 52-week high of its own. Database software company Oracle (Nasdaq) fell 6.63 to 78.31, with 60 million shares changing hands. Despite Oracle's announcement of strong quarterly earnings Thursday after the end of normal trading, some analysts said they were disappointed with the company's revenue growth. Siebel Systems (Nasdaq), an Oracle competitor, added 4.19 to 99. However, i2 Technologies fell 3.69 to 172.19, while Ariba lost 5.13 to 152.44, both on Nasdaq. Red Hat (Nasdaq) lost 4.06 to 21.19. The Research Triangle Park, N.C., developer of open-source software products posted a narrower-than-expected second-quarter loss, but left some analysts disappointed. Avon Products eased 50 cents to 41.19. The New York beauty-products marketing concern said late Thursday the Securities and Exchange Commission is investigating a $10 million charge the company took in 1999 related to the write-off of computer software. Adobe Systems (Nasdaq) moved up 7.25 to 132.63. The San Jose, Calif., software developer reported fiscal third-quarter earnings that topped forecasts. Maytag fell 2.19 to 33.63, after the Newton, Iowa, home-appliance maker warned about second-half earnings. Ivax rose 2.38 to 43.63. The Miami pharmaceutical maker received final approved from the Food and Drug Administration for its generic equivalent of Bristol-Myers Squibb's cancer drug Taxol. Carnival Corp. gained 1.75 to 22.88, while rival Royal Caribbean Cruises advanced 1.75 to 24.50. The stocks rose on hopes that the withdrawal from the market of a smaller competitor will ease excess capacity. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Politics & Policy The Homestretch By Gerald F. Seib 09/18/2000 The Wall Street Journal A40 (Copyright (c) 2000, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) The Gore and Bush campaigns will argue over which did better in the debate over debates, but one winner is clear: PBS news anchor Jim Lehrer. Not only will he moderate all three presidential debates sponsored by the bipartisan Commission on Presidential Debates, but, under an agreement completed over the weekend, he will do so under rules giving him more flexibility than ever before. He will be free to bore in on a specific subject and extend discussion of it, rather than simply move on to other questions as in the past. Under the debate agreement, the two candidates will stand behind lecterns at the opening debate Oct. 3, sit around a table in talk-show fashion on Oct. 11, and debate in a town-hall format on Oct. 17. In other campaign developments: -- Housing policy? In the closest thing yet to a campaign debate on housing issues, the Republican party's Web site is trying to entice listeners to dial in to radio talk shows and charge that Democrats are running ""The Slumlord Ticket."" Why? On top of a recent controversy over complaints by tenants of a rental house in Tennessee owned by Vice President Gore, the Web site touts the story of a similar headache now faced by running mate Joseph Lieberman. An immigrant mother was evicted when she was injured and fell behind in rent payments at a property owned by the estate of Mr. Lieberman's wealthy late uncle; Mr. Lieberman is executor of the estate. -- A fish story: To the list of the perils of holding public office, now add the danger of flying fish. Just ask Rep. Helen Chenoweth-Hage, an Idaho Republican, who was pelted with rotting salmon thrown by a 20-year-old protester at a hearing on Western wildfires held in Montana over the weekend. The protester cried out that the conservative congresswoman is ""the greatest threat to the forest"" and uncorked the salmon. She wasn't hurt, but the Associated Press reports that ""the hearing was recessed while she cleaned salmon from her hair and jacket."" --- Money Watch Top ""double givers"" -- donors of soft money to both parties In millions DONOR DEMOCRATS REPUBLICANS TOTAL AT&T $1.1 $1.8 $2.9 Microsoft 0.8 1.0 1.8 Enron 0.4 1.2 1.7 Freddie Mac 0.6 1.0 1.5 Philip Morris 0.2 1.4 1.5 SBC Comm. 0.7 0.5 1.2 America Online 0.6 0.6 1.2 Source: Common Cause Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. GE Tops Fortune's Ranking of the World's Most Admired Companies; Key To Staying Ahead of the Pack Is Innovation 09/18/2000 Business Wire (Copyright (c) 2000, Business Wire) NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sept. 18, 2000--For the third straight year, General Electric, on the strength of its management team and innovative global strategy, is No. 1 on FORTUNE's ranking of the most admired companies in the world. FORTUNE's third annual list of Global Most Admired Companies consists of 379 companies in 27 industries, with 25 selected as ""all-stars"" for exemplifying leadership on a global scale. Cisco Systems came in at No. 2 on the all-star ranking (up from No. 8 in 1999); other repeat performers in the top ten include Microsoft, whose battles with government regulators on one flank and perceptions of a foundering Internet strategy on the other caused it to slip to No. 3 from No. 2; Intel (No.4); and Wal-Mart Stores, which moved up to No. 5 from No. 7. The complete list of FORTUNE's Global Most Admired Companies appears in the October 2 issue of FORTUNE and is available at www.fortune.com as of Monday, Sept.18, at 8:30 a.m. According to Nicholas Stein's article, ""The World's Most Admired Companies,"" the schizophrenic market conditions of the past year offer one reason why the Most Admired list looks so different this year. As Stein writes: ""The winners are companies that demonstrated a new-economy style growth strategy while maintaining an old-economy approach to fiscal responsibility."" And, as Vicki Wright, global managing director of the Hay Group consultancy that helped produce the list with FORTUNE notes: ""There is something new this year in how we perceive companies. It is the emphasis on how much companies are capable of looking forward. In a year when old-economy companies have not seen their share price perform, those that have managed to weather both the old- and new-economy storms will flourish."" Notable changes among this year's Global Most Admired list include Home Depot leaping from No. 20 to No. 9, Toyota moving up from No. 16 to No. 10, and Citgroup advancing from No. 25 to No. 18. Strong demand for Sony's flat-screen TVs, digital cameras, and PlayStation game consoles helped the company move up from 14 to 6. Newcomers to this year's list -- Enron, Nokia, Charles Schwab, UPS, and Goldman Sachs -- all embody business strategies that bridge the old and new economic worlds. Companies that lost their all-star status -- IBM, Hewlett-Packard, AT&T, Procter & Gamble, DaimlerChrysler -- have been plagued with difficulties integrating new business concepts. Many of the industry categories also experienced significant turnover. Among airline companies, Singapore Airlines, which didn't even make last year's list, took the top spot from Southwest. British Airways, hobbled by internal conflict and heightened competition, fell from third to seventh. Though Intel held on to the top ranking in the computer hardware and software category, Sun Microsystems rode the dot-com revolution to second place, up from sixth last year, while Dell, facing a wireless (and PC-less) future, fell from fifth to eighth. And in the white-hot network communications and Internet technology sector, all-star newcomer Nokia edged Cisco Systems for top billing. To find out what unique management qualities set these companies apart from their peers, the Hay Group surveyed the Most Admired Companies and their less admired peers about the performance measures they use to chart the progress of their companies. According to their findings, Most Admired companies set more challenging goals, link the compensation of their executives more closely to the completion of those goals, and are generally more oriented toward long-term performance. To complete the list of the world's most admired companies, FORTUNE consulted the experts: the business executives who run companies, and the analysts who study them. Global companies were rated according to eight criteria: quality of management; quality of products or services; innovativeness; long-term investment value; financial soundness; ability to attract, develop and retain talent; community responsibility; and use of corporate assets. To reflect this list's international scope, a ninth category was added: global business acumen. A company's overall ranking is the average of the scores of all nine attributes. Companies are ranked within their industry, and the top 25 -- the All-Stars -- are culled from across all industry groups. The October 2 issue is available on newsstands beginning September 25. For more information, or to schedule an interview with a FORTUNE writer or editor, contact Nyssa Tussing at 212/522-6724. The 2000 FORTUNE Global Most Admired All-Stars 2000/1999 Company Industry Rank 1/1 General Electric Electronics, electrical equipment 2/8 Cisco Systems Network Commun., Internet Tech. 3/2 Microsoft Computer hardware, software 4/4 Intel Computer hardware, software 5/7 Wal-Mart Stores Retail: general, specialty 6/14 Sony Electronics, electrical equipment 7/9 Dell Computer Computer hardware, software 8/NR Nokia Network Commun., Internet Tech 9/20 Home Depot Retail: general, specialty 10/16 Toyota Motor Motor vehicles 11/22 Southwest Airlines Airlines 12/11 Lucent Technologies Network Commun., Internet Tech. 13/NR Goldman Sachs Securities, diversified financials 14/5 Berkshire Hathaway Insurance: property, casualty 15/3 Coca-Cola Beverages 16/NR Charles Schwab Securities, diversified financials 17/17 Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceuticals 18/25 Citigroup Securities, diversified financials 19/15 Ford Motor Motor vehicles 20/13 Pfizer Pharmaceuticals 21/10 Merck Pharmaceuticals 22/21 Walt Disney Entertainment 23/19 American Express Securities, diversified financials 24/NR United Parcel Service Mail, pkg., freight delivery 25/NR Enron Energy transmission providers NR = not ranked in 1999 CONTACT: FORTUNE, New York Nyssa Tussing, 212/522-6724 08:33 EDT SEPTEMBER 18, 2000 Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: ticket; [EMail-Body]= What are the hours for Conti vs. Air France? I am the ofice for another 45 minutes. Your phone number? Vince -----Original Message----- From: Urszula Sobczyk <urszula@pacbell.net>@ENRON Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 5:56 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Re: ticket Dzien Dobry ponownie, Na wszystkie te polaczenia ceny wychodzi ok. $1700.00. Jedyne co to wylot 04 lipca z IAH przez Chicago do Warszawy - LOT, powrot 09 lipca, Warszawa - JFK, JFK przez DFW (Dallas) do Houston. Cena wychodz $1107.10. Bardzo prosze o kontakt. Urszula Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com wrote: > Another question. What about a Continental flight to Amsterdam and from > Amsterdam to Warsaw? > > I can also fly Continental through Rome or London, as long as I don't have > to change airports. > > Vince > > -----Original Message----- > From: Urszula Sobczyk <urszula@pacbell.net>@ENRON > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 1:50 PM > To: vkamins@enron.com > Subject: re: ticket > > Dzien dobry Panu, > Na wylot 04 lipca z IAH do Warszawy i powrot 09 lipca (8 lipca nie bylo > miejsca) cena wynosi $1680.26. > Bardzo prosze o kontakt czy jest Pan zainteresowany. > Pozdrawiam, > Urszula [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Your advice on Saybrook Letter; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 02/28/2001 02:39 PM ----- Michael Tribolet/ENRON@enronXgate 02/24/2001 08:07 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: FW: Your advice on Saybrook Letter FYI: -----Original Message----- From: Gary Ackerman <foothill@lmi.net>@ENRON com] Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 8:28 PM To: Tribolet, Michael Subject: Your advice on Saybrook Letter Michael, I received today the attached letter from Jonathon Rosenthal of Saybrook Capital. Based on the conversation you and I had yesterday, I think that a proper counter proposal would be to meet in LA, organize a credit committee, and instruct Saybrook to seek funding from PG&E and SCE. But, I would be interested in hearing your thoughts. gba - WPTF jmw_.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Mr. Lay is being honored by the Houston Rotary Club as Citizen of
 the Year.  You are invited to attend luncheon.  Vanessa Groscrand will
 follow up with details.; [EMail-Body]= Junior League, by the Ritz, starts at 12:00, there's an Enron table, buffet line. Parking garage is adjacent to the Junior League. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Proposed Ad for the Ontario Market; [EMail-Body]= looks good. Rosie, you may want to include this in ken's file for the toronto trip Eric Thode 03/16/2001 08:56 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Proposed Ad for the Ontario Market I sent this to Rick Shapiro and Mark Palmer as well. This is an ad created for use in the Ontario market and would include the logos of the signatory companies (rather than individual signatures).Aleck Dadson worked with GPC on its creation. It is part of the total plan, which includes Ken Lay's visit to Toronto April 4 to meet with media and government leaders. Give me your thoughts. Eric ---------------------- Forwarded by Eric Thode/Corp/Enron on 03/16/2001 08:42 AM --------------------------- ""Jacob, Sasha"" <SJacob@GPC.CA> on 03/15/2001 02:23:24 PM To: ""'eric.thode@enron.com'"" <eric.thode@enron.com> cc: Subject: Proposed Ad Eric: As requested by Aleck Dadson, please find attached a copy of an open letter to the Premier of Ontario which we are proposing be placed as an ad in the National Post and the Globe & Mail next week. It is our intention to have the letter signed by a group of energy stakeholders including Enron, TransAlta, ATCO, Toronto Hydro, Mississauga Hydro, Dynegy, The Toronto Board of Trade, The Ontario Chamber of Commerce, the Independent Power Producers Society of Ontario, etc. <<Open Letter.doc>> Sasha Jacob GPC International sjacob@gpc.ca Ph: (416) 598-0055 Fx: (416) 598-3811 www.gpcinternational.com This email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses Ce courrier a fait l'objet d'un balayage antivirus au moyen du logiciel MIMEsweeper - Open Letter.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= SPEC SR PUBLIC RELATIONS, Job Code #0000109017; [EMail-Body]= Molly, Do you know who has posted this ad: SPEC SR PUBLIC RELATIONS, Job Code #0000109017. I have a friend who is looking for a position who seems to have the perfect skills for this job. Vince [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: From Michael L. Kirby, Esq.; [EMail-Body]= Bonnie: Please forward to Michael Kirby. I think the draft looks good. Could you also prepare a draft of the letter we discussed yesterday to convey the proposal to the committee? ""Bonnie Hugyez"" <blh@pkns.com> on 07/17/2001 12:34:20 AM To: <mmolland@brobeck.com>, <mark.e.haedicke@enron.com>, <skean@enron.com>, <breasoner@gibbs-bruns.com>, <mtuohey@velaw.com> cc: Subject: From Michael L. Kirby, Esq. Attached is a draft Nonwaiver Agreement per our telephone conferences of yesterday after the meetings with Senator Dunn. I am available in my office for a conference call to discuss this. The information contained in this e-mail message and any accompanying documents is subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or the attorney work product rule and is confidential business information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or representative of the recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify Kathryn A. Pugh at kpugh@pkns.com and immediately delete this message from your system. - 289271_1.WPD [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Jamaica forecast for JMD and inflation, dated 6/25/01; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Koepke, Gwyn Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 1:00 AM To: Hudler, Cindy; Stuart III, William; Shahi, Pushkar; Raymond, Maureen; Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Jamaica forecast for JMD and inflation, dated 6/25/01 Cindy, Please find attached the forecast for Jamaica's currency and CPI. Gwyn Koepke and Maureen Raymond-Castaneda [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron Mentions - 05/03/01; [EMail-Body]= ENRON PLANT HEARING PLANNED FOR TONIGHT South Florida Sun-Sentinel, 05/03/01 Would buying boycott help lower California's electricity bill? Associated Press Newswires, 05/03/01 INDIA: Indian banks appeal to govt to help end Enron row Reuters, 05/03/01 DNC: Special Interests Write Bush Energy Policy PR Newswire, 05/03/01 UK: INTERVIEW-Innogy starts trading power in mainland Europe Reuters, 05/03/01 Mosaic Group posts strong first quarter results Canada NewsWire, 05/03/01 European Phone Companies' Outlook Brightens: Rates of Return Bloomberg, 05/03/01 UK:Corporates warm to charms of credit derivatives Reuters, 05/03/01 Allegheny Energy buys three power plants Associated Press, 05/03/01 Allegheny Energy Buys Midwest Capacity From Enron Unit Dow Jones, 05/03/01 Allegheny Energy Supply Completes Purchase of Midwest Assets; Adds 1,700 MW to Growing Generation Fleet Business Wire, 05/03/01 SSB Cuts Forecast For Power Profitability In 2002, Beyond Dow Jones, 05/03/01 Fitch Affs Northern Border; Rtg Outlook To Stable From Negative Business Wire, 05/03/01 INDIA: UPDATE 1-Enron to meet govt panel over Indian project Reuters, 05/03/01 India State Panel's Sat Meet With Enron Unit Postponed Dow Jones, 05/03/01 EnergieKontor Secures Enron Deal For Spain, Germany Projs Dow Jones, 05/03/01 The Bottom Line: Scottish Power Looks To Refine Focus Dow Jones, 05/03/01 LOCAL ENRON PLANT HEARING PLANNED FOR TONIGHT Staff Reports 05/03/2001 South Florida Sun-Sentinel Broward Metro 3B (Copyright 2001 by the Sun-Sentinel) Pompano Beach A town meeting will be held tonight on Enron Corp.'s power plant proposal for Pompano Beach. Called by Commissioner Kay McGinn, the meeting will be open to anyone who wants to speak. The City Commission is to vote Tuesday on whether to approve a zoning variance for the project. The meeting will be held at 7 p.m. at the Pompano Beach Civic Center, 1801 NE 6th St. Would buying boycott help lower California's electricity bill? By MICHAEL LIEDTKE AP Business Writer 05/03/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - There's a limit to how much people will pay for most things in life. If the cost scares off enough buyers, prices eventually fall. So what would happen if this textbook example from Economics 101 were applied to California's electricity crisis? What if the state officials struggling to maintain energy supplies simply refused to buy power above a certain price and accepted more blackouts this summer? The question would have been absurd just a few months ago and even now the notion seems surreal, given the possible consequences. Inviting even more blackouts inevitably would hurt businesses and frustrate consumers, threatening to further depress California's already slumping economy - the sixth largest in the world. But desperate times require drastic measures, according to the economists, lawmakers and activists who believe the state will be better off sitting in the dark than buying electricity at any price during a summer shortage likely to produce recurring blackouts anyway. ""It's better to use (blackouts) and break the (wholesale energy) cartel than simply to suffer them,"" said Michael Shames, executive director of the Utility Consumer Action Network, a San Diego watchdog group. Refusing to buy enough power to keep the lights on ""would be like playing with fire,"" counters Wells Fargo & Co. chief economist Sung Won Sohn. ""Blackouts aren't a just matter of inconvenience or being too hot or cold. They cost businesses a lot of money."" Buying electricity at the last minute to meet the state's power needs already has cost the California government $5.7 billion in the past 3 1/2 months. The state energy bill for 2001 could reach $50 billion, in money otherwise spent on education, public safety and health care, Shames said. Faced with the prospect of a significant budget deficit, some lawmakers think it's time for California to take a stand against the power wholesalers - many of whom are based outside the state. This Tuesday, the state Senate Energy Committee will consider authorizing the state to refuse to buy power above certain prices. Current law requires state electricity managers to avoid blackouts by buying all available power at any cost. ""We have been over a barrel in so many ways,"" said Sen. Dede Alpert, D-Coronado, who sponsored SB73x. ""Maybe there's a point in the market where (we) just say no and go with the planned blackout strategy instead."" Economists give the bill little chance of succeeding. ""It's never going to happen. It's not a viable option,"" said University of California at Berkeley Professor Severin Borenstein, one of the energy experts who have studied the idea. The business lost during blackouts would mean more layoffs in a state already skittish over the technology downturn and the looming Hollywood writers strike, economists say. Other ripple effects include diminished gasoline supplies, leading to even higher prices at the pump, and distribution headaches that could leave store shelves bare. And some consumers - the elderly and the infirm, for example, need power at any price. Without electricity, Manteca resident Betty Jarzemkoski said she wouldn't be able to help her ailing husband to get out of his motorized bed at home. ""It would be a real hardship for us,"" said Jarzemkoski, 78. ""I'm on a fixed income so I hope they can figure out something to bring down prices. But we need power."" Despite such concerns, the concept of a buyer's boycott hasn't been flatly ruled out - at least publicly - by Gov. Gray Davis as he struggles to reduce the state's staggering electricity bill. The state is spending as much as $90 million per day to meet California's electricity needs and the bleeding is sure to get worse. When the summer heat increases demand and tightens supplies, California might spend more than $1 billion each week, state officials estimate. Extended blackouts pose an even greater cost, economists say. When Northern California suffered rolling blackouts for several hours Jan. 18-19, the economic losses totaled $2.3 billion, mostly from lost profits and wages, estimated the Los Angeles Economic Development Corp. Multiply that over several weeks across the entire state, and it becomes apparent why it makes more sense for California to continue buying power at inflated prices, even if leaves the state with deep debts and a ruined credit rating, economists argue. As it is, California probably won't be able to round up enough power at any price on some days this summer, making some blackouts a virtual certainty. The blackouts will reduce the state's economic output by $2 billion to $16 billion, according to a study released last month by the Bay Area Economic Forum. The resolve of the state's politicians and ratepayers would be sorely tested for a boycott to succeed, much in the way that labor strikes boil down to whether workers or management can withstand more financial pain. ""Politicians aren't going to willingly turn out the lights because politicians want to get re-elected,"" said Borenstein, director of the University of California's energy institute. ""As soon as people start losing their jobs because the power is off, the public will get tired of the blackouts real quick."" Still, Californians might tolerate an increase in blackouts if they understand why the state chose to pursue such a drastic course, said Stanford economics Professor Frank Wolak, who heads the Independent System Operator's market surveillance committee. ""This isn't something you could do without an enormous public relations campaign,"" he said. ""The campaign would have to explain that the state had no other choice but to do this because (federal power regulators) aren't doing their job and enforcing the law against unjust and unreasonable prices."" The largest out-of-state generators are in such robust financial shape that it might take weeks before they would feel such pain from a California boycott that they would be forced to lower prices. After making record profits last year, power wholesalers Enron, Reliant, Dynegy, Duke Energy, Williams and Mirant and earned a combined $1.6 billion during the first three months of this year. --- On The Net: Bay Area Economic Forum report: Electric Power Research Institute: http://www.epri.com Utility Consumers' Action Network Report: INDIA: Indian banks appeal to govt to help end Enron row 05/03/2001 Reuters English News Service (C) Reuters Limited 2001. BOMBAY, May 3 (Reuters) - Indian lenders to U.S. energy group Enron Corp's gas-fired power plant south of Bombay have appealed to the Indian government to help end the company's row with a state-owned electricity board over pricing and upaid bills. The board of Enron's Indian unit, Dabhol Power Co (DPC) has authorised management to stop selling power to the Maharashtra State Electricity Board (MSEB) if a bitter dispute over pricing and unpaid bills cannot be resolved. In the past half year the MSEB has defaulted on bills for electricity supplied by Dabhol, which operates the world's largest gas-fired plant on the west coast of India, 160 kilometres (100 miles) south of Bombay. Indian financial institutions, which contributed $1.4 billion towards the project in loans, are pressing the government to help end the crisis, a source told Reuters. ""We have asked the government for help. We are awaiting their reply,"" the source, who is employed with a large financial institution, said. The domestic lenders to the project are Industrial Development Bank of India , ICICI Ltd , Industrial Finance Corporation of India , Canara Bank and State Bank of India . The Dabhol Power Company (DPC), owned 65 percent by Enron, last month took the major step of bailing out of the $2.9 billion power project, citing non-payment of bills by the Maharashtra State Electricity Board (MSEB). The DPC board's move sparked widespread fears that India's image as a safe destination for foreign direct investment would be damaged. POWER STRUGGLE MSEB, which is a state-owned utility, has been a regular defaulter on payments to DPC saying that it finds the power too costly. It has also backed out on its commitment to buy more power to be produced by the project's second phase which is to begin operations later this year. Last month MSEB said it had paid Dabhol Power 1.34 billion rupees ($28.60 million) for electricity it bought in March. But the payment only partially resolves the total overdue amount of 2.26 billion rupees ($48.2 million), which Enron has been unable to collect even after invoking guarantees issued by the government of Maharashtra, India's most industrialised state, and the federal government. The state utility still owes Enron payments for power purchases in December and January. The Indian government has maintained that the contract must be renegotiated and has set up a committee to do so. ""We are concerned and would like the renegotiations to happen fast,"" the source added. The dispute has raised fears that Enron could pull the plug on the project, cease providing power to the local state electricity board and perhaps even sell the plant. ""The plant is good, Maharashtra needs power and I am sure buyers can be found,"" the source added. ($1=46.82 Indian rupees). DNC: Special Interests Write Bush Energy Policy 05/03/2001 PR Newswire (Copyright (c) 2001, PR Newswire) WASHINGTON, May 3 /PRNewswire/ -- The Democratic National Committee issued the following today: Dick Cheney began dropping hints this week as to what the Bush energy policy will look like, and it is long on oil and short on conservation. But something was missing from the coverage of Cheney's announcement: not just who benefits from the Bush plan, but who's writing it as well. (Photo: ) It's hard to understate the influence big donors and high-ranking executives have with the Bush Administration. Take Tom Kuhn, for example, one of the energy executives who came calling when Bush was thinking about actually following through on his pledge to limit carbon dioxide levels. Kuhn, a top Bush fundraiser, also served on Bush's Energy Department transition advisory team, and still enjoys access to the highest reaches of the Bush White House. Not surprisingly then, the Big Oil Bush Administration's energy policy could not make Bush's huge donors and the special interests in the energy business any happier. Since the energy industry's problems are Bush's problems, the first things on Bush's hit list are the environmental regulations that keep Big Energy in check -- and our country clean. With an energy executive running around the West Wing, Bush's energy policy could be summed up as, ""Drill anywhere, anytime, and keep those checks coming."" The Democratic Party is committed to fighting for a balanced energy policy that keeps our country's priorities -- such as a clean environment -- in mind. To learn more about Bush's misplaced priorities and kowtows to the special interests, keep reading to find out the ""Top Ten Paybacks To The Energy Industry,"" and to see how you, too, can get on the Bush gravy train in ""Recipe for a Quid Pro Quo,"" courtesy of the Democratic Party's http://www.100DaysofBush.com. BUSH'S TOP TEN PAYBACKS TO THE ENERGY INDUSTRY One of the most obvious and recurring themes of Bush's first 100 days has been the extraordinary influence the oil and gas industry has had in the new administration. Oil and gas interests are some of Bush's top campaign contributors, giving more than $3 million to get Bush elected. In exchange, Bush has rolled back regulations issued by the Clinton administration on such things as air conditioner efficiency, as well as breaking his campaign promise to regulate carbon dioxide emissions. Bush has proposed drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and national monuments. Bush has taken a backseat when it comes to the energy crisis California is experiencing, while cutting funding for energy conservation programs. He has also repaid top donors, lobbyists and industry officials with key positions throughout his administration. Here is just a sampling of how the oil, gas and other energy industries have benefited in Bush's first 100 days: 2 - BUSH TAKES HANDS-OFF APPROACH TO CALIFORNIA CRISIS WHILE ENERGY COMPANIES MAKE MILLIONS Bush Did Little to Aid California in Energy Crisis; Fleischer Said Crisis is a ""California Matter."" Bush has done little to aid California in its energy crisis, such as refusing to support wholesale price caps on electricity. White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said, ""The president continues to believe that the issue is mostly a California matter, dealing with the legislation that is before the state. And the leaders of California are working to address that in their own right."" Fleischer also said that Bush wanted to focus on a ""long term"" national energy policy. (AAP Newsfeed, 1/23/01; Wall Street Journal, 1/23/01) Texas Energy Company Accused of Price Gouging to Make Money off California's Energy Crisis. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ordered further inquiry into allegations by California officials that El Paso Natural Gas Co., a Houston based subsidiary of El Paso Energy Co., manipulated the natural gas market by keeping supply artificially low, contributing to the high price of electricity in the state. El Paso Energy was one of the Texas firms ""grandfathered"" by Bush's voluntary emissions standards in Texas. Between 1993 and 1998, El Paso Energy and El Paso Natural Gas PACs gave a total of $8,000 to Bush's gubernatorial campaigns. During the 1999-2000 election cycle, El Paso Energy Corp. and El Paso Natural Gas Co. gave a total of $743,029 to Bush and the GOP -- $460,395 to GOP in soft money, $247,750 to GOP candidates from its PAC, and $34,884 to the Bush campaign from its employees and executives. (www.opensecrets.org; Los Angeles Times, 3/30/01; tebb.epenergy.com; Boston Globe, 10/3/99) Electricity Wholesalers Reported ""Gigantic Earnings Surges"" from Energy Crisis. According to the Los Angeles Times, several electricity wholesalers to California reported ""gigantic earnings surges"" for the quarter ended March 31. The following companies, all contributors to Bush, have earned record profits off of the energy crisis in California. (Los Angeles Times, 4/18/01) COMPANY TOTAL TO BUSH COMPANY PROFIT Enron Corp. Enron is Bush's largest Enron's operating income was career patron, giving at $406 million in the first least $563,000 for his quarter of 2001, compared campaigns, including his with $338 million in the 1978 House campaign. same period last year, a 20% (San Diego Union-Tribune, increase.(Los Angeles Times, 2/11/01) 4/18/01) 6 - BUSH'S TRANSITION TEAMS Energy Interests Dominated Bush Transition Energy Advisory Team. Big energy and oil firms dominated the Bush transition's Energy Advisory Team, having contributed $857,232 to the Republican Party and Bush during the campaign. (Center for Responsive Politics, www.crp.org) Almost Two-Thirds of Bush's Energy Transition Team Worked for Energy Industry. Out of the 48 members of the Bush Energy Department transition team, 31, or almost two-thirds, worked for the energy industry: NAME EMPLOYER Brian Bennett Southern California Edison Robert Card Kaiser Hill Steve Chancellor Black Beauty Coal Company Joe Colvin Nuclear Energy Institute Don Duncan Phillips Petroleum Company Tom Farrell Dominion Energy Gay Friedman Interstate Natural Gas Association of America Jack Gerrard National Mining Association J. Roger Hirl Occidental Chemical Corporation Hunter Hunt Hunt Power, L.P. Jerry Jordan Independent Petroleum Association of America Buddy Kleemeier Kaiser Francis Oil Company Tom Kuhn Edison Electric Institute Ken Lay Enron Albee Modiano U.S. Oil and Gas Association David N. Parker American Gas Association C.J. ""Pete"" Silas Phillips Petroleum Company Gary Ellsworth USEC, Inc. Buck Harless International Industries Stephanie Kroger Mayor, Day, Caldwell & Keeton (lobbies for companies in oil and gas industries; www.mdck.com) Joe Farley Balch & Bingham (lobbying firm which focuses on managing and operating utilities of all kind; www.balch.com) Bill Martin Washington Policy and Analysis (lobbying firm which represents American Gas Association; www.influenceonline.net) The Honorable Howard Baker Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell (lobbying firm dealing with energy industry; www.bakerdonelson.com) Erle Nye TXU Electric and Gas Corporation Gregg Renkes The Renkes Group (lobbies for members of industry, including Edison Electric Institute; www.influenceonline.net) Dick Silverman S.R.P. Matt Simmons Simmons & Co. International John Tuck Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell (lobbying firm dealing with energy industry; www.bakerdonelson.com) Daniel Yergin Cambridge Energy Research Associates The Honorable Thomas C. Merritt Merritt Tool Company, Inc. (Oilfield Service Business; Inside F.E.R.C.'s Gas Market Report, 5/5/95) John Wootten Peabody Group Coal Executive, Irl Engelhardt was an Energy Advisor to the Bush-Cheney Transition, gave $100,000 to Inaugural Fund. Irl Engelhardt of Peabody Group, Inc. served as an energy advisor on the Bush-Cheney transition. During 1999- 2000 the Peabody Group gave $250,000 to the Republican National Committee, and Irl Englehardt personally gave $100,000 to the Bush-Cheney Inaugural fund. (Washington Post, 3/25/01; www.crp.org) /CONTACT: Jenny Backus of the Democratic National Committee, 202-863-8148/ 11:47 EDT UK: INTERVIEW-Innogy starts trading power in mainland Europe By Stuart Penson 05/03/2001 Reuters English News Service (C) Reuters Limited 2001. LONDON, May 3 (Reuters) - British utility Innogy said on Thursday it had started trading wholesale electricity on the French-Italian border and was set to enter the German power market. ""We have done some wholesale trading on the Italy-France border, moving power from France to Italy, and we are very close to doing some in Germany,"" said director of trading Tony West in an interview with Reuters. ""This year we will significantly increase our trading in (mainland) Europe; we are discussing relationships with counterparties at the moment,"" he added. Innogy is building a European power trading team at its headquarters in Swindon, southern England, from where it already trades the UK gas and power markets. FRANCE COULD BE KEY MARKET West said the company initially had expected the main focus of its European trading strategy to be Germany and the north west of the continent. But the early signs were that France would also play a key role, particularly as Innogy had gained access to capacity in the UK-France undersea interconnector cable. ""France has taken me by surprise. It might be more important than we anticipated although there are clearly still issues about the speed of liberalisation,"" said West. A core of about eight companies regularly trade power in France, including TXU Europe, Enron and a trading alliance between Endesa and Morgan Stanley Dean Witter, according to traders. West said Innogy had so far concentrated on buying power in France, not always from French companies, and taking it to Italy via the cross border interconnector between the two countries. Innogy had bought some of the 400-megawatts available on the interconnector through recent auctions, he said. ""It's easy to trade through France, the cost of taking power through to the border is minuscule, although buying power in France and then selling it in France is a lot more difficult,"" said West. He said Innogy had signed grid balancing agreements with French transmission grid operator RTE. Andy Duff, managing director of generation and trading, added France could become become important for Innogy on a retail level, as well as a trading level, depending on how effectively the UK-France interconnector could be used. ""The European market will be driven by the operation of interconnectors and transmission services as well as exchanges,"" said Duff. Innogy may look to trade on Germany's two power exchanges as well as that country's burgeoning over-the-counter market. The company is in the process of signing standard trading agreements for Germany based on the terms devised by the industry group the European Federation of Energy Traders (EFET). FOCUS ON TRADING, NOT ASSETS Duff said Innogy's strategy in Europe was to focus on trading but not the acquisition of physical assets. ""We are not going to lead with assets in Europe. We will focus on trading services-type arrangements, extracting value from (other companies') assets. That's the main thrust of the business,"" he said. West said Innogy's trading in mainland Europe would expand into natural gas as opportunities emerged. The company already trades around the UK-Belgium gas interconnector. Mosaic Group posts strong first quarter results 05/03/2001 Canada NewsWire (Copyright Canada NewsWire 2001) -- Diluted Cash Earnings per Share Increases by 29% and Revenues up by 89% -- TORONTO, May 3 /CNW/ - Mosaic Group Inc. (MGX:TSE), Canada's leading outsourced marketing services agency, announced today that it continued its trend of strong earnings growth for the period ending March 31, 2001. Posting its 18th consecutive quarter of year over year revenue growth, Mosaic has also reported an average quarterly organic growth rate of 27% since 1996. Financial highlights from continuing operations(x) for this quarter include: - Revenues at $171.8 million - up 89% or $80.7 million from Q1 2000. ""Mosaic has consistently outpaced the growth of its peers within an industry that is clearly expanding,"" said Mike Preston, Chairman and CEO Mosaic Group Inc. ""We have posted 18 consecutive quarters of continued growth while adding to our blue chip client list. We are building our business by taking our clients' business farther every time we deal with them. Our organic growth comes not only from securing new client wins, but from the cross-selling wins that are characteristic of a mature company able to leverage a robust and diverse range of service offerings."" New Client Wins In the first quarter of 2001, Mosaic's newly acquired business unit Paradigm, has secured new client business worth between $20 million and $25 million a year in revenue. Combined with new client wins from Mosaic's other business units, and increases in spending from some existing clients, Mosaic has made significant progress in closing its new business gap for 2001. New Power --------- During the first quarter of 2001, Paradigm signed a contract with New Power to acquire residential and commercial customers through a variety of direct response channels such as outbound telemarketing, inbound telemarketing, direct mail and ""feet on the street"". New Power was formed by Enron Corp., the largest buyer and seller of electricity and natural gas in North America. Paradigm had previously provided contract marketing services to New Power. Through diligent effort, Paradigm was able to expand the contract to include the performance-based customer acquisition component. /For further information: Please Contact: Clint Becker, Chief Financial Officer, Mosaic Group Inc., (416) 813-4275, email: Donna Cox-Davies, Director of Communications, Mosaic Group Inc., (416) 813-4279, Email: 16:10 ET European Phone Companies' Outlook Brightens: Rates of Return 2001-05-03 08:52 (New York) European Phone Companies' Outlook Brightens: Rates of Return London, May 3 (Bloomberg) -- European telephone companies such as British Telecommunications Plc and Deutsche Telekom AG have improved their ability to pay back debt in recent weeks, making their bonds a buy, investors said. ``Sentiment seems to be changing,'' said Anna Lees-Jones, who helps manage about 28 billion pounds ($40 billion) of corporate bonds at M&G Investment Management. ``I've been building up my telecoms position all year.'' British Telecom's 10-year euro-denominated bonds sold in January yield about 214 basis points more than government debt, down from a record 238 in March. Contracts that pay out if the company goes bankrupt have also fallen in the past month, according to Enron Corp., which trades the derivatives. Bond yields and bankruptcy derivatives have also declined for Deutsche Telekom and Royal KPN NV, after the companies said they would sell assets to pay down debt that has pushed their credit ratings to record lows and weighed on their shares. Phone companies sold $100 billion of bonds last year to finance licenses and equipment for new mobile services. British Telecom said yesterday it will sell its stakes in Japan Telecom Co. and Spain's Airtel SA to Vodafone Group for 4.8 billion pounds. British Telecom may also sell as much as 7.5 billion pounds of shares to existing investors in a so-called rights offer, according to Legal & General Group Plc, one of the company's shareholders. Deutsche Telekom will sell assets such as cable television, and a stake in Global One and Wind SpA, Chief Financial Officer Karl-Gerhard Eick said last week. KPN, the biggest Dutch phone company, said on March 26 it plans to raise at least 5 billion euros from asset sales to lower debt. Those plans have helped shift investors' perceptions of the companies' creditworthiness, money managers said. `Drastic Measures' ``At the beginning of the year the market was assuming telecoms companies would be downgraded from single-A to triple- B,'' said Peter Harvey, who helps run about $8.6 billion at F&C Management. ``Drastic measures such as deeply-discounted rights issues led investors to believe they will maintain their single-A status.'' The gap, or spread, between British Telecom's sterling denominated bonds maturing in 2006, and U.K. five-year government bonds has narrowed 50 basis points to 109 basis points in the past month. Spreads between Deutsche Telekom's 6.125 percent five- year euro bonds and German government debt narrowed 35 basis points to 107 in April. Bankruptcy Swaps Fall Those shifts in sentiment are also reflected in Enron's bankruptcy swaps, where prices have fallen in the past month, said Simon Brooks, a trader at Enron. Enron prices the swaps using indexes that measure the probability of bankruptcy and the likely recovery rate in that event. The price is expressed as a percentage above a benchmark interest rate such as the London interbank offered rate, or Libor. British Telecom bankruptcy swaps have declined to 66 basis points from 96 on April 1, Enron said. Bankruptcy swaps on Deutsche Telekom dropped to 78 from 100, while KPN's fell to 135 from 183. Over the same period, France Telecom SA's declined to 70 from 100 and Telecom Italia SpA's fell to 94 from 119. British Telecom's bond yields may fall further relative to government debt, analysts said. They still offer higher yields than those of rival Vodafone Group Plc, which has the same ratings though with a stable outlook. While both companies have five-year euro-denominated bonds, British Telecom's offer 55 basis points more yield. The rivals also both have bonds maturing in 2004, and Vodafone's yield about 23 basis points fewer. ``If BT retains their rating, their spreads should be probably 20 to 30 basis points narrower,'' said Brian Venables, head of credit strategy at WestLB. ``Even though it has performed extremely well this year, there is much greater potential for BT's debt.'' Debt Reduction Target Both Moody's Investors Service, which rates British Telecom ``A2'', and Standard & Poor's, which rates it ``A'', have those ratings on watch for further cuts after trimming them four rungs last year. The company's asset sales to Vodafone are ``definitely positive in terms of the rating assessment,'' said Aidan Fisher, who rates British Telecom for Moody's. In combination with the proceeds of a rights sale, ``that would meet the target they set themselves this year -- that's quite a lot to achieve in a 12 month period.'' British Telecom has said it wants to slash its 30 billion pounds of debt by a third and fend off further rating cuts. Before companies such as British Telecom clarified their debt-reduction plans, ``the world and his wife were underweight'' telecom bonds in March, said Harvey at F&C. The investment firm has since raised its holding of telecom bonds to neutral, from underweight, relative to its benchmark, he said. Bond yields ``were trading very much out of line to the rest of the market,'' said Lees-Jones at M&G. Now, ``they have come in quite a bit and will come in further.'' --Tom Kohn and Alice James in the London newsroom (44-20) 7330 7929 or at tkohn@bloomberg.net, with reporting by Christine Harper /zls Story illustration: {CRED <GO>} to see credit analysis on Bloomberg. {BRITEL <Corp> <GO>} for BT's bonds. {DT <Corp> <GO>} for Deutsche Telekom's bonds. UK:Corporates warm to charms of credit derivatives By Tom Bergin 05/03/2001 Reuters English News Service (C) Reuters Limited 2001. LONDON, May 3 (Reuters) - European corporates are beginning to turn to credit derivatives, among the more esoteric and complex of financial instruments, to hedge the risk their debtors won't pay up, market participants said on Thursday. Credit derivatives are insurance-like tools that allow users to hedge the risk of default on a debt. They are mainly used by banks, hedge funds and insurance companies to hedge or gain exposure to the risk of a bond issuer defaulting. Dealers said an environment of deteriorating credit quality and a growing awareness among corporates that credit derivatives offer certain advantages over established hedging tools was behind the increasing use of the instruments. The market remains small, with only around a dozen non-financial European corporates regularly using credit derivatives to manage their credit portfolio at present. But market professionals predict they will one day become as commonplace in the corporate world as other hedging tools such as interest rate swaps and currency options. ""We see (corporate use) as a big growth area for credit derivatives, maybe the biggest,"" says Bryan Seyfried, vice-president of Enron Credit in London. Enron Credit grew out of the efforts of energy company Enron Corp. to hedge its own credit risk portfolio and now specialises in marketing credit risk management solutions to other non-financial corporates. Ralf Lierow, director of credit derivatives at Siemens Financial Services in Munich, said the ability to buy and sell in a liquid market means credit derivatives offer a flexibility that established tools like credit insurance and forfaiting guarantees lack. Credit derivatives were are often cheaper than the alternatives, too, he added. ""This is not a trading book thing. For us, the credit default swap is another tool for credit risk management,"" Lierow said. HELPS OPERATIONAL UNITS DO MORE BUSINESS Siemens Financial Services acts as the centralised risk portfolio management operation for companies within the Siemens electronics and industrial group. It first started using credit derivatives in July 2000. Large companies like Siemens can have hundreds of millions of dollars in receivables on their books at any time. The efficiency with which these companies manage the credit risk on their receivables has an impact on their day to day business. ""The advantage for the operative area is that they can offload more receivables and do more business,"" Lierow said. Siemens uses credit default swaps, the most liquid type of credit derivatives, to hedge its portfolio of debtors on a constant basis. As the balance of cash owed by each name fluctuates over time, the company tries to match this with default swap positions. Hence, if a customer fails to pay, Siemens can recoup the debt from the default swap seller. Other companies use credit derivatives less frequently. ""There are occasional corporate users that have secured one-off requirements for balance-sheet management aims or to strip out the credit risk of a commercial transaction,"" said Walter Gontarek, head of global credit products at RBC Dominion Securities. By hedging a country or company risk which a corporate may not be comfortable in carrying, a credit derivative can facilitate a project that may otherwise be unfeasible, dealers said. NOT PUT OFF BY BAD PRESS Corporates' adoption of credit derivatives is in spite of the negative publicity the instruments have received in recent years. A number of disputes over whether protection buyers could force banks to pay up on contracts have ended up in court. However, traders insist that subsequent work done on contract documentation minimises the risk of such disputes in future. Nonetheless a very practical concern for corporates remains, in that credit derivatives documentation was designed by bankers with sovereign and corporate bonds in mind. The International Swaps and Derivatives Association (ISDA) standard documentation for credit default swaps allows for a pay-out in relation to defaults on bond payments but not on a private debtor's failure to pay. ""We use the ISDA framework but we need it redrafted in specific ways to fit our needs. You cannot take a standard contract and trade on it if you want to hedge trade receivables,"" Lierow said. These amendments add to the cost of the credit derivative. Another problem that corporates face is the complexity of credit derivatives. There is little experience of the instruments, which are barely a decade old, in the corporate world. Siemens had to get its expertise from the financial markets, hiring Lierow from Bankgesellschaft Berlin. Clive Banks, UK head of derivatives sales to buy-side clients at Schroder Salomon Smith Barney, said much of the effort in marketing credit derivatives to corporates involves educating them about the products and the risks involved. ""It's about explaining credit risk management and what kind of volatility and cost having credit risk introduces,"" he said. OUTLOOK PROMISING Yet some corporates are beginning to take full advantage of their new tool. Lierow said that Siemens, which currently only buys credit protection, planned to start acting as a default swaps seller in the coming months. He said selling would facilitate better matching of protection levels to actual exposures, and would enable diversification of risk away from industry sectors where the company's activities are concentrated. ""You could improve the portfolio mix by buying protection on automotives and selling protection on pharmaceuticals,"" he said. Allegheny Energy buys three power plants 05/03/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. HAGERSTOWN, Md. (AP) - Allegheny Energy Inc. said Thursday it has purchased three power plants from Houston-based Enron Corp. The company said it issued more than 14 million shares of common stock worth $667 million to pay for the transaction. The plants are in Tennessee, Indiana and Illinois. The Midwestern purchase will bring an additional 1,710 megawatts on line. The company is expected to own 14,000 megawatts of generating power by 2005. Allegheny also has plans to build natural gas-fired facilities in Arizona, Indiana and Pennsylvania. Allegheny Energy is the parent of Allegheny Power, which supplies electricity and natural gas to 3 million people in Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia. Allegheny Energy Buys Midwest Capacity From Enron Unit 05/03/2001 Dow Jones News Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) HAGRSTOWN, Md. -(Dow Jones)- Allegheny Energy Inc.'s (AYE) Allegheny Energy Supply Co. unit purchased 1,710 megawatts of natural gas-fired merchant generating capacity in three Midwest states from Enron Corp.'s (ENE) Enron North America unit. Financial terms weren't disclosed. In a press release Thursday, Allegheny said it financed the acquisition through debt and equity and expects the purchase to add to earnings in 2001, excluding transaction costs. Allegheny noted that this latest acquisition gives Allegheny Energy Supply more than 14,000 MW of total generating capacity that it will own or control by 2005. Allegheny Energy Global Markets will market output from the three facilities. On April 27, Allegheny priced its public offering of 12.4 million shares at $48.25 each, and said it would use the $598.3 million in gross proceeds to fund its previously reported acquisition of generating facilities located in the Midwest and for other corporate purposes. New York Stock Exchange-listed shares of Allegheny recently traded at $49.85, down 51 cents, or 1%, on composite volume of 306,000 shares. Average daily volume is 538,773 shares. Allegheny, which posted an operating net of $313.7 million, or $2.84 a share, on revenue of $4.01 billion for the year ended Dec. 31, is an energy company. Company Web site -Karen M. Chow; Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-5400 Allegheny Energy Supply Completes Purchase of Midwest Assets; Adds 1,700 MW to Growing Generation Fleet 05/03/2001 Business Wire (Copyright (c) 2001, Business Wire) HAGERSTOWN, Md.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 3, 2001--Allegheny Energy, Inc. (NYSE: AYE) today announced that its unregulated generation subsidiary, Allegheny Energy Supply Company, LLC, has completed the purchase of 1,710 megawatts of natural gas-fired merchant generating capacity in three Midwest states from Enron North America, a wholly owned subsidiary of Enron Corp. (NYSE: ENE). The acquisition gives Allegheny Energy more than 14,000 MW of total generating capacity that it will own or control by 2005 and marks a significant step in the Company's strategic course toward becoming a national energy supplier. Earlier this year, Allegheny Energy Supply acquired 83 MW of coal-fired generation in the Conemaugh Generating Facility near Johnstown, Pa. Additionally, the Company has announced plans to build a 1,080-MW natural gas combined-cycle plant in La Paz County, Ariz.; a 630-MW natural gas combined-cycle facility near South Bend, Ind.; and a 540-MW natural gas fired combined-cycle generating facility in Springdale, Pa. Another 220 MW of peaking capacity have already been completed in Pennsylvania. The Midwest acquisition was financed through a combination of debt and equity and will be accretive to Allegheny Energy's earnings in 2001, excluding transaction costs and other costs related to the integration. Yesterday, the Company issued more than 14 million shares of common stock to facilitate the transaction. Alan J. Noia, Chairman of the Board, President, and Chief Executive Officer of Allegheny Energy, said, ""I am pleased to announce the closing of Allegheny Energy's largest generation acquisition to date. It provides our Company with significant generation presence and capability as an energy merchant to sell electricity from efficient natural gas-fired generation facilities in more areas of the country with a growing demand for energy."" Output from the three facilities will be marketed by Allegheny Energy Global Markets. ""These premium generating assets are designed for operation in times of peak electricity demand,"" said Noia. ""Because of its national presence, Allegheny Energy Global Markets will be able to market the output from these newly acquired facilities in a wide variety of ways with our portfolio of existing assets and other supply arrangements so that overall operational efficiency and shareholder value is maximized."" Allegheny Energy Supply's newly acquired facilities include: the Gleason, Tenn., plant (546 MW), approximately 40 miles north of Jackson, Tenn.; the Wheatland, Ind., plant (508 MW), approximately 70 miles northeast of Evansville, Ind.; and the Lincoln Energy Center plant (656 MW) in Manhattan, Ill., near Chicago. These assets give Allegheny Energy Supply additional generating capacity within the East Central Area Reliability region (ECAR) and initial generation sources in the Mid-America Interconnected Network (MAIN) and the Southeastern Electric Reliability Council (SERC). Salomon Smith Barney acted as financial advisor and Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue acted as legal counsel for Allegheny Energy for the acquisition. CONTACT: Allegheny Energy Supply, Hagerstown (Media) Janice Lantz, 412/858-1630 Media Hotline: 888/233-3583 or (Investors) Greg Fries, 301/665-2713 11:35 EDT MAY 3, 2001 SSB Cuts Forecast For Power Profitability In 2002, Beyond 05/03/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) NEW YORK -(Dow Jones)- Salomon Smith Barney's utility analysts sharply cut their forecast of the profitability of generating electricity in the U.S. in 2002 and beyond because power prices are expected to drop more sharply than natural gas prices starting next year. The analysts cut the profit margin in natural gas-fired power in 2003 to $3.98 a megawatt-hour from $8.73/MWh, a 54% difference from their last forecast in February. They lowered their power price index for 2002 by 1.5% and for 2003 by 7.1% Thursday in a published report. Their forecast is based on forward markets for electricity and gas. ""Gas prices are remaining strong for a much longer period of time, while power prices drop off,"" senior electricity industry analyst Raymond Niles said in a telephone conference with investors. As a result, stock prices for power producers such as AES Corp. (AES), Mirant (MIR), Calpine Corp. (CPN) and NRG Energy (NRG) could peak this summer in advance of strong third quarter earnings reports, the Salomon report says. ""Investors may still shy away from asset and investment-heavy power producers if realized prices begin to reflect the decreases in power prices now projected in the forward curve,"" the report warns. After this summer, the stocks of energy companies that focus more on trading will regain momentum, Salomon expects. These ""energy merchant"" companies, such as Enron Corp. (ENE), Williams Cos. (WMB), Duke Energy (DUK) and Dynegy (DYN), should be able to take advantage of higher trading volume and greater volatility in power markets in non-summer months, according to Salomon. ""We expect (annual trading) volumes to grow, industry-wide, between 25% and 40%, on average, during 2001-03, as the $800 billion global energy commodity market continues to open,"" the report predicts. The overall electricity price trend is national, according to Salomon. The report, titled ""Power Curve,"" expects 2001 wholesale power prices to exceed last year's by 131% in the West and by 34% on average in the eastern U.S., including Texas. But since their last forecast, the analysts lowered their forward price curve for next year and beyond in 10 of 11 regional power pools. ""Interestingly, the exception to that is the New York Power Pool,"" Niles told investors. For the remainder of this year, however, Salomon still expects power producers to beat substantially last year's breakthrough results. ""About 50% of the spike upward in western U.S. power prices the past six months has been from something we've never seen before in this industry: political and credit risk,"" Niles said in the conference. Western merchant power suppliers are benefitting from the ""unholy mess in California,"" Niles said, but that won't last forever. ""Whenever the debate tapers off and we have a resolution in sight, that premium will slowly drain out of the western markets, and bring down profitability for the group,"" Niles said. National calls for reregulation due to the California crisis could continue to hurt stock prices for the entire sector, even though reregulation won't happen. Further, in so far as such calls discourage investment in generating plants, transmission lines and gas pipelines, they could also extend the current period of extremely high earnings, according to the report. In non-western states, the greatest profitability from power generation for the next two years is seen in New England. -By Mark Golden, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-4604; mark.golden@dowjones.com Fitch Affs Northern Border; Rtg Outlook To Stable From Negative 05/03/2001 Business Wire (Copyright (c) 2001, Business Wire) NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 3, 2001--Fitch has affirmed its `BBB+' senior debt rating for Northern Border Partners, L.P. (NBP) and its `A-` senior debt rating for its regulated pipeline affiliate Northern Border Pipeline Co. (NBPL). The Rating Outlook for both companies is changed to Stable from Negative. The rating action was taken after a review of NBP's recent acquisitions and long-term business plan. A combination of debt and equity at NBP was used to fund the recent acquisitions of Bear Paw, LLC, Midwestern Gas Transmission Company, and Dynegy Canada midstream assets. An additional $125-150 million of equity is expected to be sold in the coming months to pay down short-term debt and complete the permanent financing. The improvement in Rating Outlook primarily reflects NBP's demonstrated commitment to undertake conservative long-term financing and operating strategies. Future acquisitions at the partnership level are expected to be financed 50/50, debt/equity so as to maintain financial flexibility and a stable credit profile. Moreover, management has shown a strong bias to minimize commodity price risk as it expands its non-regulated gas operations. For example, processing contracts for Bear Paw's four processing facilities are contracted for on a percentage of proceeds basis and liquids prices have been 90% hedged by NBP through 2001, limiting downside exposure. NBPL continues to exhibit strong competitive market, operating, and financial characteristics that are consistent with its current `A-` rating. The company is a low-cost transporter of Canadian gas into the Midwest, with costs per hundred miles of less than 4 cents per mcf. The December 2000 completion of the Alliance Pipeline has had minimal impact on Northern Border as capacity utilization approaches 100%. Pipeline capacity is 99% subscribed through mid-September 2003. Its shippers are financially strong customers with uniform take-or-pay contracts. The company has never written off a bad debt. NBPL should generate EBITDA/interest coverage of nearly 4.0 times over the next few years. Credit concerns primarily relate to NBP's changing business mix and the expectation of increased market risk associated with its growing midstream operations as compared with the stable, low-risk profile of NBPL. While projected consolidated and stand alone credit measures at NBP remain relatively strong, there will be less predictability in the future cash stream utilized to service debt. NBP is a publicly traded master limited partnership. Its primary holding is a 70% economic interest in NBPL, a 1,214-mile FERC regulated interstate pipeline transporting natural gas from the Canadian border to the upper Midwest. Enron Corp. and The Williams Companies, Inc. hold a 10.0% and 3.3% stake in NBP, respectively, with the remainder publicly held. Enron controls an 82.5% stake in the management committee of NBP with Williams holding the remaining management allocation. CONTACT: Fitch, New York Ralph Pellecchia, 212/908-0586 or Hugh Welton, 212/908-0746 13:58 EDT MAY 3, 2001 INDIA: UPDATE 1-Enron to meet govt panel over Indian project 05/03/2001 Reuters English News Service (C) Reuters Limited 2001. NEW DELHI, May 3 (Reuters) - The Indian unit of Enron Corp said on Thursday that its officials would meet members of a government panel formed to re-negotiate a troubled $2.9 billion power project in western India. But the willingness to meet the panel next week should not be construed as an offer to renegotiate the contract, Dabhol Power Company (DPC) said in a statement. ""As a matter of courtesy we have agreed to meet with them next week,"" the DPC statement said. ""Since the purpose of our meeting is to hear out the committee and understand their thoughts, we will not present any proposal."" DPC said it had constantly maintained that it was open to maintaining a dialogue towards resolving issues. ""(But) This meeting should in no manner be construed as an open offer from DPC to renegotiate the terms of the contract,"" it added. DPC and the government of the western state of Maharashtra have been locked in a payment battle for months, with the state's electricity board balking at paying Enron what it considers too high a rate for electricity. At present, Maharashtra's State Electricity Board (MSEB) owes the DPC, of which Enron is a 65 percent stakeholder, some $48 million for power. The Maharashtra government last week announced the formation of a panel of experts to re-negotiate its contract with DPC and lower the cost of power sold to MSEB. LARGEST FOREIGN INVESTMENT The Dabhol project, the single largest foreign investment in India, consists of two phases, the already-built 740 megawatt power plant and a 1,444 MW plant that is expected to be finished this year. Last week, Dabhol's board authorised the plant's managing director to issue a preliminary notice of termination of service to MSEB. The notice, which has not been issued, would be the first step for Enron to pull out of the project. Earlier, a source familiar with the project told Reuters that Indian lenders, who have provided millions of dollars to Houston-based Enron to build DPC are lobbying with the government to act quickly and end the crisis. ""We have asked the government for help. We are awaiting their reply,"" the source, who is employed with a large financial institution, said. The domestic lenders to the project are Industrial Development Bank of India , ICICI Ltd , Industrial Finance Corporation of India , Canara Bank and State Bank of India . If Enron pulls out of the project, the source said, the lenders would have no choice but to seek an alternative buyer. ""The plant is good, Maharashtra needs power and I am sure buyers can be found,"" the source added. India State Panel's Sat Meet With Enron Unit Postponed 05/03/2001 Dow Jones International News (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) NEW DELHI -(Dow Jones)- India's Maharashtra state government's expert committee's Saturday meeting with the U.S. energy major Enron Corp.'s (ENE) Indian unit Dabhol Power Co. has been postponed until May 11 at the request of DPC, a committee member told Dow Jones Newswires late Thursday. The nine-member committee has been appointed to renegotiate the Maharashtra State Electricity Board's controversial power purchase agreement with DPC. The state government has asked the committee to try to negotiate a revised agreement within a month. ""The negotiating committee's first meeting with the Dabhol Power Co. management scheduled for Saturday has been postponed until May 11, 0530 GMT, at DPC's request. They (DPC) told us they wanted some more time to prepare themselves for the meeting and we have granted their request,"" said a committee member. The committee's goals are to lower the power tariff and allow the sale of excess power to the federal government or its utilities. A restructure of the DPC's stakeholding may also be on the agenda. -By Himendra Kumar, Dow Jones Newswires; 91-11-461-9427; himendra.kumar@dowjones.com EnergieKontor Secures Enron Deal For Spain, Germany Projs 05/03/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LONDON -(Dow Jones)- German wind farm developer EnergieKontor AG said Thursday it has signed a framework agreement with Enron Wind GmbH for deliveries of wind turbines for projects in Germany and Spain. In all, Enron will deliver 200 megawatts' worth of 1.5 MW turbines for onshore projects in EnergieKontor's home market and in Spain, one of its fastest-growing export markets. In addition, Neuer Markt-listed EnergieKontor said it has entered into exclusive negotiations with the local authorities for permission to build up to 15 wind farms at a number of sites in the Castilla-La Mancha region. Each site would have an installed capacity of 45-50 MW, making a total of 700 MW. ""Once we reach this stage there is about an 85-90% of the project going ahead, sometimes more,"" a spokesman told Dow Jones. EnergieKontor said it assumes that it will set up the first windfarms in Castilla-La Mancha as early as next year. -By Geoffrey T. Smith, Dow Jones Newswires; (+44 20) 7842 9260; -geoffrey.smith@dowjones.com The Bottom Line: Scottish Power Looks To Refine Focus By Andrea Chipman Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES 05/03/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LONDON -(Dow Jones)- After more than a year of lagging earnings, investment missteps and unexpected disasters, U.K. vertically-integrated utility Scottish Power (SPI) is hoping a new strategy to streamline its businesses will signal a more focused period for the company. But it's got its work cut out. While investors were cheered by news that its U.S. Utah-based Hunter power plant is back online after a six-month outage that cost the company an estimated $160 million, uncertainty over its plans for its Southern Water unit and apparent ongoing commitment to loss-making telecoms venture Thus are seen as muddling group focus. ""It all adds up - the lack of coherent strategy, quite substantial downgrades and a whole host of non-core businesses that they don't have any natural management flair or expertise in,"" said Brian Gallagher, a senior fund manager at London-based Gartmore Investment Management, which has GBP3 million of Scottish Power shares in its Global Utilities Fund. ""We have a reasonably low opinion of the company."" The company said Thursday that its pretax profit before goodwill amortization and exceptional items for the fiscal year ending March 31 fell to GBP628 million from GBP736 million a year ago. Adjusted earnings per share declined to 30.65 pence in the 2001 fiscal year from 41.22 pence in 2000. The company acknowledged profits have been hit hard by the Hunter outage, competition on wholesale and retail markets in the U.K. and strict price controls on its regulated infrastructure businesses. Although the company's shares were trading at 458.5 pence after the release of Thursday's earnings results, up from 441.5 pence Wednesday, they are down more than 15% from 533 pence a year ago. Executives say they are restructuring the business into three targeted divisions to capitalize on its traditional strengths in generation and power supply and infrastructure and to expand its overseas activities. ""We've now got a trading and commercial link between generation and supply and the first thing we are doing is putting emphasis on that...on growing earnings across that value chain,"" Scottish Power Chief Executive Ian Russell told journalists in a conference call Thursday. ""In the U.S., we are focused on cost cutting and on acquiring new businesses."" Scottish Power's move away from a full multi-utility profile - begun last year with its partial disposal of Thus and its withdrawal from an Internet banking venture with the Royal Bank of Scotland - toward a more narrowly focused energy business mimics a trend across the industry toward greater specialization. The company is also considering selling Southern Water, which would allow it to focus even more closely on its power business. Yet analysts and investors say they are looking for more details of the company's overall growth strategy from Russell, who took over as chief executive last month, and other managers. The toll from months of drift, is evident, they said. Sales Of Southern Water, Thus Seen Indeed, despite its efforts to chart a new road, Scottish Power appears to be reluctant to acknowledge the failure of some of its non-core ventures. Russell said his company remains ""supportive"" of Thus, which reported a 2000 fiscal year loss of GBP21.4 million this week, and has no plans to exit its remaining 50% stake in the company. Similarly, he said, Scottish Power hasn't yet made a final decision to dispose of Southern Water - which has cut costs under its Scottish parent but is increasingly unable to cover its capital expenditure - although he said the company had received ""a number of offers"" from potential buyers. Although he declined to identify any of the bidders, Italian energy company Enel SpA (ENI) has confirmed its interest. Industry sources said a prompt sale of the water unit looks likely, with some bids already exceeding the GBP2 billion at which many analysts value the company's combined assets and debt. It's unclear, they said, how Southern Water or Thus would fit into Scottish Power's new image. ""Scottish Power sees itself as an international energy company,"" a source familiar with the company said. In a year's time, he added, ""it would be unlikely that Southern Water and Thus would be part of the company."" Revenues from the sale of the water unit would also help Scottish Power pursue its U.S. expansion without adding to its 90% gearing levels, analysts and investors said. Russell declined to comment on reports Scottish Power is considering buying Enron Corp.'s Oregon-based unit, Portland General, but admitted the company would be a logical geographical fit with Pacificorp. Analysts said Scottish Power's plans for U.S. growth is likely to be a key part of its energy strategy. ""We like their U.S. strategy where they've leveraged expertise gained in the highly competitive U.K. market,"" said Gareth Lewis-Davies, head of utilities research at Lehman Brothers in London. Closer to home, competition and the trend toward increased specialization in the power industry may force Scottish Power to determine whether its business strength lies in asset management or retail and generation. ""Strategic decisions need to be made, and I'm not sure if they are going to make them in the near term or not,"" said Andrew Wright, U.K. utilities analyst at UBS Warburg in London. ""They are pretty much involved across the value chain, and I think it remains to be seen which part of the value chain they specialize in, if any."" Company Web site: www.scottishpower.co.uk -By Andrea Chipman, Dow Jones Newswires; 44-207-842-9259; andrea.chipman@dowjones.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Confidential Communication to my Attorney; [EMail-Body]= who knows. I can't imagine that a customer would somehow owe insurance to the provider's employees. Michelle -----Original Message----- From: Barrow, Cynthia Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 9:37 AM To: Cash, Michelle Subject: RE: Confidential Communication to my Attorney God I hope not! However, we do include a portion of leased employees in our 410(b) tests for 'insurance'. I'd like to know who he talked with. -----Original Message----- From: Cash, Michelle Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 9:18 AM To: Barrow, Cynthia Subject: FW: Confidential Communication to my Attorney Cynthia, do you know anything about this type of requirement? Michelle -----Original Message----- From: ""Hoyt H. Thomas"" <hhth@earthlink.net>@ENRON Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 9:16 AM To: Cash, Michelle Cc: Booth, Khymberly; Tholan, Scott Subject: Confidential Communication to my Attorney Michelle, I was presented with some interesting information yesterday and I wanted to run it by you . . . I was not told this by an ERISA attorney but it was a person who works with Benefits frequently. The person told me that, if a company only had one customer, the company's employees had to be included in the control group of the customer for discrimination testing purposes on the benefits plans. It sounded a little iffy to me . . . could you verify? Thanks. Hoyt -- Hoyt H. Thomas 713.668.3122 713.201.1622 Mobile [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= In Washington DC - fly in from Chicago this morning.  I told
 Cynthia that you could start meetings at 10:30.; [EMail-Body]= Lou -- Dist Gen issue LEFF Nicki Daw -- 011-44-171-316-5457 9/25 - Cy knows to hold off on scheduling more meetings until further notice. Senator Bumpers, with Harry McPherson - 2:30 3:30 Senator Crapo Cynthia will do other meetings, trying for Pallone, Gorton, Grams. You can leave on 5:10 flight. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Important - CPUC Motion - Confidential Attorney Client Privil
 ege and Work Product; [EMail-Body]= I just spoke with Mary to make sure we have the same information. Here are the facts we have so far. On November 4th, the CPUC filed a motion with FERC to adopt the form of protective order that the CPUC entered, to compel the production of documents and to shorten time to answer. According to Exhibit B (read to me by Nancy Pickover at Bracewell) the following CPUC moved against the following entities: AES, Williams, Duke, Dynegy, Reliant and Southern. Enron entities were NOT named in exhibit B. This is not to say that we could not be easily added to the group. While the motion reads as if the CPUC was moving against everybody, in fact, in footnote 2 they state they are only moving against the entities named in Exhibit B. We will have Exhibit B in hand first thing tomorrow via FEDEX to confirm this. To repeat, Enron is not named yet. Thanks Gary -----Original Message----- From: Mary.Hain@enron.com [mailto:Mary.Hain@enron.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2000 6:23 PM To: dwatkiss@bracepatt.com; Susan.J.Mara@enron.com; Richard.B.Sanders@enron.com; James.D.Steffes@enron.com; Christian.Yoder@enron.com; Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com; mday@gmssr.com; gfergus@brobeck.com; rcarroll@bracepatt.com; Alan.Comnes@enron.com; Joe.Hartsoe@enron.com; Sarah.Novosel@enron.com Cc: Tim.Belden@enron.com; Lysa.Akin@enron.com Subject: Important - CPUC Motion - Confidential Attorney Client Privilege and Work Product As you may already know, the CPUC filed a motion at FERC asking for a protective order and to compel production of the information they subpoened from us in the CPUC's OII case. Given the timing, we should discuss this on our conference call scheduled for tomorrow. They request that we be required: to answer their motion on Thursday, to provide the information within 5 working days of a FERC ordering production, and to provide of P&L information and spread sheets detailing our deals, specifically delivery point, delivery date, counterparty, volume and price. We may not have a problem providing this information for use by FERC in its proceeding subject to a confidentiality agreement but I think we would oppose their requests for: the information to be provided for ""government eyes only"" - this would prohibit EPMI from defending itself vis-a-vis other market participants. a FERC confidentiality order that would could allow FERC to ""share"" this information with the CPUC (for purposes of the PUC's OII proceeding) pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 824h(c). 16 USC 824g(c) requires the Commission to make information available to state commissions as may be of assistance in state regulation of public utilities. We should argue that 16 USC 824h(c) does not apply here given that we are not a public utility nor does the PUC regulate how much market power wholesale marketers exercise or the level of market power mitigation (these are the bases the PUC provides for explaining why it should have this information.) the above contractual information to allow them to analyze the competitiveness of the forward market to evaluate the wisdom of the Commission's decision to allow the UDC's ""unfettered access"" to the forwards market. This argument is unpersuasive given that the CPUC can get information about the competitiveness of the forward markets from the Wall Street Journal's listing of NYMEX prices. This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. To reply to our email administrator directly, send an email to postmaster@brobeck.com BROBECK PHLEGER & HARRISON LLP http://www.brobeck.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Moving foward at a good clip; [EMail-Body]= Steve Good news. As you indicated would happen, Kalen Pieper called me mid-week. We had a very good conversation about EES and Dave Delainey's leadership. She explored my views about doing business with government. Shortly thereafter, Dave's office called to invite me to Houston on Thursday July 26. Kay Chapman explained that Dave's schedule would keep him out of pocket until August 16. In order to move forward, Janet Dietrich will be meeting with me when I go to Houston next Thursday. (I must confess that after all the great things I have heard about the man, I do look forward to meeting Dave himself.) Is there a time next week that I can speak with you by phone to fine-tune my thinking / preparation for Thursday's meeting with Janet? Thank you for your all of your help. I am pleased and appreciative that things are moving forward at a good clip. Kevin Contact Information E-mail kevinscott@onlinemailbox.net Phone (213) 926-2626 Fax (707) 516-0019 Traditional Mail PO Box 21074 ?Los Angeles, CA 90021 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Arbitration with Reliance and ONGC; [EMail-Body]= Are you aware of this? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/01/2000 07:49 AM --------------------------- Sanjay Bhatnagar@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 08/01/2000 12:23 AM To: Steven J Kean@EES cc: Subject: Re: Arbitration with Reliance and ONGC ---------------------- Forwarded by Sanjay Bhatnagar/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 08/01/2000 12:23 AM --------------------------- Delivery Failure Report Your document: Re: Arbitration with Reliance and ONGC was not delivered to: steven kean because: User steven kean not listed in public Name & Address Book What should you do? You can resend the undeliverable document to the recipients listed above by choosing the Resend button or the Resend command on the Actions menu. Once you have resent the document you may delete this Delivery Failure Report. If resending the document is not successful you will receive a new failure report Unless you receive other Delivery Failure Reports, the document was successfully delivered to all other recipients. EI-NINET01/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, EI-NINET01/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, EDC_NMAIL01/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT ________________________ To: Jeffrey Sherrick/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Joseph W Rob Walls, steven kean, Wade Jimmy From: Sanjay Bhatnagar/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT Date: 08/01/2000 12:08:55 AM Subject: Re: Arbitration with Reliance and ONGC Jeff: This is all Ok after the fact but I would have expected that we would have discussed this before action was taken. For the record, I would not advise calling this an arbitration BUT mediation and I would work with senior government officials and politicians ahead of time to control the fall out that may come about especially since Parliament is in session right now. I will advise our PR group to say nothing to the press but route all queries to you. sanjay Jeffrey Sherrick@ENRON 07/31/2000 06:19 AM To: John Larry Morse/Corp/Enron@Enron, Mike Stewart/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sanjay Michael J Smalling/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stephen Wallace/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Wade Rick Phillips/Corp/Enron@Enron cc: Rob Walls/NA/Enron@Enron, James Derrick/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Joseph W Pam Christina Grow/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Arbitration with Reliance and ONGC I was in India last week meeting with partners and we all agreed that the best thing to do to move ahead regarding the old unrecovered cash calls (""joint interest billings"") was to file an arbitration proceeding and get an objective third party to settle the issue. As you know, Reliance and ONGC owe EOGIL approximately $7.1 and $10.3 million, respectively (including interest on non-payment). The arbitration notices reflected only the non-payment numbers which are $5.8 and $7.3 million for RIL and ONGC respectively. We finalized the drafting and dated the notices on July 29th and we delivered the official notice during business hours Monday July 31, 2000. This was the final step in a very long effort to resolve this issue in other means, but as I noted to the OOC after the June meetings this was the only solution in the end. While nobody likes to file arbitration, the good news is in the end all parties seen this as the only solution and as best as I can tell, at least internally ONGC and Reliance support this decision. If the issue gets external, I don't know how any of the parties will respond. Our goal is to keep it as low keyed as possible, but this is India and I would expect someone to try to make a big issue out of it. I will be in contact with John Ambler today to discuss the details of the submittal and to prepare for any response to the media that may be necessary. While both parties were expecting the notice, it may leak into the media over the next few days. Please defer any questions or comments to either John Ambler, Larry Morse or myself regarding this issue. Until John advises us otherwise, our comment will be as follows; "" The parties (ONGC, Reliance and Enron Oil and Gas India Limited) have had a dispute on certain cost items and together we have agreed it is best for the joint venture to have this dispute resolved by an independent third party using the guidelines as set forth in the Joint Operating Agreement."" Mike Smalling in our office will coordinate this matter with John Ambler and the appropriate staff. I will be available to respond if necessary and my contact numbers are as follows; office-713-853-5934 pager 888-493-1770 cell 713-569-4713 home 281-320-2198 Larry, please make sure our office understands that only you are to comment on this and any other official E&P business in India and Wade/Sanjay would you share this note with the appropriate people in your office so nobody is surprised if something comes up. Mike Smalling, John and/or I will keep you informed of any relevant events. jeff [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= <<Concur Expense Document>> - General Expenses; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/14/2001 05:30 PM ----- eserver@enron.com 03/12/2001 12:24 PM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - General Expenses The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: John Hardy Jr Jr. Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: General Expenses Report Total: $12,435.04 Amount Due Employee: $89.90 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://nahou-wwxms01p ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/14/2001 05:30 PM ----- eserver@enron.com 03/14/2001 09:44 AM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - March 2001 The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: Michael Terraso Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: March 2001 Report Total: $3,155.41 Amount Due Employee: $3,155.41 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://nahou-wwxms01p ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/14/2001 05:30 PM ----- eserver@enron.com 03/14/2001 11:54 AM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - AMEX - 02/02/01 The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: Mark A. Palmer Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: AMEX - 02/02/01 Report Total: $8,222.28 Amount Due Employee: $8,222.28 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://nahou-wwxms01p [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: 18/7 - 7:00 p.m. - Update: Emergency; [EMail-Body]= fyi ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/19/2001 08= :37 AM --------------------------- From:=09Michael Terraso/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/18/2001 07:17 PM To:=09Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc:=09=20 Subject:=09FW: 18/7 - 7:00 p.m. - Update: Emergency Steve, fyi Mike Terraso -----Original Message-----=20 From: Hawkins, Don=20 Sent: Wed 7/18/2001 5:29 PM=20 To: Lowry, Phil; Terraso, Michael=20 Cc:=20 Subject: FW: 18/7 - 7:00 p.m. - Update: Emergency FYI,=20 Don=20 -----Original Message-----=20 From: Steve [ mailto:IMCEANOTES-Steve+= On Behalf Of Steve Hop= per/TRANSREDES@ENRON Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 4:24 PM=20 To: Hopper, Steve=20 Cc: nick.tombs@shell.com.br; Weidler, = Peter E; Henshaw, Tony; Gonzalez, Fernando; Farmer, Doug; Berg, Jan van den= ; Naphan, John; Vega, John; Callau, Juan; Hawkins, Don; Khan, Nasim; Powell= , Laine; NLIMBREI@shell.com.br; Subject: Re: 18/7 - 7:00 p.m. - Update: Emergency=20 =09We have completed the inspection of the GAA line to LaPaz, and everythin= g looks OK. We'll reinitiate gas flow tonight. OSSA II should be complete= d tomorrow. Army personnel continues to be patrolling the area, but things= remain pretty calm, despite several areas in the country that are under ro= adblock by protesters. =09I'm going to keep things in emergency status until at least tomorrow, af= ter today's roadblocks are lifted. Will advise of any developments. =09Steve=20 =09Steve Hopper=20 07/17/2001 07:02 PM=20 =20 To: nick.tombs@shell.com.br, Peter E W= eidler/Enron@EnronXGate=20 cc: Tony Fernando Gonzalez/TRANSREDES@TR= ANSREDES, Doug Farmer/TRANSREDES@TRANSREDES, Jan van den Berg/TRANSREDES@TR= ANSREDES, John Naphan/TRANSREDES@TRANSREDES, John Vega/TRANSREDES@TRANSREDE= S, Juan Callau/TRANSREDES@TRANSREDES, Don Hawkins/Enron@EnronXGate, Nasim H= Khan/TRANSREDES@TRANSREDES, Laine A MENT=20 =09Subject: 17/7 - 7:00 p.m. - Update: Emergency=20 =09The situation continues to be stable. CLHB has reinitated LPG operation= s to LaPaz, but continue their inspection. TR will not reinitiate gas or c= rude export operations until we have completed our inspection. We have for= med joint teams with CLHB and Army personnel to perform the inspection. It= could take as long as 48 hours, but we'll have a better estimate after we = get a progress report in the morning. All crews available systemwide are = mobilizing for inspection of the entire system, but for now our priority co= ntinues to be the lines in the altiplano. The three stations in the altipl= ano have been shut down, bled off, and locked. Other supervisors throughou= t the system have been advised and are on alert. =09Government and regulator continue to be supportive of our shut-down and = inspection action plan. We have developed a contingency plan with COBEE (t= he regional electricity distributor) under which they will redistribute ene= rgy out of spare capacity in Cochabamba to LaPaz - this should cover LaPaz= 's electricity needs during the duration of time we need to complete our in= spection. The only other significant consumer is a large cement plant in L= aPaz. We've agreed that they will slow down their operations, and provide = only small, local supplies (industrial concrete demand will be shut-in). =09We did not send a press release on the issue, although we have received = inquiries - our response is that we are concerned about the risk to Bolivia= ns this action presented, and we are performing an inspection on the system= . We are avoiding mention of gas stoppage to LaPaz at this time, due to th= e volatility of the issue in LaPaz. Government (VMEH, SIRESE) has agreed w= ith the message. =09We expect that with the cement plant and power plant off-line, line pack= should be sufficient to keep commercial demand satisfied for a few days. = In either event, we are working with the local gas distributor to prepare a= notice for LaPaz newspapers instructing gas consumers in the area how to s= afely shut-down and restart their equipment in the event that it becomes ne= cessary. =09The most likely scenario as of now is that Edwin Morales - a local revol= utionary tied to the coca trade - is behind the action. Morales has had co= ntact in the past with the Raul Rocha bunch out of Chuquina (Oruro), so we'= re still not sure whether this was an act against TR and/or the industry, o= r if it is against government. Morales has just joined forces with another= rebel out of Cochabamba and is planning nationwide road blocks for tomorro= w. Their agenda is national - they've never isolated TR or our industry as= a whole, although Chaco in the north have been targeted in the past, proba= bly because they have a field in the middle of Morales' stronghold. The po= litical situation here is tenuous with Banzer out and various political int= erests looking to fill the leadership void. We're watching this situation = closely. The local Army brigade has committed to staying on vigilance for = at least the next few days - once we're comfortable with the operational si= tuation, we'll discuss a longer-term solution. =09Steve=20 =09---------------------- Forwarded by Steve Hopper/TRANSREDES on 07/17/200= 1 06:37 PM =09Steve Hopper=20 07/17/2001 03:53 PM=20 =20 To: nick.tombs@shell.com.br, Peter E W= eidler/Enron@EnronXGate=20 cc: =20 =09Subject: Emergency=20 =20 =09At 1:45 p.m. today, a CLHB line walker discovered a bomb on their LPG li= ne in the Altiplano 14 km from out SicaSica station. Our OSSA II (crude ex= ports to Chile) and GAA (gas to LaPaz) share the same ROW, and would likely= have been taken out with the bomb. We understand that the bomb, which had= a manual fuse, did not go off, but had been lit and failed to explode. Th= e Army has been mobilized to diffuse the bomb, and we consider the immediat= e threat neutralized. =09However, given that we have now seen several attempts in the last 10 day= s of sabotage against our lines, I have declared a state of EMERGENCY, and = will notify the Enron Crisis team. =09We have shut all Altiplano pipeline operations down, and have mobilized = a joint CLHB/TR/Army team to perform vigilance on the entire altiplano netw= ork. The immediate result of this is that lights will likely start to go o= ut in LaPaz within the next few hours - the GAA line is their primary power= fuel supply. I've notified all relevant government authorities of the sit= uation, and so far am getting support. I've also asked the Embassy to look= into the situation, with the understanding that if this is the result of a= n organized movement, they might have access to intelligence that could be = helpful. =09Additionally, we've shut down all non-critical maintenance operations th= roughtout the rest of the system, and are directing spare personnel to perf= orm vigilance on the remainder of the system as quickly as possible. Until= and unless we have information that this threat goes beyond the altiplano,= we will continue operations, with all stations on alert. We will kick off= the the total system inspection within the next few hours, as soon as our = people complete the overall plan. =09I will keep you posted as things develop.=20 =09Steve=20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= President Clinton Press Release; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/23/2000 11:42 AM --------------------------- From: Ann M Schmidt 08/23/2000 10:41 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: President Clinton Press Release Following is a link to the actual White House page with the statement from Clinton today. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message(due to missing attachment)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: California Update 07.18.01; [EMail-Body]= These are useful updates. Please include Whalley, Lavorato, Parquet, Dietrich, Delainey, Kitchens, Haedicke, Sanders, Kirby, Sharp, Leff, Calger, Belden etc on future updates. Thanks From: Jeff Dasovich on 07/18/2001 08:18 PM Sent by: Jeff Dasovich To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, skean@enron.com, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Harry Kingerski/Enron@EnronXGate, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Susan M Landwehr/Enron@EnronXGate, mpalmer@enron.com, Karen Denne/Enron@EnronXGate, Janel Guerrero/Enron@EnronXGate, Paul Kaufman/Enron@EnronXGate cc: Subject: California Update 07.18.01 The Senate, the Assembly and the Governor are either poised to engage in very difficult negotiations, or the three are about to crash and burn and Edison's going to be left dangling. In the Senate: The Senate bill 78XX is with about 90% likelihood going to be voted out of the Senate tonight---without a vote having taking place in any committee. Burton announced during one of the two ""informational"" hearings that ""this is it,"" despite the view of just about everyone who appeared before the committees the bill likely won't prevent Edison from going bankrupt. The key features of the bill are: Banks and QFs get paid in full. Edison shareholders would be responsible for debts owed to suppliers No direct access. There are conflicting reports about whether the Senate will take up the bill tomorrow de-linking the bonds from the DWR contracts and whether the Republicans will go along with it. In the Assembly: The Committee is hearing the Wright and Hertzberg bills as we speak, with Hertzberg's the likely winner. That bill now provides for Direct Access under certain conditions (the amendments describing the conditions were faxed today). We're attempting to get the ""July 12"" date changed to ""the effective date of the bill"" or later. The Assembly likely won't vote the Hertzberg bill out until tomorrow at the earliest. The Problem: The Assembly and Senate bills are diametrically opposed in the way each approaches the problem---in short, the bills are two ships passing in the night. The Democratic leaders (Governor, Hertzberg, Burton) aren't talking, and Burton hasn't expressed any interest in talking---to anybody. The likely outcome given the circumstances: Burton says he's done what he needs to do (i.e., passed out a ""fair"" bill); the Assembly and Senate can't agree; they finish the budget; time runs out; they leave Friday; and Edison's left twisting. That said, there's still a chance that the Governor could call Burton and sit down with Burton and Hertzberg and work something out by Friday, or begin talking and postpone the recess until they get it worked out. But given Burton, the chance of that happening seems very slim. In short, little has changed since yesterday. Best, Jeff [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Wyoming Energy Commission subject; [EMail-Body]= I'll be happy to accomodate. I can take you through Enron's view of how markets overall are evolving and how we approach those markets. I'd also like to spend some time reviewing interstate transmission policy and how it affects Western energy markets. ""Steve Reynolds"" <SREYNO@state.wy.us> on 05/23/2001 09:40:11 AM To: <skean@enron.com> cc: <sland@enron.com> Subject: Wyoming Energy Commission subject Steve, it was great to meet you and hear your remarks yesterday. For the speaking engagement next Wednesday, I would like you to focus upon the Enron strategic model of virtual integration of market forces in the evolution of energy development. Wyoming represents a huge material resource base and the commission is charged with the development and promotion of such. But the Governor's message is that we cannot see ourselves as producers and exporters in the traditional sense. We will continue to have the status of a colony if we do not recognize the new dynamics of how these market places are evolving. If you set the stage with a presentation of Enron strategy, then we will discuss how a state, with its agencies and auathority can play a role in this evolution. I have set your time for 45 minutes, which can include a short Qand A period. But your message can be as succint as you can make it and get the point across. You may have to present the Enron case a number of different ways, but the Governor will give you latitude to make the point. You will be welcome to participate in a following panel which will address role playing by the state and the commission. Plan to join us for lunch. If you need more detail, let me know. Thanks! Stephen [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Schroeder; [EMail-Body]= Are we taking a postion on TXU's purchase of Spanish Hydro utility [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California Refund Proceeding Privileged and Confidential Attorney
 Work Product Attorney-Client Communication; [EMail-Body]= Dan, I need your help to make sure we get the appropriate evidence of these receivables into the record, so as to offset refunds deemed to be due (if any, after netting purchases and sales). As you will recall, we submitted some documentation of the $40MM receivable to Judge Wagner. I expect that we will have to provide quite a bit (more) detail regarding this and the other receivables. Also, who do you suggest for a witness on this, or will affidavits be sufficient? Need your input on this, since we may have to do additional research and now is the time to do it before the August 13 prehearing conference. Thanks! Ray ---------------------- Forwarded by Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron on 08/02/2001 05:00 PM --------------------------- Ray Alvarez 08/02/2001 04:31 PM To: Richard B Sanders/Enron@EnronXGate, Robert C Williams/Enron@EnronXGate, gfergus@brobeck.com cc: James D Steffes/Enron@EnronXGate, Alan Comnes/Enron@EnronXGate, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/Enron@EnronXGate, dwatkiss@bracepatt.com Subject: California Refund Proceeding Privileged and Confidential Attorney Work Product Attorney-Client Communication In our litigation meeting last Tuesday, we learned that netting of spot purchases and sales is of paramount importance in limiting our exposure to refunds, under the FERC's July 26 Order, in both the California and Pacific Northwest proceedings. However, in the California proceeding we are also afforded the opportunity in the Order to offset our receivables against any refund that would otherwise have to be paid by us. Also, to the extent that our receivables exceed the refund amount, the Order provides for payment of interest to us in accordance with CFR Section 35.19a. At present, I am aware of the existence of three receivables. As you will recall, I mentioned at Tuesday's meeting that we should be able to treat as a receivable for purposes of offset, the revenues due us from the application of the CAISO underscheduling penalty. I communicated the possibility of offsetting this receivable against any potential refund at this mornings Western Wholesale conference call, and subsequent research conducted by Alan Comnes indicates that the CAISO owes us $30MM, as per the CAISO's own numbers. The CAISO also owes us approximately $40MM due to nonpayment for one to two months of business. These two figures alone, totalling approximately $70MM, exceed the estimate of our potential exposure in the California proceeding. Finally, the negative CTC issue is another receivable due us by IOU's that, under the plain language of the Order, could potentially be used to offset any refund amount. I am not aware of the magnitude of this receivable but do understand that there are some sensitivities regarding this issue, including concerns about revealing the amount of the credit due us. It is likely that the amount would become public if it is presented in the California proceeding. Please give us your thoughts as to the use of the CTC receivable to offset potential refunds in the California proceeding. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Compensation Resource Group, Inc.'s Publications; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/28/2000=20 07:28 AM --------------------------- Bill MacDonald <bill@crgmail.com> on 08/25/2000 06:49:47 PM To: CRG Publications Subscribers=20 _CN=3DREC cc: =20 Subject: Compensation Resource Group, Inc.'s Publications August 25, 2000 Dear Subscriber: Compensation Resource Group, Inc., http://www.crgworld.com, would like to= =20 thank you for taking an interest in our 2000 Survey of Current Trends - A= =20 survey of Executive Benefits for the Fortune 1000. We would like to let you= =20 know that a full color PDF version of the seventh annual survey has been=20 posted to CRG=01,s Publications web page, ons.=20 To download a free copy of the Survey: 1. Go to 2. Type in your E-Mail address and click Login. 3. If you have not previously registered with us, you will be asked to fill= =20 out the short registration form. Once you complete the form, click ""SUBMIT= "". Then you can download and print. Once again we would like to thank you for your continued interest. =20 Sincerely, William L. MacDonald Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer =20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Chris (VP-EES) would like to have breakfast or lunch with you
 sometime next week to discuss California issues and wanted me to check your
 availability. (x53725); [EMail-Body]= Shirley, Please, set a meeting with him on Monday. Shirley, also please set up a meeting with Euford Cooper (Ford). His extension is 3-5612. Please, explain I did not have time to respond to his msg. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Staehlin, Roberta Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 9:34 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Chris (VP-EES) would like to have breakfast or lunch with you sometime next week to discuss California issues and wanted me to check your availability. (x53725) [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Government Affairs off-site presentations June 2000; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 07/27/2000 09:43 AM --------------------------- Amber Keenan @ ECT 07/26/2000 08:25 AM To: Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron, Philip Davies/LON/ECT@ECT, Paul Dawson/Govt. Affairs/LON/ECT@ECT, Christopher J Day/Govt. Affairs/LON/ECT@ECT, Nailia Dindarova/LON/ECT@ECT, Viviana Florio/LON/ECT@ECT, Kyran Hanks/LON/ECT@ECT, Paul Hennemeyer/LON/ECT@ECT, Alfredo Huertas/LON/ECT@ECT, Stephen Jones/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT, Teun Van Biert/LON/ECT@ECT, Doug Wood/LON/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Amr Michael Grimes/AP/Enron@Enron, Nicholas O'Day/AP/Enron@Enron, Mac Jane Robert Stella Chris Long/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Fabio Greco/LON/ECT@ECT, Tommaso Corrado/LON/ECT@ECT, John D Burrows/HOU/EES@EES, Mike Carsten Haack/FRA/ECT@ECT, Justyna Ozegalska/WAR/ECT@ECT, Heribert Kresse/FRA/ECT@ECT cc: Beverley Ashcroft/LON/ECT@ECT, Fiona Sayers/LON/ECT@ECT, Kerryann Irwin/LON/ECT@ECT, David Gonzalez/LON/ECT@ECT, Sadia Haider/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Government Affairs off-site presentations June 2000 Please find attached the presentations that were made during the Government and Regulatory Affairs off-site in June. Apologies for the delay. THE BRATTLE GROUP KYRAN HANKS & DUNG TRAN JIM STEFFES DONALD LASSERE PAUL DAWSON PHILIP DAVIES ALFREDO HUERTAS DOUG WOOD PETER STYLES STEPHEN JONES [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: FERC rulemaking on Generator Interconnection; [EMail-Body]= Jim -- The quick answer to your question on the Barton bill is that, yes, it does = appear to address this tax issue involving interconnections, at least in pa= rt. There is language in Title VIII on various tax issues. One of them ex= ludes from gross income certain amounts received by electric utilities, spe= cifically including connection fees. In the example in the e-mail, the iss= ue was not fees paid directly, but assets paid for by the generator that ar= e then transferred to the utility. Will check on that angle. In any event, Title VIII (while in the Barton bill) is not in the jurisdict= ion of Barton's subcommittee. Instead, the tax title would have to go thro= ugh the Ways and Means Committee. There were some energy tax provisions in= the House-passed energy bill last August. Chris and I will consult tomorr= ow to see if this issue was included in that bill. Aside from the tax issue, Barton bill would require the type of interconnec= tion rulemaking that FERC is now conducting (both for connections to local = distribution and to transmission). In each case, the cost of interconnecti= on would have to be comparable to what the utility charges others similarly= situated. I will go back to double check, but off the top of my head I re= call that the Bingaman draft specifically ""socializes"" the costs of interco= nnection. John -----Original Message----- From: Steffes, James D.=20 Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 1:40 PM To: Shelk, John Subject: FW: FERC rulemaking on Generator Interconnection John -- Does the Barton proposal deal with this issue of tax on facilities for gene= rators? Jim -----Original Message----- From: Nicolay, Christi L.=20 Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 11:47 AM To: Parquet, David; Lindberg, Susan; Hueter, Barbara A.; Rasmussen, Dale; Dieball, Scott; Tweed, Sheila; Booth, Chris; Carnahan, Kathleen; Churbock, Scott; Comeaux, Keith; Gimble, Mathew; Grube, Raimund; Hausinger, Sharon; Inman, Zachary; Jacoby, Ben; Keenan, Jeffrey; Kellermeyer, Dave; Krause, Greg; Krimsky, Steven; Kroll, Heather; Mitro, Fred; Moore, John; Tapscott, Ron; Whitaker, Rick; Baughman, Edward D.; Coulter, Kayne; Day, Smith L.; Gilbert, Gerald; Kinser, John; May, Tom; Miller, Jeffrey; Will, Lloyd; Twiggs, Thane; Ryall, Jean; Jones, Karen E.; Mann, Kay; Sole III, Carlos; Calger, Christopher F. Cc: Comnes, Alan; Fulton, Donna; Novosel, Sarah; Steffes, James D.; Wehn, Samuel; Fillinger, Mark; Hartsoe, Joe; Shapiro, Richard; Robertson, Linda; Hoatson, Tom Subject: RE: FERC rulemaking on Generator Interconnection Thanks Dave, The Nov. 1 meeting will be focused more on establishing the procedure that = FERC will follow to tackle the interconnection issues other than costs (suc= h as timelines, basic procedures). ERCOT will present its agreement and pr= ocedures and EPSA will present a list of problems that members have had. E= nron worked closely with other EPSA members over the past several years on = problems that we have encountered in the interconnection procedures and IAs= . EEI will also make a presentation. (Additionally, as you are probably a= ware, over the past several years we have discussed problems with FERC hotl= ine and have also had FERC staff call us to inquire about general interconn= ection issues -- this ANOPR is meant to address many of those issues.) At the end of the Nov. 1 meeting, other meeting participants will have a br= ief amount of time to raise issues. Donna Fulton will attend for Enron. F= ERC then plans to convene a series of meetings to establish generic interco= nnection procedures and parts of an IA (results due to FERC Dec 14). We wi= ll then also submit Enron comments on the ERCOT IA and procedures by Dec. 2= 1. =20 FERC IS NOT addressing the cost issues during this stage of the proceedings= ; therefore, it will most likely not be dealing with the tax gross-up and c= rediting issues yet. It plans to deal with cost issues in a subsequent rul= emaking. (We certainly understand that cost issues are typically the most = problematic part of interconnection negotiations, but this is the way FERC = wants to proceed. FERC will continue to deal with cost issues in orders wh= en disputed IAs are filed at FERC unexecuted.) By way of background on ERCOT, as I understand it, ERCOT basically rolls in= the interconnection costs (network-type upgrades) to the entire grid throu= gh TCOS (an uplift). However, TCOS are not allowed to be unlimited -- ERCO= T has the ability to decide whether the generator interconnection is in the= best interest of the grid. Some attribute all the new generation in ERCOT= to this method. We will need to formulate Enron's view in the next phase = of the interconnection proceeding. For Thurs. meeting, I think Donna should raise these issues: -- While certain basic aspects of the IA should be standardized to eliminat= e the waste of time we usually face dealing with the same problems over and= over, the IA should be flexible enough to allow for individual business ci= rcumstances (for example, the notice to proceed that we have been including= .) -- While having timelines and procedures are fine, the larger problem has b= een getting utilities to actually follow their own filed procedures (for ex= ample, Entergy was one of the first to file procedures, yet seems to have a= problem sticking to their timelines.) This yet again means that RTOs are = critical to stop the discriminatory practices and to provide incentives to = treat us as customers. --There needs to be more discussion on best practice No.2 below -- Energy r= esource or capacity resource. This should be reviewed in the context of FE= RC's NOPR on icap (Enron just submitted comments that ""capacity"" as a separ= ate payment is not necessary in functioning markets. In addition, ""capacit= y"" is not a separately required ""payment"" in most parts of the US outside o= f current ISOs (ERCOT does not have icap)). Attached is the ANOPR, ERCOT IA and procedures. Susan Lindberg will be cir= culating a draft of Enron comments on the agreement and procedures. Includ= ed on p. 11 of the ANOPR are ""best practices"" which include: 1. Comparable treatment for IPPs (allowed to be competing network resources= for load without having to be designated as a ""network"" resouce) 2. Multiple interconnection products: Energy resource and capacity resourc= e 3. Small generator exemption 4. Queueing with reasonable milestones (10 days to correct deficiencies) 5. Deposits (with deposits over actual cost refunded) 6. Siting: TPs would post optimal and non-optimal sites for locating genera= tors (this is something that we had asked some new ITCs to provide. Most T= Ps have been reluctant to provide this service.) 7. Timelines (very similar to currently approved timelines) Please provide any thoughts/comments to Susan Lindberg, Donna Fulton, Sarah= Novosel and me. Thanks. Christi 37007 =20 =20 -----Original Message----- From: Parquet, David=20 Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 11:47 AM To: Lindberg, Susan; Hueter, Barbara A.; Rasmussen, Dale; Dieball, Scott; Tweed, Sheila; Booth, Chris; Carnahan, Kathleen; Churbock, Scott; Comeaux, Keith; Gimble, Mathew; Grube, Raimund; Hausinger, Sharon; Inman, Zachary; Jacoby, Ben; Keenan, Jeffrey; Kellermeyer, Dave; Krause, Greg; Krimsky, Steven; Kroll, Heather; Mitro, Fred; Moore, John; Tapscott, Ron; Whitaker, Rick; Baughman, Edward D.; Coulter, Kayne; Day, Smith L.; Gilbert, Gerald; Kinser, John; May, Tom; Miller, Jeffrey; Will, Lloyd Cc: Comnes, Alan; Fulton, Donna; Nicolay, Christi L.; Novosel, Sarah; Steffes, James D.; Wehn, Samuel; Fillinger, Mark Subject: RE: FERC rulemaking on Generator Interconnection I skimmed the attached NOPR looking for the approach FERC was proposing to = take to the key issue we fought over here in CA a couple of years ago. Alt= hough I did not see the word ""congestion"", the implication of what I read i= s that the generator would pay for his extension cord plus any congestion i= mpacts that it makes on the grid. The implication of the last statement is= that the generator would put the grid back into the condition it was in ""b= ut for"" the new generator. That is great, assuming I did not skim from too= high an altitude. Did I? I also read the thing from the point of view of an issue that I had forgott= en about until recently. That is, if the generator pays for all of this up= grade and ""but for"" stuff, and then ""gives"" it to the utility, are there ta= xes due on the ""gift""? When we developed our project in Pittsburg, CA, PG&= E's initial position was that we owed them for the upgrades AND for the tax= es on the upgrades (about 35 - 40% additional charge), which they turned ov= er to the state and fed. (This is potentially A LOT of money to ""waste"" on= an interconnect, if it is an expensive one.) Working with Enron's tax dep= t (I do not remember specifically with whom), we convinced PG&E that taxes = were probably not due for various reasons, and we mutually agreed to get a = private letter ruling from the IRS confirming. (We also agreed that IF the= taxes were ever due, that we would pay them.) I understand that that IRS = ruling was put in abeyance, pending some sort of law congress was consideri= ng. (I may be making this up here as I go along because Calpine bought the= project from us and I lost track of the various machinations.) The point = of all of this. Is it reasonable in this NOPR process on interconnection t= o address the tax issue? Is it too late? Is it irrelevant to the FERC pro= cess? Does anyone know the status of the law making process? =20 I am concerned about taxes for two reasons. First, many of the opponents t= o the proposed NOPR approach thought that all grid upgrades should be paid = for by the utility and included in rate base. (In other words, ""all gener= ators are good and benefit the ratepayers."") On fundamental grounds they w= ill resist paying for upgrades. If they believe that they will get the ins= ult after injury treatment (pay for upgrades AND for taxes on the upgrades)= , they will resist the NOPR more strenously. (FYI to everyone, Calpine str= ongly resisted paying for upgrades at Pittsburg and somehow got out of it. = And guess what? Now with all of the new plants - ~1200MW added by Calpine= within a 5 mile area of 2500 MW of existing - there are congestion problem= s around all of the projects, just as we forecasted. ISO is now considerin= g adding a new zone and/or charging PG&E and/or the projects for congestion= . Because PG&E did not, and probably never will in our lifetime, add the g= rid upgrades so as to include in ratebase, the projects will be hurt. Beca= use all of this is not forecastable in the context of developing a project = in a timely manner, this outcome, exactly as we had forecasted, is why we s= upported the approach in the proposed NOPR.) Second, perhaps naively, I am= assuming that the tax issue is no different for gas pipeline upgrades than= for electric transmission system upgrades. On a project we are now develo= ping in Roseville, CA, we are faced with significant gas pipeline system up= grades in PG&E's system. Significant grossups for tax impacts of the ""gift= "" are are being discussed as I remember for Pittsburg's electric transmissi= on system upgrades. Since it sounds like the same issue, sure would be nic= e if we could get some appropriate precedence going. Any possibliity of de= aling with the tax issues in this NOPR? -----Original Message----- From: Lindberg, Susan=20 Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 7:29 AM To: Parquet, David; Hueter, Barbara A.; Rasmussen, Dale; Dieball, Scott; Tweed, Sheila; Booth, Chris; Carnahan, Kathleen; Churbock, Scott; Comeaux, Keith; Gimble, Mathew; Grube, Raimund; Hausinger, Sharon; Inman, Zachary; Jacoby, Ben; Keenan, Jeffrey; Kellermeyer, Dave; Krause, Greg; Krimsky, Steven; Kroll, Heather; Mitro, Fred; Moore, John; Tapscott, Ron; Whitaker, Rick; Baughman, Edward D.; Coulter, Kayne; Day, Smith L.; Gilbert, Gerald; Kinser, John; May, Tom; Miller, Jeffrey; Will, Lloyd Cc: Comnes, Alan; Fulton, Donna; Nicolay, Christi L.; Novosel, Sarah; Steffes, James D. Subject: FW: FERC rulemaking on Generator Interconnection Please see the attached. FERC has asked for preliminary comments on its pr= oposal to adopt a standard generator interconnection agreement and procedur= es; the deadline for comments is December 21. After it has considered the = comments, FERC will issue a NOPR. EPMI will participate in the Nov. 1 meeting at FERC; an update will be sent= to you. I will be taking the lead on drafting our comments. =20 Please contact me if you need further information. Susan Lindberg 713.853.0596 -----Original Message----- From: Jackie Gallagher [mailto:JGallagher@epsa.org] Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 8:57 AM To: acomnes@enron.com; Hawkins, Bernadette; Nersesian, Carin; Nicolay, Christi L.; Fulton, Donna; Scheuer, Janelle; Hartsoe, Joe; Shelk, John; jsteffe@enron.com; Noske, Linda J.; Robertson, Linda; Alvarez, Ray; Shapiro, Richard; Novosel, Sarah; Mara, Susan; Lindberg, Susan; Hoatson, Tom Subject: FERC ANOPR on Generator Interconnection Last night, FERC issued an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANOPR) o= n Standardizing Generator Interconnection Agreements and Procedures. The A= NOPR incorporates the ERCOT interconnection procedures, modified by various= ""best practices"" identified by the Commission in an attachment. A public = meeting has been scheduled for November 1st in Washington, although the not= ice of the meeting is not yet available. We will forward it when it become= s available. The ANOPR is attached. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Presentation to faculty and students at Berkeley; [EMail-Body]= FYI. I am sending Vince some materials we have used ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/20/2000 09:21 AM ----- Vince J Kaminski@ECT 09/18/2000 01:26 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Charlene Jackson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Celeste Roberts/HOU/ECT@ECT, Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ashley Baxter/Corp/Enron@Enron Subject: Presentation to faculty and students at Berkeley Steve, I am a lead recruiter at the University of California at Berkeley for Enron Analyst/Associate program. I contacted several friends who work at Berkeley and received an invitation from one of them to make a presentation at the weekly Faculty Seminar of the Dept. of Industrial Engineering and Operations Research. The students and faculty members from the business school will be also invited. Berkeley in general, and Department of Industrial Engineering and Operations Research in particular, are important centers of academic research on electricity markets (S. Oren works very closely with Severin Borenstein). My presentation will focus on the Analyst/Associate program. I shall also have an opportunity to discuss the power markets in California (I expect many questions) before many experts who are very important to shaping public opinion and regulatory agenda. Please, let me know who in you group could help me in preparing this presentation and in presenting Enron's point of view in a more effective way. Vince FYI. The name of my friend who invited me: Shmuel S. Oren, Professor Dept. of Industrial Engineering and Operations Research 4117 Etcheverry Hall University of California Berkeley, CA 94720-1777 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: PG&E PX Credit Calculation -- CONFIDENTIAL ATTY CLIENT WORK
 PRODUCT; [EMail-Body]= I am not sure I understand your second paragraph. If PG&E reduces going-forward procurement costs to reflect FERC-ordered refunds, I do not understand why it would affect already-issued CTC charges. The cost of power would be cheaper going forward. -----Original Message----- From: Steffes, James D. Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 3:24 PM To: Comnes, Alan; Dasovich, Jeff; Tribolet, Michael; Curry, Wanda; Mellencamp, Lisa; 'Jan Paul Acton (E-mail)'; Swain, Steve; Mara, Susan Cc: Alvarez, Ray Subject: RE: PG&E PX Credit Calculation -- CONFIDENTIAL ATTY CLIENT WORK PRODUCT Thanks for the thoughts. I fully agree on BF costs and DWR costs. I believe that you are right on Est RT$ = CAISOM Imbalance, but I need to check. On the question of retroactive ratemaking, it is my understanding that you are correct. PG&E probably won't rebill, but will need to put in place an adjustment to the going forward PX Credit to ""collect"" the overpayment of Negative CTC. All of this means that the impact of the FERC refund is less than 100c on the $ for the Negative CTC. Jim -----Original Message----- From: Comnes, Alan Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 4:35 PM To: Steffes, James D.; Dasovich, Jeff; Tribolet, Michael; Curry, Wanda; Mellencamp, Lisa; 'Jan Paul Acton (E-mail)'; Swain, Steve; Mara, Susan Cc: Alvarez, Ray Subject: RE: PG&E PX Credit Calculation -- CONFIDENTIAL ATTY CLIENT WORK PRODUCT I assume that if an hourly PX market clearing price is mitigated per a FERC order it would affect variable ""HC"" in the formula laid out in the attachment. It is not clear to me which variable represents hourly ISO imbalance energy costs, but I assume its ""Est RT$"". If I am right, that variable would be affected by the mitigated market price (MMP) for CAISO imbalance energy. My comments are: The FERC is able to only order refunds to jurisdictional entities and, given appeals, it may take years before the full extent of thre refunds are known. Therefore there will be a significant difference between the change in the mitigated market price (MMP) as declared by FERC and the PX credit. That is, a 10% reduction in the MMP should not be construed as having a 10% effect on the PX credit, assuming it can be recalculated at all. Specifically, only some of the ""HC"" or ""Est RT$"" costs can be adjusted per FERC refund orders. Also, the PX credit is a tariffed rate. I do not believe the PU code allows for retroactive adjustments to tariffed rates unless there was an explicit cost tracking account (e.g. a balancing A/C). To my knowledge, no such account exists here. Finally, I do not see a relationship between MMPs and (1) block forward costs on any date and (2) PG&E and/or DWR's procurement costs for the net short position post January 19. So, those PX credit costs should be unaffected by any FERC refund order. Alan Comnes -----Original Message----- From: Steffes, James D. Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 7:22 AM To: Dasovich, Jeff; Tribolet, Michael; Curry, Wanda; Mellencamp, Lisa; Jan Paul Acton (E-mail); Swain, Steve; Mara, Susan; Comnes, Alan Subject: PG&E PX Credit Calculation Attached is a summary of PG&E's notes on how they calculate the PX Credit (until January 19, 2001 when they hardwired $150/mwh). We continue to try and get a handle on how the FERC Refund case will impact the PX Credit and Negative CTC. If anyone has any issues or comments, please let me know. Thanks. Jim << File: PG&E PX Credit Calculation.doc >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Confidential - GSS Organization Value to ETS; [EMail-Body]= I have forwarded to Stan and agree with your perspective. Could you begin to think about who those people might be if we decided to do something? -----Original Message----- From: Saunders, James Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 10:31 AM To: Hayslett, Rod Cc: Brassfield, Morris Subject: FW: Confidential - GSS Organization Value to ETS Rod, Stan is/was reviewing selected ""corp."" services, and one of those selected was GSS. I requested that Morris provide some persepective on GSS. Please review and forward to Stan, if appropriate. -----Original Message----- From: Brassfield, Morris Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 10:05 AM To: Saunders, James Subject: Confidential - GSS Organization Value to ETS Here are my thoughts on the value the GSS (Global Strategic Sourcing) brings to ETS: I believe totally in the concept of strategically sourcing our materials and services for ETS, which is the concept that GSS was founded under, while still within the ETS organization. Basically the value that GSS has brought to the bottom line during the last year has been minimal to ETS. The reasons for that statement, in my opinion, are: The materials and services that ETS purchase are basic and routine. Most of those materials and service providers were identified and sourced during 1999 and 2000. ETS is reaching the point where we need fewer providers, not more. New items identified are normally rolled into one of our already sourced NPA's. Almost all large dollar items are bid out (three bids and a buy). GSS's involvement and commitment to the deal ends with the contract signing. ETS P&SM organization and our Contracts services group deals with the actual execution and the ringing of the cash register. If the GSS organization went away tomorrow, we would need the following expertise brought over from their group: (currently this group is close to 75 people.)(and very highly paid individuals) Two (2) negotiators - Contract Managers Two (2) analysts Two (2) contract administrators The administration of the following services would need to be shifted to the ISC: iBuyit System Catalog system (part of iBuyit) iPayit system We would need to re-assess the value of the contract with SourceNet and whether we continue down that path or implement our own A/P department. This would take very few staff adds to make that happen. Let me know if you need any further detail. Morris (713) 503-1409 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Funky Business; [EMail-Body]= I have looked it over. I think they would do a good job. Another idea: Dick Foster (advisor to Enron's Board and Senior Director at McKinsey) has a great book out: ""Creative Destruction"". I was on a panel with him recently where he shared some of his research. He is a very good presenter; he knows Enron well; and his work is first rate. He might be a good addition. I have an idea on the breakout sessions. It needs some work but I'd like to talk it through with you. TERRIE JAMES@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS 07/05/2001 01:09 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Funky Business Steve, Have you had a chance to look at the book ""Funky Business"" and to give any thought to having Jonas present at the Management Conference? I know you have a thousand other things on your plate, not the least of which is California, so I understand if the answer is no. However, they've been contacted by someone else about the date so we may be forced to decide rather soon. On a related subject, I'm contemplating another topic for the conference. I'd seen an article in Fortune several months ago titled ""Managing for the Slowdown."" It talked about new challenges managers face in light of the economic downturn. (Most young managers have never experienced anything but boom times.) The article also outlines a dozen or so things companies should be thinking about now. (Use the downturn as a new opportunity to evaluate people. Overhaul your budget process. Don't stop communicating. etc.) I think it would be beneficial to address similar strategies and ideas with our managers. I'd love to get your thoughts on this idea. (Is it appropriate for Enron or am I just seeing the world through bleak-colored glasses?) Terrie James Sr. Director, Corporate Communication Enron Broadband Services 713-853-7727 (phone) 713-646-8887 (fax) terrie_james@enron.net ----- Forwarded by Terrie James/Enron Communications on 07/05/01 12:44 PM ----- Alison@isbspeakers.com 07/05/01 10:40 AM To: Terrie James/Enron Communications@Enron Communications cc: Subject: Funky Business July 5, 2001 Terrie: We received an e-mail today from the Funky Business office asking about the date we have on hold with Enron. They have another inquiry about that date and wondered if Enron is still considering using Jonas. If you are still considering them I will keep him on hold. And if they get a firm offer I will let you know immediately. We will have 24 hours to make an offer or release the hold once a firm offer comes in from another company. Hope you had a great 4th of July, Alison Kravetz 800-842-4483 x239 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: SMS conference; [EMail-Body]= Ian, My secretary contacted SMS. I was surprised that they want to charge me for the conference. Typically, the speakers are invited to attend without incurring the cost of a conference. The is the first invitation to speak I received, combined with a request to pay for the privilege. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""MacMillan, Ian"" Sent: Monday, June 18, 2001 6:37 AM To: 'vkamins@enron.com' Subject: SMS conference Hi Vince This may be out of date, but I've returned from Mainalnd China and found this message waiting for me To: ""Max"" <boisot@attglobal.net> Subject: SMSRV: #123-Panel; Boisot, M; Co-author V Kaminski Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 10:19:36 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=""iso-8859-1"" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 1 X-MSMail-Priority: High X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 ----- Original Message ----- From: Strategic Management Society <sms@mgmt.purdue.edu> To: <max.boisot@eresmas.net> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 10:30 PM Subject: #123-Panel; Boisot, M; Co-author V Kaminski > Dear Professor Boisot, > > We would appreciate your assistance... > > On June 1, 2001 an email was sent regarding Vince Kaminski...Will Mr > Kaminski be participating in the panel presentation co-authored with > yourself, Charles Baden-Fuller, Ian MacMillan, and Rita McGrath? Please > advise. If Mr Kaminski will be participating we will contact him regarding > his registration fee. If not, his name will be removed from the program. > > Thank you... > > > SMS Executive Office > 1310 Krannert Center > Purdue University > W Lafayette IN 47907-1310 > USA > Phone: 765-494-6984 > Fax: 765-494-1533 > Email: sms@mgmt.purdue.edu > Website: www.smsweb.org [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE:; [EMail-Body]= Frank, Thanks for your message. What about a meeting on Tuesday, September the 4th. We could meet at your office, let's say at 4 p.m. We would be delighted if you could join us for dinner later in the evening on the same day. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Frank A. Wolak"" Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 11:13 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Vince, I'll be out of the country for the next two weeks, but should be back September 3 and will be in the office all that week. Frank [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Bingaman reliability draft language; [EMail-Body]= It is important to point out that under the Bingaman reliability language, FERC has total discretion as to whether to adopt a NERC standard. Charles does make a good point about the deference language. As written, FERC has discretion to defer to NERC or an RTO to monitor and enforce compliance. At a minimum, that language should be expanded to include another entity like an EISB. Similarly, the language should probably be tweaked to allow FERC to adopt standards of an organization other than NERC. -----Original Message----- From: Yeung, Charles Sent: Friday, October 12, 2001 9:14 AM To: Shelk, John; Shapiro, Richard; Robertson, Linda; Steffes, James D.; Bestard, Jose; Walton, Steve; Perrino, Dave; Novosel, Sarah; Shortridge, Pat; Nicolay, Christi L. Subject: RE: Bingaman reliability draft language I understand that the NERC needs to be recognized for political reasons - but this shuts out the possibility of a EISB. Since it recognizes RTOs, it should alos leave open the possibility of yet another entity to perform the reliability standards setting function, at least allow for the RTOs to work through a central standards setting organization other than NERC. -----Original Message----- From: Shelk, John Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 10:31 AM To: Shapiro, Richard; Robertson, Linda; Steffes, James D.; Yeung, Charles; Bestard, Jose; Walton, Steve; Perrino, Dave; Novosel, Sarah; Shortridge, Pat; Nicolay, Christi L. Subject: FW: Bingaman reliability draft language Per Jim's request, below is the text of the simple Bingaman reliability language for everyone's review. -----Original Message----- From: Nersesian, Carin Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 11:11 AM To: Shelk, John Subject: Bingaman reliability draft language SEC. 410. ELECTRIC RELIABILITY STANDARDS. Part II of the Federal Power Act is further amended by adding at the end the following: ASEC. 215. ELECTRIC RELIABILITY STANDARDS. A(a) DUTY OF THE COMMISSION.B The Commission shall establish and enforce a system of mandatory electric reliability standards to ensure the reliable operation of the interstate transmission system, which shall be applicable toB A(1) any entity that sells, purchases, or transmits, electric energy using the interstate transmission system, and A(2) any entity that owns, operates, or maintains facilities that are a part of the interstate transmission system. A(b) USE OF NORTH AMERICAN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL STANDARDS.B In carrying out its responsibilities under subsection (a), the Commission may adopt and enforce, in whole or in part, a standard proposed or adopted by the North American Electric Reliability Council. A(c) MONITORING COMPLIANCE.B In carrying out its responsibilities under subsection (a), the Commission may defer to the North American Electric Reliability Council or a regional transmission organization to ensure the reliable operation of the interstate transmission system and to monitor and enforce compliance of the members of the North American Electric Reliability Council or a regional transmission organization with electric reliability standards of the Commission. A(c) DEFINITIONS .B For purposes of this section: A(1) The term >interstate transmission system= means facilities used for the transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce. A(2) The term >reliability= means the ability of the interstate transmission system to supply the aggregate electric demand and energy requirements of electricity consumers at all times and the ability of the system to withstand sudden disturbances.@. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Talking Points For Rep. Barton On Tauzin RTO Letter; [EMail-Body]= Linda requested some background and talking points on the pending RTO letter from Chairman Tauzin to FERC that is sitting on Chairman Barton's desk TODAY for his decision whether to co-sign the letter. While we have not seen the text, we are told that it is ""anti-RTO"" and may go so far as to state or imply that FERC does not have authority to do what is doing with RTOs. (We know this is the view of one of Chairman Tauzin's counsels, who formerly worked for Southern Co.). Chairman Tauzin has been contacted by Entergy and the Louisiana Public Service Commission to send the letter. I spoke to Chairman Barton's staff, Andy Black, this afternoon and relayed our concerns. The Barton Subcommittee is now expected to mark up an electricity bill in December (per a Republican Member meeting held this morning). ACTION ITEM: Call Rep. Joe Barton (202/225-2002) TALKING POINTS: 1. Should start with something about the Dynegy/Enron transaction (it will be strange if Mr. Lay or Steve calls Chairman Barton and does not start the conversation with some reference to the transaction). 2. Mentioning the transaction naturally leads into the importance of competitive wholesale markets for power, both for consumers and for the largely Texas-based marketing, trading and merchant power industries. 3. We understand that Chairman Barton has been approached by Chairman Tauzin about a letter to FERC on the RTO issue. We know Chairman Barton is well aware of Enron's strong support for FERC's RTO initiatives. We respect Chairman Barton's interest in seeing to it that Congress does not abdicate its responsibility to make energy policy. 4. If, as we have been lead to believe, the letter states or implies that FERC does not have authority to act in the RTO arena, this will be seen as a potentially destabilizing development since FERC is so far down the road of creating RTOs. 5. While we understand some in Congress and elsewhere were concerned that FERC was moving too fast, as of the last FERC meeting earlier this month, that is no longer true even if it ever was true. While we think RTOs should be created sooner rather than later, FERC is listening to state regulators and others who had concerns. 6. A letter from congressional leaders questioning FERC's authority goes too far in the direction of those who oppose any RTOs. Furthermore, it is wrong as a matter of law. The D.C. Circuit held in the gas cases and in the power cases on Order 888 that FERC has authority to address systemic discrimination, which is in large part what the RTOs are all about -- a remedy for iscrimination. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Market Stack; [EMail-Body]= Eric, July works for me. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Eric Toolson"" <etoolson@hesinet.com>@ENRON Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 2:45 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Cc: Cunningham, Lance; Lin, Martin; Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Re: Market Stack Vince, Thanks for you offer. I need to change my agenda for next week, so would something in early July work for you. Thanks for your assistance. Eric -----Original Message----- From: Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com> To: etoolson@hesinet.com <etoolson@hesinet.com> Cc: Lance.Cunningham@enron.com <Lance.Cunningham@enron.com>; Martin.Lin@enron.com <Martin.Lin@enron.com>; Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com <Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com> Date: Friday, June 15, 2001 11:42 AM Subject: RE: Market Stack >Eric, > >I shall be glad to talk to you about it. The first three days >of the next week would work for me. > >Vince > > > -----Original Message----- > From: ""Eric Toolson"" <etoolson@hesinet.com>@ENRON > NRON@ENRON.com] > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 8:10 PM > To: Vince Kaminski > Subject: Market Stack > > > Vince, > > Henwood is in the process of developing a new product that, for lack of > a better name, we are calling Market Stack. The purpose is to allow > traders to utilize the load and supply data in EMSS without the hassle > of a full-blown simulation. The software would be designed to allow > traders to develop a market (or supply) stack with a minimum number of > keystrokes. The stacks could be developed for a utility, transarea, or > region, would contain load data, and would be capable of incorporating > real-time information to provide fundamental insight and market > advantage. > > At this point in the process we are looking for ideas (and sponsors). > If you think your traders might be open to the idea, I would like to > talk to you and them about it, and potentially as early as next week. > > Please advise. > > Thanks, > Eric [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Trip to California; [EMail-Body]= Liz, Greg: Frank Wolak from Stanford will be back in the office on Tuesday, August 7. I hope to set up a meeting with him and then to finalize the meeting with Prediction Co. I shall be shooting for August 23 - 24, in view of Greg's trip on the 15th and 16th. I left a message for Norman Packard, telling him that I should be able to get back to him regarding the trip to Santa Fe by Tuesday this week. The first draft of the non-disclosure agreement will be ready by Tuesday or Wednesday. Have a good trip. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Taylor, Liz M. Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 3:33 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Cc: Crenshaw, Shirley Subject: RE: Trip to California Vince, Greg is scheduled for an Asset Tour on the 15th & 16th of this month. Liz -----Original Message----- From: Kaminski, Vince J Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 8:17 AM To: 'wolak@zia.stanford.edu' Cc: Crenshaw, Shirley; Kaminski, Vince J; Taylor, Liz M. Subject: Trip to California Frank, Greg Whalley and I are planning another trip to a California. The trip is most likely to take place on the 16th - 17th of August or a week later (23rd - 24th of August). Are you available for an afternoon meeting and / or dinner on Thursday, August 16 or August 23? We are very interested in your thoughts about the directions of the power markets across the US. Vince Kaminski [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: 1.  London, June 28 - 29; 2.  Houston, July 16 - 17; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: ""Ehud I. Ronn"" <eronn@mail.utexas.edu>@ENRON Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 11:08 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: 1. London, June 28 - 29; 2. Houston, July 16 - 17 Vince: Greetings. I write at this time for two reasons. First, w.r.t. 6/28 - 6/29 London, I remain uncertain whether you intend personally to attend and present at that EPRM Financial Math course. I wanted to advise you know that, in addition to the sightseeing/theatre we traditionally do at these events, we -- you, Duane Seppi, Peter Nance and I -- have been invited to dinner at the home of Klaus and Renee Toft Sat. evening 6/30. Second, w.r.t. the subsequent mid-July Houston training course, I write to remind you that at EPRM 2001 we discussed the possibility of jointly attending a baseball game at Enron Field 7/16 or 7/17. Per the Astros' schedule, it turns out the Cleveland Indians will be in town both nights for a 7:05 p.m. first-pitch start time at the Field. Let me know if either 7/16 or 7/17 works out from your perspective. Hope all is well. Best, Ehud Ehud I. Ronn Jack S. Josey Professor in Energy Studies Department of Finance McCombs School of Business University of Texas at Austin Austin, TX. 78712-1179 Voice: (512) 471-5853 FAX: (512) 471-5073 Internet: eronn@mail.utexas.edu [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= test message; [EMail-Body]= Testing Notes capabilities of your Enron home computer. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Summary of Administration Comments on Bingaman Bill; [EMail-Body]= I have read through the 19 pages of Administration comments on the Bingaman draft electricity bill released last month. Here are the main items in a quick bullet format so you have the flavor of them. Delete provision on federal jurisdiction over bundled/unbundled (they don't offer a reason). We of course agree for tactical reasons. Add a provision to authorize FERC to order wheeling in States that open retail markets. Add a provision to allow FERC to issue wheeling orders on its own motion based on an informal hearing rather than an adjudicatory hearing as under current law. Make it clear that the Federal Power Act does not affect the authority of a State to require retail competition (the comments say some utilities have tried to argue that the FPA prohibits states). The provision giving FERC power to order RTO participation should be deleted. The comments raise drafting question. The changes to the FERC merger review sections of the FPA should be limited. ""FERC lite"" should be extended only to state municipal utilities and cooperatives, not the Federal utilities. The FERC should authority over the Federal transmission systems equivalent to FERC authority over public utilities (with special BPA rules). No need to legislate on market-based rates (we oppose the Bingaman language anyway, so this is helpful). Interconnection language should be limited to transmission facilities, not local distribution. No objection to streamlined reliability provision (this is good for us). Remedial measures for market power should be deleted. Administration to provide legislative language on federal transmission siting provisions, which they want to retain. Not convinced there is a need for market transparency rules because FERC and DOE already have enough authority. Administration supports even tougher criminal penalties. Recordkeeping under PUHCA repeal should be clarified. Federal purchase requirement for renewable energy should be deleted. No objection to real-time pricing standard. Net metering should be limited to small residential renewable facilities. Do not support federal renewable portfolio standard (but could clarify state authority to adopt same). [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call
 Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and
 Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted; [EMail-Body]= PLEASE MARK YOUR CALENDAR Date: Every Thursday Time: 7:30 am Pacific, 9:30 am Central, and 10:30 am Eastern time Number: 1-888-271-0949 Host Code: 661877 (for Ray only) Participant Code: 936022 (for everyone else) The table of the on-going FERC issues and proceedings is available to all team members on the O drive. Please feel free to revise/add to/ update this table as appropriate. Proposed agenda for tomorrow: CAISO filed Amendment No. 40 which would suspend the use of preliminary invoices and disbursements. CA refund proceeding status. Please feel free to communicate any additional agenda items to the group . [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Update -- Project 100; [EMail-Body]= It's fine with me. Mary Clark 09/27/2000 11:23 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Update -- Project 100 Steve, our theme for the stock celebration is ""Oh, The Places You'll Go,"" which is the title of a Dr. Seuss book. Everyone on the team loves this idea because the messages in the book represent Enron thinking and culture. In case, you aren't familiar with the book, Beth Tilney has a copy. Our plan is to give every employee a book, which will have a note of appreciation on the inside cover from Ken, Jeff and Joe. We are contacting Random House (who will contact the Seuss estate) to see if we can purchase 20,000 copies and to get permission to use some of the copy in our internal communication materials. The per unit cost is considerably lower due to the volume. We think employees will like this idea. What do you think? Mary [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Department meeting conference call.  800-283-1805, in Rick's name.; [EMail-Body]= Page Montovano Diane -- pay for part of an admin Ken Rice Steve Shackman -- MayaMora Weber 609 279 4094 Cal trip Leave meessage for Eliz and Karen 39504 Sheila Galloway Ralph Cavanagh (415) 777 -0220 Mike Day 415 781 0701 Meg Nollen [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Analyst PRC; [EMail-Body]= A memo is coming out shortly. From: Rod Hayslett/ENRON@enronXgate on 04/30/2001 08:42 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Analyst PRC Where can I go to find out what is required of me for the upcoming Analyst PRC? Rod Hayslett EB4054 713-853-6178 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= House Energy Committee Passes First Energy Package; [EMail-Body]= Late this morning, the House Energy and Commerce Committee adoped the committee print, as amended, of an energy package that addresses conservation, clean coal, renewables, hydro, nuclear, and boutique fuels. The vote was 50 to 5 to report the bill. Other committees -- Ways and Means, Science, and Resources -- also moved their energy bills this week. Thus, the House is on track to consider a merged package before the start of the August Recess on August 3rd. As to electricity, during the several days of debate this week both Chairmen Tauzin and Barton reaffirmed their intention to next move to electricity issues. Mr. Barton's staff advised me this morning that the subcommittee he chairs will hold a hearing on Friday, July 20th on all electricity issues other than transmission. While Mr. Barton has publicly held out hope of marking up an electricity bill this month, sources on and off the committee do not see this timetable as realistic. On the Senate side, the majority staff is working on an electricity ""white paper"" that may be circulated for comment next week. Below is a recap of action on amendments of interest to Enron: 1. Last night, on a largely partisan vote (with Democrats Hall, Green and John voting with the Republicans) the Committee rejected an amendment by Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA) (that was to have been offered by Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-CA)) that would have retroactively amended the FERC refund date and essentially ordered refunds regardless of amounts owed to power sellers. 2. First thing this morning the Committee, again on a largely partisan basis (with Democrats Hall, Green, John and Towns), rejected a Waxman amendment to impose cost-of-service rates on all power in the West (other than generation added after 1/1/01). (Originally, Mr. Waxman was going to offer amendment to impose cost-of-service rates only on those who do not supply all available power during an emergency, but he ended up offering basically what he had pursued in subcommittee on the old ""Californa Only"" bill.) 3. The Committee adopted an amendment by Rep. Shadegg to amend the Natural Gas Act to make it clear that a natural gas ""transportation facility"" shall not be added to the National Register of Historic Places until FERC has abandoned the facility. Apparently there have been some instances of ""old"" pipelines being considered as ""historic places"" under federal law. The House Resources Committee added a similar amendment to its package yesterday. 4. By voice vote, the Committee rejected a Waxman Amendment to require the president to propose and implement a plan to bring U.S. greenhouse gases down to 1990 levels. There was strong opposition voiced by many Republicans and Democrats to this amendment. 5. By mixed vote of 24 to 29, the Committee defeated a Waxman Amendment to set cost and performance goals for renewables, including wind power, and authorize federal funds to assist with commercial project costs (up to 50 percent). [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: directions for June 21-22; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Hill Huntington <hillh@stanford.edu>@ENRON Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 6:11 PM To: conference:;@ENRON; mansur@econ.Berkeley.EDU; bjscott@aep.com; cholmes@utilicorp.com; jwcade@tva.gov; ddurack@cinergy.com; JHughes@epri.com; effarrow@stanford.edu; harris@gbn.com; kamat@ieor.berkeley.edu; pmeagher@epri.com; sparks@mills.edu; rentrike@epri.com; Subject: directions for June 21-22 If you have not yet registered for the June 21-22 conference, please do so to help our planning and to obtain contact information for you. I want to remind you that recommended conference attire is business casual. If you do not have a Stanford parking permit (either by mail or at your hotel), please drive to the conference facility, park, and obtain one at the meeting room. Detailed directions can be found on the website but here is a summary from Highway 101 North & South: Take the Embarcadero Road exit west toward Stanford. At El Camino Real, Embarcadero turns into Galvez Road as it enters the university. Stay in the left lane and continue toward the center of campus. At the four-way stop, turn right onto Campus Drive. Take first left (Lasuen Street) and drive to the end and park. Conference site is at this building. If you do not yet have a parking permit, we will give you one there. I look forward to a productive and interesting meeting. Hill Hillard G. Huntington EMF - an international forum on energy and environmental markets Voice: (650) 723-1050 408 Terman Center Fax: (650) 725-5362 Stanford University Email: hillh@stanford.edu Stanford, CA 94305-4026 EMF Website: [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Governor's Generator Phone calls; [EMail-Body]= You should also check my folder ""California - working group"" ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/15/2001 08:45 PM --------------------------- Joe Ronan <JoeR@calpine.com> on 05/15/2001 06:05:38 PM To: ""'Steven.J.Kean@enron.com'"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: RE: Governor's Generator Phone calls I thought that I sent my email, as you answered me. My fax is 925-600-8925. -----Original Message----- From: Steven.J.Kean@enron.com Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 3:51 PM To: Joe Ronan Subject: Re: Governor's Generator Phone calls Can you please send your email addresses and fax numbers too. (So I can email you information) Thank you. Maureen McVicker Steve Kean's Assistant Joe Ronan <JoeR@calpine.com> on 05/15/2001 05:23:14 PM To: ""'skean@enron.com'"" <skean@enron.com> cc: James Macias <Jmacias@calpine.com> Subject: Governor's Generator Phone calls Steve--I am at 925-600-2085, and Jim Macias is at 925-600-2306. Thanks. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Dan Allegretti's CT restructuring school in Houston -; [EMail-Body]= You are invited to join them for lunch. 1:00 - 2:00 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Lou Pai's staff meeting, 25C3.; [EMail-Body]= Hartsoe: PJM, Hogan,SPP, WSCC,Hebert,democratic nominee, ACA Andy Rotherham AAE membership (703)875-0764 Gordon Weil page Maureen [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron / Broadwing Confidential / Atty/Client Communication; [EMail-Body]= Wilson, Christine, and Robin, could you please coordinate with David L's group the gathering of the items needs by our outside counsel? As you can see, the burden of proof is on us, and without your help we will not prevail at Monday's hearing. You can see Dave Ditto's phone number and address in his earlier email. Kenton ---------------------- Forwarded by Kenton Erwin/Enron Communications on 02/23/2000 09:23 AM --------------------------- dditto@hollandhart.com on 02/23/2000 08:58:09 AM To: Brad Cheney/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, David Leatherwood/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Kenton Erwin/Enron Communications@Enron Communications cc: sblack@hollandhart.com Subject: Enron / Broadwing Confidential / Atty/Client Communication Confidentiality Notice: This message is confidential and may be privileged. If you believe that this e-mail has been sent to you in error, please reply to the sender that you might have received the message in error. Then please delete this e-mail. Thank you. Gentlemen, I am not sure who else should be included with this e-mail, but I wanted to summarize some thoughts and request additional documents and information. We will have a tough burden at the hearing on Monday at 2:00, simply because at each of the cuts they had several witnesses present while Enron had none, or perhaps one or two. After talking with Don Beamis it sounds like for the most part we photographed and investigated the cuts after the fact. Even though they may be completely at fault, proving it will be another thing. We can assume it will be a swearing match between witnesses. I hope to meet with Don Beamis Tomorrow or Friday to discuss cut reports, photographs, etc. To prevail, I think we will need to show the following: That Enron owned an easement at the site of each cut, that Enron placed its cable within that easement, that Enron or the locators properly marked the location of the cable, that Enron or the locator complied with the Wyoming statutory requirements to respond One Call and mark the easement, and that the markings complied with the statute, or recognized standards in the industry. If we can prove the above, we should be able to show that it was Broadwing's fault from there. In light of the above, I think I need the following from Enron or other sources: Right-of-Way Grants or Easement Agreements for locations of the cuts; Plats / surveys / legal descriptions / filed with One Call or county for the area of each cut; Photographs and Cut Reports for each Cut (I have most cut reports and some photographs); Correspondence by Katie Nelson (?) referenced by Broadwing authrizing it to proceed without marking; All correspondence with Broadwing; Call One records documenting the day and time of all calls from Broadwing; Map of Wyoming for demonstrative purposes to show location of the cuts to the judge; It would be nice, for demonstrative purposes, to have a one foot piece of fiber optic cable; I don't know that we will use each of the above, but I should review it and then make the decision. Whoever has some or all of the above please overnight it to me. As far as witnesses, we will need Don Beamis and others who investigated the cuts, one or more locate people to testify as to how the markings were placed and the accuracy of the markings, Brad Cheney as to irreperable harm to Enron which cannot be compensated for with damages, others? You should each think about your conversations with Broadwing to recall any admissions - I see in one of Brad's e-mails that the Mears contractor acknowledged responsibility for one of the cuts. Don Beamis can testify that Bud Black acknowledged at a meeting with the Uinta County Commissioners that the ""markings on Enron's line"" had not been a problem. I don't know if Bud was in the field and that acknowedgment may not get us far. The one by Mears may help. Who could testify to what the standard for marking in the industry is? the locate people, or Brad? Finally, opposing counsel has insisted that he be given equal time at the hearing, which may be limited to three hours. So we will be trying to fit a lot of evidence in a very short time period. After you have read this please give me your thoughts, and/or pass this on to others who may have additional facts or information that would be helpful. Thanks. David G. Ditto Holland & Hart 2515 Warren Ave. Suite 450 Cheyenne, WY 82001 Tel: (307) 778-4255 fax: (307) 778-8175 e-mail: dditto@hollandhart.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Test Message; [EMail-Body]= Mike, Thanks for your message. The meeting on Tuesday at 7 is confirmed. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Mike Boughton <boughton@maui.net>@ENRON Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 7:41 PM To: vkamins@enron.com; vkaminski@aol.com Cc: David.Rowe@risk.sungard.com Subject: Test Message Hello Vince, It was good to talk with you yesterday. David Rowe and I will be happy to meet with you for breakfast at 7:00 on Tuesday. I will call on Monday to set the location. The URL for our commodity option calculator demonstration is http://perun.otci.net/Utility Note that several of the data sets, which we obtain daily from NYMEX, are incomplete. NG, HO, CN, NT and CL have enough data to indicate performance. The others are either missing altogether or the series is too short to be useful. If you want to see the currency demonstration, it is at http://perun.otci.net/BC and includes some technical material describing work we did in creating the site. With best regards, Mike Boughton Options Technology Company, Inc. P.O. Box 1275 Wailuku, Maui, Hawaii 96793 Telephone 808.575.9592 Fax 808.575.9331 http://www.otci.net [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= LEAK; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 04/20/2000 08:19 AM --------------------------- Kelly Kimberly@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 04/20/2000 07:28 AM To: steven j kean cc: Keith Miceli Subject: LEAK A TV program in Brazil this morning announced that an investment bank has been hired to help Enron sell Elektro. Attached are the latest statement and Q and As. Who in IR needs to see this? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: DRAFT Slides for Sempra Meeting; [EMail-Body]= I think the presentation looks good. In the meeting itself I think you should go heavy on the argument that it makes no sense for Sempra shareholders to be in a commodity market as a regulated entity -- the ""heads they win tails you lose"" argument. Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 10/13/2000 06:11 PM To: skean@enron.com, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Sandra McCubbin/SFO/EES@EES, Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES, Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: DRAFT Slides for Sempra Meeting Attached for your review is a rough cut at slides we're preparing for the meeting with Sempra next Thursday. Thoughts and comments are appreciated. Please disregard korny title. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= <<Concur Expense Document>> - JB 002; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/20/2001 02:39 PM --------------------------- eserver@enron.com on 04/20/2001 11:49:50 AM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - JB 002 The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: John Brindle Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: JB 002 Report Total: $2,105.05 Amount Due Employee: $2,105.05 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://xms.enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Conference call with Rick, Mark, Dan Clearfield, Steven Shackman.
  800-283-1805, in EB0653; [EMail-Body]= Lisa Freeman MW Daily --703-816-8625 fax 703-528-7821 Joe Daughen (Phil Daily News) -- 215-854-5939 fax (215) 854 5910 Rich Heidorn (Phil Inquirer 215 - 854-4502 Fax: 5553 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Schoenemann Resume; [EMail-Body]= Presly, Greetings from London. I picked up your resume from here and forwarded it to our corporate recruiter. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""pschoenemann"" Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 2:38 AM To: vkamins@enron.com Subject: Schoenemann Resume Per your request. Thanks. Presly - Mar Comm Spec 2001.doc << File: Mar Comm Spec 2001.doc >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Recap of House Action Last Night on Energy Package; [EMail-Body]= Late last night, the House on a 240-189 vote passed, as amended, H.R. 4 -- the Securing Amerca's Future Energy (SAFE) Act of 2001. Here is what happened on the three amendments of interest to Enron: 1. The House overwhelmingly defeated (154 to 274) a Waxman Amendment (D-CA) to impose cost of service rates on wholesale sales of electricity in the WSCC for 18 months. Only three House Republicans supported the amendment (all from California -- Gallegly, Issa and Hunter); 57 Democrats opposed the Waxman Amendment, including all of the Texas Democrats EXCEPT Frost, Hinojosa, Rodriguez and Doggett (these four SUPPORTED the Waxman Amendment). Thus, our collective lobbying efforts in recent months focusing on California Republicans, Texas Democrats and other moderate Democrats worked out in the end. 2. The House also overwhelmingly defeated the Cox Amendment (R-CA) to grant California a waiver of the Clean Air Act's oxygenate requirement for reformulated gasoline. The vote was 125 to 300 (44 Republicans, 80 Democrats and 1 independent voted for the amendment; 173 Republicans, 126 Democrats and 1 independent) voted against it. 3. The House also defeated the Green Amendment (D-TX) to repeal the Natural Gas Act's ""Hinshaw Exemption"" as it applies to California's intrastate natural gas pipelines. The vote was 154 to 275 (123 Republicans and 31 Democrats voted for it, while 95 Republicans, 178 Democrats, and 2 independents voted against the amendment). Please call or e-mail with comments or questions. The Senate Energy Committee is starting its work this week on an energy package with consideration of an R&D title (other issues will be taken up in September, including electricity). The House Energy and Commerce Committee will now turn to electricity issues, with staff drafting during the August Recess, hearings in September, and votes on legislation in September or early October. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Governor Davis' Power Grab; [EMail-Body]= per my voicemail ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/25/2001 01:33 PM --------------------------- ""Wenner, Adam"" <awenner@velaw.com> on 05/25/2001 09:28:18 AM To: ""Kean, Steven (Enron Corp.)"" <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: Governor Davis' Power Grab Steve - per my voicemail, before we released this article that I prepared, we wanted to run it by you to make sure that Enron is comfortable with it. Thanks, Adam. ++++++CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE+++++ The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged. This email is intended to be reviewed by only the individual or organization named above. If you are not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination or copying of this email and its attachments, if any, or the information contained herein is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system. Thank You <<143590_1.DOC>> - 143590_1.DOC [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re:; [EMail-Body]= Thanks! Good article. Jeff.Dasovich @enron.com To: Ann.Cohn@sce.com, kmccrea@sablaw.com, mkahl@ka-pow.com, jdasovic@enron.com, 07/06/01 wbooth@booth-law.com, drothrock@camfg.com, 09:24 AM smutny@iepa.com, brbarkovich@earthlink.net, isenberg@hmot.com, jstewart@cmta.net, mdjoseph@adamsbroadwell.com, lga@mother.com, debinorton@aol.com, cra@calretailers.com, derek.naten@roche.com, vjw@cleanpower.org, ""John R. Redding (PS, NE) (E-mail)"" <john.redding@gene.GE.com>, ""Mike Florio (E-mail)"" <mflorio@turn.org> cc: Subject: FYI. From today's Post. Davis seems to continue to put distance between himself and the contracts. Best, Jeff Financial California Changes Stance on Refunds; Two Sides Far Apart In Energy Talks Peter Behr 07/06/2001 The Washington Post FINAL Page E01 Copyright 2001, The Washington Post Co. All Rights Reserved California officials have abruptly shifted tactics in their attempt to recover billions of dollars in alleged overcharges for electricity , saying they may reduce their demands for huge refunds if generators renegotiate $43 billion in long-term electricity contracts that the state signed this year. Gov. Gray Davis (D) said part of the $8.9 billion in refunds the state is seeking could be offset by reductions in energy prices in the long-term contracts, whose costs have become a growing political embarrassment for Davis. ""We've made suggestions, we've offered various ways in which people could get us $8.9 billion,"" Davis told the San Jose Mercury News in a report yesterday. ""You can renegotiate our existing contracts and save us money. However you want to do it, it's just got to net out close to $8.9 billion."" The new offer was introduced this week into the closed negotiations over a California settlement being conducted in Washington by Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Judge Curtis L. Wagner Jr., according to sources close to the negotiations. Yesterday, Wagner said he may issue his own preliminary finding today on the amount of overcharges if California officials and the generators cannot reach a compromise. ""What I'm trying to do is get people in a settlement mood,"" Wagner told reporters. ""In the event we're unable to do that, [Friday] at some point I may offer a preliminary assessment."" The settlement conference is set to conclude on Monday. Wagner, FERC's chief administrative judge, has been trying to push both sides toward a compromise that would resolve the huge energy pricing controversy. Mountainous energy prices have bankrupted California 's largest utility, drained billions of dollars out of the state treasury and put Davis at sword's point with generators that help keep the state's lights on. Last Friday, Wagner rebuked Davis's chief representative, Michael Kahn, chairman of California Independent Grid Operator -- the state's power grid manager -- indicating that the state's demand for nearly $9 billion in refunds from power generators and marketers was too high, sources said. Wagner's settlement conference, which has involved more than 100 lawyers for all sides, is closed to the public and media. Wagner complained last month that Kahn was following a political agenda, and his lack of independence in the negotiations was such a ""joke"" that the parties might as well wear ""clown suits,"" according to a Dow Jones report confirmed by sources close to the talks. But he has also criticized the generators and power marketers, led by Reliant Energy Inc., Williams Energy Services, Duke Energy and Southern Co., for failing to make serious settlement offers, these sources said. The suppliers have offered to refund $600 million, provided the state is able to call off various California lawsuits demanding far larger refunds, sources said. Wagner's leverage is his ability to propose his own refund figure to FERC's commissioners. FERC has tentatively called for $124 million in refunds, but now is taking a harder line on preventing a new escalation of California 's electricity prices this summer and is likely to be receptive to a higher refund figure, some energy analysts believe. Davis's tactical change, offering to make the long-term contracts part of an overall settlement, comes amid growing criticism of what the state will have to pay for energy under those deals. California 's energy calamity stemmed in large part from its failed deregulation plan, which relied heavily on short-term power purchases at volatile ""spot market"" prices. When energy costs shot upward last summer, so did the state's electricity bills. In response, Davis's aide, S. David Freeman, and his staff began negotiating long-term power contacts with suppliers. The $43 billion in deals signed so far would require the state to pay about $70 per hour for a megawatt of power for a large part of the electricity it will need over the next 10 years. That's well under the average of $250 per megawatt-hour that the state was paying at the beginning of this year, but above current power prices -- and considerably higher than what electricity may cost in the next decade, energy analysts say. A new agreement to lower those contract prices could relieve political pressure on Davis and focus settlement negotiations away from the state's controversial demand for the $8.9 billion refund. Davis will argue that reducing future power charges that his administration negotiated should count as a ""refund"" because the deals were reached ""under commercial duress,"" according to sources close to Wagner's negotiations. Industry supporters say Davis's refund figure is impossible to justify. ""There's no benchmark for what a fair and reasonable price should be,"" said Michael Zenger, California director of Cambridge Energy Research Associates. The state's advocates counter that if FERC enforced a ""just and reasonable"" standard for power prices based on operating costs and a generous profit, the overcharges by all sellers could easily reach the $9 billion figure. ""It's not rocket science, but it does require the regulators to regulate,"" said Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economist who heads an oversight committee for the California grid. Those polar-opposite views have left both sides in Wagner's conference room ""billions of dollars apart,"" as the talks approached their final weekend, sources said. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Dinner Plans; [EMail-Body]= I get in too late tonight, but maybe dinner or drinks on Thurs? Linda Robertson 06/19/2001 06:39 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Dinner Plans You are here Wed and Thur nights. Do you have plans? Do you want to do something with some of the DC staff? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Price Cap Media--DRAFT; [EMail-Body]= I agree with Mona: we need to include some customer contacts . . . it gives them an opportunity to look smart about going to the marketplace and getting price protection. The messages need to include Palmer's top three: 1) price caps cause shortages (Rob- can you put together soe historical examples?); 2) better solutions are already available; and 3) short term politics makes for long term problems. On item 2) we need to talk about the competitive offerings to San Diego, the fixed price offerings available at retail, and the availability of conservation and demand side management technology today (including its availability to the consuming public from existing suppliers . . . ie you don't need to wait for Enron to make a consumer offering). Mona L Petrochko 07/18/2000 01:26 PM To: Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES cc: James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Mark Palmer@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@Enron, Jeff Brown/HOU/EES@EES, Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Sandra McCubbin/SFO/EES@EES Subject: Re: Price Cap Media--DRAFT I have a couple of suggestions on parts of the draft. Media Action: In addition to doing behind the scenes editorial board meetings and the like, I would suggest that we get our coalition lined up and ready to release statements for certain key events which are likely to occur over the next several weeks, such as: 1. SDG&E's selection of the winning bid to their RFP. Even if Enron isn't selected as the winning bid, the coalition should trumpet the market-based solution and the enormous market response to SDG&E's RFP. 2. The Commission vote on UCAN's Emergency Motion. We should be prepared to issue a statement whether the Cmmn votes with us or against us. With us, the market can and did provide reasonable, expedient solutions to SDG&E's customers and protection from price spikes. Against us, despite the overwhelming market response, the Cmmn chose to ignore the market solutions and impose more regulation. 3. Potential for ARM members to surface a Provider of Last Resort proposal within the next couple of weeks. 4. ISO Bd. Mtg-keep up pressure against reducing price caps. Coalition Members: Agree that those groups listed should be contacted, although the CMA, CRA, CIU, CLECA have been luke-warm in their advocacy. I would add our customers (UC/CSU (especially the San Diego branch), PacTel, etc.) NewEnergy has indicated that Kroger/Ralph's grocery stores, San Diego-based, would give testimonials. I could solicit the members of ARM to identify a key customer contacts for interviews. We could check with our lobbyists and see who they would recommend (wine growers, dairy industry, etc.) We should also consider the water agencies and the rural counties and the City of Pittsburg. While the immediate message is responding to San Diego's situation, this latter group of potential coalition members would go to the larger message (keeping benefits of competitive markets) from a state-wide perspective. What about the City of Pittsburg? Jeff Dasovich on 07/18/2000 10:07:00 AM To: James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Steve Kean, Mark Palmer, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@Enron, Jeff Brown/HOU/EES@EES, Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES, Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Sandra McCubbin/SFO/EES@EES cc: Subject: Price Cap Media--DRAFT Here's a draft. Given sense of urgency, I tried to develop a target for folks to shoot at rather than The Perfect One-pager. So please fire at will. In particular, need PR to fill in ""Media Approaches"" and ""Key Message Points."" Best, Jeff [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California Update--0717.01; [EMail-Body]= fyi ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/18/2001 07:15 AM --------------------------- From: Jeff Dasovich on 07/17/2001 07:31 PM Sent by: Jeff Dasovich To: skean@enron.com, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Harry Kingerski/Enron@EnronXGate, Leslie Lawner/Enron@EnronXGate, Michael Tribolet/ENRON@enronXgate, Kristin Walsh/Enron@EnronXGate, Karen Denne/Enron@EnronXGate, mpalmer@enron.com, Janel Guerrero/Enron@EnronXGate, Paul Kaufman/Enron@EnronXGate, Susan M Landwehr/Enron@EnronXGate, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: California Update--0717.01 What people know: Hertzberg (et al's) bill (82XX)was heard in an ""informational"" hearing today and still sits in the Assembly Energy Committee. It will be heard again tomorrow (perhaps beginning at 10 AM) , at which time parties will have a chance to support/oppose and ask for amendments. Most, including us, oppose unless significantly amended. The Wright (D) -Richman (R) bill (83XX)was heard in an ""informational"" hearing today and still sits in the Assembly Energy Committee. It will be heard again tomorrow, at which time parties will have a chance to support/oppose and ask for amendments. From our perspective, this is the best bill out there yet, though it still has serious problems---it isn't available electronically yet, but should be tomorrow, and I'll distribute then. The chances of the joint D-R bill being successful are slim, however, since it's up against the Speakers competing bill. There is talk that the Speaker will try to negotiate with Wright/Richman tonight and include any agreement in his bill (82XX). The original version of the Governor's MOU bill sits in the Senate. Most believe that Burton will put it up for a vote this week and it will fail. The Senate's version of the MOU (Sher-Peace-Kuehl) (78XX)came out today. It will likely be heard in the committee tomorrow or the next day. Notably, it kills Direct Access completely and makes Edison shareholders responsible for that portion of Edison's debt owed to suppliers. In short, a very bad bill. Burton's 18XX, which would de-link the bond issuance (to pay back the General Fund) from the DWR contracts is likely to pass the Senate tomorrow or the next day. Many--including Enron--support the bill (though we are supporting it behind the scenes). What people don't know: Whether there's the time or the will in the Assembly and Senate to achieve by Friday a single, comprehensive bill that can be sent to the governor for his signature. Whether the Legislature would postpone its month-long recess if the Legislature hasn't finished a bill by Friday (most folks think they will not postpone). Whether it's true that, irrespective of the energy issue, the Legislature will fail to get the budget completed by Friday and therefore have to postpone their recess anyway, in which case they might continue to work on the energy legislation at the same time. Odds-makers still say it's better than 50-50 that the Legislature does not get the Edison bills done by Friday and leaves on on its 30-day vacation. Best, Jeff Sacramento is one goofy place. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= EES Staff Meeting, in 746; [EMail-Body]= Ralph Reed--get back to him (second week of Oct) Paul Carrier 202-586-5659 Phil Sharp 617-495-1363; 496-6335; 617- 495 1364 Slides for QBR re project Balboa [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Customs issue; [EMail-Body]= Got a voicemail from Rob Walls. They are (have been) looking into it. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Firsst article attached refers to the 1946 Nebraska case I mentioned to you= =20 in DC ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/02/2001 10:36 AM ----- =09Miyung Buster@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT =0903/02/2001 10:04 AM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: Ann M Schmidt/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bryan Seyfried/LON/ECT@ECT,=20 dcasse@whwg.com, dg27@pacbell.net, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron,=20 filuntz@aol.com, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Janet=20 Butler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeannie Mandelker/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff=20 Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John=20 John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT,=20 Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lysa=20 Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Margaret Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark=20 Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Markus=20 Fiala/LON/ECT@ECT, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT, Mike= =20 Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron= ,=20 Nicholas O'Day/AP/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Peggy=20 Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT, Richard=20 Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EE= S,=20 Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Stella=20 Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Sus= an=20 J Mara/NA/Enron@Enron, Mike Roan/ENRON@enronXgate, Alex=20 Parsons/EU/Enron@Enron, Andrew Morrison/LON/ECT@ECT, lipsen@cisco.com, Jane= l=20 Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Shirley A Hudler/HOU/ECT@ECT =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: Energy Issues Please see the following articles: Oakland Trib 2/28: ""Energy buyout foes say dump grid plan"" San Diego Union 2/28: ""Energy chief 'open' to plan on transmission line=20 buyout"" SF Chron, 2/28: ""Energy Experts Belie Davis' Rosy Prediction Summer expected to be crunch time"" Riverside Press 3/1: ""PUC to mull baseline level for electricity"" Orange Co. Register 3/1: ""Electricity notebook"" Contra Costa Times 3/1: ""PUC chief defends actions in crisis"" LA Times 3/2: ""Cal-ISO Says Suppliers Overcharged"" Sac Bee 3/2: Power profits targeted: Generators urged to forgive some of=20 utilities' debts (Steve Kean quoted) Energy Insight 3/2: ""California Energy Island Won't Work"" SF Chron 3/2: Ex-Regulator Urges Temporary Federal Price Caps on Power SF Chron 3/2: PG&E to Pay Creditors Only 15% / Smaller suppliers outraged= =20 over plan --- --- ------------------ Energy buyout foes say dump grid plan Davis critics point to federal veto disclosure=20 By Steve Geissinger SACRAMENTO BUREAU=20 SACRAMENTO -- Foes of Gov. Gray Davis' plan to buy power lines said Tuesday= =20 the 11th-hour disclosure of federal veto power over the stalled deal shows= =20 the effort should be abandoned altogether.=20 But Davis, who spent the day lobbying federal officials in Washington, D.C.= ,=20 said he's confident the Bush administration will support his plan to purcha= se=20 California's high-voltage transmission grid as part of a deal to rescue=20 teetering utilities.=20 Critics of the plan to ease the energy crisis, however, aren't so sure that= =20 Bush's Republican administration, which favors market-driven strategies ove= r=20 government intervention, will support the Democratic governor's proposal.= =20 Moreover, Republican legislators here said, the last-minute revelation that= =20 the plan would need the approval of federal regulators is further evidence= =20 that it is misdirected, overly complex and will take too long to implement.= =20 ""It means much more time will be required and time is something that=20 especially a lot of the creditors of the utilities do not have,"" said=20 Assembly Republican leader Bill Campbell of Villa Park.=20 ""I think this means we have to look at an alternative deal,"" Campbell said.= =20 Dan Nelson, a spokesman for Senate Republican leader James Brulte of Rancho= =20 Cucamonga, said Republicans generally oppose state purchase of power lines= =20 from utility companies as part of a plan to rescue them from financial=20 difficulty.=20 They instead support acquisition of some other asset from the utilities, su= ch=20 as stock warrants, in exchange for state assistance with their financial=20 woes.=20 Foes say the grid purchase would saddle the state with an antiquated networ= k=20 that could prove costly to maintain while supporters contend it could lead = to=20 quick improvements in a bottlenecked system overdue for repairs.=20 Word that Davis' plan to buy transmission lines would need federal approval= =20 surprised some legislators, their aides said. Open government advocates hav= e=20 harshly criticized the administration for secrecy surrounding much of the= =20 governor's energy crisis relief efforts.=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Chairman Curtis Hebert disclosed=20 recently in Washington that his board has authority over the deal, which he= =20 called ""nationalization"" that is ""against the best interests of the America= n=20 public.""=20 Following that disclosure, Democratic legislative leaders backing Davis' pl= an=20 said they hope to maneuver around the need for commission approval.=20 California can perhaps circumvent the potential hitch by relying in part on= a=20 1946 case involving the state of Nebraska that did not require federal=20 approval, according to Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, D-San Francisc= o.=20 Nevertheless, Davis, in Washington for a national governors meeting, said h= e=20 presented a nine-page proposal to U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham and= =20 expects a response by the end of the week.=20 ""He wants this problem solved and he's been very supportive,"" Davis said.= =20 ""He's recommended approval on every request I've made and I believe he will= =20 support our proposal.""=20 Abraham's office did not return calls seeking comment.=20 The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission that will likely weigh the fate of= =20 the plan, however, is independent of Abraham's office. Even so, Abraham is= =20 part of an energy policy team appointed by Bush, and Davis views Abraham's= =20 support of the proposal as a potential key to a federal nod.=20 Davis' history with the commission won't help his efforts. He and the=20 commission have been at odds for months over the governor's campaign to=20 impose tough wholesale price caps in the West.=20 The latest complications in the plan to rescue utilities came amid a=20 continuing deadlock in secret negotiations between the state and the Pacifi= c,=20 Gas and Electric Co., which is reluctant to sell its high-voltage=20 transmission lines.=20 Davis announced Friday that California's other major investor-owned utility= ,=20 Southern California Edison, had agreed on the basic framework of a deal tha= t=20 includes the sale of its transmission grid to the state for $2.8 billion.= =20 The utilities, trapped between high wholesale costs and lower=20 government-frozen retail rates, have been pushed to the brink of bankruptcy= =20 as they amassed nearly $13 billion in debt.=20 When the utilities could no longer buy enough power, the state began=20 brokering billions of dollars in emergency and long-term power deals to=20 thwart rolling blackouts.=20 Then Davis and legislators began developing strategies to ease the energy= =20 crisis, including increased conservation, construction of new generation=20 plants and ways to prevent utility bankruptcies.=20 Under Davis' plan to rescue utilities, the state would help fiscally restor= e=20 the companies with bonds in exchange for acquisition of their 26,000 miles = of=20 transmission grids. The state would upgrade the aging grid and then lease t= he=20 lines back to the utilities to operate. --- Energy chief 'open' to plan on transmission line buy out By Toby Eckert=20 COPLEY NEWS SERVICE=20 February 28, 2001=20 WASHINGTON -- Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham is ""open"" to California's pl= an=20 to take over utility transmission lines in the state, but stopped short of= =20 endorsing the proposal, saying he needed to study it further, Gov. Gray Dav= is=20 said yesterday.=20 ""From the tone of his remarks, I think his comments will be positive, and I= =20 hope by the end of the week he will be able to endorse the proposal or at= =20 least endorse a modified proposal that is satisfactory to us,"" Davis said= =20 after meeting with Abraham privately at the Department of Energy.=20 A spokesman for Abraham said he ""couldn't characterize (Abraham's) reaction= =20 one way or the other."" But he said Abraham was ""open to taking a look at th= e=20 material the governor provided"" and would follow up with Davis.=20 In his effort to drum up federal support for the buyout plan, Davis also=20 invoked a name that resonates throughout the halls of power in Washington:= =20 Alan Greenspan.=20 Davis said the Federal Reserve Board chairman ""in a general way thinks it= =20 makes sense to acquire transmission lines to make the capacity improvements= =20 that have not been done over the past 15 years.""=20 Greenspan and Davis informally talked about the power crisis this week, aid= es=20 to Davis said. Greenspan's comments could not be confirmed independently.= =20 Davis was in Washington for the four-day winter meeting of the National=20 Governors Association. But he also used the occasion to try to convince the= =20 new Bush administration -- and the media -- that his plans to solve=20 California's power woes are sound.=20 The governor spent about an hour briefing Abraham on the tentative agreemen= t=20 the state struck last week to acquire Southern California Edison's=20 transmission system for $2.76 billion. The state is trying to negotiate=20 similar deals with San Diego Gas and Electric and Pacific Gas and Electric = as=20 a condition for helping the utilities pay off about $13 billion in debt the= y=20 have accumulated because of soaring wholesale power costs.=20 The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission probably will have to sign off on= =20 any purchase plans, and FERC Chairman Curtis Hebert has made comments=20 indicating he is skeptical of the idea. But Davis believes he can overcome= =20 possible opposition at FERC if Abraham backs the plans.=20 Davis also said he and Abraham had ""some creative talks about how we might = be=20 able to find more megawatts for this summer"" and assigned staff members to= =20 work on that ""on a daily basis."" He did not elaborate on the ideas, saying= =20 there may be some details forthcoming ""in about two to three weeks.""=20 The governor will continue his East Coast sales pitch for the transmission= =20 line purchase -- and other elements of his plan to solve the power crisis -= -=20 in a meeting with Wall Street analysts and bond-raters today.=20 Davis and legislators also have pursued long-term power contracts with ener= gy=20 suppliers to wean the state from the open market, which became wildly=20 expensive last year.=20 Mirant Corp., which operates power plants in Northern California, said=20 yesterday that it has agreed to shift contracts from the defunct California= =20 Power Exchange to the Department of Water Resources, which is the state's= =20 electricity buyer.=20 The contracts amount to about 1,000 megawatts of power over the next 10=20 months. Last week, Mirant agreed to sell 750 megawatts to the state next=20 month. On a typical winter day, the maximum demand on the grid managed by t= he=20 state Independent System Operator, about 75 percent of the total state=20 network, is about 30,000 megawatts.=20 Davis' visit to Washington came against the backdrop of a muted federal=20 response to California's power crisis. The Bush administration, which favor= s=20 open power markets, has said it is largely up to state officials to solve t= he=20 problem, rejecting calls by Davis for more aggressive action like caps on= =20 wholesale power costs.=20 But the Democratic governor praised the Republican president publicly on=20 several occasions. He cited the administration's temporary extension of=20 federal orders that kept electricity and gas flowing to the state during=20 emergency shortages and its agreement to speed up federal review of new pow= er=20 plants.=20 ""Secretary Abraham and the Bush administration in general have been=20 wonderfully responsive to my requests. I cannot thank them enough,"" Davis= =20 said yesterday.=20 Other California Democrats have been less charitable toward President Bush.= =20 ""I think the president is going in the wrong direction on this issue,"" said= =20 Rep. Bob Filner, D-San Diego, a staunch advocate of wholesale price control= s.=20 ""A hands-off approach by the federal government, as the president has=20 suggested, is not going to solve this problem."" --- Energy Experts Belie Davis' Rosy Prediction Summer expected to be crunch time=20 Greg Lucas, Sacramento Bureau Chief Wednesday,?February 28, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 Sacramento -- Gov. Gray Davis' optimistic assessment that California may be= =20 on the ""back side"" of its energy crisis flies in the face of what many ener= gy=20 companies and other experts predict.=20 California's real test will come this summer when electricity usage sharply= =20 increases, and unless everything breaks the way Davis hopes, predictions ar= e=20 that large chunks of the state will be in the dark.=20 ""We're not on the back side of this crisis. This problem is far, far bigger= =20 than the governor is suggesting,"" said Gary Ackerman, executive director fo= r=20 the Western Power Trading Forum in Menlo Park.=20 ""To characterize the problem that way shows a recklessness that feeds on th= e=20 popular notion we don't have an energy crisis. We do. We have a very seriou= s=20 one that's going to hit us as temperatures and loads go up,"" Ackerman said.= =20 The Democratic governor's comments were made Monday in Washington, D.C.,=20 during an East Coast visit aimed at getting Washington and Wall Street=20 support for his energy plan.=20 He admitted more hard work is needed, but said the state is on the ""back si= de=20 of the crisis"" because lawmakers have passed bills needed to help lower=20 electricity prices.=20 ""Does that mean we're home free?"" Davis asked yesterday. ""No.""=20 But he again repeated that the state is on the back side of the crisis.=20 That is contrary to predictions by the Independent System Operator, which= =20 oversees the state's power market.=20 On any given day in June, the ISO estimates, the state will fall 6,815=20 megawatts short of demand. That would put nearly 7 million homes in the dar= k,=20 if it happens.=20 In July, the expected shortage is 4,685 megawatts. In August, it's 5,297=20 megawatts. That's if California has a normal summer. If it's hotter than=20 normal, the shortage grows.=20 The ISO's estimates tend to be conservative and do not include Davis'=20 conservation goal.=20 But even if a 10 percent reduction were achieved in June that would save=20 roughly 5,000 megawatts, the state would still be short 1,800 megawatts.=20 And there are other variables.=20 Depending on the snowpack and reservoir levels, hydroelectric plants may no= t=20 be able to run at full bore, which would also worsen the situation.=20 ""That is something the governor cannot spin his way out of,"" said Sen. Tom= =20 McClintock, R-Northridge.=20 Davis said a combination of new power plants and energy conservation will= =20 help the state get through this summer.=20 The clock is running. The ISO predicts shortages of 3,030 megawatts in May = -=20 - just two months away.=20 ""The real electricity crisis is going to be this summer, and I don't think= =20 we've made enough progress there,"" said Severin Borenstein, director of the= =20 University of California Energy Institute.=20 California won't be able to build its way out of the energy crisis by quick= ly=20 approving and building new power plants, Borenstein said.=20 The ISO's demand estimates already factor in the new power plants set to co= me=20 online this summer.=20 ""Unless we have a very mild summer and have lots of rainfall between then a= nd=20 now,"" Borenstein said, ""we are going to face some serious shortages.""=20 Like Davis, Borenstein says California needs to do more to conserve energy.= =20 Unlike Davis, he favors raising prices on big power consumers to give them = an=20 incentive to cut back.=20 But the Democratic governor may be sending Californians a mixed message.=20 By telling them the worst is over, he could undercut his plan by making=20 people believe more conservation is unnecessary.=20 Excluding what lies ahead, there are also plenty of energy issues left=20 unresolved right now.=20 Although Davis has reached a tentative deal with Southern California Edison= =20 on purchasing its share of the state's transmission system for $2.7 billion= =20 -- no such deal exists with either Pacific Gas & Electric or San Diego Gas = &=20 Electric.=20 Some alternative energy producers, like co-generation plants, are shutting= =20 down because the cash-poor utilities haven't paid them for several months. = No=20 cash means no fuel to run the turbines that make the juice.=20 Generators like Duke Energy and Reliant Energy aren't convinced the crisis= =20 has passed.=20 For starters, both companies are owed in excess of $700 million for=20 electricity bought by PG&E and Edison but never paid for.=20 ""There are a lot of issues still out there such as how much power your stat= e=20 will require this summer, whether there is enough generation on the ground = or=20 available commercially to handle the load if there is a significant spike i= n=20 demand,"" said Richard Wheatley, a Reliant spokesman.=20 Harvey Rosenfield, head of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights,= =20 has a slightly different take on whether the worst is over.=20 ""We've said all along it's a crisis inspired by the greed of the utilities= =20 and the energy companies,"" Rosenfield said.=20 ""Now that taxpayers are paying $1 billion every three weeks to buy=20 electricity and the ratepayers are going to pay between $13 billion and $20= =20 billion, the companies are happy and the crisis is over. What more could th= ey=20 want?"" --- PUC to mull baseline level for electricity It's been a decade since amounts were set. They vary by region, season and= =20 whether a home is heated with gas or electricity. By Robert T. Garrett The Press-Enterprise SACRAMENTO Inland-area residents who want a higher ""baseline quantity"" of lower-priced= =20 electricity each month will get a chance to plead their case in the next fe= w=20 weeks.=20 The state Public Utilities Commission will examine by early April whether t= he=20 monthly usage limits that trigger higher rates for residential customers ar= e=20 set too low, PUC President Loretta Lynch said Wednesday.=20 Baseline amounts are set by the PUC and vary by geographic region, season a= nd=20 whether a home is heated with gas or electricity.=20 ""It's been over a decade since the baselines were set,"" Lynch told the=20 Sacramento Press Club. "". . . I think it's about time for us to look at wha= t=20 these baselines are in the 21st century.""=20 Lynch, an appointee of Gov. Davis, declined to say whether the commission= =20 will make permanent a 9-percent rate hike imposed in early January on=20 residential customers of Southern California Edison, which serves much of t= he=20 Inland Empire.=20 With Edison and Pacific Gas Electric collapsing financially, the PUC impose= d=20 the rate hike -- and increases of up to 17 percent for Edison's large=20 business customers -- for 90 days.=20 The ""temporary surcharge"" will be lifted in early April unless the PUC vote= s=20 to keep it in effect.=20 Davis has said he hopes his plan to rescue the state's ailing utilities and= =20 avoid rolling blackouts can be carried out without further rate hikes.=20 Davis was in New York City on Wednesday, where the plan drew a tepid respon= se=20 from Wall Street.=20 Meanwhile, the unexpected shutdown of four Western power plants for repairs= ,=20 combined with scheduled maintenance at several in-state plants, forced=20 California grid officials to declare a Stage 2 alert.=20 Wall Street analysts who met privately with Davis in New York called his=20 moves a good step toward solving the energy crisis, but said more must be= =20 done.=20 ""He talked about a lot of short-term measures to alleviate problems for thi= s=20 summer, but he hasn't communicated a long-term fix,"" said Lawrence J.=20 Makovich, senior director of Cambridge Energy Research Associates.=20 Lynch said Wednesday that she and others on the PUC should have recognized= =20 sooner that utility deregulation wasn't working.=20 As part of its review of the January rate hikes, the PUC will invite public= =20 comments on baselines, Lynch said.=20 She said she plans to examine the baselines for each climate zone. In=20 Edison's service area, for instance, there are six.=20 Lynch also said the PUC would look at whether baselines are fair and=20 effective, and whether similar incentives to conserve energy should be buil= t=20 into the rates of businesses.=20 If the commission adopts ""incentives for businesses,"" she said, it has to= =20 make sure it doesn't set the baseline quantities too low for industrial=20 sectors such as agriculture and biotechnology. State Sen. Jim Battin, R-La= =20 Quinta, said Lynch's proposed review of the fairness of baselines in the=20 different climate zones ""could be encouraging.""=20 But he said he thinks businesses will oppose having baselines applied to=20 them.=20 Battin has waged a battle against baselines, which he calls ""social=20 engineering"" and which were mandated by a state law passed in the 1980s.=20 In the Inland area, the baseline system works like this:=20 In Temecula and Corona an ""all-electric"" home -- meaning one that is heated= =20 by electricity -- this summer will pay 12 cents a kilowatt for the first 30= 4=20 kilowatts used each month; for each additional kilowatt consumed, Edison wi= ll=20 charge 14 cents.=20 In Moreno Valley, Hemet, Rialto and most of Redlands, owners of=20 ""all-electric"" homes will pay Edison the lower rate for 514 kilowatts per= =20 month this summer.=20 In the Coachella Valley, in both summer and winter, Edison charges the=20 higher, 14-cent rate only for monthly consumption above 1,299 kilowatts.=20 Those with gas heating in their homes get different baseline allowances tha= n=20 do those with electric heating.=20 --- Electricity notebook=20 State, Calpine sign $8.3 billion in pacts.=20 March 1, 2001=20 Calpine Corp., a San Jose-based power plant owner, signed two contracts=20 valued at up to $8.3 billion to sell electricity to the California Departme= nt=20 of Water Resources for 10 to 20 years.=20 The contracts with the DWR, which buys electricity for the state's=20 two-biggest utilities, will provide 1,500 megawatts, or enough to light 1.5= =20 million homes, the company said.=20 Calpine signed one $5.2 billion, 10-year contract to sell 1,000 megawatts= =20 from new power plants. Deliveries are expected to begin July 1, with 200=20 megawatts. The full amount of power won't be available until July 2002.=20 A $3.1 billion contract calls for Calpine to provide power for 20 years.=20 Deliveries are expected to begin in August with 90 megawatts and to increas= e=20 to 495 megawatts in August 2002.=20 The contract also allows the state to buy up to 2,000 hours during peak=20 periods from 11 new generating units, once they are built.=20 In February, Calpine signed a 10-year contract valued at $4.6 billion with= =20 the DWR to supply 1,000 megawatts. A megawatt is enough to light 1,000 home= s.=20 Separately, Duke Energy Corp. said it is in discussions with the DWR on=20 long-term power supply contracts.=20 The Gas Co. agrees=20 to buy gas for PG&E=20 The Gas Co. said Wednesday that it reached an agreement with Pacific Gas &= =20 Electric Co. to buy natural gas for the troubled utility for the next month= .=20 PG&E, which is near bankruptcy, has said it is running out of gas supplies= =20 and is unable to buy more because creditors are hesitant to sell to it.=20 PG&E had asked the state Public Utilities Commission to force The Gas Co.,= =20 which serves all of Orange County, to step in and buy gas for PG&E on an=20 emergency basis.=20 The Gas Co. said the agreement with PG&E includes a guarantee that The Gas= =20 Co. will be paid out of the money received from PG&E customer bills. Unpaid= =20 balances cannot exceed $16.5 million, said Gas Co. spokeswoman Denise King. --- PUC chief defends actions in crisis Loretta Lynch blames the energy crunch on the failure of deregulation;=20 credit-rating firm says state will continue to feel its effects=20 By Andrew LaMar and Mike Taugher TIMES STAFF WRITERS=20 SACRAMENTO -- Loretta Lynch, who has faced close scrutiny as president of t= he=20 state Public Utilities Commission, defended her handling of the electricity= =20 crisis Wednesday and said she wishes the agency had recognized sooner that= =20 deregulation was not working.=20 Appearing before reporters at a luncheon, the 38-year-old attorney offered = a=20 harsh assessment of deregulation and said California has not faced the same= =20 degree of uncertainty since the 1920s.=20 ""From my perspective, the system that we created was built on a theory and = a=20 hope and a promise, and that promise is unrealized and the theory was fault= y=20 and so therefore the hope remains unfulfilled,"" Lynch said. ""I'm from=20 Independence, Mo.; you have got to show me how we're going to get to the=20 nirvana of the plan for deregulation.""=20 Lynch said the PUC is working feverishly on three things:=20 To advise the Legislature on scores of energy bills.=20 To legally defend its decision to keep rates frozen on two utility companie= s.=20 To prepare to decide whether to extend or increase a 9 percent electricity= =20 rate hike approved in January.=20 Meanwhile, the Wall Street credit-rating firm Standard & Poor's issued a=20 report on the dangers of the energy crisis that said California will feel i= ts=20 effects ""throughout 2001 and beyond.""=20 Damage has been contained to the state's utilities, which are nearly broke,= =20 and the state treasury, which S&P said is insulated from credit problems=20 because of its ample reserves and ability to borrow.=20 But S&P analysts said the combination of the energy crisis and a nationwide= =20 economic slowdown could restrict the state's ability to deal with budgetary= =20 issues that could come up if the economy continues to slow. Also, it could= =20 strap the budgets of cities, counties and other local governments if the=20 state decides to cut payments to them.=20 ""In addition to the overall economic slowing that is clearly evident=20 nationally, the utility crisis has hit California at a time when the=20 technology sector, the growth of which has played a significant role in the= =20 state's economy over the past several years, is undergoing a significant=20 retraction,"" S&P warned.=20 As for Lynch, she challenged several popular assumptions as myths. First, s= he=20 said, deregulation failed on its own, not because politicians cut it short.= =20 Second, she said, the PUC did not stop utilities from arranging long-term= =20 contracts to buy electricity, as they have claimed.=20 And, the defense of the PUC's rate freeze in court is not a losing=20 proposition, she said.=20 ""It is true that the utilities came to the commission and to me personally = in=20 October and said 'End the rate freeze. We are hurting.'"" Lynch said. ""When = we=20 looked at the request, it really did put us between a rock and a hard place= ,=20 and that's a rock and a hard place we remain in today.'""=20 But Lynch said if the PUC had lifted the rate freeze, ""we would have, by=20 administrative fiat, plunged the rest of California into the price volatili= ty=20 that San Diego experienced this summer.""=20 As it is, the commission is studying the market value of the assets Souther= n=20 California Edison and PG&E were supposed to sell under the terms of=20 deregulation. Once the commission sets the market value, it can determine= =20 whether the utilities are eligible to raise rates.=20 In other developments Wednesday:=20 Power generator Calpine Corp. announced two long-term electricity contracts= =20 that will require energy-starved California to pay up to $8.3 billion to ke= ep=20 the lights on in as many as 1.5 million homes.=20 With the latest agreements, San Jose-based Calpine has three separate=20 long-term electricity contracts with the state Department of Water Resource= s,=20 which is shopping for deals that will spread the soaring cost of power over= =20 several years=20 Environmentalists urged Gov. Gray Davis to upgrade his proposal to obtain= =20 development rights for scenic acreage owned by the state's beleaguered=20 utilities, saying the state should obtain the properties outright.=20 As part of a utility bailout package, the governor has recommended Edison a= nd=20 PG&E turn over development rights to more than 88,000 acres, including scen= ic=20 parcels in the Sierra, and 26,000 miles of high voltage transmission lines,= =20 among other considerations.=20 A Republican assemblyman attacked Davis for comments he made in Washington,= =20 D.C., on Tuesday. The governor said the deals he is negotiating with utilit= y=20 companies to buy their transmission lines would complete the legislative=20 fixes needed and ""it means we are basically on the downside of the problem.= ""=20 But Assemblyman Tony Strickland, R-Thousand Oaks, questioned whether there= =20 would be enough power this summer or if federal regulators would approve th= e=20 state purchase of transmission lines.=20 ""It's irresponsible to call this crisis nearly over,"" Strickland said. ""The= re=20 are still way too many unknowns."" --- -------------- Cal-ISO Says Suppliers Overcharged=20 Power: State report calls for a refund of $562 million above 'reasonable'= =20 prices. Generators deny gouging.=20 By NANCY VOGEL and JENIFER WARREN, Times Staff Writers ?????SACRAMENTO--Wholesale electricity suppliers overcharged California's= =20 utilities more than $500 million during December and January, an amount tha= t=20 the federal government should demand be refunded, according to a=20 no-holds-barred state report released Thursday. ?????The report by the California Independent System Operator, which overse= es=20 the flow of electricity in the state, said power suppliers charged $11=20 billion during those two months alone--more than they did for all of 1999. ?????Studying various market dynamics, the agency concluded that there was = a=20 ""prima facie case"" that the unnamed generators and marketers had charged $5= 62=20 million above ""just and reasonable"" prices, warranting further investigatio= n=20 and federal hearings into the appropriateness of refunds. ?????The state report is the most accusatory of a number of studies=20 undertaken to determine why wholesale electricity prices have soared in=20 California since last summer, throwing the state's biggest utilities into= =20 financial crisis and dashing hopes for lower consumer rates under=20 deregulation. ?????The study also provides new ammunition to members of California's=20 congressional delegation, who have unsuccessfully been pressing the Federal= =20 Energy Regulatory Commission to impose price ceilings on wholesale=20 electricity costs. ?????Generators defended their operating practices and rejected the=20 allegation that they had raked in unfairly large profits in December and=20 January. ?????""We have played by the rules, acted ethically and legally in all our= =20 operations,"" said Richard Wheatley, a spokesman for Houston-based Reliant= =20 Energy, which owns power plants capable of supplying more than 3 million=20 homes. ""We have nothing to hide."" ?????Gary Ackerman, executive direcor of the Western Power Trading Forum,= =20 said the Cal-ISO report does not account for less tangible factors that ten= d=20 to drive up prices, such as political and financial uncertainties. ?????""Those are the things my people take into account when deciding whethe= r=20 to sell into California,"" said Ackerman. He noted that, in the second week = of=20 December, a period analyzed in the Cal-ISO report, electricity prices were= =20 higher in the Pacific Northwest than in California. ?????The report, he said, ""provides some reasonable questions which will be= =20 responded to by my members, under FERC authority."" ?????Cal-ISO officials stressed Thursday that they are not accusing any=20 seller of inflating prices but are simply asking for federal action to=20 restrain costs. ?????""We have not seen prices come down to what we feel are justifiable=20 levels,"" said Anjali Sheffrin, director of market analysis for Cal-ISO. ?????Although federal energy commission officials on Thursday refused to=20 comment on the study, many experts predicted that refunds would not be=20 forthcoming. ?????Since July, when Gov. Gray Davis first asked the federal commission to= =20 give San Diego Gas & Electric customers refunds for electricity costs that= =20 doubled and in some cases tripled, the agency has refused to order power=20 sellers to give back some of their profits to California utilities and=20 consumers. ?????The commission, charged by Congress with assuring ""just and reasonable= ""=20 wholesale electricity rates, has also resisted imposing firm price caps on= =20 California's electricity market. In November, the commission called that=20 market ""dysfunctional"" and vulnerable to manipulation by power sellers, but= =20 the agency has so far failed to document or punish specific cases of such= =20 anti-competitive behavior. ?????""The real question is what is FERC going to do with all of this?"" said= =20 Gary Stern, chief of market analysis for Southern California Edison, once o= ne=20 of the two biggest buyers of electricity in California. ""Based on past=20 history, we think they're probably going to say they don't see wrongdoing= =20 that provides a reason for refund."" ?????Determining rebates could prove a logistical nightmare for federal=20 regulators and Cal-ISO, Stern said, but the data exist to show how much it= =20 cost power plant owners to generate electricity and what price they charged= . ?????Given that Edison and PG&E have defaulted on payments of hundreds of= =20 millions to power sellers, Stern said, a rebate order wouldn't lead to=20 reimbursement for individual utility customers. Instead, it could help the= =20 utilities eliminate some of their debt to generators and marketers. ?????Edison and PG&E have been pushed nearly to bankruptcy by high wholesal= e=20 costs, which they could not pass on to their customers because of a=20 state-imposed rate freeze.=20 ?????Last week, Davis announced that Edison had agreed in principle to stat= e=20 financial help in exchange for its transmission lines. Negotiations with PG= &E=20 continue. ?????The Folsom-based Cal-ISO drew its conclusions after reviewing=20 electricity purchases made between Dec. 8, 2000, and Jan. 31, 2001. ?????To calculate the cost of producing electricity in those months, Cal-IS= O=20 analysts assumed power plant owners were buying natural gas from the spot= =20 market, where prices soared this winter, and were running old, inefficient= =20 plants. They also assumed relatively high prices for air emission credits i= n=20 Southern California and added a 10% buffer to the operating costs. ?????Cal-ISO officials then compared these costs with the prices sellers we= re=20 paid. Their report did not name the individual sellers, which range from th= e=20 province of British Columbia to the publicly owned Los Angeles Department o= f=20 Water and Power to private companies. ?????Several lawmakers praised the report as long overdue. ?????""It's about time,"" said state Sen. Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey),=20 chairwoman of the Senate Energy Committee. She said that the desire among= =20 some legislators to seize power plants and take other drastic actions stems= =20 from the sense that ""there's no one willing to enforce the provisions of th= e=20 federal power act regarding just and reasonable rates. ?????""The utilities are doing a great job looking out for their shareholder= s,=20 but who is looking out for ratepayers?"" she asked. ?????Consumer advocacy groups applauded Cal-ISO's action and said the=20 agency's evidence of overcharges underscored the need for hard price caps o= r=20 a tax on generator profits. ?????""It's certainly not news to us that the generators are charging=20 excessive wholesale prices,"" said Mindy Spatt, spokeswoman for the Utility= =20 Reform Network of San Francisco. ""If there had been a real price cap, this= =20 investigation would not be necessary.""=20 ?????California's congressional delegation has pushed hard in recent months= =20 for legislation that would impose temporary price controls on wholesale pow= er=20 supplies in the West. On Wednesday, a bipartisan team met with Curtis Heber= t,=20 chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and came away=20 discouraged by Hebert's opposition to price caps. ?????The federal commission has imposed a so-called ""soft cap"" of $150 per= =20 megawatt-hour in California's electricity market. When sellers ask a higher= =20 price they must explain why it is necessary.=20 ?????Within 60 days, the commission can launch a review of those bids that= =20 could lead to refunds. So far, the federal panel has ordered none. On=20 Thursday, Cal-ISO asked the commission to extend the two-month deadline in= =20 its examination of the purchases made during December and January. * * * ?????Times staff writer Nancy Rivera Brooks in Los Angeles contributed to= =20 this story. --- Power profits targeted: Generators urged to forgive some of utilities' debt= s By Stuart Leavenworth and Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writers (Published March 2, 2001)=20 They are cocky and defiant, and unabashedly rich. Over the past year, the= =20 companies that generate and trade much of California's electricity have mad= e=20 multimillion-dollar profits off the state's power crunch.=20 Yet pressure is mounting for these power producers to return some of their= =20 profits, or at least forgive some debts they are owed by the state's troubl= ed=20 utilities:=20 A spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis said Thursday that at least two energy=20 companies have volunteered to forgive some debt, a development that could= =20 give Davis leverage over other suppliers.=20 Also Thursday, the state's Independent System Operator declared that some= =20 power merchants may have overcharged the state and utilities by as much as= =20 $562 million in December and January. ISO officials asked federal regulator= s=20 to confirm their findings and seek refunds from the generators.=20 Several key lawmakers say any deal to rescue Pacific Gas and Electric Co. a= nd=20 Southern California Edison must include debt forgiveness by generators and= =20 other creditors.=20 ""They have to get a haircut like anyone else,"" said state Sen. Debra Bowen,= =20 the powerful chair of the Senate Energy Committee. ""I'm not saying they hav= e=20 to walk around like Jesse Ventura, but they can't continue to walk around= =20 like Don King, either.""=20 So far, most generators adamantly refuse to discuss debt forgiveness, sayin= g=20 their electricity prices are reasonable.=20 Steven Kean, executive vice president of Enron Corp., said he didn't see ""a= ny=20 reason"" to forgive any debts. A spokeswoman for Mirant Corp. said company= =20 officials expect full payment.=20 Richard Wheatley, a spokesman for Reliant Energy Inc., said lawmakers urgin= g=20 debt relief are engaged in wishful thinking.=20 ""The more they discuss it, the more they hope it might turn into reality,""= =20 said Wheatley, whose company is owed $300 million. ""From our perspective,= =20 it's not open to negotiation.""=20 But Bowen and others say generators, bondholders and other utility creditor= s=20 have some good reasons to budge.=20 If Edison and PG&E go bankrupt, Bowen says, the generators might have to wa= it=20 years to get even partial payment. That's because they are unsecured=20 creditors -- meaning they don't hold any collateral to secure payment of=20 their debts.=20 ""It is not very hard to figure out from a dollars and cents standpoint,"" sa= id=20 Bowen, D-Marina Del Rey, who has been talking to some of the generators abo= ut=20 debt forgiveness. ""If you are owed 100 bucks, would you rather get $90=20 several months from now, or would you rather take your chances with=20 bankruptcy attorneys and get $50 three years from now?""=20 Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Davis, said the governor ""has received a=20 couple of unsolicited offers"" from generators willing to forgive debts as= =20 part of a deal. Maviglio declined to name the companies, but said, ""It is a= ll=20 part of the ongoing negotiations.""=20 The game of cat and mouse comes as Davis and lawmakers try to gain leverage= =20 over five companies -- AES Corp., Duke Energy Corp., Dynegy Inc., Mirant an= d=20 Reliant -- that bought power plants from the California-based utilities in= =20 the early days of the state's foray into deregulation.=20 Because of that divesture, much of California's power is controlled by=20 out-of-state generators and their trading subsidiaries, or by independent= =20 brokers such as Enron, the country's biggest electricity marketer.=20 In recent months, at least five class-action lawsuits have accused these=20 companies of manipulating and inflating electricity prices, either by=20 intentionally shutting down plants or by buying natural gas cheaply and usi= ng=20 it to generate electricity sold at a several-hundred-percent markup.=20 On Thursday, the nonprofit corporation that manages most of the state's=20 electric grid revealed data that could support claims of price gouging.=20 In a filing with federal regulators, the Independent System Operator said t= he=20 wholesalers overcharged the ISO by $562 million for spot-market purchases i= n=20 December and January.=20 The ISO's findings are based on federal price caps that say any bids above = a=20 certain level be justified in writing. The ISO calculated the suppliers'=20 costs, threw in a 10 percent profit margin -- and concluded that the=20 generators had sold scads of power at unreasonable prices.=20 The state's grid managers want the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to= =20 seek refunds from the generators if regulators confirm that overcharging to= ok=20 place. But some doubt the FERC will act, given its past reluctance to set= =20 price controls or interfere in California's energy markets.=20 ""I don't think they have a whole lot of chance with FERC,"" said Severin=20 Borenstein, director of the University of California Energy Institute.=20 Federal officials, he said, ""are likely to bend over backward to excuse the= =20 prices.""=20 Wholesalers also doubted the ISO report would lead anywhere, saying it left= =20 out significant, legitimate costs of selling electricity to California.=20 Suppliers had the right to charge a ""credit premium"" as the risks of=20 nonpayment began rising, said Gary Ackerman of the Western Power Trading=20 Forum. Not only did the ISO become an uncreditworthy buyer -- because it go= t=20 its money from Edison and PG&E -- but the whole political climate in=20 California added to the wholesalers' risks, Ackerman said.=20 Whether or not the ISO filing prompts action from federal regulators, it=20 could help lawmakers pressure the generators.=20 State Sen. Joe Dunn, D-Santa Ana, said he wants to sort out how much of the= =20 debts piled up by PG&E and Edison since last summer were the result of=20 electricity prices that could be deemed ""unjust and unreasonable"" under=20 federal and state laws.=20 ""Since every regulatory body has concluded those costs were unjust and=20 unreasonable, a portion, if not a very significant part of that past debt= =20 ought to be forgiven,"" Dunn said.=20 Some analysts say state leaders can't push the generators too far, since th= ey=20 depend on energy companies to build new power plants -- a supply boost that= =20 theoretically would lower energy prices.=20 Dunn acknowledges that is a concern, but says the Legislature also can't=20 afford to ignore charges that generators have gouged utilities and=20 ratepayers.=20 ""That is the game of chicken we are in now,"" Dunn said. ""And up to this=20 point, it is only the state that has blinked.""=20 The issue of debt forgiveness could become moot if Davis can't strike a dea= l=20 with PG&E and San Diego Gas & Electric to buy their transmission systems.= =20 Last week, Davis announced a tentative agreement to acquire Edison's power= =20 lines for $2.7 billion and is reportedly close to coming to terms with SDG&= E.=20 But PG&E has so far rejected the governor's overtures, and on Thursday it= =20 added to a litany of financial woes. The San Francisco-based company=20 defaulted on another $1.21 billion worth of payments to electricity=20 suppliers. It did, however, make partial payments totaling $228 million to= =20 the ISO, which bought power from the wholesalers on the utility's behalf, a= nd=20 to a group of cogenerators and alternative energy providers.=20 If talks with the state break down, one of PG&E's alternatives would be=20 bankruptcy court, where a judge would determine how its assets would be=20 divided among creditors. An alternative scenario has one or all of the=20 generators going to court to force PG&E into bankruptcy, but Bowen, for one= ,=20 is doubtful that will happen anytime soon.=20 ""If they (the generators) thought they would come out better in a bankruptc= y,=20 we would be there already,"" said Bowen, whose committee would have to appro= ve=20 any rescue plan for the utilities.=20 ""So that means they have to give. Everyone has to give.""=20 Emily Bazar of The Bee Capitol Bureau contributed to this report.=20 Thursday's developments A Davis spokesman says the governor has received ""unsolicited offers"" from= =20 some generators willing to forgive debts but declines to name them.=20 In a filing with federal regulators, the Independent System Operator says= =20 some wholesalers overcharged the ISO by $562 million for spot-market=20 purchases in December and January.=20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. pays 16 percent of a $1.44 billion bill to=20 wholesale power suppliers, defaulting on $1.21 billion of the debt but payi= ng=20 $228 million.=20 State declares Stage 2 alert but downgrades it to a ""warning"" at mid-mornin= g.=20 Calpine Corp. becomes the latest wholesaler to sign long-term supply=20 contracts with the Department of Water Resources, agreeing to two deals=20 totaling $8.3 billion -- a 10-year contract for $5.2 billion and a 20-year= =20 contract for $3.1 billion. Last month, Calpine signed a deal worth $4.6=20 billion.=20 --- Friday, March 2, 2001=20 By Rick Stouffer=20 rstouffer@ftenergy.com=20 ""=01(No state is an island, entire of itself; every state is a piece of the= =20 continent, a part of the main=01("" -John Donne California Gov. Gray Davis has seemingly hit on a plan that he thinks will= =20 solve his state's energy problems:=20 Acquire some 32,000 miles of transmission lines for between $8 billion and= =20 $10 billion to keep the bankruptcy wolf away from the state's three=20 investor-owned utilities. Create a public power authority to buy, build and operate power plants,=20 financed with up to $5 billion in state bonds. Not raise customer rates to pay for at least $10 billion in bonds used to p= ay=20 for power.=20 Sounds great, doesn't it? Something for everyone=01*no more pain=01*sounds= =20 suspiciously like California's original deregulation plan=01*itself a misno= mer;=20 California wasn't deregulated, it was restructured.=20 Energy 'island' won't work But Davis's efforts to, in effect, create the electrical island of Californ= ia=20 will not work, many say. The governor's control of transmission doesn't sol= ve=20 the immediate demand-supply conundrum.=20 And creation of the fancy-sounding California Consumer Power and Conservati= on=20 Financing Authority to buy, build and operate power plants could drive=20 private developers out of the Golden State=01*who wants to compete against = the=20 ultimate government-subsidized entity?=20 ""Davis is, in effect, nationalizing the power industry in California,"" said= =20 Jonathan Gottlieb, a partner in Washington, D.C., law firm Baker & McKenzie= 's=20 North American Utility and Energy Products Group. ""Command and control=20 economies have been collapsing around the world=01*except in California.""= =20 The problems with the California power industry are numerous and beaten to= =20 death by the media. It appears everything went wrong that could go wrong=01= *all=20 at once=01*Murphy's Law in the absurd.=20 Just as numerous as the problems, are the number of entities which can be= =20 fingered as having a hand in the debacle.=20 All that said, Gov. Davis feels he has the magic bullet which will make=20 everything right: take over much of the system, force those=20 out-of-state-based generators to act ""responsibly,"" bail out the incumbent= =20 utilities and not raise customer rates.=20 But has anyone looked longer term than the next few months concerning the= =20 consequences of Davis' moves? Anyone stop to think what happens if and when= =20 the state does take control?=20 Who runs the state-owned system?=20 ""With the transmission-lines buy, you have a mechanism which gives the=20 utilities cash to pay off the debt incurred in buying wholesale power,"" sai= d=20 Craig Pirrong, a commodity markets expert and professor in the Olin School = of=20 Business at Washington University in St. Louis.=20 ""But now there are operational questions,"" Pirrong continued. ""Is the state= =20 the most efficient entity to operate and maintain the wires system?""=20 Good question. ""You have to find someone to run the system once you take it= =20 over,"" said William Hogan, a professor in Harvard University's John F.=20 Kennedy School of Government. ""So you either contract or hire utility=20 employees.""=20 There is precedent, obviously, for government-owned and operated utilities.= =20 In the United States, more than 2,000 municipals operate today, while=20 internationally a number of state-run utilities are in operation, for examp= le=20 Electricit, de France. But government ownership of utilities appears to be = on=20 the way out across the world, the experts say.=20 ""Look what's happening worldwide,"" said Adrian Moore, executive director of= =20 the Los Angeles-based free market think tank Reason Public Policy Institute= .=20 ""Over the last seven or eight years, billions of dollars worth of utility= =20 privatizations have taken place. Germany and Italy, for example, are sellin= g=20 off huge tranches of their national utilities.""=20 Municipal utilities tout their lower costs per customer, but those figures= =20 are deceptive, some industry watchers believe.=20 ""There are a lot of tax advantages and hidden subsidies in municipal=20 utilities that mask the real cost,"" said economist Murray Weidenbaum, schol= ar=20 in residence at the Jones Graduate School of Management at Rice University = in=20 Houston, Texas, and the former first chairman of President Reagan's Council= =20 of Economic Advisers. ""If you move to a state-run utility, you can almost= =20 guarantee costs will go up over time,"" Moore said.=20 Politics taking precedence With state control of California's transmission lines, many experts see=20 politics taking precedence over economics=01*or need=01*when decisions are = made=20 concerning where to build new lines.=20 ""You can see gamesmanship and lobbying taking precedence, moving away from= =20 economic drivers toward political drivers,"" Washington University's Pirrong= =20 said.=20 On the generation side, many of the same problems associated with assuming= =20 command of the wires could occur.=20 Generators including Mirant Corp. and Duke Energy already publicly expresse= d=20 concerns with the wires acquisition; specifically, will they be shut out of= =20 access to get their power to market?=20 ""I can see politically that they've got to get something out of this to sel= l=20 the plan to consumers, but we need to make sure we aren't discriminated=20 against,"" Mirant President Marce Fuller said during the recent Cambridge=20 Energy Research Associates energy conference in Houston.=20 Discrimination against incumbents could occur, but what about bias against= =20 potential generators? With the establishment of the Consumer Power and=20 Conservation Financing Board, what private company would want to bid agains= t=20 the sixth largest economy in the world?=20 ""With the government involved, companies would be reluctant to build new=20 plants without a government contract, because the government is subsidizing= =20 construction,"" said Harvard's Hogan.=20 ""Where's the state's comparative advantage in building new plants?""=20 Washington University's Pirrong asked.=20 FERC must weigh-in There is another major player in California's ascension to wires=20 owner-operator: the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The Federa= l=20 Power Act puts FERC right in the middle of the California takeover, said=20 Baker & McKenzie's Gottlieb.=20 ""FERC Chairman Curtis Hebert has used the word 'nationalization' publicly t= o=20 describe what California is proposing, and has said he has definite concern= s=20 about the proposal,"" Gottlieb said. ""I don't think FERC can say no to the= =20 California takeover, but they could weigh it down with conditions.""=20 One of those conditions may be a trade-off: FERC will approve California's= =20 takeover of transmission wires, in exchange for the state giving control of= =20 the lines to multi-state regional transmission organizations.=20 A 'quick' fix could take months No one, including Davis, sees this plan happening quickly. In a presentatio= n=20 Wednesday to analysts in New York, the governor admitted it would take up t= o=20 four more weeks to reach agreement with PG&E Corp./Pacific Gas & Electric C= o.=20 for its wires. He also admitted he cannot win enough Republicans to pass th= e=20 bill with the two-thirds majority needed for immediate implementation. Bill= s=20 in California passed with a simple majority must wait 90 days before going= =20 into effect.=20 Thus, the entire process may not be over for at least another six weeks, an= d=20 even then the Davis plan could face a ballot initiative. But for the sake o= f=20 argument, assume Gov. Davis gets his way and takes control of the=20 investor-owned utilities' wires and begins building and buying plants. Wher= e=20 does such a massive undertaking leave the Golden State in three to five=20 years?=20 ""All things add up to a pretty grim situation,"" said the Reason Public Poli= cy=20 Institute's Moore. ""Five years from now just because the state is purchasin= g=20 power, we will have prices higher than the U.S. average. That will be=20 exacerbated by the state owning the wires and building the plants.""=20 ""I'm very dubious; the government-run utility in the long-run will be very= =20 expensive,"" Harvard's Hogan concurred.=20 Baker & McKenzie's Gottlieb sees the California screen test as providing th= e=20 impetus for a huge infrastructure build-out nationwide. One recent survey= =20 found that some $20 billion in plant financings within the United States ar= e=20 projected for just the first three months of 2001=01*compared to $24 billio= n for=20 all of 1999.=20 A textbook case According to economist Weidenbaum, the California energy debacle answers th= e=20 question ""does the government deregulate as badly as it regulates,"" with a= =20 huge exclamation point.=20 ""California is a textbook dramatization of the shortcomings of government= =20 involvement with business,"" Weidenbaum said. ""You now have Chapter Two in= =20 that book; we already have Chapter One.""=20 The English poet Donne said: ""And therefore never send to know for whom the= =20 bell tolls; it tolls for thee.""=20 In California, that ""bell"" is clanging.=20 --- Ex-Regulator Urges Temporary Federal Price Caps on Power Carolyn Lochhead, Chronicle Washington Bureau=20 ? Friday,?March 2, 2001=20 Washington -- Federal energy regulators should intervene more forcefully in= =20 California's energy crisis, a former Reagan-appointed regulator said=20 yesterday,=20 while other experts feared the financial effects could balloon into another= =20 savings-and-loan bailout disaster.=20 Independent regulatory experts speaking at a high-profile panel on the ener= gy=20 crunch also said Gov. Gray Davis may be whistling in the dark in his=20 assurances that the power crisis will be largely resolved by summer.=20 ""I think there is a fairly compelling argument that something needs to be= =20 done,"" said Elizabeth Moler, appointed to the Federal Energy Regulatory=20 Commission by President Ronald Reagan and named chairwoman by President Bil= l=20 Clinton.=20 Moler, speaking to the Brookings Institution and the American Enterprise=20 Institute Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, said some form of temporary= =20 federal intervention on wholesale prices is needed, so long as it does not= =20 discourage investment in new generation capacity.=20 Davis and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., have urged federal regulators to= =20 impose temporary price controls to give the state breathing room.=20 The chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Curt Hebert, is= =20 strongly opposed to price caps, saying they would discourage investment and= =20 delay resolution of the crisis. California needs to lift the electricity ra= te=20 freeze on consumers to encourage conservation and restore the finances of t= he=20 bankrupt investor-owned utilities, Hebert has argued.=20 But Moler faulted federal regulators and the California Public Utilities=20 Commission, both of which oversaw the state's deregulation plan, for allowi= ng=20 the problem to fester.=20 ""The signs were there in June that something needed to happen,"" Moler said,= =20 noting that electricity deregulation is complex and always needs adjustment= s.=20 ""I'd like to think I would have been reading the market monitoring reports,= ""=20 Moler said. ""I'd like to think I would have been on the airplane to San=20 Francisco every other week, and on the other weeks, the CPUC would have bee= n=20 on a plane to Washington.""=20 Moler also faulted state PUC members for blaming the crisis on their=20 predecessors. ""I'm pretty amazed the CPUC is still blaming Dan Fessler,"" th= e=20 former chairman, Moler said. ""He's been gone for three years.""=20 Moler noted that the state's plan to take over the utilities' transmission= =20 lines needs federal regulatory approval, which Hebert indicated he opposes,= =20 comparing the move to ""nationalization.""=20 Davis' assertions this week to Washington policymakers and Wall Street=20 analysts that he has the crisis under control were also viewed dubiously.= =20 Noting that peak California power demand will rise to 45,000 megawatts in t= he=20 summer from 30,000 in the winter, Robert Litan, director of the Joint Cente= r=20 for Regulatory Studies, said, ""You do your own math. If you think the probl= em=20 is bad now, you ain't seen nothing yet.""=20 Litan said the state's partial electricity deregulation was a giant gamble= =20 that freed wholesale prices would stay below fixed retail prices, but the b= et=20 went bad and now state taxpayers are paying the cost.=20 ""I used to study S&Ls, and what California is doing sounds a lot like what= =20 the federal government did for 10 years, which was pray and hope that the= =20 problem goes away,"" he said.=20 California is paying roughly $1.5 billion a month for electricity while sta= te=20 officials try to craft a long-term solution.=20 Paul Joskow, director of the Center for Energy and Environmental Policy=20 Research at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said state and feder= al=20 policymakers must devise a long-term blueprint that encourages investment i= n=20 new generation and offers price stability to consumers.=20 ""I haven't seen any long-term plan yet for where they are going in=20 California,"" Joskow said. "". . . I think the governor owes that to the=20 citizens of California, because now we're going from week to week, and you= =20 know as well as I do what it's going to be six months from now.""=20 E-mail Carolyn Lochhead at clochhead@sfchronicle.com.=20 ?=20 ? Printer-friendly version=20 ? Email this article to a friend=20 02/16/2001 - California governor proposes state power line purchase .=20 02/09/2001 - Removal of Rate Caps Urged.=20 02/08/2001 - Developments in California's power crisis .=20 02/04/2001 - Davis Neglected Key Strategy In Power Crisis.=20 >>more related articles...=20 --- NEWS=20 PG&E to Pay Creditors Only 15% / Smaller suppliers outraged over plan David Lazarus 03/02/2001=20 The San Francisco Chronicle=20 FINAL=20 Page A1=20 (Copyright 2001)=20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. said yesterday it would pay only about 15 cent= s=20 on the dollar for its outstanding power bills, sparking outrage among small= er=20 creditors, who accused the utility of driving them out of business.=20 In a filing to securities regulators, PG&E revealed it would pay just $228= =20 million of about $1.4billion due for recent electricity purchases.=20 ""How would you feel if your boss gave you just 15 percent of your paycheck= =20 and said he'll get back to you for the rest?"" asked Bob Judd, director of t= he=20 California Biomass Energy Alliance, representing operators of 28 wood-fired= =20 plants statewide.=20 PG&E's filing marks a turning point in California 's energy crisis. It is n= ow=20 possible that not only will the state's largest utility go under, but it=20 could take a number of power generators with it.=20 PG&E, now in talks with the governor on a possible financial bailout, is=20 telling creditors to be thankful for whatever they get. If the utility=20 declares bankruptcy, all parties know, many creditors may receive nothing.= =20 Still, time is running out for Ridgewood Power, a New Jersey company with 1= 4=20 plants in California . It already has had to shut down three facilities in= =20 PG&E's service area because it can no longer afford to keep them running.= =20 'NOWHERE NEAR'=20 ""The amount of money PG&E is giving us is nowhere near what we need to pay= =20 our natural gas suppliers,"" said Martin Quinn, Ridgewood's chief operating= =20 officer. ""We could restart the plants tomorrow if we could be released from= =20 our PG&E contracts and sell to another buyer.""=20 He added that his company would ask federal regulators to nullify its=20 contracts with PG&E so Ridgewood could bid for alternative power contracts= =20 being offered by California state officials.=20 PG&E's larger creditors reacted more cautiously to word that the utility=20 would pay only a fraction of its outstanding bills.=20 ""We have to study the consequences and see,"" said Richard Wheatley, a=20 spokesman for Houston's Reliant Energy, which formed a creditors' committee= =20 last month with other leading electricity providers. ""We don't know how muc= h=20 of the money we'll get.""=20 Reliant and other major creditors are grappling with how much leeway to gra= nt=20 PG&E on its unpaid bills before deciding to cut their losses and push the= =20 cash-strapped utility into bankruptcy.=20 'VERY CONCERNED'=20 ""We are very concerned about the credit issue,"" said Steve Stengel, a=20 spokesman for Houston's Dynegy Inc., another member of the creditors'=20 committee. ""But we are still interested in finding a comprehensive solution= =20 to California 's energy situation.""=20 That may depend on the outcome of current talks Gov. Gray Davis is holding= =20 with PG&E and Southern California Edison to purchase the utilities'=20 transmission lines as part of a multibillion-dollar bailout package.=20 PG&E and Edison are saddled with nearly $13 billion in debt as a result of= =20 ill-conceived efforts to deregulate the state's electricity market.=20 The announcement of partial payments was not a complete surprise to PG&E's= =20 creditors. The utility's chief financial officer, Kent Harvey, told investo= rs=20 in a conference call last month that PG&E would prefer to ""make partial=20 payments than no payments at all.""=20 PG&E has defaulted on more than $730 million in short-term debt payments=20 since January amid growing concerns that the utility will file for bankrupt= cy=20 protection.=20 In response, three California counties have formed their own creditors'=20 committee to recoup investments in PG&E's short-term debt, also known as=20 commercial paper.=20 The three -- Santa Cruz, Riverside and Siskiyou counties -- are inviting=20 other public agencies to join forces in seeking compensation from PG&E for= =20 the defaulted payments.=20 The prospect of PG&E filing for bankruptcy has diminished somewhat in recen= t=20 weeks as Davis and Sacramento lawmakers scrambled to come up with proposals= =20 to rescue California 's utilities from financial ruin.=20 Although Edison has said it is prepared to sell its power lines to the stat= e=20 for nearly $3 billion, PG&E so far has refused to follow suit.=20 However, as The Chronicle reported yesterday, the utility retained outside= =20 counsel this week to offer advice on a possible sale of its power lines,=20 increasing the likelihood that a deal may be in the works.=20 SUITS ALLEGE MISMANAGEMENT=20 Separately, PG&E said yesterday it had been hit with a pair of lawsuits=20 seeking almost $3 billion in restitution for financial mismanagement.=20 One suit charges the utility's parent company, PG&E Corp., with violating i= ts=20 fiduciary duties by forcing the utility to repurchase shares from the=20 corporation for $2.3 billion.=20 The other alleges that PG&E Corp. collected nearly $3 billion from the=20 utility under a tax-sharing arrangement but paid only $2.3 billion to the= =20 government.=20 The lawsuits were filed in San Francisco Superior Court by Richard D. Wilso= n.=20 No other information about the plaintiff was immediately available.=20 ----------- Refund RequestedElectricity generators overcharged the state by= =20 more than a half-billion dollars in two months and should be forced to retu= rn=20 the money, power officials said yesterday.=20 The California Independent System Operator said in a filing with the Federa= l=20 Energy Regulatory Commission that generators appeared to have charged $555= =20 million more than what was reasonable.=20 It was unclear how any refunds might be passed on to consumers. About=20 two-thirds of all power purchases in the spot market were over price caps= =20 established by FERC, said Eric Hildebrandt, an ISO manager of market=20 monitoring. The cap was $250 per megawatt hour in December and $150 per=20 megawatt hour in January.=20 The ISO is requesting that FERC order a refund for ""excessive"" costs.=20 Source: Chronicle Sacramento Bureau=20 Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.=20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron legislative package; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 02/28/2001 02:54 PM ----- MBD <MDay@GMSSR.com> 02/15/2001 01:20 PM To: Alan.Comnes@enron.com, Chris.H.Foster@enron.com, Christian.Yoder@enron.com, Cynthia.Sandherr@enron.com, dleff@enron.com, David.W.Delainey@enron.com, dbenevid@enron.com, dblack@enron.com, Elizabeth.Sager@enron.com, etilney@enron.com, Eric.Thode@enron.com, gsavage@enron.com, Greg.Wolfe@enron.com, Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com, Jeffrey.T.Hodge@enron.com, JKLAUBER@LLGM.COM, Joe.Hartsoe@enron.com, John.J.Lavorato@enron.com, John.Neslage@enron.com, jwhalan@enron.com, Kathryn.Corbally@enron.com, Keith.Holst@enron.com, Kristin.Walsh@enron.com, Leslie.Lawner@enron.com, Linda.Robertson@enron.com, Marcia.A.Linton@enron.com, Margaret.Carson@enron.com, Mark.Palmer@enron.com, msunde@enron.com, Mary.Hain@enron.com, Mary.Schoen@enron.com, MBD <MDay@GMSSR.com>, Michael.Tribolet@enron.com, msmith1@enron.com, Mike.Grigsby@enron.com, nbresnan@enron.com, Paul.Kaufman@enron.com, Phillip.K.Allen@enron.com, Rebecca.W.Cantrell@enron.com, Richard.B.Sanders@enron.com, Richard.Shapiro@enron.com, Rob.Bradley@enron.com, Robert.Badeer@enron.com, Robert.C.Williams@enron.com, Robert.Frank@enron.com, Robert.Johnston@enron.com, Sandra.McCubbin@enron.com, sstoness@enron.com, Shelley.Corman@enron.com, Steve.C.Hall@enron.com, Steve.Walton@enron.com, Steven.J.Kean@enron.com, Susan.J.Mara@enron.com, Tim.Belden@enron.com, Tom.Briggs@enron.com, Travis.McCullough@enron.com, Vance.Meyer@enron.com, vsharp@enron.com, William.S.Bradford@enron.com, ""'Harry.Kingerski@enron.com'"" <Harry.Kingerski@enron.com>, James.D.Steffes@enron.com cc: BTC <BCragg@GMSSR.com>, JMB <JBennett@GMSSR.com>, ""'Scott Govenar, Enron lobbyist'"" <sgovenar@govadv.com> Subject: Enron legislative package Here are 4 of the five legislative proposals our office has been asked to draft. The only one missing is no. 4, the expedited generation siting proposal, which will have to be worked on more as we have just received extensive comments from ENA and outside counsel (McCutchen). By separate cover, I will send Jeff Dasovich the summary letter desribing the proposals. If changes are required, please contact Brian Cragg of our office. (bcragg@gmssr.com) Thank you. Mike Day <<PART5.DOC>> <<PART3.DOC>> <<PART2.DOC>> <<PART1.DOC>> - PART5.DOC - PART3.DOC - PART2.DOC - PART1.DOC [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Last FINAL version; [EMail-Body]= Has this gone to Ken yet. If not please send. Maureen McVicker 06/21/2001 02:55 PM To: Lora Sullivan/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Last FINAL version Lora: This is the new ""Final"" version. The difference from the earlier version is - a few slides were taken out and the order of the remaining slides were rearranged. Please get a copy of this new ""Final"" to Ken Lay. Thanks. ----- Forwarded by Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron on 06/21/2001 02:53 PM ----- Ursula Brenner 06/21/2001 01:05 PM To: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Last version This is the final version, including the changes Jeff just requested. Ursula [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Penn. conference call; [EMail-Body]= Set up meeting re Mt. St. Helens for next week [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: HP -- confidential internal document; [EMail-Body]= Jennifer, Thank-you for stepping in on this and guiding the process! ---------------------- Forwarded by Sarah-Joy Hunter/NA/Enron on 12/12/2000 05:03 PM --------------------------- From: Patrick Tucker@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS on 12/12/2000 02:52 PM PST To: Sarah-Joy Hunter/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Re: HP -- confidential internal document Sarah-Joy, thanks for your excellent recap of progress to date. I really appreciate the organization and order you have brought to this process. It's great to work with you again after all of this time! Patrick [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Public Policy Contacts for California; [EMail-Body]= I kept your contact list, but now I can't find the CV you sent. Would you mind resending? Kevin Scott on 06/20/2001 02:02:00 PM Please respond to kevinscott@onlinemailbox.net To: Steve Kean <skean@enron.com>, Jeff Skilling <jeff.skilling@enron.com> cc: Subject: Public Policy Contacts for California Jeff and Steve As you requested, I have prepared a list of my preferred public policy contacts for California. It is composed of professionals from an array of public, private and non-profit backgrounds. I have worked in some capacity with each of these people and most I know quite well. Please call me for further background. Kevin 213-926-2626 Attachment - Kevin Scott - Preferred Contacts - 6-20-01.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW:; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: ""Frank A. Wolak"" Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 4:28 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Vince, I've been hearing rumors that Enron has decided to endorse the nodal pricing model as implemented in PJM. I just wanted to warn you that I'm not sure this is in Enron's long-term interest at all. Let me explain why. Feel free to give me a call if you'd like to talk more about this. First, let me say that I firmly believe in locational pricing and specifically pricing congestion. However, the way that PJM implements nodal pricing is to eliminate as much price volatility and reduce the transparency of the market. Specifically, the PJM tariff gives the ISO the ability to mitigate to cost plus a %10 adder the bids of any market participant that the ISO deems is out of merit in one of the three zones in region. (The fact that a nodal market is talking about zones should give you cause for alarm.) Then the ISO takes this mitigated bid and re-runs its price-setting software to compute new nodal prices. The way I have (somewhat unfairly) decribed this price-setting process is that the PJM ISO decides what prices it would like for a given day and mitigates bids until it gets them. This is not a transparent market, nor one where it makes any sense to buy the risk management services that Enron provides. The only price volatility you have to worry about in the PJM market is that kind that comes about if they need imports into their control area to meet demand. Under these circumstances, you need to pay the imports whatever is necessary to get them to come to your market. However, bear in mind FERC's desire to make a large RTO on the East Coast. This will effectively mean little imports to the East Coast RTO, so all bids can be mitigated at the discretion of the ISO. Paying market-clearing prices to cost-of-service mitigated bids is just paying too much to eliminate price volatility. It effectively kills off the development of risk management at the wholesale and retail level. Power marketing becomes much less profitable because retailers know you can always buy at cost-mitigated prices. In short, the PJM model is not market. It is just an alternative form of regulation that is politically attractive because it reduces price volatility, but it is not good for consumers or traders because they just get a higher cost form of regulation than traditional cost-of-service regulation. You pay market-clearing prices to cost-of-service mitigated bids, but under regulation you could just pay cost-of-service prices and eliminate the infra-marginal profits to low cost generators. As we discussed during our dinner, I think the two biggest sources of benefits from re-structuring will come from getting the demand-side involved in the market and from more efficient risk management. A necessary condition for both of these to occur is prices that reflect actual conditions in the market (including the extent of market power exercised). Masking these signals dulls any incentive for market participants to make the investment necessary to management. The PJM model is just way to have a market in name without achieving any significant benefits to consumers or energy traders. Frank [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: 1st Draft New Risk Management Policy; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Schultz, Cassandra Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 6:25 PM To: Murphy, Ted; Port, David; Kaminski, Vince J; Andrews, Naveen; Zipter, Rudi; Nordstrom, Mary; Gorny, Vladimir; Hagelmann, Bjorn Cc: 'vkaminski@aol.com' Subject: 1st Draft New Risk Management Policy OK, here's the working draft ""masterpiece"" (haha). Please review and provide comments and feedback by the end of the week (note: Ted and David, we have a conference call scheduled Wednesday for the three of us to discuss). Also, I'm sending to Price Waterhouse Coopers for their input as well - I need to spend more time reviewing what they sent on Friday to see if I've missed any issues we want to address. I have not reviewed the details or the (one-RAC) structure with any of the other RAC or risk management functions - please do not distribute yourselves as I'd like to ""cushion"" the reception. Review meetings with these functions begins tomorrow (Tuesday), when I meet with: ? Dave Gorte, ? Bill Bradford and Molly Harris ? Sally Beck's group (Beth Apollo and James New) ? Treasury (Perkins and later, Despain) ? Internal Audit (Kilchrist) ? Legal (Sayre/Taylor) I'll wait to hear from David/Ted tomorrow morning as to whether I should provide a complete draft to any of these other functions or to Rick Buy at this point, or if I should wait until later in the week when we've all had the opportunity to review. As I turn around the next draft, I'll work on a power point presentation for use in the executive meetings beginning the last week of June (Business Unit Offices of the Chairman, Whalley, Causey, Fastow, Skilling). I made a quick summary of changes in the document attached below; going forward I will refine this and perhaps red-line the current policy to assist our detailed review. Thanks for your help, Cassandra. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Pipeline safety legislation - update; [EMail-Body]= print ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/16/2000 10:17 AM ----- Jeffrey Keeler 10/13/2000 12:28 PM To: Stanley Horton/Corp/Enron@Enron, Phil Lowry/OTS/Enron@ENRON, John Shafer/OTS/Enron@Enron, Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, David L Johnson/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Louis Soldano/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Colleen Raker/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Chris Long/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Clayton Seigle/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Pipeline safety legislation - update Since the defeat of the Senate pipeline safety legislation earlier this week in the House, we have been working on strategies related to action that could occur before the end of the congressional session. The following developments indicate that the legislation is still very much in play, but our primary concerns are making sure efforts going forward remain under control and preventing the passage of legislation that goes too far. Developments: House Republican leadership is not interested in pursuing the legislation any further, either through regular procedures or as an attachment to appropriations, ""omnibus"" or other must-pass measures. They are somewhat angry at the industry for not being able to fight off advances made by Reps. Dingell and Oberstar, who were able to persuade enough Democrats to vote against the Senate bill so that it fell short of the 2/3 needed for passage under suspension of the rules. Senate bill sponsors/supporters are extremely angry at House Democrats for killing the Senate legislation, and at the White House/DOT for not strongly promoting the Senate bill (which they previously had supported) and reigning in House Democrats. Senator Patty Murray called the White House and expressed her concern, which prompted a series of meetings between staff for Senate and House Democrats and the White House to discuss a solution. In these meetings, House Democrats have proposed adding several provisions from the Dingell/Oberstar legislation to the Senate bill and moving that package on an omnibus or appropriations bill. Sources close to Rep. Dingell indicate that they really do not want any bill at all, and are merely keeping up the pressure in an effort to see if they can get the Senate or industry to accept tougher provisions. Senate Democrats (including Murray, Bingaman, and Breaux) are not accepting any possible amendments to the original Senate bill, and are opposed to changing the Senate bill at all. However, Senator Murray and Republican Senator Slade Gorton (who has a tough election) both want to continue to pursue the Senate bill (unamended) as a rider to an omnibus/appropriations bill. The White House is looking to cover itself from a poor performance in the House, and is considering drafting an executive order that could be issued if no legislation passes at all. It is unclear what could or would be contained in such an order, but the White House is indicating to Senate staff that it would be more like the Senate bill than the House bill. We are working with sources close to the White House to confirm their strategy. Strategy going forward: Upon hearing that some industry associations were on Capitol Hill discussing ""what industry could live with"" in terms of provisions added to the Senate bill, I insisted (along with El Paso and others) that we not take such an approach, but rather remain consistent in our approach -- we support the Senate bill and only the Senate bill. It was approved unanimously in the Senate and by 60% of the House, and if anything moves forward on an omnibus/appropriations bill, it should be the Senate bill. Consistent with what our Senate friends are doing, we should not even recognize the Dingell/Oberstar legislation as a serious proposal, nor start accepting pieces of it as a compromise. We will be shoring up support for our position of ""if anything moves forward, it should be the Senate bill only"" with Senate supporters and leadership in the House and Senate. We will also be working to thank the 51 Democrats who supported us in the House, and make sure they have any cover they need in case their vote becomes an issue. In support of Senator Gorton's election troubles, we will be working to try to get media placement of op-eds that support the efforts he has waged and make sure the House Democrats shoulder the blame for the bill's defeat. In particular, we are hopeful that Senator McCain (who has been passionate about this issue) will write op-eds that can be placed to support Gorton and others in tough races who supported the Senate bill. Congress' state of confusion over omnibus/appropriations bills and last minute politics causes the legislative activity to be extremely fluid and subject to change rapidly, so we will have no real certainty until the session is over (which now could be as late as October 20). I will keep you posted as changes and developments occur. Jeff [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= United India - strictly confidential and privileged; [EMail-Body]= Bruce this memo is dealing with the merits of litigation v arbitration to resolve DPC's DSU claim for the first set of rotor problems. Recall that we tried to negotiate a settlement with insurers for some time and then UI served DPC with a notice of arbitration because of the threat of a bad faith claim. I think I summarized it earlier for you, but essentially we now have the choice of pursuing litigation in London against insurers since United India has now sued us in London Court (in addition to arbitration because they figured out a little late that under the policy, only quantum may be arbitrated and they don't want to admit liability). Our option before was only to sue them in India which really isn't an option which is why we agreed to arbitration. Basically UI can't decide what it wants to do, but this memo from Linklaters sets forth DPC's options which Justin, Ken Blades and I discussed regarding the pros and cons of litigation v arbitration. It's a complex mess and I'll be glad to sit down and explain it to you (or not), but we are basically writing to UI's counsel to try and determine what their position is and then we'll decide whether to litigate or arbitrate. Part of this relates to the adjuster's agreement with Ken as to the quantum owed upon a determination of liability. This is all very strange, but nothing regarding India or DPC surprises me anymore. We'll talk about it when you have time, but I just want you to know I'm taking care of this--let me know how involved you want to be (or not...). Just FYI, mb ---------------------- Forwarded by Michelle Blaine/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 01/03/2000 05:22 PM --------------------------- ""Williams, Justin"" on 12/29/2000 10:31:14 AM To: ""'Ken.Blades@enron.com'"" <Ken.Blades@enron.com>, ""'Michelle.Blaine@enron.com'"" <Michelle.Blaine@enron.com> cc: ""Cornell, Peter"" Subject: United India - strictly confidential and privileged <<001229_Dispute with United India.doc>> <<001229 Beachcrofts.doc>> Ken and Michelle, As agreed, please find attached a draft paper setting out ""headlines"" of the pros and cons of litigating liability. I also attach a draft letter to Beachcrofts. Please note I shall not be in the office on 2 January. Justin This message is confidential. It may also be privileged or otherwise protected by work product immunity or other legal rules. If you have received it by mistake please let us know by reply and then delete it from your system; you should not copy the message or disclose its contents to anyone. - 001229_Dispute with United India.doc - 001229 Beachcrofts.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Ken Lay update; [EMail-Body]= Ken left a msg for me on Sunday. He was able to return Bryson's call. Not much new: Ken got Jeff's paper will try to reach Hertzberg on Monday. Bryson gave an update (very consistent with yours on Fri) Wants us to think creatively about ""how to keep DWR contracts from preventing the comprehensive solution"" and how to address the concerns of the state treasurer. Ken tried to reach Pete Peterson (Blackstone) but did not make contact. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Catch Up; [EMail-Body]= Joe, I could not find the issue. I think I have dumped all the copies of the publication. I am in London next week. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Joseph T Pokalsky Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 3:14 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Catch Up Vince: I haven't heard but I guess that you weren't able to find the article on my going to Southern. I may be in town the 26 and 27th of next week. Will you be around? Do you want to meet up for bkfst or lunch? Thanks. Joseph T. Pokalsky Energy Vertical Analysis, LLC Office: 404-350-8562 Cell: 404-456-5173 Fax: 413-691-5614 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: House and Senate Energy Hearings Today on California/Western
 Electric Situation; [EMail-Body]= I left Hartsoe a voicemail on this issue too. I'm not sure we can convince Massey and others not to cap the secondary market for example, but they need to understand the facts before they run off attacking the pipelines: gas utilities in California opposed interstate capacity expansions into the state. gas utilities had just as much opportunity as anyone else to participate in open seasons for capacity. gas utilities fialed to fill storage. gas utilites have failed to build adequate take away capacity at the Cal border I suspect Socal gas is using its interstate capacity and its in state storage to line its own pockets. In short, if FERC wants to get to the bottom of the problem they need to look in California, not outside. Ray Alvarez 05/04/2001 09:02 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: House and Senate Energy Hearings Today on California/Western Electric Situation Steve, I've been thinking about the intense preoccupation with gas prices lately and decided to pass this info along because I think it's a red flag. My concern is that there might not only be a backlash affecting our interstate pipelines, but that our gas marketing efforts might be adversely affected. It might well be found that the holders of the firm capacity (i.e. marketers?), and not the pipes themselves, are at ""fault"" for the large basis differentials between the basins and the CA delivery points. Whoever is blamed might not really matter. My gut feeling is that the other shoe is about to drop, with calls for price caps on gas commodity prices into the West. This, of course, could affect years of effort on the gas marketing side in establishing competitive markets. Pipeline open access is of no avail if there is government intervention in the gas markets. Commissioner Massey, Senator Feinstein and other Western Senators were saying some very concerning things about gas prices, the impacts in their states and that something needed to be done. FERC responded with an announcement of their technical conference on interstate pipeline capacity and intrastate take away capacity (which, by the way, doesn't appear to address storage). Everyone wants an explanation as to why the basis differential is much higher than in other states, since they thought it should only consist of transport costs. Ray ---------------------- Forwarded by Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron on 05/04/2001 09:18 AM --------------------------- Ray Alvarez 05/03/2001 06:54 PM To: Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, jalexander@gibbs-bruns.com, Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Christopher F Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: House and Senate Energy Hearings Today on California/Western Electric Situation I was at the Senate hearing today on FERC's market Monitoring and Mitigation order, and I would add only a few additional and interesting regulatory-related details to John's fine summary: The hearing was contentious- among the Senators themselves, among the FERC Commissioners themselves, and the interchanges between them. Gas prices were controversial. Commissioner Massey kicked off the discussion on this issue citing a transport basis differential into CA of $10, when it was less than a dollar in other areas. He then noted that the high gas cost would adversely affect the power price under the auction, and that FERC must act regarding the high transport differentials- ""We will never get a handle on electric prices unless we get a handle on gas prices"". That opened the floodgates of discussion, culminating with the announcement by Commissioner Breathitt of FERC's technical conference (notice of which issued today) on the topic of current and projected interstate pipeline capacity, and adequacy of infrastructure within CA. She said that this would shed light on basis differentials and gas prices. Freudian slip? Chairman Hebert was heard to say by various attendees that price mitigation in the WSCC would apply at all times (in contrast to the order, which proposes mitigation only during times when reserves reach/fall below 7%). Whether he mis-spoke, or not, remains to be seen. Regarding the issue of how often mitigation would be invoked in CA (i.e., Stages 1, 2 or 3): Hebert opined ""Most of the time"". Breathitt said ""Likely 80-85% of the time"". Massey was unconvinced. Several Senators railed at the Commission for ""not doing its job"" and threatened that if the Commission did not act, Congress would act. If you have any questions or need additional detail, please feel free to call. Ray ---------------------- Forwarded by Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron on 05/03/2001 06:09 PM --------------------------- John Shelk 05/03/2001 05:49 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron, Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Chris Long/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: House and Senate Energy Hearings Today on California/Western Electric Situation I attended both the House and Senate energy committee hearings today. House hearing was in the Barton Subcommittee (Energy & Air Quality). Senate hearing was on last week's FERC order on a ""soft price cap"" and related issues. The House witnesses were dominated by California officials: Cal Energy Commission, Cal Air Resources Board, Chairman of Gov Davis Generation Implementation Task Force. In addition, there were witnesses from the Western Area Power Admin and Bonneville PA. The Senate witnesses were the three FERC commissioners. HIghlights Chairman Barton said it is still his intention to try to mark up the Barton bill, H.R. 1647 next week (many on and off the Subcommittee doubt this will happen; we are gathering political intelligence on those prospects and will report back with more information and conclusions once that is done); Chairman Barton also said he may go to California next week. There was considerable emphasis at both hearings about the alleged role that higher natural gas prices into California play in the electric power rate increases; several witnesses focused on difference in alleged transportation costs for similar differences between California and non-CA states; FERC at the Senate hearing said that today the commission announced a staff technical conference for later this month on all aspects of the natural gas market as it relates to California; a House member from Southern Illinois coal country attacked California for using only natural gas in its new power plants. The House witnesses, primarily BPA but also the California witnesses, attacked the negawatt provision in sec. 102 of the Barton bill; the criticism was that BPA would be forced to purchase power on the open market at a high price since it is short, sell it to the DSIs under contract; let the DSI sell it at market rates and capture the difference; BPA witness said that thus sec. 102 would make it difficult if not impossible to implement their strategy to avoid as much as a 200 percent rate increase on 10/1/01; BPA testimony will make it tough for Members of Congress from that service region to support sec. 102. Both hearings also touched on how difficult it would be to actually devise a price cap; at the House hearing, none of those advocating a price cap among the witnesses could answer excellent questions about exactly how this could be done; the witnesses just said ""cost plus a reasonable profit"" and said leave the details to FERC; at afternoon Senate hearing, Chairman Hebert had the staff bring in 15 boxes from one FP&L case to show how a price cap would take too long to bring any relief to California this summer; he said last week's soft price cap is much better. Also on the price cap, Rep. Walden (R-OR) got the Cal Energy Comm chair to admit that if the price caps had been in place earlier, California would NOT have taken the conservation and new generation steps that it has taken recently. The interplay among the FERC commissioners was much more contentious than it was a House hearing on Tuesday, although it could have been worse; when Senate Chairman Murkowski (R-AK) said that ""help is on the way"" in the form of the nominees for the two vacancies, Sen. Dorgan (D-ND) made a comment that suggested that the confirmation process will not be smooth; the same concern came from the interplay among the Senators, which was also somewhat contentious at times. Please advise if you have any questions or would like further details. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= job applicant; [EMail-Body]= any interest? ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/24/2000 05:37 PM ----- Eric Thode 09/20/2000 11:46 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: job applicant Is this of interest to you? Eric ---------------------- Forwarded by Eric Thode/Corp/Enron on 09/20/2000 11:46 AM --------------------------- From: Yvette Parker 09/18/2000 05:14 PM To: Eric Thode/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: job applicant Imad Tareen forwarded me his resume for a possible job opportunity in our group. (Please see below.) I have never met him before, and I have no idea how he got my phone number, but his resume looks quite good. What do you think? Yvette ---------------------- Forwarded by Yvette Parker/Corp/Enron on 09/18/2000 05:06 PM --------------------------- Imad Tareen 09/18/2000 04:39 PM To: Yvette Parker/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Rotation Hi Yvette Thanks for your help. I am very interested in exploring opportunities in your group. I have a Masters in Public Policy from Harvard which deals a lot with communications and running campaigns. Imad [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Doctoral studies; [EMail-Body]= I think you have picked the two most interesting industries. Because energy and telecom both have natural monopoly characteristics, the government gets involved in economic regulation (not just the usual environment, safety, labor and other types of regulation which all businesses are subject to). That means that there is constant interplay between policy makers and the business community and that policy makers have alot to say about which business strategies will be successful. Rob Wilson@ENRON 07/24/2000 04:44 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Mike McGowan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON Subject: Doctoral studies Steve, Vince Kaminski suggested I contact you, I'm the Gov't Affairs rep for NNG in Omaha and begin a doctoral studies program this fall at NU. I plan a research emphasis in regulatory politics, specific to energy and telecom market convergence and the public interest. I'd welcome any advice or suggestions you have regarding other potential area's of research, based on your professional experience in the public policy arena. I appreciate any guidance, I'm in the earliest stages of forming my advisory committee and curriculum of study. My supervisor, Mike McGowan, sends his regards. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= In Washington DC with Mr. Lay; [EMail-Body]= Fly up and back on company plane [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= NEWS FLASH ON THIS MORNING'S SENATE HEARING; [EMail-Body]= This morning, all 5 FERC commissioners testified before the Senate Energy Committee on yesterday's order and on the pending Feinstein/Smith legislation to impose cost-of-service rates on wholesale power. Highlights and analysis are as follows: 1. Sen. Feinstein, the chief sponsor of Senate price cap legislation, called FERC's order ""a giant step forward"" and said she is ""very grateful"" for what the commission did. Senators Gordon Smith and Barbara Boxer agreed. Sen. Feinstein said that she and Sen. Smith would now recommend to Chairman Bingaman that next week's mark up of their price control bill be postponed ""for the time being"" pending how the order plays out in practice. Chairman Bingaman said he would follow their advice and cancel next week's mark up. (Responding to a question, each of the five commissioners said that Congress should NOT act to pass Smith/Feinstein, at least at this time -- this included Comr. Massey, who has favored legislation in the absence of ""stronger"" action by the commission.) 2. However, it is very important to point out that House Democrats in California and elsewhere out West have not been as supportive of FERC's order as have the Senators. House Democrats are still expected to attempt to offer a price control amendment to the supplemental appropriations bill when it comes before the House later this week. Of course, the reaction of the Senate may undercut the House Democrats's argument, at least at this time. Furthermore, should prices go up and the FERC order is seen as not working, price control advocates, including Sens. Feinstein, Smith and Boxer, will no doubt pick up where they left off. 3. It will be very interesting to see how Senator Lieberman and Gov. Davis react to the FERC order at the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee hearing tomorrow morning. While this committee does NOT have legislative jurisdiction over the Feinstein/Smith legislation, this hearing will be well covered by the news media. Sen. Lieberman is a cosponsor of the Feinstein/Smith legislation. 4. In my view, the political and public pressure will now shift in large part -- at least for the time being -- from the legislative price cap proposals to the settlement conference process that the FERC order will set motion. There was a clear drum beat at the hearing from the western senators, particularly Feinstein, Boxer and Cantwell (WA), for refunds either out of the settlement conference or ordered by FERC. In essence, they are pressing to have the price mitigation formula in the new order applied to power sales that took place prior to the issuance of the order. 5. Another sense of the poltiical flavor is that Sen. Schumer (D-NY), while expressing his continued support for deregulatioin and competition, pressed FERC general counsel Kevin Madden (by this point the commissioners left for the RTO conference) about why the order applied only to the WSCC and did not apply nationwide. Madden at least tried to distinguish the New York and California markets, but then said that Con Ed has filed pleadings with FERC to extend price mitigation to New York and he could not say any more about the matter. 6. Ranking Republican Frank Murkowski said he had received a letter today from four western governors -- those from Arizona, North Dakota, Utah and Wyoming -- saying that since FERC has acted, there is no need for Congress to pursue price control legislation. There were a series of questions and comments on details and technical aspects of the orders. I will do an e-mail on these items later today. Please advise if you have any questions or comments. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= HELP!!!; [EMail-Body]= Linda - I haven't heard of these guys. Do you know them? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/15/2001 06:47 PM --------------------------- Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp. From: Sherri Sera 05/15/2001 04:19 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: HELP!!! Steve and Mark, a good friend of mine works for Mr. Grimes at Stewart & Stevenson. They have been offered this opportunity by the China Assoc. for Social and Economic Development for a commitment of $74,000. Since Mr. Lay has been a past recipient (according to their attached letter), they are wondering if this is legit. Can you provide any insight? Thanks for your help. SRS ---------------------- Forwarded by Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron on 05/15/2001 04:12 PM --------------------------- Doyleene Harris <d.harris@ssss.com> on 05/15/2001 03:32:30 PM To: ""'sherri.sera@enron.com'"" <sherri.sera@enron.com> cc: Subject: HELP!!! Hi Sherri, We would be most appreciative if you can help us out on this one! Our President and CEO, Mike Grimes, received the letter (copy attached/please open) from the China Association for Social and Economic Development.? In this letter, Mr. Wu mentions that Dr. Kenneth Lay was a past recipient. Well, you just called - so I won't complete this email! Love you - Doyleene -----Original Message----- From: Judy Johnson Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 2:58 PM To: Doyleene Harris Subject: ? <<~MAP0000.jpg>> - ~MAP0000.jpg [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Confidential Contact data and RFI; [EMail-Body]= NEPOOL info from Giffels. Kevin Presto UBS Warburg Energy kevin.presto@ubswenergy.com Phone: 713-853-5035 Fax: 713-646-8272 -----Original Message----- From: Fred W. Giffels [mailto:fgiffels@HGP-Inc.com] Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 3:48 PM To: Presto, Kevin M. Cc: Dan Salter Subject: Confidential Contact data and RFI Kevin I just got the attached e-mail returned with your new address. Let me know if this one makes it thru Fred Confidential Kevin I know you are quite busy but I wonder if you could get your lead trader to look the following forecast for NEEPOOL. This may result in you getting the lead for a large block of the power so be conservative but have enough in there so it is a win win if you know what I mean. Have him fill in what he can. The client will be looking long 10 year, with maybe a series of 2 and 5 year deals. Should be putting out around 500 to 700 Mwe. Do not disclose the plant eh ? Call me at 864-370-0217 or 864-235-5607 or mobile 864-275-3193 Thanks Fred [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= New MSC Committee Report; [EMail-Body]= All: I just downloaded the attached from the ISO's website. It is dated 12/1/00= . =20 To boil it down, the MSC comes down against ""soft"" caps and recommends the= =20 ""get market-based rates in return for selling forward"" proposal that the IS= O=20 staff is pushing. Forward contracts would need to at rates that=20 ""approximate"" competitive prices. Based on my quick read that does not mea= n=20 market prices; it means somthing more akin to cost of service. MSC also=20 wants there to be a penalty on generators for underscheduling. They also= =20 claim there proposal will not exacerbate reliability problems. I would be interested in people's opinion if Enron should be responding to= =20 this report. Given the date of the report, I am not sure if/how the ISO=20 would file this at the FERC. G. Alan Comnes (GAC) Here's the list of recommendations from the report. (1) The PX =01&must-buy=018 requirement would become a =01&must-schedule=01= 8 requirement.=20 IOUs would be required to schedule all forward energy through the PX, but would = be=20 free to purchase it from any source. (2) California generators and entities that sell to any California purchase= r=20 (not limited to the PX and ISO) could continue to be eligible for market-based rates (and would= =20 be free of refund obligations) only if they offer a substantial portion of their sales= =20 in the form of two-year contracts at rates that approximate competitive prices. The detail= s=20 of such a proposal are outlined in this report. The volume offered by sellers, in the= =20 aggregate, would be sufficient to cover the all three IOUs=01, residential and small= =20 commercial customer load using an average load profile for weekdays and weekends for= =20 each month. (3) Any market participant that does not offer these two-year=20 market-power-mitigation forward contracts would be subject to cost-of-service rates for all of thei= r=20 sales of energy and ancillary services into the California market for at least the two-year= =20 market power mitigation period. (4) The CPUC would be encouraged to set a default rate for IOU residential= =20 and small commercial customers based on projected wholesale energy costs under the=20 2-year contracts described above. (5) The under-scheduling penalty should be even-handed. The MSC recommends = a=20 real-time trading charge that is applicable both to load and generation and, more=20 important, does not distinguish between instructed and uninstructed deviations from schedul= e. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= confidential ee info; [EMail-Body]= Attached is the spreadsheet for the Houston Commercial Admins. Those in white are slated to recieve offers first. Those in red will only recieve offers if someone on the primary list declines. Please make sure you and the other desk heads are comfortable with the list as it is. I will be at the Houstonian today but Amy Fitzpatrick will be here and can assist you if you need to have a meeting to discuss. Thanks. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Latest Documents; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/24/2000 05:38 PM --------------------------- Mark Koenig 08/24/2000 05:31 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Paula Rieker/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Latest Documents Steve and Mark - FYI. I would prefer not to state that Pug is on our Finance committee, and the reference to Enron's stake being substantial. I will call Diane and let her know. I assume Jeff and Ken and Pug will get a chance to approve this. MEK ---------------------- Forwarded by Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron on 08/24/2000 05:17 PM --------------------------- Diane Bazelides@AZURIX 08/24/2000 02:22 PM To: John L Garrison/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, John Ale/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, Michael Anderson/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, Elizabeth Ivers/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Carol Hensley/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX cc: Subject: Latest Documents Attached are the latest documents. We plan to issue the release at 8 a.m. CDT tomorrow. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: SRP SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL - PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL FOR
 SETTLEM	ENT DISCUSSIONS ONLY; [EMail-Body]= Let's talk about my conversation with EPNG today. Steph -----Original Message----- From: =09Tholt, Jane M. =20 Sent:=09Monday, July 30, 2001 1:18 PM To:=09Cantrell, Rebecca W.; Gay, Randall L.; Miller, Stephanie; Sullivan, P= atti; Grigsby, Mike Subject:=09FW: SRP SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL - PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL FOR SE= TTLEM=09ENT DISCUSSIONS ONLY Importance:=09High -----Original Message----- From: =09Joel Greene [mailto:IMCEANOTE= =20 Sent:=09Monday, July 30, 2001 11:11 AM To:=09agold@coral-energy.com; amy.sheridan@williams.com; barryp@bp.com; bbr= igham@sidrichgas.com; bealljp@texaco.com; bgray@cc.state.az.us; Bgray@EPEle= ctric.com; bjost@huberlaw.com; bwhitta@pnm.= com; carpentierd@dsmo.com; caschindler@hhla= w.com; cbrechte@apsc.com; cbulf@oneok.com; = coganja@aol.com; craigc@calpine.com; dani= el.collins@elpaso.com; daswanstrom@verner.com; Dave Huard Esq. (E-mail) (E-= mail); dbmcvick@srpnet.com; dfulton@enron.com; dga@sloverandloftus.com; djo= hn@jhenergy.com; dkirkla@pnm.com; dlh@jmbm.com; dlsmith@pplweb.com; dmcwash= @mshpc.com; douglas.porter@sce.com; dtom@btuwatch.com; Dwilliams@kmg.com; e= aro@dynegy.com; edward.mcmurtrie@swgas.com; elizabeth.herdes@elpaso.com; em= yerskerbal@shb.com; Fritz Kolb (E-mail); frl3@pge.com; gbaker@sempra.com; g= cvenz@duke-energy.com; gduede@apsc.com; glander@skippingstone.com; gsmith@j= henergy.com; haorndorff@aeraenergy.com; jab@cpuc.ca.gov; jalward@cc.state.a= z.us; Tholt, Jane M.; jay.golub@bakerbotts= .com; jcashin@epsa.org; jdoering@regroup.com; jeff.goforth@williams.com; je= rry.strange@elpaso.com; jgregg@mbolaw.com; jhmcgrew@brudergentile.com; jima= @pandaenergy.com; jmoriarty@fw-law.com; Joel Greene; jpa3@pge.com; jparker@= govmail.nv.state.us; jpfloom@gkrse-law.com; jpnevins@hhlaw.com; jrlilyestro= m@hhlaw.com; jrogers@btuwatch.com; jstaffier@sdsatty.com; jsuwara@sempra.co= m; judy.heineman@elpaso.com; kadaly@moheck.com; kaprice@srpnet.com; karilee= .ramaley@pinnaclewest.com; kathleen.royal@elpaso.com; kbedwards@gkrse-law.c= om; kbosley@reliant.com; kclark@jhenergy.com; com; klm@dwgp.com; larry.black@swgas.com; lhamilto@utilicorp.com; lindseyho= wdowning@dwt.com; lpadilla@gas.pemex.com; lwsmith@midcogen.com; mark.cook@e= lpaso.com; mark.minich@elpaso.com; mcregar@aeglobalmarkets.com; melissa.max= well@bakerbott.com; mfenton@pnm.com; Michael McElrath (E-mail); mike.langst= on@southernunion.com; millertr@bp.com; mmexal@giant.com; napedersen@jonesda= y.com; Norm Walker; Pat Anderson (E-mail); patricia.shelton@elpaso.com; pau= l.gendron@eng.pge.com; pcervin@br-inc.com; pckissel@gkrse-law.com; pete.fro= st@usa.conoco.com; pkeeler@br-inc.com; pmohler@hewm.com; pserrano@epelectri= c.com; racosta@epelectric.com; rcashdollar@apachenitro.com; Cantrell, Rebec= ca W.; redavis@sempra.com; rhewlett@aepnet.org; richard.derryberry@elpaso.c= om; rlacey@govmail.nv.state.us; robert.tomlinson@elpaso.com; rosa.jackson@e= lpaso.com; rpetti@ladwp.com; rrich@bracepatt.com; salleyoo@dwt.com; sally.t= urley@elpaso.com; sandrar@prestongates.com; sarah.tomalty@dynegy.com; sbree= n@czn.com; scmertz@aep.com; Scott Walton; sjf@cpuc.ca.gov; sjroyka@columbia= energygroup.com; slevine@brattle.com; Susan Ginsberg; susan.jones@eng.pge.c= om; tarpeysp@bp.com; tcarlson@apsc.com; tcubbage@cov.com; tdickers@westerng= as.com; vitagliano@gas.pemex.com; vrspurg@ppco.com; william.healy@elpaso.co= m; wlansinger@sempra.com Subject:=09SRP SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL - PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL FOR SETTLE= M=09ENT DISCUSSIONS ONLY Importance:=09High Attached are three documents (cover memo, draft settlement proposal, settlement procedures timeline) comprising SRP's formal proposal to resolve five pending dockets, RP99-507 (Indicated Shippers' Complaint), RP00-336 (Order No. 637 Allocation and Pooling Issues only), RP99-139 (ONEOK Complaint), RP01-484 (Indicated Shippers/California Complaint), and RP01-48= 6 (Texas, New Mexico and Arizona Shippers' Complaint). We appreciate the suggestions received to date and believe that while an uncontested settlement may be unlikely, a sufficient nucleus is forming around the elements of this proposal that will lead to the filing of an Offer of Settlement and ultimate FERC approval as in the public interest. We encourage your active participation in this process. Note that while Advisory Staff present at the July 18 Technical Conference is aware conceptually that SRP will be distributing a settlement proposal, this proposal has not been distributed to the Advisory Staff. This proposa= l has been sent to Rick Miles, Director, Dispute Resolution Services, for informational purposes only at this time. Joel L. Greene Energy Advocates LLP 202-371-9889 202-371-9025 (fax) jlgreene@energyadvocates.com <<SRP EPNG Settle.cvr.doc>> <<SRP EPNG Capacity Proposal.06.26.doc>> <<Proceduralschedule.doc>> - SRP EPNG Settle.cvr.doc=20 - SRP EPNG Capacity Proposal.06.26.doc=20 - Proceduralschedule.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Presentation to faculty and students at Berkeley; [EMail-Body]= Maureen -- please send Vince my California testimony and the talking point presentation for Jeff Skilling at the National Press Club. Eliz-- keep Vince on the distribution list for the documents we are generating now to repond to the California situation. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/20/2000 09:18 AM ----- Vince J Kaminski@ECT 09/18/2000 01:26 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Charlene Jackson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Celeste Roberts/HOU/ECT@ECT, Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ashley Baxter/Corp/Enron@Enron Subject: Presentation to faculty and students at Berkeley Steve, I am a lead recruiter at the University of California at Berkeley for Enron Analyst/Associate program. I contacted several friends who work at Berkeley and received an invitation from one of them to make a presentation at the weekly Faculty Seminar of the Dept. of Industrial Engineering and Operations Research. The students and faculty members from the business school will be also invited. Berkeley in general, and Department of Industrial Engineering and Operations Research in particular, are important centers of academic research on electricity markets (S. Oren works very closely with Severin Borenstein). My presentation will focus on the Analyst/Associate program. I shall also have an opportunity to discuss the power markets in California (I expect many questions) before many experts who are very important to shaping public opinion and regulatory agenda. Please, let me know who in you group could help me in preparing this presentation and in presenting Enron's point of view in a more effective way. Vince FYI. The name of my friend who invited me: Shmuel S. Oren, Professor Dept. of Industrial Engineering and Operations Research 4117 Etcheverry Hall University of California Berkeley, CA 94720-1777 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: Sac Bee, Wed, 6/6: Businesses vie for blackout exemptions:=20 The PUC must decide who should be spared, and the applicant list is very lo= ng Sac Bee, Wed, 6/6: PG&E, ISO agree to court order on power bills Sac Bee, Wed, 6/6: Peter Schrag: Turning up the heat in Houston and=20 Washington (Editorial) SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Is trading an insider's game? SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Daily energy costs for state fall in past weeks=20 SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Five tiers sought in proposed rate boost SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Port budget large, but power bills loom SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Continuous use urged for planned power plant=20 SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Rising energy prices threaten Poway troupe=20 SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Fair to use generators for midway attractions LA Times, Wed, 6/6: 'Hi, My Name Isn't Justice, Honey,' and Shame on Lockye= r =20 (Editorial) LA Times, Wed, 6/6: U.S. Probes Alleged Pact Not to Build New Plants Power:= =20 Justice officials focus on Southland operations of two firms, which deny=20 wrongdoing LA Times, Wed, 6/6: Natural Gas, Power Prices Drop Sharply Energy:=20 More conservation, mild weather are among factors keeping costs down, exper= ts=20 say LA Times, Wed, 6/6: The State Utility Averts $1 Billion in Costs Courts:=20 PG&E and Cal-ISO agree to recognize Department of Water Resources as=20 purchaser of the power SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: Dramatic drop in cost of electricity=20 LOWER BILLS: Cheaper fuel, milder weather credited SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: San Jose council gives green light to generating plant= =20 VOTE REVERSAL: Officials pressured to OK project SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: Developments in California's energy crisis SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: California conserves SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: L.A. power customers awash in cheap energy SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: PG&E doesn't want to pay for energy to avert blackouts Mercury News, Wed, 6/6: Metcalf plant gets preliminary approval=20 OC Register, Wed, 6/6: Feds probe AES, Williams Individual.com (PRnewswire), Wed, 6/6: Calpine Begins Construction of=20 Peaking Energy Center in Gilroy, Calif.=20 Individual.com (PRnewsire), Wed, 6/6: Reliant Urges FERC to Drop or Amend= =20 California Price Caps to Avoid Additional Shortages and More Blackouts Energy Insight, Wed, 6/6: Farm-fresh biopower --- Businesses vie for blackout exemptions: The PUC must decide who should be= =20 spared, and the applicant list is very long. By Carrie Peyton and Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writers (Published June 6, 2001)=20 Mixes for milkshakes and frozen coffees could spoil at ice cream parlors,= =20 sickening customers.=20 Seniors getting their hair done would have to leave their dryers and go hom= e=20 with wet heads, risking a chill.=20 Mall escalators could come to a sudden halt, endangering shoppers who lose= =20 their footing.=20 Those are among the health and safety risks cited by more than 10,000=20 businesses and government bodies asking state regulators to exempt them fro= m=20 rolling blackouts.=20 It is a list that mixes nursing homes and grocery stores, outpatient surgic= al=20 clinics and beauty salons, dialysis centers and country clubs.=20 ""A lot of people are treating this like a lottery,"" said Subodh Medhekar of= =20 Exponent Inc., the consulting firm sorting through exemption requests for t= he=20 state Public Utilities Commission.=20 For many, Medhekar said, the rationale seems to be "" 'I'm pretty sure I won= 't=20 get exempted, but what's the down side? Let's put in an application.' ""=20 Amid predictions that Californians could face dozens of rolling blackouts= =20 this summer, state regulators are trying to update a decades-old list of wh= o=20 should be spared if the lights go out.=20 The Alta Sierra County Club in Grass Valley should be among those whose pow= er=20 stays on, Sean O'Brien, the club's golf course superintendent, told=20 regulators in a nine-page application.=20 The country club telephones could go out, making it harder to phone for hel= p=20 if someone has a medical problem while golfing, he said in an interview.=20 And if the golf course's irrigation pumps shut down, it would lose the=20 ability to quell small blazes -- leaving it to rely on a fire station O'Bri= en=20 said is about one-quarter mile away.=20 Placerville Dialysis wants an exemption, too. As many as a dozen people the= re=20 can be having their blood pumped through an artificial kidney that cleans i= t=20 when their own kidneys no longer function properly.=20 ""When the power goes out, everything just stops,"" said manager Shirley=20 Carpenter. ""There is a way to manually return the blood by hand before it= =20 clots in the line. ... It would just be hectic.""=20 It takes about five minutes of manual pumping to fully disconnect someone= =20 from a dialysis machine, Carpenter said. And some patients can help by=20 operating their own pumps.=20 But, she said, ""I'm sure it would be kind of frightening to have your blood= =20 out in the line and the power off, and they're pretty much tied to the=20 machine.""=20 Pam Chin, a hairdresser at the Loomis Beauty Salon, said the owner sought a= n=20 exemption because people could get overheated if the air conditioning went= =20 out, and older customers getting their hair set could be chilled if the=20 dryers shut off.=20 With about half the state already exempt from rolling blackouts, the questi= on=20 of who else should stay connected has become a delicate one for utilities,= =20 regulators and legislators.=20 Carl Wood, the PUC commissioner who has taken the lead on blackout issues,= =20 estimates that fewer than 1,000 more utility customers can be exempted befo= re=20 they overload the rolling outage system designed to take stress off the=20 electric grid.=20 While about 6,000 customers are classified as ""essential"" by the state's tw= o=20 largest utilities, keeping them out of the blackout rotation also spares=20 about 5 million other customers who are served by the same circuits.=20 That multiplier effect will have to be weighed by the consulting firm, by= =20 utilities and eventually by PUC commissioners, who are scheduled to vote in= =20 early August on who should be added to existing standards.=20 The rules will apply to the state's investor-owned utilities, Pacific Gas a= nd=20 Electric Co., Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric Co.,= =20 but not to municipal utilities.=20 The Sacramento Municipal Utility District already rejected pleas for specia= l=20 exemptions from a medical lab, a veterinary hospital, nursing homes, medica= l=20 facilities, businesses and residents. SMUD believes they can weather=20 blackouts because they are not critical to public safety.=20 People have counted on having dependable electricity for so long that some= =20 have widely varying ideas of who can do without it safely, Medhekar said.= =20 Of the more than 500 Baskin Robbins ice cream parlors that dot California,= =20 only five are listed on the PUC Web site as applicants for exemptions.=20 The site cautions that its list of 9,239 electronic applicants hasn't been= =20 checked for duplicates -- or fiction. It includes hundreds of outlets of th= e=20 same drug store and supermarket chains, dozens of related nursing homes and= =20 more than 400 dentists. Another 1,200 commercial power users have applied b= y=20 fax.=20 Among those who have confirmed they want out of outages are the grocery=20 chains operated by West Sacramento-based Raley's, which said it took the=20 action as part of united effort with all California grocers, who are worrie= d=20 about food spoilage.=20 Others in the mix are Fairfield's Westfield Shoppingtown Solano, formerly t= he=20 Solano Mall, where officials sought the exemptions out of fear that shopper= s=20 would get injured if escalators came to a sudden halt.=20 The Yolo County Housing Authority asked for an exemption on behalf of its 7= 00=20 dwellings in the belief that the utilities offer exemptions for low-income= =20 Californians, Executive Director David Serena said.=20 Serena added that many of the authority's occupants are older or disabled a= nd=20 could be endangered by a blackout.=20 Chevron Corp. acknowledged it couldn't show that a blackout at its refineri= es=20 would present ""imminent danger to public health or safety,"" but it asked Go= v.=20 Gray Davis to support legislation exempting makers and transporters for=20 ""critical fuels,"" saying a refinery shutdown would cut into the state's=20 gasoline supply.=20 Some businesses acknowledged that their applications are a long shot.=20 ""It's probably a stretch,"" said Amanda Leveroni, who owns Bacio Catering Co= .=20 of Chico, about her request to the PUC. ""The public wouldn't be in danger.= =20 ""But we're a catering company -- somebody has planned for a year-plus for a= =20 wedding or some big event,"" she added. ""I would be in such a huge situation= .=20 I'd have to send out for pizza.""=20 The Bee's Carrie Peyton can be reached at (916) 321-1086 or=20 cpeyton@sacbee.com. PG&E, ISO agree to court order on power bills By Claire Cooper Bee Staff Writers (Published June 6, 2001)=20 SAN FRANCISCO -- Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and the operator of=20 California's power grid agreed Tuesday to a preliminary court order providi= ng=20 that the utility will continue to receive -- but not pay -- generators' bil= ls=20 for the state's purchases of the most expensive wholesale electricity.=20 The tab has been running at about $300 million a month.=20 The order, which U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali said he'll sign, will= =20 specify that the Independent System Operator will not procure power except= =20 for a ""creditworthy buyer who has agreed to pay the generator.""=20 In California, the only such potential buyer is the state Department of Wat= er=20 Resources. However, the department, which has avoided PG&E Co.'s bankruptcy= =20 proceedings by claiming sovereign immunity, will not be controlled by the= =20 agreement. Montali pointed out that the department still could demand=20 reimbursement from PG&E.=20 Under the agreement, the ISO will not press any claims against PG&E on beha= lf=20 of generators if they are not paid.=20 The proposed preliminary injunction was based on an April order by the=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which forbade the ISO from purchasing= =20 power on behalf of any non-creditworthy buyer, such as PG&E.=20 The ISO is appealing the FERC order. If the appeal succeeds, the injunction= =20 will end.=20 Peter Schrag: Turning up the heat in Houston and Washington (Published June 6, 2001)=20 Behind all the palaver about the predictable standoff at last week's energy= =20 ""summit"" between President Bush and Gov. Gray Davis, one major political=20 development was missed.=20 Put simply, in the past month the focus of the California energy crisis, an= d=20 maybe the onus as well, has moved east: from the state's (and Davis')=20 handling of the mess to the generating companies, energy marketers and gas= =20 pipeline companies that have richly profited from it, and thus to FERC, the= =20 do-next-to-nothing Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and the Bush=20 administration.=20 That wasn't all Davis' doing -- far from it -- though it's been at the hear= t=20 of his message about energy industry ""pirates"" and ""profiteers."" Bush's=20 misbegotten energy plan and the administration's political clumsiness also= =20 contributed mightily, not least by inadvertently giving Davis the chance to= =20 get media exposure he could only have dreamed about.=20 More important, there's the defection of Sen. James Jeffords from the=20 Republican Party and the resulting shift of control in the U.S. Senate, whe= re=20 the next chair of the Energy Committee will be Sen. Jeff Bingaman of New=20 Mexico, a co-sponsor of Sen. Dianne Feinstein's bill capping wholesale=20 electric rates for the next two years. And chairing the Committee on=20 Governmental Affairs will be Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, who's=20 already asked for an audit of energy prices.=20 Those changes will draw a lot more attention to recent studies showing that= a=20 handful of big generators -- Duke Power, Reliant, Mirant, Dynegy and the hu= ge=20 energy-marketing firm Enron -- have gamed the market to drive wholesale=20 prices to levels that, in the year 2000, sometimes reached 40 times the=20 prices of the year before.=20 The findings come not merely from economists at the California Independent= =20 System Operator, the agency that manages the state's grid, who estimate=20 overcharges resulting from market power at $6.2 billion for last year alone= .=20 They come also from Severin Borenstein and his colleagues at the University= =20 of California Energy Institute, who ""conservatively"" calculate the=20 overcharges at $4.5 billion; from Paul Joskow, a widely respected energy=20 economist at MIT; and from Edward Kahn, an economic analyst in San Francisc= o.=20 In a recent paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research,=20 Joskow and Kahn conclude that there's ""considerable evidence that the high= =20 prices experienced in the summer of 2000 reflect the withholding of supplie= s=20 from the market by suppliers [generators or marketers] exercising market=20 power."" That those high prices occurred not merely during peak usage but al= so=20 at off-hours, when no one had ever seen a price spike before, makes those= =20 spikes even more curious.=20 There is, in addition, the powerful suspicion that the huge increase in=20 natural gas prices that a subsidiary of El Paso Energy Co., now the largest= =20 gas company on Earth, was charging on the California side of the=20 California-Arizona border wasn't merely the result of an innocent imbalance= =20 between supply and demand.=20 None of that may be illegal. If there's no collusion, there are no violatio= ns=20 of antitrust laws. But it adds plenty of steam to the political argument. I= n=20 the 2000 election cycle alone, energy companies kicked in some $64 million = in=20 political contributions, 75 percent of it to Republicans. At a time when=20 those companies, many of them located in the same Houston neighborhood, are= =20 racking up astronomical profits and when their collective coziness with Bus= h=20 and the Republican Party is a lot more than rhetoric, their vulnerability t= o=20 a vigorous Senate investigation ought to be obvious.=20 The clincher is ""Blackout,"" a ""Frontline"" program that both symbolizes the= =20 shifting emphasis and reinforces it. (The program is scheduled to be aired = at=20 8 p.m. Friday on Sacramento cable Channel 7.) It isn't another recital of= =20 Californians worrying about their electric bills, or about the stupidity of= =20 the state's deregulation scheme or how Davis dithered in addressing the=20 crisis. It is about those generators and marketers in Houston and North=20 Carolina, men (and a few women) who regard themselves as the heroes of the= =20 new energy markets.=20 The piece is reported by Lowell Bergman, who in working for both ""Frontline= ""=20 and the New York Times has already broken major print stories about Duke=20 Power's secret approach to Davis offering unspecified energy refunds in=20 return for an end to state investigations and lawsuits. Bergman also report= ed=20 private conversations between Enron chairman Kenneth Lay, a major Bush=20 supporter, and FERC chairman Curt Hebert regarding the influence that Lay= =20 could exercise with Bush to allow Hebert to keep his chairmanship if Hebert= 's=20 supported certain decisions Enron badly wants.=20 None of these recent events is likely to end Davis' political woes, and the= y=20 may not produce the wholesale rate caps Feinstein wants and that most=20 economists think necessary -- or maybe any significant reduction in the=20 industry's predatory pricing. But they will surely help turn up the heat,= =20 both in Houston and Washington. Six months ago FERC found wholesale prices= =20 were not ""fair and reasonable"" as federal law requires, but did little abou= t=20 them. It will now have a lot more questions to answer.=20 Peter Schrag can be reached at Box 15779, Sacramento, CA 95852-0779, or at= =20 pschrag@sacbee.com. Is trading an insider's game?=20 Buying, selling of electricity is a growth business, but some say deck is= =20 stacked against consumers By Craig D. Rose=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 While Californians decry deregulation's failure to deliver a competitive=20 market, electricity wholesalers have quietly developed a vast and rapidly= =20 growing business of buying and selling power among themselves.=20 The deals take place on high-tech trading floors in Houston and elsewhere= =20 around the country, as well as on Internet-based trading systems.=20 Some experts say this electricity trading is a key mechanism for raising=20 consumer power prices, yet it's largely unregulated.=20 ""Electricity trading is like buying stock -- when you have ability to chang= e=20 the stock price,"" said Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economics profess= or=20 and member of the state grid operator's market surveillance group.=20 Energy companies say the buying and selling of contracts to deliver power= =20 provides risk management, allowing plant owners to presell their electricit= y,=20 lock in prices and avoid fluctuations. The rough and tumble of the free=20 market, they add, is the most efficient means of allocating a resource like= =20 electricity.=20 But industry critics say trading is far from a competitive market paradigm.= =20 In their view, it's a means of communication -- a way for energy insiders t= o=20 collude and raise prices under the guise of competition.=20 To be sure, the trading arms of major energy companies have emerged as star= s=20 in an industry where profit surges of 300 percent or 400 percent are not=20 uncommon.=20 The transactions, shrouded in secrecy, can leave ownership of a critical=20 commodity in unknown hands. Consider the case of power generated by AES=20 Corp.'s California plants.=20 In 1998, AES made a bold move. Immediately after purchasing power plants th= at=20 gave it control of 10 percent of the state's electric generating capacity,= =20 the company sold the output from its plants for the next 20 years to Willia= ms=20 Cos.=20 Williams did not sit on this treasure trove of electrons. The Tulsa, Okla.,= =20 company soon sold 80 percent of what it bought.=20 It is difficult to say who owns that power now. Some might be owned by Semp= ra=20 Trading, a sister company of SDG&E. Or some could be owned by Enron Corp.,= =20 the nation's biggest electricity trader.=20 A spokeswoman for Williams conceded that Williams itself may have repurchas= ed=20 some of the electricity it sold earlier. But trading companies closely guar= d=20 their positions.=20 This much can be said with certainty: Electricity that AES sold for less th= an=20 5 cents per kilowatt-hour to Williams changed hands perhaps 10 times in the= =20 wholesale market and emerged at times in recent months with a price tag for= =20 consumers that was 300 percent higher.=20 Williams' trading profits increased by 523 percent in the first quarter thi= s=20 year. Advance sales All this buying and selling creates curious confluences.=20 In their attempt to deflect criticism over high prices, generating companie= s=20 such as Duke Energy -- operator of the South Bay Power Plant in Chula and= =20 others in the state -- frequently note that they sell most of their=20 electricity far in advance. But they acknowledge less often that their=20 trading units may also be buying power, which could boost the company's=20 electricity inventory.=20 Duke was the fourth biggest electricity trader last year and cited its=20 trading activity as a prime contributor to its wholesale business profits,= =20 which soared 324 percent in the first quarter to $348 million.=20 It is a company's power traders who frequently direct plant operators to=20 increase or decrease the generation of power in response to market=20 conditions.=20 Energy companies have little option but to turn to trading for profits. One= =20 of the better kept secrets of electrical deregulation and its promise of=20 competition is that there is remarkably little competition in the productio= n=20 side of the business.=20 For one thing, electricity is a commodity; power from one company is=20 indistinguishable from that generated by others.=20 More important, nearly all modern plants generate power from turbines built= =20 by a handful of manufacturers. The result? Modern plants owned by different= =20 companies produce power at nearly identical cost.=20 ""The cost of power produced by modern plants is all within a mil=20 (one-thousandth of a dollar),"" said Michael Peevey, an adviser to Gov. Gray= =20 Davis and former president of Southern California Edison.=20 So the extraction of profit in the electricity business relies much more on= =20 trading. Traders' profits rise when prices are volatile -- plunging, or eve= n=20 better, rising sharply. Little regulation But despite the obvious temptation to manipulate the market, the burgeoning= =20 electricity trading business has remained largely unregulated.=20 The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission does require quarterly filings fro= m=20 energy traders, but these often provide incomplete information, or at least= =20 little that has been of concern to FERC.=20 In fact, although the trading of electricity grew more than a hundredfold= =20 from 1996 to 2000, FERC has taken no major enforcement action against a=20 trader. After the onset of the California crisis last year, FERC has acted= =20 once. That was against Williams, which agreed to pay $8 million without=20 admitting guilt to resolve an allegation that it withheld supply to pump up= =20 prices.=20 FERC's record of enforcement in the area of power trading stands in contras= t=20 to a long list of enforcement actions within other markets taken by the=20 Securities Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission= .=20 FERC has recently added staff to its market oversight operations. But Willi= am=20 Massey, a FERC commissioner, says the agency's effort is still inadequate.= =20 ""Electricity can be flipped, stripped and chopped up,"" Massey said. ""It's a= n=20 extraordinarily complicated market.=20 ""The sophisticated marketers and traders have simply moved past us. We're= =20 kind of horse and buggy in our approach and they're out there in rocket shi= ps=20 flying around ... The problem is that sophisticated traders don't necessari= ly=20 produce reasonable prices. They produce profits.""=20 Before deregulation, electricity trading was a low-key affair. Regulated=20 utilities dealt power back and forth on a reciprocal basis to fill=20 electricity shortfalls in their control areas. There was little trading for= =20 profit until the mid-1990s, after federal legislation and FERC rulings open= ed=20 the market.=20 Major traders include large energy companies, sister companies of=20 California's major utilities and Wall Street firms. Market volatility In many ways, the trading of power is similar to that of other commodities.= =20 But there are important differences. Because it cannot be stored and its us= e=20 is so fundamental, the price of electricity is the most volatile of all.=20 When supplies are tight, a single supplier can rapidly raise prices to=20 budget-busting levels, as evidenced by Duke Energy's recent admission that = it=20 charged California nearly $4,000 for a megawatt-hour of power, a quantity= =20 that probably sold hours earlier for one-tenth of that sum or less.=20 Wolak, the Stanford economist, and state Sen. Joseph Dunn, D-Garden Grove,= =20 who is investigating the state power market, say trading allows companies t= o=20 collude under the guise of competition. Instead of wringing out lowest cost= s,=20 the wholesale trading market serves to raise prices, they say.=20 ""As I trade to you and you trade to me, we communicate to each other what= =20 price we would like to get,"" said Wolak. ""It's not collusive. It's just=20 communicating price.""=20 Mark Palmer, a spokesman for Enron, the nation's biggest power trader, said= =20 California's problem is not the result of trading.=20 ""It's a result of shortages,"" Palmer said.=20 Underscoring its emphasis on trading, Enron's new headquarters tower in=20 downtown Houston rises from a six-story block of new trading floors,=20 including expanded space for electricity trading.=20 Enron also pioneered trading in cyberspace and its Enron Online site claims= =20 to be the most active computer-based trading market.=20 The Houston company argues that consumers won't fully benefit from power=20 trading and deregulation until they have greater choice in choosing their= =20 power supplier. And the company says FERC has not done enough to open acces= s=20 to transmission lines, which would allow traders to move power around the= =20 country. To that end, Enron has lobbied hard for President Bush's plan for = a=20 national electricity grid.=20 Palmer says the notion that the price of electricity rises each time it is= =20 traded is mistaken.=20 ""The market is always looking for the real price of a commodity,"" Palmer=20 said.=20 Dunn, the California state senator, says his investigation found a differen= t=20 function for trading. At a time when supply barely meets or falls short of= =20 demand, he noted, companies with electricity to sell have to worry only abo= ut=20 how high to set their price.=20 ""The trader is a pawn in the generator's game to drive up prices,"" said Dun= n.=20 ""Trading develops a level of trust. You, my alleged competitor, will bid in= =20 the same patterns and I will respond not in a competitive pattern but in a= =20 complimentary pattern.""=20 The state senator said his investigation found evidence that on several day= s,=20 energy companies appeared to test their ability to drive prices up, without= =20 being undercut by competitors.=20 This ability to drive up prices without competitive consequence is a key te= st=20 of market power, the technical term for manipulation or price fixing.=20 But Dunn also conceded that antitrust violations can be hard to prove in=20 court. He suggested that even if the trading behavior falls short of=20 antitrust violations, it remains anti-competitive and devastating for the= =20 California economy.=20 To Harry Trebing, a utility industry expert and professor emeritus at=20 Michigan State University, wholesale electricity trading is reminiscent of= =20 what took place in the 1920s and early '30s. Back then, utility companies= =20 created complex networks of holding companies that traded stock among=20 themselves, driving up prices in the process.=20 Undoing that scheme was a focus of President Franklin Roosevelt's=20 administration. Congress ended up barring national power companies and=20 tightening regulation of utilities, in an effort to counteract their tenden= cy=20 to create markets that work only for insiders.=20 ""The broad goals of trading are the same,"" Trebing said.=20 ""The goal is to maximize profits through raising prices.""=20 Daily energy costs for state fall in past weeks=20 By Ed Mendel=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO -- In some of the first good news of the electricity crisis, the= =20 Davis administration said yesterday that the daily cost of power purchased = by=20 the state for utility customers has dropped in recent weeks.=20 The price-drop news comes after an announcement that Californians conserved= =20 more energy than expected last month, 11 percent, and amid Davis=20 administration optimism that the Legislature may finally begin to move on a= =20 plan to keep Southern California Edison out of bankruptcy.=20 The developments, if they turn out to be a trend and not temporary, could b= e=20 among the first signs that Gov. Gray Davis' plan to end the electricity=20 crisis is beginning to work. But the administration isn't saying that.=20 ""We have had a few good days here lately,"" said S. David Freeman, a Davis= =20 power adviser. ""I don't think that I want to project.""=20 Some power-market watchers began to speculate last month that prices may ha= ve=20 peaked earlier this year. Platts, an energy information service, said=20 yesterday that spot prices for the natural gas used by power plants are=20 falling this month.=20 The governor's press secretary, Steve Maviglio, told reporters yesterday th= at=20 the daily amount spent on power is now ""well below"" $50 million, which was= =20 the average cost earlier this year.=20 A 12-day gap in the most recent notice to the Legislature that another $500= =20 million increment will be spent on power suggests that the daily average=20 during the last two weeks may have dropped down around $42 million.=20 Oscar Hidalgo, a spokesman for the state power purchasing agency, said that= =20 the average cost of power was under $40 million during the first four days = of=20 this month.=20 Maviglio attributed the lower cost to conservation, the phasing in of cheap= er=20 long-term power contracts, fewer power plants off-line for maintenance, and= =20 cooler weather.=20 However, he said, ""The average cost is still way over what we paid last=20 year.""=20 There was widespread skepticism in late April when the governor's consultan= ts=20 predicted that the $346 per megawatt-hour average paid by the state for=20 non-contracted power from April through June would drop to an average of $1= 95=20 from July through September.=20 ""We are still very comfortable with the projection that Mr. Fichera and=20 company estimated,"" Maviglio said, referring to Joseph Fichera of Saber=20 Partners in New York.=20 During a briefing on May 21, Fichera told reporters that the amount of powe= r=20 that the state would obtain under long-term contracts for May was expected = to=20 be about 43 percent of the total required, the so-called net short.=20 Fichera said contracts already signed were expected to cover 66 percent of= =20 the net short in June, 48 percent in July, and 42 percent in August. He sai= d=20 contracts that had been agreed on in principle could increase those amounts= =20 to 73 percent in June, 67 percent in July, and 60 percent in August.=20 ""We are still on target. There are risks,"" Fichera said yesterday, among th= em=20 extended hot weather and power plant outages. ""No one is popping the=20 champagne corks until Sept. 30.""=20 The governor's consultants based their forecast of power demand this summer= =20 on an estimate that Californians will reduce their electricity use by 7=20 percent.=20 The 11 percent reduction last month, as compared to May of last year, came= =20 before the sticker shock of rate hikes that begin this month for customers = of=20 Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric. And a $35 million ad campaign urging= =20 conservation has not hit full stride.=20 Maviglio said the administration plans to release some detailed information= =20 on Monday about the roughly $8 billion the state has spent buying power. Th= e=20 general fund will be repaid by a bond of up to $13.4 billion that ratepayer= s=20 will pay off over 15 years.=20 Legislative leaders have demanded detailed information about power purchase= s=20 before proceeding with the Edison plan. Assembly Democrats are working on a= =20 plan that de-emphasizes state purchase of the Edison transmission system an= d=20 would put most of the burden for paying off Edison's debt on businesses and= =20 large users, not residences. Five tiers sought in proposed rate boost=20 Conservation would be promoted, SDG&E says By Karen Kucher=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 A proposed rate increase for SDG&E customers to cover the high cost of=20 electricity should be imposed in five tiers to encourage conservation, the= =20 company is advising state utility regulators.=20 The more electricity a customer uses, the higher the rate would be.=20 SDG&E needs to raise its rates to bring in an additional $502 million=20 annually to pay the state for power purchases.=20 The state Public Utilities Commission is expected to rule on San Diego Gas = &=20 Electric's rate-increase proposal June 28.=20 The rate changes would remove a cap that has shielded most SDG&E customers= =20 from rising electricity prices for a year. The cap, enacted by state=20 lawmakers in September 2000 and retroactive to June 2000, set rates at 6.5= =20 cents per kilowatt-hour.=20 Higher rates would mean the average SDG&E residential and small-business=20 customer's electricity bills would go up by 18 percent. Large commercial=20 users' bills would average 29 percent more.=20 Public hearings on the issue will be held next Monday and Tuesday in San=20 Diego, El Cajon, Escondido and San Clemente. These sessions will focus on= =20 small-business and residential consumers. Hearings on large commercial user= s=20 were held last month.=20 Earlier this year, the PUC decided to allow the state's two largest=20 utilities, Pacific Gas and Electric and Southern California Edison, to char= ge=20 customers an extra $5.7 billion annually for electricity.=20 The state Department of Water Resources, which has been buying power for=20 SDG&E customers since February, asked SDG&E to generate a total of $915=20 million annually to cover the cost of electricity purchases.=20 With the proposed rate increases, SDG&E could do that.=20 Large commercial customers would pay about 30 percent of the overall increa= se=20 and residential and small-business customers would pay about 70 percent, sa= id=20 Ed Van Herik, a spokesman for the utility company.=20 If the increase can be tiered, as many as 60 percent of residential custome= rs=20 will see no rate increase if their electricity usage remains the same, Van= =20 Herik said.=20 But customers who use more than 130 percent of their baseline -- considered= =20 the minimum amount of electricity needed by a household -- will be billed a= t=20 increasingly higher rates.=20 Residential and small-business customers who use a lot of electricity could= =20 pay as much as 17.89 cents per kilowatt hour for some power they consume.= =20 Consumer advocate Michael Shames said he is concerned the utility's proposa= l=20 does not spread the increases evenly among different types of users. He als= o=20 called for more scrutiny of the state's request.=20 People should tell PUC officials ""that this increase should not be a carte= =20 blanche or blank check approval,"" said Shames, the head of Utility Consumer= s'=20 Action Network. ""The PUC needs to ensure that the rate increase requested b= y=20 the (state) is reasonable.""=20 The public hearings are scheduled for:=20 ?Monday, 1 p.m., San Diego Concourse, Copper Room, 200 C St., San Diego.=20 ?Monday, 7 p.m., El Cajon Community Center, 195 E. Douglas Ave., El Cajon.= =20 ?Tuesday, 1 p.m., Country Inn Hotel, 35 Via Pico Plaza, San Clemente.=20 ?Tuesday, 7 p.m., Center for the Arts, 340 N. Escondido Blvd., Escondido.= =20 Port budget large, but power bills loom=20 Slowing economy also cause for worry By Ronald W. Powell=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 The ""rock"" is rolling financially, but there are indications that the blues= =20 lurk on the horizon.=20 Officials of the San Diego Unified Port District -- headquartered in a=20 block-shaped building some employees call the rock -- are happy with a=20 projected 2001-2002 budget that is 5.1 percent larger than the current one.= =20 Total revenue is expected to reach $208.7 million, $10.2 million above what= =20 is expected in the fiscal year that ends June 30.=20 Port commissioners gave preliminary approval to the budget yesterday and ar= e=20 scheduled to take a final vote July 10.=20 But a slowing economy and surging electric bills are causes for concern.=20 Electricity costs are expected to rise from $5 million to $8.2 million in t= he=20 coming fiscal year.=20 ""As far as trends, we see a continuation of the growth we've experienced ov= er=20 the past five years,"" said Bruce Hollingsworth, the port's treasurer. ""But= =20 our percentage of growth will not rise as sharply.""=20 Port revenues have grown steadily since the 1997-1998 fiscal year, when $16= 3=20 million was generated.=20 The proposed budget calls for adding 24 employees to the port's 730-member= =20 work force. New hires will include three Harbor Police officers, 10 employe= es=20 in the aviation division and four in maritime services.=20 The port operates Lindbergh Field and administers nonmilitary tidelands alo= ng=20 San Diego Bay. It is landlord to more than 600 waterfront businesses and=20 operates two marine cargo terminals and one cruise ship terminal.=20 The budget calls for growth in each of the port's primary revenue centers:= =20 aviation, real estate and maritime services.=20 Passenger and cargo activity at Lindbergh Field is expected to generate $90= .7=20 million, or $5 million more than expected in the current year. Most of that= =20 increase is expected to come from parking-rate increases at the airport and= =20 at the port's long-term parking lot on Pacific Highway.=20 Rent from hotels and other businesses that are port tenants are expected to= =20 total $63.1 million, up $1.8 million from the current budget.=20 Increases in cargo and cruise ship traffic are expected to boost maritime= =20 income by $2.7 million, to a total of $18.4 million.=20 The port expects to spend $157 million on construction projects. They inclu= de=20 $8.5 million to relocate the General Services Department from Eighth Avenue= =20 and Harbor Drive in San Diego to National City and more than $5 million for= =20 paving and improvements at the 10th Avenue Marine Terminal.=20 Rent revenue could grow substantially in future years. Four hotel projects = on=20 port property have won approval or are seeking it.=20 Jim Bailey, president of Manchester Resorts, told commissioners yesterday= =20 that he expects to break ground on a second Hyatt tower of 750 rooms by Jun= e=20 26. Port officials said revenue from that hotel would bring in an additiona= l=20 $3.7 million a year. It is scheduled to open in the summer of 2003.=20 Hollingsworth, the treasurer, said that if all four hotels are built the po= rt=20 could receive as much as $15 million a year in new revenue.=20 Continuous use urged for planned power plant=20 Escondido facility originally proposed for peak demand By Jonathan Heller=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 ESCONDIDO -- A proposed power plant in southwest Escondido that initially w= as=20 expected to run only during times of peak electricity demand probably will = be=20 allowed to run full time.=20 A state energy official who recommended approval of the plant yesterday has= =20 said the plant could operate as often as the state deems necessary.=20 The California Energy Commission was scheduled to vote on the project today= .=20 CalPeak Power of San Diego has asked the commission to approve a 49-megawat= t=20 plant on Enterprise Street near Vineyard Avenue. Referred to as a ""peaker""= =20 plant, such facilities typically are designed to supply energy only during= =20 times of peak demand.=20 The state limits the number of hours some plants can operate to keep=20 pollution at a minimum. A 44-megawatt peaker plant being built on West=20 Mission Avenue in Escondido by Ramco Inc. will be allowed to operate no mor= e=20 than 16 hours per day.=20 That plant is permitted to emit up to 5 parts per million of nitrogen oxide= ,=20 although its actual emissions are expected to be slightly lower, said Dale= =20 Mesple, a Ramco consultant. Nitrogen oxide is a component of smog.=20 The CalPeak plant, if approved, would be restricted to 2 parts per million = of=20 nitrogen oxide.=20 It was generally assumed that the CalPeak plant would operate under similar= =20 time restrictions as the Ramco plant. The potential for air pollution was= =20 among the chief concerns of residents who spoke at the City Council hearing= s=20 on the Ramco project and at the energy commission hearings about the CalPea= k=20 plant.=20 But under the terms of approval recommended by Energy Commission Chairman= =20 William Keese, CalPeak's plant would be able to operate ""up to 8,760 hours= =20 per year, typically when the demand for electricity is high."" That number= =20 equals 24 hours a day.=20 The actual number of hours would depend on the requirements of the state's= =20 Independent System Operator, which manages the energy grid.=20 ""We certainly want to have the flexibility to run whenever we're needed,""= =20 said Mark Lyons, CalPeak's development director. ""Exactly how often we will= =20 run is anybody's guess.""=20 Escondido Councilwoman June Rady said she was frustrated by the possibility= =20 of the plant running full time. In Ramco's case, the city and the county Ai= r=20 Pollution Control District made it clear how often the plant could operate.= =20 CalPeak chose to bypass the city's permitting process and went through the= =20 state Energy Commission, which offers an expedited 21-day approval put in= =20 place by Gov. Gray Davis as an emergency measure.=20 ""I think Escondido has been absolutely ignored and there's a total lack of= =20 due process,"" Rady said. ""It boils down to an issue of local control.""=20 Although city officials objected to the commission pre-empting the city's= =20 land-use authority, the commission maintained that Davis' order gave it the= =20 final say on this type of project.=20 If the commission gives final approval today, the only remedy available to= =20 the city would be in court. At least three council members must vote to=20 initiate legal action.=20 Keese's recommended approval did take into account several city concerns=20 regarding landscaping. The CalPeak plant would be built near the entrance o= f=20 a planned high-tech business park, and city officials were worried the=20 plant's appearance might hinder the ability to attract high-quality tenants= =20 to the park.=20 Mayor Lori Holt Pfeiler said she was not surprised by the commission's=20 recommendation.=20 ""I expected they would want to approve the project, and that's why it was= =20 important for the city to weigh in with conditions we have in this=20 community,"" Pfeiler said.=20 Rising energy prices threaten Poway troupe=20 By Brian E. Clark=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 POWAY -- Rising electricity rates may extinguish the stage lights this summ= er=20 for the Poway Performing Arts Company.=20 ""I'm afraid that if SDG&E gets the price increase it's asking for -- from 6= .5=20 cents per kilowatt-hour to 8.9 cents -- that we'll go under,"" said Kathy=20 McCafferty, spokeswoman for the nonprofit theater.=20 The volunteer organization produces its plays in a building at a Poway Road= =20 shopping center. It held three fund-raising performances over the weekend,= =20 but officials were uncertain yesterday how much money was raised.=20 The group is not affiliated with the Poway Performing Arts Center and has= =20 been in business for 20 years.=20 McCafferty said the group built up a $2,000 surplus last summer before ener= gy=20 prices began to surge.=20 ""That $2,000 was a big reserve for us,"" she said. ""It seemed like a ton of= =20 money, but, boy, it went fast. And we're really energy-dependent. Our light= s=20 use a lot of power. And we're in Poway on the second floor of our building.= =20 It gets hot here, and we have to use air conditioning.""=20 But McCafferty acknowledged that the cost of power isn't the group's only= =20 problem.=20 In a recent letter to backers, President Nan Katona said the organization= =20 also needs new blood to keep operating.=20 ""The truth is that lack of funding is just a symptom of the deeper problem,= =20 which is lack of community support,"" she wrote. ""Ironically, audiences and= =20 reviewers recognize the Poway Performing Arts Company as one of the premier= =20 community arts theaters in San Diego.""=20 Katona said some new volunteers had stepped forward to take leadership role= s=20 in the theater company since she wrote her letter last month. But she said= =20 rising electricity prices could still bring the group down.=20 ""If our energy bills double or triple, we could be in dire straits,"" she=20 said. ""It could push us over the edge financially.""=20 McCafferty said it would be difficult for the theater to cut costs.=20 ""We can't run a much leaner operation,"" she said. ""If our power prices go u= p=20 again, we may still be forced out of business.""=20 The theater is at 13250 Poway Road, in the Lively Shopping Center. For more= =20 information, call (858) 679-8085.=20 Fair to use generators for midway attractions=20 By Michael Burge=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 DEL MAR -- The Del Mar Fair will generate its own electricity for thrill=20 rides on the midway this year instead of using energy from SDG&E.=20 ""In case there are planned or unplanned outages, we still will be operating= ,""=20 fairgrounds General Manager Timothy J. Fennell said.=20 Fennell decided to put the midway on generators because he didn't want the= =20 fairgrounds pulling power from the grid while county residents are coping= =20 with rolling blackouts at home and at work, he said.=20 And the fair does not want to take a chance that a rolling blackout will=20 leave some people stranded in rides high above the grounds, forcing an=20 evacuation.=20 The fairgrounds has been told it is exempt from rolling blackouts, but rath= er=20 than take such a risk it will rent 13 diesel-fuel generators and produce=20 electricity on the midway. The rest of the fairgrounds will use power from= =20 San Diego Gas & Electric Co.=20 Fairgrounds operations manager Larry Baumann estimated it would cost the=20 fairgrounds $20,000 more to generate its own electricity than to buy it fro= m=20 SDG&E.=20 Midway manager Donna Ruhm said it will be worth it.=20 ""Rides that require evacuation have to have backup power and they do,"" Ruhm= =20 said. ""Now our service won't be interrupted.""=20 It is not unusual for carnivals to generate their own power, and the=20 fairgrounds has done so in the past. Fair officials removed the generators = 10=20 to 15 years ago to reduce noise on the midway.=20 The fair opens June 15 and ends July 4.=20 While the rest of the fairgrounds is on the SDG&E grid, Baumann said backup= =20 generators can kick in during a typical 60-or 90-minute blackout, allowing= =20 the fair to operate without serious difficulty. Those generators are not=20 linked to the midway.=20 All the generators are licensed by the state and meet emission standards,= =20 fair officials said, so they do not expect the noise and odor to be=20 excessive.=20 The fairgrounds is taking the precaution of providing its own power despite= =20 the fact that it probably will not go dark during a rolling blackout.=20 ""SDG&E has assured me that .?.?. the fairgrounds and the racetrack will not= =20 be on the curtailment (blackout) list during the fair and the races,"" said= =20 Del Mar Fire Chief Jack Gosney.=20 The Del Mar Thoroughbred racing season begins July 18 and ends Sept. 5.=20 Gosney said SDG&E told him earlier this year that the fairgrounds was not= =20 subject to a forced outage because it shared a circuit with the Del Mar Fir= e=20 Station, which is a 911 dispatch center and exempt from a blackout. But he= =20 said recent research showed that the fairgrounds is on a separate circuit.= =20 Nonetheless, Gosney said, SDG&E is exempting the fairgrounds and racetrack= =20 during the busy summer season.=20 The fairgrounds paid $137,152.95 for its electricity usage from March 12 to= =20 April 10. It paid $51,845.39 for electricity during the same period last ye= ar. ?=20 Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 'Hi, My Name Isn't Justice, Honey,' and Shame on Lockyer=20 By TOM G. PALMER ?????Here's what California Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer said at a press=20 conference about Enron Corp. Chairman Kenneth Lay: ""I would love to=20 personally escort Lay to an 8-by-10 cell that he could share with a tattooe= d=20 dude who says, 'Hi, my name is Spike, honey.""'=20 ?????Here's why Lockyer should be removed from his office of public trust:= =20 First, because as the chief law enforcement officer of the largest state in= =20 the nation, he not only has admitted that rape is a regular feature of the= =20 state's prison system, but also that he considers rape a part of the=20 punishment he can inflict on others.=20 ?????Second, because he has publicly stated that he would like to personall= y=20 arrange the rape of a Texas businessman who has not even been charged with= =20 any illegal behavior.=20 ?????Lockyer's remarks reveal him to be an authoritarian thug, someone whol= ly=20 unsuited to holding an office of public trust.=20 ?????But his remarks do have one positive merit: They tell us what criminal= =20 penalties really entail.=20 ?????Contrary to some depictions of prisons as country clubs, they are=20 violent and terrible places. More and more politicians propose criminal=20 sanctions for more and more alleged misdeeds, and as a result ever more kin= ds=20 of behavior are sanctioned by criminal penalties, perhaps now even selling= =20 electricity. Those found guilty of such crimes are put into cages, where th= ey=20 are deprived of their liberty and dignity and, as Lockyer so clearly=20 acknowledged, raped and brutalized. What's worse, Lockyer has indicated tha= t=20 he believes that rape is an appropriate part of the system of punishments h= e=20 administers.=20 ?????Should it matter that Lay is a businessman? Imagine the outcry if the= =20 head of Enron were female. What would Lockyer's fellow Democrats have said = to=20 that?=20 ?????Should it matter that Lay is chairman of an electricity generator? Doe= s=20 the nature of his business justify threats to escort him to his own rape?= =20 Lockyer told the Los Angeles Times that he had singled out Enron's chairman= =20 because the Houston-based company is the world's largest energy trader.=20 ?????So apparently singling out a man for a heinous threat is OK because he= 's=20 the chairman of the world's largest energy trading company. That's accordin= g=20 to the man who, as a state senator, sponsored California's 1984 hate-crimes= =20 law. Evidently the crusader against intimidation on the basis of race,=20 religion and sexual orientation feels no hesitation at all about intimidati= ng=20 someone and threatening him with the brutal use of physical force simply=20 because he heads the world's largest energy trading company.=20 ?????Lockyer and Gov. Gray Davis seem to think that the best way to keep th= e=20 lights on is to threaten electricity producers with brute force, rather tha= n=20 to offer to pay competitive rates in competitive markets. Are energy=20 producers to blame for California's energy problems? No. Bad policies,=20 including rigid controls on retail prices of electricity, are the cause of= =20 the problem, not the people who generate energy. Scapegoating producers and= =20 threatening them with violence is an old ploy of authoritarians. California= ns=20 should not stand for it.=20 ?????An Enron spokesman said that Lockyer's chilling stated desire to arran= ge=20 the rape of Lay does not merit a response. The spokesman is wrong. Lockyer'= s=20 remarks merit public disgrace and removal from office. After all, rape is n= ot=20 a form of legal justice in America--is it?=20 - - - Tom G. Palmer Is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute in Washington. E-mai= l:=20 Palmert@cato.org Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 California ; Metro Desk=20 U.S. Probes Alleged Pact Not to Build New Plants Power: Justice officials= =20 focus on Southland operations of two firms, which deny wrongdoing. MYRON LEVIN; NANCY RIVERA BROOKS ?=20 06/06/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page B-1=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 The U.S. Department of Justice has launched an investigation into whether t= wo=20 companies that control a large swath of Southern California 's electricity= =20 supply agreed to limit power plant construction, potentially hindering=20 crucial energy production, according to federal records and interviews.=20 The civil antitrust probe of Williams Energy Services and AES Southland=20 represents the Justice Department's first foray into the activities of ener= gy=20 suppliers who have reaped huge profits in California 's price-shocked marke= t.=20 AES disclosed the investigation, which began last month, in a filing with t= he=20 Securities and Exchange Commission on Tuesday. In its papers, AES said the= =20 Justice Department is focusing on whether its agreement with Williams could= =20 constrain future power plant construction in Southern California .=20 The investigation comes at a time when the state is scrambling to get new= =20 generators built and running to avoid blackouts and economic problems.=20 The government alleges that AES and Williams agreed to limit the expansion = or=20 construction of new power plants near three facilities purchased by AES in= =20 1998 from Southern California Edison under the state's new deregulation pla= n.=20 The plants--in Long Beach, Huntington Beach and Redondo Beach--are owned by= =20 AES, but the electricity is sold by Williams. Under a 3-year-old deal, know= n=20 as a tolling agreement, Williams essentially rents out the capacity of the= =20 plants for annual payments to AES. Williams supplies natural gas to fire th= e=20 plants and sells the electricity under long-term contracts and in the costl= y=20 spot market.=20 Williams and AES have similar tolling agreements at plants in Pennsylvania= =20 and New Jersey. However, AES spokesman Aaron Thomas said the Justice=20 Department's investigative requests have focused only on agreements between= =20 Williams and AES in Southern California .=20 Thomas would say only that the agreement at the center of the investigation= =20 is simply a delineation of ""how expansion or repowerings are done at the=20 facilities.""=20 The three plants have a combined capacity of more than 3,900 megawatts,=20 enough to supply about 3 million homes. This summer, AES is bringing anothe= r=20 450 megawatts on line by reactivating two mothballed generators in Huntingt= on=20 Beach.=20 Paula Hall-Collins, a spokeswoman for Tulsa-based Williams Cos., said she= =20 believes that the investigation is unrelated to a recent inquiry by the=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission into whether AES and Williams=20 unnecessarily shut down plants to jack up prices. A portion of that=20 investigation was settled in April, when Williams, without admitting any=20 wrongdoing, agreed to pay about $8 million.=20 ""We've always maintained that we've operated within the law, and we're=20 certain the investigation by the DOJ will find we are operating legally,""= =20 Hall-Collins said.=20 Williams and AES are among the power plant owners and marketers that have= =20 been lambasted by Gov. Gray Davis because of gold-plated electricity prices= =20 that have pushed the state's biggest utilities to the edge of ruin and are= =20 steadily draining the state's budget surplus.=20 State officials are asking FERC to revoke the rights of AES and Williams to= =20 sell electricity at whatever price the market will bear. That right was=20 granted for three years, beginning in 1998 by federal regulators when=20 California 's $28-billion electricity market was opened to competition.=20 Under that plan, the rights of AES and Williams to sell into the market are= =20 the first to come up for renewal.=20 AES Southland and Williams Energy Services are both arms of large energy=20 companies--AES Corp. of Arlington, Va., and Williams Cos. of Tulsa, Okla. California ; Metro Desk=20 Natural Gas, Power Prices Drop Sharply Energy: More conservation, mild=20 weather are among factors keeping costs down, experts say. RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR; NANCY VOGEL ?=20 06/06/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page B-1=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 WASHINGTON -- The wholesale prices of electricity and natural gas in=20 California have fallen sharply in recent weeks, and experts said Tuesday th= at=20 the relief could be the harbinger of an energy turnaround.=20 Or it may be just a blip.=20 In the last couple of weeks, California power prices have plunged to the=20 lowest levels since April 2000, traders say, with electricity selling on so= me=20 days for less than $100 per megawatt-hour.=20 At night, when demand slackens, power sometimes sells for less than $20 per= =20 megawatt-hour. That is reminiscent of the days before prices went haywire= =20 last summer.=20 It is a drastically different scenario than the $500 to $800 the state paid= =20 during a spate of hot weather last month.=20 Meanwhile, wholesale natural gas prices at a bellwether pipeline junction o= n=20 the Southern California -Arizona border dipped last week to their lowest=20 levels since November, according to a publication that tracks the industry.= =20 Separately, Southern California Gas Co. and Pacific Gas & Electric Co.=20 reported June rate cuts for their residential gas customers of 16% and 38%,= =20 respectively.=20 Experts credited a combination of conservation, mild weather, a burst of=20 increased hydroelectric generation and lower natural gas prices for the dro= p=20 in electricity costs.=20 ""Conservation is starting to worry the generators, which is nice to see,""= =20 said Severin Borenstein, director of the University of California Energy=20 Institute in Berkeley. Californians used 11% less energy last month than in= =20 May 2000, according to the state Energy Commission.=20 ""I'm worried that if we don't push harder on conservation, [prices] won't= =20 stay down,"" Borenstein added.=20 On the natural gas side, experts said the price decline is due to replenish= ed=20 storage within California , a nationwide drop in the cost of the fuel and= =20 easing demand from power plants.=20 The number of shippers competing to get natural gas to the state has also= =20 increased, with the expiration of a controversial contract on the El Paso= =20 pipeline system last week.=20 But economists were reluctant to make sweeping predictions based on the=20 latest indicators.=20 ""It's hard to draw specific conclusions,"" said Bruce Henning, who tracks th= e=20 natural gas markets for Energy and Environmental Analysis Inc., an Arlingto= n,=20 Va., consulting firm.=20 How the summer turns out depends on the weather in the state, Henning said,= =20 adding, ""The weather represents the balance in the Southern California=20 market.""=20 Natural gas fuels most California power plants. With wholesale prices=20 recently averaging three to four times the rates charged elsewhere in the= =20 country, state and federal officials have despaired of chances for=20 controlling electricity costs.=20 Last Friday, however, the daily price for immediate delivery of natural gas= =20 in Topock, Ariz., a pipeline junction near the California border, dipped to= =20 $7.85 per million British thermal units.=20 According to Natural Gas Week, it was the first time since mid-November tha= t=20 the price at that location had fallen below $8 per million BTUs. One millio= n=20 BTUs is what a typical Southern California home uses in five or six days.= =20 Considered a bellwether for other pipeline systems serving California , the= =20 Topock price reached a record $56.54 per million BTUs on Dec. 8. It stood a= t=20 $9.36 per million BTUs at the close of business Tuesday, still below recent= =20 weekly averages.=20 Other industry publications have also picked up signals of price declines.= =20 Platts, the energy information division of McGraw-Hill Cos., reported Tuesd= ay=20 that the price for monthly gas delivery contracts to California fell 22% in= =20 June, following a nationwide trend.=20 But Henning said the drop in California prices is attributable to both lowe= r=20 prices around the country and a decline in the high markups for shipping ga= s=20 to California . Those markups, which far exceed the cost of transporting ga= s,=20 have drawn the attention of state and federal investigators.=20 Henning said the markups are declining as depleted storage levels in=20 California are replenished. ""Storage levels have been filling very rapidly,= =20 and that fact is reflected in prices coming down,"" he said.=20 The link between natural gas and electricity prices is a hotly debated=20 subject. Some experts say high-priced natural gas is driving up the cost of= =20 electricity . Others believe that record prices for power are raising the= =20 prices that generators are willing to pay for their fuel.=20 Electricity prices that range from $20 to $200 per megawatt-hour--instead o= f=20 the $150 to $500 per megawatt-hour paid in recent months--are great news fo= r=20 Gov. Gray Davis.=20 Average daily power prices in California for transactions through the=20 Automated Power Exchange have dropped from $149 per megawatt-hour last Frid= ay=20 to $110 per megawatt-hour Tuesday. The exchange is a private company that= =20 brings together electricity buyers and sellers and accounts for less than 1= 0%=20 of the state's market.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio said Tuesday that average daily power=20 purchases by the state have recently dipped below $50 million.=20 The state has sometimes had to pay more than $100 million a day since it=20 started buying power in January through the Department of Water Resources.= =20 The state stepped in because California 's two biggest utilities became too= =20 financially crippled to withstand the prices being charged by generators.= =20 Davis' plan to pay for past and future energy purchases with a $12.4-billio= n=20 bond issue hinges on an assumption that power prices will be driven down th= is=20 summer through long-term contracts, conservation and the construction of ne= w=20 power plants.=20 UC Berkeley's Borenstein said conservation efforts have not gone far enough= .=20 ""You walk into most buildings and you still need a sweater,"" he said. ""That= =20 ain't the way to hit the target.""=20 If Californians conserved an additional 10% off their peak usage on hot=20 afternoons, he said, ""we could really break the backs of the generators, we= =20 could really collapse the price.""=20 Prices tend to skyrocket in California 's electricity market on hot=20 afternoons, when demand soars and grid operators must scramble to purchase= =20 enough electricity . Cool weather, which reduces demand for air conditionin= g,=20 and conservation help keep the state from reaching such crisis situations.= =20 Borenstein said he believes generators are also asking less money for their= =20 electricity in part because of a federal order that took effect last month.= =20 The order limits the price power plant owners can charge when California 's= =20 supplies are strained.=20 Power sellers say there are more fundamental forces at work.=20 ""There's more supply relative to demand, which is softening prices,"" said= =20 Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum. ""The= =20 market is working, and it's providing cheaper wholesale power more quickly= =20 than any regulatory scheme could ever do.""=20 *=20 Times staff writer Dan Morain in Sacramento contributed to this story.=20 RELATED STORY=20 PG&E wins: The utility averted a $1-billion bill for power buys. B6=20 (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)=20 A Blip or a Trend?=20 Daily natural gas prices at the California border with Arizona--considered = a=20 bellwether of the state's costs--have been declining in the last two weeks.= =20 *=20 Natural gas price per 1 million Btu=20 $9.36=20 Source: Natural Gas Week California ; Metro Desk=20 The State Utility Averts $1 Billion in Costs Courts: PG&E and Cal-ISO agree= =20 to recognize Department of Water Resources as purchaser of the power. TIM REITERMAN ?=20 06/06/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page B-6=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 SAN FRANCISCO -- Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and the state's power grid=20 operator reached an agreement Tuesday that insulated PG&E at least=20 temporarily from more than $1 billion in power purchases the state made for= =20 its customers.=20 The California Independent System Operator sent $1.26 billion in invoices t= o=20 the utility for power purchases by the state Department of Water Resources= =20 for PG&E customers from January through March.=20 But the utility contended in Bankruptcy Court proceedings that it was not= =20 liable for such purchases and that continued purchases would cause annual= =20 losses of $4 billion.=20 After arguments before Judge Dennis Montali, PG&E and Cal-ISO agreed that t= he=20 Department of Water Resources, not PG&E, purchased the power. Cal-ISO had= =20 argued that it was making the purchases on PG&E's behalf.=20 ""PG&E wants to be a utility and have obligations to serve customers, but th= ey=20 don't want to pay for it,"" Cal-ISO general counsel Charles Robinson said=20 later.=20 If PG&E refuses to pay the invoices, Robinson said, Cal-ISO will send the= =20 bills to the Department of Water Resources, and officials there can decide= =20 whether to pursue claims in Bankruptcy Court. A spokesman for department,= =20 which has authorization to sell $13 billion in bonds for power purchases,= =20 said the agency will have no comment until the matter can be studied.=20 State agencies have stayed out of the bankruptcy proceedings, hoping to=20 preserve their immunity from suits in federal court.=20 The agreement will be submitted for Montali's approval Monday, but the judg= e=20 said it would not be binding on the department because no one represented t= he=20 agency in court.=20 PG&E's own production and contracts provide the majority of the power for i= ts=20 customers. But state legislation adopted this year allows the department to= =20 secure power contracts to serve customers of ailing utilities. When a=20 shortage threatens the power grid, the department purchases additional powe= r=20 through Cal-ISO on the spot electricity market.=20 PG&E filed for Chapter 11 protection from creditors on April 6, saying it w= as=20 $9 billion in debt.=20 Dramatic drop in cost of electricity=20 LOWER BILLS: Cheaper fuel, milder weather credited=20 David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL: .DTL=20 California electricity prices have plunged unexpectedly to their lowest lev= el=20 in more than a year, partly as the result of a simultaneous drop in prices= =20 for natural gas, which fuels most power plants.=20 Make no mistake: Gas and electricity prices could surge upward again in=20 months ahead.=20 But for the first time since California's energy markets went haywire last= =20 summer, industry experts are beginning to ask whether the state finally may= =20 have turned a corner in its battle with runaway power costs.=20 ""California is not yet out of the woods,"" said Kelley Doolan, who tracks=20 natural gas prices for energy market researcher Platts. ""But this is a very= =20 significant decrease in costs.""=20 Along with lower gas prices, the decline in electricity costs was attribute= d=20 by state and industry officials to milder weather, which reduces demand for= =20 power. They also credited recent conservation efforts by consumers and=20 better-than-expected runoff at dams for hydroelectric plants.=20 Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, an=20 energy-industry association, said these factors came together to produce th= e=20 lowest wholesale electricity prices since April 2000.=20 Electricity on the spot market could have been purchased yesterday for as= =20 little as $50 per megawatt hour, he noted, compared with more than $500=20 earlier this year.=20 ""If the weather stays this way, we could have reasonable prices all summer,= ""=20 Ackerman said. ""We may also have fewer blackouts.""=20 It is tempting for Californians to be suspicious of virtually any swing in= =20 energy prices. If power companies manipulated prices on the way up, as=20 critics have alleged, might they not be up to some trick as prices head in= =20 the opposite direction?=20 Nettie Hoge, executive director of The Utility Reform Network in San=20 Francisco, speculated that generators are allowing electricity prices to fa= ll=20 so they can discourage federal regulators from taking a more active role in= =20 the dysfunctional California market.=20 ""They're trying to take the heat off,"" she said.=20 Others cautioned that the lower prices may be nothing more than a statistic= al=20 blip.=20 ""This was just one month's decline,"" said Michael Shames, executive directo= r=20 of the Utility Consumers' Action Network in San Diego. ""We really have to s= ee=20 how this plays out in the future.""=20 Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis, said the governor was very= =20 encouraged by the lower energy prices. Davis announced Sunday that=20 California's power use was down 11 percent last month from a year before.= =20 ""We're not there yet,"" Maviglio said of whether an end to the state's power= =20 woes is in sight. ""But the trend is pointing in the right direction.""=20 WHITE ELEPHANT Yet this sudden drop in energy prices does have a dark side: California cou= ld=20 end up with a huge white elephant after spending about $40 billion in publi= c=20 funds on long-term power contracts.=20 The logic behind the contracts, which are at an average price of $69 per=20 megawatt hour over 10 years, is that the state expected to pay below-market= =20 rates for electricity for a number of years before prices came down and=20 California found itself paying above-market rates.=20 If current trends continue, though, California will find itself paying=20 consistently above-market rates much sooner than expected, making the long-= =20 term contracts a sweet deal for the same power companies that profited so= =20 handsomely during the state's darkest hours.=20 ""The contracts look really ugly right now,"" said Shames at the Utility=20 Consumers' Action Network. ""They may be way overpriced.""=20 Maviglio, the governor's spokesman, said it is too early to conclude that t= he=20 state did poorly negotiating dozens of long-term power contracts.=20 ""No one has a crystal ball on this,"" he said.=20 CUSTOMERS' BILLS TO DROP In any case, Pacific Gas and Electric Co. said yesterday that customers'=20 average gas bills will drop 26 percent this month to $26 and should stay ne= ar=20 that level all summer.=20 Platts, which monitors average monthly spot prices, found that the wholesal= e=20 price of gas at the California-Oregon border has tumbled nearly 42 percent= =20 since the beginning of May -- from $9.98 per million British thermal units = to=20 $5.81.=20 The wholesale gas price at the California-Arizona border fell 45 percent,= =20 from $11.91 to $6.50. This compares with a 25 percent monthly decline in=20 average natural gas prices nationwide.=20 However, California gas prices are still about 50 percent higher than they= =20 were a year ago, whereas national prices are now below year-ago levels for= =20 the first time since last spring.=20 While cooler weather nationwide helped push gas prices down overall, Doolan= =20 attributed the especially steep drop in California to a commensurate surge = in=20 prices last month related to fears of a long, hot summer of rolling=20 blackouts.=20 ""You had state officials all but promising rolling blackouts this summer,"" = he=20 said. ""That created enormous demand for electricity generation.=20 ""What has changed is that we've had weeks of mild weather,"" Doolan observed= .=20 ""The electricity generators have not come out of the woodwork buying up all= =20 the gas.""=20 This allowed utilities like PG&E to beef up gas inventories, which eased=20 demand and resulted in substantially lower prices, he said.=20 'BACK ON TRACK'=20 ""We're back on track to be completely full for winter,"" said Staci Homrig, = a=20 PG&E spokeswoman. ""That's a very good thing.""=20 Gas prices historically dip in the spring and summer and then rise again in= =20 the winter. PG&E is forecasting that customers' average gas bills could ris= e=20 to as high as $75 in December if current trends continue.=20 However, the precipitous drop in gas prices in recent weeks suggests that= =20 California's unusually high costs at last may be abating.=20 Individual power companies so far are reluctant to speculate on whether the= =20 drop in gas prices will have a lasting effect on electricity costs.=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 San Jose council gives green light to generating plant=20 VOTE REVERSAL: Officials pressured to OK project=20 Marshall Wilson, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL: .DTL=20 In a clear sign that the political landscape has shifted because of the=20 state's power crisis, the San Jose City Council gave a green light yesterda= y=20 for construction of a generating plant it had unanimously opposed in=20 November.=20 Yesterday's 10-to-1 vote came after months of mounting pressure for the cit= y=20 to reverse course and approve the controversial 600-megawatt Calpine plant = at=20 Coyote Valley.=20 That pressure -- increased by the occasional rolling blackout -- has come= =20 from nearly every corner of the state, from elected officials to high-tech= =20 businesses and labor unions worried the power crisis will drain away jobs,= =20 ruin the economy and lead to voter backlash over skyrocketing energy bills.= =20 Even the local branch of the NAACP and environmentalists pushed the council= =20 to approve the Calpine proposal -- despite overwhelming opposition from the= =20 plant's neighbors.=20 Council members did not hide their disdain yesterday for being forced to=20 reconsider their opposition to the so-called Metcalf Energy Center.=20 ""I'm holding my nose to vote for this thing,"" said Councilwoman Linda=20 LeZotte.=20 ""I'm just as unhappy as everybody else,"" Vice Mayor George Shirakawa said. = ""I=20 feel like no matter what happens, we can't win.""=20 GOVERNOR OFFERED HIS SUPPORT After the council's solid opposition in November, Calpine appealed to the= =20 California Energy Commission, which has the final say. The controversial=20 plant then received a huge boost in April when Gov. Gray Davis threw his=20 support behind it.=20 San Jose officials conceded yesterday that the energy commission was likely= =20 to override their opposition and grant approval within a few weeks. They sa= id=20 the commission's likely approval was stripping them of their power to decid= e=20 local land-use issues.=20 ""What I think has happened . . . is the governor and the Legislature at the= =20 state level have taken this out of our hands,"" said Councilwoman Pat Dando.= =20 ""I don't think there's any chance at all the California Energy Commission i= s=20 going to turn down the Metcalf Energy Center,"" Councilman Chuck Reed said.= =20 CONSTRUCTION MAY BEGIN SOON If given the go-ahead by the state, Calpine could begin construction as ear= ly=20 as next month. The natural-gas fired plant would generate electricity by=20 mid-2003, company spokesman Kenneth Arbeu said.=20 At the urging of Mayor Ron Gonzales, the council yesterday approved a new= =20 ""cooperation agreement"" with Calpine. The vote, with Councilman Forrest=20 Williams casting the lone nay, is preliminary while a final vote that is=20 scheduled for June 26.=20 Gonzales argued that the agreement did not amount to a flip-flop because it= =20 differs from what Calpine proposed in November.=20 The agreement approved by the council calls for increased monitoring of air= =20 pollution, the use of treated wastewater to cool the plant, which will redu= ce=20 discharges into San Francisco Bay, and a $6.5 million ""community benefits""= =20 package, with the bulk going toward parkland acquisition, Gonzales said.=20 ""This council has not changed its decision,"" he said. ""What we've done is= =20 change the facility.""=20 Critics, incensed that the city was buckling to outside pressure, vowed to= =20 change the council at the next election.=20 CONCERNS OVER HEALTH RISKS They raised concerns that boiled wastewater steam wafting over their homes= =20 from Calpine's plant could pose health risks. Jona Denz-Hamilton said more= =20 controls are needed to ensure the safety of neighbors like herself and her= =20 family and argued that new, cleaner-burning technologies should be installe= d=20 at the plant.=20 ""It's too great of a risk,"" she said.=20 Other critics said the state's energy woes will be solved and largely=20 forgotten by the time the plant opens in two years, while the Santa Teresa= =20 neighborhood will be stuck with pollution for decades.=20 Approval seemed a given at the start of the more than three-hour hearing.= =20 Much of the afternoon's debate focused around plans to extend a pipeline fo= r=20 treated wastewater to the new plant.=20 Critics said Calpine was receiving a sweet deal by paying only $10 million = of=20 the $50 million cost of extending the pipeline. Several council members ask= ed=20 for a more detailed report into the financing plan before the final vote is= =20 taken June 26.=20 Chronicle staff writer Bill Workman contributed to this report.=20 E-mail Marshall Wilson at ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 Developments in California's energy crisis=20 Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate1 053EDT0177.DTL=20 (06-06) 07:53 PDT (AP) --=20 Developments in California's energy crisis:=20 WEDNESDAY: * No power alerts Wednesday as reserves stay above 7 percent.=20 TUESDAY: * Gov. Gray Davis' administration says the state's electricity costs are=20 dropping substantially, even as it asks state legislators for another=20 half-billion dollars for power purchases. That brings to $8.2 billion the= =20 amount the state is paying for electricity on behalf of three financially= =20 strapped utilities.=20 Spokesman Steve Maviglio says the cost to the state treasury has dropped in= =20 the last few weeks well below the $50 million dollars the state had been=20 paying on a typical day. He credits cooler weather, conservation, more powe= r=20 plants online and more long-term contracts with helping drive down the cost= .=20 * A state Senate committee agrees to issue subpoenas to eight out-of-state= =20 electricity generators demanding they hand over documents on bidding, prici= ng=20 and other aspects of power sales in the state. The subpoenas would help a= =20 special Senate committee's investigation into whether the companies are=20 illegally profiteering from California's power crisis. The committee's=20 chairman says he expects the companies to resist, setting the stage for a= =20 court battle.=20 * Oil giant Chevron threatens to cut gasoline production in California unle= ss=20 it is exempted from rolling blackouts. The San Francisco Chronicle says it= =20 has a copy of a letter sent Friday from Chevron chairman David O'Reilly to= =20 Davis. In the letter, O'Reilly says the company will scale back gasoline=20 production at its Richmond and El Segundo plants, operating those refinerie= s=20 only with power produced by generators at the sites.=20 * New U.S. Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., supports Federal=20 Energy Regulatory Commission price caps. ""FERC must meet its obligation und= er=20 current law to ensure 'just and reasonable' prices for wholesale electricit= y=20 in the state of California. FERC has failed to meet this responsibility...,= ""=20 Daschle says in a letter to Davis. ""Unless FERC acts soon, Senator (Dianne)= =20 Feinstein's legislation should be taken up and passed to direct FERC to tak= e=20 action. I will support all necessary efforts to meet that goal.""=20 * House Subcommittee on Energy Policy, Natural Resources and Regulatory=20 Affairs Chairman Doug Ose, R-Sacramento, cites Electric Utility Week figure= s=20 that FERC's limited price caps helped cut California's power rates from $30= 0=20 to $108.47 per megawatt hour within an hour after taking effect last week.= =20 While he says more information is needed, Ose uses the figures to tout his= =20 pending bill to impose the price caps around the clock and to all Western= =20 states.=20 * Pacific Gas & Electric Co. asks U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali to= =20 stop the manager of the state's power grid from buying electricity for=20 utility or charging it for any electricity bought after the utility filed f= or=20 bankruptcy on April 6. Separately, the utility's creditors support its=20 request to the bankruptcy court to pay out $17.5 million in bonuses to the= =20 management team that guided the utility into bankruptcy.=20 * California Department of Water Resources reveals it is negotiating with= =20 municipal utilities to buy their surplus power. Department spokesman Oscar= =20 Hidalgo says talks began last week but no agreements are imminent.=20 * State lawmakers criticize a $3 million lobbying campaign by Southern=20 California Edison. The utility is telephoning shareholders to describe the= =20 dire consequences if the utility goes bankrupt. The call is then transferre= d=20 to the state Capitol so shareholders can implore lawmakers to support a=20 controversial plan to help the utility. Legislators and their staffers say= =20 the shareholders often are confused and scared their investments will be=20 degraded or wiped out.=20 * State Treasurer Phil Angelides joins an advocacy group for the poor in=20 urging the state's huge pension funds to use their economic power to levera= ge=20 power companies. The Pacific Institute for Community Organization says the= =20 two pension funds own at least $1.2 billion in stocks and bonds in most of= =20 the firms that sell electricity to California.=20 * The Assembly, by a 69-0 vote, approves a bill to spend $10 million on=20 environmental studies needed before Path 15, the inadequate transmission-li= ne=20 group between Northern and Southern California, can be expanded. The bill= =20 moves to the Senate.=20 * Pacific Gas and Electric announces a decrease in natural gas prices, down= =20 38 percent from May's rates and 66 percent lower than January's rates. The= =20 decline will bring the average residential gas bill to $26 when it goes int= o=20 effect June 7. Market analysts predict the rates will remain stable until= =20 December when demand is expected to increase with winter heating loads.=20 * No power alerts Tuesday as electricity reserves stay above 7 percent.=20 * Shares of Edison International closed at $10.05, down 53 cents. PG&E Corp= .=20 closed at $11.25, down 15 cents. Sempra Energy, the parent company of San= =20 Diego Gas & Electric, closes at $26.91, down 43 cents.=20 WHAT'S NEXT: * Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra, the parent compa= ny=20 of San Diego Gas and Electric Co., to buy the utility's transmission lines.= =20 THE PROBLEM: High demand, high wholesale energy costs, transmission glitches and a tight= =20 supply worsened by scarce hydroelectric power in the Northwest and=20 maintenance at aging California power plants are all factors in California'= s=20 electricity crisis.=20 Edison and PG&E say they've lost nearly $14 billion since June to high=20 wholesale prices the state's electricity deregulation law bars them from=20 passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs= =20 from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection= =20 April 6.=20 Electricity and natural gas suppliers, scared off by the two companies' poo= r=20 credit ratings, are refusing to sell to them, leading the state in January = to=20 start buying power for the utilities' nearly 9 million residential and=20 business customers. The state is also buying power for a third investor-own= ed=20 utility, San Diego Gas & Electric, which is in better financial shape than= =20 much larger Edison and PG&E but also struggling with high wholesale power= =20 costs.=20 The Public Utilities Commission has approved average rate increases of 37= =20 percent for the heaviest residential customers and 38 percent for commercia= l=20 customers, and hikes of up to 49 percent for industrial customers and 15=20 percent or 20 percent for agricultural customers to help finance the state'= s=20 multibillion-dollar power buys.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 California conserves=20 Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /06/E D86597.DTL=20 WHEN RAIN fails to fall from the sky, Californians know why there is a=20 drought. But when rolling blackouts suddenly appeared in the dead of winter= ,=20 many of us wondered who was responsible for and who has profited from what= =20 now seems like an artificially created power shortage in the state.=20 Our skepticism proved to be right. Windfall profits were reaped by=20 electricity generators while natural gas importers extracted prices far abo= ve=20 the national average.=20 Timid federal overseers exact only wrist-slap penalties on the offending=20 energy firms. The White House scoffs at temporary controls for a=20 malfunctioning market. California's state government has ended up as the bi= ll=20 payer for the sickly utilities, forking over $8 billion to generators. This= =20 number may hit $40 billion by year-end.=20 It's an infuriating tangle. All the more remarkable, then, that skeptical= =20 Californians have managed, within two months, to reduce their use of=20 electricity by 11 percent. The public's response to the governor's appeal f= or=20 energy conservation has exceeded expectations. Although many businesses hav= e=20 suffered enormous losses, ordinary people have made relatively painless=20 sacrifices. People turned off their lights, purchased energy-efficient=20 lightbulbs, used air conditioning less and shut off their computers when no= t=20 in use.=20 Despite this remarkable civic compliance, we still face an unconscionable= =20 lack of leadership. President Bush seems perfectly willing to allow Texas= =20 power companies to pummel the once-powerful California economy. He repeats = a=20 mantra about creating more supply -- which California is doing with 15 powe= r=20 plants under construction -- while ignoring the outsized sums paid to a=20 handful of energy generators.=20 At the same time, Gov. Gray Davis, who has given new meaning to the word=20 dithering, has failed to make the tough and transparent decisions. He delay= ed=20 an inevitable rise in power rates. Davis also dragged his feet in openly=20 announcing new power contracts that commit California to billions in spendi= ng=20 over the next decade.=20 To Davis' credit, he has urged California to conserve by laying out an $800= =20 million plan to cut power use and invest in energy-saving programs. The=20 message is getting out as higher rates take effect this month.=20 Despite a woefully unbalanced market and shortsighted leadership, the peopl= e=20 of California have demonstrated that if there is a will, there is a way.=20 Now it is time for our leaders to follow the wisdom of their constituents.= =20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 20=20 L.A. power customers awash in cheap energy=20 John Wildermuth, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /06/M N133438.DTL=20 Los Angeles -- These are flush times for the city's Department of Water and= =20 Power and the energy executives are loving every minute of it.=20 As are their customers.=20 Private power companies throughout California have been raising rates and= =20 warning customers about a long, hot summer filled with blackouts, but the= =20 city- owned DWP has been keeping prices stable and the lights on for 1.2=20 million Los Angeles customers.=20 ""Our customers are being really nice to us,"" said Angelina Galiteva, the=20 utility's strategic planning director. ""They love the DWP.""=20 Although Gov. Gray Davis' administration announced that the state had reduc= ed=20 its energy consumption 11 percent from a year ago, those in Los Angeles had= =20 cut back less than half that -- and polls show they view the energy situati= on=20 less seriously than other Californians.=20 Public utilities such as Los Angeles water and power have seen their revenu= es=20 increase during the energy crunch because they can sell their excess power = at=20 higher prices than ever before in a market tilted toward sellers.=20 The rest of the state doesn't always feel that same warm glow. Davis has=20 accused the DWP and other California public utilities of putting exorbitant= =20 price tags on the excess electricity they sell to the rest of the energy-= =20 starved state.=20 It's a charge Los Angeles utility executives deny, arguing that their exces= s=20 power is sold at cost plus 15 percent, which they say is a fair return for= =20 their customers.=20 ""Without our support, a million more homes (elsewhere in California) would= =20 have suffered rolling blackouts, which is a powerful message,"" Galiteva sai= d.=20 It wasn't supposed to be this way. When the power industry was deregulated = in=20 the late '90s, energy giants like Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern= =20 California Edison were expected to be the big winners. Now, PG&E is in=20 bankruptcy and Edison is a short step away.=20 ""When deregulation came, the experts said that the investor-owned utilities= =20 would become lean, mean machines that would be better able to operate in th= e=20 new environment,"" Galiteva said. ""But now public power has shown it can ser= ve=20 customers more efficiently at lower rates.""=20 While much of the state worries about electrical supply, Los Angeles=20 residents have been saved many of those concerns.=20 In a survey done last month by the Public Policy Institute of California, 4= 8=20 percent of the people in the Bay Area thought that electricity cost and=20 availability were the most important issues facing the state. In Los Angele= s,=20 however, only 33 percent put the energy crunch on top. When questioned abou= t=20 the size of the power problem and the effect it would have on the state's= =20 economy, Los Angeles residents were consistently less concerned than people= =20 elsewhere in California.=20 People in Los Angeles have been ""somewhat isolated"" from the energy crisis,= =20 concluded Mark Baldassare, who conducted the survey.=20 That doesn't mean the state's energy problems haven't had an effect. The DW= P=20 has seen a 3 percent to 5 percent reduction in some uses, which officials= =20 have dubbed ""sympathy conservation."" The utility also is offering its bigge= st=20 customers financial incentives to cut back on their power use.=20 ""Our average annual load growth is about 80 megawatts,"" Galiteva said. ""By= =20 this summer, we expect to have saved 40 megawatts through conservation. By= =20 December, we expect 60 megawatts in savings.""=20 The utility also is making a major attempt to create a conservation ethic= =20 among its customers. DWP's comfortable situation has made it possible to=20 offer them the carrot without the need to show them the stick.=20 ""Conservation no longer means doing without,"" Galiteva said. ""Beer can be= =20 just as cold with a superefficient refrigerator. Rooms can be just as brigh= t=20 with superefficient light bulbs.""=20 A ""Green Power"" program also is promoting the use of renewable energy=20 resources such as solar, wind and hydroelectric power. About 75,000 custome= rs=20 are paying an extra $3 per month to increase DWP's use of renewable power= =20 sources.=20 ""We're trying to give our customers a choice and a voice in determining the= =20 mix of power they use,"" Galiteva said. ""They know they can do (conservation= )=20 now or see it being mandated later.""=20 Los Angeles power officials -- and their customers -- know the DWP isn't=20 always going to continue as an island of tranquility in a sea of energy=20 turmoil. The utility's aging gas-fired plants have been affected by the=20 rising price of natural gas. Demand for energy continues to rise. In a deba= te=20 last month, both candidates for mayor of Los Angeles agreed that increases = in=20 local power bills are inevitable.=20 But the DWP has been supplying power to Los Angeles since 1916, and its=20 executives believe that the state's deregulation disaster has shown the=20 advantages of the city-owned utility.=20 ""It's nice to be the lean, mean, green efficient machine that no one ever= =20 expected us to become,"" Galiteva said.=20 E-mail John Wildermuth at ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 13=20 PG&E doesn't want to pay for energy to avert blackouts=20 DAVID KRAVETS, Associated Press Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 306EDT0102.DTL=20 (06-06) 00:06 PDT SAN FRANCISCO (AP) --=20 Pacific Gas & Electric Co. has told a bankruptcy judge it should not have t= o=20 pay for what could amount to billions of dollars in spot-market energy cost= s=20 to avert blackouts.=20 The company's position was one of two developments that emerged Tuesday as= =20 the bankrupt utility tries to cope with fallout from California's power=20 crisis. The other development saw a group of creditors that PG&E owes=20 billions endorse $17.5 million in bonuses for top managers at the utility.= =20 San Francisco-based PG&E filed for bankruptcy protection in April after=20 racking up an $8.9 billion debt which under state law it could not recoup= =20 from customers.=20 Tuesday's court dispute centered on who pays for energy bought at the last= =20 minute to avoid blackouts.=20 PG&E said an April federal regulatory decision requires that electricity ca= n=20 only be sold to those with the ability to pay electricity generators. The= =20 state is the only player with such ability, said PG&E attorney Jerome Faulk= ,=20 who argued that the utility shouldn't have to pay the $330 million in month= ly=20 spot-market energy bills.=20 Judge Dennis Montali said he may craft such an order. But he said the order= =20 would not preclude the state from suing PG&E to recover the cost.=20 In a separate but related development, a committee charged with devising a= =20 payment plan for those creditors owed billions by PG&E said it will sign of= f=20 on the utility's plan to pay $17.5 million in bonuses to PG&E's management= =20 team.=20 Attorney Allan Marks, who represents the committee, said such payments are= =20 normal during large bankruptcy cases. Under the agreement, which Montali wi= ll=20 consider at a June 18 hearing, the company must quickly produce a debt=20 payment plan that passes judicial muster.=20 The utility said it needs the bonuses for a ""management retention program.""= =20 Marks agreed. While the $17.5 million leaves less for creditors, without a= =20 financial incentive PG&E's key top brass may not be willing to cooperate wi= th=20 a payment plan, Marks said.=20 ""The main goal for the creditors' support here is to move the bankruptcy as= =20 quickly and smoothly as possible,"" Marks said.=20 The Utility Reform Network, a consumer watchdog group, says PG&E is simply= =20 rewarding managers of a failed business effort.=20 ""They're just showering money on the same people who got them in this mess,= ""=20 said TURN's Mike Florio.=20 The proposed bonuses would come on top of $50 million in bonuses and raises= =20 PG&E awarded just before the April 6 bankruptcy filing.=20 The case is In Re Pacific Gas & Electric Co., 01-30923 DM.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 Metcalf plant gets preliminary approval=20 Posted at 12:21 a.m. PDT Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 BY MIKE ZAPLER=20 Mercury News=20 As the San Jose City Council approached its 10-1 vote Tuesday to give an=20 initial nod to Calpine's big power plant in South San Jose, Councilwoman=20 Linda LeZotte perhaps captured the body's mood best.=20 ``I'm holding my nose to vote for this thing,'' she said. ``Without faultin= g=20 the mayor or his staff, quite frankly I think this deal stinks.''=20 Caught in what some members called a bind beyond their control, the council= =20 gave preliminary approval to an agreement negotiated by Mayor Ron Gonzales= =20 and Calpine on the company's proposed 600-megawatt Metcalf Energy Center.= =20 Councilman Forrest Williams, who represents the Santa Teresa neighborhood= =20 near the site, cast the lone vote against the deal.=20 The agreement is scheduled to come back before the council for a final vote= =20 on June 26, but Tuesday's vote effectively shifts the battle to the courts,= =20 where residents are expected to lodge a lawsuit in one final attempt to blo= ck=20 the plant.=20 Still, Councilwoman Pat Dando and some of her colleagues raised questions= =20 about the deal they said they want answered before the final vote. Their=20 issues could be incorporated into the final deal.=20 Many of the concerns focused on a $50 million recycled water pipeline=20 Gonzales agreed to have the city build to accommodate the project, $10=20 million of which would be reimbursed by Calpine over 30 years.=20 Pipeline possibility=20 Dando said that a private company, Great Oaks Water, may be willing to buil= d=20 the pipeline extension itself, saving the city the $50 million expense.=20 Officials at Great Oaks were unavailable Tuesday.=20 Council members peppered staff with other questions. Many were alarmed by= =20 claims of the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, which said that using treate= d=20 sewage water to cool the power plant could allow dangerous chemicals to see= p=20 into drinking water aquifers. An environmental services director said the= =20 recycled water meets federal specifications, but that there is no protocol= =20 for testing other chemicals not included in those standards.=20 Councilman Ken Yeager asked why Calpine should be allowed to spread a $3.9= =20 million water connection fee over 10 years -- an arrangement that would=20 mandate an amendment to city law.=20 LeZotte, meanwhile, said she wants to hold Calpine accountable to install= =20 ammonia-free technology at the plant. Ammonia is highly hazardous, and=20 residents say the use of the chemical to clean the plant is among their chi= ef=20 concerns.=20 The agreement requires the company to install technology to reduce or=20 eliminate the use ammonia when it becomes ``technologically and economicall= y=20 feasible.'' LeZotte said she wants a clear definition of ``feasible''=20 included in the deal.=20 Tuesday's vote marked a stark departure from the council's November vote to= =20 deny Metcalf. At the time, council members said a power plant was=20 inappropriate for the area, and many members said Tuesday that they still= =20 believe that.=20 Bowing to pressure=20 But with Gov. Gray Davis endorsing Metcalf in April and the California Ener= gy=20 Commission widely expected to override the city's denial this month, counci= l=20 members said they had no choice but to cut the best deal it could and allow= =20 the project to proceed.=20 That explanation, however, didn't sit well with residents of the Santa Tere= sa=20 neighborhood adjacent to the Metcalf site, one of whom accused Gonzales and= =20 the council of ``switching sides when the opposing team gets too close to t= he=20 goal line.''=20 Contact Mike Zapler at mzapler@sjmercury.com or at (408) 275-0140.=20 Feds probe AES, Williams=20 Antitrust investigation looks into allegations of manipulated energy prices= =20 through reduced power-plant construction.=20 June 6, 2001=20 By JAMES ROWLEY Bloomberg News=20 WASHINGTON - The U.S. Justice Department opened an antitrust investigation= =20 into California's electricity shortage by probing allegations that AES Corp= .=20 and Williams Energy Services Co. are limiting power-plant expansion to driv= e=20 up prices.=20 AES Corp., the biggest U.S. power-plant developer, disclosed the=20 investigation in a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.= =20 The Justice Department is looking into a supply-and-marketing agreement=20 between AES' California power-plant unit and a Williams unit that supplies= =20 natural gas.=20 Williams, owner of the second-largest U.S. natural-gas pipeline system, als= o=20 markets the power produced by AES' three electricity plants in the state.= =20 The department alleges the agreement limits expansion of generating capacit= y=20 near some AES plants.=20 AES said it was cooperating with the Justice Department investigation, whic= h=20 began last month, into possible violations of Section 1 of the Sherman=20 Antitrust Act.=20 That provision outlaws any restraint of trade that stifles competition.=20 A shortage of generating capacity in California has led to soaring wholesal= e=20 prices and rolling blackouts and prompted Pacific Gas & Electric, the state= 's=20 largest utility, to seek bankruptcy protection in April.=20 Aaron Thomas, a spokesman for AES, based in Arlington, Va., said the U.S.= =20 investigation started ""no more than a couple of weeks ago.""=20 Williams spokeswoman Paula Hall-Collins said the Tulsa, Okla.-based company= =20 is cooperating.=20 Gina Talamona, Justice Department spokeswoman, said the agency had no=20 immediate comment.=20 The investigation was opened several weeks after the Federal Energy=20 Regulatory Commission investigated AES plants in Long Beach and Huntington= =20 Beach, designated ""must run"" under the Federal Power Act, did not produce= =20 electricity for 10 days in April and May 2000. Williams agreed to pay the= =20 operator of California's electric grid $8 million to settle allegations tha= t=20 it overcharged for power.=20 FERC charged in March that the companies had a financial incentive to keep= =20 the units out of service to force the California Independent System Operato= r=20 to buy power from AES' plant in Redondo Beach at prices close to the=20 FERC-imposed cap of $750 per megawatt-hour.=20 AES said it was complying with a Justice Department demand for documents=20 about the agreement between its AES Southland LLC unit and Williams Energy= =20 Services Co. AES Southland, which operates the three power plants, was also= =20 asked to respond to interrogatories, the company said.=20 The Williams unit supplies the natural gas to fuel the AES plants and marke= ts=20 the power they produce.=20 AES and Williams jointly produce and sell about 4,000 megawatts in Californ= ia=20 -- 6 to 8 percent of the state's power -- enough electricity to light about= 3=20 million typical California homes.=20 AES shares dropped $2.05, to $42.54. Williams Cos. shares dropped $1, to=20 $38.20. Calpine Begins Construction of Peaking Energy Center in Gilroy, Calif.=20 June 6, 2001=20 SAN JOSE, Calif., June 5 /PRNewswire/ via NewsEdge Corporation -=20 Calpine Corporation (NYSE: CPN), the San Jose, Calif.-based independent pow= er=20 company, today announced that initial construction of 135 megawatts (mw) of= =20 peaking generation capacity will begin during this week adjacent to its=20 existing Gilroy Power Plant in Gilroy, Calif. Through an Application for=20 Certification (AFC) filed with the California Energy Commission (CEC) on=20 April 25, 2001, Calpine proposed to add three 45-mw simple-cycle gas turbin= e=20 peaking units in the first of a two-phase process. The California Energy=20 Commission approved the project on May 21, 2001.=20 ""Because the required natural gas, water and transmission infrastructure=20 exists at our Gilroy plant, it is an ideal site for the addition of peaking= =20 generation, allowing for rapid installation of needed capacity. The first= =20 three units are expected to begin generating electricity this September,""= =20 commented Bryan Bertacchi, Calpine Vice President - Western Region.=20 Upon completion the two-phase build out, the Gilroy Energy Center will be a= =20 270-mw, natural gas-fired, simple-cycle peaking generation facility located= =20 on approximately 9.5 acres at 1400 Pacheco Pass Highway in Gilroy. Commerci= al=20 operation of Phase One is scheduled for September 2001. An additional three= =20 45-mw gas turbine generators will be installed in Phase Two with full=20 build-out estimated for May 2002. Phase Two requires the filing of an=20 additional application with the CEC and is subject to a four-month review= =20 process.=20 Initial construction will begin this week with site and civil engineering= =20 activities occurring for approximately six weeks at which time the site wil= l=20 be cleared and leveled. Foundation work and the installation of generation= =20 equipment will follow shortly thereafter, and commissioning and testing wil= l=20 take place for a two to three week period prior to commercial operation in= =20 September 2001.=20 The Gilroy Energy Center web site has been created to host all information= =20 and updates related to this project. For additional information, please vis= it=20 www.gilroypower.com.=20 Calpine Corporation, based in San Jose, Calif., is dedicated to providing= =20 customers with reliable and competitively priced electricity. Calpine is=20 focused on clean, efficient, natural gas-fired generation and is the world'= s=20 largest producer of renewable geothermal energy. Calpine has launched the= =20 largest power development program in North America. To date, the company ha= s=20 approximately 32,200 megawatts of base load capacity and 7,200 megawatts of= =20 peaking capacity in operation, under construction, pending acquisitions and= =20 in announced development in 29 states and Canada. The company was founded i= n=20 1984 and is publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol= =20 CPN. For more information about Calpine, visit its Website at=20 www.calpine.com.=20 This news release discusses certain matters that may be considered=20 ""forward-looking"" statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the=20 Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities=20 Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, including statements regarding the intent= ,=20 belief or current expectations of Calpine Corporation (""the Company"") and i= ts=20 management. Prospective investors are cautioned that any such forward-looki= ng=20 statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve a number of= =20 risks and uncertainties that could materially affect actual results such as= ,=20 but not limited to, (i) changes in government regulations, including pendin= g=20 changes in California, and anticipated deregulation of the electric energy= =20 industry, (ii) commercial operations of new plants that may be delayed or= =20 prevented because of various development and construction risks, such as a= =20 failure to obtain financing and the necessary permits to operate or the=20 failure of third-party contractors to perform their contractual obligations= ,=20 (iii) cost estimates are preliminary and actual cost may be higher than=20 estimated, (iv) the assurance that the Company will develop additional=20 plants, (v) a competitor's development of a lower-cost generating gas-fired= =20 power plant, and (vi) the risks associated with marketing and selling power= =20 from power plants in the newly competitive energy market. Prospective=20 investors are also cautioned that the California energy environment remains= =20 uncertain. The Company's management is working closely with a number of=20 parties to resolve the current uncertainty, while protecting the Company's= =20 interests. Management believes that a final resolution will not have a=20 material adverse impact on the Company. Prospective investors are also=20 referred to the other risks identified from time to time in the Company's= =20 reports and registration statements filed with the Securities and Exchange= =20 Commission.=20 MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT - Click Here=20 SOURCE Calpine Corporation=20 CONTACT: media, Lisa Poelle, ext. 1285, or investors, Rick Barraza, ext.=20 1125, both of Calpine Corporation, 408-995-5115=20 Web site: http://www.gilroypower.com=20 Web site: http://www.calpine.com (CPN)=20 Reliant Urges FERC to Drop or Amend California Price Caps to Avoid Addition= al=20 Shortages and More Blackouts=20 June 6, 2001=20 HOUSTON, June 5 /PRNewswire/ via NewsEdge Corporation -=20 Reliant Energy (NYSE: REI) filed an emergency motion with the Federal Energ= y=20 Regulatory Commission (FERC) on Monday urging the agency to drop the=20 California price caps first applied May 29, or at a minimum, amend them to= =20 reflect the true costs they are attempting to control. The current price=20 caps, which send inaccurate market signals, are actually decreasing supply= =20 and increasing demand thus worsening an already dire situation.=20 ""FERC has been publicly dedicated to an open market from the beginning of t= he=20 California power crisis. We encourage FERC to reexamine these price caps an= d=20 continue that dedication,"" said Joe Bob Perkins, president and chief=20 operating officer, Reliant Energy Wholesale Group. ""Reliant is committed to= =20 helping keep the lights on in California this summer and wants to ensure th= at=20 if caps must remain part of the picture, they actually help increase supply= =20 and fix the problem.""=20 Although the price caps were first imposed less than a week ago, they have= =20 already begun to damage the market by decreasing supply. The price caps are= =20 creating a myriad of problems:=20 -- Creates Misleading Signals - The price cap methodology is misleading=20 the public on the actual cost of power. Reported ""dispatch"" costs in=20 Southern California during emergencies is far below what the actual=20 financial settlements will be under the FERC's final market mitigation=20 order. This confusion results from the ""proxy"" price used for=20 dispatch utilizing an extremely distorted blended fuel cost index.=20 This index averages gas costs in northern and southern parts of the=20 state, an impossibility in the actual market. This authorizes the=20 California Independent System Operator (ISO) to require that=20 generators dispatch power at reported market clearing prices well=20 below actual cost when back-up generation capacity begins to dip below=20 7.5 percent.=20 -- Depletes Power from Peaking Plants - The price caps distort dispatch=20 signals on peaking plants, which in some cases may be run only a few=20 days of the year because of emission regulations. The current FERC=20 price controls encourage the ISO to purchase power from emergency=20 peaking plants before it is really needed, even in the absence of a=20 stage three emergency. This depletes supplies that will, by law, run=20 out when blackout season intensifies later this summer. This power=20 from peaking units should only be purchased when blackouts are=20 imminent -- not in stage one or two emergencies.=20 -- Eliminates Price Signals for Retail Customers - Price caps remove=20 price signals for retail customers. Customers, particularly=20 industrial companies, which should be encouraged to curtail during=20 shortages, are not encouraged to conserve power when dispatched price=20 caps keep prices below the actual cost to produce electricity.=20 -- Discourages Supply from Out-of-State - Suppliers outside of=20 California, who are under no legal obligation to dispatch power during=20 an emergency in the state, are not encouraged to increase available=20 production when reported market clearing prices are below their cost=20 to produce. During times of emergencies, utilities across the Western=20 region are not likely to take on additional risks and costs if they=20 don't believe they will be fully compensated - a situation the current=20 price caps create.=20 MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT - Click Here=20 SOURCE Reliant Energy=20 CONTACT: Maxine Enciso of Ketchum Public Relations, Los Angeles,=20 310-444-1303, for Reliant Energy; or media, Richard Wheatley of Reliant=20 Energy, 713-207-5881=20 Photo: NewsCom: AP=20 Archive: http://photoarchive.ap.org PRN Photo Desk, 888-776-6555 or=20 212-782-2840=20 Company News On-Call: or fax,=20 800-758-5804, ext. 419090=20 Web site: http://www.reliantenergy.com (REI)=20 By Kathleen McFall kmcfall@ftenergy.com President George W. Bush's energy package encourages the use of biomass fue= ls=20 for both transportation purposes and electricity generation. ""They can=20 provide a reliable source of energy at a stable price, and they can also=20 generate income for farmers, landowners and others who harness them,"" his= =20 administration's report said.=20 Despite this warm and fuzzy language, however, the administration offered n= o=20 tangible funding for the fledgling biofuels industry=01*other than an exten= sion=20 of an existing ethanol tax credit that was not due to expire until 2007=01*= a=20 significant disappointment, and surprise, to advocates of renewable=20 transportation fuels. The report did recommend expanding tax credits for biomass energy projects = to=20 include forest-related and agriculture fuel sources and threw its weighty= =20 support at a new credit for electricity produced from biomass co-fired with= =20 coal. These recommendations are already included in the president's 2002=20 budget.=20 ""We are pleased that the administration included expansion of the biomass t= ax=20 credit and hope that, with congressional leadership, we will see this=20 expanded provision signed into law this year,"" said Katherine Hamilton,=20 co-director of the American Bioenergy Association (ABA).=20 Unlike other portions of the recommended energy policy, biomass energy=20 probably will not suffer under the recent change in Senate composition, giv= en=20 Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle's (D-S.D.) agricultural constituency and= =20 his previous support of the biofuels industry.=20 According to the National Energy Policy Development report, biomass account= s=20 for about 76% of non-hydropower renewable electricity generation,=20 representing a total of about 1.6% of total U.S. electricity supply.=20 Biopower advocates, however, envision an even greater market penetration in= =20 the coming decades and point to its environmental and ancillary advantages.= =20 For example, given that biomass combustion can be carbon dioxide-neutral (i= f=20 the growth and use cycle is managed sustainably), environmental groups=20 support an expanded role. Farmers with marginal lands that could grow bioma= ss=20 fuel could enjoy economic benefits. With large amounts of wood residue, the= =20 forest industry also stands to benefit from wider use of wood as a power=20 source.=20 Renewable energy offers a particular advantage to the lumber and paper=20 industry, and many analysts project that the industry may soon become a net= =20 seller of electricity.=20 ""In the lumber and paper industries, wood scraps are sometimes directly fed= =20 into boilers to produce steam for their manufacturing processes or to heat= =20 their buildings. For that reason, renewable energy offers a particular=20 advantage to the lumber and paper industry, and many analysts project that= =20 the industry may soon become a net seller of electricity,"" said the energy= =20 policy report.=20 Co-firing with coal Biomass=01*usually wood or wood residue=01*has traditionally been burned di= rectly=20 in the industrial sector for heat or on-site electricity generation.=20 According to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the existing 10 GW of=20 installed capacity are based on this direct-combustion technology.=20 For utilities and power-generating companies with coal-fired capacity,=20 however, biomass co-firing may represent one of the least-cost renewable=20 energy options, said the DOE. The process involves blending different=20 materials in varying amounts with coal.=20 Not only does mixing biomass with coal reduce emissions, it is likely to be= =20 cost-effective. Southern Co. estimates that a biomass plant alone could=20 generate power, depending on its location, at 4 to 11 cents/kWh. Given that= =20 the lower range of this corresponds to coal generation costs, there are=20 clearly circumstances where biomass-coal co-firing would be economically=20 attractive today. Plus, the environmental public relations benefit for=20 utilities with coal-fired capacity would be valuable.=20 Domestic biomass generation capacity could reach 20-30 GW by the year 2020 = by=20 co-firing at existing U.S. coal-fired power plants.=20 According to a recent report prepared by five National Laboratories, domest= ic=20 biomass generation capacity could reach 20-30 GW by the year 2020 by=20 co-firing at existing U.S. coal-fired power plants.=20 A recent report by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel for Climate= =20 Change (IPCC) also cites the potential of coal co-firing with biomass. The= =20 IPCC report concludes that co-firing in coal boilers results in the lowest= =20 cost and least technical risk of the examined approaches for biomass=20 conversion to electricity.=20 Working out the technical kinks Already, said the DOE, six power plants in the U.S. are currently co-firing= =20 coal and wood residue products on a regular basis. Another 10 plants have= =20 successfully tested co-firing over the last decade, and at least six more= =20 plants are now conducting or planning tests.=20 For example, Southern Co. is working with DOE, the Southern Research=20 Institute and the Electric Power Research Institute to study ways to grow a= nd=20 harvest switchgrass to blend with coal as a fuel for power generation.=20 Ideally suited for the southeastern U.S., switchgrass is a rugged grass tha= t=20 can be grown on marginal agricultural land. Reaching heights of up to 12=20 feet, it requires little fertilization and herbicide and can be harvested= =20 twice a year.=20 Harvesting methods, co-milling of switchgrass and pulverized coal,=20 pilot-scale co-firing tests, and a full-scale demonstration of co-firing at= =20 Alabama Power Co.'s Plant Gadsden are part of Southern Co.'s collaborative= =20 project.=20 The U.S. Agriculture Department is also taking a role in exploring the=20 potential of biomass and coal co-firing as a means to give farmers new=20 markets, especially for currently idle land. The agency recently authorized= =20 funding for three co-firing demonstration projects.=20 In Iowa, the Chariton Valley Biomass Project is a cooperative effort to=20 develop warm and cool season grasses (such as switchgrass) to co-fire with= =20 coal at Alliant Energy's Ottumwa Generating Station. The project is designe= d=20 to generate a sustained supply of 35 MW of biomass energy. Eventually, the= =20 grass could substitute for as much as 5% of the coal currently burned at th= e=20 plant.=20 In addition to reducing coal emissions, the Chariton Valley Biomass Project= =20 will support the local farm economy.=20 In addition to reducing coal emissions, the project will support the local= =20 farm economy because the grass and trees will come from acreage taken out o= f=20 production under the Agriculture Department's Conservation Reserve Program= =20 (CRP). CRP land is generally marginal land that the government subsidizes= =20 farmers to leave idle to both prevent erosion and protect commodity prices= =20 from product surpluses.=20 The Pennsylvania Switchgrass Energy and Conservation Project will produce= =20 switchgrass on CRP land for sale to a local cooperative's coal-fired=20 fluid-bed combustors.=20 In New York, the Agriculture Department project will fund willow biomass=20 crops and switchgrass on CRP acreage in the central and western part of the= =20 state. The primary markets for the willow biomass are two coal-burning powe= r=20 plants and a small university central heating facility.=20 Land conflicts, transportation may be obstacles As these pilot projects illustrate, biomass conversion efforts may have the= =20 most significant potential in rural areas. ""Since biomass is widely=20 distributed it has good potential to provide rural areas with a renewable= =20 source of energy. The challenge is to provide =01( conversion and delivery = of=20 bioenergy to the marketplace in the form of modern and competitive energy= =20 sources,"" said the IPCC report.=20 A potential drawback to co-firing is transportation. Transportation of=20 wood-based energy products is more costly, per unit of energy, than coal, f= or=20 example, and most analysts believe it will prove most economical to site=20 generation plants near biomass sources.=20 ""The generating plant or biorefinery must be located near to the resource t= o=20 minimize transport costs of the low-energy-density biomass as well as to=20 minimize impacts on air and water use,"" the IPCC report said. However, note= s=20 the report's authors, economies of scale may be significant enough to offse= t=20 the transport costs involved.=20 A potential drawback over the long term, however, for biomass conversion is= =20 land use conflicts. The IPCC report notes that by 2100, the global land=20 requirement to feed the growing world population will increase substantiall= y.=20 ""Up until this time there may well be sufficient land to supply all demands= =20 for food, fibre and energy, but at some stage after that, land-use conflict= s=20 could arise and before that, competition for water and irrigation may be a= =20 constraint.""=20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Enron's PaineWebber Service; [EMail-Body]= Thanks for getting on top of this. Please get the word out to the HR team leaders as soon as you know more. From: Aaron Brown/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/13/2001 11:36 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mary Joyce/ENRON@enronXgate cc: Subject: Enron's PaineWebber Service Rocky Emery, the Dowd family, Kim Bowden, and another 15 or so employees of UBSPaineWebber (our stock tracking provider...options, restricted stock, etc) left yesterday evening without any warning. They went to 1st Union. I've set up a meeting at 2pm today for us to go over to UBSPW and make sure they understand the special needs of Enron and to make sure our service will not be affected. I am reviewing the contract in place between PW and Enron to understand the affects of this move by Emery and his staff on the agreement. Also, I'm going to see about getting 2 providers of the stock tracking service from the following list: (in case this happens again, we'll have a solid back-up immediately) UBSPaineWEbber (our current provider) 1st Union (where Rocky Emery went) Solomon Smith Barney (way ahead of the competition from a technology standpoint...and has done the two provider thing before) Prudential (another option with internal connections) let me know if you think I should include any others or would like to discuss. Thanks, Aaron [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Last FINAL version; [EMail-Body]= Has this gone to Ken yet. If not please send. Maureen McVicker 06/21/2001 02:55 PM To: Lora Sullivan/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Last FINAL version Lora: This is the new ""Final"" version. The difference from the earlier version is - a few slides were taken out and the order of the remaining slides were rearranged. Please get a copy of this new ""Final"" to Ken Lay. Thanks. ----- Forwarded by Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron on 06/21/2001 02:53 PM ----- Ursula Brenner 06/21/2001 01:05 PM To: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Last version This is the final version, including the changes Jeff just requested. Ursula [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Greetings from London; [EMail-Body]= Thanks. Vince -----Original Message----- From: J D Duffie <duffie@stanford.edu>@ENRON Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 6:44 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Re: Greetings from London Hi Vince! I need to check when I can release this report. I have just testified, so I think it will be any day now, and I will then give you a password. I will be out of days until July 5. I see you are coming to Crete! Another chance to talk! Warm regards, Darrell On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, Kaminski, Vince J wrote: > Hello Darrell, > > I am in London this week, looking, among other things, at our > CreditDesk.com operation. > I was trying to access your expert report from your web site, but it's > password protected. > > Can you send me a copy? > > Vince > Darrell Duffie mail GSB Stanford CA 94305-5015 USA phone 650 723 1976 fax 650 725 7979 email duffie@stanford.edu web [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= IEP News 5/22; [EMail-Body]= Today's News....Thanks - Jean Wall Street Journal [THIS IS A GREAT ARTICLE!!!!] Contra Costa Times, May 22, 2001, Tuesday, STATE AND REGIONAL NEWS, K4988, ????803 words, ISO will give advanced warning of power blackouts, By Mike ????Taugher and Andrew LaMar Copley News Service, May 22, 2001, Tuesday, State and regional, 1066 words, ????State sends $533.2 million to company, part of April bill, Ed Mendel, ????SACRAMENTO Copley News Service, May 22, 2001, Tuesday, State and regional, 308 words, ????Business customers criticize proposed 29 percent SDG&E rate hike, Craig D. ????Rose, SAN DIEGO Los Angeles Times, May 22, 2001 Tuesday, Home Edition, Page 12, 426 words, ????Davis' Hiring of Consultants Los Angeles Times, May 22, 2001 Tuesday, Home Edition, Page 8, 621 words, ????The State; ; GOP Criticizes Davis' Choice of PR Aides; Capitol: Legislative ????leaders call the pair political operatives who are too partisan to represent ????the state during energy crisis., DAN MORAIN, TIMES STAFF WRITER, SACRAMENTO Los Angeles Times, May 22, 2001 Tuesday, Home Edition, Page 8, 584 words, ????The State; ; Legislators Set to Sue Federal Energy Agency; Power: Lawmakers ????try a new idea: a lawsuit arguing that blackouts pose danger to people, law ????enforcement and even water supply., DAN MORAIN, TIMES STAFF WRITER, ????SACRAMENTO Los Angeles Times, May 22, 2001 Tuesday, Home Edition, Page 1, 892 words, ????State to Issue Warnings of Power Outages; Electricity: Cal-ISO says it will ????try to give residents and businesses 24-hour notice of probable blackouts., ????MIGUEL BUSTILLO, NANCY VOGEL, TIMES STAFF WRITERS, SACRAMENTO Los Angeles Times, May 22, 2001 Tuesday, Home Edition, Page 1, 1406 words, ????CAMPAIGN 2001; Gas Prices, Not Politics, Preoccupy Valley Voters, SUE FOX, ????TIMES STAFF WRITER Newsday (New York, NY), May 22, 2001 Tuesday, NASSAU AND SUFFOLK EDITION, ????Pg. A18, 374 words, And Now, Today's Blackout Forecast, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS The San Francisco Chronicle, MAY 22, 2001, TUESDAY,, FINAL EDITION, NEWS;, ????Pg. A16;, 167 words, GILROY; ???Davis licenses 8th emergency power plant The San Francisco Chronicle, MAY 22, 2001, TUESDAY,, FINAL EDITION, NEWS;, ????Pg. A13, 669 words, Power plant 'ramping' to be probed; ???State senators ????also expected to file suit, charging federal regulators with failing to ????ensure fair rates, Christian Berthelsen The San Francisco Chronicle, MAY 22, 2001, TUESDAY,, FINAL EDITION, NEWS;, ????Pg. A1, 1527 words, Half-hour notice of blackouts planned; ???FAST ALERTS: ????Power grid operator may send voice, e-mail messages, Lynda Gledhill, ????Sacramento USA TODAY, May 22, 2001, Tuesday,, FIRST EDITION, NEWS;, Pg. 5A, 492 words, ????Americans anxious about gas prices and energy woes, skeptical of Bush, ????Richard Benedetto The Washington Times, May 22, 2001, Tuesday, Final Edition, PART A; NATION; ????INSIDE POLITICS; Pg. A6, 1242 words, Greg Pierce; THE WASHINGTON TIMES Chicago Tribune, May 22, 2001 Tuesday, NORTH SPORTS FINAL EDITION, News; ????Pg. 6; ZONE: N, 444 words, California to issue blackout forecasts, By ????Jennifer Coleman, Associated Press., SACRAMENTO The Associated Press State & Local Wire, May 22, 2001, Tuesday, BC cycle, ????5:39 AM Eastern Time, State and Regional, 506 words, One power plant is ????begun as another is finished, PHOENIX The Associated Press State & Local Wire, May 22, 2001, Tuesday, BC cycle, ????3:48 AM Eastern Time, State and Regional, 718 words, Developments in ????California's energy crisis, By The Associated Press The Associated Press State & Local Wire, May 22, 2001, Tuesday, BC cycle, ????3:05 AM Eastern Time, State and Regional, 576 words, California will ????forecast blackouts and warn the public, By JENNIFER COLEMAN, Associated ????Press Writer, SACRAMENTO, Calif. AP Online, May 21, 2001; Monday, Domestic, non-Washington, general news ????item, 793 words, AP Top News at 7 p.m. EDT Monday, May 21, 2001, ADAM JOYCE AP Online, May 21, 2001; Monday, International news, 678 words, Monday's ????Canada News Briefs, The Associated Press The Associated Press, May 21, 2001, Monday, BC cycle, Domestic News, 1473 ????words, Infrastructure strains tearing at West, By PAULINE ARRILLAGA, ????Associated Press Writer, LAS VEGAS The Associated Press, May 21, 2001, Monday, BC cycle, Domestic News; ????Business News, 648 words, California will forecast blackouts and warn the ????public, By JENNIFER COLEMAN, Associated Press Writer, SACRAMENTO, Calif. The Associated Press, May 21, 2001, Monday, BC cycle, Domestic News, 229 ????words, Survey: Gov. Davis' ratings, public confidence take dive, By ALEXA ????HAUSSLER, Associated Press Writer, SACRAMENTO, Calif. The Associated Press State & Local Wire, May 21, 2001, Monday, BC cycle, ????State and Regional, 720 words, Grid officials, others studying planned ????blackouts, By JENNIFER COLEMAN, Associated Press Writer, SACRAMENTO The Associated Press State & Local Wire, May 21, 2001, Monday, BC cycle, ????State and Regional, 901 words, 'Baseline' becoming key word for electric ????customers, By KAREN GAUDETTE, Associated Press Writer, SAN FRANCISCO The Associated Press State & Local Wire, May 21, 2001, Monday, BC cycle, ????State and Regional, 273 words, New poll suggests Californians haven't been ????this gloomy for years, SAN FRANCISCO The Associated Press State & Local Wire, May 21, 2001, Monday, BC cycle, ????State and Regional, 2497 words CNBC/Dow Jones - Business Video, CNBC/DOW JONES BUSINESS VIDEO, May 21, ????2001, Monday, Transcript # 052100cb.y50, Business, 807 words, PG&E Chairman ????& CEO - Interview, Robert Glynn, Mark Haines, Joe Battipaglia CNN, CNN INSIDE POLITICS 17:00, May 21, 2001; Monday, Transcript # ????01052100V15, News; Domestic, 7389 words, Bush Administration Endorses ????Mitchell Committee's Recommendations for Ending Mideast Violence, Mark ????Baldassare, Judy Woodruff, David Ensor, Major Garrett, William Schneider, ????Kelly Wallace, Jonathan Karl, Kate Snow, Rusty Dornin, Bruce Morton Power Drain: The U.S. Energy Crisis No Score in California Blame Game: Probes Find Little Proof Power Companies Colluded By JOHN R. EMSHWILLER Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL LOS ANGELES -- California may be struggling to keep its lights on, but one thing there is no shortage of is accusations over who is to blame for an electricity crisis that has sent power prices skyrocketing. In recent days, top California officials have stepped up their rhetoric against a handful of merchant power companies, many of them Texas-based, that supply the state with much of its juice. Gov. Gray Davis says companies such as Reliant Energy Inc., of Houston, have engaged in ""unconscionable price-gouging."" Loretta Lynch, president of the California Public Utilities Commission and a Davis appointee, proclaims that a ""cartel"" of electricity producers has created artificial shortages. Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante is backing a bill that would make energy price-fixing a felony, and as a private citizen he is suing several major power producers in Los Angeles state court. Investigations Under Way About half a dozen investigations are being conducted by entities ranging from state legislative committees to the California attorney general's office. So far, these probes -- some of which have been under way for months -- haven't yet yielded either civil or criminal charges. While the energy suppliers are generating ""unconscionable profits,"" the question remains ""whether they are illegal profits,"" says California Attorney General Bill Lockyer, who has offered rewards of as much as hundreds of millions of dollars for information about lawbreaking in the energy business. Mr. Lockyer says he believes his office will eventually file civil charges against suppliers. He would very much like to add criminal counts. ""I would love to personally escort [Enron Corp. Chairman Kenneth] Lay to an 8 x 10 cell that he could share with a tattooed dude who says 'Hi my name is Spike, honey,' "" adds Mr. Lockyer. Houston-based Enron is a major energy-trading company. Like other such firms, Enron has denied wrongdoing in the California market. Mark Palmer, Enron's vice president for corporate communications, said Mr. Lockyer's comment about Mr. Lay "" is so counterproductive that it doesn't merit a response."" Investigators and academics say there is abundant evidence that individual firms have been exercising ""market power."" This term is used to denote efforts to influence wholesale-electricity prices, such as by withholding supplies. The California Independent System Operator, or ISO, which manages the state's electric transmission grid, estimates that by exercising market power, suppliers may have added about $6.8 billion to the cost of electricity in the state since early last year. A single firm exercising such power isn't necessarily illegal, says Severin Borenstein, director of the University of California Energy Institute. If a company is a large supplier in the state and ""you're not exercising market power, you are not doing your job"" on behalf of shareholders, he says. Mr. Borenstein and others say that there are steps that should be taken against suppliers. They note that under federal power law, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission can order refunds for wholesale prices that are above ""just and reasonable"" levels. So far, FERC has tentatively ordered California suppliers to make tens of millions of dollars of such refunds, as part of that agency's ongoing inquiry into the California market. Critics of the suppliers and FERC say the refunds should be in the billions of dollars. The power industry, not surprisingly, says there is nothing to accusations of price manipulation or collusion. Executives point to a botched state-utility-deregulation plan that relies heavily on volatile spot-market purchases. Suppliers note that over the past decade, California didn't build enough new power plants to keep up with demand growth. The allegations of manipulation are ""a lot of sound and fury and they won't produce anything,"" says Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, an industry trade group. Investigations Aplenty In the year since California's energy deregulation plan began resulting in higher prices and even blackouts, a flurry of investigations has gotten under way. Here are the main ones: Agency ????Investigation Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ????Whether generators are charging more than ""just and reasonable"" rates as demanded by the Federal Power Act; whether El Paso Corp. used its position as a major natural-gas supplier to the state to illegally drive up the price of fuel used to generate electricity. California Public Utilities Commission and the State Attorney General ????Whether generators and power traders have acted illegally through collusion or other means to artificially inflate electricity prices. PUC and California Independent System Operator ????Whether generation plants were shut down for spurious reasons in order to create supply shortages and, thus, to raise electricity prices. California Electricity Oversight Board ????Whether patterns of bidding and pricing in California's electricity auction indicate collusive or otherwise illegal behavior. Sources: state and federal agencies Power generators also point to sharp increases in some of their costs, particularly natural gas, which is a major power-plant fuel. This rise in natural-gas prices also has set off a flurry of investigations over possible manipulation. One such case, involving El Paso Corp., Houston, is the subject of probes by federal and state officials. El Paso denies any wrongdoing. While power-industry officials say they have been cooperating with the investigations, law-enforcement officials say they have hit some roadblocks. For instance, Mr. Lockyer's office has gone to San Francisco state court to enforce subpoenas against Reliant, Houston-based Dynegy Inc. and Southern Co. and Mirant Corp., both of Atlanta, after the companies resisted turning over certain business documents they deemed confidential. Investigators have zeroed in on the increased frequency with which plants are going out of service for unscheduled outages. At times, several thousand fewer megawatts of capacity are available than a year ago. A thousand megawatts can power about one million homes. 'Forced Outage' Rate Rises Generators say that this increased ""forced outage"" rate shows that tight supplies over the past year have required them to run plants, some of them more than 40 years old, for long periods without routine maintenance. This combination has produced more breakdowns. ""Plants have been running flat out,"" says Tom Williams, a spokesman for Duke Energy Co., Charlotte, N.C., which says that its California power plants produced 50% more electricity in 2000 than in 1999. At the same time, during periods of lower demand, the number of unplanned outages often seems to rise enough to keep supplies tight, says Frank Wolak, a Stanford University professor and chairman of the ISO's market surveillance committee. ""Clearly, something is going on here."" However, he and others say that it is almost impossible to tell why a particular pipe failed or whether such a failure was a legitimate reason to reduce output. Some of the most intriguing evidence to date about forced outages surfaced in a federal case. FERC officials said an investigation had raised questions about whether two major power companies had taken plants out of service in order to reap higher electricity prices. The charges against AES Corp., Arlington, Va., which owns the plants, and Williams Cos., Tulsa, Okla., which markets their output, asserted that those actions allowed the companies to reap an extra $10.8 million in revenue. In one instance, according to case filings, a Williams employee ""indicated"" to AES officials that his firm wouldn't financially penalize AES for extending an outage at one plant. This conversation, which was voluntarily divulged by Williams, could be an indication of collusion. Williams and AES settled the case without admitting any wrongdoing by paying back $8 million to the ISO and by taking certain other measures. A Williams spokeswoman says the employee who talked to AES was ""counseled not to enter into any conversations of that nature"" in the future. Another issue raised by the FERC case touched on maintenance procedures. According to the filings, AES stopped doing a certain procedure to keep its plant's cooling system from getting clogged. The clogging of the system was cited as a reason for one of the forced outages. Mark Woodruff, president of the AES unit that operates the plant in question, says the company substituted what it felt was an equally effective maintenance procedure. If someone was looking to keep supplies tight and prices high, changes in maintenance procedures would be an easy way to ensure that plants, particularly old ones, have frequent forced outages, says a senior utility-industry executive. By restricting maintenance resources, he says, an operator can simply allow a plant ""to take itself out of service."" Write to John R. Emshwiller at john.emshwiller@wsj.com Copyright 2001 Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service ???????????????????????Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service Costa Times 22, 2001, Tuesday SECTION: STATE AND REGIONAL NEWS KR-ACC-NO: ?K4988 LENGTH: 803 words HEADLINE: ISO will give advanced warning of power blackouts BYLINE: By Mike Taugher and Andrew LaMar BODY: ??WALNUT CREEK, Calif. _ The East has its hurricane watches and hurricane warnings. Now California has power watches and power warnings to guide residents through days of summer blackouts. ??Beginning next week, forecasters who look at variables like electricity loads and transmission constraints instead of wind speeds and barometric pressure will lay the odds of blackouts being imposed the next day. If those odds appear to be 50-50 or greater, they will issue a power warning. ??In addition, the California Independent System Operator will issue 30-minute advisories to warn state residents that blackouts are probably imminent. ??The new warnings are in response to complaints that blackouts have taken people by surprise. ??""What we're hearing from the public is they wanted a little more heads-up when it comes to blackouts,"" said ISO spokeswoman Stephanie McCorkle. ??Meanwhile, Gov. Gray Davis was in Chicago Monday to hear firsthand from city officials about how an advance notification program can work. State lawmakers are exploring ways to provide Californians with greater notice of potential blackouts, including scheduling them in advance. ??In Chicago, where aging lines and structural limitations have produced a string of power outages over the past two summers, residents often receive 30 minutes warning a blackout is coming, and grid operators work with city agencies and police to ensure criminals don't take advantage of the opportunity. ??California's new warning system has considerable limits. ??The ISO, after all, does not determine where blackouts occur. They simply tell the three utilities in the system _ Pacific Gas & Electric, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric _ when to shut off power and how much to turn off. ??It is up to the utilities to determine where the blackouts occur. ??PG&E's website posts which of 14 outage blocks is next to be hit, so anyone who knows their block number could use information from PG&E and the ISO websites to prepare for a blackout. ??PG&E spokesman John Nelson said the Northern California utility can make tens of thousands of phone calls to businesses and customers who need power for life-support systems and other medical necessities ""in a very short period of time."" ??""We think that anything that increases the amount of time that we're given by the ISO . . . is a good thing,"" Nelson said, adding that at the beginning of this year the utility was assuming that it would get about 30 minutes notice before blackouts were ordered. ??In another development on Monday, state Controller Kathleen Connell issued another warning about the financial toll California's energy crisis is taking on the state treasury. Connell said the state could run out of cash by Sept. 1 if $ 13.4 billion in revenue bonds aren't sold. ??The state plans to sell the bonds in late August to cover the cost of buying electricity needed by financially troubled Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern California Edison to serve their customers. ??Even if the bonds go through without a hitch, Connell said the state will have to seek more bonds or borrow between $3 billion and $5 billion beginning February 2002 to continue buying power. She said electricity purchases are costing the state more than the governor anticipated and far less has been bought through long-term contracts than Davis planned. ??But the governor's top energy aides challenged Connell's analysis and said they believe long-term contracts now being put in place combined with conservation efforts will bring spending down. Joe Fichera, a Davis financial adviser, said the state spent $1.8 billion to buy power in April, only 1.4 percent higher than the $1.78 billion estimated. ??""I think reasonable people can differ in terms of the projections,"" Fichera said. ""I don't know what's underlying all of her assumptions and such. We do have more complete information . . . ."" ??To highlight the exorbitant costs of power, Connell pointed to an enlarged picture of a $533 million check the state sent the Mirant Corp. for April power purchases. ??Mirant defended its sales. Included in its April sales were $126 million worth of electricity that the company bought from companies unwilling to sell to California but which Mirant purchased and then sold to California at a 12 percent markup, according to figures released by the company. ??""If the intent was to somehow attack Mirant for its role in the California market in April, then I'd have to say that the state has apparently decided to bite a helping hand,"" said Randy Harrison, CEO of Mirant's western U.S. operations. ??KRT CALIFORNIA is a premium service of Knight Ridder/Tribune ??(c) 2001, Contra Costa Times (Walnut Creek, Calif.). ??Visit the Contra Costa Times on the Web at http://www.cctimes.com/ JOURNAL-CODE: CC LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS 2001 Copley News Service News Service 22, 2001, Tuesday SECTION: State and regional LENGTH: 1066 words HEADLINE: State sends $533.2 million to company, part of April bill BYLINE: Ed Mendel DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??One of the biggest single checks ever issued by the state of California, $533.2 million, went to an Atlanta-based firm Friday for power purchased for California utility customers during a single month, April. ??Mirant, formerly Southern Energy, says more than half of the power came from three plants in the San Francisco Bay Area that it purchased from Pacific Gas and Electric for $801 million under a failed deregulation plan. ??State Treasurer Kathleen Connell, who displayed a blown-up copy of the check at a news conference yesterday, said she thinks the state has failed to obtain enough cheap long-term power contracts and will have to borrow more than the $13.4 billion planned. ??Connell, an elected official who issues state checks, said the power bills she had paid by last Thursday, totaling $5.1 billion, provide no basis for assuming that the price of electricity ''is dropping and that it will continue to drop through the summer.'' ??But a consultant for Gov. Gray Davis said the state, which has more long-term contracts than Connell has seen, is on track to control power costs with the aid of conservation and that it plans to meet its goals without additional borrowing. ??''I think the public should have confidence that this is not a rosy scenario,'' said Joseph Fichera of Saber Partners, a Davis consultant. ''It's the expected scenario.'' ??The state plans to issue a bond of up to $13.4 billion in late August that will repay the general-fund taxpayer money used for power purchases, about $7 billion so far. The bond will be paid off over 15 years by utility customers. ??Davis has declined to reveal details of state spending for power, arguing that the information would be used by power suppliers to submit higher bids. A group of newspapers and Republican legislators have filed lawsuits to force disclosure. ??Connell said she has received 25 contracts from 17 power suppliers. She declined to release details of the contracts, saying they are complicated and have varying prices. ??Connell said the check for $533,181,235 issued to Mirant Friday is one of the largest she has written since taking office in 1995. ??''This purchase was made entirely at spot-market prices,'' Connell said, ''even though the Department of Water Resources (the state agency that purchases power) has an executed long-term contract with this company.'' ??Mirant said in a statement that, at the request of the state, its marketing arm gave the state a ''helping hand'' by buying power from suppliers not willing to sell to the state and then reselling the power to the state. ??''We've done the state a tremendous service in purchasing power on its behalf,'' said Randy Harrison, Mirant's Western chief executive officer, ''and it's wrong for the transactions to be misinterpreted and skewed in a negative light.'' ??Mirant said its subsidiaries generated 1.377 million megawatt-hours in April, while its marketing arm purchased enough additional electricity to boost the total sold to the state during the month to 2.077 million megawatt-hours. ??The firm said the power was sold for an average of $256.87 per megawatt-hour. That's below the $346 average that the state expects to pay on the expensive spot market during the second quarter of this year, from April through June. ??But it's well above the average price of $69 per megawatt-hour said to have been obtained in the first round of long-term contracts negotiated by the state. ??Mirant purchased three power plants from PG&E capable of producing 3,000 megawatts during a controversial part of deregulation. The state Public Utilities Commission ordered utilities to sell off at least half of their fossil-fuel power plants without requiring the purchasers to provide low-cost power to California. ??The utilities sold nearly two dozen major power plants capable of producing more than 20,000 megawatts. The largest group of plants, 4,700 megawatts, went to AES Corp. of Virginia. Three Texas firms purchased plants producing 7,000 megawatts. ??The power supply situation in California remained sound enough yesterday to ward off blackouts, although temperatures are on the rise throughout the state. More heat means more air conditioning, and a greater strain on the system. ??But starting next month, the state's electricity grid managers plan to provide businesses and consumers with better forecasts of potential rolling blackouts. ??The California Independent System Operator will post on its Web site ''power warnings'' when there is at least a 50 percent chance that rolling blackouts might be required during the next 24 hours. The ISO will issue a ''power watch'' when less-critical shortages are anticipated in advance of high demand days. ??The agency also plans to give a 30-minute warning before it orders utilities to cut power to customers, posting information about probable interruptions on its Web site. Its Web site address is www.caiso.com. ??''There have been a number of requests from businesses and consumers alike that would like more advance notice and to be able to plan better. That's what we are trying to do,'' ISO spokeswoman Lorie O'Donley said. ??O'Donley said many details about how notifications will occur still have to be worked out, including whether e-mails or pagers might be used. ??In other developments in the electricity crisis: ???About 1.5 million compact fluorescent light bulbs will be distributed to 375,000 households as part of the ''Power Walk'' program that began during the weekend. Members of the California Conservation Corps are going door-to-door in parts of some cities to distribute the bulbs as part of a $20 million conservation program. ???Republican legislative leaders sent Davis a letter criticizing the governor for using taxpayer funds to hire two aides to former Vice President Al Gore as communication consultants for $30,000 a month. The Republicans said Mark Fabiani and Chris Lehane operate ''a partisan, cut-throat political communications firm.'' ???The state auditor general said in a report on energy deregulation that the state is not meeting some of its goals for conservation and for building new power plants. The auditor also said the PUC does not have a process for quickly approving new transmission lines. The state has been importing about 20 percent of its power. Staff writer Karen Kucher contributed to this report. LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS 2001 Copley News Service News Service 22, 2001, Tuesday SECTION: State and regional LENGTH: 308 words HEADLINE: Business customers criticize proposed 29 percent SDG&E rate hike BYLINE: Craig D. Rose DATELINE: SAN DIEGO BODY: ??San Dieg Gas and Electric's commercial customers are attacking the prospect of paying an average of 29 percent more to cover the state's soaring cost of buying electricity. ??At a California Public Utilities Commission hearing in San Diego yesterday, some business customers also noted the irony that only in February did they win the same rate freeze as residential customers. ??''We need rates we can depend on,'' said John Roberts, who owns an irrigation products business in San Marcos. ??SDG&E customers were the first to bear the brunt of deregulation, and the utility's residential ratepayers were the first to win a reprieve when the state passed a 6.5-cent per kilowatt hour cap. ??The SDG&E cap is expected to end for all customers in the coming weeks as the commission moves to increase SDG&E's rates to levels now paid by customers of PG&E and Edison, which are about 3 cents per kilowatt hour higher. ??Yesterday's hearing, however, was for commercial rates. ??Roberts said his San Marcos-based irrigation products company has withstood a tripling of power costs over the past year, while having to cut the cost of its products because of competition, he said. ??Roberts added that socking businesses with high costs in order to spare residential electricity customers from expected rate hikes could be counterproductive. ??''If businesses leave the state, they'll be without jobs, and a $30 savings on their power bills won't mean much,'' Roberts said. ??The hearing at the County Administration Building was attended by about 30 people. An additional hearing is scheduled at 7 p.m. today in the Community Rooms at the Oceanside Civic Center, 330 N. Coast Highway. ??Larger crowds are expected for hearings on residential rate increases. Dates for those hearings have not been set. ???WAGNER-CNS-SD-05-21-01 2238PST LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ??????????????????????May 22, 2001 Tuesday ?Home Edition SECTION: California; Part 2; Page 12; Metro Desk LENGTH: 426 words HEADLINE: Davis' Hiring of Consultants BODY: ??Re ""Davis Sharpens Attack on Bush Energy Plan,"" May 19: It is very clear that Gov. Gray Davis has one major political goal: running for president of the United States. His recent hiring of two--not one--political aides, to be paid for by the taxpayers at a monthly rate more than double the salary of the governor, means that Davis has decided that the California taxpayer will pay through the nose to support this goal. ??These consultants are not experts in the energy area, which is the biggest problem facing California today, but are experienced spin doctors brought in to try to improve the diving image of Davis. I have no problem with the governor bringing in these men at his own expense, but for the taxpayer to foot the bill is bordering on criminal. ??Jack Bendar ???o7 Pacific Palisades ???f7 * ??Is anyone as outraged as I am over Davis hiring, at California taxpayers' expense, damage-control experts to cover his lack of energy policy leadership? The fee of $30,000 per month is outrageous and is an insult to citizens. If Davis feels that he needs consultants to save his image, they should be paid from his campaign treasure chest and not by California taxpayers. ??David Anderson ???o7 Mission Viejo ???f7 * ??Davis is obeying Rule No.1 for all politicians: When things are going badly, first find a scapegoat. Davis has the power generating companies. But, as Pogo said, ""We have met the enemy, and he is us."" If Davis and his cronies in the Legislature had the courage to allow retail electricity prices to rise, businesses and individuals would have a financial incentive to conserve. ??If Davis and his cronies had had the wisdom to foresee the huge capacity shortfall looming, perhaps California wouldn't have wasted the last decade without bringing even one new power plant online. And now, the best he can come up with is to beg Washington for help? ??Mark Wallace ???o7 Los Angeles ???f7 * ??Re ""California Left Twisting in the Political Wind,"" Opinion, May 20: As a native Californian who escaped in 1994, I would recommend coming to South Dakota, where there's plenty of inexpensive power, great schools, fresh air, open spaces, a low cost of living and normal people, but most of you are just too damned stupid and self-centered to figure out that neither the state government nor federal government will tell you to wear a heavy coat in the winter and stay inside during a blizzard. You'd have to figure that out for yourselves. Too bad. No; actually, it's good. ??Ken Russell ???o7 Arlington, S.D. ???f7 LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ??????????????????????May 22, 2001 Tuesday ?Home Edition SECTION: California; Part 2; Page 8; Metro Desk LENGTH: 621 words HEADLINE: The State; ; GOP Criticizes Davis' Choice of PR Aides; Capitol: Legislative leaders call the pair political operatives who are too partisan to represent the state during energy crisis. BYLINE: DAN MORAIN, TIMES STAFF WRITER DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Republican legislative leaders Monday blasted Gov. Gray Davis' decision to spend $30,000 a month in taxpayer money to retain communications consultants known for their highly partisan work. ??Labeling consultants Mark Fabiani and Chris Lehane as ""cut-throat,"" Senate GOP leader Jim Brulte of Rancho Cucamonga and Assembly Republican leader Dave Cox of Fair Oaks said in a letter to Davis that the hiring ""undermines the assertions you have made both publicly and privately throughout this crisis."" ??Davis announced Friday that he retained the duo and that the state will pay them a combined $30,000 a month for at least the next six months. ??""We're not going to support the hiring of political hacks on government payroll,"" Brulte said in an interview. ""Lehane and Fabiani are very talented. The issue is which payroll is appropriate. . . . These are political opposition research attack dogs. If the governor wants them, he ought to pay for them with his $30-million political war chest."" ??Some consumer advocates also criticized the move, citing the consultants' work on behalf of Southern California Edison. In their private consulting business, Fabiani and Lehane are working to win over public and political support for Davis' $3.5-billion plan to rescue Edison from its financial difficulties. Legislation embodying aspects of the deal is pending in Sacramento. ??On Monday, Brulte and Cox also complained about the consultants' dual role. ??""California taxpayers should not be asked to finance political consultants or individuals who have a vested business interest with the state,"" the letter said. ??Fabiani and Lehane had worked in the Clinton administration, and in Vice President Al Gore's presidential campaign, where they gained a reputation as attack-oriented operatives. Lehane on Monday defended the governor's decision to use tax money to pay their fees, saying government often hires outside experts and that he and Fabiani will ""serve as communications advisors to help the governor fight against these generators."" ??""The Republicans,"" Lehane added, ""ought to be spending time writing letters to George W. Bush to get him to stop the Texas generators from gouging California. . . . That is the real issue here."" ??Davis, meanwhile, returned to California on Monday after a weekend of fund-raisers. He was in Texas on Saturday for a Dallas event that had been scheduled for April 11. It was postponed when Pacific Gas & Electric filed for bankruptcy protection. ??""There is a very large fund-raising base for Democrats in Texas,"" Davis' campaign strategist, Garry South, said of the state that is home to some of the generators that Davis has criticized. ??Davis traveled to Chicago for another fund-raiser Sunday, then met Monday with city officials to discuss how Chicago deals with electrical blackouts. ??After blackouts crippled downtown Chicago in the summer of 1999, Mayor Richard M. Daley demanded that the city's electricity provider, Commonwealth Edison, give advance notice of power cuts. Customers now sometimes receive warnings two or three days in advance. ??Davis emerged from the meeting saying ""the utilities have got to tell us in advance when they're going to have a planned blackout."" ??It was not, however, readily apparent how Chicago's solutions would translate to California, because its electrical problems are vastly different. Rather than suffering a shortage of electricity throughout the grid like California, Chicago has the more microcosmic ills of an aging system--an obsolete transformer going down, for example, leaving several city blocks in the dark until workers can fix it. ??* ??Times staff writer Eric Slater contributed to this story. GRAPHIC: PHOTO: Protester Barbara King shakes a light bulb outside Sacramento office of a lobbyist for energy producer Enron near the Capitol. PHOTOGRAPHER: ROBERT DURELL / Los Angeles Times LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ??????????????????????May 22, 2001 Tuesday ?Home Edition SECTION: California; Part 2; Page 8; Metro Desk LENGTH: 584 words HEADLINE: The State; ; Legislators Set to Sue Federal Energy Agency; Power: Lawmakers try a new idea: a lawsuit arguing that blackouts pose danger to people, law enforcement and even water supply. BYLINE: DAN MORAIN, TIMES STAFF WRITER DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Legislative Democrats today will sue federal energy regulators, charging that their inaction threatens elderly people in nursing homes, children in day care centers, law enforcement and its ability to fight crime, and the state's drinking water supplies. ??Rather than focus on record wholesale energy costs, the lawsuit takes a new tack, homing in on the threat to health and safety posed by California's energy crisis and the blackouts likely this summer. ??A draft of the suit seeks to force the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to set ""just and reasonable"" wholesale power rates as a way of ending the crisis before blackouts occur. The action is being filed by veteran trial attorney Joe Cotchett on behalf of Senate President Pro Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco), Assembly Speaker Bob Hertzberg (D-Sherman Oaks), and the city of Oakland. ??""A crisis of unprecedented dimensions is already taking shape in California,"" the draft says. ""The public health, safety and welfare of the state's 34 million residents is in jeopardy due to the tragic consequences of rolling blackouts and punitive prices."" ??Suit Says Blackouts Pose Threats ??Until now, most California officials, including Gov. Gray Davis, have been urging that the regulatory commission cap wholesale power prices as a way of limiting costs to the state, which has spent more than $6 billion buying electricity since January. ??In the lawsuit, Cotchett will be arguing that while higher bills will stretch the budgets of people on fixed incomes, frail elderly people ""are left to wonder if their oxygen tanks, drip IVs, dialysis machines and electricity-powered therapeutic beds will respond when they are needed."" ??""Rolling blackouts represent more than just an annoyance for the men, women and children with disabilities,"" the suit says. ""They represent an imminent threat to life, health and independence."" ??Cotchett said the suit will be filed in the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, bypassing the federal trial court. Cotchett said the circuit court has direct jurisdiction over FERC. ??Joining Cotchett will be Clark Kelso, a professor at McGeorge Law School in Sacramento who briefly was insurance commissioner last year after Chuck Quackenbush resigned. Kelso said he initially was skeptical that lawmakers had legal standing to sue. But after Cotchett spoke with him, Kelso said he became convinced the suit had merit. ??""Let's face it,"" said Kelso, a Republican, ""this is the single most important issue that the state faces for the next six months."" ??Watching the Water Supply ??The suit cites warnings from governmental agencies about the implications of blackouts, including one the state Department of Health Services issued earlier this month to public water agencies statewide. The warning contains a sample notice that local water authorities should give to consumers. ??""If the water looks cloudy or dirty,"" the warning says, ""you should not drink it."" The warning suggests that if people are concerned about water quality, they can boil it or add ""eight drops of household bleach to one gallon of water, and let it sit for 30 minutes."" ??Most water agencies have back-up generators. But the suit says that ""if an agency's water treatment facilities are hit by a power outage, a two-hour blackout can result in two-day interruptions in providing safe drinking water because of time needed to bring equipment back online and flush potentially contaminated water from the system."" LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ??????????????????????May 22, 2001 Tuesday ?Home Edition SECTION: California; Part 2; Page 1; Metro Desk LENGTH: 892 words HEADLINE: State to Issue Warnings of Power Outages; Electricity: Cal-ISO says it will try to give residents and businesses 24-hour notice of probable blackouts. BYLINE: MIGUEL BUSTILLO, NANCY VOGEL, TIMES STAFF WRITERS DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Californians will hear an expanded forecast on their morning commutes this summer, courtesy of the energy crisis: ""The 405 Freeway is jammed, there's a slim chance of showers, and oh, by the way, there's a 50% likelihood of blackouts."" ??By the end of this month, the California Independent System Operator, the agency that manages the state's power grid, expects to issue 24-hour forecasts generally detailing when and where blackouts can be expected. ??It is also piecing together a high-tech system to give businesses, government officials and the public at least a half-hour notice of a probable blackout in their area. ??Just how those notices will be issued remains somewhat up in the air, but Cal-ISO is talking with private companies capable of notifying more than 10,000 customers a minute via fax and phone, and millions a minute via wireless communications such as pagers. ??Cal-ISO assembled the plan after complaints from businesses, particularly those in the Silicon Valley, that last-minute blackouts were costing California millions. The plan also responds to growing political pressure for the public to be kept informed of the barrage of outages that is expected to darken the state this summer because of insufficient supplies of electricity. ??If Californians' electricity use pattern is similar to last year's, Cal-ISO has projected, the state could suffer 34 days of blackouts, making increased notification crucial. ??With a shortage of hydroelectric power imports from the drought-stricken Pacific Northwest, and no new power plants coming online until July, the agency calculates that there will be a supply-demand gap in June of 3,700 megawatts--enough power to supply 2.8 million homes. A national utility industry group painted a more dire scenario last week when it predicted that California will experience up to 260 hours of blackouts this summer. ??""The weather report and traffic report are good analogies; people know they are not 100% accurate, but if [a blackout] really means a lot to them, they will check in,"" said Mike Florio of the Utility Reform Network, who serves on the Cal-ISO board. ??Details remain sketchy, and the programs may be altered when the board meets Thursday. But a Web page called ""Today's Outlook"" on the agency's Internet site, http://www.caiso.com, will be created to illustrate, hour by hour, how much electricity is available during a 24-hour period and whether there is a predicted surplus or shortfall. ??Media outreach will be expanded to provide news bulletins on electricity conditions a day in advance. They will not only include demand projections and the effects of weather, but they also will define the level of emergency that is expected. ??A ""power watch"" will be sounded during stage 1 and stage 2 shortages, and a more serious ""power warning"" if there is a 50-50 chance of a stage 3, which often results in blackouts. (Stage 1 emergencies occur when power reserves drop below 7%, stage 2 5% and stage 3 1.5%.) ??Most important, Cal-ISO is pledging to provide 30-minute notice of probable blackouts to people in the areas served by Pacific Gas & Electric, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric, among others. In addition to giving the warnings on the Internet and through the mass media, Cal-ISO will sound alarms to select e-mail addresses and pager numbers on ""blast lists,"" or massive computer databases that it will assemble. ??""The technology is there. This is a war California is in, and we should be deploying high-tech solutions,"" said Carl Guardino of the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group, the Cal-ISO board member who had been pushing hardest for better notification. ""Every time California goes black, the economy sees red."" ??Guardino said that businesses and public agencies are now receiving just two- to six-minute warnings before blackouts, not nearly enough to react. ??""A two-minute warning may be sufficient in a football game, but it is insufficient to protect California businesses and the public,"" he said. ??Though businesses and government agencies are expected to make the most of the warnings, Florio said residents also will benefit. ??""It will be more of a challenge to get the information to individual homeowners, but if someone works at home, and sets it up to get an e-mail notice, they can take advantage,"" he said. ??In other energy news Monday, the woman in charge of paying California's power bills warned that a $13.4-billion bond issue to cover electricity purchases will be insufficient and that the state will have to borrow $4 billion more before it runs out of cash in February. ??Calling a news conference in the capital, state Controller Kathleen Connell questioned the key assumptions underpinning Gov. Gray Davis' financial plan for overcoming the energy crisis. The plan assumes the $13.4 billion in bond sales will repay state coffers for electricity purchases and cover future power buys for the next two years. ??Connell's opinion is notable because, as the state's chief check writer, the independently elected Democrat is privy to information about the prices the state is paying for electricity bought on the spot market and through long-term contracts--data that Davis has largely kept secret. ??Davis' advisors and Department of Finance officials dispute Connell's warnings. LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ??????????????????????May 22, 2001 Tuesday ?Home Edition SECTION: California; Part 2; Page 1; Metro Desk LENGTH: 1406 words SERIES: First of four articles HEADLINE: CAMPAIGN 2001; Gas Prices, Not Politics, Preoccupy Valley Voters BYLINE: SUE FOX, TIMES STAFF WRITER BODY: ??On the sidelines of a boisterous cricket game in Woodley Avenue Park, where men knock back beer from red plastic cups, nobody is talking about compressed work schedules for police officers. ??The scheduling debate--a recent flash point in the Los Angeles mayoral race--isn't much of a conversation item among joggers circling Balboa Lake, either. ??What matters to people here tends to be far more personal, far more connected to the workaday struggles of weary drivers slogging their way through rush-hour traffic than the political battles engulfing City Hall. ??Gasoline prices. Long commutes. Mediocre schools. Housing costs. At the Sepulveda Dam Recreation Area, the Valley's answer to Central Park, such ordinary concerns about money, time and resources stretched too thin for comfort tumbled out again and again during interviews with some two dozen people visiting this green oasis. ??Sprawling northwest from the tangled junction of the San Diego and Ventura freeways, the recreation area is a pastoral patchwork of three golf courses bracketed by Woodley Avenue Park to the east and Lake Balboa to the west. It hardly looks like a battleground, but the 2,000-acre park straddles something of a political fault line in the mayoral contest. ??Both candidates in the June 5 runoff, former state legislator Antonio Villaraigosa and City Atty. James K. Hahn, have staked out the Valley as prime campaign turf, packed with thousands of up-for-grabs voters whose affections might well tip the race. ??And the Sepulveda Dam Recreation Area is wedged between an electoral no man's land--a southern ribbon of the Valley where about 60% of voters shunned both men in the election's first round--and a central Valley region where Villaraigosa took first place in April, beating Hahn by roughly a 2-to-1 margin. ??Between them, the candidates are expected to spend more than $10 million by election day to get their messages out. But it's not clear whether these impassioned appeals are reaching their intended targets. ??Less than a month before the election, many people here are preoccupied with concerns that have little to do with City Hall. And when they do voice interest in local matters, some seem unable to connect these issues to a candidate. ??For instance, several Valley voters interviewed in the park in early May said that knotted traffic on the San Diego Freeway was a major problem. But no one mentioned a plan Villaraigosa unveiled in March to buy hundreds of new buses and slash fares in a sweeping bid to cut vehicle traffic, or a proposal from Hahn to add more carpool lanes on freeways. ??Which raises a fundamental challenge for would-be mayors: Sometimes, there's just too much going on in everyday life to tune in to city politics. ""I know I ought to,"" many people confess sheepishly, ""but I just haven't gotten around to it yet."" ??Take Randye Sandel, 58, a blond and bespectacled oil painter from Valley Village. Sandel said she plans to vote for Hahn, ""a known quantity"" in City Hall, but a moment later admits that she might change her mind. The thing is, Sandel adds, she's been really busy setting up an art exhibition at a Santa Monica gallery and has yet to research her mayoral options. ""I've been totally immersed in my own life,"" she said. ??Same goes for Harold Seay, a muscular golfer heading back to his car after playing 18 holes. The 44-year-old music teacher from Encino said he's had his hands full for weeks rehearsing graduation recitals for a Brentwood private school. ""The news is the last thing I'm paying attention to,"" he said. ??But both voters can easily rattle off their most pressing concerns. Sandel, who used to teach art at Valley College, said she is particularly worried about education. ??""The last few semesters I taught, I was horrified by the academic preparedness of the students. They were practically illiterate,"" she said. ""They couldn't take notes from my lecture because they didn't understand the vocabulary. That bothers me a lot. Who's going to inherit this country?"" ??Seay, who recently moved to Los Angeles from Miami, said he is troubled by the air pollution and racial tension he has encountered here. Seay is African American and his wife is Italian, he said, and their 9-year-old daughter is ""stuck half-and-half,"" caught in what Seay regards as a troubling black-white divide. ""That black-white thing really turns me off,"" he said. ""I care about people getting along."" ??As the mayoral race hurtles into its final weeks, some of Hahn and Villaraigosa's most spirited skirmishes have erupted over crime and law enforcement issues. Each man is trying to burnish his own crime-fighting credentials while accusing his rival of neglecting public safety. ??The candidates have squabbled especially fiercely over compressed work schedules for police officers--the notion of squashing the police workweek into three 12-hour days, or possibly four 10-hour days. The Police Protective League endorsed Hahn, who supports the so-called 3-12 schedule favored by the union. Villaraigosa, whom Hahn has often characterized as soft on crime, seized upon the scheduling issue to retaliate, arguing that the three-day week would jeopardize public safety. ??But interviews with people visiting the Valley's biggest park revealed that crime--which has declined significantly since Mayor Richard Riordan took office eight years ago--was not the main issue weighing on these voters' minds. That distinction belongs to something that has walloped wallets far and wide across this car-addled city: the soaring price of gasoline. ??As he cooled down after a six-mile run near Balboa Lake, Ray Verdugo summed up the problem facing many gas-guzzlers as prices approached $2 a gallon: ""I made a big mistake and bought a big SUV,"" lamented the retired Rocketdyne engineer from Winnetka. ""I'm on a fixed income, and [gasoline prices] keep going up all the time."" ??Big-city mayors, to be sure, wield minimal influence over gasoline pumps. Gas prices are swayed by market forces, including the international cost of crude oil, rising demand and limited refinery capacity. Nonetheless, about a third of voters interviewed as they ambled around the Sepulveda Basin named gas prices as a top concern. Half as many said they were worried about crime. ??Some voters said they were troubled by California's electricity woes, although Los Angeles residents have been spared shortages and blackouts because the city's municipal utility avoided deregulation. ??""I think building more power plants would help,"" said Julie Erickson, 27, a figure-skating instructor from Reseda. ??And then there are the things that people aren't talking about. Nobody (at least nobody in an admittedly unscientific sample of voters culled over two days in the Sepulveda Basin) mentioned the Rampart police scandal or the recruiting problems crippling the Los Angeles Police Department. ??No one uttered so much as a peep about neighborhood councils, that much-ballyhooed innovation of the new city charter. Even the Valley secession movement--which Villaraigosa has pointed to as ""the biggest challenge facing Los Angeles""--hardly earned an honorable mention from this cross-section of Valleyites. Only one voter referred to secession at all, saying that she favored it. ??Instead, many people voiced personal gripes, the kind of woes unlikely to vault to the center of the mayoral radar screen--but issues that nonetheless embody the high quality of life both candidates envision for Los Angeles. ??One man, a sunburned golfer who lives in Van Nuys, said he's dismayed that the city hasn't finished building a new golf clubhouse and restaurant at the Woodley Lakes Golf Course. Another frequent park visitor, a retired housekeeper from Sherman Oaks, complained about the windblown litter she sees as she walks her dog around Balboa Lake. ??But some problems vexing these voters seem frankly beyond the grasp of even the most poll-tested candidate. ??Sandel, the oil painter, got downright metaphysical after a good 15 minutes spent mulling the troubles facing Los Angeles, and indeed the world. Technology, she concluded, was advancing so rapidly that it was crowding out humanity's intuitive, spiritual side. ??""I think there's an extraordinary sense of collective despair and psychological uncertainty smoldering just below the surface,"" she said. ""I don't know what City Hall can do about that."" GRAPHIC: PHOTO: Ray Verdugo, a retired Rocketdyne engineer, says, ""I'm on a fixed income, and [gas prices] keep going up all the time."" PHOTOGRAPHER: BORIS YARO / Los Angeles Times GRAPHIC-MAP: (no caption), Los Angeles Times LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS 2001 Newsday, Inc. (New York, NY) ???????????????May 22, 2001 Tuesday NASSAU AND SUFFOLK EDITION SECTION: NEWS, Pg. A18 LENGTH: 374 words HEADLINE: And Now, Today's Blackout Forecast BYLINE: THE ASSOCIATED PRESS BODY: ??Sacramento, Calif.-Californians will soon be waking up to the weather, the traffic-and a blackout forecast. ??The operator of the state's electricity grid said yesterday it will start issuing forecasts 24 hours ahead of expected rolling blackouts. The agency also promised to give 30 minutes' warning before it orders utility companies to pull the plug on homes and businesses, a move that could prevent traffic accidents, stuck elevators and costly shutdowns at factories. ??Up to now, the agency has refused to give more than a few minutes' warning, saying it did not want to alarm people when there was still a chance that a last-minute purchase of power could stave off blackouts. The utility companies also have resisted giving warnings, saying they did not want to tip off burglars and other criminals. ??""People are asking for additional notice, so we're doing our best to make that a reality,"" said Lorie O'Donley, a spokeswoman for the California Independent System Operator. ??The state's power system, crippled by a botched effort at deregulation, has been unable to produce or buy enough electricity to power air conditioners on hot days. The rolling blackouts move from neighborhood to neighborhood in a sequence that is determined by the utility companies and is difficult for the public to predict. The outages last 60 to 90 minutes and then skip to another neighborhood. ??Because of the lack of notice, the six days of rolling blackouts so far this year have led to pileups at intersections suddenly left without stoplights, people trapped in elevators, and losses caused by stopped production lines. People with home medical equipment fret that they will be cut off without warning. ??The new plan borrows from the language of weather forecasters: Beginning May 30 the ISO will issue a ""power watch"" or ""power warning"" that will give notice the grid could be headed toward blackouts. It will issue a 30-minute warning to the media and others before any blackouts begin but will not say what neighborhoods will be hit. ??""Any time is better than none,"" said Bill Dombrowski, president of the California Retailers Association. ""Obviously, we'd like more, but we're realistic about what they can do."" LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS ?????????????????Copyright 2001 The Chronicle Publishing Co. ?????????????????????????The San Francisco Chronicle ?????????????????????MAY 22, 2001, TUESDAY, FINAL EDITION SECTION: NEWS; Pg. A16; BAY AREA REPORT LENGTH: 167 words HEADLINE: GILROY; Davis licenses 8th emergency power plant BODY: Gov. Gray Davis announced yesterday the licensing of the eighth power plant -- a 135-megawatt site designed to meet summer demand -- under a 21-day emergency review he ordered three months ago. ???Calpine Corp. plans to build the plant -- consisting of three 45-megawatt gas-fired turbines -- next to the firm's existing cogeneration power plant in Gilroy. ?The plant should be producing electricity no later than Sept. 30. ???Calpine has guaranteed the annual sale of 2,000 hours of generation from the ""peaker"" project under contract to the California Department of Water Resources. ???To swiftly beef up the state's power production during the peak summer demand, Davis signed the February order directing the California Energy Commission to expedite review of the peaker plants -- small, temporary, simple-cycle generators that can be quickly put into operation. The eight plants licensed so far will add a total of 636 megawatts to the grid this summer.Compiled from Chronicle staff reports LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS ?????????????????Copyright 2001 The Chronicle Publishing Co. ?????????????????????????The San Francisco Chronicle ?????????????????????MAY 22, 2001, TUESDAY, FINAL EDITION SECTION: NEWS; Pg. A13 LENGTH: 669 words HEADLINE: Power plant 'ramping' to be probed; State senators also expected to file suit, charging federal regulators with failing to ensure fair rates SOURCE: Chronicle Staff Writer BYLINE: Christian Berthelsen BODY: State legislators said yesterday that they will investigate charges power companies manipulated electricity prices by repeatedly ramping the output of their plants up and down and creating artificial shortages. ???Sen. Joe Dunn, D-Santa Ana (Orange County), who heads a special committee reviewing energy prices, called the ""ramping"" allegations, first disclosed in The Chronicle on Sunday, ""outrageous acts of manipulation."" ???Dunn said that even if the practices did not violate current law, legislation could be drafted to make such acts illegal in the future. ???""We're looking at it, yes, from the point of view of civil or criminal statutes that may exist but also whether legislation should be introduced to render it a violation for future such acts."" ???Dunn's committee already has been investigating charges that power generators ""gamed"" the wholesale energy market to boost their profits. ???The Chronicle reported Sunday that power companies used a complex tactic to alter the output of their plants, sometimes several times within an hour. ???Sources who work in the plants said the ploy enabled the companies to drive up the prices they receive for electricity. The firms avoided detection by still meeting the terms of their contracts, which required them to supply a certain amount of power each hour. The sources said the tactic greatly contributed to deteriorating physical conditions at the plants, leading to the record level of outages now plaguing California plants. ???The senate committee, which convened in March after The Chronicle reported that power companies had overstated the growth in demand for electricity in California, has obtained confidential bidding and generation data for power-generating companies. Dunn said the data will be analyzed to determine which plants employed the ramping tactic. He added that the issue would be examined in a public hearing in the coming weeks. ???Meanwhile, pressure continued to mount on generating companies that drove electricity supplies through the roof during the past year. ???Sources said the California Public Utilities Commission, which is investigating allegedly unnecessary plant shutdowns, has narrowed its focus. It is targeting several plants that had no apparent defects yet went offline during periods when prices were rising because of limited electricity supplies. ???Commissioner Jeff Brown said the names of these plants are under court seal. However, Dow Jones reported yesterday that one of them was a San Diego-area plant co-owned by Dynegy Inc. of Houston and NRG Inc. of Minneapolis. Another was a Pittsburg plant owned by Mirant Corp. of Atlanta. The companies denied the allegations. ???On another front, Sen. John Burton, D-San Francisco, and Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg, D-Sherman Oaks (Los Angeles County), were expected to file a lawsuit this morning against the Federal Energy Regulatory Committee for failing to carry out its stated duty of ensuring ""just and reasonable"" electricity rates. ???""Their central failing is that they don't follow the law,"" Burton said in an interview. ""Either they're letting their friends within the industry or their ideology get in the way of their public responsibility."" ???The California attorney general's office also is pressing forward with an investigation into the practices of wholesale power companies. CHART: Offline firms ???Reliant Energy had more outages during a 39-day period examined by The Chronicle than any other power provider. Outage numbers were calculated by multiplying the number of a company's generators that were either fully or partially offline by the number of days they were out. ??Firm ????Megawatts ???Reliant ???319 ???Southern ??310 ???AES ???????278 ???Duke ??????261 ???PG&E ??????249 ???E-mail Christian Berthelsen at cberthelsen@sfchronicle.com. GRAPHIC: CHART: SEE END OF TEXT LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS ?????????????????Copyright 2001 The Chronicle Publishing Co. ?????????????????????????The San Francisco Chronicle ?????????????????????MAY 22, 2001, TUESDAY, FINAL EDITION SECTION: NEWS; Pg. A1 LENGTH: 1527 words HEADLINE: Half-hour notice of blackouts planned; FAST ALERTS: Power grid operator may send voice, e-mail messages SOURCE: Chronicle Sacramento Bureau BYLINE: Lynda Gledhill DATELINE: Sacramento BODY: Californians will receive 30 minutes' warning that blackouts may be imposed -- enough time, it is hoped, to get out of the elevator or through a dangerous intersection, the state's power grid managers said yesterday. ???The California Independent System Operator also will provide a daily power forecast 24 hours in advance so residents and businesses can plan for blackouts the same way people prepare for severe storms. ???""We want a system that is proactive,"" said Carl Guardino, an ISO board member and president of the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group. ""When the last few rolling blackouts hit there was as little as two minutes' warning. Two minutes may be fine in a football game, but it's not fine for California's economy or safety."" ???ISO officials also said they are examining high-tech ways of quickly spreading the word about impending blackouts to homeowners and businesses through mass e-mails, faxes, automated phone calls and pager messages. ???The plan, detailed in a report issued yesterday, still falls far short of other proposals being pushed in the Legislature. Lawmakers have suggested scheduling blackout days months in advance and having California join with other Western states to form a ""buyer's cartel"" that would refuse to pay for power when prices become too high. ???""It's not the report I was expecting, but 30 minutes of notice is certainly better than two,"" said Sen. Debra Bowen, D-Marina del Ray. ""No matter how you slice it, this summer is going to be miserable. The question is whether we want to have planned misery or unplanned misery."" ???A spokesman for the California Manufacturers and Technology Association, which commissioned a recent report that found unplanned blackouts could cost the state economy $21.8 billion, said the ISO policy changes will be a tremendous help to many businesses. ???""In this electrically unreliable world, any notification manufacturers can get is good,"" said Gino DeCaro, a spokesman for the association. ""While 30 minutes won't be enough for some, for most manufacturers it will be sufficient."" The ISO will wait for guidance from the governor and lawmakers regarding more complicated issues such as the creation of scheduled blackouts, said Michael Florio, an ISO board member and official at The Utility Reform Network. ???""There are bigger public policy ramifications,"" Florio said. ???The ideas will be discussed in greater detail at an ISO board meeting Thursday. Stephanie McCorkle, an ISO spokeswoman, said the changes are just updates of policies already in place. ???WARNING OF 'PROBABLE' BLACKOUTS ???The 30-minute advance-notification system, scheduled to go into effect early next month, would warn of ""probable"" blackouts, including the amount of load that will have to be curtailed in each service area. ???Until now, the agency has refused to give more than a few minutes' warning, saying it did not want to alarm people when there was still a chance that a last-minute purchase of power could stave off blackouts. The utilities also have resisted giving warnings, saying they did not want to tip off burglars and other criminals. ???The ISO also has been working to upgrade its Web site to provide the most current information about how much electricity is being used and how much is available. It will also establish a system this summer through which that information can be sent in an hourly e-mail. ???This information may make it easier for larger users of electricity to plan their operations, said ISO spokeswoman Lorie O'Donley. ???Also planned by the ISO is a ""Power Watch/Power Warning"" system that would provide a 24-hour notice of high-demand days. ???Under the two-tiered system, a ""Power Watch"" would be declared whenever a Stage One or Stage Two alert is likely, while a ""Power Warning"" would be issued whenever there is at least a 50 percent chance of a Stage Three alert. ???With one report suggesting California may see as many as 700 hours of rolling blackouts this summer, lawmakers are hard at work trying to find ways to make the outages easier for power customers to cope with. ???The idea of a buyer's cartel, the subject of a Capitol hearing today, would have California -- in partnership with other states -- set a firm ceiling on what it will pay power producers for electricity this summer -- and not one dime more. ???The idea, which has attracted the support of some key lawmakers and the cautious interest of Gov. Gray Davis, could potentially curtail the exorbitantly high prices the state has been paying for electricity. ???The trade-off would be the likelihood of more frequent blackouts than if the state continues to pay any price electricity sellers demand. ???The maximum the state would pay would be set by a formula, based on such things as the cost of natural gas. A reasonable profit for power producers would be built in, supporters said. ???DESIGNATING BLACKOUT DAYS ???Meanwhile, Assemblyman Mike Briggs, R-Fresno, will introduce a bill today that would require the state's utilities and Public Utilities Commission to designate days for potential blackouts to each block. ???For example, a customer located in Block 3 of Pacific Gas and Electric Co.'s service area could be told in advance that power will be turned off June 5 if blackouts are needed that day. ???""Right now, every day is a potential blackout day,"" Briggs said. ""This way people would know when their potential days are."" ??On alert ???-- When demand is high, the ISO will forecast peak demand, power supply and weather 24 hours in advance. ???-- A ""power watch"" will be issued when it is likely the grid will reach Stage 1 (system is within 7% of running out of power) or Stage 2 (system is within 5% of running out of power). ???-- A ""power warning"" will be issued when there is at least a 50% chance of a Stage 3 alert (demand is within 1.5% of supply). ???Who calls a blackout? ???Engineers in Folsom at the Independent System Operator keep watch on the state's power consumption. When they determine that energy reserves have dipped below 1.5 percent of available capacity, the ISO can order utilities to start cutting juice. Officials said this week they would give 30 minutes' notice before blackouts begin. The ISO tells the utilities exactly how much power to cut. ???Q: Who decides who gets blacked out and for how long? ???A: That's up to the utilities. PG&E has divided its 4.5 million customers into 14 blocks; each block is darkened for one to two hours at a time. The blocks are defined by PG&E's network of circuits rather than by geography. Thus, neighborhoods in San Francisco, Oakland and Pleasant Hill can be blacked out simultaneously. ???Q: How many users are blacked out at once? ???A: Each of PG&E's 14 ???blocks represents about 550 megawatts of electricity. (A megawatt is enough electricity to power 1,000 homes.) If PG&E is told to cut more than 550 megawatts, it can shut down two or more blocks at a time. PG&E also can black out smaller portions within each block if the ISO's requirements are for less than 550 megawatts. ???Q: How is power shut off? ???A: This is a straightforward matter of shutting off circuits in a power substation by computer or sending a crew to flip the switches by hand. ???Q: How many days of blackouts have we had this year and how many customers have been affected? ???A: A total of 3,035,000 customers have been blacked out in the six days of rolling blackouts since Jan. 1, 2001. ???Q: Which block of customers will be blacked out next? ???A: Some or all customers in Block 1. ???Q: How do I know what block I'm in? ???A: Look for the words ""Rotating Outage Block"" followed by a number on your bill. If it says Block 50, you share an electrical circuit with a hospital, police station or other ""essential service"" that is normally exempt from service cuts. ???Q: What should I do when the lights go out? ???A: Power experts advise: ???-- Turn off all lights and appliances to prevent damage-causing power surges when service is restored. Leave one light on to indicate when the electricity is back. ???-- Use caution when driving because traffic signals may be out. Treat all intersections as a four-way stop. ???-- To protect food, open refrigerator and freezer doors only when absolutely necessary. ???-- Keep a flashlight and radio with fresh batteries available. If you light candles, observe the usual safety precautions. ???-- If the lights go out, check with neighbors to determine if only your home is affected. It may be a downed power line or some other problem, in which case you should alert PG&E or your city electrical bureau. ???-- When the power returns, turn on one appliance at a time to prevent power surges. ???-- Don't plug a generator into the wall; when the lights return, it can send a high-voltage current through the system that can electrocute power workers. ???-- Tell children who are home alone to remain calm, to turn off the TV and computers, and not to use candles. ???Sources: PG&E, Chronicle staff ???Chronicle Graphic ??E-mail Lynda Gledhill at lgledhill@sfchronicle.com. GRAPHIC: GRAPHIC LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS 2001 Gannett Company, Inc. TODAY ?????????????????????May 22, 2001, Tuesday, FIRST EDITION SECTION: NEWS; Pg. 5A LENGTH: 492 words HEADLINE: Americans anxious about gas prices and energy woes, skeptical of Bush BYLINE: Richard Benedetto BODY: An American public stunned by rising gasoline prices and worried about electricity shortages greeted President Bush's energy plan with skepticism, a new USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll shows. ??The findings suggest Bush faces a major selling job if he expects to persuade Congress to enact the proposals he unveiled last week and convince the public that he is acting in its interest. ??""He needs to do something that will address energy problems in the short term and stop talking about everything being long-range,"" said Jaime Regalado, a political scientist at California State University-Los Angeles. ""And he's got to stop looking so cozy with business."" ??The president's proposal emphasizes stepped-up production and modest conservation measures. It received mixed reviews from an anxious public that appears to want quick relief but sees the plan only helping after several years. ??Although Bush says his program will allow Americans to retain the lifestyle they are accustomed to, only 30% of those surveyed said they believe it. Two of three said major lifestyle changes will be necessary to solve the nation's energy woes. ??Nearly half said the Bush plan would not do enough to conserve energy, and 43% said the plan would do too little to increase production. ??Americans also were split over the Bush proposal to increase the number of nuclear power plants to generate electricity: 49% for and 46% against. ??The tepid response to the Bush energy plan might have been a factor in raising his job-disapproval rating from 31% a week ago to 36% now, the highest of his presidency. His 56% job-approval rating did not change from a week ago. ??Bush's strongest disapproval came from Democrats, low-income earners, women under 50 and residents of California, a state wrestling with electricity shortages. ??California Democratic Gov. Gray Davis was highly critical of the Bush plan. He said it ""does nothing to address the astronomical run-up in the prices of electricity, natural gas and gasoline (and) favors more energy production at the expense of everything else."" ??White House spokesman Claire Buchan said the president will continue to press his plan, regardless of the polls: ""The president does not govern by polls. This is a serious issue that has been neglected for years, and he has begun a serious dialogue with the American people. It will continue."" ??Most poll respondents said they see threats of electricity shortages and the rising price of gasoline and heating fuels as serious problems, although only 12% said they see a ""state of crisis."" And most of those polled said Bush is not doing enough to address those problems. ??At the same time, most said energy companies have too much influence over the administration's energy polices, an argument Democrats raise. ??One in five said the Bush administration deserves a great deal of blame for the energy problems; 28% put a great deal of that blame on the Clinton administration. LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS ????????????????Copyright 2001 News World Communications, Inc. Washington Times ?????????????????????May 22, 2001, Tuesday, Final Edition SECTION: PART A; NATION; INSIDE POLITICS; Pg. A6 LENGTH: 1242 words BYLINE: Greg Pierce; THE WASHINGTON TIMES BODY: ??FIRST HISPANIC PRESIDENT ??""Some years ago, the novelist Toni Morrison, in a Time essay, proclaimed Bill Clinton America's first black president,"" Richard Rodriguez writes in an op-ed piece in the New York Times. ??""Leaving aside the affront to American blacks that Ms. ?Morrison's conceit carries today, it might be useful to regard George Bush as America's first Hispanic president,"" said Mr. ?Rodriguez, an editor with Pacific News Service. ??""It's not just his ability to speak Spanish or his recent White House celebration of Cinco de Mayo. ?George Bush, I think, sees Texas as a state of el norte. ?And when he imagines the future, he thinks of the north and the south. Maybe that is the reason for his optimism: the north and the south, Alaska to Patagonia, extend farther, suggest a future wider, than the American future bounded by coastlines. ??""Along with his far northern ambition for the Alaskan wilderness, Mr. Bush has broached with the Mexican president, Vicente Fox, the possibility of building power plants in Mexico for American consumers north of the border. Such schemes reveal him to be perhaps a visionary, as much as he seems a man oblivious of the lessons John Muir discovered in California. ??""Which is only to say, there is a wisdom in the way the Texan sees our American future. ?There is also a wisdom to the way Californians understand that future."" ??FRANK LEADS CHARGE ??A group of 22 House Democrats yesterday sent a letter to all U.S. senators urging them to delay the confirmation of solicitor general candidate Theodore Olson ""until he gives a full and honest accounting of his role"" in a magazine's investigations of former President Bill Clinton. ??""As members of various House committees with jurisdiction over the investigations that resulted from accusations of wrongdoing against President Clinton, we became very familiar with the quality of these accusations,"" they wrote. ?""To our disappointment, we found that there was a consistent pattern . . . of ideological opponents of the president making irresponsible, unfounded, and often scurrilous charges."" ??Led by Rep. ?Barney Frank, Massachusetts Democrat, the group is asking senators to defeat Mr. ?Olson's nomination ""if it turns out that he was deeply involved in this disinformation campaign."" ??Mr. ?Olson has told the Senate Judiciary Committee that, as a member of the American Spectator's board of directors, he learned of the magazine's so-called ""Arkansas Project"" in mid-1997. He has said he did not take an active role in the investigative project. ??The panel voted 9-9 on party lines last week on Mr. ?Olson's nomination, and Senate Democrats are demanding more documents and information about his involvement with the magazine before a floor vote on the nomination. ??BUSH COURTS RIORDAN ??Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan, a Republican serving his final days in that office, may run for governor against incumbent Democrat Gray Davis in 2002, National Journal reports. ??""You can say I'm giving it serious thought,"" Mr. ?Riordan said in an interview with the magazine. ??Previously, the 71-year-old Mr. ?Riordan had expressed support for Los Angeles investment banker William E. ?Simon Jr., who has been readying his candidacy for the Republican nomination. ?But that was before a May 1 phone call from President Bush in which the president wished the mayor a happy birthday - and urged him to think about the governorship. ??""I think he sees this as a chance to revive the party, and the president was extremely encouraging and very persuasive,"" Mr. ?Riordan said. ?""As you know, the Republican Party in California has been an endangered species now for several years."" ??BUSH BETTERS DAVIS ??California Gov. ?Gray Davis blames President Bush for his state's electricity woes, but a new survey finds that Californians have a higher opinion of the president than of their governor. ??Only 46 percent of 2,001 respondents in a poll conducted by the Public Policy Institute of California gave Mr. ?Davis a positive job-approval rating, down from 63 percent in January. ?And only 29 percent of those polled approved of the way the Democrat is handling the electricity crisis. Sixty percent disapprove. ??Mr. ?Bush, on the other hand, had a 57 percent job-approval rating, with 36 percent disapproving. ?Thirty-three percent approved of his handling of the electricity problem, while 56 percent disapproved. ??HIS BETTER HALF ??June's Talk magazine recalls the relationship of President Johnson and his wife, Lady Bird, who was ""keenly aware that a President might seek out the companionship of other women,"" according to Kati Marton's new book, ""Hidden Power: Presidential Marriages That Shaped Our Recent History."" ??""If I wanted him to do without the stimulation, knowledge or assistance that other women offered him, it would, after a period, have diminished me,"" said Mrs. ?Johnson, who had a unique understanding of ""what she called the 'help and support' of other women,"" according to the book. ??Mrs. ?Johnson managed to keep an eye on LBJ's extramarital liaisons and even learned a thing or two from his mistresses. ?""I learned how to dress better from this one, to always wear lipstick from another, about art or music from another,"" she said. ??It was well-known around the White House that Mr. ?Johnson was a womanizer, but such things were kept hidden by the media in those halcyon days. ??""Suddenly, the President appeared and pulled up a chair,"" recalled one veteran reporter in the book. ?""'Now boys, let me tell you something. Sometimes you may see me coming out of a room in the White House with a woman. ?You just remember,' he said, 'that is none of your business.' We just said, 'Yes, sir,' and stuck to it pretty much. ?That's just the way things were then."" ??HESTON RE-ELECTED ??Charlton Heston was elected to an unprecedented fourth term as president of the 4.3-million-member National Rifle Association yesterday. ??At a meeting following the group's 130th annual convention in Kansas City, Mo., the 76-member board of directors - whose ranks include the likes of conservative hero Oliver North and country singer Louise Mandrell - elected Mr. Heston by unanimous acclaim, Reuters reports. ??Mr. ?Heston, 77, is an Academy Award-winning actor whose signature roles have included Moses in ""The Ten Commandments"" and the title role of ""Ben-Hur,"" for which he won a best actor Oscar. ??The NRA changed its rules last year to allow Mr. ?Heston a third one-year term. ?At this year's members' meeting on Saturday, Mr. ?Heston told the assembled gun owners, ""Until recently, I'd planned for this to be my farewell address as your president. ?But I've been asked, and I've agreed, to stand for a fourth term."" ??FORGET THE BADGES ??""The long-running internal White House security system denoting who can and can't see top-secret info is getting the boot, sources say. ?Reason: The Bushies don't need no stinking badges,"" Paul Bedard writes in U.S. News & World Report. ??""The system caused problems from the start when the feelings of top aides were hurt when they found that they didn't have the needed stars to get into national security briefings. ?A longtime White House security official says: 'The stars are all going away from everyone's passes. ?The new administration does not like them.' However, a replacement system hasn't been designed."" ??* Greg Pierce can be reached at 202/636-3285 or by e-mail LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS ????????????????????Copyright 2001 Chicago Tribune Company Tribune ???????????????May 22, 2001 Tuesday, NORTH SPORTS FINAL EDITION SECTION: News; Pg. 6; ZONE: N LENGTH: 444 words HEADLINE: California to issue blackout forecasts BYLINE: By Jennifer Coleman, Associated Press. DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Californians will soon be waking up to the weather, the traffic and a blackout forecast. ??The operator of the state's electricity grid said Monday that it will start issuing forecasts 24 hours ahead of expected rolling blackouts. ??The agency also promised to give 30 minutes' warning before it orders utilities to pull the plug on homes and businesses, a move that could prevent traffic accidents, stuck elevators and costly shutdowns at factories. ??Up to now, the agency has refused to give more than a few minutes' warning, saying it did not want to alarm people when there was still a chance that a last-minute purchase of power could stave off blackouts. The utilities have also resisted giving warnings, saying they did not want to tip off criminals. ??""People are asking for additional notice, so we're doing our best to make that a reality,"" said Lorie O'Donley, a spokeswoman for the California Independent System Operator. ??Californians have been warned that rolling blackouts could be a regular feature this summer. The state's power system, crippled by a botched effort at deregulation, has been unable to produce or buy enough electricity to power air conditioners on hot days. ??The rolling blackouts move from neighborhood to neighborhood in a sequence that is determined by the utilities and is difficult or impossible for the public to predict. The outages last 60 to 90 minutes and then skip to another neighborhood. ??Because of the lack of notice, the six days of rolling blackouts to hit the state so far this year have led to pileups at intersections suddenly left without stoplights, people trapped in elevators and losses caused by stopped production lines. People with home medical equipment like oxygen fret they that they will be cut off without warning. ??The new plan by the ISO borrows from the language of weather forecasters: Beginning May 30, it will issue a ""power watch"" or ""power warning"" that will give notice the grid could be headed toward blackouts. ??The ISO will issue 30-minute warnings to the media and others before any blackouts begin. However, the ISO will not say what neighborhoods will be hit. ??""Any time is better than none,"" said Bill Dombrowski, president of the California Retailers Association. ""Obviously, we'd like more, but we're realistic about what they can do."" ??The plan falls far short of what some consumer groups and legislators are demanding. ??State Sen. Debra Bowen has said she envisions giving consumers three to five days' notice that their power will be cut during a particular period, so businesses could shut down or shift their operations to non-peak hours such as nights and weekends. LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ???????????????????????May 22, 2001, Tuesday, BC cycle AM Eastern Time SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 506 words HEADLINE: One power plant is begun as another is finished DATELINE: PHOENIX BODY: ??Arizona's power story is quite different from that of California: In Arizona, one plant is going on line just as another's construction is begun. ??But power-starved California should benefit nonetheless. ??A 120-megawatt power plant in southwestern metro Phoenix being dedicated on Tuesday was expected to be in commercial production by the month's end. The plant, owned by local power wholesaler Pinnacle West Energy, will produce enough electricity to serve about 120,000 homes, though much of it may be sold elsewhere. ??On Monday, PG&E National Energy Group, a sister of California's financially squeezed PG&E Gas and Electric, broke ground for its planned $500 million generating plant west of Phoenix that will use natural gas. ??It's one of up to 11 plants planned for Arizona by out-of-state interests. Three such plants are expected to begin production this summer, though much of their power also may be sold to other states. ??That's true of the PG&E National plant, too, but those who live in the vicinity don't care. ??""We have nothing out here now,"" said Elisa Bigbey of Harquahala Valley. ""We want to get something going."" ??The plant will increase the assessed valuation of the area by 17 times and will generate $10.7 million in new property taxes. PG&E already has given the local school district a portable shed in which to store records because the district's only school was damaged by a November fire. ??PG&E also is making a no-strings outright gift to the community of $550,000 in 11 annual cash installments. A committee of local residents will decide how to spend the windfall. ??Meanwhile, Panda Energy of Dallas and Teco Power Services of Tampa, Fla., recently broke ground for a plant south of the PG&E site, and Duke Energy North America of Charlotte, N.C., and Sempra Energy of San Diego each have started plants in the Arlington Valley. ??Pinnacle West Generating has a plant under construction near the Palo Verde nuclear plant in this same general area. ??Additionally, the Desert Basin Plant in Casa Grande is owned by Reliant Energy of Houston. The Griffith Energy Plant near Kingman is owned by Duke Energy and P&L Global. The Southpoint plant, set to begin production next month near Bullhead City, is owned by Calpine Corp. of San Jose. ??Such plants have come to Arizona because there's lot of space in Arizona, water is relatively inexpensive, there's access to natural gas, regulators are friendly and the plants can be situated at a distance from urban air pollution controls. ??The PG&E plant will produce nitrogen oxides and carbon dioxides that can lead to formation of ozone, an air pollution problem against Phoenix has been fighting for years. ??Additionally, the plant will use 6,500 acre feet of water a year, enough to meet the needs of a town of about 30,000. PG&E expects to use surplus Central Arizona Project water from the distant Colorado River - but the Harquahala Valley has a good supply of underground water PG&E can tap if the CAP surplus disappears. LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ???????????????????????May 22, 2001, Tuesday, BC cycle AM Eastern Time SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 718 words HEADLINE: Developments in California's energy crisis BYLINE: By The Associated Press BODY: ??Developments in California's energy crisis: ??MONDAY: ??- No power alerts as reserves stay above 7 percent. ??- State power grid operators say they'll soon be giving residents and businesses 30 minutes notice before they order rolling blackouts. The Independent System Operator will also be issuing a daily energy forecast with projected supply and demand, and the likelihood of blackouts. Several lawmakers say they'll introduce plans that would give Californians even more notice of blackouts - from one day to one month. ??- The state auditor releases a report on the state's energy crisis, saying previous estimates that the state could avoid blackouts this summer are overly optimistic. The Bureau of State Audits also criticized the California Public Utilities Commission, saying the commission hasn't responded to the crisis by expediting transmission line project. ??- Gov. Gray Davis is in Chicago, speaking with city officials there about blackout procedures. ??- Davis' energy advisers say that the state is meeting its energy goals, despite doubts raised by Controller Kathleen Connell and other critics. Connell questioned whether the state can buy enough electricity cheap enough to avoid borrowing more than the $13.4 billion approved by state lawmakers. But Davis adviser Joe Fichera says the state has signed more long-term power contracts that will help keep prices low. ??- Davis' office announces that an eighth ""peaker"" power plant has been licensed. The 135-megawatt plant in Gilroy is expected to be online by the end of September. The California Energy Commission says that more than 10,000 megawatts of new electricity since April 1999. ??- The California Energy Commission also announces increased rebates for renewable energy systems - such as solar panels, fuel cells or small wind generation. Rebates of up to 50 percent on the system are available for residential, commercial, industrial or agricultural users. ??- Republican legislative leaders criticize Davis for spending tax money on a political communications firm that previously advised Vice President Al Gore. Davis is hiring Gore's former press secretary and deputy campaign manager for six months at $30,000 a month to coordinate the governor's communications on energy issues. Senate GOP Leader Jim Brulte and Assembly Republican Leader Dave Cox say Davis should pay them with campaign funds, not taxpayers' money. ??- Shares of Edison International closed at $11.23, down 51 cents. PG&E Corp. dropped 48 cents to close at $11.16. ??WHAT'S NEXT: ??- Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra, the parent company of San Diego Gas and Electric Co., to buy the utility's transmission lines. ??- Davis is scheduled to sign a bill Tuesday that would expedite power plant siting. ??- Republican Assemblyman Mike Briggs plans to introduce a bill that would allow people to know a month ahead if they will be affected by rolling blackouts. ??THE PROBLEM: ??High demand, high wholesale energy costs, transmission glitches and a tight supply worsened by scarce hydroelectric power in the Northwest and maintenance at aging California power plants are all factors in California's electricity crisis. ??Edison and PG&E say they've lost nearly $14 billion since June to high wholesale prices the state's electricity deregulation law bars them from passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection April 6. ??Electricity and natural gas suppliers, scared off by the two companies' poor credit ratings, are refusing to sell to them, leading the state in January to start buying power for the utilities' nearly 9 million residential and business customers. The state is also buying power for a third investor-owned utility, San Diego Gas & Electric, which is in better financial shape than much larger Edison and PG&E but also struggling with high wholesale power costs. ??The Public Utilities Commission has approved average rate increases of 36 percent for residential customers and 38 percent for commercial customers, and hikes of up to 49 percent for industrial customers and 15 or 20 percent for agricultural customers to help finance the state's multibillion-dollar power buys. LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ???????????????????????May 22, 2001, Tuesday, BC cycle AM Eastern Time SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 576 words HEADLINE: California will forecast blackouts and warn the public BYLINE: By JENNIFER COLEMAN, Associated Press Writer DATELINE: SACRAMENTO, Calif. BODY: ??The operator of California's electricity grid is offering a partial answer to a major consumer complaint, planning to give the public a half-hour's warning before shutting off the lights. ??Beginning May 30, the Independent System Operator also plans to issue warnings similar to weather advisories 24 hours before expected blackouts. ??Up to now, the agency has refused to give more than a few minutes' warning, saying it did not want to alarm people when there was still a chance that a last-minute purchase of power could stave off blackouts. The utilities have also resisted giving warnings, saying they did not want to tip off burglars and other criminals. ??""Definitely, it's a good idea,"" said Shirley Starr, a racetrack employee in the Los Angeles suburb of Rosemead. ""If I know it's going to happen, I won't defrost the refrigerator or something."" ??Like some business customers and consumer groups, she wondered if 30 minutes warning would be enough. ??""A lot of people, if they are at work, a half hour isn't going to do any good,"" Starr said. ??""I think it should be more than 30 minutes,"" said George Aguilar, an animal control officer in El Monte. ""It should be at least eight hours."" ??Californians have been warned that rolling blackouts could be a regular feature this summer. The state's power system, crippled by a botched effort at deregulation, has been unable to produce or buy enough electricity to power air conditioners on hot days. ??The rolling blackouts move from neighborhood to neighborhood in a sequence that is determined by the utilities and is difficult or impossible for the public to predict. The outages last 60 to 90 minutes and then skip to another neighborhood. ??Because of the lack of notice, the six days of rolling blackouts to hit the state so far this year have led to pileups at intersections suddenly left without stoplights, trapped people in elevators, and caused business losses by bringing production lines to a halt. People with home medical equipment like oxygen fret they that they will be cut off without warning. ??The new plan by the ISO borrows from the language of weather forecasters: It will issue a ""power watch"" or ""power warning"" that will give notice the grid could be headed toward blackouts. ??The ISO will issue 30-minute warning to the media and others before any blackouts actually begin. However, the ISO will not say what neighborhoods will be hit. ??""It's better than no notice,"" said John Handley of California Independent Grocers. ??He said stores could use the warning to rush customers through checkout and even move items to cold storage if necessary. ??""Once the power goes out, we can't ring anyone up,"" Handley said. ??Many small factories have production lines that cannot be interrupted without risk to an entire lot of whatever they produce, said Brad Ward, president and chief executive of the Small Manufacturers Association of California. ??For example, a manufacturer might be using acid to etch something on a piece of metal. If power is shut off suddenly, the acid might not be removed in time and the piece would be ruined. ??""This is really, really good news,"" Ward said. ??The ISO said it also is looking into high-tech ways it can get word of an impending blackout quickly to homeowners and businesses through mass e-mails, faxes, automated phone calls and pager messages. ??On the Net: ??California Independent System Operator: http://www.caiso.com LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS 2001 Associated Press Online 21, 2001; Monday SECTION: Domestic, non-Washington, general news item LENGTH: 793 words HEADLINE: ?AP Top News at 7 p.m. EDT Monday, May 21, 2001 BYLINE: ADAM JOYCE BODY: ??Ford to Recall Millions of Tires ??WASHINGTON (AP) ??Ford Motor Co. plans to replace 10 million to 13 million Firestone tires, far surpassing the already huge recall ordered last summer by Bridgestone/Firestone Inc., auto industry sources told The Associated Press today. Ford CEO Jacques Nasser said he would make an announcement tomorrow about ''actions to address'' issues involving Firestone Wilderness AT tires. Earlier today, Firestone said it no longer would sell tires to Ford, ending a 95-year relationship that unraveled with last summer's recall of 6.5 million Firestone tires, which have been linked to at least 174 U.S. traffic deaths. ??Cheney Hosting GOP Donors ??WASHINGTON (AP) ??Four hundred Republican donors are getting a private reception with Vice President Dick Cheney at his government residence tonight as part of a GOP fund-raising blitz that critics say is reminiscent of the Clinton White House coffees. Fund-raising watchdogs said Cheney's use of his residence was no different from President Clinton's use of the White House for fund-raising, which became the focus of Republican-led congressional inquiries. But a Republican National Committee spokesman said the Cheney event ''is not a fund-raiser.'' ??GOP Set to Complete Tax Bill ??WASHINGTON (AP) ??Even before tonight's expected Senate passage, the Bush administration and congressional Republicans were looking ahead to rewriting the 11-year, $1.35 trillion tax cut plan in negotiations set to begin tomorrow. The bill was to be sent to a House-Senate conference committee, where conservatives will push to accelerate income tax cuts and to slash the top 39.6 percent income tax rate more deeply than the 36 percent called for in the measure. ??California to Forecast Blackouts ??SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) ??The operator of the state's electricity grid said today it will start issuing forecasts 24 hours ahead of expected rolling blackouts. The agency also promised to give 30 minutes' warning before it orders utilities to pull the plug on homes and businesses, a move that could prevent traffic accidents, stuck elevators and costly shutdowns at factories. The state's power system, crippled by a botched effort at deregulation, has been unable to produce or buy enough electricity to power air conditioners on hot days. ??Powell Calls for Mideast Talks ??WASHINGTON (AP) ??Secretary of State Colin Powell today endorsed recommendations aimed at ending the violence between Israel and the Palestinians, and he appointed U.S. diplomat William Burns to shepherd a resumption of talks. Powell called for an immediate cease-fire and said a new report may make possible the ''framework and timeline'' for getting the parties to negotiate after eight months of violence. ??Bush Addresses Alma Mater ??NEW HAVEN, Conn. (AP) ??President Bush, acknowledging his raucous years as a Yale University student, returned today to the alma mater he once scorned and told graduates, ''Life is ours to live, but not to waste.'' There were boos and protests from some in the crowd, but his remarks were generally well received, with laughter at his jokes. ??House GOP Backs Immigrant Visa Extension ??WASHINGTON (AP) ??House Republicans pressed ahead today with a bill to extend by four months the deadline for illegal immigrants to stay in the country and apply for visas. The House bill was scheduled for a vote tonight in an expedited process. An estimated 640,000 illegal immigrants were eligible under the Legal Immigration and Family Equity Act to apply for visas without leaving the country. The law took effect in December and expired April 30. ??Iraq Rejects Plan to Ease U.N. Sanctions ??BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) ??President Saddam Hussein today rejected a British proposal to ease U.N. sanctions on Iraq, saying the plan shows that the embargo had failed. The proposal, which is endorsed by the United States, would still bar Iraq from importing goods on a U.N. list of military-related items. ??Nasdaq Gains 107; Dow Closes Up 36 ??NEW YORK (AP) ??Wall Street went on a technology buying spree today, sending the Nasdaq composite index soaring more than 100 points. The Nasdaq ended up 106.71 to 2,305.59, while the Dow Jones industrial average closed up 36.18 at 11,337.92. Gainers led losers 2 to 1 on the New York Stock Exchange. ??Raiders Lose $1.2B Suit Vs. NFL ??LOS ANGELES (AP) ??The Oakland Raiders lost their $1.2 billion lawsuit against the National Football League today as jurors rejected claims that the league sabotaged a deal for a new stadium and forced them to leave Los Angeles. The jury rejected allegations of breach of contract, unjust enrichment and other violations of the NFL constitution and bylaws. LOAD-DATE: May 21, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS 2001 Associated Press Online 21, 2001; Monday SECTION: International news LENGTH: 678 words HEADLINE: ?Monday's Canada News Briefs BYLINE: The Associated Press BODY: ??Toronto Taxi Cabs Are Going High-Tech for Security ??TORONTO (AP) ??It has been more than a year since a taxicab driver was killed on the job in Canada, but safety is still a paramount concern on some big-city streets. ??Because of that, the next time you slide into a cab in Canada's most populous city, you may find yourself staring into a camera. ??Late last year, Toronto city council enacted a bylaw requiring that taxicabs be equipped with emergency lights and either a security camera or technology that allows a computer to locate the car. ??The bylaw was largely prompted by the murders of cabbies Mohammadulah Saighani, 48, on Dec. 20, 1999, and Baljinder Singh Rai, 48, killed two days later on New Year's Day 2000. ??The deadline was set for late last month but some of the safety devices are still being phased in. ??In April 2000, the city with the world's most infamous taxicabs, New York City, implemented a safety overhaul, requiring that all cabs be equipped with either a security camera or bullet-resistant partition. It also banned cab drivers from talking on cellphones while driving, or as city officials put it, ''No Yakking While Hacking!'' concludes the study from the agency's compliance programs branch. ??___ ??Energy Group: Ontario Consumers Must Be Wary on Electricity Rebate ??TORONTO (AP) ??Ontario consumers may be unwittingly signing away a valuable rebate on their electricity prices to private utility companies, says the head of an energy watchdog group. ??The Market Power Mitigation rebate was created in 1999 to offset a potential rise in power prices once Ontario's electricity market is opened to competition, sometime next spring. ??Sales representatives from private electricity marketing companies have been knocking on Ontario doors for months, asking homeowners to sign on for a fixed electricity rate when the market opens. ??Tom Adams, director of Energy Probe, says consumers may not notice a fine-print clause which, in many of the agreements, hands the potential rebate over to the electricity firm. ??While there may be nothing wrong with such a clause, consumers by and large don't even know it or the rebate exists, Adams says. ??''If the price is right, it's a balanced transaction, but the problem is nobody has any information, and the public agencies aren't doing their job of explaining it to us.'' ??The rebate is supposed to kick in for consumers when the yearly average cost of electricity for a household rises above a benchmark price of 3.8 cents per kilowatt hour. ??The rebate is designed to shield consumers from massive price spikes such as those seen in Alberta and California, where deregulated markets have recently seen a tripling of prices and rolling blackouts. ??___ ??Man Accused of Killing Alberta Girl Is Due in Court ??LETHBRIDGE, Alberta (AP) ??Sylvia Koopmans was bracing Monday for the moment when she would face the family friend charged with the murder of her youngest daughter. ??Koopmans said she planned to attend Tuesday's first court appearance of Harold Anthony Gallup, 31, who is charged with the kidnapping and first-degree murder of five-year-old Jessica. ??''I need to be there,'' said Koopmans, who planned to watch the provincial court proceeding supported by her boyfriend and her father. ??''I need him to see me ... I want him to see my face.'' ??Gallup, whose girlfriend Roseanna Soenens was Koopmans' best friend, was charged Saturday by Lethbridge police. He had been in custody since May 12, when he was charged with a car break-in at nearby High River. ??Koopmans said Gallup was a regular visitor to her home and had been playing there with Jessica, her sister and two other kids the day the little girl disappeared. ??Jessica vanished May 4 after she went to play at a friend's house. ??Her tiny body, naked and bruised, was found a week after she disappeared. A couple walking a dog made the grisly discovery in a farmer's field near Fort Macleod, Alberta, about 50 kilometres from her home. ??Police have not said if she was sexually assaulted. LOAD-DATE: May 21, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS Associated Press The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ????????????????????????May 21, 2001, Monday, BC cycle SECTION: Domestic News LENGTH: 1473 words HEADLINE: Infrastructure strains tearing at West BYLINE: By PAULINE ARRILLAGA, Associated Press Writer DATELINE: LAS VEGAS BODY: ??Drive down the Las Vegas Strip and take in the sights: The fountains and canals, the marquees that light up the sky for miles, the people pressed shoulder to shoulder and bumper to bumper. ??Las Vegas is a desert awash in water and watts, a city built in defiance of its very surroundings. It is at once a triumph of technology and Western gumption, and a reminder of how tenuous it all is. ??The great growth in the West followed a simple recipe: Water plus power equals population. There was always a feeling that the land was so big you couldn't use it up, not the resources, not the space. ??Today there are signs that's no longer true. In California, blackouts. In Oregon and Washington, drought. In Arizona, arsons to stop construction. And in every rearview mirror, more traffic all the time. ??The allure of vast prairies, open skies and endless opportunity is what first drew people out West. But as deserts disappear under development, possibilities become problems. ??Now, with its infrastructure strained by growth, the West faces difficult choices: Energy or environment? Freeways or orchards? Water for people or fish? ??""We're losing what we've come for, this ideal,"" says James Corless, California director of the Surface Transportation Policy Project, which aims to diversify transportation systems to reduce traffic and pollution caused by growth. ""And we are loath to change."" ??--- ??When the streets went dark in California, a light bulb came on across the West. ??The region saw its vulnerability. For one very important resource, demand had won out over supply. What about all the others? ??""We've got an infrastructure that can't really carry much additional power. We're starting to see the same situation with water,"" says John Maddox, president of the Denver-based Center for the New West. ??And people keep coming. ??The West added more than 10 million people in the 1990s, making it the fastest-growing region in the United States. In the next decade, another 10 million are expected. ??""What does that mean?"" Maddox says. ""How many new roads, new water infrastructure and treatment facilities, how many new runways and airports?"" ??Perhaps more than clogged freeways and periodic droughts, the power crisis has brought home the reality that there are limits to growth. ??In California, electricity consumption rose 24 percent in the past five years as the economy grew by 29 percent. However, no major new plants were built in the state in the past 10 years, according to Cambridge Energy Research Associates. ??Several projects to generate new power were shelved in the 1990s, because of regulatory red-tape, environmental protests, economics and wariness over the state's deregulation plan. ??As a result, the power ran low and California was forced to go to the open market in search of electricity, sending power rates soaring and shutting out the lights in rolling blackouts. ??California officials now predict it will take two to three years before energy production catches up with demand. ??Meanwhile, the crisis has crossed state lines. In the Northwest, generating capacity grew 4 percent in the 1990s, while demand grew 24 percent. That wasn't a problem when abundant rain and snow produced above-average hydropower generation between 1995 and 2000. ??Then drought hit, and generation dropped. Washington, Oregon, Idaho and Montana are about 3,000 megawatts short of the electricity they need. ??Now everyone's playing catch-up. California is on a plant-building spree, while other states are pushing conservation and looking for alternative fuel sources. ??Even in power-hungry Las Vegas, the mega-resorts are cutting back. The MGM Grand refitted its 5,000 guest rooms with low-watt fluorescent bulbs and changed its casino-floor lighting. Treasure Island's parking garage is switching to sodium bulbs that use 30 percent less energy. ??But a feeling of dread is gripping some Westerners. If the lights can go out, what's next? Dry faucets? ??""The thing I worry about is water,"" says Carol Ann Heggie-Hall, a retired science teacher who moved from Queens, N.Y., to Henderson, Nev., in 1999. ""Is there enough water for everyone and their plants?"" ??Much of the West is facing the worst drought in a quarter-century, prompting warnings of environmental degradation, forest fires and agricultural decline. Nevertheless, experts say the West isn't in danger of running out of water. The challenge is determining who gets how much. ??""It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that if the faucets ran dry in Scottsdale, there are places to go to get water,"" says Joe Hunter, a power and water specialist at the Center for the New West. ""But it means shifting it from one use to another."" ??About 80 percent of water in most Western states is used to irrigate crops, a percentage that could drop if residential supplies were strained, Hunter says. ??Western states and cities must also do more to share water. ??California has long used more than its allocation from the Colorado River, which supplies drinking water to seven Western states. An agreement allows California to receive surplus water if it implements conservation measures that will reduce its reliance on the river in the future. ??In the meantime, Western cities are looking elsewhere to sustain the supply. The Las Vegas Valley predicts it will reach its annual Colorado River allocation by 2007, so its regional water authority is negotiating to store 1.2 million acre feet of water in Arizona for the next 15 years. ??Beyond power and water, other infrastructure problems persist. In the Vegas area, which added 700,000 people in the '90s, road closures due to highway expansions are a daily occurrence. ??""There are few roads you can drive on that aren't under construction,"" admits Jim Gibson, mayor of Henderson, a city south of Vegas that is among the country's most rapidly growing communities. ??Without the new roads, Vegas transportation officials estimate there would be 2,289 miles of congestion by the year 2025, compared with 341 miles last year. ??Highways alleviate congestion, but also drive more growth. ??Interstate 5, the north-south freeway through Washington and Oregon, became a growth magnet. In Colorado, Interstate 70 has opened the mountains to staggering growth west of Denver. ??-- ??In the fastest-growing metro area in the fastest-growing state in the fastest-growing region of the country, Greg Cox and Dale Stark are unloading dirt on a Las Vegas street crammed with construction workers. ??The landscapers are a rare breed in a town teeming with newcomers: Cox has lived here all his life; Stark moved from Southern California in 1979. ??Both grumble about the changes they've seen, and both vow to leave. ??""I moved here when this town was nice,"" Stark says. ""Now you can't drive down the road without getting cut off and flipped off."" ??Cox complains he can barely get around at all. A drive across town used to take 20 minutes. Now, he grunts, ""You've got to pack a lunch."" ??Both agree: Even Las Vegas, the city built on the very idea of unlimited resources and space, is reaching its limits. ??The sentiment is spreading across the West: Unbridled growth must stop. ??Planning experts insist cities must reinvest in old neighborhoods rather than build new ones, and provide incentive to plan for growth in a way that incorporates existing infrastructure. ??Portland, Ore., has been a national leader with its urban growth boundary. In San Francisco, a program provides federal money to developers who build homes near transit stops. ??Still, when initiatives to rein in growth were placed on the ballot in several Western states last November, most of the big measures failed - including one in Arizona to force developers to pay for new infrastructure. Opponents warned that growth controls would be bad for business. ??In Las Vegas, despite infrastructure challenges, the official line remains that growth is good. ??""As long as you can take care of the social problems and quality of life problems, there's never such a thing as too much growth,"" declares Mayor Oscar Goodman. ""Once you stop growing, you stagnate."" ??And so for now, the fountains flow, the marquees shine. ??And the people keep coming. ??On the Net: ??Center for the New West: www.newwest.org/ ??Sierra Club sprawl campaign: ??Census stats: ??Las Vegas growth topics website: ??Surface Transportation Policy Project: http://www.transact.org/ ??Brookings Institution's Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy: ??EDITOR'S NOTE - Pauline Arrillaga is the AP's Southwest regional writer, based in Phoenix. ??End ADV for May 26-27 GRAPHIC: AP Photos NY372-375 of May 21, AP Graphic WESTERN GROWTH, AP LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS Associated Press The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ????????????????????????May 21, 2001, Monday, BC cycle SECTION: Domestic News; Business News LENGTH: 648 words HEADLINE: California will forecast blackouts and warn the public BYLINE: By JENNIFER COLEMAN, Associated Press Writer DATELINE: SACRAMENTO, Calif. BODY: ??Californians will soon be waking up to the weather, the traffic - and a blackout forecast. ??The operator of the state's electricity grid said Monday it will start issuing forecasts 24 hours ahead of expected rolling blackouts. ??The agency also promised to give 30 minutes' warning before it orders utilities to pull the plug on homes and businesses, a move that could prevent traffic accidents, stuck elevators and costly shutdowns at factories. ??Up to now, the agency has refused to give more than a few minutes' warning, saying it did not want to alarm people when there was still a chance that a last-minute purchase of power could stave off blackouts. The utilities have also resisted giving warnings, saying they did not want to tip off burglars and other criminals. ??""People are asking for additional notice, so we're doing our best to make that a reality,"" said Lorie O'Donley, a spokeswoman for the California Independent System Operator. ??Californians have been warned that rolling blackouts could be a regular feature this summer. The state's power system, crippled by a botched effort at deregulation, has been unable to produce or buy enough electricity to power air conditioners on hot days. ??The rolling blackouts move from neighborhood to neighborhood in a sequence that is determined by the utilities and is difficult or impossible for the public to predict. The outages last 60 to 90 minutes and then skip to another neighborhood. ??Because of the lack of notice, the six days of rolling blackouts to hit the state so far this year have led to pileups at intersections suddenly left without stoplights, people trapped in elevators, and losses caused by stopped production lines. People with home medical equipment like oxygen fret they that they will be cut off without warning. ??The new plan by the ISO borrows from the language of weather forecasters: Beginning May 30, it will issue a ""power watch"" or ""power warning"" that will give notice the grid could be headed toward blackouts. ??The ISO will issue 30-minute warning to the media and others before any blackouts actually begin. However, the ISO will not say what neighborhoods will be hit. ??""Any time is better than none,"" said Bill Dombrowski, president of the California Retailers Association. ""Obviously, we'd like more, but we're realistic about what they can do."" ??Assemblyman Fred Keeley, the Legislature's point man on energy, acknowledged that scheduling blackouts could attract criminals and open the state to legal liability for accidents at blacked-out intersections. ??""That is a genuine problem and genuine concern,"" Keeley said earlier. ""I think we would have to work with local governments so they could have a sufficient advance notice to be able to foresee that and try to deploy their resources appropriately."" ??The ISO said it also is looking into high-tech ways it can get word of an impending blackout quickly to homeowners and businesses through mass e-mails, faxes, automated phone calls and pager messages. ??The plan falls far short of what some consumer groups and legislators are demanding. ??State Sen. Debra Bowen has said she envisions giving consumers three to five days' notice that their power will be cut during a particular period, so businesses could shut down or shift their operations to non-peak hours such as nights and weekends. ??State Assemblyman Mike Briggs said he plans to introduce a bill that would have the Public Utilities Commission notify businesses and homeowners as much as one month ahead of time when they would have their power cut. ??""We owe the people of this state some kind of schedule,"" Briggs said. ""If businesses and individuals knew what days their power could potentially be shut off or blacked out, they could plan for that blackout accordingly."" ??On the Net: ??California Independent System Operator: http://www.caiso.com LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS Associated Press The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ????????????????????????May 21, 2001, Monday, BC cycle SECTION: Domestic News LENGTH: 229 words HEADLINE: Survey: Gov. Davis' ratings, public confidence take dive BYLINE: By ALEXA HAUSSLER, Associated Press Writer DATELINE: SACRAMENTO, Calif. BODY: ??Californians' confidence in Gov. Gray Davis and the economy has plunged in the face of a statewide energy crisis, according to a poll released Monday. ??""This crisis and general economic uncertainty have severely undermined public confidence in California's future and in its leaders,"" said Mark Baldassare, director of the survey by the Public Policy Institute of California. ??The institute, a nonprofit organization that researches economic, social and political issues, interviewed 2,001 adult California residents, in English and Spanish, between May 1 and May 9. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 2 percentage points. ??Forty-six percent said they approve of the way the Democratic governor is handling his job, down from 66 percent in September. ??And for the first time since the mid-1990s, more of the state's residents - 48 percent - believe that California is headed in the wrong direction. Forty-four percent believe it is on the right track. ??The poll also found that Californians blame the electric utility companies more than anyone else for the energy crunch. Thirty-two percent said they fault utilities, while 26 percent blame former Gov. Pete Wilson and the Legislature, 10 percent blame Davis and the current Legislature and 10 percent blame power generators. ??On the Net: ??Public Policy Institute of California: www.ppic.org LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ????????????????????????May 21, 2001, Monday, BC cycle SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 720 words HEADLINE: Grid officials, others studying planned blackouts BYLINE: By JENNIFER COLEMAN, Associated Press Writer DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Could Californians be waking up to hear a weather report, a pollen count and an electricity blackout forecast? ??It's not out of the question, say some lawmakers. ??""I actually think it's a thoughtful plan ... to give folks an opportunity to understand the likelihood of blackouts on a daily basis,"" Assemblyman Fred Keeley, D-Boulder Creek, the Assembly's point man on energy. ??Keeley compared it to ""weather forecasting, to be able to look at the next three or four days, have a percentile about the likelihood of blackouts."" ??The Independent System Operator, keeper of the state's power grid, is expected to release a report Monday detailing how such a plan would work. ??The idea is ""to provide a lot of information so people can make choices to live with blackouts on a temporary basis this summer,"" Keeley said. ??Peter Navarro, a University of California, Irvine, economics professor, released a report last month with a consumer group that recommends the state set a price limit on what they'll pay for power. And if generators don't lower the price, the state should schedule blackouts to cut consumption, he said. ??The report by Navarro and the Utility Consumers' Action Network says the state's current method of ""highly disruptive random rolling blackouts"" needs to be revamped. ??UCAN suggests that the state be divided into blackout zones that utilities could notify ahead of time that power would be cut at a specific time and for a certain duration. ??Scheduling blackouts could attract criminals to outage areas, Keeley acknowledged, and possibly could subject the state to legal liability for traffic accidents or other incidents if power is deliberately shut off. ??""That is a genuine problem and genuine concern,"" Keeley said. ""I think we would have to work with local governments so they could have a sufficient advance notice to be able to foresee that and try to deploy their resources appropriately."" ??Critics of the planned blackouts said power producers simply could sell their unused electricity to other states, or trim back production to keep supplies short. ??Assemblyman Mike Briggs, R-Fresno, plans to introduce a bill this week that would have the Public Utilities Commission notify businesses and homeowners as much as one month ahead of time when they would have their power cut. ??""We owe the people of this state some kind of schedule,"" Briggs said. ""If businesses and individuals knew what days their power could potentially be shut off or blacked out, they could plan for that blackout accordingly."" ??The Central Valley Republican said the ability to plan for outages would be especially benefit farmers, who need power to irrigate their crops. ??Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg, who convened a special subcommittee on blackouts, has also suggested the state should consider scheduling daily blackouts to cut the state's power use and drive down prices. Democratic Assembly members plan to introduce their own version of a blackout plan. ??Sen. Debra Bowen, D-Marina del Rey, has said she envisions giving consumers three to five days notice that their power will be cut during a particular period, so businesses could opt to shut down or shift their operations to nonpeak hours such as nights and weekends. ??And by treating blackouts as a first option rather than a last resort, the state could cut its peak power needs and drive down prices, Bowen said. California power consumers would in essence form ""a reverse cartel to stop the market manipulation and the price gouging,"" she said. ??The planned blackout suggestions come as state officials grow increasingly concerned that power prices will keep rising this summer, even beyond the extraordinary levels the state already has been paying on behalf of three cash-strapped privately owned utilities. ??Gov. Gray Davis said the state paid $1,900 per megawatt hour at one point last week. ??The state has dedicated $6.7 billion since mid-January to purchase power for Pacific Gas and Electric, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas and Electric. ??Those expenditures will be repaid this summer when the state issues $13.4 billion in revenue bonds. The bonds will be repaid by ratepayers over 15 years. ??--- ??On the Net: ??California Independent System Operator: http://www.caiso.com/ LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ????????????????????????May 21, 2001, Monday, BC cycle SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 901 words HEADLINE: 'Baseline' becoming key word for electric customers BYLINE: By KAREN GAUDETTE, Associated Press Writer DATELINE: SAN FRANCISCO BODY: ??A little calculation on electric bills is fast becoming a big concern for millions of residential customers of California's two largest utilities. ??Sitting near the top of Southern California Edison electric bills, and near the bottom of the last page of Pacific Gas and Electric bills, is a number called baseline, which guarantees a certain amount of electricity at the lowest price utilities charge. ??This number, which differs from customer to customer based on a host of factors, is the benchmark for determining how much more residents will pay for electricity come June - when the largest rate hikes in California history start showing up on bills. ??""Now with deregulation and prices being so much higher, it's going to require that people educate themselves about their bills the same way they had to do when long distance telephone service was deregulated,"" said Commissioner Carl Wood of the Public Utilities Commission. ??Under a rate-hike allocation plan approved Tuesday by the PUC, everyone who exceeds baseline by more than 30 percent will pay progressively more for that additional electricity - with the heaviest residential users facing a 37 percent average hike on their overall bill, translating to an increase of roughly $85 a month. ??State law ensures that residential customers who don't use more than 30 percent above baseline will not face the rate hikes. The PUC figures around half of PG&E and Edison customers now fall into that category. ??But consumer rights groups, and even the utilities, think the PUC is underestimating residential electric use, given the recent proliferation of home computers, cell phone chargers and the like. ??They think baseline is set too low for many customers, and say families and people who work at home will pay more than their fair share of the rate hikes. ??""It's an anti-family action. People with kids have a hard time staying within baseline,"" said Mike Florio, senior attorney with The Utility Reform Network. ""A rate hike of 30 to 40 percent could be 100 percent for people with large households."" ??Since 1982, when lawmakers created baseline - given in cents per kilowatt hour per month - to ensure a minimum amount of affordable power and encourage conservation, the PUC has determined baseline by dividing the state into climatic and geographic regions. ??PG&E has 10 such regions within its service territory in northern and central California; Edison has six in central and southern California. ??The PUC then finds the average amount of electricity use for customers within each region. The baseline quantity is 50 percent to 60 percent of that amount, and up to 70 percent of that amount during the winter months if a customer uses only one type of energy (electricity or natural gas). ??Customers who depend on electronic medical equipment such as suction, breathing and dialysis machines, can apply for a slightly higher baseline. ??A family living in the scorching hot Coachella Valley would have a larger allotment of lower-priced electricity than a family living in breezy Monterey, given that air conditioning for the former is necessary to survival. ??Since baseline is based on averages, a single apartment dweller and a family of four who live in the same region could have the same baseline. That makes it more likely for the family to get hit with rate hikes and less likely, economists fear, that the apartment dweller has a financial incentive to conserve. ??""Where it is imperfect is that it has no ability to make any adjustments for the size of the family,"" said John Nelson, a PG&E spokesman. ??Focusing baseline on household size gets complicated, Florio said. ""Does PG&E come by and do bed checks?"" ??Along with raising $5.7 billion to replenish the state's general fund for power buys since January, the rate hikes approved March 27 by the PUC and allocated on Tuesday were also meant to trigger conservation that could help avoid rolling blackouts this summer. ??Baseline has not been reassessed since the early 1990s. PUC president Loretta Lynch and fellow commissioner Wood say they may hold hearings as early as this coming week on possible inequities and ways to update the system. ??""There was plenty of testimony at public hearings that people suspect that baselines are not appropriate or are not calculated right,"" Wood said. ??Wood said when baseline first was created nearly 20 years ago, houses were smaller and many lacked central air conditioning. ??Though the PUC has updated baseline amounts through the years, ""living standards have changed, housing standards have changed and it may be that average usage is different from what it was,"" Wood said. ??Florio said giving baselines a second look could go either way for consumers. There are typically more electronic gadgets in homes these days, but many of those gadgets and appliances are more energy efficient than their ancestors. ??Add that to increased conservation statewide, Florio said, and there's a slim chance baselines could actually go down and expose more customers to rate hikes. ??""It's a percentage of average use historically, and people have used energy more efficiently,"" through the years, Florio said. ??--- ??On the Net: ??California Public Utilities Commission: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov ??Pacific Gas and Electric Co.: http://www.pge.com ??Southern California Edison Co.: http://www.sce.com LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ????????????????????????May 21, 2001, Monday, BC cycle SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 273 words HEADLINE: New poll suggests Californians haven't been this gloomy for years DATELINE: SAN FRANCISCO BODY: ??Not since the mid-'90s have more Californians believed the state is headed in the wrong direction. ??And it may get worse. ?Nearly 60 percent of state residents expect the economy to worsen in the next year, while about 40 percent see a brighter horizon, according to a new poll. ??The telephone survey of 2,001 adult Californians was done over eight days in early May by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California. The poll was conducted in English and Spanish. ??The twin culprits were the souring economy and the electricity crisis. ??""Californians clearly see the electricity crisis as a harbinger of other growth-related problems,"" said Mark Baldassare, the research institute's survey director. ""This crisis and general economic uncertainty have severely undermined public confidence in California's future and in its leaders."" ??Change has come swiftly. ??In January, 62 percent of state residents said California was headed in the right direction, compared to 48 percent this month. ??Other key findings include: ??-82 percent of respondents said population growth over the next 20 years will make California a less desirable place to live. ??-86 percent of respondents said the electricity crisis will hurt the state's economy. ??-43 percent of respondents favor building more power plants, up from 32 percent in January. The second most popular solution, re-regulating the electricity industry, was the favored solution in January. ??-Traffic congestion, affordable housing, air pollution and a shortage of good jobs top the list of negative consequences respondents foresee from the state's population growth. LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ????????????????????????May 21, 2001, Monday, BC cycle SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 2497 words BODY: By The Associated Press ??Excerpts from recent editorials in Iowa newspapers: ??Energy: ??DES MOINES REGISTER: ??Does it seem ironic that an Iowa ""energy crisis"" just happened to come at a time when power companies are pushing state lawmakers to relax the rules for building power generating plants? ??With three power plants down for repairs last week when temperatures spiked, large customers in eastern Iowa were notified their electricity would be cut off. Headlines proclaimed a ""crisis,"" and legislative leaders shifted into an ""I told you so"" mode. ??Hold the phone. ??This is not California. There is no crisis. Customers with interruptible service contracts have always been subject to cutoffs in times of peak consumption or when generators are down. ??It may not be fair to suggest that Alliant Energy chose to idle three of its biggest generators to make the case for changing the law, but the timing is nonetheless convenient. The Legislature is set to convene a special session in a few weeks, and among the business left over from the regular session could be a bill to make it easier for power companies to build electric generating plants. ??While crisis is not imminent, Iowa does face the prospect of consuming more electricity than the state's utilities are able to generate themselves. ... ??While Iowa's law may need some ""streamlining,"" which could be dealt with in a special session, that should not be the end of the matter. Ultimately, the Legislature must fashion a long-range energy policy for this state that takes a regional view of energy, that reflects new market and regulation realities, and that seizes the potential for conservation and renewable alternatives to fossil fuels. ??Legislative session: ??TELEGRAPH HERALD ??Even after a marathon legislative session - this one lasted 121 days - why does it always seem the big-ticket items are pushed through in the final days? ??This year's session started out strong, passing a bill to save taxpayers money by eliminating the sales tax on residential utility bills. It finished up by coming through with $40 million for teachers' pay. ??But just what happened in those middle 100 or so days is a little murky. There was plenty of hand-wringing about the budget shortfall, the usual banter about dove hunting and a fair amount of partisan bickering. ... ??-Legislators didn't get around to a ... bill to close a loophole in Iowa's Open Records law. The way it stands now, a governmental body can use a private contractor to investigate problems within the department and keep that contractor's report confidential under the law's whistle-blower provision. ... ??-The Legislature didn't want to get into a full-blown gambling debate, so it didn't address a tax freeze at racetracks. ... The issue of fairness needs to be addressed. ??Floating casinos pay a 20 percent tax, while racetracks pay a gradually increasing tax that now stands at 30 percent. Under the law enacted in 1997, that tax will grow to 36 percent by 2004. ??-Other things that legislators talked about but didn't get around to include: cutting state income tax on Social Security income and a pair of bills addressing the state's bottle-deposit law. ??So the 2002 Legislature will have its work cut out for it. Here are some jobs for next year's to-do list: ??-Amend the Open Records Law. Allowing agencies to keep information about government activities secret simply because it is in the possession of an outside contractor is a hole in the law that needs to be fixed. ??-Carry the ball on increasing teachers' pay. The $40 million shot in the arm will have been a waste if the program is left hanging unfunded. ??-Freeze the amount of tax racetracks pay where it stands and stop the hemorrhaging of dollars into state coffers. The disparity between racetracks and riverboat casinos needs to be righted. ??And if they're worried that the discussion will draw an all-out gambling debate, lawmakers might want to bring it to the table before May. ??IOWA CITY PRESS-CITIZEN: ??We agree with Gov. Tom Vilsack that the new state budget approved by legislators ""will cause hardship for people and families across our state."" ??That's what happens when you face a $300 million revenue shortfall, and you don't have as much money as you wanted. ??But we disagree that ""for 3 1/2 months, they did very little."" ??On the contrary, Vilsack got what he said all along would be the high mark of this session - $40 million for teacher pay raises and a new system for teacher pay. ??And the Republican-led Legislature also agreed to phase out the sales tax on utilities, long a goal of Vilsack's Democratic Party. ??Are we happy with the budget? No. ??Is it the best we likely can do under the circumstances? Yes. ??Vilsack should sign budget legislation, rather than vetoing it and calling a special session of the Legislature this summer. ... ??Plant Sciences Institute: ??DES MOINES REGISTER: ??Iowa needs more people, especially young people. Iowa needs more jobs that pay well - the kinds of jobs that cause other businesses, small and large, to spring up here. So why did Iowa lawmakers blow the single best opportunity for both? ??They blame it on a tight budget. Blame them for failing to grasp the big picture. The fledgling Plant Sciences Institute at Iowa State University could become a major force in the fast-growing field of biotechnology related to agriculture - yet the 2001 Legislature provided no new money. ??It did continue the $4.67 million approved in 2000. It did not add $3 million, a meager increase proposed by the governor. It allowed ISU to keep money from the sale of land, with proceeds to be used for the institute's Roy J. Carver Co-Laboratory, to be completed by 2002. It should have added at least $10 million in cash. ... ??Because of legislative inaction, promising initiatives must slow down, or may never take place. ... ??The institute had hoped to hire another top researcher in the field of corn genomics ... ??Ag-biotech companies have been appealing to the state for help putting together a protein-extraction facility ... Such a facility might extract protein from conventional or genetically modified plants for such uses as pharmaceuticals, food additives or chemical enzymes for industrial processes. The Plant Sciences Institute has a small, pilot protein-extraction facility. New money from the Legislature would have allowed it to assist businesses in establishing a commercial facility. But now? ""The people interested in this will probably go elsewhere,"" said Director Stephen Howell. ??Why wouldn't they? Plenty of other states are serious about fostering biotech industries. The Iowa commitment is hardly encouraging. ... ??Iowa has a budget crunch because its economy and population are not growing fast enough. Investing in biotechnology - the technology that is expected to drive the next great wave of economic growth - is the most promising way to make Iowa's economy and population grow. Stinting on that investment is stunningly shortsighted. ??Ten million dollars next session should not be out of the question. The question should be what sort of future will Iowa have if it does not make the most of the potential the Plant Sciences Institute holds. ??Hunting requirements: ??AMES TRIBUNE: ??In April, the Iowa House and Senate rejected a measure that would have required wild turkey hunters to report their harvest to the Department of Natural Resources, saying it was ""just another hassle,"" for hunters. ??Then, the House hiked the fees for hunting licenses, in some cases up to 218 percent. A non-resident who wants to hunt deer in Iowa under this plan will have to shell out $308, including a hunting license and habitat fee. The current total is $156. ??Hassle? You got it. We might as well hang a sign on Iowa borders that says we don't much care about managing our wildlife and we don't want you here, either. Add to the mix a federal whammy in the Freedom to Farm Act, which has all but eliminated any fence rows, and hunting as a potential tourism draw to Iowa blows away in the wind. ... ??Instead of having accurate information on how much hunting is affecting turkey populations, Department of Natural Resources wildlife managers are now left to guess. ... ??Surrounding states which capitalize on their resources require even more harvest registration, and it hasn't slowed interest. ... ??The DNR asked for the fee increases for good reasons - license fees have not increased for a decade while the costs of salaries, travel and equipment have begun to eat into funds available for facilities and land acquisition. And we're in favor of using fees to support wildlife management. ??We also would allow that some of the increases do not seem to us to be egregious. A $3 fish habitat fee for instance, isn't a great deal to pay. Nor is a $30 tab for a non-resident 7-day fishing license out of line. ??But some fee hikes were too much. ??In particular, the non-resident fees for deer hunting are high especially in comparison to surrounding states, and are more than most ordinary people are likely to pay. Wisconsin charges non-residents $135 to hunt deer. Missouri charges $125. License fees in Iowa are likely to result in less money coming in, not more. What out-of-state hunter will be drawn to Iowa when surrounding states are managing their herds better and charging less to visit? ??Iowa worries that the farm economy is in the tank. We wring our hands as our young people rush to other parts of the country. We say that our natural resources here can be an attraction that will draw people back. Yet these votes run counter to sound wildlife management and increased tourism. ??Public official recruits: ??QUAD-CITY TIMES: ??More Iowa school districts and local governments are using professional companies to help find high-level administrators such as superintendents, but that recruiting tool is making the process less accountable to the public. ??In effect, it allows private firms to dictate public policy, and that's troubling. ??One example of this trend is the Camanche School District, where six finalists for the superintendents job were in town for interviews recently. They met with school board members, district staff and some residents, yet the board does not intend to reveal the names of the candidates. The Cedar Rapids headhunter firm that has contracted with the district advised the school board not to announce the names. ??Headhunters also are advising candidates to request their names be kept confidential. Under Iowa law, a public entity such as a school board must honor such a request. ??Some public officials justify this secrecy by arguing that finalists don't want the public to know if they didn't get the job offer or worry that identification may jeopardize their current position. ... ??Those arguments aren't justified, for reasons including: ??-There is nothing dishonorable in not being chosen for a top-level post. Indeed, being considered a finalist for such a job may serve only to enhance a candidates attractiveness for another position ... ??-Identifying the finalists for the public also allows citizens to ask questions and provide other information, critical or supportive, that could be useful in helping officials make a final choice. ??-And being upfront with the public lends credibility to the entire process ... ??We prefer a process similar to one used by the City of Clinton during its recent search for a city administrator. The five finalists were not only identified, they took part in an open house to meet the public. A headhunter firm was used, but City Attorney Bruce Johansen, himself a candidate who did not get the job, said he made it clear to the agency that the finalists names should be made public. ??We applaud that effort ... ??Meanwhile, the Iowa Legislature this spring modified a state law that has been the basis of confidentiality claims for candidates seeking public positions. The change would require that official communication between private contractors and the public entities they serve be open to public inspection. Whether that law will be interpreted to include headhunter firms remains to be seen. ... ??We encourage school boards and local governments to resist confidentiality and test the new law when it takes effect July 1. ??Train service: ??CEDAR RAPIDS GAZETTE: ??Who'd have thought that the selection of the secretary of the federal Department of Human Services last winter might affect whether Davenport, Iowa City and Des Moines get rail service. ??But consider that HHS Secretary Tommy Thompson, who resigned recently from the Amtrak board, had been a strong advocate of expanded rail service here in the Midwest while he was governor of Wisconsin. Thompson had hoped to remain chairman of the Amtrak board after he went to Washington. But the Associated Press reports that a 1997 law that restructured the Amtrak board says only one of the seven seats can be held by a member of the Cabinet - and the Bush administration wants Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta on the governing board. ??Few people around are as passionate as Thompson about Amtrak, and Iowa could have benefited. It's hard to ride a national passenger train service that doesn't go where the majority of Iowans live. Maybe the service will be expanded here. But maybe, with the changes in the governing board, that train has already left the station. ??Smoker identification: ??LE MARS DAILY SENTINAL: ??Have you heard the news from Walgreen's? They're going to card everybody who wants to buy a package of cigarettes, a box of cigars, a can of chew. ??Everybody. Not under 18. Not 27 and under. Everybody. ... ??That can't have been an easy decision. Within a year, they're looking at software that will require clerk's to enter a customer's birth date into a computer before a tobacco sale can be completed. Until then, they're asking their clerks to card everybody. Good for them. ... ??Yes, it will take a little extra time ... Evidently, the owners/corporate bigwigs think the time is well spent if it eliminates the fines and bad publicity. ??A convenience store association spokesman told reporters that other stores are likely to duplicate Walgreen's efforts. Yes. We certainly hope so. ??We all have heard terrible numbers of deaths caused by tobacco, of underage users ... Many, if not most of us, know someone who hacks and coughs, who died from smoking, who cries because someone died from smoking. When you think of them, it doesn't seem so outrageous to card everyone. It seems downright brilliant. ... ??It won't stop it entirely. Young wanna-be-smokers will have somebody older do the buying, or swipe a carton. There will always be a way to get around it, there always is. ??Still, carding everyone says, ""This is important, we mean it and we're not going to make it easy for you."" LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS Content and programming copyright 2001 CNBC/Dow Jones Business Video, a division ??of CNBC/Dow Jones Desktop Video, LLC. No portions of the materials contained ?herein may be used in any media without attribution to CNBC/Dow Jones Business Video, a division of CNBC/Dow Jones Desktop Video, LLC. ?This transcript may not ???????????????????????be copied or resold in any media. Jones - Business Video ?????????????????????SHOW: CNBC/DOW JONES BUSINESS VIDEO 21, 2001, Monday # 052100cb.y50 TYPE: INTERVIEW SECTION: Business LENGTH: 807 words HEADLINE: PG&E Chairman & CEO - Interview GUESTS: Robert Glynn BYLINE: Mark Haines, Joe Battipaglia BODY: ?THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED. MARK HAINES, CNBC ANCHOR, SQUAWK BOX: One company that is hurting a lot in all this is PG&E, the parent of Pacific Gas and Electric. They filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in April. PG&E has about $9 billion in unrecovered power costs. A California bankruptcy judge says the company cannot raise retail rates to recoup those losses. The stock is on a steep decline this year, trading in the 52 week range of 6 to 32, last at about 11 1/2. Joining us to tell us where things are now and where they could be going, Robert Glynn, PG&E's Chairman and CEO. Mr. Glynn, good to see you again. ROBERT GLYNN, CHAIRMAN & CEO, PG&E: Good morning, Mark. HAINES: So where do we stand now? GLYNN: Well, we're working our way through the federal bankruptcy proceeding, where we affirmatively stepped in order to resolve issues between ourselves and our creditors. We have a plan of reorganization under development and we're getting close to the time when we can begin to share that plan with the creditors who, after all, need to get paid. HAINES: So let's first talk about time. How much time do you think this might take before PG&E emerges from bankruptcy? GLYNN: Well, it's very hard to tell for one reason. There have not been very many utility bankruptcies and I don't know of any that has had these complexities to it. The shortest possible time or shortest likely time that I've heard about has been six to eight months and that's probably shorter than it will take. The longest that I've heard about is about four years and that's an awful lot longer than I want it to take. HAINES: In the meantime you are selling electricity, transmitting and selling electricity on a retail level. Are you still losing money on your operating? GLYNN: Well, the potential area for continuing loss exposure is the issue of whether the California independent system operator is still buying on behalf of our company instead of buying directly on behalf of our customers. And that's an issue that's before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for decision making right now. HAINES: Well, I guess my question is who is paying the bills right now? GLYNN: Well, the electric rates in California have just been raised by the California Public Utilities Commission in order to have the state, the Department of Water Resources be able to recover all of its costs because that's what, of course, it wants to do. It doesn't want to go any deeper in debt than it has to. So this most recent large rate increase has applied, as best as we can tell, exclusively to cover the state's cost increases and not to cover some of the ones that we're responsible for. JOE BATTIPAGLIA: Mr. Glynn, the brownouts continue in California. What's the status of supply of electricity into the state, putting aside for a moment how you pay for it? GLYNN: Well, the California electricity crisis at its heart is a supply shortage and the outlook for this summer and next summer are pretty bleak. Every responsible entity that has reviewed the situation is forecasting that there will be a large number of rolling blackouts occurring over the summer of 2001 and probably 2002 as well, simply because there's not enough power to go around. BATTIPAGLIA: Does that spread from California to other states as the draw down becomes perilous? GLYNN: Well, the California electricity market and the Pacific Northwest markets have had a very nice symbiotic relationship over many, many years shipping power back and forth to one another. That has been interrupted because of the supply shortage in California, which means that California is trying to be a net importer all the time. And it seems like the Pacific Northwest won't have the kind of surplus energy to send south to California that it's had in the past. HAINES: Does this ultimately end with retail electricity distribution transmission and distribution being done by a state authority and no longer by privately held or publicly held companies? GLYNN: I don't think it ends there at all, Mark. And I certainly don't think that it's in the state's interest to try to get into businesses that can be done by private capital when the state has so many other important things to use its capital on, like education and infrastructure. And I do think that this supply shortage has got to be resolved. It's got to be resolved by building new supply. There's simply no alternative to that and that's going to take another couple of years before that new construction is fully completed. HAINES: All right, sir. Thank you very much for the update. We appreciate it. Robber Glynn, PG&E's Chairman and CEO. END PG & E CORP (86%); LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001 of 85 DOCUMENTS ??????????Content and programming copyright 2001 Cable News Network ???????????Transcribed under license by eMediaMillWorks, Inc. (f/k/a ??????????Federal Document Clearing House, Inc.) Formatting copyright ??????????2001 eMediaMillWorks, Inc. (f/k/a Federal Document Clearing ??????????????House, Inc.) All rights reserved. No quotes from the ??????????materials contained herein may be used in any media without ???????????attribution to Cable News Network. This transcript may not ???????????????????????be copied or resold in any media. ???????????????????????SHOW: CNN INSIDE POLITICS 17:00 21, 2001; Monday # 01052100V15 SECTION: News; Domestic LENGTH: 7389 words HEADLINE: ?Bush Administration Endorses Mitchell Committee's Recommendations for Ending Mideast Violence GUESTS: ?Mark Baldassare BYLINE: ?Judy Woodruff, David Ensor, Major Garrett, William Schneider, Kelly Wallace, Jonathan Karl, Kate Snow, Rusty Dornin, Bruce Morton HIGHLIGHT: ?As an escalating cycle of violence between Israelis and Palestinians continued today, Secretary of State Colin Powell appointed a diplomat to help the two sides end the fighting and resume talks. ?He urged the parties to use the report of a commission appointed by former President Clinton as a springboard to peace. BODY: ??THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED. ??ANNOUNCER: Live from Washington, this is INSIDE POLITICS, with Judy Woodruff. ??Amid growing bloodshed in the Middle East, the United States endorses recommendations aimed at ending the violence. ??(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) ??COLIN POWELL, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: It is now up to the leaders in the region to show that they have heard this clarion call from this committee in a loud and clear way. ??(END VIDEO CLIP) ??ANNOUNCER: Also ahead: Is President Bush taking a hit in the polls in connection with the energy crunch? ??And to what degree has a certain Yale graduate finally embraced his alma mater? ??(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) ??GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Everything I know about the spoken word I learned right here at Yale. ??(LAUGHTER) ??(END VIDEO CLIP) ??ANNOUNCER: Now Judy Woodruff takes you INSIDE POLITICS. ??JUDY WOODRUFF, CNN ANCHOR: Thank you for joining us. ?We begin with the Bush administration responding to pressure to get more involved in promoting Middle East peace. ??As an escalating cycle of violence between Israelis and Palestinians continued today, Secretary of State Colin Powell appointed a diplomat to help the two sides end the fighting and resume talks. ?And he urged the parties to use the report of a commission appointed by former President Clinton as a springboard to peace. ??Let's get more now from CNN national security correspondent David Ensor -- David. DAVID ENSOR, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Judy, Ambassador William Burns, the U.S. ambassador to Jordan, who is Mr. Powell's pick to be the next assistant secretary for the Middle East, has been asked to work with other recommendations for Mr. Powell and for President Bush on how the U.S. can best proceed from here, trying to use the recommendations of the Mitchell committee report to try to get the violence to de- escalate, to try to get the two sides talking instead of shooting at each other. ??Here is how Mr. Powell put it today. ??(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) ??POWELL: It is now up to the leaders in the region to show that they have heard this clarion call from this committee in a loud-and- clear way, and take actions that are available to them on both sides to let's have a cessation of hostilities, then we can begin the confidence-building measures and move toward negotiations. ??(END VIDEO CLIP) ??ENSOR: Now this report makes very specific recommendations and urges very specific actions by both sides: in both cases, quite difficult actions. ?First, it calls for the Palestinians and the Israelis to declare an immediate, unconditional cessation of violence. That's the first step, and that's the step that Secretary Powell repeatedly emphasized today must come first and must come right away or else nothing else will work. ??But the report goes on to make specific recommendations. ?For example, it urges that Israel put -- freeze all settlement development, all development of Israeli settlements in the occupied territories. ?It recommends that Israel resume paying the money that's collected in taxes back to the Palestinian Authority. ?It recommends a whole range of action, many of them to be taken by Israel, which the reports says would help bring the tone back to where it needs to be, would help bring the two sides back to where they could once again be negotiating instead of shooting at each other and letting off bombs. ??The -- the secretary, Secretary Powell, said that this is not the time, however, for him to get involved in shuttle diplomacy. ?He wants first to have Ambassador Burns and the others come up with recommendations over the next week, two weeks or three, and then he and the president will try to figure out where the U.S. can go from here. ??But clearly, this is -- clearly, this is a first step by an administration that until now has tried to keep its -- keep its powder a bit dry in the Middle East. ?They are now engaging somewhat, because they're so concerned about the situation out there, Judy. ??WOODRUFF: David, the report, the Mitchell report, suggesting that the Israelis more responsible here, or at least that they have more to do in order to get things back on the peace track than the Palestinians? ENSOR: The report is very even-handed. ?It doesn't blame either side for the situation. ?It, for example, does not blame Ariel Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount for the following Intifada, Intifada II it's been called. ?But it says that there needs to be a series of actions by both sides to bring down the tensions, and if you look at the list of what it's asking for, there are more steps that the Israelis would have to take than the Palestinians. ??WOODRUFF: And David, why is it that the administration is saying at this point that it is not prepared to get back in -- in a -- in a day-to-day way, in an energetically involved way the way the Clinton administration was? ??ENSOR: Well, I think the administration, this administration, feels that the Clinton people got -- got to the point where they were micromanaging the thing a little bit. ?It was too much presidential involvement and it was too much of a day-to-day hand-holding operation. ?They feel they need to hold back a little bit and try to get the parties to talk to each other. ??However, the situation is deteriorating pretty rapidly, and so now they realize they have to have some greater involvement. ?And that's why Ambassador Burns has been asked to prepare these recommendation, Judy. ??WOODRUFF: All right. ?David Ensor reporting for us from the State Department. ??For more on the Middle East conflict, stay with us for a special half-hour report. ?That's beginning at 6:00 p.m. Eastern. ??Now, we turn to questions about the Bush administration's political fund-raising tactics. ?Tonight, Vice President Dick Cheney is scheduled to host some 400 big GOP donors at his official residence in Washington. ?A spokeswoman for the Democrats says that that event smacks of, in her words, hypocrisy. ??The Democrats say the reception at the vice president's home is comparable to Clinton-era events, such as White House coffees and Lincoln Bedroom sleepovers for big donors, which drew heavy criticism from Republicans. ?Among them: presidential candidate George W. Bush. ??(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) ??BUSH: I believe they've moved that sign, ""The buck stops here,"" from the Oval Office desk to the buck stops here on the Lincoln Bedroom. ?And that's not good for the country, it's not right. ?We need to have a new look about how we conduct ourselves in office. There's a huge trust. ?I see it all the time when people come up to me and say, ""I don't want you to let me down again."" ??And we can do better than the past administration has done. ??(END VIDEO CLIP) ??WOODRUFF: Despite that sort of criticism then, the Republicans are defending their fund-raising tactics now. ?Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott had this to say about the reception for big donors at Vice President Cheney's home tonight. ??(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) ??SEN. TRENT LOTT (R-MS), MAJORITY LEADER: I'm sure it's being done in an inappropriate way, or Dick Cheney wouldn't -- wouldn't be doing it. ?So if there's any question, I'd suggest you address it to them. ?Unfortunately, I think that most of us will not be able to be there. ?We're going to be here voting, giving tax relief. ??(END VIDEO CLIP) ??WOODRUFF: Virtually all of those GOP contributors, who will mingle with Vice President Cheney at his home tonight, have given at least $100,000 to the Republican National Committee. ?They will also attend a major RNC fund-raiser tomorrow night that features President Bush as the main speaker and is expected to net some $15 million in soft money. ??Now let's bring in our White House correspondent, Major Garrett. ??Major, tell us about what this event is about tomorrow night. ??MAJOR GARRETT, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, it's the first official Republican National Committee event to honor the president and the first lady, as you said. The targeted haul is $15 million. Republican National Committee officials tell CNN that it's about 70 percent of that 15 million will be soft money. ?About 30 percent will be hard dollars -- that is dollars that are regulated under the existing campaign finance scheme -- and that it is a big event, one that the Republican Party has held for years and years in Washington. ??As for what's happening in the vice president's residence tonight, White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer told me this is a way of saying ""Thank you,"" in his words, ""to those Republicans who,"" as Ari Fleischer said, ""did so much to help win the selection."" ??And he draws a distinction with the Clinton-era coffees and sleepovers, describing them as, quote, ""organized schemes to bring people through the gates of the White House to get money or to persuade others to do so."" ??Mark Minor, who is the communications director for the Republican National Committee, also said that no one paid to go to the vice president's residence. No checks will pass between hands there. There is no quid pro quo, and that some people who will be at the vice president's residence tonight are not in fact RNC donors -- Judy. ??WOODRUFF: So, Major, again, clarify the distinction between money events that are given as a thank you and events that are given as an encouragement to give more money. ??GARRETT: Well, it's a distinction this White House wants to draw as clearly as it possibly can. ?In the words of Ari Fleischer, thanking someone, whether it's on government property or not on government property, is a completely legitimate activity for the president or the vice president to engage in. ?The distinction he is drawing is that during the Clinton era people were brought to the White House, to these coffees, and as was disclosed in the Thompson report that was conducted by the Senate investigating that, there was some evidence of actually targeted lists: that people who were brought in, money was described to bringing in for a coffee. ?A certain dollar amount was attached to donations to the Democratic National Committee, a larger amount if they, in fact, slept here at the White House in the Lincoln Bedroom. ?That is the key distinction, the Republicans say: that there is no targeting necessarily of these people to come to the vice president's residence. ??They also point out that the original letters inviting these big donors to Washington did not in any way suggest there would be a reception at the vice president's residence: the point there being these people donated without any expectation of having dinner or reception with Lynne Cheney and Dick Cheney in the vice president's home. ??WOODRUFF: And Major, just to clarify, the 400 people invited tonight to the vice president's, how many are they saying did not give money? ??GARRETT: They're not disclosing any numbers. ?They're only saying that some have given. ?They clearly and readily acknowledge that. ?Some are lobbyists. Some represent large corporations. ?But others, they say, are just Republican National Committee officials. And others of an undisclosed nature -- not fund-raisers, not Republican Party officials -- who will be there tonight. Don't have any numbers for you on that, though. ??WOODRUFF: All right, Major Garrett reporting at the White House. Thank you very much. ??Vice President Cheney maybe taking some heat for fund-raising tactics, not to mention his role in creating the Bush energy plan. Look that this: ??Our new poll shows Cheney's job approval rating is 4 points higher than the presidents. ?While Mr. Bush's approval rating has held pretty steady in the past couple of weeks, he has lost ground since late April. ?Cheney's approval rating has dipped as well. ??For more on Mr. Bush's ratings and how they relate to his policies, we are joined now by our senior political analyst Bill Schneider. ??Tell us, Bill, which of Mr. Bush's policies is the most popular? ??WILLIAM SCHNEIDER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, you might guess energy, given the high ratings for Dick Cheney that you just reported -- but you would be wrong. ??Because, what Americans like best is the tax cut. ?Two thirds of the public now favors a substantial tax cut. ?That's up from 60 percent earlier this month. Well, why not? ?What's wrong with getting some money back from the government? ??Actually, most people do not think the tax cut could benefit them much financially. ?They like it because they believe it will help the economy. ?And that is why so many Democrats find it very difficult to oppose. ??WOODRUFF: What about the energy plan? ??SCHNEIDER: Not such a success. ?Not like the tax cut. ?Americans are actually divided over the president's energy plan. ?Why? ?It's not because the public blames the Bush administration for the nation's energy problems. ?Most people blame the oil companies. ??In fact, more people blame Congress and the Clinton administration and environmental laws and American consumers than blame the Bush administration. But most Americans still give President Bush low marks on energy. ?The core criticism of his energy plan is: it doesn't do enough. ?55 percent of Americans say President Bush is not doing enough to solve the country's energy problems. ??What doesn't the plan do? ?It doesn't do much right now. ?Only 8 percent of Americans believe the plan will help the nation's energy problem immediately. Most people think oh, it will help, but only after several years. ?It's a long-run solution. ?Americans want help now. ?Right now. ?With electricity in California. ?And with gas prices all over the country. ?Long-term solutions are important, but politics is a short-term business. ?If the problem is now, people want results now. ??And they don't see what the Bush energy plan is going to do about $2-a-gallon gasoline now. ??WOODRUFF: Why do people think the energy plan fails to do that? ??SCHNEIDER: Because they think this administration is run by oilmen. ?Oilmen like $2-a-gallon gasoline. ?Maybe even 3. ??By nearly two to one, the public believes energy companies have too much influence over the Bush administration's policies. ?In fact, Americans are split when you ask them whether the Bush energy plan is designed to further the country's interests or the energy companies' interests. ?That sounds like breathtaking cynicism. ?But any administration that's run by Texas oilmen is automatically suspect. ??WOODRUFF: All right, Bill Schneider, thank you very much. You're not suspect. ??SCHNEIDER: I am certainly not. ??WOODRUFF: At least as far as we know. ??Do Californians blame President Bush for their energy crisis? We've heard a little bit from Bill on that. ?That answer and more on the issue later this hour. ?Plus: ??Just what kind of tax cut is the Senate considering? ?Jonathan Karl crunches the numbers. ?Also: ??(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) ??UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We have no ability to bring up the amendments. ?You don't set the agenda every day, and that is real power in the House. ??(END VIDEO CLIP) ??WOODRUFF: The trials and tribulations of the minority leader, as he considers the present and the future. ?And later: ??Rewarding a president's most controversial decision. ?A political ""Profile In Courage."" All ahead on INSIDE POLITICS. ??(COMMERCIAL BREAK) ??WOODRUFF: President Bush today donned the traditional commencement robes, and gave the graduating class at Yale University a few bits of advice. ?The president also included a glimpse at his less-than-perfect college years. ?As CNN's Kelly Wallace reports, today's speech was a departure from how the President's dealt with his alma mater in the past. ??(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) ??KELLY WALLACE, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A homecoming of sorts, George W. Bush who has only been back to his alma mater once since graduating in 1968, returns to address those at the top and the bottom of Yale's graduating class. ??BUSH: And to the C students... ??(LAUGHTER) ??I say, you too, can be president of the United States. ??(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE) ??WALLACE: The president offering a self-deprecating account of his days as the undergraduate, when, as a history major, he earned modest grades and was known more as a fraternity boy prankster than a rising political star. ??The visit was not without controversy, with some students protesting and some professors boycotting, charging that Mr. Bush was not yet deserving of an honorary degree. ??PETER BROOKS, YALE UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR: It doesn't seem at present to represent the intellectual ideals and the service to humanity in which we think that Yale stands for. ??WALLACE: The president has kept his distance from this Ivy League institution for most of his political life, painting it as a symbol of elitism, even during his days at Yale. TERRY JOHNSON, BUSH'S YALE ROOMMATE: What George -- does not respond well to are people who are snobs, whether you are a social snob or an intellectual snob or any other kind of snob. ??WALLACE: Mr. Bush rarely mentions what he did on this day, that he was born in New Haven when his dad, the former president, was an undergraduate at Yale. ??BUSH: My life began just a few blocks from here, but I was raised in West Texas. ?From there, Yale always seemed a world away. ??WALLACE: The president, for years, had been miffed with Yale for not awarding an honorary degree to his dad until 1991, the third year of his presidency. ?But it appears now, all is forgiven. ??BUSH: In my time they spoke of the Yale man, I was really never sure of what that was. ?But I do think that I am a better man because of Yale. ??WALLACE: Mr. Bush, the son and grandson of Yalies and now father of a current student, seems very proud that Yale is a part of his past. ??Kelly Wallace, CNN, New Haven, Connecticut. ??(END VIDEOTAPE) ??WOODRUFF: And looking now ahead to 2004: the Reverend Al Sharpton says that he will explore seeking the Democratic presidential nomination. ?The civil rights activist said yesterday that the party did not protect the rights of disenfranchised voters in Florida in the last presidential race. ??If he runs, Sharpton said that he would promote issues that concern blacks and progressives, and his effort would not be just symbolic. ?Sharpton ran unsuccessfully for the Senate in New York in 1994 and for mayor of New York City in 1997. ??Reverend Sharpton and former Republican presidential candidate Gary Bauer will discuss President Bush's faith-based plan to help the poor tonight on ""CROSSFIRE."" That's at 7:30 p.m. Eastern. ??Another note from New York: a state supreme court justice today barred Rudy Giuliani's girlfriend from the mayor's official residence, Gracie Mansion. ?The judge ruled in favor of Giuliani's estranged wife, Donna Hanover, who had requested a restraining order barring Judith Nathan from the residence. ?The ruling says that Nathan may not enter the residence as long as the Giuliani children continue to live there. ?The judge also denied Giuliani's second attempt for a gag order in the couple's divorce proceedings. ??And we'll have the latest on President Bush's tax cut when we come back. ??(COMMERCIAL BREAK) WOODRUFF: This evening, the Senate is expected to vote on the latest version of the now $1.35 trillion tax cut plan. ?Republican leaders hope to give President Bush the tax cut for approval before Memorial Day. ?But as Jonathan Karl reports, taxpayers will have a longer wait before reaping any of the measure's benefits. ??(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) ??JONATHAN KARL, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The Senate's $1.35 trillion tax cut would be the biggest in a generation, but don't spend your tax windfall yet. ?Most of the cuts will not take effect for several years to come. ??Relief from the so-called major penalty will not start until the year 2005. The estate tax won't be repealed until 2011. ?That means even if President Bush is re-elected, it wouldn't take effect until two years after he completed his second term. ?The IRA contribution limit would be raised from $2,000 to $5,000, but that also wouldn't happen until the year 2011. ??The tax cut calls for doubling of the child tax credit, but that takes 10 years too. ?The credit would rise from $500 to $600 this year, slowly increasing in $100 increments over the next 10 years until it finally reaches $1,000 in the year 2011. ?The cuts in income tax rates would be phased in even more slowly. ??SEN. CHARLES GRASSLEY (R-IA), FINANCE COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: You are right, some of them do not -- are phased in over a period of time. But there is real relief in this tax bill for every taxpayer starting January 1, 2001. ?They don't have to wait until next year. ??KARL: That immediate tax relief amounts to $300 for individuals and $600 for couples filing jointly, but just how that money gets back to taxpayers is still to be worked out. ?The option favored by the president is a simple rebate check sent directly to taxpayers, an idea opposed by many Senate Republicans who call it impractical. ??But the rebate would represent a fraction of the overall tax cut, which Democratic opponents say will explode in cost after it's fully phased in two years from now. ??SEN. KENT CONRAD (D), NORTH DAKOTA: This plan is fully back- loaded. ?That means simply that it is disguised in terms of its full cost. ?This decade it cost $1.35 trillion. ?In the next decade, it will cost from 3.5 to $4 trillion. ??KARL: But there's a little noticed provision of this tax cut that may make that point moot. ?The tax cut includes a sunset provision, that means all the tax cuts in the bill would expire in the year 2012. ?For the tax cuts to remain in place, Congress would have to pass them again. ??(END VIDEOTAPE) ??KARL: Now, the Senate is expected to vote on a series of amendments to the tax cut later on today, paving the way for a final vote on the tax cut here in the Senate tonight. ?But it will not end there. ?This still needs to be reconciled with the tax cut that was passed in House, the House passing almost exactly the president's tax cut, including much deeper cuts in income tax rates preferred by Republicans. ??The Senate and the House will have to work out their differences. They're expected to do so this week, setting the stage to send this final tax cut down Pennsylvania Avenue and onto the president's desk by Memorial Day -- Judy. ??WOODRUFF: Jon, when you talk about the plan providing 300 or $300 a year per individual, divided by 12, that's $20-some a month. Is this the kind of money the president was talking about when he said the tax cut would help people with higher gasoline prices? ??KARL: This was exactly what he had it mind. ?This was exactly what he was talking about, directing the money right into the hands of taxpayers, directly into the hands of those people paying higher gasoline prices at the pumps. ??This is an idea that his Treasury secretary, Paul O'Neill, strongly favors, the idea of direct cash payments or check payments to taxpayers. ?But one big problem with this, Judy, is that taxpayers over the course of time move, they change addresses, some of them die. The question is, how do you make sure you get all the right checks to those people at current addresses? ?It's not an easy proposition. ??WOODRUFF: And Jon, one other subject, we know the president's nominee to be solicitor general of the United States has run into a real problem in the Senate committee. ?Where does that stand right now? ?The last we heard, the Senate Judiciary had split 9-9 on the nomination of Ted Olson. ??KARL: Well, the Senate leaders, Trent Lott and Tom Daschle, are now actively involved in this, trying to come to some kind of an agreement, an agreement that will allow the Democrats to get access to some information they want about Olson, especially information that was compiled by independent council Robert Ray, looking to just what Olson's involvement was in that Arkansas Project by the ""American Spectator"" magazine, the investigation into Bill Clinton's personal life. ??They want information from the independent council to look at just how involved Olson was in that project, to see whether or not he was truthful in his testimony when he said he was not very involved at all. ?There's some movement to try to get the Democrats on the committee more of the information, also maybe to release more of it to the public. ??If that's all done, it would set the stage for a vote on the Olson nomination before the full Senate, but probably not until after Memorial Day. ?The Senate goes on recess at the end of the week, they will be off all of next week, you probably won't see a vote on the Olson nomination until after they return. ??WOODRUFF: All right, Jon Karl at the Capitol, thanks. In the House of Representatives, Democrats are finding themselves drowned out by the Republican majority. ?Add to that, critics who say the party is lacking leadership and strategy. ?And life in the House minority begins to look bleak. ?Our Kate Snow caught up with the House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt to talk about the balance of power and his political future. ??(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) ??REP. DICK GEPHARDT (D-MO), HOUSE MINORITY LEADER: We need to say what are we for, and that's what... ??KATE SNOW, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Dick Gephardt will tell you it's frustrating being a Democrat these days, stuck in the minority without the backing of the White House. ??GEPHARDT: Well, you take what you -- what you are given. ?I mean, the people run this country. ?We don't. ?And so, you fight for what you believe in as hard as you can, and if you really believe in it, then you're frustrated if you're not able to those policies through. ??SNOW: Gephardt says the Democrats are forced to play defense, responding to Republicans. ??GEPHARDT: I think we slowed down a little bit the amount of the tax bill -- not enough, in my view -- but we lowered it some so that the potential deficits out there in the future won't be so large. ?I think we cooperated with the president on the educational bill, at least the substance of it, but we still haven't been able to convince him or the Republicans to put enough money into education to really make the program happen. ??On energy, I think that we've got a very, very positive alternative that I hope people will listen to. ?People in California and Oregon and Washington need help now. ??SNOW: That was last week's theme. ?First at a gas station, the lawn of the Capitol the next day, and then in a underground war room. ??Gephardt is a master at staying on message, often spending hours talking to the press, his strategy: agree with Republicans when he thinks they're right and hammer at home when he disagrees. ??GEPHARDT: If we do not learn from history, we are forced to repeat it. ?This is a mistake that we will pay for for years to come. ??I try not to yell. ?I try to get ideas across as good a way as I can. ?But there are times when you need to show your emotion. ?You need to let people know that you really care about this. ?And you really want the country to go in a different direction. ?And I think you can't appear too tentative or too laid back or too uninterested. ??SNOW: But is the strategy working? ??I have talked to some Democrats who say that they are truly unhappy. Some of whom say that they are unhappy with your leadership. ?They don't feel that you're doing an effective job. ?Do you feel that there is trouble within the ranks? ??GEPHARDT: I don't. ?I think that -- I think the ranks and the Democratic Party are largely unified. ?They are marching together and working together in ways that I've never seen them before. ?I always tell them that it's me and we. And we have to be a team. ??I would never tell you that anybody is ever going to be pleased every day with everything that happens, but largely, I think that we've achieved real unity and real effectiveness in being the loyal opposition here in Washington. ??SNOW: How much of your days are spent thinking about 2002 in the next election? ??GEPHARDT: Well, I want to win the majority back. ?I think it's really important, not for the party and not for me, but for the country. ??SNOW: Is it more important to win back the majority than it is to win legislatively for the next couple of years? ??GEPHARDT: I think it is in the House for sure, because the minority is really out of power totally in the House. ?You have no ability to bring up amendments, you don't set the agenda every day. And that is real power in the House. ??SNOW: There is a lot of focus on 2004, a lot of talk about your ambitions, do you have plans to run for president? ??GEPHARDT: I really think that if you don't stay totally focused on the goal that is ahead of you, then you lessen your chances of reaching that goal. ?And my goal is to win back the majority in the Congress in 2002. ?I think, as usual in our system, we all want to look ahead and start calling the next race after that for president, but that is not what I'm doing and not what I should be doing. ??SNOW (voice-over): Gephardt insists he's not planning ahead, though he's scheduled to attend four events in New Hampshire in two weeks. ??GEPHARDT: The future will take of itself. ?I have no idea what will happen, and I'm not worried about it, and I don't spend time worrying about it. Because, again, I've got to do this in 2002. ?This is what we're trying to do. ??SNOW: So, are you committed to staying minority leader through 2002? ??GEPHARDT: Absolutely. ?I'm totally committed to winning this House back, and I think we are going to do it. ??SNOW: Speaker of the House, you said to me last fall that that had a nice ring to it? GEPHARDT: It works for me. ??(END VIDEOTAPE) ??WOODRUFF: Kate Snow talking with House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt. ?They talked today. ?And later this week, Kate will sit down with House Speaker Dennis Hastert. ?You can look for that report on Friday. ??On another term for the another high-profile Republican and two nationally known Democrats with apparent home state ambitions. ??INSIDE POLITICS will be right back. ??(COMMERCIAL BREAK) ??To no one's surprise, Charlton Heston was reelected today to an unprecedented fourth term as president of the National Rifle Association. ?The 77-year-old actor was chosen at the NRA's annual convention in Kansas City. ?The group changed its rules last year to allow Heston a third term, and a spokesman said there really wasn't much discussion by the board before deciding to elect him, once again. ??Former Attorney General Janet Reno may be looking for a new line of work. Now back in her native Florida, Reno says she finds the idea of running for governor appealing. ??(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) ??JANET RENO, FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL: I love Florida very much. I was born and raised there. ?I have lived there most of my life. ?And I want to make sure that I do everything I can, either as governor or otherwise, to serve the interest of the people of Florida. ??(END VIDEO CLIP) ??WOODRUFF: Reno says she does not believe that her Parkinson's Disease would keep her from running, and she expects to make a decision before the end of the year. ??Governor Jeb Bush says possible opponents do not factor into his decision on whether to run for reelection. ??House Minority Whip David Bonior may trade in his Congressional seat for a run at the governor's mansion. ?The 13-term Congressman from Michigan filed his paperwork today to become a candidate in Michigan's 2002 governor's race. ?His aides say that a formal announcement will come later. ?With Michigan slated to lose one House district, Bonior's seat may be vulnerable to the state's Republican controlled redistricting efforts. ?Republican Governor John Engler cannot seek reelection because of term limits. ??Californians and the energy crunch: are they pointing fingers at the president? ?We'll check new poll numbers from the Golden State, and discuss power politics in the state when we return. ??(COMMERCIAL BREAK) ??WOODRUFF: At ground zero on the energy crunch: more than half of Californians say they disapprove of the way President Bush is handling that state's power woes, according to a new poll. ?But the survey shows more Californians are placing blame for the problem on utility companies, former Governor Pete Wilson and current Governor Gray Davis than on President Bush and the federal government. ?The Democrats are trying hard to convince Californians that Republicans should be held accountable for the power problem. ?Here is a Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee ad that begins airing in Los Angeles today. ??(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) ??NARRATOR: California's energy crisis is deepening, with summer blackouts predicted and rate hikes of up to 80 percent. Yet President Bush has offered no relief to hard-pressed rate payers. ?His spokesman saying, ""The president continues to believe that the issue is mostly a California matter"" and our representative, Stephen Horn, has joined with Bush in opposing a temporary cap on electricity prices. ?Call Congressman Horn and tell him we need action now. ??That is if you can find the phone. ??(END VIDEO CLIP) ??WOODRUFF: The Democratic committee said that it has bought significant air time for that spot, part of a month-long radio and TV ad campaign targeting Republicans on energy. ?Let's talk more now about energy politics with the director of that Public Policy Institute of California poll we just told you about, Mark Baldassare joins us now from San Francisco. ??Mark, first of all, this poll finds Californians pessimistic in general, did that surprise you? ??MARK BALDASSARE, CALIFORNIA POLLSTER: It did. ?For the past three years, we've been in an incredible time of optimism in California. ?Two-thirds of Californians have said that the state is going in the right direction. ?Most Californians felt that economic times would continue to be good, and most Californians also were highly approving of the governor and the legislature. For the first time, we've seen a dramatic drop in optimism about the state, about the economy and ratings of the governor. ??WOODRUFF: And why do you think that is? ??BALDASSARE: Well, eight in ten Californians say they have been closely following the electricity situation in the state and most Californians are telling us in our survey that they consider it the top issue and 80 percent of Californians say it's a big problem and moreover, a problem that is going to effect the economy. ?So there's been a great deal of uncertainty that's been created by the electricity situation and because of that uncertainty, people are beginning to feel very nervous about our state. ??WOODRUFF: So you're saying because of the electricity crisis, if you want to call it that in California, it's now driving people's views of everything: population, the economy, across-the-board. ??BALDASSARE: We -- for the past few years people have been focused on improving the schools, for instance. ?Now only 6 percent in our most recent survey said that's the issue that concerns them most in the state. ?And we see that there is growing pessimism at the same time that there is growing concern that this electricity situation is not under control and could affect the state's economy. ??WOODRUFF: Explain for us, Mark, who people are blaming. ?We were -- Bill Schneider reported earlier on the program that Americans, overall, are having mixed views about to what extent President Bush is responsible. ?Here we're learning in California, they hold President Bush far less responsible than they do local leaders. ??BALDASSARE: Yeah, well, we are at time right now in California where people haven't experienced the rate hikes yet. ?They've certainly heard about them. They haven't experienced, for the most part, frequent rolling blackouts, but they hear that they're coming. And so when we talk about blame, people are focused on what happened five years ago to put us into this situation. ?And for that, of course, they don't blame either the current governor or the current president. ?Now, as we go forward over the next few months, people are going to be re-assigning blame as well as re-evaluating the solutions that are in place, and that's why I think both the Democrats and Republicans are very urgently trying to get their message out right now about who they think is to blame and who they think has the best solutions. ??WOODRUFF: Well, Mark, what is your reading on this? ?Are ads, like the ones we just saw the Democrats running out there, are those likely to have an effect on people's views? ??BALDASSARE: I don't think so. ?I think that what is will most going to have a effect on people's views over these next few months is how the crisis is actually resolved. ?And if people feel that these electricity hikes have really, you know, altered their lifestyle or they're going to impact the economy, if they feel blackouts are really going to, you know, put them in an uncomfortable situation going through the summer, then my guess is they are going to give blame both to Bush and to Davis. ??WOODRUFF: All right, Mark Baldassare of the California Public Policy Institute. ?Thanks very much, good to see you again. ??BALDASSARE: Thank you. ?Same here. ??WOODRUFF: As California tries to ease its energy problems, there are concerns about the cost not only for consumers, but for the environment. ?CNN's Rusty Dornin takes a closer look at the issues being raised by one California plant's effort to expand. ??(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) ??RUSTY DORNIN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): An aging giant known as the Mighty Moss. ?The 50-year-old Moss Landing Natural Gas plant along California's coast owned by Duke Energy. ?A face lift and an expansion will soon make this the largest power generator in the state, providing 2.3 million homes with light, heat and air conditioning. ?But all that power takes water to cool the turbines, water that's home to otters, fish, herons and other wildlife. ??CAROLYN NIELSEN, PLANT OPPONENT: Every day, Duke will use 333 football-size fields -- pools of water that are 10 feet deep. ?That is just incomprehensible. ??DORNIN: Water from the wetlands run through the plant, returning to the ocean 30 degrees warmer. ?Been that way for 50 years. ?Now environmentalists worry that increasing the intake will sterilize any creature sucked in. ??PATRICIA MATEJCEK, SIERRA CLUB: Everything that lives in that volume of water: eggs from fish from clams, diatoms, young fish, everything in it will be killed. ??DORNIN: Environmentalists say the Mighty Moss got a break on the approval process, as regulators here faced the state's energy crisis. It took 14 months. Permitting for smaller plants in the state is down to 21 days. ??KAITILIN GAFFNEY, CENTER FOR MARINE CONSERVATION: It's so fast that my concern is that we wouldn't even catch really obvious problems because we are just are not taking a hard look at these plants at all. ??DORNIN: But here's the twist as part of the permit process: local environmental groups signed off on the Mighty Moss renovation plan. ??GAFFNEY: So at the eleventh hour, we were able to work out this deal with Duke to at least ensure that the scientific monitoring will go on. ??DORNIN (on camera): Duke Energy will spend more than $8 million expanding the wetlands and in donations to local environmental groups. There will also be an independent monitor who will assess any damage to the environment. ??TOM WILLIAMS, DUKE ENERGY: This will more than compensate any potential effects that the new power plant will have on the habitat. This state is in an energy crisis. ?The new plant we're bringing on is cleaner, more efficient than virtually any plant in the country today. ??DORNIN: Environmentalists made a deal here, but many fear, in a power-hungry state, taking what they can get may be their only option. ??Rusty Dornin, CNN, Moss Landing, California. ??(END VIDEOTAPE) ??WOODRUFF: A very different kind of power politics, circa the 1970s, is being seen in a whole new light in some circles. ?Former President Ford is honored for granting a famous -- some would say infamous -- at pardon. ??That's next on INSIDE POLITICS. ??(COMMERCIAL BREAK) ??WOODRUFF: It is something that many Americans that lived through the Watergate era might never dream they would see. ?An award named for a Democratic icon presented to the man who angered many Democrats by pardoning Richard Nixon. ??CNN's Bruce Morton has an inside view of this twist on political history. ??(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) ??CAROLINE KENNEDY SCHLOSSBERG, JOHN KENNEDY'S DAUGHTER: He placed his love of country ahead of his own political future. ?We are honored to present you, President Ford, with the John F. Kennedy Profile In Courage Award for 2001. ??(APPLAUSE) ??BRUCE MORTON, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Gerald Ford, now 87, got the award because, as a new unelected president, he pardoned his predecessor, Richard Nixon, who had resigned in disgrace to avoid impeachment over the Watergate scandal. ??RICHARD M. NIXON, 37TH PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I shall resign the presidency effective at noon tomorrow. ??MORTON: ""Our long national nightmare is over,"" the new man said of Watergate. But really, what would end it? ?Nixon could still face charges. ??GERALD FORD, 38TH PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: My conscience tells me that only I, as president, have the constitutional power to firmly shut and seal this book. ??MORTON: And so he granted: ??FORD: A full, free and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon. ??MORTON: Many Americans thought that was a mistake. ??SEN. TED KENNEDY (D), MASSACHUSETTS: I was one of those who spoke out against his actions then, but time has a way of clarifying past events. ?And now we see that President Ford was right. ??MORTON: Not everyone agrees. ?Ford's press secretary at the time, Gerald Ter Horst, resigned to protest the Nixon pardon and still thinks it was wrong. ??JERRY TER HORST, FORMER FORD PRESS SECRETARY: He was going to go off scot-free, whereas all of his minions -- the people who worked at the White House, from the chief of staff on down to Ehrlichman, Chuck Colson and others -- they were going to have to do prison time; they were not going to get pardons. MORTON: And it may have cost Ford the 1976 election. ?It was a close election. Many things could have swung it, but the pardon was surely one. ?Jimmy Carter, who beat Ford, thanked him Inauguration Day. ??JAMES EARL CARTER, 39TH PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: For myself and for our nation, I want to thank my predecessor for all he has done to heal our land. ??MORTON: Accepting the award, Ford talked about the need for courage today in a politics dominated by ""partisan jockeying at the expense of public policy."" ??FORD: I sense a longing for community, a desire on the part of Americans to be part of something bigger, finer than themselves. ??MORTON: Historians may still argue about the pardon. ?They agree he cared about his country and its politics, and did what he thought was right. ??Bruce Morton, CNN, Washington. ??(END VIDEOTAPE) ??WOODRUFF: Also cited for political courage today, Democratic Congressman John Lewis of Georgia who was beaten, as he and others challenged segregation during the freedom rides through the South in 1961. ??Lewis was given a special Profile of Courage Award for Lifetime Achievement. ??Former president Ford, Congressman Lewis and Caroline Kennedy will all be guests tonight on ""WOLF BLITZER REPORTS."" That's at 8:00 p.m. Eastern. ??That's all for this edition of INSIDE POLITICS. ?But of course, you can go on-line all the time at CNN's allpolitics.com. ?AOL keyword: CNN. ??And our e-mail address is insidepolitics@cnn.com. ??This other programming note: Priscilla Sue Galey, the former stripper who claims that FBI spy Robert Hanssen showered her with gifts, will be the guest tonight on ""LARRY KING LIVE."" That's at 9:00 p.m. Eastern. ??I'm Judy Woodruff. ?Stay tuned for a CNN special report: ""Conflict in the Middle East"" coming up. ??TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com LOAD-DATE: May 21, 2001 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Bahamas LNG; [EMail-Body]= I think it would be a good idea to get together. I would include Eric Thode as he has been living through the PR battles on a daily basis. James D Steffes 05/30/2001 08:31 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Kelly Kimberly/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Subject: Bahamas LNG Steve -- In a discussion today with Mike, Kelly, etc., it was apparent that the Public Affairs team viewed the Bahamas LNG transaction quite cautiously. Given the recent issues power plant development has had in Florida (big political fights that are going the wrong way), I was wondering if it made sense to bring together a meeting of all of Public Affairs and the deal team to analyze the implications of our development plans. My primary worry is that P/L under water could have severe ecological implications that are not being internalized into the transaction. I would like to try and arrange a meeting to (1) ensure Public Affairs coordination and (2) understand the deal impacts better. Please advise if I'm worrying for no good reason. Jim [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Enron Mentions; [EMail-Body]= It looks like we are playing a smaller role than the WSJ article indicates -- i.e. a role commensurate with our level of interest. I have talked with John several times about the relative importance of OPIC, ExIm and other funding organizations in light of the change in emphasis in our business. As a result of those discussions we cut headcount and expenditures from the proposed budget for ""01 and John has joined Linda Robertson's organization in the DC office (instead of being a stand alone effort). Having said that, my view (based on the work John has been doing) is that we continue to have a considerable amount of work for him to do on the project finance front as a result of existing projects, projects we continue to pursue, and transfer issues associated with the asset sales. Do you agree? ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/07/2001 11:27 AM ----- John Hardy@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 03/07/2001 10:59 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Re: Enron Mentions Steve This is not a battle to fight with OMB, but we have to show the agencies that we are supportive of their programs and their budgets. We are not going to lead the battle and in fact have not particpated in meetings on the hill. But we are in negotiations with both EXIM and OPIC on Electrobolt and will need their support on our problem projects. Also, Rebecca McDonald is on EXIM's private sector advisory committee. If you need more lets talk. Thanks John Steven J Kean@ENRON 03/07/2001 11:43 AM To: John cc: Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON Subject: Enron Mentions How important is this fight to us now (see attached article on ExIm)? ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/07/2001 10:41 AM ----- Ann M Schmidt 03/07/2001 08:19 AM To: Ann M Schmidt/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: (bcc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron) Subject: Enron Mentions Exporters Rush to Ex-Im Bank's Defense --- Lobby Campaign to Prevent Budget Cuts Seeks Help Of 100,000 Small Firms The Wall Street Journal, 03/07/01 Plots & Ploys The Wall Street Journal, 03/07/01 Dutch Gas Competition Grows Despite Sluggish Reforms Dow Jones Energy Service, 03/07/01 USA: Big U.S. exporters to fight Ex-Im Bank cuts - WSJ. Reuters English News Service, 03/07/01 Major U.S. Exporters Rush to Export-Import Bank's Defense Dow Jones Business News, 03/07/01 What's News United States The Globe and Mail, 03/07/01 Deal with state could take until 2002 to close Associated Press Newswires, 03/06/01 Sierra Pacific CEO Doubts SEC OK Of Enron Unit Buy-Report Dow Jones Energy Service, 03/06/01 Many Power Deals Announced by California Governor Still Not Final Dow Jones Business News, 03/06/01 US Natural Gas Prices Fall As Demand Slips In Most Areas Dow Jones Energy Service, 03/06/01 Economy Exporters Rush to Ex-Im Bank's Defense --- Lobby Campaign to Prevent Budget Cuts Seeks Help Of 100,000 Small Firms By Michael M. Phillips and Laura Heinauer Staff Reporters of The Wall Street Journal 03/07/2001 The Wall Street Journal A2 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) WASHINGTON -- Angry and confused that a Republican administration has targeted one of their favorite programs for big cuts, America's largest exporters are appealing for help from lawmakers. Boeing Co., Caterpillar Inc., Enron Corp., Halliburton Co. and others are launching an aggressive lobbying campaign on Capitol Hill to protect the Export-Import Bank from budget reductions; the White House labels the Ex-Im Bank as corporate welfare. ""The administration has fired its shot, and now we're firing ours,"" said Edmund B. Rice, president of the Coalition for Employment Through Exports, an industry group that is leading the effort. Since they got wind of the proposed cuts a few weeks ago, business lobbyists have been trying to rally sympathetic lawmakers. And executives at Boeing, Caterpillar and other big companies plan to contact some 100,000 smaller suppliers that benefit indirectly from the $12.6 billion of export loans, guarantees and insurance that Ex-Im Bank provided in the last fiscal year. Those small companies, the executives hope, will create a groundswell of support in Congress for the Ex-Im Bank. ""Companies large and small who have similar interests here are banding together to provide an educational effort so people understand the impact of this,"" said Chris Hansen, Boeing senior vice president for government relations. Corporate lobbyists also have dug up a speech that Vice President Dick Cheney, while chief executive of Halliburton, gave in 1997 praising the bank and scoffing at those who consider it a giveaway to big business. They plan to pass Mr. Cheney's comments to influential members of Congress this week. ""We'll be circulating them very broadly,"" Mr. Rice said. A spokeswoman for Mr. Cheney had no immediate comment. Ex-Im Bank officials aren't talking publicly, avoiding the appearance that they are battling the White House to overturn the proposed 25% cut in the bank's $865 million operating budget for the current fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30. But an Ex-Im official said the topic has come up in conversations between key lawmakers and Ex-Im Bank Chairman James A. Harmon, who is soon to be succeeded by Mel Sembler, a Bush campaign fund-raiser and a shopping-center developer. At first, business lobbyists assumed administration budgeteers were just looking for savings anywhere they could find it. Before President Bush released his spending plan last week, companies appealed to Mitchell Daniels, head of the White House budget office, in an attempt to keep the Ex-Im Bank cuts out of the final proposal. The Ex-Im Bank's corporate clients include some of the country's largest political contributors. Boeing, the bank's largest user, received $3.3 billion of financing last year. The Seattle aerospace company and its employees contributed $1.8 million to politicians and parties during the 2000 election cycle, 61% to Republicans, according to federal election data assembled by the Center for Responsive Politics. Caterpillar, a Peoria, Ill., maker of engines and heavy equipment that secured seven Ex-Im Bank deals last year, and its employees contributed more than $500,000 -- 96% to Republicans. Company officials deny they wanted to leverage donations to try to secure political support for the Ex-Im Bank. Many lobbyists have come to the conclusion that administration officials -- those of a libertarian persuasion -- oppose Ex-Im Bank as a form of welfare for corporations. Indeed, the White House budget plan criticized the bank's operations as unjustified public subsidies for companies. ""That makes it a much more serious issue,"" Mr. Rice said. ""We're concerned that the administration seems to be turning its attention in this direction."" Barring intervention from Mr. Cheney, business groups now have largely given up hope of convincing the White House to back down, planning instead to use their muscle to convince Congress to restore the Ex-Im Bank's funding. Bank officials and U.S. companies argue that, far from being a subsidy, the bank simply allows American companies to compete with European and Japanese firms that receive assistance from their own governments. ""In many markets in Asia and Africa, the bank is absolutely critical to our ability to sell American-made products,"" said Bill Lane, Caterpillar's Washington director for governmental affairs. --- Corporate Beneficiaries Top 10 recipients of Ex-Im Bank loans, guarantees and insurance for fiscal year 2000, as measured by amount of financing, in millions Boeing $3,335 Bechtel Group $1,075 Distributed Processing Systems $388 Willbros Group $387 United Technologies $334 Raytheon $156 General Electric $150 Halliburton $136 Enron $135 LSI Logic $120 Source: Ex-Im Bank Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. The Property Report Plots & Ploys By Peter Grant 03/07/2001 The Wall Street Journal B10 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) [What's Brewing in the Real Estate Market] No Problem, Houston CENTURY DEVELOPMENT is about to announce plans to break ground on downtown Houston's third major office development in less than three years. In another sign of the strength of the city's energy sector, Century is finalizing a headquarters deal with Reliant Resources Inc. to take more than two-thirds of the project's 850,000 square feet, says Edwin Murphy, a Century senior vice president. Two other towers also are underway. In 1999, Hines began building a 1.2 million square-foot tower for Enron Corp. and late last year Crescent Real Estate Equities broke ground on a 27-story tower that will be anchored by Ernst & Young. These three projects are the first major downtown office projects to get underway since 1986. The surge is part of a renaissance of downtown Houston, where new sports facilities, hotels, apartment buildings and restaurants have been mushrooming in recent years. ""The new amenities have kept people from leaving and enticed people to come back,"" says Michael Hassler, of CB Richard Ellis. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Dutch Gas Competition Grows Despite Sluggish Reforms By Germana Canzi Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES 03/07/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LONDON -(Dow Jones)- The Netherlands is emerging as an important testing ground for E.U. gas liberalization, as new trading hubs for competitive, short-term gas supplies from the U.K. and Norway emerge on the Belgian and German borders. However, much remains to be done. A group of large energy users and traders is preparing to confront Gasunie Thursday in a hearing organized by the regulator. The main issues of contention are the balancing system, which Gasunie conducts on an hourly basis, the extent to which transport tariffs are cost-focused and third-party access to storage facilities. The emergence of competition in the Dutch gas sector is mostly due to the initiative of new market entrants who, despite a difficult regulatory environment, have managed to develop a market for short-term gas virtually from scratch. If liquidity improves in these emerging hubs, the Netherlands could become an important transit country for freely tradeable gas supplies to other countries in northwest Europe, as well as being an important market in its own right. However, the difficulty of implementing transparent third-party access systems in the Netherlands and in neighboring Germany casts a dark cloud over recent progress in competition. Since December, Enron Europe Ltd. (U.ENE), Duke Energy Corp. (DUK), E.On AG (EON), RWE AG (G.RWE) and Electrabel SA (B.ELE) have been actively buying and selling gas, sourced in the U.K., the Netherlands and Norway, in a number of hubs between Emden in Germany and Emshaven and Oude Statenzijl in the Netherlands. David Gallagher, head of European gas trading at Enron in London, estimates that at least one trade a day of around 100,000 therms for a quarterly contract is done at the Oude Statenzijl hub, where the Gasunie pipeline system connects to the network of Wingas GmbH. An important element kick-starting short-term trading was the sale, in December 2000, of a 2 billion cubic meter a year Norwegian gas supply contract to five Dutch-based power generators. Robert van der Hoeven, head of fuel procurement at Electrabel, the owner of Dutch generator EPON, said his company uses most of the gas it imports from Norway for its plants in the Netherlands and trades the rest on a short-term basis in the Oude-Emden area. This pattern is common to the other Dutch-based parties to that contract. Trading in Dutch hubs received a further boost when Nederlandse Gasunie NV (N.NEG) decided, after months of wrangling with regulator DTe, to lower its transport tariffs by 6.5% from January 2001 and to unbundle its combined commodity and service tariff, the so-called CSS system, from July 2001. Gasunie now claims its pipeline system is fully open and transparent. To prove this, it says it has lost 30% of its customers in the eligible market, but that figure hasn't changed much since March 2000. Small wonder that critics say the switching figure doesn't necessarily indicate an ideal system of third-party access. According to energy consultants The Brattle Group, around half of the gas used by alternative suppliers goes through the 1 bcm/year Zebra pipeline from Zelzate to Zeeland, which was built by Dutch utilities a few years ago precisely because Gasunie refused to provide access on favorable terms. Shippers have complained that the hourly system used by Gasunie to balance the pipeline system raises the overall cost of shipping through its network significantly. Gasunie imposes a balancing charge which effectively forces shippers to pay for the extra gas brought into the system from storage sites, in addition to the capacity and transmission price. Critics say Gasunie has so far failed to unbundle these charges, although it agreed to do so in January. According to the Brattle Group, another controversial aspect of Gasunie's tariff system is that it is based on theoretical costs of constructing new pipelines rather than its actual costs. The DTe is also considering ways of reforming the storage system to make it competitive. BP PLC (U.BP) and Nederlandse Aardolie Maatschappij NV operate storage facilities and lease capacity to Gasunie through long-term contracts. The regulator is studying ways of allowing third parties access to storage facilities. Gasunie has so far shown little sign of negotiating more competitive tariffs with storage operators and passing on the benefits to customers, critics say. The growth of short-term trading in the Dutch gas market is also inevitably linked to its potential as a transit country for gas coming from the U.K.-Belgium gas interconnector and going towards the 82bcm-a-year German market. Market participants say liquidity at the Emden and Oude hubs has grown considerably since E.On and RWE started trading there earlier this year. However, the obstructive attitude of incumbents toward third-party access there has meant that so far most gas traded in the Netherlands has remained there. -By Germana Canzi, Dow Jones Newswires; +44 20 7842 9283; germana.canzi@dowjones.com Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. USA: Big U.S. exporters to fight Ex-Im Bank cuts - WSJ. 03/07/2001 Reuters English News Service (C) Reuters Limited 2001. NEW YORK, March 7 (Reuters) - America's largest exporters are launching an aggressive lobbying campaign on Capitol Hill to protect the Export-Import Bank from budget reductions, the Wall Street Journal reported in its online edition on Wednesday. The exporters, including Boeing Co. , Caterpillar Inc. , Enron Corp. , Halliburton Co. and others, are angry and confused that a Republican administration has targeted one of their favourite programmes for big cuts, the paper reported. Ex-Im Bank officials were not talking publicly, avoiding the appearance that they are battling the White House to overturn the proposed 25 percent cut in the bank's $865 million operating budget for the current fiscal year, which ends Sept 30, it said. The White House labels the Ex-Im Bank as corporate welfare. ""The administration has fired its shot, and now we're firing ours,"" Edmund Rice, president of the Coalition for Employment Through Exports, an industry group that is leading the effort, was quoted as saying by the paper. Executives at Boeing, Caterpillar and other big companies plan to contact some 100,000 smaller suppliers who benefit indirectly from the $12.6 billion of export loans, guarantees and insurance that Ex-Im Bank provided in the last fiscal year, the paper said. Those small companies, the executives hope, will create a groundswell of support in Congress for the Ex-Im Bank, it said. New York Newsroom (212) 859-1700. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Major U.S. Exporters Rush to Export-Import Bank's Defense 03/07/2001 Dow Jones Business News (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) WASHINGTON -- Angry and confused that a Republican administration has targeted one of their favorite programs for big cuts, America's largest exporters are appealing for help from lawmakers, Wednesday's Wall Street Journal reported. Boeing Co. (BA), Caterpillar Inc. (CAT), Enron Corp. (ENE), Halliburton Co. (HAL) and others are launching an aggressive lobbying campaign on Capitol Hill to protect the Export-Import Bank from budget reductions; the White House labels the Ex-Im Bank as corporate welfare. ""The administration has fired its shot, and now we're firing ours,"" said Edmund B. Rice, president of the Coalition for Employment Through Exports, an industry group that is leading the effort. Since they got wind of the proposed cuts a few weeks ago, business lobbyists have been trying to rally sympathetic lawmakers. And executives at Boeing, Caterpillar and other big companies plan to contact some 100,000 smaller suppliers that benefit indirectly from the $12.6 billion of export loans, guarantees and insurance that Ex-Im Bank provided in the last fiscal year. Those small companies, the executives hope, will create a groundswell of support in Congress for the Ex-Im Bank. Corporate lobbyists also have dug up a speech that Vice President Dick Cheney, while chief executive of Halliburton, gave in 1997 praising the bank and scoffing at those who consider it a giveaway to big business. They plan to pass Mr. Cheney's comments to influential members of Congress this week. A spokeswoman for Mr. Cheney had no immediate comment. Ex-Im Bank officials aren't talking publicly, avoiding the appearance that they are battling the White House to overturn the proposed 25% cut in the bank's $865 million operating budget for the current fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30. But an Ex-Im official said the topic has come up in conversations between key lawmakers and Ex-Im Bank Chairman James A. Harmon, who is soon to be succeeded by Mel Sembler, a Bush campaign fund-raiser and a shopping-center developer. Copyright (c) 2001 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Report on Business: The Wall Street Journal What's News United States Wall Street Journal 03/07/2001 The Globe and Mail Metro B10 ""All material Copyright (c) Bell Globemedia Publishing Inc. and its licensors. All rights reserved."" Boeing Co., Caterpillar Inc. and Enron Corp. are among the big U.S. exporters launching an aggressive lobbying campaign on Capitol Hill to protect the Export-Import Bank from budget reductions. The White House labels the Ex-Im Bank as corporate welfare. ""The administration has fired its shot, and now we're firing ours,"" said Edmund Rice, president of the Coalition for Employment Through Exports, an industry group leading the campaign. Since they got wind of the proposed cuts a few weeks ago, business lobbyists have been trying to rally sympathetic U.S. law makers. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Deal with state could take until 2002 to close By LESLIE GORNSTEIN AP Business Writer 03/06/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. LOS ANGELES (AP) - A tentative deal aimed at rescuing Southern California Edison from insolvency might not close in time to prevent the utility from begging creditors for more patience, Edison officials said Tuesday. The utility's tentative, $2.7 billion agreement to sell its power lines to the state could take until 2002 to be consummated, thanks to complicated legal issues and other paperwork, an Edison official told bondholders Tuesday. Once the deal is signed, Edison will try to borrow against the promised cash, but Edison International Chief Financial Officer Ted Craver admitted the utility might have to ask creditors to simply wait for their money until it has the $2.7 billion in hand. Energy suppliers owed money by Edison did not immediately return calls for comment Tuesday. At least four groups of suppliers have sued Edison for millions in unpaid bills going back months. Edison and fellow utility Pacific Gas & Electric have said they have lost $13 billion on the open power market thanks to soaring prices paired with state-imposed price caps. PG&E's parent company was able to recently borrow $1 billion to pay its stockholders and its debuts. It did not use any of that money to pay PG&E's bills. Edison's disclosure, meanwhile, shocked state officials. Steve Maviglio, spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis, initially declined to comment on the status of the Edison deal, but eventually said, regarding its closure, ""We're optimistic it will be sooner rather than later."" The pacing would have nothing to do with whether fellow utilities Sempra Energy and PG&E also sell their transmission lines to California, Craver said. Among the things that could delay the deal's closing is Edison's need to find landowners on whose property its lines were built to assure no legal agreements are being violated by the sale. Edison would also have to pin down exactly what it would be selling to the state - terms that might not be decided until after a deal has been inked, Craver said. ""Trust me,"" Craver said in a phone call after the conference. ""There are a lot of legal-type documents - stuff that you and I ... would think of as a bloody nightmare."" The disclosure comes at a time when an increasing number of power suppliers are suing the utility for millions in unpaid bills. Edison also disclosed Tuesday that two more lawsuits had landed in its lap - one by a group of wind-powered generators including Enron Wind, the other by two suppliers including New York-based Caithness Energy. Both suits were filed during the past five days, Edison Assistant General Counsel Barbara Reeves said. It was not immediately clear how much the complainants were seeking; neither Enron nor Caithness returned calls for comment. The two filings bring the total number of suits by renewable-energy suppliers against Edison to four, the utility said. The city of Long Beach and CalEnergy Operating Group, a geothermal supplier, have also sued for back payments. CalEnergy alone has said it is owed $45 million in November and December payments. The line sale, part of a multifaceted, tentative deal with the state that could save Edison from insolvency, could take anywhere from several months into next year, Craver said. The tentative deal, announced by Gov. Gray Davis Feb. 23, calls for the state to pay more than twice the book value for Edison's lines. It also would require Edison to sell cheap power to the state for a decade and for Edison to end its lawsuit against state regulators. The suit asserts that price caps imposed by the California Public Utilities Commission are illegal under federal law. Additionally, Edison's parent would have to return $420 million it collected from the utility over the past several years. The money was used to pay debt, buy back stock and pay dividends to investors. SCE, PG&E and Sempra have complained they are near bankruptcy because of soaring prices on the open market combined with the state-imposed price caps for consumers. Sempra and PG&E have yet to announce similar line-sale deals with the state, though they and the governor have said negotiations are ongoing. The total cost of the 26,000 miles of lines has been estimated at $4.5 billion to $7 billion. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Sierra Pacific CEO Doubts SEC OK Of Enron Unit Buy-Report 03/06/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Sierra Pacific Resources (SRP) CEO Walter Higgins said in an interview last week that he doubts the company's $3.1 billion acquisition of Enron Corp.'s (ENE) utility Portland General Electric will be approved by the federal Securities and Exchange Commission, the Las Vegas Sun reported Tuesday. The SEC must find that Sierra Pacific is in a strong financial position before it will approve the deal, but the company is currently weakened by having lost millions of dollars in fuel and purchased power costs, Higgins said in the report. A $311 million rate increase to cover those costs began March 1, but Higgins said that money would only pay back those expenses and wouldn't improve the company's stability to a level the SEC would find adequate, according to the report. The Public Utilities Commission can halt the rate hike and order refunds if it decides the hike isn't necessary. The PUC is holding hearings to determine the prudency of the hike, and members of the state's powerful casino and mining industries have filed to intervene. Sierra Pacific's plan to shore up its financial position through the sale of its 10 power plants, worth nearly $2 billion, may also be in jeopardy. The state Senate is considering a bill to block the sales, and Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn recently sent a letter to the PUC asking that it reconsider its order allowing electric utilities to sell assets. Financial analysts have said that not allowing Sierra Pacific's two utilities to sell their assets would have a ripple effect on the company's financial position. The asset sales are tied to low-priced power contracts, and if the sales are canceled, the low-priced power will be gone as well. ""If the divestiture is stopped...the state may be dealing with a much bigger rate increase,"" Steve Fleishman, Merrill Lynch utility analyst, told Dow Jones Newswires recently. Sierra Pacific is the parent company of electric utilities Sierra Pacific Power Co. and Nevada Power, which serve customers in the state's North and South, respectively. -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872, jessica.berthold@dowjones.com -0- 07/03/01 01-04G Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Many Power Deals Announced by California Governor Still Not Final By Jason Leopold 03/06/2001 Dow Jones Business News (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) Dow Jones Newswires LOS ANGELES -- Many of the long-term power-supply contracts announced by California Gov. Gray Davis this week remain under negotiation or are the subject of ongoing lawsuits, power suppliers said Tuesday. The lack of finality to the deals raises questions about the state's success in covering its power needs, particularly going into what is expected to be an unusually tight summer. Generators said privately they were surprised the governor went ahead with his announcement Monday, given that many of the contracts haven't been signed. David Freeman, general manager of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, who negotiated the contracts on behalf of the state, conceded that details remain to be worked out. ""This is not a done deal,"" Mr. Freeman said, adding that credit concerns are keeping generators from signing the deals. Gov. Davis announced Monday that California has secured 40 long-term contracts that will provide California with about 629 million megawatt hours of electricity over 10 years, at a price of more than $40 billion. A megawatt hour is roughly the amount of electricity needed to power 1,000 homes. Several of those forward deals, however, involve contracts originally held by Edison International (EIX) unit Southern California Edison and PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric at the California Power Exchange, previously the state's main power market. The governor seized those contracts earlier this year, just before the Power Exchange liquidated them to cover hundreds of millions of dollars in power bills the utilities had failed to pay. The contracts, which total about 1.3 million megawatt hours of electricity and have a market value of about $1 billion, according to market sources, have yet to be paid for or signed over to the state. Duke Energy Corp. (DUK), one of the suppliers that sold the contracts to Pacific Gas and SoCal Ed, has sued Gov. Davis for unlawfully commandeering those contracts. Although Duke has reached an interim settlement to continue providing power to the state Department of Water Resources until April 30, the company and the Davis administration still have to ""develop a comprehensive long-term settlement to pay for the power supply contracts,"" said Duke spokesman Tom Williams. The governor went ahead with the announcement, because the California Department of Water Resources believes it will be able to finalize and sign the contracts over the next several weeks, Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio said. Separately, several suppliers named in the governor's announcement Monday -- including Duke, Reliant Energy Inc. (REI), Mirant Corp. (MIR), Sempra Energy, Enron Corp. (ENE) and Avista Corp. (AVA) -- said they have yet to sign final agreements with the state, although negotiations were ongoing. ""We are working in good faith with the DWR toward a long-term contract,"" said Art Larson, spokesman for Sempra Energy Resources, a unit of Sempra. Mr. Larson said Sempra signed a terms of agreement with the water-resources department and expects to reach a final agreement over the next several weeks. Reliant said it has only signed a short-term contract with the state that expires in about two weeks. The company will only sign a long-term contract once it's paid more than $400 million owed by Pacific Gas and SoCal Ed, spokesman Richard Wheatley said. Mirant said it also won't sign contracts with the state until it's paid. Enron said it's reached agreement on terms with the state, but has some credit-related details to hammer out. ""Everything's been agreed to except for some credit technicalities,"" Enron spokesman Mark Palmer said. Meanwhile, small, independent power plants in California that are capable of generating 1,800 megawatts of power are shut down because their owners haven't been paid by the state's two main utilities, the California Independent System Operator said Tuesday. The decline in small-plant output has contributed to the state's power-supply problems the past two months. Partnerships involving El Paso Corp. (EPG), for example, shut down 350 megawatts of generation last weekend due to nonpayment, the company said Tuesday. SoCal Ed hasn't paid the owners of the smaller generators, known as ""qualifying facilities,"" since early December, which means the generators are still owed for electric production in October, while PG&E has paid only a small percentage of its qualifying facility bills since its last full payment in early January. The plants, one-third of which are powered by renewable sources like wind and solar power, meet almost 30% of California's electricity needs. Almost all of the closed generators are fueled by natural gas, and many haven't been able to pay their gas suppliers and have been cut off from their gas supply. The California Senate Energy Committee plans to vote on legislation to create a new pricing system for all qualifying facilities this week. The proposed bill would cut the prices to qualifying facilities from about 17 cents a kilowatt-hour the past eight months to about eight cents, depending on the price of five-year natural-gas contracts the generators can sign. The plants that run on renewable resources would be paid 5.4 cents a kilowatt-hour. -- Mark Golden contributed to this article. Write to Jason Leopold at jason.leopold@dowjones.com Copyright (c) 2001 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. US Natural Gas Prices Fall As Demand Slips In Most Areas 03/06/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) HOUSTON -(Dow Jones)- U.S. natural gas physical prices fell Tuesday as demand eased, except in the Northeast and Southeast areas of the country, traders said. Heavy snowstorms in the upper Northeast supported some pricing, as did cooler weather in Georgia, the Carolinas and the Florida panhandle. Some storage buying occurred in Texas ""if they could make it work,"" a trader said. ""It was a pretty uneventful day,"" a Gulf Coast trader said late Tuesday. Also, because of the snowstorm in the Northeast, traders had purchased gas ahead of time to make up for needed load, he said. A scheduled work outage on Enron's Transwestern San Juan lateral in New Mexico was completed, and the return of a power plant in California alleviated demand in the West, traders said. At the Arizona-California border hub, buyers paid around $13-$33 a million British thermal units, West Coast traders said, down as much as $15 from Monday. At PG&E Citygate, prices were mixed, with buyers paying $9.75-$10.65/MMBtu, down 25 cents on the bid, up 15 cents on the offer. In the Midwest, Chicago Citygate prices fell 7 cents-8 cents to a range of $5.42-$5.53/MMBtu. Alliance Pipeline into Chicago traded around $5.47-$5.52/MMBtu, down 4 cents to 9 cents from Monday. The Nymex April natural gas futures contract settled at $5.315/MMBtu, down 2.1 cents in a tight, range-bound, uneventful session that started late due to bad weather. Physical gas prices at the benchmark Henry Hub in south Louisiana ended in a range of $5.25-$5.30/MMBtu, down 2 cents-6 cents from Monday. Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line at Station 65 deals were made in a similar range of $5.26-$5.35/MMBtu, down 2 cents on the bid, unchanged on the offer. At Katy in East Texas, buyers paid $5.21-$5.30/MMBtu, down 5 cents-6 cents. At Waha, prices fell 9 cents-12 cents to a range of $5.15-$5.30/MMBtu. -By John Edmiston, Dow Jones Newswires; 713-547-9209; john.edmiston@dowjones.com Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Important - CPUC Motion - Confidential Attorney ClientPrivil
 ege and Work Product; [EMail-Body]= Does anyone have an idea as to why marketers, including EPMI, are not included in the list of subject companies: Exh. B? Since EPMI is not a subject of the motion, why should it answer? Lying in the weeds may be a more prudent course of action. >>> ""Fergus, Gary S."" <GFergus@brobeck.com> 11/07/00 10:08PM >>> I just spoke with Mary to make sure we have the same information. Here are the facts we have so far. On November 4th, the CPUC filed a motion with FERC to adopt the form of protective order that the CPUC entered, to compel the production of documents and to shorten time to answer. According to Exhibit B (read to me by Nancy Pickover at Bracewell) the following CPUC moved against the following entities: AES, Williams, Duke, Dynegy, Reliant and Southern. Enron entities were NOT named in exhibit B. This is not to say that we could not be easily added to the group. While the motion reads as if the CPUC was moving against everybody, in fact, in footnote 2 they state they are only moving against the entities named in Exhibit B. We will have Exhibit B in hand first thing tomorrow via FEDEX to confirm this. To repeat, Enron is not named yet. Thanks Gary -----Original Message----- From: Mary.Hain@enron.com [mailto:Mary.Hain@enron.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2000 6:23 PM To: dwatkiss@bracepatt.com; Susan.J.Mara@enron.com; Richard.B.Sanders@enron.com; James.D.Steffes@enron.com; Christian.Yoder@enron.com; Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com; mday@gmssr.com; gfergus@brobeck.com; rcarroll@bracepatt.com; Alan.Comnes@enron.com; Joe.Hartsoe@enron.com; Sarah.Novosel@enron.com Cc: Tim.Belden@enron.com; Lysa.Akin@enron.com Subject: Important - CPUC Motion - Confidential Attorney Client Privilege and Work Product As you may already know, the CPUC filed a motion at FERC asking for a protective order and to compel production of the information they subpoened from us in the CPUC's OII case. Given the timing, we should discuss this on our conference call scheduled for tomorrow. They request that we be required: to answer their motion on Thursday, to provide the information within 5 working days of a FERC ordering production, and to provide of P&L information and spread sheets detailing our deals, specifically delivery point, delivery date, counterparty, volume and price. We may not have a problem providing this information for use by FERC in its proceeding subject to a confidentiality agreement but I think we would oppose their requests for: the information to be provided for ""government eyes only"" - this would prohibit EPMI from defending itself vis-a-vis other market participants. a FERC confidentiality order that would could allow FERC to ""share"" this information with the CPUC (for purposes of the PUC's OII proceeding) pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 824h(c). 16 USC 824g(c) requires the Commission to make information available to state commissions as may be of assistance in state regulation of public utilities. We should argue that 16 USC 824h(c) does not apply here given that we are not a public utility nor does the PUC regulate how much market power wholesale marketers exercise or the level of market power mitigation (these are the bases the PUC provides for explaining why it should have this information.) the above contractual information to allow them to analyze the competitiveness of the forward market to evaluate the wisdom of the Commission's decision to allow the UDC's ""unfettered access"" to the forwards market. This argument is unpersuasive given that the CPUC can get information about the competitiveness of the forward markets from the Wall Street Journal's listing of NYMEX prices. This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. To reply to our email administrator directly, send an email to postmaster@brobeck.com BROBECK PHLEGER & HARRISON LLP http://www.brobeck.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: London, New York, Houston, Financial Mathematics June/July 2001; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: ""Joanna Vidal"" <jvidal@riskwaters.com>@ENRON Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 3:38 PM To: ds64@cyrus.andrew.cmu.edu; Geman Helyette; vkamins@enron.com; kaminski@aol.com; pnance@teknecon.com; chris.harris@innogy.com; eronn@mail.utexas.edu; sama@dynegy.com Subject: Re: London, New York, Houston, Financial Mathematics June/July 2001 Dear Speakers, I understand how awfully busy you must all be at this time, but I would appreciate a phone call or a quick email to confirm that you ahve or have not, for that matter received the speaker packets I sent to you May 2, 2001. please advise as soon as possible, that way, if yo have not, for whatever received them, I will know what steps to take from there. All the best. Sincerely, Joanna Vidal PS: My contact details are posted below. Joanna Vidal Events Coordinator Risk Waters Group T: (212) 925 1864 ext. 197 F: (212) 925 7585jvidal@riskwaters.com www.riskwaters.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Western Interstate Energy Board; [EMail-Body]= Committee on Regional Electric Power Cooperation, in Tempe, AZ [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Protecting Confidential Information: New European Restricted List
 Procedure; [EMail-Body]= As you know, we are now launching EnronCredit.com which will involve credit derivatives trading in Europe and North America, both on Enron Online and off-line. This will involve quoting prices for buying and selling bankruptcy protection in respect of reference entities, many of whom are our counterparties in a variety of different commercial and financial contexts. This exciting cocktail of credit derivatives and Enron Online raises significant novel legal risks for Enron. Probably the most significant risk would arise in a situation where Enron has confidential information about a reference entity and wrongfully uses that information in pricing the credit derivative on that entity. This could well result in legal proceeding against Enron. In practice, an allegation of misuse of confidential information can be very difficult indeed to defend without adequate procedures in place to safeguard that information. In fact, Enron's credit trading will rely strictly on publicly available financial information and will not involve the use of confidential information, unless the reference entity has specifically consented. Nevertheless, to avoid the appearance of impropriety, we are taking additional steps to consider confidentiality agreements we have in place with potential reference entities before deciding whether or not we will quote prices on such entities. Against this background is the ever-present risk of ""insider dealing"". This crime - which carries a maximum prison sentence of 7 years and an unlimited fine - is committed where a person (or member of their family etc) deals in the securities (shares, bonds or derivatives on them) of a listed company on the basis of unpublished (confidential) price-sensitive information. We do not expect at this time to deal in publicly traded bonds as part of EnronCredit.com, but insider dealing is relevant to the conduct of Enron staff and could affect other parts of our business. In addition, SFA rules require the safeguarding of confidential information, the misuse of which is a serious disciplinary matter. In order to ensure the success of this new business and that confidential information is not misused either by Enron or its staff, we are now introducing new policies and procedures (attached) which include a simple Restricted List procedure. In essence they require you - to take prudent steps to safeguard confidential information within Enron to notify Michael Brown, Mark Elliott or myself if you become aware of confidential or sensitive information (or circumstances) about a counterparty which you think might make it appropriate for that counterparty to be placed on the Restricted List. To make life easier, numerous examples of the types of information which might be relevant are set out in the attached procedures. Please familiarise yourself, and anyone else in your group you think appropriate, with these procedures. As you will see, you are not expected to make difficult determinations about whether an entity should or should not be added to the Restricted List, just to let us know if you think there is a possibility that it should be added. We will also provide quick briefing sessions to ensure that each of you is comfortable with these new procedures. Many thanks for your co-operation. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Humberto (Beto) Kuhn, resume; [EMail-Body]= Humberto - I forwarded your resume to Barry Hunsaker who is general counsel at EOG Resources. As you may know, EOG used to be Enron Oil and Gas, a majority-owned Enron subsidiary. A couple of years ago, Enron sold its interest in EOG and it became a stand alone company. EOG Resources has been doing very well. I don't know if they are looking for lawyers now, but I think I sent your resume to the right place. ""Humberto Kuhn"" <BetoKuhn@msn.com> on 05/21/2001 11:17:21 AM To: <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: Humberto (Beto) Kuhn, resume Dear Steve:? With sincere and advance thanks, and pursuant to your recent conversation with my brother, George, I attach a copy of?the short version?of my resume.? I have a longer detailed version, as well as numerous references, that I will be pleased to furnish you.? In addition, I am at your disposal at any time that?you or any others at ENRON should wish to meet with me.? Again,?my thanks for your assistance and guidance. ? Kind regards, ? ? Beto Kuhn Cell:? 713/ 906-8463 Res:? 713/ 467-3974 - RESUME HGK,Short Form 05-01.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: California Power Markets; [EMail-Body]= Thanks for the analysis. We understand that McKinsey may be helping the Governor develop a demand buy down program. Is this true? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Ed Segner's Staff meeting, in 50M Dining Room; [EMail-Body]= Maya Weber 202 383 2260 Joe Hillings Steve Montovano [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Joe Hirko, PGE in your office; [EMail-Body]= Rick Shapiro Portland registration in cal Former CEC commissioner -- Bob Mussiter [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Gine Project-  Briefing book sections DRAFT; [EMail-Body]= I agree. I am almost through it -- and while there are improvements per our suggestions from the first draft -- there are both substantive and format problems -- i.e., it does not read very well in places, aside from substance. Will fax Amr my comments on the text and leave with DC colleagues as I will be up in the Senate on RTOs this afternoon. Thanks. -----Original Message----- From: Ibrahim, Amr Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 1:39 PM To: Steffes, James D.; Vegas, Dennis; Mara, Susan; Dasovich, Jeff; Kaufman, Paul Cc: Shelk, John; Shortridge, Pat; Nord, Sue Subject: Gine Project- Briefing book sections DRAFT Sue, Jim, Jeff, Paul: In the context of GNIE Project and the papers that shall be put forward to the participants, I am seeking your help in providing comments on paper one in the list below. I can not recommend it in its current form since it departs from Enron's line of thinking in many places. There is a tendency to make these papers neutral, but I found it actually going the other direction. Kindly advise of your point of view. It is time sensitve, and I appreciate your help Brgrds AI Dennis: I shall ask for a delay in reference to this paper for 48 hours till I consult with the colleagues above. Thank you. AI -----Original Message----- From: Vegas, Dennis Sent: Friday, August 31, 2001 1:19 PM To: Ibrahim, Amr; Shortridge, Pat; Shelk, John Cc: Robertson, Linda; Shapiro, Richard; Allen, Margaret Subject: FW: Briefing book sections DRAFT Attached as discussed is the second draft of the briefing documents for the Oct event. They have been separated per our request. These are fresh from Intellibridge and we in Houston have not reviewed them as well, but will be doing so over the weekend. The documents are attached in the order in which we intend them to appear in the Briefing Book: 1. Brief History of the Western Power Crisis (Western Power Crisis.doc) 2. Western Power Crisis Timeline (timeline.pdf) -- (Please note that on this timeline, we still need to cite sources for each of the date entries. Their graphic designer will be able to do this for us on Wednesday of next week). 3. Responses to the Nation's Energy Crunch (energy crunch clean.doc) 4. Federal vs. State Energy Policy Jurisdiction (fedvsstate.doc) 5. The Status of U.S. Electricity Restructuring (progress of states.doc) If the regulatory and government team could consolidate their feedback, it would be helpful. Once done, we would like to schedule a call for next Thursday at 3:30 pm, since we would like to do it when Intellibridge is in the DC office. Regards, - Western Power Crisis.doc << File: Western Power Crisis.doc >> - timeline.pdf << File: timeline.pdf >> - energy crunch clean.doc << File: energy crunch clean.doc >> - fedvsstate.doc << File: fedvsstate.doc >> - progress of states.doc << File: progress of states.doc >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Wade Cline; [EMail-Body]= Sandeep, Thanks. Any resolution to Krishna's problem yet? Vince -----Original Message----- From: Kohli, Sandeep Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 7:53 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Wade Cline Vince, Wade was in town today and I caught him for lunch. I conveyed your thanks for his efforts with the US Embassy on Krishna's behalf. I also had a disucssion with him on Dabhol, and will give you the details upon return. The gist is that though we are unsure, 90% probability is in the direction of terminating the PPA and arbitrating. Regards, Sandeep. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: testimony; [EMail-Body]= Here it is. Peggy Mahoney@EES 09/12/2000 11:19 AM To: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: testimony Can I plez have a copy of Steve's testimony from yesterday in San Diego? Thanks Peggy [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= PanNat Value - Confidential and Proprietary; [EMail-Body]= Jeff, Per your request, below is the value of the deal, based on MID prices as of Friday, June 28. We have also estimated the Bid/Offer costs at $30 million based upon several quotes we received last year. Let me know if you have any questions. Regards, Eric <Embedded Picture (Metafile)> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Merger News Articles; [EMail-Body]= A full list of news articles will be distributed on Monday, but here is som= e of the initial coverage. Business/Financial Desk; Section A Rival to Buy Enron, Top Energy Trader, After Financial Fall By ALEX BERENSON and ANDREW ROSS SORKIN 11/10/2001 The New York Times=20 Page 1, Column 2 c. 2001 New York Times Company=20 With its stock plunging and its finances in doubt, the world's largest ener= gy trader, the Enron Corporation, agreed to be acquired yesterday by the ri= val Dynegy Inc. for about $9 billion in stock and the assumption of $13 bil= lion in debt.=20 The deal is an extraordinary turnabout for Enron, a Houston-based company t= hat had been a driving force behind electricity deregulation nationwide. Its chairman, Kenneth L. Lay, a big contributor to the Republican Party, pr= ovided political influence, while its former chief executive, Jeffrey K. Sk= illing, helped create markets for the trading of electricity and natural ga= s. But last winter, when California's effort to deregulate the electricity = market led to soaring power prices and rolling blackouts, Enron was the sub= ject of much criticism and political anger.=20 Recent disclosures of discrepancies in Enron's financial statements and an = investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission caused the shares t= o plunge this week to their lowest level in a decade. As other companies be= came wary of doing business with it, Enron -- also facing a potential cash = squeeze -- apparently had little choice but to find a buyer, and a deal was= hastily cobbled together this week.=20 For critics who had complained about Enron's market power and its dominance= , the combination poses additional concerns. Dynegy's acquisition of Enron = will be reviewed by state and federal agencies, led by the Justice Departme= nt and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Analysts said today that t= hey expected scrutiny of the combined companies' holdings in California, wh= ere Dynegy owns power-generating plants and Enron accounts for much of the = trading of natural gas -- fuel for the state's electric power plants.=20 Buying Enron at a deep discount -- it has lost $60 billion in market value = this year -- could make Dynegy the dominant trader of electricity and natur= al gas. But the agreement carries big risks as well. Along with Enron's gas= pipelines and high-technology trading floor, Dynegy will take on Enron's s= ubstantial debt and a web of complex transactions that Enron has spun over = the last decade.=20 In addition to the $13 billion in debt that Enron carries on its books, it = has guaranteed at least $4 billion in off-balance sheet loans, and the hidd= en debt could total as much as $10 billion, said Carol Coale, a stock analy= st with Prudential Securities.=20 Charles L. Watson, Dynegy's chairman and chief executive, said yesterday th= at Dynegy could sort through Enron's tangled finances. ''We know the compan= y well,'' Mr. Watson said. ''It's not like we just started fresh. I'm confi= dent that it's as solid as we thought it was.''=20 The new company will combine Enron's 25,000-mile natural gas pipeline syste= m with the large number of power plants that Dynegy owns worldwide, as well= as Illinois Power, a Dynegy subsidiary that serves 650,000 customers in Il= linois. But its most important asset will be its trading desk. It will be t= he largest energy trader in the nation, trading more than twice as much pow= er and natural gas as its closest competitors.=20 Mr. Watson said the company did not expect to sell significant properties a= nd that the deal should pass regulatory scrutiny. ''There's really not a lo= t of overlap in assets,'' he said.=20 Mr. Watson and Steve Bergstrom, Dynegy's president, will hold those positio= ns in the new company, which will be called Dynegy and remain in Houston. M= r. Lay, who created Enron in the mid-1980's, will not have any role in the = combined company's daily operations. He has been asked to join its board bu= t has not provided an answer. ''The last three weeks haven't been a lot of = fun,'' he said.=20 In a statement announcing the agreement yesterday afternoon, Mr. Watson sai= d he was confident that the merger would produce a strong new company. ''En= ron is the ideal strategic partner for Dynegy,'' Mr. Watson said. ''We will= keep a strong balance sheet and straightforward financial structure as key= priorities.''=20 To shore up Enron's finances, Dynegy will immediately put $1.5 billion into= Enron through ChevronTexaco, the giant oil company, which already owns 27 = percent of Dynegy. Another billion dollars will be injected once the deal i= s completed.=20 Investors appeared comfortable yesterday that Dynegy could make the deal wo= rk. After falling $3, to $33, on Wednesday, when the companies first said t= hey were in discussions, Dynegy rose $5.76 on Thursday and yesterday to clo= se the week at $38.76.=20 ''On paper, it works,'' Ms. Coale of Prudential said. ''The combined compan= y would be the leading trader, the market leader in most of their businesse= s.'' Ms. Coale, who has a sell rating on Enron and a buy rating on Dynegy, = said she planned to keep her buy rating on Dynegy.=20 As it works to have the deal approved, Dynegy will have to persuade Enron's= traders to stay with the combined company. The pain of the stock's 90 perc= ent plunge this year will not be equally shared. Some Enron employees have = held onto their shares and seen their retirement accounts eviscerated. Mean= while, Mr. Lay, Mr. Skilling and other former and current executives sold h= undreds of millions of dollars in Enron stock in 2000 and this year.=20 The companies also have very different corporate cultures. Dynegy emphasize= s teamwork, while Enron is more competitive, said Ehud Ronn, director of th= e Center for Energy Finance Education and Research at the University of Tex= as. Even before the merger was announced, Enron had lost some of its employ= ees to other energy trading companies, Mr. Ronn said.=20 Some investors and analysts say that the problems with Enron's finances may= extend beyond the partnerships that have been the subject of Wall Street's= scrutiny the last month. James Chanos, a short-seller who has been one of = Enron's most vocal critics, said there was increasing evidence that Enron's= energy trading operations were not as profitable as the company had said. = ''There appears to be a culture at Enron of aggressively booking profits an= d deferring or obscuring losses,'' Mr. Chanos said.=20 On Thursday, Enron said in a filing with the S.E.C that it had overstated i= ts earnings by almost $600 million over the last five years. Mr. Chanos sai= d more restatements were possible, noting that the filing disclosed partner= ships had been used to hedge almost $1 billion in losses in 2000 and this y= ear. So far, the losses from those partnerships remain off Enron's financia= l statements, Mr. Chanos said.=20 Enron's stock had been under pressure for most of this year, as the company= ran up large losses with failed efforts to expand outside its core trading= operation. In August, Mr. Skilling resigned as chief executive, and Mr. La= y resumed control of daily operations.=20 Still, the company appeared financially sound until last month, when it dis= closed that its shareholders' equity, a measure of the company's value, dro= pped by $1.2 billion because of deals disclosed only hazily in its financia= l statements. The announcement unnerved investors, who wondered whether Enr= on had found ways to inflate its profits and move debt off its balance shee= t, and led the S.E.C. to begin an investigation.=20 Mr. Lay tried to reassure investors that Enron's finances were in order and= that its businesses remained strong. But the last three weeks have brought= a series of damaging revelations about partnerships that Enron formed with= some of its top executives, including its former chief financial officer, = Andrew S. Fastow.=20 With questions mounting, the major credit-rating agencies began to downgrad= e Enron's debt, putting additional pressure on the company. If Enron's debt= rating falls below investment grade, it would be forced to repay $3.3 bill= ion in loans that it had guaranteed.=20 To strengthen its balance sheet and bolster its stock, Enron turned to big = investors like Warren E. Buffett in search of billions of dollars of financ= ing. When the financing did not quickly appear, its stock fell further.=20 By this week, some major energy traders were refusing to extend credit to E= nron, worrying that the company would be unable to make good on its contrac= ts. The Mirant Corporation, an Atlanta-based power plant owner and electric= ity trader, sharply curtailed its trading with Enron this week. ''We're tra= ding with them on a very limited basis,'' said James Peters, a Mirant spoke= sman. ''It's not business as usual.''=20 On Wednesday, Enron's stock fell as low as $7 a share, its lowest level in = more than a decade. That day, news of the Enron and Dynegy talks leaked out= .=20 By late Wednesday, the boards of the two companies had tentatively agreed t= o a deal. But Dynegy refused to go ahead until it learned whether Enron's c= redit rating would remain investment grade and was comfortable with the eff= ect of the deal on its own rating. The deal moved forward yesterday after D= ynegy was assured Enron's debt was not in danger of being lowered to junk s= tatus soon after the deal was announced, according to company officials.=20 Dynegy and Enron had provided Standard & Poor's and Moody's Investors Servi= ce, the main credit agencies, with statements showing them what a combined = company might look like and asked the ratings agencies for an expedited rev= iew of the transaction, Mr. Watson said.=20 Under the deal, Enron shareholders will receive 0.2685 share of Dynegy stoc= k for each Enron share, or $9.80 based on Dynegy's closing price on Thursda= y. Enron's stock gained 22 cents yesterday, to $8.63.=20 ''I never thought our stock price would be at this level,'' Mr. Lay said ye= sterday.=20 Enron's shareholders will own only 36 percent of the combined company, and = Dynegy will name at least 11 members of the company's 14-member board.=20 If the deal falls apart, Enron or Dynegy will have to pay a breakup fee of = $350 million.=20 To protect Dynegy's and ChevronTexaco's cash infusion, the money will go to= an Enron unit that owns the Northern Natural Gas Pipeline. If the merger i= s not completed, Dynegy will have the right to buy the unit.=20 An army of bankers and lawyers advised the companies. Lehman Brothers Inc. = acted as financial adviser and Baker Botts and Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer &= Feld acted as counsel for Dynegy. J. P. Morgan & Company and Salomon Smith= Barney acted as financial advisers for Enron, and Vinson & Elkins and Weil= Gotshal & Manges acted as the company's counsel. Pillsbury Winthrop served= as counsel to ChevronTexaco. Chart: ''A Marriage of Strength and Weakness'' A merger of Enron and Dynegy= would bring together two of the country's biggest energy companies -- and = save Enron from potential collapse. Graph tracks the weekly closes of Enron= shares from 1999 through 2001. Top North American gas marketers SALES, OF = BILLION CUBIC FEET PER DAY* Enron: 24.6 Reliant: 13.2 Duke Energy: 12.8 BP:= 12.3 Mirant: 11.8 Dynegy: 10.9 Top North American power marketers SALES, O= F MILLION MEGAWATT HOURS* Enron: 212.5 American Electric Power: 134.5 Duke = Energy: 118.1 Reliant Resources: 86.1 PG&E National Energy Group: 73.2 Dyne= gy: 70.1 *Figures are for the 2nd quarter of 2001. (Sources: Bloomberg Fina= ncial Markets; Simmons & Co.; Natural Gas Week)(pg. C2) Dynegy, Enron Merger Deal Worth Almost $25 Billion Melita Marie Garza 11/10/2001 KRTBN Knight-Ridder Tribune Business News: Chicago Tribune - Illinois=20 Copyright (C) 2001 KRTBN Knight Ridder Tribune Business News; Source: World= Reporter (TM)=20 Enron Corp., the nation's biggest power trader, was taken over by its small= er, more conservative rival, Dynegy Inc. in a merger deal valued at nearly = $25 billion, company officials announced Friday.=20 The combined company will be called Dynegy Inc. and will be headed by Chuck= Watson, Dynegy's chairman and chief executive. If it wins regulatory and s= hareholder approval, the deal would propel Dynegy, the sixth-largest U.S. p= ower trader, to the No. 1 position, with more than 30 percent of the market= . The Houston-based competitors are new-breed energy companies, formed to cap= italize on wholesale power marketing and trading, with Dynegy emphasizing i= ts own power generation capabilities.=20 Enron, meanwhile, has been laid low in recent weeks by soured transactions = with energy partnerships run by one of its former executives and by a serie= s of revelations about questionable accounting practices. Enron this week w= as forced to restate its earnings over the past five years -- revising them= downward by 20 percent, or $586 million -- and has seen its stock price pl= unge more than 80 percent in the past three weeks.=20 Both Enron and Dynegy have extensive business dealings in Illinois, one of = the first states to begin deregulating its electric power industry; among o= ther things, Dynegy owns Illinois Power, a Downstate utility.=20 The new Dynegy would become one of the largest companies in the world, with= revenues exceeding $200 billion and assets of roughly $90 billion, company= officials said. By comparison, ExxonMobil, the nation's largest company, r= eported revenues of $232.7 billion in 2000.=20 ""We needed to do something to strengthen our balance sheet and get the inve= stor community focused on the core energy business,"" said Kenneth Lay, Enro= n's chairman and chief executive. ""We looked at several alternatives; this = was in the best interests of our employees and shareholders.""=20 Lay said he would not have a role in running the new company, but was consi= dering a request to serve on the newly combined board.=20 Watson, Dynegy's chairman, said the merger compact included escape clauses = for Dynegy. ""But, I wouldn't be standing here if I expected to see that (us= ed). I really believe the value degradation in Enron had nothing to do with= their core business. We looked under the hood, it is just as strong as we = thought it was.""=20 Still, Watson acknowledged the possibility that more problems may surface a= t Enron. ""I don't think anybody can absolutely unequivocally say there's no= thing (more) there,"" he said.=20 Dynegy's stock price closed higher Friday, rising $2.26, or 6.2 percent, to= $38.76. Enron's stock was down 33 cents, or 3.7 percent, at $8.63 a share.= =20 Together, the companies have natural gas sales of about 40 billion cubic fe= et per day through the third quarter of 2001 and power sales exceeding 500 = million megawatt hours through the third quarter of 2001. In addition, the = new Dynegy's delivery network will include more than 22,000 megawatts of ge= nerating capacity and 25,000 miles of interstate pipelines. In Enron, Dyneg= y is taking on a company saddled with a heavy debt load and a credit rating= that has been downgraded to near junk bond status and is under the cloud o= f a Securities and Exchange Commission investigation.=20 Under the stock for stock swap portion of the deal, valued at $8.846 billio= n, Dynegy is paying about $10.41 a share for the 850 million outstanding En= ron shares. Dynegy would pay .2685 shares of its stock for each share of En= ron.=20 In addition, Dynegy agreed to provide $1.5 billion infusion in cash to help= stabilize its much larger competitor and assume an estimated $15 billion i= n debt.=20 Just Thursday Enron reported that its debt was an estimated $12.9 billion p= ending completion of financial statements dated Sept. 30. A day later the c= ompany's accounting of its debt jumped $2 billion.=20 Dynegy's current shareholders, including Chevron Texaco Corp., will end up = owning 64 percent of the new company. Chevron Texaco said it would invest a= n additional $2.5 billion in Dynegy.=20 Enron's stockholders will own about 36 percent of the combined company's st= ock at closing, which is anticipated for the third quarter of 2002.=20 In Illinois, in addition to Illinois Power, Dynegy owns a Chicago area elec= tricity peaker plant and is a partner with Nicor Inc., in Nicor Energy, an = unregulated natural gas utility in the Chicago area.=20 Enron's subsidiary, Enron Energy Services, has a high-profile contract to p= rovide 60 percent of Chicago city government's electricity. It also has con= tracts to provide electricity to Quaker Oats Co. and the University of Chic= ago, among others.=20 In addition to Watson, other top Dynegy management will remain in place in = the new company. Steve Bergstrom, president of Dynegy Inc., and Rob Doty, c= hief financial officer of Dynegy Inc., will retain those positions in the c= ombined company. Enron's current president and chief operating officer, Gre= g Whalley, will become an executive vice president of the new Dynegy. The b= oard of directors of the combined company will be comprised of 14 members. = Dynegy's 11 designees will include three from ChevronTexaco. Enron will hav= e the right to designate a minimum of three board members. Business/Financial Desk; Section C Regulators Struggle With a Marketplace Created by Enron By JEFF GERTH with RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr. 11/10/2001 The New York Times=20 Page 1, Column 2 c. 2001 New York Times Company=20 WASHINGTON, Nov. 9 -- For years, the Enron Corporation used its political m= uscle to build the markets in which it thrived, pushing relentlessly on Cap= itol Hill and in bureaucratic backwaters to deregulate the nation's natural= gas and electricity businesses.=20 Its achievement, as one Enron executive said today, in creating a ''regulat= ory black hole'' fit nicely with what he called the company's ''core manage= ment philosophy, which was to be the first mover into a market and to make = money in the initial chaos and lack of transparency.'' Now, Wall Street's dissatisfaction with Enron's secretive ways has delivere= d the company into the arms of its much smaller Houston rival, Dynegy Inc.,= in a deal worth about $9 billion in stock and the assumption of $13 billio= n in debt. The combination of the two companies, energy experts and lawmake= rs said today, poses a novel set of challenges for regulators still struggl= ing to grasp the complexities of the marketplace that Enron invented.=20 ''We're in a supersonic-speed era of electronic trading with a horse-and-bu= ggy-era regulatory system to protect consumers,'' said Representative Edwar= d J. Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat who has devised legislation to close = the regulatory gap.=20 Dynegy's acquisition of Enron is expected to be reviewed by numerous state = and federal agencies, led by the Justice Department, the Federal Trade Comm= ission and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.=20 Analysts said today that sharp scrutiny would be given to the combined comp= anies' holdings in California, where Dynegy owns generating plants and Enro= n controls a large part of the market for trading natural gas -- the fuel f= or a big share of the state's electric power plants.=20 ''Dynegy would now have a greater ability to take the dominant position in = gas and raise the price of electricity,'' said Frank Wolak, a professor of = economics at Stanford University.=20 Mr. Wolak, a consultant to the Justice Department on a 1999 antitrust case = that led to limits on another merger of electricity and natural gas compani= es in Southern California, said he was skeptical that regulators were up to= the task of reviewing today's deal.=20 The transaction ''is something the Department of Justice needs to look at, = and they are going to have a hard time looking at,'' Mr. Wolak said. ''And = it's beyond the ability of the F.E.R.C. to look at.''=20 Pat Wood -- named chairman of the federal energy commission earlier this ye= ar with the backing of Kenneth L. Lay, the chairman of Enron -- acknowledge= d in an interview today that the agency had ''a long way to go'' in matchin= g the sophistication of the companies it regulates.=20 But he said that the commission had made great strides in grappling with th= e new risk management techniques pioneered by Enron, Dynegy and other energ= y companies. It is hiring more experts, he said, adopting more restrictive = rules on how much ''market power'' one party can control and requiring more= disclosure of certain energy transactions.=20 In an interview this evening, Charles L. Watson, the chairman of Dynegy, sa= id he did not believe that regulators reviewing the deal with Enron would r= equire the sale of any assets. ''We haven't really identified any pitfalls = that require any sort of asset divestiture,'' he said. ''There's not really= any overlap.''=20 A senior executive at one of Enron's largest energy-trading rivals disagree= d. ''I don't think this deal gets through unscathed,'' he said today. ''I'm= sure the Justice Department and the F.T.C. will look closely at the pretty= substantial concentration of market power these companies will have in the= energy-trading area.''=20 Enron is mainly a trader of natural gas and electricity -- indeed, the bigg= est player in both those markets -- and it also owns a network of gas pipel= ines. Dynegy processes and sells natural gas and generates and sells electr= icity. Each company owns a local electric utility, too: Dynegy owns Illinoi= s Power in Decatur, Ill., while Enron owns Portland General Electric in Por= tland, Ore., but last month announced plans to sell it to another Oregon ut= ility.=20 For a decade, as it transformed itself from a gas pipeline operator into th= e nation's biggest energy trader, Enron enjoyed unalloyed lobbying success = in Washington and the enthusiastic backing of Wall Street.=20 In the early months of the Bush administration, Mr. Lay -- whose company wa= s one of the biggest financial backers of George W. Bush's presidential cam= paign -- played a prominent, and some said unusual, role in helping the Whi= te House pick nominees to the federal energy commission. Enron executives m= et with Vice President Dick Cheney, whose energy task force backed many of = the deregulatory initiatives pushed by Mr. Lay.=20 Now, ''the company has become a pariah,'' an Enron executive said today. ''= The Bush administration doesn't want to have anything to do with us.''=20 The problems began with the energy crisis in California, where Enron's outs= poken defense of deregulation, even more than its electricity trading activ= ities, made the company a favorite whipping boy of politicians and consumer= advocates. In the financial markets, meanwhile, Enron's confusing disclosu= res, tolerated when its stock was soaring, drew disdain as the calming of t= he energy storms in California and other parts of the country beat the shar= es down, starting last spring.=20 ''Enron fell victim to their own inconsistencies on transparency,'' Mr. Wol= ak said. As California officials sought to understand why energy prices had= soared out of control, he said, Enron's ''view was that we want everybody'= s data, but if you want ours, get a subpoena.''=20 Energy executives and regulators said that sort of arrogance had long marke= d Enron's attitude about government oversight.=20 Electricity sales had for decades been the job of local utility companies, = operating as monopolies and selling power at regulated rates within their s= ervice areas. A few entrepreneurs, led by Mr. Lay, conceived a different mo= del in which power could be sold by generators or middlemen to big corporat= e users or utilities in faraway regions, at whatever price the market would= bear.=20 In the early 1990's, Congress -- under heavy lobbying by Enron -- passed le= gislation that began to open up electricity sales to marketers. Before long= , Enron became one of the first companies to receive government approval to= sell electricity at market rates. The market for interstate sales of natur= al gas had been freed up a few years earlier, and critics complained that t= raders like Enron were gleaning their profits by stoking volatility in gas = prices.=20 In the mid-1990's, independent gas producers backed legislation in Congress= to allow the creation of a co-operative marketing organization, which, the= y hoped, would have helped stabilize prices.=20 Raymond Plank, the chairman of the Apache Corporation, a gas producer based= in Houston, said that the big gas marketing and trading companies, includi= ng Enron, successfully lobbied to kill the plan, leaving prices as volatile= as ever.=20 ''It was a great concept,'' Mr. Plank said. ''We could have headed off the = problems we have today.''=20 Enron's final lobbying success came last year. With a strong push from the = company's lobbyists, Congress passed futures trading legislation that exemp= ted Internet energy trading platforms like EnronOnline, the industry leader= , from oversight by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Enron takes t= he other side of trades on its exchange. In traditional markets like the Ne= w York Mercantile Exchange, which remain subject to oversight, the exchange= acts as a middleman between buyers and sellers.=20 Under Mr. Watson, Dynegy has been less of a pathbreaker than Enron, and tho= ugh California politicians denounced it, too, as a profiteer during the ene= rgy crisis, most analysts say it has been less aggressive than Enron in bot= h its business practices and its lobbying.=20 Indeed, the rival energy-trading executive today predicted ''a huge culture= clash'' as the Houston neighbors merge. ''Blood will flow in Houston over = the integration of the trading operation,'' he said.=20 But regulators may find Dynegy easier to deal with.=20 Earlier this year, the federal energy commission asked for comments on whet= her it should tighten scrutiny of dealings between natural gas pipelines an= d energy-trading shops owned by the same company.=20 Enron wondered what all the bother was. ''Would stricter rules prevent real= affiliate abuse that current rules do not,'' it wrote in a regulatory fili= ng, ''or would they instead merely restrict the activities of some of the m= ore successful participants in the marketplace?''=20 Dynegy, by contrast, painted a grim picture and invited regulators to crack= down. ''Abuses abound,'' it said, ''because of financial windfalls, diffic= ulty of detection, lengthy investigations and increased complexity of the m= arket.'' =20 Report on Business: Canadian Dynegy to buy troubled rival Enron Reuter News Agency 11/10/2001 The Globe and Mail=20 Metro B4 ""All material Copyright (c) Bell Globemedia Publishing Inc. and its licenso= rs. All rights reserved.""=20 NEW YORK -- Energy provider Dynegy Inc. agreed yesterday to acquire fast-si= nking rival Enron Corp. for $9.5-billion (U.S.), signalling the demise of a= company that just months ago was one of Wall Street's highest fliers.=20 Terms of the transaction call for Dynegy to swap 0.2685 shares of its own s= tock for each Enron share, the companies said. That would value Houston-bas= ed Enron at $10.41 a share, including convertible stock, a premium of 21 pe= r cent over yesterday's closing price of $8.63. ChevronTexaco Corp., which owns a 27-per-cent stake in Dynegy, has agreed t= o infuse $1.5-billion immediately into Enron to support it until the deal c= loses. ""With its market-making capabilities, earnings power and proven stra= tegic approach to wholesale markets, Enron is the ideal strategic partner,""= said Dynegy chairman and chief executive officer Chuck Watson.=20 Enron, the United States' largest energy trader, has been struggling to ove= rcome a plummeting stock price and credit rating in the past month followin= g disclosures of deals being investigated by the U.S. Securities and Exchan= ge Commission for possible conflict of interest. =20 Financial Desk The Nation Smaller Rival to Acquire Teetering Enron Power: Energy giant tha= t pressed for deregulation in California is on the brink of collapse. NANCY RIVERA BROOKS; THOMAS S. MULLIGAN; NANCY VOGEL TIMES STAFF WRITERS 11/10/2001 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition A-1 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 Enron Corp., the once-highflying energy giant whose aggressive efforts to p= rofit from California's energy deregulation made it a target of consumer an= d political backlash, on Friday agreed to be saved from possible financial = collapse through a proposed acquisition by rival Dynegy Inc.=20 The roughly $7.7-billion deal is a stunning plot twist for Houston-based En= ron, which was vilified in California as it was being glorified on Wall Str= eet. In only the last month, a series of disturbing financial revelations p= ushed to the edge of ruin this once-powerful company, whose top executives = had lectured California on its energy foibles and who influenced the direct= ion of national energy policy. Enron muscled its way to the top of the energy heap using aggressive and, i= n the end, financially suspect strategies that proved its undoing.=20 Now, the company that late last year had a market value of $63 billion is w= orth one-tenth that and has agreed to be swallowed by a cross-town competit= or one-quarter its size. Enron's proud and influential chairman and chief e= xecutive, Kenneth L. Lay, who became a focus of bitter attacks by Californi= a politicians and regulators, would lose his job, as would many others at E= nron.=20 Even the name would disappear. The combined company would be called Dynegy = Inc. if the deal receives all the necessary regulatory and shareholder appr= ovals.=20 California officials took no joy in Enron's fate Friday, though there was p= erhaps some sense of retribution from its many critics in the state.=20 ""This is basically a rogue corporation,"" said Sen. Steve Peace (D-El Cajon)= , an outspoken critic of Enron for years who dealt with the company as he c= haired the committee that hammered out the legislative portion of Californi= a's landmark electricity deregulation plan in 1996. ""It has from the beginn= ing been a rogue corporation which answered in its mind to a higher law--a = fundamental belief that there are laws of economics that supersede the law = of the land.""=20 A Failed Experiment=20 Steve Maviglio, spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis, said that although Enron was= never a major force in California's doomed electricity market, it was outs= poken in support of deregulation.=20 ""In a sense, their experiment was much like California's experiment--a fail= ure,"" he said.=20 Said Harvey Rosenfield, president of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consum= er Rights in Santa Monica: ""Nothing could better illustrate the disaster of= deregulation than the fact that one of its biggest proponents, which reape= d the reward of deregulation, is suffering the consequences.""=20 Enron is the world's largest energy trader, handling one of four energy dea= ls in the United States through its online trading operation, EnronOnline. = Since it reported a surprising third-quarter loss on Oct. 16, partly tied t= o shadowy investment vehicles, Enron has endured a huge loss of investor co= nfidence, which brought on a massive cash crunch and some shrinkage of its = trading business.=20 Under the deal announced Friday, Dynegy, invited in two weeks ago after Enr= on fell short in its efforts to line up new financing, would immediately he= lp Enron by pouring $1.5 billion in cash into the company. The money would = be provided by ChevronTexaco Corp., the San Francisco oil company that owns= nearly 27% of Dynegy.=20 Enron shareholders would get 0.2685 Dynegy share for each Enron share, whic= h values the company at about $7.7 billion based on Friday's stock close. D= ynegy shares surged $2.26 to close at $38.76 per share on the New York Stoc= k Exchange; Enron added 22 cents to close at $8.63 per share, still off 89%= year to date.=20 If the deal closes in six to nine months, as the parties expect, Dynegy and= ChevronTexaco would invest $1 billion additionally in the combined company= .=20 ""This is just a financial bonanza really for both companies,"" said Charles = L. Watson, Dynegy chairman and chief executive, who will head the combined = company. Watson said the merger would immediately add to Dynegy's earnings.= =20 Even so, the repercussions of Enron's fall from grace could be far-reaching= . Coming on the heels of California's energy crisis, Enron's troubles may s= low the country's march toward energy deregulation, which Lay and Enron cha= mpioned for years as a potential boon to consumers and the economy in gener= al.=20 But the deal announced Friday will prevent an even worse outcome, energy ex= perts said: the threatened collapse of Enron, which would clog up for a tim= e the business of buying and selling electricity, natural gas and oil. That= could interfere with delivery of energy around the country, they said.=20 ""This is an encouraging development for the energy industry,"" said Stephen = Baum, chairman of Sempra Energy, the San Diego-based parent of Southern Cal= ifornia Gas and San Diego Gas & Electric. ""The Enron-Dynegy combination wil= l create a credit-worthy counter-party which will help preserve order in th= e marketplace. It also will reinforce confidence in the energy trading busi= ness going forward.""=20 But some in the industry are less pleased.=20 Raymond Plank, chairman of Apache Corp., a Houston-based natural gas explor= ation and development firm, said he is considering a motion to the Federal = Trade Commission against the proposed merger.=20 ""There are issues of concentration in a combination of the largest energy t= rader, Enron, and the fifth-largest, Dynegy,"" Plank said. ""California shoul= d be particularly concerned because Dynegy owns power plants there and Enro= n has pipelines and other interests.""=20 Troubles Mount as Stock Plunges=20 The swagger that was Enron is long gone. Consider:=20 * Enron's brash chief executive, Jeffrey K. Skilling, touted only months ag= o as one of the young stars of American business, abruptly resigned in Augu= st, citing personal reasons. Enron's stock already had fallen from its high= of nearly $90 per share as investments in water and telecommunications tur= ned sour, a fact that contributed to Skilling's departure.=20 * The Securities and Exchange Commission has launched an investigation of E= nron's controversial dealings with a number of limited partnerships, some o= rganized and run by Enron managers, including Enron Chief Financial Officer= Andrew S. Fastow, who was ousted last month.=20 * In an extraordinary confession Thursday, Enron announced that it had over= stated profit by $586 million, or 20%, during the last five years. The earl= ier financial statements reported to Wall Street and the investing public, = Enron said, ""should not be relied upon.""=20 * The company also fired its treasurer and a corporate lawyer, both of whom= it said were investors in one of the limited partnerships. Yet some analys= ts questioned whether, even in its admission of accounting trickery, Enron = wasn't still holding something back.=20 * Credit-rating agencies, which already have downgraded Enron's bonds to ba= rely above ""junk"" status, continue to pore over Enron's books. Analysts hav= e said a further downgrade to the level of junk, or below investment grade,= could precipitate a crisis akin to a run on a bank and threaten Enron's su= rvival while the merger is pending.=20 With its stock crumbling and trading partners leery about its ability to pa= y its debts, Enron was forced to walk hat in hand down Houston's Energy All= ey to negotiate a saving takeover by Dynegy, the rival once jokingly dismis= sed as ""Enron Lite.""=20 In the trading markets where Enron still holds a leading but increasingly v= ulnerable position, other players already are stepping up to grab a bigger = share of the business. Even if Enron's trading operation survives more or l= ess intact, under the wing of a Dynegy or some other company, experts said = it may never regain its former level of dominance.=20 ""Enron has been a very innovative shop, willing to spend considerably to es= tablish new markets,"" said analyst Andre Meade of Commerzbank Securities in= New York. ""If that culture is not kept, everyone loses.""=20 Skilling and mentor Lay had worked for a decade to create both a new kind o= f company and a new set of markets for it to play.=20 In large part, they succeeded. Enron transformed itself from a traditional = gas pipeline company into a high-tech global trader of everything from elec= tricity to pollution credits to aluminum. The company's overarching strateg= y was to pare its physical assets to the minimum to get the maximum profit = bang from its intellectual capital: the ranks of MBAs and PhDs that filled = its Houston trading floor.=20 Rather than maintain its own expensive gas fields and power plants--which i= t relegated to stodgy utilities and oil companies--Enron would handle every= thing by contract, relying on a network of suppliers to obtain, store and d= eliver the goods while the company focused on squeezing out the best price.= =20 Dynegy, in contrast, has invested in such energy assets, including three po= wer plants in Southern California. It uses those assets to back its trading= operation, which is much smaller than Enron's.=20 Enron pulled off a migration from the ""dirty"" extreme of the oil patch, the= asset-intensive domain of drillers and explorers, to the ""clean"" end, wher= e all the deals are done on a computer screen. It also was a migration from= lower profit margins and lower risk to high margins and high risk.=20 Shannon B. Burchett, chief executive of Risk Limited Corp., an energy-orien= ted strategic-management consultancy in Dallas, compared Enron to the inves= tment bank Salomon Bros., where he used to work in the former PhiBro commod= ities unit.=20 Enron, Burchett said, embodies ""a Wall Street culture that happens to be in= Houston.""=20 Wall Street certainly ""got it,"" or thought it did.=20 Accounting Rules Pushed to the Limit=20 At Enron's zenith last year, when its stock peaked near $90 a share and it = was pushing into esoteric markets for weather derivatives and fiber-optic b= andwidth, Enron seemed to be a one-company wave of the future.=20 Enron's aggressiveness, brainpower and willingness to back radical new idea= s with serious capital helped it acquire an aura that in some ways was its = undoing, analysts said.=20 Investors accorded Enron's stock a price-to-earnings valuation that was con= sistently higher than those of its peers, reflecting the view that its cutt= ing-edge business model could consistently deliver faster-growing profit th= an its competitors.=20 To keep profits arcing ever upward to justify the outsize valuation, Enron = began pushing the accounting rules as hard as it pushed competitors in the = trading arena. It acknowledged as much in its statement Thursday, conceding= that the operations of three of the limited partnerships should have been = consolidated with Enron's own financial statements instead of being held se= parate.=20 By raising capital and running deals through the limited partnerships, Enro= n could keep large amounts of debt and certain volatile assets off its own = balance sheet, while simultaneously booking profit from the partnerships' t= ransactions, analyst Meade said.=20 Deals Backed by Costly Guarantees=20 One risky aspect of some of Enron's deals through the partnerships was what= Meade called a ""double-trigger guarantee,"" under which Enron would pledge = a cash payout if either its bond rating fell below investment grade or its = stock declined below a certain price.=20 The guarantees must have seemed a cheap way to sweeten a deal when Enron's = stock was flying high, but they came back to haunt the company later, when = it had to pay cash to make good on its obligations, Meade said.=20 Other energy-trading companies use similar devices, but Enron carried it to= an extreme and disclosed too little detail to make the process understanda= ble to investors, he said.=20 Enron's magic, like that of the Internet-stock phenomenon, had never been e= asy to understand in the first place. The company had a reputation among an= alysts for providing scanty financial detail and hard-to-grasp explanations= of some of its dealings.=20 But as long as the reported profit kept climbing, Enron kept getting the be= nefit of the doubt.=20 M. Carol Coale, a respected Houston-based analyst for Prudential Securities= , ruefully recalled a time last winter when she told Enron she could find ""= no positive catalyst for the stock"" and was considering downgrading her inv= estment opinion.=20 Skilling telephoned Coale and asked her to hold off, promising her that the= re was unspecified good news on the horizon that would justify her faith.= =20 ""I believed him,"" Coale said last week in an interview in Houston. She held= her rating steady at that time but has since downgraded Enron to an outrig= ht ""sell.""=20 Instead of Skilling's promised good news, questions mounted during the spri= ng, and Enron's stock continued a steady decline. Coale and other analysts = were troubled that a large proportion of Enron's earnings seemed to come no= t from its core trading operations but from unusual transactions involving = the company's own stock or that of affiliates.=20 In California, Enron played a key role as chief cheerleader for electricity= deregulation and a key energy middleman in the state. As wholesale electri= city prices soared and the state plunged into its energy crisis late last y= ear, Enron and other out-of-state electricity generators and traders became= favorite targets of California politicians and regulators, who said the co= mpanies were manipulating the market and charging too much for power.=20 But significantly, California was not a directly successful territory for E= nron.=20 Markets in water did not develop as Enron subsidiary Azurix envisioned. And= Enron's plans for selling electricity to retail customers were deferred ev= en as deregulation took effect in 1998 because the state's deregulation for= mulas didn't allow room for retail competition.=20 Lay complained about California frequently and met with the governor to try= to influence the state's moves to repair its energy problems. In an interv= iew in his Houston office in January--overlooking Enron's new headquarters = building, which is still under construction as the company's name disappear= s--Lay said he and other Enron executives had objected to the way Californi= a regulation was set up.=20 ""We objected more vehemently than anyone. We opposed the concept of the poo= l,"" he said, referring to the now-defunct California Power Exchange, in whi= ch most of the state's power was bought and sold in an hourly market. ""What= competitive market in the world has a pool? We don't buy our groceries thr= ough a centralized PX.""=20 Enron also backed away from building a small power plant in California last= year when the state imposed price caps.=20 One of the loudest complaints by Davis and other California officials was t= hat generators of electricity were playing ""games"" to get higher prices.=20 They criticized Enron severely, too, even though it was not a major generat= or, because the level of its worldwide trading operations--buying and selli= ng contracts worth billions of dollars in electric power every day--gave En= ron immense sway over pricing and supplies of electricity. They also believ= e that Enron and Lay helped play a part in the reluctance of federal regula= tors for several months to place restraints on the California marketplace.= =20 CEO's Future Role Uncertain=20 ""Millions of people in California businesses lost money because this rogue = company succeeded in controlling the government of the United States,"" said= state Sen. Peace, one of the architects of the state's deregulation plan.= =20 ""Ken Lay was a mystic,"" Peace said. ""Whatever he said had to make sense bec= ause he was Ken Lay. It was hero worship.=20 ""Many of the people working as economists at the Federal Energy Regulatory = Commission worshiped Ken Lay. As a consequence, the things Enron promoted a= nd pushed for were never challenged, intellectually and otherwise.""=20 Lay, who has been asked to sit on the board of the combined company, said F= riday that he had not yet decided whether to accept.=20 He described his time building Enron as ""a very long ride. It's been a very= good ride for the most part.=20 ""I have to say the last few weeks have not been very much fun,"" he said.=20 *=20 Rivera Brooks reported from Los Angeles and Mulligan from Houston and New Y= ork. Times staff writer James Flanigan in Los Angeles contributed to this r= eport.=20 *=20 RELATED STORY=20 Fallen CEO: Enron's Lay is a brilliant man defeated by arrogance, associate= s say. A22=20 RELATED STORY=20 Energy crisis: Power firms have seen their fortunes dim in recent months. S= unday Business C1 PHOTO: Dynegy Chairman and Chief Executive Charles L. Watson, right, announ= ces the merger, with Enron Chairman Kenneth L. Lay.; ; PHOTOGRAPHER: Associ= ated Press; PHOTO: ""This is just a financial bonanza really for both compan= ies,"" says Charles L. Watson, Dynegy chairman and chief executive.; ; PHOTO= GRAPHER: Associated Press Dynegy to buy Enron Associated Press 11/10/2001 Deseret News=20 D07 Copyright (c) 2001 Deseret News Publishing Co.=20 HOUSTON -- Energy marketer Dynegy Inc. announced Friday that it will buy it= s much larger rival, the once mighty but now troubled Enron Corp., for $8 b= illion in stock. Dynegy also will assume a hefty $15 billion in Enron debt.= =20 The announcement came after Enron's stock price plummeted about 80 percent = over the past three weeks because of concerns that the company wasn't revea= ling serious financial problems to shareholders. Under the deal, ChevronTexaco Corp., which owns more than a quarter of Dyne= gy, would quickly provide about $1.5 billion. ChevronTexaco also would cont= ribute an additional $1 billion upon completion of the deal, the companies = said.=20 ""With its market-making capabilities, earnings power and proven strategic a= pproach to wholesale markets, Enron is the ideal strategic partner for Dyne= gy,"" Dynegy chairman and chief executive officer Chuck Watson said in annou= ncing the purchase.=20 Watson made it clear that he would not tolerate the sort of financial pract= ices that prompted explosive disclosures by Enron this week -- including an= admission that more than half a billion dollars in debt had been kept off = the company's books.=20 ""As a combined company, we will focus on leveraging our core skill sets and= , as always, we will keep a strong balance sheet and straightforward financ= ial structure as key priorities,"" Watson said.=20 Enron is the country's top buyer and seller of natural gas, and the No. 1 w= holesale power marketer. The company operates a 25,000-mile gas pipeline sy= stem, and also markets and trades metals, paper, coal, chemicals and fiber-= optic bandwidth.=20 Dynegy controls nearly 15,000 megawatts of power generating capacity throug= h investments in power projects, and sells the energy in wholesale markets = and through utilities.=20 At a news conference, Watson said company officials who negotiated the deal= came away convinced that Enron was worth buying despite its recent trouble= s.=20 ""We looked under the hood . . . it's just as strong as it ever was,"" Watson= said.=20 Under the terms of the deal, Enron shareholders will receive .2685 Dynegy s= hare for each share of Enron common stock, valuing each Enron share at $10.= 41. Enron has about 775 million common shares, said spokeswoman Karen Denne= .=20 That represents a 21 percent premium above Enron's closing price of $8.63 F= riday on the New York Stock Exchange -- but still just a fraction of their = 52-week high of $84.87. Dynegy's shares climbed $2.26, or 6 percent, to clo= se at $38.76 on the NYSE.=20 In after hours trading on the NYSE, Enron shares shot up 15.6 percent, or $= 1.35, to $9.98. Dynegy shares were unchanged.=20 Dynegy's stockholders will own approximately 64 percent of the new company,= with Enron's stockholders holding the remainder.=20 The boards of both companies have unanimously approved the transaction, whi= ch is expected to close next summer. The deal is expected to save the combi= ned company between $400 million and $500 million annually because of conti= nued elimination of ""non-core"" Enron holdings and lower operating costs.=20 Watson will remain as chairman and chief executive of the combined company,= which will retain the Dynegy Inc. name. Steve Bergstrom will remain as pre= sident of Dynegy.=20 Enron chairman and chief executive Kenneth L. Lay will no longer have a rol= e in day-to-day management of the company, but has been offered a seat on t= he combined company's board and will help shepherd the merger through.=20 ""I am personally committed to working with Chuck Watson, Steve Bergstrom an= d their colleagues in the months ahead to accomplish the merger and to buil= d a solid foundation for future value creation,"" Lay said.=20 Dynegy said that Greg Whalley, the current president and chief operating of= ficer of Enron, will become an executive vice president of the new Dynegy. = He said the merger sets the best course for Enron.=20 ""Few of the options we considered for our core business going forward provi= ded us with the earning potential and immediate synergies that a merger wit= h Dynegy could deliver,"" Whalley said. ""Together with Enron's recently anno= unced bank commitments, this cash infusion gives Enron immediate liquidity,= which we believe will enable the company to maintain its investment grade = credit rating.""=20 The merger was announced a day after Enron acknowledged it overstated earni= ngs by about 20 percent over the past four years and kept large amounts of = debt off its balance sheets through business partnerships now under investi= gation by the Securities and Exchange Commission.=20 Analysts said the merger rescues Enron, but leaves Dynegy in uncharted terr= itory -- with the outcome of the SEC investigation completely unknown. ""The= re is still a shroud hanging over Enron that now moves over to Dynegy,"" sai= d Carol Coale, an analyst with Prudential Securities. Business Dynegy, Enron OK $25 billion deal ; New company would rank among largest Melita Marie Garza, Tribune staff reporter 11/10/2001 Chicago Tribune=20 North Final ; N 1 (Copyright 2001 by the Chicago Tribune)=20 Enron Corp., the nation's biggest power trader, was taken over by its small= er, more conservative rival, Dynegy Inc., in a merger deal valued at nearly= $25 billion, company officials announced Friday.=20 The combined company would retain the Dynegy name and would be headed by Ch= uck Watson, Dynegy's chairman and chief executive. If it wins regulatory an= d shareholder approval, the deal would propel Dynegy, the sixth-largest U.S= . power trader, to the No. 1 position, with more than 30 percent of the mar= ket. The Houston-based rivals are new-breed energy companies, formed to capitali= ze on wholesale power marketing and trading, with Dynegy emphasizing its ow= n power generation capabilities.=20 Enron, meanwhile, has been laid low in recent weeks by soured transactions = with energy partnerships run by one of its former executives and by a serie= s of revelations about questionable accounting practices. Enron this week w= as forced to restate its earnings over the past five years--revising them d= ownward by 20 percent, or $586 million --and has seen its stock price plung= e more than 80 percent in the past three weeks.=20 Both Enron and Dynegy have extensive business dealings in Illinois, one of = the first states to begin deregulating its electric power industry; among o= ther things, Dynegy owns Illinois Power, a downstate utility.=20 The new Dynegy would be one of the largest companies in the world, with rev= enues exceeding $200 billion and assets of roughly $90 billion, company off= icials said. By comparison, ExxonMobil Corp., the nation's largest company,= reported revenues of $232.7 billion in 2000.=20 ""We needed to do something to strengthen our balance sheet and get the inve= stor community focused on the core energy business,"" said Kenneth Lay, Enro= n's chairman and CEO. ""We looked at several alternatives; this was in the b= est interests of our employees and shareholders.""=20 Lay said he would not have a role in running the new company but was consid= ering a request to serve on the newly combined board.=20 Watson said the merger agreement included escape clauses for Dynegy, ""but I= wouldn't be standing here if I expected to see that [used]. I really belie= ve the value degradation in Enron had nothing to do with their core busines= s. We looked under the hood; it is just as strong as we thought it was.""=20 Still, Watson acknowledged the possibility that more problems may surface a= t Enron. ""I don't think anybody can absolutely unequivocally say there's no= thing [more] there,"" he said.=20 Dynegy's stock price closed higher Friday, rising $2.26, or 6.2 percent, to= $38.76. Enron's stock was up 22 cents, or 2.6 percent, at $8.63 a share.= =20 Through the third quarter of 2001, the companies together have natural gas = sales of about 40 billion cubic feet per day and power sales exceeding 500 = million megawatt hours. In addition, the new Dynegy's delivery network woul= d include more than 22,000 megawatts of generating capacity and 25,000 mile= s of interstate pipelines.=20 In Enron, Dynegy is taking on a company saddled with a heavy debt load, a c= redit rating that has been downgraded to near junk bond status and which is= under the cloud of a Securities and Exchange Commission investigation.=20 Big premium=20 Under the stock-for-stock-swap portion of the deal, valued at $8.846 billio= n, Dynegy is paying the equivalent of $10.41 a share for the 850 million ou= tstanding Enron shares, a 24 percent premium. Dynegy would pay .2685 shares= of its stock for each share of Enron.=20 In addition, Dynegy agreed to provide a $1.5 billion cash infusion to help = stabilize its larger competitor and to assume an estimated $15 billion in d= ebt.=20 On Thursday Enron reported that its debt was an estimated $12.9 billion pen= ding completion of financial statements dated Sept. 30. A day later the com= pany's accounting of its debt jumped $2 billion.=20 Dynegy's current shareholders, including Chevron Texaco Corp., will end up = owning 64 percent of the new company. Chevron Texaco said it would invest a= n additional $2.5 billion in Dynegy.=20 Enron's stockholders would own about 36 percent of the combined company's s= tock at closing, which is anticipated in the third quarter of 2002.=20 Chicago-area operations=20 In Illinois, in addition to Illinois Power, Dynegy owns a Chicago- area ele= ctricity peaker plant and is a partner with Nicor Inc. in Nicor Energy, an = unregulated natural gas utility in the Chicago market.=20 Enron's subsidiary, Enron Energy Services, has a high-profile contract to p= rovide 60 percent of Chicago's city government's electricity. It also has c= ontracts to provide power to Quaker Oats Co. and the University of Chicago,= among others.=20 In addition to Watson, other top Dynegy management would remain in place in= the new company. President Steve Bergstrom and Rob Doty, chief financial o= fficer, would retain those positions in the combined company. Enron's presi= dent and chief operating officer, Greg Whalley, would become an executive v= ice president.=20 The board of directors of the combined company would have 14 members. Dyneg= y's 11 designees would include three from ChevronTexaco. Enron would have t= he right to designate a minimum of three board members. Financial Enron Accepts $8 Billion Buyout Offer From Dynegy; Energy Giant Was Forced = to Negotiating Table After Disclosing That It Had Overstated Earnings Peter Behr Washington Post Staff Writer 11/10/2001 The Washington Post=20 FINAL E01 Copyright 2001, The Washington Post Co. All Rights Reserved=20 Embattled Enron Corp. yesterday accepted a buyout offer valued at about $8 = billion from crosstown rival Dynegy Inc. If the deal is completed, it would= end Houston-based Enron's reign as the leader in the huge energy trading m= arkets that set the prices of power and natural gas in the nation.=20 Its cash dwindling and its credit rating hammered, Enron was forced to the = negotiating table after its recent disclosures that its obligations to a co= mplex web of partnerships involving company officials had caused the tradin= g powerhouse to overstate its earnings and obscure its total debt obligatio= ns. Four top Enron officials have resigned or been replaced since July and,= once Dynegy takes control, Enron's chairman and chief executive, Kenneth L= ay, will also leave the company. Lay said yesterday that he had not decided= whether to accept Dynegy's offer to serve on the combined company's board. ""It's been a good ride for a long time,"" Lay said in a conference call last= night. ""The last three weeks haven't been a whole lot of fun.""=20 The final deal was announced after the close of stock trading. Enron's shar= es -- which had fallen from $33 to $8 after the disclosures -- ended the da= y slightly higher, at $8.63. Dynegy's stock closed at $38.76, up $2.26.=20 Dynegy offered all stock for the Enron shares, so the total value of the de= al will fluctuate with Dynegy's stock price. Dynegy also said it would assu= me about $13 billion in Enron debt, bringing the total value of the transac= tion to around $21 billion.=20 Dynegy's rescue of Enron will begin with an immediate cash infusion of $1.5= billion, which will be supplied by ChevronTexaco Corp., a major Dynegy sto= ckholder. ChevronTexaco will invest another $1 billion in Dynegy after the = acquisition has passed regulatory review and is completed, which executives= said they expect will take six to nine months as Enron tries to unscramble= the complex partnerships that are now under investigation by the Securitie= s and Exchange Commission.=20 The takeover agreement gives Dynegy an escape clause permitting it to cance= l the purchase if Enron winds up with heavy regulatory fines or legal judgm= ents from shareholder suits tied to its handling of the partnerships.=20 Chuck Watson, Dynegy's chairman and chief executive, said in the conference= call that a close scrutiny over the past two weeks of Enron's financial co= ndition convinced him that the company's trading and pipeline businesses we= re solid. ""We looked under the hood, and guess what? It looked just as stro= ng as we thought it was."" Watson said he did not think more damaging disclo= sures were forthcoming from Enron.=20 Until the partnership mess, Enron was the nation's dominant energy trader, = and it had front-door political connections to the White House. Lay, its lo= ngtime chairman, raised more then $100,000 for the presidential election ca= mpaign of his friend George W. Bush. Enron rode the growth of energy tradin= g markets beginning in the mid-1990s, as first natural gas, and then electr= ic power sales were deregulated at the wholesale level. Its revenues leaped= from $9.2 billion in 1995 to $100.8 billion last year.=20 During those heady times, the Houston company could choose which questions = to answer about its dealings with related partnerships and its Byzantine bo= okkeeping.=20 ""It was always very difficult to get information,"" said Louis B. Gagliardi,= an analyst with John S. Herold Inc. ""They would always rebuff you.""=20 Until this fall, the muscular company seemed too big to stumble, said inves= tment manager David Coxe, with Harris Insight Equity Fund in Chicago.=20 Coxe bought 78,000 shares of Enron at $40 a share in August, after wrestlin= g with the decision for months, he said. Then Jeffrey Skilling, Enron's chi= ef executive and strategic mastermind, unexpectedly resigned. The stock, wh= ich had been as high as $90 in August 2000, pitched downward.=20 ""Enron seemed so indispensable to the nation's energy markets that I though= t it inconceivable it could implode,"" Coxe said. ""That's how I got sucked i= n.""=20 Enron's fall is ""classic hubris,"" Coxe said: a Greek tragedy striking someo= ne who chose to defy the gods -- ""in this case, the rules of the system.""= =20 Among the rules that Enron now acknowledges it didn't follow were the accou= nting standards that applied to the complex partnerships it created. The pu= rpose of the partnerships, Enron said, was to reduce the risks of investmen= ts in Internet transmission systems and to sell power plants and other asse= ts it no longer wanted.=20 The accounting errors were described in a 20-page SEC filing Enron made Thu= rsday. The errors resulted in a $1.2 billion reduction in the value of shar= eholders' equity. The company also said it had overstated its earnings by $= 586 million since 1997.=20 Enron created partnerships that would buy major assets -- such as a power p= lant -- that Enron wanted to sell, or in other cases, assets such as fiber-= optic cable networks that Enron intended to run but did not want to have on= its balance sheet.=20 The partnerships had outside investors, but the general partner of two of t= hem was Enron's own chief financial officer, Andrew Fastow. He earned $30 m= illion in fees from managing two of the largest partnerships, according to = the SEC document.=20 Enron added to the capital of these partnerships by pledging its stock, or = securities convertible into stock. Some of those stock transactions should = have been counted as loans, resulting in the $1.2 billion drop in sharehold= er equity, Enron now says.=20 Investors are asking why Enron's auditor, Arthur Andersen LLP, did not insi= st that these transactions be handled that way in the first place. Enron's = SEC filing mentions but does not explain some ""proposed audit adjustments"" = over the past four years that were overruled.=20 Even though, as Enron now acknowledges, it created an information barrier, = masking critical information and violating standard accounting rules, many = financial analysts who were recommending the stock to investors were not pu= shing hard enough to punch through that barrier, some analysts acknowledge.= =20 ""It was so complicated that everybody was afraid to raise their hands and s= ay, 'I don't understand it,' "" Gagliardi said.=20 The questions are now coming, from a new committee reporting to Enron's boa= rd that will investigate how the company's financial reporting was handled;= from the SEC; and, eventually, from teams of lawyers representing aggrieve= d shareholders.=20 Lay indicated yesterday he had not been aware until recently that Enron emp= loyees other than Fastow had profited from the partnership activity. Enron = directors had approved Fastow's management of the partnerships, but Fastow = quit the partnerships in July and was then replaced as chief financial offi= cer.=20 Enron this week fired Treasurer Ben Glisan and Kristina Mourdant, an Enron = division lawyer, who it said had invested in partnerships that were tied to= one of the major partnerships headed by Fastow. The Enron report to the SE= C describes a central role in these transactions played by Michael J. Koppe= r, an associate of Fastow who left Enron in July to take over Fastow's fina= ncial interests in the partnership, the company said.=20 Enron will hold a conference call next week to discuss what it has uncovere= d about outside partnership investments. http://www.washingtonpost.com Financial Desk The Nation NEWS ANALYSIS A Visionary Fallen From Grace JAMES FLANIGAN TIMES STAFF WRITER 11/10/2001 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition A-22 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 A year ago, Enron Corp. Chairman Kenneth L. Lay was on top of the energy wo= rld. As a leading fund-raiser, contributor and energy advisor to the Bush a= dministration, he played a key role in shaping the new president's energy p= olicy. As head of the world's largest energy trading company, he had an eno= rmous influence on the price of energy in California and across the nation.= Enron's highflying stock helped him cash out $123 million in stock options= last year alone.=20 On Friday, with Enron being saved from financial collapse by agreeing to be= acquired by rival Dynegy Inc., Lay's career and reputation are in shambles= . Under the merger, he will be stripped of a management job. His integrity = is tattered, with Enron's controversial financial dealings under federal in= vestigation. Enron investors and employees are chagrined and outraged becau= se the company's stock lost 80% of its value in recent weeks. The rapid rise and fall of Lay, 58, is a story of how a brilliant man with = innovative ideas and a grand scheme to transform the world's energy markets= was overcome with arrogance, associates and critics say. Under Lay, Enron = stretched the limits of the law and took risks that nearly caused its finan= cial collapse, they say. That in turn could have resulted in a widespread d= isruption in energy supplies.=20 ""Enron's behavior casts doubt on the integrity of our financial markets. It= is a very serious matter,"" said Edward R. Muller, an energy investor and f= ormer president of Edison International's Mission Energy subsidiary.=20 ""Nobody denies he's smart, but it's a question of integrity,"" said Raymond = Plank, chief executive of Apache Corp. and an associate of Lay's in Houston= 's vibrant oil and gas industry.=20 Lay and longtime partner Jeffrey K. Skilling, who served briefly as Enron's= chief executive before resigning abruptly in August, rose to prominence in= the last decade through the use of innovative financial techniques designe= d to exploit a reduction in government regulation of energy.=20 Lay transformed world energy industries through his vision of new, market-d= riven ways to finance natural gas and electricity production and transmissi= on.=20 The financial markets that Lay and his Enron associates created had an enor= mous effect on California's disastrous experiment in electricity deregulati= on. Critics say his influence was excessive and misguided.=20 ""Ken Lay was a mystic,"" said state Sen. Steve Peace (D-El Cajon), an outspo= ken critic of Enron. ""Whatever he said had to make sense because he was Ken= Lay. It was hero worship. Many of the people working as economists at the = Federal Energy Regulatory Commission worshiped Ken Lay. As a consequence, t= he things Enron promoted and pushed for were never challenged, intellectual= ly and otherwise.""=20 Lay, who has a doctorate in economics, had modest beginnings as the son of = a poor country preacher who did farm labor on the side to raise money for h= is children's education. In the Navy in the late 1960s, Lay was assigned to= the Defense Department because of his economic acumen. ""He allocated Penta= gon dollars more efficiently in purchasing for the military,"" said Mark Pal= mer, chief spokesman for Enron.=20 Lay worked for Exxon and other energy firms in the 1970s, amid soaring oil = prices, gasoline shortages and still-regulated natural gas. He headed Houst= on Natural Gas, a predecessor firm of Enron, in the 1980s as falling prices= for oil and natural gas presented grave problems for Houston's energy indu= stries.=20 When the federal government allowed pipelines to carry the gas of any produ= cer, Lay turned Enron into a foremost firm in the new, deregulated industry= . Still, Enron almost went bankrupt in the late 1980s, with natural gas in = oversupply and prices falling.=20 It was then that Skilling, a McKinsey & Co. consultant, suggested to Lay th= at the firm trade long-term contracts for gas, promising to deliver the com= modity to customers at fixed prices, buying and selling contracts of varyin= g maturities ""the way mortgage companies deal with mortgages,"" in Skilling'= s words.=20 The innovation started Enron's rapid growth and rise to prominence as the e= mbodiment of a new kind of energy company. In the 1990s, the federal govern= ment called for deregulation of electricity.=20 Lay saw opportunities. He and Skilling created a market for contracts in el= ectricity in 1994, and by 1996 Enron was the world's leading firm doing suc= h business.=20 Lay's central idea was that, by creating a market of millions of buyers and= sellers constantly taking positions, power supplies could be allocated eff= iciently and prices lowered. Lay liked to lecture, in an avuncular way, abo= ut the new economics of energy trading.=20 ""Technology is changing, and there's a lot more value in flexibility and op= tionality. Just about in every industry, you can make them a lot more effic= ient when you have more optionality,"" Lay said in an interview in January i= n his Houston offices overlooking the sparkling new Enron headquarters buil= ding, which still is under construction.=20 As Enron's business profile grew, so did Lay's political influence. He serv= ed as an energy advisor to both Bush administrations and headed Texas fund-= raising for George W. Bush's presidential campaign. Lay raised $100,000 for= the Bush-Cheney campaign, and with his wife, Linda, Lay contributed anothe= r $100,000 to help finance the inaugural gala this year.=20 As the administration prepared its energy plan, Lay gained national stature= as a preacher of market economics applied to electricity.=20 ""There's no way you can centralize a command-control environment and make t= he best decisions to have an efficient, low-cost, reliable electricity indu= stry,"" Lay said.=20 His sermon was intended for California, which suffered sharply higher price= s for electricity last winter, to the point that private utilities fell int= o or near bankruptcy and the state budget incurred a cost of $12 billion, w= hich Sacramento now is trying to recover through the sale of revenue bonds.= =20 Because Enron, trading billions of dollars a day in power contracts worldwi= de, had an immense effect on electricity prices, Lay's preaching grated on = state officials. Driven to intemperance, state Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer said= in May that he'd like to ""escort"" Lay to a prison cell.=20 But more than economic philosophy was behind Lay's goading of California. T= he state's debacle gave energy deregulation a bad name and chilled deregula= tion moves by many other states.=20 That in turn reduced growth prospects for Enron. The promise of continued g= rowth in deregulation had helped make Enron a Wall Street darling. Its stoc= k price, at one point nearly $90 a share versus less than $10 now, pushed u= p the value of Enron stock options, held by almost all employees but owned = in great amounts by Lay, Skilling and other company officers.=20 Lay cashed in last year, converting options for a gain of $123 million, whi= le Skilling gained $62 million by converting his options. As they cashed in= , Enron was encountering other problems. Attempts to set up trading markets= in water and broadband Internet transmission were floundering. A major pow= er plant venture in India was in grave economic and political trouble.=20 But in the last month, Enron revealed that it had reduced the firm's equity= value by more than $1 billion due to write-offs in a hitherto hidden partn= ership.=20 Revelations then cascaded. The firm had 33 such partnerships, which had bil= lions of dollars in debt for which Enron was liable. Lay and Skilling piled= up debt in hidden partnerships, analysts explain, because the firm needed = huge amounts of debt to support its greatly expanding levels of trading in = electricity, natural gas and other commodities.=20 But the firm could not support such debt and still retain its credit rating= , growth rate and high stock price. After weeks of gamely protesting that t= he business was sound and that he personally took offense at investment ana= lysts' suggestions of impropriety, Lay fell silent.=20 *=20 Times staff writer Nancy Vogel in Sacramento contributed to this report. PHOTO: With the takeover of his once-soaring firm, Enron chief Kenneth Lay'= s career is in tatters.; ; PHOTOGRAPHER: Reuters Business Struggling Enron agrees to takeover by smaller rival Dynegy One-time energy= giant and Southern Co. often scrapped over access to markets MATTHEW C. QUINN STAFF 11/10/2001 The Atlanta Journal - Constitution=20 Home F.1 (Copyright, The Atlanta Journal and Constitution - 2001)=20 Energy giant Enron Corp. capitulated to a mounting financial crisis Friday = and agreed to be taken over by a smaller competitor. But Atlanta-based Sout= hern Co. was not gloating at the misfortunes of its vanquished rival.=20 It wasn't easy. For years, the two companies were locked in a struggle over access to elect= ricity markets. Enron pushed for competition and deregulation, while Southe= rn resisted to protect its dominance in the fast-growing Southeast.=20 Sometimes the battle got nasty.=20 ""If Thomas Alva Edison came back from the dead and called Southern Co. to g= et some electricity, he'd find that nothing has changed,"" Jeffrey Skilling,= then Enron's president, said in November 1997. ""These guys are living in a= n industry that was created 100 years ago, and they want to keep it that wa= y.""=20 Fast forward four years.=20 Southern Co. has split itself in two, retaining its regulated Southeastern = utility business and spinning off its own unregulated power generation and = energy trading arm, Mirant Corp. Southern reported net income of $1 billion= for the first nine months of this year, and Mirant's profits were $538 mil= lion. Southern's shares are up 19 percent this year. Mirant's have declined= 7 percent.=20 Enron, on the other hand, lost 90 percent of its stock market value this ye= ar alone and this past week restated earnings for the past 4 1/2 years, red= ucing profit by more than $500 million.=20 Skilling was named chief executive in February but abruptly resigned after = six months. This week he was subpoenaed to testify in a Securities and Exch= ange Commission probe of the Texas company's questionable relationships wit= h outside partnerships.=20 Houston-based Dynegy Corp., a crosstown rival, said late Friday it will buy= Enron --- once valued at $69 billion --- for $7.8 billion in stock.=20 Enron will be wrapped into a ""new Dynegy"" managed by top Dynegy executives.= That suggested even the name Enron --- synonymous with innovation in recen= t years in the utility industry --- will go by the wayside.=20 Southern spokesman Todd Terrell declined to comment earlier in the day on E= nron's problems.=20 A.W. ""Bill' Dahlberg, who retired as Southern's chief executive in April an= d is now Mirant's board chairman, said he regretted Enron's troubles.=20 ""They were a rival and got credit for doing a lot of innovative things in o= ur industry,"" Dahlberg said. ""You always like to win the competition becaus= e you do well, not because somebody else does badly.""=20 Enron was a pioneer in the wholesale trading of electricity and natural gas= , and has been widely imitated, from Mirant's sprawling energy trading floo= r at Perimeter Center to an energy management subsidiary launched this year= by AGL Resources, parent of Atlanta Gas Light Co.=20 As the largest U.S. energy trading firm, Enron's tentacles run deep. It was= active at the Public Service Commission in 1998 when rules for Georgia's n= atural gas deregulation were written, only to opt out of becoming a gas mar= keter itself. But New Power Co., which is 45 percent owned by Enron, became= Georgia's newest marketer this year.=20 A Dynegy-Enron combination will create a $200 billion-a-year enterprise tha= t will dwarf Mirant in both the electricity and natural gas sectors.=20 Dynegy and Mirant are considered more stable than was Enron because they re= ly more on their own power plants for electricity and less on trading for p= ower produced by others. And Dynegy is no stranger to Georgia. It is a mino= rity partner with AGL Resources in Georgia Natural Gas Services, the state'= s No. 1 gas marketer.=20 But the partners have been at odds for months.=20 AGL sued Dynegy in July, alleging it ""earned millions of dollars at the exp= ense"" of the marketing company that it supplies with natural gas.=20 Dynegy's counterclaim accused AGL, among other things, of scheming to shift= the partnership's gas supply deal to AGL's own subsidiary, Houston-based S= equent Energy Management.=20 Dynegy in May started up a 500 megawatt natural gas-fired power plant in He= ard County despite opposition from nearby residents. Dynegy is also a major= buyer of electricity produced at Southern Co.'s new power plant in Jackson= County.=20 ""They're a big customer, a partner and a competitor --- all of those things= ,"" said Southern's Terrell. Graphic POWER POWERHOUSE A merger of Enron Corp. and Dynegy Corp. would cre= ate an energy powerhouse. Atlanta-based Mirant Corp. would be far behind, b= ased on second-quarter figures. Top 20 North American Gas Marketers, 2nd qu= arter 2001 Billions of cubic feet a day 1..= .Enron...................... 24.6 13.2 3...= Duke Energy................ 12.8 5...M= 7...Aq= uila Energy.............. 10.3 9...El = Paso......................9.2 10. American Electric Power......8.5 ........= ................ Top 10 North American Power Marketers, 2nd quarter 2001 Co= of megawatt hours 1...Enron..........= ............212.5 2...American Electric Power....134.5 3...Duke Energy.....= ...........118.1 4...Reliant Resources.......... 86.1 5...PG&E National Ene= rgy Grp... 73.2 7...Mirant............= ..........69.7 9. Williams............= ........ 63.4 10. Exelon Power Team.......... 52.5 Source: Natural Gas Week BUSINESS Dynegy to Acquire Troubled Enron / Energy giants in $7.8B stock deal COMBINED NEWS SERVICES 11/10/2001 Newsday=20 ALL EDITIONS A16 (Copyright Newsday Inc., 2001)=20 Houston - Energy marketer Dynegy Inc. announced Friday it will buy much lar= ger rival Enron Corp. for $7.8 billion in stock.=20 The announcement came after Enron's stock plummeted about 80 percent in the= past three weeks over concerns that the company wasn't revealing serious f= inancial problems to shareholders. ""Dynegy is taking out a competitor, acquiring some attractive assets, and t= hey're doing it at an incredible price,"" said Joseph Correnti, an analyst a= t Wayne Hummer Investments.=20 The two Houston-based companies began negotiations a week ago as it became = apparent Enron needed cash to stay in business. Dynegy, which is 26-percent= owned by ChevronTexaco Corp., agreed to the deal after Moody's Investors S= ervice maintained an investment-grade rating on Enron, eliminating a stumbl= ing block in negotiations.=20 The combined company will have annual revenue of more than $200 billion, ra= nking it as one of the nation's 10 largest. It will have more than 22,000 m= egawatts of electric generating capacity and 25,000 miles of natural gas pi= peline.=20 On Thursday, Enron acknowledged it overstated earnings by about 20 percent = over the past four years and kept large amounts of debt off its balance she= et through business partnerships now under investigation by the Securities = and Exchange Commission. Enron said financial statements from 1997 through = the first half of 2001 ""should not be relied upon.""=20 Revised statements reduced Enron's profits for those years by $586 million = and increased its debt by $628 million.=20 During its recent turmoil, Enron fired chief financial officer Andrew Fasto= w, who ran some of the partnerships under investigation by the SEC.=20 Dynegy chief executive Charles Watson will head the combined company.=20 The terms of the deal value each Enron share at $10.41, based on Friday's c= losing stock prices. That represents a 21-percent premium above Enron's clo= sing price of $8.63. Dynegy's shares closed at $38.76, up 6 percent.=20 It was not immediately clear what role Enron chairman and chief executive K= enneth L. Lay would have in the new company.=20 While Watson has led a diversified company that put as much emphasis on bui= lding power plants as on energy trading, Lay focused on the wholesale tradi= ng of natural gas and electricity. He had expanded Enron in the 1980s from = a natural gas pipeline into the most formidable competitor in the business = of energy trading, which was created by deregulation of energy markets in t= he United States and Europe. Dynegy announces $8 billion deal to buy larger rival Enron By JUAN A. LOZANO Associated Press Writer 11/09/2001 Associated Press Newswires=20 Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.=20 HOUSTON (AP) - Energy marketer Dynegy Inc. announced Friday that it will bu= y its much larger rival, the once mighty but now troubled Enron Corp., for = $8 billion in stock. Dynegy also will assume a hefty $15 billion in Enron d= ebt.=20 The announcement came after Enron's stock price plummeted about 80 percent = over the past three weeks because of concerns that the company wasn't revea= ling serious financial problems to shareholders. Under the deal, ChevronTexaco Corp., which owns more than a quarter of Dyne= gy, would quickly provide about $1.5 billion. ChevronTexaco also would cont= ribute an additional $1 billion upon completion of the deal, the companies = said.=20 ""With its market-making capabilities, earnings power and proven strategic a= pproach to wholesale markets, Enron is the ideal strategic partner for Dyne= gy,"" Dynegy chairman and chief executive officer Chuck Watson said in annou= ncing the purchase.=20 Watson made it clear that he would not tolerate the sort of financial pract= ices that prompted explosive disclosures by Enron this week - including an = admission that more than half a billion dollars in debt had been kept off t= he company's books.=20 ""As a combined company, we will focus on leveraging our core skill sets and= , as always, we will keep a strong balance sheet and straightforward financ= ial structure as key priorities,"" Watson said.=20 Enron is the country's top buyer and seller of natural gas, and the No. 1 w= holesale power marketer. The company operates a 25,000-mile gas pipeline sy= stem, and also markets and trades metals, paper, coal, chemicals, and fiber= -optic bandwidth.=20 Dynegy controls nearly 15,000 megawatts of power generating capacity throug= h investments in power projects, and sells the energy in wholesale markets = and through utilities.=20 At a news conference, Watson said company officials who negotiated the deal= came away convinced that Enron was worth buying despite its recent trouble= s.=20 ""We looked under the hood and, guess what, it's just as strong as we though= t it was,"" Watson said.=20 Under the terms of the deal, Enron shareholders will receive .2685 Dynegy s= hare for each share of Enron common stock, valuing each Enron share at $10.= 41. Enron has about 775 million common shares, said spokeswoman Karen Denne= .=20 That represents a 21 percent premium above Enron's closing price of $8.63 F= riday on the New York Stock Exchange - but still just a fraction of their 5= 2-week high of $84.87. Dynegy's shares climbed $2.26, or 6 percent, to clos= e at $38.76 on the NYSE.=20 In after hours trading on the NYSE, Enron shares shot up 15.6 percent, or $= 1.35, to $9.98. Dynegy shares were unchanged.=20 Dynegy's stockholders will own approximately 64 percent of the new company,= with Enron's stockholders holding the remainder.=20 The boards of both companies have unanimously approved the transaction, whi= ch is expected to close next summer. The deal is expected to save the combi= ned company between $400 and $500 million annually because of continued eli= mination of ""non-core"" Enron holdings and lower operating costs. Watson sai= d it was too soon to say if the deal would result in job cuts. Enron has ab= out 20,000 employees, while Dynegy's work force is about 6,000.=20 Watson will remain as chairman and chief executive of the combined company,= which will retain the Dynegy Inc. name. Dynegy's Steve Bergstrom will cont= inue as president.=20 Enron chairman and chief executive Kenneth L. Lay will no longer have a rol= e in day-to-day management of the company, but has been offered a seat on t= he combined company's board and will help shepherd the merger through.=20 Dynegy said that Greg Whalley, the current president and chief operating of= ficer of Enron, will become an executive vice president of the new Dynegy. = He said the merger sets the best course for Enron.=20 ""Few of the options we considered for our core business going forward provi= ded us with the earning potential and immediate synergies that a merger wit= h Dynegy could deliver,"" Whalley said. ""Together with Enron's recently anno= unced bank commitments, this cash infusion gives Enron immediate liquidity,= which we believe will enable the company to maintain its investment grade = credit rating.""=20 The merger was announced a day after Enron acknowledged it overstated earni= ngs by about 20 percent over the past four years and kept large amounts of = debt off its balance sheets through business partnerships now under investi= gation by the Securities and Exchange Commission.=20 Analysts said the merger rescues Enron, but leaves Dynegy in uncharted terr= itory - with the outcome of the SEC investigation completely unknown. ""Ther= e is still a shroud hanging over Enron that now moves over to Dynegy,"" said= Carol Coale, an analyst with Prudential Securities.=20 Early Friday, Moody's Investors Service downgraded Enron's debt ratings to = one level above junk bond status and said the company's long-term debt rati= ngs remain under review for further downgrade.=20 In an SEC filing, Enron said financial statements from 1997 through the fir= st half of 2001 ""should not be relied upon"" and that outside businesses run= by Enron officials during that period should have been included in the com= pany's earnings reports.=20 The revised statements reduced Enron's profits for those years by $586 mill= ion, from $2.89 billion to $2.31 billion. The revisions also increased the = company's debt each of the four years, reaching $10.86 billion - $628 milli= on more than previously reported - by the end of 2000.=20 Keeping the debt off its balance sheets likely ensured Enron could maintain= a strong credit rating to support expansion of its core businesses - whole= sale trading of natural gas and electricity.=20 But the company's stock price started dropping 10 months ago when its high-= speed Internet unit foundered and Enron had trouble collecting money from p= ower customers in India.=20 The stock price began to free fall after Enron announced a $618 million thi= rd quarter loss, and news of the SEC investigation surfaced.=20 Enron responded by firing its chief financial officer and scrambled to get = cash and increase credit lines in an attempt to regain investor confidence,= but investors dumped Enron shares and sent its stock plummeting.=20 The ousted chief financial officer, Andrew Fastow, ran some of the partners= hips under investigation by the SEC.=20 Jeff Skilling, Enron's former chief executive who left in August, has been = called to testify before the SEC, although it's unclear when.=20 ---=20 On the Net:=20 http://www.enron.com=20 http://www.dynegy.com AP Graphic DYNEGY ENRON Copyright ? 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. =20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Boise --; [EMail-Body]= You speak at 10:05 a.m. Boise time DOE conference call at 3:00 p.m. Eastern time, 1:00 Boise time. Paul Carrier will follow up with details. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: RTO Orders - Grid South, SE Trans, SPP and Entergy; [EMail-Body]= I'm still a junkie .... please email copies of the orders. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: VOICE MAIL; [EMail-Body]= I got the message and will handle. Tahnks Steven J Kean 03/01/2000 11:37 AM Sent by: Maureen McVicker To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: VOICE MAIL Joe Sutton called and wants to discuss how the vision groups are going. Have they taken place, what are the plans now? He thinks you should report it to the Exec Committee the next time you meet, but Joe wants to see the report first. I have attached below, the response Mary Clark sent to you regarding the meetings (in case you want to forward it). I did not forward this to Joe. I wanted to check with you first. Also, Joe said he spoke with Ken Lay regarding the Annual Report - Ken's concern about the cover and the Chairman's Award is the fact that the winner is not pictured on the cover. The runner ups are there but not the winner and he thinks the winner should also be in the picture. EMAIL FROM MARY CLARK: Steve, I've attached the results of the focus groups as per my notes from the meetings. Let me know if you need anything else. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron Wind Policy Meeting; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 04/20/2000 09:17 AM --------------------------- Hap Boyd@ENRON 04/19/2000 10:28 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Enron Wind Policy Meeting SK - I let Hap know that you will be attending. mm Steve, I had sent you an email on a meeting to discuss Enron Wind's policy positions and regulatory and legislative needs. The meeting will be held on Tuesday, April 25 at 9:00 am in Kurt Huneke's conference room. Please let me know whether or not you'll be able to attend. Thanks. Hap [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Joe Hirko Fortune interview; [EMail-Body]= Looks good. Some of his questions suggest he's going to include a fair amount of industry reaction -- which could be a mixed bag, some are clearly threatened by efficiencies in bw markets. Looks like it will be a really good story. He definitely appears to be excited by it. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: FERC course on for Thurs, July 26, 1-4 p.m.; [EMail-Body]= Great news. With respect to the Commissoners, I think it makes sense to go back through Ellen and ask if she could set up meetings with a few commissioners ater the staff briefing. ""wgramm"" <wgramm@osf1.gmu.edu> on 07/17/2001 03:23:19 PM Please respond to <wgramm@osf1.gmu.edu> To: ""Jerry Ellig"" <jellig@gmu.edu>, ""Steve Kean"" <skean@enron.com> cc: ""Susan Dudley"" <SDudley@gmu.edu> Subject: FERC course on for Thurs, July 26, 1-4 p.m. Susan got it done -- it'll be Thursday, July 26, 1-4 p.m. at FERC (a room on the 3rd floor?). Susan has talked with Bill Albrecht. He'll probably be coming in on Wed. p.m. Steve, any ideas about a Commissioner strategy? (invite them to attend, if the FERC folks agree; ask the FERC folks to do the inviting; ask the FERC folks to help set up meetings afterwards or a follow on if they like what we do and think it useful for Commissioners; try to do a walkaround -- that is, offer to have Jerry, Bill, Susan visit commissioners individually Friday a.m. after the course or Thursday a.m. before the course?) Wendy Wendy Gramm, Regulatory Studies Program Mercatus Center George Mason University 703-993-4884 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: NEW DRAFT OF ENRON STATEMENT; [EMail-Body]= I know we are holding for a later filing, but I have attached further comments anyway. The document is still too rough to send out. We need to take the opportunity, as soon as possible, to get a hard hitting, thoroughly researched and carefully written document in front of the Commissioners. California's reaction to the Judge's recommendation is likely to give FERC (especially the new commissioners) a feel for how irrational the California politicians can be. We will have a limited opportunity to take advantage of that realization. We need to hit it hard in the pleading, our conversations at the Commission, the Hill and the media. Linda Robertson 07/09/2001 09:58 AM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Alan Comnes/Enron@EnronXGate, Carole Hodge/ETOL/EU/Enron@ETOL, dwatkiss@bracepatt.com, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@ENRON, Richard B Sanders/Enron@EnronXGate, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, Robert Frank/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON Subject: Re: NEW DRAFT OF ENRON STATEMENT Let me emphasize that these comments are to be filed COB TODAY. James D Steffes 07/09/2001 10:50 AM To: Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Carole Hodge/ETOL/EU/Enron@ETOL, Richard B Sanders/Enron@EnronXGate, dwatkiss@bracepatt.com, Alan Comnes/Enron@EnronXGate, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: NEW DRAFT OF ENRON STATEMENT HERE IS THE MOST RECENT STATEMENT WITH STEVE'S COMMENTS. Jim [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Short Biography for Highlands Forum XVII Meeting; [EMail-Body]= Please update my bio to include Human Resources and add some boilerplate on Enron. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 06/13/2001 08:15 AM --------------------------- ""Ledgerwood, Michele"" on 06/10/2001 04:06:40 PM To: ""'skean@enron.com'"" <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: Short Biography for Highlands Forum XVII Meeting Dear Mr. Kean: My team is pulling together the briefing books for our upcoming Highlands Forum meeting in Carmel Valley. These books include a list of short biographies. Your biography, provided to me by Dick O'Neill, currently reads as follows: ""Mr. Steven J. Kean is Executive Vice President and Chief of Staff for Enron Corporation. Mr. Kean's responsibilities include government affairs, public relations, corporate communications, advertising, and administration. Mr. Kean also serves on the Executive Committee of Enron. Mr. Kean has a B.A. from Iowa State University and a J.D. from the University of Iowa."" I wanted to provide you with the opportunity to send a slightly longer biography, if you so desire. The general length of our biographies is usually roughly 15-20 lines. If I do not hear from you, I will assume that the above entry is fine. We look forward to seeing you in Carmel Valley! Warm regards, MichSle Ledgerwood > MichSle M. Ledgerwood > Project Manager, Lead Analyst, and Content Developer, The Highlands Forum > SAIC/Center for Information Strategy and Policy > Voice: (703) 676-5131 * FAX: (703) 821-1037 > ledgerwood@stanfordalumni.org ""Man's mind stretched to a new idea never goes back to its original dimensions."" - Oliver Wendell Holmes > Visit iMP: The Magazine on Information Impacts at http://www.cisp.org/imp > > [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Composition of unsecured creditors committee; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/11/2001 07:21 AM --------------------------- From: Michael Tribolet/ENRON@enronXgate on 04/11/2001 07:11 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Rick Buy/ENRON@enronXgate, William S Bradford/ENRON@enronXgate, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lisa Mellencamp/HOU/ECT@ECT, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Travis McCullough/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Composition of unsecured creditors committee Please see appointment list attached below: KES Kingsburg L.P. (QF?) City of Palo Alto (pension holdings?) Enron Corp & Affiliates State of Tennessee (pension holdings?) Dynegy Power Marketing, Inc. The Davey Tree Co. (vendor) GWF Power Systems (QF) U.S. Bank (Trustee on PCB's) Merrill Lynch (CP holder?) The Bank of New York (Bond Trustee) Bank of America (Agent on revolver) -----Original Message----- From: ""Johnson, Stephen"" 2Egov+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 7:52 PM To: Johnson, Stephen; 'jmhpower@aol.com'; Tribolet, Michael; 'tmilne@mail.state.tn.us'; 'john.c.herbert@dynegy.com'; 'david.adante@davey.com'; 'pmar@mofo.com'; 'keith.marshall@usbank.com'; 'mlurie@exchange.ml.com'; 'gbush@bankofny.com'; Subject: RE: I'm pretty sure the form was left off.... -----Original Message----- From: Johnson, Stephen Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 5:49 PM To: 'jmhpower@aol.com'; 'michael.tribolet@enron.com'; 'tmilne@mail.state.tn.us'; 'john.c.herbert@dynegy.com'; 'david.adante@davey.com'; 'pmar@mofo.com'; 'keith.marshall@usbank.com'; 'mlurie@exchange.ml.com'; 'gbush@bankofny.com'; Subject: Stephen L. Johnson Attorney United States Department of Justice Office of the U.S. Trustee 250 Montgomery Street, Suite 1000 San Francisco, CA 94104 415-705-3333 tel. 415-705-3379 fax stephen.johnson2@usdoj.gov - Appointment of Committee.pdf [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: fact sheet- latest draft; [EMail-Body]= FYI ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/27/2000 05:11 PM ----- ""Hunt, Hunter L"" <HLHunt@georgewbush.com> 09/27/2000 11:25 AM To: ""'skean@enron.com'"" <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: FW: fact sheet- latest draft - [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message(due to missing attachment)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: organizational announcement; [EMail-Body]= Ken was meeting with him the day before yesterday. I'm just waiting to hear back. Sherri Sera 03/13/2001 10:07 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: organizational announcement Just saw the memo about Sanjay, Diomedes and Jim. Guess David Haug is still around? SRS [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FCEL; [EMail-Body]= fyi - there has been some concern that this deal was being put together without Connecticut authorities knowing the full extent of our interest in FCEL. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/24/2000 04:51 PM ----- David W Delainey@ECT 09/22/2000 06:32 PM To: Janet R Dietrich/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ozzie Pagan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Heather Kroll/HOU/ECT@ECT, Charles Vetters/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeffery Ader/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Cliff Baxter/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Donahue/HOU/ECT@ECT, Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: FCEL Guys, I have spoken to Cliff and Mark and we are comfortable moving forward under the structure we have discussed. FCEL: - $5MM in equity and 1.3MM warrants from corporate treasury stock that vest based upon 60MW of orders; - discussion with FCEL in which we disclose ALL infromation we have about the potential Conn. deal - I will require that myself and Mark be on that call; - the transaction is fully press released immediately. CRRA: - subject to final due diligence on the development risks, we provide the management and wrap for CRRA on the potential fuel cell development opportunity that consists of between 25 and 50 MW; - any appropriation of funds from the government will require DPUC hearing at which we will fully disclose in a factual manner our interest in FCEL. I will require that Mark Haedicke manage this process and sign off on all press releases, term sheets, disclosure discussions, contracts and regulatory filings. I believe that we have this managed appropriately as long as we manage the process as per the script and in a factual manner. Thanks Delainey [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: [enerfaxdaily] AGA Says Market Manipulated; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Sent:=09Friday, June 15, 2001 5:20 AM To:=09vkamins@enron.com Subject:=09[enerfaxdaily] AGA Says Market Manipulated To unsubscribe see bottom of newsletter. OUTLOOK users please wait a minute= for the web to appear, AOL please scroll down past the header to view. ---= --Pure Text & Lotus Users subscribe to the pure text version by clicking h= Enerfax Daily NORTH AMERICA'S FREE POWER AND GAS INFORMATION SOURCE Friday, June 15, 2001 No. 762 PHYSICAL GAS PRICES | Gulf/Eastern Region | | | Agua Dulce | 3.88 | | ANR SE | 3.86 | | Carthage TG | 3.92 | | Chicago Citygate | 3.90 | | Columbia Gulf Onshore | 3.87 | | Dominion TTT South(CNG S. Point) | 4.18 | | Henry Hub | 3.97 | | Houston Ship Channel | 3.98 | | Katy Hub | 3.94 | | NGPL - Midcontinent | 3.72 | | NGPL STX | 3.88 | | NGPL TX/OK | 3.86 | | Niagara | 4.09 | | Sonat Tier 1 | 3.86 | | TCO IPP Pool | 4.13 | | Tetco ELa | 3.91 | | Tetco M-3 | 4.30 | | Tetco STX | 3.87 | | TGP Zone 0 | 3.86 | | TGP Zone 1 | 3.99 | | TGT Zone SL | 3.88 | | New York Citygate | 4.29 | | Transco Station 65 | 3.97 | | Transco Zone 6 (NY) | 4.29 | | Trunk ELa | 3.85 | | Western Region | | | California Border | 6.98 | | El Paso Permian | 3.74 | | El Paso San Juan | 3.15 | | Waha Hub | 3.88 | | Canadian/Rockies Region | | | Nova/Aeco (in C$/GJ) | 4.95 | | Dawn Hub/Union | 4.09 | | Northwest Stanfield | 3.45 | | Wyoming Pool | 2.88 | | Opal/Kern River | 2.90 | | PGT-Malin | 3.66 | | Sumas | 3.52 | Power Traders - If you like tools, wouldn't it be nice to have one that mak= es you money? Profit from Time2Trade(tm). Power Analysts - If you like detail, wouldn't it be great to have it all? AcuPower - Now with Trader & Analyst Consoles. For a free trial go to http://www.capacitymap.com. Gas Futures Henry Hub 12 Month Strip 4.2343 -0.1041=09=09 18 Month Strip 4.1726 -0.1107=09=09 | Month | High | Low | Close | Change | | JUL | 4.180 | 3.975 | 4.038 | -0.074 | | AUG | 4.215 | 4.070 | 4.123 | -0.088 | | SEP | 4.255 | 4.120 | 4.171 | -0.091 | | OCT | 4.300 | 4.180 | 4.218 | -0.094 | | NOV | 4.500 | 4.375 | 4.415 | -0.096 | | DEC | 4.700 | 4.430 | 4.612 | -0.097 | | JAN | 4.765 | 4.640 | 4.675 | -0.099 | | FEB | 4.630 | 4.400 | 4.540 | -0.109 | | MAR | 4.430 | 4.130 | 4.350 | -0.119 | | APR | 4.010 | 3.930 | 3.925 | -0.128 | | MAY | 3.940 | 3.840 | 3.850 | -0.128 | | JUN | 3.985 | 3.885 | 3.895 | -0.126 | Pure Text or Lotus & AOL Readers-subscribe by going to: HTML,Outlook Email, Readers-subscribe by writing POWER FUTURES | Month | COB | Change | PV | Change | | JUL | 144.00 | -45.00 | 157.00 | -42.00 | | AUG | 177.00 | -49.00 | 195.00 | -55.00 | | SEP | 135.00 | -32.00 | 135.00 | -30.00 | | OCT | 107.00 | -35.00 | 92.00 | -20.00 | | NOV | 91.00 | -26.00 | 70.00 | -8.00 | | DEC | 128.00 | -33.00 | 70.00 | -13.00 | | JAN | 80.00 | +0.00 | 75.00 | +0.00 | | FEB | 130.00 | +0.00 | 65.00 | +0.00 | | MAR | 130.00 | +0.00 | 58.00 | -7.00 | | APR | 62.00 | +0.00 | 58.00 | +0.00 | | MAY | 62.00 | +0.00 | 58.00 | +0.00 | | JUN | 62.00 | +0.00 | 78.00 | +0.00 | | Month | Entergy | Change | Cinergy | Change | | JUL | 84.75 | -1.75 | 77.25 | -2.00 | | AUG | 79.00 | -1.50 | 70.25 | -0.75 | | SEP | 41.90 | -0.85 | 36.55 | -0.55 | | OCT | 36.95 | -0.55 | 34.65 | -0.40 | | NOV | 36.95 | -0.55 | 34.65 | -0.40 | | DEC | 36.95 | -0.55 | 34.65 | -0.40 | | JAN | 39.00 | -0.50 | 37.50 | -0.75 | | FEB | 39.00 | -0.50 | 37.50 | -0.75 | | MAR | 35.75 | -0.50 | 35.00 | -0.25 | | APR | 35.75 | -0.50 | 35.00 | -0.25 | | MAY | 41.00 | -0.50 | 39.25 | +0.25 | | JUN | 52.00 | +1.25 | 49.50 | -0.25 | POWER FUTURES | Month | PJM | Change | | JUL | 73.25 | -3.75 | | AUG | 67.00 | -1.25 | | SEP | 38.75 | -0.70 | | OCT | 36.00 | -0.50 | | NOV | 36.00 | -0.50 | | DEC | 36.00 | -0.50 | | JAN | 41.25 | -0.60 | | FEB | 41.25 | -0.60 | | MAR | 37.00 | -0.50 | | APR | 37.00 | -0.50 | | MAY | 39.50 | -0.50 | | JUN | 49.50 | -0.50 | NATURAL GAS OPTIONS | | Closing | Days | Implied ATM | | Month | Price | Left | Volatility | | JUL | 4.038 | 13 | 56.23% | | AUG | 4.123 | 43 | 57.87% | | SEP | 4.171 | 76 | 58.20% | | OCT | 4.218 | 104 | 59.10% | | NOV | 4.415 | 135 | 59.62% | | DEC | 4.612 | 167 | 59.70% | PHYSICAL POWER PRICES | | High | Low | Average | | | $/MWh | $/MWh | $/MWh | | Cinergy | 58.00 | 51.00 | 53.60 | | ECAR | 46.65 | 42.85 | 45.35 | | ERCOT | 42.00 | 41.00 | 41.50 | | Entergy | 54.00 | 50.00 | 51.35 | | TVA | 61.10 | 52.40 | 57.35 | | ComEd | 54.50 | 46.50 | 48.50 | | PJM West | 57.00 | 54.00 | 55.25 | | Main | 45.00 | 39.75 | 42.75 | | MAPP | 42.50 | 38.50 | 40.40 | | Palo Verde | 71.00 | 52.00 | 66.50 | | Mid C | 60.00 | 51.00 | 54.55 | | COB | 58.00 | 58.00 | 58.00 | | 4 Corners | 50.00 | 36.00 | 42.30 | | Mead | 63.00 | 53.00 | 60.50 | | NP 15 | 57.00 | 55.00 | 56.20 | | SP 15 | 65.00 | 48.00 | 56.75 | Today's Power Bulletins * FPL Energy to Build 517 MW Natural Gas Fired Power Plant in Blythe, Calif= ornia=20 * Marriott Expands Energy Surcharge Outside California * Mirant Begins Commercial Operation of 248 MW Natural Gas Fired Power Plan= t in Bosque County, Texas * NRC Reports 1,106 MW Salem Unit 1 Operating at 32%, While Unit 2 Operates= at 83% =20 * EU Approves BHP-Billiton Merger * Salomon Initiates Coverage of DTE Energy with a Buy Rating and $54 Target= Price * Alcoa to Idle Wenatchee, WA Smelter for 15 Months, Resale Power Back to G= rid * California Lawmaker Probing Hack of ISO Electricity Grid * Puget Sound Energy and BPA Reach Federal Hydropower Accord Agreement Help= s Keep Rates Stable for PSE Customers * Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator Terminates Agreement wit= h Mid-America Interconnected Network * Tennessee Valley Authority to Redeem All 1993 Series C Power Bonds Due Ju= ly 15, 2003 * DTE Energy's International Transmission Asks FERC to Help Stop 'Free Ride= rs' on Transmission System * APX Opens Palo Verde Market, Introducing Rolling 40-Hour Trading Flexibil= ity to Arizona * TXU Energy Services Launches Large Business Energy Management Portal * Western Spot Power Prices Fall with Less Weekend Demand and More Hydro * Northeast Spot Power Prices Plunge Again with Lightened Loads GET REAL about energy risk management with KWI In today's fast moving energy markets you need to be able to manage risk in= real time. That means knowing before you hit a risk problem, not afterwards when it ma= y be too late to prevent big losses spreading right through your enterprise= . With kW3000(tm), our multi-commodity, integrated front to back office softw= are, you can monitor your Profit At Risk(tm), counterparty risk and mark-to= -market all in real time. Keep alert to risk. Do it in real time. Call KWI - http://www.kwi.com=20 Americas: +1-281-681-3301 / Europe: +44 (0) 20-7386-2700 / Asia Pacific: +6= 1(0) 2-9976-6111=20 Today's Gas Bulletins * BC Gas and Westport Innovations in Deal with T Boone Pickens to Create No= rth America's Largest Supplier of Natural Gas for Vehicles * Alberta Premier Klein Talks Energy with VP Cheney * Canadian Energy Service Firms Expect Drilling Boom-Times to Continue with= Increasing US Interest * EIA Says Iraq May Cause US Crude and Heating Oil Stocks to Drop * Producer Price Index Inches Up 0.1% in May, After a 0.3% Rise in April * Hong Kong & China Gas in Consortium with Royal Dutch/Shell to Bid for $4.= 8 Billion West-East Natural Gas Pipeline in China * ExxonMobil Says Japan Natural Gas Pipeline from Russia's Sakhalin Field i= s Economically Viable * National Fuel Gas Announces a 2-for-1 Stock Split and Increases Dividend = for the 31st Consecutive Year Natural Gas Futures Continue Lower=20 Natural gas futures on the NYMEX dropped lower yesterday as traders remaine= d in a bearish mood following Wednesday's triple digit AGA report. The July= contract lost $0.074 to $4.038 per MMBtu, trading most of the session abov= e the $4.00 support level as warm weather in the Northeast kept demand firm= . August dipped $0.088 to $4.123 per MMBtu. Local and short-term traders' e= arly efforts to push prices lower were successful, but some see the risk/re= ward of additional selling at these levels limited. On Wednesday, the AGA r= eported a storage inventory build of 105 Bcf from the previous week, well a= bove both the 2000 injection of 78 Bcf and the 5-year average of 81 Bcf for= the comparable weeks. The selling sparked by the AGA number was encouraged= by some disappointment with weather conditions in the Northeast. Earlier t= his week, some forecasters were calling for warmer temperatures, with some = cities expected to be near 90 degrees. But temperatures in the region have = been in the low to mid-80s. However, warmer weather is expected to continue= in the East though this weekend. Mild weather will linger in the north-cen= tral and northwestern states. California and the western states will begin = to heat up this weekend and early next week. Further tests of $4.00 are lik= ely, with significant support at $3.80. Resistance is seen at $4.20. Natura= l gas for next day delivery across the US and Canada was generally down $0.= 15 $0.25 yesterday, except out west, where the Topock delivery point tumbl= ed over $1.00. Natural gas for next day delivery at the Henry hub dropped $= 0.16 to $3.97 per MMBtu. North American Gas Storage Storage 2001 - 2002:=09=09=09 Source of Stability or June 22, Find the answers at Ziff Energy's natural gas storage conference. A blockb= uster roster of industry leaders from the utility, trading, pipeline and st= orage sectors in each of the North American storage regions will present ti= mely, relevant information you can use. This conference will assist you in = making critical decisions about your natural gas storage strategy for peaki= ng and the remaining seasonal base fill. The game has changed - storage str= ategy has been kicked up a notch from buying for seasonal fill to real-time= risk management. Session 1=09Supply Shortage or Storage Inefficiencies: Last Winter's Saga El Paso Corporation - Byron Wright, VP Energy Information Administration, DOE - Jim Thompson, Industry Analyst Keyspan Energy - David Manning, Senior VP, Corporation Affairs Axia Energy - David Modesett, VP Session 2=09The Changing Storage Paradigm:=20 Dynamic Storage Service vs Seasonal Fill AEC Storage & Hub Services Inc. - Rick Daniel, President Williams Energy Marketing & Trading - Blake Herndon, Director, Risk Managem= ent NiSource Inc. - T.J. Aruffo, VP Energy Supply Services Enron North America - Paul Bieniawski, Director Duke Energy Gas Transmission - David Nightingale, VP MHP Session 3=09Pricing it Right and Reducing Risk:=20 Can We Expect Stability or Chaos in Winter 2001 - 2001? Aquila Energy - Mark Cook, VP The Exchange Center Conoco Gas and Power Mark= eting - Brad King, VP Storage Sempra Energy Trading - Dan Guertin, Meteorologist For more information or to register om , call 1-800-853-6252, or email us at Nova Scotia Wants Royalty Revenue Nova Scotia wants a bigger share of the cash generated by its oil and natur= al gas reserves to fund the regulators needed to monitor the growing indust= ry, according to the provinces Premier. Speaking at an energy conference in= Halifax, he pleaded with the federal government to let the province keep m= ore of the royalties. A 1986 offshore deal between Canada and Nova Scotia n= ames the province as the main beneficiary of offshore oil and natural gas r= oyalties, but the actual revenue split gives Ottawa 81% and Nova Scotia 19%= . Nova Scotia already exports natural gas to New England from the Sable Off= shore Energy Project. A possible second pipeline proposal to the Northeast = US is being studied.=20 Natural Gas NYMEX Volume 01JLY 38,948 01AUG 11,742 01SEP 5,543 01OCT 7,074 01NOV 6,059 01DEC 2,997 02JAN 1,420 02FEB 1,092 02MAR 2,687 02APR 3,216 02MAY 573 02JUN 983 02JLY 585 02AUG 613 02SEP 40 02OCT 393 02NOV 392 02DEC 91 03JAN 26 03FEB 1 03MAR 1 03APR 51 03MAY 0 03JUN 47 Los Angeles Power Association Presents: Managing the Natural Gas & Electric Deregulation Crisis June 21, 2001 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. The Westin Hotel, 333 East Ocean Blvd., Long Beach, CA 90802 Speakers will include: Lawrence Straight, Sterling Energy Operations, Gordo= n Brown, Manager of Operations, California Independent System Operator,Rich= ard Needham, Partner, Stradling, Yocca, Carlson & Rauth Kevin McSpadden, Mi= lbank, Tweed, Hadley, McCloy LLP Geoff Ayres, Director, Southern California Gas. Co.=20 Call (714) 931-3103 for information and reservations California Expects More Power Price Regulation California lawmakers expect the FERC to strengthen its existing plan to lim= it power prices during emergencies by expanding the plan to the entire West= for all hours of the day. The plan would fall short of the price caps. But= , expanding the existing formula for price limits has picked up support amo= ng Republicans who are under increasing pressure. FERC Chairman Hebert has = called a special commission hearing for Monday to address the continuing is= sues affecting California and the West. The proposal seeks to have FERC set= target prices for wholesale electricity prices on an around-the-clock basi= s for the entire West. Under the existing plan, the FERC price limits are t= riggered when the state declares a power emergency and are based on the amo= unt that generators can charge to produce power at the least efficient plan= t. Hebert says that since the FERC relief plan went into effect on May 29th= , power prices in California have dropped to under $100 per MWh from earlie= r in May over the $300 per MWh. The day-ahead market in California recently= traded about $45 per MWh.=20 ENERGY. @ENERGY, FEA's Complete Suite of Energy Products, BUILT FOR THE FUTURE. *Manage all your energy risks. *Build and Price deals. *Value physical assets (generation, storage, etc.) *Report and reduce your energy risks FEA FINANCIAL ENGINEERING main phone number: 1 510-548-6200 email address: info@fea.com=20 Williams to Supply California Ethanol Williams Bio-Energy has agreed to supply ethanol to California by the fourt= h quarter of this year. Earlier this week, the EPA denied California's requ= est to waive provisions of the 1990 Clean Air Act requiring the use of addi= tives to make cleaner-burning gasoline. The decision means California will = need about 580 million gallons of ethanol for RFG oxygenates in 2004, becau= se the state banned MTBE by the end of 2002. Williams will house 15,000 bar= rels of ethanol at Kinder Morgan Energy Partners storage facility in Carson= , California, to supply the Los Angeles and San Diego markets. Williams pla= ns transport ethanol to the storage facility and directly to refiners by la= rge unit rail shipments and ocean vessels. =20 National Energy Services Association Email: william.harper@nesanet.org http://www.nesanet.org=20 713/856-6525 Mitchell Reports Higher Proven Reserves Mitchell Energy & Development reports its proven reserves are up 38% in= the first half of the year. Mitchells proved reserves have increased by 58= 0 Bcfe, putting its total reserves at 2.1 Tcfe. The single biggest increase= , 210 Bcfe, came from its most successful field, the Barnett Shale play in = North Texas. The new reserves came from step-out drilling; drilling which o= ccurs outside the previously confirmed area in the Barnett Shale, the fourt= h-largest producing field in Texas. Mitchell currently holds 230,000 acres = of the Barnett and has drilled the area for almost 50 years.=20 SUNGARD Solutions for Success in Energy Trading Epsilon and Panorama Energy Risk and complexity are inevitable components of every trading transaction = within today's volatile energy market. Having the right tools to manage an= d control those risks has become a determining success factor. SunGard pro= vides those tools with Epsilon and Panorama Energy - comprehensive solution= s designed to create measurable competitive advantages for energy trading o= rganizations and utility companies worldwide. To receive more information or a free demonstration, we invite you to conta= ct us at 713-266-7771 or visit our web site at http://risk.sungard.com/ener= gy.=20 Natural Gas Investments in Mexico at Risk of Drying Up=20 Mexico has made changes to its natural gas price formulas, but they have pr= oved insufficient to appease distributors, and Metrogas, Tractebel and Semp= ra are threatening to halt investment in new projects. A more efficient and= more competitive regulatory standard is required. The Mexican regulatory c= ommission for energy, the CRE has not changed the reference for prices whic= h remains southern Texas. The federal commission for regulatory improvement= s has a week to decide whether to accept the CRE's proposals. Mexico will r= equire private sector investment of $114 Billion by 2009 in the sector. The= companies want to see a new standard established before the end of the yea= r and all are thinking about pulling out if laws are not clear and in place= . The CRE wants to adjust maximum prices only when the private companies ha= ve completed five years of Mexican operations, something which will occur i= n most cases next year. Pemex still controls rights on natural gas explorat= ion.=20 Progas Storage Services, Inc was recently organized to offer specialized natural gas storage services to= marketers and end users servicing the upper Midwest and Northeast market r= egions along the major transmission systems in Indiana, Illinois, Kentucky,= and Michigan. PGSMI has 10 bcf of potential working capacity which will of= fer service along TXG, ANR, Midwestern, and is currently evaluating for pur= chase another 21 bcf of potential working capacity which can be serviced by= these and other systems in the region. PGSMI also explores for natural gas= in the Gulf Coast region through a wholly owned subsidiary. Progas intends= to go public through a route of private industry offerings, and an IPO or = registration. For more information on services or the company mail to: gast= orage@aol.com or for AOL mail to gastorage@aol.com ; web site currently und= er construction at: http://www.progas.net/wip . The company's executive and administrative office is located in Abilene, Te= xas with storage operations in Owensboro, KY and exploration operations in = Corpus Christi, TX. Progas Storage Services, Inc =20 8610 S. Hwy 277 Abilene, TX 79606 Ph 915 698 3699 Fx 915 698 2859 House Appropriations Committee Rejects Power Price Caps Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee have rejected a push by D= emocrats to cap West Coast power prices, but Democrats said they will keep = pressing the issue. The panel voted along party lines to defeat a bill to f= orce FERC to cap wholesale electricity prices in the West. Democrats tried = to stick the measure in a $6.5 billion spending bill that was intended main= ly to fill out immediate defense needs this fiscal year. Rejecting the pric= e caps amendment, Republicans argued it would not solve California's proble= ms of tight supplies, but would further distort the marketplace. House Repu= blican Whip DeLay of Texas said California's power crisis is the result of = allowing environmental extremists to run the state government. Saying the f= ederal government should not intervene in California's electricity market, = Rep. Callahan of Alabama, who chairs the House Appropriations Energy and Wa= ter subcommittee, said: I respectfully submit to you that you've made your = own bed. Democrats countered that limiting prices to cover production costs= and a reasonable profit was essential to halt price gouging by unscrupulou= s suppliers. Democrats hoped to persuade a few West Coast Republicans to su= pport the price caps, but those on the committee resisted. Under the existi= ng plan, the FERC price limits are triggered when the state declares a powe= r emergency and are based on the amount that generators can charge to produ= ce power at the least efficient plant. Generators can charge more if it can= be justified.=20 TRENTON/BLACKRIVER ""BOOM"" IN WEST VIRGINIA Land and Mineral Development LLC., Vienna, West Virginia, owns 85,000 acres= of mineral rights in Southeastern West Virginia. The first Trenton/Blackri= ver production found in the state, was in a well drilled in 1962 by Tidewat= er Oil Company adjoining our property. We need an industry partner. Geophysicist report and other information available. The 85000 ac= res would also make a great gas storage field. We also have another small storage field for sale near the new Trenton Well= s. Email - Driller@wirefire.com=20 Qualified Industry Principals only please. This is not an offer to sell anything to anyone. Land and Mineral Development LLC., P.O. Box 5370 Vienna, West Virginia, 26105 (304) 295-3333 El Paso to Buy Velvet Exploration El Paso has launched a C$347 million bid for Canada's Velvet Exploration, t= he latest takeover of a Canadian energy company by US companies. El Paso wi= ll offer C$8.15 in cash for each share of Velvet, representing a premium of= 11% over its stock price before trading was halted yesterday. El Paso will= also assume about C$79 million in debt, bringing the total value of the de= al to about C$426 million. Velvet is known for its exploration and producti= on deals on aboriginal lands with such native groups as the Hobbema, Stoney= and Peigan bands in central and southern Alberta. In the first quarter, it= produced 31 MMcf per day and over 4,000 barrels of oil per day. Velvet's h= as reserves of about 172 Bcfe, with 59% made up of natural gas. El Paso sha= res fell $1.09 to $55.50. YOU DESIGNED IT. WE BUILT IT. ZaiNet GasMaster II Today's most comprehensive gas trading, scheduling and accounting system. CAMINUS Your Competitive Edge in Energy Call Caminus at (212)515-3700 or visit the website www.caminus.com=20 Dominion Plans WV Coal Fired Plant=20 Dominion and Anker Energy have plans to develop with a $600 Million, 450 MW= , coal and coal waste fired facility and mining complex in Upshur County, W= V. Dominion would be responsible for the construction, ownership and operat= ion of the proposed facility, which will utilize state-of-the-art clean coa= l technology and would burn more than 65% coal waste. Anker would provide a= ll of the facility's fuel from on-site surface mining operations. This prop= osed coal-fired plant is the first Dominion has developed since payingt $1.= 2 billion to the EPA last November for Clean Air Act violations pertaining = to its coal-fired facilities. The proposed facility will be developed with = NOx reducing equipment built-in. Also, the plant will utilize circulating f= luidized bed boilers, technology that allows coal to be burned more efficie= ntly. The CFB boilers can also burn low heat-content coal and waste fuel, s= omething traditional burners cannot. All coal and coal waste produced will = be burned on-site. Limestone will be used to react with sulfur in the coal = to lower SO2 emissions.=20 EnerfactsDaily Job Center at http://enernetenergy.com 45 New Job Postings Including: * Financial Trader * Risk Trader * Energy Accounts * Sourcing Manager APGA Believes Market Manipulated=20 Unsatisfied by the federal government's explanation that the high gas price= s last winter were due mainly to supply and demand, the American Public Gas= Association says it believes the recent price drop is a signal that the ma= rket may have been unfairly manipulated. In a letter sent to the EIA and to= key lawmakers, APGA insists that the supply/demand explanations do not tel= l the full story. Rather, the association of municipal gas systems believes= price speculation played a major role in the dramatic upswing in prices du= ring the 2000-2001 heating season. Citing FERC's investigation into gas pri= ces at the California border, APGA said it is concerned not only about that= point, but also that market power gained through the unregulated control o= f pipeline capacity will lead to unjust and unreasonable prices for natural= gas service throughout the US. APGA says it is convinced that the true cau= se of record prices for gas will not be known unless the role played by ene= rgy traders and price speculators is examined.=20 Need a past issue of Enerfax Daily or Enerfax GOLD. Past issues are availab= le on Sagewave at nerfax=20 FINANCIAL SUMMARY The TSE 300 dropped 92.69 points to 7920.05 The CRB Index climbed 0.08 points to 211.62 The US Dollar decreased 0.93 points to 117.99 The Dow declined 181.49 points to 10690.13 The S?500 fell 21.73 points to 1219.87 The Nasdaq was down 77.59 points to 2044.07 July NYMEX Crude Oil rose 0.20 to 29.04 Canadian-US Exchange gained .0033 to 1.5214 Please welcome our advertisers by visiting these websites.http://www.kwi.co= m http://www.fea.com http://www.nesanet.org http://www.caminus.com http://w= ww.progas.net/wip http://www.energy2001.eee.= doe.gov Enerfax Daily is North America's gas and power information source. it is se= nt to you free of charge. Enerfax Daily may be copied and redistributed in = its entirety to all interested energy professionals. Please e-mail us at en= erfax@enerfax.com, or for AOL e-mail to enerfax@enerfax.com with the e-mai= l addresses of other energy professionals that would like to be added to En= erfax Daily's growing distribution list of thousands of energy professional= s in the US and Canada, or to be removed. The information contained herein = was obtained from sources which Enerfax Daily believes to be reliable, but = does not guarantee its accuracy. Your support of our advertisers is greatly= appreciated and will keep Enerfax Daily free. Thank you. Your comments are= welcome. For information on advertising, please write to advertise@enerfax.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= ISO-NE failure to mitigate ICAP market -- Release of ISO NE
 confidential information; [EMail-Body]= The New England Conference of Public Utilities Commissioners (NECUPUC) filed an Answer if Support of the Motion of the Maine Public Utilities Commission for Disclosure of Information. NECUPUC supports the request for the release of the unredacted copies of ISO-NE's September 21, 2000 Answer in this case. In the alternative, they would ask that the Commission provide to the regulators that are parties to the proceeding unredacted copies of the ISO's September 21, 2000 Answer subject to an appropriate protective order. Duke Energy North America (DENA) filed an Answer that opposes the MPUC request for public information. DENA argues that only a three month lag in the release of confidential information is impermissible under a prior FERC ruling in the NSTAR Services Co. case which set out a six-month lag rule for the release of information. Their second argument was that the request seeks information for all NEPOOL markets and not just the ICAP market which is subject to the suit. If the FERC authorizes the release of confidential information, then it should be subject to a protective order which contains the following: The information may only be used for the purposes of this docket. Only specifically named ""reviewing Reps associated with the MPUC may review the information. The confidential materials may not be removed from the NE-ISO's premises. The reviewing rep must execute a nondisclosure certificate. Answer to the MPUC's Motion for Disclosure of Information from Northeast Utilities Service Company and Select Energy and request for expedited commission action. NUSCO and Select Energy Support MPUC's request for disclosure of information that the ISO has filed under seal, but opposes the selective disclosure of this information to the MPUC and other regulatory commissions and not other participants. NUSCO and Select Energy request expedited action due the financial implications and there is also considerable uncertainty regarding prices in the residual ICAP market in January, February and March of 2000 due to the suspended settlement pending Commission guidance. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron Comments on NERC Legislation; [EMail-Body]= Attached below are the Enron comments submitted to NERC and the other parties involved in the NERC-led discussions on reliability legislation. The comments indicate that Enron does not support the final version on which comments were requested by today. The comments as submitted were reviewed by Jim, Sarah and Charles and reflect their suggested changes. Thanks to them for their assistance. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Eeegads...; [EMail-Body]= I'll be there, as will Sandi McCubbin. Are you interested in going? I thought not. -----Original Message----- From: Dasovich, Jeff Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 11:02 AM To: Kaufman, Paul; Landwehr, Susan Subject: Eeegads... Don't know how I got on the list, but just got my invitation to the Western Conference of PUCs meeting June 3-6 where the guest speakers are Frank Wolak and Gary Locke. Oh dear.... Best, Jeff [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: CONFIDENTIAL Personnel issue; [EMail-Body]= I've got a call into Valeria. --Lizzette -----Original Message----- From: Cash, Michelle Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 10:59 AM To: Corteselli, Gina; Palmer, Lizzette Subject: Re: CONFIDENTIAL Personnel issue I don't know if he went to Valeria. Lizzette, why don't you call her to find out status. I still think that termination this quickly after he raised discrim claims is a bit risky but if he is not doing his job then I think we should document it well and communicate with his agency to have it tell him that he must be there. Michelle -------------------------- Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net) [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Shift May Empower California.htm; [EMail-Body]= Thanks for taking time to call yesterday. Good luck with the Lockyer situ= ation. I truly do believe that direct and prompt interaction with Lockyer= will prove more effective for Enron than delayed or intermediated action.= As we discussed, if I can be of any help with reconnaissance or as sou= nding board, just let me know. =20 I have attached an article from this morning's LA Times. It provides an C= alifornia view on how the shakeup in the Senate might impact the state's e= nergy situation. Certainly, by the time that President Bush visits the C= alifornia in a few days, the state's two Democratic US Senators will be a = good bit more empowered. =20 Kevin 213-926-2626 =20 [IMAGE] [IMAGE][IMAGE] =09Click here to learn more! [IMAGE]=09 [IMAGE] =09Home | Discussions | Print Edition | Archives | Site Map = | Home Delivery | Advertise | Feedback | Help [IMAGE]=09 =09[IMAGE]=09 [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] News Politics Entertainment music ,= movies , art , TV , restaurants [IMAGE] Business Travel Marketplace jo= bs , homes , cars , rentals , classifieds [IMAGE] Sports Commentary Shop= ping [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] A Section= [IMAGE] [IMAGE] TOP STORIES * State's Standardized Test Spurs Scatte= red Backlash * GOP Braces for Jeffords to Bolt Today * Moderates on = Outside of GOP Big Tent MORE [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] STORIES BY DA= TE FOR THIS SECTION 5/24 | 5/23 | 5/22 | 5/21 | 5/20 | 5/19 | 5/18 = [IMAGE] DAILY SECTIONS Front Page ""A"" Section California [= IMAGE] Business Sports Calendar [IMAGE] So. Cal. Living Editorials,Lett= ers, Op/Ed WEEKLY SECTIONS Health Food [IMAGE] Tech Times [IMAG= E] Highway 1 SUNDAY SECTIONS Book Review Opinion Real Estate [IMA= GE] Calendar Magazine Travel [IMAGE] TV Times Work Place [IMAGE] [= IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Marketplace Find a home , car = , rental , job , pet , merchandise , boat, plane or RV , classifieds Pl= ace an Ad [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] L.A. Times = Subscription Services Subscribe , Change of Address , Vacation Stops , = Suspend Delivery , College Discount , Gift Subscriptions , Mail Subscriptio= ns , FAQ [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Print Ads = from the Newspaper See this week's ads [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Pri= nt Edition , Orange County , Valley , Ventura County , National , Communi= ty Papers [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Books Columnists Cross= word Education Food Health Highway Horoscope Lottery Magazine = Obituaries Reading by Real Estate Religion Science So.Cal. Living = Special Reports Sunday Opinion Tech Times Times Poll Traffic Weath= er Workplace SITE MAP [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] SHOP 'TIL YOUR = LAPTOP DROPS [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Shopping [IMAGE= ] Search Products Stores [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] = [IMAGE] [IMAGE] =09[IMAGE]=09[IMAGE] Thursday, May 24, 2001 | [IMAGE]Print= this story [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Shift May Empower California By RICHARD SI= MON, ELIZABETH SHOGREN, Times Staff Writers WASHINGTON--James M. J= effords has never mattered much to Californians. Until now. The Verm= ont senator's widely anticipated decision to abandon his fellow Republican= s and put Democrats in control of the Senate could have big implications f= or California, particularly on energy and environmental policy, lawmakers = and lobbyists said Wednesday. The change, which Jeffords is expected= to announce today, could increase political pressure on the Bush adminis= tration to respond more aggressively to California's electricity crisis, t= hese insiders said. And it might force the White House to compromise= on key elements of the national energy policy it unveiled last week. In f= act, the administration's proposed budget cuts for programs to promote ren= ewable energy were said to be a factor in Jeffords' decision. At th= e very least, Senate observers said, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) is l= ikely to get the floor vote she has sought on price controls for wholesale= electricity. That doesn't necessarily mean that the administration'= s critics will be able to have everything their way. Even if the Senate ap= proves electricity price caps, for example, the measure would face stiff o= pposition in the GOP-dominated House--and a likely veto if it made it to t= he president's desk. Still, a Democratic majority in the Senate wou= ld give Feinstein and other party members a platform to turn up the politi= cal heat on the administration and congressional Republicans on energy pol= icy. ""It kicks up the dust,"" groaned one energy industry lobbyist wh= o requested anonymity. Observed Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.): ""If P= resident Bush's hard-edged conservative approach has in fact caused the ba= lance to shift towards Democrats in the Senate, it will have profound impl= ications not just for California, but for the environment and our nation's= energy policy."" Environmentalists seemed almost giddy as they cont= emplated the possible impact of Jeffords' decision on the policies they ca= re about. All of a sudden, they said, it seems less likely that oil = exploration will take place in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, that r= ecreational snowmobiles will have free access to Yellowstone National Park= , or that the administration's desire to promote nuclear power will be emb= raced by Congress. On the other hand, it seems more probable that C= ongress would approve a new plan for managing a vast swath of the Sierra N= evada to protect the region's oldest trees, consider legislation to restri= ct emissions of carbon dioxide from power plants and protect California fr= om a resurgence of offshore oil drilling. ""It's stunning how broad t= he repercussions are, particularly on the environment,"" said Gregory Wetst= one of the Natural Resources Defense Council. ""We're trying not to count o= ur chickens before they hatch. But it will be easier for us in our battles= at least to keep from moving backwards."" For instance, Jeffords is= a chief advocate of a bill that would regulate carbon dioxide from power = plants. And if events play out as expected, he'll become the new chairman = of the Senate committee with jurisdiction over the issue. Another i= ssue under his purview would be the two-decade dispute over a proposed rep= ository for the nation's spent nuclear fuel at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. = ""Yucca Mountain is a dead turkey,"" declared Michael Francis of the W= ilderness Society. Environmentalists had been worried that a number= of pro-development provisions would be packed into appropriation bills. B= ut with Democratic senators in charge, that would become less of a threat,= they said. ""Every wacko idea Republicans have will get a higher lev= el of scrutiny,"" Francis said. The biggest change would be the power= of Senate Democrats to decide which bills will be considered in committee= s, and which ones will make it to the floor of the Senate for votes. = As part of a new Democratic majority, Feinstein and fellow California De= mocrat Barbara Boxer are likely to gain leverage with the administration o= n a number of issues considered important to the state. ""That transl= ates into more federal assistance for California across the board,"" predic= ted Steve Maviglio, spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis. ""I think it mean= s more attention to our state, for sure,"" Boxer said. ""Right now, the pres= ident doesn't seem to give a darn. They're all looking at California as a = Democratic state. They're not interested."" Feinstein, who has been = unable to arrange a meeting with Bush to discuss the energy crisis, may ge= t better treatment if winning Democratic support becomes more important to= the administration. She has been regarded as a bridge-builder who worked = effectively with Republicans in the past. ""This has not been a warm = and friendly administration,"" she complained Wednesday. ""They've got peopl= e who know all the answers and don't want to listen."" The White Hou= se disputed that. In fact, Bush agreed Wednesday to meet with Davis during= the president's first visit to California next week. Under a Democ= ratic majority, Feinstein would be in line to chair two subcommittees: the= military construction panel of the Senate Appropriations Committee, and t= he technology, terrorism and government information subcommittee of the Se= nate Judiciary Committee. Boxer would be in line to chair the subco= mmittee on Superfund, waste control and risk assessment, and the Foreign R= elations subcommittee on international operations and terrorism. Mav= iglio predicted that the effects of Jeffords' expected party defection wou= ld be felt immediately. The chairmanship of the Senate Energy and N= atural Resources Committee would be taken away from Frank H. Murkowski (R-= Alaska), who has been ""openly hostile to California's plight,"" and handed = to Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), who supports Davis' request for electricity pri= ce controls, according to Maviglio. Democrats have assailed Bush's e= nergy plan for tilting heavily toward the supply side. With Democrats in c= harge of the Senate, the administration would be more likely to compromise= , perhaps beefing up funding for Democrat-supported causes such as increas= ed energy assistance to low-income households and more aggressive promotio= n of conservation and renewable energy sources such as wind and solar powe= r. Search the archives of the Los Angeles Times for similar stories ab= out: United States - Politics , Republican Party , James M Jeffords , P= olitical Party Defections , California - Politics , Senate (U.s.) . You = will not be charged to look for stories, only to retrieve one. =09 News Politics Entertainment music , movies , art , TV , restaurants = [IMAGE] Business Travel Marketplace jobs , homes , cars , rentals , cla= ssifieds [IMAGE] Sports Commentary Shopping [IMAGE] =09[IMAGE]=09 G= et Copyright Clearance Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times Click for permi= ssion to reprint (PRC# 1.528.2001_000043610) =09 [IMAGE] =09 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: FERC's Settlement Conference on Refunds - Monday, June
 25th--CONFIDENTIAL ATTY CLIENT WORK PRODUC; [EMail-Body]= If you've been wondering where Davis's $9 billion ""overcharge number"" number comes from, attached is the apparent basis of the number, which was from a study prepared by Hildebrandt of the CAISO. It was apparently released on the CAISO site on 6/21. Note that the $9billion includes bilateral trade sold to any party. However, Hildebrandt cannot say who the supplier is unless DWR, CAISO, or the PX was the buyer (for those buyers he presumably has detailed data). Thus, he can ascribe overcharges to specific jurisdictional generators for only $5.4 billion of the $9billion total. He does not show what specific parties are attrributable to the $5.4 billion. In an earlier study on just ISO R/T ""strategic bidding"", supplier names were released inadvertantly by CAISO. Finally, as in previous CAISO studies, a significant fraction of overcharges (approx $3 billion) comes from before the refund-effective date of 10/1/00. Alan Comnes [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: Oakland Trib Wed 3/7: ""Breakthrough made in rescue of PG&E"" Bakersfield Californian, Wed 3/7: ""El Paso Energy closes six valley power plants"" Contra Costa Times, Wed 3/7: ""Still undecided: Who'll pay DWR for electricity"" SF Chron, Wed 3/7: ""State Taxpayers In Dark on Details Of Energy Deal"" Sac Bee, Wed 3/7: ""Lawmakers pitch fixes for region's energy woes"" Orange Co. Register, Wed 3/7: ""Power plan called wrong"" LA Times - Wed 3/7: ""Bill to Cut Some Power Prices Stalls"" Sac Bee, Wed 3/7: ""PG&E could face mutiny on outages: SMUD, others may balk if utility orders summer blackouts"" SF Chron, Wed 3/7: ""PUC to Decide Fate Of Utility Workers PG&E, Edison want to trim costs by laying off thousands, cutting service"" San Jose Mercury, Wed 3/7: ""Power prices could soar during the summer"" SF Chron, Wed 3/7: ""Power Plant Plans Cause Conflicts East county residents blast supervisors"" Contra Costa Times Wed 3/7: ""Supervisors set search for power plant sites"" Sac Bee, Wed 3/7: ""Peter Schrag: California's $90 billion infrastructure gap"" Contra Costa Times, Wed 3/7: ""PG&E power plan debated at hearing"" SF Chron, Thurs. 3/8: State OKs 'Peaker' Power Plant at SFO / Temporary generator could be sending electricity to 50,000 homes by August WSJ, Thurs. 3/8: Crossed Wires: Major Kinks Emerge In Gov. Davis's Plan To Power California --- State's Outlays for Electricity May Be Hard to Recover Without Rate Increases --- Betting on Long-Term Deals ------------------------ Breakthrough made in rescue of PG&E State ready to pay $7 billion for lines By Steve Geissinger SACRAMENTO BUREAU SACRAMENTO -- Signaling a breakthrough in secret energy crisis talks, the Davis administration disclosed Tuesday it may announce the framework of a pact to rescue the teetering Pacific Gas and Electric Co. next week. ""Things are going very well,"" said Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis. The state appears to be poised to pay at least $7 billion -- and possibly billions more -- for PG&E's high-voltage transmission lines as part of a deal to financially renovate the north-state utility, according to sources familiar with the negotiations. But consumer advocates insisted that even the $7 billion price is too much to pay. And experts warned that a deal with PG&E will be more complex than with other utilities. PG&E representatives declined comment, in keeping with their policy on the talks, even though the Davis administration said an announcement could come as early as next week or the following week. The new timetable for an announcement was substantially sooner than in Davis' original forecast. Until late last week, PG&E was still resisting the sale of its power grid despite the fact that Davis had announced the framework of an agreement with Southern California Edison. Davis expects to soon announce a similar deal with the San Diego Gas and Electric Co. However, any such deal still would need federal approval. The investor-owned utilities, trapped between high wholesale costs and lower, regulated retail rates, amassed nearly $13 billion in debts and were unable to buy electricity this winter. With the onset of rolling blackouts, the state began brokering billions of dollars in emergency short- and long-term power purchases. Davis' strategy to ease the energy price and supply crisis includes bolstering both conservation and generation while fiscally refurbishing the nearly bankrupt utilities. As part of the rescue deal, the utilities would have to drop legal actions seeking dramatically higher electricity bills, environmentally shield wildlands they own, sell power from their generators to Californians for the next decade and secure help with their debts from their parent companies. Together with the cash infusion from the sale of their power 26,000-mile power grids, the utilities would be allowed to sell bonds to raise funds and use customer money to pay them off. The state would upgrade the high-voltage lines and lease them back to the utilities for operation. In a reflection of the negotiations with the three utilities, a Davis administration official said the deal with PG&E is proving to be more complex than with the other firms. Though PG&E finally agreed late last week to sell its transmission grid, the utility apparently wants more than the $7 billion that Davis has offered, according to sources. The figure is more than twice the book amount, or the value placed on the system for purposes of accounting. And that's the markup that lured Edison into an agreement to sell its smaller portion of the transmission grid for $2.8 billion. But PG&E, which fears an erosion of its economic base, may be asking as much as $10 billion. Due to complexities in the state's 1996 deregulation of the industry, PG&E is more likely to lose revenue than Edison as a result of selling its transmission lines, according to experts. Big customers might be able to bypass the utility's remaining local distribution lines, thereby eroding its customer base. Therefore the utility may view bankruptcy, and sale of its transmission lines to the highest bidder, as a potentially attractive alternative to selling its share of the grid to the state at too low a price. ---- El Paso Energy closes six valley power plants Filed: 03/07/2001 By CHIP POWER, Californian staff writer e-mail: ppower@bakersfield.com El Paso Energy, citing non-payment from Pacific Gas & Electric Co., said it has shut down six cogeneration plants this week. The smaller plants produced about 175 megawatts of electricity and are located primarily in the San Joaquin Valley, said company spokesman Mel Scott. A megawatt can supply power to 1,000 homes. At least 10 plants have closed in the past two weeks as a result of non-payment, according to the state Independent System Operator, which manages most of the state's electrical distribution. The El Paso Energy plants are operated with various partners and had not been compensated for December, January and February deliveries, said Scott. He said he did not know the total amount due but said the plants would be closed until PG&E's credit worthiness is improved. A cogeneration plant, common in oil fields, simultaneously produces heat energy and electrical or mechanical power from the same fuel in the same facility. Typically, it produces electricity and steam, which can be deployed to enhance oil recovery. Kern County is the state's leading oil-producing county. El Paso owns or has interests in more than 40,000 miles of interstate and intrastate pipeline connecting the nation's principal natural gas supply regions to the five largest consuming regions in the United States, namely the Gulf Coast, California, the Northeast, the Midwest and the Southeast. El Paso closed up 99 cents on Tuesday, or 1.4 percent, at $71.49. The Houston-based company's stock price has ranged between $36.31 and $75.30 in the last 52 weeks. ---- Still undecided: Who'll pay DWR for electricity By Karen Gaudette ASSOCIATED PRESS SAN FRANCISCO -- The price tag is $3.2 billion and counting for electricity bought by the state Department of Water Resources for the customers of two nearly bankrupt utilities. Pacific Gas and Electric Co., Southern California Edison and the state disagree over how the DWR eventually will be reimbursed for its purchases on the expensive last-minute power market. So do the state power regulators, who have the final call over who gets the money when. Under a recent law, the DWR went into the electricity-buying business to help keep the two utilities from sinking further into their $13 billion debt. The state plans to retrieve the money by selling $10 billion in revenue bonds. The utilities continue to collect ratepayer dollars on that electricity, which the bill's author, Assemblyman Fred Keeley, D-Boulder Creek, says is meant to help them begin paying down their debt. In a recent letter, however, DWR officials requested that the state Public Utilities Commission order that a portion of that money be diverted to the state. But after the utilities subtract the costs of generating electricity, payments to environmentally friendly power plants and other expenses, there is no money left from ratepayer dollars to give to the DWR without sinking further into debt, PG&E spokesman Ron Low said Tuesday. If it passed along money to the DWR, ""our undercollection would grow by about $2.4 billion by the end of the year,"" Low said. The commission, unable to agree on the best course of action, left the issue untouched at its last meeting but expects to revisit the issue when it meets this morning. Commissioner Richard Bilas is proposing an alternate plan that would have the DWR set its own revenue requirements that would be passed on to ratepayers. The PUC also is expected to respond to complaints from laid-off workers and customers that layoffs by utilities to cut costs have been hurting service. Commissioner Carl Wood warned at the last meeting that failure to provide safe and reliable service could mean fines for the utilities. Representatives from electrical workers unions, the PUC and the utilities were to discuss the issue Tuesday afternoon. ""I don't think we believe that utilities can find a way out of their problems by laying off workers,"" said Mindy Spatt, a spokeswoman with the Utility Reform Network. ""We think consumers deserve safe and reliable service, and we think they deserve it at a reasonable price."" ---- State Taxpayers In Dark on Details Of Energy Deal David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, March 7, 2001 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle Few people would purchase a car simply because the dealer said, ''Trust me, it's a great deal.'' Yet Gov. Gray Davis essentially is telling Californians just that about dozens of long-term power contracts. Because of confidentiality agreements with power companies, the governor has revealed only scant details about the state's multibillion-dollar contracts for electricity over the next 10 years. ""Gov. Davis has our money, and we can't see how he's spending it,"" said Doug Heller, a spokesman for the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa Monica. ""We've been locked out of the room."" Neither Davis nor power companies would divulge specific details about the price, duration or scope of individual contracts. Each cited secrecy clauses that the governor's office said had been desired by both sides. What consumers do know is this: -- California has signed 40 contracts and tentative accords, valued at about $40 billion, to secure enough power to light 9 million homes over the next decade. -- The average purchase price of each deal is $69 per megawatt hour -- well above the $30 to $40 charged by power generators before California's energy market went haywire last summer. -- If, as is widely expected, wholesale power prices fall in years ahead, the state nevertheless will be locked into paying above-market rates for electricity. But it is not known which generator agreed to part with the most power at the cheapest level or the full range of the prices in concocting the $69 average. Moreover, it is unclear how shrewdly the state negotiated with taxpayer money in securing power on behalf of cash-strapped utilities. ""These agreements are the bedrock of our long-term energy policy,"" Davis said Monday in announcing the deals. The governor's office defended the murky nature of the contracts yesterday. ""It's a business transaction in which private corporate information is included,"" said Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Davis. ""That's the kind of information that never gets revealed."" While additional elements of the contracts will be publicized in coming months, he said, the contracts themselves will remain a secret. ""You'll never see all the details,"" Maviglio said. This did not sit well with many observers. ""It's a breach of public trust,"" said Daniel Bacon, a San Francisco attorney specializing in business law. ""A public servant spending public money shouldn't be able to keep the spending secret."" But Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, an energy-industry association in Menlo Park, called confidentiality agreements ""a necessary evil in transactions like this."" He explained that no power company would agree to a long-term contract if rival firms could learn the terms of the accord. The company would be losing too much of its competitive edge in the marketplace, Ackerman said. At the same time, he noted that secrecy allowed the buyer -- in this case, California taxpayers -- to secure more favorable terms with individual sellers. A high price with one generator would not necessarily be sought by all power providers. Still, the fact that public funds are being used makes confidentiality in this case a different matter than, say, Cisco Systems' quietly negotiating to take over yet another tech rival. ""The public is in a very awkward position,"" said Michael Shames, executive director of the Utility Consumers' Action Network in San Diego. ""It has to rely on the good word and expertise of the governor, and he has yet to demonstrate that he has expertise or good word in this field."" Shames likened consumers to passengers in a plane being flown by a pilot without a license to fly. ""But what choice do we have?"" he asked. ""I don't see many other options available right now."" There's the rub. No matter how bad a deal California may have cut to help meet its energy demands, the alternative -- blackouts, disruptions, economic catastrophe -- is far, far worse. On the other hand, it already appears that the new contracts will not shield Californians from the threat of daily outages this summer, when demand surges. Davis said only about 60 percent of the state's summertime electricity needs so far had been met. Part of the reason is that many power companies already have contracted for their output this year. Duke Energy said this was why it would not begin its nine-year contract with California until 2002, while Williams Cos. said it would only gradually increase the amount of available wattage in its 10-year contract. Both companies, meanwhile, will continue to profit this summer by selling into the volatile ""spot"" market, where wholesale power went for as much as $1, 500 per megawatt hour last year. ""You can't sell all your power into long-term contracts,"" said Paula Hall- Collins, a Williams spokeswoman. ""You save some for the spot market."" Consumer groups worry that consumers will be hammered again this summer with sky-high power prices, and then get nailed down the road by contracts for above-market rates. ""If we could look at the terms of the deals, we'd see that California is being gouged for 10 years,"" said Heller of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights. ""But the governor doesn't want us to see that."" Ackerman of the Western Power Trading Forum said the state had gotten the best rates it could under current market conditions. ""California went for long-term contracts when everyone else moved in as well,"" he said. ""Californians are paying a price for not acting sooner."" ---- Lawmakers pitch fixes for region's energy woes By David Whitney Bee Washington Bureau (Published March 7, 2001) WASHINGTON -- California members of Congress pleaded for everything from wholesale price caps to extending daylight-saving time an extra hour to help the region cope this summer with its persistent electricity shortage, but none of the ideas seemed to catch fire at a House hearing Tuesday. ""People will die in California because of this crisis,"" Rep. Brad Sherman, a Los Angeles-area Republican, warned the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Sherman testified that his idea for saving lives is to extend daylight-saving time by an extra hour, so that there would be more daylight at the end of the day when power consumption surges. ""One of the peak demand periods for electricity occurs between 5 p.m. and 8 p.m., when the sun sets and people come home from work,"" Sherman testified. ""If people come home and it is light out, there is less of an inclination to turn a light on."" Sherman said the state Legislature has called for congressional approval for states to be given authority to extend daylight-saving time, and he cited analyses by the California Energy Commission and other agencies suggesting that it could cut power consumption by 1 percent to 2 percent. Sherman, who was one of about a dozen California lawmakers presenting their views on the energy squeeze, drew no questions from committee leaders about what his legislation might do to everything from airline schedules to television programming if West Coast states didn't agree on the same time standard. Most of the committee's questioning was on the more popular idea proposed by several California and Western lawmakers, primarily Democrats, to require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to impose caps on wholesale electricity prices that have gone wild because of a regional power shortage. Rep. Bob Filner, D-San Diego, charged that the price spiral has little to do with power shortages but a lot to do with a ""small cartel"" of generators bilking ratepayers. Rep. Jay Inslee, D-Wash., said he brought up the idea of regional price caps with President Bush, who was initially skeptical. But Inslee said that Bush warmed to the idea after being told that protections could be built into the caps so as not to discourage construction of new power plants. Upon hearing that, Inslee said, Bush invited him to meet with the president's Cabinet-level task force led by Vice President Dick Cheney on a national energy strategy. But Inslee said he can't get the group to meet with him. ""It's very disappointing,"" Inslee said. Tuesday's hearing was part of a series the panel is holding on the California crisis, so far without any emerging consensus on what, if anything, Congress should do. ---- Power plan called wrong Wall Street analysts say the governor's approach to the problem avoids the issue that caused the imbalance. March 7, 2001 By DON THOMPSON The Associated Press SACRAMENTO California's scramble to insulate consumers from the soaring price of electricity may add to the state's power problems this summer, Wall Street analysts said Tuesday. Gov. Gray Davis' emphasis on buying utilities' transmission lines and negotiating long-term power contracts to help ease their debts skirts the deep imbalance between wholesale and market rates that led to the state's power problems in the first place, they said. ""In the long run, it doesn't solve anything,"" said Michael Worms, an industry analyst for Gerard Klauer Mattison & Co. ""In the long run, you need to send the right price signals to consumers, which will create its own conservation signals. Unfortunately, customers were shielded from that in California."" Davis said Monday that the state's first contracts to buy electricity for two financially struggling utilities will provide only about two-thirds of the power needed on a typical summer day, forcing Californians to cut power use at least 10 percent to avoid blackouts. Since early January, the state has been buying one- third of the power Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. customers need. The two utilities, denied credit by suppliers, say they have lost nearly $14 billion due to soaring wholesale electricity prices that the state's industry-deregulation law says they cannot pass on to consumers. The keepers of the state power grid had enough electricity Tuesday to avoid declaring an electricity alert, but have faced an almost-daily scramble for weeks due to a tight supply and high wholesale prices. Several wholesale and retail rate proposals are circulating. Among them: Free-market advocates such as Worms want an immediate end to the deregulation-imposed retail rate freeze on Edison and PG&E that will expire next year. Davis wants a Western price cap of $100 per megawatt hour on power generators he says have been prof iteering from California's short energy supply. The Bush administration and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission are cool to that idea. In December, FERC imposed a ""soft cap"" of $150 per megawatt hour on wholesale rates in the state and required suppliers to justify any higher prices they charge. Consumer groups such as The Utility Reform Network, or TURN, want regulated rates for residential and small-business customers, but free-market rates for large industrial customers, which sought deregulation in the first place. TURN also advocates a tiered rate structure, with higher rates for consumers who use more than a reasonable amount of electricity each month. Assembly Republicans say electricity and natural-gas prices will fall naturally if the state increases supply, mainly by making it easier to build plants and pipelines. ""Right now, you're sort of sitting partially with regulation and part with the free market,"" said Paul Fremont, an analyst with Jefferies & Co. ""Both these systems work. It's sort of that in-between system that you have in Califor nia that doesn't appear to be working."" The system discourages generators from building new power plants because they aren't guaranteed a profit, and it doesn't do enough to discourage power use by consumers because the price they pay doesn't reflect the true cost of power, Fremont said. ""I don't think people here have much faith in the market, and why should they?"" countered TURN's Mindy Spatt. ""I think there are probably better ways of encouraging consumers to conserve than by gouging them."" Davis insists the crisis can be resolved without raising rates for Edison and PG&E customers beyond ""the existing rate structure."" In January, state regulators imposed temporary rate hikes of 7 to 15 percent on Edison and PG&E customers. The Legislature and Davis extended the increases for up to a decade to help pay back the estimated $10 billion in power buying the state expects to do for Edison and PG&E over the next several years, and finance its purchase of the power lines owned by the two companies and San Diego Gas & Electric. Rates were already scheduled to increase next year for Edison and PG&E customers. Under the 1996 deregulation law, the pair's ratepayers saw a 10 percent rate reduction, but only until early 2002. That rate cut will likely expire as planned, Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio has said. Davis wants those rates to cover not only the traditional cost of generating, transporting and distributing power, but the added cost of paying off the two utilities' massive debt and buying their transmission lines, said Assemblyman Fred Keeley, D-Boulder Creek, the Assembly's chief power negotiator. Yet Davis has indirectly addressed the rate imbalance by signing legislation that will let regulators raise consumer rates if necessary, Keeley said. The governor and lawmakers are in effect spreading out rate increases over a decade by using long-term revenue bonds to buy power for the nearly bankrupt utilities, said Severin Borenstein, director of the University of California Energy Institute. ""At some point we have to deal with the reality that all of the power that we buy has to be paid for by somebody - it's either going to come from taxpayers or it's going to come from ratepayers,"" Bor enstein said. ""Raising rates now would get us a lot of conservation."" Davis also wants financial incentives for conservation and power-plant construction in time to make a difference this summer. ""Our mouths were agape"" at the rapid timetable, Keeley said. Legislators are rushing to pass those incentives by month's end, he said, allowing three months for consumers and suppliers to act before the heat of summer. Among bills considered Tuesday, the Senate Energy Committee approved legislation to accelerate the siting of power plants. It also was considering a proposal to restructure rates for generators that use renewable energy to provide about 30 percent of the state's electricity. ---- Bill to Cut Some Power Prices Stalls Energy: Democrats balk at varying payment levels for alternative generators. By DAN MORAIN, JULIE TAMAKI, Times Staff Writers SACRAMENTO--Legislation aimed at cutting prices for more than a fourth of the power consumed in California stalled Tuesday, as Democrats questioned why a few alternative energy generators--some of them campaign donors--stood to receive higher payments than others. Lawmakers working to unravel California's energy mess have been negotiating for weeks in an effort to cut the price paid to more than 600 generators of alternative power by more than half, to below 8 cents a kilowatt-hour. Those alternative generators' contracts with utilities have shot up in recent months because of a rise in the price of natural gas. The cash-strapped corporations have suspended or made partial payments to the generators over the last few months, causing many to shut down or reduce their outputs. But even as the lawmakers reached agreement that pushed the average price to near the 8-cent level per kilowatt-hour, some generators would have received higher prices under the bill by state Sen. Jim Battin (R-La Quinta). Some of the generators that stood to benefit had donated to Battin's campaigns. One--Windtec Inc.--gave Battin a $20,000 campaign donation in 1999. Others contributed from $3,000 and $5,000 last year. Battin acknowledged that he has received campaign contributions from some wind power generators but said there is no connection between the donations and the bill's provisions. ""It is illegal, it is unethical and it's not how I do business,"" he said. Battin noted that 25% of the state's alternative energy producers are in his district. As Democrats on the Senate Energy Committee blocked the bill, Battin warned that some alternative energy producers might react to the delay by trying to force Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric into bankruptcy. ""We will be the cause of bankruptcy,"" Battin said. That prompted Energy Committee Chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) to retort: ""I'm really tired of being threatened with bankruptcy."" Alternative energy producers, including those that use wind, solar power, biomass and other means, produce 27% of the energy used in California. They sell the electricity to the utilities, which in turn transmit it to retail consumers. But with the utilities facing multibillion-dollar debts, the alternative energy producers under contract with Edison have not been paid since November. Scores of alternative energy producers supported the measure. Edison International and the San Francisco-based consumer group, the Utility Reform Network, opposed it. Michael Florio of the Utility Reform group said the deal could result in higher consumer prices; an Edison representative said the same thing. Battin and Assemblyman Fred Keeley (D-Boulder Creek) worked out an arrangement with many of the generators. Keeley took the lead in the early negotiations, and then turned to Battin to introduce the legislation, SB 47X. Rather convoluted language would have allowed higher payments to a select few generators that produce electricity from wind and biomass. Most of California's wind suppliers, for instance, would have received about 6 cents per kilowatt-hour. But a handful of them, about half a dozen wind farms--mostly in the Palm Springs area represented by Battin--would have received 7.8 cents. Battin contends that other wind producers receive additional payments that boost them to the same level as Windtec and others that would get the higher payments. ""They get the same deal,"" Battin said of the handful of generators that would benefit from the provisions he added to the bill. In California's overall energy market, the amount of money that would have flowed to the favored generators is minor. But the added prices that would have been paid to the generators would have translated to at least $19 million in the next five years, to be absorbed by Southern California Edison customers, according to one analysis. Also Tuesday, more details were disclosed about another leg of the state's effort to escape from the energy crunch--the deals with large power generators to supply electricity to California for as long as 10 years. Those arrangements were announced by Gov. Gray Davis Monday as ""the bedrock"" of California's energy policy. But some consumer advocates warned that the deals could lock the state into excessively high-priced contracts. S. David Freeman, the general manager of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power and Davis' negotiator, said that the state guarded against that by varying the time spans of its deals. About 6,000 megawatts are expected to be available this summer, about one-third of the energy needed by the state, Freeman said. The amount of power under contract swells until more than 9,000 megawatts are contracted in 2004, half of the needed amount, before dipping to 8,000 megawatts in 2010. ""What we're doing here is what everybody said had to be done,"" Freeman said. ""We deliberately bought 50% so we'd have a good mix between long-term contracts, which may turn out to be somewhat higher or somewhat lower than the spot market,"" and purchases on the spot market. ---- PG&E could face mutiny on outages: SMUD, others may balk if utility orders summer blackouts By Carrie Peyton Bee Staff Writer (Published March 7, 2001) Sacramento's electric utility wants out of a deal that imposes rolling blackouts locally on PG&E's command. So do a lot of other utilities. They've been writing letters, lobbying lawmakers and launching informal talks with Pacific Gas and Electric Co. to get off the hook before summer. Who dodges the blackout bullet ""is going to play out as a political hot button"" around the state, said George Fraser, head of the Northern California Power Agency, a coalition of municipal utilities. In Sacramento, the next volley is expected soon, with the Sacramento Municipal Utility District reportedly poised to notify PG&E that it will no longer black out homes and businesses on the larger utility's command. ""We are absolutely trying to fight off the requirement for rolling blackouts for the Sacramento area,"" said Linda Davis, one of seven elected members of the SMUD board of directors. Saying they don't want to be dragged down by somebody else's problems, two Southern California utilities have written grid operators asking to be exempted from any blackouts caused by PG&E's or Southern California Edison's financial woes. But in PG&E's view, ""California is in an energy crisis (and) ... we're all in this together,"" said spokesman John Nelson. The maneuvering comes amid bleak forecasts for power supplies this summer. Although Gov. Gray Davis has said conservation, new power plants and moderate weather could avert blackouts, officials at the Independent System Operator, which runs much of California's grid, expect frequent rotating outages. One consulting firm, Cambridge Energy Research Associates, predicts 20 hours of rolling blackouts during July and August, and about 200 hours of especially intense calls for voluntary cutbacks. Before blackouts hit, the jockeying over just whose lights, air conditioners and assembly lines will be shut down is growing. The outcome could affect millions of people statewide. The state Public Utilities Commission is probing rolling blackout programs run by the for-profit utilities it regulates, including PG&E and Edison. A PUC analysis has suggested that PG&E's program, which currently exempts about 40 percent of its customers, should spread the burden more broadly. For example, it said, 1.9 million homes and businesses are spared just because they share a circuit with a customer deemed ""essential."" But not-for-profit utilities such as SMUD, which answer to their own elected boards or city councils, have other worries. Many have already lined up their power supplies for summer. Some have raised rates or are considering raising rates. Some have taken extra conservation steps. They think those preparations ought to give them leverage to ease blackout clauses in their contracts with PG&E. SMUD general manager Jan Schori ""is going to use every avenue ... any avenue, to put pressure on,"" including lobbying the ISO, the governor and others, said utility director Davis. The Northern California Power Agency, a joint-powers authority that owns and operates power plants for municipal utilities, has begun informal negotiations with PG&E to change blackout rules, according to Fraser, its top executive. It is preparing to write PG&E, asking that its members be exempted from outages altogether. Failing that, it wants them to face fewer outages or to be compensated for cutting off power, he said. At SMUD, the utility board has met in closed session to discuss exactly what it is required to do during electric emergencies, under terms of the interconnection contract that links SMUD's lines to PG&E's. ""The contracts are being inspected with a fine-tooth comb,"" said SMUD director Howard Posner. Schori declined to comment on any specifics. Sources indicated that the main option being considered is notifying PG&E that because of changed circumstances, SMUD believes it no longer is required to routinely comply with outage requests. Other options being explored include re-negotiating existing agreements with PG&E. Posner said that ever since two days of rolling blackouts in January, constituents have been asking him, "" 'Why are we participating when we're not the problem?' And I don't have a good answer to that."" Several directors said SMUD has already spent a lot of money -- and is considering 16 percent rate increases -- to ensure that it has enough electricity under contract to meet its customers' summer demands. They believe PG&E should do the same. ""We're almost like a David against Goliath here,"" said board vice president Genevieve Shiroma. ""The huge investor-owned utilities next door have severe problems that they need to get under control."" In addition, SMUD plans to argue that because it can cut usage through its ""Peak Corps"" program, which remotely turns off air conditioners at volunteer households, it has already done its part without rotating outages, director Davis said. PG&E believes the interconnection agreements that govern smaller utilities' ties to its transmission lines have ""benefits and burdens to both sides,"" said Nelson. ""It wouldn't be fair or good policy for just one provision to be altered without taking a look at how that affects the entire contract,"" he said. Interconnection contracts generally have clauses that require utilities to help each other out to avert greater emergencies. Sometimes reducing demand -- called load shedding -- can be the only way to stabilize the electric grid in the seconds after a major power plant or transmission line fails. ""It's been around in the electrical fabric forever,"" said Jim Pope, head of Silicon Valley Power, Santa Clara's city-run utility. In addition to legal requirements, ""you have a moral obligation so you don't bring the system to collapse."" Like other city-run utilities, Silicon Valley Power has a contract with PG&E that requires it to shed load during an electric emergency. But its contract allows it to work with big users to reduce their demand, so no one has to be completely shut off. Such agreements, formed long before deregulation when PG&E ran the north state's grid, now are complicated by the 1997 creation of the state Independent System Operator. The ISO today runs pieces of the grid owned by PG&E, Edison, and San Diego Gas & Electric Co. If it believes power use is about to surge past supply, potentially triggering a grid collapse across the western United States, the ISO notifies the three utilities that they have to shed a certain number of megawatts. The big utilities meet that requirement two ways. They cut circuits to some of their own customers, and they tell smaller, connected utilities to cut a proportionate share. In Northern California, about 80 percent of the outages are borne by PG&E customers and the rest by customers of SMUD and other municipal utilities and irrigation districts. ""In one sense, we are all in this together. If SMUD were in danger of going down, we would hope others would help us out,"" said SMUD's Posner. ""But that's if we're in danger from circumstances beyond our control, not from mismanagement or lack of financial wherewithal."" It is unclear what penalties, if any, a utility would face for violating an interconnection agreement. In the long run, the issue would be fought either in the courts or before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, grid officials said. As a practical matter, in the seconds when the risk to the grid is greatest, if one utility refused to shed load, the ISO would probably solve to problem by calling on PG&E, Edison or others who are willing to make deeper cutbacks, they said. ---- PUC to Decide Fate Of Utility Workers PG&E, Edison want to trim costs by laying off thousands, cutting service Bernadette Tansey, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, March 7, 2001 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle State regulators are set to decide today whether debt-ridden Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison can conserve cash by laying off thousands of workers and letting service standards slip. Union officials who protested the layoffs before the California Public Utilities Commission warn that if the cuts go through, neighborhoods hit by power outages could stay dark for hours, and more customers could face busy signals when they call about their bills. An administrative law judge agreed, advising the commission in February to order the utilities to restore 725 positions already cut and block the elimination of an additional 2,125 jobs. Judge John Wong said PG&E and Edison have acknowledged the layoffs will not substantially improve their shaky financial condition, which arose from skyrocketing wholesale electricity costs the utilities could not pass on to consumers under a rate cap. ""The savings would barely make a dent,"" Wong said in his draft decision. The two companies together claim that their debt from power purchases amounts to more than $13 billion. PG&E says it has saved $18 million from the first wave of 325 layoffs. Wong's recommendation is already running into resistance on the PUC. Commissioner Richard Bilas said the five-member panel should not be micromanaging the utilities in a time of crisis. Bilas has proposed an alternate ruling that would allow the utilities to make the cuts, but provide for PUC monitoring of service in case the commission wants to step in later. ""We're in a situation where the utilities are not collecting the revenues they need to operate, and yet we may be guilty of not letting them cut expenses where they can cut expenses,"" Bilas said. PG&E spokesman Jon Tremayne said savings from the layoffs are helping to keep electricity running and gas flowing. ""It keeps cash in our accounts so we can keep doing day-to-day business,"" Tremayne said. In addition to the 325 positions dropped so far, PG&E is proposing to cut an additional 675 during the next three to six months. The cuts affect temporary and contract workers who read meters, handle new service hookups and replace equipment. PG&E has no plans to eliminate permanent positions. The company is struggling to keep up with a higher workload at its call center as customers deluge the lines with inquiries about their rising bills and the effects of deregulation. Calls to PG&E ballooned from 1.3 million in January 2000 to 2.3 million in January 2001. Bilas advocates granting PG&E's request to temporarily relax standards requiring the utility to respond swiftly to customer calls and to read customers' meters once a month. PG&E wants to read meters bimonthly and send bills based on the estimated use between readings. Discrepancies could be corrected later. Wong called those measures unacceptable. He said customers need to know immediately if their efforts to conserve power are working. Wong also said the utilities' own experts have said the workforce reductions will lengthen the time required to restore power after nonemergency equipment failure. Eric Wolfe, communications director for the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 1245, said some customers have already been left without power overnight because PG&E is trying to avoid the use of overtime on nonemergency power outages. ""It hurts a lineman to walk away from the job leaving a customer without power,"" Wolfe said. Tremayne said PG&E is trying to minimize overtime costs, but denied the company has allowed customers to go without power out of financial concerns. He said crews were pulled out when darkness and falling trees made the work too dangerous. ---- Power prices could soar during the summer Posted at 10:35 p.m. PST Tuesday, March 6, 2001 BY STEVE JOHNSON Mercury News Unless Gov. Gray Davis arranges significantly more long-term electricity contracts or persuades people to turn off a lot more lights, California's unpredictable spot market for power could wreak havoc this summer. Even with the 40 long-term deals announced by Davis on Monday, experts interviewed Tuesday said, up to 43 percent of the state's daily needs may have to come from this highly volatile market, in which power is bought within a day of need. That could could prove hugely expensive, because some spot market energy has cost five to six times what it would under the long-term contracts. It's widely expected that consumers ultimately would have to pay that tab, which could amount to billions of dollars. And because that power won't be locked up in contracts, there is no guarantee it will be available when it's needed, which could lead to blackouts, according to a recent report to the California Independent System Operator, which oversees three-fourths of the state's power grid. ``The situation in California could reach catastrophic proportions,'' the report concluded, adding that unless things change dramatically, ``it is a virtual certainty that peak demand will go unmet during many hot summer days.'' Steven Maviglio, Davis' press secretary, conceded Tuesday that the spot market could be troublesome. ``It's a major concern,'' he said, which is why the state is trying to line up more power contracts, speed up power plant construction and promote conservation. During the normally hot month of August, peak daily demand for power in the Independent System Operator's territory is expected to hit about 47,700 megawatts -- enough for nearly 48 million homes. The state's three main utility firms generate about 8,200 megawatts and have long-term contracts from wind, solar and other energy sources for about 11,700 megawatts more. That totals about 20,000 megawatts. Add in the 7,000 megawatts of long-term power that Davis has announced for this summer, and the state is still nearly 21,000 megawatts short. Costly proposition If all that power has to be obtained on the spot market, the price could be high. On Friday, last-minute purchases on the market averaged $411 per megawatt-hour, compared to about $150 per megawatt-hour for all power obtained by the Independent System Operator and $69 per megawatt-hour on average under Davis' long-term contracts. It's possible that not all 21,000 megawatts would have to be purchased on the market. Assuming Davis is successful in getting people to save 10 percent -- which could prove difficult -- conservation could reduce peak demand by nearly 5,000 megawatts. California also might be able to trade for another 5,000 megawatts with the federal government's Bonneville Power Administration and a hydroelectric operator in British Columbia, said Arthur O'Donnell, editor of California Energy Markets, a trade publication. Under such deals, those two outfits often send that much power to California when they don't need it and California returns the same amount or more when its demand is low. But O'Donnell said it wasn't clear whether 5,000 megawatts would be available this summer, because ``they still haven't gotten the snowpack they need in the Pacific Northwest,'' which could limit that region's generating capacity. Still falling short Even if those hydropower imports are available and conservation works as Davis hopes, it's likely California would still require the spot market for 11,000 megawatts to meet the August demand. That's more than 20 percent of the state's overall power needs. ``All of the surrounding states are buying probably less than 5 percent, at most, of their energy on the spot market,'' said Frank Wolak, a Stanford economist, who monitors electricity prices for the Independent System Operator. He worries about how much that power could cost and is disturbed that state officials haven't adequately addressed the issue. ``No one has any idea what they are going to do, and that is part of the problem,'' he said. Officials at Pacific Gas & Electric Co. are particularly concerned. They fear that their company -- which is nearing bankruptcy -- could get stuck for much of the spot market purchases by the Independent System Operator, which has threatened to bill the utilities for the cost. Fearing the annual bill for that power could hit $2.4 billion this year, PG&E wants the tab sent to the Department of Water Resources, which also is buying power on the spot market for the state. But the Department of Water Resources has objected to that idea and the matter is expected to be heard today by the California Public Utilities Commission. ``We're looking for clarity on a number of issues'' regarding how the spot market will work ``and certainly that's one of them,'' said Thomas Hannigan, the water agency's director. ``I don't think anybody knows the answer of who's going to pay for it,'' added PG&E spokesman John Nelson. But Nettie Hoge, executive director of the Utility Reform Network in San Francisco, said she suspects consumers ultimately will foot the bill. The unfortunate likelihood about spot market purchases is that ``ratepayers are responsible for all of it eventually,'' Hoge said. ``It's a very big problem.'' ---- Power Plant Plans Cause Conflicts East county residents blast supervisors Jason B. Johnson, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, March 7, 2001 Industry dreams of building new power plants in east Contra Costa's hills are prompting an angry reaction among residents and elected officials who say they don't want more plants. The conflict was sparked by a vote by county supervisors yesterday to aggressively explore possible sites for new power plants throughout the county. The measure by Supervisors Mark DeSaulnier and Federal Glover, which passed on a 4-to-0 vote, directs the county administrator and Department of Community Development to compile a report on possible sites within 45 days. Supervisor Donna Gerber abstained after criticizing the plan for potentially repeating the same mistakes that plagued the state's energy deregulation effort by not considering how much energy the state, region and county will need in future years, and how much power is slated to come online. Gerber said alternative power sources, such as solar, should also be examined. A site drawing much attention is on top of a deposit of natural gas near the Concord Naval Weapons Station off Highway 4. The owners of 70 acres of land near the station recently formed a company, Golden State Power Co., to pursue construction of at least one small peaker plant and a much larger facility capable of producing 600 megawatts. The site could hold up to three small 50-megawatt peaker plants, and a larger 15-acre natural gas plant, said Steve Thomas, managing partner with Golden State. No land use applications have been filed. Thomas said 30 acres could be kept as open space to form a buffer around the project. ""Both (facilities) are state of the art,"" said Thomas. ""We believe that the site is ideal."" But east county residents at yesterday's meeting blasted the supervisorial measure and the power plant proposal, complaining that more plants could put people's health at risk. The region already is home to six power plants. ""We're going to get a good dose of poor air quality and (negative) health conditions from this,"" said Concord resident Evelyn Frietas. ""I think we need to stop and think about what we're doing to our quality of life."" Dan Torres said the home he bought in 1995 at a new Bay Point development would be alarmingly close to the proposed Golden State site. ""It will be dragging emissions over our home,"" said Torres. ""I didn't buy a home on that hill to be surrounded by power plants."" There are six power plants in operation in east Contra Costa. Pittsburg already has two power plants, and two more under construction. City Council members Frank Aiello and Yvonne Beals said the Antioch-Pittsburg area has done more than its share of energy production. Aiello said Pittsburg will soon produce enough energy to power three million homes in California. ""When is enough, enough?"" asked Aiello. ""Pittsburg has shouldered responsibility for a land-fill and two more power plants. At some point you have to say enough."" Beals said that while power plants have added millions to the city's general fund, the negatives of additional plants could outweigh the benefits. ""I don't think that Pittsburg or east county should be the dumping ground for energy for California,"" said Beals. ---- Supervisors set search for power plant sites The board also heard from the potential developers of a 650-megawatt plant between Bay Point and Concord By Thomas Peele TIMES STAFF WRITER MARTINEZ -- Contra Costa County supervisors took tentative steps Tuesday toward allowing the construction of at least one small power plant before summer, ordering that its staff identify potential sites in unincorporated areas within seven weeks. The board voted 4-0 to search for locations. Third District Supervisor Donna Gerber abstained, saying her colleagues lacked a ""comprehensive context'' to identify sites. ""I think the board knows just enough to be dangerous,'' she said. Gerber said the county should examine the potential for additional power plants within its borders but not investigate individual sites yet. But Fourth District Supervisor Mark DeSaulnier said the action was necessary because of the energy crisis and because of Gov. Gray Davis' call for local governments to help speed the construction of so-called ""peaker plants"" before July and August. ""I wouldn't do this except under an emergency,"" DeSaulnier said after the vote. ""There are unusual circumstances. We're not talking about putting this in a residential area."" Fifth District Supervisor Federal Glover backed DeSaulnier, but said he hoped for a location outside his heavily industrialized East County district. ""There's a lot of concern in East County as to the number of plants,"" he said. DeSaulnier said, though, that the only logical place for a small plant remains the ""industrial belt'' stretching along the waterfront from West County to Antioch. He declined to provide specifics, but said the only other potential site outside the industrial areas was the Concord Naval Weapons Station property. But he quickly added that he believes the U.S. Department of Defense ""would never go for it."" Also, DeSaulnier said he could not rule out the county building the plant itself and entering the electricity-selling market during peak demand times. Board Chairwoman Gayle Uilkema called that idea extremely premature and unlikely. ""That's a very powerful decision. I do not think we are ready,'' she said. The California Energy Commission listed the Equilon refinery in Martinez as one of 32 potential ""peaker plant"" sites in the state last week. Peaker plants kick in during peak usage times. Davis called for their quick construction before the height of summer and its energy demand for air conditioning. Plants that generate as much as 50,000 megawatts don't need Energy Commission approval. DeSaulnier said he believed a peaker plant could be built about a month after final approval. Supervisors also heard from the potential developers of a 650-megawatt plant between Bay Point and Concord. Walnut Creek commercial real estate developer Steve Thomas announced his intentions for the site north of Highway 4 last week. Construction could take two years. Eric Hasseltine, a consultant representing Thomas and what he described as a ""brand new"" company for the site, the Golden State Power Co., told supervisors that if they intended to speed peaker plant construction they should do what they can to expedite the larger plant. The Thomas site could house a peaker plant until the proposed larger one goes online. A large natural gas line passes under the site. DeSaulnier seemed cautious about the larger proposal, which he had described last week as ""a good site."" Uilkema, too, said she knew too little about it to comment. A resident who lives near the Thomas property asked the board to ""build it (the larger plant) closer to where you have industrial areas. You have to carefully consider the people"" who live nearby, said Dan Torres, 39. Evelyn Freitas of Concord said she lives downwind of the proposed site. ""Our air quality is going to be worse then it is now,"" she said. Gerber played on the environmental issues, saying the county already ranks second statewide to Los Angeles in volume of hazardous materials and amount of electrical generation. ---- Peter Schrag: California's $90 billion infrastructure gap (Published March 7, 2001) By now, California's surreal energy mess has grown from a crisis to a condition. It may not be quite as permanent as, say, death and taxes, but it's still something that could get a whole lot worse before it gets better. Until there's more realistic pricing, no gubernatorial pea-under-the-shell buyout scheme will solve it. Beyond the energy crisis, however, and in many ways similar to it, California faces a whole range of other infrastructure problems -- in transportation, in water resources and sewer systems, in school and university buildings -- that seem, once again, to be all but forgotten. The Business Roundtable has estimated the need at roughly $90 billion, though no number can possibly be exact. What's certain is that after a burst of high-level investment in public facilities during the 1950s and 1960s, California's annual capital investment has sunk precipitously -- from an annual $150 per capita in the 1960s, according to a set of recent studies for PPIC, the Public Policy Institute of California, to about $30 in the 1990s. But you probably don't need to tell anyone driving Bay Area or Los Angeles freeways or looking at the ubiquitous portable classrooms, those dreary brown boxes that house a fourth of our public school students. Ever since passage of Proposition 13 in 1978, we have been flying the flag of deferred maintenance. As in the state's electricity crisis, however, there's no way California can effectively address those problems merely by building or bonding itself out of them. In highway construction, in developing water resources, in finding enough university space to accommodate the Tidal Wave II of students, managing demand is likely to be as crucial to any solution as new construction. In the energy market -- and in electricity particularly -- it's been a familiar principle ever since David Roe of the Environmental Defense Fund first persuaded Pacific Gas and Electric that a dollar invested in conservation may be worth as much as the same investment in new generation. But in most other sectors of California's infrastructure, state and local, it's a lesson still to be learned. There have been scattered attempts to encourage conservation and reduce demand -- significant reduction in water use, for example, through the installation of low-flow faucets and low-flush toilets; some reduction in traffic by using rush-hour diamond lanes or by adjusting highway or (as in New York) bridge tolls to levels of congestion. But as pointed out by David Dowall, an urban economist at Berkeley, state policy-makers have not really begun to ""consider how demand management strategies can be applied to infrastructure service areas,"" or how the more efficient use of facilities and more realistic pricing -- highway tolls, say, or parking fees -- ""can reduce demand for scarce infrastructure resources."" In any case, says Dowall in one of the PPIC reports, we should pick which major projects we will build not just according to per capita estimates of how much we need, but according to how much consumers are willing to pay for them. To avoid hurting the poor, congestion-related highway tolls and other tariffs can be rebated on the basis of income. University fees can be means-tested. In California, they also could be adjusted to encourage summer school classes and other off-peak uses, rather than (as in the past) making UC summer courses more expensive. Given the political and economic uncertainties, there's no way to know how far such demand management can be taken. But there's not much doubt that, as Dowall and others point out, the state's infrastructure planning is a jumble of uncoordinated agency agendas and wish lists. The Legislature last year passed a bill, AB 1473, by Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg, that requires the governor, beginning next year, to submit an annual five-year infrastructure plan for state agencies and public schools, along with recommendations on how to fund it. In addition, Gov. Gray Davis' infrastructure commission is expected to recommend better coordination of infrastructure and land-use planning when it issues its report this spring. That would be a start. As California State Treasurer Phil Angelides has pointed out, the state desperately needs to start joint planning -- regional planning -- for housing, roads and other resources to reduce the need for long commutes; to preserve open space; and to bring jobs to where people live and housing to where the jobs are. That would itself reduce demand for more freeway lanes and, equally important, improve the quality of life. At present, most planning for housing, roads, water systems and other facilities rarely recognizes the regional impact of local decisions. In the East Bay, slow-growth forces push well-intended initiatives that would force more development into Tracy or Modesto and further tax the transportation systems to Silicon Valley. In city after city, there are beggar-thy-neighbor efforts to grab yet another shopping mall that produces a little extra sales tax revenue for the city that gets it, and that often compounds traffic and revenue problems in adjacent communities. In higher education we divide bond proceeds evenly among UC, the California State University and the community colleges even though the community colleges serve eight times as many students as UC. We plan road projects according to county, not regional, priorities. It is all done according to antiquated political and fiscal formulas that often no longer make sense. We don't just need better capital planning; we need a whole new planning system. ---- PG&E power plan debated at hearing A PUC meeting on the utility's capacity expansion project for the Tri-Valley follows weeks of protest from officials, residents Power upgrade in valley debated By Megan Long TIMES STAFF WRITER SAN FRANCISCO -- Dublin officials and the developer of a Livermore subdivision faced questions Tuesday about their opposition to alternative routes of PG&E's controversial Tri-Valley power upgrade plan -- and answered by restating their long-standing objections. Tuesday's cross-examination came during the third and likely final week of the California Public Utility Commission's evidentiary hearings on the utility's $91 million Tri-Valley 2002 Capacity Increase Project. It has followed weeks of protests of PG&E's upgrade plans by officials and residents of Livermore, Pleasanton, Dublin and San Ramon. And before the questioning started, Dublin Vice Mayor Janet Lockhart reiterated concerns about an alternative route deemed ""environmentally superior"" that would place a substation just 1,000 feet north of Interstate 580 between Tassajara and Fallon roads. She said that would undermine the results of a 15-year process to plan the eastern development of the city. ""It's extremely important to the residents of our community to follow a plan we worked hard to produce,"" she said. Dublin officials favor PG&E's proposed placement of the station three miles north of the freeway, away from new high-tech company offices and housing developments. Besides the Dublin substation, the project calls for construction of a substation in North Livermore, expansion of the Pleasanton substation and installation of 23.5 miles of new lines. In response to questions from PUC Administrative Law Judge Michelle Cooke, Dublin's public works director, Lee Thompson, confirmed that the Lin family, the owner of the property where the alternative substation would go, wasn't interested in selling the land to PG&E. Cooke also asked Thompson to define a ""discretionary permit,"" which is how city officials said they might treat a permit for a substation. Lee said that type of permit is one the city has the right to approve or not depending on the project's impact. Eddie Peabody, Dublin's community development director, testified that the zoning for the Lin property accommodates uses such as commercial business, research and development and light manufacturing. It would not, he said, be appropriate for a power substation. He said parcels within the East Dublin area that could host a station would include those zoned for public and semi-public uses, including land recently bought by Oracle and Sun Microsystems for new campuses. While Dublin officials testified that one buyer of land in that area paid $86 per square foot, others suggested land prices would be inflated to help make a PG&E land buy look prohibitively expensive. An executive of Centex Homes, the developer of new houses near Isabel Avenue and Concannon Boulevard, objected to an alternative route that would place high-voltage transmission lines overhead along Isabel and Stanley Boulevard. David Barclay, president of Centex's Northern California division, said that the 80-foot to 150-foot towers would have a severe visual impact on residents of the Prima tract. Ed O'Neill, a lawyer for the Kottinger Ranch Homeowners Association, pointed out that existing distribution lines on 50-foot poles on Isabel already mar the view for residents. The Foley family has been ranching on land south of Pleasanton city limits for years, said their attorney Kennedy Richardson. The utility's project would place overhead lines and a transmission station on rolling hills that the family envisions as one day being public open space with limited development, Richardson said. Lawyers for Pleasanton, Livermore, Kottinger Ranch and Centex are scheduled to cross-examine a PG&E engineer today about the project's routing. That testimony should be the most controversial of the hearings. Judge Cooke is expected to recommend an alignment by July to the PUC, which will make the final decision. ---- NEWS State OKs 'Peaker' Power Plant at SFO / Temporary generator could be sending electricity to 50,000 homes by August Marshall Wilson 03/08/2001 The San Francisco Chronicle FINAL Page A.20 (Copyright 2001) State energy officials yesterday approved plans to build a temporary electrical plant at San Francisco International Airport that should generate enough juice to power 50,000 homes by August. Meeting in Sacramento, the Energy Commission voted 4-0 to give the green light to the gas-fired plant. It will operate during peak summer and winter demand to help the state avoid Stage 3 power alerts and rolling blackouts. Texas-based El Paso Merchant Energy Co. won approval under a new state law mandating speedy, four-month reviews of so-called ""peaker"" plants. It was the only one of seven applications statewide to win approval. The other proposals were withdrawn for various reasons. The 51-megawatt plant, formally called the United Golden Gate Power Project, is scheduled to be built at the northwest corner of the airport near the United Airlines maintenance center. Within the next few weeks El Paso plans to apply to build a 571- megawatt, $400 million plant in the same area, company spokesman Jesse Frederick said. It would undergo a separate review by state energy officials. The small ""peaker"" plant approved yesterday is to generate electricity beginning around Aug. 1 for up to three years. After the end of three years, the plant would be closed or converted to a cleaner-burning system. Under state law, a temporary ""peaker"" plant is permitted to spew more air pollution than a permanent plant. El Paso's temporary plant is to be built next to a co-generation plant operated by United Airlines. It would use existing connections for natural gas and water supplies and tap into existing power transmission lines. Electricity generated by the plant would be pumped into the state's electrical grid, Energy Commission spokesman Gary Fay said. It would also serve as a backup for San Francisco Airport in case of a blackout. No one spoke against the proposed plant at yesterday's commission meeting. The proposal, however, has been criticized by area residents and environmentalists worried about air pollution. Scott Buschman, a professional photographer and San Bruno resident, said yesterday it was unjust that state officials 100 miles away in Sacramento approved a Texas company's proposal to put a power plant on land owned by San Francisco. ""The fact that they approved it without considering the public's concerns, foremost air quality, is very disturbing,"" he said. Fay said the plant complies with clean-air standards. Answering the criticism about the location of yesterday's deliberation, he said three hearings and several workshops were held in communities near the airport. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. ---- Crossed Wires: Major Kinks Emerge In Gov. Davis's Plan To Power California --- State's Outlays for Electricity May Be Hard to Recover Without Rate Increases --- Betting on Long-Term Deals By Wall Street Journal staff reporters Rebecca Smith, Mitchel Benson and John R. Emshwiller 03/08/2001 The Wall Street Journal A1 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- Earlier this year, Gov. Gray Davis made what may be the biggest bet in the history of the nation's biggest state: that he could tame an out-of-control electricity market and avoid devastating blackouts without busting the state's budget, antagonizing its consumers or derailing his own political career. His wager is still on the table, but the assumptions that underlie it are looking increasingly shaky these days. The governor has already spent around $2 billion of public money buying hugely expensive wholesale power, taking over the role formerly played by the state's near-bankrupt electric utilities. And California will probably be obliged to spend billions more before its electricity market stabilizes and those utilities are restored to some semblance of financial health. Under the governor's plan, California aims to recoup the money it is using to buy electricity by issuing $10 billion in bonds. That way it would still have a healthy budget surplus to finance new spending on roads, schools and other public services. But there's a potentially big obstacle to this plan. The state Legislature, worried about racking up billions in new debt, has put limits on the size of any bond offering. In broad terms, the Legislature's action would allow the state to borrow only four times as much as it can recover annually from utility customers. Right now that doesn't appear to be much. Under the current rate structure, essentially set in place by California's flawed 1996 electricity-deregulation plan, consumers pay far less for power than the cost of acquiring it on the wholesale market. Preliminary estimates submitted by utilities last month to the California Public Utilities Commission show the state's share of the proceeds from electricity sales this year could be as little as $241 million -- not enough to support even $1 billion in bond sales under the Legislature's formula. That would leave the state on the hook for much of the money it has already paid for power -- not to mention the billions more Gov. Davis will need to spend. That, in turn, raises the prospect that California's economy and its credit rating both could deteriorate significantly. But state finance officials say that, based on their own projections, they will be able to extract enough money to support a $10 billion bond issue. Walking a careful line between fiscal prudence and political survival, Mr. Davis and others in his administration are scrambling to come up with ways to get around the legislative restrictions without raising rates for consumers. ""If I wanted to raise rates, I could solve this problem in 20 minutes,"" Mr. Davis says. The governor says he believes that the state can obtain enough affordable power through long-term power-supply contracts to avoid the need for a big rate increase. The billions of dollars the state hopes to borrow would be used to help pay for power until electricity prices drop, as they are expected to do when new power plants come online over the next few years. The Davis administration fears that what may be its only other option -- a big increase in retail electric rates -- could prompt angry consumer groups to seek new electricity laws through a statewide ballot initiative during next year's election. That's when Mr. Davis is expected to run for a second term as governor. But trying to save California without rate increases is forcing Mr. Davis to make some colossal gambles with the state's money. State officials estimate that in the next several months, California will need to spend as much as $6 billion on power purchases -- equivalent to the state's entire fiscal surplus. Mr. Davis is also looking to spend several billion more to buy the transmission assets of three investor-owned utilities in order to restore two of them to credit-worthiness. He also has announced plans to spend several hundred million dollars more on conservation programs designed to reduce demand while new power plants are being built in the state. In order to limit the state's financial exposure in the meantime, the governor and his aides have, in some cases, ignored state law. They have threatened appointed officials who have stood in the way. And they have sharply restricted the flow of information to the public. None of those steps is expected to do much to reduce state spending on power in the coming months. In a few weeks, power usage is expected to begin a sharp seasonal rise as Californians switch on their air conditioners with the coming of warmer weather. By various estimates, demand during peak periods this summer could outstrip supply by 10%, or several thousand megawatts. That could produce more rolling blackouts like the ones that hit Northern California earlier this year. It is also likely to put strong upward pressure on wholesale electricity prices. Steven Zimmerman, managing director of Standard & Poor's Corp., says Mr. Davis and his aides don't ""have a lot of time"" to put a cap on the state's financial exposure to the crisis. The credit-rating agency has put the state on credit watch for a possible downgrade, which would affect the value of all of California's outstanding public debt. Moody's Investor Service Inc. is also concerned. It said in a recent report that the power crisis could soon ""seriously threaten the health"" of the state's economy. Mr. Davis, a Democrat and career politician, was dealt a bad hand when he took office in 1999. The deregulation plan that sparked the state's electricity crisis was enacted under his predecessor, Republican Pete Wilson. But Mr. Davis was slow to react to early signs of trouble this past summer and alarms sounded by members of the state Legislature. By the time Mr. Davis finally sprang into action earlier this year, a troublesome power-supply squeeze had escalated into a crisis. In a Jan. 17 declaration of emergency, the governor designated the state Department of Water Resources to take the utilities' place as the daily buyer of huge quantities of electricity. His hope: that by making the state the dominant player in California's power sector, he would ease electricity producers' concerns about getting paid and give the state enough clout to negotiate lower long-term power prices. Earlier this week, Mr. Davis announced final or tentative agreements with 20 power suppliers to furnish the state with a total of 8,900 megawatts for periods of as long as 20 years. But the supply situation remains extremely uncertain for this summer, when demand probably will top 45,000 megawatts. If the state can secure enough power under contract and push down demand through aggressive conservation, it might be able to squeak through the summer season. If not, it will be forced to keep buying huge amounts of costly power in the cash market. Under deregulation, retail electric rates were frozen for several years, while wholesale-power costs were free to fluctuate. When the plan was conceived, wholesale prices were low and expected to go lower. However, a combination of unexpected growth in power demand and a lack of new generating capacity helped produce a supply squeeze. Average wholesale prices more than tripled last year from 1999. And in January those prices were up 10-fold from a year earlier. By then, California's two biggest investor-owned utilities -- the Pacific Gas & Electric unit of PG&E Corp. and the Southern California Edison subsidiary of Edison International -- faced imminent financial collapse. They had racked up billions of dollars in wholesale power bills they couldn't afford to pay. As generators began shying away from selling to the two utilities, the Clinton administration forced them to sell power into the California market, an order left in place during the first weeks of the Bush administration. Still, northern California was hit by rolling blackouts on several days in early January. Since then, the DWR, which does some electricity trading as an adjunct to its main mission of managing the state's giant system of aqueducts and reservoirs, has had to learn the ins and outs of power markets on the run. It hasn't been easy. David Mills, trading-floor manager for the federal Bonneville Power Administration, says the water agency has at times offered to pay $50 to $100 per megawatt hour more than the available market price. ""They agree to prices that make you wonder,"" says Mr. Mills, whose organization markets electricity from federal dams in the Pacific Northwest. ""You'd at least think they'd check to see what the prevailing price is before throwing out their offer."" Mr. Mills says that ""to cut California some slack,"" he occasionally has instructed his traders to sell at prices lower than the DWR had offered to pay. Ray Hart, the water agency deputy director responsible for the power purchasing, says he isn't aware of any cases in which the DWR has overpaid. He says his team has been ""extremely successful by all measures."" Ultimately, the DWR's trading acumen is far less important than the overall arithmetic of power supply and demand in California. With the price of natural gas that feeds many of the region's generating plants at near record levels and some suppliers reluctant to sell into the troubled California market, wholesale electric prices remain stubbornly high and, in recent days, have again been rising. The Legislature has advanced the DWR about $3 billion from the state's general fund for power purchases. Under emergency legislation passed by the Legislature and signed by Mr. Davis on Feb. 1, the general fund is to be reimbursed from a planned bond sale later this year. But under terms of the emergency law, the water agency would have to wrest $2.5 billion a year in revenue from retail electricity rates in order to sell the $10 billion worth of bonds sought by Mr. Davis. Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg, a Southern California Democrat, says the formula was created to ensure that there would be a way to repay the bonds without draining the state's coffers. ""We didn't want to just open our wallets,"" he says. According to the language of the Feb. 1 law, the water agency gets what's left of revenue collected from ratepayers after the utilities pay certain of their own power-supply bills and other expenses. And, in their filings with the PUC last month, the utilities reckoned, under their worst-case scenarios, that there would be only $241 million available to the DWR this year. State officials are quietly pushing the PUC to rejigger the formula so that the water department gets more money -- even though that would clash with terms of the Feb. 1 law. Robert Miyashiro, deputy director of the Department of Finance, says the emergency law was ""drafted poorly"" and has led people to believe the DWR ""only gets the leftover money."" He predicts there will be ""cleanup legislation."" At the request of the Davis administration, the PUC is considering a plan to use a different revenue-sharing formula than the one in the state law. The proposed new formula was written ""in close consultation"" with Mr. Davis's Finance Department, says PUC President Loretta Lynch, who supports the initiative and is hoping to rush it through. The effort has drawn some opposition. Commissioner Richard Bilas at a recent PUC meeting questioned the legality of the commission attempting to change a formula set by the Legislature. PG&E is even more emphatic, since the DWR's extra money could come at the utility's expense. The formula ""threatens to undo the very financial protections for the utilities that [the new law] attempted to provide,"" the utility said in a recent filing with the PUC. As politicians and regulators wrestle with that issue, the Davis administration has taken a step to reduce the outflow of state cash that also seems to conflict with the Feb. 1 law. It was widely assumed that the law required the DWR to buy any electricity the state needed to keep its lights on. However, on many occasions, the DWR has refused to buy power on the grounds that it was too expensive, citing a portion of the new law that urges the agency to hold down costs. The task of covering any remaining shortfall has passed to the California Independent System Operator, which manages the state's energy grid and is charged with buying power when necessary to avert shortages. However, the ISO doesn't have any power-purchasing money of its own, and the major parties it would normally bill are PG&E and Edison, whose inability to pay their power bills was the reason the state started buying electricity in the first place. Amid criticism of its stance from generators, utilities and Wall Street, the DWR says it has started covering more of the utilities' electricity costs. The water agency is now buying 95% to 99% of what California needs in a given day, says the agency's Mr. Hart. But increased buying only adds to the uncertainty about the eventual tab. The state's legislative analyst, Elizabeth Hill, recently recommended that lawmakers hold off considering more than $2 billion in state spending on items ranging from college construction to beach cleanups because of continuing questions about the financial impact of the electricity crisis. Like others, Ms. Hill complains that the governor's office and state agencies haven't been forthcoming with information. Indeed, the DWR refuses to say precisely how much power it is purchasing and at what prices, though it has on several occasions gone back to the Legislature for more money. State officials say that data on its purchasing activities would give suppliers an advantage in continuing electricity-supply contract talks. State Controller Kathleen Connell, who is running for mayor of Los Angeles in an April election, recently announced plans to post state power-spending information on her department's Web site. But within 24 hours, Ms. Connell suspended that plan after discussions with senior Davis administration officials. ""I feel very strongly that this information should be publicly released,"" says Ms. Connell. ""I just don't want to do anything that would weaken the state's effectiveness in negotiating."" In an effort to more tightly control events, the governor obtained legislative approval to abolish the 26-member ISO board, which was made up of everyone from utility executives to representatives of consumer groups. He then appointed a new five-member board. To ensure a quick transition, the California attorney general threatened the old board members with fines of as much as $5,000 each if they didn't immediately relinquish their positions. All did. ""I was offended"" at the ""heavy-handed"" treatment, says Karen Johanson, a former ISO board member. One of the first acts of the ISO's new board was to close a meeting about the electricity crisis. The former ISO board routinely held such meetings in public. ISO attorneys say the meeting was largely designed as a private briefing for new board members and that the organization is committed to keeping its deliberations as open as possible. The Wall Street Journal and other news organizations have unsuccessfully challenged the closure in Sacramento state court. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Testimony in PGE Proceeding; [EMail-Body]= I won't be able to attend. Let me know if I need to be hooked up by phone or if you will just brief me afterward. Paul Kaufman@ECT 12/28/99 04:42 PM To: kfullenweider@velaw.com, Ann Ballard/Corp/Enron@ENRON, mtaylor@ei.enron.com, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Testimony in PGE Proceeding Sierra called today to inform us that they intend to complete their internal review of the Oregon PUC filing by the beginning of next week. They want our input by the end of next week, and to that end are scheduling a meeting in Reno for either 1/5 or 1/6. Please let me know if you plan on attending the meeting. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron Expatriates in India; [EMail-Body]= John Brindle, David Cromley and others in the Corporate Business Controls group (formerly part of EBS) have been working over the last several weeks to make sure that we can get our people out of Dabhol if there are threats to their safety. While no plan is perfectly reliable (particularly during monsoon season) we believe that we are as ready as we can be. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 06/13/2001 08:00 AM --------------------------- From: David Cromley@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS on 06/12/2001 09:18 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Enron Expatriates in India Steve, I wanted to give you the latest figures on Enron expatriates in India. There are currently 19 Enron expatriate employees based in India, accompanied by six dependants. In addition, Enron has responsibility for 15 expatriate contractors working for DPC and Lingtec, primarily at Dabhol. The total of 40 expatriates for whom Enron is directly responsible is broken down by location as follows: 21 in Mumbai, 16 at Dabhol, and three in Baroda. By company, they are broken down as follows: Enron India - eight plus three dependants; EOGIL - nine plus one dependant; EBS - one plus two dependants; DPC - seven; and Lingtec - nine. These figures are likely to continue to trend downward; Jane Wilson's departure on Friday, for example, will reduce the Enron India expatriate presence to seven plus three dependants. We are confident that the evacuation plan now in place provides the best possible prospect of successfully evacuating all of these expatriates in the event of danger. As a contingency, the plan also includes the evacuation of all 137 expatriates working at the Dabhol site, although a large-scale evacuation from Dabhol is more problematic, especially now that the monsoon season has started. A coordinated plan was needed since the limited number of available helicopters meant that the evacuation plans drawn up by individual contractors such as Bechtel were all drawing upon the same resources. As you know, Enron's security situation in India remains stable. We are in the final stages of implementing security upgrades for our employees and offices there. Dave [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Southern Co.'s Testimony; [EMail-Body]= I think a rebuttal would be in order if others agree. -----Original Message----- From: Nicolay, Christi L. Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 4:42 PM To: Shelk, John; Shapiro, Richard; Steffes, James D. Cc: Robertson, Linda; Novosel, Sarah Subject: RE: Southern Co.'s Testimony Do we need to specifically rebut this? Enron did file a study to support the natural markets of the SE, and, while we generally have stated responses to his issues in various forums, do we need to respond item by item? (FYI--I have never heard the ""lake"" analogy before -- his characterization of it as the opponent position helps his case, but it is incorrect because as far as I know, there is no one proposing a system that ignores constraints). Also, we have not focused much recently on the transmission pricing issues. This may be an opportunity to discuss this in context. He seems to use it as a reason against the Southeast RTO. -----Original Message----- From: Shelk, John Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 4:08 PM To: Shapiro, Richard; Steffes, James D.; Nicolay, Christi L. Cc: Robertson, Linda; Novosel, Sarah Subject: FW: Southern Co.'s Testimony Below is a link to Southern Co. CEO Allen Franklin's prepared testimony at the Barton hearing last week (October 10). He says they favor wholesale competition, but he then goes on to talk about the virtues of geographically smaller RTOs, with a phased approach of smaller RTOs that could later merge to become larger (although the Barton discussion draft would prevent such mergers). The statement also chronicles their involvement in the Southeast mediation process. In his oral testimony, Franklin kept ephasizing the lack of FERC cost/benefit studies on RTOs and the similar (alleged) lack of studies and analysis to support the 4 RTO model. -----Original Message----- From: Nersesian, Carin Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 4:59 PM To: Shelk, John Subject: Southern Co.'s Testimony [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: New Building IT; [EMail-Body]= Thanks for the offer. I may take you up on it. Martin Bucknell/ENRON@enronXgate 03/27/2001 06:21 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: New Building IT Steve, Thanks for the meeting today, if you would like me to sit down and go through some of the issues and risks associated with the IT elements of the project, we can meet and have a more focused discussion. It is always difficult to talk through all of the area's when both Philippe and Bill are together. Martin [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CONFIDENTIAL (The Manifesto); [EMail-Body]= To: Ad Hoc Committee Dear Colleague, Several of you have pointed out that the Manifesto is a bit long. We will endeavor to shorten it somewhat which will be possible as there is some duplication; however, more importantly we plan to add an executive summary which will be the editorial link version that most will read. I hope to get that out by 5:00 PM today. Thanks, David David J. Teece, Director Institute of Management, Innovation and Organization F402 Haas School of Business #1930 University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, CA 94720-1930 Phone: (510) 642-1075 Fax: (510) 642-2826 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Application for Financial Engineer; [EMail-Body]= Shriram, We have suspended hiring for the next few months till we shall sort our physical space problem (we have no space left in our old building). Please, feel free to contact me again in September. Vince Kaminski -----Original Message----- From: ""Shriram S."" <shrirams@hotmail.com>@ENRON Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 7:55 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Application for Financial Engineer Dear Mr. Vincent Kaminski Please consider my application for a suitable position in Quantitative Analysis, Trading or Risk Management. You will find that my profile, knowledge of investment products and derivatives, and experience in investment banking and securities meets your requirements. I bring together a combination of financial and energy experience. I have knowledge of all financial products and the acumen to apply quantitative techniques and tools to various valuation methodologies. Additionally, I have experience and exposure at all stages of investments: seed stage, venture capital, private equity, and secondary markets. My interest in energy is manifest in studying and applying valuation methodologies to fuel cell companies. You can expect my very proactive involvement in your organization, a trait I cultivated working for and with startup companies. I am graduating in Computational Finance and Financial Engineering from Carnegie Mellon University and Nanyang Technological University. This course is an intensive course in derivatives, risk management, financial modeling using Visual C++, Java and Matlab, financial maths, etc. My research interests include risk management, real options valuation, energy trading & derivatives, and structured products. I believe that with my background, knowledge, skills and experience I will do my best to meet the challenges and responsibilities of a demanding assignment. I am available to join from August 1, 2001. The company will have to sponsor my employment visa in the US. I have no location preferences and am willing to travel. I look forward to hearing from you. You can reach me on 1+412-681-0152 till June 28th and by email thereafter. Thank you for your consideration. Shriram S. Suite No.202B, 5415 Shadyside Inn, Fifth Avenue, Pittsburg, PA 1523, USA. Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. - feResume2.doc << File: feResume2.doc >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Congressman Grucci - CONFIDENTIAL REQUEST; [EMail-Body]= SK/RSS - As a follow-up to Elizabeth L (see below), it appears that we have had matters before Congressman Grucci's committees. Also, Linda Robertson is now in the loop and I will be following up with her later this am. Please call should you have any ?'s SM -----Original Message----- From: Labanowski, Elizabeth Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 10:37 AM To: Montovano, Steve Subject: RE: Congressman Grucci - CONFIDENTIAL REQUEST Thanks for this info. I will be talking to B&P this morning and will keep you updated. Please be sure that you advise STeve Kean of this. The last message I left for STeve Kean stated that we did NOT have any matters pending in front of the Congressman's committees! ejl -----Original Message----- From: Montovano, Steve Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 9:33 AM To: Labanowski, Elizabeth Cc: Robertson, Linda Subject: FW: Congressman Grucci - CONFIDENTIAL REQUEST EL - Please see the attached information, which was prepared by our Washington DC office, headed up by Linda Robertson. Based on the info Linda has prepared we need to take a much closer look at this issue. It appears that we have had several issues, including Energy, before the Congressman's committees. I also suggest that Linda is included in our conference calls. I have a call into Linda to get her up to speed and will forward the B&P memo to her once we have talked. Thanks SM -----Original Message----- From: Robertson, Linda Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 8:57 AM To: Montovano, Steve Cc: Decker, Larry Subject: FW: Congressman Grucci - CONFIDENTIAL REQUEST Steve, Here is a quick write up Larry Decker put together for me. << File: Grucci.doc >> Linda - ENA Development has had several conversations with Congressman Felix Grucci (NY) regarding a potential power project on land that the congressman owns in Long Island. I was asked to inquire as to whether or not Enron has, or expects to have, any agenda items in front of any of Felix's committees. My understanding is that Felix does not sit on any Energy committees, however I am not in a position to due the broad level search that our legal department desires to be made. Can you let me know exactly which committees Felix sits on and whether or not we have or expect to have any Enron issues in front of those committees. As always this request is time sensitive. Thanks SM [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= call to Sen Kinder; [EMail-Body]= Ken talked to Sen Kinder. He made the points you had prepared. Kinder agreed to shelve the legislation for this session. He said he had been hearing from several others, including Proctor and Gamble (which has a big facility in his district) that the legislation was not going to help competition develop in the state. He expressed willingness to work with us on a better package and also expressed interest in coming to Enron's offices. He is going to be in San Antonio in August and would like to come to Houston around that time. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE:; [EMail-Body]= Aruna, I shall be in London this week. Please, call me on Monday next week. Best time is between 7:30 and 8:30 my time. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Aruna Inalsingh@Reval"" Sent: Friday, June 22, 2001 10:15 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Cc: Crenshaw, Shirley; 'pjd9v@virginia.edu' Subject: RE: Hi Vince. Just want to follow-up on my voice mail message. I'd appreciate a few minutes of your time to learn about what Enron is doing with commodity hedging. Please let me know when is a good time to call. Thanks, Aruna > -----Original Message----- > From: Aruna Inalsingh@Reval > Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 6:54 PM > To: 'vince.j.kaminski@enron.com' > Cc: 'shirley.crenshaw@enron.com'; 'pjd9v@virginia.edu' > Subject: > > Hi Vince -- > > A friend of mine, Patrick Dennis, is a professor at University of > Virginia and the liaison to Enron. He was speaking to Anand David, a > former Enron recruiter who is now at UBS Warburg, who suggested that I > contact you. > > I work for a start-up company, which offers ASP-based treasury management > software. We currently specialize in f/x and interest rate derivatives, > and we're looking to extend our product portfolio into commodity > derivatives and/or cash management. > > As part of my market research, I'd like to speak to a few key people to > get a better understanding of the treasury management needs of companies > that use energy derivatives. Might you be able to either give me a few > minutes of your time or give me the name of someone else to talk to? > > Please find attached some general information about our company. > > << File: 4para.doc >> > I look forward to your response. > > Sincerely, > Aruna > > Ms Aruna Inalsingh > VP of Marketing > > Reval > 100 Broadway, 22nd Floor > New York, NY 10005 > 212-937-8358 (p) > 212-937-8383 (F) > Aruna_Inalsingh@Reval.com > www.reval.com > > This communication is intended only for the addressee(s) and may contain > information that is privileged and/ or confidential. Recipient of this > correspondence should not construe any information furnished herein as any > legal, tax, accounting, investment or risk-management opinion, > recommendation, strategy or advice. > > [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Regulatory Roundtable, in 49C2; [EMail-Body]= KRTH? 9:10 - 9:55 JP Pritchard 630-3600 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= In Washington DC - Breakfast with Jim Bayless at 8:00 in Willard
 Coffee Shop, then 3  interviews set up by Carolyn, approx. one hour each.; [EMail-Body]= Lunch with Joe Hartsoe at 12:00 Return to Houston on 5:20 flight. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Update on House RTO Activities; [EMail-Body]= There are now two House hearnigs tomorrow, not just one. In the morning, there is a panel on reliability, siting and incentive pricing for transmission. Jim Steffes is the EPSA witness. The RTO-related hearing, originally scheduled on a separate day, will be in the afternoon tomorrow. Peter Esposito of Dynegy is the expected EPSA witness. I am checking on the final list of other panelists and will advise. Finally, Andy Black of Chairman Barton's staff advises that they will release draft RTO language as early as today. We expect that this draft will not be to our liking. Barton thinks FERC is moving too quickly and with too much force. We expect his proposal to set a deadline of something like 12 months for utilities to join an RTO. The key is in part whether he allows FERC to continue to decide what constitutes an acceptable RTO or whether he will try to ""grandfather"" in some fashion those RTOs that have been proposed by utilities to date. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Conference Access Code Change!!!; [EMail-Body]= FYI ---------------------- Forwarded by Linda Wehring/ET&S/Enron on 11/16/2000 10:16 AM --------------------------- From: Ricki Winters 11/16/2000 10:08 AM To: Legale Black/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Robert Tangie Dykes/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Jamie Lynn/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Ruthe Newman/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Debra Jasper/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Harry Woodson/ET&S/Enron@Enron, MaryAnn Locknar/ET&S/Enron@Enron, James Carr/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Jodie Floyd/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Albert Hernandez/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Leonard Daily/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Jean Blair/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Shirley Walden/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Jan Moore/ET&S/Enron@Enron, John Buchanan/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Raetta Zadow/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Lynn Blair/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Jean Adams/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Larry Berger/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Nancy Callans/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Pamela Carter/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Terry Kowalke/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Jerry Wilkens/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Sherry Forbish/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Chris Greaney/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Kathy Sturr/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Joe Linhart/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Dale Eldridge/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Martha Cormier/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Beverly Miller/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Cynthia Rivers/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Linda Ward/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Kathy Washington/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Ramona Betancourt/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Mary Draemer/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Toby Kuehl/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Tammy Jaquet/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Maggie Matheson/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Gerry Medeles/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Sheila Nacey/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Dale Ratliff/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Diana Porter/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Rick Dietz/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Karen Brostad/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Elizabeth Brown/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Zuela Carter/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Patricia Steele/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Linda Trevino/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, John Williams/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Esther Dasilva/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Larry Davis/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Richard Hanagriff/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Alice Johnson/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Alma Green/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Nancy Bastida/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Alma Carrillo/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Randy Janzen/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Janet McDaniel/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Julia White/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Randy Bryan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Amy Mulligan/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Katherine Perry/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Dennis Lee/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Tracy Minter/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Christine McEvoy/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Keith Braswell/OTS/Enron@Enron, Josue Vasquez/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Sharon Brown/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Steven January/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Ava Garcia/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Deborah Dunten/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Karen Leslie/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Jeffrey Cochran/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Crandal Hardy/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Bart Monden/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Robert Munson/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Bill Swarthout/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Richard Barry/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Bill Bell/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Margaret Hall/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Edward Welsh/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Jesse Alvarado/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Steve Coash/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Michael Ellington/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Ron Spain/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Christopher Tracy/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Roy Armitage/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Rodney Barnes/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Helen Cummings/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Gaynel Henley/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Mike Bryant/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Michael Wagoner/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Donald Angeletti/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Loren Charbonneau/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Byron Reid/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Donna Sander/OTS/Enron@ENRON, David Velen/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Jodi Dobrinski/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Thomas Hebert/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Lynda Laferla/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Galen Coon/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Laura Giambrone/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Karen Clapper/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Mary Phillips/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Jack Howard/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Marion Collins/FGT/Enron@ENRON, James Cramer/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Tim Cooper/FGT/Enron@ENRON, William Aldinger/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Hilda Lindley/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Shahnaz Lakho/FGT/Enron@ENRON, James Studebaker/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Darrell Schoolcraft/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Gary Spraggins/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Moore/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Steven Chambers/OTS/Enron@Enron, Faith Reid/OTS/Enron@Enron, Dannis Bellard/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Donna Scott/FGT/Enron@ENRON, John Sturn/ET&S/Enron@ENRON cc: Connie Hook/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Linda Wehring/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Candace Williams/ET&S/Enron@ENRON Subject: Confidential Conference Access Code Change!!! Please be advised that effective immediatley we have changed the passcode for the daily morning conference call. The 800 number will remain the same (800) 991-9019, with a new passcode of 6133683#. This code is extremely confidential, so please do not share with anyone outside of ETS! Connie, Candace & Linda, could you please forward this on to your groups, and if you have any employees in need of this information that are out, please leave the new passcode on their phone mail. Thank you, Ricki [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Information and Securities Trading; [EMail-Body]= I need to get the form to show compliance, but I cannot get it online--I cannot remember all my passwords. Can you get this form for me? Thx. ----- Forwarded by Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT on 03/10/2001 10:07 AM ----- Office of the Chairman - Enron Wholesale Services 02/28/2001 03:53 PM Please respond to legalonline-compliance To: SANDERS@mailman.enron.com, RICHARD <richard.b.sanders@enron.com> cc: Subject: Confidential Information and Securities Trading To:SANDERS, RICHARD - 7138535587 ? Enron Wholesale Services - Office of the Chairman ? From:??Mark Frevert, Chairman & CEO ??????Greg Whalley, President & COO ??????Mark Haedicke, Managing Director & General Counsel ? Subject:??Confidential Information and Securities Trading ? Enron Wholesale Services ('EWS') maintains official Policies and Procedures Regarding Confidential Information and Securities Trading ('Policies and Procedures'), which have been revised as of November 15, 2000 to reflect the new EWS structure. These policies and procedures are intended to allow us simultaneously to pursue our diverse businesses and to protect confidential information, our reputation for integrity, and EWS and its employees from legal liability. ? You are required to become familiar with, and to comply with, the Policies and Procedures. The newly revised Policies and Procedures are available for your review on LegalOnline, the new intranet website maintained by the Enron Wholesale Services Legal Department. Please click on the attached link to access LegalOnline: ? ? You must certify your compliance with the Policies and Procedures within two weeks of your receipt of this message. The LegalOnline site will allow you to quickly and conveniently certify your compliance on-line with your SAP Personal ID number. If you have any questions concerning the Policies or Procedures, please call Lance Schuler at extension 3-5419, Mark Haedicke at extension 3-6544, Alan Aronowitz at extension 3-3214, Bob Bruce at extension 5-7780 or Donna Lowry at extension 3-1939. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Washington DC - Council of the Great City Schools; [EMail-Body]= 2:00 - 5:00 Secretary Reilly will speak just before you. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Ed Segner's Staff meeting, in 50M Dining Room; [EMail-Body]= Ross Malme -- 7587 Anthony D -- 6235 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Enron Advisory Council meeting; [EMail-Body]= We'll have the usual macroeconomic update from Larry Lindsay and Gavyn Davies, the domestic political update from Bill Kristol and some presentations from Gary Hamel and others focussing on Enron NetWorks. James M Bannantine@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 08/10/2000 02:30 PM To: Steven J Kean@EES cc: Subject: Enron Advisory Council meeting Steve, What is the agenda for this advisory council meeting? Jim ---------------------- Forwarded by James M Bannantine/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 08/10/2000 01:30 PM --------------------------- From: Vanessa Groscrand @ ENRON 08/10/2000 10:42 AM To: James M Cliff Baxter/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sanjay Rick Buy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Causey/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Diomedes Christodoulou/SA/Enron@Enron, David W Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT, James Derrick/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Andrew S Fastow/HOU/ECT@ECT, Peggy_Fowler@pgn.com, Mark Frevert/NA/Enron@Enron, Ben F Glisan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kevin Hannon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, David Stanley Horton/Corp/Enron@Enron, Larry L Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kenneth Lay/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Rebecca P Mark/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, Mike McConnell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rebecca Jeffrey McMahon/HOU/ECT@ECT, J Mark Metts/NA/Enron@Enron, Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lou L Pai/HOU/EES@EES, Ken Rice/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Jeffrey Sherrick/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Joseph W Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Thomas E White/HOU/EES@EES cc: Brenda Marcia Manarin/SA/Enron@Enron, Susan Skarness/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stacy Beena Karen K Heathman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sharron Westbrook/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kay Chapman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Molly Bobrow/NA/Enron@Enron, Rosane Fabozzi/SA/Enron@Enron, Stephanie Harris/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bridget Maronge/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mary_trosper@pgn.com, Nicki Daw/NA/Enron@Enron, Inez Dauterive/HOU/ECT@ECT, Carol Ann Brown/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Elaine Nancy Young/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Cindy Stark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary E Maureen McVicker/HOU/EES@EES, Joannie Williamson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Marsha Lindsey/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, Cathy Phillips/HOU/ECT@ECT, Loretta Sue Ford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dolores Fisher/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Owens/HOU/EES@EES, Dorothy Dalton/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Jewel Meeks/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Christina Grow/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lauren Urquhart/LON/ECT@ECT, Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Katherine Brown/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Pam Jana Mills/HOU/ECT@ECT, Liz M Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Judy G Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Bobbie Power/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Enron Advisory Council meeting The Enron Advisory Council meeting is scheduled on September 7-8, 2000. The dinner meeting will begin on Thursday, September 7 at 6:00 p.m. at the Four Seasons Hotel in the Austin Room. On Friday, September 8 the meeting is scheduled from 7:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. in the 50th Floor Boardroom. Please let me know if you plan to attend. Vanessa Groscrand [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: o:\Research access list; [EMail-Body]= Sandeep, This is the list of the groups that have access to Research directory. Martin compiled this list. Please, review it and let's talk about the recommendations regarding changes and restrictions we have to make. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Lin, Martin Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 9:27 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: o:\Research access list Please find attached an Excel workbook listing different access groups for Research. I have marked some users for keeping and deleting. I'm not sure how you wish to proceed. You can edit the list as you see fit. Perhaps we can contact those who have particular groups (e.g. Weather) for updates on their list. I am generally of the opinion that the lists should be as short as possible. A directory that Lance and I share with the power group was deleted yesterday but nobody knows who did that. I hope after this audit is done, we are much less at risk of something that like happening again. Thanks, Martin << File: Data Research.xls >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: ticket; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Urszula Sobczyk <urszula@pacbell.net>@ENRON Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 6:37 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Re: ticket Our phone number is 1-800-801-1055. Urszula Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com wrote: > What are the hours for Conti vs. Air France? I am the ofice for another 45 > minutes. > Your phone number? > > Vince > > -----Original Message----- > From: Urszula Sobczyk <urszula@pacbell.net>@ENRON > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 5:56 PM > To: Kaminski, Vince J > Subject: Re: ticket > > Dzien Dobry ponownie, > Na wszystkie te polaczenia ceny wychodzi ok. $1700.00. > Jedyne co to wylot 04 lipca z IAH przez Chicago do Warszawy - LOT, > powrot 09 lipca, Warszawa - JFK, JFK > przez DFW (Dallas) do Houston. Cena wychodz $1107.10. Bardzo prosze o > kontakt. > Urszula > > Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com wrote: > > > Another question. What about a Continental flight to Amsterdam and > from > > Amsterdam to Warsaw? > > > > I can also fly Continental through Rome or London, as long as I don't > have > > to change airports. > > > > Vince > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Urszula Sobczyk <urszula@pacbell.net>@ENRON > > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 1:50 PM > > To: vkamins@enron.com > > Subject: re: ticket > > > > Dzien dobry Panu, > > Na wylot 04 lipca z IAH do Warszawy i powrot 09 lipca (8 lipca nie > bylo > > miejsca) cena wynosi $1680.26. > > Bardzo prosze o kontakt czy jest Pan zainteresowany. > > Pozdrawiam, > > Urszula [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Curve Validation; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 04/20/2000 01:44 PM --------------------------- From: Vladimir Gorny@ECT on 04/20/2000 01:27 PM To: James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Karen L Barbour/HOU/ECT@ECT, Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Gahn/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/HOU/EES@EES cc: Ted Murphy/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Gorte/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Curve Validation Outlined below are some details of the existing curve validation process and its application to the proposed validation of tariff curves. Wholesale Curve Validation The existing process incorporates validation of all wholesale curves and includes monthly validations and random curve reviews. Every month, results of the validation are summarized in a memo and distributed to the Senior Management. Results of the random curve reviews are brought up to the attention of Desk Heads responsible for the respective curves and Senior Management as necessary. Curve Assessment Green: - curve is reasonable - small P&L impact from curve shift Yellow: - curve is illiquid - medium-to-large position and P&L impact from curve shift - some ability to validate prices from external sources Red: - curve mark is inaccurate (based on external data obtained) - curve is illiquid: no ability to validate externally - significant positions and P&L impact from curve shift Curves that are inaccurately marked based on data obtained from external sources are urged by the Senior Management to be corrected. In the cases where external data is not available or clear, the Senior Management urges the respective Desk Head not to increase an already large illiquid position or to built in a risk premium by widening the respective bid/offer spread and not to take on positions inside of that spread. Selection Criteria The criteria for monthly curve selection are the following: P&L sensitivity Largest positions Staleness (curves have not been marked for a period of time) Completeness (curves that have not been validated in a long time) The main criteria for random curve validation is new deals. Curve Validation Tools Broker Quotes/Other external data Graph Analysis (curve slope vs. a peer group, curve humps/sculpting vs. a peer group, curve shift vs. position shift, etc.) New Deal Analysis (comparison of curve marks and executed/quoted prices) Boundary Analysis/V@R Simulations (comparison of curve to simulated curve boundaries using Enron's V@R Engine) SAVA Model Comparison (comparison of curves to model generated results) Tariff Curve Validation Scope/Timing: ASAP - 20 curves with the largest positions related to deals pending review: (Frito-Lay, Quaker Oats, Starwood) - to ensure timely and smooth approval of these deals. Next 30-days - 20 curves with the largest positions/P&L impact Monthly/Quarterly - 20 curves selected based on criteria described above Randomly - curves with significant positions/P&L impact, resulting from new deals Data Gathering: This Month: Listing of 20 curves (related to deals in progress) and the related support requested by EGA (to be provided by Scott Stoness) On-going Basis: The process of obtaining data should be streamlined and the curve validation process should be relatively painless: - RAC should have access to the curve data (Minal Dalia is fully devoted to EES and is currently residing on the EES floor) - Curve assumptions should be documented (to be provided by Scott Stoness) Execution/Reporting: RAC, EGA and EES Risk Management Group work together on curve validation utilizing available tools and work on developing new tools Utilize the Wholesale Curve Assessment methodology (Green, Yellow, Red) Generate a curve validation report (see template attached) Provide feedback to the Desk Heads and distribute the Curve Validation Report to Enron and EES Senior Management Other Curves Other curves related to EES business should be gradually incorporated into the aforesaid process (ancillary services, congestion, DSM and labor related curves) - let us set a timetable. In conclusion, curve validation results should be evaluated in conjunction with other risk analytics: stress testing of prices, volatilities and correlations, Value-at-Risk/Capital-at-Risk analysis, performance measures, capital allocation framework, etc. Vlady. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Agreement; [EMail-Body]= Here is the latest copy. Once you may the changes I am going to run it by Mark Metts and send it over to CINergy. I am trying to get this sogned today, so I can head down to Florida to meet up with Don and company. Thanks Ben ---------------------- Forwarded by Benjamin Rogers/HOU/ECT on 06/14/2000 01:27 PM --------------------------- ""Wahl, Jennifer"" <jwahl@Cinergy.com> on 06/06/2000 10:43:34 AM To: ""'Ben Rogers'"" <benjamin.rogers@enron.com> cc: ""Cyrus, Michael"" <mcyrus@Cinergy.com> Subject: Confidential Agreement This follows up on your voice mail message regarding the status of the Confidentiality Agreement in light of renewed discussions between the two companies. Attached is the latest draft of the Confidentiality Agreement which was transmitted to you on May 13. Please call me with any comments or questions. <<Confidential AGrement with Enron which was sent to Ben Rogers on 51200 - this version is a clean version accepting all blacklined changes from 59437v3.DOC>> - Confidential AGrement with Enron which was sent to Ben Rogers on 51200 - this version is a clean version accepting all blacklined changes from 59437v3.DOC [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: FW: Dadisms; [EMail-Body]= George ""Herbert Hoover"" Bush. ""Robert Kean"" <rkean@starband.net> on 07/07/2001 10:13:19 AM Please respond to <rkean@starband.net> To: ""Alan Kean \(E-mail\)"" <rex04@msn.com>, ""'Doug & Karen Reiman \(E-mail\)'"" <dkreiman@mcleodusa.net>, ""Kathy Wedig \(E-mail\)"" <kat.wedig@netzero.net>, ""Melissa Kean \(E-mail\)"" <kean@rice.edu>, ""Phil Kean \(E-mail\)"" <kean.philip@mcleodusa.net>, ""'Steve & Melissa Kean \(E-mail\)'"" <skean@enron.com> cc: ""Diane Kean \(E-mail 2\)"" <dkean@starband.net> Subject: FW: Dadisms Dadisms 1. Run for the roundhouse Nellie, he'll never corner you there. 2. Slick as catshit and twice as nasty. 3. Like shit through a goose. 4. Yeah, that's right, keep fiddlin' with that, you'll break it 5. Ho! Ho! she cried in excess wild and waved her wooden leg on high! 6. On accounta the war. 7. They'll have to shoot him on judgement day. 8. Then of course, there are the names: Katy, Devie, My Little Mochawk, Phil Jofus, and Bubba 9. Choke ass (referring to peanut butter) 10. If it tastes good there are no calories 11. Didn't know you were in town (as driver passes on the right, etc.) 12. Like a couple of cub bears (meaning Rob and Phil) 13. Washington D.C. District or Corruption 14. Have some onions for defense 15. He won't have the guts to do THAT again (when a bug hits the windshield) 16. Saps goin' up the tree 17. Big Al 18. Douglas Doorite 19. Must be a storm comin'; the kids are actin' up 20. Constipate (concentrate) 21. Like being in hell with your back broke 22. gourd cover (hat) 23. mitts, dogs, paws (hands or feet) 24. you're too young 25. Worthington (when we asked him where something was or where he was going) 26. overhose (blue jeans) 27. excruciating pain! (when we squeezed his hand) 28. That's a hell of a note 29. meat wagon (ambulance) 30. drappies (drapes) 31. grappies (grapes) 32. Whoa horsie! Just cuz you only got 3 legs. (when he was putting on the brakes in the car) 33. Jeana, Jeana corpastina, I'm in love with you 34. I love you anyway 35. Scuse my boardin' house reach. 36. Come on out and let me lay a wheel on ya! (in traffic) 37. Sit down and start passin' (at meal time) 38. That's a bit of all right. 39. Here, guard this with your life (when he handed something to us at a store) 40. SOL (shit out of luck) 41. I'll tell ya when your're 21. 42. fernilla, dawberry, shocoletta (vanilla, strawberry, chocolate) 43. straighten up, now. 44. Pardon me soldier. (when he burped) 45. I'm going to assume the position of a soldier. (when he was going to lay on the couch for a nap) 46. horses doovers 47. lemon meringoo pie 48. solft 49. go ahead, see if it bends (when someone pulled out in front of him) 50. Ioway State 51. Cedar Rapids, Cedar Rapids, come on down. Hotel Roosevelt center of town. 52. A hundred dogs going wild in the tobacco field. Does your cigarette taste difference? (a quote from the one Russian guy in Cascade) 53. Cut her loose and let her wander. 54. Get your dogs under the table. 55. ""Shit!"" cried the queen and a thousand loyal subjects strained their bowels. 56. Who's side are you on?! The power company? (when we left lights on) 57. That makes it soggy and hard to light 58. Full as a tick 59. A treat instead of a treatment 60. Intermittent Power [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Shift May Empower California.htm; [EMail-Body]= Thanks for taking time to call yesterday. Good luck with the Lockyer situ= ation. I truly do believe that direct and prompt interaction with Lockyer= will prove more effective for Enron than delayed or intermediated action.= As we discussed, if I can be of any help with reconnaissance or as sou= nding board, just let me know. =20 I have attached an article from this morning's LA Times. It provides an C= alifornia view on how the shakeup in the Senate might impact the state's e= nergy situation. Certainly, by the time that President Bush visits the C= alifornia in a few days, the state's two Democratic US Senators will be a = good bit more empowered. =20 Kevin 213-926-2626 =20 [IMAGE] [IMAGE][IMAGE] =09Click here to learn more! [IMAGE]=09 [IMAGE] =09Home | Discussions | Print Edition | Archives | Site Map = | Home Delivery | Advertise | Feedback | Help [IMAGE]=09 =09[IMAGE]=09 [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] News Politics Entertainment music ,= movies , art , TV , restaurants [IMAGE] Business Travel Marketplace jo= bs , homes , cars , rentals , classifieds [IMAGE] Sports Commentary Shop= ping [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] A Section= [IMAGE] [IMAGE] TOP STORIES * State's Standardized Test Spurs Scatte= red Backlash * GOP Braces for Jeffords to Bolt Today * Moderates on = Outside of GOP Big Tent MORE [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] STORIES BY DA= TE FOR THIS SECTION 5/24 | 5/23 | 5/22 | 5/21 | 5/20 | 5/19 | 5/18 = [IMAGE] DAILY SECTIONS Front Page ""A"" Section California [= IMAGE] Business Sports Calendar [IMAGE] So. Cal. Living Editorials,Lett= ers, Op/Ed WEEKLY SECTIONS Health Food [IMAGE] Tech Times [IMAG= E] Highway 1 SUNDAY SECTIONS Book Review Opinion Real Estate [IMA= GE] Calendar Magazine Travel [IMAGE] TV Times Work Place [IMAGE] [= IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Marketplace Find a home , car = , rental , job , pet , merchandise , boat, plane or RV , classifieds Pl= ace an Ad [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] L.A. Times = Subscription Services Subscribe , Change of Address , Vacation Stops , = Suspend Delivery , College Discount , Gift Subscriptions , Mail Subscriptio= ns , FAQ [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Print Ads = from the Newspaper See this week's ads [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Pri= nt Edition , Orange County , Valley , Ventura County , National , Communi= ty Papers [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Books Columnists Cross= word Education Food Health Highway Horoscope Lottery Magazine = Obituaries Reading by Real Estate Religion Science So.Cal. Living = Special Reports Sunday Opinion Tech Times Times Poll Traffic Weath= er Workplace SITE MAP [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] SHOP 'TIL YOUR = LAPTOP DROPS [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Shopping [IMAGE= ] Search Products Stores [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] = [IMAGE] [IMAGE] =09[IMAGE]=09[IMAGE] Thursday, May 24, 2001 | [IMAGE]Print= this story [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Shift May Empower California By RICHARD SI= MON, ELIZABETH SHOGREN, Times Staff Writers WASHINGTON--James M. J= effords has never mattered much to Californians. Until now. The Verm= ont senator's widely anticipated decision to abandon his fellow Republican= s and put Democrats in control of the Senate could have big implications f= or California, particularly on energy and environmental policy, lawmakers = and lobbyists said Wednesday. The change, which Jeffords is expected= to announce today, could increase political pressure on the Bush adminis= tration to respond more aggressively to California's electricity crisis, t= hese insiders said. And it might force the White House to compromise= on key elements of the national energy policy it unveiled last week. In f= act, the administration's proposed budget cuts for programs to promote ren= ewable energy were said to be a factor in Jeffords' decision. At th= e very least, Senate observers said, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) is l= ikely to get the floor vote she has sought on price controls for wholesale= electricity. That doesn't necessarily mean that the administration'= s critics will be able to have everything their way. Even if the Senate ap= proves electricity price caps, for example, the measure would face stiff o= pposition in the GOP-dominated House--and a likely veto if it made it to t= he president's desk. Still, a Democratic majority in the Senate wou= ld give Feinstein and other party members a platform to turn up the politi= cal heat on the administration and congressional Republicans on energy pol= icy. ""It kicks up the dust,"" groaned one energy industry lobbyist wh= o requested anonymity. Observed Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.): ""If P= resident Bush's hard-edged conservative approach has in fact caused the ba= lance to shift towards Democrats in the Senate, it will have profound impl= ications not just for California, but for the environment and our nation's= energy policy."" Environmentalists seemed almost giddy as they cont= emplated the possible impact of Jeffords' decision on the policies they ca= re about. All of a sudden, they said, it seems less likely that oil = exploration will take place in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, that r= ecreational snowmobiles will have free access to Yellowstone National Park= , or that the administration's desire to promote nuclear power will be emb= raced by Congress. On the other hand, it seems more probable that C= ongress would approve a new plan for managing a vast swath of the Sierra N= evada to protect the region's oldest trees, consider legislation to restri= ct emissions of carbon dioxide from power plants and protect California fr= om a resurgence of offshore oil drilling. ""It's stunning how broad t= he repercussions are, particularly on the environment,"" said Gregory Wetst= one of the Natural Resources Defense Council. ""We're trying not to count o= ur chickens before they hatch. But it will be easier for us in our battles= at least to keep from moving backwards."" For instance, Jeffords is= a chief advocate of a bill that would regulate carbon dioxide from power = plants. And if events play out as expected, he'll become the new chairman = of the Senate committee with jurisdiction over the issue. Another i= ssue under his purview would be the two-decade dispute over a proposed rep= ository for the nation's spent nuclear fuel at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. = ""Yucca Mountain is a dead turkey,"" declared Michael Francis of the W= ilderness Society. Environmentalists had been worried that a number= of pro-development provisions would be packed into appropriation bills. B= ut with Democratic senators in charge, that would become less of a threat,= they said. ""Every wacko idea Republicans have will get a higher lev= el of scrutiny,"" Francis said. The biggest change would be the power= of Senate Democrats to decide which bills will be considered in committee= s, and which ones will make it to the floor of the Senate for votes. = As part of a new Democratic majority, Feinstein and fellow California De= mocrat Barbara Boxer are likely to gain leverage with the administration o= n a number of issues considered important to the state. ""That transl= ates into more federal assistance for California across the board,"" predic= ted Steve Maviglio, spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis. ""I think it mean= s more attention to our state, for sure,"" Boxer said. ""Right now, the pres= ident doesn't seem to give a darn. They're all looking at California as a = Democratic state. They're not interested."" Feinstein, who has been = unable to arrange a meeting with Bush to discuss the energy crisis, may ge= t better treatment if winning Democratic support becomes more important to= the administration. She has been regarded as a bridge-builder who worked = effectively with Republicans in the past. ""This has not been a warm = and friendly administration,"" she complained Wednesday. ""They've got peopl= e who know all the answers and don't want to listen."" The White Hou= se disputed that. In fact, Bush agreed Wednesday to meet with Davis during= the president's first visit to California next week. Under a Democ= ratic majority, Feinstein would be in line to chair two subcommittees: the= military construction panel of the Senate Appropriations Committee, and t= he technology, terrorism and government information subcommittee of the Se= nate Judiciary Committee. Boxer would be in line to chair the subco= mmittee on Superfund, waste control and risk assessment, and the Foreign R= elations subcommittee on international operations and terrorism. Mav= iglio predicted that the effects of Jeffords' expected party defection wou= ld be felt immediately. The chairmanship of the Senate Energy and N= atural Resources Committee would be taken away from Frank H. Murkowski (R-= Alaska), who has been ""openly hostile to California's plight,"" and handed = to Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), who supports Davis' request for electricity pri= ce controls, according to Maviglio. Democrats have assailed Bush's e= nergy plan for tilting heavily toward the supply side. With Democrats in c= harge of the Senate, the administration would be more likely to compromise= , perhaps beefing up funding for Democrat-supported causes such as increas= ed energy assistance to low-income households and more aggressive promotio= n of conservation and renewable energy sources such as wind and solar powe= r. Search the archives of the Los Angeles Times for similar stories ab= out: United States - Politics , Republican Party , James M Jeffords , P= olitical Party Defections , California - Politics , Senate (U.s.) . You = will not be charged to look for stories, only to retrieve one. =09 News Politics Entertainment music , movies , art , TV , restaurants = [IMAGE] Business Travel Marketplace jobs , homes , cars , rentals , cla= ssifieds [IMAGE] Sports Commentary Shopping [IMAGE] =09[IMAGE]=09 G= et Copyright Clearance Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times Click for permi= ssion to reprint (PRC# 1.528.2001_000043610) =09 [IMAGE] =09 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= <<Concur Expense Document>> - RLB-Florida; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/28/2001 04:39 PM ----- eserver@enron.com 03/28/2001 09:55 AM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - RLB-Florida The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: Robert L. Bradley Jr Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: RLB-Florida Report Total: $537.19 Amount Due Employee: $537.19 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://xms.enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Report On EPSA Legislative Affairs Committee Meeting; [EMail-Body]= The EPSA leg. affairs cmt. met today during the fall meeting. The speakers were Howard Useem, Republican counsel to the Senate Energy Committee, and Jimmy Glotfelty, senior policy advisory to the Secretary of Energy. Useem said Senate Energy Committee Republicans were meeting later this morning to finalize their energy proposal. (We later learned that they opted against including any electricity provisions, not even the PURPA, PUHCA and reliability issues that Howard thought might be included when he spoke before the senators met; this is good news since it makes it less likely that anti-FERC provisions will be added.) (Howard said now is the best time to legislative on electricity because the Supreme Court has not yet acted on the bundling/unbundling issue.) On RTOs, in some what of a surprise, Useem said that there is general support among Senate Republicans for RTOs, including consolidating them into a few RTOs of large scope (surprising since this is not what we have heard in meetings with individual Senate offices). While he said that, he also said that support is stronger in the abstract than in specifics. He said the biggest opposition was coming from very vocal state regulators (EPSA staff did a good job of pointing to state regulators, mainly in the Midwest, who support larger RTOs). Most importantly, Howard said none of the senators on his committee take a ""not over my dead body"" approach to RTOs. Jimmy Glotfelty explained to several EPSA members who asked questions just why it is that the Administration wants Congress to be silent on RTOs. He said while they would prefer a sentence or two affirming FERC's authority, they do not believe this is what would come out of the legislative process. They are not willing to run that risk. He stressed that the president wants to include other electricity issues. He said they were very close to an agreement with Western governors on regional transmission siting. Jimmy further said that the Administration also wants silence on incentive rates, another issue where FERC can act now. They continue to talk to Barton and his staff in an attempt to get them to back away from the restrictive approach to RTOs in the Barton discussion draft. (He said Pat Wood spent several hours with Barton and other House committee staff yesterday.) Of concern, Jimmy said something like ""could be 4 RTOs, could be 8 RTOs,"" what is important is getting standard design. He also said DOE will make sure that PMAs are included in RTOs. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Washington DC to meet with Jefferds; [EMail-Body]= Lunch - still outstanding (No mci guy) 2:30- Chris Perkins, Senator Jefferds office (R-VT), Senate Building Room 728 Hart, Malcolm and Cynthia will attend, she also invited Mike Marvin, Business Council 3:30 - Rick Kessler, Congressman Pallone, Democrate from New Jersey, 420 Cannon, Malcolm can also attend 4:00 - Elise Jones, Congresswoman Furse (D-OR), 316 Cannon, Malcolm can go to this MCI we'll try to do on May 1st. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: ticket; [EMail-Body]= Wincenty J Kaminski 10 Snowbird Place The Woodlands TX 77381 WT 472179 Wincenty Kaminski -----Original Message----- From: Urszula Sobczyk <urszula@pacbell.net>@ENRON Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 6:37 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Re: ticket Our phone number is 1-800-801-1055. Urszula Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com wrote: > What are the hours for Conti vs. Air France? I am the ofice for another 45 > minutes. > Your phone number? > > Vince > > -----Original Message----- > From: Urszula Sobczyk <urszula@pacbell.net>@ENRON > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 5:56 PM > To: Kaminski, Vince J > Subject: Re: ticket > > Dzien Dobry ponownie, > Na wszystkie te polaczenia ceny wychodzi ok. $1700.00. > Jedyne co to wylot 04 lipca z IAH przez Chicago do Warszawy - LOT, > powrot 09 lipca, Warszawa - JFK, JFK > przez DFW (Dallas) do Houston. Cena wychodz $1107.10. Bardzo prosze o > kontakt. > Urszula > > Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com wrote: > > > Another question. What about a Continental flight to Amsterdam and > from > > Amsterdam to Warsaw? > > > > I can also fly Continental through Rome or London, as long as I don't > have > > to change airports. > > > > Vince > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Urszula Sobczyk <urszula@pacbell.net>@ENRON > > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 1:50 PM > > To: vkamins@enron.com > > Subject: re: ticket > > > > Dzien dobry Panu, > > Na wylot 04 lipca z IAH do Warszawy i powrot 09 lipca (8 lipca nie > bylo > > miejsca) cena wynosi $1680.26. > > Bardzo prosze o kontakt czy jest Pan zainteresowany. > > Pozdrawiam, > > Urszula [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Senate Energy Hearing Today; [EMail-Body]= The Senate Energy Committee held an oversight hearing today on siting impediments to energy infrastructure. The four witnesses were Jerry Halvorsen of INGAA, William Nugent of Maine for NARUC, David Cook, general counsel of NERC, and Stan Szwed, vp-transmission of FirstEnergy Corp. The hearing was well attended by committee Republicans, but only Sen. Bingaman and Sen. Landrieu on the Democratic side, and then only briefly. Highlights NARUC's Nugent urged the Committee to move swiftly to confirm Wood and Brownell to FERC, noting their confirmation hearing is tomorrow. Consensus that energy infrastructure is not able to keep up with projected energy demand, both gas and electric. Surprising willingness (even among western Republican senators who are normally pro-states rights, pro-private property rights) that Congress should at least seriously consider, if not implement, some form of federal authority over power transmission siting. Specifics were not nailed down, with some senators expressing more support for treating electric like FERC already has power over natural gas, while others were inclined more toward a FERC back stop or last resort authority when state decisionmaking breaks down. The drift was certainly toward some enhanced federal role. NERC released is Summer Assessment today that is more pessimistic than California ISO on the extent of expected rolling blackouts and shortages this summer. NERC seees a capacity shortage in the Pacific Northwest this winter. While NY/NE is adequate this summer, Cook says it bears watching because of bouts of high heat in the region and a high level of unplanned outages that often occur in the region in the summer. Chairman Murkowski engaged in a series of questions with INGAA's Halvorsen designed to lay the blame for the natural gas capacity problem to California and corresponding high price levels on the actions of LDCs in California not supporting expansion of interstate pipelines. Halvorsen's testimony includes a chart of specific cases where LDCs intervened. In his verbal testimony, Halvorsen singled out Sempra as a source of opposition, including Sempra filings against expansions by Transwestern and Kern River. Chairman Murkowski got Halvorsen to say that the actions of the California LDCs and the intrastate nature of all gas pipelines in California effectively denied California consumers the benefit of open access for natural gas. Murkowski implied he would entertain a change in the Natural Gas Act as it relates to the status of interstate pipelines going in to California. Sen. Domenici joined the increasing chorus of members of Congress raising questions about why natural gas prices are low at the wellhead for his producers in New Mexico, but so high into California. He asked the panel who is making the money in the differential, but none of the witnesses wanted to tackle the question. This is just one more indication of the growing interest in the natural gas aspects of the California situation. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Friday?; [EMail-Body]= Dale, I shall be in your part of the world on Friday (Palo Alto). I shall ask Krishna to meet you in my place. Vince Kaminski -----Original Message----- From: ""Dale M. Nesbitt"" Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 2:32 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Friday? Vince: I am firming up my plans for this week. Is it the right time to get together this coming Friday at your facility to talk about NARG and/or the impending NARG demo with you and/or the responsible Enron people? Give me an email shout if you could to confirm or schedule for a later date. It would be propitious from our end to initiate the discussions with the right people in your organization on that day because my gas guy Tom Choi (Kim Watson and others know him) will also be with me in Houston on that day. All the best. I hope you have dried out. Dale Nesbitt [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Washington DC; [EMail-Body]= pena - 1:30; Spurling @11:15 and D'Amato @12:00 11:15 D'Amato 12:00 Sperling 1:30 Pena meeting - Tentative 3:30 Janel Guerrero Flying up on company plane. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: FW: RTO/market power discussion document; [EMail-Body]= In the underscored language added to the RTO section I would insert ""access to"" between the words ""planning"" and ""maintenance"". Cynthia Sandherr@ENRON 07/20/2000 06:22 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, dwatkiss@bracepatt.com, cingebretson@bracepatt.com cc: Subject: FW: RTO/market power discussion document ---------------------- Forwarded by Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron on 07/20/2000 07:30 AM --------------------------- ""Kanner, Marty"" <mkanner@kannerandassoc.com> on 07/19/2000 07:09:20 PM To: ""Jane Dunn Cirrincione (E-mail)"" <jcirrincione@APPAnet.org>, ""Deborah Sliz (E-mail)"" <dsliz@morganmeguire.com>, ""Mark Yacker (E-mail)"" <myacker@elcon.org>, ""Cynthia Sandherr (E-mail)"" <cynthia.sandherr@enron.com>, ""Cynthia Bogorad (E-mail)"" <BogoradC@spiegelmcd.com>, ""Gene Peters (E-mail)"" <gpeters@epsa.org> cc: Subject: FW: RTO/market power discussion document I sent the following to Andy Black in order to ensure that we also discuss the RTO/market power issues. I'll bring copies to the meeting. Please feel free to take issue with the language. Marty Kanner Kanner and Associates 122 C Street, NW Suite 500 202-347-6625 - phone 202-347-6605 - fax www.kannerandassoc.com -----Original Message----- From: Kanner, Marty Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 7:07 PM To: Andy Black (E-mail) Cc: Catherine Van Way (E-mail); Curry Hagerty (E-mail); Joe Kelliher (E-mail); Bob Bolster (E-mail); Ramsen Betfarhad (E-mail); Rick Kessler (E-mail); Sue Sheridan (E-mail) Subject: RTO/market power discussion document Andy - Thanks again for allowing me to participate in this afternoon's discussion. As I mentioned, I believe discussions of transmission issues must include both jurisdictional and RTO. I understand that the RTO discussion is more difficult in the absence of paper. For that reason, I have taken the liberty of drafting language that I believe mirrors (at least my view) of one possible construct of RTO Proposal I. I hope you find this helpful. I will bring copies to our meeting tomorrow. <<rto mp amend for barton discussion.doc>> Marty Kanner Kanner and Associates 122 C Street, NW Suite 500 202-347-6625 - phone 202-347-6605 - fax www.kannerandassoc.com - rto mp amend for barton discussion.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Confidential -- Terry Thorn; [EMail-Body]= Shanna, talk with Rick but he will be working until June or July then he will retire and be available as a consultant to us. m Shanna Funkhouser@ENRON 02/08/2001 10:09 AM To: Mike McConnell/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Rick Subject: Confidential -- Terry Thorn Mike, I wanted to let you know that Cindy Skinner passed the information she gathered on Terry to me. Please let me know what the status is with his termination ie; timing, etc. so that I may start the process. Thanks, Shanna X59386 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: FW: Possible co-sponsorships; [EMail-Body]= Though I had a somewhat different notion when I initially raised the idea of co-sponsorship, I agree with Lee's observations and think that we should proceed the way he suggests. gramlr@pjm.com on 08/29/2000 04:06:56 PM To: amosher@appanet.org, hcameron@uclink.berkeley.edu, lfried@uclink.berkeley.edu, jeff.dasovich@enron.com cc: Subject: FW: Possible co-sponsorships All, Lee asked me to forward this. I'm still awaiting additional suggestions from anyone on speakers. I guess Lee's e-mail changes things. If the business school wants to go forward with a conference anyway then it may be a bad idea to have a separate one. Jeff has said he likes the idea of coordinating. Bill and Allen, what do you think? I will chime in that Carl Shapiro is very much a big wig, as a former chief economist at DOJ. As for the Frank Wolak suggestion, Frank is a Stanford economist who is an outstanding analyst and has published probably more than anyone else on electricity market design performance, regarding the UK, Australia, and California. He speaks a mile a minute though and his understanding of policy and politics is a bit naive. I should note that ICF will not be able to contribute. I heard from Michael Berg this morning. So he will not be participating in our discussions either. My opinion is let's do whatever is best for the school. One positive outcome of this would be stronger relationships with some of the University's top notch economic policy faculty. Overshadowing is possible. Lee, does Dean Nacht have a view on joint sponsorship? Rob > -----Original Message----- > From: Lee S. Friedman > Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2000 2:56 PM > To: Rob Gramlich > Subject: Possible co-sponsorships > > Rob, I'd send this to the whole group but I am at a different computer today > and don't have all the email addresses. Perhaps you can forward this. > > I just received a phone call from Carl Shapiro. He began by saying that he > and several people from the Business School (Severin Borenstein, George > Cluff) are planning an electricity deregulation mini-conference that sounds > exactly like ours, and wanted to check so that we don't step on each others > toes and perhaps can do it together. They even had October in mind for their > timing. We are further along then they are, however. > > My first response to him was that because our event is alumni-initiated, I > am not sure that they would want this to be other than a GSPP event. By the > end of our conversation, we were discussing GSPP co-sponsorship with two > other campus units: IBER and UEI. Neither are schools. Carl is Director of > the Institute for Business and Economics Research, a campus-wide organized > research unit (and Rich Gilbert assists in this). UEI is Severin's group, > the university-wide energy research institute. Carl suggested that they > could help with administration and perhaps some modest support if we do this > together. Carl himself is on the Market Surveillance Committee of the ISO, > and I think would hope to have some speaking role. He also mentioned Frank > Wolak of Stanford as a speaker. > > I think it would be good to try and work out this co-sponsorship. It would > mean allowing some of them (Carl and Severin?) into our planning group. > There connections are probably very valuable to us, and they really are on > the same wavelength. The alternative of GSPP going it alone after this > initiative seems to me to be bad feelings and crossed-wires that would be no > good to anyone. Reactions? > > Lee [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= L.A. Confidential has been received.; [EMail-Body]= [IMAGE] Qwiklist(9) MyAccount Rental History Shipping List We have received L.A. Confidential(1997) on 12/31/2001 We will be processing your QwikList selections and will send the next available dvd on your QwikList. You will receive another email when it ships. Thank You! [IMAGE] L.A. Confidential(1997) Home | Customer Service | Rental Details [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: news/updates; [EMail-Body]= As to whether long term contracting by Cal. is a good idea, the answer is somewhat mixed. We were one of the early parties pointing out the problems with total reliance on the spot market and encouraging more forward contracting. Given the utilities' precarious financial position there were two options: 1) outsource the default provider obligation to the market (this is what we prefer but there was no political support for it), or 2) have the state put its credit behind the purchases. California is pursuing the latter, with CDWR prucahsing the utilities' requirements. In the short term, we have criticized the state's plan because it contemplates state takeover of the grid; state participation in power plant financing, construction, and ownership; and they have not made it clear that CDWR really has the money to pay for all the purchases. I am attaching text I have used as the base for a number of communications with policymakers. Mark Schroeder@ECT 03/11/2001 02:11 PM To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: news/updates In the press, I saw two news stories that I wondered if we (Enron) had any role/hand in, and what was the offical ""spin"" in both cases. 1) The FERC Order requiring something like 55-65 million dollars in refunds by generators (or did it include traders) for overcharging in California in December, if I recall my facts/news stories correctly, and 2) the reports of 40 companies entering into 10-year contracts with California (touted by Davis). Was Enron a contracting party? Do we think this is a good solution (I think I know the answer, but defer to your lead on this, so we stay on your message)? thanks mcs [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Dereg Articles; [EMail-Body]= Looks good Mark Palmer 09/27/2000 02:09 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Re: Dereg Articles Here's the draft that Allegretti is sending. ----- Forwarded by Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron on 09/27/2000 02:09 PM ----- Mark Palmer 09/26/2000 04:08 PM To: Daniel Allegretti/HOU/EES@EES cc: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: Dereg Articles I've taken the editor's pencil to Dan's draft. Here's the result: Kirk Johnson's September 26th article, Debate on Need for New Power Plants Ignores Conservation, leaves readers with the misperception that competitive electricity markets discourage conservation. True customer choice proves otherwise. My company supplies electricity to a number of businesses in Maine. One of these customers is a paper mill that uses more electricity than thousands of homes. When New England power prices temporarily spiked last May, we actually paid the mill to shut down ... which they were more than happy to do. As a result, the customer made money, the grid worked better, and residential customers didn't hear a word about ""brownouts."" The financial rewards in the open market create much better incentives to conserve than do the bureaucratic, one-size-fits-all programs of the regulatory elite. It's proving true in Maine, why not give New York and other states the same choice? Dan Allegretti Enron Corp. If you like it, send it to the Letters to the Editor section at the New York Times. The protocol is on the editorial page. Thanks for the quick response, Mark [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Confidential information; [EMail-Body]= Nanette: Changes are made. I'll have the attached document signed and faxed to you tonight. You can fax your executed document back to me at (713) 646-3490. Thanks, Leslie Hansen Nanette Crist <NCrist@prebon.com> 11/20/2000 03:38 PM To: ""'Leslie.Hansen@enron.com'"" <Leslie.Hansen@enron.com> cc: Subject: RE: Confidential information Leslie--A few nits. Prebon Energy Inc. in the first sentence should not have a comma. Clause (a) in the carve-out as to what constitutes Confidential Information should start ""that is or becomes..."" I would put ""as demonstrable by the receiving party"" in parens at the end of clause (c). That's it. If you want to have the agreement signed and faxed to me at 201-557-5973, I'll have George sign it tonight or in the morning before the call and send it back to you. Thanks. -----Original Message----- From: Leslie.Hansen@enron.com Sent: Monday, November 20, 2000 4:20 PM To: NCrist@prebon.com Subject: Re: Confidential information Importance: High Nanette: Attached please find a clean and red-lined version of the NDA. Let me know if it's acceptable and I will have it executed and sent to you. Leslie (See attached file: Prebon ETA.doc)(See attached file: Prebon ETA red-line.doc) [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= <<Concur Expense Document>> - General Expenses; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/13/2001 01:16 PM ----- eserver@enron.com 03/12/2001 12:24 PM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - General Expenses The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: John Hardy Jr Jr. Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: General Expenses Report Total: $12,435.04 Amount Due Employee: $89.90 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://nahou-wwxms01p [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 02/28/2001 02:19 PM ----- Miyung Buster@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 02/26/2001 09:03 AM To: Ann M Schmidt/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bryan Seyfried/LON/ECT@ECT, dcasse@whwg.com, dg27@pacbell.net, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron, filuntz@aol.com, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Janet Butler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeannie Mandelker/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Margaret Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Markus Fiala/LON/ECT@ECT, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT, Mike Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron, Nicholas O'Day/AP/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Stella Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@Enron, Mike Roan/ENRON@enronXgate, Alex Parsons/EU/Enron@Enron, Andrew Morrison/LON/ECT@ECT, lipsen@cisco.com, Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Energy Issues Riverside Press 2/23: ""Power line plan has new foes"" Contra Costa Times, 2/23: ""GOP in a fix over power crisis"" Sac Bee, Fri 2/23: ""Davis says State has tentative deal for Edison grid"" SF Chron 2/23: ""Utilities Search for Long-Term Fix During Breather..."" SJ Mercury 2/23: ""State's Energy Price Tag Increases"" LA Times 2/23: ""Paying for power still a big question"" Long Beach Press 2/23: ""Lowenthal returns utility money"" Sac Bee 2/23: Columnist Dan Walters: ""A power grab by politicians"" SF Chron, 2/23: ""Discount Urged Near Power Plants"" Sac Bee 2/23: ""At last, power alerts are lifted..."" Sac Bee 2/23: ""Davis' deadlines on energy much easier set than met"" SF Chron, 2/23: ""GOP Sees Power Crisis as Davis' Achilles' Heel"" Contra Costa Times 2/23: ""Pressure Is on Utilities to Accept Grid Sale"" SF Chron 2/23: ""Energy Firms Won't Pay All of Monster Debt PUC reverses, taxpayers could foot the bill "" San Diego Union, 2/23: ""Small electric producers OK big price cut"" Power line plan has new foes La Cresta residents vow to keep electricity equipment out of the Cleveland Forest and a wilderness area. By Thomas Buckley The Press-Enterprise LAKE ELSINORE A new group has raised its objections to Lake Elsinore's proposed hydroelectric plant and the power lines that might carry its electricity to San Diego County. On Thursday, the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District board set aside for further study later this month a motion by Director Gary Kelley to ensure that both the lines and the actual power plant that make up a $450 million proposal from Enron North America proceed together. But residents of La Cresta, a mountaintop community near where the lines might run, did not care whether the plant and lines happened together. Many of them do not want the lines to be there at all. ""We are resolved to keep power lines out of the Cleveland National Forest and the San Mateo Wilderness Area,"" said La Cresta resident Bill Stockmar. ""Our constituents and the local residents impacted by the proposed project are outraged and respectfully demand immediate intervention to stop this project at the planning level."" As it stands now, the power lines from the hydroelectric plant would run from Temescal Canyon to Camp Pendleton along the ridge line of the Elsinore Mountains just west of the lake. Those lines could run in a narrow strip of forest land just west of the La Cresta community. Enron project manager Rob Bakondy said the final determination of where the lines might run is not set, but he said the power lines could be built at least a year before the plant itself. Besides serving the hydroelectric plant, the power lines could be used to replace lines San Diego Gas and Electric wants to build through Murrieta and Temecula to bring power to San Diego. The water district also announced it is considering financing and building the lines itself. District General Manager John Rossi said Wednesday that it was too early to say exactly how the lines would be built, but that the district's building or owning the lines, or both, in cooperation with Enron is ""one possibility."" Board President Kris Anderson said it is too early to tell whether it would benefit the district to become so directly involved in the project. But he said the district would be able to borrow the approximately $50 million needed to build the lines at a lower interest rate than a private company could get. That difference, Anderson said, could mean extra dollars for the district. How Governor Davis' proposal to purchase thousands of miles of transmission lines from the ailing utilities will affect the project is not yet clear, said Enron spokeswoman Kathy Russeth. The timing of the construction of the project, if it is approved by state and federal regulators, will not be finally known until a contract between Enron and the water district has been agreed upon. That is expected to happen by the end of May. GOP in a fix over power crisis Leaders seek solutions that won't undercut past support for deregulation By Daniel Borenstein TIMES POLITICAL EDITOR California Republican Party leaders are trying desperately to politicize the state's electricity crisis by blaming Gray Davis, but it seems that the harder they try the more popular the Democratic governor becomes. The latest GOP push will come today when party leaders, meeting in Sacramento for the start of their three-day state convention, hold a hastily organized workshop on energy. ""We should be explaining to California that Gray Davis was asleep at the switch last year,"" said one of the scheduled speakers, Republican strategist Dan Schnur. ""But that message can only work if it's coupled with a proposal for an alternative solution."" So far, that hasn't happened. For all the complaints about Davis, Republicans are moving even slower. Looking to 2002, when Davis will stand for re-election, the GOP has run radio ads attacking the governor for delays. But the party has yet to distinguish itself with a solid plan of its own. ""If Republicans are able in the next couple of months to articulate a clear plan, which is different from the Democratic plan, yes, we can use it as a political message,"" said Stuart DeVeaux, spokesman for the California Republican Party. ""Are Republicans in Sacramento going to come up with a plan that articulates a future for our energy problem? I'm not telling you it's going to be revealed this weekend. It's my hope it will be articulated this weekend."" Republicans are caught in an ideological quagmire. Pushing for re-regulation of electricity conflicts with the party's basic tenet of less government interference. Conversely, arguing for full deregulation puts Republicans at odds with a solid majority of Californians. A Los Angeles Times poll taken Feb. 14-15 found that 60 percent of Californians want to go back to a regulated electricity industry, while 25 percent are opposed. The GOP problem is exacerbated because there is no easy policy solution to the energy mess, said Jack Pitney, government professor at Claremont McKenna College. ""It's difficult to see how we get out of this situation without considerable cost. If there were a silver bullet, somebody would have found it by now."" Republicans have attacked Davis for his plan to buy power lines from private utilities. ""Everybody agrees there's $1 billion or $2 billion in deferred maintenance,"" said GOP consultant Sal Russo, another speaker at the party's convention today. ""We need to be in this business like a hole in the head."" But the Times poll found that Californians, by a 52-36 margin, favor the idea. Moreover, Davis' job approval rating has climbed this year. In January, 49 percent approved and 25 percent disapproved. In February, it was up to 57-26. Californians give Davis better marks for handling the electricity crisis than they give President Bush. Republicans are going to have difficult time laying the political blame on Davis. ""It's 'Murder on the Orient Express.' Everybody did it,"" Pitney said. ""Although you can make a case that Davis was slow in reacting, no one can seriously pin him with the primary blame for the problem."" The deregulation bill passed the Legislature in 1996 with the strong support of both parties and a Republican governor, Pete Wilson. Senate Minority Leader Jim Brulte, R-Rancho Cucamonga, is considered one of the Republican Party's top strategists. He was also one of the leading proponents of the deregulation bill. For all of those reasons, Garry South, Davis' political strategist, said he does not fear a GOP attack on electricity. ""If the Republicans want to get into a full-out firefight over how this mess came about, I'm more than willing to play. They don't have a very good story to tell."" For now, Davis' political strength is stable. But the 2002 primary elections are still more than a year away, and the general election is a political eternity from now. ""If this isn't resolved, there is nothing to guarantee that there won't be a voter backlash against the government,"" said political analyst Sherry Bebitch Jeffe. ""And right now the government in California is the Democratic Party."" That's the message the Republicans want to drive home. But if they can't come up with their own alternative, they might have a hard time playing the blame game. Davis says state has tentative deal for Edison grid Updated: Feb. 23, 2001 - 4:42 p.m. LOS ANGELES -- After a week of intense closed-door negotiations with utility representatives, Gov. Gray Davis said Friday he had reached an ""agreement in principle"" with Southern California Edison to buy the utility's power lines for an estimated $2.7 billion. The deal also requires Edison International, the parent company of Edison, to sell cheap power to the state for a decade. ""This is the framework of a good, balanced deal,"" Davis said. ""It's not a final deal. There's a lot of work to be done, But we're making progress."" The governor said he did not expect customer rates to increase as a result of the deal. Edison did not immediately return calls seeking comment. The state has been in talks for a week to buy a total of 26,000 miles of transmission lines from Edison, Pacific Gas and Electric and Sempra Energy, which operates San Diego Gas & Electric. The total cost of the lines could range from $4.5 billion to $7 billion. The effort is intended to help restore the financial health of the state's two largest utilities, PG&E and Edison, both of which are near bankruptcy. The $2.7 billion price for the Edison lines amounts to 2.3 times the estimated book value, Davis said. The utilities say they have lost nearly $13 billion since June, trapped between soaring wholesale power prices and state-imposed rate caps for consumers. The tentative plan announced by Davis would allow Edison to issue bonds for a substantial portion of its losses. Davis said the state is making good progress in its talks with Sempra and ""some progress"" with PG&E. Thursday, Davis said he will not sign off on any grid buyout without all three utilities' participation. ""I do not believe we can make a satisfactory arrangement without 60 percent of the transmission grid, and that would require cooperation with PG&E,"" he said Friday. PG&E spokesman Ron Low said Thursday night that talks had ended with no resolution that day. ""These are complicated problems that will not be solved overnight,"" Low said. ""There are clearly some issues where we are very far apart."" Still, PG&E chief executive officer Robert Glynn Jr. said Friday the meeting with Davis was a ""milestone in the resolution of California's energy crisis"" and said he was willing to meet further to discuss the utility's proposal. ""Each utility's issues and opportunities in this crisis are different, and we believe that PG&E has proposed a detailed solution that balances ratepayer and shareholder interests,"" Glynn said in a statement issued Friday before the governor's news conference. The company said it would have no further comment. The tentative agreement also calls for: Edison parent Edison International to make payments to the utility of about $420 million. Edison International to commit the entire output of its Sunrise Mission power project at low, cost-based rates for 10 years. Davis said that arrangement could save ratepayers $500 million over the next two years. Edison to provide cost-based rates from generating plants it owns for another 10 years. Edison to drop its lawsuit against the California Public Utilities Commission claiming that imposed rate caps were illegal under federal law. ""This entire transaction, which I believe is fair and balanced for both sides, will be accomplished within the existing rate structure,"" Davis said. ""We will not be asking any more of consumers to allow this transaction to come to pass."" Davis said negotiations will continue in the coming days. Consumer advocate Harvey Rosenfield called the governor's plan ""an outrageous giveaway"" and predicted that if lawmakers didn't halt it, voters would revolt. ""The most outrageous part of this isn't even paying 2.3 times what the lines are worth, but then allowing the parent companies that siphoned off billions of dollars to pay only the tax payment they already owe,"" Rosenfield said. The Public Utilities Commission already regulates how much the utilities can charge for power their own plants generate, Rosenfield said. --By Leslie Gornstein, Associated Press Writer - Utilities Search for Long-Term Fix During Breather State purchase of power lines under discussion Friday,?February 23, 2001 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle Sacramento -- A break in the weather and a break in the energy crisis coincided yesterday, as California enjoyed its first day in more than a month without a power alert. With the short-term picture for power improving, representatives of the state's three troubled utilities met separately with Gov. Gray Davis and his staff to work on a longer-range fix for the power crisis that would include state purchase of the firms' transmission lines. Trouble loomed in at least one set of talks, however, as Pacific Gas and Electric Co. said it was ""very far"" from reaching a deal. The California Independent System Operator, which coordinates the flow of electricity through the state's power grid, removed all power alerts at about 9 a.m. yesterday. Spokeswoman Lorie O'Donley said that with springtime approaching and weather improving, and with some power plants coming back to full output from maintenance, the overall picture is brightening. ""We're optimistic,"" she said. ""We're coming into the spring season, the majority of generators have had their maintenance completed. But everything is dependent on the weather and temperature."" The last day California had no power alerts was Jan. 13. Since then, there have been two days of rolling blackouts in Northern California and many other days of Stage 3 alerts -- when power reserves dip below 1.5 percent of available capacity. The mildest alert, Stage 1, is declared when reserves are between 5 and 7 percent of capacity. The supply of power has been helped by warmer temperatures in other Western states, cutting demand there, and by an increase in generators on line in California, O'Donley said. Last week, when the state was still in Stage 3 alerts, 10,500 megawatts were offline in California. Yesterday, there were 8,200 megawatts offline, a difference that provides enough power for a couple million homes. O'Donley warned that the supply picture in California is still tight, and conservation still necessary. But the focus of attention was turning to Sacramento and Davis' talks with the utilities. Davis announced a plan last week for the state to purchase 26,000 miles of utility-owned transmission lines in exchange for backing bonds that allow the utilities to repay the almost $13 billion in debt they say they owe. While Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas and Electric have indicated willingness to sell their lines, PG&E has refused to comment on the proposal. It is not clear if PG&E is unwilling to sell or simply trying to strike a harder bargain. The utility had accumulated more debt than its Southern California counterparts, and also owns the largest part of the transmission line grid. Talks between Davis' staff and PG&E did not start until late yesterday afternoon, and indications were that they were more difficult than negotiations involving the other two utilities. ""They're just on a different page,"" Michael Peevey, the former Edison president who is Davis' chief negotiator, told Bloomberg News. PG&E spokesman Ron Low said, ""These are difficult problems that cannot be solved overnight. There are clearly some areas where we are very far apart."" Davis hopes to make an announcement with at least one of the utilities before leaving today for the four-day National Governors Association meeting in Washington, D.C. The union that represents some 11,000 PG&E employees, meanwhile, called on Davis to negotiate state ownership of two power plants under construction in which PG&E holds large stakes. Jack McNally, business manager of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 1245, in Walnut Creek told Davis in a letter that a transmission line takeover would be a ""grand experiment"" fraught with danger. Acquiring the two prospective power plants, in Kern and San Diego counties, would do more to address energy shortages than taking over transmission lines that need hundreds of millions of dollars in maintenance, union officials said. Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio countered that state acquisition of transmission lines ""would not affect one union job,"" as the state would simply lease the grid back to the utilities. Maviglio predicted union jobs would increase with investment in new capacity and system upgrades. Chronicle staff writers Patrick Hoge and Robert Salladay contributed to this report. State's energy price tag increases Published Friday, Feb. 23, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News BY DION NISSENBAUM Mercury News Sacramento Bureau SACRAMENTO -- California's energy crisis took another big bite out of the state budget Thursday when finance aides to Gov. Gray Davis announced that the cost of buying energy may top $3 billion by mid-March. In a move that raised new alarms for lawmakers, the governor's finance team for the third time this month asked for $500 million to buy electricity in the coming weeks while Davis tries to work out a deal to bail out the state's near-bankrupt utilities. That, combined with money spent last month to buy energy, could drain the state coffers of $3 billion by St. Patrick's Day. The request for more cash came on the same day that California spent its first day in weeks without an official energy emergency and Davis held critical talks with the heads of Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and San Diego Gas & Electric Co. The talks are aimed at rescuing the two companies and Southern California Edison from financial collapse. While Davis had expressed hope last week of working out a deal by today, sources said that an agreement still remains elusive. Until a compromise can be hammered out, the state is being forced to pay upward of $50 million a day from the general fund to buy electricity. State leaders expect that the money will eventually be repaid to the general fund under a $10 billion bond package. But lawmakers are growing increasingly concerned about the short-term impact on the state fiscal plan. Assemblywoman Carole Migden, D-San Francisco, said the latest request for more money could create ``greater concern and anxiety'' among lawmakers and added that the energy crisis was going to make it harder to fund other programs, such as support for abused children. ``It's going to be a bleak year for other budget priorities,'' said Migden, who is chairwoman of the powerful Assembly Appropriations Committee. Earlier this week, the state's independent financial analyst warned that the energy crisis could eat into state money the governor wants to spend on other things such as the environment and public safety. While lawmakers have so far bitten their tongues about the growing power price tag, Migden said the Legislature might be hesitant to allow the costs to go any higher. ``I can't imagine another infusion after this being required,'' Migden said. ``I think this has to be the last request because we're going to hit fundamental core programs.'' Waiting for bailout plan California stepped in to buy the energy last month after PG&E and Southern California Edison lost the financial wherewithal to do it themselves. At the time, state leaders reluctantly agreed to buy the energy for a short period of time as part of a larger plan for California to sign long-term contracts with power generators. But those negotiations have failed to produce much energy so far, and Davis said earlier this week that the power producers are hesitant to sign any deals until California agrees to a bailout plan for the utilities. On Thursday, one power producer -- Williams Cos. -- announced that it had signed a 10-year contract with the state to provide up to 1,400 megawatts of power to California. In a bid to work out the bailout plan, Davis and his advisers met Thursday and were to meet again today with top executives from all three electric utilities in financial trouble. The Democratic governor wants to buy 26,000 miles of high voltage transmission lines owned by the three companies in exchange for helping the utilities pay off $13 billion in debts. The utilities are being asked to protect thousands of acres of wilderness lands they own, hang onto power plants that provide the state with its cheapest electricity, and drop explosive lawsuits that could allow the companies to dramatically raise customer rates. But sources said talks have bogged down on the transmission line deal, which PG&E has been reluctant to accept. Alternative energy helps out While talks slogged along in the governor's office, state lawmakers announced that another key piece of the puzzle needed to solve the energy crisis was falling into place. State Sen. Jim Battin, R-Palm Desert, and Assemblyman Fred Keeley, D-Santa Cruz, said that alternative energy producers had agreed to dramatically lower their prices in a deal that could save California $3 billion to $4 billion. Those energy producers, nearly 700 wind, solar and natural gas-fired plants, provide about a third of the state's energy. Paying for power still a big question POWER CRISIS PG&E doesn't like the plan the PUC proposed to collect electricity costs By Mike Taugher TIMES STAFF WRITER Three weeks after Gov. Gray Davis signed into law the state's centerpiece for stabilizing energy costs, big differences remain over how the solutions will be implemented and who will pay for them. The plan, outlined in legislation known as AB1X, was intended first to stop the financial bleeding of California's two largest utilities by asking the state to buy enough unsecured power to keep the lights on. Next, the state would enter long-term contracts for less expensive power that would eventually lessen the need for more costly, last-minute electricity. But the state has balked at buying the entire portfolio of last-minute electricity that is needed, and a disagreement emerged Thursday over what portion of consumers' bills should be used to reimburse state coffers. Meanwhile, progress on completing contracts has been slow, although two were signed Thursday. A spokesman for Davis said more contracts for relatively low-cost power would be signed once the state bought the utilities' transmission lines and other assets, because then the utilities could pay their past-due bills. The governor said last week that he expected a deal with the utilities by today, but that might not happen. ""Clearly, there's been challenges getting long-term contracts, but we've turned the corner,"" said Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio. ""We've got three in the bank and 10 more once we get these deals (with the utilities) done."" Also Thursday, the Public Utilities Commission was poised to allow the state to collect the entire amount that customers pay specifically for electricity. But Pacific Gas & Electric Co. said it is entitled to deduct other costs from customers' payments before reimbursing the state. That would reduce payments from PG&E to the state by about half, according to the company. The PUC proposal was in response to a request from the state Department of Water Resources that it be allowed to start collecting money so that energy companies would be more willing to sell power to the agency. The two Republican-appointed commissioners of the PUC blocked the move, which needed four of five commissioners' approval to reach the agenda. ""DWR's (action) is exacerbating a problem AB1X was meant to alleviate,"" said Commissioner Richard Bilas. ""It is pushing the utilities closer to bankruptcy."" PG&E spokesman John Nelson said the proposal brought by PUC President Loretta Lynch would have been unfair to the utilities because AB1X allows them to deduct expenses for buying electricity and generating energy at their own power plants before reimbursing the state. ""All of those costs need to be paid going forward. Otherwise, you still leave the utilities to bleed,"" Nelson said. That stance appeared to be at odds with the office of Assemblyman Fred Keeley, the Boulder Creek Democrat who wrote AB1X. ""For PG&E to think it can keep money for electrons it never even owned is astounding to us,"" said Guy Phillips, a Keeley aide. While nothing has gone smoothly, Phillips and others expressed optimism that the state's biggest effort to date to fix the energy crisis would work. ""We think those will be sorted out,"" said Phillips, who acknowledged there has been much confusion about what lawmakers intended in AB1X. For example, Keeley's office said lawmakers wanted the water resources agency to make up the entire amount of electricity that the state's two largest utilities had not secured ahead of time. The high cost of this last-minute electricity -- and the utilities' heavy reliance on it -- is what drove PG&E and Southern California Edison to the brink of bankruptcy. But the water agency has balked at buying electricity offered at prices it calls ""unreasonable."" While state officials have refused to say how much electricity it has left to utilities to purchase, the state is paying about $55 million a day to keep electricity flowing. And that amounts to about 90 percent of the electricity purchased on behalf of the utilities on the same day it is needed, according to Phillips. The state's reluctance to buy all of the so-called real-time electricity has led to fears that the utilities will continue to run up debt and that power companies will not collect money owed to them. That dispute has landed in federal court, where a Sacramento judge is forcing three major power suppliers and a marketing company to continue selling power in the state. If a settlement is not reached today, U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell is expected to decide whether to extend his order, to modify it or to drop it. Staff writer Andrew LaMar contributed to this story. Lowenthal returns utility money By Will Shuck From our Sacramento Bureau SACRAMENTO Assemblyman Alan Lowenthal, D-Long Beach, this week joined a small group of legislators who returned campaign contributions to California utility companies and other energy firms. He sent $5,000 back to Southern California Edison and $500 to Sempra Energy, parent company of Southern California Gas. It was a small portion of the more than Lowenthal $500,000 Lowenthal had raised in 2000 for his re-election campaign. He said he returned the money, as did nine other Assembly members, at the urging of the consumer advocacy group Global Exchange. ""We think it's fantastic that he has recognized that in the eyes of the public there is a very serious potential conflict of interest,"" said group spokeswoman Medea Benjamin. ""We applaud him for wanting to ensure the integrity of the legislative process."" While Benjamin says it's critical that lawmakers not be tainted by energy money during the state's power crisis, others wonder where the line should be drawn. ""In the real world of politics it costs money to run for office and you have to get that money somewhere,"" said Paul Schmidt, a political science professor at Cal State Long Beach. ""To say that you can only make decisions on things involving individuals that haven't given you any money would result in paralysis of government."" Benjamin and other consumer advocates say the power crisis calls for special consideration. ""There are not many cases in which they're actually voting whether a company will survive with billions of dollars of taxpayer money or go bankrupt, as they're doing with the utility companies,"" Benjamin said. Lowenthal agreed. ""I thought it was an appropriate request,"" he said. ""These are unique circumstances, and I just think it's in the public's best interest that I return that money."" Dan Walters: A power grab by politicians (Published Feb. 23, 2001) Slowly, but inexorably, control over the generation, acquisition and distribution of electric power in California is being shifted from professional utility managers and independent regulators into the hands of politicians. The 1996 utility ""deregulation"" scheme enacted by the Legislature was an initial foray into politicization. Legislation granting the governor more control over the makeup of the Public Utilities Commission was another. But the current power supply/price crisis has led to even more direct political influence over -- or interference with -- electric service. One hastily enacted bill, for example, gives the governor direct control of the now-misnamed ""Independent System Operator,"" which operates the statewide power grid. More political intrusion is in the works, from a state takeover of the intercity power transmission grid to the creation of a state power authority that would buy, generate and sell electricity directly. And while local public utilities function well, a state power agency might operate on the whims of professional politicians. The Legislature, for example, wants appointments to the board that would direct a state power authority, and big state power projects would be subject to the same kind of pork-barrel mentality that distorts other public works appropriations. Where power plants were to be built, or where high-voltage lines would be strung, might well depend on who could, and could not, bring political influence to bear, rather than what the system needed to work efficiently. Clues to the potential pitfalls of a state-operated power system are found in the approaches of Capitol politicians to the current crisis. There is, for example, the unspoken goal of avoiding big power rate boosts until after the November 2002 election -- even if it means running up billions of dollars in debts to do it. Would future rates charged by a state power authority be raised or lowered to enhance the prospects of the dominant party or an incumbent governor? There's no evidence in past performances to indicate they wouldn't be. And then there's the knotty question of who would get vital power supplies in the event of shortages -- a situation that is already looming and could become worse in future months. Emergency legislation already gives the state the right to sell power as it pleases, without competitive bidding or even public notice. There's nothing, really, to prevent politically influential power customers such as big industrial enterprises from cutting their own supply deals with politically directed state officials. And whose juice would be cut off if shortages mean blackouts? Approximately 45 percent of current power customers are effectively exempt from rolling blackouts because they are connected to circuits (called ""blocks"") that also include vital services, such as hospitals, fire and police agencies, water supply systems and communications centers. The Capitol, not surprisingly, is in one of those noninterruptible blocks. With the threat of further blackouts looming, legislation is being drafted to designate which customers will suffer and which will not -- thus taking that authority out of the hands of utilities and regulators. And that, in turn, is generating pressure from lobbyists from all sorts of interest groups to place their clients on protected lists. Should farmers be cut off, or biotechnology facilities, or computer chip plants, or schools? When politicians control any process or system, one can be certain that they will always make expedient political decisions, regardless of the long-term or wider consequences. Thus, we may someday regret allowing the Capitol's self-serving politicians to get their hands on our electric power system. Discount Urged Near Power Plants Senator urges electricity rate break for neighbors of generators Friday,?February 23, 2001 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle As California officials propose building 32 new ""peaker"" power plants across the state by July, one legislator from plant-rich eastern Contra Costa County thinks residents should get a discount on their power bill for having a generator in their backyard. The proposed bill would provide a little payback for residents of state Sen. Tom Torlakson's district, which is home to a half-dozen plants and has three more in the construction pipeline. Under the bill introduced yesterday by Torlakson, D-Antioch, people living within a 20-mile circle around a power plant would receive a 20 percent discount on their electricity bill and be exempt from blackouts. The legislation was partially inspired by San Jose officials' rejecting a proposal to build a 600-megawatt power plant in the Coyote Valley, as well as Gov. Gray Davis' plan to build 5,000 megawatts of new generating capacity by July 1. ""It's a question of fairness,"" Torlakson said. ""People in communities who are shouldering the burden for having plants in their backyard should get some benefit from it."" Torlakson said consumers who lived in communities without plants could pick up the tab for the discounts. ""But the utilities would have to figure that out within their rate system,"" he said. A PG&E spokesman said yesterday that the company does not comment on pending legislation. While consumer advocates, environmentalists and power generators were lukewarm to the proposal yesterday, many admit that the state has not thought about how to -- of even if they have to -- offer communities a little incentive to approve a power plant within their borders. However, the state has allocated $30 million for plants that get online by July 1. ""As far as incentives, I'd think most communities would see the value of the employment they'd get and the increase to the tax base,"" said Larry Hamlin, the governor's recently appointed project manager for the plant-building campaign. A spokesman for California's Environmental Protection Agency, which permits plants, said the plan might be a ""worthwhile idea for making power plants more palatable to Californians."" Michael Shames, head of Utility Consumer Action Network in San Diego said the bill was attacking a ""not in my back yard"" problem that doesn't exist. ""Many San Diego communities are clamoring for plants in the hope that they would bring stability to the market,"" he said. James Peters of Mirent, the Atlanta-based company formerly known as Southern Energy, said the plan wouldn't encourage generators to build the number of plants needed to solve the energy crisis. Already, communities like Pittsburg have cut deals with power generators before letting them build. In exchange for letting the Calpine Corp. build two large plants in town, Pittsburg received the lifetime option to purchase 100 megawatts of power at below-market rates. Next week, a Pittsburg group is going to begin gathering signatures demanding that city leaders use the estimated 26 megawatts it would take to light residences and businesses to give local residents a break on bills. The group will hold an organizational meeting at 7 p.m. Tuesday at the Los Medanos Community Hospital, 2311 Loveridge Rd. in Pittsburg. At last, power alerts are lifted: Enjoy respite because crisis far from resolved, experts say By Carrie Peyton Bee Staff Writer (Published Feb. 23, 2001) As oddly as it arrived, California's electric emergency lifted Thursday morning. At 9 a.m., the Independent System Operator, which controls most of California's grid, ended a Stage 1 alert. It was the first time since Jan. 13 that the state hadn't been under a power emergency, declared when low supplies threaten grid stability. The alerts included 32 straight days of Stage 3 emergencies, the black clouds that gather before rotating outages. The clouds cleared on a day when predicted peak use was low -- but not the lowest it has been for the last five weeks. Many power plants were back on line after repairs -- but more plants had been operating during at least one Stage 3 day. So what happened? A little luck, a little planning and maybe a little group psychology, said those who have closely watched recent gyrations of the state's electric roller coaster. ""It is a roll of the dice,"" said Gary Ackerman, head of the Western Power Trading Forum, which represents plant owners and marketers. ""If it continues for the next three or four weeks I wouldn't be too surprised. That'll be our respite. Enjoy it."" The end of a 40-day string of emergencies could mean a few more lights in store aisles or a little less worry about running an electric furnace. Some speculated it might also mean lower wholesale prices. But major changes are not likely in the steady rain of conservation calls that have fallen on Californians since the north state was twice plunged into rotating blackouts last month. ""I hope people don't just go back to wasteful ways,"" said Mike Florio of The Utility Reform Network, a consumer group. Now that the emergencies have dissipated, ""we don't have to talk about imposing hardships on people, but prudent use of energy is an idea we're going to have to live with for a long time,"" he said. At the ISO, longer days and slightly warmer weather was credited with decreasing peak demand for electricity. Supplies are up within the state, and power imports from the Pacific Northwest have risen significantly, said Jim Detmers, who manages grid operations. Plus, in one of the biggest changes, the state Department of Water Resources has begun getting more power supplies lined up at least a day in advance, he said. Since the department stepped in to buy power on behalf of cash-strapped utilities, it has often managed to line up about 70 percent to 75 percent of what the state needed to supplement utility-controlled supplies, according to Detmers. That meant grid operators had to scramble to buy the rest on very short notice. But starting last Friday, the state began to schedule about 90 percent of its purchases at least one day in advance. ""The operators are able to enter a day with a lot more confidence about being able to make it,"" Detmers said. ""You don't have to search to find those megawatts at the last minute."" Closely in sync with increased purchases by the state, the ISO dropped from a Stage 3 emergency to Stage 2 on Friday, and then slid to a Stage 1 Wednesday. The stages are based on how much reserve power is left for unexpected crises; a Stage 3 is declared when reserves slip below 1.5 percent. For their part, power buyers at the water resources department weren't sure what has made the difference over the past few days. ""It's certainly not that people are lining up to sell us power at cheap prices,"" said Jim Spence, the department's director of emergency operations. ""We're just buying whatever we can, and it turned out that it was easier to make ends meet."" He said he couldn't make any prediction about how long that would last. The string of power emergencies has been unpredictable from the start, erupting in winter, when California's hunger for electricity traditionally declines and supplies are usually so flush that plants close for tune-ups. Consumer advocates and power traders blamed finances for the emergencies, rather than a fundamental lack of supply, as fears of utility bankruptcies triggered a descent into market chaos and high-stakes political maneuvering. But basic supply shortages are expected to move to the forefront by summer, when temperatures rise and demand soars. Meanwhile, the brief respite -- whatever the reason -- brought palpable relief to those charged with keeping the power grid stable. ""When we found out yesterday during the board meeting that we were only in Stage 1, we broke out in applause,"" said Florio, who sits on the five-member ISO board. The change also could be good news for consumers, who may one day be paying higher rates for the wholesale electricity now being purchased by the state. ""Getting out of a Stage 3 typically means prices are going to ease,"" Florio said. ""When you're even in a Stage 1, that's a signal to everybody, 'They're short, that means we can hold them up now.' "" Davis' deadlines on energy much easier set than met By Emily Bazar Bee Staff Writer (Published Feb. 23, 2001) Exactly one week ago, Gov. Gray Davis sounded hopeful, optimistic even, when he predicted that the state and its debt-ridden utilities would forge an agreement by today on a plan to save the companies from financial doom. Problem is, it won't work out that way. Negotiations between state officials and the investor-owned utilities have produced no comprehensive agreement to announce today. Davis' predictions during the energy crisis have been wrong before. For weeks, he has set deadlines for agreements and legislative action that haven't been met. On deadline days, even when there's little substantive progress to report, Davis often holds news conferences anyway -- many of them on Friday afternoons after financial markets close. The Democratic governor's office scheduled an ""announcement"" for today in Los Angeles, even though one utility representative said agreement is far away. Davis' actions have fueled speculation that he's trying to force consensus by setting artificial deadlines and putting a spin on the news, and tarnishing the state's credibility in the process. ""I can't see how you would negotiate such a complex deal, like the purchase of the transmission grid, in such a short period of time. It doesn't seem realistic,"" said Gary Ackerman of the Western Power Trading Forum, an association of wholesale generators. ""I guess the people I represent have turned it off. They have stopped listening. They hear it and say, 'OK, sure. Here's another photo op.' "" Last Friday, Davis told a gathering of reporters that state officials and the utilities would agree by today on a rescue plan for the utilities. ""I believe we'll have agreement before next week is out, on exactly what should go in a piece of legislation,"" he said at the time. ""And hopefully, that legislation will be passed by the end of the following week."" Legislative veterans said his comments were ill-advised and unrealistic. Davis met into the night Thursday with top officials of Pacific Gas and Electric Co., but no agrement was reached. ""These are complicated problems that will not be solved overnight,"" said PG&E spokesman Ron Low. ""On some issues, we are very far away from agreement."" Sources said PG&E has been unwilling to negotiate sale of its transmission lines, which Davis has said is a necessary component of a deal. More progress was reported with the two other near-bankrupt companies -- San Diego Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison -- although sources said talks with them were far from concluded. Davis has been setting specific deadlines for himself and the Legislature for months: In November, the governor promised to present a comprehensive ""plan"" by Dec. 1 to stave off a full-blown energy crisis, but ended up offering only a modest slate of proposals. Davis called Feb. 12 a ""drop dead"" date by which he hoped to cement a deal between lawmakers and the utilities. There's no deal yet. Davis told reporters that he and the state's legislative leaders would reach a ""consensus agreement"" on the proposal to take to utilities by last Friday. It didn't happen; he made the announcement alone. Leon Panetta, a White House chief of staff under former President Clinton, said it's important that the governor set deadlines because the nature of politics is to delay. However, he cautioned against missing deadlines. ""You have to be careful that you keep the deadlines you establish, because the more that you establish and not meet, the more that begins to lose its value as a political tool,"" Panetta said. The governor can't continue to indefinitely set deadlines without facing consequences, cautioned Steven Fetter, managing director of the Global Power Group at Fitch, a credit-rating agency based in New York. At some point, he warned, creditors and power suppliers may push the utilities into involuntary bankruptcy, which would trigger an official deadline that can't be ignored. The dispute would be tied up in court at a judge's discretion. ""Eventually, there is going to be a real deadline,"" Fetter said. ""The problem is it's probably not a deadline that will be set by Gov. Davis. It's a deadline that will be set by the banks and the (electricity) suppliers."" In several cases when deadlines haven't been met, Davis has held a news conference regardless, unveiling little new information and scant detail. On Jan. 26, for instance, the governor promoted the broad framework of a plan to save the utilities rather than a detailed plan that had been anticipated. One prong of the plan: ""Aggressively promote energy efficiency, conservation and demand reduction among consumers, businesses and public entities."" Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio said that the governor continues to set deadlines because it's important to show that the state is making progress, particularly to Wall Street. He added that it's not the governor's fault the deadlines have been missed. ""Many of the dates have been blown away by factors no one has been able to foresee or have control over: court decisions, actions by creditors, weather, you name it,"" Maviglio said. ""The governor sets deadlines that continue to move the ball forward and he has been successful at doing that."" Many of these announcements came after 2 p.m. on Fridays, triggering suggestions that the governor has attempted to spin the facts and manipulate the markets. Timing announcements after the close of East Coast financial markets is commonly used by politicians who don't want to send stocks soaring or tumbling by making an announcement, Panetta said. ""You want people to evaluate what's happening so there isn't a panic reaction to a news flash going over the wire,"" he said. But market analysts say that ever since PG&E and Edison stocks plummeted in early January, the governor's statements haven't significantly affected their performance. ""There has been so much news that has been so negative for the companies that I don't think it makes much of a difference,"" said Ed Schuller, a senior vice president for the full-service brokerage firm Sutro & Co. ""It's beyond that point now."" GOP Sees Power Crisis as Davis' Achilles' Heel Republicans line up to run for governor Friday,?February 23, 2001 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle Democratic Gov. Gray Davis, politically wounded by the state's power woes, has become the target of a growing pack of Republicans looking to turn him out of office. ""Four months ago, Davis looked on track to get re-elected by a voice vote,"" said Dan Schnur, a GOP strategist. ""But the energy crisis has exposed vulnerabilities that have encouraged others to look at the (2002 governor's) race."" The governor's backers, however, are confident California voters will recognize Davis is dealing with a problem that has been brewing for years, through previous Republican administrations. ""If the Republicans want to have a full-out firefight over who brought this (energy crisis) down, we're ready for it,"" said Garry South, the governor's top political adviser. ""It's a fight they can't win."" With the primary election still more than a year away, no one but Davis is a sure bet to leap into the contest, but at least three names will be circulating when California Republicans meet in Sacramento this weekend for their state convention. Secretary of State Bill Jones, Los Angeles investor Bill Simon Jr. and actor Arnold Schwarzenegger all have made noises about challenging Davis, but so far their incipient campaigns have been more talk than action. Simon's effort might be the farthest along, but he also has the longest way to travel. A political unknown, the 49-year-old Simon runs his family's investment company and has been active in a number of charitable organizations in Southern California. Simon, whose father was treasury secretary under President Richard Nixon, has brought in veteran GOP consultant Sal Russo to study a possible run for governor. ""Bill Simon feels we need a governor who's prepared to lead and not one who's focused on fund-raising or the next political office,"" Russo said in a jab at Davis. Simon was an assistant U.S. attorney in New York, but founded William E. Simon & Sons with his brother and late father in 1988. The $2 billion private investment firm owns a number of companies and has also invested heavily in South of Market real estate in San Francisco. Wealthy political outsiders don't have an enviable record in recent California elections. Republican Michael Huffington spent $29 million to lose a 1994 Senate race to Dianne Feinstein. Darrell Issa dropped around $13 million in a losing race for the 1998 GOP Senate nomination. Al Checchi spent about $38 million of his own money to lose the Democratic primary to Davis in 1998. While Simon likely would be spending plenty of his own money on a governor's bid, he's working to get outside support, both political and financial, before committing to the race, Russo said. With the state's problems mounting and the economy increasingly shaky, the time may be ripe for a political unknown, he added. ""When things start going bad, people are willing to look outside for a new face, someone who will get things done,"" Russo said. Jones is anything but a political outsider. A veteran legislator from the Fresno area, he is now serving his second and last term as California's secretary of state. He managed to hang onto his job during the GOP's 1998 electoral debacle, which cost the party every other constitutional office. While Jones has long talked about a run for governor, he's still playing coy. ""We have not made any decision and probably won't make one until early March,"" said Rob Lapsley, one of Jones' top advisers. ""Right now we're putting together information for Bill to make a decision."" While Jones' role as the state's top GOP officeholder makes him an obvious choice to challenge Davis, he's made a number of political enemies over the years, many of them in his own party. His surprise decision last year to switch his support from George W. Bush to Arizona Sen. John McCain in California's presidential primary won him no fans among Bush supporters and could hurt his attempts to raise money for a gubernatorial bid. Money is a major problem for Jones, who listed $118,000 in his campaign fund last month, compared with nearly $26 million for Davis. Some of his opponents have suggested that fund-raising woes may force Jones to run for an office other than governor. ""Right now, we're focused on the governor's race,"" Lapsley insisted. The real Republican wild card is Schwarzenegger, the movie action hero who would be instantly recognized by nearly every California voter. While Schwarzenegger's publicist told The Chronicle last month that he had no plans to get involved in next year's governor's race, the Austrian-born star was on the telephone to a Los Angeles Times columnist days later, talking about his love for politics and his political ambitions. Fame, however, has its drawbacks, as the 53-year-old Schwarzenegger has found. An article in Premiere magazine entitled ""Arnold the Barbarian"" accused him of groping women on movie sets and generally boorish behavior, while the supermarket tabloids have him on the cover this week, suggesting that his marriage to Maria Shriver is on the rocks. South, Davis' political adviser, gleefully sent copies of the Premiere article to reporters across the state, suggesting that ""the piece lays out a real 'touching' story -- if you get what I mean."" Whoever ends up with the GOP nomination still will face an uphill battle against Davis, a popular governor and a ""take no prisoners"" campaigner. ""I've been predicting since Day One that the GOP would find some moneybags candidate to throw against Gray,"" South said. ""That's why we've kept our political and fund-raising operation going since election day."" Pressure Is on Utilities to Accept Grid Sale Energy: Gov. Davis wants accord today, but Edison executive says company might prefer bankruptcy. By DAN MORAIN and NANCY VOGEL, Times Staff Writers ?????SACRAMENTO--His credibility at risk and California's energy future on the line, Gov. Gray Davis on Thursday turned up the heat on the state's utilities to accept today a series of tentative rescue accords that would put the companies' transmission systems into public hands. ?????How far the utilities are willing to bend to the governor's intensified pressure was unclear late Thursday. Given Davis' mandate, a top executive of Southern California Edison said his company is now being forced to seriously contemplate whether it might fare better in Bankruptcy Court. ?????""We are weighing two very unpalatable alternatives,"" he said. ?????Two alternatives facing the utilities are either to sell their electrical transmission systems to the state at a price they consider too low or gamble in Bankruptcy Court that they could hang onto their valuable assets. ?????After nearly a week of negotiations, Davis administration officials said they hoped to announce today a partial deal that would calm the utilities' jittery creditors and help subdue California's runaway electricity market. ?????State officials said Thursday they were close to agreements with Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric but remained at odds with the state's biggest utility, Pacific Gas & Electric, which has balked at giving up its transmission grid. ?????""These are complex issues that cannot be resolved overnight,"" said PG&E spokesman Ron Lowe. ""There are clearly some areas where we are very far apart."" ?????On Thursday, Edison Chairman John Bryson conferred with members of his utility's board of directors. But by evening, the company's top executives still had not decided whether to acknowledge that an agreement is near. ?????Although the utility has begun to contemplate the protections of bankruptcy, it is unclear when, or if, such a dramatic action would occur. ?????Davis is believed to be offering roughly $7 billion for the utilities' transmission grids. The companies could use the cash to restructure their debt, which resulted from the utilities' inability to pass along their soaring wholesale electricity costs to ratepayers. ?????Davis has significant political and fiscal reasons for wanting to make an announcement today. He is scheduled to arrive in Washington for the National Governor's Assn. conference this weekend, meet with U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham on Sunday, and attend the Democratic Governors Assn. annual fund-raising dinner Monday night. ?????Davis, a prodigious fund-raiser, is chairman of the Democratic Governors Assn., and the dinner is expected to raise more than $5 million. Of that amount, Davis' political organization raised in excess of $1 million, said Garry South, his chief political advisor. ?????Any progress Davis can cite could help improve his national political standing. But his aides say it's especially important to be able to show at least a semblance of an agreement when he travels to New York on Wednesday to confer with Wall Street analysts. ?????On Thursday, those analysts reacted exuberantly to early hints from the governor's office that settlements with the utilities might be announced. ?????The recently anemic stocks of Edison International and PG&E Corp. soared on the New York Stock Exchange on a day when most utility stocks closed lower. ?????Edison jumped $1.50 per share, or 11.15%, to close at $14.95 while PG&E gained $1.49, or 11.41%, to $14.55 per share. ?????""That suggests that someone thinks something good is happening in Sacramento,"" said analyst James D. von Riesemann of Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co. ?????But some analysts fear investor enthusiasm might be hasty. ?????""I'm concerned that the governor's optimism may not coincide with all the parties at the table and it may not coincide with the Legislature,"" said Paul Patterson, utility analyst at Credit Suisse First Boston Corp. ?????Davis met Thursday with Steve Baum, chairman of Sempra, the parent company of SDG&E. Administration officials are confident that an agreement can be reached. But the San Diego company is the smallest of the state's three major private utilities, and its debt is far smaller--$605 million, compared to the combined $12.7 billion that Edison and PG&E say they have amassed. ?????""[Baum] is willing to listen,"" said Sempra spokesman Doug Kline. "" . . . We're on the record as stating that we are willing to consider the sale of those [transmission] assets if it helps solve the crisis."" ?????PG&E executives had been scheduled to start meeting with Davis at 11 a.m. Thursday. But in what was seen a slight against PG&E, Davis' aides did not summon negotiators for the Northern California utility, including company Chairman Robert Glynn, until after 3:30. ?????Although the parties continued to wrangle over details, there was progress Thursday on the sidelines. ?????State officials announced they had signed a long-term contract for a relatively small amount of electricity with a major energy supplier--an achievement that was perhaps more symbolic than substantive. ?????Tulsa-based Williams Cos. said it had agreed to a 10-year deal to sell power to the Department of Water Resources. By April, the company will provide at least 175 megawatts--enough electricity to supply 175,000 homes--at times of the day when demand for electricity soars. Such peak supplies will increase through next summer and reach 900 megawatts by 2006, according to Williams. ?????The agreement is only the second such long-term contract since Davis signed a bill Feb. 1 putting the Department of Water Resources into the power-buying business for many years to come. ?????At least 10 other power suppliers have reached understandings with the state, Davis said Wednesday. But those companies refuse to sign deals, the governor said, until the state finds a way to help California's two biggest utilities pay off their billion-dollar debts. ?????""As soon as we revitalize the utilities,"" the governor said, ""I think you'll see a lot of movement on long-term contracts."" ?????Another small but important piece of the state's energy plan emerged Thursday when legislation was introduced by Sen. Jim Battin (R-La Quinta) to slash the rates paid to alternative energy producers--a move expected to shave $3 billion or more in annual costs charged to the big private utilities. Reducing the amount paid to producers of renewable energy such as solar, wind and biomass power is considered a crucial step in keeping expected consumer rate hikes down. ?????And, after 40 days of dangerously low electricity supplies, the state got a reprieve Thursday morning when grid officials lifted the state's ""electrical emergency"" status for the first time since Jan. 13. ?????So far, the state has spent nearly $2 billion buying electricity on behalf of the utilities, according to the Department of Finance, which informed the Legislature on Thursday that it will release another $500 million for electricity purchases. --- ?????Times staff writers Nancy Rivera Brooks, Nancy Cleeland and Mitchell Landsberg in Los Angeles and Julie Tamaki and Jenifer Warren in Sacramento contributed to this story. Energy Firms Won't Pay All of Monster Debt PUC reverses, taxpayers could foot the bill Christian Berthelsen, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday,?February 23, 2001 Under a ruling yesterday by state regulators, California taxpayers could be on the hook for hundreds of millions of dollars in power purchases the state has made in behalf of two troubled utilities. The California Public Utilities Commission voted unanimously to absolve Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison of responsibility for any costs above the revenue they collect from ratepayers. The ruling reversed a position taken earlier by the commission, which had said the utilities were responsible for making up the difference between the state's costs and their own revenue. John Tremaine, a PG&E spokesman, said the funding needed to make up the difference could come in the form of a surcharge imposed on customers who use 130 percent of the baseline amount of electricity. That is one option under a bill passed last month by the Legislature, he said. But Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis, said the governor does not believe the money will come from ratepayers' electric bills. The costs, Maviglio said, could be covered by the $10 billion bond measure the state recently issued to cover power purchases. As California tries to resolve its power crisis, state officials are working out the precise way that should be done. Under the state's deregulation plan approved in 1996, the utilities have been forced to absorb skyrocketing wholesale electricity costs while being prevented by law from passing the increases on to customers through higher rates. Since the California Department of Water Resources began buying power last month, details showing how it will be repaid, how much or by whom have not been established. Yesterday's PUC decision was an attempt to begin setting the repayment criteria. A precise accounting of how much money is at stake is impossible to determine at this point, officials said, because PG&E declines to release ratepayer revenue figures, and the state is refusing to say exactly how much it has spent buying power. Officials estimate the state will spend $2.3 billion by the beginning of March and Davis authorized the expenditure of $500 million more yesterday. The state's Department of Water Resources became the buyer of record on Jan. 17 when the two utilities' credit was so damaged that they were no longer able to buy power. Both utilities had opposed the commission's previous position that they be responsible for all power costs. The PUC's shift yesterday was summed up by Commissioner Richard Bilas, who said he could not support holding the utilities responsible for the revenue shortfall. ""The DWR is not about to go bankrupt; the utilities are,"" he said. Yet consumer advocates downplayed the commission's ruling yesterday. Nettie Hoge, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, said the ruling only dealt with the narrow issue of who has to account for the revenue shortfall, and did not reach an overarching decision about who, ultimately, will be financially responsible for it. ""This is not a huge deal,"" she said. The state has been buying the lion's share of its power in the real-time market run by the Independent System Operator since the demise of the longer- term California Power Exchange, said Jesus Arredondo, a spokesman for the exchange. The state has been paying premium prices because it is buying in a market that was designed to handle last-minute emergencies. The governor's office has been seeking cheaper, long-term power contracts with only modest results. Small electric producers OK big price cut By Ed Mendel STAFF WRITER February 23, 2001 SACRAMENTO -- Legislators said yesterday that small generators who produce about 30 percent of the state's power have agreed to cut their power prices in half, an important step toward easing the electricity crisis. Negotiations continued on what Gov. Gray Davis has called the final step: the state purchase of the transmission systems of the three investor-owned utilities in exchange for paying off their huge debt. Meanwhile, the amount that the state is spending to buy power for the customers of the utilities grows. Officials gave notice that an additional $500 million will be needed in 10 days, bringing the total to $2.6 billion. But for the first time in nearly six weeks the state did not declare an alert yesterday due to power shortages. More power was available from other states, and some power plants that had been shut down for maintenance resumed operation. Two legislators, Sen. Jim Battin, R-Palm Desert, and Assemblyman Fred Keeley, D-Boulder Creek, said they introduced legislation that sharply reduces the prices paid to small generators after weeks of difficult negotiations. ""Ultimately, this bill will reduce the cost of energy to the state and its ratepayers by billions of dollars,"" said Battin, who represents eastern San Diego County. About half of the small generators use ""renewable"" technologies such as solar, wind, geothermal and biomass. The rest is ""co-generation,"" when fuel is used for industrial purposes and electricity is generated as a by-product. The small generators have grown to produce nearly a third of California's power under a two-decade-old federal ""qualifying facilities"" program, which requires utilities to buy their power. Battin and Keeley said that under the bill, SB 47X, the average price for these QF contracts could drop from the current 17 cents per kilowatt-hour to about 8 to 8.5 cents per kilowatt-hour. ""We believe that the rates are at least that low, if not lower,"" said Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of the Independent Energy Producers, which represents small and large generators. The small generators support the bill because it will give them a stable price for five years, avoiding ups and downs and the possibility that state regulators might make a more unfavorable price cut. Much of the current price formula is based on the price of natural gas at the California border, which has soared this winter. The legislation spreads the price bench mark over a five-year period. ""We encourage the Legislature to take quick action to approve SB 47X as quickly as possible to help stabilize the electricity crisis,"" Smutny-Jones said. He said one of the side agreements to the legislation is the creation of a portfolio of long-term contracts to purchase natural gas for some co-generators, lowering their production costs. The legislation was applauded as ""a major step forward"" by a group of small generators who formed a creditors committee last week and threatened to take the utilities into bankruptcy. ""We call on the Legislature and the governor to act on it immediately,"" said Chris Thompson, a spokesman for the group. Thompson said Southern California Edison continues to collect money from ratepayers, as the state buys power for its customers, but is not paying anything to the small non-polluting generators. A spokesman for a geothermal generator in El Centro, which filed a lawsuit seeking $45 million from Edison for power provided since November, welcomed the legislation for giving generators stability and ratepayers cheaper power. But Vince Signorotti, a spokesman for CalEnergy, said it would be ""premature"" to consider dropping the lawsuit. Battin and Keeley said that payment of the small generators depends on the governor's attempt to negotiate the purchase of the transmission systems of Edison, Pacific Gas and Electric, and San Diego Gas and Electric in exchange for payment of their debt. As part of the governor's plan, the utilities would agree to provide low-cost power for five to 10 years from their generators, which provide about a third of the state's power. Davis aides are attempting to negotiate long-term contracts with generators for the remaining third of the power required by the state, sharply reducing the cost of buying power on the expensive spot market. But the governor said this week that many generators are reluctant to sign long-term contracts until they know how the utilities will pay their debt for previous power purchases. The state called off all power alerts yesterday for the first time since mid-January, rescinding a Stage 1 alert declared Wednesday. Grid operators made the change after increased power supplies became available. ""The supply situation this week has gradually been improving,"" said Lorie O'Donley, a spokeswoman with the California Independent System Operator, which manages most of the state's power supplies. However, she said the improvements shouldn't deter consumers from conservation. ""It is good news to be out of electrical emergencies but we just want to remind everybody that we are looking at a long-term power supply situation here,"" she said. ""And the high-demand summer is just around the corner. So we would ask that people continue with their conservation efforts."" In San Francisco yesterday, state power regulators decided unanimously that the Department of Water Resources is responsible for buying any power that cash-strapped utilities are unable to generate or buy on their own -- no matter what price wholesalers are charging. But the PUC voted 3-2 against taking action that would have allowed the DWR to receive a portion of ratepayer revenues from the utilities to help cover the cost of buying electricity. The state, through the DWR, was authorized by a recent law to buy power for the utilities. Edison and PG&E have such low credit ratings that no power companies will sell to them. SDG&E's rating is much better, but its debt also was mounting. The DWR purchases that portion of electricity beyond what the utilities provide through their own generating plants and through existing long-term contracts. But the DWR has refused to buy power beyond a certain price. That means more last-minute power purchases on the expensive spot market. The utilities and the state had disagreed over how the DWR will be reimbursed -- whether through state bonds or ratepayer dollars -- and the extent of its power-buying role. The author of the bill authorizing the long-term contracts, Assemblyman Keeley, said the legislation's intent was to fully cover the one-third of the power that utilities purchased on the spot market, either through extended contracts or through the state ISO. Staff writer Karen Kucher and The Associated Press contributed to this report. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Conference Call to discuss E-Trans Roll-Out; [EMail-Body]= calendar ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/09/2000 03:31 PM ----- Marcia A Linton 10/09/2000 10:40 AM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Thane Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Brown/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Conference Call to discuss E-Trans Roll-Out A conference call has been set up from 9:30 - 10:30 am Wednesday, October 11 to discuss the roll-out plan for project E-Trans. The call in number is 888-476-3762, Host Code (for Jeff only) is 319346, Participant Code (for everyone else) is 697588. Conference room EB-47C1 in Houston has been reserved for this call. If you have any questions regarding this call, please give me a call at Ext. 33226. Thanks, Marcia [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Data responses in SDG&E -- confidential treatment; [EMail-Body]= PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL Appropos of Agave's phone message. Steve was in this loop. The discount reports are available to anyone who wants them under the Open Records Act. TK, you indicated that Agave thinks the rates were published somewhere by FERC -- I don't know whether that's true, but the bottom line is that FERC has the information in its files and could publish it any time at wants; we have no control over that. Let me know if you want me to talk with Agave's lawyers. ---------------------- Forwarded by Susan Scott/ET&S/Enron on 01/22/2001 04:09 PM --------------------------- Drew Fossum 01/12/2001 09:14 AM To: Susan Scott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON cc: Mary Kay Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Maria Pavlou/Enron@EnronXGate, Glen Hass/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON Subject: Re: Data responses in SDG&E -- confidential treatment I'm not remembering whether the discount reports are confidential or not, but if they are public (which I think is the case) then I agree with your recommendation. DF Susan Scott 01/11/2001 04:58 PM To: Mary Kay Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Drew Fossum@ENRON, Maria Pavlou/ET&S/Enron, Glen Hass/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Shelley Corman cc: Subject: Data responses in SDG&E -- confidential treatment After doing a little looking into what data about our contracts is publicly available, I've concluded that there is little if any basis for requesting confidential treatment for any of our responses to the FERC's data requests. My chief concern was the pre-637 contracts that are not in our transactional reports. Most of the discount letters include confidentiality provisions and we're required to seek confidential treatment if required to disclose the contracts. I was hoping to find that none of the information about these contracts had been disclosed in any public forum. However, I think our shippers (and TW) would be hard-pressed to claim that the info FERC is requesting is confidential. These shippers' names and contract rates are disclosed in our monthly discount reports to FERC. (I assume we do not seek confidential treatment of these reports -- let me know if I'm mistaken.) Quantities, expiration date and receipt and delivery points for these shippers' contracts appear on the Index of Customers on our website. I would recommend that we not request confidential treatment because I can find no convincing basis for saying this information is confidential. Let me know whether you concur. Thanks. <Embedded StdOleLink> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Houston 1996 - 2001; [EMail-Body]= I am so sorry. You guys gave him a really good life. ""Robert Kean"" <rkean@starband.net> on 07/07/2001 01:48:08 PM Please respond to <rkean@starband.net> To: ""Pat Hilleman \(E-mail\)"" <pat.hilleman@rsparch.com>, ""Greg Smith \(E-mail\)"" <grsmith@qwest.net>, ""Greg Smith \(E-mail 2\)"" <gregory_r_smith@uhc.com>, ""Colin Lamb \(E-mail\)"" <dsmcolin@home.com>, ""Maggie Kean \(E-mail\)"" <Ginny85956@aol.com>, ""Nora Kean \(E-mail\)"" <Beetle81088@aol.com>, ""Nora Kean \(E-mail 2\)"" <nora_kean@duchesne.org>, ""Sann & Evelyn Gossum \(E-mail\)"" <gossumr@worldnet.att.net>, ""Doug & Karen Reiman \(E-mail\)"" <dkreiman@mcleodusa.net>, ""Jean Kean \(E-mail\)"" <rex04@msn.com>, ""Kathy Wedig \(E-mail\)"" <kat.wedig@netzero.net>, ""Melissa Kean \(E-mail\)"" <kean@rice.edu>, ""Phil Kean \(E-mail\)"" <kean.philip@mcleodusa.net>, ""Steve & Melissa Kean \(E-mail\)"" <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: Houston 1996 - 2001 Houston died today after a long battle with Auto Immune Hemolytic Anemia. Rest in peace. Rob Kean [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: Sac Bee, Fri, 7/6: Two more say Duke withheld power: The company says it was responding to the state grid operator Sac Bee, Fri, 7/6: Lockyer seeks SEC investigation of PG&E's financial transfers LA Times, Fri, 7/6: California State Seeks SEC Probe of PG&E Transfers LA Times, Fri, 7/6: THE NATION Little Progress on Energy Rebate, Judge Hints SF Chron, Fri, 7/6: Davis energy team denied pay State controller says work for Edison is a conflict of interest SF Chron, Fri, 7/6: Ex-staff speaks out against Duke Two more charge prices manipulated SF Chron, Fri, 7/6: Vallejo to produce its own energy Conservation, generators expected to make city self-sufficient Mercury News, Fri, 7/6: SEC asked to see if PG&E Corp. violated law with subsidiary Mercury News, Fri, 7/6: Judge may speed up electricity refund talks Mercury News, Fri, 7/6: Davis keeps state addicted to fossil fuels (Commentary) Chicago Trib, Fri, 7/6: Economics fuels power solution in California Price relief gains political support Wash. Post, Fri, 7/6: California Changes Stance on Refunds; Two Sides Far Apart In Energy Talks WSJ, Fri, 7/6: U.S. Hearing Officer May Impose Pact To End California Power-Overcharge Case Two more say Duke withheld power: The company says it was responding to the state grid operator. By Kevin Yamamura Bee Capitol Bureau (Published July 6, 2001) Two more former workers from a Duke Energy power plant came forward Thursday to bolster recent claims by colleagues that the power generator withheld production to drive up prices. But Duke attributed witness accounts of fluctuating generation to instructions from the state's transmission-grid operator. Richard J. Connors, an auxiliary operator, and E. Robert Edwards, an electrician, said generation units at Duke's Chula Vista plant sat idle during emergency periods for no apparent reason. Three of their former co-workers -- two mechanics and a control room operator -- told lawmakers two weeks ago that Duke had disposed of new parts and varied its production. While that testimony drew significant attention, it was countered Monday by a report released by the state's Independent System Operator that showed the ISO had in fact ordered Duke's up-and-down output Jan. 16-18. On Thursday, the Charlotte, N.C.-based company leaned on the ISO report in its defense. ""The ISO could have dispatched those units at will,"" said Duke spokesman Tom Williams, referring to unused equipment. But Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante, who has filed a lawsuit against generators, contended that the ISO had based its orders on Duke's dubious bidding history. ""These ISO orders came only after Duke had continuously manipulated the market with price-gouging schemes forcing the ISO to regulate production,"" Bustamante said. Connors and Edwards each worked more than 20 years at the South Bay plant in Chula Vista. For most of that time, the plant was owned by San Diego Gas & Electric. Two years ago, Duke purchased South Bay and retained Connors and Edwards under state-mandated agreements that ended in April. Edwards said that during power blackouts in January, he saw a 225-megawatt unit off-line. Other units, he said, were operating far below capacity. ""Our No. 1 priority in life was to make money,"" Edwards said. Williams rebutted the claims as observations from those ""who did not have the complete picture."" ""It's dead on, dead true that there are times when that plant is not running at full capacity and there is a Stage 3,"" Williams said. ""There may be blackouts in San Francisco. But the reason why it's not running is because the power can't move up Path 15 (a north-south bottleneck)."" Bustamante, however, maintained that Duke has continued to manipulate the market, calling Connors and Edwards the ""tip of the iceberg"" in the price-gouging investigation. State Sen. Joe Dunn, D-Santa Ana, chairman of the Senate committee investigating price manipulation, said Connors and Edwards may testify before lawmakers after further evaluation. Dunn added that his committee has talked to potential whistleblowers from other power generators who said they have seen production decreases and suspicious activities. It is undetermined whether they will testify, he said. The Bee's Kevin Yamamura can be reached at (916) 326-5542 or kyamamura@sacbee.com. Lockyer seeks SEC investigation of PG&E's financial transfers By Ed Fletcher Bee Capitol Bureau (Published July 6, 2001) State Attorney General Bill Lockyer on Thursday asked the federal Securities and Exchange Commission to scrutinize financial transfers made to PG&E Corp. from its subsidiary that has filed for bankruptcy protection. ""SEC scrutiny is essential to protect the public interest, ratepayers and the people of the state of California,"" Lockyer said in a prepared statement. Charges that PG&E Corp. hastened the bankruptcy filing of Pacific Gas and Electric Co. have been made before, responded Greg Pruett, a vice president of PG&E Corp. ""That is an issue that has been investigated multiple times by the Public Utilities Commission earlier this year, by an Assembly oversight committee, and in each of these audits there has been no conclusion that the transfers were inappropriate or that they were injurious to PG&E Co.,"" Pruett said. In its filing with the SEC, the attorney general's office said that ""without meaningful review by the SEC, it cannot be determined what impact the transfer of assets ... may have on the financial condition of the bankrupt utility."" An SEC spokesman said the commission has yet to examine the petition. Among other concerns raised by Lockyer's office is the transfer of more than $4 billion from 1997 to 1999 to PG&E Corp. from PG&E Co. The majority of the $4 billion came from the sales of PG&E power plants, as was required by deregulation. ""The bulk of the money went to pay debt that was incurred to actually build those plants,"" Pruett said. The rest of the transfers were to pay stockholder dividends, he said. PG&E filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in April after having run up $6.6 billion in debt. The Bee's Ed Fletcher can be reached at (916) 326-5548 or efletcher@sacbee.com. Business; Financial Desk California State Seeks SEC Probe of PG&E Transfers NANCY RIVERA BROOKS ? 07/06/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition Page C-2 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company California Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer on Thursday asked the Securities and Exchange Commission to investigate PG&E Corp. for potential abuses of its responsibilities as a utility holding company. At issue is a series of transactions over the last several years in which PG&E Corp. transferred funds from its utility, Pacific Gas & Electric Co., which now is operating under Bankruptcy Court protection. The money--more than $4 billion since 1997--flowed to the parent company and to unregulated sister companies of the utilities. The transfers have been scrutinized by the California Public Utilities Commission and the state Legislature with no finding of wrongdoing, said PG&E Corp. spokesman Greg S. Pruett. The SEC currently exempts PG&E from almost all requirements of the Public Utility Holding Company Act because the San Francisco utility operates primarily within California . That law regulates transactions between holding companies and their utility subsidiaries. Lockyer wants the SEC to withdraw PG&E's exemption, citing $13 billion in PG&E assets outside of California . ""All the primary evils addressed by PUHCA are relevant to PG&E Corp.,"" Lockyer's petition to the SEC stated. In Bankruptcy Court on Thursday, PG&E said it is close to reaching an agreement with Calpine Corp. to pay more than $267 million it owes the San Jose-based power generator and to preserve contracts for 453 megawatts of relatively cheap electricity . In all, PG&E buys about 2,600 megawatts of electricity from nearly 25 alternative generators, which are seeking repayment and release from their contracts through Bankruptcy Court. National Desk THE NATION Little Progress on Energy Rebate, Judge Hints RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR ? 07/06/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition Page A-30 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company WASHINGTON -- The federal mediator seeking a settlement for billions of dollars in alleged electricity overcharges in California signaled Thursday that the talks are in trouble, and analysts said hope for a deal seems to be fading. Curtis L. Wagner Jr., chief judge of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, said he may issue a report on the closed-door talks as early as today if he sees no progress. ""The judge will perhaps issue a preliminary assessment of the talks,"" said Tamara Young-Allen, a spokeswoman for FERC. ""He will do this only if he feels the talks aren't moving along as he sees fit."" Originally, a preliminary report from the judge was not part of the plan. Wagner had previously said all sides would labor in private through the weekend to try to get a deal by Monday's midnight deadline. If that failed, the judge said he would take seven days to craft a proposed settlement for FERC's governing board. Kit Konolige, a power industry analyst with Morgan Stanley in New York, said Wagner's announcement on Thursday amounted to a judicial distress signal. ""The judge wouldn't say something like this if the parties were close to a settlement,"" said Konolige. ""I suppose he may be trying to jump-start things, but I think most people believed the sides were so far apart going into the talks that it seemed like a long way to go to reach a settlement."" Although Wagner has imposed a gag order on participants, several people with knowledge of the negotiations said Thursday that major power generators and California officials have not budged from dug-in positions since the talks began last week. They also said the judge is extremely frustrated with the state and with several large power suppliers. California is demanding $9 billion in refunds. According to sources, the generators have offered less than $1 billion. And some major power sellers are insisting they do not owe anything. Many experts say California has little hope of obtaining the $9 billion since only $5.4 billion of that is attributable to sellers under FERC's jurisdiction. On the other hand, it seems clear from statements by FERC commissioners that the board is prepared to extract significant refunds from generators. Wagner is said to be probing for a compromise figure between $1 billion and $9 billion. It could take the form of a mix of cash payments and discounts on long-term contracts for power. FERC's governing board ordered Wagner to hold the talks to see if a compromise could be struck on three big issues: refunds, guarantees that generators will be paid, and ways to shift more of the state's power purchases to long-term contracts. The board also made clear that it would impose its own settlement if the state and power sellers were unable to come to an agreement. Wagner said Thursday that if he issues a preliminary report today, he will give all the parties a chance to respond publicly on Monday. Such a report might embarrass some of the key players, since Wagner is known for his plain-spoken conclusions. The judge would then prepare a settlement recommendation for the FERC board by July 16. However, he also said he is willing to work through the weekend to reach a settlement if it appears within striking distance. The talks are in a large hearing room on the second floor of the FERC building near Washington's Union Station. Access is strictly controlled and special badges have been issued to the more than 140 lawyers participating. Some people with knowledge of the negotiations said Wagner's threat to issue a report may be a bid to see if one of the parties will make a move. ""It was like a shot across the bow,"" said one source. * RELATED STORIES Energy savers: College students help businesses cut waste. B1 SEC probe: The state urges a review of PG&E fund transfers. C2 'No' vote: Reliant Energy workers reject union representation. C2 Davis energy team denied pay State controller says work for Edison is a conflict of interest Robert Salladay, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau Friday, July 6, 2001 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle URL: N198197.DTL Sacramento -- State Controller Kathleen Connell is refusing to pay two former Clinton- Gore campaign operatives hired by Gov. Gray Davis, even though one of the consultants dropped his Southern California Edison contract amid conflict-of- interest allegations. Mark Fabiani and Chris Lehane were collectively known as the ""Masters of Disaster"" for their work in the Clinton White House during various federal investigations. They also worked for Vice President Al Gore during the 2000 presidential campaign. Because of their work for Davis, Connell says the contract Fabiani and Lehane signed with Edison is a conflict of interest under state ethics rules. Davis is negotiating with Edison on a bailout for the utility. Late last week, at the bottom of a press release, Davis announced that Fabiani was no longer a communications consultant because his work had been ""successfully implemented."" Lehane, on the other hand, has dropped his contract with Edison and signed a new agreement with Davis. Lehane's new contract includes reimbursement for travel and meal expenses, which he didn't have before, and requires him to work a maximum of 66 hours a month at $150 an hour. His total payments are capped at $76,000 for work from June 26 to Nov. 20, 2001. In his release, Davis said Lehane would be paid the same amount as former communications director Phil Trounstine, about $9,900 a month. But Connell, like Davis a Democrat, said Trounstine undoubtedly worked more than 66 hours in a month for his $9,990. ""We don't intend to be paying it,"" Connell said of the contract for both men. ""They represented Southern California Edison. You have to have a singular relationship with the state of California and not show a conflict."" Previously, the Davis administration said there was no conflict because Edison and Davis wanted the same things out of their negotiations. Earlier this week, Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio said attorneys had different opinions over whether the two consultants had violated ethics rules. Davis spokeswoman Hilary McLean said the governor had signed an executive order allowing him to enter into consulting contracts with anyone he believed could help him solve the state's energy crisis. She said Lehane had been working full-time on public policy, even though his contract caps his salary. The National Tax-Limitation Committee, a Sacramento group that mostly monitors legislation, sued last month alleging that Fabiani and Lehane were violating the state Political Reform Act because of the Edison contract. In a recently filed disclosure statement, Fabiani also listed more than $10, 000 worth of consulting work for Cisco Systems, another company that frequently brings issues before state authorities, including Davis. The state Fair Political Practices Commission also is looking into a complaint filed by GOP Secretary of State Bill Jones that Fabiani and Lehane violated state ethics rules. E-mail Robert Salladay at rsalladay@sfchronicle.com. ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 3 Ex-staff speaks out against Duke Two more charge prices manipulated Robert Salladay, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau Friday, July 6, 2001 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle URL: N122949.DTL Sacramento -- Two more former employees at Duke Energy's Chula Vista power plant came forward yesterday with allegations that the company manipulated the energy market to drive up prices, although they offered no hard proof and little new information. Their accusations bring to five the number of Duke plant workers who say they observed suspicious behavior, including the disappearance of parts needed for repairs, the idling of generators for no apparent reason, and continual stopping and starting that critics of Duke suspect was designed to withhold power and artificially increase prices. E. Robert Edwards, a 50-year-old electrician, related one conversation with a Duke foreman sometime in January that prompted suspicion. ""I asked the foreman why Unit 4 wasn't running,"" Edwards said yesterday at a press conference. ""We had a 225-megawatt generator sitting there, and he just shrugged his shoulders and said, 'I really can't tell you. I'm not privy to that information.' "" State lawmakers have been focusing on whether Duke manipulated prices during three days in January, when the company at one point offered a single megawatt of power for a record-shattering $3,880. Duke says it was following orders from the Independent System Operator, which runs the state's power grid, when it repeatedly turned its generators on and off during those three days. An ISO memo recently released by Duke confirms the company's contention it was under orders. But January logs from the ISO and the generators don't offer an explanation for every allegation of price manipulation, since Duke has refused to release a detailed list of the prices it offered and paid during that period. The two workers who came forward yesterday, Edwards and 46-year-old Richard J. Connors, both worked more than 20 years in the business. They left the South Bay Plant in Chula Vista in April, two years after Duke purchased it from San Diego Gas & Electric as part of deregulation. SOME SHIFTS UNPOPULAR ""It is true units were taken offline, mostly on the weekends for whatever reason,"" said Connors, a former auxiliary operator. ""It got to the point as an operator that you were dreading working swing shifts on Sunday or graveyard Monday morning because you knew you were going to be running around putting units back online."" Edwards said he had seen a company warehouse eventually emptied of parts that are used to repair broken generators, although he didn't know where the parts went. Forcing a longer wait for repair parts was designed to dry up the power supply and push prices higher, lawmakers and other investigators suspect. Edwards, however, admitted the warehouse was being cleaned out even when SDG&E ran the plant. Duke contends the workers weren't familiar with Duke's inventory system and couldn't possibly know why parts were being moved. Duke and other energy companies are facing scrutiny by two legislative committees, a 19-member Sacramento County grand jury, state Attorney General Bill Lockyer, the California Public Utilities Commission and federal regulators. BUSTAMANTE ALSO SUING Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante, who introduced Edwards and Connors yesterday, also is suing a variety of generators in state court for alleged price manipulation and bad business practices. He said Edwards and Connors ""reiterated what we've know all along -- Duke has been gouging California consumers through its use and abuse of the South Bay Plant."" Duke offers a variety of defenses for its actions during the three days in January and throughout the energy crisis. Tom Williams, a spokesman for Duke, said Edwards and Connors had offered nothing new yesterday. Beyond the ISO's 37 separate orders to stop and start generators during the three days in January, Williams said state air regulations required the company to shut the plant at certain times because it was running out of emissions credits that limit the amount of air pollution it can put out. Duke, which controls about 5 percent of the state energy market, also contends the state's power transmission lines can't always handle an increase in load. ""Yes, it's true there are times when that plant is not running at full capacity, and there is a Stage Three (alert), and there may be blackouts in San Francisco,"" Williams said. ""The reason why it's not running is the power cannot move up Path 15,"" the transmission line bottleneck near Los Banos. E-mail Robert Salladay at rsalladay@sfchronicle.com. ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 3 Vallejo to produce its own energy Conservation, generators expected to make city self-sufficient Jason B. Johnson, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday, July 6, 2001 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle URL: N138966.DTL Vallejo leaders, looking to escape mounting gas and electric bills, are planning to build enough new power generators that the city government will be self-sufficient when it comes to energy. City officials said they believe that Vallejo is the first city in the nation to take such an approach. ""This is going to be a showplace,"" said Scott Sossen, the chief executive officer of Edge Capital Group, a funding agency based in Orange County. Edge will be supervising the work along with O'Hara Energy Corp. of Nevada. The plan comes at a time when the city expects to see its energy costs double next year if it continues buying its power from PG&E. ""It couldn't be more timely,"" said Mayor Tony Intintoli. Vallejo leaders are in the process of contracting with private business to build new wind, solar and microturbine generators. Construction of a one- megawatt solar generator could start within 30 to 60 days. Conservation is also part of the plan, and energy-efficiency improvements are already under way at Vallejo City Hall and the fire and police stations. City officials hope to add enough sources of power generation to make all city offices -- which consume about 10 megawatts a year -- self-sufficient by the end of the year. The Vallejo City Council gave tentative approval to the project late last month and will continue its discussions on the plan next week. Vallejo taxpayers won't have to pay any money in advance, because Edge will finance the project's first $50 million in capital costs. In return, a portion of the city's projected financial savings will be shared with the Edge and O'Hara. ""This is a fairly sizable project,"" said Kevin Chambers, the chief executive officer at O'Hara. ""Energy-efficient capital is difficult to find because it is such a new field."" O'Hara is installing high-tech energy management systems at all city-owned property to reduce energy consumption. Final sites for the construction of new wind, solar and microturbine generators have not been chosen. In recent years, the energy bill for Vallejo city government has averaged between $2 million and $3 million per year. That includes the police and fire departments, City Hall and water-pumping stations. Vallejo is part of a group of 50 local governments in Northern California that pooled their resources to buy electricity and natural gas, keeping prices down. But the group's current contract expires Dec. 30. As a result, the city expects its energy bill to double next year, from 9.2 cents per kilowatt hour to 20 cents per kilowatt hour. ""It's been very positive what we've been doing, and it hasn't cost us anything,"" said City Manager David Martinez. ""We're going to be very optimistic that this is going to be a good thing for the city."" City officials hope to eventually extend the plan to Vallejo's 4,500 businesses and 37,000 households. E-mail Jason B. Johnson at jbjohnson@sfchronicle.com. ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 23 SEC asked to see if PG&E Corp. violated law with subsidiary Published Friday, July 6, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News BY JENNIFER BJORHUS Mercury News California Attorney General Bill Lockyer asked the federal Securities and Exchange Commission on Thursday to step in to investigate whether PG&E Corp. violated federal law in taking billions of dollars from its bankrupt subsidiary. ``SEC scrutiny is essential to protect the public interest, ratepayers and the people of the state of California,'' Lockyer said in a statement. More than $4 billion flowed from the Pacific Gas & Electric utility to parent PG&E Corp. from 1997 to 1999, according to Lockyer's petition, representing nearly 70 percent of the cash that flowed to the parent company during that period. PG&E Corp. spent $2.7 billion to buy back its stock, $1.5 billion to pay dividends to shareholders and invested $800 million in its other subsidiaries, according to the petition filed Thursday in Washington. Those figures are similar to figures from a state-ordered independent audit of PG&E Corp.'s finances released in late January. By moving assets from the utility to other businesses, the company potentially harmed the utility and violated the federal Public Utility Holding Company Act in several ways, according to the petition. The SEC is the nation's top cop for publicly held companies. But the commission has not reviewed PG&E Corp.'s asset movements, saying the company is exempt from scrutiny under the Public Utility Holding Company Act because it's mainly a California operation and such intrastate operations are exempt. The attorney general's office argues that PG&E Corp., with more than $13 billion of its assets outside the state, can no longer claim it is primarily an intrastate company. The SEC should step in, it argues. The petition surprised PG&E Corp. officials, who said they had no idea the attorney general's office had an issue with the company's exemption from the federal law, said company spokesman Greg Pruett. Pruett said PG&E Corp.'s actions were appropriate because the federal utility law only applies if a company has one or more of the following activities in several states: electric transmission and distribution, gas distribution or utility-owned generation. ``We have none of those things except in California,'' Pruett said, adding that the National Energy Group, a PG&E Corp. affiliate, ``has natural gas transmission but no distribution.'' ``The power plants that NEG owns or operates are not part of a utility and thus aren't regulated by PUCHA, and it has an energy-trading arm that is also not regulated by PUCHA,'' he said. The petition further asks the SEC to order PG&E Corp. to cooperate fully with the California Public Utilities Commission. The state commission is investigating whether PG&E Corp.'s corporate structure and its relationship with its bankrupt utility violate state utility regulations. The petition states it expects a response from the SEC within 60 days. But SEC spokesman John Heine said there's no statutory deadline for a response. He said he had not seen the petition and could not comment. Contact Jennifer Bjorhus at jbjorhus@sjmercury.com or (408) 920-5660. Judge may speed up electricity refund talks Published Friday, July 6, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News BY RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR Los Angeles Times WASHINGTON -- A federal mediator seeking a settlement for billions of dollars in alleged electricity overcharges in California signaled Thursday that the talks are in trouble. Curtis L. Wagner Jr., chief judge of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, said he may issue a report on the closed-door talks as early as today if progress is not made. ``The judge will perhaps issue a preliminary assessment of the talks,'' said Tamara Young-Allen, a FERC spokeswoman. ``He will do this only if he feels the talks aren't moving along as he sees fit.'' Wagner had previously said all sides would labor in private through the weekend to try to get a deal by the deadline of Monday at midnight. If that failed, the judge said, he would take seven days to craft a proposed settlement for FERC's governing board. California is demanding $9 billion in refunds. According to sources, the generators have offered less than $1 billion. Wagner is said to be probing for a compromise figure that could take the form of a mix of cash payments and discounts on long-term contracts for power. Davis keeps state addicted to fossil fuels Published Friday, July 6, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News BY JOE COSTELLO BEFORE this year's energy ``crisis,'' Gray Davis wanted to be known as the education governor. However, Davis and his advisers' energy teachings have revealed alarming failures, setting back state energy policy not one or two years, but one or two decades. While George W. Bush proposed an energy policy tied to fossil fuels, disproportionate building of centralized generation plants, too little energy efficiency, lowering environmental standards and increased global warming emissions, Davis enacted it. First, Davis has tied the state for the next decade or longer to contracts with facilities that are exclusively fossil fuel generation. Second, he has encouraged an unprecedented surge in the building of new centralized fossil fuel plants. Finally, he has pushed the lowering of environmental standards to increase production from the dirtiest fossil fuel facilities. The state's new energy purchasing department has spent zero on renewable generation. David Freeman, the governor's energy czar, giving lip service to alternatives, has negotiated close to $50 billion in long-term contracts with fossil fuel generators. By comparison, the governor has authorized investment of only $13 million in expanding solar generation. Photovoltaic cells produce electricity directly from the sun's energy, offering a clean, efficient solution to the state's future peak energy demand. While the governor talks a lot about energy efficiency, the state's funding of demand programs is about 1 percent of the funding for supply. Most egregious, the vast majority of state energy efficiency money is funneled back to the utilities. While environmentalists deride the Bush administration proposals, in California organizations such as the Natural Resources Defense Council actively support Davis' fossil fuel energy policy. The Davis energy policy has stuck California with the same old electric system for at least the next decade. Money has literally been burned instead of invested in innovation and creation of a cleaner and more efficient system. The best hedge against price spikes is a diversity of fuel sources, unfortunately California's electric system is now tied to an even greater degree to fossil fuels. After binding the state economy to the past, the Davis end game is logical. Davis and his energy advisers want to spend tens of billions of dollars for the utilities' restoration -- the very companies that for so long stifled industry innovation and remain most responsible for California's energy fiasco. There is still an opportunity to make the best out of a bad situation. Instead of bailing out the utilities, they should be dismantled and sold off. A combination of a dozen or so local government and publicly owned companies should be created with a goal of innovating the industry. An auction could be held that would sell customer blocks and with it the state's long-term contracts. Choice should be reinstated with the lifting of the suspension on direct access to alternative suppliers. Instead of moving the state to the next level of energy development, the education governor's remedial energy teachings will force California to repeat its energy lessons. Joe Costello is an energy and communications consultant based in Larkspur. Business Economics fuels power solution in California Price relief gains political support Robert Gibbons, BridgeNews ? 07/06/2001 Chicago Tribune North Sports Final ; N Page 3 (Copyright 2001 by the Chicago Tribune) Political pressure coming from the U.S. Congress and politicians from Western states seems to have influenced the approach to the power crisis, despite opposition to price caps in the Bush administration. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in June expanded price mitigation measures on wholesale electricity sales in California during periods when blackouts are possible. The measures encourage generators to sell power into the state to prevent emergency alerts from being declared, which trigger price caps. The move came with support growing in Congress, especially among representatives of Western states on both sides of the aisle, for legislation that would have capped wholesale prices in the region. The macroeconomic force may have been the difference between the $7 billion cost of power for California in 1999 and its rise to approximately $27 billion in 2000. The cost is estimated to reach between $50 billion and $70 billion in 2001. With that kind of money at stake, suddenly the concern becomes less a question of who is responsible for the problem, but rather, how it can be solved quickly to prevent harsh political consequences. California Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer has conducted an investigation into the actions of power generators and offered multimillion dollar rewards to whistleblowers to provide evidence of price manipulation by independent power generators. The state is seeking refunds of $8.9 billion, the amount it estimates independent power generators overcharged California 's troubled utilities. The U.S. General Accounting Office has released a report criticizing the FERC for not finding evidence of power generators using plant outages to drive up prices in California . ""FERC's [February] study was not thorough enough to support its overall conclusion that audited companies were not physically withholding electricity supply to influence prices,"" the GAO found. Of the major independent power generators and marketers, like Reliant Energy, Dynegy, Duke Energy and Enron, only Williams and its CEO Keith Bailey came out in April in favor of some sort of short- term price relief for California . ""The political dynamic out there is much more Draconian than what we're proposing,"" Bailey told analysts in April, defending Williams' position supporting some limited, short-term price mitigation. What he was worried about was California Gov. Gray Davis using eminent domain powers to take over power plants and the state setting up a public power authority to build state-owned plants. Financial California Changes Stance on Refunds; Two Sides Far Apart In Energy Talks Peter Behr ? 07/06/2001 The Washington Post FINAL Page E01 Copyright 2001, The Washington Post Co. All Rights Reserved California officials have abruptly shifted tactics in their attempt to recover billions of dollars in alleged overcharges for electricity , saying they may reduce their demands for huge refunds if generators renegotiate $43 billion in long-term electricity contracts that the state signed this year. Gov. Gray Davis (D) said part of the $8.9 billion in refunds the state is seeking could be offset by reductions in energy prices in the long-term contracts, whose costs have become a growing political embarrassment for Davis. ""We've made suggestions, we've offered various ways in which people could get us $8.9 billion,"" Davis told the San Jose Mercury News in a report yesterday. ""You can renegotiate our existing contracts and save us money. However you want to do it, it's just got to net out close to $8.9 billion."" The new offer was introduced this week into the closed negotiations over a California settlement being conducted in Washington by Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Judge Curtis L. Wagner Jr., according to sources close to the negotiations. Yesterday, Wagner said he may issue his own preliminary finding today on the amount of overcharges if California officials and the generators cannot reach a compromise. ""What I'm trying to do is get people in a settlement mood,"" Wagner told reporters. ""In the event we're unable to do that, [Friday] at some point I may offer a preliminary assessment."" The settlement conference is set to conclude on Monday. Wagner, FERC's chief administrative judge, has been trying to push both sides toward a compromise that would resolve the huge energy pricing controversy. Mountainous energy prices have bankrupted California 's largest utility, drained billions of dollars out of the state treasury and put Davis at sword's point with generators that help keep the state's lights on. Last Friday, Wagner rebuked Davis's chief representative, Michael Kahn, chairman of California Independent Grid Operator -- the state's power grid manager -- indicating that the state's demand for nearly $9 billion in refunds from power generators and marketers was too high, sources said. Wagner's settlement conference, which has involved more than 100 lawyers for all sides, is closed to the public and media. Wagner complained last month that Kahn was following a political agenda, and his lack of independence in the negotiations was such a ""joke"" that the parties might as well wear ""clown suits,"" according to a Dow Jones report confirmed by sources close to the talks. But he has also criticized the generators and power marketers, led by Reliant Energy Inc., Williams Energy Services, Duke Energy and Southern Co., for failing to make serious settlement offers, these sources said. The suppliers have offered to refund $600 million, provided the state is able to call off various California lawsuits demanding far larger refunds, sources said. Wagner's leverage is his ability to propose his own refund figure to FERC's commissioners. FERC has tentatively called for $124 million in refunds, but now is taking a harder line on preventing a new escalation of California 's electricity prices this summer and is likely to be receptive to a higher refund figure, some energy analysts believe. Davis's tactical change, offering to make the long-term contracts part of an overall settlement, comes amid growing criticism of what the state will have to pay for energy under those deals. California 's energy calamity stemmed in large part from its failed deregulation plan, which relied heavily on short-term power purchases at volatile ""spot market"" prices. When energy costs shot upward last summer, so did the state's electricity bills. In response, Davis's aide, S. David Freeman, and his staff began negotiating long-term power contacts with suppliers. The $43 billion in deals signed so far would require the state to pay about $70 per hour for a megawatt of power for a large part of the electricity it will need over the next 10 years. That's well under the average of $250 per megawatt-hour that the state was paying at the beginning of this year, but above current power prices -- and considerably higher than what electricity may cost in the next decade, energy analysts say. A new agreement to lower those contract prices could relieve political pressure on Davis and focus settlement negotiations away from the state's controversial demand for the $8.9 billion refund. Davis will argue that reducing future power charges that his administration negotiated should count as a ""refund"" because the deals were reached ""under commercial duress,"" according to sources close to Wagner's negotiations. Industry supporters say Davis's refund figure is impossible to justify. ""There's no benchmark for what a fair and reasonable price should be,"" said Michael Zenger, California director of Cambridge Energy Research Associates. The state's advocates counter that if FERC enforced a ""just and reasonable"" standard for power prices based on operating costs and a generous profit, the overcharges by all sellers could easily reach the $9 billion figure. ""It's not rocket science, but it does require the regulators to regulate,"" said Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economist who heads an oversight committee for the California grid. Those polar-opposite views have left both sides in Wagner's conference room ""billions of dollars apart,"" as the talks approached their final weekend, sources said. http://www.washingtonpost.com Contact: http://www.washingtonpost.com Politics & Policy U.S. Hearing Officer May Impose Pact To End California Power-Overcharge Case By Richard B. Schmitt ? 07/06/2001 The Wall Street Journal Page A10 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) WASHINGTON -- With settlement talks apparently stalled, a federal hearing officer said he may propose his own solution to settle billions in alleged electricity overcharges tied to the California power crisis. Curtis L. Wagner Jr. said he was still ""optimistic"" California officials and several power companies could come to terms on $8.9 billion in disputed electricity charges the state has incurred over the past year. Absent more-meaningful progress, he said he would offer his own ""preliminary assessment"" and recommendation as soon as today. In that event, Mr. Wagner also said, he would convene a hearing Monday where the two sides would be given the chance to comment on his plans. Mr. Wagner has previously indicated he feels California is due some refunds, but far less than the total the state claims. California is also indebted to the power companies for billions in previous deliveries; those debts could at least partially offset any refunds. Mr. Wagner has also said long-term contracts that would insulate the state from the sort of price shocks it has experienced over the past year could be part of any resolution. An administrative-law judge with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Mr. Wagner was named by the panel two weeks ago to broker a peace of the overcharge dispute. Commission officials have given the parties until Monday to reach an agreement behind closed doors. After that, absent a settlement, the commission has ordered Mr. Wagner to report back with his findings and recommendations within a week. At that point, the commission has said it will impose a settlement of its own liking. The overcharge issue has been a flash point in the California debacle, with the state's governor, Gray Davis, calling the energy companies ""pirates"" and ""marauders."" The industry considers itself a scapegoat for a bungled state deregulation effort. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= BABC-Houston Newsletter; [EMail-Body]= Please handle ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 03/10/99 06:06 PM --------------------------- babch <babch@renaissancehouse.com> on 03/10/99 10:03:56 AM To: ""Barry R. Brits"" <bbrits@anpower.com>, Bruce Rieser <bruce.rieser@bausa.com>, Catherine Gull <catherine.gull@cwusa.com>, David Preng <dpreng@preng.com>, Simon Phillips Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Steven Peacock <peacocsg@bp.com> cc: Subject: BABC-Houston Newsletter We are publishing photographs of board members in the upcoming issue of the BABC-Houston newsletter. Please provide us with a photo (in color if possible). Will you also include a short biography? Your response by this Friday will be helpful. We hope to have the newsletter out early next week. Thank you! [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Fwd: The Answer!; [EMail-Body]= enjoy! ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/24/2001 05:18 PM --------------------------- Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp. From: Rebecca W Cantrell @ ECT 05/24/2001 05:11 PM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Fwd: The Answer! I just had to share this with you. I hope you haven't seen it already. ---------------------- Forwarded by Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT on 05/24/2001 05:09 PM --------------------------- ""Randall Rich"" <rrich@bracepatt.com> on 05/24/2001 05:10:19 PM To: <llawner@enron.com>, cc: Subject: Fwd: The Answer! Thought you'd enjoy this. Received: from mcafee.bracepatt.com by mail.bracepatt.com; Thu, 24 May 2001 00:49:13 -0500 Received: FROM hountnmail1.ngccorp.com BY mcafee.bracepatt.com ; Thu May 24 00:59:27 2001 -0500 X-Proxy: keymaster.bracepatt.com protected From: Betsy.Carr@dynegy.com Subject: The Answer! To: tbradley@bracepatt.com, asettanni@bracepatt.com Sender: Betsy.Carr@dynegy.com Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 23:11:59 -0500 Message-ID: X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on 5.0.5 |September 22, 2000) at 05/24/2001 12:44:04 AM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/mixed ; Content-Disposition: inline finally....... (See attached file: windmilldavis.gif) - windmilldavis.gif [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Draft of Organizational Announcement; [EMail-Body]= As we discussed... The other memo will follow shortly from Maureen McVicker (my assistant). ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 06/12/2001 09:08 AM --------------------------- From: Sherri Sera/ENRON@enronXgate on 06/11/2001 04:51 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: FW: Draft of Organizational Announcement Steve, Kevin Garland sent this to me hoping to get Jeff's approval to send it out from the office of the chairman. Would it make sense to incorporate it into the memo you're working on? Please advise. Thanks, SRS -----Original Message----- From: Garland, Kevin Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 3:28 PM To: Sera, Sherri Subject: FW: Draft of Organizational Announcement Announcing the Formation of One Corporate Equity Investing Unit To better develop and manage equity investment opportunities related to our core businesses, Enron has formed one corporate equity investment unit. This new unit, Enron Principal Investments, will combine the existing investment units of ENA, EBS and Enron Investment Partners. Additionally, the Enron Special Asset Group will also become part of Enron Principal Investments. The strategy of Enron Principal Investments will be to work with all the business units of Enron to identify, execute, and manage equity investments, which leverage Enron's unique and proprietary knowledge. These investments may be in the form of venture capital, LBO's, traditional private equity and distressed debt positions. Kevin Garland will serve as Managing Director, overseeing all activities of Enron Principal Investments. Gene Humphrey, Michael Miller, Dick Lydecker, and their groups, will join Kevin and his group to form Enron Principal Investments. This new business unit will report to an investment committee, consisting of Greg Whalley, Ken Rice and Dave Delainey. Please join me in congratulating and supporting Kevin, Gene, Michael, Dick and the other members of this group in this effort. Jeff Skilling [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential - May 2001 HR At A Glance; [EMail-Body]= Attached is the May 2001 ""At A Glance"" report. A couple of additions this month, which include a section on Capital Expenditures with Pay Backs and some analysis of the recent new hire survey that we set up. Please call if you have any questions. DCL [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= kean's presentation; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/27/2001 02:42 PM ----- Alhamd Alkhayat 11/14/2000 04:40 PM To: Simon Shih/Graphics/Enron@ENRON, Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: kean's presentation maureen, here is the presentation simon, can we please get it on cd steve, good luck Alhamd Alkhayat ENRON CORP. +1(713)853-0315 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Senate passes Alper/Davis Bill 30-0; [EMail-Body]= what does the siting bill provide for? Mona L Petrochko@EES 08/29/2000 04:38 PM To: Douglas Condon/SFO/EES@EES, Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES, James M Wood/HOU/EES@EES, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Greg Cordell, Roger Yang, Edward Hamb/HOU/EES@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Karen Denne@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, West GA, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mary Hain@Enron Subject: Senate passes Alper/Davis Bill 30-0 AB 265 passed through the Senate a few minutes ago. It now must go to the Assembly, where there is still a lot of uncertainty about what changes the Assembly will want to the bill. We still haven't seen the latest ""republican"" language. Also, AB 265 is double joined to AB 970, controversial siting bill. To the extent one or the other fails, they both fail. AB 265 (Davis/Alpert) has: 1. a 6.5 cent/kWh energy rate cap through 2002, with potential extension through 2003. 2. Applicable to residential, small commercial (up to 100 kW) 3. Opt-in provision for large industrial/agricultural customers at 6.5 cents with an annual true-up 4. Use of revenues from utility generation assets (including PPA) to offset undercollections. 5. Reasonableness review for San Diego G&E Will update with more information as available. No news about SCE. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Confidential - Rob Stewart; [EMail-Body]= Shanna, I'm supportive of the raise to $150k. I think he is doing a good job and has a lot of value. He didn't fair well during the ranking due to lack of big $ or closure but maybe this will send him a good message. Thanks, m [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= fyi; [EMail-Body]= Please send to the distribution list ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/28/2000 07:36 AM --------------------------- From: Cindy Derecskey on 08/25/2000 04:01 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: fyi ----- Forwarded by Cindy Derecskey/Corp/Enron on 08/25/2000 04:00 PM ----- ""Martin, Kim"" <martinki@fleishman.com> on 08/25/2000 03:51:17 PM To: ""'mark.palmer@enron.com'"" <mark.palmer@enron.com> cc: Subject: fyi Didn't know if you saw this column in today's LA Times, but he makes some good arguments... > JAMES FLANIGAN: Simple Steps May Ease Self-Inflicted > Electricity Woes > Los Angeles Times -- August 25, 2000 [Return to Headlines] > > > Publication Date: Friday August 25, 2000 > Page C-1 > Los Angeles Times (Home Edition) > Copyright 2000 / The Times Mirror Company > By JAMES FLANIGAN > > Let's be clear, the fact that the state botched the job of > deregulation to begin with is one reason California's electricity market > is such a mess. > > But failure to build a single new power plant in the state > even as California's economy expanded its use of electricity is the basic > cause of today's shortages and soaring prices in San Diego, Orange County > and other areas. > > Still, some simple steps can be taken by regulators, > legislators and Gov. Gray Davis to provide immediate relief. > > The state's major utilities should be free to buy power > wherever they can get it. They should not have to buy exclusively from the > Power Exchange, the Pasadena-based power pool that was set up by the 1998 > deregulation to achieve auction-based prices for roughly 80% of the > state's electricity. > > Approval should be expedited for adding smaller generating > plants that supply power at times of peak demand. That could alleviate a > tight supply-demand situation over the next year or two while larger > plants are built. > > Long term, the state needs to speed up the approval process > for building new electricity plants. The state also should force utilities > to invest in the still-regulated system of power transmission lines, which > now has weaknesses in the San Diego and San Francisco areas. > > Perhaps the most glaring fact about California's electricity > problem is how few companies have stepped up to supply power to this > enormous market, the nation's biggest. Only 15 or so suppliers, including > federal agencies, the state's own utilities, municipal companies and > private generating firms, supply power to California's system. > > By contrast, Pennsylvania, which has an electricity market > less than 12% the size of California's, has 130 separate suppliers of > electricity today, reports John Quain, chairman of that state's Public > Utility Commission. > > It's no coincidence that Pennsylvania has seen monthly > electric bills drop 3% on average since deregulation. ""It's worked out > terrifically,"" Quain says. > > What did California do wrong? It allowed the state's major > utilities--Pacific Gas & Electric, Southern California Edison and San > Diego Gas & Electric--to recover 100% of their unrecovered or ""stranded"" > costs for nuclear and hydroelectric plants and for past power purchase > schemes mandated by the California legislature to encourage alternative > sources of energy. > > Then California's legislators told the utilities to sell > their conventional power plants to private generating companies, all of > which would sell their power to a central Power Exchange. > > The California scheme was flawed, at once over-regulated and > yet commercially clueless in not foreseeing trouble from a single power > pool fed by only a handful of suppliers. > > How did Pennsylvania do it? It allowed the state's utilities > to recover no more than 67% of their stranded costs for nuclear > plants--reasoning that company shareholders should accept some of the risk > of their investments. And rather than set up a central power exchange, the > state allowed its utilities and newcomers to the state's electric system > to compete for business. > > Competition, after all, is what deregulation is supposed to > encourage. And competition is not happening in California. > > It should be noted that the summer is relatively cool in the > East this year and extraordinarily hot throughout the West. All the > Western states are suffering electricity problems. That's another reason > for California's trouble. > > Normally, 28% of California's electricity comes from U.S. > and Canadian government systems and from utilities in Oregon and > Washington, Nevada and Arizona. But this year, because of lower > hydroelectric supplies and higher demand from booming economies in those > other states, power for California is in shorter supply and more expensive > when the state can get it. Now there are accusations that some suppliers > to California have taken advantage of their market leverage to extract > premium prices for power. > > There's nothing illegal in angling for a better price or in > using futures markets and other trading techniques, as some generators may > have done. If any stepped over the line to illegal collusion, federal and > other investigations will determine the facts. > > But who gave the generators the market leverage to exploit > us? The California regulators, legislators and utilities did. Told to sell > their generating plants in 1998, the utilities sold dozens of plants in > package deals of two and three to single buyers. They received premium > prices from buyers such as AES Corp., Duke Energy, Southern Co. Reliant > Energy, Dynegy and NRG. The premiums were paid for the market leverage > that multiple plants afforded the buyers. > > Nobody in the utilities reckoned that they were handing > market leverage to potential commercial adversaries. Nobody in the > Legislature or the regulatory staffs reckoned that the central Power > Exchange could be held up by market leverage. > > As outsiders often say about Californians: ""Maybe it's the > sunshine makes them slow."" > > (END) > > 05:23 EDT August 25, 2000 > Copyright , 2000 Times Mirror Company > > > > [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: AP Wires, Thurs 3/22: ""Report: Power wholesalers overcharged California $5.= 5=20 billion"" Dow Jones Newswires, Thurs 3/22: ""Reliant To Appeal Fed Judge Ruling To Sel= l=20 Pwr To Calif"" Sac Bee, Thurs 3/22: ""Federal judge orders major power wholesaler to sell t= o=20 California"" San Jose Mercury News Thurs, 3/22: ""State falling short on pacts that provi= de=20 low-cost energy"" Contra Costa Times, Thurs 3/22: ""Crisis saps state surplus"" Sac Bee. Fri, 3/23: ""Bill to pay small energy firms stalls"" Sac Bee, Fri., 3/23: ""House panel ends energy hearings -- will it step in? Sac Bee, Fri, 3/23: ""Dan Walters: Crisis deepens: politicos panic"" San Diego Union, Fri., 3/23: ""Report says power wholesalers overcharged=20 state $6 billion"" San Diego Union, Fri, 3/23: ""Disappearing state surplus sparks alarm"" San Diego Union, Fri., 3/23: ""Outages darken economic outlook in state, so= me=20 say"" San Diego Union, Fri., 3/23: ""Out-of-state generators question power=20 regulators' authority "" San Diego Union, Fri., 3/23: ""Allegheny Energy makes big California=20 connection"" LA Times, Fri, 3/23: ""Judge Frees Small Firm From Edison Contract "" SF Chron, Fri, 3/23: ""Lodi Defies Order for Blackouts=20 Utility tells PG&E to 'pay the bills' "" SF Chron, Fri, 3/23: ""Coming Down to the Wire=20 State legislators battle over alternative energy bills"" SF Chron, Fri, 3/23: ""Grid Operators Push to Prevent Overcharging=20 They say regulators must be aggressive to stop billing abuses""=20 Mercury News, Fri., 3/23: ""State's bill for energy could double this year"" Mercury News, Fri., 3/23: ""Plan for alternate power plants stalls"" --- --- Report: Power wholesalers overcharged California $5.5 billion=20 DON THOMPSON, Associated Press Writer Thursday, March 22, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 (03-22) 11:41 PST SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- Electricity wholesalers have= =20 overcharged California more than $5 billion since May by manipulating the= =20 energy market, according to a report prepared for power grid managers.=20 The Independent System Operator will file the findings with federal=20 regulators and ask for a refund, ISO spokesman Patrick Dorinson said.=20 The state auditor also said Thursday that the state's 1996 deregulation law= =20 encouraged both buyers and sellers of electricity to ``manipulate wholesale= =20 prices to their advantage'' by underestimating supply and demand.=20 The auditor's report lays out what it calls ``a complex combination'' of=20 deficiencies and misjudgments it says led to the state's power problems.=20 According to the ISO report, five in-state power suppliers and 16 importers= =20 frequently offered electricity at prices higher than it cost them to produc= e=20 -- effectively withholding supplies -- or didn't bid at all when they were= =20 able to generate power.=20 ISO Director of Market Analysis Anjali Sheffrin presented the findings at a= =20 conference in Berkeley last week.=20 The companies have denied overcharging California and have said they expect= =20 the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission will determine their prices were= =20 justified.=20 The commission has recently stepped up scrutiny of power companies' behavio= r=20 during California's power crisis, asking suppliers to justify $124 million = in=20 sales during the first two months of the year or refund the money. Critics= =20 claim thousands of additional questionable sales are not being challenged.= =20 California has been spending about $45 million a day -- $4.2 billion since= =20 January -- to purchase power for Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern= =20 California Edison. Both utilities, the state's largest, have been cut off b= y=20 electricity wholesalers because their credit is almost worthless.=20 Edison and PG&E say they are nearly $14 billion in debt due to soaring=20 wholesale power costs. The state's deregulation law blocks them from=20 recovering the costs from customers.=20 State Controller Kathleen Connell said Wednesday that the state's=20 power-buying is gutting its budget surplus.=20 Since the state started making emergency power buys, the surplus has fallen= =20 from $8.5 billion to about $3.2 billion, she said.=20 Connell ordered an audit of the power buys, saying Gov. Gray Davis is=20 withholding key financial information from her office and the Legislature.= =20 She said she would refuse to transfer $5.6 billion into a ``rainy day fund'= '=20 she said was set up to impress Wall Street as the state prepares to issue $= 10=20 billion in revenue bonds to cover its power buys.=20 Transferring the money would leave the state general fund $2.4 billion in= =20 debt, Connell said.=20 Sandy Harrison, spokesman for the state Department of Finance, and Keely=20 Bosler, of the Legislative Analyst's Office, said such transfers are routin= e=20 and required by law.=20 ``The law says she has to do it. The law does not give her the power to=20 demand that kind of audit information,'' Harrison said.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio said the administration has released the=20 financial information it can without jeopardizing negotiations for long-ter= m=20 power contracts with wholesalers.=20 Also Wednesday, a federal judge ordered a major wholesaler, Reliant Energy= =20 Services, to continue selling power to California despite its fear that it= =20 will not be paid.=20 The ISO buys power from companies like Reliant on behalf of utilities in=20 attempts to fend off rolling blackouts like those that hit the state this= =20 week and during two days in January.=20 --- Reliant To Appeal Fed Judge Ruling To Sell Pwr To Calif 03/22/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Reliant Energy Inc. (REI) said Thursday it will= =20 immediately file with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco in= =20 response to a federal judge's ruling late Wednesday that the company contin= ue=20 selling power to California regardless of whether it is paid.=20 U.S. District Court Judge Frank Damrell granted California's Independent=20 System Operator, which makes last minute power purchases in the spot market= ,=20 a preliminary injunction against Reliant, saying Californians were at risk = of=20 irreparable harm if Reliant stopped selling power to the state. The ISO, manager of the state's electricity grid, said the judge's ruling= =20 will allow the agency to keep the lights on in California.=20 Reliant, which is owed more than $300 million from the state's cash-strappe= d=20 utilities, supplies California with about 3,000 megawatts of electricity fr= om=20 power plants it owns in the state.=20 Reliant spokesman Richard Wheatley said the state Department of Water=20 Resources, the agency that buys California's bulk power needs on behalf of= =20 PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric, Edison International (EIX) un= it=20 Southern California Edison and Sempra Energy (SRE) unit San Diego Gas &=20 Electric, should back the ISO's last minute power purchases.=20 In a filing with the Securities and Commission, Reliant said it is owed $10= 8=20 million by the DWR for last minute power purchases the ISO made during the= =20 six weeks prior to the agreement Reliant made with the DWR.=20 Damrell dismissed Reliant's claim, saying he does not have the authority to= =20 force the DWR to pay for that power.=20 ""We're going to immediately appeal Judge Damrell's order,"" Wheatley said.= =20 ""Clearly the judge understands the implications of his order. We are requir= ed=20 to do business with creditworthy entities. Unfortuantely the judge did not= =20 force the ISO to post a surety bond, which would allowed us to do business= =20 with the ISO.""=20 Gov. Gray Davis has said the state is not responsible for the last minute= =20 power purchases the ISO makes, despite a law passed authorizing the DWR to= =20 buy power on behalf of the utilities.=20 Wheatley added that the company will also seek relief on the issue at the= =20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Damrell's ruling remains in effect=20 until the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission rules on the matter.=20 Separately, Wheatley said a short-term power supply contract that Reliant= =20 signed with the DWR expired Monday and the DWR has not renewed the contract= .=20 A spokesman for the DWR would not comment on the issue.=20 -By Jason Leopold; Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3874;=20 jason.leopold@dowjones.com --- --- ----------------------- Federal judge orders major power wholesaler to sell to California Updated: March 21, 2001 - 8:23 p.m.=20 A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction Wednesday ordering a major= =20 electricity wholesaler to continue selling to California despite its fear= =20 that it will not get paid.=20 U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said Californians were at risk of= =20 irreparable harm if Reliant Energy Services stopped selling power to the=20 Independent System Operator, which oversees the state's power grid. The ISO= =20 buys last-minute power on behalf of utilities to fill gaps in supply to try= =20 to fend off blackouts.=20 Damrell dismissed Reliant's attempt to force the state Department of Water= =20 Resources to back the ISO's purchases for the state's two biggest utilities= .=20 The state has been spending about $50 million a day on power for Pacific Ga= s=20 and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison, both denied credit by=20 suppliers after amassing billions of dollars in debts. The judge said he had no authority to force the DWR to pay for that power.= =20 Gov. Gray Davis has said the state isn't responsible for purchasing the=20 costly last-minute power ISO buys for Edison and PG&E, despite a law=20 authorizing state power purchases on the utilities' behalf.=20 ISO attorney Charles Robinson said the ruling gives ISO operators ""a tool t= o=20 assist them in keeping the lights on in California.""=20 ""Had the decision gone the other way, one could expect other generators to= =20 simply ignore emergency orders,"" Robinson said.=20 Damrell's preliminary injunction will remain in effect until the Federal=20 Energy Regulatory Commission rules on the matter.=20 Damrell denied the ISO's request for preliminary injunctions against three= =20 other wholesalers, Dynegy, AES and Williams, who agreed to continue selling= =20 to the ISO pending the FERC ruling.=20 Spokesmen for Reliant, Dynegy, AES and Williams were out of the office=20 Wednesday night and didn't immediately return calls from The Associated Pre= ss=20 seeking comment on the ruling.=20 The ISO went to court in February after a federal emergency order requiring= =20 the power sales expired. The judge then issued a temporary restraining orde= r,=20 requiring the sales, but dropped it after the suppliers agreed to continue= =20 sales to California, pending his Wednesday ruling.=20 The ISO said it would lose about 3,600 megawatts if the suppliers pulled ou= t,=20 enough power for about 2.7 million households. One megawatt is enough for= =20 roughly 750 homes.=20 Grid officials said Reliant's share alone is about 3,000 megawatts. Reliant= =20 said the amount at issue actually is less than a fourth of that, because mo= st=20 of the power is committed under long-term contracts.=20 Reliant, which provides about 9 percent of the state's power, worries it=20 won't get paid due to the financial troubles of PG&E and Edison.=20 PG&E and Edison say that together they have lost about $13 billion since Ju= ne=20 due to soaring wholesale electricity costs that California's 1996=20 deregulation law bars them from passing onto customers.=20 At the same time, the state has faced a tight electricity supply, due in pa= rt=20 to California power plant shutdowns for maintenance and to a tight=20 hydroelectric supply in the Pacific Northwest.=20 Managers of the state power grid imposed rolling blackouts across the state= =20 Monday and Tuesday as supply fell short of demand. Wednesday, cooling=20 temperatures and the completion of repairs at several power plants allowed= =20 the state to avoid blackouts. State Controller Kathleen Connell said Wednesday that the energy crunch als= o=20 imperils California's financial health. Connell said the state's power-buying on behalf of Edison and PG&E is is=20 gutting its budget surplus. Since the state started making emergency power= =20 buys in January, the surplus has fallen from $8.5 billion to about $3.2=20 billion, she said.=20 Connell ordered an audit of the state's power-buying, saying Davis is=20 withholding key financial information from her office and the Legislature.= =20 She is refusing a request by Davis and the Legislature to transfer $5.6=20 billion into a ""rainy day fund"" she said was set up to impress Wall Street = as=20 the state prepares to issue $10 billion in revenue bonds to cover its=20 power-buying.=20 Transferring the money would leave the state general fund $2.4 billion in= =20 debt, Connell said.=20 Sandy Harrison, spokesman for the state Department of Finance, and Keely=20 Bosler of the Legislative Analyst's Office, said such transfers are routine= =20 and required by law.=20 They put the state's budget surplus at $5.6 billion.=20 ""The law says she has to do it. The law does not give her the power to dema= nd=20 that kind of audit information,"" Harrison said.=20 He said the state's budget isn't in danger because it will be repaid with t= he=20 $10 billion in long-term debt.=20 Wells Fargo & Co. chief economist Sung Won Sohn said he sees little progres= s=20 in efforts to fix the state's power problems and end state electricity=20 purchases.=20 ""If we're going to pour money into a bottomless pit, I would worry about th= e=20 state's finances,"" he said. ""At some point we're going to run out of money.= "" The controller's criticism of fellow Democrat Davis won support from Assemb= ly=20 Republicans and Secretary of State Bill Jones, a Republican considering=20 challenging Davis next year.=20 Jones said he wants to announce his own plan to solve the state's energy=20 woes, but can't unless Davis releases more financial details.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio dismissed the criticism. ""Political grandstanding doesn't generate one more kilowatt of energy for= =20 California in this time of emergency,"" he said.=20 Maviglio said the administration has released the financial information it= =20 can without jeopardizing negotiations for long-term power contracts with=20 wholesalers.=20 Also Wednesday, a report by Davis' chief power negotiator appears to show= =20 that as much as 75 percent of the state's power purchases will have to be o= n=20 the expensive short-term market this summer, said Sen. Debra Bowen, D-Marin= a=20 del Rey, chairwoman of the Senate Energy Committee.=20 ""The prices may be phenomenol,"" she said, particularly given predicted=20 hydroelectric shortages due to drought in the Pacific Northwest.=20 The report by David Freeman, who is negotiating the state's long-term power= =20 contracts, shows California has finalized 19 contracts and has 25 agreement= s=20 in principle. Freeman said DWR is continuing to negotiate other contracts. Bowen said FERC should impose short-term price caps or let generators to=20 charge enough to make a reasonable profit ""or we could be subject to enormo= us=20 price-gouging this summer.""=20 -- Associated Press --- State falling short on pacts that provide low-cost energy=20 Published Thursday, March 22, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News=20 BY CHRIS O'BRIEN AND JOHN WOOLFOLK=20 Mercury News=20 The state has signed low-cost contracts for just a third of the energy it= =20 needs this year, raising the prospect that California could be forced to bu= y=20 much of its electricity this summer on the expensive spot market.=20 A spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis conceded Wednesday that the state will be i= n=20 trouble without more contracts, but insisted California will meet its needs= =20 through conservation and additional long-term deals for cheap electricity.= =20 The state, according to a report released Wednesday, has fallen far short o= f=20 the governor's goal of filling almost all its electricity needs through suc= h=20 deals. In fact, the state has lined up contracts for about half the amount= =20 Davis had projected earlier this month.=20 If the state has to rely heavily on the volatile spot market, where the pri= ce=20 of electricity this summer could reach five times the state's contract pric= e,=20 pressure could mount to raise the cap on the electricity rates consumers pa= y.=20 But Steven Maviglio, the governor's spokesman, said, ``The governor has sai= d=20 he's committed to work this in the existing rate structure, so that's the= =20 plan.''=20 In the report sent to state lawmakers, the state Department of Water=20 Resources indicated that it had secured just more than 20 million=20 megawatt-hours for this year, leaving it far short of the 60 million=20 megawatt-hours needed.=20 ``This is just a progress report,'' Maviglio said. ``They did all this in= =20 three weeks, which is pretty amazing when you think about it, and we have a= =20 lot more to do.''=20 The state got into the power buying business in January, supplying it to th= e=20 state's nearly bankrupt utilities.=20 The state negotiated long-term contracts with generators to supply that pow= er=20 at a reduced rate. Based on the report, the state will pay an average of $6= 8=20 per megawatt-hour over the next 10 years -- significantly less than in=20 December when prices spiked higher than $300 per megawatt-hour but not as l= ow=20 as the $55 Davis hoped to reach.=20 Most of this power, however, won't be delivered until 2004. From 2004 to=20 2006, the Department of Water Resources estimates, it has enough power unde= r=20 contract. Until then, the amount falls short.=20 In 2001, it appears the state has about one-third of the power it needs. Th= e=20 gap closes to about half in 2002 and two-thirds in 2003.=20 At a news conference in Los Angeles two weeks ago, Davis said the state wou= ld=20 have to buy only 30 to 45 percent of the power it needs this summer on the= =20 open market.=20 At the time, critics said with only two-thirds of the power under contract,= a=20 rate increase was almost inevitable. Even Davis' chief negotiator, S. David= =20 Freeman, offered a bleak assessment for the summer, saying that all availab= le=20 electricity has already been sold.=20 ``We'll be subject to extremely high prices,'' said Frank Wolak, a Stanford= =20 professor who sits on a market committee for the Independent System Operato= r,=20 the agency that runs the state power grid.=20 Wolak said there are two main hopes for avoiding a price increase this=20 summer: Federal officials could cap the wholesale price, a step they've=20 resisted, or Californians can conserve an unprecedented amount of power. --- --- ----------------------- Crisis saps state surplus POWER CRISIS=20 Controller moves to block a transfer of funds, saying the $8.5 billion=20 surplus has been cut more than half since January=20 By Mike Taugher TIMES STAFF WRITER=20 The energy crisis has bled California's once-touted budget surplus by more= =20 than half since taxpayers began buying electricity two months ago, leading = a=20 top state finance official Wednesday to order an audit of the power purchas= es=20 and block Gov. Gray Davis' plan to transfer funds into a reserve account.= =20 A booming economy last year produced a budget surplus that totaled $8.5=20 billion in January. But that figure now stands at about $3.2 billion,=20 according to Controller Kathleen Connell.=20 ""We started this year with a generous budget surplus,"" Connell said in a=20 statement announcing her decision to block what Davis administration=20 officials described as a routine transfer of surplus money. ""The energy=20 crisis has taken much of that away, and this transfer on top of the=20 electricity purchases would put the fund at risk.""=20 Meanwhile, the Davis administration released a report by David Freeman, the= =20 governor's chief negotiator on power purchases, on the progress of executin= g=20 long-term agreements meant to stabilize the power buys.=20 According to the report, only about 40 percent of the electricity needed fr= om=20 the open market this year has been lined up. That means the state could be= =20 forced to continue buying a substantial amount of power on the highly=20 expensive spot market and further drain its coffers.=20 And a key regulatory panel is scheduled next week to issue a ruling that=20 would determine how quickly state funds will be replenished when it decides= =20 what portion of electric bill payments should be allocated to the state=20 treasury, a decision that could include a rate increase to fully repay=20 taxpayers without further crippling the state's two largest electric=20 utilities.=20 The Public Utilities Commission also will consider whether it will force th= e=20 utilities to pay alternative energy producers, whose shutdowns this week=20 contributed to blackouts.=20 Connell's action underscores a growing nervousness over the sheer volume of= =20 money that is being poured into energy buys, despite the fact that state=20 officials plan to replenish the treasury with up to $10 billion in loans th= at=20 will be repaid by electricity consumers.=20 The state has committed to spending $4.2 billion to date to keep lights on= =20 since taxpayers were forced in mid-January to take over electricity buys fr= om=20 the financially crippled utilities, Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern= =20 California Edison. Tax money is going out at a clip of about $50 million a= =20 day.=20 High prices already have brought PG&E and Edison to the brink of bankruptcy= ,=20 and now the state's surplus is at risk, according to Connell.=20 In addition to requesting an audit and announcing her intention to delay th= e=20 transfer to the reserve account, Connell said she wanted the administration= =20 to send her office more information about the electricity purchases.=20 Davis' representatives questioned Connell's authority in trying to block th= e=20 funds transfer, which they called a routine accounting procedure, and accus= ed=20 her of making political hay.=20 ""It is not helpful to the taxpayers or ratepayers or the people who just wa= nt=20 to keep the lights on, it isn't helpful to have the situation muddied like= =20 this,"" said Sandy Harrison, a Finance Department spokesperson. ""We're sorry= =20 it came up in this manner.""=20 Connell and the administration have butted heads in recent weeks. The=20 controller wants to post details of the state's electricity purchases on he= r=20 Web site, a plan that have been delayed under pressure from Davis because o= f=20 the governor's concerns that releasing those details will allow power=20 generators and traders to sell at higher prices.=20 Harrison said administration officials believe Connell lacks the authority= =20 either to block the funds transfer to a reserve account or to audit the sta= te=20 water resources department.=20 Two days of widespread blackouts this week show how vulnerable the power gr= id=20 is to financial glitches. Although several factors combined to produce the= =20 blackouts, state power officials say the outages could have been avoided if= =20 the utilities were paying their bills to alternative energy producers.=20 Many of those producers, including clean-burning natural gas power plants,= =20 wind, solar and geothermal energy developers, shut down enough production t= o=20 spell the difference between grid reliability and blackouts Monday and=20 Tuesday.=20 Davis called the utilities' failure to pay bills to those producers, known = as=20 qualifying facilities, ""immoral."" The QFs were either unable to buy gas fro= m=20 their suppliers or were frustrated with the utilities' failure to pay them.= =20 ""The utilities hoarded billions of dollars since November without paying an= y=20 money out,"" said Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio. ""They've got the money --= =20 we're pulling the trigger to make them pay it.""=20 The utilities, however, say they are doing all they can to conserve enough= =20 cash to continue operating. Together, they owe the QFs about $1.5 billion.= =20 Next week, the PUC is scheduled to consider whether to force the utilities = to=20 heed Davis' demand to pay the QFs, and it might also decide how much of=20 ratepayers' bill payments will be used to refund taxpayers for power buys.= =20 PG&E says that under a formula proposed by the administration, the water=20 resources department would receive about 40 percent of the money collected= =20 from ratepayers for power purchases.=20 The rest of that money, about $240 million, would have to be divided among= =20 QFs, existing power contracts, operating PG&E's nuclear and hydroelectric= =20 plants, and what hour-by-hour purchases the utility still must make on the= =20 spot market, according to PG&E spokesman John Nelson.=20 ""There isn't enough to do that,"" he said.=20 That is making it increasingly likely that electric bills will be hiked,=20 according to a growing chorus of officials and experts.=20 Unless rates are raised, Nelson said, the only entity that can absorb a lac= k=20 of payment or a partial payment is the state treasury. Cutting off any othe= rs=20 will lead to electricity becoming unavailable and more blackouts, he said.= =20 ""If they do it under existing rates -- given that the existing pool of mone= y=20 is not enough -- who doesn't get paid or who gets a partial payment?"" Nelso= n=20 said. ""What's the only entity left with wiggle room? The state.""=20 Rate hikes are also a sticking point in negotiations to bail out the=20 utilities through purchase of their transmission lines and other assets,=20 Maviglio said.=20 ""They want rate increases of significant magnitude, and we're not going=20 there,"" he said.=20 WE CAN TRIM STORY HERE IF NECESSARY, BUT KEEP TAGLINES AT BOTTOM=20 About one-third the electricity needed by the customers of California's thr= ee=20 major utility companies is produced by the companies themselves, one-third= =20 comes from alternative producers who use environmentally friendly technique= s=20 and one-third is bought on the open market.=20 The state stepped in to buy the one-third needed from the open market after= =20 the utility companies ran out of cash and credit in January to make the=20 purchases themselves.=20 But that electricity has proven to be enormously expensive, and Davis has= =20 planned to lower those prices by committing to long-term purchases.=20 Freeman's report on the progress of those long-term purchases, dated March = 15=20 but released this week, said the state has finalized 19 contracts with seve= n=20 suppliers and reached 25 additional agreements.=20 Mike Taugher covers the environment and energy. Reach him at 925-943-8324 o= r=20 mtaugher@cctimes.com.=20 Staff writer Andrew LaMar contributed to this story. --- --- ----------------------- Bill to pay small energy firms stalls By Kevin Yamamura, Dale Kasler and Jim Sanders Bee Staff Writers (Published March 23, 2001)=20 A quickly melded proposal that would assure payments for alternative energy= =20 suppliers whose money woes contributed to power blackouts this week stalled= =20 Thursday in a divided Legislature.=20 The state Senate passed the bill, AB 8x, but with Republicans balking, it w= as=20 rejected in the Assembly along party lines. Assembly leaders said they may= =20 try again today.=20 For most of Thursday, lawmakers scrutinized legislation they had overhauled= =20 the night before to include Gov. Gray Davis' plan to force utilities to pay= =20 solar, wind and small gas-fired suppliers. Such providers, called ""qualifie= d=20 facilities,"" or QFs, provide more than 20 percent of California's=20 electricity, and their shutdowns were partly to blame for rolling blackouts= =20 Monday and Tuesday.=20 Under the Democratic governor's plan, the state Public Utilities Commission= =20 would determine prices at which alternative generators may sell power, but= =20 legislation is needed to authorize the PUC action.=20 Lawmakers faced time pressures Thursday. They wanted to pass the bill quick= ly=20 so the PUC could act next week and legislators could embark Monday on an=20 annual three-day lobbying trip in Washington, D.C.=20 Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg, D-Sherman Oaks, said the Republicans'=20 rejection of AB 8x could jeopardize more than $4 billion the state has spen= t=20 or allocated for electricity during the energy crisis.=20 Hertzberg said producers of alternative energy, which are owed more than $1= =20 billion, have threatened to drag debt-ridden utilities into involuntary=20 bankruptcy if the Legislature failed to pass the measure.=20 ""They said it, and I believe it,"" Hertzberg said. If such bankruptcies occu= r,=20 he added, the state with its multibillion-dollar debt would become ""just=20 another creditor in a pile of creditors.""=20 But Assembly Republican leader Bill Campbell of Villa Park said the=20 finger-pointing is unfair. Passage of AB 8x would not necessarily prevent= =20 bankruptcies, he said.=20 One alternative energy provider won a crucial court ruling Thursday that=20 staved off, at least for a while, threats by some creditors to haul one or= =20 both big utilities into bankruptcy court for nonpayment of bills.=20 CalEnergy Co. Inc. won the right to sell its geothermal power, which was=20 contracted to Southern California Edison, on the open market. CalEnergy sai= d=20 it is owed $45 million by Edison.=20 If the Imperial County judge hadn't ruled in CalEnergy's favor, the company= =20 and seven other QFs ""were fully prepared"" to file an involuntary bankruptcy= =20 petition against Edison this morning, said David Sokol, chief executive of= =20 CalEnergy's parent, MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co. of Des Moines, Iowa.=20 ""That is currently off the table.""=20 An involuntary bankruptcy proceeding would take California's energy crisis= =20 into uncharted territory, although a bankruptcy judge would have the leeway= =20 to reject the filing.=20 Freed from its contract with Edison, CalEnergy will move to sell its=20 electricity ""to people who will pay for it,"" Sokol said.=20 Besides calming the bankruptcy movement temporarily, the ruling also could= =20 prompt other alternative energy providers -- hundreds of which have shut do= wn=20 because of nonpayment by Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. -- to foll= ow=20 CalEnergy's example and find other buyers for their electricity, said Gary= =20 Ackerman of the Western Power Trading Forum, an association of generators.= =20 Assembly Republicans said they felt the Senate's decision to package three= =20 important energy issues into a single bill was an attempt to ramrod=20 legislation through both houses.=20 ""We have to stand and say no,"" Campbell said during floor debate.=20 Besides determining alternative generator payments, the bill would change a= n=20 earlier law by capping the value of bonds the state may sell for power=20 purchases at $10 billion. It also would extend to large businesses an=20 existing rate cap in the San Diego Gas and Electric Co. service area.=20 And it would earmark a portion of rates paid by utility customers to fund t= he=20 state's ongoing power purchases. Within a week, the state will have spent= =20 $4.2 billion on power since January.=20 Without the bill, some legislators fear, Pacific Gas and Electric and=20 Southern California Edison would be reimbursed before the state.=20 ""They have got (some) gall to go to the PUC and say they're going to go to= =20 court to keep our money -- to keep our money to pay off their creditors,""= =20 said Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, D-San Francisco.=20 Most of the bill's controversy, however, centered on how the PUC would trea= t=20 gas-fired alternative generators.=20 The commission issued a revised draft decision Wednesday that would impose= =20 prices for qualifying facilities at $79 a megawatt-hour for five-year=20 contracts or $69 a megawatt-hour for 10 years.=20 But those producers that use natural gas -- representing about two-thirds o= f=20 the alternative energy providers in California -- spent Thursday arguing th= at=20 Davis' plan to rescue them would all but guarantee that they would go out o= f=20 business instead.=20 The plan -- ordering Edison and PG&E to pay them a fixed price for their=20 power -- would set rates well below the cost of natural gas, they said.=20 Democratic lawmakers tried to assure such producers that the PUC would set= =20 prices that make business sense, even obtaining a letter to that effect fro= m=20 Loretta Lynch, who heads the commission.=20 Davis has vowed to fine Edison and PG&E if they don't pay alternative=20 producers for future deliveries. But Sokol said his company isn't convinced= =20 that Edison will pay.=20 Calling Edison a ""confrontive, in-your-face, nasty organization,"" Sokol sai= d=20 the utility was ""sitting on $2 billion"" and not paying its bills. Edison, i= n=20 a Securities and Exchange Commission filing Thursday, said its debts outwei= gh=20 its cash reserves by $722 million.=20 The Senate sent the Assembly two other bills that deal specifically with=20 supply and demand. The first, SB 5x, would spend about $1 billion on energy= =20 conservation and low-income assistance programs. The other, SB 28x, would= =20 streamline siting procedures for power plant construction.=20 In separate energy-related matters Thursday, the Assembly approved:=20 AB 21x, which would allow businesses, industries or other electrical=20 customers to negotiate private contracts with energy providers.=20 Nine energy bills designed to generate or save 665 megawatts of electricity= =20 -- including 345 megawatts this summer. One megawatt is enough electricity = to=20 light about 1,000 homes.=20 The state put power emergencies behind it, after dropping out of a Stage 1= =20 alert late Wednesday. The California Independent System Operator, which=20 manages the state's power transmission grid, was predicting no further aler= ts=20 this week. It expected cooling temperatures and a regular dropoff in=20 electricity use on Fridays to lessen demand, at the same time that more pow= er=20 plants were returning to service.=20 Bee staff writer Carrie Peyton contributed to this report.=20 --- House panel ends energy hearings -- will it step in? By David Whitney Bee Washington Bureau (Published March 23, 2001)=20 WASHINGTON -- A key House panel wrapped up a series of hearings on the=20 California electricity crisis Thursday and now will decide whether to come = to=20 the state's aid with legislation.=20 But the panel's Texas chairman made clear that West Coast price controls=20 won't be on the table.=20 ""Caps will not be in anything I am submitting,"" said Rep. Joe Barton,=20 chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee's energy and air qualit= y=20 subcommittee.=20 Some form of federal controls to hold down escalating wholesale prices this= =20 summer because of power shortages has been the most frequent appeal of=20 witnesses who testified before the panel during roughly 30 hours of hearing= s=20 over five days.=20 Such controls have been sought by the governors of California, Oregon and= =20 Washington. As power shortages are forecast for other regions, states like= =20 New York also have appealed for temporary price controls to halt gouging.= =20 But the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which is responsible for=20 enforcing reasonable wholesale rates under the Federal Power Act, has refus= ed=20 to impose them, and the Bush administration is bolstering that decision by= =20 opposing any legislation that would compel such action.=20 Barton, in a brief hallway interview, declined to say what other legislativ= e=20 remedies he might propose to address the worsening California situation.=20 He said he expects to submit a list of ideas to the White House today, and= =20 after receiving comment on it, sit down with other committee Republicans an= d=20 Democrats next week to see if any legislation is in order.=20 ""If we are going to do anything to help California or the West this summer,= =20 we have to make it law within the next month or six weeks,"" Barton said.=20 Even the panel's senior Democrat, Virginia Rep. Rick Boucher, was urging a= =20 ""careful and deliberate approach"" to the California crisis, which he said w= as=20 largely of the state's own making.=20 There are steps Congress might take to provide some help to the West, such = as=20 more money for conservation and relaxed federal regulation of air quality= =20 standards. That would permit older, more polluting generators to operate=20 through a long, hot summer when electricity demand could exceed supply by= =20 about 3,000 megawatts, roughly the amount needed to power 3 million homes.= =20 But Alan Lloyd, chairman of the California Air Resources Board, said power= =20 production already is being maximized without sacrificing air quality.=20 ""Simply put, no essential electricity generation has been curtailed due to= =20 air emission limitations,"" he said. ""California's programs to protect publi= c=20 health are not major factors in the electricity shortages experienced to=20 date.""=20 The concern is that as shortages turn into more rolling blackouts, wholesal= e=20 prices will jump even higher and steadily bleed the economies of California= =20 and the West Coast.=20 William L. Massey, the lone member of the energy regulatory commission who= =20 supports price controls, said at a Tuesday hearing that without them the We= st=20 Coast faces economic catastrophe this summer.=20 It was evident from the comments of some Republicans that they think their= =20 party could capitalize politically from a difficult summer.=20 ""If they had a bad summer, it could show up in the polls,"" said Rep. Charli= e=20 Norwood, R-Ga. ""And sometimes that's not a bad idea.""=20 One of the most dramatic exchanges during the weeklong hearings came Thursd= ay=20 with S. David Freeman, the former general manager of the Sacramento Municip= al=20 Utility District who now heads the Los Angeles Department of Water and Powe= r.=20 He recently was named Gov. Gray Davis' chief negotiator with power generato= rs=20 for long-term contracts to stabilize future deliveries.=20 ""Don't feel sorry for California,"" Freeman said. ""We're going to come out o= f=20 this stronger than ever.""=20 But Freeman said it will be a year or two before all the fixes are in place= ,=20 and in the meantime the region desperately needs Congress' help to force th= e=20 FERC into controlling wholesale prices, which witnesses said are likely to= =20 rise from $7 billion last year to as much as $70 billion or more this year.= =20 ""We recognize that the current administration and various legislators have= =20 their own opinion as to the California situation,"" Freeman said. ""But my=20 personal plea is that if the federal government is not going to help us, th= e=20 least it should do is refrain from legislation that attempts to tell us wha= t=20 to do.""=20 Barton perked up at that idea.=20 ""Leave California alone, huh?"" Barton said. ""That might be a good motto.""= =20 --- --------------------- Dan Walters: Crisis deepens: politicos panic (Published March 23, 2001)=20 That choking sound you hear is California's political class shifting into= =20 near-panic mode as it realizes that the energy crisis is on the verge of=20 becoming a full-scale meltdown, with utilities forced into bankruptcy and= =20 consumers hammered by severe and prolonged power blackouts and soaring=20 electricity bills.=20 The Legislature, which had been content to allow Gov. Gray Davis to handle= =20 the crisis on his own, suddenly came to life Thursday, jolted by this week'= s=20 unexpected rolling blackouts and threats by creditors to force the utilitie= s=20 into bankruptcy court. Lawmakers quickly fashioned a basketful of legislati= on=20 aimed -- or so they hope -- at increasing power supplies, promoting=20 conservation and relieving the financial pressure on utilities and=20 electricity generators. But it may be too little, too late -- and Davis and= =20 other politicians are already pointing fingers of blame, aware that a=20 political price will be paid if the apocalypse strikes.=20 While Davis chants his mantra that he inherited a fatally flawed utility=20 deregulation scheme from predecessor Pete Wilson, Republicans are blaming= =20 Davis for moving too slowly after the crisis first surfaced last summer, an= d=20 even some of Davis' fellow Democrats are distancing themselves from the=20 governor.=20 ""Deregulation was a product of a Republican governor, a Republican author a= nd=20 a Republican PUC (Public Utilities Commission) that was unduly impatient,""= =20 Davis said at one point this week as the Capitol buzzed with private=20 negotiations and public posturing.=20 A day later, however, state Controller Kathleen Connell, a Democrat, issued= a=20 warning that Davis' power purchases, running at $50 million a day, had=20 already drawn down state budget reserves by nearly two-thirds, and she=20 refused to authorize additional transfers. It was a direct shot by Connell = at=20 Davis, an old rival, and came just a day after the governor had endorsed a= =20 Connell foe, Antonio Villaraigosa, in the duel for mayor of Los Angeles.=20 Other Democrats didn't join Connell's direct challenge to Davis, but there= =20 is, nevertheless, a growing concern among Democratic legislators that the= =20 power purchases are costing many billions of dollars more than the governor= =20 had projected and could place the state budget in jeopardy. They're nervous= =20 because Davis has refused to reveal, even to legislators, exactly how much= =20 power the state is buying each day and how much it is paying.=20 From the few details that have been disclosed, it's clear that the state is= =20 spending about $1.5 billion a month, which would wipe out the state's=20 reserves by midsummer. It's also becoming increasingly clear that Davis=20 probably can't make good on his promise to avoid major consumer rate=20 increases, unless the state is willing to plunge deeply and semi-permanentl= y=20 into debt to underwrite wholesale costs, or unless federal authorities orde= r=20 huge refunds from power suppliers.=20 Rates in areas served by private utilities have risen only slightly while t= he=20 costs, first to utilities and later to the state, soared. Data from the=20 administration and utilities, when collated, indicate that the state is in= =20 line to collect just 20 cents for every dollar it's spending on power=20 purchases, and the gap will increase as summer heat drives up demand.=20 Privately, some economists say that private utility rates will have to rise= =20 33 percent to 50 percent to cover costs of current power supplies, plus=20 utilities' past debts to generators and the state's purchase of the=20 utilities' transmission system, if that deal is made final.=20 ""It's ultimately going to break down, and the ratepayer is going to pay for= =20 it one way or the other,"" Republican Sen. Jim Battin said during one of=20 Thursday's many committee hearings on utility legislation. No one disagreed= =20 with him.=20 DAN WALTERS' column appears daily, except Saturday. Mail: P.O. Box 15779,= =20 Sacramento, CA 95852; phone (916) 321-1195; fax: (781) 846-8350 E-mail: dwalters@sacbee.com Recent columns: --- Report says power wholesalers overcharged state $6 billion=20 By Don Thompson ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 22, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) Electricity wholesalers have overcharged California more th= an=20 $6.2 billion by manipulating the energy market, according to a report by an= =20 economist working for power grid managers.=20 The Independent System Operator planned to file the findings with federal= =20 regulators Thursday, and ask for a refund, said ISO spokesman Patrick=20 Dorinson.=20 In a related development, the state auditor said Thursday that the state's= =20 1996 deregulation law encouraged both buyers and sellers of electricity to= =20 ""manipulate wholesale prices to their advantage"" by underestimating both=20 supply and demand.=20 Disappearing state surplus sparks alarm=20 Outages darken economic outlook in state, some say=20 Out-of-state generators question power regulators' authority=20 Allegheny Energy makes big California connection=20 Enron stock slides despite earnings reassurance=20 California's electricity crisis at-a-glance=20 ?=20 The auditor's report lays out what it calls ""a complex combination"" of=20 deficiencies and misjudgments it says led to the state's power problems.=20 The ISO's filing came a day after the state controller complained that a=20 relentless energy crisis is jeopardizing California's financial future.=20 Since May, the companies manipulated the market by bidding at excessive=20 prices, effectively withholding supplies or by not bidding at all when they= =20 had generation capability available, according to the ISO study.=20 ISO Director of Market Analysis Anjali Sheffrin presented the findings at a= n=20 energy conference at the University of California, Berkeley, last week.=20 The companies have denied overcharging California and have said they expect= =20 the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission will determine their prices were= =20 justified.=20 In a burst of activity after weeks of delay, both houses of the Legislature= =20 approved bills Thursday designed to ease the energy crisis.=20 The state Senate approved measures to encourage energy conservation and spe= ed=20 up power plant construction.=20 Topping that, the Assembly sent the Senate 14 energy-related bills, includi= ng=20 $455 million in loans and grants to encourage energy efficiency and=20 conservation and alternative energy projects by this summer.=20 One of the Assembly bills would require new energy plants approved by the= =20 state to sell their power within California before they offer it to other= =20 states.=20 ""The (California) Energy Commission says for every day we delay this bill= =20 there are 20 megawatts that could be saved that we're not saving,"" said sta= te=20 Sen. Byron Sher, D-Stanford, as senators voted 28-10 to send his conservati= on=20 measure to the Assembly.=20 Senators also approved another Sher bill speeding up the siting of power=20 plants. It went to the Assembly on a 37-1 vote.=20 Meanwhile, a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction Wednesday orderi= ng=20 one of the companies named in the ISO filing, Reliant Energy Services, to= =20 continue selling to California despite its fear that it will not be paid.= =20 U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said Californians were at risk of= =20 irreparable harm if Reliant stopped selling power to the ISO, which buys at= =20 the last minute on behalf of utilities to bolster supplies and try to fend= =20 off blackouts.=20 Such blackouts struck the state twice this week, shutting off power to=20 hundreds of thousands of people from San Diego to Oregon, snarling traffic= =20 and shutting down businesses.=20 The state remained free of any power alerts Thursday morning, as power=20 reserves stayed above 7 percent.=20 Damrell dismissed Reliant's attempt to force the state Department of Water= =20 Resources to back the ISO's purchases for the state's two biggest utilities= ,=20 Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric Co.=20 The judge said he had no authority to force the DWR to pay for that power.= =20 The utilities have been denied credit after amassing billions of dollars in= =20 debt paying high prices for power that the state's energy deregulation law= =20 prevents them from passing on to consumers.=20 Gov. Gray Davis has said the state isn't responsible for purchasing the=20 costly last-minute power the ISO buys for Edison and PG&E, despite a law=20 authorizing state power purchases on the utilities' behalf.=20 ISO attorney Charles Robinson said the ruling gives ISO operators ""a tool t= o=20 assist them in keeping the lights on in California.""=20 ""Had the decision gone the other way, one could expect other generators to= =20 simply ignore emergency orders,"" Robinson said.=20 Damrell's preliminary injunction will remain in effect until the Federal=20 Energy Regulatory Commission rules on the matter.=20 In another development Wednesday, state Controller Kathleen Connell=20 complained that the energy crunch is imperiling California's financial=20 health.=20 Connell said the state's power buying on behalf of Edison and PG&E is gutti= ng=20 its budget surplus. Since the state started making emergency power buys in= =20 January, the surplus has fallen from $8.5 billion to about $3.2 billion, sh= e=20 said.=20 Connell ordered an audit of the state's power buying, saying Davis is=20 withholding key financial information from her office and the Legislature.= =20 She is also refusing a request by Davis and the Legislature to transfer $5.= 6=20 billion into a ""rainy day fund"" she said was set up to impress Wall Street = as=20 the state prepares to issue $10 billion in revenue bonds to cover its power= =20 buying.=20 Transferring the money would leave the state general fund $2.4 billion in= =20 debt, Connell said.=20 Sandy Harrison, spokesman for the state Department of Finance, and Keely=20 Bosler of the Legislative Analyst's Office, said such transfers are routine= =20 and required by law.=20 They put the state's budget surplus at $5.6 billion.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio dismissed the criticism.=20 ""Political grandstanding doesn't generate one more kilowatt of energy for= =20 California in this time of emergency,"" he said.=20 Connell is a candidate for mayor of Los Angeles in next month's election.= =20 The ISO study, meanwhile, covered five major in-state power suppliers =01)= =20 Reliant, Dynegy, Williams/AES, Duke Energy and Mirant, as well as 16 power= =20 importers. All deliver power to customers of Edison, PG&E and San Diego Gas= &=20 Electric Co., the state's three largest investor-owned utilities.=20 ""All overcharged, but some excessively and some by moderate amounts,"" said= =20 ISO's Sheffrin.=20 According to the report, the overcharging took place beginning last May, wh= en=20 the energy crisis began, and continued through last month.=20 During that time, according to the report, energy suppliers commonly offere= d=20 their electricity at twice the amount it cost them to produce.=20 FERC member William L. Massey said he wasn't shocked to hear the amount=20 overcharged added up to more than $5 billion.=20 ""Prices over the past 10 months in California have greatly exceeded the=20 federal standards of just and reasonable prices, and I think they have=20 exceeded the standards by possibly billions of dollars,"" he said.=20 Chuck Griffin, spokesman for Atlanta-based Mirant said the company would=20 justify their charges to FERC officials.=20 ""I think we're missing sometimes just how basic the problem is in Californi= a.=20 Supply and demand are out of whack and some basic rules of economics kick i= n=20 when that happens,"" he said.=20 --- ------------- Disappearing state surplus sparks alarm=20 Controller puts hold on transfer of $5.6 billion to reserve funds By Karen Kucher and Ed Mendel=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITERS=20 March 22, 2001=20 The state's general fund surplus has dropped to $3.2 billion from $8.5=20 billion since January largely because California's power purchases are=20 devouring the money, state controller Kathleen Connell said yesterday.=20 Connell said she wants to see more documentation about state power spending= =20 before approving the transfer of $5.6 billion from the general fund to a=20 special reserve fund requested by Gov. Gray Davis.=20 Connell said the state would have to borrow $2.4 billion to cover the=20 transfer.=20 Report says power wholesalers overcharged California $5.5 billion=20 Outages darken economic outlook in state, some say=20 Out-of-state generators question power regulators' authority=20 Allegheny Energy makes big California connection=20 Enron stock slides despite earnings reassurance=20 California's electricity crisis at-a-glance=20 ?=20 ""We started this year with a generous budget surplus. The energy crisis has= =20 taken much of that away, and this transfer on top of the electricity=20 purchases would put the (general) fund at risk,"" Connell said in a statemen= t.=20 Her action came on a day when state power supplies improved. After two days= =20 of forced outages this week, no rolling blackouts were ordered yesterday.= =20 Several power plants came back on line and imports from the Pacific Northwe= st=20 provided enough electricity to meet demand yesterday, said Stephanie=20 McCorkle, a spokeswoman with the California Independent System Operator,=20 which manages most of the state's power grid.=20 ""Gradually more (electricity) generation comes on every day,"" McCorkle said= .=20 ""By Monday, we should see somewhere around 2,200 megawatts back in service= =20 that was not on this Monday. That's if no other generation falls off.""=20 Meanwhile, Connell's move took some by surprise.=20 A spokesman for the state Department of Finance said Connell is denying a= =20 routine transfer that is required by law. ""It was just a routine accounting= =20 measure that we didn't anticipate becoming controversial,"" Sandy Harrison= =20 said.=20 Connell announced the denial of the transfer a day after Davis endorsed one= =20 of her opponents, former Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa, in the race= =20 for Los Angeles mayor.=20 Connell, who monitors California's cash flow, said she was ""deeply concerne= d=20 about putting the state's general fund in a deficit situation in light of t= he=20 energy crisis.""=20 About two months ago, the state began spending about $50 million a day to b= uy=20 power after Pacific Gas and Electric and Southern California Edison nearly= =20 went bankrupt. It is also purchasing power for customers of San Diego Gas a= nd=20 Electric.=20 The Davis administration said earlier this week it soon will begin spending= =20 an additional $500 million on power purchases, bringing the total to $4.2= =20 billion.=20 As that staggering sum continues to grow, the state won a court battle with= =20 an electricity supplier yesterday. A federal judge in Sacramento sided with= =20 the state and ordered the wholesaler to continue selling to California=20 despite its fear that it will not get paid.=20 Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said Californians were at risk of irreparable ha= rm=20 if Reliant Energy Services stopped selling power to the Independent System= =20 Operator. The ISO acquires last-minute power on behalf of utilities to fill= =20 gaps in supply to try to fend off blackouts.=20 Damrell dismissed Reliant's attempt to force the state Department of Water= =20 Resources to back the ISO's purchases for the state's two biggest utilities= .=20 The judge said he had no authority to force the DWR to pay for the power.= =20 Davis has said the state isn't responsible for purchasing the costly=20 last-minute power the ISO buys for Edison and PG&E, despite a law authorizi= ng=20 state power purchases on the utilities' behalf.=20 Meanwhile, those who manage the power grid say the forecast for power=20 supplies this week looks good, although conditions can change quickly.=20 ISO managers continue to stress the importance of conservation. Utility=20 customers across the state conserved about 900 megawatts of power Tuesday,= =20 which kept blackouts from being ordered that night.=20 As the power crisis worsened this week, ISO managers wished aloud that they= =20 still could rely on business customers to shut down in exchange for lower= =20 energy rates.=20 Such ""interruptible"" customers saved as much as 2,100 megawatts last spring= ,=20 a figure that dropped to about 1,700 last summer and 1,400 at the end of th= e=20 year. But in January, the state Public Utilities Commission told utilities= =20 they could no longer impose fines on business customers who refuse to shut= =20 down when asked.=20 ISO managers realize the program was harming businesses with frequent=20 interruptions of service -- but they still miss having that option, McCorkl= e=20 said.=20 ""It would have made an enormous difference, but at the same time we=20 understand the impact it was having on businesses,"" McCorkle said. --- -------------- Outages darken economic outlook in state, some say=20 By Dean Calbreath? UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 March 22, 2001=20 Until this week, the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce was predicting= =20 that the county was well-insulated from the growing threat of economic=20 recession.=20 But that was before the lights went out in the chamber's downtown=20 headquarters Monday.=20 Working by window light in his darkened office, chamber economist Kelly=20 Cunningham rapidly erased his previous projections for 3.5 percent growth f= or=20 San Diego County. Cunningham now feels the local economy could fall into a= =20 recession thanks to its shaky supply of energy.=20 Report says power wholesalers overcharged California $5.5 billion=20 Disappearing state surplus sparks alarm=20 Out-of-state generators question power regulators' authority=20 Allegheny Energy makes big California connection=20 Enron stock slides despite earnings reassurance=20 California's electricity crisis at-a-glance=20 ?=20 ""Blackouts are very disruptive to the economy,"" Cunningham said. ""A busines= s=20 can absorb rising energy prices by cutting costs or raising its own prices.= =20 But an energy shutoff is much less predictable. It cuts into productivity.""= =20 Those sentiments are being echoed throughout California, as business leader= s=20 and economists worry that rolling blackouts will darken the state's=20 previously glowing economy.=20 At the University of California Los Angeles, for instance, leading financia= l=20 theorists will meet April 4 to discuss the question ""Can California grow in= =20 the dark?"" Although the topic was chosen before the recent string of power= =20 outages, the blackouts have given the issue new urgency.=20 ""These blackouts are not just a single episode,"" said UCLA economist Tom=20 Lieser. ""They are a bridge to what will happen this summer. If we don't fal= l=20 into a recession in the second half of the year, we will fall pretty close.= ""=20 Tapan Munroe, an economist formerly with Pacific Gas and Electric, this wee= k=20 crossed out his projection for 2 percent statewide growth. After blackouts= =20 rolled toward his consulting offices in the Bay Area city of Moraga, Munroe= =20 decided the state will be lucky if it manages zero growth.=20 ""I'm a pretty optimistic guy by nature, but this has been sobering,"" Munroe= =20 said. ""On Tuesday, one restaurant alone in San Francisco lost $20,000.=20 Multiply that by all of the businesses that lost power in the state and=20 you've got a serious problem.""=20 Two days of blackouts in San Diego County have hurt businesses large and=20 small. Among the industries under threat is the local biotechnology sector,= =20 which requires a steady supply of electricity to power areas of laboratorie= s=20 that must remain temperature-controlled and sterile.=20 Continued blackouts ""could have a huge impact, not only in dollars, but=20 multiple millions of dollars,"" said Tom Oster, vice president of operations= =20 for BioCom, the leading trade organization for the more than 200 biotechs i= n=20 San Diego County.=20 Idun Pharmaceuticals, a biotech near La Jolla Village Drive that has 67=20 employees, had its power cut for about 40 minutes Tuesday. Though the compa= ny=20 has a back-up generator, some segments of its laboratories and lab equipmen= t=20 were not supported by it. Chemists also had to turn off some sensitive lab= =20 equipment to avoid the possibility of a damaging power surge once the=20 blackout was over.=20 ""We're not in a position as a small company to back up the whole facility,""= =20 said Steven Mento, Idun's chief executive. ""We haven't done a survey yet to= =20 determine whether we had losses, either in experiments or equipment damaged= =20 -- but we're hoping because the blackout was so short that damage will be= =20 minimal.""=20 Mento said rolling blackouts, coupled with continuing high energy costs,=20 could cripple many small biotechs -- and even take a bite out of bigger, mo= re=20 established companies.=20 ""We generate new compounds in controlled environments on a daily basis, and= =20 when power goes off you can lose samples because of contamination and other= =20 issues,"" Mento said. ""We are fortunate that our losses would be in having t= o=20 repeat an experiment -- but this could be really critical for companies wit= h=20 drug manufacturing and issues of quality control.""=20 The wireless firms along Sorrento Valley have not been immune from blackout= s.=20 The lights went out at Qualcomm early this week, although executives declin= ed=20 to comment about the impact.=20 No blackouts hit the big shipbuilding operations on the waterfront this wee= k.=20 But the National Steel and Shipbuilding Co. -- one of San Diego's largest= =20 employers -- already experienced a voluntary loss of power this year, its= =20 first since World War II. Since the shipyard does not have its own power=20 supply, NASSCO executives fear the effect of unplanned outages.=20 ""Our average payroll totals half a million dollars a day,"" said NASSCO=20 spokesman Jim Scott. ""When you have a day's work disrupted, that can be=20 pretty serious. We're currently in discussions about the possibility of=20 buying from independent power suppliers, or setting up a power plant of our= =20 own.""=20 Small businesses, which constitute the bulk of employment in San Diego=20 County, were hurt by disruptions as well -- costing them vital revenue at a= =20 time when their power bills have skyrocketed.=20 At Fantastic Sam's, a hair salon in Chula Vista, Angelica Alcala estimated= =20 that business dropped 60 percent when the blackouts hit Tuesday. Among othe= r=20 things, Alcala had to alter her planned haircuts because she was relying on= =20 scissors instead of electric clippers.=20 At the Family Fun Center in El Cajon, the management gave vouchers or refun= ds=20 to the 15 or so video-game players who were in the midst of killing aliens = or=20 fighting ninja warriors as the power went down.=20 Papa John's Pizza estimates that it may have lost several thousand dollars = in=20 business after six stores were blacked out Monday and four others lost powe= r=20 Tuesday. Brian Mills, who runs 23 Papa John's stores in the county, said hi= s=20 main concern was shutting down the computers so they would not be damaged b= y=20 a power surge when the electricity was restored.=20 Paul Ecke III, a member of the West Coast advisory panel for the Federal=20 Reserve, said the potential impact of the energy crisis ""is worse than any= =20 downturn in the stock market.""=20 Ecke, who runs the Paul Ecke Ranch flower operation in Encinitas, said the= =20 crisis could be particularly harmful for the state's agricultural sector,= =20 since farmers need electricity to pump water and natural gas to heat=20 greenhouses.=20 ""What I'm really worried about is the energy thing is going to cast a shado= w=20 on California,"" he said. ""If you're a business person thinking about moving= =20 to California right now, you're probably not going to do it because you're= =20 not sure you're going to have your lights on this summer.""=20 Besides the disruption to businesses, the energy crisis is also hurting the= =20 pocketbooks of hourly workers who have been sent home during the crisis.=20 Under state law, employers are free to send hourly workers home without pay= =20 during such emergencies, although salaried workers must still be paid.=20 Susan Kemp, an attorney with the California Chamber of Commerce, said there= =20 are ways of minimizing the impact on hourly workers.=20 ""You have to look at what time it is when the blackout occurs and how long= =20 you think it's going to last,"" Kemp said. ""If it's around a meal time, you= =20 might send the workers out for a longer meal period if you think it's going= =20 to be an hour or hour and a half delay.""=20 But the potential for losing wages doesn't sit well with the hourly workers= .=20 ""When you get sent home early and lose your wages, you have even less money= =20 to pay your inflated energy bills,"" said an hourly worker who was sent home= =20 during Monday's blackout.=20 --- ---------- Out-of-state generators question power regulators' authority=20 By Karen Gaudette ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 22, 2001=20 SAN FRANCISCO =01) At least three major out-of-state electricity generators= are=20 challenging the authority of the California Public Utilities Commission to= =20 investigate whether they deliberately reduced power supplies to drive up=20 prices.=20 The PUC has asked for power plant maintenance records as it tries to=20 determine whether Duke Energy, Dynegy Inc., Mirant Corp. and other=20 wholesalers have manipulated the energy market at California's expense.=20 At issue is who ultimately controls oversight of in-state plants that provi= de=20 most of California's electricity. The plants, once owned by the state's=20 largest utilities, were sold off as part of the state's 1996 attempt at=20 deregulation.=20 Report says power wholesalers overcharged California $5.5 billion=20 Disappearing state surplus sparks alarm=20 Outages darken economic outlook in state, some say=20 Allegheny Energy makes big California connection=20 Enron stock slides despite earnings reassurance=20 California's electricity crisis at-a-glance=20 ?=20 PUC President Loretta Lynch said the public deserves to know whether=20 generators have unnecessarily taken plants off-line to create artificial=20 shortages, forcing the utilities and now state bureaucrats to buy much high= er=20 priced power on the spot energy market.=20 ""What I do know is we have historically high levels of outages across the= =20 board,"" Lynch told The Associated Press. ""Dynegy and Duke have been fightin= g=20 the PUC in the PUC's quest to obtain documents about these outages.""=20 The PUC has the authority to regulate facilities within its borders, she=20 added. ""It doesn't matter where the headquarters of the company is.""=20 Duke, based in North Carolina, says it does matter =01) and that since it a= nd=20 other wholesalers aren't headquartered in California, the PUC can't require= =20 it to turn over the maintenance records.=20 ""We have not given them proprietary information because they do not regulat= e=20 us,"" said Duke's spokesman, Tom Williams.=20 Dynegy did not return calls for comment Wednesday.=20 The PUC also faces a new challenge in the legislature. A bill sponsored by= =20 Assemblywoman Carole Migden, D-San Francisco, which would have granted the= =20 PUC greater inspection authority over out-of-state generators, was amended= =20 this month to grant the authority to Independent System Operator instead.= =20 The ISO has managed the delivery of energy through most of the state's powe= r=20 grid but historically has done little regulating and has had no policing=20 authority.=20 This board, created during the state's 1996 attempt at deregulation, was=20 redesigned in January. Now it has a five-member board appointed by Davis,= =20 replacing a 26-member ISO board composed of utility executives, marketers,= =20 power plant owners and others.=20 The latest version of Migden's bill requires wholesalers to report monthly = to=20 the ISO about any plants that are off-line or working at reduced capacity,= =20 and gives the ISO power to audit these reports.=20 But because the ISO board historically has made key decisions behind closed= =20 doors and is exempt from certain open-government regulations, government=20 watchdogs are outraged by the switch.=20 ""The PUC's been no friend of ratepayers, but at least under the constitutio= n=20 and state law they're required to conduct their process in the open and the= =20 public can intervene,"" said Harvey Rosenfield of the Foundation for Taxpaye= r=20 and Consumer Rights.=20 Davis ordered last month that the ISO take the lead among state agencies to= =20 ensure adequate energy supplies. Alan LoFaso, an aide to Migden, said the= =20 amendment follows Davis' lead.=20 Both LoFaso and the governor's spokesman, Steve Maviglio, downplayed the=20 change. ""I don't know if we have a preference"" as to which state agency get= s=20 the authority to continue the probe, Maviglio said.=20 The challenge by Duke Energy, Houston-based Dynegy Inc. and Mirant Corp. of= =20 Atlanta came in filings March 12 asking for a rehearing of the PUC's Februa= ry=20 resolution reasserting its legal authority to ""examine the books, accounts,= =20 memoranda, contracts and records"" of generators selling energy to utilities= =20 already subject to PUC regulation.=20 Those utilities include Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern Californi= a=20 Edison Co., which have been nearly bankrupted buying power from wholesalers= ,=20 as well as the financially troubled San Diego Gas and Electric -- Allegheny Energy makes big California connection=20 ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 22, 2001=20 HAGERSTOWN, Md. =01) Allegheny Energy Inc. said Thursday it has agreed to s= ell=20 $4.5 billion worth of power to California's electricity-purchasing agency= =20 over the next 10 years.=20 The company said the contract call for Allegheny to provide up to 1,000=20 megawatts that the Hagerstown-based company has secured from western=20 generating plants through its new energy trading division, Allegheny Energy= =20 Global Markets =01) formerly Merrill Lynch Global Energy Markets.=20 ""This is a win-win for both the state of California and Allegheny Energy. I= t=20 provides a long-term source of fixed-price energy and should help to=20 stabilize prices in California,"" said Michael P. Morrell, president of the= =20 Allegheny Energy Supply division.=20 --- ----------- Judge Frees Small Firm From Edison Contract=20 By KEN ELLINGWOOD and DAN MORAIN, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????EL CENTRO--California's balance of electrical power shifted slightly= =20 Thursday when an Imperial County judge temporarily freed a small geothermal= =20 energy producer from its contract with Southern California Edison, allowing= =20 it to sell power on the open market. ?????The ruling by Superior Court Judge Donal B. Donnelly could lead to a= =20 mass exodus by hundreds of small energy producers that have been selling=20 power to the state's financially troubled utilities for months without=20 getting paid. ?????At the same time, it may have staved off plans by a group of the small= =20 generators to send Edison into involuntary bankruptcy as early as today. ?????In Sacramento, energy legislation pushed by Gov. Gray Davis passed in= =20 the state Senate but foundered in the Assembly. The measure was intended to= =20 ensure that the state gets repaid for the electricity that it has been buyi= ng=20 on behalf of Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric, which say they lack the cas= h=20 and credit to purchase power. The bill also was supposed to guarantee that= =20 the small, alternative energy producers--which together provide nearly a=20 third of the state's power--get paid. But Assembly Republicans opposed it,= =20 saying it hadn't been given sufficient scrutiny. ?????The impact of the small producers was made clear in Imperial County,= =20 where Edison's failure to pay CalEnergy, the county's biggest property=20 taxpayer, had outsize implications. CalEnergy had put county officials on= =20 notice that it was about to miss a $3.8-million property tax payment. The= =20 uncertainty had prompted the tiny Calipatria Unified School District to=20 postpone a bond issue for badly needed school repairs. ?????Among CalEnergy Chairman David Sokol's first acts after the judge's=20 ruling Thursday was to promise Imperial County Supervisor Wally J. Leimgrub= er=20 that the company would pay its property taxes on time. ?????""That is great news,"" Leimgruber said. ?????Within hours of its court victory, CalEnergy had stopped transmitting= =20 geothermal power to Edison and begun selling it to El Paso Energy, a=20 marketing company that purchased the energy at prevailing rates and resold = it=20 on the spot market. ?????Some of the more than 700 other small energy producers in the state sa= id=20 they were considering similar action against Edison and Pacific Gas &=20 Electric. ?????""We absolutely need the right to sell to third parties,"" said Dean=20 Vanech, president of Delta Power, a New Jersey company that owns five small= =20 gas-fired plants in California and is owed tens of millions of dollars by= =20 Edison. ?????Sokol praised the Imperial County judge and said his company simply=20 wanted the authority to sell its power ""to a credit-worthy company that, in= =20 fact, pays for the power."" ?????An Edison spokesman said the company was disappointed with the ruling,= =20 but sympathized with CalEnergy and other small producers because=20 ""California's power crisis has placed [them] in financial distress, just as= =20 it has placed utilities in financial distress."" ?????Edison expressed concern that the ruling would prompt CalEnergy and=20 other small producers to sell their power out of state. Sokol said CalEnerg= y=20 had specifically told El Paso Energy that it hoped its power would remain i= n=20 California, ""but if someone wants to pay a higher price out of state, we=20 can't stop them."" ?????Sokol said that Edison still owes CalEnergy $140 million and that the= =20 company--along with seven other small producers--had been prepared to file = a=20 petition in federal bankruptcy court in Los Angeles today forcing the utili= ty=20 into involuntary bankruptcy. He said his company no longer intends to do so= ,=20 and he believed--but wasn't certain--that the other companies would shelve= =20 their plans. ?????Edison filed papers Thursday with the federal Securities and Exchange= =20 Commission showing that it owed $840 million to various small electricity= =20 producers, many of which rely on renewable energy sources such as geotherma= l=20 steam, solar energy or wind. ?????The alternative energy producers--and utilities--strenuously objected = to=20 the legislation considered in Sacramento on Thursday. The bill, spelling ou= t=20 how the utilities are to pay the state and the small producers, passed the= =20 Senate on a 27-9 vote, the exact two-thirds margin required. But it stalled= =20 in the Assembly on a 46-23 party-line vote, well short of two-thirds. ?????""When I was a citizen back in Lancaster, I heard these stories about= =20 pieces of legislation that were cooked up late at night, that . . . were cu= t=20 and pasted together and were rammed through by the Legislature,"" Assemblyma= n=20 George Runner (R-Lancaster) said. ""That's exactly what we have before us."" ?????The alternative electricity generators, including oil companies, warne= d=20 that they would lose money under the Davis proposal, while representatives = of=20 Edison and PG&E, which have amassed billions in debt in the worsening energ= y=20 crisis, said the legislation would push them deeper into the hole. ?????""There isn't enough money,"" Edison attorney Ann Cohn testified at a=20 Senate hearing on the bill Thursday. ""It is a very simple question: Dollars= =20 going out cannot be greater than dollars coming in."" ?????The bill, AB 8X, combined several proposals. First, it sought to clari= fy=20 earlier legislation by spelling out that Edison and PG&E must pay the state= =20 all money collected from consumers for electricity that the state has been= =20 buying. ?????Additionally, the bill would turn over to the California Public=20 Utilities Commission the thorny issue of how much to pay alternative energy= =20 producers for their electricity. ?????Wind, solar and geothermal producers might agree to the prices offered= =20 by the administration. But most of the alternative energy producers,=20 including Chevron and British Petroleum, use natural gas to generate=20 electricity through ""cogeneration,"" a process of creating steam for both=20 electric generation and heat. With natural gas prices high, they contend,= =20 they would lose money at the prices Davis is offering. ---=20 ?????Ellingwood reported from El Centro, Morain from Sacramento. Times staf= f=20 writers Mitchell Landsberg in Los Angeles and Jenifer Warren, Nancy Vogel a= nd=20 Carl Ingram in Sacramento contributed to this story. --- ------------------- Lodi Defies Order for Blackouts=20 Utility tells PG&E to 'pay the bills'=20 Alan Gathright, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday, March 23, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /23/M N171303.DTL=20 Let history show that the rebellion against rolling blackouts started when= =20 the Central Valley town of Lodi defied PG&E and refused to unplug its=20 customers this week.=20 Like several cities that own their own utilities, Lodi saw the energy crunc= h=20 looming last fall and spent millions for long-term power contracts in an=20 attempt to avoid blackouts.=20 Now, Lodi and a Northern California municipal utility cooperative that=20 includes Palo Alto, Santa Clara and Alameda are telling Pacific Gas and=20 Electric Co. that it's unfair to force their customers to endure blackouts= =20 triggered by the near-bankrupt utility's failure to pay its debts.=20 ""The problem is not paying bills, so pay the bills,"" said Alan Vallow,=20 director of the utility serving Lodi's 58,000 residents. ""I won't arbitrari= ly=20 screw my customers . . . so 5,000 PG&E customers can turn on their lights= =20 somewhere else.""=20 When PG&E relayed an order from state power regulators Monday and Tuesday f= or=20 Lodi to black out some of its customers, a strategy intended to keep the=20 West's power grid from collapsing, Lodi said no.=20 So far, other cities in the Northern California Power Agency say they will= =20 continue to participate in rotating outages.=20 But in a letter last Friday to PG&E, members of the agency and four other= =20 utility districts, including Sacramento's, warned they didn't believe long-= =20 standing agreements that allow them to use PG&E transmission lines to conne= ct=20 to the grid obliged them to endure rolling blackouts because of ""PG&E's=20 failure to pay its power obligations.""=20 They say the agreements require them to reduce power demand only in respons= e=20 to natural disasters or malfunctions damaging power lines or plants.=20 The agencies asked for a meeting with PG&E President Gordon Smith before=20 anticipated summer blackouts hit, ""to develop a more rational program for= =20 allocation of risks associated with (power demand) load shedding before you= =20 call on us to participate in load shedding again.""=20 REFUSING TO SHARE BURDEN PG&E officials accused Lodi of selfishly refusing to share the burden of th= e=20 statewide energy crisis.=20 ""It is regrettable that after reaping the benefits of the (power grid)=20 interconnection contract for many years, Lodi is suddenly unwilling to bear= =20 their share of the burden of the statewide energy crisis,"" said PG&E=20 spokesman Ron Low. ""When cities like Lodi do not follow the (state=20 Independent System Operator's) order to curtail power, it hurts all of=20 California and jeopardizes the entire power grid.""=20 Low also disagreed with accusations that this week's blackouts were trigger= ed=20 by PG&E's failure to pay its bills, noting that the ISO stated that 12,000= =20 megawatts of power were offline because of plant maintenance.=20 But ISO spokeswoman Lisa Szot confirmed assertions by the municipal utiliti= es=20 that power generators had kept an additional 3,000 megawatts offline becaus= e=20 they feared PG&E couldn't pay.=20 Lodi's Vallow said he was legally obliged to serve city customers. Lodi=20 residents are facing rate increases of as much as 15 percent under a power= =20 contract that the city secured in hopes of avoiding blackouts. The contract= =20 required Lodi to pay a $10 million premium above its typical $23 million=20 annual energy bill.=20 'THAT'S NOT FAIR'=20 ""I've been hearing (PG&E say), 'Gee, that's not fair. Where's the equity if= =20 everybody is doing rolling blackouts and you're not?' "" Vallow said. ""Well,= I=20 put my customers at financial risk to the tune of $10 million. And if they'= re=20 not going to get to use that power they paid for, then by God, give us that= =20 money back.""=20 Vallow said he was willing to sell PG&E some of Lodi's power surplus, knowi= ng=20 Lodi might not be paid.=20 ""But I'm not willing to turn off 5,000 customers, so 5,000 customers=20 somewhere else can turn their lights on,"" Vallow said. ""The objective here,= =20 people, is to keep as many lights on as possible.""=20 Other city-owned utilities, while annoyed with the rolling blackouts, aren'= t=20 going as far as Lodi.=20 WEATHERING BLACKOUTS ""I certainly understand the frustrations of utilities like Lodi and actuall= y=20 share those frustrations in many cases,"" said John Roukema, assistant=20 director of Santa Clara's utility.=20 But he stressed that his agency had been able to weather blackouts without= =20 hurting residents or small business, because 17 major industrial power user= s=20 had agreed to curtail demand during energy alerts.=20 ""The prudent thing to do at this time is to continue to do our share and=20 participate in rolling blackouts, because a single problem could cause a=20 catastrophic failure in the statewide system,"" Roukema said.=20 In Alameda, residents endured blackouts this week despite the fact that cit= y=20 has secured reliable power supplies, said Matt McCabe, spokesman for Alamed= a=20 Power & Telecom.=20 ""It was in the best of interests of Alamedans to maintain the stability and= =20 integrity of the grid,"" he said. ""Now, if it becomes evident that the syste= m=20 is being jeopardized for financial reasons, then we should not have to=20 subject Alamedans to rolling blackouts.""=20 In Palo Alto, which also had blackouts this week, utility officials told th= e=20 City Council they were expecting a 30 to 40 percent rate hike this spring t= o=20 pay new contracts guaranteeing a stable power supply, said Councilman Bern= =20 Beecham. The city hopes to avoid giving customers the double whammy of rate= =20 boosts and more blackouts with a program that gets industrial users to cut= =20 demand voluntarily during alerts.=20 ""When there's not enough generating capacity in the state to protect the=20 integrity of the grid, that is in fact everybody's problem,"" Beecham said,= =20 but that doesn't mean Palo Alto is willing to endure blackouts to prop up= =20 PG&E's ailing finances.=20 ""We need to have some very frank discussions with PG&E about mutual=20 obligations,"" Beecham said.=20 Energy Tips=20 With Californians facing electricity and natural gas shortages, PG&E has=20 several tips to help conserve both:=20 -- Set the furnace thermostat at 68 degrees or lower, health permitting.=20 -- Wash only full loads in a dishwasher. If operating instructions allow,= =20 turn dishwasher off before the drying cycle and let dishes dry naturally.= =20 -- Use low-wattage or fluorescent lights.=20 -- Fix defective plumbing and dripping faucets, which waste water and=20 increase the gas or electric bill for heating the water.=20 -- Plug gaps around pipes, ducts, fans and vents that go through walls,=20 ceilings and floors.=20 -- Keep furnaces clean, and clean or replace the filter regularly.=20 -- Turn heaters down when using a fireplace, and close the damper when not= =20 using the fireplace.=20 -- On sunny days, open drapes on windows facing south and let the sun shine= =20 in. At night, close the drapes to retain indoor heat.=20 Source: www.pge.com=20 E-mail Alan Gathright at ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 --- Coming Down to the Wire=20 State legislators battle over alternative energy bills=20 Greg Lucas, Robert Salladay, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau Friday, March 23, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /23/M N113351.DTL=20 Sacramento -- After several weeks of slow to no progress in attacking the= =20 state's energy mess, the Legislature erupted yesterday into a frenzy of=20 energy activity.=20 The sudden action on a series of energy bills -- including one to let=20 businesses buy power directly from generators -- stemmed initially from the= =20 fear of bad publicity lawmakers might receive for a planned three-day junke= t=20 next week to Washington, D.C.=20 When a key bill bogged down in the Assembly late yesterday, Speaker Bob=20 Hertzberg, D-Sherman Oaks, announced the trip was canceled.=20 Another reason for the flurry of action was recognition that time is runnin= g=20 out.=20 Several alternative energy producers -- like wind farms and biomass plants = -=20 - said they were one day away from forcing the state's two biggest utilitie= s=20 into bankruptcy because they were owed more than $1 billion.=20 The Legislature's action and a court ruling that could free alternative=20 producers from unpaid contracts.=20 ""This is triage, members of the Senate,"" said Sen. Jim Costa, D-Fresno. ""Th= is=20 is crisis activity we're engaged in.""=20 The Senate approved a bill aimed at helping state regulators get cash to so= me=20 alternative energy producers. Most of them have been paid little or nothing= =20 since November by the utilities they sell electricity to.=20 Senators passed a bill to help the Public Utilities Commission order=20 utilities to pay solar, wind and other alternative energy producers who sig= n=20 lower-priced contracts with the utilities.=20 The bill failed in the Assembly because of GOP opposition, fanned in part b= y=20 price concerns by the oil industry, a major co-generation producer. The=20 Assembly is set to meet again today to try again pass the bill, which the P= UC=20 needs to issue its final order.=20 The PUC's proposed order offers the first hint of financial relief for=20 hundreds of alternative energy producers, known as ''qualified facilities"" = in=20 the energy industry, who have been paid just pennies on the dollar by cash-= =20 strapped Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison.=20 Lack of payments has caused many alternative generators to shutter their=20 operations.=20 The PUC's proposal, which will be considered at the commission's meeting=20 Tuesday, offers generators a choice of agreeing to a five-year contract at= =20 $79 per megawatt or a 10-year deal at $69 per megawatt, Davis said. The goi= ng=20 rate now is about $150 a megawatt hour.=20 The order does not address money already owed to the more than 600=20 alternative energy producers.=20 Under the order, utilities would have to pay any generator who signed the n= ew=20 contracts within two weeks.=20 But PG&E said it might not be able to afford do that.=20 Operators of co-generation facilities say the contracts contemplated by the= =20 PUC don't cover their cost of producing energy because the sale price no=20 longer would be pegged to the the price of natural gas.=20 In a significant court decision affecting generators, one geothermal energy= =20 supplier in Imperial County won a lawsuit yesterday against Edison allowing= =20 the company to escape a contract requiring it to sell electricity to the=20 utility.=20 A superior court judge said CalEnergy, operator of the geothermal plant,=20 could suspend deliveries to Edison and sell the 268 megawatt hours it=20 generated on the open market.=20 CalEnergy is owed $75 million by the utility.=20 The court victory may ease mounting pressure from some qualified facilities= ,=20 including CalEnergy, to drive one or both of the utilities into involuntary= =20 bankruptcy.=20 The Assembly and Senate, meanwhile, rushed through a series of bills aimed = at=20 increasing energy conservation, and rushing the building of new power plant= s.=20 Most significant for bigger residential and commercial utility customers is= a=20 measure passed by the Assembly to allow energy customers to buy power=20 directly from generators.=20 That right was eliminated in January when the state began buying power for= =20 the cash-strapped utilities.=20 The bill approved unanimously yesterday would impose a yet to be determined= =20 exit fee on customers who leave the power grid to help cover the state's=20 financial exposure.=20 Tell Us What You Think=20 Can you save 20 percent on your energy use? Gov. Gray Davis' administration= =20 is offering rebates for Californians who save on power starting in June, an= d=20 if you've got a strategy for conserving, The Chronicle wants to hear it.=20 We'll be writing about the hardest-working energy savers in a future story.= =20 To get involved, write to the Energy Desk, San Francisco Chronicle, 901=20 Mission St., San Francisco, CA 94103; or e-mail energysaver@sfchronicle.com= .=20 E-mail the reporters at glucas@sfchronicle.com and bsalladay@sfchronicle.co= m.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 14=20 --- State's bill for energy could double this year=20 Posted at 9:34 p.m. PST Thursday, March 22, 2001=20 BY=20 STEVE=20 JOHNSON=20 AND=20 JOHN=20 Warning that California is imperiled by the prices it is paying for=20 electricity, a report Thursday said the state's annual power tab could wind= =20 up being 10 times what it was two years ago.=20 At the current rate of spending, the report estimated that the total=20 electricity bill in California this year could hit $70 billion, which is mo= re=20 than twice what it was last year and about 10 times what was paid in 1999 a= nd=20 1998.=20 ``The California electricity market has gone from being `dysfunctional' to= =20 precipitating a crisis,'' according to the report from the Independent Syst= em=20 Operator.=20 It added that the price being charged ``threatens any semblance of just and= =20 reasonable consumer rates, the financial viability of California's=20 investor-owned utilities, the financial stability of California, of its=20 neighboring states and of the nation.''=20 While power suppliers denied any wrongdoing, the report said the state=20 appears to have been hit with ``excess'' charges totaling $6.87 billion sin= ce=20 May, based on an assessment of the typical operating costs of power plant= =20 owners. Out of that total, $6.2 billion appeared to be excessive charges=20 during times when power was not in particularly short supply, the agency=20 said.=20 The cost of power has become a growing concern now that the state has stepp= ed=20 in to buy it on behalf of Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern Californi= a=20 Edison, which claim to be so strapped for cash that they are on the verge o= f=20 bankruptcy.=20 In making public the report, which was sent to the Federal Energy Regulator= y=20 Commission, officials at the Independent System Operator were careful not t= o=20 accuse any power companies of price gouging. While the prices appeared to b= e=20 unreasonable, they said, the state needs to learn more about the specific= =20 operating costs of power plant operators before they could determine whethe= r=20 California was cheated.=20 The officials said they were considering asking the federal agency, which= =20 oversees power wholesalers, to order the suppliers to make refunds. In the= =20 past two weeks, the federal agency has warned a number of suppliers that th= ey=20 may have to refund $135 million in apparent overcharges during January and= =20 February.=20 But many experts question whether the federal agency is serious about=20 demanding such refunds, so California officials also are reviewing the=20 possibility of suing the suppliers or seeking criminal charges against some= =20 of them. ``We're working very closely with a number of agencies to review t= he=20 information we currently have to determine what remedies may be available,'= '=20 said Charles Robinson, the Independent System Operator's general counsel.= =20 The report's suspicions were partly bolstered by another study made public= =20 Thursday by the state auditor. It said California's market structure=20 encouraged bidding gamesmanship by both utilities and power sellers ``in an= =20 effort to manipulate wholesale prices to their advantage.'' But it stopped= =20 short of accusing power generators of profiting illegally.=20 ``There's clearly some evidence of market abuse,'' said state Auditor Elain= e=20 Howle. Even so, she added, ``that's not to say it's anything illegal. We=20 hired consultants, they looked at some of the bidding, and they weren't=20 comfortable going that far.''=20 Although no power companies were named in either report, officials with=20 several suppliers insisted they have done nothing wrong.=20 ``We've conducted our business legally and ethically,'' said Richard=20 Wheatley, spokesman for Reliant Energy, which runs five major California=20 power plants. ``The ISO report appears to be nothing more than just another= =20 attempt to put blame at someone else's doorstep, when there's been very=20 little action out of Sacramento to resolve the problems in the California= =20 marketplace.''=20 Duke Energy spokesman Jeremy Dreier said the company, which runs plants in= =20 Moss Landing and Morro Bay, sold most of its power last year and this year = in=20 relatively low-cost, long-term contracts, and was among the first to offer= =20 such deals to the state. He added that Duke increased production from its= =20 aging plants to meet surging demand.=20 ``The fact that we were among the first to bring long-term contracts to the= =20 table speaks volumes about how we're trying to serve this market,'' Dreier= =20 said.=20 John Sousa of Dynegy Inc., which co-owns three major California plants, add= ed=20 that ``given the market conditions, the rates we charged were just and=20 reasonable.''=20 --- Plan for alternate power plants stalls=20 Posted at 10:03 p.m. PST Thursday, March 22, 2001=20 BY DION NISSENBAUM AND JENNIFER BJORHUS=20 Mercury News=20 SACRAMENTO -- The state's prospects for plugging a critical electricity gap= =20 dimmed Thursday when the state Assembly rejected a rescue plan for=20 alternative power companies and a state judge ruled that one such firm coul= d=20 stop selling energy in California.=20 Both actions threaten the plan Gov. Gray Davis announced just Tuesday to ke= ep=20 these companies running and stave off more blackouts. With the state's=20 troubled utilities failing to pay for their electricity, many alternative= =20 energy plants have been shutting down.=20 The dual blows came on a day when tempers flared in the Capitol as lawmaker= s=20 jarred by back-to-back blackouts launched bipartisan attacks on Pacific Gas= &=20 Electric Co. and Southern California Edison, which aren't paying wind, sola= r,=20 biomass, geothermal and small gas-fired plants for their electricity.=20 After Republicans shot down the measure meant to keep alternative energy=20 companies in business, Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg, D-Van Nuys, warne= d=20 that the restless companies might act on their threat to force the utilitie= s=20 into bankruptcy.=20 ``They said it, and I understood them to mean it,'' he said.=20 The failure overshadowed a burst of action in Sacramento where lawmakers=20 approved a host of other measures. The Senate approved two key bills: one= =20 that would spend more than $1 billion to encourage Californians to conserve= =20 energy and one that would make it easier to build power plants. The Assembl= y=20 approved 14 incremental bills.=20 Six votes short=20 But the Assembly fell six votes short of passing a hastily prepared bill=20 meant to help prop up the nearly 700 alternative energy companies, many of= =20 which are now idle.=20 Those closings sapped California of energy this week and helped cause two= =20 days of rolling blackouts -- the first since January.=20 In response, Davis and lawmakers cobbled together a plan to set new, lower= =20 rates for alternative power and to fine the utilities if they refuse to pay= =20 these companies, which supply up to a third of the state's power.=20 But Republicans refused to back the measure and said it contained too many= =20 complex parts that needed more time to analyze.=20 ``Everyone in this room knows that this piece of legislation has not had a= =20 good look,'' said Assemblyman George Runner, R-Lancaster.=20 Assemblyman Fred Keeley, D-Santa Cruz, castigated the Republicans and=20 implored them to accept an imperfect solution.=20 ``Ladies and gentlemen: Welcome to the NFL,'' he said. ``Welcome to the wor= ld=20 where large, complex issues don't have a simple solution.''=20 Approval is needed before state regulators at the Public Utilities Commissi= on=20 can vote on the fine points of the plan. That was supposed to happen Tuesda= y.=20 Much of the criticism focused on concerns raised by power plants that use= =20 natural gas to produce energy. Administrators from those plants said the=20 Davis price caps would make it impossible for them to break even.=20 The derailment came hours after the measure narrowly won approval in the=20 state Senate.=20 Hertzberg plans to search for a compromise today and canceled plans for the= =20 Assembly's annual trip to Washington.=20 Thursday's actions were highlighted by angry attacks on the utilities by=20 frustrated lawmakers.=20 ``I hope they do go bankrupt,'' shouted Senate President pro tem John Burto= n,=20 D-San Francisco, during a debate on the energy crisis. ``Let them go belly= =20 up. I don't care any more.''=20 Legal decision adds twist=20 The legislative failure was compounded by a legal decision in Southern=20 California that further complicated the picture.=20 A Superior Court judge in Imperial County cleared the way for CalEnergy=20 Operating Corp. to break its contract with Edison and sell its 268 megawatt= s=20 of power on the open market. The judge concluded that Edison had breached i= ts=20 contract by failing to pay CalEnergy since November.=20 That ruling could pave the way for hundreds of others to follow suit and=20 drain off power California needs to prevent blackouts.=20 ``It's not good,'' said V. John White, director of the Center for Energy=20 Efficiency and Renewable Technologies. ``This is potentially going to chang= e=20 the dynamics of the situation, and probably not for the better.''=20 Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of the Independent Energy Producers=20 Association, said it was unclear whether other companies would sue.=20 ``I think this is a very significant development,'' he said. ``We're sort o= f=20 at a period where the industry's reaching the end of the rope.''=20 The ruling did have one silver lining: CalEnergy Chairman David Sokol said= =20 his company and seven others had planned to force Edison into bankruptcy if= =20 they lost in court.=20 But he also warned, ``You stick a sharp stick in enough people's eyes, and= =20 they get pretty tired of it.''=20 The situation with generators supplying PG&E isn't as dire since the compan= y=20 has been making partial payments.=20 Kent Burton, senior vice president for Covanta Energy Corp. in New Jersey,= =20 said, ``They've tried to be responsive.''=20 Mercury News Staff Writer Mark Gladstone contributed to this report. Contac= t=20 Dion Nissenbaum at dnissenbaum@sjmercury.com or (916) 441-4603 or Jennifer= =20 Bjorhus at jbjorhus@sjmercury.com or (408) 920-5660. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Hold for Cynthia - possible meeting with Erskine Bowles (with Dr.
 Lay) and others; [EMail-Body]= Dept of ag [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Video Tape; [EMail-Body]= I'll send it back on Tuesday. Jose Bestard@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 02/18/2000 08:02 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Maureen McVicker/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Video Tape Steve. Did you get a chance to look at the video tape I gave you? I would like to have it back to show it in Brazil Thanks, Jose [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Summary, and electronic version of presentation slides on
 06/28/2001; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Kim, Jinbaek Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 3:08 PM To: Lee, Bob; Kaminski, Vince J; Lu, Zimin; Bharati, Rakesh; De, Rabi; Huang, Alex; Shanbhogue, Vasant; Supatgiat, Chonawee; Barkley, Tom Subject: Summary, and electronic version of presentation slides on 06/28/2001 Hi, Attached is the summary and slides. Regards, Jinbaek [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Friday?; [EMail-Body]= Krishna, FYI Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Dale M. Nesbitt"" Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 12:18 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Cc: Thomas Y. Choi Subject: RE: Friday? Vince: Perfect. I forgot what year your son was. Did he graduate with Chelsea and the Clintons? Tons of Bay Area TV coverage of the Clinton graduation (with honors they said) from Stanford. (How can you graduate with honors when you are traveling all over the world with mom and dad.) Fortunately, they plan to be gone when you get here...lot less crowded. I will look forward to hearing from Krishna via email or via cell phone at 650.218.3069. Thanks very much for accelerating this and putting it on your agenda. Dale -----Original Message----- From: Kaminski, Vince J Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 8:07 AM To: Cc: Krishnarao, Pinnamaneni; Crenshaw, Shirley Subject: RE: Friday? Dale, I shall be in your part of the world on Friday (Palo Alto). I shall ask Krishna to meet you in my place. Vince Kaminski > -----Original Message----- > From: ""Dale M. Nesbitt"" > > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 2:32 AM > To: Kaminski, Vince J > Subject: Friday? > > Vince: > > I am firming up my plans for this week. Is it the right time to get > together this coming Friday at your facility to talk about NARG and/or > the > impending NARG demo with you and/or the responsible Enron people? > Give me > an email shout if you could to confirm or schedule for a later date. > It > would be propitious from our end to initiate the discussions with the > right > people in your organization on that day because my gas guy Tom Choi > (Kim > Watson and others know him) will also be with me in Houston on that > day. > > All the best. I hope you have dried out. > > Dale Nesbitt > [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL - Scott Jones Draft; [EMail-Body]= Attached is the draft testimony of Scott Jones. Comments should be received no later than 3:00 PM EST on Sunday, August 26. All comments and suggestions need to be in writing and can be faxed (not E-mailed) to Dan Watkiss at 202-857-2131. Also, if your suggestion is a proposed addition, please write out the exact language you would propose we incorporate into the testimony and where you would place the addition. Donald A. Kaplan, Esq. Preston Gates Ellis & Rouvelas Meeds LLP Suite 500 1735 New York Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006 Ph: (202) 662-8466 Fax: (202) 331-1024 donk@prestongates.com (See attached file: TFG SJones Draft 8-25-01.doc)(See attached file: Exhibit STJ-6.xls)(See attached file: Exhibit STJ-3.xls)(See attached file: Exhibit STJ-4.xls)(See attached file: Exhibit STJ-5.xls)(See attached file: Exhibit STJ-2.doc) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This email message is intended solely for the individual or individuals named above. It may contain confidential attorney-client privileged information and/or attorney work product. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are requested not to read, copy or distribute it or any of the information it contains. Please delete it immediately and notify the sender by return email or by telephone. Thank you. <<TFG SJones Draft 8-25-01.doc>> <<Exhibit STJ-6.xls>> <<Exhibit STJ-3.xls>> <<Exhibit STJ-4.xls>> <<Exhibit STJ-5.xls>> <<Exhibit STJ-2.doc>> - TFG SJones Draft 8-25-01.doc - Exhibit STJ-6.xls - Exhibit STJ-3.xls - Exhibit STJ-4.xls - Exhibit STJ-5.xls - Exhibit STJ-2.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW:  StatSoft; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Mack, Iris Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2001 1:50 PM To: Dhar, Amitava; Frantzeskakis, Kyriakos Cc: Shanbhogue, Vasant; Kaminski, Vince J; Tamarchenko, Tanya Subject: FW: StatSoft FYI, the following website describes a variety of econometrics methods - which we plan to implement to solve the private firm problem. Many of these methods were briefly described in the recent draft of the Duffie document. Kyriakos will be writing a paper which will describe these methods in more detail. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Lay, Palmer and isakoff; [EMail-Body]= , Palmer [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Follow up for Ken; [EMail-Body]= Rep Scott McGinnis (colo) told Ken that he would like to be briefed on the California and broader energy situation so that he can speak out on the issue. Also, don't forget that we need to go see your buddy Newt! [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CONFIDENTIAL - Disclosure Schedules; [EMail-Body]= > Attached please find copies of the following schedules and annexes to the > Purchase and Sale Agreement: > > 1) the Master Parent Disclosure Letter; > > 2) the schedules for India; > > 3) the schedules for EGEP; > > 4) the schedules for APACHI; and > > 5) Annex G, listing the contracts that have been excluded for > confidentiality reasons. > > Please note that the schedules for the SoCal assets will follow shortly > under a separate cover. In addition, we plan to circulate copies of the > CALME and Wind schedules tomorrow. > > If you have any questions or any problems opening any of the attachments, > please do not hesitate to contact either Gray Sasser at (713)758-3425 or > Donnie Roark at (713)758-3374. > > > > > > <<Master-Disclosure-Ltr.DOC>> <<India-Schedules.DOC>> > <<EGEP-Schedules.DOC>> <<APACHI-Schedules.wpd>> <<Annex G -- > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++ > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > +++++++++++++++++++++++ > The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged. This > email is intended to be reviewed by only the individual or organization > named above. If you are not the intended recipient or an authorized > representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any > review, dissemination or copying of this email and its attachments, if > any, or the information contained herein is prohibited. If you have > received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by > return email and delete this email from your system. Thank You > > - WORD v1 Summer Disclosure Letter.DOC - 00 India Schedules.DOC - 285641_1.DOC - Lightning-Schedules3.wpd - Annex G -- Excluded Information Based on Confidentiality Requirements.DOC [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= EPSA Meeting Today On Barton RTO Draft; [EMail-Body]= The EPSA Leg. Affairs Committee is having a special meeting this afternoon (out of the normal biweekly cycle) to discuss how EPSA should respond to the Barton RTO discussion draft. In addition to the e-mail yesterday morning, I spoke in person with Gene Peters of the EPSA staff to convey our strongly held view that mere ""technical corrections"" were not enough to fix the Barton RTO proposal, as the EPSA draft letter stated. Gene came around because in a subsequent meeting we had with Rep. Chip Pickering (R-MS), a member of the House Energy and Air Quality Subcommittee, Gene said that silence would be better than what is in the Barton draft. He did indicate to me (not to Pickering) that some EPSA members, without naming them, didn't want to come down too hard on Barton because in their view the draft could have been worse. These unnamed companies (or company?) claim to have told of earlier versions not released that would have been more restrictive on FERC's discretion. Some companies also think FERC could wiggle out of the strictures of the draft. I told Gene that there is no way to wiggle out of the definitions of minimum size/scope that FERC would be forced to accept and the various procedural advantages for recalcitrant utilities. While I am checking with counterparts at other EPSA members in advance of the afternoon meeting, you might want to do the same as you speak with contacts at other EPSA members. I am confident we can get the EPSA letter to better reflect our position -- my suspicion is that the unnamed company Gene referred to is Reliant, but I can't prove it. John [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Services briefing  8:30 at the Hyatt  contact: Tom Schoeve
 x4830; [EMail-Body]= You speak from 8:30 - 10:00 - Dogwood Room on the 3rd floor. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: Sac Bee, Thurs, 7/5: Many rural towns to escape blackouts, utility maps sho= w Sac Bee, Tues, 7/3: Details emerge in power contracts SD Union, Thurs, 7/5: New FERC member seems attuned to state's woes SD Union, Wed, 7/4: Electricity price-cap tests spark allegations SD Union, Wed, 7/4: Renewable energy fades from picture in rush for solutio= n SD Union, Wed, 7/4: SDG&E spreads word of looming blackouts SD Union, Wed, 7/4: Two more energy whistleblowers slated to come forward SD Union, Wed, 7/4: Disabled PG&E employees ask state for help in getting= =20 disability checks LA Times, Thurs, 7/5: Powerful Judge Illuminates Energy Practices Law:=20 'Folksy' jurist, 72, stuns utility executives and lawyers alike with his=20 courtroom incisiveness. SF Chron, Thurs, 7/5: Davis lauds California generator=20 Vote of confidence at Calpine's festival=20 SF Chron, Wed, 7/4: Activists stage anti-corporate march to power plant=20 SF Chron, Wed, 7/4: Davis asks PUC to let utilities cut voltage=20 1% savings on energy consumption predicted SF Chron, Wed, 7/4: Federal price limits backfire=20 Some generators withhold power rather than abide by rate caps SF Chron, Wed, 7/4: Two more energy whistleblowers slated to come forward Mercury News, Wed, 7/4: Davis seeking cheaper contracts=20 --- Many rural towns to escape blackouts, utility maps show=20 By Carrie Peyton Bee Staff Writer (Published July 5, 2001)=20 Huge stretches of Northern California, including many rural foothill and=20 valley communities, won't face rolling blackouts this summer, spared by a= =20 combination of geography and circuitry.=20 Placerville and Loomis, Esparto and Isleton are among the many towns that= =20 will be largely or entirely bypassed by deliberate blackouts, according to= =20 new Pacific Gas and Electric Co. outage maps.=20 Such communities are served by so few circuits that each one has been=20 exempted from outages because a critical facility, such as a fire station o= r=20 a water treatment plant, lies along the circuit somewhere, PG&E spokesman= =20 John Nelson said.=20 Both PG&E and the Sacramento Municipal Utility District have begun shedding= =20 more light on their strategies for rotating outages in the wake of a=20 governor's order requiring utilities to let people know where blackouts wil= l=20 strike next.=20 For PG&E, that has meant quickly posting and then updating blackout maps on= =20 its Web site. For SMUD it has meant publicly detailing, for the first time,= =20 the boundaries of 78 separate rotating outage areas and listing by number= =20 which areas could be tapped next.=20 ""We were contemplating putting the map on the Web before the governor's=20 order, but the timing coincided very well,"" said John DiStasio, SMUD's=20 assistant general manager for customer service.=20 SMUD updated its Web site, www.smud.org, on June 22 so that now people can= =20 click on ""rotating outages"" and then ""next likely locations and map"" to see= =20 the shape of outages to come.=20 The map replaces less-precise neighborhood names, which is all SMUD supplie= d=20 until Gov. Gray Davis ordered utilities to give the public ""common=20 geographical boundaries, grid or block numbers, maps or similar identifying= =20 information"" about where outages will strike.=20 With six days of rolling blackouts already behind California this year, and= =20 forecasts that more probably lie ahead, Davis has told utilities and the=20 state Independent System Operator to give better notice of when and where= =20 blackouts might occur.=20 Grid operators and utilities have cautioned that Davis' program of two-day,= =20 one-day and one-hour warnings could produce many false alarms because power= =20 supplies often come through at the last minute. There is also some wariness= =20 about outage maps, which SMUD and PG&E warn could change at any time.=20 But the maps do provide insight into how each utility will roll blackouts= =20 through its territory. PG&E's maps, on the Web at www.pge.com under ""find= =20 your outage block"" and then ""rotating outage block map,"" have recently been= =20 updated to be searchable by zip code.=20 They show that the vast majority of El Dorado and Placer counties and much = of=20 Yolo County are in PG&E's ""block 50,"" a designation for a circuit that won'= t=20 be in line for rolling outages because someone along it is crucial to healt= h=20 or safety.=20 Police stations, fire stations, hospitals and airports are all deemed=20 essential customers that should keep functioning even when the state power= =20 grid is so overloaded that blackouts are needed to keep it from collapsing.= =20 In densely populated areas, circuits tend to be compact, leaving lots of=20 neighborhoods eligible for rolling blackouts, Nelson said.=20 But ""in rural areas, particularly remote rural areas, a circuit can go on f= or=20 miles and miles,"" Nelson said. ""You can have multiple communities on one=20 circuit =01( (and) virtually every community has either a police station or= a=20 fire station or a hospital or a drinking water facility.""=20 That has been good news for communities like Placerville, which scrambled f= or=20 traffic control earlier this year when a rolling outage took out the signal= =20 lights on Highway 50, which bisects the town of 10,000.=20 ""That has been our biggest concern because of the amount of traffic that go= es=20 through there,"" said City Manager John Driscoll. Placerville will be spared= =20 future outages because regulators now are protecting more hospitals from=20 blackouts, and much of the rest of the town shares circuits with hospitals.= =20 ""We didn't ask to be exempted out, but I feel very happy that we are. From = a=20 selfish standpoint, it feels very nice,"" Driscoll said.=20 The Bee's Carrie Peyton can be reached at (916) 321-1086 or=20 cpeyton@sacbee.com.=20 =20 Details emerge in power contracts By Carrie Peyton and Chris Bowman Bee Staff Writers=20 (Published July 3, 2001) California's power bills for the next decade probably will exceed the=20 forecasts of Gov. Gray Davis, the State Controller's Office said Monday as = it=20 released unedited versions of long-term contracts in a new jab at the=20 governor.=20 The electricity contracts, which Davis' office sought in court to keep=20 secret, offer a glimpse into the rapid, high-stakes deals struck early in t= he=20 state's power crisis and illustrate the way deregulation's unraveling could= =20 haunt California for years to come.=20 Some show that builders of new power plants could recoup the entire cost of= =20 those plants in four years or less. Some show lucrative swaps for power,=20 including one arranged the same day California was rocked by rolling=20 blackouts.=20 More than two dozen additional administrative contracts detail the price=20 California is paying its consultants to seek a way out of the power mess,= =20 from tens of thousands for Davis' aides down to $51 an hour for copying and= =20 phone answering.=20 The governor's office defended its estimates of the state's future power=20 bill.=20 The 41 long-term contracts, 27 consulting contracts, five short-term deals= =20 and stacks of receipts and invoices released Monday by state Controller=20 Kathleen Connell may just be the start.=20 Her office hopes to provide details about how much California has already= =20 paid individual power generators in the volatile short-term, or ""spot,""=20 market.=20 The deals include so many intricate pricing formulas that Connell said she= =20 couldn't immediately predict exactly how high California's hourly power cos= ts=20 would go.=20 Walter Barnes, chief deputy controller of finance, said the contracts=20 probably would be ""well in excess"" of the $69 a megawatt-hour that Davis on= ce=20 said would be California's average cost for contract power for the next=20 decade.=20 The contracts' prices range from $55 to $249 a megawatt-hour, and most are= =20 more than the $69, Connell said.=20 The state Department of Water Resources, the state's power buying arm, late= r=20 revised the $69 forecast to $70 a megawatt-hour through the end of 2010, wi= th=20 the higher priced power coming first.=20 If anything, those figures could decline because natural gas, the fuel for= =20 most new power plants, is getting cheaper, DWR spokesman Oscar Hidalgo said= ,=20 adding that his office sticks with its forecasts.=20 ""We're on pretty solid ground here,"" he said.=20 As the statewide elected official who pays California's bills, Connell=20 repeatedly has criticized the governor for his electricity spending, saying= =20 that she never believed the contracts should be kept secret.=20 But Davis' office blasted her for giving out details that power generators= =20 and traders could use to learn the state's negotiating positions and buying= =20 practices and said the information could boost wholesale prices within days= .=20 ""When they open their electric bill next time, every Californian can thank= =20 Kathleen Connell for higher electricity costs,"" Davis spokesman Steve=20 Maviglio said.=20 The long-term contracts were first released June 15 by the water resources= =20 department with power plant names, performance data, delivery points and=20 other details blocked out under heavy black strokes.=20 Analysts said that was the sort of data they could have used to calculate h= ow=20 much more than the production costs the state was going to be paying for th= e=20 electricity purchased on behalf of three cash-strapped investor-owned=20 utilities.=20 As analysts began sizing up some of the specifics Monday, early reactions= =20 were wary.=20 ""This just shows when the state comes in and takes over the utility system,= =20 we're just going to be in deep from all sorts of expenses and inefficiencie= s=20 that we were trying to get away from"" with deregulation, said Arthur=20 O'Donnell, who edits a trade newsletter, California Energy Markets.=20 Bill Marcus, a power consultant who had analyzed the edited contracts for a= =20 consumer group, quickly read through the unedited versions muttering things= =20 such as ""offensive"" and ""they got absolutely ripped here.""=20 In one swap that was negotiated on a day of rolling blackouts in March, the= =20 state agreed to send Powerex, the trading arm of British Columbia's=20 government utility, 2* times more electricity in the spring than Powerex=20 would return in the summer.=20 Although seasonal swaps are common, the 2*-to-1 ratio was a sign of ""panic""= =20 and inexperience on the state's part, he said.=20 The consultants who advise California on power deals were frenetic at the= =20 time, with one staffer at the Navigant consulting firm billing for hours=20 worked that were the equivalent of 9.7 hours a day for 34 consecutive days.= =20 The power purchase terms disclosed Monday confirm many energy analysts'=20 predictions that California consumers would be paying premium prices for=20 years to cover the costs of the new plants coming on line.=20 In several of the contracts, the state agreed to pay generators a 25 percen= t=20 to 30 percent annual return on their plant construction costs, which could= =20 pay off the entire plant in four years or less.=20 Before deregulation, utilities generally received 3 percent to 18 percent= =20 annual return on their capital investments over 30 years, said Marcus, a=20 veteran energy analyst whose firm, JBS Energy Inc. of West Sacramento,=20 represents ratepayer groups.=20 ""We're all going to have to pay more for power plants over the next 10 or= =20 more years because the generators are looking to pay off their plants in ha= lf=20 the time,"" he said.=20 ""Beyond blackouts and price spikes, this will be the long-term legacy of=20 deregulation,"" he said. ""The private market needs a high rate of return on= =20 their investment.""=20 Several contracts were drafted in the late winter and early spring when=20 California endured Stage 2 and Stage 3 energy alerts.=20 The unmasked terms in some of those agreements reflect the state's=20 desperation for megawatts amid fears of routine blackouts when temperatures= =20 and energy use began to rise in the summer.=20 For example, the state agreed in a March 29 contract to pay Calpine $232 a= =20 megawatt-hour to supply 300 megawatts nonstop from July 1 through Sept. 30.= =20 But a more recent Calpine contract calls for about $59 a megawatt-hour,=20 starting Oct. 1.=20 Time made all the difference, said Jim Macias, a Calpine senior vice=20 president. He said that last winter, Calpine couldn't guarantee that plants= =20 under construction in Sutter County and the East Bay would be on line by=20 summer. So the company bought the power on the spot market for the state,= =20 Macias said.=20 ""Back in the winter, $232 was a good price for electricity this summer,"" he= =20 said.=20 Calpine officials said that they made no money on the sale and even knocked= =20 15 percent off their price to maintain good relations with the state power= =20 buyers.=20 The gesture more than paid off with the signing of the 10-year contract, sa= id=20 Kathleen Potter, Calpine spokeswoman.=20 ""It was a great transaction for us,"" Potter said. ""We appreciate the=20 business.""=20 Proponents of ""free-market"" energy buying have said that in the long-run,= =20 competitive forces would result in more-efficient, less-costly power=20 generation.=20 But the contracts show that pressed for more electricity this summer and=20 fall, officials resorted to buying power from some of the least-efficient= =20 plants in the state, guaranteeing owners of these aging generators 10 more= =20 years of income.=20 The Bee's Carrie Peyton can be reached at (916) 321-1086 or=20 cpeyton@sacbee.com. New FERC member seems attuned to state's woes=20 Texan may become agency's next chief By Toby Eckert=20 COPLEY NEWS SERVICE=20 July 5, 2001=20 WASHINGTON -- During his first weeks at the Federal Energy Regulatory=20 Commission, Pat Wood has set a decidedly different tone in the agency's=20 strained relationship with California.=20 After meeting with Gov. Gray Davis last week, Wood -- who was recently=20 appointed to the commission by President Bush and is widely expected to be= =20 named chairman soon -- praised the state's efforts to come to grips with it= s=20 power problems. It was a stark contrast to the almost constant criticism fr= om=20 FERC Chairman Curtis Hebert.=20 ""It certainly seems to me that both the political leadership and the=20 regulatory leadership of the state are committed to the kind of=20 infrastructure upgrades that are needed to really get supply and demand bac= k=20 into whack,"" Wood said, referring to power plants being built in California= .=20 The former Texas utility regulator also raised the possibility of closer=20 cooperation between FERC and state regulators, including a ""joint effort"" o= n=20 inspecting power plants. State officials have accused generators of idling= =20 plants to drive up electricity costs, a charge generators deny.=20 ""If we're kind of co-regulators with the state, and in many regards we are,= =20 it's helpful to work off the same set of facts so you get to conclusions mu= ch=20 more expeditiously,"" Wood said, though he was quick to add that he has not= =20 seen any evidence of intentional withholding of supply.=20 State officials hope Wood's statements signal that FERC is poised to take a= =20 more aggressive role in helping the state. If elevated to chairman, Wood=20 would set FERC's agenda and shape its approach to dealing with California.= =20 The agency regulates wholesale electricity and natural gas markets, which= =20 have subjected the state to skyrocketing prices.=20 Wood ""has brought a very good perspective to FERC,"" said Howard Gantman, a= =20 spokesman for Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., a frequent critic of the=20 commission. ""He seems very interested in getting to the root of the problem= =20 and finding solutions.""=20 Throughout the crisis, the state's relationship with FERC has been poisonou= s.=20 Davis criticized the commission for being slow to rein in electricity price= s,=20 while Hebert faulted the state for crafting a bad deregulation law and=20 failing to build enough plants to keep up with demand.=20 Davis issued a guardedly conciliatory statement after his meeting in=20 Sacramento with Wood and Commissioner Nora Brownell, who is also new to FER= C.=20 ""In a refreshing change from my past dealings over the past year with the= =20 agency, these commissioners offered a problem-solving approach in resolving= =20 California's energy challenge,"" Davis said. He added, ""It appears that FERC= =20 may finally be poised to do its job controlling energy costs.""=20 Threats criticized Despite the soothing words, there is no shortage of potential flash points= =20 between Davis and FERC.=20 Wood, who professes a ""religious zeal about competition,"" raised concerns= =20 about a possible move by the California Public Utilities Commission to keep= =20 retail power customers from shopping around for alternative providers.=20 He also criticized threats that Davis and other California politicians have= =20 made to seize power plants and impose a windfall profits tax on power=20 sellers.=20 ""I think the rhetoric's still pretty hot out there. If I were a generator= =20 looking at 50 states, one that's talking about a windfall profits tax and= =20 expropriation of property and all that is not a great climate,"" Wood said.= =20 For his part, Davis has questioned whether the recent price curbs imposed b= y=20 FERC in the West will be enough to tame soaring wholesale power costs that= =20 have bankrupted one utility, cost the state treasury billions of dollars an= d=20 raised consumers' power bills.=20 Davis has also made it clear that he expects hefty refunds to result from t= he=20 FERC-brokered talks between the state and power providers, which are in the= ir=20 second week.=20 ""I will be vigilant in insisting that Californians get their money back,""= =20 Davis said.=20 California consumer activists are taking a wait-and-see attitude toward Woo= d,=20 saying they know little about him.=20 A major role ""My impression from afar is he seems to be more moderate,"" said Harvey=20 Rosenfield, president of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in= =20 Santa Monica.=20 Once considered a bureaucratic backwater, the five-member FERC has come to= =20 play a high-profile role in the California debacle and other disputes=20 involving the largely deregulated wholesale power markets.=20 The commission is charged with ensuring that ""just and reasonable"" prices= =20 prevail.=20 Bush is expected to make Wood the FERC chairman because Hebert is seen as t= oo=20 much of a lightning rod.=20 Before coming to Washington, Wood, who turned 39 yesterday, headed the Texa= s=20 Public Utility Commission. There he oversaw the state's move toward a=20 deregulated electricity market. Like Hebert, Wood is convinced that a free= =20 market will deliver cheaper power to consumers than a highly regulated one.= =20 ""I just think customers fare better when they have more choices,"" Wood said= .=20 But consumer advocates and others who have worked with Wood in Texas say hi= s=20 zeal is tempered by a healthy dose of pragmatism.=20 ""Bottom line, it's all about the customer. Y'all will hear me say that unti= l=20 you get sick of it,"" Wood said. ""We want to make sure that the world we're= =20 moving to is better than the one we left.""=20 Electricity price-cap tests spark allegations=20 Suppliers said to have held back; industry blames ISO By Craig D. Rose and Bill Ainsworth=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITERS=20 July 4, 2001=20 The first emergency tests of new electricity price controls have generated= =20 accusations that suppliers were withholding power and questions that the ca= ps=20 might need to be revised or scrapped.=20 And in a case of turnabout, a power industry spokesman yesterday said the= =20 Independent System Operator, which manages the state's electricity grid,=20 might be using the federal price caps to manipulate the electricity market.= =20 This time, however, the charge is that the ISO is gaming to push prices=20 lower.=20 At any rate, California survived its second consecutive day of power=20 emergencies without blackouts under price caps recently imposed by federal= =20 regulators, but not without some bumps along the way.=20 The main culprit was hot weather that baked Western states for two days,=20 forcing the ISO to issue Stage 1 and then Stage 2 alerts. Yesterday, the IS= O=20 warned that rolling blackouts might hit in the afternoon.=20 But as has happened often this year, the ISO bought power in the last minut= es=20 to avoid outages. The grid operator also credited conservation efforts with= =20 shaving from 2,000 to 4,000 megawatts of consumption. A megawatt can power= =20 about 750 homes.=20 ""It was a lot hotter than expected and a lot more humid,"" said Kristina=20 Werst, spokeswoman for the ISO.=20 Today, state officials expect to avoid any blackouts because of the holiday= ,=20 which tends to decrease electricity demand, Werst said.=20 The price controls ordered last month by the Federal Energy Regulatory=20 Commission set up formulas for maximum prices during emergency and=20 nonemergency periods. The FERC said the complex system was intended to=20 balance the need for lower costs with its desire to promote a power market.= =20 But questions are growing about the effectiveness of the FERC price caps.= =20 A Department of Water Resources spokesman, which buys power for the state,= =20 said generators withheld between 660 and 1,500 megawatts of electricity=20 during a critical period earlier this week because of the price caps. That= =20 would be enough to cut electricity reserves from 7 percent to 5 percent and= =20 bump a Stage 1 alert to a Stage 2.=20 Sempra Energy Trading, a marketing unit of San Diego Gas & Electric Co.'s= =20 parent corporation, admitted that it ceased selling power to the state for= =20 what could have been a critical 30 minutes Monday.=20 A spokesman for the trading company said it halted sales for the half-hour= =20 because it was unsure about where the ISO would set maximum prices during t= he=20 first power emergency under the new caps.=20 When power emergencies are called under the FERC plan, a new price cap is s= et=20 based on the cost of operating the least efficient, most costly electric=20 generating plant. Because the identity of that plant is unknown beforehand,= =20 the selling price is set retrospectively by the ISO.=20 ""It was unclear to the traders what the proxy price would be,"" said Doug=20 Kline, a Sempra spokesman, who emphasized that the company's trading unit= =20 resells power generated by other companies. ""So it was unclear whether the= =20 ISO would come back later and say, 'You purchased power at $70 per=20 megawatt-hour but we're only going to pay you $60.'?""=20 For its part, the ISO said the impact of price controls on electricity=20 supplies during emergencies is still unclear. The controls this week kept= =20 emergency prices Monday from a little over $70 per megawatt-hour to a high = of=20 about $90. FERC's nonemergency price cap has been about $92 per=20 megawatt-hour.=20 Earlier this year, the average price per megawatt-hour was nearly $300.=20 Before the power crisis hit last year, the price was about $30.=20 The ISO said several factors other than the price controls might have=20 contributed to tight supplies this week, including plant shutdowns in other= =20 states and the regional heat wave.=20 But a spokeswoman for Nevada Power said the utility believed the price caps= ,=20 or confusion over their implementation, had contributed to a power shortfal= l=20 that led to blackouts Monday. The utility fell about 100 megawatts short of= =20 its need as temperatures in some of its service areas hit 122 degrees.=20 ""Power is tight in the region,"" said Sonya Heagen of Nevada Power. ""What=20 tipped it over (for southern Nevada) was several utilities decided to hold= =20 back power.""=20 Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, an=20 industry group, said the FERC's price-control plan fails to allow the=20 recovery of electricity transportation costs. That has the effect of keepin= g=20 electricity in the region in which it is generated, rather than where it=20 might be needed most, he said.=20 Ackerman said transportation costs, which typically run from $2 to $8 per= =20 megawatt-hour, are more significant now that overall prices have settled in= to=20 a $100 range.=20 ""They didn't mean as much to the suppliers when they were getting $400 per= =20 megawatt-hour,"" Ackerman said.=20 He also said some of his members suspect the ISO made moves during power=20 alerts to artificially keep prices lower.=20 The FERC pricing regime sets nonemergency prices at 85 percent of the last= =20 full hour of a Stage 1 emergency. But this week, the ISO twice went from a= =20 Stage 1 to a Stage 2 alert in less than an hour. That kept the nonemergency= =20 price cap in place at about $92 per megawatt-hour, set back in May.=20 ""Some traders said the ISO is 'gaming the market' to keep the price lower,""= =20 Ackerman said. ""I have a few traders who think the price should be higher.""= =20 The ISO rejected the charge of manipulation and said it continues to make i= ts=20 emergency declarations based on power supply and demand. The ISO also said = it=20 has not identified transportation costs as a problem under the FERC order.= =20 Other energy experts, however, said the FERC system of using the most=20 inefficient power plants to set emergency prices was a mistake.=20 Frank Wolak, a member of the ISO's market monitoring unit and a Stanford=20 University economist, said the plan invited energy companies to keep their= =20 least efficient plants in operation to ensure the highest prices.=20 But James Sweeney, also a Stanford professor and energy expert, said he=20 preferred the FERC plan to a rigid market price cap.=20 Consumer advocate Doug Heller of the Foundation for Taxpayer & Consumer=20 Rights said the FERC plan is too complex and urged a return to a regulated= =20 system, which pays generators for their production costs plus a reasonable= =20 profit. Gov. Gray Davis supports a similar approach.=20 Arthur O'Donnell, editor of California Energy Markets, saw much of the=20 maneuvering this week as an industry road test of new price regime.=20 ""I think they were testing the boundaries,"" O'Donnell said. ""This is the we= ek=20 where we test the bugs in the system.""=20 Copley News Service correspondent Toby Eckert and The Associated Press=20 contributed to this report.=20 Renewable energy fades from picture in rush for solution=20 By Ed Mendel=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 July 4, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO -- The electricity crisis is putting the squeeze on the renewabl= e=20 energy industry: the power plants that use the sun, wind or underground hea= t.=20 The environmentally friendly, alternative energy provides about 12 percent = of=20 the state's power. But the energy crunch and the state's effort to resolve = it=20 could end up shrinking the role of renewable energy in the coming years jus= t=20 as backers were hoping to see it expand.=20 For example:=20 ?Long-term power contracts obtained by the state to reduce costs will cover= =20 most state needs for a decade. Nearly all of the contracts are with natural= =20 gas-fired plants, reducing the long-term market for new renewable plants.= =20 ?The uncertainty and lack of payment resulting from the crisis have slowed= =20 the development of renewable plants under an incentive program created as= =20 part of the state electricity deregulation plan.=20 ?Regulators are poised to prevent marketers from selling electricity,=20 including ""green power"" from renewable sources, directly to customers. A=20 large base of ratepayers must stay in the state program to pay off a power= =20 bond of up to $13.4 billion over 15 years. The state Public Utilities=20 Commission yesterday for the second time put off a decision whether to=20 curtail such direct access.=20 State and federal programs had been encouraging renewable energy to reduce= =20 dependency on the new wave of relatively clean and efficient natural-gas=20 power plants. The cost of electricity from those plants could go up if the= =20 demand for gas outpaces supply.=20 Renewable energy, with the exception of some biomass plants, also avoids th= e=20 pollution problems of power plants fueled by oil and coal -- not to mention= =20 the safety and radioactive waste-disposal problems of nuclear power.=20 A spokesman for a coalition of renewable generators and environmental group= s=20 said he thinks renewable energy has suffered during the electricity crisis= =20 because of a lack of attention, not a shift in state policy.=20 ""I think the renewables are an unintended casualty,"" said V. John White of= =20 the Center for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technologies.=20 The state became a major player in the power equation in January when it=20 began buying power for debt-ridden utilities.=20 State officials say they would like to have a mix of power to spread the ri= sk=20 if something goes wrong with one source. For example, soaring natural gas= =20 prices last winter were part of the reason for the high cost of electricity= .=20 In a trade-off, the state scrambled to obtain long-term contracts that woul= d=20 lower the price of electricity now in exchange for prices that are expected= =20 to be above the market in the years to come.=20 The 38 contracts, worth $43 billion over the next decade, will help finance= =20 the construction of gas-fired power plants. About 70 percent of the power= =20 will come from plants that have not yet been built.=20 Only four of the contracts are for renewable power, and their 120 megawatts= =20 is a tiny fraction of the total amount of power now under state contract. A= =20 megawatt can provide power for 750 to 1,000 homes.=20 ""We agree the portfolio is lopsided and should be more diverse than it is,""= =20 Ray Hart, head of the power purchasing unit in the state Department of Wate= r=20 Resources, told the Senate Energy Committee last month.=20 The state has agreements in principle on an additional 19 contracts for 1,2= 70=20 megawatts from renewable sources. Most of the power, 1,172 megawatts, would= =20 come from wind generation.=20 ""Anything could happen,"" said Oscar Hidalgo, a Water Resources spokesman. ""= It=20 could increase or decrease, depending on what gets signed.""=20 One renewable generator, CalEnergy, said the state rejected its offer to=20 provide 340 megawatts from a geothermal plant in the Imperial Valley for 20= =20 years at 6.9 cents per kilowatt-hour, a price that is said to be the 10-yea= r=20 average of the state contracts.=20 ""We were astonished,"" said Jonathan Weisgall, CalEnergy vice president.=20 Hidalgo said state power purchasers ""don't recall the specifics"" of the=20 CalEnergy offer. He said the proposal may have been rejected because of its= =20 length, the time of the power delivery, or other reasons.=20 ""They may have to regroup, restructure, repackage, and look for what we=20 want,"" Hidalgo said.=20 Under deregulation, part of monthly ratepayer bills were earmarked for a fu= nd=20 to encourage renewable energy sources. The fund provides five-year incentiv= es=20 of up to 1.5 cents per kilowatt hour.=20 The state held auctions in 1998 and again last summer that awarded $202=20 million in incentives for dozens of new small renewable plants that could= =20 produce about 1,000 megawatts. The average incentive was .4 cents per=20 kilowatt hour.=20 But at this point, said Marwan Masri of the California Energy Commission,= =20 only plants capable of producing 180 megawatts have been completed.=20 ""There is the overall issue of who will buy the power,"" said Masri, ""and at= =20 what price and for how long.""=20 A firm that specialized in marketing ""green power"" from renewable sources f= or=20 the environmentally conscious has taken a double hit from the electricity= =20 crisis.=20 Green Mountain Energy of Austin, Texas., sells power to customers in a part= =20 of deregulation that is often called ""direct access,"" which bypassed=20 utilities and later the state after it began buying power for utility=20 customers.=20 The firm canceled contracts with 50,000 customers because the price was=20 indexed to the state Power Exchange, which went bankrupt last spring after= =20 the debt-ridden utilities defaulted on their debt.=20 Green Mountain still has contracts with about 7,000 customers in San Diego= =20 County who receive power under contracts at a fixed rate, 8.5 cents per=20 kilowatt-hour.=20 The state Public Utilities Commission is still expected to prohibit future= =20 direct-access contracts, a step directed by the legislation authorizing the= =20 state to buy power for utility customers.=20 ""That was the second blow to us,"" said Rick Counihan of Green Mountain. ""It= =20 meant that we couldn't go out and buy a block of fixed-price power to sell = to=20 customers.""=20 The ban on direct-access contracts is vigorously opposed by business groups= ,=20 who say that direct access would lower the cost of doing business in=20 California.=20 But supporters of the direct-access ban say that if customers bypass the=20 utilities, the remaining ratepayers will be stuck with paying off a bond of= =20 up to $13.4 billion that is expected to be issued in September for power=20 costs.=20 Despite the problems, some representatives of the renewable energy industry= =20 are optimistic about its potential for growth in the future.=20 ""A lot of the market is being served by rapidly aging power plants that=20 should be replaced,"" said Jan Smutny-Jones of the Independent Energy=20 Producers. ""I think we also are going to see additional demand.""=20 Moreover, state government may take more steps to encourage the renewable= =20 industry.=20 The Energy Commission is proposing a goal for the incentive program that=20 would increase the amount of power coming from renewable sources to 17=20 percent of the total by 2006, up from 12 percent.=20 State Sen. Byron Sher, D-Stanford, has introduced a bill, SB 531, that woul= d=20 set a goal of increasing the renewable share of state power to 20 percent b= y=20 2010. SDG&E spreads word of looming blackouts=20 By Jeff McDonald=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 July 4, 2001=20 While power supplies dwindled and the likelihood of blackouts loomed, San= =20 Diego Gas & Electric Co. for the first time yesterday was able to warn=20 customers in advance that they might go dark.=20 Under increasing pressure from businesses and residents, SDG&E launched a n= ew=20 system to notify customers by pager and e-mail whenever the state declares= =20 supply emergencies that might lead to blackouts.=20 Some 5,000 customers signed up for the warnings, which ended up being false= =20 alarms by midafternoon when the Independent System Operator, which manages= =20 the state's electricity grid, was able to find enough megawatts to avoid th= e=20 first blackouts since May.=20 ""This at least gives people the opportunity to make a switch over to backup= =20 generation, to power down essential equipment or to back up critical files,= ""=20 SDG&E spokesman Ed Van Herik said.=20 ""It's definitely an improvement, but we'll certainly look for ways to=20 increase the effectiveness of the notification process.""=20 Even so, the warnings from SDG&E came barely an hour before the ISO was=20 expected to issue a Stage 3 power alert, meaning that demand had climbed to= =20 within 1.5 percent of available supplies. As it turned out, the state never= =20 rose above a Stage 2 alert.=20 As the threat of blackouts continues to vex state power officials, early=20 warnings about potential outages have become a key issue for businesses and= =20 residents who rely on uninterrupted service.=20 During blackouts earlier this year, darkened traffic lights caused numerous= =20 accidents, people were stranded in elevators and business owners complained= =20 of losses that could have been minimized.=20 ""Regular notification is a good idea,"" said Samuel Ingersoll-Weng of the Sa= n=20 Diego Community Technology Group, which works with hundreds of local=20 organizations to promote computer literacy.=20 ""It would be very helpful in terms of scheduling staff, canceling or holdin= g=20 classes and also to protect equipment from power spikes or suddenly being= =20 shut off,"" he said.=20 For most of the year, SDG&E was telephoning a small number of such customer= s=20 on mornings they worried that demand for electricity might exceed supplies.= =20 But the problem is that when orders to pull megawatts from the grid come fr= om=20 the ISO, the utility has only minutes to cut supplies and there has been=20 little time to warn people they may lose power.=20 Yesterday, SDG&E was told 90 minutes ahead of time that a Stage 3 warning= =20 would likely be called at 3 p.m. The company issued the mass e-mails and=20 pages within 30 minutes.=20 Gov. Gray Davis announced plans this spring to provide neighborhoods 48-,= =20 24-and 1-hour notices when blackout orders might be called. The ISO issued = no=20 such notice yesterday, when it came the closest it had in weeks to ordering= =20 blackouts.=20 Ratepayers interested in signing up to be notified early of potential=20 blackouts can call the utility at (800) 411-SDGE.=20 Two more energy whistleblowers slated to come forward=20 By Don Thompson ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 July 4, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) Two more former workers at a San Diego-area Duke Energy pla= nt=20 are slated to talk with state investigators Thursday, echoing concerns by= =20 other employees over how the plant was run when the state needed its power= =20 most.=20 However, another former worker at the Chula Vista plant said he discarded= =20 perfectly good equipment three to five years ago, while the plant was still= =20 owned by San Diego Gas and Electric.=20 ""Stuff that cost $3- to $5,000 we were throwing away,"" said Don Perkins of= =20 Alpine, a mechanic at SDG&E plants for nearly 25 years.=20 That undercuts testimony from other former workers who told the Senate Sele= ct=20 Committee to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Energy Market= =20 last month that they discarded valuable repair parts on the orders of Duke= =20 supervisors.=20 Like the other former SDG&E employees who have come forward, Perkins was no= t=20 hired by Duke when it took over full operation of the plant in April. Perki= ns=20 said he is happy in retirement, but like his former co-workers believes Duk= e=20 was driving up energy prices =01) which the company vehemently denies.=20 He and the three other former workers suggested Duke did not adequately=20 maintain its equipment, leading to unnecessary repairs they said cut power= =20 generation and may have helped boost prices by cutting supply. That include= d=20 running a 15-megawatt jet-fuel fired turbine until it broke down.=20 ""We ran the heck out of the plant, you bet we did,""responded Duke spokesman= =20 Tom Williams. But he said the plant had fewer outages under Duke's ownershi= p=20 than while it was owned by SDG&E.=20 Duke eventually had to completely rebuild the jet-fuel fired turbine,=20 Williams said.=20 ""It ran more last year than the previous 37 years combined, because the sta= te=20 needed the power,"" Williams said.=20 An attorney for Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante, who is to introduce the two new= =20 whistleblowers Thursday, said they will echo their co-workers complaints th= at=20 maintenance slipped once Duke took over the plant.=20 Williams dismissed the news conference as ""a media event"" and the workers'= =20 complaints as old news the company has rebutted since the earlier testimony= =20 before the committee.=20 Disabled PG&E employees ask state for help in getting disability checks=20 ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 July 4, 2001=20 SAN FRANCISCO =01) After not receiving checks for work-related disabilities= for=20 months, more than 200 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. employees have asked the= =20 state to take over their disability payments.=20 The employees stopped getting checks after Pacific Service Employees=20 Association sent them a letter saying it did not have enough funds. Until= =20 this year, the association had paid almost all of PG&E's disability claims.= =20 PG&E said it has no legal responsibility to help the disabled workers and= =20 blames the employee association. But workers waiting for their payments=20 disagree.=20 ""The association and PG&E are one and the same,"" A.J. Cavallaro, an=20 electrical engineer with PG&E for 25 years who is on disability leave due t= o=20 a sleep disorder, told the San Francisco Chronicle.=20 Originally created by PG&E workers to organize social events, the associati= on=20 has its own board of directors and is legally separate from the utility and= =20 its parent company. The association began offering a short-term disability= =20 plan to PG&E workers in 1949.=20 Pacific Service transferred its members to the State Disability Insurance= =20 plan on Jan. 1. But about 230 PG&E workers decided to stay with the=20 association's plan after they were told they would continue to receive thei= r=20 disability checks.=20 Mike Colon, the association's general manager filed an appeal with the=20 California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board for the state to take over= =20 the group's payments.=20 Ralph Hilton, chief counsel for the appeals board in Sacramento, said that = if=20 the board decides the state should take over the payments, checks would be= =20 issued within days of the ruling.=20 Workers may have to wait until August for the case to be heard.=20 National Desk=20 THE NATION Powerful Judge Illuminates Energy Practices Law: 'Folksy' jurist= ,=20 72, stuns utility executives and lawyers alike with his courtroom=20 incisiveness. RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR ?=20 07/05/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page A-12=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 WASHINGTON -- The silver-haired judge handling federal negotiations on=20 refunds for alleged overcharges by power generators in California is often= =20 described as a Southern gentleman.=20 But Curtis L. Wagner Jr. can lose the folksy charm in a New York minute.=20 Wagner, chief judge of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, showed his= =20 knack for cutting through nonsense when he tangled with a smooth energy=20 company executive in his hearing room in May. The executive confidently=20 insisted he didn't need his boss' approval to enter into a $39-million=20 natural gas transportation deal.=20 Wagner didn't buy it.=20 ""I'm appalled that you're trying to pull this over my eyes,"" intoned the=20 judge, stunning a courtroom of high-priced lawyers into catatonic silence.= =20 ""Just answer my question . . .=20 ""Did you get approval . . . whether you got it after the meeting, whether y= ou=20 got it the day before, whether you got it in the head while you were both= =20 relieving yourselves?""=20 Added Wagner, owner of a 32-foot sailboat named ""Hizzoner"": ""The head, for= =20 non-boating people, is the restroom.""=20 Visibly squirming, the witness acknowledged that his boss had, in fact, OKd= =20 the deal.=20 That kind of mettle prompted FERC's governing board to assign the overcharg= e=20 settlement case to the 72-year-old judge, who likes to stay in shape by=20 attending early-morning aerobics classes in the agency's exercise room. ""I= =20 think Judge Wagner is the toughest tool in our toolbox,"" said FERC=20 Commissioner Patrick H. Wood III.=20 Expectations are low that anybody can bridge the chasm between California a= nd=20 electricity generators and marketers, with the state alleging it was gouged= =20 by $9 billion and the companies muttering about governmental extortion.=20 ""There are some very large numbers being talked about, which makes it=20 unlikely that the companies would want to agree to a settlement,"" said Kit= =20 Konolidge, an electricity industry analyst with Morgan Stanley in New York.= =20 But in an interview, Wagner said he feels ""pretty good"" about the chances. = ""I=20 never give up until the very end. With these things, it looks impossible, a= nd=20 then all of a sudden it comes together.""=20 FERC, the equivalent of a national utility commission, is also dangling som= e=20 carrots in front of the parties. Along with refunds, Wagner is trying to ge= t=20 a deal on long-term contracts for power and guarantees that the generators,= =20 which are owed hundreds of millions of dollars, will be paid.=20 The commission set a short time frame for the negotiations, which are to=20 conclude Monday. If a settlement is not reachable, FERC would impose its ow= n=20 solution. A mandated settlement is likely to be challenged in federal court= ,=20 where it could bog down for years.=20 FERC employs more than a dozen administrative law judges like Wagner to hea= r=20 disputes involving the companies it regulates. While presiding over the=20 closed-door settlement talks, Wagner has traded his robes for a business=20 suit.=20 He has come down from the bench and sits at a table, eye-level with more th= an=20 140 lawyers in his hearing room. ""There's a lot of billable hours there,"" h= e=20 said.=20 The lawyers have been sorted into three big working groups, representing=20 state agencies, power sellers and energy marketers. The negotiations are=20 expected to intensify this week, and participants said Wagner admonished al= l=20 sides on Friday to be ready to deal or face summary judgment from the FERC= =20 commission.=20 The judge has been variously quoted as saying that $1 billion, $2 billion o= r=20 $2.5 billion might be an appropriate total refund. ""None of those [figures]= =20 are really attributable to me. I did make a statement--and I probably=20 shouldn't have--that it was probably less than $9 billion."" Of the $9 billi= on=20 in overcharges claimed by the state, only $5.4 billion is attributable to= =20 sellers within FERC's jurisdiction.=20 James J. Hoecker, immediate past FERC chairman in the Clinton administratio= n,=20 said that, in 23 years as chief judge, Wagner has built a reputation for=20 making things happen in difficult situations.=20 ""What is behind that is a lot of years on the bench and a certain amount of= =20 self-confidence,"" Hoecker said. ""He has the ability . . . to move the parti= es=20 closer together. Sometimes that requires some fairly dramatic statements,= =20 which are calculated to get people to feel the heat and get more creative= =20 about the flexibility they might have.""=20 A senior FERC official said Wagner is like a pitcher who gets called from t= he=20 bullpen when the game is on the line. ""When things are tough, we turn stuff= =20 over to Curtis,"" said the official, who asked not to be identified.=20 Wagner has had many big cases over the years, on matters too arcane to garn= er=20 national attention.=20 He is handling a second major case before FERC. It involves allegations tha= t=20 Houston-based El Paso Corp. manipulated California 's natural gas market la= st=20 year, thereby adding an estimated $3.7 billion to the state's energy costs.= =20 It was in that case that he grilled the executive.=20 Success in the California settlement negotiations would cap Wagner's 47th= =20 year as a government lawyer. The Tennessee native started at the Justice=20 Department on Aug. 2, 1954. He got into regulatory law by representing the= =20 military in railroad disputes arising from the Korean War. After serving as= a=20 civilian lawyer for the Army for more than a decade, he joined FERC's=20 predecessor agency in 1974.=20 But Wagner, a widower, doesn't dwell on his place in the annals of FERC. He= =20 tells agency employees he is working too many hours and missing his aerobic= s=20 classes.=20 Davis lauds California generator=20 Vote of confidence at Calpine's festival=20 Suzanne Herel, Chronicle Staff Writer Thursday, July 5, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /05/M N166801.DTL=20 Gov. Gray Davis took the stage at the San Jose America Festival yesterday a= nd=20 pledged to ""keep the lights on"" -- with the help of the Calpine energy=20 company, which sponsored the fete.=20 ""You've heard me say some pretty tough things about out-of-state energy=20 companies trying to bleed us dry,"" said Davis, standing against the backdro= p=20 of a huge Calpine banner proclaiming, ""Reliable Energy for a Brighter=20 Future.""=20 ""Calpine is from California,"" he said. ""They're going to make sure the ligh= ts=20 stay on.""=20 Davis was a surprise guest sandwiched between musical acts Nina Storey and= =20 John Brown's Body during the daylong Fourth of July festival, which feature= d=20 music, food and vendors near the San Jose Airport.=20 The governor thanked the crowd of at least 1,000 for joining other=20 Californians in conserving energy. Conservation surpassed the 10 percent ma= rk=20 statewide in May and June, he said.=20 ""We could not get through the summer without you doing your part,"" he said.= =20 Davis was introduced by Calpine chief executive Peter Cartwright -- whose= =20 multimillion-dollar stock option cash-in made news last month -- and San Jo= se=20 Mayor Ron Gonzalez, who unsuccessfully opposed Calpine's planned 600-megawa= tt=20 Metcalf Energy Center in Coyote Valley.=20 In an interview after his appearance, Davis countered criticism leveled at= =20 him this week by State Controller Kathleen Connell, who accused him of=20 foolishly locking California into expensive long-term energy contracts.=20 ""You have to look at the total cost of electricity,"" he said.=20 The state paid $109 million in May, he said, but that cost dropped to about= =20 $33 million last month.=20 Earlier yesterday, after walking in the Redwood City Fourth of July parade,= =20 Davis said that the price drop was a direct result of the long-term=20 contracts.=20 ""That would not have happened without the security and stability of long-= =20 term contracts,"" he said. ""We did the right thing.""=20 In San Jose, he also said that the $15 million the state was paying=20 consultants to help negotiate power contracts was money well spent.=20 ""Before, it was like the Yankees winning the World Series against the sandl= ot=20 baseball team,"" he said. ""We're finally getting some stars on our team. ""= =20 E-mail Suzanne Herel at sherel@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 2=20 Activists stage anti-corporate march to power plant=20 GISELE DURHAM, Associated Press Writer Wednesday, July 4, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate2 024EDT0201.DTL=20 (07-04) 17:24 PDT LONG BEACH, Calif. (AP) --=20 Consumer activists rallied against rising energy prices and pledged their= =20 independence from corporate ""tyrants"" amid Fourth of July celebrations=20 Wednesday.=20 About 200 people carrying signs reading "" public power, not corporate=20 bailout"" and ""human need, not corporate greed"" marched two miles from a loc= al=20 park in the Los Angeles suburb to the Alamitos generating station.=20 ""We feel we have been gouged and bled dry,"" said Medea Benjamin, founding= =20 director of Global Exchange, a San Francisco-based consumer advocacy group.= =20 ""We've been treated the way tyrants treat their servants.""=20 The protest was a joint effort of several national and local consumer=20 activist organizations. No arrests were made, although dozens of police=20 officers were out in force for crowd control.=20 Earlier this week, a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order=20 preventing the city from enforcing an ordinance that could have blocked the= =20 march.=20 The law requires organizers of public protests to give 30 days notice of th= e=20 event, post an insurance bond and pay for police protection at the rate of= =20 $55 per hour for each officer.=20 At the plant, organizers had intended to serve officials with a ""notice of= =20 seizure by eminent domain"" declaring the facility to be public property. Bu= t=20 nobody appeared at the front gate. The demonstrators posted the notice on t= he=20 chain-link fence and staged about a 40-minute rally before dispersing.=20 The symbolic notice was meant to emphasize the groups' discontent with=20 skyrocketing power prices during the past year, the use of state budget mon= ey=20 for power purchases, and the activists' desire to have the state take over= =20 power plants to stabilize market prices.=20 ""The money they're making off of us is criminal,"" said Loni Baker, one of t= he=20 marchers. ""They're greed is taking money away from our kids' schools.""=20 Representatives of Arlington, Va.-based AES, Corp., which owns the plant, d= id=20 not immediately return calls seeking comment.=20 Last month, the U.S. Justice Department opened an antitrust investigation= =20 into a power sales partnership between AES and Williams Energy, the Tulsa,= =20 Okla.-based company that sells power for AES under an exclusive marketing= =20 agreement.=20 Both companies have denied wrongdoing but in May, Williams agreed to refund= =20 $8 million after the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission accused of the=20 company of temporarily closing AES plants to drive up power prices.=20 Davis asks PUC to let utilities cut voltage=20 1% savings on energy consumption predicted=20 David Perlman, Chronicle Science Editor Wednesday, July 4, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /04/M N29133.DTL=20 Gov. Gray Davis asked the Public Utilities Commission yesterday to allow=20 electric companies to lower voltage levels on power lines delivering=20 electricity to consumers this summer.=20 The move will save about 1 percent in the state's electricity consumption,= =20 the equivalent of building a new 500-megawatt power plant.=20 Lowering voltages by 2.5 percent will prove barely noticeable by domestic= =20 users who might see their incandescent light bulbs dim slightly.=20 Refrigerators and electric motors, such as those that run air conditioners,= =20 should operate more efficiently on the lower voltages, experts said.=20 The move should save consumers about 1 percent on their electricity bills,= =20 according to Energy Commissioner Arthur Rosenfeld.=20 With support already promised by the state's major power companies, the PUC= =20 is expected to approve the change in its voltage rules within weeks, Robert= =20 Kinosian, energy adviser to PUC President Loretta Lynch, said at a Sacramen= to=20 press conference.=20 Similar voltage decreases have gone into effect in several other states=20 during power emergencies in recent years, Rosenfeld said. But this is the= =20 first time it will occur statewide throughout an entire period of peak powe= r=20 demand.=20 PUC rules now require power companies to deliver between 114 and 126 volts = to=20 consumers all the time.=20 Less than two months ago, Bill Wattenburg, a maverick engineer and longtime= =20 consultant to the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, assembled a team = to=20 test the effects on lights, appliances, microwave ovens and motors operatin= g=20 at voltages that were lowered by 5 percent or more.=20 At the press conference yesterday, Wattenburg said those tests -- conducted= =20 with utility company senior engineers -- showed that no devices were damage= d,=20 nor was their performance impaired. But cooking food on electric ranges --= =20 whether boiling water or making a roast reach a given temperature -- would= =20 take longer and consume slightly more power under any lowered voltage, he= =20 said.=20 John Ballance, director of network engineering at Southern California Ediso= n,=20 said his company is equipped to control its voltage levels electronically a= nd=20 can lower them as soon as the PUC approves the change.=20 But Pacific Gas & Electric Co. operates differently and will have to change= =20 its voltage levels at each of its 2,400 substations individually -- a task= =20 that could take several weeks, Rosenfeld said.=20 ""This proposal may well achieve new efficiencies and reduce electric bills= =20 for California ratepayers,"" Davis said in a statement. ""I urge the PUC to= =20 give it serious consideration.""=20 E-mail David Perlman at dperlman@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 13=20 Federal price limits backfire=20 Some generators withhold power rather than abide by rate caps=20 David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, July 4, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /04/M N186091.DTL=20 Officials in California and Nevada, after months of lobbying for federal=20 regulators to cap Western power prices, warned yesterday that the newly=20 imposed limits have had the unintended consequence of increasing a threat o= f=20 blackouts in the two states.=20 The warnings were issued as California came within minutes of rolling=20 blackouts yesterday afternoon, and one day after the first-ever rolling=20 blackouts in Las Vegas forced energy-hungry casinos to shut off fountains a= nd=20 reduce air conditioning.=20 The two states are asking the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to take = a=20 closer look at the so-called price mitigation plan and come up with revisio= ns=20 that would deter power companies from withholding electricity during=20 shortages.=20 ""We need some clarity to this order,"" said Oscar Hidalgo, a spokesman for t= he=20 California Department of Water Resources, which is spending billions of=20 dollars to keep the state's lights on.=20 ""Generators need to be held accountable,"" he said.=20 The crux of the problem is that price limits kick in during shortages, yet= =20 power companies say these caps force them to sell power at below-market rat= es=20 during periods of high demand.=20 Some companies have responded by holding back power rather than face the=20 expense of shipping electricity from state to state. Each mile that=20 electricity must be transmitted adds to the overall cost.=20 ""No one's going to pay for transmission if the cost is near the caps,"" said= =20 Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, an=20 energy-industry association in Menlo Park.=20 Ackerman said several companies in his organization decided that there was = no=20 economic advantage to offering power in regional markets when price control= s=20 are in effect.=20 ""This means individual regions like California or Las Vegas could end up no= t=20 having enough,"" Ackerman said. ""It increases the threat of blackouts.""=20 BLACKOUT ALERT CANCELED California authorities issued a blackout alert at 1:45 p.m. yesterday when= =20 power reserves dipped to dangerously low levels. They canceled the alert=20 about an hour later, after finding additional supplies.=20 ""Everyone in the West is fighting for megawatts,"" said Stephanie McCorkle, = a=20 spokeswoman for the California Independent System Operator, which oversees= =20 the state's power network.=20 The Golden State's latest brush with lights-out conditions came a day after= =20 Nevada experienced its own rolling blackouts for the first time, prompting= =20 heavy power users such as the MGM Grand and Caesars Palace to dim their=20 lights.=20 Don Soderberg, chairman of the Nevada Public Utilities Commission, said tha= t=20 the sudden power emergency took state authorities by surprise and that they= =20 are investigating to see what role the federal price limits may have had in= =20 exacerbating Monday's shortage.=20 ""We're looking very closely at this,"" he said. ""There seems to be a potenti= al=20 for unintended consequences.""=20 Specifically, Soderberg said Nevada is focusing on operators of older, less= -=20 efficient plants who would find profit margins shrinking, if not vanishing,= =20 under capped prices.=20 ""We're going to see how the caps might have played into this,"" he said.=20 The federal ceiling in 10 Western states, excluding California, is about $9= 2=20 per megawatt hour. In California, a 10 percent surcharge is added because o= f=20 the state's credit risk, bringing the price to just over $101.=20 Ackerman at the Western Power Trading Forum said regional price controls ha= ve=20 extended California's power crisis to neighboring states.=20 ""California sneezed and the rest of the region caught the virus,"" he said.= =20 'LAWYERS LOOKING FOR LOOPHOLES'=20 California and Nevada officials, however, said that they still have faith= =20 that price limits can stabilize Western electricity markets but that federa= l=20 regulators may have to tweak the system so that power companies cannot=20 withhold output.=20 ""The generators have banks of lawyers looking for loopholes (in the plan),""= =20 said Hidalgo at the Department of Water Resources.=20 Unfortunately, it may take some time for the regulators to revisit an issue= =20 that they took up only with the greatest reluctance. For months, federal=20 regulators refused to impose price controls, preferring instead to let supp= ly=20 and demand determine costs.=20 Hidalgo said that when it appeared that power companies were throttling bac= k=20 on output Monday, California officials immediately dialed the hot line numb= er=20 provided by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in case of emergencies= .=20 ""No one answered,"" he said. ""They were closed.""=20 State officials tried again yesterday, and this time were told that the=20 commission would look into the matter. They were not given a time frame for= =20 when the commission might come up with a response.=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 Two more energy whistleblowers slated to come forward=20 DON THOMPSON, Associated Press Writer Wednesday, July 4, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 336EDT0118.DTL=20 (07-04) 00:36 PDT SACRAMENTO (AP) --=20 Two more former workers at a San Diego-area Duke Energy plant are slated to= =20 talk with state investigators Thursday, echoing concerns by other employees= =20 over how the plant was run when the state needed its power most.=20 However, another former worker at the Chula Vista plant said he discarded= =20 perfectly good equipment three to five years ago, while the plant was still= =20 owned by San Diego Gas and Electric.=20 ""Stuff that cost $3- to $5,000 we were throwing away,"" said Don Perkins of= =20 Alpine, a mechanic at SDG&E plants for nearly 25 years.=20 That undercuts testimony from other former workers who told the Senate Sele= ct=20 Committee to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Energy Market= =20 last month that they discarded valuable repair parts on the orders of Duke= =20 supervisors.=20 Like the other former SDG&E employees who have come forward, Perkins was no= t=20 hired by Duke when it took over full operation of the plant in April. Perki= ns=20 said he is happy in retirement, but like his former co-workers believes Duk= e=20 was driving up energy prices -- which the company vehemently denies.=20 He and the three other former workers suggested Duke did not adequately=20 maintain its equipment, leading to unnecessary repairs they said cut power= =20 generation and may have helped boost prices by cutting supply. That include= d=20 running a 15-megawatt jet-fuel fired turbine until it broke down.=20 ""We ran the heck out of the plant, you bet we did,""responded Duke spokesman= =20 Tom Williams. But he said the plant had fewer outages under Duke's ownershi= p=20 than while it was owned by SDG&E.=20 Duke eventually had to completely rebuild the jet-fuel fired turbine,=20 Williams said.=20 ""It ran more last year than the previous 37 years combined, because the sta= te=20 needed the power,"" Williams said.=20 An attorney for Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante, who is to introduce the two new= =20 whistleblowers Thursday, said they will echo their co-workers complaints th= at=20 maintenance slipped once Duke took over the plant.=20 Williams dismissed the news conference as ""a media event"" and the workers'= =20 complaints as old news the company has rebutted since the earlier testimony= =20 before the committee.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 Davis seeking cheaper contracts=20 Posted at 10:33 p.m. PDT Wednesday, July 4, 2001=20 BY JOHN WOOLFOLK=20 Mercury News=20 California officials are asking energy companies for better deals on the=20 state's long-term power contracts as a way to settle a dispute over billion= s=20 of dollars in electricity costs from the past year, Gov. Gray Davis said=20 Wednesday.=20 In closed-door Washington, D.C., settlement talks scheduled to conclude=20 Monday, state officials are demanding that energy companies forgo $8.9=20 billion in bills for electricity that the state argues was overpriced.=20 But Davis, during a San Jose visit Wednesday, said the state would consider= =20 accepting some of that refund in the form of cheaper long-term contracts, a= =20 move that could appease critics who say the $43 billion deals cost far too= =20 much.=20 The governor's comments shed light on the state's bargaining strategy in th= e=20 negotiations. Few details have emerged from the talks since the judge=20 overseeing them imposed a gag order.=20 ``We've made suggestions, we've offered various ways in which people could= =20 get us $8.9 billion,'' Davis said. ``We've said it doesn't have to be all= =20 cash. You can give it to us in lower contract prices than you otherwise wou= ld=20 have given to us. You can renegotiate our existing contracts and save us=20 money. However you want to do it, it's just got to net out to $8.9 billion.= ''=20 It's unclear how those offers have been received by energy suppliers, who= =20 have insisted their prices were fair given the uncertainty over whether the= y=20 would ever get paid. Several major companies, including Duke Energy and=20 Enron, say they're owed millions of dollars from the state and its major=20 utilities.=20 Paula Hall-Collins, a spokeswoman for Williams Companies, which signed=20 several contracts with the state in February to deliver power over the next= =20 10 years, said she could not comment.=20 But one industry official said it was encouraging to see the governor show= =20 some flexibility and that the concept seems reasonable.=20 ``We take that as a positive,'' said Gary Ackerman, executive director of t= he=20 Western Power Trading Forum, a trade association. ``If he wants to talk som= e=20 trade-off in renegotiating the contracts, that doesn't seem to be totally o= ut=20 of hand. We're not going to turn away any serious offer.''=20 But Ackerman said the state needs to give a little on its refund target.=20 The $8.9 billion, a figure estimated by the state's power grid analysts for= =20 sales from May 2000 to May 2001, has been widely challenged by industry=20 leaders. Even the judge overseeing the settlement talks said it's probably= =20 too high.=20 ``I don't think it serves the state of California for the state to hold fas= t=20 to a number, any more than it does for my members to do the same,'' Ackerma= n=20 said. ``It just doesn't get to a solution. There's got to be some give and= =20 take, and we certainly haven't heard that until now from the governor.''=20 The state began buying electricity in January for its largest utilities aft= er=20 they became so saddled with debt from high power prices that energy compani= es=20 refused to sell to them. The state has spent about $8 billion since then in= =20 daily and short-term purchases.=20 The Davis administration signed $43 billion worth of electricity contracts= =20 with 18 energy suppliers for power over the next 10 years and has dozens of= =20 deals pending. The contracts are aimed at lowering the amount of power the= =20 state has to buy in daily markets, where prices have soared.=20 Davis has credited the contracts with lowering the state's power costs from= =20 $100 million a day or more in May to about $33 million a day. His chief=20 energy negotiator, S.?David Freeman, has said he's proud of the contracts.= =20 But Davis has faced blistering criticism about the deals from Republican=20 lawmakers, state Controller Kathleen Connell and consumer advocates, who sa= y=20 the contracts will soak consumers with high electricity prices for many=20 years.=20 Davis initially sought contracts at prices around $55 per megawatt-hour, bu= t=20 the deals signed so far average $70 per megawatt-hour.=20 That was a bargain earlier this year when daily prices averaged more than= =20 $200 per megawatt-hour. But average daily prices have since fallen to $89= =20 during peak hours and as low as $56 during low-demand periods.=20 The average daily price in 1999 was about $30 per megawatt-hour.=20 If the state and power suppliers cannot reach an agreement by Monday, they= =20 can request an additional 10 days. Otherwise, the judge will recommend a=20 settlement and the five-member Federal Energy Regulatory Commission will vo= te=20 on it.=20 So far, the two sides still seem far apart.=20 ``It's very, very difficult,'' said Davis, who named the state's negotiator= s=20 to the Washington talks. ``We'll see on Monday whether or not agreements ar= e=20 made. My hope is that a settlement will be reached. It's possible one will= =20 be.''=20 Contact John Woolfolk at jwoolfolk@sjmercury.com or (408) 278-3410.=20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Risk 2001 Australia; [EMail-Body]= Philip, Frank's E-mail: wolak@zia.stanford.edu Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""philip annesley"" Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 9:12 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: RE: Risk 2001 Australia Thanks Vince - I'll give him a try. -----Original Message----- From: Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 10:03 PM To: pannesley@riskwaters.com Subject: RE: Risk 2001 Australia Philip, Please, try Frank Wolak from Stanford University. He is the best expert on California right now. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""philip annesley"" +3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 7:50 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: RE: Risk 2001 Australia Vince Thanks for coming back to me on this anyway. Would you be able to suggest anyone else - either in Australia, Europe or US who would be good to get to discuss the California crisis? kind regards. Philip -----Original Message----- From: Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 12:00 AM To: pannesley@riskwaters.com Cc: Vkaminski@aol.com Subject: RE: Risk 2001 Australia Philip, I have to decline the invitation with regrets. I have too many commitments right now. Vince Kaminski -----Original Message----- From: ""philip annesley"" +3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com] Sent: Monday, May 28, 2001 3:27 AM To: vkamins@enron.com Subject: Risk 2001 Australia Dear Vince Just a quick message to follow up on the email that I sent you recently inviting you to speak at our forthcoming congress, Risk 2001 Australia, which is taking place in Sydney on 20 & 21 August 2001. Have you had an opportunity to consider the invitation yet? We are aiming to have the programme printed next week, so I would really need to know as soon as possible if you would be available to speak at this year's congress. I am working from our Hong Kong office for this week only (Tel: +852 2545 2710), and I can be contacted by phone there or by email. Kind regards. Philip Philip Annesley Conference Producer Risk Waters Group +44 20 7484 9866 +44 20 7484 9800 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re:; [EMail-Body]= Restructuring Today quotes Jeff at length on retail vs wholesale price caps. He does talk about protecting small customers with retail caps and highlights the more destructive nature of wholesale caps. If you need a copy let me know. kmagruder@newpower.com on 09/09/2000 11:39:55 AM To: Steven.J.Kean@enron.com cc: rshapiro@enron.com, glockhart@newpower.com, mmanly@newpower.com Subject: Re: Thanks, Steve. The message we received was that Jeff had said he'd take retail price caps to avoid wholesale price caps. I know the press and listeners will distort things, so I take the reports with a grain of salt. We just hope that you and Dasovich will find a way, if asked, to stress the right way to take care of small customers - enhance competition and create a robust retail market. I know we all want the same result. We just hope that with our roadshow beginning next week, Gene doesn't have to explain away any other perceived Enron slams on retail competition. P. S. I can't think of two better spokesmen for the cause of competition than you and Dasovich. Steven J Kean@ENRON 09/08/2000 06:03 PM Sent by: Steven J Kean@ENRON To: kmagrude@enron.com cc: Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Got your message. I'm testifying at the Congressional hearing and Dasovich is covering FERC. I think Jeff's comments were taken out of context. He said policymakers do need to take care of small customers whose bills are tripling. Frankly, we'd get slaughtered if we said anything else. But he also said there is a right way and a wrong way to do it. Enron and others had provided a market based answer by offering a fixed price deal to SDG&E (which would have enabled them to cap rates to those who had not switched. California elected instead to cap rates and deficit spend (ie create a deferral account). I don't think we can stand for anything that doesn't protect the small customers, but we can continue to emphasize the market based solutions. One of the messages in my testimony will be: customers should be encouraged to choose. Those who did are doing fine. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= How should this be handled - rather touchy; [EMail-Body]= Is this someone in the analyst/associate program? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/23/2000 05:55 PM --------------------------- From: Cindy Derecskey on 08/23/2000 04:32 PM To: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: How should this be handled - rather touchy ----- Forwarded by Cindy Derecskey/Corp/Enron on 08/23/2000 04:31 PM ----- MerryKath@aol.com 08/23/2000 03:52 PM To: public-relations@enron.com cc: Subject: No Subject Dear Sir and Madam. I did not know whom to contact at Enron, so chose to contact you. I am a Ph.D candidate at the University of Rhode Island. My speciality is English and Business Communication. I am contacting you because I a person I know has applied and given a high-end position within your company. Please check his credentials. He is presenting himself as a Brown University Graduate with an MBA from another college. Please be advised, I did a reference check with Brown, and he is not a Brown graduate. His name is Steven R. Hill. I feel obliged to divulge this information to you because of the law that holds me responsible for knowing that someone might be purposely misrepresenting themselves. Mary K. Cardinale [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Speech to the British Institute of Energy Economists; [EMail-Body]= I agree with Mark's points. While we have advocated our merger with PGE (which did not concentrate market power) we have intervened in opposition to most others. Moreover, there is some hope that the German government will take the opportunity to use the proposed utility merger to force greater open access. We will likely encourage that action and may oppose the merger otherwise. Most mergers in this industry are defensive, not procompetitive, and, in my view, deserve no credit for convergence, innovation, or liberlization. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 09/10/99 01:17 PM --------------------------- Mark Schroeder@ECT 09/10/99 05:26 AM To: Margaret Carson/Corp/Enron@Enron cc: Joan Wasylik/LON/ECT@ECT, Danny McCarty/LON/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Speech to the British Institute of Energy Economists Margaret - apologies for the delay in getting comments to you on your speech. Due to press of other matters I will be brief. First, your speech caption, refernecing ""mergers"" is somewhat different than the topic shown in the agenda, i.e., ""Industry Structure and Competitive Behaviour"", but I trust you are wroking that out with the BIEE. Second, in your first paragraph, you note that developments in the energy sector over the last decade are due to the mergers of the last five years (a point I will retrun to later), but in any event, not entirely consistent in terms of timeframes. Third, I am surprised that the Enron Corp. view is that gas and electricity markets grew as they did over the decade due to mergers. In the past, things like unbundling and non-discriminatory third-party access have featured prominently in our advocacy. Indeed, though it was not my role at Enron, I would have thought that in many of the recent electricity mergers pre-dating Order No. 888 we would have joined the chorus of voices arguing that these mergers concentrated market power, and that such market power could only be mitigated with the provision of non-discriminatory third-party access (an argument we will be repeating in, e.g., Germany, as noted below). Finally, I would note that in the past, I thought we had questioned the value of mergers as an impediment to competitive markets, as I recall Ken Rice gave an infamous address/speech, in which he described ""good"" mergers and ""bad"" mergers, i.e., defensive mergers like Houston Industries and NorAm. I actually borrowed heavily from that speech two years ago, in paris, but if we have changed our tune, that is good to know. Even the ""good"" mergers identified in his/my speech, e.g., Enron/Portland, have had the ""goods"" thwarted, in part, by regulators, who would not let us do all we wanted to do that was pro-competitive. Also, in the past, we have used as a good example of ""convergence"" the arbitrage we have done at Sithe's facility in NY, pointing out that we are in an ""energy"" or ""BTU""market, not gas alone, or electricity alone. Not clear to me that mergers in the US demonstrate this. Fourth, accepting that it is the Enron Corp. view that mergers are symbolic of the convergence of gas and electricity, and are what yield the many beneifts of competition that you dsicuss elsewhere in your speech (I do, of course, agree with all the platitueds that competition yilds more service offerings, innovation, etc.), you should be aware, coming over to this market, that a number of mergers are taking place that we have expressed concerns about in comments to the regulators, and will do so in the future. here are some you should be aware of: Veical integration in the UK electricity industry (not clear yet that this will result in better/more service, but definitely loss of counter-parties, re-bundling of business before retail unbundling/competition has taken hold); Exxon/Mobil (consolidation in the upstream sector in Continental Europe, which is already concentrated), VEBA/VIAG in Germany (probalby okay, assuming thrid-party access is allowed/enhanced to the wires). Just FYI, any objections we have are usually communicated confidentially. Fifth, if you are ging to emphasise mergers, as per your title and opening paragraph, I question the inclusion of all the discussion on privatisation, which is good, but does not seem to demonstrate the benefits of merger activity, which I read is the premise of your speech, per paragraph one. In addition, recitation of ownership of miles of gathering lines and transmission lines does demonstrate change in aggregate ownership, but not clear it is all due to mergers (e.g., I thin NNG is just capital expansion), nor does the connection get made that this has lead to innovative or enhanced service offerings. I do think excellent points can be made about the deregulation/divestment of gathering, and getting it out of federal regualtroy purview, but that is not in the speech at this point. Sixth, you describe ""network industries"" well, but in the broader context of your speech, I think your listeners will assume you are referring to the physical network, rather than the Enron vision, which you capture accurately, nor is it easily understood how this demonstrates or adds to your point about convergence. Seventh, in your table of converged companies, you could be asked about the fact that Duke has already disposed of the pipeline assets it acquired in the PanEnergy deal (since sold to CMS), apparently keeping only the trading business. Also, our pieeline assets to do not serve our cogen facilites in NJ, so not clear to me that thisdemonstrate convergence in the East Coast. Hope this helps. I will be travelling today and Monday, but if you have questions, please leave me voice mails, and I will return your calls. P.S. at p. 7 you describe ""secular"" change. I assme that this should read ""sectoral"" change. Mark [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FREETRIAL - Enron Corporation News Alert:
 KEANSTEVEN_J_ENRON_COPORATIONS 1 new stories.; [EMail-Body]= I'm not saying we should buy this service, but I do think we need some way = of=20 staying on top of TV spots mentioning Enron. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/05/2001 07:33 AM ----- =09<FREETRIAL@ptvnews.net> =0903/05/2001 06:00 AM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: <skean@enron.com> =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: FREETRIAL - Enron Corporation News Alert:=20 1 new stories. News Alert=20 Each business day, Power Television will send to you by email a listing of= =20 the news your company has made from television stations across the United= =20 States. Over 100 local media markets and 20 networks will be monitored by o= ur=20 service at NO COST to you.=20 Each headline will allow you to link to a text transcript of the news story= .=20 If the story is of significant interest, a video clip can be ordered online= =20 as well.=20 As a way to introduce our innovative new service, you will be able to view= =20 text transcripts for free. After a week=01,s trial, the news notifications = will=20 be delivered to you at no cost but if you would like to view actual text=20 transcripts of news stories there is a nominal $9 per view cost. VHS tapes= =20 can be ordered for $95 plus shipping. Our goal is to provide an online=20 alternative to the costly traditional television monitoring and clipping=20 services.=20 The following stories have been posted to your KEANSTEVEN_J_ENRON_COPORATIO= NS=20 account for the Enron Corporation search: 2001-03-03 23:04:16 NBC San=20 Francisco/Oakland/San Jose, CA BONUSES TO THEIR CHIEF EXECUTIVES. ENRON OF TEXAS AND DUKE ENERGY=20 Power Television offers a daily news notification service free of charge.= =20 Costs are only incurred when viewing text transcripts, ordering VHS tapes o= r=20 when a link is forwarded and a new user who views a transcript.=20 Please alter my news alert=20 Please add an email addresses to this news alert=20 Please remove me from your free service=20 If you have any questions, please call 1.888.628.9191 or inquire online at= =20 www.ptvnews.net=20 Disclaimer: Material supplied may be used for internal review, analysis or= =20 research only. Any editing, reproduction, publication, rebroadcast, public= =20 showing or public display is forbidden and prohibited by copyright laws. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: SCE Counter Claim -- Underreporting of Volumes -- Confidential
 --	 Attorney Work Product; [EMail-Body]= JBennett <JBennett@GMSSR.com> 05/18/2001 01:25 PM To: ""Robert Williams (E-mail)"" ""Richard Sanders (E-mail)"" ""Mike Smith (E-mail)"" <msmith1@enron.com>, ""Dennis Benevides (E-mail)"" <dbenevid@enron.com>, ""George Phillips (E-mail)"" <gphillip@enron.com> cc: MDay <MDay@GMSSR.com> Subject: SCE Counter Claim -- Underreporting of Volumes -- Confidential -- Attorney Work Product After speaking with George Phillips yesterday about SCE's counterclaim against EES and EEMC regarding underreporting of usage to the ISO, I think there may be some internal confusion (of which I may have contributed to) about the nature of SCE's counterclaim. As I understand, from my review of certain documents received from SCE in response to our data requests, review of an ""Executive Summary"" prepared by George Phillips on the issue, and from my conversation with him yesterday, EES and EEMC, as a result of some problems with their settlement system, did indeed underreport customers' usage to the ISO during the time period claimed by SCE. This has, I believe, resulted in two separate (although interrelated) points of contention with SCE -- of which only one is the subject matter of its counterclaim. First, the underreporting resulted in Unaccounted For Energy (UFE) charges to the market. In correspondence sent by SCE to EEMC and EES during the last quarter of 2001, it appears that SCE was calculating the ""cost to the market"" from the EES/EEMC underreporting by applying the hourly day ahead market clearing price to the individual hourly variances. This cost to the market is overestimated, however, as SCE failed to take into account the fact that the ISO nets underreported amounts against overreported accounts to get a net amount of underreporting. This underreported amount is then allocated to all providers of physical load within a service territory through the assessment of UFE charges. Thus whatever the ultimate cost was determined to be, SCE would not be allocated the entire amount. Second, the underreporting of usage to the ISO results, according to SCE, in SCE paying EES and EEMC a PX credit for energy they never purchased. This claim is separate and apart from what SCE claims EES/EEMC cost the market in the way of UFE charges. What SCE is saying is that it believes that EES and EEMC only purchased on behalf of their customers the amount of energy which they reported to the ISO. EES' and EEMC's customers actually used more than the amount which EES and EEMC reported. SCE calculated the PX credit based on the amount used, not reported. It is SCE's claim that EES and EEMC are not entitled to a PX credit on the delta as the market, not EES and EEMC, purchased those volumes. It is only the second point of contention which is the subject matter of SCE's counterclaim. SCE is alleging that it should not have to pay a PX credit to EES and EEMC for volumes that EES and EEMC did not purchase. SCE is claiming that we only purchased the amount we reported to the ISO. While SCE may believe that it should not have to pay any UFE charges as the result of EES/EEMC underreporting, the UFE charges are not the basis of its counterclaim. Based on the above analysis, I think that the most critical piece of information to refute the counterclaim is that, despite the underreporting of volumes to the ISO, EES and EEMC actually purchased on behalf of their DA customers those customers' full usage. Can we make such claim? and do we have data to back it up? Jeanne Bennett [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call
 Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and
 Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Perrino, Dave Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 10:07 AM To: Hawkins, Bernadette Cc: Walton, Steve; Mara, Susan; Comnes, Alan; Lawner, Leslie; Cantrell, Rebecca; Fulton, Donna; Dasovich, Jeff; Nicolay, Christi; Steffes, James; jalexander@gibbs-bruns.com; Allen, Phillip K.; Noske, Linda; Black, Don; Frank, Robert; Miller, Stephanie; Tycholiz, Barry; linda.noske@enron.com; Alamo, Joseph Subject: Re: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted Bernadette, Will you be sending out an agenda before COB today? I'd like to have a look before tomorrow morning if possible. Thanks, Dave 06/20/2001 09:59 AM Bernadette Hawkins@ENRON Bernadette Hawkins@ENRON Bernadette Hawkins@ENRON 06/20/2001 09:59 AM 06/20/2001 09:59 AM To: Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, jalexander@gibbs-bruns.com, Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Linda J Noske/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dave Perrino/SF/ECT@ECT, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron, Stephanie Miller/Enron@EnronXGate, Barry Tycholiz/Enron@EnronXGate cc: linda.noske@enron.com, Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted THE MEETING TIME HAS BEEN CHANGED!!!! PLEASE MARK YOUR CALENDAR Date: Every Thursday Time: 7:30 AM Pacific, 9:30 AM Central, and 10:30 AM Eastern time Number: 1-888-271-0949 Host Code: 661877 (for Ray only) Participant Code: 936022 (for everyone else) ----- Forwarded by Bernadette Hawkins/Corp/Enron on 06/20/2001 12:43 PM ----- Ray Alvarez 05/31/2001 11:55 AM To: Bernadette Hawkins/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Re: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted ---------------------- Forwarded by Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron on 05/31/2001 11:55 AM --------------------------- Ray Alvarez 05/31/2001 11:54 AM To: Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, jalexander@gibbs-bruns.com, Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Linda J Noske/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dave Perrino/SF/ECT@ECT, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron, Stephanie Miller/Enron@EnronXGate, Barry Tycholiz/Enron@EnronXGate cc: Subject: Re: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted PLEASE MARK YOUR CALENDAR Date: Every Thursday Time: 1:00 pm Pacific, 3:00 pm Central, and 4:00 pm Eastern time, Number: 1-888-271-0949 Host Code: 661877 (for Ray only) Participant Code: 936022 (for everyone else) The table of the on-going FERC issues and proceedings will be updated for use on today's conference call, and distributed by Bernadette Hawkins. It is available to all team members on the O drive. Please feel free to revise/add to/ update this table as appropriate. Proposed agenda for today: FERC Order of May 25 clarifying the April 26 Order re market monitoring and price mitigation. ISO de-rating of ATC complaint- status (item 20) EPSA intervention and protest re CAISO compliance filing and proposed tariff amendment (item 32) EPSA rehearing request of FERC market monitoring and mitigation order in EL00-95-12 (item 9d) Miscellaneous information items: CA legislators' suit against FERC. RTO conference is to be planned and held by FERC in the near future. Please feel free to communicate to the group any additional agenda items you may have. <Embedded Picture (Device Independent Bitmap)> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California Power Markets; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/10/2001 12:17 PM --------------------------- on 03/02/2001 12:04:50 PM Sent by: Carol_Benter@mckinsey.com To: skean@enron.com cc: Subject: California Power Markets Sorry that we haven't talked in some time. I thought that you would want to take a look at some analysis we have recently completed with regard to the California Power Crisis. You may find some of the analysis to be helpful. Let me know if you have any questions. (See attached file: 10209 zxd414.ppt) | This message may contain confidential and/or privileged | | information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to | | receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, | | disclose or take any action based on this message or any | | information herein. If you have received this message in | | error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail | | and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. | - 10209 zxd414.ppt [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 02/28/2001 02:19 PM ----- Miyung Buster@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 02/26/2001 09:03 AM To: Ann M Schmidt/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bryan Seyfried/LON/ECT@ECT, dcasse@whwg.com, dg27@pacbell.net, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron, filuntz@aol.com, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Janet Butler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeannie Mandelker/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Margaret Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Markus Fiala/LON/ECT@ECT, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT, Mike Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron, Nicholas O'Day/AP/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Stella Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@Enron, Mike Roan/ENRON@enronXgate, Alex Parsons/EU/Enron@Enron, Andrew Morrison/LON/ECT@ECT, lipsen@cisco.com, Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Energy Issues Riverside Press 2/23: ""Power line plan has new foes"" Contra Costa Times, 2/23: ""GOP in a fix over power crisis"" Sac Bee, Fri 2/23: ""Davis says State has tentative deal for Edison grid"" SF Chron 2/23: ""Utilities Search for Long-Term Fix During Breather..."" SJ Mercury 2/23: ""State's Energy Price Tag Increases"" LA Times 2/23: ""Paying for power still a big question"" Long Beach Press 2/23: ""Lowenthal returns utility money"" Sac Bee 2/23: Columnist Dan Walters: ""A power grab by politicians"" SF Chron, 2/23: ""Discount Urged Near Power Plants"" Sac Bee 2/23: ""At last, power alerts are lifted..."" Sac Bee 2/23: ""Davis' deadlines on energy much easier set than met"" SF Chron, 2/23: ""GOP Sees Power Crisis as Davis' Achilles' Heel"" Contra Costa Times 2/23: ""Pressure Is on Utilities to Accept Grid Sale"" SF Chron 2/23: ""Energy Firms Won't Pay All of Monster Debt PUC reverses, taxpayers could foot the bill "" San Diego Union, 2/23: ""Small electric producers OK big price cut"" Power line plan has new foes La Cresta residents vow to keep electricity equipment out of the Cleveland Forest and a wilderness area. By Thomas Buckley The Press-Enterprise LAKE ELSINORE A new group has raised its objections to Lake Elsinore's proposed hydroelectric plant and the power lines that might carry its electricity to San Diego County. On Thursday, the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District board set aside for further study later this month a motion by Director Gary Kelley to ensure that both the lines and the actual power plant that make up a $450 million proposal from Enron North America proceed together. But residents of La Cresta, a mountaintop community near where the lines might run, did not care whether the plant and lines happened together. Many of them do not want the lines to be there at all. ""We are resolved to keep power lines out of the Cleveland National Forest and the San Mateo Wilderness Area,"" said La Cresta resident Bill Stockmar. ""Our constituents and the local residents impacted by the proposed project are outraged and respectfully demand immediate intervention to stop this project at the planning level."" As it stands now, the power lines from the hydroelectric plant would run from Temescal Canyon to Camp Pendleton along the ridge line of the Elsinore Mountains just west of the lake. Those lines could run in a narrow strip of forest land just west of the La Cresta community. Enron project manager Rob Bakondy said the final determination of where the lines might run is not set, but he said the power lines could be built at least a year before the plant itself. Besides serving the hydroelectric plant, the power lines could be used to replace lines San Diego Gas and Electric wants to build through Murrieta and Temecula to bring power to San Diego. The water district also announced it is considering financing and building the lines itself. District General Manager John Rossi said Wednesday that it was too early to say exactly how the lines would be built, but that the district's building or owning the lines, or both, in cooperation with Enron is ""one possibility."" Board President Kris Anderson said it is too early to tell whether it would benefit the district to become so directly involved in the project. But he said the district would be able to borrow the approximately $50 million needed to build the lines at a lower interest rate than a private company could get. That difference, Anderson said, could mean extra dollars for the district. How Governor Davis' proposal to purchase thousands of miles of transmission lines from the ailing utilities will affect the project is not yet clear, said Enron spokeswoman Kathy Russeth. The timing of the construction of the project, if it is approved by state and federal regulators, will not be finally known until a contract between Enron and the water district has been agreed upon. That is expected to happen by the end of May. GOP in a fix over power crisis Leaders seek solutions that won't undercut past support for deregulation By Daniel Borenstein TIMES POLITICAL EDITOR California Republican Party leaders are trying desperately to politicize the state's electricity crisis by blaming Gray Davis, but it seems that the harder they try the more popular the Democratic governor becomes. The latest GOP push will come today when party leaders, meeting in Sacramento for the start of their three-day state convention, hold a hastily organized workshop on energy. ""We should be explaining to California that Gray Davis was asleep at the switch last year,"" said one of the scheduled speakers, Republican strategist Dan Schnur. ""But that message can only work if it's coupled with a proposal for an alternative solution."" So far, that hasn't happened. For all the complaints about Davis, Republicans are moving even slower. Looking to 2002, when Davis will stand for re-election, the GOP has run radio ads attacking the governor for delays. But the party has yet to distinguish itself with a solid plan of its own. ""If Republicans are able in the next couple of months to articulate a clear plan, which is different from the Democratic plan, yes, we can use it as a political message,"" said Stuart DeVeaux, spokesman for the California Republican Party. ""Are Republicans in Sacramento going to come up with a plan that articulates a future for our energy problem? I'm not telling you it's going to be revealed this weekend. It's my hope it will be articulated this weekend."" Republicans are caught in an ideological quagmire. Pushing for re-regulation of electricity conflicts with the party's basic tenet of less government interference. Conversely, arguing for full deregulation puts Republicans at odds with a solid majority of Californians. A Los Angeles Times poll taken Feb. 14-15 found that 60 percent of Californians want to go back to a regulated electricity industry, while 25 percent are opposed. The GOP problem is exacerbated because there is no easy policy solution to the energy mess, said Jack Pitney, government professor at Claremont McKenna College. ""It's difficult to see how we get out of this situation without considerable cost. If there were a silver bullet, somebody would have found it by now."" Republicans have attacked Davis for his plan to buy power lines from private utilities. ""Everybody agrees there's $1 billion or $2 billion in deferred maintenance,"" said GOP consultant Sal Russo, another speaker at the party's convention today. ""We need to be in this business like a hole in the head."" But the Times poll found that Californians, by a 52-36 margin, favor the idea. Moreover, Davis' job approval rating has climbed this year. In January, 49 percent approved and 25 percent disapproved. In February, it was up to 57-26. Californians give Davis better marks for handling the electricity crisis than they give President Bush. Republicans are going to have difficult time laying the political blame on Davis. ""It's 'Murder on the Orient Express.' Everybody did it,"" Pitney said. ""Although you can make a case that Davis was slow in reacting, no one can seriously pin him with the primary blame for the problem."" The deregulation bill passed the Legislature in 1996 with the strong support of both parties and a Republican governor, Pete Wilson. Senate Minority Leader Jim Brulte, R-Rancho Cucamonga, is considered one of the Republican Party's top strategists. He was also one of the leading proponents of the deregulation bill. For all of those reasons, Garry South, Davis' political strategist, said he does not fear a GOP attack on electricity. ""If the Republicans want to get into a full-out firefight over how this mess came about, I'm more than willing to play. They don't have a very good story to tell."" For now, Davis' political strength is stable. But the 2002 primary elections are still more than a year away, and the general election is a political eternity from now. ""If this isn't resolved, there is nothing to guarantee that there won't be a voter backlash against the government,"" said political analyst Sherry Bebitch Jeffe. ""And right now the government in California is the Democratic Party."" That's the message the Republicans want to drive home. But if they can't come up with their own alternative, they might have a hard time playing the blame game. Davis says state has tentative deal for Edison grid Updated: Feb. 23, 2001 - 4:42 p.m. LOS ANGELES -- After a week of intense closed-door negotiations with utility representatives, Gov. Gray Davis said Friday he had reached an ""agreement in principle"" with Southern California Edison to buy the utility's power lines for an estimated $2.7 billion. The deal also requires Edison International, the parent company of Edison, to sell cheap power to the state for a decade. ""This is the framework of a good, balanced deal,"" Davis said. ""It's not a final deal. There's a lot of work to be done, But we're making progress."" The governor said he did not expect customer rates to increase as a result of the deal. Edison did not immediately return calls seeking comment. The state has been in talks for a week to buy a total of 26,000 miles of transmission lines from Edison, Pacific Gas and Electric and Sempra Energy, which operates San Diego Gas & Electric. The total cost of the lines could range from $4.5 billion to $7 billion. The effort is intended to help restore the financial health of the state's two largest utilities, PG&E and Edison, both of which are near bankruptcy. The $2.7 billion price for the Edison lines amounts to 2.3 times the estimated book value, Davis said. The utilities say they have lost nearly $13 billion since June, trapped between soaring wholesale power prices and state-imposed rate caps for consumers. The tentative plan announced by Davis would allow Edison to issue bonds for a substantial portion of its losses. Davis said the state is making good progress in its talks with Sempra and ""some progress"" with PG&E. Thursday, Davis said he will not sign off on any grid buyout without all three utilities' participation. ""I do not believe we can make a satisfactory arrangement without 60 percent of the transmission grid, and that would require cooperation with PG&E,"" he said Friday. PG&E spokesman Ron Low said Thursday night that talks had ended with no resolution that day. ""These are complicated problems that will not be solved overnight,"" Low said. ""There are clearly some issues where we are very far apart."" Still, PG&E chief executive officer Robert Glynn Jr. said Friday the meeting with Davis was a ""milestone in the resolution of California's energy crisis"" and said he was willing to meet further to discuss the utility's proposal. ""Each utility's issues and opportunities in this crisis are different, and we believe that PG&E has proposed a detailed solution that balances ratepayer and shareholder interests,"" Glynn said in a statement issued Friday before the governor's news conference. The company said it would have no further comment. The tentative agreement also calls for: Edison parent Edison International to make payments to the utility of about $420 million. Edison International to commit the entire output of its Sunrise Mission power project at low, cost-based rates for 10 years. Davis said that arrangement could save ratepayers $500 million over the next two years. Edison to provide cost-based rates from generating plants it owns for another 10 years. Edison to drop its lawsuit against the California Public Utilities Commission claiming that imposed rate caps were illegal under federal law. ""This entire transaction, which I believe is fair and balanced for both sides, will be accomplished within the existing rate structure,"" Davis said. ""We will not be asking any more of consumers to allow this transaction to come to pass."" Davis said negotiations will continue in the coming days. Consumer advocate Harvey Rosenfield called the governor's plan ""an outrageous giveaway"" and predicted that if lawmakers didn't halt it, voters would revolt. ""The most outrageous part of this isn't even paying 2.3 times what the lines are worth, but then allowing the parent companies that siphoned off billions of dollars to pay only the tax payment they already owe,"" Rosenfield said. The Public Utilities Commission already regulates how much the utilities can charge for power their own plants generate, Rosenfield said. --By Leslie Gornstein, Associated Press Writer - Utilities Search for Long-Term Fix During Breather State purchase of power lines under discussion Friday,?February 23, 2001 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle Sacramento -- A break in the weather and a break in the energy crisis coincided yesterday, as California enjoyed its first day in more than a month without a power alert. With the short-term picture for power improving, representatives of the state's three troubled utilities met separately with Gov. Gray Davis and his staff to work on a longer-range fix for the power crisis that would include state purchase of the firms' transmission lines. Trouble loomed in at least one set of talks, however, as Pacific Gas and Electric Co. said it was ""very far"" from reaching a deal. The California Independent System Operator, which coordinates the flow of electricity through the state's power grid, removed all power alerts at about 9 a.m. yesterday. Spokeswoman Lorie O'Donley said that with springtime approaching and weather improving, and with some power plants coming back to full output from maintenance, the overall picture is brightening. ""We're optimistic,"" she said. ""We're coming into the spring season, the majority of generators have had their maintenance completed. But everything is dependent on the weather and temperature."" The last day California had no power alerts was Jan. 13. Since then, there have been two days of rolling blackouts in Northern California and many other days of Stage 3 alerts -- when power reserves dip below 1.5 percent of available capacity. The mildest alert, Stage 1, is declared when reserves are between 5 and 7 percent of capacity. The supply of power has been helped by warmer temperatures in other Western states, cutting demand there, and by an increase in generators on line in California, O'Donley said. Last week, when the state was still in Stage 3 alerts, 10,500 megawatts were offline in California. Yesterday, there were 8,200 megawatts offline, a difference that provides enough power for a couple million homes. O'Donley warned that the supply picture in California is still tight, and conservation still necessary. But the focus of attention was turning to Sacramento and Davis' talks with the utilities. Davis announced a plan last week for the state to purchase 26,000 miles of utility-owned transmission lines in exchange for backing bonds that allow the utilities to repay the almost $13 billion in debt they say they owe. While Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas and Electric have indicated willingness to sell their lines, PG&E has refused to comment on the proposal. It is not clear if PG&E is unwilling to sell or simply trying to strike a harder bargain. The utility had accumulated more debt than its Southern California counterparts, and also owns the largest part of the transmission line grid. Talks between Davis' staff and PG&E did not start until late yesterday afternoon, and indications were that they were more difficult than negotiations involving the other two utilities. ""They're just on a different page,"" Michael Peevey, the former Edison president who is Davis' chief negotiator, told Bloomberg News. PG&E spokesman Ron Low said, ""These are difficult problems that cannot be solved overnight. There are clearly some areas where we are very far apart."" Davis hopes to make an announcement with at least one of the utilities before leaving today for the four-day National Governors Association meeting in Washington, D.C. The union that represents some 11,000 PG&E employees, meanwhile, called on Davis to negotiate state ownership of two power plants under construction in which PG&E holds large stakes. Jack McNally, business manager of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 1245, in Walnut Creek told Davis in a letter that a transmission line takeover would be a ""grand experiment"" fraught with danger. Acquiring the two prospective power plants, in Kern and San Diego counties, would do more to address energy shortages than taking over transmission lines that need hundreds of millions of dollars in maintenance, union officials said. Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio countered that state acquisition of transmission lines ""would not affect one union job,"" as the state would simply lease the grid back to the utilities. Maviglio predicted union jobs would increase with investment in new capacity and system upgrades. Chronicle staff writers Patrick Hoge and Robert Salladay contributed to this report. State's energy price tag increases Published Friday, Feb. 23, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News BY DION NISSENBAUM Mercury News Sacramento Bureau SACRAMENTO -- California's energy crisis took another big bite out of the state budget Thursday when finance aides to Gov. Gray Davis announced that the cost of buying energy may top $3 billion by mid-March. In a move that raised new alarms for lawmakers, the governor's finance team for the third time this month asked for $500 million to buy electricity in the coming weeks while Davis tries to work out a deal to bail out the state's near-bankrupt utilities. That, combined with money spent last month to buy energy, could drain the state coffers of $3 billion by St. Patrick's Day. The request for more cash came on the same day that California spent its first day in weeks without an official energy emergency and Davis held critical talks with the heads of Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and San Diego Gas & Electric Co. The talks are aimed at rescuing the two companies and Southern California Edison from financial collapse. While Davis had expressed hope last week of working out a deal by today, sources said that an agreement still remains elusive. Until a compromise can be hammered out, the state is being forced to pay upward of $50 million a day from the general fund to buy electricity. State leaders expect that the money will eventually be repaid to the general fund under a $10 billion bond package. But lawmakers are growing increasingly concerned about the short-term impact on the state fiscal plan. Assemblywoman Carole Migden, D-San Francisco, said the latest request for more money could create ``greater concern and anxiety'' among lawmakers and added that the energy crisis was going to make it harder to fund other programs, such as support for abused children. ``It's going to be a bleak year for other budget priorities,'' said Migden, who is chairwoman of the powerful Assembly Appropriations Committee. Earlier this week, the state's independent financial analyst warned that the energy crisis could eat into state money the governor wants to spend on other things such as the environment and public safety. While lawmakers have so far bitten their tongues about the growing power price tag, Migden said the Legislature might be hesitant to allow the costs to go any higher. ``I can't imagine another infusion after this being required,'' Migden said. ``I think this has to be the last request because we're going to hit fundamental core programs.'' Waiting for bailout plan California stepped in to buy the energy last month after PG&E and Southern California Edison lost the financial wherewithal to do it themselves. At the time, state leaders reluctantly agreed to buy the energy for a short period of time as part of a larger plan for California to sign long-term contracts with power generators. But those negotiations have failed to produce much energy so far, and Davis said earlier this week that the power producers are hesitant to sign any deals until California agrees to a bailout plan for the utilities. On Thursday, one power producer -- Williams Cos. -- announced that it had signed a 10-year contract with the state to provide up to 1,400 megawatts of power to California. In a bid to work out the bailout plan, Davis and his advisers met Thursday and were to meet again today with top executives from all three electric utilities in financial trouble. The Democratic governor wants to buy 26,000 miles of high voltage transmission lines owned by the three companies in exchange for helping the utilities pay off $13 billion in debts. The utilities are being asked to protect thousands of acres of wilderness lands they own, hang onto power plants that provide the state with its cheapest electricity, and drop explosive lawsuits that could allow the companies to dramatically raise customer rates. But sources said talks have bogged down on the transmission line deal, which PG&E has been reluctant to accept. Alternative energy helps out While talks slogged along in the governor's office, state lawmakers announced that another key piece of the puzzle needed to solve the energy crisis was falling into place. State Sen. Jim Battin, R-Palm Desert, and Assemblyman Fred Keeley, D-Santa Cruz, said that alternative energy producers had agreed to dramatically lower their prices in a deal that could save California $3 billion to $4 billion. Those energy producers, nearly 700 wind, solar and natural gas-fired plants, provide about a third of the state's energy. Paying for power still a big question POWER CRISIS PG&E doesn't like the plan the PUC proposed to collect electricity costs By Mike Taugher TIMES STAFF WRITER Three weeks after Gov. Gray Davis signed into law the state's centerpiece for stabilizing energy costs, big differences remain over how the solutions will be implemented and who will pay for them. The plan, outlined in legislation known as AB1X, was intended first to stop the financial bleeding of California's two largest utilities by asking the state to buy enough unsecured power to keep the lights on. Next, the state would enter long-term contracts for less expensive power that would eventually lessen the need for more costly, last-minute electricity. But the state has balked at buying the entire portfolio of last-minute electricity that is needed, and a disagreement emerged Thursday over what portion of consumers' bills should be used to reimburse state coffers. Meanwhile, progress on completing contracts has been slow, although two were signed Thursday. A spokesman for Davis said more contracts for relatively low-cost power would be signed once the state bought the utilities' transmission lines and other assets, because then the utilities could pay their past-due bills. The governor said last week that he expected a deal with the utilities by today, but that might not happen. ""Clearly, there's been challenges getting long-term contracts, but we've turned the corner,"" said Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio. ""We've got three in the bank and 10 more once we get these deals (with the utilities) done."" Also Thursday, the Public Utilities Commission was poised to allow the state to collect the entire amount that customers pay specifically for electricity. But Pacific Gas & Electric Co. said it is entitled to deduct other costs from customers' payments before reimbursing the state. That would reduce payments from PG&E to the state by about half, according to the company. The PUC proposal was in response to a request from the state Department of Water Resources that it be allowed to start collecting money so that energy companies would be more willing to sell power to the agency. The two Republican-appointed commissioners of the PUC blocked the move, which needed four of five commissioners' approval to reach the agenda. ""DWR's (action) is exacerbating a problem AB1X was meant to alleviate,"" said Commissioner Richard Bilas. ""It is pushing the utilities closer to bankruptcy."" PG&E spokesman John Nelson said the proposal brought by PUC President Loretta Lynch would have been unfair to the utilities because AB1X allows them to deduct expenses for buying electricity and generating energy at their own power plants before reimbursing the state. ""All of those costs need to be paid going forward. Otherwise, you still leave the utilities to bleed,"" Nelson said. That stance appeared to be at odds with the office of Assemblyman Fred Keeley, the Boulder Creek Democrat who wrote AB1X. ""For PG&E to think it can keep money for electrons it never even owned is astounding to us,"" said Guy Phillips, a Keeley aide. While nothing has gone smoothly, Phillips and others expressed optimism that the state's biggest effort to date to fix the energy crisis would work. ""We think those will be sorted out,"" said Phillips, who acknowledged there has been much confusion about what lawmakers intended in AB1X. For example, Keeley's office said lawmakers wanted the water resources agency to make up the entire amount of electricity that the state's two largest utilities had not secured ahead of time. The high cost of this last-minute electricity -- and the utilities' heavy reliance on it -- is what drove PG&E and Southern California Edison to the brink of bankruptcy. But the water agency has balked at buying electricity offered at prices it calls ""unreasonable."" While state officials have refused to say how much electricity it has left to utilities to purchase, the state is paying about $55 million a day to keep electricity flowing. And that amounts to about 90 percent of the electricity purchased on behalf of the utilities on the same day it is needed, according to Phillips. The state's reluctance to buy all of the so-called real-time electricity has led to fears that the utilities will continue to run up debt and that power companies will not collect money owed to them. That dispute has landed in federal court, where a Sacramento judge is forcing three major power suppliers and a marketing company to continue selling power in the state. If a settlement is not reached today, U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell is expected to decide whether to extend his order, to modify it or to drop it. Staff writer Andrew LaMar contributed to this story. Lowenthal returns utility money By Will Shuck From our Sacramento Bureau SACRAMENTO Assemblyman Alan Lowenthal, D-Long Beach, this week joined a small group of legislators who returned campaign contributions to California utility companies and other energy firms. He sent $5,000 back to Southern California Edison and $500 to Sempra Energy, parent company of Southern California Gas. It was a small portion of the more than Lowenthal $500,000 Lowenthal had raised in 2000 for his re-election campaign. He said he returned the money, as did nine other Assembly members, at the urging of the consumer advocacy group Global Exchange. ""We think it's fantastic that he has recognized that in the eyes of the public there is a very serious potential conflict of interest,"" said group spokeswoman Medea Benjamin. ""We applaud him for wanting to ensure the integrity of the legislative process."" While Benjamin says it's critical that lawmakers not be tainted by energy money during the state's power crisis, others wonder where the line should be drawn. ""In the real world of politics it costs money to run for office and you have to get that money somewhere,"" said Paul Schmidt, a political science professor at Cal State Long Beach. ""To say that you can only make decisions on things involving individuals that haven't given you any money would result in paralysis of government."" Benjamin and other consumer advocates say the power crisis calls for special consideration. ""There are not many cases in which they're actually voting whether a company will survive with billions of dollars of taxpayer money or go bankrupt, as they're doing with the utility companies,"" Benjamin said. Lowenthal agreed. ""I thought it was an appropriate request,"" he said. ""These are unique circumstances, and I just think it's in the public's best interest that I return that money."" Dan Walters: A power grab by politicians (Published Feb. 23, 2001) Slowly, but inexorably, control over the generation, acquisition and distribution of electric power in California is being shifted from professional utility managers and independent regulators into the hands of politicians. The 1996 utility ""deregulation"" scheme enacted by the Legislature was an initial foray into politicization. Legislation granting the governor more control over the makeup of the Public Utilities Commission was another. But the current power supply/price crisis has led to even more direct political influence over -- or interference with -- electric service. One hastily enacted bill, for example, gives the governor direct control of the now-misnamed ""Independent System Operator,"" which operates the statewide power grid. More political intrusion is in the works, from a state takeover of the intercity power transmission grid to the creation of a state power authority that would buy, generate and sell electricity directly. And while local public utilities function well, a state power agency might operate on the whims of professional politicians. The Legislature, for example, wants appointments to the board that would direct a state power authority, and big state power projects would be subject to the same kind of pork-barrel mentality that distorts other public works appropriations. Where power plants were to be built, or where high-voltage lines would be strung, might well depend on who could, and could not, bring political influence to bear, rather than what the system needed to work efficiently. Clues to the potential pitfalls of a state-operated power system are found in the approaches of Capitol politicians to the current crisis. There is, for example, the unspoken goal of avoiding big power rate boosts until after the November 2002 election -- even if it means running up billions of dollars in debts to do it. Would future rates charged by a state power authority be raised or lowered to enhance the prospects of the dominant party or an incumbent governor? There's no evidence in past performances to indicate they wouldn't be. And then there's the knotty question of who would get vital power supplies in the event of shortages -- a situation that is already looming and could become worse in future months. Emergency legislation already gives the state the right to sell power as it pleases, without competitive bidding or even public notice. There's nothing, really, to prevent politically influential power customers such as big industrial enterprises from cutting their own supply deals with politically directed state officials. And whose juice would be cut off if shortages mean blackouts? Approximately 45 percent of current power customers are effectively exempt from rolling blackouts because they are connected to circuits (called ""blocks"") that also include vital services, such as hospitals, fire and police agencies, water supply systems and communications centers. The Capitol, not surprisingly, is in one of those noninterruptible blocks. With the threat of further blackouts looming, legislation is being drafted to designate which customers will suffer and which will not -- thus taking that authority out of the hands of utilities and regulators. And that, in turn, is generating pressure from lobbyists from all sorts of interest groups to place their clients on protected lists. Should farmers be cut off, or biotechnology facilities, or computer chip plants, or schools? When politicians control any process or system, one can be certain that they will always make expedient political decisions, regardless of the long-term or wider consequences. Thus, we may someday regret allowing the Capitol's self-serving politicians to get their hands on our electric power system. Discount Urged Near Power Plants Senator urges electricity rate break for neighbors of generators Friday,?February 23, 2001 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle As California officials propose building 32 new ""peaker"" power plants across the state by July, one legislator from plant-rich eastern Contra Costa County thinks residents should get a discount on their power bill for having a generator in their backyard. The proposed bill would provide a little payback for residents of state Sen. Tom Torlakson's district, which is home to a half-dozen plants and has three more in the construction pipeline. Under the bill introduced yesterday by Torlakson, D-Antioch, people living within a 20-mile circle around a power plant would receive a 20 percent discount on their electricity bill and be exempt from blackouts. The legislation was partially inspired by San Jose officials' rejecting a proposal to build a 600-megawatt power plant in the Coyote Valley, as well as Gov. Gray Davis' plan to build 5,000 megawatts of new generating capacity by July 1. ""It's a question of fairness,"" Torlakson said. ""People in communities who are shouldering the burden for having plants in their backyard should get some benefit from it."" Torlakson said consumers who lived in communities without plants could pick up the tab for the discounts. ""But the utilities would have to figure that out within their rate system,"" he said. A PG&E spokesman said yesterday that the company does not comment on pending legislation. While consumer advocates, environmentalists and power generators were lukewarm to the proposal yesterday, many admit that the state has not thought about how to -- of even if they have to -- offer communities a little incentive to approve a power plant within their borders. However, the state has allocated $30 million for plants that get online by July 1. ""As far as incentives, I'd think most communities would see the value of the employment they'd get and the increase to the tax base,"" said Larry Hamlin, the governor's recently appointed project manager for the plant-building campaign. A spokesman for California's Environmental Protection Agency, which permits plants, said the plan might be a ""worthwhile idea for making power plants more palatable to Californians."" Michael Shames, head of Utility Consumer Action Network in San Diego said the bill was attacking a ""not in my back yard"" problem that doesn't exist. ""Many San Diego communities are clamoring for plants in the hope that they would bring stability to the market,"" he said. James Peters of Mirent, the Atlanta-based company formerly known as Southern Energy, said the plan wouldn't encourage generators to build the number of plants needed to solve the energy crisis. Already, communities like Pittsburg have cut deals with power generators before letting them build. In exchange for letting the Calpine Corp. build two large plants in town, Pittsburg received the lifetime option to purchase 100 megawatts of power at below-market rates. Next week, a Pittsburg group is going to begin gathering signatures demanding that city leaders use the estimated 26 megawatts it would take to light residences and businesses to give local residents a break on bills. The group will hold an organizational meeting at 7 p.m. Tuesday at the Los Medanos Community Hospital, 2311 Loveridge Rd. in Pittsburg. At last, power alerts are lifted: Enjoy respite because crisis far from resolved, experts say By Carrie Peyton Bee Staff Writer (Published Feb. 23, 2001) As oddly as it arrived, California's electric emergency lifted Thursday morning. At 9 a.m., the Independent System Operator, which controls most of California's grid, ended a Stage 1 alert. It was the first time since Jan. 13 that the state hadn't been under a power emergency, declared when low supplies threaten grid stability. The alerts included 32 straight days of Stage 3 emergencies, the black clouds that gather before rotating outages. The clouds cleared on a day when predicted peak use was low -- but not the lowest it has been for the last five weeks. Many power plants were back on line after repairs -- but more plants had been operating during at least one Stage 3 day. So what happened? A little luck, a little planning and maybe a little group psychology, said those who have closely watched recent gyrations of the state's electric roller coaster. ""It is a roll of the dice,"" said Gary Ackerman, head of the Western Power Trading Forum, which represents plant owners and marketers. ""If it continues for the next three or four weeks I wouldn't be too surprised. That'll be our respite. Enjoy it."" The end of a 40-day string of emergencies could mean a few more lights in store aisles or a little less worry about running an electric furnace. Some speculated it might also mean lower wholesale prices. But major changes are not likely in the steady rain of conservation calls that have fallen on Californians since the north state was twice plunged into rotating blackouts last month. ""I hope people don't just go back to wasteful ways,"" said Mike Florio of The Utility Reform Network, a consumer group. Now that the emergencies have dissipated, ""we don't have to talk about imposing hardships on people, but prudent use of energy is an idea we're going to have to live with for a long time,"" he said. At the ISO, longer days and slightly warmer weather was credited with decreasing peak demand for electricity. Supplies are up within the state, and power imports from the Pacific Northwest have risen significantly, said Jim Detmers, who manages grid operations. Plus, in one of the biggest changes, the state Department of Water Resources has begun getting more power supplies lined up at least a day in advance, he said. Since the department stepped in to buy power on behalf of cash-strapped utilities, it has often managed to line up about 70 percent to 75 percent of what the state needed to supplement utility-controlled supplies, according to Detmers. That meant grid operators had to scramble to buy the rest on very short notice. But starting last Friday, the state began to schedule about 90 percent of its purchases at least one day in advance. ""The operators are able to enter a day with a lot more confidence about being able to make it,"" Detmers said. ""You don't have to search to find those megawatts at the last minute."" Closely in sync with increased purchases by the state, the ISO dropped from a Stage 3 emergency to Stage 2 on Friday, and then slid to a Stage 1 Wednesday. The stages are based on how much reserve power is left for unexpected crises; a Stage 3 is declared when reserves slip below 1.5 percent. For their part, power buyers at the water resources department weren't sure what has made the difference over the past few days. ""It's certainly not that people are lining up to sell us power at cheap prices,"" said Jim Spence, the department's director of emergency operations. ""We're just buying whatever we can, and it turned out that it was easier to make ends meet."" He said he couldn't make any prediction about how long that would last. The string of power emergencies has been unpredictable from the start, erupting in winter, when California's hunger for electricity traditionally declines and supplies are usually so flush that plants close for tune-ups. Consumer advocates and power traders blamed finances for the emergencies, rather than a fundamental lack of supply, as fears of utility bankruptcies triggered a descent into market chaos and high-stakes political maneuvering. But basic supply shortages are expected to move to the forefront by summer, when temperatures rise and demand soars. Meanwhile, the brief respite -- whatever the reason -- brought palpable relief to those charged with keeping the power grid stable. ""When we found out yesterday during the board meeting that we were only in Stage 1, we broke out in applause,"" said Florio, who sits on the five-member ISO board. The change also could be good news for consumers, who may one day be paying higher rates for the wholesale electricity now being purchased by the state. ""Getting out of a Stage 3 typically means prices are going to ease,"" Florio said. ""When you're even in a Stage 1, that's a signal to everybody, 'They're short, that means we can hold them up now.' "" Davis' deadlines on energy much easier set than met By Emily Bazar Bee Staff Writer (Published Feb. 23, 2001) Exactly one week ago, Gov. Gray Davis sounded hopeful, optimistic even, when he predicted that the state and its debt-ridden utilities would forge an agreement by today on a plan to save the companies from financial doom. Problem is, it won't work out that way. Negotiations between state officials and the investor-owned utilities have produced no comprehensive agreement to announce today. Davis' predictions during the energy crisis have been wrong before. For weeks, he has set deadlines for agreements and legislative action that haven't been met. On deadline days, even when there's little substantive progress to report, Davis often holds news conferences anyway -- many of them on Friday afternoons after financial markets close. The Democratic governor's office scheduled an ""announcement"" for today in Los Angeles, even though one utility representative said agreement is far away. Davis' actions have fueled speculation that he's trying to force consensus by setting artificial deadlines and putting a spin on the news, and tarnishing the state's credibility in the process. ""I can't see how you would negotiate such a complex deal, like the purchase of the transmission grid, in such a short period of time. It doesn't seem realistic,"" said Gary Ackerman of the Western Power Trading Forum, an association of wholesale generators. ""I guess the people I represent have turned it off. They have stopped listening. They hear it and say, 'OK, sure. Here's another photo op.' "" Last Friday, Davis told a gathering of reporters that state officials and the utilities would agree by today on a rescue plan for the utilities. ""I believe we'll have agreement before next week is out, on exactly what should go in a piece of legislation,"" he said at the time. ""And hopefully, that legislation will be passed by the end of the following week."" Legislative veterans said his comments were ill-advised and unrealistic. Davis met into the night Thursday with top officials of Pacific Gas and Electric Co., but no agrement was reached. ""These are complicated problems that will not be solved overnight,"" said PG&E spokesman Ron Low. ""On some issues, we are very far away from agreement."" Sources said PG&E has been unwilling to negotiate sale of its transmission lines, which Davis has said is a necessary component of a deal. More progress was reported with the two other near-bankrupt companies -- San Diego Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison -- although sources said talks with them were far from concluded. Davis has been setting specific deadlines for himself and the Legislature for months: In November, the governor promised to present a comprehensive ""plan"" by Dec. 1 to stave off a full-blown energy crisis, but ended up offering only a modest slate of proposals. Davis called Feb. 12 a ""drop dead"" date by which he hoped to cement a deal between lawmakers and the utilities. There's no deal yet. Davis told reporters that he and the state's legislative leaders would reach a ""consensus agreement"" on the proposal to take to utilities by last Friday. It didn't happen; he made the announcement alone. Leon Panetta, a White House chief of staff under former President Clinton, said it's important that the governor set deadlines because the nature of politics is to delay. However, he cautioned against missing deadlines. ""You have to be careful that you keep the deadlines you establish, because the more that you establish and not meet, the more that begins to lose its value as a political tool,"" Panetta said. The governor can't continue to indefinitely set deadlines without facing consequences, cautioned Steven Fetter, managing director of the Global Power Group at Fitch, a credit-rating agency based in New York. At some point, he warned, creditors and power suppliers may push the utilities into involuntary bankruptcy, which would trigger an official deadline that can't be ignored. The dispute would be tied up in court at a judge's discretion. ""Eventually, there is going to be a real deadline,"" Fetter said. ""The problem is it's probably not a deadline that will be set by Gov. Davis. It's a deadline that will be set by the banks and the (electricity) suppliers."" In several cases when deadlines haven't been met, Davis has held a news conference regardless, unveiling little new information and scant detail. On Jan. 26, for instance, the governor promoted the broad framework of a plan to save the utilities rather than a detailed plan that had been anticipated. One prong of the plan: ""Aggressively promote energy efficiency, conservation and demand reduction among consumers, businesses and public entities."" Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio said that the governor continues to set deadlines because it's important to show that the state is making progress, particularly to Wall Street. He added that it's not the governor's fault the deadlines have been missed. ""Many of the dates have been blown away by factors no one has been able to foresee or have control over: court decisions, actions by creditors, weather, you name it,"" Maviglio said. ""The governor sets deadlines that continue to move the ball forward and he has been successful at doing that."" Many of these announcements came after 2 p.m. on Fridays, triggering suggestions that the governor has attempted to spin the facts and manipulate the markets. Timing announcements after the close of East Coast financial markets is commonly used by politicians who don't want to send stocks soaring or tumbling by making an announcement, Panetta said. ""You want people to evaluate what's happening so there isn't a panic reaction to a news flash going over the wire,"" he said. But market analysts say that ever since PG&E and Edison stocks plummeted in early January, the governor's statements haven't significantly affected their performance. ""There has been so much news that has been so negative for the companies that I don't think it makes much of a difference,"" said Ed Schuller, a senior vice president for the full-service brokerage firm Sutro & Co. ""It's beyond that point now."" GOP Sees Power Crisis as Davis' Achilles' Heel Republicans line up to run for governor Friday,?February 23, 2001 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle Democratic Gov. Gray Davis, politically wounded by the state's power woes, has become the target of a growing pack of Republicans looking to turn him out of office. ""Four months ago, Davis looked on track to get re-elected by a voice vote,"" said Dan Schnur, a GOP strategist. ""But the energy crisis has exposed vulnerabilities that have encouraged others to look at the (2002 governor's) race."" The governor's backers, however, are confident California voters will recognize Davis is dealing with a problem that has been brewing for years, through previous Republican administrations. ""If the Republicans want to have a full-out firefight over who brought this (energy crisis) down, we're ready for it,"" said Garry South, the governor's top political adviser. ""It's a fight they can't win."" With the primary election still more than a year away, no one but Davis is a sure bet to leap into the contest, but at least three names will be circulating when California Republicans meet in Sacramento this weekend for their state convention. Secretary of State Bill Jones, Los Angeles investor Bill Simon Jr. and actor Arnold Schwarzenegger all have made noises about challenging Davis, but so far their incipient campaigns have been more talk than action. Simon's effort might be the farthest along, but he also has the longest way to travel. A political unknown, the 49-year-old Simon runs his family's investment company and has been active in a number of charitable organizations in Southern California. Simon, whose father was treasury secretary under President Richard Nixon, has brought in veteran GOP consultant Sal Russo to study a possible run for governor. ""Bill Simon feels we need a governor who's prepared to lead and not one who's focused on fund-raising or the next political office,"" Russo said in a jab at Davis. Simon was an assistant U.S. attorney in New York, but founded William E. Simon & Sons with his brother and late father in 1988. The $2 billion private investment firm owns a number of companies and has also invested heavily in South of Market real estate in San Francisco. Wealthy political outsiders don't have an enviable record in recent California elections. Republican Michael Huffington spent $29 million to lose a 1994 Senate race to Dianne Feinstein. Darrell Issa dropped around $13 million in a losing race for the 1998 GOP Senate nomination. Al Checchi spent about $38 million of his own money to lose the Democratic primary to Davis in 1998. While Simon likely would be spending plenty of his own money on a governor's bid, he's working to get outside support, both political and financial, before committing to the race, Russo said. With the state's problems mounting and the economy increasingly shaky, the time may be ripe for a political unknown, he added. ""When things start going bad, people are willing to look outside for a new face, someone who will get things done,"" Russo said. Jones is anything but a political outsider. A veteran legislator from the Fresno area, he is now serving his second and last term as California's secretary of state. He managed to hang onto his job during the GOP's 1998 electoral debacle, which cost the party every other constitutional office. While Jones has long talked about a run for governor, he's still playing coy. ""We have not made any decision and probably won't make one until early March,"" said Rob Lapsley, one of Jones' top advisers. ""Right now we're putting together information for Bill to make a decision."" While Jones' role as the state's top GOP officeholder makes him an obvious choice to challenge Davis, he's made a number of political enemies over the years, many of them in his own party. His surprise decision last year to switch his support from George W. Bush to Arizona Sen. John McCain in California's presidential primary won him no fans among Bush supporters and could hurt his attempts to raise money for a gubernatorial bid. Money is a major problem for Jones, who listed $118,000 in his campaign fund last month, compared with nearly $26 million for Davis. Some of his opponents have suggested that fund-raising woes may force Jones to run for an office other than governor. ""Right now, we're focused on the governor's race,"" Lapsley insisted. The real Republican wild card is Schwarzenegger, the movie action hero who would be instantly recognized by nearly every California voter. While Schwarzenegger's publicist told The Chronicle last month that he had no plans to get involved in next year's governor's race, the Austrian-born star was on the telephone to a Los Angeles Times columnist days later, talking about his love for politics and his political ambitions. Fame, however, has its drawbacks, as the 53-year-old Schwarzenegger has found. An article in Premiere magazine entitled ""Arnold the Barbarian"" accused him of groping women on movie sets and generally boorish behavior, while the supermarket tabloids have him on the cover this week, suggesting that his marriage to Maria Shriver is on the rocks. South, Davis' political adviser, gleefully sent copies of the Premiere article to reporters across the state, suggesting that ""the piece lays out a real 'touching' story -- if you get what I mean."" Whoever ends up with the GOP nomination still will face an uphill battle against Davis, a popular governor and a ""take no prisoners"" campaigner. ""I've been predicting since Day One that the GOP would find some moneybags candidate to throw against Gray,"" South said. ""That's why we've kept our political and fund-raising operation going since election day."" Pressure Is on Utilities to Accept Grid Sale Energy: Gov. Davis wants accord today, but Edison executive says company might prefer bankruptcy. By DAN MORAIN and NANCY VOGEL, Times Staff Writers ?????SACRAMENTO--His credibility at risk and California's energy future on the line, Gov. Gray Davis on Thursday turned up the heat on the state's utilities to accept today a series of tentative rescue accords that would put the companies' transmission systems into public hands. ?????How far the utilities are willing to bend to the governor's intensified pressure was unclear late Thursday. Given Davis' mandate, a top executive of Southern California Edison said his company is now being forced to seriously contemplate whether it might fare better in Bankruptcy Court. ?????""We are weighing two very unpalatable alternatives,"" he said. ?????Two alternatives facing the utilities are either to sell their electrical transmission systems to the state at a price they consider too low or gamble in Bankruptcy Court that they could hang onto their valuable assets. ?????After nearly a week of negotiations, Davis administration officials said they hoped to announce today a partial deal that would calm the utilities' jittery creditors and help subdue California's runaway electricity market. ?????State officials said Thursday they were close to agreements with Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric but remained at odds with the state's biggest utility, Pacific Gas & Electric, which has balked at giving up its transmission grid. ?????""These are complex issues that cannot be resolved overnight,"" said PG&E spokesman Ron Lowe. ""There are clearly some areas where we are very far apart."" ?????On Thursday, Edison Chairman John Bryson conferred with members of his utility's board of directors. But by evening, the company's top executives still had not decided whether to acknowledge that an agreement is near. ?????Although the utility has begun to contemplate the protections of bankruptcy, it is unclear when, or if, such a dramatic action would occur. ?????Davis is believed to be offering roughly $7 billion for the utilities' transmission grids. The companies could use the cash to restructure their debt, which resulted from the utilities' inability to pass along their soaring wholesale electricity costs to ratepayers. ?????Davis has significant political and fiscal reasons for wanting to make an announcement today. He is scheduled to arrive in Washington for the National Governor's Assn. conference this weekend, meet with U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham on Sunday, and attend the Democratic Governors Assn. annual fund-raising dinner Monday night. ?????Davis, a prodigious fund-raiser, is chairman of the Democratic Governors Assn., and the dinner is expected to raise more than $5 million. Of that amount, Davis' political organization raised in excess of $1 million, said Garry South, his chief political advisor. ?????Any progress Davis can cite could help improve his national political standing. But his aides say it's especially important to be able to show at least a semblance of an agreement when he travels to New York on Wednesday to confer with Wall Street analysts. ?????On Thursday, those analysts reacted exuberantly to early hints from the governor's office that settlements with the utilities might be announced. ?????The recently anemic stocks of Edison International and PG&E Corp. soared on the New York Stock Exchange on a day when most utility stocks closed lower. ?????Edison jumped $1.50 per share, or 11.15%, to close at $14.95 while PG&E gained $1.49, or 11.41%, to $14.55 per share. ?????""That suggests that someone thinks something good is happening in Sacramento,"" said analyst James D. von Riesemann of Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co. ?????But some analysts fear investor enthusiasm might be hasty. ?????""I'm concerned that the governor's optimism may not coincide with all the parties at the table and it may not coincide with the Legislature,"" said Paul Patterson, utility analyst at Credit Suisse First Boston Corp. ?????Davis met Thursday with Steve Baum, chairman of Sempra, the parent company of SDG&E. Administration officials are confident that an agreement can be reached. But the San Diego company is the smallest of the state's three major private utilities, and its debt is far smaller--$605 million, compared to the combined $12.7 billion that Edison and PG&E say they have amassed. ?????""[Baum] is willing to listen,"" said Sempra spokesman Doug Kline. "" . . . We're on the record as stating that we are willing to consider the sale of those [transmission] assets if it helps solve the crisis."" ?????PG&E executives had been scheduled to start meeting with Davis at 11 a.m. Thursday. But in what was seen a slight against PG&E, Davis' aides did not summon negotiators for the Northern California utility, including company Chairman Robert Glynn, until after 3:30. ?????Although the parties continued to wrangle over details, there was progress Thursday on the sidelines. ?????State officials announced they had signed a long-term contract for a relatively small amount of electricity with a major energy supplier--an achievement that was perhaps more symbolic than substantive. ?????Tulsa-based Williams Cos. said it had agreed to a 10-year deal to sell power to the Department of Water Resources. By April, the company will provide at least 175 megawatts--enough electricity to supply 175,000 homes--at times of the day when demand for electricity soars. Such peak supplies will increase through next summer and reach 900 megawatts by 2006, according to Williams. ?????The agreement is only the second such long-term contract since Davis signed a bill Feb. 1 putting the Department of Water Resources into the power-buying business for many years to come. ?????At least 10 other power suppliers have reached understandings with the state, Davis said Wednesday. But those companies refuse to sign deals, the governor said, until the state finds a way to help California's two biggest utilities pay off their billion-dollar debts. ?????""As soon as we revitalize the utilities,"" the governor said, ""I think you'll see a lot of movement on long-term contracts."" ?????Another small but important piece of the state's energy plan emerged Thursday when legislation was introduced by Sen. Jim Battin (R-La Quinta) to slash the rates paid to alternative energy producers--a move expected to shave $3 billion or more in annual costs charged to the big private utilities. Reducing the amount paid to producers of renewable energy such as solar, wind and biomass power is considered a crucial step in keeping expected consumer rate hikes down. ?????And, after 40 days of dangerously low electricity supplies, the state got a reprieve Thursday morning when grid officials lifted the state's ""electrical emergency"" status for the first time since Jan. 13. ?????So far, the state has spent nearly $2 billion buying electricity on behalf of the utilities, according to the Department of Finance, which informed the Legislature on Thursday that it will release another $500 million for electricity purchases. --- ?????Times staff writers Nancy Rivera Brooks, Nancy Cleeland and Mitchell Landsberg in Los Angeles and Julie Tamaki and Jenifer Warren in Sacramento contributed to this story. Energy Firms Won't Pay All of Monster Debt PUC reverses, taxpayers could foot the bill Christian Berthelsen, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday,?February 23, 2001 Under a ruling yesterday by state regulators, California taxpayers could be on the hook for hundreds of millions of dollars in power purchases the state has made in behalf of two troubled utilities. The California Public Utilities Commission voted unanimously to absolve Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison of responsibility for any costs above the revenue they collect from ratepayers. The ruling reversed a position taken earlier by the commission, which had said the utilities were responsible for making up the difference between the state's costs and their own revenue. John Tremaine, a PG&E spokesman, said the funding needed to make up the difference could come in the form of a surcharge imposed on customers who use 130 percent of the baseline amount of electricity. That is one option under a bill passed last month by the Legislature, he said. But Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis, said the governor does not believe the money will come from ratepayers' electric bills. The costs, Maviglio said, could be covered by the $10 billion bond measure the state recently issued to cover power purchases. As California tries to resolve its power crisis, state officials are working out the precise way that should be done. Under the state's deregulation plan approved in 1996, the utilities have been forced to absorb skyrocketing wholesale electricity costs while being prevented by law from passing the increases on to customers through higher rates. Since the California Department of Water Resources began buying power last month, details showing how it will be repaid, how much or by whom have not been established. Yesterday's PUC decision was an attempt to begin setting the repayment criteria. A precise accounting of how much money is at stake is impossible to determine at this point, officials said, because PG&E declines to release ratepayer revenue figures, and the state is refusing to say exactly how much it has spent buying power. Officials estimate the state will spend $2.3 billion by the beginning of March and Davis authorized the expenditure of $500 million more yesterday. The state's Department of Water Resources became the buyer of record on Jan. 17 when the two utilities' credit was so damaged that they were no longer able to buy power. Both utilities had opposed the commission's previous position that they be responsible for all power costs. The PUC's shift yesterday was summed up by Commissioner Richard Bilas, who said he could not support holding the utilities responsible for the revenue shortfall. ""The DWR is not about to go bankrupt; the utilities are,"" he said. Yet consumer advocates downplayed the commission's ruling yesterday. Nettie Hoge, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, said the ruling only dealt with the narrow issue of who has to account for the revenue shortfall, and did not reach an overarching decision about who, ultimately, will be financially responsible for it. ""This is not a huge deal,"" she said. The state has been buying the lion's share of its power in the real-time market run by the Independent System Operator since the demise of the longer- term California Power Exchange, said Jesus Arredondo, a spokesman for the exchange. The state has been paying premium prices because it is buying in a market that was designed to handle last-minute emergencies. The governor's office has been seeking cheaper, long-term power contracts with only modest results. Small electric producers OK big price cut By Ed Mendel STAFF WRITER February 23, 2001 SACRAMENTO -- Legislators said yesterday that small generators who produce about 30 percent of the state's power have agreed to cut their power prices in half, an important step toward easing the electricity crisis. Negotiations continued on what Gov. Gray Davis has called the final step: the state purchase of the transmission systems of the three investor-owned utilities in exchange for paying off their huge debt. Meanwhile, the amount that the state is spending to buy power for the customers of the utilities grows. Officials gave notice that an additional $500 million will be needed in 10 days, bringing the total to $2.6 billion. But for the first time in nearly six weeks the state did not declare an alert yesterday due to power shortages. More power was available from other states, and some power plants that had been shut down for maintenance resumed operation. Two legislators, Sen. Jim Battin, R-Palm Desert, and Assemblyman Fred Keeley, D-Boulder Creek, said they introduced legislation that sharply reduces the prices paid to small generators after weeks of difficult negotiations. ""Ultimately, this bill will reduce the cost of energy to the state and its ratepayers by billions of dollars,"" said Battin, who represents eastern San Diego County. About half of the small generators use ""renewable"" technologies such as solar, wind, geothermal and biomass. The rest is ""co-generation,"" when fuel is used for industrial purposes and electricity is generated as a by-product. The small generators have grown to produce nearly a third of California's power under a two-decade-old federal ""qualifying facilities"" program, which requires utilities to buy their power. Battin and Keeley said that under the bill, SB 47X, the average price for these QF contracts could drop from the current 17 cents per kilowatt-hour to about 8 to 8.5 cents per kilowatt-hour. ""We believe that the rates are at least that low, if not lower,"" said Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of the Independent Energy Producers, which represents small and large generators. The small generators support the bill because it will give them a stable price for five years, avoiding ups and downs and the possibility that state regulators might make a more unfavorable price cut. Much of the current price formula is based on the price of natural gas at the California border, which has soared this winter. The legislation spreads the price bench mark over a five-year period. ""We encourage the Legislature to take quick action to approve SB 47X as quickly as possible to help stabilize the electricity crisis,"" Smutny-Jones said. He said one of the side agreements to the legislation is the creation of a portfolio of long-term contracts to purchase natural gas for some co-generators, lowering their production costs. The legislation was applauded as ""a major step forward"" by a group of small generators who formed a creditors committee last week and threatened to take the utilities into bankruptcy. ""We call on the Legislature and the governor to act on it immediately,"" said Chris Thompson, a spokesman for the group. Thompson said Southern California Edison continues to collect money from ratepayers, as the state buys power for its customers, but is not paying anything to the small non-polluting generators. A spokesman for a geothermal generator in El Centro, which filed a lawsuit seeking $45 million from Edison for power provided since November, welcomed the legislation for giving generators stability and ratepayers cheaper power. But Vince Signorotti, a spokesman for CalEnergy, said it would be ""premature"" to consider dropping the lawsuit. Battin and Keeley said that payment of the small generators depends on the governor's attempt to negotiate the purchase of the transmission systems of Edison, Pacific Gas and Electric, and San Diego Gas and Electric in exchange for payment of their debt. As part of the governor's plan, the utilities would agree to provide low-cost power for five to 10 years from their generators, which provide about a third of the state's power. Davis aides are attempting to negotiate long-term contracts with generators for the remaining third of the power required by the state, sharply reducing the cost of buying power on the expensive spot market. But the governor said this week that many generators are reluctant to sign long-term contracts until they know how the utilities will pay their debt for previous power purchases. The state called off all power alerts yesterday for the first time since mid-January, rescinding a Stage 1 alert declared Wednesday. Grid operators made the change after increased power supplies became available. ""The supply situation this week has gradually been improving,"" said Lorie O'Donley, a spokeswoman with the California Independent System Operator, which manages most of the state's power supplies. However, she said the improvements shouldn't deter consumers from conservation. ""It is good news to be out of electrical emergencies but we just want to remind everybody that we are looking at a long-term power supply situation here,"" she said. ""And the high-demand summer is just around the corner. So we would ask that people continue with their conservation efforts."" In San Francisco yesterday, state power regulators decided unanimously that the Department of Water Resources is responsible for buying any power that cash-strapped utilities are unable to generate or buy on their own -- no matter what price wholesalers are charging. But the PUC voted 3-2 against taking action that would have allowed the DWR to receive a portion of ratepayer revenues from the utilities to help cover the cost of buying electricity. The state, through the DWR, was authorized by a recent law to buy power for the utilities. Edison and PG&E have such low credit ratings that no power companies will sell to them. SDG&E's rating is much better, but its debt also was mounting. The DWR purchases that portion of electricity beyond what the utilities provide through their own generating plants and through existing long-term contracts. But the DWR has refused to buy power beyond a certain price. That means more last-minute power purchases on the expensive spot market. The utilities and the state had disagreed over how the DWR will be reimbursed -- whether through state bonds or ratepayer dollars -- and the extent of its power-buying role. The author of the bill authorizing the long-term contracts, Assemblyman Keeley, said the legislation's intent was to fully cover the one-third of the power that utilities purchased on the spot market, either through extended contracts or through the state ISO. Staff writer Karen Kucher and The Associated Press contributed to this report. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Bill Massey; [EMail-Body]= Probably not. Let's communicate Breathitt's interest to Bone and stay out of it for now. Richard Shapiro 08/16/2000 08:42 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Re: Bill Massey Is this the right time to weigh ? Steven J Kean 08/16/2000 06:56 AM To: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Re: Bill Massey I believe we should back Massey as well. Who do we weigh in with now? Joe Hartsoe@ENRON 08/15/2000 08:27 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Bill Massey Steve/Rick/Jim --- Talked to John Anderson yesterday. He had just gotten off the phone with Massey. Massey believes Linda B. is spending time at the White House lobbying to be Chair. Have we decided whether to back either and if so which? I would prefer backing Massey. Thoughts? JOE 202.466.9150 ---------------------- Forwarded by Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron on 08/15/2000 09:13 AM --------------------------- janderson <janderson@elcon.org> on 08/14/2000 03:05:28 PM To: jhartso@enron.com cc: Subject: Bill Massey Joe, As you are probably aware, Jim Hoecker is considering leaving FERC relatively soon. The President will then name a new Chairman. Bill Massey is quite interested in receiving the nomination. Please call to discuss. John [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: ticket; [EMail-Body]= Pani Urszulo, Czy to jest Air France? Vince -----Original Message----- From: Urszula Sobczyk <urszula@pacbell.net>@ENRON Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 1:50 PM To: vkamins@enron.com Subject: re: ticket Dzien dobry Panu, Na wylot 04 lipca z IAH do Warszawy i powrot 09 lipca (8 lipca nie bylo miejsca) cena wynosi $1680.26. Bardzo prosze o kontakt czy jest Pan zainteresowany. Pozdrawiam, Urszula [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call
 Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and
 Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted; [EMail-Body]= Can you guys coordinate to make sure someone listens to this conference call each week. Tara from the fundamental group was recording these calls when they happened every day. Phillip ---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 05/07/2001 07:26 AM --------------------------- James D Steffes@ENRON 05/03/2001 05:44 AM To: Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Re: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted Please forward to anyone on your team that wants updates on Western wholesale matters (should also give you an opportunity to raise state matters if you want to discuss). Jim ---------------------- Forwarded by James D Steffes/NA/Enron on 05/03/2001 07:42 AM --------------------------- Ray Alvarez 05/02/2001 05:40 PM To: Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, jalexander@gibbs-bruns.com, Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Linda J Noske/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted Date: Every Thursday Time: 1:00 pm Pacific, 3:00 pm Central, and 4:00 pm Eastern time, Number: 1-888-271-0949, Host Code: 661877, (for Jim only), Participant Code: 936022, (for everyone else), Attached is the table of the on-going FERC issues and proceedings updated for use on tomorrow's conference call. It is available to all team members on the O drive. Please feel free to revise/add to/ update this table as appropriate. Proposed agenda for tomorrow: Power- Discussion of FERC market monitoring and mitigation order in EL00-95-12 and review of upcoming filings Gas- Response to subpoenas of SoCal Edison in RP00-241 and upcoming items Misc. I will be unable to participate in the call tomorrow as I will be attending the Senate Energy and Resource Committee Hearing on the elements of the FERC market monitoring and mitigation order. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Attorney Client Privilege - Attorney Work Product; [EMail-Body]= I have drafted the attached letter denying the Cal ISO's request to send it (and the EOB) EPMI and EES' cost information for transactions over the FERC's cost cap. Since I believe we are on very firm ground, my initial inclination was to send no response to the ISO's letter, so there would be nothing to quote in the press. However, I drafted this letter at Alan's suggestion for purposes of discussion. We should decide whether to send a letter before distributing this draft more widely in-house to discuss how to parse the message. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Stella Chan /Project Summer transfers; [EMail-Body]= How are we handling these now? Last time I talked to Jeff, we weren't going to lift the restrictions until next week (assuming we do lift the restrictions). Any word? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/31/2000 02:26 PM --------------------------- Scott Gilchrist@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 08/31/2000 10:45 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Cindy Olson, Rebecca McDonald Subject: Stella Chan /Project Summer transfers Steve/ Cindy Just want to state a case for this move, (before everyone starts up on the movement moratorium issues surronding the "" EI"" companies -which I understand is still in place). Stella Chan (Director level) is one of 6 expats Apachi have seconded into our SK Enron JV in Korea. Because they all mobilized at the same time, Darrell Kinder and I put in place a rotation plan whereby some would leave early, some extend (so we didnt have everyone leaving the JV at the same time). Its worked well to date, and we've mamanged to keep the Partners happy with the moves/replacements. Bottom line with respect to the Project Summer moratorium (in my view) is that because Stella will be replaced she is no longer part of the 'intellectual capital' the buyer (or any future buyer) is seeking to retain, and so the move should go ahead. Hope you concur. ---------------------- Forwarded by Scott Gilchrist/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 08/31/2000 10:34 AM --------------------------- Enron International From: Anthony Dorazio 08/30/2000 09:21 AM To: Darrell W cc: Scott Subject: Chan Darrell, Stella Chan's contract will conclude March 1 2001. She had shown some desire to repatriate early and under the repatriation agreement I allowed her to start her search (six months prior). Stella's search was very quick and she has landed a job with the Corporate Public Affairs group under Harry Kingerski, who works for Rick Shapiro, who works for Steve Kean. She has set a preliminary job switch for October 16, 2000. This does not cause me too much concern, for as you are aware Waymon Votaw who works in the Southern Cone group under John Guidry has shown a desire to be Stella's replacement. The timing of this could work out real well. Please pass this to the powers to be for approval so I may move forward with the next step with both individuals. Thanks Tony [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RTO Question; [EMail-Body]= For those who attended the FERC meeting yesterday, can anyone elaborate on the reference in the Energy Daily article today that said Pat Wood remarked at the meeting that the Barton RTO language is ""balanced"" and that he likes it. I am working on our own and helping EPSA with their comments on the Barton language which is, as we know, a retrenchment from current law and FERC's plans on RTOs. But if Pat Wood likes it and thinks it is ""balanced"" that undercuts our position. Since the trade press is not always accurate, I thought I would first check with those of you who were there. Thanks. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Confidential Draft - David Pope; [EMail-Body]= fyi ---------------------- Forwarded by Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT on 04/10/2000 01:46 PM --------------------------- Tara Rozen 04/10/2000 12:09 PM To: Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Re: Confidential Draft - David Pope Thanks. Nigel has now spoken with David and Nigel has gone to Danny with the result. We shall see how he responds!! Thanks Tara Michelle Cash 10/04/2000 18:00 To: Tara Rozen/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Nigel Sellens/LON/ECT@ECT, David Oxley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mary Joyce/HR/Corp/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: Confidential Draft - David Pope Tara, You are right -- those changes were not included. For Vice President level employees, corporate comp.does not promote guaranteed performance bonuses. The request that he be able to ""get out"" of his employment contract if he is not promoted also is not something that we can do; otherwise, it will undermine the enforceability of our non-competes across the board. I spoke with David Oxley on both of those points, and he concurred that these changes could not be made. Michelle Tara Rozen 04/05/2000 12:23 PM To: Twanda Sweet/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Nigel Sellens/LON/ECT@ECT, Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Confidential Draft - David Pope Thanks for this, Twanda I have two comments; 1)I cannot find the exception clause which indicates that David Pope can resign if he doesn't make MD as described in previous email. Am I missing this or can we not put this in? 2)Danny McCarty wanted guaranteed bonus for 2000 rather than performance target bonus as per email. Is this possible? Thanks Tara [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Confidential - GSS Organization Value to ETS; [EMail-Body]= I agree with Morris. Little value to the pipes -------------------------- Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net) -----Original Message----- From: Saunders, James <James.Saunders@ENRON.com> To: Hayslett, Rod <Rod.Hayslett@ENRON.com> CC: Brassfield, Morris <Morris.Brassfield@ENRON.com> Sent: Wed Nov 21 10:31:29 2001 Subject: FW: Confidential - GSS Organization Value to ETS Rod, Stan is/was reviewing selected ""corp."" services, and one of those selected was GSS. I requested that Morris provide some persepective on GSS. Please review and forward to Stan, if appropriate. -----Original Message----- From: Brassfield, Morris Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 10:05 AM To: Saunders, James Subject: Confidential - GSS Organization Value to ETS Here are my thoughts on the value the GSS (Global Strategic Sourcing) brings to ETS: I believe totally in the concept of strategically sourcing our materials and services for ETS, which is the concept that GSS was founded under, while still within the ETS organization. Basically the value that GSS has brought to the bottom line during the last year has been minimal to ETS. The reasons for that statement, in my opinion, are: * The materials and services that ETS purchase are basic and routine. * Most of those materials and service providers were identified and sourced during 1999 and 2000. * ETS is reaching the point where we need fewer providers, not more. * New items identified are normally rolled into one of our already sourced NPA's. * Almost all large dollar items are bid out (three bids and a buy). * GSS's involvement and commitment to the deal ends with the contract signing. * ETS P&SM organization and our Contracts services group deals with the actual execution and the ringing of the cash register. If the GSS organization went away tomorrow, we would need the following expertise brought over from their group: (currently this group is close to 75 people.)(and very highly paid individuals) * Two (2) negotiators - Contract Managers * Two (2) analysts * Two (2) contract administrators The administration of the following services would need to be shifted to the ISC: * iBuyit System * Catalog system (part of iBuyit) * iPayit system We would need to re-assess the value of the contract with SourceNet and whether we continue down that path or implement our own A/P department. This would take very few staff adds to make that happen. Let me know if you need any further detail. Morris (713) 503-1409 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: CA Customers; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/05/2001 07:29 AM --------------------------- From: Michelle Robichaux@EES on 07/02/2001 12:32 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Marcus Dotson/HOU/EES@EES, Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES Subject: RE: CA Customers Tricon works extremely close with Retailer's Association. Tricon suggested we contact the President of the CA Retailer's Association for assistance. Michelle ---------------------- Forwarded by Michelle Robichaux/HOU/EES on 07/02/2001 12:29 PM --------------------------- ""Main, Joe"" <Joe.Main@Tricon-Yum.Com> on 07/02/2001 12:28:00 PM To: ""\""Michelle Robichaux\"" "" <mrobicha@enron.com> cc: ""Fister, Marcus"" ""Riendeau, Brian"" Subject: RE: CA Customers Michelle, We have not been called to testify. We work with Bill Dombrowski, President of California Retailer's Assoc. Your California govt. relations person could reach Bill at 916-443-1975 to see if other commercial customers were called. Joe Reply Separator Subject: CA Customers Author: ""Michelle Robichaux"" <SMTP:mrobicha@enron.com> at Dallas Date: 07/02/2001 10:38 AM CA customers called to testify in favor of DA. Have you been asked to participate??? (Embedded Enron Energy Services image moved to file: From: Mark Courtney pic16804.pcx) 07/02/2001 10:25 AM Phone No: 713-853-6368 Office 713-646-8913 Fax 877-596-2409 Pager EB 744 To: Michelle Robichaux/HOU/EES@EES, Mary Jo Johnson/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Re: Customers ---------------------- Forwarded by Mark Courtney/HOU/EES on 07/02/2001 10:24 AM --------------------------- Scott Gahn 07/02/2001 07:53 AM To: Mark Courtney/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Re: Customers ---------------------- Forwarded by Scott Gahn/HOU/EES on 07/02/2001 07:53 AM --------------------------- Dan Leff 07/02/2001 07:32 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON, Michael Mann/HOU/EES@EES, Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Angela Schwarz/HOU/EES@EES, Gayle W Muench/HOU/EES@EES, Craig H Sutter/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Gahn/HOU/EES@EES, Greg Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Kevin Keeney/HOU/EES@EES, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Eric Letke/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard L Zdunkewicz/HOU/EES@EES, James M Wood/HOU/EES@EES, Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES cc: David W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Re: Customers (Document link: Scott Gahn) Steve - Thank you. Team - FYI and action. Probably best to coordinate with Steffes / Mahoney. Thanks - Dan Steven J Kean@ENRON 06/30/2001 07:24 AM To: Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Customers You may want to forward this to your customers. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 06/30/2001 07:23 AM --------------------------- Scott Govenar <sgovenar@govadv.com> on 06/28/2001 04:51:56 PM To: Hedy Govenar <hgovenar@govadv.com>, Mike Day <MDay@GMSSR.com>, Bev Hansen <bhansen@lhom.com>, Jeff Dasovich <jdasovic@enron.com>, Susan J Mara <smara@enron.com>, Paul Kaufman <paul.kaufman@enron.com>, Michael McDonald <Michael.McDonald@enron.com>, Rick Shapiro <rshapiro@enron.com>, Jim Steffes <james.d.steffes@enron.com>, Alan Comnes <acomnes@enron.com>, Steven Kean <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com>, Karen Denne <kdenne@enron.com>, ""Harry.Kingerski@enron.com"" <Harry.Kingerski@enron.com>, Leslie Lawner <Leslie.Lawner@enron.com>, Robert Frank <rfrank@enron.com>, Ken Smith <ken@kdscommunications.com>, Janel Guerrero <Janel.Guerrero@enron.com>, Miyung Buster <Miyung.Buster@enron.com>, Jennifer Thome <Jennifer.Thome@enron.com>, Eric Letke <eletke@enron.com>, Mary Schoen <Mary.Schoen@enron.com>, David Leboe <David.Leboe@ENRON.com>, Ban Sharma <ban.sharma@enron.com> cc: Subject: Customers The California Chamber of Commerce received a call from someone at the CPUC who requested that they send as many customers as possible to testify at Tuesday's hearing in favor of direct access. The Chamber has requested the same thing of Enron. ---------------------------- This communication is confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, (i) please do not read or disclose to others, (ii) please notify the sender by reply mail, and (iii) please delete this communication from your system. Failure to follow this process may be unlawful. Thank you for your cooperation. ---------------------------- [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Confidential Contact data and RFI; [EMail-Body]= Update from Giffels. Kevin Presto UBS Warburg Energy kevin.presto@ubswenergy.com Phone: 713-853-5035 Fax: 713-646-8272 -----Original Message----- From: Fred W. Giffels [mailto:fgiffels@HGP-Inc.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 9:06 AM To: Presto, Kevin M. Cc: Dan Salter Subject: Re: Confidential Contact data and RFI Kevin I had the Capacity forecast column units mislabeled Here is the revised one. If you want, just have your NEEPOOL lead type over our forecast and re-send to us. We will not let this get out of our shop, and we will get you in on a block to buy. Thanks again Fred ----- Original Message ----- From: Presto, Kevin M. To: Fred W. Giffels <mailto:fgiffels@HGP-Inc.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 8:07 AM Subject: RE: Confidential Contact data and RFI Any nuclear specific info? Kevin Presto UBS Warburg Energy kevin.presto@ubswenergy.com Phone: 713-853-5035 Fax: 713-646-8272 -----Original Message----- From: Fred W. Giffels [mailto:fgiffels@HGP-Inc.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 7:04 AM To: Presto, Kevin M. Cc: Dan Salter Subject: Re: Confidential Contact data and RFI Confidential Kevin I know you would not bid the entire 1000Mwe, we are trying to come up with a proxy to assist in the bid, I am also trying to get you in with Mr.Green and the 150-200Mwe indicative would be great. I need it by Wednesday (2/13/02). Thanks for the return e-mail. Did you see the alert from the FBI yesterday and today ? Fred ----- Original Message ----- From: Presto, Kevin M. To: Fred W. Giffels <mailto:fgiffels@HGP-Inc.com> Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 5:50 PM Subject: RE: Confidential Contact data and RFI I'll get back with you on this within a couple of days. Do you want an indicative bid for 7x24 bus-bar energy (2, 5 and 10 years). We would not bid on the entire 1000 MW - maybe 150-200 MW. thanks for the info. Kevin Presto UBS Warburg Energy kevin.presto@ubswenergy.com Phone: 713-853-5035 Fax: 713-646-8272 -----Original Message----- From: Fred W. Giffels [mailto:fgiffels@HGP-Inc.com] Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 3:48 PM To: Presto, Kevin M. Cc: Dan Salter Subject: Confidential Contact data and RFI Kevin I just got the attached e-mail returned with your new address. Let me know if this one makes it thru Fred Confidential Kevin I know you are quite busy but I wonder if you could get your lead trader to look the following forecast for NEEPOOL. This may result in you getting the lead for a large block of the power so be conservative but have enough in there so it is a win win if you know what I mean. Have him fill in what he can. The client will be looking long 10 year, with maybe a series of 2 and 5 year deals. Should be putting out around 500 to 700 Mwe. Do not disclose the plant eh ? Call me at 864-370-0217 or 864-235-5607 or mobile 864-275-3193 Thanks Fred Visit our website at http://www.ubswarburg.com This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy version. This message is provided for informational purposes and should not be construed as a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any securities or related financial instruments. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Report on Calif. Electricity Price Spikes by CPUC and EOB; [EMail-Body]= As we discussed. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/09/2000 02:44 PM --------------------------- Richard Shapiro 08/03/2000 07:35 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Report on Calif. Electricity Price Spikes by CPUC and EOB ---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES on 08/03/2000 07:35 AM --------------------------- Joseph Alamo 08/02/2000 07:51 PM To: California Government Affairs, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/HOU/EES@EES, David Parquet/SF/ECT@ECT, Laird Dyer/SF/ECT@ECT, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Michael McDonald/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Report on Calif. Electricity Price Spikes by CPUC and EOB For your review: [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Government Affairs Meeting; [EMail-Body]= Go ahead. From: Elizabeth Linnell on 04/25/2001 04:53 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Government Affairs Meeting Do you mind if the professionals in my group attend? 5 people (assuming they all want to go - Margo, Miyung, Linda, Lynnette and Earlene) each at $190 for airfare, $380 for two hotel nights, plus shuttle services and misc expenses. I'm always encouraging my group to interact with Rick's group, as Gov't Affairs is our primary customer base. I'm not planning to attend the meeting. Thanks! ----- Forwarded by Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron on 04/25/2001 04:50 PM ----- Ginger Dernehl 04/25/2001 04:31 PM To: Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Government Affairs Meeting Well, the time has arrived for me to let you know what is in store for everyone at the next Government Affairs department meeting on Thursday, June 14. The meeting will take place at: The Omni Interlocken 500 Interlocken Blvd. Broomfield, Colorado 80021 Phone# 303-438-6600 Fax# 303-464-3252 Check-in time 3:00 p.m. Check-out time 12:00 p.m. (Noon) The Government Affairs meeting will take place on Thursday, June 14 and will begin at 8:00 am and will conclude by 11:30 am. I have arranged for box lunches to be served after the meeting. After the meeting, we will have the remainder of the day for some fun activities, along with a buffet dinner served that evening to complete the day (on-site dinner location TBD). Block of Rooms - A block of rooms have been reserved for Government Affairs. I will be turning in a rooming list to the hotel next week so, I would like to know by Friday, April 27 your plans to attend the meeting. Shuttle Service - See attachment for shuttle times. Please note, a return reservation from the hotel to the airport is required. Please contact the Concierge to arrange for shuttle service. Colorado Weather - For the month of June, you can expect the following: High's - 80.............Low's - 52 Flights from Houston - I have checked with TAP for roundtrip flights from Houston - Denver, Denver - Houston and an exceptionally great (non-refundable) fare of $190.94 is available. However, fares are not guaranteed until actually booked. Let's book early!!!!! The activities to choose from are as follows: Please let me know by May 4 your choice of activity!!!!!! Whitewater Rafting - A bus will leave the Omni Interlocken Resort at 2:00pm to head for an afternoon of exciting adventure on Colorado's Clear Creek. The Arkansas River is one of the most popular whitewater adventures anywhere, combining spectacular scenery and action packed rapids. Teamwork is the name of the game as your team paddles down these tumbling cascades. Continuous class III and IV rapids will thrill guests throughout the run. Drop over Nomad, surge through the Phoenix Holes and take on the class IV climax, the Outer Limits. Good physical condition and the ability to swim are recommended. The group will have three thrilling hours on the river and will return to the Omni by 6:15pm. Chautauqua Park Hiking Adventure - One of the most popular access points for mountain hiking trails in Boulder is Chautauqua Park. The focal point is the 100-year-old dining hall. The Colorado Chautauqua is one of only four of the original Chautauquas still operating in America, as opposed to when thousands dotted the nation and culturally enriched rural people in the early 1900s. The tour includes: transportation, professional guide service, two hours of guided hiking - total time for excursion is 4 hours. (Dress code: Shorts or hiking attire, appropriate footwear, sunglasses, sunscreen and hats). Departure time and return will be relayed at a later date. Spa Services - The Spa at Omni Interlocken Resort offers a number of spa services (massages, facial & skin care treatments, body treatments or nail services, to name a few). If you are interested in this as an activity, please let me know and I will fax a detailed list of their services. You will need to call the spa and schedule your own appointment if this is the activity you choose. Golf - For the golf enthusiasts, an afternoon of golf at the Omni Interlocken 27-hole championship golf course which stretches out over 300 acres of verdant fairways is another activity to select from. Spectacular panoramic views from three 9-hole courses, which feature more than 400 feet in elevation changes. If this is the activity of choice please respond via e:mail and I will add you to the list. The game of choice will be ""best ball"" play. Biking - Scenic bike paths are located near the hotel for those with interest. If this is your choice of activity, please let me know and I will reserve a bike and map for you enjoyment. After reviewing the choices above, please select an activity you prefer to take part in. Due to the fact that our group is so large, (which makes it more difficult to coordinate activities) once you select an activity, we ask that you not change your selection. So, please talk to your colleagues ahead of time before making your choice. Thanks and don't hesitate to call me if you have any questions. Gngr - SuperShuttle.doc - Directions from DIA with map.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Compliance Agreement; [EMail-Body]= What's this about? Could you e-mail Dave and I with the background, any effect on us, etc.? Why was Dave on this distribution? ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/29/2001 07:51 AM ----- David W Delainey@EES 03/28/2001 08:33 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Ana Shafer/ENRON@enronxgate cc: Subject: RE: Compliance Agreement ????? ---------------------- Forwarded by David W Delainey/HOU/EES on 03/28/2001 08:32 AM --------------------------- ""Michehl R. Gent"" <mgent@nerc.com> on 03/25/2001 06:04:51 AM To: ""David Cook"" <dcook@nerc.com> cc: ""Dave Delainey"" <ddelain2@enron.com> Subject: RE: Compliance Agreement David: Nice job! Can you imagine the ""fun"" someone is going to have if a Region, say SPP, MAIN, MAPP, WSCC, or FRCC, has a major blackout this summer and the ""loyal opposition"" ""discovers"" that said region has refused to sign an agreement such as this and not implemented the program required by the agreement. That may even constitute ""willful neglect."" Wouldn't it be even worst if the ""discovery"" showed that the region was not signed because the region wanted to use it's position as a bargaining ploy? (SPP, FRCC, and WSCC) Oh no, I sound like a wantabe lawyer! Mike -----Original Message----- From: David Cook [mailto:dcook@nerc.com] Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2001 4:19 PM To: dcook@nerc.com Subject: Compliance Agreement Regional Managers Compliance Task Force As we discussed on the conference call on Friday, I have prepared a simple draft letter of intent for the use of those regions who wish to indicate support for the regional compliance and enforcement program, but are not yet in a position to sign the Agreement for Regional Compliance and Enforcement Programs that the NERC Board of Trustees approved on February 13. For the benefit of those who were not on the call, I'd like to recap where things stand at this point. My apologies if I mischaracterize anyone's position. NPCC and ERCOT have signed the agreement. ECAR has stated it will sign the agreement at the signing ceremony on March 30. SPP is prepared to sign the agreement, but doesn't want to be the only one it its part of the Eastern Interconnection to do so. FRCC was not on the call, but has previously stated that it is prepared to sign so long as at least six regions sign. MAPP and MAIN have indicated that they prefer to develop their program with their own members before they sign the NERC agreement. WSCC may need to consider the matter at its Board meeting in early April. SERC has the matter under consideration. I have not heard from MAAC, but it has a meeting scheduling for March 29. I want to share with you my concern for the climate in Washington. In the past few weeks I have had occasion to speak with a number of people on Capitol Hill and in the new Administration. All are very concerned about what might happen this summer. If a serious incident occurs, I am quite sure that Congress will legislate very quickly--whether it will legislate wisely is a different question. We have the opportunity with this agreement for the industry to take charge of its own destiny. If Congress acts it may well assign a very central role to the Federal government to take direct responsibility for reliability. There are those in the Department of Energy who are pushing for such a role. Congressman Barton is talking of the possibility of emergency legislation, possibly within the next few weeks. If the industry pulls together, I believe we can forestall direct governmental controls, just as in 1965. If the industry does not step up, then Congress may well assign the responsibility elsewhere. The CTG recommended to the Board that a critical mass of six Regions sign onto the agreement before it goes forward. For those Regions that are considering developing their own programs with their members before they sign the agreement, with the view of having the CAPG determine in advance whether their programs meets the requirements of the agreement, I ask you to consider this: If we don't get a critical mass of Regions to sign, then the CAPG may not come into existence. The NERC/Regions agreement is really an undertaking by the regions to work to develop their own regional compliance and enforcement program with their members. My request remains that each of the regions sign the agreement by the March 30 Board meeting. That will assure that we are able to make the governance changes that we have all been working for. If any region is unable to sign by March 30, then use of the letter of intent would be a way to demonstrate support for the program. That may be enough to satisfy those who have stated that moving forward on the compliance program is a condition to their support of the governance changes. Thanks very much for your consideration of the program and all the work you've put into this transition so far. Please let me know if you have questions or if there is anything that we can do from here to be of assistance to you. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential - ENhome Program; [EMail-Body]= The purpose of this message is to provide key areas (specifically IT Suppor= t=20 and Purchasing Organizations which might receive questions about the new=20 ENhome program) with preliminary information about the ENhome program as we= ll=20 as a standard message to deliver. The goal is to communicate a consistent= =20 message to all of our employees. Please keep in mind that changes are stil= l=20 being made at this time so your discretion is welcomed until the internal= =20 communication has been distributed. At the same time, please inform the=20 appropriate individuals within your area that you believe might receive=20 questions. What is ENhome? An OTC approved program that will provide eligible employee= s=20 (active, regular full-time and part-time employees whose business units ele= ct=20 to participate) at home with high-end internet devices, broadband internet= =20 connection (where commercially available) and an employee-centric portal fo= r=20 personal use.=20 Attached to this message are three documents concerning this new program. = =20 These documents are: ENhome PowerPoint Presentation - High-level presentation provided to all of= =20 the Business Unit=01,s Human Resource Departments describing the program. = =20 ENhome Draft of Internal Communications =01) This is a draft of the interna= l=20 communication that will be sent to eligible employees. I will send you the= =20 final copy when it has been approved. ENhome Q&A Draft =01) This is a draft of the Q&A document in case you may= =20 encounter these questions. Please review this document and if you feel the= re=20 are additional questions that need to be addressed, let me know and I will= =20 work to get these answered. This program is scheduled to be announced to all eligible Enron employees a= t=20 either the end of this week or early next week. Remember that these=20 attachments are drafts and may be changed. As soon as I receive final=20 copies, I will forward them to you. =20 Questions regarding the message from the Office of the Chairman concerning = =01&A=20 Computer for You and Your Family=018 should be responded to as: ""This program is being sponsored by Enron=01,s Office of the Chairman and w= ill=20 be coordinated by Corporate Human Resources. The Global Information=20 Technology unit of Enron Net Works and Global Strategic Sourcing are workin= g=20 in conjunction with Corporate Human Resources to support this endeavor. =20 Details about this program are still being finalized and will be communicat= ed=20 as they become available. An eSpeak session will be scheduled in the near= =20 future where you will have an opportunity to ask questions."" If you have any additional questions regarding this program or the=20 communications that will be released, please feel free to contact me at=20 713-853-7947. Thanks, Susan [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: California Amendments DEFEATED!; [EMail-Body]= Congrats Linda Robertson 07/19/2001 09:44 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, mark s palmer/enron@enronXgate@Enron cc: Subject: California Amendments DEFEATED! John Shelk will provide a more thorough report in a later Email, but I just wanted you to know that the Waxman price cap amendment was just defeated in full Committee markup and the Eshoo refund amendment was defeated. Both by sizable margins. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Price Cap Media--DRAFT; [EMail-Body]= I agree that we need to add our customer contacts to the list. This gives them a great opportunity to look smart -- ""we went to the market and got price protection"". On the messages we need to include Mark's top three: 1) price caps cause shortages (Rob Bradley: let's put some historical examples together) Mona L Petrochko 07/18/2000 01:26 PM To: Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES cc: James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Mark Palmer@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@Enron, Jeff Brown/HOU/EES@EES, Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Sandra McCubbin/SFO/EES@EES Subject: Re: Price Cap Media--DRAFT I have a couple of suggestions on parts of the draft. Media Action: In addition to doing behind the scenes editorial board meetings and the like, I would suggest that we get our coalition lined up and ready to release statements for certain key events which are likely to occur over the next several weeks, such as: 1. SDG&E's selection of the winning bid to their RFP. Even if Enron isn't selected as the winning bid, the coalition should trumpet the market-based solution and the enormous market response to SDG&E's RFP. 2. The Commission vote on UCAN's Emergency Motion. We should be prepared to issue a statement whether the Cmmn votes with us or against us. With us, the market can and did provide reasonable, expedient solutions to SDG&E's customers and protection from price spikes. Against us, despite the overwhelming market response, the Cmmn chose to ignore the market solutions and impose more regulation. 3. Potential for ARM members to surface a Provider of Last Resort proposal within the next couple of weeks. 4. ISO Bd. Mtg-keep up pressure against reducing price caps. Coalition Members: Agree that those groups listed should be contacted, although the CMA, CRA, CIU, CLECA have been luke-warm in their advocacy. I would add our customers (UC/CSU (especially the San Diego branch), PacTel, etc.) NewEnergy has indicated that Kroger/Ralph's grocery stores, San Diego-based, would give testimonials. I could solicit the members of ARM to identify a key customer contacts for interviews. We could check with our lobbyists and see who they would recommend (wine growers, dairy industry, etc.) We should also consider the water agencies and the rural counties and the City of Pittsburg. While the immediate message is responding to San Diego's situation, this latter group of potential coalition members would go to the larger message (keeping benefits of competitive markets) from a state-wide perspective. What about the City of Pittsburg? Jeff Dasovich on 07/18/2000 10:07:00 AM To: James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Steve Kean, Mark Palmer, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@Enron, Jeff Brown/HOU/EES@EES, Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES, Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Sandra McCubbin/SFO/EES@EES cc: Subject: Price Cap Media--DRAFT Here's a draft. Given sense of urgency, I tried to develop a target for folks to shoot at rather than The Perfect One-pager. So please fire at will. In particular, need PR to fill in ""Media Approaches"" and ""Key Message Points."" Best, Jeff [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL Attorney/Client Communication: Your TW
 Capacity Options questions; [EMail-Body]= Elizabeth, Jeff forwarded me your questions about capacity options. I've answered them to the extent they involve legal/regulatory issues. If you need anything further please don't hesitate to call. ? Can a new shipper who enters into an FTS-1 contract with zero MDQ in order to purchase a shipper call option or sell a transporter put option be allowed, prior to the exercise date, to transfer the underlying option rights by permanently releasing this contract? YES. ? Will we be required to report these contracts with zero MDQ on the Index of Customers and/or the Transactional Report? YES. ? Can the releasing shipper permanently release a portion of his existing MDQ and choose to keep or transfer the option rights? YES. The shipper could even release all of its MDQ (reducing it to zero) and keep its option rights. ? How is it determined whether a contract with an option amendment is within the min/max tariff rate or needs to be filed as a negotiated rate? The option fee is converted to a per-Dth, per day rate and added to the transport rate. If the total exceeds the maximum tariff rate, it's ""negotiated"". Otherwise, our position is that it's not negotiated. We are not 100% positive that FERC will agree with us on this issue. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= BG&E; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/13/2000 08:11 AM --------------------------- From: Vicki Sharp@EES on 09/12/2000 09:09 AM To: Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: BG&E ---------------------- Forwarded by Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES on 09/12/2000 09:09 AM --------------------------- Enron Energy Services From: Vicki Sharp 09/12/2000 09:07 AM Phone No: 713 853-7413 To: Bill Votaw/HOU/EES@EES, John Carr/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Porter/HOU/EES@EES, Laren Dean Tarbet/HOU/EES@EES, Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron, Cynthia Sandherr, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Rick Shapiro, Steve Kean cc: Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Jeremy Blachman, Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES, Lou Pai, Thomas E White/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES Subject: BG&E See below. VEPCO intends to challenge the USMDW privatization. More details to come. ---------------------- Forwarded by Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES on 09/12/2000 09:04 AM --------------------------- Robert C Williams@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 09/11/2000 04:39 PM To: Vicki Sharp@EES, Andrew cc: Subject: BG&E I have scheduled a meeting with Larry Adams, the Asst. U.S. Attorney, and Doug Kornreich, the Corps lawyer, for Wednesday at 10:30 AM. Doug tells me that VEPCO has told him that it plans to file a challenge to the GAO's decision in the Court of Federal Claims this week. I have also spoken to Andy Holloman; we will call him from the Venable office for a ""download"" on the Colorado case. Ideas on D.C. counsel? V&E or Venable are the logical choices; offhand I would propose V&E. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California Refund Proceeding Privileged and Confidential Attorney
 Work Product Attorney-Client Communication; [EMail-Body]= In our litigation meeting last Tuesday, we learned that netting of spot purchases and sales is of paramount importance in limiting our exposure to refunds, under the FERC's July 26 Order, in both the California and Pacific Northwest proceedings. However, in the California proceeding we are also afforded the opportunity in the Order to offset our receivables against any refund that would otherwise have to be paid by us. Also, to the extent that our receivables exceed the refund amount, the Order provides for payment of interest to us in accordance with CFR Section 35.19a. At present, I am aware of the existence of three receivables. As you will recall, I mentioned at Tuesday's meeting that we should be able to treat as a receivable for purposes of offset, the revenues due us from the application of the CAISO underscheduling penalty. I communicated the possibility of offsetting this receivable against any potential refund at this mornings Western Wholesale conference call, and subsequent research conducted by Alan Comnes indicates that the CAISO owes us $30MM, as per the CAISO's own numbers. The CAISO also owes us approximately $40MM due to nonpayment for one to two months of business. These two figures alone, totalling approximately $70MM, exceed the estimate of our potential exposure in the California proceeding. Finally, the negative CTC issue is another receivable due us by IOU's that, under the plain language of the Order, could potentially be used to offset any refund amount. I am not aware of the magnitude of this receivable but do understand that there are some sensitivities regarding this issue, including concerns about revealing the amount of the credit due us. It is likely that the amount would become public if it is presented in the California proceeding. Please give us your thoughts as to the use of the CTC receivable to offset potential refunds in the California proceeding. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEY WORK CLIENT PRIVILEGE ASSERTED; [EMail-Body]= Paul -- Can we have a phone call with our Reg team on Friday to make sure that everything is a-ok? I want one final run through. If yes, please let me know by phone and I'll ask Linda Noske to set up the call. Also, I owe you a call on Sue / Jeff. Are you in Thurs? Jim -----Original Message----- From: ""Paul Kaufman"" <manretz@msn.com>@ENRON Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 3:28 PM To: Shapiro, Richard; Steffes, James D. Subject: highly confidential - 081401 Granite II Memorandum.doc << File: 081401 Granite II Memorandum.doc >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= REMOVE; [EMail-Body]= What do you think? If you think this would be useful, go ahead and order it. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/04/2000 04:22 PM ----- ""Dvorkin, Robert"" <dvorkin@sewkis.com> 10/03/2000 10:51 AM To: ""'Arthur Tane'"" <aapi@aapi.com.au>, USL <rws@sayer.com>, USL <s031rbr@zionsbank.com>, USL <safeenergy@erols.com>, USL <sal@livingstrongrp.com>, USL <sam@freedomproject.org>, USL <sbarton@usmayors.org>, USL <sbvr@shawbransford.com>, USL <schagrin@erols.com>, USL <scutter@mmlk.com>, USL <sda@sda-inc.com>, USL <sgattys@lava.net>, USL <shall@mstlaw.com>, USL <simoncode@aol.com>, SKNYC <sknyc@sewkis.com>, USL <skean@enron.com>, USL USL <smrussell@ashland.com>, USL <spradlobby@aol.com>, USL <srkelley@swbell.net>, USL <sstretch@ix.netcom.com>, USL <stateside@stateside.com>, USL <stb@spilanlaw.com>, USL <steve.meier@tm.com>, USL <steve@bkbh.com>, USL <steven.kline@pge-corp.com>, USL <steven.powell@equifax.com>, USL <strategy@hawthorngroup.com>, USL USL <swojdak@wojdak.com>, USL <sxb@amtrak.com>, USL USL <tamaccu@inland.com>, USL <tamsin_smith@gap.com>, USL <tcr666@worldnet.att.net>, USL USL USL <tgorrie@corus.jnj.com>, USL <TheSpecGrp@aol.com>, USL <thevgroup@aol.com>, USL <thomas.h.weaver@nspco.com>, USL <thomas.ross@hq.loral.com>, USL <thomas_grissom@vencor.com>, USL <thorupg@hro.com>, USL <tjohnson@oshtruck.com>, USL <tmvthomas@aol.com>, USL <toker000@mail.genmills.com>, USL <tom_finnigan@praxair.com>, USL <transforum@igc.org>, USL <tsc@senior.org>, USL <tschatz@cagw.org> cc: Subject: REMOVE -----Original Message----- From: Arthur Tane [mailto:aapi@aapi.com.au] Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2000 4:27 PM To: USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; SKNYC; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL; USL Subject: For The Library: Who's Who in the Leadership of the United States CD-Rom Who's Who in the Leadership of the United States CD-ROM The Leadership CD-Rom covers every sector of the business, government, professional and nonprofit worlds of the United States of America. Up-to-date and current, this CD-Rom functions as a powerful research tool, offering unparalleled access to the 400,000 individuals who comprise the institutional leadership of the United States. The Leadership CD-Rom consists of the following 14 parts or directories: CONGRESSIONAL DIRECTORY: The most current information available on who's who in Congress, including senators and representatives, their committee and subcommittee assignments, and key staff. FEDERAL DIRECTORY: Identifies over 38,000 government officials in the Executive Office of the President, cabinet-level departments, and more than 70 federal agencies. STATE DIRECTORY: Provides information on over 35,000 state officials in the executive and legistative branches of the 50 U.S. State governments. MUNICIPAL DIRECTORY: Includes contact information for over 32,000 elected and administrative officials of leading cities, counties and local authorities in the United States. FEDERAL REGIONAL DIRECTORY: Information on over 36,000 federal decision-makers located outside of Washington, DC, enabling users to reach the offices with the appropriate jurisdictions. JUDICIAL DIRECTORY: Provides details on 3,200 federal and state judges, including staff and law clerks, with the law schools they attended, as well as detailed biographical information on each judge. CORPORATE YELLOW PAGES: Provides names and titles of over 51,000 executives and their corporations, the nature of each enterprise, including more than 10,000 corporate board members and their business affiliations. FINANCIAL DIRECTORY: Includes over 36,000 leaders in all financial fields, with board member affiliations. Provides individual titles, functions, and contact details. NEWS MEDIA DIRECTORY: Enables users to communicate their ideas or publicize information effectively to over 34,000 journalists at 2,700 national news media organisations. ASSOCIATIONS DIRECTORY: Lists over 43,000 officers at 1,100 trade and professional organisations, keeping users current with chief state executive turnover, changes in staff and governing boards, and mergers and name changes. LAW FIRMS DIRECTORY: Identifies over 23,000 partners who make the business decisions and manage the practice areas of the nation's 800 leading law firms. GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS DIRECTORY: Lists over 19,000 government affairs experts in fields such as legislative affairs, environmental affairs, and international trade. Details the issues they contest and the coalitions they form. FOREIGN REPRESENTATIVES DIRECTORY: Includes Information on foreign representatives at embassies, consulates , and intergovernmental organisations in the United States. Lists U.S. executives of over 1,300 foreign corporations and more than 340 foreign financial institutions with offices in the United States. NONPROFIT SECTOR DIRECTORY: Provides contact information for over 40,000 nonprofit sector executives and trustees at over 1,000 nonprofit organizations, including foundations, colleges and universities and museums, performing arts groups and centers, medical institutions, library systems, preparatory schools, and charitable service organizations. Features of entries in this CD-Rom include up-to-date: * Mailing address, telephone , fax and e-mail information * Website addresses * Biographical information or Corporate/Organizational information * Photograph of each listed individual * Administrative support staff contact information * plus much more ! Functions: > Browse. Browse each directory's table of contents by individual or organization name, or within an organisation by department. > View. View pages on screen as clearly and graphically as if they were in printed directories. > Search. Search with numerous selection criteria to create customised lists of individuals and organizations. > Export. Export search results in convenient formats for mailing lists or data base mergers. > Link. With an Internet connection, link from the CD-Rom to thousands of websites and e-mail addresses. The Leadership CD-Rom has over 55 indexes thus helping researchers to locate individuals and organisations throughout the United States in a wide variety of ways. An essential reference tool for professional researchers, governments, libraries and corporations, The Leadership CD-Rom is available in a easy to use Windows-based inferface enabling users quick access to vital information. US$525.00 including delivery worldwide. ORDER FORM To purchase your copy of THE LEADERSHIP CD-ROM, please fill out this Order Form and return it to: ASIA PACIFIC INFOSERV, GPO BOX 2987, SYDNEY 1043 AUSTRALIA Tel: 61 2 4934.6290 Fax: 61 2 4934.3692 E-mail: aapi@aapi.com.au ABN: 43 461 915 913 Please send ........ copies of THE LEADERSHIP CD-ROM @ only $US525. Payment Options: 1. A Cheque for $US ............ payable to Asia Pacific InfoServ is enclosed. 2. A Bank Transfer for $US .......... has been made to your account. Australia and New Zealand (ANZ) Banking Group, Hunter Street, Newcastle, 2300 Australia Account Name: Asia Pacific InfoServ Account No: 012770.351431638 3. Visa / Mastercard facilities available. Please send to: Remove - If you would like to be removed from this list, reply to this message with the word REMOVE in the subject line. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re:; [EMail-Body]= Thanks anyway. no need to do anything right now. enjoy your vacation. Jeffrey Keeler 06/18/2001 01:10 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Re: Sorry I missed this on Friday -- was on vacation end of last week and rest of this week. If its not too late, I'll have Lisa pull some things together quickly. Also, my wife Marietta knows Isikoff well....they worked together on a number of things when she was at Court TV in Washington. Let me know what I can do to help. Jeffrey Keeler Director, Environmental Strategies Enron Washington DC office - (202) 466-9157 Cell Phone (203) 464-1541 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: RTO Week -- Summary of Standards and Practices Panel; [EMail-Body]= Getting more information in this person and getting him to contact Congress= is very important. He is in the district of House Chief Deputy Whip Roy B= lunt (R-MO), who is Cong. DeLay's right-hand man in the leadership. He als= o serves on the Barton Subcommittee. While Linda, Pat and I had breakfast = with him next week, and he will be in Houston for next month, he and his st= aff stress that he is close to public power in his district, which includes= Springfield, MO. Did he have a prepared statement at the RTO Week hearing= ? -----Original Message----- From: Landwehr, Susan M.=20 Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 5:12 PM To: Shelk, John Cc: Hueter, Barbara A.; Robertson, Linda; Nord, Sue; Shortridge, Pat; Novos= el, Sarah; Shapiro, Richard; Guerrero, Janel; Steffes, James D. Subject: FW: RTO Week -- Summary of Standards and Practices Panel John--this is the recap from Thursday afternoon of RTO week. Although Andy= did not focus on it in his report, there was an individual who sat on the = panel from Missouri that did a fantastic job of supporting FERC and market = postitions despite the fact that he is a public power guy. His name is Bil= l Burks and he is the Associate General Manager of the City Utilities of Sp= ringfield, Missouri. In his comments he stated that his utility was ""whole= heartedly supporting FERC moving forward to push for on RTO"" and then went = on to talk about how Missouri is going to continue to suffer from seams iss= ues if FERC doesn't stick to their guns on just a few major RTOs. =20 He stated that ""flexible"" standardization would not work and that the FERC = should put out a platform of standardized tariffs and if there was some uti= lity or group of stakeholders that thought they were special or unique or d= ifferent, then the burden of proff should be on them to petition FERC for a= n exemption, not the other way around. =20 =20 I'm thinking that this gentlemen would be an excellent choice for a committ= ee hearing if you have the opportunity to suggest folks to testify in the f= uture. IF you are able to get transcripts from RTO week, it might also be w= orth it to review his comments and pass them on as appropriate. =20 =20 =20 =20 -----Original Message-----=20 From: Rodriquez, Andy=20 Sent: Thu 10/18/2001 4:46 PM=20 To: Black, Tamara Jae; Abler, William; Aggarwal, Anubhav; = Allen, Diana; Arora, Harry; Bailey, Debra; Ballato, Russell; Ballinger, Ted= ; Baughman Jr., Don; Benchluch, Moises; Benjelloun, Hicham; Benson, Robert;= Bentley, Corry; Blaine, Jay; Bolt, Laurel; Broderick, Paul J.; Broussard, = Richard; Burnett, Lisa; Campbell, Larry F.; Capasso, Joe; Carson, Mike; Che= n, Alan; Choate, Jason; Cline, Kevin; Collins, Dustin; Comeaux, Keith; Coul= ter, Kayne; Davis, Mark Dana; Day, Smith L.; Dean, Clint; Decook, Todd; Eme= sih, Gerald; Errigo, Joe; Forney, John M.; Freije, William; Garcia, Miguel = L.; Gilbert, Gerald; Gilbert-smith, Doug; Giron, Gustavo; Greer, Andrew; Gu= aly, Jaime; Guerra, Claudia; Gulmeden, Utku; Gupta, Gautam; Ha, Amie; Hanse= , Patrick; Hernandez, Juan; Imai, Rika; Ingram, David; Jenkins IV, Daniel; = Kaniss, Jason; King, Jeff; Kinser, John; Larkworthy, Carrie; Laurent, Dean;= Laverell, Justin; Lenartowicz, Chris; Lorenz, Matt; Lotz, Gretchen; Lowell= , Thomas; Mack, Iris; Mahajan, Ashish; Makkai, Peter; Marquez, Mauricio; Ma= skell, David; May, Tom; McElreath, Alexander; Miller, Jeffrey; Oh, Seung-Ta= ek; Olinde Jr., Steve; Pace, Andy; Padron, Juan; Pan, Steve; Philip, Willis= ; Podurgiel, Laura; Poppa, John D.; Presto, Kevin M.; Quenet, Joe; Rawal, P= unit; Rogers, Benjamin; Rust, Bill; Ryan, David; Saibi, Eric; Schiavone, Pa= ul; Schneider, Bryce; Seely, Michael; Serio, Erik; Shoemake, Lisa; Simpson,= Erik; Stalford, Robert; Stepenovitch, Joe; Sturm, Fletcher J.; Symms, Mark= ; Tamma, Ramanarao; Thomas, Paul D.; Trejo, Reese; Valdes, Maria; Vernon, C= layton; Wang, Steve; Williams, Ryan; Willis, Cory; Zipperer, Mike; Baughman= , Edward D.; Clynes, Terri; Dalton III, Oscar; Kelly, Mike E.; Sewell, Doug= ; Valderrama, Larry; Walton, Steve; Roan, Michael; Perrino, Dave; Maurer, L= uiz; Hueter, Barbara A.; Landwehr, Susan M.; Hoatson, Tom; Novosel, Sarah; = Nicolay, Christi L.; Yeung, Charles=20 Cc:=20 Subject: RE: RTO Week -- Summary of Standards and Practices Panel RTO Week =20 Day 4 - October 18, 2001 Afternoon Session =20 Standardizing Markets, Business, and Other Practices=20 Panelists for this discussion were: Sarah Barpoulis, PG&E National Energy = Group; William P. Boswell, GISB; Bill Burkes (substituting for David J. Chr= istiano), City Utilities of Springfield, Missouri; David N. Cook, NERC Gene= ral Counsel; Michael Kormos PJM Interconnection; LeRoy Koppendrayer, Minnes= ota Public Utilities Commission; and Marty Mennes, Florida Power & Light Co= mpany. =20 General Observations =20 The Commissioners were all present the majority of the time (Massey left la= te in the afternoon). FERC Staff was active in the discussion; however, t= he commissioners were very active as well, asking perhaps as much as 70% of= all questions. There was a general consensus that standards were needed; = much discussion focused simply on how much and by who. The Commission seeme= d very interested in leaning what they needed to do to move the industry fo= rward and how far they needed to go. Panelists urged the need to mover for= ward as quickly as possible, but both they and FERC seemed to recognize tha= t some of the issues regarding standardized market design and such needed t= o be addressed before RTOs could really begin to move forward. There was d= iscussion on identifying which industry group (NERC or GISB) would take the= reins in the future. On an interesting tangential note, there was noticea= ble conflict between NERC and GISB, with veiled insults between the two org= anizations somewhat common during the discussions.=20 =20 FERC Deliverables A great deal of the discussions focused on identifying what the industry ne= eded from the Commission. Staffers probed all panelists to find what they = felt was critical. =20 The first major topic was ""How many RTOs? What is their scope?"" All panel= ists seemed to agree that this question needed to be answered immediately b= y FERC, in strong definitive language. N o one offered any specific langua= ge, but seemed to be urging FERC to issue a formal statement. The next topic was, ""What will be standard market design?"" Panelists varie= d on this, but most felt strong guidance from FERC is urgent. Some urged f= or one mandatory design for North America, one supported a set of rigid sta= ndard designs, one supported a single design with requests for exceptions (= followed by an in-depth review process), and one seemed to prefer the curre= nt situation. The commission in general seemed to be very interested in understanding wha= t the industry needed to move forward. They continually visited this topic= throughout their discussions, asking questions like, ""Do we need to issue = a Mega-Order that addresses all these issues?"" and, ""How much detail do you= need us to provide?"" General feel from the panelsists seemed to be they = wanted strong leadership in this areas. Kormos and Burkes went so far as t= o say FERC should ""Mandate as much as they felt comfortable - and then go a= little further."" Others seemed to be a little worried about this idea, bu= t in general did not oppose the concept, citing only general warnings and t= he need for cautious investigation. =20 One item of interest: Wood referred to the filing made by the Electronic Sc= heduling Collaborative and specifically asked if the items identified in th= e ""RTO Design and RTO Implementation"" section would address many of the que= stions and uncertainty facing the industry with regard to RTO design. Korm= os indicated that clear and specific answers to these questions specifying = a course of action would go a long way toward guiding the industry. The se= ction to which Wood referred was one that I wrote, and asked the following = questions: ? Congestion Management - When Operational Security Violations occu= r, how is the system to be stabilized in a fair and equitable manner that i= s nonetheless efficient? Will LMP based systems be standard, or will there= be others that must be accommodated? ? Transmission Service - Are transmission services required to sch= edule (""covered"" schedules only), or are they risk management tools protect= ing from congestion charges (both ""covered"" and ""uncovered"" schedules are a= llowed)?=20 ? Loop Flows - Are contract-path based or flow-based transmission = services appropriate? If contract-path based, how are parallel path issues= to be addressed? ? Grandfathered Transmission Service - Should contracts existing pr= ior to RTO development be transferred, or is there an equitable way to reti= re those contracts? Are there other solutions? ? Energy Imbalance Markets - How are imbalance markets to function?= Will they serve as real-time energy markets (support unbalanced schedules)= , be limited to supplying needs of imbalance service (require balanced sche= dules), or will they be required at all? ? Ancillary Services - Will ancillary service markets be developed = in standard ways? Will entities be required to actually schedule ancillary= services (required to schedule), or will they be treated primarily as fina= ncial instruments (protecting against real-time POLR charges)? ? Losses - Can we utilize the imbalance markets to support losses? = Can we create specific loss standards that facilitate the scheduling proce= ss, or must we support methods that are currently in tariffs, but technical= ly unwieldy? ? Non-Jurisdictionals - How are non-jurisdictionals to be integrate= d into the new world? Should systems be designed with the assumption that = non-jurisdictional will be part of an RTO? Or should they be designed to t= reat each NJE as a separate entity? Hopefully, FERC will use this section as a template to answer these critica= l questions in an assertive manner, and give some solid direction in which = to move. Kormos emphasized the need for concrete answers to these questions= , pointing out that vague answers (i.e., ""do congestion management"") will t= ake a year or two to resolve, but specific answers (i.e., ""LMP with financi= al hedging instruments"") will take only months. The Commission asked Mike = about moving forward, and he told them that effectively, it was impossible = to move forward with implementation without getting these issues addressed. Now for a funny point - One of the commissioners (I think Breathitt) refer= red to some concerns expressed in the Northwest that their high concentrati= on of hydro power makes LMP inefficient for the Northwest. Kormos flat out= said, ""My profession is understanding how power systems work, and I don't = believe that that statement is true."" He then backpedaled a bit and said t= hat it would need more study, but he stood by his statement that the assert= ion by the Northwest interests was false. NERC and GISB A great deal of discussion focused around the need for a single standard-se= tting organization. Massey went so far as to ask, ""Are we looking at a bea= uty contest between NERC and GISB?"" Cook and Boswell then went into severa= l short polite jabs at each other's organizations. Other participants cont= inually reiterated the need for ONE, INDEPENDENT organization. Interesting= ly, Boswell was very emphatic about the established trust and respect in GI= SB, while Cook preferred to only talk about the ""new"" structure of NERC and= did not focus on its history. Brownell offered some not-too-subtle passive support of GISB by pointedly a= sking both Cook and Boswell if they lobbied political positions (i.e., were= they not only an organization but also a stakeholder?). GISB was easily a= ble to say they were not, but NERC of course had to admit to their romancin= g of Congress and the Bush administration for reliability legislation. Poin= t, Brownell. Mennes acted as somewhat of a supporter for NERC, playing Dave Cook's yes-m= an. He probably did them a little bit of harm by pointing to NERC's suppos= ed ""successes,"" such as TLR and E-Tag. If staffers have tenure, they will = likely remember that these ""successes"" have not been so successful, resulti= ng in several filings and interventions. We may also wish to file comments= in specific objection to these claims, to refresh their memory and to show= the pretty picture Marty painted was in fact a fiction. There was a little discussion about splitting reliability and market issues= , but general consensus was that I could not be done. There was also some = talk of folding NERC under GISB/EISB. The arguments began winding down after a some time, and Boswell strongly ur= ged the Commission to speak to industry executives and advocacy group leade= rship to see whether NERC or GISB should lead the industry forward. NERC s= omewhat less enthusiastically supported this position. In general, I would= say it was a close fight but GISB came out more on top. Let me know if you have any questions. Andy Rodriquez Regulatory Affairs - Enron Corp. andy.rodriquez@enron.com 713-345-3771=20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Revised INGAA Itinerary; [EMail-Body]= FYI - itinerary. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/05/2001 08:57 AM --------------------------- From: Christina Grow/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/03/2001 12:26 PM To: Stanley Horton/ENRON@enronXgate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Koenig/ENRON@enronXgate, Paula Rieker/ENRON@enronXgate cc: Cindy Stark/ENRON@enronXgate, Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Laura Valencia/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: Revised INGAA Itinerary Please note departure time has changed and dinner time has changed. I will contact Papa's assistant to give her details of the changes. Thanks, Chris Ext: 3-6021 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Risk 2001 Australia; [EMail-Body]= Philip, Please, try Frank Wolak from Stanford University. He is the best expert on California right now. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""philip annesley"" Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 7:50 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: RE: Risk 2001 Australia Vince Thanks for coming back to me on this anyway. Would you be able to suggest anyone else - either in Australia, Europe or US who would be good to get to discuss the California crisis? kind regards. Philip -----Original Message----- From: Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 12:00 AM To: pannesley@riskwaters.com Cc: Vkaminski@aol.com Subject: RE: Risk 2001 Australia Philip, I have to decline the invitation with regrets. I have too many commitments right now. Vince Kaminski -----Original Message----- From: ""philip annesley"" +3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com] Sent: Monday, May 28, 2001 3:27 AM To: vkamins@enron.com Subject: Risk 2001 Australia Dear Vince Just a quick message to follow up on the email that I sent you recently inviting you to speak at our forthcoming congress, Risk 2001 Australia, which is taking place in Sydney on 20 & 21 August 2001. Have you had an opportunity to consider the invitation yet? We are aiming to have the programme printed next week, so I would really need to know as soon as possible if you would be available to speak at this year's congress. I am working from our Hong Kong office for this week only (Tel: +852 2545 2710), and I can be contacted by phone there or by email. Kind regards. Philip Philip Annesley Conference Producer Risk Waters Group +44 20 7484 9866 +44 20 7484 9800 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Supreme court brief; [EMail-Body]= Good brief. I have noted a few comments and questions throughout the text. Ignore my universal change to the word ""transmissions"". [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: the summary report, I am sorry.; [EMail-Body]= Thanks Vince -----Original Message----- From: Kim, Jinbaek Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 10:08 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: the summary report, I am sorry. Vince, I am sorry to send this late. I had to finish a report for DealBench team yesterday, and read papers and prepare slides for the meeting scheduled tomorrow 2PM. Because I thought those work has to be done first, I didn't put the priority to the summary report. Attached is the summary report. However, I hope I have more time to double check this. I'll do the proofreadding, and send this again, after the presentation tomorrow, together with the summary report of tomorrow's presentation. I am sorry for this again. Jinbaek << File: summary.06.15.doc >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW:; [EMail-Body]= Martin, Lance What do you think? Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Frank A. Wolak"" Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 4:28 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Vince, I've been hearing rumors that Enron has decided to endorse the nodal pricing model as implemented in PJM. I just wanted to warn you that I'm not sure this is in Enron's long-term interest at all. Let me explain why. Feel free to give me a call if you'd like to talk more about this. First, let me say that I firmly believe in locational pricing and specifically pricing congestion. However, the way that PJM implements nodal pricing is to eliminate as much price volatility and reduce the transparency of the market. Specifically, the PJM tariff gives the ISO the ability to mitigate to cost plus a %10 adder the bids of any market participant that the ISO deems is out of merit in one of the three zones in region. (The fact that a nodal market is talking about zones should give you cause for alarm.) Then the ISO takes this mitigated bid and re-runs its price-setting software to compute new nodal prices. The way I have (somewhat unfairly) decribed this price-setting process is that the PJM ISO decides what prices it would like for a given day and mitigates bids until it gets them. This is not a transparent market, nor one where it makes any sense to buy the risk management services that Enron provides. The only price volatility you have to worry about in the PJM market is that kind that comes about if they need imports into their control area to meet demand. Under these circumstances, you need to pay the imports whatever is necessary to get them to come to your market. However, bear in mind FERC's desire to make a large RTO on the East Coast. This will effectively mean little imports to the East Coast RTO, so all bids can be mitigated at the discretion of the ISO. Paying market-clearing prices to cost-of-service mitigated bids is just paying too much to eliminate price volatility. It effectively kills off the development of risk management at the wholesale and retail level. Power marketing becomes much less profitable because retailers know you can always buy at cost-mitigated prices. In short, the PJM model is not market. It is just an alternative form of regulation that is politically attractive because it reduces price volatility, but it is not good for consumers or traders because they just get a higher cost form of regulation than traditional cost-of-service regulation. You pay market-clearing prices to cost-of-service mitigated bids, but under regulation you could just pay cost-of-service prices and eliminate the infra-marginal profits to low cost generators. As we discussed during our dinner, I think the two biggest sources of benefits from re-structuring will come from getting the demand-side involved in the market and from more efficient risk management. A necessary condition for both of these to occur is prices that reflect actual conditions in the market (including the extent of market power exercised). Masking these signals dulls any incentive for market participants to make the investment necessary to management. The PJM model is just way to have a market in name without achieving any significant benefits to consumers or energy traders. Frank [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Barton Bill; [EMail-Body]= Thanks for the explanation. I agree, though I may not have explained the context adequately to Ken. Linda Robertson 05/11/2001 04:32 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Barton Bill You seemed troubled by the call to Barton. This bill may or may not be subsumed by the comprehensive energy bill that Congress undertakes this summer. Both bills have a very difficult, if not nearly impossible, path ahead given that the Democrats are in no mood for compromise. The call to Barton was to: a) repair relationships (and with the Wall Street Journal calling Barton about his troubled past with Enron, repair is needed); b) proclaim victory, even of a limited nature (something I think Enron has not done much of); c) build a further bond with Barton so we would have more input at full Committee (something we will need given the chances that this will go off the track are real); and d) allow Enron to get significant credit for the defeat of price caps. I hear from lots of DC sources that we have not had any success in the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Numerous folks at the markup noted in private conversations that this was Enron's first real role in the Committee. Thus, even though this is a very limited bill, the call made sense. I do not think that this means we should call the White House to push the bill with them. The bill itself still has lots of obstacles and many potential threats ahead. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Congressman Ose loved your letter to Sen. Dunn; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/12/2001 10:48 AM --------------------------- From: Tom Briggs on 07/12/2001 10:43 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Congressman Ose loved your letter to Sen. Dunn [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Rice Letter; [EMail-Body]= Anita, Very minor changes. Thanks. Vince [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Senate passes Alper/Davis Bill 30-0; [EMail-Body]= This is the e-mail I was talking about. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/31/2000 05:41 PM --------------------------- James M Wood@EES 08/30/2000 09:11 AM To: Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES cc: Douglas Condon/SFO/EES@EES, Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Greg Cordell/HOU/EES@EES, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Edward Hamb/HOU/EES@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Karen Denne@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mary Hain@Enron Subject: Re: Senate passes Alper/Davis Bill 30-0 Mona, If you can get the opt-in removed it would be a great benefit to our effort. 6.5 cents is well below market at this point and we can not compete against it. I understand there is a true-up but do we know how this will work? Given the lack market intelligence I would suspect customers will opt-in just because the price cap is lower than offers in the market. Please, do everything possible to remove this opt-in. Thanks Mona L Petrochko 08/29/2000 04:38 PM To: Douglas Condon/SFO/EES@EES, Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES, James M Wood/HOU/EES@EES, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Greg Cordell, Roger Yang, Edward Hamb/HOU/EES@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Karen Denne@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, West GA, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mary Hain@Enron Subject: Senate passes Alper/Davis Bill 30-0 AB 265 passed through the Senate a few minutes ago. It now must go to the Assembly, where there is still a lot of uncertainty about what changes the Assembly will want to the bill. We still haven't seen the latest ""republican"" language. Also, AB 265 is double joined to AB 970, controversial siting bill. To the extent one or the other fails, they both fail. AB 265 (Davis/Alpert) has: 1. a 6.5 cent/kWh energy rate cap through 2002, with potential extension through 2003. 2. Applicable to residential, small commercial (up to 100 kW) 3. Opt-in provision for large industrial/agricultural customers at 6.5 cents with an annual true-up 4. Use of revenues from utility generation assets (including PPA) to offset undercollections. 5. Reasonableness review for San Diego G&E Will update with more information as available. No news about SCE. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= SRP Change in Business Practice at Palo Verde; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/20/2000 08:43 AM ----- ""EPADILL@pnm.com"" <EPADILL 09/19/2000 06:54 PM To: ""'jtunderh@srpnet.com'"" <jtunderh@srpnet.com>, ""'rstultin@apsc.com'"" <rstultin@apsc.com>, ""'rsmith03@apsc.com'"" <rsmith03@apsc.com>, ""'jwhitacr@epelectric.com'"" <jwhitacr@epelectric.com>, ""'djensen@epelectric.com'"" <djensen@epelectric.com>, ""'shoang@dwp.ci.la.ca.us'"" <shoang@dwp.ci.la.ca.us>, ""GWOLF@pnm.com"" <GWOLF@pnm.com>, ""DHINES@pnm.com"" <DHINES@pnm.com>, ""'allenjw@sce.com'"" <allenjw@sce.com>, ""'grfrere@srpnet.com'"" <grfrere@srpnet.com>, ""'michael.d.lopez@sce.com'"" <michael.d.lopez@sce.com>, ""'amacfa@ladwp.com'"" <amacfa@ladwp.com>, ""'shomer@scppa.org'"" <shomer@scppa.org>, ""'skesler@apsc.com'"" <skesler@apsc.com>, ""'gordon.scott@nerc.com'"" <gordon.scott@nerc.com>, ""Clark, Robert"" <RCLARK@pnm.com>, ""DFarmer@pnm.com"" <DFarmer@pnm.com>, ""'don.benjamin@nerc.com'"" <don.benjamin@nerc.com>, ""RFLYNN@pnm.com"" <RFLYNN@pnm.com>, ""THAMM@pnm.com"" <THAMM@pnm.com>, ""'iliffandco@aol.com'"" <iliffandco@aol.com>, ""'skean@enron.com'"" <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: SRP Change in Business Practice at Palo Verde Please see attached letter, same subject -- signed, hard copy to follow. <<SRP Change.doc>> - SRP Change In Scheduling Practices_.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Update - Jeff Skilling Conference Call with John Q Anderson; [EMail-Body]= Thanks to Jim and Charles for the reports on the NERC conference call earlier today. Aside from whatever is done directly with NERC on details of their internal operations to respond to our concerns (i.e., Jeff's presentation to their board and the list of issues Charles had), the NERC/PJM drafting process will continue in DC in coming weeks. In addition, Congressional staff are likely to be drafting electricity legislation, including a reliability title, during the August Recess that will start at the end of this week (i.e., we will likely be asked to comment on reliability legislation before any meetings with the NERC board are completed). I will analyze the ""shortened NERC"" and ""PJM Revised"" versions and share some thoughts based on our objectives. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: 1.  London, June 28 - 29; 2.  Houston, July 16 - 17; [EMail-Body]= Ehud, Sorry for the delay in replying to your message. I was on the road a lot. I am in London right now and plan to attend the conference. I am leaving on Saturday morning for Houston. I have asked Shirley to get tickets for one of the evening you mentioned. I should know by Thursday if the tickets are available. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Ehud I. Ronn"" <eronn@mail.utexas.edu>@ENRON Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 11:08 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: 1. London, June 28 - 29; 2. Houston, July 16 - 17 Vince: Greetings. I write at this time for two reasons. First, w.r.t. 6/28 - 6/29 London, I remain uncertain whether you intend personally to attend and present at that EPRM Financial Math course. I wanted to advise you know that, in addition to the sightseeing/theatre we traditionally do at these events, we -- you, Duane Seppi, Peter Nance and I -- have been invited to dinner at the home of Klaus and Renee Toft Sat. evening 6/30. Second, w.r.t. the subsequent mid-July Houston training course, I write to remind you that at EPRM 2001 we discussed the possibility of jointly attending a baseball game at Enron Field 7/16 or 7/17. Per the Astros' schedule, it turns out the Cleveland Indians will be in town both nights for a 7:05 p.m. first-pitch start time at the Field. Let me know if either 7/16 or 7/17 works out from your perspective. Hope all is well. Best, Ehud Ehud I. Ronn Jack S. Josey Professor in Energy Studies Department of Finance McCombs School of Business University of Texas at Austin Austin, TX. 78712-1179 Voice: (512) 471-5853 FAX: (512) 471-5073 Internet: eronn@mail.utexas.edu [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential for Dan Watkiss; [EMail-Body]= Jim If you are able to provide this to Dan for the meeting I would appreciate it. He may not want to circulate it to the group. It is intended as a work product for attorney. This e-mail and the attachments were prepared at the request of counsel. <<NOTES FOR DISCUSSION.doc>> Jan Paul Acton Vice President Charles River Associates 1201 F St., NW, Suite 700 Washington, DC 20004-1204 Voice: (202) 662 3902 Fax: (202) 662 3910 ***** This electronic message contains information from the consulting firm of Charles River Associates Inc., which may be confidential or privileged. The information is intended for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify us by telephone (617 425-3582) or by e-mail (postmaster@crai.com) immediately. ***** - NOTES FOR DISCUSSION.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Welcome New Associates - Reception; [EMail-Body]= calendar ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/01/2000 07:54 AM --------------------------- Tracy L Arthur@ECT 07/31/2000 11:49 AM To: Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Jeffrey A Shankman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Rex Shelby/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Tod Lindholm/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Jeff Donahue/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jay Fitzgerald/NY/ECT@ECT, Richard DiMichele/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Brian Redmond/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Michael Kopper/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Sandy Roberts/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Welcome New Associates - Reception [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message(due to missing attachment)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re:; [EMail-Body]= Palmisano left a couple of months ago to start his own business. Jeff Keeler (in our DC office) is covering John's issues. To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Thanks for the call this morning. The convention sounds interesting. On another note, I was wondering is John Palmisano still works here? for you? I got a call from a conference organizer about an emissions meeting in Cologne, Ger. and I think he has spoken at this gathering. I'll forward the email to you, and to the emissions/coal group as well to determine our interest. Regards. Jeff [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Status of Discussions on Electricity Legislation -- No Agreement
 Reached; [EMail-Body]= Once again today I participated in the discussions on possible electricity legislation held in the offices of Majority Whip Tom DeLay with other interested parties including industry segments, public power and state regulators. The other congressional participants were staff to Reps. Steve Largent and Chip Pickering. After meeting all week (except Wednesday), the group was unable to reach an agreement or even a provisional consensus on what could be placed in an electricity title that could be added to the comprehensive energy package that the House Energy and Commerce Committee will begin to process next week. Congressional staff will report to their bosses on the status of the discussions as of this afternoon and from there the Members will determine whether to proceed further. There is a general perception that committee leaders will elect NOT to take up electricty legislation at this time and in the context of the broader package in the absence of broadly supported legislation. In the end, the discussions did not bear fruit because divisions remained over the usual issues and along most of the usual fault lines. As the drafts progressed during the week, we succeeded in deleting the original language that would have had Congress weigh into the bundled/unbundled and federa/state jurisdictional rules at the very time that likely adverse action in Congress could in turn adversely impact the Supreme Court case. A last minute attempt was made by the congressional staff to stitch together a minimalist electricity title that would have included reliability (with the understanding that the NERC discussions could produce modifications more to our liking), PUHCA repeal, PURPA reform, interconnection language and federal siting. However, in each instance there were one more politically relevant interest groups not willing to go along. Cong. DeLay's staff also tried to link PUHCA repeal to those who had joined an RTO. There was also an attempt to strip it down to reliability, interconnection and siting (eminent domain) -- but again there was either disagreement on the details or objection from those who favorite subject was left out of the minimalist package. There was one rather interesting discussion when the public power folks floated language on market power that included a sentence that would have made the filed rate doctrine inapplicable to antitrust challenges to market rates. Needless to say, I strongly objected as did EPSA and others. As noted, the lack of an agreement reduces our exposure when the mark up occurs. In the absence of an electricity title, refund, price control and other issues should not be germane to the package that the subcommittee will take up on Tuesday and the full committee next Friday. That package will have five issues addressed: conservation, clean coal, hyrdo, nuclear and reformulated gasoline. Details to follow once legislative language is released. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: FW: Request for PR2 Access; [EMail-Body]= OK From: Jo Ann Hill/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/18/2001 04:31 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Kathryn Schultea/ENRON@enronXgate, Mary Joyce/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: FW: Request for PR2 Access Steve -- For your approval. As some additional information regarding the request, Kathy, Diane Taylor and I met with Deana Taylor this afternoon to understand what each person's role was and the specific access needed. For the interim, we are recommending that the HR View Basic Data & Org ENTP and View Payroll and Time ENTP role be granted to each of the individuals listed below. Until January 1, this function was performed in the Payroll Department and at that time was transitioned to Karen and Deana's group. The people listed below actually transferred from the Payroll Department. For the long term, we are going to look at creating a specific role for this group that would let them access only those data elements needed. I've spoken with Mary Joyce by phone and she has approved, so I am requesting your approval as well. These people have basically been prevented from being able to reconcile any of the net pay accounts, etc. for the past week. Please let me know if you will approve or if you need any additional information. Thanks. Jo Ann -----Original Message----- From: Taylor, Deana Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 4:37 PM To: Hill, Jo Ann Cc: Choyce, Karen; Lindsey, Mark E. Subject: Request for PR2 Access Jo Ann, As we discussed I am sending this email to request PR2 Enterprise access re-activated for the following employees: Karen Choyce HR View Basic Data & Org ENTP Deana Taylor HR View Basic Data & Org ENTP Joanne Cortez HR View Basic Data & Org ENTP (starting in the group 7/16) Rebecca Tran HR View Basic Data & Org ENTP & View Payroll and Time Roy Comeaux HR View Basic Data & Org ENTP & View Payroll and Time George Howell HR View Basic Data & Org ENTP & View Payroll and Time Please note I am not requesting access for the entire department, the list of employees above are the only individuals in our group that will be allowed this type of access. Corp's payroll accounting group is responsible for reconciling the general ledger balance sheet accounts across all Enron companies, therefore Enterprise access is needed. The requested access is essential for our group to perform our job. Without this, we are unable to trace amounts related to FIT, FICA, net pay, stock option deductions, etc, through the payroll system to the ledger, and to ensure that the items are accounted for properly. Equally as important, the access enables us to identify system issues between PR2 (payroll) and PR1 (ledger). Corp's payroll accounting group has already identified several processing issues and alerted the ISC. I hope this ""pleads our case"" on why we need the access and request it be re-activated. Please feel free to call me or Mark Lindsey, if you need additional information. Thanks, Deana 3-4593 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: AP Wire services, Tues 3/20: ""Calif. Officials Order Blackouts"" Dow Jones News, Tues 3/20: ""California Panel to Order Utilities to Make $1= =20 Billion in Back Payments"" SF Chron, 3/20: ""As Davis Seeks Money, Lawmakers Want Answers=20 Members of both parties angry at lack of dialogue"" Fresno Bee, Tues 3/20: ""Jones rips state on energy crisis "" Sac Bee, Wed., 3/21: ""Day 2 -- Battling blackouts: Payment plan sought to= =20 restart small plants"" Sac Bee, Wed., 3/21: ""Hospitals take hit, seek power guarantee"" Sac Bee, Wed., 3/21: ""Lodi still won't pull the plug"" San Diego Union, Tues., 3/20: ""Blackouts hit for second day; break seen=20 Wednesday"" San Diego Union, Tues., 3/20: ""State power regulators working on energy=20 rescue""=20 San Diego Union, Tues., 3/20: ""Federal regulators scored for not ordering= =20 more California refunds"" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: ""Second Day of Blackouts Disrupts 500,000 Home and= =20 Businesses"" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: ""Fragile Supply Network Apt to Fail"" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: ""Elevator Anxiety is Riding High"" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: ""State says it's accelerating plan to buy Power=20 Utilities' Grid"" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: ""L.A., Long Beach File Suits Over Gas Companies'=20 Prices "" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: ""Davis OKs Subsidy of Pollution Fees"" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: ""As Losses Mount, Companies work around outages"" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: Commentary: ""A Blackout on Answers"" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: Commentary: ""Rolling Blackouts: Blatant Extortion"" SF Chron, Wed., 3/21: ""Utilities' Demand Blocks Bailout=20 NEGOTIATIONS HIT SNAG: PG&E, Edison want end to price freeze if they sell= =20 transmission lines to state"" SF Chron, Wed., 3/21: ""Utilities' Demand Blocks Bailout=20 BLACKOUTS ROLL ON: Weather, increased consumption blamed"" SF Chron, Wed., 3/21: ""Manners Go Out the Window=20 Pedestrians in peril as drivers turn darkened S.F. streets into free-for-al= l"" SF Chron, Tues., 3/20: ""Historic Blackouts in State=20 Bay Area learns to cope"" SF Chron., Tues., 3/20: ""Second day of rolling blackouts in power-starved= =20 California"" Mercury News., Wed., 3/21: ""Bay Area Residents Learning to roll with=20 Blackouts"" Orange County, Wed., 3/21: ""Powerless, Again"" Orange County, Wed., 3/21: ""The iceman shunneth effects of hourlong blacko= ut"" Orange County, Wed., 3/21: ""Traffic officials are seeing red over blackout= s"" Orange County, Wed., 3/21: ""Alternative power producers cut back or shut= =20 down as payments from big utilities lag"" Orange County, Wed., 3/21: ""O.C. saves its energy -- for blaming others"" Orange County, Wed., 3/21: ""Blackout readiness on agenda"" Dow Jones Energy News, Wed., 3/21: ""Calif To Order Utils To Pay Small=20 Generators Up Front-Gov"" Dow Jones Energy News., Wed., 3/21: ""PG&E Says It Is Negotiating With=20 Qualifying Facilities"" Energy Insight, Wed., 3/21: ""New York at the Crossroads"" --- Calif. Officials Order Blackouts=20 By PAUL CHAVEZ, Associated Press Writer=20 LOS ANGELES (AP) - State power managers ordered rolling blackouts across=20 California for a second straight day Tuesday as demand for electricity agai= n=20 exceeded supply.=20 The same factors that collided to strap California's power supply on Monday= =20 hit again, officials with the Independent System Operator said. Those inclu= de=20 reduced electricity imports from the Pacific Northwest, numerous power plan= ts=20 offline for repairs and higher-than-expected demand because of warm=20 temperatures.=20 A two-unit Southern California plant that the ISO hoped would be working=20 Tuesday had not been fixed. One of its units might go online at noon to hel= p=20 the situation, the ISO's Jim Detmers said.=20 In addition, hydroelectric power imports from the Northwest were 800=20 megawatts lower than Monday, he said. The ISO oversees most of the state's= =20 power grid.=20 --- California Panel to Order Utilities to Make $1 Billion in Back Payments By Jason Leopold 03/20/2001 Dow Jones Business News (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) Dow Jones Newswires=20 LOS ANGELES -- The California Public Utilities Commission will order Edison= =20 International's Southern California Edison and PG&E Corp.'s Pacific Gas &= =20 Electric unit to pay small power generators that are qualified utilities=20 about $1 billion in past-due payments in order to keep the plant owners fro= m=20 dragging the utilities into an involuntary bankruptcy proceedings, and to= =20 also ensure the generation units keep pumping out electricity, people=20 familiar with the matter told Dow Jones Newswires late Monday. Gov. Gray Davis, state Sen. Debra Bowen, and Assemblymembers Fred Keeley an= d=20 Robert Hertzberg, all Democrats, spent most of the day y trying to hammer o= ut=20 an agreement with the so-called qualifying facilities, alternative power=20 producers that use the wind, sun, steam and biomass to generate electricity= =20 for the state, on supply contracts and past payments the utilities failed t= o=20 make.=20 The qualifying facilities, which represent about one-third of the state's= =20 total power supply and signed contracts to sell power directly to the=20 utilities under a government mandate, would then agree to sign power-supply= =20 contracts with the utilities for a period of five to 10 years for about $79= a=20 megawatt hour for the first five years and about $61 a megawatt hour=20 thereafter, two sources involved in the negotiations said.=20 The PUC is expected to issue a draft resolution on the issue sometime this= =20 week, one source said.=20 The lawmakers wouldn't comment on the details of their talks Monday.=20 Representatives with SoCal Ed (EIX) and PG&E (PCG) said they were unaware= =20 Gov. Davis and his administration were meeting on the issue.=20 The utilities are more than $13 billion in debt and have failed to make=20 payments on their qualifying-facilities contracts since November. PG&E has= =20 paid some of its qualified facilities just a fraction of what they are owed= .=20 Legislation To Restructure QF Rates Stalls In Senate Energy Committee=20 Mr. Keeley had recently drafted legislation, along with state Sen. Jim=20 Battin, a Republican from Palm Desert, that would have restructured the rat= es=20 the qualified facilities charge the utilities, from $170 a megawatt hour to= =20 $80 a megawatt hour for five years.=20 The bill, SB47X, stalled in the Senate Energy Committee, of which Ms. Bowen= =20 chairs. SoCal Ed opposed the legislation, saying the rates were still too= =20 high. A utility spokesman said the qualified-facilities rates should be=20 reduced to under $50 a megawatt hour.=20 But the lawmakers and the governor is trying to avoid the need for=20 legislation, largely because there isn't much support in both houses for su= ch=20 a bill and the chance that it won't be passed in time to keep the qualified= =20 facilities from dragging the utilities into involuntary bankruptcy=20 proceedings, the legislative source said.=20 The PUC will take over the issue from the Legislature, the source said.=20 Monday, about 3,000 megawatts of qualified-facilities generation went offli= ne=20 because the companies that operate the power plants can no longer afford to= =20 buy natural gas used to fuel the plants due to the utilities' failure to pa= y=20 money owed to the companies, said Jim Detmers, vice president of operations= =20 for the state's Independent System Operator.=20 The outages triggered a major shortfall in the state which resulted in near= ly=20 eight hours of statewide rolling blackouts Monday.=20 Many owners of the qualified-facilities said without immediate relief, they= =20 would likely force SoCal Ed, and possibly PG&E, into involuntary bankruptcy= ,=20 perhaps as soon as Thursday.=20 One such facility, CalEnergyOperating Co., wants to be freed temporarily fr= om=20 its contract with the utility and be allowed to sell its electricity to thi= rd=20 parties until the utility is able to pay its bills. CalEnergy is an affilia= te=20 of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co., which is majority owned by Warren=20 Buffet's Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRKA).=20 The company sued SoCal Ed last month, and the case is scheduled to be heard= =20 Thursday in Imperial County Superior Court. If a judge delivers an=20 unfavorable ruling, CalEnergy and other unsecured creditors would drag SoCa= l=20 Ed into involuntary bankruptcy, three executives with the companies involve= d=20 said.=20 CalEnergy is said to be organizing a bankruptcy petition now circulating=20 among six of Southern California Edison's independent power suppliers and= =20 could file the petition very quickly if it fails in its suit Thursday, said= =20 executives with three of the six companies.=20 Write to Jason Leopold at jason.leopold@dowjones.com=20 Copyright (c) 2001 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.=20 All Rights Reserved --- --- As Davis Seeks Money, Lawmakers Want Answers=20 Members of both parties angry at lack of dialogue=20 Lynda Gledhill, Greg Lucas, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau Tuesday, March 20, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 Sacramento -- The Legislature has warned it may block further state purchas= es=20 of electricity as lawmakers' frustration with Gov. Gray Davis' handling of= =20 the energy crisis increases.=20 A test may come soon because Davis asked yesterday for another $500 million= =20 to continue buying power.=20 Sen. Steve Peace, D-El Cajon, chairman of the Joint Legislative Budget=20 Committee, wrote to Davis' Finance Department on Friday that the committee= =20 might deny further spending requests ""in the absence any discernable=20 progress"" from the Public Utilities Commission to ensure that the state wou= ld=20 get its money back.=20 Members of the committee, both Republican and Democratic, said they support= ed=20 Peace's call for more oversight of the spending, given the lack of=20 information from Davis on details of the state's power purchases.=20 ""He's been holding things close to the chest, and that bothers me,"" said Se= n.=20 John Vasconcellos, D-Santa Clara. ""I want to know a lot more.""=20 Sen. Dick Ackerman, R-Fullerton, said the administration ""has been=20 stonewalling us about how much is being spent, and how much power we're=20 getting for it. When the state is spending that kind of money, at a minimum= ,=20 legislators should know for what.""=20 The state had spent $2.6 billion on electricity through March 11. Davis'=20 request for more money would put the state at the $3 billion mark by the=20 middle of April. The state is spending an average of $49 million a day.=20 The money is supposed to be paid back through the rates collected from=20 utilities' customers. It is up to the PUC to decide how to divide that mone= y=20 among the state, the utilities and the utilities' debtors. The commission i= s=20 scheduled to take up the issue at its March 27 meeting.=20 The problem is that there appear to be more demands on the money than there= =20 is money to go around.=20 The utilities have said they need the money to pay off some of their=20 creditors. Among those looking for cash are alternative-power generators th= at=20 were selling electricity to Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern=20 California Edison. Half of them have shut down because they have not been= =20 paid.=20 Earlier this month, the PUC granted the Department of Water Resources, whic= h=20 has been purchasing electricity for the state, the power to recoup its full= =20 costs through rates.=20 It's unclear whether that can be accomplished without raising electricity= =20 prices, though Davis has insisted he can solve the crisis without boosting= =20 rates.=20 Lawmakers said they approved the bill that allowed the state to buy power i= n=20 the belief such purchases would be a stopgap until the Davis administration= =20 could sign long-term contracts with power suppliers. However, only about 19= =20 contracts have been signed to date, out of 42 agreements. If all the=20 contracts are signed, they will account for about 70 percent of the power= =20 California is expected to need.=20 ""It was our expectation some of these contracts would kick in,"" said=20 Assemblywoman Carole Migden, D-San Francisco. ""This was designed to only be= =20 bridge money to avert a power disaster. We should hold firm and come up wit= h=20 a plan.=20 ""I recall about three weeks ago when we first asked about one of these $500= =20 million letters,"" Migden said. ""We said maybe this one is necessary, but=20 there won't be carte blanche approval of any future requests. I'm pleased= =20 Sen. Peace is taking that approach.""=20 To Assemblyman George Runner, R-Lancaster, Peace's letter was ""another way= =20 for the Legislature to send a message we need to be in this loop. We're jus= t=20 getting a small little dribble of information, which just creates more=20 questions.""=20 A spokesman for the Department of Finance said officials hoped to work with= =20 the committee members about their concerns.=20 --- --- Jones rips state on energy crisis=20 Secretary of state hints that he'll take on Davis in 2002.=20 By John Ellis=20 The Fresno Bee (Published March 20, 2001)=20 Officially, he's Bill Jones, secretary of state for California. Unofficiall= y,=20 he's Bill Jones, 2002 gubernatorial candidate.=20 The evidence is right there between the lines -- in the subtleties of his= =20 speeches, their subject matter, and the way Jones carries himself when he's= =20 in public.=20 Monday was no different, as Jones addressed a Rotary Club luncheon in Fresn= o=20 full of people who are assuming -- though nothing is official -- that the= =20 Fresno native will soon announce his intention to challenge Gov. Davis next= =20 year.=20 ""Bill, they call me governor,"" Chas Looney, a former Rotary Club district= =20 governor, quipped to Jones. ""I look forward to the day we all can call you= =20 governor.""=20 Jones then proceeded to deliver a speech to a packed house in the DoubleTre= e=20 Hotel that touched on his accomplishments as secretary of state, but quickl= y=20 moved to his main topic: California's crumbling infrastructure and how the= =20 energy crisis is affecting the state.=20 Always in the background but never mentioned by name was Davis. Jones was= =20 careful to hew to the Rotary rule that speeches steer clear of partisan=20 politics.=20 Still, Jones looked, sounded and acted like a candidate for governor, and= =20 near the end of his speech he promised his decision would come soon.=20 The Fresno Republican's speech began by highlighting his work in passing th= e=20 ""Three Strikes and You're Out"" initiative in 1994.=20 Jones also talked of his efforts to remove 2 million inactive California=20 voters from the rolls.=20 But it was clearly the energy crisis and its ramifications -- an issue=20 Republicans feel they can pin on Davis and the Democratic-controlled=20 Legislature -- that was the centerpiece of the speech.=20 Today, the energy crisis is being driven, he said, by a lack of power plant= =20 construction. And while billions go to solve the crisis, he said, the state= =20 faces $100 billion in unmet infrastructure needs -- everything from school= =20 repair to road repair.=20 ""Doesn't that scare you?"" Jones asked.=20 He then recounted the warning signs -- ignored by the state, he said -- of= =20 the looming energy crisis.=20 He cited the initial warnings that the deregulation bill was flawed, last= =20 summer's request by Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric to allow forward=20 contracting and the Republican request for a special session to deal with t= he=20 energy crisis. All ignored, Jones said.=20 Now, Edison and PG&E are near bankruptcy and the state finds itself steppin= g=20 up as a creditor. ""And the solution now becomes California getting into the= =20 energy business,"" he said. ""Or, even carrying it to a greater degree, not= =20 just in the short term to buy power to keep the lights on. I'm talking abou= t=20 basically socializing the energy business.""=20 Jones said he prefers low-interest loans to Edison and PG&E, taking the=20 electric grid as collateral.=20 ""I just do not believe in California getting into something it does not kno= w=20 how to do -- has never done before -- on top of all of our other=20 obligations,"" he said.=20 ""It really worries me that California will not be able to endure that type = of=20 obligation.""=20 Jones said polls now show increasing numbers of residents saying the state = is=20 headed in the wrong direction.=20 ""I feel obligated to speak out and say there is a better way,"" Jones said. --- --- Day 2 -- Battling blackouts: Payment plan sought to restart small plants By Dale Kasler and Carrie Peyton Bee Staff Writers (Published March 21, 2001)=20 Blackouts rolled across California for a second straight day Tuesday,=20 snarling traffic, darkening businesses and sending state officials scrambli= ng=20 to craft a payment plan to revive the wind farms and other critically neede= d=20 small energy producers that have shut down because of financial woes.=20 On a day when another 570,000 customers lost power, Gov. Gray Davis said th= e=20 Public Utilities Commission and the Legislature would move promptly to orde= r=20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison to start paying= =20 those small energy producers for their electricity. Davis said the two=20 utilities will face ""considerable fines"" if they don't pay up.=20 But several of the producers, known as ""qualifying facilities,"" said they= =20 doubted Davis' plan would go far enough to get them back in operation. And = it=20 wasn't clear whether the plan would keep the increasingly impatient=20 alternative producers from hauling one or both of the big utilities into=20 bankruptcy court, as some have threatened.=20 The shortage of power from the qualifying facilities -- plus a near-record= =20 heat wave (downtown Sacramento topped off at 83 degrees, one degree short o= f=20 the 84 degree record set in 1960), a lack of hydropower and other problems = --=20 prompted the state's Independent System Operator to order a second day of= =20 blackouts starting mid-morning. But the blackouts hit only about half as ma= ny=20 Californians as Monday's, with late afternoon conservation efforts helping= =20 balance supply with demand.=20 The blackouts, usually about an hour long, hit about 7,600 Sacramento=20 Municipal Utility District customers in Elk Grove and south Sacramento=20 County. PG&E customers in suburban counties were affected as well.=20 The order darkened shops in San Francisco's Chinatown and was blamed for a= =20 crash that left two motorists seriously injured in the Los Angeles suburb o= f=20 South El Monte. A Sun Microsystems Inc. factory in Newark had to close for= =20 several hours.=20 Most Californians took the blackouts in stride, though. Elk Grove High Scho= ol=20 students filed outside to play hacky sack. Coffee shop patrons in Davis=20 milled outdoors, enjoying the unseasonably warm weather.=20 Yet the blackout order was met with outright defiance by one municipal=20 utility. The city of Lodi refused to cut power to its residents Monday or= =20 Tuesday, saying it shouldn't have to suffer because of the financial crisis= =20 afflicting PG&E and Edison.=20 The outlook for today and the near future was brighter, as several big powe= r=20 plants came back on line after repairs. ISO officials also praised=20 Californians' conservation efforts, which had faltered in the morning but= =20 came on strong in the afternoon, helping to prevent further blackouts. By= =20 evening the grid was in a relatively mild Stage 2 power alert.=20 But the second day of blackouts -- plus an increasing threat of utility=20 bankruptcy -- pushed Davis to the brink. The governor cobbled together a=20 payment plan to rescue the qualifying facilities -- some 600 wind farms,=20 geothermal plants and other alternative-energy generators whose production= =20 has become increasingly vital in recent days.=20 Under Davis' plan, the Legislature and the PUC would order PG&E and Edison = to=20 pay the qualifying facilities for power delivered after April 1. The=20 utilities are required to buy power from the qualifying facilities under a= =20 1978 federal law designed to bring cheaper and cleaner forms of electricity= =20 to market.=20 Davis said the PUC would release a proposed order late Tuesday that would= =20 require the utilities to pay the qualifying facilities $79 a megawatt hour= =20 for five-year contracts or $69 for 10-year contracts. The Legislature also= =20 would have to pass a law authorizing the PUC to issue such an order.=20 But the situation was far from resolved late Tuesday, and PG&E and Edison= =20 were likely to oppose at least portions of Davis' plan.=20 Edison is willing only to make ""some kind of partial payments going forward= ,""=20 said Thomas Higgins, a senior vice president with parent company Edison=20 International. ""We have a limited amount of resources available to us in=20 rates, ... and that's the constraining factor.""=20 PG&E, which has been making partial payments to the qualifying facilities,= =20 said it could pay them in advance, in full, for future power deliveries.=20 But PG&E said such payments would eat up half the $400 million it has=20 available each month to buy power -- and unless it gets a rate hike, there= =20 wouldn't be enough to pay the qualifying facilities and cover other expense= s,=20 including the cost of reimbursing the state Department of Water Resources f= or=20 the power the agency is buying on behalf of the troubled utility.=20 PG&E's proposal could represent a challenge of sorts to state officials:=20 Accept less money for the water department, or raise rates.=20 State officials ""need to resolve who they want to see paid,"" PG&E spokesman= =20 John Nelson said. ""There is a limited pool of money.""=20 For his part, Davis insisted that the water department would be first in li= ne=20 to be paid, and he said the PUC will issue a proposed order to that effect.= =20 ""We are getting paid before anybody else,"" Davis said.=20 Hundreds of qualifying facilities are out of commission because PG&E and=20 Edison haven't paid them. The situation has robbed the state of several=20 thousand badly needed megawatts and is a key reason blackouts have been=20 ordered. In normal times the facilities produce more than 20 percent of=20 California's electricity.=20 Some of the qualifying facilities have been threatening to haul one or both= =20 of California's beleaguered utilities into bankruptcy court unless they get= =20 paid soon, saying a bankruptcy filing might be the only way they can save= =20 their businesses.=20 ""You've got to take care of the QF problem or the whole thing blacks out,""= =20 said Jerry Bloom, a lawyer representing one group of qualifying facilities.= =20 ""(State officials) are starting to understand.""=20 One thing that was fairly certain about Davis' still-sketchy payment plan: = It=20 wouldn't cover PG&E and Edison's existing debt to the qualifying facilities= ,=20 estimated at more than $1.48 billion.=20 In their current financial state, the utilities say they can't afford to pa= y=20 the existing debt. In addition, paying the debt would create a major=20 complication: Other creditors, including the big power generators, would=20 surely haul Edison and PG&E into bankruptcy court on the grounds that they= =20 weren't being treated fairly.=20 ""You can't give preferential payment treatment to one class of creditors ov= er=20 another,"" PG&E's Nelson said. ""You virtually assure that (the other=20 creditors) have to file an involuntary bankruptcy proceeding against you.""= =20 But without full payment, it wasn't clear how many of the qualifying=20 facilities would be able to restart.=20 Executives at several plants -- the ones that run on natural gas -- said=20 they're not sure their gas suppliers will deliver unless the existing debts= =20 are cleared up.=20 ""We need to convince a gas company to supply us,"" said Ed Tomeo of UAE Ener= gy=20 Operations Corp., which had to shut off its 40-megawatt Kern County plant= =20 Tuesday. ""We're a company that already owes millions of dollars for gas=20 supplies. How do you coax them to sell you millions more?""=20 ""It's wishful thinking ... that the gas suppliers are going to sell us gas,= ""=20 Robert Swanson of Ridgewood Power said.=20 I>Bee Capitol Bureau Chief Amy Chance and staff writers Stuart Leavenworth,= =20 Bill Lindelof, Pamela Martineau and the Associated Press contributed to thi= s=20 report. --- --- Lodi still won't pull the plug By Carrie Peyton Bee Staff Writer=20 (Published March 21, 2001) In a growing rebellion against blackouts, the city of Lodi has twice refuse= d=20 to cut power to its residents despite an order from Pacific Gas and Electri= c=20 Co.=20 The small city-run electric system is among many disgruntled utilities,=20 including the Sacramento Municipal Utility District, that believe their=20 contractual pledges to cut back during emergencies were never meant for tim= es=20 like this.=20 ""It's been a philosophical debate up to this point. Now I guess we've drawn= a=20 line in the sand,"" said Lodi utility director Alan Vallow.=20 PG&E said it is reviewing its interconnection contract, the agreement that= =20 links Lodi to the grid through PG&E-owned high-voltage lines, to determine= =20 what action it will take next.=20 ""It's unfortunate that while the city of Lodi has received the benefit of= =20 this agreement for years, they are unwilling to bear the burden of this=20 statewide energy shortage,"" said PG&E's Jon Tremayne.=20 One utility coalition, the Northern California Power Agency, believes that= =20 PG&E has already violated that agreement by not lining up enough power for= =20 customers.=20 The agency wrote PG&E on Friday saying that its members -- municipal=20 utilities and irrigation districts -- believe they aren't required to=20 participate in blackouts prompted by financial disputes.=20 And SMUD, which has been considering dropping out of future blackouts, will= =20 be watching the response to Lodi, said SMUD board President Larry Carr.=20 Some SMUD directors say they're ready to go to court to force the issue. So= =20 is Lodi, population 58,000, said Vallow.=20 ""I've heard an Edison executive describe this as a natural disaster akin to= =20 an earthquake. That's crap. This is a man-made event,"" he said.=20 Lodi said it will still help in genuine emergencies, such as fires or toppl= ed=20 transmission lines. But it decided that on Monday and Tuesday that wasn't t= he=20 case.=20 ""You have 3,000 megawatts of QFs (qualifying facilities) offline because=20 their bills haven't been paid. Well, guess what? Somebody ought to pay thos= e=20 ... bills,"" Vallow said. --- --- Blackouts hit for second day; break seen Wednesday=20 By Audrey Cooper ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 20, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) Rolling blackouts hit California for a second straight day= =20 Tuesday, closing souvenir shops in San Francisco's Chinatown, snarling=20 traffic and plunging schools and offices around the state into darkness.=20 Roughly a half-million homes and businesses from San Diego to the Oregon=20 border faced outages, blamed on the same factors that collided to force=20 blackouts Monday =01) unseasonably warm weather, reduced electricity import= s=20 from the Pacific Northwest, numerous power plants offline for repairs and= =20 less power provided by cash-strapped alternative-energy plants.=20 Five rounds of outages in San Diego affected about 74,000 customers. State= =20 power grid officials expected to have enough electricity to avoid further= =20 outages through at least Wednesday, although the supply remained tight.=20 State power regulators working on energy rescue=20 Federal regulators scored for not ordering more California refunds=20 ?=20 Gov. Gray Davis blamed the blackouts in part on the failure of Southern=20 California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. to pay millions of dolla= rs=20 they owe ""qualifying facilities,"" power suppliers that use cogeneration =01= )=20 steam from manufacturing plus natural gas =01) or solar, wind and other=20 renewable energy to generate electricity.=20 State power grid officials say California this week has lost about half the= =20 electricity QFs normally provide. Several cogeneration plants say they=20 haven't been paid by Edison and PG&E for weeks and can't afford to buy=20 natural gas to fuel their plants.=20 Davis said the utilities are taking in money from customers but still faili= ng=20 to pay the QFs. The state has been spending about $45 million a day since= =20 January to buy power for customers of Edison and PG&E, which are so=20 credit-poor that suppliers refuse to sell to them.=20 ""It's wrong and irresponsible of the utilities to pocket this money and not= =20 pay the generators,"" Davis said at a Capitol news conference Tuesday evenin= g.=20 ""They've acted irresponsibly and immorally and it has to stop.""=20 Southern California Edison officials said in a written statement that the= =20 utility is intent on paying creditors and working with the PUC to pay QFs f= or=20 future power sales. PG&E representatives were out of the office late Tuesda= y=20 night and didn't immediately return calls from The Associated Press seeking= =20 comment.=20 John Harrison of the Northwest Power Planning Council, a consortium that=20 monitors power use in several Western states, said blackouts on the first d= ay=20 of spring are an ominous sign of what lies ahead this summer.=20 ""We're in trouble,"" he said. ""We will likely be able to meet our needs this= =20 summer, but there won't be much to send to California.""=20 Tuesday's outages began at 9:30 a.m. PST and continued in 90-minute waves= =20 until about 2 p.m., when the Independent System Operator lifted its blackou= t=20 order.=20 Grid officials credited an influx of power from the Glen Canyon hydroelectr= ic=20 plant on the Utah-Arizona border.=20 The blackouts were blamed for at least one serious traffic accident.=20 Two cars collided at an intersection without traffic lights in the Los=20 Angeles suburb of South El Monte, leaving two people with serious injuries,= =20 California Highway Patrol Officer Nick Vite said.=20 Ventura Foods in Industry sent its employees out for an early lunch after= =20 blackouts shut down its phones and computers.=20 ""This is mild weather for this time of year. I don't know what's going to= =20 happen in the summer,"" manager Frank Hynes said. ""This is going to have a= =20 serious impact on the state's economy. They can't just keep shutting people= =20 down.""=20 Statewide, demand was higher than expected because of warm spring weather.= =20 Temperatures reached record highs across California on Monday, including th= e=20 80s and low 90s in Southern California. They were expected to be somewhat= =20 lower Tuesday but still in the 70s and 80s.=20 The ISO hoped demand would start to subside and conservation would kick in,= =20 but that did not happen Tuesday morning.=20 ""We have not seen the kind of conservation we saw back in January,"" when th= e=20 first blackouts hit, ISO spokesman Patrick Dorinson said. ""If we don't have= =20 conservation efforts, that just means that's more power we have to take off= =20 the grid.""=20 In San Francisco's Chinatown, souvenir shops normally bustling with visitor= s=20 were forced to shut down. Nearby, irritated customers waited for a bank to= =20 reopen.=20 ""It's no good for anybody =01) stores or businesses or people,"" said Yin Su= n=20 Chan, among those in line.=20 PG&E, the state's largest utility, accounted for most of the customers=20 affected.=20 At least 438,000 PG&E residential and business customers were affected as o= f=20 early afternoon, spokesman Ron Low said.=20 Edison cut power to about 50,000 customers. Edison was ordered to cut less= =20 power than PG&E and saved some due to conservation programs, including one= =20 that lets the utility shut off air conditioning for 118,500 residential and= =20 business customers when the power supply is tight.=20 About 73,400 San Diego Gas & Electric customers were hit by the blackouts.= =20 Los Angeles, whose municipal utility is not on the grid that serves most of= =20 California, wasn't included in the blackout order.=20 More than 1 million homes and businesses statewide experienced outages=20 Monday.=20 California's power crisis is expected to get even worse this summer, when= =20 temperatures soar and residents crank their air conditioning.=20 Natural gas supplies are tight, water supplies are down and the state is=20 spending tens of millions of dollars each day to buy electricity for Edison= =20 and PG&E, who say they are nearly bankrupt due to high wholesale power cost= s.=20 Edison and PG&E say they have lost more than $13 billion since last June to= =20 climbing wholesale electricity prices the state's 1996 deregulation law=20 prevents them from recouping from ratepayers.=20 Adding to the problems, the state this week lost about 3,100 megawatts from= =20 QFs. One megawatt is enough power to serve about 750 households.=20 The plants say they are owed about $1 billion for past sales to PG&E and=20 Edison.=20 PG&E said it is offering to prepay the QFs starting next month to get them= =20 back in operation. Negotiations were expected to continue Wednesday.=20 California Co-Generation Council attorney Jerry Bloom said he supports=20 proposals that will get the Qfs paid, but the promise of future payments ma= y=20 not be enough.=20 PG&E and Bloom said the utility's prepayments hinge on an upcoming Public= =20 Utilities Commission decision on whether the utility's rates are sufficient= =20 to pay its bills and cover the state's power purchases on its behalf, which= =20 amount to $4.2 billion since early January.=20 Davis said the PUC planned to issue a draft order late Tuesday directing th= e=20 utilities to pay their future QF bills.=20 It plans to take action on that order next Tuesday, Davis said. The=20 Legislature plans to approve a bill in the meantime giving the PUC the=20 authority to issue such an order and fine the utilities if they fail to=20 comply, he said.=20 Davis said he is confident the utilities and the state can pay their bills= =20 without further rate increases for Edison and PG&E customers.=20 --- --- State power regulators working on energy rescue=20 By Karen Gaudette ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 20, 2001=20 SAN FRANCISCO =01) State power regulators continue to delay the release of= =20 guidelines that will determine a portion of the money the Department of Wat= er=20 Resources can recoup from financially troubled utilities for electricity it= =20 has bought on their customers' behalf.=20 These guidelines will help the water department determine whether it must= =20 raise consumer power rates to reimburse the state for the more than $3=20 billion it has committed to buying electricity.=20 Assemblyman Fred Keeley, D-Boulder Creek, said Tuesday that the Public=20 Utilities Commission would likely have to raise rates by 15 percent to cove= r=20 the state's costs and the utilities' bills.=20 The PUC guidelines were most recently delayed by a letter from DWR Director= =20 Thomas Hannigan asking that the water department receive a percentage of=20 ratepayer money collected by the utilities equal to the percentage of=20 electricity it provides to utilities.=20 The DWR currently buys around 40 percent of the power used by Pacific Gas a= nd=20 Electric Co., Southern California Edison Co. and San Diego Gas and Electric= .=20 Under the DWR's proposal the utilities would have to hand over 40 percent o= f=20 the money they continue to collect from ratepayers.=20 The DWR would then also receive whatever money remains after the utilities= =20 subtract their own generation and long-term contract costs, the letter said= .=20 That amount would become the ""California Procurement Adjustment"" =01) an am= ount=20 that will help the state retrieve money spent on power purchases and help= =20 establish the size of state revenue bonds that are currently estimated to= =20 total $10 billion.=20 The state plans to issue the bonds in May to help pay off the more than $3= =20 billion Gov. Gray Davis' administration has committed to power purchases=20 since January to help the utilities climb out of debt.=20 Ron Low, a spokesman with PG&E, said the utility objects to paying the DWR= =20 such a large sum, claiming it would interfere with efforts to pay its=20 ""qualifying facilities"" =01) power plants that use the sun, wind, biomass o= r=20 natural gas to generate about one third of the state's electricity.=20 The nearly bankrupt utilities owe the QFs more than $1 billion for=20 electricity they have produced since November, said Jan Smutney-Jones,=20 executive director of the Independent Energy Producers.=20 Hannigan also said in the letter the DWR intends to use its authority to=20 raise consumer electricity rates to recoup any money not reimbursed through= =20 the CPA and other means.=20 The Public Utilities Commission expected to release the guidelines last wee= k,=20 but was delayed by debates over legislation that would slash the rates of= =20 environmentally friendly power plants under contract to provide electricity= =20 to the investor-owned utilities.=20 Without knowing how much ratepayer money the utilities need to pay these=20 ""qualifying facilities"" for future electricity, it's unknown how much money= =20 they'll have on hand to pay the DWR.=20 In a written statement, PUC Administrative Law Judge Joseph DeUlloa said th= at=20 he would issue a temporary decision on the CPA ""as soon as is practical.""= =20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison Co. say they ha= ve=20 lost more than $13 billion since last June to climbing wholesale electricit= y=20 prices that the state's 1996 deregulation law prevents them from recouping= =20 from ratepayers.=20 --- --- Federal regulators scored for not ordering more California refunds=20 By H. Josef Hebert ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 20, 2001=20 WASHINGTON =01) House Democrats asked federal energy regulators Tuesday why= they=20 are not going more aggressively after alleged overcharges for wholesale=20 electricity in California and ordering more refunds.=20 The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has asked suppliers to justify $12= 4=20 million in sales during the first two months of the year or refund the mone= y,=20 but critics charge that thousands of additional questionable sales are not= =20 being challenged.=20 The three commissioners testifying at a hearing of the House Commerce=20 subcommittee on energy, were asked why they limited their refund demands to= =20 only power sales that occurred during so-called Stage 3 alerts of acute pow= er=20 shortages in California.=20 ""It appears to me a price is unreasonable when it is unreasonable,"" and not= =20 just during a power alert, said Rep. Rick Boucher of Virginia, the panels'= =20 ranking Democrat.=20 The commission last week ordered six power generators to justify some 1,000= =20 transactions during February in the California market whenever the price wa= s=20 above $430 per megawatt hour and occurred during a Stage 3 emergency alert.= =20 But the lawmakers were told Tuesday that 56 percent of another 14,168=20 transactions, occurring outside a Stage 3 emergency, also exceeded the $430= =20 trigger, but are not being questioned.=20 ""The line was drawn to limit the scope of the refund,"" said agency=20 commissioner William Massey, a Democrat, who strongly opposed the refund=20 actions because he said they were too limited.=20 Chairman Curtis Hebert, a Republican, defended the way the commission decid= e=20 on what transactions to challenge saying that it sought to replicate market= =20 conditions as they existed at the time of the sales.=20 ""We deserve a better explanation,"" retorted Boucher.=20 Massey said that agency's investigation of overcharges for January also=20 failed to consider thousands of transactions that exceeded the refund trigg= er=20 because they did not occur during Stage 3 supply emergencies.=20 Managers of California's electricity grid, state regulators and utilities= =20 have accused the agency of refusing to aggressively investigate price gougi= ng=20 by wholesalers who have charged from $150 to $565 per megawatt hour, as muc= h=20 as 20 times what prices were in 1999.=20 While Hebert and commissioner Linda Breathitt defended the commissioners=20 attempt to investigate whole electricity prices, Massey has been highly=20 critical.=20 What message does the agency's scrutiny of prices send to the power=20 companies? he was asked.=20 ""It makes clear FERC is going to be looking for the wallet under the lamp= =20 post with the lights shining =01) and nowhere else,"" replied Massey.=20 Meanwhile, Massey and his two fellow commissioners, also disagreed sharply = on=20 whether the energy agency should impose temporary price controls on the=20 wholesale power market in the West to dampen further expected price increas= es=20 this summer.=20 Massey said he fears ""a disasters in the making"" if some price restraints a= re=20 not imposed by FERC, which regulates wholesale electricity sales. ""We need = a=20 temporary time out,"" he said.=20 But Massey is in the minority on the commission. Both Hebert and Breathitt= =20 are against price caps, arguing they will have long-term detrimental impact= =20 on power supply.=20 The Bush administration has made its opposition to interfering in the=20 wholesale markets well known for weeks. Vice President Dick Cheney's task= =20 force is to unveil an energy plan in about a month that is expected to lean= =20 heavily on energy production.=20 --- --- Second Day of Blackouts Disrupts 500,000 Homes and Businesses=20 Power: Grid operators say the shortage should ease in the next few days, bu= t=20 officials see a grim summer.=20 By MITCHELL LANDSBERG and ERIC BAILEY, Times Staff Writers=20 A traffic signal that stopped working during Tuesday's rolling blackouts le= d=20 to this collision be tween a car and a truck at an intersection in El Monte= .=20 The outages ran from 9:30 a.m. to 2 p.m. AP ?????Electricity blackouts rolled through California for a second straight= =20 day Tuesday, disrupting business in one of the world's most technologically= =20 advanced economies and leaving schoolchildren groping in the dark. ?????Jinxed by a combination of bad luck and bad decisions, utilities were= =20 forced to cut off power to more than half a million homes and businesses fr= om=20 San Diego to the Oregon border. ?????By day's end, there was some good news from the operators of the=20 statewide power grid, who said the situation had eased and appeared likely = to=20 improve for the next few days. And Gov. Gray Davis announced a proposed=20 solution to one vexing problem: the utilities' failure to pay the state's= =20 small, alternative power generators, many of whom have stopped producing=20 power as a result. ?????Davis called the utilities ""shameful"" for failing to pay, and praised= =20 the alternative power generators, which include solar, wind and geothermal= =20 energy producers, as ""good corporate citizens"" who produced power although= =20 they weren't being paid. ?????""We are anxious to pay the [small producers], who are dropping like=20 flies,"" Davis said. ?????Despite the progress, it was hard for some people to look on the brigh= t=20 side after enduring outages that took place when the state's hunger for pow= er=20 was almost 50% less than at its summer peak. ?????""This is a taste, almost like an appetizer, of a really unpalatable me= al=20 that's going to be served up this summer,"" said Michael Shames of the Utili= ty=20 Consumers' Action Network in San Diego, himself a victim of a rolling=20 blackout that hit his office in San Diego early Tuesday. ?????Power officials have warned that this could be a grim summer in=20 California, since demand for electricity sharply rises when people turn on= =20 air conditioners. The state has been struggling to meet its power needs in= =20 recent months because of rising prices and a flawed deregulation plan that= =20 has left the two biggest private utilities on the brink of bankruptcy. Stat= e=20 leaders have so far failed to agree on a comprehensive plan to solve the=20 problems. Wally Quirk teaches a business class in a borrowed classroom Tuesday at=20 Sonoma State after the state's rolling blackouts cut the power to his usual= =20 classroom, which does not have any windows. SCOTT MANCHESTER / The Press Democrat ?????The latest round of blackouts began about 9:30 a.m. Tuesday when the= =20 California Independent System Operator, which runs the statewide grid,=20 determined that the demand for electricity was 500 megawatts more than the= =20 supply--an imbalance that meant the state was short on the power needed to= =20 supply electricity to about 375,000 homes. ?????Grid operators blamed a confluence of events, including warmer weather= ;=20 outages at several major power plants, including one unit of the San Onofre= =20 nuclear power station; a reduction in imports from the Pacific Northwest, a= nd=20 the shutdown of many alternative energy producers. Similar blackouts Monday= =20 were the first since January. ?????The situation improved somewhat by late Tuesday morning, with some=20 supplies restored and Californians conserving energy, and Cal-ISO was able = to=20 halt the rolling blackouts at 2 p.m. ?????Once again, customers of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power= =20 were spared, although the municipally owned utility said its electrical=20 surplus was smaller than usual. The DWP, like Southern California Edison, w= as=20 affected by an outage at the huge Mohave power plant in Nevada, as well as = by=20 planned outages at several of its facilities. ?????As in the past, by far the biggest impact was felt by customers served= =20 by Pacific Gas & Electric, the state's largest utility, which cut power to= =20 438,000 homes and businesses. ?????Edison cut power to 47,462 customers in about 40 cities, but eventuall= y=20 was able to avoid blackouts by shutting off the air conditioners of some of= =20 the 118,500 customers who participate in a voluntary cutoff program. ?????San Diego Gas & Electric cut power to 73,400 customers. ?????Innovative Ways of Coping ?????As on Monday, most people took the outages in stride, as an annoying b= ut=20 ultimately unavoidable inconvenience. ?????In Palmdale, four schools lost power during one of the hourlong=20 blackouts, but teachers and students pressed on in the sunlight pouring=20 through windows and skylights. At Barrel Springs Elementary, Principal Cruz= =20 Earls said the biggest problem came when students had to go to the bathroom= :=20 Hand in hand, they made their way through darkened hallways with flashlight= s. ?????All in all, it wasn't a terrible experience. Then again, the weather= =20 wasn't that hot Tuesday, with a high of 79 in Palmdale, so the shutdown of= =20 air conditioners wasn't much of a hardship. ""I don't want to think about th= e=20 conditions this could create in May or June,"" Earls said. ?????Businesses of all kinds complained about the lack of warning for the= =20 outages--and sometimes found innovative ways to get around the problem. ?????Rattled by news reports of Monday's rolling blackouts, El Burrito=20 Mexican Food Products in the city of Industry started its Tuesday shift at = 2=20 a.m. to beat the clock in the event of an outage. That hunch paid off.=20 Workers had just finished cooking and packaging the last batches of salsa a= nd=20 masa when the lights went out at 10:20 a.m. ?????Company owner Mark Roth said the firm will continue working odd hours = to=20 avoid further outages. But he isn't buying the line from the utilities that= =20 they can't provide advance warning because of concerns about looting and=20 rioting. ?????""We're ready to do whatever it takes to get through this thing,"" he=20 said. ""But they've got to give us some notification."" ?????At Big O Tires in Elk Grove, just south of Sacramento, owner Daniel Cr= um=20 had his 14 workers take an early lunch break or head to the warehouse to=20 reorganize the goods. Without electricity, they couldn't repair brakes or= =20 align front ends. ?????""I'd never let them be idle,"" said Crum. ?????At least two minor traffic accidents were blamed on the outages. ?????The blackouts resulted from a convergence of factors. ?????Demand was slightly higher than expected, probably because of=20 unseasonably warm weather. Supplies were tighter than usual, in part becaus= e=20 of several outages, including that at the Mohave plant, half of which was= =20 brought back on line by the end of the day. ?????The San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station was still limping along=20 without power from one of its two 1,100-megawatt units, which was shut down= =20 Feb. 3 after a half-hour fire in a nonnuclear part of the plant. Edison,=20 which operates San Onofre, initially estimated the unit would be out for=20 several weeks but recently said ""extensive damage"" to parts of the turbine= =20 will keep the unit out of commission until mid-June. ?????Shipments from the drought-stricken Pacific Northwest, which generates= =20 most of its electricity from large dams, were also down. ?????""Each time we take a measurement, we're closer to the all-time record= =20 for the driest year,"" said Dulcy Mahar, spokeswoman for the Bonneville Powe= r=20 Administration, the network of federal dams that provides the region with= =20 much of its electricity. ""We've been doing what we can, but we simply don't= =20 have power to sell."" ?????Finally, there was the problem of the small and alternative energy=20 producers, which have shut down plants because they haven't been paid by th= e=20 private utilities since November. Those outages have cost the state about= =20 3,000 megawatts of electricity, enough for about 2.3 million homes. ?????""You're seeing the system freeze up,"" said David Sokol, chairman and C= EO=20 of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co., which runs eight geothermal plants in t= he=20 Imperial Valley through its subsidiary, CalEnergy. His company hasn't shut= =20 down yet, but Sokol said smaller companies couldn't continue to sell their= =20 energy to utilities for free. ?????""Why should we fund Edison?"" he asked. ""That's just ridiculous."" ?????A Choice of 2 Rate Plans ?????Davis joined lawmakers in the Capitol on Tuesday to outline his plan t= o=20 get the producers running again. He said utilities have had no right to=20 collect money from ratepayers and then not use the funds to repay the small= =20 producers. The state has spent billions to buy power from large conventiona= l=20 producers on behalf of the utilities but has refused to pick up the tab for= =20 alternative energy. ?????""The utilities acted in a shameful manner by putting money in their=20 pockets that was designed to pay the [small producers],"" Davis said. ?????The plan outlined by Davis would allow the generators to choose betwee= n=20 two rate plans. They could decide to be paid 7.9 cents per kilowatt-hour ov= er=20 five years or 6.9 cents a kilowatt-hour over 10 years. ?????The utilities must begin paying the generators the new rates beginning= =20 April 1 or face fines, Davis said. ?????The question of how the companies will get paid the about $1.5 billion= =20 they are owed remains unresolved. That issue will be decided in coming week= s=20 as Davis' negotiators continue to work on rescue plans for the state's=20 financially hobbled private utilities. ?????PG&E spokesman Ron Low said the state's largest utility did not take= =20 kindly to Davis' criticism, and noted that the governor's plan is similar t= o=20 a proposal that PG&E made last week to producers. ?????Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of a trade group that includes so= me=20 of the small generators, described the plan as a positive step. ?????""The governor got it right in that it's not acceptable for small power= =20 producers to continue to generate and not be paid,"" Smutny-Jones said. ""But= =20 we'll need to see what the order says; the devil will truly be in the=20 details."" ?????Grid operators said the state's overall energy situation eased by midd= ay=20 Tuesday because of repairs at the Mohave plant and another large plant at= =20 Ormond Beach, and because the Western Area Power Administration came up wit= h=20 300 megawatts of electricity from Glen Canyon Dam. ?????Also, grid spokesman Patrick Dorinson said conservation savings spiked= =20 upward after earlier complaints that Californians weren't conserving. ?????""We saw the people of California probably conserve 900 megawatts today= ,""=20 he said. ""That was probably the difference."" ---=20 ?????Times staff writers Andrew Blankstein, Jose Cardenas, Marla Dickerson,= =20 Noaki Schwartz, Nicholas Riccardi, Doug Smith, Rebecca Trounson and Richard= =20 Winton in Los Angeles, Miguel Bustillo and Julie Tamaki in Sacramento, Mari= a=20 La Ganga in San Francisco, Stanley Allison, Matt Ebnet, Scott Martelle,=20 Dennis McLellan, Monte Morin, Jason Song, Mai Tran and Nancy Wride in Orang= e=20 County, and Richard Simon in Washington contributed to this story. --- --- Fragile Supply Network Apt to Fail=20 By JENIFER WARREN and ERIC BAILEY, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????A lot of people were caught off guard by the blackouts that swept over= =20 California this week. Debra Bowen wasn't one of them. ?????As chairwoman of the state Senate Energy Committee, she is=20 intimately--and painfully--familiar with the state's energy supply. And she= =20 is willing to share a secret: It's a fragile system, capable of collapse at= =20 any time. ?????That knowledge keeps Bowen awake at night, particularly with the=20 approach of summer, when power demand surges as Californians get reacquaint= ed=20 with their air conditioners. ?????""I sound a bit less like Chicken Little today, don't I?"" Bowen said=20 Tuesday, as chunks of the state once again were forcibly darkened. ""I know = a=20 lot of people don't feel we have a problem. But we have a very, very big=20 problem."" ?????With the recent slowdown in Stage 3 emergencies, a sense of calm had= =20 settled over the energy debate, and even some legislators were speaking wit= h=20 guarded optimism about the hot months ahead. ?????On Tuesday, however, a creeping sense of doom was almost palpable amon= g=20 energy watchers, and previous supply forecasts--which predict that the stat= e=20 may yet escape summer blackouts--were being given a second look. ?????""The outages of the last two days are something that Californians are= =20 going to have to get used to for July and August,"" said Michael Zenker,=20 California director of Cambridge Energy Research Associates. The=20 Massachusetts consulting firm is predicting about 20 hours of blackouts thi= s=20 summer. ?????At the California Independent System Operator, which manages 75% of th= e=20 statewide power grid, officials said the energy cushion the state had in=20 recent weeks was, in some ways, a phantom caused by heavy imports of power. ?????Cal-ISO spokesman Patrick Dorinson said people may have been deluded= =20 into a false state of comfort: ""Maybe there is a tendency to think things= =20 have improved,"" he said. In fact, they haven't. ?????More than anything, this week's events illustrate the delicate balance= =20 of factors that keep California illuminated, from the multitude of supply= =20 sources to the weather. ?????Temperatures were higher than usual. Alternative-energy suppliers--who= =20 haven't been paid in months by the cash-strapped utilities--cut their outpu= t.=20 Suppliers in the Northwest--which faces a drought--slashed exports. Equipme= nt=20 breakdowns and maintenance at power plants--much of it unanticipated--took= =20 13,000 megawatts offline. A utility-run program that gives businesses=20 discounts in exchange for cutting power during emergencies is all but dead. ?????""The fragility of the system is such that a small perturbation can tur= n=20 everything upside down very easily,"" said Gary Ackerman, executive director= =20 of the Western Power Trading Forum, a group of electricity generators and= =20 traders. ?????One factor receiving particular attention is the dip in supply caused = by=20 unscheduled maintenance. To help officials predict available supply,=20 generators provide an annual maintenance plan that is updated regularly. ?????In addition, however, facilities sometimes shut down for unexpected=20 reasons: leaking tubes, burnt-out transformers, cracked turbines and faulty= =20 feed pumps. At one point Tuesday, about 8,200 megawatts were unavailable=20 because of unscheduled shutdowns. That's enough to supply about 6 million= =20 households, and up from 5,700 megawatts a week ago. ?????The huge 1,400-megawatt Mohave power plant near Laughlin, Nev., which= =20 supplies Southern California Edison and the Los Angeles Department of Water= =20 and Power, was felled Monday by a transformer problem. That was enough to= =20 push the state into blackouts. ?????A growing number of skeptics, however, question whether those reasons= =20 are always valid, accusing generators of withholding power to shrink supply= =20 and drive up prices. ?????""There's no way to verify it, so you've got to take their word for it,= ""=20 said Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economist who studies California's= =20 electricity market. ""And given that it's very profitable for these things t= o=20 occur, you start to wonder if they're creating an artificial scarcity."" ?????Tom Williams of Duke Energy said the Houston-based company is working= =20 hard to keep its California power plants, which are capable of producing=20 3,351 megawatts of electricity, in operation after months of near-continuou= s=20 operation. ?????""It's like riding a moped across the country,"" he said. ""They're just= =20 not meant to run this hard."" ?????Last week, the state Senate formed a committee to investigate charges = of=20 market manipulation by power suppliers. The chairman, state Sen. Joe Dunn= =20 (D-Santa Ana), says the issue of unscheduled plant shutdowns is on his agen= da. ?????""The problem is: How does one prove that a particular outage was part = of=20 a deliberate strategy to deprive the state of kilowatts, rather than a resu= lt=20 of normal business operations?"" Dunn said. ---=20 ?????Times staff writer Nancy Rivera Brooks contributed to this story. --- --- Elevator Anxiety Is Riding High=20 Emergencies: Workers in skyscrapers worry about blackouts trapping them in= =20 their buildings. Some take the risk in stride; others make plans to take th= e=20 stairs.=20 By JOHN M. GLIONNA and JOE MOZINGO, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????SAN FRANCISCO--In Susan Clifton's highly placed opinion, sunny Tuesday= =20 would have been a picture-perfect day to work atop one of the tallest=20 buildings in San Francisco, a scenic city littered with soaring skyscrapers= . ?????But Clifton--like many other high-rise office dwellers in blackout-pro= ne=20 parts of California--couldn't help but feel some high anxiety at the prospe= ct=20 of being stranded by electrical outages that were sweeping across the state= =20 for a second day. ?????""I think about it all the time,"" said Clifton, a 21-year-old=20 receptionist at Deutsche Bank's offices on the 48th floor of a tower in the= =20 city's financial district who recently moved from rural Virginia. ""The way = I=20 see it, Californians take a lot of things on faith, working atop tall=20 buildings with all these earthquakes and power outages."" ?????For Long Beach office worker Dave Suhada, the anxiety has taken the fo= rm=20 of elevator phobia: a fear of getting stuck on an 80-degree day crammed in = a=20 pod of sweating, heavy-breathing humans, with no way out. ?????""I'm just eyeing the buttons to see which one I could push as fast as = I=20 can if the power goes out,"" he said.=20 ?????For 20-year-old Lisa Riley, it means entering the elevator each day in= =20 her Long Beach office building with a prayer. ""I just could not get stuck f= or=20 an hour and a half,"" she said, nodding nervously. Often she now opts for th= e=20 stairs. ?????In San Francisco, emergency services officials say that most of the=20 city's office buildings are equipped with backup generators to run elevator= s=20 and security equipment in the event of a blackout. ?????Fire Department spokesman Pete House said the city has 19 trucks with= =20 experts trained to extricate people trapped in elevators. Firefighters=20 handling blackout-related emergencies rescued a person trapped in a downtow= n=20 building Tuesday and handled five elevator mishaps Monday. ?????Christopher Stafford didn't get caught inside an elevator Monday, but= =20 suffered the next-worst thing: being stranded in his 15th-floor apartment= =20 after the power failed when he went home for lunch. ?????So the 41-year-old real estate worker trooped down the stairs to the= =20 lobby and even made some new friends along the way, helping a few elderly= =20 women who were struggling down the stairs. ?????""It was a pain,"" he acknowledged. ""But I have to tell you: I really li= ke=20 my panoramic view, so it's worth the hassle."" ?????Nowadays, Sherrie Tellier makes sure her cellular phone is in hand whe= n=20 she gets in the elevator. She got trapped once before, and the emergency=20 phone didn't work. It's amazing, she said, how small an elevator seems when= =20 you can't get out. ""It's like a broom closet.Now there's a sigh of relief= =20 every time the door opens."" ?????Some high-rise office workers said Tuesday that they preferred not to= =20 think about the perils of going without power and being vulnerable and=20 isolated so high up. ?????But on the 42nd floor of San Francisco's Transamerica Tower, Sasha=20 Monpere wasn't fazed by the chance that during a blackout, her building's= =20 backup generators wouldn't kick in. ?????""Hey, I'm young and I'm healthy. I can always walk down the stairs,""= =20 said the 29-year-old receptionist. ""I've done the Statue of Liberty. It can= 't=20 be any worse than that. And walking down 42 flights is a lot easier than=20 walking up all those stairs."" ?????Likewise with Phil Ip, who works on the 52nd--and top--floor of San=20 Francisco's tallest skyscraper. The 25-year restaurant veteran says he has= =20 the utmost faith in modern technology. ?????""We're safe, even up here,"" said Ip, assistant general manager of the= =20 Carnelian Room, a restaurant atop the Bank of America building. ""You should= =20 see the engineer's room in this building. It's like a big steamship. They'r= e=20 equipped for anything that could happen."" ?????One floor below, Cheryl Martin hears every day about people's fear of= =20 heights. In the year since she began answering phones in a law office, she= =20 has often escorted clients afraid of express elevators that shudder and ris= e=20 so fast that passengers' ears pop from the altitude gain. ?????""Everybody, and I mean everybody, asks, 'So, what happens during a pow= er=20 outage?' "" she said. ?????Rory Thompson said he believes in karma and is sure that if the rollin= g=20 blackouts come calling, his office will be spared. In July 1993, Thompson's= =20 building was the site of an incident known as the 101 California St.=20 massacre, in which gunman Gian Luigi Ferri killed eight people and wounded= =20 six before killing himself. ?????""This building has already had its bad day,"" he said. ""They say that t= he=20 day after a crash is the safest day to ride an airline. So I'll take my=20 chances with the rolling blackouts."" --- State Says It's Accelerating Plan to Buy Power Utilities' Grid=20 Government: Talks with Edison are reported near completion, but agreement= =20 with heavily indebted PG&E has a way to go.=20 By RONE TEMPEST and DAN MORAIN, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????SACRAMENTO--As blackouts hit California for a second day Tuesday, a ke= y=20 consultant to Gov. Gray Davis said negotiations to buy the power grid owned= =20 by the state's largest utilities ""are proceeding at an accelerated pace."" ?????Wall Street consultant Joseph Fichera said talks with Southern=20 California Edison could be wrapped up within days, although those with PG&E= =20 are much less advanced.=20 ?????The administration and PG&E have not reached even an agreement in=20 principle, he said. PG&E, which has more debt than Edison, says its=20 transmission lines are more extensive than those of its Southern California= =20 counterpart. ?????The state wants to buy the utilities' transmission lines and other=20 assets for about $7 billion to provide cash to the utilities, help stabiliz= e=20 the electricity supply and ease the power crunch that has plagued Californi= a=20 for months. To research the grid purchase, Fichera said, the state has had = to=20 pore over 80,000 documents just to assess the utilities' liabilities. ?????""We are working at a good pace,"" said Fichera, chief executive of the= =20 New York firm Saber Partners. "" . . . If we get to a deal-breaker, it might= =20 be longer."" ?????By making Fichera, who is also a consultant to the Texas Public=20 Utilities Commission, available to reporters Tuesday, the Davis=20 administration was clearly trying to reassure the public that progress is= =20 being made on the governor's plan to pull the state out of the crisis. ?????Since mid-January, when the big utilities' credit failed and suppliers= =20 stopped selling to them, the state has spent nearly $3 billion buying=20 electricity from a handful of large suppliers in Texas, Oklahoma, Georgia a= nd=20 North Carolina. Not a cent has gone to the hundreds of alternative energy= =20 suppliers in California who provide about a quarter of the state's=20 electricity. ?????The Monday and Tuesday blackouts occurred partly because many of the= =20 cash-strapped alternative suppliers, including solar, biomass and wind powe= r=20 units, cut their normal supply to the system in half. They say Edison and= =20 PG&E have not paid them since November; the utilities say they are out of= =20 cash. ?????Assemblyman Fred Keeley (D-Boulder Creek) said the plight of the=20 alternative suppliers has dragged on because of the complexity of dealing= =20 with ""almost 700 individual contractors."" ?????Another delaying factor, said Keeley, who with state Sen. Jim Battin= =20 (R-La Quinta) worked for almost three months to come up with a legislative= =20 plan to lower the small producers' prices, was ""the huge enmity . . .=20 manifested between the utilities and the qualifying facilities. These peopl= e=20 just don't like each other."" ?????This week's blackouts provided two painful lessons for the Davis=20 administration: ?????* When it comes to electricity, size doesn't matter--every kilowatt=20 counts. During peak use, a small wind power facility in Riverside County ca= n=20 make the difference between full power and blackouts. ?????* There is no such thing as a partial solution. Unless the whole energ= y=20 equation is balanced, the parts don't work. ?????For the Davis plan to work, several key elements need to come together= =20 or utility customers will almost certainly face rate increases above the 19= %=20 already set in motion: ?????* The cost of power purchased by the state must be reduced through=20 long-term contracts with the big out-of-state producers. ?????These contracts, the details of which the Davis administration has kep= t=20 confidential, are still being negotiated by Davis consultant Vikram Budhraj= a=20 of the Pasadena firm Electric Power Group. The administration says it has= =20 concluded 40 contracts with generators, about half of which have been signe= d. ?????According to the most recent statistics released by the Department of= =20 Water Resources, which buys power for the state, current prices are still= =20 well above the rate state Treasurer Phil Angelides says is necessary for a= =20 planned $10-billion bond offering to succeed. ?????The bonds, set for sale in May, will be used to reimburse the state fo= r=20 the money it will have spent by that time to buy electricity. The state is= =20 currently spending at a rate of $58 million a day to buy power. If prices= =20 stay high, the $10 billion in bonds will not cover the state's power=20 purchases by the end of the summer. ?????Angelides says he cannot proceed with bridge financing for the bonds= =20 until the Public Utilities Commission devises a formula to guarantee that a= =20 portion of utility bills will be dedicated to bond repayment. Angelides has= =20 estimated that, under the January law that put the state in the power buyin= g=20 business, the state must be reimbursed $2.5 billion annually, and that $1.3= =20 billion is needed to service the debt. ?????PUC Administrative Law Judge Joseph R. DeUlloa is expected to announce= =20 his ruling on the reimbursement rate later this week, leading to a PUC vote= =20 on the matter as early as next week. ?????* The rates charged for electricity by the alternative producers, know= n=20 as qualifying facilities, must be cut at least in half, down from an averag= e=20 of more than 17 cents per kilowatt-hour. In his news conference Tuesday,=20 Davis said he will ask the PUC to set QF rates at 6.9 cents for 10-year=20 contracts and 7.5 cents for five-year contracts. ?????Meanwhile, PUC Chairman Loretta Lynch, a Davis appointee, said Tuesday= =20 that the commission will vote next week on a proposed order requiring=20 Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric to pay the QFs for=20 electricity in the future. Lynch said a recent PUC assessment showed that t= he=20 utilities have enough cash on hand for that. ?????""We are trying to make sure the folks providing the power get paid,""= =20 Lynch said. ""The qualified facilities have demonstrated that they haven't= =20 been paid and that it is impairing their ability to provide power."" ?????The utilities contend that if they pay the small providers what they o= we=20 them, there will not be enough money left to pay other creditors. ?????""There is not enough money in the current rate structure to pay the=20 [alternative producers], pay the [Department of Water Resources] and pay th= e=20 utilities for their generation,"" said John Nelson, a spokesman for PG&E. ?????* The utilities must sell to the state the power they produce=20 themselves, mainly from hydro and nuclear sources, at a rate only slightly= =20 above the cost of producing it. This is tied to the ongoing negotiations=20 between the Davis administration and the utilities to restore the=20 near-bankrupt utilities to solvency. ---=20 ?????Times staff writers Julie Tamaki, Miguel Bustillo and Tim Reiterman=20 contributed to this report. --- L.A., Long Beach File Suits Over Gas Companies' Prices=20 Energy: Separate actions allege a conspiracy and gouging. Suppliers blame= =20 rising demand and a fluctuating market.=20 By TINA DAUNT and DAN WEIKEL, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????Seeking damages that could reach ""into the billions of dollars,"" the= =20 cities of Los Angeles and Long Beach on Tuesday filed separate lawsuits=20 alleging that a coalition of gas companies illegally conspired to eliminate= =20 competition, drive up natural gas prices and discourage the construction of= =20 electricity generating plants in California. ?????Officials from the two cities alleged that Southern California Gas Co.= ,=20 San Diego Gas & Electric and El Paso Natural Gas Co. violated the state's= =20 antitrust law and engaged in unfair and fraudulent business practices that= =20 caused gas prices to skyrocket. ?????The cities are the first California municipalities to take action=20 against the gas companies. A number of similar lawsuits filed by antitrust= =20 attorneys, state regulators and private citizens are pending elsewhere. ?????The energy companies deny any impropriety. They contend that Californi= a=20 is the victim of its own soaring electricity demand and overreliance on=20 fluctuating spot markets for natural gas. ?????""The conspiracy theories that have been promoted have no basis in=20 reality,"" said Denise King, spokeswoman for Southern California Gas' parent= =20 company, Sempra Energy, which also was named in the suits. ""Southern=20 California Gas continues to look out for the best interest of its customers= ."" ?????The lawsuits filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court accuse the=20 companies of conspiring to manipulate the price of natural gas by agreeing = to=20 kill pipeline projects that would have brought ample supplies of cheaper=20 natural gas to Southern California. ?????They allege that executives for the energy companies made the pact=20 during a meeting in a Phoenix hotel room five years ago to discuss=20 ""opportunities"" arising from the state's newly deregulated electricity mark= et. ?????""The fulfillment of the illicit plan has had devastating effects on=20 Southern California gas consumers,"" according to Los Angeles' suit. ""Gas=20 prices in the Southern California market have skyrocketed, and the Southern= =20 California gas consumers are paying the highest prices in the nation."" ?????In recent months, natural gas prices have tripled across the nation fo= r=20 a number of reasons, including a shortage of supplies to meet demands for= =20 home heating. Prices have increased far more in California, where natural g= as=20 is a central factor in the state's energy crisis. The state relies on the= =20 clean-burning fuel to generate half its electrical power. ?????""This not only led to price-gouging of all natural gas consumers, from= =20 homeowners to government to industry, but it contributed to the current=20 electrical power crisis in California,"" said City Atty. James K. Hahn, a=20 mayoral candidate who urged the City Council to pursue the case. ?????Chris Garner, Long Beach's utility director, said that since November,= =20 the average residential bill for gas in Long Beach has more than doubled, t= o=20 $175 a month. Some customers, he said, have seen rate increases of 500%. ?????""The people of Long Beach are being gouged by energy conglomerates who= =20 are artificially manipulating the supply of natural gas and reaping excess= =20 profits at the expense of the public,"" said City Attorney Robert Shannon. ?????Holding a special meeting, the Los Angeles City Council voted 12 to 0= =20 Tuesday to file the suit. ?????""If the allegations are true, they are extremely serious,"" said=20 Councilman Mike Feuer, who is a candidate to succeed Hahn as city attorney.= =20 ""And there appears to be some important evidence that substantiates the=20 allegations in the complaint, which means that this lawsuit is, I think, mo= re=20 than a viable lawsuit."" ?????Councilman Mark Ridley-Thomas added: ""We cannot tolerate this and we= =20 must use the full weight of the law to try to correct it."" ?????A growing number of lawsuits around the state are targeting California= 's=20 natural gas suppliers. El Paso Corp., which owns the main pipeline=20 transporting out-of-state gas to Southern California, has been targeted=20 repeatedly by utility companies, state regulators and antitrust attorneys.= =20 ?????Some of the first antitrust lawsuits were filed against Sempra Energy = in=20 December. They were brought by Continental Forge Co., a Compton-based=20 aluminum forging business, and Andrew and Andrea Berg, who own a business i= n=20 San Diego. ?????The cities' lawsuits request that the defendant companies be barred fr= om=20 such conduct in the future, and they seek civil penalties and damages. ?????Shannon estimates that Long Beach could collect more than $100 million= =20 in damages, including triple penalties for antitrust violations. ?????""We are filing this for our citizens,"" Shannon said. ""They include the= =20 poor, the elderly, people living on fixed incomes and small business owners= ."" ?????The Los Angeles suit was filed on behalf of all Californians. Official= s=20 place damage estimates ""in the billions.""=20 ?????Hahn, however, warned council members that it could take the city a ye= ar=20 or more to resolve the suit. ?????""Lawsuits take time,"" Hahn said. ""We are hopeful we can enter into=20 meaningful discovery to disclose what's been going on."" --- Davis OKs Subsidy of Pollution Fees=20 Smog: As part of secret deal to get long-term energy contracts, state would= =20 pay for some of the credits that allow excess power plant emissions. Critic= s=20 renew call for full disclosure.=20 By DAN MORAIN , Times Staff Writer=20 ?????SACRAMENTO--As part of his closed-door negotiations to buy electricity= ,=20 Gov. Gray Davis has agreed to relieve some generators from having to pay=20 potentially millions of dollars in fees for emitting pollutants into the ai= r,=20 Davis said Tuesday. ?????Davis announced two weeks ago that his negotiators had reached deals= =20 with 20 generators to supply $43 billion worth of power during the next 10= =20 years. ?????However, the Democratic governor has refused to release any of the=20 contracts or detail various terms, contending that release of such=20 information would hamper the state's ability to negotiate deals with other= =20 generators and therefore ultimately would raise prices Californians pay for= =20 electricity. ?????Sources familiar with the negotiations, speaking on condition of=20 anonymity, said the agreement reached with Dynegy Inc., a power company bas= ed=20 in Houston, is one that includes language requiring that the state pay the= =20 cost of credits that allow emissions. Dynegy spokesman Steve Stengel declin= ed=20 to discuss the company's deal with the state. ?????""We couldn't get them to sign contracts; it was a sticking point,"" Dav= is=20 said of the decision to pay the fees of some generators. ""We had to lock do= wn=20 some power so we were not totally dependent on the spot market."" ?????The fees in question are part of an emission trading system known as= =20 RECLAIM. Under the system, companies are allotted a certain amount of=20 allowable pollution. If their operations pollute more, companies are requir= ed=20 to purchase credits on an open market. Currently the credits cost about $45= =20 per pound of pollution--an amount that can lead to a bill of well over $10= =20 million a year for a power plant. ?????The South Coast Air Quality Management District, which regulates=20 pollution in the Los Angeles Basin, is considering steps to significantly= =20 lower the cost of the system--a step that could considerably cut the state'= s=20 potential cost, Davis said. ?????Senate Energy Committee Chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey)=20 defended the decision to cover the power company's costs. ?????""It is a question of whether it brings down the price of power,"" she= =20 said. ""If it brings down the price of power, I don't have a problem with it= ."" ?????Nevertheless, word that the contracts could bind the state to pay=20 pollution fees caused some critics of Davis' policy to renew calls for Davi= s=20 to reconsider the secrecy surrounding the power negotiations. The payment= =20 provision underscores the fact that the contracts involve more than merely= =20 the prices the state will pay for its megawatts, the critics note. ?????""The Legislature should have known about it,"" said Senate President Pr= o=20 Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco). ""It is going to cost taxpayers money. It= =20 makes you wonder. . . . This was a policy issue that was never discussed wi= th=20 the Legislature."" ?????V. John White, a lobbyist for the Sierra Club, who also represents=20 alternative energy producers, called the contract proposal ""a horrible=20 precedent."" ?????""Until we know exactly what the state has agreed to and how much of a= =20 subsidy this represents, we can't determine how serious the breach of=20 principle this is,"" White said. ?????Another critic of the secrecy of the negotiations, Terry Francke,=20 general counsel for the California First Amendment Coalition, said the=20 provision in question ""raises the possibility that there are other=20 [concessions]"" that have not yet come to light. ?????In the summer, when demand for power is highest, some generators=20 probably will exceed pollution limits set by regional air quality managemen= t=20 districts. ?????To avert blackouts, state officials might ask the companies to keep=20 plants running. In such cases, some sources familiar with aspects of the=20 contracts said, the contract language could be interpreted to suggest that= =20 the state would cover any fines--although Davis said Tuesday the state will= =20 not cover the cost of fines. ?????A recent Dynegy filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission=20 underscores the rising cost of pollution-related measures. The company, whi= ch=20 is partners with NRG Energy in three California plants in El Segundo, Long= =20 Beach and Carlsbad in San Diego County, said its ""aggregate expenditures fo= r=20 compliance with laws related to the regulation of discharge of materials in= to=20 the environment"" rose to $14.3 million in 2000, from $3.6 million in 1999. ?????A South Coast Air Quality Management spokesman said Dynegy's facilitie= s=20 appear to be fairly clean--although Sierra Club lobbyist White said Dynegy= =20 has been seeking a permit at one of its plants to burn fuel oil, which is= =20 dirtier than natural gas. ?????Davis said he intends to ""make this information public,"" but he added= =20 that ""we do not want to put the public's interest in jeopardy by asking the= m=20 to pay higher prices."" ?????""Nobody likes the notion that [the administration is] not being fully= =20 forthcoming,"" Davis said. ""But I also have a corollary responsibility that = I=20 don't stick these generators with a higher rate."" --- As Losses Mount, Companies Work Around Outages=20 By MARLA DICKERSON,JERRY HIRSCH and NANCY CLEELAND, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????As blackouts moved from theory to reality, many Southern California=20 businesses spent Day 2 assessing their losses and digging in for what they= =20 expect to be a long, hot summer. ?????An hour without electricity may be an inconvenience for most residents= .=20 But for manufacturers and many other businesses, even a brief loss of power= =20 can generate tens of thousands in losses. ?????Whether shaping metal or making salsa, businesses of all kinds=20 complained Tuesday about the lack of warning of impending outages, even as= =20 they sought sometimes creative ways to work around the loss of power. ?????Rattled by news reports of Monday's rolling blackouts, Industry-based = El=20 Burrito Mexican Food Products started its Tuesday shift at 2 a.m. Workers h= ad=20 just finished cooking and packaging the last batches of salsa and masa when= =20 the lights went out at 10:20 a.m. ?????""We dodged a bullet,"" said El Burrito founder Mark Roth. ""Losing a day= 's=20 production of salsa would have cost me $15,000 to $20,000."" ?????But other companies weren't so fortunate. ?????Long Beach-based Delco Machine & Gear was still totaling up its losses= =20 from Monday's blackout, which amounted to at least $30,000 in lost wages an= d=20 production, said Nick Campanelli, vice president of manufacturing. The=20 company, a division of Florida-based B/E Aerospace Inc., makes parts for th= e=20 aerospace industry. The sudden loss of power caused its sophisticated metal= =20 cutting and grinding machines to crash, ruining precision parts in producti= on. ?????But the losses don't end there. He said employees will need to spend= =20 hours resetting the equipment. Campanelli is particularly irked that the=20 company received no warning. ?????""Five minutes' notice,"" he fumed. ""That's all I needed."" ?????Although businesses such as Campanelli's typically receive no warning= =20 that they are about to lose power, insurance companies count the rolling=20 blackouts as ""planned events,"" a determination that in most cases=20 disqualifies a business from making a claim. ?????""I know it must be frustrating for businesses who have the power go of= f=20 suddenly, but these outages are planned by the grid operators,"" said Pete= =20 Moraga of the Insurance Information Network of California. ""That means it= =20 would not be a covered peril in a traditional business insurance policy."" ?????Typically, business insurance covers loss of profit and damage from=20 unforeseen events such as fires or windstorms. The component of the policy= =20 that covers interruptions in business kicks in after a given amount of time= =20 elapses, usually 24 to 48 hours. ?????Business polices can be written to include unusual coverages, Moraga= =20 said, but he has never heard of a policy that covers losses from a rolling= =20 blackout. ?????Some companies are taking measures not to get caught in a situation=20 where a blackout can hurt them. ?????The region's largest steel supplier shut down for two hours Monday aft= er=20 Southern California Edison called to warn of tight supplies. ?????""We just can't take a chance,"" said Lourenco Goncalvez, president of= =20 California Steel Industries Inc. in San Bernardino County. ""We have a lot o= f=20 safety issues. People could get hurt."" ?????Goncalvez said the plant has multiple 20-ton and 25-ton overhead crane= s=20 that operate with electromagnetic devices, which would fail if they lost=20 power suddenly. Falling materials could injure workers below, he said. ""We= =20 have been asking to be exempt from rolling blackouts,"" he said. ?????Goncalvez said he couldn't put a price on the lost production at the= =20 24-hour plant and said he worried more about the long term. ?????""Two hours is nothing,"" he said. ""My concern is this thing will start = to=20 happen almost every day. If it will be like this all summer, you can be sur= e=20 it will have dramatic consequences for the entire economy. . . . We're goin= g=20 to have a shortage of steel products in California. Maybe the government do= es=20 not consider this is serious. We'll see."" ?????At Sport Chalet, a La Canada Flintridge-based chain of 22 sporting goo= ds=20 stores in Southern California, an administrative assistant monitors the sta= te=20 power situation, hoping to warn any stores that are in danger of losing=20 power, said Craig Levra, the company's chief executive. ?????Levra said the assistant was assigned the monitoring duties last year,= =20 when rolling blackouts were still only a threat. ?????The chain put in place an emergency plan--similar to what it would do = in=20 a major earthquake. Backup power will kick on emergency lights and allow th= e=20 cash registers to complete transactions. Employees are instructed to escort= =20 customers from the building safely, Levra said. ?????Other businesses, however, have plans to remain open during the 60- to= =20 90-minute blackouts. ?????When power went out at two Cheesecake Factory restaurants in Orange=20 County on Monday afternoon, the eateries switched to serving cold dishes su= ch=20 as sandwiches and salads, said Howard Gordon, senior vice president of the= =20 Calabasas Hills-based chain. ?????The restaurants had enough backup power to operate emergency lights an= d=20 cash registers. Large windows provided the rest of the light, Gordon said. ?????So far, the 99 Cents Only Stores chain has missed the shotgun pattern = of=20 the blackouts. But with nearly 100 stores in California, company President= =20 Eric Schiffer believes it is only a matter of time before the lights go out= =20 at one of its outlets. ?????Though the stores have some backup power, the chain has systems in pla= ce=20 to operate without it. Its cash registers can open mechanically, Schiffer= =20 said. Because an item sells for a multiple of 99 cents, sales clerks are=20 equipped with ""blackout sheets"" that calculate a customer's tab, including= =20 tax. All the clerk has to do is count the number of items in the shopping= =20 cart and check the tables on the sheet. ?????This week's power crunch has been exacerbated by the fact that so-call= ed=20 interruptible electricity customers no longer face large penalties if they= =20 decline to shut down their operations when supplies get critically low. ?????The Public Utilities Commission suspended the fines in January to ease= =20 the burden on about 1,400 businesses that found themselves bearing the brun= t=20 of the crisis to prevent rolling blackouts in the rest of the state. ?????According to Edison, about 10% of its interruptible customers are=20 complying with requests to curtail electricity usage during crunch time. Bu= t=20 Scott Keller isn't among them. ?????The owner of Chino-based STC Plastics Inc. said he was forced to shut= =20 down more than 20 times since September, costing him as much as $10,000 in= =20 lost production per day. He ignored requests Monday and Tuesday to curtail= =20 usage and said he doesn't feel a twinge of remorse. ?????""If I'm shut down, I can't pay my workers,"" he said. ""I'd feel more=20 guilty about that."" ?????But this is one area where insurance eventually might help. Moraga sai= d=20 some carriers are developing plans that would cover penalties for continuin= g=20 to use power after they have been asked by a utility to cut back. --- Wednesday, March 21, 2001=20 A Blackout on Answers=20 Davis needs to do a better job in communicating to Californians about the= =20 electricity crisis. In the absence of that, cynicism grows.=20 ?????The oil shocks of the 1970s, from the Arab oil embargo to the Iran-Ira= q=20 war, were dead simple compared with the California power shortage. Then, th= e=20 problem was a lack of imported oil and the chief symptom was long lines and= =20 high prices at gas stations. Politicians urged conservation: Turn down the= =20 heat, drive fewer miles, buy more efficient cars. People understood the cau= se=20 of the crisis and the benefit of their actions. Today it's a different stor= y=20 and a damnably complicated one that gives consumers no place--or actually,= =20 too many places--to focus their anger.=20 ?????The last two days of rolling blackouts, including previously exempt=20 Southern California, have not reduced power demand, or at least not enough.= =20 Consumers are suspicious: Are out-of-state power companies holding back=20 production? Did utilities really not have enough money to pay alternative= =20 energy producers--the little guys who, combined, could produce enough power= =20 to prevent the blackouts? And what happened to long-term power contracts, t= he=20 state-bargained deal that was supposed to stabilize the crisis?=20 ?????The frustrations are vast, and there are too many gaps in the story. I= f=20 it's just a pack of thieves creating an artificial shortage, as even some= =20 consumer organizations charge, why should anyone sacrifice to conserve? Tha= t,=20 in a nutshell, is the problem that Gov. Gray Davis, the state Legislature a= nd=20 the Public Utilities Commission face.=20 ?????Davis, for one, has to level with the public and stop acting as if he= =20 can fix the crisis. He has proved he can't, at least not without reductions= =20 in usage and, most likely, rate increases. If Davis, who is notoriously=20 averse to delivering bad news, had leveled with the public about the=20 fragility of the current system, the last two days of blackouts statewide= =20 (except in places with full municipal power, like Los Angeles) might not ha= ve=20 come as such a shock.=20 ?????The Legislature tried and failed earlier to solve the alternative ener= gy=20 producers' nonpayment problems with a very complicated bill. Tuesday night,= =20 Davis and legislators announced a simpler plan that would set lower, more= =20 flexible rates for alternative power but also force the utilities to pay fo= r=20 future purchases.=20 ?????Which leads to the utilities themselves. With the state shelling out= =20 billions for power from the major generators, how could Southern California= =20 Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric still not have the cash flow to pay the= =20 alternative producers? That motley collection of biomass, solar, wind and= =20 cogeneration companies has been shutting down for nonpayment--some of them= =20 because natural gas suppliers have cut them off. PG&E has made some payment= s,=20 but SCE has paid zilch, though a spokesman says it hopes to strike a deal t= o=20 start paying this week.=20 ?????Without enough honest information, conspiracy scenarios fill the holes= .=20 Bad news is better than no news, something Davis seems not to quite realize= .=20 By today or Thursday, the weather will cool and some plants taken down for= =20 repair will come back online. The blackouts may cease but the crisis will b= e=20 just as deep as it was Monday and Tuesday. It is up to Davis to do a better= =20 job of persuasively explaining why. Otherwise, the cynicism grows.=20 --- Wednesday, March 21, 2001=20 Rolling Blackouts: Blatant Extortion=20 ?????* Re ""Rolling Blackouts Hit Southland for First Time as Production=20 Falls,"" March 20:=20 ?????So here we are, 22 years after the notorious gas shortage, having=20 another gun held to our head by an opportunistic energy consortium. Back in= =20 1979, we all had to wait in long lines just to pay more for gasoline. Now, = we=20 have to face food in our freezers thawing and simmering in our homes during= =20 hot summer days, just to earn the honor of paying more for electricity.=20 ?????Of course, as soon as the rates are up and the environmental concerns= =20 are shoved aside, watch how plentiful power will be. When is somebody in=20 government going to stand up for the consumer and stop this blatant form of= =20 extortion?=20 ?????JOHN JOHNSON=20 ?????Agoura Hills=20 * * * ?????So customers of PG&E and Edison are ""shielded from soaring wholesale= =20 prices""? Some shield: turning off all our power without so much as a moment= 's=20 notice, endangering lives and disrupting businesses just to keep our=20 electricity prices unreasonably low. Let's lift the rate caps to get the=20 lights back on. And if I need to be shielded from soaring prices, I'll turn= =20 my own lights off.=20 ?????ANDREW LOWD=20 ?????Claremont=20 * * * ?????This state needs adequate, reliable electricity to run a diverse=20 economy. Both political parties and business interests are at fault. This= =20 crisis demands top priority, aimed at lasting solutions.=20 ?????The most immediate solution is fast-tracking of added generating=20 capacity. Freeway bridges were rebuilt in record time after the Northridge= =20 quake, so we know it can be done. That is the type of effort that is needed= ,=20 immediately.=20 ?????Since Democrats hold the governorship and control both state legislati= ve=20 houses, they are in the driver's seat. If the lights go out, the Democrats = go=20 out. If this state government can't solve the problem, we need a new=20 government that can.=20 ?????STEVE ANDERSON=20 ?????Huntington Beach=20 * * * ?????The alleged energy crisis in California is entirely contrived to relax= =20 environmental pollution standards and to raise energy rates. It's curious= =20 that the L.A. Department of Water and Power, which was not deregulated, is= =20 not currently experiencing an energy crisis. PG&E and Edison are both part = of=20 national and multinational corporations. Why should utility customers have = to=20 pay for their economic problems or gross mismanagement?=20 ?????Several power plants were taken off-line for ""routine maintenance,""=20 which may not have been so routine. Energy is a vital necessity; if these= =20 companies can't provide it at a reasonable, affordable rate then they shoul= d=20 be replaced by companies that can, be taken over by the government, or=20 de-deregulated. There is an abundance of solar energy in California, of whi= ch=20 only a small fraction is being utilized. There is no shortage of energy in= =20 California, only a shortage of intelligence, will and honest politicians.= =20 ?????CHARLES B. EDELMAN=20 ?????Los Angeles=20 --- Utilities' Demand Blocks Bailout=20 NEGOTIATIONS HIT SNAG: PG&E, Edison want end to price freeze if they sell= =20 transmission lines to state David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, March 21, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /21/M N114450.DTL=20 California's near-bankrupt utilities are demanding that higher electric rat= es=20 be a part of any deal to sell the state their power lines, The Chronicle ha= s=20 learned.=20 A rate increase -- perhaps of more than 50 percent, according to earlier=20 industry estimates -- would certainly draw a firestorm of protest from=20 consumer groups and force Gov. Gray Davis to backtrack from earlier pledges= =20 that rates would remain unchanged.=20 Nevertheless, sources close to negotiations on the deal said Pacific Gas an= d=20 Electric Co. and Southern California Edison are attempting to make higher= =20 rates a condition for agreeing to a bailout scheme in which they would sell= =20 the state their transmission systems and some land.=20 The sources said the talks hit a new snag this week when state officials=20 realized that fine print sought by the companies could require the Public= =20 Utilities Commission to pass along all of the utilities' costs to ratepayer= s.=20 The sources said this would end a rate freeze that shields consumers from= =20 runaway wholesale electricity prices.=20 The inclusion of potential rate increases in the talks reflects the growing= =20 complexity of a deal originally intended by Davis to stabilize the finances= =20 of PG&E and Edison so banks would resume loans to the cash-strapped=20 utilities.=20 The negotiations subsequently have expanded to involve a state purchase of= =20 the utilities' transmission networks and acquisition of utility-owned land,= =20 including spectacular coastal property near PG&E's Diablo Canyon nuclear=20 power plant.=20 Now they also have embraced further deregulation of California's=20 dysfunctional electricity market.=20 ""Clearly, one of the terms being discussed is the regulatory environment,""= =20 said Joseph Fichera, head of Saber Partners, a New York investment bank tha= t=20 is advising Davis in the talks.=20 ""The past situation has not worked well,"" he added. ""The utilities want som= e=20 certainty about their future.""=20 TENTATIVE DEAL WITH EDISON To date, the governor has announced a tentative agreement with Edison for t= he=20 state to buy the utility's power lines for almost $3 billion. Discussions= =20 with PG&E for a similar accord have dragged on for weeks.=20 An Edison official, asking that his name be withheld, acknowledged yesterda= y=20 that an end to the rate freeze is an expected result of the power- line sal= e.=20 ""Once the details of the pact are complete, dominoes will fall,"" the offici= al=20 said. ""One of the dominoes is the rate freeze.""=20 A PG&E spokesman declined to comment.=20 In fact, both Edison and PG&E have been aggressively seeking an end to the= =20 rate freeze for months.=20 The two utilities have a lawsuit pending in federal court demanding that th= e=20 PUC immediately raise rates so the utilities can recover almost $13 billion= =20 in debt accrued as a result of the freeze.=20 ""They have been trying a lot of things to get the rate freeze ended in=20 various forms,"" said Carl Wood, who sits on the PUC. ""Adding it to the=20 present talks is consistent with past behavior.""=20 Wall Street has taken note that the negotiations no longer appear to be=20 making progress.=20 Paul Patterson, an energy industry analyst at Credit Suisse First Boston,= =20 told clients on Monday that the discussions ""may have lost some momentum in= =20 recent days."" He did not give a reason.=20 For his part, the governor sounded unusually cautious about the course of t= he=20 talks when asked late last week if a breakthrough was imminent.=20 SECRET STICKING POINTS ""We are going to take the transmission systems and the land that's deeded,= =20 and we will work out an agreement,"" Davis said at an appearance in San Jose= .=20 ""But there are a number of sticking points in the talks with PG&E that I'm= =20 not going to reveal.""=20 One of those sticking points apparently is an insistence that the sale of= =20 utility assets include a long-sought lifting of the rate freeze.=20 Sources said lawyers from both PG&E and Edison had inserted the related ter= ms=20 into draft accords affecting each utility, and that the full impact of the= =20 additions was not realized by state officials until this week.=20 One source said the language was just convoluted enough to slip beneath the= =20 radar screen of state negotiators. But the upshot, once the words had been= =20 parsed, was that the PUC effectively would lose control over power rates.= =20 CREDITWORTHINESS ON THE TABLE In Edison's case, the terms of the tentative deal include the governor aski= ng=20 the PUC ""to support the creditworthiness"" of the utility.=20 ""This would ensure that future investments in both utility distribution and= =20 utility generation plants are provided fair returns of and on capital,=20 consistent with current authorized returns and capital structure provisions= ,""=20 it says.=20 Sources said the provision could be interpreted as a guarantee from the sta= te=20 that Edison would be permitted to recoup all outstanding costs from=20 ratepayers.=20 ""There may be some assumptions about this language that the rate freeze end= s=20 if it is adopted,"" the Edison official said, adding that he saw no reason t= o=20 disagree with such assumptions.=20 But Fichera, Davis' adviser in the talks, insisted that nothing is set in= =20 stone, and that the negotiations are proceeding without a hitch.=20 ""This is a very complex transaction,"" he said. ""God and the devil are in th= e=20 details.""=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 --- --- Utilities' Demand Blocks Bailout=20 BLACKOUTS ROLL ON: Weather, increased consumption blamed=20 David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, March 21, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /21/M N156508.DTL=20 Hundreds of thousands of Californians went without electricity for a second= =20 day yesterday as unusually warm weather and a high number of idle power=20 plants prompted blackouts throughout the state.=20 State officials said electricity usage rose yesterday even though condition= s=20 were largely unchanged from a day before. They surmised that fewer=20 Californians were conserving power.=20 ""We need people to really focus on that,"" implored Patrick Dorinson, a=20 spokesman for the Independent System Operator, manager of the state's power= =20 grid. ""The more people can do, the better it will be.""=20 Rolling blackouts were ordered by the ISO about 9:30 a.m. and were suspende= d=20 at 2 p.m. after several plants that had been down for repairs returned to= =20 service. Additional power also was obtained from a plant in Arizona.=20 Utilities estimated that about 560,000 customers were affected yesterday,= =20 compared with more than 1 million a day earlier.=20 This week's blackouts marked the first time that people in Los Angeles shar= ed=20 the pain with those in San Francisco. Blackouts in January were confined to= =20 the northern part of the state.=20 FEWER AFFECTED IN SOUTH However, Southern California Edison's burden was considerably lighter=20 yesterday than that of Pacific Gas and Electric Co.=20 Karen Shepard-Grimes, a spokeswoman for the Southern California utility, sa= id=20 only about 50,000 customers went without power, compared with nearly 440, 0= 00=20 for PG&E.=20 Affected areas in the south included Palm Springs, Santa Monica, Long Beach= =20 and Pomona.=20 ""We're not in the business of turning customers' lights off,"" Shepard- Grim= es=20 said. ""We're in the business of keeping lights on.""=20 In PG&E's case, things were tougher because low rainfall means that less=20 power is currently available from dams throughout the Pacific Northwest.=20 Ron Low, a spokesman for the utility, said blackouts were experienced by PG= &E=20 customers from Eureka to Bakersfield.=20 ""Our goal was to carry out the ISO's order with minimal impact on customers= ,=20 "" he said.=20 For its part, San Diego Gas & Electric said about 75,000 customers were=20 darkened.=20 Yesterday's blackouts began with PG&E customers in Block 12 and halted midw= ay=20 through Block 14. Customers in each block -- defined by power circuits rath= er=20 than geography -- typically will lose power for about 90 minutes before the= =20 service interruption ""rolls"" elsewhere.=20 Some cutoffs can last more than two hours, however, because of technical=20 problems switching individual blocks on and off.=20 NEXT UP: BLOCK 14 If additional blackouts are ordered today, they will commence with the=20 remaining portion of Block 14 customers. (PG&E customers can determine thei= r=20 block by looking at the bottom left-hand corner of their monthly bill.)=20 The ISO's Dorinson said it is hoped that cooler weather and increased=20 generation will help avert further cutoffs this week.=20 ""Units are coming back into service that have been out,"" he said. ""That wil= l=20 help a great deal.""=20 Roughly 15,000 megawatts of generating capacity was offline yesterday,=20 including half of the alternative-energy plants, which are unable to afford= =20 natural gas to run their turbines.=20 Many of the plant owners say they have not been paid by PG&E and Edison sin= ce=20 November. They are asking federal regulators for permission to sell their= =20 electricity elsewhere.=20 At the same time, one of two units at the Mohave Generating Station in Neva= da=20 damaged in a fire Monday returned to service yesterday, easing the load on= =20 California's grid.=20 The plant, partly owned by Edison, is not expected to return to full output= =20 until tomorrow.=20 PROBING SHUTDOWNS Nearly a third of California's generating capacity is currently down for=20 scheduled or unexpected maintenance. State regulators are investigating=20 whether some plant owners might be deliberately shutting down to drive pric= es=20 higher or reduce operating costs.=20 Loretta Lynch, president of the Public Utilities Commission, on Monday call= ed=20 the number of idle plants ""highly suspicious.""=20 Dorinson at the ISO said that about 12,000 megawatts of mainstream capacity= =20 was offline yesterday, compared with roughly 10,000 megawatts last year at= =20 this time.=20 --=20 Tell Us What You Think=20 Can you save 20 percent on your energy usage? Gov. Gray Davis is offering= =20 rebates for Californians who save on power starting in June, and if you've= =20 got a strategy for conserving, The Chronicle wants to hear it. We'll be=20 writing about the hardest-working energy savers in a future story. To get= =20 involved, Write to the Energy Desk, San Francisco Chronicle, 901 Mission St= .,=20 San Francisco, 94103; or e-mail --=20 THE ENERGY CRUNCH -- Blackouts: About 560,000 Californians, including 440,000 in Northern=20 California, lost electricity yesterday for 90 minutes at a time.=20 -- Areas affected: Blackouts hit parts of blocks 12 and 14 and all of block= =20 13 yesterday. In the event of further blackouts, the remainer of block 14= =20 would be next, followed by block 1.=20 -- Outlook: Officials say blackouts are less likely today as temperatures a= re=20 expected to cool and power plants that have been offline for maintenance=20 resume generating electricity.=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 --- --- Manners Go Out the Window=20 Pedestrians in peril as drivers turn darkened S.F. streets into free-for-al= l=20 Steve Rubenstein, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, March 21, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /21/M N173178.DTL=20 Nobody got plowed into yesterday at Fifth and Howard streets in San=20 Francisco. Many came close.=20 The power outage that darkened the traffic lights at the frenetic South of= =20 Market intersection for more than an hour also darkened the souls of untold= =20 numbers of drivers, sending motoring manners into the toilet.=20 The law says motorists are supposed to treat an intersection with=20 nonfunctioning traffic lights as a four-way stop. That means everyone stops= ,=20 then takes turns -- one by one -- creeping through the intersection.=20 Tell that to the two people in motorized wheelchairs who were nearly creame= d=20 by two eastbound SUVs.=20 Or to the young Swedish couple who had traveled halfway around the globe,= =20 only to scamper through the intersection barely ahead of an office supply= =20 truck.=20 Or to the New Jersey tourist, who proclaimed that California drivers during= =20 power outages were proof positive that the Chaos Theory lives and breathes.= =20 Some motorists stopped and took turns, but many didn't. Some sped into the= =20 intersection immediately behind the vehicle in front, without themselves=20 stopping at the white line. Some sailed through with a rolling stop and a= =20 warning honk. Some blasted through without stopping or honking.=20 ""I'm scared to death,"" said Brian Walters of Dorchester, N.J., after making= =20 it across Howard Street. ""This is organized madness. I subscribe to the Cha= os=20 Theory, and this is what it looks like.""=20 Sydney Freedman, a tourist from Sydney, walked briskly across the darkened= =20 crossroads, smiling grimly.=20 ""I'll chance it,"" he said.=20 He looked back and saw a woman in a motorized wheelchair nearly get squishe= d=20 by a westbound Chevy.=20 ""You have to be authoritative in this town when you cross the street,"" he= =20 said. ""Especially that lady.""=20 Therese Anderson and Andreas Sandstrom, from Sweden, raced across as quickl= y=20 as their backpacks would allow.=20 ""In this country, everyone is in such a hurry,"" said Anderson.=20 ""Everybody drives like a madman,"" added Sandstrom. ""They say, 'I want to be= =20 home right now, and I don't care what happens to anyone else.' ""=20 The couple paused to gaze in wonder at the intersection, learning more abou= t=20 America in five minutes than a pile of guidebooks could tell them.=20 ""This intersection,"" said Sandstrom, ""reminds you not to take life for=20 granted.""=20 A few minutes later, Parking Control Officer Tom Butz arrived in his meter= =20 minder wagon and pulled his orange vest and whistle from the saddlebag. He= =20 strode brave and true into the center of the bullring, planted himself=20 between the whizzing cars and began waving his arms as if conducting ""The= =20 Rite of Spring.""=20 ""I'm all by myself,"" he said. ""I know it's a little risky. I'd better keep = my=20 angels with me.""=20 At that moment, the angels were on duty in Menlo Park, where a blacked-out= =20 intersection at El Camino Real and Santa Cruz Avenue backed up traffic so f= ar=20 that it stretched into neighboring Atherton.=20 ""It's a large intersection and traffic is slow anyway, but now it is severe= ly=20 impacted,"" said Police Sgt. Terri Molakides. ""We don't get any warning=20 either. When the power is out, the power is out. It's not like we can make= =20 any plans.""=20 In general, motorists seemed more likely to obey the four-way-stop rule on= =20 the Peninsula and in the East Bay than in San Francisco.=20 In San Mateo County, some police departments have stopped trying to make=20 advance plans to cover darkened intersections. San Mateo Police Sgt. Kevin= =20 Rafaelli said putting up signs and posting officers sometimes caused proble= ms=20 rather than solving them.=20 ""If people just follow the law (and) stop at the intersection, they can=20 handle it better than we do if we're out there,"" he said. ""People are sort = of=20 getting used to it and are dealing with it.""=20 In Berkeley and Emeryville, motorists stopped one at a time at temporary st= op=20 signs, with no apparent problems. At University Avenue and Sacramento Stree= t=20 in Berkeley, Officer Matt Meredith said motorists were behaving themselves.= =20 That wasn't the case a while back, when a driver who didn't stop at an=20 intersection during a blackout was broadsided by someone who did, Meredith= =20 said.=20 ""The thing to remember is to stop and look,"" he said.=20 TRAFFIC TIPS To avoid a collisions during blackouts, the California Highway Patrol offer= s=20 this advice to motorists:=20 -- Treat any intersection with inoperative traffic lights as a four-way sto= p.=20 Each vehicle must stop when arriving at the white limit line, then proceed= =20 only when safe, taking turns.=20 -- If two vehicles arrive at the intersection at the same time, the motoris= t=20 on the left must yield to the motorist on the right.=20 -- Never insist on taking the right of way, even if you are entitled to it.= =20 -- Follow the directions of a police officer or traffic control officer,=20 whose directions take precedence over lights or signs.=20 Chronicle staff writers Henry K. Lee and Matthew B. Stannard contributed to= =20 this report. / E-mail Steve Rubenstein at ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 8=20 --- --- Historic Blackouts in State=20 Bay Area learns to cope=20 Jonathan Curiel, George Raine, Justino Aguila, and Matthew B. St Tuesday, March 20, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /20/M N219412.DTL=20 Today's rolling blackouts caused concern throughout the Bay Area, including= =20 Colma, where the sudden lack of power apparently caused a fire.=20 A light fixture at the Home Depot store in Colma caught fire around 10:45 a= .=20 m., 15 minutes after Pacific Gas and Electric Co. ordered blackouts for the= =20 area. No one was hurt.=20 ""I was in the back of the store when the power outage started,"" said Dave= =20 Cole, a consultant from Pacifica who was shopping for bolts and screws. ""We= =20 lost maybe 90 percent of the lights, then maybe 10 percent of the lights ca= me=20 up. Then I heard a guy saying, 'Get a ladder, get a ladder!'=20 ""One of the lights on the ceiling had caught on fire, and a couple of peopl= e=20 were getting ladders and fire extinguishers.""=20 Store managers whisked everyone out of the store, and Colma firefighters=20 arrived to make sure the blaze was extinguished.=20 At 11 a.m., Cole was waiting to get back into the store, which was still=20 closed.=20 ""I need my bolts,"" he said.=20 Elsewhere, the San Francisco Fire Department had to rescue people stuck in = an=20 elevator at 2001 Embarcadero North, said fire department spokesman Pete=20 Howes.=20 Scores of residents and businesses near the Embarcadero, including the Levi= =20 Strauss & Co. headquarters, were affected by the blackout.=20 At Levi Strauss this morning, Phil Marineau, the president and chief=20 executive officer, led his 1,300 employees by example, using only minimal= =20 lighting for a meeting in his office at 10 a.m.=20 Employees were sent e-mails minutes after PG&E's 9:30 a.m. notification tha= t=20 a blackout was possible. The e-mails said workers should frequently save wo= rk=20 on their computers, and that they should remain in the building and stand b= y=20 for further instructions.=20 Emergency lighting in hallways and stairwells were operated by generators.= =20 All elevators descended to the ground floor but one remained operating,=20 through a generator.=20 ""Worked nicely,"" said Jeff Beckman, a company spokesman.=20 Yesterday -- the first day that rolling blackouts returned -- Shannon=20 Cashman's home in Walnut Creek was a difficult place to be.=20 Cashman's 4-year-old daughter, Madison, suffers from a brain defect that=20 stops her from breathing during sleep. The girl depends on a ventilator tha= t=20 runs on electricity.=20 Recently hospitalized and with a weakened immune system, Madison badly need= ed=20 a nap yesterday afternoon. But when the Cashmans' power went out about noon= ,=20 it meant reading and coloring instead of rest for the girl and a little mor= e=20 anxiety than normal for her mother.=20 ""If this was a major earthquake or something like that and we couldn't use= =20 the ventilator, we'd take her to the hospital,"" said the 33-year-old Cashma= n.=20 ""Otherwise, we'll just wait for the power to come back on.""=20 In a stroke of irony yesterday, the lights went out and computer screens we= nt=20 dark at the San Francisco offices of the state Public Utilities Commission,= =20 the agency some people blame for the energy crisis and others look to for t= he=20 solution.=20 At a Petco animal store in Redwood City, nocturnal leopard geckos that=20 weren't familiar with the state's power woes thought it was night and awoke= =20 from their routine daytime slumber.=20 The geckos clung to the glass of their cages as manager Sally Daine and her= =20 employees misted lizards and watched frozen mealworms melt.=20 ""The worst thing is some of the reptiles need heat, but it's so hot, I don'= t=20 think it will matter,"" she said.=20 At Auto Pride Car Wash a few blocks away, Dan Giudici watched as the team o= f=20 employees he supervised washed cars the old-fashioned way -- with buckets a= nd=20 hoses. The company's big mechanical car wash went unused.=20 Customers didn't seem to mind the manual wash, said Giudici, who was chargi= ng=20 half-price. But he was running out of towels.=20 Even those who hoped they were immune to power problems were affected.=20 Palo Alto runs its own utility, but the electricity began winking out about= =20 12:30 p.m.=20 The city depends on a distribution line of the state grid, so it is=20 vulnerable to blackouts, said Linda Clerkson, public relations manager for= =20 Palo Alto Utilities. In addition, the city relies on PG&E for some of its= =20 power, she said.=20 Businesses were caught by surprise.=20 ""Well, at least it happened in a better time than the morning,"" said Nick= =20 Badiee, owner of the Lytton Roasting Co. coffee house. ""My toaster went out= =20 and the coffee began getting cold, so I lost three or four people who walke= d=20 out the door. I'm not angry, yet, but I would say I am concerned.""=20 For one Milwaukee woman visiting San Francisco, the blackout was an=20 unexpected lesson in the problems of electricity deregulation.=20 Cindy Wilburth, a financial consultant who advises Wisconsin utilities, cam= e=20 to the Bay Area for vacation but left yesterday with important research for= =20 her job.=20 ""This has been a huge learning lesson for Wisconsin,"" Wilburth said as she= =20 waited for a bus outside the powerless Comfort Inn by the Bay in Cow Hollow= .=20 Wilburth said her state and others that once eyed deregulation are now=20 backing off.=20 ""It just makes me realize how we've gotten ourselves in a pinch in a free= =20 economy,"" she said.=20 As she mused about the predicament in which the state has found itself, her= =20 friend was just thankful to get out of here.=20 ""I love the cold, compared to this,"" said Cindy Stuckey of Milwaukee. ""At= =20 least I know I can stay in my home, secure and warm.""=20 Across the street, at the Travelodge By the Bay, Rolando Gutierrez had=20 already lost three guests just an hour into the blackout.=20 ""This is the richest state and this is a rich city -- plenty of people want= =20 to come here,"" he said. ""We shouldn't be suffering these blackouts.""=20 Chronicle staff writers Jaxon Van Derbeken, Mark Martin, Henry K. Lee,=20 Michael McCabe, Bernadette Tansey and Marshall Wilson contributed to this= =20 report.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 --- --- Bay Area residents learning to roll with blackouts=20 Posted at 9:58 p.m. PST Tuesday, March 20, 2001=20 JOHN=20 WOOLFOLK=20 AND STEVE=20 JOHNSON=20 Mercury News=20 As rolling blackouts swept the state for a second straight day Tuesday,=20 Californians already seasoned by droughts and earthquakes were learning to= =20 live with yet another upheaval: periodic power outages.=20 Blackouts are still a novelty in Southern California -- hit for the second= =20 time Tuesday -- but they're almost routine for Bay Area residents who have= =20 seen four days of outages this year and now expect many more as temperature= s=20 rise. Toting flashlights, avoiding certain roads and even shutting off thei= r=20 coveted hot tubs, they're adjusting to life in California's new Dark Age.= =20 ? ? Karen T. Borchers--Mercury News When the lights went out at Grant Elementary School in San Jose on Tuesday= =20 morning, teacher Renee Johnson took her second-grade students out to the la= wn=20 to read to them. Marjorie Meagher now looks at her clock before taking the elevator she need= s=20 to get around her two-story San Jose home, fearing she'll get stuck during= =20 rolling blackouts.=20 ``They tend to happen on the hour or half-hour, so I try not to use it=20 then,'' said Meagher, 74, who is disabled. ``I'm very careful. My own=20 personal fear is getting stranded in the elevator.''=20 From 750,000 to about 1 million customers lost power for an hour or so in= =20 stages Tuesday as a rash of power plant outages and record temperatures in= =20 San Jose and elsewhere triggered a critical shortage.=20 As was the case Monday, when 1.2 million to 1.8 million customers were=20 affected, Tuesday's outages were split between the northern and southern=20 parts of the state. Blackouts began at 9:30 a.m. and lasted until 2 p.m. wh= en=20 authorities obtained extra power from other Western states. Outages were=20 considered less likely today.=20 But people are preparing anyway. Like low-flow toilets and earthquake kits,= =20 flashlights and generators may be emerging as another fact of life in the= =20 Golden State.=20 In San Francisco's Inner Sunset district, Han Yong Park had the satisfied= =20 smile of a well-prepared man having bought a portage generator for his Park= 's=20 Farmers Market five months ago.=20 Tuesday morning, the generator churned loudly on the sidewalk, positioned= =20 between the tomatoes and green beans. Inside, clerks tallied purchases on= =20 electric cash registers.=20 Park motioned down the street, where neon signs were dark and some=20 restaurants closed. ``No one else in the area has a generator,'' he said.= =20 Energy officials say such equipment will come in handy this summer. Power= =20 supplies are expected to be so strained that Californians should expect man= y=20 more rolling blackouts.=20 ``I don't want to kid anybody,'' said Patrick Dorinson, spokesman for the= =20 California Independent System Operator, which manages the power grid for mo= st=20 of the state. ``Supplies are very, very tight. When you look at such a big= =20 state and such a large shortfall, I think we have to prepare ourselves. It'= s=20 very possible that going into this spring and summer we're going to see som= e=20 very difficult days.''=20 Combination of factors=20 The multiple causes that conspired to darken California on Tuesday=20 underscored the difficulty officials face in keeping the lights on.=20 The thermometer shot to record-breaking levels at some locations in the Bay= =20 Area, driving up power demand. San Jose hit 83, compared with an average 66= =20 degrees for March 20, and breaking the record high of 80 set in 1960.=20 What's more, 12,000 megawatts of power were unavailable because plants had= =20 shut down for maintenance or because cash-strapped utilities haven't paid= =20 them.=20 And consumer conservation has been spotty. While state energy officials say= =20 conservation rose from 5 percent in January to 8 percent in February, grid= =20 managers said this week Californians weren't saving enough energy. They eve= n=20 revised their estimate of how much homes a megawatt can power, down from=20 1,000 homes to 750 to reflect greater consumption.=20 Improved conservation later in the day helped stave off a second wave of=20 outages, they said.=20 Many shrug off the threat of rolling blackouts.=20 ``I think I've gotten used to it,'' said Mary Carlson, 58, of San Jose, who= =20 took her granddaughter for a walk and read the paper during blackouts in=20 January. ``I just go with the flow. I'm not going to get too excited about= =20 it. If they turn the power off, it's no big thing.''=20 Erica Finn, secretary at Acacia Glass in San Francisco, said she wasn't too= =20 upset when blackouts shut down the credit card machines, electric sanders a= nd=20 phones. She bought coffee, pulled a chair into the sun and popped Madonna= =20 into her portable CD player.=20 ``I have to brush up on my tan, and get paid for it,'' she said.=20 But for others, the consequences are potentially serious.=20 At a Palo Alto dental office, the blackouts interrupted root canals for thr= ee=20 patients. Dentists Darrell Dang, Robert McWilliams and Kurtis Finley insert= ed=20 temporary fillings by hand, rescheduled the procedures, and went to lunch.= =20 The receptionist used a cell phone to cancel the afternoon's appointments,= =20 frustrated that there's no way to prevent a repeat of Tuesday's fiasco if t= he=20 blackouts continue.=20 A new routine=20 Others have taken everyday steps to cope with the threat of losing power.= =20 Stephen O'Reilly, a 34-year-old San Jose engineer who often drives to see= =20 clients, said he avoids side streets because blackouts could darken signal= =20 lights and tie up intersections.=20 ``I used to take back roads to avoid traffic, but I'm trying to use the=20 freeways more because there are no lights,'' said O'Reilly, adding that he'= s=20 shut down his electric hot tub to help conserve power.=20 At Pasta Primavera in San Mateo, manager Chris Harris has stocked up on=20 candles and has plans to buy a generator for his restaurant. When blackouts= =20 arrived just before the lunch crowd Tuesday and cut power to ventilation=20 fans, he even considered revising his menu, replacing smoke-producing chick= en=20 and shrimp with simple marinaras and alfredos.=20 ``I don't know if you'd want to dine with the smell of smoke,'' Harris said= =20 as customers trickled into his darkened restaurant on Fourth Avenue. ``If= =20 this is going to continue through the summer, it's going to affect our=20 pockets.''=20 San Francisco International Airport, which agreed months ago to shut down i= ts=20 massive air conditioners to save power during shortages, is now routinely= =20 stuffy.=20 On Tuesday the temperature reached a steamy 85 degrees inside the airport's= =20 North Terminal, which serves most of United Airlines' flights.=20 ``It's become uncomfortable if not intolerable,'' said Ron Wilson, airport= =20 spokesman. ``It's like getting in a car that's been left in the sun all day= .=20 It's much hotter inside. .?.?. We've turned on the fans but they're just=20 moving the hot air.''=20 Hospitals cut off=20 Several hospitals complained they lost power Tuesday, saying they thought= =20 they were exempt. PG&E said hospitals with sufficient backup generation to= =20 power themselves can be turned off. But state regulators said they could no= t=20 confirm that statement, and hospital officials scoffed at the suggestion.= =20 ``Every hospital has backup power generation, but it only covers 30 to 40= =20 percent of the hospital,'' said Roger Richter, a senior vice president with= =20 the Hospital Council.=20 Nonetheless, hospitals are coping with the situation.=20 ``Our patients are concerned, for sure,'' said Jackie Floyd, head nurse at= =20 the Satellite Dialysis Center South in San Jose, which lost power. ``But=20 while it's a pain, we can handle the blackouts. We're kind of getting the= =20 idea here that this a problem and we have to adjust.''=20 But while Californians may be adjusting, they're not at all pleased.=20 ``I'm frustrated with this power thing,'' said Ana Rivera, who manages the= =20 Wash Club in San Francisco, where washers and dryers had stopped mid-cycle.= =20 ``Who do you blame? No one wants to accept blame.'' Sara Neufeld, Ann Marimow, Kim Vo, Frank Sweeney, Barbara Feder, Aaron Davi= s,=20 Gil Duran, and Dave Beck contributed to this report.=20 --- --- Powerless, again=20 Outages were lighter after generators came back online and conservation=20 efforts kicked in. Blackouts may be averted today.=20 March 21, 2001=20 By TONY SAAVEDRA, JOHN HOWARD, CHRIS KNAP and JEFF COLLINS The Orange County Register=20 The Ridgewood Power methane-burning plant at the Olinda Alpha landfill in= =20 Brea is producing 3.3 megawatts, down from five, because Edison owes it $1.= 5=20 million and cranking up to full power is no longer a priority Photo: H. Lorren Au Jr. / The Register ? ? A second day of statewide blackouts ratcheted up the frustration level=20 Tuesday on the streets of Orange County and in Sacramento, as consumers=20 demanded solutions from politicians unable to give them.=20 There was a bit of good news, though: Blackouts may be averted for the rest= =20 of the week after temperatures moderated, two stalled generators came back= =20 online and conservation efforts kicked into gear.=20 ?=20 Some Orange County residents took the blackouts in stride. In Mission Viejo= ,=20 above, the West Coast Football Club's under-16 boys team scrimmages under= =20 gas-powered lights Tuesday. The club has been running to conserve energy=20 Photo: Kevin Sullivan / The Register ? ? Consumers were able to save 900 megawatts - enough to light about 675,000= =20 homes - by cutting power usage, said Patrick Dorinson, spokesman for the=20 Independent System Operator, which oversees 75 percent of the state's=20 electricity grid. That helped the ISO halt the blackouts Tuesday afternoon.= =20 ""Californians are back on the conservation trail, and we appreciate it,""=20 Dorinson said.=20 Power regulators Tuesday morning predicted there would be twice as many=20 outages as Monday, when more than 1 million consumers statewide lost power = in=20 one-hour to 90-minute increments.=20 Luis Pagan, an assistant at the Santa Ana Animal Shelter, waits out the=20 blackout Tuesday with one of the shelter's dogs up for adoption Photo: Paul E. Rodriguez / The Register ? ? Beginning at 9:30 a.m. Tuesday, blackouts tangled intersections in Costa=20 Mesa, forced Huntington Beach students to study by flashlight and stilled= =20 cash registers in Santa Ana. About a half-million homes and businesses were= =20 unplugged statewide before 2 p.m. Power was restored to most of Southern=20 California by 11:30 a.m. Outages affected more than 9,200 consumers in Oran= ge=20 County.=20 The ISO had expected more severe outages to hit at the peak hour of 7 p.m.,= =20 but was able to keep the lights on as downed power plants came back online= =20 and imports from other states increased.=20 While outages were lighter than Monday, the blackouts aggravated consumers= =20 who doubted that Gov. Gray Davis, lawmakers and electricity officials are= =20 doing enough to keep the power flowing in California.=20 ?=20 Zulema Avarez, left, and Erica Ramirez said they were caught off-guard when= =20 the power went out, so they closed the fashion store in Santa Ana where the= y=20 work Photo: Paul E. Rodriguez / The Register ? ? ""I think this is insane,"" said Charlee Lang, 63, of Costa Mesa. ""Gray Davis= =20 didn't do his job for a long time; he didn't get serious until November. We= =20 need to demand immediate action be taken.""=20 Bill Brannick, 65, of Costa Mesa, added: ""There's a lot of complicity here= =20 and we're just innocent victims.""=20 Davis, in a Sacramento news conference, said he inherited California's fail= ed=20 experiment with electricity deregulation, enacted in 1996 under former Gov.= =20 Pete Wilson.=20 ""I think a fair assessment of this situation is that we were dealt a pretty= =20 bad hand here,"" Davis said. ""No (new power) plant was approved in the 12=20 years prior to my being governor.""=20 With summer peak demand expected to be 16,000 megawatts higher than Monday= =20 and Tuesday, more days of blackouts are forecast for coming months. Though= =20 Davis has signed long-term contracts to provide California with reliable=20 energy, the deals haven't yet taken effect. Some suppliers won't start=20 providing electricity until the state reaches a so-far elusive agreement to= =20 help the utilities pay off billions in debt by buying their transmission=20 lines.=20 Assembly Republican Leader Bill Campbell, R-Villa Park, said that the effor= t=20 to resolve the ""state's energy crisis was floundering in the midst of unpai= d=20 bills, stalled negotiations and rolling blackouts.""=20 Tuesday began with 29 percent of California's power supply off line, mostly= =20 from generating plants suddenly down for unscheduled maintenance. About 3,0= 00=20 megawatts was missing from so-called qualifying facilities, or small power= =20 producers who have not been paid $1.8 billion by cash-strapped utilities an= d=20 say they can't afford to operate. Davis said he would ask the PUC to order= =20 utilities to begin paying the qualifying facilities for any energy supplied= =20 beginning April 1, but the payments would not apply to the outstanding debt= .=20 Some smaller producers threatened to force Edison into involuntary bankrupt= cy=20 if they are not paid soon.=20 Blackouts began Tuesday two hours earlier than on Monday, as the ISO called= =20 on utilities to dump 500 megawatts. It was only the second day of blackouts= =20 for Southern California, but the fourth for Northern California since=20 January.=20 The Disney Resort, which includes Disneyland and the new California=20 Adventure, voluntarily cut back one megawatt of electricity on Monday and= =20 again Tuesday, said Anaheim Public Utilities.=20 All of the reductions were in backstage areas not seen by guests, said Disn= ey=20 spokeswoman Chela Castano-Lenahan.=20 In other workplaces, people tried to make do.=20 Flashlight beams bobbed in aisles at a Target in Santa Ana, where the power= =20 stopped at 10:30 a.m. Workers escorted customers, who continued shopping an= d=20 made their purchases at battery-powered cash registers. Customers were=20 eventually asked to leave when the batteries ran low.=20 ""Oh well; no soda, no sunglasses,"" said one woman as she headed back to her= =20 car.=20 The Metro Pointe shopping center in Costa Mesa also went dark.=20 ""I was in the middle of making a reservation when everything went out,"" sai= d=20 Peggy Thomas, a sales executive for Travel of America, along South Coast=20 Drive. ""All of us here went, 'Oh no, it's happened to us.' ""=20 Said one Costa Mesa police officer, as he headed for his motorcycle and a= =20 blackout-related fender bender: ""You can thank the governor for that one.""= =20 At Hawes Elementary School in Huntington Beach, Principal Marie Smith was= =20 demonstrating to her third-grade class what would happen in a blackout. But= =20 before she could flip off the light switch, the power died.=20 The kids thought she was joking.=20 Register staff writers Tiffany Montgomery, Sarah Tully Tapia, Nancy Luna, J= im=20 Radcliffe, Binh Ha Hong, Theresa Salinas, Eric Johnson and Danielle Herubin= =20 and the Associated Press contributed to this report.=20 --- --- The iceman shunneth effects of hourlong blackout=20 March 21, 2001=20 By JIM RADCLIFFE The Orange County Register=20 Ken Ackerman, owner of ABC Ice House in Laguna Niguel, checks on his frozen= =20 inventory during Tuesday morning's rolling blackout. The ice managed to=20 endure the hourlong power outage Photo: Jebb Harris / The Register ? ? Ken Ackerman didn't sweat much when a blackout struck his Laguna Niguel ice= =20 business at 10:30 a.m. Tuesday.=20 The walk-in freezer at ABC Ice House held 8 tons of ice. And for an hour, t= he=20 temperature in there rose from 20 degrees to 45 degrees.=20 But very little melted.=20 Ackerman said most refrigerators can handle blackouts as long as outages ar= e=20 less than two hours.=20 ""I think people are going to get used to one-hour blackouts and realize it'= s=20 not a problem,'' Ackerman said.=20 The blackouts actually were profitable for Ackerman.=20 An Irvine laboratory struck by a power outage bought 100 pounds of dry ice = to=20 preserve human tissue.=20 More blackouts through the summer could be a boon for the ice business - or= a=20 bust.=20 It could mean more ice sales -- or that his supplier has trouble filling hi= s=20 orders.=20 ""It's going to be an interesting summer,'' Ackerman said.=20 ""I have no idea if we'll make more or less.''=20 Traffic will be the biggest problem if blackouts continue, Ackerman said.= =20 On Monday, a nearby Costco that had lost power ordered 200 pounds of ice to= =20 keep its refrigerated goods cold.=20 But dead traffic lights and congested roads made it impossible to deliver t= he=20 ice before the outage ended. Costco canceled the sale.=20 ""We pride ourselves on getting our deliveries made in an hour,"" Ackerman=20 said.=20 --- --- Traffic officials are seeing red over blackouts=20 Battery backups are planned by several cities to aid confused drivers.=20 March 21, 2001=20 By HEATHER LOURIE The Orange County Register=20 Traffic backs up Tuesday at Crown Valley Parkway at Forbes Road in Laguna= =20 Niguel as drivers had to navigate their own way Photo: Jebb Harris / The Register ? ? Toby Tran approached an Aliso Viejo intersection and wasn't sure what to do= .=20 Ahead of him, the traffic signal was dark, a casualty of the rolling=20 blackouts that struck Orange County on Monday and Tuesday.=20 So Tran kept driving, smacking into an oncoming car at the corner of Aliso= =20 Creek and Enterprise.=20 ""It just happened,"" a shaken Tran, 29, said from his Aliso Viejo home. ""I= =20 tried to stop and I couldn't. There was no light. Nothing.""=20 Tran's accident Monday afternoon, and several others like it, underscore on= e=20 of the most significant dangers looming in the threat of future blackouts.= =20 Traffic signals that fade to black when the power goes out, instead of=20 converting to flashing red, make wrecks far more likely because drivers=20 become confused and frustrated, traffic engineers and experts said Tuesday.= =20 ""I didn't know what to do,"" said Tran, who was on his way to a high school= =20 jogging track. ""Luckily I'm alive, but I'm very scared.""=20 On Day 2 of Southern California's power outages, worried city officials=20 across Orange County hunted for ways to respond to paralyzed intersections= =20 when state regulators pull the plug.=20 ""We need to be ready,"" said Hamid Bahadori, traffic engineer in the city of= =20 Orange. ""This thing is only going to get worse in July and August.""=20 One popular idea: installing emergency battery-backup units at traffic=20 signals to keep lights flashing red during blackouts. Several Orange County= =20 cities, including Irvine, Laguna Niguel and Orange, are already moving to= =20 install the devices as early as this summer.=20 ""In our minds, (a flashing light) is a vast improvement over a blacked-out= =20 signal,"" said Dave Rogers, Laguna Niguel traffic engineer. On Tuesday night= ,=20 his city was expected to approve the purchase of the battery packs for all = 74=20 of its traffic signals.=20 ""Timing, in this case, seems to be everything,"" Rogers said. ""A lot of citi= es=20 had contemplated it. We just took it that extra step.""=20 John Thai, an Anaheim traffic engineer, cautioned that cities need to do=20 adequate research and testing before they launch into such projects.=20 ""There is nothing that is foolproof,"" Thai said. ""All this is new territory= .""=20 Some cities are also considering rolling out temporary stop signs and sendi= ng=20 police officers to more intersections.=20 Although the state's vehicle code requires motorists to treat dead traffic= =20 signals like a four-way stop, motorists often blow through the intersection= s,=20 police said.=20 ""It's dangerous,"" said Tustin police Lt. Mike Shanahan, after several=20 near-wrecks in his city during Monday's outages. ""People are not very good = at=20 reacting to changes in their conditions.=20 ""Flashing red is something that catches your eye. It's a warning that=20 something is amiss, but the absence of all lights is worse.""=20 RELATED STORIES=20 =01=07 How to contact your Representatives =01=07 'Current' events =01=07 The iceman shunneth effects of hourlong blackout =01=07 Powerless, again =01=07 Alternative power producers cut back or shut down as payments from b= ig=20 utilities lag =01=07 O.C. saves its energy -- for blaming others =01=07 Blackout readiness on agenda --- --- Alternative power producers cut back or shut down as payments from big=20 utilities lag=20 That is a factor in blackouts=20 March 21, 2001=20 By HANH KIM QUACH The Orange County Register=20 Every megawatt of electricity counts in this deregulated energy market -=20 including the five megawatts generated from the Olinda Alpha landfill in=20 Brea.=20 The methane-burning plant is producing only 3.3 megawatts now because=20 Southern California Edison owes it $1.5 million and cranking up to full pow= er=20 is no longer a priority, said Martin Quinn, executive vice president of=20 Ridgewood Power, which runs the plant.=20 ""We're doing maintenance now when we ordinarily wouldn't do it. Because we'= re=20 not being paid, it was a good time to cut back,'' Quinn said.=20 That scenario has been playing out across the state in the past two weeks a= nd=20 was a major factor in Monday's and Tuesday's blackouts.=20 Those who provide electricity through alternative means - burning methane o= r=20 wood chips, or using cleaner-burning technology with traditional fossil fue= ls=20 - are not being paid for what they sell to the big utilities. So they eithe= r=20 can't afford to produce energy or see little incentive to do so.=20 On Monday, their absence from the statewide electricity grid created a=20 1,300-megawatt shortfall -- enough to power 1.3 million homes.=20 Taking that much power offline meant that any burp in the system would put= =20 the state under the minimum amount of electricity needed to avoid blackouts= .=20 When one conventional Southern California plant went down because of a=20 transformer fire Monday, the blackouts began.=20 ""If all of California's (alternative) generators were operating yesterday a= nd=20 today, rolling blackouts would have been avoided,'' Quinn said Tuesday.=20 Within the next couple of weeks, as the weather warms and alternative energ= y=20 producers continue to try and operate without money, California could see= =20 twice as many of those producers go offline, further increasing the potenti= al=20 for blackouts, said Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of Independent=20 Energy Producers.=20 The alternative energy producers, which provide about a third of the state'= s=20 energy, are deemed so crucial that Gov. Gray Davis wants the Public Utiliti= es=20 Commission to order the utilities to pay them. As drafted, though, the orde= r=20 would only include payment on future sales; it doesn't address existing deb= t.=20 The Legislature has been working since January to halve the rates that=20 alternative producers charge utilities and to require utilities to pay for= =20 November's energy by April 1. But that bill is still moving through the=20 Legislature.=20 Small plants threaten Edison with bankruptcy=20 Smutny-Jones said that if the small generators are not paid promptly, sever= al=20 will attempt to force Edison into bankruptcy, probably within a week.=20 Unlike the large natural-gas generators that have been paid by the state=20 Department of Water Resources, alternative energy producers are locked into= =20 contracts with utilities. Collectively, Pacific Gas & Electric and Edison o= we=20 alternative energy producers about $1 billion.=20 PG&E has paid about 15 cents for each dollar it owes.=20 ""Obviously, they're a source of generation, and looking at how much load ou= r=20 customers need, they're a source that has provided energy,'' said Jon=20 Tremayne, Pacific Gas & Electric spokesman. ""We've been trying, in good=20 faith, to make payments on energy.''=20 But Edison has not paid any money. Edison's alternative energy director, La= rs=20 Bergmann, said the company will not pay until larger reforms are made in ho= w=20 the producers' rates are calculated.=20 But the company recognizes that its nonpayment is causing problems.=20 ""To the extent that there are hundreds of megawatts that are idled here, it= =20 just exacerbates the (energy) problem. ... They're facing similar problems = to=20 what we faced - they don't have sufficient (income) coming in the door,''= =20 Bergmann said.=20 Plants go into mothball mode=20 Millenium Energy in Kern County is owed $40 million total by PG&E and Ediso= n.=20 On March 1, the company shut down both of its coal and petroleum coke-burni= ng=20 plants and doesn't plan to bring them back up until it is paid.=20 Millenium's plants, which use a special technology to reduce emissions,=20 generate 150 megawatts of energy.=20 ""We've gone into mothball mode; our machinery just sits there on cold=20 standby,'' said President Mike Hawkins. ""We've been delivering free electro= ns=20 to the system in the hope that the system would resolve itself. But we can'= t=20 do that anymore.""=20 One biomass plant in Lassen County has scaled back from 31 megawatts to=20 eight. Burney Forest Power burns wood chips to produce energy and has only = a=20 couple weeks' supply of chips left.=20 ""When you don't even know what you'll get paid, it's hard to say, 'Let's go= =20 out and get a bunch of fuel,''' said Milt Schultz, the plant's general=20 manager.=20 ""The sad thing is, (the state) really can't afford to lose us.''=20 --- --- O.C. saves its energy -- for blaming others=20 March 21, 2001=20 By RICHARD CHANG The Orange County Register=20 Darkened stores were forced to turn away customers, as stock manager=20 Bridgette Kelly, left, does here at a Linens 'n Things in Costa Mesa. The= =20 store closed for 45 minutes Tuesday morning Photo: Michael Kitada / The Orange County Register ? ? Orange County residents are making efforts, large and small, to conserve=20 electricity as they face rolling blackouts and surging energy bills.=20 Reactions to the early spring crisis - with blackouts throughout the state= =20 Monday and Tuesday - are ranging from confusion to rage.=20 Many residents have taken practical steps, such as turning off lights they'= re=20 not using, waiting until off-peak hours to do their laundry and opening=20 windows instead of using air conditioning.=20 ""My house is full of Philips energy-saving light bulbs,"" said Ray Rutledge,= =20 48, of Buena Park. ""Our light bill has dropped 7 1/2 percent. We use=20 low-voltage outdoor lighting. We've got an energy-saving thermostat. It's s= et=20 back to 65 (degrees) in the wintertime.""=20 Kim Wilson, who lives in an unincorporated area of Orange County near Santa= =20 Ana and Tustin, said he has cut down on lighting in his house and has reduc= ed=20 by half the time his pool cleaner runs. Still, his energy bill remains abou= t=20 $400 a month.=20 ""I don't know what ... to do,"" Wilson, 57, said. ""We've cut back.""=20 Wilson added that he is not pleased with the way government or the energy= =20 companies have handled the crisis.=20 ""I think it's disgusting. It's such political garbage. Who was it that made= =20 these decisions? Who got us into it?""=20 'TRYING TO CONSERVE'=20 Jenny Hann, 60, of Costa Mesa said her workplace has devised an emergency= =20 plan for conservation and future blackouts.=20 ""We're definitely trying to conserve as much as we can,"" the bank=20 administrator said. Hann expressed frustration with the energy companies.= =20 ""When you see these executives that have been running the show and the mone= y=20 they're making, it's bothersome,"" she said.=20 Jennifer Souto, 27, of Tustin said even though she's a stay-at-home mother,= =20 she keeps the lights off all day. She doesn't use her air conditioning,=20 either.=20 Souto said she was locked out of her house for 90 minutes Monday because a= =20 blackout cut power to her garage door. She says she's not sure who to blame= .=20 Paul Finch, 38, of Westminster blames Edison and Gov. Gray Davis.=20 ""I don't believe info I get from Edison or from our illustrious governor,""= =20 Finch said. ""There's more to it than how they've represented it.""=20 --- --- Blackout readiness on agenda=20 O.C. companies braced for outages Tuesday in different ways. Not all were= =20 struck, but they felt the effects.=20 March 21, 2001=20 By TAMARA CHUANG The Orange County Register=20 In case of a power failure Tuesday, the Fluor Corp. in Aliso Viejo stocked= =20 elevators with homemade blackout kits, filled with cookies, flashlights and= =20 bottles of water.=20 ""They're in the elevators, although we've been told not to use the=20 elevators,"" said Lori Serrato, a company spokeswoman. ""We're using the=20 stairwells, waiting for our time of darkness.""=20 Tales of anxious preparation were more common than actual blackouts for=20 Orange County businesses Tuesday.=20 Edison told some companies, as special power users who've agreed to cut bac= k=20 when asked, to expect to do so. Conexant Systems Inc. got a warning from=20 Edison and immediately shut down air conditioning and equipment not in use,= =20 and stopped production. The blackout never came.=20 Kingston Technology Co., when notified by Edison on Tuesday morning,=20 broadcast the warning on the company intercom. The company also e-mailed=20 employees a guide explaining the blackout.=20 ""It's already affected productivity. We've been busy getting all our e-mail= s=20 out before it happens,"" said Heather Jardin, a spokeswoman for the Fountain= =20 Valley computer memory maker.=20 Kingston still had power by day's end, but in an emergency, the company's= =20 manufacturing plants revert to Kingston's own power generators, Jardin said= .=20 Heart valve maker Edwards Lifesciences turned on its backup generators=20 Tuesday morning, ""because of the potential for there to be a blackout in ou= r=20 area,"" said company spokesman Scott Nelson. But (as of 3:30 p.m.) the=20 blackout didn't materialize, Nelson said.=20 At the regional office in Irvine, Verizon Wireless implemented conservation= =20 efforts, such as motion sensors that shut off lights after 30 minutes of=20 inactivity, and separate heating and air conditioning units on all floors.= =20 Some of the company's cell sites in Orange County and Los Angeles did lose= =20 power Monday and Tuesday, but they automatically switched to backup battery= =20 sources.=20 Other companies - PacifiCare, ICN Pharmaceuticals, Beckman Coulter and=20 Allergan - said they took precautions, turning out some hallway lights and= =20 communicating safety procedures to employees.=20 Disneyland, Ingram Micro in Santa Ana and Western Digital Corp. in Lake=20 Forest all were prepared.=20 But none reported blackouts by day's end.=20 Some county businesses did get hit.=20 Businesses along the 900 block of South Coast Drive - including 14 stores a= t=20 the Metro Point shopping center in Costa Mesa - went dark about 10:20 a.m.= =20 ""All of a sudden it was dark,"" said Henry Gonzalez, manager of Boudin Baker= y.=20 ""We ran out of coffee. We couldn't bake anything. We tried to accommodate a= s=20 best as we can.""=20 Other stores simply closed during the blackout, frustrating shoppers.=20 ""We walked over to (Marshalls) and it was dark and there was a sign on the= =20 door that said 'Due to the blackout, we're closed,'"" said shopper Roberta= =20 Allison, a West Virginia tourist. ""Don't they warn people here? Do they jus= t=20 whack the power off?""=20 Marshalls employees escorted customers out of the store when the power went= =20 out. Other stores, including Nordstrom Rack and Best Buy, were not affected= .=20 Across the street from the center, employees spilled out of office building= s=20 cheering and waving their hands in victory as power outages forced them to= =20 halt work.=20 ""Lots of people just walked out of the office to run errands,"" said Amy=20 Bateman, a loan officer at Capital Funding Group in Costa Mesa.=20 She said her office building, at 940 South Coast Drive, went dark for about= =20 70 minutes. Like dozens of others in the building, she was working at her= =20 desk when the computers and lights went dark.=20 ""We've just been sitting around. We can't do anything,"" said Bateman.=20 The blackout hit other businesses on Monday.=20 Buy.com employees spent their hour without power using their wireless=20 Blackberry pagers to answer and send e-mail.=20 The Crazy Horse Steakhouse in Irvine lost power after the lunch rush, said= =20 Donna Mulkey, the restaurant's manager. Since the broilers remained hot, th= e=20 cooks kept cooking and the customers kept eating. When they finished, waite= rs=20 calculated the bills by hand.=20 At Broadcom Corp. in Irvine, the power went out just before Rep. Christophe= r=20 Cox was to tour the facility.=20 ""It struck me as particularly ironic,"" Cox told members of the House=20 subcommittee on energy and air quality Tuesday, that Broadcom's co-founder,= =20 Henry Samueli, ""spent the hour before the meeting using a letter opener to= =20 open his paper mail and sitting by the window so he could get some sunlight= =20 to read.""=20 Cox, R-Newport Beach, told the panel, which was holding a hearing on=20 California's electricity crisis, that ""the entire company could not functio= n=20 during this period of time and the same was true for more than a million=20 people,"" he said. ""It's a Third World experience in California.""=20 Register reporters Chris Farnsworth, Dena Bunis, Bernard Wolfson, Nancy Lun= a,=20 Eric Johnson, Elizabeth Aguilera and Jennifer Hieger contributed to this=20 story.=20 --- --- Calif To Order Utils To Pay Small Generators Up Front-Gov 03/21/2001=20 Dow Jones Energy Service=20 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)=20 SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP)-- California regulators will order the state's two= =20 largest utilities to pay small, independent power generators in advance, a= =20 move Gov. Gray Davis hopes will bring a quick end to the blackouts that=20 darkened California this week.=20 Davis accused PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Edison= =20 International (EIX) unit Southern California Edison of taking in money from= =20 customers while failing to pay the generators, known as qualifying=20 facilities, which produce up to one-third of the state's power. As a result= ,=20 he said, the utilities are partly responsible for this week's blackouts.=20 ""It's wrong and irresponsible of the utilities to pocket this money and not= =20 pay the generators,"" the governor said at a Capitol news conference Tuesday= =20 evening. ""They've acted irresponsibly and immorally and it has to stop.""=20 The state lost about 3,100 megawatts, or enough electricity to power 3.1=20 million homes, on Tuesday from alternative energy plants that say they can'= t=20 afford to keep operating because the utilities haven't paid their bills in= =20 weeks. The utilities, which are near bankruptcy, owe the QFs about $1=20 billion. Pacific Gas & Electric has made partial payments.=20 As reported by Dow Jones Newswires, Southern California Edison met with=20 representatives of the governor Tuesday to discuss plans to begin making=20 partial payments to the QFs. Pacific Gas & Electric , which called Davis'= =20 statements ""inappropriate and unjustified,"" said it has informed the QFs an= d=20 the governor's office that it plans to begin paying the QFs in full going= =20 forward.=20 Davis said the PUC planned to issue an order next week directing the=20 utilities to prepay future bills to the QFs.=20 Edison and PG&E say they have lost more than $13 billion since last June to= =20 climbing wholesale electricity prices, which the state's 1996 deregulation= =20 law prevents them from passing on to ratepayers. California has been spendi= ng=20 about $45 million a day since January to buy power for the utilities'=20 customers, but hasn't included QF-generated power in its purchases.=20 Keepers of the state's power grid were cautiously optimistic that Californi= a=20 might get through Wednesday without another day of rolling blackouts after= =20 two idle plants were returned to service. A Stage 1 power alert, the mildes= t=20 of three forms of alerts, was called around 6 a.m. Wednesday as power=20 reserves fell to around 7 percent.=20 About a half-million customers were hit by Tuesday's blackouts, which snarl= ed=20 traffic and plunged schools and businesses into darkness from San Diego to= =20 the Oregon border. Tuesday's outages began at 9:30 a.m. and continued in=20 90-minute waves until about 2 p.m., when the ISO lifted its blackout order.= =20 They were blamed for at least one serious traffic accident.=20 The blackouts were caused by a combination of problems, including=20 unseasonably warm weather, reduced electricity imports from the Pacific=20 Northwest, numerous power plants being shut down for repairs and the loss o= f=20 power from QFs.=20 Meanwhile, a leading lawmaker on energy issues said the PUC may soon have t= o=20 raise rates by about 15% to cover the state's costs and its utilities' bill= s.=20 ""My sense is that people will appreciate having some certainty and being ab= le=20 to plan for it,"" said Assemblyman Fred Keeley. ""They don't have to like it,= =20 but I think they'll appreciate it.""=20 Davis has said he is confident the utilities and the state can pay their=20 bills without further rate increases.=20 --- --- PG&E Says It Is Negotiating With Qualifying Facilities 03/21/2001=20 Dow Jones Energy Service=20 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)=20 (This article was originally published Tuesday)=20 =20 LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas and Electric Co= .=20 said Tuesday it is offering small generators, or ""qualifying facilities"",= =20 prepayment of $200 million per month so they will have the funds to return = to=20 the state power grid.=20 But high level sources at the qualifying facilities who are involved in the= =20 negotiations said PG&E's proposal is incomplete and doesn't address the iss= ue=20 of past due payments.=20 The sources said PG&E had discussions with some qualifying facility operato= rs=20 last week regarding the plan and it wasn't accepted at that time.=20 About 3,000 megawatts of power from qualifying facilities, or QFs, have bee= n=20 off the state's grid since Monday because the generators weren't being paid= =20 by utilities and couldn't afford to continue operating. The QFs unavailable= =20 power was partly responsible for Monday and Tuesday's statewide rolling=20 blackouts.=20 Also Tuesday, California Gov. Gray Davis will hold a press conference to=20 discuss progress made in negotiations with the QFs to revise their contract= s=20 with the state's two nearly-bankrupt utilities so that the utilities pay le= ss=20 for power.=20 Edison International (EIX) unit Southern California Edison also said Tuesda= y=20 it intends to make partial payments on an ongoing basis to some QFs.=20 Edison executives met with Gov. Gray Davis' negotiating team Tuesday to=20 discuss how and when SoCal Ed can begin to make payments, and a spokesman= =20 said they hope to have a plan in a matter of days.=20 Pacific Gas & Electric Co. has made partial payments of about $51 million t= o=20 the QFs it contracts with, but owes much more. Edison owes the QFs hundreds= =20 of millions of dollars and hasn't paid the QFs since November. Together, th= e=20 two utilities owe QFs about $1 billion.=20 PG&E said it has been collecting about $400 million per month from ratepaye= rs=20 to pay QFs and other generators with which it has bilateral contracts, the= =20 state grid operator for spot power purchases, and costs of its own=20 generation.=20 The average combined bill for those costs exceeds $1.4 billion per month,= =20 PG&E said.=20 ""This mismatch between revenues and costs requires tough choices. Since the= re=20 isn't enough money in rates to cover all these costs, the Public Utilities= =20 Commission decision on how this $400 million will be allocated going forwar= d=20 will determine our ability to make advance payments to QFs,"" said Gordon R.= =20 Smith, the utility's president and CEO.=20 The PUC is responsible for implementing the legislation which allows the=20 state to buy power and will decide how much of utilities' ratepayer revenue= =20 will go to the state for power purchases and how much will go to the=20 utilities.=20 For several weeks, a number of QFs have taken their generating units offlin= e=20 because they can no longer afford to buy fuel needed to run their units.=20 QFs supply California with one-third of its total power supply.=20 PG&E and SoCal Ed have almost $13 billion in purchased power undercollectio= ns=20 because they cannot collect full costs from customers protected by a=20 state-mandated rate freeze.=20 -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872;=20 -(Jason Leopold contributed to this article.)=20 --- -------------------- Wednesday, March 21, 2001=20 By Dave Todd=20 dtodd@ftenergy.com=20 U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham declared this week that the Big Apple= =20 is on the verge of being bitten hard by power cuts and rising energy prices= . Delivering the keynote address at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's national= =20 energy summit in Washington Monday, Abraham said, ""California is not the on= ly=20 state facing a mismatch between supply and demand,"" what with ""electricity= =20 shortages predicted for New York City and Long Island this summer"" and low= =20 capacity margins threatening electricity reliability elsewhere across the= =20 country. But how likely is it that New Yorkers will face blackouts of the= =20 sort confronting Californians?=20 Not very, says energy trade specialist Edward Krapels, managing director of= =20 Boston-based METIS Trading Advisors. Krapels, a consultant helping major=20 Northeastern utilities, such as Consolidated Edison, design market-hedging= =20 programs, adamantly decried what he said are facile comparisons between=20 conditions in New York and California, there being ""more differences than= =20 there are similarities"" between those two industrial cornerstones of the=20 country's economy in respect to energy security management.=20 ""First of all, New York has a more varied portfolio of energy generation=20 sources than California,"" he said. California has hydro, nuclear and gas, b= ut=20 when it lost a lot of hydro, the state needed gas to pick up the slack, and= =20 the ""capacity just wasn't there."" In New York's case, the state has oil and= =20 coal still in the mix and its overall dependence on gas is much lower than= =20 California's, Krapels added.=20 New York avoids making same mistakes Portfolio diversity is one pillar of any effective plan to help New York=20 avoid the same errors made in redesigning California's marketplace. New=20 York's Independent System Operator (ISO), in a new report warning that the= =20 state is at an ""energy crossroads"" in terms of its capacity adequacy in the= =20 immediate future, argues that a concerted effort is required to arrest=20 declining in-state generation capacity reserve margins, and a strategy must= =20 be put in place, whether or not new generation comes on-line, in accordance= =20 with current anticipated scenarios.=20 A measure of New York's essential difficulty is that, between 1995 and 2000= ,=20 statewide demand for electricity grew 2,700 MW, while generating capacity= =20 expanded by only 1,060 MW. With no major new generating plants in downstate= =20 New York fully approved, the gap is expected to continue to widen. To avoid= =20 ""a replication of California's market meltdown"" the New York ISO calculates= =20 the state's daily generating capacity needs to grow by 8,600 MW by 2005, wi= th=20 more than half of that located in New York City and on Long Island.=20 Expressing concern this may be too big a burden for the current bureaucrati= c=20 process to bear, the ISO wants to see a state-appointed ombudsman named to= =20 help would-be merchant power plant investors plow through red tape.=20 ""Increasing New York's generating capacity will also lessen the state's=20 escalating and risky reliance on out-of-state sources of electricity,"" the= =20 ISO added. ""Since 1999, New York State has been unable to cover its reserve= =20 requirements from in-state sources.""=20 Not everyone agrees with that analysis, insofar as it argues for circling t= he=20 wagons inward. Some analysts believe the ultimate solution lies not in tyin= g=20 in more inwardly dedicated power, but in expanding the marketplace by=20 breaking down inter-jurisdictional barriers. In any case, New York energy= =20 regulatory authorities and those responsible elsewhere in the U.S. Northeas= t,=20 such as PJM (Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland) Interconnection and the New= =20 England Power Pool, are in vastly better shape in terms of ""cross-border""= =20 cooperation than California and its neighbors in that efforts are being mad= e=20 among various authorities toward developing an integrated regional=20 electricity market. In California, by contrast, the state's focus=01*for=20 example, in the case of new gas-fired power plant development=01*has been t= o=20 ensure dedicated supply to the California market alone, rather than on a=20 regional marketplace.=20 The New York ISO's new broad-based analysis of market-restructuring needs= =20 argues that the relatively stronger health of its reformed environment is= =20 ""due in large part to the ability of New York's utilities to enter into=20 long-term power contracts.""=20 What needs to be done most, it says, is to move aggressively to build some = of=20 the more than 29,000 MW of ""proposed new generation in the siting pipeline.= ""=20 In the meantime, the 30,200 MW of electricity New Yorkers used on a peak da= y=20 last summer shouldn't be eclipsed on too many days this coming summer (give= n=20 early long-range weather forecasts). Demand, however, is expected to increa= se=20 at an annual average rate of up to 1.4%.=20 So while New York City, the rest of the state and adjacent parts might=20 breathe easy this year, it could be a brief rest from the fray. Meanwhile, = a=20 4% shortfall is still being planned for this summer that is not yet provide= d=20 for, as authorities hurriedly seek to arrange new generation plants around= =20 Manhattan, on Long Island and even on barges offshore.=20 One way or another, whether it is the weather or the politics of siting new= =20 energy facilities, it's going to be a hot time in the city.=20 Long-term solutions hit brick wall Meanwhile, attempts at longer-term solutions continue to run into trouble.= =20 Last week, Connecticut state regulators came out against a proposal to run = a=20 new underwater cable under Long Island Sound that Hydro-Quebec subsidiary= =20 TransEnergie U.S. Ltd. wants to build to pump more juice into Long Island= =20 Power Authority's load pocket. Despite strong promises from TransEnergie to= =20 be diligent in avoiding damage to oyster beds in Long Island Sound, the=20 proposal failed to convince authorities, who were persuaded the pipeline=20 project could lead to diversion of electricity from Connecticut.=20 In similar fashion, private companies wanting to build 10 small independent= =20 power plants and temporary generators offshore New York City are running in= to=20 intense opposition from environmental groups and citizen organizations=01*s= ome=20 of whom have taken their cases to the state assembly in Albany.=20 The David vs. Goliath nature of such controversies has further alerted ener= gy=20 companies to the difficulties of addressing complex energy supply issues th= at=20 may ultimately devolve to people not wanting things in their backyard,=20 regardless of what the alternative might mean to their fellow citizens or t= he=20 greater public good.=20 But suddenly, in New York, California's troubles=01*while still distant in = their=20 intensity=01* may not be so far away. By some estimates, this summer's bill= s for=20 Consolidated Edison customers could be up as much as one third or more over= =20 last year's charges.=20 Letting the time slip when it comes to building new infrastructure isn't=20 going to make the pain go away.=20 =20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: CONFIDENTIAL - Disclosure Schedules; [EMail-Body]= Attached please find a draft of the financial schedules prepared by Enron Corp. Please call or email me if you have questions. Mike McGown <<Draft Financial Reps and Warranties>> - Summer financials sent to V&E 8_2_00.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Gas Controller's Association speaker (California Energy Crisis); [EMail-Body]= I can do it, but have to be at the airport before 2:00 for a flight to NY. Sherri Sera 03/14/2001 04:17 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Mary Poorman/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Gas Controller's Association speaker (California Energy Crisis) Steve, Jeff will be in Boston on this date doing 1:1s following 1Q earnings release. Is this something you would be interested in/available to do? If not, who would you recommend sending it to? Thanks, SRS ---------------------- Forwarded by Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron on 03/14/2001 04:16 PM --------------------------- Mary Poorman 03/14/2001 03:14 PM To: Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Gas Controller's Association speaker (California Energy Crisis) The Gas Controller's Association, of which I am the Assistant Secretary, is holding a meeting on April 19th at the Gulf South (Koch) Building. We would like to present a speaker who can educate our members on the California Energy Crisis, and discuss/present any of the proposed solutions thereto. We would appreciate it if you could carve some time out of your very busy schedule. If you are unable to make any commitments, could you recommend someone within the organization who would be as well-versed on the topic? About our organization: The mission statement of the GCA is to ""create an environment that facilitates the exchange of current and practical information, while enhancing relationships and promoting goodwill between operating, scheduling, distribution, and others involved in the process of moving natural gas."" In addition, the GCA provides scholarships to students who plan to obtain a degree in a field deemed to be ""industry related"" from local area high schools. Thank you for your time, Mary Poorman [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Downtown Arena- HHCC asked to give public comments to
 Construction Committee this week; [EMail-Body]= I would like your insights. Meredith, I'd like yours as well (particularly in light of the messageyou received from Lawson and Jefferson). Laura Schwartz@ENRON 08/02/2000 08:22 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Re: Downtown Arena- HHCC asked to give public comments to Construction Committee this week Steve, Please let me know if there is anything you would like me to do regarding this matter. Thanks, Laura ---------------------- Forwarded by Laura Schwartz/Corp/Enron on 08/02/2000 09:11 AM --------------------------- Enron Investment Partners From: Mark Lay @ ECT 08/01/2000 04:47 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Laura Schwartz/Corp/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: Downtown Arena- HHCC asked to give public comments to Construction Committee this week Steve, I don't want to get caught in a crossfire here, so I thought your group could give me some guidance. I think the referendum is very important for the city and will help us continue to show Houston as a significant metropolitan area. I am not convinced that the ultimate form of the deal for minority participation in Enron Field was, in fact, what was intended. In that agreement, Aramark owns all of the concessions, but has a 30% profit share with minorities. My understanding is that there are no minority owned businesses in that deal. I would like to communicate this sentiment, but I would also, certainly like to reinforce Enron's position. Thanks, Mark ""Richard R. Torres"" <rtorres@argolink.net> on 08/01/2000 03:44:25 PM To: <ralvarado@betterbags.com>, <hcardenas@montylawfirm.com>, <jcl1005@aol.com>, <ecolon@llgm.com>, <leo@boonedeleon.com>, <irma@etchouston.com>, <evelio.fernandez@goya.com>, <peccorp1@msn.com>, <Lupef@tejasoffice.com>, <divagarza@aol.com>, <tgrijalva@gacompanies.com>, <John.Hernandez@chase.com>, <shunsaker@lockeliddell.com>, <Mark.Lay@enron.com>, <lmcmai@coair.com>, <pmendoza@staffmark.com>, <highmark@neosoft.com>, <gmir@mfrgroup.com>, <cesarnav@aol.com>, <alex@lopeznegrete.com>, <ramos_s@hccs.cc.tx.us>, <ricreyes@flash.net>, <gsaenz@ogs-law.com>, <vanessa@friersoncpa.com>, <rtorres85@argolink.net>, <drtrevino@trevinogroup.com>, <jatrevino@univision.net>, <gougeks@texaco.com>, <massey@ptg.com>, <mweitzman@aeromexico.com>, <rz2743@sbc.com> cc: Subject: Downtown Arena- HHCC asked to give public comments to Construction Committee this week Dear Board Member- As you may already know, we have been working with the Harris County-Houston Sports Authority to have included in their agreement with the Houston Rockets a 30% minority participation goal in the design, construction and operation of a downtown basketball arena. This is the same commitment that we received from the Rockets in 1999. We received a commitment from the sports authority and the mayor's office that the minority participation goal of 30% will be included in the contract. We have met with Celena Garza and communicated with Al Luna our interests and they have expressed their support for our position. We have also asked Sen. Mario Gallegos for his support and received it. We are in the process of confirming that our language calling for such goal has been included in the final document and that Al Luna and Celena Garza are sufficiently satisfied with the language, which will be voted on later this week. Once confirmed, Sonny Flores, Chairman of the Economic Development Committee has recommended to Massey that the Chamber be prepared to offer some sort of public statement in support or not supporting a referendum to build the arena. (We have been asked to address the Construction Committee of the sports authority by Billy Burge and Wayne Smith) Sonny has indicated that once we have a confirmation from Al and Celena, our interests should be sufficiently covered and that supporting the referendum would be good for Hispanic businesses. Massey has asked that I poll the board for its input and get a majority commitment from the board so as to move forward in offering support or no support for the referendum. Ordinarily, this would be discussed and considered at a meeting of the Board of Directors, however, since the sports authority posted its meeting notice (72 hours prior to meeting) and is ready to proceed with its approval of the Letter Agreement with the Houston Rockets we are seeking input in this manner. I am attaching a copy of the Memorandum of Understanding between the Chamber and the Sports Authority for you review. There have been no revisions to the last copy that was circulated at the past Executive Committee meeting at Tony Grijalva's office. Massey has asked that you respond with your input, suggestions and position for or not for the chamber offering its support for the arena via e-mail within 24 hours of this notice. The chamber's position will be determined by the majority of those respondents to this e-mail by no later than 4:00 p.m. CDT on Wednesday, August 2, 2000. - Sports Authority MOU, July 20, 2000.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: ISO's Response to BPA Rebuttal of Sheffrin Study--Confidential
 Atty Client work product; [EMail-Body]= This is something interesting to put in your back pocket. -----Original Message----- From: Alan Comnes Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 6:48 PM To: gfergus@brobeck.com@SMTP; Tim Belden; Susan J Mara; James D Steffes; Mark Palmer; Jeff Dasovich; Tim Heizenrader; Paul Kaufman; rcarroll@bracepatt.com@SMTP; Richard B Sanders Cc: Ray Alvarez Subject: ISO's Response to BPA Rebuttal of Sheffrin Study--Confidential Atty Client work product I recommend reading CAISO's response. This letter was reported in last week's trade press. I am told that BPA does not consider this letter confidential even though it is labeled as such by CAISO. Many of the CAISO ""backpedal"" statements made re: claims of strategic bidding would apply equally to other importers. Alan Comnes [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: CONFIDENTIAL - Residential in CA; [EMail-Body]= Amen. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Declined: Mtg w/Vince Kaminski; [EMail-Body]= Eydie, I shall be out on Monday, July 9. What about the following Tuesday? Vince [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Thursday Meeting on Winter Gas Prices; [EMail-Body]= calendar ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/13/2000 08:07 AM --------------------------- Rob Bradley 09/12/2000 11:01 AM To: Kenneth Lay/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Alhamd Alkhayat/NA/Enron@ENRON, Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Stinson Gibner/HOU/ECT@ECT, Gil Muhl/Corp/Enron@ENRON (bcc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron) Subject: Thursday Meeting on Winter Gas Prices Ken: I have invited the following individuals to join us at the 3 pm Thursday meeting to review the draft of your Columbus speech on the natural gas situation. Hamd Alhkayat--Hamd has replaced Andrew Miles in the rotation and will be helping me with your presentations as well as being the lead with Jeff's speeches. Shelley Corman--Shelley has been developing messages for the current and anticipated gas situation and pipeline safety for the gas pipeline group. (The safety issue could come up in your Q&A.) Stinson Gibner--Stinson is with the research group that has generated some of the more complex slides in your draft dealing with volatility and historic futures pricing. Gil Muhl--Gil markets gas products to customers and is speaking at an AGA conference on the gas supply and price situation the day before your talk. His group is focusing on new products to help end-users with winter volatility. I have asked Gil to send you his presentation as well for the meeting. Back to your presentation (the draft slides of which I am delivering to you today), Dan Yergin thought it would be appropriate for you to give an overview of the situation as the ""teacher"" or ""professor."" Some questions that you could address would include: Where has the industry come from, and what lessons have we learned? How is the business different today? What public policy conclusions are implicit in this history? I think our comparative advantage over the specialists who will be presenting before and after your keynote is that you have ""been there"" in the evolution of the natural gas market, and Enron is at the forefront of helping customers deal with price and supply uncertainty. There is also a good opportunity to stress the need for new industry ""best practices"" (more hedging) and the right public policies to deal with this issue (from ""do no harm"" to expanding incentives in the market). - Rob [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Confidential - PAA - HW & TD; [EMail-Body]= Here are two we did for Harry and Tangie. Thanks. Lynn -----Original Message----- From: Dietz, Rick Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 5:15 PM To: Corman, Shelley Cc: Blair, Lynn Subject: Confidential - PAA - HW & TD Please accept the attached Personal Achievement Award request for Harry Woodson and Tangie Dykes. I have included both of them on the same request form since their recognition is for their contributions toward the ONEOK arbitration project. If you have any questions, please let me know. Rick [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= TW Gas Sales: PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE; [EMail-Body]= 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."" [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= help with neighborhood; [EMail-Body]= Please forward to Sue Walden and get her ideas. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/03/2000 06:44 PM --------------------------- Carol Ann Brown@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS 08/03/2000 08:49 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: help with neighborhood Steve, I am having a problem with the drainage in our easements in my neighborhood and Kevin Hannon suggested I email you. I live in Garden Oaks (which is located off of the 610 North Loop between Shepherd and Yale near the Heights). Our neighborhood was built in the early 1940's, and the city put in open drainage (which is basically ditches in the front of all the properties). Over the past 60 years the drains have filled in and leveled which is preventing the water from flowing correctly to the sewers, and this in turn causes minor flooding and BIG headaches. My address is 236 W. 30th Street and the area of 30th Street I am asking the city to regrade is between Ashland and Yale (approximately 2,500 feet). I have been calling the City of Houston Public Works Department 713-247-1000 for about the last 4 years (generally once a month) to ask them to please come out and regrade our ditches. (The Public Works Department only has records over the last year because they changed their computer system and lost many files including mine.) For the last year or so I have been receiving a more positive response when I call which is: ""This is a Code 1 priority and will schedule as work load allows."" Although this response is encouraging, I still feel that my request is falling on deaf ears. Kevin suggested that perhaps a call or letter to a city council person might help expedite this work request. I would be extremely grateful if there is anything you could do to help me and my neighbors. Carol Brown Executive Assistant Office of the Chairman Enron Broadband Services, Inc. 713.853.7974 713.853.9469 - fax carol_brown@enron.net [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: GISB Approves Strawman 2.1; [EMail-Body]= When appropriate, GISB should do some kind of press release and congressional outreach so that policymakers are aware of this significant development. We have made reference to the process of turning GISB into EISB as we have discussed the reliability issue, but the board vote is another reason for them to do some outreach on their own as well. -----Original Message----- From: Yeung, Charles Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 7:34 AM To: mips@nerc.com; esc@nerc.com Cc: Steffes, James D.; Shapiro, Richard; Robertson, Linda; Shelk, John; Nicolay, Christi L.; Lindberg, Susan; Presto, Kevin M.; Will, Lloyd Subject: GISB Approves Strawman 2.1 Yesterday, Spet 19, the GISB Board of Directors voted unanimously to recharter GISB into the EISB as proposed in the Strawman Ver 2.1. This will form the four quadrant standards setting organization. It was recognized that each of the four quadrants would devlop on their own pace and lack of formation of any one quadrant would not inhibit the formation of EISB itself. The GISB Board also recognized a comment from PJM who asked to strike out language in the Strawman 2.1 that referenced NERC and AGA as two physical reliability standards organizations. Many electric wholesale customer, including EPSA and Enron, have argued that reliability and commercial issues are inseparable and believe there should not be artificial limits to what the wholesale electric quadrant should be able to address. The GISB Board recognized this concern, but rather than strike the language, it was recognized that the words were only in a preamble and instructed the drafting of the new charter to not include such language. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= EES Organizational Announcement; [EMail-Body]= Congratulations! ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/28/2000=20 11:49 AM --------------------------- Office of the Chairman From: Office of the Chairman on 08/28/2000 10:19 AM To: All Enron Worldwide cc: =20 Subject: EES Organizational Announcement Enron Energy Services has created explosive growth in the retail energy=20 business. To advance EES=01, leadership position and to rapidly expand the= =20 reach of its energy management services, the company is forming four new=20 business groups and promoting several key individuals. EES continues to see an ever-increasing demand for energy management servic= es=20 in North America, with interest coming from a growing number of customer=20 classes. EES North America, headed by Marty Sunde, President and CEO, has= =20 been established to bring outsourcing, commodity and mid-market solutions t= o=20 industrial and commercial customers in North America. Harold Buchanan and= =20 Jeremy Blachman have been named co-Chief Operating Officers of the group. EES Europe is responsible for energy outsourcing across Europe, as well as= =20 rapidly growing mid-market business (Enron Direct, Enron Directo) and heavy= =20 industrial business (ETOL). Matthew Scrimshaw, President and CEO will lead= =20 this group. As EES and Enron=01,s customer base grows, world class execution capabiliti= es=20 and customer relationship management skills are required to maximize value.= =20 Global Energy Services, headed by Dan Leff, President and CEO, is being=20 established to manage execution, delivery, operations & maintenance, accoun= t=20 / customer management and contract value enhancement of Enron=01,s asset an= d=20 energy outsourcing activities worldwide. This group will include Enron=20 Facility Services (EFS), led by Joe Earle, President & CEO and Operational= =20 Energy Corporation (OEC), led by Mark Dobler, Vice President. EES continues to see additional opportunities for business that will benefi= t=20 from the growth of its energy outsourcing business. To manage and develop= =20 these new business opportunities, EES New Business Ventures has been=20 created. Mark Muller, President and CEO will lead this group. All four new business leaders will report directly to EES=01, Office of the= =20 Chairman, Lou Pai, who will continue as Chairman, and Tom White, who will= =20 continue as Vice Chairman. In addition, Kevin Hughes, Vice President and= =20 Chief Accounting Officer, Vicki Sharp, Managing Director and General Counse= l,=20 and Beth Tilney, Managing Director of Marketing, HR and Customer Satisfacti= on=20 will continue to report to the Office of the Chairman. Please join us in congratulating these individuals. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Some Background on California Gas Price Spikes--The Other Side of
 the Story; [EMail-Body]= We need to communicate with Massey before he gets completely carried away blaming the interstate pipeline business for gas price spikes. We need to get him the information regarding Cal LDCs failure to fill storage and their opposition to additional pipeline construction in the state. Shelley -- could you forward copies of the LDC filings to the group. Should Joe or I (or both) try to see massey when I am in town next week? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/26/2001 02:07 PM --------------------------- From: Jeff Dasovich on 04/24/2001 06:57 PM Sent by: Jeff Dasovich To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, skean@enron.com, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enro@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Some Background on California Gas Price Spikes--The Other Side of the Story Last week, I distributed a presentation that the Brattle Group gave before the California Inquisition (i.e., legislative gas oversight committee looking into the gas price spikes at the Cal border). The Brattle Group is a consulting firm that Edison has long used to beat up on SoCalGas (recall that Edison used to be a big gas customer when it owned power plants). Edison ""arranged"" for the Brattle Group to be the star witness at the Cal Leg gas hearing. Their job was to set up El Paso and Dynegy for the hit at hearings that took place the following day. Their message was simple (and simplistic): El Paso and Dynegy have market power. They have used the market power to drive up basis and thus the price of gas at the border (to ""obscene"" levels). That, in turn, has driven up electricity prices. Ken Lay is giving a gas talk tomorrow, and Rob Bradley asked that I provide the alternative view to the Edison/Brattle rant, in the event that he gets any questions on the topic. It's attached. Apologies, it's quick and dirty, but it provides the basics. Obviously no need for us to defend El Paso or Dynegy, but might be useful to offer a more rationale explanation than the one that the California Legislature is peddling. Finally, we were also fingered somewhat as culprits at the hearing (the California PUC FERC lawyer claimed that ENA and TW colluded to drive up basis when ENA controlled a portion of the capacity), but the overriding goal of the hearing was to go after EP and Dynegy. Best, Jeff [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Thank you all very much for your support - NOT!; [EMail-Body]= I genuinely believed in Enron and the Values of the company You demonstrated that that trust was misplaced and worth nothing I particularly like your adherance to the core values - you ""respected"" us, you ""communicated"" brilliantly with us, your fucking us over was ""excellent"", your ""integrity"" was without question You load of bastards - you screwed us all and got fat on the profits of our sweat I hope that the board and upper management rot in jail and never see the light of day again - apart from when you are exercising in the open prison yard in your shackles Just Another Fucked Over Ex-Employee Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Hendricks; [EMail-Body]= I think we should let people in the legislature know about this and see if one or more of them can get their hands on it. From: Richard B Sanders@ECT on 05/06/2001 10:40 AM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Hendricks Any thoughts? ----- Forwarded by Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT on 05/06/2001 10:39 AM ----- ""Michael Kirby"" <mlk@pkns.com> 05/04/2001 06:00 PM To: <Richard.b.sanders@enron.com> cc: <Gfergus@brobeck.com>, <Rgibbs@gibbs-.com>, ""David Noonan"" <djn@pkns.com> Subject: Hendricks The complaint,albeit brief, filed May 1 in San Diego Superior Court by Strategy Integration, Inc versus Michael Aguirre and the other Hendricks plaintiffs' attorneys is quite extraordinary in its disclosure. A hard copy is being faxed. The expert firm alleges they were ""retained...to explain, research, and investigate potential claims of gaming and collusion by energy providers who supply electricity to the California Energy Market ...[and] ...retained to perform utility and energy consulting services."" After alleging that the Hendricks attorneys ""refused to pay Plaintiffs' first billing"" it is alleged that""defendants' refusal may have resulted from the conclusions Plaintiff drew in its analysis."" We should consider if there is there a way to get this filing to Senator Dunn's office or a more friendly Senator without identifying us as the source,.They can see what some expert in the field hired by the plaintiffs' class action lawyers apparently concluded on their own about the claims of gaming and collusion. I suspect that Sen Dunn has no interest but some Republican Senator might have some use for it. It could have some value if the hearings go forward. This is not urgent timewise but I wanted to bring it to your attention. The information contained in this e-mail message and any accompanying documents is subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or the attorney work product rule and is confidential business information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or representative of the recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the Systems Administrator at admin@pkns.com and immediately delete this message from your system. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Fwd: IS TRADING AN INSIDER'S GAME?; [EMail-Body]= Enclosed is an article in this morning's San Diego Union, written by one of their reporters that I know. As indicated, it focuses on Enron. Of particular interest are the comments by Senator Dunn, which are at odds with his statements to the Sacramento lobbyists that he has no idea what Enron does. The information contained in this e-mail message and any accompanying documents is subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or the attorney work product rule and is confidential business information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or representative of the recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the Systems Administrator at admin@pkns.com and immediately delete this message from your system. Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 08:53:28 -0700 From: ""Cindy Frederick"" <cfred@pkns.com> To: ""Michael Kirby"" <mlk@pkns.com> Subject: IS TRADING AN INSIDER'S GAME? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=""us-ascii"" Content-Disposition: inline IS TRADING AN INSIDER'S GAME? Buying, selling of electricity is a growth business, but some say deck is stacked against consumers By Craig D. Rose STAFF WRITER June 6, 2001 While Californians decry deregulation's failure to deliver a competitive market, electricity wholesalers have quietly developed a vast and rapidly growing business of buying and selling power among themselves. The deals take place on high-tech trading floors in Houston and elsewhere around the country, as well as on Internet-based trading systems. Some experts say this electricity trading is a key mechanism for raising consumer power prices, yet it's largely unregulated. ""Electricity trading is like buying stock -- when you have ability to change the stock price,"" said Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economics professor and member of the state grid operator's market surveillance group. Energy companies say the buying and selling of contracts to deliver power provides risk management, allowing plant owners to presell their electricity, lock in prices and avoid fluctuations. The rough and tumble of the free market, they add, is the most efficient means of allocating a resource like electricity. But industry critics say trading is far from a competitive market paradigm. In their view, it's a means of communication -- a way for energy insiders to collude and raise prices under the guise of competition. To be sure, the trading arms of major energy companies have emerged as stars in an industry where profit surges of 300 percent or 400 percent are not uncommon. The transactions, shrouded in secrecy, can leave ownership of a critical commodity in unknown hands. Consider the case of power generated by AES Corp.'s California plants. In 1998, AES made a bold move. Immediately after purchasing power plants that gave it control of 10 percent of the state's electric generating capacity, the company sold the output from its plants for the next 20 years to Williams Cos. Williams did not sit on this treasure trove of electrons. The Tulsa, Okla., company soon sold 80 percent of what it bought. It is difficult to say who owns that power now. Some might be owned by Sempra Trading, a sister company of SDG&E. Or some could be owned by Enron Corp., the nation's biggest electricity trader. A spokeswoman for Williams conceded that Williams itself may have repurchased some of the electricity it sold earlier. But trading companies closely guard their positions. This much can be said with certainty: Electricity that AES sold for less than 5 cents per kilowatt-hour to Williams changed hands perhaps 10 times in the wholesale market and emerged at times in recent months with a price tag for consumers that was 300 percent higher. Williams' trading profits increased by 523 percent in the first quarter this year. Advance sales All this buying and selling creates curious confluences. In their attempt to deflect criticism over high prices, generating companies such as Duke Energy -- operator of the South Bay Power Plant in Chula and others in the state -- frequently note that they sell most of their electricity far in advance. But they acknowledge less often that their trading units may also be buying power, which could boost the company's electricity inventory. Duke was the fourth biggest electricity trader last year and cited its trading activity as a prime contributor to its wholesale business profits, which soared 324 percent in the first quarter to $348 million. It is a company's power traders who frequently direct plant operators to increase or decrease the generation of power in response to market conditions. Energy companies have little option but to turn to trading for profits. One of the better kept secrets of electrical deregulation and its promise of competition is that there is remarkably little competition in the production side of the business. For one thing, electricity is a commodity; power from one company is indistinguishable from that generated by others. More important, nearly all modern plants generate power from turbines built by a handful of manufacturers. The result? Modern plants owned by different companies produce power at nearly identical cost. ""The cost of power produced by modern plants is all within a mil (one-thousandth of a dollar),"" said Michael Peevey, an adviser to Gov. Gray Davis and former president of Southern California Edison. So the extraction of profit in the electricity business relies much more on trading. Traders' profits rise when prices are volatile -- plunging, or even better, rising sharply. Little regulation But despite the obvious temptation to manipulate the market, the burgeoning electricity trading business has remained largely unregulated. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission does require quarterly filings from energy traders, but these often provide incomplete information, or at least little that has been of concern to FERC. In fact, although the trading of electricity grew more than a hundredfold from 1996 to 2000, FERC has taken no major enforcement action against a trader. After the onset of the California crisis last year, FERC has acted once. That was against Williams, which agreed to pay $8 million without admitting guilt to resolve an allegation that it withheld supply to pump up prices. FERC's record of enforcement in the area of power trading stands in contrast to a long list of enforcement actions within other markets taken by the Securities Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. FERC has recently added staff to its market oversight operations. But William Massey, a FERC commissioner, says the agency's effort is still inadequate. ""Electricity can be flipped, stripped and chopped up,"" Massey said. ""It's an extraordinarily complicated market. ""The sophisticated marketers and traders have simply moved past us. We're kind of horse and buggy in our approach and they're out there in rocket ships flying around ... The problem is that sophisticated traders don't necessarily produce reasonable prices. They produce profits."" Before deregulation, electricity trading was a low-key affair. Regulated utilities dealt power back and forth on a reciprocal basis to fill electricity shortfalls in their control areas. There was little trading for profit until the mid-1990s, after federal legislation and FERC rulings opened the market. Major traders include large energy companies, sister companies of California's major utilities and Wall Street firms. Market volatility In many ways, the trading of power is similar to that of other commodities. But there are important differences. Because it cannot be stored and its use is so fundamental, the price of electricity is the most volatile of all. When supplies are tight, a single supplier can rapidly raise prices to budget-busting levels, as evidenced by Duke Energy's recent admission that it charged California nearly $4,000 for a megawatt-hour of power, a quantity that probably sold hours earlier for one-tenth of that sum or less. Wolak, the Stanford economist, and state Sen. Joseph Dunn, D-Garden Grove, who is investigating the state power market, say trading allows companies to collude under the guise of competition. Instead of wringing out lowest costs, the wholesale trading market serves to raise prices, they say. ""As I trade to you and you trade to me, we communicate to each other what price we would like to get,"" said Wolak. ""It's not collusive. It's just communicating price."" Mark Palmer, a spokesman for Enron, the nation's biggest power trader, said California's problem is not the result of trading. ""It's a result of shortages,"" Palmer said. Underscoring its emphasis on trading, Enron's new headquarters tower in downtown Houston rises from a six-story block of new trading floors, including expanded space for electricity trading. Enron also pioneered trading in cyberspace and its Enron Online site claims to be the most active computer-based trading market. The Houston company argues that consumers won't fully benefit from power trading and deregulation until they have greater choice in choosing their power supplier. And the company says FERC has not done enough to open access to transmission lines, which would allow traders to move power around the country. To that end, Enron has lobbied hard for President Bush's plan for a national electricity grid. Palmer says the notion that the price of electricity rises each time it is traded is mistaken. ""The market is always looking for the real price of a commodity,"" Palmer said. Dunn, the California state senator, says his investigation found a different function for trading. At a time when supply barely meets or falls short of demand, he noted, companies with electricity to sell have to worry only about how high to set their price. ""The trader is a pawn in the generator's game to drive up prices,"" said Dunn. ""Trading develops a level of trust. You, my alleged competitor, will bid in the same patterns and I will respond not in a competitive pattern but in a complimentary pattern."" The state senator said his investigation found evidence that on several days, energy companies appeared to test their ability to drive prices up, without being undercut by competitors. This ability to drive up prices without competitive consequence is a key test of market power, the technical term for manipulation or price fixing. But Dunn also conceded that antitrust violations can be hard to prove in court. He suggested that even if the trading behavior falls short of antitrust violations, it remains anti-competitive and devastating for the California economy. To Harry Trebing, a utility industry expert and professor emeritus at Michigan State University, wholesale electricity trading is reminiscent of what took place in the 1920s and early '30s. Back then, utility companies created complex networks of holding companies that traded stock among themselves, driving up prices in the process. Undoing that scheme was a focus of President Franklin Roosevelt's administration. Congress ended up barring national power companies and tightening regulation of utilities, in an effort to counteract their tendency to create markets that work only for insiders. ""The broad goals of trading are the same,"" Trebing said. ""The goal is to maximize profits through raising prices."" [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Comments of Wolak; [EMail-Body]= Wolak makes some good points. In ERCOT, Enron is in support of nodal pricing. I would not go so far as to say we are pushing for PJM's implementation, however, but for a market with nodal prices (and unilateral bids - aka unbalanced schedules, congestion reflect by price differentials, etc). I was unaware PJM had such great power to alter bids. This is something we don't want, and something for which I am not aware we have advocated. Perhaps in Enron's promotion of locational prices, it has been retold as PJM-style locational prices. Given that PJM is the most commonly cited example of locational prices, it does not surprise me to have the sloppiness in discussions that could lead to the rumors. Martin -----Original Message----- From: Kaminski, Vince J Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 4:35 PM To: Lin, Martin Cc: 'vkaminski@aol.com' Subject: FW: Martin, Lance What do you think? Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Frank A. Wolak"" Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 4:28 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Vince, I've been hearing rumors that Enron has decided to endorse the nodal pricing model as implemented in PJM. I just wanted to warn you that I'm not sure this is in Enron's long-term interest at all. Let me explain why. Feel free to give me a call if you'd like to talk more about this. First, let me say that I firmly believe in locational pricing and specifically pricing congestion. However, the way that PJM implements nodal pricing is to eliminate as much price volatility and reduce the transparency of the market. Specifically, the PJM tariff gives the ISO the ability to mitigate to cost plus a %10 adder the bids of any market participant that the ISO deems is out of merit in one of the three zones in region. (The fact that a nodal market is talking about zones should give you cause for alarm.) Then the ISO takes this mitigated bid and re-runs its price-setting software to compute new nodal prices. The way I have (somewhat unfairly) decribed this price-setting process is that the PJM ISO decides what prices it would like for a given day and mitigates bids until it gets them. This is not a transparent market, nor one where it makes any sense to buy the risk management services that Enron provides. The only price volatility you have to worry about in the PJM market is that kind that comes about if they need imports into their control area to meet demand. Under these circumstances, you need to pay the imports whatever is necessary to get them to come to your market. However, bear in mind FERC's desire to make a large RTO on the East Coast. This will effectively mean little imports to the East Coast RTO, so all bids can be mitigated at the discretion of the ISO. Paying market-clearing prices to cost-of-service mitigated bids is just paying too much to eliminate price volatility. It effectively kills off the development of risk management at the wholesale and retail level. Power marketing becomes much less profitable because retailers know you can always buy at cost-mitigated prices. In short, the PJM model is not market. It is just an alternative form of regulation that is politically attractive because it reduces price volatility, but it is not good for consumers or traders because they just get a higher cost form of regulation than traditional cost-of-service regulation. You pay market-clearing prices to cost-of-service mitigated bids, but under regulation you could just pay cost-of-service prices and eliminate the infra-marginal profits to low cost generators. As we discussed during our dinner, I think the two biggest sources of benefits from re-structuring will come from getting the demand-side involved in the market and from more efficient risk management. A necessary condition for both of these to occur is prices that reflect actual conditions in the market (including the extent of market power exercised). Masking these signals dulls any incentive for market participants to make the investment necessary to management. The PJM model is just way to have a market in name without achieving any significant benefits to consumers or energy traders. Frank [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Meeting with Bill Hogan, Mr. Lay, and Mr. Skilling, Irwin Stelzer
 and Richard Tabors will sit in as well, in 50M03; [EMail-Body]= (Connie Burns in Bill Hogan's office 617-495-1318) Lunch will be served. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Follow up; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/25/2001 06:33 PM ----- David Lugar <DLugar@QuinnGillespie.com> 03/23/2001 03:23 PM To: ""'skean@enron.com'"" <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: Follow up Steve, Sorry for the delay in tracking down this rumor on a potential ad campaign. I left a message with Maureen this afternoon and subsequently talked with Smith's staff person. She said she was not aware of any ad campaign but she would talk with the Senator about it when he is back on Monday. Have a good weekend and I will call you on Monday. Dave David Lugar Quinn Gillespie and Associates 202-457-1110 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Stock Options; [EMail-Body]= Sorry for the delay. I have asked the question and should have an answer in a day or two. . . . don't do anything rash in the meantime. Jane M Tholt@ECT 05/07/2001 12:15 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Stock Options Hi Steve. I know you are extremely busy but I was just wondering if you found out about whether the 3 year period apllies to all options or just the ones in that program. Question 2) does the 3 year time frame apply to only options that are vested at the time of departure or does it apply also to options which vest over the 3 year time frame. I look forward to hearing from you. Thank you. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Fwd: Portland Consultant's Investigation Finds California Has
 Capacity for Electricity Needs; [EMail-Body]= FYI ---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Hain/HOU/ECT on 10/17/2000 09:11 AM --------------------------- Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp. From: ""Ronald Carroll"" <rcarroll@bracepatt.com> 10/17/2000 07:07 AM To: <jdasovic@enron.com>, <mary.hain@enron.com>, <smara@enron.com>, <cfi1@tca-us.com> cc: Subject: Fwd: Portland Consultant's Investigation Finds California Has Capacity for Electricity Needs FYI Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 08:53:16 -0500 From: ""Tracey Bradley"" <tbradley@bracepatt.com> To: ""Deanna King"" <dking@bracepatt.com>, ""Paul Fox"" <pfox@bracepatt.com>, ""Ronald Carroll"" <rcarroll@bracepatt.com> Subject: Portland Consultant's Investigation Finds California Has Capacity for Electricity Needs Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Disposition: inline FYI - It sounds like this consultant's findings are being questioned by many in the industry, including by the CAISO. Portland, Ore.-Based Firm Says California Has Capacity for Electricity Needs Dan McSwain , North County Times, Escondido, Calif. ( October 17, 2000 ) Oct. 13--PORTLAND, Ore.--A private investigation of state power markets has come to the conclusion that California had plenty of electricity generating capacity this summer. The state enjoyed a 32 percent reserve margin even as wholesale prices soared and the state's power manager declared 36 separate ""power emergencies"" because California was thought to be in the grips of a critical shortage, according to the investigation. The author of the investigation's preliminary report, Portland-based economist and utility industry consultant Robert McCullough, said at a conference of analysts, power traders and electricity industry regulators Thursday that he has found evidence that generators and trading companies manipulated the production of power from June through August to create a false shortage and push up prices. The Encina power plant in Carlsbad provides a stark example: it ran at well below its full capacity for much of June, even though wholesale power prices ---- and consumer electricity bills ---- shot to well above the generating plant's cost of production. The actual production of electricity by the plants was determined by an analysis of data from the Environmental Protection Agency, which monitors emissions. ""We are seeing a lot of under-generation,"" McCullough said. ""This is market power in action."" Market power is a term used by economists to describe the ability of market participants -- in this case suppliers -- to influence prices. Many of the industry experts present at the conference Thursday reaffirmed their belief that supply shortages were very real this summer, and contributed to high prices, but several participants said deregulation has reduced the amount of market information that is available to analysts. Mainstream economists have questioned the accuracy of data from federal agencies, including the EPA. Conventional explanations for the low energy production observed in San Diego County are scant. Encina's operators, a joint venture of energy giants Dynegy Inc. and NRG Energy Inc. called Cabrillo Power, confirmed that the power plant had no abnormal maintenance problems. The San Diego Regional Air Quality Board said Wednesday that the power plant was well within its state-mandated pollution limits. But David Lloyd, the corporate secretary of Cabrillo, denied that the Encina plant has been used to game the San Diego County power markets. ""That can't possibly be right,"" Lloyd said of McCullough's analysis. ""In North County, we were right on the ragged edge of being off (an emergency shutdown because of heavy output). ""Without knowing the specific details of time and which units were on or off, I can't comment,"" Lloyd said. ""We certainly don't want to be accused of anything wrongful,"" he said. ""We don't have that much power in California, and for us to be shutting down in California to push up the price somewhere else doesn't make sense for us. We want to run all we can when the prices are high."" Electricity prices have soared to record levels since May, resulting in a doubling and tripling of power bills this summer for the 1.2 million customers of San Diego Gas & Electric Co. and causing an estimated $5 billion in losses for Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric. State lawmakers have intervened on behalf of San Diego County consumers with a retail rate cap, but the law in turn created a looming IOU that could grow beyond $300 million if high wholesale prices persist. No fewer than five private, state and federal investigations are under way to assess the competitiveness of power markets in the interconnected Western states. The investigations also seek to answer charges that the companies which produce and trade electricity have either figured out how to exploit deregulated markets to outmaneuver regulators or have engaged in outright manipulation in order to increase profits. Inquiries by the California Public Utilities Commission, Electricity Oversight Board and attorney general, along with a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission investigation, were launched in July and August. Staff investigators of the state and federal commissions said this week that they are still in the process of issuing subpoenas and gathering market data. McCullough was hired in late May by the Seattle city utility and a consortium of large industrial power consumers in the Pacific Northwest to investigate the price spikes. His effort is thought to be the first to complete an exhaustive analysis of state and federal information that tracks the amount of electricity that was available and compares it to the amount of power that was actually used. Chief among McCullough's findings was that demand for power was lower this summer than what was forecasted by the Western Systems Coordinating Council, a federal agency that is charged with ensuring the stability of the vast web of power transmission lines that connect California to 13 other Western states, British Columbia and northern Mexico. McCullough provided a copy of his preliminary findings Tuesday to the North County Times, and the initial reaction of the state's energy community was one of deep skepticism. ""EPA data is notoriously unreliable,"" said Frank Wolak, a Stanford professor and the chairman of the market surveillance committee of the California Independent System Operator, the agency that manages the state grid and which has paid enormous sums for emergency power this summer. To gauge the actual output of power plants that burn fossil fuel, McCullough used emissions data from the EPA. ""Greed would get the best of anybody,"" Wolak said. ""I found a lot of hours where in-state generators were exceeding nameplate capacity. These guys were cranking it out."" Wolak, in a study of power markets for the system operator, did conclude, however, that exercise of market power by power generators and traders was the major cause of higher prices this summer. At the conference in Portland, most of the panelists did not openly criticize McCullough's analysis, but implicitly disputed his conclusions by attributing higher prices and the presumed exercise of market power to a very real shortage of electricity generating capacity among the Western states. Low hydroelectric production in the Pacific Northwest and high temperatures in the Southwest were blamed for limiting California's ability to import electricity. Others said state and federal regulators, along with market participants themselves, won't really know what happened until more experts look at hard market information that is in short supply. Ron Eachus, the chairman of the Oregon Public Utilities Commission, said market information is routinely withheld from regulators, the public and buyers of electricity, but is shared among power generators and trading companies. ""If the market is sharing it with themselves, but not us, I don't buy that,"" Eachus said. Tim Belden is the vice president of West Trading for Enron North America, the largest marketer and trader of electricity in the world. Enron takes the unique stand that more information which has been labeled ""proprietary"" by companies, such as when a plant is being run and how much the electricity is selling for, should be made available instantly to the markets. ""Is there a smoking gun out there or are market participants behaving rationally?"" Belden said. ""California is characterized by secret, black box market models that nobody understands,"" he said. ""If you've got nothing to hide, release the data."" ----- To see more of the North County Times, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.nctimes.com (c) 2000, North County Times, Escondido, Calif. Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News. SRE, SCE.Q, PCG, [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Angle Master Invention; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/26/2000 04:51 PM ----- Edmund Szol <eszol@nwlink.com> 09/24/2000 05:29 PM To: undisclosed-recipients:; cc: Subject: Angle Master Invention Please have someone contact me at 425-503-4339 (cell telephone) or at the address on the web site underlined below if Enron has an interest in the U.S. and internationally patented Angle Master. We now have marketing prototypes made, patents in place, outstanding consumer interest and are ready to proceed to the next step. The Angle Master can be very large or small.. The output gear smoothly transitions from 0-90 degrees at high torque to to reach or drill any angle. The input gear can be driven by any device. No product on the market can perform like the Angle Master. I can see the use of the Angle Master for various drilling applications, including horizontal drilling Professional mechanics in all fields who have seen the smaller Angle Master all want one. We have endorsements from professional drivers, mechanics, and many others. A recently retired Captain of a nuclear aircraft carrier has stated in a letter ""....The use of the Angle Master.... will result in a significant time savings which in turn will increase combat readiness of aircraft and ships due to the more rapid turnaround of out of commission systems. Every mechanic will want the Angle Master in their toolbox after they have seen it in operation."" A Senior Vice President of Operations for a major Aerospace Company has stated in writing "" .... Prototype manufacturing, tool manufacturing, assembly, repair and overhaul operations will all benefit from the flexibility of the Angle Master."" The attached web page location underlined below is not yet completed, but it indicates just a few of thesmaller scale uses for the Angle Master. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Ed Szol President Angle Master Industries LTD. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re:; [EMail-Body]= These are good fixes. I still think it's important for our security people to be able to recognize all of our senior executives and make sure their guests get where they are going quickly. To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Susan Skarness/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Follow-up Steve - Following up on our conversation Friday, we have advised Cliff Baxter's Assistant that effective immediately Cliff and his quests can pass through Security on the Plaza, without showing his access card or requiring his quests to sign in or identify themselves. All he needs to do is approach the front Reception Desks and asking for entry. The receptionists will recognise Cliff by sight and ensure that he and his quests pass through - without delay - by lifting the adjacent rope. We are asking Cliff to use his badge at the card readers, as per standard procedure, when he is entering the building by himself. We are also refining procedures and upgrading our IT systems/data base @ the Reception Desk, to make it easier on a visitor of any employee. For example if you call down to the Plaza Reception Desk and advise that a visitor is expected, the receptionist will have a pass prepared so as to eliminate the sign in process. The guest simply has to exchange their business card for the visitor pass. Or if an employee shows their access card at the Reception Desk and asks that their guest gain entry, that guest can get a badge without signing in. Again, we ask that the guest exchange their business card for a visitor pass. We are working on installing a new data base @ the Desk that will pull up a digitised photo of the employee (duplicate of what's on their badge) on the screen. This will allow employees to get a temporary access badge without showing other ID and will speed process. Finally, we are testing a small proximity access card which is designed to be a duplicate back-up for executives. It is sized to fit on a key chain and works with our standard card readers. - Bill [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Chairman's Speech; [EMail-Body]= See e-mail exchange between Andy Black of Barton staff and me (below). Seems to confirm what he told me a few weeks ago -- and rumor that Barton told EEI yesterday at their CEO conference -- that his draft will make RTOs mandatory. -----Original Message----- From: Black, Andy Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 5:53 PM To: Shelk, John Subject: RE: Chairman's Speech He spoke yesterday to that group. I do expect participation in an RTO to be mandatory, but there may be provisions dealing with FERC authority to change existing RTOs. -----Original Message----- From: Shelk, John [ Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2001 5:42 PM To: Black, Andy Subject: Chairman's Speech Ran into a fellow Texas company lobbyist who said that the Chairman today is speaking to EEI CEO Conference you mentioned and he was going to release the bill or at least say the bill would include mandatory RTOs. Just checking out the rumor. Thanks. John This e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or its relevant affiliate and may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient (s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender or reply to Enron Corp. at and delete all copies of the message. This e-mail (and any attachments hereto) are not intended to be an offer (or an acceptance) and do not create or evidence a binding and enforceable contract between Enron Corp. (or any of its affiliates) and the intended recipient or any other party, and may not be relied on by anyone as the basis of a contract by estoppel or otherwise. Thank you. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: REVISION - New HR Rep for Public Affairs and Administration; [EMail-Body]= Please do send it out. Thanks for the kind words. I know you know how I feel about your work and I have shared that view widely. I have enjoyed working with you; I always valued your insights , your responsiveness, and your work ehtic. I wish you all the best in your new role. Gwendolyn Petteway@ENRON 07/24/2000 02:47 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: REVISION - New HR Rep for Public Affairs and Administration Arquella's last day is Wed., 7/26. ---------------------- Forwarded by Gwendolyn Petteway/HR/Corp/Enron on 07/24/2000 02:44 PM --------------------------- Gwendolyn Petteway 07/24/2000 02:16 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: New HR Rep for Public Affairs and Administration Steve, please see below my announcement relative to the upcoming HR changes. If you concur, I would like to send this out Monday, 7/31 to all Govt Affairs and PR employees. The formal transition meeting between Kim and I is scheduled for Monday, 7/31/00. Effectively Tuesday, August 1, the new HR Representative for Public Affairs and Administration is Kim Rizzi. To assist with the transition in HR teams, Kim and I previously met to discuss current activity for the Public Affairs and Administration group. Kim can be reached at ext. 33833. Kim's assistant is Jennifer Jordan and she can be reached at ext. 37554. My team and I have truly enjoyed working with the Public Affairs and Administration Group over the past 3 years . We have learned a great deal and even logged a few miles (to/fro Washington, DC and San Francisco) during the course of this partnership. It has all been a pleasure and I wish each of you the best! Effective August 1, I will assume the Director of Staffing role for the Associate and Analyst Program reporting to Charlene Jackson. Constance Charles, my assistant will be transferring with me. Wednesday, July 26th was Arquella Hargrove, our Human Resources Associate's last day with Corp Human Resources. Arquella will rotate to the CALME region and support HR Senior Director, Janie Bonnard when she returns from her leave. No she has not delivered the baby yet, but any day now!! We hope, she hopes...... Steve, I will truly miss working and partnering with you. You have made this Enron journey a bright, challenging and refreshing experience. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: India Help; [EMail-Body]= Thanks so much for your message. Your communications are always complete, firm, clear and polite. I am sorry that perhaps the most critical aspect of your efforts -- security-- has been so confused by our end. I understand from John Brindle that the confusion generated by our end has not kept you from accomplishing a great deal of the work anyway. I have asked John to lead the effort, to the extent you need him. John and his team are very experienced and have been in contact with and coordination with the London office. Mike Hicks is a good hand, but for the most part, all I have asked him to do is be in a position to identify outside resources skilled in the area in question. It is a bit too much to ask Mike to be hands on for all of Enron's corporate security needs. A little background I'll bore you with: after Andre Legallo (formerly VP of Security for Enron) left, we did not replace his function. Most of the operating companies had their own security and business controls groups. When Andre left, we reduced the corporate function to a ""default provider"" role -- if a business unit had a need it was not otherwise meeting, Mike Hicks (as well as an outside consulting firm) would help identify competent resources in the area. With the reorganization of EBS, I have inherited the very competent and experienced team they had assembled (led by John Brindle). John identified some concerns regarding India mid last week. I urged him to get in touch with Rebecca; he did. It was clear after further inquiries by John that the India team had already addressed many if not all of the concerns and much of the remaining work involved implementation. John volunteered to send some people over to help and I said OK. He had already been in touch with the London team and Mike Hicks (who I have asked to return to Houston). The last thing you need right now is confusion caused by a group saying ""we're from corporate and we're here to help"". If you don't need any ""help"" or if the situation gets anything other than significantly better, let me know. To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Rebecca McDonald/Enron@EnronXGate, James A Hughes/Enron@EnronXGate Subject: India Help Steve, As you are well aware, we are facing a lot of things happening fast in India. We are using several parts of your team, and are very pleased with most. I want to mention a couple of areas, HR and Security. 1. HR: I heard that some folks in Houston had raised concerns about the quality of the India HR team and their preparedness. The HR team is doing an outstanding job and I wanted you to hear that from me. Once we realized we had a major issue on our hand, and I received clearance from Rebecca and Jim to bring some HR folks into the loop, HR had someone on a plane within 20 hours of my first call. We have always had great HR support through Drew Lynch and Bob Sparger, helping our team led by Sandip Malik, and this time Scott Gilchrist has joined in and helped as well. But the two workhorses have been Bob and Sandip. Bob got on a plane immediately and came over, and he and Sandip have been working around the clock so that we are much better prepared now than we were just a couple of days back. We really relied heavily on HR, and Drew had his team there for us. 2. PR: top notch team of John Ambler and Johan Zaayman, working with and supporting Jimmy Mogal on the ground. Johan and Jimmy have been a strong team on the ground, and John has provided leadership and all coordination with Houston. Great efforts and productive work. 3. Security: This area has not worked as well, and if you ever want feedback on our one-time experience with this group, I will provide it. I don't have any idea who is in charge from Enron's perspective here. There are 2 groups headed this way. Mike Hicks will arrive Thursday night, and Mike has informed us that he will be leading all security efforts. Jim Rountree is apparently travelling with Mike, and Don Hawkins sent me an e-mail earlier today telling me that Don has instructed Jim that Jim is in charge of coordinating our security. John Brindle has sent me an e-mail saying that you have asked him to coordinate and help in the ongoing efforts, and John is sending 3 people over arriving Saturday night. First, we are very happy to have the help, but I just hope that Mike, Jim and John know which of the three are in charge. If you could just let me know who you want to be in charge, we will coordinate with that person. On a side note, the people who have really been helpful were brought in through Drew Lynch of Europe HR. They are Jim Roth and Dave Lawler, both of whom work for John Sherriff. They had a great attitude, were willing to work day and night and were planning on coming to coordinate until Mike decided he would come. At Mike's earlier suggestion, we engaged Hill & Associates to help on security. Because I was having to meet with them 3 to 4 times per day, I asked Jane Wilson to help coordinate all our security efforts. Jane has done a fantastic job in an impossibly short time frame. The tasks she has been overseeing include coordinating with Hill & Associates, removing (in a lowkey yet rush manner) over 400 boxes of files and documents and getting them through customs and to Europe, removing 2 container truck loads of files from the Dabhol site and getting them out of the country, and overseeing a complete security check and file removal of all our electronic files from servers, desktops and laptops. In addition, she has coordinated security for all expats and families as well as worked with EOGIL expats and Anthony Duenner of EBS Asia. Again, we appreciate all the help. Wade [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= New Orleans - ""Day of the Trader"" - McGraw Hill conf - Ron Dionne
 is the contact - Kathleen is doing this; [EMail-Body]= Sunday through Tuesday [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Update of Executive Support Database; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/23/2001 12:29 PM --------------------------- From: Montrice Malone/ENRON@enronXgate on 04/23/2001 12:14 PM To: Beverly Aden/HOU/EES@EES, Amelia Alder/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Jessica Anaya/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Andrews/Corp/Enron@Enron, Megan Angelos/ENRON@enronXgate, Julie Armstrong/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Paul Terri Bachand/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Juan Barba/ENRON@enronXgate, Carol Martha Benner/ENRON@enronXgate, Connie Blackwood/ENRON@enronXgate, Nicola Blancke/EU/Enron@ENRON, Rosario Boling/ENRON@enronXgate, Blanca Bollom/NA/Enron@Enron, Rossana Booty/HOU/EES@EES, Erica Braden/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Rocio Braley/NA/Enron@ENRON, Loretta Brelsford/ENRON@enronXgate, Elaine Brown/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kimberly Bullock/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Andrew Burns/HOU/EES@EES, Jennifer Burns/ENRON@enronXgate, Kathy Campos/ENRON@enronXgate, Ilan Lillian Carroll/ENRON@enronXgate, Rosie Castillo/ENRON@enronXgate, Alan Chapman/EU/Enron@Enron, Kay Chapman/HOU/EES@EES, Norma Chavez/ENRON@enronXgate, Katherine Chisley/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Susan Christianson/NA/Enron@Enron, Cindy Cicchetti/HOU/EES@EES, Venita Coleman/ENRON@enronXgate, Crissy Collett/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Angie Collins/ENRON@enronXgate, Faye Collis/EU/Enron@Enron, Debbie Contreras/ENRON@enronXgate, Adam Cooper/DUB/EES@EES, Tracy Cooper/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Lisa Costello/ENRON@enronXgate, Sheri L Cromwell/ENRON@enronXgate, Andrew Daley/EU/Enron@Enron, Oscar Dalton/ENRON@enronXgate, Dorothy Dalton/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Tiajuan Dancy/ENRON@enronXgate, Suzanne Danz/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jacqui Darrah/ENRON@enronXgate, Inez Dauterive/HOU/ECT@ECT, Binky Davidson/HOU/EES@EES, Tammie Davis/ENRON@enronXgate, Theresa Davis/HOU/EES@EES, Nicki Daw/ENRON@enronXgate, Nicki Daw/LON/ECT@ECT, Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron, Sharon Dick/HOU/EES@EES, Kathy Dodgen/HOU/EES@EES, Billy Joyce Dorsey/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Bill Doyle/HOU/EES@EES, Debbie Doyle/ENRON@enronXgate, Amy Duncan/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kari Deborah J Edison/ENRON@enronXgate, Janette Elbertson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Patricia English/Enron@EnronXGate, Mercedes Estrada/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Rosane Fabozzi/SA/Enron@Enron, Susan Fallon/ENRON@enronXgate, Kerry Ferrari/LON/ECT@ECT, Dolores Fisher/Enron@EnronXGate, Amy Flores/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sue Ford/ENRON@enronXgate, Blanca Franco/ENRON@enronXgate, Bert Frazier/ENRON@enronXgate, Stephen H Friedlander/EWC/Enron@Enron, Irma Fuentes/ENRON@enronXgate, Mrudula Shelia B Galloway/ENRON@enronXgate, Carolyn George/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mercy Gil/ENRON@enronXgate, Lisa Gillette/HOU/ECT@ECT, Christina Grow/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Vanessa Guest/EU/Enron@Enron, Mollie Gustafson/PDX/ECT@ECT, Laura Gutierrez/ENRON@enronXgate, Lauren Earl Hailey/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Tracy Harris/HOU/EES@EES, Joshua Hatch/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Karen K Heathman/ENRON@enronXgate, Debra Hicks/ENRON@enronXgate, Kimberly Hillis/ENRON@enronXgate, Sandy Hoelscher/HOU/EES@EES, Janice Hogan/ENRON@enronXgate, Barbara Rita Houser/ENRON@enronXgate, Elizabeth Ivers/NA/Enron@Enron, Priya Jaisinghani/NA/Enron@Enron, Diana Jebousek/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, Kelly Johnson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Melissa Jones/ENRON@enronXgate, Susan Jones/ENRON@enronXgate, Jennifer Jordan/ENRON@enronXgate, Robin Jordan/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Ann Joyner/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Francisca Juarez/ENRON@enronXgate, Regina Karsolich/ENRON@enronXgate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Sally Keepers/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sharon Killey/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Cheryl Kondo/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Tammy Kovalcik/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Cheryl Kuehl/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lena Lacey/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Diane Latson/ENRON@enronXgate, David Leboe/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kimberly Lerro/ENRON@enronXgate, Sandy Lewelling/NA/Enron@Enron, Wykena Lipscomb/NA/Enron@Enron, Anita Llamas-Granado/HOU/EES@EES, Craig Lodrigue/ECP/HOU/ECT@ECT, Leasa Lopez/HOU/EES@EES, Bridget Maronge/ENRON@enronXgate, Lucy Marshall/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Victoria G Martinez/ENRON@enronXgate, Yolanda Martinez/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Peggy McCurley/ENRON@enronXgate, Belinda McGaughy/EWC/Enron@ENRON, Kathy McMahon/NA/Enron@Enron, Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Yorleni Mendez/Corp/Enron@ENRON, cc: Carolyn Evans/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: Update of Executive Support Database Hello to all Support Staff. I am Montrice Malone, Support Clerk for the Executive Support Team. I am updating the Executive Support Database. In order to better serve their IT needs for home support, the following information is needed. Executive name, cell phone, home phone, home street, home city, home zip code, spouse if any. In addition, because you are primary support you are also eligible for home support from the IT executive home support team. We also need your home phone, home street, home zip code, for our records. Thank you very much for your assistance and information. You may reply to this e-mail or contact me at EXT# 5-3600. Thanks, Montrice Malone Executive Support Team Clerk Office: 713-345-3600 Montrice.Malone@ENRON.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= call phil moeller 202.589.0905; [EMail-Body]= TASK ASSIGNMENT Task Priority: Task Due On: 4/16/2001 Task Start Date: [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Guatemala FX and inflation curves, dated June 2001; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Koepke, Gwyn Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 12:29 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: FW: Guatemala FX and inflation curves, dated June 2001 Vince, FYI. Gwyn -----Original Message----- From: Koepke, Gwyn Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 1:28 PM To: Hudler, Cindy Cc: Shahi, Pushkar; Stuart III, William; Raymond, Maureen Subject: Guatemala FX and inflation curves, dated June 2001 Cindy, Attached is the file containing the quetzal and the CPI forecast for Guatemala. Gwyn Koepke and Maureen Raymond-Castaneda [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Request for Confidential Information by the CPUC; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT on 03/10/2001 10:00 AM ----- <Lisa_G_Urick@calpx.com> 02/22/2001 03:15 PM To: richard.b.sanders@enron.com cc: Subject: Request for Confidential Information by the CPUC Per your request. ---------------------- Forwarded by Sandi J. Thompson/users/PX_CALIF on 02/07/2001 02:06 PM --------------------------- : Market Participant AB1, Market Participant CD1, Market Participant CD2, Market Participant EG1, Market Participant EG2, Market Participant HJ1, Market Participant KL1, Market Participant KL2, Market Participant MN1, Market Participant MN2, Market Participant OR1, Market Participant OR2, Market Participant ST1, Market Participant ST2, Market Participant UZ1 cc: rmcmanus@bakerbotts.com, lcottle@whitecase.com, thoulihan@mdbe.com, napedersen@jonesday.com, jareding@phjw.com, bjf@cpuc.ca.gov Subject: Request for Confidential Information by the CPUC To All California Power Exchange Participants: Notice is hereby provided pursuant to Section 19.3.4 of the California Power Exchange Tariff that the Consumer Services Division of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), as part of its investigation into the ""generating, selling, buying and trading of energy in the State of California"" (see attached declaration of Barbara Ferguson), has requested information that may be confidential under Section 19.3.2 of the CalPX Tariff. The subpoena requests the California Power Exchange to respond to the subpoena no later than Thursday, February 15, 2001, but Ms. Ferguson has agreed to extend the deadline until Tuesday, February 20, 2001. If you desire to assert a claim of privilege or confidentiality pursuant to legal authority, the California Power Exchange will include your written assertion of that claim, together with its submittal to the CPUC, provided that it is timely received. The CPUC has indicated that for purposes of this investigation, it is willing to treat confidential information in a manner comparable to that provided under Section 583 of the Public Utilities Code for confidential information provided by public utilities to the CPUC. Your written statement must be directed to the CPUC as follows: Barbara J. Ferguson California Public Utilities Commission 505 Van Ness Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102 415.703.2682 telephone 415.703.2262 facsimile bjf@cpuc.ca.gov Please copy your statement to the California Power Exchange as follows: Lisa Urick California Power Exchange 200 South Los Robles Avenue, Suite 400 Pasadena, CA 91101 626.537.3100 telephone 626.537.3159 facsimile lgurick@calpx.com Any written statement must be received by Ms. Urick no later than Friday, February 16, 2001, 5:00 p.m. PT, to be included with any information delivered by the CalPX to the CPUC. You are also free to take any other legal action you may deem appropriate in the circumstances of this investigation. A copy of the subpoena and declaration are attached for your reference. Thank you. (See attached file: Revised PX Subpoena-CPUC.doc) (See attached file: SDT Declaration-CPUC.doc) - Revised PX Subpoena-CPUC.doc - SDT Declaration-CPUC.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Organizational Changes; [EMail-Body]= Mary -- see attached Stacy Guidroz@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 09/22/99 09:36 PM To: Steven J Kean@EES cc: Subject: Organizational Changes The following is a message from Sanjay Bhatnagar: Organizational changes in India (South Asia) Region which includes India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. The team is lead by Sanjay Bhatnagar, CEO. Wade Cline has joined the team as the Chief Operating Officer. Other management appointments include: (1) Bobby Farris will lead all development efforts in the region (2) Raj Thapar will lead the M&A efforts (3) Bangladesh will continue to be managed by David Howe who will report in to Bobby Farris (4) P. Sreekumar leads up the accounting function as Chief Accounting Officer assisted by Carol Hoes in Houston (5) Neil McGregor heads up the Dabhol Power Company as its President and reports directly into Sanjay and Wade (6) Communication is currently being lead by Sanjay (7) Ranabir Dutt leads the Finance Team [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call
 Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and
 Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Hawkins, Bernadette Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 9:59 AM To: Walton, Steve; Mara, Susan; Comnes, Alan; Lawner, Leslie; Cantrell, Rebecca; Fulton, Donna; Dasovich, Jeff; Nicolay, Christi; Steffes, James; jalexander@gibbs-bruns.com; Allen, Phillip K.; Noske, Linda; Perrino, Dave; Black, Don; Frank, Robert; Miller, Stephanie; Tycholiz, Barry Cc: linda.noske@enron.com; Alamo, Joseph Subject: Re: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted Importance: High THE MEETING TIME HAS BEEN CHANGED!!!! PLEASE MARK YOUR CALENDAR Date: Every Thursday Time: 7:30 AM Pacific, 9:30 AM Central, and 10:30 AM Eastern time Number: 1-888-271-0949 Host Code: 661877 (for Ray only) Participant Code: 936022 (for everyone else) ----- Forwarded by Bernadette Hawkins/Corp/Enron on 06/20/2001 12:43 PM ----- Ray Alvarez 05/31/2001 11:55 AM To: Bernadette Hawkins/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Re: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted ---------------------- Forwarded by Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron on 05/31/2001 11:55 AM --------------------------- Ray Alvarez 05/31/2001 11:54 AM To: Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, jalexander@gibbs-bruns.com, Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Linda J Noske/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dave Perrino/SF/ECT@ECT, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron, Stephanie Miller/Enron@EnronXGate, Barry Tycholiz/Enron@EnronXGate cc: Subject: Re: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted PLEASE MARK YOUR CALENDAR Date: Every Thursday Time: 1:00 pm Pacific, 3:00 pm Central, and 4:00 pm Eastern time, Number: 1-888-271-0949 Host Code: 661877 (for Ray only) Participant Code: 936022 (for everyone else) The table of the on-going FERC issues and proceedings will be updated for use on today's conference call, and distributed by Bernadette Hawkins. It is available to all team members on the O drive. Please feel free to revise/add to/ update this table as appropriate. Proposed agenda for today: FERC Order of May 25 clarifying the April 26 Order re market monitoring and price mitigation. ISO de-rating of ATC complaint- status (item 20) EPSA intervention and protest re CAISO compliance filing and proposed tariff amendment (item 32) EPSA rehearing request of FERC market monitoring and mitigation order in EL00-95-12 (item 9d) Miscellaneous information items: CA legislators' suit against FERC. RTO conference is to be planned and held by FERC in the near future. Please feel free to communicate to the group any additional agenda items you may have. <Embedded Picture (Device Independent Bitmap)> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: confidential employee information-dutch quigley; [EMail-Body]= thx Jeanie Slone 12/19/2000 04:51 PM To: John Arnold/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: confidential employee information-dutch quigley Dutch requested a meeting with me today and I gave him the scoop on the promotion. I will follow-up with him after our meeting the first week of Jan. He was ok with everything. let me know if you need anything else. ---------------------- Forwarded by Jeanie Slone/HOU/ECT on 12/19/2000 04:45 PM --------------------------- Jeanie Slone 12/19/2000 10:09 AM To: John Arnold/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Ted C Bland/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Oxley/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: confidential employee information-dutch quigley John, As we discussed earlier, ENA HR is working with the A/A program to develop a process for placing sr. spec into associate titles. Unfortunately, that process has not been finalized and as such, Dutch is not yet an associate. Ted is finalizing the process this week and it will likely require Dutch to interview with 4 other commercial managers outside of ENA. Additionally, there are two other sr. spec. on the gas trading floor in similar situations and we will be discussing them at a promotion meeting to be held the first week of Jan. I would like to handle all of these consistently and had planned to include Dutch's promotion in this discussion. I would recommend that we hold on a title change for Dutch until after this meeting and manage it through the promotions process. Per the message attached below, Dutch believes he has already received the title change. Please clarify the situation with him at your earliest convenience. If you need my assistance with this please let me know. I apologize if there was any confusion from our previous discussions. Please contact me with any questions/concerns. ---------------------- Forwarded by Jeanie Slone/HOU/ECT on 12/19/2000 09:21 AM --------------------------- people.finder@ENRON 12/19/2000 09:19 AM Sent by: Felicia Buenrostro@ENRON To: Dutch.Quigley@enron.com cc: Jeanie Slone/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: PeopleFinder Feedback Dutch, Unfortunately, I cannot make that change for you. Please contacct your HR Rep (Jeanne Slone). Your HR Rep can only change your title. Thanks. Felicia Dutch.Quigley@enron.com on 12/18/2000 08:05:19 AM To: people.finder@enron.com cc: Subject: PeopleFinder Feedback My job title needs to be updated to ASSOCIATE. Dutch [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: EnTouch Newsletter; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Enron On Behalf Of ENA Public Relations@ENRON Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 11:40 PM To: En Touch Newsletter List@ENRON Subject: EnTouch Newsletter BUSINESS HIGHLIGHTS AEP COMPLETES PURCHASE OF HOUSTON PIPE LINE COMPANY FROM ENRON COLUMBUS, Ohio - American Electric Power (NYSE: AEP) announced that it has completed its purchase of the stock of Houston Pipe Line Company (HPL), an intrastate natural gas pipeline subsidiary of Enron Corp. (NYSE: ENE). The acquisition includes inventory and a 30-year pre-paid lease related to the operation of the Bammel Storage Facility. The $726.6 million for the transaction will be raised by issuing a non-controlling, preferred equity interest to private investors. The purchase, announced Jan. 11, 2001, was completed following clearance from the Department of Justice under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act. HPL owns, or leases, and operates one of the most extensive and flexible natural gas gathering, transportation and storage operations in Texas. HPL's intrastate system includes more than 4,400 miles of pipe with capacity of approximately 2.4 billion cubic feet per day and the operation of the Bammel Storage Facility, one of the largest storage facilities in North America with a capacity of approximately 118 billion cubic feet and significant injection and withdrawal capacity. Industrial Markets Siebel launch is a great success The EIM Fundamentals Siebel Team successfully launched The Force: Episode I (Siebel Express) in record time, less than 6 weeks. This was the quickest Siebel implementation thanks to teams in EIM, Networks, PWC (PriceWaterhouseCoopers) and Siebel Corp.The team took contact and account information from 100+ EIM originators and traders and compiled them into a single database for customer management. Training began on May 8, 2001. In less than a month, we have populated The Force with 5,700 Accounts (Counterparties) and 10,000 Contacts for Forest Products and Steel Industries. We have set up and trained over 150 users in 4 different domestic locations. Originators and traders now can easily log phone calls and meetings with customers as well as store deal documentation, deal pipeline and sales stage information. Episode II will launch end of June and will include synchronization capabilities and well as other customized fields for EIM business. Siebel Sales Enterprise is a customer-focused centralized database, which enables sharing of all information learned about our customers. Siebel is designed to help in-house and mobile sales professionals to manage accounts, contacts, activities and opportunities associated with the sales cycle. IN THE NEWS Enron Tops Gas Market: Higher commodity prices and greater demand have generated record earnings for many gas marketers during the past quarter, making energy one of the few sectors gaining ground in the U.S. economy. Leading the pack is Enron whose gas volumes grew 30 percent, with 27.2 billion cfd traded on average by March 31. Much of Enron's success is attributed to EnronOnline, which saw 275,000 transactions with a total value of $162 billion in various commodities in the first quarter. The second place earner, El Paso, earned half of Enron's total with only 13.8 billion traded in 2001. EnronOnline Statistics Below are the latest figures for EnronOnline as of June 12, 2001 * Total Life to Date Transactions > 1,075,000 * Life to Date Notional Value of Transactions > $648 billion REUTERS TO PROVIDE ITS CUSTOMERS WITH ENRONONLINE REAL-TIME QUOTES NEW YORK, JUNE XX, 2001 ? Reuters (NASDAQ: RTRSY), the global information, news and technology group, today announced the launch of EnronOnline Real-Time Quotes. This new service provides commodity traders and analysts with access to real-time and historical quotes for a variety of commodities and derivatives traded on the world's largest commodity trading website, EnronOnline. Since its launch on November 29, 1999, customers have completed over one million transactions on the site and today, EnronOnline transacts over $3 billion daily in energy and other commodities every day. Subscribers to EnronOnline Real-Time Quotes can view bids, offers, and midpoints as well as high, low, closing midpoint and change from previous day indications for numerous commodity products. Quotes will be available for power, natural gas, crude oil and refined products, bandwidth, coal, emission allowances, and weather derivatives markets. Subscribers will be able to integrate EnronOnline Real-Time Quotes with Reuters' leading news, data and analytical tools to view real-time prices and charts as well as create option models, position reports and other analysis. WELCOME New Hires EGM - Sandra Deleon EIM - Eugene Karagodin EGM - Jason Paterniti NUGGETS & NOTES Travel Tip of the Week When booking through TAP or ClickTrip, use preferred international airline carriers to recognize special Enron discounts. Air France 20-25% British Airways 15-30% Cathay Pacific 5-30% Continental 25% Lufthansa 28% Northwest/KLM 30% Quantas 16-20% Please note: discounts are confidential and should not be disclosed to anyone other than Enron employees. LEGAL STUFF The information contained in this newsletter is confidential and proprietary to Enron Corp. and its subsidiaries. It is intended for internal use only and should not be disclosed. <Embedded Paintbrush Picture> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= MEMO; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 06/13/2001 04:52 PM --------------------------- From: Jody Underwood on 06/13/2001 04:44 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: MEMO [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message(due to missing attachment)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: part time/reduced hour employees; [EMail-Body]= ok Cindy Olson 05/08/2001 11:48 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: part time/reduced hour employees Steve, I think we have consensus on how we would like the part ttime people handled in the PRS process for mid year.....okay. ---------------------- Forwarded by Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron on 05/08/2001 11:41 AM --------------------------- From: Gina Corteselli/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/06/2001 04:10 PM To: Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: David Oxley/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: part time/reduced hour employees Cindy I chatted with Elyse (Elizabeth Labanowski never returned my calls or messages) on the pt/rh issue. Elyse is in favor of having the pt/rh employees in the regular PRC process, with education for managers and at facilitator training and a statement in the ground rules to ensure that they are not penalized or otherwise disadvantaged by the process. David and I discussed this option which he is in favor of it as well. In the meantime for year end we will be ready with a system change to allow us to see pt/rh employees on the screen segregated from the full timers- and to have a live chart of pt/rh employees as well as the full timers. We can't do that for mid-year because it requires a good deal of programming, but it is a feature we can incorporate at year end. what do you think? Gina [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Nov. 13 UC summit conference on electricity; [EMail-Body]= I've got a few too many speeches coming up. You are probably in the best position to address this crowd (time for the student to teach the teacher), but I'd understand if you think it would be awkward (the we should just decline). Jeff Dasovich 10/05/2000 01:23 PM To: Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, skean@enron.com cc: Subject: Re: Nov. 13 UC summit conference on electricity Steve: Let me know if you'd like to discuss. I like Tim's idea re: maybe you should take the slot. But in my view definitely not Skilling. I think you saw my thoughts about this conference in a previous email exchange with Schroeder re: Littlechild. Also, they're breaking my arms and legs about sponsoring ($3-5K range). I had a thought that maybe EBS could stream the conference as an in-kind contribution---the PR that EBS gets out of streaming might outweigh the cost of providing gratis. I had only raised it as a thought, though, and am surprised to see it turn up in print. Tim and I had both had Lee as a professor and I've been talking him about this conference alot and have no problem delivering whatever the news is. In fact, I had already told them that they shouldn't count on us for this one but that we're always interested in working together. Best, Jeff Tim Belden@ECT 10/05/2000 01:00 PM To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Nov. 13 UC summit conference on electricity Jeff, I sent this e-mail to Kean last night. I am fine with your recommendation for Skilling to pass on this event. Do you want to deliver the news to Lee. Do we want to offer you, Steve Kean, or me as an alternative? Personally, I would like to attend but don't have much interest in speaking (assuming that they would allow low lifes like you or me to speak). Your call on all of this. Call bob Badeer with questions about the BEEP as I am heading out of town in a couple of hours. Tim: I've worked hard with these guys to try to make this conference the best that it could be, but it ain't quite there. So I'd rather keep our powder dry and use Skilling at another time. Not top-shelf enough in my view. If you want to discuss further let me know. Also, one question: Is the BEEP stack the constrained supply curve post-adjustment bids? I have that right? ---------------------- Forwarded by Tim Belden/HOU/ECT on 10/05/2000 10:59 AM --------------------------- From: Tim Belden on 10/04/2000 06:33 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Nov. 13 UC summit conference on electricity I just received this e-mail from a former professor of mine at Berekely. Dasovich knows more about this than I do, so you should definitely talk to him. Do you think that this is something that Skilling should attend? ---------------------- Forwarded by Tim Belden/HOU/ECT on 10/04/2000 06:33 PM --------------------------- Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp. From: ""Lee S. Friedman"" <lfried@uclink4.berkeley.edu> 10/04/2000 03:52 PM To: ""Tim Belden"" <tim.belden@enron.com>, ""Jeff Dasovich"" <jdasovic@enron.com> cc: Subject: Nov. 13 UC summit conference on electricity Jeff and Tim, Tim, I know Jeff knows all about the conference we are organizing and I hope you do as well. Rob, I and the rest of the conference organizers are wondering if you could help us find out if Jeff Skilling from Enron would be willing to be one of our panelists? He has been an articulate critic of the current state of our electricity markets, and we definitely would like the genco perspective represented. Naturally we are hoping to get a quick answer because our publicity about the conference will be going out shortly. A brief description of the conference is appended below. Please let me know if you need any additional information. Thanks very much for your help and advice. Lee The summer of San Diego has prompted the School, in collaboration with UC's Energy Institute and Competition Policy Center, to sponsor a high-level summit conference on electricity deregulation. The focus, and the audience, will be national, but heavily informed and influenced by the California crisis. The conference will evaluate (1) the wisdom of deregulation and (2) how the pitfalls encountered so far can be avoided and remedied. The University will facilitate an open, honest and reasoned exchange between executive-level players from various perspectives: industry, regulators, consumers, legislators, academics, and market and system operators. The format entails two roundtable discussions with six speakers and a moderator. During the panel sessions, the speakers will engage in a debate/dialogue on the current situation in electricity deregulation, where we have come from, what the future holds, and what solutions lie on the horizon. Each speaker will have uninterrupted time to speak, followed by Q&A and discussion. We expect a live audience of about 200, including a large press presence. One sponsor has tentatively offered to provide internet streaming video services. We hope to have a balanced group of sponsors ranging from the American Public Power Association to energy companies. The speakers are being arranged at this time. We have commitments from: Loretta Lynch (Chair, CPUC), and PJM CEO Phil Harris. We have a preliminary acceptance from Steven Littlechild (England's former primary electricity regulator) and Laura Tyson (former Chair, President's Council of Economic Advisors and National Economic Council, currently Dean, Haas School of Business). We have invited FERC Commissioner Curt Hebert, and U.S. Representative Edward Markey, executive-level managers from several energy companies and state legislators. Former DOJ chief economist Carl Shapiro will be on one of the panels, as will economist Severin Borenstein, Director of UCEI and Professor of Business and Public Policy. Michael Florio from The Utility Reform Network (TURN) will be a consumer advocate on one of the panels. Lee Friedman, economist and Professor of Public Policy, will briefly provide an introduction to the panel discussions with his talk ""Lighting the Stage: The Electricity of Deregulation."" A dinner for the panelists and organizers will be hosted at UC's Goldman School of Public Policy following the conference proceedings. We have reserved rooms for our speakers at Berkeley's landmark Claremont Hotel. We can reimburse those speakers who request it for coach airfare expenses and other ordinary local expenses. Forfurther information, please contact: Lee S. Friedman Professor of Public Policy Goldman School of Public Policy University of California 2607 Hearst Avenue Berkeley, CA 94720-7320 Ph: (510) 642-7513 Fax: (510) 643-9657 email: lfried@uclink4.berkeley.edu [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Turkey's FX and CPI forecasts, dated June 2001; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Koepke, Gwyn Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 12:27 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: FW: Turkey's FX and CPI forecasts, dated June 2001 Vince, FYI...also attached for your perusal is the country risk report we wrote internally for this forecast. Gwyn -----Original Message----- From: Koepke, Gwyn Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 5:58 PM To: Thuraisingham, Padmesh Cc: Hudler, Cindy; Manning, Jolyon; Wirya Simunovic, Suryan; Raymond, Maureen Subject: Turkey's FX and CPI forecasts, dated June 2001 Paddy and Cindy, Please find attached the updated forecast for the Turkish lira and CPI. Gwyn Koepke and Maureen Raymond-Castaneda -----Original Message----- From: Thuraisingham, Padmesh Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 9:38 AM To: Koepke, Gwyn Cc: Hudler, Cindy; Manning, Jolyon; Wirya Simunovic, Suryan Subject: Turkish FX curve Gwyn, Thank you for you efforts on this. As I've told Cindy, we really need you to send it to us this evening (Houston time), so that we can put it into the model tomorrow morning (UK time). Could you please copy in Joyon Manning and Suryan Wirya Simunovic when you send it. Regards, Paddy. -----Original Message----- From: Koepke, Gwyn Sent: 21 June 2001 01:18 To: Thuraisingham, Padmesh; Hudler, Cindy Cc: Raymond, Maureen Subject: Turkey FX and inflation curves - update Hi Paddy, We are finishing up the Turkey curve and will have it to you by the latter part of the day on Thursday. Thanks, Gwyn Koepke [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Information and Securities Trading; [EMail-Body]= To:GRIFFITH, JOHN Email:john.griffith@enron.com - 713-853-6247 ? Enron Wholesale Services - Office of the Chairman ? From:??Mark Frevert, Chairman & CEO ??????Greg Whalley, President & COO ??????Mark Haedicke, Managing Director & General Counsel ? Subject:??Confidential Information and Securities Trading ? Enron Wholesale Services ('EWS') maintains official Policies and Procedures Regarding Confidential Information and Securities Trading ('Policies and Procedures'), which have been revised as of November 15, 2000 to reflect the new EWS structure. These policies and procedures are intended to allow us simultaneously to pursue our diverse businesses and to protect confidential information, our reputation for integrity, and EWS and its employees from legal liability. ? You are required to become familiar with, and to comply with, the Policies and Procedures. The newly revised Policies and Procedures are available for your review on LegalOnline, the new intranet website maintained by the Enron Wholesale Services Legal Department. Please click on the attached link to access LegalOnline: ? ? You must certify your compliance with the Policies and Procedures within two weeks of your receipt of this message. The LegalOnline site will allow you to quickly and conveniently certify your compliance on-line with your SAP Personal ID number. If you have any questions concerning the Policies or Procedures, please call Lance Schuler at extension 3-5419, Mark Haedicke at extension 3-6544, Alan Aronowitz at extension 3-3214, Bob Bruce at extension 5-7780 or Donna Lowry at extension 3-1939. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Hi Daddy; [EMail-Body]= I love you, baby. Study hard. Kean_Nora <Nora_Kean@Duchesne.org> on 05/04/2001 01:09:47 PM To: ""'skean@enron.com'"" <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: Hi Daddy Hi Daddy. I love you!! - Nora [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Privileged and Confidential Attorney Client Work Product; [EMail-Body]= Rick, Committee staff attendees included David L. Cavicke (Committee Majority Counsel), Brian McCullough (Committee Majority Professional Staff Member), Christopher Knauer (Committee Minority Investigator), and Michael Geffroy (Committee Minority Counsel). Jim -----Original Message----- From: Buy, Rick [<mailto:Rick.Buy@ENRON.com>] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:54 AM To: jtdelorenzo@swidlaw.com Subject: Names of Investigators Jim- Do you have a list of who I talked to in Houston and their affiliation. I would like to keep straight who I have spoken with. The only card I received is from Michael Geffroy. Let me know if there is a problem with this request. Thanks, Rick Buy This e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or its relevant affiliate and may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient (s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender or reply to Enron Corp. at and delete all copies of the message. This e-mail (and any attachments hereto) are not intended to be an offer (or an acceptance) and do not create or evidence a binding and enforceable contract between Enron Corp. (or any of its affiliates) and the intended recipient or any other party, and may not be relied on by anyone as the basis of a contract by estoppel or otherwise. Thank you. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Management Conference - Save the Date; [EMail-Body]= looks fine From: Terrie James/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/19/2001 04:31 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Cindy Olson/ENRON@enronXgate cc: Sherri Sera/ENRON@enronXgate, Marge Nadasky/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: Management Conference - Save the Date Steve and Cindy, Attached is the electronic ""Save the Date"" memo for the Management Conference. We are preparing to send it out next week. Please let me know if you have any comments or concerns on the e-mail. As for distribution, we've worked with HR on the distribution list for VPs; but will circle back with David Oxley's team to ensure we have the most up-to-date list. Since some VPs in redeployment will most likely find positions within Enron by November, I don't plan to exclude them from the distribution ... unlike United Way, where we are not soliciting employees in redeployment for a contribution. I look forward to any feedback. Terrie James Senior Director, Public Relations Enron Broadband Services (ph) 713.853.7727 (fax) 713.646.3248 terrie.james@enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Ed Segner's Staff meeting, in 50M Dining Room; [EMail-Body]= PGE meeting -- identify alternatives Tom Hagen @ CSW Shockley would be avail on thurs or Fri or Lay [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Status of Discussions on Electricity Legislation -- No Agreement
 Reached; [EMail-Body]= Once again today I participated in the discussions on possible electricity legislation held in the offices of Majority Whip Tom DeLay with other interested parties including industry segments, public power and state regulators. The other congressional participants were staff to Reps. Steve Largent and Chip Pickering. After meeting all week (except Wednesday), the group was unable to reach an agreement or even a provisional consensus on what could be placed in an electricity title that could be added to the comprehensive energy package that the House Energy and Commerce Committee will begin to process next week. Congressional staff will report to their bosses on the status of the discussions as of this afternoon and from there the Members will determine whether to proceed further. There is a general perception that committee leaders will elect NOT to take up electricty legislation at this time and in the context of the broader package in the absence of broadly supported legislation. In the end, the discussions did not bear fruit because divisions remained over the usual issues and along most of the usual fault lines. As the drafts progressed during the week, we succeeded in deleting the original language that would have had Congress weigh into the bundled/unbundled and federa/state jurisdictional rules at the very time that likely adverse action in Congress could in turn adversely impact the Supreme Court case. A last minute attempt was made by the congressional staff to stitch together a minimalist electricity title that would have included reliability (with the understanding that the NERC discussions could produce modifications more to our liking), PUHCA repeal, PURPA reform, interconnection language and federal siting. However, in each instance there were one more politically relevant interest groups not willing to go along. Cong. DeLay's staff also tried to link PUHCA repeal to those who had joined an RTO. There was also an attempt to strip it down to reliability, interconnection and siting (eminent domain) -- but again there was either disagreement on the details or objection from those who favorite subject was left out of the minimalist package. There was one rather interesting discussion when the public power folks floated language on market power that included a sentence that would have made the filed rate doctrine inapplicable to antitrust challenges to market rates. Needless to say, I strongly objected as did EPSA and others. As noted, the lack of an agreement reduces our exposure when the mark up occurs. In the absence of an electricity title, refund, price control and other issues should not be germane to the package that the subcommittee will take up on Tuesday and the full committee next Friday. That package will have five issues addressed: conservation, clean coal, hyrdo, nuclear and reformulated gasoline. Details to follow once legislative language is released. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Invitation to speak at September Pricing conference; [EMail-Body]= Forward to whomever you see fit. It looks like an opportunity to explain price risk management to large customers. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/10/2001 09:21 AM --------------------------- ""Valerie Anderson"" <valeriea@cbinet.com> on 05/09/2001 01:52:47 PM To: <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: Invitation to speak at September Pricing conference Hello Mr. Kean, In follow up to an earlier phone message I left, I am sending you the preliminary agenda for my upcoming conference in Atlanta. If you are not the right person for this topic, I would appreciate suggestions for other speakers at Enron. Thank you! Valerie Anderson Conference Producer 781-939-2420 - PricingOutline.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Ed Segner's Staff meeting, in 50M Dining Room; [EMail-Body]= greg piper Andy Keleman 628-7654 re Roadshow [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Governor Ridge might call Ken Lay today; [EMail-Body]= FYI. These are the items I left Ken a voicemail about. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 12/15/99 05:29 PM --------------------------- Carolyn Cooney@ENRON 12/15/99 12:11 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Maureen McVicker/HOU/EES@EES, Elizabeth Linnell/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Governor Ridge might call Ken Lay today I just received a call from Bob O'Dell (215-569-5312) following up on the request from Mayor Edward Rendell regarding the upcoming Millennium Philadelphia's Light and Laser Show and Philadelphia 2000. The Mayor has asked Enron for a $750,000 commitment. As outlined in my December 6th memo -- the breakdown of the commitment was for Enron to contribute $500,000 for the Millennium Philadelphia's Light and Laser Show on December 31, 1999. The $250,000 would be credited to Philadelphia 2000 Convention package. The Mayor and Mr. Lay have spoken several weeks ago but no commitment was made at the time. Will we be sponsoring the event? Also, Bob gave us the heads up --- that Governor Tom Ridge (R-PA) will be calling Ken Lay this afternoon to ask Mr. Lay to be the chair/co-chair of the Republican Governors Association dinner that will be held in Washington, DC in February 2000. Please let me know if you need additional information. Thank you. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= EGEP Sale Announcement; [EMail-Body]= print ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/16/2000 10:15 AM ----- John Ambler@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 10/13/2000 04:39 PM To: Jimmy cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer@ENRON, Johan Subject: EGEP Sale Announcement Jimmy, I'll be working up a limited statement and Q&As, which we will need to run by Jeff Sherrick and Mark Metts. Once we have an approved statement I'll let you know. Of course, we would prefer to avoid publicity if possible. Until we have an approved statement, please call me to discuss if you have pressing demands. Thanks, John ---------------------- Forwarded by John Ambler/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 10/13/2000 04:26 PM --------------------------- Jeffrey Sherrick@ENRON 10/13/2000 03:04 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, John Jimmy cc: Stephen Wallace/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Larry Morse/Corp/Enron@Enron, Mike Stewart/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sanjay Subject: EGEP Sale Announcement On Friday (last night Houston time) we announced Enron's decision to sell Enron Oil & Gas India Ltd. (EOGIL), our subsidary that owns a 30% interest in the Panna, Mukta and Tapti concession areas. We now have bankers involved and a data room is being prepared in Houston which made it extremely difficult to keep the deal quiet any longer. There were a rumors circulating through the office, but the reality of the announcement was still a shock to most of the employees in India and Houston. Attached is a memo we handed out to employees, but basically we said the following: 1) Selling assets or companies is a routine part of Enron's strategy to redeploy capital in the higher return opportunities. The company has exposure to a number of tremendous opportunities today that were not envisioned even twelve months ago. In line with this strategy, we are placing EOGIL in the market. 2) Depending on the success of finding an acceptable buyer for EOGIL, we will be reviewing the balance of our portfolio for transfer to other Enron entities or for sale as separate packages. We anticipate closing the EOGIL transaction and rationalizing the remaining portfolio by March 31, 2001. 3) Pending the success outlined in item #2, we will eliminate Enron Global E&P as an Enron business unit on March 31, 2001. 4) We announced some interim staff changes to facilitate the process. a) Jeff Sherrick would re-focus his time largely on the sale process b) Mike Stewart will be responsible for all India activity except the sale process c) Steve Harper will be responsible for EGEP's sale activity and coordination with our bankers and Corporate Development 5) Commented on the potential impact to employees in general terms. We told them it was pre-mature to outline all of the possibilities until we signed a PSA with a buyer. However, in general, there is a good likelihood that many people will either have opportunities for future employment with the buyers or through redeployment within Enron. Those people that do not remain with the assets or are not redeployed in Enron will be involuntarily terminated March 31, 2001 unless they are needed to close a transaction or to provide transition services to a buyer. I would like to keep this as low-keyed as possible. Last year when we were for sale there were not a lot of comments, but you never know. If anyone in the media picks up on this I would expect it to happen early next week. Mike Stewart is currently in India in the Mumbai office (01191228395841) and can be reached at the Mariott after-hours(01191228577878). He is fully briefed on our position regarding the activities within EGEP and EOGIL. Mike will be traveling offshore and to Baroda over the weekend and on Monday. I will be available all weekend and next week at the following numbers; (work) 713-853-5934, (home) 281-320-2198, (cell) 713-569-4713. I would suggest talking with Mike or I before making any comments to the media if possible. This afternoon I notified our partners and thr Gov't of India of our intention to market our assets. I will be making a trip to India soon to visit with the appropriate people in these organizations within the next two weeks. While I wouldn't expect this to happen, please refer any inquiries from our partners (ONGC and Reliance) or the GOI to Mike or me. As you might expect, we want to be careful and consistent in our message to these groups. I will keep you informed regarding any changes to the above. If you have any questions, contact me at the above numbers. jeff [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Protecting Confidential Information: New European Restricted List
 Procedure; [EMail-Body]= As you probably all know, we are on the verge of launching credit derivatives trading in Europe and North America, both on Enron Online and off-line. This will involve quoting prices for buying and selling bankruptcy protection in respect of reference entities, many of whom are our counterparties in a variety of different commercial and financial contexts. This exciting cocktail of credit derivatives and Enron Online raises significant novel legal risks for Enron. Probably the most significant risk arises where Enron has confidential information about a reference entity and wrongfully uses that information in pricing the credit derivative on that entity. This could well result in legal proceeding against Enron. In practice, an allegation of misuse of confidential information can be very difficult indeed to defend without adequate procedures in place to safeguard that information. Against this background is the ever-present risk of ""insider dealing"". This crime - which carries a maximum prison sentence of 7 years and an unlimited fine - is committed where a person (or member of their family etc) deals in the securities (shares or bonds) of a listed company on the basis of unpublished (confidential) price-sensitive information. In addition, SFA rules require the safeguarding of confidential information, the misuse of which is a serious disciplinary matter. In order to ensure the success of this new business, we are now introducing new policies and procedures (attached) which include a simple Restricted List procedure. In essence they require you - to take prudent steps to safeguard confidential information within Enron to notify Michael Brown, Mark Elliott or myself if you become aware of confidential information (or circumstances) about a counterparty which you think might make it appropriate for that counterparty to be placed on the Restricted List. To make life easier, numerous examples of the types of information which might be relevant are set out in the attached procedures, so please familiarise yourself, and anyone else in your group you think appropriate, with them. As you will see, you are not expected to make difficult determinations about whether an entity should or should not be added to the Restricted List, just to let us know if you think there is a possibility that it should be added. We will also provide quick briefing sessions to ensure that each of you is comfortable with these new procedures. Many thanks for your co-operation. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Fw: Tagging issue at NERC Security Subcommittee tomorrow; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/26/2000 04:20 PM ----- ""Duncan Kincheloe"" <dkincheloe@mpua.org> 09/26/2000 10:22 AM To: <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: Fw: Tagging issue at NERC Security Subcommittee tomorrow Steve, ? I sent the below to you this morning at an apparently outdated email address.? Your secretary was kind enough to update me so I'm forwarding it again. ? Duncan Kincheloe General Manager and CEO Missouri Public Utility Alliance 573-445-3279 Fax 573-445-0680 ----- Original Message ----- From: Duncan Kincheloe To: Steven Kean Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2000 10:01 AM Subject: Tagging issue at NERC Security Subcommittee tomorrow Steve, I haven't been in touch since the DOE Reliability Task Force and hope this email address through Elizabeth is still the way to reach you.? Incidentally, I was with Sue Tierney at a NARUC conference yesterday and we've started a new pool to wager when Congress will get this issue dealt with. Want in? Perhaps you remember that while we were serving on the Task Force I moved to EPRI to direct their government relations.? Last year I moved back to Missouri to run the municipals' state joint action agency, which is why I'm writing.? Part of our activity is operating a 19 city power pool (MoPEP) that has a three year supply contract of up to 40 mWh/hr with Enron.? We've had some difficulties with delivery since a change in tagging was made in June. ? The issue and a proposed solution is explained in the attached three page ""bullet statement"" that we've just submitted to the new NERC Security Subcommittee that meets tomorrow.? Based on his discussions with NERC staff, with a Mike Curry with Enron and other affected utilities, my chief operating officer for MoPEP is optimistic about prospects for this resolution.? I would like to make sure of Enron's support.? I'm told that Dick Ingersoll will be at the subcommittee meeting for Enron, and I know Dick from SPP meetings when I was on the Missouri Commission but don't have contact information on him now.? I'd be very grateful if you could pass along a nod of benign interest in this. We'd greatly appreciate Enron's support for the proposed resolution of the tagging issue at the NERC Subcommittee tomorrow, mainly because it should avoid what might otherwise be a messy contract dispute, at FERC or elsewhere, between our organizations.? Without getting into the details, my understanding of the issue under the energy purchase agreement has to do with whether the change in NERC tagging that was required on June 1 (the date when MoPEP started taking certain control area services from Western Resources) affects Enron's obligation under the agreement to deliver energy to the Associated Electric Cooperative transmission system.? MoPEP's view is that Enron's obligations are unaffected, but some at Enron apparently have had a different view.? Our belief is that the proposal that will be presented to the Security Subcommittee will resolve the tagging matter such that both Enron and MoPEP would regard any potential dispute on this issue as moot. Sorry for such short notice, but this resolution and taking it to the subcommittee came out of discussions in Atlanta Friday. Thanks for your consideration, Steve.? Hope all is well with you. Duncan Kincheloe General Manager and CEO Missouri Public Utility Alliance 573-445-3279 Fax 573-445-0680 - MoPEP Tagging.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: HP -- confidential internal document; [EMail-Body]= This is an excellent update. Thanks for putting this together. Dale/Patrick - lets regroup on how we want to move this onward. Seems like SJ's suggestion of our spending more time with Bill Dwyer is a good one. Thanks Matt Sarah-Joy Hunter@ENRON 12/12/00 02:42 PM To: Matt Harris/Enron Communications@Enron Communications cc: Patrick Tucker/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Peter Goebel/NA/Enron@Enron, Dale Clark/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Jennifer Medcalf/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: HP -- confidential internal document Matt: As GSS Business Development transitions the HP relationship for broadband to your team, there are several issues I wanted to clarify in terms of how the relationship has been developed and who the contacts have been to date. Additionally, I outlined the discussion points/action items from this morning's meeting you held with Jennifer Medcalf and myself. Per your request, the HP presentation complete with a listing of HP's business partners was e-mailed to you this morning. HP contacts to date: Bill Lovejoy, Western Gulf Area Sales Manager Houston, TX #(713)-439-5587 (Gerry Cashiola's boss) Gerry Cashiola, sales representative Houston, TX #(713)-439-5555 (To date, HP person coordinating the relationship--seeking a short term play) Greg Pyle, Solution Control Manager Southeast Region Austin, TX (#(512)-257-5735 (Pyle has been playing the business developer role but continues to defer leadership of the process to Gerry Cashiola) Daniel Morgridge, Manager of Internet - E-Services long term alliances Austin, TX #(512)-257-5736 (Interested in E-services/wireless longer term alliances) Bill Dwyer, Chief Architect, e-Services Solutions Cupertino, CA #(408)-447-5240 (To date, clearly the most knowledgeable person on HP's business propositions; strong technical, financial background to craft value propositions. Gerry Cashiola and Greg Pyle deferred to his judgement in the 11/16th meeting) Matt, On November 10th, GSS Business Development took HP through a tour of Enron's trading floor, the gas control center, and the peaking power plant unit center on the trading floor. This tour was one meeting, amongst several, held in October and November to provide HP a full overview of Enron's products and services and introduce them to appropriate contacts at Enron (EBS, GSS buy side -- Peter Goebel). On November 16th GSS Business Development, Patrick Tucker, and Dale Clark outlined 3 possible EBS/HP focus areas -- connectivity, storage, and wireless. Three EBS action items were defined in that meeting: 1) HP was to provide an HP contact on connectivity (to date, Gerry Cashiola has stalled on providing this). Sarah-Joy will continue to pursue this information and get a sense from Gerry Cashiola of what he means by short term opportunity. What is HP's time horizon for short term? 2) EBS and GSS/BD was to facilitate a conference call on Storage with Ravi to explore size and potential scope of opportunity (completed 12/8) 3) GSS/BD was to facilitate a conference call with Peter Goebel, GSS IT Sourcing Portfolio Leader (set for 12/14) In conversations with you, Jennifer Medcalf and myself this morning, several decisions on forward-looking strategy with HP/EBS were confirmed: Gerry Cashiola has been unable to take control of the process. More importantly, despite numerous visits to Enron in which he has had overviews of Enron's products and services; met with Peter Goebel and his team on the GSS buy side, and participated in an Experience Enron tour, Gerry has been unable to define an HP business proposition. The coordination between Cashiola (short term initiative) Morgridge (long term, 12-24 months) has remained unorganized. These initiatives need to be developed separately. Clearly, the conversations with HP need to be elevated to a more senior level so EBS can work with HP decision makers who can move the relationship forward at a strategic level. As the relationship is developed at this strategic level, shorter term opportunities will crop up along the way. But Gerry's short term plans will not be the focus of the EBS/HP relationship, rather a by-product. To facilitate this process of elevating the relationship, Jennifer Medcalf and I are following up with Bill Lovejoy and Greg Pyle. Lovejoy's boss is Dan Sytsma, VP of HP's America's Central Region. In the conference call Thursday, 12/14 with Peter Goebel and HP regarding wireless initiatives, Peter will support the GSS/BD push for the HP/EBS initiative by reiterating the following two points: a) Enron is already an HP customer; the onus is on HP to move forward on the process of building a strategic relationship (IBM and Lexmark are only some of the HP competitors who could push them out of the running) b) HP's ability to bring the right people to the table will influence HP's business relationship process with Enron Patrick Tucker and Dale Clark could build their relationship with Bill Dwyer, Chief Architect e-Services Solutions, (met at the meeting 11/16) in the near term. Perhaps, plan a visit to Cupertino, California to see Dwyer in person. We look forward to continuing close collaboration with your team on this and other opportunities. Sarah-Joy Hunter Enron Corporation Global Strategic Sourcing - Business Development #(713)-345-6541 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Confidential - Decision tree on projects; [EMail-Body]= We will discuss at the next Staff meeting. Thanks for bringing it up. Any= feedback from the floor meeting yesterday would be appreciated. -----Original Message----- From: =09Mahan, Mariella =20 Sent:=09Tuesday, November 13, 2001 2:54 PM To:=09Horton, Stanley; Hughes, James A.; Hayslett, Rod; Sommers, Jeffrey E. Subject:=09Confidential - Decision tree on projects Something for us to talk about during our next staff meeting. There are three projects which have significant cash flow problems and thus= difficulties in meeting debt obligations: these are: SECLP, Panama and Gaz= a. In the past, as I suppose we have done in Dabhol, we have taken the pos= ition that we would not inject cash into these companies and would be prepa= red to face a default and possible acceleration of the loans. SECLP has be= en the biggest issue/problem. Panama is much less (a few million of floati= ng of our receivables from the company) would be sufficient to meet the cas= h crunch in April of this year. Note that, in Panama, the debt is fully gu= aranteed by the government and is non-recoursed to the operating company, B= LM. In the past, we have discussed letting the debt default, which would c= ause the bank to potentially seek complete payment and acceleration from th= e GoPanama. The reason: the vast majority of BLM's problems stem from acti= ons taken by the regulator that have effectively amended our PPA's with pri= vate parties; those actions resulted in significant loss of revenues, which= although today have stopped or have been limited, have left a ""mark"" on th= e company's liquidity position. =20 Now the question is: come April of 2002, should any of our actions in Panam= a or decisions related thereto (which we would have otherwise taken or made= ) be affected in any way by either the proposed merger or an effort by Enro= n to preserve efforts to re-establish investor/creditor confidence? The sa= me could go for SECLP and Gaza. This is simply an overall ""guidance"" question. Let's take it up during our= staff meeting next week, if that's ok with you. Many thanks, Mariella [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: NARUC Summer Committee Meeting; [EMail-Body]= Is Jeff available? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/24/2001 07:43 AM --------------------------- Richard Shapiro 05/23/2001 03:17 PM To: Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: NARUC Summer Committee Meeting We should do it.,....and should check Ken or Jeff's availability. From: Lisa Yoho on 05/23/2001 03:11 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: NARUC Summer Committee Meeting Steve and Rick: I just received a call from NARUC's meeting coordinator, and she is putting together a panel of speakers to address ""what is needed to achieve a balanced energy policy"" at the summer committee meeting. The panel will consist of 2 state commissioners, a consumer ""type"", an environmental advocate, and an energy CEO. She is interested in having someone from Enron on the panel, which is scheduled for July 16th in Seattle. Are we interested in doing this? Lisa [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: DASH on Straits Loan Restructuring - Private and confidential ,
 Attorney client privilege; [EMail-Body]= I guess I don't have strong feelings if a dash is written here or not but I do care that a troubled situation receive the attention it requires to avoid getting in deeper. There always seems to be reluctance in UK to have a dash prepared, Steve always used a huge amount of energy on justifying the task. We all know that if problem deals are not addressed they always get worse. Maybe Michael could be led to ""suggest"" an alternative memo or approach. A ""problem deal"" memo. If you all think a dash is the best approach do it and I don't care if they don't sign it. Once the website is functional, it will be helpful to have a complete history of deals and having these kind of memos in dash format will aid this process. One final thought, Michael is quite supportive of our effort and I think we should pick battles carefully. Rick [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Catch Up; [EMail-Body]= BTW = By the way. Putnam in Boston. it's official. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Joseph T Pokalsky Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 12:10 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Re: Catch Up Thanks. What does BTW mean? I assume ""between the wall and us"", I'll keep it quite. Where is he going? On Wed, 20 Jun 2001 11:02:22 -0500 Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com writes: > Joe, > > Here it is > > david_cox@enron.net > karen.owens@enron.com > > Gail ,evidently left Enron. Haven't seen her in ages. > > > BTW, P. Bibi resigned. > > Vince > > -----Original Message----- > From: Joseph T Pokalsky > > com+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com] > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 7:34 AM > To: Kaminski, Vince J > Subject: Re: Catch Up > > Too bad. It would be good to catch up. Do you know the emails > for: > > David Cox, Karen Owens, Gail Bennett? I couldn't find an e-mail > directory on Enron's web site. > > Have a great trip, enjoy London. Thanks. > > > > On Tue, 19 Jun 2001 17:16:13 -0500 Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com > writes: > > Joe, > > > > I could not find the issue. I think I have dumped all the > copies of > > the > > publication. > > I am in London next week. > > > > Vince > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Joseph T Pokalsky > > > > > > > com+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com] > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 3:14 PM > > To: Kaminski, Vince J > > Subject: Catch Up > > > > Vince: > > > > I haven't heard but I guess that you weren't able to find > the > > article on > > my going to Southern. I may be in town the 26 and 27th of > next > > week. > > Will you be around? Do you want to meet up for bkfst or > lunch? > > Thanks. > > > > > > Joseph T. Pokalsky > > Energy Vertical Analysis, LLC > > Office: 404-350-8562 > > Cell: 404-456-5173 > > Fax: 413-691-5614 > > > > Joseph T. Pokalsky > Energy Vertical Analysis, LLC > Office: 404-350-8562 > Cell: 404-456-5173 > Fax: 413-691-5614 > Joseph T. Pokalsky Energy Vertical Analysis, LLC Office: 404-350-8562 Cell: 404-456-5173 Fax: 413-691-5614 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Fletcher School/Enron; [EMail-Body]= Thaniks for the note. Christie is now organizing our university relationships, so direct the communication to her. Thanks again David Merrill@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 09/09/2000 05:59 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Fletcher School/Enron Dear Steve: Last month while at my reunion at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University, some of the school officials told me that Enron has hired about eight Fletcher graduates recently and is happy with them. The school is also happy and wants to strengthen its relationship with Enron. They had earlier this year contacted a Laura Kalmans, Director of Community Development at Enron, to discuss various ideas for cooperation with Enron that would strengthen our capacity in environmental matters and give the students exposure to real world issues, but nothing happened and they lost contact. They asked me who they should contact to find out how to pursue this and I said I thought it might be you or someone under you. They now want to send a letter to someone at Enron on this proposal. It is OK if it is addressed to you or should I tell them another name? Please advise me how to steer them in the right direction. Many thanks. David Merrill ---------------------- Forwarded by David Merrill/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 09/09/2000 06:33 PM --------------------------- Laura Karch <Laura.Karch@tufts.edu> on 09/05/2000 03:15:08 PM To: david.merrill@enron.com cc: Subject: Fletcher School/Enron Dear Ambassador Merrill, I understand that you and Betsy Ginsberg had a conversation at reunion last month about a possible partnership between the Fletcher School and Enron. Thank you for generously offering to help us explore this connection. We believe there are strong synergies between Professor Bill Moomaw's International Environment and Resource Policy program and Enron's business model. There is currently a strong recruiting relationship between Enron and Fletcher; there are nine Fletcherites at Enron at this time. I'm confident that our strong recruiting relationship is a solid first step from which to launch an even stronger partnership. In order to explore expanding this relationship Ms. Elise Kalmans, Director of Community Development, agreed to arrange a meeting for Bill and me last spring. Unfortunately, the scheduling did not work out, and Ms. Kalmans then began a maternity leave so we had trouble identifying a new point of contact. I appreciate your suggestion that we aim to work through Stephen Kean. As Senior Vice President for Public and Environmental and Government Affairs, he does sound like the ideal contact with whom to discuss Professor Moomaw's program and its students. How do you suggest we proceed? Should we send a letter from Interim Dean Trachtman to ask if Mr. Kean would be willing to meet with Professor Moomaw? May I mention that you suggested we write him? At Betsy's suggestion, I have attached the presentation outline we prepared for Enron, along with the letter we originally mailed to Elise. I would be very interested in any suggestions you may have. If you have any trouble opening the powerpoint file or word document, please let me know and I would be happy to mail or fax them. Thank you again for your kind offer of assistance. Sincerely, Laura Karch Associate Director, External Relations Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy 617-627-2720 - IERP enron.ppt - enron Kalmans.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CONFIDENTIAL Personnel issue; [EMail-Body]= Michelle/Lizsette; I was wondering if circumstances with Jonathan Lane (the contract Help desk person whom I mentioned to you a week or so ago) have been resolved? When we last spoke I mentioned that he went to Valeria Hope's group. I am not sure of the outcome of that visit, but I will tell you that his negative attitude and general dissatisfaction on the team is becoming disruptive to the other help desk members. He is away from his desk often (having ""meetings"", which may be interviews for other positions), he has shared with the other team members his perceptions of management and his issues with us. If and when I can do so, I would like to terminate him. I won't until I hear from you all, and we are documenting discussions as you requested. I hope this can end soon, though because this is causing real problems here. Gina [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: IHI Arbitration: PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY CLIENT
 COMMUNICATION; [EMail-Body]= That all depends on your definition of the word""job."" It was actually anticlimactic---Mark told Bob he needed to stick around on some of the old EI litigation, a fact we already knew. Are you at the Sempra deposition. how is it going? Gail Brownfeld/ENRON@enronXgate 03/07/2001 03:06 PM To: Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: RE: IHI Arbitration: PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY CLIENT COMMUNICATION He keeps saying that he ""needs"" the $15 million. Maybe it's a budget thing. I think he really just wants to renegotiate the deal. I don't think he thinks that IHI has the money to pay us back. What happened at the meeting on Monday with Mark? Do I still have a job? -----Original Message----- From: Sanders, Richard Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2001 3:02 PM To: Brownfeld, Gail Subject: RE: IHI Arbitration: PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY CLIENT COMMUNICATION Thanks. I have no idea why Enerson is being so panicky. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call
 Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and
 Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted; [EMail-Body]= Western Wholesale Activities Conference Call - Gas & Power Date: Today and Every Thursday Time: 1:00 pm Pacific, 3:00 pm Central, and 4:00 pm Eastern time, Number: 1-888-271-0949 Participant Code: 936022 In Ray's absence, I am facilitating today's call. The proposed agenda (Item numbers refer to the proceedings document row number): Electric 1. Responses to ISO and CA utility RTO filings due June 19 (item 9a) 2. ATC Complaint - next steps (item 20) 3. RTO Seams Conference 6/19/01 and request to speak due tomorrow 6/8/01 (item 37) 4. ISO withholding of as-bid and OOM price data 5. Generator data requests - (Hatsoe) Gas 6. Response to FERC to Re-Impose Transportation Price Caps (item 36) 7. Quarterly reporting requirements (item 35) 8. Gas-related data requests (item 33) [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: [enerfaxdaily] TODAYS ENERGY PRICES &NEWS; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Sent:=09Saturday, June 23, 2001 1:11 PM To:=09Kaminski, Vince J Subject:=09[enerfaxdaily] TODAYS ENERGY PRICES &NEWS Outlook users please wait a minute for email to appear. Scroll completely d= own to view. To delete Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com see bottom of newsletter.= OUTLOOK users please wait a minute for the web to appear, others may need = to scrolldown past the header to view. If you can not view energy prices & = news visit http://www.enerfax.com for today's power & natural gas prices & = news. -----Pure Text & Lotus Users subscribe to the pure text version by cl= icking Enerfax Daily NORTH AMERICA'S FREE POWER AND GAS INFORMATION SOURCE Monday, June 25, 2001 No. 768 Visit our website at: http://www.enerfax.com/ =20 For Oil Prices & News write or go to Please view in a fixed-width font such as Courier. PHYSICAL GAS PRICES | Gulf/Eastern Region | | | Agua Dulce | 3.55 | | ANR SE | 3.64 | | Carthage TG | 3.63 | | Chicago Citygate | 3.64 | | Columbia Gulf Onshore | 3.66 | | Dominion TTT South(CNG S. Point) | 3.88 | | Henry Hub | 3.68 | | Houston Ship Channel | 3.68 | | Katy Hub | 3.63 | | NGPL - Midcontinent | 3.47 | | NGPL STX | 3.54 | | NGPL TX/OK | 3.61 | | Niagara | 3.84 | | Sonat Tier 1 | 3.67 | | TCO IPP Pool | 3.85 | | Tetco ELa | 3.61 | | Tetco M-3 | 4.02 | | Tetco STX | 3.54 | | TGP Zone 0 | 3.56 | | TGP Zone 1 | 3.65 | | TGT Zone SL | 3.63 | | New York Citygate | 4.06 | | Transco Station 65 | 3.75 | | Transco Zone 6 (NY) | 4.06 | | Trunk ELa | 3.60 | | Western Region | | | California Border | 3.90 | | El Paso Permian | 3.46 | | El Paso San Juan | 2.47 | | Waha Hub | 3.54 | | Canadian/Rockies Region | | | Nova/Aeco (in C$/GJ) | 4.46 | | Dawn Hub/Union | 3.82 | | Northwest Stanfield | 3.23 | | Wyoming Pool | 2.03 | | Opal/Kern River | 2.05 | | PGT-Malin | 3.35 | | Sumas | 3.17 | GAS FUTURES Henry Hub 12 Month Strip 3.9433 +0.0121 =20 18 Month Strip 3.8870 +0.0164 =20 | Month | High | Low | Close | Change | | JUL | 3.780 | 3.720 | 3.742 | +0.005 | | AUG | 3.840 | 3.785 | 3.802 | +0.008 | | SEP | 3.880 | 3.830 | 3.845 | +0.008 | | OCT | 3.925 | 3.885 | 3.898 | +0.008 | | NOV | 4.140 | 4.100 | 4.121 | +0.009 | | DEC | 4.355 | 4.300 | 4.336 | +0.021 | | JAN | 4.430 | 4.375 | 4.406 | +0.024 | | FEB | 4.300 | 4.240 | 4.271 | +0.024 | | MAR | 4.090 | 4.042 | 4.066 | +0.024 | | APR | 3.660 | 3.610 | 3.636 | +0.024 | | MAY | 3.595 | 3.560 | 3.576 | +0.024 | | JUN | 3.625 | 3.605 | 3.621 | +0.024 | Power Traders=20 If you like tools, wouldn't it be nice to have one that makes you money? = --Profit from Time2Trade(tm) Power Analysts=20 If you like detail, wouldn't it be great to have it all? --AcuPower - Now with Trader & Analyst Consoles For a free trial go to http://www.capacitymap.com/ . POWER FUTURES | Month | COB | Change | PV | Change | | JUL | 115.00 | +0.00 | 91.00 | -21.00 | | AUG | 127.00 | +0.00 | 126.00 | +0.00 | | SEP | 105.00 | +0.00 | 103.00 | +0.00 | | OCT | 97.00 | +0.00 | 82.00 | +0.00 | | NOV | 85.00 | +0.00 | 60.00 | +0.00 | | DEC | 105.00 | +0.00 | 60.00 | +0.00 | | JAN | 100.00 | +0.00 | 60.00 | +0.00 | | FEB | 85.00 | +0.00 | 55.00 | +0.00 | | MAR | 65.00 | +0.00 | 50.00 | +0.00 | | APR | 49.00 | +0.00 | 48.00 | +0.00 | | MAY | 49.00 | +0.00 | 48.00 | +0.00 | | JUN | 49.00 | +0.00 | 62.00 | +0.00 | | Month | Entergy | Change | Cinergy | Change | | JUL | 64.50 | +0.50 | 62.50 | +0.50 | | AUG | 64.50 | +0.50 | 62.00 | +2.00 | | SEP | 36.50 | -0.70 | 32.75 | -0.35 | | OCT | 33.50 | -1.00 | 31.75 | -0.25 | | NOV | 33.50 | -1.00 | 31.75 | -0.25 | | DEC | 33.50 | -1.00 | 31.75 | -0.25 | | JAN | 36.25 | +0.25 | 35.50 | +0.25 | | FEB | 36.25 | +0.25 | 35.50 | +0.25 | | MAR | 34.00 | +0.00 | 33.50 | +0.00 | | APR | 34.00 | +0.00 | 33.50 | +0.00 | | MAY | 38.00 | -0.50 | 37.00 | +0.00 | | JUN | 46.00 | +0.00 | 44.50 | +0.00 | GET REAL about energy risk management with KWI In today's fast moving energy markets you need to be able to manage risk in= real time. That means knowing before you hit a risk problem, not afterwards when it ma= y be too late to prevent big losses spreading right through your enterprise= . With kW3000(tm), our multi-commodity, integrated front to back office softw= are, you can monitor your Profit At Risk(tm), counterparty risk and mark-to= -market all in real time. Keep alert to risk. Do it in real time. Call KWI - http://www.ziffenergy.co= m/=20 Americas: +1-281-681-3301 / Europe: +44 (0) 20-7386-2700 / Asia Pacific: +6= 1(0) 2-9976-6111=20 POWER FUTURES | Month | PJM | Change | | JUL | 60.50 | +2.00 | | AUG | 58.50 | +1.50 | | SEP | 35.55 | +0.00 | | OCT | 33.00 | +0.15 | | NOV | 33.00 | +0.15 | | DEC | 33.00 | +0.15 | | JAN | 38.00 | -0.10 | | FEB | 38.00 | -0.10 | | MAR | 35.50 | +0.00 | | APR | 35.50 | +0.00 | | MAY | 36.50 | +0.00 | | JUN | 44.00 | +0.00 | ENERGY. @ENERGY, FEA's Complete Suite of Energy Products, BUILT FOR THE FUTURE. *Manage all your energy risks. *Build and Price deals. *Value physical assets (generation, storage, etc.) *Report and reduce your energy risks FEA FINANCIAL ENGINEERING main phone number: 1 510-548-6200 email address: info@fea.com=20 NATURAL GAS OPTIONS | | Closing | Days | Implied ATM | | Month | Price | Left | Volatility | | JUL | 3.742 | 4 | 49.65% | | AUG | 3.802 | 34 | 61.32% | | SEP | 3.845 | 67 | 60.60% | | OCT | 3.898 | 95 | 61.22% | | NOV | 4.121 | 126 | 61.16% | | DEC | 4.336 | 158 | 60.84% | PHYSICAL POWER PRICES | | High | Low | Average | | | $/MWh | $/MWh | $/MWh | | Cinergy | 21.00 | 19.50 | 20.40 | | ECAR | 37.05 | 34.35 | 35.70 | | ERCOT | 40.00 | 39.75 | 39.90 | | Entergy | 34.00 | 21.50 | 29.90 | | TVA | 40.00 | 38.95 | 40.00 | | ComEd | 21.00 | 21.00 | 21.00 | | PJM West | 32.50 | 31.50 | 31.90 | | Main | 39.50 | 33.50 | 36.30 | | MAPP | 49.50 | 42.00 | 44.75 | | Palo Verde | 93.00 | 79.00 | 87.60 | | Mid C | 81.00 | 70.00 | 75.00 | | COB | 80.00 | 78.00 | 79.00 | | 4 Corners | 80.00 | 75.00 | 77.50 | | Mead | 82.00 | 80.00 | 81.00 | | NP 15 | 82.00 | 65.00 | 76.35 | | SP 15 | 88.00 | 75.00 | 84.10 | IMMEDIATELY AVAILABLE NOx CONTROL SYSTEMS Two (2) complete simple-cycle (hot-side) SCR systems including reactors, ca= talyst, ammonia injection grids and systems, CEMS duct sections, vaporizers= , storage tank and controls. Current design allows for up to 60% NOx remov= al with expansion space available for over 80% NOx removal. Originally designed for Frame 6B's but possibly adaptable to LM6000's, W251= 's or multiple smaller gas turbines. Ideal to apply to fast-track CA project to comply with 2001 waivers and sub= sequently adapt to meet 2002 emissions requirements. Owners would consider= equity in appropriate project and could assist qualified partners with imm= ediate site and fuel, as well as possible availability of gas turbine equipment. All equipment is subject to prior sale. For further information, principals only please contact: David Wakefield Phone 713-520-5083, Fax 713-520-6291 Email EPICDWAKE@AOL.COM=20 Today's Power Bulletins * Moody's Cuts Ipalco Enterprises' Commercial Paper Ratings to 'Prime-2' * No Blackouts Last Week, But California Still Wary * AstroPower Stock Jumps 12.3% After Selected by US Home to Supply at Least= 500 Solar Electric Home Power Systems Beginning in 2003 * EU Drafts Ambitious Climate Emissions Trade Plan Washington State Attorney General to Ask FERC ALJ to Allow Utilities to Neg= otiate=20 * Refunds for Overcharges by Power GeneratorsBPA to Announce Load Cuts and = Rates Friday, June 29th * Niagara Mohawk and IBEW Local 97 Reach Tentative Labor Agreement * Central Maine Power Urges FERC to Speed Integration of Regional Power Mar= kets * Duke Energy Launches Australian Power Plant * CMS Energy's $260 Million Senior Notes Rated 'BB+' by Fitch * Fuel Cell Technology and Vehicles Come to Capitol Hill Tuesday; Energy Se= cretary Abraham to Speak * 500 MW Kewaunee Nuclear Plant Returns to Full Power * ISO New England Backs Connecticut Governor Rowland for Vetoing Power Plan= t Emissions Legislation More stories with bulletins at l=20 Saddle Up for NESA / HEA's 24th Annual Meeting ""Deep in the Heart of Texas"" September 9 - 11, 2001 Hyatt Regency Hill Country Resort San Antonio, Texas The Annual Meeting Planning Committee has put together an outstanding progr= am for your review. Visit out web site at www.nesanet.org <http://www.nesa= net.org/ > for a complete brochure. If you have problems with the file ca= ll NESA / HEA Headquarters at (713) 856-6525 and we'll mail or fax a copy o= ut immediately. General Session topics include: * Will Tomorrow's Restructured Electric Infrastructure Support Tomorrow'= s Economy? * Power Deregulation Panel: Developer/IPP, Utility/ Transmission, Power = Marketer, Government, Retail * Power Demand * The State of the Energy Industry * New Political Administration - Impact on Energy Policy and Environment Networking Opportunities: * Opening Reception - Sunday, September 9 * Golf Tournament & Tours of Area Attractions - Monday, September 10 We hope that you take this opportunity to meet with your colleagues and cus= tomers in this relaxing yet professional environment to exchange ideas on m= atters of importance covering a broad spectrum of subjects. The Annual Meeting agenda includes timely issues presented by knowledgeable industry l= eaders who will discuss formidable and thought provoking issues affecting t= he energy industry today. NESA / HEA's 24th Annual Meeting Educating the Energy Professional Today's Gas Bulletins * Federal Judge Halts Oil and Natural Gas Exploration off Central Californi= a Coast * Baker Hughes US Rig Count Up 11 to 1,277; Canada Down 15 to 305; Gulf of = Mexico Down 4 to 154; Searching for Oil Down 12 to 211; Searching for Natur= al Gas Up 21 to 1,063 * FERC Concurs with California Energy Commission that Lack of Adequate Stor= age and Take-Away Capacity Within the State Are Cause of Soaring Natural Ga= s Prices * Judge Issues Order Denying Southwest Gas and ONEOK's Motions to Dismiss = Southern Union's Federal Claims Against Them; But Dismisses 2 Major Claims = Against ONEOK * The American Stock Exchange Lists Common Stock of Provident Energy Trust = Under Ticker Symbol 'PVX' * W-H Energy Services Equity Offering Priced at $24.00 per Share with Closi= ng June 27th; Total of 5.5 Million Common Shares Sold=20 * Southern Union Selects Planalytics' Weathernomics Gas Buyer to Help Manag= e Natural Gas Buying and Hedging More stories with bulletins at l=20 Natural Gas Futures Steady Again=20 Natural gas futures on the NYMEX settled nearly flat Friday for the sec= ond consecutive day with traders hesitant to take on new positions ahead of= the weekend. Trade and commercial activity was almost non-existent and muc= h of the activity was confined to low risk spread trading. Bearish sentimen= t was offset by short covering ahead of the weekend, although most traders = say the downtrend is still intact in the absence of any significant weather= change or hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico. The July contract traded in a $= 0.06 range, ending up $0.005 at $3.742 per MMBtu. August gained $0.008 to $= 3.802 per MMBtu. The market was expected to dip to the $3.670 mark, but cou= ld not slide past $3.720, leading to some short-covering. The market remain= s under pressure from mild weather and a series of larger-than-normal stora= ge injections that have filled storage to 49% of capacity. Texas should ret= urn to very warm conditions this week. In addition, the Northeast and Midwe= st are expected to see a rise in temperatures early this week that will cre= ate stronger demand. At test of support at the May 30th low of $3.67 is lik= ely this week. The next level of support after $3.670 is seen at $3.570 and= then $3.50. Resistance was pegged at $3.98 and then again at $4.14. Natura= l gas for next day delivery across the US and Canada was generally mixed to= down $0.05 Friday, except out west where spot prices continued to tumble. = The Southern California delivery point of Topock fell about $2.50 per MMBtu= , while Kern River and Opal dipped well below $2.00 per MMBtu. Natural gas = for next delivery at the Henry Hub slipped $0.01 to $3.68 per MMBtu. North American Gas Storage Conference =20 Storage 2001 - 2002: =20 Source of Stability or Chaos? =20 June 22, Houston =20 Find the answers at Ziff Energy's natural gas storage conference. A blockb= uster roster of industry leaders from the utility, trading, pipeline and st= orage sectors in each of the North American storage regions will present ti= mely, relevant information you can use. This conference will assist you in = making critical decisions about your natural gas storage strategy for peaki= ng and the remaining seasonal base fill. The game has changed - storage str= ategy has been kicked up a notch from buying for seasonal fill to real-time= risk management. Session 1 Supply Shortage or Storage Inefficiencies: Last Winter's Saga El Paso Corporation - Byron Wright, VP Energy Information Administration, DOE - Jim Thompson, Industry Analyst Keyspan Energy - David Manning, Senior VP, Corporation Affairs Axia Energy - David Modesett, VP Session 2 The Changing Storage Paradigm:=20 Dynamic Storage Service vs Seasonal Fill AEC Storage & Hub Services Inc. - Rick Daniel, President Williams Energy Marketing & Trading - Blake Herndon, Director, Risk Managem= ent NiSource Inc. - T.J. Aruffo, VP Energy Supply Services Enron North America - Paul Bieniawski, Director Duke Energy Gas Transmission - David Nightingale, VP MHP Session 3 Pricing it Right and Reducing Risk:=20 Can We Expect Stability or Chaos in Winter 2001 - 2001? Aquila Energy - Mark Cook, VP The Exchange Center Conoco Gas and Power Mark= eting - Brad King, VP Storage Sempra Energy Trading - Dan Guertin, Meteorologist For more information or to register om/ , call 1-800-853-6252, or email us at California Power Bonds Delayed Again California's plan to issue up to $13.4 billion in bonds to pay for powe= r will be delayed until at least October. The delay is another a series of = setbacks since the state first pushed back the initial offering date for th= e debt, originally planned for May. Proceeds from the sale, of what will be= the largest municipal bond in US history, will fund future energy purchase= s and repay the treasury drained of billions of dollars from previous power= purchases. Also, further delays are possible if a number of factors do not= fall into place by mid-July. Including a failure of the California PUC to = suspend its 'retail choice program' or to extend a $0.03 rate increase on S= DG&E customers. Both of these revenue sources are needed to pay off the bon= ds. Still, California has secured an additional $1 billion on top of the $3= .5 billion bridge loan secured earlier this week to help see the state thro= ugh until officials can bring the bonds too market. The bond sale is expect= ed to include $10 billion in tax-exempt debt, of which $6 billion will be f= ixed rate and $4 billion will be variable rate. It will include an addition= al $3.4 billion in taxable bonds that will also be priced at both fixed and= variable rates. The huge amount of tax-free bonds will boost supply of Cal= ifornia debt, forcing the state to offer higher yields to attract investors= .=20 Natural Gas NYMEX Volume 01JLY 25,050 01AUG 10,720 01SEP 4,208 01OCT 4,429 01NOV 1,769 01DEC 1,779 02JAN 1,554 02FEB 1,233 02MAR 1,487 02APR 1,650 02MAY 741 02JUN 289 02JLY 139 02AUG 218 02SEP 158 02OCT 194 02NOV 112 02DEC 116 03JAN 23 03FEB 15 03MAR 12 03APR 8 03MAY 8 03JUN 38 SUNGARD Solutions for Success in Energy Trading Epsilon and Panorama Energy Risk and complexity are inevitable components of every trading transaction = within today's volatile energy market. Having the right tools to manage an= d control those risks has become a determining success factor. SunGard pro= vides those tools with Epsilon and Panorama Energy - comprehensive solution= s designed to create measurable competitive advantages for energy trading o= rganizations and utility companies worldwide. To receive more information or a free demonstration, we invite you to conta= ct us at 713-266-7771 or visit our web site at http://risk.sungard.com/ENER= GY=20 California Power Bonds Delayed Again California's plan to issue up to $13.4 billion in bonds to pay for powe= r will be delayed until at least October. The delay is another a series of = setbacks since the state first pushed back the initial offering date for th= e debt, originally planned for May. Proceeds from the sale, of what will be= the largest municipal bond in US history, will fund future energy purchase= s and repay the treasury drained of billions of dollars from previous power= purchases. Also, further delays are possible if a number of factors do not= fall into place by mid-July. Including a failure of the California PUC to = suspend its 'retail choice program' or to extend a $0.03 rate increase on S= DG&E customers. Both of these revenue sources are needed to pay off the bon= ds. Still, California has secured an additional $1 billion on top of the $3= .5 billion bridge loan secured earlier this week to help see the state thro= ugh until officials can bring the bonds too market. The bond sale is expect= ed to include $10 billion in tax-exempt debt, of which $6 billion will be f= ixed rate and $4 billion will be variable rate. It will include an addition= al $3.4 billion in taxable bonds that will also be priced at both fixed and= variable rates. The huge amount of tax-free bonds will boost supply of Cal= ifornia debt, forcing the state to offer higher yields to attract investors= .=20 YOU DESIGNED IT. WE BUILT IT. ZaiNet GasMaster II Today's most comprehensive gas trading, scheduling and accounting system. CAMINUS Your Competitive Edge in Energy Call us at (212)515-3700 or visit us at the website http://www.caminus.com/= =20 CMS Joins Enron with India Problems=20 CMS Energy's LNG-based power project at Ennore in southern India is now= completely stalled because of the need for a credit support mechanism from= the Indian government. CMS's problems come against a backdrop of a bitter = payment battle between Enron's Dabhol Power and the state-run utility in In= dia's Maharashtra state. CMS, along with India's Grasim Industries, leads a= consortium to build a $1.6-billion LNG terminal and 1,850 MW power plant a= t Ennore port, just north of Madras. In January, India's finance ministry i= ndicated it may scrap a plan to extend sovereign guarantees to 3 huge=20 power projects, including the Ennore LNG project. The Ennore project has b= een promoted by the Dakshin Bharat Energy consortium which also includes Ge= rmany's Siemens, Australia's Woodside and Unocal. The CMS-led consortium wo= n the LNG project from the Tamil Nadu state government in 1998 and plans to= build a 2.5-million tonnes a year LNG import, storage and regasification t= erminal. The LNG is to be imported from Qatar's RasGas and the electricity = from the power plant will be sold to the federal government-owned Power Tra= ding Corp of India.=20 Visit EnerfactsDaily Job Center at http:www.enernetenergy.com=20 New Postings Include *Junior and senior derivatives/risk analysts - electricity and/or electricity industry treasury instruments. *Senior Gas Analyst Islander East Plans Pipeline from Connecticut to Long Island Islander East Pipeline has filed an application with the FERC to constr= uct, own and operate 50 miles of interstate pipeline that will transport na= tural gas to growing markets in Connecticut, New York City and Long Island.= Islander East is an equally owned, limited liability company formed by Du= ke and Key Span. Islander East is expected to be in service in 2003, and wi= ll transport additional volumes to meet the energy needs of this region. Th= rough interconnections to virtually every major supply basin in North Ameri= ca, including recently developed natural gas reserves in eastern Canada, Is= lander East will further supplement the natural gas supplies necessary to f= uel new natural gas fired generating plants as well as local distribution c= ompanies in the area. The proposed 24-inch Islander East mainline will exte= nd from Connecticut across Long Island Sound to Wading River, NY, with conn= ections to KeySpan's Long Island delivery system. Also, Algonquin Gas Trans= mission Company is proposing certain upgrades to its system in Connecticut,= that will interconnect with Islander East.=20 Progas Storage Services, Inc was recently organized to offer specialized natural gas storage services to= marketers and end users servicing the upper Midwest and Northeast market r= egions along the major transmission systems in Indiana, Illinois, Kentucky,= and Michigan. PGSMI has 10 bcf of potential working capacity which will of= fer service along TXG, ANR, Midwestern, and is currently evaluating for pur= chase another 21 bcf of potential working capacity which can be serviced by= these and other systems in the region. PGSMI also explores for natural gas= in the Gulf Coast region through a wholly owned subsidiary. Progas intends= to go public through a route of private industry offerings, and an IPO or = registration. For more information on services or the company mail to: gast= orage@aol.com or for AOL mail to gastorage@aol.com ; web site currently und= er construction at: http://www.progas.net/wip . The company's executive and administrative office is located in Abilene, Te= xas with storage operations in Owensboro, KY and exploration operations in = Corpus Christi, TX. Progas Storage Services, Inc =20 8610 S. Hwy 277 Abilene, TX 79606 Ph 915 698 3699 Fx 915 698 2859 FERC ALJ Says California Power Refunds Likely The FERC administrative law judge, who is overseeing refund settlement = talks in California's power market, says that generators that sold electric= ity in the state will probably have to pay back overcharges of several bill= ion dollars. However, one would have to be paid in the first place before a= nyone could repay anything. The ALJ says California's claim the state is ow= ed $9 billion is too high. Enron, Mirant, Duke, Williams, Reliant Energy, a= nd Dynegy are among the producers that FERC could compel to make the refund= s. The companies have said they did nothing wrong. The California PUC and t= he utilities will join in the negotiations at FERC headquarters in Washingt= on. If no agreement is reached, the ALJ will have 7 days to make a recommen= dation to the 5 FERC commissioners on the refund issue.=20 Pure Text or Lotus & AOL Readers-subscribe by going to:http://www.modernmed= HTML,Outlook Email, Readers-subscribe by lay.netatlantic.com=20 California Senate Hears Allegations Against Duke Three former Southern California power plant employees gave testimony = on Friday to a state Senate committee investigating alleged price manipulat= ion. Allegations against Duke Energy, as the plant's operator, included thr= owing out spare parts to prolong the time a unit was out of service and ram= ping electricity output up and down to manipulate power prices. Duke denied= the latest allegations by former workers at its South Bay power plant, say= ing it finds the charges disturbing and incredible. Duke says the time has = come for it to take a stand against this daily barrage of misinformation. C= alifornia has for months been accusing the Duke and other generators who pu= rchased many of the state's power plants of taking advantage of a chronic s= hortage of electricity and price gouging. The governor is demanding $9 bill= ion in refunds, and numerous lawsuits have been filed. The rhetoric has esc= alated into branding the generators as pirates and even murderers and rapi= sts of the California economy, most of which is a smokescreen to hide their= true agenda, the forced donation of power to the state. When Duke took ov= er the Southern California plant they kept on all of its employees for 2 ye= ars under an operating agreement. Once that agreement expired, Duke hired a= bout 80% of the staff. The 3 that testified were among those not offered jo= bs.=20 Commodity Futures Trading Commission NYMEX Natural Gas Futures=20 Reportable Positions as of 6/19/01=20 Open Interest: 457,143 10,000 MMBtu=20 Non-Reportable Non-= Commercial | Commercial | Total | Positions=20 Long |Short |Spreading | Long| Short | Long | Short | Long | Short=20 4,642 24,069 21,531 388,192 356,574 414,365 432,174 42,778 24,969 Changes from 6/12/01 Change in Open Interest: 4,285=20 349 -3,314 653 8,312 13,968 9,314 11,307 -5,029 -7,022 Percent of Open Interest for Each Category of Trader 1.0% 5.3% 4.7% 84.9% 84.6% 90.6% 94.5% 9.4% 5.5%=20 FINANCIAL SUMMARY The TSE 300 gained 32.74 points to 7739.66 The CRB Index lost 1.16 points to 205.38 The US Dollar decreased 0.08 points to 118.91 The Dow declined 110.84 points to 10604.59 The S&P 500 dropped 11.69 points to 1225.35 The Nasdaq was down 23.93 points to 2034.83 August NYMEX Crude Oil rose 0.08 to 26.58 Canadian-US Exchange gained .0025 to 1.5289 Please welcome our advertisers by visiting these websites.http://www.kwi.co= m/ http://www.fea.com/ http://www.nesanet.org/ http://www.caminus.com/ http= ://www.progas.net/wip http://www.capacitymap.com/ http://risk.sungard.com/e= nergy Enerfax Daily is North America's gas and power information source. it is se= nt to you free of charge. Enerfax Daily may be copied and redistributed in = its entirety to all interested energy professionals. Please e-mail us at en= erfax@enerfax.com with the e-mail addresses of other energy professionals = that would like to be added to Enerfax Daily's growing distribution list of= thousands of energy professionals in the US and Canada, or to be removed. = The information contained herein was obtained from sources which Enerfax Da= ily believes to be reliable, but does not guarantee its accuracy. Your supp= ort of our advertisers is greatly appreciated and will keep Enerfax Daily f= ree. Thank you. Your comments are welcome. For information on advertising, please write to advertise@enerfax.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Privileged and Confidential -- Performance Bonus Language; [EMail-Body]= David, You asked me to provide my opinion about the employment agreement provisions relating to target bonus amounts that are based on performance. The bonus language contained in the majority of the agreements with a target bonus is as follows: ""Provided that Enron meets its earnings targets and provided that Employee is rated within the top 25% of the performance criteria under Enron's annual performance rating system or its equivalent for the calendar year in question, Employee's annual bonus amounts under the Plan for calendar years 2001, 2002, and 2003 (payable in 2002, 2003, and 2004, respectively), shall be based on an annual bonus target of $_____________."" This language does not address a person's performance as compared to one's peers, but instead looks at the number of performance criteria and requires that a person be in the top 25% of those criteria. Thus, if there are only 3 rating categories (i.e., 1, 2, 3, distributed as 10-80-10), then only the people in the top category would be within the top 25/33% of the rating criteria. Given the huge change in our process, however, there is an argument that the above language cannot be applied to the current scheme and that instead, we should look at the top 25% of the peer group, instead of performance criteria, even though that was not the intent of the provision when it was drafted. As a result, I would suggest that the middle category be divided further into either 2 or 3 subcategories (i.e., 2A, 2B, or 2C). That way, persons who fall out in categories 1 or 2A would be eligible for the target bonus. If there is a decision not to break down the middle 80 further, then it would be useful to look at those employees with a bonus target that we think is too high. For those employees, a more conservative approach may be to evaluate them on a scale that is more subdivided than the 10-80-10 breakdown and to document that they fell out in the bottom 75% of the categories under that process. Of course, it goes without saying that we should ensure consistent treatment based on race, sex, national origin, age, etc. in this process. Please let me know if you have any questions. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Confidential - Decision tree on projects; [EMail-Body]= 2 meetings on monday 8 & 9:30 and 2 on friday, 9 & 10. -----Original Message----- From: Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 3:40 PM To: Hayslett, Rod Subject: RE: Confidential - Decision tree on projects Rod: I have been meaning to ask you, what staff meetings should I be attending and when are they held? -----Original Message----- From: ""Hayslett, Rod"" COMMUNICATIONS Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 3:15 PM To: kevin.howard@enron.net Subject: Fw: Confidential - Decision tree on projects Fyi -------------------------- Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net) -----Original Message----- From: Mahan, Mariella <Mariella.Mahan@ENRON.com> To: Horton, Stanley <Stanley.Horton2@ENRON.com>; Hughes, James A. <James.A.Hughes@ENRON.com>; Hayslett, Rod <Rod.Hayslett@ENRON.com>; Sommers, Jeffrey E. <Jeffrey.E.Sommers@ENRON.com> Sent: Tue Nov 13 14:53:54 2001 Subject: Confidential - Decision tree on projects Something for us to talk about during our next staff meeting. There are three projects which have significant cash flow problems and thus difficulties in meeting debt obligations: these are: SECLP, Panama and Gaza. In the past, as I suppose we have done in Dabhol, we have taken the position that we would not inject cash into these companies and would be prepared to face a default and possible acceleration of the loans. SECLP has been the biggest issue/problem. Panama is much less (a few million of floating of our receivables from the company) would be sufficient to meet the cash crunch in April of this year. Note that, in Panama, the debt is fully guaranteed by the government and is non-recoursed to the operating company, BLM. In the past, we have discussed letting the debt default, which would cause the bank to potentially seek complete payment and acceleration from the GoPanama. The reason: the vast majority of BLM's problems stem from actions taken by the regulator that have effectively amended our PPA's with private parties; those actions resulted in significant loss of revenues, which although today have stopped or have been limited, have left a ""mark"" on the company's liquidity position. Now the question is: come April of 2002, should any of our actions in Panama or decisions related thereto (which we would have otherwise taken or made) be affected in any way by either the proposed merger or an effort by Enron to preserve efforts to re-establish investor/creditor confidence? The same could go for SECLP and Gaza. This is simply an overall ""guidance"" question. Let's take it up during our staff meeting next week, if that's ok with you. Many thanks, Mariella [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= TW Gas Sales: PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE; [EMail-Body]= Julia and Steve--here are some questions I've sent to Darrell on the TW Cal. border line pack sales. I'd like him to pull in the right people to get me the answers so we will be prepared if we need to explain these events. Darrell--I thought I'd better let your bosses know that I've been putting more stuff on your already full plate. Thanks all. DF ---------------------- Forwarded by Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron on 03/06/2001 08:54 AM --------------------------- Drew Fossum 03/05/2001 04:23 PM To: Darrell Schoolcraft/ET&S/Enron@ENRON cc: Danny McCarty/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Steven Harris/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kevin Hyatt/Enron@EnronXGate Subject: TW Gas Sales: PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE 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."" [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= PDF Attachment-Request for Confidential Information by the GAO; [EMail-Body]= A PDF version of the original letter is attached below. To All California Power Exchange Participants: Notice is hereby provided pursuant to Section 19.3.4 of the California Power Exchange Tariff that the United States General Accounting Office (GAO), as part of the ongoing investigation of California markets, has requested the same information to be provided to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Such information may be confidential under Section 19.3.2 of the Tariff. The manner in which the GAO will treat such confidential information is outlined in the attached letter. The GAO states that it has authority under 31 U.S.C. 717 to evaluate programs or activities of the Federal Government, in this case, deregulation of the electricity markets initiated by FERC. The GAO has requested the California Power Exchange to provide such information no later than Thursday, October 5, 2000. If you desire to assert a claim of privilege or confidentiality pursuant to legal authority, the California Power Exchange will include your written assertion of that claim together with its submittal to the GAO, provided that it is timely received. Your written statement should be directed to the GAO as follows: Mr. Jim Wells Director, Energy Resources, and Science Issues United States General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548 You may deliver your statement to the California Power Exchange as follows: Karen Koyano California Power Exchange 1000 S. Fremont Avenue Unit 20 Alhambra, CA 91801 626.537.3173 facsimile Any written statement must be received by Ms. Koyano no later than Wednesday, October 4, 2000, 5:00 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time, to be included with any information delivered to the GAO. You are also free to take any other legal action you may deem appropriate in the circumstances of this investigation. Thank you. (See attached file: GAO Letter 9-22-00.pdf) - GAO Letter 9-22-00.pdf [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Duke release and news conference; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/01/2000 06:56 PM --------------------------- Peggy Mahoney 08/01/2000 01:48 PM To: Karen L Williams/HOU/EES@EES, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES cc: Subject: Duke release and news conference Duke is holding a news conference at 3pm Central Time. Call in number is below. Duke Energy Offers Governor Davis Solutions to California's Power Supply Shortfall Committing to Deliver 3,000 Megawatts of New Supply to California And a Five-Year Fixed Price Supply Contract HOUSTON AND MOSS LANDING, Calif., July 31 /PRNewswire/ -- Duke Energy North America (DENA) today offered to California Governor Gray Davis specific solutions to address the state's electricity supply shortage proposing to deliver 3,000 megawatts of new supply through the construction of generation facilities. In addition, DENA proposed a five-year, fixed-price supply contract to incumbent utilities to address the immediate concern with volatile electricity prices. ""California's high electricity prices during peak-demand periods result from insufficient supply to meet the demand,"" said Jim Donnell, president and chief executive officer of DENA. ""In the past ten years, no significant new power generation facilities have been built in California. During the same period, peak demand has risen more than 10,000 megawatts. This combination has caused the state's reserve margin to fall to less than 2 percent, which necessarily results in higher prices and abnormal volatility."" Under current procedures, it takes in excess of four years to deliver new power generation in California. To add substantial incremental generating capacity to California, DENA proposed Governor Davis use his existing authority under the California Emergency Services Act to streamline the permitting process to facilitate the rapid construction of environmentally friendly generation by 2001. DENA also asked the governor to use his current authority to allow California utilities to enter into bilateral contracts with energy providers, so they could better manage their exposure to high energy prices. To help solve the state's supply shortfall, DENA said it remained committed to adding substantial generation in California. Within two months and upon receiving final regulatory approvals, the company will begin construction on 1,000 megawatts at its Moss Landing facility. The expansion of the current 1,478-megawatt facility will be in commercial operation by summer 2002. And, with an expedited permitting process, DENA could deploy its available resources to construct an additional 500 megawatts for commercial operation in 2001 and 1,500 megawatts for 2002. To address the concern associated with the high energy prices experienced this year, DENA offered to provide up to 2,000 megawatts of electricity to the incumbent utilities at $50 per megawatt-hour for a five-year period beginning Sept. 1, 2000. This would mitigate the exposure to price spikes, for a reasonable time period during which additional generation resources can be built. ""DENA is committed to help bring electricity price stability for the citizens of California through these proposals,"" Donnell said. ""We are confident that our expertise in building and operating power generation facilities can help resolve the supply crisis."" Duke Energy North America (DENA), is a leading wholesale energy services company. DENA, and its affiliates, including Duke Energy Trading and Marketing, provides natural gas and power supply and services, and risk management products to wholesale energy producers and users. DENA also develops, owns and manages a portfolio of merchant generation facilities. DENA is a wholly owned subsidiary of Duke Energy. Duke Energy (NYSE: DUK), a diversified multinational energy company, creates value for customers and shareholders through an integrated network of energy assets and expertise. Duke Energy manages a dynamic portfolio of natural gas and electric supply, delivery and trading businesses -- generating revenues of nearly $22 billion in 1999. Duke Energy, headquartered in Charlotte, N.C., is a Fortune 100 company traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol DUK. More information about the company is available on the Internet at: http://www.duke-energy.com . SOURCE Duke Energy Corporation Web site: http://www.duke-energy.com Company News On-Call: or fax, 800-758-5804, ext. 257451 CONTACT: Tom Williams, California, 805-595-4270, or pager, 877-364-5170, or Bryant Kinney, 704-382-2208, both of Duke Energy Corporation EDITOR'S ADVISORY: Duke Energy North America will hold an audioconference today at 1 p.m. Pacific time. Jim Donnell, president and chief executive officer, will discuss DENA's position and proposed solutions for California's power supply crisis. Media representatives should dial 800/289-0437 and provide access code 744661 to participate in the call. The call will be replayed later this afternoon. Dial 888/203-1112 for the replay and use the same access code above. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Something to shoot at--California; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 04/20/2000 09:04 AM --------------------------- Kelly Kimberly@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 04/19/2000 11:55 AM To: rex rogers, diomedes christodoulou, j mark metts, mitch taylor, randy young, bruce harris, ed graham, steven j kean cc: keith miceli Subject: Something to shoot at--California Attached are three documents for your consideration: --Q and As if there is a leak about the possible sale, but we don't want to admit it (qanoadmit) --News release if the leak runs amok and it is determined that we must divulge--either for shareholder reasons or severe reputation problems/miconceptions. (leaknr) --Q and As to accompany news release. I suppose another option is having a statement and Q and As ready without a release, but I don't think this gives us the control we would need. (qaadmit) Please review and comment by end of next week. Thanks. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= <<Concur Expense Document>> - May2001ExpenseReport; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/24/2001 02:05 PM --------------------------- eserver@enron.com on 05/24/2001 03:02:16 PM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - May2001ExpenseReport The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: Cindy K. Olson Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: May2001ExpenseReport Report Total: $7,759.81 Amount Due Employee: $7,759.81 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://xms.enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Senate Investigative Committe Begins Hearings Today @ 1:30; [EMail-Body]= The State Senate begins it's investigative hearings today, April 18 @ 1:30 pm in Room 2040. The topic this week, and next week, will be to go over previous investigations into market power. Today the committee will be hearing testimony from: Frank Wolak, Chairman Market Surveillance Committee, CAISO. Eric Hildebrandt, Manager Market Monitoring, CAISO Elaine Howle, State Auditor IEP will be prepared to respond to media at the hearings, and will be distributing the attached materials: An outline of previous investigations into market manipulation, and price gouging -- and ???their findings. ? A detailed analysis of the flaws in the CAISO reports We will keep you posted. Thanks, Jean -- Jean Munoz McNally Temple Associates, Inc. 916-447-8186 916-447-6326 (fx) - ISO Report An.pdf - Previous Inve.pdf [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Gov Geringer meeting; [EMail-Body]= I'll do it. I saw Steve Reynolds (the govs assistant), today, and told him I would do it. I have a lot of respect for Geringer. I may try to persuade them that they should reach out to FERC and Congress as a state that sees the need for a federal role in transmiission and encourages FERC to act. Any background you have would be most appreciated. From: Susan M Landwehr on 05/20/2001 09:35 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: Gov Geringer meeting Steve--unfortunately, I really do need you to do this one. Steven J Kean 05/17/2001 12:04 PM To: Susan M Landwehr/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Re: Gov Geringer meeting I'd prefer to skip. How big of a problem would that be? From: Susan M Landwehr on 05/14/2001 03:09 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT Subject: Gov Geringer meeting Steve/RIck ---as you may be aware, Governor Geringer personally asked Ken Lay to come to the kick off meeting of the Wyoming Energy Task Force, a group that was created by legislative mandate last month. The meeting is on May 30th in Cheyenne. Mr. Lay told the Governor that he would not be able to make it on that date, but promised that a senior Enron exectutive would be there. I spoke with Governor Geringer's staff person again this past week and was hoping that Paul Kaufman could be the senior executive, but no such luck (unless you give Paul a huge new title!). In talking with Maureen I understand that you have a previous conflict Steve, but I am hoping that you can review your calendar to see if you could make an adjustment in order to meet the request of the Governor. Your speech would be in the morning--I've been told about 9 o clock or so---which would allow for you to leave by noonish. I [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Information and Securities Trading; [EMail-Body]= Please respond to ANDREW - 7138536278 Enron Wholesale Services - Office of the Chairman From: Mark Frevert, Chairman & CEO Greg Whalley, President & COO Mark Haedicke, Managing Director & General Counsel Subject: Confidential Information and Securities Trading Enron Wholesale Services ('EWS') maintains official Policies and Procedures Regarding Confidential Information and Securities Trading ('Policies and Procedures'), which have been revised as of November 15, 2000 to reflect the new EWS structure. These policies and procedures are intended to allow us simultaneously to pursue our diverse businesses and to protect confidential information, our reputation for integrity, and EWS and its employees from legal liability. You are required to become familiar with, and to comply with, the Policies and Procedures. The newly revised Policies and Procedures are available for your review on LegalOnline, the new intranet website maintained by the Enron Wholesale Services Legal Department. Please click on the attached link to access LegalOnline: You must certify your compliance with the Policies and Procedures within two weeks of your receipt of this message. The LegalOnline site will allow you to quickly and conveniently certify your compliance on-line with your SAP Personal ID number. If you have any questions concerning the Policies or Procedures, please call Lance Schuler at extension 3-5419, Mark Haedicke at extension 3-6544, Alan Aronowitz at extension 3-3214, Bob Bruce at extension 5-7780 or Donna Lowry at extension 3-1939. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Presentation at ETS HR Employee Meeting; [EMail-Body]= Thanks. I was glad to do it and would do it again... next time my computer will work. I benefitted a great deal from what I heard from the group, especially regarding the PRC. Roger Sumlin 03/23/2001 09:34 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Gary P Smith/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Wilson Barbee/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Brian Schaffer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Ann Vaughn/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Fran Fagan/OTS/Enron@ENRON Subject: Presentation at ETS HR Employee Meeting Steve . . . FYI -- we conducted a post-event survey on opinions about the HR employee meeting held last month and the HR management team thought you should know that participants rated your presentation very high. When asked what should be kept the same next time, participants commented as follows about your presentation: ""I think a presentation from Corporate HR is of great value."" ""Keep the presentations by the officers . . . to talk about the business."" ""I liked having other people from ETS/Enron there to better understand the big picture and where Enron is going."" ""Continue to bring in invited guests to keep the group apprised of Corporate activities. I liked the opportunity to hear both Stan and Steve--the field staff don't get as many opportunities to hear from corporate management."" ""Visits by Steve Kean and Stan Horton. Their perspectives are very good . . ."" Clearly, your participation provided much value to the group and we appreciate very much your taking the time to come meet with us and share information. You should expect that we'll be asking you to come back again! Regards, - Roger [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Suzanne Brown in your office.; [EMail-Body]= Hartsoe-Commissions order on 75 O888 compl programs Maya WeberGordon Weil Dave Marquart Richard Tabors [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Return of Confidential Materials; [EMail-Body]= In order to comply with terms of the Confidentiality Agreement that Enron executed in connection with our evaluation of UAE, we must destroy or return all confidential materials (including the Offering Memorandum). Accordingly, please either send your materials to me by interoffice mail or destroy all your materials AND send me an email confirming that you have done so. thanks, Jeff Jeffrey M. Bartlett Director, Enron Americas 713-853-5629 jeff.bartlett@enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Meeting Notice - California Document Production Issues; [EMail-Body]= calendar ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/06/2001 01:04 PM --------------------------- From: Mark E on 07/06/2001 12:22 PM Sent by: Janette Elbertson/ENRON@enronXgate To: David W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, John J Lavorato/ENRON@enronXgate, Richard B Sanders/Enron@enronXgate, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Greg Whalley/ENRON@enronXgate, Robert C Williams/ENRON@enronXgate cc: Kay Chapman/HOU/EES@EES, Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Kimberly Hillis/ENRON@enronXgate, Twanda Sweet/ENRON@enronXgate, Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron, Kathy Dodgen/HOU/EES@EES, Liz M Taylor/ENRON@enronXgate, Jan Cooley/ENRON@enronXgate, Jessica Ramirez/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: Meeting Notice - California Document Production Issues There will be a meeting on Monday, July 9, from 10:00 a.m. to Noon in EB3321 to discuss the referenced issues. Thank you. Janette Elbertson Enron Wholesale Services Legal Department - EB3326 Telephone: (713) 853-7906 Fax: (713) 646-2600 e-mail address: janette.elbertson@enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= SDG&E; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/25/2000 07:12 AM --------------------------- Christopher F Calger@ECT 08/24/2000 06:04 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: SDG&E Steve, SDG&E came out with the attached RFP for fixed price power. They are requesting proposals for several standard blocks through 12/03. Responses are due August 30. ENA/EPMI will be prepared to respond, if appropriate. In the meantime, we continue to price the full requirements residential structure and await any news from the governor's office/legislature. I can be reached at 503-464-3735. Regards, Chris [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: Bay City News, Wed 3/21: ""Blackouts Not Expected=20 Today"" Dow Jones Newswire, Wed 3/21: ""Calif State Controller:General Fund Surplus = Dn=20 To $3.2B"" CBS.MarketWatch.com, Wed 3/21: ""Davis says regulators will act to pay QFs Electricity providers insist they need to be paid"" Long Beach Press, Wed 3/21: ""Rash power bill may need fix"" SF Chron, Wed 3/21: ""PUC considers rewarding producers that sign long-term= =20 contracts"" Sac Bee, Thurs, 3/22: ""State claims $5.5 billion overcharge: Refunds by=20 wholesale generators sought"" Sac Bee, Thurs, 3/22: ""Power solution eludes Davis: Lawmakers grow edgy as= =20 crisis drags on"" Sac Bee, Thurs., 3/22: "" Legislators learn some details of power contracts= "" San Diego Union, Thurs, 3/22: ""Federal judge orders major power wholesaler= =20 to sell to California"" San Diego Union, Thurs., 3/22: ""Controller: State's power spending imperil= s=20 its financial health"" San Diego Union, Wed, 3/21: ""Governor says utilities must pay in advance f= or=20 some power"" LA Times, Thurs, 3/22: ""Energy Overcharge of $5.5 Billion Is Alleged"" LA Times, Thurs, 3/22: ""Power Strain Eases but Concerns Mount"" LA Times, Thurs, 3/22: Graphics: Overcharges Alleged=20 San Fran Chron, Thurs, 3/22: ""Net Complex A Dilemma For San Jose=20 SERVER FARM: Plant would tax grid"" San Fran Chron, Thurs, 3/22: ""Contracts Won't Meet Summer Demands=20 DETAILS: 2004 before full impact felt"" Mercury News, Thurs, 3/22: ""California overcharged $5.5 bln for wholesale= =20 power"" Orange Cty Register, Thurs, 3/22: Commentary: ""If the Power Goes Off"" =20 Orange Cty Register, Thurs, 3/22: Commentary: ""Socialized Electricity"" San Fran Chron, Thurs, 3/22: ""Bush's Energy Policy Will Backfire,=20 Feinstein Warns / She wants federal price controls now"" Dow Jones Newswires, Thurs, 3/22: ""Reliant Still In Power Pact Talks With= =20 Calif. DWR"" Dow Jones Newswires, Thurs, 3/22: ""CPUC Must Address Rates In QF Repayment= =20 Order - SoCal Ed"" Dow Jones Newswires, Thurs, 3/22: ""Calif Small Pwr Producers To Shut Plant= s=20 If Rates Capped"" --- --- Blackouts Not Expected=20 Today Bay City News=20 Following two consecutive days of rolling blackouts, California's power=20 picture looks much brighter today, but conservation is still needed.=20 The California Independent System Operator is urging consumers to continue= =20 conservation measures during today's Stage One Electrical Emergency.=20 ""The conservation efforts of Californians, particularly Tuesday evening, we= re=20 significant and helped to reduce the duration and impact of yesterday's=20 blackouts,'' according to officials. ""The California ISO asks customers to= =20 continue their voluntary reductions during this time of tight supply.""=20 More than 11,500 megawatts of in-state generation remain unavailable with= =20 power plants completing repairs and needed maintenance. However, several=20 generating units returned to service today and the level of imported power= =20 has increased, boosting the supply.=20 ""The ISO is cautiously optimistic that customer outages will be avoided=20 today,'' according to officials.=20 Today's Stage One alert is in effect through midnight tonight.=20 Stage One Emergencies are declared when power reserves fall below 7 percent= .=20 Stage Two kicks in when reserves fall below 5 percent. Stage Three is=20 initiated when reserves drop to below 1.5 percent. --- Calif State Controller:General Fund Surplus Dn To $3.2B 03/21/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- California State Controller Kathleen Connell=20 Wednesday said the state's general fund surplus has dropped to $3.2 billion= =20 from $8.5 billion in January, mostly because of electricity purchases made = by=20 the state's Department of Water Resources, a press release said.=20 Connell also denied Gov. Gray Davis' request to transfer an additional $5.6= =20 billion from the general fund to the Special Fund for Economic Uncertaintie= s,=20 the release said. Connell noted that, given the rapid depletion of the general fund on power= =20 purchases, the state would need to borrow $2.4 billion in order to tranfer= =20 the $5.6 billion from the general fund to the special fund.=20 ""We started this year with a generous budget surplus. The energy crisis has= =20 taken much of that away, and this transfer on top of the electricity=20 purchases would put the fund at risk,"" Connell said.=20 Connell called on Davis to ensure that the CDWR completes by the end of May= =20 2001 the revenue bond sales that will be used to buy power and repay the=20 general fund.=20 She also asked that the CDWR notify her of all power purchases made and=20 contracts negotiated thus far and requested that she be told within 7 days = of=20 any purchases and contracts negotiated in the future.=20 Connell also said she wanted to be told within 24 hours of any power buys= =20 that exceed $55 million and asked that the Department of Finance be directe= d=20 to prepare new general fund cash flow estimates for the next 30 and 60 days= ,=20 and for the end of the fiscal year.=20 The state's Department of Water Resources has been buying power since Janua= ry=20 in lieu of Edison International (EIX) utility Southern California Edison an= d=20 PG&E Corp (PCG) utility Pacific Gas and Electric Co, because suppliers=20 refused to sell to the nearly-bankrupt utilities.=20 -By Jessica Berthold; Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872;=20 Gov. Davis' office said, in response to Connell's comments, that the state= =20 budget was solid and the economy remained strong.=20 ""We will be getting the money back we've paid for energy and it should have= =20 no significant effect on the state's finances from the Wall Street=20 perspective,"" said Davis press secretary Steve Maviglio.=20 -By Jessica Berthold; Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872;=20 jessicaberthold@dowjones.com --- -------- Davis says regulators will act to pay QFs Electricity providers insist they need to be paid By Russ Britt, CBS.MarketWatch.com=20 Last Update: 9:45 PM ET Mar 20, 2001 LOS ANGELES (CBS.MW) - California Gov. Gray Davis said regulators will act= =20 Tuesday on a plan to guarantee that independent power generators are paid. Independent power producers provide about 30 percent of California's=20 electricity from a variety of sources including wind, solar and other=20 sources. Because many of the companies, known as Qualifying Facilities, or= =20 QFs, haven't been paid they've begun to withhold power, contributing to=20 blackouts in the state Monday and Tuesday.=20 ""We are anxious to pay the QFs because they're falling like flies,"" Davis= =20 said at a news conference late Tuesday. ""If they don't get paid, the lights= =20 will go out."" Davis said the state's PUC order will require the state's nearly bankrupt= =20 utilities to enter five-year contracts with the QFs at rates of 7.9 cents p= er=20 kilowatt hour, or 10-year contracts for lower rates. The structure is simil= ar=20 to rates Davis claims he was able to negotiate for long-term power contract= s=20 from out-of-state generators. --- Rash power bill may need fix By Will Shuck From our Sacramento Bureau SACRAMENTO Even as lawmakers lament the slow pace of solving California's= =20 energy crisis, the cost of haste has cropped up in their first major act, a= =20 multibillion dollar measure that put the state in the power-buying business= .=20 AB1X, the highly touted bill that put California in the power-buying=20 business, may have been so rashly crafted that it will take another piece o= f=20 legislation to fix it, an influential senator said Tuesday.=20 At issue is vague wording that makes it unclear when and to what extent=20 Southern California Edison and other utilities have to repay the state for= =20 buying power.=20 State Sen. Debra Bowen, chairwoman of the Senate Energy, Utilities and=20 Communications Committee, said the bill apparently has left room for utilit= y=20 lawyers to argue that their companies needn't repay the state until they ha= ve=20 covered other costs.=20 But Bowen, a Redondo Beach Democrat who represents downtown and western Lon= g=20 Beach, said ""the legislative intent is crystal clear"" that the state wanted= =20 to be repaid directly for supplying about a third of the power utility=20 companies deliver to their customers.=20 ""We need a cleanup bill"" to set the matter straight, she said.=20 Although AB1X illustrates the flaws that come with speed, Bowen said, the= =20 Legislature can't afford to delay.=20 ""I think we are much too slow in our response,"" she said. ""But that has to = be=20 balanced against things we've done in a tearing hurry and then have had to= =20 fix later.""=20 No matter what the Legislature does in the coming weeks, she said, Californ= ia=20 is in for a tough summer, and only determined conservation efforts will put= =20 much of a dent in a precarious supply-demand equation. --- PUC considers rewarding producers that sign long-term contracts=20 Greg Lucas, Lynda Gledhill, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau Wednesday, March 21, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 Sacramento -- Some cash-strapped producers of wind, solar and other=20 alternative forms of energy will get long-delayed financial relief under a= =20 proposed order by state regulators, Gov. Gray Davis said yesterday evening.= =20 A proposed order by the Public Utilities Commission is designed to reward= =20 energy producers who sign long-term contracts with utilities at lower rates= .=20 Alternative energy producers that voluntarily enter such contracts, which= =20 would start on April 1, would be paid within 15 days, said Davis, who=20 requested the order. Those that do not would have to wait until the utiliti= es=20 that buy their power return to solvency.=20 Davis blasted Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern California Edison for= =20 not paying the alternative generators -- know as qualified facilities, or= =20 ""QFs"" -- even though the companies have been collecting money through rates= .=20 ""It is wrong and irresponsible of the utilities to pocket and withhold the= =20 money designed to compensate the QFs,"" Davis said. ""It's immoral and has to= =20 stop.""=20 Alternative producers -- ranging from massive co-generation facilities at o= il=20 refineries to tiny biomass plants -- produce about a third of the state's= =20 supply of electricity. But many are shutting down because utilities have no= t=20 paid them since November.=20 The loss of some 3,000 megawatts from tapped-out alternative energy produce= rs=20 contributed to the blackouts that snarled California yesterday and Monday,= =20 according to the Independent System Operator, which manages the state's pow= er=20 grid.=20 The PUC's proposed order -- which will be considered at the board's Tuesday= =20 meeting -- offers the generators a choice of agreeing to a five-year contra= ct=20 at $79 per megawatt or a 10-year deal at $69 per megawatt, Davis said.=20 The order does not address the more than $1 billion already owed to the mor= e=20 than 600 alternative energy producers around the state. Davis said to favor= =20 one creditor over another in past debt could bring on bankruptcy proceeding= s=20 from other creditors.=20 The Legislature would also need to act to make the order work.=20 ""It is critical to keep these facilities up and online,"" said Sen. Debra=20 Bowen, D-Marina del Ray, who estimates that Edison has $1.5 billion in cash= =20 on hand, and PG&E $2.5 billion. ""The utilities owe it to the people of the= =20 state to pay them.""=20 Edison said yesterday that it opposed any attempt to place alternative=20 producers ahead of their other creditors.=20 But Tom Higgins, a senior vice president for Edison International, which ow= es=20 alternative producers some $835 million, said his company was talking to th= e=20 governor's office about possible payment structures.=20 Alternative energy producers, particularly those that use high-priced natur= al=20 gas to fire their generators, say that without an immediate infusion of cas= h=20 they must close their plants.=20 ""We've been obsessed with the health of the utilities and (have) forgotten= =20 the health of everyone else,"" said V. John White, legislative director of t= he=20 Clean Power Campaign, which lobbies for alternative energy producers.=20 CalEnergy Operating Corp., which operates eight geothermal plants in the=20 Imperial Valley producing 268 megawatt hours for Edison has sued the utilit= y=20 asking to be paid and to be temporarily released from their contract with= =20 Edison which has paid them nothing since November.=20 CalEnergy has a court hearing tomorrow on its Edison contract. Edison owes= =20 the company $75 million, and the debt increases by $1 million a day.=20 ""We've lived up to our end of the bargain but Edison hasn't. We're now not = in=20 a position to make a property tax payment on April 10 and we're the largest= =20 employer in the county,"" said Vince Signorotti, CalEnergy's property manage= r.=20 Unlike Edison, PG&E is paying its creditors 15 cents on the dollar.=20 ""We have offered over the past five days to prepay for future power not yet= =20 delivered to keep as many of them operating as possible, but the state need= s=20 to decide how its going to divvy up the limited money under the frozen=20 rates,"" said John Nelson, a PG&E spokesman.=20 The PUC's sudden attempt to recast the rates paid to alternative generators= =20 comes after several months of inaction, partly a result of waiting for=20 legislative negotiations on the issue to conclude. Those negotiations=20 eventually failed to move forward.=20 --- State claims $5.5 billion overcharge: Refunds by wholesale generators sough= t By Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writer (Published March 22, 2001)=20 In its boldest attempt yet to extract refunds from wholesale power=20 generators, the state's grid operator accused the generators Wednesday of= =20 overcharging Californians by $5.5 billion for electricity since last May.= =20 The state's Independent System Operator, which manages the state's=20 transmission grid, plans to tell a federal regulatory agency today that pow= er=20 generators consistently took advantage of their stranglehold on the=20 California market to ratchet up prices.=20 The federal agency, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, recently=20 threatened to order generators to refund $134.8 million for overcharges,=20 mostly covering January and February. But those refunds amounted to just a= =20 fraction of what the grid operator was seeking. The ISO, which has been=20 complaining about market abuses for several months, says FERC must do more.= =20 ""We're happy that (FERC) took this first step, but we think there's a long= =20 way to go,"" said Anjali Sheffrin, the ISO's director of market analysis. ""A= s=20 far as I'm concerned, it's been too little, too late. ... The refunds they= =20 have acted on (so far) have been minimal.""=20 She said the report covers five major power suppliers and 16 other power=20 importers.=20 FERC Commissioner William L. Massey said it would be improper for him to=20 comment on a report that has not yet been filed. But when told of the $5.5= =20 billion total, Massey told the Los Angeles Times: ""That doesn't shock me in= =20 any way.""=20 ""Prices over the past 10 months in California have greatly exceeded the=20 federal standards of just and reasonable prices, and I think they have=20 exceeded the standards by possibly billions of dollars,"" he said.=20 However, most FERC critics are skeptical that the federal agency, which is = a=20 strong believer in letting free markets run their course, would order a=20 refund anywhere near as large as $5.5 billion -- even though it has found= =20 that California prices at times have been ""unjust and unreasonable.""=20 The big power generators, saying their charges were reasonable, are disputi= ng=20 the $134.8 million refunds proposed so far and have vowed to fight the ISO'= s=20 latest effort.=20 If the ISO were to prevail, the $5.5 billion in refunds could go a long way= =20 toward remedying California's energy mess.=20 They could help restore the financial health of Pacific Gas and Electric Co= .=20 and Southern California Edison, which have nearly been bankrupted by the=20 prices charged by the power generators. They also could ease the strain on= =20 the state treasury, which is spending billions to purchase electricity for= =20 Californians because PG&E and Edison can't.=20 Sheffrin said her department studied sales made by the power generators to= =20 ISO, which makes last-minute power purchases to balance supply with demand,= =20 and the California Power Exchange, the now-bankrupt entity where most of=20 California's wholesale electricity was bought and sold until December.=20 She said the study made ""very generous"" allowances for natural gas expenses= ,=20 costly air-pollution credits and other factors, including the scarcity of= =20 electricity. The result was $5.5 billion worth of charges ""in excess of=20 competitive costs,"" she said.=20 In many cases, the companies used their market clout to submit bids that we= re=20 ""way beyond their costs,"" she said.=20 ""It was insufficient competition,"" Sheffrin said. ""They got away with a lot= .""=20 She said the refund request isn't just a shot in the dark. FERC, she noted,= =20 ""has already found that prices in the California wholesale energy market ha= ve=20 been unreasonable. We took it upon ourselves ... to show FERC how they got = to=20 be so high.""=20 FERC proposed refunds totaling $124 million for January and February sales,= =20 declaring that generators' prices were too high.=20 In a separate case the federal agency, for the first time, accused two=20 generators last week of taking plants offline to force prices up.=20 --- Power solution eludes Davis: Lawmakers grow edgy as crisis drags on=20 By Emily Bazar and Amy Chance Bee Capitol Bureau (Published March 22, 2001)=20 Gov. Gray Davis likes to compare the state's energy crisis to a complicated= =20 ""three-cornered"" billiard shot.=20 But as California plunged into another round of power blackouts this week,= =20 Davis has yet to line up the angle on an ultimate solution.=20 The state's short-term power bill is nearing $4.2 billion, and legislators= =20 are balking at the administration's requests for additional money.=20 Getting even the least controversial pieces of the puzzle through the=20 Legislature is taking weeks longer than expected.=20 While the Democratic governor has insisted secrecy about details of his pow= er=20 purchases is necessary to protect the state's bargaining position, other=20 state officials are complaining vigorously about the lack of information.= =20 And critical deals the governor hoped to reach with energy suppliers and=20 utility companies are proving difficult to close.=20 ""I think we all got lulled into a little complacency a few weeks ago. All= =20 these things seemed to be going along, and the governor was making all thes= e=20 warm and fuzzy comments,"" said Assemblyman John Campbell, R-Irvine.=20 ""But it only takes one deal to go sideways and we're all blacked out,"" he= =20 added. ""The governor is running around basically saying, 'Trust me.' I'm no= t=20 sure he's deserving of the trust at this point.""=20 Davis and his aides insist they are working around the clock on plans to=20 boost power generation, encourage conservation and reach an agreement with= =20 utilities that will keep them out of bankruptcy.=20 The utility plan, they say, is the equivalent of a large corporate merger= =20 that simply can't be accomplished overnight. Davis notes that earlier=20 deregulation efforts might have benefitted from a little more time.=20 Although the state has reached a broad ""agreement in principle"" with Southe= rn=20 California Edison to obtain its power transmission lines in exchange for he= lp=20 paying off its debts, a final, detailed deal has not been reached. The=20 initial agreement with Edison was announced Feb. 23.=20 And the governor has yet to achieve a tentative agreement with Pacific Gas= =20 and Electric Co., which is driving a harder bargain over price and other=20 elements of a potential rescue plan.=20 Joseph Fichera, one of several consultants receiving more than $11 million= =20 from the administration for advice on the energy crisis, said many people= =20 don't realize the complexity of the deal they're brokering.=20 In their bid to achieve a public takeover of the investor-owned utilities'= =20 transmission lines, he said, negotiators have to pore over thousands of=20 documents related to the transmission lines alone.=20 ""We are doing what is normal in a transaction of this magnitude, which is= =20 investigate, document, circulate, redocument, agree, move forward,"" said=20 Fichera, an investment banker with Saber Partners in New York City. ""The=20 governor has put a 'I want this yesterday' fire"" under his negotiating team= .=20 The negotiator, however, declined to say when he expects final agreements t= o=20 be reached with the companies.=20 ""It could be days, it could be weeks,"" he said.=20 There were signs, meanwhile, of trouble brewing on another front: the giant= =20 bond sale the state must make to repay the money it has spent so far on=20 electricity and to finance future long-term contracts for energy.=20 State Treasurer Phil Angelides said Wednesday the utilities are appealing a= =20 ruling by the state Public Utilities Commission that essentially ensures th= e=20 state will be repaid, a move that he said threatens to delay the sale=20 indefinitely.=20 ""If the utilities have decided to adopt a scorched earth policy until they= =20 get what they need and want, then it will be a significant problem,""=20 Angelides said.=20 PG&E spokesman Ron Low said the governor is simply placing too many demands= =20 on a rate structure that doesn't compensate the utilities for their current= =20 costs.=20 ""Political rhetoric is not going to change the math,"" he said.=20 In the Legislature, lawmakers are growing grumpier. Most were taken by=20 surprise Monday when blackouts were ordered across the state, weeks before= =20 summer temperatures were expected to set in and strain the power system.=20 ""I'm more worried than ever,"" said Assemblyman Bill Leonard, R-San=20 Bernardino. ""A lot of the elements we thought we had a handle on in January= =20 are unraveling.""=20 A deal the governor said had been worked out weeks ago between the state an= d=20 more than 600 small alternative energy suppliers collapsed last week.=20 The alternative generators have not been paid by the utilities for months,= =20 and state leaders attempted to bargain down the price utilities pay those= =20 generators for power.=20 But administration officials complained privately that lawmakers instead=20 sweetened the pot for the suppliers to the point that the measure no longer= =20 helped solve the overall financial situation pushing the utilities toward= =20 bankruptcy. Under a proposal announced Tuesday by Davis, the Legislature=20 would authorize the PUC to require the utilities to pay the alternative=20 suppliers at prices more closely resembling the original deal.=20 But the governor ran into immediate opposition, as some suppliers said said= =20 he would not pay them enough to cover their fuel costs.=20 ""We would go from not being paid, to losing money,"" said Hal Dittmer of=20 Wellhead Electric, a Sacramento-based supplier that has been shut down for= =20 more than a month. ""Almost everybody who burns natural gas is going to shut= =20 down. (Davis) got it wrong.""=20 Democrats outside the Davis administration, meanwhile, are complaining abou= t=20 the amount of money the state Department of Water Resources is spending on= =20 expensive, last-minute power purchases. Within a week, $4.2 billion will ha= ve=20 been committed.=20 State Sen. Steve Peace, D-El Cajon, chairman of the joint Legislative Budge= t=20 Committee, is warning the Davis administration that he will block additiona= l=20 funds for last-minute purchases of power until the PUC makes progress=20 recovering money that already has been spent. He intends to hold a hearing = on=20 the issue this morning.=20 On Wednesday, state Controller Kathleen Connell told Davis she will refuse = to=20 make a routine budget transfer he had requested, saying she is concerned th= at=20 there is ""no outside check and balance"" on the money the administration is= =20 spending to buy electricity on the spot market.=20 As the statewide elected official who pays the state's bills, Connell said= =20 she has yet to receive information from the Department of Water Resources= =20 about how much it is spending.=20 ""We really need an accounting as to the total amount of liability they have= =20 accumulated,"" she said. ""I understand they're in an emergency situation ...= =20 but it begins to imperil the state's ability to manage its cash flow.""=20 Meanwhile, a bill to provide $1 billion for conservation programs, aimed at= =20 reducing power needs this summer, also has languished for several weeks in= =20 the state Senate. While Davis has focused his attention elsewhere, Republic= an=20 lawmakers have opposed the measure as too expensive. Democrats argue that= =20 each two-week delay prevents the state from saving as much energy as one=20 ""peaker"" plant will produce this summer. Peaker plants are designed to help= =20 meet the peaks of electricity demand.=20 ""I'm the eternal optimist, but we have to keep working on all fronts,"" said= =20 Sen. Byron Sher, D-Palo Alto, who hopes to take his energy conservation bil= l=20 up for a vote in the Senate again today. ""It's a formidable challenge.""=20 Bee staff writer Dale Kasler contributed to this report.=20 --- Legislators learn some details of power contracts By John Hill Bee Capitol Bureau (Published March 22, 2001)=20 The veil of secrecy surrounding the state's electricity contracts lifted=20 Wednesday -- a little.=20 Gov. Gray Davis gave state legislators a report laying out some of the=20 details of long-term contracts designed to help the state pull out of its= =20 energy crisis. But the report left legislators and others clamoring for mor= e.=20 ""The information raises more questions,"" said Assemblyman George Runner,=20 R-Lancaster. ""I liken it to watching a parade through a knothole in a fence= .=20 You get to look at one float, but you're not sure about what's coming up an= d=20 what you've missed.""=20 Davis had previously disclosed that the state had signed or was close to=20 signing 40 long-term contracts, at an average price over 10 years of $69 pe= r=20 megawatt-hour.=20 The contracts are part of the state's strategy for trying to avoid a fiscal= =20 shellacking in the energy spot market while making sure there's enough=20 electricity to avoid more blackouts.=20 Davis also previously disclosed that the contracts were for an average of= =20 about 9,000 megawatts a year, and that the total cost exceeded $40 billion.= =20 But Davis has resisted telling more, saying the state would jeopardize its= =20 ability to get the best prices if electricity generators knew what their=20 counterparts were getting.=20 On Wednesday, the governor's office released a March 15 report from S. Davi= d=20 Freeman, general manager of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, = to=20 the state Department of Water Resources. The state agency has been given th= e=20 responsibility of making power purchases, and Freeman was brought in to lea= d=20 the negotiations.=20 As of March 15, the state had signed 19 contracts with seven suppliers for= =20 periods ranging from 14 months to 20 years, with many for three or five=20 years, the report says. Some of the contracts are for electricity to meet t= he=20 state's everyday power demand, while others are only for times of peak use,= =20 such as hot summer days.=20 The state had ""agreements in principle"" for an additional 25 contracts.=20 Runner said he has been told that two of these contracts have since been=20 finalized.=20 The amount of power provided reaches a peak in 2004 of more than 10,000=20 megawatts. As the long-term contracts start to expire around then, the stat= e=20 is hoping that demand can be met with new contracts or spot purchases at=20 prices expected to be much cheaper.=20 The report says nine more long-term contracts were under discussion.=20 Some of the contracts are with power generators, while others are with=20 marketers who may get the power from a number of sources.=20 In some cases, the state may supply the natural gas used to generate the=20 electricity, or power costs may be pegged to the going rate for the fuel.= =20 Some suppliers can cancel if the state fails to sell bonds by a certain dat= e=20 to cover power costs or fails to maintain an investment grade credit rating= .=20 Some depend on the construction of power plants, but Freeman said they were= =20 firm commitments.=20 ""We were pretty careful not to put a hope and a dream in the portfolio,"" he= =20 said.=20 More contracts will have to be signed to meet summer demand, and these=20 agreements will probably be more expensive, the report says.=20 One item not in Freeman's report was a secret deal to relieve several major= =20 generators from having to pay for polluting the air beyond allowable limits= .=20 The long-term power contracts include language that would have the state pa= y=20 the costs of ""pollution credits"" that allow power plants to exceed their=20 permitted levels of smog-forming pollutants, the governor's office confirme= d=20 Wednesday. Spokesman Steve Maviglio said that several generators are being= =20 relieved from having to pay those costs.=20 V. John White, a Sierra Club lobbyist close to the negotiations, said Dyneg= y=20 Inc., which has power plants in El Segundo, Encina and Long Beach, is one o= f=20 them. Dynegy officials did not return calls to The Bee on Wednesday.=20 Freeman said that generators were demanding hefty premiums for having to de= al=20 with air quality regulators in the summer and he figured it would be cheape= r=20 just to pay for the pollution credits.=20 In other energy-related developments:=20 With more power plants back online, grid operators dropped down to a Stage = 1=20 electricity alert. The state Independent System Operator was expecting=20 supplies to gradually increase over the next few days.=20 The state Public Utilities Commission issued a revised draft decision that= =20 would impose the prices outlined Tuesday by Davis for power produced by=20 alternative energy companies -- $79 a megawatt-hour for five-year contracts= =20 or $69 a megawatt-hour for 10 years. The proposal is scheduled for a PUC vo= te=20 March 27.=20 A federal judge ruled that one of the nation's major electricity generators= =20 must continue supplying California with emergency power.=20 In imposing an injunction on Reliant Energy Services Inc., U.S. District=20 Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. noted the ""rolling blackouts (that have) darkene= d=20 the California landscape"" and said the loss of Reliant's production ""poses = an=20 imminent threat.""=20 Bee staff writers Carrie Peyton, Chris Bowman and Denny Walsh contributed t= o=20 this report.=20 --- Federal judge orders major power wholesaler to sell to California=20 By Don Thompson ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 21, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction Wednesday= =20 ordering a major electricity wholesaler to continue selling to California= =20 despite its fear that it will not get paid.=20 U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said Californians were at risk of= =20 irreparable harm if Reliant Energy Services stopped selling power to the=20 Independent System Operator, which oversees the state's power grid. The ISO= =20 buys last-minute power on behalf of utilities to fill gaps in supply to try= =20 to fend off blackouts.=20 Damrell dismissed Reliant's attempt to force the state Department of Water= =20 Resources to back the ISO's purchases for the state's two biggest utilities= .=20 The state has been spending about $50 million a day on power for Pacific Ga= s=20 and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison, both denied credit by=20 suppliers after amassing billions of dollars in debts.=20 Controller: State's power spending imperils its financial health=20 Governor says utilities must pay in advance for some power=20 ?=20 The judge said he had no authority to force the DWR to pay for that power.= =20 Gov. Gray Davis has said the state isn't responsible for purchasing the=20 costly last-minute power ISO buys for Edison and PG&E, despite a law=20 authorizing state power purchases on the utilities' behalf.=20 ISO attorney Charles Robinson said the ruling gives ISO operators ""a tool t= o=20 assist them in keeping the lights on in California.""=20 ""Had the decision gone the other way, one could expect other generators to= =20 simply ignore emergency orders,"" Robinson said.=20 Damrell's preliminary injunction will remain in effect until the Federal=20 Energy Regulatory Commission rules on the matter.=20 Damrell denied the ISO's request for preliminary injunctions against three= =20 other wholesalers, Dynegy, AES and Williams, who agreed to continue selling= =20 to the ISO pending the FERC ruling.=20 The ISO went to court in February after a federal emergency order requiring= =20 the power sales expired. The judge then issued a temporary restraining orde= r,=20 requiring the sales, but dropped it after the suppliers agreed to continue= =20 sales to California, pending his Wednesday ruling.=20 The ISO said it would lose about 3,600 megawatts if the suppliers pulled ou= t,=20 enough power for about 2.7 million households. One megawatt is enough for= =20 roughly 750 homes.=20 Grid officials said Reliant's share alone is about 3,000 megawatts. Reliant= =20 said the amount at issue actually is less than a fourth of that, because mo= st=20 of the power is committed under long-term contracts.=20 Reliant, which provides about 9 percent of the state's power, worries it=20 won't get paid due to the financial troubles of PG&E and Edison.=20 PG&E and Edison say that together they have lost about $13 billion since Ju= ne=20 due to soaring wholesale electricity costs that California's 1996=20 deregulation law bars them from passing onto customers.=20 At the same time, the state has faced a tight electricity supply, due in pa= rt=20 to California power plant shutdowns for maintenance and to a tight=20 hydroelectric supply in the Pacific Northwest.=20 Managers of the state power grid imposed rolling blackouts across the state= =20 Monday and Tuesday as supply fell short of demand. Wednesday, cooling=20 temperatures and the completion of repairs at several power plants allowed= =20 the state to avoid blackouts.=20 State Controller Kathleen Connell said Wednesday that the energy crunch als= o=20 imperils California's financial health.=20 Connell said the state's power-buying on behalf of Edison and PG&E is is=20 gutting its budget surplus. Since the state started making emergency power= =20 buys in January, the surplus has fallen from $8.5 billion to about $3.2=20 billion, she said.=20 Connell ordered an audit of the state's power-buying, saying Davis is=20 withholding key financial information from her office and the Legislature.= =20 She is refusing a request by Davis and the Legislature to transfer $5.6=20 billion into a ""rainy day fund"" she said was set up to impress Wall Street = as=20 the state prepares to issue $10 billion in revenue bonds to cover its=20 power-buying.=20 Transferring the money would leave the state general fund $2.4 billion in= =20 debt, Connell said.=20 Sandy Harrison, spokesman for the state Department of Finance, and Keely=20 Bosler of the Legislative Analyst's Office, said such transfers are routine= =20 and required by law.=20 They put the state's budget surplus at $5.6 billion.=20 ""The law says she has to do it. The law does not give her the power to dema= nd=20 that kind of audit information,"" Harrison said.=20 He said the state's budget isn't in danger because it will be repaid with t= he=20 $10 billion in long-term debt.=20 Wells Fargo & Co. chief economist Sung Won Sohn said he sees little progres= s=20 in efforts to fix the state's power problems and end state electricity=20 purchases.=20 ""If we're going to pour money into a bottomless pit, I would worry about th= e=20 state's finances,"" he said. ""At some point we're going to run out of money.= ""=20 The controller's criticism of fellow Democrat Davis won support from Assemb= ly=20 Republicans and Secretary of State Bill Jones, a Republican considering=20 challenging Davis next year.=20 Jones said he wants to announce his own plan to solve the state's energy=20 woes, but can't unless Davis releases more financial details.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio dismissed the criticism.=20 ""Political grandstanding doesn't generate one more kilowatt of energy for= =20 California in this time of emergency,"" he said.=20 Maviglio said the administration has released the financial information it= =20 can without jeopardizing negotiations for long-term power contracts with=20 wholesalers.=20 --- Controller: State's power spending imperils its financial health=20 By Don Thompson ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 21, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) California's power-buying on behalf of two strapped utiliti= es is=20 gutting its budget surplus and putting the state at financial risk, the sta= te=20 controller said Wednesday.=20 The surplus dropped from $8.5 billion in January, when the state began buyi= ng=20 electricity for Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison= ,=20 to $3.2 billion now, Kathleen Connell estimates.=20 Connell ordered an audit of the state's power-buying, saying Gov. Gray Davi= s=20 is withholding key financial information from her office and the Legislatur= e.=20 Wednesday marked the first time in three days the state avoided rolling=20 blackouts. Power grid officials credited cooling temperatures and the=20 completion of repairs at several power plants.=20 Connell said the energy crunch now imperils the state's budget as well as i= ts=20 electric grid.=20 California has been spending about $45 million a day =01) $4.2 billion so f= ar =01)=20 to buy power for Edison and PG&E, both denied credit by electricity=20 wholesalers.=20 The two utilities, California's largest, say they are nearly $14 billion in= =20 debt due to soaring wholesale power costs the state's deregulation law bloc= ks=20 them from recovering from customers.=20 Meanwhile, the state has faced high natural gas costs and a tight power=20 supply driven in part by power plant repairs in California and scarce=20 hydroelectric power in the Pacific Northwest.=20 Standard & Poor's has put the state on a credit watch due to its power=20 purchases and chastised Davis, the Legislature and state regulators for not= =20 taking more aggressive steps to assure the utilities can pay their bills.= =20 On Wednesday, Connell said she is refusing a request by Davis and the=20 Legislature to transfer $5.6 billion into a ""rainy day fund"" she said was s= et=20 up to impress Wall Street as the state prepares to issue $10 billion in=20 revenue bonds to cover its power-buying.=20 Transferring the money would leave the state general fund $2.4 billion in= =20 debt, Connell said.=20 Sandy Harrison, spokesman for the state Department of Finance, and Keely=20 Bosler of the Legislative Analyst's Office, said such transfers are routine= =20 and required by law.=20 They put the state's budget surplus at $5.6 billion.=20 ""The law says she has to do it. The law does not give her the power to dema= nd=20 that kind of audit information,"" Harrison said.=20 He said the state's budget isn't in danger because it will be repaid with t= he=20 $10 billion in long-term debt.=20 Connell said the scope of the proposed transfer is unprecedented and amount= s=20 to a ""shell game"" that disguises the power purchases' impact on the state= =20 budget.=20 Wells Fargo & Co. chief economist Sung Won Sohn said he sees little progres= s=20 in efforts to fix the state's power problems and end state electricity=20 purchases.=20 ""If we're going to pour money into a bottomless pit, I would worry about th= e=20 state's finances,"" he said. ""At some point we're going to run out of money.= ""=20 The controller's criticism of fellow Democrat Davis won support from Assemb= ly=20 Republicans and Secretary of State Bill Jones, a Republican considering=20 challenging Davis next year.=20 Jones said he wants to announce his own plan to solve the state's energy=20 woes, but can't unless Davis releases more financial details. He said his= =20 plan may involve giving the utilities low-interest loans with their=20 transmission lines held as collateral.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio dismissed the criticism.=20 ""Political grandstanding doesn't generate one more kilowatt of energy for= =20 California in this time of emergency,"" he said.=20 Maviglio said the administration has released the financial information it= =20 can without jeopardizing negotiations for long-term power contracts with=20 wholesalers.=20 --- Governor says utilities must pay in advance for some power=20 By Jennifer Coleman ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 21, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) The state's two largest utilities will be ordered to pay=20 environmentally friendly power generators in advance, a move Gov. Gray Davi= s=20 hopes will bring a quick end to the power blackouts that darkened Californi= a=20 this week.=20 The statewide blackouts that stretched from San Diego to Oregon on Monday a= nd=20 Tuesday were caused in part by the failure of Southern California Edison an= d=20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. to pay millions of dollars they owe ""qualifyin= g=20 facilities"" or QFs, Davis said.=20 Such suppliers use cogeneration =01) steam from manufacturing plus natural = gas =01)=20 or solar, wind and other renewable energy to generate electricity. This wee= k=20 California lost about half the power those generators normally provide.=20 Controller: State's power spending imperils its financial health=20 ?=20 Several of them said they hadn't been paid by Edison and PG&E in weeks and= =20 can't afford to keep operating their plants.=20 Davis accused the utilities of taking in money from customers while failing= =20 to pay the QFs. The state has been spending about $45 million a day since= =20 January to buy power for customers of Edison and PG&E, which are so=20 credit-poor that suppliers refuse to sell to them.=20 ""It's wrong and irresponsible of the utilities to pocket this money and not= =20 pay the generators,"" the governor said at a Capitol news conference Tuesday= =20 evening. ""They've acted irresponsibly and immorally and it has to stop.""=20 PG&E called the governor's statements ""inappropriate and unjustified,"" addi= ng=20 that it was negotiating a payment plan with the QFs. Edison said it is inte= nt=20 on paying creditors and working with the California Public Utilities=20 Commission to pay QFs for future power sales.=20 Controller Kathleen Connell warned Wednesday that the state's $2=20 billion-a-month power purchases are jeopardizing California's budget.=20 The state's budget surplus dropped from $8.5 billion in January, when the= =20 power purchases began, to $3.2 billion now, Connell estimates. She blamed= =20 Davis for withholding key financial information, and ordered an audit of th= e=20 state's power spending starting next week.=20 She blocked a request by the Legislature and Davis administration to transf= er=20 $5.6 billion from the state's general fund into a special ""rainy day"" fund,= =20 saying that would have left the general fund $2.4 billion in debt.=20 The Legislative Analyst's Office said such transfers are routine; Connell= =20 agreed, but said the size of the transfer is unprecedented.=20 ""We started this year with a generous budget surplus,"" Connell said. ""The= =20 energy crisis has taken much of that away and this transfer on top of the= =20 electricity purchases would put the fund at risk.""=20 Meanwhile, keepers of the state's power grid were optimistic California wou= ld=20 get through Wednesday without another day of rolling blackouts. Two plants= =20 down for repairs returned to service.=20 Several power plants that were taken down for repairs are also expected com= e=20 online by the end of the week, reducing the likelihood of blackouts, said J= im=20 Detmers, ISO vice president.=20 Power may flow to homes and businesses, but it could soon cost consumers=20 more, said Assemblyman Fred Keeley, one of the Legislature's leaders on=20 energy issues.=20 ""I think it's intellectually appropriate and honest to tell people as soon = as=20 it's apparent"" that a rate increase is warranted, the Boulder Creek Democra= t=20 said Tuesday, indicating that time had come.=20 He estimated that the state Public Utilities Commission may soon have to=20 raise rates by about 15 percent to cover the state's costs and its utilitie= s'=20 bills.=20 ""My sense is that people will appreciate having some certainty and being ab= le=20 to plan for it,"" he said. ""They don't have to like it but I think they'll= =20 appreciate it.""=20 Davis said he is confident the utilities and the state can pay their bills= =20 without further rate increases for Edison and PG&E customers.=20 In the meantime, the Independent System Operator, keeper of the grid, is=20 counting on continued conservation by residents and businesses to avoid mor= e=20 blackouts. Conservation accounted for about 300 megawatts in savings during= =20 Tuesday's peak usage, enough to power 300,000 homes.=20 Roughly a half-million homes and businesses were affected by Tuesday's=20 blackouts, which snarled traffic and plunged schools and businesses into=20 darkness across the state.=20 The outages began at 9:30 a.m. and continued in 90-minute waves until about= 2=20 p.m., when the ISO lifted its blackout order. They were blamed for at least= =20 one serious traffic accident.=20 Two cars collided at an intersection in the Los Angeles suburb of South El= =20 Monte where the traffic lights were out. Two people were seriously hurt, sa= id=20 California Highway Patrol Officer Nick Vite.=20 In San Francisco's Chinatown, souvenir shops normally bustling with visitor= s=20 were forced to shut down. Nearby, irritated customers waited for a bank to= =20 reopen.=20 The blackouts, like Monday's, were caused by a combination of problems,=20 including unseasonably warm weather, reduced electricity imports from the= =20 Pacific Northwest and numerous power plants being shut down for repairs.=20 Adding to those troubles, the state lost about 3,100 megawatts from the QF= =20 plants.=20 Senate Energy Committee Chairwoman Debra Bowen, D-Marina del Rey, estimated= =20 Tuesday that Edison has amassed more than $1 billion and PG&E more than $2= =20 billion that they have not paid to generators.=20 Davis said the PUC planned to issue an order next week directing the=20 utilities to pre-pay their future QF bills.=20 PG&E said its prepayments hinge on an upcoming PUC decision on whether the= =20 utility's rates are sufficient to pay its bills and cover the state's power= =20 purchases on its behalf, which amount to $4.2 billion since early January.= =20 Edison and PG&E say they have lost more than $13 billion since last June to= =20 climbing wholesale electricity prices, which the state's 1996 deregulation= =20 law prevents them from passing on to ratepayers.=20 --- Energy Overcharge of $5.5 Billion Is Alleged=20 Power: Money should be refunded to taxpayers and utilities, the state grid= =20 operator says, citing evidence of market manipulation. Suppliers deny the= =20 accusation.=20 By TIM REITERMAN and NANCY RIVERA BROOKS, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????Wholesale electricity suppliers overcharged California by about $5.5= =20 billion between May and last month, and that money should be refunded to th= e=20 state's taxpayers and financially strapped utilities, the state power grid= =20 operator said Wednesday. ?????Generators engaged in market manipulation and consistent patterns of= =20 bidding far above costs in the deregulated energy market, the California=20 Independent System Operator found in a study of pricing data. The findings= =20 support the widespread belief that these suppliers reaped massive additiona= l=20 revenue by manipulating the market. ?????Spokesmen for the companies denied the accusation. ?????The study, prepared for a filing with federal regulators today, is=20 central to Cal-ISO's efforts to seek reimbursement for what it considers=20 excessive charges by electricity suppliers during the state's energy crisis= . ?????""This might be the first time we told them the total impact and=20 magnitude [of the overcharging],"" said Anjali Sheffrin, Cal-ISO's director = of=20 market analysis. ""We think the entire amount deserves consideration for=20 refunds."" ?????Using confidential bidding data on tens of thousands of electricity=20 sales, Cal-ISO found that five companies that together supply about 30% of= =20 the power delivered to customers of the state's investor-owned utilities=20 engaged in two types of behavior that tended to push up prices: ?????* They effectively withheld supplies by bidding at excessive prices,= =20 even though they could have made some money selling more electricity. ?????* Less frequently, they had power generation available but did not bid= =20 at all. ?????The study concluded that energy suppliers commonly offered their=20 electricity at twice their cost. For example, Sheffrin said, the average=20 markup in August was 100% during peak hours. ?????A spokeswoman at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which=20 oversees wholesale electricity pricing across the country, declined to=20 comment Wednesday, saying, ""This is part of an ongoing proceeding."" ?????FERC member William L. Massey, who has considered previous commission= =20 actions on refunds to be inadequate, said it would be improper for him to= =20 comment on a report that has not yet been filed. But when told of the=20 $5.5-billion total, Massey said: ""That doesn't shock me in any way."" ?????""Prices over the past 10 months in California have greatly exceeded th= e=20 federal standards of just and reasonable prices, and I think they have=20 exceeded the standards by possibly billions of dollars,"" he said. ?????Cal-ISO, which oversees grid operations and an emergency energy market= ,=20 previously detailed $550 million in alleged overcharges for December and=20 January and asked FERC for refunds. But the commission has proposed refunds= =20 of only a tiny fraction of that amount. ?????The study covered five major in-state power suppliers--Reliant Energy,= =20 Dynegy, Williams/AES, Duke Energy and Mirant, formerly Southern Energy--plu= s=20 16 power importers, all of which deliver power to customers of Pacific Gas = &=20 Electric Co., Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric Co. ?????""All [21] overcharged, but some excessively and some by moderate=20 amounts,"" Sheffrin said. ?????Cal-ISO's public filing will quantify the alleged overcharging by each= =20 company, but the companies will be identified only by a number. The code wi= ll=20 be provided to FERC, Sheffrin said, and Cal-ISO lawyers will determine how= =20 much information about the companies will be made public. ?????State, U.S. Investigations ?????California electricity markets and the companies that buy and sell pow= er=20 in the state have been the subject of several investigations by state and= =20 federal authorities since wholesale electricity prices first skyrocketed in= =20 May. ?????Electricity suppliers have repeatedly denied manipulating the Californ= ia=20 market in any way, whether through above-cost bidding in spot markets or=20 through physical withholding of electricity to drive up prices. ?????Reliant Energy is cooperating with FERC's requests for more data and i= s=20 confident the commission will conclude that prices charged by Reliant were= =20 justified, said Joe Bob Perkins, president of the Houston-based company. ?????Perkins also bitterly disputed charges that Reliant has shut down unit= s=20 so that it can earn bigger profits on the power sold by the remaining plant= s.=20 These charges have been leveled against all of the power-plant owners in th= e=20 state. ?????Reliant Vice President John Stout said Cal-ISO's calculations typicall= y=20 don't include such fixed costs as salaries, taxes and the interest on bonds= =20 they sold to finance their power plants, which they acquired under terms of= =20 the state's landmark 1996 deregulation law. ?????In addition, he said, many high-priced power days have resulted from= =20 buyers bidding against each other for scarce supplies rather than sellers= =20 charging excessive amounts--like a house price being driven far above the= =20 listing price in a hot real estate market. ?????Williams Energy Services, a trading company that markets most of the= =20 power produced by plants owned by AES, also says it will be exonerated by= =20 FERC once the commission examines documentation being submitted, said Paula= =20 Hill-Collins, spokeswoman for the Tulsa, Okla., company. ?????""FERC has the obligation to investigate when these accusations are=20 made,"" Hill-Collins said. ""This is just a process of justification, not=20 necessarily proof of guilt."" ?????Williams/AES was recently ordered by FERC to prove that it did not tak= e=20 generating units out of service last year to drive up electricity prices, o= r=20 refund $10.8 million to California utilities. ?????During the period studied, suppliers sold electricity in the Californi= a=20 Power Exchange to Southern California Edison, PG&E and San Diego Gas &=20 Electric Co. and in a backup market for last-minute electricity operated by= =20 Cal-ISO. But sky-high prices plunged Edison and PG&E deeply into debt, and= =20 most suppliers stopped selling to them in January, forcing the state=20 Department of Water Resources to step in as the primary electricity buyer f= or=20 the three big utilities' 27 million customers. ?????The Cal-ISO study, first summarized at an energy conference last week = at=20 UC Berkeley but not otherwise publicized, concluded that the companies=20 exercised so-called market power to pump up electricity prices. ?????Severin Borenstein, director of the Energy Institute at Berkeley, said= =20 Cal-ISO's study is consistent with his research examining pricing practices= =20 in 2000. ?????""We found several billion dollars . . . in departures from competitive= =20 pricing,"" he said. ""When the market was tight this summer, they were able t= o=20 push up prices, and they did."" ?????The early warning signs of electricity price spikes, the study found,= =20 appeared in May after two years of relatively stable prices of $30 to $40 p= er=20 megawatt-hour under deregulation. Prices went up during the summer, dipped = in=20 September and October with lower demand, then took off in November and=20 December as weather turned cold and the price of natural gas, which is used= =20 to generate much of the state's electricity, reached record levels. ?????""There were plant outages, and demand and supply became close,"" Sheffr= in=20 said. ""Whatever price they bid had to be taken, and market power asserted= =20 itself."" ?????Cal-ISO found that $3 billion of the alleged overcharges occurred=20 between May and November. ?????On Friday, federal regulators ordered six wholesale power suppliers to= =20 refund $55 million to California if they cannot justify prices charged in= =20 February. The refund was limited to power sold that month in excess of $430= =20 per megawatt-hour during Stage 3 power alerts, when supplies are so tight= =20 that rolling blackouts are threatened. (One megawatt-hour is enough=20 electricity to supply 750 typical homes for an hour.) ?????The previous week, FERC ordered 13 suppliers to justify or refund $69= =20 million for power sold in January at prices above $273 per megawatt-hour. ?????Massey opposed the potential refunds as too low because they were=20 limited to hours in which a Stage 3 power emergency was in place and becaus= e=20 the benchmark price set for each month was too high--combining to exempt mo= re=20 than 70,000 transactions from scrutiny. ?????""We're still looking for our lost wallet under the lamppost, which is= =20 Stage 3 alerts,"" said Massey, one of three commissioners on the five-member= =20 board (two seats are vacant). ?????Generators ""have been given the free and clear,"" he said. ?????""These tinkling little refunds they have come out with recently are=20 almost a joke,"" said Cal-ISO board member Mike Florio, senior attorney at t= he=20 Utility Reform Network. ?????Resisting Price Caps ?????Cal-ISO contends that the last 10 months have proved that generators c= an=20 no longer be allowed to receive electricity prices that are dictated by wha= t=20 the market will bear. ?????""FERC granted market-based rate authority on each of these suppliers'= =20 own showing that they could not manipulate prices, yet their actions have= =20 shown the contrary,"" Sheffrin said. ""We feel FERC needs to look at the=20 premise of allowing these generators to continue selling at market-based=20 rates."" ?????The commission is responsible for ensuring just and reasonable=20 electricity rates. Although it has called California's power market=20 dysfunctional and vulnerable to manipulation, the agency has resisted setti= ng=20 firm price caps sought by California's congressional delegation. ?????Chairman Curt L. Hebert Jr. strongly opposes caps, while Massey wants = to=20 use caps across the West as a ""temporary timeout."" ?????Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, in a New York news conference=20 Wednesday, reiterated his opposition to electricity price caps as a way to= =20 cope with California's energy crisis. ?????""If we put price caps in place, there will be more blackouts, and=20 they'll be worse,"" Abraham said. ?????Cal-ISO is filing its market study as part of its comments on FERC sta= ff=20 recommendations on ways to thwart market manipulation. FERC's proposal=20 includes strict coordination of power plant outages by Cal-ISO with reporti= ng=20 of suspicious closures to FERC, and generator-by-generator bid caps tied to= =20 costs. ---=20 ?????Reiterman reported from San Francisco, Rivera Brooks from Los Angeles.= =20 Times staff writer Thomas S. Mulligan in New York contributed to this story= . --- --- Power Strain Eases but Concerns Mount=20 Energy: Officials say summer prices will be high, and a state report shows= =20 that contracts with generators are far short of goals.=20 By DAN MORAIN and JENIFER WARREN, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????SACRAMENTO--California's fragile electricity system stabilized=20 Wednesday, but a Davis administration report suggested troubles ahead becau= se=20 the state could be forced to buy most of its power for the coming summer on= =20 the costly and volatile spot market. ?????After two days of statewide blackouts, power plants that had been shut= =20 down were cranked up. Unseasonable heat tapered off. The operators of the= =20 statewide power grid relaxed their state of emergency. ?????But plenty of ominous signs remained. Many small producers remained sh= ut=20 down, skeptical about Gov. Gray Davis' plan for utilities to pay them. ?????State Controller Kathleen Connell issued a sharp warning about the hig= h=20 cost of the state's foray into the power business and announced that she wi= ll=20 block an administration request that she transfer $5.6 billion into an=20 account that could be tapped to pay for state purchases of electricity. ?????And a report from the administration summarizing contracts between Dav= is=20 and independent power generators showed that the state has signed contracts= =20 for only 2,247 megawatts of electricity, significantly less than the 6,000 = to=20 7,000 megawatts previously claimed. ?????While there are agreements in principle for the full amount, the repor= t=20 notes that generators can back out of the contracts for a variety of reason= s,=20 including the state's failure to sell bonds to finance power purchased by= =20 July 1. The Legislature has approved plans to sell $10 billion in bonds, bu= t=20 none have yet been issued. ?????""We are exposed enormously this summer,"" Senate Energy Committee=20 chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) said after looking at the report.= =20 ""We owe the people the truth about how difficult this summer is going to be= .=20 We don't have a power fairy."" ?????Perhaps most significant, the report suggests that the contracts fall= =20 significantly short of Davis' stated goal of buying no more than 5% of the= =20 state's summer needs on the spot electricity market, where prices can be ma= ny=20 times those of long-term contracts. ?????After reading the report, Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economist= =20 who studies the California electricity market, said the numbers suggested= =20 that the state's long-term contracts will cover less than half of what the= =20 state will need this summer. ?????""We're definitely short this summer, next summer and the summer of=20 2003,"" he said. ?????California was forced to start buying electricity in December--at a co= st=20 of $50 million a day--because producers refused to sell to Southern=20 California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric. The two utilities amassed=20 billions of dollars in debt when prices for wholesale power soared on the= =20 spot market. ?????Vikram Budhraja, a consultant retained by Davis to negotiate deals wit= h=20 generators, said the report represents a ""work in progress."" He said the=20 state may yet sign new contracts. ?????However, Wolak said the contract figures confirm what he and others ha= ve=20 been dreading: that summer is going to be rife with rolling blackouts unles= s=20 serious steps to cut demand are taken immediately. ?????Wolak and other experts say large industrial customers must be switche= d=20 to real-time meters and pricing to persuade them to use the bulk of their= =20 energy at times of low demand. ?????The head of the Energy Foundation, a San Francisco-based nonprofit tha= t=20 promotes sustainable sources of power, made the same proposal to Davis on= =20 Wednesday. ?????""The government need not ask customers to swelter in the dark this=20 summer,"" foundation President Hal Harvey argued in a letter. ?????He also proposed a crash campaign to boost sales of efficient applianc= es=20 and lightbulbs. He said the state needs to take over the utilities' contrac= ts=20 with alternative energy providers to ensure they stay in business, and sign= =20 new contracts for 1,500 megawatts of new wind power--the cheapest, fastest= =20 and cleanest source of new supply. ?????Davis had proposed a formula Tuesday to force private utilities to pay= =20 the alternative producers, some of which have not been paid since November.= =20 But some of them warned Wednesday that Davis' plan offers them little=20 incentive to turn on their generators. ?????Alternative energy producers supply more than a quarter of the=20 electricity consumed in California. ?????Many producers generate electricity from wind, sun and geothermal=20 sources. But most of them generate power using natural gas--and the cost of= =20 natural gas has been soaring. Several natural gas users said Davis' plan,= =20 which caps rates, won't cover their fuel costs. ?????Davis assumes that the price of natural gas will fall. But small=20 generators say they don't have sufficient purchasing power or sophisticatio= n=20 to gamble on future prices. ?????The Public Utilities Commission is expected to approve Davis' proposal= =20 next week. It offers producers two choices: 7.9 cents a kilowatt-hour if th= ey=20 agree to supply power for five years, or 6.9 cents a kilowatt-hour over 10= =20 years. ?????""The price of natural gas is higher than that,"" said Marty Quinn,=20 executive vice president and chief operating officer of Ridgewood Power LLC= ,=20 which owns three natural gas-fired co-generation plants. ""If we operate,=20 we'll lose money."" ?????Ridgewood is not operating, having been cut off by gas suppliers. The= =20 company sued PG&E last month seeking overdue payments and release from its= =20 contracts with the utility. ?????A hearing is scheduled in El Centro today in another lawsuit filed by = a=20 small energy producer, an Imperial Valley geothermal producer that sued=20 Edison for refusing to let it break its contract and sell on the open marke= t.=20 CalEnergy says Edison owes it about $140 million for energy sold since=20 November. ?????A company spokesman, Jay Lawrence, said CalEnergy was going ahead with= =20 its suit despite Davis' proposal. ""We've had promises before,"" he said. ?????In other developments: ?????* A federal judge in Sacramento on Wednesday ordered Reliant Energy of= =20 Houston, a major producer, to continue selling power to California during= =20 emergencies, despite the company's argument that it may not be fully=20 reimbursed. The order will remain in effect for 60 days or until the U.S.= =20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission decides a related case. ?????* Connell said the state budget surplus has shrunk to $3.2 billion=20 because the state has spent roughly $2.8 billion on electricity. She=20 criticized the administration for withholding basic information about state= =20 finances, and said she will begin an audit on Monday of the Department of= =20 Water Resources, which is responsible for purchasing power. ?????Davis' aides said Connell took her action because the Democratic=20 governor endorsed one of Connell's foes this week in the race for Los Angel= es=20 mayor, former Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa. A Connell aide scoffed= =20 at the notion. ?????* Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said she ""never has had a response""= =20 from President Bush after writing him last month for an appointment to=20 discuss the California energy crisis. ?????In a wide-ranging lunch talk with reporters in Washington, she deplore= d=20 the fact that ""huge, huge profits are being made"" in the California crisis,= =20 and said ""an appropriate federal role"" would be to guarantee a reliable=20 source of power until the state can get nine new generators online. ---=20 ?????Times staff writers Mitchell Landsberg in Los Angeles and Robert L.=20 Jackson in Washington contributed to this report. --- --- ------------------------ --- --- ------------------------ Net Complex A Dilemma For San Jose=20 SERVER FARM: Plant would tax grid=20 David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Thursday, March 22, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /22/M N236772.DTL=20 San Jose, while trying to block construction of a new power plant, is set t= o=20 approve a vast computer complex that could overwhelm California's already= =20 strained power grid.=20 City officials gave preliminary approval last week to what would be the=20 world's largest ""server farm."" The sprawling facility to handle Internet=20 traffic would drain about 150 megawatts of power from the state electricity= =20 grid.=20 If granted final authorization on April 3, the $1.2 billion project would a= dd=20 the equivalent of about 150,000 homes to California's power system, which w= as=20 hit this week by rolling blackouts as demand for juice outstripped availabl= e=20 supply.=20 The server-farm issue highlights a vexing dilemma for the state.=20 On the one hand, Gov. Gray Davis is calling for widespread conservation to= =20 help California overcome its current troubles. On the other, no one wants t= o=20 curtail growth of the high-tech industry, which is an engine for economic= =20 vitality.=20 ""San Jose will make a lot of money from this project,"" said Craig Breon,=20 executive director of the Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society. ""But to not= =20 help the state out of its energy situation, there's a fair amount of=20 hypocrisy going on.""=20 The server farm would be owned by U.S. DataPort, a San Jose data-management= =20 firm. As planned, it would occupy 10 buildings on more than 170 acres in th= e=20 city's Alviso area.=20 Total projected energy use would be 180 megawatts. About 30 megawatts would= =20 be generated by a small on-site facility, and the rest would have to be=20 provided by Pacific Gas and Electric Co.=20 ""We're confident that the DataPort project will be approved because it's ve= ry=20 important to San Jose and to the local economy,"" said San Jose Mayor Ron=20 Gonzales.=20 But PG&E already is saying that its power cupboard is bare. The utility ""do= es=20 not have sufficient existing electric infrastructure"" to meet U.S. DataPort= 's=20 needs, it said in a recent letter to San Jose officials.=20 John Mogannam, U.S. DataPort's senior vice president of operations, counter= ed=20 that it could take as long as five years for the server farm to grow big=20 enough to require the full 150 megawatts from the state grid.=20 ""Hopefully, by then the whole energy crisis will pass by, and we won't have= a=20 problem,"" he said.=20 Mogannam stressed the positive aspects of the project, such as its ability = to=20 handle about 15 percent of global Internet traffic, the 700 jobs it would= =20 create, and the $70 million over 10 years it would generate for San Jose in= =20 property and utility taxes.=20 ""That's why the city likes it,"" he said.=20 Indeed, San Jose officials are so enamored with such developments that they= =20 have all but turned a deaf ear to warnings that the server farm will=20 exacerbate California's already dire power shortage.=20 Andrew Crabtree, the city's senior planner, said the planning commission ha= d=20 barely touched the question of energy supply when it approved the server fa= rm=20 last week.=20 ""It wasn't incumbent on the commission to solve the state's energy-supply= =20 problems,"" he said.=20 Rather, San Jose city planners focused on the environmental ramifications o= f=20 the proposed facility, including air pollution from diesel generators and t= he=20 impact on nearby wildlife.=20 How it would affect dozens of burrowing owls in the area was a key topic of= =20 discussion.=20 ""We all recognized that there's a power shortage,"" Crabtree said. ""But we= =20 couldn't do anything about that with this project.""=20 Except to make things tougher, of course.=20 Server farms run 24 hours a day, seven days a week. They are an aspect of t= he=20 high-tech boom that was never foreseen by energy experts, and which are now= a=20 major contributor to California's surging electricity demand.=20 A server farm essentially is a large building filled with computers. Each= =20 computer handles the Web site or Internet traffic for hundreds of corporate= =20 clients that do not have the technical resources to look after such things= =20 in- house.=20 Most server farms consume between 10 and 60 megawatts of power. At 180=20 megawatts, the U.S. DataPort facility is billed as the most extensive data= =20 center on the planet.=20 ""There won't be another this size anywhere in the world,"" said Mogannam, th= e=20 company's senior vice president. ""This will be the biggest.""=20 With such a vast scale, however, comes additional concerns. For example, al= l=20 that hardware will generate huge amounts of heat, requiring powerful air=20 conditioners running around the clock to keep things cool.=20 Patrick Dorinson, a spokesman for the Independent System Operator, which=20 oversees California's electricity network, said server farms had ""a big=20 impact"" on the state's tight energy supply.=20 ""We have an economy that's increasingly based on delivery of information,"" = he=20 observed. ""We certainly need to make sure we're building adequate generatio= n=20 and transmission to get it there.""=20 As it stands, no major power plants have been built in California for the= =20 past 12 years, while dozens of server farms have sprung up throughout the= =20 state.=20 The Yankee Group, a Boston consulting firm, estimates that the amount of=20 space taken up by server farms nationwide rose to 9 million square feet fro= m=20 1999 to 2000.=20 By 2003, it expects that figure to increase to 25 million square feet, or= =20 enough room for more than a hundred 10-story office buildings.=20 San Francisco may be the exception. Supervisor Sophie Maxwell proposed=20 interim zoning controls last week that would require server farms to receiv= e=20 special permission from City Hall to operate.=20 San Jose, for its part, has no such reservations. It does, however, draw th= e=20 line at big, fat power plants in the backyard of the city's leading corpora= te=20 citizen.=20 Gonzales is spearheading opposition to a proposed 600-megawatt generating= =20 facility in Coyote Valley because of its proximity to a residential area at= =20 the site of a planned Cisco Systems office complex.=20 ""There's plenty of opportunities to generate power in the city,"" he said.= =20 ""This project is just in the wrong site.""=20 The matter is now in the hands of the California Energy Commission, which i= s=20 expected to issue a ruling by May.=20 Cisco, critics say, twisted the mayor's arm to fight the plant because it d= id=20 not want a generating facility in its neighborhood. The area will be home t= o=20 thousands of well-heeled tech workers.=20 ""It's politics,"" said Breon at the Audubon Society. ""City officials are=20 making political decisions rather than good planning decisions.""=20 Ted Smith, executive director of the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, a=20 grassroots organization, is calling for a moratorium on construction of all= =20 new server farms in the South Bay until sufficient power can be found to ke= ep=20 them running.=20 ""Until they figure out how to build these things without draining the=20 electricity grid even dryer it is, they shouldn't build them,"" he said.=20 ""The Internet industry is creating unintended consequences that will really= =20 screw up our future,"" Smith added. ""They are so busy focusing on next=20 quarter's profits that they don't stop and think about the consequences."" .= =20 .=20 SOME FAST FACTS ABOUT 'SERVER FARMS' .=20 -- What are they? ""Server farms"" are facilities dedicated exclusively to=20 housing powerful computers for Internet use.=20 -- Who uses them? Companies and individuals pay server farms to maintain=20 their Web sites, handle Net traffic and store vast amounts of data --=20 functions that otherwise would require extensive hardware and technical=20 support.=20 -- Why do they use them? As Internet use explodes, server farms play an=20 increasingly vital role in managing data and keeping information moving.=20 -- What's the problem? Server farms drain considerable amounts of electrici= ty=20 to keep running.=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 --- Contracts Won't Meet Summer Demands=20 DETAILS: 2004 before full impact felt=20 Lynda Gledhill, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau Thursday, March 22, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /22/M N230640.DTL=20 Sacramento -- Long-term power contracts negotiated by the state won't cover= =20 California's entire demand for electricity until 2004, according to newly= =20 released details about the agreements.=20 The information suggests that California might have to scrounge for=20 electricity on the high-priced spot market for a couple more years even as = it=20 continues to push conservation efforts and construction of more generating= =20 plants.=20 Details of the agreements released by Gov. Gray Davis' administration show= =20 that the contracts will provide for just over a third of the state's demand= =20 for power this year. Energy secured by the contracts will grow to meet the= =20 expected demand in three years.=20 Short-term purchases of power have at least temporarily depleted the state'= s=20 budget surplus and have raised the possibility of sharp rate increases=20 sometime in the future for electricity customers.=20 Davis administration officials are banking on the hope that conservation=20 efforts and increased generating capacity will cover the shortfall along wi= th=20 purchases of electricity on the spot market.=20 ""We're facing an extreme challenge still this summer,"" said Severin=20 Borenstein, head of the University of California at Berkeley Energy=20 Institute. ""Signing contracts doesn't create more electricity.""=20 The information released did not include the names of companies that the=20 state has signed contracts with or the purchase prices.=20 The sketchy details did not satisfy frustrated lawmakers, who said many=20 questions remain, especially how much the state will end up paying under th= e=20 terms of the contracts.=20 ""The fundamental question is how much is it costing the state of California= =20 to keep the lights on,"" said Assemblyman Tony Strickland, R-Thousand Oaks.= =20 ""What we really need is total disclosure.""=20 The state started buying power in January, after generators began refusing = to=20 provide electricity to the state's investor-owned utilities. Pacific Gas an= d=20 Electric Co. and Southern California Edison say they have more than $13=20 billion in past debt.=20 The state has been spending $49 million a day on power purchases since Jan.= =20 17, according to documents obtained by The Chronicle last week.=20 Those documents said the average price of the contracts across 10 years is= =20 $69 per megawatt hour, including summer peak. The five-year average price i= s=20 $79 per megawatt hour.=20 According to one chart provided by the governor's office yesterday, the=20 long-term contracts will fall about 35 million megawatt hours short in 2002= .=20 Based on the average price per megawatt hour the state has been paying sinc= e=20 January, that could end up costing between $6.6 billion and $13 billion.=20 The law creating the state purchasing authority allowed purchases up to $10= =20 billion and extends until 2003.=20 The governor's office said 21 contracts have been signed and another 23=20 agreements that have been reached but not yet signed.=20 Several generators have said that they will not sign contracts with the sta= te=20 until the back debt by the utilities has been taken care of.=20 ""We have some real potential problems,"" said Senate President Pro Tem John= =20 Burton, D-San Francisco.=20 Strickland and several media outlets, including The Chronicle, have filed= =20 public information requests to get more information about the prices of the= =20 contracts from the administration.=20 Releasing the information would jeopardize the negotiations for future=20 contracts, said Steve Maviglio, Davis' spokesman.=20 Lawmakers, also frustrated by the lack of information given out by the Davi= s=20 administration, were not given notice that the information was coming, and= =20 many said it was lost in their mail pile.=20 The cover letter was on Los Angeles Department of Water and Power letterhea= d,=20 not that of the administration. The letter was written by S. David Freeman,= =20 head of the Los Angeles system who was on leave for the month of February t= o=20 help the state negotiate the contracts.=20 Assemblyman George Runner, R-Lancaster, said the ""ambiguity of the=20 information raises more questions than it answers.""=20 ""It's like watching a parade through a peephole,"" he said. ""He's showing us= =20 another float, but I don't know what the parade looks like.""=20 Blaming the state's purchases of electricity, Controller Kathleen Connell= =20 said yesterday that the state's cash on hand had fallen from $8.5 billion i= n=20 January to $3.2 billion. Connell ordered an audit of the state's power=20 buying.=20 Connell said she would block a transfer sought by the Davis administration = of=20 $5.6 billion from the general fund to the state's emergency reserve account= ,=20 claiming it would lead to a ''serious cash flow crisis.""=20 The transfer, however, is not related to the energy crisis. The sum=20 represents a routine rollover of unspent money from the previous fiscal yea= r.=20 State law requires that money to be sent to a special reserve account for= =20 emergencies.=20 Davis officials acknowledged that $3.7 billion in energy purchases have had= =20 an impact on state coffers, but they say the state will be repaid once bond= s=20 are issued in the coming weeks. They also said the state typically has its= =20 lowest cash reserves at this time of year. That changes in mid-April when a= =20 flood of income tax revenue pours in.=20 ""The transfer has nothing to do with energy purchases,"" said Sandy Harrison= ,=20 a spokesman for the Department of Finance.=20 ""It's not helpful to ratepayers, taxpayers and people who want their lights= =20 to stay on to have the issue muddied with this sort of inaccurate innuendo,= ""=20 Harrison said.=20 In other developments yesterday:=20 -- After two days of statewide rolling blackouts, power grid managers avoid= ed=20 outages. Demand was lower because of cooler temperatures around the state a= nd=20 supply increased as several power plants completed repairs.=20 -- A federal judge in Sacramento ordered a major power generator to continu= e=20 supplying power to California. Reliant Energy Services Inc. had insisted th= at=20 it should not be forced to sell to debt-heavy utilities unless the state=20 guaranteed the bills.=20 Chronicle staff writer Greg Lucas contributed to this story. / E-mail Lynda= =20 Gledhill at lgledhill@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 --- --- ----------------- California overcharged $5.5 bln for wholesale power=20 SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- Electricity wholesalers overcharged California= =20 $5.5 billion over the past 10 months, according to a report by managers of= =20 the state's power grid.=20 The five companies, among other things, frequently offered electricity at= =20 prices double what it cost them to produce, concludes the California=20 Independent System Operator study, which was published Thursday in the Los= =20 Angeles Times.=20 ``All overcharged, but some excessively and some by moderate amounts,'' sai= d=20 Anjali Sheffrin, the ISO's director of market analysis.=20 The Times said the ISO planned to file the study with federal regulators=20 Thursday and are demanding that the money be paid back.=20 The companies denied the allegations, adding they expect the Federal Energy= =20 Regulatory Commission will determine their prices were justified.=20 The commission has recently stepped up its scrutiny of power companies'=20 behavior during California's power crisis, asking suppliers to justify $124= =20 million in sales during the first two months of the year or refund the mone= y.=20 Critics claim thousands of additional questionable sales are not being=20 challenged.=20 The ISO study alleges the wholesalers manipulated the market by bidding at= =20 excessive prices, effectively withholding supplies, or by not bidding at al= l=20 when they had generation capability available.=20 California has been spending about $45 million a day -- $4.2 billion since= =20 January -- to purchase power for Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern= =20 California Edison. Both utilities, the state's largest, have been cut off b= y=20 electricity wholesalers because their credit is almost worthless.=20 State Controller Kathleen Connell said Wednesday that the state's=20 power-buying is gutting its budget surplus. Since the state started making= =20 emergency power buys, the surplus has fallen from $8.5 billion to about $3.= 2=20 billion, she said.=20 A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction Wednesday ordering a major= =20 electricity wholesaler, Reliant Energy Services, to continue selling to=20 California despite its fear that it will not be paid.=20 U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said Californians were at risk of= =20 irreparable harm if Reliant stopped selling power to the ISO, which buys it= =20 at the last minute on behalf of utilities to bolster supplies and try to fe= nd=20 off rolling blackouts.=20 Such blackouts hit the state twice this week. On Wednesday, cooling=20 temperatures and the completion of repairs at several power plants allowed= =20 the state to avoid blackouts.=20 Standard & Poor's has put the state on a credit watch due to its power=20 purchases and chastised Gov. Gray Davis, the Legislature and state regulato= rs=20 for not taking more aggressive steps to make sure the utilities can pay the= ir=20 bills.=20 Edison and PG&E say they are nearly $14 billion in debt due to soaring=20 wholesale power costs. The state's deregulation law blocks them from=20 recovering the costs from customers.=20 Connell ordered an audit of the state's power-buying, saying Davis is=20 withholding key financial information from her office and the Legislature.= =20 She said she would refuse to transfer $5.6 billion into a ``rainy day fund'= '=20 she said was set up to impress Wall Street as the state prepares to issue $= 10=20 billion in revenue bonds to cover its power buys. Transferring the money=20 would leave the state general fund $2.4 billion in debt, Connell said.=20 She called the scope of the proposed transfer unprecedented and said it=20 amounted to a ``shell game'' that disguises the power purchases' effect on= =20 the state budget.=20 Sandy Harrison, spokesman for the state Department of Finance, and Keely=20 Bosler, of the Legislative Analyst's Office, said such transfers are routin= e=20 and required by law. They put the state's budget surplus at $5.6 billion.= =20 ``The law says she has to do it. The law does not give her the power to=20 demand that kind of audit information,'' Harrison said.=20 Harrison said the state's budget isn't in danger because it will be repaid= =20 with the revenue bonds.=20 Connell's criticism of Davis, a fellow Democrat, won support from Assembly= =20 Republicans and Secretary of State Bill Jones, a Republican who may challen= ge=20 Davis next year.=20 Jones said he wants to announce his own plan to solve the state's energy=20 woes, but can't unless Davis releases more financial details.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio dismissed the criticism.=20 ``Political grandstanding doesn't generate one more kilowatt of energy for= =20 California in this time of emergency,'' he said.=20 Maviglio said the administration has released the financial information it= =20 can without jeopardizing negotiations for long-term power contracts with=20 wholesalers. --- --- ---------------------------- If the power goes off=20 Thursday, March 22, 2001=20 For most of us, rolling power blackouts are a nuisance. For some people, it= =20 could mean life or death.=20 ""In Laguna Hills, cancer patient Ruben Marquez said the blackout interrupte= d=20 and prolonged his dialysis treatment. He was unharmed,"" the Register report= ed=20 on Monday's blackouts, which hit about 1.2 million Californians, including= =20 100,000 Orange County homes and businesses.=20 What can people do to prevent disaster?=20 ""They and their families should have a backup plan,"" Rebecca Long,=20 spokesperson for the Orange County Red Cross, told us.=20 ""The Red Cross recommends in general that you plan for this as you would fo= r=20 any disaster, making sure you have battery-operated radios and flashlights.= =20 We do not recommend candles for an emergency,"" because of the fire hazard.= =20 She recommended a Web site: www.prepare.org People with special health needs, such as electric-powered respirators and= =20 oxygen machines, also should register with the power company. ""There's a whole classification"" for such persons with health needs, Southe= rn=20 California Edison spokesperson Clara Potes-Fellow told us. ""The list is for us to alert them that the power could be discontinued. The= y=20 arrange to have power through other means, batteries or generators. We=20 recommend that they have a battery backup of eight hours. Therefore, if the= =20 rotating outages are one hour, they will have plenty."" Even though the power company has such people's names, she said, ""we don't= =20 inform them in advance because we have just minutes from when the Independe= nt=20 System Operator,"" which directs where the electrons go, orders Edison to=20 implement a power outage on the grid Edison owns. ""By the time it took to= =20 call people, the outage would be over."" What's the problem at the ISO? ""We notify as best we can,"" Pat Dorinson, IS= O=20 director of communications, told us.=20 ""The object is to keep the lights on. Sometimes it's just a moment's notice= ""=20 before a blackout. ""It makes [giving more notice] pretty difficult. We're= =20 looking into ways to make the system better.""=20 In the meantime, citizens will have to keep taking precautions. We can't help noting that free market pricing, instead of politically-drive= n=20 prices, would much more likely make electricity available, albeit at higher= =20 prices.=20 We would expect, too, there would be hardship allowances, donations and=20 level-pay plans to accommodate various types of needs. --- Socialized electricity=20 Thursday, March 22, 2001=20 Government control of state power won't add one watt for consumers' use TOM MCCLINTOCK Sen. McClintock, R-Thousand Oaks, represents the 19th state Senate District= =20 in the state Legislature.=20 In a city where bad ideas never die, Sacramento is once again host to a=20 variety of plans for the government takeover of California's power system.= =20 The private sector, it is said, has done such a terrible job of providing= =20 electricity that government must now step in to save the day. Thus, the=20 Legislature is awash in proposals to spend billions of dollars of public=20 money to acquire existing power facilities. Fifteen billion dollars has=20 already been authorized for this purpose, and an additional $10 billion is= =20 pending in the Senate.=20 Meanwhile, Gov. Davis is losing about a $1.5 billion a month day-trading in= =20 the electricity market. The irony is that after the expenditure of as much = as=20 $25 billion for ""public power,'' not a single inch will have been added to= =20 the transmission lines, nor a single watt to the generating capacity of=20 California. The root of California's crisis is a catastrophic shortage of electricity. = In=20 a shortage, prices rise or blackouts occur. To reduce prices and avoid=20 blackouts, the only permanent solution is to increase the supply. Merely=20 changing the ownership of existing facilities leaves Californians with=20 exactly the same shortage, only billions of dollars the poorer for it.=20 Government takeover advocates argue that at least a government power=20 authority will protect consumers against price gouging and poor management.= =20 Unfortunately, government power authorities don't insulate against price=20 gouging. The biggest price gouger in this entire crisis has been the Los=20 Angeles Department of Water and Power, which was generating electricity for= =20 $51 per megawatt hour and selling it back to California ratepayers for as= =20 much as $1,400.=20 Nor does a government takeover assure better management. Just a few years= =20 ago, the LADWP was buried in $7 billion in debt. The Sacramento Municipal= =20 Utilities District was a managerial laughing stock, having squandered=20 hundreds of millions of dollars for a nuclear plant it barely used. ""Say what you will,'' the government takeover advocates reply, ""when push= =20 came to shove, the municipal utility districts of California are in great= =20 shape, while the private utilities are a basket case.'' But one needs to lo= ok=20 at the reason. Ever since the state reorganized the electricity market in= =20 1996, the municipal utility districts were allowed to trade in a free marke= t,=20 while the private utilities were forced to buy power exclusively in a=20 Soviet-style power exchange where the highest bid during an hour set all=20 prices. The municipal utilities were able to retain their generators. Government=20 forced the private utilities to sell theirs. The municipal utilities were= =20 able to enter into long-term contracts. Government prevented the private=20 utilities from doing the same thing. The municipal utilities were able to= =20 negotiate the lowest prices available for power. Government forced the=20 private utilities to pay the outlandish prices on the government's power=20 exchange. The municipal utilities were allowed to adjust their rates to=20 reflect the actual cost of power to consumers. Government forced the privat= e=20 utilities to sell at astronomical losses. The final argument is simply an ideological one: that power is just too=20 important to be left in private hands. Really? Food is a great deal more=20 important and private hands have kept this nation well fed for centuries.= =20 Picturing the Department of Motor Vehicles running the local supermarket=20 should sober even the most euphoric of the government takeover advocates. California's Independent System Operator is predicting a 6,000-megawatt=20 shortfall this summer. When there is no electricity on the transmission=20 lines, it really won't matter who owns them. During the hottest hours of th= e=20 hottest days of the year, when as many as 6 million homes are without=20 electricity, it may begin to dawn on most people that socialism doesn't wor= k=20 any better in California than it did in the Soviet Union. --- --- ------- NEWS=20 Bush's Energy Policy Will Backfire, Feinstein Warns / She wants federal pri= ce=20 controls now Carolyn Lochhead 03/22/2001=20 The San Francisco Chronicle=20 FINAL=20 Page A.3=20 (Copyright 2001)=20 Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., warned yesterday that when blackouts=20 intensify in California this summer, the pressure will intensify on the Bus= h=20 administration to explain why it rejected price controls on wholesale=20 electricity.=20 ""If by this summer California is, as anticipated, facing these blackouts, a= nd=20 the federal government won't help, I don't think the American people are=20 going to be very pleased,"" Feinstein told California reporters.=20 Asked if help means the cost-based price controls Feinstein is pushing, she= =20 said, ""Right now, yes.""=20 Feinstein said California Democrats will begin to escalate their criticism = of=20 the administration, predicting that support will build among Western senato= rs=20 for her legislation to impose price caps on wholesale electricity in exchan= ge=20 for lifting the rate cap on California consumers.=20 If it passes, she said, ""the administration is really going to have to face= =20 whether they're going to help or not help.""=20 Feinstein said House Democrats from the West Coast also told her they expec= t=20 that White House inaction on price caps would help them gain seats in 2002.= =20 But she refused to speculate on the political fallout from the energy crisi= s=20 against Democrats in California .=20 Feinstein characterized Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham's adamant argument= s=20 against price controls as ""recalcitrant,"" saying his statement to a Senate= =20 committee last week ""essentially said California 's on its own.""=20 She speculated that because "" California is dominantly Democratic, even=20 somebody like me that works across party lines is beginning to wonder if th= is=20 isn't an unnecessarily barbed stick at California .""=20 White House spokesman Ken Lisaius disputed the charge, saying the Bush=20 administration is doing all it can, but can't control that demand is=20 outstripping supply.=20 ""The federal government cannot prevent blackouts, but can only help at the= =20 margins in situations like this,"" Lisaius said. ""The only thing that can=20 prevent blackouts is reduced demand, increased supply and good weather.""=20 Abraham has twice in the last week argued strongly against price controls,= =20 including the cost-based ones Feinstein advocates, saying they could increa= se=20 blackouts by discouraging power sales into the Western electricity grid.=20 He also said many power providers, including the federal Bonneville Power= =20 Administration in the home district of Sen. Gordon Smith, the Oregon=20 Republican co-sponsoring Feinstein's bill, would be exempt from federal pri= ce=20 caps. Feinstein disputed that, but Smith's office agreed.=20 Abraham argued that price controls would not work in part because roughly= =20 half the Western electricity market would be exempt, including federal powe= r=20 marketing authorities such as Bonneville, rural electric cooperatives and= =20 municipal utilities such as the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power.= =20 On another front, House Republicans omitted from their budget projected=20 revenues from opening part of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil an= d=20 gas exploration.=20 A Budget Committee spokeswoman said Chairman Jim Nussle, R-Iowa, determined= =20 that the $1 billion in revenues from the wildlife refuge the Bush=20 administration included in its budget were not needed and that there was ""n= o=20 reason to put in something that controversial, that some of our members don= 't=20 even like, when you don't have to.""=20 But Rep. Gary Miller, R-Diamond Bar (Los Angeles County) said House=20 Republicans ""are not backing off at all"" from opening the wildlife refuge t= o=20 drilling. ""Our goal is to get it passed in the House,"" he said, saying the= =20 Budget Committee omitted the revenue projections because the drilling has n= ot=20 yet been approved.=20 PHOTO; Caption: Sen. Dianne Feinstein wants to cap wholesale electricity=20 costs and end caps on con- sumer rates.=20 --- ------ Reliant Still In Power Pact Talks With Calif. DWR=20 By Christina Cheddar 03/22/2001=20 Dow Jones News Service=20 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)=20 Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES=20 =20 (This report was originally published late Wednesday.)=20 =20 NEW YORK -(Dow Jones)- Reliant Energy Inc. (REI) remains in discussions wit= h=20 the California Department of Water Resources to sign long-term power=20 contracts.=20 However, issues regarding the creditworthiness of the agency remain, said J= oe=20 Bob Perkins, president of Reliant's Wholesale Division.=20 ""We want to be part of the solution,"" Perkins said. At the same time, Relia= nt=20 is trying to protect itself from incurring additional unpaid accounts=20 receivable, he said.=20 The DWR has been buying power on behalf of California 's financially troubl= ed=20 utilities. However, Reliant has yet to sign a formal agreement with the=20 agency because Reliant is concerned it won't be paid.=20 During a conference call Wednesday, Perkins said he couldn't comment on a= =20 lawsuit between Reliant and the California Independent System Operator=20 because he didn't know how it was progressing.=20 Further court action on the case is expected Wednesday.=20 The lawsuit stems from Reliant's desire not to be required to sell power to= =20 California if the state won't guarantee payment. The Houston energy company= =20 is concerned that it won't be paid for power being bought by the ISO on=20 behalf of Edison International's (EIX) Southern California Edison unit and= =20 PG&E Corp.'s (PCG) Pacific Gas & Electric Co. unit.=20 To date, Reliant is owed ""some $370 million"" from unpaid power sales to the= =20 utilities.=20 Much of Perkins' presentation centered on how the power crisis in Californi= a=20 emerged.=20 Using data from research firm Cambridge Energy Research Associates, the=20 company discussed the imbalance between California 's power demand and its= =20 power supply.=20 Looking ahead to the summer, it isn't a question of whether rolling blackou= ts=20 will occur, but ""how many and how severe,"" Perkins said.=20 Low hydroelectric availability, loss of imported power, warm weather, deman= d=20 growth and plant outages could lead to a worst-case scenario in California = ,=20 he said, adding that some estimates predict California could experience 1,1= 00=20 hours of power outages this summer.=20 The skyrocketing power prices in the region are a reflection of the power= =20 market's imbalance, he said.=20 Reliant submitted only ""economically sound"" bids for power, Perkins said. H= e=20 expects the company can document why it charged the prices it did as requir= ed=20 by regulators.=20 ""We have been very rigorous and very disciplined in what we have submitted,= ""=20 Perkins said.=20 He added that retail customer price increases are one way of sending a sign= al=20 to consumers to lower consumption. He cited studies that show a 20% retail= =20 price increase could reduce consumption by 2,000 megawatts. A megawatt is= =20 enough power to serve roughly 1,000 homes.=20 -By Christina Cheddar, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-5166;=20 --- ------ CPUC Must Address Rates In QF Repayment Order - SoCal Ed 03/22/2001=20 Dow Jones Energy Service=20 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)=20 (This article was originally published Wednesday)=20 =20 LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Any order from the California Public Utilities=20 Commission requiring utilities to pay small, independent generators going= =20 forward must determine how that could be done within the existing rate=20 structure, a spokesman for Edison International (EIX) utility Southern=20 California Edison said Wednesday.=20 The utility was responding to a PUC proposed decision that would require=20 utilities to pay small generators, called qualifying facilities, $79 a=20 megawatt hour within 15 days of electricity delivery. The decision will be= =20 voted March 27 by the CPUC.=20 ""We're still reviewing (the decision) and should have more to say in a day = or=20 two. To the extent that the commission orders us to pay going forward of=20 course we will. But it needs to address how we will pay the QFs,"" a SoCal= =20 Edison spokesman said.=20 SoCal Edison and PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric Co. are=20 struggling under nearly $13 billion in uncollected power costs due to an=20 inability to pass high wholesale power costs to customers under a rate=20 freeze.=20 Gov. Gray Davis Tuesday blasted the utilities for not having paid their QF= =20 bills in full since December. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. has made some=20 partial payments to QFs, but SoCal Edison has paid nothing. Together, they= =20 owe the QFs about $1 billion, but the order doesn't address that debt.=20 An Edison executive said, in reaction to the governor's sharp comments, tha= t=20 the company simply doesn't have the money to pay creditors.=20 ""The root problem here is there just isn't enough money in the current rate= =20 base to pay our bills,"" said Edison Senior Vice President of Public Affairs= =20 Bob Foster. ""We understand the financial distress (the QFs) face; we are=20 facing financial distress ourselves.""=20 The proposed PUC order would also require the state's investor-owned=20 utilities to offer the small generators five- and 10-year contracts for pow= er=20 for $79/MWh and $69/MWh, respectively.=20 The QFs ""may be able to live with"" the PUC proposal, but the five- and=20 10-year contract prices may be inadequate if natural gas prices at one of t= he=20 California borders are high, said Jan Smutny-Jones, president of the=20 Independent Energy Producers Association. Natural gas prices into Californi= a=20 are currently higher than anywhere in the country.=20 But some say the proposed decision may not be enough to prevent the QFs fro= m=20 filing involuntary bankruptcy proceedings against the utilities for the mon= ey=20 they are still owed.=20 ""There's still a lot of skepticism. To say our position has changed based o= n=20 the CPUC decision or the governor's announcement is not accurate. A lot sti= ll=20 has to happen,"" said Jay Lawrence, a spokesman for a renewable creditors=20 committee.=20 -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872;=20 --- ------ Calif Small Pwr Producers To Shut Plants If Rates Capped By Jason Leopold 03/22/2001=20 Dow Jones Energy Service=20 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)=20 Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES=20 =20 (This article was originally published earlier Thursday.)=20 =20 LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Many of California 's independent power producers= =20 late Wednesday threatened to take their small power plants offline this wee= k=20 if state lawmakers pass legislation that would cap the rates the generators= =20 charge for electricity they sell directly to the state's three investor-own= ed=20 utilities.=20 At issue is a bill that would repeal a section of the state's Public=20 Utilities Code, which links the 688 so-called qualifying facilities'=20 electricity rates to the monthly border price of natural gas.=20 Lawmakers, however, are poised to pass the legislation.=20 State regulators are then expected to approve a measure that would=20 restructure the fluctuating rates the QFs charge PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit=20 Pacific Gas & Electric , Edison International (EIX) unit Southern Californi= a=20 Edison, and Sempra Energy (SRE) unit San Diego Gas & Electric from $170 a= =20 megawatt-hour to $69-$79/MWh, regardless of the price of natural gas.=20 Whereas each of the 688 QF contracts differed, largely because natural gas= =20 prices are higher in Southern California than Northern California , the sta= te=20 wants the QFs to sign a general contract with the utilities.=20 The cogeneration facilities, which produce about 5,400 megawatts of=20 electricity in the state, said the rates are too low and they won't sign ne= w=20 supply contracts with the utilities.=20 ""For $79/MWh, natural gas would have to be $6 per million British thermal= =20 unit at the Southern California border,"" said Tom Lu, executive director of= =20 Carson-based Watson Cogeneration Company, the state's largest QF, generatin= g=20 340 MW. ""Our current gas price at the border is $12.50.""=20 Other gas-fired QFs said the state could face another round of rolling=20 blackouts if lawmakers and state regulators pass the legislation, which is= =20 expected to be heard on the Senate floor Thursday, and allow it to be=20 implemented by Public Utilities Commission next week.=20 Lu, whose company is half-owned by BP Amoco PLC (BP) and is owed $100 milli= on=20 by SoCal Ed, said the proposals by the PUC and the Legislature ""will only= =20 make things worse.""=20 David Fogarty, spokesman for Western States Petroleum Association, whose=20 members supply California with more than 2,000 MW, said the utilities need = to=20 pay the QFs more than $1 billion for electricity that was already produced.= =20 =20 State Loses 3,000 MW QF Output Due Of Financial Reasons=20 =20 The QFs represent about one-third, or 9,700 MW, of the state's total power= =20 supply. Roughly 5,400 MW are produced by natural gas-fired facilities. The= =20 rest is generated by wind, solar power and biomass.=20 About 3,000 MW of gas-fired and renewable QF generation is offline in=20 California because the power plant owners haven't been paid hundreds of=20 millions of dollars from cash-strapped utilities SoCal Ed and PG&E for near= ly=20 four months.=20 Several small power plant owners owed money by SoCal Ed have threatened to= =20 drag the utility into involuntary bankruptcy if the utility continues to=20 default on payments and fails to agree to supply contracts at higher rates.= =20 The defaults have left many of the renewable and gas-fired QFs unable to=20 operate their power plants because they can't afford to pay for the natural= =20 gas to run their units. Others continue to produce electricity under their= =20 contracts with the state's utilities but aren't being paid even on a forwar= d=20 basis.=20 The California Independent System Operator, keeper of the state's electrici= ty=20 grid, said the loss of the QF generation was the primary reason rolling=20 blackouts swept through the state Monday and Tuesday.=20 Gov. Gray Davis, recognizing the potential disaster if additional QFs took= =20 their units offline, held marathon meetings with key lawmakers Monday and= =20 Tuesday to try and hammer out an agreement that would get the QFs paid on a= =20 forward basis and set rates of $79/MWh and $69/MWh for five and 10 year=20 contracts. He also said he would direct the PUC to order the utilities to p= ay=20 the QFs for power they sell going forward.=20 ""After next week the QF problem will be behind us,"" Davis said Tuesday. ""We= =20 want to get the QFs paid...the QFs are dropping like flies...and when that= =20 happens the lights go out.""=20 But this just makes the problem worse, said Assemblyman Dean Florez,=20 D-Shafter, a member of the Assembly energy committee.=20 ""I don't know how we are going to keep the lights on,"" Florez said in an=20 interview. ""Many of these congenerators are in my district. They said if th= e=20 legislation doesn't change they are going offline. This compounds the issue= =20 of rolling blackouts, especially now when we need every megawatt.""=20 Davis, who didn't meet with people representing the QFs, said he was handin= g=20 the QF issue to the PUC because lawmakers failed to pass legislation that= =20 would have set a five-year price for natural gas and allow the QFs to sign= =20 individual contracts with the utilities. In addition, SOCal Ed opposed the= =20 legislation, saying the rates should be below $50/MWh.=20 Some renewable power producers said they aren't vehemently opposed to the n= ew=20 rate structure because it guarantees them a higher rate than what was=20 originally proposed.=20 =20 QFs Want Third Party Supply Contracts=20 =20 John Wood, who represents the SoCal Ed Gas Fired Creditors Committee, one o= f=20 a handful of groups that have formed since January to explore options on=20 getting paid by the utilities, said his group of gas-fired QF creditors wan= t=20 to be released from their supply contracts and sell to third parties.=20 ""Under our plan, we would be permitted to sell electricity to third parties= =20 (including the state Department of Water Resources) until a resolution to t= he=20 crisis can be accomplished,"" wood said.=20 Hal Dittmer, president of Sacramento-based Wellhead Electric in Sacramento,= =20 which is owed $8 million by PG&E, has 85 MW of gas-fired generation units= =20 offline.=20 Under the state's plan, Dittmer said he risks going out of business.=20 ""I can't buy natural gas for what I would be paid under this decision,"" he= =20 said. ""The state needs to quit kidding themselves that they don't need to= =20 raise electricity rates. All of this is being driven by an artificial=20 construct that California can avoid raising rates.""=20 =20 -By Jason Leopold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3874;=20 jason.leopold@dowjones.com=20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Unbelievable!; [EMail-Body]= keep sending the message board quotes. Sometimes when I open them I have trouble locating the specific quote (other times I'm taken right to it). Do you imbed the URLs differently? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= UC-CSU-Enron press release; [EMail-Body]= I know we got a lot of grief on the Hill when we had our fight with UC/CSU. Now we have settled and this release will go out (with some modification) today. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/06/2001 07:23 AM --------------------------- From: Max Eberts@EES on 07/05/2001 07:25 PM To: Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES, Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Robert C Williams/Enron@EnronXGate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: UC-CSU-Enron press release Attached is a draft of the UC-CSU-Enron press release concerning the settlement agreement. Please review and let me know of any revisions or suggestions. We would like for this to go out tomorrow if possible. We're still waiting for a quote from CSU. I'll make sure you see that as well. Thank you. Max [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: 40th Birthday; [EMail-Body]= Thank you...I think jane.m.tholt@enron.com on 06/15/2001 11:36:01 AM To: skean@enron.com cc: Subject: 40th Birthday Hello! jane.m.tholt@enron.com has just sent you an Egreetings.com card! To view your greeting, simply click on this pickup window link: If your e-mail doesn't recognize the above address as a link, simply copy and paste it in your browser address window. If you need further help, visit our Help pages at Your Friends at Egreetings.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: NEW DRAFT OF ENRON STATEMENT; [EMail-Body]= I know we are holding for a later filing, but I have attached further comments anyway. The document is still too rough to send out. We need to take the opportunity, as soon as possible, to get a hard hitting, thoroughly researched and carefully written document in front of the Commissioners. California's reaction to the Judge's recommendation is likely to give FERC (especially the new commissioners) a feel for how irrational the California politicians can be. We will have a limited opportunity to take advantage of that realization. We need to hit it hard in the pleading, our conversations at the Commission, the Hill and the media. Linda Robertson 07/09/2001 09:58 AM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Alan Comnes/Enron@EnronXGate, Carole Hodge/ETOL/EU/Enron@ETOL, dwatkiss@bracepatt.com, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@ENRON, Richard B Sanders/Enron@EnronXGate, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, Robert Frank/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON Subject: Re: NEW DRAFT OF ENRON STATEMENT Let me emphasize that these comments are to be filed COB TODAY. James D Steffes 07/09/2001 10:50 AM To: Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Carole Hodge/ETOL/EU/Enron@ETOL, Richard B Sanders/Enron@EnronXGate, dwatkiss@bracepatt.com, Alan Comnes/Enron@EnronXGate, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: NEW DRAFT OF ENRON STATEMENT HERE IS THE MOST RECENT STATEMENT WITH STEVE'S COMMENTS. Jim <Embedded StdOleLink> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Press release; [EMail-Body]= Looks ok Peggy Mahoney@EES 08/25/2000 01:24 PM To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Cedric Burgher/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Press release New version. I think all suggested changes were made. Let me know soon!! Peggy ---------------------- Forwarded by Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES on 08/25/2000 01:21 PM --------------------------- Kathy Johnson 08/25/2000 12:39 PM To: Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Press release Peggy: Attached is the revised release. On Gene's direction, I did not omit the ""economies of scale"" phrase, but I did make changes which attribute it to technology (AOL) and processing (IBM). Let me know what everyone thinks. Thanks, Kathy [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Nigeria Contract support; [EMail-Body]= Sean - is this anything we need to follow up on? ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 02/28/2001 02:26 PM ----- Sherri Sera 02/28/2001 01:58 PM To: Mark Frevert/NA/Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Nicki Daw/NA/Enron, Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Nigeria Contract support Mark and Steve, sorry to bother you with this, but I'm at a loss. This guy (Jim Cofield) called me on my cell phone last night about 7:00 p.m. to get my e-mail address. He asked that I take a look at his e-mail in the morning and route it to the appropriate person within Enron. The "".jpg"" files below have no information in them, but the "".doc"" file is a 14 page document with numerous correspondence from Mary Beth Cahill, former director in the White House Office for Public Liaison, to Mr. Cofield regarding a trip to Nigeria that he supposedly accompanied President Clinton on several months ago; followed by a number of ""proprietary information documents"" that mean absolutely nothing to me; followed by an overview of Nigeria's electrical power situation; etc....The best I can tell, they are trying to get Enron to bid on some project in Nigeria. Since this e-mail is copied to the Vice President of the United States in addition to several ambassadors, I thought it might need attention. If you can figure it out, please let me know how to proceed. Thanks, SRS ---------------------- Forwarded by Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron on 02/28/2001 01:44 PM --------------------------- ""Jim Cofield"" <jcofield@home.com> on 02/27/2001 07:06:11 PM To: ""Sherri Sera"" <sherri.sera@enron.com> cc: ""Richard Cheney"" ""Ambassador Dele Cole"" <bedeos2000@yahoo.com>, ""Ambassador Jibril Aminu"" <bedeos2000@yahoo.com>, ""Ambassador Li Zhaoxing"" <webmaster@china-embassy.org> Subject: Nigeria Contract support [IMAGE] ? ? Jim E. Cofield World Headquarters Cofield Building 1016-22nd Street, Suite 200-500 Newport News, VA 23607-5316??????? Telephone? 757 223-0843 Fax: 757 223-0844 jcofield@home.com (email) WebSite: http://cofield.my.treeway.com ""Making the World a Safer Place"" It is always an Honor to Serve and Support ? ? - image001.jpg - image002.jpg - image001.jpg - image002.jpg - Nigeria-Best8.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: DPC - strictly confidential and privileged; [EMail-Body]= In the three years I have been here, I am unaware of an ENA/ECT bad faith claim against any insurance company. Anyone else? If so, please contact Michelle. ----- Forwarded by Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT on 11/28/2000 07:46 PM ----- Michelle Blaine@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 11/28/2000 07:35 PM To: ""Williams, Justin"" @ ENRON cc: Richard B Sanders@ECT Subject: RE: DPC - strictly confidential and privileged Justin, I have no knowledge of any bad faith actins Enron has pending inTexas but I will call Richard Sanders who manages domestic litgation here. I've read the materials you sent and agree we need to address these allegations appropriately. Richard do you have any bad faith litigation pending against any insurers in Texas or are you aware of any Enron has filed?? We sued Houston Casualty last year but I don't recall making any bad faith claims. It settled anyway, a long time ago. mb ""Williams, Justin"" on 11/28/2000 12:18:12 PM To: ""'Michelle.Blaine@enron.com'"" <Michelle.Blaine@enron.com> cc: Ken.Blades@enron.com Subject: RE: DPC - strictly confidential and privileged Michelle, Did you get my fax on Friday? I guess the questions on which I should like your steer are: (a) Do you have a particular sensitivity about the reference to bad faith proceedings made by United India? (b) Is it right that Enron has 3 sets of bad faith proceedings in Texas? (c) Are you happy with the draft letter to Beachcrofts I sent you? Please give me a call if you would like to discuss. Justin -----Original Message----- From: Michelle.Blaine@enron.com Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2000 6:04 PM To: Cc: Ken.Blades@enron.com Subject: Re: DPC - strictly confidential and privileged Not when I was there, but I wasn't there the whole time. ""Williams, Justin"" on 11/28/2000 03:49:57 AM To: ""'Michelle.Blaine@enron.com'"" <Michelle.Blaine@enron.com>, ""'Ken.Blades@enron.com'"" <Ken.Blades@enron.com> cc: ""Cornell, Peter"" Subject: DPC - strictly confidential and privileged Michelle and Ken, were you able to discuss the ""bad faith"" proceedings issue yesterday? If you got the chance today, I should be really grateful if one of you could give me a call to discuss this issue; I think we should set out DPC's position clearly on this in correspondence without too much delay. Justin This message is confidential. It may also be privileged or otherwise protected by work product immunity or other legal rules. If you have received it by mistake please let us know by reply and then delete it from your system; you should not copy the message or disclose its contents to anyone. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Letter to Bob Houck; [EMail-Body]= The letter looks fine. Set it up as ""your letter to Ken Lay was forwarded to me for response"" and have Jeff B sign. Thanks Marcia A Linton 09/20/2000 04:04 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Letter to Bob Houck Here is the draft letter to Bob Houck from Ken Lay that Jeff Brown asked me to forward to you. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Schedule for the Schedules; [EMail-Body]= fyi ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/16/2000 07:23 AM --------------------------- From: Lance Schuler-Legal@ECT on 08/15/2000 05:14 PM To: Frank Bruce Daniel R Sandeep Robert C Gail Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, John Novak/SA/Enron@Enron, Robert H George/SA/Enron@Enron, John Lamb/EWC/Enron@ENRON, Stephen Wallace/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Frank Smith/Corp/Enron@ENRON, David Nutt/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Charles Cheek/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Joyce/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Aaron Brown/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bob Butts/GPGFIN/Enron@ENRON, James L Bouillion/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cullen cc: Subject: Schedule for the Schedules The current schedule contemplates sending a draft of the Disclosure Schedules to Skadden by the end of the day on Friday. Please provide any remaining comments to the draft Schedules as soon as you can. I realize there will still be some holes, as we continue to negotiate the Purchase and Sale Agreement. No doubt it would help to have the Appendices to the Purchase and Sale Agreement completed, or say maybe a dollar amount or two completed in the Definitions section. Thanks for all the help. Lance. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron projects with OPIC financing; [EMail-Body]= OPIC information ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/02/2000 06:32 PM --------------------------- From: John Hardy@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 08/02/2000 03:43 PM To: Steven J Kean@EES cc: Subject: Enron projects with OPIC financing Steve Here are the projcts which have OPIC financing: Batangas, Philippines - closed Dabhol I - closed Dabhol II - closed Trakya, Turkey - closed Accro, Venezuela - closed. Projects in process: Cuiaba I - Board approval received, Financially closed, awaiting disbursement (projected August 15,2000) Guatemala PQ - Board approval received, Not yet financially closed. Gaza - Board approval received, Not yet financially closed, [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: DRAFT EDITORIAL: Enron is Committed to Florida's Energy Future; [EMail-Body]= I think it starts off a bit too hot. I would pull up some of the arguments you make about the need for additional supply and the importance of electricity to our way of life. I'd then go into a discussion of the debacle in the West (and how they are now playing catchup - with loud, polluting diesel generators ... as was reported today). Then I'd go into how our plants in Florida represent a very reasonable, inobtrusive solution for Florida. From: Eric Thode/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/24/2001 09:07 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: DRAFT EDITORIAL: Enron is Committed to Florida's Energy Future In support of of our three power plant proposals in South Florida, I have written an editorial for distribution to South Florida newspapers, including the Sun Sentinel and Miami Herald. Additionally, we would distribute it to a number of small city papers, including the Pompano Pelican, Deerfield Times, Pompano Times, Deerfield Observer, etc. Needless to say, no decision has been made regarding releasing it. I would like your input on the subject. If we decide to proceed, our goal would be placement during the first week in June leading up to the next round of Commission hearings, which are scheduled for June 6, 8 and 12. Please provide comments to me at your earliest convenience. If you have any questions, please call me at ext. 3-9053. Thanks. Eric [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Happy Hanukah and Merry Christmas...; [EMail-Body]= First of all, Hanukkah was three weeks ago. Second, you spelled it incorrectly. Get a clue, you idiot. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= SMethodist Presentation; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/27/2001 02:43 PM ----- Ursula Brenner 03/23/2001 04:03 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: SMethodist Presentation Steve, Jeff is talking at SMU Management Briefing Series on March 27th. The organizers wanted him to talk about his background and career at Enron and about where the industry is heading. The presentation covers this last piece. The audience will be local business people and some SMU students and professors (350-400 people) Jeff already reviewed this presentation. Please, let me know if you have any questions or suggestions. Thanks, Ursula Brenner ENRON CORP. +1(713)345-3787 This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohibited. ---------------------- Forwarded by Ursula Brenner/NA/Enron on 03/23/2001 04:00 PM --------------------------- Katrina Burton 03/23/2001 03:43 PM Sent by: Katrina Burton To: Ursula Brenner/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: SMethodist Presentation [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= AG letter - privileged and confidential: request for legal advice.; [EMail-Body]= The letter looks good. A couple of comments for your consideration: On page three we describe the change to the definition of Public Utility and then argue that we don't fit into it. Would it be worth explaining why that makes sense? Specifically, the New Jersey restructuring law, like most efforts of its kind in other markets, is designed to separate the competitive from monopoly elements of the power (and gas) businesses. Economic regulation would then be restricted to the remaining monopoly elements of the business (eg distribution). The competitive market can not be solely relied upon to ""regulate"" the behavior of monopoly asset owners, such as distribution utilities. Therefore, regulators continue to be called upon to set pricing and other terms of service. What those regulators decide matters a great deal to those monopoly utilities and it consequently makes sense for lawmakers to be concerned about attempts by such entities to use campaign contributions to tacitly influence decision makers. The same public policies simply do not apply to that portion of the market which is competitive. The generation and sales business has a competitive structure (i.e. relatively low barriers to entry, multiple competitors etc.). These components of the power and gas business can be ""regulated"" by the market with respect to rates and terms of service. They do not require economic regulation any more than grocery stores, department stores, appliance sellers or other ""retailers"" (who presumably are not prohibited from making contributions. Competition and markets discipline behavior and establish competitive prices and terms of service. Because regulators don't set the prices and terms of service for such sellers, there is no reason to be concerned about campaign contribuitions from such organizations. Indeed, the legislation, and the legislative history, clearly conform to this underlying policy rationale. As a former practicing lawyer, I certainly understand the value of pleading in the alternative. But, I question how certain of our arguments woud be perceived by the public if they ever came to light (which these documents have a habit of doing).. . I can just see the press seizing on Enron's claim of ""ignorance or mistake"" or the fact that we pled for the favorable exercise of ""prosecutorial discretion"". I suggest that we add whatever we feel is necessary to the very solid looking intent argument, not make specific reference to ""ignorance or mistake"", and not plead for the favorable esxercise of PD. If we feel we need to write about this last item, perhaps we could suggest that it would be a waste of the public's resources to pursue a claim under such circumstances. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re:; [EMail-Body]= The conversation was very positive (Glynn did not know anything about it at first, but, looked into it and called Ken back Friday evening). Glynn said they were including the amount owed in their negotiations over the price for the transmission assets and said they intended to pay all of their debts, including this one, as soon as they get paid. He said that this weekk would be focussed on finalizing a deal for SCE given the threat of bankruptcy; the discussions would then turn to PG&E. Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 03/14/2001 07:03 PM To: skean@enron.com cc: Subject: Steve: Jim mentioned that Ken Lay was trying to talk to Glynn today about getting the PX credit issue resolved. Any progress made? Best, Jeff [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Background and Message Points; [EMail-Body]= Attached is Jeff's backgrounder in the event you call Hertzberg. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 06/15/2001 01:56 PM --------------------------- From: Jeff Dasovich on 06/15/2001 01:05 PM Sent by: Jeff Dasovich To: skean@enron.com cc: Subject: Background and Message Points Steve: Please review and edit as needed. I'm on my way to airport to return to SF. If you need me, please page. Best, Jeff [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Request for Confidential Information by the California State
	 Senate Select Committee; [EMail-Body]= Please be advised that the CalPX has received a subpoena from the California State Senate Select Committee to investigate price manipulation of the wholesale energy market. The subpoena is posted on the CalPX Web site and is available through the link below. The subpoena seeks confidential information, including materials that are confidential under Section 19.3.2 of the CalPX tariff. Confidential materials provided by the CalPX in response to this subpoena will be treated by the Senate Select Committee in accordance with the terms of the May 15, 2001 letter from Senator Joseph L. Dunn that is also posted on the CalPX Web site. The date for production by the CalPX of the requested materials has been extended beyond the May 18, 2001 deadline stated in the subpoena and letter. If you desire to assert a claim of confidentiality or privilege, you should direct your written statement by Tuesday, May 22, 2001, to the name and address below: Larry Drivon Special Counsel to the Select Committee Office of Senator Dunn State Capitol Room 2080 Sacramento, CA 95814 Tel: (916)445-5831 Fax: (916)323-2323 E-mail: You may also deliver a copy of your statement to the CalPX as follows: Lisa Urick Managing Attorney California Power Exchange Corporation 200 South Los Robles Avenue Suite 400 Pasadena, CA 91101 Tel: (626)537-3100 Fax: (626)537-3159 E-mail: lgurick@calpx.com Thank you. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Calling All Investors: The New Power Company's IPO Priced at $21
 Per Share; [EMail-Body]= Do you guys follow these reports? Do we need to correct them? ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/09/2000 08:50 AM ----- =09Mark Schroeder@ECT =0910/09/2000 04:05 AM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: Calling All Investors: The New Power Company's IPO Priced a= t $21=20 Per Share Was Enron actually banned from the California residential market, as per=20 below? mcs ---------------------- Forwarded by Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT on 09/10/2000=20 10:08 --------------------------- =20 =09Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp. =09 =09From: ""IssueAlert"" <IssueAlert@scientech.com> = =20 06/10/2000 12:13 =09 To:=20 cc: =20 Subject: Calling All Investors: The New Power Company's IPO Priced at $21 P= er=20 Share http://www.consultrci.com SCIENTECH's timely and newest InfoGrid, The Telecommunications InfoGrid, will help you keep up with the latest moves of energy companies into the fast-growing telecom market. Learn more about SCIENTECH'S InfoGrids at: SCIENTECH IssueAlert, October 6, 2000 Calling All Investors: The New Power Company's IPO Priced at $21 Per Share By: Will McNamara, Director, Electric Industry Analysis TNPC, Inc., parent of The New Power Company, announced yesterday that its initial public offering (IPO) of 24 million common shares was priced at $21 per share. The stock closed yesterday at $27 per share. The Company expects to receive net proceeds from the offering of its shares at=20 approximately $473 million, exclusive of the underwriters' option to purchase an addition= al 3,600,000 common shares to cover over allotments. TNPC, Inc.=01*a partnersh= ip between Enron, America Online (AOL) and IBM=01*was formed in late 1999 to provide electricity and natural gas directly to households and small=20 businesses in the deregulated energy marketplace. TNPC's shares will be listed on the NYSE under the symbol NPW. Closing of the offering is expected to occur Oct. 11. ANALYSIS: I am sure that many eyebrows were raised when TNPC issued the IPO of its stock at $21, a figure that seemed surprisingly high for a start= -up company that has been in operation only since early summer. It is rather mind-boggling that a company with no significant track record could open its stock at such a price, but it is not unheard of. In fact, TNPC is=20 following a trend of new Internet companies initiating IPOs that are supported by grand concepts rather than tangible success. However, the TNPC ""dream team"" alliance between Enron, AOL and IBM has been met with great expectations (and a lot of skepticism as well) throughout the industry. I read through the S-1/A filing that TNPC submitted to the SEC, so hopefull= y I can cut through the hype regarding this deal to get to its nucleus. First= , TNPC acknowledges repeatedly throughout its filing that it is entering into an extremely high-risk venture, and in fact will ""incur substantial operating and net losses, and cannot assure that we will attain=20 profitability."" Further, TNPC admits that it expects to incur these losses for a=20 ""significant,"" but undetermined, period of time. Why, then, would Wall Street be greeting this IPO with such a positive welcome? One could easily argue that the sheer market presence of Enron, AOL and IBM has by association driven up the value of TNPC, but I think a deeper answer lies within several factors. First, TNPC has been bankrolled by some hefty investments. In two separate, private placements, investors such as Enron, GE Capital Equity Investments and DLJMB Partners (among others) put up about $214 million in start-up capital in exchange for shares in the company. Enron is the majority owner of TNPC, with 57-percent control. This money has allowed TNPC to make=20 important acquisitions. For instance, TNPC bought the residential and small commercia= l retail energy business of Columbia Energy Group, which includes approximate= ly 285,000 natural-gas customers and 20,000 electricity customers in eight states. This is a valuable card in TNPC's deck as it locks in customers during this time when deregulation is developing slowly in retail markets. I wouldn't be surprised if TNPC makes a similar acquisition of another customer base in the near future, such as in Texas, where customers have been spun off to energy service companies rather than being held by the T&D operations of utilities. In other words, in Texas TNPC could easily buy customers without having to buy wires or infrastructure, assuming there is a willing seller. Second, and perhaps more importantly, earlier this year Enron transferred its residential and small commercial retail operations in California and Ohio to TNPC. This deal included the operations of Enron Energy Services but did not include PG&E Energy Services, which Enron acquired earlier this year. Together with the Columbia Energy Group acquisition, TNPC has come out of the gate running with a significant beginning customer base of over 325,000 customers. Why would Enron have turned over its residential customers to TNPC? Don't forget that Enron struggled in and retreated from the California residential market, stating that it couldn't make any money in the retail market. TNPC's S1/A filing confirms rumors that Enron Energy Services actually retreated from California due to a lawsuit claimin= g the company had violated laws relating to advertising directed to residenti= al consumers in 1997 and 1998. Enron was in fact banned from selling power to the residential market in California. Under this customer transfer, Enron is able to put its money into a completely separate business=01*essen= tially moving this high-risk business venture, and worst performing part of its retail service, off its own books. Yet if TNPC succeeds, Enron still benefi= ts as it is the majority owner. I think these two factors answer why Wall Street has looked so favorably on a self-described ""new company with a limited operating history."" Looking ahead, can TNPC maintain this comparatively high value of its stock? Well, there's both good news and bad news for TNPC. First, let's look on the bright side. TNPC has put into place a great management team, starting with H. Eugene Lockhart, formerly of AT&T, as president and CEO. Other key players bring retail market expertise from work at MasterCard, Exxon and PespiCo. In addition, within the energy industry, TNPC arguably could not have a better backer than Enron. What other company's touch has been golden in nearly every venture it has pursued? In addition to being the majority owner, Enron probably is also providing TNPC access to commodities at preferential prices, which will certainly enhance its sales approach in the retail market. Plus, TNPC has access to the 24 million customers that AOL represents, which I've always thought was the company's secret weapon. But then there are the risks, and they are substantial. First, competition is not materializing rapidly on the retail side. In a state like Pennsylvan= ia, which perhaps represents the strongest deregulated market in the United States, only about 16 percent of customers in PECO's territory have opted to switch their provider. So, TNPC has an uphill climb, to say the least, in making any inroads at capturing a lock=01*and making money=01*in the ret= ail market. Second, the only way that I can see TNPC making it at all is if they continue to buy customers like they did from Columbia Energy Group. There are big questions surrounding whether the company will be able to do this or not, and much of its success hinges on this uncertainty. Third, and perhaps most serious of all, is TNPC's vulnerability on the technology side of its operation. TNPC has entered into a 10-year revenue management and customer care agreement with IBM Global Services, under which IBM will manage the company's online commerce and billing application= s. IBM's track record in developing customer care systems is less than stellar= . In fact, PG&E initiated a lawsuit against IBM a few years ago when the utility had to pull the plug on a massive $100 million customer information system (CIS), employed by IBM, which it claimed was ineffective. IBM has partnered with SCT to provide the infrastructure to be used by TNPC. Under an agreement between IBM Global Services and SCT, the SCT Banner CIS will be integrated into a number of back-office IT solutions under development by IBM for TNPC. Experts in the CIS industry have questioned whether SCT's Banner CIS can handle over one million customers. If it cannot, this will surely limit TNPC's growth potential. Moreover, although TNPC's IPO signals a strong future, there are many=20 uncertainties surrounding this nascent operation. As one of the few major players in the energy retail market, TNPC has very few competitors, with the possible exceptions of NewEnergy or GreenMountain. Another competitor is also emergi= ng in Britain's Centrica, which plans to expand in North America after its recent acquisition of Canadian retail gas supplier Direct Energy.=20 Consequently, the coming year could either make or break TNPC and the challenges that the company faces in wanting to conquer the retail market are extremely steep. Learn more about SCIENTECH's Issues and Analysis products and services at: SCIENTECH is pleased to provide you with your free, daily IssueAlert. Let us know if we can help you with in-depth analyses or any other SCIENTECH information products including e-commerce and telecom in the electric utili= ty industry. If you would like to refer a colleague to receive our free, daily IssueAlerts, please reply to this email and include their full name and email address or register directly at: Sincerely, Will McNamara Director, Electric Industry Analysis wmcnamara@scientech.com Feedback regarding SCIENTECH's IssueAlert should be sent to=20 wmcnamara@scientech.com SCIENTECH's IssueAlerts are compiled based on independent analysis by=20 SCIENTECH consultants. The opinions expressed in SCIENTECH's IssueAlerts are not intended to predict financial performance of companies discussed or to be the basis for investment decisions of any kind. SCIENTECH's sole purpos= e in publishing its IssueAlerts is to offer an independent perspective regard= ing the key events occurring in the energy industry, based on its long-standing reputation as an expert on energy and telecommunications issues. Copyright 2000. SCIENTECH, Inc. If you do not wish to receive any further IssueAlerts from SCIENTECH, pleas= e reply to this message and in the body of the email type ""remove."" [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CAISO NOTICE: Freedom of Information Request of confidential atta
	chments to the DMA report filed with FERC on March 1, 2001; [EMail-Body]= So, why did the ISO make the attachments confidential if it does not believe that they are confidential. If the attachments are to be released, they should be released to everyone. How do we make that happen? Sue Mara Enron Corp. Tel: (415) 782-7802 Fax:(415) 782-7854 ----- Forwarded by Susan J Mara/NA/Enron on 05/11/2001 12:57 PM ----- ""Grant, Colleen"" <CGrant@caiso.com> 05/11/2001 11:56 AM Please respond to ""Sole, Jeanne"" To: ISO Market Participants cc: Subject: CAISO NOTICE: Freedom of Information Request of confidential atta chments to the DMA report filed with FERC on March 1, 2001 Market Participants: The CA ISO has been informed of a Freedom of Information Request received by FERC for the confidential attachments to the DMA report filed with FERC on March 1, 2001 (attached). The CA ISO does not believe the attachments are confidential under the CA ISO Tariff and provides this notice as a courtesy only. Market Participant interested in commenting on the request should submit their comments to the FERC directly and should not rely on the CA ISO to communicate to FERC any concerns they may have regarding the request. The deadline for a response by the CA ISO is May 18. Jeanne M. Sol? Regulatory Counsel California ISO (916) 608-7144 The Foregoing e-Mail Communication (Together With Any Attachments Thereto) Is Intended For The Designated Recipient(s) Only. Its Terms May Be Confidential And Protected By Attorney/Client Privilege or Other Applicable Privileges. Unauthorized Use, Dissemination, Distribution, Or Reproduction Of This Message Is Strictly Prohibited. - Swidler OEA.pdf [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Test; [EMail-Body]= testing [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: Sac Bee, Wed, 6/20: Weather an early test for fee caps:=20 Any severe jump in prices will likely be curbed, experts say Sac Bee, Wed, 6/20: State to borrow up to $5 billion to buy energy Sac Bee, Wed, 6/20: Dan Walters: Once burned, lawmakers are very wary of Davis-Edison agreement SD Union, Wed, 6/20: Senate Democrats lay back to see if FERC action=20 provides rate relief=20 SD Union, Wed, 6/20: House panel erases Bush energy cuts LA Times, Wed, 6/20: Davis, Regulators Face Off at Hearing LA Times, Wed, 6/20: Energy on Agenda, but Issue Is Blame LA Times, Wed, 6/20: Blackout Forecasts' Dark Side LA Times, Wed, 6/20: FERC Move Short-Circuits for Hard Price Caps LA Times, Wed, 6/20: Plan Won't Raise Rates, Davis Says LA Times, Wed, 6/20: State to Pay Electric Bill With Loan, Not Taxes LA Times, Wed, 6/20: Edison Unveils Blackout Warning Plan LA Times, Wed, 6/20: State Joins Challenge to Bush on Air-Conditioner=20 Standards LA Times, Wed, 6/20: New Price Caps Not a Deterrent, Power Firms Say LA Times, Wed, 6/20: The FERC's Action Is Good, Bad, Ugly (Commentary) SF Chron, Wed, 6/20: Davis OKs stopgap loan=20 CRISIS POWERS: Action sidesteps Legislature SF Chron, Wed, 6/20: Experts say state must seize the day=20 ANALYSIS: Price caps set stage for future SF Chron, Wed, 6/20: California's energy crisis hits Northwest like a tidal= =20 wave SF Chron, Wed, 6/20: Davis demands nearly $9 billion for electricity=20 overcharges SF Chron, Wed, 6/20: Fed price caps placate Demos=20 But Feinstein's bill to regulate energy producers was more strict SF Chron, Wed, 6/20: Potrero Hill power plant hit by 2 lawsuits=20 Neighbors, city ask court to cut back hours of operation SF Chron, Wed, 6/20: Washington wakes up Mercury News, Wed, 6/20: Feinstein halts electricity price caps bill=20 Mercury News, 6/20: FERC's fixes have fallen short (Commentary) OC Register, Wed, 6/20: Easing the crunch on costs of power (Commentary) Individual.com (Bridgenews), Wed, 6/20: [B] POWER UPDATE/ US Senate panel to hold off vote on Calif. cap bill=20 Individual.com (Bridgenews), Wed, 6/20: [B] FERC order seen having little= =20 effect on US generator profits Individual.com (PRnewswire), Wed, 6/20: SCE Unveils Rotating Blackout Web S= ite and Public Notification Plan=20 Individual.com (AP), Wed, 6/20: Edison CEO/ Ruling Hasn't Helped NY Times, Wed, 6/20: At Last, Action on California (Editorial) NY Times, Wed, 6/20: Regulators' Order Could Bring Broad California Power= =20 Accord Wash. Post, Wed, 6/20: Davis Finds Hope in Calif. Power Crunch NY Times, Wed, 6/20: The Lesson of When to Give Aid to Free Markets --- Weather an early test for fee caps: Any severe jump in prices will likely b= e=20 curbed, experts say. By Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writer (Published June 20, 2001)=20 California electricity prices have shot back up recently, potentially posin= g=20 an early test of a new federal price-control plan that takes effect today.= =20 Warm weather has sent wholesale prices doubling this week, partially=20 reversing a dramatic slide that had some state officials believing they'd= =20 tamed the wildly unpredictable California electricity market.=20 The rebound in prices ""would be expected,"" said Arthur O'Donnell, editor of= =20 the California Energy Markets newsletter. ""It's 110 degrees in Phoenix, and= =20 it's 100 degrees (in Sacramento) and points in between.""=20 Prices this week moved back above $100 a megawatt hour, about double what= =20 they were last week -- although well below the roughly $300 suppliers were= =20 charging California in mid-May. Prices showed signs of stabilizing Tuesday,= =20 analysts said.=20 Experts said the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's new price-mitigatio= n=20 plan is likely to curb the most severe price spikes. ""This will eliminate t= he=20 astronomical prices,"" said Severin Borenstein, director of the University o= f=20 California Energy Institute.=20 But the plan probably won't bring California a cascade of cheap power,=20 either.=20 Prices likely will bump up constantly against FERC's new price caps, which= =20 will fluctuate from time to time, and they're not likely to go much below t= he=20 caps unless there's a significant glut of energy, said Peter Stiffler of th= e=20 energy consulting firm Economic Insight Inc.=20 ""Traders will always trade in at the price ceiling,"" Stiffler said. ""They'r= e=20 going to offer power at the highest price they can.""=20 The fluctuating FERC caps are tied to the production costs of the=20 least-efficient, most-expensive generating plant operating in California wh= en=20 supplies are tight and an official ""power alert"" is declared by the state's= =20 Independent System Operator, which runs most of the power grid. When there= =20 isn't a power alert, prices can't exceed 85 percent of the price establishe= d=20 during the most recent alert.=20 FERC said the system would begin today with a cap of $108.49 a megawatt hou= r=20 but would rise to $127.64 if a power alert is declared.=20 But the cap can fluctuate significantly. Under the old FERC plan, the price= =20 cap in May was set at $267 a megawatt hour. The old plan was similar to the= =20 new system but applied only to California and only kicked in during power= =20 alerts.=20 With the caps flexible, generators could have incentives to withhold power = at=20 some plants in order to raise the caps, said Stanford University economist= =20 Frank Wolak.=20 The FERC plan ""still doesn't solve the problem of withholding,"" said Wolak,= =20 chairman of the ISO's market surveillance committee.=20 Wolak also said he's afraid FERC will let power generators exaggerate their= =20 costs in order to bump up the caps.=20 ""The good news is, they seem to be more serious,"" Wolak said of the=20 oft-criticized commissioners. ""But given how many times we've been taken in= ,=20 I'm wary.""=20 In addition, generators will be allowed to exceed the price caps if they ca= n=20 justify it to FERC officials. Borenstein said FERC in the past has allowed= =20 generators to justify just about every price level imaginable, and he's=20 suspicious that the commission will let generators do the same in order to= =20 evade the new price controls.=20 State officials, while cautiously optimistic about the plan, were upset tha= t=20 FERC will allow a 10 percent price premium on electricity because of the ri= sk=20 of selling to the California market.=20 ""We recognize that the risk of nonpayment in California continues to be=20 greater"" than in other states, the commission said in its written opinion,= =20 released late Tuesday.=20 Gov. Gray Davis' spokesman, Steve Maviglio, called the premium ludicrous=20 because the state Department of Water Resources has been buying electricity= =20 ever since the state's troubled utilities exhausted their credit in=20 mid-January.=20 ""The state is as creditworthy a buyer as you can get,"" Maviglio said.=20 Experts said the plan also won't correct the state's energy imbalance.=20 ""None of this is going to have much effect on blackouts,"" Borenstein said.= =20 ""This is solving part of the problem; I'm worried people will think=20 everything has been solved.=20 ""The emphasis now has to be on getting California to conserve,"" he added.= =20 A spokesman for power generators, Gary Ackerman, said the price controls=20 could worsen shortages this summer and will discourage generating firms fro= m=20 investing in the new power plants the West desperately needs.=20 Builders ""are going to sit on the fence and think about this,"" said Ackerma= n,=20 head of the Western Power Trading Forum.=20 Acting in the face of mounting political pressure and unrelenting criticism= =20 from California, FERC voted Monday to impose round-the-clock price controls= =20 throughout the 11-state Western region.=20 The FERC plan replaces a three-week-old plan that applied only to Californi= a=20 and took effect only when power reserves fell to below 7 percent of demand= =20 and an official ""power alert"" was declared.=20 By extending the plan to the entire West, experts said the commission=20 probably put an end to the phenomenon known as ""megawatt laundering,"" in=20 which power was shipped out of California and then re-imported. Imported=20 power wasn't subject to the old price controls.=20 The new controls, said consultant Stiffler, ""significantly narrow the abili= ty=20 of a trader to move power around and play the market.""=20 The Bee's Dale Kasler can be reached at (916) 321-1066 or dkasler@sacbee.co= m. State to borrow up to $5 billion to buy energy=20 By Emily Bazar Bee Capitol Bureau (Published June 20, 2001)=20 State Treasurer Phil Angelides announced Tuesday that he will borrow up to = $5=20 billion to pay for future power purchases, a move he said was necessary to= =20 avoid a continued drain on California's budget and cuts in other state=20 programs.=20 Since mid-January, energy purchased by the state Department of Water=20 Resources on the spot market and under long-term contracts has come out of= =20 the state's general fund, the source of most state spending.=20 Once the loan becomes final by the end of next week, however, energy will b= e=20 purchased with the proceeds.=20 Made possible by an emergency order from the governor, the loan ultimately= =20 will be paid off by customers of the state's investor-owned utilities throu= gh=20 their electricity rates.=20 ""In essence, it stops the general fund bleeding,"" Angelides said.=20 The state has so far committed $8.2 billion from the general fund to=20 electricity purchases. Of that amount, Angelides said the Department of Wat= er=20 Resources has actually spent about $6.1 billion through June 12 on power=20 purchases, and has received about $900 million back from customers'=20 electricity rates.=20 Officials expect the loan to finance power purchases through September, whe= n=20 they plan to issue up to $13.4 billion in revenue bonds.=20 The bonds will reimburse the general fund and and pay off the loan.=20 ""This gives the state some more running room, some more cushion in case=20 anything goes awry with the bond sale to make sure ... the state does not r= un=20 out of general fund money, jeopardizing education programs, law enforcement= =20 programs, children's and health services,"" the Democratic treasurer said.= =20 Angelides said he has obtained firm commitments for $3.5 billion from JP=20 Morgan and Lehman Brothers at a blended interest rate of about 4.5 percent.= =20 If the long-term bonds are not issued by Oct. 31, the interest rate would= =20 climb to about 7 percent.=20 Lawmakers initially had hoped to close the short-term loan in May and float= =20 the long-term bonds shortly thereafter. However, Republicans in the state= =20 Legislature balked at the plan, forcing the delay of the bond sale until=20 mid-August.=20 Rather than wait, Gov. Gray Davis invoked his emergency powers to allow for= =20 the loan and circumvent the delay.=20 Assembly Republicans don't mind that the governor used his emergency powers= =20 to expedite the loan, said James Fisfis, a spokesman for the caucus. Instea= d,=20 he said, they're concerned the loan could backfire and hurt Californians.= =20 ""If the larger bond offering falls through, the penalties and added interes= t=20 could add up on ratepayers' bills,"" he said.=20 But Angelides argued that the loan would benefit ratepayers on several=20 fronts: Power generators can no longer argue the state should pay a ""credit= =20 premium"" on electricity, he said, and for the most part will not be able to= =20 walk away from long-term energy contracts that have provisions requiring th= e=20 Department of Water Resources to obtain external financing by July 1.=20 Outside the Legislature, the announcement drew praise from financial analys= ts=20 who had criticized the state for buying power with taxpayer money.=20 In late April, for instance, Standard & Poor cited fears over the state's= =20 mounting power costs when it downgraded California's credit rating on state= =20 bonds.=20 But S&P managing director Steven Zimmermann called the governor's executive= =20 order a step in the right direction.=20 ""We're very happy,"" Zimmermann said. ""We were very anxious for the state to= =20 take the general fund out of the energy purchasing position it's been in.""= =20 The Bee's Emily Bazar can be reached at (916) 326-5540 or ebazar@sacbee.com= . Dan Walters: Once burned, lawmakers are very wary of Davis-Edison agreement (Published June 20, 2001)=20 The Capitol's politicians rarely attempt to resolve big, complicated policy= =20 issues, preferring to occupy their time with relatively trivial matters --= =20 which also tend to be the priorities of well-heeled and generous interest= =20 groups.=20 And when they even acknowledge a need to address something big, they'll oft= en=20 just nibble at the edges rather than confront the underlying conflicts=20 squarely. That's been the pattern on water, transportation, population grow= th=20 and public education, to name but a few of many examples.=20 The Capitol completed just one comprehensive, or seemingly comprehensive, b= it=20 of policymaking during the last quarter-century. But the issue on that=20 occasion was electric utility deregulation, which has exploded into an ener= gy=20 crisis of monumental proportions. And that experience is having a paralyzin= g=20 effect on the Capitol's denizens.=20 Some Capitol old-timers call it ""1890 disease,"" named after the number of t= he=20 1996 bill that created California's fatally flawed system of pricing electr= ic=20 power. The legislation was written largely by lobbyists for affected intere= st=20 groups and then presented to the full Legislature for take-it-or-leave-it= =20 approval. The measure was passed without a single dissenting vote, even=20 though only a few lawmakers even began to understand its ramifications.=20 It was a huge failure of the legislative process, virtually a dereliction o= f=20 duty, and those who participated have been doing some fancy explaining. But= =20 given the history, both veteran legislators and those who came to the Capit= ol=20 after 1996 are very leery about putting their names on additional pieces of= =20 energy policy that could backfire if the real-world outcome is markedly=20 different from the purported effects.=20 One example is the $43 billion in long-term energy supply contracts=20 negotiated by Gov. Gray Davis' administration to end the state's dependence= =20 on volatile spot market prices. When the long-term contracting program was= =20 authorized by the Legislature early this year, it was on the assurances of= =20 the administration that it could obtain large quantities of power at cheap= =20 prices. But by the time that the contracts were made final, months later, t= he=20 average price was 25 percent higher than what was stated earlier, while the= =20 spot market had fallen dramatically. Now the long-term contracts that seeme= d=20 like such a good idea in January and February could become financial=20 albatrosses.=20 An even more telling example is the deal Davis made with Southern Californi= a=20 Edison to keep the utility from joining Pacific Gas and Electric in=20 bankruptcy. The utilities accumulated at least $13 billion in debts in six= =20 months, buying power at prices much higher than they were allowed to=20 recapture from their customers. Consumer groups are denouncing the Edison= =20 deal as a corporate bailout that would impose multibillion-dollar burdens o= n=20 customers while imposing virtually no financial onus on Edison or its=20 creditors. And the deal's critics are pouncing on legislators' reluctance t= o=20 do something that might haunt them later -- especially in 2002, a critical= =20 election year.=20 ""Five years ago, lawmakers and the utilities foolishly foisted this=20 deregulation scheme onto California consumers, and now the governor and=20 Edison expect the ratepayers to pay billions more to save the utilities fro= m=20 their own mismanagement and bad policy decisions,"" consumer gadfly Harvey= =20 Rosenfield said Tuesday as legislative hearings opened on the Edison deal.= =20 ""This time, the whole world is watching the Legislature.""=20 Harry Snyder of Consumers Union echoed Rosenfield's pledge to hold=20 legislators accountable. ""It looks a lot like 1890,"" Snyder said. ""It's too= =20 big, (and) this is the same process all over again.""=20 The sheer complexity and potential ramifications of the deal are weighing= =20 heavily on lawmakers. ""This is not a Mother's Day resolution,"" Senate Energ= y=20 Committee Chairwoman Debra Bowen said wryly as the hearings began. Davis an= d=20 Edison lobbyists are pulling out all the stops, but legislators are very,= =20 very nervous about taking another big step that could generate public=20 backlash.=20 The Bee's Dan Walters can be reached at (916) 321-1195 or dwalters@sacbee.c= om . Senate Democrats lay back to see if FERC action provides rate relief=20 By Finlay Lewis COPLEY NEWS SERVICE=20 June 19, 2001=20 WASHINGTON =01) Key Senate Democrats called a truce Tuesday in the politica= l=20 wars raging over California's energy crisis, as they adopted a wait-and-see= =20 posture over the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's latest order=20 restricting electricity prices across much of the West.=20 Senators of both parties expressed relief over FERC's action on Monday. But= =20 Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said she was skeptical that the order woul= d=20 end wholesale price manipulation by power providers or result in refunds to= =20 overcharged ratepayers.=20 Feinstein and Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., have prepared legislation seeking = a=20 much tighter pricing formula than the one FERC used. But she asked that the= ir=20 bill be set aside temporarily in deference to the agency's action.=20 ""I think we should wait and see what happens,"" Feinstein said during a Sena= te=20 Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing on the FERC order.=20 Democrats on the committee pressed FERC Chairman Curtis L. Hebert and the= =20 four other commissioners on why they had not acted sooner to control the=20 daily price turbulence in the California energy market. A market-interventi= on=20 order issued by FERC in April was designed to cope only with energy-supply= =20 emergencies, despite pleas by California Gov. Gray Davis and other Californ= ia=20 Democrats for more drastic measures.=20 ""It's time to stop blaming and start problem-solving,"" said Hebert, a=20 Republican appointed chairman by President Bush.=20 Hebert noted that electricity prices on the volatile spot market have dropp= ed=20 considerably since the April order. Prices on the energy futures market hav= e=20 also tumbled, as have natural gas prices =01) a key component in the cost o= f=20 electricity.=20 On Monday, FERC unanimously ordered around-the-clock restraints on wholesal= e=20 electricity prices in California and 10 neighboring states over the next 15= =20 months.=20 As was the case with the April measure, prices will be pegged to the costs = of=20 the least efficient power provider when reserves in California fall below 7= =20 percent. But when reserves are more plentiful, the prices will drop to 85= =20 percent of the level established during supply shortages.=20 The order also provides for a 22-day period, involving arbitration and revi= ew=20 by an administrative law judge, for resolving price-gouging allegations and= =20 providing refunds in cases of improper pricing.=20 Adamantly opposing price controls earlier, FERC acted after coming under=20 intense pressure from lawmakers of both parties. Republicans said they were= =20 worried that their GOP colleagues in California would have been blamed and= =20 possibly imperiled at the polls if FERC had failed to act.=20 Bush, who also took a hard line against price caps, blessed FERC's action= =20 after it was taken.=20 Hebert criticized the bill advanced by Feinstein and Smith as an attempt to= =20 solve California's problem by ""bureaucratic fiat.""=20 Their measure would calculate wholesale electricity prices based on the=20 reported production costs of the individual generators, with an added=20 allowance for a profit margin.=20 Hebert argued that the ""mitigation price"" that FERC will establish ""is not = a=20 blunt, arbitrary figure that bears no resemblance to market conditions and = is=20 subject to political pressures and whims.""=20 Meanwhile, Commissioner William Massey made it clear that he harbors=20 misgivings about the FERC measure, although he supported it.=20 He said the agency should have acted earlier to avoid the subsequent=20 ""carnage"" in California, has failed to provide guidelines that would assure= =20 refunds to overcharged consumers and has acted questionably in allowing pow= er=20 providers to impose a 10-percent surcharge to cover credit-worthiness risks= .=20 Massey, a Democrat who has consistently criticized his colleagues for movin= g=20 too slowing in the California crisis, also said he wondered whether the ord= er=20 would provide an unintended incentive for generators to continue using=20 inefficient units in order to assure higher profit margins for their more= =20 modern facilities.=20 Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., said she would propose legislation later this= =20 week designed to assure refunds to customers who have had to pay unfair=20 prices for their electricity.=20 ""If FERC won't do it ... Congress should,"" Boxer said.=20 A spokesman for Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., chairman of the committee, said= =20 Bingaman agreed with Feinstein on the need for a time-out while the FERC=20 order is being implemented.=20 Gov. Davis will testify today (6/20) before the Senate Government Affairs= =20 Committee, which is investigating FERC's role in the crisis. Hebert and the= =20 other commissioners will also appear.=20 House panel erases Bush energy cuts=20 By Alan Fram ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 June 19, 2001=20 WASHINGTON =01) A House subcommittee voted Tuesday to spend $1.2 billion mo= re=20 next year than President Bush proposed for energy and water programs,=20 underlining lawmakers' sensitivity to the West's power problems and their= =20 desire for home-district projects.=20 The $23.7 billion measure, approved by voice vote by a panel of the House= =20 Appropriations Committee, is normally one of the more routine of the 13=20 annual spending measures Congress must approve. But with this year's=20 escalating battle between Bush and Democrats over energy policy, the=20 measure's profile has been raised.=20 The bill would provide $18.7 billion for the Energy Department, $641 millio= n=20 more than Bush requested and $444 million more than this year. Fiscal 2002,= =20 which the bill covers, begins Oct. 1.=20 It also includes nearly $4.5 billion for the Army Corps of Engineers and th= e=20 hundreds of water projects it has under way across the country, $568 millio= n=20 more than Bush proposed but $73 million less than this year.=20 The measure was approved shortly after top members of the committee met wit= h=20 Bush at the White House.=20 Participants said Bush and the lawmakers reaffirmed their goal of keeping t= he=20 price tag of the 13 bills to $661 billion, which is one-third of the overal= l=20 federal budget. That would be a 4 percent boost over 2001, which many=20 Democrats =01) and some Republicans in private =01) say is too low.=20 ""He said there would be attempts to raise this as we go through the process= ,=20 and let's stick with him,"" said Rep. Sonny Callahan, R-Ala., chairman of th= e=20 energy and water subcommittee.=20 Illustrating the pressures Republicans face, David Sirota, spokesman for th= e=20 Democrats on the committee, said the bill lacked the new spending needed fo= r=20 renewable energy and other programs that could help alleviate power=20 shortages.=20 Under the bill approved Tuesday, renewable energy programs would get $377= =20 million, $100 million more than Bush wanted and $1 million more than this= =20 year. Nuclear energy, basic energy sciences, biological and environmental= =20 research and a study of whether spent nuclear fuel should be stored at a=20 Nevada site would all get about what Bush proposed.=20 The bill's $7.03 billion for environmental cleanups is $699 million more th= an=20 Bush proposed. Programs aimed at containing the nuclear arsenals of former= =20 Soviet states would get $845 million, $71 million more than Bush's plan.=20 Members voted to hold the brief meeting behind closed doors after citing th= e=20 national security sensitivity of publicly discussing some of the nuclear=20 weapons programs covered by the bill.=20 Davis, Regulators Face Off at Hearing From Reuters=20 ?????WASHINGTON -- California Governor Gray Davis, a Democrat, today blamed= a=20 Republican-led energy regulatory agency for not doing enough to help his=20 energy-starved state and demanded refunds of $6.7 billion for alleged=20 price-gouging by power generators. ?????Davis, whose political future has been linked to his state's electrici= ty=20 woes, was testifying at a Senate hearing with members of the Federal Energy= =20 Regulatory Commission. ?????The hearing marked the first time that Davis met face to face with all= =20 five FERC commissioners. ?????FERC regulates interstate electricity markets and has jurisdiction to= =20 order refunds by power generators found to have overcharged utilities. ?????Earlier this week the agency, led by a Republican majority, rejected= =20 Davis' pleas for strict caps on prices that soared above $400 per megawatt= =20 hour last month. ?????Sen. Joseph Lieberman, the former Democratic vice presidential nominee= ,=20 heads the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee that quizzed the FERC=20 commissioners and Davis on efforts to stabilize the chaotic Western=20 electricity market. ?????Davis accused FERC of failing to act aggressively against alleged=20 price-gouging by out-of-state generators. ?????""To date, not a single penny in refunds has been returned to=20 Californians,"" Davis said. ""It is unconscionable for the generators to prof= it=20 from their egregious overcharges. FERC must move quickly to enforce the law= =20 and order the energy companies to give back the money."" ?????Davis said the state is owed refunds of at least $6.7 billion.=20 California's grid operator has estimated that from May 2000 to May 2001,=20 power generators charged the state nearly $9 billion more than a competitiv= e=20 market would warrant, he said. ?????California, the nation's most populous state, has been hit with a seri= es=20 of rolling blackouts, the bankruptcy of its largest utility, and an economi= c=20 slowdown since the power crisis began last year. ?????The state is expected to convene a criminal grand jury to investigate= =20 whether some power generators withheld supplies, shut down plants or=20 exploited the bidding process to drive up prices. Out-of-state generators= =20 deny any illegal activity, saying the high prices simply reflect supply=20 shortages. ?????Today also marks the day that FERC's newly expanded ""price mitigation""= =20 program goes into effect in all 11 Western states with a wholesale price=20 limit of $107.9 per megawatt hour linked to a market formula. The plan had= =20 previously applied only to California during emergency power outages. ?????Since FERC's action earlier this week, Senate Democrats dropped a=20 legislative effort to strictly cap electricity prices in the West. However,= =20 California Democrats in the House were still trying to force a full vote on= a=20 package of energy amendments, including a price cap. ?????The Bush administration and many Republicans oppose price caps,=20 contending they would discourage more power production. ?????Separately, today the U.S. Energy Department issued a study that=20 supported the White House's view that strict price caps would hurt, not hel= p,=20 California. ?????The study found California faces about 113 hours of rolling blackouts= =20 this summer, a level that would double if wholesale prices were capped at= =20 $150 per megawatt because some 3,600 megawatts of generating capacity would= =20 shut down. An alternative approach of setting a price cap based on producti= on=20 costs plus $25 per megawatt would delay or close about 1,300 megawatts of= =20 capacity scheduled to be built in the state, according to the study. ?????However, lawmakers from both political parties have scrambled for some= =20 kind of solution to address the shortages in California well before the=20 congressional elections next year. ?????The FERC plan expands an existing ""price mitigation"" program in=20 California to 10 other Western states. The plan, which runs through Septemb= er=20 2002, means that during nonemergency periods the price for wholesale power= =20 cannot exceed 85 percent of the cost of electricity sold during a Stage 1= =20 power shortage emergency in California. ?????A Stage 1 emergency is declared when electricity supplies fall below 7= =20 percent of demand on the Western power grid. ?????The plan also imposes a 10 percent surcharge on all power sales into= =20 California as financial protection for generators reluctant to sell to the= =20 state's financially weak utilities. ?????Davis was due to meet the two newest FERC commissioners, Patrick Wood = of=20 Texas and Nora Brownell of Pennsylvania, today. Both are former utilities= =20 regulators in states that successfully deregulated their power industry and= =20 nominated to the agency by President Bush. Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 NEWS ANALYSIS Energy on Agenda, but Issue Is Blame=20 Politics: Gov. Davis will try to sway voter anger toward the GOP as he face= s=20 a Senate panel.=20 By RONALD BROWNSTEIN, Times Political Writer=20 ?????WASHINGTON--When California Gov. Gray Davis testifies at a high-profil= e=20 Senate hearing today, the issue formally on the table will be the expanded= =20 electricity price controls that federal regulators approved this week. But= =20 the session's political subtext will be the escalating struggle between Dav= is=20 and national Republicans to determine where California voters look for=20 solutions--and blame--for the state's power woes. ?????In both California and Washington, Republican strategists believe Davi= s=20 is trying to manufacture a succession of conflicts with the White House tha= t=20 will allow him to run in 2002 as much against President Bush as against=20 whomever the state GOP nominates in the gubernatorial race. In return,=20 Republicans are trying to shift the focus back toward Davis--most=20 aggressively through a California-wide television advertising campaign=20 organized by Scott Reed, a former executive director of the Republican=20 National Committee. ?????""Our goal is to get the focus back to Sacramento, where it belongs,""= =20 Reed said. ?????Both sides see the same prize in this tug of war: the opportunity to= =20 determine where most Californians direct their anger during what could be a= =20 long, hot summer of power shortages. ?????""The situation is that the public's minds are not made up on this=20 issue--whether it is Sacramento or Washington who has acted too little, too= =20 late,"" said Mark Baldassare, a pollster at the independent Public Policy=20 Institute of California. ""That gives both sides an opportunity to get their= =20 messages out. The stakes are fairly high in terms of how the public in=20 California ends up assessing blame over the next few months."" ?????A Slight Uptick in Davis' Popularity ?????Overall, Davis' political situation appears to be stabilizing. After= =20 months of runaway power costs, the prices the state pays for wholesale=20 electricity are falling and new plants will come online next month. And=20 following a free fall in private polls, Davis has seen his numbers tick bac= k=20 up slightly. Similarly, a poll financed by independent power generators=20 showed that in mid-June, for the first time in months, Californians were=20 becoming slightly more confident that the crisis is easing. ?????Within the state Capitol, Davis is asserting himself, demanding that= =20 lawmakers hold hearings on his rescue plan for Southern California Edison. = On=20 Monday, he released details of a similar plan for San Diego Gas & Electric.= =20 Last week, he announced an agreement that is likely to increase generation = by=20 alternative energy producers, who account for about a fourth of the state's= =20 supply. ?????""This guy is changing,"" said state Sen. Steve Peace (D-El Cajon), who = a=20 few months back had been urging that Davis take a more aggressive stance on= =20 the crisis. ""There is a difference in his demeanor and focus."" ?????Yet the energy crisis still looms as a vast cloud over a reelection=20 campaign that once looked like a stroll on the beach. ?????The paradox for Davis is that the substantive victory for pricecontrol= =20 advocates at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission meeting this week may= =20 complicate his political goal of maintaining a heavy focus on Washington.= =20 Though Davis and some congressional Democrats portrayed FERC's decision as= =20 insufficient, it appears to have lanced the pressure for federal legislatio= n=20 to impose the tighter price controls that Davis supports.=20 ?????Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), a principal sponsor of that bill, on= =20 Tuesday announced she would shelve the measure for six months to give the n= ew=20 FERC plan time to work. ?????As a result, the political effect of the FERC ruling could be to shift= =20 the focus away from Washington back toward decisions in Sacramento, which i= s=20 exactly what Republicans prefer. ""Gray Davis is the dog that finally caught= =20 the car,"" said Dan Schnur, a San Francisco-based GOP consultant. ""Davis is= =20 going to keep screaming about price caps and refunds, but now Republicans c= an=20 point to substantive action."" ?????Davis: 'Much More They Should Do' ?????For months, Davis has criticized Bush for refusing to support=20 electricity price controls and other measures that the governor says could= =20 ease California's energy crunch. At almost every opportunity, Davis offers= =20 the same message: California is taking the steps it needs to, but Washingto= n=20 has failed to help enough. That was precisely Davis' message Monday when FE= RC=20 significantly expanded the limited price caps it had imposed previously. ?????While saying that FERC had ""finally taken a step in the right=20 direction,"" Davis added: ""There is much more they should do""--including=20 providing refunds to California for alleged overcharges. The overall tone o= f=20 Davis' statement was much more skeptical about FERC's action than the remar= ks=20 from Feinstein, who described the decision as ""a giant step forward."" ?????Aides say Davis plans to repeat that two-part message in his appearanc= e=20 today before the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, chaired by Sen.=20 Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.). In his testimony, and in a round of schedule= d=20 television appearances, Davis will demand that FERC order refunds in the=20 range of $5 billion to $6 billion to the state, aides said. Davis also will= =20 distribute to every member of Congress a 177-page book chronicling the=20 state's response to the crisis. ?????Inside the Bush White House, some officials see in Davis' cool respons= e=20 to FERC's decision more evidence that the governor is determined to use the= =20 White House as a foil in his reelection campaign. The prevailing view, one= =20 official said, is that, no matter what concessions the administration offer= s,=20 Davis will immediately raise the bar and demand something else--the way he= =20 did by talking about rebates as soon as FERC offered tougher price controls= . ?????""That is Davis' M.O.,"" said one official involved in the White House's= =20 energy strategy. ""He asks the administration to do something, the=20 administration does it, and then he attacks the administration for not doin= g=20 enough. . . . He needs someone to blame."" ?????Davis aides reject that characterization, arguing that the governor is= =20 merely representing the state's interests against an administration that th= ey=20 maintain is favoring energy producers over consumers. But Davis advisors=20 acknowledge that they have used focus groups to test campaign messages that= =20 pin the blame for the energy crunch primarily on Davis' Republican=20 predecessor, Pete Wilson, and a ""Republican president who has failed to sto= p=20 his rich friends in the energy industry"" from gouging consumers, one aide= =20 said. ?????""You don't have to tell people in focus groups more than once how this= =20 is connected,"" the Davis aide said. ?????Gubernatorial Rivals Are Free of Blame ?????Baldassare, the independent pollster, notes it may be especially=20 imperative for Davis to keep Bush's energy decisions in the spotlight becau= se=20 none of his potential Republican opponents in 2002--California Secretary of= =20 State Bill Jones, former Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan or businessman= =20 William E. Simon Jr.--is easily tagged with complicity in the problem. ""Non= e=20 of them were really involved in the decision-making over deregulation,""=20 Baldassare said. ""The only one else to blame, in a political sense, is=20 Washington and the Bush administration."" ?????The new independent advertising campaign against Davis was inspired=20 largely by the fear of that strategy succeeding--damaging the standing in= =20 California not only of Bush but also of other Republicans, particularly tho= se=20 in Congress. Reed, whose American Taxpayers Alliance is funding the ads, sa= id=20 he decided to launch the campaign after Davis appeared to gain the upper ha= nd=20 in the media debate following Bush's visit to California late last month. ?????""The Bush trip really changed the terms of debate about Davis' problem= =20 and made it more of a possible national Republican problem,"" Reed said. ""Th= e=20 entire terms of debate turned around and was focused on the issue of price= =20 caps as opposed to negligence on Davis' behalf. Our group is attempting to = go=20 out and engage Davis."" ?????To ""engage"" Davis, Reed's group, which has not revealed its donors, is= =20 spending what he said would be $1.5 million on an initial ad criticizing=20 Davis this week, though a spot check of TV stations around the state=20 indicated a far more modest buy. Reed said the group is planning to air a n= ew=20 ad as soon as this week. ?????Democrats plan to answer the ads with attacks of their own and will be= =20 filing complaints with the IRS and other federal agencies about the anonymo= us=20 funding of the Reed ad. ?????Today's Senate hearing will give Davis another chance to respond to th= e=20 GOP and make his case for greater help from Washington. But Lieberman aides= =20 acknowledge the hearing is likely to be much less confrontational than it= =20 would have been if FERC had not acted Monday. The agency's decision ""change= d=20 the dynamic,"" the aide said. ?????That assessment may apply not only to the conflict between FERC and it= s=20 critics but also equally to the hostilities between Davis and the White Hou= se. ---=20 ?????Times staff writers Dan Morain in Sacramento and Mark Z. Barabak in Lo= s=20 Angeles contributed to this story. Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 Blackout Forecasts' Dark Side=20 If optimists are wrong and the power runs out, California's energy crisis= =20 could quickly cost lives and cripple the economy.=20 By JENIFER WARREN, Times Staff Writer=20 ?????It's here. Summer 2001, the blackout season, is only a day away. ?????Already Californians anticipate power outages when temperatures rise. = By=20 August, the occasional annoyances endured so far--stoplights gone dark,=20 computers, air conditioners and elevators idled--could seem almost quaint. ?????Gov. Gray Davis insists we needn't worry. Four large new power plants= =20 are firing up soon, he said, and government's best and brightest are lockin= g=20 up still more megawatts to help meet our peak summer need. Californians,=20 Davis predicts, will valiantly heed his call to conserve, helping the state= =20 survive the hot months, no sweat. ?????With luck, he'll be right. Power prices have stabilized, and some ener= gy=20 analysts are wondering whether California may have tamed the blackout beast= . ?????But what if those plants don't get built in time, people don't trim=20 their electricity use 7% and energy imports are more meager than expected? ?????And what if the state gets hit by a summer that is not moderately hot,= =20 as Davis bets, but blistering, record-setting hot? ?????Government experts who ponder such questions don't expect disaster in= =20 the coming months. But they are planning for it nonetheless. ?????At best, they say, Californians can expect some gridlocked=20 intersections, an occasionally overloaded 911 system, perhaps some business= =20 bankruptcies, certainly inconvenience. At worst, the Western power grid cou= ld=20 crash, causing uncontrolled blackouts that might lead to looting,=20 contaminated water supplies, even civil unrest. ?????""How bad could this summer get?"" said state Sen. Joe Dunn (D-Santa Ana= ).=20 ""This summer could be the worst disaster to ever hit the state of Californi= a."" ?????Imagine it's a Thursday morning in the third week of July. Relentless= =20 heat grips California, the curse of a stubborn high-pressure ridge that jus= t=20 won't budge. ?????As air conditioners from Redding to Chula Vista lumber to life, manage= rs=20 of the state's power grid in Folsom gulp their third and fourth cups of=20 coffee, stare at a bank of computers and begin to fret. ?????Demand is jumping. Supply is static, Canada and Arizona have nothing t= o=20 sell. It's looking tight. ?????Thirty minutes later, the picture is gloomier. A brush fire shuts down= =20 transmission lines near Fresno, squeezing supply in the Central Valley. In= =20 the Bay Area, the unusual heat drives demand well past projections. ?????By noon things look bleak. Operators of the Diablo Canyon nuclear powe= r=20 plant near San Luis Obispo have cut output by 80%. The trouble? Chunks of= =20 kelp have lodged in one of the plant's seawater intake valves, creating a= =20 clog like one that plagued the facility in January. ?????With a chorus of groans, the grid's keepers scour the market for power= =20 to offset the Diablo loss. No luck. As the mercury climbs and the Golden=20 State economy roars into full swing, electricity consumption ticks upward,= =20 minute by minute. And when managers of a power plant near Long Beach cut=20 output because of a cracked turbine, everyone knows what it means. ?????Alert the utilities. It's lights out, California, for the fourth day i= n=20 a row. ?????Dr. J. Michael Leary dreads blackouts--not personally, but=20 professionally. Leary is an emergency room physician in the desert city of= =20 Rancho Mirage. When air conditioners go on the blink there, the=20 victims--scores of them, mostly old folks--wind up in his ER. ?????In a normal year, 75% of his emergency patients are geriatrics. Like= =20 infants, the elderly are unusually vulnerable to the heat. When blackouts= =20 hit, they are most at risk. ?????""It's as if you lived in Maine and they turned the heat off in January= ,""=20 Leary said. ""This is an extreme environment we live in. The effects can be= =20 devastating."" ?????Many desert seniors are on fixed incomes and live in mobile homes, som= e=20 of them poorly insulated boxes that turn into ovens under the brutal summer= =20 sun. Take away the air conditioning and the humans inside start baking, qui= ck. ?????For Leary, the specter of continual, back-to-back blackouts in=20 July--and, some predict, in June and August too--conjures images of an=20 82-year-old man, living alone in one of those mobile homes, taking medicati= on=20 for heart disease. The cardiovascular drugs plague the man with numerous si= de=20 effects; one inhibits his body's ability to cool itself. ?????When a person gets overheated, body temperature eventually rises=20 uncontrollably. Then comes a nasty spiral of effects, and pretty soon ""you = go=20 into shock,"" Leary said. ""Everything just shuts down."" ?????On average each year, 371 Americans die from heat-related causes, more= =20 than the number killed by earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, lightning and= =20 floods combined. In 1995, a record hot spell in Chicago killed 465 people.= =20 Eleven Californians died from the heat in 1998. ?????A new report by the United Seniors Assn. predicts that more than half = a=20 million elderly Californians could need hospitalization for heat-related=20 ailments this summer.=20 ?????Some communities have laid plans for cooling shelters, wading pools an= d=20 other measures to provide relief. But will all who need help get it? Or get= =20 it in time? ?????Out in the desert, paramedics expect a crush of 911 calls when the pow= er=20 goes out and the ill, frail and frightened seek help. Leary and others at= =20 Eisenhower Medical Center will be waiting, armed with ice packs, cooled IVs= =20 and ventilators. ?????""I am very, very worried,"" the doctor said. ""I think we'll see a great= =20 toll in human suffering, even mortality."" ?????California's tomato processors are no less anxious. They wash, cook,= =20 peel, chop, mash and can about 1 million tons of tomatoes a week from July = to=20 October--enough to account for half the world's supply. For them, a string = of=20 unexpected power losses could mean economic ruin in a matter of days. ?????The reason lies in the peculiar nature of food processing--a sterile= =20 system instantly contaminated if the power fails and the plant's precise=20 temperature is disturbed. ?????Once a batch of tomatoes is tainted, it must be thrown out--all 50,000= =20 pounds. The plant must then be sanitized, a painstaking process that takes= =20 about 36 hours. ?????""If you get hit by blackouts every third day for, say, two weeks, you'= re=20 starting, stopping, cleaning, restarting--it's a nightmare,"" said Jeff Boes= e,=20 president of the California League of Food Processors. ""You could lose thre= e=20 batches and be out $40 million before you knew what hit you."" ?????Meanwhile, farmers with still more truckloads of tomatoes line up=20 outside the plant, waiting to be paid for their crop: ""If we can't process= =20 them, the farmers have spent an entire season growing them for nothing,""=20 Boese said. ?????In Sonoma County, the object in peril is the chicken. Egg producers=20 equip their laying houses with fans and swamp coolers to keep the hens=20 comfortable. Power is also needed to run giant refrigerators filled with eg= gs. ?????""In a blackout, those hens can overheat in no time,"" said Rich Matteis= =20 of the Pacific Egg and Poultry Assn. ""In 20 or 30 minutes, you could have= =20 100,000 birds die."" ?????Many large producers have backup generators, but they are not designed= =20 for ongoing, intensive use. Will they hold up? Small-scale egg producers=20 often have no backup power at all. ?????Hundreds of other California businesses could suffer if summer shapes = up=20 as bad as some predict. ?????The Valero Refining Co. of California, northeast of San Francisco,=20 produces 115,000 barrels of gasoline a day. Because restarting a refinery i= s=20 a complicated task, two or three blackouts close together could prompt=20 officials to shutter it until electricity supplies stabilize--costing=20 California about 10% of its gasoline supply. ?????At a Berkeley medical laboratory, doctors say power losses to their=20 freezers could destroy bone marrow needed to give young leukemia patients= =20 lifesaving transplants. The state's 400 dialysis centers, where patients=20 without kidney function go to have their blood cleansed every other day, ar= e=20 in the same fix. Few have backup generators, so when an outage hits,=20 technicians must crank the machines by hand. ?????Most Californians, of course, face far more ordinary consequences. The= =20 scoreboards will fizzle at summer softball games, joggers on treadmills wil= l=20 be stopped in their tracks, electric organs will go silent, leaving choirs = to=20 sing without accompaniment. ?????Parents will be asked to retrieve children from day-care centers when= =20 the lights and cooling systems conk out. Anniversary lunches may be ruined= =20 when restaurants cannot grill salmon or blend margaritas. ?????Most people will tolerate occasional disturbances, psychologists say,= =20 doing their part in a time of crisis. But what if such irritations become a= n=20 everyday fact of life? ?????Hundreds of ""essential"" energy users--including prisons, fire=20 departments and airports--are protected from blackouts, and hundreds more= =20 have applied for exemptions. That means the pool of people bearing the=20 blackout burden is shrinking, so more frequent outages are likely. ?????Blackout predictions vary widely, but at least one forecaster, a=20 consultant for California water districts, anticipates an outage almost eve= ry=20 afternoon of every workday this summer if temperatures are unusually warm. ?????Californians are accustomed to trash compactors, giant-screen TVs and= =20 having the Internet at their fingertips. How much deprivation will they=20 tolerate? ?????""So far, the version of blackouts we've experienced hasn't looked too= =20 scary to people--it happens on a workday, in the afternoon, and you basical= ly=20 have to come home and reset your VCR,"" said Dan Kammen, a professor of ener= gy=20 and society at UC Berkeley. ?????But if outages become daily events, and start to invade the evening=20 hours, the public mood could change abruptly. ?????""When there's a disaster or crisis or trauma, people tend to act=20 heroically and work together,"" said Robert Butterworth, a Los Angeles=20 psychologist and trauma specialist. ""But the civilized behavior only lasts = a=20 short period. Then people start acting in unpredictable ways."" ?????That tendency may be exacerbated, Butterworth said, by the nature of t= he=20 energy crisis--not a natural disaster, but a man-made one. ?????""People start to look for a scapegoat,"" he said. ""People will look for= a=20 target, and there's a tendency to strike out at whoever is closest to you."" ?????One place that tendency may surface, Butterworth said, is on=20 traffic-clogged roads. Blackouts already have led to scores of accidents. A= dd=20 summer heat to the mix, and repeat the pattern day after day at rush hour,= =20 and motorists' patience could wear thin, law enforcement officials say. ?????""We're bracing for . . . possible acts of violence and road rage,"" sai= d=20 Sacramento County Sheriff's Lt. Larry Saunders. ?????Lon House is the water consultant who predicts California could see=20 blackouts almost every summer weekday. Among the worries for the 440 water= =20 agencies he represents: losing the ability to pump water during wildfire=20 season. ?????""I'm telling them to be ready for a major earthquake every day this=20 summer--meaning all your power is out throughout your district for multiple= =20 hours,"" House said. ?????House insists he isn't an alarmist. But on top of the fire fears, he= =20 warns that blackouts of more than a few hours would allow air into water=20 pipes, contaminating supplies. If that happens, Californians would be urged= =20 to boil their water until the system can be disinfected from one end of the= =20 pipe to the other. ?????Though rolling blackouts are risky, they remain essentially a controll= ed=20 phenomenon, occurring when and where the grid managers and utilities decide= .=20 Far more frightening--and devastating--are unexpected, cascading outages th= at=20 could shut down the entire Western power grid. It happened in August 1996,= =20 leaving 4 million people without power during a triple-digit heat wave. ?????The problem began when power lines in Oregon sagged into trees and shu= t=20 themselves off. That triggered a chain reaction of automatic switch-offs an= d=20 oscillating surges of energy that ultimately shut down all four of the main= =20 power arteries between California and the Pacific Northwest. ?????That robbed the system of thousands of megawatts--enough to power the= =20 city of Seattle four times over--and scattered outages across California an= d=20 six other Western states. Thousands of customers were without power for mor= e=20 than a day. ?????Though such an episode is rare, California grid managers say it is mor= e=20 likely today because the system is taxed by the ever-increasing load of=20 electricity it bears. ?????""The system is very dynamic, and when it's heavily loaded and highly= =20 stressed, like it is now, the smallest little thing could cause big trouble= ,""=20 said Kevin Bakker, who oversees California's connection to the greater=20 Western power grid.=20 ?????If a massive, uncontrolled outage should hit, the ramifications could = be=20 dizzying, said Mike Guerin, chief of law enforcement for the state Office o= f=20 Emergency Services. Police departments would probably go to tactical alert,= =20 guarding against looting by criminals who might take advantage of disabled= =20 alarm systems and darkened street lights. ?????In hot areas, cities might convert municipal buses--parked with air=20 conditioners running--into cooling shelters, Guerin said. The state would= =20 provide emergency generators to nursing homes and others in need, while the= =20 California National Guard might be called into action. ?????""With this kind of blackout scenario, you're not worried about the=20 bologna going bad in the refrigerator,"" Guerin said. ""We're talking about= =20 doctors doing surgeries on backup generators for three days. We're talking= =20 about a lot of things we don't like to think about."" ---=20 ?????Times staff writers Nancy Vogel and Alexander Gronke and researcher=20 Patti Williams contributed to this story. Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 FERC Move Short-Circuits Push for Hard Price Caps=20 By RICHARD T. COOPER and JANET HOOK, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????WASHINGTON--The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's decision to=20 impose full-time price ceilings on wholesale electricity in California and= =20 the West appears to have deflated the congressional drive for a return to= =20 traditional utility regulation. ?????Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), calling the ""price mitigation"" syste= m=20 FERC unveiled Monday ""a giant step forward,"" announced Tuesday that she is= =20 pulling back her bill to force a return to the ""cost of service"" pricing=20 system that prevailed before deregulation. Republican Sen. Gordon Smith of= =20 Oregon, a co-sponsor, agreed, as did Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), chairman = of=20 the Senate Energy Committee. ?????House Democrats vowed to fight on for tougher controls, but they were= =20 given little chance to succeed. ?????As a result, although the political blame game will rage on, the reali= ty=20 of a long, ugly summer for California appears to have arrived: at least=20 several months of tears, toil, sweat--and fast-rising electric bills. ?????California consumers are likely to face an unpleasant paradox, energy= =20 analysts said: Given present power shortages, blackouts are virtually=20 inevitable this summer. And, since state authorities are beginning to let= =20 high wholesale prices flow through into retail bills after months of=20 subsidies, many consumers could face higher charges at the same time their= =20 lights begin to flicker. ?????Even if FERC's order succeeds and wholesale prices fall, as they have= =20 begun to do in recent weeks, consumers' bills are likely to rise. Since=20 retail charges lag well behind wholesale prices, closing the gap will=20 probably mean a period of higher costs for consumers, regardless of what=20 happens in wholesale markets. ?????There is light at the end of the tunnel, energy analysts said, but it = is=20 probably a year away. And reaching it, they said, depends in part on=20 government officials taking no action that might spook investors and disrup= t=20 present plans for expanding the region's capacity to generate and deliver= =20 more power. ?????The new FERC system, which its designers said would provide temporary= =20 price relief while preserving incentives for energy investment, imposes=20 cost-based curbs on wholesale prices throughout the West and covers all suc= h=20 sales, not just those during periods of extreme shortages, as did the order= =20 issued in April. ?????FERC Chairman Curtis L. Hebert Jr. told the committee the new system= =20 will prevent ""megawatt laundering"" and other potential abuses. He said his= =20 agency is ""committed to ferreting out any forms of market misbehavior 24=20 hours a day, seven days a week."" ?????With the apparent collapse of demands for more intervention, Congress= =20 now seems ready to give FERC a year or more of leeway to see whether its pl= an=20 will curb wholesale prices and create what FERC member Linda Breathitt, a= =20 Democrat, called ""a breathing spell"" in which California and the West can= =20 ""repair their dysfunctional markets."" ?????""It still remains to be seen whether there can be manipulation, but I= =20 think we should wait and see,"" Feinstein said Tuesday at a Senate Energy=20 Committee meeting attended by all five FERC members. The commissioners call= =20 their new system ""price mitigation,"" not price caps, but Feinstein said it= =20 amounts to the same thing. ?????""Whether you call it price mitigation or something else, a rose is a= =20 rose is a rose,"" said Feinstein, a member of the energy committee. ?????And Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), appearing before the committee as a= =20 witness, said: ""I was very pleased with [Monday's] about-face by FERC. I=20 believe they have a new tone."" ?????Democrats on the other side of the Capitol pledged to keep fighting fo= r=20 traditional regulation, but with Republicans in control of the House, the= =20 struggle appears to be largely symbolic. ?????House Democrats wanted to introduce amendments on price controls and= =20 other energy policy to a mid-year supplemental appropriation bill due to co= me=20 before the House today. However, GOP leaders expected to block Democrats fr= om=20 even offering the amendments on procedural grounds. ?????The most sweeping of the amendments would set cost-based limits on=20 wholesale energy prices in the West. Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Los Angeles) a= nd=20 other sponsors insisted that the measure is still needed in spite of the FE= RC=20 action, which he said would continue to provide windfall profits to=20 generators, encourage suppliers to withhold power and do too little to=20 restrain the price of natural gas. ?????He called the FERC policy an ""experiment"" that is using California and= =20 other Western states as subjects. ?????Similarly, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) said: ""Although the FER= C=20 decision [Monday] is a step in the right direction, I am concerned it does= =20 not remove incentives for energy suppliers to withhold power, drive up pric= es=20 and gouge consumers."" ?????The commission went as far as it did in part because of the specter of= =20 broader price control legislation, Pelosi said. ""They felt the heat, they s= aw=20 the amendments coming and decided to act."" ?????And Rep. Bob Filner (D-San Diego), in an interview Tuesday, said he wi= ll=20 press ahead with legislation to impose hard price caps. ""I would advise the= =20 senators that after a year of dealing with these price gougers that they wi= ll=20 easily manipulate this latest order,"" he said, calling it a ""Swiss cheese= =20 order--full of holes.""=20 ?????Feinstein's shift put House Democrats in an awkward political position= =20 because it came just as they prepared to make their big push for tougher=20 controls. But the Democrats tried to minimize the differences in legislativ= e=20 strategy. ?????""She too is waiting to see if the FERC experiment works,"" Waxman said.= =20 ""I'm a little more skeptical, but we're both watching carefully."" ?????As a political matter, a Democratic leadership aide acknowledged, the= =20 FERC order muddies the debate at a time when Democrats have been working ha= rd=20 to make it a defining issue--and one they had hoped would help them win=20 control of the House in the 2002 elections. ?????""It's hard to describe to people what the difference is between what w= e=20 want and what FERC has done,"" said the aide. ?????And Republicans said FERC's action had clearly taken the wind out of t= he=20 sails of price control efforts that some GOP strategists feared might have= =20 passed the House. ?????""I would have thought [it would pass] last week,"" said John Feehery,= =20 spokesman for House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.). ""But now, with what= =20 FERC did, it takes a lot of air out of the balloon."" ?????""I think the FERC action will dissipate that strong push,"" agreed Emil= y=20 Miller, a spokeswoman for House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Texas). ""It will= =20 take the heat off."" ?????House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-Texas) said the message to Democra= ts=20 was, ""It's time to come off your political high horse."" ?????He said he wanted to keep Democrats from offering their price control= =20 amendment to Wednesday's supplemental appropriation bill because the propos= al=20 is ""a political statement, not a policy statement."" ---=20 ?????Times staff writers Megan Garvey and Richard Simon contributed to this= =20 story. Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 Plan Won't Raise Rates, Davis Says=20 Edison: Governor seeks to assure Senate, where Democrats say action is a=20 bailout of nearly bankrupt utility.=20 By CARL INGRAM, Times Staff Writer=20 ?????SACRAMENTO--Gov. Gray Davis sought to assure the state Senate on Tuesd= ay=20 that his plan to save Southern California Edison from threatened financial= =20 collapse would work without increasing customer rates. ?????Davis sent assurances to the Senate Energy Committee through his top= =20 attorney, Barry Goode, who helped negotiate the controversial proposal with= =20 the utility. ?????Senate Republicans have taken a wait-and-see attitude on the plan. But= =20 they generally contend that the business of utilities belongs in the hands = of=20 private enterprise. ?????But Democrats in both houses have charged that the deal between Democr= at=20 Davis and Edison represents a state bailout of the nearly bankrupt=20 Rosemead-based utility. The analysis is shared by leading consumer activist= s. ?????At the first in a series of Senate hearings on the package, which is= =20 considered all but dead in its current form, Sen. Byron Sher (D-Palo Alto)= =20 voiced concerns about political problems with the plan. ?????He asked Goode, who was flanked at a witness table by Edison executive= s,=20 whether monthly bills of the utility's customers would increase as a=20 consequence of approval of the governor's package. ?????""Our models say there will be no additional impact on the ratepayers,""= =20 Goode replied. ?????Other members appeared ready to pursue rate increase questions, but=20 Chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) cut them short. She said the issu= e=20 would be fully examined at a later hearing. ?????To spare Edison from going into bankruptcy and to restore its=20 credit-worthiness, Davis and executives of the utility reached a complex=20 compromise in April, the centerpiece of which was a state purchase of=20 Edison's transmission grid for about $2.8 billion, more than twice its book= =20 value. ?????Edison has estimated that it owes $3.5 billion to creditors, including= =20 wholesale power generators, as a result of deregulation of retail electrici= ty=20 prices in 1996. ?????Because of a freeze in retail rates, Edison was prohibited from passin= g=20 its energy costs to customers. ?????Other features of the deal include dedicating a portion of consumer=20 rates to help pay off the debt, a guaranteed 11.6% rate of return to Edison= =20 on its sales and investments, and termination of an ongoing Public Utilitie= s=20 Commission investigation into financial dealings of Edison's parent company= ,=20 Edison International. ?????The energy committee held the hearing for fact-finding purposes and di= d=20 not consider the Edison bill, SB 78x by Sen. Richard Polanco (D-Los Angeles= ). ?????But the Davis-Edison deal has angered consumer activists, who contende= d=20 that bankruptcy for Edison would be preferable. ?????They deplored it as a bailout that would cost Edison customers $5=20 billion to $7 billion. ?????""If the Legislature makes the mistake of forcing the ratepayers of=20 California to pay one more penny to bail out these companies, we will put [= an=20 initiative] right on the ballot,"" said Harvey Rosenfield of the Foundation= =20 for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights. ?????Consumer organizations in 1998 put to the voters an initiative to junk= =20 the 1996 deregulation law. The measure failed. ?????Rosenfield, Harry Snyder of Consumers Union and Matt Freedman of the= =20 Utility Reform Network all asserted at a news conference that the Davis=20 rescue program should be killed. ?????Snyder, who opposed deregulation, said the governor's bill is shaping = up=20 as a replay of 1996. ?????""It's too big, too complicated. . . . This is the same process that=20 brought about this [deregulation] disaster,"" Snyder said. ?????Separately, San Diego Gas & Electric agreed Monday to sell its=20 transmission grid to the state for about $1 billion on the same terms as=20 Edison. ?????With all the controversy surrounding the Edison deal, the chance of=20 SDG&E winning legislative approval of its sale is slightly better than 50%,= =20 said Stephen L. Baum, chief executive of Sempra Energy, parent of SDG&E. ?????""I think there's a widely shared view in the Legislature that they don= 't=20 want the state in the long-term business of power procurement. . . . In ord= er=20 to get Edison back into that business there has to be this infusion of=20 capital"" to pay off past electricity debts and make the utility=20 credit-worthy, Baum said. ---=20 ?????Times staff writer Nancy Rivera Brooks contributed to this story. Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 State to Pay Electric Bill With Loan, Not Taxes=20 By MIGUEL BUSTILLO, Times Staff Writer=20 ?????SACRAMENTO--California taxpayers, who have had to bankroll billions of= =20 dollars in electricity purchases for the teetering power utilities, will so= on=20 no longer see their money evaporate at record rates, under an executive ord= er=20 by Gov. Gray Davis. ?????As early as next week, the order will stop the hemorrhaging of the sta= te=20 budget by allowing Treasurer Phil Angelides to borrow $5 billion to buy=20 electricity. That money is expected to cover power purchases until this fal= l,=20 when the state plans to sell an unprecedented $12.5 billion in bonds to rep= ay=20 the general tax fund and buy future electricity. ?????Angelides said Tuesday that he has already lined up $3.5 billion in=20 loans from two Wall Street firms, and expects to secure at least another=20 billion by next week, when he plans to close the deal and obtain the money. ?????The loan is critical, he said, because without it, electricity purchas= es=20 would completely deplete state coffers as early as October. ?????""In essence, it stops the general-fund bleeding,"" Angelides said. ""Wha= t=20 this interim financing does is take the pressure off the general fund and,= =20 hopefully, avert a cash crisis."" ?????The loan could also ease concerns on Wall Street that California's ris= ky=20 entry into the power business has placed the state budget in a precarious= =20 position. Those concerns were one of the main reasons two major credit rati= ng=20 agencies downgraded the state earlier this year. ?????""We have been looking forward to this day,"" said Ray Murphy, a vice=20 president at Moody's Investors Service, one of the two firms that downgrade= d=20 California's credit rating. ""We view this as a positive first step toward= =20 getting the state out of the power business. We wanted the state to get the= =20 general fund out of the business as quickly as possible."" ?????California has allocated $8.2 billion in taxpayer money for electricit= y=20 since January because the state's private utilities became too saddled with= =20 debt to continue purchasing power on the open market. and massive blackouts= =20 loomed. ?????Under a plan devised by Davis and approved by the Legislature, the sta= te=20 budget is supposed to be reimbursed for the power purchases with the bond= =20 issue, the largest in American history. The bonds, in turn, are to be paid= =20 off by utility ratepayers through their monthly bills. ?????The bond issue, however, has been delayed by partisan politics and=20 complex legal issues raised by the bankruptcy of Pacific Gas & Electric Co.= ,=20 the state's largest private utility. ?????A bond sale initially planned for May is now scheduled for late=20 September, according to Angelides' latest estimate. The state's Public=20 Utilities Commission still needs to take a number of technical actions befo= re=20 the sale can take place. ?????As a result, the state budget has been drained for power purchases far= =20 longer than initially anticipated--a situation that has imperiled spending = on=20 education, transportation and other critical needs, at least temporarily. ?????Angelides had earlier sought to secure a $4-billion bridge loan to rep= ay=20 the state budget for power purchases until the bonds were sold, but was=20 rebuffed by Republicans in the Legislature, who argued that the loan was no= t=20 necessary. ?????Davis' executive order, issued late Monday as part of the Democratic= =20 governor's emergency powers during the energy crisis, gives Angelides the= =20 authority to press ahead. ?????But it does not allow the treasurer to use the loan to repay the budge= t=20 for the billions spent so far this year on electricity, as he had originall= y=20 intended. Rather, it permits Angelides to use the loan proceeds to assist t= he=20 Department of Water Resources, the state agency buying power, with its futu= re=20 electricity expenses. ?????If the bond issue is further delayed, Angelides estimated, the loan=20 would gives California another four to six months before it would begin to= =20 run out of money. Furthermore, the loan closes a potential loophole that=20 existed in the long-term contracts Davis had signed to stabilize the cost o= f=20 electricity, which would have let power suppliers walk away from the deals = if=20 the state had not secured a source of financing by next month. ?????But Republicans warned that by entering into a bridge loan deal withou= t=20 knowing when the bonds would be sold, Davis and the Democrats were incurrin= g=20 major risks that could further drive up the price tag of the crisis. ?????The loan carries a blended interest rate of about 4.5%, but if it is n= ot=20 repaid by Oct. 31, the rate jumps to 7%. Because the loan is to be repaid b= y=20 the bonds, which have been marred by a history of delay, GOP officials=20 Tuesday were already calling the bridge loan a ""bridge to nowhere."" ?????""The thing that is most troubling is that the governor did not bother = to=20 consult with anyone,"" said Assembly Republican leader Dave Cox (R-Fair Oaks= ),=20 who learned of Davis' order from reporters. ""It's disappointing, but the=20 governor does not seem to recognize there is a legislative branch."" Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 Edison Unveils Blackout Warning Plan=20 Technology: The utility will notify customers by Internet and telephone whe= n=20 power might go out.=20 By DANIEL HERNANDEZ, Times Staff Writer ?????Southern California Edison on Tuesday unveiled a system that will=20 forecast coming blackouts over the Internet and by telephone.=20 ?????Ordered by the state to create a warning system for customers as=20 California enters a summer that will almost certainly include rotating=20 blackouts, Edison is also preparing to use automatic phone calls, faxes and= =20 wireless communications to alert subscribers to outages.=20 ?????With these steps, Edison is complying with an order by the state Publi= c=20 Utilities Commission, which in April told the company to notify customers o= f=20 coming outages. Privately held Pacific Gas and Electric Co. established a= =20 similar program months ago.=20 ?????Edison previously opposed a notification system, arguing that such a= =20 system could incite looters and burglars. But police agencies, including th= e=20 Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, saw more danger in not warning=20 customers, said Richard Rosenblum, an Edison senior vice president. ?????""On balance, [we concluded] it was preferable for public safety to mak= e=20 that information available,"" Rosenblum said. ?????Consumer advocates said Edison's notification system is welcome, if=20 tardy. ?????""It's fair to say that Edison has been a little behind where PG&E has= =20 been in trying to implement this,"" said Mike Florio, an attorney with the= =20 Utility Reform Network and a member of the California Independent System=20 Operator board, which runs the state power grid. ?????Edison's Web site, www.sce.com, now features a pop-up screen that warn= s=20 of any blackouts coming in the next hour. It also links to a page, which ca= n=20 be reached at www.outagewatch.com, that forecasts which ""outage groups"" wil= l=20 be cut off next in the event of rotating blackouts. Detailed maps outline= =20 which areas are included in each group.=20 ?????The new Web features are expected to handle about 4 million simultaneo= us=20 users. Beginning this month, Edison customers also can learn their block=20 number by looking at their bills, said Edison spokesman Gil Alexander. ?????Outage information also will be made available on an automated phone= =20 line, (800) 611-1911. ?????Edison officials are negotiating with another company to provide=20 additional warnings by e-mail, fax, phone and wireless communications. SDG&= E,=20 which like Edison was required to inform customers of outage forecasts, has= =20 moved more quickly, providing large industrial customers with blackout=20 notification via pager since June 4. ?????Up-to-the-minute outage reports also will be provided in several=20 languages to radio and TV stations, Edison officials said. ?????Edison officials emphasized that the new alert system can never be 100= %=20 accurate, and that sudden blackouts, although rare, are always a possibilit= y.=20 ?????""We have planned as aggressively as we think is warranted, understandi= ng=20 that you can't predict how your customers will respond,"" Alexander said. Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 State Joins Challenge to Bush on Air-Conditioner Standards=20 Regulations: U.S. rolled back Clinton rule from 30% increase in efficiency = to=20 20% on manufacturers' urging.=20 By JENIFER WARREN, Times Staff Writer=20 ?????California and two other states joined environmentalists Tuesday in=20 suing the Bush administration over its decision to weaken efficiency=20 standards for home air conditioners. ?????The lawsuit caps weeks of criticism heaped on the administration after= =20 it rolled back a rule requiring manufacturers to increase the efficiency of= =20 air conditioners 30% by 2006. ?????That rule was adopted by President Clinton during his final days in=20 office and after years of research and debate. California and other=20 states--including Texas--endorsed it as a way to substantially cut energy u= se=20 and improve air quality. ?????But after reviewing the rule at the industry's behest, Bush=20 administration officials in April sliced the mandated increase to 20%. The= =20 higher standard, they said, would have made home coolers too expensive,=20 especially for the poor. ?????Conservationists and consumer groups blasted the policy change, callin= g=20 it shortsighted at a time when California and other states are enduring an= =20 energy crunch. ?????In California, residential air-conditioning accounts for about 15% of= =20 the peak energy demand. Weakening efficiency standards, critics say, will= =20 require as many as 60 new power plants nationwide, four in California. ?????""This is a time when we need to conserve electricity and reduce our=20 dependence on the large energy generators and importers,"" state Atty. Gen.= =20 Bill Lockyer said in an interview. ""Weakening this standard is precisely th= e=20 wrong message at precisely the wrong time."" ?????In their lawsuit, Lockyer and the attorneys general of New York and=20 Connecticut allege that federal law bars the U.S. Department of Energy from= =20 softening an appliance efficiency standard. A separate but similar suit was= =20 filed by the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Consumer Federation of= =20 America and another nonprofit group. ?????Joe Davis, the Energy Department's deputy spokesman, said there would = be=20 no immediate comment on the suit, filed in federal court in Manhattan. He= =20 added, however, that ""we believe all of the actions of our decision-making = in=20 the air conditioner standards are well within the law."" ?????When Clinton's rule was issued in January, his outgoing energy=20 secretary, Bill Richardson, said the payoff in power savings and cleaner ai= r=20 would be one of the administration's greatest environmental achievements. ?????But a trade association representing air conditioner manufacturers=20 challenged the new rule, arguing that it would dramatically increase costs = of=20 the units--priced between $2,000 and $4,000--and thus discourage people fro= m=20 replacing old ones. ?????The Department of Energy sided with the industry group in April.=20 Officials said Clinton's proposal would have added $335 to the price of a n= ew=20 air conditioner, while the lower, 20% standard would boost prices only abou= t=20 $213. ?????Others, however, say those figures do not take into account the=20 economies of scale gained when manufacturers increase production of the mor= e=20 efficient units. When Congress passed the first efficiency standard for air= =20 conditioners in the late 1980s, ""industry said the sky was falling, and tha= t=20 it would increase the cost of air conditioners by $700,"" said Andrew Delask= i,=20 executive director of the nonprofit Appliance Standards Awareness Project. = In=20 fact, he said, U.S. Department of Commerce data showed no price jump. ?????Dan Reicher, the assistant secretary of Energy under Clinton who overs= aw=20 development of the stricter standards, added that high-efficiency air=20 conditioners ""are not some exotic, untested technology."" ?????""There are lots and lots of air conditioners already meeting the=20 standards--between 5% and 10% of the units sold today,"" he said. ?????Although most manufacturers support the Bush rollback, the second=20 largest maker of air conditioners--Houston-based Goodman Global Holding,=20 which produces the Amana brand--opposes it, saying any higher upfront costs= =20 would be recovered by consumers in lower utility bills. ?????On Tuesday, the company's president, John Goodman, issued a statement= =20 supporting the lawsuit, saying the tougher standard would ""give consumers a= n=20 enormous cost saving, U.S. energy consumption will drop and our environment= =20 will benefit from reduced air pollutant emissions and greenhouse gases."" ---=20 ?????Times staff writer James Gerstenzang in Washington contributed to this= =20 story. Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 New Price Caps Not a Deterrent, Power Firms Say=20 Regulation: Producers are unhappy with the federal action but say it is=20 unlikely to discourage them from constructing new plants.=20 By NANCY VOGEL and THOMAS S. MULLIGAN, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????The expanded electricity price limits approved by federal regulators= =20 could squeeze big energy traders but will probably not discourage power pla= nt=20 construction in California, electricity producers said Tuesday. ?????Power plant owners and marketers said they had not had time to digest= =20 the 53-page order and thus could not say exactly how it would affect=20 California and the 10 other Western states it covers. ?????But the companies generally asserted Tuesday that the order would not= =20 deter them from investing in the vast, power-starved Western region--though= =20 they have often raised such a prospect in arguing against price controls. ?????Whatever its long-term effects, Monday's order by the Federal Energy= =20 Regulatory Commission appeared to have an immediate effect in dampening=20 prices in California's volatile daily, or spot, market. ?????The order does not take effect until today, but the prospect of new=20 measures aimed at limiting prices appeared to tame markets Tuesday.=20 Californians used more electricity at the late-afternoon peak than on any d= ay=20 this year, yet market prices hovered around $100 a megawatt-hour. ?????That is well below the average of $284 a megawatt-hour that the state= =20 paid for electricity from January through April, with prices soaring as hig= h=20 as $1,900 at times of tight supply. ?????""All the markets in the West have come down,"" said Mike Wilczek, senio= r=20 power markets reporter for Platts, the energy market information division o= f=20 the McGraw-Hill Cos. ""It's bearish news."" ?????Nevertheless, several generators minimized the effects of the FERC=20 order, contradicting earlier warnings from some industry sources and=20 officials of the Bush administration who consider price limits to be=20 impediments to future investment in power plants. ?????""Calpine will have no problem operating under this order,"" said Joe=20 Ronan, vice president of regulatory affairs for San Jose-based Calpine Corp= .,=20 which has three power plants under construction in California and plans to= =20 build at least three others. ?????The federal order lasts only until September 2002, he said, and becaus= e=20 it sets prices based on the cost of running the most expensive, inefficient= =20 power plant in the market, it should guarantee the owners of modern plants = a=20 profit. ?????Another company planning major investments in California, Duke Energy= =20 Corp. of North Carolina, said it will not be seriously affected by the=20 federal order because it has sold the output of its four California plants= =20 well into the future. ?????""We've already forward-sold 90% of our generation for 2001 and 70% for= =20 2002,"" company spokesman Pat Mullen said. ?????Reliant Energy Inc. of Houston, which owns five power plants in=20 California, was not so sanguine about the federal order, but it has not=20 backed away from plans to install more generators. ?????""We remain committed to California, as hard as it is to do business he= re=20 today,"" spokesman Richard Wheatley said. ""We have plans that are on the=20 drawing boards for at least one, possibly two projects."" ?????On Monday, Reliant Chief Executive Joe Bob Perkins called the FERC=20 action ""more of a political response"" than an acknowledgment of the gap=20 between electricity supply and demand in California. ?????""Price caps don't work,"" Perkins said, and he warned California=20 consumers against assuming that the energy crisis is over simply because=20 wholesale electricity prices have recently dropped to their lowest levels i= n=20 a year. ?????Prices are falling because of mild weather, not price controls, he sai= d. ?????""Without sound economics that increase available supply and reduce pea= k=20 demand . . . consumers can only hope for favorable weather and look forward= =20 to [rolling blackouts],"" Perkins said. ?????Energy analyst Frederick Schultz of Raymond James & Associates in=20 Houston called the FERC order ""a nonevent to the California generators""=20 because so much of their power is now being sold through long-term contract= s. ?????However, every long-term deal reduces the size of the electricity=20 market, which supplies about 20% of California's needs. And that, in turn,= =20 limits trading opportunities for such firms as Enron Corp., which profit on= =20 the daily market's ups and downs, Schultz said. ?????Enron representatives did not respond to calls for comment. ?????The federal order imposes round-the-clock price curbs on wholesale=20 electricity sold in 11 Western states that are connected by transmission=20 grids. ?????Under the order, traders say, market prices will probably hover around= =20 $100 a megawatt-hour, depending upon the price of the natural gas that fuel= s=20 most of the state's electric generating plants. Though that is well below= =20 recent market prices, it is higher than the average of about $32 a=20 megawatt-hour that California utilities paid in 1999, before the state's=20 deregulated market spiraled out of control. ?????The FERC order dictates that the price for spot market electricity=20 across the West will be based on the cost of producing one megawatt-hour of= =20 power at the least-efficient plant selling to California grid operators. Ma= y=20 31, when a previous FERC order based on a similar formula took effect, the= =20 price set was $127 a megawatt-hour. ---=20 ?????Vogel reported from Sacramento, Mulligan from New York. Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 Wednesday, June 20, 2001=20 The FERC's Action Is Good, Bad,Ugly=20 By PETER NAVARRO ?????The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's new wholesale price caps wi= ll=20 save the Western states literally tens of billions of dollars in electricit= y=20 bills. As wonderful as that sounds, the FERC order still allows wholesale= =20 generators to extract enough windfall profits to drive the region into=20 recession.=20 ?????The FERC's approach may also perversely lead to more air pollution and= =20 natural gas shortages.=20 ?????Let's look at what the FERC did right. First, the order approved Monda= y=20 establishes price caps on a 24/7 basis rather than simply during power=20 emergencies--a long overdue reform.=20 ?????Second, the order protects the entire West, not just California. This= =20 regional cap will end ""megawatt laundering,"" whereby in-state generators so= ld=20 power across California lines and then resold it back into the state to eva= de=20 caps.=20 ?????Third, the order closes the ridiculous broker loophole that made the= =20 FERC's previous price caps Swiss cheese. Before, generators could redirect= =20 their sales from the market to energy brokers who were exempt from the pric= e=20 caps.=20 ?????So where did the FERC go wrong? The problem may be traced to the two= =20 competing methods of imposing price caps and the all-important concept of= =20 ""economic rent.""=20 ?????Economic rent, in the wholesale electricity market, is the market pric= e=20 of electricity minus the producer's cost, where cost includes not just labo= r=20 and fuel but a ""fair profit"" on the invested capital as well. In traditiona= l=20 regulation, this fair profit is calculated very simply as the market cost o= f=20 the money borrowed to build the power plant.=20 ?????Under this definition, if the producer's cost is a nickel a kilowatt= =20 hour and he can sell it for 35 cents--as producers in the West have been=20 doing--the producer can extract 30 cents of economic rent from consumers.= =20 ?????In California, the extraction of such economic rent through market=20 manipulation has taken place on a grand-theft scale. In 1999, California's= =20 electricity bill was about $7 billion. Last year, it was almost $30 billion= =20 for roughly the same amount of electricity. This year, California's bill is= =20 well on its way to $50 billion annually.=20 ?????To stop this rip-off, Gov. Gray Davis proposed ""cost-based"" price caps= .=20 Such caps are calculated on a plant-specific basis. Each generator is allow= ed=20 to recover its cost of production, including the fair profit, but not a pen= ny=20 more.=20 ?????Thus, for example, a newer, highly efficient plant generating power at= a=20 nickel per kilowatt hour would collect a nickel. The oldest, least efficien= t=20 plant that generated power for 20 cents would be allowed to collect 20 cent= s.=20 ?????By setting different prices for different plants, the economic rents a= re=20 driven to zero. Yet each generator still has a fair profit incentive to=20 produce. From a public policy perspective, it's the best of all possible=20 worlds. And it was categorically rejected by the FERC. Instead, the FERC se= ts=20 a single price for all generators based on the cost of the ""least efficient= =20 plant.""=20 ?????The obvious problem with this umbrella pricing rule is that it still= =20 allows generators to extract billions in economic rent from consumers.=20 ?????In our previous example, and under the FERC's rule, the least efficien= t=20 plant still collects 20 cents a unit to recover costs. However, the most=20 efficient plant producing power at a nickel-per-kilowatt also collects 20= =20 cents rather than a nickel and thus extracts a full 15 cents of economic=20 rent.=20 ?????Thus, under the FERC's rule, wholesale generators still will be able t= o=20 capture tens of billions of dollars more from consumers and businesses than= =20 under Davis' cost-based rule.=20 ?????The FERC's approach is still subject to the same kind of strategic=20 gaming that has been the hallmark of this crisis. Generators will ensure th= at=20 during peak times, when the price cap is being established, the most=20 expensive possible plant is in operation--whether it needs to be or not. Th= is=20 will peg the price at the highest level.=20 ?????In addition, the FERC provides generators with a perverse incentive to= =20 run their least efficient units more often. Since these least efficient=20 plants are also the highest polluting, the result will be dirtier air.=20 Moreover, the excessive running of these plants may also put a strain on=20 already stretched natural gas supplies. These least efficient plants use up= =20 to 40% more natural gas to produce a unit of electricity.=20 ?????The bottom line: The FERC ""done good."" But it could have done a lot=20 better. And the way things stand now, there still is a danger that higher= =20 electricity costs could push California and the rest of the West--and=20 eventually the nation--into a nasty recession.=20 - - - Peter Navarro Is an Associate Professor of Economics and Public Policy at U= c=20 Irvine. E-mail: Pnavarro@uci.edu Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 Davis OKs stopgap loan=20 CRISIS POWERS: Action sidesteps Legislature=20 Greg Lucas, Sacramento Bureau Chief Wednesday, June 20, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL: .DTL=20 Circumventing the Legislature, Gov. Gray Davis used his emergency powers=20 yesterday to authorize borrowing up to $5 billion for energy purchases in= =20 advance of a record bond issue.=20 Sidestepping the Legislature with a stroke of the pen, Davis' action=20 indicates that the state may need more time to prepare a $12.5 billion bond= =20 issue this fall, the largest sale of its kind in history.=20 The Democratic governor's action was swiftly assailed by the Republican=20 leadership.=20 ""This is not a dictatorship. It's a democracy,"" said Assembly GOP leader Da= ve=20 Cox of Carmichael. ""There is a judiciary, a legislative side and an executi= ve=20 side, and everyone has roles and responsibilities. Yet we continue to have= =20 the governor say, 'I'm the only one around here that makes any difference.= =20 The rest of you shall do my bidding.' ""=20 Normally, it is the Legislature that has the power to raise and spend money= ,=20 and a governor may not spend a cent unless lawmakers allow him to.=20 But Davis has broad powers under the state of emergency, which he declared = in=20 January to combat California's energy crisis.=20 NO ADVANCE NOTICE The governor's aides declined to comment on yesterday's executive order and= =20 gave no advance notice of it.=20 ""This executive order, authorizing a bridge loan, will allow us to get=20 California's General Fund out of the power-buying business,"" was the=20 governor's only comment in a written statement issued last night.=20 State Treasurer Phil Angelides said lawyers had advised him and the governo= r=20 that such borrowing could be authorized by an executive order.=20 The loan from Wall Street will temporarily fill the $5.2 billion -- and=20 growing -- hole in the state budget created when the state began buying=20 electricity on behalf of the state's cash-starved utilities in January.=20 The idea is to tide the state over until a larger bond sale of $12.5 billio= n=20 can be arranged later this year. A portion of that sale will pay back the= =20 $5.2 billion borrowed from Wall Street.=20 'STOPS THE BLEEDING'=20 ""It stops the general fund bleeding,"" said Angelides. ""It takes the pressur= e=20 off, and hopefully we'll avert a cash crisis.""=20 The state runs out of internal borrowing power sometime in October. Angelid= es=20 said the loan would buy the state another four to six months.=20 The idea of a loan was floated earlier this year.=20 Cox and other GOP lawmakers objected, wondering why the state should pay=20 interest on borrowed money when it could still borrow from various accounts= =20 within the state budget.=20 They refused to vote for a bill authorizing the larger bond sale of $12.5= =20 billion, forcing a delay in issuing it until at least Aug. 14.=20 The idea of borrowing from Wall Street appears to have been abandoned, sinc= e=20 both Davis administration and legislative budget-writers said the state cou= ld=20 keep borrowing internally into October, well after the bond sale.=20 Yesterday's executive order authorizing the borrowing suggests that neither= =20 Angelides nor Davis are confident that the steps needed to prepare the $12.= 5=20 billion bond issue for market can be completed before then.=20 Angelides had previously said he hoped to sell the bonds in early September= .=20 Yesterday, he said the governor's ""hope is to still sell long-term bonds by= =20 Sept. 30.""=20 ACT OF DESPERATION? Sen. Tom McClintock, R-Northridge, described the executive order as an act = of=20 desperation that ""would suggest they are expecting the large bond sale to= =20 occur later rather than sooner.'=20 Numerous actions must be completed before the bond sale.=20 Among them are the approval by the Public Utilities Commission of several= =20 deals with the state and utilities, to ensure that enough money from=20 consumers flows back to bond buyers to pay off interest and principal.=20 Although Davis' executive order authorizes $5 billion in loans, Angelides h= as=20 only lined up $3.5 billion.=20 So far, only two lenders have come forward to offer the state a loan, J.P= =20 Morgan with $2.5 billion and Lehman Brothers with $1 billion, at an interes= t=20 rate of 4.5 percent. If the long-term bonds are not sold by Oct. 31, that= =20 will increase to 7 percent.=20 Angelides said he hoped to line up another $1 billion by next week, when th= e=20 loan deal occurs.=20 Assuming a loan of $4.5 billion, Angelides said the state would pay out $8= =20 million in fees.=20 E-mail Greg Lucas at glucas@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 Experts say state must seize the day=20 ANALYSIS: Price caps set stage for future=20 David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, June 20, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL: DTL=20 One day after federal authorities ordered long-sought electricity price cap= s=20 throughout the West, analysts said yesterday it is up to California to=20 respond with measures to bring an end to the state's long, frustrating=20 experiment with deregulation.=20 Possible steps the experts point to include raising power bills, easing=20 pollution controls and spending billions of dollars in taxpayers' money on= =20 new plants.=20 ""Gov. (Gray) Davis and his team have been making this up week by week,"" sai= d=20 Paul Joskow, director of the Center for Energy and Environmental Policy=20 Research at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.=20 ""It's time for them to get together with the Federal Energy Regulatory=20 Commission (FERC) to come up with some solutions,"" he said. ""The state need= s=20 to get down to business and decide how the power market is going to look 18= =20 months from now.""=20 Easier said than done. To date, California's strategy for tackling its ener= gy=20 woes largely has consisted of wheedling, cajoling and all but begging feder= al=20 officials to come to the rescue.=20 Now that the federal regulators have gone much of the way toward granting t= he=20 state's wishes, analysts said Davis and other officials must act swiftly an= d=20 decisively to further remedy California's prolonged power troubles.=20 For his part, however, the governor feels that federal regulators have not= =20 done enough. He will push today during congressional hearings in Washington= =20 for billions of dollars in refunds for California ratepayers.=20 ""FERC has taken some first steps, but the proverbial fat lady hasn't sung,""= =20 said Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Davis.=20 This persistent focus on federal assistance could slow progress toward a=20 lasting solution to California's problems, some analysts believe.=20 ""We are still likely to experience blackouts this summer,"" said Michael=20 Zenker, director of Cambridge Energy Research Associates in Oakland. ""It's= =20 not yet clear that the state will do what it can to address other aspects o= f=20 the problem.""=20 Put simply, such steps would require enormous political courage -- and woul= d=20 be very expensive. In the end, taxpayers and ratepayers will bear the burde= n=20 for this prolonged fiasco.=20 Among measures under consideration:=20 -- Raising electricity rates even higher. Although Californians got the=20 largest rate increase in state history last month, even higher charges woul= d=20 promote conservation and lessen the need for California to borrow billions = of=20 dollars in the bond market.=20 -- Loosening emissions restrictions for power plants statewide. This would= =20 provide more electricity during shortages but turn back the clock on=20 California's strict environmental standards.=20 -- Building new plants at taxpayers' expense. This would guarantee a steady= =20 supply of juice but would leave the state struggling for years to recoup th= e=20 huge investment costs.=20 Of the three, easing pollution controls is the easiest first step and the= =20 most likely, analysts said. Such environmental protections have been roundl= y=20 criticized by power industry officials who claim the restrictions have=20 hampered the construction of new generating plants.=20 Taxpayer-financed power plants are possible under a new state power authori= ty=20 backed by the governor, but the timing and financing remain undecided.=20 Higher electricity rates could be the toughest move to make, analysts agree= .=20 They note that Davis will seek re-election next year and doesn't want to be= =20 seen as the governor who sent voters' power bills into the stratosphere.=20 Already, critics are trying to paint him as the governor who was asleep at= =20 the power switch.=20 As federal regulators were moving at last on the price-cap front this week,= =20 another big development took place closer to home Monday when Davis disclos= ed=20 a tentative deal with Sempra Energy's San Diego Gas & Electric Co. The plan= =20 calls for the state to purchase the utility's 1,800 miles of power lines fo= r=20 nearly $1 billion.=20 As with a similar accord reached with Southern California Edison, the Sempr= a=20 deal is intended to counter the catastrophic effects of California having= =20 deregulated wholesale power prices but not allowing the state's utilities t= o=20 pass on costs to customers.=20 Between them, California's three major utilities have rung up more than $15= =20 billion in debt.=20 Here, too, the state appears unsure how to proceed. Both the Sempra and=20 Edison agreements require approval from the Legislature. It's anyone's gues= s=20 whether such approval is forthcoming.=20 ""It's going to be a really, really tough sell,"" said Nettie Hoge, executive= =20 director of The Utility Reform Network in San Francisco. ""These aren't=20 fabulous deals.""=20 ONE SCENARIO FOR UTILITIES Rather, she believes the agreements will be reworked so that less taxpayer= =20 money changes hands while allowing the utilities to retain possession of=20 their power systems.=20 Hoge said this could subsequently influence a speedy resolution of Pacific= =20 Gas and Electric Co.'s bankruptcy proceedings. If it can avoid selling off= =20 key assets like power lines, PG&E may be more open to any settlement plans= =20 put forward by the state.=20 ""The utilities are all going to end up with similar deals,"" Hoge forecast.= =20 State Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, D-San Francisco, isn't so sure.= =20 He observed that the Edison deal hinges on a sale of the utility's power=20 lines to the state, while the Sempra accord could stand even without such a= =20 transaction.=20 ""The two deals are totally unrelated,"" Burton said, adding that approval of= =20 the Edison accord is ""very much in flux."" A bankruptcy filing by the state'= s=20 second-largest utility remains a distinct possibility, he said.=20 This would only increase the importance of price caps in bringing some=20 stability back to California's power market.=20 While the state's current rate freeze will continue cushioning consumers fr= om=20 the volatility of wholesale electricity prices, the caps -- or ""price=20 mitigation,"" as federal regulators are calling it -- will limit the amount= =20 that power generators can charge on the open market.=20 SYSTEM HAS FLAWS It is not a perfect system: Power companies can base prices on the cost of= =20 running the least-efficient -- and thus costliest -- generating facility. B= ut=20 this amount almost certainly will be below some of the more outrageous pric= es=20 seen when the sky was the limit.=20 On at least one occasion this year, California's wholesale power price topp= ed=20 $3,000 per megawatt hour, compared with just $30 about a year ago.=20 ""This is a plan that is good for California, good for the Pacific Northwest= =20 and good for the entire West,"" said FERC Chairman Curt Hebert.=20 That remains to be seen. As it stands, the price caps will remain in effect= =20 through next summer.=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 California's energy crisis hits Northwest like a tidal wave=20 Jeff Hammarlund Wednesday, June 20, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /20/E D165509.DTL=20 THERE WAS a time when many Northwesterners thought we could watch=20 California's energy crisis from a safe distance.=20 We have since learned that a major energy crisis does not stop at the Golde= n=20 State's borders but, instead, rolls over the Northwest like a tidal wave,= =20 wreaking havoc with our economy and overwhelming our carefully crafted ener= gy=20 policies.=20 As one Northwest utility official put it, ""We learned that everyone else is= =20 the tail. California is the dog.""=20 To understand why the Northwest is now facing its own energy crisis and how= =20 the energy problems in the Northwest and California each affect each other,= =20 one must understand how the Northwest gets its power.=20 In the Northwest, falling water is our primary fuel. Depending on the=20 available snowpack, hydroelectricity produced at more than 200 dams in the= =20 Columbia River basin generates between 60 and 75 percent of the region's=20 electricity. About two-thirds of this hydropower comes from 29 dams owned a= nd=20 operated by the two federal agencies, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and= =20 the Bureau of Reclamation.=20 By taking advantage of the region's geography and climate, the Columbia's= =20 hydroelectric dams have produced some of the least expensive electricity in= =20 the nation, power that has been the economic backbone of the region.=20 However, the Columbia's hydrosystem also has two curses.=20 One is that water conditions can vary greatly, and right now the Northwest= =20 and California are in the middle of an extreme drought. The second is the= =20 dams' negative impact on salmon. These dams operate under a federal salmon= =20 recovery plan established under the Endangered Species Act that calls for= =20 more water to be sent over spillways to help push the salmon downstream=20 instead of through the dams' power-generating turbines.=20 That power is sold at cost and transmitted to Northwest consumer-owned=20 utilities by yet another federal agency called the Bonneville Power=20 Administration. These ""cost-based"" rates cover the expense of repaying the= =20 U.S.=20 Treasury for the cost of developing these hydropower projects, moving the= =20 power over massive transmission lines, and supporting efforts to restore th= e=20 dwindling salmon runs.=20 Under federal law, Northwest consumers get preferred access to the relative= ly=20 low-cost power. Any surplus power can be sold, most often to California's= =20 municipal and investor-owned utilities.=20 This Northwest ""regional preference"" to federal power was part of the deal= =20 that led to the construction of the massive transmission lines, called ""the= =20 intertie,"" which first connected the Northwest with California and the=20 Southwest in the late 1960s.=20 For decades, the intertie worked almost flawlessly and to everyone's benefi= t.=20 During the summer, when air conditioners caused California's power use to= =20 peak, many California utilities would supplement their needs by turning to= =20 the Northwest. In the winter, when Northwest electric furnaces are turned o= n=20 for space heating, California utilities would return the favor and ship the= ir=20 surplus power north.=20 Recently, the BPA has had to purchase large blocs of power on the wholesale= =20 market to meet its contractual obligations to its Northwest customers.=20 The same exorbitant wholesale prices that began to plague California last= =20 year have also affected the Northwest, meaning that the BPA has been runnin= g=20 out of money, and is now in danger of defaulting on its debt obligations to= =20 the Treasury.=20 California's deregulation plan has affected energy relations between the tw= o=20 regions in other ways. For example, the BPA has historically sold surplus= =20 power to California for relatively low prices. However, the state's=20 deregulation law made it almost impossible for California utilities to ente= r=20 into favorable long-term contracts.=20 Instead, power had to be purchased at the much higher ""market clearing pric= e""=20 on the short-term spot market.=20 The BPA has taken extraordinary steps to help California keep the lights on= .=20 At times, the agency even declared energy emergencies, which allowed it to= =20 temporarily override salmon protections and use the water to generate power= =20 for California rather than sweep salmon over the dams. California officials= =20 have praised the BPA for its cooperation, but Northwest environmentalists a= nd=20 tribal leaders complain that the BPA has been helping California address it= s=20 energy crisis by selling salmon down the river.=20 The Northwest will be helped by FERC's decision yesterday to extend limited= =20 temporary price restrictions it had imposed in California in the spring to= =20 other Western states during severe shortages. The order should also be good= =20 for California. Without consistent price restrictions throughout the West,= =20 power marketers would simply skip California during an emergency and sell a= t=20 higher prices elsewhere.=20 But not everyone is happy with the decision. Many critics say the rates are= =20 still too high, and some critics said in s published report that the ""order= =20 rewards inefficiency by pegging price ceilings to the costliest California= =20 gas plants.""=20 The half-hearted response from FERC, along with continuing supply shortages= =20 and other problems make it likely that California will continue to face=20 rolling blackouts and high utility bills -- even though they may not be as= =20 high as we once feared.=20 The Northwest may follow suit next winter.=20 Some in our region fear that some desperate California political leaders=20 might try to wrest control of the BPA and a large portion of the Columbia= =20 Basin's hydropower. The 6,600 megawatts of hydropower from the Columbia's= =20 federal dams would only offer a few drops in the bucket for California's=20 massive 50,000-megawatt system, but its loss would devastate the Northwest= =20 economy.=20 The four Northwest governors (of Washington, Oregon, Idaho and Montana) and= =20 more than 40 state legislators met in February and agreed to explore ways t= o=20 ensure that the Northwest does not lose its regional preference to the=20 Columbia's hydropower.=20 Northwest governors have had some productive meetings with Gov. Gray Davis= =20 and his staff this year regarding power sharing, and there are encouraging= =20 signs that trust is growing at this and other levels.=20 Just last week, officials from the BPA, California's Department of Water=20 Resources, and the California ISO agreed on a plan that outlines when and h= ow=20 the BPA may be able to help California during the expected summer shortages= .=20 We will soon find out whether our two regions will succeed in collaborating= =20 with or cannibalizing each other as we enter the next phase of the West Coa= st=20 energy crisis.=20 Ultimately, California's experience with energy deregulation makes the case= =20 for a strong and supportive federal role in the energy markets. It also=20 reinforces the view that electricity should be treated as an essential=20 service and be sold at cost by utilities that are owned and controlled by t= he=20 public, rather than as a commodity and sold at the highest price.=20 In fact, something like a California power authority that places California= =20 in charge of its own destiny makes more sense to me all the time.=20 Jeff Hammarlund is an adjunct associate professor and research fellow at th= e=20 Mark Hatfield School of Government at Portland State University where he=20 teaches graduate courses on energy policy. He is also president of Northwes= t=20 Energy and Environmental Str=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 19=20 Davis demands nearly $9 billion for electricity overcharges=20 H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer Wednesday, June 20, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 ation al1103EDT0569.DTL=20 (06-20) 08:03 PDT WASHINGTON (AP) --=20 California Gov. Gray Davis demanded that power generators refund nearly $9= =20 billion in electricity overcharges and complained that federal regulators= =20 have ""looked the other way while energy companies bilked our state.""=20 Davis told a Senate hearing Wednesday that the decision by the Federal Ener= gy=20 Regulatory Commission to curtail price spikes in California and 10 other=20 Western states was a step forward. ""But its actions do nothing about the=20 overcharges"" over the past year, he said.=20 The governor, a Democrat, has been criticized by Republicans, who charge he= =20 has allowed the California power crisis to get out of hand.=20 Davis defended his actions, saying the state has stepped up approval for ne= w=20 power plants and strengthened conservation programs. He also said the state= =20 has little control over price gouging by out-of-state power generators.=20 ""The governor once said he could solve California's problems in 15 minutes.= =20 ... But it appears that California has continued to try and hide the true= =20 cost of power by having the state pay for it instead of the utilities,""=20 putting California taxpayers in jeopardy, said Sen. Frank Murkowski,=20 R-Alaska.=20 Murkowski said many of the alleged overcharges are by public power entities= =20 not under FERC jurisdiction=20 Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., chairman of the Governmental Affairs Committee= ,=20 said the FERC, which regulates wholesale electricity sales, has been slow t= o=20 respond and ""surprisingly reluctant"" to assure that electricity prices are= =20 just and reasonable, as required by the 1934 Federal Power Act.=20 The agency's response to the Western power problem ""raises serious question= s=20 about whether (FERC) has or will oversee the newly deregulated energy=20 markets"" not only in the West but across the rest of the country.=20 The federal agency, whose commissioners were to testify later in the day,= =20 imposed limited, market-based price caps on Monday in California and 10 oth= er=20 Western states from Washington to Arizona. The agency also ordered the=20 parties to attend a conference next week to try to work out agreements on= =20 overcharges and other issues.=20 Months ago, the FERC singled out $124 million in alleged overcharges by pow= er=20 generators. The power companies have since challenged the agency's findings= =20 and the matter remains in dispute.=20 ""To date not a single penny in refunds has been returned to California,""=20 complained Davis. He said that between May 2000 and the beginning of this= =20 month power generators are believed to have overcharged California $8.9=20 billion.=20 ""They must be required to give us back our money,"" said Davis. ""It is=20 unconscionable that FERC looked the other way while energy companies bilked= =20 our state for up to $9 billion.""=20 The state spent $7 billion for electricity in 1999 and $27 billion in 2000= =20 and is projected to pay nearly $50 billion this year, said Davis. ""Power=20 generators have been able to exert extreme power over our energy market,"" h= e=20 said.=20 Davis rejected Republican criticism that the state is not addressing the=20 problem. He said newly approved power plants will provide 20,000 additional= =20 megawatts of electricity by 2003, including 4,000 megawatts by the end of= =20 this summer. ""Everything that can be done to bring reliable, affordable=20 energy to California is being done ... except wholesale price relief,"" he= =20 said.=20 ""This administration has minimized this crisis (for) more months,"" said Sen= .=20 Patty Murray, D-Wash., alluding to President Bush's repeated refusal to urg= e=20 the FERC to mitigate electricity prices. Bush has strongly opposed price=20 controls, although he indicated support for FERC's limited price mitigation= =20 effort this week.=20 Murray said the government should issue a disaster declaration so that=20 businesses can get low-income loans, and require that FERC press its=20 investigation into price gouging and demand refunds not only in California= =20 but in the Pacific Northwest, where electricity prices have also skyrockete= d.=20 Republicans continued their opposition to more stringent price caps based o= n=20 the cost of generation at individual power plants.=20 ""Having a federal agency try to determine what is a just and reasonable pri= ce=20 is laughable,"" said Sen. Fred Thompson of Tennessee, the committee's rankin= g=20 Republican. Hard price caps ""don't work when supply is the problem. ... The= y=20 make a bad situation worse,"" he said.=20 After FERC issued its limited price control order this week, Senate Democra= ts=20 on Tuesday said they would drop legislation to require more stringent=20 cost-based price caps on Western electricity sales.=20 Democrats in the House, however, said they would continue to pursue a bill= =20 requiring the FERC to take more aggressive action.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 Fed price caps placate Demos=20 But Feinstein's bill to regulate energy producers was more strict=20 Carolyn Lochhead, Chronicle Washington Bureau Wednesday, June 20, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /20/M N145950.DTL=20 Washington -- With federal regulators moving to cap prices on wholesale=20 electricity, California's Dianne Feinstein and other Senate Democrats=20 yesterday withdrew their threat to do it for them.=20 ""A rose is a rose by any other name,"" Feinstein declared to the five member= s=20 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the day after they unanimously= =20 imposed a sweeping price ceiling on electricity throughout eleven western= =20 states.=20 ""I'm very grateful,"" Feinstein told the commissioners, who were called to= =20 testify to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. ""Let's watch= =20 and wait and see how this order works.""=20 Feinstein had been leading the Democratic charge in Washington to force FER= C=20 to impose price controls; indeed, yesterday's hearing had been intended to= =20 highlight the agency's inaction. Gov. Gray Davis is still billed to appear= =20 today at another Senate panel headed by Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., to=20 investigate price gouging.=20 The 60-page FERC order, which takes effect at midnight tonight and remains= =20 until September 2002, limits prices based on the cost of the least-efficien= t,=20 and therefore highest-cost, generating plant. It is intended to mimic the w= ay=20 a competitive market functions.=20 While Democrats hailed FERC's move, power generators and marketers warned= =20 that it would backfire, leading to more blackouts and stifling investment i= n=20 new power plants.=20 ""It doesn't create or conserve a single megawatt in California or the West,= ""=20 said Enron spokesman Mark Palmer. ""Government price controls always have=20 unintended consequences, and history has proven that those have never been= =20 good for consumers.""=20 Joe Bob Perkins, president and chief operating officer of Reliant Energy,= =20 bluntly called the price caps ""a political response"" to California's crisis= =20 that ignores the basics of supply and demand.=20 ""Price caps don't work,"" Perkins said in a statement. ""This fact has been= =20 proven over and over in the context of virtually every business sector in= =20 which government regulators have experimented with such measures.""=20 The Bush administration, which has fought electricity price caps since taki= ng=20 office in January, yesterday insisted that FERC had actually spurned them.= =20 ""It's important to note that FERC rejected price controls,"" said White Hous= e=20 spokesman Ari Fleischer, who instead called it ""a market-based mitigation= =20 plan.""=20 He added the order is ""in keeping with the president's desire to help the= =20 state of California and to make certain that there is no illegal price=20 gouging carried on by any companies.""=20 FERC's action coincided with the arrival of two new Bush appointees to the= =20 agency, Patrick Henry Wood III, a former Texas utility regulator, and Nora= =20 Mead Brownell, a former Pennsylvania regulator.=20 The soft-spoken, boyish-looking Wood yesterday sought to allay Feinstein's= =20 lingering concerns that the new price control scheme would still permit=20 generators to manipulate the market.=20 Feinstein's bill would have gone further than the new FERC plan, imposing a= =20 cost-of-service based price cap that would return California to the=20 regulatory regime it had before its 1996 electricity restructuring.=20 ""I am personally not allergic to that sort of remedy,"" Wood told the panel = -=20 - a position that is toxic to the Bush administration's former opposition t= o=20 price caps. ""The cost-of-service regime was good enough for 80 years,"" Wood= =20 said. ""We're trying to move away from it but we can still do it.""=20 FERC's action, followed by Feinstein's bill withdrawal, quickly defused a= =20 mounting political confrontation between the Bush White House and Democrats= =20 over price caps -- one that saw Capitol Hill Republicans beating a retreat.= =20 Democrats argued that Bush, by refusing to impose price controls, was=20 allowing out-of-state generators based mostly in Texas to gouge California= =20 consumers.=20 The administration, especially Vice President Dick Cheney and Energy=20 Secretary Spencer Abraham, had insisted that price controls would backfire = by=20 reducing electricity sales and power plant investment, making the state's= =20 blackouts worse.=20 Yesterday, Sen. Gordon Smith, an Oregon Republican who co-sponsored=20 Feinstein's bill, as much as said the White House would have lost the fight= .=20 Smith said their measure ""would have won large majorities in both the Senat= e=20 and House"" had it gone to a vote.=20 E-mail Carolyn Lochhead at clochhead@sfchronicle.com=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 11=20 Potrero Hill power plant hit by 2 lawsuits=20 Neighbors, city ask court to cut back hours of operation=20 Rachel Gordon, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, June 20, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /20/M N238116.DTL=20 The San Francisco city attorney joined forces with environmental and=20 community groups and sued in federal court yesterday to force the operator = of=20 the Potrero Hill power plant to cut its ramped-up electricity output until= =20 more rigorous pollution controls are installed.=20 The plant, run by Mirant Corp., increased its output in response to Gov. Gr= ay=20 Davis' move to relax environmental laws on power producers and generate mor= e=20 electricity for Californians.=20 The lawsuits, filed against Mirant in U.S. District Court, allege the compa= ny=20 is illegally operating its so-called peaker plants. The suits appear to be= =20 the first challenge in California to Davis' efforts to produce more power.= =20 The Potrero Hill plant, which runs during times of peak demand, has a total= =20 of six turbines that generate 156 megawatts of electricity, enough to power= =20 156,000 homes. Each turbine is permitted to operate 877 hours a year -- a= =20 threshold that already has been exceeded.=20 Mirant struck a deal March 30 with administrators of the Bay Area Air Quali= ty=20 Management District -- the regional agency that regulates air pollution -- = to=20 run the plants as much as needed to keep up with the energy demand. In=20 return, Mirant will pay $20,000 per ton of excess emissions of nitrogen=20 oxides, a pollutant that causes smog. The company placed $400,000 on deposi= t.=20 ""The Mirant Corporation is behaving like an outlaw and the air district is= =20 their willing accomplice in violating clean air laws,"" said Mike Thomas, an= =20 organizer with Communities for a Better Environment, one of the plaintiffs.= =20 The other groups that sued are Bayview-Hunters Point Community Advocates an= d=20 Our Children's Earth.=20 The city filed a separate suit over the same issue.=20 The lawsuits ask the court to order Mirant to stop operating beyond the 877= -=20 hour cap until it obtains new permits. The city and environmental groups=20 argue the permits for expanded operation are required by the federal Clean= =20 Air Act.=20 The lawsuits also demand that more stringent pollution controls be installe= d=20 on the peakers. The increased power production poses a potentially serious= =20 health risk to the people who live and work in the surrounding neighborhood= ,=20 the plaintiffs charge.=20 Because the peaker plants weren't originally intended to run full time, the= y=20 aren't equipped with the most up-to-date pollution controls.=20 The plaintiffs also allege the air district regulators violated the=20 California Environmental Quality Act by failing to conduct thorough reviews= =20 of the expanded operation and not allowing for public comment.=20 ""We as a city are not saying no to power. We're saying there's a process an= d=20 they need to follow it,"" said San Francisco Supervisor Sophie Maxwell, who= =20 represents District 10 where the power plant is located.=20 Terry Lee, a spokesman for the air district, said her agency and Mirant did= =20 nothing illegal. Mirant spokesman Patrick Dorinson concurred.=20 They pointed to Davis' executive orders earlier this year that gave power= =20 companies the right to step up production without going through the normal= =20 permit process and adhering to the stricter pollution controls.=20 William Rostov, an attorney for Communities for a Better Environment,=20 contends Davis does not have authority to override federal air quality laws= .=20 Lee said the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency signed off on the=20 governor's plan.=20 The plant, near 23rd and Illinois streets, long has been a target of=20 neighbors trying to close it. Mirant is hoping to build a new 540-megawatt= =20 plant on the site that uses cleaner-burning natural gas. The existing plant= =20 burns highly polluting distillate oil.=20 Lee said the money Mirant is paying for the extra emissions will help reduc= e=20 air pollution in Potrero Hill. The efforts include placing filters on Muni= =20 diesel fuel buses that operate in the neighborhood and installing a lower-= =20 polluting engine on a tug boat that runs off the nearby shores.=20 ""Is this a perfect situation? No,"" Lee said. ""But under the governor's=20 executive orders this is the way we're proceeding.""=20 E-mail Rachel Gordon at rgordon@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 13=20 Washington wakes up=20 Wednesday, June 20, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /20/E D40132.DTL=20 WASHINGTON, after all, does feel our pain. Partial but reasonable price=20 controls will contain wholesale electricity prices beginning today under a= =20 long-sought ruling by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. It's about= =20 time.=20 Where was this agency until now, and why the sudden willingness to help?=20 Politics.=20 At first, the Bush administration denounced controls as market interference= =20 that would chase off investment in power generation.=20 But the peril has spread beyond California to other Western states, whose= =20 governors are Republicans. Mid-term elections for Congress are coming up ne= xt=20 year. Also, the White House was besieged by California Republicans and=20 business groups worried about blackouts and price gouging.=20 President Bush finally sounded the retreat the day before the commission=20 vote. He could accept a ""mechanism"" that would ""mitigate any severe price= =20 spike."" He insisted that the final results were not firm price controls,=20 which arguably they are not.=20 Gov. Gray Davis, who begged for help for months, said the final package=20 didn't go far enough. What he wanted were tougher limits pegged to generati= on=20 costs, plus a profit figure of 30 to 50 percent.=20 The final formula approved by the commission amounts to a loose-fit limit= =20 that should dampen the absurd price surges that have endangered the state.= =20 The 24/7 plan rewards modern plants by setting prices based on the=20 least-efficient power producers. It covers 11 states, not just sickly=20 California.=20 There is room for doubt. Canny operators may find ways to exploit the prici= ng=20 mechanism. Also, California will be whacked with a one-state-only surcharge= =20 of 10 percent. The commission took no action on another Davis complaint tha= t=20 power generators may have overcharged the state by $6.2 billion.=20 Still, the new limits may be the most anyone could expect. Consider how far= =20 Washington has come: A hidebound ideology has given way to real-world=20 recognition of a huge problem. U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein acknowledged as= =20 much yesterday when she dropped a measure to impose stricter price limits.= =20 California's troubles aren't over. Conservation remains supremely important= .=20 New power plants need approval and speedy construction. The financial damag= e=20 to state utilities and the state's coffers needs attention. The severity of= =20 summer blackouts is a wild card.=20 The federal controls add a measure of protection from this volatile mix. It= 's=20 a shame that help didn't come sooner.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 18=20 Feinstein halts electricity price caps bill=20 Posted at 12:15 a.m. PDT Wednesday, June 20, 2001=20 BY JIM PUZZANGHERA=20 Mercury News=20 WASHINGTON -- Like a steam valve on an overheating boiler, the move by=20 federal regulators to enact broad new electricity price controls in the Wes= t=20 has relieved much of the growing political pressure for stronger action --= =20 for now.=20 Sen. Dianne Feinstein removed one major source of that pressure Tuesday.=20 Satisfied that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has taken ``a giant= =20 step forward'' in curbing California energy prices, Feinstein withdrew her= =20 legislation to enact price caps on wholesale electricity prices throughout= =20 the West.=20 ``Let's watch and wait and see how this order works,'' the California=20 Democrat told members of the commission during a Senate hearing.=20 But while the battle over the actions of federal regulators may have=20 subsided, the larger political war over energy prices continues.=20 California Gov. Gray Davis, who has been pounding away for weeks at the Bus= h=20 administration for not providing enough help to the state, will step into t= he=20 fray here today. The governor will appear at a Senate hearing where he will= =20 praise federal regulators for moving in the right direction with the new=20 plan. But he's also expected to continue to press for harder price caps and= =20 criticize federal regulators for taking months to act while the state drain= ed=20 billions from its budget to pay for electricity.=20 In addition, Davis will question some aspects of the plan, such as the lack= =20 of strong action on forcing refunds from suppliers. ``He wants to make sure= =20 that Congress gets the message loud and clear that we want our money back= =20 from the overcharges by generators,'' said Davis media representative Steve= =20 Maviglio.=20 But the Republicans are just as eager to lay responsibility for the=20 electricity crisis on Davis, who is up for re-election next year. A=20 hard-hitting Republican-backed TV ad campaign in California organized by=20 Scott Reed, a former executive director of the Republican National Committe= e,=20 blames the governor for failing to act quickly when the crisis first emerge= d.=20 The politics of shifting blame are likely to set the tone for the hearings= =20 organized by the new Democratic chair of the Senate Governmental Affairs=20 Committee, Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn. Davis and all five FERC commissioner= s=20 have been invited to the hearing to determine if the commission has lived u= p=20 to its legal obligation to ensure ``just and reasonable'' electricity price= s=20 in California.=20 Price controls=20 With that oversight hearing pending this week, the commission called a=20 special meeting Monday and took stronger action. It expanded existing=20 electricity price controls around the clock and to 11 Western states. Under= =20 the commission's plan, ceiling prices will be set that suppliers can exceed= =20 as long as they provide justification for the higher price. A hard price ca= p=20 would set a price that could not be exceeded.=20 Commission Chairman Curt H,bert, a Republican, said politics played no role= =20 in enacting the new plan. But Commissioner William Massey, one of two=20 Democrats on the five-member commission, acknowledged that political pressu= re=20 in recent weeks from Republicans and newly empowered Democrats in the Senat= e=20 had an impact.=20 ``We are an independent agency but we operate in a highly charged political= =20 environment. I would not imply that we did not rule on an independent basis= =20 here, but you know, this is Washington, D.C., for God's sake,'' Massey told= =20 the Mercury News on Tuesday. ``I think that it was enlightening to the agen= cy=20 that this wasn't just a Democratic question, this was Democrats and=20 Republicans throughout the West saying, `My God, solve this problem.' And s= o=20 we hope we have.''=20 The White House, which had opposed any form of price controls, also moved t= o=20 adjust to this political reality.=20 ``To the degree that it is a market-based program, this is in keeping with= =20 what the president said, and the president is pleased to be able to help=20 California in that manner,'' White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said= .=20 ``It does not change the president's fundamental view that a separate=20 economic matter, which would be price controls, would not be productive.''= =20 But Democrats are eager to point to the shift as evidence that the White=20 House realized it was paying too high a political price for its earlier=20 position, insisting that the electricity crisis was largely California's=20 problem to solve.=20 ``The Bush administration is realizing the jig is up. The game is over,''= =20 said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. ``Their attitude of hands-off has hurt th= em=20 deeply.''=20 Democrats in the House have vowed to continue pushing for a vote on their o= wn=20 price-caps bill. The legislation is adamantly opposed by Republican leaders= =20 in Congress, who believe FERC's actions Monday are enough government=20 intervention.=20 ``I hope that its actions are based on market principles, not political=20 half-measures,'' said House Majority Whip Tom DeLay, R-Texas. ``It's now ti= me=20 for Governor Davis to stop pointing fingers and shifting blame.''=20 Feinstein has vowed to quickly resurrect her bill if electricity prices sho= ot=20 up dramatically. Boxer said she will introduce legislation to force FERC to= =20 order power suppliers to refund what the state says are billions of dollars= =20 in overcharges for electricity purchases.=20 Meeting on refunds=20 The commission has set up a conference for the state, suppliers and utiliti= es=20 to settle the contentious refund issue by July 10. If no settlement can be= =20 reached under the auspices of an administrative law judge, the judge will= =20 make a recommendation to the commission and it will resolve the dispute,=20 H,bert said.=20 Massey had supported Feinstein's legislation to force him and his fellow=20 commissioners to enact price caps. But after the commission unanimously=20 approved its expanded price-control plan, he joined the four other=20 commissioners Tuesday in urging the Senate Energy and Natural Resources=20 Committee not to pass such a law.=20 The commission's chair, H,bert, strongly warned against legislative action,= =20 saying, ``I believe in my heart, and I know in my educated mind, that we ar= e=20 on the right track.''=20 But the issue disappeared Tuesday as Feinstein and the Republican co-sponso= r=20 of the price-cap legislation tabled their plan.=20 ``I think it renders substantially moot the legislative efforts that she an= d=20 I were pursuing,'' Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., said of the commission's new= =20 price-control plan. ``And I do believe that effort would have won large=20 majorities in the Senate and the House, and so I think what you are doing i= s=20 reflecting the will of the elected representatives of the American people.'= '=20 Feinstein said that whatever the commission calls the plan, it is close=20 enough to hard caps to merit a chance to work.=20 ``I view this action by FERC as a giant step forward and I'm very grateful = to=20 you,'' she told the commissioners. ``I also view the fact that Senator Smit= h=20 and I have worked hard on this bill perhaps has been helpful in urging you= =20 along.''=20 FERC's fixes have fallen short=20 Published Wednesday, June 20, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News=20 BY FRANK WOLAK=20 ON Monday, for the third time in the past eight months, the Federal Energy= =20 Regulatory Commission, the agency charged with regulating wholesale=20 electricity prices in California, implemented remedies that it claims will= =20 set just and reasonable wholesale electricity prices. This is a case where= =20 the third time is unlikely to be a charm.=20 As chairman of the Market Surveillance Committee of the California=20 Independent System Operator, the independent committee formed by FERC to=20 monitor the California market, I have analyzed the results of FERC's previo= us=20 attempts. They reveal a misunderstanding of important details of the=20 California electricity market. It is therefore not surprising that they hav= e=20 been ineffective.=20 Starting in November of 2000, FERC acknowledged that wholesale prices in=20 California during the summer of 2000 were unjust and unreasonable. Its=20 December 2000 order implemented the first set of remedies. Both the=20 California Power Exchange Market Monitoring Committee and the committee I= =20 chair pointed out important shortcomings in FERC's analysis of the Californ= ia=20 market and argued that its remedies would most likely harm, rather than=20 enhance, market performance.=20 At this time, FERC also did not order refunds for the unjust and unreasonab= le=20 prices, even though it acknowledged the prices reflected the exercise of=20 market power, which is the ability of a producer to force prices higher. Th= e=20 Federal Power Act requires refunds under these circumstances. But FERC said= =20 it was unable to find specific instances of firms exercising market power.= =20 This makes no sense. If FERC finds that prices indicate market power, then= =20 the generators who bid those prices are exercising market power.=20 Following the implementation of these remedies, conditions in the Californi= a=20 market deteriorated far beyond what had been predicted by the two market=20 monitoring committees. Even though January and February are the lowest dema= nd=20 months of the year, average wholesale electricity prices were almost 10 tim= es=20 higher in 2001 than they were during the same two months of 2000 and almost= =20 double the average price during the summer of 2000. In January, March and= =20 May, California experienced several days of rolling blackouts and had syste= m=20 emergencies almost every day during January and February of 2001.=20 IN April, FERC made another round of market rule changes designed to lead t= o=20 just and reasonable prices. However, in response to growing pressure from= =20 Congress, less than 10 days after these remedies were implemented, FERC=20 enacted its most recent order.=20 Before Congress declares victory, it should verify that FERC's most recent= =20 plan achieves the following two goals.=20 First, the plan should guarantee that the average price of wholesale=20 electricity paid by California over the next two years is equal to the=20 average price that would occur in a competitive electricity market, with=20 California's current supply and demand conditions and fuel costs. The Feder= al=20 Power Act requires not just a high probability of just and reasonable rates= ;=20 it requires that they occur with certainty.=20 The second goal is to alter the incentives faced by all market participants= =20 so that it will no longer be profit-maximizing for a firm to withhold=20 electricity from the market in order to drive up prices.=20 FERC's most recently implemented plan does not achieve either of these goal= s,=20 although it does come closer than any previous attempts.=20 One solution satisfying both of these goals has been proposed to FERC. In a= =20 December report to FERC, the Market Surveillance Committee of the Californi= a=20 ISO proposed a one-time regulatory intervention. This intervention would=20 require that each generator serving California sign a forward contract=20 guaranteeing that California consumers can purchase 75 percent of the=20 generator's expected output over the next two years at a specified=20 competitive benchmark price. Once a firm has signed these forward contracts= ,=20 it is free to sell all remaining energy in the western U.S. wholesale marke= t=20 at whatever price it can obtain.=20 The obligation to provide power under the contracts, and the incentive to= =20 sell 25 percent of power at unrestricted prices, would prevent generators= =20 from withholding power.=20 Unless FERC implements a solution satisfying these two goals, Congress shou= ld=20 require FERC to suspend the market-based pricing authority for all supplier= s=20 in the Western U.S. for the next two years and order all sales during this= =20 period at cost-of-service prices. This will guarantee that FERC meets the= =20 statutory mandate of the Federal Power Act in California. Frank Wolak is a professor of economics at Stanford University.=20 Wednesday, June 20, 2001=20 Easing the crunch on costs of power=20 It could have been worse. Yesterday the Federal Energy Regulatory Commissio= n=20 expanded limited price caps on electricity to cover 11 Western states and t= o=20 last 24 hours a day during an emergency.=20 This follows an action in April that imposed caps only in California during= =20 the hours the state declared a power emergency.=20 Under the new rules, ""when reserves are below 7 percent in the California= =20 Independent System Operator spot markets ... the maximum price that can be= =20 charged for spot market sales ... will be 85 percent of the highest hourly= =20 price that was in effect during the most recent Stage 1 [emergency] called = by=20 the ISO,"" the FERC explained yesterday. The order will last until Sept. 30, 2001.=20 The action came after intense pressure by Democrats and the Bush=20 administration on the FERC, whose three Republican and two Democrat members= =20 all voted for the new controls. It also comes after continuing stories about ""gouging"" by suppliers. On=20 Sunday, the Register reported how Tulsa-based Williams, an energy supplier,= =20 manipulated the market to keep prices high.=20 And after Gov. Gray Davis last week attacked Los Angeles' government-run=20 Department of Water and Power for gouging the state on electricity purchase= s,=20 reported the Los Angeles Daily News, ""the DWP caved in, and agreed to start= =20 selling the state power at 'cost'."" The new FERC ruling certainly is better than the demand for across-the-boar= d,=20 continuous price controls demanded by Gov. Davis and other Democrats. ""They're trying to let the market do the best it can under tremendous=20 pressure,"" Robert Michaels, a professor of economics at Cal State Fullerton= ,=20 told us of the FERC members. ""It's explicitly only for one kind of power,= =20 that on short-term, so-called spot market kinds of exchanges. Most power is= =20 under other kinds of contracts not touched."" The main effect of the new order is that, unlike full-blown price controls,= =20 it should not discourage the construction of new power generators.=20 [B] POWER UPDATE/ US Senate panel to hold off vote on Calif. cap bill=20 June 20, 2001=20 (BridgeNews) June 19, 2124 GMT/1724 ET=20 TOP=20 STORIES:=20 US Senate panel to hold off vote on Calif. power cap bill=20 San Francisco, June 19 (BridgeNews) - U.S. Senate Energy and Natural=20 Resources Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., plans to hold off on=20 voting on a bill for U.S. West power price caps following a request by fell= ow=20 senators Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., according= =20 to an aide in Bingaman's office Tuesday. ( Story .20121 )=20 IPE says merger with ICE complete; will keep IPE name=20 New York, June 19 (BridgeNews) - London's International Petroleum Exchange= =20 has completed its merger with the Intercontinental Exchange, an electronic= =20 market for the trading of energy and metals products, IPE Chief Executive= =20 Richard Ward said Tuesday. He said the company will still be called the IPE= .=20 His statement follows ICE's announcement Monday that all of conditions of i= ts=20 recommended offer to acquire the issued share capital of IPE Holdings had= =20 been satisfied or waived and that the offer was unconditional. ( Story=20 .17970, .19353 )=20 OF=20 INTEREST:=20 --AMERICAS--=20 FERC order seen having little effect on US generator profits=20 San Francisco, June 19 (BridgeNews) - A U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory=20 Commission order to impose a ""soft"" price cap on U.S. West wholesale power= =20 prices will likely have little significant effect on producer profits from= =20 electricity sales while the order is in effect over the next year, industry= =20 analysts said Tuesday. Some analysts cautioned that some producers without= =20 long-term contracts could be negatively affected by the order. ( Story .203= 40=20 )=20 White House says FERC power plan ""helpful step"" for California=20 Washington, June 19 (BridgeNews) - The White House Tuesday said action take= n=20 Monday by the federal energy regulators to extend limits on electricity=20 prices in California ""is and can be a helpful step"" for the beleaguered=20 state. ( Story .18824 )=20 Calif. ISO rescinds Tues blackout forecast; supplies still tight=20 New York, June 19 (BridgeNews) - While the California Independent System=20 Operator has rescinded its forecast of possible blackouts for Tuesday, the= =20 agency running the Golden State's electricity grid is currently projecting= =20 very little surplus power generated in the state for the day. ( Story .1491= 3=20 )=20 Three states sue DOE over air conditioning standards ruling=20 New York, June 19 (BridgeNews) - Attorney generals of California, Connectic= ut=20 and New York along with several consumer groups sued the Department of Ener= gy=20 to block a Bush Administration plan allegedly designed to weaken efficiency= =20 standards for residential appliances, including air conditioners and heat= =20 pumps. The complaint filed Tuesday in Manhattan federal court calls the=20 administration ""short sighted"" and seeks to invalidate its rule changes. (= =20 Story .18548 )=20 NY, New England ISOs expand power reserve sharing agreement=20 New York, June 19 (BridgeNews) - The Independent System Operators (ISO) for= =20 New York (NYIOS) and New England (ISO-NE) have agreed to expand their=20 reserve-sharing agreement to allow for each ISO to draw on available reserv= es=20 in the other region in the event of a system interruption, according to a= =20 statement issued Tuesday by ISO-NE. ( Story .19283 )=20 AGA Preview: US natural gas inventories seen up 85 to 95 bcf=20 New York, June 19 (BridgeNews) - The American Gas Association (AGA) is=20 expected to report Wednesday that U.S. natural gas stocks have risen by 85= =20 billion to 95 billion cubic feet (bcf) for the week ended Friday, according= =20 to a BridgeNews survey of brokers, analysts and traders. The AGA will relea= se=20 the storage report at 1400 ET Wednesday. ( Story .1856 )=20 --ASIA/PACIFIC--=20 GAIL planning 20-bln-rupee gas pipeline in southern India=20 New Delhi, June 19 (BridgeNews) - India's state-owned Gas Authority of Indi= a=20 Ltd. plans to lay a new 500-kilometer-long natural gas pipeline connecting= =20 the two southern states of Kerala and Karnataka at a cost of 20 billion=20 rupees, the Press Trust of India said Tuesday. The pipeline will carry 6=20 million cubic meters of gas. ( Story .12193 )=20 Indonesia official sees power cuts by 2004 unless new units built=20 Jakarta, June 19 (BridgeNews) - Indonesia will face power cuts by 2004 unle= ss=20 additional generating capacity is built, Eddie Widiono, president director = of=20 state power group PLN, said at an industry seminar here on Tuesday. But=20 experts warned that the capital markets were unwilling to finance the=20 billion-dollar investments needed and the public sector could not afford it= .=20 ( Story .12536 )=20 Indonesia to restructure PLN, raise power tariff, says minister=20 Jakarta, June 19 (BridgeNews) - The government aims to revive investment in= =20 Indonesia's power sector with a scheduled 17.5% rise in electricity prices= =20 this year and a later $3 billion debt equity swap to restructure state powe= r=20 company PLN, minister of energy and mines Purnomo Yusgiantoro said Tuesday.= =20 PLN will negotiate directly with independent power producers (IPPs) to=20 install additional capacity, he added. ( Story .10568 )=20 Indonesian minister claims ExxonMobil to resume Aceh operations soon=20 Jakarta, June 19 (AFP) - PT Exxon Mobil Indonesia will resume oil and gas= =20 production in separatist-plagued Aceh province in early July, ending a free= ze=20 of more than three months for security reasons, a minister said Tuesday. (= =20 Story .10751 )=20 --EUROPE/MIDDLE EAST--=20 Czech's Temelin nuclear plant reactor to be restarted in July=20 Prague, June 19 (AFP) - Reactor number one at the controversial Temelin=20 nuclear plant in the Czech Republic will be restarted on July 21 after bein= g=20 shut down for two months for repairs, the plant's spokesman announced=20 Tuesday. The reactor was shut down in early May when faults were detected i= n=20 its non-nuclear secondary circuit, the latest in a series of technical=20 glitches discovered since it was first put into service in October last yea= r.=20 ( Story .16716 )=20 British Energy: Sizewell B power plant back onstream=20 London, June 19 (BridgeNews) - The 1188-megawatt Sizewell B nuclear power= =20 plant has been back onstream ""for a few days,"" a spokeswoman for operator= =20 British Energy told BridgeNews Tuesday, refusing to detail when exactly the= =20 plant was recommissioned and whether its available capacity had since been= =20 utilized by the market. ( Story .12928 )=20 Germany's Mueller says nuclear phase-down formula won't disrupt=20 Berlin, June 19 (BridgeNews) - The formula for shutting down German nuclear= =20 power plants should cut atomic generating capacity only one-sixth by 2010,= =20 insufficient to raise fears of shortages, said Economics Minister Werner=20 Mueller. ( Story .12337 )=20 TURKEY CRISIS: Press: Govt late on IMF pledged power sell-offs=20 Ankara, June 19 (BridgeNews) - The Turkish Cabinet has decided to propose t= o=20 the parliament to extend the transfer of operational rights of power plants= =20 to the private sector by another four months, once again violating pledges= =20 made to the IMF when securing a U.S. $10 billion bailout package after the= =20 February crisis, Sabah newspaper reported Tuesday. The government, in its n= ew=20 IMF-supported program, pledged to complete transfer of the rights by=20 end-June. ( Story .11978 )=20 se SPOT= =20 NEWS LINKS:=20 THE=20 MARKETS:=20 US FUTURES: UK FUTURES .1908 NY Natural Gas Pre-Opg .1795 IPE Nat Gas Review=20 .1906 NY Natural Gas Review .1794 IPE Nat Gas Midday=20 .1747 NY Natural Gas=20 US/CANADA CASH NATURAL GAS UK/EUROPE CASH NATURAL GAS .1894 Henry Hub natural gas .1807 UK Spot Gas=20 .1884 US/Canada Spot Natural Gas=20 US CASH ELECTRICITY UK/EUROPE CASH ELECTRICITY .8575 California PX: Next day .1892 UK Power Index=20 .8576 .8577 WSCC Forwards (AM/PM) .1889 Nordic Power Market=20 .8585 .8586 PJM Forwards (AM/PM) .1890 Spanish Power Market=20 .8593 .8594 Cinergy Forwards (AM/PM) .1844 UK EFA Power Market=20 .8597 .8598 Entergy Forwards (AM/PM) CANADA CASH ELECTRICITY=20 .8601 .8602 ERCOT Forwards (AM/PM) .5637 Canadian Power Market=20 .8603 New England Forwards=20 .8587 .8600 TVA Forwards (AM/PM)=20 OTHER=20 .1873 US Nuclear Plants Operating Status=20 .2029 BRIDGE CALENDAR: US POWER: Key events to watch=20 .2030 US Utility Deregulation Digest=20 .1704 US Utility M&A Digest=20 SYMBOL=20 LINKS:=20 Click below for adamb chart in Athena NATURAL GAS=20 NYMEX - IPE - NYMEX ELECTRICITY=20 Palo Verde electricity - COB electricity- Cinergy electricity - Entergy electricity - PJM electricity - BridgeNews=20 Send comments to gennews@bridge.com=20 [B] FERC order seen having little effect on US generator profits=20 June 20, 2001=20 By Christine Cordner San Francisco, June 19 (BridgeNews) - A U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory=20 Commission order to impose a ""soft"" price cap on U.S. West wholesale power= =20 prices will likely have little significant effect on producer profits from= =20 electricity sales while the order is in effect over the next year, industry= =20 analysts said Tuesday. Some analysts cautioned that some producers without= =20 long-term contracts could be negatively affected by the order.=20 * * * ""FERC's decision to expand the soft price cap throughout the western grid i= s=20 not very painful for generators,"" Barry Abramson, UBS Warburg analyst, said= =20 in a research note. ""The expanded soft price cap will have little impact on= =20 the earnings of the wholesale generating companies. By definition, every=20 other power plant is more efficient than the least efficient power plant, a= nd=20 thus every other power plant should be able to make a good profit selling a= t=20 the soft price cap.=20 ""Furthermore, on most days, most of the power that is produced is sold at= =20 prices below the soft price cap, so the soft-price cap has little impact on= =20 the overall earnings of the wholesale generators in the region,"" Abramson= =20 said.=20 FERC on Monday unanimously voted 5-to-0 to expand wholesale price caps to t= he=20 10 western states comprising the Western Systems Coordinating Council. FERC= =20 also expanded the price caps on wholesale power to 24 hours per day, seven= =20 days per week, from limits only during supply emergencies when reserve=20 margins in California fall below 7%.=20 Under the order, wholesale power prices will be limited to 85% of the price= =20 in effect during the final hour of the most recent emergency, when Californ= ia=20 is not in a supply emergency. The proxy price will be based on the costs fo= r=20 the least efficient power plant used to generate electricity on that day as= =20 well as the price for natural gas.=20 Generators, investor-owned utilities and independent power producers,=20 however, can receive more than the proxy price if they can justify the high= er=20 generation costs. The plan also allows a 10% surcharge on all wholesale pow= er=20 sales in California in order to account for credit risk.=20 In a research note, JP Morgan analysts Jim Von Riesemann and Anatol Feygin= =20 said that earnings for generating companies ""should remain relatively intac= t=20 and valuations look attractive,"" especially for AES, Mirant and NRG.=20 Robert Winters, a Bear Stearns analyst, said, ""The near-term actions by the= =20 FERC (and the focus on Monday's meeting), the heightened political rhetoric= =20 and the weakening in gas and power prices across much of the U.S. over the= =20 past month has led to the weakness in the shares of the wholesale energy=20 companies...We believe very attractive buying opportunities are being creat= ed=20 within certain areas of the wholesale energy sectors where companies are no= w=20 trading at discounts to their projected earnings growth range.""=20 Winters said there were buying opportunities with Williams, ""which continue= s=20 to be our top pick in the wholesale energy space,"" and with Enron Corp.=20 But Abramson noted that the order does not allow producers ""to mark up the = r=20 price of spot power for resale above the soft price cap,"" which could affec= t=20 some profit margins.=20 ""The FERC plan should make it challenging for some to repeat the growth of= =20 the last couple of quarters in the West, particularly those that without=20 long-term contracts. It appears that the plan would likely dampen volatilit= y,=20 although price caps can have unexpected consequences,"" said Merrill Lynch= =20 analyst Steven Fleishman.=20 ""On a relative basis, we believe companies that have locked up much of thei= r=20 capacity under long-term contracts and have efficient baseload power are be= st=20 positioned under the new FERC plan,"" Fleishman said in a note. He said=20 Calpine, Dynegy, NRG Energy and Williams stand to benefit the most from thi= s=20 scenario.=20 ""Companies that could be challenged are those with less long-term contracts= ,=20 that are more dependent on inefficient peaking plants, and that could be=20 affected by less volatility in the West,"" Fleishman said. ""The big question= =20 is how well the marketers positioned their books ahead of this changed=20 environment."" He said Reliant Resources since it appears to have the least= =20 contracted in the West for 2002.=20 The plan, which will be in effect from Wednesday to Sept. 30, 2002, follows= =20 pleas from California Gov. Gray Davis to control wholesale prices, which he= =20 said cost the state roughly $50 billion this year.=20 The state's largest utility Pacific Gas & Electric declared bankruptcy=20 earlier this year, citing losses from high wholesale prices. End=20 SCE Unveils Rotating Blackout Web Site and Public Notification Plan=20 June 20, 2001=20 ROSEMEAD, Calif., June 19 /PRNewswire/ via NewsEdge Corporation -=20 Southern California Edison (SCE) today unveiled its enhanced Web site and= =20 public notification process to help guide the public through possible=20 rotating power blackouts when ordered by the California Independent System= =20 Operator (Cal-ISO).=20 ""We have been able to increase significantly the amount of outage informati= on=20 available to our customers, because we want to empower them with critical= =20 information to prepare for and safely cope through power blackouts,"" said P= am=20 Bass, SCE's senior vice president of customer service. ""We recognize that t= he=20 more information customers have before and during rotating outages, the=20 better equipped they will be to address the concerns and safety of their=20 families and employees.""=20 Bass said customers have indicated they want to know four basic things when= =20 rotating blackouts occur: the location, the duration, whether it affects=20 them, and what they should and should not do to safely get through the=20 outages. SCE offers several information resources that address these concer= ns=20 -- through toll-free phone lines, through news media updates, and now throu= gh=20 an expanded, user-friendly rotating outage Web site.=20 All of these sources will tell customers that the outages rotate among=20 electrical circuits across SCE's vast service area for about one hour, as= =20 directed by Cal-ISO. They will also list the likely affected customer group= s=20 and communities, and even provide geographic maps outlining the specific=20 neighborhoods. Customers will also be able to access practical tips on how = to=20 prepare and function safely through outages.=20 Customers can find out the group their home or business is assigned to by= =20 identifying their alphanumeric Rotating Outage Group Number, which now=20 appears directly under the customer's name and address in the top left corn= er=20 of the bill's front page. When Cal-ISO predicts possible rotating outages,= =20 SCE will immediately announce which groups may be affected through its outa= ge=20 hotline -- (800) 611-1911 -- its Web site -- www.sce.com -- and through the= =20 news media.=20 When outages are forecasted or actually begin, customers can determine if= =20 their group is part of the current outage or likely to be included in the= =20 next round, since SCE generally interrupts groups in numerical order, with= =20 some exceptions. For example, customers can now hear on the morning news=20 whether Cal-ISO is predicting outages for the day. By calling the hotline o= r=20 checking www.sce.com, they can learn which groups would likely be interrupt= ed=20 if circumstances turn out as predicted. If their group number is on the lis= t=20 of groups likely to be interrupted, the customer could take steps to prepar= e=20 for the likelihood of rotating blackouts affecting their home or business= =20 that particular day.=20 It should be noted that group numbers may change without advance notice for= =20 operational reasons or when state regulators revise their policy regarding= =20 customers exempted from blackouts. SCE will notify customers of such change= s=20 as quickly as practical.=20 Visitors to SCE's customer Web site, www.sce.com, will find the following= =20 helpful enhancements:=20 -- The site displays outage group numbers and corresponding communities=20 affected during recent, current, and predicted rotating outage=20 incidents.=20 -- When customers click on the name of a community affected by an outage,= =20 they are taken to a detailed street map of the affected circuit.=20 -- The Web site offers general outage information and links, including=20 outage preparation and safety tips, grid status information from Cal-=20 ISO, frequently asked questions about rotating outages, and=20 conservation tips.=20 -- A dynamic home-page pop-up window will change messages depending on=20 state power conditions. For example, during a Stage 2 Emergency,=20 customers will be directed to information about potential outages.=20 During a Stage 3 Emergency in which rotating outages are underway, the=20 box will provide a hotlink to group numbers and communities currently=20 affected and likely to be affected should outages likely continue.=20 For customers who don't have Internet access, SCE provides essentially the= =20 same Web site information through an automated outage phone line, (800)=20 611-1911. This service makes it possible to obtain outage information=20 immediately without waiting. Among major features:=20 -- Customers can call at any time to learn the Rotating Outage Group=20 Number assigned to their home or business.=20 -- When customers experience a power blackout, they can call to determine= =20 whether they are part of a rotating outage incident or if their=20 circuit has been affected by a routine interruption such as a car or=20 construction accident.=20 -- During rotating blackouts, customers can learn if their circuit is=20 currently affected or may be affected in the coming hours and which=20 portions of specific communities may be affected.=20 -- When customers call, they should have their account number and group=20 number handy. However, if customers call during a rotating outage=20 incident and do not know their group number, they will be able to=20 obtain information by entering their zip code.=20 SCE's media relations office has developed strategic communications=20 partnerships with radio and television stations that provide frequent live= =20 updates to the public, including information about circuit groups affected = or=20 likely to be affected by outages.=20 It should be further noted that while SCE is committed to providing as much= =20 advance public notification about pending rotating blackouts, it can only d= o=20 so as it receives timely notification from Cal-ISO.=20 SOURCE Southern California Edison=20 CONTACT: Corporate Communications of Southern California Edison,=20 626-302-2255, www.edisonnews.com=20 Web site: http://www.sce.com (EIX)=20 Edison CEO/ Ruling Hasn't Helped=20 June 20, 2001=20 By LESLIE GORNSTEIN AP Business Writer LOS ANGELES (AP) via NewsEdge Corporation -=20 A federal ruling this week limiting wholesale energy prices in 10 Western= =20 states hasn't been enough to pull Southern California Edison any further fr= om=20 the brink of bankruptcy, Edison International chief John E. Bryson said=20 Tuesday.=20 The state's second-largest utility is no further from or closer to bankrupt= cy=20 now than it was ``two weeks, four weeks, six weeks ago,'' Bryson told a pre= ss=20 conference before a speech to Town Hall Los Angeles, a public policy forum.= =20 Bryson is chairman, president and chief executive officer of Edison=20 International, parent of subsidiary Southern California Edison, which serve= s=20 4.2 million customers.=20 Bryson said, however, that he senses a warming among state legislators to a= =20 proposed bailout deal between his company and the state.=20 That deal would supply billions of dollars to Edison in exchange for years = of=20 cheap power and possibly the utility's power lines.=20 ``Interest has at least intensified in Sacramento on the part of legislator= s=20 to take steps _ debate continues exactly what steps _ to have Edison health= y=20 and to take the state out of the power business and so on,'' Bryson said.= =20 Such lawmaker approval is required for the deal to survive. Key lawmakers= =20 surrounding the deal were not immediately available for comment.=20 In his Town Hall address, Bryson used the forum as a kind of open plea to= =20 state legislators, listing what he called a series of widespread myths that= =20 might be keeping leaders from acting.=20 ``The first myth is that somehow Southern California Edison is seeking a=20 bailout from taxpayers,'' Bryson said. ``Only the reverse is true.''=20 Instead, Bryson said, it was Edison who bailed out California by keeping th= e=20 lights on even when the utility's power costs far exceeded its revenues.=20 Secondly, Bryson said, Edison and its investors are not profiting from the= =20 power crisis, and SoCal Edison's parent did not act improperly by collectin= g=20 money from the utility earlier this year.=20 That money was later given to shareholders, a move that outraged consumer= =20 groups.=20 Bryson also warned that a SoCal Edison bankruptcy would severely hurt=20 California's economy by scaring away new businesses and investment capital.= =20 ``Inaction would deeply hurt the state of California and all of us,'' he=20 said.=20 Editorial Desk; Section A=20 At Last, Action on California=20 ?=20 06/20/2001=20 The New York Times=20 Page 22, Column 1=20 c. 2001 New York Times Company=20 After months of dithering, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission took so= me=20 potentially meaningful steps on Monday to contain the wholesale price of=20 electricity in California and elsewhere in the Western United States. Anxio= us=20 not to be seen as caving in to public pressure or abandoning its fidelity t= o=20 the free market, the White House described the new policy as ''consistent= =20 with where the president has been all along.'' Gov. Gray Davis of Californi= a=20 , for his part, said the policy did not go far enough, and of course only= =20 time will tell whether it does. But to many others, including Senator Diann= e=20 Feinstein of California , the move amounted to the first significant federa= l=20 intervention in the California wholesale market since the crisis began last= =20 year. Ms. Feinstein withdrew her own price-cap bill pending the outcome of= =20 the new plan.=20 Under the new arrangement, approved unanimously by a reshuffled five-member= =20 Regulatory Commission, price limits will be based on the cost of producing= =20 electricity at the least efficient generator. The formula covers the sale o= f=20 electricity for immediate delivery -- the so-called ''spot market'' that=20 supplies about 20 percent of California 's needs and that California turns = to=20 when it is desperately trying to keep the lights on. The companies will be= =20 allowed to charge higher prices during peak periods, but not the huge sums= =20 they command today.=20 In addition, the constraints will apply throughout 10 other Western states,= =20 presumably eliminating any incentive for generators to withhold power from= =20 the California market in order to obtain a higher price elsewhere. The=20 controls are to expire in September of next year, which should relieve some= =20 of the administration's earlier fears that constraints of any kind would=20 discourage investment in new and badly needed sources of supply.=20 The benefits will not immediately be felt by California consumers. Both=20 individuals and businesses have recently been hit by rate increases belated= ly=20 imposed by the state's Public Utilities Commission at Mr. Davis's request.= =20 But the new plan should ultimately benefit taxpayers by lessening the impac= t=20 of higher energy costs on the state government, which has been buying power= =20 on behalf of the state's two largest utilities, both essentially insolvent.= =20 Recent estimates have suggested that California , which paid $7 billion for= =20 electricity two years ago, could pay as much as $50 billion this year.=20 Until quite recently the president and his energy czar, Dick Cheney, had=20 seemed almost indifferent to California 's needs. But Republican members of= =20 Congress from California and other Western states have been growing=20 increasingly restive as they contemplate the potential political fallout in= =20 the midterm elections of 2002. In addition, the two newest members of the= =20 regulatory commission, both Bush appointees, have expressed sympathy for=20 California 's plight. Whatever the reason, the administration appears to ha= ve=20 seen the light, even though it is reluctant to admit it. National Desk; Section A=20 Regulators' Order Could Bring Broad California Power Accord By LAURA M. HOLSON with JEFF GERTH ?=20 06/20/2001=20 The New York Times=20 Page 14, Column 3=20 c. 2001 New York Times Company=20 LOS ANGELES, June 19 -- An order by federal regulators that power generator= s=20 enter settlement talks with the State of California could open the door to = a=20 sweeping compromise of the financial issues in the state's power crisis,=20 energy industry analysts and executives said today.=20 But the question that remains -- and it is a vital one, they said -- is=20 whether the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has the wherewithal to for= ce=20 the warring parties to hammer out an understanding that, at its heart, is a= s=20 much about politics as about money.=20 The commission on Monday gave California regulators and power generators=20 until July 9 to come up with a plan for settling accounts between the=20 generators and California 's struggling utilities. The power companies are= =20 owed billions, but the state has accused them of price-gouging. If the=20 parties cannot reach some agreement, an administrative judge will step in a= nd=20 recommend a settlement to the commission instead.=20 Asked at a Senate hearing in Washington today to clarify what he hoped to= =20 accomplish as a result of the two weeks of settlement talks, the commission= 's=20 chairman, Curtis L. Hebert Jr., was noncommittal. The parties, he explained= ,=20 need two things for the talks to succeed: a deadline and uncertainty.=20 Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California , expressed skepticism abo= ut=20 the undertaking. Ms. Feinstein said at the hearing, held by the Senate Ener= gy=20 and Natural Resources Committee, that she was concerned that the commission= =20 had laid out ''no rules'' for the talks.=20 ''Very little, if any, money has changed hands as a result of prior=20 settlement conferences,'' she said.=20 Many industry executives and state officials have not yet seen the=20 commission's order, and they were scrambling today to figure out exactly wh= at=20 they were being asked to do.=20 ''Without seeing what exactly is in the order, who knows?'' said Sean=20 Gallagher, a staff lawyer for California 's Public Utilities Commission.=20 ''But we wouldn't turn our noses up at participating in negotiations.''=20 Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, a=20 coalition of energy traders and electricity generators, noted that the=20 federal regulators' timetable ''has a very short fuse.'' And the fact that= =20 the state's biggest utility, the Pacific Gas and Electric Company, has file= d=20 for bankruptcy will complicate efforts to reach a comprehensive agreement, = he=20 added.=20 ''I don't hold high hopes that a settlement would work out,'' Mr. Ackerman= =20 said, ''but I commend the FERC for taking a stab.''=20 Moreover, the parties to the settlement talks may lack an element vital to= =20 successful negotiations: trust.=20 Several California entities, including the Public Utilities Commission, are= =20 investigating whether generators took advantage of consumers by charging=20 excessive prices for power. The Independent System Operator, which runs the= =20 state's power grid, released a study in March concluding that Californians= =20 might have been overcharged for electricity by more than $6 billion. One=20 state government negotiator said the California attorney general's office= =20 could file a suit against the power generators in the next few weeks.=20 And as state officials, including Gov. Gray Davis, continue to hurl attacks= =20 at the generators, calling them pirates and profiteers, the companies and= =20 California utilities are blaming legislators, saying they failed to address= =20 the power crisis quickly enough.=20 In March, Duke Energy, one of the companies the state has accused of=20 profiteering, offered to negotiate a broad settlement, but Governor Davis= =20 ruled out calling off the state's inquiries as part of any agreement.=20 The outlines of Duke's proposal included a compromise on the money owed by= =20 California utilities, in exchange for the dropping of private lawsuits,=20 California 's complaints to federal regulators and the state investigations= .=20 Duke would have admitted no wrongdoing.=20 In formal proceedings, the power generators to date have vigorously fought= =20 discounting the debts they are owed by California .=20 The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has ordered generators to refund= =20 nearly $130 million in what it judged to be overcharges. Today one of the= =20 commissioners, William L. Massey, said 80 percent of that money had not bee= n=20 collected. A Section=20 Davis Finds Hope in Calif. Power Crunch Rene Sanchez and Peter Behr ?=20 06/20/2001=20 The Washington Post=20 FINAL=20 Page A06=20 Copyright 2001, The Washington Post Co. All Rights Reserved=20 LOS ANGELES, June 19 -- Sinking in the polls, under attack by a new=20 Republican advertising campaign and still struggling to avert a summer of= =20 blackouts, California Gov. Gray Davis (D) nevertheless seems heartened abou= t=20 the latest developments in the power crisis that has engulfed his state and= =20 threatened his political career.=20 On his first trip to Washington in months, Davis will detail California 's= =20 plight Wednesday in testimony to a Senate committee newly led by sympatheti= c=20 Democrats -- one important reason for his optimism.=20 But he has others: Conservation is taking hold in the state, and prices for= =20 power on the daily spot market are dropping. California has managed to avoi= d=20 rolling blackouts so far this month, in part because it has been spared a= =20 heat wave.=20 Federal regulators, under pressure even from Republican lawmakers, decided= =20 Monday to impose more controls on prices that energy suppliers can charge= =20 California . Two new power plants are scheduled to begin producing=20 electricity in weeks. California also has recently secured more than a doze= n=20 deals for power over the next decade, a move Davis contends will stabilize= =20 the volatile wholesale market for energy.=20 In short, Davis and his aides say their concerted political strategy and=20 efforts to ease the crisis are beginning to pay off.=20 ""The bottom line is that we're stabilizing prices and assuring the power wi= ll=20 be there without additional rate increases,"" said Steve Maviglio, a spokesm= an=20 for the governor. But he added: ""We're not ready to say the war is over. It= 's=20 still going to be a tight summer.""=20 Whether any or all of those steps will keep the lights on in California thi= s=20 summer, or help solve an array of other financial problems the crisis has= =20 caused, is hardly clear.=20 In fact, California 's power shortfall could produce 113 hours of rotating= =20 outages this summer, according to a U.S. Department of Energy study schedul= ed=20 to be released Wednesday.=20 Since California 's two largest utilities fell into financial ruin this yea= r,=20 forcing the state to spend nearly $5 billion to buy power directly and=20 saddling residents with huge new rate increases, the support that Davis onc= e=20 had from a majority of voters has vanished. Recent polls suggest that he=20 could have trouble winning a second term.=20 Consumer advocates here are besieging him, saying that the $43 billion in= =20 long-term power deals that Davis has signed could lock residents into payin= g=20 artificially high utility rates for years. Some contend that all he has=20 gained from Washington is political cover.=20 ""The Bush administration has created this toothless price cap mechanism tha= t=20 will be used as political protection but certainly not consumer protection,= ""=20 said Doug Heller, a director of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer=20 Rights.=20 Davis has stuck mostly to the same political script. He is demanding more= =20 federal help for California -- on Monday he called the Federal Energy=20 Regulatory Commission's decision merely ""a step in the right direction"" --= =20 and he is denouncing out-of-state energy suppliers and their Republican=20 allies.=20 Today, Republicans launched a $1.5 million advertising offensive that blame= s=20 Davis for the state's energy crunch. The spots, running on English and=20 Spanish-language media, describe the crisis as ""Grayouts from Gray Davis.""= =20 Scott Reed, the GOP strategist who runs the American Taxpayers Alliance,=20 which funded the ad campaign, said his group wants to counter the governor'= s=20 spin. ""The blame game has to end,"" said Reed.=20 But Davis's aides say the ads are a sign that Republicans sense California = 's=20 energy predicament could deepen GOP political troubles in the state.=20 Privately, some Republican lawmakers pushing for more federal assistance sa= y=20 they are worried that in midterm congressional elections next fall the GOP= =20 could lose House seats in California that it needs to hold a majority.=20 Today's hearing will bring both Davis and his adversaries on the Federal=20 Energy Regulatory Commission before the Senate's Governmental Affairs=20 Committee, chaired by Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.).=20 Instead of a committee debate on California 's electricity prices, the focu= s=20 of the session may be shifting toward the billions of dollars of alleged=20 overcharges by energy suppliers.=20 Under growing pressure from both parties in Congress, FERC's commissioners= =20 responded Monday with far more extensive price controls than they had been= =20 willing to consider previously. They extended April price controls that had= =20 applied only to times of power emergencies to all hours of the day, through= =20 September 2002. And they expanded the controls to cover 10 other western=20 states.=20 California Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, both Democrats, said= =20 FERC's action was a positive step and agreed to delay efforts to direct the= =20 commission to clamp down on California 's energy prices. ""We're willing to= =20 give them a chance to see if it works,"" Boxer told reporters.=20 Now, Davis will press his demands that FERC recover some $8 billion in=20 alleged overcharges by wholesale power suppliers since the crisis began -- = a=20 far larger amount than the $124.5 million in refunds that FERC has so far= =20 assessed.=20 Whether there is even a chance of a peace process is unclear. Just last wee= k,=20 California Attorney General Bill Lockyer announced plans to convene a=20 criminal grand jury to investigate whether power generators illegally=20 conspired to drive up electricity and natural gas prices.=20 The governor could face other new problems. Several of California 's major= =20 independent power generators said the price controls and state lawsuits=20 against the generators made it more difficult to justify expanding operatio= ns=20 in California , a warning echoed today by Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham.= =20 But heading into the summer, California 's power prices are much lower than= =20 they were a month or two ago, with daily or ""spot"" power prices averaging $= 78=20 per megawatt hour in June, compared to $372 in April.=20 Both Davis and the FERC commissioners are taking credit. S. David Freeman,= =20 Davis's energy adviser, said that the long-term power contracts the state h= as=20 signed, the new power plants and favorable weather have tamed prices.=20 FERC Chairman Curt Hebert Jr. said Monday that the limited price restraints= =20 that the commission imposed on wholesale electricity sales in April have be= en=20 a key reason for the price decline.=20 Sanchez reported from Los Angeles and Behr from Washington. Staff writers= =20 Mike Allen and Juliet Eilperin contributed to this report from Washington.= =20 Contact: National Desk; Section A=20 The Lesson of When to Give Aid to Free Markets By DAVID E. SANGER ?=20 06/20/2001=20 The New York Times=20 Page 14, Column 3=20 c. 2001 New York Times Company=20 WASHINGTON, June 19 -- Three weeks ago George W. Bush addressed a sympathet= ic=20 audience of business executives at the Century Plaza Hotel in Los Angeles a= nd=20 declared that his administration ''will not take any action that makes=20 California 's problems worse, and that's why I oppose price caps'' on=20 electricity .=20 As he spoke, the Democratic governor of California , Gray Davis, sat=20 impassively on the dais, preparing to meet Mr. Bush and then denounce him f= or=20 failing to protect California consumers from an electricity market gone wil= d.=20 Today, the White House halfheartedly welcomed action by federal regulators = to=20 impose throughout the West a system that looks and smells a lot like price= =20 caps -- though the White House said it was something different.=20 ''This is not a price control,'' Ari Fleischer, the White House spokesman,= =20 said. ''This is a market-based mitigation plan that now will extend to 11= =20 Western states.''=20 In fact, it bore some resemblance to a proposal made by 10 leading economis= ts=20 who urged a middle ground between fixed prices and a deregulated electricit= y=20 market. Mr. Davis used their proposal to support his position in favor of= =20 limited price restraints when Mr. Bush visited California .=20 The White House shift from outright opposition to price controls to its mor= e=20 nuanced position today exemplifies how Mr. Bush has tempered his embrace of= =20 completely unfettered markets in recent weeks. He didn't have much choice.= =20 As the threat of blackouts loomed, demands for action rose from officials o= f=20 both parties and from consumers in the West. It was almost possible to hear= =20 sighs of relief at the White House today that the Federal Energy Regulatory= =20 Commission -- an independent body in the Energy Department -- had moved to= =20 turn down the political heat.=20 In fact, while some House Democrats are still pressing for firmer caps on= =20 prices, Senators Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California , and Gordon H.= =20 Smith, Republican of Oregon, withdrew a bill that would have placed strict= =20 price controls on electricity sold in Western markets.=20 Senator Feinstein said the White House could call yesterday's regulatory=20 action ''mitigation'' or anything else it pleased.=20 ''A rose is a rose by any other name,'' she said today.=20 And a free market is not always free. Two weeks ago the administration said= =20 it would rescue steel companies and steelworkers who have long complained= =20 about unfair competition from South Korea, Taiwan, China, Brazil, Germany,= =20 Russia and Ukraine. The White House defended the action by saying it was th= e=20 only way for the industry to adjust to a new competitive environment.=20 Last month, with no major announcements at the White House, the Bush=20 administration voted for International Monetary Fund aid to two countries,= =20 Turkey and Argentina, that (like California ) had made some economically=20 disastrous political decisions.=20 In each case, Mr. Bush's economic orthodoxies were tempered by political=20 realities.=20 The California crisis was one thing when it involved a Democratic governor = in=20 a state Mr. Bush lost by a million votes; it was another, one of his aides= =20 conceded today, when congressional Republicans from around the West were=20 warning Mr. Bush that blackouts and sky-high prices could blow up in his=20 first year in office.=20 ''We heard from a lot of members of Congress who feared that Republicans=20 would be tarred with worsening the problem, even though it happened on Gray= =20 Davis's watch,'' the political aide said. ''The president took that on=20 board.''=20 Similarly, the steel decision was partly about enforcing laws against=20 ''dumping'' foreign products in the market -- and partly about Mr. Bush's= =20 desire to convince labor unions not to block his trade agenda. Like=20 Californians coping with higher energy prices, the steelworkers need time t= o=20 adjust to a new world, the administration said.=20 ''Open markets improve the lives of people by increasing opportunity, choic= e=20 and economic freedom,'' Robert B. Zoellick, Mr. Bush's trade representative= ,=20 said in an interview today. ''But compassionate conservatism also recognize= s=20 the reality that the effects of rapid change fall harder on some communitie= s=20 and industries,'' which, he said, need ''vital breathing space to adapt to= =20 change.''=20 While Mr. Bush expressed deep reservations about I.M.F. bailouts during the= =20 presidential campaign, the situation seemed a bit more complicated once he= =20 got to Washington. The State and Defense Departments feared that if Turkey= =20 were engulfed in economic chaos, and blamed the United States for failing t= o=20 come to its aid, its leaders might be less inclined to let American fighter= =20 jets use its territory to mount missions over Iraq.=20 So given the choice between letting the Turkish people pay a high price for= =20 political mistakes -- Californians take note -- and weakening American=20 pressure on Saddam Hussein, Mr. Bush decided that economic niceties were le= ss=20 important than political consistency. Mr. Bush chose the Pentagon over the= =20 Treasury.=20 Administration officials said these actions did not represent a retreat fro= m=20 let-the-markets-prevail orthodoxy.=20 Lawrence B. Lindsey, Mr. Bush's chief economic adviser, said in an intervie= w=20 today that he opposed price caps at the beginning of the California crisis= =20 and that he opposed them now. But he would not criticize the federal=20 commission for ''mitigating'' price spikes in the market.=20 ''What they are trying to do is achieve two incompatible missions --=20 preserving what is called 'just and reasonable pricing' and assuring an=20 adaquate supply of electricity ,'' Mr. Lindsey said. Yet the reality, he=20 added, is that new supplies of electricity will not become available for a= =20 year or more. ''FERC is doing its best to square that circle in the face of= =20 the fundamental problem, which is inadequate supply,'' he said.=20 That is the kind of argument that keeps economists happily arguing for hour= s.=20 It is not likely to be the kind of argument Mr. Bush himself is likely to= =20 engage in for long. As one of his political advisers said the other day,=20 ''Don't think about this purely in terms of megawatts. We need to produce= =20 more electricity , but we also need to produce some more seats in the=20 House.''=20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Telephone Interview with The Enron Corp. Research Group; [EMail-Body]= Ms. Crenshaw, Thank you very much for the message. I am very interested in the opportunity to talk to personnel from the Research Group at Enron. Between the two days you suggest, I prefer Wednesday 12/6. Considering the two-hour time difference between California and Texas, 11:00 am Pacific time (1:00 pm your time) seems to be a good slot. However, I am open most of the day on 12/6 so if some other time slot is prefered on your end, please let me know. Thanks again. I look forward to talking to you and your colleagues. Jingming On Tue, 28 Nov 2000 Shirley.Crenshaw@enron.com wrote: > Good afternoon Jingming: > > Professor Wolak forwarded your resume to the Research Group, and > they would like to conduct a telephone interview with you, sometime next > week, at your convenience. The best days would be Tuesday, 12/5 or > Wednesday, 12/6. > > Please let me know which day and what time would be best for you and > they will call you. Let me know the telephone number that you wish to be > contacted at. > > The interviewers would be: > > Vince Kaminski Managing Director and Head of Research > Vasant Shanbhogue Vice President, Research > Lance Cunningham Manager, Research > Alex Huang Manager, Research > > Look forward to hearing from you. > > Best regards, > > Shirley Crenshaw > Administrative Coordinator > Enron Research Group. > 713-853-5290 > > > Jingming ""Marshall"" Yan jmyan@leland.stanford.edu Department of Economics (650)497-4045 (H) Stanford University (650)725-8914 (O) Stanford, CA 94305 358C, Economics Bldg If one seeks to act virtuously and attain it, then what is there to repine about? -- Confucius _?OO??OOo? ?T=15xO-?? -- =14??<o=15 O""?> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron's natural gas policy positions; [EMail-Body]= coule you get Jeannie copies of the slides or other write ups you have on this. Jeannie -- I don't know how far it is prudent to take a position on this as a co. It has already become a key battleground (garnering some discussion in the Gore-Lieberman debate). I think we stay away from it as a co., but we at least ought to put the information in front of anyone we are asking to do an oped so that they can make a reasoned judgement. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/16/2000 10:18 AM ----- Jeannie Mandelker@ECT 10/13/2000 08:19 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Enron's natural gas policy positions Hi -- I'm working on a dual gas/power op-ed (the former DeLay op-ed). I have Enron's message points on higher gas prices, but I wondered if we were taking a position on expanding natural gas exploration as Gov. Bush proposes -- onto more federal lands, particularly in Alaska. I read somewhere that 40% of potential US reserves are on federal lands. Thanks for your help, Jeannie [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Jamaica forecast for JMD and inflation, dated 6/25/01; [EMail-Body]= Gwyn, Thanks for this msg and other updates. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Koepke, Gwyn Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 1:00 AM To: Hudler, Cindy; Stuart III, William; Shahi, Pushkar; Raymond, Maureen; Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Jamaica forecast for JMD and inflation, dated 6/25/01 Cindy, Please find attached the forecast for Jamaica's currency and CPI. Gwyn Koepke and Maureen Raymond-Castaneda << File: Jamaica_062501.xls >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Corporate Farewell Lunch for Ed Segner, in wine room at Brennan's
 - Not going; [EMail-Body]= I've RSVP'd for you. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CA load growth; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/14/2001 04:21 PM ----- Tim Belden@ECT 03/14/2001 11:46 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Stephen Swain/PDX/ECT@ECT Subject: CA load growth here is our analysis of load growth. i have no idea where cera came up with there's. in short, it looks like load grew somewhere between 5% and 6% per year between april 1998 and june of 2000. since then, load growth has been flat to negative. from april 1998 to february 2001 it looks like typical load growth was around 3.7% on an annualized basis. ---------------------- Forwarded by Tim Belden/HOU/ECT on 03/14/2001 08:44 AM --------------------------- Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp. From: Stephen Swain 03/14/2001 09:28 AM To: Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: CA load growth Here 'tis. Let me know if this suits your fancy. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: White House Talking Points and Abraham Mtg with EPSA; [EMail-Body]= Linda - as we discussed, adding a sentence on open access is key. Also, I would delete the sentence about the transmission system not being designed for the way it's being used today. Richard Shapiro 04/02/2001 04:23 AM To: Linda Robertson/NA/Enron cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron Subject: Re: White House Talking Points and Abraham Mtg with EPSA It would be nice to get a one sentence mention made of open access just to show they care....I say this in part because of Scott Miller's e-mail pleading for more focus on this issue. Thanks. Linda Robertson 03/30/2001 12:31 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: White House Talking Points and Abraham Mtg with EPSA 1. I am faxing to you a bootleg copy of the draft talking points Ed received this morning at the White House energy ""messaging"" meeting. These are very close hold. Ed asked that we not circulate these to anyone. Ed asked us to give him feedback of any concerns we have with the talking points (he will be giving them comments). After glancing at the TPs, the obvious missing point is open access. However, I am not sure we should be alarmed about that. There really isn't any policy in the TPs. This is a typical WH message document. Let me know if you think it is imperative to insert open access. Also, Ed would like to position us as the coalition leader of the White House outreach effort. Any thoughts? 2. I am faxing to you EPSA's summary of the generators meeting with Secretary Abraham. I am glad I did not attend this meeting. As you will see from the summary, there were three parts to the meeting: a) an exchange of policy views, both long and short term, b) discussion of how to maximize generator output in Calif; and c) a request that industry participate in a DOE reliability group. I don't see any follow up for Enron, outside of our normal course of activities and independent interchange with DOE officials. Let me know if you have additional thoughts. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call
 Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and
 Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted; [EMail-Body]= Another agenda item I got a call today from Bob Pease, Attorney with Market Oversight and Enforcement at FERC, 202-208-0131, to invite Enron to a meeting called by Chairman Wood at the CAISO offices on 24-25 Sep 01. The purpose of the meeting is to try to get the FERC, CAISO, DWR and other market participants to work out issues related to reliability that have arisen in recent months. Issues include those that that affect operations and reliability such as the must-offer requirements, ramping, etc. He was not clear as to whether they would address creditworthiness issues. From the FERC staff ""non-decisional"" employees will attend. He invited solutions/proposals in advance of the meeting. Enron needs to decide who to send. Alan Comnes -----Original Message----- From: Alvarez, Ray Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 8:31 AM To: Comnes, Alan; Walton, Steve; Mara, Susan; Lawner, Leslie; Cantrell, Rebecca W.; Fulton, Donna; Dasovich, Jeff; Nicolay, Christi L.; Steffes, James D.; 'jalexander@gibbs-bruns.com'; Allen, Phillip K.; Noske, Linda J.; Perrino, Dave; Black, Don; Frank, Robert; Miller, Stephanie; Tycholiz, Barry; Novosel, Sarah; Thome, Jennifer; Hall, Steve C. (Legal); Lindberg, Susan Subject: RE: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted PLEASE MARK YOUR CALENDAR Date: Every Thursday Time: 7:30 am Pacific, 9:30 am Central, and 10:30 am Eastern time Number: 1-888-271-0949 Host Code: 661877 (for Ray only) Participant Code: 936022 (for everyone else) The table of the on-going FERC issues and proceedings is available to all team members on the O drive. Please feel free to revise/add to/ update this table as appropriate. Proposed agenda for tomorrow: CAISO filed Amendment No. 40 which would suspend the use of preliminary invoices and disbursements. CA refund proceeding status. Please feel free to communicate any additional agenda items to the group . [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: ENE Officer Elections; [EMail-Body]= We should include David Oxley -- VP of human resources. From: Kelly Johnson/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/18/2001 11:13 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: ENE Officer Elections Steve: Please review the attached ENE Officer list for your direct reports and approve. Thank you. Kelly M. Johnson Enron Corp. Executive Assistant Tel: (713) 853-6485 Fax: (713) 853-2534 E-Mail: kelly.johnson@enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Idea; [EMail-Body]= If you think this is worth pursuing, get in touch with Christie. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 07/25/2000 02:08 PM --------------------------- From: Christi L Nicolay@ECT on 07/25/2000 01:46 PM To: James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES cc: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@Enron, Kevin M Presto/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Idea AEP, ComEd, Duke and CP&L announced last week that they would be collaborating on a new version of a net based system better than OASIS. I think that Enron should consider joining with these utilities on this. There may be substantial Enron upside to such a venture from added information disclosure and standardization and streamlining for easier use: On 7/14, FERC issued an Advance NOPR asking for input by 2/15/01 on OASIS Phase II (the new OASIS proposal). In particular, FERC states that this new OASIS should address: (i) communication of critical market information (like transmission rights); (ii) posting of ATC, TTC, and CBM; and (ii) seams issues between RTOs (transmission service across multiple RTOs). FERC says that the new OASIS should make use of Internet, interactive displays, etc. FERC also asks for information on dynamic notification (where the OASIS automatically alerts the customer to changes in ATC, reservations, etc.) This type of functionality would allow Enron to determine if it wants to stay in a queue when transmission becomes available (rather than getting kicked out after the first denial for lack of ATC.) FERC also wants information on whether generator-run status should be included on OASIS; electronic scheduling (which can now be done via etag); and business practices that should be standardized. Enron could have significant input to force these utilities to propose a good, customer friendly system that provides valid and helpful data on ATC, TTC, and CBM, rather than the total lack of substantive information that is available today. (Recall that Enron proposed that CBM use be posted--FERC has not adopted that idea yet.) Because these are critical utilities, any system that they propose may be very likely to be adopted (with some changes). I think it is better to be in on the front end. Enron's participation would also give validity to their system. Dan Larcamp told me that he would like more ""classes"" for his staff from Enron and that we should give joint classes with AEP because Susan Tomasky told Dan L. that ""AEP has nothing to hide."" This type of venture would allow AEP one venue to make good on that statement. Steve K. asked us to pursue the idea that Enron build a computer system. This may be a good way to have significant input while leveraging these companies' money and promoting Enron's congestion model ideas, etc. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: CPUC Request for Confidential Information; [EMail-Body]= I understand that we may have no choice in the matter, but having wtinessed Loretta Lynch's inability to define market power when asked to do so by Joe Barton last Monday, and, having heard Carl Wood declare war on capitalism at FERC's hearing on Tuesday, and, knowing that the likes of Harvey Morse (PUC FERC attorney), who has never come down on the side of ""no market power here"" in any analysis, is ""heading up"" the PUC investigation, and seeing Gov Davis' press releases demanding refunds from the faceless, out-of-state suppliers I'm, well, maybe a little nervous about them getting their paws on our data. Jeff [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: TALKING POINTS UC/CSU; [EMail-Body]= Please post on internal site ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/13/2001 12:12 PM ----- Peggy Mahoney@EES 03/13/2001 09:21 AM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Elizabeth Ivers/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: TALKING POINTS UC/CSU Two documents: First is the external document we faxed to certain reporters. This is what Steve is referring to. Second is the talking points which reflect all changes to date. I am waiting legal approval - which I'm expecting any minute (I emailed Mike Smith your changes last night). We should put both on website as soon as I track down Mike or Vicki. Thanks, Peggy From: James D Steffes@ENRON on 03/13/2001 07:59 AM To: Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Re: TALKING POINTS UC/CSU Peggy -- My understanding is that you and Steve Kean finished these talking points. Can I please get the final copy? Jim Peggy Mahoney@EES 03/12/2001 10:31 PM To: Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: TALKING POINTS UC/CSU From: Sandra McCubbin@ENRON on 03/12/2001 04:56 PM PST To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Re: TALKING POINTS UC/CSU could we have this finalized by tomorrow am...also, understand CSU issued press release, could we see it asap..thanks [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= HOOVER INSTITUTION NEWS ADVISORY: Conference on the California
 Electricity Problem; [EMail-Body]= H o o v e r I n s t i t u t i o n News Advisory September 27, 2001 _____ FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Note: The complete text of this News Advisory can also be viewed in the attached file. CONFERENCE ON THE CALIFORNIA ELECTRICITY PROBLEM October 18-19, 2001 Sponsored by the Hoover Institution and Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR) What: A conference on California's electricity problem, sponsored by the Hoover Institution and Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR). When: Thursday and Friday, October 18-19, 2001 Where: Stauffer Auditorium, Hoover Institution, Stanford University Why: To address the causes of and solutions to the problem, including: its impact on the state economy, deregulation issues, and politics. Who: ????????The Honorable Spencer Abraham, U. S. Secretary of Energy, dinner speaker, 6:30 p.m., October 18 ????????Discussion: Electricity problem's causes and proposed solution with James Sweeney of SIEPR, Hoover and Stanford, and Severin Borenstein, of UC-Berkeley, 1:15 p.m., October 18 ????????Discussion: I. The electricity problem's impact on the state economy with Edward Leamer of UCLA, 3 p.m., October 18 ????????Discussion: II. Achieving competition through real time pricing with Frank Wolak of Stanford and SIEPR and Vernon Smith of George Mason University, 3 p.m., October 18 ????????Panel: Power production and politics with John Bryson, Edison International; Peter Cartwright of Calpine Corporation, and Hoover fellow and former California Governor Pete Wilson, 8:30 a.m., October 19 ????????Panel: Deregulation with Hoover fellows Milton Friedman, Nobel laureate; former U.S. Secretary of State George P. Shultz, and James Sweeney, 10:30 a.m., October 19 A mult box will be available for broadcast media. RSVP by October 15: Call Public Affairs at the Hoover Institution at 650-723-0603. Michele M. Horaney APR Michelle Mosman, Director of Communications Public Affairs Manager Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR) Hoover Institution 579 Serra Mall@Galvez St. Stanford University Stanford University Stanford, CA 94305-6010 Stanford, CA 94305-6015 650-725-7293 F:650-8611 650-725-1872 cell: 650-722-0798 Horaney@Hoover.Stanford.edu mmosman@stanford.edu Hoover.Stanford.edu siepr@Stanford.edu [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: CONFIDENTIAL Personnel issue; [EMail-Body]= Great. That is exactly what I would like you to do. Michelle -------------------------- Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net) [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Trade Mission; [EMail-Body]= Terry was acting with full coordination from Jose. The problem was this: Daly insisted someone speak on behalf of the group to the press (and designated Terry to be the one); Terry did not have the updated information that we were about to meet with the government officials and deliver a slightly different message (i.e. that we needed to know if the government planned to really open Petrobras or not -- the implication being that we would work within either decision but we needed to know one way or the other); Terry was simply not in possession of this information and no one had given it to him (probably because they had no reason to assume that Terry would be thrust in front of the press); moreover, it's hard to see how Terry could have taken such a position publicly anyway. By my eyes Terry did the best he could and we had an unavoidable communications bust. I know the Southern cone team is moving to make it right, but I see absolutely no reason to come don on anyone about this. Richard Shapiro 02/17/2000 09:47 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Re: Trade Mission What was the outcome? Steven J Kean 02/17/2000 08:13 AM To: Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES cc: Subject: Re: Trade Mission FYI. I will call Terry and get in touch with Jim/Diomedes ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 02/17/2000 08:13 AM --------------------------- Diomedes 02/17/2000 02:42 AM To: James M Steven J Kean@EES, Kelly cc: Subject: Re: Trade Mission Jim/Steve, How can Terry go out with public statements without knowing a thing of the dynamics of our negotiations with the Minister on the gas issue? This is especially damaging given we are depending on the Minister to get approvals for our two emergency power projects. Let's monitor this but my suggestion is that Jim needs to call Carraro right away and give some explanation before he decides to boycot our projects. ---------------------- Forwarded by Diomedes on 02/17/2000 05:37 AM --------------------------- Jose Bestard 02/15/2000 05:18 PM To: Denise M Macedo/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, James M Diomedes cc: Subject: Re: Trade Mission See below the messages I had asked Terry to convey in his meetings in the region. I did ask him to raise the issue of Petrobras through Secretary Daly with the Brazilians officials as an impediment to the open markets. It never occurred to me that he would be making Press statements. (or that he would be quoted in this flavor). This, coupled with the GM ABEGAS) article will turn up the heat. Given that Jim's messages are going to be delivered this week (Denise, Jim will discuss the issue with Carraro. We intend to file a protest in ANP by Friday due to lack of responsiveness in our request for a transportation tariff)......... 1) I would not go to the press. Let it go.. 2) If asked, repeat the vision ""regional integration, based on the principles of open access, greater reliance on competition and customer choice"" 3) Monitor the response. Let me know if you are getting unfavorable reactions (other than Petrobras). 4) Jim, if you get a call ahead of your meeting, we cannot discredit Terry (The shadow of Petrobras is an unfortunate quote). Use this in your favor. Press on with the message ""Is Brazil ready to open the gas market to competition"". If so, let's get started. Jose ---------------------- Forwarded by Jose Bestard/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 02/15/2000 01:45 PM --------------------------- Jose Bestard 02/15/2000 01:45 PM To: Terence H cc: Subject: Re: Trade Mission Terry. The Key message for the trip, in regards to energy, should be: ""Achieve regional integration, based on the principles of open access, greater reliance on competition and customer choice rather than regulated monopolies"" The vision is that a customer in any of the countries will have choices ""several competing providers""; ""different service options"", and the providers will have the flexibility and agility to assemble an attractive package by combining transactions with other suppliers and customers. This approach maximizes the utilization of the existing infrastructure (reduces idle or redundant facilities) and gives customers the ability to more closely tailor their energy purchases to the their needs. There are barriers to achieve this vision. It is in the interest of the governments to work in a common protocol to progress rapidly. Development of infrastructure .- Still not well developed. Needs to attract project financing. At this stage, the customers have few alternatives. Government policy should be to allow access above and beyond what was initially contracted to justify the financing. Terms of financing have to be honored. Long term, competing facilities (pipelines, refineries, transmission lines, power plants) will be fighting for customers. Threat. Control of these facilities: Petrobras through the BBPL; YPF in Argentina Cross-border Licensing.- Very time consuming, bureaucratic delays to grant, export, import, re-export permitting. Present regime cannot accommodate the rapid transaction scenario which will be required to support real integration. Cuiaba Power plant,- As of today we have not received all the permits. Latest issue is the Bolivian-Argentina border dispute due to YPF denial to accommodate a transaction of Bolivian gas into Argentina. Operationally, the plant will receive daily instructions from Brasilia. The gas supply from Argentina/Bolivia, including spot market transaction has to be nominated within 48 hours notice. There are no mechanisms to change quickly the approved volumes. Commercial entities need to be given the opportunity to export/import to aggregate the requirements of different suppliers various customers. Taxation.- Transfer taxes (i.e. receipt taxes ,stamp taxes) for each step down the chain needs to be eliminated for commercial entities, particularly for export transactions. These commercial entities buy pieces of the services on behalf of the ultimate customer (act as their agent) and package the final offer. The objective to reduce the cost of the product, which would not be met by adding a further taxable event. There should not be more, nor any less taxes because of the services of the middle company, except for the larger amount of income taxes generated by increase commercial activity. Money Transfers.- Central Bank Controls to authorize the transfer of currency needs to be made more agile. Currently these procedures are very time consuming and cumbersome (Brazil -- I am not as familiar with the other countries) This is affecting us in Cuiaba. The Central Bank has not approved the gas contract, specifically the Take-or-pay provision that has a one-year make up period. They want a longer make-up period, but that was negotiated with YPF as part of the larger agreement. YPF may agree but at a higher price. The Central Bank does not want to send US$ out of the country, so they view TOP as a devise of paying for a commodity never received. So they are meddling in contract negotiations. Below are other notes Thanks Jose Terence H Thorn 02/09/2000 09:22 AM To: Jose cc: Richard Shapiro@EES Subject: Trade Mission I have forwarded to you the final schedule of meetings for Daly's trade mission. I am very comfortable with issues for Argentina and think we need to focus mainly on the stamp tax issue. Secondly, I would raise the issue of open access pipelines, especially allowing Bolivian gas to flow to Argentina. The question I have on this latter issue is whether this is a matter of changing the law, changing policy or pressuring YPF to allow the gas to flow on it's section of pipe which I understand is not under the jurisdiction of Enargas. What can the government do? JB.- I am not familiar with the genesis of this situation, how these pipelines escaped the jurisdiction of the regulator. If it is determined that they are not part of the regulated pipeline network, in time a bypass pipeline may be built. But an immediate solution needs to be developed. In Brazil, I am not sure what to raise. On Monday we have meetings with the Minister of Development, Industry and Commerce and the Secretary of Energy and Mines. What do I need to have Daly raise with them in private? Myself in public? or the Minister of External Affairs? JB.- For background, the Brazilians have rising concerns of the rising dollarization of their economy, ""desnacionaliza?ao"". Their concern is not the US$, it is control. It is that the Old-boys network in Brazil Government/Industry, has been disturbed by the New-boys taking control of high visibility sectors, Banking, telecommunications, energy. Malan, Finance is criticized by the clique that wants the government to be active in direct investment and support of big projects. Complaints about BNDES (Brazilian development bank) lending to foreigners for privatization (Recent AES incident) Tourinho, Mines and Energy-- pushing a new privatization model -- sale of stock at the market, not sale of control to a given company. This allows the existing management to stay in place. If it is the Secretary of Energy, Carraro, his big mission is to coordinate the developement of emergengy thermal plants. Big Picture Governement Porgram -- Petrobras provides that gas; Eletrobras buys and remarkets the electric energy; BNDES provides the financing --- All within the family. Foreign companies will not play by the rules of the old network. Enron has been actively complaining about the gas policy under Petrobras control. The One Issue I would raise is the lack of competition in the gas sector. Petrobras control of the BBPL and national gas. There cannot be true competition in the energy sector because the marginal power plants, price setters, gas power plants. As a note, there was a commitment with the World Bank to sell the part of 51% control of the Brazilian part of the BBPL pipeline. What Petrobras is doing is locking-up the capacity long term, and building a second pipeline. Of equal importance is our meeting with the Sao Paulo Governor. What issues do we have or what do you want me to say to him regarding our assets in this area. Even if it's to compliment on something, that's fine. JB.- The State of Sao Paulo, Mario Covas team are to be congratulated by the skillful manner that they have conducted the gradual privatization of energy sector. Covas is very influential. His current battle deals with tax reforms in Brazil. He is fighting a system of tax-preferences in other states to attract industries, which ultimately creates a Federal burden and consequently a Sao Paulo burden. The Petrobras control issue of the gas sector should have resonance. I assume we have no key issues in Chile at this time. JB.- There may be some but I a blissfully unaware of them. I would be interested on what you pick up Thanks. ---------------------- Forwarded by Jose Bestard/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 02/15/2000 01:45 PM --------------------------- Denise M Macedo 02/15/2000 06:50 AM To: Jose James M Diomedes cc: Subject: Gazeta Mercantil - Terry Thorn Hi guys, 1. Gostaria de saber se esta declara??o faz parte de um projeto consciente da Enron em enfrentar a Petrobr?s ou se foi um descuido do porta-voz. 2. Caso a imprensa nos procure para repercutir tal declara??o que, suponho, vai gerar umarea??o extremamente negativada Petrobr?s, existe alguma estrat,gia, key messages, etc? Vocs pretendem falar sobre o assunto? O que ser? dito???Thanks??Denise???04. GAZETA: Energia , o alvo dos empres?rios americanos??BRAS?LIA, 15 de fevereiro de 2000 - Empres?rios norte-americanos que ?acompanharam o secret?rio de Com,rcio, William Daley, destacaram o setor de ?energia ?no Brasil como a principal ?rea para investimentos no Pa?s. Segundo o ?vice-presidente da Enron, Terrence Thorn, por,m, 'o monop?lio exercido pela ?Petrobras? tem que acabar para que o setor se desenvolva. Todos devem competir, ?inclusive a estatal'.?Um dos obst?culos ,, de acordo com ele, 'a sombra que a Petrobras faz sobre o ?mercado de energia no Brasil'. O executivo norte-americano lembra que a ?decis?o do governo brasileiro de estabelecer um pre?o ?nico para o g?s ?natural em todo o pa?s , um claro exemplo de medidas que devem ter seus dias ?contados. 'Ficamos confusos ao saber de tal decis?o'. Terrence Thorn acredita ?que um monop?lio estatal pode ser negativo . concorrncia e que a privatiza??o da Petrobras ter? que ocorrer um dia. Para ele, o processo de privatiza??o de energia no Brasil vem sendo conduzido de forma eficaz, 'mas o Pa?s ainda n?o concluiu o projeto de desregulamenta??o (liberalizar o pre?o do g?s natural, por exemplo) e h? muito trabalho pela frente'. Segundo Thorn, as empresas estrangeiras de energia podem oferecer servi?os inovadores para o setor. 'O problema , que o mercado n?o est? preparado'. Ele defende que as novas fases da desregulamenta??o do setor energ,tico no Pa?s sejam debatidas por toda a sociedade. O interesse dos norte-americanos pelo setor p""de ser visto na pr?pria composi??o da miss?o de empres?rios ao Brasil. Das 20 empresas que viajaram com Daley, dez eram do setor de energia. O representante da Agncia de ?Desenvolvimento e Com,rcio dos Estados Unidos (USTR), Albert Angulo, ainda ?informou? que o ?rg?o est? analisando cinco oportunidades de investimentos dos EUA no ?mercado de energia do Brasil. 'Realizamos estudos de viabilidade para que? empresa venham ao Pa?s, mas o certo , que uma maior desregulamenta??o do ?setor energ,tico seria muito positivo para as empresas norte-americanas', diz.?A vice-presidente da empresa Energy Conversion Devices, Nancy Bacon, defende ?que o governo brasileiro deixe de gastar recursos com a gera??o de energia ?em locais distantes e passe a comprar tecnologias alternativas dos ?norte-americanos. 'Para locais de dif?cil acesso, como a Amaz""nia, a ?tecnologia de fotoc,lulas? , a grande solu??o para suprir o d,ficit energ,tico do Brasil'. (Gazeta ?Mercantil/P?gina A4) (Jamil Chade)???????????? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Fwd:; [EMail-Body]= FYI. ----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 10/12/2000 09:42 AM ----- Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 10/11/2000 02:25 PM To: Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, skean@enron.com, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, mpalmer@enron.com, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Margaret Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sue Nord/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Fwd: ----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 10/11/2000 02:23 PM ----- Susan J Mara@EES 10/11/2000 02:12 PM To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Fwd: ---------------------- Forwarded by Susan J Mara/SFO/EES on 10/11/2000 12:12 PM --------------------------- ""Daniel Douglass"" <douglass@ArterHadden.com> on 10/11/2000 12:54:40 PM To: <Barbara_Klemstine@apsc.com>, <Bob_Anderson@apses.com>, <berry@apx.com>, <dcazalet@apx.com>, <billr@calpine.com>, <jackp@calpine.com>, <glwaas@calpx.com>, <Ken_Czarnecki@calpx.com>, <cabaker@duke-energy.com>, <rjhickok@duke-energy.com>, <GTBL@dynegy.com>, <KEWH@dynegy.com>, <j_dasovi@ect.enron.com>, <rpelote@energy.twc.com>, <susan_j_mara@enron.com>, <curt.Hatton@gen.pge.com>, <foothill@lmi.net>, <camiessn@newwestenergy.com>, <jcgardin@newwestenergy.com>, <rsnichol@newwestenergy.com>, <rllamkin@seiworldwide.com>, <cfi1@tca-us.com> cc: Subject: Fwd: Attached are Frank Wolak's slides from his presentation at WPTF's meeting last Friday.? Greg Blue asked that I send these to the board, although I note that?a few?of you received them directly from Frank. ? Dan Received: from dymwsm07.mailwatch.com by ArterHadden.com; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:40:09 -0400 Received: from dymw0110.mailwatch.com (dymw0110.allegro.net [204.253.83.102]) by dymwsm07.mailwatch.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id e9AEaAL06385 for <Douglass@@arterhadden.com>; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:36:10 -0400 Received: from 204.253.83.71 by dymw0110.mailwatch.com with SMTP ( MailWatch 3.0(WSS) v4.3); Tue, 10 Oct 00 10:40:00 -0400 X-Server-Uuid: Received: from zia.stanford.edu (zia.Stanford.EDU [171.64.233.220]) by dymwsm09.mailwatch.com (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9AEaLH17504 for <Douglass@@arterhadden.com>; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:36:21 -0400 Received: from econ-wolak (econ-wolak.Stanford.EDU [171.64.233.175]) by zia.stanford.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id HAA04330; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 07:38:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: X-Sender: wolak@zia.stanford.edu (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 07:37:06 -0700 To: GTBL@dynegy.com, lyncorum@earthlink.net, william.freddo@neg.pge.com, rllamkin@seiworldwide.com, philm@SCDEnergy.com, mahoppe@calpx.com, BWoertz@caiso.com, Douglass@@arterhadden.com, foothill@lmi.net From: ""Frank A. Wolak"" <wolak@zia.stanford.edu> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-WSS-ID: 15FDF5CA563477-01-01 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; Here are my slides from the WPTF presentation as a .pdf file. Frank Wolak - wptf.pdf [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Fellow referred to me by Ken Lay; [EMail-Body]= yes Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 03/13/2001 12:10 PM To: skean@enron.com cc: Subject: Re: Fellow referred to me by Ken Lay Steve: Based on the note from Rosalee, and if you agree, I'm going to assign low priority to the issue. Jeff Rosalee Fleming 03/13/2001 08:46 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Vanessa Groscrand/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Re: Fellow referred to me by Ken Lay Hi Steve and Jeff - This was a cold call to Ken that Vanessa took while we were in Exec. Comm. meeting. She had asked Ginger who to refer him to as it was CA. and she mentioned Jeff. Please only call if there is any interest. Rosie From: Steven J Kean on 03/12/2001 04:46 PM To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Vanessa Groscrand/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Re: Fellow referred to me by Ken Lay It was not mentioned to me. I'm copying rosie and vanessa to find out if this was a simple referral (in which case you should keep the work to a minimum -- return the call, but don't get distracted from your other efforts) or whether Ken is especially interested in this and wants us to follow through. Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 03/12/2001 03:54 PM To: skean@enron.com cc: Subject: Fellow referred to me by Ken Lay Just got a call from a fellow named Jame Edgerly at the Enterprise Zone, Inc. He told me that Ken Lay (through Ken's secretary Vanessa) referred me to him. He is very interested in getting us to help him work with the Legislature to establish an ""Enterprise Zone"" energy tariff to encourage investment in California's Enterprice Zones. Before I launch on the effort, just wanted to check in and see if this rings a bell with you. Thanks. Best, Jeff [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Privileged and Confidential -- website; [EMail-Body]= FYI, the attached article and story is disturbing and surprising about Southern Company. It also raises an issue that we could face if we are not careful. The article discusses internal diversity studies, which the plaintiffs are using as evidence to support their claims. The company claims that the studies were done by people who did not know how to conduct the appropriate analyses under the relevant legal standards. I have this concern here, as well, when we have people running analyses that do not factor in the legal standards and instead try to interpret data themselves. I would like to talk about how to manage that. Let me know who you think should be included in such a meeting, and I'll set something up. Thanks. Michelle -----Original Message----- From: Lighthill, Sandra Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 5:08 PM To: Cash, Michelle; Hope, Valeria A.; Johnson, Rick Cc: Acevedo, Felecia Subject: FW: website FYI, This article recently aired on Dateline. Southern Power's statistics don't look too good. Sandra -----Original Message----- From: Castellano, Bonne Sent: Wed 8/22/2001 4:42 PM To: Lighthill, Sandra Cc: Subject: website This is the Dateline website with the article we discussed earlier today. Interesting. Bonne EB1669B [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Regulatory issues memo: Revised; [EMail-Body]= Additional information on the regulatory context. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/02/2000 06:19 PM --------------------------- Richard Shapiro 08/02/2000 05:54 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Regulatory issues memo: Revised ---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES on 08/02/2000 05:53 PM --------------------------- Richard Shapiro 08/01/2000 11:59 AM To: Cheryl Lipshutz/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lisa Mellencamp/HOU/ECT@ECT, Nicole Alvino/HOU/ECT@ECT, lbrasher@skadden.com, cstill@skadden.com cc: wweiland@velaw.com Subject: Regulatory issues memo: Revised Enclosed is revised regulatory "" issues"" memo that served as the basis for discussion at yesterday's regulatory review meeting--- the only outstanding issue , as I just communicated to Charles Still at Skadden, is confirmation of the fact that there are no antitrust approvals required in South Korea relative to SK- that confirmation should be forthcoming from local counsel this evening. Lisa- I assume you will see this gets to Bill Gathmann immediately so he can forward on to regional general counsel for final sign-off. ---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES on 08/01/2000 11:47 AM --------------------------- ""Weiland, William"" <wweiland@velaw.com> on 08/01/2000 11:44:10 AM To: ""'Shapiro, Rick'"" <rshapiro@enron.com> cc: Subject: Attached Files Rick, please find attached clean and marked versions of the regulatory issues memo. <<Regulatory Issues.DOC>> <<compare 4v2.DOC>> - Regulatory Issues.DOC - compare 4v2.DOC [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Enron Advisory Council meeting; [EMail-Body]= I may be adding someone to the agenda -- Vikram Pandit (recommended by Ken Lay and Pug Winokar) [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: CONFIDENTIAL - Residential in CA; [EMail-Body]= I like the idea, particularly if we can time any decision to turn the customers back so it falls after the failure to get some action out of Sacto (instead of after our earnings release). The only problem I see is that we would need a decision from the top that we're not going to turn the customers back if we get direct access (so we can end the debate). I don't think it helps us if we get lucky, get direct access back, then make a decision to return customers to the utility. Karen Denne@ENRON 04/13/2001 10:30 AM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Re: CONFIDENTIAL - Residential in CA Before any decision is made, I think we really need to weigh in with EES on the ramifications (both PR and legislative) of turning back 16,000 residential customers. I strongly believe that the public hit we will take will be far greater than our actual out-of-pocket losses. We will be crucified by the public, media, consumer groups, legislators, governor, attorney general, etc., and this action will reaffirm our reputation of packing up and leaving when it's not in our interest. The impact of this action would be exacerbated since it is on the heels of UC/CSU. I would also argue that this hurts our national dereg efforts. If we're advocating that competition and choice benefits consumers and then we turn around and pull out of a market and abandon customers when we're not ""profiting,"" we'll kill any chances we have of ever serving retail customers in California -- or in any other state. We look foolish advocating for direct access when we're not willing to serve our existing -- let alone future customers What about a preemptive strike that engages these 16,000 customers to weigh in on direct access -- i.e. a letter that says ""Enron may be forced to cancel its contract -- call/write/send the enclosed postcard to your legislator and tell them you want to keep your right to choose your energy service provider."" Our credibility is on the line. Before we take this action, we need to be cognizant of all the long-range strategic implications, and we need to seriously weigh the negative impact this will have on our corporate reputation, on our legislative abilities and on our commercial success going forward. kd James D Steffes 04/12/2001 09:05 PM To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES Subject: CONFIDENTIAL - Residential in CA In the meeting today, no decision was made about what to do with Enron's 16,000 residential customers. Each of the contracts gives a basic 30 day out right to Enron. That being said, I think that we have a short window to push for DA before any public action impacts us in Sacramento. I realize that the ultimate action (which I think is inevitable) makes it harder for our advocacy on DA, but real $ are flowing out of the company. EES will give us notice when a decision is reached. Thanks, Jim [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: October London meeting; [EMail-Body]= Attached is a draft of the Agenda we discussed. Irwin - I show Joskow on here but he has already declined (his wife is having surgery right before our meeting date). We may want to consider someone like Seabron Adamson (Frontier Economics) or perhaps someone else. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Project Stanley Q&As; [EMail-Body]= I think the Qs and As look good. I wouldn't bring up the California situation (eliminate the second half of A25). Eric Thode 08/22/2000 04:53 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Project Stanley Q&As Comments? ---------------------- Forwarded by Eric Thode/Corp/Enron on 08/22/2000 04:55 PM --------------------------- Eric Thode 08/22/2000 04:52 PM To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Aleck Dadson/TOR/ECT@ECT, Robert Hemstock/CAL/ECT@ECT, Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Project Stanley Q&As I haven't heard from anyone yet on the Q&A document related to Project Stanley. Any thoughts or comments on the attached? ---------------------- Forwarded by Eric Thode/Corp/Enron on 08/22/2000 04:53 PM --------------------------- Eric Thode 08/11/2000 04:31 PM To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Aleck Dadson/TOR/ECT@ECT, Robert Hemstock/CAL/ECT@ECT, Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Project Stanley Q&As Attached are the 58 questions prepared by GPC in anticipation of a public release on Project Stanley. The answers have been compiled by numerous individuals, including Aleck, Rob, Kevin Wellenius and me. Please review, make changes and return to me at your earliest convenience. I will compile everyone's corrections, additions, etc. and prepare a revised document. Thanks. If you have any questions, call me at ext. 3-9053. Eric [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Economic Espionage Act Presentation - August 15th; [EMail-Body]= calendar -- FYI ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/03/2000 07:15 PM --------------------------- Scott Tholan@ECT 08/01/2000 04:49 PM Sent by: Sharon Purswell@ECT To: John J Lavorato/Corp/Enron@Enron, Jeffrey A Shankman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Jim Fallon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Russell Woody/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, John Brindle, David Oxley/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Alan Aronowitz/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Economic Espionage Act Presentation - August 15th You are cordially invited to attend a presentation entitled: ""Acquiring Information: Trade Secrets and the Economic Espionage Act (EEA)"". Daniel Waltz, of the law firm Patton Boggs LLP, is a leading expert on the EEA and will deliver what promises to be an interesting and informative segment. Congress passed the EEA in 1996, and it will increasingly shape how corporate America collects, uses, and protects valued information. In addition to explaining some of the intricacies of the EEA, Dan Waltz will include ""hypothetical"" corporate case studies (some actually torn from the headlines) to illustrate his points. This event is sponsored by ENA's Competitive Analysis and Business Controls (CABC) group and is supported by ENA legal. This event kicks-off CABC's Competitive Intelligence Standards Program, which seeks to raise awareness of issues relevant both to Enron's practitioners and senior consumers of competitive intelligence. This particular speaking engagement is designed to raise awareness of the EEA's legal guidelines, as well as to stimulate thought both on the collection opportunities against our competitors as well as how we might better protect Enron's own proprietary information. I believe the topic of the EEA is especially relevant, given that we find ourselves amidst the big bang of this new information age. All CABC staff is being asked to attend this presentation, and we are inviting a small number of other Enron employees who are engaged in aspects of serious competitive intelligence. Select executives like yourselves are being invited to attend, and I would welcome any suggestions of others that you think might benefit from attending this event. The EEA presentation is set for August 15, 1:30-3:00 PM, in the 50th floor Conference room. Please RSVP to either myself or Sharon Purswell. Hope to see you there. P.S. By the way, our next speaker segment in the CI Standards Program will concentrate on the guidelines and implications of the ""Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA),"" and will likely be scheduled for the fall. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: ticket; [EMail-Body]= vkaminski@aol.com -----Original Message----- From: Urszula Sobczyk <urszula@pacbell.net>@ENRON Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 6:37 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Re: ticket Our phone number is 1-800-801-1055. Urszula Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com wrote: > What are the hours for Conti vs. Air France? I am the ofice for another 45 > minutes. > Your phone number? > > Vince > > -----Original Message----- > From: Urszula Sobczyk <urszula@pacbell.net>@ENRON > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 5:56 PM > To: Kaminski, Vince J > Subject: Re: ticket > > Dzien Dobry ponownie, > Na wszystkie te polaczenia ceny wychodzi ok. $1700.00. > Jedyne co to wylot 04 lipca z IAH przez Chicago do Warszawy - LOT, > powrot 09 lipca, Warszawa - JFK, JFK > przez DFW (Dallas) do Houston. Cena wychodz $1107.10. Bardzo prosze o > kontakt. > Urszula > > Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com wrote: > > > Another question. What about a Continental flight to Amsterdam and > from > > Amsterdam to Warsaw? > > > > I can also fly Continental through Rome or London, as long as I don't > have > > to change airports. > > > > Vince > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Urszula Sobczyk <urszula@pacbell.net>@ENRON > > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 1:50 PM > > To: vkamins@enron.com > > Subject: re: ticket > > > > Dzien dobry Panu, > > Na wylot 04 lipca z IAH do Warszawy i powrot 09 lipca (8 lipca nie > bylo > > miejsca) cena wynosi $1680.26. > > Bardzo prosze o kontakt czy jest Pan zainteresowany. > > Pozdrawiam, > > Urszula [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: Sac Bee, Wed, 6/6: Businesses vie for blackout exemptions:=20 The PUC must decide who should be spared, and the applicant list is very lo= ng Sac Bee, Wed, 6/6: PG&E, ISO agree to court order on power bills Sac Bee, Wed, 6/6: Peter Schrag: Turning up the heat in Houston and=20 Washington (Editorial) SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Is trading an insider's game? SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Daily energy costs for state fall in past weeks=20 SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Five tiers sought in proposed rate boost SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Port budget large, but power bills loom SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Continuous use urged for planned power plant=20 SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Rising energy prices threaten Poway troupe=20 SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Fair to use generators for midway attractions LA Times, Wed, 6/6: 'Hi, My Name Isn't Justice, Honey,' and Shame on Lockye= r =20 (Editorial) LA Times, Wed, 6/6: U.S. Probes Alleged Pact Not to Build New Plants Power:= =20 Justice officials focus on Southland operations of two firms, which deny=20 wrongdoing LA Times, Wed, 6/6: Natural Gas, Power Prices Drop Sharply Energy:=20 More conservation, mild weather are among factors keeping costs down, exper= ts=20 say LA Times, Wed, 6/6: The State Utility Averts $1 Billion in Costs Courts:=20 PG&E and Cal-ISO agree to recognize Department of Water Resources as=20 purchaser of the power SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: Dramatic drop in cost of electricity=20 LOWER BILLS: Cheaper fuel, milder weather credited SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: San Jose council gives green light to generating plant= =20 VOTE REVERSAL: Officials pressured to OK project SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: Developments in California's energy crisis SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: California conserves SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: L.A. power customers awash in cheap energy SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: PG&E doesn't want to pay for energy to avert blackouts Mercury News, Wed, 6/6: Metcalf plant gets preliminary approval=20 OC Register, Wed, 6/6: Feds probe AES, Williams Individual.com (PRnewswire), Wed, 6/6: Calpine Begins Construction of=20 Peaking Energy Center in Gilroy, Calif.=20 Individual.com (PRnewsire), Wed, 6/6: Reliant Urges FERC to Drop or Amend= =20 California Price Caps to Avoid Additional Shortages and More Blackouts Energy Insight, Wed, 6/6: Farm-fresh biopower --- Businesses vie for blackout exemptions: The PUC must decide who should be= =20 spared, and the applicant list is very long. By Carrie Peyton and Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writers (Published June 6, 2001)=20 Mixes for milkshakes and frozen coffees could spoil at ice cream parlors,= =20 sickening customers.=20 Seniors getting their hair done would have to leave their dryers and go hom= e=20 with wet heads, risking a chill.=20 Mall escalators could come to a sudden halt, endangering shoppers who lose= =20 their footing.=20 Those are among the health and safety risks cited by more than 10,000=20 businesses and government bodies asking state regulators to exempt them fro= m=20 rolling blackouts.=20 It is a list that mixes nursing homes and grocery stores, outpatient surgic= al=20 clinics and beauty salons, dialysis centers and country clubs.=20 ""A lot of people are treating this like a lottery,"" said Subodh Medhekar of= =20 Exponent Inc., the consulting firm sorting through exemption requests for t= he=20 state Public Utilities Commission.=20 For many, Medhekar said, the rationale seems to be "" 'I'm pretty sure I won= 't=20 get exempted, but what's the down side? Let's put in an application.' ""=20 Amid predictions that Californians could face dozens of rolling blackouts= =20 this summer, state regulators are trying to update a decades-old list of wh= o=20 should be spared if the lights go out.=20 The Alta Sierra County Club in Grass Valley should be among those whose pow= er=20 stays on, Sean O'Brien, the club's golf course superintendent, told=20 regulators in a nine-page application.=20 The country club telephones could go out, making it harder to phone for hel= p=20 if someone has a medical problem while golfing, he said in an interview.=20 And if the golf course's irrigation pumps shut down, it would lose the=20 ability to quell small blazes -- leaving it to rely on a fire station O'Bri= en=20 said is about one-quarter mile away.=20 Placerville Dialysis wants an exemption, too. As many as a dozen people the= re=20 can be having their blood pumped through an artificial kidney that cleans i= t=20 when their own kidneys no longer function properly.=20 ""When the power goes out, everything just stops,"" said manager Shirley=20 Carpenter. ""There is a way to manually return the blood by hand before it= =20 clots in the line. ... It would just be hectic.""=20 It takes about five minutes of manual pumping to fully disconnect someone= =20 from a dialysis machine, Carpenter said. And some patients can help by=20 operating their own pumps.=20 But, she said, ""I'm sure it would be kind of frightening to have your blood= =20 out in the line and the power off, and they're pretty much tied to the=20 machine.""=20 Pam Chin, a hairdresser at the Loomis Beauty Salon, said the owner sought a= n=20 exemption because people could get overheated if the air conditioning went= =20 out, and older customers getting their hair set could be chilled if the=20 dryers shut off.=20 With about half the state already exempt from rolling blackouts, the questi= on=20 of who else should stay connected has become a delicate one for utilities,= =20 regulators and legislators.=20 Carl Wood, the PUC commissioner who has taken the lead on blackout issues,= =20 estimates that fewer than 1,000 more utility customers can be exempted befo= re=20 they overload the rolling outage system designed to take stress off the=20 electric grid.=20 While about 6,000 customers are classified as ""essential"" by the state's tw= o=20 largest utilities, keeping them out of the blackout rotation also spares=20 about 5 million other customers who are served by the same circuits.=20 That multiplier effect will have to be weighed by the consulting firm, by= =20 utilities and eventually by PUC commissioners, who are scheduled to vote in= =20 early August on who should be added to existing standards.=20 The rules will apply to the state's investor-owned utilities, Pacific Gas a= nd=20 Electric Co., Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric Co.,= =20 but not to municipal utilities.=20 The Sacramento Municipal Utility District already rejected pleas for specia= l=20 exemptions from a medical lab, a veterinary hospital, nursing homes, medica= l=20 facilities, businesses and residents. SMUD believes they can weather=20 blackouts because they are not critical to public safety.=20 People have counted on having dependable electricity for so long that some= =20 have widely varying ideas of who can do without it safely, Medhekar said.= =20 Of the more than 500 Baskin Robbins ice cream parlors that dot California,= =20 only five are listed on the PUC Web site as applicants for exemptions.=20 The site cautions that its list of 9,239 electronic applicants hasn't been= =20 checked for duplicates -- or fiction. It includes hundreds of outlets of th= e=20 same drug store and supermarket chains, dozens of related nursing homes and= =20 more than 400 dentists. Another 1,200 commercial power users have applied b= y=20 fax.=20 Among those who have confirmed they want out of outages are the grocery=20 chains operated by West Sacramento-based Raley's, which said it took the=20 action as part of united effort with all California grocers, who are worrie= d=20 about food spoilage.=20 Others in the mix are Fairfield's Westfield Shoppingtown Solano, formerly t= he=20 Solano Mall, where officials sought the exemptions out of fear that shopper= s=20 would get injured if escalators came to a sudden halt.=20 The Yolo County Housing Authority asked for an exemption on behalf of its 7= 00=20 dwellings in the belief that the utilities offer exemptions for low-income= =20 Californians, Executive Director David Serena said.=20 Serena added that many of the authority's occupants are older or disabled a= nd=20 could be endangered by a blackout.=20 Chevron Corp. acknowledged it couldn't show that a blackout at its refineri= es=20 would present ""imminent danger to public health or safety,"" but it asked Go= v.=20 Gray Davis to support legislation exempting makers and transporters for=20 ""critical fuels,"" saying a refinery shutdown would cut into the state's=20 gasoline supply.=20 Some businesses acknowledged that their applications are a long shot.=20 ""It's probably a stretch,"" said Amanda Leveroni, who owns Bacio Catering Co= .=20 of Chico, about her request to the PUC. ""The public wouldn't be in danger.= =20 ""But we're a catering company -- somebody has planned for a year-plus for a= =20 wedding or some big event,"" she added. ""I would be in such a huge situation= .=20 I'd have to send out for pizza.""=20 The Bee's Carrie Peyton can be reached at (916) 321-1086 or=20 cpeyton@sacbee.com. PG&E, ISO agree to court order on power bills By Claire Cooper Bee Staff Writers (Published June 6, 2001)=20 SAN FRANCISCO -- Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and the operator of=20 California's power grid agreed Tuesday to a preliminary court order providi= ng=20 that the utility will continue to receive -- but not pay -- generators' bil= ls=20 for the state's purchases of the most expensive wholesale electricity.=20 The tab has been running at about $300 million a month.=20 The order, which U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali said he'll sign, will= =20 specify that the Independent System Operator will not procure power except= =20 for a ""creditworthy buyer who has agreed to pay the generator.""=20 In California, the only such potential buyer is the state Department of Wat= er=20 Resources. However, the department, which has avoided PG&E Co.'s bankruptcy= =20 proceedings by claiming sovereign immunity, will not be controlled by the= =20 agreement. Montali pointed out that the department still could demand=20 reimbursement from PG&E.=20 Under the agreement, the ISO will not press any claims against PG&E on beha= lf=20 of generators if they are not paid.=20 The proposed preliminary injunction was based on an April order by the=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which forbade the ISO from purchasing= =20 power on behalf of any non-creditworthy buyer, such as PG&E.=20 The ISO is appealing the FERC order. If the appeal succeeds, the injunction= =20 will end.=20 Peter Schrag: Turning up the heat in Houston and Washington (Published June 6, 2001)=20 Behind all the palaver about the predictable standoff at last week's energy= =20 ""summit"" between President Bush and Gov. Gray Davis, one major political=20 development was missed.=20 Put simply, in the past month the focus of the California energy crisis, an= d=20 maybe the onus as well, has moved east: from the state's (and Davis')=20 handling of the mess to the generating companies, energy marketers and gas= =20 pipeline companies that have richly profited from it, and thus to FERC, the= =20 do-next-to-nothing Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and the Bush=20 administration.=20 That wasn't all Davis' doing -- far from it -- though it's been at the hear= t=20 of his message about energy industry ""pirates"" and ""profiteers."" Bush's=20 misbegotten energy plan and the administration's political clumsiness also= =20 contributed mightily, not least by inadvertently giving Davis the chance to= =20 get media exposure he could only have dreamed about.=20 More important, there's the defection of Sen. James Jeffords from the=20 Republican Party and the resulting shift of control in the U.S. Senate, whe= re=20 the next chair of the Energy Committee will be Sen. Jeff Bingaman of New=20 Mexico, a co-sponsor of Sen. Dianne Feinstein's bill capping wholesale=20 electric rates for the next two years. And chairing the Committee on=20 Governmental Affairs will be Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, who's=20 already asked for an audit of energy prices.=20 Those changes will draw a lot more attention to recent studies showing that= a=20 handful of big generators -- Duke Power, Reliant, Mirant, Dynegy and the hu= ge=20 energy-marketing firm Enron -- have gamed the market to drive wholesale=20 prices to levels that, in the year 2000, sometimes reached 40 times the=20 prices of the year before.=20 The findings come not merely from economists at the California Independent= =20 System Operator, the agency that manages the state's grid, who estimate=20 overcharges resulting from market power at $6.2 billion for last year alone= .=20 They come also from Severin Borenstein and his colleagues at the University= =20 of California Energy Institute, who ""conservatively"" calculate the=20 overcharges at $4.5 billion; from Paul Joskow, a widely respected energy=20 economist at MIT; and from Edward Kahn, an economic analyst in San Francisc= o.=20 In a recent paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research,=20 Joskow and Kahn conclude that there's ""considerable evidence that the high= =20 prices experienced in the summer of 2000 reflect the withholding of supplie= s=20 from the market by suppliers [generators or marketers] exercising market=20 power."" That those high prices occurred not merely during peak usage but al= so=20 at off-hours, when no one had ever seen a price spike before, makes those= =20 spikes even more curious.=20 There is, in addition, the powerful suspicion that the huge increase in=20 natural gas prices that a subsidiary of El Paso Energy Co., now the largest= =20 gas company on Earth, was charging on the California side of the=20 California-Arizona border wasn't merely the result of an innocent imbalance= =20 between supply and demand.=20 None of that may be illegal. If there's no collusion, there are no violatio= ns=20 of antitrust laws. But it adds plenty of steam to the political argument. I= n=20 the 2000 election cycle alone, energy companies kicked in some $64 million = in=20 political contributions, 75 percent of it to Republicans. At a time when=20 those companies, many of them located in the same Houston neighborhood, are= =20 racking up astronomical profits and when their collective coziness with Bus= h=20 and the Republican Party is a lot more than rhetoric, their vulnerability t= o=20 a vigorous Senate investigation ought to be obvious.=20 The clincher is ""Blackout,"" a ""Frontline"" program that both symbolizes the= =20 shifting emphasis and reinforces it. (The program is scheduled to be aired = at=20 8 p.m. Friday on Sacramento cable Channel 7.) It isn't another recital of= =20 Californians worrying about their electric bills, or about the stupidity of= =20 the state's deregulation scheme or how Davis dithered in addressing the=20 crisis. It is about those generators and marketers in Houston and North=20 Carolina, men (and a few women) who regard themselves as the heroes of the= =20 new energy markets.=20 The piece is reported by Lowell Bergman, who in working for both ""Frontline= ""=20 and the New York Times has already broken major print stories about Duke=20 Power's secret approach to Davis offering unspecified energy refunds in=20 return for an end to state investigations and lawsuits. Bergman also report= ed=20 private conversations between Enron chairman Kenneth Lay, a major Bush=20 supporter, and FERC chairman Curt Hebert regarding the influence that Lay= =20 could exercise with Bush to allow Hebert to keep his chairmanship if Hebert= 's=20 supported certain decisions Enron badly wants.=20 None of these recent events is likely to end Davis' political woes, and the= y=20 may not produce the wholesale rate caps Feinstein wants and that most=20 economists think necessary -- or maybe any significant reduction in the=20 industry's predatory pricing. But they will surely help turn up the heat,= =20 both in Houston and Washington. Six months ago FERC found wholesale prices= =20 were not ""fair and reasonable"" as federal law requires, but did little abou= t=20 them. It will now have a lot more questions to answer.=20 Peter Schrag can be reached at Box 15779, Sacramento, CA 95852-0779, or at= =20 pschrag@sacbee.com. Is trading an insider's game?=20 Buying, selling of electricity is a growth business, but some say deck is= =20 stacked against consumers By Craig D. Rose=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 While Californians decry deregulation's failure to deliver a competitive=20 market, electricity wholesalers have quietly developed a vast and rapidly= =20 growing business of buying and selling power among themselves.=20 The deals take place on high-tech trading floors in Houston and elsewhere= =20 around the country, as well as on Internet-based trading systems.=20 Some experts say this electricity trading is a key mechanism for raising=20 consumer power prices, yet it's largely unregulated.=20 ""Electricity trading is like buying stock -- when you have ability to chang= e=20 the stock price,"" said Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economics profess= or=20 and member of the state grid operator's market surveillance group.=20 Energy companies say the buying and selling of contracts to deliver power= =20 provides risk management, allowing plant owners to presell their electricit= y,=20 lock in prices and avoid fluctuations. The rough and tumble of the free=20 market, they add, is the most efficient means of allocating a resource like= =20 electricity.=20 But industry critics say trading is far from a competitive market paradigm.= =20 In their view, it's a means of communication -- a way for energy insiders t= o=20 collude and raise prices under the guise of competition.=20 To be sure, the trading arms of major energy companies have emerged as star= s=20 in an industry where profit surges of 300 percent or 400 percent are not=20 uncommon.=20 The transactions, shrouded in secrecy, can leave ownership of a critical=20 commodity in unknown hands. Consider the case of power generated by AES=20 Corp.'s California plants.=20 In 1998, AES made a bold move. Immediately after purchasing power plants th= at=20 gave it control of 10 percent of the state's electric generating capacity,= =20 the company sold the output from its plants for the next 20 years to Willia= ms=20 Cos.=20 Williams did not sit on this treasure trove of electrons. The Tulsa, Okla.,= =20 company soon sold 80 percent of what it bought.=20 It is difficult to say who owns that power now. Some might be owned by Semp= ra=20 Trading, a sister company of SDG&E. Or some could be owned by Enron Corp.,= =20 the nation's biggest electricity trader.=20 A spokeswoman for Williams conceded that Williams itself may have repurchas= ed=20 some of the electricity it sold earlier. But trading companies closely guar= d=20 their positions.=20 This much can be said with certainty: Electricity that AES sold for less th= an=20 5 cents per kilowatt-hour to Williams changed hands perhaps 10 times in the= =20 wholesale market and emerged at times in recent months with a price tag for= =20 consumers that was 300 percent higher.=20 Williams' trading profits increased by 523 percent in the first quarter thi= s=20 year. Advance sales All this buying and selling creates curious confluences.=20 In their attempt to deflect criticism over high prices, generating companie= s=20 such as Duke Energy -- operator of the South Bay Power Plant in Chula and= =20 others in the state -- frequently note that they sell most of their=20 electricity far in advance. But they acknowledge less often that their=20 trading units may also be buying power, which could boost the company's=20 electricity inventory.=20 Duke was the fourth biggest electricity trader last year and cited its=20 trading activity as a prime contributor to its wholesale business profits,= =20 which soared 324 percent in the first quarter to $348 million.=20 It is a company's power traders who frequently direct plant operators to=20 increase or decrease the generation of power in response to market=20 conditions.=20 Energy companies have little option but to turn to trading for profits. One= =20 of the better kept secrets of electrical deregulation and its promise of=20 competition is that there is remarkably little competition in the productio= n=20 side of the business.=20 For one thing, electricity is a commodity; power from one company is=20 indistinguishable from that generated by others.=20 More important, nearly all modern plants generate power from turbines built= =20 by a handful of manufacturers. The result? Modern plants owned by different= =20 companies produce power at nearly identical cost.=20 ""The cost of power produced by modern plants is all within a mil=20 (one-thousandth of a dollar),"" said Michael Peevey, an adviser to Gov. Gray= =20 Davis and former president of Southern California Edison.=20 So the extraction of profit in the electricity business relies much more on= =20 trading. Traders' profits rise when prices are volatile -- plunging, or eve= n=20 better, rising sharply. Little regulation But despite the obvious temptation to manipulate the market, the burgeoning= =20 electricity trading business has remained largely unregulated.=20 The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission does require quarterly filings fro= m=20 energy traders, but these often provide incomplete information, or at least= =20 little that has been of concern to FERC.=20 In fact, although the trading of electricity grew more than a hundredfold= =20 from 1996 to 2000, FERC has taken no major enforcement action against a=20 trader. After the onset of the California crisis last year, FERC has acted= =20 once. That was against Williams, which agreed to pay $8 million without=20 admitting guilt to resolve an allegation that it withheld supply to pump up= =20 prices.=20 FERC's record of enforcement in the area of power trading stands in contras= t=20 to a long list of enforcement actions within other markets taken by the=20 Securities Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission= .=20 FERC has recently added staff to its market oversight operations. But Willi= am=20 Massey, a FERC commissioner, says the agency's effort is still inadequate.= =20 ""Electricity can be flipped, stripped and chopped up,"" Massey said. ""It's a= n=20 extraordinarily complicated market.=20 ""The sophisticated marketers and traders have simply moved past us. We're= =20 kind of horse and buggy in our approach and they're out there in rocket shi= ps=20 flying around ... The problem is that sophisticated traders don't necessari= ly=20 produce reasonable prices. They produce profits.""=20 Before deregulation, electricity trading was a low-key affair. Regulated=20 utilities dealt power back and forth on a reciprocal basis to fill=20 electricity shortfalls in their control areas. There was little trading for= =20 profit until the mid-1990s, after federal legislation and FERC rulings open= ed=20 the market.=20 Major traders include large energy companies, sister companies of=20 California's major utilities and Wall Street firms. Market volatility In many ways, the trading of power is similar to that of other commodities.= =20 But there are important differences. Because it cannot be stored and its us= e=20 is so fundamental, the price of electricity is the most volatile of all.=20 When supplies are tight, a single supplier can rapidly raise prices to=20 budget-busting levels, as evidenced by Duke Energy's recent admission that = it=20 charged California nearly $4,000 for a megawatt-hour of power, a quantity= =20 that probably sold hours earlier for one-tenth of that sum or less.=20 Wolak, the Stanford economist, and state Sen. Joseph Dunn, D-Garden Grove,= =20 who is investigating the state power market, say trading allows companies t= o=20 collude under the guise of competition. Instead of wringing out lowest cost= s,=20 the wholesale trading market serves to raise prices, they say.=20 ""As I trade to you and you trade to me, we communicate to each other what= =20 price we would like to get,"" said Wolak. ""It's not collusive. It's just=20 communicating price.""=20 Mark Palmer, a spokesman for Enron, the nation's biggest power trader, said= =20 California's problem is not the result of trading.=20 ""It's a result of shortages,"" Palmer said.=20 Underscoring its emphasis on trading, Enron's new headquarters tower in=20 downtown Houston rises from a six-story block of new trading floors,=20 including expanded space for electricity trading.=20 Enron also pioneered trading in cyberspace and its Enron Online site claims= =20 to be the most active computer-based trading market.=20 The Houston company argues that consumers won't fully benefit from power=20 trading and deregulation until they have greater choice in choosing their= =20 power supplier. And the company says FERC has not done enough to open acces= s=20 to transmission lines, which would allow traders to move power around the= =20 country. To that end, Enron has lobbied hard for President Bush's plan for = a=20 national electricity grid.=20 Palmer says the notion that the price of electricity rises each time it is= =20 traded is mistaken.=20 ""The market is always looking for the real price of a commodity,"" Palmer=20 said.=20 Dunn, the California state senator, says his investigation found a differen= t=20 function for trading. At a time when supply barely meets or falls short of= =20 demand, he noted, companies with electricity to sell have to worry only abo= ut=20 how high to set their price.=20 ""The trader is a pawn in the generator's game to drive up prices,"" said Dun= n.=20 ""Trading develops a level of trust. You, my alleged competitor, will bid in= =20 the same patterns and I will respond not in a competitive pattern but in a= =20 complimentary pattern.""=20 The state senator said his investigation found evidence that on several day= s,=20 energy companies appeared to test their ability to drive prices up, without= =20 being undercut by competitors.=20 This ability to drive up prices without competitive consequence is a key te= st=20 of market power, the technical term for manipulation or price fixing.=20 But Dunn also conceded that antitrust violations can be hard to prove in=20 court. He suggested that even if the trading behavior falls short of=20 antitrust violations, it remains anti-competitive and devastating for the= =20 California economy.=20 To Harry Trebing, a utility industry expert and professor emeritus at=20 Michigan State University, wholesale electricity trading is reminiscent of= =20 what took place in the 1920s and early '30s. Back then, utility companies= =20 created complex networks of holding companies that traded stock among=20 themselves, driving up prices in the process.=20 Undoing that scheme was a focus of President Franklin Roosevelt's=20 administration. Congress ended up barring national power companies and=20 tightening regulation of utilities, in an effort to counteract their tenden= cy=20 to create markets that work only for insiders.=20 ""The broad goals of trading are the same,"" Trebing said.=20 ""The goal is to maximize profits through raising prices.""=20 Daily energy costs for state fall in past weeks=20 By Ed Mendel=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO -- In some of the first good news of the electricity crisis, the= =20 Davis administration said yesterday that the daily cost of power purchased = by=20 the state for utility customers has dropped in recent weeks.=20 The price-drop news comes after an announcement that Californians conserved= =20 more energy than expected last month, 11 percent, and amid Davis=20 administration optimism that the Legislature may finally begin to move on a= =20 plan to keep Southern California Edison out of bankruptcy.=20 The developments, if they turn out to be a trend and not temporary, could b= e=20 among the first signs that Gov. Gray Davis' plan to end the electricity=20 crisis is beginning to work. But the administration isn't saying that.=20 ""We have had a few good days here lately,"" said S. David Freeman, a Davis= =20 power adviser. ""I don't think that I want to project.""=20 Some power-market watchers began to speculate last month that prices may ha= ve=20 peaked earlier this year. Platts, an energy information service, said=20 yesterday that spot prices for the natural gas used by power plants are=20 falling this month.=20 The governor's press secretary, Steve Maviglio, told reporters yesterday th= at=20 the daily amount spent on power is now ""well below"" $50 million, which was= =20 the average cost earlier this year.=20 A 12-day gap in the most recent notice to the Legislature that another $500= =20 million increment will be spent on power suggests that the daily average=20 during the last two weeks may have dropped down around $42 million.=20 Oscar Hidalgo, a spokesman for the state power purchasing agency, said that= =20 the average cost of power was under $40 million during the first four days = of=20 this month.=20 Maviglio attributed the lower cost to conservation, the phasing in of cheap= er=20 long-term power contracts, fewer power plants off-line for maintenance, and= =20 cooler weather.=20 However, he said, ""The average cost is still way over what we paid last=20 year.""=20 There was widespread skepticism in late April when the governor's consultan= ts=20 predicted that the $346 per megawatt-hour average paid by the state for=20 non-contracted power from April through June would drop to an average of $1= 95=20 from July through September.=20 ""We are still very comfortable with the projection that Mr. Fichera and=20 company estimated,"" Maviglio said, referring to Joseph Fichera of Saber=20 Partners in New York.=20 During a briefing on May 21, Fichera told reporters that the amount of powe= r=20 that the state would obtain under long-term contracts for May was expected = to=20 be about 43 percent of the total required, the so-called net short.=20 Fichera said contracts already signed were expected to cover 66 percent of= =20 the net short in June, 48 percent in July, and 42 percent in August. He sai= d=20 contracts that had been agreed on in principle could increase those amounts= =20 to 73 percent in June, 67 percent in July, and 60 percent in August.=20 ""We are still on target. There are risks,"" Fichera said yesterday, among th= em=20 extended hot weather and power plant outages. ""No one is popping the=20 champagne corks until Sept. 30.""=20 The governor's consultants based their forecast of power demand this summer= =20 on an estimate that Californians will reduce their electricity use by 7=20 percent.=20 The 11 percent reduction last month, as compared to May of last year, came= =20 before the sticker shock of rate hikes that begin this month for customers = of=20 Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric. And a $35 million ad campaign urging= =20 conservation has not hit full stride.=20 Maviglio said the administration plans to release some detailed information= =20 on Monday about the roughly $8 billion the state has spent buying power. Th= e=20 general fund will be repaid by a bond of up to $13.4 billion that ratepayer= s=20 will pay off over 15 years.=20 Legislative leaders have demanded detailed information about power purchase= s=20 before proceeding with the Edison plan. Assembly Democrats are working on a= =20 plan that de-emphasizes state purchase of the Edison transmission system an= d=20 would put most of the burden for paying off Edison's debt on businesses and= =20 large users, not residences. Five tiers sought in proposed rate boost=20 Conservation would be promoted, SDG&E says By Karen Kucher=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 A proposed rate increase for SDG&E customers to cover the high cost of=20 electricity should be imposed in five tiers to encourage conservation, the= =20 company is advising state utility regulators.=20 The more electricity a customer uses, the higher the rate would be.=20 SDG&E needs to raise its rates to bring in an additional $502 million=20 annually to pay the state for power purchases.=20 The state Public Utilities Commission is expected to rule on San Diego Gas = &=20 Electric's rate-increase proposal June 28.=20 The rate changes would remove a cap that has shielded most SDG&E customers= =20 from rising electricity prices for a year. The cap, enacted by state=20 lawmakers in September 2000 and retroactive to June 2000, set rates at 6.5= =20 cents per kilowatt-hour.=20 Higher rates would mean the average SDG&E residential and small-business=20 customer's electricity bills would go up by 18 percent. Large commercial=20 users' bills would average 29 percent more.=20 Public hearings on the issue will be held next Monday and Tuesday in San=20 Diego, El Cajon, Escondido and San Clemente. These sessions will focus on= =20 small-business and residential consumers. Hearings on large commercial user= s=20 were held last month.=20 Earlier this year, the PUC decided to allow the state's two largest=20 utilities, Pacific Gas and Electric and Southern California Edison, to char= ge=20 customers an extra $5.7 billion annually for electricity.=20 The state Department of Water Resources, which has been buying power for=20 SDG&E customers since February, asked SDG&E to generate a total of $915=20 million annually to cover the cost of electricity purchases.=20 With the proposed rate increases, SDG&E could do that.=20 Large commercial customers would pay about 30 percent of the overall increa= se=20 and residential and small-business customers would pay about 70 percent, sa= id=20 Ed Van Herik, a spokesman for the utility company.=20 If the increase can be tiered, as many as 60 percent of residential custome= rs=20 will see no rate increase if their electricity usage remains the same, Van= =20 Herik said.=20 But customers who use more than 130 percent of their baseline -- considered= =20 the minimum amount of electricity needed by a household -- will be billed a= t=20 increasingly higher rates.=20 Residential and small-business customers who use a lot of electricity could= =20 pay as much as 17.89 cents per kilowatt hour for some power they consume.= =20 Consumer advocate Michael Shames said he is concerned the utility's proposa= l=20 does not spread the increases evenly among different types of users. He als= o=20 called for more scrutiny of the state's request.=20 People should tell PUC officials ""that this increase should not be a carte= =20 blanche or blank check approval,"" said Shames, the head of Utility Consumer= s'=20 Action Network. ""The PUC needs to ensure that the rate increase requested b= y=20 the (state) is reasonable.""=20 The public hearings are scheduled for:=20 ?Monday, 1 p.m., San Diego Concourse, Copper Room, 200 C St., San Diego.=20 ?Monday, 7 p.m., El Cajon Community Center, 195 E. Douglas Ave., El Cajon.= =20 ?Tuesday, 1 p.m., Country Inn Hotel, 35 Via Pico Plaza, San Clemente.=20 ?Tuesday, 7 p.m., Center for the Arts, 340 N. Escondido Blvd., Escondido.= =20 Port budget large, but power bills loom=20 Slowing economy also cause for worry By Ronald W. Powell=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 The ""rock"" is rolling financially, but there are indications that the blues= =20 lurk on the horizon.=20 Officials of the San Diego Unified Port District -- headquartered in a=20 block-shaped building some employees call the rock -- are happy with a=20 projected 2001-2002 budget that is 5.1 percent larger than the current one.= =20 Total revenue is expected to reach $208.7 million, $10.2 million above what= =20 is expected in the fiscal year that ends June 30.=20 Port commissioners gave preliminary approval to the budget yesterday and ar= e=20 scheduled to take a final vote July 10.=20 But a slowing economy and surging electric bills are causes for concern.=20 Electricity costs are expected to rise from $5 million to $8.2 million in t= he=20 coming fiscal year.=20 ""As far as trends, we see a continuation of the growth we've experienced ov= er=20 the past five years,"" said Bruce Hollingsworth, the port's treasurer. ""But= =20 our percentage of growth will not rise as sharply.""=20 Port revenues have grown steadily since the 1997-1998 fiscal year, when $16= 3=20 million was generated.=20 The proposed budget calls for adding 24 employees to the port's 730-member= =20 work force. New hires will include three Harbor Police officers, 10 employe= es=20 in the aviation division and four in maritime services.=20 The port operates Lindbergh Field and administers nonmilitary tidelands alo= ng=20 San Diego Bay. It is landlord to more than 600 waterfront businesses and=20 operates two marine cargo terminals and one cruise ship terminal.=20 The budget calls for growth in each of the port's primary revenue centers:= =20 aviation, real estate and maritime services.=20 Passenger and cargo activity at Lindbergh Field is expected to generate $90= .7=20 million, or $5 million more than expected in the current year. Most of that= =20 increase is expected to come from parking-rate increases at the airport and= =20 at the port's long-term parking lot on Pacific Highway.=20 Rent from hotels and other businesses that are port tenants are expected to= =20 total $63.1 million, up $1.8 million from the current budget.=20 Increases in cargo and cruise ship traffic are expected to boost maritime= =20 income by $2.7 million, to a total of $18.4 million.=20 The port expects to spend $157 million on construction projects. They inclu= de=20 $8.5 million to relocate the General Services Department from Eighth Avenue= =20 and Harbor Drive in San Diego to National City and more than $5 million for= =20 paving and improvements at the 10th Avenue Marine Terminal.=20 Rent revenue could grow substantially in future years. Four hotel projects = on=20 port property have won approval or are seeking it.=20 Jim Bailey, president of Manchester Resorts, told commissioners yesterday= =20 that he expects to break ground on a second Hyatt tower of 750 rooms by Jun= e=20 26. Port officials said revenue from that hotel would bring in an additiona= l=20 $3.7 million a year. It is scheduled to open in the summer of 2003.=20 Hollingsworth, the treasurer, said that if all four hotels are built the po= rt=20 could receive as much as $15 million a year in new revenue.=20 Continuous use urged for planned power plant=20 Escondido facility originally proposed for peak demand By Jonathan Heller=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 ESCONDIDO -- A proposed power plant in southwest Escondido that initially w= as=20 expected to run only during times of peak electricity demand probably will = be=20 allowed to run full time.=20 A state energy official who recommended approval of the plant yesterday has= =20 said the plant could operate as often as the state deems necessary.=20 The California Energy Commission was scheduled to vote on the project today= .=20 CalPeak Power of San Diego has asked the commission to approve a 49-megawat= t=20 plant on Enterprise Street near Vineyard Avenue. Referred to as a ""peaker""= =20 plant, such facilities typically are designed to supply energy only during= =20 times of peak demand.=20 The state limits the number of hours some plants can operate to keep=20 pollution at a minimum. A 44-megawatt peaker plant being built on West=20 Mission Avenue in Escondido by Ramco Inc. will be allowed to operate no mor= e=20 than 16 hours per day.=20 That plant is permitted to emit up to 5 parts per million of nitrogen oxide= ,=20 although its actual emissions are expected to be slightly lower, said Dale= =20 Mesple, a Ramco consultant. Nitrogen oxide is a component of smog.=20 The CalPeak plant, if approved, would be restricted to 2 parts per million = of=20 nitrogen oxide.=20 It was generally assumed that the CalPeak plant would operate under similar= =20 time restrictions as the Ramco plant. The potential for air pollution was= =20 among the chief concerns of residents who spoke at the City Council hearing= s=20 on the Ramco project and at the energy commission hearings about the CalPea= k=20 plant.=20 But under the terms of approval recommended by Energy Commission Chairman= =20 William Keese, CalPeak's plant would be able to operate ""up to 8,760 hours= =20 per year, typically when the demand for electricity is high."" That number= =20 equals 24 hours a day.=20 The actual number of hours would depend on the requirements of the state's= =20 Independent System Operator, which manages the energy grid.=20 ""We certainly want to have the flexibility to run whenever we're needed,""= =20 said Mark Lyons, CalPeak's development director. ""Exactly how often we will= =20 run is anybody's guess.""=20 Escondido Councilwoman June Rady said she was frustrated by the possibility= =20 of the plant running full time. In Ramco's case, the city and the county Ai= r=20 Pollution Control District made it clear how often the plant could operate.= =20 CalPeak chose to bypass the city's permitting process and went through the= =20 state Energy Commission, which offers an expedited 21-day approval put in= =20 place by Gov. Gray Davis as an emergency measure.=20 ""I think Escondido has been absolutely ignored and there's a total lack of= =20 due process,"" Rady said. ""It boils down to an issue of local control.""=20 Although city officials objected to the commission pre-empting the city's= =20 land-use authority, the commission maintained that Davis' order gave it the= =20 final say on this type of project.=20 If the commission gives final approval today, the only remedy available to= =20 the city would be in court. At least three council members must vote to=20 initiate legal action.=20 Keese's recommended approval did take into account several city concerns=20 regarding landscaping. The CalPeak plant would be built near the entrance o= f=20 a planned high-tech business park, and city officials were worried the=20 plant's appearance might hinder the ability to attract high-quality tenants= =20 to the park.=20 Mayor Lori Holt Pfeiler said she was not surprised by the commission's=20 recommendation.=20 ""I expected they would want to approve the project, and that's why it was= =20 important for the city to weigh in with conditions we have in this=20 community,"" Pfeiler said.=20 Rising energy prices threaten Poway troupe=20 By Brian E. Clark=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 POWAY -- Rising electricity rates may extinguish the stage lights this summ= er=20 for the Poway Performing Arts Company.=20 ""I'm afraid that if SDG&E gets the price increase it's asking for -- from 6= .5=20 cents per kilowatt-hour to 8.9 cents -- that we'll go under,"" said Kathy=20 McCafferty, spokeswoman for the nonprofit theater.=20 The volunteer organization produces its plays in a building at a Poway Road= =20 shopping center. It held three fund-raising performances over the weekend,= =20 but officials were uncertain yesterday how much money was raised.=20 The group is not affiliated with the Poway Performing Arts Center and has= =20 been in business for 20 years.=20 McCafferty said the group built up a $2,000 surplus last summer before ener= gy=20 prices began to surge.=20 ""That $2,000 was a big reserve for us,"" she said. ""It seemed like a ton of= =20 money, but, boy, it went fast. And we're really energy-dependent. Our light= s=20 use a lot of power. And we're in Poway on the second floor of our building.= =20 It gets hot here, and we have to use air conditioning.""=20 But McCafferty acknowledged that the cost of power isn't the group's only= =20 problem.=20 In a recent letter to backers, President Nan Katona said the organization= =20 also needs new blood to keep operating.=20 ""The truth is that lack of funding is just a symptom of the deeper problem,= =20 which is lack of community support,"" she wrote. ""Ironically, audiences and= =20 reviewers recognize the Poway Performing Arts Company as one of the premier= =20 community arts theaters in San Diego.""=20 Katona said some new volunteers had stepped forward to take leadership role= s=20 in the theater company since she wrote her letter last month. But she said= =20 rising electricity prices could still bring the group down.=20 ""If our energy bills double or triple, we could be in dire straits,"" she=20 said. ""It could push us over the edge financially.""=20 McCafferty said it would be difficult for the theater to cut costs.=20 ""We can't run a much leaner operation,"" she said. ""If our power prices go u= p=20 again, we may still be forced out of business.""=20 The theater is at 13250 Poway Road, in the Lively Shopping Center. For more= =20 information, call (858) 679-8085.=20 Fair to use generators for midway attractions=20 By Michael Burge=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 DEL MAR -- The Del Mar Fair will generate its own electricity for thrill=20 rides on the midway this year instead of using energy from SDG&E.=20 ""In case there are planned or unplanned outages, we still will be operating= ,""=20 fairgrounds General Manager Timothy J. Fennell said.=20 Fennell decided to put the midway on generators because he didn't want the= =20 fairgrounds pulling power from the grid while county residents are coping= =20 with rolling blackouts at home and at work, he said.=20 And the fair does not want to take a chance that a rolling blackout will=20 leave some people stranded in rides high above the grounds, forcing an=20 evacuation.=20 The fairgrounds has been told it is exempt from rolling blackouts, but rath= er=20 than take such a risk it will rent 13 diesel-fuel generators and produce=20 electricity on the midway. The rest of the fairgrounds will use power from= =20 San Diego Gas & Electric Co.=20 Fairgrounds operations manager Larry Baumann estimated it would cost the=20 fairgrounds $20,000 more to generate its own electricity than to buy it fro= m=20 SDG&E.=20 Midway manager Donna Ruhm said it will be worth it.=20 ""Rides that require evacuation have to have backup power and they do,"" Ruhm= =20 said. ""Now our service won't be interrupted.""=20 It is not unusual for carnivals to generate their own power, and the=20 fairgrounds has done so in the past. Fair officials removed the generators = 10=20 to 15 years ago to reduce noise on the midway.=20 The fair opens June 15 and ends July 4.=20 While the rest of the fairgrounds is on the SDG&E grid, Baumann said backup= =20 generators can kick in during a typical 60-or 90-minute blackout, allowing= =20 the fair to operate without serious difficulty. Those generators are not=20 linked to the midway.=20 All the generators are licensed by the state and meet emission standards,= =20 fair officials said, so they do not expect the noise and odor to be=20 excessive.=20 The fairgrounds is taking the precaution of providing its own power despite= =20 the fact that it probably will not go dark during a rolling blackout.=20 ""SDG&E has assured me that .?.?. the fairgrounds and the racetrack will not= =20 be on the curtailment (blackout) list during the fair and the races,"" said= =20 Del Mar Fire Chief Jack Gosney.=20 The Del Mar Thoroughbred racing season begins July 18 and ends Sept. 5.=20 Gosney said SDG&E told him earlier this year that the fairgrounds was not= =20 subject to a forced outage because it shared a circuit with the Del Mar Fir= e=20 Station, which is a 911 dispatch center and exempt from a blackout. But he= =20 said recent research showed that the fairgrounds is on a separate circuit.= =20 Nonetheless, Gosney said, SDG&E is exempting the fairgrounds and racetrack= =20 during the busy summer season.=20 The fairgrounds paid $137,152.95 for its electricity usage from March 12 to= =20 April 10. It paid $51,845.39 for electricity during the same period last ye= ar. ?=20 Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 'Hi, My Name Isn't Justice, Honey,' and Shame on Lockyer=20 By TOM G. PALMER ?????Here's what California Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer said at a press=20 conference about Enron Corp. Chairman Kenneth Lay: ""I would love to=20 personally escort Lay to an 8-by-10 cell that he could share with a tattooe= d=20 dude who says, 'Hi, my name is Spike, honey.""'=20 ?????Here's why Lockyer should be removed from his office of public trust:= =20 First, because as the chief law enforcement officer of the largest state in= =20 the nation, he not only has admitted that rape is a regular feature of the= =20 state's prison system, but also that he considers rape a part of the=20 punishment he can inflict on others.=20 ?????Second, because he has publicly stated that he would like to personall= y=20 arrange the rape of a Texas businessman who has not even been charged with= =20 any illegal behavior.=20 ?????Lockyer's remarks reveal him to be an authoritarian thug, someone whol= ly=20 unsuited to holding an office of public trust.=20 ?????But his remarks do have one positive merit: They tell us what criminal= =20 penalties really entail.=20 ?????Contrary to some depictions of prisons as country clubs, they are=20 violent and terrible places. More and more politicians propose criminal=20 sanctions for more and more alleged misdeeds, and as a result ever more kin= ds=20 of behavior are sanctioned by criminal penalties, perhaps now even selling= =20 electricity. Those found guilty of such crimes are put into cages, where th= ey=20 are deprived of their liberty and dignity and, as Lockyer so clearly=20 acknowledged, raped and brutalized. What's worse, Lockyer has indicated tha= t=20 he believes that rape is an appropriate part of the system of punishments h= e=20 administers.=20 ?????Should it matter that Lay is a businessman? Imagine the outcry if the= =20 head of Enron were female. What would Lockyer's fellow Democrats have said = to=20 that?=20 ?????Should it matter that Lay is chairman of an electricity generator? Doe= s=20 the nature of his business justify threats to escort him to his own rape?= =20 Lockyer told the Los Angeles Times that he had singled out Enron's chairman= =20 because the Houston-based company is the world's largest energy trader.=20 ?????So apparently singling out a man for a heinous threat is OK because he= 's=20 the chairman of the world's largest energy trading company. That's accordin= g=20 to the man who, as a state senator, sponsored California's 1984 hate-crimes= =20 law. Evidently the crusader against intimidation on the basis of race,=20 religion and sexual orientation feels no hesitation at all about intimidati= ng=20 someone and threatening him with the brutal use of physical force simply=20 because he heads the world's largest energy trading company.=20 ?????Lockyer and Gov. Gray Davis seem to think that the best way to keep th= e=20 lights on is to threaten electricity producers with brute force, rather tha= n=20 to offer to pay competitive rates in competitive markets. Are energy=20 producers to blame for California's energy problems? No. Bad policies,=20 including rigid controls on retail prices of electricity, are the cause of= =20 the problem, not the people who generate energy. Scapegoating producers and= =20 threatening them with violence is an old ploy of authoritarians. California= ns=20 should not stand for it.=20 ?????An Enron spokesman said that Lockyer's chilling stated desire to arran= ge=20 the rape of Lay does not merit a response. The spokesman is wrong. Lockyer'= s=20 remarks merit public disgrace and removal from office. After all, rape is n= ot=20 a form of legal justice in America--is it?=20 - - - Tom G. Palmer Is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute in Washington. E-mai= l:=20 Palmert@cato.org Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 California ; Metro Desk=20 U.S. Probes Alleged Pact Not to Build New Plants Power: Justice officials= =20 focus on Southland operations of two firms, which deny wrongdoing. MYRON LEVIN; NANCY RIVERA BROOKS ?=20 06/06/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page B-1=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 The U.S. Department of Justice has launched an investigation into whether t= wo=20 companies that control a large swath of Southern California 's electricity= =20 supply agreed to limit power plant construction, potentially hindering=20 crucial energy production, according to federal records and interviews.=20 The civil antitrust probe of Williams Energy Services and AES Southland=20 represents the Justice Department's first foray into the activities of ener= gy=20 suppliers who have reaped huge profits in California 's price-shocked marke= t.=20 AES disclosed the investigation, which began last month, in a filing with t= he=20 Securities and Exchange Commission on Tuesday. In its papers, AES said the= =20 Justice Department is focusing on whether its agreement with Williams could= =20 constrain future power plant construction in Southern California .=20 The investigation comes at a time when the state is scrambling to get new= =20 generators built and running to avoid blackouts and economic problems.=20 The government alleges that AES and Williams agreed to limit the expansion = or=20 construction of new power plants near three facilities purchased by AES in= =20 1998 from Southern California Edison under the state's new deregulation pla= n.=20 The plants--in Long Beach, Huntington Beach and Redondo Beach--are owned by= =20 AES, but the electricity is sold by Williams. Under a 3-year-old deal, know= n=20 as a tolling agreement, Williams essentially rents out the capacity of the= =20 plants for annual payments to AES. Williams supplies natural gas to fire th= e=20 plants and sells the electricity under long-term contracts and in the costl= y=20 spot market.=20 Williams and AES have similar tolling agreements at plants in Pennsylvania= =20 and New Jersey. However, AES spokesman Aaron Thomas said the Justice=20 Department's investigative requests have focused only on agreements between= =20 Williams and AES in Southern California .=20 Thomas would say only that the agreement at the center of the investigation= =20 is simply a delineation of ""how expansion or repowerings are done at the=20 facilities.""=20 The three plants have a combined capacity of more than 3,900 megawatts,=20 enough to supply about 3 million homes. This summer, AES is bringing anothe= r=20 450 megawatts on line by reactivating two mothballed generators in Huntingt= on=20 Beach.=20 Paula Hall-Collins, a spokeswoman for Tulsa-based Williams Cos., said she= =20 believes that the investigation is unrelated to a recent inquiry by the=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission into whether AES and Williams=20 unnecessarily shut down plants to jack up prices. A portion of that=20 investigation was settled in April, when Williams, without admitting any=20 wrongdoing, agreed to pay about $8 million.=20 ""We've always maintained that we've operated within the law, and we're=20 certain the investigation by the DOJ will find we are operating legally,""= =20 Hall-Collins said.=20 Williams and AES are among the power plant owners and marketers that have= =20 been lambasted by Gov. Gray Davis because of gold-plated electricity prices= =20 that have pushed the state's biggest utilities to the edge of ruin and are= =20 steadily draining the state's budget surplus.=20 State officials are asking FERC to revoke the rights of AES and Williams to= =20 sell electricity at whatever price the market will bear. That right was=20 granted for three years, beginning in 1998 by federal regulators when=20 California 's $28-billion electricity market was opened to competition.=20 Under that plan, the rights of AES and Williams to sell into the market are= =20 the first to come up for renewal.=20 AES Southland and Williams Energy Services are both arms of large energy=20 companies--AES Corp. of Arlington, Va., and Williams Cos. of Tulsa, Okla. California ; Metro Desk=20 Natural Gas, Power Prices Drop Sharply Energy: More conservation, mild=20 weather are among factors keeping costs down, experts say. RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR; NANCY VOGEL ?=20 06/06/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page B-1=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 WASHINGTON -- The wholesale prices of electricity and natural gas in=20 California have fallen sharply in recent weeks, and experts said Tuesday th= at=20 the relief could be the harbinger of an energy turnaround.=20 Or it may be just a blip.=20 In the last couple of weeks, California power prices have plunged to the=20 lowest levels since April 2000, traders say, with electricity selling on so= me=20 days for less than $100 per megawatt-hour.=20 At night, when demand slackens, power sometimes sells for less than $20 per= =20 megawatt-hour. That is reminiscent of the days before prices went haywire= =20 last summer.=20 It is a drastically different scenario than the $500 to $800 the state paid= =20 during a spate of hot weather last month.=20 Meanwhile, wholesale natural gas prices at a bellwether pipeline junction o= n=20 the Southern California -Arizona border dipped last week to their lowest=20 levels since November, according to a publication that tracks the industry.= =20 Separately, Southern California Gas Co. and Pacific Gas & Electric Co.=20 reported June rate cuts for their residential gas customers of 16% and 38%,= =20 respectively.=20 Experts credited a combination of conservation, mild weather, a burst of=20 increased hydroelectric generation and lower natural gas prices for the dro= p=20 in electricity costs.=20 ""Conservation is starting to worry the generators, which is nice to see,""= =20 said Severin Borenstein, director of the University of California Energy=20 Institute in Berkeley. Californians used 11% less energy last month than in= =20 May 2000, according to the state Energy Commission.=20 ""I'm worried that if we don't push harder on conservation, [prices] won't= =20 stay down,"" Borenstein added.=20 On the natural gas side, experts said the price decline is due to replenish= ed=20 storage within California , a nationwide drop in the cost of the fuel and= =20 easing demand from power plants.=20 The number of shippers competing to get natural gas to the state has also= =20 increased, with the expiration of a controversial contract on the El Paso= =20 pipeline system last week.=20 But economists were reluctant to make sweeping predictions based on the=20 latest indicators.=20 ""It's hard to draw specific conclusions,"" said Bruce Henning, who tracks th= e=20 natural gas markets for Energy and Environmental Analysis Inc., an Arlingto= n,=20 Va., consulting firm.=20 How the summer turns out depends on the weather in the state, Henning said,= =20 adding, ""The weather represents the balance in the Southern California=20 market.""=20 Natural gas fuels most California power plants. With wholesale prices=20 recently averaging three to four times the rates charged elsewhere in the= =20 country, state and federal officials have despaired of chances for=20 controlling electricity costs.=20 Last Friday, however, the daily price for immediate delivery of natural gas= =20 in Topock, Ariz., a pipeline junction near the California border, dipped to= =20 $7.85 per million British thermal units.=20 According to Natural Gas Week, it was the first time since mid-November tha= t=20 the price at that location had fallen below $8 per million BTUs. One millio= n=20 BTUs is what a typical Southern California home uses in five or six days.= =20 Considered a bellwether for other pipeline systems serving California , the= =20 Topock price reached a record $56.54 per million BTUs on Dec. 8. It stood a= t=20 $9.36 per million BTUs at the close of business Tuesday, still below recent= =20 weekly averages.=20 Other industry publications have also picked up signals of price declines.= =20 Platts, the energy information division of McGraw-Hill Cos., reported Tuesd= ay=20 that the price for monthly gas delivery contracts to California fell 22% in= =20 June, following a nationwide trend.=20 But Henning said the drop in California prices is attributable to both lowe= r=20 prices around the country and a decline in the high markups for shipping ga= s=20 to California . Those markups, which far exceed the cost of transporting ga= s,=20 have drawn the attention of state and federal investigators.=20 Henning said the markups are declining as depleted storage levels in=20 California are replenished. ""Storage levels have been filling very rapidly,= =20 and that fact is reflected in prices coming down,"" he said.=20 The link between natural gas and electricity prices is a hotly debated=20 subject. Some experts say high-priced natural gas is driving up the cost of= =20 electricity . Others believe that record prices for power are raising the= =20 prices that generators are willing to pay for their fuel.=20 Electricity prices that range from $20 to $200 per megawatt-hour--instead o= f=20 the $150 to $500 per megawatt-hour paid in recent months--are great news fo= r=20 Gov. Gray Davis.=20 Average daily power prices in California for transactions through the=20 Automated Power Exchange have dropped from $149 per megawatt-hour last Frid= ay=20 to $110 per megawatt-hour Tuesday. The exchange is a private company that= =20 brings together electricity buyers and sellers and accounts for less than 1= 0%=20 of the state's market.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio said Tuesday that average daily power=20 purchases by the state have recently dipped below $50 million.=20 The state has sometimes had to pay more than $100 million a day since it=20 started buying power in January through the Department of Water Resources.= =20 The state stepped in because California 's two biggest utilities became too= =20 financially crippled to withstand the prices being charged by generators.= =20 Davis' plan to pay for past and future energy purchases with a $12.4-billio= n=20 bond issue hinges on an assumption that power prices will be driven down th= is=20 summer through long-term contracts, conservation and the construction of ne= w=20 power plants.=20 UC Berkeley's Borenstein said conservation efforts have not gone far enough= .=20 ""You walk into most buildings and you still need a sweater,"" he said. ""That= =20 ain't the way to hit the target.""=20 If Californians conserved an additional 10% off their peak usage on hot=20 afternoons, he said, ""we could really break the backs of the generators, we= =20 could really collapse the price.""=20 Prices tend to skyrocket in California 's electricity market on hot=20 afternoons, when demand soars and grid operators must scramble to purchase= =20 enough electricity . Cool weather, which reduces demand for air conditionin= g,=20 and conservation help keep the state from reaching such crisis situations.= =20 Borenstein said he believes generators are also asking less money for their= =20 electricity in part because of a federal order that took effect last month.= =20 The order limits the price power plant owners can charge when California 's= =20 supplies are strained.=20 Power sellers say there are more fundamental forces at work.=20 ""There's more supply relative to demand, which is softening prices,"" said= =20 Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum. ""The= =20 market is working, and it's providing cheaper wholesale power more quickly= =20 than any regulatory scheme could ever do.""=20 *=20 Times staff writer Dan Morain in Sacramento contributed to this story.=20 RELATED STORY=20 PG&E wins: The utility averted a $1-billion bill for power buys. B6=20 (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)=20 A Blip or a Trend?=20 Daily natural gas prices at the California border with Arizona--considered = a=20 bellwether of the state's costs--have been declining in the last two weeks.= =20 *=20 Natural gas price per 1 million Btu=20 $9.36=20 Source: Natural Gas Week California ; Metro Desk=20 The State Utility Averts $1 Billion in Costs Courts: PG&E and Cal-ISO agree= =20 to recognize Department of Water Resources as purchaser of the power. TIM REITERMAN ?=20 06/06/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page B-6=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 SAN FRANCISCO -- Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and the state's power grid=20 operator reached an agreement Tuesday that insulated PG&E at least=20 temporarily from more than $1 billion in power purchases the state made for= =20 its customers.=20 The California Independent System Operator sent $1.26 billion in invoices t= o=20 the utility for power purchases by the state Department of Water Resources= =20 for PG&E customers from January through March.=20 But the utility contended in Bankruptcy Court proceedings that it was not= =20 liable for such purchases and that continued purchases would cause annual= =20 losses of $4 billion.=20 After arguments before Judge Dennis Montali, PG&E and Cal-ISO agreed that t= he=20 Department of Water Resources, not PG&E, purchased the power. Cal-ISO had= =20 argued that it was making the purchases on PG&E's behalf.=20 ""PG&E wants to be a utility and have obligations to serve customers, but th= ey=20 don't want to pay for it,"" Cal-ISO general counsel Charles Robinson said=20 later.=20 If PG&E refuses to pay the invoices, Robinson said, Cal-ISO will send the= =20 bills to the Department of Water Resources, and officials there can decide= =20 whether to pursue claims in Bankruptcy Court. A spokesman for department,= =20 which has authorization to sell $13 billion in bonds for power purchases,= =20 said the agency will have no comment until the matter can be studied.=20 State agencies have stayed out of the bankruptcy proceedings, hoping to=20 preserve their immunity from suits in federal court.=20 The agreement will be submitted for Montali's approval Monday, but the judg= e=20 said it would not be binding on the department because no one represented t= he=20 agency in court.=20 PG&E's own production and contracts provide the majority of the power for i= ts=20 customers. But state legislation adopted this year allows the department to= =20 secure power contracts to serve customers of ailing utilities. When a=20 shortage threatens the power grid, the department purchases additional powe= r=20 through Cal-ISO on the spot electricity market.=20 PG&E filed for Chapter 11 protection from creditors on April 6, saying it w= as=20 $9 billion in debt.=20 Dramatic drop in cost of electricity=20 LOWER BILLS: Cheaper fuel, milder weather credited=20 David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL: .DTL=20 California electricity prices have plunged unexpectedly to their lowest lev= el=20 in more than a year, partly as the result of a simultaneous drop in prices= =20 for natural gas, which fuels most power plants.=20 Make no mistake: Gas and electricity prices could surge upward again in=20 months ahead.=20 But for the first time since California's energy markets went haywire last= =20 summer, industry experts are beginning to ask whether the state finally may= =20 have turned a corner in its battle with runaway power costs.=20 ""California is not yet out of the woods,"" said Kelley Doolan, who tracks=20 natural gas prices for energy market researcher Platts. ""But this is a very= =20 significant decrease in costs.""=20 Along with lower gas prices, the decline in electricity costs was attribute= d=20 by state and industry officials to milder weather, which reduces demand for= =20 power. They also credited recent conservation efforts by consumers and=20 better-than-expected runoff at dams for hydroelectric plants.=20 Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, an=20 energy-industry association, said these factors came together to produce th= e=20 lowest wholesale electricity prices since April 2000.=20 Electricity on the spot market could have been purchased yesterday for as= =20 little as $50 per megawatt hour, he noted, compared with more than $500=20 earlier this year.=20 ""If the weather stays this way, we could have reasonable prices all summer,= ""=20 Ackerman said. ""We may also have fewer blackouts.""=20 It is tempting for Californians to be suspicious of virtually any swing in= =20 energy prices. If power companies manipulated prices on the way up, as=20 critics have alleged, might they not be up to some trick as prices head in= =20 the opposite direction?=20 Nettie Hoge, executive director of The Utility Reform Network in San=20 Francisco, speculated that generators are allowing electricity prices to fa= ll=20 so they can discourage federal regulators from taking a more active role in= =20 the dysfunctional California market.=20 ""They're trying to take the heat off,"" she said.=20 Others cautioned that the lower prices may be nothing more than a statistic= al=20 blip.=20 ""This was just one month's decline,"" said Michael Shames, executive directo= r=20 of the Utility Consumers' Action Network in San Diego. ""We really have to s= ee=20 how this plays out in the future.""=20 Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis, said the governor was very= =20 encouraged by the lower energy prices. Davis announced Sunday that=20 California's power use was down 11 percent last month from a year before.= =20 ""We're not there yet,"" Maviglio said of whether an end to the state's power= =20 woes is in sight. ""But the trend is pointing in the right direction.""=20 WHITE ELEPHANT Yet this sudden drop in energy prices does have a dark side: California cou= ld=20 end up with a huge white elephant after spending about $40 billion in publi= c=20 funds on long-term power contracts.=20 The logic behind the contracts, which are at an average price of $69 per=20 megawatt hour over 10 years, is that the state expected to pay below-market= =20 rates for electricity for a number of years before prices came down and=20 California found itself paying above-market rates.=20 If current trends continue, though, California will find itself paying=20 consistently above-market rates much sooner than expected, making the long-= =20 term contracts a sweet deal for the same power companies that profited so= =20 handsomely during the state's darkest hours.=20 ""The contracts look really ugly right now,"" said Shames at the Utility=20 Consumers' Action Network. ""They may be way overpriced.""=20 Maviglio, the governor's spokesman, said it is too early to conclude that t= he=20 state did poorly negotiating dozens of long-term power contracts.=20 ""No one has a crystal ball on this,"" he said.=20 CUSTOMERS' BILLS TO DROP In any case, Pacific Gas and Electric Co. said yesterday that customers'=20 average gas bills will drop 26 percent this month to $26 and should stay ne= ar=20 that level all summer.=20 Platts, which monitors average monthly spot prices, found that the wholesal= e=20 price of gas at the California-Oregon border has tumbled nearly 42 percent= =20 since the beginning of May -- from $9.98 per million British thermal units = to=20 $5.81.=20 The wholesale gas price at the California-Arizona border fell 45 percent,= =20 from $11.91 to $6.50. This compares with a 25 percent monthly decline in=20 average natural gas prices nationwide.=20 However, California gas prices are still about 50 percent higher than they= =20 were a year ago, whereas national prices are now below year-ago levels for= =20 the first time since last spring.=20 While cooler weather nationwide helped push gas prices down overall, Doolan= =20 attributed the especially steep drop in California to a commensurate surge = in=20 prices last month related to fears of a long, hot summer of rolling=20 blackouts.=20 ""You had state officials all but promising rolling blackouts this summer,"" = he=20 said. ""That created enormous demand for electricity generation.=20 ""What has changed is that we've had weeks of mild weather,"" Doolan observed= .=20 ""The electricity generators have not come out of the woodwork buying up all= =20 the gas.""=20 This allowed utilities like PG&E to beef up gas inventories, which eased=20 demand and resulted in substantially lower prices, he said.=20 'BACK ON TRACK'=20 ""We're back on track to be completely full for winter,"" said Staci Homrig, = a=20 PG&E spokeswoman. ""That's a very good thing.""=20 Gas prices historically dip in the spring and summer and then rise again in= =20 the winter. PG&E is forecasting that customers' average gas bills could ris= e=20 to as high as $75 in December if current trends continue.=20 However, the precipitous drop in gas prices in recent weeks suggests that= =20 California's unusually high costs at last may be abating.=20 Individual power companies so far are reluctant to speculate on whether the= =20 drop in gas prices will have a lasting effect on electricity costs.=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 San Jose council gives green light to generating plant=20 VOTE REVERSAL: Officials pressured to OK project=20 Marshall Wilson, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL: .DTL=20 In a clear sign that the political landscape has shifted because of the=20 state's power crisis, the San Jose City Council gave a green light yesterda= y=20 for construction of a generating plant it had unanimously opposed in=20 November.=20 Yesterday's 10-to-1 vote came after months of mounting pressure for the cit= y=20 to reverse course and approve the controversial 600-megawatt Calpine plant = at=20 Coyote Valley.=20 That pressure -- increased by the occasional rolling blackout -- has come= =20 from nearly every corner of the state, from elected officials to high-tech= =20 businesses and labor unions worried the power crisis will drain away jobs,= =20 ruin the economy and lead to voter backlash over skyrocketing energy bills.= =20 Even the local branch of the NAACP and environmentalists pushed the council= =20 to approve the Calpine proposal -- despite overwhelming opposition from the= =20 plant's neighbors.=20 Council members did not hide their disdain yesterday for being forced to=20 reconsider their opposition to the so-called Metcalf Energy Center.=20 ""I'm holding my nose to vote for this thing,"" said Councilwoman Linda=20 LeZotte.=20 ""I'm just as unhappy as everybody else,"" Vice Mayor George Shirakawa said. = ""I=20 feel like no matter what happens, we can't win.""=20 GOVERNOR OFFERED HIS SUPPORT After the council's solid opposition in November, Calpine appealed to the= =20 California Energy Commission, which has the final say. The controversial=20 plant then received a huge boost in April when Gov. Gray Davis threw his=20 support behind it.=20 San Jose officials conceded yesterday that the energy commission was likely= =20 to override their opposition and grant approval within a few weeks. They sa= id=20 the commission's likely approval was stripping them of their power to decid= e=20 local land-use issues.=20 ""What I think has happened . . . is the governor and the Legislature at the= =20 state level have taken this out of our hands,"" said Councilwoman Pat Dando.= =20 ""I don't think there's any chance at all the California Energy Commission i= s=20 going to turn down the Metcalf Energy Center,"" Councilman Chuck Reed said.= =20 CONSTRUCTION MAY BEGIN SOON If given the go-ahead by the state, Calpine could begin construction as ear= ly=20 as next month. The natural-gas fired plant would generate electricity by=20 mid-2003, company spokesman Kenneth Arbeu said.=20 At the urging of Mayor Ron Gonzales, the council yesterday approved a new= =20 ""cooperation agreement"" with Calpine. The vote, with Councilman Forrest=20 Williams casting the lone nay, is preliminary while a final vote that is=20 scheduled for June 26.=20 Gonzales argued that the agreement did not amount to a flip-flop because it= =20 differs from what Calpine proposed in November.=20 The agreement approved by the council calls for increased monitoring of air= =20 pollution, the use of treated wastewater to cool the plant, which will redu= ce=20 discharges into San Francisco Bay, and a $6.5 million ""community benefits""= =20 package, with the bulk going toward parkland acquisition, Gonzales said.=20 ""This council has not changed its decision,"" he said. ""What we've done is= =20 change the facility.""=20 Critics, incensed that the city was buckling to outside pressure, vowed to= =20 change the council at the next election.=20 CONCERNS OVER HEALTH RISKS They raised concerns that boiled wastewater steam wafting over their homes= =20 from Calpine's plant could pose health risks. Jona Denz-Hamilton said more= =20 controls are needed to ensure the safety of neighbors like herself and her= =20 family and argued that new, cleaner-burning technologies should be installe= d=20 at the plant.=20 ""It's too great of a risk,"" she said.=20 Other critics said the state's energy woes will be solved and largely=20 forgotten by the time the plant opens in two years, while the Santa Teresa= =20 neighborhood will be stuck with pollution for decades.=20 Approval seemed a given at the start of the more than three-hour hearing.= =20 Much of the afternoon's debate focused around plans to extend a pipeline fo= r=20 treated wastewater to the new plant.=20 Critics said Calpine was receiving a sweet deal by paying only $10 million = of=20 the $50 million cost of extending the pipeline. Several council members ask= ed=20 for a more detailed report into the financing plan before the final vote is= =20 taken June 26.=20 Chronicle staff writer Bill Workman contributed to this report.=20 E-mail Marshall Wilson at ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 Developments in California's energy crisis=20 Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate1 053EDT0177.DTL=20 (06-06) 07:53 PDT (AP) --=20 Developments in California's energy crisis:=20 WEDNESDAY: * No power alerts Wednesday as reserves stay above 7 percent.=20 TUESDAY: * Gov. Gray Davis' administration says the state's electricity costs are=20 dropping substantially, even as it asks state legislators for another=20 half-billion dollars for power purchases. That brings to $8.2 billion the= =20 amount the state is paying for electricity on behalf of three financially= =20 strapped utilities.=20 Spokesman Steve Maviglio says the cost to the state treasury has dropped in= =20 the last few weeks well below the $50 million dollars the state had been=20 paying on a typical day. He credits cooler weather, conservation, more powe= r=20 plants online and more long-term contracts with helping drive down the cost= .=20 * A state Senate committee agrees to issue subpoenas to eight out-of-state= =20 electricity generators demanding they hand over documents on bidding, prici= ng=20 and other aspects of power sales in the state. The subpoenas would help a= =20 special Senate committee's investigation into whether the companies are=20 illegally profiteering from California's power crisis. The committee's=20 chairman says he expects the companies to resist, setting the stage for a= =20 court battle.=20 * Oil giant Chevron threatens to cut gasoline production in California unle= ss=20 it is exempted from rolling blackouts. The San Francisco Chronicle says it= =20 has a copy of a letter sent Friday from Chevron chairman David O'Reilly to= =20 Davis. In the letter, O'Reilly says the company will scale back gasoline=20 production at its Richmond and El Segundo plants, operating those refinerie= s=20 only with power produced by generators at the sites.=20 * New U.S. Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., supports Federal=20 Energy Regulatory Commission price caps. ""FERC must meet its obligation und= er=20 current law to ensure 'just and reasonable' prices for wholesale electricit= y=20 in the state of California. FERC has failed to meet this responsibility...,= ""=20 Daschle says in a letter to Davis. ""Unless FERC acts soon, Senator (Dianne)= =20 Feinstein's legislation should be taken up and passed to direct FERC to tak= e=20 action. I will support all necessary efforts to meet that goal.""=20 * House Subcommittee on Energy Policy, Natural Resources and Regulatory=20 Affairs Chairman Doug Ose, R-Sacramento, cites Electric Utility Week figure= s=20 that FERC's limited price caps helped cut California's power rates from $30= 0=20 to $108.47 per megawatt hour within an hour after taking effect last week.= =20 While he says more information is needed, Ose uses the figures to tout his= =20 pending bill to impose the price caps around the clock and to all Western= =20 states.=20 * Pacific Gas & Electric Co. asks U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali to= =20 stop the manager of the state's power grid from buying electricity for=20 utility or charging it for any electricity bought after the utility filed f= or=20 bankruptcy on April 6. Separately, the utility's creditors support its=20 request to the bankruptcy court to pay out $17.5 million in bonuses to the= =20 management team that guided the utility into bankruptcy.=20 * California Department of Water Resources reveals it is negotiating with= =20 municipal utilities to buy their surplus power. Department spokesman Oscar= =20 Hidalgo says talks began last week but no agreements are imminent.=20 * State lawmakers criticize a $3 million lobbying campaign by Southern=20 California Edison. The utility is telephoning shareholders to describe the= =20 dire consequences if the utility goes bankrupt. The call is then transferre= d=20 to the state Capitol so shareholders can implore lawmakers to support a=20 controversial plan to help the utility. Legislators and their staffers say= =20 the shareholders often are confused and scared their investments will be=20 degraded or wiped out.=20 * State Treasurer Phil Angelides joins an advocacy group for the poor in=20 urging the state's huge pension funds to use their economic power to levera= ge=20 power companies. The Pacific Institute for Community Organization says the= =20 two pension funds own at least $1.2 billion in stocks and bonds in most of= =20 the firms that sell electricity to California.=20 * The Assembly, by a 69-0 vote, approves a bill to spend $10 million on=20 environmental studies needed before Path 15, the inadequate transmission-li= ne=20 group between Northern and Southern California, can be expanded. The bill= =20 moves to the Senate.=20 * Pacific Gas and Electric announces a decrease in natural gas prices, down= =20 38 percent from May's rates and 66 percent lower than January's rates. The= =20 decline will bring the average residential gas bill to $26 when it goes int= o=20 effect June 7. Market analysts predict the rates will remain stable until= =20 December when demand is expected to increase with winter heating loads.=20 * No power alerts Tuesday as electricity reserves stay above 7 percent.=20 * Shares of Edison International closed at $10.05, down 53 cents. PG&E Corp= .=20 closed at $11.25, down 15 cents. Sempra Energy, the parent company of San= =20 Diego Gas & Electric, closes at $26.91, down 43 cents.=20 WHAT'S NEXT: * Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra, the parent compa= ny=20 of San Diego Gas and Electric Co., to buy the utility's transmission lines.= =20 THE PROBLEM: High demand, high wholesale energy costs, transmission glitches and a tight= =20 supply worsened by scarce hydroelectric power in the Northwest and=20 maintenance at aging California power plants are all factors in California'= s=20 electricity crisis.=20 Edison and PG&E say they've lost nearly $14 billion since June to high=20 wholesale prices the state's electricity deregulation law bars them from=20 passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs= =20 from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection= =20 April 6.=20 Electricity and natural gas suppliers, scared off by the two companies' poo= r=20 credit ratings, are refusing to sell to them, leading the state in January = to=20 start buying power for the utilities' nearly 9 million residential and=20 business customers. The state is also buying power for a third investor-own= ed=20 utility, San Diego Gas & Electric, which is in better financial shape than= =20 much larger Edison and PG&E but also struggling with high wholesale power= =20 costs.=20 The Public Utilities Commission has approved average rate increases of 37= =20 percent for the heaviest residential customers and 38 percent for commercia= l=20 customers, and hikes of up to 49 percent for industrial customers and 15=20 percent or 20 percent for agricultural customers to help finance the state'= s=20 multibillion-dollar power buys.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 California conserves=20 Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /06/E D86597.DTL=20 WHEN RAIN fails to fall from the sky, Californians know why there is a=20 drought. But when rolling blackouts suddenly appeared in the dead of winter= ,=20 many of us wondered who was responsible for and who has profited from what= =20 now seems like an artificially created power shortage in the state.=20 Our skepticism proved to be right. Windfall profits were reaped by=20 electricity generators while natural gas importers extracted prices far abo= ve=20 the national average.=20 Timid federal overseers exact only wrist-slap penalties on the offending=20 energy firms. The White House scoffs at temporary controls for a=20 malfunctioning market. California's state government has ended up as the bi= ll=20 payer for the sickly utilities, forking over $8 billion to generators. This= =20 number may hit $40 billion by year-end.=20 It's an infuriating tangle. All the more remarkable, then, that skeptical= =20 Californians have managed, within two months, to reduce their use of=20 electricity by 11 percent. The public's response to the governor's appeal f= or=20 energy conservation has exceeded expectations. Although many businesses hav= e=20 suffered enormous losses, ordinary people have made relatively painless=20 sacrifices. People turned off their lights, purchased energy-efficient=20 lightbulbs, used air conditioning less and shut off their computers when no= t=20 in use.=20 Despite this remarkable civic compliance, we still face an unconscionable= =20 lack of leadership. President Bush seems perfectly willing to allow Texas= =20 power companies to pummel the once-powerful California economy. He repeats = a=20 mantra about creating more supply -- which California is doing with 15 powe= r=20 plants under construction -- while ignoring the outsized sums paid to a=20 handful of energy generators.=20 At the same time, Gov. Gray Davis, who has given new meaning to the word=20 dithering, has failed to make the tough and transparent decisions. He delay= ed=20 an inevitable rise in power rates. Davis also dragged his feet in openly=20 announcing new power contracts that commit California to billions in spendi= ng=20 over the next decade.=20 To Davis' credit, he has urged California to conserve by laying out an $800= =20 million plan to cut power use and invest in energy-saving programs. The=20 message is getting out as higher rates take effect this month.=20 Despite a woefully unbalanced market and shortsighted leadership, the peopl= e=20 of California have demonstrated that if there is a will, there is a way.=20 Now it is time for our leaders to follow the wisdom of their constituents.= =20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 20=20 L.A. power customers awash in cheap energy=20 John Wildermuth, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /06/M N133438.DTL=20 Los Angeles -- These are flush times for the city's Department of Water and= =20 Power and the energy executives are loving every minute of it.=20 As are their customers.=20 Private power companies throughout California have been raising rates and= =20 warning customers about a long, hot summer filled with blackouts, but the= =20 city- owned DWP has been keeping prices stable and the lights on for 1.2=20 million Los Angeles customers.=20 ""Our customers are being really nice to us,"" said Angelina Galiteva, the=20 utility's strategic planning director. ""They love the DWP.""=20 Although Gov. Gray Davis' administration announced that the state had reduc= ed=20 its energy consumption 11 percent from a year ago, those in Los Angeles had= =20 cut back less than half that -- and polls show they view the energy situati= on=20 less seriously than other Californians.=20 Public utilities such as Los Angeles water and power have seen their revenu= es=20 increase during the energy crunch because they can sell their excess power = at=20 higher prices than ever before in a market tilted toward sellers.=20 The rest of the state doesn't always feel that same warm glow. Davis has=20 accused the DWP and other California public utilities of putting exorbitant= =20 price tags on the excess electricity they sell to the rest of the energy-= =20 starved state.=20 It's a charge Los Angeles utility executives deny, arguing that their exces= s=20 power is sold at cost plus 15 percent, which they say is a fair return for= =20 their customers.=20 ""Without our support, a million more homes (elsewhere in California) would= =20 have suffered rolling blackouts, which is a powerful message,"" Galiteva sai= d.=20 It wasn't supposed to be this way. When the power industry was deregulated = in=20 the late '90s, energy giants like Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern= =20 California Edison were expected to be the big winners. Now, PG&E is in=20 bankruptcy and Edison is a short step away.=20 ""When deregulation came, the experts said that the investor-owned utilities= =20 would become lean, mean machines that would be better able to operate in th= e=20 new environment,"" Galiteva said. ""But now public power has shown it can ser= ve=20 customers more efficiently at lower rates.""=20 While much of the state worries about electrical supply, Los Angeles=20 residents have been saved many of those concerns.=20 In a survey done last month by the Public Policy Institute of California, 4= 8=20 percent of the people in the Bay Area thought that electricity cost and=20 availability were the most important issues facing the state. In Los Angele= s,=20 however, only 33 percent put the energy crunch on top. When questioned abou= t=20 the size of the power problem and the effect it would have on the state's= =20 economy, Los Angeles residents were consistently less concerned than people= =20 elsewhere in California.=20 People in Los Angeles have been ""somewhat isolated"" from the energy crisis,= =20 concluded Mark Baldassare, who conducted the survey.=20 That doesn't mean the state's energy problems haven't had an effect. The DW= P=20 has seen a 3 percent to 5 percent reduction in some uses, which officials= =20 have dubbed ""sympathy conservation."" The utility also is offering its bigge= st=20 customers financial incentives to cut back on their power use.=20 ""Our average annual load growth is about 80 megawatts,"" Galiteva said. ""By= =20 this summer, we expect to have saved 40 megawatts through conservation. By= =20 December, we expect 60 megawatts in savings.""=20 The utility also is making a major attempt to create a conservation ethic= =20 among its customers. DWP's comfortable situation has made it possible to=20 offer them the carrot without the need to show them the stick.=20 ""Conservation no longer means doing without,"" Galiteva said. ""Beer can be= =20 just as cold with a superefficient refrigerator. Rooms can be just as brigh= t=20 with superefficient light bulbs.""=20 A ""Green Power"" program also is promoting the use of renewable energy=20 resources such as solar, wind and hydroelectric power. About 75,000 custome= rs=20 are paying an extra $3 per month to increase DWP's use of renewable power= =20 sources.=20 ""We're trying to give our customers a choice and a voice in determining the= =20 mix of power they use,"" Galiteva said. ""They know they can do (conservation= )=20 now or see it being mandated later.""=20 Los Angeles power officials -- and their customers -- know the DWP isn't=20 always going to continue as an island of tranquility in a sea of energy=20 turmoil. The utility's aging gas-fired plants have been affected by the=20 rising price of natural gas. Demand for energy continues to rise. In a deba= te=20 last month, both candidates for mayor of Los Angeles agreed that increases = in=20 local power bills are inevitable.=20 But the DWP has been supplying power to Los Angeles since 1916, and its=20 executives believe that the state's deregulation disaster has shown the=20 advantages of the city-owned utility.=20 ""It's nice to be the lean, mean, green efficient machine that no one ever= =20 expected us to become,"" Galiteva said.=20 E-mail John Wildermuth at ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 13=20 PG&E doesn't want to pay for energy to avert blackouts=20 DAVID KRAVETS, Associated Press Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 306EDT0102.DTL=20 (06-06) 00:06 PDT SAN FRANCISCO (AP) --=20 Pacific Gas & Electric Co. has told a bankruptcy judge it should not have t= o=20 pay for what could amount to billions of dollars in spot-market energy cost= s=20 to avert blackouts.=20 The company's position was one of two developments that emerged Tuesday as= =20 the bankrupt utility tries to cope with fallout from California's power=20 crisis. The other development saw a group of creditors that PG&E owes=20 billions endorse $17.5 million in bonuses for top managers at the utility.= =20 San Francisco-based PG&E filed for bankruptcy protection in April after=20 racking up an $8.9 billion debt which under state law it could not recoup= =20 from customers.=20 Tuesday's court dispute centered on who pays for energy bought at the last= =20 minute to avoid blackouts.=20 PG&E said an April federal regulatory decision requires that electricity ca= n=20 only be sold to those with the ability to pay electricity generators. The= =20 state is the only player with such ability, said PG&E attorney Jerome Faulk= ,=20 who argued that the utility shouldn't have to pay the $330 million in month= ly=20 spot-market energy bills.=20 Judge Dennis Montali said he may craft such an order. But he said the order= =20 would not preclude the state from suing PG&E to recover the cost.=20 In a separate but related development, a committee charged with devising a= =20 payment plan for those creditors owed billions by PG&E said it will sign of= f=20 on the utility's plan to pay $17.5 million in bonuses to PG&E's management= =20 team.=20 Attorney Allan Marks, who represents the committee, said such payments are= =20 normal during large bankruptcy cases. Under the agreement, which Montali wi= ll=20 consider at a June 18 hearing, the company must quickly produce a debt=20 payment plan that passes judicial muster.=20 The utility said it needs the bonuses for a ""management retention program.""= =20 Marks agreed. While the $17.5 million leaves less for creditors, without a= =20 financial incentive PG&E's key top brass may not be willing to cooperate wi= th=20 a payment plan, Marks said.=20 ""The main goal for the creditors' support here is to move the bankruptcy as= =20 quickly and smoothly as possible,"" Marks said.=20 The Utility Reform Network, a consumer watchdog group, says PG&E is simply= =20 rewarding managers of a failed business effort.=20 ""They're just showering money on the same people who got them in this mess,= ""=20 said TURN's Mike Florio.=20 The proposed bonuses would come on top of $50 million in bonuses and raises= =20 PG&E awarded just before the April 6 bankruptcy filing.=20 The case is In Re Pacific Gas & Electric Co., 01-30923 DM.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 Metcalf plant gets preliminary approval=20 Posted at 12:21 a.m. PDT Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 BY MIKE ZAPLER=20 Mercury News=20 As the San Jose City Council approached its 10-1 vote Tuesday to give an=20 initial nod to Calpine's big power plant in South San Jose, Councilwoman=20 Linda LeZotte perhaps captured the body's mood best.=20 ``I'm holding my nose to vote for this thing,'' she said. ``Without faultin= g=20 the mayor or his staff, quite frankly I think this deal stinks.''=20 Caught in what some members called a bind beyond their control, the council= =20 gave preliminary approval to an agreement negotiated by Mayor Ron Gonzales= =20 and Calpine on the company's proposed 600-megawatt Metcalf Energy Center.= =20 Councilman Forrest Williams, who represents the Santa Teresa neighborhood= =20 near the site, cast the lone vote against the deal.=20 The agreement is scheduled to come back before the council for a final vote= =20 on June 26, but Tuesday's vote effectively shifts the battle to the courts,= =20 where residents are expected to lodge a lawsuit in one final attempt to blo= ck=20 the plant.=20 Still, Councilwoman Pat Dando and some of her colleagues raised questions= =20 about the deal they said they want answered before the final vote. Their=20 issues could be incorporated into the final deal.=20 Many of the concerns focused on a $50 million recycled water pipeline=20 Gonzales agreed to have the city build to accommodate the project, $10=20 million of which would be reimbursed by Calpine over 30 years.=20 Pipeline possibility=20 Dando said that a private company, Great Oaks Water, may be willing to buil= d=20 the pipeline extension itself, saving the city the $50 million expense.=20 Officials at Great Oaks were unavailable Tuesday.=20 Council members peppered staff with other questions. Many were alarmed by= =20 claims of the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, which said that using treate= d=20 sewage water to cool the power plant could allow dangerous chemicals to see= p=20 into drinking water aquifers. An environmental services director said the= =20 recycled water meets federal specifications, but that there is no protocol= =20 for testing other chemicals not included in those standards.=20 Councilman Ken Yeager asked why Calpine should be allowed to spread a $3.9= =20 million water connection fee over 10 years -- an arrangement that would=20 mandate an amendment to city law.=20 LeZotte, meanwhile, said she wants to hold Calpine accountable to install= =20 ammonia-free technology at the plant. Ammonia is highly hazardous, and=20 residents say the use of the chemical to clean the plant is among their chi= ef=20 concerns.=20 The agreement requires the company to install technology to reduce or=20 eliminate the use ammonia when it becomes ``technologically and economicall= y=20 feasible.'' LeZotte said she wants a clear definition of ``feasible''=20 included in the deal.=20 Tuesday's vote marked a stark departure from the council's November vote to= =20 deny Metcalf. At the time, council members said a power plant was=20 inappropriate for the area, and many members said Tuesday that they still= =20 believe that.=20 Bowing to pressure=20 But with Gov. Gray Davis endorsing Metcalf in April and the California Ener= gy=20 Commission widely expected to override the city's denial this month, counci= l=20 members said they had no choice but to cut the best deal it could and allow= =20 the project to proceed.=20 That explanation, however, didn't sit well with residents of the Santa Tere= sa=20 neighborhood adjacent to the Metcalf site, one of whom accused Gonzales and= =20 the council of ``switching sides when the opposing team gets too close to t= he=20 goal line.''=20 Contact Mike Zapler at mzapler@sjmercury.com or at (408) 275-0140.=20 Feds probe AES, Williams=20 Antitrust investigation looks into allegations of manipulated energy prices= =20 through reduced power-plant construction.=20 June 6, 2001=20 By JAMES ROWLEY Bloomberg News=20 WASHINGTON - The U.S. Justice Department opened an antitrust investigation= =20 into California's electricity shortage by probing allegations that AES Corp= .=20 and Williams Energy Services Co. are limiting power-plant expansion to driv= e=20 up prices.=20 AES Corp., the biggest U.S. power-plant developer, disclosed the=20 investigation in a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.= =20 The Justice Department is looking into a supply-and-marketing agreement=20 between AES' California power-plant unit and a Williams unit that supplies= =20 natural gas.=20 Williams, owner of the second-largest U.S. natural-gas pipeline system, als= o=20 markets the power produced by AES' three electricity plants in the state.= =20 The department alleges the agreement limits expansion of generating capacit= y=20 near some AES plants.=20 AES said it was cooperating with the Justice Department investigation, whic= h=20 began last month, into possible violations of Section 1 of the Sherman=20 Antitrust Act.=20 That provision outlaws any restraint of trade that stifles competition.=20 A shortage of generating capacity in California has led to soaring wholesal= e=20 prices and rolling blackouts and prompted Pacific Gas & Electric, the state= 's=20 largest utility, to seek bankruptcy protection in April.=20 Aaron Thomas, a spokesman for AES, based in Arlington, Va., said the U.S.= =20 investigation started ""no more than a couple of weeks ago.""=20 Williams spokeswoman Paula Hall-Collins said the Tulsa, Okla.-based company= =20 is cooperating.=20 Gina Talamona, Justice Department spokeswoman, said the agency had no=20 immediate comment.=20 The investigation was opened several weeks after the Federal Energy=20 Regulatory Commission investigated AES plants in Long Beach and Huntington= =20 Beach, designated ""must run"" under the Federal Power Act, did not produce= =20 electricity for 10 days in April and May 2000. Williams agreed to pay the= =20 operator of California's electric grid $8 million to settle allegations tha= t=20 it overcharged for power.=20 FERC charged in March that the companies had a financial incentive to keep= =20 the units out of service to force the California Independent System Operato= r=20 to buy power from AES' plant in Redondo Beach at prices close to the=20 FERC-imposed cap of $750 per megawatt-hour.=20 AES said it was complying with a Justice Department demand for documents=20 about the agreement between its AES Southland LLC unit and Williams Energy= =20 Services Co. AES Southland, which operates the three power plants, was also= =20 asked to respond to interrogatories, the company said.=20 The Williams unit supplies the natural gas to fuel the AES plants and marke= ts=20 the power they produce.=20 AES and Williams jointly produce and sell about 4,000 megawatts in Californ= ia=20 -- 6 to 8 percent of the state's power -- enough electricity to light about= 3=20 million typical California homes.=20 AES shares dropped $2.05, to $42.54. Williams Cos. shares dropped $1, to=20 $38.20. Calpine Begins Construction of Peaking Energy Center in Gilroy, Calif.=20 June 6, 2001=20 SAN JOSE, Calif., June 5 /PRNewswire/ via NewsEdge Corporation -=20 Calpine Corporation (NYSE: CPN), the San Jose, Calif.-based independent pow= er=20 company, today announced that initial construction of 135 megawatts (mw) of= =20 peaking generation capacity will begin during this week adjacent to its=20 existing Gilroy Power Plant in Gilroy, Calif. Through an Application for=20 Certification (AFC) filed with the California Energy Commission (CEC) on=20 April 25, 2001, Calpine proposed to add three 45-mw simple-cycle gas turbin= e=20 peaking units in the first of a two-phase process. The California Energy=20 Commission approved the project on May 21, 2001.=20 ""Because the required natural gas, water and transmission infrastructure=20 exists at our Gilroy plant, it is an ideal site for the addition of peaking= =20 generation, allowing for rapid installation of needed capacity. The first= =20 three units are expected to begin generating electricity this September,""= =20 commented Bryan Bertacchi, Calpine Vice President - Western Region.=20 Upon completion the two-phase build out, the Gilroy Energy Center will be a= =20 270-mw, natural gas-fired, simple-cycle peaking generation facility located= =20 on approximately 9.5 acres at 1400 Pacheco Pass Highway in Gilroy. Commerci= al=20 operation of Phase One is scheduled for September 2001. An additional three= =20 45-mw gas turbine generators will be installed in Phase Two with full=20 build-out estimated for May 2002. Phase Two requires the filing of an=20 additional application with the CEC and is subject to a four-month review= =20 process.=20 Initial construction will begin this week with site and civil engineering= =20 activities occurring for approximately six weeks at which time the site wil= l=20 be cleared and leveled. Foundation work and the installation of generation= =20 equipment will follow shortly thereafter, and commissioning and testing wil= l=20 take place for a two to three week period prior to commercial operation in= =20 September 2001.=20 The Gilroy Energy Center web site has been created to host all information= =20 and updates related to this project. For additional information, please vis= it=20 www.gilroypower.com.=20 Calpine Corporation, based in San Jose, Calif., is dedicated to providing= =20 customers with reliable and competitively priced electricity. Calpine is=20 focused on clean, efficient, natural gas-fired generation and is the world'= s=20 largest producer of renewable geothermal energy. Calpine has launched the= =20 largest power development program in North America. To date, the company ha= s=20 approximately 32,200 megawatts of base load capacity and 7,200 megawatts of= =20 peaking capacity in operation, under construction, pending acquisitions and= =20 in announced development in 29 states and Canada. The company was founded i= n=20 1984 and is publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol= =20 CPN. For more information about Calpine, visit its Website at=20 www.calpine.com.=20 This news release discusses certain matters that may be considered=20 ""forward-looking"" statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the=20 Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities=20 Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, including statements regarding the intent= ,=20 belief or current expectations of Calpine Corporation (""the Company"") and i= ts=20 management. Prospective investors are cautioned that any such forward-looki= ng=20 statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve a number of= =20 risks and uncertainties that could materially affect actual results such as= ,=20 but not limited to, (i) changes in government regulations, including pendin= g=20 changes in California, and anticipated deregulation of the electric energy= =20 industry, (ii) commercial operations of new plants that may be delayed or= =20 prevented because of various development and construction risks, such as a= =20 failure to obtain financing and the necessary permits to operate or the=20 failure of third-party contractors to perform their contractual obligations= ,=20 (iii) cost estimates are preliminary and actual cost may be higher than=20 estimated, (iv) the assurance that the Company will develop additional=20 plants, (v) a competitor's development of a lower-cost generating gas-fired= =20 power plant, and (vi) the risks associated with marketing and selling power= =20 from power plants in the newly competitive energy market. Prospective=20 investors are also cautioned that the California energy environment remains= =20 uncertain. The Company's management is working closely with a number of=20 parties to resolve the current uncertainty, while protecting the Company's= =20 interests. Management believes that a final resolution will not have a=20 material adverse impact on the Company. Prospective investors are also=20 referred to the other risks identified from time to time in the Company's= =20 reports and registration statements filed with the Securities and Exchange= =20 Commission.=20 MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT - Click Here=20 SOURCE Calpine Corporation=20 CONTACT: media, Lisa Poelle, ext. 1285, or investors, Rick Barraza, ext.=20 1125, both of Calpine Corporation, 408-995-5115=20 Web site: http://www.gilroypower.com=20 Web site: http://www.calpine.com (CPN)=20 Reliant Urges FERC to Drop or Amend California Price Caps to Avoid Addition= al=20 Shortages and More Blackouts=20 June 6, 2001=20 HOUSTON, June 5 /PRNewswire/ via NewsEdge Corporation -=20 Reliant Energy (NYSE: REI) filed an emergency motion with the Federal Energ= y=20 Regulatory Commission (FERC) on Monday urging the agency to drop the=20 California price caps first applied May 29, or at a minimum, amend them to= =20 reflect the true costs they are attempting to control. The current price=20 caps, which send inaccurate market signals, are actually decreasing supply= =20 and increasing demand thus worsening an already dire situation.=20 ""FERC has been publicly dedicated to an open market from the beginning of t= he=20 California power crisis. We encourage FERC to reexamine these price caps an= d=20 continue that dedication,"" said Joe Bob Perkins, president and chief=20 operating officer, Reliant Energy Wholesale Group. ""Reliant is committed to= =20 helping keep the lights on in California this summer and wants to ensure th= at=20 if caps must remain part of the picture, they actually help increase supply= =20 and fix the problem.""=20 Although the price caps were first imposed less than a week ago, they have= =20 already begun to damage the market by decreasing supply. The price caps are= =20 creating a myriad of problems:=20 -- Creates Misleading Signals - The price cap methodology is misleading=20 the public on the actual cost of power. Reported ""dispatch"" costs in=20 Southern California during emergencies is far below what the actual=20 financial settlements will be under the FERC's final market mitigation=20 order. This confusion results from the ""proxy"" price used for=20 dispatch utilizing an extremely distorted blended fuel cost index.=20 This index averages gas costs in northern and southern parts of the=20 state, an impossibility in the actual market. This authorizes the=20 California Independent System Operator (ISO) to require that=20 generators dispatch power at reported market clearing prices well=20 below actual cost when back-up generation capacity begins to dip below=20 7.5 percent.=20 -- Depletes Power from Peaking Plants - The price caps distort dispatch=20 signals on peaking plants, which in some cases may be run only a few=20 days of the year because of emission regulations. The current FERC=20 price controls encourage the ISO to purchase power from emergency=20 peaking plants before it is really needed, even in the absence of a=20 stage three emergency. This depletes supplies that will, by law, run=20 out when blackout season intensifies later this summer. This power=20 from peaking units should only be purchased when blackouts are=20 imminent -- not in stage one or two emergencies.=20 -- Eliminates Price Signals for Retail Customers - Price caps remove=20 price signals for retail customers. Customers, particularly=20 industrial companies, which should be encouraged to curtail during=20 shortages, are not encouraged to conserve power when dispatched price=20 caps keep prices below the actual cost to produce electricity.=20 -- Discourages Supply from Out-of-State - Suppliers outside of=20 California, who are under no legal obligation to dispatch power during=20 an emergency in the state, are not encouraged to increase available=20 production when reported market clearing prices are below their cost=20 to produce. During times of emergencies, utilities across the Western=20 region are not likely to take on additional risks and costs if they=20 don't believe they will be fully compensated - a situation the current=20 price caps create.=20 MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT - Click Here=20 SOURCE Reliant Energy=20 CONTACT: Maxine Enciso of Ketchum Public Relations, Los Angeles,=20 310-444-1303, for Reliant Energy; or media, Richard Wheatley of Reliant=20 Energy, 713-207-5881=20 Photo: NewsCom: AP=20 Archive: http://photoarchive.ap.org PRN Photo Desk, 888-776-6555 or=20 212-782-2840=20 Company News On-Call: or fax,=20 800-758-5804, ext. 419090=20 Web site: http://www.reliantenergy.com (REI)=20 By Kathleen McFall kmcfall@ftenergy.com President George W. Bush's energy package encourages the use of biomass fue= ls=20 for both transportation purposes and electricity generation. ""They can=20 provide a reliable source of energy at a stable price, and they can also=20 generate income for farmers, landowners and others who harness them,"" his= =20 administration's report said.=20 Despite this warm and fuzzy language, however, the administration offered n= o=20 tangible funding for the fledgling biofuels industry=01*other than an exten= sion=20 of an existing ethanol tax credit that was not due to expire until 2007=01*= a=20 significant disappointment, and surprise, to advocates of renewable=20 transportation fuels. The report did recommend expanding tax credits for biomass energy projects = to=20 include forest-related and agriculture fuel sources and threw its weighty= =20 support at a new credit for electricity produced from biomass co-fired with= =20 coal. These recommendations are already included in the president's 2002=20 budget.=20 ""We are pleased that the administration included expansion of the biomass t= ax=20 credit and hope that, with congressional leadership, we will see this=20 expanded provision signed into law this year,"" said Katherine Hamilton,=20 co-director of the American Bioenergy Association (ABA).=20 Unlike other portions of the recommended energy policy, biomass energy=20 probably will not suffer under the recent change in Senate composition, giv= en=20 Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle's (D-S.D.) agricultural constituency and= =20 his previous support of the biofuels industry.=20 According to the National Energy Policy Development report, biomass account= s=20 for about 76% of non-hydropower renewable electricity generation,=20 representing a total of about 1.6% of total U.S. electricity supply.=20 Biopower advocates, however, envision an even greater market penetration in= =20 the coming decades and point to its environmental and ancillary advantages.= =20 For example, given that biomass combustion can be carbon dioxide-neutral (i= f=20 the growth and use cycle is managed sustainably), environmental groups=20 support an expanded role. Farmers with marginal lands that could grow bioma= ss=20 fuel could enjoy economic benefits. With large amounts of wood residue, the= =20 forest industry also stands to benefit from wider use of wood as a power=20 source.=20 Renewable energy offers a particular advantage to the lumber and paper=20 industry, and many analysts project that the industry may soon become a net= =20 seller of electricity.=20 ""In the lumber and paper industries, wood scraps are sometimes directly fed= =20 into boilers to produce steam for their manufacturing processes or to heat= =20 their buildings. For that reason, renewable energy offers a particular=20 advantage to the lumber and paper industry, and many analysts project that= =20 the industry may soon become a net seller of electricity,"" said the energy= =20 policy report.=20 Co-firing with coal Biomass=01*usually wood or wood residue=01*has traditionally been burned di= rectly=20 in the industrial sector for heat or on-site electricity generation.=20 According to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the existing 10 GW of=20 installed capacity are based on this direct-combustion technology.=20 For utilities and power-generating companies with coal-fired capacity,=20 however, biomass co-firing may represent one of the least-cost renewable=20 energy options, said the DOE. The process involves blending different=20 materials in varying amounts with coal.=20 Not only does mixing biomass with coal reduce emissions, it is likely to be= =20 cost-effective. Southern Co. estimates that a biomass plant alone could=20 generate power, depending on its location, at 4 to 11 cents/kWh. Given that= =20 the lower range of this corresponds to coal generation costs, there are=20 clearly circumstances where biomass-coal co-firing would be economically=20 attractive today. Plus, the environmental public relations benefit for=20 utilities with coal-fired capacity would be valuable.=20 Domestic biomass generation capacity could reach 20-30 GW by the year 2020 = by=20 co-firing at existing U.S. coal-fired power plants.=20 According to a recent report prepared by five National Laboratories, domest= ic=20 biomass generation capacity could reach 20-30 GW by the year 2020 by=20 co-firing at existing U.S. coal-fired power plants.=20 A recent report by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel for Climate= =20 Change (IPCC) also cites the potential of coal co-firing with biomass. The= =20 IPCC report concludes that co-firing in coal boilers results in the lowest= =20 cost and least technical risk of the examined approaches for biomass=20 conversion to electricity.=20 Working out the technical kinks Already, said the DOE, six power plants in the U.S. are currently co-firing= =20 coal and wood residue products on a regular basis. Another 10 plants have= =20 successfully tested co-firing over the last decade, and at least six more= =20 plants are now conducting or planning tests.=20 For example, Southern Co. is working with DOE, the Southern Research=20 Institute and the Electric Power Research Institute to study ways to grow a= nd=20 harvest switchgrass to blend with coal as a fuel for power generation.=20 Ideally suited for the southeastern U.S., switchgrass is a rugged grass tha= t=20 can be grown on marginal agricultural land. Reaching heights of up to 12=20 feet, it requires little fertilization and herbicide and can be harvested= =20 twice a year.=20 Harvesting methods, co-milling of switchgrass and pulverized coal,=20 pilot-scale co-firing tests, and a full-scale demonstration of co-firing at= =20 Alabama Power Co.'s Plant Gadsden are part of Southern Co.'s collaborative= =20 project.=20 The U.S. Agriculture Department is also taking a role in exploring the=20 potential of biomass and coal co-firing as a means to give farmers new=20 markets, especially for currently idle land. The agency recently authorized= =20 funding for three co-firing demonstration projects.=20 In Iowa, the Chariton Valley Biomass Project is a cooperative effort to=20 develop warm and cool season grasses (such as switchgrass) to co-fire with= =20 coal at Alliant Energy's Ottumwa Generating Station. The project is designe= d=20 to generate a sustained supply of 35 MW of biomass energy. Eventually, the= =20 grass could substitute for as much as 5% of the coal currently burned at th= e=20 plant.=20 In addition to reducing coal emissions, the Chariton Valley Biomass Project= =20 will support the local farm economy.=20 In addition to reducing coal emissions, the project will support the local= =20 farm economy because the grass and trees will come from acreage taken out o= f=20 production under the Agriculture Department's Conservation Reserve Program= =20 (CRP). CRP land is generally marginal land that the government subsidizes= =20 farmers to leave idle to both prevent erosion and protect commodity prices= =20 from product surpluses.=20 The Pennsylvania Switchgrass Energy and Conservation Project will produce= =20 switchgrass on CRP land for sale to a local cooperative's coal-fired=20 fluid-bed combustors.=20 In New York, the Agriculture Department project will fund willow biomass=20 crops and switchgrass on CRP acreage in the central and western part of the= =20 state. The primary markets for the willow biomass are two coal-burning powe= r=20 plants and a small university central heating facility.=20 Land conflicts, transportation may be obstacles As these pilot projects illustrate, biomass conversion efforts may have the= =20 most significant potential in rural areas. ""Since biomass is widely=20 distributed it has good potential to provide rural areas with a renewable= =20 source of energy. The challenge is to provide =01( conversion and delivery = of=20 bioenergy to the marketplace in the form of modern and competitive energy= =20 sources,"" said the IPCC report.=20 A potential drawback to co-firing is transportation. Transportation of=20 wood-based energy products is more costly, per unit of energy, than coal, f= or=20 example, and most analysts believe it will prove most economical to site=20 generation plants near biomass sources.=20 ""The generating plant or biorefinery must be located near to the resource t= o=20 minimize transport costs of the low-energy-density biomass as well as to=20 minimize impacts on air and water use,"" the IPCC report said. However, note= s=20 the report's authors, economies of scale may be significant enough to offse= t=20 the transport costs involved.=20 A potential drawback over the long term, however, for biomass conversion is= =20 land use conflicts. The IPCC report notes that by 2100, the global land=20 requirement to feed the growing world population will increase substantiall= y.=20 ""Up until this time there may well be sufficient land to supply all demands= =20 for food, fibre and energy, but at some stage after that, land-use conflict= s=20 could arise and before that, competition for water and irrigation may be a= =20 constraint.""=20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Minutes from last Thurs' CAISO Board Meeting (Sorry for the delay); [EMail-Body]= CAISO BOG 10/25/01 Notes taken by G. Alan Comnes Meeting went from about 10:30 to 1 p.m. Written materials discussed at this meeting are available at www.caiso.com/bog. 1. Budget. Board approved budget, which contains a significant increase in GMCs and, for the first time applies GMC fees, on the self provision of A/S. The motion to adopt was modified to say the Board would revisit budget if, in response to Gov. Davis requests to par budgets, the CAISO budget is cut. 2. Retirement plan Audit 3. Allocation of Above-MCP 487 charges. This mechanism will improve the allocation of OOM costs so that the per-MWh charges match up with actual OOM costs. Stated that penalty revenues used to lower OOM costs could come from imbalance penalties. Action. approved (?) to allow staff to make a tariff amendment on this change. 4. Winter Assessment. Presentation by staff Kahn took issue (i.e., did not even want staff report presented) that CAISO does an assessment without consulting the Power Authority, CPUC, and the CEC. Worried about conflicting with the other resource assessments out there and giving media ways to take shots at DWR buying practices. In the end, the full presentation was not given but questions were asked about whether the assessment spells trouble or provides assurance. The answer: things are tight in some months but are expected to be ok given the level of conservative assumptions used in the analysis. Action: staff was tasked to compare this assessment with CEC's and others and come back in another month. 5. Generator maintenance program. Will use GADS data. This program is mandatory for PGA generator units. CAISO staffer represented that no other ISO has a prescriptive program like the one CAISO is proposing. Current schedule: brief FERC staff next week, return to Board in November for approval, make FERC filing, implement in early '02. Benchmarks are based on each unit's historical performance; i.e. dogs will be benchmarked against their past doggy behavior. There is no component to raise the ""bar"" on performance but a unit that falls relative to past performance would trigger further review. 6. MSC Selection Committee. MSC provides ""independent"" review of the CAISO markets for CAISO, the state, and FERC. Wolak is the only member left at the moment. Selection committee will be Sheffrin, Wolak, and Borenstein. Candidates will go to Exec. Director and the final candidates to the Board in February 2002 (!). Kahn questioned how the MSC can survive with only one member and take until February 02 to select a final members. Nonetheless, the glacially paced schedule was adopted. 7. FERC RTO Seams Issues. Steve Greenleaf presented. Updated BOG on RTO week and said that the ""4 RTO"" model took a step backward (""off the table"" in the words of Chair Wood) in response to criticism from state PUCs on Thursday. (Is this an accurate recounting of Day 4?). ISO is engaged in interregional coordination. Mentioned ""CSIC"" group Mentions SSGWY's (?)sponsorship of a market monitoring workshop on November 16. 8. Update of CERS Settlement BEEP/AS Payment Procedure. Edison and PG&E ""are making progress"" but no agreement with CERS have been reached. SDG&E signed and the procedure was implemented at least in part with SDG&E. 9. Monthly reports: financial. 10. Monthly reports: DMA. Sheffrin. Mostly followed the briefing charts. Emphasized the following: CERS OOM purchases are generally down and are reasonably priced once purchases and sales are disaggregated. Said that suppliers are still bidding above costs. DMA files confidential reports that include info on bidding data weekly to FERC. Bids are not coming down. Intrazonal congestion is up due to new generation coming on line. That allows generators to play the ""dec"" game. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: Sac Bee, Thurs, 7/5: Many rural towns to escape blackouts, utility maps sho= w Sac Bee, Tues, 7/3: Details emerge in power contracts SD Union, Thurs, 7/5: New FERC member seems attuned to state's woes SD Union, Wed, 7/4: Electricity price-cap tests spark allegations SD Union, Wed, 7/4: Renewable energy fades from picture in rush for solutio= n SD Union, Wed, 7/4: SDG&E spreads word of looming blackouts SD Union, Wed, 7/4: Two more energy whistleblowers slated to come forward SD Union, Wed, 7/4: Disabled PG&E employees ask state for help in getting= =20 disability checks LA Times, Thurs, 7/5: Powerful Judge Illuminates Energy Practices Law:=20 'Folksy' jurist, 72, stuns utility executives and lawyers alike with his=20 courtroom incisiveness. SF Chron, Thurs, 7/5: Davis lauds California generator=20 Vote of confidence at Calpine's festival=20 SF Chron, Wed, 7/4: Activists stage anti-corporate march to power plant=20 SF Chron, Wed, 7/4: Davis asks PUC to let utilities cut voltage=20 1% savings on energy consumption predicted SF Chron, Wed, 7/4: Federal price limits backfire=20 Some generators withhold power rather than abide by rate caps SF Chron, Wed, 7/4: Two more energy whistleblowers slated to come forward Mercury News, Wed, 7/4: Davis seeking cheaper contracts=20 --- Many rural towns to escape blackouts, utility maps show=20 By Carrie Peyton Bee Staff Writer (Published July 5, 2001)=20 Huge stretches of Northern California, including many rural foothill and=20 valley communities, won't face rolling blackouts this summer, spared by a= =20 combination of geography and circuitry.=20 Placerville and Loomis, Esparto and Isleton are among the many towns that= =20 will be largely or entirely bypassed by deliberate blackouts, according to= =20 new Pacific Gas and Electric Co. outage maps.=20 Such communities are served by so few circuits that each one has been=20 exempted from outages because a critical facility, such as a fire station o= r=20 a water treatment plant, lies along the circuit somewhere, PG&E spokesman= =20 John Nelson said.=20 Both PG&E and the Sacramento Municipal Utility District have begun shedding= =20 more light on their strategies for rotating outages in the wake of a=20 governor's order requiring utilities to let people know where blackouts wil= l=20 strike next.=20 For PG&E, that has meant quickly posting and then updating blackout maps on= =20 its Web site. For SMUD it has meant publicly detailing, for the first time,= =20 the boundaries of 78 separate rotating outage areas and listing by number= =20 which areas could be tapped next.=20 ""We were contemplating putting the map on the Web before the governor's=20 order, but the timing coincided very well,"" said John DiStasio, SMUD's=20 assistant general manager for customer service.=20 SMUD updated its Web site, www.smud.org, on June 22 so that now people can= =20 click on ""rotating outages"" and then ""next likely locations and map"" to see= =20 the shape of outages to come.=20 The map replaces less-precise neighborhood names, which is all SMUD supplie= d=20 until Gov. Gray Davis ordered utilities to give the public ""common=20 geographical boundaries, grid or block numbers, maps or similar identifying= =20 information"" about where outages will strike.=20 With six days of rolling blackouts already behind California this year, and= =20 forecasts that more probably lie ahead, Davis has told utilities and the=20 state Independent System Operator to give better notice of when and where= =20 blackouts might occur.=20 Grid operators and utilities have cautioned that Davis' program of two-day,= =20 one-day and one-hour warnings could produce many false alarms because power= =20 supplies often come through at the last minute. There is also some wariness= =20 about outage maps, which SMUD and PG&E warn could change at any time.=20 But the maps do provide insight into how each utility will roll blackouts= =20 through its territory. PG&E's maps, on the Web at www.pge.com under ""find= =20 your outage block"" and then ""rotating outage block map,"" have recently been= =20 updated to be searchable by zip code.=20 They show that the vast majority of El Dorado and Placer counties and much = of=20 Yolo County are in PG&E's ""block 50,"" a designation for a circuit that won'= t=20 be in line for rolling outages because someone along it is crucial to healt= h=20 or safety.=20 Police stations, fire stations, hospitals and airports are all deemed=20 essential customers that should keep functioning even when the state power= =20 grid is so overloaded that blackouts are needed to keep it from collapsing.= =20 In densely populated areas, circuits tend to be compact, leaving lots of=20 neighborhoods eligible for rolling blackouts, Nelson said.=20 But ""in rural areas, particularly remote rural areas, a circuit can go on f= or=20 miles and miles,"" Nelson said. ""You can have multiple communities on one=20 circuit =01( (and) virtually every community has either a police station or= a=20 fire station or a hospital or a drinking water facility.""=20 That has been good news for communities like Placerville, which scrambled f= or=20 traffic control earlier this year when a rolling outage took out the signal= =20 lights on Highway 50, which bisects the town of 10,000.=20 ""That has been our biggest concern because of the amount of traffic that go= es=20 through there,"" said City Manager John Driscoll. Placerville will be spared= =20 future outages because regulators now are protecting more hospitals from=20 blackouts, and much of the rest of the town shares circuits with hospitals.= =20 ""We didn't ask to be exempted out, but I feel very happy that we are. From = a=20 selfish standpoint, it feels very nice,"" Driscoll said.=20 The Bee's Carrie Peyton can be reached at (916) 321-1086 or=20 cpeyton@sacbee.com.=20 =20 Details emerge in power contracts By Carrie Peyton and Chris Bowman Bee Staff Writers=20 (Published July 3, 2001) California's power bills for the next decade probably will exceed the=20 forecasts of Gov. Gray Davis, the State Controller's Office said Monday as = it=20 released unedited versions of long-term contracts in a new jab at the=20 governor.=20 The electricity contracts, which Davis' office sought in court to keep=20 secret, offer a glimpse into the rapid, high-stakes deals struck early in t= he=20 state's power crisis and illustrate the way deregulation's unraveling could= =20 haunt California for years to come.=20 Some show that builders of new power plants could recoup the entire cost of= =20 those plants in four years or less. Some show lucrative swaps for power,=20 including one arranged the same day California was rocked by rolling=20 blackouts.=20 More than two dozen additional administrative contracts detail the price=20 California is paying its consultants to seek a way out of the power mess,= =20 from tens of thousands for Davis' aides down to $51 an hour for copying and= =20 phone answering.=20 The governor's office defended its estimates of the state's future power=20 bill.=20 The 41 long-term contracts, 27 consulting contracts, five short-term deals= =20 and stacks of receipts and invoices released Monday by state Controller=20 Kathleen Connell may just be the start.=20 Her office hopes to provide details about how much California has already= =20 paid individual power generators in the volatile short-term, or ""spot,""=20 market.=20 The deals include so many intricate pricing formulas that Connell said she= =20 couldn't immediately predict exactly how high California's hourly power cos= ts=20 would go.=20 Walter Barnes, chief deputy controller of finance, said the contracts=20 probably would be ""well in excess"" of the $69 a megawatt-hour that Davis on= ce=20 said would be California's average cost for contract power for the next=20 decade.=20 The contracts' prices range from $55 to $249 a megawatt-hour, and most are= =20 more than the $69, Connell said.=20 The state Department of Water Resources, the state's power buying arm, late= r=20 revised the $69 forecast to $70 a megawatt-hour through the end of 2010, wi= th=20 the higher priced power coming first.=20 If anything, those figures could decline because natural gas, the fuel for= =20 most new power plants, is getting cheaper, DWR spokesman Oscar Hidalgo said= ,=20 adding that his office sticks with its forecasts.=20 ""We're on pretty solid ground here,"" he said.=20 As the statewide elected official who pays California's bills, Connell=20 repeatedly has criticized the governor for his electricity spending, saying= =20 that she never believed the contracts should be kept secret.=20 But Davis' office blasted her for giving out details that power generators= =20 and traders could use to learn the state's negotiating positions and buying= =20 practices and said the information could boost wholesale prices within days= .=20 ""When they open their electric bill next time, every Californian can thank= =20 Kathleen Connell for higher electricity costs,"" Davis spokesman Steve=20 Maviglio said.=20 The long-term contracts were first released June 15 by the water resources= =20 department with power plant names, performance data, delivery points and=20 other details blocked out under heavy black strokes.=20 Analysts said that was the sort of data they could have used to calculate h= ow=20 much more than the production costs the state was going to be paying for th= e=20 electricity purchased on behalf of three cash-strapped investor-owned=20 utilities.=20 As analysts began sizing up some of the specifics Monday, early reactions= =20 were wary.=20 ""This just shows when the state comes in and takes over the utility system,= =20 we're just going to be in deep from all sorts of expenses and inefficiencie= s=20 that we were trying to get away from"" with deregulation, said Arthur=20 O'Donnell, who edits a trade newsletter, California Energy Markets.=20 Bill Marcus, a power consultant who had analyzed the edited contracts for a= =20 consumer group, quickly read through the unedited versions muttering things= =20 such as ""offensive"" and ""they got absolutely ripped here.""=20 In one swap that was negotiated on a day of rolling blackouts in March, the= =20 state agreed to send Powerex, the trading arm of British Columbia's=20 government utility, 2* times more electricity in the spring than Powerex=20 would return in the summer.=20 Although seasonal swaps are common, the 2*-to-1 ratio was a sign of ""panic""= =20 and inexperience on the state's part, he said.=20 The consultants who advise California on power deals were frenetic at the= =20 time, with one staffer at the Navigant consulting firm billing for hours=20 worked that were the equivalent of 9.7 hours a day for 34 consecutive days.= =20 The power purchase terms disclosed Monday confirm many energy analysts'=20 predictions that California consumers would be paying premium prices for=20 years to cover the costs of the new plants coming on line.=20 In several of the contracts, the state agreed to pay generators a 25 percen= t=20 to 30 percent annual return on their plant construction costs, which could= =20 pay off the entire plant in four years or less.=20 Before deregulation, utilities generally received 3 percent to 18 percent= =20 annual return on their capital investments over 30 years, said Marcus, a=20 veteran energy analyst whose firm, JBS Energy Inc. of West Sacramento,=20 represents ratepayer groups.=20 ""We're all going to have to pay more for power plants over the next 10 or= =20 more years because the generators are looking to pay off their plants in ha= lf=20 the time,"" he said.=20 ""Beyond blackouts and price spikes, this will be the long-term legacy of=20 deregulation,"" he said. ""The private market needs a high rate of return on= =20 their investment.""=20 Several contracts were drafted in the late winter and early spring when=20 California endured Stage 2 and Stage 3 energy alerts.=20 The unmasked terms in some of those agreements reflect the state's=20 desperation for megawatts amid fears of routine blackouts when temperatures= =20 and energy use began to rise in the summer.=20 For example, the state agreed in a March 29 contract to pay Calpine $232 a= =20 megawatt-hour to supply 300 megawatts nonstop from July 1 through Sept. 30.= =20 But a more recent Calpine contract calls for about $59 a megawatt-hour,=20 starting Oct. 1.=20 Time made all the difference, said Jim Macias, a Calpine senior vice=20 president. He said that last winter, Calpine couldn't guarantee that plants= =20 under construction in Sutter County and the East Bay would be on line by=20 summer. So the company bought the power on the spot market for the state,= =20 Macias said.=20 ""Back in the winter, $232 was a good price for electricity this summer,"" he= =20 said.=20 Calpine officials said that they made no money on the sale and even knocked= =20 15 percent off their price to maintain good relations with the state power= =20 buyers.=20 The gesture more than paid off with the signing of the 10-year contract, sa= id=20 Kathleen Potter, Calpine spokeswoman.=20 ""It was a great transaction for us,"" Potter said. ""We appreciate the=20 business.""=20 Proponents of ""free-market"" energy buying have said that in the long-run,= =20 competitive forces would result in more-efficient, less-costly power=20 generation.=20 But the contracts show that pressed for more electricity this summer and=20 fall, officials resorted to buying power from some of the least-efficient= =20 plants in the state, guaranteeing owners of these aging generators 10 more= =20 years of income.=20 The Bee's Carrie Peyton can be reached at (916) 321-1086 or=20 cpeyton@sacbee.com. New FERC member seems attuned to state's woes=20 Texan may become agency's next chief By Toby Eckert=20 COPLEY NEWS SERVICE=20 July 5, 2001=20 WASHINGTON -- During his first weeks at the Federal Energy Regulatory=20 Commission, Pat Wood has set a decidedly different tone in the agency's=20 strained relationship with California.=20 After meeting with Gov. Gray Davis last week, Wood -- who was recently=20 appointed to the commission by President Bush and is widely expected to be= =20 named chairman soon -- praised the state's efforts to come to grips with it= s=20 power problems. It was a stark contrast to the almost constant criticism fr= om=20 FERC Chairman Curtis Hebert.=20 ""It certainly seems to me that both the political leadership and the=20 regulatory leadership of the state are committed to the kind of=20 infrastructure upgrades that are needed to really get supply and demand bac= k=20 into whack,"" Wood said, referring to power plants being built in California= .=20 The former Texas utility regulator also raised the possibility of closer=20 cooperation between FERC and state regulators, including a ""joint effort"" o= n=20 inspecting power plants. State officials have accused generators of idling= =20 plants to drive up electricity costs, a charge generators deny.=20 ""If we're kind of co-regulators with the state, and in many regards we are,= =20 it's helpful to work off the same set of facts so you get to conclusions mu= ch=20 more expeditiously,"" Wood said, though he was quick to add that he has not= =20 seen any evidence of intentional withholding of supply.=20 State officials hope Wood's statements signal that FERC is poised to take a= =20 more aggressive role in helping the state. If elevated to chairman, Wood=20 would set FERC's agenda and shape its approach to dealing with California.= =20 The agency regulates wholesale electricity and natural gas markets, which= =20 have subjected the state to skyrocketing prices.=20 Wood ""has brought a very good perspective to FERC,"" said Howard Gantman, a= =20 spokesman for Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., a frequent critic of the=20 commission. ""He seems very interested in getting to the root of the problem= =20 and finding solutions.""=20 Throughout the crisis, the state's relationship with FERC has been poisonou= s.=20 Davis criticized the commission for being slow to rein in electricity price= s,=20 while Hebert faulted the state for crafting a bad deregulation law and=20 failing to build enough plants to keep up with demand.=20 Davis issued a guardedly conciliatory statement after his meeting in=20 Sacramento with Wood and Commissioner Nora Brownell, who is also new to FER= C.=20 ""In a refreshing change from my past dealings over the past year with the= =20 agency, these commissioners offered a problem-solving approach in resolving= =20 California's energy challenge,"" Davis said. He added, ""It appears that FERC= =20 may finally be poised to do its job controlling energy costs.""=20 Threats criticized Despite the soothing words, there is no shortage of potential flash points= =20 between Davis and FERC.=20 Wood, who professes a ""religious zeal about competition,"" raised concerns= =20 about a possible move by the California Public Utilities Commission to keep= =20 retail power customers from shopping around for alternative providers.=20 He also criticized threats that Davis and other California politicians have= =20 made to seize power plants and impose a windfall profits tax on power=20 sellers.=20 ""I think the rhetoric's still pretty hot out there. If I were a generator= =20 looking at 50 states, one that's talking about a windfall profits tax and= =20 expropriation of property and all that is not a great climate,"" Wood said.= =20 For his part, Davis has questioned whether the recent price curbs imposed b= y=20 FERC in the West will be enough to tame soaring wholesale power costs that= =20 have bankrupted one utility, cost the state treasury billions of dollars an= d=20 raised consumers' power bills.=20 Davis has also made it clear that he expects hefty refunds to result from t= he=20 FERC-brokered talks between the state and power providers, which are in the= ir=20 second week.=20 ""I will be vigilant in insisting that Californians get their money back,""= =20 Davis said.=20 California consumer activists are taking a wait-and-see attitude toward Woo= d,=20 saying they know little about him.=20 A major role ""My impression from afar is he seems to be more moderate,"" said Harvey=20 Rosenfield, president of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in= =20 Santa Monica.=20 Once considered a bureaucratic backwater, the five-member FERC has come to= =20 play a high-profile role in the California debacle and other disputes=20 involving the largely deregulated wholesale power markets.=20 The commission is charged with ensuring that ""just and reasonable"" prices= =20 prevail.=20 Bush is expected to make Wood the FERC chairman because Hebert is seen as t= oo=20 much of a lightning rod.=20 Before coming to Washington, Wood, who turned 39 yesterday, headed the Texa= s=20 Public Utility Commission. There he oversaw the state's move toward a=20 deregulated electricity market. Like Hebert, Wood is convinced that a free= =20 market will deliver cheaper power to consumers than a highly regulated one.= =20 ""I just think customers fare better when they have more choices,"" Wood said= .=20 But consumer advocates and others who have worked with Wood in Texas say hi= s=20 zeal is tempered by a healthy dose of pragmatism.=20 ""Bottom line, it's all about the customer. Y'all will hear me say that unti= l=20 you get sick of it,"" Wood said. ""We want to make sure that the world we're= =20 moving to is better than the one we left.""=20 Electricity price-cap tests spark allegations=20 Suppliers said to have held back; industry blames ISO By Craig D. Rose and Bill Ainsworth=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITERS=20 July 4, 2001=20 The first emergency tests of new electricity price controls have generated= =20 accusations that suppliers were withholding power and questions that the ca= ps=20 might need to be revised or scrapped.=20 And in a case of turnabout, a power industry spokesman yesterday said the= =20 Independent System Operator, which manages the state's electricity grid,=20 might be using the federal price caps to manipulate the electricity market.= =20 This time, however, the charge is that the ISO is gaming to push prices=20 lower.=20 At any rate, California survived its second consecutive day of power=20 emergencies without blackouts under price caps recently imposed by federal= =20 regulators, but not without some bumps along the way.=20 The main culprit was hot weather that baked Western states for two days,=20 forcing the ISO to issue Stage 1 and then Stage 2 alerts. Yesterday, the IS= O=20 warned that rolling blackouts might hit in the afternoon.=20 But as has happened often this year, the ISO bought power in the last minut= es=20 to avoid outages. The grid operator also credited conservation efforts with= =20 shaving from 2,000 to 4,000 megawatts of consumption. A megawatt can power= =20 about 750 homes.=20 ""It was a lot hotter than expected and a lot more humid,"" said Kristina=20 Werst, spokeswoman for the ISO.=20 Today, state officials expect to avoid any blackouts because of the holiday= ,=20 which tends to decrease electricity demand, Werst said.=20 The price controls ordered last month by the Federal Energy Regulatory=20 Commission set up formulas for maximum prices during emergency and=20 nonemergency periods. The FERC said the complex system was intended to=20 balance the need for lower costs with its desire to promote a power market.= =20 But questions are growing about the effectiveness of the FERC price caps.= =20 A Department of Water Resources spokesman, which buys power for the state,= =20 said generators withheld between 660 and 1,500 megawatts of electricity=20 during a critical period earlier this week because of the price caps. That= =20 would be enough to cut electricity reserves from 7 percent to 5 percent and= =20 bump a Stage 1 alert to a Stage 2.=20 Sempra Energy Trading, a marketing unit of San Diego Gas & Electric Co.'s= =20 parent corporation, admitted that it ceased selling power to the state for= =20 what could have been a critical 30 minutes Monday.=20 A spokesman for the trading company said it halted sales for the half-hour= =20 because it was unsure about where the ISO would set maximum prices during t= he=20 first power emergency under the new caps.=20 When power emergencies are called under the FERC plan, a new price cap is s= et=20 based on the cost of operating the least efficient, most costly electric=20 generating plant. Because the identity of that plant is unknown beforehand,= =20 the selling price is set retrospectively by the ISO.=20 ""It was unclear to the traders what the proxy price would be,"" said Doug=20 Kline, a Sempra spokesman, who emphasized that the company's trading unit= =20 resells power generated by other companies. ""So it was unclear whether the= =20 ISO would come back later and say, 'You purchased power at $70 per=20 megawatt-hour but we're only going to pay you $60.'?""=20 For its part, the ISO said the impact of price controls on electricity=20 supplies during emergencies is still unclear. The controls this week kept= =20 emergency prices Monday from a little over $70 per megawatt-hour to a high = of=20 about $90. FERC's nonemergency price cap has been about $92 per=20 megawatt-hour.=20 Earlier this year, the average price per megawatt-hour was nearly $300.=20 Before the power crisis hit last year, the price was about $30.=20 The ISO said several factors other than the price controls might have=20 contributed to tight supplies this week, including plant shutdowns in other= =20 states and the regional heat wave.=20 But a spokeswoman for Nevada Power said the utility believed the price caps= ,=20 or confusion over their implementation, had contributed to a power shortfal= l=20 that led to blackouts Monday. The utility fell about 100 megawatts short of= =20 its need as temperatures in some of its service areas hit 122 degrees.=20 ""Power is tight in the region,"" said Sonya Heagen of Nevada Power. ""What=20 tipped it over (for southern Nevada) was several utilities decided to hold= =20 back power.""=20 Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, an=20 industry group, said the FERC's price-control plan fails to allow the=20 recovery of electricity transportation costs. That has the effect of keepin= g=20 electricity in the region in which it is generated, rather than where it=20 might be needed most, he said.=20 Ackerman said transportation costs, which typically run from $2 to $8 per= =20 megawatt-hour, are more significant now that overall prices have settled in= to=20 a $100 range.=20 ""They didn't mean as much to the suppliers when they were getting $400 per= =20 megawatt-hour,"" Ackerman said.=20 He also said some of his members suspect the ISO made moves during power=20 alerts to artificially keep prices lower.=20 The FERC pricing regime sets nonemergency prices at 85 percent of the last= =20 full hour of a Stage 1 emergency. But this week, the ISO twice went from a= =20 Stage 1 to a Stage 2 alert in less than an hour. That kept the nonemergency= =20 price cap in place at about $92 per megawatt-hour, set back in May.=20 ""Some traders said the ISO is 'gaming the market' to keep the price lower,""= =20 Ackerman said. ""I have a few traders who think the price should be higher.""= =20 The ISO rejected the charge of manipulation and said it continues to make i= ts=20 emergency declarations based on power supply and demand. The ISO also said = it=20 has not identified transportation costs as a problem under the FERC order.= =20 Other energy experts, however, said the FERC system of using the most=20 inefficient power plants to set emergency prices was a mistake.=20 Frank Wolak, a member of the ISO's market monitoring unit and a Stanford=20 University economist, said the plan invited energy companies to keep their= =20 least efficient plants in operation to ensure the highest prices.=20 But James Sweeney, also a Stanford professor and energy expert, said he=20 preferred the FERC plan to a rigid market price cap.=20 Consumer advocate Doug Heller of the Foundation for Taxpayer & Consumer=20 Rights said the FERC plan is too complex and urged a return to a regulated= =20 system, which pays generators for their production costs plus a reasonable= =20 profit. Gov. Gray Davis supports a similar approach.=20 Arthur O'Donnell, editor of California Energy Markets, saw much of the=20 maneuvering this week as an industry road test of new price regime.=20 ""I think they were testing the boundaries,"" O'Donnell said. ""This is the we= ek=20 where we test the bugs in the system.""=20 Copley News Service correspondent Toby Eckert and The Associated Press=20 contributed to this report.=20 Renewable energy fades from picture in rush for solution=20 By Ed Mendel=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 July 4, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO -- The electricity crisis is putting the squeeze on the renewabl= e=20 energy industry: the power plants that use the sun, wind or underground hea= t.=20 The environmentally friendly, alternative energy provides about 12 percent = of=20 the state's power. But the energy crunch and the state's effort to resolve = it=20 could end up shrinking the role of renewable energy in the coming years jus= t=20 as backers were hoping to see it expand.=20 For example:=20 ?Long-term power contracts obtained by the state to reduce costs will cover= =20 most state needs for a decade. Nearly all of the contracts are with natural= =20 gas-fired plants, reducing the long-term market for new renewable plants.= =20 ?The uncertainty and lack of payment resulting from the crisis have slowed= =20 the development of renewable plants under an incentive program created as= =20 part of the state electricity deregulation plan.=20 ?Regulators are poised to prevent marketers from selling electricity,=20 including ""green power"" from renewable sources, directly to customers. A=20 large base of ratepayers must stay in the state program to pay off a power= =20 bond of up to $13.4 billion over 15 years. The state Public Utilities=20 Commission yesterday for the second time put off a decision whether to=20 curtail such direct access.=20 State and federal programs had been encouraging renewable energy to reduce= =20 dependency on the new wave of relatively clean and efficient natural-gas=20 power plants. The cost of electricity from those plants could go up if the= =20 demand for gas outpaces supply.=20 Renewable energy, with the exception of some biomass plants, also avoids th= e=20 pollution problems of power plants fueled by oil and coal -- not to mention= =20 the safety and radioactive waste-disposal problems of nuclear power.=20 A spokesman for a coalition of renewable generators and environmental group= s=20 said he thinks renewable energy has suffered during the electricity crisis= =20 because of a lack of attention, not a shift in state policy.=20 ""I think the renewables are an unintended casualty,"" said V. John White of= =20 the Center for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technologies.=20 The state became a major player in the power equation in January when it=20 began buying power for debt-ridden utilities.=20 State officials say they would like to have a mix of power to spread the ri= sk=20 if something goes wrong with one source. For example, soaring natural gas= =20 prices last winter were part of the reason for the high cost of electricity= .=20 In a trade-off, the state scrambled to obtain long-term contracts that woul= d=20 lower the price of electricity now in exchange for prices that are expected= =20 to be above the market in the years to come.=20 The 38 contracts, worth $43 billion over the next decade, will help finance= =20 the construction of gas-fired power plants. About 70 percent of the power= =20 will come from plants that have not yet been built.=20 Only four of the contracts are for renewable power, and their 120 megawatts= =20 is a tiny fraction of the total amount of power now under state contract. A= =20 megawatt can provide power for 750 to 1,000 homes.=20 ""We agree the portfolio is lopsided and should be more diverse than it is,""= =20 Ray Hart, head of the power purchasing unit in the state Department of Wate= r=20 Resources, told the Senate Energy Committee last month.=20 The state has agreements in principle on an additional 19 contracts for 1,2= 70=20 megawatts from renewable sources. Most of the power, 1,172 megawatts, would= =20 come from wind generation.=20 ""Anything could happen,"" said Oscar Hidalgo, a Water Resources spokesman. ""= It=20 could increase or decrease, depending on what gets signed.""=20 One renewable generator, CalEnergy, said the state rejected its offer to=20 provide 340 megawatts from a geothermal plant in the Imperial Valley for 20= =20 years at 6.9 cents per kilowatt-hour, a price that is said to be the 10-yea= r=20 average of the state contracts.=20 ""We were astonished,"" said Jonathan Weisgall, CalEnergy vice president.=20 Hidalgo said state power purchasers ""don't recall the specifics"" of the=20 CalEnergy offer. He said the proposal may have been rejected because of its= =20 length, the time of the power delivery, or other reasons.=20 ""They may have to regroup, restructure, repackage, and look for what we=20 want,"" Hidalgo said.=20 Under deregulation, part of monthly ratepayer bills were earmarked for a fu= nd=20 to encourage renewable energy sources. The fund provides five-year incentiv= es=20 of up to 1.5 cents per kilowatt hour.=20 The state held auctions in 1998 and again last summer that awarded $202=20 million in incentives for dozens of new small renewable plants that could= =20 produce about 1,000 megawatts. The average incentive was .4 cents per=20 kilowatt hour.=20 But at this point, said Marwan Masri of the California Energy Commission,= =20 only plants capable of producing 180 megawatts have been completed.=20 ""There is the overall issue of who will buy the power,"" said Masri, ""and at= =20 what price and for how long.""=20 A firm that specialized in marketing ""green power"" from renewable sources f= or=20 the environmentally conscious has taken a double hit from the electricity= =20 crisis.=20 Green Mountain Energy of Austin, Texas., sells power to customers in a part= =20 of deregulation that is often called ""direct access,"" which bypassed=20 utilities and later the state after it began buying power for utility=20 customers.=20 The firm canceled contracts with 50,000 customers because the price was=20 indexed to the state Power Exchange, which went bankrupt last spring after= =20 the debt-ridden utilities defaulted on their debt.=20 Green Mountain still has contracts with about 7,000 customers in San Diego= =20 County who receive power under contracts at a fixed rate, 8.5 cents per=20 kilowatt-hour.=20 The state Public Utilities Commission is still expected to prohibit future= =20 direct-access contracts, a step directed by the legislation authorizing the= =20 state to buy power for utility customers.=20 ""That was the second blow to us,"" said Rick Counihan of Green Mountain. ""It= =20 meant that we couldn't go out and buy a block of fixed-price power to sell = to=20 customers.""=20 The ban on direct-access contracts is vigorously opposed by business groups= ,=20 who say that direct access would lower the cost of doing business in=20 California.=20 But supporters of the direct-access ban say that if customers bypass the=20 utilities, the remaining ratepayers will be stuck with paying off a bond of= =20 up to $13.4 billion that is expected to be issued in September for power=20 costs.=20 Despite the problems, some representatives of the renewable energy industry= =20 are optimistic about its potential for growth in the future.=20 ""A lot of the market is being served by rapidly aging power plants that=20 should be replaced,"" said Jan Smutny-Jones of the Independent Energy=20 Producers. ""I think we also are going to see additional demand.""=20 Moreover, state government may take more steps to encourage the renewable= =20 industry.=20 The Energy Commission is proposing a goal for the incentive program that=20 would increase the amount of power coming from renewable sources to 17=20 percent of the total by 2006, up from 12 percent.=20 State Sen. Byron Sher, D-Stanford, has introduced a bill, SB 531, that woul= d=20 set a goal of increasing the renewable share of state power to 20 percent b= y=20 2010. SDG&E spreads word of looming blackouts=20 By Jeff McDonald=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 July 4, 2001=20 While power supplies dwindled and the likelihood of blackouts loomed, San= =20 Diego Gas & Electric Co. for the first time yesterday was able to warn=20 customers in advance that they might go dark.=20 Under increasing pressure from businesses and residents, SDG&E launched a n= ew=20 system to notify customers by pager and e-mail whenever the state declares= =20 supply emergencies that might lead to blackouts.=20 Some 5,000 customers signed up for the warnings, which ended up being false= =20 alarms by midafternoon when the Independent System Operator, which manages= =20 the state's electricity grid, was able to find enough megawatts to avoid th= e=20 first blackouts since May.=20 ""This at least gives people the opportunity to make a switch over to backup= =20 generation, to power down essential equipment or to back up critical files,= ""=20 SDG&E spokesman Ed Van Herik said.=20 ""It's definitely an improvement, but we'll certainly look for ways to=20 increase the effectiveness of the notification process.""=20 Even so, the warnings from SDG&E came barely an hour before the ISO was=20 expected to issue a Stage 3 power alert, meaning that demand had climbed to= =20 within 1.5 percent of available supplies. As it turned out, the state never= =20 rose above a Stage 2 alert.=20 As the threat of blackouts continues to vex state power officials, early=20 warnings about potential outages have become a key issue for businesses and= =20 residents who rely on uninterrupted service.=20 During blackouts earlier this year, darkened traffic lights caused numerous= =20 accidents, people were stranded in elevators and business owners complained= =20 of losses that could have been minimized.=20 ""Regular notification is a good idea,"" said Samuel Ingersoll-Weng of the Sa= n=20 Diego Community Technology Group, which works with hundreds of local=20 organizations to promote computer literacy.=20 ""It would be very helpful in terms of scheduling staff, canceling or holdin= g=20 classes and also to protect equipment from power spikes or suddenly being= =20 shut off,"" he said.=20 For most of the year, SDG&E was telephoning a small number of such customer= s=20 on mornings they worried that demand for electricity might exceed supplies.= =20 But the problem is that when orders to pull megawatts from the grid come fr= om=20 the ISO, the utility has only minutes to cut supplies and there has been=20 little time to warn people they may lose power.=20 Yesterday, SDG&E was told 90 minutes ahead of time that a Stage 3 warning= =20 would likely be called at 3 p.m. The company issued the mass e-mails and=20 pages within 30 minutes.=20 Gov. Gray Davis announced plans this spring to provide neighborhoods 48-,= =20 24-and 1-hour notices when blackout orders might be called. The ISO issued = no=20 such notice yesterday, when it came the closest it had in weeks to ordering= =20 blackouts.=20 Ratepayers interested in signing up to be notified early of potential=20 blackouts can call the utility at (800) 411-SDGE.=20 Two more energy whistleblowers slated to come forward=20 By Don Thompson ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 July 4, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) Two more former workers at a San Diego-area Duke Energy pla= nt=20 are slated to talk with state investigators Thursday, echoing concerns by= =20 other employees over how the plant was run when the state needed its power= =20 most.=20 However, another former worker at the Chula Vista plant said he discarded= =20 perfectly good equipment three to five years ago, while the plant was still= =20 owned by San Diego Gas and Electric.=20 ""Stuff that cost $3- to $5,000 we were throwing away,"" said Don Perkins of= =20 Alpine, a mechanic at SDG&E plants for nearly 25 years.=20 That undercuts testimony from other former workers who told the Senate Sele= ct=20 Committee to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Energy Market= =20 last month that they discarded valuable repair parts on the orders of Duke= =20 supervisors.=20 Like the other former SDG&E employees who have come forward, Perkins was no= t=20 hired by Duke when it took over full operation of the plant in April. Perki= ns=20 said he is happy in retirement, but like his former co-workers believes Duk= e=20 was driving up energy prices =01) which the company vehemently denies.=20 He and the three other former workers suggested Duke did not adequately=20 maintain its equipment, leading to unnecessary repairs they said cut power= =20 generation and may have helped boost prices by cutting supply. That include= d=20 running a 15-megawatt jet-fuel fired turbine until it broke down.=20 ""We ran the heck out of the plant, you bet we did,""responded Duke spokesman= =20 Tom Williams. But he said the plant had fewer outages under Duke's ownershi= p=20 than while it was owned by SDG&E.=20 Duke eventually had to completely rebuild the jet-fuel fired turbine,=20 Williams said.=20 ""It ran more last year than the previous 37 years combined, because the sta= te=20 needed the power,"" Williams said.=20 An attorney for Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante, who is to introduce the two new= =20 whistleblowers Thursday, said they will echo their co-workers complaints th= at=20 maintenance slipped once Duke took over the plant.=20 Williams dismissed the news conference as ""a media event"" and the workers'= =20 complaints as old news the company has rebutted since the earlier testimony= =20 before the committee.=20 Disabled PG&E employees ask state for help in getting disability checks=20 ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 July 4, 2001=20 SAN FRANCISCO =01) After not receiving checks for work-related disabilities= for=20 months, more than 200 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. employees have asked the= =20 state to take over their disability payments.=20 The employees stopped getting checks after Pacific Service Employees=20 Association sent them a letter saying it did not have enough funds. Until= =20 this year, the association had paid almost all of PG&E's disability claims.= =20 PG&E said it has no legal responsibility to help the disabled workers and= =20 blames the employee association. But workers waiting for their payments=20 disagree.=20 ""The association and PG&E are one and the same,"" A.J. Cavallaro, an=20 electrical engineer with PG&E for 25 years who is on disability leave due t= o=20 a sleep disorder, told the San Francisco Chronicle.=20 Originally created by PG&E workers to organize social events, the associati= on=20 has its own board of directors and is legally separate from the utility and= =20 its parent company. The association began offering a short-term disability= =20 plan to PG&E workers in 1949.=20 Pacific Service transferred its members to the State Disability Insurance= =20 plan on Jan. 1. But about 230 PG&E workers decided to stay with the=20 association's plan after they were told they would continue to receive thei= r=20 disability checks.=20 Mike Colon, the association's general manager filed an appeal with the=20 California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board for the state to take over= =20 the group's payments.=20 Ralph Hilton, chief counsel for the appeals board in Sacramento, said that = if=20 the board decides the state should take over the payments, checks would be= =20 issued within days of the ruling.=20 Workers may have to wait until August for the case to be heard.=20 National Desk=20 THE NATION Powerful Judge Illuminates Energy Practices Law: 'Folksy' jurist= ,=20 72, stuns utility executives and lawyers alike with his courtroom=20 incisiveness. RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR ?=20 07/05/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page A-12=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 WASHINGTON -- The silver-haired judge handling federal negotiations on=20 refunds for alleged overcharges by power generators in California is often= =20 described as a Southern gentleman.=20 But Curtis L. Wagner Jr. can lose the folksy charm in a New York minute.=20 Wagner, chief judge of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, showed his= =20 knack for cutting through nonsense when he tangled with a smooth energy=20 company executive in his hearing room in May. The executive confidently=20 insisted he didn't need his boss' approval to enter into a $39-million=20 natural gas transportation deal.=20 Wagner didn't buy it.=20 ""I'm appalled that you're trying to pull this over my eyes,"" intoned the=20 judge, stunning a courtroom of high-priced lawyers into catatonic silence.= =20 ""Just answer my question . . .=20 ""Did you get approval . . . whether you got it after the meeting, whether y= ou=20 got it the day before, whether you got it in the head while you were both= =20 relieving yourselves?""=20 Added Wagner, owner of a 32-foot sailboat named ""Hizzoner"": ""The head, for= =20 non-boating people, is the restroom.""=20 Visibly squirming, the witness acknowledged that his boss had, in fact, OKd= =20 the deal.=20 That kind of mettle prompted FERC's governing board to assign the overcharg= e=20 settlement case to the 72-year-old judge, who likes to stay in shape by=20 attending early-morning aerobics classes in the agency's exercise room. ""I= =20 think Judge Wagner is the toughest tool in our toolbox,"" said FERC=20 Commissioner Patrick H. Wood III.=20 Expectations are low that anybody can bridge the chasm between California a= nd=20 electricity generators and marketers, with the state alleging it was gouged= =20 by $9 billion and the companies muttering about governmental extortion.=20 ""There are some very large numbers being talked about, which makes it=20 unlikely that the companies would want to agree to a settlement,"" said Kit= =20 Konolidge, an electricity industry analyst with Morgan Stanley in New York.= =20 But in an interview, Wagner said he feels ""pretty good"" about the chances. = ""I=20 never give up until the very end. With these things, it looks impossible, a= nd=20 then all of a sudden it comes together.""=20 FERC, the equivalent of a national utility commission, is also dangling som= e=20 carrots in front of the parties. Along with refunds, Wagner is trying to ge= t=20 a deal on long-term contracts for power and guarantees that the generators,= =20 which are owed hundreds of millions of dollars, will be paid.=20 The commission set a short time frame for the negotiations, which are to=20 conclude Monday. If a settlement is not reachable, FERC would impose its ow= n=20 solution. A mandated settlement is likely to be challenged in federal court= ,=20 where it could bog down for years.=20 FERC employs more than a dozen administrative law judges like Wagner to hea= r=20 disputes involving the companies it regulates. While presiding over the=20 closed-door settlement talks, Wagner has traded his robes for a business=20 suit.=20 He has come down from the bench and sits at a table, eye-level with more th= an=20 140 lawyers in his hearing room. ""There's a lot of billable hours there,"" h= e=20 said.=20 The lawyers have been sorted into three big working groups, representing=20 state agencies, power sellers and energy marketers. The negotiations are=20 expected to intensify this week, and participants said Wagner admonished al= l=20 sides on Friday to be ready to deal or face summary judgment from the FERC= =20 commission.=20 The judge has been variously quoted as saying that $1 billion, $2 billion o= r=20 $2.5 billion might be an appropriate total refund. ""None of those [figures]= =20 are really attributable to me. I did make a statement--and I probably=20 shouldn't have--that it was probably less than $9 billion."" Of the $9 billi= on=20 in overcharges claimed by the state, only $5.4 billion is attributable to= =20 sellers within FERC's jurisdiction.=20 James J. Hoecker, immediate past FERC chairman in the Clinton administratio= n,=20 said that, in 23 years as chief judge, Wagner has built a reputation for=20 making things happen in difficult situations.=20 ""What is behind that is a lot of years on the bench and a certain amount of= =20 self-confidence,"" Hoecker said. ""He has the ability . . . to move the parti= es=20 closer together. Sometimes that requires some fairly dramatic statements,= =20 which are calculated to get people to feel the heat and get more creative= =20 about the flexibility they might have.""=20 A senior FERC official said Wagner is like a pitcher who gets called from t= he=20 bullpen when the game is on the line. ""When things are tough, we turn stuff= =20 over to Curtis,"" said the official, who asked not to be identified.=20 Wagner has had many big cases over the years, on matters too arcane to garn= er=20 national attention.=20 He is handling a second major case before FERC. It involves allegations tha= t=20 Houston-based El Paso Corp. manipulated California 's natural gas market la= st=20 year, thereby adding an estimated $3.7 billion to the state's energy costs.= =20 It was in that case that he grilled the executive.=20 Success in the California settlement negotiations would cap Wagner's 47th= =20 year as a government lawyer. The Tennessee native started at the Justice=20 Department on Aug. 2, 1954. He got into regulatory law by representing the= =20 military in railroad disputes arising from the Korean War. After serving as= a=20 civilian lawyer for the Army for more than a decade, he joined FERC's=20 predecessor agency in 1974.=20 But Wagner, a widower, doesn't dwell on his place in the annals of FERC. He= =20 tells agency employees he is working too many hours and missing his aerobic= s=20 classes.=20 Davis lauds California generator=20 Vote of confidence at Calpine's festival=20 Suzanne Herel, Chronicle Staff Writer Thursday, July 5, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /05/M N166801.DTL=20 Gov. Gray Davis took the stage at the San Jose America Festival yesterday a= nd=20 pledged to ""keep the lights on"" -- with the help of the Calpine energy=20 company, which sponsored the fete.=20 ""You've heard me say some pretty tough things about out-of-state energy=20 companies trying to bleed us dry,"" said Davis, standing against the backdro= p=20 of a huge Calpine banner proclaiming, ""Reliable Energy for a Brighter=20 Future.""=20 ""Calpine is from California,"" he said. ""They're going to make sure the ligh= ts=20 stay on.""=20 Davis was a surprise guest sandwiched between musical acts Nina Storey and= =20 John Brown's Body during the daylong Fourth of July festival, which feature= d=20 music, food and vendors near the San Jose Airport.=20 The governor thanked the crowd of at least 1,000 for joining other=20 Californians in conserving energy. Conservation surpassed the 10 percent ma= rk=20 statewide in May and June, he said.=20 ""We could not get through the summer without you doing your part,"" he said.= =20 Davis was introduced by Calpine chief executive Peter Cartwright -- whose= =20 multimillion-dollar stock option cash-in made news last month -- and San Jo= se=20 Mayor Ron Gonzalez, who unsuccessfully opposed Calpine's planned 600-megawa= tt=20 Metcalf Energy Center in Coyote Valley.=20 In an interview after his appearance, Davis countered criticism leveled at= =20 him this week by State Controller Kathleen Connell, who accused him of=20 foolishly locking California into expensive long-term energy contracts.=20 ""You have to look at the total cost of electricity,"" he said.=20 The state paid $109 million in May, he said, but that cost dropped to about= =20 $33 million last month.=20 Earlier yesterday, after walking in the Redwood City Fourth of July parade,= =20 Davis said that the price drop was a direct result of the long-term=20 contracts.=20 ""That would not have happened without the security and stability of long-= =20 term contracts,"" he said. ""We did the right thing.""=20 In San Jose, he also said that the $15 million the state was paying=20 consultants to help negotiate power contracts was money well spent.=20 ""Before, it was like the Yankees winning the World Series against the sandl= ot=20 baseball team,"" he said. ""We're finally getting some stars on our team. ""= =20 E-mail Suzanne Herel at sherel@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 2=20 Activists stage anti-corporate march to power plant=20 GISELE DURHAM, Associated Press Writer Wednesday, July 4, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate2 024EDT0201.DTL=20 (07-04) 17:24 PDT LONG BEACH, Calif. (AP) --=20 Consumer activists rallied against rising energy prices and pledged their= =20 independence from corporate ""tyrants"" amid Fourth of July celebrations=20 Wednesday.=20 About 200 people carrying signs reading "" public power, not corporate=20 bailout"" and ""human need, not corporate greed"" marched two miles from a loc= al=20 park in the Los Angeles suburb to the Alamitos generating station.=20 ""We feel we have been gouged and bled dry,"" said Medea Benjamin, founding= =20 director of Global Exchange, a San Francisco-based consumer advocacy group.= =20 ""We've been treated the way tyrants treat their servants.""=20 The protest was a joint effort of several national and local consumer=20 activist organizations. No arrests were made, although dozens of police=20 officers were out in force for crowd control.=20 Earlier this week, a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order=20 preventing the city from enforcing an ordinance that could have blocked the= =20 march.=20 The law requires organizers of public protests to give 30 days notice of th= e=20 event, post an insurance bond and pay for police protection at the rate of= =20 $55 per hour for each officer.=20 At the plant, organizers had intended to serve officials with a ""notice of= =20 seizure by eminent domain"" declaring the facility to be public property. Bu= t=20 nobody appeared at the front gate. The demonstrators posted the notice on t= he=20 chain-link fence and staged about a 40-minute rally before dispersing.=20 The symbolic notice was meant to emphasize the groups' discontent with=20 skyrocketing power prices during the past year, the use of state budget mon= ey=20 for power purchases, and the activists' desire to have the state take over= =20 power plants to stabilize market prices.=20 ""The money they're making off of us is criminal,"" said Loni Baker, one of t= he=20 marchers. ""They're greed is taking money away from our kids' schools.""=20 Representatives of Arlington, Va.-based AES, Corp., which owns the plant, d= id=20 not immediately return calls seeking comment.=20 Last month, the U.S. Justice Department opened an antitrust investigation= =20 into a power sales partnership between AES and Williams Energy, the Tulsa,= =20 Okla.-based company that sells power for AES under an exclusive marketing= =20 agreement.=20 Both companies have denied wrongdoing but in May, Williams agreed to refund= =20 $8 million after the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission accused of the=20 company of temporarily closing AES plants to drive up power prices.=20 Davis asks PUC to let utilities cut voltage=20 1% savings on energy consumption predicted=20 David Perlman, Chronicle Science Editor Wednesday, July 4, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /04/M N29133.DTL=20 Gov. Gray Davis asked the Public Utilities Commission yesterday to allow=20 electric companies to lower voltage levels on power lines delivering=20 electricity to consumers this summer.=20 The move will save about 1 percent in the state's electricity consumption,= =20 the equivalent of building a new 500-megawatt power plant.=20 Lowering voltages by 2.5 percent will prove barely noticeable by domestic= =20 users who might see their incandescent light bulbs dim slightly.=20 Refrigerators and electric motors, such as those that run air conditioners,= =20 should operate more efficiently on the lower voltages, experts said.=20 The move should save consumers about 1 percent on their electricity bills,= =20 according to Energy Commissioner Arthur Rosenfeld.=20 With support already promised by the state's major power companies, the PUC= =20 is expected to approve the change in its voltage rules within weeks, Robert= =20 Kinosian, energy adviser to PUC President Loretta Lynch, said at a Sacramen= to=20 press conference.=20 Similar voltage decreases have gone into effect in several other states=20 during power emergencies in recent years, Rosenfeld said. But this is the= =20 first time it will occur statewide throughout an entire period of peak powe= r=20 demand.=20 PUC rules now require power companies to deliver between 114 and 126 volts = to=20 consumers all the time.=20 Less than two months ago, Bill Wattenburg, a maverick engineer and longtime= =20 consultant to the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, assembled a team = to=20 test the effects on lights, appliances, microwave ovens and motors operatin= g=20 at voltages that were lowered by 5 percent or more.=20 At the press conference yesterday, Wattenburg said those tests -- conducted= =20 with utility company senior engineers -- showed that no devices were damage= d,=20 nor was their performance impaired. But cooking food on electric ranges --= =20 whether boiling water or making a roast reach a given temperature -- would= =20 take longer and consume slightly more power under any lowered voltage, he= =20 said.=20 John Ballance, director of network engineering at Southern California Ediso= n,=20 said his company is equipped to control its voltage levels electronically a= nd=20 can lower them as soon as the PUC approves the change.=20 But Pacific Gas & Electric Co. operates differently and will have to change= =20 its voltage levels at each of its 2,400 substations individually -- a task= =20 that could take several weeks, Rosenfeld said.=20 ""This proposal may well achieve new efficiencies and reduce electric bills= =20 for California ratepayers,"" Davis said in a statement. ""I urge the PUC to= =20 give it serious consideration.""=20 E-mail David Perlman at dperlman@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 13=20 Federal price limits backfire=20 Some generators withhold power rather than abide by rate caps=20 David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, July 4, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /04/M N186091.DTL=20 Officials in California and Nevada, after months of lobbying for federal=20 regulators to cap Western power prices, warned yesterday that the newly=20 imposed limits have had the unintended consequence of increasing a threat o= f=20 blackouts in the two states.=20 The warnings were issued as California came within minutes of rolling=20 blackouts yesterday afternoon, and one day after the first-ever rolling=20 blackouts in Las Vegas forced energy-hungry casinos to shut off fountains a= nd=20 reduce air conditioning.=20 The two states are asking the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to take = a=20 closer look at the so-called price mitigation plan and come up with revisio= ns=20 that would deter power companies from withholding electricity during=20 shortages.=20 ""We need some clarity to this order,"" said Oscar Hidalgo, a spokesman for t= he=20 California Department of Water Resources, which is spending billions of=20 dollars to keep the state's lights on.=20 ""Generators need to be held accountable,"" he said.=20 The crux of the problem is that price limits kick in during shortages, yet= =20 power companies say these caps force them to sell power at below-market rat= es=20 during periods of high demand.=20 Some companies have responded by holding back power rather than face the=20 expense of shipping electricity from state to state. Each mile that=20 electricity must be transmitted adds to the overall cost.=20 ""No one's going to pay for transmission if the cost is near the caps,"" said= =20 Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, an=20 energy-industry association in Menlo Park.=20 Ackerman said several companies in his organization decided that there was = no=20 economic advantage to offering power in regional markets when price control= s=20 are in effect.=20 ""This means individual regions like California or Las Vegas could end up no= t=20 having enough,"" Ackerman said. ""It increases the threat of blackouts.""=20 BLACKOUT ALERT CANCELED California authorities issued a blackout alert at 1:45 p.m. yesterday when= =20 power reserves dipped to dangerously low levels. They canceled the alert=20 about an hour later, after finding additional supplies.=20 ""Everyone in the West is fighting for megawatts,"" said Stephanie McCorkle, = a=20 spokeswoman for the California Independent System Operator, which oversees= =20 the state's power network.=20 The Golden State's latest brush with lights-out conditions came a day after= =20 Nevada experienced its own rolling blackouts for the first time, prompting= =20 heavy power users such as the MGM Grand and Caesars Palace to dim their=20 lights.=20 Don Soderberg, chairman of the Nevada Public Utilities Commission, said tha= t=20 the sudden power emergency took state authorities by surprise and that they= =20 are investigating to see what role the federal price limits may have had in= =20 exacerbating Monday's shortage.=20 ""We're looking very closely at this,"" he said. ""There seems to be a potenti= al=20 for unintended consequences.""=20 Specifically, Soderberg said Nevada is focusing on operators of older, less= -=20 efficient plants who would find profit margins shrinking, if not vanishing,= =20 under capped prices.=20 ""We're going to see how the caps might have played into this,"" he said.=20 The federal ceiling in 10 Western states, excluding California, is about $9= 2=20 per megawatt hour. In California, a 10 percent surcharge is added because o= f=20 the state's credit risk, bringing the price to just over $101.=20 Ackerman at the Western Power Trading Forum said regional price controls ha= ve=20 extended California's power crisis to neighboring states.=20 ""California sneezed and the rest of the region caught the virus,"" he said.= =20 'LAWYERS LOOKING FOR LOOPHOLES'=20 California and Nevada officials, however, said that they still have faith= =20 that price limits can stabilize Western electricity markets but that federa= l=20 regulators may have to tweak the system so that power companies cannot=20 withhold output.=20 ""The generators have banks of lawyers looking for loopholes (in the plan),""= =20 said Hidalgo at the Department of Water Resources.=20 Unfortunately, it may take some time for the regulators to revisit an issue= =20 that they took up only with the greatest reluctance. For months, federal=20 regulators refused to impose price controls, preferring instead to let supp= ly=20 and demand determine costs.=20 Hidalgo said that when it appeared that power companies were throttling bac= k=20 on output Monday, California officials immediately dialed the hot line numb= er=20 provided by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in case of emergencies= .=20 ""No one answered,"" he said. ""They were closed.""=20 State officials tried again yesterday, and this time were told that the=20 commission would look into the matter. They were not given a time frame for= =20 when the commission might come up with a response.=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 Two more energy whistleblowers slated to come forward=20 DON THOMPSON, Associated Press Writer Wednesday, July 4, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 336EDT0118.DTL=20 (07-04) 00:36 PDT SACRAMENTO (AP) --=20 Two more former workers at a San Diego-area Duke Energy plant are slated to= =20 talk with state investigators Thursday, echoing concerns by other employees= =20 over how the plant was run when the state needed its power most.=20 However, another former worker at the Chula Vista plant said he discarded= =20 perfectly good equipment three to five years ago, while the plant was still= =20 owned by San Diego Gas and Electric.=20 ""Stuff that cost $3- to $5,000 we were throwing away,"" said Don Perkins of= =20 Alpine, a mechanic at SDG&E plants for nearly 25 years.=20 That undercuts testimony from other former workers who told the Senate Sele= ct=20 Committee to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Energy Market= =20 last month that they discarded valuable repair parts on the orders of Duke= =20 supervisors.=20 Like the other former SDG&E employees who have come forward, Perkins was no= t=20 hired by Duke when it took over full operation of the plant in April. Perki= ns=20 said he is happy in retirement, but like his former co-workers believes Duk= e=20 was driving up energy prices -- which the company vehemently denies.=20 He and the three other former workers suggested Duke did not adequately=20 maintain its equipment, leading to unnecessary repairs they said cut power= =20 generation and may have helped boost prices by cutting supply. That include= d=20 running a 15-megawatt jet-fuel fired turbine until it broke down.=20 ""We ran the heck out of the plant, you bet we did,""responded Duke spokesman= =20 Tom Williams. But he said the plant had fewer outages under Duke's ownershi= p=20 than while it was owned by SDG&E.=20 Duke eventually had to completely rebuild the jet-fuel fired turbine,=20 Williams said.=20 ""It ran more last year than the previous 37 years combined, because the sta= te=20 needed the power,"" Williams said.=20 An attorney for Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante, who is to introduce the two new= =20 whistleblowers Thursday, said they will echo their co-workers complaints th= at=20 maintenance slipped once Duke took over the plant.=20 Williams dismissed the news conference as ""a media event"" and the workers'= =20 complaints as old news the company has rebutted since the earlier testimony= =20 before the committee.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 Davis seeking cheaper contracts=20 Posted at 10:33 p.m. PDT Wednesday, July 4, 2001=20 BY JOHN WOOLFOLK=20 Mercury News=20 California officials are asking energy companies for better deals on the=20 state's long-term power contracts as a way to settle a dispute over billion= s=20 of dollars in electricity costs from the past year, Gov. Gray Davis said=20 Wednesday.=20 In closed-door Washington, D.C., settlement talks scheduled to conclude=20 Monday, state officials are demanding that energy companies forgo $8.9=20 billion in bills for electricity that the state argues was overpriced.=20 But Davis, during a San Jose visit Wednesday, said the state would consider= =20 accepting some of that refund in the form of cheaper long-term contracts, a= =20 move that could appease critics who say the $43 billion deals cost far too= =20 much.=20 The governor's comments shed light on the state's bargaining strategy in th= e=20 negotiations. Few details have emerged from the talks since the judge=20 overseeing them imposed a gag order.=20 ``We've made suggestions, we've offered various ways in which people could= =20 get us $8.9 billion,'' Davis said. ``We've said it doesn't have to be all= =20 cash. You can give it to us in lower contract prices than you otherwise wou= ld=20 have given to us. You can renegotiate our existing contracts and save us=20 money. However you want to do it, it's just got to net out to $8.9 billion.= ''=20 It's unclear how those offers have been received by energy suppliers, who= =20 have insisted their prices were fair given the uncertainty over whether the= y=20 would ever get paid. Several major companies, including Duke Energy and=20 Enron, say they're owed millions of dollars from the state and its major=20 utilities.=20 Paula Hall-Collins, a spokeswoman for Williams Companies, which signed=20 several contracts with the state in February to deliver power over the next= =20 10 years, said she could not comment.=20 But one industry official said it was encouraging to see the governor show= =20 some flexibility and that the concept seems reasonable.=20 ``We take that as a positive,'' said Gary Ackerman, executive director of t= he=20 Western Power Trading Forum, a trade association. ``If he wants to talk som= e=20 trade-off in renegotiating the contracts, that doesn't seem to be totally o= ut=20 of hand. We're not going to turn away any serious offer.''=20 But Ackerman said the state needs to give a little on its refund target.=20 The $8.9 billion, a figure estimated by the state's power grid analysts for= =20 sales from May 2000 to May 2001, has been widely challenged by industry=20 leaders. Even the judge overseeing the settlement talks said it's probably= =20 too high.=20 ``I don't think it serves the state of California for the state to hold fas= t=20 to a number, any more than it does for my members to do the same,'' Ackerma= n=20 said. ``It just doesn't get to a solution. There's got to be some give and= =20 take, and we certainly haven't heard that until now from the governor.''=20 The state began buying electricity in January for its largest utilities aft= er=20 they became so saddled with debt from high power prices that energy compani= es=20 refused to sell to them. The state has spent about $8 billion since then in= =20 daily and short-term purchases.=20 The Davis administration signed $43 billion worth of electricity contracts= =20 with 18 energy suppliers for power over the next 10 years and has dozens of= =20 deals pending. The contracts are aimed at lowering the amount of power the= =20 state has to buy in daily markets, where prices have soared.=20 Davis has credited the contracts with lowering the state's power costs from= =20 $100 million a day or more in May to about $33 million a day. His chief=20 energy negotiator, S.?David Freeman, has said he's proud of the contracts.= =20 But Davis has faced blistering criticism about the deals from Republican=20 lawmakers, state Controller Kathleen Connell and consumer advocates, who sa= y=20 the contracts will soak consumers with high electricity prices for many=20 years.=20 Davis initially sought contracts at prices around $55 per megawatt-hour, bu= t=20 the deals signed so far average $70 per megawatt-hour.=20 That was a bargain earlier this year when daily prices averaged more than= =20 $200 per megawatt-hour. But average daily prices have since fallen to $89= =20 during peak hours and as low as $56 during low-demand periods.=20 The average daily price in 1999 was about $30 per megawatt-hour.=20 If the state and power suppliers cannot reach an agreement by Monday, they= =20 can request an additional 10 days. Otherwise, the judge will recommend a=20 settlement and the five-member Federal Energy Regulatory Commission will vo= te=20 on it.=20 So far, the two sides still seem far apart.=20 ``It's very, very difficult,'' said Davis, who named the state's negotiator= s=20 to the Washington talks. ``We'll see on Monday whether or not agreements ar= e=20 made. My hope is that a settlement will be reached. It's possible one will= =20 be.''=20 Contact John Woolfolk at jwoolfolk@sjmercury.com or (408) 278-3410.=20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= <<Concur Expense Document>> - RS050901; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/24/2001 02:00 PM --------------------------- eserver@enron.com on 05/17/2001 05:28:07 PM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - RS050901 The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: Richard Shapiro Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: RS050901 Report Total: $4,095.22 Amount Due Employee: $4,095.22 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://xms.enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call
 Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and
 Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted; [EMail-Body]= Per last week's call, I am circulating updated FERC staff talking points to the entire Western Wholesale group. This version of the talking points incorporates comments from Steffes, Walton, and Perrino. Phillip Allen: people on the call were wondering if there are any informal messages the West gas desk would like to relay to FERC staff. Notes, however, that ex parte contacts such as these generally must avoid issues that are being currently litigated by the FERC. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Fwd: New York Times - Plan on California Energy Has No	Shortage of
 Critics; [EMail-Body]= Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 10:22:32 -0500 From: ""Tracey Bradley"" <tbradley@bracepatt.com> To: ""Deanna King"" <dking@bracepatt.com>, ""Justin Long"" <jlong@bracepatt.com>, ""Paul Fox"" <pfox@bracepatt.com> Cc: ""Ronald Carroll"" <rcarroll@bracepatt.com> Subject: New York Times - Plan on California Energy Has No Shortage of Critics Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline FYI - Linda Stuntz is quoted in this article. She characterized the RTO filing requirement as ""bizarre"". It appears to me that it is typical FERC behavior; FERC likes to use whatever leverage it has to force compliance. April 27, 2001 Plan on California Energy Has No Shortage of Critics By JOSEPH KAHN WASHINGTON, April 26 * A novel plan by federal regulators to control California's runaway electricity prices is a messy, politically motivated compromise that may offer some relief to consumers but will do little to fix the state's dysfunctional energy market, analysts said today. The intervention, announced by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on Wednesday night after much haggling, was dismissed by a wide range of critics today as a flawed effort that satisfies no one. It fell short of the sweeping suspension of regional electricity deregulation that California officials and some energy experts had advocated. But it also crossed what has become a firm ideological line among Republican leaders, including President Bush, by imposing price controls on some electricity sales to utilities. Under the agency's order, which takes effect on May 1, California regulators can begin to impose price controls on power generators when electricity supplies fall to within 7.5 percent of consumer demand. The state is expected to face such shortages routinely this summer, and the order has the potential to shave billions of dollars off California's electricity bill if implemented fully, some people at the federal agency say. ""The president has a long-held belief that price caps don't work,"" the White House press secretary, Ari Fleischer, said today. ""The last thing you want to do is create artificially increased demand and put in disincentives that harm the availability of supply."" Mr. Fleischer noted that the energy commission is an independent federal agency, adding that the Bush administration has no authority to countermand its orders. But Mr. Bush did appoint the commission's chairman, Curtis L. H,bert Jr., a Republican. Like the president, Mr. H,bert has often insisted that price caps do no good. But he came under withering political pressure to abandon the agency's largely hands- off approach to the California crisis. Some of that pressure came from the two other commissioners at the agency, both Democrats, and Mr. H,bert wound up voting for the controls adopted on Wednesday night. The split with the Bush administration raises fresh questions about whether the president will seek to replace Mr. H,bert as chairman in coming weeks. Mr. Bush has nominated two Republicans to fill vacant slots on the commission, including Pat Wood, a longtime ally of the president who served as chief electricity regulator in Texas. Industry executives say they expect that Mr. Bush will eventually name Mr. Wood to the commission's top post. In a reflection of how delicate the issue is, Mr. H,bert argued that the agency's action did not amount to imposing price caps. But his position appeared to rest on a semantic distinction between returning to cost- based electricity regulation (as some Californians favor) and the agency's decision to impose tactical price controls. Among California officials, the dominant reaction was disappointment. Some state regulators and market experts said the agency was practicing upside-down economics: it has chosen to impose price limits during periods of severe scarcity, when prices theoretically ought to rise to encourage companies to build power plants and encourage people to use less electricity. The agency, its critics argue, has chosen to ignore price abuses during times of relative abundance, when power generators, the critics say, have used artificial market power to earn high profits. ""They got it exactly wrong,"" said Frank Wolak, chief market supervisor for the California Independent System Operator, which runs the state's power grid. ""It looks like they're doing something, but it doesn't work in real time."" Mr. Wolak has estimated that most overcharges by generators last year * in amounts that he puts in the billions of dollars * occurred when electricity supplies were not acutely short, meaning that the agency's price caps would have had no mitigating effect. The state is likely to face many emergency shortages this summer. But, Mr. Wolak said, generating companies have become adept at ""gaming"" the system. He predicted that they would find ways to continue to earn high profits in California. One fear is that generating companies will arrange to sell their output to affiliates out of state. When California's transmission grid managers scramble to find supplies, the same companies will offer to sell the power back to the state, but only above the cap price. The agency's new order includes a provision that is intended to discourage this sort of abuse, known as megawatt laundering. But the agency has a weak record of enforcing such mandates, and California officials are skeptical. The order also came under fire on other grounds. The commission said that price caps would be canceled unless California submitted a proposal to link its transmission grid to the one that serves the Western region, a priority of the agency that state officials have resisted. Linda Stuntz, an electricity industry lobbyist who is an expert on the agency, called that clause bizarre, arguing that it held the entire California market hostage to a technical filing requirement. California politicians said they worried that even if the price caps were carried out as promised, relief would be too limited. The price limits will be based on estimates of the highest operating costs of the least efficient generating plant in the state. The order as written means that companies that operate efficient generating plants could still sell power at large mark-ups during periods when caps are imposed. When the agency scrutinized the California market earlier this year, it found the high-cost generators to be justified in charging about $300 a megawatt hour for electricity, a price that is about 10 times as high as the state was paying for power a year ago. Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California Power Crisis Update (No. 10); [EMail-Body]= We have been pulling together these weekly(sometimes more often) summaries for internal purposes. Would you find it helpful to be on the distribution list? Hope you are doing well. Look forward to touching base soon. ----- Forwarded by Suzanne on 03/28/2001 03:41 AM ----- Memorandum TO: Pru Sheppard BCC: Suzanne Nimocks FROM: Pru Sheppard B. Venki Venkateshwara DATE: March 27, 2001 California Power Crisis Update (No. 10) DEVELOPMENTS THIS WEEK, 3/23/2001 The weeks highlights include: ? Continued indications that the issue of market power and possible remedies for it is likely to remain a high profile issue in California and elsewhere (both retroactively and prospectively) ? An ironical situation with respect to QFs in which QF power under contract is effectively being released into the market at higher prices ? A court order requiring Reliant to continue to sell power to the ISO even if it is not being paid in a full and timely manner ? Another Stage 3 emergency and rolling blackouts Market power There are continued indications that the issue of market power will not be settled simply. This week there was a lengthy and politically influential front page story in the New York Times about FERCs passive approach to policing generators (Critics Say U.S. Energy Agency Is Weak in Oversight of Utilities). The story was by Jeff Gerth and Joseph Kahn. (Jeff Gerth's 1992 story on the Whitewater deal is viewed by journalists to have been the origin of what eventually became a multi-year investigation of Bill Clinton.) The key issues are familiar: ? Does market power exist to a degree that warrants remedies such as price caps, refunds, and so on? ? If so, what is the basis for asserting that market power exists and what is the remedy? (See the discussion in the New York Times article on the ""good hours"" vs. ""bad hours"" approach and the associated political decision not to deal with ""good hours""). ? Can market power be used as leverage to eventually settle generator bills in California at something less than 100 cents on the dollar. (The California ISO filed a complaint claiming $6 billion in overcharges this week.) The QF irony Through the 1990s, QF contracts were projected to be the source of stranded costs because they were priced ""way above market."" In recent months, in California, they look like a bargain (although some are not such great bargains because a portion of their price is tied to gas). You would think that the utilities would request QFs to maximize their output. But credit problems have created an ironical situation. The facts: ? PG&E and Edison have not been paying the QFs fully and promptly for some time. ? The QFs form a creditors committee and threaten to push PG&E and Edison into bankruptcy. (Some gas-fired QFs had to shut down because they did not have money to pay for the gas.) ? Last week's court decision allows MidAmerican/CalEnergy to essentially sell its power to others even though the QF contract ""dedicates"" the output to the purchasing utility. ? CalEnergy does so immediately, selling to El Paso. The Reliant Order A court ordered Reliant to continue to sell to the ISO, when requested, regardless of whether Reliant had been paid fully and promptly for past deliveries to the ISO. Reliant announced it will appeal the order. This is somewhat of a contrast to the QF situation except that the circumstances governing the 2 situations are probably different. The QF contracts pre-date the ISO and are with the utilities and most likely make no reference to providing power during emergencies. In fact, many QF contracts have the opposite provision: authority for the utility to cut takes during so-called ""light load"" periods. Stage 3 emergency and rolling blackouts--again There was another Stage 3 emergency in California ? with rolling blackouts this week. This prompted everyone to wonder why this was happening in March. Among the factors: ? Increased demand from summer-like temperatures ? Cutbacks in imports ? Loss of 1400 MW due to a transformer fire at an Edison plant ? Loss of about 3100 MW from QF plants that were forced to shutdown because they could not afford gas bills (VV) MARKET COMMENTARY (For easier printing of all the articles in this section use the file at the end of the section) Critics Say U.S. Energy Agency Is Weak in Oversight of Utilities By JEFF GERTH and JOSEPH KAHN 03/23/2001 The New York Times Page 1, Column 1 c. 2001 New York Times Company WASHINGTON, March 22 -- The pressure was intense when federal regulators met privately last month to debate remedies for soaring electricity prices in California. Officials of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the agency whose mandate is to ensure ''just and reasonable'' electricity rates nationwide, had evidence that a few companies had been selling electricity to California at prices far above the cost of generating it. The agency faced an imminent deadline to challenge those prices or let the companies possibly pocket hundreds of millions of dollars in unfair profits. An internal memorandum laid out two choices. The agency could audit and punish ''bad actors,'' the companies that were exploiting the market. Or it could identify ''bad hours,'' when electricity shortages were most acute and spiking prices were arguably nobody's fault, and order refunds for only the most exorbitant prices. ''It may be easier to identify bad hours than bad actors,'' the memorandum said. The commission took the easier way. It decided not to investigate reports of abuses by companies, but issued an order that could require them to refund to the state utilities up to $124 million collected during a relatively few ''bad hours'' in January and February. That is hundreds of millions of dollars less than California might have claimed, since the most potential overcharging occurred during ''good hours,'' when power was more plentiful but prices were often just as extreme. The order ignored those hours. Today, in a criticism of the agency's lack of aggressiveness, California regulators estimated that generators had charged $6.2 billion above competitive levels over 10 months. They urged the agency to dig deeper, hoping it would demand more refunds or other stiff remedies. But the agency's track record -- one of complacency in the eyes of state officials -- leaves California regulators skeptical that Washington will confront the big power producers. The small, obscure agency, tucked behind the rail yard of Union Station here, has largely soft-pedaled its role as the electricity industry's top cop, even though it has wide authority to keep power companies in line. To keep rates reasonable, it can impose price caps, strip companies of the right to charge market rates, force them to return excessive profits and even suspend deregulation altogether. Instead, the agency has largely left it to private companies to pry open the $250 billion electricity industry, which has historically been controlled by monopoly utilities and state officials. The agency's defenders, including its chairman, Curt Hebert Jr., a fierce advocate of unfettered markets, say that its largely hands-off approach reflects the delicate balancing of competing interests -- a commitment to protect consumers while not stifling market forces. But politicians, utility executives, energy economists and local regulators say California's rolling blackouts and skyrocketing electricity prices are the signs of a market running amok. They accuse the agency of standing aside as companies manipulate their way to windfall profits. The agency's critics, who include one of its own commissioners and numerous staff members, say that its enforcement mission has been blunted by free-market passions and the influence of industry insiders in its ranks. When the agency began its first national investigation of high electricity prices last year, it named a newly recruited industry insider, Scott Miller, to lead the effort. Mr. Miller and his colleagues said in their report that there was ''insufficient data'' in California to prove any profiteering by generating companies. Yet his own former employer, PG&E Energy Trading, was at the time a subject of a civil antitrust investigation by the Justice Department that focused on electricity market abuses in New England. The agency has given state regulators a lead role in monitoring local power markets. Yet even as these regulators have urged the agency to be more aggressive in investigating suspicions that companies have abused their power in California, New England, the Midwest and the mid-Atlantic, they have frequently been ignored or rebuffed. Critics say that the agency began deregulation before it was ready or willing to make sure the markets worked effectively. They accuse it of showing favoritism to industry -- allowing companies, for example, to ignore requirements to file detailed reports of market transactions that are critical to proving accusations of market abuses. ''We need to wake up to the fact that this is a dysfunctional market that is being gamed and manipulated by those who participate in it,'' said William Massey, a commissioner of the agency who has become one of its leading critics. The agency's inaction, the critics say, leads to ''gaming'' -- jockeying for profits that does not necessarily involve illegality -- and outright market manipulation. Consumers and utilities are the victims, paying billions of dollars more for electricity than if the markets were truly competitive. Agency officials acknowledge that enforcement of market rules to curb gaming and manipulation had not been a high priority in previous years. But they defended their recent California order as proof that they intend to keep markets free of abuse. They add that the agency is also pressuring two generators to refund almost $11 million for possibly manipulating the California market last spring. Agency officials and some outside analysts say that poorly conceived deregulation plans by states, a shortage of power plants, rising natural gas prices, and even the weather have had more impact on electricity prices than abuses by companies or any failings by the agency. They say the agency must balance the competing interests of generators, local regulators and utility companies if it is to keep deregulation on track. ''We're trying to craft a system that gives breathing room to develop a market, but not so much room that undue market power punishes consumers,'' Mr. Hebert said. Fight Over Deregulation Today's debate traces back to the 1930's, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt backed legislation to break up utility monopolies. The Federal Power Act of 1935 gave the Federal Power Commission a mandate to ensure ''just and reasonable'' electricity rates. The Federal Power Commission was abolished in 1977 and replaced by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, an independent agency with 1,200 employees that also oversees oil pipelines and the natural gas market. The president appoints the chairman and four commissioners -- two Democrats and two Republicans with staggered terms of five years. Two Republican seats are currently unfilled. The deregulation of the electricity markets began in the late 1980's, after the agency had begun opening the gas markets. By 1996, the commissioners issued a landmark order that forced utility companies to open their transmission lines to other utilities and electricity wholesalers. The commission and many private economists expected that by prying open protected markets, electricity prices would immediately fall. That possibility set off a deregulation frenzy, most prominently in California, New York, New England and the mid-Atlantic states. Generating companies rushed to expand in the new, borderless market. But the agency's balancing act has grown more difficult as electricity deregulation has spread nationwide. Congress has forced it to trim its staff in recent years. Officials complain that investigating abuses in electricity markets strains their resources. And as the California crisis has worsened, the commissioners have begun sparring publicly among themselves about what to do. This week, Mr. Massey, a Democratic commissioner, and Mr. Hebert (pronounced AY-bear), a Republican, sat side by side before a House panel and argued diametrically opposed positions. Mr. Hebert said high prices in California ''were sending the right signals to get supply there.'' Mr. Massey called the prices that generators were charging ''unlawful'' and said that his agency, by not reining them in, ''is simply not doing its job.'' The agency's leadership has been in flux for months. Congressional and industry officials in Washington say President Bush is considering replacing Mr. Hebert, whom he named to the top post less than two months ago, with Pat Wood, who runs the Texas public utility commission. A White House spokeswoman had no comment on the reports. Though Mr. Hebert's positions are not far from those of the Bush administration, his relations with California leaders may have made his position tenuous. Mr. Hebert, a Mississippian who is a close ally of the Senate majority leader, Trent Lott, has warred with California politicians who have proposed new solutions to the crisis there. Mr. Hebert, who has served as a commissioner since 1997, has often taken the most ideologically free-market position of any commissioner. He flatly rejects the idea of price caps on electricity as hopelessly ineffective and contrary to market forces. When Gov. Gray Davis outlined a plan to have the state buy transmission lines to relieve utility companies' debt, Mr. Hebert's response was dismissive. ''It's not in the interest of the American public,'' he pronounced. Even as new electricity markets opened in the summer of 1999, they started producing nasty shocks. The mid-Atlantic region experienced some early volatility. As the turmoil grew, economists began raising the alarm about a phenomenon called ''market power,'' the ability of energy traders in the new national market to sustain prices above the competitive level. Proving such abuses is difficult, because it requires comparing tens of thousands of separate electricity transactions with the costs of the generators that initiated them. Joseph Bowring, who heads the market monitoring unit of the nonprofit entity that operates the mid-Atlantic transmission system, said that power companies there had exercised some market power. But only the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, not local regulators, had the authority to collect the data to determine how much market power had been exercised and whether it had been abusive or not, he said. Mr. Bowring said he talked to agency officials about doing so. In the end, Mr. Bowring and several agency officials said, the agency chose not to investigate. The decision roiled some agency officials. Ron Rattey, a veteran agency economist, wrote a memorandum last June describing the staff as ''impotent in our ability to monitor, foster, and ensure competitive electric power markets.'' The staff, the memorandum said, did not even enforce a requirement that power companies file detailed quarterly reports listing essentially every sale they make. Such data would have been useful to Mr. Bowring. Local-Federal Clash Local regulators who want to ensure competitive prices often have to act on their own. Monitors in New England have intervened about 600 times since 1999 to correct prices they determined had been caused, at least in part, by market manipulation. The federal agency has sometimes chastised them for interfering too much. The industry, not surprisingly, shares that view. One vocal critic was Mr. Miller. Before the agency recruited him last July to head its division of energy markets, he was director of policy coordination for the national energy-trading unit of PG&E Corporation, the California holding company whose assets also include Pacific Gas and Electric, the California utility. Although the utility has lost billions of dollars during California's crisis, Mr. Miller's former unit has become one of the most profitable new energy traders nationwide. PG&E Energy Trading, by several estimates, is now the second-largest seller of electricity in New England. The company has had a rocky relationship with regulators. They intervened several times in 1999 and 2000 to retroactively cancel auctions they said produced excessive profits for PG&E and other companies. Mr. Miller denounced the practice, though he acknowledged in public testimony that his company sometimes charged ''very high'' prices when it could. ''One person's predatory pricing is another person's competitive advantage,'' Mr. Miller said at a public hearing on deregulation in Texas in 1999. New England regulators too often acted as ''judge, jury and executioner'' when overseeing the market, he said. One year later, Mr. Miller and his new colleagues at the federal agency got a chance to examine New England's problems from the regulators' perspective. Their Nov. 1 report attributed New England's frequent price gyrations to technical and regulatory flaws. As Mr. Miller's team was preparing its report, the Justice Department, whose threshold for stepping into possible industry wrongdoing is far higher than the agency's, began looking into whether price spikes in New England pointed to unlawful monopoly power or collusion, people contacted by the department during that inquiry said. One subject of the civil inquiry is possible price manipulation in one of New England's ancillary services markets, people contacted by the department said. They said the department was examining whether PG&E and two other companies tried to corner that market for several months early last year. PG&E confirmed that the Justice Department had contacted it, but denies wrongdoing and says it has cooperated with the department's requests. Mr. Miller has declined to comment on his role at PG&E or at the agency. His supervisors defended his work and said they had detected no conflict of interest between his work at PG&E and his duties at the agency. Those duties brought Mr. Miller to California last August. With electricity prices there soaring, he and his colleagues sat down with several utility executives at the agency's San Francisco office. One executive, Gary Stern, director of market monitoring for Southern California Edison, wanted the agency to stop what he suspected were market abuses by power generators. He provided a road map to help investigators figure out how power companies traded power contracts -- and whether they had manipulated the markets. But when Mr. Miller and his team approached 11 generators and marketers -- including his old employer -- a few weeks later, they did it their way. They asked eight questions, many of them imprecise, like: ''Describe your strategy for bidding generation resources into market.'' This question, Mr. Stern said in a recent interview, ''was equivalent to asking a suspected burglar how he spent his day.'' Some agency officials also thought the team should probe deeper. Mr. Rattey recommended that Mr. Miller seek the quarterly pricing reports that marketers were supposed to file. But his suggestion was not adopted, agency records show. Daniel Larcamp, Mr. Miller's supervisor, said ''there might have been more information that could have been obtained'' in the California inquiry. But he said the commission gave the staff only three months to finish, making it impossible to collect and analyze the reams of data involved. For Mr. Miller, agency documents show, the investigation was so time-consuming that he had no time to fill out the financial disclosure form required of new federal employees. Mr. Miller submitted his form in late January, after a reporter requested it. Agency lawyers approved the form, but only after he provided additional information about his job and compensation from PG&E. The lawyers said Mr. Miller's participation had been permissible because PG&E was not the subject of the investigation. When the staff report was issued on Nov. 1, it found high prices and problems in the design of the California market. But while the companies ''had the potential to exercise market power,'' the commission said, there was ''insufficient data'' to prove that they did. Some marketers saw the report as an exoneration. ''This has been looked at several times, most notably by the FERC and nobody has found any evidence of market manipulation and profiteering,'' Rob Doty, the chief financial officer of Dynegy Inc., told a reporter earlier this year. California Inquiry The agency has recently shown signs of wanting to apply pressure on generators. But its early efforts show how it is treading on new and uncertain turf. When the California crisis grew severe last December, the commission issued a refund order, a shot across the bow for generators charging high prices. It required them to submit detailed data any time they sold electricity in California for more than $150 per megawatt hour, considered at the time a fair estimate of the highest costs any of them faced. It also told generators that for the next several months, they could be forced to give refunds if the agency found that they had charged excessive prices. The commission also said that it would examine bidding practices and strategies for withholding generating capacity to ferret out any efforts to artificially raise prices. When the agency's own 60-day deadline for examining market data in January approached, however, it became clear that staff members had not made any detailed examination. Instead, staff members said, the agency scrambled to forge a last-minute compromise that would allow it to issue a statement opposing high prices in the state without a time-consuming investigation. During this scramble, a senior staff member, Kevin Kelly, suggested focusing on bad hours instead of bad actors. ''Our attempts to find illegal behavior or legal 'misbehavior' by sellers ('bad actors') always seems to fail,'' his memorandum said. It said that the agency could more easily blame high prices on acute shortages during the most critical hours. The suggestion won the day. The commission decided to limit its order to the hours when California declared a Stage 3 emergency, when supplies are critically low. Mr. Stern of Southern California Edison and several private-sector economists have attacked the economic logic of that order. They said that the commission has focused on times when prices might be legitimately high. The bigger worry: Generators can and often do sustain artificially high prices when supplies are not as tight, they say. Mr. Massey, the Democratic commissioner, dissented from the decision for those reasons. Because most high-priced transactions in January and February did not occur during bad hours, he argued, the commission effectively chose to bless as ''just and reasonable'' the hefty profits generators are making from the California crisis. ''The problem with my agency is that we're so carried away with the rhetoric of markets that we've gotten sloppy,'' Mr. Massey said. ''We're talking about electricity. It's the juice of the economy, so it's got to be available and reasonably priced.'' Williams defends pricing of electricity 03/23/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. TULSA, Okla. (AP) - Williams Cos. Inc. says it can justify the rates it charged for wholesale power, despite accusations from federal regulators that it sold over-priced electricity to California. Federal regulators claim Williams Energy Marketing and Trading Co., a unit of Tulsa-based Williams, owes California more than $40 million in refunds for power it sold to the state's Independent System Operator. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission says that Williams is one of several power providers responsible for $124 million in overcharges from transactions in January and February. The Independent System Operator, which manages the state's power grid, claims the state was overcharged $6.2 billion by 21 wholesale power providers, including Williams, between May and February. Williams says the rates it charged California were fair and were based on production costs and market conditions. ""Williams is confident that it performed within the guidelines established by the ISO,"" said Williams spokeswoman Paula Hall Collins. ""We felt like we had worked within the regulations set up by ISO."" According to the commission, power prices levied by Williams in January and February exceeded federal price ceilings based on the cost of natural gas and other market conditions. However, the price ceilings were established after the ISO accepted Williams' power prices, Collins said. The commission will review Williams' explanation and either accept the justification or order the company to pay refunds. Allegheny Energy makes big California connection 03/23/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. HAGERSTOWN, Md. (AP) - Allegheny Energy Inc. said Thursday it has agreed to sell $4.5 billion worth of power to California's electricity-purchasing agency over the next 10 years. The company said the contract call for Allegheny to provide up to 1,000 megawatts that the Hagerstown-based company has secured from western generating plants through its new energy trading division, Allegheny Energy Global Markets - formerly Merrill Lynch Global Energy Markets. ""This is a win-win for both the state of California and Allegheny Energy. It provides a long-term source of fixed-price energy and should help to stabilize prices in California,"" said Michael P. Morrell, president of the Allegheny Energy Supply division. Allegheny Energy is the parent of Allegheny Power, which delivers electric energy and natural gas to parts of Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia. Williams plans expansion of pipeline to help power Calif. 03/23/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. SALT LAKE CITY (AP) - The Williams Cos. plans to expands its Kern River pipeline, which runs through Utah, to provide more natural gas for generating plants in California. Williams' gas pipeline unit in Salt Lake City said Thursday that it plans to construct nearly 700 miles of additional pipeline that will run parallel to its existing Kern River line. Construction on the $1 billion project is expected to begin next year and is scheduled for completion in May 2003, said Kirk Morgan, director of business development for Kern River pipeline. ""Shippers are seeking more access to natural gas from the Rocky Mountain basin, where producers are aggressively stepping up production,"" Morgan said. The new pipeline is expected to deliver about 900 million cubic feet of natural gas per day to markets in Utah, Nevada and California. Most of the gas will be used for generating plants planned in California. If all of the pipeline's capacity were used to generate electricity, it could produce about 5,400 megawatts. ""That is enough to light around 4.5 million homes,"" Morgan said. The original Kern River line was completed in 1992. It enters Utah from Wyoming then crosses into the Salt Lake Valley near Bountiful. It turns south near the Salt Lake City International Airport then runs the length of the state before passing into southern Nevada and winding up near Bakersfield, Calif. It currently transports 700 million cubic feet of natural gas per day. Williams, based in Tulsa, Okla., recently filed an emergency application with federal regulators to install additional pumping stations on the line to increase its capacity by 135 million cubic feet per day. That $81 million pumping station project should be completed by July 1. During the 2002 construction period, the Kern River project will employ between 1,500 and 1,800 people. The company estimates annual property taxes it pays to Utah counties will increase from $3.5 million to about $7 million. Questar will be one of the customers on the new pipeline, Morgan said. The utility wants to supply additional gas to southern Utah cities, including St. George and Cedar City. ""Our own pipelines serving southern Utah are at full capacity so this is an opportunity to transport additional gas into those areas from company-owned supplies in Wyoming,"" said Questar Gas spokeswoman Audra Sorensen. Calif Energy Commission OKs 3 Pwr Plants Worth 2,076 MW 03/23/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) (This article was originally published Thursday) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- The California Energy Commission Wednesday approved three power plants worth 2,076 megawatts, two of which are scheduled to come on line by the end of 2002, a CEC spokesman said Thursday. The plants approved include BP Amoco PLC (BP) unit ARCO Western Energy's 500 megawatt Western Midway Sunset Project, slated to come on line in October 2002; Caithness Energy's 520 MW Blythe Power Plant, to come on line by Dec. 31, 2002; and Thermo Ecotek's 1,056 MW Mountainview Power Plant, scheduled to come on line in April 2003. All three of the new plants will be natural gas-fired combined-cycle plants. The $550 million Mountainview plant will be located in Southern California, near San Bernadino. The $300 million Western Midway-Sunset plant will be located in central Kern County, while the $250 million Blythe plant will be located in the city of Blythe in Riverside County. The latest approvals bring to 13 the total number of plants approved since April 1999 by the CEC, a spokesman said. Those plants will supply 8,405 MW to the state, which has seen rolling blackouts and spiking wholesale power prices in the last six months, in part due to lack of supply. -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872; jessica.berthold@dowjones.com Some CalEnergy Power Could Be Sold Outside Calif - CEO 03/23/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) (This article was originally published Thursday) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Some of CalEnergy Operating Corp's power could end up being sold outside of California, though that is not the company's intent, CalEnergy Chairman and CEO David Sokol said in a conference call Thursday. CalEnergy, an affiliate of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co, which is majority owned by Warren Buffett's Berkshire-Hathaway (BRKA), was given legal authority Thursday to suspend 270 megawatts of power delivery to Edison International (EIX) utility Southern California Edison and sell on the open market, because SoCal Edison has not paid its bills since November. CalEnergy stopped supplying power to SoCal Ed immediately following the court ruling. ""We stopped supplying power at 1 PM (PST) and have been selling to parties that will pay since then....We are selling it to marketers; our current marketing agent is El Paso Corp (EPG) and they will sell it for us,"" Sokol said. Sokol added that while it was his company's intention to have its power sold to California, that could not be guaranteed. ""We leave the energy selling to El Paso....We've directed them that we would like the power to stay in California but we can't stop them,"" from selling out of state, Sokol said. Wholesale prices on the open market are about $400-$500 a megawatt-hour, three times more than what the company had received under its contract with SoCal Ed. The court's ruling did not address the $45 million SoCal Ed still owes CalEnergy for November and December power, and Sokol said that his company's separate lawsuit on that matter sought to attach the utility's assets as payment for that debt. Sokol said the court's ruling had ""significant implications"" for the entire community of small, independent generators, known as qualifying facilities or QFs, who have not received payment from SoCal Ed. ""Edison's own lawyer said it best....that every QF in the state will begin to mitigate if the judge allowed us (to sell on the open market),"" Sokol said. Sokol said his company was prepared to push SoCal Ed into involuntary bankruptcy Friday if CalEnergy hadn't won the case, but said he couldn't speculate whether other QFs may be more or less inclined to do so as a result of the court outcome. A group of renewable power suppliers, owed more than $100 million from SoCal Ed, said late Wednesday they want state lawmakers to release them for their supply contracts with PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric and SoCal Ed until the utilities are restored to financial stability. The utilities claim close to $13 billion in undercollections due to an inability to pass high wholesale power costs to customers under a rate freeze. In a statement, SoCal Ed said it opposed CalEnergy's bid to suspend its QF contract because the utility believed Gov. Gray Davis and state regulators are close to resolving ""very legitimate financial concerns of CalEnergy and other QF suppliers."" SoCal Ed said it was concerned that CalEnergy's request to sell to third parties would lead to a major supply shortage in California. The utility said it has informed the QFs that it is working to resolve the issue without giving unfair advantage to one class of creditors. While many of the state's large power suppliers have been paid by on a forward basis for the power they sell into California, the QFs, which make up one-third of the state's total power supply, haven't been paid by SoCal Ed since November. PG&E has made partial payments to its QFs. -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872, jessica.berthold@dowjones.com (Jason Leopold contributed to this article.) California and the West Judge Frees Small Firm From Edison Contract KEN ELLINGWOOD; DAN MORAIN TIMES STAFF WRITERS 03/23/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-3 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company El CENTRO -- California's balance of electrical power shifted slightly Thursday when an Imperial County judge temporarily freed a small geothermal energy producer from its contract with Southern California Edison, allowing it to sell power on the open market. The ruling by Superior Court Judge Donal B. Donnelly could lead to a mass exodus by hundreds of small energy producers that have been selling power to the state's financially troubled utilities for months without getting paid. At the same time, it may have staved off plans by a group of the small generators to send Edison into involuntary bankruptcy as early as today. In Sacramento, energy legislation pushed by Gov. Gray Davis passed in the state Senate but foundered in the Assembly. The measure was intended to ensure that the state gets repaid for the electricity that it has been buying on behalf of Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric, which say they lack the cash and credit to purchase power. The bill also was supposed to guarantee that the small, alternative energy producers--which together provide nearly a third of the state's power--get paid. But Assembly Republicans opposed it, saying it hadn't been given sufficient scrutiny. The impact of the small producers was made clear in Imperial County, where Edison's failure to pay CalEnergy, the county's biggest property taxpayer, had outsize implications. CalEnergy had put county officials on notice that it was about to miss a $3.8-million property tax payment. The uncertainty had prompted the tiny Calipatria Unified School District to postpone a bond issue for badly needed school repairs. Among CalEnergy Chairman David Sokol's first acts after the judge's ruling Thursday was to promise Imperial County Supervisor Wally J. Leimgruber that the company would pay its property taxes on time. ""That is great news,"" Leimgruber said. Within hours of its court victory, CalEnergy had stopped transmitting geothermal power to Edison and begun selling it to El Paso Energy, a marketing company that purchased the energy at prevailing rates and resold it on the spot market. Some of the more than 700 other small energy producers in the state said they were considering similar action against Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric. ""We absolutely need the right to sell to third parties,"" said Dean Vanech, president of Delta Power, a New Jersey company that owns five small gas-fired plants in California and is owed tens of millions of dollars by Edison. Sokol praised the Imperial County judge and said his company simply wanted the authority to sell its power ""to a credit-worthy company that, in fact, pays for the power."" An Edison spokesman said the company was disappointed with the ruling, but sympathized with CalEnergy and other small producers because ""California's power crisis has placed [them] in financial distress, just as it has placed utilities in financial distress."" Edison expressed concern that the ruling would prompt CalEnergy and other small producers to sell their power out of state. Sokol said CalEnergy had specifically told El Paso Energy that it hoped its power would remain in California, ""but if someone wants to pay a higher price out of state, we can't stop them."" Sokol said that Edison still owes CalEnergy $140 million and that the company--along with seven other small producers--had been prepared to file a petition in federal bankruptcy court in Los Angeles today forcing the utility into involuntary bankruptcy. He said his company no longer intends to do so, and he believed--but wasn't certain--that the other companies would shelve their plans. Edison filed papers Thursday with the federal Securities and Exchange Commission showing that it owed $840 million to various small electricity producers, many of which rely on renewable energy sources such as geothermal steam, solar energy or wind. The alternative energy producers--and utilities--strenuously objected to the legislation considered in Sacramento on Thursday. The bill, spelling out how the utilities are to pay the state and the small producers, passed the Senate on a 27-9 vote, the exact two-thirds margin required. But it stalled in the Assembly on a 46-23 party-line vote, well short of two-thirds. ""When I was a citizen back in Lancaster, I heard these stories about pieces of legislation that were cooked up late at night, that . . . were cut and pasted together and were rammed through by the Legislature,"" Assemblyman George Runner (R-Lancaster) said. ""That's exactly what we have before us."" The alternative electricity generators, including oil companies, warned that they would lose money under the Davis proposal, while representatives of Edison and PG&E, which have amassed billions in debt in the worsening energy crisis, said the legislation would push them deeper into the hole. ""There isn't enough money,"" Edison attorney Ann Cohn testified at a Senate hearing on the bill Thursday. ""It is a very simple question: Dollars going out cannot be greater than dollars coming in."" The bill, AB 8X, combined several proposals. First, it sought to clarify earlier legislation by spelling out that Edison and PG&E must pay the state all money collected from consumers for electricity that the state has been buying. Additionally, the bill would turn over to the California Public Utilities Commission the thorny issue of how much to pay alternative energy producers for their electricity. Wind, solar and geothermal producers might agree to the prices offered by the administration. But most of the alternative energy producers, including Chevron and British Petroleum, use natural gas to generate electricity through ""cogeneration,"" a process of creating steam for both electric generation and heat. With natural gas prices high, they contend, they would lose money at the prices Davis is offering. * Ellingwood reported from El Centro, Morain from Sacramento. Times staff writers Mitchell Landsberg in Los Angeles and Jenifer Warren, Nancy Vogel and Carl Ingram in Sacramento contributed to this story. (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) Power Points Background The state Legislature approved electricity deregulation with a unanimous vote in 1996. The move was expected to lower power bills in California by opening up the energy market to competition. Relatively few companies, however, entered that market to sell electricity, giving each that did considerable influence over the price. Meanwhile, demand has increased in recent years while no major power plants have been built. These factors combined last year to push up the wholesale cost of electricity. But the state's biggest utilities--Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison--are barred from increasing consumer rates. So the utilities have accumulated billions of dollars in debt and, despite help from the state, have struggled to buy enough electricity. * Daily Developments * Overcharges by major electricity suppliers were estimated at $6.3 billion, up from the $5.5 billion first thought, California's power grid operator said. * Electricity producers denied that they have profiteered and argued that Cal-ISO's figures don't take into account all their costs. * A Superior Court judge's ruling Thursday freeing a small producer from its contract with Edison could lead to a mass exodus by small energy producers that have been selling to the utilities without getting paid. * Verbatim ""If these guys have such high costs ... how come they're making so much money?"" --Gary Stern, Edison's director of market monitoring and analysis, referring to power producers Complete package and updates at www.latimes.com/power Grid Operator Says California Paid Too Much for Power By Rebecca Smith and John R. Emshwiller Staff Reporters of The Wall Street Journal 03/23/2001 The Wall Street Journal A2 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) California's electric-grid operator said power suppliers may have overcharged the state and its utilities by $6.2 billion, or a total of 30%, in a 10-month period, and has asked federal regulators to step up their policing of electricity markets. Meanwhile, a California state judge handed down a decision involving small power producers that could result in more electricity being made available in the energy-starved state, but likely at greater cost to the state government. The $6.2 billion figure was contained in a market analysis by the California Independent System Operator filed yesterday with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The ISO says it isn't seeking a refund -- for the May through February period -- because its analysis lacked important market data. For example, it estimated costs for 21 suppliers based on published prices for natural gas, not on specific data showing what each generator actually paid for the fuel. ""We don't know how much gas actually was purchased at spot-market prices,"" said Anjali Sheffrin, the ISO's head of market analysis. Charles Robinson, general counsel for the ISO, said FERC needs to become ""more aggressive about market-power mitigation."" The ISO's filing, he said, was intended to push the agency in that direction, since FERC is responsible for policing deregulated electricity and natural-gas markets. He said that if the FERC doesn't act, the state of California may find ways to discipline the market, such as through the state attorney general's office. The attorney general has been investigating the state's electricity market for many months but hasn't brought any court action. Dynegy Inc., a big owner of power plants in California, said it will provide additional information to FERC supporting its position that the prices it has charged for power have been ""just and reasonable."" The Houston company was one of 13 energy suppliers that the FERC this month ordered to pay refunds totaling $124 million or ""show cause"" why it should be excused. Dynegy said the FERC analysis was flawed, because it used ""inaccurate"" prices for natural gas and pollution credits. While big power producers such as Dynegy came under attack, small power producers won a potentially significant victory in a state court in Southern California's Imperial County. A judge granted 10 geothermal plants operated by the CalEnergy Co. unit of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co., a unit of Berkshire Hathaway Inc., of Omaha, Neb., permission to suspend deliveries of electricity to Southern California Edison Co. and instead seek other buyers. These plants, known as ""qualifying facilities,"" are under long-term contract to Edison and other utilities but haven't been paid for months. Edison, a unit of Edison International, of Rosemead, Calif., says it has been unable to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in power bills to CalEnergy and others because it has been driven to the brink of insolvency by the state's failed utility-deregulation plan. While the CalEnergy case involves only about 320 megawatts of power, the repercussions could be far greater. Collectively, hundreds of qualifying facilities, or QFs, produce as much as 30% of California's electricity needs. QFs totaling 3,000 megawatts cut their production in recent weeks for lack of payment. This loss of output was a significant cause of the blackouts that hit California this week. Observers believe the CalEnergy court decision could give other QFs an opportunity to sell power in the open market, presumably to the state government that now is California's biggest energy buyer. An hour after the court decision yesterday, some 400 megawatts of power came back into the market, the ISO said. However, additional QF power sales on the open market could substantially increase the state's tab. Already, the state has allocated more than $4 billion for electricity purchases. Separately, Edison said in a Securities and Exchange Commission filing that its unpaid power bills could contribute to a write-off of as much as $2.7 billion for 2000. Because of uncertainty caused by the energy crisis, the company hasn't yet reported year-end earnings. Power regulators debate who should be exempted from blackouts By KAREN GAUDETTE Associated Press Writer 03/22/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - State power regulators said Thursday they are working to exempt all California hospitals, regardless of size, from rolling blackouts. The Public Utilities Commission met with representatives from hospitals and investor-owned utilities after Los Angeles lawyer David Huard filed an emergency motion with the PUC on behalf of more than 500 hospitals throughout the state. Under PUC rules, hospitals with more than 100 beds are exempt from losing electricity during power emergencies. But during rolling blackouts Monday, at least a dozen hospitals from Long Beach to Clearlake were forced to use their backup generators. Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison Co. say they blacked out those hospitals specifically because they have backup generators. Both utilities said the temporary blackouts were part of their overall efforts to spread the burden of blackouts over more of their customers. Linda Ziegler, director of business and regulatory planning for SoCal Edison, said the utility is following state law and will implement new guidelines if the PUC changes them. But hospitals say there is a 10-second lapse before emergency generators kick in, which could harm patients in the midst of delicate surgical procedures such as organ transplants or brain surgery. ""You wouldn't fly a plane with only your emergency backup systems in place,"" said Ann Mosher, a spokeswoman for California Pacific Medical Center in San Francisco. ""Backup generators are just that, they're not designed to keep the hospital up and running at full capacity."" Ziegler said that power still goes out for reasons beyond the energy crisis, from incidents like lightning or a knocked-down power pole. ""If it's a serious problem for the hospital it's certainly something they should be address just from an ongoing basis,"" she said. The exemption would cover all hospitals within the territory of the state's investor owned utilities PG&E, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas and Electric. Hospitals within the range of municipally owned utilities, such as the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, are separately regulated. For more than two decades, prisons, hospitals with more than 100 beds and emergency services such as fire and police departments have been classified as ""essential"" services, and are exempted from blackouts by order of state power regulators. After rolling blackouts began darkening the state in January, many other public service groups began seeking relief from power interruptions, including transit systems, schools and water districts. --- On the Net: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov Federal Judge Orders Reliant To Keep Selling Pwr To Calif 03/22/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP)--A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction Wednesday ordering a major electricity wholesaler to continue selling to California despite its fear that it will not get paid. U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said Californians were at risk of irreparable harm if Reliant Energy (REI) stopped selling power to the Independent System Operator, which oversees the state's power grid. The ISO buys last-minute power on behalf of utilities to fill gaps in supply. Damrell dismissed Reliant's attempt to force the state Department of Water Resources to back the ISO's purchases for the state's two biggest utilities. The state has been spending about $50 million a day on power for Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison, both denied credit by suppliers after amassing billions of dollars in debts. The judge said he had no authority to force the DWR to pay for that power. Gov. Gray Davis has said the state isn't responsible for purchasing the costly last-minute power ISO buys for Edison and PG&E, despite a law authorizing state power purchases on the utilities' behalf. ISO attorney Charles Robinson said the ruling gives ISO operators ""a tool to assist them in keeping the lights on in California."" ""Had the decision gone the other way, one could expect other generators to simply ignore emergency orders,"" Robinson said. Damrell's preliminary injunction will remain in effect until the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission rules on the matter. Damrell denied the ISO's request for preliminary injunctions against three other wholesalers - Dynegy Inc. (DYN), AES Corp. (AES) and Williams Cos. (WMB) - which agreed to continue selling to the ISO pending the FERC ruling. Spokesmen for Reliant, Dynegy, AES and Williams were out of the office Wednesday night and didn't immediately return calls from The Associated Press seeking comment on the ruling. The ISO went to court in February after a federal emergency order requiring the power sales expired. The judge then issued a temporary restraining order, requiring the sales, but dropped it after the suppliers agreed to continue sales to California pending his Wednesday ruling. The ISO said it would lose about 3,600 megawatts if the suppliers pulled out, enough power for about 2.7 million households. One megawatt is enough for roughly 750 homes. Grid officials said Reliant's share alone is about 3,000 megawatts. Reliant said the amount at issue actually is less than a fourth of that, because most of its output is already committed under long-term contracts. Reliant, which currently provides about 9% of the state's power, worries it won't get paid due to the financial troubles of PG&E and Edison. PG&E and Edison say that together they have lost about $13 billion since June due to soaring wholesale electricity costs that California's 1996 deregulation law bars them from passing onto customers. Calif Small Pwr Producers To Shut Plants If Rates Capped By Jason Leopold Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES 03/22/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Many of California's independent power producers late Wednesday threatened to take their small power plants offline this week if state lawmakers pass legislation that would cap the rates the generators charge for electricity they sell directly to the state's three investor-owned utilities. At issue is a bill that would repeal a section of the state's Public Utilities Code, which links the 688 so-called qualifying facilities' electricity rates to the monthly border price of natural gas. Lawmakers, however, are poised to pass the legislation. State regulators are then expected to approve a measure that would restructure the fluctuating rates the QFs charge PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric, Edison International (EIX) unit Southern California Edison, and Sempra Energy (SRE) unit San Diego Gas & Electric from $170 a megawatt-hour to $69-$79/MWh, regardless of the price of natural gas. Whereas each of the 688 QF contracts differed, largely because natural gas prices are higher in Southern California than Northern California, the state wants the QFs to sign a general contract with the utilities. The cogeneration facilities, which produce about 5,400 megawatts of electricity in the state, said the rates are too low and they won't sign new supply contracts with the utilities. ""For $79/MWh, natural gas would have to be $6 per million British thermal unit at the Southern California border,"" said Tom Lu, executive director of Carson-based Watson Cogeneration Company, the state's largest QF, generating 340 MW. ""Our current gas price at the border is $12.50."" Other gas-fired QFs said the state could face another round of rolling blackouts if lawmakers and state regulators pass the legislation, which is expected to be heard on the Senate floor Thursday, and allow it to be implemented by Public Utilities Commission next week. Lu, whose company is half-owned by BP Amoco PLC (BP) and is owed $100 million by SoCal Ed, said the proposals by the PUC and the Legislature ""will only make things worse."" David Fogarty, spokesman for Western States Petroleum Association, whose members supply California with more than 2,000 MW, said the utilities need to pay the QFs more than $1 billion for electricity that was already produced. State Loses 3,000 MW QF Output Due Of Financial Reasons The QFs represent about one-third, or 9,700 MW, of the state's total power supply. Roughly 5,400 MW are produced by natural gas-fired facilities. The rest is generated by wind, solar power and biomass. About 3,000 MW of gas-fired and renewable QF generation is offline in California because the power plant owners haven't been paid hundreds of millions of dollars from cash-strapped utilities SoCal Ed and PG&E for nearly four months. Several small power plant owners owed money by SoCal Ed have threatened to drag the utility into involuntary bankruptcy if the utility continues to default on payments and fails to agree to supply contracts at higher rates. The defaults have left many of the renewable and gas-fired QFs unable to operate their power plants because they can't afford to pay for the natural gas to run their units. Others continue to produce electricity under their contracts with the state's utilities but aren't being paid even on a forward basis. The California Independent System Operator, keeper of the state's electricity grid, said the loss of the QF generation was the primary reason rolling blackouts swept through the state Monday and Tuesday. Gov. Gray Davis, recognizing the potential disaster if additional QFs took their units offline, held marathon meetings with key lawmakers Monday and Tuesday to try and hammer out an agreement that would get the QFs paid on a forward basis and set rates of $79/MWh and $69/MWh for five and 10 year contracts. He also said he would direct the PUC to order the utilities to pay the QFs for power they sell going forward. ""After next week the QF problem will be behind us,"" Davis said Tuesday. ""We want to get the QFs paid...the QFs are dropping like flies...and when that happens the lights go out."" But this just makes the problem worse, said Assemblyman Dean Florez, D-Shafter, a member of the Assembly energy committee. ""I don't know how we are going to keep the lights on,"" Florez said in an interview. ""Many of these congenerators are in my district. They said if the legislation doesn't change they are going offline. This compounds the issue of rolling blackouts, especially now when we need every megawatt."" Davis, who didn't meet with people representing the QFs, said he was handing the QF issue to the PUC because lawmakers failed to pass legislation that would have set a five-year price for natural gas and allow the QFs to sign individual contracts with the utilities. In addition, SOCal Ed opposed the legislation, saying the rates should be below $50/MWh. Some renewable power producers said they aren't vehemently opposed to the new rate structure because it guarantees them a higher rate than what was originally proposed. QFs Want Third Party Supply Contracts John Wood, who represents the SoCal Ed Gas Fired Creditors Committee, one of a handful of groups that have formed since January to explore options on getting paid by the utilities, said his group of gas-fired QF creditors want to be released from their supply contracts and sell to third parties. ""Under our plan, we would be permitted to sell electricity to third parties (including the state Department of Water Resources) until a resolution to the crisis can be accomplished,"" wood said. Hal Dittmer, president of Sacramento-based Wellhead Electric in Sacramento, which is owed $8 million by PG&E, has 85 MW of gas-fired generation units offline. Under the state's plan, Dittmer said he risks going out of business. ""I can't buy natural gas for what I would be paid under this decision,"" he said. ""The state needs to quit kidding themselves that they don't need to raise electricity rates. All of this is being driven by an artificial construct that California can avoid raising rates."" -By Jason Leopold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3874; jason.leopold@dowjones.com Power Strain Eases but Concerns Mount Energy: Officials say summer prices will be high, and a state report shows that contracts with generators are far short of goals. DAN MORAIN; JENIFER WARREN TIMES STAFF WRITERS 03/22/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-3 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SACRAMENTO -- California's fragile electricity system stabilized Wednesday, but a Davis administration report suggested troubles ahead because the state could be forced to buy most of its power for the coming summer on the costly and volatile spot market. After two days of statewide blackouts, power plants that had been shut down were cranked up. Unseasonable heat tapered off. The operators of the statewide power grid relaxed their state of emergency. But plenty of ominous signs remained. Many small producers remained shut down, skeptical about Gov. Gray Davis' plan for utilities to pay them. State Controller Kathleen Connell issued a sharp warning about the high cost of the state's foray into the power business and announced that she will block an administration request that she transfer $5.6 billion into an account that could be tapped to pay for state purchases of electricity. And a report from the administration summarizing contracts between Davis and independent power generators showed that the state has signed contracts for only 2,247 megawatts of electricity, significantly less than the 6,000 to 7,000 megawatts previously claimed. While there are agreements in principle for the full amount, the report notes that generators can back out of the contracts for a variety of reasons, including the state's failure to sell bonds to finance power purchased by July 1. The Legislature has approved plans to sell $10 billion in bonds, but none have yet been issued. ""We are exposed enormously this summer,"" Senate Energy Committee chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) said after looking at the report. ""We owe the people the truth about how difficult this summer is going to be. We don't have a power fairy."" Perhaps most significant, the report suggests that the contracts fall significantly short of Davis' stated goal of buying no more than 5% of the state's summer needs on the spot electricity market, where prices can be many times those of long-term contracts. After reading the report, Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economist who studies the California electricity market, said the numbers suggested that the state's long-term contracts will cover less than half of what the state will need this summer. ""We're definitely short this summer, next summer and the summer of 2003,"" he said. California was forced to start buying electricity in December--at a cost of $50 million a day--because producers refused to sell to Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric. The two utilities amassed billions of dollars in debt when prices for wholesale power soared on the spot market. Vikram Budhraja, a consultant retained by Davis to negotiate deals with generators, said the report represents a ""work in progress."" He said the state may yet sign new contracts. However, Wolak said the contract figures confirm what he and others have been dreading: that summer is going to be rife with rolling blackouts unless serious steps to cut demand are taken immediately. Wolak and other experts say large industrial customers must be switched to real-time meters and pricing to persuade them to use the bulk of their energy at times of low demand. The head of the Energy Foundation, a San Francisco-based nonprofit that promotes sustainable sources of power, made the same proposal to Davis on Wednesday. ""The government need not ask customers to swelter in the dark this summer,"" foundation President Hal Harvey argued in a letter. He also proposed a crash campaign to boost sales of efficient appliances and lightbulbs. He said the state needs to take over the utilities' contracts with alternative energy providers to ensure they stay in business, and sign new contracts for 1,500 megawatts of new wind power--the cheapest, fastest and cleanest source of new supply. Davis had proposed a formula Tuesday to force private utilities to pay the alternative producers, some of which have not been paid since November. But some of them warned Wednesday that Davis' plan offers them little incentive to turn on their generators. Alternative energy producers supply more than a quarter of the electricity consumed in California. Many producers generate electricity from wind, sun and geothermal sources. But most of them generate power using natural gas--and the cost of natural gas has been soaring. Several natural gas users said Davis' plan, which caps rates, won't cover their fuel costs. Davis assumes that the price of natural gas will fall. But small generators say they don't have sufficient purchasing power or sophistication to gamble on future prices. The Public Utilities Commission is expected to approve Davis' proposal next week. It offers producers two choices: 7.9 cents a kilowatt-hour if they agree to supply power for five years, or 6.9 cents a kilowatt-hour over 10 years. ""The price of natural gas is higher than that,"" said Marty Quinn, executive vice president and chief operating officer of Ridgewood Power LLC, which owns three natural gas-fired co-generation plants. ""If we operate, we'll lose money."" Ridgewood is not operating, having been cut off by gas suppliers. The company sued PG&E last month seeking overdue payments and release from its contracts with the utility. A hearing is scheduled in El Centro today in another lawsuit filed by a small energy producer, an Imperial Valley geothermal producer that sued Edison for refusing to let it break its contract and sell on the open market. CalEnergy says Edison owes it about $140 million for energy sold since November. A company spokesman, Jay Lawrence, said CalEnergy was going ahead with its suit despite Davis' proposal. ""We've had promises before,"" he said. In other developments: * A federal judge in Sacramento on Wednesday ordered Reliant Energy of Houston, a major producer, to continue selling power to California during emergencies, despite the company's argument that it may not be fully reimbursed. The order will remain in effect for 60 days or until the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission decides a related case. * Connell said the state budget surplus has shrunk to $3.2 billion because the state has spent roughly $2.8 billion on electricity. She criticized the administration for withholding basic information about state finances, and said she will begin an audit on Monday of the Department of Water Resources, which is responsible for purchasing power. Davis' aides said Connell took her action because the Democratic governor endorsed one of Connell's foes this week in the race for Los Angeles mayor, former Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa. A Connell aide scoffed at the notion. * Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said she ""never has had a response"" from President Bush after writing him last month for an appointment to discuss the California energy crisis. In a wide-ranging lunch talk with reporters in Washington, she deplored the fact that ""huge, huge profits are being made"" in the California crisis, and said ""an appropriate federal role"" would be to guarantee a reliable source of power until the state can get nine new generators online. * Times staff writers Mitchell Landsberg in Los Angeles and Robert L. Jackson in Washington contributed to this report. (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) Power Points Daily Developments * Wholesale electricity suppliers overcharged by about $5.5 billion between May and last month, and that money should be refunded to taxpayers and utilities, according to a Cal-ISO report. * The state may have to buy most of its power for summer on the costly spot market, which could drive consumers' bills up, a Davis administration report concludes. * State Controller Kathleen Connell said she will block a request by the Davis administration for $5.6 billion for state purchases of electricity. Verbatim ""We owe the people the truth about how difficult this summer is going to be. We don't have a power fairy."" Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey), Senate Energy Committee chairwoman CPUC Must Address Rates In QF Repayment Order - SoCal Ed 03/21/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Any order from the California Public Utilities Commission requiring utilities to pay small, independent generators going forward must determine how that could be done within the existing rate structure, a spokesman for Edison International (EIX) utility Southern California Edison said Wednesday. The utility was responding to a PUC proposed decision that would require utilities to pay small generators, called qualifying facilities, $79 a megawatt hour within 15 days of electricity delivery. The decision will be voted March 27 by the CPUC. ""We're still reviewing (the decision) and should have more to say in a day or two. To the extent that the commission orders us to pay going forward of course we will. But it needs to address how we will pay the QFs,"" a SoCal Edison spokesman said. SoCal Edison and PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric Co. are struggling under nearly $13 billion in uncollected power costs due to an inability to pass high wholesale power costs to customers under a rate freeze. Gov. Gray Davis Tuesday blasted the utilities for not having paid their QF bills in full since December. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. has made some partial payments to QFs, but SoCal Edison has paid nothing. Together, they owe the QFs about $1 billion, but the order doesn't address that debt. An Edison executive said, in reaction to the governor's sharp comments, that the company simply doesn't have the money to pay creditors. ""The root problem here is there just isn't enough money in the current rate base to pay our bills,"" said Edison Senior Vice President of Public Affairs Bob Foster. ""We understand the financial distress (the QFs) face; we are facing financial distress ourselves."" The proposed PUC order would also require the state's investor-owned utilities to offer the small generators five- and 10-year contracts for power for $79/MWh and $69/MWh, respectively. The QFs ""may be able to live with"" the PUC proposal, but the five- and 10-year contract prices may be inadequate if natural gas prices at one of the California borders are high, said Jan Smutny-Jones, president of the Independent Energy Producers Association. Natural gas prices into California are currently higher than anywhere in the country. But some say the proposed decision may not be enough to prevent the QFs from filing involuntary bankruptcy proceedings against the utilities for the money they are still owed. ""There's still a lot of skepticism. To say our position has changed based on the CPUC decision or the governor's announcement is not accurate. A lot still has to happen,"" said Jay Lawrence, a spokesman for a renewable creditors committee. -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872; jessica.berthold@dowjones.com -0- 22/03/01 01-27G State Says It's Accelerating Plan to Buy Power Utilities' Grid Government: Talks with Edison are reported near completion, but agreement with heavily indebted PG&E has a way to go. RONE TEMPEST; DAN MORAIN TIMES STAFF WRITERS 03/21/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-22 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SACRAMENTO -- As blackouts hit California for a second day Tuesday, a key consultant to Gov. Gray Davis said negotiations to buy the power grid owned by the state's largest utilities ""are proceeding at an accelerated pace."" Wall Street consultant Joseph Fichera said talks with Southern California Edison could be wrapped up within days, although those with PG&E are much less advanced. The administration and PG&E have not reached even an agreement in principle, he said. PG&E, which has more debt than Edison, says its transmission lines are more extensive than those of its Southern California counterpart. The state wants to buy the utilities' transmission lines and other assets for about $7 billion to provide cash to the utilities, help stabilize the electricity supply and ease the power crunch that has plagued California for months. To research the grid purchase, Fichera said, the state has had to pore over 80,000 documents just to assess the utilities' liabilities. ""We are working at a good pace,"" said Fichera, chief executive of the New York firm Saber Partners. "" . . . If we get to a deal-breaker, it might be longer."" By making Fichera, who is also a consultant to the Texas Public Utilities Commission, available to reporters Tuesday, the Davis administration was clearly trying to reassure the public that progress is being made on the governor's plan to pull the state out of the crisis. Since mid-January, when the big utilities' credit failed and suppliers stopped selling to them, the state has spent nearly $3 billion buying electricity from a handful of large suppliers in Texas, Oklahoma, Georgia and North Carolina. Not a cent has gone to the hundreds of alternative energy suppliers in California who provide about a quarter of the state's electricity. The Monday and Tuesday blackouts occurred partly because many of the cash-strapped alternative suppliers, including solar, biomass and wind power units, cut their normal supply to the system in half. They say Edison and PG&E have not paid them since November; the utilities say they are out of cash. Assemblyman Fred Keeley (D-Boulder Creek) said the plight of the alternative suppliers has dragged on because of the complexity of dealing with ""almost 700 individual contractors."" Another delaying factor, said Keeley, who with state Sen. Jim Battin (R-La Quinta) worked for almost three months to come up with a legislative plan to lower the small producers' prices, was ""the huge enmity . . . manifested between the utilities and the qualifying facilities. These people just don't like each other."" This week's blackouts provided two painful lessons for the Davis administration: * When it comes to electricity, size doesn't matter--every kilowatt counts. During peak use, a small wind power facility in Riverside County can make the difference between full power and blackouts. * There is no such thing as a partial solution. Unless the whole energy equation is balanced, the parts don't work. For the Davis plan to work, several key elements need to come together or utility customers will almost certainly face rate increases above the 19% already set in motion * The cost of power purchased by the state must be reduced through long-term contracts with the big out-of-state producers. These contracts, the details of which the Davis administration has kept confidential, are still being negotiated by Davis consultant Vikram Budhraja of the Pasadena firm Electric Power Group. The administration says it has concluded 40 contracts with generators, about half of which have been signed. According to the most recent statistics released by the Department of Water Resources, which buys power for the state, current prices are still well above the rate state Treasurer Phil Angelides says is necessary for a planned $10-billion bond offering to succeed. The bonds, set for sale in May, will be used to reimburse the state for the money it will have spent by that time to buy electricity. The state is currently spending at a rate of $58 million a day to buy power. If prices stay high, the $10 billion in bonds will not cover the state's power purchases by the end of the summer. Angelides says he cannot proceed with bridge financing for the bonds until the Public Utilities Commission devises a formula to guarantee that a portion of utility bills will be dedicated to bond repayment. Angelides has estimated that, under the January law that put the state in the power buying business, the state must be reimbursed $2.5 billion annually, and that $1.3 billion is needed to service the debt. PUC Administrative Law Judge Joseph R. DeUlloa is expected to announce his ruling on the reimbursement rate later this week, leading to a PUC vote on the matter as early as next week. * The rates charged for electricity by the alternative producers, known as qualifying facilities, must be cut at least in half, down from an average of more than 17 cents per kilowatt-hour. In his news conference Tuesday, Davis said he will ask the PUC to set QF rates at 6.9 cents for 10-year contracts and 7.5 cents for five-year contracts. Meanwhile, PUC Chairman Loretta Lynch, a Davis appointee, said Tuesday that the commission will vote next week on a proposed order requiring Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric to pay the QFs for electricity in the future. Lynch said a recent PUC assessment showed that the utilities have enough cash on hand for that. ""We are trying to make sure the folks providing the power get paid,"" Lynch said. ""The qualified facilities have demonstrated that they haven't been paid and that it is impairing their ability to provide power."" The utilities contend that if they pay the small providers what they owe them, there will not be enough money left to pay other creditors. ""There is not enough money in the current rate structure to pay the [alternative producers], pay the [Department of Water Resources] and pay the utilities for their generation,"" said John Nelson, a spokesman for PG&E. * The utilities must sell to the state the power they produce themselves, mainly from hydro and nuclear sources, at a rate only slightly above the cost of producing it. This is tied to the ongoing negotiations between the Davis administration and the utilities to restore the near-bankrupt utilities to solvency. * Times staff writers Julie Tamaki, Miguel Bustillo and Tim Reiterman contributed to this report. Davis OKs Subsidy of Pollution Fees Smog: As part of secret deal to get long-term energy contracts, state would pay for some of the credits that allow excess power plant emissions. Critics renew call for full disclosure. DAN MORAIN TIMES STAFF WRITER 03/21/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-23 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SACRAMENTO -- As part of his closed-door negotiations to buy electricity, Gov. Gray Davis has agreed to relieve some generators from having to pay potentially millions of dollars in fees for emitting pollutants into the air, Davis said Tuesday. Davis announced two weeks ago that his negotiators had reached deals with 20 generators to supply $43 billion worth of power during the next 10 years. However, the Democratic governor has refused to release any of the contracts or detail various terms, contending that release of such information would hamper the state's ability to negotiate deals with other generators and therefore ultimately would raise prices Californians pay for electricity. Sources familiar with the negotiations, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the agreement reached with Dynegy Inc., a power company based in Houston, is one that includes language requiring that the state pay the cost of credits that allow emissions. Dynegy spokesman Steve Stengel declined to discuss the company's deal with the state. ""We couldn't get them to sign contracts; it was a sticking point,"" Davis said of the decision to pay the fees of some generators. ""We had to lock down some power so we were not totally dependent on the spot market."" The fees in question are part of an emission trading system known as RECLAIM. Under the system, companies are allotted a certain amount of allowable pollution. If their operations pollute more, companies are required to purchase credits on an open market. Currently the credits cost about $45 per pound of pollution--an amount that can lead to a bill of well over $10 million a year for a power plant. The South Coast Air Quality Management District, which regulates pollution in the Los Angeles Basin, is considering steps to significantly lower the cost of the system--a step that could considerably cut the state's potential cost, Davis said. Senate Energy Committee Chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) defended the decision to cover the power company's costs. ""It is a question of whether it brings down the price of power,"" she said. ""If it brings down the price of power, I don't have a problem with it."" Nevertheless, word that the contracts could bind the state to pay pollution fees caused some critics of Davis' policy to renew calls for Davis to reconsider the secrecy surrounding the power negotiations. The payment provision underscores the fact that the contracts involve more than merely the prices the state will pay for its megawatts, the critics note. ""The Legislature should have known about it,"" said Senate President Pro Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco). ""It is going to cost taxpayers money. It makes you wonder. . . . This was a policy issue that was never discussed with the Legislature."" V. John White, a lobbyist for the Sierra Club, who also represents alternative energy producers, called the contract proposal ""a horrible precedent."" ""Until we know exactly what the state has agreed to and how much of a subsidy this represents, we can't determine how serious the breach of principle this is,"" White said. Another critic of the secrecy of the negotiations, Terry Francke, general counsel for the California First Amendment Coalition, said the provision in question ""raises the possibility that there are other [concessions]"" that have not yet come to light. In the summer, when demand for power is highest, some generators probably will exceed pollution limits set by regional air quality management districts. To avert blackouts, state officials might ask the companies to keep plants running. In such cases, some sources familiar with aspects of the contracts said, the contract language could be interpreted to suggest that the state would cover any fines--although Davis said Tuesday the state will not cover the cost of fines. A recent Dynegy filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission underscores the rising cost of pollution-related measures. The company, which is partners with NRG Energy in three California plants in El Segundo, Long Beach and Carlsbad in San Diego County, said its ""aggregate expenditures for compliance with laws related to the regulation of discharge of materials into the environment"" rose to $14.3 million in 2000, from $3.6 million in 1999. A South Coast Air Quality Management spokesman said Dynegy's facilities appear to be fairly clean--although Sierra Club lobbyist White said Dynegy has been seeking a permit at one of its plants to burn fuel oil, which is dirtier than natural gas. Davis said he intends to ""make this information public,"" but he added that ""we do not want to put the public's interest in jeopardy by asking them to pay higher prices."" ""Nobody likes the notion that [the administration is] not being fully forthcoming,"" Davis said. ""But I also have a corollary responsibility that I don't stick these generators with a higher rate."" FERC ORDERS WILLIAMS ENERGY AND AES TO EXPLAIN THEIR REFUSAL TO MAKE CERTAIN RMR UNITS AVAILABLE TO CALIFORNIA ISO LAST YEAR 03/21/2001 Foster Electric Report 5 (c) Copyright 2001, Foster Associates, Inc. Following a preliminary, non-public investigation, FERC directed AES Southland Inc. and Williams Energy Marketing & Trading Co. (IN01-3) on March 14 to show cause why they did not violate section 205 of the Federal Power Act (FPA) by failing to provide power to the California ISO from two reliability must-run (RMR) generator units during a period in April and May 2000. The investigation responded to a matter referred by the Cal-ISO. If a violation is found, Williams Energy and AES could be required to refund excess profits of $10.9 million (as calculated by FERC) and face restrictions on their market-based rate authority for a year. The show cause order involves two generation units (Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2), owned and operated by AES. Williams Energy markets all output from the Alamitos and Huntington Beach plants, including the two units at issue here, pursuant to a tolling agreement filed with the Commission. The Cal-ISO designated the two units as RMR units that it could call on when necessary to provide energy and ancillary service essential to the reliability of the California transmission network. The Cal-ISO makes both a fixed payment to the RMR owner or operator to compensate for the RMR unit's availability and a variable payment for the RMR unit's output (if the unit is not otherwise participating in the market). Williams Energy and the Cal-ISO executed RMR agreements, filed as rate schedules with the Commission, allowing the Cal-ISO to dispatch units ""solely for purposes of meeting local reliability needs or managing intra-zonal congestion."" The ISO may dispatch a non-RMR unit if the designated RMR unit is not available. Under its RMR agreement with the ISO, Williams is paid the greater of its contract price or marginal cost for operating RMR units. However, if a non-RMR unit has to be dispatched because a designated RMR unit is unavailable, Williams will be paid its bid price, not the RMR contract price. During the April to May 2000 period, the Cal-ISO sought to dispatch both Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2 as RMR units to provide voltage support. However, according to the FERC order, Williams Energy refused to make Alamitos 4 available from April 25 through May 5, and to make Huntington Beach 2 available from May 6 through May 11, ""for reasons not directly related to the necessary and timely maintenance of the units."" Consequently, the Cal-ISO was forced to dispatch non-RMR units at a higher cost, namely, Williams Energy's bid price for service provided by the replacement units. By contrast, if the RMR units had not experienced outages and been available from April 25 through May 11, Williams Energy would have received either (1) the market revenues only from the respective units, which would have resulted in no payments for RMR output from the ISO to Williams Energy, or (2) Williams Energy's variable cost for operating the RMR units less the market revenues from the respective units' output. Accordingly, FERC observed, Williams Energy had ""a financial incentive to prolong any outages of Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2 in April and May 2000."" The bid price for the non-RMR units was at or near the Cal-ISO's then-effective bid cap of $750/MWh, FERC continued. Therefore, Williams Energy received payments from the Cal-ISO of more than $11.3 million, or about $10.3 million greater than the estimated average variable operating cost of the non-RMR units (approximately $63/MWh) during the period in question. This indicates a refund amount, including interest, of nearly $10.9 million. The information in this order and a non-public appendix, the Commission declared, suggests that AES declared outages at the two RMR units and maintained Huntington Beach 2 in a manner inconsistent with good utility practice, and that Williams Energy took action to extend the outage at Alamitos 4 and to make Huntington Beach 2 unavailable for ""pretextual reasons."" Based on this information coupled with Williams Energy's financial incentive not to make the Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2 units available, FERC found serious questions about whether (1) AES and Williams Energy violated applicable RMR contracts and tariffs on file with the Commission pursuant to FPA section 205 when they refused to make Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2 available for dispatch by the Cal-ISO; (2) whether Williams acted inconsistently with its market-based rate authority and the market monitoring information protocols of the Cal-ISO's tariff regarding the unavailability of the RMR units during the period at issue; and (3) whether AES violated a tolling agreement on file with the Commission pursuant to section 205. The Commission identified two remedies for these potential violations: a refund by Williams Energy and/or AES of revenues received greater than the amount that would have collected from the ISO if the RMR units had been available, and a condition on Williams Energy's market-based rate authority. Specifically, for a one-year period, if an RMR unit were not available when dispatched by the Cal-ISO, a non-RMR unit dispatched in its place would only receive payment according to the terms of the applicable RMR contract. In other words, Williams Energy would not receive the bid price for operation of the substitute, non- RMR unit. The Commission directed Williams Energy and AES to show cause, within 20 days, why they should not be found to have committed the above-described violations and why the specified remedies should not be imposed. Further, to ensure procurement of all relevant information, the Commission instituted a formal, non-public investigation into the operation, maintenance and sales of power from the Alamitos and Huntington Beach plants in 2000 and 2001. Calif Consumers Failing To Conserve Pwr Despite Blackouts 03/20/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- California consumers haven't been conserving enough electricity to relieve strain on the power grid and reduce demand in the state, a spokesman with the Independent System Operator said Tuesday. The ISO said that despite two straight days of statewide rolling blackouts, consumers aren't using less electricity, which means additional megawatts will be taken off the grid. As a result, blackouts could last longer and impact additional communities, the ISO said. ISO spokesman Pat Dorinson said Monday ""conservation in California is no longer an option,"" but consumers in the state aren't heeding the call to reduce consumption. Conservation efforts during rolling blackouts Monday and Tuesday were far less than Jan. 17 and Jan. 18, when blackouts swept through Northern California due to transmission constraints. Jim Detmers, the ISO's vice president of operation, said consumers saved the state about 1,000 megawatts of electricity, enough power for 1 million houses. The ISO said conservation efforts Monday were about 500 MW or less. ""We would be very happy if we saw the same amount this time,"" Detmers said. The state's Energy Commission said consumers think it's no longer important to save electricity until blackouts are imposed. ""People have been saving generally, but it isn't a big bump from hour to hour,"" a spokesman for the Energy Commission said. Gov. Gray Davis launched a massive conservation campaign this month, promising consumers a rebate on their summer electricity bill if they save at least 20% of electricity, compared with last summer. The governor said he believes conservation this summer will amount to possibly saving 5,000 MW and averting the chance of rolling blackouts. -By Jason Leopold; Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3874; jason.leopold@dowjones.com Gas Co.'s Success Opens Debate Southern California energy supplier has reaped millions of dollars in state incentives for keeping down its costs. Though consumers get a share of the windfall, regulators are asking whether they should get more of the bonus, which is expected to be huge this year, as a form of price relief. The natural gas provider says it deserves to keep its reward. TIM REITERMAN TIMES STAFF WRITER 03/18/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition C-1 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SAN FRANCISCO -- While consumers suffer soaring energy bills and the big electric utilities lurch toward insolvency, the news is not all dire at Southern California Gas Co. Through vigorous deal making, the Sempra Energy subsidiary has consistently beaten the volatile natural gas market during the last year, and the company stands to reap millions of dollars in savings through a state incentive program that rewards utilities for keeping costs down. For several years, the utility has been splitting the savings 50-50 with ratepayers whenever the company's gas costs fall slightly below market levels. Those savings, Gas Co. executives acknowledged, have shot to unprecedented heights during the state's power crisis. Now, in this climate of high consumer gas bills and runaway market prices, regulators are taking another look at the program. The question before the Public Utilities Commission: Should Gas Co. ratepayers, who endured huge bill increases this winter, get a bigger share of the savings? The total windfall under the incentive program has in some years exceeded $20 million. But the amount for the last 12 months is expected to multiply many times over, company executives said, partly because the Gas Co. has done so well in the wild market by selling, lending and trading gas as well as buying it. ""The recent market conditions . . . could possibly result in some unintended consequences that result in shared savings of benefits that may be more appropriately allocated entirely to ratepayers,"" the PUC's consumer protection arm, the Office of Ratepayer Advocates, reported Oct. 30, even before the latest upward market spirals. Gas Co. representatives express frustration, saying they have done what the state has requested under its gas-cost incentive program: Buy smarter, and pass the savings along to its 5 million residential and small-business customers. The company contends it has worked hard to keep bills down and should be rewarded for taking risks to obtain gas at the lowest possible cost. ""The PUC, every time we do well, raises the bar on us,"" said Jim Harrigan, director of gas acquisition. ""I don't necessarily agree with it."" By virtue of its purchasing power and storage and pipeline capacity, the Gas Co. has become a big player in the regional natural gas market. In the company's bustling trading room at its Los Angeles headquarters, 15 employees track price movements, pipeline supplies and even the weather via computer, while cutting deals and arranging gas shipments. Although the Gas Co. buys the commodity for its customers, the company also sells to marketers, other utilities and producers. State officials say the number of transactions by the company has risen steeply to 10,000 to 20,000 a year, including gas sales along California's border, where prices have rocketed. The PUC created the cost incentive program for the state's three major gas utilities--San Diego Gas & Electric Co. in 1993, Southern California Gas the next year and PG&E Corp.'s Pacific Gas & Electric Co. in 1997. Like Southern California Gas, SDG&E is a subsidiary of Sempra Energy. The program was designed to give utilities added motivation for obtaining gas at the best price for customers. It replaced lengthy and contentious reviews by the PUC, which assessed whether utilities had purchased gas at reasonable prices and sometimes ordered them to return millions of dollars to customers. An annual audit of the Gas Co. program and a staff evaluation requested by the PUC recently concluded that the program has achieved many of its goals, but it also proposed adjustments that would give customers a greater share of the rewards. ""These incentives were designed in less volatile times,"" said program supervisor Mark Pocta of the Office of Ratepayer Advocates, which conducted the audit. ""There is a question of how much should go to ratepayers and shareholders."" His office also plans to assess whether the Gas Co.'s trading had any negative effects on the gas market, resulting in diminished supplies or higher prices for other utilities and their customers. Under the program, the Gas Co. shares risks and rewards with its ratepayers, but since the program was launched, it has consistently produced awards. If the cost of gas is 0.5% or more below a benchmark based on monthly gas market indexes, the company and its customers split the savings 50-50. California's gas utilities are not allowed to profit on their raw commodity costs; they merely pass along those costs to ratepayers with no markup. The savings under the incentive program are automatically reflected in consumers' monthly gas bills but are not itemized. At the end of the year, the utilities request their share of the savings, and the PUC has routinely granted approval. Then the companies, and thus their shareholders, are paid through customer utility bills. The resulting bill increases typically have been modest, less than 1%. But as the awards increase, regulators say, the effect on customers will become more significant unless the present structure is changed. ""There's no question, when you start to talk about $100 million [or more in savings], and add [the company's award] into rates in a year, it will make a noticeable difference,"" said Los Angeles economist Jeff Leitzinger, president of Econ One, who has done consulting for the Gas Co. Still, he said, ratepayers should bear in mind that they already benefit from below-market gas and transportation costs. In the early years of the program, records show, the Gas Co.'s awards went from zero to $3.2 million, $10.6 million, $2 million and $7.7 million. Last year's award of $9.8 million is awaiting PUC approval. This year's proposed award, covering the period through the end of this month, has not yet been submitted by the Gas Co. But the utility has provided monthly figures and oral updates on a confidential basis to PUC officials, who declined to provide figures. Harrigan of the Gas Co. said the savings are expected to multiply ""many times over,"" largely because the company was well-equipped for the market fluctuations and tried to insulate its customers from high gas prices. ""Any trading company, especially one with assets like we have, has benefited from volatility in the market,"" he said. Harrigan said, however, that he does not believe the company's level of activity has adversely affected the market and that its trading pales in volume to that of unregulated energy companies. Anne Smith, the Gas Co.'s vice president of customer service and marketing, said the utility will not release figures for this year's incentive program until they are filed with the PUC in June. ""I don't want to interrupt that process,"" Smith said, noting that the PUC ultimately will determine the company's award. ""I think they need to focus on what [the Gas Co.] has done for the ratepayers. It has been immense."" Although the typical monthly gas bill has risen to $80 from $50 a year ago, Gas Co. customers tend to have lower rates than those of other California utilities. The company's gas procurement cost in February was 66 cents per therm, or 100 cubic feet. That's more than twice last year's cost but only about half what sister company SDG&E paid for its 740,000 customers in February. It's also much lower than the $1.09 per therm PG&E pays. ""We were as upset about the overall [gas price] increase as anyone else,"" Harrigan said. ""I would rather see the prices of a year ago, even though we managed to do a little better in the [recent] environment."" When it comes to keeping down costs, regulators say, the Gas Co. has advantages over other utilities in the marketplace. For one, the company has so much pipeline capacity at major gas basins that it purchases a relatively small portion of its needs--about 10% to 15%--at the California border, where prices in December briefly rose to the equivalent of $6 per therm, or 20 times those a year earlier. This presents opportunities. ""At the beginning of the month, they forecast a certain amount of gas they have to buy,"" said Pocta of the Office of Ratepayer Advocates. ""If they go out and buy and do not need to use as much because the weather is more moderate than expected, they can either inject the gas into storage or they can make sales at the border."" With gas price run-ups like those seen in the last year, Pocta said, ""there is a question: Should that benefit be shared, or flow entirely to ratepayers?"" Customers, he pointed out, may be entitled to additional benefits because they pay for the interstate and intrastate pipeline capacity and the gas storage that give the company the flexibility to make advantageous deals. ""By the same token, we want [the Gas Co.] . . . to go into the market and generate cost savings that can be passed on to the customers,"" he added. ""We want them to have incentives. The question is how to balance them."" Under deregulation, the Gas Co. adopted the nontraditional role of marketer, according to a PUC Energy Division report in January. The company makes gas sales at various locations. It engages in exchanges. It makes futures transactions to help stabilize costs. ""They look for ways to lower the gas cost,"" said Richard Myers, program supervisor at the Energy Division. ""Before they were lots more risk-averse. Now they feel they can take risks and make money for shareholders, and it is a benefit for ratepayers at the same time."" The incentive programs are tailored to individual utilities, so it is difficult to compare them. Records show that the shared savings at SDG&E, a much smaller utility, declined steadily from $9.2 million in the 1996-97 cycle to $560,000 in 1999-2000. Spokesman Ed Van Herik said the falloff largely represents a drop in gas purchases, especially as the company sold off its own gas-fired electricity-generating plants. He said the company does not yet know how much savings have accrued in the last year. In an annual report to the PUC in February, PG&E said it had no savings under the incentive program and thus it is not entitled to any award for the 1999-2000 cycle. The Utility Reform Network, a San Francisco-based consumer advocacy group, said it will closely watch the PUC's evaluation of the incentive program at the Gas Co. ""We want to make sure, given the dramatic changes in the gas market and prices, ratepayers are not left out of the [additional] benefits,"" TURN attorney Marcel Hawiger said. ""We'll look to see whether the mechanism should be changed."" Severin Borenstein, director of the Energy Institute at UC Berkeley, said the program should be changed to provide more incentive for utilities to enter long-term contracts that would smooth out volatility in the market. ""Unfortunately, under the system,"" he said, ""the only incentive is to beat the [spot] market."" Use this file to download and print all the articles in this section (See attached file: Dow Jones IMPLICATIONS FOR OTHER MARKETS (For easier printing of all the articles in this section use the file at the end of the section) New York: New York at the crossroads Wednesday, March 21, 2001 Energy Insight (Embedded image moved to file: pic24389.pcx) By Dave Todd dtodd@ftenergy.com U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham declared this week that the Big Apple is on the verge of being bitten hard by power cuts and rising energy prices. Delivering the keynote address at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's national energy summit in Washington Monday, Abraham said, ""California is not the only state facing a mismatch between supply and demand,"" what with ""electricity shortages predicted for New York City and Long Island this summer"" and low capacity margins threatening electricity reliability elsewhere across the country. But how likely is it that New Yorkers will face blackouts of the sort confronting Californians? Not very, says energy trade specialist Edward Krapels, managing director of Boston-based METIS Trading Advisors. Krapels, a consultant helping major Northeastern utilities, such as Consolidated Edison, design market-hedging programs, adamantly decried what he said are facile comparisons between conditions in New York and California, there being ""more differences than there are similarities"" between those two industrial cornerstones of the country's economy in respect to energy security management. ""First of all, New York has a more varied portfolio of energy generation sources than California,"" he said. California has hydro, nuclear and gas, but when it lost a lot of hydro, the state needed gas to pick up the slack, and the ""capacity just wasn't there."" In New York's case, the state has oil and coal still in the mix and its overall dependence on gas is much lower than California's, Krapels added. New York avoids making same mistakes Portfolio diversity is one pillar of any effective plan to help New York avoid the same errors made in redesigning California's marketplace. New York's Independent System Operator (ISO), in a new report warning that the state is at an ""energy crossroads"" in terms of its capacity adequacy in the immediate future, argues that a concerted effort is required to arrest declining in-state generation capacity reserve margins, and a strategy must be put in place, whether or not new generation comes on-line, in accordance with current anticipated scenarios. A measure of New York's essential difficulty is that, between 1995 and 2000, statewide demand for electricity grew 2,700 MW, while generating capacity expanded by only 1,060 MW. With no major new generating plants in downstate New York fully approved, the gap is expected to continue to widen. To avoid ""a replication of California's market meltdown"" the New York ISO calculates the state's daily generating capacity needs to grow by 8,600 MW by 2005, with more than half of that located in New York City and on Long Island. Expressing concern this may be too big a burden for the current bureaucratic process to bear, the ISO wants to see a state-appointed ombudsman named to help would-be merchant power plant investors plow through red tape. ""Increasing New York's generating capacity will also lessen the state's escalating and risky reliance on out-of-state sources of electricity,"" the ISO added. ""Since 1999, New York State has been unable to cover its reserve requirements from in-state sources."" Not everyone agrees with that analysis, insofar as it argues for circling the wagons inward. Some analysts believe the ultimate solution lies not in tying in more inwardly dedicated power, but in expanding the marketplace by breaking down inter-jurisdictional barriers. In any case, New York energy regulatory authorities and those responsible elsewhere in the U.S. Northeast, such as PJM (Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland) Interconnection and the New England Power Pool, are in vastly better shape in terms of ""cross-border"" cooperation than California and its neighbors in that efforts are being made among various authorities toward developing an integrated regional electricity market. In California, by contrast, the state's focus?for example, in the case of new gas-fired power plant development?has been to ensure dedicated supply to the California market alone, rather than on a regional marketplace. (Embedded image moved to file: pic05075.pcx) The New York ISO's new broad-based analysis of market-restructuring needs argues that the relatively stronger health of its reformed environment is ""due in large part to the ability of New York's utilities to enter into long-term power contracts."" What needs to be done most, it says, is to move aggressively to build some of the more than 29,000 MW of ""proposed new generation in the siting pipeline."" In the meantime, the 30,200 MW of electricity New Yorkers used on a peak day last summer shouldn't be eclipsed on too many days this coming summer (given early long-range weather forecasts). Demand, however, is expected to increase at an annual average rate of up to 1.4%. So while New York City, the rest of the state and adjacent parts might breathe easy this year, it could be a brief rest from the fray. Meanwhile, a 4% shortfall is still being planned for this summer that is not yet provided for, as authorities hurriedly seek to arrange new generation plants around Manhattan, on Long Island and even on barges offshore. One way or another, whether it is the weather or the politics of siting new energy facilities, it's going to be a hot time in the city. Long-term solutions hit brick wall Meanwhile, attempts at longer-term solutions continue to run into trouble. Last week, Connecticut state regulators came out against a proposal to run a new underwater cable under Long Island Sound that Hydro-Quebec subsidiary TransEnergie U.S. Ltd. wants to build to pump more juice into Long Island Power Authority's load pocket. Despite strong promises from TransEnergie to be diligent in avoiding damage to oyster beds in Long Island Sound, the proposal failed to convince authorities, who were persuaded the pipeline project could lead to diversion of electricity from Connecticut. In similar fashion, private companies wanting to build 10 small independent power plants and temporary generators offshore New York City are running into intense opposition from environmental groups and citizen orga nizations?some of whom have taken their cases to the state assembly in Albany. The David vs. Goliath nature of such controversies has further alerted energy companies to the difficulties of addressing complex energy supply issues that may ultimately devolve to people not wanting things in their backyard, regardless of what the alternative might mean to their fellow citizens or the greater public good. But suddenly, in New York, California's troubles?while still distant in their intensity? may not be so far away. By some estimates, this summer's bills for Consolidated Edison customers could be up as much as one third or more over last year's charges. Letting the time slip when it comes to building new infrastructure isn't going to make the pain go away. NEW YORK: NY-ISO REPORT SAYS STATE NEEDS 4,000 - 5,000 MW OF NEW GENERATION SOON TO AVOID SEVERE SHORTAGES; NY-ISO ALSO ASKS FERC TO EXTEND BID CAP AND TEMPORARY EMERGENCY PROCEDURES 03/21/2001 Foster Electric Report 2 (c) Copyright 2001, Foster Associates, Inc. Raising the specter of an East Coast version of the California crisis, the New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (NY-ISO) is warning of serious electricity shortages, air quality deterioration and stunted economic growth without immediate approval of between 4,000-5,000 MW of new generating capacity in the state. Of this amount, 2,000-3,000 MW is needed to serve New York City. Another 8,600 MW of new capacity will have to be built by 2005, the NY-ISO said in a recent report, Power Alert: New York's Energy Crossroads. ""New York is heading towards a very serious situation unless it acts immediately to get new supply sited within its borders,"" said NY-ISO president William Museler in a statement accompanying the report. ""This report is essentially a caution light at New York's energy crossroads."" Sources in the New York Public Service Commission have downplayed the NY-ISO's warning, asserting that a process for bringing on new generation is well underway, with more than 85 projects in the approval pipeline. In a related development, the NY-ISO asked FERC to approve a proposed tariff amendment (ER01-1517) extending existing bids caps in some of its markets until 10/31/02, and a separate and related amendment (ER01-1489) extending the NY-ISO's so-called temporary extraordinary procedures (TEP) that allow the ISO to make price adjustments and take other corrective actions if it finds evidence of market power abuse. The NY-ISO Report --The NY-ISO likened the situation in New York to that faced by California, where a relentless increase in demand has not been met with an equal increase in supply. The NY-ISO said that between 1995 and 2000, statewide demand for electricity rose by 2,700 MW, while generating capacity increased by only 1,060 MW. With no major new generating plants in downstate New York fully approved for construction at this time and generation demand in the state expected to grow around 1.3 percent annually for the next several years, the NY-ISO said this gap will continue to widen. The inevitable result of this trend is large rate increases for New York's power consumers. The NY-ISO's modeling suggests that ""by 2005, statewide prices are likely to be more than 20-25 percent lower in the case in which new plants are built than in the case where they are not."" In New York City, ""the price to consumers of electric power could be reduced by as much as 28 percent when compared to the case of no new supply or load management programs."" Besides large rate increases, the NY-ISO asserted that a failure to site and build new plants in New York will threaten power reliability in the state and lead to increasing reliance on out-of-state resources. The report said that if no new in-state generation comes on line in the next five years, the state's generation reserve margins will shrink from the current 14.9 percent above peak demand ""to a dangerously low 8.4 percent by 2005."" Pointing to California's situation, the report added that increased reliance on power imports ""can subject electrical suppliers and customers in New York to transmission restrictions and political and economic considerations beyond the control or influence of responsible New York State entities."" To avoid these harsh consequences, the NY-ISO said New York's new siting law, known as the Article X process, needs to be modified. Since the law was passed 18 months ago, the report noted that only two plants have been approved (both upstate) and neither has yet been built. The problem, according to the NY-ISO, is that the siting process ""requires the cooperation of multiple state agencies."" To expedite the process, the report suggested the ""clear designation of a lead agency and the adoption of an `ombudsman program' to expedite and coordinate the work of the agencies responsible for the Article X process must be made."" The NY-ISO added that an expedited approval process would improve the environment because older, more polluting power plants would be replaced by cleaner gas-fired units. On a more positive note, the NY-ISO reported that New York's restructured power market ""is far healthier than that in California, due in large part to the ability of New York `s utilities to enter long-term power contracts. The basic structure of the New York market will also reduce unwarranted price spikes and other market disruptions through mitigation programs which automatically correct price spikes due to market power abuses."" ""Nevertheless, California `s experience raises a caution flag for all New Yorkers,"" the report continued. ""The deregulated market in New York cannot achieve lower costs through competition without an increase in generating capacity similar in magnitude to the recommendations of this report, along with simultaneous efforts to institute greater conservation, better load management and alternative energy supply initiatives. Additionally, closer integration with regional suppliers of power is both inevitable and beneficial."" The report also recommended (1) accelerating conservation, real-time metering and price-sensitive load programs; and (2) upgrading the state's and the Northeast's transmission infrastructure. The Proposed Tariff Amendments -- New York's Article X siting process and continuing tight supplies were also cited in the NY-ISO's request to extend from 4/30/01 until 10/31/02 its $1,000/MWh bid caps. FERC first approved the 1,000/MWh bid caps in July 2000 (see REPORT No.197, pg.6), and subsequently extended them. The NY-ISO's board ""is sensitive to the Commission's concerns about undue intervention in energy markets,"" the filing related. ""Nevertheless, the NY-ISO is submitting this request because it believes that delays in New York state's `Article X' process for licensing and siting new generating capacity is inhibiting supply from increasing to match continued demand growth. . . . Moreover, although the NY-ISO proposes to implement several demand-side measures this summer, it is not yet clear whether they will make demand sufficiently price-responsive to avoid periods of high prices that would not occur if there were an efficient demand-side response."" Thus, the NY-ISO insisted that the requested extension is needed to provide more time for the development of additional generation and to gauge the effectiveness of the NY-ISO's proposed demand-side response mechanisms ""in order to avoid exposing consumers to price spikes that are not a product of the interplay of competitive market forces."" Other problems cited in the NY-ISO's filing which keep New York's power market from being fully competitive include continuing capacity and operating constraints at the state's Central-East interface, and questions over adequate gas supply. ""The NY-ISO remains acutely aware that taking steps to deal with price abnormalities can have undesirable consequences,"" the filing continued. ""Nevertheless, the NY-ISO believes that the $1,000/MWh cap that has been used in the PJM's markets since inception does not appear to have had an adverse impact there. . . . The permanent bid caps in PJM, and the interim bid caps in ISO New England (proposed for extension through the end of 2001) also make continuation of the NY-ISO's bid caps more important in order to maintain uniformity across the Northeastern markets. The NY-ISO also continues to believe that suppliers will not be materially harmed by the continuation of bid caps, which are likely to come into effect very rarely and are set at levels that prevent only artificially high run-ups in prices."" The NY-ISO's request to extend its TEP procedures (which also were previously extended) through 10/31/02 cited similar problems with New York's power markets, but claimed that the NY-ISO ""has made great strides"" toward eliminating market design and software flaws. ""The TEPs were, and remain, an indispensable tool for responding to and correcting market flaws and other instances where the markets are not operating as the NY-ISO and the Commission intended,"" the filing insisted. MASSACHUSETTS: Attorney general says summer poses electricity concerns By JOHN McELHENNY Associated Press Writer 03/19/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. BOSTON (AP) - The state's top consumer advocate warned that Massachusetts may see ""California-type"" electricity blackouts this summer when temperatures rise and residents turn on air conditioners and fans. ""It would be a mistake to feel this is a cold weather problem,"" said Attorney General Thomas Reilly in an interview with The Associated Press. ""Our major problem will come this summer."" State deregulation of the electric industry has been among the factors blamed for local power outages in California, and on Monday, California for the first time suffered rolling blackouts across the entire state. Massachusetts relaxed regulations on its own electric industry in 1998 to attract more companies to stir competition. But that hasn't happened yet, largely because the current high cost of oil and gas make it expensive to produce electricity. ""The promise of deregulation was that there was going to be competition,"" said Reilly, a Democrat. ""That competition in the wholesale market is not happening."" Hot summer weather drives up electricity use as residents turn on air conditioners and fans, and Reilly said a few particularly hot days could strain the grid that provides the region's power. A spokeswoman for the region's power grid said electricity use is expected to rise 1.5 to 2 percent this year, but the region should have enough power because of six new power plants that have begun generating electricity in the past 18 months. ""The situation is unlike California because we have new generation coming on line that is outpacing demand,"" said Ellen Foley, spokeswoman for ISO New England Inc., which manages the grid of 330 generators connected by 8,000 miles of high voltage transmission lines. Still, a particularly hot day and an unforeseen power generation breakdown could prompt ISO to ask residents to conserve electricity, a situation that arose once last summer, Foley said. In order to avoid any power outages and protect consumers, Reilly repeated calls for electric companies to build more power lines and to offer more options for new customers who have signed up since deregulation. Those customers typically pay more than long-term customers. Electric transmission companies should also be allowed to enter into two-year contracts with suppliers, instead of the six-month contracts many have now, to avoid short-term price spikes for consumers, Reilly said. The Attorney General's Office acts as an advocate for consumers. Michael Monahan, a spokesman for NSTAR, which provides electricity to more than 1 million customers, is upgrading some of its power lines and last year built a new line to Cape Cod, but currently has no lines under construction. ""I wholeheartedly concur with the attorney general that it's something we have to focus on,"" Monahan said, but he added, ""The indications I see are that we have an ample supply of electricity."" California's statewide outages were ordered on Monday after a transformer fire, high demand and a lack of electricity imports pushed power reserves to near zero. California partially deregulated its electric industry in 1996, two years before Massachusetts. --- On the Net: Attorney General's Office: http://www.ago.state.ma.us NSTAR: http://www.nstaronline.com ISO New England Inc.: http://www.iso-ne.com NEVADA: Discussion of bill stopping power plant sales to continue Wednesday By JOHN WILKERSON Associated Press Writer 03/19/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. CARSON CITY, Nev. (AP) - Lawmakers hit more delays Monday in trying to pass a measure that pulls the plug on the sale of Nevada power plants to avoid California-style energy problems. ""The goal of this bill is only stopping the divestiture of power plants and making sure it's constitutional,"" said Senate Commerce and Labor Chairman Randolph Townsend, R-Reno. ""And that's not as easy as it sounds."" Townsend's comment just before his committee began working on SB253 was prophetic - witnesses kept bringing up the need for more flexibility in the measure. Translation: Don't kill all deals by stopping Reno-based Sierra Pacific Power and Las Vegas-based Nevada Power from selling their Nevada power plants until June 2003 - and possibly until 2006. Pete Ernaut, a lobbyist for Reliant Energy which has been trying to buy a power plant, said unforeseen market changes could make a plant sale before 2003 a deal that would be in the public's interest. ""If you put a two-year moratorium on these plants, all these deals are going to go away,"" he said. ""When the cow leaves the barn, it's difficult to catch."" Townsend had hoped to wrap up committee work on SB253 on Monday. Now it's up for review again Wednesday in the Commerce and Labor Committee. Reliant isn't the only company trying to keep power plant purchases alive. Earlier this month, executives of Pinnacle West Energy told the committee that it's in the public's interest to allow Sierra Pacific Resources to sell its Harry Allen power plant. The Harry Allen plant produces about 72 megawatts out of the 2,900 megawatts of energy that Nevada utilities generate. Pinnacle has plans to expand that to 700 megawatts by 2004. Other provisions not strictly related to the plant divestitures, such as ways in which Sierra Pacific and Nevada Power can recover the cost of undoing the sales contracts, don't have to be included in SB253, Townsend said. Townsend said the other concerns dealing with the energy crisis and utility deregulation can be handled in later bills - but the power plant sale issue must be handled now. Nevada's PUC and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission had directed Sierra Pacific and Nevada Power to sell the plants as a condition of the companies' merger in 1999 under the parent company Sierra Pacific Resources. Critics of the plant sales say the plants generate about half the state's electricity - and if they're sold, the unregulated new owners could sell the power to other states and put Nevada into the energy dilemma California faces of shrinking supply and rising prices. The Southern Nevada Water Authority has presented an analysis stating that rate payers will save from $1.7 billion to $3.5 billion by July 2001 if the power plant sales are stopped. Nevada's Consumer Advocate's Office previously had projected a conservative estimate of $915 million in savings. MAINE: Panel of experts would review impact of energy deregulation By GLENN ADAMS Associated Press Writer 03/19/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. AUGUSTA, Maine (AP) - In the wake of rolling blackouts in California and rate spikes in their home state, Maine's top legislators proposed a study Monday into the effects of deregulation of the energy industry. ""Deregulation of electricity is a new idea and we still have a lot to learn,"" Senate President Michael Michaud said as he called for the analysis. A panel of industry insiders, elected officials and consumers would study issues such as what standard rate consumers can expect and the likelihood of energy shortfalls over the next three years, and whether Maine consumers are vulnerable to anti-competitive activities. In addition, the Blue Ribbon Commission would look into whether changes in Maine's deregulation law are needed to encourage more generating capacity, improve conservation and spur competition. The study is being proposed as consumers remain mindful of a power crisis in California that resulted from high wholesale energy costs, a consumer rate cap and too few power plants in that deregulated state. Maine's deregulation law is designed to avoid such pitfalls, said Rep. William Savage, D-Buxton, House chairman of the Legislature's Utilities Committee. Maine's law does not cap consumer prices, as California's does, and the state has more than enough generating facilities to meet the state's energy needs, Savage said. Since Maine's deregulation law took effect in March 2000, Bangor Hydro-Electric Co. rates have increased 19 percent. The Public Utilities Commission approved a residential standard rate increase as recently as last month. Federal energy regulators are reviewing their decision to allow steep fee increases for utilities and power wholesalers that fail to arrange enough capacity to meet customers' peak load. Gov. Angus King and all four members of Maine's congressional delegation oppose the hike. The PUC has approved standard rate increases for energy delivered by Central Maine Power Co. to medium-sized and large industrial users. On the other hand, some towns and school districts are saving money on energy through deals they can get in the deregulated market. In the meantime, legislation has been introduced in response to some of the changes that have occurred in Maine's deregulated energy industry. One would use some of the money from the sale of power-generating assets to offset an increase in rates paid by large industrial users, said Sen. Norman Ferguson, R-Hanover, Senate chairman of the Utilities Committee. Supporters of the utility study that was proposed Monday said they are not looking to make changes in Maine's deregulation law, but if it needs fixing it could be done during next year's session. The lawmakers' primary interest is to find out how trends in a new environment designed to encourage competition will affect consumers, and to try to identify what consumers can expect in the few years ahead. House Speaker Michael Saxl, D-Portland, said the Legislature ""has a fundamental public policy interest in making sure rate-payers and businesses are protected against exorbitant rate hikes."" Michaud, D-East Millinocket, said he's interested in finding out how future changes in electric prices and availability might affect businesses and consumers in northern Maine. ""The economy in my part of the state is the most vulnerable, and I want to make certain we are leaving no stone unturned in our effort to prevent any shocks to the economy in northern, western and eastern Maine,"" Michaud added. The commission would include House and Senate members from each party, a utility executive, and representatives of energy producers, providers, a large commercial consumer and individual consumers. OREGON: State Senate moves to combat energy crisis 03/16/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. SALEM, Ore. (AP) - In an attempt to avoid a California-like energy crisis, the Oregon Senate approved a bill Friday that would quicken the process of siting power plants that use gas and renewable resources. ""It's important for Oregon. It makes sure that energy will be available to everyone,"" said Sen. Lee Beyer, D-Springfield. The measure, SB843, would shorten the siting process for power plants that use gas and renewable resources, like wind, from a year and a half to a matter of months. The speeded-up process would be in effect for two years. ""If we can act now, we can actually start to solve power supply problems by this summer,"" said Sen. Jason Atkinson, R-Jacksonville California's strict regulations on the construction of new power plants has contributed to its current shortage and legislators took note. Beyer said though California was definitely a wake-up call, the measure is a reaction to the larger power picture in the Northwest. With low rainfall, hydroelectric generators will have trouble meeting demand, Beyer said. Gas-fired and wind plants could come online as soon as this fall and would provide relief. ""We are not in a position to sit back and do nothing about the energy crisis the Northwest and the country are experiencing,"" said Senate Minority Leader Kate Brown, D-Portland. Conservationists, however, caution that lawmakers should be careful not to rush to provide power at the expense of environmental standards. WISCONSIN: Two utilities to add 975 megawatts in plan to avoid energy crisis By The Associated Press 03/22/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. Plans of two state utilities to add 975 megawatts to Wisconsin's electric power grid as a way of avoiding an energy crisis similar to California's were questioned Thursday by a consumer advocate who said too many power plants may be in the works. ""Certainly nobody wants to see blackouts like you have in California but there is the danger Wisconsin could be overbuilding,"" said Steve Hiniker, executive director of the Citizens' Utility Board, which represents consumer interests in utility rate cases. He noted that plant construction costs ultimately are born by the utility customers. Alliant Energy Corp. announced its proposal Wednesday - in a filing with the state Public Service Commission - to spend $1 billion to build one coal and two gas-fired power plants. Alliant has proposed building a 500 megawatt coal-fired plant and a 100 megawatt natural-gas fired plant by 2006. It also wants to build a 200 megawatt natural gas-fired facility in 2011. Wisconsin has not built a coal-fired plant in more than two decades. Alliant has not determined the plants' locations. Also, Madison Gas & Electric, the state's smallest investor-owned utility, said Wednesday that it had signed deals to buy 175 megawatts of power from three generating plants in Wisconsin and Illinois. ""Three out of the four past summers, we've had public appeals for conservation due to shortages somewhere in the state. We need to take steps to avoid that, and the California situation makes that even more clear,"" said Alliant spokesman Chris Schoenherr. ""Getting more iron in the ground will give us more flexibility in the state to be able to react."" Alliant acknowledged the new plants will probably mean rate increases, but it was too early to say how much rates would go up. California's problems, which this week resulted in the first deliberate blackouts since World War II, stemmed from underestimating the state's power needs, forcing utilities to sell their power plants but not allowing them to secure long-term supply contracts, and freezing rates, among other things. But Wisconsin's situation is far different. The state has moved slower than California toward deregulation, and there has been no desire here to speed up the process in recent years as power reliability became a problem. The PSC estimates that Wisconsin will need an additional 3,000 megawatts of power over the next decade. Hiniker said Wisconsin needs to coordinate its planning to avoid overbuilding. The costs of new power plants are passed on to ratepayers, meaning electric bills will increase as new generation is added. In addition, coal-generated power plants are a major source of air pollution in the state. ""We don't have the advance planning that has kept Wisconsin from overbuilding in the past,"" said Hiniker. ""This is something the PSC should be doing."" MG&E's deals are: -A 10-year contract to buy 75 megawatts from Calpine Energy Services starting in May 2004. The power will come from the natural gas-fired plant Rock River Energy Center, near Beloit. Calpine Energy Services is a unit of San Jose, Calif.-based Calpine Energy Corp. The plant is being built by Northbrook, Ill.-based SkyGen Energy LLC, which Calpine bought last year from SkyGen President Michael Polsky and Wisvest Corp., a unit of Wisconsin Energy Corp. -A 10-year contract to buy 50 megawatts of power from the Rainy River Energy Corp. starting in May 2002. The power is coming from a natural gas-fired plant near Joliet, Ill. owned by LS Power Co. Rainy River is a unit of Duluth-based Minnesota Power Inc. -A five-year contract to buy 50 megawatts from an El Paso Merchant Energy plant near Cordova, Ill., in western Illinois. The owner of the natural gas facility is the Cordova Energy Center Co., which is a unit of Iowa-based MidAmerican Energy Holdings. Alliant also offered support in the Wednesday filing for a $7 billion plan of Milwaukee-based Wisconsin Energy, which includes five new power plants in Oak Creek and Pleasant Prairie. -- On the Net: CUB: http://www.wiscub.org/ Alliant Energy: http://www.alliant-energy.com Wisconsin Public Service Commission: http://www.psc.state.wi.us Wisconsin Energy: http://www.wisenergy.com/ Madison Gas & Electric: http://www.mge.com Use this file to download and print all the articles in this section (See attached file: Dow Jones If you wish to be removed from the distribution list for this update please contact Pru Sheppard - DC. All recipients of this message have been Bcc'd as part of industry best practice for broadcast emails. | This message may contain confidential and/or privileged | | information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to | | receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, | | disclose or take any action based on this message or any | | information herein. If you have received this message in | | error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail | | and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. | - Dow Jones - pic24389.pcx - pic05075.pcx - Dow Jones [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= ISO's Response to BPA Rebuttal of Sheffrin Study--Confidential Atty
 Client work product; [EMail-Body]= I recommend reading CAISO's response. This letter was reported in last week's trade press. I am told that BPA does not consider this letter confidential even though it is labeled as such by CAISO. Many of the CAISO ""backpedal"" statements made re: claims of strategic bidding would apply equally to other importers. Alan Comnes [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Folder to safely pass information to Arthur Andersen; [EMail-Body]= Please read and follow below: Thanks ---------------------- Forwarded by Jeffrey C Gossett/HOU/ECT on 04/10/2001 09:01 AM --------------------------- From: Beth Apollo/ENRON@enronXgate on 04/10/2001 08:52 AM To: Shona Wilson/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeffrey C Gossett/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stacey W White/HOU/ECT@ECT, D Todd Hall/ENRON@enronXgate, Sheri Thomas/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brenda F Herod/ENRON@enronXgate, cc: Sally Beck/HOU/ECT@ECT, Georgeanne Hodges/ENRON@enronXgate, Vanessa Schulte/ENRON@enronXgate, Bob M Hall/NA/Enron@Enron, Leslie Reeves/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brent A Price/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: Confidential Folder to safely pass information to Arthur Andersen We have become increasingly concerned about confidential information (dpr/position info, curves, validations/stress tests, etc) being passed to Arthur Andersen for audit purposes over the Web to their Arthur Andersen email addresses. (necessary now they no longer have access to Enron's internal email system) Please use the folder described below when passing any info (that you would have concerns about if it was picked up by a third party) via the shared drive that has been set up for this specific purpose. Note: AA should also use the shared drive to pass info back if there are questions, or the data needs updating. We should also consider the sensitivity of audit findings and special presentations if they are being distributed electronically. Please pass this note to others in your groups who have the need to pass info back and forth. Details on how to access for those who will use this method to pass info: A secured folder has been set up on the ""o"" drive under Corporate called Arthur_Andersen Please post all confidential files in this folder rather than emailing the files to their company email address. If you need access to this folder, submit an eRequest through the IT Central site: Arthur Andersen will be able to retrieve these files for review with their terminal server access at the Three Allen Center location. Please contact Vanessa Schulte if you have any problems or questions Beth Apollo [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Upcoming Advisory Council Meeting; [EMail-Body]= I'm looking forward to your discussion regarding the ""reregulation threat"" at the next meeting. Below are some of my observations: While it's premature to say we have an energy crisis, we are witnessing the triple threat of high summer gasoline prices, spiking electricity prices, and high natural gas prices for the upcoming heating season (I'll send along some of the data). There is at least the potential for this to become a prominent national political issue: Gore has focussed relentlessly on Bush's ties to ""big oil"" (which includes us by the way, though we produce nary a drop); and Congressional republicans have blamed the current administration for failing to have a coherent energy policy (though, at least so far, the dominant characteristic of the administration's policy has been a republicanesque reliance on the market). Notwithstanding the issue's potential to become political fodder and its prominence in the popular press, many Americans seem blissfully ignorant, at least on the electricity issue. We did some focus group testing recently in Southern California -- a mere 15 minutes from the epicenter of the San Diego price quakes -- and most people knew nothing about it. So, while the issue has the potential for political traction, it may not have caught on yet (except in places like San Diego and New York city. The reaction in California has been to call for government intervention in electricity markets. Investigations of out of state ""price gougers and profiteers"" have been undertaken and wholesale and retail price caps have been put in place. They have not worked -- at least in wholesale markets. Suppliers are deciding to site plants elsewhere and when prices are high elsewhere in the West, power flows out of California to those other markets. Ironically, though I can't explain it in classical economic terms, the setting of rate caps in wholesale markets has had the effect of pulling prices up to the capped levels in offpeak times when there is more than enough supply. For the most part, though, the caps and the other political reactions have been somewhat muted: policy makers have been reluctant to throw the deregulation plan out and start over, and the retail price caps have been relatively narrow ... so far. Outside of California, the authors of other states' deregulation plans have distinguished their proposals from California's. Regulators and legislators from such diverse places as Connecticut, Texas and Alberta have gone out of their way to defend their plans and explain why ""California won't happen here."" For the most part, then, the reaction to California has been positive from Enron's perspective in states that have already deregulated. There does remain some threat that aspects of the state plans (e.g. utility plant divestiture) may be postponed or cancelled. The story is a bit more grim in states that were considering deregulation but have not gone forward with their plans: I think it's off the agenda in most places. The fact that most of the major markets (about 70% of total electric revenue) are already deregulated/deregulating is a blessing in that regard. At the federal level there has been a combination of the ""burn the village in order to save it"" approach -- allow some price caps to remove the pressure to reverse the whole deregulation program -- and a more positive call for comprehensive reform. All in all, I believe we're OK so far and we need to look at this as an opportunity: business is booming; we sell protection from price volatility and the need for such protection is now plastered over the front pages of major newspapers. On the public policy front we need to convert the controversy into productive action. Our target has been FERC -- they are somewhat removed from the white hot rhetoric in California and they are a single commissioner's vote away from taking action to further open the market. Enron's response: Initially we hoped to feed information into industry groups and let them carry the message; our concern was that Enron -- a company which was in and out of the residential market in Cal. -- would not make the most attractive champion for the open market message. We hoped that the new generators in Cal would take up the mantle. It's fair to say that they fumbled the ball: they are now locked in a pitched battle with the utilities over price caps and fall all to easily into the out of state profiteer label .... standing between Aunt Millie and rate relief. They were also extremely slow out of the blocks with a more productive message. We are now working the issue directly. We are working the issue on a number of levels: 1) PR - we have good contacts in the press and have talked to numerous reporters and editorial writers. As time goes on, the information and reporting has gotten somewhat better. 2) Govt relations - we have been pushing for power plant siting legislation in California (the market wants to build capacity but the government won't let it). This may be the best environment we'll ever see for streamlining the permitting process. Also, in typical Enron fashion, we put a deal on the table. We offered to sell power to the local utility at a price which would enable them to lock in stable rates for their customers at below current rates. Our offer was followed by nine others and we tried to make something of the fact that the market was offering better solutions than California politicians. SDG&E dropped the ball, unfortunately. Instead of seizing the opportunity, they ended up going along with a government granted rate discount which will cause them to accrue a massive deferral account. At the federal level we are contacting members, the DOE and FERC. Here we are making a push for FERC action to finish ""leveling the playing field"" in wholesale markets so power can get from where it is to where its needed. Additionally, we are developing a prepackaged system (including software) for nondiscriminatory open access (to take away any lingering excuses or delays). 3) Overall messaging -- we have been working with a well known political pollster to check our messages for their resonance at the grassroots level. As we hone these messages we will be using them in the fora we are currently working. Overall, we have more opportunity than risk in the current environment, but capitalizing on those opportunities continues to be a long shot. An intersting rhetorical challenge for us is this: much of the problem in power markets is blamed on high upstream fuel prices, particularly natural gas. The gas market is open and structured pretty much the way we are advocating for electricity, so how can we maintain that the problem in power markets is an absence of open markets when the most open commodity market on the planet (natural gas) is producing such outsized prices? The answer is somewhat complicated and therefore a bit unsatisfactory in the current debate: gas prices are still lower in real terms than they were pre-deregulation; long term prices are also lower than historical levels ( the curve is ""backwardated"" (sp?) meaning that prices in later years are lower than today so you can buy gas for 3 years at a price lower than current spot prices); and the economy is booming and driving up demand for basic inputs (this begs the question: why didn't the market react sooner and avoid the spike?). When all else fails, a big part of the problem can be blamed on OPEC. We haven't had this thrown at us yet, but we are trying to anticipate it and have answers at the ready. This is just the tip of the iceberg. The issue is a great example of the intersection of our business interests with public policy debates and should promote a lively discussion when we get together. Let me know if there is anything else you need. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Details - follow up (back); [EMail-Body]= Thanks for handling. Let me know if it begins to interfere unduly with your new responsibilities. Mark Schroeder@ECT 04/12/2001 04:23 AM To: Mike cc: Jo Ann Hill/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: Details - follow up (back) Thanks. I am seeing a few things through to conclusion, and I expect this situation to be one, unless Steve prefers to handle it differently. I think it is a matter of either him or me, and I think this is one item I can keep off of his plate. thanks mcs Mike Dahlke@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 11/04/2001 14:41 To: Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Re: Details - follow up (back) Mark, Congratulations on your new assignment. It has been a long time since I have dealt with Coal but the business desperately needed new ideas and approaches when I knew it. Good luck! Yes, I did meet with JoAnn last Friday. As required by the agreement she gave me, I have retained counsel and the proposal is being reviewed by my attorney. In light of the announced change, I am wondering if questions and comments should still be addressed to you? Please advise. Mike D. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Computer Based Communications Training Initiative - Response
 Reminder for Feedback; [EMail-Body]= My message cut off... The conclusion is that while we continue to need to address the kinds of issues laid out in your recommnedations, we need to look at solutions which may go deeper to adress our communications problems .. . solutions which have become available only recently. Why not have these guys focus on an online training program to both teach people how to make information available and accessible (eg by recording information and updating on the intranet) and demonstrating the importance of this activity to the success of the organization. I think you and your team have done a fine job dealing with the traditional (and perhaps largely insoluble problems) that this group wants to take on. I am pessimistic that the program outlined below will provide anything other than marginal improvements. I am somewhat optimistic, though, that we may be able to bypass many of these problems (and get to the heart of what people are really complaining about in the survey) by instituting real knowledge management at Enron. Richard Amabile 08/18/2000 05:20 PM To: Mike McConnell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Gorte/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James Prentice/GPGFIN/Enron@ENRON, Jan Johnson/GPGFIN/Enron@ENRON, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sharon Butcher/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Gina Taylor/OTS/Enron@Enron, Mike Stewart/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Dave Schafer/OTS/Enron@ENRON, David A Terlip/Corp/Enron@Enron, Joe Kishkill/SA/Enron@Enron, Marie Hejka/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Craig Childers/HOU/EES@EES, Craig H Sutter/HOU/EES@EES, Kirk Kathleen A John Keith James C Ray Bennett/HOU/EES@EES, Joseph W George Wasaff/NA/Enron@Enron, Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT, Andrew S Fastow/HOU/ECT@ECT, Billy Lemmons/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Yeager@ees, Eric Thode/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Marie Hejka/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cynthia Barrow/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John Thompson/LON/ECT@ECT, Nigel Sellens/LON/ECT@ECT, David Oxley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Drew C Lynch/LON/ECT@ECT, Marla Barnard/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, robert.jones@enron.com, Kimberly Rizzi/HOU/ECT@ECT, Scott Janie willie.williams@enron.com, Scott Tim O'Rourke/Corp/Enron@Enron, Miguel Padron/SA/Enron@Enron, Gerry Chatham/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cindy Skinner/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ranendra cc: ksargent@cognitivearts.com Subject: Computer Based Communications Training Initiative - Response Reminder for Feedback This is a reminder that we would like your feedback/input on the items mentioned below regarding the Computer Based Communications Training Initiative. Please respond by the close of business Monday, August 21 otherwise we will need to move ahead with the responses received by that time. Dick Amabile ---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Amabile/HR/Corp/Enron on 08/18/2000 04:31 PM --------------------------- Richard Amabile 08/16/2000 02:40 PM To: Mike McConnell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Gorte/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James Prentice/GPGFIN/Enron@ENRON, Jan Johnson/GPGFIN/Enron@ENRON, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sharon Butcher/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Gina Taylor/OTS/Enron@Enron, Mike Stewart/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Dave Schafer/OTS/Enron@ENRON, David A Terlip/Corp/Enron@Enron, Joe Kishkill/SA/Enron@Enron, Richard Amabile/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Marie Hejka/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Craig Childers/HOU/EES@EES, Craig H Sutter/HOU/EES@EES, Kirk Kathleen A John Keith James C Richard Ray Bennett/HOU/EES@EES, Joseph W George Wasaff/NA/Enron@Enron, Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT, Andrew S Fastow/HOU/ECT@ECT, Billy Lemmons/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Diane Bazelides/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, Scott Yeager@ees, Eric Thode/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Marie Hejka/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cynthia Barrow/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John Thompson/LON/ECT@ECT, Nigel Sellens/LON/ECT@ECT, David Oxley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Drew C Lynch/LON/ECT@ECT, Marla Barnard/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, robert.jones@enron.com, Kimberly Rizzi/HOU/ECT@ECT, Scott Janie willie.williams@enron.com, Scott Tim O'Rourke/Corp/Enron@Enron, Miguel Padron/SA/Enron@Enron, Gerry Chatham/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cindy Skinner/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ranendra cc: ksargent@cognitivearts.com Subject: Computer Based Communications Training Initiative As agreed in our V&V meeting today I have attached two items for your review: 1. A list of those who have been interviewed or have been part of a focus group on this subject. The input from individuals on this list will be the basis for developing the 5-7 key scenarios that will be a part of the training. Please let me know if you feel we should include more people from your unit to insure that your unit's unique circumstances are appropriately taken into account. If so, let us know either their names or how you would like them to be identified. Some of the individuals on this list will be contacted as Subject Matter Experts to help provide real Enron contexts for the scenarios as they are further developed. 2. A list of the ""first draft"" objectives for the program and 10 possible scenarios. Since we will only be able to have a total of about 5-7 scenarios in the final version, identify the 5 - 7 on this list of high level scenario ideas that will have the most impact on improving communications and the most applicability to a range of managers across the Enron organization. Any other feedback you can provide on the objectives or scenarios would be greatly appreciated. We are seeking to move forward with the development of scenarios by the beginning of next week. Therefore, if you could provide your feedback on both of the items above by Friday, August 18th, it would be greatly appreciated. Dick Amabile [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: CONFIDENTIAL (The Manifesto); [EMail-Body]= great idea. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: California Truck Wreck on 2/28 Involving Cummings and an
 Ex-EOTT Driver; CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED ATTORNEY/CLIENT COMMUNICATION
 AND ATTORNEY'S WORK PRODUCT; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Michael Burke/Houston/Eott on 03/01/2000 08:55 AM --------------------------- Cutty Cunningham 02/29/2000 03:31 PM To: Steve Duffy/Houston/Eott@Eott cc: Susan Ralph/Houston/Eott@Eott, Bob Jacobs/Long_Beach/Eott@Eott, Scott Clark/Bakersfield/Eott@Eott, Michael Burke/Houston/Eott@Eott, Gary Fuller/Bakersfield/Eott@Eott, Dana Gibbs/Houston/Eott@Eott, Lori Maddox/Houston/Eott@Eott, Mary Ellen Coombe/Houston/Eott@Eott, Walt Zimmerman/Houston/Eott@Eott, Mike Frank/Houston/Eott@Eott, Molly Sample/Houston/Eott@Eott, Edward Attanasio/Remote/Eott@Eott, Scott Vonderheide/Corp/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: California Truck Wreck on 2/28 Involving Cummings and an Ex-EOTT Driver; CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED ATTORNEY/CLIENT COMMUNICATION AND ATTORNEY'S WORK PRODUCT Here is the web site for the LA Times article: If this hot spot doesn't work, you can copy it and paste it into your browser URL line. Cutty [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Market Stack; [EMail-Body]= Eric, I shall be glad to talk to you about it. The first three days of the next week would work for me. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Eric Toolson"" <etoolson@hesinet.com>@ENRON Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 8:10 PM To: Vince Kaminski Subject: Market Stack Vince, Henwood is in the process of developing a new product that, for lack of a better name, we are calling Market Stack. The purpose is to allow traders to utilize the load and supply data in EMSS without the hassle of a full-blown simulation. The software would be designed to allow traders to develop a market (or supply) stack with a minimum number of keystrokes. The stacks could be developed for a utility, transarea, or region, would contain load data, and would be capable of incorporating real-time information to provide fundamental insight and market advantage. At this point in the process we are looking for ideas (and sponsors). If you think your traders might be open to the idea, I would like to talk to you and them about it, and potentially as early as next week. Please advise. Thanks, Eric [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re:; [EMail-Body]= Frank, I am definitely interested in the resume. I can meet the candidate on campus when I visit my son. I am planning to come to Palo Alto around Thanksgiving. Also, Energy and Power Risk Management (an English publication) organizes every year in Houston a POWER RISK conference (typically in May). They ask me for recommendations regarding speakers. Would you be interested in participating? Vince ""Frank A. Wolak"" <wolak@zia.stanford.edu> on 11/13/2000 08:44:57 AM To: vkamins@enron.com cc: Subject: Vince, I am writing about a student of mine who is on the job market this year. When you stopped by my office, about 18 months ago you asked if I had any students that might be appropriate for your group. Although I didn't at the time, now I do. This student has excellent technical skills, including an M.S. in Statistics and a Ph.D. in Economics by the end of the current academic year. His dissertation research is on the investment behavior of Independent Power Producers in the US. As a result of research assistance he has done for me, he knows the California market very well and is familiar with the other ISOs. I think he would be an excellent match for you. The only problem is that he will probably have many other options available. However, I definitely think he's worth a look. If you'd like him to send you a CV, please let me know. Thanks. Frank Wolak Professor Frank A. Wolak email: wolak@zia.stanford.edu Department of Economics Phone: 650-723-3944 (Office) Stanford University FAX: 650-725-5702 Stanford, CA 94305-6072 Phone: 650-856-0109 (Home) World-Wide Web Page: Cell Phone: 650-814-0107 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Budget transition info; [EMail-Body]= yes, send to dennis 04/10/2001 11:33 AM Stacy Walker@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS Stacy Walker@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS Stacy Walker@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS 04/10/2001 11:33 AM 04/10/2001 11:33 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@ENRON Subject: Budget transition info Hi, Steve - Dennis Vegas has requested budget information from Kelly on the people from EBS that are transferring over to Corp. Kelly is on vacation now, for the next week and a half, and I wanted to check with you to make sure that it is OK to share these documents with him. They are what Kelly reviewed with you in your initial meeting regarding the subject. He only asked for information on the people shifting to Corp, not the people on redeployment, so I could delete that portion of these documents. Perhaps I could only send him the first document that is about budget, but with the redeployment information taken out. Sorry to bother you, but I am concerned about doing the right thing and following protocol in Kelly's absence. Thanks, Stacy [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= <<Concur Expense Document>> - Miscellaneous - May 2001; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/10/2001 09:13 AM --------------------------- eserver@enron.com on 05/09/2001 04:31:02 PM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - Miscellaneous - May 2001 The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: Mark A. Palmer Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: Miscellaneous - May 2001 Report Total: $255.60 Amount Due Employee: $255.60 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://xms.enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Financial Mathematics to Energy Derivatives; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: ""Joanna Vidal"" <jvidal@riskwaters.com>@ENRON Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 3:46 PM To: ds64@cyrus.andrew.cmu.edu; pnance@teknecon.com; Kaminski, Vince J; sama@dynergy.com Cc: Anneliese Geis; Crenshaw, Shirley Subject: Financial Mathematics to Energy Derivatives Hello! Just a friendly reminder that tomorrow all presentations are due as I will be in and out of the office for the rest of the week at the Asset and Liability Management conference. If your presentations are not ready, for whatever reason, please send me an email to notify me and I will send you a headcount as to how many copies of your presentations to print. You will need to take them to the training course yourself. Please remember that you will need to bring your own laptops as we do not provide them. Spyros, I believe you are to inquire with Peter to see if you can use his. Also, I am under the impression that the presentations submitted for the London training course, will be the same ones to be used in the New York and Houston Financial Mathematics training courses. Please correct me if I am wrong and let me know by when you will have presentations ready for those particular courses in those locations. Should you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me. All the best and I look forward to meeting you soon. Joanna Joanna Vidal Events Coordinator Risk Waters Group T: (212) 925 1864 ext. 197 F: (212) 925 7585jvidal@riskwaters.com www.riskwaters.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re:; [EMail-Body]= I would just say Jeff is pres and ceo, not refer to him as Ken's replacement. Nicholas O'Day 03/08/2001 08:58 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron cc: Subject: Steve we briefly discussed last Tuesday the possibility of using Mr Lay's contact with the Chairman of Toyota, Mr Okuda, to assist us in securing a senior executive from Toyota to speak at the May 15 conference in Tokyo. We agreed that I should draft a letter for Jeff Skilling to send to Mr Okuda. I have had a rethink and believe that as a matter of courtesy (Japanese style), it would be preferable in the first instance if the contact with Mr Okuda is done from chairman to chairman. Mr Lay's letter will serve as an introduction to Jeff Skilling, and will also permit Enron Japan to follow up directly with Mr Okuda's staff in Japan. We can then draft a letter for Jeff Skilling to confirm arrangements. I attach a draft letter for that purpose. If the revised approach is in order, I will liaise on the matter with Rosalee and Sherri, with a copy to you. kind regards [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: CONFIDENTIAL -- LITIGATION WORKPRODUCT (417.26): DRAFT IEP SRAC
 REBUTTAL TESTIMONY; [EMail-Body]= FYI Hap boyd ---------------------- Forwarded by Hap Boyd/EWC/Enron on 05/23/2001 05:31 AM --------------------------- ""Steven Kelly"" <steven@iepa.com> on 05/22/2001 01:51:29 PM To: ""Alan Comnes (E-mail)"" <acomnes@enron.com>, ""Alex Makler (E-mail)"" <AlexM@calpine.com>, ""Alex Sugaoka (E-mail)"" <alex.sugaoka@uaecorp.com>, ""Bill Adams (E-mail)"" <sangorgon@aol.com>, ""Bill Woods (E-mail)"" <billw@calpine.com>, ""Bob Ellery (E-mail)"" <bellery@spi-ind.com>, ""Bob Escalante (E-mail)"" <rescalante@riobravo-gm.com>, ""Brian T. Cragg (E-mail)"" <bcragg@gmssr.com>, ""Charles Johnson (E-mail)"" <c.johnson@ejgd.com>, ""David Parquet (E-mail)"" <david.parquet@enron.com>, ""Doug Levitt (E-mail)"" <SDL@calwind.com>, ""Duane Nelsen (E-mail)"" <dnelsen@gwfpower.com>, ""Ed Tomeo (E-mail)"" <ed.tomeo@uaecorp.com>, ""Edward Lozowicki (E-mail)"" <lozowickie@coudert.com>, ""Graeme Donaldson (E-mail)"" <GDonald386@aol.com>, ""Hap Boyd (E-mail)"" <rboyd@enron.com>, ""Jack Pigott (E-mail)"" <jackp@calpine.com>, ""Joe Ronan (E-mail)"" <joer@calpine.com>, ""Jonathan Weisgall (E-mail)"" <jweisgall@aol.com>, ""Kelly Lloyd (E-mail)"" <kellyl@enxco.com>, ""Ken Hoffman (E-mail)"" ""Kent Burton (E-mail)"" <kburton@covantaenergy.com>, ""Lucian Fox (E-mail)"" ""'Marcie Milner'"" <mmilner@coral-energy.com>, ""Mark Fillinger (E-mail)"" <mark.fillinger@enron.com>, ""Marty McFadden (E-mail)"" ""Mathew Troughton (E-mail)"" <troughtonm@coudert.com>, ""Michael L. Hawkins (E-mail)"" <hawkins@2000energy.com>, ""Milton Shultz (E-mail)"" <bfpjv@c-zone.net>, ""Paul Wood (E-mail)"" <pwood@covantaenergy.com>, ""Paula Soos (E-mail)"" <psoos@covantaenergy.com>, ""Phil Reese (E-mail)"" <rcsc@west.net>, ""Rachel King (E-mail)"" <rachel.king@elpaso.com>, ""Rand Havens (E-mail)"" <rhavens@coral-energy.com>, ""Robert Frees (E-mail)"" <freesrj@apci.com>, ""Roger Pelote (E-mail)"" <roger.pelote@williams.com>, ""Ross Ain (E-mail)"" <ain@worldnet.att.net>, ""Steve Ponder (E-mail)"" <steve_ponder@fpl.com>, ""Ted Cortopassi (E-mail)"" ""Thomas Heller (E-mail)"" <hellertj@apci.com>, ""Tom Hartman (E-mail)"" <tom_hartman@fpl.com>, ""Tony Wetzel (E-mail)"" <twetzel@thermoecotek.com>, ""Trond Aschehoug (E-mail)"" <norway@mindsync.com>, ""Ward Scobee (E-mail)"" ""'Wayne Kawamoto'"" <wkawamoto@wm.com>, ""William Carlson (E-mail)"" <wcarlson@wm.com>, ""William Hall (E-mail)"" <wfhall2@duke-energy.com> cc: ""Douglas Kerner (E-mail)"" <dkk@eslawfirm.com>, ""Bill Monsen (E-mail)"" <wam@mrwassoc.com>, ""Carol Hudson (E-mail)"" <carol@iepa.com>, ""Jan Smutny-Jones (E-mail)"" <smutny@iepa.com>, ""Katie Kaplan (E-mail)"" <kaplan@iepa.com>, ""Sandra Moseley (E-mail)"" <sandra@iepa.com>, ""Steven Kelly (E-mail)"" <steven@iepa.com> Subject: FW: CONFIDENTIAL -- LITIGATION WORKPRODUCT (417.26): DRAFT IEP SRAC REBUTTAL TESTIMONY Attached for your review is draft IEP SRAC Rebuttal Testimony. This testimony will be the subject to discussion during the conference call previously scheduled for 1:30 p.m. (PST) on Wednesday, May 23. The agenda for the call is as follows: Discussion of Draft SRAC Testimony Discussion of IEP Proposed QF Interconnection/Excess Sales Policy Discussion of Potential Litigation Matters related to SRAC The Conference call-In Number is 877/288-4427 The Participant Code is 111756 -----Original Message----- From: Bill Monsen [mailto:wam@mrwassoc.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 12:59 PM To: steven@iepa.com; dkk@eslawfirm.com; RunWithMee@aol.com Cc: djb@mrwassoc.com Subject: CONFIDENTIAL -- LITIGATION WORKPRODUCT (417.26) Steven and Doug, Attached is a draft of the rebuttal testimony in the IER/O&M adder proceeding. It is still rough but it should at least give the members an idea of where we are going. If you want to discuss this prior to the conference call, please let me know. Bill - IEP Section 390 Rebuttal Testimony 5-22-01.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Computers; [EMail-Body]= Tell him we are sending his note on to the appropriate person. MARY CLARK 04/03/2001 03:23 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Computers Steve, I need your help in responding to this question. Mary ---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Clark/Corp/Enron on 04/03/2001 03:22 PM --------------------------- From: Sherri Sera 04/03/2001 02:45 PM To: Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Computers ---------------------- Forwarded by Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron on 04/03/2001 02:46 PM --------------------------- Anonymous From: Anonymous on 04/03/2001 02:32 PM To: cc: Subject: Computers Since Enron and EBS are trying to cut costs and be more cost effective, why would a vice president need an executive computer setup at home? Especially if they already have a laptop (provided by Enron) they take home every night and have taken advantage of the Click at Home program as well. Since Enron has gone through the expense of giving each and every employee the opportunity of the Click at Home program, it seems to be a somewhat redundant expense of which I might add is unnecessary in my opinion. I feel it would behoove ALL EMPLOYEES, including executives, to be more conscientious of costs and expenses to improve Enron's and EBS' bottom-line. How can we (""Enron"") be a world leading company if we don't have leading world leaders that spend Enron's money as if it were there own. I think it would be in Enron's best interest to set some guidelines regarding expenses such as these. Just because a person is an executive of the company why should be allowed to have anything they want just because they can? Thank you for your time and the opportunity to express myself. Especially since I am a shareholder also and care where the money goes. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS PROPOSAL; [EMail-Body]= And another..... ----- Forwarded by Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT on 05/22/2001 09:45 AM ----- ""Joseph Iza"" <josephiza9@yahoo.com> 05/19/2001 07:37 PM To: cc: Subject: CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS PROPOSAL URGENT BUSINESS PROPOSAL This letter may come to you as a surprise since it is coming from someone you have not met before. However, we decided to contact you based on a satisfactory information we had about your business person as regard business information concerning your country and the safety of our funds in a steady economy such as that of your country compared to our country Nigeria Africa. I am a civil adviser currently working with the monitoring committee overseeing the winding up of the petroleum trust fund(PTF). Myself and my close and trusted colleagues need your assistance in the transfer of US$25 million into any reliable Account you may nominate overseas.This fund was generated from over-invoicing of contracts executed by the PTF under the administration of the past military government. These were discovered while we were reviewing the PTF accounts. From our discoveries, these contracts have been executed and the contractors in question were all paid. The difference of US$25,000,000 being the over-invoiced amount is the funds, we want your corporate entity to help us receive. What we want from you is a good and reliable company or personal Account into which we shall transfer this fund.Details should include the following: 1. Name of Bank 2. Address of Bank with Fax & Tel. No.3. Account Number4. Beneficiary/Signatory to Account (Account Name) Upon the Successful crediting of your account. The fund will be shared as follows: 1. 20% for you and your assistance 2. 75% for myself & my Colleagues 3. 5% for contingency expenses. Please after your first reply through e-mail I will want us to continue further communication by fax and telephone for confidential purpose. We wish to assure you that your involvement should you decide to assist us, will be well protected, and also, this business, proposal is 100% risk free as we have put a whole lot into it. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation while we look forward to a mutually benefiting business relationship with you.When replying to my e-mail kindly include your telephone, fax number and mobile telephone numbers preferably extremely private numbers where we can reach you any time of the day. Please be aware that a high level of confidentiality and trust is required in this business. My private telephone 234 1 7754653 and my fax number is 234 1 7593270. Best Regards, Dr. Joseph Iza. tel:234 1 7754653 fax:234 1 7593270 Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= National Governor's Association - Springtime in Washington
 Reception; [EMail-Body]= 6:15 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. Contact is Alva Hines 202-624-5325 - not going unless going to be in DC already [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Draft Organizational Announcement about Japan; [EMail-Body]= Suggested changes are highlighted below. John Sherriff@ECT 04/24/2001 12:55 AM To: (713) 529-7757, Ken Rice/Enron Communications, Kevin Hannon/Enron Communications, Mark Frevert/NA/Enron, Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT, Mike McConnell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Joseph P Hirl/AP/ENRON@ENRON, Jeremy Thirsk/AP/Enron@ENRON, Morten E Pettersen/AP/Enron@Enron, Nicholas O'Day/AP/Enron@Enron, Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeffrey McMahon/HOU/ECT, Jeffrey A Shankman/Enron@EnronXGate, Raymond Bowen/enron@enronxgate, Joe Gold/LON/ECT@ECT, Bryan Seyfried/LON/ECT@ECT, Jeff Kinneman/HOU/ECT, Rebecca McDonald/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Carey Brian Stanley/EU/Enron, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT, Mark Evans/Legal/LON/ECT, Fernley Dyson/LON/ECT, Ted Murphy/LON/ECT@ECT, Rick Buy/HOU/ECT, Richard Causey/Corp/Enron, Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT, Drew C Lynch/LON/ECT, David Oxley/HOU/ECT@ECT, John J Lavorato/Enron@EnronXGate, lkitchen@enron.co.uk cc: Subject: Draft Organizational Announcement about Japan May I please have your comments if any on this draft by close of business Wednesday. We hope to have agreed on the Q&A's by then and to send it out the announcement on Thursday. John To be sent to: All Enron Europe, all employees in Japan, all Global Markets and all VPs and up around the company Enron has established several wholesale businesses in Japan in the last year including Metals, Power Plant Development (via our investment in EnCom), Coal, LNG & Weather. We see significant opportunities in each of these businesses and we will continue to expand our presence in Japan in order to capture these opportunities. However, while Japan continues to make progress towards a liberalized electricity market, significant barriers to power trading remain under the current interim market structure. Until further tangible steps are taken to improve third party access for electricity in Japan, we will suspend our power marketing efforts and focus on the significant opportunities that currently exist in our other wholesale businesses. [Any statement regarding our existing power sales commitment?] Once the necessary regulatory changes have been completed we expect to aggressively pursue Enron's traditional position as the leading buyer and seller of electricity in every deregulated market. We are making a number of organization changes in order to better align our resources with the opportunities in the Japanese market. [deleted text] Joe Hirl our President of Enron Japan will move to the Global Markets group and lead a team that will focus on developing all our Global Markets opportunities in Japan especially Weather, Oil, LNG, Coal, and Shipping. We expect to continue our general recruiting of Japanese nationals and as President of Enron Japan, Joe will continue to provide the overall business leadership to both recruiting and the Analyst and Associate program in Japan. The Finance origination team headed by Jeremy Thirsk will continue to report to Joe and also move to Global Markets. Our power trading group led by Morton Erik Pettersen will transition into other roles around Enron. The Equity/FX/Interest rate team which is a part of Global Markets has two employees in the Tokyo office today and they expect to expand their efforts throughout the year. The EnCom group, which is our power plant development business (with minority partners) and headed by Carey Sloan will continue its efforts in developing power plants in Japan. We are pleased with the progress we are making on a number of sites and EnCom will continue to report to the Enron Europe Office of the Chairman. Our Metals team headed by Kazunari Sugimoto will continue to report through Enron Metals in London. By May we expect Enron Credit to have two to three employees in Tokyo pursing the Credit Derivative business. These employees remain in Enron Credit , a part of Enron Europe. EBS has two employees headed by Jim Weisser and this team expects to expand by year end. The Industrial Markets team also expects to have two employees in the Tokyo office in the next couple of months. In the last seven months the commercial support services for Japan have been transitioned to London for support and this is not changing. Jane McBride heads the legal team and will continue to functionally report to Mark Evans, General Counsel in London. The RAC function will continue to report to Ted Murphy, head of RAC for Enron Europe. The Risk Management and Accounting team is headed by Jan-Erland Bekeng will continue to functionally report to Fernley Dyson in London. The IT, HR, Tax and real estate teams will also continue to functionally report to London. Nick O'Day who heads the Public Affairs group (Government & Regulatory Affairs and the Public Relations) in Japan will report to the Enron Europe Office of the Chair with a Public Relations functional reporting to Jackie Gentle in London and a Government Affairs functional reporting to Rick Shapiro in Houston. We anticipate that his team's efforts will be primarily directed to supporting the EnCom power plant development team but they will also continue to provide support for Global Markets, EBS & Industrial Markets. We have already made considerable progress in breaking into the Japanese markets across a wide range of Enron businesses and we anticipate that this will provide significant profit growth for years to come. Through these current changes we can demonstrate our ability to be flexible and target our resources where they will realise the most immediate value for the company. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Houston 1996 - 2001; [EMail-Body]= I am so sorry. You guys gave him a really good life. ""Robert Kean"" <rkean@starband.net> on 07/07/2001 01:48:08 PM Please respond to <rkean@starband.net> To: ""Pat Hilleman \(E-mail\)"" <pat.hilleman@rsparch.com>, ""Greg Smith \(E-mail\)"" <grsmith@qwest.net>, ""Greg Smith \(E-mail 2\)"" <gregory_r_smith@uhc.com>, ""Colin Lamb \(E-mail\)"" <dsmcolin@home.com>, ""Maggie Kean \(E-mail\)"" <Ginny85956@aol.com>, ""Nora Kean \(E-mail\)"" <Beetle81088@aol.com>, ""Nora Kean \(E-mail 2\)"" <nora_kean@duchesne.org>, ""Sann & Evelyn Gossum \(E-mail\)"" <gossumr@worldnet.att.net>, ""Doug & Karen Reiman \(E-mail\)"" <dkreiman@mcleodusa.net>, ""Jean Kean \(E-mail\)"" <rex04@msn.com>, ""Kathy Wedig \(E-mail\)"" <kat.wedig@netzero.net>, ""Melissa Kean \(E-mail\)"" <kean@rice.edu>, ""Phil Kean \(E-mail\)"" <kean.philip@mcleodusa.net>, ""Steve & Melissa Kean \(E-mail\)"" <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: Houston 1996 - 2001 Houston died today after a long battle with Auto Immune Hemolytic Anemia. Rest in peace. Rob Kean [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Weather triggered options pricing; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Lu, Zimin Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 12:06 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J; Krishnarao, Pinnamaneni; Kohli, Sandeep; Tamarchenko, Tanya; Roberts, Mike A. Cc: Huang, Alex; Halliburton, Tom Subject: Weather triggered options pricing Dear all, We have developed analytical soulutions for weather-triggered commodity options. We have also programmed those formulas into user-friendly Excel functions. The original request came from the weather derivatives structuring desk, but the model can be used in other situations --- generically it is a double trigger option deal. See the documentation for more details. Zimin [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Ackerman to talk to Wolak; [EMail-Body]= Gary has been seeing Frank Wolak all over the place on the media scene. I asked him to ask Frank to do something POSITIVE and under the state's own control and push DA. Gary is also speaking to a bunch of CEOs (with Anjali of the ISO and Carl Wood) and he said he would carry our message to them as well. Sue Mara Enron Corp. Tel: (415) 782-7802 Fax:(415) 782-7854 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW:; [EMail-Body]= Liz, An update on Frank's availability at Stanford. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Frank A. Wolak"" Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 11:13 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Vince, I'll be out of the country for the next two weeks, but should be back September 3 and will be in the office all that week. Frank [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= IEP in the News, and other headlines; [EMail-Body]= San Jose Mercury News, April 19, 2001, Thursday, SJ-POWER, 593 words, ????Testimony Indicates California Electricity Market Was Troubled in 1998, By ????Brandon Bailey (Quotes Smutny on behalf of IEP) The Associated Press State & Local Wire, April 19, 2001, Thursday, BC cycle ????, 9:55 AM Eastern Time, State and Regional, 930 words, Developments in ????California's energy crisis, By The Associated Press (Quotes Smutny on behalf of IEP) The Associated Press State & Local Wire, April 19, 2001, Thursday, BC cycle ????, 9:32 AM Eastern Time, State and Regional, 820 words, Legislators probe ????possible power, natural gas collusion, By DON THOMPSON, Associated Press ????Writer, SACRAMENTO (Quotes Smutny on behalf of IEP) The Associated Press State & Local Wire, April 18, 2001, Wednesday, BC ????cycle, State and Regional, 833 words, Legislators probe possible power, ????natural gas collusion, By DON THOMPSON, Associated Press Writer, SACRAMENTO ???(Quotes Smutny on behalf of IEP) The Associated Press State & Local Wire, April 18, 2001, Wednesday, BC ????cycle, State and Regional, 841 words, Developments in California's energy ????crisis, By The Associated Press (Quotes Smutny on behalf of IEP) Power bloc blasts seizure idea Producers say talk of bold action fuels crisis ???????By Steve Geissinger SACRAMENTO BUREAU ?-- Oakland Tribune (Quotes Smutny on behalf of IEP) Copley News Service, April 19, 2001, Thursday, State and regional, 780 ????words, Windfall-profits tax gets Davis' backing, Bill Ainsworth, SACRAMENTO Los Angeles Times, April 19, 2001, Thursday,, Home Edition, Page 3, 772 ????words, CAPITOL JOURNAL; ?CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; ??Price Caps Don't Fit in ????Cheney's Head for Figures, GEORGE SKELTON, SACRAMENTO Los Angeles Times, April 19, 2001, Thursday,, Home Edition, Page 3, 1373 ????words, CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; ??DAVIS BACKS SILICON VALLEY POWER PROJECT; ????ENERGY: GOVERNOR URGES QUICK APPROVAL OF SAN JOSE PLANT DESPITE OPPOSITION ????BY CITY AND A POWERFUL FIRM., JENIFER WARREN and TERENCE MONMANEY, TIMES ????STAFF WRITERS, SACRAMENTO The Orange County Register, April 19, 2001, Thursday, STATE AND REGIONAL ????NEWS, K7970, 275 words, Ex-energy chief leery of state buying power lines, ????By Kate Berry The San Francisco Chronicle, APRIL 19, 2001, THURSDAY,, FINAL EDITION, ????NEWS;, Pg. A18, 585 words, Alameda public utility rents four backup ????generators; ???Extra electricity will be used during summer rolling ????blackouts, Matthew Yi, Alameda The San Francisco Chronicle, APRIL 19, 2001, THURSDAY,, FINAL EDITION, ????NEWS;, Pg. A3, 845 words, Davis' gouging claims disputed; ???Officials say ????no link between PG&E bankruptcy, high prices, David Lazarus The San Francisco Chronicle, APRIL 19, 2001, THURSDAY,, FINAL EDITION, ????NEWS;, Pg. A3, 888 words, Davis backs San Jose power plant; ???He also ????acknowledges bailout for Edison will be uphill fight, Lynda Gledhill, ????Sacramento The Vancouver Sun, April 19, 2001 Thursday, 731 words, B.C. Hydro's credit ????to California firms exceeded 1999 guidelines, David Baines The Associated Press State & Local Wire, April 18, 2001, Wednesday, BC ????cycle, Business News, 348 words, Williams again target of overcharging ????allegations from federal regulators, TULSA, Okla. The Associated Press State & Local Wire, April 18, 2001, Wednesday, BC ????cycle, State and Regional, 332 words, Governor, congressman to fight ????proposals for national power deregulation policy, By MARGERY BECK, ????Associated Press Writer, LINCOLN, Neb. San Jose Mercury News, April 18, 2001, Wednesday, SJ-POWER-PLANT, 1038 ????words, California Governor May Back Energy Firm's Proposed Power Plant Scripps Howard News Service, April 18, 2001, Wednesday, DOMESTIC NEWS, 588 ????words, Davis says Edison agreement may need altering, EMILY BAZAR and KEVIN ????YAMAMURA, SACRAMENTO, Calif. San Jose Mercury News April 19, 2001, Thursday KR-ACC-NO: SJ-POWER LENGTH: 593 words HEADLINE: Testimony Indicates California Electricity Market Was Troubled in 1998 BYLINE: By Brandon Bailey BODY: ??SACRAMENTO, Calif.--California's electricity market was showing signs of trouble as far back as 1998, the year that it was officially opened to competition, members of a special legislative investigating committee were told Wednesday. ??Abnormal price spikes -- far higher than what should have occurred in a competitive market -- were showing up in August 1998, the committee was told by Frank Wolak, a Stanford economist and top advisor to the California Independent System Operator, which runs the state's transmission grid. ??Appearing on the first day of hearings called by a state Senate select committee to investigate alleged wholesale energy price manipulation, Wolak testified that the ISO's economic advisors repeatedly found signs that power suppliers were able to influence prices over the last three years -- even before wholesale prices soared skyhigh last summer. ??By controlling even a relatively small portion of power supply, just enough to make a difference in whether the state could meet consumers' needs, Wolak said, generators have been able to charge prices far higher than their costs. ??All told, the ISO has estimated, power suppliers collected more than $ 6 billion in unjustified profits last year. ??In his opinion, Wolak added, that violates the terms by which federal regulators allowed the suppliers to enter the state's newly deregulated market when it opened in 1998. ??The ISO is now filing petitions with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, asking that agency to revoke the generators' right to charge unregulated prices. ??But Wolak repeatedly told the committee that he had no evidence that the suppliers acted in collusion or that they had violated any federal anti-trust laws. ??When state Senator Joe Dunn, D-Garden Grove, pressed him on the point, Wolak insisted, ""I can't say yes, I can't say no. There's a lot of things that certainly look puzzling. It's hard without further information and analysis to say definitively, but there's lots of things to seem to be worth looking into."" ??Dunn, a former consumer attorney, is leading the Legislature's efforts to answer a question that a host of other state and federal officials have also posed: have California's electricity prices been the result of any illegal or unethical acts? ??Power suppliers and their representatives have repeatedly said the answer is no. They say their prices are the result of short supplies and natural market swings. ??""Eleven investigations into California's electricity market have been conducted or are currently under way,"" said a statement issued Wednesday by Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of the Independent Energy Producers Association. ""Not one has found or proven any wrongdoing by generators."" ??Dunn, however, said Wednesday's testimony was only the start of what he promised would be a vigorous investigation. He said the committee has already asked several power companies for records and other information and he hinted that subpoenas may be issued in the coming weeks. ??""We will try to figure out how to stop these high prices if they are unjustified,"" Dunn said at the beginning of the hearing. ??""We're not going to be looking for ways to finance these payments,"" he added. The state is now paying $ 70 million a day to buy power for California consumers, after major utilities wracked up billions in debts while buying power on the open market in recent months. ??----- ??To see more of the San Jose Mercury News, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.sjmercury.com JOURNAL-CODE: SJ LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 5 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ??????????????????????April 19, 2001, Thursday, BC cycle AM Eastern Time SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 930 words HEADLINE: Developments in California's energy crisis BYLINE: By The Associated Press BODY: ??Developments in California's energy crisis: ??THURSDAY: ??- The state remains free of power alerts as reserves stay above 7 percent. ??- Gov. Gray Davis meets with 25 members of the California congressional delegation at the Los Angeles International Airport to discuss the state's power crisis. ??- An Assembly committee continues hearings on the natural gas supply and possible price manipulation. ??-The Public Utilities Commission meets in San Francisco to decide whether to investigate if a key bloc of independent generators are purposely keeping their plants offline. ??WEDNESDAY: ??- Unchecked free-market forces drove up the price of natural gas to Southern California Edison by about $750 million over the last year, an industry consultant tells the Assembly Electricity Oversight Subcommittee. ??Meanwhile, the Senate's Select Committee to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Energy Market begins investigating whether electric generators artificially inflated power prices. ??An industry spokesman predicts the investigations will uncover nothing illegal. ??- The state offers financial backing to Houston-based Dynegy, which worried it would not be paid for power generated at its plants in California. Dynegy agrees to sell 300 megawatts of power from 17 small turbine generators in Carlsbad after receiving an offer from the California Department of Water Resources. ??- Gov. Gray Davis urges state regulators to approve the construction of a controversial 600-megawatt power plant in south San Jose to provide electricity to roughly 450,000 homes in the Silicon Valley. ??- The Democratic governor lobbies Senate Democrats to support his plan to pay $2.7 billion for the transmission lines owned by Southern California Edison. ??State spending on electricity has jumped by more than 50 percent since Pacific Gas and Electric Corp. declared bankruptcy April 6, thanks in part of surcharges tacked on by power generators worried they won't be repaid, Davis said. ??- The Senate Appropriations Committee sends the full Senate a bill creating a public power authority that would loan out up to $5 billion to build or buy power plants that would be required to sell electricity to consumers at low rates. ??- An Assembly committee advances a bill ending the exemption under which utility lobbyists do not have to follow the same reporting requirements as do other lobbyists. The bill now goes to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. ??- A Pacific Gas and Electric Corp. shareholder sues the company, claiming it misled shareholders by forecasting annual profits for two quarters last year when, the suit says, the company knew it was incurring losses. ??-Public Utilities Commission President Loretta Lynch issues a statement late Wednesday, saying inaction by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission forced Southern Caifornia Edison Co. to take a large write-off of debt. ""The company should not have to shoulder these liabilities and neither should its customers,"" Lynch says. ??- Edison International's stock closes at $11.40, down 48 cents, while stock in PG&E's parent closes up 14 cents at $9.04. ??- The state remains free of power alerts as reserves stay above 7 percent. ??WHAT'S NEXT: ??- The Assembly's Energy Oversight Subcommittee plans to resume hearings Thursday in its inquiry into California's highest-in-the-nation natural gas prices with testimony from gas companies. ??- Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra, the parent company of San Diego Gas and Electric Co., to buy the utility's transmission lines. Davis says he expects to have an agreement within two weeks. ??- The state Public Utilities Commission will decide Thursday whether to investigate why a key block of power generators is staying off-line despite regulators' order last month that they start getting paid by the state's utilities. Independent Energy Producers Executive Director Jan Smutny-Jones says the generators can't afford to operate because they are still owed more than a billion dollars, and because the PUC's rates don't cover their operating costs. ??PUC President Loretta Lynch also wants the commission to decide Thursday to investigate whether PG&E's April 6 bankruptcy protection filing is enough of a threat to the PUC's regulatory authority to prompt more PUC involvement in the bankruptcy proceedings. ??THE PROBLEM: ??High demand, high wholesale energy costs, transmission glitches and a tight supply worsened by scarce hydroelectric power in the Northwest and maintenance at aging California power plants are all factors in California's electricity crisis. ??Edison and PG&E say they've lost nearly $14 billion since June to high wholesale prices that the state's electricity deregulation law bars them from passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection April 6. ??Electricity and natural gas suppliers, scared off by the two companies' poor credit ratings, are refusing to sell to them, leading the state in January to start buying power for the utilities' nearly 9 million residential and business customers. The state is also buying power for a third investor-owned utility, San Diego Gas & Electric, which is in better financial shape than much larger Edison and PG&E but also struggling with high wholesale power costs. ??The Public Utilities Commission has raised rates up to 46 percent to help finance the state's multibillion-dollar power-buying. LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 5 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ??????????????????????April 19, 2001, Thursday, BC cycle AM Eastern Time SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 820 words HEADLINE: Legislators probe possible power, natural gas collusion BYLINE: By DON THOMPSON, Associated Press Writer DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Southern California Edison was charged about $750 million more this year for natural gas because of unchecked free-market forces, an industry consultant testified. ??Paul Carpenter told the Assembly Electricity Oversight Subcommittee on Wednesday the price spikes came after the El Paso Natural Gas Co. contracted first with Dynegy and later with its own marketing affiliate, El Paso Merchant Energy, to control the pipeline capacity. ??Officials with El Paso and other natural gas suppliers are expected to testify Thursday that they did not illegally manipulate the market. ??The California Public Utilities Commission estimated a year ago that overcharges by the companies that control natural gas flow drove up prices by $ 100 million a year to California gas and electricity customers. ??But PUC attorney Harvey Morris said that was before last summer's price spikes, which he blamed on natural gas suppliers using a ""monopoly"" to ""game the system."" ??""It's way worse than we could possibly have imagined,"" Morris said after testifying before the subcommittee. ""It's obviously way higher than $100 million."" ??Natural gas rates at the California border generally tracked national prices until November, when they spiked as high as 11 times higher than the price of natural gas elsewhere in the nation, Carpenter said. ??""I have never seen gas prices like this anywhere in the world,"" said Carpenter, who has been studying the energy market for 20 years for Cambridge, Mass.-based consultant The Brattle Group. The Brattle Group was hired by Edison to study the natural gas market. ??The committee is one of two legislative committees exploring whether illegal market manipulation in the electricity and natural gas markets has driven up California's energy costs. ??""This is a market that is plagued by the exercise of market power,"" Frank Wolak, chairman of the California Independent System Operator's Market Surveillance Committee, told the Senate Select Committee to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Energy Market. The ISO runs the state's power grid. ??However, ""there is no law against me saying, 'I'm not going to sell to you,""' Wolak said. Market manipulation only becomes illegal when there is collusion, Wolak said, and such evidence is hard to find. ??Electricity generators and natural gas suppliers say a severe supply and demand imbalance - not market manipulation - has led to higher prices. ??""Everybody's busy doing investigations. They're not interested in solving the problem,"" said Independent Energy Producers Executive Director Jan Smutny-Jones. ??Investigations ""are wasting everybody's time,"" Smutny-Jones said, adding that previous probes and lawsuits have uncovered no wrongdoing. He said the state's power problems came because state regulators denied utilities the chance to sign long-term energy contracts when they had the chance. ??""People have been playing by the rules,"" Smutny-Jones said. ??But the Senate committee's first witnesses are ISO officials who authored studies that claim the state paid more than $6 billion too much for power last year. ??Committee chair Joseph Dunn, D-Garden Grove, also has slated state Auditor Elaine Howell, who last month blamed buyers and sellers for skyrocketing electricity costs. Dunn also has scheduled future testimony from state, federal, academic and private investigators studying the power market. ??He invited five major generators to attend the committee's second hearing next week. All five - Reliant, Dynegy, Williams Energy, Duke Energy and Mirant - say they are eager to cooperate and clear their names, Dunn said. ??Dunn asked the five for a total of 86 specific documents. If the companies feel they cannot provide documents because of legal or confidentiality concerns, Dunn said he will subpoena them. ??Smutny-Jones said investigators appear to be growing desperate to blame the state's natural gas and electricity price hikes on illegal market manipulation instead of natural market forces. ??He cited Attorney General Bill Lockyer's announcement last week that any informant who helped prove wrongdoing would be entitled to a percentage of the state's recovery he estimated could range from $50 million to hundreds of millions of dollars. ??""If the state's offering a $50 million reward, they haven't found anything,"" Smutny-Jones said. ""I don't think you're going to find the fact that anybody did anything criminal here."" ??Assemblywoman Jenny Oropeza, D-Long Beach, said she believes otherwise after Wednesday's testimony: ""I think it is very clear there was some price manipulation going on."" ??But Assemblyman John Campbell, R-Irvine, isn't sure there was anything illegal. ??""There clearly are market forces at work, that's evident,"" Campbell said. ""Whether you make the jump to market manipulation ... I haven't seen conclusive evidence that leads me to make that jump."" LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 5 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ?????????????????????April 18, 2001, Wednesday, BC cycle SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 833 words HEADLINE: Legislators probe possible power, natural gas collusion BYLINE: By DON THOMPSON, Associated Press Writer DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Unchecked free-market forces drove up the price of natural gas to Southern California Edison by about $750 million over the last year, an industry consultant testified Wednesday. ??Paul Carpenter told the Assembly Electricity Oversight Subcommittee the price spikes came after the El Paso Natural Gas Co. contracted first with Dynegy and later with its own marketing affiliate, El Paso Merchant Energy, to control the pipeline capacity. ??The California Public Utilities Commission estimated a year ago that overcharges by the companies that control natural gas flow drove up prices by $ 100 million a year to California gas and electricity customers. ??But PUC attorney Harvey Morris said that was before last summer's price spikes, which he blamed on natural gas suppliers using a ""monopoly"" to ""game the system."" ??""It's way worse than we could possibly have imagined,"" Morris said after testifying before the subcommittee. ""It's obviously way higher than $100 million."" ??Natural gas rates at the California border generally tracked national prices until November, when they spiked as high as 11 times higher than the price of natural gas elsewhere in the nation, Carpenter said. ??""I have never seen gas prices like this anywhere in the world,"" said Carpenter, who has been studying the energy market for 20 years for Cambridge, Mass.-based consultant The Brattle Group. The Brattle Group was hired by Edison to study the natural gas market. ??Officials with El Paso and other natural gas suppliers have denied illegally manipulating the market. They are scheduled to testify Thursday. El Paso officials did not return telephone calls for comment Wednesday. ??The committee is one of two legislative committees exploring whether illegal market manipulation in the electricity and natural gas markets has driven up California's energy costs. ??""This is a market that is plagued by the exercise of market power,"" Frank Wolak, chairman of the California Independent System Operator's Market Surveillance Committee, told the Senate Select Committee to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Energy Market. The ISO runs the state's power grid. ??However, ""there is no law against me saying, 'I'm not going to sell to you,""' Wolak said. Market manipulation only becomes illegal when there is collusion, Wolak said, and such evidence is hard to find. ??Electricity generators and natural gas suppliers say a severe supply and demand imbalance - not market manipulation - has led to higher prices. ??""Everybody's busy doing investigations. They're not interested in solving the problem,"" said Independent Energy Producers Executive Director Jan Smutny-Jones. ??Investigations ""are wasting everybody's time,"" Smutny-Jones said, adding that previous probes and lawsuits have uncovered no wrongdoing. He said the state's power problems came because state regulators denied utilities the chance to sign long-term energy contracts when they had the chance. ??""People have been playing by the rules,"" Smutny-Jones said. ??But the Senate committee's first witnesses are ISO officials who authored studies that claim the state paid more than $6 billion too much for power last year. ??Committee chair Joseph Dunn, D-Garden Grove, also has slated state Auditor Elaine Howell, who last month blamed buyers and sellers for skyrocketing electricity costs. Dunn also has scheduled future testimony from state, federal, academic and private investigators studying the power market. ??He invited five major generators to attend the committee's second hearing next week. All five - Reliant, Dynegy, Williams Energy, Duke Energy and Mirant - say they are eager to cooperate and clear their names, Dunn said. ??Dunn asked the five for a total of 86 specific documents. If the companies feel they cannot provide documents because of legal or confidentiality concerns, Dunn said he will subpoena them. ??Smutny-Jones said investigators appear to be growing desperate to blame the state's natural gas and electricity price hikes on illegal market manipulation instead of natural market forces. ??He cited Attorney General Bill Lockyer's announcement last week that any informant who helped prove wrongdoing would be entitled to a percentage of the state's recovery he estimated could range from $50 million to hundreds of millions of dollars. ??""If the state's offering a $50 million reward, they haven't found anything,"" Smutny-Jones said. ""I don't think you're going to find the fact that anybody did anything criminal here."" ??Assemblywoman Jenny Oropeza, D-Long Beach, said she believes otherwise after Wednesday's testimony: ""I think it is very clear there was some price manipulation going on."" ??But Assemblyman John Campbell, R-Irvine, isn't sure there was anything illegal. ??""There clearly are market forces at work, that's evident,"" Campbell said. ""Whether you make the jump to market manipulation ... I haven't seen conclusive evidence that leads me to make that jump."" LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 5 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ?????????????????????April 18, 2001, Wednesday, BC cycle SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 841 words HEADLINE: Developments in California's energy crisis BYLINE: By The Associated Press BODY: ??Developments in California's energy crisis: ??WEDNESDAY: ??- Unchecked free-market forces drove up the price of natural gas to Southern California Edison by about $750 million over the last year, an industry consultant tells the Assembly Electricity Oversight Subcommittee. ??Meanwhile, the Senate's Select Committee to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Energy Market begins investigating whether electric generators artificially inflated power prices. ??An industry spokesman predicts the investigations will uncover nothing illegal. ??- The state offers financial backing to Houston-based Dynegy, which worried it would not be paid for power generated at its plants in California. Dynegy agrees to sell 300 megawatts of power from 17 small turbine generators in Carlsbad after receiving an offer from the California Department of Water Resources. ??- Gov. Gray Davis urges state regulators to approve the construction of a controversial 600-megawatt power plant in south San Jose to provide electricity to roughly 450,000 homes in the Silicon Valley. ??- The Democratic governor lobbies Senate Democrats to support his plan to pay $2.7 billion for the transmission lines owned by Southern California Edison. ??State spending on electricity has jumped by more than 50 percent since Pacific Gas and Electric Corp. declared bankruptcy April 6, thanks in part of surcharges tacked on by power generators worried they won't be repaid, Davis said. ??- The Senate Appropriations Committee sends the full Senate a bill creating a public power authority that would loan out up to $5 billion to build or buy power plants that would be required to sell electricity to consumers at low rates. ??- An Assembly committee advances a bill ending the exemption under which utility lobbyists do not have to follow the same reporting requirements as do other lobbyists. The bill now goes to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. ??- A Pacific Gas and Electric Corp. shareholder sues the company, claiming it misled shareholders by forecasting annual profits for two quarters last year when, the suit says, the company knew it was incurring losses. ??-Public Utilities Commission President Loretta Lynch issues a statement late Wednesday, saying inaction by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission forced Southern Caifornia Edison Co. to take a large write-off of debt. ""The company should not have to shoulder these liabilities and neither should its customers,"" Lynch says. ??- Edison International's stock closes at $11.40, down 48 cents, while stock in PG&E's parent closes up 14 cents at $9.04. ??- The state remains free of power alerts as reserves stay above 7 percent. ??WHAT'S NEXT: ??- The Assembly's Energy Oversight Subcommittee plans to resume hearings Thursday in its inquiry into California's highest-in-the-nation natural gas prices with testimony from gas companies. ??- Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra, the parent company of San Diego Gas and Electric Co., to buy the utility's transmission lines. Davis says he expects to have an agreement within two weeks. ??- The state Public Utilities Commission will decide Thursday whether to investigate why a key block of power generators is staying off-line despite regulators' order last month that they start getting paid by the state's utilities. Independent Energy Producers Executive Director Jan Smutny-Jones says the generators can't afford to operate because they are still owed more than a billion dollars, and because the PUC's rates don't cover their operating costs. ??PUC President Loretta Lynch also wants the commission to decide Thursday to investigate whether PG&E's April 6 bankruptcy protection filing is enough of a threat to the PUC's regulatory authority to prompt more PUC involvement in the bankruptcy proceedings. ??THE PROBLEM: ??High demand, high wholesale energy costs, transmission glitches and a tight supply worsened by scarce hydroelectric power in the Northwest and maintenance at aging California power plants are all factors in California's electricity crisis. ??Edison and PG&E say they've lost nearly $14 billion since June to high wholesale prices that the state's electricity deregulation law bars them from passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection April 6. ??Electricity and natural gas suppliers, scared off by the two companies' poor credit ratings, are refusing to sell to them, leading the state in January to start buying power for the utilities' nearly 9 million residential and business customers. The state is also buying power for a third investor-owned utility, San Diego Gas & Electric, which is in better financial shape than much larger Edison and PG&E but also struggling with high wholesale power costs. ??The Public Utilities Commission has raised rates up to 46 percent to help finance the state's multibillion-dollar power-buying. LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 Power bloc blasts seizure idea Producers say talk of bold action fuels crisis By Steve Geissinger SACRAMENTO BUREAU ?-- Oakland Tribune SACRAMENTO -- Outraged by a report in The Oakland Tribune that some lawmakers asked the governor to seize high-priced power contracts, a key industry group Tuesday warned the Davis administration and Legislature that such action would worsen the energy crisis. ""We're publicly saying . . . this kind of rhetoric will have dire consequences on both the reliability and cost of power in California for years to come,"" said Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of the Independent Energy Producers Association. ""It is the kind of rhetoric one would expect in Indonesia or the Philippines, not the sixth largest economy on the planet,"" he said in a teleconference. At the same time, Davis administration officials confirmed that seizing contracts of allegedly profiteering brokers is the most likely last-ditch move if options continue to narrow, ahead of the previously discussed concepts of seizing California power plants owned by out-of-state firms or passing a windfall profits tax. Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio pointed out the governor already seized power contracts on which California's investor-owned utilities were defaulting in early February. The state, trying to buy its way out of the energy crisis with no clear end in sight, lost a substantial measure of control over electricity prices and supplies to the courts with the recent bankruptcy filing by the Pacific Gas and Electric Co. Gov. Gray Davis, a Democrat, employed hard-sell tactics Tuesday in an effort to convince reluctant Democrats that their failure to embrace his plan to financially rescue teetering Southern California Edison could plunge that utility into bankruptcy, as well. While most Republicans are flatly opposed to the plan as misguided, Democrats, who hold a majority in the Legislature, worry it's a public bailout of an investor-owned utility and would hand the state control over only Edison's south-state piece of the strategic high-voltage transmission grid in California. Soaring wholesale power costs have financially shattered utilities, forcing the state into runaway, multibillion-dollar spending that helps keep the lights on but threatens the state budget. The manager of the state's power grid has accused generators and marketers of overcharging Californians more than $6 billion in recent months. Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg, D-Van Nuys, said Monday that members of both legislative houses were interested in seizure of California power plants' contracts with brokers, who sell to customers within or outside the state. Sen. Don Perata, D-Oakland, an outspoken critic of the Davis administration's handling of the crisis, said some lawmakers had asked the governor to use emergency or eminent domain powers to seize the overpriced contracts and were awaiting Davis' answer this week. Supporters of the move said seizure would allow the state to control where the power is sold and decrease price markups by eliminating the middleman. But myriad questions remain unanswered, including regulatory and interstate commerce issues as well as any state reimbursement of the brokers. Any move to seize power contracts would be overturned by the courts, said Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum. ""Instead of trying to do what's legally within their reach, they go to extreme measures that are on their very face unlawful and unconstitutional,"" Ackerman said. Moreover, industry officials said, seizure would not only chill industry investment in California's power system and lead to higher power costs but would be ironic since California has shunned lower-cost, long-term contracts, industry officials said. ""It would create a very unstable political, regulatory environment,"" Smutny-Jones said. ""It would have extremely adverse consequences for California in the long term."" Even so, the talk has worried the industry. Smutny-Jones said his clients are ""very, very troubled by this sudden turn in rhetoric."" ""I assume when senior members of the Legislature make pronouncements about potentially seizing contracts, it's designed to get our attention and we obviously take those things seriously,"" he said. The Independent Energy Producers group is ""in the process"" of contacting the Davis administration and lawmakers, said Smutny-Jones. ""You'll hear more about this."" Copyright 2001 Copley News Service Copley News Service April 19, 2001, Thursday SECTION: State and regional LENGTH: 780 words HEADLINE: Windfall-profits tax gets Davis' backing BYLINE: Bill Ainsworth DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Federal regulators' failure to stop what they described as anti-competitive practices in the natural-gas industry added $750 million to Southern California Edison's cost of electricity, a consultant estimated yesterday. ??The consultant, Paul Carpenter of the Brattle Group, spoke to an Assembly subcommittee investigating why California pays the highest natural-gas prices in the nation. Natural gas is a critical part of the electricity crisis because most of the state's generating plants run on natural gas. ??Natural-gas prices have soared throughout the nation, but the bench mark price paid at California's border has been double that paid at other bench mark locations throughout the nation for months, according to figures released by the Assembly Subcommittee on Energy Oversight. ??Next week, Carpenter plans to testify at hearings in Washington, D.C., on behalf of Southern California Edison and the California Public Utilities Commission, which are asking federal regulators to intervene. ??The giant utility and the state regulatory body contend that a sweetheart deal between El Paso Natural Gas and El Paso Merchant Energy gave the sister companies enough market power to artificially raise the price of natural gas that flows into Southern California from Texas. ??El Paso owns the major pipeline bringing natural gas from fields in New Mexico and Texas to Southern California. El Paso Merchant Energy is an unregulated sister company. ??Carpenter called the prices paid in Southern California ''simply unprecedented'' in the United States. He estimated that the sister companies manipulated the market enough to add $2.60 to the price of a million British thermal units of gas. ??In addition, he said, El Paso Merchant Energy owns part of 20 smaller power plants, ''qualifying facilities'' that get paid based on the price of natural gas in California. The higher natural-gas prices increase the company's revenues, Carpenter said. ??El Paso company officials are expected to testify in front of the Assembly subcommittee today, but in proceedings before the federal regulators they have denied any sweetheart deal. ??In a report they commissioned, the company blamed the higher natural-gas prices in Southern California on increased demand and constraints on pipeline capacity. ??Gov. Gray Davis, meanwhile, gave his strongest endorsement yet to a windfall-profits tax on generators as a Senate committee chaired by Joseph Dunn, D-Laguna Niguel, began a series of hearings to probe possible price gouging by generators. ??''I believe the Legislature would be well within its prerogative to insist that generators receive an appropriate reduction, whether it's 20 percent or any other number the Legislature hit upon,'' Davis said. ??Senate Democrats, Davis said, will form a special committee to help work on his plan for the state purchase of the transmission system of Southern California Edison for $2.76 billion, in exchange for state aid in paying off the utilities' debt. ??The governor said he told Senate Democrats, a number of whom are skeptical of the plan, that Edison's parent firm has agreed to back a $3 billion upgrade of the neighborhood distribution system retained by Edison and to return a $400 million tax refund to the utility. ??At the natural-gas hearing yesterday, state officials said that after El Paso Merchant Energy bought a significant part of the pipeline capacity from its sister company, it withheld natural gas to drive prices up. ??''Marketers have gamed the system and figured out how to hoard capacity and undermine competition,'' said Harvey Morris, an attorney for the California Public Utilities Commission. ??State regulators want the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which regulates natural gas, to open the market to more competitors. ??But the commission has repeatedly rejected similar complaints in the past. On March 28, FERC ruled that the affiliates did not arrange a sweetheart deal. ??''The fact that El Paso Merchant controls a large volume of capacity does not, in and of itself, render the El Paso contracts unjust, unreasonable or unduly discriminatory,'' FERC ruled. ??In other cases involving natural gas, federal regulators acknowledged that certain contract provisions allowed anti-competitive behavior, but they approved those contracts anyway. ??Lawmakers said they were puzzled by the federal regulators' lack of action. ??''It baffles me that we've found the problem anti-competitive behavior and market gaming, but there's no cure because federal regulators won't take action,'' said Assemblyman Juan Vargas, D-San Diego. Staff writer Ed Mendel contributed to this report. LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ????????????????????April 19, 2001, Thursday, Home Edition SECTION: Part A; Part 1; Page 3; Metro Desk LENGTH: 772 words HEADLINE: CAPITOL JOURNAL; CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; Price Caps Don't Fit in Cheney's Head for Figures BYLINE: GEORGE SKELTON DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Want price caps on wholesale electricity to staunch the bleeding of billions from California? Not going to happen, Vice President Dick Cheney insists. Don't waste your energy thinking about it. ??""Frankly, California is looked on by many folks as a classic example of the kinds of problems that arise when you do use price caps,"" Cheney said in a telephone interview Wednesday. ??The vice president was referring to another type of price cap--the infamous state cap on consumer rates that has left the private utilities billions short of enough revenue to pay their gouging wholesalers. What political leaders in California and the Northwest are pleading for from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is a regional cap on wholesale prices. ??Early last year, a megawatt-hour was selling wholesale in California for $ 30. By year's end, it had risen to an average $ 300, according to state officials. At peak, prices have soared to $ 1,500. Meanwhile, demand increased last year by less than 4%. In fact, demand last month was 9% less than in March 2000. ??This is the sorry news for ratepayers/ taxpayers: Californians paid $ 7.4 billion for electricity in 1999. This year, the tab--without price caps--is projected at $ 70 billion. Gov. Gray Davis disclosed Tuesday that his administration has been shelling out $ 73 million a day to buy electricity for the pauper utilities. ??The profits of power producers--many of them Texans and Bush backers--have risen 400%-500%-600%. ??* ??But none of this budges the Bush administration. ??Price caps, Cheney declares, may provide ""short-term political relief for the politicians. But they don't do anything to deal with the basic fundamental problem."" That problem is supply, he says; price caps discourage investment in new power plants and encourage consumption. ??Counters Garry South, Davis' political strategist: ""The notion by free market zanies that you have to let profits rise 500%-600% is ludicrous. Reasonable profits can be made without bankrupting the system. They're just trying to protect the profits of their friends in the energy business."" ??In truth, California is building power plants as fast as it can. But not enough new megawatts apparently will be online by summer to prevent blackouts--and the bleeding of billions more into the pockets of out-of-state profiteers. ??How about a temporary price cap? ??""Six months? Six years?"" Cheney replies. ""Once politicians can no longer resist the temptation to go with price caps, they usually are unable to ever muster the courage to end them . . . ??""I don't see that as a possibility . . . Any package you can wrap it in, any fancy rhetoric you can prop it up with, it does not solve the problem."" ??* ??The White House clearly understands it has a problem in California--a political problem. A problem with a Democratic-dominated state that voted overwhelmingly for Al Gore. And now a problem with that mythical headline--Bush to California: Drop Dead--which seems to be getting bigger each day. ??There have been several recent California: Drop Dead stories. One was in Sunday's New York Times--""Bush Devoting Scanty Attention to California."" Tuesday, the Sacramento Bee reported that when Cheney met with Northwest members of Congress to discuss West Coast energy, he barred Californians from the room. ??Cheney flatly denies it. ??But Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) says she has had trouble making contact with the Bush White House. She has sent two letters to President Bush asking for a meeting on energy. The first time, she got back a form letter with her name misspelled. On the second try, she got a group meeting with Cheney. ??""It was very disappointing,"" she says. ""He spoke about letting the free market work and drilling in Alaska . That's not going to help California in the short-term. We need price caps until we're able to fix this very broken market. . . ??""There seems no interest in really wanting to understand the California situation."" ??I asked Cheney whether he sensed an anti-California bias across the country? ""No more than there's an anti-Texas bias,"" he replied. ""I wouldn't get paranoid about it. ??""The fact is, California is one of the leading states in the nation. Often a trendsetter. . . . Well, we hope not to emulate your energy policy. Hopefully, we'll learn from that."" ??His message to California: ""There's no reason not to be optimistic. The energy crunch obviously is a significant problem. . . . But it too will pass."" ??While learning from California, the Bush White House also might take a refresher course in the free market Hoover administration. LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ????????????????????April 19, 2001, Thursday, Home Edition SECTION: Part A; Part 1; Page 3; Metro Desk LENGTH: 1373 words HEADLINE: CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; DAVIS BACKS SILICON VALLEY POWER PROJECT; ENERGY: GOVERNOR URGES QUICK APPROVAL OF SAN JOSE PLANT DESPITE OPPOSITION BY CITY AND A POWERFUL FIRM. BYLINE: JENIFER WARREN and TERENCE MONMANEY, TIMES STAFF WRITERS DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Attempting to show that no region in California is safe from sacrifice, Gov. Gray Davis on Wednesday called for quick state approval of a controversial power plant proposed for the Silicon Valley. ??The governor's action locks him in combat with the San Jose City Council, which has unanimously rejected the plant, and Cisco Systems, the computer networking giant that wants to build its worldwide headquarters on adjacent land. ??In praising the proposed plant as a model of low-polluting efficiency, Davis said all regions of California must share the pain as the state expands its power supply--a key step toward ending blackouts and reducing sky-high electricity prices. ??If approved, the plant would be the 14th licensed by the California Energy Commission since Davis took office. The 13th--a 510-megawatt plant near San Diego--was approved unanimously by the commission Wednesday with little controversy. ??Rushing to expand the state's overtaxed energy supply, the governor has recently cut in half the approval times for the licensing of some plants. Six are under construction, according to Davis, and three are scheduled to begin operation this summer. A fourth--the AES Corp. generator in Huntington Beach that is due to be restarted --could add more megawatts to the supply this summer. ??V. John White, an energy consultant in Sacramento, said the governor's newly active role as an advocate for power plants was a necessary step given the urgency of the supply shortage. ??""It's very rare, and I wouldn't want him to short-circuit the commission's review process,"" White said. ""But I think he's trying to reassure folks we're doing everything we can and not just sitting around in our hot tubs."" ??Davis urged the Energy Commission--a five-member panel dominated by his appointees--to stop talking about the project and grant it a license. If the commission does so, it will mark only the third time the panel has usurped a local government's authority over zoning. ??""We are all in this together,"" Davis said, flanked by a forest of electric transformers near the Capitol. ""We are one state, and we all have to make the sacrifices necessary to make up for the mistakes of the last 12 years, when no major power plants were built."" ??The governor said the plant's developers, Calpine Corp. and Bechtel Enterprises Holdings Inc., have made ""numerous concessions"" to San Jose officials, including an agreement to sell power exclusively in the region. ??He added that the $ 300-million plant--expected to supply about 450,000 homes--will be equipped with state-of-the-art systems that make it ""one of the cleanest plants to go up in the nation."" ??The commission's staff has recommended licensing the project, and some analysts said the governor's intervention--said to be unprecedented--should fuel momentum for approval. ??Commissioner Robert Laurie--one of two members who held evidentiary hearings on the project and is preparing a recommendation for the full commission--would not comment on the plant's prospects. But Laurie, an appointee of former Gov. Pete Wilson, insisted that the project would receive an impartial review. ??""I know the importance of independent decision-making,"" he said. ??San Jose officials say the Calpine project conflicts with the aesthetics of its site in a bucolic valley 15 miles south of downtown. On Wednesday, Mayor Ron Gonzales urged the Energy Commission to ""give serious attention"" to the city's concerns about the plant's potential impact on residents and the environment. ??""As the project has been designed and proposed to operate . . . it would present an unfair burden to our community,"" the mayor said. ??A spokeswoman for the Calpine/Bechtel partnership disagreed and characterized the plant as key to restoring energy stability in the Silicon Valley, a region heavily dependent on imported power. ??""This is the only project in the pipeline that can help Silicon Valley out of its predicament in the near future,"" said the spokeswoman, Lisa Poelle. ??She expressed hope that the governor's comments, which cap numerous meetings between the partnership staff and Davis aides, would encourage San Jose to soften its stance on the project. ??The 600-megawatt plant is proposed for a swath of open space currently leased to a rancher and occupied by grazing cattle. A preliminary ruling by Laurie and the other commissioner scrutinizing the project is expected by June. The full commission would take a final vote about a month later, and if a license were granted, the plant would begin operations sometime in 2003. ??From the beginning, the plant has been dogged by opposition, and the Energy Commission has held more than 20 hearings--an unusually large number--on its fate. ??On Wednesday, a spokesman for its heftiest foe, San Jose-based Cisco, said the company still has serious concerns about ""health and safety issues."" ??Cisco has strongly opposed the plant because the company wants to build a $ 1.3-billion headquarters for 20,000 employees nearby. In the past, Cisco officials have threatened to relocate to another state if the power plant is built. ??Company spokesman Steve Langdon said the firm's plans to build an industrial campus were not scuttled by the announcement Monday that it is cutting 8,500 workers from its payroll because of slumping sales of its Internet networking equipment. ??But he suggested that the plans were flexible enough to be scaled down for a smaller work force and that the campus may not house the company's headquarters. ??""It doesn't all get built at once,"" he said. ""We will build and occupy the site over time in phases as needed."" ??Another leading opponent of the power plant argued Wednesday that the Energy Commission lacks authority to override San Jose officials and license the project. The Santa Teresa Citizen Action Group, launched by homeowners near the site, says the commission may only take such a step if a better plant site hasn't been identified. ??The group charges that the commission is aware of other available sites, including one in an industrial part of the East Bay area, and lists eight other reasons the plant should not be built, among them the noise and emissions it would produce. ??The local Sierra Club chapter, however, has endorsed the plant largely on grounds that it would run cleaner than existing plants in the area. By offsetting emissions from those older plants, the new project would actually reduce air pollution, said Kurt Newick of the Sierra Club's Loma Prieta chapter. ??On another front, Davis continued to lobby legislators for support for his plan to rescue Southern California Edison from bankruptcy through purchase of the utility's transmission grid. ??Emerging from lunch with state Senate Democrats who are openly wary of the deal, Davis said he'd made progress to ""bridge some of the gaps."" It was the governor's third meeting in two days with lawmakers of both parties. ??Some of the toughest skeptics are members of his own party in the Senate. Many fear that the deal Davis struck with Edison will hand the utility too much at the expense of ratepayers, and some say bankruptcy might be a better option for the state's second-largest private utility. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. filed for bankruptcy April 6. ??To assuage concerns, Davis proposed that a special Senate committee be named to meet with his energy advisors as the administration and Edison finalize details of the deal before it goes to the Legislature for approval. ??Senate leader John Burton (D-San Francisco), who has called the Edison agreement ""problematic,"" said he may appoint such a committee but continued to suggest that an Edison bankruptcy might be acceptable. ??""Many of the Fortune 100 companies have gone into Chapter 11 bankruptcy and it ain't like the end of the world for anybody,"" Burton said. ??* ??Times staff writer Carl Ingram contributed to this story. ??Powering Up California ??Power plant projects recently licensed by the California Energy Commission and when they are expected to go online: ??* ??* Two of four turbines are expected to go online in December 2001; the other two are expected to go online in March 2002. ??Source: California Energy Commission GRAPHIC: PHOTO: (2 photos) Gov. Gray Davis urges California Energy Commission to approve Metcalf Energy Center, a 600-megawatt power plant planned for San Jose. Demonstrators greet Davis on his way to news conference in Sacramento. PHOTOGRAPHER: Associated Press PHOTO: (2 photos) Gov. Gray Davis urges California Energy Commission to approve Metcalf Energy Center, a 600-megawatt power plant planned for San Jose. Demonstrators greet Davis on his way to news conference in Sacramento. ?PHOTOGRAPHER: ROBERT DURELL / Los Angeles Times GRAPHIC: Powering Up California, Los Angeles Times LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS ??????????????Copyright 2001 Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service ???????????????????????Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service ??????????????????????????The Orange County Register 19, 2001, Thursday SECTION: STATE AND REGIONAL NEWS KR-ACC-NO: ?K7970 LENGTH: 275 words HEADLINE: Ex-energy chief leery of state buying power lines BYLINE: By Kate Berry BODY: ??ONTARIO, Calif. _ Former Energy Secretary Bill Richardson said Wednesday that he is ""uncomfortable"" with the state's $2.76 billion purchase of the transmission lines of Southern California Edison because it would derail future plans to fully deregulate the state's electricity market. ??""I'm leery of a state purchase,"" Richardson said at an economic conference in Ontario, adding that ""the jury is still out"" on a plan by Gov. Gray Davis to keep Edison out of bankruptcy. ??He called for a rescue of Pacific Gas and Electric, the San Francisco utility that filed for bankruptcy two weeks ago. ??In a half-hour speech, Richardson admonished the Bush administration for failing to take a more active role in the California crisis. He backs a one-year regional price cap to calm the volatile wholesale market. ??""In the Clinton administration, California was gold,"" he said. ""With the new administration, it's another ballgame."" ??Richardson also pushed for a bipartisan energy bill with Democratic themes including energy-efficiency standards, conservation and environmental regulations. ??""We need an energy policy for this country that embraces both parties' proposals,"" he said. ??Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham has sparred with Richardson by trying to rescind new energy-efficiency standards for air conditioners that were approved in the last 30 days of the Clinton administration. ??ARCHIVE PHOTOS available from NewsCom-PressLink: ??Richardson. ??KRT CALIFORNIA is a premium service of Knight Ridder/Tribune ??(c) 2001, The Orange County Register (Santa Ana, Calif.). ??Visit the Register on the World Wide Web at http://www.ocregister.com/ JOURNAL-CODE: OC LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS ?????????????????Copyright 2001 The Chronicle Publishing Co. ?????????????????????????The San Francisco Chronicle ???????????????????APRIL 19, 2001, THURSDAY, FINAL EDITION SECTION: NEWS; Pg. A18 LENGTH: 585 words HEADLINE: Alameda public utility rents four backup generators; Extra electricity will be used during summer rolling blackouts SOURCE: Chronicle Staff Writer BYLINE: Matthew Yi DATELINE: Alameda BODY: Alameda's public utility announced yesterday that it is leasing four portable diesel electrical generators to avoid the one woe of the state's energy crisis they haven't been able to duck so far -- rolling blackouts. ???The utility's move to provide a backup source of electricity for its customers is part of a trend among city-owned utilities to gear up for expected power shortages during the dog days of summer. ???Healdsburg, Santa Clara and Palo Alto -- all with their own electric grids -- are also initiating their own energy backup plans. ???The generators would kick in only during severe energy shortages when rolling blackouts are on the horizon. ???In Alameda, four generators -- each the size of a tractor trailer -- arrived last week and are ready to be fired up, Alameda Mayor Ralph Appezzato said yesterday. ???""We're going to be the masters of our destiny,"" he said. ???Alameda Power and Telecom is one of about 30 municipal utilities in California that opted not to deregulate with the rest of the state four years ago. Consequently, its customers' power rates are expected to be stable this year while Pacific Gas and Electric Co. customers face huge rate increases. ???But municipal utilities such as Alameda's are still part of the statewide power grid, which is managed by the Independent System Operator, and are subject to rolling blackouts like everybody else when the state's energy reserves dip below 1.5 percent. ???Each of Alameda's four diesel generators will produce 1.5 megawatts of power. Each megawatt can light up 1,000 homes, utility officials say. ???The units, leased at a total cost of $68,000 a month through the end of the year, are parked at Alameda Point. ???Their cost will be paid through the municipal utility's reserve fund and customers' power bills won't be affected, said Junona Jonas, the utility's general manager. ???""I think in the long run, we'll see more supply in the state, but until that happens, there will be communities that'll have to take these short-term drastic measures,"" Jonas said. ???The utility's spokesman, Matthew McCabe, said the diesel exhaust from the generators won't be an environmental factor. ???""Our environmental record is extremely important to us,"" McCabe said. ""The diesel generators are only for emergency backup. . . . Besides, these things are clean -- it's not like standing next to a diesel bus."" ???The city is also getting help from the U.S. Maritime Administration, which operates more than a dozen ships at the former Navy station in Alameda. When the juice is low, those ships will unplug from the port and use onboard generators, Jonas said. ???In the North Bay, Healdsburg officials are waiting for the arrival of two diesel generators. Combined, they are expected to produce 3.5 megawatts of power, which can account for about 20 percent of the city's expected summer peak load, said Bill Duarte, city utility director. ???""We're taking matters into our own hands,"" he said. ???Farther south, both Santa Clara and Palo Alto are considering leasing portable generators, officials said. ???Bill Reichmann, senior electric utility engineer at Santa Clara's Silicon Valley Power, said the utility is planning to lease eight generators, operating them in the southeastern end of town near the San Jose International Airport. ???Palo Alto's municipal utility also has recommended that the City Council approve renting two generators starting next month, said spokeswoman Rima Johnson.E-mail Matthew Yi at myi@sfchronicle.com. LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS ?????????????????Copyright 2001 The Chronicle Publishing Co. ?????????????????????????The San Francisco Chronicle ???????????????????APRIL 19, 2001, THURSDAY, FINAL EDITION SECTION: NEWS; Pg. A3 LENGTH: 845 words HEADLINE: Davis' gouging claims disputed; Officials say no link between PG&E bankruptcy, high prices SOURCE: Chronicle Staff Writer BYLINE: David Lazarus BODY: Officials on the front lines of California's energy mess yesterday challenged Gov. Gray Davis' assertion that the state is being gouged by power companies because of PG&E's bankruptcy filing. ???Such dissent from the governor's own subordinates could make it harder for Davis to gain support for his energy measures in the state Legislature. ???Despite Davis' latest claims, the Department of Water Resources, which is spending about $70 million a day buying power, said there is no evidence linking recent price increases to Pacific Gas and Electric Co. filing for bankruptcy protection on April 6. ???""It is a seller's market,"" said Viju Patel, executive manager of the Department of Water Resources' power systems department. ""The power companies do not need an excuse to raise prices."" ???Critics say Davis' penchant for secrecy on energy issues has come back to haunt him at a time when he needs all the allies he can find. ???""People aren't taking his words at face value,"" said Michael Shames, executive director of the Utility Consumers' Action Network in San Diego. ???Republican lawmakers -- and even some Democrats -- have challenged a number of the governor's initiatives, including a multibillion-dollar bailout scheme for Southern California Edison. ???Nevertheless, Davis reiterated his belief yesterday that recent electricity price increases are ""an aberration driven by the bankruptcy of PG&E."" ???He said California's spending on power jumped 40 percent in the week following PG&E's bankruptcy filing because generators say they face a greater risk of not being paid. ???""Nothing else in the equation has changed,"" said Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for the governor. ""Everything is the same except the bankruptcy."" ???However, power companies were quick to challenge this assertion. They insisted that PG&E's bankruptcy actually was seen as a positive development by those in the energy business. ???""If anything, PG&E provides some solace for traders because the bankruptcy provides an organized mechanism for recovery of payments,"" said Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, a Menlo Park energy-industry association. ???On the other hand, he acknowledged that power companies are becoming increasingly wary of the state of California's creditworthiness as an energy buyer. ???The Department of Water Resources already has spent nearly $5 billion buying electricity and has yet to recoup a dime from ratepayers. State regulators are still trying to come up with a way to apportion the limited revenues from power rates among the various parties in California's energy picture. ???Rating agency Fitch Inc. said yesterday it may cut the state's credit rating because of questions surrounding recovery of energy costs. ???""People are keeping an eye on things,"" Ackerman said. ""They're watching how California finances things."" ???If a premium on electricity sales to the state exists, he said it probably has been in place since the beginning of the year, well before PG&E's current woes. ???UCAN's Shames agreed. He said power companies added a ""risk premium"" to their California power sales late last year when it looked like the state's energy troubles were worsening. ???""PG&E's bankruptcy may have increased the uncertainty,"" Shames said, ""but we've been paying a risk premium for months now."" ???Richard Wheatley, a spokesman for Reliant Energy in Houston, insisted that his company's traders are not using questions about PG&E's or California's financial solvency as a fresh excuse for higher prices. ???""I haven't seen any evidence of it,"" he said. ???Mark Palmer, a spokesman for Houston's Enron Corp., laid blame for recent price increases on low rainfall throughout the West, which has cut output at hydroelectric facilities, as well as on California's chronic power shortage. ???""It's not that there's a premium on prices,"" he said. ""It's just supply and demand."" ???That said, Palmer acknowledged that California's firm insistance on blackouts being avoided at all costs leaves the state vulnerable to virtually any price generators choose to demand. ???""This means prices will be used to allocate a scarce resource,"" he said. ""There's no other way it could work."" ???Bottom line for consumers: It's going to be a long, hot summer, and electricity prices will soar even higher as demand surges. ???And despite the best efforts of state officials, a daily threat of blackouts remains a virtual certainty as California's beleaguered power grid is stretched to the breaking point. ???At the Department of Water Resources' command center in a Sacramento shopping mall, the state's team of electricity traders has moved onto a new, high-tech trading floor, where they negotiate power deals each day from the crack of dawn. ???The department's Patel said daily blackouts may be averted this summer after consumers see skyrocketing power prices reflected in their bills. ???""People will respond to these prices and they are going to conserve like never before,"" Patel predicted.E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com. GRAPHIC: PHOTO, Gov. Gray Davis urged the California Energy Commission to approve construction of the proposed 600-megawatt power plant. / Associated Press LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS ?????????????????Copyright 2001 The Chronicle Publishing Co. ?????????????????????????The San Francisco Chronicle ???????????????????APRIL 19, 2001, THURSDAY, FINAL EDITION SECTION: NEWS; Pg. A3 LENGTH: 888 words HEADLINE: Davis backs San Jose power plant; He also acknowledges bailout for Edison will be uphill fight SOURCE: Chronicle Sacramento Bureau BYLINE: Lynda Gledhill DATELINE: Sacramento BODY: Gov. Gray Davis urged the state Energy Commission yesterday to approve a controversial power plant in San Jose, saying California needs every megawatt it can harness. ???Davis' recommendation runs counter to the wishes of the San Jose City Council and Mayor Ron Gonzales, who have come out against the 600-megawatt Metcalf Energy Center in south San Jose's Coyote Valley. It also puts the governor at odds with one of his political allies, Cisco Systems chief John Chambers, whose company opposes the plant because it would be built near the tech firm's proposed new campus. ???Davis' announcement came the same day he all but admitted he lacks the support he needs in the state Senate for the deal he reached with Southern California Edison to restore the utility to financial health. Davis has portrayed that deal and construction of new power plants as essential to making California's energy market functional again. ???""I think when we have an opportunity to put more power on line we should seize it,"" Davis said. ""I believe we spend too much time talking about Metcalf. It's time to start building it."" ???The Energy Commission has been reviewing the proposal by Calpine Corp. and Bechtel Enterprises Inc. for months. The commission's staff recommended in October that the plant be built, and a final decision is expected by summer. If it is approved, the plant could come on line next year and provide enough electricity for 600,000 homes. ???None of the five commissioners could be reached yesterday. Three are Democrats appointed by Davis and two are Republicans appointed by former Gov. Pete Wilson. ???Gonzales and the rest of the City Council rejected the Metcalf plant in November. Until yesterday, Davis had sat on the sidelines as the energy crisis deepened and a long line of state and federal officials, including four of the five Assembly members from Silicon Valley, urged the commission to overturn the council's vote. ???Some neighborhood groups oppose the plant, along with computer networking giant Cisco, which hopes to build a 20,000-worker campus on a neighboring parcel. Cisco chief Chambers donated $50,000 to Davis in the first six months of last year. ???Cisco's reaction yesterday was restrained. ???""We have great respect for the governor and respect his decision,"" said Cisco spokesman Steve Langdon. ???However, Langdon added: ""We still have serious concerns about health and safety issues related to the proposed power plant."" ???Some neighbors were much angrier. ???""He's trying to act like he's the big, bad tough governor, and he's spineless,"" said Issa Ajlouny, who lives in the Santa Teresa neighborhood, less than a mile from the proposed plant. ""He knows the approval process isn't working in his favor, so he's trying to come out and act like a hero to the state of California. But he's nothing but backstabbing the city of San Jose on the environmental issues."" ???Supporters of the plant see the 14 acres of former junkyard as the perfect site -- right next to Pacific Gas and Electric Co.'s largest substation in the South Bay, close to major transmission lines and shielded from its neighbors by a 350-foot hill. ???But a housing development is also nearby, and residents fear the power plant will belch pollutants in an area already suffering from some of the worst air quality in the Bay Area. ???Mayor Gonzales continued to express his concern yesterday. ???""I would support clean power plants that will help us achieve greater energy self-sufficiency for San Jose residents and business,"" Gonzales said. ""As the Metcalf project has been designed and proposed to operate, however, it would present an unfair burden on our community."" ???That's not what Davis said, however, calling Metcalf ""one of the cleanest, most efficient plants in the country."" ???Davis praised the efforts of Calpine/Bechtel to work with the local community and said he was especially pleased that the venture had agreed to commit all the power to the local region. ???""The Silicon Valley is obviously the engine driving our economy, but they are very dependent on outside power,"" Davis said. ???Also in Sacramento yesterday, after an hourlong session with Senate Democrats -- the toughest legislative sell for Davis' proposed Edison deal -- the governor all but admitted his plan could not win enough votes for Senate approval. ???""I think he knew there weren't enough votes going in,"" said Sen. Don Perata, D-Oakland. ""But there may be a way of perfecting a deal people can at least think of supporting."" ???Senate Democrats have openly opposed Edison's deal, saying the only beneficiaries are Edison shareholders and power generators who would be paid every cent owed them by the utility -- at the expense of customers who would pay more to erase Edison's debt. ???Unlike his meeting with Assembly Democrats, after which Davis said he was encouraged, the governor said yesterday he wanted the Senate to appoint a special committee to iron out differences over the Edison deal. ???Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, D-San Francisco, said he was ""not aware a committee was being set up."" He said he favored an up-or-down vote on Davis' current proposal.Chronicle staff writers Greg Lucas, Alan Gathright and Maria Alicia Gaura contributed to this report. / E-mail Lynda Gledhill at lgledhill@sfchronicle.com. GRAPHIC: PHOTO, Gov. Gray Davis urged the California Energy Commission to approve construction of the proposed 600-megawatt power plant. / Associated Press LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS 2001 Pacific Press Ltd. Vancouver Sun ????????????????????April 19, 2001 Thursday FINAL EDITION SECTION: BUSINESS, Pg. F1 / Front LENGTH: 731 words HEADLINE: B.C. Hydro's credit to California firms exceeded 1999 guidelines BYLINE: David Baines SOURCE: Vancouver Sun BODY: ??A confidential document issued in late 1999 shows that B.C. Hydro's power-trading subsidiary, Powerex, set a credit limit of $100 million US for its California customers. ??However, by the end of 2000, Powerex had extended three times that amount of credit to those customers -- the California Independent System Operator and the California Power Exchange. With the California Power Exchange and Cal-ISO's major customer, Pacific Gas & Electric, under Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, repayment of this debt is now in doubt. ??Powerex spokesman Wayne Cousins noted that the document obtained by The Vancouver Sun, which is marked ""strictly confidential,"" was issued in November 1999. ??""That's an old copy of our risk-management policy,"" he said in an interview Wednesday. ??""Credit limits have changed since then based on careful assessment of several factors including market conditions, risks, maintaining long-standing relationships and helping California meet its electricity needs to prevent crisis situations. ??""Temporary revisions were only implemented after very diligent review incorporating the best market intelligence available, our own due diligence and on-going dialogue with appropriate market participants."" ??He refused to say when the credit limits for Cal-ISO and the California Power Exchange were increased. ??""That type of information is confidential. You have a copy that, I assume, was leaked in some way, but this is commercially confidential information."" ??He said the increase in credit limits helped B.C. Hydro achieve record net income of about $1 billion during the year ending March 31. This figures does not include any write-downs that may occur if Powerex determines that any of its customer accounts are not collectible. ??Cousins, however, was insistent that all debts will be collected: ""We continue to pursue monies owing and we expect to be paid for electricity we have sold."" ??He noted that Powerex suspended trades to all California entities on Dec. 8 unless those trades were fully secured by creditworthy customers. ??By that time, Cal-ISO and California had racked up an unpaid bill of about $ 300 million US, or $475 million Cdn -- about half the net income that Hydro has tentatively reported for the year ending March 31. ??The confidential document states that Powerex's policies and procedures are designed to control ""the risk of financial loss due to changes in market prices or volatility"" and ""the risk that a counterparty (customer) in a commodity transaction defaults on delivery and/or settlement."" ??It states that the amount of credit to be advanced to any customer depends on its credit rating. An ""AAA"" customer, for example, may be granted credit to a maximum of $20 million. ??Cal-ISO and California Power Exchange are not utilities, they are power pools. They purchase power from Powerex and other suppliers and re-sell it to utilities such as Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison. ??The pools are not rated, but are assigned specific credit limits. As of November 1999, Cal-ISO had a credit limit of $40 million US and the California Power Exchange $60 million US. ??The risk-management document notes that the credit-worthiness of these pools depends on that of its suppliers. ??""The Powerex credit-risk manager and the treasury manager are responsible for initially evaluating, and then monitoring, the credit-authorization policies and credit limits for each power pool in which Powerex trades,"" the document states. ""Significant alterations in the credit policies of a power pool will trigger a mandatory reappraisal of the power-pool credit limit."" ??California has been caught in a power vice in recent months. The problem dates back to 1996, when the state developed a plan to deregulate the electricity business. Competition was supposed to lower rates below a price cap that had been imposed. ??However, dry conditions cut the ability to generate hydro-electric power and a surge in the state's economy created unprecedented demand for electricity. Prices soared. ??The result was that the California utilities paid record prices for power, but weren't allowed to pass along the full cost to consumers. ??Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison, the state's two biggest utilities, now owe about $12 billion. ??dbaines@pacpress.southam.ca TYPE: Business LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ?????????????????????April 18, 2001, Wednesday, BC cycle SECTION: Business News LENGTH: 348 words HEADLINE: Williams again target of overcharging allegations from federal regulators DATELINE: TULSA, Okla. BODY: ??Federal regulators are once against targeting Williams for allegedly overcharging Californians for electricity. ??The Tulsa-based energy company was cited in a notice this week from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for allegedly overcharging California customers $25,574 in March. ??Two other companies were also cited in the notice from federal regulators Monday. ??Dynegy Power Marketing Inc. of Houston was cited for overcharging California customers $469,662, while Mirant California LLC, of Atlanta, was cited for overcharges of $92,620. ??The commission told Williams and the other two companies to either refund the money or justify their prices, which exceeded a price of $300 per megawatt hour that was set by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission because of the California's electricity shortage. ??Williams also was accused of excessive charges of $8 million in January and $ 21.6 million in February, for a total of $29.6 million. ??Williams spokeswoman Paula Hall-Collins said while the overpricing allegations against Williams in March were not as significant as in the other months, the process of justifying them will be the same as in previous months. ??""They determine the price that they feel is fair and justifiable, and then we come back and say why we charged what we did,"" she said. ??Hall-Collins said federal regulators haven't said whether they are satisfied with how Williams justified its alleged overcharges from previous months. ??Also in March, the commission accused Williams and AES Southland of generating less power to drive up electricity prices in May and June 2000, resulting in alleged overcharging of $10.8 million. ??Williams denies overcharging for electricity it provides. ??In other news, Williams Express Inc., a unit of Williams, announced Tuesday it was selling 198 MAPCO Express convenience stores to Israel-based Delek Group for $147 million. Most of the stores are in Tennessee and executives expect to close the deal by the end of May. ??Williams will keep 29 MAPCO stores in Alaska. LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ?????????????????????April 18, 2001, Wednesday, BC cycle SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 332 words HEADLINE: Governor, congressman to fight proposals for national power deregulation policy BYLINE: By MARGERY BECK, Associated Press Writer DATELINE: LINCOLN, Neb. BODY: ??Gov. Mike Johanns and Rep. Lee Terry, R-Neb., said Wednesday they will be working to make sure national leaders understand Nebraska's stance on a national energy policy. ??Nebraska's unique status as the only 100 percent public power state in the nation and its reliance on the corn-based fuel additive ethanol make the state's input in the development of national energy policy important, Johanns said. ??""Public power has worked very well for Nebraska consumers by providing low cost electricity,"" he said, adding that the deregulated state of California has suffered through weeks of rolling blackouts. ""We are committed to protecting public power in this environment of deregulation."" ??Terry said he has talked at length to the staff of Vice President Dick Cheney, who has been tapped to come up with a national energy policy draft. That draft will end up before the House Energy and Commerce Committee, on which Terry serves. ??""There will be a discussion about a national deregulation policy,"" Terry said. ??A national deregulation policy would threaten Nebraska's public power system, Terry and Johanns said. Terry said he plans to push for a states' rights exemption to any such policy. ??""It is absolutely necessary that Nebraska have a voice in that discussion,"" Terry said. ??Terry said he also has pleaded with the Bush administration not to grant a request from California to wave the Clean Air Act's gasoline oxygen requirement. ??Such a move is considered a death knell to ethanol, a clean-air fuel additive, because other states would be expected to follow suit in requesting - and receiving - similar waivers, thereby destroying ethanol's market. ??""They did not telegraph their position on the waiver,"" Terry said of White House, which is expected to decide on California's request this spring. ??Other energy concerns Nebraska leaders hope to address are rising heating costs and gasoline prices, which are expected to top $2 a gallon in Nebraska this summer. LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS ??????????????Copyright 2001 Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News 2001 San Jose Mercury News Jose Mercury News 18, 2001, Wednesday KR-ACC-NO: SJ-POWER-PLANT LENGTH: 1038 words HEADLINE: California Governor May Back Energy Firm's Proposed Power Plant BODY: ??Under intense pressure to increase California's energy supply, Gov. Gray Davis is expected to announce today his support for Calpine Corp.'s proposed South San Jose power plant -- a move that could ensure the state's most controversial power project is built. ??Davis said for months that he would not interfere in the environmental review of the proposed 600-megawatt power plant. But a source close to the governor said Davis has decided to use Calpine's Coyote Valley project to send a signal that California is ready to build more power plants and is ""open to business."" ??San Jose has strenuously opposed the power plant. But Davis' decision to urge the California Energy Commission to approve it would likely hold sway with the agency, which has authority over where plants are located but has almost never overridden local opposition. ??The commission -- three of whose five members were appointed by Davis -- is expected to complete its environmental review and make a decision early this summer. ??A spokesman for the governor declined to confirm the endorsement. But late Tuesday, the governor scheduled a press conference for this morning to make an ""important energy generation announcement."" ??San Jose Mayor Ron Gonzales declined to comment. But another of the plant's leading opponents pledged to keep fighting what would be the South Bay's largest power plant. ??An endorsement from Davis would cap a stunning turnaround for the project. ??Five months ago, Calpine's Metcalf Energy Center was unanimously rejected by the San Jose City Council, which decided that the power plant would be incompatible with the city's plans to develop high-tech campuses in North Coyote Valley. ??Some Calpine officials even considered giving up plans to build the power plant. ??But as California's energy woes intensified, the Metcalf plant increasingly became a poster child for the need for more power generation to reduce the skyrocketing cost of electricity and avoid rolling blackouts. Silicon Valley, one of the state's largest electricity consumers, produces only a fraction of the energy it uses. ??Despite fierce opposition from local residents concerned about the environmental effects of a large power plant, a steady stream of state and local organizations lined up behind the project, including the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group, the San Jose Silicon Valley Chamber of Commerce and the local chapters of the Sierra Club and American Lung Association. ??The California Assembly voted unanimously in February to urge the energy commission to override San Jose and license the power plant. ??And top officials and attorneys at the energy commission have been working for months to ensure that the project wins approval, a Mercury News investigation of the commission's environmental review of the project showed. The officials undermined negative environmental assessments of the Metcalf site and silenced commission analysts who said other sites would be better. ??The energy commissioners are weighing the staff's recommendation to approve the plant. ??Commissioner Robert A. Laurie, who oversaw hearings on the project, insisted at one hearing two months ago that the commission would complete an independent review. ??Although Davis has stressed his efforts to speed construction of new power plants, the governor insisted he would not take a position on the project. ??""The governor has repeatedly said he wants the process to play out,"" Davis press secretary Steve Maviglio said last week. ""The governor believes the energy commission should complete its review."" ??But there have been growing signs that Davis would throw his weight behind Calpine's project. ??A senior energy commission official said aides to the governor have been calling the commission for months to urge quick approval of the Metcalf plant. The governor's press secretary said no calls have been made. ??When Davis was looking for a backdrop to hold a press conference earlier this year to announce his plans to speed up approval of new power plants, he chose Calpine's new plant in Sutter. ??The company also has actively campaigned for the governor's support. ??Earlier this year, Calpine offered to sell the state cheaper power from the plant if it is approved. ??When Calpine and its development partner Bechtel Enterprises were looking for a lobbyist in Sacramento, the companies turned to Platinum Advisors, whose president, Darius Anderson, was finance chairman of Davis' 1998 gubernatorial campaign. ??The San Jose-based company gave the governor $ 19,000 last year, according to state campaign finance reports. ??Maviglio said the governor's ties to Calpine are no different from his relationship with Cisco Systems CEO John Chambers, who has opposed the power plant. Campaign finance reports show Chambers gave Davis $ 50,000 last year. ??Calpine officials said Tuesday they did not know of the governor's impending announcement. But they said they were not surprised. ""We've been working with the governor on a number of issues,"" said project manager Ken Abreu. ""Metcalf is just one of them."" ??Meanwhile, Calpine's opponents in San Jose City Hall and in the neighborhood nearest the proposed power plant appear more isolated than at any time since the contentious debate over the Metcalf site began more than two years ago. ??Mayor Gonzales refused to comment on Davis' planned announcement. ""I don't respond to rumors,"" said the mayor, who has helped lead opposition to Metcalf. ""I have not heard anything. If he makes a statement, I'll respond."" ??But one of Calpine's fiercest local opponents said the nearby Santa Teresa neighborhood will continue to fight. ""We have a strong case,"" said longtime South San Jose resident Issa Ajlouny. ""And we will win."" ??The Mercury News strives to avoid use of unnamed sources. When unnamed sources are used because information cannot otherwise be obtained, the newspaper generally requires more than one source to confirm the information. ??By Noam Levey and Mark Gladstone. Mike Zapler of the Mercury News contributed to this report. ??----- ??To see more of the San Jose Mercury News, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.sjmercury.com JOURNAL-CODE: SJ LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 of 63 DOCUMENTS 2001 Scripps Howard, Inc. Howard News Service 18, 2001, Wednesday SECTION: DOMESTIC NEWS LENGTH: 588 words HEADLINE: Davis says Edison agreement may need altering SOURCE: Scripps-McClatchy Western Service BYLINE: EMILY BAZAR and KEVIN YAMAMURA DATELINE: SACRAMENTO, Calif. BODY: ??Gov. Gray Davis indicated Wednesday that he may need to alter the agreement to purchase Southern California Edison's transmission lines if he wants legislators to approve the deal. ??Though the Democratic governor declined to discuss particulars, he said he asked Senate leaders to appoint a special committee dedicated to resolving disagreements between the administration and lawmakers. ??Many provisions of the memorandum of understanding, the document that lays out the terms of the Edison deal, must be approved by the Legislature and the state Public Utilities Commission. ??""There is a determination to try and solve this problem whether or not it means amending the MOU or trying a slightly different approach,"" Davis said after meeting with Senate Democrats. ??A spokesman for the utility declined to comment on the governor's statements. ??Davis announced the Edison agreement April 9, just three days after Pacific Gas & Electric Co. unexpectedly cut off transmission line negotiations with the governor and filed for bankruptcy protection. ??The deal would require the state to pay $2.76 billion for Edison's transmission lines, or 2.3 times book value. In addition, a portion of consumer electricity rates would be dedicated to paying off the remainder of the utility's debt, estimated at about $5 billion. ??Both Edison and PG&E stockpiled massive debt when wholesale electricity prices soared. Price caps prevented them from passing along the entire cost of electricity to consumers. ??Since the Edison deal was announced, however, legislators have been critical of certain provisions, suggesting that California consumers will receive little in return for relieving the utility of billions of dollars in debt. ??""It's clear that the deal, as is, could well be problematic,"" said Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, D-San Francisco. ""This has to do with what's in the bill, what's in it for the people of the state."" ??Lawmakers initially believed they would have little ability to change the agreement, and referred to it as a ""take it or leave it"" deal. ??In fact, the memorandum of understanding itself says the deal can be nullified ""in the event any law is passed, adopted or repealed ... (which) would materially impede or frustrate the ability of the Parties to effectuate all of the elements of the plan as a package."" ??But in his meeting with Senate Democrats, Davis indicated he may be willing to compromise. His goal, he said, is to keep Edison from following PG&E into bankruptcy. ??""We still have some work to do,"" Davis said. ""I think the appointment of a special Senate committee, assuming that happens, will let us work through the detail in an appropriate fashion."" ??Burton said he has not decided whether to appoint a committee. ??Other senators came out of the meeting guardedly optimistic that they could compromise with the governor. ??""It was obvious that there were concerns from members,"" said Sen. Don Perata, D-Alameda. ""He is open and ready to have the proposal perfected as it moves through the legislative process."" ??Sen. Jackie Speier, D-Hillsborough, said she hopes to amend the deal to ensure power generators are penalized for over-charging the utilities and the state for electricity. ??""The way it's presently crafted, (generators) are being rewarded,"" she said. ""They are getting a premium for selling electricity at a higher premium than ever conceived of by humankind."" ??(Contact Emily Bazar and Kevin Yamamura of the Sacramento Bee in California at http://www.sacbee.com.) LOAD-DATE: April 19, 2001 ??? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential (Clien/Attorney Priveledge); [EMail-Body]= I just forwarded this to Ellen. ---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Hain/HOU/ECT on 02/01/2000 08:13 AM --------------------------- From: Cooper Richey on 01/31/2000 06:09 PM To: Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Confidential (Clien/Attorney Priveledge) the information Ellen requested is attached. -c [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Two Requests re: May 22-23 Forum; [EMail-Body]= I already responded to this. Print for my meeting file. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/25/2001 07:54 AM --------------------------- ""Heidi VanGenderen"" <hvg@carbon.cudenver.edu> on 04/24/2001 04:16:43 PM Please respond to <hvg@carbon.cudenver.edu> To: <hvg@carbon.cudenver.edu> cc: Subject: Two Requests re: May 22-23 Forum Greetings: Thank you for joining us for the May 22-23, 2001 Forum on Securing the Energy Future of the Western United States here in Denver. If you require any audio visual aids for your presentations (overhead projector, LCD, etc.), please respond to this e-mail ASAP. Please remember that you will be asked to remain within the time limits outlined in the memo to speakers/discussants from Marshall Kaplan and David Olsen. We are compiling a series of articles on western state power problems and possible options to overcome problems for distribution to all Forum participants. We welcome your submission of any recent article or articles, or their citations and/or web page references, that you have found interesting and useful. These might address subjects such as power challenges; alternate policies with respect to supply and demand management; financing power related infrastructure; use of innovative technology with respect to energy management and efficiency; or the convergence of power, environmental and carbon emission reduction policies. If you have an article or articles to submit for inclusion in the Forum Notebook, please convey it electronically by responding to this e-mail, or fax or mail it as noted in the signature concluding this message by no later than May 4th. If you are intending to write out your remarks to the Forum, we would also welcome receiving those in advance of the Forum for inclusion in the materials provided to participants. Please feel free to contact us with any questions or comments. Thanks for your attention to these requests. We look forward to seeing you at the Forum on May 22nd. Sincerely, Heidi VanGenderen, Senior Associate Wirth Chair in Environmental and Community Development Policy Institute for Policy Research and Implementation University of Colorado-Denver 1445 Market Street, Suite 350 Denver, CO 80202-1727 Tel - 303-820-5676 Fax - 303-534-8774 Marshall Kaplan Tel - 303-820-5605 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Wyden Bankruptcy Amendment; [EMail-Body]= The amendment was defeated Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 03/14/2001 11:11 AM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Chip Schneider/Enron@EnronXGate, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, skean@enron.com cc: Subject: Wyden Bankruptcy Amendment ----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 03/14/2001 11:10 AM ----- Joe Ronan <JoeR@calpine.com> 03/14/2001 11:02 AM To: ""'Jean Munoz'"" <jmunoz@mcnallytemple.com>, Katie Kaplan <kaplan@iepa.com>, ""'Andy Brown (E-mail)'"" <ABB@eslawfirm.com>, ""'B Brown Andy (E-mail)'"" <andybrwn@earthlink.net>, ""'Baker Carolyn (E-mail)'"" <cabaker@duke-energy.com>, ""'Bob Escalante (E-mail)'"" <rescalante@riobravo-gm.com>, ""'Bob Weisenmiller (E-mail)'"" <rbw@mrwassoc.com>, ""'Curtis Kebler (E-mail)'"" ""'Douglas Kerner (E-mail)'"" <DKK@eslawfirm.com>, ""'Greg Blue (E-mail)'"" <gtbl@dynegy.com>, ""'Jan Smutny-Jones (E-mail)'"" <smutny@iepa.com>, ""'Jeff Dasovich (E-mail)'"" <Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com>, Joe Ronan <JoeR@calpine.com>, ""'John Larrea (E-mail)'"" <john.g.larrea@williams.com>, ""'John Stout (E-mail)'"" ""'Julee Malinowski-Ball (E-mail)'"" <jmball@ns.net>, Kassandra Gough <kgough@calpine.com>, ""'kent Palmerton (E-mail)'"" ""'Kristin Vellandi (E-mail)'"" <kvellandi@pstrategies.com>, ""'Lynn Lednicky (E-mail)'"" <lale@dynegy.com>, ""'Marty Wilson (E-mail)'"" <mwilson@pstrategies.com>, ""'McNally Ray (E-mail)'"" <rmcnally@mcnallytemple.com>, ""''Nam Nguyen' (E-mail)'"" <nam.nguyen@powersrc.com>, ""'Norton Kelli (E-mail)'"" <knorton@mcnallytemple.com>, ""'Paula Hall-Collins (E-mail)'"" Jack Pigott <jackp@calpine.com>, ""'Richard Hyde (E-mail)'"" <rwhyde@duke-energy.com>, ""'Rob Lamkin (E-mail)'"" <rllamkin@seiworldwide.com>, ""'Roger Pelote (E-mail)'"" <roger.pelote@williams.com>, ""'Stephanie-Newell (E-mail)'"" ""'Sue Mara (E-mail)'"" <smara@enron.com>, ""'Theo Pahos (E-mail)'"" <tpahos@ppallc.com>, ""'Tom Ross (E-mail)'"" <tross@mcnallytemple.com>, ""Carol H Hudson (E-mail)"" <Chudson@iepa.com>, steven kelly <steven@iepa.com>, ""'Anne Kelly (E-mail)'"" <kelly@hnks.com>, ""'Chuck Cole (E-mail)'"" <ccole@advocation-inc.com>, ""'Delany Hunter (E-mail)'"" ""'DJ Smith (E-mail)'"" ""'Hedy Govenar (E-mail)'"" <hgovenar@acom2.com>, ""'Maureen OHaren (E-mail)'"" <Oharen@hmot.com>, ""'Mike Monagan (E-mail)'"" <mrmonagan@aol.com>, ""'Phil Isenberg (E-mail)'"" <isenberg@hmot.com>, ""'Robert Ross (E-mail)'"" <robbiz@cwo.com>, ""'Ron Tom (E-mail)'"" <Rtom@govadv.com>, ""'Scott Govenar (E-mail)'"" <sgovenar@govadv.com>, ""'Susan Mccabe (E-mail)'"" <sfmccabe@mindspring.com>, rtemple@mcnallytemple.com, megan.beiser@edelman.com, tracy.fairchild@edelman.com, deborah.fiorito@dynegy.com, tcwillia@duke-energy.com cc: Subject: Wyden Bankruptcy Amendment--URGENT The Wyden Amendment to the Bankruptcy Bill is being debated on the Senate floor as we speak. If it passes,the QF's in California will be severly imnpaired ina bankruptcy proceeding. I hope that you have contacted your Congressional representatives. Feinstein is fighting this and Boxer has suppoted, then opposed it, and may be supporting it again. EPSA and EEI opposed the Amendment. Jan--has IEP weighed in yet? -----Original Message----- [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: AP Wire services, Tues 3/20: ""Calif. Officials Order Blackouts"" Dow Jones News, Tues 3/20: ""California Panel to Order Utilities to Make $1= =20 Billion in Back Payments"" SF Chron, 3/20: ""As Davis Seeks Money, Lawmakers Want Answers=20 Members of both parties angry at lack of dialogue"" Fresno Bee, Tues 3/20: ""Jones rips state on energy crisis "" Sac Bee, Wed., 3/21: ""Day 2 -- Battling blackouts: Payment plan sought to= =20 restart small plants"" Sac Bee, Wed., 3/21: ""Hospitals take hit, seek power guarantee"" Sac Bee, Wed., 3/21: ""Lodi still won't pull the plug"" San Diego Union, Tues., 3/20: ""Blackouts hit for second day; break seen=20 Wednesday"" San Diego Union, Tues., 3/20: ""State power regulators working on energy=20 rescue""=20 San Diego Union, Tues., 3/20: ""Federal regulators scored for not ordering= =20 more California refunds"" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: ""Second Day of Blackouts Disrupts 500,000 Home and= =20 Businesses"" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: ""Fragile Supply Network Apt to Fail"" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: ""Elevator Anxiety is Riding High"" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: ""State says it's accelerating plan to buy Power=20 Utilities' Grid"" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: ""L.A., Long Beach File Suits Over Gas Companies'=20 Prices "" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: ""Davis OKs Subsidy of Pollution Fees"" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: ""As Losses Mount, Companies work around outages"" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: Commentary: ""A Blackout on Answers"" LA Times, Wed., 3/21: Commentary: ""Rolling Blackouts: Blatant Extortion"" SF Chron, Wed., 3/21: ""Utilities' Demand Blocks Bailout=20 NEGOTIATIONS HIT SNAG: PG&E, Edison want end to price freeze if they sell= =20 transmission lines to state"" SF Chron, Wed., 3/21: ""Utilities' Demand Blocks Bailout=20 BLACKOUTS ROLL ON: Weather, increased consumption blamed"" SF Chron, Wed., 3/21: ""Manners Go Out the Window=20 Pedestrians in peril as drivers turn darkened S.F. streets into free-for-al= l"" SF Chron, Tues., 3/20: ""Historic Blackouts in State=20 Bay Area learns to cope"" SF Chron., Tues., 3/20: ""Second day of rolling blackouts in power-starved= =20 California"" Mercury News., Wed., 3/21: ""Bay Area Residents Learning to roll with=20 Blackouts"" Orange County, Wed., 3/21: ""Powerless, Again"" Orange County, Wed., 3/21: ""The iceman shunneth effects of hourlong blacko= ut"" Orange County, Wed., 3/21: ""Traffic officials are seeing red over blackout= s"" Orange County, Wed., 3/21: ""Alternative power producers cut back or shut= =20 down as payments from big utilities lag"" Orange County, Wed., 3/21: ""O.C. saves its energy -- for blaming others"" Orange County, Wed., 3/21: ""Blackout readiness on agenda"" Dow Jones Energy News, Wed., 3/21: ""Calif To Order Utils To Pay Small=20 Generators Up Front-Gov"" Dow Jones Energy News., Wed., 3/21: ""PG&E Says It Is Negotiating With=20 Qualifying Facilities"" Energy Insight, Wed., 3/21: ""New York at the Crossroads"" --- Calif. Officials Order Blackouts=20 By PAUL CHAVEZ, Associated Press Writer=20 LOS ANGELES (AP) - State power managers ordered rolling blackouts across=20 California for a second straight day Tuesday as demand for electricity agai= n=20 exceeded supply.=20 The same factors that collided to strap California's power supply on Monday= =20 hit again, officials with the Independent System Operator said. Those inclu= de=20 reduced electricity imports from the Pacific Northwest, numerous power plan= ts=20 offline for repairs and higher-than-expected demand because of warm=20 temperatures.=20 A two-unit Southern California plant that the ISO hoped would be working=20 Tuesday had not been fixed. One of its units might go online at noon to hel= p=20 the situation, the ISO's Jim Detmers said.=20 In addition, hydroelectric power imports from the Northwest were 800=20 megawatts lower than Monday, he said. The ISO oversees most of the state's= =20 power grid.=20 --- California Panel to Order Utilities to Make $1 Billion in Back Payments By Jason Leopold 03/20/2001 Dow Jones Business News (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) Dow Jones Newswires=20 LOS ANGELES -- The California Public Utilities Commission will order Edison= =20 International's Southern California Edison and PG&E Corp.'s Pacific Gas &= =20 Electric unit to pay small power generators that are qualified utilities=20 about $1 billion in past-due payments in order to keep the plant owners fro= m=20 dragging the utilities into an involuntary bankruptcy proceedings, and to= =20 also ensure the generation units keep pumping out electricity, people=20 familiar with the matter told Dow Jones Newswires late Monday. Gov. Gray Davis, state Sen. Debra Bowen, and Assemblymembers Fred Keeley an= d=20 Robert Hertzberg, all Democrats, spent most of the day y trying to hammer o= ut=20 an agreement with the so-called qualifying facilities, alternative power=20 producers that use the wind, sun, steam and biomass to generate electricity= =20 for the state, on supply contracts and past payments the utilities failed t= o=20 make.=20 The qualifying facilities, which represent about one-third of the state's= =20 total power supply and signed contracts to sell power directly to the=20 utilities under a government mandate, would then agree to sign power-supply= =20 contracts with the utilities for a period of five to 10 years for about $79= a=20 megawatt hour for the first five years and about $61 a megawatt hour=20 thereafter, two sources involved in the negotiations said.=20 The PUC is expected to issue a draft resolution on the issue sometime this= =20 week, one source said.=20 The lawmakers wouldn't comment on the details of their talks Monday.=20 Representatives with SoCal Ed (EIX) and PG&E (PCG) said they were unaware= =20 Gov. Davis and his administration were meeting on the issue.=20 The utilities are more than $13 billion in debt and have failed to make=20 payments on their qualifying-facilities contracts since November. PG&E has= =20 paid some of its qualified facilities just a fraction of what they are owed= .=20 Legislation To Restructure QF Rates Stalls In Senate Energy Committee=20 Mr. Keeley had recently drafted legislation, along with state Sen. Jim=20 Battin, a Republican from Palm Desert, that would have restructured the rat= es=20 the qualified facilities charge the utilities, from $170 a megawatt hour to= =20 $80 a megawatt hour for five years.=20 The bill, SB47X, stalled in the Senate Energy Committee, of which Ms. Bowen= =20 chairs. SoCal Ed opposed the legislation, saying the rates were still too= =20 high. A utility spokesman said the qualified-facilities rates should be=20 reduced to under $50 a megawatt hour.=20 But the lawmakers and the governor is trying to avoid the need for=20 legislation, largely because there isn't much support in both houses for su= ch=20 a bill and the chance that it won't be passed in time to keep the qualified= =20 facilities from dragging the utilities into involuntary bankruptcy=20 proceedings, the legislative source said.=20 The PUC will take over the issue from the Legislature, the source said.=20 Monday, about 3,000 megawatts of qualified-facilities generation went offli= ne=20 because the companies that operate the power plants can no longer afford to= =20 buy natural gas used to fuel the plants due to the utilities' failure to pa= y=20 money owed to the companies, said Jim Detmers, vice president of operations= =20 for the state's Independent System Operator.=20 The outages triggered a major shortfall in the state which resulted in near= ly=20 eight hours of statewide rolling blackouts Monday.=20 Many owners of the qualified-facilities said without immediate relief, they= =20 would likely force SoCal Ed, and possibly PG&E, into involuntary bankruptcy= ,=20 perhaps as soon as Thursday.=20 One such facility, CalEnergyOperating Co., wants to be freed temporarily fr= om=20 its contract with the utility and be allowed to sell its electricity to thi= rd=20 parties until the utility is able to pay its bills. CalEnergy is an affilia= te=20 of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co., which is majority owned by Warren=20 Buffet's Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRKA).=20 The company sued SoCal Ed last month, and the case is scheduled to be heard= =20 Thursday in Imperial County Superior Court. If a judge delivers an=20 unfavorable ruling, CalEnergy and other unsecured creditors would drag SoCa= l=20 Ed into involuntary bankruptcy, three executives with the companies involve= d=20 said.=20 CalEnergy is said to be organizing a bankruptcy petition now circulating=20 among six of Southern California Edison's independent power suppliers and= =20 could file the petition very quickly if it fails in its suit Thursday, said= =20 executives with three of the six companies.=20 Write to Jason Leopold at jason.leopold@dowjones.com=20 Copyright (c) 2001 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.=20 All Rights Reserved --- --- As Davis Seeks Money, Lawmakers Want Answers=20 Members of both parties angry at lack of dialogue=20 Lynda Gledhill, Greg Lucas, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau Tuesday, March 20, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 Sacramento -- The Legislature has warned it may block further state purchas= es=20 of electricity as lawmakers' frustration with Gov. Gray Davis' handling of= =20 the energy crisis increases.=20 A test may come soon because Davis asked yesterday for another $500 million= =20 to continue buying power.=20 Sen. Steve Peace, D-El Cajon, chairman of the Joint Legislative Budget=20 Committee, wrote to Davis' Finance Department on Friday that the committee= =20 might deny further spending requests ""in the absence any discernable=20 progress"" from the Public Utilities Commission to ensure that the state wou= ld=20 get its money back.=20 Members of the committee, both Republican and Democratic, said they support= ed=20 Peace's call for more oversight of the spending, given the lack of=20 information from Davis on details of the state's power purchases.=20 ""He's been holding things close to the chest, and that bothers me,"" said Se= n.=20 John Vasconcellos, D-Santa Clara. ""I want to know a lot more.""=20 Sen. Dick Ackerman, R-Fullerton, said the administration ""has been=20 stonewalling us about how much is being spent, and how much power we're=20 getting for it. When the state is spending that kind of money, at a minimum= ,=20 legislators should know for what.""=20 The state had spent $2.6 billion on electricity through March 11. Davis'=20 request for more money would put the state at the $3 billion mark by the=20 middle of April. The state is spending an average of $49 million a day.=20 The money is supposed to be paid back through the rates collected from=20 utilities' customers. It is up to the PUC to decide how to divide that mone= y=20 among the state, the utilities and the utilities' debtors. The commission i= s=20 scheduled to take up the issue at its March 27 meeting.=20 The problem is that there appear to be more demands on the money than there= =20 is money to go around.=20 The utilities have said they need the money to pay off some of their=20 creditors. Among those looking for cash are alternative-power generators th= at=20 were selling electricity to Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern=20 California Edison. Half of them have shut down because they have not been= =20 paid.=20 Earlier this month, the PUC granted the Department of Water Resources, whic= h=20 has been purchasing electricity for the state, the power to recoup its full= =20 costs through rates.=20 It's unclear whether that can be accomplished without raising electricity= =20 prices, though Davis has insisted he can solve the crisis without boosting= =20 rates.=20 Lawmakers said they approved the bill that allowed the state to buy power i= n=20 the belief such purchases would be a stopgap until the Davis administration= =20 could sign long-term contracts with power suppliers. However, only about 19= =20 contracts have been signed to date, out of 42 agreements. If all the=20 contracts are signed, they will account for about 70 percent of the power= =20 California is expected to need.=20 ""It was our expectation some of these contracts would kick in,"" said=20 Assemblywoman Carole Migden, D-San Francisco. ""This was designed to only be= =20 bridge money to avert a power disaster. We should hold firm and come up wit= h=20 a plan.=20 ""I recall about three weeks ago when we first asked about one of these $500= =20 million letters,"" Migden said. ""We said maybe this one is necessary, but=20 there won't be carte blanche approval of any future requests. I'm pleased= =20 Sen. Peace is taking that approach.""=20 To Assemblyman George Runner, R-Lancaster, Peace's letter was ""another way= =20 for the Legislature to send a message we need to be in this loop. We're jus= t=20 getting a small little dribble of information, which just creates more=20 questions.""=20 A spokesman for the Department of Finance said officials hoped to work with= =20 the committee members about their concerns.=20 --- --- Jones rips state on energy crisis=20 Secretary of state hints that he'll take on Davis in 2002.=20 By John Ellis=20 The Fresno Bee (Published March 20, 2001)=20 Officially, he's Bill Jones, secretary of state for California. Unofficiall= y,=20 he's Bill Jones, 2002 gubernatorial candidate.=20 The evidence is right there between the lines -- in the subtleties of his= =20 speeches, their subject matter, and the way Jones carries himself when he's= =20 in public.=20 Monday was no different, as Jones addressed a Rotary Club luncheon in Fresn= o=20 full of people who are assuming -- though nothing is official -- that the= =20 Fresno native will soon announce his intention to challenge Gov. Davis next= =20 year.=20 ""Bill, they call me governor,"" Chas Looney, a former Rotary Club district= =20 governor, quipped to Jones. ""I look forward to the day we all can call you= =20 governor.""=20 Jones then proceeded to deliver a speech to a packed house in the DoubleTre= e=20 Hotel that touched on his accomplishments as secretary of state, but quickl= y=20 moved to his main topic: California's crumbling infrastructure and how the= =20 energy crisis is affecting the state.=20 Always in the background but never mentioned by name was Davis. Jones was= =20 careful to hew to the Rotary rule that speeches steer clear of partisan=20 politics.=20 Still, Jones looked, sounded and acted like a candidate for governor, and= =20 near the end of his speech he promised his decision would come soon.=20 The Fresno Republican's speech began by highlighting his work in passing th= e=20 ""Three Strikes and You're Out"" initiative in 1994.=20 Jones also talked of his efforts to remove 2 million inactive California=20 voters from the rolls.=20 But it was clearly the energy crisis and its ramifications -- an issue=20 Republicans feel they can pin on Davis and the Democratic-controlled=20 Legislature -- that was the centerpiece of the speech.=20 Today, the energy crisis is being driven, he said, by a lack of power plant= =20 construction. And while billions go to solve the crisis, he said, the state= =20 faces $100 billion in unmet infrastructure needs -- everything from school= =20 repair to road repair.=20 ""Doesn't that scare you?"" Jones asked.=20 He then recounted the warning signs -- ignored by the state, he said -- of= =20 the looming energy crisis.=20 He cited the initial warnings that the deregulation bill was flawed, last= =20 summer's request by Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric to allow forward=20 contracting and the Republican request for a special session to deal with t= he=20 energy crisis. All ignored, Jones said.=20 Now, Edison and PG&E are near bankruptcy and the state finds itself steppin= g=20 up as a creditor. ""And the solution now becomes California getting into the= =20 energy business,"" he said. ""Or, even carrying it to a greater degree, not= =20 just in the short term to buy power to keep the lights on. I'm talking abou= t=20 basically socializing the energy business.""=20 Jones said he prefers low-interest loans to Edison and PG&E, taking the=20 electric grid as collateral.=20 ""I just do not believe in California getting into something it does not kno= w=20 how to do -- has never done before -- on top of all of our other=20 obligations,"" he said.=20 ""It really worries me that California will not be able to endure that type = of=20 obligation.""=20 Jones said polls now show increasing numbers of residents saying the state = is=20 headed in the wrong direction.=20 ""I feel obligated to speak out and say there is a better way,"" Jones said. --- --- Day 2 -- Battling blackouts: Payment plan sought to restart small plants By Dale Kasler and Carrie Peyton Bee Staff Writers (Published March 21, 2001)=20 Blackouts rolled across California for a second straight day Tuesday,=20 snarling traffic, darkening businesses and sending state officials scrambli= ng=20 to craft a payment plan to revive the wind farms and other critically neede= d=20 small energy producers that have shut down because of financial woes.=20 On a day when another 570,000 customers lost power, Gov. Gray Davis said th= e=20 Public Utilities Commission and the Legislature would move promptly to orde= r=20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison to start paying= =20 those small energy producers for their electricity. Davis said the two=20 utilities will face ""considerable fines"" if they don't pay up.=20 But several of the producers, known as ""qualifying facilities,"" said they= =20 doubted Davis' plan would go far enough to get them back in operation. And = it=20 wasn't clear whether the plan would keep the increasingly impatient=20 alternative producers from hauling one or both of the big utilities into=20 bankruptcy court, as some have threatened.=20 The shortage of power from the qualifying facilities -- plus a near-record= =20 heat wave (downtown Sacramento topped off at 83 degrees, one degree short o= f=20 the 84 degree record set in 1960), a lack of hydropower and other problems = --=20 prompted the state's Independent System Operator to order a second day of= =20 blackouts starting mid-morning. But the blackouts hit only about half as ma= ny=20 Californians as Monday's, with late afternoon conservation efforts helping= =20 balance supply with demand.=20 The blackouts, usually about an hour long, hit about 7,600 Sacramento=20 Municipal Utility District customers in Elk Grove and south Sacramento=20 County. PG&E customers in suburban counties were affected as well.=20 The order darkened shops in San Francisco's Chinatown and was blamed for a= =20 crash that left two motorists seriously injured in the Los Angeles suburb o= f=20 South El Monte. A Sun Microsystems Inc. factory in Newark had to close for= =20 several hours.=20 Most Californians took the blackouts in stride, though. Elk Grove High Scho= ol=20 students filed outside to play hacky sack. Coffee shop patrons in Davis=20 milled outdoors, enjoying the unseasonably warm weather.=20 Yet the blackout order was met with outright defiance by one municipal=20 utility. The city of Lodi refused to cut power to its residents Monday or= =20 Tuesday, saying it shouldn't have to suffer because of the financial crisis= =20 afflicting PG&E and Edison.=20 The outlook for today and the near future was brighter, as several big powe= r=20 plants came back on line after repairs. ISO officials also praised=20 Californians' conservation efforts, which had faltered in the morning but= =20 came on strong in the afternoon, helping to prevent further blackouts. By= =20 evening the grid was in a relatively mild Stage 2 power alert.=20 But the second day of blackouts -- plus an increasing threat of utility=20 bankruptcy -- pushed Davis to the brink. The governor cobbled together a=20 payment plan to rescue the qualifying facilities -- some 600 wind farms,=20 geothermal plants and other alternative-energy generators whose production= =20 has become increasingly vital in recent days.=20 Under Davis' plan, the Legislature and the PUC would order PG&E and Edison = to=20 pay the qualifying facilities for power delivered after April 1. The=20 utilities are required to buy power from the qualifying facilities under a= =20 1978 federal law designed to bring cheaper and cleaner forms of electricity= =20 to market.=20 Davis said the PUC would release a proposed order late Tuesday that would= =20 require the utilities to pay the qualifying facilities $79 a megawatt hour= =20 for five-year contracts or $69 for 10-year contracts. The Legislature also= =20 would have to pass a law authorizing the PUC to issue such an order.=20 But the situation was far from resolved late Tuesday, and PG&E and Edison= =20 were likely to oppose at least portions of Davis' plan.=20 Edison is willing only to make ""some kind of partial payments going forward= ,""=20 said Thomas Higgins, a senior vice president with parent company Edison=20 International. ""We have a limited amount of resources available to us in=20 rates, ... and that's the constraining factor.""=20 PG&E, which has been making partial payments to the qualifying facilities,= =20 said it could pay them in advance, in full, for future power deliveries.=20 But PG&E said such payments would eat up half the $400 million it has=20 available each month to buy power -- and unless it gets a rate hike, there= =20 wouldn't be enough to pay the qualifying facilities and cover other expense= s,=20 including the cost of reimbursing the state Department of Water Resources f= or=20 the power the agency is buying on behalf of the troubled utility.=20 PG&E's proposal could represent a challenge of sorts to state officials:=20 Accept less money for the water department, or raise rates.=20 State officials ""need to resolve who they want to see paid,"" PG&E spokesman= =20 John Nelson said. ""There is a limited pool of money.""=20 For his part, Davis insisted that the water department would be first in li= ne=20 to be paid, and he said the PUC will issue a proposed order to that effect.= =20 ""We are getting paid before anybody else,"" Davis said.=20 Hundreds of qualifying facilities are out of commission because PG&E and=20 Edison haven't paid them. The situation has robbed the state of several=20 thousand badly needed megawatts and is a key reason blackouts have been=20 ordered. In normal times the facilities produce more than 20 percent of=20 California's electricity.=20 Some of the qualifying facilities have been threatening to haul one or both= =20 of California's beleaguered utilities into bankruptcy court unless they get= =20 paid soon, saying a bankruptcy filing might be the only way they can save= =20 their businesses.=20 ""You've got to take care of the QF problem or the whole thing blacks out,""= =20 said Jerry Bloom, a lawyer representing one group of qualifying facilities.= =20 ""(State officials) are starting to understand.""=20 One thing that was fairly certain about Davis' still-sketchy payment plan: = It=20 wouldn't cover PG&E and Edison's existing debt to the qualifying facilities= ,=20 estimated at more than $1.48 billion.=20 In their current financial state, the utilities say they can't afford to pa= y=20 the existing debt. In addition, paying the debt would create a major=20 complication: Other creditors, including the big power generators, would=20 surely haul Edison and PG&E into bankruptcy court on the grounds that they= =20 weren't being treated fairly.=20 ""You can't give preferential payment treatment to one class of creditors ov= er=20 another,"" PG&E's Nelson said. ""You virtually assure that (the other=20 creditors) have to file an involuntary bankruptcy proceeding against you.""= =20 But without full payment, it wasn't clear how many of the qualifying=20 facilities would be able to restart.=20 Executives at several plants -- the ones that run on natural gas -- said=20 they're not sure their gas suppliers will deliver unless the existing debts= =20 are cleared up.=20 ""We need to convince a gas company to supply us,"" said Ed Tomeo of UAE Ener= gy=20 Operations Corp., which had to shut off its 40-megawatt Kern County plant= =20 Tuesday. ""We're a company that already owes millions of dollars for gas=20 supplies. How do you coax them to sell you millions more?""=20 ""It's wishful thinking ... that the gas suppliers are going to sell us gas,= ""=20 Robert Swanson of Ridgewood Power said.=20 I>Bee Capitol Bureau Chief Amy Chance and staff writers Stuart Leavenworth,= =20 Bill Lindelof, Pamela Martineau and the Associated Press contributed to thi= s=20 report. --- --- Lodi still won't pull the plug By Carrie Peyton Bee Staff Writer=20 (Published March 21, 2001) In a growing rebellion against blackouts, the city of Lodi has twice refuse= d=20 to cut power to its residents despite an order from Pacific Gas and Electri= c=20 Co.=20 The small city-run electric system is among many disgruntled utilities,=20 including the Sacramento Municipal Utility District, that believe their=20 contractual pledges to cut back during emergencies were never meant for tim= es=20 like this.=20 ""It's been a philosophical debate up to this point. Now I guess we've drawn= a=20 line in the sand,"" said Lodi utility director Alan Vallow.=20 PG&E said it is reviewing its interconnection contract, the agreement that= =20 links Lodi to the grid through PG&E-owned high-voltage lines, to determine= =20 what action it will take next.=20 ""It's unfortunate that while the city of Lodi has received the benefit of= =20 this agreement for years, they are unwilling to bear the burden of this=20 statewide energy shortage,"" said PG&E's Jon Tremayne.=20 One utility coalition, the Northern California Power Agency, believes that= =20 PG&E has already violated that agreement by not lining up enough power for= =20 customers.=20 The agency wrote PG&E on Friday saying that its members -- municipal=20 utilities and irrigation districts -- believe they aren't required to=20 participate in blackouts prompted by financial disputes.=20 And SMUD, which has been considering dropping out of future blackouts, will= =20 be watching the response to Lodi, said SMUD board President Larry Carr.=20 Some SMUD directors say they're ready to go to court to force the issue. So= =20 is Lodi, population 58,000, said Vallow.=20 ""I've heard an Edison executive describe this as a natural disaster akin to= =20 an earthquake. That's crap. This is a man-made event,"" he said.=20 Lodi said it will still help in genuine emergencies, such as fires or toppl= ed=20 transmission lines. But it decided that on Monday and Tuesday that wasn't t= he=20 case.=20 ""You have 3,000 megawatts of QFs (qualifying facilities) offline because=20 their bills haven't been paid. Well, guess what? Somebody ought to pay thos= e=20 ... bills,"" Vallow said. --- --- Blackouts hit for second day; break seen Wednesday=20 By Audrey Cooper ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 20, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) Rolling blackouts hit California for a second straight day= =20 Tuesday, closing souvenir shops in San Francisco's Chinatown, snarling=20 traffic and plunging schools and offices around the state into darkness.=20 Roughly a half-million homes and businesses from San Diego to the Oregon=20 border faced outages, blamed on the same factors that collided to force=20 blackouts Monday =01) unseasonably warm weather, reduced electricity import= s=20 from the Pacific Northwest, numerous power plants offline for repairs and= =20 less power provided by cash-strapped alternative-energy plants.=20 Five rounds of outages in San Diego affected about 74,000 customers. State= =20 power grid officials expected to have enough electricity to avoid further= =20 outages through at least Wednesday, although the supply remained tight.=20 State power regulators working on energy rescue=20 Federal regulators scored for not ordering more California refunds=20 ?=20 Gov. Gray Davis blamed the blackouts in part on the failure of Southern=20 California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. to pay millions of dolla= rs=20 they owe ""qualifying facilities,"" power suppliers that use cogeneration =01= )=20 steam from manufacturing plus natural gas =01) or solar, wind and other=20 renewable energy to generate electricity.=20 State power grid officials say California this week has lost about half the= =20 electricity QFs normally provide. Several cogeneration plants say they=20 haven't been paid by Edison and PG&E for weeks and can't afford to buy=20 natural gas to fuel their plants.=20 Davis said the utilities are taking in money from customers but still faili= ng=20 to pay the QFs. The state has been spending about $45 million a day since= =20 January to buy power for customers of Edison and PG&E, which are so=20 credit-poor that suppliers refuse to sell to them.=20 ""It's wrong and irresponsible of the utilities to pocket this money and not= =20 pay the generators,"" Davis said at a Capitol news conference Tuesday evenin= g.=20 ""They've acted irresponsibly and immorally and it has to stop.""=20 Southern California Edison officials said in a written statement that the= =20 utility is intent on paying creditors and working with the PUC to pay QFs f= or=20 future power sales. PG&E representatives were out of the office late Tuesda= y=20 night and didn't immediately return calls from The Associated Press seeking= =20 comment.=20 John Harrison of the Northwest Power Planning Council, a consortium that=20 monitors power use in several Western states, said blackouts on the first d= ay=20 of spring are an ominous sign of what lies ahead this summer.=20 ""We're in trouble,"" he said. ""We will likely be able to meet our needs this= =20 summer, but there won't be much to send to California.""=20 Tuesday's outages began at 9:30 a.m. PST and continued in 90-minute waves= =20 until about 2 p.m., when the Independent System Operator lifted its blackou= t=20 order.=20 Grid officials credited an influx of power from the Glen Canyon hydroelectr= ic=20 plant on the Utah-Arizona border.=20 The blackouts were blamed for at least one serious traffic accident.=20 Two cars collided at an intersection without traffic lights in the Los=20 Angeles suburb of South El Monte, leaving two people with serious injuries,= =20 California Highway Patrol Officer Nick Vite said.=20 Ventura Foods in Industry sent its employees out for an early lunch after= =20 blackouts shut down its phones and computers.=20 ""This is mild weather for this time of year. I don't know what's going to= =20 happen in the summer,"" manager Frank Hynes said. ""This is going to have a= =20 serious impact on the state's economy. They can't just keep shutting people= =20 down.""=20 Statewide, demand was higher than expected because of warm spring weather.= =20 Temperatures reached record highs across California on Monday, including th= e=20 80s and low 90s in Southern California. They were expected to be somewhat= =20 lower Tuesday but still in the 70s and 80s.=20 The ISO hoped demand would start to subside and conservation would kick in,= =20 but that did not happen Tuesday morning.=20 ""We have not seen the kind of conservation we saw back in January,"" when th= e=20 first blackouts hit, ISO spokesman Patrick Dorinson said. ""If we don't have= =20 conservation efforts, that just means that's more power we have to take off= =20 the grid.""=20 In San Francisco's Chinatown, souvenir shops normally bustling with visitor= s=20 were forced to shut down. Nearby, irritated customers waited for a bank to= =20 reopen.=20 ""It's no good for anybody =01) stores or businesses or people,"" said Yin Su= n=20 Chan, among those in line.=20 PG&E, the state's largest utility, accounted for most of the customers=20 affected.=20 At least 438,000 PG&E residential and business customers were affected as o= f=20 early afternoon, spokesman Ron Low said.=20 Edison cut power to about 50,000 customers. Edison was ordered to cut less= =20 power than PG&E and saved some due to conservation programs, including one= =20 that lets the utility shut off air conditioning for 118,500 residential and= =20 business customers when the power supply is tight.=20 About 73,400 San Diego Gas & Electric customers were hit by the blackouts.= =20 Los Angeles, whose municipal utility is not on the grid that serves most of= =20 California, wasn't included in the blackout order.=20 More than 1 million homes and businesses statewide experienced outages=20 Monday.=20 California's power crisis is expected to get even worse this summer, when= =20 temperatures soar and residents crank their air conditioning.=20 Natural gas supplies are tight, water supplies are down and the state is=20 spending tens of millions of dollars each day to buy electricity for Edison= =20 and PG&E, who say they are nearly bankrupt due to high wholesale power cost= s.=20 Edison and PG&E say they have lost more than $13 billion since last June to= =20 climbing wholesale electricity prices the state's 1996 deregulation law=20 prevents them from recouping from ratepayers.=20 Adding to the problems, the state this week lost about 3,100 megawatts from= =20 QFs. One megawatt is enough power to serve about 750 households.=20 The plants say they are owed about $1 billion for past sales to PG&E and=20 Edison.=20 PG&E said it is offering to prepay the QFs starting next month to get them= =20 back in operation. Negotiations were expected to continue Wednesday.=20 California Co-Generation Council attorney Jerry Bloom said he supports=20 proposals that will get the Qfs paid, but the promise of future payments ma= y=20 not be enough.=20 PG&E and Bloom said the utility's prepayments hinge on an upcoming Public= =20 Utilities Commission decision on whether the utility's rates are sufficient= =20 to pay its bills and cover the state's power purchases on its behalf, which= =20 amount to $4.2 billion since early January.=20 Davis said the PUC planned to issue a draft order late Tuesday directing th= e=20 utilities to pay their future QF bills.=20 It plans to take action on that order next Tuesday, Davis said. The=20 Legislature plans to approve a bill in the meantime giving the PUC the=20 authority to issue such an order and fine the utilities if they fail to=20 comply, he said.=20 Davis said he is confident the utilities and the state can pay their bills= =20 without further rate increases for Edison and PG&E customers.=20 --- --- State power regulators working on energy rescue=20 By Karen Gaudette ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 20, 2001=20 SAN FRANCISCO =01) State power regulators continue to delay the release of= =20 guidelines that will determine a portion of the money the Department of Wat= er=20 Resources can recoup from financially troubled utilities for electricity it= =20 has bought on their customers' behalf.=20 These guidelines will help the water department determine whether it must= =20 raise consumer power rates to reimburse the state for the more than $3=20 billion it has committed to buying electricity.=20 Assemblyman Fred Keeley, D-Boulder Creek, said Tuesday that the Public=20 Utilities Commission would likely have to raise rates by 15 percent to cove= r=20 the state's costs and the utilities' bills.=20 The PUC guidelines were most recently delayed by a letter from DWR Director= =20 Thomas Hannigan asking that the water department receive a percentage of=20 ratepayer money collected by the utilities equal to the percentage of=20 electricity it provides to utilities.=20 The DWR currently buys around 40 percent of the power used by Pacific Gas a= nd=20 Electric Co., Southern California Edison Co. and San Diego Gas and Electric= .=20 Under the DWR's proposal the utilities would have to hand over 40 percent o= f=20 the money they continue to collect from ratepayers.=20 The DWR would then also receive whatever money remains after the utilities= =20 subtract their own generation and long-term contract costs, the letter said= .=20 That amount would become the ""California Procurement Adjustment"" =01) an am= ount=20 that will help the state retrieve money spent on power purchases and help= =20 establish the size of state revenue bonds that are currently estimated to= =20 total $10 billion.=20 The state plans to issue the bonds in May to help pay off the more than $3= =20 billion Gov. Gray Davis' administration has committed to power purchases=20 since January to help the utilities climb out of debt.=20 Ron Low, a spokesman with PG&E, said the utility objects to paying the DWR= =20 such a large sum, claiming it would interfere with efforts to pay its=20 ""qualifying facilities"" =01) power plants that use the sun, wind, biomass o= r=20 natural gas to generate about one third of the state's electricity.=20 The nearly bankrupt utilities owe the QFs more than $1 billion for=20 electricity they have produced since November, said Jan Smutney-Jones,=20 executive director of the Independent Energy Producers.=20 Hannigan also said in the letter the DWR intends to use its authority to=20 raise consumer electricity rates to recoup any money not reimbursed through= =20 the CPA and other means.=20 The Public Utilities Commission expected to release the guidelines last wee= k,=20 but was delayed by debates over legislation that would slash the rates of= =20 environmentally friendly power plants under contract to provide electricity= =20 to the investor-owned utilities.=20 Without knowing how much ratepayer money the utilities need to pay these=20 ""qualifying facilities"" for future electricity, it's unknown how much money= =20 they'll have on hand to pay the DWR.=20 In a written statement, PUC Administrative Law Judge Joseph DeUlloa said th= at=20 he would issue a temporary decision on the CPA ""as soon as is practical.""= =20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison Co. say they ha= ve=20 lost more than $13 billion since last June to climbing wholesale electricit= y=20 prices that the state's 1996 deregulation law prevents them from recouping= =20 from ratepayers.=20 --- --- Federal regulators scored for not ordering more California refunds=20 By H. Josef Hebert ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 20, 2001=20 WASHINGTON =01) House Democrats asked federal energy regulators Tuesday why= they=20 are not going more aggressively after alleged overcharges for wholesale=20 electricity in California and ordering more refunds.=20 The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has asked suppliers to justify $12= 4=20 million in sales during the first two months of the year or refund the mone= y,=20 but critics charge that thousands of additional questionable sales are not= =20 being challenged.=20 The three commissioners testifying at a hearing of the House Commerce=20 subcommittee on energy, were asked why they limited their refund demands to= =20 only power sales that occurred during so-called Stage 3 alerts of acute pow= er=20 shortages in California.=20 ""It appears to me a price is unreasonable when it is unreasonable,"" and not= =20 just during a power alert, said Rep. Rick Boucher of Virginia, the panels'= =20 ranking Democrat.=20 The commission last week ordered six power generators to justify some 1,000= =20 transactions during February in the California market whenever the price wa= s=20 above $430 per megawatt hour and occurred during a Stage 3 emergency alert.= =20 But the lawmakers were told Tuesday that 56 percent of another 14,168=20 transactions, occurring outside a Stage 3 emergency, also exceeded the $430= =20 trigger, but are not being questioned.=20 ""The line was drawn to limit the scope of the refund,"" said agency=20 commissioner William Massey, a Democrat, who strongly opposed the refund=20 actions because he said they were too limited.=20 Chairman Curtis Hebert, a Republican, defended the way the commission decid= e=20 on what transactions to challenge saying that it sought to replicate market= =20 conditions as they existed at the time of the sales.=20 ""We deserve a better explanation,"" retorted Boucher.=20 Massey said that agency's investigation of overcharges for January also=20 failed to consider thousands of transactions that exceeded the refund trigg= er=20 because they did not occur during Stage 3 supply emergencies.=20 Managers of California's electricity grid, state regulators and utilities= =20 have accused the agency of refusing to aggressively investigate price gougi= ng=20 by wholesalers who have charged from $150 to $565 per megawatt hour, as muc= h=20 as 20 times what prices were in 1999.=20 While Hebert and commissioner Linda Breathitt defended the commissioners=20 attempt to investigate whole electricity prices, Massey has been highly=20 critical.=20 What message does the agency's scrutiny of prices send to the power=20 companies? he was asked.=20 ""It makes clear FERC is going to be looking for the wallet under the lamp= =20 post with the lights shining =01) and nowhere else,"" replied Massey.=20 Meanwhile, Massey and his two fellow commissioners, also disagreed sharply = on=20 whether the energy agency should impose temporary price controls on the=20 wholesale power market in the West to dampen further expected price increas= es=20 this summer.=20 Massey said he fears ""a disasters in the making"" if some price restraints a= re=20 not imposed by FERC, which regulates wholesale electricity sales. ""We need = a=20 temporary time out,"" he said.=20 But Massey is in the minority on the commission. Both Hebert and Breathitt= =20 are against price caps, arguing they will have long-term detrimental impact= =20 on power supply.=20 The Bush administration has made its opposition to interfering in the=20 wholesale markets well known for weeks. Vice President Dick Cheney's task= =20 force is to unveil an energy plan in about a month that is expected to lean= =20 heavily on energy production.=20 --- --- Second Day of Blackouts Disrupts 500,000 Homes and Businesses=20 Power: Grid operators say the shortage should ease in the next few days, bu= t=20 officials see a grim summer.=20 By MITCHELL LANDSBERG and ERIC BAILEY, Times Staff Writers=20 A traffic signal that stopped working during Tuesday's rolling blackouts le= d=20 to this collision be tween a car and a truck at an intersection in El Monte= .=20 The outages ran from 9:30 a.m. to 2 p.m. AP ?????Electricity blackouts rolled through California for a second straight= =20 day Tuesday, disrupting business in one of the world's most technologically= =20 advanced economies and leaving schoolchildren groping in the dark. ?????Jinxed by a combination of bad luck and bad decisions, utilities were= =20 forced to cut off power to more than half a million homes and businesses fr= om=20 San Diego to the Oregon border. ?????By day's end, there was some good news from the operators of the=20 statewide power grid, who said the situation had eased and appeared likely = to=20 improve for the next few days. And Gov. Gray Davis announced a proposed=20 solution to one vexing problem: the utilities' failure to pay the state's= =20 small, alternative power generators, many of whom have stopped producing=20 power as a result. ?????Davis called the utilities ""shameful"" for failing to pay, and praised= =20 the alternative power generators, which include solar, wind and geothermal= =20 energy producers, as ""good corporate citizens"" who produced power although= =20 they weren't being paid. ?????""We are anxious to pay the [small producers], who are dropping like=20 flies,"" Davis said. ?????Despite the progress, it was hard for some people to look on the brigh= t=20 side after enduring outages that took place when the state's hunger for pow= er=20 was almost 50% less than at its summer peak. ?????""This is a taste, almost like an appetizer, of a really unpalatable me= al=20 that's going to be served up this summer,"" said Michael Shames of the Utili= ty=20 Consumers' Action Network in San Diego, himself a victim of a rolling=20 blackout that hit his office in San Diego early Tuesday. ?????Power officials have warned that this could be a grim summer in=20 California, since demand for electricity sharply rises when people turn on= =20 air conditioners. The state has been struggling to meet its power needs in= =20 recent months because of rising prices and a flawed deregulation plan that= =20 has left the two biggest private utilities on the brink of bankruptcy. Stat= e=20 leaders have so far failed to agree on a comprehensive plan to solve the=20 problems. Wally Quirk teaches a business class in a borrowed classroom Tuesday at=20 Sonoma State after the state's rolling blackouts cut the power to his usual= =20 classroom, which does not have any windows. SCOTT MANCHESTER / The Press Democrat ?????The latest round of blackouts began about 9:30 a.m. Tuesday when the= =20 California Independent System Operator, which runs the statewide grid,=20 determined that the demand for electricity was 500 megawatts more than the= =20 supply--an imbalance that meant the state was short on the power needed to= =20 supply electricity to about 375,000 homes. ?????Grid operators blamed a confluence of events, including warmer weather= ;=20 outages at several major power plants, including one unit of the San Onofre= =20 nuclear power station; a reduction in imports from the Pacific Northwest, a= nd=20 the shutdown of many alternative energy producers. Similar blackouts Monday= =20 were the first since January. ?????The situation improved somewhat by late Tuesday morning, with some=20 supplies restored and Californians conserving energy, and Cal-ISO was able = to=20 halt the rolling blackouts at 2 p.m. ?????Once again, customers of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power= =20 were spared, although the municipally owned utility said its electrical=20 surplus was smaller than usual. The DWP, like Southern California Edison, w= as=20 affected by an outage at the huge Mohave power plant in Nevada, as well as = by=20 planned outages at several of its facilities. ?????As in the past, by far the biggest impact was felt by customers served= =20 by Pacific Gas & Electric, the state's largest utility, which cut power to= =20 438,000 homes and businesses. ?????Edison cut power to 47,462 customers in about 40 cities, but eventuall= y=20 was able to avoid blackouts by shutting off the air conditioners of some of= =20 the 118,500 customers who participate in a voluntary cutoff program. ?????San Diego Gas & Electric cut power to 73,400 customers. ?????Innovative Ways of Coping ?????As on Monday, most people took the outages in stride, as an annoying b= ut=20 ultimately unavoidable inconvenience. ?????In Palmdale, four schools lost power during one of the hourlong=20 blackouts, but teachers and students pressed on in the sunlight pouring=20 through windows and skylights. At Barrel Springs Elementary, Principal Cruz= =20 Earls said the biggest problem came when students had to go to the bathroom= :=20 Hand in hand, they made their way through darkened hallways with flashlight= s. ?????All in all, it wasn't a terrible experience. Then again, the weather= =20 wasn't that hot Tuesday, with a high of 79 in Palmdale, so the shutdown of= =20 air conditioners wasn't much of a hardship. ""I don't want to think about th= e=20 conditions this could create in May or June,"" Earls said. ?????Businesses of all kinds complained about the lack of warning for the= =20 outages--and sometimes found innovative ways to get around the problem. ?????Rattled by news reports of Monday's rolling blackouts, El Burrito=20 Mexican Food Products in the city of Industry started its Tuesday shift at = 2=20 a.m. to beat the clock in the event of an outage. That hunch paid off.=20 Workers had just finished cooking and packaging the last batches of salsa a= nd=20 masa when the lights went out at 10:20 a.m. ?????Company owner Mark Roth said the firm will continue working odd hours = to=20 avoid further outages. But he isn't buying the line from the utilities that= =20 they can't provide advance warning because of concerns about looting and=20 rioting. ?????""We're ready to do whatever it takes to get through this thing,"" he=20 said. ""But they've got to give us some notification."" ?????At Big O Tires in Elk Grove, just south of Sacramento, owner Daniel Cr= um=20 had his 14 workers take an early lunch break or head to the warehouse to=20 reorganize the goods. Without electricity, they couldn't repair brakes or= =20 align front ends. ?????""I'd never let them be idle,"" said Crum. ?????At least two minor traffic accidents were blamed on the outages. ?????The blackouts resulted from a convergence of factors. ?????Demand was slightly higher than expected, probably because of=20 unseasonably warm weather. Supplies were tighter than usual, in part becaus= e=20 of several outages, including that at the Mohave plant, half of which was= =20 brought back on line by the end of the day. ?????The San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station was still limping along=20 without power from one of its two 1,100-megawatt units, which was shut down= =20 Feb. 3 after a half-hour fire in a nonnuclear part of the plant. Edison,=20 which operates San Onofre, initially estimated the unit would be out for=20 several weeks but recently said ""extensive damage"" to parts of the turbine= =20 will keep the unit out of commission until mid-June. ?????Shipments from the drought-stricken Pacific Northwest, which generates= =20 most of its electricity from large dams, were also down. ?????""Each time we take a measurement, we're closer to the all-time record= =20 for the driest year,"" said Dulcy Mahar, spokeswoman for the Bonneville Powe= r=20 Administration, the network of federal dams that provides the region with= =20 much of its electricity. ""We've been doing what we can, but we simply don't= =20 have power to sell."" ?????Finally, there was the problem of the small and alternative energy=20 producers, which have shut down plants because they haven't been paid by th= e=20 private utilities since November. Those outages have cost the state about= =20 3,000 megawatts of electricity, enough for about 2.3 million homes. ?????""You're seeing the system freeze up,"" said David Sokol, chairman and C= EO=20 of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co., which runs eight geothermal plants in t= he=20 Imperial Valley through its subsidiary, CalEnergy. His company hasn't shut= =20 down yet, but Sokol said smaller companies couldn't continue to sell their= =20 energy to utilities for free. ?????""Why should we fund Edison?"" he asked. ""That's just ridiculous."" ?????A Choice of 2 Rate Plans ?????Davis joined lawmakers in the Capitol on Tuesday to outline his plan t= o=20 get the producers running again. He said utilities have had no right to=20 collect money from ratepayers and then not use the funds to repay the small= =20 producers. The state has spent billions to buy power from large conventiona= l=20 producers on behalf of the utilities but has refused to pick up the tab for= =20 alternative energy. ?????""The utilities acted in a shameful manner by putting money in their=20 pockets that was designed to pay the [small producers],"" Davis said. ?????The plan outlined by Davis would allow the generators to choose betwee= n=20 two rate plans. They could decide to be paid 7.9 cents per kilowatt-hour ov= er=20 five years or 6.9 cents a kilowatt-hour over 10 years. ?????The utilities must begin paying the generators the new rates beginning= =20 April 1 or face fines, Davis said. ?????The question of how the companies will get paid the about $1.5 billion= =20 they are owed remains unresolved. That issue will be decided in coming week= s=20 as Davis' negotiators continue to work on rescue plans for the state's=20 financially hobbled private utilities. ?????PG&E spokesman Ron Low said the state's largest utility did not take= =20 kindly to Davis' criticism, and noted that the governor's plan is similar t= o=20 a proposal that PG&E made last week to producers. ?????Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of a trade group that includes so= me=20 of the small generators, described the plan as a positive step. ?????""The governor got it right in that it's not acceptable for small power= =20 producers to continue to generate and not be paid,"" Smutny-Jones said. ""But= =20 we'll need to see what the order says; the devil will truly be in the=20 details."" ?????Grid operators said the state's overall energy situation eased by midd= ay=20 Tuesday because of repairs at the Mohave plant and another large plant at= =20 Ormond Beach, and because the Western Area Power Administration came up wit= h=20 300 megawatts of electricity from Glen Canyon Dam. ?????Also, grid spokesman Patrick Dorinson said conservation savings spiked= =20 upward after earlier complaints that Californians weren't conserving. ?????""We saw the people of California probably conserve 900 megawatts today= ,""=20 he said. ""That was probably the difference."" ---=20 ?????Times staff writers Andrew Blankstein, Jose Cardenas, Marla Dickerson,= =20 Noaki Schwartz, Nicholas Riccardi, Doug Smith, Rebecca Trounson and Richard= =20 Winton in Los Angeles, Miguel Bustillo and Julie Tamaki in Sacramento, Mari= a=20 La Ganga in San Francisco, Stanley Allison, Matt Ebnet, Scott Martelle,=20 Dennis McLellan, Monte Morin, Jason Song, Mai Tran and Nancy Wride in Orang= e=20 County, and Richard Simon in Washington contributed to this story. --- --- Fragile Supply Network Apt to Fail=20 By JENIFER WARREN and ERIC BAILEY, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????A lot of people were caught off guard by the blackouts that swept over= =20 California this week. Debra Bowen wasn't one of them. ?????As chairwoman of the state Senate Energy Committee, she is=20 intimately--and painfully--familiar with the state's energy supply. And she= =20 is willing to share a secret: It's a fragile system, capable of collapse at= =20 any time. ?????That knowledge keeps Bowen awake at night, particularly with the=20 approach of summer, when power demand surges as Californians get reacquaint= ed=20 with their air conditioners. ?????""I sound a bit less like Chicken Little today, don't I?"" Bowen said=20 Tuesday, as chunks of the state once again were forcibly darkened. ""I know = a=20 lot of people don't feel we have a problem. But we have a very, very big=20 problem."" ?????With the recent slowdown in Stage 3 emergencies, a sense of calm had= =20 settled over the energy debate, and even some legislators were speaking wit= h=20 guarded optimism about the hot months ahead. ?????On Tuesday, however, a creeping sense of doom was almost palpable amon= g=20 energy watchers, and previous supply forecasts--which predict that the stat= e=20 may yet escape summer blackouts--were being given a second look. ?????""The outages of the last two days are something that Californians are= =20 going to have to get used to for July and August,"" said Michael Zenker,=20 California director of Cambridge Energy Research Associates. The=20 Massachusetts consulting firm is predicting about 20 hours of blackouts thi= s=20 summer. ?????At the California Independent System Operator, which manages 75% of th= e=20 statewide power grid, officials said the energy cushion the state had in=20 recent weeks was, in some ways, a phantom caused by heavy imports of power. ?????Cal-ISO spokesman Patrick Dorinson said people may have been deluded= =20 into a false state of comfort: ""Maybe there is a tendency to think things= =20 have improved,"" he said. In fact, they haven't. ?????More than anything, this week's events illustrate the delicate balance= =20 of factors that keep California illuminated, from the multitude of supply= =20 sources to the weather. ?????Temperatures were higher than usual. Alternative-energy suppliers--who= =20 haven't been paid in months by the cash-strapped utilities--cut their outpu= t.=20 Suppliers in the Northwest--which faces a drought--slashed exports. Equipme= nt=20 breakdowns and maintenance at power plants--much of it unanticipated--took= =20 13,000 megawatts offline. A utility-run program that gives businesses=20 discounts in exchange for cutting power during emergencies is all but dead. ?????""The fragility of the system is such that a small perturbation can tur= n=20 everything upside down very easily,"" said Gary Ackerman, executive director= =20 of the Western Power Trading Forum, a group of electricity generators and= =20 traders. ?????One factor receiving particular attention is the dip in supply caused = by=20 unscheduled maintenance. To help officials predict available supply,=20 generators provide an annual maintenance plan that is updated regularly. ?????In addition, however, facilities sometimes shut down for unexpected=20 reasons: leaking tubes, burnt-out transformers, cracked turbines and faulty= =20 feed pumps. At one point Tuesday, about 8,200 megawatts were unavailable=20 because of unscheduled shutdowns. That's enough to supply about 6 million= =20 households, and up from 5,700 megawatts a week ago. ?????The huge 1,400-megawatt Mohave power plant near Laughlin, Nev., which= =20 supplies Southern California Edison and the Los Angeles Department of Water= =20 and Power, was felled Monday by a transformer problem. That was enough to= =20 push the state into blackouts. ?????A growing number of skeptics, however, question whether those reasons= =20 are always valid, accusing generators of withholding power to shrink supply= =20 and drive up prices. ?????""There's no way to verify it, so you've got to take their word for it,= ""=20 said Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economist who studies California's= =20 electricity market. ""And given that it's very profitable for these things t= o=20 occur, you start to wonder if they're creating an artificial scarcity."" ?????Tom Williams of Duke Energy said the Houston-based company is working= =20 hard to keep its California power plants, which are capable of producing=20 3,351 megawatts of electricity, in operation after months of near-continuou= s=20 operation. ?????""It's like riding a moped across the country,"" he said. ""They're just= =20 not meant to run this hard."" ?????Last week, the state Senate formed a committee to investigate charges = of=20 market manipulation by power suppliers. The chairman, state Sen. Joe Dunn= =20 (D-Santa Ana), says the issue of unscheduled plant shutdowns is on his agen= da. ?????""The problem is: How does one prove that a particular outage was part = of=20 a deliberate strategy to deprive the state of kilowatts, rather than a resu= lt=20 of normal business operations?"" Dunn said. ---=20 ?????Times staff writer Nancy Rivera Brooks contributed to this story. --- --- Elevator Anxiety Is Riding High=20 Emergencies: Workers in skyscrapers worry about blackouts trapping them in= =20 their buildings. Some take the risk in stride; others make plans to take th= e=20 stairs.=20 By JOHN M. GLIONNA and JOE MOZINGO, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????SAN FRANCISCO--In Susan Clifton's highly placed opinion, sunny Tuesday= =20 would have been a picture-perfect day to work atop one of the tallest=20 buildings in San Francisco, a scenic city littered with soaring skyscrapers= . ?????But Clifton--like many other high-rise office dwellers in blackout-pro= ne=20 parts of California--couldn't help but feel some high anxiety at the prospe= ct=20 of being stranded by electrical outages that were sweeping across the state= =20 for a second day. ?????""I think about it all the time,"" said Clifton, a 21-year-old=20 receptionist at Deutsche Bank's offices on the 48th floor of a tower in the= =20 city's financial district who recently moved from rural Virginia. ""The way = I=20 see it, Californians take a lot of things on faith, working atop tall=20 buildings with all these earthquakes and power outages."" ?????For Long Beach office worker Dave Suhada, the anxiety has taken the fo= rm=20 of elevator phobia: a fear of getting stuck on an 80-degree day crammed in = a=20 pod of sweating, heavy-breathing humans, with no way out. ?????""I'm just eyeing the buttons to see which one I could push as fast as = I=20 can if the power goes out,"" he said.=20 ?????For 20-year-old Lisa Riley, it means entering the elevator each day in= =20 her Long Beach office building with a prayer. ""I just could not get stuck f= or=20 an hour and a half,"" she said, nodding nervously. Often she now opts for th= e=20 stairs. ?????In San Francisco, emergency services officials say that most of the=20 city's office buildings are equipped with backup generators to run elevator= s=20 and security equipment in the event of a blackout. ?????Fire Department spokesman Pete House said the city has 19 trucks with= =20 experts trained to extricate people trapped in elevators. Firefighters=20 handling blackout-related emergencies rescued a person trapped in a downtow= n=20 building Tuesday and handled five elevator mishaps Monday. ?????Christopher Stafford didn't get caught inside an elevator Monday, but= =20 suffered the next-worst thing: being stranded in his 15th-floor apartment= =20 after the power failed when he went home for lunch. ?????So the 41-year-old real estate worker trooped down the stairs to the= =20 lobby and even made some new friends along the way, helping a few elderly= =20 women who were struggling down the stairs. ?????""It was a pain,"" he acknowledged. ""But I have to tell you: I really li= ke=20 my panoramic view, so it's worth the hassle."" ?????Nowadays, Sherrie Tellier makes sure her cellular phone is in hand whe= n=20 she gets in the elevator. She got trapped once before, and the emergency=20 phone didn't work. It's amazing, she said, how small an elevator seems when= =20 you can't get out. ""It's like a broom closet.Now there's a sigh of relief= =20 every time the door opens."" ?????Some high-rise office workers said Tuesday that they preferred not to= =20 think about the perils of going without power and being vulnerable and=20 isolated so high up. ?????But on the 42nd floor of San Francisco's Transamerica Tower, Sasha=20 Monpere wasn't fazed by the chance that during a blackout, her building's= =20 backup generators wouldn't kick in. ?????""Hey, I'm young and I'm healthy. I can always walk down the stairs,""= =20 said the 29-year-old receptionist. ""I've done the Statue of Liberty. It can= 't=20 be any worse than that. And walking down 42 flights is a lot easier than=20 walking up all those stairs."" ?????Likewise with Phil Ip, who works on the 52nd--and top--floor of San=20 Francisco's tallest skyscraper. The 25-year restaurant veteran says he has= =20 the utmost faith in modern technology. ?????""We're safe, even up here,"" said Ip, assistant general manager of the= =20 Carnelian Room, a restaurant atop the Bank of America building. ""You should= =20 see the engineer's room in this building. It's like a big steamship. They'r= e=20 equipped for anything that could happen."" ?????One floor below, Cheryl Martin hears every day about people's fear of= =20 heights. In the year since she began answering phones in a law office, she= =20 has often escorted clients afraid of express elevators that shudder and ris= e=20 so fast that passengers' ears pop from the altitude gain. ?????""Everybody, and I mean everybody, asks, 'So, what happens during a pow= er=20 outage?' "" she said. ?????Rory Thompson said he believes in karma and is sure that if the rollin= g=20 blackouts come calling, his office will be spared. In July 1993, Thompson's= =20 building was the site of an incident known as the 101 California St.=20 massacre, in which gunman Gian Luigi Ferri killed eight people and wounded= =20 six before killing himself. ?????""This building has already had its bad day,"" he said. ""They say that t= he=20 day after a crash is the safest day to ride an airline. So I'll take my=20 chances with the rolling blackouts."" --- State Says It's Accelerating Plan to Buy Power Utilities' Grid=20 Government: Talks with Edison are reported near completion, but agreement= =20 with heavily indebted PG&E has a way to go.=20 By RONE TEMPEST and DAN MORAIN, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????SACRAMENTO--As blackouts hit California for a second day Tuesday, a ke= y=20 consultant to Gov. Gray Davis said negotiations to buy the power grid owned= =20 by the state's largest utilities ""are proceeding at an accelerated pace."" ?????Wall Street consultant Joseph Fichera said talks with Southern=20 California Edison could be wrapped up within days, although those with PG&E= =20 are much less advanced.=20 ?????The administration and PG&E have not reached even an agreement in=20 principle, he said. PG&E, which has more debt than Edison, says its=20 transmission lines are more extensive than those of its Southern California= =20 counterpart. ?????The state wants to buy the utilities' transmission lines and other=20 assets for about $7 billion to provide cash to the utilities, help stabiliz= e=20 the electricity supply and ease the power crunch that has plagued Californi= a=20 for months. To research the grid purchase, Fichera said, the state has had = to=20 pore over 80,000 documents just to assess the utilities' liabilities. ?????""We are working at a good pace,"" said Fichera, chief executive of the= =20 New York firm Saber Partners. "" . . . If we get to a deal-breaker, it might= =20 be longer."" ?????By making Fichera, who is also a consultant to the Texas Public=20 Utilities Commission, available to reporters Tuesday, the Davis=20 administration was clearly trying to reassure the public that progress is= =20 being made on the governor's plan to pull the state out of the crisis. ?????Since mid-January, when the big utilities' credit failed and suppliers= =20 stopped selling to them, the state has spent nearly $3 billion buying=20 electricity from a handful of large suppliers in Texas, Oklahoma, Georgia a= nd=20 North Carolina. Not a cent has gone to the hundreds of alternative energy= =20 suppliers in California who provide about a quarter of the state's=20 electricity. ?????The Monday and Tuesday blackouts occurred partly because many of the= =20 cash-strapped alternative suppliers, including solar, biomass and wind powe= r=20 units, cut their normal supply to the system in half. They say Edison and= =20 PG&E have not paid them since November; the utilities say they are out of= =20 cash. ?????Assemblyman Fred Keeley (D-Boulder Creek) said the plight of the=20 alternative suppliers has dragged on because of the complexity of dealing= =20 with ""almost 700 individual contractors."" ?????Another delaying factor, said Keeley, who with state Sen. Jim Battin= =20 (R-La Quinta) worked for almost three months to come up with a legislative= =20 plan to lower the small producers' prices, was ""the huge enmity . . .=20 manifested between the utilities and the qualifying facilities. These peopl= e=20 just don't like each other."" ?????This week's blackouts provided two painful lessons for the Davis=20 administration: ?????* When it comes to electricity, size doesn't matter--every kilowatt=20 counts. During peak use, a small wind power facility in Riverside County ca= n=20 make the difference between full power and blackouts. ?????* There is no such thing as a partial solution. Unless the whole energ= y=20 equation is balanced, the parts don't work. ?????For the Davis plan to work, several key elements need to come together= =20 or utility customers will almost certainly face rate increases above the 19= %=20 already set in motion: ?????* The cost of power purchased by the state must be reduced through=20 long-term contracts with the big out-of-state producers. ?????These contracts, the details of which the Davis administration has kep= t=20 confidential, are still being negotiated by Davis consultant Vikram Budhraj= a=20 of the Pasadena firm Electric Power Group. The administration says it has= =20 concluded 40 contracts with generators, about half of which have been signe= d. ?????According to the most recent statistics released by the Department of= =20 Water Resources, which buys power for the state, current prices are still= =20 well above the rate state Treasurer Phil Angelides says is necessary for a= =20 planned $10-billion bond offering to succeed. ?????The bonds, set for sale in May, will be used to reimburse the state fo= r=20 the money it will have spent by that time to buy electricity. The state is= =20 currently spending at a rate of $58 million a day to buy power. If prices= =20 stay high, the $10 billion in bonds will not cover the state's power=20 purchases by the end of the summer. ?????Angelides says he cannot proceed with bridge financing for the bonds= =20 until the Public Utilities Commission devises a formula to guarantee that a= =20 portion of utility bills will be dedicated to bond repayment. Angelides has= =20 estimated that, under the January law that put the state in the power buyin= g=20 business, the state must be reimbursed $2.5 billion annually, and that $1.3= =20 billion is needed to service the debt. ?????PUC Administrative Law Judge Joseph R. DeUlloa is expected to announce= =20 his ruling on the reimbursement rate later this week, leading to a PUC vote= =20 on the matter as early as next week. ?????* The rates charged for electricity by the alternative producers, know= n=20 as qualifying facilities, must be cut at least in half, down from an averag= e=20 of more than 17 cents per kilowatt-hour. In his news conference Tuesday,=20 Davis said he will ask the PUC to set QF rates at 6.9 cents for 10-year=20 contracts and 7.5 cents for five-year contracts. ?????Meanwhile, PUC Chairman Loretta Lynch, a Davis appointee, said Tuesday= =20 that the commission will vote next week on a proposed order requiring=20 Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric to pay the QFs for=20 electricity in the future. Lynch said a recent PUC assessment showed that t= he=20 utilities have enough cash on hand for that. ?????""We are trying to make sure the folks providing the power get paid,""= =20 Lynch said. ""The qualified facilities have demonstrated that they haven't= =20 been paid and that it is impairing their ability to provide power."" ?????The utilities contend that if they pay the small providers what they o= we=20 them, there will not be enough money left to pay other creditors. ?????""There is not enough money in the current rate structure to pay the=20 [alternative producers], pay the [Department of Water Resources] and pay th= e=20 utilities for their generation,"" said John Nelson, a spokesman for PG&E. ?????* The utilities must sell to the state the power they produce=20 themselves, mainly from hydro and nuclear sources, at a rate only slightly= =20 above the cost of producing it. This is tied to the ongoing negotiations=20 between the Davis administration and the utilities to restore the=20 near-bankrupt utilities to solvency. ---=20 ?????Times staff writers Julie Tamaki, Miguel Bustillo and Tim Reiterman=20 contributed to this report. --- L.A., Long Beach File Suits Over Gas Companies' Prices=20 Energy: Separate actions allege a conspiracy and gouging. Suppliers blame= =20 rising demand and a fluctuating market.=20 By TINA DAUNT and DAN WEIKEL, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????Seeking damages that could reach ""into the billions of dollars,"" the= =20 cities of Los Angeles and Long Beach on Tuesday filed separate lawsuits=20 alleging that a coalition of gas companies illegally conspired to eliminate= =20 competition, drive up natural gas prices and discourage the construction of= =20 electricity generating plants in California. ?????Officials from the two cities alleged that Southern California Gas Co.= ,=20 San Diego Gas & Electric and El Paso Natural Gas Co. violated the state's= =20 antitrust law and engaged in unfair and fraudulent business practices that= =20 caused gas prices to skyrocket. ?????The cities are the first California municipalities to take action=20 against the gas companies. A number of similar lawsuits filed by antitrust= =20 attorneys, state regulators and private citizens are pending elsewhere. ?????The energy companies deny any impropriety. They contend that Californi= a=20 is the victim of its own soaring electricity demand and overreliance on=20 fluctuating spot markets for natural gas. ?????""The conspiracy theories that have been promoted have no basis in=20 reality,"" said Denise King, spokeswoman for Southern California Gas' parent= =20 company, Sempra Energy, which also was named in the suits. ""Southern=20 California Gas continues to look out for the best interest of its customers= ."" ?????The lawsuits filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court accuse the=20 companies of conspiring to manipulate the price of natural gas by agreeing = to=20 kill pipeline projects that would have brought ample supplies of cheaper=20 natural gas to Southern California. ?????They allege that executives for the energy companies made the pact=20 during a meeting in a Phoenix hotel room five years ago to discuss=20 ""opportunities"" arising from the state's newly deregulated electricity mark= et. ?????""The fulfillment of the illicit plan has had devastating effects on=20 Southern California gas consumers,"" according to Los Angeles' suit. ""Gas=20 prices in the Southern California market have skyrocketed, and the Southern= =20 California gas consumers are paying the highest prices in the nation."" ?????In recent months, natural gas prices have tripled across the nation fo= r=20 a number of reasons, including a shortage of supplies to meet demands for= =20 home heating. Prices have increased far more in California, where natural g= as=20 is a central factor in the state's energy crisis. The state relies on the= =20 clean-burning fuel to generate half its electrical power. ?????""This not only led to price-gouging of all natural gas consumers, from= =20 homeowners to government to industry, but it contributed to the current=20 electrical power crisis in California,"" said City Atty. James K. Hahn, a=20 mayoral candidate who urged the City Council to pursue the case. ?????Chris Garner, Long Beach's utility director, said that since November,= =20 the average residential bill for gas in Long Beach has more than doubled, t= o=20 $175 a month. Some customers, he said, have seen rate increases of 500%. ?????""The people of Long Beach are being gouged by energy conglomerates who= =20 are artificially manipulating the supply of natural gas and reaping excess= =20 profits at the expense of the public,"" said City Attorney Robert Shannon. ?????Holding a special meeting, the Los Angeles City Council voted 12 to 0= =20 Tuesday to file the suit. ?????""If the allegations are true, they are extremely serious,"" said=20 Councilman Mike Feuer, who is a candidate to succeed Hahn as city attorney.= =20 ""And there appears to be some important evidence that substantiates the=20 allegations in the complaint, which means that this lawsuit is, I think, mo= re=20 than a viable lawsuit."" ?????Councilman Mark Ridley-Thomas added: ""We cannot tolerate this and we= =20 must use the full weight of the law to try to correct it."" ?????A growing number of lawsuits around the state are targeting California= 's=20 natural gas suppliers. El Paso Corp., which owns the main pipeline=20 transporting out-of-state gas to Southern California, has been targeted=20 repeatedly by utility companies, state regulators and antitrust attorneys.= =20 ?????Some of the first antitrust lawsuits were filed against Sempra Energy = in=20 December. They were brought by Continental Forge Co., a Compton-based=20 aluminum forging business, and Andrew and Andrea Berg, who own a business i= n=20 San Diego. ?????The cities' lawsuits request that the defendant companies be barred fr= om=20 such conduct in the future, and they seek civil penalties and damages. ?????Shannon estimates that Long Beach could collect more than $100 million= =20 in damages, including triple penalties for antitrust violations. ?????""We are filing this for our citizens,"" Shannon said. ""They include the= =20 poor, the elderly, people living on fixed incomes and small business owners= ."" ?????The Los Angeles suit was filed on behalf of all Californians. Official= s=20 place damage estimates ""in the billions.""=20 ?????Hahn, however, warned council members that it could take the city a ye= ar=20 or more to resolve the suit. ?????""Lawsuits take time,"" Hahn said. ""We are hopeful we can enter into=20 meaningful discovery to disclose what's been going on."" --- Davis OKs Subsidy of Pollution Fees=20 Smog: As part of secret deal to get long-term energy contracts, state would= =20 pay for some of the credits that allow excess power plant emissions. Critic= s=20 renew call for full disclosure.=20 By DAN MORAIN , Times Staff Writer=20 ?????SACRAMENTO--As part of his closed-door negotiations to buy electricity= ,=20 Gov. Gray Davis has agreed to relieve some generators from having to pay=20 potentially millions of dollars in fees for emitting pollutants into the ai= r,=20 Davis said Tuesday. ?????Davis announced two weeks ago that his negotiators had reached deals= =20 with 20 generators to supply $43 billion worth of power during the next 10= =20 years. ?????However, the Democratic governor has refused to release any of the=20 contracts or detail various terms, contending that release of such=20 information would hamper the state's ability to negotiate deals with other= =20 generators and therefore ultimately would raise prices Californians pay for= =20 electricity. ?????Sources familiar with the negotiations, speaking on condition of=20 anonymity, said the agreement reached with Dynegy Inc., a power company bas= ed=20 in Houston, is one that includes language requiring that the state pay the= =20 cost of credits that allow emissions. Dynegy spokesman Steve Stengel declin= ed=20 to discuss the company's deal with the state. ?????""We couldn't get them to sign contracts; it was a sticking point,"" Dav= is=20 said of the decision to pay the fees of some generators. ""We had to lock do= wn=20 some power so we were not totally dependent on the spot market."" ?????The fees in question are part of an emission trading system known as= =20 RECLAIM. Under the system, companies are allotted a certain amount of=20 allowable pollution. If their operations pollute more, companies are requir= ed=20 to purchase credits on an open market. Currently the credits cost about $45= =20 per pound of pollution--an amount that can lead to a bill of well over $10= =20 million a year for a power plant. ?????The South Coast Air Quality Management District, which regulates=20 pollution in the Los Angeles Basin, is considering steps to significantly= =20 lower the cost of the system--a step that could considerably cut the state'= s=20 potential cost, Davis said. ?????Senate Energy Committee Chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey)=20 defended the decision to cover the power company's costs. ?????""It is a question of whether it brings down the price of power,"" she= =20 said. ""If it brings down the price of power, I don't have a problem with it= ."" ?????Nevertheless, word that the contracts could bind the state to pay=20 pollution fees caused some critics of Davis' policy to renew calls for Davi= s=20 to reconsider the secrecy surrounding the power negotiations. The payment= =20 provision underscores the fact that the contracts involve more than merely= =20 the prices the state will pay for its megawatts, the critics note. ?????""The Legislature should have known about it,"" said Senate President Pr= o=20 Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco). ""It is going to cost taxpayers money. It= =20 makes you wonder. . . . This was a policy issue that was never discussed wi= th=20 the Legislature."" ?????V. John White, a lobbyist for the Sierra Club, who also represents=20 alternative energy producers, called the contract proposal ""a horrible=20 precedent."" ?????""Until we know exactly what the state has agreed to and how much of a= =20 subsidy this represents, we can't determine how serious the breach of=20 principle this is,"" White said. ?????Another critic of the secrecy of the negotiations, Terry Francke,=20 general counsel for the California First Amendment Coalition, said the=20 provision in question ""raises the possibility that there are other=20 [concessions]"" that have not yet come to light. ?????In the summer, when demand for power is highest, some generators=20 probably will exceed pollution limits set by regional air quality managemen= t=20 districts. ?????To avert blackouts, state officials might ask the companies to keep=20 plants running. In such cases, some sources familiar with aspects of the=20 contracts said, the contract language could be interpreted to suggest that= =20 the state would cover any fines--although Davis said Tuesday the state will= =20 not cover the cost of fines. ?????A recent Dynegy filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission=20 underscores the rising cost of pollution-related measures. The company, whi= ch=20 is partners with NRG Energy in three California plants in El Segundo, Long= =20 Beach and Carlsbad in San Diego County, said its ""aggregate expenditures fo= r=20 compliance with laws related to the regulation of discharge of materials in= to=20 the environment"" rose to $14.3 million in 2000, from $3.6 million in 1999. ?????A South Coast Air Quality Management spokesman said Dynegy's facilitie= s=20 appear to be fairly clean--although Sierra Club lobbyist White said Dynegy= =20 has been seeking a permit at one of its plants to burn fuel oil, which is= =20 dirtier than natural gas. ?????Davis said he intends to ""make this information public,"" but he added= =20 that ""we do not want to put the public's interest in jeopardy by asking the= m=20 to pay higher prices."" ?????""Nobody likes the notion that [the administration is] not being fully= =20 forthcoming,"" Davis said. ""But I also have a corollary responsibility that = I=20 don't stick these generators with a higher rate."" --- As Losses Mount, Companies Work Around Outages=20 By MARLA DICKERSON,JERRY HIRSCH and NANCY CLEELAND, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????As blackouts moved from theory to reality, many Southern California=20 businesses spent Day 2 assessing their losses and digging in for what they= =20 expect to be a long, hot summer. ?????An hour without electricity may be an inconvenience for most residents= .=20 But for manufacturers and many other businesses, even a brief loss of power= =20 can generate tens of thousands in losses. ?????Whether shaping metal or making salsa, businesses of all kinds=20 complained Tuesday about the lack of warning of impending outages, even as= =20 they sought sometimes creative ways to work around the loss of power. ?????Rattled by news reports of Monday's rolling blackouts, Industry-based = El=20 Burrito Mexican Food Products started its Tuesday shift at 2 a.m. Workers h= ad=20 just finished cooking and packaging the last batches of salsa and masa when= =20 the lights went out at 10:20 a.m. ?????""We dodged a bullet,"" said El Burrito founder Mark Roth. ""Losing a day= 's=20 production of salsa would have cost me $15,000 to $20,000."" ?????But other companies weren't so fortunate. ?????Long Beach-based Delco Machine & Gear was still totaling up its losses= =20 from Monday's blackout, which amounted to at least $30,000 in lost wages an= d=20 production, said Nick Campanelli, vice president of manufacturing. The=20 company, a division of Florida-based B/E Aerospace Inc., makes parts for th= e=20 aerospace industry. The sudden loss of power caused its sophisticated metal= =20 cutting and grinding machines to crash, ruining precision parts in producti= on. ?????But the losses don't end there. He said employees will need to spend= =20 hours resetting the equipment. Campanelli is particularly irked that the=20 company received no warning. ?????""Five minutes' notice,"" he fumed. ""That's all I needed."" ?????Although businesses such as Campanelli's typically receive no warning= =20 that they are about to lose power, insurance companies count the rolling=20 blackouts as ""planned events,"" a determination that in most cases=20 disqualifies a business from making a claim. ?????""I know it must be frustrating for businesses who have the power go of= f=20 suddenly, but these outages are planned by the grid operators,"" said Pete= =20 Moraga of the Insurance Information Network of California. ""That means it= =20 would not be a covered peril in a traditional business insurance policy."" ?????Typically, business insurance covers loss of profit and damage from=20 unforeseen events such as fires or windstorms. The component of the policy= =20 that covers interruptions in business kicks in after a given amount of time= =20 elapses, usually 24 to 48 hours. ?????Business polices can be written to include unusual coverages, Moraga= =20 said, but he has never heard of a policy that covers losses from a rolling= =20 blackout. ?????Some companies are taking measures not to get caught in a situation=20 where a blackout can hurt them. ?????The region's largest steel supplier shut down for two hours Monday aft= er=20 Southern California Edison called to warn of tight supplies. ?????""We just can't take a chance,"" said Lourenco Goncalvez, president of= =20 California Steel Industries Inc. in San Bernardino County. ""We have a lot o= f=20 safety issues. People could get hurt."" ?????Goncalvez said the plant has multiple 20-ton and 25-ton overhead crane= s=20 that operate with electromagnetic devices, which would fail if they lost=20 power suddenly. Falling materials could injure workers below, he said. ""We= =20 have been asking to be exempt from rolling blackouts,"" he said. ?????Goncalvez said he couldn't put a price on the lost production at the= =20 24-hour plant and said he worried more about the long term. ?????""Two hours is nothing,"" he said. ""My concern is this thing will start = to=20 happen almost every day. If it will be like this all summer, you can be sur= e=20 it will have dramatic consequences for the entire economy. . . . We're goin= g=20 to have a shortage of steel products in California. Maybe the government do= es=20 not consider this is serious. We'll see."" ?????At Sport Chalet, a La Canada Flintridge-based chain of 22 sporting goo= ds=20 stores in Southern California, an administrative assistant monitors the sta= te=20 power situation, hoping to warn any stores that are in danger of losing=20 power, said Craig Levra, the company's chief executive. ?????Levra said the assistant was assigned the monitoring duties last year,= =20 when rolling blackouts were still only a threat. ?????The chain put in place an emergency plan--similar to what it would do = in=20 a major earthquake. Backup power will kick on emergency lights and allow th= e=20 cash registers to complete transactions. Employees are instructed to escort= =20 customers from the building safely, Levra said. ?????Other businesses, however, have plans to remain open during the 60- to= =20 90-minute blackouts. ?????When power went out at two Cheesecake Factory restaurants in Orange=20 County on Monday afternoon, the eateries switched to serving cold dishes su= ch=20 as sandwiches and salads, said Howard Gordon, senior vice president of the= =20 Calabasas Hills-based chain. ?????The restaurants had enough backup power to operate emergency lights an= d=20 cash registers. Large windows provided the rest of the light, Gordon said. ?????So far, the 99 Cents Only Stores chain has missed the shotgun pattern = of=20 the blackouts. But with nearly 100 stores in California, company President= =20 Eric Schiffer believes it is only a matter of time before the lights go out= =20 at one of its outlets. ?????Though the stores have some backup power, the chain has systems in pla= ce=20 to operate without it. Its cash registers can open mechanically, Schiffer= =20 said. Because an item sells for a multiple of 99 cents, sales clerks are=20 equipped with ""blackout sheets"" that calculate a customer's tab, including= =20 tax. All the clerk has to do is count the number of items in the shopping= =20 cart and check the tables on the sheet. ?????This week's power crunch has been exacerbated by the fact that so-call= ed=20 interruptible electricity customers no longer face large penalties if they= =20 decline to shut down their operations when supplies get critically low. ?????The Public Utilities Commission suspended the fines in January to ease= =20 the burden on about 1,400 businesses that found themselves bearing the brun= t=20 of the crisis to prevent rolling blackouts in the rest of the state. ?????According to Edison, about 10% of its interruptible customers are=20 complying with requests to curtail electricity usage during crunch time. Bu= t=20 Scott Keller isn't among them. ?????The owner of Chino-based STC Plastics Inc. said he was forced to shut= =20 down more than 20 times since September, costing him as much as $10,000 in= =20 lost production per day. He ignored requests Monday and Tuesday to curtail= =20 usage and said he doesn't feel a twinge of remorse. ?????""If I'm shut down, I can't pay my workers,"" he said. ""I'd feel more=20 guilty about that."" ?????But this is one area where insurance eventually might help. Moraga sai= d=20 some carriers are developing plans that would cover penalties for continuin= g=20 to use power after they have been asked by a utility to cut back. --- Wednesday, March 21, 2001=20 A Blackout on Answers=20 Davis needs to do a better job in communicating to Californians about the= =20 electricity crisis. In the absence of that, cynicism grows.=20 ?????The oil shocks of the 1970s, from the Arab oil embargo to the Iran-Ira= q=20 war, were dead simple compared with the California power shortage. Then, th= e=20 problem was a lack of imported oil and the chief symptom was long lines and= =20 high prices at gas stations. Politicians urged conservation: Turn down the= =20 heat, drive fewer miles, buy more efficient cars. People understood the cau= se=20 of the crisis and the benefit of their actions. Today it's a different stor= y=20 and a damnably complicated one that gives consumers no place--or actually,= =20 too many places--to focus their anger.=20 ?????The last two days of rolling blackouts, including previously exempt=20 Southern California, have not reduced power demand, or at least not enough.= =20 Consumers are suspicious: Are out-of-state power companies holding back=20 production? Did utilities really not have enough money to pay alternative= =20 energy producers--the little guys who, combined, could produce enough power= =20 to prevent the blackouts? And what happened to long-term power contracts, t= he=20 state-bargained deal that was supposed to stabilize the crisis?=20 ?????The frustrations are vast, and there are too many gaps in the story. I= f=20 it's just a pack of thieves creating an artificial shortage, as even some= =20 consumer organizations charge, why should anyone sacrifice to conserve? Tha= t,=20 in a nutshell, is the problem that Gov. Gray Davis, the state Legislature a= nd=20 the Public Utilities Commission face.=20 ?????Davis, for one, has to level with the public and stop acting as if he= =20 can fix the crisis. He has proved he can't, at least not without reductions= =20 in usage and, most likely, rate increases. If Davis, who is notoriously=20 averse to delivering bad news, had leveled with the public about the=20 fragility of the current system, the last two days of blackouts statewide= =20 (except in places with full municipal power, like Los Angeles) might not ha= ve=20 come as such a shock.=20 ?????The Legislature tried and failed earlier to solve the alternative ener= gy=20 producers' nonpayment problems with a very complicated bill. Tuesday night,= =20 Davis and legislators announced a simpler plan that would set lower, more= =20 flexible rates for alternative power but also force the utilities to pay fo= r=20 future purchases.=20 ?????Which leads to the utilities themselves. With the state shelling out= =20 billions for power from the major generators, how could Southern California= =20 Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric still not have the cash flow to pay the= =20 alternative producers? That motley collection of biomass, solar, wind and= =20 cogeneration companies has been shutting down for nonpayment--some of them= =20 because natural gas suppliers have cut them off. PG&E has made some payment= s,=20 but SCE has paid zilch, though a spokesman says it hopes to strike a deal t= o=20 start paying this week.=20 ?????Without enough honest information, conspiracy scenarios fill the holes= .=20 Bad news is better than no news, something Davis seems not to quite realize= .=20 By today or Thursday, the weather will cool and some plants taken down for= =20 repair will come back online. The blackouts may cease but the crisis will b= e=20 just as deep as it was Monday and Tuesday. It is up to Davis to do a better= =20 job of persuasively explaining why. Otherwise, the cynicism grows.=20 --- Wednesday, March 21, 2001=20 Rolling Blackouts: Blatant Extortion=20 ?????* Re ""Rolling Blackouts Hit Southland for First Time as Production=20 Falls,"" March 20:=20 ?????So here we are, 22 years after the notorious gas shortage, having=20 another gun held to our head by an opportunistic energy consortium. Back in= =20 1979, we all had to wait in long lines just to pay more for gasoline. Now, = we=20 have to face food in our freezers thawing and simmering in our homes during= =20 hot summer days, just to earn the honor of paying more for electricity.=20 ?????Of course, as soon as the rates are up and the environmental concerns= =20 are shoved aside, watch how plentiful power will be. When is somebody in=20 government going to stand up for the consumer and stop this blatant form of= =20 extortion?=20 ?????JOHN JOHNSON=20 ?????Agoura Hills=20 * * * ?????So customers of PG&E and Edison are ""shielded from soaring wholesale= =20 prices""? Some shield: turning off all our power without so much as a moment= 's=20 notice, endangering lives and disrupting businesses just to keep our=20 electricity prices unreasonably low. Let's lift the rate caps to get the=20 lights back on. And if I need to be shielded from soaring prices, I'll turn= =20 my own lights off.=20 ?????ANDREW LOWD=20 ?????Claremont=20 * * * ?????This state needs adequate, reliable electricity to run a diverse=20 economy. Both political parties and business interests are at fault. This= =20 crisis demands top priority, aimed at lasting solutions.=20 ?????The most immediate solution is fast-tracking of added generating=20 capacity. Freeway bridges were rebuilt in record time after the Northridge= =20 quake, so we know it can be done. That is the type of effort that is needed= ,=20 immediately.=20 ?????Since Democrats hold the governorship and control both state legislati= ve=20 houses, they are in the driver's seat. If the lights go out, the Democrats = go=20 out. If this state government can't solve the problem, we need a new=20 government that can.=20 ?????STEVE ANDERSON=20 ?????Huntington Beach=20 * * * ?????The alleged energy crisis in California is entirely contrived to relax= =20 environmental pollution standards and to raise energy rates. It's curious= =20 that the L.A. Department of Water and Power, which was not deregulated, is= =20 not currently experiencing an energy crisis. PG&E and Edison are both part = of=20 national and multinational corporations. Why should utility customers have = to=20 pay for their economic problems or gross mismanagement?=20 ?????Several power plants were taken off-line for ""routine maintenance,""=20 which may not have been so routine. Energy is a vital necessity; if these= =20 companies can't provide it at a reasonable, affordable rate then they shoul= d=20 be replaced by companies that can, be taken over by the government, or=20 de-deregulated. There is an abundance of solar energy in California, of whi= ch=20 only a small fraction is being utilized. There is no shortage of energy in= =20 California, only a shortage of intelligence, will and honest politicians.= =20 ?????CHARLES B. EDELMAN=20 ?????Los Angeles=20 --- Utilities' Demand Blocks Bailout=20 NEGOTIATIONS HIT SNAG: PG&E, Edison want end to price freeze if they sell= =20 transmission lines to state David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, March 21, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /21/M N114450.DTL=20 California's near-bankrupt utilities are demanding that higher electric rat= es=20 be a part of any deal to sell the state their power lines, The Chronicle ha= s=20 learned.=20 A rate increase -- perhaps of more than 50 percent, according to earlier=20 industry estimates -- would certainly draw a firestorm of protest from=20 consumer groups and force Gov. Gray Davis to backtrack from earlier pledges= =20 that rates would remain unchanged.=20 Nevertheless, sources close to negotiations on the deal said Pacific Gas an= d=20 Electric Co. and Southern California Edison are attempting to make higher= =20 rates a condition for agreeing to a bailout scheme in which they would sell= =20 the state their transmission systems and some land.=20 The sources said the talks hit a new snag this week when state officials=20 realized that fine print sought by the companies could require the Public= =20 Utilities Commission to pass along all of the utilities' costs to ratepayer= s.=20 The sources said this would end a rate freeze that shields consumers from= =20 runaway wholesale electricity prices.=20 The inclusion of potential rate increases in the talks reflects the growing= =20 complexity of a deal originally intended by Davis to stabilize the finances= =20 of PG&E and Edison so banks would resume loans to the cash-strapped=20 utilities.=20 The negotiations subsequently have expanded to involve a state purchase of= =20 the utilities' transmission networks and acquisition of utility-owned land,= =20 including spectacular coastal property near PG&E's Diablo Canyon nuclear=20 power plant.=20 Now they also have embraced further deregulation of California's=20 dysfunctional electricity market.=20 ""Clearly, one of the terms being discussed is the regulatory environment,""= =20 said Joseph Fichera, head of Saber Partners, a New York investment bank tha= t=20 is advising Davis in the talks.=20 ""The past situation has not worked well,"" he added. ""The utilities want som= e=20 certainty about their future.""=20 TENTATIVE DEAL WITH EDISON To date, the governor has announced a tentative agreement with Edison for t= he=20 state to buy the utility's power lines for almost $3 billion. Discussions= =20 with PG&E for a similar accord have dragged on for weeks.=20 An Edison official, asking that his name be withheld, acknowledged yesterda= y=20 that an end to the rate freeze is an expected result of the power- line sal= e.=20 ""Once the details of the pact are complete, dominoes will fall,"" the offici= al=20 said. ""One of the dominoes is the rate freeze.""=20 A PG&E spokesman declined to comment.=20 In fact, both Edison and PG&E have been aggressively seeking an end to the= =20 rate freeze for months.=20 The two utilities have a lawsuit pending in federal court demanding that th= e=20 PUC immediately raise rates so the utilities can recover almost $13 billion= =20 in debt accrued as a result of the freeze.=20 ""They have been trying a lot of things to get the rate freeze ended in=20 various forms,"" said Carl Wood, who sits on the PUC. ""Adding it to the=20 present talks is consistent with past behavior.""=20 Wall Street has taken note that the negotiations no longer appear to be=20 making progress.=20 Paul Patterson, an energy industry analyst at Credit Suisse First Boston,= =20 told clients on Monday that the discussions ""may have lost some momentum in= =20 recent days."" He did not give a reason.=20 For his part, the governor sounded unusually cautious about the course of t= he=20 talks when asked late last week if a breakthrough was imminent.=20 SECRET STICKING POINTS ""We are going to take the transmission systems and the land that's deeded,= =20 and we will work out an agreement,"" Davis said at an appearance in San Jose= .=20 ""But there are a number of sticking points in the talks with PG&E that I'm= =20 not going to reveal.""=20 One of those sticking points apparently is an insistence that the sale of= =20 utility assets include a long-sought lifting of the rate freeze.=20 Sources said lawyers from both PG&E and Edison had inserted the related ter= ms=20 into draft accords affecting each utility, and that the full impact of the= =20 additions was not realized by state officials until this week.=20 One source said the language was just convoluted enough to slip beneath the= =20 radar screen of state negotiators. But the upshot, once the words had been= =20 parsed, was that the PUC effectively would lose control over power rates.= =20 CREDITWORTHINESS ON THE TABLE In Edison's case, the terms of the tentative deal include the governor aski= ng=20 the PUC ""to support the creditworthiness"" of the utility.=20 ""This would ensure that future investments in both utility distribution and= =20 utility generation plants are provided fair returns of and on capital,=20 consistent with current authorized returns and capital structure provisions= ,""=20 it says.=20 Sources said the provision could be interpreted as a guarantee from the sta= te=20 that Edison would be permitted to recoup all outstanding costs from=20 ratepayers.=20 ""There may be some assumptions about this language that the rate freeze end= s=20 if it is adopted,"" the Edison official said, adding that he saw no reason t= o=20 disagree with such assumptions.=20 But Fichera, Davis' adviser in the talks, insisted that nothing is set in= =20 stone, and that the negotiations are proceeding without a hitch.=20 ""This is a very complex transaction,"" he said. ""God and the devil are in th= e=20 details.""=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 --- --- Utilities' Demand Blocks Bailout=20 BLACKOUTS ROLL ON: Weather, increased consumption blamed=20 David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, March 21, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /21/M N156508.DTL=20 Hundreds of thousands of Californians went without electricity for a second= =20 day yesterday as unusually warm weather and a high number of idle power=20 plants prompted blackouts throughout the state.=20 State officials said electricity usage rose yesterday even though condition= s=20 were largely unchanged from a day before. They surmised that fewer=20 Californians were conserving power.=20 ""We need people to really focus on that,"" implored Patrick Dorinson, a=20 spokesman for the Independent System Operator, manager of the state's power= =20 grid. ""The more people can do, the better it will be.""=20 Rolling blackouts were ordered by the ISO about 9:30 a.m. and were suspende= d=20 at 2 p.m. after several plants that had been down for repairs returned to= =20 service. Additional power also was obtained from a plant in Arizona.=20 Utilities estimated that about 560,000 customers were affected yesterday,= =20 compared with more than 1 million a day earlier.=20 This week's blackouts marked the first time that people in Los Angeles shar= ed=20 the pain with those in San Francisco. Blackouts in January were confined to= =20 the northern part of the state.=20 FEWER AFFECTED IN SOUTH However, Southern California Edison's burden was considerably lighter=20 yesterday than that of Pacific Gas and Electric Co.=20 Karen Shepard-Grimes, a spokeswoman for the Southern California utility, sa= id=20 only about 50,000 customers went without power, compared with nearly 440, 0= 00=20 for PG&E.=20 Affected areas in the south included Palm Springs, Santa Monica, Long Beach= =20 and Pomona.=20 ""We're not in the business of turning customers' lights off,"" Shepard- Grim= es=20 said. ""We're in the business of keeping lights on.""=20 In PG&E's case, things were tougher because low rainfall means that less=20 power is currently available from dams throughout the Pacific Northwest.=20 Ron Low, a spokesman for the utility, said blackouts were experienced by PG= &E=20 customers from Eureka to Bakersfield.=20 ""Our goal was to carry out the ISO's order with minimal impact on customers= ,=20 "" he said.=20 For its part, San Diego Gas & Electric said about 75,000 customers were=20 darkened.=20 Yesterday's blackouts began with PG&E customers in Block 12 and halted midw= ay=20 through Block 14. Customers in each block -- defined by power circuits rath= er=20 than geography -- typically will lose power for about 90 minutes before the= =20 service interruption ""rolls"" elsewhere.=20 Some cutoffs can last more than two hours, however, because of technical=20 problems switching individual blocks on and off.=20 NEXT UP: BLOCK 14 If additional blackouts are ordered today, they will commence with the=20 remaining portion of Block 14 customers. (PG&E customers can determine thei= r=20 block by looking at the bottom left-hand corner of their monthly bill.)=20 The ISO's Dorinson said it is hoped that cooler weather and increased=20 generation will help avert further cutoffs this week.=20 ""Units are coming back into service that have been out,"" he said. ""That wil= l=20 help a great deal.""=20 Roughly 15,000 megawatts of generating capacity was offline yesterday,=20 including half of the alternative-energy plants, which are unable to afford= =20 natural gas to run their turbines.=20 Many of the plant owners say they have not been paid by PG&E and Edison sin= ce=20 November. They are asking federal regulators for permission to sell their= =20 electricity elsewhere.=20 At the same time, one of two units at the Mohave Generating Station in Neva= da=20 damaged in a fire Monday returned to service yesterday, easing the load on= =20 California's grid.=20 The plant, partly owned by Edison, is not expected to return to full output= =20 until tomorrow.=20 PROBING SHUTDOWNS Nearly a third of California's generating capacity is currently down for=20 scheduled or unexpected maintenance. State regulators are investigating=20 whether some plant owners might be deliberately shutting down to drive pric= es=20 higher or reduce operating costs.=20 Loretta Lynch, president of the Public Utilities Commission, on Monday call= ed=20 the number of idle plants ""highly suspicious.""=20 Dorinson at the ISO said that about 12,000 megawatts of mainstream capacity= =20 was offline yesterday, compared with roughly 10,000 megawatts last year at= =20 this time.=20 --=20 Tell Us What You Think=20 Can you save 20 percent on your energy usage? Gov. Gray Davis is offering= =20 rebates for Californians who save on power starting in June, and if you've= =20 got a strategy for conserving, The Chronicle wants to hear it. We'll be=20 writing about the hardest-working energy savers in a future story. To get= =20 involved, Write to the Energy Desk, San Francisco Chronicle, 901 Mission St= .,=20 San Francisco, 94103; or e-mail --=20 THE ENERGY CRUNCH -- Blackouts: About 560,000 Californians, including 440,000 in Northern=20 California, lost electricity yesterday for 90 minutes at a time.=20 -- Areas affected: Blackouts hit parts of blocks 12 and 14 and all of block= =20 13 yesterday. In the event of further blackouts, the remainer of block 14= =20 would be next, followed by block 1.=20 -- Outlook: Officials say blackouts are less likely today as temperatures a= re=20 expected to cool and power plants that have been offline for maintenance=20 resume generating electricity.=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 --- --- Manners Go Out the Window=20 Pedestrians in peril as drivers turn darkened S.F. streets into free-for-al= l=20 Steve Rubenstein, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, March 21, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /21/M N173178.DTL=20 Nobody got plowed into yesterday at Fifth and Howard streets in San=20 Francisco. Many came close.=20 The power outage that darkened the traffic lights at the frenetic South of= =20 Market intersection for more than an hour also darkened the souls of untold= =20 numbers of drivers, sending motoring manners into the toilet.=20 The law says motorists are supposed to treat an intersection with=20 nonfunctioning traffic lights as a four-way stop. That means everyone stops= ,=20 then takes turns -- one by one -- creeping through the intersection.=20 Tell that to the two people in motorized wheelchairs who were nearly creame= d=20 by two eastbound SUVs.=20 Or to the young Swedish couple who had traveled halfway around the globe,= =20 only to scamper through the intersection barely ahead of an office supply= =20 truck.=20 Or to the New Jersey tourist, who proclaimed that California drivers during= =20 power outages were proof positive that the Chaos Theory lives and breathes.= =20 Some motorists stopped and took turns, but many didn't. Some sped into the= =20 intersection immediately behind the vehicle in front, without themselves=20 stopping at the white line. Some sailed through with a rolling stop and a= =20 warning honk. Some blasted through without stopping or honking.=20 ""I'm scared to death,"" said Brian Walters of Dorchester, N.J., after making= =20 it across Howard Street. ""This is organized madness. I subscribe to the Cha= os=20 Theory, and this is what it looks like.""=20 Sydney Freedman, a tourist from Sydney, walked briskly across the darkened= =20 crossroads, smiling grimly.=20 ""I'll chance it,"" he said.=20 He looked back and saw a woman in a motorized wheelchair nearly get squishe= d=20 by a westbound Chevy.=20 ""You have to be authoritative in this town when you cross the street,"" he= =20 said. ""Especially that lady.""=20 Therese Anderson and Andreas Sandstrom, from Sweden, raced across as quickl= y=20 as their backpacks would allow.=20 ""In this country, everyone is in such a hurry,"" said Anderson.=20 ""Everybody drives like a madman,"" added Sandstrom. ""They say, 'I want to be= =20 home right now, and I don't care what happens to anyone else.' ""=20 The couple paused to gaze in wonder at the intersection, learning more abou= t=20 America in five minutes than a pile of guidebooks could tell them.=20 ""This intersection,"" said Sandstrom, ""reminds you not to take life for=20 granted.""=20 A few minutes later, Parking Control Officer Tom Butz arrived in his meter= =20 minder wagon and pulled his orange vest and whistle from the saddlebag. He= =20 strode brave and true into the center of the bullring, planted himself=20 between the whizzing cars and began waving his arms as if conducting ""The= =20 Rite of Spring.""=20 ""I'm all by myself,"" he said. ""I know it's a little risky. I'd better keep = my=20 angels with me.""=20 At that moment, the angels were on duty in Menlo Park, where a blacked-out= =20 intersection at El Camino Real and Santa Cruz Avenue backed up traffic so f= ar=20 that it stretched into neighboring Atherton.=20 ""It's a large intersection and traffic is slow anyway, but now it is severe= ly=20 impacted,"" said Police Sgt. Terri Molakides. ""We don't get any warning=20 either. When the power is out, the power is out. It's not like we can make= =20 any plans.""=20 In general, motorists seemed more likely to obey the four-way-stop rule on= =20 the Peninsula and in the East Bay than in San Francisco.=20 In San Mateo County, some police departments have stopped trying to make=20 advance plans to cover darkened intersections. San Mateo Police Sgt. Kevin= =20 Rafaelli said putting up signs and posting officers sometimes caused proble= ms=20 rather than solving them.=20 ""If people just follow the law (and) stop at the intersection, they can=20 handle it better than we do if we're out there,"" he said. ""People are sort = of=20 getting used to it and are dealing with it.""=20 In Berkeley and Emeryville, motorists stopped one at a time at temporary st= op=20 signs, with no apparent problems. At University Avenue and Sacramento Stree= t=20 in Berkeley, Officer Matt Meredith said motorists were behaving themselves.= =20 That wasn't the case a while back, when a driver who didn't stop at an=20 intersection during a blackout was broadsided by someone who did, Meredith= =20 said.=20 ""The thing to remember is to stop and look,"" he said.=20 TRAFFIC TIPS To avoid a collisions during blackouts, the California Highway Patrol offer= s=20 this advice to motorists:=20 -- Treat any intersection with inoperative traffic lights as a four-way sto= p.=20 Each vehicle must stop when arriving at the white limit line, then proceed= =20 only when safe, taking turns.=20 -- If two vehicles arrive at the intersection at the same time, the motoris= t=20 on the left must yield to the motorist on the right.=20 -- Never insist on taking the right of way, even if you are entitled to it.= =20 -- Follow the directions of a police officer or traffic control officer,=20 whose directions take precedence over lights or signs.=20 Chronicle staff writers Henry K. Lee and Matthew B. Stannard contributed to= =20 this report. / E-mail Steve Rubenstein at ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 8=20 --- --- Historic Blackouts in State=20 Bay Area learns to cope=20 Jonathan Curiel, George Raine, Justino Aguila, and Matthew B. St Tuesday, March 20, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /20/M N219412.DTL=20 Today's rolling blackouts caused concern throughout the Bay Area, including= =20 Colma, where the sudden lack of power apparently caused a fire.=20 A light fixture at the Home Depot store in Colma caught fire around 10:45 a= .=20 m., 15 minutes after Pacific Gas and Electric Co. ordered blackouts for the= =20 area. No one was hurt.=20 ""I was in the back of the store when the power outage started,"" said Dave= =20 Cole, a consultant from Pacifica who was shopping for bolts and screws. ""We= =20 lost maybe 90 percent of the lights, then maybe 10 percent of the lights ca= me=20 up. Then I heard a guy saying, 'Get a ladder, get a ladder!'=20 ""One of the lights on the ceiling had caught on fire, and a couple of peopl= e=20 were getting ladders and fire extinguishers.""=20 Store managers whisked everyone out of the store, and Colma firefighters=20 arrived to make sure the blaze was extinguished.=20 At 11 a.m., Cole was waiting to get back into the store, which was still=20 closed.=20 ""I need my bolts,"" he said.=20 Elsewhere, the San Francisco Fire Department had to rescue people stuck in = an=20 elevator at 2001 Embarcadero North, said fire department spokesman Pete=20 Howes.=20 Scores of residents and businesses near the Embarcadero, including the Levi= =20 Strauss & Co. headquarters, were affected by the blackout.=20 At Levi Strauss this morning, Phil Marineau, the president and chief=20 executive officer, led his 1,300 employees by example, using only minimal= =20 lighting for a meeting in his office at 10 a.m.=20 Employees were sent e-mails minutes after PG&E's 9:30 a.m. notification tha= t=20 a blackout was possible. The e-mails said workers should frequently save wo= rk=20 on their computers, and that they should remain in the building and stand b= y=20 for further instructions.=20 Emergency lighting in hallways and stairwells were operated by generators.= =20 All elevators descended to the ground floor but one remained operating,=20 through a generator.=20 ""Worked nicely,"" said Jeff Beckman, a company spokesman.=20 Yesterday -- the first day that rolling blackouts returned -- Shannon=20 Cashman's home in Walnut Creek was a difficult place to be.=20 Cashman's 4-year-old daughter, Madison, suffers from a brain defect that=20 stops her from breathing during sleep. The girl depends on a ventilator tha= t=20 runs on electricity.=20 Recently hospitalized and with a weakened immune system, Madison badly need= ed=20 a nap yesterday afternoon. But when the Cashmans' power went out about noon= ,=20 it meant reading and coloring instead of rest for the girl and a little mor= e=20 anxiety than normal for her mother.=20 ""If this was a major earthquake or something like that and we couldn't use= =20 the ventilator, we'd take her to the hospital,"" said the 33-year-old Cashma= n.=20 ""Otherwise, we'll just wait for the power to come back on.""=20 In a stroke of irony yesterday, the lights went out and computer screens we= nt=20 dark at the San Francisco offices of the state Public Utilities Commission,= =20 the agency some people blame for the energy crisis and others look to for t= he=20 solution.=20 At a Petco animal store in Redwood City, nocturnal leopard geckos that=20 weren't familiar with the state's power woes thought it was night and awoke= =20 from their routine daytime slumber.=20 The geckos clung to the glass of their cages as manager Sally Daine and her= =20 employees misted lizards and watched frozen mealworms melt.=20 ""The worst thing is some of the reptiles need heat, but it's so hot, I don'= t=20 think it will matter,"" she said.=20 At Auto Pride Car Wash a few blocks away, Dan Giudici watched as the team o= f=20 employees he supervised washed cars the old-fashioned way -- with buckets a= nd=20 hoses. The company's big mechanical car wash went unused.=20 Customers didn't seem to mind the manual wash, said Giudici, who was chargi= ng=20 half-price. But he was running out of towels.=20 Even those who hoped they were immune to power problems were affected.=20 Palo Alto runs its own utility, but the electricity began winking out about= =20 12:30 p.m.=20 The city depends on a distribution line of the state grid, so it is=20 vulnerable to blackouts, said Linda Clerkson, public relations manager for= =20 Palo Alto Utilities. In addition, the city relies on PG&E for some of its= =20 power, she said.=20 Businesses were caught by surprise.=20 ""Well, at least it happened in a better time than the morning,"" said Nick= =20 Badiee, owner of the Lytton Roasting Co. coffee house. ""My toaster went out= =20 and the coffee began getting cold, so I lost three or four people who walke= d=20 out the door. I'm not angry, yet, but I would say I am concerned.""=20 For one Milwaukee woman visiting San Francisco, the blackout was an=20 unexpected lesson in the problems of electricity deregulation.=20 Cindy Wilburth, a financial consultant who advises Wisconsin utilities, cam= e=20 to the Bay Area for vacation but left yesterday with important research for= =20 her job.=20 ""This has been a huge learning lesson for Wisconsin,"" Wilburth said as she= =20 waited for a bus outside the powerless Comfort Inn by the Bay in Cow Hollow= .=20 Wilburth said her state and others that once eyed deregulation are now=20 backing off.=20 ""It just makes me realize how we've gotten ourselves in a pinch in a free= =20 economy,"" she said.=20 As she mused about the predicament in which the state has found itself, her= =20 friend was just thankful to get out of here.=20 ""I love the cold, compared to this,"" said Cindy Stuckey of Milwaukee. ""At= =20 least I know I can stay in my home, secure and warm.""=20 Across the street, at the Travelodge By the Bay, Rolando Gutierrez had=20 already lost three guests just an hour into the blackout.=20 ""This is the richest state and this is a rich city -- plenty of people want= =20 to come here,"" he said. ""We shouldn't be suffering these blackouts.""=20 Chronicle staff writers Jaxon Van Derbeken, Mark Martin, Henry K. Lee,=20 Michael McCabe, Bernadette Tansey and Marshall Wilson contributed to this= =20 report.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 --- --- Bay Area residents learning to roll with blackouts=20 Posted at 9:58 p.m. PST Tuesday, March 20, 2001=20 JOHN=20 WOOLFOLK=20 AND STEVE=20 JOHNSON=20 Mercury News=20 As rolling blackouts swept the state for a second straight day Tuesday,=20 Californians already seasoned by droughts and earthquakes were learning to= =20 live with yet another upheaval: periodic power outages.=20 Blackouts are still a novelty in Southern California -- hit for the second= =20 time Tuesday -- but they're almost routine for Bay Area residents who have= =20 seen four days of outages this year and now expect many more as temperature= s=20 rise. Toting flashlights, avoiding certain roads and even shutting off thei= r=20 coveted hot tubs, they're adjusting to life in California's new Dark Age.= =20 ? ? Karen T. Borchers--Mercury News When the lights went out at Grant Elementary School in San Jose on Tuesday= =20 morning, teacher Renee Johnson took her second-grade students out to the la= wn=20 to read to them. Marjorie Meagher now looks at her clock before taking the elevator she need= s=20 to get around her two-story San Jose home, fearing she'll get stuck during= =20 rolling blackouts.=20 ``They tend to happen on the hour or half-hour, so I try not to use it=20 then,'' said Meagher, 74, who is disabled. ``I'm very careful. My own=20 personal fear is getting stranded in the elevator.''=20 From 750,000 to about 1 million customers lost power for an hour or so in= =20 stages Tuesday as a rash of power plant outages and record temperatures in= =20 San Jose and elsewhere triggered a critical shortage.=20 As was the case Monday, when 1.2 million to 1.8 million customers were=20 affected, Tuesday's outages were split between the northern and southern=20 parts of the state. Blackouts began at 9:30 a.m. and lasted until 2 p.m. wh= en=20 authorities obtained extra power from other Western states. Outages were=20 considered less likely today.=20 But people are preparing anyway. Like low-flow toilets and earthquake kits,= =20 flashlights and generators may be emerging as another fact of life in the= =20 Golden State.=20 In San Francisco's Inner Sunset district, Han Yong Park had the satisfied= =20 smile of a well-prepared man having bought a portage generator for his Park= 's=20 Farmers Market five months ago.=20 Tuesday morning, the generator churned loudly on the sidewalk, positioned= =20 between the tomatoes and green beans. Inside, clerks tallied purchases on= =20 electric cash registers.=20 Park motioned down the street, where neon signs were dark and some=20 restaurants closed. ``No one else in the area has a generator,'' he said.= =20 Energy officials say such equipment will come in handy this summer. Power= =20 supplies are expected to be so strained that Californians should expect man= y=20 more rolling blackouts.=20 ``I don't want to kid anybody,'' said Patrick Dorinson, spokesman for the= =20 California Independent System Operator, which manages the power grid for mo= st=20 of the state. ``Supplies are very, very tight. When you look at such a big= =20 state and such a large shortfall, I think we have to prepare ourselves. It'= s=20 very possible that going into this spring and summer we're going to see som= e=20 very difficult days.''=20 Combination of factors=20 The multiple causes that conspired to darken California on Tuesday=20 underscored the difficulty officials face in keeping the lights on.=20 The thermometer shot to record-breaking levels at some locations in the Bay= =20 Area, driving up power demand. San Jose hit 83, compared with an average 66= =20 degrees for March 20, and breaking the record high of 80 set in 1960.=20 What's more, 12,000 megawatts of power were unavailable because plants had= =20 shut down for maintenance or because cash-strapped utilities haven't paid= =20 them.=20 And consumer conservation has been spotty. While state energy officials say= =20 conservation rose from 5 percent in January to 8 percent in February, grid= =20 managers said this week Californians weren't saving enough energy. They eve= n=20 revised their estimate of how much homes a megawatt can power, down from=20 1,000 homes to 750 to reflect greater consumption.=20 Improved conservation later in the day helped stave off a second wave of=20 outages, they said.=20 Many shrug off the threat of rolling blackouts.=20 ``I think I've gotten used to it,'' said Mary Carlson, 58, of San Jose, who= =20 took her granddaughter for a walk and read the paper during blackouts in=20 January. ``I just go with the flow. I'm not going to get too excited about= =20 it. If they turn the power off, it's no big thing.''=20 Erica Finn, secretary at Acacia Glass in San Francisco, said she wasn't too= =20 upset when blackouts shut down the credit card machines, electric sanders a= nd=20 phones. She bought coffee, pulled a chair into the sun and popped Madonna= =20 into her portable CD player.=20 ``I have to brush up on my tan, and get paid for it,'' she said.=20 But for others, the consequences are potentially serious.=20 At a Palo Alto dental office, the blackouts interrupted root canals for thr= ee=20 patients. Dentists Darrell Dang, Robert McWilliams and Kurtis Finley insert= ed=20 temporary fillings by hand, rescheduled the procedures, and went to lunch.= =20 The receptionist used a cell phone to cancel the afternoon's appointments,= =20 frustrated that there's no way to prevent a repeat of Tuesday's fiasco if t= he=20 blackouts continue.=20 A new routine=20 Others have taken everyday steps to cope with the threat of losing power.= =20 Stephen O'Reilly, a 34-year-old San Jose engineer who often drives to see= =20 clients, said he avoids side streets because blackouts could darken signal= =20 lights and tie up intersections.=20 ``I used to take back roads to avoid traffic, but I'm trying to use the=20 freeways more because there are no lights,'' said O'Reilly, adding that he'= s=20 shut down his electric hot tub to help conserve power.=20 At Pasta Primavera in San Mateo, manager Chris Harris has stocked up on=20 candles and has plans to buy a generator for his restaurant. When blackouts= =20 arrived just before the lunch crowd Tuesday and cut power to ventilation=20 fans, he even considered revising his menu, replacing smoke-producing chick= en=20 and shrimp with simple marinaras and alfredos.=20 ``I don't know if you'd want to dine with the smell of smoke,'' Harris said= =20 as customers trickled into his darkened restaurant on Fourth Avenue. ``If= =20 this is going to continue through the summer, it's going to affect our=20 pockets.''=20 San Francisco International Airport, which agreed months ago to shut down i= ts=20 massive air conditioners to save power during shortages, is now routinely= =20 stuffy.=20 On Tuesday the temperature reached a steamy 85 degrees inside the airport's= =20 North Terminal, which serves most of United Airlines' flights.=20 ``It's become uncomfortable if not intolerable,'' said Ron Wilson, airport= =20 spokesman. ``It's like getting in a car that's been left in the sun all day= .=20 It's much hotter inside. .?.?. We've turned on the fans but they're just=20 moving the hot air.''=20 Hospitals cut off=20 Several hospitals complained they lost power Tuesday, saying they thought= =20 they were exempt. PG&E said hospitals with sufficient backup generation to= =20 power themselves can be turned off. But state regulators said they could no= t=20 confirm that statement, and hospital officials scoffed at the suggestion.= =20 ``Every hospital has backup power generation, but it only covers 30 to 40= =20 percent of the hospital,'' said Roger Richter, a senior vice president with= =20 the Hospital Council.=20 Nonetheless, hospitals are coping with the situation.=20 ``Our patients are concerned, for sure,'' said Jackie Floyd, head nurse at= =20 the Satellite Dialysis Center South in San Jose, which lost power. ``But=20 while it's a pain, we can handle the blackouts. We're kind of getting the= =20 idea here that this a problem and we have to adjust.''=20 But while Californians may be adjusting, they're not at all pleased.=20 ``I'm frustrated with this power thing,'' said Ana Rivera, who manages the= =20 Wash Club in San Francisco, where washers and dryers had stopped mid-cycle.= =20 ``Who do you blame? No one wants to accept blame.'' Sara Neufeld, Ann Marimow, Kim Vo, Frank Sweeney, Barbara Feder, Aaron Davi= s,=20 Gil Duran, and Dave Beck contributed to this report.=20 --- --- Powerless, again=20 Outages were lighter after generators came back online and conservation=20 efforts kicked in. Blackouts may be averted today.=20 March 21, 2001=20 By TONY SAAVEDRA, JOHN HOWARD, CHRIS KNAP and JEFF COLLINS The Orange County Register=20 The Ridgewood Power methane-burning plant at the Olinda Alpha landfill in= =20 Brea is producing 3.3 megawatts, down from five, because Edison owes it $1.= 5=20 million and cranking up to full power is no longer a priority Photo: H. Lorren Au Jr. / The Register ? ? A second day of statewide blackouts ratcheted up the frustration level=20 Tuesday on the streets of Orange County and in Sacramento, as consumers=20 demanded solutions from politicians unable to give them.=20 There was a bit of good news, though: Blackouts may be averted for the rest= =20 of the week after temperatures moderated, two stalled generators came back= =20 online and conservation efforts kicked into gear.=20 ?=20 Some Orange County residents took the blackouts in stride. In Mission Viejo= ,=20 above, the West Coast Football Club's under-16 boys team scrimmages under= =20 gas-powered lights Tuesday. The club has been running to conserve energy=20 Photo: Kevin Sullivan / The Register ? ? Consumers were able to save 900 megawatts - enough to light about 675,000= =20 homes - by cutting power usage, said Patrick Dorinson, spokesman for the=20 Independent System Operator, which oversees 75 percent of the state's=20 electricity grid. That helped the ISO halt the blackouts Tuesday afternoon.= =20 ""Californians are back on the conservation trail, and we appreciate it,""=20 Dorinson said.=20 Power regulators Tuesday morning predicted there would be twice as many=20 outages as Monday, when more than 1 million consumers statewide lost power = in=20 one-hour to 90-minute increments.=20 Luis Pagan, an assistant at the Santa Ana Animal Shelter, waits out the=20 blackout Tuesday with one of the shelter's dogs up for adoption Photo: Paul E. Rodriguez / The Register ? ? Beginning at 9:30 a.m. Tuesday, blackouts tangled intersections in Costa=20 Mesa, forced Huntington Beach students to study by flashlight and stilled= =20 cash registers in Santa Ana. About a half-million homes and businesses were= =20 unplugged statewide before 2 p.m. Power was restored to most of Southern=20 California by 11:30 a.m. Outages affected more than 9,200 consumers in Oran= ge=20 County.=20 The ISO had expected more severe outages to hit at the peak hour of 7 p.m.,= =20 but was able to keep the lights on as downed power plants came back online= =20 and imports from other states increased.=20 While outages were lighter than Monday, the blackouts aggravated consumers= =20 who doubted that Gov. Gray Davis, lawmakers and electricity officials are= =20 doing enough to keep the power flowing in California.=20 ?=20 Zulema Avarez, left, and Erica Ramirez said they were caught off-guard when= =20 the power went out, so they closed the fashion store in Santa Ana where the= y=20 work Photo: Paul E. Rodriguez / The Register ? ? ""I think this is insane,"" said Charlee Lang, 63, of Costa Mesa. ""Gray Davis= =20 didn't do his job for a long time; he didn't get serious until November. We= =20 need to demand immediate action be taken.""=20 Bill Brannick, 65, of Costa Mesa, added: ""There's a lot of complicity here= =20 and we're just innocent victims.""=20 Davis, in a Sacramento news conference, said he inherited California's fail= ed=20 experiment with electricity deregulation, enacted in 1996 under former Gov.= =20 Pete Wilson.=20 ""I think a fair assessment of this situation is that we were dealt a pretty= =20 bad hand here,"" Davis said. ""No (new power) plant was approved in the 12=20 years prior to my being governor.""=20 With summer peak demand expected to be 16,000 megawatts higher than Monday= =20 and Tuesday, more days of blackouts are forecast for coming months. Though= =20 Davis has signed long-term contracts to provide California with reliable=20 energy, the deals haven't yet taken effect. Some suppliers won't start=20 providing electricity until the state reaches a so-far elusive agreement to= =20 help the utilities pay off billions in debt by buying their transmission=20 lines.=20 Assembly Republican Leader Bill Campbell, R-Villa Park, said that the effor= t=20 to resolve the ""state's energy crisis was floundering in the midst of unpai= d=20 bills, stalled negotiations and rolling blackouts.""=20 Tuesday began with 29 percent of California's power supply off line, mostly= =20 from generating plants suddenly down for unscheduled maintenance. About 3,0= 00=20 megawatts was missing from so-called qualifying facilities, or small power= =20 producers who have not been paid $1.8 billion by cash-strapped utilities an= d=20 say they can't afford to operate. Davis said he would ask the PUC to order= =20 utilities to begin paying the qualifying facilities for any energy supplied= =20 beginning April 1, but the payments would not apply to the outstanding debt= .=20 Some smaller producers threatened to force Edison into involuntary bankrupt= cy=20 if they are not paid soon.=20 Blackouts began Tuesday two hours earlier than on Monday, as the ISO called= =20 on utilities to dump 500 megawatts. It was only the second day of blackouts= =20 for Southern California, but the fourth for Northern California since=20 January.=20 The Disney Resort, which includes Disneyland and the new California=20 Adventure, voluntarily cut back one megawatt of electricity on Monday and= =20 again Tuesday, said Anaheim Public Utilities.=20 All of the reductions were in backstage areas not seen by guests, said Disn= ey=20 spokeswoman Chela Castano-Lenahan.=20 In other workplaces, people tried to make do.=20 Flashlight beams bobbed in aisles at a Target in Santa Ana, where the power= =20 stopped at 10:30 a.m. Workers escorted customers, who continued shopping an= d=20 made their purchases at battery-powered cash registers. Customers were=20 eventually asked to leave when the batteries ran low.=20 ""Oh well; no soda, no sunglasses,"" said one woman as she headed back to her= =20 car.=20 The Metro Pointe shopping center in Costa Mesa also went dark.=20 ""I was in the middle of making a reservation when everything went out,"" sai= d=20 Peggy Thomas, a sales executive for Travel of America, along South Coast=20 Drive. ""All of us here went, 'Oh no, it's happened to us.' ""=20 Said one Costa Mesa police officer, as he headed for his motorcycle and a= =20 blackout-related fender bender: ""You can thank the governor for that one.""= =20 At Hawes Elementary School in Huntington Beach, Principal Marie Smith was= =20 demonstrating to her third-grade class what would happen in a blackout. But= =20 before she could flip off the light switch, the power died.=20 The kids thought she was joking.=20 Register staff writers Tiffany Montgomery, Sarah Tully Tapia, Nancy Luna, J= im=20 Radcliffe, Binh Ha Hong, Theresa Salinas, Eric Johnson and Danielle Herubin= =20 and the Associated Press contributed to this report.=20 --- --- The iceman shunneth effects of hourlong blackout=20 March 21, 2001=20 By JIM RADCLIFFE The Orange County Register=20 Ken Ackerman, owner of ABC Ice House in Laguna Niguel, checks on his frozen= =20 inventory during Tuesday morning's rolling blackout. The ice managed to=20 endure the hourlong power outage Photo: Jebb Harris / The Register ? ? Ken Ackerman didn't sweat much when a blackout struck his Laguna Niguel ice= =20 business at 10:30 a.m. Tuesday.=20 The walk-in freezer at ABC Ice House held 8 tons of ice. And for an hour, t= he=20 temperature in there rose from 20 degrees to 45 degrees.=20 But very little melted.=20 Ackerman said most refrigerators can handle blackouts as long as outages ar= e=20 less than two hours.=20 ""I think people are going to get used to one-hour blackouts and realize it'= s=20 not a problem,'' Ackerman said.=20 The blackouts actually were profitable for Ackerman.=20 An Irvine laboratory struck by a power outage bought 100 pounds of dry ice = to=20 preserve human tissue.=20 More blackouts through the summer could be a boon for the ice business - or= a=20 bust.=20 It could mean more ice sales -- or that his supplier has trouble filling hi= s=20 orders.=20 ""It's going to be an interesting summer,'' Ackerman said.=20 ""I have no idea if we'll make more or less.''=20 Traffic will be the biggest problem if blackouts continue, Ackerman said.= =20 On Monday, a nearby Costco that had lost power ordered 200 pounds of ice to= =20 keep its refrigerated goods cold.=20 But dead traffic lights and congested roads made it impossible to deliver t= he=20 ice before the outage ended. Costco canceled the sale.=20 ""We pride ourselves on getting our deliveries made in an hour,"" Ackerman=20 said.=20 --- --- Traffic officials are seeing red over blackouts=20 Battery backups are planned by several cities to aid confused drivers.=20 March 21, 2001=20 By HEATHER LOURIE The Orange County Register=20 Traffic backs up Tuesday at Crown Valley Parkway at Forbes Road in Laguna= =20 Niguel as drivers had to navigate their own way Photo: Jebb Harris / The Register ? ? Toby Tran approached an Aliso Viejo intersection and wasn't sure what to do= .=20 Ahead of him, the traffic signal was dark, a casualty of the rolling=20 blackouts that struck Orange County on Monday and Tuesday.=20 So Tran kept driving, smacking into an oncoming car at the corner of Aliso= =20 Creek and Enterprise.=20 ""It just happened,"" a shaken Tran, 29, said from his Aliso Viejo home. ""I= =20 tried to stop and I couldn't. There was no light. Nothing.""=20 Tran's accident Monday afternoon, and several others like it, underscore on= e=20 of the most significant dangers looming in the threat of future blackouts.= =20 Traffic signals that fade to black when the power goes out, instead of=20 converting to flashing red, make wrecks far more likely because drivers=20 become confused and frustrated, traffic engineers and experts said Tuesday.= =20 ""I didn't know what to do,"" said Tran, who was on his way to a high school= =20 jogging track. ""Luckily I'm alive, but I'm very scared.""=20 On Day 2 of Southern California's power outages, worried city officials=20 across Orange County hunted for ways to respond to paralyzed intersections= =20 when state regulators pull the plug.=20 ""We need to be ready,"" said Hamid Bahadori, traffic engineer in the city of= =20 Orange. ""This thing is only going to get worse in July and August.""=20 One popular idea: installing emergency battery-backup units at traffic=20 signals to keep lights flashing red during blackouts. Several Orange County= =20 cities, including Irvine, Laguna Niguel and Orange, are already moving to= =20 install the devices as early as this summer.=20 ""In our minds, (a flashing light) is a vast improvement over a blacked-out= =20 signal,"" said Dave Rogers, Laguna Niguel traffic engineer. On Tuesday night= ,=20 his city was expected to approve the purchase of the battery packs for all = 74=20 of its traffic signals.=20 ""Timing, in this case, seems to be everything,"" Rogers said. ""A lot of citi= es=20 had contemplated it. We just took it that extra step.""=20 John Thai, an Anaheim traffic engineer, cautioned that cities need to do=20 adequate research and testing before they launch into such projects.=20 ""There is nothing that is foolproof,"" Thai said. ""All this is new territory= .""=20 Some cities are also considering rolling out temporary stop signs and sendi= ng=20 police officers to more intersections.=20 Although the state's vehicle code requires motorists to treat dead traffic= =20 signals like a four-way stop, motorists often blow through the intersection= s,=20 police said.=20 ""It's dangerous,"" said Tustin police Lt. Mike Shanahan, after several=20 near-wrecks in his city during Monday's outages. ""People are not very good = at=20 reacting to changes in their conditions.=20 ""Flashing red is something that catches your eye. It's a warning that=20 something is amiss, but the absence of all lights is worse.""=20 RELATED STORIES=20 =01=07 How to contact your Representatives =01=07 'Current' events =01=07 The iceman shunneth effects of hourlong blackout =01=07 Powerless, again =01=07 Alternative power producers cut back or shut down as payments from b= ig=20 utilities lag =01=07 O.C. saves its energy -- for blaming others =01=07 Blackout readiness on agenda --- --- Alternative power producers cut back or shut down as payments from big=20 utilities lag=20 That is a factor in blackouts=20 March 21, 2001=20 By HANH KIM QUACH The Orange County Register=20 Every megawatt of electricity counts in this deregulated energy market -=20 including the five megawatts generated from the Olinda Alpha landfill in=20 Brea.=20 The methane-burning plant is producing only 3.3 megawatts now because=20 Southern California Edison owes it $1.5 million and cranking up to full pow= er=20 is no longer a priority, said Martin Quinn, executive vice president of=20 Ridgewood Power, which runs the plant.=20 ""We're doing maintenance now when we ordinarily wouldn't do it. Because we'= re=20 not being paid, it was a good time to cut back,'' Quinn said.=20 That scenario has been playing out across the state in the past two weeks a= nd=20 was a major factor in Monday's and Tuesday's blackouts.=20 Those who provide electricity through alternative means - burning methane o= r=20 wood chips, or using cleaner-burning technology with traditional fossil fue= ls=20 - are not being paid for what they sell to the big utilities. So they eithe= r=20 can't afford to produce energy or see little incentive to do so.=20 On Monday, their absence from the statewide electricity grid created a=20 1,300-megawatt shortfall -- enough to power 1.3 million homes.=20 Taking that much power offline meant that any burp in the system would put= =20 the state under the minimum amount of electricity needed to avoid blackouts= .=20 When one conventional Southern California plant went down because of a=20 transformer fire Monday, the blackouts began.=20 ""If all of California's (alternative) generators were operating yesterday a= nd=20 today, rolling blackouts would have been avoided,'' Quinn said Tuesday.=20 Within the next couple of weeks, as the weather warms and alternative energ= y=20 producers continue to try and operate without money, California could see= =20 twice as many of those producers go offline, further increasing the potenti= al=20 for blackouts, said Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of Independent=20 Energy Producers.=20 The alternative energy producers, which provide about a third of the state'= s=20 energy, are deemed so crucial that Gov. Gray Davis wants the Public Utiliti= es=20 Commission to order the utilities to pay them. As drafted, though, the orde= r=20 would only include payment on future sales; it doesn't address existing deb= t.=20 The Legislature has been working since January to halve the rates that=20 alternative producers charge utilities and to require utilities to pay for= =20 November's energy by April 1. But that bill is still moving through the=20 Legislature.=20 Small plants threaten Edison with bankruptcy=20 Smutny-Jones said that if the small generators are not paid promptly, sever= al=20 will attempt to force Edison into bankruptcy, probably within a week.=20 Unlike the large natural-gas generators that have been paid by the state=20 Department of Water Resources, alternative energy producers are locked into= =20 contracts with utilities. Collectively, Pacific Gas & Electric and Edison o= we=20 alternative energy producers about $1 billion.=20 PG&E has paid about 15 cents for each dollar it owes.=20 ""Obviously, they're a source of generation, and looking at how much load ou= r=20 customers need, they're a source that has provided energy,'' said Jon=20 Tremayne, Pacific Gas & Electric spokesman. ""We've been trying, in good=20 faith, to make payments on energy.''=20 But Edison has not paid any money. Edison's alternative energy director, La= rs=20 Bergmann, said the company will not pay until larger reforms are made in ho= w=20 the producers' rates are calculated.=20 But the company recognizes that its nonpayment is causing problems.=20 ""To the extent that there are hundreds of megawatts that are idled here, it= =20 just exacerbates the (energy) problem. ... They're facing similar problems = to=20 what we faced - they don't have sufficient (income) coming in the door,''= =20 Bergmann said.=20 Plants go into mothball mode=20 Millenium Energy in Kern County is owed $40 million total by PG&E and Ediso= n.=20 On March 1, the company shut down both of its coal and petroleum coke-burni= ng=20 plants and doesn't plan to bring them back up until it is paid.=20 Millenium's plants, which use a special technology to reduce emissions,=20 generate 150 megawatts of energy.=20 ""We've gone into mothball mode; our machinery just sits there on cold=20 standby,'' said President Mike Hawkins. ""We've been delivering free electro= ns=20 to the system in the hope that the system would resolve itself. But we can'= t=20 do that anymore.""=20 One biomass plant in Lassen County has scaled back from 31 megawatts to=20 eight. Burney Forest Power burns wood chips to produce energy and has only = a=20 couple weeks' supply of chips left.=20 ""When you don't even know what you'll get paid, it's hard to say, 'Let's go= =20 out and get a bunch of fuel,''' said Milt Schultz, the plant's general=20 manager.=20 ""The sad thing is, (the state) really can't afford to lose us.''=20 --- --- O.C. saves its energy -- for blaming others=20 March 21, 2001=20 By RICHARD CHANG The Orange County Register=20 Darkened stores were forced to turn away customers, as stock manager=20 Bridgette Kelly, left, does here at a Linens 'n Things in Costa Mesa. The= =20 store closed for 45 minutes Tuesday morning Photo: Michael Kitada / The Orange County Register ? ? Orange County residents are making efforts, large and small, to conserve=20 electricity as they face rolling blackouts and surging energy bills.=20 Reactions to the early spring crisis - with blackouts throughout the state= =20 Monday and Tuesday - are ranging from confusion to rage.=20 Many residents have taken practical steps, such as turning off lights they'= re=20 not using, waiting until off-peak hours to do their laundry and opening=20 windows instead of using air conditioning.=20 ""My house is full of Philips energy-saving light bulbs,"" said Ray Rutledge,= =20 48, of Buena Park. ""Our light bill has dropped 7 1/2 percent. We use=20 low-voltage outdoor lighting. We've got an energy-saving thermostat. It's s= et=20 back to 65 (degrees) in the wintertime.""=20 Kim Wilson, who lives in an unincorporated area of Orange County near Santa= =20 Ana and Tustin, said he has cut down on lighting in his house and has reduc= ed=20 by half the time his pool cleaner runs. Still, his energy bill remains abou= t=20 $400 a month.=20 ""I don't know what ... to do,"" Wilson, 57, said. ""We've cut back.""=20 Wilson added that he is not pleased with the way government or the energy= =20 companies have handled the crisis.=20 ""I think it's disgusting. It's such political garbage. Who was it that made= =20 these decisions? Who got us into it?""=20 'TRYING TO CONSERVE'=20 Jenny Hann, 60, of Costa Mesa said her workplace has devised an emergency= =20 plan for conservation and future blackouts.=20 ""We're definitely trying to conserve as much as we can,"" the bank=20 administrator said. Hann expressed frustration with the energy companies.= =20 ""When you see these executives that have been running the show and the mone= y=20 they're making, it's bothersome,"" she said.=20 Jennifer Souto, 27, of Tustin said even though she's a stay-at-home mother,= =20 she keeps the lights off all day. She doesn't use her air conditioning,=20 either.=20 Souto said she was locked out of her house for 90 minutes Monday because a= =20 blackout cut power to her garage door. She says she's not sure who to blame= .=20 Paul Finch, 38, of Westminster blames Edison and Gov. Gray Davis.=20 ""I don't believe info I get from Edison or from our illustrious governor,""= =20 Finch said. ""There's more to it than how they've represented it.""=20 --- --- Blackout readiness on agenda=20 O.C. companies braced for outages Tuesday in different ways. Not all were= =20 struck, but they felt the effects.=20 March 21, 2001=20 By TAMARA CHUANG The Orange County Register=20 In case of a power failure Tuesday, the Fluor Corp. in Aliso Viejo stocked= =20 elevators with homemade blackout kits, filled with cookies, flashlights and= =20 bottles of water.=20 ""They're in the elevators, although we've been told not to use the=20 elevators,"" said Lori Serrato, a company spokeswoman. ""We're using the=20 stairwells, waiting for our time of darkness.""=20 Tales of anxious preparation were more common than actual blackouts for=20 Orange County businesses Tuesday.=20 Edison told some companies, as special power users who've agreed to cut bac= k=20 when asked, to expect to do so. Conexant Systems Inc. got a warning from=20 Edison and immediately shut down air conditioning and equipment not in use,= =20 and stopped production. The blackout never came.=20 Kingston Technology Co., when notified by Edison on Tuesday morning,=20 broadcast the warning on the company intercom. The company also e-mailed=20 employees a guide explaining the blackout.=20 ""It's already affected productivity. We've been busy getting all our e-mail= s=20 out before it happens,"" said Heather Jardin, a spokeswoman for the Fountain= =20 Valley computer memory maker.=20 Kingston still had power by day's end, but in an emergency, the company's= =20 manufacturing plants revert to Kingston's own power generators, Jardin said= .=20 Heart valve maker Edwards Lifesciences turned on its backup generators=20 Tuesday morning, ""because of the potential for there to be a blackout in ou= r=20 area,"" said company spokesman Scott Nelson. But (as of 3:30 p.m.) the=20 blackout didn't materialize, Nelson said.=20 At the regional office in Irvine, Verizon Wireless implemented conservation= =20 efforts, such as motion sensors that shut off lights after 30 minutes of=20 inactivity, and separate heating and air conditioning units on all floors.= =20 Some of the company's cell sites in Orange County and Los Angeles did lose= =20 power Monday and Tuesday, but they automatically switched to backup battery= =20 sources.=20 Other companies - PacifiCare, ICN Pharmaceuticals, Beckman Coulter and=20 Allergan - said they took precautions, turning out some hallway lights and= =20 communicating safety procedures to employees.=20 Disneyland, Ingram Micro in Santa Ana and Western Digital Corp. in Lake=20 Forest all were prepared.=20 But none reported blackouts by day's end.=20 Some county businesses did get hit.=20 Businesses along the 900 block of South Coast Drive - including 14 stores a= t=20 the Metro Point shopping center in Costa Mesa - went dark about 10:20 a.m.= =20 ""All of a sudden it was dark,"" said Henry Gonzalez, manager of Boudin Baker= y.=20 ""We ran out of coffee. We couldn't bake anything. We tried to accommodate a= s=20 best as we can.""=20 Other stores simply closed during the blackout, frustrating shoppers.=20 ""We walked over to (Marshalls) and it was dark and there was a sign on the= =20 door that said 'Due to the blackout, we're closed,'"" said shopper Roberta= =20 Allison, a West Virginia tourist. ""Don't they warn people here? Do they jus= t=20 whack the power off?""=20 Marshalls employees escorted customers out of the store when the power went= =20 out. Other stores, including Nordstrom Rack and Best Buy, were not affected= .=20 Across the street from the center, employees spilled out of office building= s=20 cheering and waving their hands in victory as power outages forced them to= =20 halt work.=20 ""Lots of people just walked out of the office to run errands,"" said Amy=20 Bateman, a loan officer at Capital Funding Group in Costa Mesa.=20 She said her office building, at 940 South Coast Drive, went dark for about= =20 70 minutes. Like dozens of others in the building, she was working at her= =20 desk when the computers and lights went dark.=20 ""We've just been sitting around. We can't do anything,"" said Bateman.=20 The blackout hit other businesses on Monday.=20 Buy.com employees spent their hour without power using their wireless=20 Blackberry pagers to answer and send e-mail.=20 The Crazy Horse Steakhouse in Irvine lost power after the lunch rush, said= =20 Donna Mulkey, the restaurant's manager. Since the broilers remained hot, th= e=20 cooks kept cooking and the customers kept eating. When they finished, waite= rs=20 calculated the bills by hand.=20 At Broadcom Corp. in Irvine, the power went out just before Rep. Christophe= r=20 Cox was to tour the facility.=20 ""It struck me as particularly ironic,"" Cox told members of the House=20 subcommittee on energy and air quality Tuesday, that Broadcom's co-founder,= =20 Henry Samueli, ""spent the hour before the meeting using a letter opener to= =20 open his paper mail and sitting by the window so he could get some sunlight= =20 to read.""=20 Cox, R-Newport Beach, told the panel, which was holding a hearing on=20 California's electricity crisis, that ""the entire company could not functio= n=20 during this period of time and the same was true for more than a million=20 people,"" he said. ""It's a Third World experience in California.""=20 Register reporters Chris Farnsworth, Dena Bunis, Bernard Wolfson, Nancy Lun= a,=20 Eric Johnson, Elizabeth Aguilera and Jennifer Hieger contributed to this=20 story.=20 --- --- Calif To Order Utils To Pay Small Generators Up Front-Gov 03/21/2001=20 Dow Jones Energy Service=20 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)=20 SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP)-- California regulators will order the state's two= =20 largest utilities to pay small, independent power generators in advance, a= =20 move Gov. Gray Davis hopes will bring a quick end to the blackouts that=20 darkened California this week.=20 Davis accused PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Edison= =20 International (EIX) unit Southern California Edison of taking in money from= =20 customers while failing to pay the generators, known as qualifying=20 facilities, which produce up to one-third of the state's power. As a result= ,=20 he said, the utilities are partly responsible for this week's blackouts.=20 ""It's wrong and irresponsible of the utilities to pocket this money and not= =20 pay the generators,"" the governor said at a Capitol news conference Tuesday= =20 evening. ""They've acted irresponsibly and immorally and it has to stop.""=20 The state lost about 3,100 megawatts, or enough electricity to power 3.1=20 million homes, on Tuesday from alternative energy plants that say they can'= t=20 afford to keep operating because the utilities haven't paid their bills in= =20 weeks. The utilities, which are near bankruptcy, owe the QFs about $1=20 billion. Pacific Gas & Electric has made partial payments.=20 As reported by Dow Jones Newswires, Southern California Edison met with=20 representatives of the governor Tuesday to discuss plans to begin making=20 partial payments to the QFs. Pacific Gas & Electric , which called Davis'= =20 statements ""inappropriate and unjustified,"" said it has informed the QFs an= d=20 the governor's office that it plans to begin paying the QFs in full going= =20 forward.=20 Davis said the PUC planned to issue an order next week directing the=20 utilities to prepay future bills to the QFs.=20 Edison and PG&E say they have lost more than $13 billion since last June to= =20 climbing wholesale electricity prices, which the state's 1996 deregulation= =20 law prevents them from passing on to ratepayers. California has been spendi= ng=20 about $45 million a day since January to buy power for the utilities'=20 customers, but hasn't included QF-generated power in its purchases.=20 Keepers of the state's power grid were cautiously optimistic that Californi= a=20 might get through Wednesday without another day of rolling blackouts after= =20 two idle plants were returned to service. A Stage 1 power alert, the mildes= t=20 of three forms of alerts, was called around 6 a.m. Wednesday as power=20 reserves fell to around 7 percent.=20 About a half-million customers were hit by Tuesday's blackouts, which snarl= ed=20 traffic and plunged schools and businesses into darkness from San Diego to= =20 the Oregon border. Tuesday's outages began at 9:30 a.m. and continued in=20 90-minute waves until about 2 p.m., when the ISO lifted its blackout order.= =20 They were blamed for at least one serious traffic accident.=20 The blackouts were caused by a combination of problems, including=20 unseasonably warm weather, reduced electricity imports from the Pacific=20 Northwest, numerous power plants being shut down for repairs and the loss o= f=20 power from QFs.=20 Meanwhile, a leading lawmaker on energy issues said the PUC may soon have t= o=20 raise rates by about 15% to cover the state's costs and its utilities' bill= s.=20 ""My sense is that people will appreciate having some certainty and being ab= le=20 to plan for it,"" said Assemblyman Fred Keeley. ""They don't have to like it,= =20 but I think they'll appreciate it.""=20 Davis has said he is confident the utilities and the state can pay their=20 bills without further rate increases.=20 --- --- PG&E Says It Is Negotiating With Qualifying Facilities 03/21/2001=20 Dow Jones Energy Service=20 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)=20 (This article was originally published Tuesday)=20 =20 LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas and Electric Co= .=20 said Tuesday it is offering small generators, or ""qualifying facilities"",= =20 prepayment of $200 million per month so they will have the funds to return = to=20 the state power grid.=20 But high level sources at the qualifying facilities who are involved in the= =20 negotiations said PG&E's proposal is incomplete and doesn't address the iss= ue=20 of past due payments.=20 The sources said PG&E had discussions with some qualifying facility operato= rs=20 last week regarding the plan and it wasn't accepted at that time.=20 About 3,000 megawatts of power from qualifying facilities, or QFs, have bee= n=20 off the state's grid since Monday because the generators weren't being paid= =20 by utilities and couldn't afford to continue operating. The QFs unavailable= =20 power was partly responsible for Monday and Tuesday's statewide rolling=20 blackouts.=20 Also Tuesday, California Gov. Gray Davis will hold a press conference to=20 discuss progress made in negotiations with the QFs to revise their contract= s=20 with the state's two nearly-bankrupt utilities so that the utilities pay le= ss=20 for power.=20 Edison International (EIX) unit Southern California Edison also said Tuesda= y=20 it intends to make partial payments on an ongoing basis to some QFs.=20 Edison executives met with Gov. Gray Davis' negotiating team Tuesday to=20 discuss how and when SoCal Ed can begin to make payments, and a spokesman= =20 said they hope to have a plan in a matter of days.=20 Pacific Gas & Electric Co. has made partial payments of about $51 million t= o=20 the QFs it contracts with, but owes much more. Edison owes the QFs hundreds= =20 of millions of dollars and hasn't paid the QFs since November. Together, th= e=20 two utilities owe QFs about $1 billion.=20 PG&E said it has been collecting about $400 million per month from ratepaye= rs=20 to pay QFs and other generators with which it has bilateral contracts, the= =20 state grid operator for spot power purchases, and costs of its own=20 generation.=20 The average combined bill for those costs exceeds $1.4 billion per month,= =20 PG&E said.=20 ""This mismatch between revenues and costs requires tough choices. Since the= re=20 isn't enough money in rates to cover all these costs, the Public Utilities= =20 Commission decision on how this $400 million will be allocated going forwar= d=20 will determine our ability to make advance payments to QFs,"" said Gordon R.= =20 Smith, the utility's president and CEO.=20 The PUC is responsible for implementing the legislation which allows the=20 state to buy power and will decide how much of utilities' ratepayer revenue= =20 will go to the state for power purchases and how much will go to the=20 utilities.=20 For several weeks, a number of QFs have taken their generating units offlin= e=20 because they can no longer afford to buy fuel needed to run their units.=20 QFs supply California with one-third of its total power supply.=20 PG&E and SoCal Ed have almost $13 billion in purchased power undercollectio= ns=20 because they cannot collect full costs from customers protected by a=20 state-mandated rate freeze.=20 -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872;=20 -(Jason Leopold contributed to this article.)=20 --- -------------------- Wednesday, March 21, 2001=20 By Dave Todd=20 dtodd@ftenergy.com=20 U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham declared this week that the Big Apple= =20 is on the verge of being bitten hard by power cuts and rising energy prices= . Delivering the keynote address at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's national= =20 energy summit in Washington Monday, Abraham said, ""California is not the on= ly=20 state facing a mismatch between supply and demand,"" what with ""electricity= =20 shortages predicted for New York City and Long Island this summer"" and low= =20 capacity margins threatening electricity reliability elsewhere across the= =20 country. But how likely is it that New Yorkers will face blackouts of the= =20 sort confronting Californians?=20 Not very, says energy trade specialist Edward Krapels, managing director of= =20 Boston-based METIS Trading Advisors. Krapels, a consultant helping major=20 Northeastern utilities, such as Consolidated Edison, design market-hedging= =20 programs, adamantly decried what he said are facile comparisons between=20 conditions in New York and California, there being ""more differences than= =20 there are similarities"" between those two industrial cornerstones of the=20 country's economy in respect to energy security management.=20 ""First of all, New York has a more varied portfolio of energy generation=20 sources than California,"" he said. California has hydro, nuclear and gas, b= ut=20 when it lost a lot of hydro, the state needed gas to pick up the slack, and= =20 the ""capacity just wasn't there."" In New York's case, the state has oil and= =20 coal still in the mix and its overall dependence on gas is much lower than= =20 California's, Krapels added.=20 New York avoids making same mistakes Portfolio diversity is one pillar of any effective plan to help New York=20 avoid the same errors made in redesigning California's marketplace. New=20 York's Independent System Operator (ISO), in a new report warning that the= =20 state is at an ""energy crossroads"" in terms of its capacity adequacy in the= =20 immediate future, argues that a concerted effort is required to arrest=20 declining in-state generation capacity reserve margins, and a strategy must= =20 be put in place, whether or not new generation comes on-line, in accordance= =20 with current anticipated scenarios.=20 A measure of New York's essential difficulty is that, between 1995 and 2000= ,=20 statewide demand for electricity grew 2,700 MW, while generating capacity= =20 expanded by only 1,060 MW. With no major new generating plants in downstate= =20 New York fully approved, the gap is expected to continue to widen. To avoid= =20 ""a replication of California's market meltdown"" the New York ISO calculates= =20 the state's daily generating capacity needs to grow by 8,600 MW by 2005, wi= th=20 more than half of that located in New York City and on Long Island.=20 Expressing concern this may be too big a burden for the current bureaucrati= c=20 process to bear, the ISO wants to see a state-appointed ombudsman named to= =20 help would-be merchant power plant investors plow through red tape.=20 ""Increasing New York's generating capacity will also lessen the state's=20 escalating and risky reliance on out-of-state sources of electricity,"" the= =20 ISO added. ""Since 1999, New York State has been unable to cover its reserve= =20 requirements from in-state sources.""=20 Not everyone agrees with that analysis, insofar as it argues for circling t= he=20 wagons inward. Some analysts believe the ultimate solution lies not in tyin= g=20 in more inwardly dedicated power, but in expanding the marketplace by=20 breaking down inter-jurisdictional barriers. In any case, New York energy= =20 regulatory authorities and those responsible elsewhere in the U.S. Northeas= t,=20 such as PJM (Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland) Interconnection and the New= =20 England Power Pool, are in vastly better shape in terms of ""cross-border""= =20 cooperation than California and its neighbors in that efforts are being mad= e=20 among various authorities toward developing an integrated regional=20 electricity market. In California, by contrast, the state's focus=01*for=20 example, in the case of new gas-fired power plant development=01*has been t= o=20 ensure dedicated supply to the California market alone, rather than on a=20 regional marketplace.=20 The New York ISO's new broad-based analysis of market-restructuring needs= =20 argues that the relatively stronger health of its reformed environment is= =20 ""due in large part to the ability of New York's utilities to enter into=20 long-term power contracts.""=20 What needs to be done most, it says, is to move aggressively to build some = of=20 the more than 29,000 MW of ""proposed new generation in the siting pipeline.= ""=20 In the meantime, the 30,200 MW of electricity New Yorkers used on a peak da= y=20 last summer shouldn't be eclipsed on too many days this coming summer (give= n=20 early long-range weather forecasts). Demand, however, is expected to increa= se=20 at an annual average rate of up to 1.4%.=20 So while New York City, the rest of the state and adjacent parts might=20 breathe easy this year, it could be a brief rest from the fray. Meanwhile, = a=20 4% shortfall is still being planned for this summer that is not yet provide= d=20 for, as authorities hurriedly seek to arrange new generation plants around= =20 Manhattan, on Long Island and even on barges offshore.=20 One way or another, whether it is the weather or the politics of siting new= =20 energy facilities, it's going to be a hot time in the city.=20 Long-term solutions hit brick wall Meanwhile, attempts at longer-term solutions continue to run into trouble.= =20 Last week, Connecticut state regulators came out against a proposal to run = a=20 new underwater cable under Long Island Sound that Hydro-Quebec subsidiary= =20 TransEnergie U.S. Ltd. wants to build to pump more juice into Long Island= =20 Power Authority's load pocket. Despite strong promises from TransEnergie to= =20 be diligent in avoiding damage to oyster beds in Long Island Sound, the=20 proposal failed to convince authorities, who were persuaded the pipeline=20 project could lead to diversion of electricity from Connecticut.=20 In similar fashion, private companies wanting to build 10 small independent= =20 power plants and temporary generators offshore New York City are running in= to=20 intense opposition from environmental groups and citizen organizations=01*s= ome=20 of whom have taken their cases to the state assembly in Albany.=20 The David vs. Goliath nature of such controversies has further alerted ener= gy=20 companies to the difficulties of addressing complex energy supply issues th= at=20 may ultimately devolve to people not wanting things in their backyard,=20 regardless of what the alternative might mean to their fellow citizens or t= he=20 greater public good.=20 But suddenly, in New York, California's troubles=01*while still distant in = their=20 intensity=01* may not be so far away. By some estimates, this summer's bill= s for=20 Consolidated Edison customers could be up as much as one third or more over= =20 last year's charges.=20 Letting the time slip when it comes to building new infrastructure isn't=20 going to make the pain go away.=20 =20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= ISO's Response to BPA Rebuttal of Sheffrin Study--Confidential Atty
 Client work product; [EMail-Body]= I recommend reading CAISO's response. This letter was reported in last week's trade press. I am told that BPA does not consider this letter confidential even though it is labeled as such by CAISO. Many of the CAISO ""backpedal"" statements made re: claims of strategic bidding would apply equally to other importers. Alan Comnes [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re:; [EMail-Body]= Yes From: Jeff Dasovich on 04/19/2001 03:45 PM Sent by: Jeff Dasovich To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Re: Make sense for me to attend the meeting? Steven J Kean 04/19/2001 12:31 PM To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan M Landwehr/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT Subject: I got a voicemail fro Ken. He would be happy to meet with Freeman. He is willing to work on other times, but suggested the following After 3:00 on May 2nd (right after Ken's speech to the RGA) or late the day before or in the morning of the second (to do this though he would have to cancel his speech to the Texas Governor's business council but he is willing to do this if necessary) His least preferred alternative in this general time frame would be early morning on the third. Jeff -- could you coordinate with Rosie to get the time and place nailed down? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: A Special Announcement from eMarketer's CEO; [EMail-Body]= Martin, You may find it useful. Vince -----Original Message----- From: gpramsey@emarketer.com@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 11:10 AM To: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ENRON Subject: A Special Announcement from eMarketer's CEO - att1.htm - att2.eml <Embedded Picture (Device Independent Bitmap)> <Embedded Picture (Device Independent Bitmap)> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= confidential employee information; [EMail-Body]= Oxley asked that I send you a few bullets on Tom Martin. Please see below and let me know if you need further info. Feedback from two exit interviews from voluntary terminations in regard to Tom is as follows: ""was treated as inferior by my manager"" ""was lied to and insulted by my supervisor"" Tom ""berates employees in front of others and blames underlings for his mistakes. Additionally, he second guessed every position I put on, sold me out of positions (which turned out good) and used all our allocated VAR for his own benefit."" Tom ""has a reputation for not representing employees well in the end of year review process. I found this to be the case as well."" ""Tom is difficult to communicate with"" Additionally, we had an incident w/ an employee when Tom offered her an employment agreement. She felt that she was being forced to sign the agreement When she declined the agreement and turned in resignation, she said that Tom said he would make it difficult for her to leave She said that she felt threatened by Tom Her boy friend called Tom and threatened him As a result, Legal asked Tom not to have further contact with the employee. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Suggested Approach; [EMail-Body]= Please see the attached. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: ENE Officer Elections; [EMail-Body]= No. We have reallocated some of the responsibilities, but Cindy has a significant part of the HR organization and continues to manage Community Relations, so her title is accurate. Thanks From: Kelly Johnson/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/19/2001 01:06 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: RE: ENE Officer Elections Thanks, Steve. Do we need to change Cindy Olson's title? Let me know. -----Original Message----- From: Kean, Steven Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 1:03 PM To: Johnson, Kelly Subject: Re: ENE Officer Elections We should include David Oxley -- VP of human resources. From: Kelly Johnson/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/18/2001 11:13 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: ENE Officer Elections Steve: Please review the attached ENE Officer list for your direct reports and approve. Thank you. << File: KEAN.doc >> Kelly M. Johnson Enron Corp. Executive Assistant Tel: (713) 853-6485 Fax: (713) 853-2534 E-Mail: kelly.johnson@enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Jeff on CNN; [EMail-Body]= fyi -- further distribute this message as you see fit. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/16/2001 01:37 PM --------------------------- Karen Denne 05/15/2001 09:07 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Vance Meyer/NA/Enron@ENRON Subject: Jeff on CNN fyi... ---------------------- Forwarded by Karen Denne/Corp/Enron on 05/15/2001 08:54 PM --------------------------- Vance Meyer 05/15/2001 06:47 PM To: Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Joannie Williamson/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Meredith Philipp/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Ann M Schmidt/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Jeff on CNN Here are the scheduled times for Jeff's ""The Players"" segment on ""Business Unusual,"" the taping he did for Arthur Anderson. Vance CNN Sunday, May 20th 5:30 Central (a.m. and p.m.) CNNfn Monday, 5/21 - Friday, 5/25 7:00 p.m. & 10:30 p.m. Central CNN international Europe: Saturday, 5/19: 1130 CET Sunday, 5/20: 1930 CET Asia: Saturday, 5/19: 1030 HK Sunday, 5/20: 1630 HK Latin America: Saturday, 5/19: 930 BA Sunday, 5/20: 1030 BA [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Purchased TWA ticket for flight Des Moines/DC.  Didn't use United
 ticket for this leg.; [EMail-Body]= In DC to do Lou Pai's speech. You speak between 10:30 and 12:00. 3:00 House staff briefing by John Runyon of International Paper [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= NAES/ Regulatory Meeting in 29C2.; [EMail-Body]= Joe Hartsoe to handle. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: US and Philippines; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Mujica, Mitra On Behalf Of Raymond, Maureen Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 1:19 AM To: Shahi, Pushkar; Hudler, Cindy; Stuart III, William Cc: Kaminski, Vince J; Koepke, Gwyn Subject: US and Philippines Hello! Enclosed are the curves for the US and the Philippines. Mitra on behalf of Maureen Raymond [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential - Decision tree on projects; [EMail-Body]= Something for us to talk about during our next staff meeting. There are three projects which have significant cash flow problems and thus= difficulties in meeting debt obligations: these are: SECLP, Panama and Gaz= a. In the past, as I suppose we have done in Dabhol, we have taken the pos= ition that we would not inject cash into these companies and would be prepa= red to face a default and possible acceleration of the loans. SECLP has be= en the biggest issue/problem. Panama is much less (a few million of floati= ng of our receivables from the company) would be sufficient to meet the cas= h crunch in April of this year. Note that, in Panama, the debt is fully gu= aranteed by the government and is non-recoursed to the operating company, B= LM. In the past, we have discussed letting the debt default, which would c= ause the bank to potentially seek complete payment and acceleration from th= e GoPanama. The reason: the vast majority of BLM's problems stem from acti= ons taken by the regulator that have effectively amended our PPA's with pri= vate parties; those actions resulted in significant loss of revenues, which= although today have stopped or have been limited, have left a ""mark"" on th= e company's liquidity position. =20 Now the question is: come April of 2002, should any of our actions in Panam= a or decisions related thereto (which we would have otherwise taken or made= ) be affected in any way by either the proposed merger or an effort by Enro= n to preserve efforts to re-establish investor/creditor confidence? The sa= me could go for SECLP and Gaza. This is simply an overall ""guidance"" question. Let's take it up during our= staff meeting next week, if that's ok with you. Many thanks, Mariella [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: PJM RTO Order; [EMail-Body]= Great summary. I think the two main issues you raise are the right ones, b= ut I have one other thought we should discuss internally. Do we want to cr= eate a set of incentives for the management of PJM that would entitle manag= ement to incentive compensation to the extent they meet certain goals -- eg= relieving congestion on the grid, increasing throughput across the transmi= ssion system, expediting interconnection (measured in terms of actual inter= connections not just applications approved), etc. This way we could create= an organization that would have the incentive to make a workable and open = transmission system. From:=09Sarah Novosel on 07/13/2001 07:57 AM To:=09Kevin M Presto/Enron@EnronXGate, Mark Dana Davis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Ad= er/HOU/EES@EES, Edward D Baughman/Enron@EnronXGate, Joe Gordon/Enron@EnronX= Gate, Janelle Scheuer/Enron@EnronXGate, mbrown9@enron.com, Mark Bernstein/H= OU/EES@EES, John Llodra/Enron@EnronXGate, W David Duran/Enron@EnronXGate, G= eorge Wood/Enron@EnronXGate, Dave Perrino/SF/ECT@ECT, Paul J Broderick/Enro= n@EnronXGate, Jason Thompkins/Enron@EnronXGate, Mason Hamlin/Enron@EnronXGa= te, Robert Stalford/Enron@EnronXGate, Tom May/Enron@EnronXGate, Gautam Gupt= a/Enron@EnronXGate, Narsimha Misra/Enron@EnronXGate, Steve Montovano/NA/Enr= on@Enron, Garrett Tripp/Enron@EnronXGate, Berney C Aucoin/Enron@EnronXGate,= Jason Thompkins/Enron@EnronXGate, Rob Wheeler/Enron@EnronXGate, Rogers Her= ndon/Enron@EnronXGate, Jim Meyn/Enron@EnronXGate, Aleck Dadson/Enron@EnronX= Gate, Daniel Allegretti/Enron@EnronXGate, Pearce W Hammond/HOU/EES@EES, Don= na Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Howard Fromer/NA/Enron@Enron, Kathleen Sullivan= /NA/Enron@ENRON, Tom Hoatson/Enron@EnronXGate, Thane Twiggs/Enron@EnronXGat= e, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, James D S= teffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/NA/E= nron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Charles Decker/HOU/EES@EES, Nick = Politis/Enron@EnronXGate, sscott3@enron.com, Aleck Dadson/Enron@EnronXGate,= Lloyd Will/Enron@EnronXGate, Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON, Susan M Landwehr/= NA/Enron@Enron, Charles Yeung/HOU/ECT@ECT, Andy Rodriquez/Enron@EnronXGate,= John J Lavorato/Enron@EnronXGate, Louise Kitchen/Enron@EnronXGate, Greg Wh= alley/Enron@EnronXGate, susan.j.mara@enron.com, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enro= n, Karen Denne/Enron@EnronXGate, mpalmer@enron.com, Alan Comnes/Enron@Enron= XGate, Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron, John Shelk/NA/Enron@Enron, Pat Shortridge= /Corp/Enron@Enron, Chris Long/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mike Roan/ENRON@enronXgate,= Kerry Stroup/NA/Enron@Enron, Janine Migden/Enron@EnronXGate, Dave Mangskau= /Corp/Enron@ENRON cc:=09=20 Subject:=09PJM RTO Order Attached is a summary of the PJM RTO order. While it is somewhat lengthy, = the order has a lot of good information in it that I wanted to share with t= he group, particularly the Commission's statements regarding the existing c= onfiguration of the northeast and the need to expand it. We are working on summaries of the New York and New England RTO orders and = will have those out shortly. If you would like copies of the orders, just = let us know. We expect the mediation proceeding to begin within the next week. We will = keep you updated. Sarah =20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Fantastic Article in wash post on Refunds; [EMail-Body]= - California Changes Stance on Refunds Two Sides Far Apart In Energy Talks By Peter Behr Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, July 6, 2001; Page E01 California officials have abruptly shifted tactics in their attempt to recover billions of dollars in alleged overcharges for electricity, saying they may reduce their demands for huge refunds if generators renegotiate $43 billion in long-term electricity contracts that the state signed this year. Gov. Gray Davis (D) said part of the $8.9 billion in refunds the state is seeking could be offset by reductions in energy prices in the long-term contracts, whose costs have become a growing political embarrassment for Davis. ""We've made suggestions, we've offered various ways in which people could get us $8.9 billion,"" Davis told the San Jose Mercury News in a report yesterday. ""You can renegotiate our existing contracts and save us money. However you want to do it, it's just got to net out close to $8.9 billion."" The new offer was introduced this week into the closed negotiations over a California settlement being conducted in Washington by Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Judge Curtis L. Wagner Jr., according to sources close to the negotiations. Yesterday, Wagner said he may issue his own preliminary finding today on the amount of overcharges if California officials and the generators cannot reach a compromise. ""What I'm trying to do is get people in a settlement mood,"" Wagner told reporters. ""In the event we're unable to do that, [Friday] at some point I may offer a preliminary assessment."" The settlement conference is set to conclude on Monday. Wagner, FERC's chief administrative judge, has been trying to push both sides toward a compromise that would resolve the huge energy pricing controversy. Mountainous energy prices have bankrupted California's largest utility, drained billions of dollars out of the state treasury and put Davis at sword's point with generators that help keep the state's lights on. Last Friday, Wagner rebuked Davis's chief representative, Michael Kahn, chairman of California Independent Grid Operator -- the state's power grid manager -- indicating that the state's demand for nearly $9 billion in refunds from power generators and marketers was too high, sources said. Wagner's settlement conference, which has involved more than 100 lawyers for all sides, is closed to the public and media. Wagner complained last month that Kahn was following a political agenda, and his lack of independence in the negotiations was such a ""joke"" that the parties might as well wear ""clown suits,"" according to a Dow Jones report confirmed by sources close to the talks. But he has also criticized the generators and power marketers, led by Reliant Energy Inc., Williams Energy Services, Duke Energy and Southern Co., for failing to make serious settlement offers, these sources said. The suppliers have offered to refund $600 million, provided the state is able to call off various California lawsuits demanding far larger refunds, sources said. Wagner's leverage is his ability to propose his own refund figure to FERC's commissioners. FERC has tentatively called for $124 million in refunds, but now is taking a harder line on preventing a new escalation of California's electricity prices this summer and is likely to be receptive to a higher refund figure, some energy analysts believe. Davis's tactical change, offering to make the long-term contracts part of an overall settlement, comes amid growing criticism of what the state will have to pay for energy under those deals. California's energy calamity stemmed in large part from its failed deregulation plan, which relied heavily on short-term power purchases at volatile ""spot market"" prices. When energy costs shot upward last summer, so did the state's electricity bills. In response, Davis's aide, S. David Freeman, and his staff began negotiating long-term power contacts with suppliers. The $43 billion in deals signed so far would require the state to pay about $70 per hour for a megawatt of power for a large part of the electricity it will need over the next 10 years. That's well under the average of $250 per megawatt-hour that the state was paying at the beginning of this year, but above current power prices -- and considerably higher than what electricity may cost in the next decade, energy analysts say. A new agreement to lower those contract prices could relieve political pressure on Davis and focus settlement negotiations away from the state's controversial demand for the $8.9 billion refund. Davis will argue that reducing future power charges that his administration negotiated should count as a ""refund"" because the deals were reached ""under commercial duress,"" according to sources close to Wagner's negotiations. Industry supporters say Davis's refund figure is impossible to justify. ""There's no benchmark for what a fair and reasonable price should be,"" said Michael Zenger, California director of Cambridge Energy Research Associates. The state's advocates counter that if FERC enforced a ""just and reasonable"" standard for power prices based on operating costs and a generous profit, the overcharges by all sellers could easily reach the $9 billion figure. ""It's not rocket science, but it does require the regulators to regulate,"" said Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economist who heads an oversight committee for the California grid. Those polar-opposite views have left both sides in Wagner's conference room ""billions of dollars apart,"" as the talks approached their final weekend, sources said. , 2001 The Washington Post Company [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= NYTimes.com Article: The Real Wolf; [EMail-Body]= Please respond to vkaminskiThis article from NYTimes.com has been sent to you by vkaminski@aol.com. /-------------------- advertisement -----------------------\ Looking for better IT solutions? Toshiba is uniting digital, mobile and network innovations in a bold new vision of Information Technology for today and tomorrow. Take a closer look at life in the new Digital Age. And imagine how good IT can be. Visit Toshiba.com for more details. The Real Wolf RECKONINGS By PAUL KRUGMAN ecently I received a letter from an economist I respect, chiding me for my ""Naderite"" columns on the California energy crisis. He just didn't believe that market manipulation by power companies could possibly be an important issue; it sounded too much to him like the sort of thing one hears from knee-jerk leftists, who blame greedy capitalists for every problem, be it third-world poverty or high apartment rents. The left has cried ""Wolf!"" so many times that sensible people have learned to discount such claims. But now a bona fide wolf has arrived, whose predatory behavior is doing terrible damage to our most populous state - and nobody will believe it. True, California would be heading for a summer of power shortages even if it had never deregulated. And even if there was workable competition in the wholesale electricity market, prices in that market would spike during periods of peak demand, transferring billions of dollars from either taxpayers or consumers to the generators. But the evidence is now overwhelming that there isn't workable competition in California's power market, and that the actions of generators ""gaming the system"" have greatly magnified the crisis. The key fact is that California has somehow remained in a state of more or less continuous power shortage and very high wholesale prices regardless of the level of demand. A rash of outages has kept the electricity market conveniently - and very profitably - short of supply even during periods of low demand, when there ought to be lots of excess capacity. As Frank Wolak, the Stanford economist who also advises the state's power grid, has pointed out, an outage at a power plant is a lot like an employee calling in sick. You can't tell directly whether he is really sick or has chosen to take the day off for other reasons, but you can look for circumstantial evidence. And such evidence has convinced Mr. Wolak that ""generators use forced outages strategically to withhold capacity from the market"" - a view shared by a growing number of other researchers. Which brings us to the latest move by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. On Wednesday, the commission apparently decided to offer California some relief, and put new price caps in place on the California electricity market. I say ""apparently"" because the more you look at the plan the less likely it seems to be any help at all. Indeed, the measure was passed on a 2-to-1 vote, with William Massey - the one commissioner who has been sympathetic to calls for price controls - voting against it on the grounds that it would be ineffectual. What's wrong with FERC's plan? First, it caps prices only in emergency conditions - ignoring the fact that electricity prices have stayed at hard- to-explain levels even when there is no emergency. In effect, the plan is laid out as if the electricity market were really competitive, in spite of all the evidence that it is not. Second, even those emergency price caps are full of loopholes, offering extensive opportunities for what Mr. Wolak calls ""megawatt laundering"" - selling power to affiliated companies that for one reason or another are exempted from the price controls (for example, the controls do not apply to ""imports"" from neighboring states), then selling it back into the California market. Severin Borenstein of the University of California Energy Institute adds that because the allowed price depends on the cost of generation at the least efficient plant, generators will have a clear incentive to produce inefficiently: ""I predict we will find some plants we never heard of before that are suddenly operating again, and they will be pretty inefficient."" The general verdict seems to be that this is not a serious plan. There are serious proposals to mitigate the crisis out there - indeed, last fall Mr. Wolak submitted a proposal that was well received by other experts - but FERC has ignored all of them. The charitable interpretation is that FERC still doesn't get it, that it just can't bring itself to believe that this time the wolf is real. The uncharitable interpretation is that last week's action was meant to fail. The Medley Report, an online newsletter, calls the FERC plan ""a grand exercise in posturing without substance . . . a very clever temporary move by the Bush administration to deflect any political fallout"" from the looming disaster. Whatever the explanation, the plain fact is that FERC and the administration have yet to offer California any significant relief. Visit NYTimes.com for complete access to the most authoritative news coverage on the Web, updated throughout the day. Become a member today! It's free! http://www.nytimes.com?eta HOW TO ADVERTISE For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters or other creative advertising opportunities with The New York Times on the Web, please contact Alyson Racer at alyson@nytimes.com or visit our online media kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo For general information about NYTimes.com, write to help@nytimes.com. Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Natural Resources and Energy MBA students; [EMail-Body]= Billy, This is another message from the University of Alberta. They have an Energy MBA program; I heard some good comments about the quality of this program. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Calder, Barry"" Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 4:00 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Natural Resources and Energy MBA students Hello Vince; Joseph Doucet has passed along your name to me, in regards to exploring opportunities between Enron, and the Natural Resources and Energy MBA students at the U.of A. I would be pleased to assist in any capacity, from helping organize an information session by Enron to our students in the fall at the U.of A., to co-ordinating job interviews for permanent or summer internship positions, and everything in between! My function is to assist MBA students and appropriate corporations to find each other! I look forward to hearing from you. Regards, Barry. Barry D. Calder, BSc, MBA MBA Placement Coordinator Office of Placement Services Faculty of Business University of Alberta PH: (780) 492-2320 Fax: (780) 492-7980 Email: Barry.Calder@ualberta.ca http://www.bus.ualberta.ca [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Due Diligence Info - GS; [EMail-Body]= There is a lot of confidential information here (in items 1and 2) Detailed monthly P&L covering all trading activity for the last three years Potential Exposure by sector (eg gas and electricity utility) Detailed monthly P&L covering all trading activity for the last three years. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Press Clipping - Germany (Enron Mention); [EMail-Body]= The quotes are accurate, but I did not say California does not have a supply problem. Mark Schroeder@ECT 03/19/2001 06:04 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT@ECT, Alex Parsons/EU/Enron@Enron Subject: Press Clipping - Germany (Enron Mention) Steve - FYI, and presumably they misquoted you on the problem (at least in California) not being a function of indaequate capacity (it is one of the root causes we have been pointing to over here, among others). mcs ---------------------- Forwarded by Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT on 19/03/2001 12:07 --------------------------- Katy Lomax 15/03/2001 16:31 To: Eva Hoeffelman/LON/ECT@ECT, Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT, Paul Hennemeyer/LON/ECT@ECT, Viviana Florio/FRA/ECT@ECT, Bart Lyon/LON/ECT@ECT, Peter Kreuzberg/FRA/ECT@ECT, Sven Becker/FRA/ECT@ECT, Michael Schuh/FRA/ECT@ECT, Gregor Baumerich/LON/ECT@ECT, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT, John Oliver/LON/ECT@ECT, Kathryn Corbally/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Andrew Green/LON/ECT@ECT, Meindert Witteveen/LON/ECT@ECT, rory_macrae@edelman.com, Laura.Currie@edelman.com, Soenke Becker/EU/Enron@Enron, Eric Shaw/LON/ECT@ECT, Helge-J_rgen Beil/FRA/ECT@ECT, Carsten Haack/FRA/ECT@ECT, Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Barbara Thompson/FRA/ECT@ECT, Ann M Schmidt/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cindy Derecskey/Corp/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Press Clipping - Germany (Enron Mention) Please find attached the following article/s: ""Missing the goal"" - Financial Times Deutschland Kind Regards, Katy Lomax [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Utilities, Electric: Deregulation: Electricity Crisis Cools Down a
 Bit in San Diego County, ...; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Miyung Buster/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 09/29/2000 04:10 PM ----- 09/26/2000 11:19 PM Please respond to nobody To: 86464@WCTOPICS.djnr.com cc: Subject: Utilities, Electric: Deregulation: Electricity Crisis Cools Down a Bit in San Diego County, ... Electricity Crisis Cools Down a Bit in San Diego County, Calif. Dan McSwain ? 09/26/2000 KRTBN Knight-Ridder Tribune Business News: North County Times - Escondido, California Copyright (C) 2000 KRTBN Knight Ridder Tribune Business News; Source: World Reporter (TM) An uneasy aftermath has settled over this summer's power price shocks in San Diego County, punctuated this weekend by cool weather and falling electricity prices, as the state and federal policy-making apparatus shifts from a season of panicked damage control to the extremely difficult question of what to do next. In the parlance of the electricity industry, these are the ""shoulder"" months; a breather between periods of heavy demand for summer cooling and winter heating in which power-generating plants are typically pulled out of commission for trouble-shooting, overdue maintenance and refueling. California's pioneering deregulation of its electricity industry lies in a state of exhaustion. Guarantees from politicians of greater efficiency and lower prices have collapsed this summer into chronic power shortages and a historic transfer of wealth that in about 90 days moved $10.6 billion from the buyers of electricity to the sellers. Optimism is in short supply as a fractious collection of stakeholders and the nation's political and regulatory institutions begin to search for solutions. Emergency legislation approved by state lawmakers in August will temporarily reduce bills for the 1.2 million customers of San Diego Gas & Electric Co. from an average $146 in September to about $72 per month. In July 1999, San Diego County and parts of south Orange County became the first region in the nation under deregulation law to directly pay the wholesale price of electricity. Cool weather has caused demand for power to sag this weekend, bringing prices down from their lofty summer peaks to about 7.5 cents per kilowatt hour on Friday. But while the legislation has capped rates at 6.5 cents per kilowatt hour for SDGOcustomers, the utility will continue to pay the volatile wholesale cost of power, which averaged 21.4 cents this month. Historically, prices have fallen to as low as 1 cent per kilowatt in the winter months, but this year prices seem likely to exceed 6.5 cents for most of the year, and take off again in summer 2001. Analysts say generating and power marketing companies will retain their ability to raise prices, called market power, because their costs are higher and supplies of power are tight in the Pacific Northwest. SDGOsays the legislation could create a shortfall, to be financed by the company, that could run up an $800 million IOU by 2003. In the past, the Public Utilities Commission has allowed the utility to pass on such shortfalls to consumers in the form of higher rates. Pacific Gas&Electric and Southern California Edison, the state's other investor-owned utilities, have collectively lost at least $3.3 billion this summer because their retail rates have remain capped under deregulation. Both utilities are seeking to end their retail rate caps early to escape the risk of sustained high wholesale prices. Consumer groups are outraged; investors are skeptical. Three major credit rating companies said the California utilities face increased regulatory uncertainty, and the utilities' stock prices fell last week. A hot-potato mentality is emerging among policy-makers who say the authority to clamp down on market behavior has been dispersed by deregulation. California regulators and consumer advocates have great expectations for a series of state and federal investigations into the causes of higher prices and into charges of market manipulation and price gouging by power companies. Chief among them is an investigation by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission that may lead to changes in California's power trading system. ""Unfortunately, we have ceded most of our authority over wholesale markets to the federal government,"" said Loretta Lynch, the president of the California Public Utilities Commission, the state's top regulator. James Hoecker, the chairman of the federal commission, said Lynch overstates the case. ""California has not given me one scintilla of authority that I didn't already have,"" Hoecker said in August. The federal commission has been critical of California's approach to deregulation, but has been reluctant to intervene in interstate wholesale markets, into state trading systems, or to make aggressive use of its investigative powers. What is dawning on California policy-makers, analysts say, is the hard lesson that deregulation transfers considerable authority away from government officials and to the market participants. The challenge is to get deregulation right the first time. ""The problem is not deregulation,"" said Robert McCullough, an economist and former utility executive based in Portland, Ore. ""The problem is this Rube Goldberg device that has been constructed in California."" The trading practices of power marketers in the West also is under scrutiny by the federal commission. Regulators informed electricity marketing companies in August that if price gouging is found, the refund of some profits may be ordered by the commission for windfall profits that are earned after mid-October. A surprising number of observers say generators have simply acted in their own interest and taken advantage of the rules to make money. Ranging from consumer advocates to economists to some regulators themselves, many say bungled deregulation is a more likely cause of high prices than a conspiracy of generating companies. ""This market has behaved very rationally this summer,"" said Frank Wolak, a Stanford economist who chairs the market surveillance committee of California's power transmission manager. ""All you need is tight supply to exercise market power in this market; you don't need collusion."" A titanic shift is shaping up in the way power is bought on the wholesale markets on behalf of California consumers. All three utilities have been granted authority by state regulators to make confidential deals for electricity directly with individual generators or power trading companies, largely bypassing the state's nonprofit power exchange. In an equally important development, the manager of most of California's transmission system has asked federal regulators for permission to sign long-term deals for power. Up to now, the transmission manager has been limited to last-minute purchases of emergency power to stabilize the grid. Critics fear both measures are steps toward reinstating the system that existed before deregulation, in which a small number of buyers made large, long-term deals with a handful of suppliers. The architects of California's deregulation, fearing the monopoly power of the utilities, had stripped bilateral purchasing authority to foster competition among a new kind of retail power provider. Under the scheme, utilities were to be limited to the highly regulated business of electricity distribution Folder Name: Utilities, Electric: Deregulation Relevance Score on Scale of 100: To review or revise your folder, visit Dow Jones CustomClipsor contact Dow Jones Customer Service by e-mail at by phone at 800-369-7466. (Outside the U.S. and Canada, call 609-452-1511 or contact your local sales representative.) Copyright (c) 2000 Dow Jones &Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Talking Points For Rep. Barton On Tauzin RTO Letter; [EMail-Body]= Linda requested some background and talking points on the pending RTO letter from Chairman Tauzin to FERC that is sitting on Chairman Barton's desk TODAY for his decision whether to co-sign the letter. While we have not seen the text, we are told that it is ""anti-RTO"" and may go so far as to state or imply that FERC does not have authority to do what is doing with RTOs. (We know this is the view of one of Chairman Tauzin's counsels, who formerly worked for Southern Co.). Chairman Tauzin has been contacted by Entergy and the Louisiana Public Service Commission to send the letter. I spoke to Chairman Barton's staff, Andy Black, this afternoon and relayed our concerns. The Barton Subcommittee is now expected to mark up an electricity bill in December (per a Republican Member meeting held this morning). ACTION ITEM: Call Rep. Joe Barton (202/225-2002) TALKING POINTS: 1. Should start with something about the Dynegy/Enron transaction (it will be strange if Mr. Lay or Steve calls Chairman Barton and does not start the conversation with some reference to the transaction). 2. Mentioning the transaction naturally leads into the importance of competitive wholesale markets for power, both for consumers and for the largely Texas-based marketing, trading and merchant power industries. 3. We understand that Chairman Barton has been approached by Chairman Tauzin about a letter to FERC on the RTO issue. We know Chairman Barton is well aware of Enron's strong support for FERC's RTO initiatives. We respect Chairman Barton's interest in seeing to it that Congress does not abdicate its responsibility to make energy policy. 4. If, as we have been lead to believe, the letter states or implies that FERC does not have authority to act in the RTO arena, this will be seen as a potentially destabilizing development since FERC is so far down the road of creating RTOs. 5. While we understand some in Congress and elsewhere were concerned that FERC was moving too fast, as of the last FERC meeting earlier this month, that is no longer true even if it ever was true. While we think RTOs should be created sooner rather than later, FERC is listening to state regulators and others who had concerns. 6. A letter from congressional leaders questioning FERC's authority goes too far in the direction of those who oppose any RTOs. Furthermore, it is wrong as a matter of law. The D.C. Circuit held in the gas cases and in the power cases on Order 888 that FERC has authority to address systemic discrimination, which is in large part what the RTOs are all about -- a remedy for discrimination. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Executive Committee List - Updates; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/10/2000 02:02 PM ----- Katherine Brown 10/10/2000 09:58 AM To: James M Cliff Baxter/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sanjay Rick Buy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Causey/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Diomedes Christodoulou/SA/Enron@Enron, David W Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT, James Derrick/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Andrew S Fastow/HOU/ECT@ECT, Peggy_Fowler@pgn.com, Mark Frevert/NA/Enron@Enron, Ben F Glisan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kevin Hannon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, David Stanley Horton/Corp/Enron@Enron, Larry L Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kenneth Lay/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Rebecca P Mark/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, Mike McConnell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rebecca Jeffrey McMahon/HOU/ECT@ECT, J Mark Metts/NA/Enron@Enron, Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lou L Pai/HOU/EES@EES, Ken Rice/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Jeffrey Sherrick/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Joseph W Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Thomas E White/HOU/EES@EES, Brenda Castillo/NA/Enron@Enron, Marcia Manarin/SA/Enron@Enron, Susan Skarness/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stacy Beena Karen K Heathman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sharron Westbrook/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kay Chapman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Molly Bobrow/NA/Enron@Enron, Rosane Fabozzi/SA/Enron@Enron, Stephanie Harris/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bridget Maronge/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mary_trosper@pgn.com, Nicki Daw/NA/Enron@Enron, Inez Dauterive/HOU/ECT@ECT, Carol Ann Brown/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Elaine Cindy Stark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary E Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Joannie Williamson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Vanessa Groscrand/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Tori L Wells/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cathy Phillips/HOU/ECT@ECT, Loretta Sue Ford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dolores Fisher/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Owens/HOU/EES@EES, Dorothy Dalton/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Mercedes Estrada/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Christina Grow/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lauren Urquhart/LON/ECT@ECT, Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Katherine Brown/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Pam Jana Mills/HOU/ECT@ECT, Liz M Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Judy G Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Bobbie Power/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Suzanne Danz/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Executive Committee List - Updates Updates Mark Frevert - new cellular number [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential - Job Description; [EMail-Body]= FYI...I'll keep you informed. dave ---------------------- Forwarded by Dave Schafer/ET&S/Enron on 03/03/2000 11:15 AM --------------------------- Shanna Funkhouser 03/03/2000 11:06 AM To: Dave Schafer/ET&S/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Confidential - Job Description Dave, I had a short conversation with Scott this morning and explained the job, why we have vacancies, etc. He is going to evaluate the job description and see if there would be any ties in this job to his future career goals. In other words, he doesn't see himself taking a long-term departure from Investor Relations, but possibly there are some skills he would gain in this job that would make him even more valuable in a future IR role. For example, when he was with El Paso, IR and PR were combined. He said that he would follow up with me this afternoon or Monday and let me know if he has interest in discussing further. Shanna ---------------------- Forwarded by Shanna Funkhouser/HR/Corp/Enron on 03/03/2000 11:10 AM --------------------------- Shanna Funkhouser 03/03/2000 11:03 AM To: Scott Vonderheide/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Confidential - Job Description Scott, I'll talk to you this afternoon or Monday. Thanks, Shanna [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Expense Reports Awaiting Your Approval; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/09/2001 07:56 AM --------------------------- on 07/09/2001 01:17:27 AM To: ""John Brindle"" <john_brindle@enron.net> cc: ""Steven Kean"" <skean@enron.com> Subject: Expense Reports Awaiting Your Approval The following reports have been waiting for your approval for more than 4 days. Please review. Owner: Kyle S Norosky Report Name: KN 008 Days In Mgr. Queue: 5 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California Power Crisis Update (No. 10); [EMail-Body]= We have been pulling together these weekly(sometimes more often) summaries for internal purposes. Would you find it helpful to be on the distribution list? Hope you are doing well. Look forward to touching base soon. ----- Forwarded by Suzanne on 03/28/2001 03:41 AM ----- Memorandum TO: Pru Sheppard BCC: Suzanne Nimocks FROM: Pru Sheppard B. Venki Venkateshwara DATE: March 27, 2001 California Power Crisis Update (No. 10) DEVELOPMENTS THIS WEEK, 3/23/2001 The weeks highlights include: ? Continued indications that the issue of market power and possible remedies for it is likely to remain a high profile issue in California and elsewhere (both retroactively and prospectively) ? An ironical situation with respect to QFs in which QF power under contract is effectively being released into the market at higher prices ? A court order requiring Reliant to continue to sell power to the ISO even if it is not being paid in a full and timely manner ? Another Stage 3 emergency and rolling blackouts Market power There are continued indications that the issue of market power will not be settled simply. This week there was a lengthy and politically influential front page story in the New York Times about FERCs passive approach to policing generators (Critics Say U.S. Energy Agency Is Weak in Oversight of Utilities). The story was by Jeff Gerth and Joseph Kahn. (Jeff Gerth's 1992 story on the Whitewater deal is viewed by journalists to have been the origin of what eventually became a multi-year investigation of Bill Clinton.) The key issues are familiar: ? Does market power exist to a degree that warrants remedies such as price caps, refunds, and so on? ? If so, what is the basis for asserting that market power exists and what is the remedy? (See the discussion in the New York Times article on the ""good hours"" vs. ""bad hours"" approach and the associated political decision not to deal with ""good hours""). ? Can market power be used as leverage to eventually settle generator bills in California at something less than 100 cents on the dollar. (The California ISO filed a complaint claiming $6 billion in overcharges this week.) The QF irony Through the 1990s, QF contracts were projected to be the source of stranded costs because they were priced ""way above market."" In recent months, in California, they look like a bargain (although some are not such great bargains because a portion of their price is tied to gas). You would think that the utilities would request QFs to maximize their output. But credit problems have created an ironical situation. The facts: ? PG&E and Edison have not been paying the QFs fully and promptly for some time. ? The QFs form a creditors committee and threaten to push PG&E and Edison into bankruptcy. (Some gas-fired QFs had to shut down because they did not have money to pay for the gas.) ? Last week's court decision allows MidAmerican/CalEnergy to essentially sell its power to others even though the QF contract ""dedicates"" the output to the purchasing utility. ? CalEnergy does so immediately, selling to El Paso. The Reliant Order A court ordered Reliant to continue to sell to the ISO, when requested, regardless of whether Reliant had been paid fully and promptly for past deliveries to the ISO. Reliant announced it will appeal the order. This is somewhat of a contrast to the QF situation except that the circumstances governing the 2 situations are probably different. The QF contracts pre-date the ISO and are with the utilities and most likely make no reference to providing power during emergencies. In fact, many QF contracts have the opposite provision: authority for the utility to cut takes during so-called ""light load"" periods. Stage 3 emergency and rolling blackouts--again There was another Stage 3 emergency in California ? with rolling blackouts this week. This prompted everyone to wonder why this was happening in March. Among the factors: ? Increased demand from summer-like temperatures ? Cutbacks in imports ? Loss of 1400 MW due to a transformer fire at an Edison plant ? Loss of about 3100 MW from QF plants that were forced to shutdown because they could not afford gas bills (VV) MARKET COMMENTARY (For easier printing of all the articles in this section use the file at the end of the section) Critics Say U.S. Energy Agency Is Weak in Oversight of Utilities By JEFF GERTH and JOSEPH KAHN 03/23/2001 The New York Times Page 1, Column 1 c. 2001 New York Times Company WASHINGTON, March 22 -- The pressure was intense when federal regulators met privately last month to debate remedies for soaring electricity prices in California. Officials of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the agency whose mandate is to ensure ''just and reasonable'' electricity rates nationwide, had evidence that a few companies had been selling electricity to California at prices far above the cost of generating it. The agency faced an imminent deadline to challenge those prices or let the companies possibly pocket hundreds of millions of dollars in unfair profits. An internal memorandum laid out two choices. The agency could audit and punish ''bad actors,'' the companies that were exploiting the market. Or it could identify ''bad hours,'' when electricity shortages were most acute and spiking prices were arguably nobody's fault, and order refunds for only the most exorbitant prices. ''It may be easier to identify bad hours than bad actors,'' the memorandum said. The commission took the easier way. It decided not to investigate reports of abuses by companies, but issued an order that could require them to refund to the state utilities up to $124 million collected during a relatively few ''bad hours'' in January and February. That is hundreds of millions of dollars less than California might have claimed, since the most potential overcharging occurred during ''good hours,'' when power was more plentiful but prices were often just as extreme. The order ignored those hours. Today, in a criticism of the agency's lack of aggressiveness, California regulators estimated that generators had charged $6.2 billion above competitive levels over 10 months. They urged the agency to dig deeper, hoping it would demand more refunds or other stiff remedies. But the agency's track record -- one of complacency in the eyes of state officials -- leaves California regulators skeptical that Washington will confront the big power producers. The small, obscure agency, tucked behind the rail yard of Union Station here, has largely soft-pedaled its role as the electricity industry's top cop, even though it has wide authority to keep power companies in line. To keep rates reasonable, it can impose price caps, strip companies of the right to charge market rates, force them to return excessive profits and even suspend deregulation altogether. Instead, the agency has largely left it to private companies to pry open the $250 billion electricity industry, which has historically been controlled by monopoly utilities and state officials. The agency's defenders, including its chairman, Curt Hebert Jr., a fierce advocate of unfettered markets, say that its largely hands-off approach reflects the delicate balancing of competing interests -- a commitment to protect consumers while not stifling market forces. But politicians, utility executives, energy economists and local regulators say California's rolling blackouts and skyrocketing electricity prices are the signs of a market running amok. They accuse the agency of standing aside as companies manipulate their way to windfall profits. The agency's critics, who include one of its own commissioners and numerous staff members, say that its enforcement mission has been blunted by free-market passions and the influence of industry insiders in its ranks. When the agency began its first national investigation of high electricity prices last year, it named a newly recruited industry insider, Scott Miller, to lead the effort. Mr. Miller and his colleagues said in their report that there was ''insufficient data'' in California to prove any profiteering by generating companies. Yet his own former employer, PG&E Energy Trading, was at the time a subject of a civil antitrust investigation by the Justice Department that focused on electricity market abuses in New England. The agency has given state regulators a lead role in monitoring local power markets. Yet even as these regulators have urged the agency to be more aggressive in investigating suspicions that companies have abused their power in California, New England, the Midwest and the mid-Atlantic, they have frequently been ignored or rebuffed. Critics say that the agency began deregulation before it was ready or willing to make sure the markets worked effectively. They accuse it of showing favoritism to industry -- allowing companies, for example, to ignore requirements to file detailed reports of market transactions that are critical to proving accusations of market abuses. ''We need to wake up to the fact that this is a dysfunctional market that is being gamed and manipulated by those who participate in it,'' said William Massey, a commissioner of the agency who has become one of its leading critics. The agency's inaction, the critics say, leads to ''gaming'' -- jockeying for profits that does not necessarily involve illegality -- and outright market manipulation. Consumers and utilities are the victims, paying billions of dollars more for electricity than if the markets were truly competitive. Agency officials acknowledge that enforcement of market rules to curb gaming and manipulation had not been a high priority in previous years. But they defended their recent California order as proof that they intend to keep markets free of abuse. They add that the agency is also pressuring two generators to refund almost $11 million for possibly manipulating the California market last spring. Agency officials and some outside analysts say that poorly conceived deregulation plans by states, a shortage of power plants, rising natural gas prices, and even the weather have had more impact on electricity prices than abuses by companies or any failings by the agency. They say the agency must balance the competing interests of generators, local regulators and utility companies if it is to keep deregulation on track. ''We're trying to craft a system that gives breathing room to develop a market, but not so much room that undue market power punishes consumers,'' Mr. Hebert said. Fight Over Deregulation Today's debate traces back to the 1930's, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt backed legislation to break up utility monopolies. The Federal Power Act of 1935 gave the Federal Power Commission a mandate to ensure ''just and reasonable'' electricity rates. The Federal Power Commission was abolished in 1977 and replaced by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, an independent agency with 1,200 employees that also oversees oil pipelines and the natural gas market. The president appoints the chairman and four commissioners -- two Democrats and two Republicans with staggered terms of five years. Two Republican seats are currently unfilled. The deregulation of the electricity markets began in the late 1980's, after the agency had begun opening the gas markets. By 1996, the commissioners issued a landmark order that forced utility companies to open their transmission lines to other utilities and electricity wholesalers. The commission and many private economists expected that by prying open protected markets, electricity prices would immediately fall. That possibility set off a deregulation frenzy, most prominently in California, New York, New England and the mid-Atlantic states. Generating companies rushed to expand in the new, borderless market. But the agency's balancing act has grown more difficult as electricity deregulation has spread nationwide. Congress has forced it to trim its staff in recent years. Officials complain that investigating abuses in electricity markets strains their resources. And as the California crisis has worsened, the commissioners have begun sparring publicly among themselves about what to do. This week, Mr. Massey, a Democratic commissioner, and Mr. Hebert (pronounced AY-bear), a Republican, sat side by side before a House panel and argued diametrically opposed positions. Mr. Hebert said high prices in California ''were sending the right signals to get supply there.'' Mr. Massey called the prices that generators were charging ''unlawful'' and said that his agency, by not reining them in, ''is simply not doing its job.'' The agency's leadership has been in flux for months. Congressional and industry officials in Washington say President Bush is considering replacing Mr. Hebert, whom he named to the top post less than two months ago, with Pat Wood, who runs the Texas public utility commission. A White House spokeswoman had no comment on the reports. Though Mr. Hebert's positions are not far from those of the Bush administration, his relations with California leaders may have made his position tenuous. Mr. Hebert, a Mississippian who is a close ally of the Senate majority leader, Trent Lott, has warred with California politicians who have proposed new solutions to the crisis there. Mr. Hebert, who has served as a commissioner since 1997, has often taken the most ideologically free-market position of any commissioner. He flatly rejects the idea of price caps on electricity as hopelessly ineffective and contrary to market forces. When Gov. Gray Davis outlined a plan to have the state buy transmission lines to relieve utility companies' debt, Mr. Hebert's response was dismissive. ''It's not in the interest of the American public,'' he pronounced. Even as new electricity markets opened in the summer of 1999, they started producing nasty shocks. The mid-Atlantic region experienced some early volatility. As the turmoil grew, economists began raising the alarm about a phenomenon called ''market power,'' the ability of energy traders in the new national market to sustain prices above the competitive level. Proving such abuses is difficult, because it requires comparing tens of thousands of separate electricity transactions with the costs of the generators that initiated them. Joseph Bowring, who heads the market monitoring unit of the nonprofit entity that operates the mid-Atlantic transmission system, said that power companies there had exercised some market power. But only the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, not local regulators, had the authority to collect the data to determine how much market power had been exercised and whether it had been abusive or not, he said. Mr. Bowring said he talked to agency officials about doing so. In the end, Mr. Bowring and several agency officials said, the agency chose not to investigate. The decision roiled some agency officials. Ron Rattey, a veteran agency economist, wrote a memorandum last June describing the staff as ''impotent in our ability to monitor, foster, and ensure competitive electric power markets.'' The staff, the memorandum said, did not even enforce a requirement that power companies file detailed quarterly reports listing essentially every sale they make. Such data would have been useful to Mr. Bowring. Local-Federal Clash Local regulators who want to ensure competitive prices often have to act on their own. Monitors in New England have intervened about 600 times since 1999 to correct prices they determined had been caused, at least in part, by market manipulation. The federal agency has sometimes chastised them for interfering too much. The industry, not surprisingly, shares that view. One vocal critic was Mr. Miller. Before the agency recruited him last July to head its division of energy markets, he was director of policy coordination for the national energy-trading unit of PG&E Corporation, the California holding company whose assets also include Pacific Gas and Electric, the California utility. Although the utility has lost billions of dollars during California's crisis, Mr. Miller's former unit has become one of the most profitable new energy traders nationwide. PG&E Energy Trading, by several estimates, is now the second-largest seller of electricity in New England. The company has had a rocky relationship with regulators. They intervened several times in 1999 and 2000 to retroactively cancel auctions they said produced excessive profits for PG&E and other companies. Mr. Miller denounced the practice, though he acknowledged in public testimony that his company sometimes charged ''very high'' prices when it could. ''One person's predatory pricing is another person's competitive advantage,'' Mr. Miller said at a public hearing on deregulation in Texas in 1999. New England regulators too often acted as ''judge, jury and executioner'' when overseeing the market, he said. One year later, Mr. Miller and his new colleagues at the federal agency got a chance to examine New England's problems from the regulators' perspective. Their Nov. 1 report attributed New England's frequent price gyrations to technical and regulatory flaws. As Mr. Miller's team was preparing its report, the Justice Department, whose threshold for stepping into possible industry wrongdoing is far higher than the agency's, began looking into whether price spikes in New England pointed to unlawful monopoly power or collusion, people contacted by the department during that inquiry said. One subject of the civil inquiry is possible price manipulation in one of New England's ancillary services markets, people contacted by the department said. They said the department was examining whether PG&E and two other companies tried to corner that market for several months early last year. PG&E confirmed that the Justice Department had contacted it, but denies wrongdoing and says it has cooperated with the department's requests. Mr. Miller has declined to comment on his role at PG&E or at the agency. His supervisors defended his work and said they had detected no conflict of interest between his work at PG&E and his duties at the agency. Those duties brought Mr. Miller to California last August. With electricity prices there soaring, he and his colleagues sat down with several utility executives at the agency's San Francisco office. One executive, Gary Stern, director of market monitoring for Southern California Edison, wanted the agency to stop what he suspected were market abuses by power generators. He provided a road map to help investigators figure out how power companies traded power contracts -- and whether they had manipulated the markets. But when Mr. Miller and his team approached 11 generators and marketers -- including his old employer -- a few weeks later, they did it their way. They asked eight questions, many of them imprecise, like: ''Describe your strategy for bidding generation resources into market.'' This question, Mr. Stern said in a recent interview, ''was equivalent to asking a suspected burglar how he spent his day.'' Some agency officials also thought the team should probe deeper. Mr. Rattey recommended that Mr. Miller seek the quarterly pricing reports that marketers were supposed to file. But his suggestion was not adopted, agency records show. Daniel Larcamp, Mr. Miller's supervisor, said ''there might have been more information that could have been obtained'' in the California inquiry. But he said the commission gave the staff only three months to finish, making it impossible to collect and analyze the reams of data involved. For Mr. Miller, agency documents show, the investigation was so time-consuming that he had no time to fill out the financial disclosure form required of new federal employees. Mr. Miller submitted his form in late January, after a reporter requested it. Agency lawyers approved the form, but only after he provided additional information about his job and compensation from PG&E. The lawyers said Mr. Miller's participation had been permissible because PG&E was not the subject of the investigation. When the staff report was issued on Nov. 1, it found high prices and problems in the design of the California market. But while the companies ''had the potential to exercise market power,'' the commission said, there was ''insufficient data'' to prove that they did. Some marketers saw the report as an exoneration. ''This has been looked at several times, most notably by the FERC and nobody has found any evidence of market manipulation and profiteering,'' Rob Doty, the chief financial officer of Dynegy Inc., told a reporter earlier this year. California Inquiry The agency has recently shown signs of wanting to apply pressure on generators. But its early efforts show how it is treading on new and uncertain turf. When the California crisis grew severe last December, the commission issued a refund order, a shot across the bow for generators charging high prices. It required them to submit detailed data any time they sold electricity in California for more than $150 per megawatt hour, considered at the time a fair estimate of the highest costs any of them faced. It also told generators that for the next several months, they could be forced to give refunds if the agency found that they had charged excessive prices. The commission also said that it would examine bidding practices and strategies for withholding generating capacity to ferret out any efforts to artificially raise prices. When the agency's own 60-day deadline for examining market data in January approached, however, it became clear that staff members had not made any detailed examination. Instead, staff members said, the agency scrambled to forge a last-minute compromise that would allow it to issue a statement opposing high prices in the state without a time-consuming investigation. During this scramble, a senior staff member, Kevin Kelly, suggested focusing on bad hours instead of bad actors. ''Our attempts to find illegal behavior or legal 'misbehavior' by sellers ('bad actors') always seems to fail,'' his memorandum said. It said that the agency could more easily blame high prices on acute shortages during the most critical hours. The suggestion won the day. The commission decided to limit its order to the hours when California declared a Stage 3 emergency, when supplies are critically low. Mr. Stern of Southern California Edison and several private-sector economists have attacked the economic logic of that order. They said that the commission has focused on times when prices might be legitimately high. The bigger worry: Generators can and often do sustain artificially high prices when supplies are not as tight, they say. Mr. Massey, the Democratic commissioner, dissented from the decision for those reasons. Because most high-priced transactions in January and February did not occur during bad hours, he argued, the commission effectively chose to bless as ''just and reasonable'' the hefty profits generators are making from the California crisis. ''The problem with my agency is that we're so carried away with the rhetoric of markets that we've gotten sloppy,'' Mr. Massey said. ''We're talking about electricity. It's the juice of the economy, so it's got to be available and reasonably priced.'' Williams defends pricing of electricity 03/23/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. TULSA, Okla. (AP) - Williams Cos. Inc. says it can justify the rates it charged for wholesale power, despite accusations from federal regulators that it sold over-priced electricity to California. Federal regulators claim Williams Energy Marketing and Trading Co., a unit of Tulsa-based Williams, owes California more than $40 million in refunds for power it sold to the state's Independent System Operator. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission says that Williams is one of several power providers responsible for $124 million in overcharges from transactions in January and February. The Independent System Operator, which manages the state's power grid, claims the state was overcharged $6.2 billion by 21 wholesale power providers, including Williams, between May and February. Williams says the rates it charged California were fair and were based on production costs and market conditions. ""Williams is confident that it performed within the guidelines established by the ISO,"" said Williams spokeswoman Paula Hall Collins. ""We felt like we had worked within the regulations set up by ISO."" According to the commission, power prices levied by Williams in January and February exceeded federal price ceilings based on the cost of natural gas and other market conditions. However, the price ceilings were established after the ISO accepted Williams' power prices, Collins said. The commission will review Williams' explanation and either accept the justification or order the company to pay refunds. Allegheny Energy makes big California connection 03/23/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. HAGERSTOWN, Md. (AP) - Allegheny Energy Inc. said Thursday it has agreed to sell $4.5 billion worth of power to California's electricity-purchasing agency over the next 10 years. The company said the contract call for Allegheny to provide up to 1,000 megawatts that the Hagerstown-based company has secured from western generating plants through its new energy trading division, Allegheny Energy Global Markets - formerly Merrill Lynch Global Energy Markets. ""This is a win-win for both the state of California and Allegheny Energy. It provides a long-term source of fixed-price energy and should help to stabilize prices in California,"" said Michael P. Morrell, president of the Allegheny Energy Supply division. Allegheny Energy is the parent of Allegheny Power, which delivers electric energy and natural gas to parts of Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia. Williams plans expansion of pipeline to help power Calif. 03/23/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. SALT LAKE CITY (AP) - The Williams Cos. plans to expands its Kern River pipeline, which runs through Utah, to provide more natural gas for generating plants in California. Williams' gas pipeline unit in Salt Lake City said Thursday that it plans to construct nearly 700 miles of additional pipeline that will run parallel to its existing Kern River line. Construction on the $1 billion project is expected to begin next year and is scheduled for completion in May 2003, said Kirk Morgan, director of business development for Kern River pipeline. ""Shippers are seeking more access to natural gas from the Rocky Mountain basin, where producers are aggressively stepping up production,"" Morgan said. The new pipeline is expected to deliver about 900 million cubic feet of natural gas per day to markets in Utah, Nevada and California. Most of the gas will be used for generating plants planned in California. If all of the pipeline's capacity were used to generate electricity, it could produce about 5,400 megawatts. ""That is enough to light around 4.5 million homes,"" Morgan said. The original Kern River line was completed in 1992. It enters Utah from Wyoming then crosses into the Salt Lake Valley near Bountiful. It turns south near the Salt Lake City International Airport then runs the length of the state before passing into southern Nevada and winding up near Bakersfield, Calif. It currently transports 700 million cubic feet of natural gas per day. Williams, based in Tulsa, Okla., recently filed an emergency application with federal regulators to install additional pumping stations on the line to increase its capacity by 135 million cubic feet per day. That $81 million pumping station project should be completed by July 1. During the 2002 construction period, the Kern River project will employ between 1,500 and 1,800 people. The company estimates annual property taxes it pays to Utah counties will increase from $3.5 million to about $7 million. Questar will be one of the customers on the new pipeline, Morgan said. The utility wants to supply additional gas to southern Utah cities, including St. George and Cedar City. ""Our own pipelines serving southern Utah are at full capacity so this is an opportunity to transport additional gas into those areas from company-owned supplies in Wyoming,"" said Questar Gas spokeswoman Audra Sorensen. Calif Energy Commission OKs 3 Pwr Plants Worth 2,076 MW 03/23/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) (This article was originally published Thursday) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- The California Energy Commission Wednesday approved three power plants worth 2,076 megawatts, two of which are scheduled to come on line by the end of 2002, a CEC spokesman said Thursday. The plants approved include BP Amoco PLC (BP) unit ARCO Western Energy's 500 megawatt Western Midway Sunset Project, slated to come on line in October 2002; Caithness Energy's 520 MW Blythe Power Plant, to come on line by Dec. 31, 2002; and Thermo Ecotek's 1,056 MW Mountainview Power Plant, scheduled to come on line in April 2003. All three of the new plants will be natural gas-fired combined-cycle plants. The $550 million Mountainview plant will be located in Southern California, near San Bernadino. The $300 million Western Midway-Sunset plant will be located in central Kern County, while the $250 million Blythe plant will be located in the city of Blythe in Riverside County. The latest approvals bring to 13 the total number of plants approved since April 1999 by the CEC, a spokesman said. Those plants will supply 8,405 MW to the state, which has seen rolling blackouts and spiking wholesale power prices in the last six months, in part due to lack of supply. -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872; jessica.berthold@dowjones.com Some CalEnergy Power Could Be Sold Outside Calif - CEO 03/23/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) (This article was originally published Thursday) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Some of CalEnergy Operating Corp's power could end up being sold outside of California, though that is not the company's intent, CalEnergy Chairman and CEO David Sokol said in a conference call Thursday. CalEnergy, an affiliate of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co, which is majority owned by Warren Buffett's Berkshire-Hathaway (BRKA), was given legal authority Thursday to suspend 270 megawatts of power delivery to Edison International (EIX) utility Southern California Edison and sell on the open market, because SoCal Edison has not paid its bills since November. CalEnergy stopped supplying power to SoCal Ed immediately following the court ruling. ""We stopped supplying power at 1 PM (PST) and have been selling to parties that will pay since then....We are selling it to marketers; our current marketing agent is El Paso Corp (EPG) and they will sell it for us,"" Sokol said. Sokol added that while it was his company's intention to have its power sold to California, that could not be guaranteed. ""We leave the energy selling to El Paso....We've directed them that we would like the power to stay in California but we can't stop them,"" from selling out of state, Sokol said. Wholesale prices on the open market are about $400-$500 a megawatt-hour, three times more than what the company had received under its contract with SoCal Ed. The court's ruling did not address the $45 million SoCal Ed still owes CalEnergy for November and December power, and Sokol said that his company's separate lawsuit on that matter sought to attach the utility's assets as payment for that debt. Sokol said the court's ruling had ""significant implications"" for the entire community of small, independent generators, known as qualifying facilities or QFs, who have not received payment from SoCal Ed. ""Edison's own lawyer said it best....that every QF in the state will begin to mitigate if the judge allowed us (to sell on the open market),"" Sokol said. Sokol said his company was prepared to push SoCal Ed into involuntary bankruptcy Friday if CalEnergy hadn't won the case, but said he couldn't speculate whether other QFs may be more or less inclined to do so as a result of the court outcome. A group of renewable power suppliers, owed more than $100 million from SoCal Ed, said late Wednesday they want state lawmakers to release them for their supply contracts with PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric and SoCal Ed until the utilities are restored to financial stability. The utilities claim close to $13 billion in undercollections due to an inability to pass high wholesale power costs to customers under a rate freeze. In a statement, SoCal Ed said it opposed CalEnergy's bid to suspend its QF contract because the utility believed Gov. Gray Davis and state regulators are close to resolving ""very legitimate financial concerns of CalEnergy and other QF suppliers."" SoCal Ed said it was concerned that CalEnergy's request to sell to third parties would lead to a major supply shortage in California. The utility said it has informed the QFs that it is working to resolve the issue without giving unfair advantage to one class of creditors. While many of the state's large power suppliers have been paid by on a forward basis for the power they sell into California, the QFs, which make up one-third of the state's total power supply, haven't been paid by SoCal Ed since November. PG&E has made partial payments to its QFs. -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872, jessica.berthold@dowjones.com (Jason Leopold contributed to this article.) California and the West Judge Frees Small Firm From Edison Contract KEN ELLINGWOOD; DAN MORAIN TIMES STAFF WRITERS 03/23/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-3 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company El CENTRO -- California's balance of electrical power shifted slightly Thursday when an Imperial County judge temporarily freed a small geothermal energy producer from its contract with Southern California Edison, allowing it to sell power on the open market. The ruling by Superior Court Judge Donal B. Donnelly could lead to a mass exodus by hundreds of small energy producers that have been selling power to the state's financially troubled utilities for months without getting paid. At the same time, it may have staved off plans by a group of the small generators to send Edison into involuntary bankruptcy as early as today. In Sacramento, energy legislation pushed by Gov. Gray Davis passed in the state Senate but foundered in the Assembly. The measure was intended to ensure that the state gets repaid for the electricity that it has been buying on behalf of Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric, which say they lack the cash and credit to purchase power. The bill also was supposed to guarantee that the small, alternative energy producers--which together provide nearly a third of the state's power--get paid. But Assembly Republicans opposed it, saying it hadn't been given sufficient scrutiny. The impact of the small producers was made clear in Imperial County, where Edison's failure to pay CalEnergy, the county's biggest property taxpayer, had outsize implications. CalEnergy had put county officials on notice that it was about to miss a $3.8-million property tax payment. The uncertainty had prompted the tiny Calipatria Unified School District to postpone a bond issue for badly needed school repairs. Among CalEnergy Chairman David Sokol's first acts after the judge's ruling Thursday was to promise Imperial County Supervisor Wally J. Leimgruber that the company would pay its property taxes on time. ""That is great news,"" Leimgruber said. Within hours of its court victory, CalEnergy had stopped transmitting geothermal power to Edison and begun selling it to El Paso Energy, a marketing company that purchased the energy at prevailing rates and resold it on the spot market. Some of the more than 700 other small energy producers in the state said they were considering similar action against Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric. ""We absolutely need the right to sell to third parties,"" said Dean Vanech, president of Delta Power, a New Jersey company that owns five small gas-fired plants in California and is owed tens of millions of dollars by Edison. Sokol praised the Imperial County judge and said his company simply wanted the authority to sell its power ""to a credit-worthy company that, in fact, pays for the power."" An Edison spokesman said the company was disappointed with the ruling, but sympathized with CalEnergy and other small producers because ""California's power crisis has placed [them] in financial distress, just as it has placed utilities in financial distress."" Edison expressed concern that the ruling would prompt CalEnergy and other small producers to sell their power out of state. Sokol said CalEnergy had specifically told El Paso Energy that it hoped its power would remain in California, ""but if someone wants to pay a higher price out of state, we can't stop them."" Sokol said that Edison still owes CalEnergy $140 million and that the company--along with seven other small producers--had been prepared to file a petition in federal bankruptcy court in Los Angeles today forcing the utility into involuntary bankruptcy. He said his company no longer intends to do so, and he believed--but wasn't certain--that the other companies would shelve their plans. Edison filed papers Thursday with the federal Securities and Exchange Commission showing that it owed $840 million to various small electricity producers, many of which rely on renewable energy sources such as geothermal steam, solar energy or wind. The alternative energy producers--and utilities--strenuously objected to the legislation considered in Sacramento on Thursday. The bill, spelling out how the utilities are to pay the state and the small producers, passed the Senate on a 27-9 vote, the exact two-thirds margin required. But it stalled in the Assembly on a 46-23 party-line vote, well short of two-thirds. ""When I was a citizen back in Lancaster, I heard these stories about pieces of legislation that were cooked up late at night, that . . . were cut and pasted together and were rammed through by the Legislature,"" Assemblyman George Runner (R-Lancaster) said. ""That's exactly what we have before us."" The alternative electricity generators, including oil companies, warned that they would lose money under the Davis proposal, while representatives of Edison and PG&E, which have amassed billions in debt in the worsening energy crisis, said the legislation would push them deeper into the hole. ""There isn't enough money,"" Edison attorney Ann Cohn testified at a Senate hearing on the bill Thursday. ""It is a very simple question: Dollars going out cannot be greater than dollars coming in."" The bill, AB 8X, combined several proposals. First, it sought to clarify earlier legislation by spelling out that Edison and PG&E must pay the state all money collected from consumers for electricity that the state has been buying. Additionally, the bill would turn over to the California Public Utilities Commission the thorny issue of how much to pay alternative energy producers for their electricity. Wind, solar and geothermal producers might agree to the prices offered by the administration. But most of the alternative energy producers, including Chevron and British Petroleum, use natural gas to generate electricity through ""cogeneration,"" a process of creating steam for both electric generation and heat. With natural gas prices high, they contend, they would lose money at the prices Davis is offering. * Ellingwood reported from El Centro, Morain from Sacramento. Times staff writers Mitchell Landsberg in Los Angeles and Jenifer Warren, Nancy Vogel and Carl Ingram in Sacramento contributed to this story. (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) Power Points Background The state Legislature approved electricity deregulation with a unanimous vote in 1996. The move was expected to lower power bills in California by opening up the energy market to competition. Relatively few companies, however, entered that market to sell electricity, giving each that did considerable influence over the price. Meanwhile, demand has increased in recent years while no major power plants have been built. These factors combined last year to push up the wholesale cost of electricity. But the state's biggest utilities--Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison--are barred from increasing consumer rates. So the utilities have accumulated billions of dollars in debt and, despite help from the state, have struggled to buy enough electricity. * Daily Developments * Overcharges by major electricity suppliers were estimated at $6.3 billion, up from the $5.5 billion first thought, California's power grid operator said. * Electricity producers denied that they have profiteered and argued that Cal-ISO's figures don't take into account all their costs. * A Superior Court judge's ruling Thursday freeing a small producer from its contract with Edison could lead to a mass exodus by small energy producers that have been selling to the utilities without getting paid. * Verbatim ""If these guys have such high costs ... how come they're making so much money?"" --Gary Stern, Edison's director of market monitoring and analysis, referring to power producers Complete package and updates at www.latimes.com/power Grid Operator Says California Paid Too Much for Power By Rebecca Smith and John R. Emshwiller Staff Reporters of The Wall Street Journal 03/23/2001 The Wall Street Journal A2 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) California's electric-grid operator said power suppliers may have overcharged the state and its utilities by $6.2 billion, or a total of 30%, in a 10-month period, and has asked federal regulators to step up their policing of electricity markets. Meanwhile, a California state judge handed down a decision involving small power producers that could result in more electricity being made available in the energy-starved state, but likely at greater cost to the state government. The $6.2 billion figure was contained in a market analysis by the California Independent System Operator filed yesterday with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The ISO says it isn't seeking a refund -- for the May through February period -- because its analysis lacked important market data. For example, it estimated costs for 21 suppliers based on published prices for natural gas, not on specific data showing what each generator actually paid for the fuel. ""We don't know how much gas actually was purchased at spot-market prices,"" said Anjali Sheffrin, the ISO's head of market analysis. Charles Robinson, general counsel for the ISO, said FERC needs to become ""more aggressive about market-power mitigation."" The ISO's filing, he said, was intended to push the agency in that direction, since FERC is responsible for policing deregulated electricity and natural-gas markets. He said that if the FERC doesn't act, the state of California may find ways to discipline the market, such as through the state attorney general's office. The attorney general has been investigating the state's electricity market for many months but hasn't brought any court action. Dynegy Inc., a big owner of power plants in California, said it will provide additional information to FERC supporting its position that the prices it has charged for power have been ""just and reasonable."" The Houston company was one of 13 energy suppliers that the FERC this month ordered to pay refunds totaling $124 million or ""show cause"" why it should be excused. Dynegy said the FERC analysis was flawed, because it used ""inaccurate"" prices for natural gas and pollution credits. While big power producers such as Dynegy came under attack, small power producers won a potentially significant victory in a state court in Southern California's Imperial County. A judge granted 10 geothermal plants operated by the CalEnergy Co. unit of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Co., a unit of Berkshire Hathaway Inc., of Omaha, Neb., permission to suspend deliveries of electricity to Southern California Edison Co. and instead seek other buyers. These plants, known as ""qualifying facilities,"" are under long-term contract to Edison and other utilities but haven't been paid for months. Edison, a unit of Edison International, of Rosemead, Calif., says it has been unable to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in power bills to CalEnergy and others because it has been driven to the brink of insolvency by the state's failed utility-deregulation plan. While the CalEnergy case involves only about 320 megawatts of power, the repercussions could be far greater. Collectively, hundreds of qualifying facilities, or QFs, produce as much as 30% of California's electricity needs. QFs totaling 3,000 megawatts cut their production in recent weeks for lack of payment. This loss of output was a significant cause of the blackouts that hit California this week. Observers believe the CalEnergy court decision could give other QFs an opportunity to sell power in the open market, presumably to the state government that now is California's biggest energy buyer. An hour after the court decision yesterday, some 400 megawatts of power came back into the market, the ISO said. However, additional QF power sales on the open market could substantially increase the state's tab. Already, the state has allocated more than $4 billion for electricity purchases. Separately, Edison said in a Securities and Exchange Commission filing that its unpaid power bills could contribute to a write-off of as much as $2.7 billion for 2000. Because of uncertainty caused by the energy crisis, the company hasn't yet reported year-end earnings. Power regulators debate who should be exempted from blackouts By KAREN GAUDETTE Associated Press Writer 03/22/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - State power regulators said Thursday they are working to exempt all California hospitals, regardless of size, from rolling blackouts. The Public Utilities Commission met with representatives from hospitals and investor-owned utilities after Los Angeles lawyer David Huard filed an emergency motion with the PUC on behalf of more than 500 hospitals throughout the state. Under PUC rules, hospitals with more than 100 beds are exempt from losing electricity during power emergencies. But during rolling blackouts Monday, at least a dozen hospitals from Long Beach to Clearlake were forced to use their backup generators. Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison Co. say they blacked out those hospitals specifically because they have backup generators. Both utilities said the temporary blackouts were part of their overall efforts to spread the burden of blackouts over more of their customers. Linda Ziegler, director of business and regulatory planning for SoCal Edison, said the utility is following state law and will implement new guidelines if the PUC changes them. But hospitals say there is a 10-second lapse before emergency generators kick in, which could harm patients in the midst of delicate surgical procedures such as organ transplants or brain surgery. ""You wouldn't fly a plane with only your emergency backup systems in place,"" said Ann Mosher, a spokeswoman for California Pacific Medical Center in San Francisco. ""Backup generators are just that, they're not designed to keep the hospital up and running at full capacity."" Ziegler said that power still goes out for reasons beyond the energy crisis, from incidents like lightning or a knocked-down power pole. ""If it's a serious problem for the hospital it's certainly something they should be address just from an ongoing basis,"" she said. The exemption would cover all hospitals within the territory of the state's investor owned utilities PG&E, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas and Electric. Hospitals within the range of municipally owned utilities, such as the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, are separately regulated. For more than two decades, prisons, hospitals with more than 100 beds and emergency services such as fire and police departments have been classified as ""essential"" services, and are exempted from blackouts by order of state power regulators. After rolling blackouts began darkening the state in January, many other public service groups began seeking relief from power interruptions, including transit systems, schools and water districts. --- On the Net: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov Federal Judge Orders Reliant To Keep Selling Pwr To Calif 03/22/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP)--A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction Wednesday ordering a major electricity wholesaler to continue selling to California despite its fear that it will not get paid. U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said Californians were at risk of irreparable harm if Reliant Energy (REI) stopped selling power to the Independent System Operator, which oversees the state's power grid. The ISO buys last-minute power on behalf of utilities to fill gaps in supply. Damrell dismissed Reliant's attempt to force the state Department of Water Resources to back the ISO's purchases for the state's two biggest utilities. The state has been spending about $50 million a day on power for Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison, both denied credit by suppliers after amassing billions of dollars in debts. The judge said he had no authority to force the DWR to pay for that power. Gov. Gray Davis has said the state isn't responsible for purchasing the costly last-minute power ISO buys for Edison and PG&E, despite a law authorizing state power purchases on the utilities' behalf. ISO attorney Charles Robinson said the ruling gives ISO operators ""a tool to assist them in keeping the lights on in California."" ""Had the decision gone the other way, one could expect other generators to simply ignore emergency orders,"" Robinson said. Damrell's preliminary injunction will remain in effect until the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission rules on the matter. Damrell denied the ISO's request for preliminary injunctions against three other wholesalers - Dynegy Inc. (DYN), AES Corp. (AES) and Williams Cos. (WMB) - which agreed to continue selling to the ISO pending the FERC ruling. Spokesmen for Reliant, Dynegy, AES and Williams were out of the office Wednesday night and didn't immediately return calls from The Associated Press seeking comment on the ruling. The ISO went to court in February after a federal emergency order requiring the power sales expired. The judge then issued a temporary restraining order, requiring the sales, but dropped it after the suppliers agreed to continue sales to California pending his Wednesday ruling. The ISO said it would lose about 3,600 megawatts if the suppliers pulled out, enough power for about 2.7 million households. One megawatt is enough for roughly 750 homes. Grid officials said Reliant's share alone is about 3,000 megawatts. Reliant said the amount at issue actually is less than a fourth of that, because most of its output is already committed under long-term contracts. Reliant, which currently provides about 9% of the state's power, worries it won't get paid due to the financial troubles of PG&E and Edison. PG&E and Edison say that together they have lost about $13 billion since June due to soaring wholesale electricity costs that California's 1996 deregulation law bars them from passing onto customers. Calif Small Pwr Producers To Shut Plants If Rates Capped By Jason Leopold Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES 03/22/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Many of California's independent power producers late Wednesday threatened to take their small power plants offline this week if state lawmakers pass legislation that would cap the rates the generators charge for electricity they sell directly to the state's three investor-owned utilities. At issue is a bill that would repeal a section of the state's Public Utilities Code, which links the 688 so-called qualifying facilities' electricity rates to the monthly border price of natural gas. Lawmakers, however, are poised to pass the legislation. State regulators are then expected to approve a measure that would restructure the fluctuating rates the QFs charge PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric, Edison International (EIX) unit Southern California Edison, and Sempra Energy (SRE) unit San Diego Gas & Electric from $170 a megawatt-hour to $69-$79/MWh, regardless of the price of natural gas. Whereas each of the 688 QF contracts differed, largely because natural gas prices are higher in Southern California than Northern California, the state wants the QFs to sign a general contract with the utilities. The cogeneration facilities, which produce about 5,400 megawatts of electricity in the state, said the rates are too low and they won't sign new supply contracts with the utilities. ""For $79/MWh, natural gas would have to be $6 per million British thermal unit at the Southern California border,"" said Tom Lu, executive director of Carson-based Watson Cogeneration Company, the state's largest QF, generating 340 MW. ""Our current gas price at the border is $12.50."" Other gas-fired QFs said the state could face another round of rolling blackouts if lawmakers and state regulators pass the legislation, which is expected to be heard on the Senate floor Thursday, and allow it to be implemented by Public Utilities Commission next week. Lu, whose company is half-owned by BP Amoco PLC (BP) and is owed $100 million by SoCal Ed, said the proposals by the PUC and the Legislature ""will only make things worse."" David Fogarty, spokesman for Western States Petroleum Association, whose members supply California with more than 2,000 MW, said the utilities need to pay the QFs more than $1 billion for electricity that was already produced. State Loses 3,000 MW QF Output Due Of Financial Reasons The QFs represent about one-third, or 9,700 MW, of the state's total power supply. Roughly 5,400 MW are produced by natural gas-fired facilities. The rest is generated by wind, solar power and biomass. About 3,000 MW of gas-fired and renewable QF generation is offline in California because the power plant owners haven't been paid hundreds of millions of dollars from cash-strapped utilities SoCal Ed and PG&E for nearly four months. Several small power plant owners owed money by SoCal Ed have threatened to drag the utility into involuntary bankruptcy if the utility continues to default on payments and fails to agree to supply contracts at higher rates. The defaults have left many of the renewable and gas-fired QFs unable to operate their power plants because they can't afford to pay for the natural gas to run their units. Others continue to produce electricity under their contracts with the state's utilities but aren't being paid even on a forward basis. The California Independent System Operator, keeper of the state's electricity grid, said the loss of the QF generation was the primary reason rolling blackouts swept through the state Monday and Tuesday. Gov. Gray Davis, recognizing the potential disaster if additional QFs took their units offline, held marathon meetings with key lawmakers Monday and Tuesday to try and hammer out an agreement that would get the QFs paid on a forward basis and set rates of $79/MWh and $69/MWh for five and 10 year contracts. He also said he would direct the PUC to order the utilities to pay the QFs for power they sell going forward. ""After next week the QF problem will be behind us,"" Davis said Tuesday. ""We want to get the QFs paid...the QFs are dropping like flies...and when that happens the lights go out."" But this just makes the problem worse, said Assemblyman Dean Florez, D-Shafter, a member of the Assembly energy committee. ""I don't know how we are going to keep the lights on,"" Florez said in an interview. ""Many of these congenerators are in my district. They said if the legislation doesn't change they are going offline. This compounds the issue of rolling blackouts, especially now when we need every megawatt."" Davis, who didn't meet with people representing the QFs, said he was handing the QF issue to the PUC because lawmakers failed to pass legislation that would have set a five-year price for natural gas and allow the QFs to sign individual contracts with the utilities. In addition, SOCal Ed opposed the legislation, saying the rates should be below $50/MWh. Some renewable power producers said they aren't vehemently opposed to the new rate structure because it guarantees them a higher rate than what was originally proposed. QFs Want Third Party Supply Contracts John Wood, who represents the SoCal Ed Gas Fired Creditors Committee, one of a handful of groups that have formed since January to explore options on getting paid by the utilities, said his group of gas-fired QF creditors want to be released from their supply contracts and sell to third parties. ""Under our plan, we would be permitted to sell electricity to third parties (including the state Department of Water Resources) until a resolution to the crisis can be accomplished,"" wood said. Hal Dittmer, president of Sacramento-based Wellhead Electric in Sacramento, which is owed $8 million by PG&E, has 85 MW of gas-fired generation units offline. Under the state's plan, Dittmer said he risks going out of business. ""I can't buy natural gas for what I would be paid under this decision,"" he said. ""The state needs to quit kidding themselves that they don't need to raise electricity rates. All of this is being driven by an artificial construct that California can avoid raising rates."" -By Jason Leopold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3874; jason.leopold@dowjones.com Power Strain Eases but Concerns Mount Energy: Officials say summer prices will be high, and a state report shows that contracts with generators are far short of goals. DAN MORAIN; JENIFER WARREN TIMES STAFF WRITERS 03/22/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-3 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SACRAMENTO -- California's fragile electricity system stabilized Wednesday, but a Davis administration report suggested troubles ahead because the state could be forced to buy most of its power for the coming summer on the costly and volatile spot market. After two days of statewide blackouts, power plants that had been shut down were cranked up. Unseasonable heat tapered off. The operators of the statewide power grid relaxed their state of emergency. But plenty of ominous signs remained. Many small producers remained shut down, skeptical about Gov. Gray Davis' plan for utilities to pay them. State Controller Kathleen Connell issued a sharp warning about the high cost of the state's foray into the power business and announced that she will block an administration request that she transfer $5.6 billion into an account that could be tapped to pay for state purchases of electricity. And a report from the administration summarizing contracts between Davis and independent power generators showed that the state has signed contracts for only 2,247 megawatts of electricity, significantly less than the 6,000 to 7,000 megawatts previously claimed. While there are agreements in principle for the full amount, the report notes that generators can back out of the contracts for a variety of reasons, including the state's failure to sell bonds to finance power purchased by July 1. The Legislature has approved plans to sell $10 billion in bonds, but none have yet been issued. ""We are exposed enormously this summer,"" Senate Energy Committee chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) said after looking at the report. ""We owe the people the truth about how difficult this summer is going to be. We don't have a power fairy."" Perhaps most significant, the report suggests that the contracts fall significantly short of Davis' stated goal of buying no more than 5% of the state's summer needs on the spot electricity market, where prices can be many times those of long-term contracts. After reading the report, Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economist who studies the California electricity market, said the numbers suggested that the state's long-term contracts will cover less than half of what the state will need this summer. ""We're definitely short this summer, next summer and the summer of 2003,"" he said. California was forced to start buying electricity in December--at a cost of $50 million a day--because producers refused to sell to Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric. The two utilities amassed billions of dollars in debt when prices for wholesale power soared on the spot market. Vikram Budhraja, a consultant retained by Davis to negotiate deals with generators, said the report represents a ""work in progress."" He said the state may yet sign new contracts. However, Wolak said the contract figures confirm what he and others have been dreading: that summer is going to be rife with rolling blackouts unless serious steps to cut demand are taken immediately. Wolak and other experts say large industrial customers must be switched to real-time meters and pricing to persuade them to use the bulk of their energy at times of low demand. The head of the Energy Foundation, a San Francisco-based nonprofit that promotes sustainable sources of power, made the same proposal to Davis on Wednesday. ""The government need not ask customers to swelter in the dark this summer,"" foundation President Hal Harvey argued in a letter. He also proposed a crash campaign to boost sales of efficient appliances and lightbulbs. He said the state needs to take over the utilities' contracts with alternative energy providers to ensure they stay in business, and sign new contracts for 1,500 megawatts of new wind power--the cheapest, fastest and cleanest source of new supply. Davis had proposed a formula Tuesday to force private utilities to pay the alternative producers, some of which have not been paid since November. But some of them warned Wednesday that Davis' plan offers them little incentive to turn on their generators. Alternative energy producers supply more than a quarter of the electricity consumed in California. Many producers generate electricity from wind, sun and geothermal sources. But most of them generate power using natural gas--and the cost of natural gas has been soaring. Several natural gas users said Davis' plan, which caps rates, won't cover their fuel costs. Davis assumes that the price of natural gas will fall. But small generators say they don't have sufficient purchasing power or sophistication to gamble on future prices. The Public Utilities Commission is expected to approve Davis' proposal next week. It offers producers two choices: 7.9 cents a kilowatt-hour if they agree to supply power for five years, or 6.9 cents a kilowatt-hour over 10 years. ""The price of natural gas is higher than that,"" said Marty Quinn, executive vice president and chief operating officer of Ridgewood Power LLC, which owns three natural gas-fired co-generation plants. ""If we operate, we'll lose money."" Ridgewood is not operating, having been cut off by gas suppliers. The company sued PG&E last month seeking overdue payments and release from its contracts with the utility. A hearing is scheduled in El Centro today in another lawsuit filed by a small energy producer, an Imperial Valley geothermal producer that sued Edison for refusing to let it break its contract and sell on the open market. CalEnergy says Edison owes it about $140 million for energy sold since November. A company spokesman, Jay Lawrence, said CalEnergy was going ahead with its suit despite Davis' proposal. ""We've had promises before,"" he said. In other developments: * A federal judge in Sacramento on Wednesday ordered Reliant Energy of Houston, a major producer, to continue selling power to California during emergencies, despite the company's argument that it may not be fully reimbursed. The order will remain in effect for 60 days or until the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission decides a related case. * Connell said the state budget surplus has shrunk to $3.2 billion because the state has spent roughly $2.8 billion on electricity. She criticized the administration for withholding basic information about state finances, and said she will begin an audit on Monday of the Department of Water Resources, which is responsible for purchasing power. Davis' aides said Connell took her action because the Democratic governor endorsed one of Connell's foes this week in the race for Los Angeles mayor, former Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa. A Connell aide scoffed at the notion. * Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said she ""never has had a response"" from President Bush after writing him last month for an appointment to discuss the California energy crisis. In a wide-ranging lunch talk with reporters in Washington, she deplored the fact that ""huge, huge profits are being made"" in the California crisis, and said ""an appropriate federal role"" would be to guarantee a reliable source of power until the state can get nine new generators online. * Times staff writers Mitchell Landsberg in Los Angeles and Robert L. Jackson in Washington contributed to this report. (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC) Power Points Daily Developments * Wholesale electricity suppliers overcharged by about $5.5 billion between May and last month, and that money should be refunded to taxpayers and utilities, according to a Cal-ISO report. * The state may have to buy most of its power for summer on the costly spot market, which could drive consumers' bills up, a Davis administration report concludes. * State Controller Kathleen Connell said she will block a request by the Davis administration for $5.6 billion for state purchases of electricity. Verbatim ""We owe the people the truth about how difficult this summer is going to be. We don't have a power fairy."" Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey), Senate Energy Committee chairwoman CPUC Must Address Rates In QF Repayment Order - SoCal Ed 03/21/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Any order from the California Public Utilities Commission requiring utilities to pay small, independent generators going forward must determine how that could be done within the existing rate structure, a spokesman for Edison International (EIX) utility Southern California Edison said Wednesday. The utility was responding to a PUC proposed decision that would require utilities to pay small generators, called qualifying facilities, $79 a megawatt hour within 15 days of electricity delivery. The decision will be voted March 27 by the CPUC. ""We're still reviewing (the decision) and should have more to say in a day or two. To the extent that the commission orders us to pay going forward of course we will. But it needs to address how we will pay the QFs,"" a SoCal Edison spokesman said. SoCal Edison and PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric Co. are struggling under nearly $13 billion in uncollected power costs due to an inability to pass high wholesale power costs to customers under a rate freeze. Gov. Gray Davis Tuesday blasted the utilities for not having paid their QF bills in full since December. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. has made some partial payments to QFs, but SoCal Edison has paid nothing. Together, they owe the QFs about $1 billion, but the order doesn't address that debt. An Edison executive said, in reaction to the governor's sharp comments, that the company simply doesn't have the money to pay creditors. ""The root problem here is there just isn't enough money in the current rate base to pay our bills,"" said Edison Senior Vice President of Public Affairs Bob Foster. ""We understand the financial distress (the QFs) face; we are facing financial distress ourselves."" The proposed PUC order would also require the state's investor-owned utilities to offer the small generators five- and 10-year contracts for power for $79/MWh and $69/MWh, respectively. The QFs ""may be able to live with"" the PUC proposal, but the five- and 10-year contract prices may be inadequate if natural gas prices at one of the California borders are high, said Jan Smutny-Jones, president of the Independent Energy Producers Association. Natural gas prices into California are currently higher than anywhere in the country. But some say the proposed decision may not be enough to prevent the QFs from filing involuntary bankruptcy proceedings against the utilities for the money they are still owed. ""There's still a lot of skepticism. To say our position has changed based on the CPUC decision or the governor's announcement is not accurate. A lot still has to happen,"" said Jay Lawrence, a spokesman for a renewable creditors committee. -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872; jessica.berthold@dowjones.com -0- 22/03/01 01-27G State Says It's Accelerating Plan to Buy Power Utilities' Grid Government: Talks with Edison are reported near completion, but agreement with heavily indebted PG&E has a way to go. RONE TEMPEST; DAN MORAIN TIMES STAFF WRITERS 03/21/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-22 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SACRAMENTO -- As blackouts hit California for a second day Tuesday, a key consultant to Gov. Gray Davis said negotiations to buy the power grid owned by the state's largest utilities ""are proceeding at an accelerated pace."" Wall Street consultant Joseph Fichera said talks with Southern California Edison could be wrapped up within days, although those with PG&E are much less advanced. The administration and PG&E have not reached even an agreement in principle, he said. PG&E, which has more debt than Edison, says its transmission lines are more extensive than those of its Southern California counterpart. The state wants to buy the utilities' transmission lines and other assets for about $7 billion to provide cash to the utilities, help stabilize the electricity supply and ease the power crunch that has plagued California for months. To research the grid purchase, Fichera said, the state has had to pore over 80,000 documents just to assess the utilities' liabilities. ""We are working at a good pace,"" said Fichera, chief executive of the New York firm Saber Partners. "" . . . If we get to a deal-breaker, it might be longer."" By making Fichera, who is also a consultant to the Texas Public Utilities Commission, available to reporters Tuesday, the Davis administration was clearly trying to reassure the public that progress is being made on the governor's plan to pull the state out of the crisis. Since mid-January, when the big utilities' credit failed and suppliers stopped selling to them, the state has spent nearly $3 billion buying electricity from a handful of large suppliers in Texas, Oklahoma, Georgia and North Carolina. Not a cent has gone to the hundreds of alternative energy suppliers in California who provide about a quarter of the state's electricity. The Monday and Tuesday blackouts occurred partly because many of the cash-strapped alternative suppliers, including solar, biomass and wind power units, cut their normal supply to the system in half. They say Edison and PG&E have not paid them since November; the utilities say they are out of cash. Assemblyman Fred Keeley (D-Boulder Creek) said the plight of the alternative suppliers has dragged on because of the complexity of dealing with ""almost 700 individual contractors."" Another delaying factor, said Keeley, who with state Sen. Jim Battin (R-La Quinta) worked for almost three months to come up with a legislative plan to lower the small producers' prices, was ""the huge enmity . . . manifested between the utilities and the qualifying facilities. These people just don't like each other."" This week's blackouts provided two painful lessons for the Davis administration: * When it comes to electricity, size doesn't matter--every kilowatt counts. During peak use, a small wind power facility in Riverside County can make the difference between full power and blackouts. * There is no such thing as a partial solution. Unless the whole energy equation is balanced, the parts don't work. For the Davis plan to work, several key elements need to come together or utility customers will almost certainly face rate increases above the 19% already set in motion * The cost of power purchased by the state must be reduced through long-term contracts with the big out-of-state producers. These contracts, the details of which the Davis administration has kept confidential, are still being negotiated by Davis consultant Vikram Budhraja of the Pasadena firm Electric Power Group. The administration says it has concluded 40 contracts with generators, about half of which have been signed. According to the most recent statistics released by the Department of Water Resources, which buys power for the state, current prices are still well above the rate state Treasurer Phil Angelides says is necessary for a planned $10-billion bond offering to succeed. The bonds, set for sale in May, will be used to reimburse the state for the money it will have spent by that time to buy electricity. The state is currently spending at a rate of $58 million a day to buy power. If prices stay high, the $10 billion in bonds will not cover the state's power purchases by the end of the summer. Angelides says he cannot proceed with bridge financing for the bonds until the Public Utilities Commission devises a formula to guarantee that a portion of utility bills will be dedicated to bond repayment. Angelides has estimated that, under the January law that put the state in the power buying business, the state must be reimbursed $2.5 billion annually, and that $1.3 billion is needed to service the debt. PUC Administrative Law Judge Joseph R. DeUlloa is expected to announce his ruling on the reimbursement rate later this week, leading to a PUC vote on the matter as early as next week. * The rates charged for electricity by the alternative producers, known as qualifying facilities, must be cut at least in half, down from an average of more than 17 cents per kilowatt-hour. In his news conference Tuesday, Davis said he will ask the PUC to set QF rates at 6.9 cents for 10-year contracts and 7.5 cents for five-year contracts. Meanwhile, PUC Chairman Loretta Lynch, a Davis appointee, said Tuesday that the commission will vote next week on a proposed order requiring Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric to pay the QFs for electricity in the future. Lynch said a recent PUC assessment showed that the utilities have enough cash on hand for that. ""We are trying to make sure the folks providing the power get paid,"" Lynch said. ""The qualified facilities have demonstrated that they haven't been paid and that it is impairing their ability to provide power."" The utilities contend that if they pay the small providers what they owe them, there will not be enough money left to pay other creditors. ""There is not enough money in the current rate structure to pay the [alternative producers], pay the [Department of Water Resources] and pay the utilities for their generation,"" said John Nelson, a spokesman for PG&E. * The utilities must sell to the state the power they produce themselves, mainly from hydro and nuclear sources, at a rate only slightly above the cost of producing it. This is tied to the ongoing negotiations between the Davis administration and the utilities to restore the near-bankrupt utilities to solvency. * Times staff writers Julie Tamaki, Miguel Bustillo and Tim Reiterman contributed to this report. Davis OKs Subsidy of Pollution Fees Smog: As part of secret deal to get long-term energy contracts, state would pay for some of the credits that allow excess power plant emissions. Critics renew call for full disclosure. DAN MORAIN TIMES STAFF WRITER 03/21/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition A-23 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SACRAMENTO -- As part of his closed-door negotiations to buy electricity, Gov. Gray Davis has agreed to relieve some generators from having to pay potentially millions of dollars in fees for emitting pollutants into the air, Davis said Tuesday. Davis announced two weeks ago that his negotiators had reached deals with 20 generators to supply $43 billion worth of power during the next 10 years. However, the Democratic governor has refused to release any of the contracts or detail various terms, contending that release of such information would hamper the state's ability to negotiate deals with other generators and therefore ultimately would raise prices Californians pay for electricity. Sources familiar with the negotiations, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the agreement reached with Dynegy Inc., a power company based in Houston, is one that includes language requiring that the state pay the cost of credits that allow emissions. Dynegy spokesman Steve Stengel declined to discuss the company's deal with the state. ""We couldn't get them to sign contracts; it was a sticking point,"" Davis said of the decision to pay the fees of some generators. ""We had to lock down some power so we were not totally dependent on the spot market."" The fees in question are part of an emission trading system known as RECLAIM. Under the system, companies are allotted a certain amount of allowable pollution. If their operations pollute more, companies are required to purchase credits on an open market. Currently the credits cost about $45 per pound of pollution--an amount that can lead to a bill of well over $10 million a year for a power plant. The South Coast Air Quality Management District, which regulates pollution in the Los Angeles Basin, is considering steps to significantly lower the cost of the system--a step that could considerably cut the state's potential cost, Davis said. Senate Energy Committee Chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) defended the decision to cover the power company's costs. ""It is a question of whether it brings down the price of power,"" she said. ""If it brings down the price of power, I don't have a problem with it."" Nevertheless, word that the contracts could bind the state to pay pollution fees caused some critics of Davis' policy to renew calls for Davis to reconsider the secrecy surrounding the power negotiations. The payment provision underscores the fact that the contracts involve more than merely the prices the state will pay for its megawatts, the critics note. ""The Legislature should have known about it,"" said Senate President Pro Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco). ""It is going to cost taxpayers money. It makes you wonder. . . . This was a policy issue that was never discussed with the Legislature."" V. John White, a lobbyist for the Sierra Club, who also represents alternative energy producers, called the contract proposal ""a horrible precedent."" ""Until we know exactly what the state has agreed to and how much of a subsidy this represents, we can't determine how serious the breach of principle this is,"" White said. Another critic of the secrecy of the negotiations, Terry Francke, general counsel for the California First Amendment Coalition, said the provision in question ""raises the possibility that there are other [concessions]"" that have not yet come to light. In the summer, when demand for power is highest, some generators probably will exceed pollution limits set by regional air quality management districts. To avert blackouts, state officials might ask the companies to keep plants running. In such cases, some sources familiar with aspects of the contracts said, the contract language could be interpreted to suggest that the state would cover any fines--although Davis said Tuesday the state will not cover the cost of fines. A recent Dynegy filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission underscores the rising cost of pollution-related measures. The company, which is partners with NRG Energy in three California plants in El Segundo, Long Beach and Carlsbad in San Diego County, said its ""aggregate expenditures for compliance with laws related to the regulation of discharge of materials into the environment"" rose to $14.3 million in 2000, from $3.6 million in 1999. A South Coast Air Quality Management spokesman said Dynegy's facilities appear to be fairly clean--although Sierra Club lobbyist White said Dynegy has been seeking a permit at one of its plants to burn fuel oil, which is dirtier than natural gas. Davis said he intends to ""make this information public,"" but he added that ""we do not want to put the public's interest in jeopardy by asking them to pay higher prices."" ""Nobody likes the notion that [the administration is] not being fully forthcoming,"" Davis said. ""But I also have a corollary responsibility that I don't stick these generators with a higher rate."" FERC ORDERS WILLIAMS ENERGY AND AES TO EXPLAIN THEIR REFUSAL TO MAKE CERTAIN RMR UNITS AVAILABLE TO CALIFORNIA ISO LAST YEAR 03/21/2001 Foster Electric Report 5 (c) Copyright 2001, Foster Associates, Inc. Following a preliminary, non-public investigation, FERC directed AES Southland Inc. and Williams Energy Marketing & Trading Co. (IN01-3) on March 14 to show cause why they did not violate section 205 of the Federal Power Act (FPA) by failing to provide power to the California ISO from two reliability must-run (RMR) generator units during a period in April and May 2000. The investigation responded to a matter referred by the Cal-ISO. If a violation is found, Williams Energy and AES could be required to refund excess profits of $10.9 million (as calculated by FERC) and face restrictions on their market-based rate authority for a year. The show cause order involves two generation units (Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2), owned and operated by AES. Williams Energy markets all output from the Alamitos and Huntington Beach plants, including the two units at issue here, pursuant to a tolling agreement filed with the Commission. The Cal-ISO designated the two units as RMR units that it could call on when necessary to provide energy and ancillary service essential to the reliability of the California transmission network. The Cal-ISO makes both a fixed payment to the RMR owner or operator to compensate for the RMR unit's availability and a variable payment for the RMR unit's output (if the unit is not otherwise participating in the market). Williams Energy and the Cal-ISO executed RMR agreements, filed as rate schedules with the Commission, allowing the Cal-ISO to dispatch units ""solely for purposes of meeting local reliability needs or managing intra-zonal congestion."" The ISO may dispatch a non-RMR unit if the designated RMR unit is not available. Under its RMR agreement with the ISO, Williams is paid the greater of its contract price or marginal cost for operating RMR units. However, if a non-RMR unit has to be dispatched because a designated RMR unit is unavailable, Williams will be paid its bid price, not the RMR contract price. During the April to May 2000 period, the Cal-ISO sought to dispatch both Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2 as RMR units to provide voltage support. However, according to the FERC order, Williams Energy refused to make Alamitos 4 available from April 25 through May 5, and to make Huntington Beach 2 available from May 6 through May 11, ""for reasons not directly related to the necessary and timely maintenance of the units."" Consequently, the Cal-ISO was forced to dispatch non-RMR units at a higher cost, namely, Williams Energy's bid price for service provided by the replacement units. By contrast, if the RMR units had not experienced outages and been available from April 25 through May 11, Williams Energy would have received either (1) the market revenues only from the respective units, which would have resulted in no payments for RMR output from the ISO to Williams Energy, or (2) Williams Energy's variable cost for operating the RMR units less the market revenues from the respective units' output. Accordingly, FERC observed, Williams Energy had ""a financial incentive to prolong any outages of Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2 in April and May 2000."" The bid price for the non-RMR units was at or near the Cal-ISO's then-effective bid cap of $750/MWh, FERC continued. Therefore, Williams Energy received payments from the Cal-ISO of more than $11.3 million, or about $10.3 million greater than the estimated average variable operating cost of the non-RMR units (approximately $63/MWh) during the period in question. This indicates a refund amount, including interest, of nearly $10.9 million. The information in this order and a non-public appendix, the Commission declared, suggests that AES declared outages at the two RMR units and maintained Huntington Beach 2 in a manner inconsistent with good utility practice, and that Williams Energy took action to extend the outage at Alamitos 4 and to make Huntington Beach 2 unavailable for ""pretextual reasons."" Based on this information coupled with Williams Energy's financial incentive not to make the Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2 units available, FERC found serious questions about whether (1) AES and Williams Energy violated applicable RMR contracts and tariffs on file with the Commission pursuant to FPA section 205 when they refused to make Alamitos 4 and Huntington Beach 2 available for dispatch by the Cal-ISO; (2) whether Williams acted inconsistently with its market-based rate authority and the market monitoring information protocols of the Cal-ISO's tariff regarding the unavailability of the RMR units during the period at issue; and (3) whether AES violated a tolling agreement on file with the Commission pursuant to section 205. The Commission identified two remedies for these potential violations: a refund by Williams Energy and/or AES of revenues received greater than the amount that would have collected from the ISO if the RMR units had been available, and a condition on Williams Energy's market-based rate authority. Specifically, for a one-year period, if an RMR unit were not available when dispatched by the Cal-ISO, a non-RMR unit dispatched in its place would only receive payment according to the terms of the applicable RMR contract. In other words, Williams Energy would not receive the bid price for operation of the substitute, non- RMR unit. The Commission directed Williams Energy and AES to show cause, within 20 days, why they should not be found to have committed the above-described violations and why the specified remedies should not be imposed. Further, to ensure procurement of all relevant information, the Commission instituted a formal, non-public investigation into the operation, maintenance and sales of power from the Alamitos and Huntington Beach plants in 2000 and 2001. Calif Consumers Failing To Conserve Pwr Despite Blackouts 03/20/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- California consumers haven't been conserving enough electricity to relieve strain on the power grid and reduce demand in the state, a spokesman with the Independent System Operator said Tuesday. The ISO said that despite two straight days of statewide rolling blackouts, consumers aren't using less electricity, which means additional megawatts will be taken off the grid. As a result, blackouts could last longer and impact additional communities, the ISO said. ISO spokesman Pat Dorinson said Monday ""conservation in California is no longer an option,"" but consumers in the state aren't heeding the call to reduce consumption. Conservation efforts during rolling blackouts Monday and Tuesday were far less than Jan. 17 and Jan. 18, when blackouts swept through Northern California due to transmission constraints. Jim Detmers, the ISO's vice president of operation, said consumers saved the state about 1,000 megawatts of electricity, enough power for 1 million houses. The ISO said conservation efforts Monday were about 500 MW or less. ""We would be very happy if we saw the same amount this time,"" Detmers said. The state's Energy Commission said consumers think it's no longer important to save electricity until blackouts are imposed. ""People have been saving generally, but it isn't a big bump from hour to hour,"" a spokesman for the Energy Commission said. Gov. Gray Davis launched a massive conservation campaign this month, promising consumers a rebate on their summer electricity bill if they save at least 20% of electricity, compared with last summer. The governor said he believes conservation this summer will amount to possibly saving 5,000 MW and averting the chance of rolling blackouts. -By Jason Leopold; Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3874; jason.leopold@dowjones.com Gas Co.'s Success Opens Debate Southern California energy supplier has reaped millions of dollars in state incentives for keeping down its costs. Though consumers get a share of the windfall, regulators are asking whether they should get more of the bonus, which is expected to be huge this year, as a form of price relief. The natural gas provider says it deserves to keep its reward. TIM REITERMAN TIMES STAFF WRITER 03/18/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition C-1 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SAN FRANCISCO -- While consumers suffer soaring energy bills and the big electric utilities lurch toward insolvency, the news is not all dire at Southern California Gas Co. Through vigorous deal making, the Sempra Energy subsidiary has consistently beaten the volatile natural gas market during the last year, and the company stands to reap millions of dollars in savings through a state incentive program that rewards utilities for keeping costs down. For several years, the utility has been splitting the savings 50-50 with ratepayers whenever the company's gas costs fall slightly below market levels. Those savings, Gas Co. executives acknowledged, have shot to unprecedented heights during the state's power crisis. Now, in this climate of high consumer gas bills and runaway market prices, regulators are taking another look at the program. The question before the Public Utilities Commission: Should Gas Co. ratepayers, who endured huge bill increases this winter, get a bigger share of the savings? The total windfall under the incentive program has in some years exceeded $20 million. But the amount for the last 12 months is expected to multiply many times over, company executives said, partly because the Gas Co. has done so well in the wild market by selling, lending and trading gas as well as buying it. ""The recent market conditions . . . could possibly result in some unintended consequences that result in shared savings of benefits that may be more appropriately allocated entirely to ratepayers,"" the PUC's consumer protection arm, the Office of Ratepayer Advocates, reported Oct. 30, even before the latest upward market spirals. Gas Co. representatives express frustration, saying they have done what the state has requested under its gas-cost incentive program: Buy smarter, and pass the savings along to its 5 million residential and small-business customers. The company contends it has worked hard to keep bills down and should be rewarded for taking risks to obtain gas at the lowest possible cost. ""The PUC, every time we do well, raises the bar on us,"" said Jim Harrigan, director of gas acquisition. ""I don't necessarily agree with it."" By virtue of its purchasing power and storage and pipeline capacity, the Gas Co. has become a big player in the regional natural gas market. In the company's bustling trading room at its Los Angeles headquarters, 15 employees track price movements, pipeline supplies and even the weather via computer, while cutting deals and arranging gas shipments. Although the Gas Co. buys the commodity for its customers, the company also sells to marketers, other utilities and producers. State officials say the number of transactions by the company has risen steeply to 10,000 to 20,000 a year, including gas sales along California's border, where prices have rocketed. The PUC created the cost incentive program for the state's three major gas utilities--San Diego Gas & Electric Co. in 1993, Southern California Gas the next year and PG&E Corp.'s Pacific Gas & Electric Co. in 1997. Like Southern California Gas, SDG&E is a subsidiary of Sempra Energy. The program was designed to give utilities added motivation for obtaining gas at the best price for customers. It replaced lengthy and contentious reviews by the PUC, which assessed whether utilities had purchased gas at reasonable prices and sometimes ordered them to return millions of dollars to customers. An annual audit of the Gas Co. program and a staff evaluation requested by the PUC recently concluded that the program has achieved many of its goals, but it also proposed adjustments that would give customers a greater share of the rewards. ""These incentives were designed in less volatile times,"" said program supervisor Mark Pocta of the Office of Ratepayer Advocates, which conducted the audit. ""There is a question of how much should go to ratepayers and shareholders."" His office also plans to assess whether the Gas Co.'s trading had any negative effects on the gas market, resulting in diminished supplies or higher prices for other utilities and their customers. Under the program, the Gas Co. shares risks and rewards with its ratepayers, but since the program was launched, it has consistently produced awards. If the cost of gas is 0.5% or more below a benchmark based on monthly gas market indexes, the company and its customers split the savings 50-50. California's gas utilities are not allowed to profit on their raw commodity costs; they merely pass along those costs to ratepayers with no markup. The savings under the incentive program are automatically reflected in consumers' monthly gas bills but are not itemized. At the end of the year, the utilities request their share of the savings, and the PUC has routinely granted approval. Then the companies, and thus their shareholders, are paid through customer utility bills. The resulting bill increases typically have been modest, less than 1%. But as the awards increase, regulators say, the effect on customers will become more significant unless the present structure is changed. ""There's no question, when you start to talk about $100 million [or more in savings], and add [the company's award] into rates in a year, it will make a noticeable difference,"" said Los Angeles economist Jeff Leitzinger, president of Econ One, who has done consulting for the Gas Co. Still, he said, ratepayers should bear in mind that they already benefit from below-market gas and transportation costs. In the early years of the program, records show, the Gas Co.'s awards went from zero to $3.2 million, $10.6 million, $2 million and $7.7 million. Last year's award of $9.8 million is awaiting PUC approval. This year's proposed award, covering the period through the end of this month, has not yet been submitted by the Gas Co. But the utility has provided monthly figures and oral updates on a confidential basis to PUC officials, who declined to provide figures. Harrigan of the Gas Co. said the savings are expected to multiply ""many times over,"" largely because the company was well-equipped for the market fluctuations and tried to insulate its customers from high gas prices. ""Any trading company, especially one with assets like we have, has benefited from volatility in the market,"" he said. Harrigan said, however, that he does not believe the company's level of activity has adversely affected the market and that its trading pales in volume to that of unregulated energy companies. Anne Smith, the Gas Co.'s vice president of customer service and marketing, said the utility will not release figures for this year's incentive program until they are filed with the PUC in June. ""I don't want to interrupt that process,"" Smith said, noting that the PUC ultimately will determine the company's award. ""I think they need to focus on what [the Gas Co.] has done for the ratepayers. It has been immense."" Although the typical monthly gas bill has risen to $80 from $50 a year ago, Gas Co. customers tend to have lower rates than those of other California utilities. The company's gas procurement cost in February was 66 cents per therm, or 100 cubic feet. That's more than twice last year's cost but only about half what sister company SDG&E paid for its 740,000 customers in February. It's also much lower than the $1.09 per therm PG&E pays. ""We were as upset about the overall [gas price] increase as anyone else,"" Harrigan said. ""I would rather see the prices of a year ago, even though we managed to do a little better in the [recent] environment."" When it comes to keeping down costs, regulators say, the Gas Co. has advantages over other utilities in the marketplace. For one, the company has so much pipeline capacity at major gas basins that it purchases a relatively small portion of its needs--about 10% to 15%--at the California border, where prices in December briefly rose to the equivalent of $6 per therm, or 20 times those a year earlier. This presents opportunities. ""At the beginning of the month, they forecast a certain amount of gas they have to buy,"" said Pocta of the Office of Ratepayer Advocates. ""If they go out and buy and do not need to use as much because the weather is more moderate than expected, they can either inject the gas into storage or they can make sales at the border."" With gas price run-ups like those seen in the last year, Pocta said, ""there is a question: Should that benefit be shared, or flow entirely to ratepayers?"" Customers, he pointed out, may be entitled to additional benefits because they pay for the interstate and intrastate pipeline capacity and the gas storage that give the company the flexibility to make advantageous deals. ""By the same token, we want [the Gas Co.] . . . to go into the market and generate cost savings that can be passed on to the customers,"" he added. ""We want them to have incentives. The question is how to balance them."" Under deregulation, the Gas Co. adopted the nontraditional role of marketer, according to a PUC Energy Division report in January. The company makes gas sales at various locations. It engages in exchanges. It makes futures transactions to help stabilize costs. ""They look for ways to lower the gas cost,"" said Richard Myers, program supervisor at the Energy Division. ""Before they were lots more risk-averse. Now they feel they can take risks and make money for shareholders, and it is a benefit for ratepayers at the same time."" The incentive programs are tailored to individual utilities, so it is difficult to compare them. Records show that the shared savings at SDG&E, a much smaller utility, declined steadily from $9.2 million in the 1996-97 cycle to $560,000 in 1999-2000. Spokesman Ed Van Herik said the falloff largely represents a drop in gas purchases, especially as the company sold off its own gas-fired electricity-generating plants. He said the company does not yet know how much savings have accrued in the last year. In an annual report to the PUC in February, PG&E said it had no savings under the incentive program and thus it is not entitled to any award for the 1999-2000 cycle. The Utility Reform Network, a San Francisco-based consumer advocacy group, said it will closely watch the PUC's evaluation of the incentive program at the Gas Co. ""We want to make sure, given the dramatic changes in the gas market and prices, ratepayers are not left out of the [additional] benefits,"" TURN attorney Marcel Hawiger said. ""We'll look to see whether the mechanism should be changed."" Severin Borenstein, director of the Energy Institute at UC Berkeley, said the program should be changed to provide more incentive for utilities to enter long-term contracts that would smooth out volatility in the market. ""Unfortunately, under the system,"" he said, ""the only incentive is to beat the [spot] market."" Use this file to download and print all the articles in this section (See attached file: Dow Jones IMPLICATIONS FOR OTHER MARKETS (For easier printing of all the articles in this section use the file at the end of the section) New York: New York at the crossroads Wednesday, March 21, 2001 Energy Insight (Embedded image moved to file: pic24389.pcx) By Dave Todd dtodd@ftenergy.com U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham declared this week that the Big Apple is on the verge of being bitten hard by power cuts and rising energy prices. Delivering the keynote address at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's national energy summit in Washington Monday, Abraham said, ""California is not the only state facing a mismatch between supply and demand,"" what with ""electricity shortages predicted for New York City and Long Island this summer"" and low capacity margins threatening electricity reliability elsewhere across the country. But how likely is it that New Yorkers will face blackouts of the sort confronting Californians? Not very, says energy trade specialist Edward Krapels, managing director of Boston-based METIS Trading Advisors. Krapels, a consultant helping major Northeastern utilities, such as Consolidated Edison, design market-hedging programs, adamantly decried what he said are facile comparisons between conditions in New York and California, there being ""more differences than there are similarities"" between those two industrial cornerstones of the country's economy in respect to energy security management. ""First of all, New York has a more varied portfolio of energy generation sources than California,"" he said. California has hydro, nuclear and gas, but when it lost a lot of hydro, the state needed gas to pick up the slack, and the ""capacity just wasn't there."" In New York's case, the state has oil and coal still in the mix and its overall dependence on gas is much lower than California's, Krapels added. New York avoids making same mistakes Portfolio diversity is one pillar of any effective plan to help New York avoid the same errors made in redesigning California's marketplace. New York's Independent System Operator (ISO), in a new report warning that the state is at an ""energy crossroads"" in terms of its capacity adequacy in the immediate future, argues that a concerted effort is required to arrest declining in-state generation capacity reserve margins, and a strategy must be put in place, whether or not new generation comes on-line, in accordance with current anticipated scenarios. A measure of New York's essential difficulty is that, between 1995 and 2000, statewide demand for electricity grew 2,700 MW, while generating capacity expanded by only 1,060 MW. With no major new generating plants in downstate New York fully approved, the gap is expected to continue to widen. To avoid ""a replication of California's market meltdown"" the New York ISO calculates the state's daily generating capacity needs to grow by 8,600 MW by 2005, with more than half of that located in New York City and on Long Island. Expressing concern this may be too big a burden for the current bureaucratic process to bear, the ISO wants to see a state-appointed ombudsman named to help would-be merchant power plant investors plow through red tape. ""Increasing New York's generating capacity will also lessen the state's escalating and risky reliance on out-of-state sources of electricity,"" the ISO added. ""Since 1999, New York State has been unable to cover its reserve requirements from in-state sources."" Not everyone agrees with that analysis, insofar as it argues for circling the wagons inward. Some analysts believe the ultimate solution lies not in tying in more inwardly dedicated power, but in expanding the marketplace by breaking down inter-jurisdictional barriers. In any case, New York energy regulatory authorities and those responsible elsewhere in the U.S. Northeast, such as PJM (Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland) Interconnection and the New England Power Pool, are in vastly better shape in terms of ""cross-border"" cooperation than California and its neighbors in that efforts are being made among various authorities toward developing an integrated regional electricity market. In California, by contrast, the state's focus?for example, in the case of new gas-fired power plant development?has been to ensure dedicated supply to the California market alone, rather than on a regional marketplace. (Embedded image moved to file: pic05075.pcx) The New York ISO's new broad-based analysis of market-restructuring needs argues that the relatively stronger health of its reformed environment is ""due in large part to the ability of New York's utilities to enter into long-term power contracts."" What needs to be done most, it says, is to move aggressively to build some of the more than 29,000 MW of ""proposed new generation in the siting pipeline."" In the meantime, the 30,200 MW of electricity New Yorkers used on a peak day last summer shouldn't be eclipsed on too many days this coming summer (given early long-range weather forecasts). Demand, however, is expected to increase at an annual average rate of up to 1.4%. So while New York City, the rest of the state and adjacent parts might breathe easy this year, it could be a brief rest from the fray. Meanwhile, a 4% shortfall is still being planned for this summer that is not yet provided for, as authorities hurriedly seek to arrange new generation plants around Manhattan, on Long Island and even on barges offshore. One way or another, whether it is the weather or the politics of siting new energy facilities, it's going to be a hot time in the city. Long-term solutions hit brick wall Meanwhile, attempts at longer-term solutions continue to run into trouble. Last week, Connecticut state regulators came out against a proposal to run a new underwater cable under Long Island Sound that Hydro-Quebec subsidiary TransEnergie U.S. Ltd. wants to build to pump more juice into Long Island Power Authority's load pocket. Despite strong promises from TransEnergie to be diligent in avoiding damage to oyster beds in Long Island Sound, the proposal failed to convince authorities, who were persuaded the pipeline project could lead to diversion of electricity from Connecticut. In similar fashion, private companies wanting to build 10 small independent power plants and temporary generators offshore New York City are running into intense opposition from environmental groups and citizen orga nizations?some of whom have taken their cases to the state assembly in Albany. The David vs. Goliath nature of such controversies has further alerted energy companies to the difficulties of addressing complex energy supply issues that may ultimately devolve to people not wanting things in their backyard, regardless of what the alternative might mean to their fellow citizens or the greater public good. But suddenly, in New York, California's troubles?while still distant in their intensity? may not be so far away. By some estimates, this summer's bills for Consolidated Edison customers could be up as much as one third or more over last year's charges. Letting the time slip when it comes to building new infrastructure isn't going to make the pain go away. NEW YORK: NY-ISO REPORT SAYS STATE NEEDS 4,000 - 5,000 MW OF NEW GENERATION SOON TO AVOID SEVERE SHORTAGES; NY-ISO ALSO ASKS FERC TO EXTEND BID CAP AND TEMPORARY EMERGENCY PROCEDURES 03/21/2001 Foster Electric Report 2 (c) Copyright 2001, Foster Associates, Inc. Raising the specter of an East Coast version of the California crisis, the New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (NY-ISO) is warning of serious electricity shortages, air quality deterioration and stunted economic growth without immediate approval of between 4,000-5,000 MW of new generating capacity in the state. Of this amount, 2,000-3,000 MW is needed to serve New York City. Another 8,600 MW of new capacity will have to be built by 2005, the NY-ISO said in a recent report, Power Alert: New York's Energy Crossroads. ""New York is heading towards a very serious situation unless it acts immediately to get new supply sited within its borders,"" said NY-ISO president William Museler in a statement accompanying the report. ""This report is essentially a caution light at New York's energy crossroads."" Sources in the New York Public Service Commission have downplayed the NY-ISO's warning, asserting that a process for bringing on new generation is well underway, with more than 85 projects in the approval pipeline. In a related development, the NY-ISO asked FERC to approve a proposed tariff amendment (ER01-1517) extending existing bids caps in some of its markets until 10/31/02, and a separate and related amendment (ER01-1489) extending the NY-ISO's so-called temporary extraordinary procedures (TEP) that allow the ISO to make price adjustments and take other corrective actions if it finds evidence of market power abuse. The NY-ISO Report --The NY-ISO likened the situation in New York to that faced by California, where a relentless increase in demand has not been met with an equal increase in supply. The NY-ISO said that between 1995 and 2000, statewide demand for electricity rose by 2,700 MW, while generating capacity increased by only 1,060 MW. With no major new generating plants in downstate New York fully approved for construction at this time and generation demand in the state expected to grow around 1.3 percent annually for the next several years, the NY-ISO said this gap will continue to widen. The inevitable result of this trend is large rate increases for New York's power consumers. The NY-ISO's modeling suggests that ""by 2005, statewide prices are likely to be more than 20-25 percent lower in the case in which new plants are built than in the case where they are not."" In New York City, ""the price to consumers of electric power could be reduced by as much as 28 percent when compared to the case of no new supply or load management programs."" Besides large rate increases, the NY-ISO asserted that a failure to site and build new plants in New York will threaten power reliability in the state and lead to increasing reliance on out-of-state resources. The report said that if no new in-state generation comes on line in the next five years, the state's generation reserve margins will shrink from the current 14.9 percent above peak demand ""to a dangerously low 8.4 percent by 2005."" Pointing to California's situation, the report added that increased reliance on power imports ""can subject electrical suppliers and customers in New York to transmission restrictions and political and economic considerations beyond the control or influence of responsible New York State entities."" To avoid these harsh consequences, the NY-ISO said New York's new siting law, known as the Article X process, needs to be modified. Since the law was passed 18 months ago, the report noted that only two plants have been approved (both upstate) and neither has yet been built. The problem, according to the NY-ISO, is that the siting process ""requires the cooperation of multiple state agencies."" To expedite the process, the report suggested the ""clear designation of a lead agency and the adoption of an `ombudsman program' to expedite and coordinate the work of the agencies responsible for the Article X process must be made."" The NY-ISO added that an expedited approval process would improve the environment because older, more polluting power plants would be replaced by cleaner gas-fired units. On a more positive note, the NY-ISO reported that New York's restructured power market ""is far healthier than that in California, due in large part to the ability of New York `s utilities to enter long-term power contracts. The basic structure of the New York market will also reduce unwarranted price spikes and other market disruptions through mitigation programs which automatically correct price spikes due to market power abuses."" ""Nevertheless, California `s experience raises a caution flag for all New Yorkers,"" the report continued. ""The deregulated market in New York cannot achieve lower costs through competition without an increase in generating capacity similar in magnitude to the recommendations of this report, along with simultaneous efforts to institute greater conservation, better load management and alternative energy supply initiatives. Additionally, closer integration with regional suppliers of power is both inevitable and beneficial."" The report also recommended (1) accelerating conservation, real-time metering and price-sensitive load programs; and (2) upgrading the state's and the Northeast's transmission infrastructure. The Proposed Tariff Amendments -- New York's Article X siting process and continuing tight supplies were also cited in the NY-ISO's request to extend from 4/30/01 until 10/31/02 its $1,000/MWh bid caps. FERC first approved the 1,000/MWh bid caps in July 2000 (see REPORT No.197, pg.6), and subsequently extended them. The NY-ISO's board ""is sensitive to the Commission's concerns about undue intervention in energy markets,"" the filing related. ""Nevertheless, the NY-ISO is submitting this request because it believes that delays in New York state's `Article X' process for licensing and siting new generating capacity is inhibiting supply from increasing to match continued demand growth. . . . Moreover, although the NY-ISO proposes to implement several demand-side measures this summer, it is not yet clear whether they will make demand sufficiently price-responsive to avoid periods of high prices that would not occur if there were an efficient demand-side response."" Thus, the NY-ISO insisted that the requested extension is needed to provide more time for the development of additional generation and to gauge the effectiveness of the NY-ISO's proposed demand-side response mechanisms ""in order to avoid exposing consumers to price spikes that are not a product of the interplay of competitive market forces."" Other problems cited in the NY-ISO's filing which keep New York's power market from being fully competitive include continuing capacity and operating constraints at the state's Central-East interface, and questions over adequate gas supply. ""The NY-ISO remains acutely aware that taking steps to deal with price abnormalities can have undesirable consequences,"" the filing continued. ""Nevertheless, the NY-ISO believes that the $1,000/MWh cap that has been used in the PJM's markets since inception does not appear to have had an adverse impact there. . . . The permanent bid caps in PJM, and the interim bid caps in ISO New England (proposed for extension through the end of 2001) also make continuation of the NY-ISO's bid caps more important in order to maintain uniformity across the Northeastern markets. The NY-ISO also continues to believe that suppliers will not be materially harmed by the continuation of bid caps, which are likely to come into effect very rarely and are set at levels that prevent only artificially high run-ups in prices."" The NY-ISO's request to extend its TEP procedures (which also were previously extended) through 10/31/02 cited similar problems with New York's power markets, but claimed that the NY-ISO ""has made great strides"" toward eliminating market design and software flaws. ""The TEPs were, and remain, an indispensable tool for responding to and correcting market flaws and other instances where the markets are not operating as the NY-ISO and the Commission intended,"" the filing insisted. MASSACHUSETTS: Attorney general says summer poses electricity concerns By JOHN McELHENNY Associated Press Writer 03/19/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. BOSTON (AP) - The state's top consumer advocate warned that Massachusetts may see ""California-type"" electricity blackouts this summer when temperatures rise and residents turn on air conditioners and fans. ""It would be a mistake to feel this is a cold weather problem,"" said Attorney General Thomas Reilly in an interview with The Associated Press. ""Our major problem will come this summer."" State deregulation of the electric industry has been among the factors blamed for local power outages in California, and on Monday, California for the first time suffered rolling blackouts across the entire state. Massachusetts relaxed regulations on its own electric industry in 1998 to attract more companies to stir competition. But that hasn't happened yet, largely because the current high cost of oil and gas make it expensive to produce electricity. ""The promise of deregulation was that there was going to be competition,"" said Reilly, a Democrat. ""That competition in the wholesale market is not happening."" Hot summer weather drives up electricity use as residents turn on air conditioners and fans, and Reilly said a few particularly hot days could strain the grid that provides the region's power. A spokeswoman for the region's power grid said electricity use is expected to rise 1.5 to 2 percent this year, but the region should have enough power because of six new power plants that have begun generating electricity in the past 18 months. ""The situation is unlike California because we have new generation coming on line that is outpacing demand,"" said Ellen Foley, spokeswoman for ISO New England Inc., which manages the grid of 330 generators connected by 8,000 miles of high voltage transmission lines. Still, a particularly hot day and an unforeseen power generation breakdown could prompt ISO to ask residents to conserve electricity, a situation that arose once last summer, Foley said. In order to avoid any power outages and protect consumers, Reilly repeated calls for electric companies to build more power lines and to offer more options for new customers who have signed up since deregulation. Those customers typically pay more than long-term customers. Electric transmission companies should also be allowed to enter into two-year contracts with suppliers, instead of the six-month contracts many have now, to avoid short-term price spikes for consumers, Reilly said. The Attorney General's Office acts as an advocate for consumers. Michael Monahan, a spokesman for NSTAR, which provides electricity to more than 1 million customers, is upgrading some of its power lines and last year built a new line to Cape Cod, but currently has no lines under construction. ""I wholeheartedly concur with the attorney general that it's something we have to focus on,"" Monahan said, but he added, ""The indications I see are that we have an ample supply of electricity."" California's statewide outages were ordered on Monday after a transformer fire, high demand and a lack of electricity imports pushed power reserves to near zero. California partially deregulated its electric industry in 1996, two years before Massachusetts. --- On the Net: Attorney General's Office: http://www.ago.state.ma.us NSTAR: http://www.nstaronline.com ISO New England Inc.: http://www.iso-ne.com NEVADA: Discussion of bill stopping power plant sales to continue Wednesday By JOHN WILKERSON Associated Press Writer 03/19/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. CARSON CITY, Nev. (AP) - Lawmakers hit more delays Monday in trying to pass a measure that pulls the plug on the sale of Nevada power plants to avoid California-style energy problems. ""The goal of this bill is only stopping the divestiture of power plants and making sure it's constitutional,"" said Senate Commerce and Labor Chairman Randolph Townsend, R-Reno. ""And that's not as easy as it sounds."" Townsend's comment just before his committee began working on SB253 was prophetic - witnesses kept bringing up the need for more flexibility in the measure. Translation: Don't kill all deals by stopping Reno-based Sierra Pacific Power and Las Vegas-based Nevada Power from selling their Nevada power plants until June 2003 - and possibly until 2006. Pete Ernaut, a lobbyist for Reliant Energy which has been trying to buy a power plant, said unforeseen market changes could make a plant sale before 2003 a deal that would be in the public's interest. ""If you put a two-year moratorium on these plants, all these deals are going to go away,"" he said. ""When the cow leaves the barn, it's difficult to catch."" Townsend had hoped to wrap up committee work on SB253 on Monday. Now it's up for review again Wednesday in the Commerce and Labor Committee. Reliant isn't the only company trying to keep power plant purchases alive. Earlier this month, executives of Pinnacle West Energy told the committee that it's in the public's interest to allow Sierra Pacific Resources to sell its Harry Allen power plant. The Harry Allen plant produces about 72 megawatts out of the 2,900 megawatts of energy that Nevada utilities generate. Pinnacle has plans to expand that to 700 megawatts by 2004. Other provisions not strictly related to the plant divestitures, such as ways in which Sierra Pacific and Nevada Power can recover the cost of undoing the sales contracts, don't have to be included in SB253, Townsend said. Townsend said the other concerns dealing with the energy crisis and utility deregulation can be handled in later bills - but the power plant sale issue must be handled now. Nevada's PUC and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission had directed Sierra Pacific and Nevada Power to sell the plants as a condition of the companies' merger in 1999 under the parent company Sierra Pacific Resources. Critics of the plant sales say the plants generate about half the state's electricity - and if they're sold, the unregulated new owners could sell the power to other states and put Nevada into the energy dilemma California faces of shrinking supply and rising prices. The Southern Nevada Water Authority has presented an analysis stating that rate payers will save from $1.7 billion to $3.5 billion by July 2001 if the power plant sales are stopped. Nevada's Consumer Advocate's Office previously had projected a conservative estimate of $915 million in savings. MAINE: Panel of experts would review impact of energy deregulation By GLENN ADAMS Associated Press Writer 03/19/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. AUGUSTA, Maine (AP) - In the wake of rolling blackouts in California and rate spikes in their home state, Maine's top legislators proposed a study Monday into the effects of deregulation of the energy industry. ""Deregulation of electricity is a new idea and we still have a lot to learn,"" Senate President Michael Michaud said as he called for the analysis. A panel of industry insiders, elected officials and consumers would study issues such as what standard rate consumers can expect and the likelihood of energy shortfalls over the next three years, and whether Maine consumers are vulnerable to anti-competitive activities. In addition, the Blue Ribbon Commission would look into whether changes in Maine's deregulation law are needed to encourage more generating capacity, improve conservation and spur competition. The study is being proposed as consumers remain mindful of a power crisis in California that resulted from high wholesale energy costs, a consumer rate cap and too few power plants in that deregulated state. Maine's deregulation law is designed to avoid such pitfalls, said Rep. William Savage, D-Buxton, House chairman of the Legislature's Utilities Committee. Maine's law does not cap consumer prices, as California's does, and the state has more than enough generating facilities to meet the state's energy needs, Savage said. Since Maine's deregulation law took effect in March 2000, Bangor Hydro-Electric Co. rates have increased 19 percent. The Public Utilities Commission approved a residential standard rate increase as recently as last month. Federal energy regulators are reviewing their decision to allow steep fee increases for utilities and power wholesalers that fail to arrange enough capacity to meet customers' peak load. Gov. Angus King and all four members of Maine's congressional delegation oppose the hike. The PUC has approved standard rate increases for energy delivered by Central Maine Power Co. to medium-sized and large industrial users. On the other hand, some towns and school districts are saving money on energy through deals they can get in the deregulated market. In the meantime, legislation has been introduced in response to some of the changes that have occurred in Maine's deregulated energy industry. One would use some of the money from the sale of power-generating assets to offset an increase in rates paid by large industrial users, said Sen. Norman Ferguson, R-Hanover, Senate chairman of the Utilities Committee. Supporters of the utility study that was proposed Monday said they are not looking to make changes in Maine's deregulation law, but if it needs fixing it could be done during next year's session. The lawmakers' primary interest is to find out how trends in a new environment designed to encourage competition will affect consumers, and to try to identify what consumers can expect in the few years ahead. House Speaker Michael Saxl, D-Portland, said the Legislature ""has a fundamental public policy interest in making sure rate-payers and businesses are protected against exorbitant rate hikes."" Michaud, D-East Millinocket, said he's interested in finding out how future changes in electric prices and availability might affect businesses and consumers in northern Maine. ""The economy in my part of the state is the most vulnerable, and I want to make certain we are leaving no stone unturned in our effort to prevent any shocks to the economy in northern, western and eastern Maine,"" Michaud added. The commission would include House and Senate members from each party, a utility executive, and representatives of energy producers, providers, a large commercial consumer and individual consumers. OREGON: State Senate moves to combat energy crisis 03/16/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. SALEM, Ore. (AP) - In an attempt to avoid a California-like energy crisis, the Oregon Senate approved a bill Friday that would quicken the process of siting power plants that use gas and renewable resources. ""It's important for Oregon. It makes sure that energy will be available to everyone,"" said Sen. Lee Beyer, D-Springfield. The measure, SB843, would shorten the siting process for power plants that use gas and renewable resources, like wind, from a year and a half to a matter of months. The speeded-up process would be in effect for two years. ""If we can act now, we can actually start to solve power supply problems by this summer,"" said Sen. Jason Atkinson, R-Jacksonville California's strict regulations on the construction of new power plants has contributed to its current shortage and legislators took note. Beyer said though California was definitely a wake-up call, the measure is a reaction to the larger power picture in the Northwest. With low rainfall, hydroelectric generators will have trouble meeting demand, Beyer said. Gas-fired and wind plants could come online as soon as this fall and would provide relief. ""We are not in a position to sit back and do nothing about the energy crisis the Northwest and the country are experiencing,"" said Senate Minority Leader Kate Brown, D-Portland. Conservationists, however, caution that lawmakers should be careful not to rush to provide power at the expense of environmental standards. WISCONSIN: Two utilities to add 975 megawatts in plan to avoid energy crisis By The Associated Press 03/22/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. Plans of two state utilities to add 975 megawatts to Wisconsin's electric power grid as a way of avoiding an energy crisis similar to California's were questioned Thursday by a consumer advocate who said too many power plants may be in the works. ""Certainly nobody wants to see blackouts like you have in California but there is the danger Wisconsin could be overbuilding,"" said Steve Hiniker, executive director of the Citizens' Utility Board, which represents consumer interests in utility rate cases. He noted that plant construction costs ultimately are born by the utility customers. Alliant Energy Corp. announced its proposal Wednesday - in a filing with the state Public Service Commission - to spend $1 billion to build one coal and two gas-fired power plants. Alliant has proposed building a 500 megawatt coal-fired plant and a 100 megawatt natural-gas fired plant by 2006. It also wants to build a 200 megawatt natural gas-fired facility in 2011. Wisconsin has not built a coal-fired plant in more than two decades. Alliant has not determined the plants' locations. Also, Madison Gas & Electric, the state's smallest investor-owned utility, said Wednesday that it had signed deals to buy 175 megawatts of power from three generating plants in Wisconsin and Illinois. ""Three out of the four past summers, we've had public appeals for conservation due to shortages somewhere in the state. We need to take steps to avoid that, and the California situation makes that even more clear,"" said Alliant spokesman Chris Schoenherr. ""Getting more iron in the ground will give us more flexibility in the state to be able to react."" Alliant acknowledged the new plants will probably mean rate increases, but it was too early to say how much rates would go up. California's problems, which this week resulted in the first deliberate blackouts since World War II, stemmed from underestimating the state's power needs, forcing utilities to sell their power plants but not allowing them to secure long-term supply contracts, and freezing rates, among other things. But Wisconsin's situation is far different. The state has moved slower than California toward deregulation, and there has been no desire here to speed up the process in recent years as power reliability became a problem. The PSC estimates that Wisconsin will need an additional 3,000 megawatts of power over the next decade. Hiniker said Wisconsin needs to coordinate its planning to avoid overbuilding. The costs of new power plants are passed on to ratepayers, meaning electric bills will increase as new generation is added. In addition, coal-generated power plants are a major source of air pollution in the state. ""We don't have the advance planning that has kept Wisconsin from overbuilding in the past,"" said Hiniker. ""This is something the PSC should be doing."" MG&E's deals are: -A 10-year contract to buy 75 megawatts from Calpine Energy Services starting in May 2004. The power will come from the natural gas-fired plant Rock River Energy Center, near Beloit. Calpine Energy Services is a unit of San Jose, Calif.-based Calpine Energy Corp. The plant is being built by Northbrook, Ill.-based SkyGen Energy LLC, which Calpine bought last year from SkyGen President Michael Polsky and Wisvest Corp., a unit of Wisconsin Energy Corp. -A 10-year contract to buy 50 megawatts of power from the Rainy River Energy Corp. starting in May 2002. The power is coming from a natural gas-fired plant near Joliet, Ill. owned by LS Power Co. Rainy River is a unit of Duluth-based Minnesota Power Inc. -A five-year contract to buy 50 megawatts from an El Paso Merchant Energy plant near Cordova, Ill., in western Illinois. The owner of the natural gas facility is the Cordova Energy Center Co., which is a unit of Iowa-based MidAmerican Energy Holdings. Alliant also offered support in the Wednesday filing for a $7 billion plan of Milwaukee-based Wisconsin Energy, which includes five new power plants in Oak Creek and Pleasant Prairie. -- On the Net: CUB: http://www.wiscub.org/ Alliant Energy: http://www.alliant-energy.com Wisconsin Public Service Commission: http://www.psc.state.wi.us Wisconsin Energy: http://www.wisenergy.com/ Madison Gas & Electric: http://www.mge.com Use this file to download and print all the articles in this section (See attached file: Dow Jones If you wish to be removed from the distribution list for this update please contact Pru Sheppard - DC. All recipients of this message have been Bcc'd as part of industry best practice for broadcast emails. | This message may contain confidential and/or privileged | | information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to | | receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, | | disclose or take any action based on this message or any | | information herein. If you have received this message in | | error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail | | and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. | - Dow Jones - pic24389.pcx - pic05075.pcx - Dow Jones [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: CONFIDENTIAL - Residential in CA; [EMail-Body]= Jim / Karen - Thank you. We are not going to pull the trigger to turn back these customers without a full review and the agreement of all appropriate teams at Enron. Thanks - Dan Karen Denne@ENRON 04/13/2001 12:30 PM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Re: CONFIDENTIAL - Residential in CA Before any decision is made, I think we really need to weigh in with EES on the ramifications (both PR and legislative) of turning back 16,000 residential customers. I strongly believe that the public hit we will take will be far greater than our actual out-of-pocket losses. We will be crucified by the public, media, consumer groups, legislators, governor, attorney general, etc., and this action will reaffirm our reputation of packing up and leaving when it's not in our interest. The impact of this action would be exacerbated since it is on the heels of UC/CSU. I would also argue that this hurts our national dereg efforts. If we're advocating that competition and choice benefits consumers and then we turn around and pull out of a market and abandon customers when we're not ""profiting,"" we'll kill any chances we have of ever serving retail customers in California -- or in any other state. We look foolish advocating for direct access when we're not willing to serve our existing -- let alone future customers What about a preemptive strike that engages these 16,000 customers to weigh in on direct access -- i.e. a letter that says ""Enron may be forced to cancel its contract -- call/write/send the enclosed postcard to your legislator and tell them you want to keep your right to choose your energy service provider."" Our credibility is on the line. Before we take this action, we need to be cognizant of all the long-range strategic implications, and we need to seriously weigh the negative impact this will have on our corporate reputation, on our legislative abilities and on our commercial success going forward. kd James D Steffes 04/12/2001 09:05 PM To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES Subject: CONFIDENTIAL - Residential in CA In the meeting today, no decision was made about what to do with Enron's 16,000 residential customers. Each of the contracts gives a basic 30 day out right to Enron. That being said, I think that we have a short window to push for DA before any public action impacts us in Sacramento. I realize that the ultimate action (which I think is inevitable) makes it harder for our advocacy on DA, but real $ are flowing out of the company. EES will give us notice when a decision is reached. Thanks, Jim [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron Mentions; [EMail-Body]= California Blame Game Yields No Score --- Probes Reveal Little Evidence Suppliers Acted Illegally The Wall Street Journal, 05/22/01 Enron Unit Moves to End India Contract For Power The New York Times, 05/22/01 The State GOP Criticizes Davis' Choice of PR Aides Capitol: Legislative leaders call the pair political operatives who are too partisan to represent the state during energy crisis. Los Angeles Times, 05/22/01 BUSINESS DIGEST The New York Times, 05/22/01 World Watch The Wall Street Journal, 05/22/01 IN BRIEF / ENERGY Enron Withdraws from Qatar Project Los Angeles Times, 05/22/01 INDIA: UPDATE 1-Indian state spurred by Enron reopens power deals. Reuters English News Service, 05/22/01 INDIA: India utility may slap 4bln rupee fine on Enron unit. Reuters English News Service, 05/22/01 IXEurope creates a Storm in colocation M2 Presswire, 05/22/01 Power corrupts... The Economic Times, 05/22/01 The Godbole findings Business Standard, 05/22/01 SMARTMONEY.COM: Power Grab Dow Jones News Service, 05/22/01 Malaysian LNG Sales to India Threatened by Enron Power Dispute Bloomberg, 05/22/01 LEADER: India unplugged Financial Times; May 22, 2001 Enron pulls out of venture drilling in Qatar's waters Houston Chronicle, 05/22/01 Enron exploring commodity trading Houston Chronicle, 05/22/01 Plains Resources Gets New Officers Houston Chronicle, 05/22/01 Economy California Blame Game Yields No Score --- Probes Reveal Little Evidence Suppliers Acted Illegally By John R. Emshwiller Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal 05/22/2001 The Wall Street Journal A2 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -- California may be struggling to keep its lights on, but one thing there is no shortage of is accusations over who is to blame for an electricity crisis that has sent power prices skyrocketing. In recent days, top California officials have stepped up their rhetoric against a handful of merchant power companies, many of them Texas-based, that supply the state with much of its juice. Gov. Gray Davis says companies such as Reliant Energy Inc., of Houston, have engaged in ""unconscionable price gouging."" Loretta Lynch, president of the California Public Utilities Commission and a Davis appointee, proclaims that a ""cartel"" of electricity producers has created artificial shortages. Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante is backing a bill that would make energy price fixing a felony, and as a private citizen he is suing several major power producers in Los Angeles state court. About half a dozen investigations are being conducted by entities ranging from state legislative committees to the California attorney general's office. So far, these probes -- some of which have been under way for months -- haven't yet yielded either civil or criminal charges. While the energy suppliers are generating ""unconscionable profits,"" the question remains ""whether they are illegal profits,"" says California Attorney General Bill Lockyer, who has offered rewards of as much as hundreds of millions of dollars for information about lawbreaking in the energy business. Mr. Lockyer says he believes his office will eventually file civil charges against suppliers. He would very much like to add criminal counts. ""I would love to personally escort [Enron Corp. Chairman Kenneth] Lay to an 8 x 10 cell that he could share with a tattooed dude who says `Hi my name is Spike, honey,'"" adds Mr. Lockyer. Houston-based Enron is a major energy-trading company. Like other such firms, Enron has denied wrongdoing in the California market. Mark Palmer, Enron's vice president for corporate communications, said Mr. Lockyer's comment about Mr. Lay ""is so counterproductive that it doesn't merit a response."" Investigators and academics say there is abundant evidence that individual firms have been exercising ""market power."" This term is used to denote efforts to influence wholesale-electricity prices, such as by withholding supplies. The California Independent System Operator, or ISO, which manages the state's electric transmission grid, estimates that by exercising market power, suppliers may have added about $6.8 billion to the cost of electricity in the state since early last year. A single firm exercising such power isn't necessarily illegal, says Severin Borenstein, director of the University of California Energy Institute. If a company is a large supplier in the state and ""you're not exercising market power, you are not doing your job"" on behalf of shareholders, he says. Mr. Borenstein and others say that there are steps that should be taken against suppliers. They note that under federal power law, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission can order refunds for wholesale prices that are above ""just and reasonable"" levels. So far, FERC has tentatively ordered California suppliers to make tens of millions of dollars of such refunds, as part of that agency's ongoing inquiry into the California market. Critics of the suppliers and FERC say the refunds should be in the billions of dollars. The power industry, not surprisingly, says there is nothing to accusations of price manipulation or collusion. Executives point to a botched state-utility-deregulation plan that relies heavily on volatile spot-market purchases. Suppliers note that over the past decade, California didn't build enough new power plants to keep up with demand growth. The allegations of manipulation are ""a lot of sound and fury and they won't produce anything,"" says Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, an industry trade group. Power generators also point to sharp increases in some of their costs, particularly natural gas, which is a major power-plant fuel. This rise in natural-gas prices also has set off a flurry of investigations over possible manipulation. One such case, involving El Paso Corp., Houston, is the subject of probes by federal and state officials. El Paso denies any wrongdoing. While power-industry officials say they have been cooperating with the investigations, law-enforcement officials say they have hit some roadblocks. For instance, Mr. Lockyer's office has gone to San Francisco state court to enforce subpoenas against Reliant, Houston-based Dynegy Inc., and Southern Co. and Mirant Corp., both of Atlanta, after the companies resisted turning over certain business documents they deemed confidential. Investigators have zeroed in on the increased frequency with which plants are going out of service for unscheduled outages. At times, several thousand fewer megawatts of capacity are available than a year ago. A thousand megawatts can power about one million homes. Generators say that this increased ""forced outage"" rate shows that tight supplies over the past year have required them to run plants, some of them more than 40 years old, for long periods without routine maintenance. This combination has produced more breakdowns. ""Plants have been running flat out,"" says Tom Williams, a spokesman for Duke Energy Co., Charlotte, N.C., which says that its California power plants produced 50% more electricity in 2000 than in 1999. At the same time, during periods of lower demand, the number of unplanned outages often seems to rise enough to keep supplies tight, says Frank Wolak, a Stanford University professor and chairman of the ISO's market surveillance committee. ""Clearly, something is going on here."" However, he and others say that it is almost impossible to tell why a particular pipe failed or whether such a failure was a legitimate reason to reduce output. Some of the most intriguing evidence to date about forced outages surfaced in a federal case. FERC officials said an investigation had raised questions about whether two major power companies had taken plants out of service in order to reap higher electricity prices. The charges against AES Corp., Arlington, Va., which owns the plants, and Williams Cos., Tulsa, Okla., which markets their output, asserted that those actions allowed the companies to reap an extra $10.8 million in revenue. In one instance, according to case filings, a Williams employee ""indicated"" to AES officials that his firm wouldn't financially penalize AES for extending an outage at one plant. This conversation, which was voluntarily divulged by Williams, could be an indication of collusion. Williams and AES settled the case without admitting any wrongdoing by paying back $8 million to the ISO and by taking certain other measures. A Williams spokeswoman says the employee who talked to AES was ""counseled not to enter into any conversations of that nature"" in the future. Another issue raised by the FERC case touched on maintenance procedures. According to the filings, AES stopped doing a certain procedure to keep its plant's cooling system from getting clogged. The clogging of the system was cited as a reason for one of the forced outages. Mark Woodruff, president of the AES unit that operates the plant in question, says the company substituted what it felt was an equally effective maintenance procedure. If someone was looking to keep supplies tight and prices high, changes in maintenance procedures would be an easy way to ensure that plants, particularly old ones, have frequent forced outages, says a senior utility-industry executive. By restricting maintenance resources, he says, an operator can simply allow a plant ""to take itself out of service."" --- Journal Link: What is California doing to alleviate the energy crisis? See a video report of California State Treasurer Philip Angelides discussing the state's plans, in the online Journal at WSJ.com/JournalLinks. --- Investigations Aplenty In the year since California's energy deregulation plan began resulting in higher prices and even blackouts, a flurry of investigations has gotten under way. Here are the main ones: AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission INVESTIGATION: Whether generators are charging more than ""just and reasonable"" rates as demanded by the Federal Power Act; whether El Paso Corp. used its position as a major natural-gas supplier to the state to illegally drive up the price of fuel used to generate electricity. AGENCY: California Public Utilities Commission and the State Attorney General INVESTIGATION: Whether generators and power traders have acted illegally through collusion or other means to artificially inflate electricity prices. AGENCY: PUC and California Independent System Operator INVESTIGATION: Whether generation plants were shut down for spurious reasons in order to create supply shortages and, thus, to raise electricity prices. AGENCY: California Electricity Oversight Board INVESTIGATION: Whether patterns of bidding and pricing in California's electricity auction indicate collusive or otherwise illegal behavior. Sources: state and federal agencies Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Business/Financial Desk; Section W Enron Unit Moves to End India Contract For Power By SARITHA RAI 05/22/2001 The New York Times Page 1, Column 6 c. 2001 New York Times Company BANGALORE, India, May 21 -- Fed up with its main customer's refusal to pay its bills, the Enron Corporation's Indian power-generating venture served formal notice on Saturday that it would terminate its power supply contract and pull out. The move by the Dabhol Power Company, 65 percent owned by Enron, starts the clock ticking on a six-month notice period before the contract is voided, during which negotiations to settle the dispute are expected. The $2.9 billion Dabhol project represents the largest single foreign investment in India. Separately, Enron said today that it was withdrawing from a pipeline project in Qatar, which would have supplied some gas to Dabhol. The company said that the two steps were unrelated. The Dabhol project has been the subject of a series of wrangles between the company and the governments of India and of the western Indian state of Maharashtra. The state-owned utility company that contracted to buy power from the Dabhol plant has defaulted on some $64 million in unpaid power bills, and has accused Dabhol of charging too much. Dabhol said it was left with little choice but to issue the termination notice after both governments failed to honor their contractual commitments to buy and pay for its output. But in a statement issued over the weekend, Dabhol said it was ''still open to constructive discussion on the solutions.'' The company said a ''lasting and feasible solution'' to the dispute would require that the two governments either honor their obligations to buy Dabhol's power or find other creditworthy buyers to take the power instead. The first phase of the project now generates 740 megawatts of power, and the second phase, adding another 1,444 megawatts of capacity, is scheduled to go on line next month. Under the contract, the termination that Enron has set in motion would oblige the federal and state governments to pay damages to Enron and the lenders that financed the project, possibly as much as $500 million -- the value of a year's output of power plus the project's $300 million in debt -- if it is shut down. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. California; Metro Desk The State GOP Criticizes Davis' Choice of PR Aides Capitol: Legislative leaders call the pair political operatives who are too partisan to represent the state during energy crisis. DAN MORAIN TIMES STAFF WRITER 05/22/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition B-8 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SACRAMENTO -- Republican legislative leaders Monday blasted Gov. Gray Davis' decision to spend $30,000 a month in taxpayer money to retain communications consultants known for their highly partisan work. Labeling consultants Mark Fabiani and Chris Lehane as ""cut-throat,"" Senate GOP leader Jim Brulte of Rancho Cucamonga and Assembly Republican leader Dave Cox of Fair Oaks said in a letter to Davis that the hiring ""undermines the assertions you have made both publicly and privately throughout this crisis."" Davis announced Friday that he retained the duo and that the state will pay them a combined $30,000 a month for at least the next six months. ""We're not going to support the hiring of political hacks on government payroll,"" Brulte said in an interview. ""Lehane and Fabiani are very talented. The issue is which payroll is appropriate. . . . These are political opposition research attack dogs. If the governor wants them, he ought to pay for them with his $30-million political war chest."" Some consumer advocates also criticized the move, citing the consultants' work on behalf of Southern California Edison. In their private consulting business, Fabiani and Lehane are working to win over public and political support for Davis' $3.5-billion plan to rescue Edison from its financial difficulties. Legislation embodying aspects of the deal is pending in Sacramento. On Monday, Brulte and Cox also complained about the consultants' dual role. ""California taxpayers should not be asked to finance political consultants or individuals who have a vested business interest with the state,"" the letter said. Fabiani and Lehane had worked in the Clinton administration, and in Vice President Al Gore's presidential campaign, where they gained a reputation as attack-oriented operatives. Lehane on Monday defended the governor's decision to use tax money to pay their fees, saying government often hires outside experts and that he and Fabiani will ""serve as communications advisors to help the governor fight against these generators."" ""The Republicans,"" Lehane added, ""ought to be spending time writing letters to George W. Bush to get him to stop the Texas generators from gouging California. . . . That is the real issue here."" Davis, meanwhile, returned to California on Monday after a weekend of fund-raisers. He was in Texas on Saturday for a Dallas event that had been scheduled for April 11. It was postponed when Pacific Gas & Electric filed for bankruptcy protection. ""There is a very large fund-raising base for Democrats in Texas,"" Davis' campaign strategist, Garry South, said of the state that is home to some of the generators that Davis has criticized. Davis traveled to Chicago for another fund-raiser Sunday, then met Monday with city officials to discuss how Chicago deals with electrical blackouts. After blackouts crippled downtown Chicago in the summer of 1999, Mayor Richard M. Daley demanded that the city's electricity provider, Commonwealth Edison, give advance notice of power cuts. Customers now sometimes receive warnings two or three days in advance. Davis emerged from the meeting saying ""the utilities have got to tell us in advance when they're going to have a planned blackout."" It was not, however, readily apparent how Chicago's solutions would translate to California, because its electrical problems are vastly different. Rather than suffering a shortage of electricity throughout the grid like California, Chicago has the more microcosmic ills of an aging system--an obsolete transformer going down, for example, leaving several city blocks in the dark until workers can fix it. * Times staff writer Eric Slater contributed to this story. PHOTO: Protester Barbara King shakes a light bulb outside Sacramento office of a lobbyist for energy producer Enron near the Capitol.; ; PHOTOGRAPHER: ROBERT DURELL / Los Angeles Times Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Business/Financial Desk; Section C BUSINESS DIGEST 05/22/2001 The New York Times Page 1, Column 1 c. 2001 New York Times Company Enron Moves to End India Contract Fed up with its main customer's refusal to pay its bills, Enron's Indian power-generating venture said that it would terminate its power supply contract. [World Business, Section W.] Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. International World Watch Compiled by David I. Oyama 05/22/2001 The Wall Street Journal A18 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) EUROPE/MIDEAST Insurer Storebrand Favors Sampo's Bid Over Den Norske Norway's largest insurer, Storebrand, became the center of a bidding war between Finnish financial-services company Sampo and Norway's Den Norske Bank, with Storebrand favoring Sampo. Sampo's offer values Storebrand at 20.8 billion Norwegian kroner ($2.3 billion), compared with DnB's 17.6 billion kroner bid, as the Nordic region's top financial companies battle for position in a consolidating sector. Sampo and Storebrand, in a joint Helsinki news conference, said they were confident their deal would succeed. Sampo's cash-and-stock offer, valued at 75 kroner a share, represents a 31% premium to Storebrand's average share price during the past month and was backed by Storebrand's management. DnB wouldn't say whether it would alter its bid. ""One cannot count on that,"" its chairman said. HypoVereinsbank Results Disappoint Bayerische Hypo- und Vereinsbank, Germany's second-largest bank, known as HypoVereinsbank, said first-quarter pretax profit rose 25% from a year earlier to 770 million euros ($678 million), below analysts' consensus forecast of 795 million euros. Profit rose 63% to 468 million euros; earnings and pretax profit were both helped by one-time gains of 454 million euros. Operating profit fell 59% in the retail-banking division to 98 million euros, and was down 43% in the international-markets division to 184 million euros. HypoVereinsbank said tough market conditions world-wide reduced regular commission and interest income. Enron Pulls Out of Emirates Gas Project U.S. energy company Enron has decided to pull out of the multibillion-dollar Dolphin natural-gas project, selling its 24.5% stake to the United Arab Emirates Offsets Group, or UOG, according to Dolphin Energy's managing director, Ahmed Al-Sayigh. He didn't specify the reason for Enron's withdrawal or the value of Enron's stake. The Dolphin project agreement, reached two years ago by UOG and Qatar Petroleum, aims to bring two billion cubic feet a day of natural gas from Qatar's offshore North Field in the Persian Gulf to Abu Dhabi and onward to Dubai. Enron and France's TotalFinaElf each held a 24.5% stake, with UOG owning the remaining 51%. Mr. Sayigh said UOG will hold discussions with other companies on a possible sale of Enron's original stake. Richard Bergester, manager for Enron Middle East, said that having contributed to the project's initial stages, Enron now feels it can't ""add"" any more. He didn't elaborate. A TotalFinaElf official said it is interested in a greater stake in Dolphin. Marc Rich Gains Control of Swiss Firm Marc Rich, the former U.S. fugitive given a controversial pardon by President Clinton, effectively pulled off a management coup at Swiss real-estate company Feldschloesschen-Huerlimann Holding by thwarting its merger plans with Swiss Prime Site and forcing the board to quit. Feldschloesschen's ousted chairman, Robert Jeker, said Marc Rich Group now had control of the company. Mr. Rich himself is not on the board, but he controls more than 10% of the votes in Feldschloesschen. ASIA/PACIFIC BRIEFLY: -- Bass Hotels & Resorts, a unit of Britain's Bass, said it will buy the Regent Hotel Hong Kong for $346 million from Hong Kong's New World Development. -- Indian lenders said they want the Indian government to intervene after U.S. energy company Enron's threat to walk out of its Dabhol Power unit's huge project in Maharashtra state put their loans in jeopardy. Domestic lenders have lent $1.4 billion out of the project's total $2.9 billion cost. -- Australian Prime Minister John Howard caved in to intense pressure over the collapse of HIH Insurance, announcing a royal commission into the company's failure and setting aside over 500 million Australian dollars ($265 million) to assist victims of the Australian insurer's collapse. -- Japan's trade surplus shrank at a faster-than-expected pace in April, narrowing 42% from a year earlier to 665.9 billion yen ($5.39 billion), as reduced foreign demand weighed on the country's economy. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Business; Financial Desk IN BRIEF / ENERGY Enron Withdraws from Qatar Project Bloomberg News 05/22/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition C-2 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company Enron Corp. pulled out of a $2-billion pipeline project to export gas from Qatar as it became increasingly likely that an Indian power-sales agreement will collapse. The company said the move is not related to a filing by its 65%-owned Dabhol Power Co. to India's Maharashtra state's electricity board to stop supplying power because it's owed about $63.9 million by the board. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. INDIA: UPDATE 1-Indian state spurred by Enron reopens power deals. By Narayanan Madhavan 05/22/2001 Reuters English News Service (C) Reuters Limited 2001. BANGALORE, India, May 22 (Reuters) - India's technology state of Karnataka, spurred by a payments row involving U.S. power developer Enron Corp in a neighbouring province, has reopened sealed power purchase deals with 11 private firms. The southern state's government has told independent power producers (IPPs), which are yet to start generation, that they need to make their tariffs more competitive, officials said. ""Now it (electricity) cannot be at any cost,"" V.P. Baligar, chairman and managing director of the Karnataka State Power Transmission Corp Ltd (KPTCL), the state's monopoly power distributor, told Reuters in an interview late on Monday. The move comes on the heels of the bitter wrangle in Maharashtra state involving Dabhol Power Co, 65-percent owned by Houston-based Enron. Dabhol issued a preliminary notice on Saturday to end a contract to sell power to the Maharashtra State Electricity Board. The step came after Maharashtra ceased payments saying Dabhol's tariffs were too high. The $2.9-billion project, which is 90-percent complete, was first billed as a showcase of India's decade-old reform programme but now is regarded by critics as a symbol of policy bungling. ""Enron is a lesson for all of us,"" Baligar said. Karnataka also said it would not provide financial assurances in the form of escrow cover and government loan guarantees which the firms wanted to help sweeten lending rates. ""We're trying to tell them your tariff has to be competitive,"" Baligar said, but added that the state was open to negotiations. ""You have to have the final capability so you can implement the project without any guarantee or escrow."" SIGNED DEALS Five years ago, the state signed power purchase deals with 14 private firms. Three of them are already generating power at rates higher than the state would now like to pay. They will continue to get these rates but the 11 unbuilt units face an uncertain future. The 11 plants involve 2,000 megawatts (MW) of capacity, half of which would be supplied by the Mangalore Power Co (MPC) from which U.S.-based Cogentrix exited in 1999, citing litigation and delays in government approval. China Light & Power now owns the company, in which India's Tata group is expected to take 30 percent. MPC Managing Director V.P. Sharma told Reuters that his firm's project would not be hit by the demand for lower tariffs because it was based on coal unlike the Enron project, based on naphtha. ""Our cost is the lowest cost approved (and) coal prices have fallen (since the agreement),"" Sharma told Reuters from Bombay. Company officials say the project is also looking forward to a federal guarantee to help it move forward. Baligar said the government's intention was to weed out those who are not serious. ""Those who are serious can sit with us and sort out their problems,"" he said. Power tariffs vary, depending upon foreign exchange rates and the type and prices of fuels. Three projects which are already generating power get about 3.0 to 4.0 rupees (6.4 to 8.5 U.S. cents) per unit. The 11 uninstalled plants had comparable rates but MPC says falling coal prices helped its competitiveness. One generating firm, Jindal Tractabel, which uses coal and gas, gets about 2.60 rupees. Its purchase agreement was not among the 14 and is awaiting regulatory approval. The state wants the Jindal rate to be the benchmark for reopened agreements. If private firms cut capital costs and work out long-term fuel supplies, they will be able to cut rates, Baligar said. The state says it needs 4,000 MW of new capacity over 10 years and 2,500 MW over five years. State-run utilities are in a position to meet five-year needs at low rates, Baligar said. Asked if Karnataka could face litigation over the reopening of the contracts, Baligar had legally strong arguments. ( $1 = 46.9 rupees). Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. INDIA: India utility may slap 4bln rupee fine on Enron unit. 05/22/2001 Reuters English News Service (C) Reuters Limited 2001. BOMBAY, May 22 (Reuters) - An Indian utility is planning to impose a second penalty of four billion rupees ($85 million) on Enron's local unit, barely a week after the U.S. energy giant took its first step to pull out of the embattled project. A senior official at the Maharashtra State Electricity Board (MSEB) said on Tuesday the fine on Dabhol Power Company (DPC) was for not meeting capacity targets within a stipulated period. ""We will do this as soon as the bill for May is received next month,"" the official told Reuters. DPC officials declined to comment on the matter. Earlier this year, MSEB had imposed a similar penalty on DPC - which DPC has not paid - saying its plant could not be ramped up to full capacity within three hours from a cold start. Enron and MSEB have been battling for six months over payment defaults and last week DPC, owned 65 percent by Enron, issued a preliminary notice to terminate a power purchase agreement - widely seen as a move that would lead to a pull out. According to DPC, it is owed $48 million by MSEB. A top government official told Reuters in Delhi on Monday the federal government is optimistic Houston-based Enron and the Maharashtra state will resolve their wrangle. The agreement signed between MSEB and DPC in 1995 stipulates that if Dabhol's plant cannot achieve 100 percent capacity within three hours from restart, MSEB is entitled to impose a penalty. The MSEB official said the plant had failed to fulfil this condition in February and March, considered peak periods for power demand by the utility. DPC is building a $2.9 billion, 2,184 MW plant, of which the first phase of 740 MW began operations in May 1999. Enron is India's largest foreign investor. ($1=47.0 Indian rupees). Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. IXEurope creates a Storm in colocation 05/22/2001 M2 Presswire Copyright 2001 M2 Communications, Ltd. All Rights Reserved. IXEurope, a leading pan-European provider of Internet infrastructure and hosting services, today announces that it has signed a deal with Storm Telecommunications Limited (Storm), the international optical switched service provider, with an intelligent optical backbone network built in the UK, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden and Norway. Over the coming months Storm's network will also be operational in the USA, Switzerland, Italy and Austria. Under the agreement Storm will locate its optical switching equipment at IXEurope's flagship datacentres in London and Frankfurt, with plans to use other IXDatacentres across Europe for colocation of its equipment to support its European and North American metro access rollout. Storm is the tenth carrier to enter the London city IXDatacentre meaning that IXEurope's customers (including other carriers) will benefit from the services that Storm offers. This illustrates the advantages that IXEurope's carrier-neutral status brings -connectivity, cost-effective choice and flexibility. Guy Willner, CEO of IXEurope, commenting on the deal, said: ""We are pleased to support Storm's IP network rollout. It will naturally interlink with the new gigabit ethernet service we are offering across our pan-European network of IXDataCentres."" Mark Stewart, senior vice president, business development of Storm, said ""We chose IXEurope as one of our colocation partners because of its extensive pan-European presence and the strategic location of its datacentres. IXEurope has ensured that its datacentres are located where there is an abundance of network, and provides a choice of carriers, which allows us great flexibility. IXEurope will also provide us with the ability to expand over an agreed time scale."" IXEurope, which now has eight operational datacentres across Europe, has recently signed contracts to provide colocation and managed services to Hewlett Packard, Enron Broadband Services (EBS) and The Data Company. IXEurope has just been awarded the ISO9002 quality assured certification for the second consecutive year , showing its commitment to quality across its European operations. IXEurope IXEurope provides neutral colocation and facilities management services to corporate, internet and telecoms organisations, allowing them speedier access to market and the freedom to focus on their core business. IXDatacentres are present across Europe in all major business centres, including London, Paris, Frankfurt, Zurich, Nice, Dusseldorf, Milan and Barcelona. IXEurope is an ISO9002 Quality Certified Company and a founding member of the Colocation and Hosting Association. IXEurope's funders include Bank of America, JPMorgan and European Acquisition Capital. For more information please visit the website at www.ixeurope.com About Storm Telecommunications Storm Telecommunications Limited, wholly owned and group operating company of Storm Investments Limited, is the first OSP (optical-switched service provider). Storm provides voice, bandwidth and IP services and had revenues of GBP52m in 2000. Storm's intelligent mesh network is operational in the UK, France, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands, shortly reaching the USA, Italy, Austria and Switzerland. In February 2000, Storm's management completed an MBO backed by investment affiliates of Soros Private Equity Partners, and further backing by investment affiliates of Merrill Lynch & Co came in May 2000. Storm's intelligent optical network is in prime position to meet the e-business challenges of 2001 and beyond. For more information, please visit HTTP:\\WWW.STORMTEL.COM. ((M2 Communications Ltd disclaims all liability for information provided within M2 PressWIRE. Data prepared by named party/parties. Further information on M2 PressWIRE can be obtained at http://www.presswire.net on the world wide web. Inquiries to info@m2.com)). CONTACT: Victoria Dickson, Citigate Technology Tel: +44 (0)207 950 2982 e-mail: Chris Moseley/Vidushi Patel, Miller Shandwick Technologies Tel: +44 (0)20 7282 2844 e-mail: cmoseley@miller.shandwick.com e-mail: vpatel@miller.shandwick.com Russell Poole, General Manager UK, IXEurope e-mail: russell.poole@ixeurope.com Helen O'Hanlon, PR Manager, Storm Telecommunications e-mail: H.O'Hanlon@stormtel.com Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Power corrupts... 05/22/2001 The Economic Times Copyright (C) 2001 The Economic Times; Source: World Reporter (TM) APROPOS of Enrons notice to the government of Maharashtra, Mumbai should act pragmatically instead of indulging in heroics and rhetoric. It should set its own house in order, improve MSEBs functioning and quickly privatise. If it fails to do these its threat to Enron will also be taken as just another case of demanding kickbacks. IT is sad really that Enron had to issue its pre-termination notice. We should now ask whether MSEB would be able to construct such a project in record time. Corruption is rampant in MSEB. They may say Enron power is not needed, but you cannot even get a new connection easily. Interruptions are commonplace in rural areas (sometimes up to four times a week). Power thefts are commonplace too. Each day, on average, we pay MSEB about Rs 6 per unit for commercial connections. But most people would be willing to pay Rs 7 or so if they got clean, uninterrupted power. We have seen, for example, the vast cost overruns of many of the official water management projects. These overruns go up to 20 times, with delays stretching up to 10 years with no guarantee no results even then. All told, the government is sending very wrong signals to the international community by raking up the Enron controversy. It should set its own house in order. THE new state ministries are too big in size West Bengals in particular. It has allotted one minister just to deal with fire brigades. The expenditure in lakhs it entails could exceed the total number of fire tenders under the department. Despite that it needed 7 complete days to control a recent fire (with private tankers requisitioned to help over and above the ones owned by the corporation and municipalities). We need more fire tenders, not ministers or those who are associated with the big boss. Also we need a new minister, plus a full-fledged department, to examine corrupt practices in local government and also in the central government offices located in states. Meanwhile, was the Sarkaria Commissions recommendation to restrict the size of the ministry to within 10 per cent of the size of the Assembly advanced only to be flouted? We should call a stop to such commissions as not even 10 per cent of their purpose is served; they too entail huge establishments which are maintained year after year at taxpayer expense. SINCE 1993, I have been familiar with the political, social and business scenarios in the US and so I feel reasonably qualified to make some observations on US immigration policy by Sudhir Shah. Shahs statistics are not totally accurate but they depict the `global picture. The Indian immigrants (a million plus now) are, in many respects, a class apart. Their education levels are far higher than those of other immigrants, many of whom are just a grade above our rag-pickers (they are the cherry and berry pickers on US farms). I have not come across a single uneducated Indian in the US since 1983. Even in asset-formation, Indians (even Pakistanis) are leagues ahead of the other immigrants. B T Dasture, Mumbai - Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. The Godbole findings Our Editorial 05/22/2001 Business Standard 15 Copyright (c) Business Standard The Godbole committee's first report, submitted on 10 April, is an eye-opener to what can only be called a massive scandal. It leaves several players MSEB, successive Maharashtra governments, the Kirit Parikh re-negotiation exercise, the Central Electricity Authority, and other players in New Delhi with no clothes on. MSEB claimed that it had negotiated a tariff that was lower than would result from applying the central government's standard formula. But this was patently fraudulent, because the comparison was based on wrong numbers, incorrect technical parameters and unequal assumptions (one rupee-dollar rate for the Dabhol tariff, another for calculating the government formula), all of it designed to establish what was not true. Asked in court why there had been no competitive bidding, the answer (believe it or not) was that MSEB was not competent to handle competitive bidding. But it was so wonderfully capable of handling direct tariff negotiations that it eventually gave Dabhol a higher tariff than Enron had initially sought, before the negotiations began! That's only for starters. There is much more in the Godbole report. On the basis of a passing comment in an FIPB meeting, that the project's costs were broadly in line with other similar projects, the power secretary in New Delhi tells the Central Electricity Authority that the CEA's techno-economic clearance is not required though this is statutorily mandated. The CEA agrees to this untenable proposition, but later issues a vaguely worded clearance on the basis of a meeting whose minutes were not made available to the Godbole committee. The re-gasification project that was made part of the power project had a capacity to handle 5 million tonnes, though Dabhol itself needed only 2.1 million tonnes. A port facility had similar excess capacity. Yet the entire cost of these facilities was loaded on to Dabhol, along with the full cost of the 20-year gas supply contract. Thus, as the Godbole committee observes, what should have been a variable cost was converted to part of the fixed cost, which MSEB would have to service through a capacity charge, whether any power or gas was bought or not. Even the power requirements of Maharashtra were mis-calculated in order to over-ride a warning from the World Bank that the Dabhol power would not be needed. This was done by assuming that industrial demand for power would grow overnight at twice the earlier rate, and that MSEB itself would overnight see a dramatic worsening of its operating parameters. There is still more in the report, but the point should be obvious. What the report shows is that the Dabhol contract can be subjected to legal test (as in fact two members of the Godbole committee recommend), on the grounds that it was improperly handled and violative of law and common sense. If a favourable judicial decision becomes possible, that should help mitigate the costs of winding up a truly scandalous project. For reasons that are not clear, MSEB and the Maharashtra government have chosen not to go down this route. Perhaps they have greater and continuing faith in the re-negotiation process. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. SMARTMONEY.COM: Power Grab By Elizabeth Harris 05/21/2001 Dow Jones News Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) NEW YORK -(Dow Jones)- Feeling squeezed by rising electricity bills and shrinking investment returns? Consider investing in utilities, which posted solid gains amid the recent bear-market carnage. But plugging into this volatile sector is risky business, as anyone who piled in this year based on energy's surge in 2000 can testify. After returning 7.28% last year as demand for power outstripped supply, the average utilities fund is so far down 1% through May 18, according to the fund research firm Morningstar. Though the sector's prospects remain attractive, such volatility is par for the course, says Mark Beckwith, portfolio manager of the Vanguard Utilities Income fund (VGSUX). Utilities and funds that focus on the sector no longer perform like bonds, delivering most of the gains via relatively predictable dividend yields. Instead, the industry has greater growth prospects (and the correspondingly higher potential for losses) tied to the fluctuating demand for power. Already, high prices for natural gas and electricity have created incentives for producers to boost supplies. And the stodgy local monopolies that once dominated the industry must now reckon with a bevy of independent producers, distributors and traders. Even telecom companies are now considered fair game, offering managers of sector funds fresh choices alongside greater risk. ""The classification of a utility has changed,"" Beckwith says. At the same time, the crisis gripping electricity-starved California is showing other states the pitfalls to avoid as they deregulate their grids. ""The outlook for wiser deregulation is very much with us,"" says Bill Reaves, a manager of the Strong American Utilities fund (SAMUX). The crisis out west has also spurred construction of new power plants from New York to Florida, he adds. Managers also count on continued political support from the former oilmen in the White House who are determined to boost domestic output. With such inducements in mind, we screened Morningstar's database looking for no-load utilities portfolios with one-year returns of at least 1% and three-year annualized returns of 5% or more. We also sought funds with initial investment minimums no higher than $3,000 and expense ratios below the category's average. Strong American Utilities Bill Reaves, co-manager of the Strong American Utilities fund, characterizes the $290 million portfolio's positions as ""real utilities."" ""We try to concentrate in the electric and natural-gas area,"" Reaves says. ""We try to concentrate in holdings and companies where we see good growth."" Last year, that meant scaling back significantly from telecom stocks, in part because of a deteriorating outlook. Right now, electric utilities represent 44.5% of the fund - and Dominion Resources (D) is the largest position. Energy ranging from gas utilities to integrated oil and gas companies has also been a significant holding, at 24.2%. Reaves and the rest of the portfolio management team are also very sensitive to valuations. The portfolio consists of 40 stocks, but the managers can devote up to 75% of the fund's assets to the 16 to 18 companies seen as the best bargains. This cautious approach has stood the fund well at a time when some of its competitors got hit by telecoms' travails. The Strong portfolio rose 27.33% in 2000 and is up 2.42% so far this year, contributing to a 15.18% three-year record. Reaves expects the good times to last, with industry earnings growth on the order of 8% to 10% coupled with dividends of about 5% over the next three to five years. ""Demand is likely to keep on being strong...and the value of the service is going to be appreciated a great deal more,"" Reaves says. For example, the electric utilities' average price-to-earnings ratio for 2002 is about 12 - roughly a 50% discount to the Standard & Poor's 500 index. The minimum investment is $2,500, and the portfolio bears a 1% expense ratio. Vanguard Utilities Income ""We won't be moving with the Nasdaq,"" says portfolio manager Beckwith of the Vanguard Utilities Income fund he runs. Beckwith invests a relatively small 17% slice of the $900 million fund in telecom stocks. As with the other funds in this screen, such caution paid off last year, when the fund gained 18.7%. That turned the tables on 1999, when the technology boom consigned Vanguard Utilities to the rear echelon of its peer group. Annualized over three years, the portfolio has returned 9.33%, trailing the average utilities' fund's 10.53%. Here, too, the emphasis is on attractive valuations. Beckwith also has a mandate to invest at least 95% of the portfolio in dividend-paying utilities (last year, all assets had to be invested in such stocks.) ""I'm going to get as much growth as I can without taking on too much risk,"" Beckwith says. Right now, Beckwith has 61% of his assets in defensive electric utilities such as Dominion Resources or the FPL Group (FPL). The portfolio is down 2.65% so far this year, but Beckwith, too, is counting on continued strong demand for electricity. ""Earnings momentum will be very good for the group at least over the next year,"" he says. His main concern is that high energy prices could encourage conservation, eventually depressing demand. The investment threshold is $3,000, and the expense ratio is a slim 0.38%. American Gas Index fund This concentrated portfolio rises and falls with the gas industry's prospects. Strong natural-gas prices boosted the American Gas Index fund's (GASFX) return last year to a 55.86%, far above the sector's average. That more than offset the 3.71% drop in 1999. Annualized over three years, the roughly $300 million fund has gained 15.82%. Like other index portfolios, the fund doesn't make stock picks; instead it owns 73 members of the American Gas Association, representing much of the gas distribution and transmission industry in most U.S. regions. Stocks are weighted by market-cap and by the portion of a company's assets involved in natural gas. Top holdings include Williams Companies (WMB), Enron (ENE) and Duke Energy (DUK). The initial investment is $2,500, and expenses are 0.85%. For more information and analysis of companies and mutual funds, visit SmartMoney.com at http://www.smartmoney.com/ Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Malaysian LNG Sales to India Threatened by Enron Power Dispute 2001-05-22 06:32 (New York) Malaysian LNG Sales to India Threatened by Enron Power Dispute Kuala Lumpur, May 22 (Bloomberg) -- Malaysia LNG Tiga Sdn. may have to find new buyers for as much as 2.6 million metric tons a year of liquefied natural gas if Dabhol Power Co. carries through termination of electricity supplies to India's Maharashtra State Electricity Board. MLNG Tiga has an agreement to deliver a maximum 2.6 million tons a year of LNG each year to an import terminal Enron is building to feed the Dabhol power plant. Saturday, Dabhol Power, 65 percent owned by Enron Corp. of the U.S., started a procedure to end its power supply contract to the electricity board, its sole customer, which owes over 3 billion Indian rupees ($64 million) in unpaid power bills. ``It is our hope that matters in India would be resolved,'' said Azman Ibrahim, spokesman for state-owned Petroliam Nasional Bhd., which owns 60 percent of MLNG Tiga. ``If they do not work out, we would have to find or make alternative arrangements.'' MLNG Tiga is constructing Malaysia's third gas export facility, which will raise the country's LNG capacity to 23 million tons from about 16 million tons in 2000. If Dabhol goes through with cancellation of its power supply contract, MLNG Tiga would have to find buyers for more than a third of the 6.8 million tons it is adding to Malaysia's output capacity. Other partners in MLNG Tiga are the Sarawak state government with a 10 percent share, Royal Dutch/Shell Group's unit Shell Gas BV with 15 percent, Nippon Oil LNG (Netherlands) BV with 10 percent and Diamond Gas Netherlands BV with 5 percent. The plant is due to be completed at the end of 2002 with commercial production due to begin in 2003. India's federal and state governments may have to pay Dabhol Power Co. more than 170 billion rupees ($3.6 billion) if the Enron Corp. unit cancels its 2,184 megawatt power venture. LEADER: India unplugged Financial Times; May 22, 2001 The latest threat from Enron, the US energy group, to pull out of its Dabhol power plant venture near Bombay illustrates both the shambolic nature of India's electricity system and the wider risks of investing in the country. The project had serious drawbacks. But unless energy companies can expect a commercial return, they will not invest in badly needed new infrastructure. Unless contracts are honoured, few foreign companies will consider India as a place to do business. The Maharashtra state electricity board, the Dabhol plant's only customer, is refusing to pay its bills, arguing that the tariffs are unjustifiably inflated. Prices are certainly high. The plant, fuelled by expensive naphtha, is running way below capacity due to unexpectedly low demand, further increasing unit costs. More difficult to judge is whether this is within the terms of the contract, since Enron is keeping the details confidential. The argument over unit costs, though, is in any case less relevant than it might seem as most of India's state electricity boards, including Maharashtra's, operate at a large loss. Many consumers pay highly subsidised rates. Many pay nothing. Bills go uncollected. Half of Delhi's electricity output is stolen, mostly to power middle-class air conditioners rather than light bulbs for the poor. Bankrupt state utilities are then periodically bailed out to the detriment of spending on health and education. India's state authorities urgently need to introduce a common minimum tariff and a more targeted form of subsidy. This may be unpopular, but the central government's offer of Dollars 5.6bn, raised via a bond issue, to pay off the electricity boards' debts should sweeten the pill. A new pricing regime is only the first step. Electricity generation, transmission and distribution should be unbundled and privatised. Contracts should be awarded through competition, not by arrangement with the relevant political party. This would require much more transparency than many of India's politicians have been ready to concede. Enron's difficulties over the Dabhol plant, the largest foreign investment in India, have persuaded other western companies to withdraw from similar projects. This will hardly help the country to overcome the power shortages that hinder economic development. But the effect will reverberate well beyond the energy sector. India receives a pitifully small slice of the world's foreign direct investment. Infrastructure weaknesses are certainly one factor. But as important is the readiness of Indian politicians to manipulate foreign business for their own ends. Copyright: The Financial Times Limited May 22, 2001 Houston Chronicle Enron pulls out of venture drilling in Qatar's waters By LAURA GOLDBERG Copyright 2001 Houston Chronicle Enron Corp. is pulling out of a large natural gas project off Qatar, the company said Monday. Plans for the Dolphin project called for Houston-based Enron to work with Elf, a subsidiary of France's TotalFinaElf, and the United Arab Emirates Offsets Group to develop and pipe natural gas from a block of the Qatar North Field. More than a year ago those involved with the project said it could end up requiring investments of up to $10 billion over six or seven years. Enron said Monday it was transferring its 24.5 percent stake in the project to the United Arab Emirates Offsets Group, which said in a news release it had started negotiating with other international players to become stakeholders. With the transfer, United Arab Emirates Offsets Group will own 75.5 percent of Dolphin. Terms of the deal weren't released. Enron pulled out for a couple reasons, including that it believes there are better places to invest its money, said Alex Parsons, a company spokesman in London. The project doesn't necessarily fit with Enron's current focus. It is emphasizing businesses such as marketing and trading in wholesale markets such as those for natural gas, electricity and broadband. Enron said it would consider future ventures with the United Arab Emirates Offsets Group that were ""in line with our core business activities."" M. Carol Coale, an energy analyst with Prudential Securities in Houston, said Enron's move is consistent with its exit strategy from international assets that generate low returns. May 22, 2001 Houston Chronicle Enron exploring commodity trading Copyright 2001 Houston Chronicle News Services NEW YORK -- Houston-based Enron Corp., the nation's largest natural gas and electricity trading house, is looking to continue its expansion into industries beyond energy with a move into the cocoa, coffee and sugar businesses, industry sources said Monday. Enron has had conversations and interviews with members of the commodity trade in recent weeks, using a London-based recruitment firm to help them, the sources said. ""They are definitely interested in getting into the business. Enron has been looking for physical traders. They have some internal people and are looking for lieutenants with experience,"" a cocoa trader said. A representative of Enron's public relations department would only say that the firm is constantly investigating different markets and opportunities. ""There is always a lot of speculation about what we are doing,"" Habiba Bayi of Enron said Monday. May 22, 2001 Houston Chronicle Local and state Plains Resources gets new officers Former executives of Enron and Kinder Morgan are among those chosen for a new slate of officers at Plains Resources, an oil and gas exploration and production company that had been sharing management with Plains All American Pipeline. They are filling vacancies created by people who went over to the pipeline side, said spokeswoman Carolyn Tice. John T. Raymond, who was vice president of corporate development at Kinder Morgan and Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, was appointed executive vice president and chief operating officer of Plains Resources. Jere Overdyke Jr., formerly managing director of Enron Global Markets, was named executive vice president and chief financial officer. Timothy Stephens, formerly chairman, president and chief executive of Abacan Resource Corp., was named general counsel and executive vice president-administration. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: RTO Question; [EMail-Body]= On this same subject of Chairman Wood, I am told that he met with Rep. Doug Ose (energy subcommittee chairman of the Government Reform Committee) and Ose's ""energy advisory board"" on Wednesday of this week and said similar things. He made a big deal out of a Big Mac analogy -- saying that whether you ordered one in Portland, Oregon or Portland, Maine the product is the same. With RTOs, he supposedly said this meant if the rules are standardized, the number of RTOs becomes less important. Those in the room, including EPSA staff, came away with the impression that Wood is backing away from only 4 RTOs based on this and other comments. Ditto on a 12/15/01 deadline. On the positive side, he did say that he had been consulted on the Administration's comments on the Bingaman bill and agreed that legislation without RTO language or bundled/unbundled is OK. He understands the high risk that Congress would go the wrong way on these issues. -----Original Message----- From: Shapiro, Richard Sent: Friday, October 12, 2001 12:32 PM To: Shelk, John; Novosel, Sarah; Fulton, Donna Cc: Robertson, Linda; Nicolay, Christi L.; Shortridge, Pat Subject: RE: RTO Question He said it ....was a surprise to many...hopefully he'll clarify once he's talked to. -----Original Message----- From: Shelk, John Sent: Friday, October 12, 2001 10:37 AM To: Novosel, Sarah; Fulton, Donna Cc: Shapiro, Richard; Robertson, Linda; Nicolay, Christi L.; Shortridge, Pat Subject: RTO Question For those who attended the FERC meeting yesterday, can anyone elaborate on the reference in the Energy Daily article today that said Pat Wood remarked at the meeting that the Barton RTO language is ""balanced"" and that he likes it. I am working on our own and helping EPSA with their comments on the Barton language which is, as we know, a retrenchment from current law and FERC's plans on RTOs. But if Pat Wood likes it and thinks it is ""balanced"" that undercuts our position. Since the trade press is not always accurate, I thought I would first check with those of you who were there. Thanks. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Privileged/Confidential -- Microsoft Lawsuit; [EMail-Body]= FYI, particularly the part about the performance management system. Let's see what kind of data we can get about the Microsoft evaluation system to find the differences. Thanks. Michelle ---------------------- Forwarded by Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT on 10/23/2000 09:22 AM --------------------------- Jane Allen 10/20/2000 08:43 AM To: Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sharon Butcher/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Microsoft Lawsuit What are your thoughts? Jane J. Allen Enron Corp Global Employee Services Phone - 713/345-5064 Fax - 713/646-9501 ----- Forwarded by Jane Allen/HOU/ECT on 10/20/2000 08:42 AM ----- Tara Rozen 10/18/2000 04:43 AM To: Jane Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Timothy Callahan/NA/Enron@Enron, Bobbi Tessandori/Corp/Enron@Enron cc: Madeline Fox/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Microsoft Lawsuit Hi. Some interesting reading. Although it doesn't explicitly relate to foreign assignments, I am aware that our assignments to and from Europe are predominately white males and I am assuming that this is the case globally as well. I am sure that if Enron was ever filed with a lawsuit for discrimination, this could be an area that would negatively affect the outcome of Enron's defence as foreign assignments generally provide career development opportunities that most non-white males at Enron are missing out on. Tara ---------------------- Forwarded by Tara Rozen/LON/ECT on 18/10/2000 10:40 --------------------------- Enron Europe From: Melissa Laing 17/10/2000 18:16 To: Kirsten Ross/LON/ECT@ECT, Tara Rozen/LON/ECT@ECT, Madeline Fox/LON/ECT@ECT, Michele Small/LON/ECT@ECT, Alison Henry/LON/ECT@ECT, Julie Hayward/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Nigel Sellens/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Microsoft Lawsuit FYI ---------------------- Forwarded by Melissa Laing/LON/ECT on 17/10/2000 18:20 --------------------------- Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp. From: Felecia Acevedo @ ENRON 17/10/2000 16:53 To: Sheila Knudsen/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Ron James/HOU/EES@EES, Willie Gerry Chatham/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Chris Tull/HOU/ECT@ECT, Charles Philpott/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Susan Carrera/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Charles Gauthier/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Ann Vaughn/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jana Domke/Corp/Enron@Enron, Kari Oquinn/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael Feuerbacher/Corp/Enron@Enron, Felecia Acevedo/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Melissa Laing/LON/ECT@ECT, Andrea Yowman/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kimberly Rizzi/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michele Small/LON/ECT@ECT, Shelly Pierce/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Pam Butler/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Microsoft Lawsuit Thought I'd share this with the group. This case will be watched very closely because 1) it was filed against Microsoft, and 2) because of the large potential class of plaintiffs. Class action suits are an employers worst nightmare (think Texaco and Coca-Cola). Please feel free to share this with your management. No. 200 Monday, October 16, 2000 Page A-3 ISSN 1522-5968 News Discrimination Suit Filed by Microsoft Salaried Employee Alleges Discrimination Based on Race, Sex SEATTLE--A suit has been filed against Microsoft Corp. alleging the company maintains a systemic and pervasive practice of discriminating against African American and female salaried employees, affecting pay rates and promotion opportunities (Donaldson v. Microsoft Corp., W.D. Wash., No. C00-1684P, 10/4/00). Such discrimination at the company ""is the standard operating procedure,"" the lawsuit said. The suit filed Oct. 4 in federal court in Seattle seeks back pay, other job benefits, and compensatory and punitive damages for a proposed class of about 400 African American employees and some 4,500 female employees. Mark Murray, company spokesman, said Microsoft does not tolerate discrimination of any kind. ""We take these kinds of issues very seriously,"" Murray said regarding the lawsuit. The company has an ""active diversity policy"" and seeks to recruit and promote minorities and women, Murray told BNA Oct. 12. He said he could not comment on any specific aspects of the lawsuit. The class would include all current and former female salaried employees who worked for Microsoft beginning Feb. 23, 1999, and all current and former African American salaried employees who worked at the company beginning Oct. 4, 1998. Microsoft employs some 18,000 workers in the U.S. the complaint said. About 2.5 percent to 3 percent are African American and about 26 percent are women. Murray said the company has about 27,250 employees in the U.S., including 21,767 in Western Washington. In the U.S., 26.3 percent of Microsoft employees are women and 22.2 percent minorities, he said. The lawsuit was filed by Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll of Seattle. The named plaintiff, Monique Donaldson, sued on behalf of herself and a class of all similarly situated African American and similarly situated female salaried employees at Microsoft. ""African American and female salaried employees of Microsoft are routinely subjected to a pattern and practice of race and sex discrimination affecting the terms and conditions of their employment"" at the company, the complaint said. The violations--of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Civil Rights Act of 1991, and Civil Rights Act of 1871--are ""systemic in nature, and constitute a pattern and practice of conduct which permeates Microsoft's operations,"" the lawsuit maintains. 'Excessive Subjectivity' Alleged The complaint said the company allows ""excessive subjectivity"" in decisions involving promotions and compensation. Microsoft has retaliated against employees in the class who complained ""either internally or externally about Microsoft's treatment of African American and female employees by giving unjustified lowered performance evaluations and constructively terminating them."" The lawsuit said the company ""uses an excessively subjective evaluation system"" that allows managers ""who are predominantly white males, to rate employees based upon their own biases rather than based upon merit."" Performance evaluations, for instance, use a five-point scal, but scores of five, the highest number, are not awarded. Within any organization of the company, only a certain number of employees are allowed to receive each score, which can range from 2.5 to 4.5, the lawsuit said. ""Thus, no matter how good or bad the actual performance of employees a certain number of them must still receive the lower scores."" Any employee with a 2.5 score is placed on a ""personal improvement plan"" or asked to resign, the complaint said. ""Stack rankings"" are used to rank employees in the same job category and organizational unit from best to worst, the complaint said. Employees can be ranked higher under the stack ranking than others who receive numerically higher performance evaluations, the lawsuit said. ""Obtaining higher stack rankings is often governed by an employees' personal popularity with other managers"" because the rankings mix employees working for different managers. In addition to allowing discrimination in performance appraisals, the company also has a pattern of paying African American and female employees salaries ""substantially lower"" than those paid white males doing similar work, with the same or lesser skills, and with similar or lesser experience, the lawsuit said. Furthermore, ""excessively subjective decisionmaking criteria"" are applied in promotions, which favor white males with fewer qualifications than African Americans and female employees. By Nan Netherton Copyright , 2000 by The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., Washington D.C. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Wyoming Energy Commission subject; [EMail-Body]= Could you please put together a combined presentation : Enron's strategy and the need for open access on the transmission system? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/24/2001 09:18 AM --------------------------- ""Steve Reynolds"" <SREYNO@state.wy.us> on 05/23/2001 09:40:11 AM To: <skean@enron.com> cc: <sland@enron.com> Subject: Wyoming Energy Commission subject Steve, it was great to meet you and hear your remarks yesterday. For the speaking engagement next Wednesday, I would like you to focus upon the Enron strategic model of virtual integration of market forces in the evolution of energy development. Wyoming represents a huge material resource base and the commission is charged with the development and promotion of such. But the Governor's message is that we cannot see ourselves as producers and exporters in the traditional sense. We will continue to have the status of a colony if we do not recognize the new dynamics of how these market places are evolving. If you set the stage with a presentation of Enron strategy, then we will discuss how a state, with its agencies and auathority can play a role in this evolution. I have set your time for 45 minutes, which can include a short Qand A period. But your message can be as succint as you can make it and get the point across. You may have to present the Enron case a number of different ways, but the Governor will give you latitude to make the point. You will be welcome to participate in a following panel which will address role playing by the state and the commission. Plan to join us for lunch. If you need more detail, let me know. Thanks! Stephen [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Meeting Request - July 25th; [EMail-Body]= Yes. Maureen - please schedule. From: Michael on 07/06/2001 03:05 AM GDT To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron=20 Subject: Meeting Request - July 25th Steve -=20 I=01,ll be in Houston July 23-26 and would like to get together to bring yo= u up=20 to date on the latest developments in Japan regarding EBS and EGM, as well= =20 as=01; energy markets.=01; Would you=01; have half an hour on the morning o= f Wednesday=20 the 25th? Thanks, Mike [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: FW: Dadisms; [EMail-Body]= George ""Herbert Hoover"" Bush. ""Robert Kean"" <rkean@starband.net> on 07/07/2001 10:13:19 AM Please respond to <rkean@starband.net> To: ""Alan Kean \(E-mail\)"" <rex04@msn.com>, ""'Doug & Karen Reiman \(E-mail\)'"" <dkreiman@mcleodusa.net>, ""Kathy Wedig \(E-mail\)"" <kat.wedig@netzero.net>, ""Melissa Kean \(E-mail\)"" <kean@rice.edu>, ""Phil Kean \(E-mail\)"" <kean.philip@mcleodusa.net>, ""'Steve & Melissa Kean \(E-mail\)'"" <skean@enron.com> cc: ""Diane Kean \(E-mail 2\)"" <dkean@starband.net> Subject: FW: Dadisms Dadisms 1. Run for the roundhouse Nellie, he'll never corner you there. 2. Slick as catshit and twice as nasty. 3. Like shit through a goose. 4. Yeah, that's right, keep fiddlin' with that, you'll break it 5. Ho! Ho! she cried in excess wild and waved her wooden leg on high! 6. On accounta the war. 7. They'll have to shoot him on judgement day. 8. Then of course, there are the names: Katy, Devie, My Little Mochawk, Phil Jofus, and Bubba 9. Choke ass (referring to peanut butter) 10. If it tastes good there are no calories 11. Didn't know you were in town (as driver passes on the right, etc.) 12. Like a couple of cub bears (meaning Rob and Phil) 13. Washington D.C. District or Corruption 14. Have some onions for defense 15. He won't have the guts to do THAT again (when a bug hits the windshield) 16. Saps goin' up the tree 17. Big Al 18. Douglas Doorite 19. Must be a storm comin'; the kids are actin' up 20. Constipate (concentrate) 21. Like being in hell with your back broke 22. gourd cover (hat) 23. mitts, dogs, paws (hands or feet) 24. you're too young 25. Worthington (when we asked him where something was or where he was going) 26. overhose (blue jeans) 27. excruciating pain! (when we squeezed his hand) 28. That's a hell of a note 29. meat wagon (ambulance) 30. drappies (drapes) 31. grappies (grapes) 32. Whoa horsie! Just cuz you only got 3 legs. (when he was putting on the brakes in the car) 33. Jeana, Jeana corpastina, I'm in love with you 34. I love you anyway 35. Scuse my boardin' house reach. 36. Come on out and let me lay a wheel on ya! (in traffic) 37. Sit down and start passin' (at meal time) 38. That's a bit of all right. 39. Here, guard this with your life (when he handed something to us at a store) 40. SOL (shit out of luck) 41. I'll tell ya when your're 21. 42. fernilla, dawberry, shocoletta (vanilla, strawberry, chocolate) 43. straighten up, now. 44. Pardon me soldier. (when he burped) 45. I'm going to assume the position of a soldier. (when he was going to lay on the couch for a nap) 46. horses doovers 47. lemon meringoo pie 48. solft 49. go ahead, see if it bends (when someone pulled out in front of him) 50. Ioway State 51. Cedar Rapids, Cedar Rapids, come on down. Hotel Roosevelt center of town. 52. A hundred dogs going wild in the tobacco field. Does your cigarette taste difference? (a quote from the one Russian guy in Cascade) 53. Cut her loose and let her wander. 54. Get your dogs under the table. 55. ""Shit!"" cried the queen and a thousand loyal subjects strained their bowels. 56. Who's side are you on?! The power company? (when we left lights on) 57. That makes it soggy and hard to light 58. Full as a tick 59. A treat instead of a treatment 60. Intermittent Power [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= PGE/Commercial Support Group Meeting, 32C1; [EMail-Body]= Per Geoff Roberts [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Notice; [EMail-Body]= Please call before you leave and please send me your contact information when you have it for your new job. thanks Jane Wilson@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 05/30/2001 07:31 AM To: Wade Neil Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Richard Shapiro@Enron, Sue Nord@Enron, Anthony Duenner@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS, Rebecca McDonald/Enron@EnronXGate, Sandip Bob Sparger/Corp/Enron@Enron, Scott Subject: Notice After almost 13 years with Enron, I've decided to pursue other opportunities outside of the company. While the problems in India remain challenging and I have enjoyed my tenure here, the job I've been offered is really too good to pass up. Thus, please consider this e:mail as formal notice of my intention to resign from the company, effective close of business June 16, 2001. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Hap Boyd Promotion; [EMail-Body]= I don't really have a problem with this, but I thought that all VP promotions were supposed to go through our year end process. That's what I have been saying in response to the inquiries I am getting. Ken, being newly back in the fold, likely didn't know about the process. Kurt S Huneke@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 12/12/99 08:31 PM To: Steven J Kean@EES cc: Subject: Hap Boyd Promotion First I heard about this. I assume it is a reward for the PTC extension. Hope it makes sense to you. ---------------------- Forwarded by Kurt S Huneke/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 12/12/99 08:30 PM --------------------------- Ken Karas@ENRON 12/10/99 01:50 PM To: Enron Everyone_EWC cc: (bcc: Kurt S Huneke/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT) Subject: Hap Boyd Promotion I am pleased to announce that Hap Boyd has been promoted to Vice President - Governmental and Regulatory Affairs for Enron Wind Corp. reporting to me. Hap will be responsible for managing our worldwide governmental, legislative, and regulatory needs. Hap has been a valued member of our team for since 1994 and recently has lead the successful effort to extend the Production Tax Credit. Hap has made a number of significant contributions to our business and I am delighted that he is taking on this expanded role. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Firsst article attached refers to the 1946 Nebraska case I mentioned to you= =20 in DC ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/02/2001 10:36 AM ----- =09Miyung Buster@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT =0903/02/2001 10:04 AM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: Ann M Schmidt/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bryan Seyfried/LON/ECT@ECT,=20 dcasse@whwg.com, dg27@pacbell.net, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron,=20 filuntz@aol.com, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Janet=20 Butler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeannie Mandelker/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff=20 Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John=20 John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT,=20 Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lysa=20 Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Margaret Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark=20 Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Markus=20 Fiala/LON/ECT@ECT, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT, Mike= =20 Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron= ,=20 Nicholas O'Day/AP/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Peggy=20 Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT, Richard=20 Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EE= S,=20 Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Stella=20 Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Sus= an=20 J Mara/NA/Enron@Enron, Mike Roan/ENRON@enronXgate, Alex=20 Parsons/EU/Enron@Enron, Andrew Morrison/LON/ECT@ECT, lipsen@cisco.com, Jane= l=20 Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Shirley A Hudler/HOU/ECT@ECT =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: Energy Issues Please see the following articles: Oakland Trib 2/28: ""Energy buyout foes say dump grid plan"" San Diego Union 2/28: ""Energy chief 'open' to plan on transmission line=20 buyout"" SF Chron, 2/28: ""Energy Experts Belie Davis' Rosy Prediction Summer expected to be crunch time"" Riverside Press 3/1: ""PUC to mull baseline level for electricity"" Orange Co. Register 3/1: ""Electricity notebook"" Contra Costa Times 3/1: ""PUC chief defends actions in crisis"" LA Times 3/2: ""Cal-ISO Says Suppliers Overcharged"" Sac Bee 3/2: Power profits targeted: Generators urged to forgive some of=20 utilities' debts (Steve Kean quoted) Energy Insight 3/2: ""California Energy Island Won't Work"" SF Chron 3/2: Ex-Regulator Urges Temporary Federal Price Caps on Power SF Chron 3/2: PG&E to Pay Creditors Only 15% / Smaller suppliers outraged= =20 over plan --- --- ------------------ Energy buyout foes say dump grid plan Davis critics point to federal veto disclosure=20 By Steve Geissinger SACRAMENTO BUREAU=20 SACRAMENTO -- Foes of Gov. Gray Davis' plan to buy power lines said Tuesday= =20 the 11th-hour disclosure of federal veto power over the stalled deal shows= =20 the effort should be abandoned altogether.=20 But Davis, who spent the day lobbying federal officials in Washington, D.C.= ,=20 said he's confident the Bush administration will support his plan to purcha= se=20 California's high-voltage transmission grid as part of a deal to rescue=20 teetering utilities.=20 Critics of the plan to ease the energy crisis, however, aren't so sure that= =20 Bush's Republican administration, which favors market-driven strategies ove= r=20 government intervention, will support the Democratic governor's proposal.= =20 Moreover, Republican legislators here said, the last-minute revelation that= =20 the plan would need the approval of federal regulators is further evidence= =20 that it is misdirected, overly complex and will take too long to implement.= =20 ""It means much more time will be required and time is something that=20 especially a lot of the creditors of the utilities do not have,"" said=20 Assembly Republican leader Bill Campbell of Villa Park.=20 ""I think this means we have to look at an alternative deal,"" Campbell said.= =20 Dan Nelson, a spokesman for Senate Republican leader James Brulte of Rancho= =20 Cucamonga, said Republicans generally oppose state purchase of power lines= =20 from utility companies as part of a plan to rescue them from financial=20 difficulty.=20 They instead support acquisition of some other asset from the utilities, su= ch=20 as stock warrants, in exchange for state assistance with their financial=20 woes.=20 Foes say the grid purchase would saddle the state with an antiquated networ= k=20 that could prove costly to maintain while supporters contend it could lead = to=20 quick improvements in a bottlenecked system overdue for repairs.=20 Word that Davis' plan to buy transmission lines would need federal approval= =20 surprised some legislators, their aides said. Open government advocates hav= e=20 harshly criticized the administration for secrecy surrounding much of the= =20 governor's energy crisis relief efforts.=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Chairman Curtis Hebert disclosed=20 recently in Washington that his board has authority over the deal, which he= =20 called ""nationalization"" that is ""against the best interests of the America= n=20 public.""=20 Following that disclosure, Democratic legislative leaders backing Davis' pl= an=20 said they hope to maneuver around the need for commission approval.=20 California can perhaps circumvent the potential hitch by relying in part on= a=20 1946 case involving the state of Nebraska that did not require federal=20 approval, according to Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, D-San Francisc= o.=20 Nevertheless, Davis, in Washington for a national governors meeting, said h= e=20 presented a nine-page proposal to U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham and= =20 expects a response by the end of the week.=20 ""He wants this problem solved and he's been very supportive,"" Davis said.= =20 ""He's recommended approval on every request I've made and I believe he will= =20 support our proposal.""=20 Abraham's office did not return calls seeking comment.=20 The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission that will likely weigh the fate of= =20 the plan, however, is independent of Abraham's office. Even so, Abraham is= =20 part of an energy policy team appointed by Bush, and Davis views Abraham's= =20 support of the proposal as a potential key to a federal nod.=20 Davis' history with the commission won't help his efforts. He and the=20 commission have been at odds for months over the governor's campaign to=20 impose tough wholesale price caps in the West.=20 The latest complications in the plan to rescue utilities came amid a=20 continuing deadlock in secret negotiations between the state and the Pacifi= c,=20 Gas and Electric Co., which is reluctant to sell its high-voltage=20 transmission lines.=20 Davis announced Friday that California's other major investor-owned utility= ,=20 Southern California Edison, had agreed on the basic framework of a deal tha= t=20 includes the sale of its transmission grid to the state for $2.8 billion.= =20 The utilities, trapped between high wholesale costs and lower=20 government-frozen retail rates, have been pushed to the brink of bankruptcy= =20 as they amassed nearly $13 billion in debt.=20 When the utilities could no longer buy enough power, the state began=20 brokering billions of dollars in emergency and long-term power deals to=20 thwart rolling blackouts.=20 Then Davis and legislators began developing strategies to ease the energy= =20 crisis, including increased conservation, construction of new generation=20 plants and ways to prevent utility bankruptcies.=20 Under Davis' plan to rescue utilities, the state would help fiscally restor= e=20 the companies with bonds in exchange for acquisition of their 26,000 miles = of=20 transmission grids. The state would upgrade the aging grid and then lease t= he=20 lines back to the utilities to operate. --- Energy chief 'open' to plan on transmission line buy out By Toby Eckert=20 COPLEY NEWS SERVICE=20 February 28, 2001=20 WASHINGTON -- Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham is ""open"" to California's pl= an=20 to take over utility transmission lines in the state, but stopped short of= =20 endorsing the proposal, saying he needed to study it further, Gov. Gray Dav= is=20 said yesterday.=20 ""From the tone of his remarks, I think his comments will be positive, and I= =20 hope by the end of the week he will be able to endorse the proposal or at= =20 least endorse a modified proposal that is satisfactory to us,"" Davis said= =20 after meeting with Abraham privately at the Department of Energy.=20 A spokesman for Abraham said he ""couldn't characterize (Abraham's) reaction= =20 one way or the other."" But he said Abraham was ""open to taking a look at th= e=20 material the governor provided"" and would follow up with Davis.=20 In his effort to drum up federal support for the buyout plan, Davis also=20 invoked a name that resonates throughout the halls of power in Washington:= =20 Alan Greenspan.=20 Davis said the Federal Reserve Board chairman ""in a general way thinks it= =20 makes sense to acquire transmission lines to make the capacity improvements= =20 that have not been done over the past 15 years.""=20 Greenspan and Davis informally talked about the power crisis this week, aid= es=20 to Davis said. Greenspan's comments could not be confirmed independently.= =20 Davis was in Washington for the four-day winter meeting of the National=20 Governors Association. But he also used the occasion to try to convince the= =20 new Bush administration -- and the media -- that his plans to solve=20 California's power woes are sound.=20 The governor spent about an hour briefing Abraham on the tentative agreemen= t=20 the state struck last week to acquire Southern California Edison's=20 transmission system for $2.76 billion. The state is trying to negotiate=20 similar deals with San Diego Gas and Electric and Pacific Gas and Electric = as=20 a condition for helping the utilities pay off about $13 billion in debt the= y=20 have accumulated because of soaring wholesale power costs.=20 The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission probably will have to sign off on= =20 any purchase plans, and FERC Chairman Curtis Hebert has made comments=20 indicating he is skeptical of the idea. But Davis believes he can overcome= =20 possible opposition at FERC if Abraham backs the plans.=20 Davis also said he and Abraham had ""some creative talks about how we might = be=20 able to find more megawatts for this summer"" and assigned staff members to= =20 work on that ""on a daily basis."" He did not elaborate on the ideas, saying= =20 there may be some details forthcoming ""in about two to three weeks.""=20 The governor will continue his East Coast sales pitch for the transmission= =20 line purchase -- and other elements of his plan to solve the power crisis -= -=20 in a meeting with Wall Street analysts and bond-raters today.=20 Davis and legislators also have pursued long-term power contracts with ener= gy=20 suppliers to wean the state from the open market, which became wildly=20 expensive last year.=20 Mirant Corp., which operates power plants in Northern California, said=20 yesterday that it has agreed to shift contracts from the defunct California= =20 Power Exchange to the Department of Water Resources, which is the state's= =20 electricity buyer.=20 The contracts amount to about 1,000 megawatts of power over the next 10=20 months. Last week, Mirant agreed to sell 750 megawatts to the state next=20 month. On a typical winter day, the maximum demand on the grid managed by t= he=20 state Independent System Operator, about 75 percent of the total state=20 network, is about 30,000 megawatts.=20 Davis' visit to Washington came against the backdrop of a muted federal=20 response to California's power crisis. The Bush administration, which favor= s=20 open power markets, has said it is largely up to state officials to solve t= he=20 problem, rejecting calls by Davis for more aggressive action like caps on= =20 wholesale power costs.=20 But the Democratic governor praised the Republican president publicly on=20 several occasions. He cited the administration's temporary extension of=20 federal orders that kept electricity and gas flowing to the state during=20 emergency shortages and its agreement to speed up federal review of new pow= er=20 plants.=20 ""Secretary Abraham and the Bush administration in general have been=20 wonderfully responsive to my requests. I cannot thank them enough,"" Davis= =20 said yesterday.=20 Other California Democrats have been less charitable toward President Bush.= =20 ""I think the president is going in the wrong direction on this issue,"" said= =20 Rep. Bob Filner, D-San Diego, a staunch advocate of wholesale price control= s.=20 ""A hands-off approach by the federal government, as the president has=20 suggested, is not going to solve this problem."" --- Energy Experts Belie Davis' Rosy Prediction Summer expected to be crunch time=20 Greg Lucas, Sacramento Bureau Chief Wednesday,?February 28, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 Sacramento -- Gov. Gray Davis' optimistic assessment that California may be= =20 on the ""back side"" of its energy crisis flies in the face of what many ener= gy=20 companies and other experts predict.=20 California's real test will come this summer when electricity usage sharply= =20 increases, and unless everything breaks the way Davis hopes, predictions ar= e=20 that large chunks of the state will be in the dark.=20 ""We're not on the back side of this crisis. This problem is far, far bigger= =20 than the governor is suggesting,"" said Gary Ackerman, executive director fo= r=20 the Western Power Trading Forum in Menlo Park.=20 ""To characterize the problem that way shows a recklessness that feeds on th= e=20 popular notion we don't have an energy crisis. We do. We have a very seriou= s=20 one that's going to hit us as temperatures and loads go up,"" Ackerman said.= =20 The Democratic governor's comments were made Monday in Washington, D.C.,=20 during an East Coast visit aimed at getting Washington and Wall Street=20 support for his energy plan.=20 He admitted more hard work is needed, but said the state is on the ""back si= de=20 of the crisis"" because lawmakers have passed bills needed to help lower=20 electricity prices.=20 ""Does that mean we're home free?"" Davis asked yesterday. ""No.""=20 But he again repeated that the state is on the back side of the crisis.=20 That is contrary to predictions by the Independent System Operator, which= =20 oversees the state's power market.=20 On any given day in June, the ISO estimates, the state will fall 6,815=20 megawatts short of demand. That would put nearly 7 million homes in the dar= k,=20 if it happens.=20 In July, the expected shortage is 4,685 megawatts. In August, it's 5,297=20 megawatts. That's if California has a normal summer. If it's hotter than=20 normal, the shortage grows.=20 The ISO's estimates tend to be conservative and do not include Davis'=20 conservation goal.=20 But even if a 10 percent reduction were achieved in June that would save=20 roughly 5,000 megawatts, the state would still be short 1,800 megawatts.=20 And there are other variables.=20 Depending on the snowpack and reservoir levels, hydroelectric plants may no= t=20 be able to run at full bore, which would also worsen the situation.=20 ""That is something the governor cannot spin his way out of,"" said Sen. Tom= =20 McClintock, R-Northridge.=20 Davis said a combination of new power plants and energy conservation will= =20 help the state get through this summer.=20 The clock is running. The ISO predicts shortages of 3,030 megawatts in May = -=20 - just two months away.=20 ""The real electricity crisis is going to be this summer, and I don't think= =20 we've made enough progress there,"" said Severin Borenstein, director of the= =20 University of California Energy Institute.=20 California won't be able to build its way out of the energy crisis by quick= ly=20 approving and building new power plants, Borenstein said.=20 The ISO's demand estimates already factor in the new power plants set to co= me=20 online this summer.=20 ""Unless we have a very mild summer and have lots of rainfall between then a= nd=20 now,"" Borenstein said, ""we are going to face some serious shortages.""=20 Like Davis, Borenstein says California needs to do more to conserve energy.= =20 Unlike Davis, he favors raising prices on big power consumers to give them = an=20 incentive to cut back.=20 But the Democratic governor may be sending Californians a mixed message.=20 By telling them the worst is over, he could undercut his plan by making=20 people believe more conservation is unnecessary.=20 Excluding what lies ahead, there are also plenty of energy issues left=20 unresolved right now.=20 Although Davis has reached a tentative deal with Southern California Edison= =20 on purchasing its share of the state's transmission system for $2.7 billion= =20 -- no such deal exists with either Pacific Gas & Electric or San Diego Gas = &=20 Electric.=20 Some alternative energy producers, like co-generation plants, are shutting= =20 down because the cash-poor utilities haven't paid them for several months. = No=20 cash means no fuel to run the turbines that make the juice.=20 Generators like Duke Energy and Reliant Energy aren't convinced the crisis= =20 has passed.=20 For starters, both companies are owed in excess of $700 million for=20 electricity bought by PG&E and Edison but never paid for.=20 ""There are a lot of issues still out there such as how much power your stat= e=20 will require this summer, whether there is enough generation on the ground = or=20 available commercially to handle the load if there is a significant spike i= n=20 demand,"" said Richard Wheatley, a Reliant spokesman.=20 Harvey Rosenfield, head of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights,= =20 has a slightly different take on whether the worst is over.=20 ""We've said all along it's a crisis inspired by the greed of the utilities= =20 and the energy companies,"" Rosenfield said.=20 ""Now that taxpayers are paying $1 billion every three weeks to buy=20 electricity and the ratepayers are going to pay between $13 billion and $20= =20 billion, the companies are happy and the crisis is over. What more could th= ey=20 want?"" --- PUC to mull baseline level for electricity It's been a decade since amounts were set. They vary by region, season and= =20 whether a home is heated with gas or electricity. By Robert T. Garrett The Press-Enterprise SACRAMENTO Inland-area residents who want a higher ""baseline quantity"" of lower-priced= =20 electricity each month will get a chance to plead their case in the next fe= w=20 weeks.=20 The state Public Utilities Commission will examine by early April whether t= he=20 monthly usage limits that trigger higher rates for residential customers ar= e=20 set too low, PUC President Loretta Lynch said Wednesday.=20 Baseline amounts are set by the PUC and vary by geographic region, season a= nd=20 whether a home is heated with gas or electricity.=20 ""It's been over a decade since the baselines were set,"" Lynch told the=20 Sacramento Press Club. "". . . I think it's about time for us to look at wha= t=20 these baselines are in the 21st century.""=20 Lynch, an appointee of Gov. Davis, declined to say whether the commission= =20 will make permanent a 9-percent rate hike imposed in early January on=20 residential customers of Southern California Edison, which serves much of t= he=20 Inland Empire.=20 With Edison and Pacific Gas Electric collapsing financially, the PUC impose= d=20 the rate hike -- and increases of up to 17 percent for Edison's large=20 business customers -- for 90 days.=20 The ""temporary surcharge"" will be lifted in early April unless the PUC vote= s=20 to keep it in effect.=20 Davis has said he hopes his plan to rescue the state's ailing utilities and= =20 avoid rolling blackouts can be carried out without further rate hikes.=20 Davis was in New York City on Wednesday, where the plan drew a tepid respon= se=20 from Wall Street.=20 Meanwhile, the unexpected shutdown of four Western power plants for repairs= ,=20 combined with scheduled maintenance at several in-state plants, forced=20 California grid officials to declare a Stage 2 alert.=20 Wall Street analysts who met privately with Davis in New York called his=20 moves a good step toward solving the energy crisis, but said more must be= =20 done.=20 ""He talked about a lot of short-term measures to alleviate problems for thi= s=20 summer, but he hasn't communicated a long-term fix,"" said Lawrence J.=20 Makovich, senior director of Cambridge Energy Research Associates.=20 Lynch said Wednesday that she and others on the PUC should have recognized= =20 sooner that utility deregulation wasn't working.=20 As part of its review of the January rate hikes, the PUC will invite public= =20 comments on baselines, Lynch said.=20 She said she plans to examine the baselines for each climate zone. In=20 Edison's service area, for instance, there are six.=20 Lynch also said the PUC would look at whether baselines are fair and=20 effective, and whether similar incentives to conserve energy should be buil= t=20 into the rates of businesses.=20 If the commission adopts ""incentives for businesses,"" she said, it has to= =20 make sure it doesn't set the baseline quantities too low for industrial=20 sectors such as agriculture and biotechnology. State Sen. Jim Battin, R-La= =20 Quinta, said Lynch's proposed review of the fairness of baselines in the=20 different climate zones ""could be encouraging.""=20 But he said he thinks businesses will oppose having baselines applied to=20 them.=20 Battin has waged a battle against baselines, which he calls ""social=20 engineering"" and which were mandated by a state law passed in the 1980s.=20 In the Inland area, the baseline system works like this:=20 In Temecula and Corona an ""all-electric"" home -- meaning one that is heated= =20 by electricity -- this summer will pay 12 cents a kilowatt for the first 30= 4=20 kilowatts used each month; for each additional kilowatt consumed, Edison wi= ll=20 charge 14 cents.=20 In Moreno Valley, Hemet, Rialto and most of Redlands, owners of=20 ""all-electric"" homes will pay Edison the lower rate for 514 kilowatts per= =20 month this summer.=20 In the Coachella Valley, in both summer and winter, Edison charges the=20 higher, 14-cent rate only for monthly consumption above 1,299 kilowatts.=20 Those with gas heating in their homes get different baseline allowances tha= n=20 do those with electric heating.=20 --- Electricity notebook=20 State, Calpine sign $8.3 billion in pacts.=20 March 1, 2001=20 Calpine Corp., a San Jose-based power plant owner, signed two contracts=20 valued at up to $8.3 billion to sell electricity to the California Departme= nt=20 of Water Resources for 10 to 20 years.=20 The contracts with the DWR, which buys electricity for the state's=20 two-biggest utilities, will provide 1,500 megawatts, or enough to light 1.5= =20 million homes, the company said.=20 Calpine signed one $5.2 billion, 10-year contract to sell 1,000 megawatts= =20 from new power plants. Deliveries are expected to begin July 1, with 200=20 megawatts. The full amount of power won't be available until July 2002.=20 A $3.1 billion contract calls for Calpine to provide power for 20 years.=20 Deliveries are expected to begin in August with 90 megawatts and to increas= e=20 to 495 megawatts in August 2002.=20 The contract also allows the state to buy up to 2,000 hours during peak=20 periods from 11 new generating units, once they are built.=20 In February, Calpine signed a 10-year contract valued at $4.6 billion with= =20 the DWR to supply 1,000 megawatts. A megawatt is enough to light 1,000 home= s.=20 Separately, Duke Energy Corp. said it is in discussions with the DWR on=20 long-term power supply contracts.=20 The Gas Co. agrees=20 to buy gas for PG&E=20 The Gas Co. said Wednesday that it reached an agreement with Pacific Gas &= =20 Electric Co. to buy natural gas for the troubled utility for the next month= .=20 PG&E, which is near bankruptcy, has said it is running out of gas supplies= =20 and is unable to buy more because creditors are hesitant to sell to it.=20 PG&E had asked the state Public Utilities Commission to force The Gas Co.,= =20 which serves all of Orange County, to step in and buy gas for PG&E on an=20 emergency basis.=20 The Gas Co. said the agreement with PG&E includes a guarantee that The Gas= =20 Co. will be paid out of the money received from PG&E customer bills. Unpaid= =20 balances cannot exceed $16.5 million, said Gas Co. spokeswoman Denise King. --- PUC chief defends actions in crisis Loretta Lynch blames the energy crunch on the failure of deregulation;=20 credit-rating firm says state will continue to feel its effects=20 By Andrew LaMar and Mike Taugher TIMES STAFF WRITERS=20 SACRAMENTO -- Loretta Lynch, who has faced close scrutiny as president of t= he=20 state Public Utilities Commission, defended her handling of the electricity= =20 crisis Wednesday and said she wishes the agency had recognized sooner that= =20 deregulation was not working.=20 Appearing before reporters at a luncheon, the 38-year-old attorney offered = a=20 harsh assessment of deregulation and said California has not faced the same= =20 degree of uncertainty since the 1920s.=20 ""From my perspective, the system that we created was built on a theory and = a=20 hope and a promise, and that promise is unrealized and the theory was fault= y=20 and so therefore the hope remains unfulfilled,"" Lynch said. ""I'm from=20 Independence, Mo.; you have got to show me how we're going to get to the=20 nirvana of the plan for deregulation.""=20 Lynch said the PUC is working feverishly on three things:=20 To advise the Legislature on scores of energy bills.=20 To legally defend its decision to keep rates frozen on two utility companie= s.=20 To prepare to decide whether to extend or increase a 9 percent electricity= =20 rate hike approved in January.=20 Meanwhile, the Wall Street credit-rating firm Standard & Poor's issued a=20 report on the dangers of the energy crisis that said California will feel i= ts=20 effects ""throughout 2001 and beyond.""=20 Damage has been contained to the state's utilities, which are nearly broke,= =20 and the state treasury, which S&P said is insulated from credit problems=20 because of its ample reserves and ability to borrow.=20 But S&P analysts said the combination of the energy crisis and a nationwide= =20 economic slowdown could restrict the state's ability to deal with budgetary= =20 issues that could come up if the economy continues to slow. Also, it could= =20 strap the budgets of cities, counties and other local governments if the=20 state decides to cut payments to them.=20 ""In addition to the overall economic slowing that is clearly evident=20 nationally, the utility crisis has hit California at a time when the=20 technology sector, the growth of which has played a significant role in the= =20 state's economy over the past several years, is undergoing a significant=20 retraction,"" S&P warned.=20 As for Lynch, she challenged several popular assumptions as myths. First, s= he=20 said, deregulation failed on its own, not because politicians cut it short.= =20 Second, she said, the PUC did not stop utilities from arranging long-term= =20 contracts to buy electricity, as they have claimed.=20 And, the defense of the PUC's rate freeze in court is not a losing=20 proposition, she said.=20 ""It is true that the utilities came to the commission and to me personally = in=20 October and said 'End the rate freeze. We are hurting.'"" Lynch said. ""When = we=20 looked at the request, it really did put us between a rock and a hard place= ,=20 and that's a rock and a hard place we remain in today.'""=20 But Lynch said if the PUC had lifted the rate freeze, ""we would have, by=20 administrative fiat, plunged the rest of California into the price volatili= ty=20 that San Diego experienced this summer.""=20 As it is, the commission is studying the market value of the assets Souther= n=20 California Edison and PG&E were supposed to sell under the terms of=20 deregulation. Once the commission sets the market value, it can determine= =20 whether the utilities are eligible to raise rates.=20 In other developments Wednesday:=20 Power generator Calpine Corp. announced two long-term electricity contracts= =20 that will require energy-starved California to pay up to $8.3 billion to ke= ep=20 the lights on in as many as 1.5 million homes.=20 With the latest agreements, San Jose-based Calpine has three separate=20 long-term electricity contracts with the state Department of Water Resource= s,=20 which is shopping for deals that will spread the soaring cost of power over= =20 several years=20 Environmentalists urged Gov. Gray Davis to upgrade his proposal to obtain= =20 development rights for scenic acreage owned by the state's beleaguered=20 utilities, saying the state should obtain the properties outright.=20 As part of a utility bailout package, the governor has recommended Edison a= nd=20 PG&E turn over development rights to more than 88,000 acres, including scen= ic=20 parcels in the Sierra, and 26,000 miles of high voltage transmission lines,= =20 among other considerations.=20 A Republican assemblyman attacked Davis for comments he made in Washington,= =20 D.C., on Tuesday. The governor said the deals he is negotiating with utilit= y=20 companies to buy their transmission lines would complete the legislative=20 fixes needed and ""it means we are basically on the downside of the problem.= ""=20 But Assemblyman Tony Strickland, R-Thousand Oaks, questioned whether there= =20 would be enough power this summer or if federal regulators would approve th= e=20 state purchase of transmission lines.=20 ""It's irresponsible to call this crisis nearly over,"" Strickland said. ""The= re=20 are still way too many unknowns."" --- -------------- Cal-ISO Says Suppliers Overcharged=20 Power: State report calls for a refund of $562 million above 'reasonable'= =20 prices. Generators deny gouging.=20 By NANCY VOGEL and JENIFER WARREN, Times Staff Writers ?????SACRAMENTO--Wholesale electricity suppliers overcharged California's= =20 utilities more than $500 million during December and January, an amount tha= t=20 the federal government should demand be refunded, according to a=20 no-holds-barred state report released Thursday. ?????The report by the California Independent System Operator, which overse= es=20 the flow of electricity in the state, said power suppliers charged $11=20 billion during those two months alone--more than they did for all of 1999. ?????Studying various market dynamics, the agency concluded that there was = a=20 ""prima facie case"" that the unnamed generators and marketers had charged $5= 62=20 million above ""just and reasonable"" prices, warranting further investigatio= n=20 and federal hearings into the appropriateness of refunds. ?????The state report is the most accusatory of a number of studies=20 undertaken to determine why wholesale electricity prices have soared in=20 California since last summer, throwing the state's biggest utilities into= =20 financial crisis and dashing hopes for lower consumer rates under=20 deregulation. ?????The study also provides new ammunition to members of California's=20 congressional delegation, who have unsuccessfully been pressing the Federal= =20 Energy Regulatory Commission to impose price ceilings on wholesale=20 electricity costs. ?????Generators defended their operating practices and rejected the=20 allegation that they had raked in unfairly large profits in December and=20 January. ?????""We have played by the rules, acted ethically and legally in all our= =20 operations,"" said Richard Wheatley, a spokesman for Houston-based Reliant= =20 Energy, which owns power plants capable of supplying more than 3 million=20 homes. ""We have nothing to hide."" ?????Gary Ackerman, executive direcor of the Western Power Trading Forum,= =20 said the Cal-ISO report does not account for less tangible factors that ten= d=20 to drive up prices, such as political and financial uncertainties. ?????""Those are the things my people take into account when deciding whethe= r=20 to sell into California,"" said Ackerman. He noted that, in the second week = of=20 December, a period analyzed in the Cal-ISO report, electricity prices were= =20 higher in the Pacific Northwest than in California. ?????The report, he said, ""provides some reasonable questions which will be= =20 responded to by my members, under FERC authority."" ?????Cal-ISO officials stressed Thursday that they are not accusing any=20 seller of inflating prices but are simply asking for federal action to=20 restrain costs. ?????""We have not seen prices come down to what we feel are justifiable=20 levels,"" said Anjali Sheffrin, director of market analysis for Cal-ISO. ?????Although federal energy commission officials on Thursday refused to=20 comment on the study, many experts predicted that refunds would not be=20 forthcoming. ?????Since July, when Gov. Gray Davis first asked the federal commission to= =20 give San Diego Gas & Electric customers refunds for electricity costs that= =20 doubled and in some cases tripled, the agency has refused to order power=20 sellers to give back some of their profits to California utilities and=20 consumers. ?????The commission, charged by Congress with assuring ""just and reasonable= ""=20 wholesale electricity rates, has also resisted imposing firm price caps on= =20 California's electricity market. In November, the commission called that=20 market ""dysfunctional"" and vulnerable to manipulation by power sellers, but= =20 the agency has so far failed to document or punish specific cases of such= =20 anti-competitive behavior. ?????""The real question is what is FERC going to do with all of this?"" said= =20 Gary Stern, chief of market analysis for Southern California Edison, once o= ne=20 of the two biggest buyers of electricity in California. ""Based on past=20 history, we think they're probably going to say they don't see wrongdoing= =20 that provides a reason for refund."" ?????Determining rebates could prove a logistical nightmare for federal=20 regulators and Cal-ISO, Stern said, but the data exist to show how much it= =20 cost power plant owners to generate electricity and what price they charged= . ?????Given that Edison and PG&E have defaulted on payments of hundreds of= =20 millions to power sellers, Stern said, a rebate order wouldn't lead to=20 reimbursement for individual utility customers. Instead, it could help the= =20 utilities eliminate some of their debt to generators and marketers. ?????Edison and PG&E have been pushed nearly to bankruptcy by high wholesal= e=20 costs, which they could not pass on to their customers because of a=20 state-imposed rate freeze.=20 ?????Last week, Davis announced that Edison had agreed in principle to stat= e=20 financial help in exchange for its transmission lines. Negotiations with PG= &E=20 continue. ?????The Folsom-based Cal-ISO drew its conclusions after reviewing=20 electricity purchases made between Dec. 8, 2000, and Jan. 31, 2001. ?????To calculate the cost of producing electricity in those months, Cal-IS= O=20 analysts assumed power plant owners were buying natural gas from the spot= =20 market, where prices soared this winter, and were running old, inefficient= =20 plants. They also assumed relatively high prices for air emission credits i= n=20 Southern California and added a 10% buffer to the operating costs. ?????Cal-ISO officials then compared these costs with the prices sellers we= re=20 paid. Their report did not name the individual sellers, which range from th= e=20 province of British Columbia to the publicly owned Los Angeles Department o= f=20 Water and Power to private companies. ?????Several lawmakers praised the report as long overdue. ?????""It's about time,"" said state Sen. Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey),=20 chairwoman of the Senate Energy Committee. She said that the desire among= =20 some legislators to seize power plants and take other drastic actions stems= =20 from the sense that ""there's no one willing to enforce the provisions of th= e=20 federal power act regarding just and reasonable rates. ?????""The utilities are doing a great job looking out for their shareholder= s,=20 but who is looking out for ratepayers?"" she asked. ?????Consumer advocacy groups applauded Cal-ISO's action and said the=20 agency's evidence of overcharges underscored the need for hard price caps o= r=20 a tax on generator profits. ?????""It's certainly not news to us that the generators are charging=20 excessive wholesale prices,"" said Mindy Spatt, spokeswoman for the Utility= =20 Reform Network of San Francisco. ""If there had been a real price cap, this= =20 investigation would not be necessary.""=20 ?????California's congressional delegation has pushed hard in recent months= =20 for legislation that would impose temporary price controls on wholesale pow= er=20 supplies in the West. On Wednesday, a bipartisan team met with Curtis Heber= t,=20 chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and came away=20 discouraged by Hebert's opposition to price caps. ?????The federal commission has imposed a so-called ""soft cap"" of $150 per= =20 megawatt-hour in California's electricity market. When sellers ask a higher= =20 price they must explain why it is necessary.=20 ?????Within 60 days, the commission can launch a review of those bids that= =20 could lead to refunds. So far, the federal panel has ordered none. On=20 Thursday, Cal-ISO asked the commission to extend the two-month deadline in= =20 its examination of the purchases made during December and January. * * * ?????Times staff writer Nancy Rivera Brooks in Los Angeles contributed to= =20 this story. --- Power profits targeted: Generators urged to forgive some of utilities' debt= s By Stuart Leavenworth and Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writers (Published March 2, 2001)=20 They are cocky and defiant, and unabashedly rich. Over the past year, the= =20 companies that generate and trade much of California's electricity have mad= e=20 multimillion-dollar profits off the state's power crunch.=20 Yet pressure is mounting for these power producers to return some of their= =20 profits, or at least forgive some debts they are owed by the state's troubl= ed=20 utilities:=20 A spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis said Thursday that at least two energy=20 companies have volunteered to forgive some debt, a development that could= =20 give Davis leverage over other suppliers.=20 Also Thursday, the state's Independent System Operator declared that some= =20 power merchants may have overcharged the state and utilities by as much as= =20 $562 million in December and January. ISO officials asked federal regulator= s=20 to confirm their findings and seek refunds from the generators.=20 Several key lawmakers say any deal to rescue Pacific Gas and Electric Co. a= nd=20 Southern California Edison must include debt forgiveness by generators and= =20 other creditors.=20 ""They have to get a haircut like anyone else,"" said state Sen. Debra Bowen,= =20 the powerful chair of the Senate Energy Committee. ""I'm not saying they hav= e=20 to walk around like Jesse Ventura, but they can't continue to walk around= =20 like Don King, either.""=20 So far, most generators adamantly refuse to discuss debt forgiveness, sayin= g=20 their electricity prices are reasonable.=20 Steven Kean, executive vice president of Enron Corp., said he didn't see ""a= ny=20 reason"" to forgive any debts. A spokeswoman for Mirant Corp. said company= =20 officials expect full payment.=20 Richard Wheatley, a spokesman for Reliant Energy Inc., said lawmakers urgin= g=20 debt relief are engaged in wishful thinking.=20 ""The more they discuss it, the more they hope it might turn into reality,""= =20 said Wheatley, whose company is owed $300 million. ""From our perspective,= =20 it's not open to negotiation.""=20 But Bowen and others say generators, bondholders and other utility creditor= s=20 have some good reasons to budge.=20 If Edison and PG&E go bankrupt, Bowen says, the generators might have to wa= it=20 years to get even partial payment. That's because they are unsecured=20 creditors -- meaning they don't hold any collateral to secure payment of=20 their debts.=20 ""It is not very hard to figure out from a dollars and cents standpoint,"" sa= id=20 Bowen, D-Marina Del Rey, who has been talking to some of the generators abo= ut=20 debt forgiveness. ""If you are owed 100 bucks, would you rather get $90=20 several months from now, or would you rather take your chances with=20 bankruptcy attorneys and get $50 three years from now?""=20 Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Davis, said the governor ""has received a=20 couple of unsolicited offers"" from generators willing to forgive debts as= =20 part of a deal. Maviglio declined to name the companies, but said, ""It is a= ll=20 part of the ongoing negotiations.""=20 The game of cat and mouse comes as Davis and lawmakers try to gain leverage= =20 over five companies -- AES Corp., Duke Energy Corp., Dynegy Inc., Mirant an= d=20 Reliant -- that bought power plants from the California-based utilities in= =20 the early days of the state's foray into deregulation.=20 Because of that divesture, much of California's power is controlled by=20 out-of-state generators and their trading subsidiaries, or by independent= =20 brokers such as Enron, the country's biggest electricity marketer.=20 In recent months, at least five class-action lawsuits have accused these=20 companies of manipulating and inflating electricity prices, either by=20 intentionally shutting down plants or by buying natural gas cheaply and usi= ng=20 it to generate electricity sold at a several-hundred-percent markup.=20 On Thursday, the nonprofit corporation that manages most of the state's=20 electric grid revealed data that could support claims of price gouging.=20 In a filing with federal regulators, the Independent System Operator said t= he=20 wholesalers overcharged the ISO by $562 million for spot-market purchases i= n=20 December and January.=20 The ISO's findings are based on federal price caps that say any bids above = a=20 certain level be justified in writing. The ISO calculated the suppliers'=20 costs, threw in a 10 percent profit margin -- and concluded that the=20 generators had sold scads of power at unreasonable prices.=20 The state's grid managers want the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to= =20 seek refunds from the generators if regulators confirm that overcharging to= ok=20 place. But some doubt the FERC will act, given its past reluctance to set= =20 price controls or interfere in California's energy markets.=20 ""I don't think they have a whole lot of chance with FERC,"" said Severin=20 Borenstein, director of the University of California Energy Institute.=20 Federal officials, he said, ""are likely to bend over backward to excuse the= =20 prices.""=20 Wholesalers also doubted the ISO report would lead anywhere, saying it left= =20 out significant, legitimate costs of selling electricity to California.=20 Suppliers had the right to charge a ""credit premium"" as the risks of=20 nonpayment began rising, said Gary Ackerman of the Western Power Trading=20 Forum. Not only did the ISO become an uncreditworthy buyer -- because it go= t=20 its money from Edison and PG&E -- but the whole political climate in=20 California added to the wholesalers' risks, Ackerman said.=20 Whether or not the ISO filing prompts action from federal regulators, it=20 could help lawmakers pressure the generators.=20 State Sen. Joe Dunn, D-Santa Ana, said he wants to sort out how much of the= =20 debts piled up by PG&E and Edison since last summer were the result of=20 electricity prices that could be deemed ""unjust and unreasonable"" under=20 federal and state laws.=20 ""Since every regulatory body has concluded those costs were unjust and=20 unreasonable, a portion, if not a very significant part of that past debt= =20 ought to be forgiven,"" Dunn said.=20 Some analysts say state leaders can't push the generators too far, since th= ey=20 depend on energy companies to build new power plants -- a supply boost that= =20 theoretically would lower energy prices.=20 Dunn acknowledges that is a concern, but says the Legislature also can't=20 afford to ignore charges that generators have gouged utilities and=20 ratepayers.=20 ""That is the game of chicken we are in now,"" Dunn said. ""And up to this=20 point, it is only the state that has blinked.""=20 The issue of debt forgiveness could become moot if Davis can't strike a dea= l=20 with PG&E and San Diego Gas & Electric to buy their transmission systems.= =20 Last week, Davis announced a tentative agreement to acquire Edison's power= =20 lines for $2.7 billion and is reportedly close to coming to terms with SDG&= E.=20 But PG&E has so far rejected the governor's overtures, and on Thursday it= =20 added to a litany of financial woes. The San Francisco-based company=20 defaulted on another $1.21 billion worth of payments to electricity=20 suppliers. It did, however, make partial payments totaling $228 million to= =20 the ISO, which bought power from the wholesalers on the utility's behalf, a= nd=20 to a group of cogenerators and alternative energy providers.=20 If talks with the state break down, one of PG&E's alternatives would be=20 bankruptcy court, where a judge would determine how its assets would be=20 divided among creditors. An alternative scenario has one or all of the=20 generators going to court to force PG&E into bankruptcy, but Bowen, for one= ,=20 is doubtful that will happen anytime soon.=20 ""If they (the generators) thought they would come out better in a bankruptc= y,=20 we would be there already,"" said Bowen, whose committee would have to appro= ve=20 any rescue plan for the utilities.=20 ""So that means they have to give. Everyone has to give.""=20 Emily Bazar of The Bee Capitol Bureau contributed to this report.=20 Thursday's developments A Davis spokesman says the governor has received ""unsolicited offers"" from= =20 some generators willing to forgive debts but declines to name them.=20 In a filing with federal regulators, the Independent System Operator says= =20 some wholesalers overcharged the ISO by $562 million for spot-market=20 purchases in December and January.=20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. pays 16 percent of a $1.44 billion bill to=20 wholesale power suppliers, defaulting on $1.21 billion of the debt but payi= ng=20 $228 million.=20 State declares Stage 2 alert but downgrades it to a ""warning"" at mid-mornin= g.=20 Calpine Corp. becomes the latest wholesaler to sign long-term supply=20 contracts with the Department of Water Resources, agreeing to two deals=20 totaling $8.3 billion -- a 10-year contract for $5.2 billion and a 20-year= =20 contract for $3.1 billion. Last month, Calpine signed a deal worth $4.6=20 billion.=20 --- Friday, March 2, 2001=20 By Rick Stouffer=20 rstouffer@ftenergy.com=20 ""=01(No state is an island, entire of itself; every state is a piece of the= =20 continent, a part of the main=01("" -John Donne California Gov. Gray Davis has seemingly hit on a plan that he thinks will= =20 solve his state's energy problems:=20 Acquire some 32,000 miles of transmission lines for between $8 billion and= =20 $10 billion to keep the bankruptcy wolf away from the state's three=20 investor-owned utilities. Create a public power authority to buy, build and operate power plants,=20 financed with up to $5 billion in state bonds. Not raise customer rates to pay for at least $10 billion in bonds used to p= ay=20 for power.=20 Sounds great, doesn't it? Something for everyone=01*no more pain=01*sounds= =20 suspiciously like California's original deregulation plan=01*itself a misno= mer;=20 California wasn't deregulated, it was restructured.=20 Energy 'island' won't work But Davis's efforts to, in effect, create the electrical island of Californ= ia=20 will not work, many say. The governor's control of transmission doesn't sol= ve=20 the immediate demand-supply conundrum.=20 And creation of the fancy-sounding California Consumer Power and Conservati= on=20 Financing Authority to buy, build and operate power plants could drive=20 private developers out of the Golden State=01*who wants to compete against = the=20 ultimate government-subsidized entity?=20 ""Davis is, in effect, nationalizing the power industry in California,"" said= =20 Jonathan Gottlieb, a partner in Washington, D.C., law firm Baker & McKenzie= 's=20 North American Utility and Energy Products Group. ""Command and control=20 economies have been collapsing around the world=01*except in California.""= =20 The problems with the California power industry are numerous and beaten to= =20 death by the media. It appears everything went wrong that could go wrong=01= *all=20 at once=01*Murphy's Law in the absurd.=20 Just as numerous as the problems, are the number of entities which can be= =20 fingered as having a hand in the debacle.=20 All that said, Gov. Davis feels he has the magic bullet which will make=20 everything right: take over much of the system, force those=20 out-of-state-based generators to act ""responsibly,"" bail out the incumbent= =20 utilities and not raise customer rates.=20 But has anyone looked longer term than the next few months concerning the= =20 consequences of Davis' moves? Anyone stop to think what happens if and when= =20 the state does take control?=20 Who runs the state-owned system?=20 ""With the transmission-lines buy, you have a mechanism which gives the=20 utilities cash to pay off the debt incurred in buying wholesale power,"" sai= d=20 Craig Pirrong, a commodity markets expert and professor in the Olin School = of=20 Business at Washington University in St. Louis.=20 ""But now there are operational questions,"" Pirrong continued. ""Is the state= =20 the most efficient entity to operate and maintain the wires system?""=20 Good question. ""You have to find someone to run the system once you take it= =20 over,"" said William Hogan, a professor in Harvard University's John F.=20 Kennedy School of Government. ""So you either contract or hire utility=20 employees.""=20 There is precedent, obviously, for government-owned and operated utilities.= =20 In the United States, more than 2,000 municipals operate today, while=20 internationally a number of state-run utilities are in operation, for examp= le=20 Electricit, de France. But government ownership of utilities appears to be = on=20 the way out across the world, the experts say.=20 ""Look what's happening worldwide,"" said Adrian Moore, executive director of= =20 the Los Angeles-based free market think tank Reason Public Policy Institute= .=20 ""Over the last seven or eight years, billions of dollars worth of utility= =20 privatizations have taken place. Germany and Italy, for example, are sellin= g=20 off huge tranches of their national utilities.""=20 Municipal utilities tout their lower costs per customer, but those figures= =20 are deceptive, some industry watchers believe.=20 ""There are a lot of tax advantages and hidden subsidies in municipal=20 utilities that mask the real cost,"" said economist Murray Weidenbaum, schol= ar=20 in residence at the Jones Graduate School of Management at Rice University = in=20 Houston, Texas, and the former first chairman of President Reagan's Council= =20 of Economic Advisers. ""If you move to a state-run utility, you can almost= =20 guarantee costs will go up over time,"" Moore said.=20 Politics taking precedence With state control of California's transmission lines, many experts see=20 politics taking precedence over economics=01*or need=01*when decisions are = made=20 concerning where to build new lines.=20 ""You can see gamesmanship and lobbying taking precedence, moving away from= =20 economic drivers toward political drivers,"" Washington University's Pirrong= =20 said.=20 On the generation side, many of the same problems associated with assuming= =20 command of the wires could occur.=20 Generators including Mirant Corp. and Duke Energy already publicly expresse= d=20 concerns with the wires acquisition; specifically, will they be shut out of= =20 access to get their power to market?=20 ""I can see politically that they've got to get something out of this to sel= l=20 the plan to consumers, but we need to make sure we aren't discriminated=20 against,"" Mirant President Marce Fuller said during the recent Cambridge=20 Energy Research Associates energy conference in Houston.=20 Discrimination against incumbents could occur, but what about bias against= =20 potential generators? With the establishment of the Consumer Power and=20 Conservation Financing Board, what private company would want to bid agains= t=20 the sixth largest economy in the world?=20 ""With the government involved, companies would be reluctant to build new=20 plants without a government contract, because the government is subsidizing= =20 construction,"" said Harvard's Hogan.=20 ""Where's the state's comparative advantage in building new plants?""=20 Washington University's Pirrong asked.=20 FERC must weigh-in There is another major player in California's ascension to wires=20 owner-operator: the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The Federa= l=20 Power Act puts FERC right in the middle of the California takeover, said=20 Baker & McKenzie's Gottlieb.=20 ""FERC Chairman Curtis Hebert has used the word 'nationalization' publicly t= o=20 describe what California is proposing, and has said he has definite concern= s=20 about the proposal,"" Gottlieb said. ""I don't think FERC can say no to the= =20 California takeover, but they could weigh it down with conditions.""=20 One of those conditions may be a trade-off: FERC will approve California's= =20 takeover of transmission wires, in exchange for the state giving control of= =20 the lines to multi-state regional transmission organizations.=20 A 'quick' fix could take months No one, including Davis, sees this plan happening quickly. In a presentatio= n=20 Wednesday to analysts in New York, the governor admitted it would take up t= o=20 four more weeks to reach agreement with PG&E Corp./Pacific Gas & Electric C= o.=20 for its wires. He also admitted he cannot win enough Republicans to pass th= e=20 bill with the two-thirds majority needed for immediate implementation. Bill= s=20 in California passed with a simple majority must wait 90 days before going= =20 into effect.=20 Thus, the entire process may not be over for at least another six weeks, an= d=20 even then the Davis plan could face a ballot initiative. But for the sake o= f=20 argument, assume Gov. Davis gets his way and takes control of the=20 investor-owned utilities' wires and begins building and buying plants. Wher= e=20 does such a massive undertaking leave the Golden State in three to five=20 years?=20 ""All things add up to a pretty grim situation,"" said the Reason Public Poli= cy=20 Institute's Moore. ""Five years from now just because the state is purchasin= g=20 power, we will have prices higher than the U.S. average. That will be=20 exacerbated by the state owning the wires and building the plants.""=20 ""I'm very dubious; the government-run utility in the long-run will be very= =20 expensive,"" Harvard's Hogan concurred.=20 Baker & McKenzie's Gottlieb sees the California screen test as providing th= e=20 impetus for a huge infrastructure build-out nationwide. One recent survey= =20 found that some $20 billion in plant financings within the United States ar= e=20 projected for just the first three months of 2001=01*compared to $24 billio= n for=20 all of 1999.=20 A textbook case According to economist Weidenbaum, the California energy debacle answers th= e=20 question ""does the government deregulate as badly as it regulates,"" with a= =20 huge exclamation point.=20 ""California is a textbook dramatization of the shortcomings of government= =20 involvement with business,"" Weidenbaum said. ""You now have Chapter Two in= =20 that book; we already have Chapter One.""=20 The English poet Donne said: ""And therefore never send to know for whom the= =20 bell tolls; it tolls for thee.""=20 In California, that ""bell"" is clanging.=20 --- Ex-Regulator Urges Temporary Federal Price Caps on Power Carolyn Lochhead, Chronicle Washington Bureau=20 ? Friday,?March 2, 2001=20 Washington -- Federal energy regulators should intervene more forcefully in= =20 California's energy crisis, a former Reagan-appointed regulator said=20 yesterday,=20 while other experts feared the financial effects could balloon into another= =20 savings-and-loan bailout disaster.=20 Independent regulatory experts speaking at a high-profile panel on the ener= gy=20 crunch also said Gov. Gray Davis may be whistling in the dark in his=20 assurances that the power crisis will be largely resolved by summer.=20 ""I think there is a fairly compelling argument that something needs to be= =20 done,"" said Elizabeth Moler, appointed to the Federal Energy Regulatory=20 Commission by President Ronald Reagan and named chairwoman by President Bil= l=20 Clinton.=20 Moler, speaking to the Brookings Institution and the American Enterprise=20 Institute Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, said some form of temporary= =20 federal intervention on wholesale prices is needed, so long as it does not= =20 discourage investment in new generation capacity.=20 Davis and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., have urged federal regulators to= =20 impose temporary price controls to give the state breathing room.=20 The chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Curt Hebert, is= =20 strongly opposed to price caps, saying they would discourage investment and= =20 delay resolution of the crisis. California needs to lift the electricity ra= te=20 freeze on consumers to encourage conservation and restore the finances of t= he=20 bankrupt investor-owned utilities, Hebert has argued.=20 But Moler faulted federal regulators and the California Public Utilities=20 Commission, both of which oversaw the state's deregulation plan, for allowi= ng=20 the problem to fester.=20 ""The signs were there in June that something needed to happen,"" Moler said,= =20 noting that electricity deregulation is complex and always needs adjustment= s.=20 ""I'd like to think I would have been reading the market monitoring reports,= ""=20 Moler said. ""I'd like to think I would have been on the airplane to San=20 Francisco every other week, and on the other weeks, the CPUC would have bee= n=20 on a plane to Washington.""=20 Moler also faulted state PUC members for blaming the crisis on their=20 predecessors. ""I'm pretty amazed the CPUC is still blaming Dan Fessler,"" th= e=20 former chairman, Moler said. ""He's been gone for three years.""=20 Moler noted that the state's plan to take over the utilities' transmission= =20 lines needs federal regulatory approval, which Hebert indicated he opposes,= =20 comparing the move to ""nationalization.""=20 Davis' assertions this week to Washington policymakers and Wall Street=20 analysts that he has the crisis under control were also viewed dubiously.= =20 Noting that peak California power demand will rise to 45,000 megawatts in t= he=20 summer from 30,000 in the winter, Robert Litan, director of the Joint Cente= r=20 for Regulatory Studies, said, ""You do your own math. If you think the probl= em=20 is bad now, you ain't seen nothing yet.""=20 Litan said the state's partial electricity deregulation was a giant gamble= =20 that freed wholesale prices would stay below fixed retail prices, but the b= et=20 went bad and now state taxpayers are paying the cost.=20 ""I used to study S&Ls, and what California is doing sounds a lot like what= =20 the federal government did for 10 years, which was pray and hope that the= =20 problem goes away,"" he said.=20 California is paying roughly $1.5 billion a month for electricity while sta= te=20 officials try to craft a long-term solution.=20 Paul Joskow, director of the Center for Energy and Environmental Policy=20 Research at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said state and feder= al=20 policymakers must devise a long-term blueprint that encourages investment i= n=20 new generation and offers price stability to consumers.=20 ""I haven't seen any long-term plan yet for where they are going in=20 California,"" Joskow said. "". . . I think the governor owes that to the=20 citizens of California, because now we're going from week to week, and you= =20 know as well as I do what it's going to be six months from now.""=20 E-mail Carolyn Lochhead at clochhead@sfchronicle.com.=20 ?=20 ? Printer-friendly version=20 ? Email this article to a friend=20 02/16/2001 - California governor proposes state power line purchase .=20 02/09/2001 - Removal of Rate Caps Urged.=20 02/08/2001 - Developments in California's power crisis .=20 02/04/2001 - Davis Neglected Key Strategy In Power Crisis.=20 >>more related articles...=20 --- NEWS=20 PG&E to Pay Creditors Only 15% / Smaller suppliers outraged over plan David Lazarus 03/02/2001=20 The San Francisco Chronicle=20 FINAL=20 Page A1=20 (Copyright 2001)=20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. said yesterday it would pay only about 15 cent= s=20 on the dollar for its outstanding power bills, sparking outrage among small= er=20 creditors, who accused the utility of driving them out of business.=20 In a filing to securities regulators, PG&E revealed it would pay just $228= =20 million of about $1.4billion due for recent electricity purchases.=20 ""How would you feel if your boss gave you just 15 percent of your paycheck= =20 and said he'll get back to you for the rest?"" asked Bob Judd, director of t= he=20 California Biomass Energy Alliance, representing operators of 28 wood-fired= =20 plants statewide.=20 PG&E's filing marks a turning point in California 's energy crisis. It is n= ow=20 possible that not only will the state's largest utility go under, but it=20 could take a number of power generators with it.=20 PG&E, now in talks with the governor on a possible financial bailout, is=20 telling creditors to be thankful for whatever they get. If the utility=20 declares bankruptcy, all parties know, many creditors may receive nothing.= =20 Still, time is running out for Ridgewood Power, a New Jersey company with 1= 4=20 plants in California . It already has had to shut down three facilities in= =20 PG&E's service area because it can no longer afford to keep them running.= =20 'NOWHERE NEAR'=20 ""The amount of money PG&E is giving us is nowhere near what we need to pay= =20 our natural gas suppliers,"" said Martin Quinn, Ridgewood's chief operating= =20 officer. ""We could restart the plants tomorrow if we could be released from= =20 our PG&E contracts and sell to another buyer.""=20 He added that his company would ask federal regulators to nullify its=20 contracts with PG&E so Ridgewood could bid for alternative power contracts= =20 being offered by California state officials.=20 PG&E's larger creditors reacted more cautiously to word that the utility=20 would pay only a fraction of its outstanding bills.=20 ""We have to study the consequences and see,"" said Richard Wheatley, a=20 spokesman for Houston's Reliant Energy, which formed a creditors' committee= =20 last month with other leading electricity providers. ""We don't know how muc= h=20 of the money we'll get.""=20 Reliant and other major creditors are grappling with how much leeway to gra= nt=20 PG&E on its unpaid bills before deciding to cut their losses and push the= =20 cash-strapped utility into bankruptcy.=20 'VERY CONCERNED'=20 ""We are very concerned about the credit issue,"" said Steve Stengel, a=20 spokesman for Houston's Dynegy Inc., another member of the creditors'=20 committee. ""But we are still interested in finding a comprehensive solution= =20 to California 's energy situation.""=20 That may depend on the outcome of current talks Gov. Gray Davis is holding= =20 with PG&E and Southern California Edison to purchase the utilities'=20 transmission lines as part of a multibillion-dollar bailout package.=20 PG&E and Edison are saddled with nearly $13 billion in debt as a result of= =20 ill-conceived efforts to deregulate the state's electricity market.=20 The announcement of partial payments was not a complete surprise to PG&E's= =20 creditors. The utility's chief financial officer, Kent Harvey, told investo= rs=20 in a conference call last month that PG&E would prefer to ""make partial=20 payments than no payments at all.""=20 PG&E has defaulted on more than $730 million in short-term debt payments=20 since January amid growing concerns that the utility will file for bankrupt= cy=20 protection.=20 In response, three California counties have formed their own creditors'=20 committee to recoup investments in PG&E's short-term debt, also known as=20 commercial paper.=20 The three -- Santa Cruz, Riverside and Siskiyou counties -- are inviting=20 other public agencies to join forces in seeking compensation from PG&E for= =20 the defaulted payments.=20 The prospect of PG&E filing for bankruptcy has diminished somewhat in recen= t=20 weeks as Davis and Sacramento lawmakers scrambled to come up with proposals= =20 to rescue California 's utilities from financial ruin.=20 Although Edison has said it is prepared to sell its power lines to the stat= e=20 for nearly $3 billion, PG&E so far has refused to follow suit.=20 However, as The Chronicle reported yesterday, the utility retained outside= =20 counsel this week to offer advice on a possible sale of its power lines,=20 increasing the likelihood that a deal may be in the works.=20 SUITS ALLEGE MISMANAGEMENT=20 Separately, PG&E said yesterday it had been hit with a pair of lawsuits=20 seeking almost $3 billion in restitution for financial mismanagement.=20 One suit charges the utility's parent company, PG&E Corp., with violating i= ts=20 fiduciary duties by forcing the utility to repurchase shares from the=20 corporation for $2.3 billion.=20 The other alleges that PG&E Corp. collected nearly $3 billion from the=20 utility under a tax-sharing arrangement but paid only $2.3 billion to the= =20 government.=20 The lawsuits were filed in San Francisco Superior Court by Richard D. Wilso= n.=20 No other information about the plaintiff was immediately available.=20 ----------- Refund RequestedElectricity generators overcharged the state by= =20 more than a half-billion dollars in two months and should be forced to retu= rn=20 the money, power officials said yesterday.=20 The California Independent System Operator said in a filing with the Federa= l=20 Energy Regulatory Commission that generators appeared to have charged $555= =20 million more than what was reasonable.=20 It was unclear how any refunds might be passed on to consumers. About=20 two-thirds of all power purchases in the spot market were over price caps= =20 established by FERC, said Eric Hildebrandt, an ISO manager of market=20 monitoring. The cap was $250 per megawatt hour in December and $150 per=20 megawatt hour in January.=20 The ISO is requesting that FERC order a refund for ""excessive"" costs.=20 Source: Chronicle Sacramento Bureau=20 Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.=20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Op Ed satire; [EMail-Body]= Can one of you forward to Ed, or whoever you feel appropriate? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 06/13/2001 08:14 AM --------------------------- From: Andrew S Fastow/ENRON@enronXgate on 06/10/2001 08:01 PM To: Jeff Skilling/ENRON@enronXgate cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Op Ed satire Nothing to do except things like this when you're trapped inside by a flood. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Confidential Employee Information/Lenhart; [EMail-Body]= I also need to know the base salaries of Jay Reitmeyer and Monique Sanchez. They are doing the same job as Matt. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: FERC course on for Thurs, July 26, 1-4 p.m.; [EMail-Body]= Great news. With respect to the Commissoners, I think it makes sense to go back through Ellen and ask if she could set up meetings with a few commissioners ater the staff briefing. ""wgramm"" <wgramm@osf1.gmu.edu> on 07/17/2001 03:23:19 PM Please respond to <wgramm@osf1.gmu.edu> To: ""Jerry Ellig"" <jellig@gmu.edu>, ""Steve Kean"" <skean@enron.com> cc: ""Susan Dudley"" <SDudley@gmu.edu> Subject: FERC course on for Thurs, July 26, 1-4 p.m. Susan got it done -- it'll be Thursday, July 26, 1-4 p.m. at FERC (a room on the 3rd floor?). Susan has talked with Bill Albrecht. He'll probably be coming in on Wed. p.m. Steve, any ideas about a Commissioner strategy? (invite them to attend, if the FERC folks agree; ask the FERC folks to do the inviting; ask the FERC folks to help set up meetings afterwards or a follow on if they like what we do and think it useful for Commissioners; try to do a walkaround -- that is, offer to have Jerry, Bill, Susan visit commissioners individually Friday a.m. after the course or Thursday a.m. before the course?) Wendy Wendy Gramm, Regulatory Studies Program Mercatus Center George Mason University 703-993-4884 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Next policy committee meeting; [EMail-Body]= We may be able to handle this specific issue outside the policy committee, but I think it would be a good idea to set the next one anyway. I'm sure we'll have something we'll need to talk about. From: Sherri Sera/ENRON@enronXgate on 06/12/2001 01:17 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Next policy committee meeting Steve, given yesterday's conversation toward the end of the executive committee - i.e., countries ENE will do business in - do you think we should try to set up another policy committee meeting? Jeff's schedule is pretty ugly for the rest of this month and early July, but could probably do something mid-July. I'm not sure what Ken Lay's schedule looks like, though. Please advise. Thanks, SRS [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Legislative Status Report Week Ending 4/20; [EMail-Body]= Date: 4/20/01 To: Jan Smutny-Jones, Steven Kelly, Katie Kaplan Cc: IEP Board of Directors From: Julee Malinowski-Ball, Edson + Modisette RE: Legislative Status Report Week Ending 4/20 RECENT EVENTS: -- IEP with the help of Chris Ellison has been at the negotiating table mos= t of the week dealing with the most recent amendments to SB 28x. SB 28x (Sher/Battin) makes various changes to the siting process including many IEP-sponsored proposals. As you will recall, two new provisions were added to the bill at the last minute before going to the Assembly Floor dealing with both retrofit schedules and environmental dispatch of generating facilities. Per the direction from IEP member companies, IEP has decided not to negotiate on the environmental dispatch issue. If the provision remained in the bill, IEP would continue to push the Republicans to hold their opposed position. We were, however, given the authority to negotiate on the retrofit issue as long as we were only talking about facilities that already have retrofit requirements. I will be faxing out the agreed upon language which in essence says the ARB shall set a schedule for the completion of any mandated retrofits. It does not expand the authority of the air districts and ARB to mandate retrofits under existing law. The schedule would require completion of the retrofits by July 1, 2004 or such later date as the ISO determines is necessary to maintain reliability. With these amendments, including some clean-up language, SB 28x will be voted-on on the Assembly floor on Monday and go to the Senate for concurrence on Tuesday. The final version will include the following IEP-sponsored proposals: ? Conforming the timing of offsets for power plants to Clean Air Act requirements ? Substituting CEQA-style hearings for the trial-like proceedings of the CE= C ? Streamlining the permit process for the modernization of existing power plant sites ? Giving consideration to the positive environmental impacts of a proposed project. ? Improving the timeliness and coordination of state and local agency review. ? Extending the current deadlines for the expedited review process established in AB 970. Since SB 28x is only a first step in making changes to the siting process, IEP member should now be thinking about what is next. IEP proposals still on the table include: ? Permitting local agencies to make zoning changes or other decisions for power plants contingent upon CEC CEQA Compliance ? Giving deference to other state and regional agencies ? Easing the threshold for override of local land use requirements. ? Making the ISO responsible for determining interconnection requirements -- Bad news on the =01&California First=018 issue quickly followed the good= news. The CEC staff analysis which said the State can't require builders of new power plants to sell electricity here, even as a trade-off for expedited permitting, was countered by another staff analysis that says the state can= . Both documents cannot be obtained due to attorney-client privilege. This issue is coming to a head next week with a decision pending by the CEC to include a California First clause on the approval of an expedited AES power plant project. AB 60x (Hertzberg), which ties to the siting process the requirement that a developer enter into a contract to sell power to specified California entities, is still poised to be heard in the Senate Energy committee. IEP members company lobbyist should continue to lobby against this measure regardless of the CEC=01,s decision on AES, although our arguments are definitely strengthened if the addition of the clause at the CEC is denied. -- IEP has finalized negotiations with Senator Burton=01,s office on amendm= ents attempting to solve our problem with the eminent domain provision in SB 6x (Burton), which is the State Power Authority measure. Attached is a copy o= f the bill in PDF form. The agreed upon language, which clarifies that the Authority=01,s purpose is to supplement existing generation activities, can= be found on pages 6-7 (Section 3310), 13 (Section 3341.1) and 16-17 (Section3352). Considering the inflammatory remarks made by Senator Burton in the press lately regarding seizing generation assets, this was most likely the best we could get. -- The first of Senator Dunn=01,s hearings with the Senate Select Committee= to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Market occurred this week. This week and next week=01,s topics will be to go over previous investigati= ons into market power. The committee heard or will be hearing testimony from: Frank Wolak, Chairman Market Surveillance Committee, CAISO; Eric Hildebrandt, Manager Market Monitoring, CAISO; and, Elaine Howle, State Auditor. -- The Assembly Electricity Oversight Subcommittee met this week and focused on the issue of natural gas collusion. Testifying before the committee were representatives from Dynegy and El Paso, commenting on the rise of natural gas prices and whether illegal market manipulation and collusion occurred. The subcommittee plans on putting together a package o= f bills related to natural gas issues, which would be the culmination of the committee=01,s hearings over the last two months. This package will be up = for consideration first by the whole special Assembly Energy committee. -- Governor Davis came out this week supporting the construction of the Calpine Metcalf Energy Center, the 600-megawatt power plant proposed for th= e San Jose region. The Governor urged the CEC to approve the plant siting so that construction can begin. -- Two long-term contracting bills are scheduled for hearings next week. IEP counsel is currently reviewing AB 57 (Wright) and SB 997 (Morrow) and will comment on their provisions as soon as possible. -- Attached is the most recent legislative tracking reports, both the special session and regular session. Please let me know if you need copies of any of these bills. UPCOMING EVENTS: MONDAY, April 23rd Assembly Utilities and Commerce Committee AB 57 (Wright) =01) long-term contracting reasonableness review TUESDAY, April 24th Senate Energy Committee SB 997 (Morrow) =01) long-term contracting reasonableness review WEDNESDAY, April 25th Assembly Appropriations Committee AB 62x (Cohn) =01) California First AB 63x (Florez) =01) Sale of Kern Power Plant THURSDAY, April 26th Select Committee to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Market Informational hearing on the overview of investigations, studies, and reports regarding the energy crisis. MONDAY, April 30th Senate Appropriations Committee SB 1x (Soto) =01) excess profits tax Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee AB 128x (Corbett) =01) excess profits tax ON THE ASSEMBLY FLOOR SB 6x (Burton) =01) State Power Authority SB 28x (Sher/Battin) =01) siting --end-- Julee Malinowski-Ball Senior Associate Edson + Modisette 916-552-7070 FAX-552-7075 jmball@ns.net - 2001 Tracking Report.doc - 2001 Tracking Report.special session.doc - [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: Sac Bee, Fri, 5/4: ""Expect prices to shoot up, analysts say"" Sac Bee, Fri, 5/4: ""GOP: Shrink plan for bonds"" Sac Bee, Fri, 5/4: ""FERC chief defends plan for state"" Sac Bee, Fri, 5/4: ""PG&E to judge: ISO, $1 billion tab will drain us"" Sac Bee, Fri, 5/4: ""Jack Sirard: PG&E's woes a warning to utility investor= s"" SD Union (AP), Fri, 5/4: ""Legislature sends power authority bill to govern= or"" LA Times, Fri, 5/4: ""GOP Tries to Force Its Dramatically Different Energy Plan on Governor"" LA Times, Fri, 5/4: ""Secretary of Energy, Davis Meet on U.S. Plan to Boost Conservation"" LA Times, Fri, 5/4: ""PG&E Seeks Relief From High-Priced Power Purchases"" LA Times, Fri, 5/4: ""SDG&E Blackout Plan Would Pay Firms to Use Generators= "" SF Chron, Fri, 5/4: ""Been there, done that=20 Bay Area finds little new in Bush's ideas "" SF Chron, Fri, 5/4: ""Bush calls power supply the solution=20 He says conservation useful but secondary "" SF Chron (AP), Fri, 5/4: ""SDG&E unveils plan to contend with rolling=20 blackouts"" SF Chron (AP), Fri, 5/4: ""California crisis brings new talk of energy=20 conservation""=20 SF Chron (AP), Fri, 5/4: ""Developments in California's energy crisis"" SF Chron, Fri, 5/4: ""Energy at a glance"" SF Chron, Fri, 5/4: ""Ships would help during blackouts=20 Ready reserve fleet has power to provide""=20 SF Chron, Fri, 5/4: ""PG&E chairman wants to keep power lines"" Mercury News, Fri, 5/4: ""Bush shifts policy on conservation after meeting= =20 with GOP"" Mercury News, Fri, 5/4: ""Senate plans public power"" Mercury News, Fri, 5/4: ""All Caps Hed"" OC Register, Fri, 5/4: ""Energy notebook Vote delayed on $12 billion state bond for power"" OC Register, Fri, 5/4: ""US conservation order called Bush's best effort"" Individual.com (Bridgenews), Fri, 5/4: ""[B] POWER UPDATE/ Bush directs fed= s to save energy in California"" Individual.com (AP), Fri, 5/4: ""Judge Dismisses $10B PG&E Suit"" Individual.com (Business wire), Fri, 5/4: ""Bankruptcy Update/ PG&E Files= =20 Motion to Require CAISO to Follow Federal Law"" --- Expect prices to shoot up, analysts say By Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writer (Published May 4, 2001)=20 Gov. Gray Davis' plan for solving the energy crisis relies partly on a=20 striking assumption: that the state's power expenditures will drop=20 dramatically this summer.=20 But energy-market analysts believe Davis is underestimating the cost of=20 electricity and say the state should brace for a significant run-up in pric= es=20 during what is likely to be a summer of chronic shortages.=20 In particular, analysts question Davis' prediction the state will pay an=20 average of $195 a megawatt-hour on the spot market from July to September, = a=20 44 percent reduction from the projected average price for April through Jun= e.=20 ""One hundred and ninety-five dollars? Boy, I wish it were true,"" said Sever= in=20 Borenstein of the University of California Energy Institute. ""My estimate i= s=20 substantially higher.""=20 Yet Davis' advisers are sticking by their projection of the state's power= =20 costs, released Monday to a skeptical Legislature by private consultants to= =20 the governor. They say the lower cost estimates reflect expected increases = in=20 supplies, the projected impact of California's new conservation program and= =20 the state's growing ability to wean itself from the ultra-expensive spot=20 market and buy much of its power through cheaper long-term contracts.=20 Prices may rise, but spending by the state will decline, starting this=20 summer, they insist.=20 ""This is a very credible plan,"" said Joseph Fichera, a Wall Street financie= r=20 advising the governor. ""We have done things to mitigate our exposure (to th= e=20 spot market).""=20 The credibility of the projections is crucial to the state's plan to sell $= 10=20 billion worth of bonds -- a key element of Davis' rescue plan. The bonds=20 would compensate the state for past and future power purchases made on beha= lf=20 of moribund Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric Co., wi= th=20 ratepayers ultimately footing the bill. Davis expects the state to spend=20 $18.7 billion on power by June 2002.=20 But if electricity costs go higher than Davis expects, the strain on the=20 state's budget could worsen, complicating the bond sale. Republican=20 lawmakers, wary of higher costs and distrustful of Davis' projections, have= =20 been threatening to block the sale.=20 Higher-than-expected costs also would increase the likelihood of blackouts;= =20 Davis acknowledged last week that the state might stop purchasing electrici= ty=20 at times when prices go out of sight.=20 And many private-sector experts believe prices will surely rise.=20 ""I see no reason, given what's happened the past six months, that the next= =20 six months is going to be dramatically different,"" said Keith Bailey, chief= =20 executive of generator Williams Cos., which sells power to California.=20 One great unknown is the impact of a ""price mitigation"" plan approved last= =20 week by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Price caps would kick in= =20 when California's power reserves are less than 7 percent of demand -- the= =20 so-called ""power alert"" days.=20 Bailey said the plan would have ""a very real effect,"" but state officials= =20 called it inadequate. ""More holes than Swiss cheese,"" Davis said this week.= =20 In Washington, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and other Western senators= =20 tore into FERC Chairman Curtis Hebert Jr. at a hearing on the price=20 mitigation plan. Feinstein wondered aloud why the FERC didn't simply=20 establish a firm ceiling on prices.=20 As it stands now, California officials have been spending upward of $50=20 million a day for Edison and PG&E; the tab can fluctuate wildly from day to= =20 day as prices shoot up and down. On Thursday, prices in California ranged= =20 between $214 and $240 a megawatt-hour, depending on location, for peak-time= =20 power, according to industry newsletter Enerfax Daily.=20 Because summertime demand is typically about 50 percent higher than it is i= n=20 spring, most analysts expect prices to rise. California electricity futures= =20 prices, considered by many to be a decent gauge of where prices are going,= =20 are trading at $375 a megawatt-hour for July and $525 for August, Enerfax= =20 said.=20 ""I would trust the traders,"" said Gary Ackerman of the Western Power Tradin= g=20 Forum, an association of power generators. ""They've been right more often= =20 than the Davis administration.""=20 The Northwest drought, robbing California of cheap hydropower, is a key=20 reason many analysts believe costs won't drop.=20 ""What it all adds up to is much less imported hydroelectric power than we'r= e=20 used to,"" said Arthur O'Donnell, editor of the California Energy Markets=20 newsletter.=20 But Davis' consultants say new power is coming from other sources this=20 summer, easing prices. New power plants, scheduled to begin operations this= =20 summer, will add 4,500 megawatts of power to California's energy-starved=20 grid, Davis said.=20 O'Donnell, though, said the new plants won't provide immediate relief. ""Pow= er=20 plants, in their start-up phase, frequently have problems,"" he said.=20 Another unknown quantity is the fate of hundreds of cogenerators, wind farm= s=20 and other alternative-energy providers that deliver more than 20 percent of= =20 the state's electricity under contract to the utilities.=20 After going months without payment from PG&E and Edison, scores of these=20 producers shut down in February and March, depriving the state of an=20 estimated 3,000 megawatts of power and contributing mightily to two days of= =20 blackouts in March.=20 About 800 megawatts of power returned to service in April, after PG&E and= =20 Edison were ordered to resume paying the generators, the two utilities said= .=20 And Fichera said more will come back starting June 1, when their contracts= =20 say they must operate or face financial penalties.=20 But some generators say they won't produce full throttle this summer. Anger= ed=20 at a new payment schedule that substantially cuts their income, they'll run= =20 ""the absolute bare minimum"" to fulfill their contracts, said Hal Dittmer of= =20 Wellhead Electric Co., a small generator that's been shut down.=20 Representatives of the small generators met with Davis on Thursday, with=20 Davis agreeing to work with them on the possibility of increasing their=20 payments, said generators' attorney Jerry Bloom.=20 Davis, meanwhile, also is betting that energy usage will fall. Recently=20 approved rate hikes will create ""sticker shock"" that will cut demand 3=20 percent, Fichera said. The state's conservation program will contribute an= =20 additional 4 percent, he said.=20 ""If we buy less than what (generators) expect, prices drop,"" Davis said.=20 Above all, the state has completed or is in final negotiations on a slew of= =20 long-term contracts with major generators -- deals that will substantially= =20 cut the state's dependence on the spot market and reduce its overall power= =20 bill, said Ron Nichols of Navigant Consulting Inc., which developed the=20 power-cost estimates for Davis.=20 The Bee's Dale Kasler can be reached at (916) 321-1066 or dkasler@sacbee.co= m.=20 David Whitney of The Bee's Washington Bureau contributed to this report.=20 GOP: Shrink plan for bonds By John Hill Bee Capitol Bureau (Published May 4, 2001)=20 The state should bite the bullet and use $5 billion of its surplus to pay f= or=20 electricity instead of borrowing the money and prolonging the fiscal agony,= =20 Assembly Republicans said Thursday.=20 Paying up front is preferable to a Democratic plan that would ""saddle=20 electric customers with higher utility rates to pay the state back with=20 interest,"" said Assemblyman Bill Leonard of San Bernardino, one of 30 membe= rs=20 of the Assembly Republican Caucus.=20 But the caucus's plan drew fire from state Treasurer Phil Angelides, a=20 Democrat in charge of putting together the bond deal. He said a GOP block o= f=20 the bond deal would cut into this year's spending for education and=20 transportation and ""take the state toward fiscal insolvency.""=20 Angelides said the Republican stance will force the Legislature to pass the= =20 bill authorizing bonds with a simple majority, needing no GOP votes but=20 requiring a 90-day wait for the bill to become law. By that time, he said,= =20 the state will be perilously close to running out of money.=20 ""It is to me, from a business perspective, one of the most irresponsible ac= ts=20 I've witnessed,"" he said.=20 The Assembly Republican plan calls for the state to sell $8 billion in bond= s,=20 instead of the $12.5 billion proposed by Gov. Gray Davis. This move would= =20 relieve pressure for more electricity rate increases, Leonard said.=20 The Republicans would make up the difference by taking $5 billion from the= =20 state's general fund. That's money the Democratic governor proposed in=20 January would go to one-time expenditures on a variety of projects, from=20 clean beaches to housing, as well as new spending on schools.=20 The Republican plan calls for rate rebates for people whose electric=20 utilities are publicly owned, such as the Sacramento Municipal Utility=20 District. Some argue that these ratepayers are getting a bad deal because= =20 their tax money is subsidizing ratepayers whose utilities are in financial= =20 trouble.=20 It also includes past Republican proposals that have stagnated in the=20 Legislature, such as allowing residential customers to make deals with=20 independent electricity providers and encouraging quick building of power= =20 plants.=20 Although the Republicans are in the minority, they wield leverage in the=20 energy debate because a bill that would authorize a bond sale requires a=20 two-thirds vote. At least five of the 30 Assembly Republicans would have to= =20 vote for it.=20 The Republicans say they are uncomfortable with the size of the bond deal= =20 proposed by Davis, which combined with other energy bond sales could top $2= 0=20 billion. ""It's too much to swallow,"" said James Fisfis, a spokesman for the= =20 caucus.=20 Fisfis said the plan represents a preliminary response to Democratic=20 proposals -- a ""starting point in negotiations and a vision of Republicans= =20 and what they would do if they were governing.""=20 ""We don't want those phony messages that everything's fine and hunky-dory,= =20 and it's not,"" he said. ""This is a time for financial restraint.""=20 The Republican proposal blasts as ""expensive gimmickry"" a plan by Angelides= =20 to get a $4.1 billion bridge loan from three major lenders to keep the stat= e=20 flush until the bonds are sold.=20 Angelides said such loans are routine when California and other states sell= =20 bonds. The loan in this case, he said, provides ""momentum"" for what's likel= y=20 to be the biggest bond sale in U.S. history. ""It's three of the most powerf= ul=20 investment banks in the country side by side with us, signalling to the wor= ld=20 marketplace that they believe in this transaction,"" he said.=20 The fees to the investment banks of several million dollars represent a=20 fraction of one day of the state's power costs, he said.=20 Legislative Analyst Elizabeth Hill said the proposal would require all $2.3= =20 billion in one-time expenditures in the governor's budget to be axed, as we= ll=20 as $2.7 billion of proposed year-to-year spending.=20 In addition, state revenues for the fiscal year starting July 1 appear to b= e=20 lower than anticipated, so the Republican plan might force even more cuts,= =20 she said.=20 The Republican caucus plan came the same day that Secretary of State Bill= =20 Jones, the lone Republican statewide officeholder and a GOP candidate for= =20 governor next year, released his own ideas on the energy crisis.=20 Jones, in a letter to Vice President Dick Cheney, said the state ""is on the= =20 brink of fiscal insolvency"" because of Davis' efforts to buy power.=20 Instead of selling bonds or negotiating to buy the utility companies'=20 transmission lines or other assets, the state should ask power generators t= o=20 forgive some of the nearly $14 billion they're owed in exchange for immedia= te=20 payment, Jones said.=20 In addition, the state should offer low-interest loans to utilities to help= =20 them repay their debt, using the power lines as collateral. Finally, he sai= d,=20 the utilities' parent companies should help reduce the debt.=20 While Jones said the Davis plan is ""socializing the delivery of power,"" the= =20 state Senate on Thursday sent the governor a bill that will likely drive th= e=20 state further into the energy business by allowing a public power authority= =20 to run its own power plants.=20 The authorizing bill, SB 6x by state Senate President Pro Tem John Burton,= =20 D-San Francisco, passed the Senate on a 24-14 party-line vote.=20 The agency would have access to $5 billion in bond money with which it coul= d=20 build, run and seize power facilities and institute conservation programs.= =20 The Bee's John Hill can be reached at (916) 326-5543 or jhill@sacbee.com.= =20 Kevin Yamamura of The Bee Capitol Bureau contributed to this report.=20 FERC chief defends plan for state=20 By David Whitney and David Westphal Bee Washington Bureau (Published May 4, 2001)=20 WASHINGTON -- The chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission=20 sternly defended the panel's new plan for controlling California electricit= y=20 prices Thursday amid mounting criticism that it is too little and too late = to=20 do much good.=20 The criticism came from Democrats and one Republican, Oregon Sen. Gordon=20 Smith, at a hastily arranged hearing of the Senate Energy and Natural=20 Resources Committee that was intended to be a forum for FERC Chairman Curt= =20 Hebert Jr. to dispel concerns that the plan won't protect consumers from=20 price-gouging electricity marketers.=20 The order, approved last week by a 2-1 vote, is supposed to dampen prices= =20 without rigid price controls by ordering generators to sell all the power= =20 they produce and setting a benchmark price based on the highest-cost,=20 least-efficient plant operating during periods of emergency shortages.=20 ""FERC is acting,"" Hebert said. ""FERC is acting responsibly. ... We're doing= =20 what we can do.""=20 But the commission's lone dissenter on last week's order, William Massey,= =20 charged that the measures to control skyrocketing prices would be in effect= =20 only during power emergencies when supplies were tightest. And while that= =20 might be as much as 40 percent or 45 percent of the time during the long ho= t=20 summer, he said, that still leaves most of the time when power marketers ar= e=20 free to sell at whatever price they can get.=20 ""I have no confidence that prices will be fair and just at all times this= =20 summer,"" Massey said.=20 Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., continued on that theme. She produced what= =20 was described as a ""megawatt laundering"" blueprint she had received detaili= ng=20 how FERC's order could be used to trade power back and forth between=20 marketers to bid up wholesale prices in a way that would be outside FERC=20 monitoring.=20 The contentious hearing came as the FERC is about to publish notice in the= =20 Federal Register to expand the price monitoring plan to Oregon, Washington= =20 and other Western states.=20 But Smith said he thought the commission was misreading the political=20 firestorm brewing throughout the West if it thought its plan would quell=20 outrage over rising prices.=20 ""Are you aware of the head of steam that is building up?"" asked Smith, who= =20 said prices in his region are 10 or 12 times what they were a year ago. ""Th= is=20 is unsustainable, for this administration, for this Congress.""=20 Smith and Feinstein have introduced legislation that would temporarily cap= =20 wholesale power rates at the cost of production plus a fixed profit margin.= =20 Feinstein, who was more supportive of the FERC order after its release last= =20 week, said after the hearing that she now believes it is flawed by too many= =20 loopholes and problems.=20 ""I can't understand why they are doing this,"" she said.=20 Meanwhile, one of California's biggest power customers, the U.S. military,= =20 vowed Thursday to reduce its peak-hours electricity use by 10 percent this= =20 summer as President Bush expressed new concern about the state's looming=20 season of blackouts.=20 ""We're worried about blackouts that may occur this summer and we want to be= =20 part of any solutions,"" said Bush, who gave federal officials 30 days to=20 implement electricity-reducing plans.=20 Gov. Gray Davis welcomed the president's comments, but said the plan falls= =20 short. ""Surely the federal government can do more and match California's 20= =20 percent savings at all state buildings,"" he said.=20 Vice President Dick Cheney, in a speech earlier this week, spoke dismissive= ly=20 of conservation efforts in the 1970s, and warned that the nation won't be= =20 able to ""simply conserve or ration our way out of the situation we're in.""= =20 But Bush spoke repeatedly Thursday of the importance of conserving. ""We've= =20 got to do both,"" he said. ""We must conserve, but we've also got to find new= =20 sources of energy.""=20 The administration set no target for reducing federal power use, but=20 recommended actions such as turning off escalators and raising thermostats = to=20 78 degrees when state reserves fall below 5 percent.=20 ""We're not trying to pick a figure arbitrarily out of the sky,"" said Energy= =20 Secretary Spencer Abraham.=20 Earlier, in a letter to Congress, Davis excoriated federal inaction on=20 soaring electricity rates as he prepared to meet in Sacramento with Abraham= =20 on Thursday evening.=20 ""With all our actions in California, it is a travesty that on the one issue= =20 over which the federal government has exclusive jurisdiction -- wholesale= =20 energy prices -- it has utterly failed to discharge its responsibility,""=20 Davis said.=20 The Bee's David Whitney can be reached at (202) 383-0004 or=20 dwhitney@mcclatchydc.com.=20 PG&E to judge: ISO, $1 billion tab will drain us By Claire Cooper Bee Legal Affairs Writer (Published May 4, 2001)=20 SAN FRANCISCO -- Pacific Gas and Electric Co. asked a federal bankruptcy=20 judge Thursday to bar the operator of California's power grid from buying= =20 electricity for the utility or collecting almost $1 billion now due for pas= t=20 wholesale purchases.=20 PG&E's bankruptcy estate would be depleted by paying the high prices passed= =20 on by the California Independent System Operator, the utility said in askin= g=20 U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali to issue an injunction.=20 PG&E filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization April 6. The utility's= =20 corporate parent, San Francisco-based PG&E Corp., is not part of the=20 bankruptcy proceedings.=20 The ISO buys electricity from independent wholesalers to supplement whateve= r=20 power the utilities can send to the grid, matching supply with demand on a= =20 daily basis. Throughout the past year it has provided as much as 30 percent= =20 of the state's electricity and as little as 10 percent on any given day, sa= id=20 ISO spokesman Patrick Dorinson.=20 ISO Vice President Elena Schmid said Thursday that the ISO stopped buying= =20 electricity for PG&E after being told to do so April 6 by the Federal Energ= y=20 Regulatory Commission because the utility no longer was creditworthy.=20 But the PG&E legal complaint said the ISO continued making purchases throug= h=20 April 30 at an average cost almost six times as high as the frozen retail= =20 rates that PG&E can charge its customers.=20 Even with an upcoming rate increase, said the complaint, PG&E could lose $2= 28=20 million a month if it depended on the ISO for 25 percent of its electricity= .=20 Since mid-January, the California Department of Water Resources also has be= en=20 buying electricity for PG&E and Southern California Edison, under AB 1x,=20 legislation that authorized state power purchases and rate increases if=20 necessary to repay the state.=20 PG&E said in the complaint that the state water department has limited its= =20 purchases to power it can buy at rates it deems reasonable, leaving it to t= he=20 ISO to obtain ""at extremely high rates"" the remainder of the electricity PG= &E=20 needed to balance supply and demand.=20 PG&E has been able to generate or has contracts for between 50 percent and = 60=20 percent of its retail electricity demand.=20 PG&E spokesman Ron Low said the DWR has been buying about 85 percent of the= =20 balance, but the company doesn't know how much the ISO is buying until it= =20 receives the bills.=20 ISO's Schmid said no decision had been reached concerning the effect of the= =20 bankruptcy proceedings on PG&E's outstanding billion-dollar bill for=20 electricity purchases in January and February.=20 ""We're certainly going to live by whatever terms the Bankruptcy Court puts = on=20 it,"" she said.=20 Two weeks ago, ISO advised PG&E that ISO's January and February invoices, t= o=20 the extent they conflicted with the bankruptcy process, were submitted only= =20 for record-keeping purposes.=20 But PG&E said ISO still plans to hold the company responsible for the bills= .=20 A hearing has been set for June 4.=20 The Bee's Claire Cooper can be reached at (415) 551-7701 or=20 ccooper@sacbee.com.=20 Jack Sirard: PG&E's woes a warning to utility investors (Published May 4, 2001)=20 Q: Like so many other investors, I bailed out of my Pacific Gas and Electri= c=20 shares. I am now looking at Con Ed. It looks fairly priced with a great=20 yield. Would it be wise to take the money I got from PG&E and buy Con Ed?= =20 My biggest concern is that Con Ed could suffer a fate similar to the one th= at=20 devastated PG&E. What do you think?=20 --Robert A., Carmichael=20 A: Consolidated Edison (ticker symbol ED) is one of the nation's largest=20 investor-owned energy companies. The company provides a wide range of=20 energy-related services to customers in New York, New Jersey and=20 Pennsylvania.=20 For the three months ended March 31, revenues increased 24 percent to $2.89= =20 billion while its net income declined 5 percent to $179.1 million.=20 The company's stock closed Thursday at $36.26, near its 52-week high of=20 $39.50 and well above its low of $29.61. The company pays a generous annual= =20 dividend of $2.20 a share, giving it a current yield of 6.04 percent.=20 Last week the company said it would spend $483 million this year as part of= a=20 program to prepare for the summer of 2001, enhance reliability and improve= =20 infrastructure. And over the next five years, Con Ed plans to invest $2.4= =20 billion to upgrade its electric delivery system, which serves New York City= =20 and Westchester County.=20 You're certainly right to be concerned about any utility's plans to deal wi= th=20 the energy crisis.=20 Here's what I found about Con Ed. The company sold most of its power plants= =20 and, like California utilities, failed to lock in multiyear contracts with= =20 suppliers to protect its customers against rising wholesale prices. But Con= =20 Ed can pass wholesale electricity price increases through to consumers. Las= t=20 summer, a spike in wholesale prices briefly pushed Con Ed electric rates up= =20 43 percent and that could happen again this summer.=20 Value Line says Con Ed stock is expected to lag the market but says=20 income-oriented investors might want to build a stake. The company has been= =20 increasing its dividend slowly but surely over the years. If you buy the=20 stock, keep a close eye on it. Utilities, unfortunately, no longer can be= =20 bought and tucked away.=20 Q: Our gross income is $100,000 a year and, other than our house payment, w= e=20 have no outstanding debt except a car payment of $250 a month. We have abou= t=20 $175,000 in investments including our stocks, mutual funds and 401(k), whic= h=20 we are adding about $1,000 a month to.=20 We have two kids, age 10 and 12, and hope to retire from our jobs with the= =20 state in about seven years at age 53 to 55 and convert our investments to 2= 5=20 percent CDs, 25 percent bond funds, 25 percent stocks and 25 percent mutual= =20 funds. What do you think?=20 --Jim R., Sacramento=20 A: After looking at the stocks (down 74 percent) and mutual funds (down 51= =20 percent) that you have bought on your own, I'd suggest that you need=20 professional help with your investing. Admittedly, you have taken a hit by= =20 being heavily invested in technology components. By comparison, your 401(k)= =20 is down only 23 percent.=20 Instead of being concerned about how to invest once you retired, if I were= =20 you, I'd focus my attention on whether I had enough money to retire. Becaus= e=20 you and your spouse both work for the state, your retirement benefits shoul= d=20 be solid, but I think you need to get a professional review of your financi= al=20 situation to see if all the numbers add up. At first glance, it doesn't loo= k=20 to me that they do.=20 You're at the age when you need to have a financial game plan in place that= =20 can pay for college for the children and your own retirement. In your case = --=20 as with many others -- spending some time and money now with a professional= =20 will pay off in the future.=20 The Bee's Jack Sirard can be reached at (916)321-1041 or jsirard@sacbee.com= =20 Legislature sends power authority bill to governor=20 By Audrey Cooper ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 May 3, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) California is poised to enter the power business after the = state=20 Senate approved the creation of a public power authority and sent its bill = to=20 Gov. Gray Davis Thursday.=20 A power authority, supporters said, will give the state more control over i= ts=20 wholesale electricity market by building and operating its own power plants= .=20 State-owned plants could charge lower prices, and building new plants could= =20 increase supply and ease wholesale prices.=20 If signed by the Davis, the bill creates a California Consumer Power and=20 Conservation Financing Authority that could issue up to $5 billion in reven= ue=20 bonds to pay for power plants, natural gas storage and additional pipelines= =20 and conservation programs.=20 Davis has said he supports creating a public power authority similar to one= =20 in New York. The New York authority has 10 power plants, 1,400 miles of=20 transmission lines and produces about 25 percent of the state's power.=20 Nebraska also has a power authority, which created a market in which=20 residents pay 22 percent less than the national average, said Sen. John=20 Burton, D-San Francisco, who wrote the bill.=20 A Davis spokesman said Thursday that although the governor has supported th= e=20 concept of a power authority, he has not decided whether or not to sign the= =20 legislation.=20 The authority would be run by the state treasurer and four other members=20 appointed by the governor.=20 Opponents of the plan, most of them Republicans, have said an authority=20 thrusts the state into a power market in which it doesn't belong and could= =20 obstruct private interests' efforts to build and operate power plants.=20 The new board would also be able to seize plants by eminent domain, a power= =20 the governor also has under an emergency order issued in January.=20 Sen. Steve Peace, D-El Cajon, said California needs the authority because t= he=20 1996 deregulation law didn't create real competition and the Federal Energy= =20 Regulatory Commission refuses to control rising wholesale prices.=20 The state's deregulation is ""the economic equivalent to the World Wrestling= =20 Federation,"" Peace said. ""The wrestlers follow a script and the referee,=20 FERC, ensures it is entertaining. It is not real competition.""=20 The authority won't help the state escape blackouts this summer, but will= =20 help restore reliable and affordable electricity in the future, said consum= er=20 advocate Harvey Rosenfield with the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer=20 Rights.=20 ""The agency is California's key to survival and independence from the energ= y=20 cartel,"" he said.=20 Davis and state lawmakers are also considering purchasing Southern Californ= ia=20 Edison's transmission system, which would be governed by a separate public= =20 authority. Negotiations with San Diego Gas & Electric Co. are continuing. T= he=20 Legislature would have to approve those buys.=20 The authority's main power would be over generator construction, said=20 Stanford University economist Frank Wolak. Energy companies would likely be= =20 hired to build the plants, something the companies are already pursuing.=20 ""As far as operating power plants, we're not as good as these other guys=20 are,"" he said.=20 However, the authority may speed the siting of power plants, an approval=20 process mostly anchored in state agencies. Centering the approval process i= n=20 the state government could speed the process, he said.=20 Richard Sklar, the governor's new energy czar, said the goal of the state's= =20 power authority will be to balance the energy market in California and keep= =20 private companies from controlling the prices.=20 ""The power authority is a sensible long-term strategy,"" Sklar said. ""It's n= ot=20 a bad idea for the state, if the private sector will not build it, to build= =20 plants so supply won't fall short of demand and this game won't be able to = be=20 played.""=20 Opponents said California should create total deregulation of the electrici= ty=20 market, not a government solution.=20 The 24-14 vote on the bill, written by San Francisco Democratic Sen. John= =20 Burton, was split down party lines.=20 Some of the most ""feared words in the English language are 'I'm from the=20 government and I'm here to help you,'"" said Sen. Bill Morrow, R-Oceanside.= =20 The state Assembly passed the bill last week in a 47-28 vote split along=20 party lines.=20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. spokesman Ron Low declined comment on the=20 legislation. Officials from San Diego Gas and Electric Co. didn't return=20 calls seeking comment.=20 ?? Read Burton's SB6X www.leginfo.ca.gov=20 GOP Tries to Force Its Dramatically Different Energy Plan on Governor=20 By MIGUEL BUSTILLO, Times Staff Writer=20 ?????SACRAMENTO--Republican lawmakers are trying to force Gov. Gray Davis= =20 into a dramatically different exit strategy for the energy crisis: writing= =20 off the $5 billion the state has already spent on electricity and borrowing= =20 billions less to finance future power purchases. ?????GOP lawmakers are holding up emergency legislation needed to replenish= =20 the budget for power costs, because they don't think the Democratic=20 governor's plan to get California out of the power business will work. They= =20 say the plan is full of dangerously optimistic assumptions, such as estimat= es=20 that 90% of the state's alternative energy producers will be generating=20 electricity this summer--only two-thirds are now--and that Californians wil= l=20 use 7% less electricity. ?????Although Republicans don't control either house, the emergency=20 legislation requires a two-thirds vote, which gives the GOP significant swa= y. ?????The plan from the Republican leadership would commit taxpayer money fo= r=20 the first time to an electricity problem that has only affected customers o= f=20 private utilities. Because the plan is sure to draw strong opposition from= =20 politicians in Los Angeles and other areas served by public power agencies,= =20 Republicans have included a complex, $1.5-billion proposal to provide refun= ds=20 to those served by municipal utilities. ?????By blocking the emergency legislation, Republicans may stop state=20 Treasurer Phil Angelides from securing a $4.13-billion loan to repay state= =20 coffers for electricity purchases--a failure that would reduce the money=20 available to Davis for his next budget and possibly delay his plan to resol= ve=20 the energy crisis. Angelides needs the bill to guarantee repayment for the= =20 loan. ?????If Angelides does not obtain legislative approval by Monday, he will= =20 miss a Tuesday deadline lenders had given him to close the loan. That would= =20 clearly leave Davis with less money for new education, police and=20 road-building programs as he begins planning his next budget this month. ?????Moreover, failure to pass the bill could delay a record bond issue tha= t=20 Davis promised would replenish the budget and shield it from further energy= =20 drains by summer. And it could harm sagging confidence on Wall Street that= =20 California can deliver on its plans to manage the energy crisis, Angelides= =20 said. ?????California's credit rating has already been downgraded by one credit= =20 agency, Standard & Poor's, largely because of concerns about the effect of= =20 electricity purchases on state finances. ?????Negotiations Are Continuing ?????""The Republicans appear to be digging in and playing a dangerous game = of=20 financial roulette with the state. This is really ludicrous to me,"" Angelid= es=20 said. ""Standard & Poor's has already downgraded us. The other credit rating= =20 agencies are watching. I just don't understand what the Republicans are=20 thinking."" ?????Said Assembly Republican leader Dave Cox (R-Fair Oaks): ""We're not=20 prepared to give the governor a blank check."" ?????Democrats threatened Thursday to test the Republicans' resolve by=20 bringing the bill to a vote in the Assembly, but backed down. Negotiations= =20 among legislative leaders continue. ?????To avoid widespread blackouts, the state government entered the=20 electricity-buying business in January after the private utilities became t= oo=20 burdened with debt to continue purchasing power on the expensive wholesale= =20 market. ?????Under a plan approved by the Legislature and signed into law by Davis,= =20 the state budget is to be repaid for the power purchases through a massive= =20 municipal bond issue, expected to be the largest in American history. The= =20 bonds, in turn, are to be paid off by utility ratepayers through a slice of= =20 their monthly bills. ?????However, the plan was based on the premise that the state would quickl= y=20 bring down power costs by entering into long-term contracts with suppliers-= -a=20 scenario that has yet to materialize. ?????In fact, California's power costs have gone up since January. Lawmaker= s=20 initially estimated that $10 billion in bonds would allow the budget to be= =20 repaid and cover future power purchases. Davis is now proposing $12.5 billi= on=20 in bonds--and higher electric bills--to finance the state's costs until 200= 3. ?????Republicans are convinced that it will not be enough. They say the=20 Angelides bridge loan is not needed because the state has money in various= =20 funds that could cover power purchases well into the fall. ?????They also confess to political considerations. Republican legislators= =20 believe that by allowing Angelides to obtain his loan now, they will be=20 powerless to oppose further borrowing later. The loan Angelides set up with= =20 J.P. Morgan Chase and several other financial services companies is to be= =20 repaid with the bond issue. If the loan is not repaid by the end of the=20 summer, the interest rate will rise dramatically, a situation that would ma= ke=20 it hard for the minority Republicans to oppose more bonds. ?????The strong GOP views were shaped in part by Democratic state Controlle= r=20 Kathleen Connell, who met with Republican legislators earlier this week and= =20 shared a highly critical appraisal of Davis' plan. ?????Connell told the Republicans that the governor's strategy was based on= a=20 series of assumptions about electricity market conditions in California thi= s=20 summer that, in her view, are highly improbable. ?????""It is almost impossible for all these hypothetical situations=20 envisioned in their scenario to occur at once,"" Connell said. ?????But even if all the assumptions came to pass, she predicted that=20 California would still need to secure another source of financing by next= =20 spring to continue energy purchases. Davis administration officials have=20 rebutted her claim. ?????""I am deeply troubled by this incremental approach to this financing= =20 that is long-term in nature and is going to burden the state for many years= ,""=20 Connell said, in what appeared to be a reference to Davis' reputation as a= =20 plodder.=20 ?????Using Surplus to Pay for Electricity ?????Republicans, who have traditionally been opposed to financing public= =20 programs with large bond issues, contend that Davis needs to reevaluate his= =20 plan. By proposing to essentially forget the $5 billion the state has spent= =20 so far on power, they are advocating using up the state's projected budget= =20 surplus on electricity costs, even if it means cutting new government=20 programs. ?????""If Gov. Davis continues down this path, he could bankrupt the state,""= =20 said Assemblyman Dennis Mountjoy (R-Monrovia). ""That would have a far great= er=20 impact on education."" ?????Democrats, who strongly believe that the surplus should be invested in= =20 roads, schools and to meet other long-term future needs, are unlikely to ev= er=20 support the idea. Lawmakers are already discussing outflanking the=20 Republicans by drafting a bill to repay the budget on a nonemergency basis,= =20 which would only require a majority vote. ?????That, however, would probably delay the financing until at least Augus= t,=20 since nonemergency measures do not take effect for 90 days--giving Californ= ia=20 only about six weeks to cut the largest municipal bond deal ever before sta= te=20 coffers begin to empty, according to Angelides. ?????There is another potential consequence: Many of the long-term contract= s=20 the Davis administration has reached to purchase electricity contain clause= s=20 that may make them void if the state does not obtain financing by July. ?????""This is a very dangerous game,"" Angelides said. ?????In other electricity developments Thursday: ?????* Over Republican objections, Democrats in the state Senate approved a= nd=20 sent to Davis a far-reaching bill that would put state government in the=20 business of operating its own power plants and selling electricity at cheap= er=20 rates than private companies. The bill, SB 6x by Senate leader John Burton= =20 (D-San Francisco), would create a state power authority with the ability to= =20 finance, buy, own and build generation plants and sell the energy at=20 cost-based rates. ?????on likened the proposed government body to the New York Power Authorit= y,=20 approved by GOP Gov. George Pataki, which brought about a 10% reduction in= =20 rates. ?????The difference from the current situation is that ""the people of=20 California, the ratepayers, would benefit, and not the corporate officers a= nd=20 not the shareholders"" of private energy companies, Burton said. ?????But Republicans attacked the power authority as ""more government"" that= =20 would impose itself on an enterprise better suited for private operators wi= th=20 years of expertise. ?????""This is a horrific mistake and one that California ratepayers will be= =20 paying for many years to come,"" said state Sen. Tom McClintock (R-Thousand= =20 Oaks.) ?????* California Secretary of State Bill Jones, a GOP gubernatorial hopefu= l,=20 released his plan to address the electricity crisis, criticizing Davis'=20 efforts as a state takeover of the power industry. ?????Jones called on the utilities' parent companies to help bail out their= =20 troubled subsidiaries and said creditors should accept lower payments on ba= ck=20 debts. He also called for creation of a state-federal emergency management= =20 plan to deal with any blackouts this summer. Jones made his three-page=20 proposal in a letter to Vice President Dick Cheney, head of the Bush=20 administration's energy task force. ---=20 ?????Times staff writers Carl Ingram in Sacramento and Mark Z. Barabak in L= os=20 Angeles contributed to this story. Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 Secretary of Energy, Davis Meet on U.S. Plan to Boost Conservation=20 Crisis: Federal buildings and military bases, accounting for 1.5% of state'= s=20 usage, will cut back.=20 By RICHARD SIMON and DAN MORAIN, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????SACRAMENTO--In a visit meant to underscore the Bush administration's= =20 heightened concern about the California electricity crisis, Secretary of=20 Energy Spencer Abraham met Thursday with Gov. Gray Davis in Sacramento to= =20 discuss federal energy conservation plans. ?????""I think we have an approach that can result in significant savings,""= =20 Abraham told Davis. The energy secretary said he was in California ""to gaug= e=20 what we can do to add to what California is already doing."" ?????The trip came after President Bush revealed plans for a series of=20 conservation measures for federal buildings and military bases nationwide.= =20 Those facilities in California account for 1.5% of the state's total energy= =20 use. Today, Abraham is scheduled to meet with federal officials in San=20 Francisco to work out details of the nationwide program for more than 500,0= 00=20 federal buildings. ?????After meeting with Abraham at the White House earlier Thursday, Bush= =20 said: ""We're worried about blackouts that may occur this summer, and we wan= t=20 to be a part of any solutions. This administration is deeply concerned abou= t=20 California and its citizens."" ?????Defending his response to the California crisis, Bush said, ""As I said= =20 from the very beginning of my administration, we'll work to help California= =20 in any way we can."" ?????Also Thursday, Davis met with alternative energy producers in an attem= pt=20 to persuade them to continue operations, despite being owed more than $1=20 billion by California's private utilities. ?????Alternative energy producers, including oil companies that generate=20 electricity as a byproduct of their operations, account for about 27% of th= e=20 electricity consumed in California. Several have stopped producing after th= e=20 utilities could no long afford to pay soaring prices for their power. ?????Davis assigned S. David Freeman and former Assemblyman Richard Katz, a= =20 Davis appointee to a state water board, to be in charge of negotiations.=20 Davis said he hoped that the talks could be completed within a week. ?????And in a sign that major energy companies may get more involved in the= =20 California crisis, Kenneth Lay, CEO of the Houston-based energy giant Enron= =20 Corp., met Thursday with Davis, Assembly Speaker Bob Hertzberg (D-Sherman= =20 Oaks) and Senate President Pro Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco). ?????Meanwhile, Bush on Thursday directed federal agencies to ""take=20 appropriate actions to conserve energy use at their facilities."" ?????In California, such measures could include setting thermostats to 78= =20 degrees, lowering lighting and turning off escalators during Stage 2 and=20 Stage 3 power emergencies, administration officials said. Those occur when= =20 the state's electricity reserves fall below 5% and 1.5%, respectively, and= =20 can trigger interruptions in service. ?????Bush did not set an energy-saving target. But the Defense Department,= =20 one of the state's single largest energy consumers--using about 1% of peak= =20 demand--pledged to reduce peak use by 10% this summer and an additional 5% = by=20 summer 2002. That would make available 200 megawatts, officials said, enoug= h=20 to provide electricity to about 150,000 homes during the summer. ?????The federal government accounts for about 1.5% of total energy use=20 across the country, making it one of the nation's largest energy consumers,= =20 according to the Energy Department. ?????Bush also offered to make available to the state power-generating unit= s=20 owned by the federal government. ?????But his efforts failed to mollify Democratic critics, who renewed call= s=20 for the administration to impose price controls on wholesale electricity. ?????""The generating companies are gouging California consumers while the= =20 president turns his back on us,"" Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) said in a=20 statement. ?????Rep. Sam Farr (D-Carmel), leader of the California Democratic=20 congressional delegation, sent a letter to Vice President Dick Cheney=20 protesting Democrats' exclusion from Cheney's meeting this week with=20 California GOP lawmakers. ?????""As we head into the high summer demand months, it is unfortunate that= =20 you have decided to keep Democrats in the dark about the administration's= =20 plans to deal with the crisis,"" Farr said. ?????Bush's conservation initiative comes after Cheney, who is heading a ta= sk=20 force on national energy policy, was assailed by some critics for emphasizi= ng=20 production over conservation. ?????""Conservation has got to be an integral part of making sure we've got = a=20 reasonable energy policy,"" Bush said Thursday. ""But what the vice president= =20 was saying is we can't conserve our way to energy independence, nor can we= =20 conserve our way to having enough energy available. We've got to do both. W= e=20 must conserve, but we've also got to find new sources of energy."" ?????David M. Nemtzow, president of the Alliance to Save Energy, called the= =20 directive an ""emergency answer to a long-term problem."" ?????""We need to fix the underlying problem by investing in energy-efficien= t=20 lighting, cooling and controls,"" he said. ""We hope that this crisis will=20 encourage the president to increase the budget for energy management rather= =20 than cut it by 48% as previously proposed."" ?????Political analysts said the effort was driven by concerns for not only= =20 electrons but also elections. ?????""It's all about political conservation,"" said Marshall Wittmann, senio= r=20 fellow at the conservative Hudson Institute. ?????Thomas E. Mann, senior fellow at the nonpartisan Brookings Institution= ,=20 agreed: ""The administration has come to the view that just because they can= 't=20 win California in a presidential election doesn't mean the Republican Party= =20 can afford to kiss off the largest state in the Union."" ?????Analysts speculated that the administration came under pressure from= =20 California Republicans in Congress who worried about perceptions that the= =20 White House was not being aggressive enough in responding to the crisis. ?????As federal officials search for ways that California can avoid blackou= ts=20 this summer, a Woodland Hills-based advocacy group, More Power to You, has= =20 suggested that the Navy hook its nuclear-powered ships to the state power= =20 grid to provide energy while in port. ?????The Navy has nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and submarines in San= =20 Diego and Washington state. ?????But Navy officials said it is not technologically feasible to use the= =20 nuclear reactors aboard the ships to provide power for the grid because mos= t=20 of that power goes directly to the propulsion systems. ?????Even to ""capture"" power not used for propulsion would require extensiv= e=20 construction on shore and retrofitting aboard ship, officials said. Also,= =20 using ships to provide onshore power could disrupt training and deployment= =20 schedules, they said. ---=20 ?????Times staff writer Tony Perry contributed to this report. Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 PG&E Seeks Relief From High-Priced Power Purchases=20 Bankruptcy: Utility asks judge to order grid operator to stop buying=20 electricity on its behalf at prices beyond its means.=20 By TIM REITERMAN, Times Staff Writer=20 ?????SAN FRANCISCO--Pacific Gas & Electric Co. asked a federal bankruptcy= =20 judge Thursday to order the state's power grid operator to stop buying=20 electricity for its customers on the sky-high spot market, unless the utili= ty=20 can recover the full cost. ?????The move represents PG&E's latest attempt in Bankruptcy Court to get= =20 relief from actions that the company says are driving it deeper into debt. ?????PG&E asked Judge Dennis Montali to enjoin the California Independent= =20 System Operator from making the company pay the costs of power purchased on= =20 the utility's behalf. The company said it recently received a $1-billion bi= ll=20 for such purchases in January and February. ?????""By purchasing wholesale power at a cost higher than the retail rates= =20 and sending us the bill, [Cal-ISO] . . . could be reducing the value of our= =20 assets by hundreds of millions of dollars a month,"" said PG&E spokesman Ron= =20 Low. ?????In its motion, the company argued that Cal-ISO is violating bankruptcy= =20 law by requiring the utility to pay more for power than it can collect from= =20 state-regulated rates frozen under California's deregulation plan. PG&E sai= d=20 Cal-ISO's actions would force the utility to seek credit on onerous terms. ?????The motion also contended Cal-ISO is violating an April 6 order by the= =20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission that said the grid operator could only= =20 buy power on behalf of credit-worthy entities. ?????That same day, PG&E sought Chapter 11 protection from creditors, sayin= g=20 it was $9 billion in debt. It later filed a motion seeking to halt an=20 accounting change ordered by the California Public Utilities Commission,=20 which the company says is prolonging the rate freeze and preventing it from= =20 recouping the cost of power. ?????Elena Schmid, Cal-ISO's vice president of corporate and strategic=20 development, said she has not seen the motion and could not fully comment. ?????But she said Cal-ISO has been discussing billings with PG&E in hopes o= f=20 determining which payments fall within the FERC ruling and which are subjec= t=20 to the bankruptcy case. ?????""We will live by the FERC ruling and whatever constraints the Bankrupt= cy=20 Court places on us,"" Schmid said. ""We have indicated to them (PG&E) that we= =20 are sending the bill . . . and they should treat it as information, until w= e=20 can work it through."" ?????PG&E listed Cal-ISO as one of its biggest creditors, with $1.1 million= =20 owed for power purchased from third parties. Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 SDG&E Blackout Plan Would Pay Firms to Use Generators=20 Utilities: Program in which large customers produce their own power is=20 forecast to cut demand by as much as 50 megawatts, save $1.6 billion.=20 By NANCY RIVERA BROOKS, Times Staff Writer=20 ?????San Diego Gas & Electric unveiled a novel plan Thursday to pay custome= rs=20 to fire up their backup generators when blackouts threaten. ?????The utility said the program could cut demand on the power grid by 50= =20 megawatts--enough to serve about 37,500 homes--allowing it to avoid or=20 minimize blackouts this summer in San Diego and southern Orange County. ?????""California needs an infusion of new power supplies, but in the interi= m,=20 we hope this unique program will help shield San Diego from some of the=20 devastating effects of rolling blackouts this summer, including the increas= ed=20 risks to public safety and health,"" SDG&E President Debra L. Reed said. ?????The Rolling Blackout Reduction Program, as the Sempra Energy subsidiar= y=20 has dubbed it, would cost $15 million to implement but could save the regio= n=20 as much as $1.6 billion in lost revenue, reduced productivity and property= =20 damage, the utility has estimated. ?????Energy experts are forecasting a dark summer for California, with=20 blackout totals ranging between 20 hours and 1,100 hours. The California=20 Independent System Operator, which runs the electricity transmission grid f= or=20 most of the state, has said residents face 34 days of rotating outages if= =20 they use the same amount of electricity this summer as they did last summer= . ?????The state and utilities have been working feverishly to develop progra= ms=20 that will reduce electricity use this summer. ?????SDG&E, Edison International's Southern California Edison and PG&E=20 Corp.'s Pacific Gas & Electric have programs that grant large customers low= er=20 electricity rates in exchange for cutting electricity use when Cal-ISO=20 declares a Stage 2 emergency as power reserves dip below 5%. But=20 participation in those programs has dropped sharply because of repeated pow= er=20 interruptions. ?????SDG&E's ""interruptible"" program represents 49 megawatts of demand, hal= f=20 of what it was in October, spokesman Ed Van Herik said. ?????The new SDG&E program, which must be approved by the California Public= =20 Utilities Commission, would kick in whenever Cal-ISO declares a Stage 3=20 emergency, indicating that power reserves are down to 1.5% of demand and th= at=20 rolling blackouts are imminent. ?????SDG&E hopes to sign up 50 megawatts of backup generation, representing= =20 about 40 large commercial and industrial customers, but believes customers= =20 capable of generating a total of 200 megawatts may be eligible for the=20 program, Van Herik said. ?????""We found a lot of customers are interested in this program,"" he said.= =20 ""This is an opportunity for San Diego to become involved."" ?????During a Stage 3 order, program participants would be asked to start= =20 their backup generators and then reduce the electricity they receive from= =20 SDG&E by the same amount. ?????Participants would be paid a monthly fee of $7 per kilowatt of=20 generation capacity. On top of that, they would receive 35 cents for every= =20 kilowatt-hour of power they generate for their own use. That price is about= =20 what power plant owners have been commanding in California's pricey=20 electricity market. ?????""We think the fees we are proposing are fair,"" Van Herik said. ""These= =20 aren't people who are in the generation business, and undoubtedly there wil= l=20 be wear and tear on equipment and increased personnel and fuel costs."" ?????The program, which SDG&E wants to implement by June 1, would operate i= n=20 compliance with air pollution regulations, the utility said. Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 Been there, done that=20 Bay Area finds little new in Bush's ideas=20 Joe Garofoli, Bob Egelko, Matthew Yi, Chronicle Staff Writers Friday, May 4, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL: .DTL=20 Californians who have been sweating for months to cut their home energy usa= ge=20 20 percent didn't blink yesterday at President Bush's suggestion that feder= al=20 offices conserve half that much.=20 Sure, some might nod off at their desks this summer, when thermostats at=20 federal buildings will be set at 78 degrees during power shortages. And som= e=20 will get an aerobic workout, when the escalators at those same buildings ar= e=20 turned off.=20 But civilians and federal employees alike yawned at yesterday's conservatio= n=20 suggestions such as ""unplug unused coffee pots"" after doing everything shor= t=20 of burning their shoelaces for wattage during the past few months.=20 Conservation tips are so December to any Californian worth his baseline.=20 ""I don't think it's frustrating to (us) because most people know what's goi= ng=20 on, that we're in an energy crisis,"" said Ansara Johnson, 40, revenue offic= er=20 at the Internal Revenue Service in Oakland.=20 The Bush administration may be setting the pace in the moving-stair=20 department, however. BART, whose escalators don't run so great in the best = of=20 times, said yesterday it is looking at operating escalators with an automat= ic=20 stop-start system to save power this summer. The escalators would be dorman= t=20 until passengers activated them.=20 ""It is kind of ironic, considering we just spent $20 million to fix the=20 escalators,"" BART spokesman Ron Rodriguez said.=20 Just don't turn them off during peak hours, Ingrid Severson pleaded while= =20 pulling her massage chair onto an escalator at the 12th Street BART station= =20 in downtown Oakland.=20 ""That would suck,"" said the 23-year-old massage therapist. ""There are certa= in=20 things that shouldn't be sacrificed.""=20 San Francisco International Airport already is turning off escalators durin= g=20 down times, though the long, long moving sidewalks are going to keep going = no=20 matter what, spokesman Ron Wilson said.=20 Those with customers to serve, however, embraced the Bush energy plan as=20 warmly as a meter-reader.=20 While federal employees will be working up a sweat this summer hiking up=20 stairs to work, shoppers at Concord's Sunvalley Mall will be coolly cruisin= g=20 down the moving stairs to Victoria's Secret.=20 ""We have no plans to shut down our escalators,"" said Sunvalley general=20 manager Tom McCracken. ""How else would people get from floor to floor?""=20 FASHION VICTIMS The new guidelines could have an unintended effect. They may provoke a=20 fashion revolution among federal employees, not a group traditionally known= =20 for its couture choices.=20 It's not their fault. There's only so much you can do with postal blue or= =20 judicial black. But with Bush's directive that thermostats be set at 78=20 degrees, many employees said, something has to change. Like their wardrobes= .=20 Start with the long-suffering post office sales associates -- the clerks=20 behind the counter -- whom government regulations have shackled in long woo= l-=20 blend pants.=20 ""I still have not heard a clear-cut reason why we're not allowed to wear=20 shorts and the mail carriers are,"" said Steve Wellington, a postal sales=20 associate in Concord. The former postal union leader said the=20 shorts-vs.-pants debate has been a hot one for a long time.=20 ""Look at these pants,"" Wellington said, offering a visitor a touch of his= =20 trousers. ""These get real warm in the summer.""=20 While postal officials were happy to point out that their San Francisco=20 offices have used 17 percent less electricity than last year, they wouldn't= =20 touch the shorts issue. ""I don't think we need to comment on that,"" said=20 Horace Hinshaw, a spokesman for the U.S. Postal Service.=20 JUDGES GET EXEMPTION Then there are judges. Attorneys and court employees said the bench needs t= o=20 take the lead in the casual attire revolution. Ditch those heavy black robe= s=20 in favor of, say, a black polo shirt.=20 ""Black really magnifies the heat,"" said Napa attorney Paul Carey. ""They=20 should allow judges to wear lighter colors, like yellow or chartreuse. If t= he=20 judges would allow it, every attorney I know would love to wear a T-shirt,= =20 shorts and sandals into court.""=20 However, there was one indication that judges may be thermostat-exempt, at= =20 least at the Phillip Burton Federal Building, a 20-story tower at 450 Golde= n=20 Gate Ave. in San Francisco that houses federal courts and numerous agencies= .=20 A contractor who was working yesterday to install new thermostat controls i= n=20 the building said two areas were excluded: computer rooms, to protect the= =20 equipment, and courtrooms.=20 ""That was the mandate,"" said Erik Ahrens, vice president of Syserco, which= =20 has a contract for heating and vent control. ""Courtrooms are on separate=20 units. ""=20 At the Ronald V. Dellums Federal Building in downtown Oakland, lights alrea= dy=20 have been dimmed in hallways, and workers have been encouraged to turn off= =20 unneeded lights and computers since early this year. Cynthia Mackey, 38, a= =20 revenue officer for the Internal Revenue Service, wasn't happy to hear the= =20 thermostat would be going up.=20 ""Oh, no. I guess I'll just work at home,"" where Mackey said the thermostat = is=20 set at 68 degrees. ""If it's set at 78, and with all the employees and all t= he=20 computers, it would be hot.""=20 Then it will be time to change -- habits and clothes.=20 E-mail the reporters at jgarofoli@sfchronicle.com, begelko@sfchronicle.com = or=20 myi@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 Bush calls power supply the solution=20 He says conservation useful but secondary=20 Marc Sandalow, Washington Bureau Chief Friday, May 4, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL: .DTL=20 Even as he ordered a new conservation effort in California, President Bush= =20 insisted yesterday that finding new sources of energy -- not cutting back o= n=20 consumption -- is the long-term answer to the nation's energy woes.=20 ""You cannot conserve your way to energy independence,"" Bush said. ""We can d= o=20 a better job in conservation, but we darn sure have to do a better job of= =20 finding more supply.""=20 Bush's comments, his most extensive to date on California's energy crisis,= =20 called on all federal managers to conserve energy ""to the maximum extent=20 consistent with the effective discharge of public responsibilities.""=20 As part of that effort, the Defense Department -- one of California's large= st=20 consumers of energy -- announced plans to curtail electrical use by at leas= t=20 10 percent by this summer.=20 ""This administration is deeply concerned about California and its citizens,= ""=20 Bush said after a meeting with his top energy advisers. ""We're worried abou= t=20 blackouts that may occur this summer, and we want to be a part of any=20 solution. ""=20 While touting the value of conservation, Bush repeatedly identified the=20 limits to that approach. In response to questions from reporters, Bush made= =20 clear that he would not be confused with former President Jimmy Carter, who= =20 donned a cardigan sweater and preached the virtues of conservation two=20 decades ago.=20 ""It is naive for the American people and its leaders . . . to say that we c= an=20 be OK from an energy perspective by only focusing on conservation,"" Bush=20 said. ""We've got to find additional supplies of energy.""=20 Bush has called for oil drilling in Alaska, as well as exploratory drilling= =20 in other parts of the West. Members of his administration also have touted= =20 the expanded use of coal and have floated the idea of building new nuclear= =20 power plants.=20 SUPPLY-SIDE PLAN There have been repeated signals that the comprehensive energy plan being= =20 developed by a White House task force -- which is expected to be released i= n=20 two weeks -- will focus less on conservation than on boosting energy=20 supplies.=20 Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, speaking to reporters after meeting with= =20 the president, said conservation plays an important role in helping=20 California through its immediate crisis. Yet developing new sources of ener= gy=20 is important to prevent the rest of the nation from experiencing California= 's=20 shortages.=20 ""We have a crisis and an emergency this summer (in California) that will=20 result in 30 to 35 days of blackouts,"" Abraham said from the White House=20 driveway. ""We don't have the time between now and those occasions to develo= p=20 new (energy) sources sufficient to meet the challenge.""=20 By the middle of the month, the White House will release ""a national energy= =20 plan that will be more comprehensive and more far reaching, that will offer= a=20 new vision that addresses Americans long-term supply security,"" Abraham sai= d.=20 MEETING WITH DAVIS The energy secretary traveled to Sacramento last night where he planned to= =20 meet with Gov. Gray Davis and other state officials. He is scheduled to hol= d=20 a public conservation event this morning in San Francisco and to discuss wi= th=20 federal officials how they can reduce energy consumption.=20 An action plan distributed by the Department of Energy calls for federal=20 workers across the country to develop conservation plans within the next 30= =20 days.=20 In addition, it calls for specific actions during Stage 2 or Stage 3 power= =20 emergencies, when supplies are within 5 percent of demand. Some experts war= n=20 that California will be in such a state for much of the summer.=20 Among the steps called for in an energy emergency are setting thermostats i= n=20 federal buildings no lower than 78 degrees, turning off escalators and=20 hallway lights, and unplugging coffee pots, computers and any nonessential= =20 appliances.=20 The plan suggests that employees be notified when temperatures might be war= m,=20 so they can wear more casual clothing to make the heat more bearable.=20 Meanwhile, the Pentagon announced it will reduce its consumption during pea= k=20 demand hours by 10 percent, and perhaps by as much as 15 percent by next=20 summer. It will also hook up wind generation facilities at Edwards Air Forc= e=20 Base.=20 Paul Wolfowitz, deputy secretary of defense, said the steps will save the= =20 state's power grid about 200 megawatts of power, enough electricity for 200= ,=20 000 homes.=20 Energy officials have explored many options, including the use of nuclear= =20 submarines to provide energy during shortages and firing up the generators = on=20 the Navy's mothball fleet in Suisun Bay, near Benicia. Both ideas have been= =20 rejected as unfeasible, energy officials said.=20 Democrats cheered Bush's call for conservation, though several said it did= =20 not go far enough.=20 IRONIC PRAISE ""I am very happy the president and Secretary Abraham recognized that=20 conservation matters,"" said Richard Sklar, Gov. Davis' top energy adviser.= =20 ""We thank the president for catching up with the train.""=20 Republican governors meeting in San Jose suggested that Davis could do more= =20 on his own and in concert with other Western states to help California ease= =20 its energy crunch.=20 It's time, Montana Gov. Judy Martz argued, that California ""met its=20 responsibility to build an adequate power supply and stop looking to=20 Washington for a bailout.""=20 Others, however, called on Bush to go further and impose price caps on=20 wholesale electricity prices to guarantee a steady flow of electricity and= =20 keep prices down for consumers.=20 Chronicle staff writers Lynda Gledhill and Bill Workman contributed to this= =20 report. / E-mail Marc Sandalow at msandalow@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 SDG&E unveils plan to contend with rolling blackouts=20 Friday, May 4, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 957EDT0155.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 (05-04) 06:57 PDT SAN DIEGO (AP) -- San Diego Gas & Electric has unveiled a= =20 plan that would pay customers who fire up their emergency generators when= =20 rolling blackouts loom.=20 The utility is seeking approval from the state Public Utilities Commission = to=20 place about 40 companies under contract to generate a total of 50 megawatts= =20 during statewide power alerts. The backup power would be enough to serve=20 about 37,500 homes.=20 ``These businesses would actually be sharing their backup generation with t= he=20 San Diego region,'' Debra Reed, president of SDG&E, said Thursday.=20 The Rolling Blackout Reduction Program would cost the utility an estimated= =20 $15 million to implement, but could save the regions as much as $1.6 billio= n=20 in lost revenue, property damage and reduced productivity caused by=20 blackouts, utility officials said.=20 The California Independent System Operator, which manages the transmission= =20 grid for most of the state, has estimated that residents face up to 200 hou= rs=20 of blackouts over 30 to 35 days this summer due to high demand and=20 insufficient energy supplies.=20 The use of emergency generators will lead to more air pollution, but Reed= =20 said the ``social benefit'' of the trade-off would be worth it, because=20 residents and businesses would not have to deal with the safety risks and= =20 hazards of blackouts.=20 SDG&E officials want the Public Utilities Commission to act on its request= =20 within a week and hope to have the program in effect by June 1.=20 The program would go into effect whenever Cal-ISO declares a Stage 3=20 emergency, which indicates that power reserves are down to 1.5 percent and= =20 rolling blackouts are imminent. Program participants would be asked to star= t=20 their emergency generators and then reduce the electricity they receive fro= m=20 SDG&E by the same amount.=20 Participants would be paid a monthly fee of $7 per kilowatt of generation= =20 capacity, plus receive an additional 35 cents for every kilowatt-hour of=20 power generated for their own use.=20 ``We think the fees we are proposing are fair,'' said SDG&E spokesman Ed Va= n=20 Herik. ``These aren't people who are in the generation business, and=20 undoubtedly there will be wear and tear on equipment and increased personne= l=20 and fuel costs.''=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 California crisis brings new talk of energy conservation.=20 DEB RIECHMANN, Associated Press Writer Friday, May 4, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 945EDT0153.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 (05-04) 06:45 PDT WASHINGTON (AP) -- In the 1970s, energy conservation was= =20 Jimmy Carter in a cardigan telling people to bundle up and turn down the=20 heat. Today, it's about using energy-efficient fluorescent bulbs,=20 computerized thermostats and motion sensors.=20 To many Americans, California's energy crisis is a problem isolated on the= =20 West Coast. Yet it has resurrected interest in conservation that hasn't bee= n=20 heard since gas lines and the OPEC oil embargo more than two decades ago.= =20 President Bush on Thursday ordered federal agencies to cut power use in=20 California where rolling blackouts have catapulted the debate over future= =20 energy supplies to the top of the national agenda.=20 Bush's conservation message came just days after Vice President Dick Cheney= ,=20 who claims the whole nation could face blackouts like those in California= =20 unless it finds more oil, natural gas and coal, said America cannot ``simpl= y=20 conserve or ration our way out of the situation we're in.''=20 Environmentalists maintain the Bush administration is using California's=20 electricity crisis -- largely due to a failed attempt at electricity=20 deregulation -- to push through a broader energy plan to drill for oil and= =20 natural gas in now off-limits areas of Alaska and the West. Hardly any powe= r=20 plants run on oil, they note.=20 And energy-conservation groups say if everybody made better use of the ener= gy=20 already being generated, America would not need many of the 1,300-plus powe= r=20 plants that Bush and Cheney say demand will require over the next 20 years.= =20 Nobody will have to sit in the dark, they say, if it were made easier for= =20 Americans to use less energy through more fuel efficient light bulbs, motor= s,=20 automobiles, office buildings and homes.=20 ``In today's world we are not asking people to not use their (air=20 conditioning) -- that is not today's message of conservation,'' said Rozann= e=20 Weissman, a spokeswoman for the Alliance to Save Energy, a Washington-based= =20 nonprofit group. ``What we need to do is look at using our energy more=20 efficiently and using today's technologies to help do it for us.''=20 According to the alliance:=20 --If each household in the United States replaced four regular 100-watt bul= bs=20 with energy-efficient compact fluorescent bulbs, the output of 30=20 medium-sized power plants (each with a 300-megawatt capacity) would not be= =20 needed.=20 --If the Bush administration's new efficiency standards for air conditioner= s=20 and heat pumps improved energy use by 30 percent instead of 20 percent, the= =20 output of 138 of these power plants would not been needed during peak use= =20 times.=20 Americans could even unplug idle appliances -- TVs, VCRs, cable boxes, CD= =20 players and microwaves -- when they go out of town. Some of these appliance= s=20 continue to consume energy when switched off. The power keeps display clock= s=20 lighted and memory chips and remote controls working. The alliance says the= se=20 electric leaks cost consumers more than $3 billion a year.=20 Conservation does help, according to Alexandra von Meier, director of the= =20 Environmental Technology Center at Sonoma State University in California. S= he=20 told a House energy subcommittee on Thursday that residential and commercia= l=20 buildings use about 35 percent of the energy -- electricity and fuels -- in= =20 the United States.=20 ``This amount of energy can be cut in half, if not more, by implementing th= e=20 things we already know about how to make buildings more energy efficient an= d,=20 at the same time, more comfortable,'' she said, explaining how Venetian=20 blinds hung on the outside of the technology center keeps the glass from=20 transferring heat.=20 Howard Geller, former executive director of the American Council for an=20 Energy Efficient Economy, told the committee about an Energy Department stu= dy=20 in November 2000 that said increasing energy efficiency throughout the=20 economy could cut national energy use by at least 10 percent by 2010 and by= =20 20 percent in 2020.=20 ``Even though the United States is much more energy-efficient today than it= =20 was 25 years ago, there is still enormous potential for additional=20 cost-effective energy savings,'' said Geller.=20 Associated Press reporter H. Josef Hebert contributed to this report.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 Developments in California's energy crisis=20 The Associated Press Friday, May 4, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 410EDT0127.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 , , -- (05-04) 01:10 PDT Developments in California's energy crisis:=20 FRIDAY:< ?--No power stage alerts are reported as of early Friday morning. = ?THURSDAY:<=20 -- Gov. Gray Davis meets with representatives of the qualifying facilities = in=20 Sacramento to discuss their concerns and the possibility of getting their= =20 plants online during all peak periods.=20 -- The state Senate sends a bill to the governor that would create a state= =20 public power authority. Supporters say the bill will ease the energy crisis= =20 by allowing the state to build and buy power plants that could provide=20 cheaper wholesale electricity.=20 -- State Treasurer Phil Angelides says Assembly Republicans are ``holding= =20 their own state hostage'' by not approving a bill to authorize up to $12.5= =20 billion in bonds for power purchases. Republicans put their own plan forwar= d=20 Wednesday, saying they'd rather use $5 billion of the state's surplus and= =20 finance less.=20 -- Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham travels to the Capitol to discuss the= =20 state's power woes with Davis. Abraham meets with state Republican leaders = in=20 San Francisco following the meeting with the governor.=20 -- The new special counsel to the Senate Select Committee to Investigate=20 Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Energy Market says ``it is likely there= =20 was some criminal activity'' in driving up electricity prices. Laurence=20 Drivon, a private plaintiff's attorney from Stockton, will work for the=20 committee for free, spending about four days a week on the job initially. H= is=20 review of thousands of power-related documents leads him to believe there w= as=20 criminal collusion; he would not elaborate.=20 -- The San Joaquin County District Attorney is joining the Senate Select=20 Committee in its power investigation. Supervising Deputy District Attorney= =20 Franklin Stephenson says three experienced investigators will help the=20 committee decide if there was illegal price-fixing, antitrust violations, o= r=20 theft of public funds by public or private electric generators.=20 -- Pacific Gas and Electric Co. asks a federal bankruptcy judge to stop the= =20 state's power grid manager from charging the utility for expensive,=20 last-minute electricity. PG&E has applied for bankruptcy protection and say= s=20 that the ISO's bills ``could be reducing the value of the company's assets = by=20 potentially hundreds of millions of dollars per month.''=20 -- Secretary of State Bill Jones, a Republican candidate for governor,=20 proposes a utility rescue plan that would take the state out of the=20 electricity business. The plan calls for utility creditors to accept=20 less-than-full payments; more cash flow from the utilities' parent companie= s;=20 and low-interest state loans to help the utilities pay off their debts.=20 -- The California Association of Health Care Facilities says it expects the= =20 state Public Utilities Commission to exempt nursing homes from blackouts. T= he=20 group says many nursing home residents depend on electric life support=20 machines. A PUC decision is expected by May 14.=20 -- The California Immigrant Welfare Collaborative said they are worried tha= t=20 state's power purchases could threaten two assistance programs that pay for= =20 food stamps and cash benefits. The programs, which help recent immigrants,= =20 expire Sept. 30 unless they get renewed during budget negotiations.=20 -- The state auditor will look into the California Energy Commission's=20 process for siting new power plants and allowing defunct plants to return t= o=20 service. The audit was requested by Assemblyman Jay La Suer, R-La Mesa, and= =20 is expected in August.=20 -- Edison International stock closes at $9.28, down 9 cents. PG&E Corp.=20 dropped 10 cents to close at $8.86.=20 -- The state remains free of power alerts as electricity reserves stay abov= e=20 7 percent.=20 WHAT'S NEXT:< -- The governor meets Wednesday with the CEOs of several major energy=20 suppliers to discuss the money their owed by the state's two largest=20 utilities, the state's creditworthiness and how wholesalers can help the=20 state during the energy crisis. Davis says he won't be discussing any of th= e=20 investigations into price manipulation in the wholesale market.=20 -- Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra, the parent=20 company of San Diego Gas and Electric Co., to buy the utility's transmissio= n=20 lines.=20 THE PROBLEM:< High demand, high wholesale energy costs, transmission glitches and a tight= =20 supply worsened by scarce hydroelectric power in the Northwest and=20 maintenance at aging California power plants are all factors in California'= s=20 electricity crisis.=20 Edison and PG&E say they've lost nearly $14 billion since June to high=20 wholesale prices the state's electricity deregulation law bars them from=20 passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs= =20 from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection= =20 April 6.=20 Electricity and natural gas suppliers, scared off by the two companies' poo= r=20 credit ratings, are refusing to sell to them, leading the state in January = to=20 start buying power for the utilities' nearly 9 million residential and=20 business customers. The state is also buying power for a third investor-own= ed=20 utility, San Diego Gas & Electric, which is in better financial shape than= =20 much larger Edison and PG&E but also struggling with high wholesale power= =20 costs.=20 The Public Utilities Commission has raised rates as much as 46 percent to= =20 help finance the state's multibillion-dollar power buys.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 Energy at a glance=20 Friday, May 4, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /04/M N225908.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 In other energy-related developments yesterday:=20 STATE POWER AUTHORITY On a partisan vote, the Legislature sent Gov. Davis a bill creating a state= =20 public power authority that can sell as much as $5 billion in bonds to buil= d=20 or buy power plants, beef up conservation and renewable energy programs and= =20 retrofit older plants to make them less polluting. Davis is expected to sig= n=20 the bill by state Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, D-San Francisco, ne= xt=20 week.=20 STATE SENATE INVESTIGATION A special Senate committee investigating allegations of antitrust violation= s=20 and price-fixing by electricity generators announced that Larry Drivon, a= =20 Stockton trial lawyer, would serve as the committee's general counsel. Driv= on=20 said that from documents he has seen, there is ""some indication there very= =20 well may have been criminal aspects to this.""=20 PG&E COMPLAINTS PG&E, usually the target of complaints about electricity bills, made its ow= n=20 gripe about high bills to a federal bankruptcy judge yesterday. PG&E said t= he=20 California Independent System Operator, which manages the state's power gri= d,=20 charged the utility nearly $1 billion for power that the ISO bought above= =20 retail prices in January and February and reduced the assets available in= =20 bankruptcy. The company asked the judge to tell the ISO to back off. ISO=20 spokeswoman Lorie O'Donnelly said her agency has stopped buying power for= =20 PG&E -- a task now handled by the state -- and will await the outcome of th= e=20 bankruptcy proceedings to see how much of its bill it can collect.=20 ALTERNATIVE ENERGY Gov. Davis met with producers of alternative energy, such as solar panels a= nd=20 wind farms, a third of whom have shuttered their operations because the=20 utilities they have contracts with have paid them pennies on the dollar sin= ce=20 November. The generators going offline have contributed to recent rolling= =20 blackouts. Davis said the meeting's purpose was to resolve any remaining=20 disputes between the energy producers and the utilities so more electricity= =20 can be produced this summer. The participants said they made progress and= =20 agreed to meet again next week.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 17=20 Ships would help during blackouts=20 Ready reserve fleet has power to provide=20 Carl Nolte, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday, May 4, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /04/M N182291.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 San Francisco -- A fleet of 13 gray government cargo ships tied up on the S= an=20 Francisco waterfront and at Alameda is ready and able to provide emergency= =20 electric power if rolling blackouts hit this summer.=20 ""We'd be more than willing to help,"" said Capt. Frank Johnston, Western=20 region administrator for the U.S. Maritime Administration, which manages th= e=20 ships. The vessels are part of the country's ready reserve fleet, have crew= s=20 aboard 24 hours a day and are prepared to sail anywhere in the world on fiv= e=20 days' notice.=20 The offer comes a day after the Bush administration suggested using ships i= n=20 the so-called mothball fleet in Suisun Bay near Benicia to provide power.= =20 However, the officer in charge of the old ships there said yesterday he=20 thought his vessels could not make much of a contribution.=20 ""Nobody has contacted us about that,"" said Joseph Pecoraro, superintendent = of=20 the reserve fleet.=20 Unlike the ready reserve ships, the mothball vessels are neither modern nor= =20 set to sail anytime soon.=20 Pecoraro said the equipment on most of the ships has not been used in years= .=20 To use them to supply civilian power, he said, ""is not real simple.""=20 ""It's feasible,"" he said, but probably not practical.=20 On the other hand, using the ready reserve ships also has some drawbacks --= =20 crewing the ships, paying for fuel, and more seriously, the amount of=20 pollution produced by running the ship's diesel generators.=20 Johnston said the ships meet Environmental Protection Agency standards, but= =20 some environmental activists have grave misgivings. ""Nothing could be a=20 bigger disaster for air quality,"" said Russell Long, executive director of= =20 the Bluewater Network in San Francisco, which has been highly critical of a= ir=20 pollution caused by marine engines. ""These are very highly polluting engine= s.=20 They produce a hundred times more pollution per kilowatt hour than modern= =20 generators,"" he said.=20 Long says EPA standards for ships ""are pathetic.""=20 ""Ships are the worst polluters on the planet.""=20 Several of the ready reserve ships are in highly visible berths in San=20 Francisco. One of them, the cargo ship Cape Henry, is at Pier 27 at the foo= t=20 of Telegraph Hill, and another, the Cape Orlando, is at Pier 50, on the=20 southern waterfront, not far from Pacific Bell Park. The ship is visible fr= om=20 the stands and is a kind of floating backdrop to the right-field wall.=20 Nine of the ships are tied up at the former Alameda Naval Air Station, but= =20 any or all of them could be easily moved.=20 The ships have civilian crews, but are often confused with Navy ships becau= se=20 they are painted battleship gray. They are intended for use in time of=20 international crisis or other incident.=20 All of them have the capacity to generate electricity. Johnston said he was= =20 not sure exactly how much power his ships could supply, but it would be=20 enough for emergency services.=20 ""We could supply fire stations, or police stations, or hospitals, or the 91= 1=20 network,"" he said. ""There are all kinds of possibilities and we are more th= an=20 willing to consider any proposal,"" Johnston said.=20 ""It is better to plan now than to wait until the power goes out and then wo= rk=20 by flashlight,"" he said.=20 Johnston said he did not have the authority to conclude an agreement with= =20 local officials himself, but he would be glad ""to run a plan up the flagpol= e=20 in Washington.""=20 Power from ships has been used in the past in emergency situations. Many=20 years ago, said Capt. Patrick Moloney, executive director of the California= =20 Pilot Commission, power from the aircraft carrier Saratoga was used to supp= ly=20 the city of Tacoma, Wa., during an emergency.=20 However, he said, because of the complexity of connecting ship's power with= =20 the civilian grid, such applications are rare. ""It is a nice idea,"" he said= ,=20 ""but ships are not configured for it.""=20 E-mail Carl Nolte at cnolte@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 19=20 PG&E chairman wants to keep power lines=20 David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday, May 4, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /04/B U162707.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. may be more amenable to selling off its dams= =20 rather than its power lines if required to part with assets as part of the= =20 utility's bankruptcy proceedings, PG&E Chairman Robert Glynn said yesterday= .=20 In a meeting with Chronicle editors and writers, Glynn stressed that he sti= ll=20 hopes to get through the bankruptcy process without selling any of PG&E's= =20 resources to pay off creditors.=20 ""But if there is an asset to be sold, it's not clear that the power lines i= s=20 it,"" he said. ""Our hydro assets actually have a higher value.""=20 Glynn's comments may signal challenges down the road for Gov. Gray Davis'= =20 efforts to acquire the transmission systems of all three of California's=20 investor-owned utilities.=20 Southern California Edison already has agreed to sell its lines to the stat= e=20 for $2.7 billion. A similar accord is expected to be reached with San Diego= =20 Gas & Electric.=20 However, critics have said Davis would be purchasing a white elephant if he= =20 manages to buy only about a third of the statewide electricity grid. Withou= t=20 PG&E's lines, the Edison and San Diego systems would be of lesser value.=20 Glynn noted that he had tentatively agreed to sell off PG&E's power lines f= or=20 an undisclosed sum before the utility's negotiations with the state collaps= ed=20 in March.=20 ""But I've said pretty clearly that I don't want to sell off any part of our= =20 business,"" he said.=20 Glynn defended his decision to file for bankruptcy by saying it was the mos= t=20 efficient way to restore cash-strapped PG&E to credit-worthiness. The utili= ty=20 has racked up about $9 billion in debt because of runaway wholesale power= =20 prices.=20 ""The company's got to be able to pay its bills,"" Glynn said. ""We expect to= =20 pay all of our valid debts.""=20 He said PG&E will submit a proposed reorganization plan to the bankruptcy= =20 court in San Francisco by early August. That plan may include aspects of th= e=20 bailout accord reached between Davis and Edison.=20 ""If an element of it makes sense for us, we would be comfortable including= =20 it,"" Glynn said.=20 He said it appears likely that an average 40 percent rate increase already= =20 approved by state regulators will cover current energy purchases and that n= o=20 further rate hikes may be required.=20 Under this plan, the current average monthly PG&E electricity bill of $60= =20 will rise by about $18.=20 However, Glynn said the need for higher power bills will not be clear until= =20 the Public Utilities Commission decides how it will divide existing rates= =20 between PG&E and the state Department of Water Resources, which is spending= =20 about $50 million a day to keep California's lights on.=20 ""If the state wants to take all the money, then a solution does not exist,""= =20 he said.=20 Glynn said that despite recent progress in getting Californians to conserve= =20 energy, he believes the only way the state will solve its long-term power= =20 woes will be to build more generating facilities.=20 ""It is my personal belief that it's not possible to conserve our way back t= o=20 a stable supply-and-demand balance,"" he said. ""We've got to get back to the= =20 point where we have enough supply to meet demand every day of the year.""=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?B - 1=20 Bush shifts policy on conservation after meeting with GOP=20 Posted at 10:06 p.m. PDT Thursday, May 3, 2001=20 BY JIM PUZZANGHERA=20 Mercury News Washington Bureau=20 WASHINGTON -- On Monday, Vice President Dick Cheney used a major speech to= =20 largely dismiss energy conservation as an outdated notion from the 1970s. O= n=20 Thursday, President George W. Bush announced a major initiative to force=20 federal facilities in California and nationwide to conserve energy to try t= o=20 avoid blackouts.=20 What happened in those three days?=20 The impetus for the shift appears to have been a one-hour meeting Tuesday= =20 between Cheney and 18 Republican members of Congress from California on=20 Capitol Hill.=20 An energy conservation plan for federal agencies was brought up by=20 congressional Republicans, according to two participants. And the political= =20 ramifications on the party of appearing to do nothing to ease the crisis we= re=20 discussed . No Democrats were invited, even though they outnumber Republica= ns=20 in the state's congressional delegation 32 to 20 and the meeting was suppos= ed=20 to look at federal help for the California crisis.=20 Some California Republicans have been griping that the White House has not= =20 been showing enough concern for the state as it continues to struggle throu= gh=20 its energy crisis. Bush, who lost California by 1.3 million votes in=20 November, and top members of his administration have consistently stressed= =20 that the crisis is largely California's to solve.=20 ``I think there was a need for the administration to begin to weigh in on= =20 this thing especially because there's been so much finger-pointing. Democra= ts=20 have been trying to divert the real blame away from'' Gov. Gray Davis, said= =20 Rep. George Radanovich, R-Fresno, who attended the meeting. ``I mentioned t= o=20 the vice president that politically speaking we don't want that to happen. = We=20 want the blame to rest where it deserves to rest, with the governor. And th= ey=20 need to be concerned about that for politics in California.''=20 Damage control=20 Democrats, like Rep. Sam Farr, D-Salinas, said Thursday it's obvious the=20 White House got the message and the conservation plan is an attempt at dama= ge=20 control.=20 The president is ``worried the blackouts may be known as the `Bush Blackout= s'=20 and he wants them to be known as the `Davis Blackouts,'? '' said Farr, head= =20 of the state's Democratic congressional delegation. He wrote to Cheney on= =20 Thursday expressing ``extreme disappointment'' that the vice president had= =20 excluded Democrats from the Tuesday meeting. Despite several requests, Farr= =20 and his Democratic colleagues have yet to meet with Cheney or any other top= =20 administration officials on the issue.=20 Bush on Thursday denied there was any change in policy.=20 ``What the vice president and I understand is that you cannot conserve your= =20 way to energy independence,'' Bush said Thursday after meeting with Energy= =20 Secretary Spencer Abraham and Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz. ``We= =20 can do a better job in conservation, but we darn sure have to do a better j= ob=20 of finding more supply.''=20 A task force headed by Cheney is finalizing a national energy plan that is= =20 expected to put is major emphasis on increasing supply through more drillin= g=20 for oil and natural gas and greater use of coal and nuclear power.=20 Bush emphasized that ``this administration is deeply concerned about=20 California and its citizens'' as he instructed federal agencies to reduce= =20 their energy usage during Stage 2 or 3 power emergencies in California. The= =20 directive will extend to other states that find themselves facing blackouts= =20 this summer, such as those in the Pacific Northwest and the Northeast.=20 Steps to conserve=20 Among the measures, administration officials said, will be turning up=20 thermostats to 78 degrees, darkening interior hallways and pre-cooling=20 buildings at night. Wolfowitz said the Defense Department expected to reduc= e=20 its usage in California by 10 percent over last year and plans to hook up a= n=20 idle wind-powered generating facility at Edwards Air Force Base. All told,= =20 the Defense Department hopes to make about 200 megawatts of power available= =20 to the state this summer through reduced usage and added generation.=20 The presidential directive follows one issued by former President Clinton= =20 late last year to federal facilities in California and the Pacific Northwes= t=20 to conserve energy. The Bush administration said its move was more extensiv= e=20 because it directs all facilities nationwide to conserve and requires=20 agencies to report back their actions within 30 days.=20 Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Huntington Beach, said he and others at Tuesday's= =20 meeting urged that Bush travel to California. Bush has yet to visit the sta= te=20 despite traveling extensively through the country during his first three=20 months.=20 ``We suggested the president come out, the vice president come out, and any= =20 members of the administration come out so that the people know we're=20 engaged,'' Rohrabacher said.=20 California clearly was the main impetus for the Bush directive, and the=20 president dispatched Abraham to California on Thursday to discuss the plan= =20 with Davis and the regional heads of federal agencies. Dan Schnur, a=20 Republican consultant, said that was a good move for the White House.=20 ``Substantively, the Bush administration has been doing the right things, b= ut=20 because they haven't been out here making their case in person, it makes it= =20 much tougher for their case to be heard.,'' Schnur said. ``After the=20 Northridge earthquake, Clinton had half his Cabinet out here. None of them= =20 had anything official to do, but you couldn't turn around without seeing on= e=20 of them on local television talking about Clinton's commitment to rebuildin= g=20 after the earthquake.''=20 Abraham said the White House has responded to nearly every request the stat= e=20 made regarding the electricity crisis. But the administration has not=20 delivered the regionwide caps on electricity prices officials from Californ= ia=20 and the Pacific Northwest have pressed for.=20 The administration even looked into bringing nuclear submarines or aircraft= =20 carriers to the California coast and hooking up their generators to the=20 state's electricity grid. The idea was scrapped after federal officials=20 realized only a small amount of power could be supplied and that safety=20 issues could not be overcome, Abraham said.=20 Contact Jim Puzzanghera at (202) 383-6043 or at jpuzzanghera@krwashington.c= om Senate plans public power=20 Published Friday, May 4, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News=20 BY AUDREY COOPER=20 Associated Press=20 SACRAMENTO -- California is poised to enter the power business after the=20 state Senate on Thursday approved creation of a public power authority and= =20 sent its bill to Gov. Gray Davis.=20 A power authority, supporters said, will give the state more control over i= ts=20 wholesale electricity market by building and operating its own power plants= .=20 State-owned plants could charge lower prices, and building new plants could= =20 increase supply and ease wholesale prices.=20 If signed by Davis, the bill would create a California Consumer Power and= =20 Conservation Financing Authority that could issue up to $5 billion in reven= ue=20 bonds to pay for power plants, natural gas storage and additional pipelines= =20 and conservation programs.=20 Also Thursday, state Treasurer Phil Angelides blasted a Republican plan to= =20 use $5 billion of the state's surplus toward buying power, rather than=20 financing the entire amount with $12.5 billion in bonds.=20 Lawmakers ``are playing a dangerous game of financial roulette, putting in= =20 jeopardy the state's fiscal integrity and solvency,'' Angelides said.=20 Angelides has been pushing the Legislature to pass a bill that spells out a= =20 limit on the bonds by May 8. The bonds must be approved by then so the stat= e=20 can get a bridge loan to replenish the state's general fund until the bonds= =20 are sold.=20 In a letter to Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg late Wednesday, the=20 Republicans laid out an alternative plan. The bonds are to repay the state= =20 for $5 billion in power purchased since January for customers of Pacific Ga= s=20 & Electric Co., Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric. Th= e=20 remainder of the bond issue would pay for future power for those customers.= =20 Assembly Republican Leader Dave Cox, Sacramento, said taxpayers have the=20 surplus funds and should use that to get out of the crisis, rather than=20 financing the total bill.=20 ``There's no need for the bridge loan,'' Cox said. ``This is about fiscal= =20 responsibility, not borrowing money you don't have to borrow. The state of= =20 California needs to tighten its belt, just like California ratepayers and= =20 taxpayers had to.''=20 Davis has not decided whether to sign the power authority bill, the spokesm= an=20 said. But Davis has said he supports creating an authority similar to one i= n=20 New York. The New York authority has 10 power plants and 1,400 miles of=20 transmission lines and produces about 25 percent of the state's power.=20 The 24-14 vote on the bill was split down party lines. ALL CAPS HED=20 Published Friday, May 4, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News=20 Developments Thursday in California's energy crisis:=20 The state Senate sends a bill to the governor that would create a state=20 public power authority to build and buy power plants.=20 Secretary of State Bill Jones, a Republican candidate for governor, propose= s=20 a utility rescue plan that would take the state out of the electricity=20 business.=20 State Treasurer Phil Angelides says Assembly Republicans are ``holding thei= r=20 own state hostage'' by not approving a bond-authorization bill for power=20 purchases.=20 Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham meets in the Capitol with Gov. Gray Davis. Source:?Associated Press=20 Energy notebook=20 Vote delayed on $12 billion state bond for power.=20 May 4, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO - California lawmakers delayed voting on a $12 billion bond sale= =20 for power purchases after Republicans proposed to reduce the size of the sa= le=20 and use part of the state's surplus to cut electric rates.=20 Assembly Republican leader Dave Cox of Sacramento proposed reducing the bon= d=20 sale to $8 billion and using $5 billion of California's budget surplus to c= ut=20 rates for consumers.=20 California began buying power for its cash-strapped utilities this year and= =20 has spent $5.6 billion so far. The state expects to spend about $15.1 billi= on=20 on power this year, according to a report released this week by Gov. Gray= =20 Davis.=20 Lawyer hired to probe possible price-gouging=20 SACRAMENTO - A lawyer who won big verdicts against Ford Motor Co. and the= =20 Roman Catholic Church was appointed Wednesday to lead a state Senate=20 investigation into possible price-gouging and antitrust violations by=20 electricity producers.=20 Laurence Drivon, a Stockton lawyer, has taken a temporary leave from his=20 practice and will work in the office of Sen. Joe Dunn, D-Santa Ana.=20 Dunn chairs the committee that is looking into why California's energy pric= es=20 have skyrocketed, what legislative action must be taken to remedy the=20 problem, and whether there is any proof of criminal misconduct on the part = of=20 the power producers.=20 Drivon is credited as co-counsel for $295 million verdict in a 1999 case=20 against Ford for a rollover accident that killed three passengers in a 1978= =20 Bronco. Drivon also won a $30 million verdict against the Roman Catholic=20 Diocese of Stockton in 1998 after he showed the church knew a parish priest= =20 had molested two children but failed to intervene.=20 Dunn also announced the formation of a statewide coalition of district=20 attorneys to look into the allegations.=20 PG&E wants ISO to cease trying to bill it for power=20 SAN FRANCISCO - Pacific Gas & Electric Co. has asked a federal bankruptcy= =20 judge to stop the state's power grid manager from charging the utility for= =20 expensive last-minute electricity it has bought.=20 California's largest utility filed the motion Thursday, asking that the=20 Independent System Operator ""comply with bankruptcy law ... and stop billin= g=20 the utility for wholesale power purchased.""=20 The utility is barred from repaying debts incurred before its bankruptcy=20 filing without permission from U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali. PG&E= =20 also wants to stop paying the bill for any future ISO buys on its behalf.= =20 Jones floats plan to try to rescue utilities, state=20 SACRAMENTO - Saying power purchases will drive California deeply into debt,= =20 Secretary of State Bill Jones proposed a utility rescue plan Thursday that= =20 would take the state out of the electricity business.=20 ""The state of California must get out of the power business immediately to= =20 avoid mortgaging our children's future,"" said Jones, a Republican candidate= =20 for governor.=20 ""If the governor doesn't change course, it will take decades for California= 's=20 budget and economy to recover.""=20 Jones' four-part plan calls for:=20 Utility creditors to accept less than full payment in exchange for immediat= e=20 partial compensation.=20 A ""significant infusion"" of cash from the utilities' parent companies to he= lp=20 pay off the debts.=20 The utilities to accept less than full payment for money they owe themselve= s=20 for power they generated and sold to themselves at high prices through the= =20 state power pool.=20 The state would make low-interest loans to the utilities to cover the rest = of=20 their debts.=20 Instead of the state buying the utilities' transmission lines, as Davis has= =20 proposed, the utilities would retain them as loan collateral.=20 PG&E suit for $10 billion from ratepayers dismissed=20 SAN FRANCISCO - A federal judge has dismissed as premature a lawsuit filed= =20 against the state's Public Utilities Commission by California's largest=20 utility, Pacific Gas & Electric Co., that sought $10 billion from Californi= a=20 ratepayers.=20 PG&E had asked the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles to overrule PUC=20 decisions that the utility was not entitled to the money, which the utility= =20 spent buying electricity on the increasingly expensive wholesale market.=20 District Judge Ronald S.W. Lew dismissed the suit Wednesday, saying ""PG&E's= =20 claims are not yet ripe for review."" He said PG&E may refile once the=20 commission's interim orders become final, and a PG&E statement afterwards= =20 said that ""allows us to continue to pursue the merits of the case.""=20 State weighed connecting power grid to nuclear ships=20 SAN DIEGO - California officials considered tapping nuclear-powered warship= s=20 to supplement power during peak demand this summer, but dropped the idea=20 after deciding it wasn't worth the effort, Pentagon officials said Thursday= .=20 Linking nuclear-powered submarines and aircraft carriers to the state power= =20 grid is possible but would yield little electricity for the extensive=20 modifications that would be required, Pentagon spokesman Rear Adm. Craig=20 Quigley said.=20 ""It would not be much of an advantage ... to go through that engineering,""= =20 Quigley said.=20 Davis to ask generators for profit concessions=20 SACRAMENTO - Gov. Gray Davis asked the chief executives of the largest U.S.= =20 energy producers and traders to meet with him next week, when he will ask= =20 them to forgo some profit from selling power in the state.=20 The meeting is set for Wednesday in Sacramento.=20 The Associated Press, Bloomberg News and Register staff writer Kimberly Kin= dy=20 contributed to this report.=20 U.S. conservation order called Bush's best effort=20 The energy chief says there's not enough time for other action.=20 May 4, 2001=20 By DENA BUNIS The Orange County Register=20 WASHINGTON - President George W. Bush's order that federal agencies conserv= e=20 every megawatt they can is the best way he can help California live through= a=20 hot summer of expected blackouts, the nation's energy chief said Thursday.= =20 ""We have a crisis and an emergency this summer that could result in 30 to 3= 5=20 days of some form of blackouts taking place in California,'' Energy Secreta= ry=20 Spencer Abraham said after a White House meeting of the president's energy= =20 team. ""We don't have time between now and those occasions to develop new-= =20 generation sources sufficient to meet that challenge.''=20 Bush's order directs all agencies to report to Abraham within 30 days on=20 their plans for conserving power during peak demand and particularly in=20 California during electricity emergencies.=20 ""We're worried about blackouts that may occur this summer,'' Bush said afte= r=20 his meeting. ""And we want to be a part of any solutions.""=20 When California reaches a Stage 2 emergency, which means electricity reserv= es=20 fall below 5 percent, federal facilities will implement a conservation plan= =20 that includes setting thermostats at 78 degrees. Other measures under=20 consideration include installing more efficient lighting, closing off=20 unneeded space, and doing some work at off-peak times.=20 Off the table, Abraham said, were suggestions that the federal government= =20 transfer power to the state from nuclear submarines or aircraft carriers.= =20 They would yield little power and the potential for safety problems was=20 great.=20 Federal power usage amounts to a little less than 2 percent of California's= =20 electricity needs. About 1 percent of that is at military installations.=20 Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said his department's goal is a 10= =20 percent reduction in electricity use this summer and an additional 5 percen= t=20 by next summer.=20 ""We are going to do our part to try to mitigate the energy shortage through= a=20 combination of conservation, power generation an investment in energy=20 efficient methods,'' Wolfowitz said.=20 Abraham said there is no firm figure for nonmilitary conservation.=20 He flew to California on Thursday afternoon, another effort to blunt=20 criticism of the administration's inaction during the crisis.=20 He met with Gov. Gray Davis and was to meet today in San Francisco with=20 federal officials to talk about the conservation plan.=20 Davis on Wednesday had criticized the impending order as not enough. The=20 state has cut usage by 20 percent.=20 ""Every time we take an action there's someone somewhere who says we should = do=20 something different,'' Abraham said. ""We think this is the most constructiv= e=20 action we can take in this time.''=20 And while Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said of the president's action= =20 that ""every little bit helps,'' she and other Western senators Thursday=20 continued to criticize federal regulators for not going further to curb=20 prices.=20 ""This is unsustainable politically for this administration, for this=20 Congress,"" said Republican Sen. Gordon Smith of Oregon. Smith and Feinstein= =20 have authored a bill to allow much deeper price controls than those approve= d=20 by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission last week.=20 On the long-range front, Bush met with Mexican President Vicente Fox on=20 Thursday. They talked generally about the U.S. importing energy from Mexico= =20 and Canada, countries with large oil and gas reserves. [B] POWER UPDATE/ Bush directs feds to save energy in California (BridgeNews) May 3, 1952 GMT/1552 ET TOP STORIES: Bush directs federal government to save energy in California Washington, May 3 (AP) - President Bush on Thursday ordered all federal agencies in California to cut power use, saying ""we want to be a part of a= ny solutions"" to an energy crunch that could cripple the largest state. ( Story .19646 ) Air emissions exemptions in House energy bill criticized Santa Fe, N.M., May 3 (BridgeNews) - Legislation to temporarily exempt new power plants from air emissions limits isn't needed because state and feder= al regulations are flexible enough to allow for maximum output, Michael Kenney= ,=20 an executive of the California Air Resources Board, said Thursday, testifying before a U.S. House Energy and Air Quality subcommittee. Others argued provisions of the bill allowing businesses to generate and sell their own= =20 power are harmful to the environment and unfair to certain consumers. ( Story .19200 ) Pacificorp calls for region-wide US West power price cap Santa Fe, N.M., May 3 (BridgeNews) - Pacificorp wants region-wide price caps in U.S. western power markets with all market participants under the s= ame price mitigation rules, a company representative told a U.S. House energy subcommittee Thursday. The company is one of the few investor-owned utiliti= es outside of California to adopt such a position. ( Story .18379 ) Repeats: Duke Energy: Will pay to end Calif. power price probe Santa Fe, N.M., May 2 (BridgeNews) - Duke Energy North America said Wednesday it will build new generation in California, sell power on a=20 long-term basis, forgive some unpaid bills by state utilities and repay alleged overcharges for wholesale power if all investigations into alleged price-gouging by state and federal authorities are resolved at the same tim= e. Duke admitted no wrongdoing. ( Story .16332 ) OF INTEREST: --AMERICAS-- US Northeast real-time power prices high on warm weather Toms River, N.J., May 3 (BridgeNews) - Real time power prices in the Northeast U.S. were relatively strong early Thursday as above-normal temperatures swept through the region. However, most daily prices slipped a= s lower temperatures are forecast to move in on Friday. ( Story .17034 ) Calif. Gov. Davis says 50 Mw power plant licensed for summer New York, May 3 (BridgeNews) - California Governor Gray Davis announced Wednesday the licensing on a 50 Mw King City power project. This makes the fifth summer reliability power plant that has been permitted under the California Energy Commission's expedited emergency review process. ( Story .18775 ) FOCUS: Natgas distributors ready for possible summer price spike New York, May 3 (BridgeNews) - Local distribution companies (LDCs) do not plan to get caught short if warmer temperatures drive up the price of natur= al gas this summer. LDCs say they are ready for the possibility and are using various strategies, including hedging gas costs and entering into long-term supply pacts, to avoid having to buy in an extremely volatile spot market. ( Story .18313 ) Fund companies see US energy policy benefiting power sector New York, May 3 (BridgeNews) - As the U.S. flirts with an energy shortage and dramatic fuel and power price hikes, mutual funds are salivating over t= he prospects for companies like Duke Energy Corp., Calpine Corp., and Dynegy I= nc. Alternative energy companies like Capstone Turbine Corp. and Ballard Power Systems Inc., however, are being left out in the cold as federal energy pol= icy has shifted from emphasizing conservation to feeding supply. ( Story .15998 ) FULL: Allegheny Energy unit closes buy of Midwest gas-fired oprs New York, May 3 (BridgeNews) - Allegheny Energy Inc.'s Allegheny Energy Supply Co. LLC unit completed the acquisition of 1,710 megawatts of natural gas-fired merchant generating capacity in three Midwest states from Enron Corp.'s Enron North America. --Rajesh S. Kurup, BridgeNews ( Story .17696 ) US Press: Bush to order energy conservation at Calif. govt buildings New York, May 3 (BridgeNews) - President George Bush is expected Thursday to order federal office buildings in California to conserve energy this sum= mer as a way of helping to address the state's power crises and deflect critici= sm that the administration's energy policy is focusing solely on increased production, the New York Times reported Thursday. ( Story .16906 ) --EUROPE-- Nuclear reactor shut down in central Russia due to minor glitch Moscow, May 3 (BridgeNews) - A nuclear reactor was automatically shut down Thursday at the Balakovo nuclear power plant in Central Russia due to a min= or glitch in its electricity system, state utility Rosenergoatom said. The electricity fault presented no threat to the plant's safe operation and the radiation level at the site remained normal, Rosenergoatom added. ( Story .12186 ) Shell Q1 adj profits up 23% at $3.855 bln, beating forecasts London, May 3 (BridgeNews) - Royal Dutch/Shell on Thursday reported adjusted earnings on a current cost of supplies (CCS) basis for the first quarter of 2001 of $3.86 billion, up 23% from $3.13 billion for the same quarter last year. Net income for the quarter was $3.89 billion, up 17% fro= m $3.34 billion in the three months of 2000, the company said. The figures we= re above the top end of analysts' forecasts, which had pointed to adjusted CCS earnings of between $3.1-3.6 billion. ( Story .12297 ) FOCUS: Scottish Power rides west U.S. crisis; no clues on S. Water London, May 3 (BridgeNews) - Scottish Power is focussing on consolidating its position in the U.S. since its purchase of Pacificorp and amid the ongo= ing power crisis in the Western U.S., chief executive Ian Russell told reporter= s=20 at a conference Thursday. Russell said that Scottish Power had not yet made a decision on the future of Southern Water and would not be drawn into speculation over the likelihood of a sale to Italy's Enel. ( Story .16660 ) --ASIA/PACIFIC-- Taiwan to accept bids for new power plants around May-end Taipei, May 3 (BridgeNews) - Taiwan authorities plans to open a new round of bidding around the end of May for independent power producers (IPPs) to generate a total of 4,200 megawatts (MW) of electricity commencing in 2007-2009, an official at the Energy Commission under the Ministry of Econo= mic Affairs (MOEA) said Thursday. The invitation for IPP projects will be the fourth of its kind. ( Story .10571 ) SPOT NEWS LINKS: THE MARKETS: US FUTURES: UK FUTURES .1908 NY Natural Gas Pre-Opg .1795 IPE Nat Gas Review .1906 NY Natural Gas Review .1794 IPE Nat Gas Midday .1747 NY Natural Gas US/CANADA CASH NATURAL GAS UK/EUROPE CASH NATURAL GAS .1894 Henry Hub natural gas .1807 UK Spot Gas .1884 US/Canada Spot Natural Gas US CASH ELECTRICITY UK/EUROPE CASH ELECTRICITY .8575 California PX: Next day .1892 UK Power Index 0.0 .8576 .8577 WSCC Forwards (AM/PM) .1889 Nordic Power Market .8585 .8586 PJM Forwards (AM/PM) .1890 Spanish Power Market .8593 .8594 Cinergy Forwards (AM/PM) .1844 UK EFA Power Market .8597 .8598 Entergy Forwards (AM/PM) CANADA CASH ELECTRICITY .8601 .8602 ERCOT Forwards (AM/PM) .5637 Canadian Power Market .8603 New England Forwards .8587 .8600 TVA Forwards (AM/PM) OTHER .1873 US Nuclear Plants Operating Status .2029 BRIDGE CALENDAR: US POWER: Key events to watch .2030 US Utility Deregulation Digest .1704 US Utility M&amp;A Digest SYMBOL LINKS: Click below for adamb chart in Athena NATURAL GAS NYMEX - IPE - NYMEX ELECTRICITY Palo Verde electricity - COB electricity- Cinergy electricity - Entergy electricity - PJM electricity - BridgeNews Send comments to gennews@bridge.com Judge Dismisses $10B PG&E Suit By KAREN GAUDETTE Associated Press Writer SAN FRANCISCO (AP) via NewsEdge Corporation - A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed against the California Public Utilities Commission by the state's largest utility, which sought $10 billion from ratepayers. PG&amp;E had asked the U.S. District Court in Los Angeles to overrule PUC decisions that the utility was not entitled to the money, which the utility spent buying electricity on the increasingly expensive wholesale market. In dismissing the lawsuit Wednesday, Judge Ronald S.W. Lew said ``PG&amp;E's claims are not yet ripe for review,'' meaning the case wasn't ready for trial. Steve Maviglio, spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis, declared the decision a win for California ratepayers. ``PG&amp;E was banking on winning this case and using it as one of their excuses for not negotiating with the governor. It appears at least for now they failed,'' Maviglio said. But because the case was dismissed on procedural grounds rather than merit, PG&amp;E said the door was left open for the utility to refile its action once the commission makes final its interim orders on PG&amp;E's requested rate increase. ``The court determined that our lawsuit was premature because the CPUC had not yet finalized its various decisions on PG&amp;E's request for recovery of its costs to purchase wholesale power,'' PG&amp;E said in a statement. ``Today's action allows us to continue to pursue the merits of the case on a timely basis.'' A similar federal case filed by Southern California Edison is on hold, said company spokeswoman Clara Potes-Fellow. Edison, the state's second-largest utility, would drop that case as part of a rescue plan negotiated by Davis, which also includes the state buying the utility's transmission lines for $2.7 billion. Since last June, the two utilities say they have lost more than $14 billion. California's 1996 deregulation law froze electricity prices for customers of the state's three investor-owned utilities. When prices rose to record levels over the past year, PG&amp;E was unable to recoup the higher costs from its customers' bills. The undercollection, along with a failed deal to sell its transmission lines to the state, drove PG&amp;E to file for federal Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on April 6, the company argued. On Wednesday, the parent company, PG&amp;E Corp., reported a first-quarter loss of $951 million, or $2.62 per share. The first-quarter loss follows a fourth-quarter loss of $4.1 billion that also stemmed from continuing costs in California's power crisis. Bankruptcy Update/ PG&E Files Motion to Require CAISO to Follow Federal Law SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 3, 2001 via NewsEdge Corporation - Pacific Gas and Electric Company has filed a motion in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court asking the court to direct the California Independent System Operator (CAISO) to comply with bankruptcy law, its Tariff, and a recent Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) ruling, and stop billing the utility for wholesale power purchased. Pacific Gas and Electric Company's motion, which includes a request for a preliminary injunction, asks the court to enjoin the CAISO from requiring the utility to pay costs the CAISO has incurred and continues to incur to purchase wholesale power on its behalf, unless the utility can fully recover these costs. Bankruptcy law imposes an automatic stay to prevent parties from making certain claims or taking certain actions that would interfere with the estate or property of the estate of a Chapter 11 debtor. By purchasing power at costs higher than existing retail prices, and then sending the bill to the utility, the CAISO is violating the automatic stay provision and could be reducing the value of the company's assets by potentially hundreds of millions of dollars per month, depending on the average retail rate, the wholesale price, and the amount of power purchased by the CAISO. Recently, the CAISO sent Pacific Gas and Electric Company a bill for January and February spot market purchases that totaled nearly $1 billion. The action alleges that requiring the utility to pay more than it can collect in its existing generation-related rates would be improper under federal Bankruptcy Code because it is not in the best interest of the estate, would be an unauthorized post-petition use of Pacific Gas and Electric Company's property, and would force the utility to undertake credit on onerous terms. In addition, on April 6, 2001, FERC ordered the CAISO to comply with its February 14 order, in which FERC ordered that the CAISO could only buy power on behalf of creditworthy entities. Both Pacific Gas and Electric Company and Southern California Edison Company are no longer creditworthy companies. By continuing to purchase power on behalf of Pacific Gas and Electric Company, the CAISO is in violation of its own Tariff, FERC orders, and federal law. CONTACT: Pacific Gas and Electric Company | News Department,= =20 415/973-5930 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= San Jose Mercury News - California Officials Investigate Electric
 'Megawatt Laundering'; [EMail-Body]= California Officials Investigate Electric 'Megawatt Laundering' Steve Johnson , San Jose Mercury News, Calif. ( October 31, 2000 ) Oct. 30--While investigating this summer's stunning spike in electricity prices, state authorities have heard stories about a curious phenomenon: On days when the weather is hot, batches of power generated in California are sold to other states. A little later in the day, similar amounts of power are sold back to California -- but at much higher prices. The question is, is it the same power? If so, that could be ""megawatt laundering"" -- a multi-company conspiracy to evade California's wholesale price cap, which covers power generated in California but not power sold into California from elsewhere. Worried that such transactions could be costing consumers millions of dollars, several energy specialists raised concerns about megawatt laundering during a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission hearing a month ago in San Diego. And earlier this month, state Sen. Steve Peace, D-La Mesa -- who helped lead the push to deregulate electricity sales in California -- formally asked the commission to investigate the practice, which he termed ""potentially illegal market coordination."" But an unconfirmed news report last week said the federal agency had concluded that generators had not abused the market. And others say concerns about megawatt laundering are exaggerated. Among them is Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of the Independent Energy Producers Association, a power-firm trade group, and chairman of the Independent System Operator, which oversees most of California's power grid. While acknowledging that such laundering is possible, Smutny-Jones said there is no evidence it is actually occurring or is widespread. ""This is one of those things that's turning into an urban legend,"" he said. ""I don't want to characterize this as a significant problem."" Even some critics of the way power is purchased in California concede that most of what has been labeled megawatt laundering probably reflects nothing more sinister than the ability of some entrepreneurs to take advantage of a good deal when they see one. Nonetheless, they see evidence that at least some California-produced power is being sold out of and back into the state at a higher price. And they blame that on loopholes in the system that they say ought to be closed because the transactions are helping to drive up the cost of power. The Independent System Operator ""invites this type of activity,"" said Frank Wolak, a Stanford economist who chairs the non-profit corporation's market surveillance committee, which has warned of the potential for megawatt laundering in at least two reports this year. ""The thing that makes all these problems go is the fact that the ISO has said, `We'll pay whatever it takes to keep the lights on,' and that's screwing consumers big time."" In 1998, when the state's energy markets were deregulated, it was generally assumed that opening up the sale of electricity to competition would make power less expensive. As a precaution, however, officials at the Independent System Operator instituted wholesale price caps, which they lowered twice this summer to help keep a lid on costs. On July 1 this year, they reduced the cap from $750 per megawatt per hour to $500, one megawatt being sufficient power for 1,000 homes. Then, on Aug. 7, they cut it to $250. Unfortunately, things haven't worked out the way officials had hoped. Wholesale prices rose dramatically this year. And while a freeze on retail utility rates has temporarily shielded Pacific Gas & Electric Co. customers from those soaring costs, home electricity prices have tripled in San Diego, where a similar freeze already has come off. In the process, some generators learned that all it takes to get around the state's wholesale price caps is a basic understanding of how the market works. One of the best ways to get top dollar, they learned, was to hold off selling their electricity until the Independent System Operator issues what is known as an out-of-market call for energy, which amounts to an emergency request for electricity. From May through September this year, the overall price of power in the state averaged less than $125 per megawatt hour, according to authorities. But over the same period, power sold in response to out-of-market calls averaged more than $430. During the summer, when energy use is at a maximum, California typically imports about one-fourth of the power it uses from other states. Since power generated by firms in other states isn't limited by California's price cap, those companies generally are in a better position than California firms to make a killing on out-of-market sales. But by cutting a deal with a collaborator in another state, energy specialists say, California generators also can profit handsomely -- despite the cap. Here's how: Say a California generator has 100 megawatts. Instead of selling it in California, where the firm can receive no more than $250 per megawatt hour under the current cap, it finds a utility, an electricity broker or a corporate affiliate with an equal amount of power in another state, such as Arizona. Then -- just before an expected heat wave in California, which is likely to result in an out-of-market call for power here -- it convinces the other firm to do a trade. Under the deal, the California generator sends its 100 megawatts for one hour to the company in Arizona, where there is no price cap, and earns $300 or more per megawatt -- for a total of $300,000. In return, the Arizona firm ships its 100 megawatts for one hour here. Since that power isn't subject to California's cap, it earns perhaps $400 per megawatt -- for a total of $400,000. Presumably, energy specialists say, the two firms then split the $100,000 difference. The potential profit from such deals is considerable. Generators in and out of California received more than $110 million from out-of-market sales this summer, according to the Independent System Operator. But determining if megawatt laundering is really happening, how often and who might be benefiting, is difficult. One California investigator said authorities first suspected that megawatt laundering was occurring when they noticed that precisely the same amount of power was being sold to another state and then sold back into California minutes later. But other experts said the evidence has rarely been that clear. While hundreds of megawatts is sold into and out of the state on any given day, they said, the suspicion that firms were conspiring to sell the same power back and forth has stemmed largely from unfounded speculation. One big problem for investigators trying to learn if the system has been abused is that confidentiality rules keep many of the details about these electricity transactions private. ""Entities like us and others who may be suffering from the consequences of this laundering don't necessarily have the documents"" to prove it, said Gary Stern, director of market monitoring for Southern California Edison, one of the state's three main utilities. ""We can only speculate based on things we've heard from others about the practice....It's our hope that's one of the things that's being examined"" by the various federal and state agencies investigating this summer's extraordinary rise in California power prices. Indeed, while some people say megawatt laundering can be substantially limited by ending the practice of paying more than the wholesale cap for out-of-state power, others argue that it's just as important to eliminate the secrecy surrounding electricity transactions. ""I'd like to see more information"" made public, said Jim Bushnell, a researcher at the University of California Energy Institute in Berkeley, who specializes in analyzing the state's energy markets. ""There are a lot of rumors circulating around this,"" he said of megawatt laundering, ""and it would help clarify if this is a serious problem."" ----- To see more of the San Jose Mercury News, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.sjmercury.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= IEP News 4/30; [EMail-Body]= Today's news, and some from the weekend, in the following order: A year later, energy crisis shows no signs of cooling off, By Ed Mendel , San Diego Union Tribune April 30, 2001 (Quotes ??? ???Smutny on behalf of IEP) The Daily News of Los Angeles, April 27, 2001 Friday, Valley Edition, NEWS; ????Pg. N9, 275 words, PROPOSED LAW PUTS BOUNTY ON ENERGY MANIPULATORS, Staff ????And Wire Services (Quotes Smutny on behalf of IEP) San Jose Mercury News, April 27, 2001, Friday, SJ-ELECTRIC-SUIT, 245 words, ????Santa Clara County, Calif., Joins Lawsuit against Electric Suppliers, By ????John Woolfolk (Quotes Smutny on behalf of IEP) FERC Considers Imposing a Fee on Electricity Sales in California ????? ???Updated: Monday, April 30, 2001 12:40 AM?ET ????-- Dow Jones News Wire? ? Los Angeles Times, April 30, 2001, Monday,, Home Edition, Page 3, 792 words ????, CAPITOL JOURNAL; ?CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; ??How Sales Tax Is Falling ????Through a Loophole, GEORGE SKELTON, SACRAMENTO Los Angeles Times, April 30, 2001, Monday,, Home Edition, Page 3, 1808 ????words, CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; ??THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY CRISIS; ??LIST OF ????PG&E CREDITORS SHOWS FIRM'S WIDE REACH IN BUSINESS; ??BANKRUPTCY: IT ????INCLUDES SMALL AND BIG COMPANIES, GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND FORMER EMPLOYEES., ????TIM REITERMAN, TIMES STAFF WRITER, SAN FRANCISCO Los Angeles Times, April 30, 2001, Monday,, Home Edition, Page 3, 1228 ????words, CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; ??THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY CRISIS; ??POWER WOES ????COMPLICATE DISCUSSIONS ON BUDGET; ??FUNDING: GOV. DAVIS' PLAN FOR NEXT YEAR ????FACES DEMANDS FOR BILLIONS AS A RESERVE AND TO CUSHION ELECTRICITY RATE ????HIKES., DAN MORAIN, TIMES STAFF WRITER, SACRAMENTO Los Angeles Times, April 30, 2001, Monday,, Home Edition, Page 7, 839 words ????, COMMENTARY; ??WILL THE FERC SEE THE LIGHT ON THE LAW?, FRANK A. WOLAK, ????Frank A. Wolak, an economics professor at Stanford University, is, chairman ????of the Market Surveillance Committee of the California, Independent System ????Operator The New York Times, April 30, 2001, Monday, Late Edition - Final, Section ????A; Page 1; Column 5; Business/Financial Desk, 1444 words, While a Utility ????May Be Failing, Its Owner Is Not, By By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr. and LAURA M. ????HOLSON The San Francisco Chronicle, APRIL 30, 2001, MONDAY,, FINAL EDITION, NEWS;, ????Pg. A3, 1108 words, NEWSMAKER PROFILE; ???Nettie Hoge; ???Taking on power; ????Consumer advocate revels in uphill battle, Chuck Squatriglia The Washington Post, April 30, 2001, Monday, Final Edition, A SECTION; Pg. ????A03, 1669 words, Energy Forecast for Summer: No Blackouts but Price Spikes; ????Grid Managers Promote Conservation, Await New Plants, William Claiborne, ????Washington Post Staff Writer, CHICAGO The Associated Press State & Local Wire, April 30, 2001, Monday, BC cycle, ????9:49 AM Eastern Time, State and Regional, 594 words, Developments in ????California's energy crisis, By The Associated Press AP Online, April 29, 2001; Sunday, Domestic, non-Washington, general news ????item, 1313 words, Geothermal Plants Need More Steam, JENNIFER COLEMAN, ????MIDDLETOWN, Calif. The Associated Press State & Local Wire, April 29, 2001, Sunday, BC cycle, ????State and Regional, 413 words, Guns in schools, deregulation delay on ????lawmakers' agenda, By BRAD CAIN, Associated Press Writer, SALEM, Ore. Idaho Falls Post Register, April 29, 2001 Sunday, News; Pg. a1, 530 words, ????Plenty of blame to go around for West's power woes, PAUL MENSER Los Angeles Times, April 29, 2001, Sunday,, Home Edition, Page 6, 1312 ????words, THE STATE; ??HOW KILOWATT SOCIALISM SAVED L.A. FROM THE ENERGY CRISIS ????, JEFF STANSBURY, Jeff Stansbury is a PhD candidate in American history at ????UCLA. His, dissertation is on the role of the labor movement in the building ????of, L.A.'s infrastructure Los Angeles Times, April 29, 2001, Sunday,, Home Edition, Page 4, 558 words ????, CONSERVATION SANDBAGS; ??THE DAVIS ADMINISTRATION NEEDS TO LAUNCH A CRASH ????EDUCATION COURSE TO CONVINCE CALIFORNIANS OF THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE ????ELECTRICITY CRISIS AND THE NEED FOR FAR-REACHING ENERGY-SAVING MEASURES. Los Angeles Times, April 29, 2001, Sunday,, Home Edition, Page 27, 1316 ????words, BUSH: THE FIRST 100 DAYS; ??BUSH IS OFF TO A ROCKY START IN HIS ????HANDLING OF ALL THINGS CALIFORNIAN; ??POLITICS: BUT WHY WOO THE GOLDEN STATE ????WHEN HE CAN'T CARRY IT IN AN ELECTION 'NO MATTER HOW HARD HE TRIES,' ONE ????ANALYST POINTS OUT., RICHARD SIMON, TIMES STAFF WRITER, WASHINGTON Los Angeles Times, April 29, 2001, Sunday,, Home Edition, Page 2, 1290 ????words, WEEK IN REVIEW; ??TOP 10 STORIES / APRIL 23-27, Lisa Girion and ????Terril Yue Jones and Sallie Hofmeister and James Bates and Peter Pae and ????Jeff Leeds and Nancy Rivera Brooks and Peter Gosselin The New York Times, April 29, 2001, Sunday, Late Edition - Final, Section ????4; Page 17; Column 1; Editorial Desk, 756 words, Reckonings; The Real Wolf, ????By PAUL KRUGMAN Sacramento Bee, April 29, 2001, Sunday, Pg. A1;, 1323 words, Diesel plants ????spark concern They're expected to generate big air-quality problems when ????predicted summer blackouts hit., Chris Bowman and Stuart Leavenworth Bee ????Staff Writers Sacramento Bee, April 29, 2001, Sunday, Pg. A1, 1544 words, Why Edison, ????PG&E split on strategy, Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writer Sacramento Bee, April 29, 2001, Sunday, Pg. A3, 679 words, What will be ????fallout from California's energy meltdown?, Dan Walters The San Francisco Chronicle, APRIL 29, 2001, SUNDAY,, FINAL EDITION, ????INSIGHT;, Pg. D1, 1419 words, The energy crisis is good for you, Louis ????Freedberg Ventura County Star, April 29, 2001 Sunday, Editorials; Pg. B09, 704 words, ????Reality is what's needed for real policy ?GOVERNOR: Consumers deserve to get ????real facts from Davis., Dan Walters Los Angeles Times, April 28, 2001, Saturday,, Home Edition, Page 19, 679 ????words, OFFICIALS CALL PRICE STABILITY PLAN ILLEGAL; ??UTILITIES: AGENCY ????CHIEFS SAY THE FEDERAL PROPOSAL COULD ALSO CAUSE MORE BLACKOUTS THIS SUMMER. ????, NANCY VOGEL and MIGUEL BUSTILLO, TIMES STAFF WRITERS, SACRAMENTO Los Angeles Times, April 28, 2001, Saturday,, Home Edition, Page 19, 688 ????words, BILL COULD FOIL DAVIS' ELECTRICITY OFFENSIVE; ??POWER: CONGRESSMAN ????WANTS TO LET SMALL PRODUCERS SELL ON WHOLESALE MARKET. BACKERS SAY PLAN ????WOULD BOOST SUPPLY, BUT FOES SEE IT COSTING CALIFORNIA DEARLY., JULIE TAMAKI ????and MIGUEL BUSTILLO, TIMES STAFF WRITERS, SACRAMENTO Los Angeles Times, April 28, 2001, Saturday,, Home Edition, Page 2, 137 ????words, BRIEFLY / ENERGY; ??PUC ORDERS UTILITIES TO POST BLACKOUT DATA, Nancy ????Rivera Brooks Sacramento Bee, April 28, 2001, Saturday, Pg. A3;, 1109 words, Cities take ????new look at public power The state's uncertain electricity picture has local ????officials deciding it's time to revisit the idea of municipal utilities., ????Carrie Peyton Bee Staff Writer A year later, energy crisis shows no signs of cooling off By Ed Mendel San Diego Union Tribune April 30, 2001 SACRAMENTO -- The first anniversary of the California energy crisis is coming up next month, and as the Queen of England once remarked when the royal family seemed to deregulate, it's been an ""annus horribilis."" The horrible year for California began last May when electricity prices suddenly began to soar, triggering a debate about the cause of the mysterious price increase that is likely to continue for years. It started when a three-day heat wave, from May 21 to May 24, set records in some areas of the state and drove up the demand for electricity as Californians sought relief with air conditioning. More record heat June 14 in the San Francisco Bay Area strained the overloaded system of Pacific Gas & Electric and resulted in rolling blackouts, the planned temporary power outages that some fear may be routine this summer. The average price of electricity on the now-defunct Power Exchange soared to $120 per megawatt hour in June, five times higher than the same month the previous year, and remained roughly at that level until skyrocketing to $377 in December. San Diego sounded the statewide alarm last summer as San Diego Gas & Electric, the first utility to be deregulated, passed along much of the higher cost of electricity to its customers, until legislation rolled back and capped the utility's rates in September. The executive director of a San Diego consumers group, the Utility Consumers' Action Network, thinks the generators and the marketers of power, using sophisticated computer methods, learned something as the heat wave drove up the demand for power. ""It was the first time the generators had an opportunity to see how high the price could go,"" said UCAN'S Michael Shames. ""It was their primer. It was Gouge 101."" State Sen. Steve Peace, D-El Cajon, who chaired a two-house committee that completed the deregulation plan in 1996, had seen routine monitoring data suggesting that the power market was being manipulated to drive up prices. Peace took the unusual step last June of personally urging the adoption of a much lower price cap by the board of the agency that makes last-minute power purchases to maintain the grid, the Independent System Operator. But the motion failed by a single vote. The consumer representative who cast the decisive vote against the lower cap resigned afterward with a blast at Peace, complaining of heavy-handed pressure. Peace is unapologetic. He believes that stronger action by the ISO last June would have sent a signal that might have discouraged market manipulation. ""It's just like the Federal Reserve mis-timing an interest-rate move,"" Peace said. The former ISO chairman, who represents generators, cited an ISO report attributing the price increase last May to the heat wave, power plant outages, less hydroelectric power and higher prices for the natural gas used by power plants. ""I think all of those things showing up at the same time resulted in significantly higher prices,"" said Jan Smutny-Jones of the Independent Energy Producers. Why power prices remained at high levels and even soared last winter, instead of dropping as usual, is more difficult to explain. The ISO contended last month that generators overcharged by more than $6 billion from last May through February. But federal regulators, who have their critics, have found only $125 million in overcharges, making it an ""annus marvelous"" for generators. Ed Mendel is Capitol bureau chief for the Union-Tribune. Copyright 2001 Union-Tribune Publishing Co. The Daily News of Los Angeles April 27, 2001 Friday, Valley Edition SECTION: NEWS; Pg. N9 LENGTH: 275 words HEADLINE: PROPOSED LAW PUTS BOUNTY ON ENERGY MANIPULATORS BYLINE: Staff And Wire Services BODY: ??California stepped up its war on the power industry Thursday as state legislators offered to pay millions of dollars to ""bounty hunters"" who provide information leading to the arrest and conviction of energy executives and others who manipulate the electricity market. ???California ""is being plundered by an energy cartel,"" said Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamente, who is promoting a bill that would level criminal penalties for exploiting energy markets. ?""If what they are doing isn't illegal, it ought to be."" ???Bustamente was one of a crowd of state leaders who went before microphones. ???On the floor of the Assembly, Speaker Bob Hertzberg, D-Van Nuys, rallied his Democratic colleagues behind a bill to create a state power authority with equally blistering attacks on private power suppliers. ???But after Thursday's hearing before a Senate committee formed to investigate alleged price-fixing in the energy market, committee chairman Joe Dunn, D-Garden Grove, told a reporter: ""I've never seen this much smoke when there wasn't a fire."" ???Power generators insist they are operating fairly and say there is no evidence of them acting outside the law. ???Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of the Independent Energy Producers Association, dismissed the harsh rhetoric as unproductive. ""Putting people in prison isn't going to encourage more generation,"" Smutny-Jones said, warning that the political posturing would make energy generators think twice about investing in California. ???Also on Thursday, experts said federally ordered caps on wholesale electricity prices won't necessarily mean California will escape rolling blackouts this summer. Copyright 2001 San Jose Mercury News San Jose Mercury News April 27, 2001, Friday KR-ACC-NO: SJ-ELECTRIC-SUIT LENGTH: 245 words HEADLINE: Santa Clara County, Calif., Joins Lawsuit against Electric Suppliers BYLINE: By John Woolfolk BODY: ??Santa Clara County agreed Thursday to join a lawsuit against power suppliers, alleging they conspired to raise prices and boost profits while subjecting consumers to higher bills and rolling blackouts. ??The county is the first to join the suit originally filed by San Francisco in January. ?The suit seeks refunds for consumers of more than $ 1 billion in alleged excess electricity profits. ??""The San Francisco suit contains significant allegations of manipulation and collusion by the wholesalers, resulting in the disastrous consequences we're all familiar with,"" said lead deputy county counsel Alan Tieger. ""We looked at the evidence on which those allegations were grounded and found they were indeed supported by the evidence, expert and otherwise."" ??The suit names a dozen electricity generating and marketing companies, including Duke Energy and Enron Energy Marketing. ??Similar claims have been filed by three water districts in the San Diego area, and two class-action lawsuits by private attorneys on behalf of consumers are pending against power suppliers. ??The companies have vigorously denied the charges. ??""I don't think there will be any evidence of illegal activity by anyone,"" said Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of the Independent Energy Producers Association, when asked about various government probes. ??----- ??To see more of the San Jose Mercury News, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.sjmercury.com FERC Considers Imposing a Fee on Electricity Sales in California ???? Updated: Monday, April 30, 2001 12:40 AM?ET ????? ? Such a surcharge, at least in the short run, would fall hardest on the state of California, which since January has spent more than $5 billion buying power because the utilities have been unable to meet their obligations. For now, the idea is nothing more than a proposal that occupies one paragraph buried in a 39-page order issued Thursday concerning changes to California's flawed deregulated electricity market. The commission is seeking public comment on the surcharge proposal for 30 days. After that, it will decide whether to implement it. The fee was proposed by Commission Chairman Curt Hebert, a Mississippi Republican, as a way ""to stabilize the market,"" he said Friday, ""since part of the problem in California has to do with nonpayment of bills by the utilities."" But the provision also has the potential to funnel billions of dollars to energy suppliers at a time when those payments are the subject of intense negotiation. One of the utilities, PG&E Corp.'s Pacific Gas & Electric Co. (PCG, news, msgs), filed for protection from creditors under U.S. bankruptcy law on April 6, hoping to settle its claims with power suppliers for something less than face value. Representatives of Pacific Gas & Electric and Edison International's (EIX, news, msgs) Southern California Edison declined to comment on the FERC proposal Friday. The surcharge idea faces stiff opposition from some state officials, one of whom said it amounts to an ""unwarranted intrusion"" into state jurisdiction. Loretta Lynch, president of the California Public Utilities Commission, said imposition of a surcharge would put pressure on wholesale-power costs that already are too high. Bulk power cost $7 billion in California in 1999 and topped $27 billion last year as prices careened out of control. Ms. Lynch said she opposes the surcharge provision and the entire order given Thursday, but that it will be up to the full commission to decide how -- or whether -- to file a challenge at FERC. A spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis said ""the governor would be strongly opposed to any attempt to siphon money away from the state"" and expects to lodge an objection. Los Angeles Times ?????????????????????April 30, 2001, Monday, Home Edition SECTION: Part A; Part 1; Page 3; Metro Desk LENGTH: 792 words HEADLINE: CAPITOL JOURNAL; CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; How Sales Tax Is Falling Through a Loophole BYLINE: GEORGE SKELTON DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Dot-coms are in distress and laying off. Silicon Valley is a home buyer's bazaar. The Nasdaq is nauseous. So is this any time to be siccing the tax collector on Internet retailers? ??You bet. Coddling these techie traders with tax favors doesn't seem to be helping them much anyway. So why not treat e-tailers like everyone else, like brick-and-mortar merchants? Treat everybody evenhandedly. ??That's the view of Assemblywoman Carole Migden (D-San Francisco), assertive chair of the Assembly Appropriations Committee. For the second straight year, Migden is pushing a bill she says will close a loophole that benefits some Internet retailers. She insists it's about fairly enforcing existing law, not about a new Web tax, as critics claim. ??Present law requires Internet e-tailers to collect the sales tax if they have a physical presence in California, such as a traditional brick-and-mortar store. But some big outfits have created separate out-of-state subsidiaries to handle their Internet orders. Same goods, same ads--with a large tax loophole because the subsidiary ostensibly does not have a physical presence in California. ??Never mind that an unsatisfied customer of bookseller Barnes & Noble dot-com, for example, can return the Internet purchase to the local Barnes & Noble store. ??Many e-tailers with dual ""bricks-and-clicks"" operations do collect the sales tax from Internet customers. Migden cites Macy's, Wal-Mart, REI, Hewlett-Packard and Eddie Bauer. Others refuse, she says: Barnes & Noble, Borders Books, KB Toys, Gateway Computers, Radio Shack. ??Her bill simply ""clarifies"" that the sales tax applies when the e-tailer is affiliated with a California business, sells identical products, and they market jointly. ??""Right now,"" Migden contends, ""certain big businesses blatantly violate the tax law and put hard-working, honest small business people at a disadvantage."" ??* ??Gov. Gray Davis is miffed at Migden, she hears. He vetoed her bill last year, declaring ""it would send the wrong signal about California's international role as the incubator of the dot-com community."" Internet marketing ""must be given time to mature,"" he maintained. ??Now Migden's at it again. ""The governor's exercised. He thinks I'm jamming him,"" she says. ""But I'm moving the bill. He can veto it if he wants. I'm putting it on his desk."" ??It already has cleared the Assembly tax committee and will shoot out of her panel Wednesday, headed for the Assembly floor. Last year, Democrats backed the bill. Republicans opposed it, siding with the Democratic governor. ??Davis fears some future opponent will claim he signed a bill to tax the Internet. Migden is frustrated by that Internet tax tag, calling it ""a lazy misinterpretation."" ??""I'm not picking on e-commerce,"" she protests. ""I'm picking on the multinationals who are arrogantly evading the law in complicity with the state Board of Equalization."" ??That would be, in particular, Republican board member Dean Andal of Stockton. ""It's the usual liberal nut case bill,"" Andal says. ""Just a bill chasing no problem."" ??* ??The BOE administers the sales tax. And Andal does agree that if an Internet purchase can be returned to a store, the e-tailer legally must collect the tax. ""We've been looking into that,"" he says. ??The board shouldn't have to look far. Barnes & Noble tells e-customers right on its Web site that ""you can return purchases to ANY Barnes & Noble store for in-store credit."" ??But other than that, Andal contends, a company has a constitutional right to create an out-of-state subsidiary to avoid taxes. ??And, he notes, we're talking about relative pennies: $ 17 million annually, the BOE estimates, compared to $ 39 billion in total California sales tax collections. That lost revenue would cover only about seven hours worth of electricity the state now is buying for utilities. ??But e-tailing is bound to grow. Tax avoidance could become significant, benefiting dot-coms while discriminating against small retailers and the poor who cannot afford Internet access. ??Migden will be in a strong position to change sales tax policy if she wins her race next year for the five-member BOE. She's the early front-runner. ??Her concern--her reverence--is for the local booksellers, the mom-and-pop merchants, the neighbor shopkeepers who can be smothered by the big tax evaders. ""The little guy with the books stacked in the back,"" she says, ""sweeping the sidewalk, putting on extra locks, obeying the law and collecting taxes--trying to make a go."" ??Davis wants to be seen as a futuristic, New Age pol, worthy of campaign donations from wealthy Web masters. But he can manage that without tromping on his Democratic roots as protector of the little guy. LOAD-DATE: April 30, 2001 of 103 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ?????????????????????April 30, 2001, Monday, Home Edition SECTION: Part A; Part 1; Page 3; Metro Desk LENGTH: 1808 words HEADLINE: CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY CRISIS; LIST OF PG&E CREDITORS SHOWS FIRM'S WIDE REACH IN BUSINESS; BANKRUPTCY: IT INCLUDES SMALL AND BIG COMPANIES, GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND FORMER EMPLOYEES. BYLINE: TIM REITERMAN, TIMES STAFF WRITER DATELINE: SAN FRANCISCO BODY: ??It reads like a phone book: Able Auto Body, Able Building Maintenance, Able Fence Co., Able Printing, Able Termite & Pest Control. . . . ??These companies are among about 50,000 entries on Pacific Gas & Electric Co.'s roster of creditors recently filed in U.S. Bankruptcy Court. ??Another company, A&J Electrical Cable Corp. of Hayward, has supplied PG&E with utility cables since 1980. But now the unpaid bills are hitting the $ 100,000 mark--and that is a big deal to a relatively small business. ??""Who would ever think that PG&E would be in bankruptcy?"" said owner Magdalene Reilly. ""This is something affecting people. I've got a lot of paychecks on Friday. ??""We have orders for the rest of the year from PG&E ,"" she added. ""It is a question: Do you decide to ship? . . . We probably will. They are a good customer."" ??When PG&E filed for Chapter 11 protection from creditors April 6, businesses from California to Canada were caught by surprise. The names of the 20 biggest creditors, some with billion-dollar claims, were filed with the court. The utility also submitted a list of potential creditors--more than 3,500 pages worth. ??The roster speaks to the remarkable economic clout and reach of a company that prospered for almost a century before plunging into the third-biggest bankruptcy case in U.S. history. It provides a glimpse into the relationships between a giant utility--the state's largest--and businesses of all sorts and sizes. And it underscores the high stakes as a bankruptcy judge reorders PG&E's financial affairs and decides in the coming months, if not years, who should be paid and how much. ??The case, said U.S. bankruptcy trustee Linda Ekstrom Stanley, ""has a ripple effect. . . . Creditors are affected, and they can't pay their bills either."" ??There are small companies and conglomerates that sold power to PG&E. ??There are financial institutions from Wall Street to San Francisco's Montgomery Street that lent money or provided services. ??There are government agencies at all levels, even the California Public Utilities Commission. ??There are some retired PG&E employees and officers, including at least one of the company's former chief executive officers. ??But there also are vendors that have provided goods and services to PG&E for years: tree trimming around power lines, bodywork for the utility's truck fleet, fencing for its vast land holdings, calibration of meters, fans to cool electrical transformers, printing of brochures, signs for office doors, flight suits for aviators who patrol power lines, limousine service for traveling executives. ??No dollar amounts are attached to names on the master list. But records and interviews with dozens of creditors show that the sums owed range from hundreds of millions of dollars to very little--or nothing at all. Many of the smaller creditors were unaware they were on the roster until contacted by The Times. ??PG&E used to buy pump filters from California Pump & Supply in Sacramento. ??""We just closed out their account because they owed us $ 29,"" said office manager Lisa Giordano. ""It's a hassle to get anyone over there. I just wrote it off."" ??The utility bought $ 38 worth of plants from Forest Nursery in Los Osos, west of San Luis Obispo. ""It's nothing to go to court about, especially since they paid it,"" said bookkeeper Lori Parsons. ??A wine wholesaler, an ice cream company and a coastal hotel are listed. So is Sing A Long Productions in Burlingame, which supples disc jockeys and karaoke. ??""I am sure we have done business with PG&E and other companies that have parties from time to time,"" said owner Nick Foster. ""Maybe somebody forgot that we did not get paid."" ??PG&E spokesman Ron Low said the list includes everyone to whom the utility wrote a check in the last two years, such as homeowners who received energy conservation rebates and retirees who received checks related to benefits. ??""It was an attempt to notify anybody who possibly could have a claim against the company and to cast the widest net possible,"" he said. ??Several PG&E retirees, such as Robert W. Oliver of Berkeley, were baffled by their inclusion on the list. ""I draw a little pension,"" said Oliver, who was a personnel executive and left the company in 1980. ""It's a vested pension."" ??Another retiree on the list is former Chief Executive Richard A. Clarke. ??He and about 10 other former high-ranking PG&E executives or their survivors have retained an attorney to help ensure that their retirement benefits are protected during the bankruptcy case. ??""We don't want someone to get the idea that this is a bunch of well-heeled executives trying to get a piece of the action,"" said the attorney, John T. Hansen. ""Some in our group are widows of former executives who depend on the pensions they receive as survivors."" ??Hansen said some retired executives have deferred-compensation packages that might be considered a general unsecured bankruptcy claim. ??One concern, he said, is that PG&E Chairman Robert D. Glynn Jr. wrote recently in a San Francisco Chronicle op-ed article that health care plans and other benefits ""for employees and most retirees"" will continue. ??""We would want to know what 'most' is,"" Hansen said. ""We want to sort it out."" ??Low of PG&E said fewer than 100 retired employees, most former officers, ""have a portion of their pension that is unsecured."" That means their claims will be handled in Bankruptcy Court with those of other unsecured creditors whose debts are not backed by utility assets. ??The spokesman emphasized that ex-employees could be on the list because they received a check from the company for something. ??Companies and individuals on the list, PG&E said, will be contacted and given an opportunity to state their claims, which the utility will file with the court May 11. ??Meanwhile, the effects of the bankruptcy filing continue to ripple beyond the utility. ??PG&E's action hit AA Safe & Lock Co. in Santa Cruz particularly hard. The firm replaces keys and locks for PG&E offices and trucks. ??""We are a small business, and it is a big account,"" said owner Paul Bing, who declined to say what the utility owes. ""We haven't been doing as much for them since the whole crisis started."" ??A Hayward firm that conducts environmental testing when PG&E remodels or razes buildings is out money too. Ken Byk, president of Forensic Analytical, would not provide a figure but said: ""I am obviously concerned. . . . They are a good customer, but any time you run into these problems, it's disappointing."" ??California Steam Inc. of Sacramento services PG&E pressure washers and water recyclers at its truck-cleaning facilities. ""I have just a couple of invoices out,"" said service manager Bruce Amlin. The debt, he said, is less than $ 500. ??A similar amount is owed to California Turbo Inc. in Ontario. Sales manager Cam Young said the utility has not paid for eight fans used to cool electrical transformers. ""We're a small business,"" Young said, adding with a laugh: ""We might have to eat peanut butter and jelly for four or five months."" ??Within days of the bankruptcy filing, PG&E sent about 12,000 creditors letters that began: ""Valued Goods and Services Provider: . . . Unfortunately, the bankruptcy code precludes payment for goods and services received prior to the date of filing. Payments on this pre-petition debt will be settled as part of the plan of reorganization."" The company assured vendors that they will be paid for any future purchases. ??Some are not only forgiving, they are outspokenly loyal to PG&E. ??The relationship between the utility and AG Signs of Stockton spans two decades. When Tony Guebara was starting his company, PG&E gave him business. ""They try to help the little guy,"" he said. ""Just about everybody in town is a vendor. They have people here who paint their trucks."" ??AG Signs now has five employees and supplies PG&E with door lettering for trucks, name plaques for office doors and signs and flags for construction sites. ??Guebara said the utility's debt does not worry him: ""PG&E has treated me real well. If I lose a couple of bucks because of this adversity, that is OK. . . . I don't think we've seen the last of PG&E."" ??Many businesses and individuals said they had no idea why the company believes it owes them money. ??Being included on the creditors list left the Vallejo Camp Fire Girls & Boys and other charitable organizations somewhat confused. Officials of one Berkeley church could only speculate that it was listed because PG&E stock was bequeathed to the congregation decades ago. ??Twylah Lemargie, manager of the Cancer Aid Thrift Shop in Grass Valley, said the utility is not even a customer. ""PG&E did come in and replaced lots of our ceiling lights with the long tubes,"" she said. ""But it was done free as an energy saver."" ??A number of vendors said PG&E's account is paid up. ??The utility rented temporary housing units for workers on a hydroelectric project about two years ago, but California RV Rentals in Rio Lindo is still named as a creditor. ""They don't owe me money,"" said Sandra Weaver, the manager. ""If they want to give me some, it's OK."" ??Many creditors are health clubs and health care providers: medical and dental offices, foot and joint specialists, pharmacies, chiropractors. ??When informed that the Castro Valley Chamber of Commerce was on the creditors list, the woman who answered the phone laughed uproariously. Then Executive Director Bonnie Dettmer came to the line. ??""I'm going to guess it's membership dues,"" she said. ""They are a member and they have been very supportive. I would bet they belong to every chamber of commerce."" ??One creditor is the state agency that PG&E says drove the company into insolvency by not allowing full recovery of its wholesale power costs. ??""They owe us $ 5.9 million . . . for environmental impact reports on PG&E projects,"" said Paul Clanon, director of the Public Utilities Commission's energy division. ""It's a serious amount of money but currently is not having an impact."" ??Top 10 Creditors ??The creditors owed the most money by Pacific Gas & Electric Co., according to the company's Chapter 11 filing: ???Creditor owed ???Bank of New York ????????????????????????$2.20 billion ???California Power Exchange ???????????????$1.96 billion ???Bankers Trust Co. ???????????????????????$1.30 billion ???California Independent System Operator ??$1.12 billion ???Bank of America* ?????????????????????????$938 million ???US Bank million ???Calpine Gilroy Cogeneration LP ????????????$58 million ???Calpine Greenleaf Inc. ????????????????????$49 million ???Crocket Cogen million ???Calpine King City Cogen LLC ???????????????$45 million ??* Heading a group of banks ??Source: U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Northern DIstrict of California GRAPHIC: GRAPHIC: Top 10 Creditors, Los Angeles Times PHOTO: Magdalene Reilly, owner of A&J Electrical Cable Corp. of Hayward, says her company has supplied Pacific Gas & Electric with utility cables since 1980, and that their unpaid bills are now hitting the $100,000 mark. ?PHOTOGRAPHER: ROBERT DURELL / Los Angeles Times PHOTO: ""They try to help the little guy,"" says Tony Guebara, owner of AG Signs in Stockton, of PG&E. He has been doing business with utility for two decades. ?PHOTOGRAPHER: ROBERT DURELL / Los Angeles Times LOAD-DATE: April 30, 2001 of 103 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ?????????????????????April 30, 2001, Monday, Home Edition SECTION: Part A; Part 1; Page 3; Metro Desk LENGTH: 1228 words HEADLINE: CALIFORNIA AND THE WEST; THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY CRISIS; POWER WOES COMPLICATE DISCUSSIONS ON BUDGET; FUNDING: GOV. DAVIS' PLAN FOR NEXT YEAR FACES DEMANDS FOR BILLIONS AS A RESERVE AND TO CUSHION ELECTRICITY RATE HIKES. BYLINE: DAN MORAIN, TIMES STAFF WRITER DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Jockeying over the state's next spending plan, a tradition that usually takes place in the summer, already is turning intense as the energy crisis casts a pall over what otherwise might have been relatively painless budget squabbles. ??A key state senator, worried about the slowing economy, is looking for places to pare as much as $ 4 billion from Gov. Gray Davis' proposed $ 104.7-billion budget. And Republicans are beginning to demand that the state spend billions in general tax money to cushion electricity rate hikes of up to 40% being imposed on consumers and businesses. ??Davis won't sign the budget for the 2001-02 fiscal year into law until late June at the earliest. But with California mired in the energy crisis and the economy slowing, the new budget is shaping up to be especially vexing. ??California's largest utility and a major private employer, Pacific Gas & Electric, is in bankruptcy. The state has spent $ 5.2 billion in general tax money to buy electricity, with no end in sight. Even before summer temperatures hit, Sacramento shelled out $ 90 million to buy electricity in a single day last week. ??And the Wall Street rating firm Standard & Poor's, unsure that the state will be reimbursed for the power purchases, lowered California's credit rating two notches for the first time since the recession of the 1990s. ??Brightening an otherwise cloudy situation, income tax payments are meeting or exceeding predictions. More than $ 8 billion in checks from April income tax returns have flooded into the Franchise Tax Board, said Department of Finance economist Ted Gibson. On one day last week, the state's haul was $ 3.6 billion, a record. ??""Receipts are very much on track, I'm relieved to tell you,"" Gibson said. ??But even as budget writers were exhaling, the payments merely offered proof that the economy was strong last year, back when then-President Bill Clinton was heralding the longest period of economic growth in U.S. history, and Californians' lexicon did not include the term ""rolling blackout."" ??State income and sales tax receipts softened in the first few months of 2001, an indication that people will be earning less this year--and paying less in taxes next year. ??Seeing trouble ahead, Senate Budget Committee Chairman Steve Peace (D-El Cajon) wants to boost the state's emergency reserve, which was $ 1.9 billion in January. To do that, Peace last week called on budget committee members to come up with a list of cuts totaling $ 2 billion to $ 4 billion. ??Without a larger reserve heading into 2002, Peace said, the slowing economy could force the state to make deep cuts or raise taxes next year, at a time when most legislators and Davis will be running for reelection. ??""The thing to be worried about is not the current year, but the trend line,"" Peace said. ??He adds a caveat for the spending plan that by law must be in place by July 1: There will be cuts if legislators fail to approve legislation that state Treasurer Phil Angelides says he needs to obtain short-term loans and market long-term bonds to finance electricity purchases. ??Davis and Angelides are preparing the largest bond sale--a way that government borrows money--in U.S. history, as much as $ 12.4 billion. The state would use the proceeds to ease the shock to utility customers of record high electricity prices this year. The bond debt would be paid off over a period of perhaps 15 years. ??Given the size and complexity of the bond issue, many legislators say Angelides may not be able to sell it for months. ??Davis, however, has an immediate need for money. The governor must release a revised state budget within weeks. So, he is pushing for legislators to approve legislation that would allow Angelides to obtain a short-term loan of as much as $ 6 billion. ??At least some of the proceeds of the long-term bonds would be used to pay off the short-term loan--sort of like using one credit card to pay the balance on a second piece of plastic. ??Republican legislators are balking at the idea. ??Back in December, before the state entered the power buying business, GOP legislators had called for $ 3.2 billion in tax cuts. With the energy crisis complicating the financial situation, some Republicans are contending that Davis should use as much as $ 5 billion from the budget surplus to soften the impact of electricity rate hikes. ??""That will be a de facto tax cut,"" said Senate Republican leader Jim Brulte of Rancho Cucamonga. ""Our Democratic friends want to do the bridge financing so they can increase the size of government."" ??Republicans are in the minority. But they have a significant voice, because state law requires that both houses of the Legislature approve spending decisions by a two-thirds vote. ??The state Constitution says the budget must be in place by the July 1 start of the new fiscal year. Davis signed his first two budgets on time. Given this year's uncertainties, however, some legislators are thinking twice about making July vacation plans. ??The sudden turnaround may come as a shock to many legislators and lobbyists who seek slices of the state budget pie. ??In recent years, legislators have grown used to the multibillion-dollar windfalls of tax payments, which allowed them to deliver new swimming pools, school programs, museums, parks, social and health care spending, and tax cuts to their constituents. Indeed, the budget in Davis' first two years grew 37%, even as the Democratic governor and legislators cut taxes by $ 3.9 billion. ??In a Legislature populated by term-limited newcomers, only a handful of current legislators were in the Capitol in the early 1990s, when the worst recession to hit California since the Great Depression caused the state budget to actually shrink. Then-Gov. Pete Wilson and the Legislature reacted to a $ 14-billion budget gap by raising taxes by more than $ 5 billion and slashing spending. ??""It is not going to be the pie-in-the-sky budget some of us thought it would be last year and even as late as January,"" said Sen. Jack O'Connell (D-San Luis Obispo). ??Veterans of the annual summer rite say there is no template for the coming budget fights. Jean Ross of the California Budget Project, a private budget watchdog and advocacy group, said Davis and legislators not only must pay attention to the economy. ??They also must take into account many unknowns: Will the judge overseeing PG&E's bankruptcy proceeding seek to raise rates further? Will federal energy regulators be able to effectively limit wholesale electricity costs? What will the economic impact be of summer blackouts? ??""It's a lot more complex and unpredictable than other years,"" Ross said. ??Legislators say they are lowering their sights. But letters from state senators requesting money for their favored projects fill five large red binders. ""You wouldn't know there is a money shortage based on requests in appropriations,"" said Assembly Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Carole Migden (D-San Francisco), preparing for what she calls her ""hatchet role"" of blocking bills that require spending. ??For his part, Davis has not decided to significantly cut back on his proposals, ranging from a sales tax ""holiday"" timed for back-to-school shopping to plans to clean sewage from beaches. He won't reveal those decisions until he releases his revised spending plan. LOAD-DATE: April 30, 2001 of 103 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ?????????????????????April 30, 2001, Monday, Home Edition SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 7; Op Ed Desk LENGTH: 839 words HEADLINE: COMMENTARY; WILL THE FERC SEE THE LIGHT ON THE LAW? BYLINE: FRANK A. WOLAK, Frank A. Wolak, an economics professor at Stanford University, is, chairman of the Market Surveillance Committee of the California, Independent System Operator BODY: ??Out-of-state firms selling into the California wholesale electricity market at exorbitant prices have been blamed for the current electricity crisis. They are, claim many observers, exercising their market power to raise wholesale electricity prices. ??Although it is not illegal under California or U.S. antitrust law for a firm to exercise its market power, it is illegal to do so under the Federal Power Act. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC, which regulates the California wholesale electricity market, is the entity charged with enforcing this law. Its refusal to take sufficient actions that would result in ""just and reasonable"" wholesale electricity rates is the fundamental cause of California's current energy crisis. It is highly unlikely that anything it has done in the last week has changed things at all. ??In 1935, Congress passed the Federal Power Act and required the Federal Power Commission (the predecessor to FERC) to set ""just and reasonable"" wholesale electricity prices. Just and reasonable prices are those that recover production costs, including a ""fair"" rate of return on the capital invested by the firm. Moreover, if the FERC finds that wholesale electricity prices are unjust and unreasonable, the Federal Power Act gives it wide-ranging discretion to take actions that result in just and reasonable prices. The FERC can also order refunds for any payments by consumers in excess of just and reasonable prices. ??Almost 10 years ago, the FERC began to allow generators to receive market prices instead of prices set through a cost-of-service regulatory process. However, there is no guarantee that market prices meet the just and reasonable standard required by the Federal Power Act. Markets often set prices substantially in excess of the production costs for significant periods of time. This occurs because one or more firms operating in the market have what economists call market power--the ability of a firm to raise market prices and profit from it. ??However, if no firm possesses market power, the market price should be very close to a price that only recovers production costs. In such a circumstance, the price set by the market satisfies the just and reasonable standard of the Federal Power Act. ??Before it allows any market participant to receive a market price rather than a cost-based price set through a regulatory process, the FERC requires each participant to demonstrate that it does not have market power. In other words, each market participant must submit sworn testimony to the FERC demonstrating it does not have the ability to raise market prices and profit from this behavior. ??Each of the out-of-state generators made these filings before they began selling into the California market, which started in April 1998. Each firm had its authority to receive market prices approved by the FERC for a three-year period that ends before this summer for several of the firms. It is virtually impossible to determine on a prospective basis whether a firm possesses market power. Moreover, the methodology used by the FERC to make this determination uses analytical techniques that have long been acknowledged by the economics profession as grossly inadequate. The events of the past 10 months have demonstrated that contrary to their filings stating otherwise, all of the out-of-state generators possess significant market power. ??A number of independent studies have shown that the market power exercised by these firms has resulted in unjust and unreasonable rates from May 2000, until now. Moreover, in its Dec. 15, 2000 report on the California electricity market, the FERC concluded that wholesale electricity prices during the summer and autumn of 2000 were unjust and unreasonable and reflected the exercise of significant market power. ??Despite its own conclusion, the FERC thus far has refused to set just and reasonable prices for wholesale electricity in California. Instead, the FERC implemented market rule changes that have enhanced the ability of these firms to set excessive wholesale electricity prices. In addition, it has refused to order refunds for any overpayment during the summer and autumn of 2000 for the prices that it deemed unjust and unreasonable. ??Fortunately for California consumers, the California Public Utilities Commission and Gov. Gray Davis refused to be accomplices in the FERC's decision not to enforce the Federal Power Act. They refused to pass on to California consumers prices that the FERC itself had determined were unjust and unreasonable. ??Because these out-of-state firms must apply for renewal of their market-based pricing authority before this summer, the FERC has one more opportunity to set just and reasonable prices for wholesale electricity in California. It has before it several proposals that would enforce all provisions of the Federal Power Act. The health of the California and national economies would be severely undermined if the FERC continues to ignore its legal obligations. LOAD-DATE: April 30, 2001 of 103 DOCUMENTS ??????????????????Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company New York Times ?????????????????April 30, 2001, Monday, Late Edition - Final SECTION: Section A; Page 1; Column 5; Business/Financial Desk LENGTH: 1444 words HEADLINE: While a Utility May Be Failing, Its Owner Is Not BYLINE: ?By By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr. and LAURA M. HOLSON BODY: ??Pacific Gas and Electric, the giant California utility, may have just made one of the largest bankruptcy filings in history, but it has been a banner year for the rest of its parent company, the PG& E Corporation. ??In Bethesda, Md., far from the energy crisis in California, another PG& E subsidiary, National Energy Group, earned $162 million last year and ranked as the nation's third-largest power trader. Compensation for the unit's executives soared. Many investors now believe that the subsidiary, just a decade in the making, is by itself worth more than its 96-year-old utility sibling. ???How did National Energy get so big so fast? By using cash, partly generated by its sister utility, to buy unregulated power plants in the Northeast, expand trading-floor operations and sell power across the country. The exact numbers are in dispute, but much of Nationals Energy's profits last year came from California. ??Most other large utilities have done the same thing over the past decade, building national or even global power companies from roots in local monopolies. But nowhere is the success of these unregulated businesses more of an issue than in California, where PG& E's investments may be challenged in bankruptcy court. ??Still, such transfers of assets were fundamental to deregulation plans in two dozen states, and they were encouraged by federal rules designed to build a new wholesale marketplace in electricity. ??And today, the offspring of the nation's utilities dominate that market, after industry leader Enron. ?Eight of the nation's 10 largest power marketers are affiliates or spinoffs of regulated utilities, controlling about 42 percent of power trading. ??It is largely these unregulated power producers and traders whose sales of power in California have prompted accusations by state leaders of price gouging, and demands for the price caps that federal regulators took their first, halting steps toward embracing last week. ??The profitability of the utilities' unregulated operations is becoming clear as companies report earnings for the first three months of the year. ??For example, Reliant Energy reported that operating income at its unregulated wholesale energy business soared to $216 million in the first quarter, or 16 percent more than at its regulated utility, which serves Houston. This week, Reliant expects to spin off its unregulated businesses through an initial public stock offering that would put a market value on the new company of as much as $8.8 billion -- more than the rest of Reliant. ??A number of other major utility companies have spinoffs or trading and generation units that now earn nearly as much as, or more than, their core utility operations. These include Duke Energy in Charlotte, N.C.; Sempra Energy of San Diego; the Southern Company in Atlanta; the Constellation Energy Group in Baltimore; and Utilicorp United in Kansas City, Mo. ??In some places, the growth of the unregulated businesses continues to raise questions of fairness -- particularly where utilities have been permitted to transfer plants to the new units at deep discounts to their market value. Critics say that ratepayers, whose bills paid for the plants' construction, should benefit more when the plants are sold. ??In Florida, a commission on energy deregulation formed by Gov. Jeb Bush has proposed permitting such transfers on the grounds that they are needed to create a new wholesale marketplace. Opponents, including the Florida Municipal Electric Association, which represents utilities owned by local governments, say the plan would produce a $9 billion windfall that should go to ratepayers. ??In California, some creditors of Pacific Gas and Electric have signaled that they will want the bankruptcy court in San Francisco to review parent PG& E's efforts to keep its unregulated businesses out of creditors' reach. ??And the California Public Utilities Commission is investigating whether PG& E and Edison International, whose Southern California Edison utility unit is also near insolvency, have improperly transferred cash to their parents and to unregulated sister companies. ??A recent audit ordered by the commission showed that Pacific Gas and Electric transferred $4.1 billion to PG& E from 1997 to 1999. Most of that went to dividends and stock repurchases, but $838 million was invested in other subsidiaries, primarily its National Energy Group unit. Southern California Edison transferred $4.8 billion to its parent company between 1996 and November 2000, a separate audit showed; Edison International invested $2.5 billion in its unregulated Mission Group subsidiaries during the same period. ??Executives of the companies say the transfers were proper. Audits have shown that ""we followed the rules and didn't do anything wrong,"" said PG& E's chief executive, Robert Glynn. ""We did not ask consumers in California to support any of the losses that occurred in those businesses when we started them up,"" he said. Now, forcing the unregulated units to support their ailing sister utility, he said, ""would be no different than calling up shareholders and saying, 'The California electric bills are pretty high; send some money in so we can give it back to them.' "" ??Loretta Lynch, the president of the utilities commission, took a different view. ""Should we look backward,"" she asked, ""and say, 'Hey, wait a minute -- that corporate structure profited by all of our power payments to them in the past, and they should participate in helping us through to get to a solution in the future?' "" ??The cornerstone deal of PG& E's unregulated energy business was struck four years ago, when it acquired the hydroelectric and fossil-fueled generation plants of New England Electric System for $1.6 billion. PG& E is now one of the largest generators in the Northeast, operating plants that can light up to five million average-sized homes. ??While California officials say Pacific Gas and Electric's woes have been caused, at least in part, by market manipulation by out-of-state generators, the Justice Department has been investigating possible market abuses involving PG& E and two other companies in New England. Mr. Glynn said that PG& E had done nothing wrong and that the company has responded to Justice Department requests for information. ??Overall, PG& E's National Energy Group has 30 power plants in 10 states, and others under development or construction that include one in Athens, N.Y., that is expected to begin supplying electricity to New York City in 2003. It also operates an energy trading operation in Bethesda and controls a natural gas pipeline into Northern California. ??To Wall Street, the utility companies' investments in unregulated businesses were a necessary survival tactic, as investors demanded faster-growing profits. ??""The stock market was going like gangbusters, and the utilities' returns of 11 percent weren't cutting it,"" said Richard Cortright, a utility analyst at Standard and Poor's, the bond rating agency. ??Moreover, as deregulation loomed, industry executives saw no choice but to make new investments. ""It looked like the utility opportunity was going to start shrinking,"" Mr. Glynn said. ??Consumer groups question whether utilities would have invested more in improving basic service if they had not had the option of putting money elsewhere. ??Mike Florio, a lawyer with The Utility Reform Network, a consumer group in San Francisco, cited findings last year by state regulators that from 1987 to 1995, Pacific Gas & Electric spent nearly $550 million less on maintaining electric and gas facilities than had been factored into its rates. Separately, in 1999, the utility agreed to pay about $29 million to settle charges that consumers were endangered because it failed to trim trees near high-voltage power lines. ??""Several hundred million dollars didn't get spent for maintenance, and that ultimately falls to the bottom line as profit,"" Mr. Florio said. ??Mr. Glynn said the utility had always spent appropriate sums on maintenance, coming within one-half of one percent of the amount built into rates over a 20-year period. ??In the big picture, he said, it was hard to see how PG& E had been a winner in deregulation, even before its utility's humiliating bankruptcy. ""If you look at what happened, the net of it was a loss,"" Mr. Glynn said, ""because the value leaked out on the regulated utility side faster than we were able to build it on the nonregulated side."" About This Report ??This article is part of a joint reporting effort with the PBS series ""Frontline,"" which will broadcast a documentary about California's energy crisis on June 5. ??http://www.nytimes.com GRAPHIC: Charts: ""The Biggest Power Marketers"" Most of the biggest unregulated power marketers and traders are owned by the the country's biggest electric utilities or have been spun off by them. Here are the top 10, based on 2000 sales. Companies owned or spun off from utilities: Enron Power and affliliates MEGAWATTS SOLD IN 2000 (IN MILLIONS): 590.2 MARKET SHARE: 13.03% CHANGE FROM 1999: + 97% Companies owned or spun off from utilities: American Electric Power Service MEGAWATTS SOLD IN 2000 (IN MILLIONS): 401.3 MARKET SHARE: 8.86 CHANGE FROM 1999: +84 Companies owned or spun off from utilities: PG&E Energy and affiliates MEGAWATTS SOLD IN 2000 (IN MILLIONS): 282.6 MARKET SHARE: 6.24 CHANGE FROM 1999: +62 Companies owned or spun off from utilities: Duke Energy and affiliates MEGAWATTS SOLD IN 2000 (IN MILLIONS): 276.2 MARKET SHARE: 6.10 CHANGE FROM 1999: +226 Companies owned or spun off from utilities: Reliant Energy and affiliates MEGAWATTS SOLD IN 2000 (IN MILLIONS): 204.3 MARKET SHARE: 4.51 CHANGE FROM 1999: +166 Companies owned or spun off from utilities: Mirant Americas Energy and affiliates MEGAWATTS SOLD IN 2000 (IN MILLIONS): 202.6 MARKET SHARE: 4.47 CHANGE FROM 1999: +23 Companies owned or spun off from utilities: Aquila Energy Marketing MEGAWATTS SOLD IN 2000 (IN MILLIONS): 186.7 MARKET SHARE: 4.12 CHANGE FROM 1999: +4 Companies owned or spun off from utilities: Cinergy operating companies MEGAWATTS SOLD IN 2000 (IN MILLIONS): 166.4 MARKET SHARE: 3.67 CHANGE FROM 1999: +246 Companies owned or spun off from utilities: Constellation Power Source MEGAWATTS SOLD IN 2000 (IN MILLIONS): 162.3 MARKET SHARE: 3.58 CHANGE FROM 1999: +222 Companies owned or spun off from utilities: Williams Energy and affiliates MEGAWATTS SOLD IN 2000 (IN MILLIONS): 138.4 MARKET SHARE: 3.05 CHANGE FROM 1999: +127 (Source: Platt Power Markets Week)(pg. A17) ""Outdoing Their Parents"" Taking advantage of deregulation, many of the country's biggest power utilities have set up unregulated subsidiaries to trade and produce power. These subsidiaries have become extremely profitable, often outperforming their regulated corporate siblings. UTILITY: Duke Energy OPERATING INCOME (MILLIONS) 1Q '00: +$465 1Q '01: +460 UNREGULATED BUSINESS: North American Wholesale Energy OPERATING INCOME (MILLIONS) 1Q '00: +82 1Q '01: +348 RELATIONSHIP OF UNREGULATED BUSINESS TO UTILITY North American Wholesale Energy is a subsidiary of Duke Energy. UTILITY: Reliant Energy OPERATING INCOME (MILLIONS) 1Q '00: +$202 1Q '01: +186 UNREGULATED BUSINESS: Wholesale Energy OPERATING INCOME (MILLIONS) 1Q '00: -22 1Q '01: +216 RELATIONSHIP OF UNREGULATED BUSINESS TO UTILITY Reliant Energy plans to sell 18 percent of Reliant Resources -- mostly Wholesale Energy -- this week. UTILITY: Southern OPERATING INCOME (MILLIONS) 1Q '00: +$439 1Q '01: +483 UNREGULATED BUSINESS: Mirant OPERATING INCOME (MILLIONS) 1Q '00: +169 1Q '01: +279 RELATIONSHIP OF UNREGULATED BUSINESS TO UTILITY Southern completed the spinoff of Mirant on April 2. (Source: S.E.C. filings)(pg. A17) LOAD-DATE: April 30, 2001 of 103 DOCUMENTS ?????????????????Copyright 2001 The Chronicle Publishing Co. ?????????????????????????The San Francisco Chronicle ????????????????????APRIL 30, 2001, MONDAY, FINAL EDITION SECTION: NEWS; Pg. A3 LENGTH: 1108 words HEADLINE: NEWSMAKER PROFILE; Nettie Hoge; Taking on power; Consumer advocate revels in uphill battle SOURCE: Chronicle Staff Writer BYLINE: Chuck Squatriglia BODY: Given a choice, Nettie Hoge would rather be out in her garden right about now, digging in the dirt. ???Instead, the head of The Utility Reform Network is digging into California's energy mess, making sure the average Joe doesn't take it in the kisser as lawmakers, regulators and utility brass hats try to keep the lights on and utilities afloat. ???It's grueling work, full of long hours that leave precious little time for the gardening Hoge so adores. Not that she's complaining. Hoge, 50, honestly loves her job and insists she wouldn't do anything else. ???""I've got a mutant gene,"" she said with a laugh as she relaxed, for just a moment, in a spartan office littered with messy piles of paperwork. ""I've always wanted to do this."" ???TURN has been keeping tabs on companies like Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Pacific Bell for more than 25 years. Hoge and her crew lobby the Public Utilities Commission, counsel lawmakers, analyze reports and file the occasional lawsuit. They are, in short, professional gadflies who represent the public in a system that some say favors big business. ???""The biggest protector of the consumer, by far, has been TURN,"" said Bob Gnaizda, public policy director for the Greenlining Institute in San Francisco. ""(Hoge) has made TURN into the leading consumer utility advocate in the nation."" ???It's not glamorous work, nor is it particularly lucrative. Hoge, a lawyer by training, took a pay cut when she accepted the $75,000-a-year job in 1995. And, truth be told, most folks have no idea Hoge is in their corner. ???""There are other rewards,"" she said. ""You don't get the adoration of Joe Citizen standing up and yelling, 'Yay TURN!' But there's an excitement about being involved in the discussions where the big decisions are made."" ???The youngest of four children, Hoge bounced around the middle of the country as she grew up, following her career Army officer father from Kansas to Oklahoma to Texas. ???""All the places where you can shoot big guns,"" she joked. ???Hoge graduated from high school in Pullman, Wash. After a stint at the University of Southern California, she graduated Phi Beta Kappa from Washington State University and earned a law degree from the University of San Francisco. ???Hoge's entire career has been spent protecting the underdog. During a two-year stint as a law school graduate at Brobeck, Phleger & Harrison in San Francisco, ""I got into trouble for doing too much pro bono work,"" Hoge recalled. ""The partners would come around each month to check our billable hours. Mine were always zero."" ???Since taking the helm almost six years ago, Hoge has led TURN to some impressive consumer victories. They include persuading the Public Utilities Commission to create a $352 million fund to underwrite rural telephone service and bringing an end to ratepayer subsidies of PG&E's Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant in 2002. ???Hoge, a stickler for detail, has a reputation for giving exhaustive answers to even mundane questions. ???""Everybody agrees she knows what she's talking about,"" said Harvey Rosenfield, president of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights. ""In many respects, TURN is the intellectual force in this debate. Those of us who are deeply involved in this issue rely upon Nettie to lay out the facts for us."" ???Hoge is surprised people think her wonkish, but admits she is circumspect. ???""My big fear is being marginalized and having people think we (at TURN) don't know what we're talking about,"" she said. ""Maybe I overcompensate."" ???Few doubt Hoge's smarts, but she has plenty of critics among the utilities, lawmakers and lobbyists she has crossed swords with over the years. However, none of them will say anything publicly. ???""We have no comment on her,"" said Shawn Cooper, a spokesman for Pacific Gas and Electric Corp., the parent company of the foundering utility. ???It was the same story with Southern California Edison and many of the legislators who have criticized Hoge and TURN in recent years. ???Hoge isn't surprised her adversaries are keeping mum. ???""There's nothing for them to gain by saying anything negative about us because the public is on our side,"" she said. ???Still, TURN has drawn criticism from Carl Wood, generally considered the most ardent consumer advocate on the PUC. ???""Frankly, I would have expected myself to be on the same page with (TURN) more than I actually am,"" Wood said. ""I'm not sure they wholeheartedly believe in regulation, and I think it comes from a distrust of regulators. But maybe I'm taking it personally."" ???Wood chastised TURN for supporting utility divestiture of generating plants as California's deregulation effort got under way. And he said Hoge places too much emphasis on the utilities' role in the energy mess instead of focusing on the profiteering of power generators. ???""The utilities have some culpability, but they are not the main driver behind the crisis,"" Wood said. ""TURN's interventions do not reflect that reality."" ???Still, he gave TURN high marks and credited Hoge with making it a far more effective advocate. ???Hoge admits she has had her hands full with the energy crisis, saying she and her staff ""are trying to keep our health and sanity."" ???Asked if she would have joined TURN if she had known how crazy California's energy market would become and how hard she would have to work, Hoge was characteristically wary. ???""I don't think anyone would want to sign up for this,"" she said after a moment's pause. ""On the one hand, it's very serious, very rewarding work. But on the other hand, sometimes you're just beating your head against the wall."" ???Still, Hoge doesn't plan to give up the fight anytime soon. ???""But at some point I'd like to retreat and spend some time contemplating the forest for the trees."" ???Or the garden for the plants. ??Nettie Hoge -- Age: 50. ???-- Residence: Oakland. ???-- Job: Executive director, The Utility Reform Network, October 1995 to present. The utility and telecommunications industry watchdog group in San Francisco represents consumers before the Public Utilities Commission, the Legislature and elsewhere. ???-- Education: Bachelor's degree in communications, Phi Beta Kappa, from Washington State University, 1976. Law degree, cum laude, from University of San Francisco, 1985. ???-- Background: Most of Hoge's 25-year career has been spent protecting the little guy, first as a social worker and later as an attorney with Consumers Union and the California Department of Insurance under Insurance Commissioner John Garamendi.E-mail Chuck Squatriglia at csquatriglia@sfchronicle.com. GRAPHIC: PHOTO, (1) Nettie Hoge is respected for her encyclopedic knowledge of regulatory issues., (2) Nettie Hoge has headed The Utility Reform Network for six years. ""I've always wanted to do this,"" she says. / John O'Hara/The Chronicle LOAD-DATE: April 30, 2001 of 103 DOCUMENTS 2001 The Washington Post Washington Post ????????????????????April 30, 2001, Monday, Final Edition SECTION: A SECTION; Pg. A03 LENGTH: 1669 words HEADLINE: Energy Forecast for Summer: No Blackouts but Price Spikes; Grid Managers Promote Conservation, Await New Plants BYLINE: William Claiborne, Washington Post Staff Writer DATELINE: CHICAGO BODY: ??The rest of the United States is virtually certain to escape rolling blackouts this summer like the ones that have plagued California, but record price hikes for electricity are likely in many places, energy experts agree. ???Despite their confidence that they can survive everything but an extremely hot summer without power outages, managers of the nation's interconnecting electrical power grids are anxiously awaiting new power plants that are scheduled to come on-line. They are also promoting more frugal consumption by power customers and seeking ways to avoid distribution logjams during peak demand periods this summer. ???""We see a big distinction between California and the rest of the country,"" said David Costello, an economist in charge of short-term forecasting for the Energy Information Administration, the statistical arm of the Department of Energy. ""We have no real reason to believe anyplace is unusually at risk."" ???But record spikes in the price of electricity are a given for this summer, some industry analysts say, because a growing proportion of power plants now run on natural gas, which has doubled in price over the past year. ???The DOE estimates that electricity demand will grow 2.3 percent nationally this year, with much higher increases in the West and the South. At the same time, the reserve capacity margin that utilities try to build into their systems to handle the hottest days -- when use of air conditioners and other appliances taxes supplies -- has been falling in some regions to well less than the desired 15 percent above peak summer loads. ???That means utilities may have to import large volumes of electricity over transmission systems that were not designed to handle them. What power officials are hoping to avoid are critical shortfalls in generating capacity in some regions, followed by overwhelming strains on aging high-voltage transmission lines as power is bought and sold across the country in increasingly competitive electricity markets. ???Even though scores of new power plants have been built in the Northeast, South and Midwest in recent months and many more are on the drawing boards, the expected 15 percent increase in new generation will not be fully on-line for another two years. That leaves parts of the nation vulnerable to outages if there are prolonged heat waves this summer, or if utilities are unable to start up new or rebuilt gas-fired power plants as scheduled, according to energy experts. ???Despite all those potential problems, there is no reason to believe that California's power nightmares will spread to the rest of the country, officials said. ???This year, utilities have announced they are adding 40 to 50 gigawatts of new generating capacity to gas-fired plants across the nation, compared with only 22 gigawatts that were added last year, Costello said. He said that even if half of those announced plants never materialize, this year's new capacity is certain to be as great or greater than last year's, meaning that the predicted increased consumption can probably be met. A gigawatt is 1,000 megawatts, or enough to power about 1 million homes. ???""We don't know that [transmission] infrastructure has really been fixed, but my sense is they're in better shape overall as far as capacity is concerned,"" Costello said. ???The nation's 203,600-mile high-voltage network has undergone relatively few changes in 50 years, during which deregulation has prompted electricity wholesalers to sell power at even greater distances to reach more lucrative markets, adding to the pressure on the grid system. ???California, in a sense, has been serving as a stalking horse for other states, some of which also deregulated their electricity systems and are consciously avoiding doing anything that resembles the California model. ???Eugene Gorzelnik, spokesman for the North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC), which oversees the interlocking power grids, said: ""Obviously, there will be problems in California and there's nothing that's going on that will solve those problems. But a lot of [utilities] people are looking at California and saying to themselves, 'Can I do this in a way they didn't?' That's a positive development."" ???Apart from California, the worst problems are expected in adjoining western states, as Golden State electrical grid managers scramble to buy electricity at a time when power production at the region's hydroelectric dams is already being cut because of shrinking water levels in reservoirs. ???The Northwest Power Planning Council recently reported that the demand for electricity has grown 24 percent in the past decade while new generation has grown only 4 percent. ???NERC is not expected to issue its long-awaited pre-summer electricity reliability assessment -- a document that forecasts peak generation and consumption -- until next month. But in interviews, officials of many of the 10 regional reliability councils that comprise the national grid system appeared fairly sanguine about the prospect of avoiding widespread brownouts this summer. ???""Assuming normal weather and assuming our generating units come off maintenance on schedule, we don't anticipate any particular problems meeting our loads,"" said Bill Reinke, executive director of the Southeastern Electricity Reliability Council. ???Reinke said the region was adding 300 miles of new transmission lines, has 5,600 megawatts of new generating capacity -- enough to power 5.6 million homes -- and is seeking to identify potential transmission bottlenecks so it can take preemptive corrective measures against distribution failures. ???Outside the West, the greatest potential for blackouts may be in New York, where the near certainty of transmission logjams in an antiquated infrastructure prompted Consolidated Edison Co. to request approval for 11 combustion turbine mini-generators in case of a power shortage. Residents and conservationists are appealing court approval of the generators on environmental grounds. ???Stephen Allen, spokesman for the Northeast Power Coordinating Council said, ""If the 400 megawatts the generators provide go on-line, it'll still be tight, but New York should be okay."" He said Upstate New York should have surplus electricity to sell to New York City, although some experts say transmission bottlenecks could make it difficult for New York City to import power on abnormally hot days. ???New York City customers, who have already had their electricity rates increased 40 percent in the last two years, could see prices rise an additional 50 percent because of the deregulated power industry's dependence on gas-fired generation, according to some analysts. ???Allen said that since last June, New England has added mostly gas-fired plants that generate more than 1,000 megawatts and should have an additional 2,000 megawatts on-line before the end of the summer. He said the region should have a 15 percent to 18 percent capacity margin. ???The Mid-Atlantic Area Council, made up of Maryland, Virginia, the District of Columbia, Delaware, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, is expecting a reserve margin of more than 16 percent and an increase of 2,100 megawatts in generating capacity over last year, to about 60,000 megawatts, according to the council's president, Phillip G. Harris. Harris said the council met last year's peak of 49,288 megawatts with no problems, though the summer of 2000 was relatively cool. ???Harris cited several reasons ""why we are not like California,"" including a decision to centralize all planning, which California did not; the creation of a regional market instead of a state-based marketplace like California's, and a policy of only slow, incremental changes in the grid. ???""A single misstep can have huge consequences,"" Harris said. ""We're tinkering with something that has worked for 100 years, so you better do it right."" ???In the Midwest, utilities expect a peak demand this summer of 55,221 megawatts, compared with 52,214 megawatts last summer, according to Richard Bulley, executive director of the six-state Mid-America Interconnected Network. But keeping pace with the nearly 6 percent increase in demand is the addition of 5,470 megawatts of capacity, Bulley said. ???""We do not anticipate any major limitations on the region's bulk transmission system, and we project a healthy reserve margin of more than 18 percent,"" he said. ???Since 1998, 33 companies have proposed projects in Illinois totaling 25,000 megawatts of gas-fired power. Although no one expects all of that to come on-line, the state's total generating capacity is just under 34,000 megawatts, meaning that even if only a modest amount of the anticipated power was added, the region would have a cushion, even in a hot summer. ???Officials of Commonwealth Edison Co., the biggest utility in Illinois, say that new or rebuilt electrical distribution facilities should prevent a repeat of the kind of disastrous power outages that crippled offices in Chicago's Loop last summer, when lines broke and transformers burst into flames. ???Few power grids are in as good shape as Texas's. The state anticipates a 23 percent power margin this summer and the addition of 9,188 megawatts of new generating capacity this year, according to Heather Tindall, spokeswoman for the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT). Texas utilities have 27 new power plants under construction and 31 more in the planning stages, she said. ???As a result, ERCOT is forecasting almost 70,000 megawatts of generating capacity this summer, compared with a peak demand of 57,600 megawatts on one 111-degree day last summer. ???Tindall said that after studying California's system, the Texas grid made a ""concerted effort"" to operate theirs differently. For example, she said, Texas supports utilities entering into long-term contracts for power, while in California, power companies did not enter into such contracts and were forced to pay exorbitant prices at peak times. LOAD-DATE: April 30, 2001 of 103 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ???????????????????????April 30, 2001, Monday, BC cycle AM Eastern Time SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 594 words HEADLINE: Developments in California's energy crisis BYLINE: By The Associated Press BODY: ??Developments in California's energy crisis: ??MONDAY: ??- Members of the Assembly Subcommittee on Natural Gas Costs and Availability unveil legislation to cut natural gas prices. ??- The state remains free of power alerts as electricity reserves stay above 7 percent. ??FRIDAY: ??-Gov. Gray Davis calls a federal regulatory order ""a Trojan horse"" that will profit power generators at California ratepayers' expense. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is considering requiring the state's electric grid operator to add a surcharge on power sales to pay generators the money they are owed by the state's two large financially strapped utilities. ??- State power buyers have asked for another $500 million to buy electricity for the customers of three cash-strapped utilities. That brings the total amount authorized for power purchases to $6.2 billion since mid-January, when the state began purchases power for Pacific Gas and Electric Co., Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas and Electric. ??- Gov. Gray Davis says state office buildings cut energy use by an average of 20 percent in January and February, saving taxpayers $286,000 in utility bills. ??- State officials negotiating long-term power contracts for customers of three cash-strapped utilities have secured five more contracts. Four of the contracts signed in March by the Department of Water Resources will provide 466 megawatts of electricity during times of peak demand this summer, according to DWR documents. One megawatt is roughly enough power for 750 homes. ??- California Public Utilities Commission attorneys are advising state agencies to avoid submitting monetary claims against Pacific Gas and Electric Co. despite the company's bankruptcy. The PUC is trying to retain their electric rate-setting authority over the utility and says submitting claims could bring the state under the court's jurisdiction as a creditor, which could allow the judge to set electric rates. ??- Shares of Edison International closed at $9.90, up 15 cents. PG&E Corp. closed at $8.94, up 20 cents. ??-The state remains free of power alerts as reserves stay above 7 percent. ??WHAT'S NEXT: ??- Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra, the parent company of San Diego Gas and Electric Co., to buy the utility's transmission lines. Davis says he expects to have an agreement within two weeks. ??THE PROBLEM: ??High demand, high wholesale energy costs, transmission glitches and a tight supply worsened by scarce hydroelectric power in the Northwest and maintenance at aging California power plants are all factors in California's electricity crisis. ??Edison and PG&E say they've lost nearly $14 billion since June to high wholesale prices the state's electricity deregulation law bars them from passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection April 6. ??Electricity and natural gas suppliers, scared off by the two companies' poor credit ratings, are refusing to sell to them, leading the state in January to start buying power for the utilities' nearly 9 million residential and business customers. The state is also buying power for a third investor-owned utility, San Diego Gas & Electric, which is in better financial shape than much larger Edison and PG&E but also struggling with high wholesale power costs. ??The Public Utilities Commission has raised rates as much as 46 percent to help finance the state's multibillion-dollar power buys. LOAD-DATE: April 30, 2001 of 103 DOCUMENTS 2001 Associated Press Online 29, 2001; Sunday SECTION: Domestic, non-Washington, general news item LENGTH: 1313 words HEADLINE: ?Geothermal Plants Need More Steam BYLINE: JENNIFER COLEMAN DATELINE: MIDDLETOWN, Calif. BODY: ???Geothermal plants in The Geysers area north of the Napa Valley have tapped steam fields to produce electricity since the 1960s. The 350-degree steam rushes more than 1,500 feet up from the earth, spinning turbines that create a constant flow of electricity. ??But mismanagement of the steam fields beneath the hilly northwestern California region that straddles the Sonoma and Lake county lines has led to a large decline of pressure and a drop of more than 50 percent in the amount of power the plants produce. ??The geothermal decline comes as California already faces short supplies of hydroelectricity from the drought-ridden Pacific Northwest and growing competition for megawatts from other power-starved states. ??State power grid managers estimate they're losing about 900 megawatts of geothermal electricity due to the gradual depletion of the steam fields. That's enough power for roughly 675,000 homes. ??''They just overproduced. It is a renewable source of power, but it's renewable over geologic time,'' says Katherine Potter, a spokeswoman for Calpine Energy, which owns 19 of the 21 geothermal power plants in The Geysers region, which incidentally has no geysers. ??The first electricity produced by tapping into pockets of steam trapped in the earth made its debut in 1904 in Larderello, Italy. That plant, rebuilt due to World War II damage, is still operating. The first U.S. geothermal plant was a small operation at The Geysers built in 1962. ??Steam fields are created when water flows through fissures in the rock deep in the earth and is heated by hot magma. Geothermal plants tap into that pressure and use it to spin turbines. The plants' cooling towers release plumes of white steam, which can be seen for miles on a clear day. ??While The Geysers is a unique geologic formation called a dry steam field, there is the potential for thousands of megawatts of geothermal power from other regions that could use the more common ''wet steam'' process, said Karl Gawell, executive director of the Geothermal Energy Association in Washington D.C. ??Wet steam plants tap into superheated water in the earth, separate the steam and use it to power generators. The water and the condensed steam is pumped back into the earth. ??CalEnergy Corp. owns 10 power plants in Imperial County that produce about 330 megawatts of power, enough for about 247,500 homes. Those plants and others like them haven't seen a decline in pressure like Calpine's plants. ??Geothermal energy is second only to hydroelectricity as a continuous, cheap source of power, said Jan Stewart, Calpine's public relations manager. ??The plants in The Geysers reached their peak power production in the 1980s, producing about 2,000 megawatts of electricity enough to power about 1.5 million homes. ??At that time, about 30 companies were involved in various geothermal ventures in the area and didn't work together, Stewart said. ??''The resource wasn't being managed properly. As a result, it was a very fractured environment,'' she said. ''If one plant shut down, the steam would be vented to the atmosphere, instead of being rerouted to another plant where it could be used.'' ??In the 1960s and '70s when The Geysers got started, there was ''a real wildcatter's mentality'' among power generators, said Rich Ferguson, energy chairman for Sierra Club California. ??''Basically, they took out the water in the form of steam faster than Mother Nature was putting it back in,'' he said. ??The available steam declined, and the area now puts out about 850 megawatts, sufficient power for roughly 637,500 homes. ??Since then, geothermal engineers have learned more about managing the resource, Ferguson said. ??The superheated, self-contained system at The Geysers has no ??ater running through it. ?''The Geysers is unique worldwide. There really aren't other dry steam fields,'' Gawell said. ''In effect, there was never a sustainable level of production, you always would have depleted it eventually. It's like a giant pressure cooker. As soon as you put the first straw in, you began to deplete the resource.'' ??Calpine is experimenting with replenishing the steam fields by pumping treated waste water back into the earth. It began three years ago, when Lake County stopped pumping its treated waste water into Clear Lake. ??Now, more than 8 million gallons of treated waste water is returned daily to the earth. The experiment appears to be working _ power output is up 68 megawatts. ??''People like the stewardship that Calpine provides now,'' Ferguson said. '' Calpine has taken on as a long-term goal to make that sustainable.'' ??Calpine is building a 50-mile pipeline to Santa Rosa and plans to pump another 11 million of treated waste water daily from that city. The company expects that will boost production another 85 megawatts. ??Even with the new project, power grid managers say they're planning for diminishing geothermal electricity. ??''We've lost a considerable portion of their output due to the decline in the output of the steam,'' said Jim McIntosh, director of grid operations for the Independent System Operator. ''All supplies are very important to us at this point.'' ??The plants are relatively low-maintenance once they're running _ only one engineer staffs each of the 19 Calpine plants in The Geysers. ??But geothermal plants are more expensive to build than natural gas-fired power plants, Gaywell said. ??''It's like choosing between two identical cars one is $10,000 and the other is $30,000, but the $30,000 car comes with a lifetime supply of fuel,'' he said. ''People are shortsighted on investments and it takes more money upfront to build geothermal.'' ??Most geothermal resources are on public land, lengthening the building process because more permits are needed, Gawell said. ??Two new plants are in the application process in California. ??Researchers estimate there are 2,500 megawatts of untapped geothermal resources in Nevada, Gawell said. Idaho, New Mexico and Oregon also have sites that could be tapped, he said. ??''Many of these sites were looked at in the '80s, but then nothing happened because in the '90s natural gas was too cheap to meter,'' he said. ??Ferguson said the state spent $540 million over the last four years on incentives for renewable energy projects, including geothermal, solar, wind and biomass, and he expects the plan will be renewed when it expires in December. ??''We think there will be an equivalent amount of money,'' he said. ''All the technologies have to compete against each other, but geothermal should do pretty good.'' ??___ ??There are three types of geothermal power plants. Here's a look at how they work: ???Dry steam: Such plants are rare, producing steam and not hot water. The Geysers region is the world's largest dry steam field. Steam from the earth is piped to the power plant, where it spins turbines to create electricity. After the remaining steam condenses back to liquid, it is returned to the earth. ???Wet steam: This type of geothermal plant is more common. There are several such plants in Southern California. Hot water and steam are brought to the surface, separated and the steam is used to power turbines. The water is returned to the earth as is the condensed steam. ???Binary: These plants use hot water and steam from the earth to heat another liquid, such as isobutane, which has a lower boiling point than water. That liquid's steam is used to power turbines to make electricity. When the steam cools and becomes liquid it's returned to the tank and reused. This type of system is self-contained and has no emissions. ??___ ??On the Net: ??Geothermal Education Office: http://geothermal.marin.org ??California ISO: http://www.caiso.com ??Calpine Corp.: http://www.calpine.com ?????(PROFILE ?????(CO:Calpine Corp; TS:CPN; IG:ELC;) ?????) LOAD-DATE: April 29, 2001 of 103 DOCUMENTS ???????????????????The Associated Press State & Local Wire The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. ?These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. ???????????????????????April 29, 2001, Sunday, BC cycle SECTION: State and Regional LENGTH: 413 words HEADLINE: Guns in schools, deregulation delay on lawmakers' agenda BYLINE: By BRAD CAIN, Associated Press Writer DATELINE: SALEM, Ore. BODY: ??Backers of a bill to prevent holders of concealed handgun licenses from bringing their weapons onto school property will spend the coming week trying to force a Senate vote on the issue. ??Also this week, House Speaker Mark Simmons is planning to schedule a hearing on his bill to pull the plug - at least for now - on a key part of an electric deregulation law that's due to take effect this fall for large businesses. ??The guns-in-schools bill has been on life support for weeks, with a key Senate committee chairman refusing to schedule a hearing on the bill on grounds that it is overly contentious and wouldn't pass anyway. ??The sponsor of the bill, Sen. Ryan Deckert, D-Beaverton, and other supporters aren't giving up, however. ??They are hoping to use a parliamentary maneuver that would enable them to move the school guns issue to the full Senate for debate by attaching it to another education-related bill. ??Gun owner groups say SB508 is unnecessary because there have been no documented cases of law-abiding carriers of concealed handguns causing any problems at schools. ??But a key supporter of the bill, Sen. Ginny Burdick, D-Portland, says she is convinced the measure would pass in both the House and Senate - if it can be brought up for vote. ??""I don't think we should wait to have dead children before we ban guns in schools,"" said Burdick, who was a chief sponsor of a measure passed by voters last fall expanding background checks at gun shows. ??California's power woes that were precipitated by that state's move to deregulation are giving Oregon lawmakers second thoughts about their decision to approve a phased-in deregulation of the electricity market in Oregon. ??A bill passed by the 1999 Legislature is supposed to open Oregon's electric markets to industrial and large commercial customers, beginning this October. ??The 1999 law is supposed to free large businesses to buy power on the open market, and does not deregulate electric rates for residential customers. ??Still, Simmons says that drought conditions and the power market turmoil caused by California's energy crisis require reconsideration of the law. ??For that reason, the House speaker is planning hearings this week on his proposal to enact a 15-month delay in Oregon's electricity restructuring efforts. ??""This just gives the opportunity for the energy markets to settle for a while,"" the Elgin Republican said. ??Similar legislation is pending in the Senate. LOAD-DATE: April 30, 2001 of 103 DOCUMENTS 2001 The Post Register Falls Post Register 29, 2001 Sunday SECTION: News; Pg. a1 LENGTH: 530 words HEADLINE: Plenty of blame to go around for West's power woes BYLINE: PAUL MENSER BODY: ??When it comes to power, the West is a mess. ??Because of its botched deregulation attempts, California bears a lot of the blame - but not all of it, said Susan F. Tierney, a former assistant secretary in the Energy Department, now a consultant for Lexecon, a Cambridge, Mass., consulting firm. ??Like planets lining up to usher in an age of hysteria, a combination of unforeseen circumstances have put the Northwest behind the eight ball. In addition to California's self-created tangle, oil and natural gas prices are rising and a drought is stymieing the region's hydropower production. ??The situation is less volatile in other parts of the country. In the Northeast, South and Midwest, where growth has been modest and generating capacity has been more stable, there's less discrepancy between supply and demand. ??Undergirding the West's situation was some serious lack of foresight, Tierney said. ??When it looked like California power customers would be able to get electricity from whoever offered it at the cheapest price, utilities worried about recovering the money they'd spent building plants and transmission lines in the '70s and early '80s. So they sold off their power plants and bought power on the wholesale market, where it was cheap and plentiful. ??Not trusting the marketplace, California legislators capped the rates utilities could charge residential customers. When wholesale power prices went up, they couldn't pass those increases on to consumers. ??""At the time, they did not realize that in a couple of years there would not be an adequate power supply,"" Tierney said. ??California's economic explosion of the late '90s, coupled with a failure to build any new plants, brought the crisis to a head. Computers are not by themselves big energy consumers, but the factories that make them are. The Internet, with all its server farms and data hotels, also became a heavy power user. ??When demand in California finally caught up with supply, ""all of a sudden, utilities had to buy power, and it became a seller's market,"" Tierney said. ??But most of the Northwest's power comes from hydroelectric dams, and there has to be water in the rivers to power the turbines at the dams. In a drought year like this, the power has to come from somewhere else, most likely oil- and natural gas-fired plants, which fire up when demand is high. ??Because demand is so high this year, generators can charge exorbitant prices, knowing that California and the Northwest have nowhere else to buy power. ??Also, natural gas prices have gone through the roof in the last 18 months and aren't likely to come down until next year at the earliest. Until 18 months ago, the price of natural gas had been at a prolonged low, so companies weren't interested in expensive drilling projects. ??The problem is not likely to be permanent. As exploration and extraction pick up, prices will come down. The public has already begun to hear a conservation message, and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is being deluged with applications for new power plant construction. ??Staff writer Paul Menser can be reached at 542-6752, or via e-mail at pmenser@idahonews.com. LOAD-DATE: April 29, 2001 of 103 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ?????????????????????April 29, 2001, Sunday, Home Edition SECTION: Opinion; Part M; Page 6; Opinion Desk LENGTH: 1312 words HEADLINE: THE STATE; HOW KILOWATT SOCIALISM SAVED L.A. FROM THE ENERGY CRISIS BYLINE: JEFF STANSBURY, Jeff Stansbury is a PhD candidate in American history at UCLA. His, dissertation is on the role of the labor movement in the building of, L.A.'s infrastructure BODY: ??Why is Los Angeles an island of tranquillity in the electric-power crisis that has rocked California and threatens to spread across the nation? ??News stories have repeatedly told us that the city's ownership and operation of its own generating stations is the principal reason. By staying clear of the state's 1996 deregulation scheme for private utilities, the Department of Water and Power was able to hold onto its power plants. ??So far, so good. But when we ask how Los Angeles came to enjoy public power in the first place, the answer commonly given makes a hash of history. ??Most historians and political scientists credit the city's progressive reform movement of 1890-1915 for having wisely settled on a municipal utility. True, some of the entrepreneurs, lawyers and reform-minded professionals who called themselves ""the best men"" during that era agitated for the city-built Owens Valley aqueduct and its generating stations. But many reformers opposed the city's effort to distribute its own power. Because they had allied themselves with railway magnate Henry Huntington, who owned an electric company, or because they favored regulation over municipal ownership, they wanted L.A.'s three private electric companies to sell and profit from aqueduct power. Meyer Lissner, a reform attorney often portrayed as a champion of public power, opposed the holding of a decisive 1911 citywide straw poll on the subject because he knew most Angelenos would cast their ballots for municipal ownership. That, he said, would be ""unfair"" to the three utilities. ??The most steadfast partisans of public power were not progressive reformers like Lissner but the city's much-maligned labor unions, and for a simple reason. While mistrust of oligopoly ran through nearly all sectors of society, it burned hottest in working-class wards. Without organized labor's dogged campaign for ""gas and water socialism,"" as well as its willingness to hand control of these resources to the anti-union regimes of Mayors George Alexander and Henry Rose, there would be no DWP today. ??Organized labor played a key role in the city's original decision to municipalize its water distribution system. On Oct. 24, 1892, 700 union members met to demand that the city build a small neighborhood waterworks as a step toward public control of the entire water supply. From that day on, L.A.'s unions never wavered in their call for a public water supply publicly managed. They mobilized the rank and file for the water-company buyouts of 1901-04, and, in 1906, the Public Ownership Party's citywide campaign primed voters to pour $ 23 million into construction of the Owens River aqueduct a year later. The aqueduct was the sine qua non of public power. At a time when most progressive reformers were mute on the subject, organized labor insisted that the aqueduct be used to generate electricity for the city's streets, homes and businesses. ??A broad consensus backed the city's construction of hydroelectric plants while the aqueduct was being built, but most of the city's politicians and corporate lobbyists were committed to public subsidies, not public ownership, of aqueduct power. The 1911 straw poll, in which city voters declared their support for municipal ownership and distribution of Owens River power, upset their plans. ??The most consistent fighters for public power during the decades after the straw poll were the Central Labor Council, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, other unions and city employees who stuffed campaign envelopes, canvassed precincts and got out the vote. Voters who favored municipally owned power and initiatives bolstering the DWP tended to be working class and Democratic; those opposed were mainly middle and upper class and Republican. ??In this polarized political climate, Mayor Alexander called for a $ 6.5-million bond issue to complete the aqueduct-power distribution network; he left open the question of who would sell the power to consumers. Unions and socialists tied their support for the bonds to a city charter reform that would guarantee them a long-sought role in city government through proportional representation. When the reform failed at the polls, they withheld support from the power bonds, and these, too, went down to defeat in 1913. Much of the rancor workers felt was aimed at progressives like Lissner, head of the Good Government Organization, who fought labor's charter plank because it would bring socialists onto the City Council. ??The labor movement's dedication to public ownership soon reasserted itself, however. With a citywide election coming up that June, five unionists seeking council seats on the Socialist Party ticket revived labor's long-standing demand for city operation of all public utilities at cost. They urged the City Council to hold a new power-bond election with a clear public ownership mandate. They attacked the power companies' efforts to buy aqueduct power from the city and sell it to Angelenos at a profit. Soon, the great majority of unions in the Central Labor Council were locked in what turned out to be a decisive struggle against the power oligopoly made up of Southern California Edison, Pacific Light & Power and Los Angeles Gas & Electric. ??An unprecedented event brightened the bonds' chances. A machinist, Fred C. Wheeler, won a seat on the City Council, the first unionist to do so in the 20th century. Wheeler led a successful fight against an attempt to split the power-bond issue into two separate ballot propositions, one to complete the aqueduct's generating stations, the other to create a city-owned distribution system. Such a division would probably have doomed public power. ??The large majority of unionists who favored public power had little time to savor Wheeler's victory. While pressing the attack on the three electric companies, they faced a small but angry split in their own ranks. Dissenters in the Building Trades Council and a few of its unions argued that labor's grievances against the progressive regimes of 1909-14 had turned the argument for municipal ownership on its head. What good was municipal ownership in the hands of a council and mayor who had caused the arrest of hundreds of peaceful picketers during the citywide strikes of 1910, had underpaid aqueduct workers and fed them bad food and had denied unionists influential city jobs? The final blow was the council's rebuff of a petition signed by thousands of workers for a ""living wage"" law. Was it not folly to reward labor's foes with control of the aqueduct's power? ??Union activists who favored the bonds conceded that the dissenters were correct in their assessment of ""progressive"" city government. But the progressive star was fading. What counted in the long run was whether Los Angeles could wrest the city's electric power system from the grasp of private utilities. The Central Labor Council's unions took this challenge to heart and voted, 60-4, for a resolution favoring the bonds. ??On its own, as well as in coalition with other groups, the labor movement marshaled its rank and file on behalf of public power. It turned out hundreds of poll-watchers and canvassers on election day. The pro-bond unions never did win over the dissenting faction; rather, they overwhelmed it at the polls. On May 8, 1914, L.A.'s voters emphatically endorsed the power bonds by a hefty 71%-29%, with the city's working-class wards providing by far the largest margin of victory. ??Within a year, Los Angeles sold its bonds and began buying out the three investor-owned utilities. The first public power flowed into local homes and businesses in 1916. Two decades later, the DWP eliminated the last of its private competition and consolidated the working-class legacy of kilowatt and water socialism that has served the city so well in the current energy crisis. GRAPHIC: GRAPHIC-DRAWING: (no caption), JENNIFER HEWITSON / For The Times LOAD-DATE: April 29, 2001 of 103 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ?????????????????????April 29, 2001, Sunday, Home Edition SECTION: Opinion; Part M; Page 4; Editorial Writers Desk LENGTH: 558 words HEADLINE: CONSERVATION SANDBAGS; THE DAVIS ADMINISTRATION NEEDS TO LAUNCH A CRASH EDUCATION COURSE TO CONVINCE CALIFORNIANS OF THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE ELECTRICITY CRISIS AND THE NEED FOR FAR-REACHING ENERGY-SAVING MEASURES. BODY: ??Natural disasters and crises can be devastating but are relatively simple and easy to grasp. A brush fire you fight with shovels. An earthquake, you clean up the rubble afterward and strengthen buildings in anticipation of the next. But California's energy crisis is far different and more complex. It's a quiet disaster on scattered, invisible fronts. Most people see it only when their own lights go out. ??There also is no precedent for this crisis in California and no accurate way to forecast how bad it can get, either the blackouts or the financial consequences. But as May approaches, it's certain that most Californians are not adequately informed about the severity of the problem or what they can do to limit its impact. ??Gov. Gray Davis, the utilities and others need to engage in a crash education program that will convince Californians of the seriousness of the problem and motivate them to undertake their own conservation programs in homes and businesses. California has been a pioneer in power conservation, and its citizens will listen to persuasive reasoning. ??As the chairwoman of the state Senate's Energy Committee, Sen. Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) deals with problems ranging from utility company insolvency to rate ""gaming"" by energy producers. ""But I'm really worried about this summer,"" she said last week, referring to the potential for day after day of rolling blackouts. She told of one businessman in her district who reported he will lose an estimated $ 30,000 every time his power is cut. Why not at least schedule blackouts so people can plan for them? she asked. Why not? ??In San Francisco, the Bay Area Economic Forum released a study indicating that power woes could deliver a $ 17-billion blow to the state's economy in lost production, the cost of rate increases and increased product prices. That may be conservative. The study did not include the $ 5.1 billion the state has spent so far to buy power for the insolvent private utilities. ??Republicans in the Legislature are stalling bills that would float a $ 10-billion revenue bond issue to finance power purchases and keep the state fiscally above water. They have latched onto a powerful issue, Davis' unwillingness to detail how he's spending the taxpayers' billions. Davis says he needs secrecy for competitive reasons as he bargains with power companies, though he is letting out a slightly wider trickle of figures. ??Wall Street, already wary about the credit-worthiness of the state, thinks poorly of the delay in issuing the bonds. Republicans should put a temporary hold on their battle with Davis and get the measure to the governor's desk this week. ??Lawmakers were slow in passing an $ 850-million conservation program, Bowen acknowledges. But Davis put the new program on a fast track Friday and made a smart choice in S. David Freeman, former chief of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, to run the conservation effort. ??Freeman, 75, is a canny veteran of electric power politics. Davis may abhor giving out bad news, but Freeman need not shrink from it. Freeman should be on radio and television every day telling California just how bad the problem is and what they can do about it. If this were a flood, we'd be stacking sandbags. Our sandbags are conservation programs. We need to start stacking them now. LOAD-DATE: April 29, 2001 of 103 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ?????????????????????April 29, 2001, Sunday, Home Edition SECTION: Part A; Part 1; Page 27; National Desk LENGTH: 1316 words HEADLINE: BUSH: THE FIRST 100 DAYS; BUSH IS OFF TO A ROCKY START IN HIS HANDLING OF ALL THINGS CALIFORNIAN; POLITICS: BUT WHY WOO THE GOLDEN STATE WHEN HE CAN'T CARRY IT IN AN ELECTION 'NO MATTER HOW HARD HE TRIES,' ONE ANALYST POINTS OUT. BYLINE: RICHARD SIMON, TIMES STAFF WRITER DATELINE: WASHINGTON BODY: ??So what if President Bush has opposed electricity price controls sought by California officials? Or that he has proposed cutting aid to states for incarcerating illegal immigrants convicted of crimes? Or that he has visited 26 states in his first 100 days in office--but not the most populous? ??Bush really does care about California, the White House insists, even if the state preferred Al Gore on election day. Administration officials said they have done a lot and plan to do more to lessen the electricity turmoil expected this summer. ??""I don't think he's treated California any differently than any other state,"" said Rep. George P. Radanovich (R-Mariposa). ??Some Californians feel otherwise. ??""The Bush administration's treatment of California started at indifference, moved to neglect and has now reached actual harm,"" complained Phil Schiliro, chief of staff for Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Los Angeles). ??Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) has asked three times for a meeting with Bush to discuss the energy crisis. Her response from the White House: a form letter with her name misspelled. ??Bush has called for requiring public agencies to buy costly earthquake insurance, a measure opposed by California lawmakers of both parties. He has proposed cutting an earthquake preparedness program. And he provided no money in his proposed budget to clean up a pile of uranium processing waste in Utah leaking into the Colorado River. ??""That's our water supply,"" political analyst Sherry Bebitch Jeffe said. ""What kind of message is that?"" ??John J. Pitney Jr., associate professor of government at Claremont McKenna College, said Bush's apparent indifference makes political sense. ??""It's hard to argue that Bush should spend any political capital in California,"" he said. ""The 2000 election suggested that he cannot carry the state no matter how hard he tries. The Republicans have already lost several House seats and have probably hit rock bottom. . . . From a purely political angle, there's little point in giving California any money or attention that could otherwise go to more competitive states, such as Florida."" ??But Jeffe, senior scholar at USC's School of Policy, Planning and Development, said Bush's failure to visit the state is hurting GOP efforts to rebuild itself in California. ""We are ground zero for the kind of Latino outreach that he said he wanted to do."" ??And veteran California Republican political strategist Kenneth L. Khachigian said Bush at least needs to prepare for the electricity problems predicted for summer. ??""If you get three or four days of successive blackouts, air conditioners going out, traffic lights going out, a second bankruptcy--whether he wants it or not--it's his problem,"" Khachigian said. ""It would be wise for him to have a proactive stance, not just reactive."" ??Tough Act to Follow ??Some political analysts have suggested that if Bush becomes too involved in California's troubles, what is now Democratic Gov. Gray Davis' problem could become Bush's. But, Khachigian said, ""there's a fine line between taking responsibility for a problem and claiming that California isn't part of the United States."" ??In dealing with heavily Democratic California, Bush has made this much clear: He is no Bill Clinton. ??Bush has a hard act to follow. When Clinton was president, he visited California often and rewarded it with federal largess. And California in return showered him with buckets of campaign dollars and electoral votes. ??But Rep. Ed Royce (R-Fullerton) said California will benefit from Bush's presidency too. ""As Californians bear a disproportionately higher tax burden, they stand to benefit greatly from the president's tax relief plan."" ??While House spokeswoman Claire Buchan assured that Bush will visit California soon. His wife already has done so. ??As proof that California is on their mind, administration officials point to the three Californians in the Cabinet--Ann M. Veneman of Agriculture, Norman Y. Mineta of Transportation and Anthony J. Principi of Veterans Affairs--and others in top White House jobs. ??Bush also has appointed California Latinos to high-level posts: Huntington Park Councilwoman Rosario Marin as treasurer, Los Angeles entrepreneur Hector V. Barreto Jr. as head of the Small Business Administration and former San Mateo County Supervisor Ruben Barrales as deputy assistant for intergovernmental affairs. ??Critics said that a Californian at the top does not guarantee that the Cabinet departments will develop California-friendly policies. The proposed Agriculture budget, for example, provides only $ 5 million--not the $ 15 million that California lawmakers said they need--to fight the glassy winged sharpshooter, an agricultural pest that threatens the state's wine industry. ??A spokesman for Veneman assured that additional funding will be considered, if requested by California lawmakers. And Rep. Mike Thompson (D-St. Helena), who assailed Bush for missing opportunities to help California, nonetheless expressed confidence in Veneman. ""She's going to keep pounding away to make sure that the California wine industry gets what it needs."" ??Some Good News ??Though he has proposed cuts in some programs that are important to California, Bush has taken some actions that please state officials. He has proposed a permanent research and development tax credit--an action that would particularly benefit Silicon Valley. ??His proposed budget includes additional money to crack down on illegal immigration and drug smuggling and unsafe trucks crossing into California from Mexico. And he has proposed increased funding to reduce backlogs at immigration offices. ??In one area, Bush even bested Clinton. He proposed $ 14 million to clean Lake Tahoe, more than the $ 3 million recommended by Clinton last year. ??And although he has drawn flak for proposing cuts in programs to promote energy efficiency and alternative fuels, his proposal to boost assistance to low-income families for insulating their homes and reducing their utility bills would nearly double California's allocation, to $ 8 million next year. ??No Bush policy has been more criticized in California than his approach to the state's energy woes--particularly his adamant opposition to price controls. Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Davis, said Bush and his aides ""got off to a strong start"" by extending federal orders sought by the state to keep power flowing into California. ??""Since then . . . they've been AWOL,"" Maviglio said. In a reference to price controls, he added: ""They're skirting around the edges of the problem without taking the bold action they need to take."" ??""The feds are the only ones who can step in and bring some sanity to the cost of electricity in California,"" Thompson said. ??Administration officials said they have taken steps ""from our first hours in office"" to address the energy crisis. They said they have responded favorably to all the state's requests except price controls, which Bush contends would discourage the building of power plants. ??While some seek to portray Bush's opposition to price controls as unsympathetic to California's plight, a number of California's House Republicans also oppose price controls. And even those who support them argue that the issue misses the larger point. ??Rep. Randy ""Duke"" Cunningham (R-San Diego), an advocate of price controls, nevertheless said: ""I agree with the administration that the state alone remains responsible for solving this crisis."" ??Added Rep. Mary Bono (R-Palm Springs): ""I don't believe Bush should bear the brunt of responsibility that the Clinton administration left over."" ??Tim Ransdell, executive director of the California Institute for Federal Policy Research, doubted that Bush would ignore California. ""California represents one-eighth of the nation. One in eight Americans can't be ignored."" LOAD-DATE: April 29, 2001 of 103 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ?????????????????????April 29, 2001, Sunday, Home Edition SECTION: Business; Part C; Page 2; Financial Desk LENGTH: 1290 words HEADLINE: WEEK IN REVIEW; TOP 10 STORIES / APRIL 23-27 BYLINE: Lisa Girion and Terril Yue Jones and Sallie Hofmeister and James Bates and Peter Pae and Jeff Leeds and Nancy Rivera Brooks and Peter Gosselin BODY: ??1. Economic Growth a Welcome Surprise: The U.S. economy grew at an unexpectedly strong 2% annual rate in the first three months of the year, thanks largely to buoyant shopping by American consumers. The gross domestic product--the country's total output of goods and services--expanded at twice the pace it did in the final three months of 2000 and at twice what analysts had expected, the government said Friday. Although many analysts said the economy remains balanced between strong growth and recession, economic optimists exulted over the report. Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan added to the celebratory mood by saying that a key trend behind the economy's strong performance of the last decade--its ability to improve productivity--is likely to resume despite the current slowdown. ??(Peter Gosselin) ??* ??2. Stocks Rise on Good News: The GDP report boosted stock prices, which already had gotten a lift from better-than-expected home sales figures earlier in the week. The Dow Jones industrial average rose 117.70 to close at 10,810.05 on Friday, up 2.2% for the week, while the S&P 500 index climbed 18.53 to 1,253.05. The Nasdaq, which had fallen Thursday on concerns over weak technology profits, rose 40.80 to 2,075.68, finishing the week down 4.1%. Meanwhile, the yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury note rose to 5.33% from 5.19%. ??(Times Staff Writer) ??* ??3. Power Crisis Zaps State Bond Rating; Price Controls OKd: The mounting cost to the state general fund of buying electricity for California consumers prompted Standard & Poor's Corp. to downgrade $ 25 billion of California's general obligation bonds. S&P lowered California's bond rating by two notches, to A-plus from AA. The move could add hundreds of millions of dollars to the state's borrowing costs, bond experts said. Separately, federal regulators approved a plan to control electricity prices in California during times of supply shortages. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission tied prices during power emergencies to the cost of natural gas and emission controls, among other things, with the least efficient generator setting the market price. Critics said the order contains loopholes that will allow market manipulation. ??(Nancy Rivera Brooks) ??* ??4. FTC Pans Music Industry Marketing: A much-anticipated sequel to last year's Federal Trade Commission report on the marketing of violent entertainment to children slammed the record industry for failing to heed regulators' recommendations. Though it gave some credit to the film and video-game industries for revising the way they marketed to young audiences, the FTC found the five major record conglomerates continued to advertise ""explicit-content"" albums on popular teen shows such as MTV's ""Total Request Live"" and BET's ""Top 10 Live."" Just before the release of the first report, the Recording Industry Assn. of America had blunted some of the criticism by introducing a policy against ads for such albums on TV shows or in publications whose audience is mostly 16 years old or younger. But the RIAA said it rescinded the policy in September. ??(Jeff Leeds) ??* ??5. Gas Prices Continue Upward Spiral: The average price of self-serve regular gasoline spurted higher again in California and around the nation on an increase in demand and a switch by refiners to the more costly summer gasoline blend required in parts of the country by air-quality regulations. Prices in California got an extra boost from a fire at a Los Angeles-area refinery owned by Tosco Corp. and by a change in Tosco's pricing strategy. In late March, Tosco increased wholesale prices to its dealers in Southern California and Arizona and tied prices to the cost of gasoline in the spot market. Some other major suppliers have begun matching the Tosco increase, market experts said. Some market watchers foresee gas at $ 3 a gallon or more. ??(Nancy Rivera Brooks) ??* ??6. General Dynamics Renews Newport News Bid: General Dynamics Corp. agreed to acquire Newport News Shipbuilding Inc. in a $ 2.1-billion deal that would create the nation's largest military shipbuilder and leave only one maker of U.S. aircraft carriers and submarines. The proposed merger, which the Pentagon had rejected two years ago, marks the latest in a renewed wave of consolidations in the defense industry and would again make General Dynamics one of the largest private employers in San Diego. General Dynamics executives said they are confident of receiving the necessary approvals because this time they will be dealing with the Bush administration, which may view the takeover differently. ??(Peter Pae) ??* ??7. Disney Earnings Beat Estimates: Walt Disney Co.'s second-quarter operating results exceeded Wall Street's expectations as the company's studio and consumer products units improved, although Disney did post a net loss stemming largely from a one-time charge related to the restructuring of its Internet portal. Disney also confirmed that it will shrink its venerable animation unit, with a union official estimating as many as 300 jobs of about 1,000 in Burbank could be cut. Separately, President Robert Iger confirmed that layoffs will be needed to reach Disney's previously announced goal of cutting 4,000 jobs companywide. Disney's studio and consumer products groups showed improved results in the quarter, while earnings were flat in its theme parks and softer in broadcasting. ??(James Bates) ??* ??8. New FCC Chief Vows Deregulation: Repudiating decades-old media ownership rules, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Michael K. Powell said he envisions a broad rollback of restrictions, which could bring about a tidal wave of consolidation. In his most candid remarks about the role of the FCC since taking office, Powell said he would move in early May to eliminate regulations that prevent one company from owning a newspaper and a television station in the same city. Powell also told broadcasters meeting in Las Vegas that Viacom Inc. was likely to prevail in its challenge of federal rules that prevent any broadcaster from owning stations that reach more than 35% of the nation's television viewers. ??(Sallie Hofmeister) ??* ??9. Ford Takes More Heat Over Explorer Tires: Ford Motor Co. came under the most direct criticism leveled against it yet regarding last year's massive Firestone tire recall. Two prominent consumer safety groups issued a report saying that the auto maker was largely to blame for accidents in which Ford Explorer sport-utility vehicles, equipped with Firestone tires, spun out of control after the tires lost their treads. Though they blamed Bridgestone/Firestone for producing tires prone to failure, Public Citizen and Safetyforum.com said Ford bore the bulk of the responsibility for dictating an insufficiently robust tire design and designing the Explorer so it would overly stress the tires and tip over too easily once a tire blew. ??(Terril Yue Jones) ??* ??10. American Airlines Sued Over Health Coverage: A flight attendant filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in Los Angeles, charging that American Airlines discriminated against some employees by refusing to offer insurance coverage for birth control, Pap tests and infertility treatments. The case could test the position the EEOC took in December that the federal Pregnancy Discrimination Act forbids employers from excluding contraceptives from prescription drug plans. ??(Lisa Girion) ??* ??These and additional stories from last week are available at divided by category. Click on ""Money and Investing,"" ""Entertainment Business"" and other topics. ??* Please see Monday's Business section for a preview of the week's events. GRAPHIC: PHOTO: Though Disney's second-quarter profit beat Wall Street predictions, its theme-park earnings were flat. ?PHOTOGRAPHER: Associated Press LOAD-DATE: April 29, 2001 of 103 DOCUMENTS ??????????????????Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company New York Times ?????????????????April 29, 2001, Sunday, Late Edition - Final SECTION: Section 4; Page 17; Column 1; Editorial Desk LENGTH: 756 words HEADLINE: Reckonings; The Real Wolf BYLINE: ?By PAUL KRUGMAN BODY: ??Recently I received a letter from an economist I respect, chiding me for my ""Naderite"" columns on the California energy crisis. He just didn't believe that market manipulation by power companies could possibly be an important issue; it sounded too much to him like the sort of thing one hears from knee-jerk leftists, who blame greedy capitalists for every problem, be it third-world poverty or high apartment rents. The left has cried ""Wolf!"" so many times that sensible people have learned to discount such claims. ??But now a bona fide wolf has arrived, whose predatory behavior is doing terrible damage to our most populous state -- and nobody will believe it. ???True, California would be heading for a summer of power shortages even if it had never deregulated. And even if there was workable competition in the wholesale electricity market, prices in that market would spike during periods of peak demand, transferring billions of dollars from either taxpayers or consumers to the generators. ??But the evidence is now overwhelming that there isn't workable competition in California's power market, and that the actions of generators ""gaming the system"" have greatly magnified the crisis. The key fact is that California has somehow remained in a state of more or less continuous power shortage and very high wholesale prices regardless of the level of demand. A rash of outages has kept the electricity market conveniently -- and very profitably -- short of supply even during periods of low demand, when there ought to be lots of excess capacity. ??As Frank Wolak, the Stanford economist who also advises the state's power grid, has pointed out, an outage at a power plant is a lot like an employee calling in sick. You can't tell directly whether he is really sick or has chosen to take the day off for other reasons, but you can look for circumstantial evidence. And such evidence has convinced Mr. Wolak that ""generators use forced outages strategically to withhold capacity from the market"" -- a view shared by a growing number of other researchers. ??Which brings us to the latest move by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. On Wednesday, the commission apparently decided to offer California some relief, and put new price caps in place on the California electricity market. I say ""apparently"" because the more you look at the plan the less likely it seems to be any help at all. Indeed, the measure was passed on a 2-to-1 vote, with William Massey -- the one commissioner who has been sympathetic to calls for price controls -- voting against it on the grounds that it would be ineffectual. ??What's wrong with FERC's plan? First, it caps prices only in emergency conditions -- ignoring the fact that electricity prices have stayed at hard-to-explain levels even when there is no emergency. In effect, the plan is laid out as if the electricity market were really competitive, in spite of all the evidence that it is not. ??Second, even those emergency price caps are full of loopholes, offering extensive opportunities for what Mr. Wolak calls ""megawatt laundering"" -- selling power to affiliated companies that for one reason or another are exempted from the price controls (for example, the controls do not apply to ""imports"" from neighboring states), then selling it back into the California market. Severin Borenstein of the University of California Energy Institute adds that because the allowed price depends on the cost of generation at the least efficient plant, generators will have a clear incentive to produce inefficiently: ""I predict we will find some plants we never heard of before that are suddenly operating again, and they will be pretty inefficient."" ??The general verdict seems to be that this is not a serious plan. There are serious proposals to mitigate the crisis out there -- indeed, last fall Mr. Wolak submitted a proposal that was well received by other experts -- but FERC has ignored all of them. ??The charitable interpretation is that FERC still doesn't get it, that it just can't bring itself to believe that this time the wolf is real. The uncharitable interpretation is that last week's action was meant to fail. The Medley Report, an online newsletter, calls the FERC plan ""a grand exercise in posturing without substance . . . a very clever temporary move by the Bush administration to deflect any political fallout"" from the looming disaster. ??Whatever the explanation, the plain fact is that FERC and the administration have yet to offer California any significant relief. ??http://www.nytimes.com LOAD-DATE: April 29, 2001 of 103 DOCUMENTS ??????????????????Copyright 2001 McClatchy Newspapers, Inc. Bee ??????????????????April 29, 2001, Sunday METRO FINAL EDITION SECTION: MAIN NEWS; Pg. A1; POWER CRUNCH LENGTH: 1323 words HEADLINE: Diesel plants spark concern They're expected to generate big air-quality problems when predicted summer blackouts hit. BYLINE: Chris Bowman and Stuart Leavenworth Bee Staff Writers BODY: ??When blackouts roll across California in the coming months - as captains of the crippled electricity grid say they surely will - tens of thousands of miniature powerhouses will whine, cough and rumble to the rescue. ??These backup plants will ignite the same fuel that powers locomotives, ships and 18-wheel trucks. And they'll be spewing the same pollution - only more so, because most are old, with little or no emissions controls. ??They are diesel-powered generators, the dirtiest of internal combustion engines. And unlike trucks and other vehicles, they've largely escaped 30 years of air pollution restrictions because they were intended only for emergencies, as when a storm or earthquake knocks out power. ??But, now, as a season of multiple planned blackouts appears imminent, many California businesses are expected to fire up the old stogies more often than was ever imagined. ??And the generators will kick in when their expelled gases can do the most harm. The hot weather that taxes air conditioners and drains electricity supplies also accelerates the conversion of engine exhaust to ozone gas, the ingredient in smog that inflames airways and impairs breathing. ??""That is why we think this is going to be the most challenging summer ever for air quality,"" said Luna Salaver, spokeswoman for the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, a nine-county region with thousands of unregulated standby generators. ??""On those hot days when we want people to stop driving and doing things that pollute the air, the generators will kick in, and air quality will worsen,"" Salaver said. ??No one knows how many diesel generators are scattered around the state at hospitals, universities, factories and businesses. But air districts report there are at least 641 in Sacramento; up to 5,000 in the Bay Area; 1,200 in the San Joaquin Valley; and thousands more in the smog-plagued valleys of Southern California. ??Some are relatively clean, particularly if they have been built or retrofitted in the last few years. But most are tiny pollution factories, and were intended only to be run for short periods following natural disasters. ??According to the state Air Resources Board, a typical diesel generator emits about 50 to 100 times more smog-forming compounds per unit of energy than a typical gas-fired power plant. When the plants run for hours, people downwind can get a heavy dose of the tiny, toxic particles contained in diesel exhaust. ??""Go down to the Greyhound bus station and have them turn on their engines and hang around there - that's what it's like,"" said Michael Scheible, deputy executive officer of the state Air Resources Board, which regulates engines and fuels. ??Environmentalists say generators should be cranked up only during power outages. But in recent months, farmers and manufacturers have pressured regulators to redefine an emergency and allow generators to be used well before a blackout is ordered. ??Business groups say regulators need to be sensitive to data centers, chip makers and other manufacturers that can't afford even a one-second interruption in power. ??""We would like some kind of statewide policy on when and where we can use the diesel generators,"" said Gino DiCaro, a spokesman for the California Manufacturers and Technology Association. ""Obviously, we would like to use them more than we can now."" ??""We need to basically let go of this air-quality issue,"" said Mike Jennings, a Fresno energy consultant whose clients include members of the food-processing and dairy industries. ??State air and energy regulators are pushing energy conservation as the best way to avoid power outages. Nonetheless, the California Energy Commission has been compiling a list of generators statewide to see how their use could be coordinated, a move that stirs hope from business groups. ??""Six months ago, nobody wanted to talk about this because diesel was a big, bad word,"" DiCaro said. ""Now, at least we have agencies like the Energy Commission and the Public Utilities Commission talking about how diesel generators can fit into our electrically unreliable world."" ??Environmentalists worry that, as the summer drags on, Gov. Gray Davis will allow unrestricted use of the diesels. ??So far, the governor's staff has ""held firm,"" said Gail Ruderman Feuer, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council, a national environmental group. ""But if blackouts start happening in a big way, they could change their tune."" ??Along with other forecasters, officials with the California Independent System Operator, manager of the state's electricity grid, expect a flurry of blackouts in coming months. The next two months could be critical, because most new power plants under construction won't go on line before July. In addition, California will be losing one of its largest generators of electricity today when one of two units at the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant is taken off-line for 35 days of scheduled refueling. ??""You should be ready for the worst-case scenario,"" said Del Evans, Pacific Gas and Electric Co.'s head of power load management, at a media briefing last week. ??For sellers and makers of diesel generators, the gloomy predictions are a gold mine. Small businesses, farmers, manufacturers - all are rushing to buy generators before the blackouts hit. ??""We are busier than we have ever been,"" said Rob Bly, president of Tuban Industrial Products Co., which assembles about 300 generators a year at its plant in Sacramento. ""We are twice as busy as we were in the height of the Y2K madness."" ??Bly says the generators he makes are ""10 times cleaner"" than ones of a decade ago. Still, he acknowledges, diesel is diesel. ??""If you are a hospital and you want standby power, you can't use propane. The fire marshall won't let you,"" said Bly. ""That leaves you with just one thing, and that is diesel."" ??Responding to such concerns, state Sen. Rico Oller, R-Andreas, introduced a bill this year to exempt thousands of backup generators from pollution controls whenever any power alert is called. The bill, however, was blocked by a Senate committee, and environmentalists say air districts have already relaxed their rules enough. ??""One of the big concerns is the cancer risk,"" Ruderman Feuer said. Air board studies, she noted, have found that a person's lifetime cancer risk increases 50 percent if he or she lives near a big diesel generator that runs 250 hours a year. ??In January, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency allowed air districts to loosen their restrictions on generators. In turn, the South Coast Air Quality Management District extended the number of hours that diesel generators could be operated each year. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District went even further, allowing businesses to run generators when state power reserves drop to 1.5 percent or when the ISO predicts blackouts anywhere in the Valley. ??The Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District still requires businesses and public agencies to wait for blackouts before generators are fired up. Altogether, the district has permits for 641 generators, including major clusters at data centers and companies such as Intel. ??In the Bay Area, regulators are even more uncertain of what could happen this summer. Unlike other regions of the state, the Bay Area never required permits for diesel generators smaller than 250 horsepower. (In Sacramento, the threshold is 50 horsepower.) ??As a result, only 12 of the region's estimated 5,000 generators are subject to pollution controls. ??Salaver, the district's spokeswoman, said officials assumed the generators would be used only during earthquakes, and therefore didn't need any regulation. ??""Now, we find people are operating generators even if we are in a Stage Two alert,"" Salaver said. ""That is not what emergency generators are for."" ??* * * ??The Bee's Chris Bowman can be reached at (916) 321-1069 or cbowman@sacbee.com. GRAPHIC: Sacramento Bee / Jay Mather Mark Karakas checks a newly assembled diesel generator at Tuban Industrial Products in Sacramento. Sacramento Bee / Sheldon Carpenter Lights out, generators on Diesel-powered generators can save lives during emergencies, but they spew far more pollution per unit of energy than other power sources and could significantly degrade air quality during the blackouts expected in the next six months. Smog-forming compounds Power source / Pounds of nitrogen oxides per megawatt-hour of electricity Existing diesel generator / 25 to 30 Diesel generator wiht latest pollution controls / 7 Uncontrolled gas-fired power plant / 2 to 4 Controlled older gas-fired power plant / 0.1-0.15 New ""combined cycle"" gas-fired power plant / 0.05 Cancer causing particulates (PM) Power source / Pounds of PM per megawatt-hour of electricity Existing diesel generator / 1 to 3 Diesel generator wiht latest pollution controls / 0.1 to 0.5 Gas-fired power plant / 0.03 to 0.07 Snapshot of generators Number of emergency diesel generators in selected air districst: Bay Area Air quality Management District Generators: 3,000 to 5,000 Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District Generators: 641 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Generators: 1,200 South Coast Air Quality Management District Generators: 5,000 Sources: California Air Resources Board, regional air quality districts LOAD-DATE: April 30, 2001 of 103 DOCUMENTS ??????????????????Copyright 2001 McClatchy Newspapers, Inc. Bee ??????????????????April 29, 2001, Sunday METRO FINAL EDITION SECTION: MAIN NEWS; Pg. A1 LENGTH: 1544 words HEADLINE: Why Edison, PG&E split on strategy BYLINE: Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writer BODY: ??One utility was more entrepreneurial, accustomed to the rough-and-tumble of free markets - and apparently believed only a radical remedy would cure its ills. ??The other was a more political animal, conversant with the language of Sacramento - and confident that negotiations and compromise with state officials could fix its problems. ??Different cultures and different circumstances sent Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. on separate paths this month. Edison, run by a former president of the Public Utilities Commission, negotiated a rescue package with Gov. Gray Davis. PG&E, with fewer ties to government and possessed of an independent streak, walked away from Davis and straight into U.S. Bankruptcy Court. ??As California's energy crisis hurtles toward a summer of blackouts and higher rates, experts are debating which company found the best solution for digging its way out of billions in debt. ??""We now have two models; it'll be interesting to see who recovers the quickest,"" said Mitch Wilk, a former PUC president who is now an energy consultant in San Francisco. ??At first blush, Edison and PG&E had plenty in common. Both utilities were afflicted with the same problem: runaway wholesale electricity costs they weren't able to recover from customers because of a state-mandated rate freeze. Both had been teetering on the edge of bankruptcy since January, when their losses depleted their cash reserves and credit. ??But PG&E was far sicker financially than Edison. Its debts from the state's flawed deregulation scheme reached $6.6 billion vs. $3.5 billion for Edison. That's because Edison serves a smaller territory and has more long-term supply contracts, so it was buying far less electricity than PG&E on the horrendously expensive spot market. ??Faced with a comparatively manageable loss, Edison was receptive to selling its share of California's transmission grid to the state, a deal that would generate $2.76 billion. The proceeds, along with funds from a proposed long-term bond sale, would pay off Edison's debts, according to the terms of the deal. ??Although PG&E says it was willing to sell its transmission lines, too, there was a crucial difference in the two companies' backgrounds that ultimately would influence their approach to the financial crisis. ??Unlike Edison, PG&E is a natural gas company as well as an electric company. PG&E, a subsidiary of PG&E Corp., had survived the bruising wars of natural gas deregulation in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The experience took PG&E out of the cozy world of the regulated monopoly - in which the utility had exclusive rights to its service territory but was subject to state price controls - and into the world of competition. ??The experience gave PG&E more of a free-market bent, said a former PUC staffer who requested anonymity. ??So even though Davis' aides say the governor offered PG&E a plan that would have paid off its debts - including $3 billion to $4 billion for its share of the grid - the utility balked at a key provision. While the original deregulation called for the cap on customer prices to end in 2002, Davis was insisting the utility remain regulated for a decade. ??PG&E wanted an immediate end to Public Utilities Commission regulation, and would agree only to a cursory review of rates through ""a jury-rigged arbitration,"" Davis said last week. ??""I believe PG&E was in denial,"" Davis said in an interview with Bee editors and reporters. ??PG&E says it wasn't demanding an end to regulation. Rather, what it wanted - and what Davis' negotiator Michael Peevey agreed to in principle - was to let the utility charge ratepayers for all its costs of buying wholesale electricity, said PG&E spokesman Ron Low. ??In that same deal, reached Feb. 25 in Los Angeles, PG&E made a ""handshake agreement"" to sell its transmission grid, Low said. He wouldn't reveal the price. ??In the weeks that followed, the governor's team reneged, Low said. ""The discussions and negotiations broke down because they would not agree to the basic principles that were reached by (PG&E Chairman) Bob Glynn and Michael Peevey,"" Low said. ??PG&E also became disgusted with a series of PUC rulings in late March and early April that it believed would seriously hinder its ability to recover its debts. ??Things came to a head April 5 when Davis proposed a rate increase and outlined his rescue plan in a televised address. A few minutes later, Joseph Fichera, a Wall Street financier advising Davis, and other Davis advisers held a conference call in which they fleshed out the details for investors. Edison officials and directors listened in, but PG&E didn't, Fichera said. ??""They had made up their minds,"" Fichera said, referring to PG&E officials. ??The next morning, with Glynn dismissing Davis' speech as ""a lot of words,"" the utility filed for bankruptcy protection. ??That afternoon, Davis called PG&E ""selfish"" and pointedly went into a negotiating session with John Bryson, the chairman and chief executive of Edison's parent Edison International. ??For Davis, the meeting was crucial. Although Edison had tentatively agreed in February to sell its transmission lines, the deal wasn't sewn up and Davis was nervous the PG&E bankruptcy would prompt Edison's creditors to ""jerk Edison into bankruptcy,"" Davis said last week. ??That afternoon, ""conceptually we reached an agreement,"" Davis said. The deal was announced the following Monday. ??Consumer advocates and some legislative leaders blasted the agreement as a giveaway, and said Davis hastily sweetened the terms for Edison because he needed to show progress on the energy crisis in the wake of the PG&E imbroglio. ??Not true, Davis said; the basic terms were already on the table before PG&E filed for bankruptcy. Either way, Edison was receptive to negotiating with Davis. ??Edison's background is different from PG&E's. Because it isn't in the natural gas business, it doesn't have the track record PG&E does with free markets. It is more comfortable in the regulatory and political realm, experts say. ??Notably, Bryson was president of the PUC in the 1970s - when Davis was Gov. Jerry Brown's chief of staff. ??""He knows Gray Davis,"" said ex-PUC President Wilk. ""He may feel a higher level of comfort in dealing with a very adversarial process. He felt he could rely on the governor."" ??Politically savvy, Edison is one of the utility industry's biggest contributors to national political campaigns, and it usually spends more than PG&E on California campaigns. Edison International's board of directors includes Los Angeles attorney Warren Christopher, the former U.S. secretary of state and an elder statesman of the Democratic Party. ??Though it's open to negotiations, Edison isn't a pussycat. To the contrary, experts say. ??""It was usually Edison that was more combative than PG&E,"" said Tom Willoughby, a retired PG&E lobbyist. ??Wilk agreed, adding: ""I find it curious that PG&E's being painted as the confrontational, aggressive company and Edison as the get-along, company."" ??Edison hasn't been shy about going to Sacramento for favors; last year, for example, Edison wanted some changes made in the operation of the state's power grid. Instead of talking to the grid manager, the Independent System Operator, Edison went to the Legislature, a source said. Lawmakers then pressured the ISO to make the changes. ??One more factor may have played into Edison's willingness to deal with the governor. ??Last year it became involved in a protracted dispute with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which oversees the transmission grid, over how much profit Edison could earn from the grid. ??Edison eventually won its point, but the case influenced the utility's thinking when Davis offered to buy the grid. According to industry consultant Barbara Barkovich, Edison figured, why wrestle with the federal government over profits when it simply could raise billions through a cash sale? ??Besides, Edison has a back-up plan if the Legislature scraps the grid purchase, as many lawmakers have threatened. The company has said it would follow PG&E's lead and file for bankruptcy. ??But its willingness to negotiate with the governor will have served it well, even if it goes into bankruptcy, said Nancy Day, a utility industry veteran consulting for the Legislature. ??Day said she believes the governor's appointees on the PUC will ""punish"" PG&E for its behavior. If Edison winds up in bankruptcy court, it ""won't be punished for it,"" Day said. ??PUC President Loretta Lynch couldn't be reached for comment. ??Energy companies at a glance Edison Main subsidiary: Southern California Edison Headquarters: Rosemead, Los Angeles County Customers: 4.2 million in Southern California Chairman: John Bryson Performance: Lost $1.94 billion in 2000 on revenue of $11.72 billion Stock ticker symbol: EIX ??PG&E Main subsidiary: Pacific Gas and Electric Co. Headquarters: San Francisco Customers: 13 million in Northern, Central California Chairman: Robert Glynn Jr. Performance: Lost $3.36 billion in 2000 on revenue of $26.23 billion. Stock ticker symbol: PCG ??* * * ??The Bee's Dale Kasler can be reached at (916) 321-1066 or dkasler@sacbee.com. GRAPHIC: Bryson Glynn LOAD-DATE: April 30, 2001 of 103 DOCUMENTS ??????????????????Copyright 2001 McClatchy Newspapers, Inc. Bee ??????????????????April 29, 2001, Sunday METRO FINAL EDITION SECTION: MAIN NEWS; Pg. A3 LENGTH: 679 words HEADLINE: What will be fallout from California's energy meltdown? BYLINE: Dan Walters BODY: ??No one knows for certain how - or when - California's energy crisis will conclude. It is an inordinately complicated four-dimensional chess game that has so far defied politicians' simplistic - perhaps simple-minded - efforts at resolution. ??That said, one may speculate reasonably on the financial, social and political consequences for California in the months and years ahead. ??Financially, Californians - especially the 70 percent who are served by private electric utilities - will feel the pinch for years, if not decades, to come. Before the crisis hit, California's power rates were already among the highest in the nation. Given the nearly $20 billion in power purchase debts that the utilities and the state have accumulated so far, the stubbornly high wholesale prices and other data, it's not unreasonable to project that Californians in private utility areas will see their rates double, or rise even higher. ??Politicians have been laying the rhetorical groundwork for big increases, although they've been disingenuous about the outer parameters. The burden will fall most heavily on business customers and, coupled with doubts about power reliability and rising natural gas prices, will damage the state's ability to attract job-creating investment. States with low and stable energy prices already are using the crisis as a recruiting tool. In February, Intel President Craig Barrett told the Wall Street Journal: ""As long as California is a Third World country, we won't build $2 billion manufacturing plants here."" ??The inevitable escalation of utility rates will create distortions within the state as well, since utility rates for the 30 percent of Californians served by publicly owned utilities are not likely to rise by more than token amounts. The municipal utilities' rates were roughly a third lower than private utilities' rates prior to the crisis. By the time the dust settles, they may be just half as much. It will contribute to the balkanization of California that was already being defined by such factors as housing prices, ethnicity and income levels. Low-cost regions will become magnets for people and jobs while high-price regions will be shunned. ??The energy crisis will certainly be the defining issue of the 2002 elections, and perhaps for others to follow. Gov. Gray Davis' popularity has plummeted since he took charge of the crisis, laying waste to his intentions to seek an easy re-election next year as a middle-of-the-road, business-friendly, tough-on-crime education reformer. ??With his popularity waning, Davis may be compelled to turn left, shoring up his base by catering to demands of labor unions, environmentalists, trial lawyers and other liberal elements of the Democratic Party. That, in turn, would undermine the triangulating strategy he has pursued, in which he took Democratic voters for granted and cultivated business executives and social conservatives. Business interests are worried, for example, that Davis may now feel compelled to sign union-friendly legislation, such as boosts in workers' compensation and unemployment benefits, that he vetoed in the past. ??Davis' relations with fellow Democrats in the Legislature have turned from cool to poisonous, with lawmakers openly trashing his leadership and management of the energy crisis and worrying that he'll try to shift the blame to them if the crisis turns to disaster. If Democratic leaders fear that voters will be in a throw-the-bums-out mood next year, they may throttle back on intentions to maximize their party strength in drawing new legislative districts. Such maximization would require spreading Democratic voters out among many districts, and such margin-thinning could make Democrats vulnerable in an energy crisis-spawned voter rebellion. Democrats may well strive for fewer but safer seats. ??These are but a few of the potential effects that California will experience long after the immediate crisis has faded, whenever that may be. ??* * * ??The Bee's Dan Walters can be reached at (916) 321-1195 or dwalters@sacbee.com. LOAD-DATE: April 30, 2001 of 103 DOCUMENTS ?????????????????Copyright 2001 The Chronicle Publishing Co. ?????????????????????????The San Francisco Chronicle ????????????????????APRIL 29, 2001, SUNDAY, FINAL EDITION SECTION: INSIGHT; Pg. D1 LENGTH: 1419 words HEADLINE: The energy crisis is good for you SOURCE: Insight Senior Writer BYLINE: Louis Freedberg BODY: Here's a message for pampered and overindulged citizens of the Golden State who complain unceasingly about high energy bills and the day-to-day prospect of rolling blackouts: Stop whining. ???It's not a crisis -- it's an opportunity. The energy ""crisis"" is good for us. ???For decades, we burned lights whenever we wanted, bought more and more energy-guzzling appliances, bigger and bigger television sets. Today, as citizens of the richest state in the world's only superpower, who is going to tell us when to stop? ???""We talk about having to hit mules over the head with a 2 by 4 to get their attention, but I don't think human beings are much more responsive or foresighted. I hate to see people suffering, but on the other hand, if that is the way we learn, so be it,"" says Ernest Callenbach, the Berkeley author of the futuristic 1975 novel, ""Ecotopia."" Callenbach's work was a major influence on the alternative energy policies of former Gov. Jerry Brown. ???Nowhere has the ethic of unlimited consumption been more out of control than in the Bay Area, where the energy demands of high tech outstripped what the electricity grid could supply. Aside from the energy needs of the industry itself, the wealth it generated encouraged avaricious lifestyles that include power-swilling mansions and freeways clogged with monster sport utility vehicles. ???Perhaps the 34 days of blackouts some experts predict for this summer will bring the discipline that eludes us. Except for the hardships the crisis has inflicted on the poor, Californians still enjoy a sybaritic lifestyle that, in ways, would put to shame the pharaohs of Egypt or the court of Louis XIV. Lights still burn when they're not needed. Except for very occasional blackouts, electricity still flows 24 hours a day. Our daily routines have barely been affected. A visitor from another state or country would have a hard time finding signs of our highly publicized ""crisis."" ???As we brace for deregulated electric bills courtesy of the state Public Utilities Commission, imagine what life was like for Native Americans who lived for millennia in a bounteous Bay Area without microwaves, waffle irons, air conditioning or 24-cubic-foot refrigerators. No one is suggesting that we revert to those days. But let's consider the thought that we may actually be better off without the piles of appliances whose tangle of cords clogs our homes and offices. ???Smug Californians love to point to the state's ranking as a miserly consumer of energy -- only three other states consume less per capita -- to rebut accusations that we have become greedy energy hogs. Tougher efficiency standards have helped, but so has our great weather. ""California has a uniquely good climate to be efficient,"" says Dan Kammen, director of the Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory at the University of California at Berkeley. ""Compared to countries with much harsher climates, we have not done enough."" ???There's no denying the sudden, sharp pain caused by the crisis -- from threats of sky-high electric bills to fears that California's economic engine is near collapse. But if we handle it right, all kinds of positive energy will result. Potential benefits extend from the spiritual (a revival of the conservation ethic) to the curative (making the state immune to power-problem overloads) to the liberating (throwing off for good our dependence on the Texas energy overlords). ???Consumers, shocked into action by tripled or quadrupled energy bills, are already rushing to Bay Area hardware stores, snapping up setback thermostats, hot water heater blankets, insulating window film and outdoor clotheslines. Alan Ginsberg of Satco Products in Hayward, who imports from China container-loads of squiggly shaped energy-saving fluorescent bulbs, says, ""They're flying out the door."" ???More significantly, the crisis impels the state to move ahead with the construction of badly needed power plants. It puts on the agenda of public debate the fundamental question of whether our energy system should be in the hands of giant utilities or run by municipalities or by the state. It certainly unveiled the greed of out-of-state energy producers who have sucked billions of dollars from California. ???The crisis has also made us focus on fundamental flaws in our energy grid, such as the 4,500-megawatt electricity shortage that emerged in the 1990s while we were all reveling in California's boom times. ???By exposing those who got us into this predicament -- producers, utilities, regulators and politicians -- there's a chance we'll get out of it with a more rational and efficient energy grid and be better prepared to deal with challenges down the road. If that happens, Gov. Gray Davis might yet confound critics who say his political prospects are sinking faster than you can say ""megawatt."" ???The ease and convenience of modern life fools us into thinking that power, water and food are infinite. Flip a switch and the lights magically go on. Turn a faucet and water flows. These days, the biggest challenge in gathering our daily bread is the hunt for a space in the supermarket parking lot. ???And we want it all, leading us straight into denial. We want instant, abundant power -- but we don't want any new power plants, especially in our backyards. Coal is dirty. Natural gas is expensive. Dams kill salmon. Nuclear power? Forget about it. The contradictions haven't mattered -- so long as an endless supply of electrons flowed from our wall outlets. But that mindless ease, the crisis taught us, is history. ???The energy crisis warns us that we must become more self-sufficient or risk slipping toward oblivion if we continue to spend billions of dollars on shrinking non-renewable energy sources such as coal and natural gas. ???The Roman Empire fell because of the decadence of its ruling elites. And the British empire, dependent on raw materials from the colonies, began to collapse when it became too expensive to import goods across oceans. ???A new consciousness about where electricity comes from is the first step toward using less of it. It could also translate into a greater awareness of other environmental causes. ???If we get the message, ""the net outcome (of the energy crisis) will be a quite profound shift in consciousness in energy conservation,"" predicts Michael Lerner, executive director of Commonweal, a health and environmental institute in Bolinas. ???Such a turnaround is no snap. ???During the last energy crisis in the 1970s, there was a similar rush toward conservation. President Jimmy Carter installed solar panels on the White House roof. President Ronald Reagan took them down. He also phased out tax credits and other inducements to encourage development of renewable energy sources. ???Closer to home, one of former Gov. George Deukmejian's first acts was to abolish the Office of Appropriate Technology established by Gov. Jerry Brown to move us away from our dependence on non-renewable fossil fuels. ???Since then, we have regressed further. Even record high gasoline prices have done nothing to depress the sales of SUVs, which now account for the largest share of automobile and light truck sales (20 percent at last count). ???But today's crisis could lead to permanent changes in behavior, if only because the technology needed to harness sun, wind and other renewable energy sources has become far more cost effective than a generation ago. California already gets 12 percent of its energy from these ""alternative"" sources, and the market incentives to develop them further has never been higher. ???Stratospherically high electricity bills could finally force on us the technological changes and the discipline that Europeans -- who use two-thirds as much energy per capita as we do -- and the Japanese -- who use only half as much -- have had to embrace. ???This difficult moment in California's history has already yielded some ecological epiphanies, like those experienced by Ernest Callenbach's neighbors. They installed solar photovoltaic cells on their roof. The installation now puts surplus electricity back into the energy grid, instead of sucking more out of it. ???""The magical moment is the idea that by having a photovoltaic cell on your roof, you can make your electric meter run backward,"" said Callenbach. ""Instead of it going to the right, you actually see it going in the other direction. You say to yourself, 'Oh Lord, Oh Lord, I have seen the future.' "" ??Email Louis Freedberg at lfreedberg@sfchronicle.com GRAPHIC: GRAPHIC, Don McCartney/The Chronicle LOAD-DATE: April 29, 2001 of 103 DOCUMENTS 2001 Ventura County Star County Star 29, 2001 Sunday SECTION: Editorials; Pg. B09 LENGTH: 704 words HEADLINE: Reality is what's needed for real policy GOVERNOR: Consumers deserve to get real facts from Davis. BYLINE: Dan Walters BODY: ??Gov. Gray Davis is continuing to tell Californians that he's on top of the state's energy crisis and, as he said at one gathering last week, ""in three years this problem will be a distant memory."" Fat chance. All major aspects of the situation are growing worse, not better, minute-by-minute. ??Politicians took over the crisis in January as the state's major utilities exhausted their cash reserves and lines of credit. Davis began what he said then would be a short-term, emergency program of power purchases to keep electrons flowing into homes and businesses. ??From that moment forward, the situation has steadily deteriorated, moving toward a three-pronged disaster: severe summer blackouts, the bankruptcy of the utilities and sharply escalating power bills. With the bankruptcy filing by Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and decisions by Davis and the Public Utilities Commission to begin ratcheting up utility rates, two of the three negative scenarios are now in place. And everyone involved in the crisis expects blackouts this summer as demands for power soar and supplies dwindle. ??The Davis strategy, if there is one, is to continue the state's massive power purchases while negotiating longer-term and presumably cheaper supply contracts, encourage conservation, help utilities pay off their debts by selling their intercity transmission system to the state and tapping ratepayers, and build more power plants to ease the supply crunch. ??Currently, the governor is touting his deal with Edison International, parent company of Southern California Edison, to sell its portion of the grid and is working on a similar deal with Sempra, the parent of San Diego Gas and Electric. But PG&E's bankruptcy casts doubt on the viability of the cash-for-grid concept and legislators, particularly Davis' fellow Democrats, are very skeptical of the Edison deal. ??Clearly, Davis rushed into the Edison deal just three days after PG&E filed bankruptcy, in hopes of erasing the political stain of the latter action, but its provisions are being labeled a ""bailout"" by critics. It places only a token financial burden on Edison International while guaranteeing the profitability of its utility subsidiary by charging its customers whatever is required to cover its costs and past debts. ??Meanwhile, the state is spending -- by Davis' own account -- about $70 million a day or $2-plus billion a month on spot power purchases, paying roughly five times what consumers are being charged at the retail level. And the current futures market for power indicates that wholesale power prices will jump by another 50 percent by mid-summer; higher prices and greater purchases could increase the drain on the state treasury to as much as $5 billion a month. ??State Treasurer Phil Angelides is desperately trying to arrange a ""bridge loan"" to relieve pressure on the state's rapidly vanishing reserves, but Wall Street is reluctant to lend without a fuller explanation of what's happening and a specific authorization from a suspicious Legislature. ??He said Tuesday that Davis, who has maintained secrecy on power purchases, must offer a comprehensive and public plan for dealing with the financial squeeze. ??Meanwhile, bankers are sending strong signals that the state government is becoming as poor a lending risk as the utilities. ??Davis, for some reason, is unwilling to declare this situation the emergency that it is truly becoming -- one that could take a toll of human life if major blackouts shut down air conditioners, respirators and traffic lights. He insists on issuing his periodic -- and wholly unrealistic -- assurances that things will turn out all right, even declaring to reporters this past Tuesday that ""we think we'll have this thing licked by the end of fall."" ??It's time for someone -- the governor, preferably, but someone -- to lay out for Californians exactly what's happening, the downside financial and power supply risks, and what's being done to deal with the looming disaster facing this state. ??It's time for politicians to treat us as adults who can face reality, not as children to be fed sugarcoated sound bites and slogans. ??-- Dan Walters writes for the Sacramento Bee. LOAD-DATE: April 29, 2001 of 103 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ????????????????????April 28, 2001, Saturday, Home Edition SECTION: Part A; Part 1; Page 19; Metro Desk LENGTH: 679 words HEADLINE: OFFICIALS CALL PRICE STABILITY PLAN ILLEGAL; UTILITIES: AGENCY CHIEFS SAY THE FEDERAL PROPOSAL COULD ALSO CAUSE MORE BLACKOUTS THIS SUMMER. BYLINE: NANCY VOGEL and MIGUEL BUSTILLO, TIMES STAFF WRITERS DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??Two top state energy officials said Friday that a federal plan to stabilize electricity prices in California could increase the odds of blackouts this summer and most likely is illegal. ??In a barrage of complaints attacking the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the state's top power regulator and the head of the board overseeing California's transmission grid said they might challenge the federal order in court. ??The order was approved on a 2-1 vote Wednesday and released to the public late Thursday. ??""We're going to take whatever actions we can to oppose this to the extent our lawyers tell us it's illegal,"" said Michael Kahn, an attorney named by Gov. Gray Davis to head the board overseeing the California Independent System Operator. Cal-ISO manages the transmission grid reaching three-quarters of the state. ??In a conference call with reporters, Kahn and Loretta Lynch, president of the California Public Utilities Commission, said the order also seems to indicate that FERC is unwilling to force power sellers to rebate any of the extraordinary profits earned before last October in California's market, where wholesale electricity prices began soaring last May. ??And, according to Kahn, the federal order illegally ties limits on power prices to a requirement that California link its transmission grid with those of other states. ??""It's not within their authority to have this kind of linkage,"" he said. ??The federal order is scheduled to take effect May 29. Though it is not clear how the order will play out in the state's electricity market, Lynch and Kahn said they do not believe it will bring down power costs or help the state avoid blackouts, as intended. ??""They're creating a whole new, wholesale blackout system,"" said Lynch, referring to a section of the order that allows large customers, such as steel mills and food processors, to get paid to shut down when grid operators are struggling to find enough electricity to meet demand. ??Though a somewhat similar program has helped California avoid blackouts, the federal order requires state power buyers to name the price to which electricity must rise before they shut down customers. ??The requirement of naming a price could lead to more blackouts, said Stanford University economist Frank Wolak, because it prevents power buyers from paying more if that's what it takes to keep electricity flowing. ??""Stating your price and sticking to it means that somebody could call your bluff,"" Wolak said. ""The generators just say, look, we can't supply all you want at the price you want to pay. ??""So they supply everything they can at the price we're willing to pay--and no more--and we have rotating blackouts,"" he said. ??Lynch said that no matter how this aspect of the FERC order unfolds, ""it ain't for Washington bureaucrats to decide when the lights go out in California. "" ??Grid operators at Cal-ISO must quickly buy batches of electricity to constantly match supply and demand on the transmission system serving most of the state, excluding the city of Los Angeles. When Cal-ISO cannot find enough power, it must order Southern California Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric and San Diego Gas & Electric to trigger rotating blackouts. ??The state suffered such controlled outages on four days in January and March, and many such days are predicted for this summer as air conditioning drives up demand for power. ??In other energy news Friday, Gov. Gray Davis announced in Los Angeles that electricity use in California state office buildings dropped by an average of 20% in the first two months of this year, compared to the same months of 2000. State workers have been under orders since late last year to turn off nonessential lights, computers, printers and other electrical appliances. Some agencies have even changed workers' schedules, eliminating ""flextime"" so that everyone works the same hours and the offices can open later and close earlier, shortening the energy-using day. ??* ??Times staff writer Mitchell Landsberg in Los Angeles contributed to this story. LOAD-DATE: April 28, 2001 of 103 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ????????????????????April 28, 2001, Saturday, Home Edition SECTION: Part A; Part 1; Page 19; Metro Desk LENGTH: 688 words HEADLINE: BILL COULD FOIL DAVIS' ELECTRICITY OFFENSIVE; POWER: CONGRESSMAN WANTS TO LET SMALL PRODUCERS SELL ON WHOLESALE MARKET. BACKERS SAY PLAN WOULD BOOST SUPPLY, BUT FOES SEE IT COSTING CALIFORNIA DEARLY. BYLINE: JULIE TAMAKI and MIGUEL BUSTILLO, TIMES STAFF WRITERS DATELINE: SACRAMENTO BODY: ??A Texas congressman plans to introduce legislation next week that would allow California's small power producers to sell their supplies on the wholesale market--a move that could threaten Gov. Gray Davis' plan to end the state's energy crisis. ??The proposal by Republican Rep. Joe Barton, the influential chairman of the House energy and air quality subcommittee, would permit producers of alternative and renewable energy to suspend their contracts with the state's two biggest investor-owned utilities and sell their supplies to a third party. ??Proponents say the bill could dramatically bolster the state's electricity supplies by luring producers whose plants have been shut down by payment disputes to restart them in time for summer, when supplies are expected to be tight and blackouts are feared. ??But allowing producers to sell to a third party would essentially devastate Davis' plan to rescue the utilities and get the state out of the business of making emergency electricity purchases. ??The governor's plan is based on California locking down the costs of electricity from the utilities and small power producers for several years, at a reduced cost. ??During that time, the state would buy the remaining portion of the electricity the utilities need to serve their customers. Meanwhile, the utilities would regain their financial footing by selling assets to the state in exchange for being allowed to recover a portion of their back debt through a surcharge on electricity bills. ??If the alternative producers were allowed to sell their power on the wholesale market, the state could be forced to purchase much more electricity on the expensive open market. ??That would dramatically increase California's already massive power costs, forcing the state to further raise electricity rates and borrow even more than the record $ 12 billion in bonds it is planning to finance the plan. The state has spent more than $ 5 billion buying electricity that the utilities cannot afford, and Davis expects to spend $ 15 billion by year's end. ??""It is a way of busting the budget for the state of California,"" said Joseph Fichera, a Wall Street energy consultant hired by the Davis administration. He called the potential release of the small producers a ""disaster scenario"" for the state. ??Added Stephen E. Frank, chairman, president and chief executive of Southern California Edison: ""Releasing them from their contractual obligations will simply exacerbate the problem, because they would then be selling into the market at additionally higher rates and just compound the state's problems."" ??But Eugene Peters of the Electric Power Supply Assn. disputed that contention. The state, he said, is already buying replacement supplies on the open market because of reduced output by small producers. ??""If 3,000 megawatts are made available again, it will have a potentially profound effect on what people pay for power by bolstering overall electricity supplies,"" Peters said. ??Utility executives contend that only 1,200 megawatts are offline because of payment problems. ??California is home to nearly 700 small energy producers, which generate more than a quarter of the electricity consumed in the state. They differ from their big out-of-state counterparts, which have been getting paid by the state. ??The Barton proposal will be the subject of public hearings Tuesday and Thursday, and could move to the full House Energy and Commerce Committee for a vote the next week. Barton could not be reached for comment Friday. ??The alternative-energy provision is one of several in his emergency energy bill. Others designed to help the West through a difficult summer of price spikes and energy shortages range from offering federal aid to relieving a bottleneck in the transmission system to permitting governors to secure waivers from environmental rules to boost power supplies. ??The provisions dealing with waivers of environmental rules have been among the most controversial, drawing opposition from environmentalists. ??* ??Times staff writer Richard Simon in Washington contributed to this story. LOAD-DATE: April 28, 2001 of 103 DOCUMENTS 2001 / Los Angeles Times Angeles Times ????????????????????April 28, 2001, Saturday, Home Edition SECTION: Business; Part C; Page 2; Financial Desk LENGTH: 137 words HEADLINE: BRIEFLY / ENERGY; PUC ORDERS UTILITIES TO POST BLACKOUT DATA BYLINE: Nancy Rivera Brooks BODY: ??Responding to customer complaints, the California Public Utilities Commission ordered Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric to tell customers more about when they will be blacked out during times of extreme power shortages. The PUC told Edison and SDG&E to begin listing on electricity bills by June 1 the ""outage block"" into which each customer falls. ?The utilities then must use their Web sites to tell customers which blocks are slated for blackouts should more rotating outages be required. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. already lists outage block numbers on its customer bills. A pop-up box on PG&E's Web site shows which blocks are next in line for blackouts. Edison and SDG&E said they have been working on implementing such notification on their own and will comply with the PUC ruling. LOAD-DATE: April 28, 2001 of 103 DOCUMENTS ??????????????????Copyright 2001 McClatchy Newspapers, Inc. Bee ?????????????????April 28, 2001, Saturday METRO FINAL EDITION SECTION: MAIN NEWS; Pg. A3; POWER CRUNCH LENGTH: 1109 words HEADLINE: Cities take new look at public power The state's uncertain electricity picture has local officials deciding it's time to revisit the idea of municipal utilities. BYLINE: Carrie Peyton Bee Staff Writer BODY: ??From the shipwreck of California's electric industry, Albert Vera sees a chance to build a life raft. ??""This is an opportunity that shall never come again,"" the former Culver City mayor told city and county officials gathered this week in Sacramento. ??Every rate hike, every blackout, every corporate bonus is more evidence for believers that it's time for local government to get into the power business. They pin their hopes on municipal utility drives in San Francisco, Corona, San Diego County and beyond. ??Over the past few years, however, only a handful of cities have set up their own electric departments, and they are mostly limited entities that fall short of full-fledged utilities. More commonly, cities - including Davis, Lincoln and Culver City - have studied the idea and rejected it, at least temporarily. ??They all face the same question, said Santa Rosa City Manager Jeffrey Kolin: ??""Is the investment worth the risk? Most of us would say we don't know yet."" ??Kolin's city, like scores of others across the state, has decided it is time to study the issue anew, motivated by the prospect of soaring electric bills, repeated blackouts, and Pacific Gas and Electric Co.'s bankruptcy filing. ??""All their citizens are screaming,"" said Yvonne Hunter, a lobbyist for the League of California Cities. ??The highest visibility fight will likely come in November, when San Franciscans go to the polls to decided whether to create their own utility in a city that houses PG&E's corporate headquarters. ??""We will take it very seriously,"" PG&E spokesman John Nelson said. ??Shortly after deregulation in 1996, several drives for ratepayer-owned utilities stumbled or stalled. An effort in the far north state to create a multicounty public power agency was rejected by state regulators because some local governments objected. ??Now, with a bill to create a state power authority moving through the Legislature, some believe the climate may be changing. ??""One of the things this crisis has proved is the value of local control,"" said Jerry Jordan, head of the California Municipal Utilities Association. ??Since January, the cities of Hercules in the Bay Area and Corona in Southern California have formed utilities to deliver electric service to new neighborhoods - a strategy that sidesteps potential condemnation fights with the existing utility. The county of San Diego is trying to get special legislative authority to create a regional power agency without a popular vote. ??""We could produce power better, cheaper and faster than the private sector,"" county Supervisor Dianne Jacob said. ??Not so, say PG&E and Southern California Edison. ??""There's been much more talk of it, but as soon as most folks sit down and take a look at the realities ... they realize that they would have to buy on the same market, at the same outrageous prices that we and the state have been paying,"" Nelson said. ""The talk quickly evaporates."" ??For-profit utilities have long argued that government shouldn't usurp the role of private industry in delivering electricity. PG&E contends that the factors that once made public power attractive - such as access to low-cost electricity from federal dams - have evaporated. ??In addition, cities that try to withdraw from PG&E or Edison now probably would still have to funnel money their way for years to come, to pay off still-unsold state bonds that will stretch out a single year's power costs for up to 15 years. ??With so many unknowns, the next few years are likelier to produce more studies than new utilities, said a number of city officials who attended a seminar in Sacramento this week, sponsored in part by the American Public Power Association. ??Former New York state Sen. Al Coppola told the group the session should have been titled: ""Independence from the greedy robber baron utilities."" ??Public power backers share three key beliefs: ??* They can charge customers less because they don't have to pay dividends to investors or pay taxes on their sales; they can respond to local preferences on issues like which customers pay the lowest rates and how blackouts are staged; and existing utilities will do everything in their power to oppose them. ??""Edison did the right thing - (use) fear,"" to discourage Culver City from creating an electric arm in 1995, Vera, the city's former mayor, told the group. ??And Glenn Prentice, head of the newly created Corona electric utility, said in an interview that a half-dozen other cities have contacted him for more information, but he declined to name them. ??""If I do, Edison will start the attack on them. We're talking about a lot of money,"" he said. ""We're here to serve the public. They're here to make money."" ??PG&E sees new utilities as ""competition for our business,"" and it has a policy of lobbying hard against them, Nelson said. ??Less than 18 months ago, it warned residents of the Placer County town of Lincoln that a city power enterprise would be costlier and less dependable than PG&E, and its officials labeled the effort a ""tax dodge."" ??But by January of this year, PG&E barely blinked when Hercules set up a utility to deliver power and telecommunications service in new neighborhoods. ??""We got more resistance from AT&T and PacBell,"" said Raj Pankhania, assistant to the city manager of Hercules. ??Pankhania has been researching utility drives across the state and has seen no groundswell for public power, although he believes it can bring cities added revenue and more local control. ??That could change this summer, Prentice said. ??""It really depends on how bad the blackouts are."" ??A blackout that left one city councilmember's daughter at a darkened school was part of what led the Riverside County city of Corona to vote April 4 to form its own electric arm, he said. Heavy industry became anxious, too. ??""They said to the city council, 'Do something!' "" Prentice said. ??Skipping detailed studies, Corona quickly decided to create a utility that will build small power plants, under 50 megawatts, to serve city operations and new neighborhoods in the city of 127,000 east of Disneyland. ??In time, said Hercules' Pankhania, cities like his could become the living laboratory for whichever system can deliver better service and lower rates. ??Hercules' plans calls for the older two-thirds of its homes and businesses to retain their PG&E service and the newest third to be served by the city utility. ??""The existing homeowner will definitely compare five to 10 years down the road,"" he said. ""Then let the people decide which way they want to go."" ??* * * ??The Bee's Carrie Peyton can be reached at (916) 321-1086 or cpeyton@sacbee.com. LOAD-DATE: April 29, 2001 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CFTC Reauthorization; [EMail-Body]= Background information. I'd like to talk to Ken about making the call. . . I'll see him at Exec comm today. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/14/2000 08:54 AM --------------------------- Richard Shapiro 08/10/2000 06:11 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Chris Long/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: CFTC Reauthorization I agree w/ chris's recommendation- you too? ---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES on 08/10/2000 06:10 PM --------------------------- Chris Long@ENRON 08/10/2000 05:12 PM To: Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron cc: raislerk@sullcrom.com, Allison Navin/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: CFTC Reauthorization At his request, I met Lee Sachs, Assistant Treasury Secretary, who had requested the meeting after a brief conversation recently. Lee said that senior-level negotiations led by Secretary Summers were initiated last week between the CFTC and SEC and that progress was being made on the single stock futures issue (the major issue postponing movement of the legislation). As you know, the House completed committee work on HR 4541 before it recessed. The bill will now is pending before the Rules Committee where differences will be worked out between the three different Committee versions (Agriculture, Commerce, and Banking). The Senate Agriculture Committee passed out the Senate version in July. However, the bill is not moving quickly in the Senate due to Senator Phil Gramm's desire to see significant changes made to the legislation (not directly related to our energy language). Last week at the Republican Convention, I asked the Senator about the bill and he said they were working on it, but much needs to be changed for his support. More telling perhaps, were Wendy Gramm's comments that she would rather the current bill die if a better bill can be passed next year. What this means is that we must, at the least, remove Senator Gramm's opposition to the bill to move the process and more importantly seek to gain his support of the legislation. Lee Sachs message was just that. I told Lee that we shared his desire to move the legislation as long as it contains a full exclusion for all non-agriculture commodities (including metals). He said that we would have a difficult time defending the metals provision politically. But, Lee said ""we would not find Treasury opposition to the House Commerce Committee language"" (which includes favourable language on energy and metals). This is a positive development, because it isolates the CFTC from its key defenders and I hope ensures no veto threat on our issues. However, I do not expect Treasury to be vocal in support of our position. It is clear that Congressional leaders and the Administration want to get this bill done this year and there remains a good opportunity for enactment. However, with less than 20 or so legislative days left, we need Senator Gramm to engage. A call from Ken Lay in the next two weeks to Senator Gramm could be an impetus for Gramm to move his staff to resolve the differences. Gramm needs to fully understand how helpful the bill is to Enron. Let me know your thoughts on this approach. I am prepared to assist in coordinating the call and drafting the talking points for a Ken Lay/Sen. Gramm call. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron's Global Asset Management Conference; [EMail-Body]= I think you, or someone in your group, should cover this. The attendees are operations focussed and may be interested in issues such as siting, interconnection and environmental issues. Also, from a more macro perspective, what kinds of demands the new industry structure may place on operators -- the importance of flexibility in asset operations (ie the premium the market will place on quick response) or the challenges of different scheduling regimes between the gas and power markets. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 07/25/2000 02:20 PM --------------------------- JENNIFER STEWART@ENRON 07/24/2000 09:45 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Enron's Global Asset Management Conference Steve, As we discussed the other day, Enron's Global Asset Management Conference committee would like to invite you to be the sponsor for our panel discussion on Enron's Regulatory and Governmental Affairs issues for this conference which is being held at the Woodlands Conference Center on October 8-11. We would like to have your panel discussion on October 9, from 3:30-5:30PM. We would like to ask that the you to put together a session that highlights topics that provide a insight from both a national and international perspective The conference committee has chosen the One Enron theme since the attendees at the conference are coming from all the Enron business units both domestically and internationally. The estimated attendance at the conference will be 225 Enron and Joint Venture employees. The invitations are being issued enterprise-wide to employees who are engaged in This conference is the expansion of the annual plant managers' conference that is held each year in Houston. We are replacing it with what we will be a ""Best in Class"" conference addressing multiple topics that will provide direction that will result in lower costs, increased earnings and employee retention. We will also be utilizing this conference as an additional mentoring activity for our Minority/Women Business Enterprise suppliers. I hope that you will accept our invitation, because I know many of the participates will benefit from your panels experiences and knowledge. An agenda has been attached for your review, however it is still in development. If you have any questions, I can be reached at (713) 646-8235. Jennifer L. Stewart Senior Director Global Strategic Sourcing (713) 646-8235 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Polaroid agreement; [EMail-Body]= sounds good, but i couldn't open the file. could you send hard copy Kelly Kimberly@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS 10/10/2000 11:41 PM To: Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Lauren Goldblatt/NY/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Polaroid agreement Wow! We are making a little progress, it looks like! (Steve, when Mike and I met with Francis for the first time he told us we had to agree that we'd never use WWF's name related to this initiative if they participated with EES) ----- Forwarded by Kelly Kimberly/Enron Communications on 10/10/00 11:26 PM ----- GRANT@wwfus.org 10/10/00 07:59 AM To: kkimber@ei.enron.com, Michael.Terraso@enron.com cc: (bcc: Kelly Kimberly/Enron Communications) Subject: Polaroid agreement Thought you might be interested in the latest climate savers partner. There is a press conference with Senator Kerry today in Boston announcing the deal. We added in Enron. F. <<WWF Climate Savers Press Release.doc>> Francis A. Grant-Suttie Director, Private Sector Initiatives World Wildlife Fund 1250 Twenty-Fourth St., NW Washington, DC 20037-1132 phone: (202) 778-9718 fax: (202) 861-8378 e-mail: [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Davis' Energy Advisors Draw SEC Attention.htm; [EMail-Body]= Scrutiny of Davis and crew is taking hold. The state controller, Kathleen= Connell, also has a well written op-ed critical of Davis in today's LA Ti= mes. =20 Kevin 213-926-2626 =20 [IMAGE]Los Angeles Times - latimes.com =09[IMAGE] [IMAGE]=09 [IMAGE] [IMAGE] =09Home | Subscribe | Register | Site Map | Ar= chives | Print Edition | Advertise | Feedback | Help [IMAGE]=09 Marketplace jobs * cars * homes * rentals [IMAGE] Arts and Enter= tainment Movies , Music , TV , Dining print edition [IMAGE] Fro= nt Page Inside ""A"" California Business Sports So Cal Living Calendar = Editorials, Op-Ed [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Weekly [IMAGE] Health Food Tech T= imes Highway 1 Workplace [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Sunday [IMAGE] Books Calen= dar Magazine Opinion Real Estate Travel TV Times [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [I= MAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] The World [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] The Natio= n [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] California [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Busi= ness [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Politics [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Spo= rts [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Technology [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Tr= avel [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Editorials, Op-Ed [IMAGE] Sections [I= MAGE] Books Columnists Education Food Health Highway 1 Obituaries = Real Estate Religion Science So. Cal. Living Sunday Opinion Tech Time= s Times Poll Workplace/Jobs [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Editions [IMAGE] Print E= dition National Wireless [IMAGE] Extras [IMAGE] Crossword Horoscop= e Lottery Traffic Weather Multimedia [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Feat= ures [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] SITE MAP [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Subscripti= on Services Subscribe Change of Address Vacation Stops Suspend Delive= ry College Discount Gift Subscriptions Mail Subscriptions FAQ [IMAG= E] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Classifieds jobs , homes , cars , re= ntals Print Ads Shopping Advertising Supplements [IMAGE] [IMAGE] LA= Times Initiatives [IMAGE] Times in Education Reading by 9 Times-Mirro= r Foundation Events [IMAGE] [IMAGE] =09[IMAGE]=09[IMAGE] July 31, 2001= [IMAGE] Talk about it [IMAGE] E-mail story [IMAGE] Print THE STATE= Davis' Energy Advisors Draw SEC Attention *Probe: Under review is the pos= sible use of inside information to buy power company stocks. GOP rival of = governor requested the inquiry. [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Times Headline= s * Latinos Assured Water Is OK * Car Dealer Not Bound by Ad Error, = Court Rules * Suspect in Simi Valley Serial Rapes Arrested * New LAPD= Radios Get Negative Reviews * 2 Shot to Death, 1 at Home by Stray Bulle= t more > [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Subscribe By WALTER HAMILTON JEFFE= RY L. RABIN and DARYL KELLEY, TIMES STAFF WRITERS The Securities and Exch= ange Commission has launched a preliminary inquiry into whether energy con= sultants advising Gov. Gray Davis used inside information to trade stocks = of power companies doing business with the state, a source with knowledge = of the matter said Monday. The federal agency began its review late last = week, the source said, in response to a request from California Secretary = of State Bill Jones. A Republican rival of Davis, Jones charged that stock= trading by consultants may have violated federal laws barring buying and = selling based on information not available to the public. On Friday, top = aides to the governor disclosed that five consultants had been fired for = possible conflicts of interest between their official positions and their = personal finances. As news of the SEC inquiry spread through the capital M= onday, Davis officials were confronted by a flurry of questions about who = in the administration owns energy stocks. Financial disclosure records fi= led by the governor's spokesman, Steve Maviglio, show that he owns between= $10,000 and $100,000 in a Texas company he and his boss have accused of m= aking ""obscene"" profits while California has been ""on its knees."" Maviglio= said he bought the shares in Houston-based Enron Corp. in 1996. ""It's no= t a crime to own energy stock,"" Maviglio said. He also owns 300 shares of= San Jose-based Calpine Corp., which has the largest share of the $43 bill= ion in long-term state power contracts. Maviglio placed the order for the= stock on May 31, one day after San Jose's mayor dropped his opposition to= a controversial Calpine plant favored by the governor and others. Under t= he terms of Maviglio's purchase, the transaction was completed about three= weeks later when the stock reached $40 a share, a value of $12,000. It ha= s since fallen in value. ""I viewed it as a good long-term investment,"" M= aviglio said, adding that he purchased the shares for his retirement accou= nt based on publicly available information. The Davis administration has = spared Calpine the kind of fierce criticisms that it has leveled at other = electricity suppliers, such as Enron. But California's grid operator has i= dentified the company as one of many energy merchants to overcharge the st= ate millions of dollars. The fired consultants also owned shares in Calpi= ne, ranging in value from several thousand dollars to more than $100,000, = records show. Another top Davis administration official, legal affairs s= ecretary Barry Goode, disclosed in his economic interest statement that he= recently held between $100,000 and $1 million in another out-of-state com= pany accused of multimillion-dollar price gouging. In a statement, Goode = said he sold his stock in Williams Co's. a month after he began working fo= r the governor in February. Goode said the shares were supposed to be sold= before he went on the state payroll, but his broker failed to do so. In = light of the recent disclosures, Secretary of State Jones said the governo= r must do more to ensure the public that its interest comes first. ""The g= overnor should direct all of his staff to immediately file updated conflic= t of interest statements that reflect current holdings and any activity si= nce their last statement of economic interest was filed,"" said Jones, who = is seeking the GOP nomination for governor. Word of the SEC's entry into = California's energy problems comes as the governor faces harsh criticism f= rom lawmakers and others for the quick and broad hiring of highly paid pri= vate consultants to guide him through the crisis. In his written request = to the SEC, Jones said that recently filed disclosure documents showed tha= t at least one consultant bought and sold shares of two energy companies w= ithin the same month, raising ""a red flag"" about the possibility of inside= r trading. State law prohibits officials from participating in decisions= involving their personal financial interests. The five consultants fired= last week were among 11 named in Jones' letter, delivered to the San Fran= cisco office of the SEC last Wednesday. It was not clear which individuals= are the focus of the SEC's inquiry, or whether the agency's review would = result in any charges. Two of the former traders said Monday that they ha= d not been contacted by federal investigators and knew nothing of an inqui= ry into possible insider trading. But William Mead, fired Thursday, said = it is no mystery why so many of his colleagues owned Calpine stock. Mead = said he bought it 2 1/2 years ago and made so much money he recommended it= to his colleagues last year, while they all still worked for the now-defu= nct California Power Exchange in Alhambra. Calpine power was not traded on= that exchange, so there was no conflict of interest, he said. Mead and = three other energy traders--hired by the state in February and March--were= terminated by the Davis administration for allegedly buying power for the= state from Calpine while owning the company's stock. Fired traders Herman= Leung, Peggy Cheng and Constantine Louie did not list the date of their C= alpine purchases on financial statements that the state required to be fil= ed only two weeks ago. ""But I'm sure they bought it while they were still= at the power exchange, because that's when we discussed it,"" Mead said. ""= It was kind of like a hobby. I'm sure it wasn't done with the intent to ma= nipulate."" Former trader Elaine Griffin, who also owned Calpine stock and= resigned two weeks ago to take another job, said she didn't know she owne= d energy securities until she checked with her financial advisor July 13, = just before leaving her state job. Griffin said she and her husband own a= bout $10,000 worth of Calpine stock in individual retirement accounts mana= ged by their advisor, who bought the stock Feb. 1 without their knowledge,= she said, after research found it to be a good investment. ""I kind of fe= el like we've been used for political reasons,"" Griffin said. ""We would ha= ve disclosed anything right at first, but they never asked."" As a trader= , Griffin said she occasionally bought Calpine power for the state, but on= ly at market prices. Meanwhile, two Democratic political consultants, who= helped Davis polish his image after the ongoing energy crisis caused his = poll numbers to plummet, have agreed to accept no payment for their work a= s part of an out-of-court settlement of a taxpayer lawsuit. Tom Hiltachk,= a lawyer for conservative anti-tax activist Lewis Uhler, said the settlem= ent was reached last Friday after negotiations with lawyers for communicat= ions consultants Mark Fabiani and Chris Lehane. ""Now they will not receiv= e one red cent,"" said Hiltachk. ""Very simply Mr. Fabiani and Mr. Lehane ha= ve agreed to cease all activities for the governor, to accept no payments = for their services and to basically get out of the consulting business wit= h the governor."" As his part of the agreement, Hiltachk said, Uhler with= drew his lawsuit Monday morning. Uhler had filed a lawsuit against the tw= o consultants and Controller Kathleen Connell in June contending that they= should not receive any payments because of a conflict of interest. The tw= o men also did consulting work for financially troubled Southern Californi= a Edison, which was seeking help from Davis and the Legislature. Connell,= a former Los Angeles mayoral candidate who has been at odds with Davis si= nce he endorsed an opponent, had held up the payments pending the outcome = of the lawsuit. Under an agreement with Davis, the men were to have been = paid $30,000 a month for six months. Fabiani and Lehane could not be reac= hed for comment. * Times staff writers Nancy Vogel and Virginia Ellis i= n Sacramento and Robert J. Lopez in Los Angeles contributed to this story.= For information about reprinting this article, go to http://www.lats.co= m/rights/register.htm =09[IMAGE]=09 a d v e r t i s i n g Subscribe NO= W and SAVE on your home delivery subscription! [IMAGE]Cool down rooms w= ithout touching the thermostat A floor lamp that spreads sunshine all = over a room Bring the power of the digital revolution to your fingert= ips Private DVD theater puts a floating 6-foot screen right before you= r eyes! It?s time to put all of your photos onto your computer NASA = research creates ""smart bed"" sleep surface [IMAGE] =09 =09[IMAGE] Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times By visiting this site, y= ou are agreeing to our Terms of Service . Powered by Genuity =09 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Enron; [EMail-Body]= Has this previously been covered by the Office of the Chairman budget? If so, please handle; otherwise let me know. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/09/2001 08:54 AM --------------------------- ""Nelson W. Cunningham"" <ncunningham@mclarty.com> on 06/27/2001 01:09:46 PM Please respond to <ncunningham@mclarty.com> To: ""J. Steven Kean \(E-mail\)"" <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: FW: Enron Steve -- A question aimed far below your pay grade. Our most recent invoice to Enron (dating from April) has not yet been paid. Our accountant, Paul Hart, reports that the individual to whom we had previously been told to direct the invoices says he is no longer the appropriate person to approve it. Any guidance on to whom we should turn? All the best, Nelson -----Original Message----- From: Paul Hart [mailto:phart@ahartco.com] Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 11:03 AM To: Nelson Cunningham Subject: Enron Nelson: We spoke to Enron's accounting dept who said that the invoice is still in their system because James Derrick (whom all the previous invoices have been sent) said that he is not the person to approve the payment. The accountant asked me whom he sould direct the invoice to. Please let me know your thoughts. Paul [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= MEMO; [EMail-Body]= Please call me. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 06/13/2001 04:49 PM --------------------------- From: Jody Underwood on 06/13/2001 04:44 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: MEMO [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW:; [EMail-Body]= FYI. The first leg of the trip has been confirmed. Vince. -----Original Message----- From: ""Frank A. Wolak"" Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 9:26 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: RE: Vince, 4 pm on September 4 and I'd be happy to go to dinner. Frank At 08:33 AM 8/23/01 -0500, you wrote: >Frank, > >Thanks for your message. > >What about a meeting on Tuesday, September the 4th. >We could meet at your office, let's say at 4 p.m. We would be delighted if >you >could join us for dinner later in the evening on the same day. > > >Vince > > -----Original Message----- > From: ""Frank A. Wolak"" > >Eedu+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com] > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 11:13 AM > To: Kaminski, Vince J > Subject: > > Vince, > > I'll be out of the country for the next > two weeks, but should be back September 3 > and will be in the office all that week. > > Frank > > > >This e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or its relevant affiliate >and may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of >the intended recipient (s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by >others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or >authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender or >reply to Enron Corp. at and >delete all copies of the message. This e-mail (and any attachments hereto) >are not intended to be an offer (or an acceptance) and do not create or >evidence a binding and enforceable contract between Enron Corp. (or any of >its affiliates) and the intended recipient or any other party, and may not >be relied on by anyone as the basis of a contract by estoppel or >otherwise. Thank you. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FERC, meeting starts at 10:00 a.m.; [EMail-Body]= Jeff Skilling and Mr. Lay are not going, so company plane is not reserved. Bill Butler is going, will stay at the Willard [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Executive Committee Recommendation - VP Candidate - Rick Fehl; [EMail-Body]= OK by me. Ken Rice@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS 05/01/2001 03:48 PM To: Cliff Baxter/HOU/ECT, Rick Buy/HOU/ECT, Richard Causey/Corp/Enron@Enron, James Derrick/Corp/Enron, Andrew S Fastow/HOU/ECT, Ben Glisan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kenneth Lay/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Metts/NA/Enron, Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lou L Pai/HOU/EES@EES, Jeffrey Sherrick/Corp/Enron, Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@Enron, Philippe A Bibi/HOU/ECT, Raymond Bowen/HOU/ECT, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT, Wade Mark Frevert/NA/Enron, James A Hughes/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT, John J Lavorato/Corp/Enron, Mike McConnell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rebecca McDonald/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Jeffrey McMahon/HOU/ECT, Greg Piper/Corp/Enron, Jeffrey A Shankman/HOU/ECT, John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, David W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Matthew Scrimshaw/LON/ECT@ECT, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Thomas E White/HOU/EES@EES, David Cox/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Steve Elliott/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Jim Fallon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Kevin Hannon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Rod Hayslett/FGT/Enron, Stanley Horton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Danny McCarty/ET&S/Enron@Enron cc: Carol Ann Brown/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Dorothy Dalton/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Subject: Executive Committee Recommendation - VP Candidate - Rick Fehl Executive Committee: We would like to pursue an offer to Rick Fehl prior to the next Executive Committee meeting on May 7, 2001. Please forward your comments or questions as soon as possible. You will find attached the recommendation letter and his resume. Regards, Ken Rice & Kevin Hannon [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Message Points on Higher Gas Prices; [EMail-Body]= Please pst and circulate to the team. We probably need to open a new section on the site to adress gas prices. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/27/2000 05:32 PM ----- Shelley Corman 09/07/2000 05:34 PM To: Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Margaret Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Message Points on Higher Gas Prices I anticipate that GPG management will be asked at several upcoming industry meetings to comment on the reasons for and implications of rising natural gas prices. Attached is a proposed set of talking points for use in Q&A and briefing materials. Please let me know if you find these message points to be consistent with our general Enron response to pricing inquiries. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Hold for Mike Day/Wright and Talisman, 49c5; [EMail-Body]= With Mark Haedicke, keep Sylvia Sauseda and Bernadette apprised of details. Betsy Diamond in Mike Day's office 415-781-0701is making their arrangements [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Amendment of the CPUC subpoena for production on June 4 with mont
	hly updates, and clarification on confidential treatment; [EMail-Body]= This one is due Monday! Lots of notice. Sue Mara Enron Corp. Tel: (415) 782-7802 Fax:(415) 782-7854 ----- Forwarded by Susan J Mara/NA/Enron on 06/03/2001 11:08 PM ----- ""Borchardt, Tiffaney"" <TBorchardt@caiso.com> 06/01/2001 05:50 PM To: ISO Market Participants cc: Subject: Amendment of the CPUC subpoena for production on June 4 with mont hly updates, and clarification on confidential treatment To Market Participants and Scheduling Coordinators: Today the ISO received an amendment to the subpoena from the California Public Utilities Commission (""CPUC"") issued May 25 (and circulated to Market Participants on that date) and requiring a response by June 4. The subpoena of May 25 and the amendment require monthly updates on an ongoing basis. The ISO intends to comply with the monthly update requirement. In addition, the ISO received a letter from the CPUC clarifying the confidential treatment it will afford confidential information produced in response to the subpeona and amendment. The May 25 subpoena and the amendment and letter on confidentiality are attached. In its June 4 production and subsequent monthly updates, the ISO will mark as confidential documents it produces to the CPUC that contain information subject to 20.3.2, and will request confidential treatment in accordance with the CPUC's letter on confidentiality. Concerns related to the subpoena should be relayed directly to the California Public Utilities Commission. The CPUC contact related to the subpoena is Robert Cagen who can be reached at (415) 703-2197. The ISO would appreciate being notified also of any concerns. The ISO contacts are Jeanne Sol? at jsole@caiso.com and Norma Formanek at <mailto:nformanek@fbm.com> nformanek@fbm.com both of whom should be copied on correspondence. Jeanne M. Sol? Regulatory Counsel California ISO (916) 608-7144 The Foregoing e-Mail Communication (Together With Any Attachments Thereto) Is Intended For The Designated Recipient(s) Only. Its Terms May Be Confidential And Protected By Attorney/Client Privilege or Other Applicable Privileges. Unauthorized Use, Dissemination, Distribution, Or Reproduction Of This Message Is Strictly Prohibited. - CPUC May 25 Subp.pdf - CPUC Subpoena.pdf [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= 2000 dividends; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/02/2001 09:45 AM ----- Katie Spencer Sent by: Brenda Sells 04/02/2001 08:56 AM To: skean@enron.com cc: Subject: 2000 dividends 1099 information is only produced if an account earns more than $10 in dividend/interest income. Your savings for the year 2000 earned $3.96 and you have the free checking account which is non-interest bearing so there were no dividends earned on that account. If you need additional information, please contact the Financial Services Department at the credit union at 713-853-6902. Thank you. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= SRP SETTLEMENT PROPOSAL - PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL FOR SETTLEM
	ENT DISCUSSIONS ONLY; [EMail-Body]= Attached are three documents (cover memo, draft settlement proposal, settlement procedures timeline) comprising SRP's formal proposal to resolve five pending dockets, RP99-507 (Indicated Shippers' Complaint), RP00-336 (Order No. 637 Allocation and Pooling Issues only), RP99-139 (ONEOK Complaint), RP01-484 (Indicated Shippers/California Complaint), and RP01-486 (Texas, New Mexico and Arizona Shippers' Complaint). We appreciate the suggestions received to date and believe that while an uncontested settlement may be unlikely, a sufficient nucleus is forming around the elements of this proposal that will lead to the filing of an Offer of Settlement and ultimate FERC approval as in the public interest. We encourage your active participation in this process. Note that while Advisory Staff present at the July 18 Technical Conference is aware conceptually that SRP will be distributing a settlement proposal, this proposal has not been distributed to the Advisory Staff. This proposal has been sent to Rick Miles, Director, Dispute Resolution Services, for informational purposes only at this time. Joel L. Greene Energy Advocates LLP 202-371-9889 202-371-9025 (fax) jlgreene@energyadvocates.com <<SRP EPNG Settle.cvr.doc>> <<SRP EPNG Capacity Proposal.06.26.doc>> <<Proceduralschedule.doc>> - SRP EPNG Settle.cvr.doc - SRP EPNG Capacity Proposal.06.26.doc - Proceduralschedule.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: Sac Bee, Wed, 6/6: Businesses vie for blackout exemptions:=20 The PUC must decide who should be spared, and the applicant list is very lo= ng Sac Bee, Wed, 6/6: PG&E, ISO agree to court order on power bills Sac Bee, Wed, 6/6: Peter Schrag: Turning up the heat in Houston and=20 Washington (Editorial) SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Is trading an insider's game? SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Daily energy costs for state fall in past weeks=20 SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Five tiers sought in proposed rate boost SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Port budget large, but power bills loom SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Continuous use urged for planned power plant=20 SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Rising energy prices threaten Poway troupe=20 SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Fair to use generators for midway attractions LA Times, Wed, 6/6: 'Hi, My Name Isn't Justice, Honey,' and Shame on Lockye= r =20 (Editorial) LA Times, Wed, 6/6: U.S. Probes Alleged Pact Not to Build New Plants Power:= =20 Justice officials focus on Southland operations of two firms, which deny=20 wrongdoing LA Times, Wed, 6/6: Natural Gas, Power Prices Drop Sharply Energy:=20 More conservation, mild weather are among factors keeping costs down, exper= ts=20 say LA Times, Wed, 6/6: The State Utility Averts $1 Billion in Costs Courts:=20 PG&E and Cal-ISO agree to recognize Department of Water Resources as=20 purchaser of the power SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: Dramatic drop in cost of electricity=20 LOWER BILLS: Cheaper fuel, milder weather credited SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: San Jose council gives green light to generating plant= =20 VOTE REVERSAL: Officials pressured to OK project SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: Developments in California's energy crisis SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: California conserves SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: L.A. power customers awash in cheap energy SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: PG&E doesn't want to pay for energy to avert blackouts Mercury News, Wed, 6/6: Metcalf plant gets preliminary approval=20 OC Register, Wed, 6/6: Feds probe AES, Williams Individual.com (PRnewswire), Wed, 6/6: Calpine Begins Construction of=20 Peaking Energy Center in Gilroy, Calif.=20 Individual.com (PRnewsire), Wed, 6/6: Reliant Urges FERC to Drop or Amend= =20 California Price Caps to Avoid Additional Shortages and More Blackouts Energy Insight, Wed, 6/6: Farm-fresh biopower --- Businesses vie for blackout exemptions: The PUC must decide who should be= =20 spared, and the applicant list is very long. By Carrie Peyton and Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writers (Published June 6, 2001)=20 Mixes for milkshakes and frozen coffees could spoil at ice cream parlors,= =20 sickening customers.=20 Seniors getting their hair done would have to leave their dryers and go hom= e=20 with wet heads, risking a chill.=20 Mall escalators could come to a sudden halt, endangering shoppers who lose= =20 their footing.=20 Those are among the health and safety risks cited by more than 10,000=20 businesses and government bodies asking state regulators to exempt them fro= m=20 rolling blackouts.=20 It is a list that mixes nursing homes and grocery stores, outpatient surgic= al=20 clinics and beauty salons, dialysis centers and country clubs.=20 ""A lot of people are treating this like a lottery,"" said Subodh Medhekar of= =20 Exponent Inc., the consulting firm sorting through exemption requests for t= he=20 state Public Utilities Commission.=20 For many, Medhekar said, the rationale seems to be "" 'I'm pretty sure I won= 't=20 get exempted, but what's the down side? Let's put in an application.' ""=20 Amid predictions that Californians could face dozens of rolling blackouts= =20 this summer, state regulators are trying to update a decades-old list of wh= o=20 should be spared if the lights go out.=20 The Alta Sierra County Club in Grass Valley should be among those whose pow= er=20 stays on, Sean O'Brien, the club's golf course superintendent, told=20 regulators in a nine-page application.=20 The country club telephones could go out, making it harder to phone for hel= p=20 if someone has a medical problem while golfing, he said in an interview.=20 And if the golf course's irrigation pumps shut down, it would lose the=20 ability to quell small blazes -- leaving it to rely on a fire station O'Bri= en=20 said is about one-quarter mile away.=20 Placerville Dialysis wants an exemption, too. As many as a dozen people the= re=20 can be having their blood pumped through an artificial kidney that cleans i= t=20 when their own kidneys no longer function properly.=20 ""When the power goes out, everything just stops,"" said manager Shirley=20 Carpenter. ""There is a way to manually return the blood by hand before it= =20 clots in the line. ... It would just be hectic.""=20 It takes about five minutes of manual pumping to fully disconnect someone= =20 from a dialysis machine, Carpenter said. And some patients can help by=20 operating their own pumps.=20 But, she said, ""I'm sure it would be kind of frightening to have your blood= =20 out in the line and the power off, and they're pretty much tied to the=20 machine.""=20 Pam Chin, a hairdresser at the Loomis Beauty Salon, said the owner sought a= n=20 exemption because people could get overheated if the air conditioning went= =20 out, and older customers getting their hair set could be chilled if the=20 dryers shut off.=20 With about half the state already exempt from rolling blackouts, the questi= on=20 of who else should stay connected has become a delicate one for utilities,= =20 regulators and legislators.=20 Carl Wood, the PUC commissioner who has taken the lead on blackout issues,= =20 estimates that fewer than 1,000 more utility customers can be exempted befo= re=20 they overload the rolling outage system designed to take stress off the=20 electric grid.=20 While about 6,000 customers are classified as ""essential"" by the state's tw= o=20 largest utilities, keeping them out of the blackout rotation also spares=20 about 5 million other customers who are served by the same circuits.=20 That multiplier effect will have to be weighed by the consulting firm, by= =20 utilities and eventually by PUC commissioners, who are scheduled to vote in= =20 early August on who should be added to existing standards.=20 The rules will apply to the state's investor-owned utilities, Pacific Gas a= nd=20 Electric Co., Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric Co.,= =20 but not to municipal utilities.=20 The Sacramento Municipal Utility District already rejected pleas for specia= l=20 exemptions from a medical lab, a veterinary hospital, nursing homes, medica= l=20 facilities, businesses and residents. SMUD believes they can weather=20 blackouts because they are not critical to public safety.=20 People have counted on having dependable electricity for so long that some= =20 have widely varying ideas of who can do without it safely, Medhekar said.= =20 Of the more than 500 Baskin Robbins ice cream parlors that dot California,= =20 only five are listed on the PUC Web site as applicants for exemptions.=20 The site cautions that its list of 9,239 electronic applicants hasn't been= =20 checked for duplicates -- or fiction. It includes hundreds of outlets of th= e=20 same drug store and supermarket chains, dozens of related nursing homes and= =20 more than 400 dentists. Another 1,200 commercial power users have applied b= y=20 fax.=20 Among those who have confirmed they want out of outages are the grocery=20 chains operated by West Sacramento-based Raley's, which said it took the=20 action as part of united effort with all California grocers, who are worrie= d=20 about food spoilage.=20 Others in the mix are Fairfield's Westfield Shoppingtown Solano, formerly t= he=20 Solano Mall, where officials sought the exemptions out of fear that shopper= s=20 would get injured if escalators came to a sudden halt.=20 The Yolo County Housing Authority asked for an exemption on behalf of its 7= 00=20 dwellings in the belief that the utilities offer exemptions for low-income= =20 Californians, Executive Director David Serena said.=20 Serena added that many of the authority's occupants are older or disabled a= nd=20 could be endangered by a blackout.=20 Chevron Corp. acknowledged it couldn't show that a blackout at its refineri= es=20 would present ""imminent danger to public health or safety,"" but it asked Go= v.=20 Gray Davis to support legislation exempting makers and transporters for=20 ""critical fuels,"" saying a refinery shutdown would cut into the state's=20 gasoline supply.=20 Some businesses acknowledged that their applications are a long shot.=20 ""It's probably a stretch,"" said Amanda Leveroni, who owns Bacio Catering Co= .=20 of Chico, about her request to the PUC. ""The public wouldn't be in danger.= =20 ""But we're a catering company -- somebody has planned for a year-plus for a= =20 wedding or some big event,"" she added. ""I would be in such a huge situation= .=20 I'd have to send out for pizza.""=20 The Bee's Carrie Peyton can be reached at (916) 321-1086 or=20 cpeyton@sacbee.com. PG&E, ISO agree to court order on power bills By Claire Cooper Bee Staff Writers (Published June 6, 2001)=20 SAN FRANCISCO -- Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and the operator of=20 California's power grid agreed Tuesday to a preliminary court order providi= ng=20 that the utility will continue to receive -- but not pay -- generators' bil= ls=20 for the state's purchases of the most expensive wholesale electricity.=20 The tab has been running at about $300 million a month.=20 The order, which U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali said he'll sign, will= =20 specify that the Independent System Operator will not procure power except= =20 for a ""creditworthy buyer who has agreed to pay the generator.""=20 In California, the only such potential buyer is the state Department of Wat= er=20 Resources. However, the department, which has avoided PG&E Co.'s bankruptcy= =20 proceedings by claiming sovereign immunity, will not be controlled by the= =20 agreement. Montali pointed out that the department still could demand=20 reimbursement from PG&E.=20 Under the agreement, the ISO will not press any claims against PG&E on beha= lf=20 of generators if they are not paid.=20 The proposed preliminary injunction was based on an April order by the=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which forbade the ISO from purchasing= =20 power on behalf of any non-creditworthy buyer, such as PG&E.=20 The ISO is appealing the FERC order. If the appeal succeeds, the injunction= =20 will end.=20 Peter Schrag: Turning up the heat in Houston and Washington (Published June 6, 2001)=20 Behind all the palaver about the predictable standoff at last week's energy= =20 ""summit"" between President Bush and Gov. Gray Davis, one major political=20 development was missed.=20 Put simply, in the past month the focus of the California energy crisis, an= d=20 maybe the onus as well, has moved east: from the state's (and Davis')=20 handling of the mess to the generating companies, energy marketers and gas= =20 pipeline companies that have richly profited from it, and thus to FERC, the= =20 do-next-to-nothing Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and the Bush=20 administration.=20 That wasn't all Davis' doing -- far from it -- though it's been at the hear= t=20 of his message about energy industry ""pirates"" and ""profiteers."" Bush's=20 misbegotten energy plan and the administration's political clumsiness also= =20 contributed mightily, not least by inadvertently giving Davis the chance to= =20 get media exposure he could only have dreamed about.=20 More important, there's the defection of Sen. James Jeffords from the=20 Republican Party and the resulting shift of control in the U.S. Senate, whe= re=20 the next chair of the Energy Committee will be Sen. Jeff Bingaman of New=20 Mexico, a co-sponsor of Sen. Dianne Feinstein's bill capping wholesale=20 electric rates for the next two years. And chairing the Committee on=20 Governmental Affairs will be Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, who's=20 already asked for an audit of energy prices.=20 Those changes will draw a lot more attention to recent studies showing that= a=20 handful of big generators -- Duke Power, Reliant, Mirant, Dynegy and the hu= ge=20 energy-marketing firm Enron -- have gamed the market to drive wholesale=20 prices to levels that, in the year 2000, sometimes reached 40 times the=20 prices of the year before.=20 The findings come not merely from economists at the California Independent= =20 System Operator, the agency that manages the state's grid, who estimate=20 overcharges resulting from market power at $6.2 billion for last year alone= .=20 They come also from Severin Borenstein and his colleagues at the University= =20 of California Energy Institute, who ""conservatively"" calculate the=20 overcharges at $4.5 billion; from Paul Joskow, a widely respected energy=20 economist at MIT; and from Edward Kahn, an economic analyst in San Francisc= o.=20 In a recent paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research,=20 Joskow and Kahn conclude that there's ""considerable evidence that the high= =20 prices experienced in the summer of 2000 reflect the withholding of supplie= s=20 from the market by suppliers [generators or marketers] exercising market=20 power."" That those high prices occurred not merely during peak usage but al= so=20 at off-hours, when no one had ever seen a price spike before, makes those= =20 spikes even more curious.=20 There is, in addition, the powerful suspicion that the huge increase in=20 natural gas prices that a subsidiary of El Paso Energy Co., now the largest= =20 gas company on Earth, was charging on the California side of the=20 California-Arizona border wasn't merely the result of an innocent imbalance= =20 between supply and demand.=20 None of that may be illegal. If there's no collusion, there are no violatio= ns=20 of antitrust laws. But it adds plenty of steam to the political argument. I= n=20 the 2000 election cycle alone, energy companies kicked in some $64 million = in=20 political contributions, 75 percent of it to Republicans. At a time when=20 those companies, many of them located in the same Houston neighborhood, are= =20 racking up astronomical profits and when their collective coziness with Bus= h=20 and the Republican Party is a lot more than rhetoric, their vulnerability t= o=20 a vigorous Senate investigation ought to be obvious.=20 The clincher is ""Blackout,"" a ""Frontline"" program that both symbolizes the= =20 shifting emphasis and reinforces it. (The program is scheduled to be aired = at=20 8 p.m. Friday on Sacramento cable Channel 7.) It isn't another recital of= =20 Californians worrying about their electric bills, or about the stupidity of= =20 the state's deregulation scheme or how Davis dithered in addressing the=20 crisis. It is about those generators and marketers in Houston and North=20 Carolina, men (and a few women) who regard themselves as the heroes of the= =20 new energy markets.=20 The piece is reported by Lowell Bergman, who in working for both ""Frontline= ""=20 and the New York Times has already broken major print stories about Duke=20 Power's secret approach to Davis offering unspecified energy refunds in=20 return for an end to state investigations and lawsuits. Bergman also report= ed=20 private conversations between Enron chairman Kenneth Lay, a major Bush=20 supporter, and FERC chairman Curt Hebert regarding the influence that Lay= =20 could exercise with Bush to allow Hebert to keep his chairmanship if Hebert= 's=20 supported certain decisions Enron badly wants.=20 None of these recent events is likely to end Davis' political woes, and the= y=20 may not produce the wholesale rate caps Feinstein wants and that most=20 economists think necessary -- or maybe any significant reduction in the=20 industry's predatory pricing. But they will surely help turn up the heat,= =20 both in Houston and Washington. Six months ago FERC found wholesale prices= =20 were not ""fair and reasonable"" as federal law requires, but did little abou= t=20 them. It will now have a lot more questions to answer.=20 Peter Schrag can be reached at Box 15779, Sacramento, CA 95852-0779, or at= =20 pschrag@sacbee.com. Is trading an insider's game?=20 Buying, selling of electricity is a growth business, but some say deck is= =20 stacked against consumers By Craig D. Rose=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 While Californians decry deregulation's failure to deliver a competitive=20 market, electricity wholesalers have quietly developed a vast and rapidly= =20 growing business of buying and selling power among themselves.=20 The deals take place on high-tech trading floors in Houston and elsewhere= =20 around the country, as well as on Internet-based trading systems.=20 Some experts say this electricity trading is a key mechanism for raising=20 consumer power prices, yet it's largely unregulated.=20 ""Electricity trading is like buying stock -- when you have ability to chang= e=20 the stock price,"" said Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economics profess= or=20 and member of the state grid operator's market surveillance group.=20 Energy companies say the buying and selling of contracts to deliver power= =20 provides risk management, allowing plant owners to presell their electricit= y,=20 lock in prices and avoid fluctuations. The rough and tumble of the free=20 market, they add, is the most efficient means of allocating a resource like= =20 electricity.=20 But industry critics say trading is far from a competitive market paradigm.= =20 In their view, it's a means of communication -- a way for energy insiders t= o=20 collude and raise prices under the guise of competition.=20 To be sure, the trading arms of major energy companies have emerged as star= s=20 in an industry where profit surges of 300 percent or 400 percent are not=20 uncommon.=20 The transactions, shrouded in secrecy, can leave ownership of a critical=20 commodity in unknown hands. Consider the case of power generated by AES=20 Corp.'s California plants.=20 In 1998, AES made a bold move. Immediately after purchasing power plants th= at=20 gave it control of 10 percent of the state's electric generating capacity,= =20 the company sold the output from its plants for the next 20 years to Willia= ms=20 Cos.=20 Williams did not sit on this treasure trove of electrons. The Tulsa, Okla.,= =20 company soon sold 80 percent of what it bought.=20 It is difficult to say who owns that power now. Some might be owned by Semp= ra=20 Trading, a sister company of SDG&E. Or some could be owned by Enron Corp.,= =20 the nation's biggest electricity trader.=20 A spokeswoman for Williams conceded that Williams itself may have repurchas= ed=20 some of the electricity it sold earlier. But trading companies closely guar= d=20 their positions.=20 This much can be said with certainty: Electricity that AES sold for less th= an=20 5 cents per kilowatt-hour to Williams changed hands perhaps 10 times in the= =20 wholesale market and emerged at times in recent months with a price tag for= =20 consumers that was 300 percent higher.=20 Williams' trading profits increased by 523 percent in the first quarter thi= s=20 year. Advance sales All this buying and selling creates curious confluences.=20 In their attempt to deflect criticism over high prices, generating companie= s=20 such as Duke Energy -- operator of the South Bay Power Plant in Chula and= =20 others in the state -- frequently note that they sell most of their=20 electricity far in advance. But they acknowledge less often that their=20 trading units may also be buying power, which could boost the company's=20 electricity inventory.=20 Duke was the fourth biggest electricity trader last year and cited its=20 trading activity as a prime contributor to its wholesale business profits,= =20 which soared 324 percent in the first quarter to $348 million.=20 It is a company's power traders who frequently direct plant operators to=20 increase or decrease the generation of power in response to market=20 conditions.=20 Energy companies have little option but to turn to trading for profits. One= =20 of the better kept secrets of electrical deregulation and its promise of=20 competition is that there is remarkably little competition in the productio= n=20 side of the business.=20 For one thing, electricity is a commodity; power from one company is=20 indistinguishable from that generated by others.=20 More important, nearly all modern plants generate power from turbines built= =20 by a handful of manufacturers. The result? Modern plants owned by different= =20 companies produce power at nearly identical cost.=20 ""The cost of power produced by modern plants is all within a mil=20 (one-thousandth of a dollar),"" said Michael Peevey, an adviser to Gov. Gray= =20 Davis and former president of Southern California Edison.=20 So the extraction of profit in the electricity business relies much more on= =20 trading. Traders' profits rise when prices are volatile -- plunging, or eve= n=20 better, rising sharply. Little regulation But despite the obvious temptation to manipulate the market, the burgeoning= =20 electricity trading business has remained largely unregulated.=20 The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission does require quarterly filings fro= m=20 energy traders, but these often provide incomplete information, or at least= =20 little that has been of concern to FERC.=20 In fact, although the trading of electricity grew more than a hundredfold= =20 from 1996 to 2000, FERC has taken no major enforcement action against a=20 trader. After the onset of the California crisis last year, FERC has acted= =20 once. That was against Williams, which agreed to pay $8 million without=20 admitting guilt to resolve an allegation that it withheld supply to pump up= =20 prices.=20 FERC's record of enforcement in the area of power trading stands in contras= t=20 to a long list of enforcement actions within other markets taken by the=20 Securities Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission= .=20 FERC has recently added staff to its market oversight operations. But Willi= am=20 Massey, a FERC commissioner, says the agency's effort is still inadequate.= =20 ""Electricity can be flipped, stripped and chopped up,"" Massey said. ""It's a= n=20 extraordinarily complicated market.=20 ""The sophisticated marketers and traders have simply moved past us. We're= =20 kind of horse and buggy in our approach and they're out there in rocket shi= ps=20 flying around ... The problem is that sophisticated traders don't necessari= ly=20 produce reasonable prices. They produce profits.""=20 Before deregulation, electricity trading was a low-key affair. Regulated=20 utilities dealt power back and forth on a reciprocal basis to fill=20 electricity shortfalls in their control areas. There was little trading for= =20 profit until the mid-1990s, after federal legislation and FERC rulings open= ed=20 the market.=20 Major traders include large energy companies, sister companies of=20 California's major utilities and Wall Street firms. Market volatility In many ways, the trading of power is similar to that of other commodities.= =20 But there are important differences. Because it cannot be stored and its us= e=20 is so fundamental, the price of electricity is the most volatile of all.=20 When supplies are tight, a single supplier can rapidly raise prices to=20 budget-busting levels, as evidenced by Duke Energy's recent admission that = it=20 charged California nearly $4,000 for a megawatt-hour of power, a quantity= =20 that probably sold hours earlier for one-tenth of that sum or less.=20 Wolak, the Stanford economist, and state Sen. Joseph Dunn, D-Garden Grove,= =20 who is investigating the state power market, say trading allows companies t= o=20 collude under the guise of competition. Instead of wringing out lowest cost= s,=20 the wholesale trading market serves to raise prices, they say.=20 ""As I trade to you and you trade to me, we communicate to each other what= =20 price we would like to get,"" said Wolak. ""It's not collusive. It's just=20 communicating price.""=20 Mark Palmer, a spokesman for Enron, the nation's biggest power trader, said= =20 California's problem is not the result of trading.=20 ""It's a result of shortages,"" Palmer said.=20 Underscoring its emphasis on trading, Enron's new headquarters tower in=20 downtown Houston rises from a six-story block of new trading floors,=20 including expanded space for electricity trading.=20 Enron also pioneered trading in cyberspace and its Enron Online site claims= =20 to be the most active computer-based trading market.=20 The Houston company argues that consumers won't fully benefit from power=20 trading and deregulation until they have greater choice in choosing their= =20 power supplier. And the company says FERC has not done enough to open acces= s=20 to transmission lines, which would allow traders to move power around the= =20 country. To that end, Enron has lobbied hard for President Bush's plan for = a=20 national electricity grid.=20 Palmer says the notion that the price of electricity rises each time it is= =20 traded is mistaken.=20 ""The market is always looking for the real price of a commodity,"" Palmer=20 said.=20 Dunn, the California state senator, says his investigation found a differen= t=20 function for trading. At a time when supply barely meets or falls short of= =20 demand, he noted, companies with electricity to sell have to worry only abo= ut=20 how high to set their price.=20 ""The trader is a pawn in the generator's game to drive up prices,"" said Dun= n.=20 ""Trading develops a level of trust. You, my alleged competitor, will bid in= =20 the same patterns and I will respond not in a competitive pattern but in a= =20 complimentary pattern.""=20 The state senator said his investigation found evidence that on several day= s,=20 energy companies appeared to test their ability to drive prices up, without= =20 being undercut by competitors.=20 This ability to drive up prices without competitive consequence is a key te= st=20 of market power, the technical term for manipulation or price fixing.=20 But Dunn also conceded that antitrust violations can be hard to prove in=20 court. He suggested that even if the trading behavior falls short of=20 antitrust violations, it remains anti-competitive and devastating for the= =20 California economy.=20 To Harry Trebing, a utility industry expert and professor emeritus at=20 Michigan State University, wholesale electricity trading is reminiscent of= =20 what took place in the 1920s and early '30s. Back then, utility companies= =20 created complex networks of holding companies that traded stock among=20 themselves, driving up prices in the process.=20 Undoing that scheme was a focus of President Franklin Roosevelt's=20 administration. Congress ended up barring national power companies and=20 tightening regulation of utilities, in an effort to counteract their tenden= cy=20 to create markets that work only for insiders.=20 ""The broad goals of trading are the same,"" Trebing said.=20 ""The goal is to maximize profits through raising prices.""=20 Daily energy costs for state fall in past weeks=20 By Ed Mendel=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO -- In some of the first good news of the electricity crisis, the= =20 Davis administration said yesterday that the daily cost of power purchased = by=20 the state for utility customers has dropped in recent weeks.=20 The price-drop news comes after an announcement that Californians conserved= =20 more energy than expected last month, 11 percent, and amid Davis=20 administration optimism that the Legislature may finally begin to move on a= =20 plan to keep Southern California Edison out of bankruptcy.=20 The developments, if they turn out to be a trend and not temporary, could b= e=20 among the first signs that Gov. Gray Davis' plan to end the electricity=20 crisis is beginning to work. But the administration isn't saying that.=20 ""We have had a few good days here lately,"" said S. David Freeman, a Davis= =20 power adviser. ""I don't think that I want to project.""=20 Some power-market watchers began to speculate last month that prices may ha= ve=20 peaked earlier this year. Platts, an energy information service, said=20 yesterday that spot prices for the natural gas used by power plants are=20 falling this month.=20 The governor's press secretary, Steve Maviglio, told reporters yesterday th= at=20 the daily amount spent on power is now ""well below"" $50 million, which was= =20 the average cost earlier this year.=20 A 12-day gap in the most recent notice to the Legislature that another $500= =20 million increment will be spent on power suggests that the daily average=20 during the last two weeks may have dropped down around $42 million.=20 Oscar Hidalgo, a spokesman for the state power purchasing agency, said that= =20 the average cost of power was under $40 million during the first four days = of=20 this month.=20 Maviglio attributed the lower cost to conservation, the phasing in of cheap= er=20 long-term power contracts, fewer power plants off-line for maintenance, and= =20 cooler weather.=20 However, he said, ""The average cost is still way over what we paid last=20 year.""=20 There was widespread skepticism in late April when the governor's consultan= ts=20 predicted that the $346 per megawatt-hour average paid by the state for=20 non-contracted power from April through June would drop to an average of $1= 95=20 from July through September.=20 ""We are still very comfortable with the projection that Mr. Fichera and=20 company estimated,"" Maviglio said, referring to Joseph Fichera of Saber=20 Partners in New York.=20 During a briefing on May 21, Fichera told reporters that the amount of powe= r=20 that the state would obtain under long-term contracts for May was expected = to=20 be about 43 percent of the total required, the so-called net short.=20 Fichera said contracts already signed were expected to cover 66 percent of= =20 the net short in June, 48 percent in July, and 42 percent in August. He sai= d=20 contracts that had been agreed on in principle could increase those amounts= =20 to 73 percent in June, 67 percent in July, and 60 percent in August.=20 ""We are still on target. There are risks,"" Fichera said yesterday, among th= em=20 extended hot weather and power plant outages. ""No one is popping the=20 champagne corks until Sept. 30.""=20 The governor's consultants based their forecast of power demand this summer= =20 on an estimate that Californians will reduce their electricity use by 7=20 percent.=20 The 11 percent reduction last month, as compared to May of last year, came= =20 before the sticker shock of rate hikes that begin this month for customers = of=20 Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric. And a $35 million ad campaign urging= =20 conservation has not hit full stride.=20 Maviglio said the administration plans to release some detailed information= =20 on Monday about the roughly $8 billion the state has spent buying power. Th= e=20 general fund will be repaid by a bond of up to $13.4 billion that ratepayer= s=20 will pay off over 15 years.=20 Legislative leaders have demanded detailed information about power purchase= s=20 before proceeding with the Edison plan. Assembly Democrats are working on a= =20 plan that de-emphasizes state purchase of the Edison transmission system an= d=20 would put most of the burden for paying off Edison's debt on businesses and= =20 large users, not residences. Five tiers sought in proposed rate boost=20 Conservation would be promoted, SDG&E says By Karen Kucher=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 A proposed rate increase for SDG&E customers to cover the high cost of=20 electricity should be imposed in five tiers to encourage conservation, the= =20 company is advising state utility regulators.=20 The more electricity a customer uses, the higher the rate would be.=20 SDG&E needs to raise its rates to bring in an additional $502 million=20 annually to pay the state for power purchases.=20 The state Public Utilities Commission is expected to rule on San Diego Gas = &=20 Electric's rate-increase proposal June 28.=20 The rate changes would remove a cap that has shielded most SDG&E customers= =20 from rising electricity prices for a year. The cap, enacted by state=20 lawmakers in September 2000 and retroactive to June 2000, set rates at 6.5= =20 cents per kilowatt-hour.=20 Higher rates would mean the average SDG&E residential and small-business=20 customer's electricity bills would go up by 18 percent. Large commercial=20 users' bills would average 29 percent more.=20 Public hearings on the issue will be held next Monday and Tuesday in San=20 Diego, El Cajon, Escondido and San Clemente. These sessions will focus on= =20 small-business and residential consumers. Hearings on large commercial user= s=20 were held last month.=20 Earlier this year, the PUC decided to allow the state's two largest=20 utilities, Pacific Gas and Electric and Southern California Edison, to char= ge=20 customers an extra $5.7 billion annually for electricity.=20 The state Department of Water Resources, which has been buying power for=20 SDG&E customers since February, asked SDG&E to generate a total of $915=20 million annually to cover the cost of electricity purchases.=20 With the proposed rate increases, SDG&E could do that.=20 Large commercial customers would pay about 30 percent of the overall increa= se=20 and residential and small-business customers would pay about 70 percent, sa= id=20 Ed Van Herik, a spokesman for the utility company.=20 If the increase can be tiered, as many as 60 percent of residential custome= rs=20 will see no rate increase if their electricity usage remains the same, Van= =20 Herik said.=20 But customers who use more than 130 percent of their baseline -- considered= =20 the minimum amount of electricity needed by a household -- will be billed a= t=20 increasingly higher rates.=20 Residential and small-business customers who use a lot of electricity could= =20 pay as much as 17.89 cents per kilowatt hour for some power they consume.= =20 Consumer advocate Michael Shames said he is concerned the utility's proposa= l=20 does not spread the increases evenly among different types of users. He als= o=20 called for more scrutiny of the state's request.=20 People should tell PUC officials ""that this increase should not be a carte= =20 blanche or blank check approval,"" said Shames, the head of Utility Consumer= s'=20 Action Network. ""The PUC needs to ensure that the rate increase requested b= y=20 the (state) is reasonable.""=20 The public hearings are scheduled for:=20 ?Monday, 1 p.m., San Diego Concourse, Copper Room, 200 C St., San Diego.=20 ?Monday, 7 p.m., El Cajon Community Center, 195 E. Douglas Ave., El Cajon.= =20 ?Tuesday, 1 p.m., Country Inn Hotel, 35 Via Pico Plaza, San Clemente.=20 ?Tuesday, 7 p.m., Center for the Arts, 340 N. Escondido Blvd., Escondido.= =20 Port budget large, but power bills loom=20 Slowing economy also cause for worry By Ronald W. Powell=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 The ""rock"" is rolling financially, but there are indications that the blues= =20 lurk on the horizon.=20 Officials of the San Diego Unified Port District -- headquartered in a=20 block-shaped building some employees call the rock -- are happy with a=20 projected 2001-2002 budget that is 5.1 percent larger than the current one.= =20 Total revenue is expected to reach $208.7 million, $10.2 million above what= =20 is expected in the fiscal year that ends June 30.=20 Port commissioners gave preliminary approval to the budget yesterday and ar= e=20 scheduled to take a final vote July 10.=20 But a slowing economy and surging electric bills are causes for concern.=20 Electricity costs are expected to rise from $5 million to $8.2 million in t= he=20 coming fiscal year.=20 ""As far as trends, we see a continuation of the growth we've experienced ov= er=20 the past five years,"" said Bruce Hollingsworth, the port's treasurer. ""But= =20 our percentage of growth will not rise as sharply.""=20 Port revenues have grown steadily since the 1997-1998 fiscal year, when $16= 3=20 million was generated.=20 The proposed budget calls for adding 24 employees to the port's 730-member= =20 work force. New hires will include three Harbor Police officers, 10 employe= es=20 in the aviation division and four in maritime services.=20 The port operates Lindbergh Field and administers nonmilitary tidelands alo= ng=20 San Diego Bay. It is landlord to more than 600 waterfront businesses and=20 operates two marine cargo terminals and one cruise ship terminal.=20 The budget calls for growth in each of the port's primary revenue centers:= =20 aviation, real estate and maritime services.=20 Passenger and cargo activity at Lindbergh Field is expected to generate $90= .7=20 million, or $5 million more than expected in the current year. Most of that= =20 increase is expected to come from parking-rate increases at the airport and= =20 at the port's long-term parking lot on Pacific Highway.=20 Rent from hotels and other businesses that are port tenants are expected to= =20 total $63.1 million, up $1.8 million from the current budget.=20 Increases in cargo and cruise ship traffic are expected to boost maritime= =20 income by $2.7 million, to a total of $18.4 million.=20 The port expects to spend $157 million on construction projects. They inclu= de=20 $8.5 million to relocate the General Services Department from Eighth Avenue= =20 and Harbor Drive in San Diego to National City and more than $5 million for= =20 paving and improvements at the 10th Avenue Marine Terminal.=20 Rent revenue could grow substantially in future years. Four hotel projects = on=20 port property have won approval or are seeking it.=20 Jim Bailey, president of Manchester Resorts, told commissioners yesterday= =20 that he expects to break ground on a second Hyatt tower of 750 rooms by Jun= e=20 26. Port officials said revenue from that hotel would bring in an additiona= l=20 $3.7 million a year. It is scheduled to open in the summer of 2003.=20 Hollingsworth, the treasurer, said that if all four hotels are built the po= rt=20 could receive as much as $15 million a year in new revenue.=20 Continuous use urged for planned power plant=20 Escondido facility originally proposed for peak demand By Jonathan Heller=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 ESCONDIDO -- A proposed power plant in southwest Escondido that initially w= as=20 expected to run only during times of peak electricity demand probably will = be=20 allowed to run full time.=20 A state energy official who recommended approval of the plant yesterday has= =20 said the plant could operate as often as the state deems necessary.=20 The California Energy Commission was scheduled to vote on the project today= .=20 CalPeak Power of San Diego has asked the commission to approve a 49-megawat= t=20 plant on Enterprise Street near Vineyard Avenue. Referred to as a ""peaker""= =20 plant, such facilities typically are designed to supply energy only during= =20 times of peak demand.=20 The state limits the number of hours some plants can operate to keep=20 pollution at a minimum. A 44-megawatt peaker plant being built on West=20 Mission Avenue in Escondido by Ramco Inc. will be allowed to operate no mor= e=20 than 16 hours per day.=20 That plant is permitted to emit up to 5 parts per million of nitrogen oxide= ,=20 although its actual emissions are expected to be slightly lower, said Dale= =20 Mesple, a Ramco consultant. Nitrogen oxide is a component of smog.=20 The CalPeak plant, if approved, would be restricted to 2 parts per million = of=20 nitrogen oxide.=20 It was generally assumed that the CalPeak plant would operate under similar= =20 time restrictions as the Ramco plant. The potential for air pollution was= =20 among the chief concerns of residents who spoke at the City Council hearing= s=20 on the Ramco project and at the energy commission hearings about the CalPea= k=20 plant.=20 But under the terms of approval recommended by Energy Commission Chairman= =20 William Keese, CalPeak's plant would be able to operate ""up to 8,760 hours= =20 per year, typically when the demand for electricity is high."" That number= =20 equals 24 hours a day.=20 The actual number of hours would depend on the requirements of the state's= =20 Independent System Operator, which manages the energy grid.=20 ""We certainly want to have the flexibility to run whenever we're needed,""= =20 said Mark Lyons, CalPeak's development director. ""Exactly how often we will= =20 run is anybody's guess.""=20 Escondido Councilwoman June Rady said she was frustrated by the possibility= =20 of the plant running full time. In Ramco's case, the city and the county Ai= r=20 Pollution Control District made it clear how often the plant could operate.= =20 CalPeak chose to bypass the city's permitting process and went through the= =20 state Energy Commission, which offers an expedited 21-day approval put in= =20 place by Gov. Gray Davis as an emergency measure.=20 ""I think Escondido has been absolutely ignored and there's a total lack of= =20 due process,"" Rady said. ""It boils down to an issue of local control.""=20 Although city officials objected to the commission pre-empting the city's= =20 land-use authority, the commission maintained that Davis' order gave it the= =20 final say on this type of project.=20 If the commission gives final approval today, the only remedy available to= =20 the city would be in court. At least three council members must vote to=20 initiate legal action.=20 Keese's recommended approval did take into account several city concerns=20 regarding landscaping. The CalPeak plant would be built near the entrance o= f=20 a planned high-tech business park, and city officials were worried the=20 plant's appearance might hinder the ability to attract high-quality tenants= =20 to the park.=20 Mayor Lori Holt Pfeiler said she was not surprised by the commission's=20 recommendation.=20 ""I expected they would want to approve the project, and that's why it was= =20 important for the city to weigh in with conditions we have in this=20 community,"" Pfeiler said.=20 Rising energy prices threaten Poway troupe=20 By Brian E. Clark=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 POWAY -- Rising electricity rates may extinguish the stage lights this summ= er=20 for the Poway Performing Arts Company.=20 ""I'm afraid that if SDG&E gets the price increase it's asking for -- from 6= .5=20 cents per kilowatt-hour to 8.9 cents -- that we'll go under,"" said Kathy=20 McCafferty, spokeswoman for the nonprofit theater.=20 The volunteer organization produces its plays in a building at a Poway Road= =20 shopping center. It held three fund-raising performances over the weekend,= =20 but officials were uncertain yesterday how much money was raised.=20 The group is not affiliated with the Poway Performing Arts Center and has= =20 been in business for 20 years.=20 McCafferty said the group built up a $2,000 surplus last summer before ener= gy=20 prices began to surge.=20 ""That $2,000 was a big reserve for us,"" she said. ""It seemed like a ton of= =20 money, but, boy, it went fast. And we're really energy-dependent. Our light= s=20 use a lot of power. And we're in Poway on the second floor of our building.= =20 It gets hot here, and we have to use air conditioning.""=20 But McCafferty acknowledged that the cost of power isn't the group's only= =20 problem.=20 In a recent letter to backers, President Nan Katona said the organization= =20 also needs new blood to keep operating.=20 ""The truth is that lack of funding is just a symptom of the deeper problem,= =20 which is lack of community support,"" she wrote. ""Ironically, audiences and= =20 reviewers recognize the Poway Performing Arts Company as one of the premier= =20 community arts theaters in San Diego.""=20 Katona said some new volunteers had stepped forward to take leadership role= s=20 in the theater company since she wrote her letter last month. But she said= =20 rising electricity prices could still bring the group down.=20 ""If our energy bills double or triple, we could be in dire straits,"" she=20 said. ""It could push us over the edge financially.""=20 McCafferty said it would be difficult for the theater to cut costs.=20 ""We can't run a much leaner operation,"" she said. ""If our power prices go u= p=20 again, we may still be forced out of business.""=20 The theater is at 13250 Poway Road, in the Lively Shopping Center. For more= =20 information, call (858) 679-8085.=20 Fair to use generators for midway attractions=20 By Michael Burge=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 DEL MAR -- The Del Mar Fair will generate its own electricity for thrill=20 rides on the midway this year instead of using energy from SDG&E.=20 ""In case there are planned or unplanned outages, we still will be operating= ,""=20 fairgrounds General Manager Timothy J. Fennell said.=20 Fennell decided to put the midway on generators because he didn't want the= =20 fairgrounds pulling power from the grid while county residents are coping= =20 with rolling blackouts at home and at work, he said.=20 And the fair does not want to take a chance that a rolling blackout will=20 leave some people stranded in rides high above the grounds, forcing an=20 evacuation.=20 The fairgrounds has been told it is exempt from rolling blackouts, but rath= er=20 than take such a risk it will rent 13 diesel-fuel generators and produce=20 electricity on the midway. The rest of the fairgrounds will use power from= =20 San Diego Gas & Electric Co.=20 Fairgrounds operations manager Larry Baumann estimated it would cost the=20 fairgrounds $20,000 more to generate its own electricity than to buy it fro= m=20 SDG&E.=20 Midway manager Donna Ruhm said it will be worth it.=20 ""Rides that require evacuation have to have backup power and they do,"" Ruhm= =20 said. ""Now our service won't be interrupted.""=20 It is not unusual for carnivals to generate their own power, and the=20 fairgrounds has done so in the past. Fair officials removed the generators = 10=20 to 15 years ago to reduce noise on the midway.=20 The fair opens June 15 and ends July 4.=20 While the rest of the fairgrounds is on the SDG&E grid, Baumann said backup= =20 generators can kick in during a typical 60-or 90-minute blackout, allowing= =20 the fair to operate without serious difficulty. Those generators are not=20 linked to the midway.=20 All the generators are licensed by the state and meet emission standards,= =20 fair officials said, so they do not expect the noise and odor to be=20 excessive.=20 The fairgrounds is taking the precaution of providing its own power despite= =20 the fact that it probably will not go dark during a rolling blackout.=20 ""SDG&E has assured me that .?.?. the fairgrounds and the racetrack will not= =20 be on the curtailment (blackout) list during the fair and the races,"" said= =20 Del Mar Fire Chief Jack Gosney.=20 The Del Mar Thoroughbred racing season begins July 18 and ends Sept. 5.=20 Gosney said SDG&E told him earlier this year that the fairgrounds was not= =20 subject to a forced outage because it shared a circuit with the Del Mar Fir= e=20 Station, which is a 911 dispatch center and exempt from a blackout. But he= =20 said recent research showed that the fairgrounds is on a separate circuit.= =20 Nonetheless, Gosney said, SDG&E is exempting the fairgrounds and racetrack= =20 during the busy summer season.=20 The fairgrounds paid $137,152.95 for its electricity usage from March 12 to= =20 April 10. It paid $51,845.39 for electricity during the same period last ye= ar. ?=20 Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 'Hi, My Name Isn't Justice, Honey,' and Shame on Lockyer=20 By TOM G. PALMER ?????Here's what California Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer said at a press=20 conference about Enron Corp. Chairman Kenneth Lay: ""I would love to=20 personally escort Lay to an 8-by-10 cell that he could share with a tattooe= d=20 dude who says, 'Hi, my name is Spike, honey.""'=20 ?????Here's why Lockyer should be removed from his office of public trust:= =20 First, because as the chief law enforcement officer of the largest state in= =20 the nation, he not only has admitted that rape is a regular feature of the= =20 state's prison system, but also that he considers rape a part of the=20 punishment he can inflict on others.=20 ?????Second, because he has publicly stated that he would like to personall= y=20 arrange the rape of a Texas businessman who has not even been charged with= =20 any illegal behavior.=20 ?????Lockyer's remarks reveal him to be an authoritarian thug, someone whol= ly=20 unsuited to holding an office of public trust.=20 ?????But his remarks do have one positive merit: They tell us what criminal= =20 penalties really entail.=20 ?????Contrary to some depictions of prisons as country clubs, they are=20 violent and terrible places. More and more politicians propose criminal=20 sanctions for more and more alleged misdeeds, and as a result ever more kin= ds=20 of behavior are sanctioned by criminal penalties, perhaps now even selling= =20 electricity. Those found guilty of such crimes are put into cages, where th= ey=20 are deprived of their liberty and dignity and, as Lockyer so clearly=20 acknowledged, raped and brutalized. What's worse, Lockyer has indicated tha= t=20 he believes that rape is an appropriate part of the system of punishments h= e=20 administers.=20 ?????Should it matter that Lay is a businessman? Imagine the outcry if the= =20 head of Enron were female. What would Lockyer's fellow Democrats have said = to=20 that?=20 ?????Should it matter that Lay is chairman of an electricity generator? Doe= s=20 the nature of his business justify threats to escort him to his own rape?= =20 Lockyer told the Los Angeles Times that he had singled out Enron's chairman= =20 because the Houston-based company is the world's largest energy trader.=20 ?????So apparently singling out a man for a heinous threat is OK because he= 's=20 the chairman of the world's largest energy trading company. That's accordin= g=20 to the man who, as a state senator, sponsored California's 1984 hate-crimes= =20 law. Evidently the crusader against intimidation on the basis of race,=20 religion and sexual orientation feels no hesitation at all about intimidati= ng=20 someone and threatening him with the brutal use of physical force simply=20 because he heads the world's largest energy trading company.=20 ?????Lockyer and Gov. Gray Davis seem to think that the best way to keep th= e=20 lights on is to threaten electricity producers with brute force, rather tha= n=20 to offer to pay competitive rates in competitive markets. Are energy=20 producers to blame for California's energy problems? No. Bad policies,=20 including rigid controls on retail prices of electricity, are the cause of= =20 the problem, not the people who generate energy. Scapegoating producers and= =20 threatening them with violence is an old ploy of authoritarians. California= ns=20 should not stand for it.=20 ?????An Enron spokesman said that Lockyer's chilling stated desire to arran= ge=20 the rape of Lay does not merit a response. The spokesman is wrong. Lockyer'= s=20 remarks merit public disgrace and removal from office. After all, rape is n= ot=20 a form of legal justice in America--is it?=20 - - - Tom G. Palmer Is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute in Washington. E-mai= l:=20 Palmert@cato.org Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 California ; Metro Desk=20 U.S. Probes Alleged Pact Not to Build New Plants Power: Justice officials= =20 focus on Southland operations of two firms, which deny wrongdoing. MYRON LEVIN; NANCY RIVERA BROOKS ?=20 06/06/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page B-1=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 The U.S. Department of Justice has launched an investigation into whether t= wo=20 companies that control a large swath of Southern California 's electricity= =20 supply agreed to limit power plant construction, potentially hindering=20 crucial energy production, according to federal records and interviews.=20 The civil antitrust probe of Williams Energy Services and AES Southland=20 represents the Justice Department's first foray into the activities of ener= gy=20 suppliers who have reaped huge profits in California 's price-shocked marke= t.=20 AES disclosed the investigation, which began last month, in a filing with t= he=20 Securities and Exchange Commission on Tuesday. In its papers, AES said the= =20 Justice Department is focusing on whether its agreement with Williams could= =20 constrain future power plant construction in Southern California .=20 The investigation comes at a time when the state is scrambling to get new= =20 generators built and running to avoid blackouts and economic problems.=20 The government alleges that AES and Williams agreed to limit the expansion = or=20 construction of new power plants near three facilities purchased by AES in= =20 1998 from Southern California Edison under the state's new deregulation pla= n.=20 The plants--in Long Beach, Huntington Beach and Redondo Beach--are owned by= =20 AES, but the electricity is sold by Williams. Under a 3-year-old deal, know= n=20 as a tolling agreement, Williams essentially rents out the capacity of the= =20 plants for annual payments to AES. Williams supplies natural gas to fire th= e=20 plants and sells the electricity under long-term contracts and in the costl= y=20 spot market.=20 Williams and AES have similar tolling agreements at plants in Pennsylvania= =20 and New Jersey. However, AES spokesman Aaron Thomas said the Justice=20 Department's investigative requests have focused only on agreements between= =20 Williams and AES in Southern California .=20 Thomas would say only that the agreement at the center of the investigation= =20 is simply a delineation of ""how expansion or repowerings are done at the=20 facilities.""=20 The three plants have a combined capacity of more than 3,900 megawatts,=20 enough to supply about 3 million homes. This summer, AES is bringing anothe= r=20 450 megawatts on line by reactivating two mothballed generators in Huntingt= on=20 Beach.=20 Paula Hall-Collins, a spokeswoman for Tulsa-based Williams Cos., said she= =20 believes that the investigation is unrelated to a recent inquiry by the=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission into whether AES and Williams=20 unnecessarily shut down plants to jack up prices. A portion of that=20 investigation was settled in April, when Williams, without admitting any=20 wrongdoing, agreed to pay about $8 million.=20 ""We've always maintained that we've operated within the law, and we're=20 certain the investigation by the DOJ will find we are operating legally,""= =20 Hall-Collins said.=20 Williams and AES are among the power plant owners and marketers that have= =20 been lambasted by Gov. Gray Davis because of gold-plated electricity prices= =20 that have pushed the state's biggest utilities to the edge of ruin and are= =20 steadily draining the state's budget surplus.=20 State officials are asking FERC to revoke the rights of AES and Williams to= =20 sell electricity at whatever price the market will bear. That right was=20 granted for three years, beginning in 1998 by federal regulators when=20 California 's $28-billion electricity market was opened to competition.=20 Under that plan, the rights of AES and Williams to sell into the market are= =20 the first to come up for renewal.=20 AES Southland and Williams Energy Services are both arms of large energy=20 companies--AES Corp. of Arlington, Va., and Williams Cos. of Tulsa, Okla. California ; Metro Desk=20 Natural Gas, Power Prices Drop Sharply Energy: More conservation, mild=20 weather are among factors keeping costs down, experts say. RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR; NANCY VOGEL ?=20 06/06/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page B-1=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 WASHINGTON -- The wholesale prices of electricity and natural gas in=20 California have fallen sharply in recent weeks, and experts said Tuesday th= at=20 the relief could be the harbinger of an energy turnaround.=20 Or it may be just a blip.=20 In the last couple of weeks, California power prices have plunged to the=20 lowest levels since April 2000, traders say, with electricity selling on so= me=20 days for less than $100 per megawatt-hour.=20 At night, when demand slackens, power sometimes sells for less than $20 per= =20 megawatt-hour. That is reminiscent of the days before prices went haywire= =20 last summer.=20 It is a drastically different scenario than the $500 to $800 the state paid= =20 during a spate of hot weather last month.=20 Meanwhile, wholesale natural gas prices at a bellwether pipeline junction o= n=20 the Southern California -Arizona border dipped last week to their lowest=20 levels since November, according to a publication that tracks the industry.= =20 Separately, Southern California Gas Co. and Pacific Gas & Electric Co.=20 reported June rate cuts for their residential gas customers of 16% and 38%,= =20 respectively.=20 Experts credited a combination of conservation, mild weather, a burst of=20 increased hydroelectric generation and lower natural gas prices for the dro= p=20 in electricity costs.=20 ""Conservation is starting to worry the generators, which is nice to see,""= =20 said Severin Borenstein, director of the University of California Energy=20 Institute in Berkeley. Californians used 11% less energy last month than in= =20 May 2000, according to the state Energy Commission.=20 ""I'm worried that if we don't push harder on conservation, [prices] won't= =20 stay down,"" Borenstein added.=20 On the natural gas side, experts said the price decline is due to replenish= ed=20 storage within California , a nationwide drop in the cost of the fuel and= =20 easing demand from power plants.=20 The number of shippers competing to get natural gas to the state has also= =20 increased, with the expiration of a controversial contract on the El Paso= =20 pipeline system last week.=20 But economists were reluctant to make sweeping predictions based on the=20 latest indicators.=20 ""It's hard to draw specific conclusions,"" said Bruce Henning, who tracks th= e=20 natural gas markets for Energy and Environmental Analysis Inc., an Arlingto= n,=20 Va., consulting firm.=20 How the summer turns out depends on the weather in the state, Henning said,= =20 adding, ""The weather represents the balance in the Southern California=20 market.""=20 Natural gas fuels most California power plants. With wholesale prices=20 recently averaging three to four times the rates charged elsewhere in the= =20 country, state and federal officials have despaired of chances for=20 controlling electricity costs.=20 Last Friday, however, the daily price for immediate delivery of natural gas= =20 in Topock, Ariz., a pipeline junction near the California border, dipped to= =20 $7.85 per million British thermal units.=20 According to Natural Gas Week, it was the first time since mid-November tha= t=20 the price at that location had fallen below $8 per million BTUs. One millio= n=20 BTUs is what a typical Southern California home uses in five or six days.= =20 Considered a bellwether for other pipeline systems serving California , the= =20 Topock price reached a record $56.54 per million BTUs on Dec. 8. It stood a= t=20 $9.36 per million BTUs at the close of business Tuesday, still below recent= =20 weekly averages.=20 Other industry publications have also picked up signals of price declines.= =20 Platts, the energy information division of McGraw-Hill Cos., reported Tuesd= ay=20 that the price for monthly gas delivery contracts to California fell 22% in= =20 June, following a nationwide trend.=20 But Henning said the drop in California prices is attributable to both lowe= r=20 prices around the country and a decline in the high markups for shipping ga= s=20 to California . Those markups, which far exceed the cost of transporting ga= s,=20 have drawn the attention of state and federal investigators.=20 Henning said the markups are declining as depleted storage levels in=20 California are replenished. ""Storage levels have been filling very rapidly,= =20 and that fact is reflected in prices coming down,"" he said.=20 The link between natural gas and electricity prices is a hotly debated=20 subject. Some experts say high-priced natural gas is driving up the cost of= =20 electricity . Others believe that record prices for power are raising the= =20 prices that generators are willing to pay for their fuel.=20 Electricity prices that range from $20 to $200 per megawatt-hour--instead o= f=20 the $150 to $500 per megawatt-hour paid in recent months--are great news fo= r=20 Gov. Gray Davis.=20 Average daily power prices in California for transactions through the=20 Automated Power Exchange have dropped from $149 per megawatt-hour last Frid= ay=20 to $110 per megawatt-hour Tuesday. The exchange is a private company that= =20 brings together electricity buyers and sellers and accounts for less than 1= 0%=20 of the state's market.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio said Tuesday that average daily power=20 purchases by the state have recently dipped below $50 million.=20 The state has sometimes had to pay more than $100 million a day since it=20 started buying power in January through the Department of Water Resources.= =20 The state stepped in because California 's two biggest utilities became too= =20 financially crippled to withstand the prices being charged by generators.= =20 Davis' plan to pay for past and future energy purchases with a $12.4-billio= n=20 bond issue hinges on an assumption that power prices will be driven down th= is=20 summer through long-term contracts, conservation and the construction of ne= w=20 power plants.=20 UC Berkeley's Borenstein said conservation efforts have not gone far enough= .=20 ""You walk into most buildings and you still need a sweater,"" he said. ""That= =20 ain't the way to hit the target.""=20 If Californians conserved an additional 10% off their peak usage on hot=20 afternoons, he said, ""we could really break the backs of the generators, we= =20 could really collapse the price.""=20 Prices tend to skyrocket in California 's electricity market on hot=20 afternoons, when demand soars and grid operators must scramble to purchase= =20 enough electricity . Cool weather, which reduces demand for air conditionin= g,=20 and conservation help keep the state from reaching such crisis situations.= =20 Borenstein said he believes generators are also asking less money for their= =20 electricity in part because of a federal order that took effect last month.= =20 The order limits the price power plant owners can charge when California 's= =20 supplies are strained.=20 Power sellers say there are more fundamental forces at work.=20 ""There's more supply relative to demand, which is softening prices,"" said= =20 Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum. ""The= =20 market is working, and it's providing cheaper wholesale power more quickly= =20 than any regulatory scheme could ever do.""=20 *=20 Times staff writer Dan Morain in Sacramento contributed to this story.=20 RELATED STORY=20 PG&E wins: The utility averted a $1-billion bill for power buys. B6=20 (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)=20 A Blip or a Trend?=20 Daily natural gas prices at the California border with Arizona--considered = a=20 bellwether of the state's costs--have been declining in the last two weeks.= =20 *=20 Natural gas price per 1 million Btu=20 $9.36=20 Source: Natural Gas Week California ; Metro Desk=20 The State Utility Averts $1 Billion in Costs Courts: PG&E and Cal-ISO agree= =20 to recognize Department of Water Resources as purchaser of the power. TIM REITERMAN ?=20 06/06/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page B-6=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 SAN FRANCISCO -- Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and the state's power grid=20 operator reached an agreement Tuesday that insulated PG&E at least=20 temporarily from more than $1 billion in power purchases the state made for= =20 its customers.=20 The California Independent System Operator sent $1.26 billion in invoices t= o=20 the utility for power purchases by the state Department of Water Resources= =20 for PG&E customers from January through March.=20 But the utility contended in Bankruptcy Court proceedings that it was not= =20 liable for such purchases and that continued purchases would cause annual= =20 losses of $4 billion.=20 After arguments before Judge Dennis Montali, PG&E and Cal-ISO agreed that t= he=20 Department of Water Resources, not PG&E, purchased the power. Cal-ISO had= =20 argued that it was making the purchases on PG&E's behalf.=20 ""PG&E wants to be a utility and have obligations to serve customers, but th= ey=20 don't want to pay for it,"" Cal-ISO general counsel Charles Robinson said=20 later.=20 If PG&E refuses to pay the invoices, Robinson said, Cal-ISO will send the= =20 bills to the Department of Water Resources, and officials there can decide= =20 whether to pursue claims in Bankruptcy Court. A spokesman for department,= =20 which has authorization to sell $13 billion in bonds for power purchases,= =20 said the agency will have no comment until the matter can be studied.=20 State agencies have stayed out of the bankruptcy proceedings, hoping to=20 preserve their immunity from suits in federal court.=20 The agreement will be submitted for Montali's approval Monday, but the judg= e=20 said it would not be binding on the department because no one represented t= he=20 agency in court.=20 PG&E's own production and contracts provide the majority of the power for i= ts=20 customers. But state legislation adopted this year allows the department to= =20 secure power contracts to serve customers of ailing utilities. When a=20 shortage threatens the power grid, the department purchases additional powe= r=20 through Cal-ISO on the spot electricity market.=20 PG&E filed for Chapter 11 protection from creditors on April 6, saying it w= as=20 $9 billion in debt.=20 Dramatic drop in cost of electricity=20 LOWER BILLS: Cheaper fuel, milder weather credited=20 David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL: .DTL=20 California electricity prices have plunged unexpectedly to their lowest lev= el=20 in more than a year, partly as the result of a simultaneous drop in prices= =20 for natural gas, which fuels most power plants.=20 Make no mistake: Gas and electricity prices could surge upward again in=20 months ahead.=20 But for the first time since California's energy markets went haywire last= =20 summer, industry experts are beginning to ask whether the state finally may= =20 have turned a corner in its battle with runaway power costs.=20 ""California is not yet out of the woods,"" said Kelley Doolan, who tracks=20 natural gas prices for energy market researcher Platts. ""But this is a very= =20 significant decrease in costs.""=20 Along with lower gas prices, the decline in electricity costs was attribute= d=20 by state and industry officials to milder weather, which reduces demand for= =20 power. They also credited recent conservation efforts by consumers and=20 better-than-expected runoff at dams for hydroelectric plants.=20 Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, an=20 energy-industry association, said these factors came together to produce th= e=20 lowest wholesale electricity prices since April 2000.=20 Electricity on the spot market could have been purchased yesterday for as= =20 little as $50 per megawatt hour, he noted, compared with more than $500=20 earlier this year.=20 ""If the weather stays this way, we could have reasonable prices all summer,= ""=20 Ackerman said. ""We may also have fewer blackouts.""=20 It is tempting for Californians to be suspicious of virtually any swing in= =20 energy prices. If power companies manipulated prices on the way up, as=20 critics have alleged, might they not be up to some trick as prices head in= =20 the opposite direction?=20 Nettie Hoge, executive director of The Utility Reform Network in San=20 Francisco, speculated that generators are allowing electricity prices to fa= ll=20 so they can discourage federal regulators from taking a more active role in= =20 the dysfunctional California market.=20 ""They're trying to take the heat off,"" she said.=20 Others cautioned that the lower prices may be nothing more than a statistic= al=20 blip.=20 ""This was just one month's decline,"" said Michael Shames, executive directo= r=20 of the Utility Consumers' Action Network in San Diego. ""We really have to s= ee=20 how this plays out in the future.""=20 Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis, said the governor was very= =20 encouraged by the lower energy prices. Davis announced Sunday that=20 California's power use was down 11 percent last month from a year before.= =20 ""We're not there yet,"" Maviglio said of whether an end to the state's power= =20 woes is in sight. ""But the trend is pointing in the right direction.""=20 WHITE ELEPHANT Yet this sudden drop in energy prices does have a dark side: California cou= ld=20 end up with a huge white elephant after spending about $40 billion in publi= c=20 funds on long-term power contracts.=20 The logic behind the contracts, which are at an average price of $69 per=20 megawatt hour over 10 years, is that the state expected to pay below-market= =20 rates for electricity for a number of years before prices came down and=20 California found itself paying above-market rates.=20 If current trends continue, though, California will find itself paying=20 consistently above-market rates much sooner than expected, making the long-= =20 term contracts a sweet deal for the same power companies that profited so= =20 handsomely during the state's darkest hours.=20 ""The contracts look really ugly right now,"" said Shames at the Utility=20 Consumers' Action Network. ""They may be way overpriced.""=20 Maviglio, the governor's spokesman, said it is too early to conclude that t= he=20 state did poorly negotiating dozens of long-term power contracts.=20 ""No one has a crystal ball on this,"" he said.=20 CUSTOMERS' BILLS TO DROP In any case, Pacific Gas and Electric Co. said yesterday that customers'=20 average gas bills will drop 26 percent this month to $26 and should stay ne= ar=20 that level all summer.=20 Platts, which monitors average monthly spot prices, found that the wholesal= e=20 price of gas at the California-Oregon border has tumbled nearly 42 percent= =20 since the beginning of May -- from $9.98 per million British thermal units = to=20 $5.81.=20 The wholesale gas price at the California-Arizona border fell 45 percent,= =20 from $11.91 to $6.50. This compares with a 25 percent monthly decline in=20 average natural gas prices nationwide.=20 However, California gas prices are still about 50 percent higher than they= =20 were a year ago, whereas national prices are now below year-ago levels for= =20 the first time since last spring.=20 While cooler weather nationwide helped push gas prices down overall, Doolan= =20 attributed the especially steep drop in California to a commensurate surge = in=20 prices last month related to fears of a long, hot summer of rolling=20 blackouts.=20 ""You had state officials all but promising rolling blackouts this summer,"" = he=20 said. ""That created enormous demand for electricity generation.=20 ""What has changed is that we've had weeks of mild weather,"" Doolan observed= .=20 ""The electricity generators have not come out of the woodwork buying up all= =20 the gas.""=20 This allowed utilities like PG&E to beef up gas inventories, which eased=20 demand and resulted in substantially lower prices, he said.=20 'BACK ON TRACK'=20 ""We're back on track to be completely full for winter,"" said Staci Homrig, = a=20 PG&E spokeswoman. ""That's a very good thing.""=20 Gas prices historically dip in the spring and summer and then rise again in= =20 the winter. PG&E is forecasting that customers' average gas bills could ris= e=20 to as high as $75 in December if current trends continue.=20 However, the precipitous drop in gas prices in recent weeks suggests that= =20 California's unusually high costs at last may be abating.=20 Individual power companies so far are reluctant to speculate on whether the= =20 drop in gas prices will have a lasting effect on electricity costs.=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 San Jose council gives green light to generating plant=20 VOTE REVERSAL: Officials pressured to OK project=20 Marshall Wilson, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL: .DTL=20 In a clear sign that the political landscape has shifted because of the=20 state's power crisis, the San Jose City Council gave a green light yesterda= y=20 for construction of a generating plant it had unanimously opposed in=20 November.=20 Yesterday's 10-to-1 vote came after months of mounting pressure for the cit= y=20 to reverse course and approve the controversial 600-megawatt Calpine plant = at=20 Coyote Valley.=20 That pressure -- increased by the occasional rolling blackout -- has come= =20 from nearly every corner of the state, from elected officials to high-tech= =20 businesses and labor unions worried the power crisis will drain away jobs,= =20 ruin the economy and lead to voter backlash over skyrocketing energy bills.= =20 Even the local branch of the NAACP and environmentalists pushed the council= =20 to approve the Calpine proposal -- despite overwhelming opposition from the= =20 plant's neighbors.=20 Council members did not hide their disdain yesterday for being forced to=20 reconsider their opposition to the so-called Metcalf Energy Center.=20 ""I'm holding my nose to vote for this thing,"" said Councilwoman Linda=20 LeZotte.=20 ""I'm just as unhappy as everybody else,"" Vice Mayor George Shirakawa said. = ""I=20 feel like no matter what happens, we can't win.""=20 GOVERNOR OFFERED HIS SUPPORT After the council's solid opposition in November, Calpine appealed to the= =20 California Energy Commission, which has the final say. The controversial=20 plant then received a huge boost in April when Gov. Gray Davis threw his=20 support behind it.=20 San Jose officials conceded yesterday that the energy commission was likely= =20 to override their opposition and grant approval within a few weeks. They sa= id=20 the commission's likely approval was stripping them of their power to decid= e=20 local land-use issues.=20 ""What I think has happened . . . is the governor and the Legislature at the= =20 state level have taken this out of our hands,"" said Councilwoman Pat Dando.= =20 ""I don't think there's any chance at all the California Energy Commission i= s=20 going to turn down the Metcalf Energy Center,"" Councilman Chuck Reed said.= =20 CONSTRUCTION MAY BEGIN SOON If given the go-ahead by the state, Calpine could begin construction as ear= ly=20 as next month. The natural-gas fired plant would generate electricity by=20 mid-2003, company spokesman Kenneth Arbeu said.=20 At the urging of Mayor Ron Gonzales, the council yesterday approved a new= =20 ""cooperation agreement"" with Calpine. The vote, with Councilman Forrest=20 Williams casting the lone nay, is preliminary while a final vote that is=20 scheduled for June 26.=20 Gonzales argued that the agreement did not amount to a flip-flop because it= =20 differs from what Calpine proposed in November.=20 The agreement approved by the council calls for increased monitoring of air= =20 pollution, the use of treated wastewater to cool the plant, which will redu= ce=20 discharges into San Francisco Bay, and a $6.5 million ""community benefits""= =20 package, with the bulk going toward parkland acquisition, Gonzales said.=20 ""This council has not changed its decision,"" he said. ""What we've done is= =20 change the facility.""=20 Critics, incensed that the city was buckling to outside pressure, vowed to= =20 change the council at the next election.=20 CONCERNS OVER HEALTH RISKS They raised concerns that boiled wastewater steam wafting over their homes= =20 from Calpine's plant could pose health risks. Jona Denz-Hamilton said more= =20 controls are needed to ensure the safety of neighbors like herself and her= =20 family and argued that new, cleaner-burning technologies should be installe= d=20 at the plant.=20 ""It's too great of a risk,"" she said.=20 Other critics said the state's energy woes will be solved and largely=20 forgotten by the time the plant opens in two years, while the Santa Teresa= =20 neighborhood will be stuck with pollution for decades.=20 Approval seemed a given at the start of the more than three-hour hearing.= =20 Much of the afternoon's debate focused around plans to extend a pipeline fo= r=20 treated wastewater to the new plant.=20 Critics said Calpine was receiving a sweet deal by paying only $10 million = of=20 the $50 million cost of extending the pipeline. Several council members ask= ed=20 for a more detailed report into the financing plan before the final vote is= =20 taken June 26.=20 Chronicle staff writer Bill Workman contributed to this report.=20 E-mail Marshall Wilson at ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 Developments in California's energy crisis=20 Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate1 053EDT0177.DTL=20 (06-06) 07:53 PDT (AP) --=20 Developments in California's energy crisis:=20 WEDNESDAY: * No power alerts Wednesday as reserves stay above 7 percent.=20 TUESDAY: * Gov. Gray Davis' administration says the state's electricity costs are=20 dropping substantially, even as it asks state legislators for another=20 half-billion dollars for power purchases. That brings to $8.2 billion the= =20 amount the state is paying for electricity on behalf of three financially= =20 strapped utilities.=20 Spokesman Steve Maviglio says the cost to the state treasury has dropped in= =20 the last few weeks well below the $50 million dollars the state had been=20 paying on a typical day. He credits cooler weather, conservation, more powe= r=20 plants online and more long-term contracts with helping drive down the cost= .=20 * A state Senate committee agrees to issue subpoenas to eight out-of-state= =20 electricity generators demanding they hand over documents on bidding, prici= ng=20 and other aspects of power sales in the state. The subpoenas would help a= =20 special Senate committee's investigation into whether the companies are=20 illegally profiteering from California's power crisis. The committee's=20 chairman says he expects the companies to resist, setting the stage for a= =20 court battle.=20 * Oil giant Chevron threatens to cut gasoline production in California unle= ss=20 it is exempted from rolling blackouts. The San Francisco Chronicle says it= =20 has a copy of a letter sent Friday from Chevron chairman David O'Reilly to= =20 Davis. In the letter, O'Reilly says the company will scale back gasoline=20 production at its Richmond and El Segundo plants, operating those refinerie= s=20 only with power produced by generators at the sites.=20 * New U.S. Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., supports Federal=20 Energy Regulatory Commission price caps. ""FERC must meet its obligation und= er=20 current law to ensure 'just and reasonable' prices for wholesale electricit= y=20 in the state of California. FERC has failed to meet this responsibility...,= ""=20 Daschle says in a letter to Davis. ""Unless FERC acts soon, Senator (Dianne)= =20 Feinstein's legislation should be taken up and passed to direct FERC to tak= e=20 action. I will support all necessary efforts to meet that goal.""=20 * House Subcommittee on Energy Policy, Natural Resources and Regulatory=20 Affairs Chairman Doug Ose, R-Sacramento, cites Electric Utility Week figure= s=20 that FERC's limited price caps helped cut California's power rates from $30= 0=20 to $108.47 per megawatt hour within an hour after taking effect last week.= =20 While he says more information is needed, Ose uses the figures to tout his= =20 pending bill to impose the price caps around the clock and to all Western= =20 states.=20 * Pacific Gas & Electric Co. asks U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali to= =20 stop the manager of the state's power grid from buying electricity for=20 utility or charging it for any electricity bought after the utility filed f= or=20 bankruptcy on April 6. Separately, the utility's creditors support its=20 request to the bankruptcy court to pay out $17.5 million in bonuses to the= =20 management team that guided the utility into bankruptcy.=20 * California Department of Water Resources reveals it is negotiating with= =20 municipal utilities to buy their surplus power. Department spokesman Oscar= =20 Hidalgo says talks began last week but no agreements are imminent.=20 * State lawmakers criticize a $3 million lobbying campaign by Southern=20 California Edison. The utility is telephoning shareholders to describe the= =20 dire consequences if the utility goes bankrupt. The call is then transferre= d=20 to the state Capitol so shareholders can implore lawmakers to support a=20 controversial plan to help the utility. Legislators and their staffers say= =20 the shareholders often are confused and scared their investments will be=20 degraded or wiped out.=20 * State Treasurer Phil Angelides joins an advocacy group for the poor in=20 urging the state's huge pension funds to use their economic power to levera= ge=20 power companies. The Pacific Institute for Community Organization says the= =20 two pension funds own at least $1.2 billion in stocks and bonds in most of= =20 the firms that sell electricity to California.=20 * The Assembly, by a 69-0 vote, approves a bill to spend $10 million on=20 environmental studies needed before Path 15, the inadequate transmission-li= ne=20 group between Northern and Southern California, can be expanded. The bill= =20 moves to the Senate.=20 * Pacific Gas and Electric announces a decrease in natural gas prices, down= =20 38 percent from May's rates and 66 percent lower than January's rates. The= =20 decline will bring the average residential gas bill to $26 when it goes int= o=20 effect June 7. Market analysts predict the rates will remain stable until= =20 December when demand is expected to increase with winter heating loads.=20 * No power alerts Tuesday as electricity reserves stay above 7 percent.=20 * Shares of Edison International closed at $10.05, down 53 cents. PG&E Corp= .=20 closed at $11.25, down 15 cents. Sempra Energy, the parent company of San= =20 Diego Gas & Electric, closes at $26.91, down 43 cents.=20 WHAT'S NEXT: * Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra, the parent compa= ny=20 of San Diego Gas and Electric Co., to buy the utility's transmission lines.= =20 THE PROBLEM: High demand, high wholesale energy costs, transmission glitches and a tight= =20 supply worsened by scarce hydroelectric power in the Northwest and=20 maintenance at aging California power plants are all factors in California'= s=20 electricity crisis.=20 Edison and PG&E say they've lost nearly $14 billion since June to high=20 wholesale prices the state's electricity deregulation law bars them from=20 passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs= =20 from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection= =20 April 6.=20 Electricity and natural gas suppliers, scared off by the two companies' poo= r=20 credit ratings, are refusing to sell to them, leading the state in January = to=20 start buying power for the utilities' nearly 9 million residential and=20 business customers. The state is also buying power for a third investor-own= ed=20 utility, San Diego Gas & Electric, which is in better financial shape than= =20 much larger Edison and PG&E but also struggling with high wholesale power= =20 costs.=20 The Public Utilities Commission has approved average rate increases of 37= =20 percent for the heaviest residential customers and 38 percent for commercia= l=20 customers, and hikes of up to 49 percent for industrial customers and 15=20 percent or 20 percent for agricultural customers to help finance the state'= s=20 multibillion-dollar power buys.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 California conserves=20 Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /06/E D86597.DTL=20 WHEN RAIN fails to fall from the sky, Californians know why there is a=20 drought. But when rolling blackouts suddenly appeared in the dead of winter= ,=20 many of us wondered who was responsible for and who has profited from what= =20 now seems like an artificially created power shortage in the state.=20 Our skepticism proved to be right. Windfall profits were reaped by=20 electricity generators while natural gas importers extracted prices far abo= ve=20 the national average.=20 Timid federal overseers exact only wrist-slap penalties on the offending=20 energy firms. The White House scoffs at temporary controls for a=20 malfunctioning market. California's state government has ended up as the bi= ll=20 payer for the sickly utilities, forking over $8 billion to generators. This= =20 number may hit $40 billion by year-end.=20 It's an infuriating tangle. All the more remarkable, then, that skeptical= =20 Californians have managed, within two months, to reduce their use of=20 electricity by 11 percent. The public's response to the governor's appeal f= or=20 energy conservation has exceeded expectations. Although many businesses hav= e=20 suffered enormous losses, ordinary people have made relatively painless=20 sacrifices. People turned off their lights, purchased energy-efficient=20 lightbulbs, used air conditioning less and shut off their computers when no= t=20 in use.=20 Despite this remarkable civic compliance, we still face an unconscionable= =20 lack of leadership. President Bush seems perfectly willing to allow Texas= =20 power companies to pummel the once-powerful California economy. He repeats = a=20 mantra about creating more supply -- which California is doing with 15 powe= r=20 plants under construction -- while ignoring the outsized sums paid to a=20 handful of energy generators.=20 At the same time, Gov. Gray Davis, who has given new meaning to the word=20 dithering, has failed to make the tough and transparent decisions. He delay= ed=20 an inevitable rise in power rates. Davis also dragged his feet in openly=20 announcing new power contracts that commit California to billions in spendi= ng=20 over the next decade.=20 To Davis' credit, he has urged California to conserve by laying out an $800= =20 million plan to cut power use and invest in energy-saving programs. The=20 message is getting out as higher rates take effect this month.=20 Despite a woefully unbalanced market and shortsighted leadership, the peopl= e=20 of California have demonstrated that if there is a will, there is a way.=20 Now it is time for our leaders to follow the wisdom of their constituents.= =20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 20=20 L.A. power customers awash in cheap energy=20 John Wildermuth, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /06/M N133438.DTL=20 Los Angeles -- These are flush times for the city's Department of Water and= =20 Power and the energy executives are loving every minute of it.=20 As are their customers.=20 Private power companies throughout California have been raising rates and= =20 warning customers about a long, hot summer filled with blackouts, but the= =20 city- owned DWP has been keeping prices stable and the lights on for 1.2=20 million Los Angeles customers.=20 ""Our customers are being really nice to us,"" said Angelina Galiteva, the=20 utility's strategic planning director. ""They love the DWP.""=20 Although Gov. Gray Davis' administration announced that the state had reduc= ed=20 its energy consumption 11 percent from a year ago, those in Los Angeles had= =20 cut back less than half that -- and polls show they view the energy situati= on=20 less seriously than other Californians.=20 Public utilities such as Los Angeles water and power have seen their revenu= es=20 increase during the energy crunch because they can sell their excess power = at=20 higher prices than ever before in a market tilted toward sellers.=20 The rest of the state doesn't always feel that same warm glow. Davis has=20 accused the DWP and other California public utilities of putting exorbitant= =20 price tags on the excess electricity they sell to the rest of the energy-= =20 starved state.=20 It's a charge Los Angeles utility executives deny, arguing that their exces= s=20 power is sold at cost plus 15 percent, which they say is a fair return for= =20 their customers.=20 ""Without our support, a million more homes (elsewhere in California) would= =20 have suffered rolling blackouts, which is a powerful message,"" Galiteva sai= d.=20 It wasn't supposed to be this way. When the power industry was deregulated = in=20 the late '90s, energy giants like Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern= =20 California Edison were expected to be the big winners. Now, PG&E is in=20 bankruptcy and Edison is a short step away.=20 ""When deregulation came, the experts said that the investor-owned utilities= =20 would become lean, mean machines that would be better able to operate in th= e=20 new environment,"" Galiteva said. ""But now public power has shown it can ser= ve=20 customers more efficiently at lower rates.""=20 While much of the state worries about electrical supply, Los Angeles=20 residents have been saved many of those concerns.=20 In a survey done last month by the Public Policy Institute of California, 4= 8=20 percent of the people in the Bay Area thought that electricity cost and=20 availability were the most important issues facing the state. In Los Angele= s,=20 however, only 33 percent put the energy crunch on top. When questioned abou= t=20 the size of the power problem and the effect it would have on the state's= =20 economy, Los Angeles residents were consistently less concerned than people= =20 elsewhere in California.=20 People in Los Angeles have been ""somewhat isolated"" from the energy crisis,= =20 concluded Mark Baldassare, who conducted the survey.=20 That doesn't mean the state's energy problems haven't had an effect. The DW= P=20 has seen a 3 percent to 5 percent reduction in some uses, which officials= =20 have dubbed ""sympathy conservation."" The utility also is offering its bigge= st=20 customers financial incentives to cut back on their power use.=20 ""Our average annual load growth is about 80 megawatts,"" Galiteva said. ""By= =20 this summer, we expect to have saved 40 megawatts through conservation. By= =20 December, we expect 60 megawatts in savings.""=20 The utility also is making a major attempt to create a conservation ethic= =20 among its customers. DWP's comfortable situation has made it possible to=20 offer them the carrot without the need to show them the stick.=20 ""Conservation no longer means doing without,"" Galiteva said. ""Beer can be= =20 just as cold with a superefficient refrigerator. Rooms can be just as brigh= t=20 with superefficient light bulbs.""=20 A ""Green Power"" program also is promoting the use of renewable energy=20 resources such as solar, wind and hydroelectric power. About 75,000 custome= rs=20 are paying an extra $3 per month to increase DWP's use of renewable power= =20 sources.=20 ""We're trying to give our customers a choice and a voice in determining the= =20 mix of power they use,"" Galiteva said. ""They know they can do (conservation= )=20 now or see it being mandated later.""=20 Los Angeles power officials -- and their customers -- know the DWP isn't=20 always going to continue as an island of tranquility in a sea of energy=20 turmoil. The utility's aging gas-fired plants have been affected by the=20 rising price of natural gas. Demand for energy continues to rise. In a deba= te=20 last month, both candidates for mayor of Los Angeles agreed that increases = in=20 local power bills are inevitable.=20 But the DWP has been supplying power to Los Angeles since 1916, and its=20 executives believe that the state's deregulation disaster has shown the=20 advantages of the city-owned utility.=20 ""It's nice to be the lean, mean, green efficient machine that no one ever= =20 expected us to become,"" Galiteva said.=20 E-mail John Wildermuth at ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 13=20 PG&E doesn't want to pay for energy to avert blackouts=20 DAVID KRAVETS, Associated Press Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 306EDT0102.DTL=20 (06-06) 00:06 PDT SAN FRANCISCO (AP) --=20 Pacific Gas & Electric Co. has told a bankruptcy judge it should not have t= o=20 pay for what could amount to billions of dollars in spot-market energy cost= s=20 to avert blackouts.=20 The company's position was one of two developments that emerged Tuesday as= =20 the bankrupt utility tries to cope with fallout from California's power=20 crisis. The other development saw a group of creditors that PG&E owes=20 billions endorse $17.5 million in bonuses for top managers at the utility.= =20 San Francisco-based PG&E filed for bankruptcy protection in April after=20 racking up an $8.9 billion debt which under state law it could not recoup= =20 from customers.=20 Tuesday's court dispute centered on who pays for energy bought at the last= =20 minute to avoid blackouts.=20 PG&E said an April federal regulatory decision requires that electricity ca= n=20 only be sold to those with the ability to pay electricity generators. The= =20 state is the only player with such ability, said PG&E attorney Jerome Faulk= ,=20 who argued that the utility shouldn't have to pay the $330 million in month= ly=20 spot-market energy bills.=20 Judge Dennis Montali said he may craft such an order. But he said the order= =20 would not preclude the state from suing PG&E to recover the cost.=20 In a separate but related development, a committee charged with devising a= =20 payment plan for those creditors owed billions by PG&E said it will sign of= f=20 on the utility's plan to pay $17.5 million in bonuses to PG&E's management= =20 team.=20 Attorney Allan Marks, who represents the committee, said such payments are= =20 normal during large bankruptcy cases. Under the agreement, which Montali wi= ll=20 consider at a June 18 hearing, the company must quickly produce a debt=20 payment plan that passes judicial muster.=20 The utility said it needs the bonuses for a ""management retention program.""= =20 Marks agreed. While the $17.5 million leaves less for creditors, without a= =20 financial incentive PG&E's key top brass may not be willing to cooperate wi= th=20 a payment plan, Marks said.=20 ""The main goal for the creditors' support here is to move the bankruptcy as= =20 quickly and smoothly as possible,"" Marks said.=20 The Utility Reform Network, a consumer watchdog group, says PG&E is simply= =20 rewarding managers of a failed business effort.=20 ""They're just showering money on the same people who got them in this mess,= ""=20 said TURN's Mike Florio.=20 The proposed bonuses would come on top of $50 million in bonuses and raises= =20 PG&E awarded just before the April 6 bankruptcy filing.=20 The case is In Re Pacific Gas & Electric Co., 01-30923 DM.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 Metcalf plant gets preliminary approval=20 Posted at 12:21 a.m. PDT Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 BY MIKE ZAPLER=20 Mercury News=20 As the San Jose City Council approached its 10-1 vote Tuesday to give an=20 initial nod to Calpine's big power plant in South San Jose, Councilwoman=20 Linda LeZotte perhaps captured the body's mood best.=20 ``I'm holding my nose to vote for this thing,'' she said. ``Without faultin= g=20 the mayor or his staff, quite frankly I think this deal stinks.''=20 Caught in what some members called a bind beyond their control, the council= =20 gave preliminary approval to an agreement negotiated by Mayor Ron Gonzales= =20 and Calpine on the company's proposed 600-megawatt Metcalf Energy Center.= =20 Councilman Forrest Williams, who represents the Santa Teresa neighborhood= =20 near the site, cast the lone vote against the deal.=20 The agreement is scheduled to come back before the council for a final vote= =20 on June 26, but Tuesday's vote effectively shifts the battle to the courts,= =20 where residents are expected to lodge a lawsuit in one final attempt to blo= ck=20 the plant.=20 Still, Councilwoman Pat Dando and some of her colleagues raised questions= =20 about the deal they said they want answered before the final vote. Their=20 issues could be incorporated into the final deal.=20 Many of the concerns focused on a $50 million recycled water pipeline=20 Gonzales agreed to have the city build to accommodate the project, $10=20 million of which would be reimbursed by Calpine over 30 years.=20 Pipeline possibility=20 Dando said that a private company, Great Oaks Water, may be willing to buil= d=20 the pipeline extension itself, saving the city the $50 million expense.=20 Officials at Great Oaks were unavailable Tuesday.=20 Council members peppered staff with other questions. Many were alarmed by= =20 claims of the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, which said that using treate= d=20 sewage water to cool the power plant could allow dangerous chemicals to see= p=20 into drinking water aquifers. An environmental services director said the= =20 recycled water meets federal specifications, but that there is no protocol= =20 for testing other chemicals not included in those standards.=20 Councilman Ken Yeager asked why Calpine should be allowed to spread a $3.9= =20 million water connection fee over 10 years -- an arrangement that would=20 mandate an amendment to city law.=20 LeZotte, meanwhile, said she wants to hold Calpine accountable to install= =20 ammonia-free technology at the plant. Ammonia is highly hazardous, and=20 residents say the use of the chemical to clean the plant is among their chi= ef=20 concerns.=20 The agreement requires the company to install technology to reduce or=20 eliminate the use ammonia when it becomes ``technologically and economicall= y=20 feasible.'' LeZotte said she wants a clear definition of ``feasible''=20 included in the deal.=20 Tuesday's vote marked a stark departure from the council's November vote to= =20 deny Metcalf. At the time, council members said a power plant was=20 inappropriate for the area, and many members said Tuesday that they still= =20 believe that.=20 Bowing to pressure=20 But with Gov. Gray Davis endorsing Metcalf in April and the California Ener= gy=20 Commission widely expected to override the city's denial this month, counci= l=20 members said they had no choice but to cut the best deal it could and allow= =20 the project to proceed.=20 That explanation, however, didn't sit well with residents of the Santa Tere= sa=20 neighborhood adjacent to the Metcalf site, one of whom accused Gonzales and= =20 the council of ``switching sides when the opposing team gets too close to t= he=20 goal line.''=20 Contact Mike Zapler at mzapler@sjmercury.com or at (408) 275-0140.=20 Feds probe AES, Williams=20 Antitrust investigation looks into allegations of manipulated energy prices= =20 through reduced power-plant construction.=20 June 6, 2001=20 By JAMES ROWLEY Bloomberg News=20 WASHINGTON - The U.S. Justice Department opened an antitrust investigation= =20 into California's electricity shortage by probing allegations that AES Corp= .=20 and Williams Energy Services Co. are limiting power-plant expansion to driv= e=20 up prices.=20 AES Corp., the biggest U.S. power-plant developer, disclosed the=20 investigation in a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.= =20 The Justice Department is looking into a supply-and-marketing agreement=20 between AES' California power-plant unit and a Williams unit that supplies= =20 natural gas.=20 Williams, owner of the second-largest U.S. natural-gas pipeline system, als= o=20 markets the power produced by AES' three electricity plants in the state.= =20 The department alleges the agreement limits expansion of generating capacit= y=20 near some AES plants.=20 AES said it was cooperating with the Justice Department investigation, whic= h=20 began last month, into possible violations of Section 1 of the Sherman=20 Antitrust Act.=20 That provision outlaws any restraint of trade that stifles competition.=20 A shortage of generating capacity in California has led to soaring wholesal= e=20 prices and rolling blackouts and prompted Pacific Gas & Electric, the state= 's=20 largest utility, to seek bankruptcy protection in April.=20 Aaron Thomas, a spokesman for AES, based in Arlington, Va., said the U.S.= =20 investigation started ""no more than a couple of weeks ago.""=20 Williams spokeswoman Paula Hall-Collins said the Tulsa, Okla.-based company= =20 is cooperating.=20 Gina Talamona, Justice Department spokeswoman, said the agency had no=20 immediate comment.=20 The investigation was opened several weeks after the Federal Energy=20 Regulatory Commission investigated AES plants in Long Beach and Huntington= =20 Beach, designated ""must run"" under the Federal Power Act, did not produce= =20 electricity for 10 days in April and May 2000. Williams agreed to pay the= =20 operator of California's electric grid $8 million to settle allegations tha= t=20 it overcharged for power.=20 FERC charged in March that the companies had a financial incentive to keep= =20 the units out of service to force the California Independent System Operato= r=20 to buy power from AES' plant in Redondo Beach at prices close to the=20 FERC-imposed cap of $750 per megawatt-hour.=20 AES said it was complying with a Justice Department demand for documents=20 about the agreement between its AES Southland LLC unit and Williams Energy= =20 Services Co. AES Southland, which operates the three power plants, was also= =20 asked to respond to interrogatories, the company said.=20 The Williams unit supplies the natural gas to fuel the AES plants and marke= ts=20 the power they produce.=20 AES and Williams jointly produce and sell about 4,000 megawatts in Californ= ia=20 -- 6 to 8 percent of the state's power -- enough electricity to light about= 3=20 million typical California homes.=20 AES shares dropped $2.05, to $42.54. Williams Cos. shares dropped $1, to=20 $38.20. Calpine Begins Construction of Peaking Energy Center in Gilroy, Calif.=20 June 6, 2001=20 SAN JOSE, Calif., June 5 /PRNewswire/ via NewsEdge Corporation -=20 Calpine Corporation (NYSE: CPN), the San Jose, Calif.-based independent pow= er=20 company, today announced that initial construction of 135 megawatts (mw) of= =20 peaking generation capacity will begin during this week adjacent to its=20 existing Gilroy Power Plant in Gilroy, Calif. Through an Application for=20 Certification (AFC) filed with the California Energy Commission (CEC) on=20 April 25, 2001, Calpine proposed to add three 45-mw simple-cycle gas turbin= e=20 peaking units in the first of a two-phase process. The California Energy=20 Commission approved the project on May 21, 2001.=20 ""Because the required natural gas, water and transmission infrastructure=20 exists at our Gilroy plant, it is an ideal site for the addition of peaking= =20 generation, allowing for rapid installation of needed capacity. The first= =20 three units are expected to begin generating electricity this September,""= =20 commented Bryan Bertacchi, Calpine Vice President - Western Region.=20 Upon completion the two-phase build out, the Gilroy Energy Center will be a= =20 270-mw, natural gas-fired, simple-cycle peaking generation facility located= =20 on approximately 9.5 acres at 1400 Pacheco Pass Highway in Gilroy. Commerci= al=20 operation of Phase One is scheduled for September 2001. An additional three= =20 45-mw gas turbine generators will be installed in Phase Two with full=20 build-out estimated for May 2002. Phase Two requires the filing of an=20 additional application with the CEC and is subject to a four-month review= =20 process.=20 Initial construction will begin this week with site and civil engineering= =20 activities occurring for approximately six weeks at which time the site wil= l=20 be cleared and leveled. Foundation work and the installation of generation= =20 equipment will follow shortly thereafter, and commissioning and testing wil= l=20 take place for a two to three week period prior to commercial operation in= =20 September 2001.=20 The Gilroy Energy Center web site has been created to host all information= =20 and updates related to this project. For additional information, please vis= it=20 www.gilroypower.com.=20 Calpine Corporation, based in San Jose, Calif., is dedicated to providing= =20 customers with reliable and competitively priced electricity. Calpine is=20 focused on clean, efficient, natural gas-fired generation and is the world'= s=20 largest producer of renewable geothermal energy. Calpine has launched the= =20 largest power development program in North America. To date, the company ha= s=20 approximately 32,200 megawatts of base load capacity and 7,200 megawatts of= =20 peaking capacity in operation, under construction, pending acquisitions and= =20 in announced development in 29 states and Canada. The company was founded i= n=20 1984 and is publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol= =20 CPN. For more information about Calpine, visit its Website at=20 www.calpine.com.=20 This news release discusses certain matters that may be considered=20 ""forward-looking"" statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the=20 Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities=20 Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, including statements regarding the intent= ,=20 belief or current expectations of Calpine Corporation (""the Company"") and i= ts=20 management. Prospective investors are cautioned that any such forward-looki= ng=20 statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve a number of= =20 risks and uncertainties that could materially affect actual results such as= ,=20 but not limited to, (i) changes in government regulations, including pendin= g=20 changes in California, and anticipated deregulation of the electric energy= =20 industry, (ii) commercial operations of new plants that may be delayed or= =20 prevented because of various development and construction risks, such as a= =20 failure to obtain financing and the necessary permits to operate or the=20 failure of third-party contractors to perform their contractual obligations= ,=20 (iii) cost estimates are preliminary and actual cost may be higher than=20 estimated, (iv) the assurance that the Company will develop additional=20 plants, (v) a competitor's development of a lower-cost generating gas-fired= =20 power plant, and (vi) the risks associated with marketing and selling power= =20 from power plants in the newly competitive energy market. Prospective=20 investors are also cautioned that the California energy environment remains= =20 uncertain. The Company's management is working closely with a number of=20 parties to resolve the current uncertainty, while protecting the Company's= =20 interests. Management believes that a final resolution will not have a=20 material adverse impact on the Company. Prospective investors are also=20 referred to the other risks identified from time to time in the Company's= =20 reports and registration statements filed with the Securities and Exchange= =20 Commission.=20 MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT - Click Here=20 SOURCE Calpine Corporation=20 CONTACT: media, Lisa Poelle, ext. 1285, or investors, Rick Barraza, ext.=20 1125, both of Calpine Corporation, 408-995-5115=20 Web site: http://www.gilroypower.com=20 Web site: http://www.calpine.com (CPN)=20 Reliant Urges FERC to Drop or Amend California Price Caps to Avoid Addition= al=20 Shortages and More Blackouts=20 June 6, 2001=20 HOUSTON, June 5 /PRNewswire/ via NewsEdge Corporation -=20 Reliant Energy (NYSE: REI) filed an emergency motion with the Federal Energ= y=20 Regulatory Commission (FERC) on Monday urging the agency to drop the=20 California price caps first applied May 29, or at a minimum, amend them to= =20 reflect the true costs they are attempting to control. The current price=20 caps, which send inaccurate market signals, are actually decreasing supply= =20 and increasing demand thus worsening an already dire situation.=20 ""FERC has been publicly dedicated to an open market from the beginning of t= he=20 California power crisis. We encourage FERC to reexamine these price caps an= d=20 continue that dedication,"" said Joe Bob Perkins, president and chief=20 operating officer, Reliant Energy Wholesale Group. ""Reliant is committed to= =20 helping keep the lights on in California this summer and wants to ensure th= at=20 if caps must remain part of the picture, they actually help increase supply= =20 and fix the problem.""=20 Although the price caps were first imposed less than a week ago, they have= =20 already begun to damage the market by decreasing supply. The price caps are= =20 creating a myriad of problems:=20 -- Creates Misleading Signals - The price cap methodology is misleading=20 the public on the actual cost of power. Reported ""dispatch"" costs in=20 Southern California during emergencies is far below what the actual=20 financial settlements will be under the FERC's final market mitigation=20 order. This confusion results from the ""proxy"" price used for=20 dispatch utilizing an extremely distorted blended fuel cost index.=20 This index averages gas costs in northern and southern parts of the=20 state, an impossibility in the actual market. This authorizes the=20 California Independent System Operator (ISO) to require that=20 generators dispatch power at reported market clearing prices well=20 below actual cost when back-up generation capacity begins to dip below=20 7.5 percent.=20 -- Depletes Power from Peaking Plants - The price caps distort dispatch=20 signals on peaking plants, which in some cases may be run only a few=20 days of the year because of emission regulations. The current FERC=20 price controls encourage the ISO to purchase power from emergency=20 peaking plants before it is really needed, even in the absence of a=20 stage three emergency. This depletes supplies that will, by law, run=20 out when blackout season intensifies later this summer. This power=20 from peaking units should only be purchased when blackouts are=20 imminent -- not in stage one or two emergencies.=20 -- Eliminates Price Signals for Retail Customers - Price caps remove=20 price signals for retail customers. Customers, particularly=20 industrial companies, which should be encouraged to curtail during=20 shortages, are not encouraged to conserve power when dispatched price=20 caps keep prices below the actual cost to produce electricity.=20 -- Discourages Supply from Out-of-State - Suppliers outside of=20 California, who are under no legal obligation to dispatch power during=20 an emergency in the state, are not encouraged to increase available=20 production when reported market clearing prices are below their cost=20 to produce. During times of emergencies, utilities across the Western=20 region are not likely to take on additional risks and costs if they=20 don't believe they will be fully compensated - a situation the current=20 price caps create.=20 MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT - Click Here=20 SOURCE Reliant Energy=20 CONTACT: Maxine Enciso of Ketchum Public Relations, Los Angeles,=20 310-444-1303, for Reliant Energy; or media, Richard Wheatley of Reliant=20 Energy, 713-207-5881=20 Photo: NewsCom: AP=20 Archive: http://photoarchive.ap.org PRN Photo Desk, 888-776-6555 or=20 212-782-2840=20 Company News On-Call: or fax,=20 800-758-5804, ext. 419090=20 Web site: http://www.reliantenergy.com (REI)=20 By Kathleen McFall kmcfall@ftenergy.com President George W. Bush's energy package encourages the use of biomass fue= ls=20 for both transportation purposes and electricity generation. ""They can=20 provide a reliable source of energy at a stable price, and they can also=20 generate income for farmers, landowners and others who harness them,"" his= =20 administration's report said.=20 Despite this warm and fuzzy language, however, the administration offered n= o=20 tangible funding for the fledgling biofuels industry=01*other than an exten= sion=20 of an existing ethanol tax credit that was not due to expire until 2007=01*= a=20 significant disappointment, and surprise, to advocates of renewable=20 transportation fuels. The report did recommend expanding tax credits for biomass energy projects = to=20 include forest-related and agriculture fuel sources and threw its weighty= =20 support at a new credit for electricity produced from biomass co-fired with= =20 coal. These recommendations are already included in the president's 2002=20 budget.=20 ""We are pleased that the administration included expansion of the biomass t= ax=20 credit and hope that, with congressional leadership, we will see this=20 expanded provision signed into law this year,"" said Katherine Hamilton,=20 co-director of the American Bioenergy Association (ABA).=20 Unlike other portions of the recommended energy policy, biomass energy=20 probably will not suffer under the recent change in Senate composition, giv= en=20 Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle's (D-S.D.) agricultural constituency and= =20 his previous support of the biofuels industry.=20 According to the National Energy Policy Development report, biomass account= s=20 for about 76% of non-hydropower renewable electricity generation,=20 representing a total of about 1.6% of total U.S. electricity supply.=20 Biopower advocates, however, envision an even greater market penetration in= =20 the coming decades and point to its environmental and ancillary advantages.= =20 For example, given that biomass combustion can be carbon dioxide-neutral (i= f=20 the growth and use cycle is managed sustainably), environmental groups=20 support an expanded role. Farmers with marginal lands that could grow bioma= ss=20 fuel could enjoy economic benefits. With large amounts of wood residue, the= =20 forest industry also stands to benefit from wider use of wood as a power=20 source.=20 Renewable energy offers a particular advantage to the lumber and paper=20 industry, and many analysts project that the industry may soon become a net= =20 seller of electricity.=20 ""In the lumber and paper industries, wood scraps are sometimes directly fed= =20 into boilers to produce steam for their manufacturing processes or to heat= =20 their buildings. For that reason, renewable energy offers a particular=20 advantage to the lumber and paper industry, and many analysts project that= =20 the industry may soon become a net seller of electricity,"" said the energy= =20 policy report.=20 Co-firing with coal Biomass=01*usually wood or wood residue=01*has traditionally been burned di= rectly=20 in the industrial sector for heat or on-site electricity generation.=20 According to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the existing 10 GW of=20 installed capacity are based on this direct-combustion technology.=20 For utilities and power-generating companies with coal-fired capacity,=20 however, biomass co-firing may represent one of the least-cost renewable=20 energy options, said the DOE. The process involves blending different=20 materials in varying amounts with coal.=20 Not only does mixing biomass with coal reduce emissions, it is likely to be= =20 cost-effective. Southern Co. estimates that a biomass plant alone could=20 generate power, depending on its location, at 4 to 11 cents/kWh. Given that= =20 the lower range of this corresponds to coal generation costs, there are=20 clearly circumstances where biomass-coal co-firing would be economically=20 attractive today. Plus, the environmental public relations benefit for=20 utilities with coal-fired capacity would be valuable.=20 Domestic biomass generation capacity could reach 20-30 GW by the year 2020 = by=20 co-firing at existing U.S. coal-fired power plants.=20 According to a recent report prepared by five National Laboratories, domest= ic=20 biomass generation capacity could reach 20-30 GW by the year 2020 by=20 co-firing at existing U.S. coal-fired power plants.=20 A recent report by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel for Climate= =20 Change (IPCC) also cites the potential of coal co-firing with biomass. The= =20 IPCC report concludes that co-firing in coal boilers results in the lowest= =20 cost and least technical risk of the examined approaches for biomass=20 conversion to electricity.=20 Working out the technical kinks Already, said the DOE, six power plants in the U.S. are currently co-firing= =20 coal and wood residue products on a regular basis. Another 10 plants have= =20 successfully tested co-firing over the last decade, and at least six more= =20 plants are now conducting or planning tests.=20 For example, Southern Co. is working with DOE, the Southern Research=20 Institute and the Electric Power Research Institute to study ways to grow a= nd=20 harvest switchgrass to blend with coal as a fuel for power generation.=20 Ideally suited for the southeastern U.S., switchgrass is a rugged grass tha= t=20 can be grown on marginal agricultural land. Reaching heights of up to 12=20 feet, it requires little fertilization and herbicide and can be harvested= =20 twice a year.=20 Harvesting methods, co-milling of switchgrass and pulverized coal,=20 pilot-scale co-firing tests, and a full-scale demonstration of co-firing at= =20 Alabama Power Co.'s Plant Gadsden are part of Southern Co.'s collaborative= =20 project.=20 The U.S. Agriculture Department is also taking a role in exploring the=20 potential of biomass and coal co-firing as a means to give farmers new=20 markets, especially for currently idle land. The agency recently authorized= =20 funding for three co-firing demonstration projects.=20 In Iowa, the Chariton Valley Biomass Project is a cooperative effort to=20 develop warm and cool season grasses (such as switchgrass) to co-fire with= =20 coal at Alliant Energy's Ottumwa Generating Station. The project is designe= d=20 to generate a sustained supply of 35 MW of biomass energy. Eventually, the= =20 grass could substitute for as much as 5% of the coal currently burned at th= e=20 plant.=20 In addition to reducing coal emissions, the Chariton Valley Biomass Project= =20 will support the local farm economy.=20 In addition to reducing coal emissions, the project will support the local= =20 farm economy because the grass and trees will come from acreage taken out o= f=20 production under the Agriculture Department's Conservation Reserve Program= =20 (CRP). CRP land is generally marginal land that the government subsidizes= =20 farmers to leave idle to both prevent erosion and protect commodity prices= =20 from product surpluses.=20 The Pennsylvania Switchgrass Energy and Conservation Project will produce= =20 switchgrass on CRP land for sale to a local cooperative's coal-fired=20 fluid-bed combustors.=20 In New York, the Agriculture Department project will fund willow biomass=20 crops and switchgrass on CRP acreage in the central and western part of the= =20 state. The primary markets for the willow biomass are two coal-burning powe= r=20 plants and a small university central heating facility.=20 Land conflicts, transportation may be obstacles As these pilot projects illustrate, biomass conversion efforts may have the= =20 most significant potential in rural areas. ""Since biomass is widely=20 distributed it has good potential to provide rural areas with a renewable= =20 source of energy. The challenge is to provide =01( conversion and delivery = of=20 bioenergy to the marketplace in the form of modern and competitive energy= =20 sources,"" said the IPCC report.=20 A potential drawback to co-firing is transportation. Transportation of=20 wood-based energy products is more costly, per unit of energy, than coal, f= or=20 example, and most analysts believe it will prove most economical to site=20 generation plants near biomass sources.=20 ""The generating plant or biorefinery must be located near to the resource t= o=20 minimize transport costs of the low-energy-density biomass as well as to=20 minimize impacts on air and water use,"" the IPCC report said. However, note= s=20 the report's authors, economies of scale may be significant enough to offse= t=20 the transport costs involved.=20 A potential drawback over the long term, however, for biomass conversion is= =20 land use conflicts. The IPCC report notes that by 2100, the global land=20 requirement to feed the growing world population will increase substantiall= y.=20 ""Up until this time there may well be sufficient land to supply all demands= =20 for food, fibre and energy, but at some stage after that, land-use conflict= s=20 could arise and before that, competition for water and irrigation may be a= =20 constraint.""=20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= EES Staff Meeting, in 791 - per Julie's cc:Mail on 9/5; [EMail-Body]= EES Budget meeting ? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Corporate Policy Committee; [EMail-Body]= The memo going out on Monday discusses the corporate policy committee brief= ly=20 at the end. The corporate policy committee does the MD PRC (evaluation of= =20 MDs and promotions to MD), reviews the recommendations of the other=20 committees (which we are just now forming). Additionally, the corporate=20 policy committee met to determine the membership and charters of the other= =20 committees (including the PRC committees). The corporate policy committee = is=20 comprised of the most senior executives, including the Office of the=20 Chairman, the leaders of the four business units and the heads of the=20 corporate functions. In addition to the specific items mentioned above, th= e=20 corporate policy committee was intended to discuss and resolve the major=20 issues facing the company, including issues of strategy, personnel and=20 challenges facing the company. =20 The corporate policy committee has met three times so far, so not much=20 history yet. Perhaps as further pronouncements issue from this august body= ,=20 we will make more of a point about where they came from. =09Mary Clark =0903/15/2001 05:36 PM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: RE: Corporate Policy Committee Steve, please briefly describe what the policy committee does so we can=20 respond to this employee question. Thanks. Mary ---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Clark/Corp/Enron on 03/15/2001 05:= 35=20 PM --------------------------- Mary Clark 03/07/2001 10:11 AM To: Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: =20 Subject: RE: Corporate Policy Committee =20 Sherri and Rosie: The Enron Policy Committee is a new name for Enron=20 employees. Perhaps, we should have stated what the committee does for thos= e=20 employees who forget what they read or who do not read their emails. Too= =20 late for this one. I will get Steve to give me a short description. Mary =20 =09 =09 =09From: Sherri Sera 03/07/2001 09:43 AM =09 To: Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: =20 Subject: RE: Corporate Policy Committee It's not like we've sent out a lot of memos about the corporate policy=20 committee, but this guy hasn't read the ones that did go out! SRS ---------------------- Forwarded by Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron on 03/07/2001=20 09:43 AM --------------------------- Anonymous From: Anonymous on 03/07/2001 02:43 AM To:=20 cc: =20 Subject: RE: Corporate Policy Committee=20 Dear Office of the Chairman, Could I beg your indulgence for just a few minutes please? I=01,m guessing= this=20 is good news for Dave and John. But, what does the Corporate Policy=20 Committee do? Aside from the board, are their many other executive level= =20 committees? I suppose that as a Senior Director, and +5year employee, that I should kno= w,=20 however I can=01,t recall hearing about these groups before. Regards, Richard. -----Original Message----- From: Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON=20 ON. com] On Behalf Of Ken Lay & Jeff Skilling@ENRON Sent: 06 March 2001 23:46 To: All Enron Worldwide@ENRON Subject: Organizational Announcement We are pleased to announce that Dave Delainey and John Sherriff are joining= =20 the Enron Corporate Policy Committee. With these additions, below is a current listing of Corporate Policy=20 Committee members. =20 Cliff Baxter Rick Causey Dave Delainey Jim Derrick Andy Fastow Mark Frevert Kevin Hannon Stan Horton Steve Kean Ken Lay Lou Pai Ken Rice John Sherriff Jeff Skilling Greg Whalley [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Brazil Real and IGPM forecast, dated 6/26/01; [EMail-Body]= Gwyn, There are several Kaminskis at Enron right now. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Kaminski, Amanda Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 10:59 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: FW: Brazil Real and IGPM forecast, dated 6/26/01 Vince, This e-mail was sent to me by mistake. I just wanted to make sure that you got the information that you needed. Have a good evening. Amanda Kaminski -----Original Message----- From: Koepke, Gwyn Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 4:53 PM To: Hudler, Cindy; Sassatani, Ricardo; Shahi, Pushkar; Stuart III, William; Raymond, Maureen; Kaminski, Amanda; Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Brazil Real and IGPM forecast, dated 6/26/01 Cindy and Ricardo, Please find attached the updated forecast for the Brazilian Real and for the general price index, IGPM. Gwyn Koepke and Maureen Raymond-Castaneda [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Employee Info; [EMail-Body]= -Larry Jester(mid yr-superior and yr end-strong)-Reports to D. Gilbert-Smith .Real time trader, great job, looking for career advancement possibilities -Keller Mayeaux (mid yr-strong and yr end-satisfactory)-He was disgruntled at yr end and as a result, he asked to get out of agreement and leave Enron, now he w/d like to stay at Enron. Jester is preferable to Mayeaux. Other groups are recruiting Jester. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Challenge to exercise of Eminent Domain - Confidential Attorney
 Work Product; [EMail-Body]= Although I don't yet have all the facts, Steve Hall said that late yesterday (Friday) afternoon, the Governor exercised eminent domain over the IOU forward contracts that the PX had been in the process of auctioning to pay PX participants. I would like Bracewell to research at least the following two possible ways this action is unlawful. First, this violates the banking provisions of the PX tariff (Section 6). These provisions requires the PX to hold all PX accounts in trust for PX participants. Second, these are wholesale contracts and the State only has the right to exercise eminent domain concerning retail service. I don't have any law to support the second idea but think it should be researched nonetheless. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= PGE/Commercial Support Group Meeting, 32C1; [EMail-Body]= Per Geoff Roberts [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: Sac Bee, Wed, 6/6: Businesses vie for blackout exemptions:=20 The PUC must decide who should be spared, and the applicant list is very lo= ng Sac Bee, Wed, 6/6: PG&E, ISO agree to court order on power bills Sac Bee, Wed, 6/6: Peter Schrag: Turning up the heat in Houston and=20 Washington (Editorial) SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Is trading an insider's game? SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Daily energy costs for state fall in past weeks=20 SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Five tiers sought in proposed rate boost SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Port budget large, but power bills loom SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Continuous use urged for planned power plant=20 SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Rising energy prices threaten Poway troupe=20 SD Union, Wed, 6/6: Fair to use generators for midway attractions LA Times, Wed, 6/6: 'Hi, My Name Isn't Justice, Honey,' and Shame on Lockye= r =20 (Editorial) LA Times, Wed, 6/6: U.S. Probes Alleged Pact Not to Build New Plants Power:= =20 Justice officials focus on Southland operations of two firms, which deny=20 wrongdoing LA Times, Wed, 6/6: Natural Gas, Power Prices Drop Sharply Energy:=20 More conservation, mild weather are among factors keeping costs down, exper= ts=20 say LA Times, Wed, 6/6: The State Utility Averts $1 Billion in Costs Courts:=20 PG&E and Cal-ISO agree to recognize Department of Water Resources as=20 purchaser of the power SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: Dramatic drop in cost of electricity=20 LOWER BILLS: Cheaper fuel, milder weather credited SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: San Jose council gives green light to generating plant= =20 VOTE REVERSAL: Officials pressured to OK project SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: Developments in California's energy crisis SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: California conserves SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: L.A. power customers awash in cheap energy SF Chron, Wed, 6/6: PG&E doesn't want to pay for energy to avert blackouts Mercury News, Wed, 6/6: Metcalf plant gets preliminary approval=20 OC Register, Wed, 6/6: Feds probe AES, Williams Individual.com (PRnewswire), Wed, 6/6: Calpine Begins Construction of=20 Peaking Energy Center in Gilroy, Calif.=20 Individual.com (PRnewsire), Wed, 6/6: Reliant Urges FERC to Drop or Amend= =20 California Price Caps to Avoid Additional Shortages and More Blackouts Energy Insight, Wed, 6/6: Farm-fresh biopower --- Businesses vie for blackout exemptions: The PUC must decide who should be= =20 spared, and the applicant list is very long. By Carrie Peyton and Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writers (Published June 6, 2001)=20 Mixes for milkshakes and frozen coffees could spoil at ice cream parlors,= =20 sickening customers.=20 Seniors getting their hair done would have to leave their dryers and go hom= e=20 with wet heads, risking a chill.=20 Mall escalators could come to a sudden halt, endangering shoppers who lose= =20 their footing.=20 Those are among the health and safety risks cited by more than 10,000=20 businesses and government bodies asking state regulators to exempt them fro= m=20 rolling blackouts.=20 It is a list that mixes nursing homes and grocery stores, outpatient surgic= al=20 clinics and beauty salons, dialysis centers and country clubs.=20 ""A lot of people are treating this like a lottery,"" said Subodh Medhekar of= =20 Exponent Inc., the consulting firm sorting through exemption requests for t= he=20 state Public Utilities Commission.=20 For many, Medhekar said, the rationale seems to be "" 'I'm pretty sure I won= 't=20 get exempted, but what's the down side? Let's put in an application.' ""=20 Amid predictions that Californians could face dozens of rolling blackouts= =20 this summer, state regulators are trying to update a decades-old list of wh= o=20 should be spared if the lights go out.=20 The Alta Sierra County Club in Grass Valley should be among those whose pow= er=20 stays on, Sean O'Brien, the club's golf course superintendent, told=20 regulators in a nine-page application.=20 The country club telephones could go out, making it harder to phone for hel= p=20 if someone has a medical problem while golfing, he said in an interview.=20 And if the golf course's irrigation pumps shut down, it would lose the=20 ability to quell small blazes -- leaving it to rely on a fire station O'Bri= en=20 said is about one-quarter mile away.=20 Placerville Dialysis wants an exemption, too. As many as a dozen people the= re=20 can be having their blood pumped through an artificial kidney that cleans i= t=20 when their own kidneys no longer function properly.=20 ""When the power goes out, everything just stops,"" said manager Shirley=20 Carpenter. ""There is a way to manually return the blood by hand before it= =20 clots in the line. ... It would just be hectic.""=20 It takes about five minutes of manual pumping to fully disconnect someone= =20 from a dialysis machine, Carpenter said. And some patients can help by=20 operating their own pumps.=20 But, she said, ""I'm sure it would be kind of frightening to have your blood= =20 out in the line and the power off, and they're pretty much tied to the=20 machine.""=20 Pam Chin, a hairdresser at the Loomis Beauty Salon, said the owner sought a= n=20 exemption because people could get overheated if the air conditioning went= =20 out, and older customers getting their hair set could be chilled if the=20 dryers shut off.=20 With about half the state already exempt from rolling blackouts, the questi= on=20 of who else should stay connected has become a delicate one for utilities,= =20 regulators and legislators.=20 Carl Wood, the PUC commissioner who has taken the lead on blackout issues,= =20 estimates that fewer than 1,000 more utility customers can be exempted befo= re=20 they overload the rolling outage system designed to take stress off the=20 electric grid.=20 While about 6,000 customers are classified as ""essential"" by the state's tw= o=20 largest utilities, keeping them out of the blackout rotation also spares=20 about 5 million other customers who are served by the same circuits.=20 That multiplier effect will have to be weighed by the consulting firm, by= =20 utilities and eventually by PUC commissioners, who are scheduled to vote in= =20 early August on who should be added to existing standards.=20 The rules will apply to the state's investor-owned utilities, Pacific Gas a= nd=20 Electric Co., Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric Co.,= =20 but not to municipal utilities.=20 The Sacramento Municipal Utility District already rejected pleas for specia= l=20 exemptions from a medical lab, a veterinary hospital, nursing homes, medica= l=20 facilities, businesses and residents. SMUD believes they can weather=20 blackouts because they are not critical to public safety.=20 People have counted on having dependable electricity for so long that some= =20 have widely varying ideas of who can do without it safely, Medhekar said.= =20 Of the more than 500 Baskin Robbins ice cream parlors that dot California,= =20 only five are listed on the PUC Web site as applicants for exemptions.=20 The site cautions that its list of 9,239 electronic applicants hasn't been= =20 checked for duplicates -- or fiction. It includes hundreds of outlets of th= e=20 same drug store and supermarket chains, dozens of related nursing homes and= =20 more than 400 dentists. Another 1,200 commercial power users have applied b= y=20 fax.=20 Among those who have confirmed they want out of outages are the grocery=20 chains operated by West Sacramento-based Raley's, which said it took the=20 action as part of united effort with all California grocers, who are worrie= d=20 about food spoilage.=20 Others in the mix are Fairfield's Westfield Shoppingtown Solano, formerly t= he=20 Solano Mall, where officials sought the exemptions out of fear that shopper= s=20 would get injured if escalators came to a sudden halt.=20 The Yolo County Housing Authority asked for an exemption on behalf of its 7= 00=20 dwellings in the belief that the utilities offer exemptions for low-income= =20 Californians, Executive Director David Serena said.=20 Serena added that many of the authority's occupants are older or disabled a= nd=20 could be endangered by a blackout.=20 Chevron Corp. acknowledged it couldn't show that a blackout at its refineri= es=20 would present ""imminent danger to public health or safety,"" but it asked Go= v.=20 Gray Davis to support legislation exempting makers and transporters for=20 ""critical fuels,"" saying a refinery shutdown would cut into the state's=20 gasoline supply.=20 Some businesses acknowledged that their applications are a long shot.=20 ""It's probably a stretch,"" said Amanda Leveroni, who owns Bacio Catering Co= .=20 of Chico, about her request to the PUC. ""The public wouldn't be in danger.= =20 ""But we're a catering company -- somebody has planned for a year-plus for a= =20 wedding or some big event,"" she added. ""I would be in such a huge situation= .=20 I'd have to send out for pizza.""=20 The Bee's Carrie Peyton can be reached at (916) 321-1086 or=20 cpeyton@sacbee.com. PG&E, ISO agree to court order on power bills By Claire Cooper Bee Staff Writers (Published June 6, 2001)=20 SAN FRANCISCO -- Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and the operator of=20 California's power grid agreed Tuesday to a preliminary court order providi= ng=20 that the utility will continue to receive -- but not pay -- generators' bil= ls=20 for the state's purchases of the most expensive wholesale electricity.=20 The tab has been running at about $300 million a month.=20 The order, which U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali said he'll sign, will= =20 specify that the Independent System Operator will not procure power except= =20 for a ""creditworthy buyer who has agreed to pay the generator.""=20 In California, the only such potential buyer is the state Department of Wat= er=20 Resources. However, the department, which has avoided PG&E Co.'s bankruptcy= =20 proceedings by claiming sovereign immunity, will not be controlled by the= =20 agreement. Montali pointed out that the department still could demand=20 reimbursement from PG&E.=20 Under the agreement, the ISO will not press any claims against PG&E on beha= lf=20 of generators if they are not paid.=20 The proposed preliminary injunction was based on an April order by the=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which forbade the ISO from purchasing= =20 power on behalf of any non-creditworthy buyer, such as PG&E.=20 The ISO is appealing the FERC order. If the appeal succeeds, the injunction= =20 will end.=20 Peter Schrag: Turning up the heat in Houston and Washington (Published June 6, 2001)=20 Behind all the palaver about the predictable standoff at last week's energy= =20 ""summit"" between President Bush and Gov. Gray Davis, one major political=20 development was missed.=20 Put simply, in the past month the focus of the California energy crisis, an= d=20 maybe the onus as well, has moved east: from the state's (and Davis')=20 handling of the mess to the generating companies, energy marketers and gas= =20 pipeline companies that have richly profited from it, and thus to FERC, the= =20 do-next-to-nothing Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and the Bush=20 administration.=20 That wasn't all Davis' doing -- far from it -- though it's been at the hear= t=20 of his message about energy industry ""pirates"" and ""profiteers."" Bush's=20 misbegotten energy plan and the administration's political clumsiness also= =20 contributed mightily, not least by inadvertently giving Davis the chance to= =20 get media exposure he could only have dreamed about.=20 More important, there's the defection of Sen. James Jeffords from the=20 Republican Party and the resulting shift of control in the U.S. Senate, whe= re=20 the next chair of the Energy Committee will be Sen. Jeff Bingaman of New=20 Mexico, a co-sponsor of Sen. Dianne Feinstein's bill capping wholesale=20 electric rates for the next two years. And chairing the Committee on=20 Governmental Affairs will be Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, who's=20 already asked for an audit of energy prices.=20 Those changes will draw a lot more attention to recent studies showing that= a=20 handful of big generators -- Duke Power, Reliant, Mirant, Dynegy and the hu= ge=20 energy-marketing firm Enron -- have gamed the market to drive wholesale=20 prices to levels that, in the year 2000, sometimes reached 40 times the=20 prices of the year before.=20 The findings come not merely from economists at the California Independent= =20 System Operator, the agency that manages the state's grid, who estimate=20 overcharges resulting from market power at $6.2 billion for last year alone= .=20 They come also from Severin Borenstein and his colleagues at the University= =20 of California Energy Institute, who ""conservatively"" calculate the=20 overcharges at $4.5 billion; from Paul Joskow, a widely respected energy=20 economist at MIT; and from Edward Kahn, an economic analyst in San Francisc= o.=20 In a recent paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research,=20 Joskow and Kahn conclude that there's ""considerable evidence that the high= =20 prices experienced in the summer of 2000 reflect the withholding of supplie= s=20 from the market by suppliers [generators or marketers] exercising market=20 power."" That those high prices occurred not merely during peak usage but al= so=20 at off-hours, when no one had ever seen a price spike before, makes those= =20 spikes even more curious.=20 There is, in addition, the powerful suspicion that the huge increase in=20 natural gas prices that a subsidiary of El Paso Energy Co., now the largest= =20 gas company on Earth, was charging on the California side of the=20 California-Arizona border wasn't merely the result of an innocent imbalance= =20 between supply and demand.=20 None of that may be illegal. If there's no collusion, there are no violatio= ns=20 of antitrust laws. But it adds plenty of steam to the political argument. I= n=20 the 2000 election cycle alone, energy companies kicked in some $64 million = in=20 political contributions, 75 percent of it to Republicans. At a time when=20 those companies, many of them located in the same Houston neighborhood, are= =20 racking up astronomical profits and when their collective coziness with Bus= h=20 and the Republican Party is a lot more than rhetoric, their vulnerability t= o=20 a vigorous Senate investigation ought to be obvious.=20 The clincher is ""Blackout,"" a ""Frontline"" program that both symbolizes the= =20 shifting emphasis and reinforces it. (The program is scheduled to be aired = at=20 8 p.m. Friday on Sacramento cable Channel 7.) It isn't another recital of= =20 Californians worrying about their electric bills, or about the stupidity of= =20 the state's deregulation scheme or how Davis dithered in addressing the=20 crisis. It is about those generators and marketers in Houston and North=20 Carolina, men (and a few women) who regard themselves as the heroes of the= =20 new energy markets.=20 The piece is reported by Lowell Bergman, who in working for both ""Frontline= ""=20 and the New York Times has already broken major print stories about Duke=20 Power's secret approach to Davis offering unspecified energy refunds in=20 return for an end to state investigations and lawsuits. Bergman also report= ed=20 private conversations between Enron chairman Kenneth Lay, a major Bush=20 supporter, and FERC chairman Curt Hebert regarding the influence that Lay= =20 could exercise with Bush to allow Hebert to keep his chairmanship if Hebert= 's=20 supported certain decisions Enron badly wants.=20 None of these recent events is likely to end Davis' political woes, and the= y=20 may not produce the wholesale rate caps Feinstein wants and that most=20 economists think necessary -- or maybe any significant reduction in the=20 industry's predatory pricing. But they will surely help turn up the heat,= =20 both in Houston and Washington. Six months ago FERC found wholesale prices= =20 were not ""fair and reasonable"" as federal law requires, but did little abou= t=20 them. It will now have a lot more questions to answer.=20 Peter Schrag can be reached at Box 15779, Sacramento, CA 95852-0779, or at= =20 pschrag@sacbee.com. Is trading an insider's game?=20 Buying, selling of electricity is a growth business, but some say deck is= =20 stacked against consumers By Craig D. Rose=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 While Californians decry deregulation's failure to deliver a competitive=20 market, electricity wholesalers have quietly developed a vast and rapidly= =20 growing business of buying and selling power among themselves.=20 The deals take place on high-tech trading floors in Houston and elsewhere= =20 around the country, as well as on Internet-based trading systems.=20 Some experts say this electricity trading is a key mechanism for raising=20 consumer power prices, yet it's largely unregulated.=20 ""Electricity trading is like buying stock -- when you have ability to chang= e=20 the stock price,"" said Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economics profess= or=20 and member of the state grid operator's market surveillance group.=20 Energy companies say the buying and selling of contracts to deliver power= =20 provides risk management, allowing plant owners to presell their electricit= y,=20 lock in prices and avoid fluctuations. The rough and tumble of the free=20 market, they add, is the most efficient means of allocating a resource like= =20 electricity.=20 But industry critics say trading is far from a competitive market paradigm.= =20 In their view, it's a means of communication -- a way for energy insiders t= o=20 collude and raise prices under the guise of competition.=20 To be sure, the trading arms of major energy companies have emerged as star= s=20 in an industry where profit surges of 300 percent or 400 percent are not=20 uncommon.=20 The transactions, shrouded in secrecy, can leave ownership of a critical=20 commodity in unknown hands. Consider the case of power generated by AES=20 Corp.'s California plants.=20 In 1998, AES made a bold move. Immediately after purchasing power plants th= at=20 gave it control of 10 percent of the state's electric generating capacity,= =20 the company sold the output from its plants for the next 20 years to Willia= ms=20 Cos.=20 Williams did not sit on this treasure trove of electrons. The Tulsa, Okla.,= =20 company soon sold 80 percent of what it bought.=20 It is difficult to say who owns that power now. Some might be owned by Semp= ra=20 Trading, a sister company of SDG&E. Or some could be owned by Enron Corp.,= =20 the nation's biggest electricity trader.=20 A spokeswoman for Williams conceded that Williams itself may have repurchas= ed=20 some of the electricity it sold earlier. But trading companies closely guar= d=20 their positions.=20 This much can be said with certainty: Electricity that AES sold for less th= an=20 5 cents per kilowatt-hour to Williams changed hands perhaps 10 times in the= =20 wholesale market and emerged at times in recent months with a price tag for= =20 consumers that was 300 percent higher.=20 Williams' trading profits increased by 523 percent in the first quarter thi= s=20 year. Advance sales All this buying and selling creates curious confluences.=20 In their attempt to deflect criticism over high prices, generating companie= s=20 such as Duke Energy -- operator of the South Bay Power Plant in Chula and= =20 others in the state -- frequently note that they sell most of their=20 electricity far in advance. But they acknowledge less often that their=20 trading units may also be buying power, which could boost the company's=20 electricity inventory.=20 Duke was the fourth biggest electricity trader last year and cited its=20 trading activity as a prime contributor to its wholesale business profits,= =20 which soared 324 percent in the first quarter to $348 million.=20 It is a company's power traders who frequently direct plant operators to=20 increase or decrease the generation of power in response to market=20 conditions.=20 Energy companies have little option but to turn to trading for profits. One= =20 of the better kept secrets of electrical deregulation and its promise of=20 competition is that there is remarkably little competition in the productio= n=20 side of the business.=20 For one thing, electricity is a commodity; power from one company is=20 indistinguishable from that generated by others.=20 More important, nearly all modern plants generate power from turbines built= =20 by a handful of manufacturers. The result? Modern plants owned by different= =20 companies produce power at nearly identical cost.=20 ""The cost of power produced by modern plants is all within a mil=20 (one-thousandth of a dollar),"" said Michael Peevey, an adviser to Gov. Gray= =20 Davis and former president of Southern California Edison.=20 So the extraction of profit in the electricity business relies much more on= =20 trading. Traders' profits rise when prices are volatile -- plunging, or eve= n=20 better, rising sharply. Little regulation But despite the obvious temptation to manipulate the market, the burgeoning= =20 electricity trading business has remained largely unregulated.=20 The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission does require quarterly filings fro= m=20 energy traders, but these often provide incomplete information, or at least= =20 little that has been of concern to FERC.=20 In fact, although the trading of electricity grew more than a hundredfold= =20 from 1996 to 2000, FERC has taken no major enforcement action against a=20 trader. After the onset of the California crisis last year, FERC has acted= =20 once. That was against Williams, which agreed to pay $8 million without=20 admitting guilt to resolve an allegation that it withheld supply to pump up= =20 prices.=20 FERC's record of enforcement in the area of power trading stands in contras= t=20 to a long list of enforcement actions within other markets taken by the=20 Securities Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission= .=20 FERC has recently added staff to its market oversight operations. But Willi= am=20 Massey, a FERC commissioner, says the agency's effort is still inadequate.= =20 ""Electricity can be flipped, stripped and chopped up,"" Massey said. ""It's a= n=20 extraordinarily complicated market.=20 ""The sophisticated marketers and traders have simply moved past us. We're= =20 kind of horse and buggy in our approach and they're out there in rocket shi= ps=20 flying around ... The problem is that sophisticated traders don't necessari= ly=20 produce reasonable prices. They produce profits.""=20 Before deregulation, electricity trading was a low-key affair. Regulated=20 utilities dealt power back and forth on a reciprocal basis to fill=20 electricity shortfalls in their control areas. There was little trading for= =20 profit until the mid-1990s, after federal legislation and FERC rulings open= ed=20 the market.=20 Major traders include large energy companies, sister companies of=20 California's major utilities and Wall Street firms. Market volatility In many ways, the trading of power is similar to that of other commodities.= =20 But there are important differences. Because it cannot be stored and its us= e=20 is so fundamental, the price of electricity is the most volatile of all.=20 When supplies are tight, a single supplier can rapidly raise prices to=20 budget-busting levels, as evidenced by Duke Energy's recent admission that = it=20 charged California nearly $4,000 for a megawatt-hour of power, a quantity= =20 that probably sold hours earlier for one-tenth of that sum or less.=20 Wolak, the Stanford economist, and state Sen. Joseph Dunn, D-Garden Grove,= =20 who is investigating the state power market, say trading allows companies t= o=20 collude under the guise of competition. Instead of wringing out lowest cost= s,=20 the wholesale trading market serves to raise prices, they say.=20 ""As I trade to you and you trade to me, we communicate to each other what= =20 price we would like to get,"" said Wolak. ""It's not collusive. It's just=20 communicating price.""=20 Mark Palmer, a spokesman for Enron, the nation's biggest power trader, said= =20 California's problem is not the result of trading.=20 ""It's a result of shortages,"" Palmer said.=20 Underscoring its emphasis on trading, Enron's new headquarters tower in=20 downtown Houston rises from a six-story block of new trading floors,=20 including expanded space for electricity trading.=20 Enron also pioneered trading in cyberspace and its Enron Online site claims= =20 to be the most active computer-based trading market.=20 The Houston company argues that consumers won't fully benefit from power=20 trading and deregulation until they have greater choice in choosing their= =20 power supplier. And the company says FERC has not done enough to open acces= s=20 to transmission lines, which would allow traders to move power around the= =20 country. To that end, Enron has lobbied hard for President Bush's plan for = a=20 national electricity grid.=20 Palmer says the notion that the price of electricity rises each time it is= =20 traded is mistaken.=20 ""The market is always looking for the real price of a commodity,"" Palmer=20 said.=20 Dunn, the California state senator, says his investigation found a differen= t=20 function for trading. At a time when supply barely meets or falls short of= =20 demand, he noted, companies with electricity to sell have to worry only abo= ut=20 how high to set their price.=20 ""The trader is a pawn in the generator's game to drive up prices,"" said Dun= n.=20 ""Trading develops a level of trust. You, my alleged competitor, will bid in= =20 the same patterns and I will respond not in a competitive pattern but in a= =20 complimentary pattern.""=20 The state senator said his investigation found evidence that on several day= s,=20 energy companies appeared to test their ability to drive prices up, without= =20 being undercut by competitors.=20 This ability to drive up prices without competitive consequence is a key te= st=20 of market power, the technical term for manipulation or price fixing.=20 But Dunn also conceded that antitrust violations can be hard to prove in=20 court. He suggested that even if the trading behavior falls short of=20 antitrust violations, it remains anti-competitive and devastating for the= =20 California economy.=20 To Harry Trebing, a utility industry expert and professor emeritus at=20 Michigan State University, wholesale electricity trading is reminiscent of= =20 what took place in the 1920s and early '30s. Back then, utility companies= =20 created complex networks of holding companies that traded stock among=20 themselves, driving up prices in the process.=20 Undoing that scheme was a focus of President Franklin Roosevelt's=20 administration. Congress ended up barring national power companies and=20 tightening regulation of utilities, in an effort to counteract their tenden= cy=20 to create markets that work only for insiders.=20 ""The broad goals of trading are the same,"" Trebing said.=20 ""The goal is to maximize profits through raising prices.""=20 Daily energy costs for state fall in past weeks=20 By Ed Mendel=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO -- In some of the first good news of the electricity crisis, the= =20 Davis administration said yesterday that the daily cost of power purchased = by=20 the state for utility customers has dropped in recent weeks.=20 The price-drop news comes after an announcement that Californians conserved= =20 more energy than expected last month, 11 percent, and amid Davis=20 administration optimism that the Legislature may finally begin to move on a= =20 plan to keep Southern California Edison out of bankruptcy.=20 The developments, if they turn out to be a trend and not temporary, could b= e=20 among the first signs that Gov. Gray Davis' plan to end the electricity=20 crisis is beginning to work. But the administration isn't saying that.=20 ""We have had a few good days here lately,"" said S. David Freeman, a Davis= =20 power adviser. ""I don't think that I want to project.""=20 Some power-market watchers began to speculate last month that prices may ha= ve=20 peaked earlier this year. Platts, an energy information service, said=20 yesterday that spot prices for the natural gas used by power plants are=20 falling this month.=20 The governor's press secretary, Steve Maviglio, told reporters yesterday th= at=20 the daily amount spent on power is now ""well below"" $50 million, which was= =20 the average cost earlier this year.=20 A 12-day gap in the most recent notice to the Legislature that another $500= =20 million increment will be spent on power suggests that the daily average=20 during the last two weeks may have dropped down around $42 million.=20 Oscar Hidalgo, a spokesman for the state power purchasing agency, said that= =20 the average cost of power was under $40 million during the first four days = of=20 this month.=20 Maviglio attributed the lower cost to conservation, the phasing in of cheap= er=20 long-term power contracts, fewer power plants off-line for maintenance, and= =20 cooler weather.=20 However, he said, ""The average cost is still way over what we paid last=20 year.""=20 There was widespread skepticism in late April when the governor's consultan= ts=20 predicted that the $346 per megawatt-hour average paid by the state for=20 non-contracted power from April through June would drop to an average of $1= 95=20 from July through September.=20 ""We are still very comfortable with the projection that Mr. Fichera and=20 company estimated,"" Maviglio said, referring to Joseph Fichera of Saber=20 Partners in New York.=20 During a briefing on May 21, Fichera told reporters that the amount of powe= r=20 that the state would obtain under long-term contracts for May was expected = to=20 be about 43 percent of the total required, the so-called net short.=20 Fichera said contracts already signed were expected to cover 66 percent of= =20 the net short in June, 48 percent in July, and 42 percent in August. He sai= d=20 contracts that had been agreed on in principle could increase those amounts= =20 to 73 percent in June, 67 percent in July, and 60 percent in August.=20 ""We are still on target. There are risks,"" Fichera said yesterday, among th= em=20 extended hot weather and power plant outages. ""No one is popping the=20 champagne corks until Sept. 30.""=20 The governor's consultants based their forecast of power demand this summer= =20 on an estimate that Californians will reduce their electricity use by 7=20 percent.=20 The 11 percent reduction last month, as compared to May of last year, came= =20 before the sticker shock of rate hikes that begin this month for customers = of=20 Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric. And a $35 million ad campaign urging= =20 conservation has not hit full stride.=20 Maviglio said the administration plans to release some detailed information= =20 on Monday about the roughly $8 billion the state has spent buying power. Th= e=20 general fund will be repaid by a bond of up to $13.4 billion that ratepayer= s=20 will pay off over 15 years.=20 Legislative leaders have demanded detailed information about power purchase= s=20 before proceeding with the Edison plan. Assembly Democrats are working on a= =20 plan that de-emphasizes state purchase of the Edison transmission system an= d=20 would put most of the burden for paying off Edison's debt on businesses and= =20 large users, not residences. Five tiers sought in proposed rate boost=20 Conservation would be promoted, SDG&E says By Karen Kucher=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 A proposed rate increase for SDG&E customers to cover the high cost of=20 electricity should be imposed in five tiers to encourage conservation, the= =20 company is advising state utility regulators.=20 The more electricity a customer uses, the higher the rate would be.=20 SDG&E needs to raise its rates to bring in an additional $502 million=20 annually to pay the state for power purchases.=20 The state Public Utilities Commission is expected to rule on San Diego Gas = &=20 Electric's rate-increase proposal June 28.=20 The rate changes would remove a cap that has shielded most SDG&E customers= =20 from rising electricity prices for a year. The cap, enacted by state=20 lawmakers in September 2000 and retroactive to June 2000, set rates at 6.5= =20 cents per kilowatt-hour.=20 Higher rates would mean the average SDG&E residential and small-business=20 customer's electricity bills would go up by 18 percent. Large commercial=20 users' bills would average 29 percent more.=20 Public hearings on the issue will be held next Monday and Tuesday in San=20 Diego, El Cajon, Escondido and San Clemente. These sessions will focus on= =20 small-business and residential consumers. Hearings on large commercial user= s=20 were held last month.=20 Earlier this year, the PUC decided to allow the state's two largest=20 utilities, Pacific Gas and Electric and Southern California Edison, to char= ge=20 customers an extra $5.7 billion annually for electricity.=20 The state Department of Water Resources, which has been buying power for=20 SDG&E customers since February, asked SDG&E to generate a total of $915=20 million annually to cover the cost of electricity purchases.=20 With the proposed rate increases, SDG&E could do that.=20 Large commercial customers would pay about 30 percent of the overall increa= se=20 and residential and small-business customers would pay about 70 percent, sa= id=20 Ed Van Herik, a spokesman for the utility company.=20 If the increase can be tiered, as many as 60 percent of residential custome= rs=20 will see no rate increase if their electricity usage remains the same, Van= =20 Herik said.=20 But customers who use more than 130 percent of their baseline -- considered= =20 the minimum amount of electricity needed by a household -- will be billed a= t=20 increasingly higher rates.=20 Residential and small-business customers who use a lot of electricity could= =20 pay as much as 17.89 cents per kilowatt hour for some power they consume.= =20 Consumer advocate Michael Shames said he is concerned the utility's proposa= l=20 does not spread the increases evenly among different types of users. He als= o=20 called for more scrutiny of the state's request.=20 People should tell PUC officials ""that this increase should not be a carte= =20 blanche or blank check approval,"" said Shames, the head of Utility Consumer= s'=20 Action Network. ""The PUC needs to ensure that the rate increase requested b= y=20 the (state) is reasonable.""=20 The public hearings are scheduled for:=20 ?Monday, 1 p.m., San Diego Concourse, Copper Room, 200 C St., San Diego.=20 ?Monday, 7 p.m., El Cajon Community Center, 195 E. Douglas Ave., El Cajon.= =20 ?Tuesday, 1 p.m., Country Inn Hotel, 35 Via Pico Plaza, San Clemente.=20 ?Tuesday, 7 p.m., Center for the Arts, 340 N. Escondido Blvd., Escondido.= =20 Port budget large, but power bills loom=20 Slowing economy also cause for worry By Ronald W. Powell=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 The ""rock"" is rolling financially, but there are indications that the blues= =20 lurk on the horizon.=20 Officials of the San Diego Unified Port District -- headquartered in a=20 block-shaped building some employees call the rock -- are happy with a=20 projected 2001-2002 budget that is 5.1 percent larger than the current one.= =20 Total revenue is expected to reach $208.7 million, $10.2 million above what= =20 is expected in the fiscal year that ends June 30.=20 Port commissioners gave preliminary approval to the budget yesterday and ar= e=20 scheduled to take a final vote July 10.=20 But a slowing economy and surging electric bills are causes for concern.=20 Electricity costs are expected to rise from $5 million to $8.2 million in t= he=20 coming fiscal year.=20 ""As far as trends, we see a continuation of the growth we've experienced ov= er=20 the past five years,"" said Bruce Hollingsworth, the port's treasurer. ""But= =20 our percentage of growth will not rise as sharply.""=20 Port revenues have grown steadily since the 1997-1998 fiscal year, when $16= 3=20 million was generated.=20 The proposed budget calls for adding 24 employees to the port's 730-member= =20 work force. New hires will include three Harbor Police officers, 10 employe= es=20 in the aviation division and four in maritime services.=20 The port operates Lindbergh Field and administers nonmilitary tidelands alo= ng=20 San Diego Bay. It is landlord to more than 600 waterfront businesses and=20 operates two marine cargo terminals and one cruise ship terminal.=20 The budget calls for growth in each of the port's primary revenue centers:= =20 aviation, real estate and maritime services.=20 Passenger and cargo activity at Lindbergh Field is expected to generate $90= .7=20 million, or $5 million more than expected in the current year. Most of that= =20 increase is expected to come from parking-rate increases at the airport and= =20 at the port's long-term parking lot on Pacific Highway.=20 Rent from hotels and other businesses that are port tenants are expected to= =20 total $63.1 million, up $1.8 million from the current budget.=20 Increases in cargo and cruise ship traffic are expected to boost maritime= =20 income by $2.7 million, to a total of $18.4 million.=20 The port expects to spend $157 million on construction projects. They inclu= de=20 $8.5 million to relocate the General Services Department from Eighth Avenue= =20 and Harbor Drive in San Diego to National City and more than $5 million for= =20 paving and improvements at the 10th Avenue Marine Terminal.=20 Rent revenue could grow substantially in future years. Four hotel projects = on=20 port property have won approval or are seeking it.=20 Jim Bailey, president of Manchester Resorts, told commissioners yesterday= =20 that he expects to break ground on a second Hyatt tower of 750 rooms by Jun= e=20 26. Port officials said revenue from that hotel would bring in an additiona= l=20 $3.7 million a year. It is scheduled to open in the summer of 2003.=20 Hollingsworth, the treasurer, said that if all four hotels are built the po= rt=20 could receive as much as $15 million a year in new revenue.=20 Continuous use urged for planned power plant=20 Escondido facility originally proposed for peak demand By Jonathan Heller=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 ESCONDIDO -- A proposed power plant in southwest Escondido that initially w= as=20 expected to run only during times of peak electricity demand probably will = be=20 allowed to run full time.=20 A state energy official who recommended approval of the plant yesterday has= =20 said the plant could operate as often as the state deems necessary.=20 The California Energy Commission was scheduled to vote on the project today= .=20 CalPeak Power of San Diego has asked the commission to approve a 49-megawat= t=20 plant on Enterprise Street near Vineyard Avenue. Referred to as a ""peaker""= =20 plant, such facilities typically are designed to supply energy only during= =20 times of peak demand.=20 The state limits the number of hours some plants can operate to keep=20 pollution at a minimum. A 44-megawatt peaker plant being built on West=20 Mission Avenue in Escondido by Ramco Inc. will be allowed to operate no mor= e=20 than 16 hours per day.=20 That plant is permitted to emit up to 5 parts per million of nitrogen oxide= ,=20 although its actual emissions are expected to be slightly lower, said Dale= =20 Mesple, a Ramco consultant. Nitrogen oxide is a component of smog.=20 The CalPeak plant, if approved, would be restricted to 2 parts per million = of=20 nitrogen oxide.=20 It was generally assumed that the CalPeak plant would operate under similar= =20 time restrictions as the Ramco plant. The potential for air pollution was= =20 among the chief concerns of residents who spoke at the City Council hearing= s=20 on the Ramco project and at the energy commission hearings about the CalPea= k=20 plant.=20 But under the terms of approval recommended by Energy Commission Chairman= =20 William Keese, CalPeak's plant would be able to operate ""up to 8,760 hours= =20 per year, typically when the demand for electricity is high."" That number= =20 equals 24 hours a day.=20 The actual number of hours would depend on the requirements of the state's= =20 Independent System Operator, which manages the energy grid.=20 ""We certainly want to have the flexibility to run whenever we're needed,""= =20 said Mark Lyons, CalPeak's development director. ""Exactly how often we will= =20 run is anybody's guess.""=20 Escondido Councilwoman June Rady said she was frustrated by the possibility= =20 of the plant running full time. In Ramco's case, the city and the county Ai= r=20 Pollution Control District made it clear how often the plant could operate.= =20 CalPeak chose to bypass the city's permitting process and went through the= =20 state Energy Commission, which offers an expedited 21-day approval put in= =20 place by Gov. Gray Davis as an emergency measure.=20 ""I think Escondido has been absolutely ignored and there's a total lack of= =20 due process,"" Rady said. ""It boils down to an issue of local control.""=20 Although city officials objected to the commission pre-empting the city's= =20 land-use authority, the commission maintained that Davis' order gave it the= =20 final say on this type of project.=20 If the commission gives final approval today, the only remedy available to= =20 the city would be in court. At least three council members must vote to=20 initiate legal action.=20 Keese's recommended approval did take into account several city concerns=20 regarding landscaping. The CalPeak plant would be built near the entrance o= f=20 a planned high-tech business park, and city officials were worried the=20 plant's appearance might hinder the ability to attract high-quality tenants= =20 to the park.=20 Mayor Lori Holt Pfeiler said she was not surprised by the commission's=20 recommendation.=20 ""I expected they would want to approve the project, and that's why it was= =20 important for the city to weigh in with conditions we have in this=20 community,"" Pfeiler said.=20 Rising energy prices threaten Poway troupe=20 By Brian E. Clark=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 POWAY -- Rising electricity rates may extinguish the stage lights this summ= er=20 for the Poway Performing Arts Company.=20 ""I'm afraid that if SDG&E gets the price increase it's asking for -- from 6= .5=20 cents per kilowatt-hour to 8.9 cents -- that we'll go under,"" said Kathy=20 McCafferty, spokeswoman for the nonprofit theater.=20 The volunteer organization produces its plays in a building at a Poway Road= =20 shopping center. It held three fund-raising performances over the weekend,= =20 but officials were uncertain yesterday how much money was raised.=20 The group is not affiliated with the Poway Performing Arts Center and has= =20 been in business for 20 years.=20 McCafferty said the group built up a $2,000 surplus last summer before ener= gy=20 prices began to surge.=20 ""That $2,000 was a big reserve for us,"" she said. ""It seemed like a ton of= =20 money, but, boy, it went fast. And we're really energy-dependent. Our light= s=20 use a lot of power. And we're in Poway on the second floor of our building.= =20 It gets hot here, and we have to use air conditioning.""=20 But McCafferty acknowledged that the cost of power isn't the group's only= =20 problem.=20 In a recent letter to backers, President Nan Katona said the organization= =20 also needs new blood to keep operating.=20 ""The truth is that lack of funding is just a symptom of the deeper problem,= =20 which is lack of community support,"" she wrote. ""Ironically, audiences and= =20 reviewers recognize the Poway Performing Arts Company as one of the premier= =20 community arts theaters in San Diego.""=20 Katona said some new volunteers had stepped forward to take leadership role= s=20 in the theater company since she wrote her letter last month. But she said= =20 rising electricity prices could still bring the group down.=20 ""If our energy bills double or triple, we could be in dire straits,"" she=20 said. ""It could push us over the edge financially.""=20 McCafferty said it would be difficult for the theater to cut costs.=20 ""We can't run a much leaner operation,"" she said. ""If our power prices go u= p=20 again, we may still be forced out of business.""=20 The theater is at 13250 Poway Road, in the Lively Shopping Center. For more= =20 information, call (858) 679-8085.=20 Fair to use generators for midway attractions=20 By Michael Burge=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 June 6, 2001=20 DEL MAR -- The Del Mar Fair will generate its own electricity for thrill=20 rides on the midway this year instead of using energy from SDG&E.=20 ""In case there are planned or unplanned outages, we still will be operating= ,""=20 fairgrounds General Manager Timothy J. Fennell said.=20 Fennell decided to put the midway on generators because he didn't want the= =20 fairgrounds pulling power from the grid while county residents are coping= =20 with rolling blackouts at home and at work, he said.=20 And the fair does not want to take a chance that a rolling blackout will=20 leave some people stranded in rides high above the grounds, forcing an=20 evacuation.=20 The fairgrounds has been told it is exempt from rolling blackouts, but rath= er=20 than take such a risk it will rent 13 diesel-fuel generators and produce=20 electricity on the midway. The rest of the fairgrounds will use power from= =20 San Diego Gas & Electric Co.=20 Fairgrounds operations manager Larry Baumann estimated it would cost the=20 fairgrounds $20,000 more to generate its own electricity than to buy it fro= m=20 SDG&E.=20 Midway manager Donna Ruhm said it will be worth it.=20 ""Rides that require evacuation have to have backup power and they do,"" Ruhm= =20 said. ""Now our service won't be interrupted.""=20 It is not unusual for carnivals to generate their own power, and the=20 fairgrounds has done so in the past. Fair officials removed the generators = 10=20 to 15 years ago to reduce noise on the midway.=20 The fair opens June 15 and ends July 4.=20 While the rest of the fairgrounds is on the SDG&E grid, Baumann said backup= =20 generators can kick in during a typical 60-or 90-minute blackout, allowing= =20 the fair to operate without serious difficulty. Those generators are not=20 linked to the midway.=20 All the generators are licensed by the state and meet emission standards,= =20 fair officials said, so they do not expect the noise and odor to be=20 excessive.=20 The fairgrounds is taking the precaution of providing its own power despite= =20 the fact that it probably will not go dark during a rolling blackout.=20 ""SDG&E has assured me that .?.?. the fairgrounds and the racetrack will not= =20 be on the curtailment (blackout) list during the fair and the races,"" said= =20 Del Mar Fire Chief Jack Gosney.=20 The Del Mar Thoroughbred racing season begins July 18 and ends Sept. 5.=20 Gosney said SDG&E told him earlier this year that the fairgrounds was not= =20 subject to a forced outage because it shared a circuit with the Del Mar Fir= e=20 Station, which is a 911 dispatch center and exempt from a blackout. But he= =20 said recent research showed that the fairgrounds is on a separate circuit.= =20 Nonetheless, Gosney said, SDG&E is exempting the fairgrounds and racetrack= =20 during the busy summer season.=20 The fairgrounds paid $137,152.95 for its electricity usage from March 12 to= =20 April 10. It paid $51,845.39 for electricity during the same period last ye= ar. ?=20 Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 'Hi, My Name Isn't Justice, Honey,' and Shame on Lockyer=20 By TOM G. PALMER ?????Here's what California Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer said at a press=20 conference about Enron Corp. Chairman Kenneth Lay: ""I would love to=20 personally escort Lay to an 8-by-10 cell that he could share with a tattooe= d=20 dude who says, 'Hi, my name is Spike, honey.""'=20 ?????Here's why Lockyer should be removed from his office of public trust:= =20 First, because as the chief law enforcement officer of the largest state in= =20 the nation, he not only has admitted that rape is a regular feature of the= =20 state's prison system, but also that he considers rape a part of the=20 punishment he can inflict on others.=20 ?????Second, because he has publicly stated that he would like to personall= y=20 arrange the rape of a Texas businessman who has not even been charged with= =20 any illegal behavior.=20 ?????Lockyer's remarks reveal him to be an authoritarian thug, someone whol= ly=20 unsuited to holding an office of public trust.=20 ?????But his remarks do have one positive merit: They tell us what criminal= =20 penalties really entail.=20 ?????Contrary to some depictions of prisons as country clubs, they are=20 violent and terrible places. More and more politicians propose criminal=20 sanctions for more and more alleged misdeeds, and as a result ever more kin= ds=20 of behavior are sanctioned by criminal penalties, perhaps now even selling= =20 electricity. Those found guilty of such crimes are put into cages, where th= ey=20 are deprived of their liberty and dignity and, as Lockyer so clearly=20 acknowledged, raped and brutalized. What's worse, Lockyer has indicated tha= t=20 he believes that rape is an appropriate part of the system of punishments h= e=20 administers.=20 ?????Should it matter that Lay is a businessman? Imagine the outcry if the= =20 head of Enron were female. What would Lockyer's fellow Democrats have said = to=20 that?=20 ?????Should it matter that Lay is chairman of an electricity generator? Doe= s=20 the nature of his business justify threats to escort him to his own rape?= =20 Lockyer told the Los Angeles Times that he had singled out Enron's chairman= =20 because the Houston-based company is the world's largest energy trader.=20 ?????So apparently singling out a man for a heinous threat is OK because he= 's=20 the chairman of the world's largest energy trading company. That's accordin= g=20 to the man who, as a state senator, sponsored California's 1984 hate-crimes= =20 law. Evidently the crusader against intimidation on the basis of race,=20 religion and sexual orientation feels no hesitation at all about intimidati= ng=20 someone and threatening him with the brutal use of physical force simply=20 because he heads the world's largest energy trading company.=20 ?????Lockyer and Gov. Gray Davis seem to think that the best way to keep th= e=20 lights on is to threaten electricity producers with brute force, rather tha= n=20 to offer to pay competitive rates in competitive markets. Are energy=20 producers to blame for California's energy problems? No. Bad policies,=20 including rigid controls on retail prices of electricity, are the cause of= =20 the problem, not the people who generate energy. Scapegoating producers and= =20 threatening them with violence is an old ploy of authoritarians. California= ns=20 should not stand for it.=20 ?????An Enron spokesman said that Lockyer's chilling stated desire to arran= ge=20 the rape of Lay does not merit a response. The spokesman is wrong. Lockyer'= s=20 remarks merit public disgrace and removal from office. After all, rape is n= ot=20 a form of legal justice in America--is it?=20 - - - Tom G. Palmer Is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute in Washington. E-mai= l:=20 Palmert@cato.org Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 California ; Metro Desk=20 U.S. Probes Alleged Pact Not to Build New Plants Power: Justice officials= =20 focus on Southland operations of two firms, which deny wrongdoing. MYRON LEVIN; NANCY RIVERA BROOKS ?=20 06/06/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page B-1=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 The U.S. Department of Justice has launched an investigation into whether t= wo=20 companies that control a large swath of Southern California 's electricity= =20 supply agreed to limit power plant construction, potentially hindering=20 crucial energy production, according to federal records and interviews.=20 The civil antitrust probe of Williams Energy Services and AES Southland=20 represents the Justice Department's first foray into the activities of ener= gy=20 suppliers who have reaped huge profits in California 's price-shocked marke= t.=20 AES disclosed the investigation, which began last month, in a filing with t= he=20 Securities and Exchange Commission on Tuesday. In its papers, AES said the= =20 Justice Department is focusing on whether its agreement with Williams could= =20 constrain future power plant construction in Southern California .=20 The investigation comes at a time when the state is scrambling to get new= =20 generators built and running to avoid blackouts and economic problems.=20 The government alleges that AES and Williams agreed to limit the expansion = or=20 construction of new power plants near three facilities purchased by AES in= =20 1998 from Southern California Edison under the state's new deregulation pla= n.=20 The plants--in Long Beach, Huntington Beach and Redondo Beach--are owned by= =20 AES, but the electricity is sold by Williams. Under a 3-year-old deal, know= n=20 as a tolling agreement, Williams essentially rents out the capacity of the= =20 plants for annual payments to AES. Williams supplies natural gas to fire th= e=20 plants and sells the electricity under long-term contracts and in the costl= y=20 spot market.=20 Williams and AES have similar tolling agreements at plants in Pennsylvania= =20 and New Jersey. However, AES spokesman Aaron Thomas said the Justice=20 Department's investigative requests have focused only on agreements between= =20 Williams and AES in Southern California .=20 Thomas would say only that the agreement at the center of the investigation= =20 is simply a delineation of ""how expansion or repowerings are done at the=20 facilities.""=20 The three plants have a combined capacity of more than 3,900 megawatts,=20 enough to supply about 3 million homes. This summer, AES is bringing anothe= r=20 450 megawatts on line by reactivating two mothballed generators in Huntingt= on=20 Beach.=20 Paula Hall-Collins, a spokeswoman for Tulsa-based Williams Cos., said she= =20 believes that the investigation is unrelated to a recent inquiry by the=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission into whether AES and Williams=20 unnecessarily shut down plants to jack up prices. A portion of that=20 investigation was settled in April, when Williams, without admitting any=20 wrongdoing, agreed to pay about $8 million.=20 ""We've always maintained that we've operated within the law, and we're=20 certain the investigation by the DOJ will find we are operating legally,""= =20 Hall-Collins said.=20 Williams and AES are among the power plant owners and marketers that have= =20 been lambasted by Gov. Gray Davis because of gold-plated electricity prices= =20 that have pushed the state's biggest utilities to the edge of ruin and are= =20 steadily draining the state's budget surplus.=20 State officials are asking FERC to revoke the rights of AES and Williams to= =20 sell electricity at whatever price the market will bear. That right was=20 granted for three years, beginning in 1998 by federal regulators when=20 California 's $28-billion electricity market was opened to competition.=20 Under that plan, the rights of AES and Williams to sell into the market are= =20 the first to come up for renewal.=20 AES Southland and Williams Energy Services are both arms of large energy=20 companies--AES Corp. of Arlington, Va., and Williams Cos. of Tulsa, Okla. California ; Metro Desk=20 Natural Gas, Power Prices Drop Sharply Energy: More conservation, mild=20 weather are among factors keeping costs down, experts say. RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR; NANCY VOGEL ?=20 06/06/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page B-1=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 WASHINGTON -- The wholesale prices of electricity and natural gas in=20 California have fallen sharply in recent weeks, and experts said Tuesday th= at=20 the relief could be the harbinger of an energy turnaround.=20 Or it may be just a blip.=20 In the last couple of weeks, California power prices have plunged to the=20 lowest levels since April 2000, traders say, with electricity selling on so= me=20 days for less than $100 per megawatt-hour.=20 At night, when demand slackens, power sometimes sells for less than $20 per= =20 megawatt-hour. That is reminiscent of the days before prices went haywire= =20 last summer.=20 It is a drastically different scenario than the $500 to $800 the state paid= =20 during a spate of hot weather last month.=20 Meanwhile, wholesale natural gas prices at a bellwether pipeline junction o= n=20 the Southern California -Arizona border dipped last week to their lowest=20 levels since November, according to a publication that tracks the industry.= =20 Separately, Southern California Gas Co. and Pacific Gas & Electric Co.=20 reported June rate cuts for their residential gas customers of 16% and 38%,= =20 respectively.=20 Experts credited a combination of conservation, mild weather, a burst of=20 increased hydroelectric generation and lower natural gas prices for the dro= p=20 in electricity costs.=20 ""Conservation is starting to worry the generators, which is nice to see,""= =20 said Severin Borenstein, director of the University of California Energy=20 Institute in Berkeley. Californians used 11% less energy last month than in= =20 May 2000, according to the state Energy Commission.=20 ""I'm worried that if we don't push harder on conservation, [prices] won't= =20 stay down,"" Borenstein added.=20 On the natural gas side, experts said the price decline is due to replenish= ed=20 storage within California , a nationwide drop in the cost of the fuel and= =20 easing demand from power plants.=20 The number of shippers competing to get natural gas to the state has also= =20 increased, with the expiration of a controversial contract on the El Paso= =20 pipeline system last week.=20 But economists were reluctant to make sweeping predictions based on the=20 latest indicators.=20 ""It's hard to draw specific conclusions,"" said Bruce Henning, who tracks th= e=20 natural gas markets for Energy and Environmental Analysis Inc., an Arlingto= n,=20 Va., consulting firm.=20 How the summer turns out depends on the weather in the state, Henning said,= =20 adding, ""The weather represents the balance in the Southern California=20 market.""=20 Natural gas fuels most California power plants. With wholesale prices=20 recently averaging three to four times the rates charged elsewhere in the= =20 country, state and federal officials have despaired of chances for=20 controlling electricity costs.=20 Last Friday, however, the daily price for immediate delivery of natural gas= =20 in Topock, Ariz., a pipeline junction near the California border, dipped to= =20 $7.85 per million British thermal units.=20 According to Natural Gas Week, it was the first time since mid-November tha= t=20 the price at that location had fallen below $8 per million BTUs. One millio= n=20 BTUs is what a typical Southern California home uses in five or six days.= =20 Considered a bellwether for other pipeline systems serving California , the= =20 Topock price reached a record $56.54 per million BTUs on Dec. 8. It stood a= t=20 $9.36 per million BTUs at the close of business Tuesday, still below recent= =20 weekly averages.=20 Other industry publications have also picked up signals of price declines.= =20 Platts, the energy information division of McGraw-Hill Cos., reported Tuesd= ay=20 that the price for monthly gas delivery contracts to California fell 22% in= =20 June, following a nationwide trend.=20 But Henning said the drop in California prices is attributable to both lowe= r=20 prices around the country and a decline in the high markups for shipping ga= s=20 to California . Those markups, which far exceed the cost of transporting ga= s,=20 have drawn the attention of state and federal investigators.=20 Henning said the markups are declining as depleted storage levels in=20 California are replenished. ""Storage levels have been filling very rapidly,= =20 and that fact is reflected in prices coming down,"" he said.=20 The link between natural gas and electricity prices is a hotly debated=20 subject. Some experts say high-priced natural gas is driving up the cost of= =20 electricity . Others believe that record prices for power are raising the= =20 prices that generators are willing to pay for their fuel.=20 Electricity prices that range from $20 to $200 per megawatt-hour--instead o= f=20 the $150 to $500 per megawatt-hour paid in recent months--are great news fo= r=20 Gov. Gray Davis.=20 Average daily power prices in California for transactions through the=20 Automated Power Exchange have dropped from $149 per megawatt-hour last Frid= ay=20 to $110 per megawatt-hour Tuesday. The exchange is a private company that= =20 brings together electricity buyers and sellers and accounts for less than 1= 0%=20 of the state's market.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio said Tuesday that average daily power=20 purchases by the state have recently dipped below $50 million.=20 The state has sometimes had to pay more than $100 million a day since it=20 started buying power in January through the Department of Water Resources.= =20 The state stepped in because California 's two biggest utilities became too= =20 financially crippled to withstand the prices being charged by generators.= =20 Davis' plan to pay for past and future energy purchases with a $12.4-billio= n=20 bond issue hinges on an assumption that power prices will be driven down th= is=20 summer through long-term contracts, conservation and the construction of ne= w=20 power plants.=20 UC Berkeley's Borenstein said conservation efforts have not gone far enough= .=20 ""You walk into most buildings and you still need a sweater,"" he said. ""That= =20 ain't the way to hit the target.""=20 If Californians conserved an additional 10% off their peak usage on hot=20 afternoons, he said, ""we could really break the backs of the generators, we= =20 could really collapse the price.""=20 Prices tend to skyrocket in California 's electricity market on hot=20 afternoons, when demand soars and grid operators must scramble to purchase= =20 enough electricity . Cool weather, which reduces demand for air conditionin= g,=20 and conservation help keep the state from reaching such crisis situations.= =20 Borenstein said he believes generators are also asking less money for their= =20 electricity in part because of a federal order that took effect last month.= =20 The order limits the price power plant owners can charge when California 's= =20 supplies are strained.=20 Power sellers say there are more fundamental forces at work.=20 ""There's more supply relative to demand, which is softening prices,"" said= =20 Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum. ""The= =20 market is working, and it's providing cheaper wholesale power more quickly= =20 than any regulatory scheme could ever do.""=20 *=20 Times staff writer Dan Morain in Sacramento contributed to this story.=20 RELATED STORY=20 PG&E wins: The utility averted a $1-billion bill for power buys. B6=20 (BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)=20 A Blip or a Trend?=20 Daily natural gas prices at the California border with Arizona--considered = a=20 bellwether of the state's costs--have been declining in the last two weeks.= =20 *=20 Natural gas price per 1 million Btu=20 $9.36=20 Source: Natural Gas Week California ; Metro Desk=20 The State Utility Averts $1 Billion in Costs Courts: PG&E and Cal-ISO agree= =20 to recognize Department of Water Resources as purchaser of the power. TIM REITERMAN ?=20 06/06/2001=20 Los Angeles Times=20 Home Edition=20 Page B-6=20 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company=20 SAN FRANCISCO -- Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and the state's power grid=20 operator reached an agreement Tuesday that insulated PG&E at least=20 temporarily from more than $1 billion in power purchases the state made for= =20 its customers.=20 The California Independent System Operator sent $1.26 billion in invoices t= o=20 the utility for power purchases by the state Department of Water Resources= =20 for PG&E customers from January through March.=20 But the utility contended in Bankruptcy Court proceedings that it was not= =20 liable for such purchases and that continued purchases would cause annual= =20 losses of $4 billion.=20 After arguments before Judge Dennis Montali, PG&E and Cal-ISO agreed that t= he=20 Department of Water Resources, not PG&E, purchased the power. Cal-ISO had= =20 argued that it was making the purchases on PG&E's behalf.=20 ""PG&E wants to be a utility and have obligations to serve customers, but th= ey=20 don't want to pay for it,"" Cal-ISO general counsel Charles Robinson said=20 later.=20 If PG&E refuses to pay the invoices, Robinson said, Cal-ISO will send the= =20 bills to the Department of Water Resources, and officials there can decide= =20 whether to pursue claims in Bankruptcy Court. A spokesman for department,= =20 which has authorization to sell $13 billion in bonds for power purchases,= =20 said the agency will have no comment until the matter can be studied.=20 State agencies have stayed out of the bankruptcy proceedings, hoping to=20 preserve their immunity from suits in federal court.=20 The agreement will be submitted for Montali's approval Monday, but the judg= e=20 said it would not be binding on the department because no one represented t= he=20 agency in court.=20 PG&E's own production and contracts provide the majority of the power for i= ts=20 customers. But state legislation adopted this year allows the department to= =20 secure power contracts to serve customers of ailing utilities. When a=20 shortage threatens the power grid, the department purchases additional powe= r=20 through Cal-ISO on the spot electricity market.=20 PG&E filed for Chapter 11 protection from creditors on April 6, saying it w= as=20 $9 billion in debt.=20 Dramatic drop in cost of electricity=20 LOWER BILLS: Cheaper fuel, milder weather credited=20 David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL: .DTL=20 California electricity prices have plunged unexpectedly to their lowest lev= el=20 in more than a year, partly as the result of a simultaneous drop in prices= =20 for natural gas, which fuels most power plants.=20 Make no mistake: Gas and electricity prices could surge upward again in=20 months ahead.=20 But for the first time since California's energy markets went haywire last= =20 summer, industry experts are beginning to ask whether the state finally may= =20 have turned a corner in its battle with runaway power costs.=20 ""California is not yet out of the woods,"" said Kelley Doolan, who tracks=20 natural gas prices for energy market researcher Platts. ""But this is a very= =20 significant decrease in costs.""=20 Along with lower gas prices, the decline in electricity costs was attribute= d=20 by state and industry officials to milder weather, which reduces demand for= =20 power. They also credited recent conservation efforts by consumers and=20 better-than-expected runoff at dams for hydroelectric plants.=20 Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, an=20 energy-industry association, said these factors came together to produce th= e=20 lowest wholesale electricity prices since April 2000.=20 Electricity on the spot market could have been purchased yesterday for as= =20 little as $50 per megawatt hour, he noted, compared with more than $500=20 earlier this year.=20 ""If the weather stays this way, we could have reasonable prices all summer,= ""=20 Ackerman said. ""We may also have fewer blackouts.""=20 It is tempting for Californians to be suspicious of virtually any swing in= =20 energy prices. If power companies manipulated prices on the way up, as=20 critics have alleged, might they not be up to some trick as prices head in= =20 the opposite direction?=20 Nettie Hoge, executive director of The Utility Reform Network in San=20 Francisco, speculated that generators are allowing electricity prices to fa= ll=20 so they can discourage federal regulators from taking a more active role in= =20 the dysfunctional California market.=20 ""They're trying to take the heat off,"" she said.=20 Others cautioned that the lower prices may be nothing more than a statistic= al=20 blip.=20 ""This was just one month's decline,"" said Michael Shames, executive directo= r=20 of the Utility Consumers' Action Network in San Diego. ""We really have to s= ee=20 how this plays out in the future.""=20 Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis, said the governor was very= =20 encouraged by the lower energy prices. Davis announced Sunday that=20 California's power use was down 11 percent last month from a year before.= =20 ""We're not there yet,"" Maviglio said of whether an end to the state's power= =20 woes is in sight. ""But the trend is pointing in the right direction.""=20 WHITE ELEPHANT Yet this sudden drop in energy prices does have a dark side: California cou= ld=20 end up with a huge white elephant after spending about $40 billion in publi= c=20 funds on long-term power contracts.=20 The logic behind the contracts, which are at an average price of $69 per=20 megawatt hour over 10 years, is that the state expected to pay below-market= =20 rates for electricity for a number of years before prices came down and=20 California found itself paying above-market rates.=20 If current trends continue, though, California will find itself paying=20 consistently above-market rates much sooner than expected, making the long-= =20 term contracts a sweet deal for the same power companies that profited so= =20 handsomely during the state's darkest hours.=20 ""The contracts look really ugly right now,"" said Shames at the Utility=20 Consumers' Action Network. ""They may be way overpriced.""=20 Maviglio, the governor's spokesman, said it is too early to conclude that t= he=20 state did poorly negotiating dozens of long-term power contracts.=20 ""No one has a crystal ball on this,"" he said.=20 CUSTOMERS' BILLS TO DROP In any case, Pacific Gas and Electric Co. said yesterday that customers'=20 average gas bills will drop 26 percent this month to $26 and should stay ne= ar=20 that level all summer.=20 Platts, which monitors average monthly spot prices, found that the wholesal= e=20 price of gas at the California-Oregon border has tumbled nearly 42 percent= =20 since the beginning of May -- from $9.98 per million British thermal units = to=20 $5.81.=20 The wholesale gas price at the California-Arizona border fell 45 percent,= =20 from $11.91 to $6.50. This compares with a 25 percent monthly decline in=20 average natural gas prices nationwide.=20 However, California gas prices are still about 50 percent higher than they= =20 were a year ago, whereas national prices are now below year-ago levels for= =20 the first time since last spring.=20 While cooler weather nationwide helped push gas prices down overall, Doolan= =20 attributed the especially steep drop in California to a commensurate surge = in=20 prices last month related to fears of a long, hot summer of rolling=20 blackouts.=20 ""You had state officials all but promising rolling blackouts this summer,"" = he=20 said. ""That created enormous demand for electricity generation.=20 ""What has changed is that we've had weeks of mild weather,"" Doolan observed= .=20 ""The electricity generators have not come out of the woodwork buying up all= =20 the gas.""=20 This allowed utilities like PG&E to beef up gas inventories, which eased=20 demand and resulted in substantially lower prices, he said.=20 'BACK ON TRACK'=20 ""We're back on track to be completely full for winter,"" said Staci Homrig, = a=20 PG&E spokeswoman. ""That's a very good thing.""=20 Gas prices historically dip in the spring and summer and then rise again in= =20 the winter. PG&E is forecasting that customers' average gas bills could ris= e=20 to as high as $75 in December if current trends continue.=20 However, the precipitous drop in gas prices in recent weeks suggests that= =20 California's unusually high costs at last may be abating.=20 Individual power companies so far are reluctant to speculate on whether the= =20 drop in gas prices will have a lasting effect on electricity costs.=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 San Jose council gives green light to generating plant=20 VOTE REVERSAL: Officials pressured to OK project=20 Marshall Wilson, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL: .DTL=20 In a clear sign that the political landscape has shifted because of the=20 state's power crisis, the San Jose City Council gave a green light yesterda= y=20 for construction of a generating plant it had unanimously opposed in=20 November.=20 Yesterday's 10-to-1 vote came after months of mounting pressure for the cit= y=20 to reverse course and approve the controversial 600-megawatt Calpine plant = at=20 Coyote Valley.=20 That pressure -- increased by the occasional rolling blackout -- has come= =20 from nearly every corner of the state, from elected officials to high-tech= =20 businesses and labor unions worried the power crisis will drain away jobs,= =20 ruin the economy and lead to voter backlash over skyrocketing energy bills.= =20 Even the local branch of the NAACP and environmentalists pushed the council= =20 to approve the Calpine proposal -- despite overwhelming opposition from the= =20 plant's neighbors.=20 Council members did not hide their disdain yesterday for being forced to=20 reconsider their opposition to the so-called Metcalf Energy Center.=20 ""I'm holding my nose to vote for this thing,"" said Councilwoman Linda=20 LeZotte.=20 ""I'm just as unhappy as everybody else,"" Vice Mayor George Shirakawa said. = ""I=20 feel like no matter what happens, we can't win.""=20 GOVERNOR OFFERED HIS SUPPORT After the council's solid opposition in November, Calpine appealed to the= =20 California Energy Commission, which has the final say. The controversial=20 plant then received a huge boost in April when Gov. Gray Davis threw his=20 support behind it.=20 San Jose officials conceded yesterday that the energy commission was likely= =20 to override their opposition and grant approval within a few weeks. They sa= id=20 the commission's likely approval was stripping them of their power to decid= e=20 local land-use issues.=20 ""What I think has happened . . . is the governor and the Legislature at the= =20 state level have taken this out of our hands,"" said Councilwoman Pat Dando.= =20 ""I don't think there's any chance at all the California Energy Commission i= s=20 going to turn down the Metcalf Energy Center,"" Councilman Chuck Reed said.= =20 CONSTRUCTION MAY BEGIN SOON If given the go-ahead by the state, Calpine could begin construction as ear= ly=20 as next month. The natural-gas fired plant would generate electricity by=20 mid-2003, company spokesman Kenneth Arbeu said.=20 At the urging of Mayor Ron Gonzales, the council yesterday approved a new= =20 ""cooperation agreement"" with Calpine. The vote, with Councilman Forrest=20 Williams casting the lone nay, is preliminary while a final vote that is=20 scheduled for June 26.=20 Gonzales argued that the agreement did not amount to a flip-flop because it= =20 differs from what Calpine proposed in November.=20 The agreement approved by the council calls for increased monitoring of air= =20 pollution, the use of treated wastewater to cool the plant, which will redu= ce=20 discharges into San Francisco Bay, and a $6.5 million ""community benefits""= =20 package, with the bulk going toward parkland acquisition, Gonzales said.=20 ""This council has not changed its decision,"" he said. ""What we've done is= =20 change the facility.""=20 Critics, incensed that the city was buckling to outside pressure, vowed to= =20 change the council at the next election.=20 CONCERNS OVER HEALTH RISKS They raised concerns that boiled wastewater steam wafting over their homes= =20 from Calpine's plant could pose health risks. Jona Denz-Hamilton said more= =20 controls are needed to ensure the safety of neighbors like herself and her= =20 family and argued that new, cleaner-burning technologies should be installe= d=20 at the plant.=20 ""It's too great of a risk,"" she said.=20 Other critics said the state's energy woes will be solved and largely=20 forgotten by the time the plant opens in two years, while the Santa Teresa= =20 neighborhood will be stuck with pollution for decades.=20 Approval seemed a given at the start of the more than three-hour hearing.= =20 Much of the afternoon's debate focused around plans to extend a pipeline fo= r=20 treated wastewater to the new plant.=20 Critics said Calpine was receiving a sweet deal by paying only $10 million = of=20 the $50 million cost of extending the pipeline. Several council members ask= ed=20 for a more detailed report into the financing plan before the final vote is= =20 taken June 26.=20 Chronicle staff writer Bill Workman contributed to this report.=20 E-mail Marshall Wilson at ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 Developments in California's energy crisis=20 Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate1 053EDT0177.DTL=20 (06-06) 07:53 PDT (AP) --=20 Developments in California's energy crisis:=20 WEDNESDAY: * No power alerts Wednesday as reserves stay above 7 percent.=20 TUESDAY: * Gov. Gray Davis' administration says the state's electricity costs are=20 dropping substantially, even as it asks state legislators for another=20 half-billion dollars for power purchases. That brings to $8.2 billion the= =20 amount the state is paying for electricity on behalf of three financially= =20 strapped utilities.=20 Spokesman Steve Maviglio says the cost to the state treasury has dropped in= =20 the last few weeks well below the $50 million dollars the state had been=20 paying on a typical day. He credits cooler weather, conservation, more powe= r=20 plants online and more long-term contracts with helping drive down the cost= .=20 * A state Senate committee agrees to issue subpoenas to eight out-of-state= =20 electricity generators demanding they hand over documents on bidding, prici= ng=20 and other aspects of power sales in the state. The subpoenas would help a= =20 special Senate committee's investigation into whether the companies are=20 illegally profiteering from California's power crisis. The committee's=20 chairman says he expects the companies to resist, setting the stage for a= =20 court battle.=20 * Oil giant Chevron threatens to cut gasoline production in California unle= ss=20 it is exempted from rolling blackouts. The San Francisco Chronicle says it= =20 has a copy of a letter sent Friday from Chevron chairman David O'Reilly to= =20 Davis. In the letter, O'Reilly says the company will scale back gasoline=20 production at its Richmond and El Segundo plants, operating those refinerie= s=20 only with power produced by generators at the sites.=20 * New U.S. Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., supports Federal=20 Energy Regulatory Commission price caps. ""FERC must meet its obligation und= er=20 current law to ensure 'just and reasonable' prices for wholesale electricit= y=20 in the state of California. FERC has failed to meet this responsibility...,= ""=20 Daschle says in a letter to Davis. ""Unless FERC acts soon, Senator (Dianne)= =20 Feinstein's legislation should be taken up and passed to direct FERC to tak= e=20 action. I will support all necessary efforts to meet that goal.""=20 * House Subcommittee on Energy Policy, Natural Resources and Regulatory=20 Affairs Chairman Doug Ose, R-Sacramento, cites Electric Utility Week figure= s=20 that FERC's limited price caps helped cut California's power rates from $30= 0=20 to $108.47 per megawatt hour within an hour after taking effect last week.= =20 While he says more information is needed, Ose uses the figures to tout his= =20 pending bill to impose the price caps around the clock and to all Western= =20 states.=20 * Pacific Gas & Electric Co. asks U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali to= =20 stop the manager of the state's power grid from buying electricity for=20 utility or charging it for any electricity bought after the utility filed f= or=20 bankruptcy on April 6. Separately, the utility's creditors support its=20 request to the bankruptcy court to pay out $17.5 million in bonuses to the= =20 management team that guided the utility into bankruptcy.=20 * California Department of Water Resources reveals it is negotiating with= =20 municipal utilities to buy their surplus power. Department spokesman Oscar= =20 Hidalgo says talks began last week but no agreements are imminent.=20 * State lawmakers criticize a $3 million lobbying campaign by Southern=20 California Edison. The utility is telephoning shareholders to describe the= =20 dire consequences if the utility goes bankrupt. The call is then transferre= d=20 to the state Capitol so shareholders can implore lawmakers to support a=20 controversial plan to help the utility. Legislators and their staffers say= =20 the shareholders often are confused and scared their investments will be=20 degraded or wiped out.=20 * State Treasurer Phil Angelides joins an advocacy group for the poor in=20 urging the state's huge pension funds to use their economic power to levera= ge=20 power companies. The Pacific Institute for Community Organization says the= =20 two pension funds own at least $1.2 billion in stocks and bonds in most of= =20 the firms that sell electricity to California.=20 * The Assembly, by a 69-0 vote, approves a bill to spend $10 million on=20 environmental studies needed before Path 15, the inadequate transmission-li= ne=20 group between Northern and Southern California, can be expanded. The bill= =20 moves to the Senate.=20 * Pacific Gas and Electric announces a decrease in natural gas prices, down= =20 38 percent from May's rates and 66 percent lower than January's rates. The= =20 decline will bring the average residential gas bill to $26 when it goes int= o=20 effect June 7. Market analysts predict the rates will remain stable until= =20 December when demand is expected to increase with winter heating loads.=20 * No power alerts Tuesday as electricity reserves stay above 7 percent.=20 * Shares of Edison International closed at $10.05, down 53 cents. PG&E Corp= .=20 closed at $11.25, down 15 cents. Sempra Energy, the parent company of San= =20 Diego Gas & Electric, closes at $26.91, down 43 cents.=20 WHAT'S NEXT: * Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra, the parent compa= ny=20 of San Diego Gas and Electric Co., to buy the utility's transmission lines.= =20 THE PROBLEM: High demand, high wholesale energy costs, transmission glitches and a tight= =20 supply worsened by scarce hydroelectric power in the Northwest and=20 maintenance at aging California power plants are all factors in California'= s=20 electricity crisis.=20 Edison and PG&E say they've lost nearly $14 billion since June to high=20 wholesale prices the state's electricity deregulation law bars them from=20 passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs= =20 from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection= =20 April 6.=20 Electricity and natural gas suppliers, scared off by the two companies' poo= r=20 credit ratings, are refusing to sell to them, leading the state in January = to=20 start buying power for the utilities' nearly 9 million residential and=20 business customers. The state is also buying power for a third investor-own= ed=20 utility, San Diego Gas & Electric, which is in better financial shape than= =20 much larger Edison and PG&E but also struggling with high wholesale power= =20 costs.=20 The Public Utilities Commission has approved average rate increases of 37= =20 percent for the heaviest residential customers and 38 percent for commercia= l=20 customers, and hikes of up to 49 percent for industrial customers and 15=20 percent or 20 percent for agricultural customers to help finance the state'= s=20 multibillion-dollar power buys.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 California conserves=20 Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /06/E D86597.DTL=20 WHEN RAIN fails to fall from the sky, Californians know why there is a=20 drought. But when rolling blackouts suddenly appeared in the dead of winter= ,=20 many of us wondered who was responsible for and who has profited from what= =20 now seems like an artificially created power shortage in the state.=20 Our skepticism proved to be right. Windfall profits were reaped by=20 electricity generators while natural gas importers extracted prices far abo= ve=20 the national average.=20 Timid federal overseers exact only wrist-slap penalties on the offending=20 energy firms. The White House scoffs at temporary controls for a=20 malfunctioning market. California's state government has ended up as the bi= ll=20 payer for the sickly utilities, forking over $8 billion to generators. This= =20 number may hit $40 billion by year-end.=20 It's an infuriating tangle. All the more remarkable, then, that skeptical= =20 Californians have managed, within two months, to reduce their use of=20 electricity by 11 percent. The public's response to the governor's appeal f= or=20 energy conservation has exceeded expectations. Although many businesses hav= e=20 suffered enormous losses, ordinary people have made relatively painless=20 sacrifices. People turned off their lights, purchased energy-efficient=20 lightbulbs, used air conditioning less and shut off their computers when no= t=20 in use.=20 Despite this remarkable civic compliance, we still face an unconscionable= =20 lack of leadership. President Bush seems perfectly willing to allow Texas= =20 power companies to pummel the once-powerful California economy. He repeats = a=20 mantra about creating more supply -- which California is doing with 15 powe= r=20 plants under construction -- while ignoring the outsized sums paid to a=20 handful of energy generators.=20 At the same time, Gov. Gray Davis, who has given new meaning to the word=20 dithering, has failed to make the tough and transparent decisions. He delay= ed=20 an inevitable rise in power rates. Davis also dragged his feet in openly=20 announcing new power contracts that commit California to billions in spendi= ng=20 over the next decade.=20 To Davis' credit, he has urged California to conserve by laying out an $800= =20 million plan to cut power use and invest in energy-saving programs. The=20 message is getting out as higher rates take effect this month.=20 Despite a woefully unbalanced market and shortsighted leadership, the peopl= e=20 of California have demonstrated that if there is a will, there is a way.=20 Now it is time for our leaders to follow the wisdom of their constituents.= =20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 20=20 L.A. power customers awash in cheap energy=20 John Wildermuth, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /06/M N133438.DTL=20 Los Angeles -- These are flush times for the city's Department of Water and= =20 Power and the energy executives are loving every minute of it.=20 As are their customers.=20 Private power companies throughout California have been raising rates and= =20 warning customers about a long, hot summer filled with blackouts, but the= =20 city- owned DWP has been keeping prices stable and the lights on for 1.2=20 million Los Angeles customers.=20 ""Our customers are being really nice to us,"" said Angelina Galiteva, the=20 utility's strategic planning director. ""They love the DWP.""=20 Although Gov. Gray Davis' administration announced that the state had reduc= ed=20 its energy consumption 11 percent from a year ago, those in Los Angeles had= =20 cut back less than half that -- and polls show they view the energy situati= on=20 less seriously than other Californians.=20 Public utilities such as Los Angeles water and power have seen their revenu= es=20 increase during the energy crunch because they can sell their excess power = at=20 higher prices than ever before in a market tilted toward sellers.=20 The rest of the state doesn't always feel that same warm glow. Davis has=20 accused the DWP and other California public utilities of putting exorbitant= =20 price tags on the excess electricity they sell to the rest of the energy-= =20 starved state.=20 It's a charge Los Angeles utility executives deny, arguing that their exces= s=20 power is sold at cost plus 15 percent, which they say is a fair return for= =20 their customers.=20 ""Without our support, a million more homes (elsewhere in California) would= =20 have suffered rolling blackouts, which is a powerful message,"" Galiteva sai= d.=20 It wasn't supposed to be this way. When the power industry was deregulated = in=20 the late '90s, energy giants like Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern= =20 California Edison were expected to be the big winners. Now, PG&E is in=20 bankruptcy and Edison is a short step away.=20 ""When deregulation came, the experts said that the investor-owned utilities= =20 would become lean, mean machines that would be better able to operate in th= e=20 new environment,"" Galiteva said. ""But now public power has shown it can ser= ve=20 customers more efficiently at lower rates.""=20 While much of the state worries about electrical supply, Los Angeles=20 residents have been saved many of those concerns.=20 In a survey done last month by the Public Policy Institute of California, 4= 8=20 percent of the people in the Bay Area thought that electricity cost and=20 availability were the most important issues facing the state. In Los Angele= s,=20 however, only 33 percent put the energy crunch on top. When questioned abou= t=20 the size of the power problem and the effect it would have on the state's= =20 economy, Los Angeles residents were consistently less concerned than people= =20 elsewhere in California.=20 People in Los Angeles have been ""somewhat isolated"" from the energy crisis,= =20 concluded Mark Baldassare, who conducted the survey.=20 That doesn't mean the state's energy problems haven't had an effect. The DW= P=20 has seen a 3 percent to 5 percent reduction in some uses, which officials= =20 have dubbed ""sympathy conservation."" The utility also is offering its bigge= st=20 customers financial incentives to cut back on their power use.=20 ""Our average annual load growth is about 80 megawatts,"" Galiteva said. ""By= =20 this summer, we expect to have saved 40 megawatts through conservation. By= =20 December, we expect 60 megawatts in savings.""=20 The utility also is making a major attempt to create a conservation ethic= =20 among its customers. DWP's comfortable situation has made it possible to=20 offer them the carrot without the need to show them the stick.=20 ""Conservation no longer means doing without,"" Galiteva said. ""Beer can be= =20 just as cold with a superefficient refrigerator. Rooms can be just as brigh= t=20 with superefficient light bulbs.""=20 A ""Green Power"" program also is promoting the use of renewable energy=20 resources such as solar, wind and hydroelectric power. About 75,000 custome= rs=20 are paying an extra $3 per month to increase DWP's use of renewable power= =20 sources.=20 ""We're trying to give our customers a choice and a voice in determining the= =20 mix of power they use,"" Galiteva said. ""They know they can do (conservation= )=20 now or see it being mandated later.""=20 Los Angeles power officials -- and their customers -- know the DWP isn't=20 always going to continue as an island of tranquility in a sea of energy=20 turmoil. The utility's aging gas-fired plants have been affected by the=20 rising price of natural gas. Demand for energy continues to rise. In a deba= te=20 last month, both candidates for mayor of Los Angeles agreed that increases = in=20 local power bills are inevitable.=20 But the DWP has been supplying power to Los Angeles since 1916, and its=20 executives believe that the state's deregulation disaster has shown the=20 advantages of the city-owned utility.=20 ""It's nice to be the lean, mean, green efficient machine that no one ever= =20 expected us to become,"" Galiteva said.=20 E-mail John Wildermuth at ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 13=20 PG&E doesn't want to pay for energy to avert blackouts=20 DAVID KRAVETS, Associated Press Writer Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 306EDT0102.DTL=20 (06-06) 00:06 PDT SAN FRANCISCO (AP) --=20 Pacific Gas & Electric Co. has told a bankruptcy judge it should not have t= o=20 pay for what could amount to billions of dollars in spot-market energy cost= s=20 to avert blackouts.=20 The company's position was one of two developments that emerged Tuesday as= =20 the bankrupt utility tries to cope with fallout from California's power=20 crisis. The other development saw a group of creditors that PG&E owes=20 billions endorse $17.5 million in bonuses for top managers at the utility.= =20 San Francisco-based PG&E filed for bankruptcy protection in April after=20 racking up an $8.9 billion debt which under state law it could not recoup= =20 from customers.=20 Tuesday's court dispute centered on who pays for energy bought at the last= =20 minute to avoid blackouts.=20 PG&E said an April federal regulatory decision requires that electricity ca= n=20 only be sold to those with the ability to pay electricity generators. The= =20 state is the only player with such ability, said PG&E attorney Jerome Faulk= ,=20 who argued that the utility shouldn't have to pay the $330 million in month= ly=20 spot-market energy bills.=20 Judge Dennis Montali said he may craft such an order. But he said the order= =20 would not preclude the state from suing PG&E to recover the cost.=20 In a separate but related development, a committee charged with devising a= =20 payment plan for those creditors owed billions by PG&E said it will sign of= f=20 on the utility's plan to pay $17.5 million in bonuses to PG&E's management= =20 team.=20 Attorney Allan Marks, who represents the committee, said such payments are= =20 normal during large bankruptcy cases. Under the agreement, which Montali wi= ll=20 consider at a June 18 hearing, the company must quickly produce a debt=20 payment plan that passes judicial muster.=20 The utility said it needs the bonuses for a ""management retention program.""= =20 Marks agreed. While the $17.5 million leaves less for creditors, without a= =20 financial incentive PG&E's key top brass may not be willing to cooperate wi= th=20 a payment plan, Marks said.=20 ""The main goal for the creditors' support here is to move the bankruptcy as= =20 quickly and smoothly as possible,"" Marks said.=20 The Utility Reform Network, a consumer watchdog group, says PG&E is simply= =20 rewarding managers of a failed business effort.=20 ""They're just showering money on the same people who got them in this mess,= ""=20 said TURN's Mike Florio.=20 The proposed bonuses would come on top of $50 million in bonuses and raises= =20 PG&E awarded just before the April 6 bankruptcy filing.=20 The case is In Re Pacific Gas & Electric Co., 01-30923 DM.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 Metcalf plant gets preliminary approval=20 Posted at 12:21 a.m. PDT Wednesday, June 6, 2001=20 BY MIKE ZAPLER=20 Mercury News=20 As the San Jose City Council approached its 10-1 vote Tuesday to give an=20 initial nod to Calpine's big power plant in South San Jose, Councilwoman=20 Linda LeZotte perhaps captured the body's mood best.=20 ``I'm holding my nose to vote for this thing,'' she said. ``Without faultin= g=20 the mayor or his staff, quite frankly I think this deal stinks.''=20 Caught in what some members called a bind beyond their control, the council= =20 gave preliminary approval to an agreement negotiated by Mayor Ron Gonzales= =20 and Calpine on the company's proposed 600-megawatt Metcalf Energy Center.= =20 Councilman Forrest Williams, who represents the Santa Teresa neighborhood= =20 near the site, cast the lone vote against the deal.=20 The agreement is scheduled to come back before the council for a final vote= =20 on June 26, but Tuesday's vote effectively shifts the battle to the courts,= =20 where residents are expected to lodge a lawsuit in one final attempt to blo= ck=20 the plant.=20 Still, Councilwoman Pat Dando and some of her colleagues raised questions= =20 about the deal they said they want answered before the final vote. Their=20 issues could be incorporated into the final deal.=20 Many of the concerns focused on a $50 million recycled water pipeline=20 Gonzales agreed to have the city build to accommodate the project, $10=20 million of which would be reimbursed by Calpine over 30 years.=20 Pipeline possibility=20 Dando said that a private company, Great Oaks Water, may be willing to buil= d=20 the pipeline extension itself, saving the city the $50 million expense.=20 Officials at Great Oaks were unavailable Tuesday.=20 Council members peppered staff with other questions. Many were alarmed by= =20 claims of the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, which said that using treate= d=20 sewage water to cool the power plant could allow dangerous chemicals to see= p=20 into drinking water aquifers. An environmental services director said the= =20 recycled water meets federal specifications, but that there is no protocol= =20 for testing other chemicals not included in those standards.=20 Councilman Ken Yeager asked why Calpine should be allowed to spread a $3.9= =20 million water connection fee over 10 years -- an arrangement that would=20 mandate an amendment to city law.=20 LeZotte, meanwhile, said she wants to hold Calpine accountable to install= =20 ammonia-free technology at the plant. Ammonia is highly hazardous, and=20 residents say the use of the chemical to clean the plant is among their chi= ef=20 concerns.=20 The agreement requires the company to install technology to reduce or=20 eliminate the use ammonia when it becomes ``technologically and economicall= y=20 feasible.'' LeZotte said she wants a clear definition of ``feasible''=20 included in the deal.=20 Tuesday's vote marked a stark departure from the council's November vote to= =20 deny Metcalf. At the time, council members said a power plant was=20 inappropriate for the area, and many members said Tuesday that they still= =20 believe that.=20 Bowing to pressure=20 But with Gov. Gray Davis endorsing Metcalf in April and the California Ener= gy=20 Commission widely expected to override the city's denial this month, counci= l=20 members said they had no choice but to cut the best deal it could and allow= =20 the project to proceed.=20 That explanation, however, didn't sit well with residents of the Santa Tere= sa=20 neighborhood adjacent to the Metcalf site, one of whom accused Gonzales and= =20 the council of ``switching sides when the opposing team gets too close to t= he=20 goal line.''=20 Contact Mike Zapler at mzapler@sjmercury.com or at (408) 275-0140.=20 Feds probe AES, Williams=20 Antitrust investigation looks into allegations of manipulated energy prices= =20 through reduced power-plant construction.=20 June 6, 2001=20 By JAMES ROWLEY Bloomberg News=20 WASHINGTON - The U.S. Justice Department opened an antitrust investigation= =20 into California's electricity shortage by probing allegations that AES Corp= .=20 and Williams Energy Services Co. are limiting power-plant expansion to driv= e=20 up prices.=20 AES Corp., the biggest U.S. power-plant developer, disclosed the=20 investigation in a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.= =20 The Justice Department is looking into a supply-and-marketing agreement=20 between AES' California power-plant unit and a Williams unit that supplies= =20 natural gas.=20 Williams, owner of the second-largest U.S. natural-gas pipeline system, als= o=20 markets the power produced by AES' three electricity plants in the state.= =20 The department alleges the agreement limits expansion of generating capacit= y=20 near some AES plants.=20 AES said it was cooperating with the Justice Department investigation, whic= h=20 began last month, into possible violations of Section 1 of the Sherman=20 Antitrust Act.=20 That provision outlaws any restraint of trade that stifles competition.=20 A shortage of generating capacity in California has led to soaring wholesal= e=20 prices and rolling blackouts and prompted Pacific Gas & Electric, the state= 's=20 largest utility, to seek bankruptcy protection in April.=20 Aaron Thomas, a spokesman for AES, based in Arlington, Va., said the U.S.= =20 investigation started ""no more than a couple of weeks ago.""=20 Williams spokeswoman Paula Hall-Collins said the Tulsa, Okla.-based company= =20 is cooperating.=20 Gina Talamona, Justice Department spokeswoman, said the agency had no=20 immediate comment.=20 The investigation was opened several weeks after the Federal Energy=20 Regulatory Commission investigated AES plants in Long Beach and Huntington= =20 Beach, designated ""must run"" under the Federal Power Act, did not produce= =20 electricity for 10 days in April and May 2000. Williams agreed to pay the= =20 operator of California's electric grid $8 million to settle allegations tha= t=20 it overcharged for power.=20 FERC charged in March that the companies had a financial incentive to keep= =20 the units out of service to force the California Independent System Operato= r=20 to buy power from AES' plant in Redondo Beach at prices close to the=20 FERC-imposed cap of $750 per megawatt-hour.=20 AES said it was complying with a Justice Department demand for documents=20 about the agreement between its AES Southland LLC unit and Williams Energy= =20 Services Co. AES Southland, which operates the three power plants, was also= =20 asked to respond to interrogatories, the company said.=20 The Williams unit supplies the natural gas to fuel the AES plants and marke= ts=20 the power they produce.=20 AES and Williams jointly produce and sell about 4,000 megawatts in Californ= ia=20 -- 6 to 8 percent of the state's power -- enough electricity to light about= 3=20 million typical California homes.=20 AES shares dropped $2.05, to $42.54. Williams Cos. shares dropped $1, to=20 $38.20. Calpine Begins Construction of Peaking Energy Center in Gilroy, Calif.=20 June 6, 2001=20 SAN JOSE, Calif., June 5 /PRNewswire/ via NewsEdge Corporation -=20 Calpine Corporation (NYSE: CPN), the San Jose, Calif.-based independent pow= er=20 company, today announced that initial construction of 135 megawatts (mw) of= =20 peaking generation capacity will begin during this week adjacent to its=20 existing Gilroy Power Plant in Gilroy, Calif. Through an Application for=20 Certification (AFC) filed with the California Energy Commission (CEC) on=20 April 25, 2001, Calpine proposed to add three 45-mw simple-cycle gas turbin= e=20 peaking units in the first of a two-phase process. The California Energy=20 Commission approved the project on May 21, 2001.=20 ""Because the required natural gas, water and transmission infrastructure=20 exists at our Gilroy plant, it is an ideal site for the addition of peaking= =20 generation, allowing for rapid installation of needed capacity. The first= =20 three units are expected to begin generating electricity this September,""= =20 commented Bryan Bertacchi, Calpine Vice President - Western Region.=20 Upon completion the two-phase build out, the Gilroy Energy Center will be a= =20 270-mw, natural gas-fired, simple-cycle peaking generation facility located= =20 on approximately 9.5 acres at 1400 Pacheco Pass Highway in Gilroy. Commerci= al=20 operation of Phase One is scheduled for September 2001. An additional three= =20 45-mw gas turbine generators will be installed in Phase Two with full=20 build-out estimated for May 2002. Phase Two requires the filing of an=20 additional application with the CEC and is subject to a four-month review= =20 process.=20 Initial construction will begin this week with site and civil engineering= =20 activities occurring for approximately six weeks at which time the site wil= l=20 be cleared and leveled. Foundation work and the installation of generation= =20 equipment will follow shortly thereafter, and commissioning and testing wil= l=20 take place for a two to three week period prior to commercial operation in= =20 September 2001.=20 The Gilroy Energy Center web site has been created to host all information= =20 and updates related to this project. For additional information, please vis= it=20 www.gilroypower.com.=20 Calpine Corporation, based in San Jose, Calif., is dedicated to providing= =20 customers with reliable and competitively priced electricity. Calpine is=20 focused on clean, efficient, natural gas-fired generation and is the world'= s=20 largest producer of renewable geothermal energy. Calpine has launched the= =20 largest power development program in North America. To date, the company ha= s=20 approximately 32,200 megawatts of base load capacity and 7,200 megawatts of= =20 peaking capacity in operation, under construction, pending acquisitions and= =20 in announced development in 29 states and Canada. The company was founded i= n=20 1984 and is publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol= =20 CPN. For more information about Calpine, visit its Website at=20 www.calpine.com.=20 This news release discusses certain matters that may be considered=20 ""forward-looking"" statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the=20 Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities=20 Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, including statements regarding the intent= ,=20 belief or current expectations of Calpine Corporation (""the Company"") and i= ts=20 management. Prospective investors are cautioned that any such forward-looki= ng=20 statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve a number of= =20 risks and uncertainties that could materially affect actual results such as= ,=20 but not limited to, (i) changes in government regulations, including pendin= g=20 changes in California, and anticipated deregulation of the electric energy= =20 industry, (ii) commercial operations of new plants that may be delayed or= =20 prevented because of various development and construction risks, such as a= =20 failure to obtain financing and the necessary permits to operate or the=20 failure of third-party contractors to perform their contractual obligations= ,=20 (iii) cost estimates are preliminary and actual cost may be higher than=20 estimated, (iv) the assurance that the Company will develop additional=20 plants, (v) a competitor's development of a lower-cost generating gas-fired= =20 power plant, and (vi) the risks associated with marketing and selling power= =20 from power plants in the newly competitive energy market. Prospective=20 investors are also cautioned that the California energy environment remains= =20 uncertain. The Company's management is working closely with a number of=20 parties to resolve the current uncertainty, while protecting the Company's= =20 interests. Management believes that a final resolution will not have a=20 material adverse impact on the Company. Prospective investors are also=20 referred to the other risks identified from time to time in the Company's= =20 reports and registration statements filed with the Securities and Exchange= =20 Commission.=20 MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT - Click Here=20 SOURCE Calpine Corporation=20 CONTACT: media, Lisa Poelle, ext. 1285, or investors, Rick Barraza, ext.=20 1125, both of Calpine Corporation, 408-995-5115=20 Web site: http://www.gilroypower.com=20 Web site: http://www.calpine.com (CPN)=20 Reliant Urges FERC to Drop or Amend California Price Caps to Avoid Addition= al=20 Shortages and More Blackouts=20 June 6, 2001=20 HOUSTON, June 5 /PRNewswire/ via NewsEdge Corporation -=20 Reliant Energy (NYSE: REI) filed an emergency motion with the Federal Energ= y=20 Regulatory Commission (FERC) on Monday urging the agency to drop the=20 California price caps first applied May 29, or at a minimum, amend them to= =20 reflect the true costs they are attempting to control. The current price=20 caps, which send inaccurate market signals, are actually decreasing supply= =20 and increasing demand thus worsening an already dire situation.=20 ""FERC has been publicly dedicated to an open market from the beginning of t= he=20 California power crisis. We encourage FERC to reexamine these price caps an= d=20 continue that dedication,"" said Joe Bob Perkins, president and chief=20 operating officer, Reliant Energy Wholesale Group. ""Reliant is committed to= =20 helping keep the lights on in California this summer and wants to ensure th= at=20 if caps must remain part of the picture, they actually help increase supply= =20 and fix the problem.""=20 Although the price caps were first imposed less than a week ago, they have= =20 already begun to damage the market by decreasing supply. The price caps are= =20 creating a myriad of problems:=20 -- Creates Misleading Signals - The price cap methodology is misleading=20 the public on the actual cost of power. Reported ""dispatch"" costs in=20 Southern California during emergencies is far below what the actual=20 financial settlements will be under the FERC's final market mitigation=20 order. This confusion results from the ""proxy"" price used for=20 dispatch utilizing an extremely distorted blended fuel cost index.=20 This index averages gas costs in northern and southern parts of the=20 state, an impossibility in the actual market. This authorizes the=20 California Independent System Operator (ISO) to require that=20 generators dispatch power at reported market clearing prices well=20 below actual cost when back-up generation capacity begins to dip below=20 7.5 percent.=20 -- Depletes Power from Peaking Plants - The price caps distort dispatch=20 signals on peaking plants, which in some cases may be run only a few=20 days of the year because of emission regulations. The current FERC=20 price controls encourage the ISO to purchase power from emergency=20 peaking plants before it is really needed, even in the absence of a=20 stage three emergency. This depletes supplies that will, by law, run=20 out when blackout season intensifies later this summer. This power=20 from peaking units should only be purchased when blackouts are=20 imminent -- not in stage one or two emergencies.=20 -- Eliminates Price Signals for Retail Customers - Price caps remove=20 price signals for retail customers. Customers, particularly=20 industrial companies, which should be encouraged to curtail during=20 shortages, are not encouraged to conserve power when dispatched price=20 caps keep prices below the actual cost to produce electricity.=20 -- Discourages Supply from Out-of-State - Suppliers outside of=20 California, who are under no legal obligation to dispatch power during=20 an emergency in the state, are not encouraged to increase available=20 production when reported market clearing prices are below their cost=20 to produce. During times of emergencies, utilities across the Western=20 region are not likely to take on additional risks and costs if they=20 don't believe they will be fully compensated - a situation the current=20 price caps create.=20 MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT - Click Here=20 SOURCE Reliant Energy=20 CONTACT: Maxine Enciso of Ketchum Public Relations, Los Angeles,=20 310-444-1303, for Reliant Energy; or media, Richard Wheatley of Reliant=20 Energy, 713-207-5881=20 Photo: NewsCom: AP=20 Archive: http://photoarchive.ap.org PRN Photo Desk, 888-776-6555 or=20 212-782-2840=20 Company News On-Call: or fax,=20 800-758-5804, ext. 419090=20 Web site: http://www.reliantenergy.com (REI)=20 By Kathleen McFall kmcfall@ftenergy.com President George W. Bush's energy package encourages the use of biomass fue= ls=20 for both transportation purposes and electricity generation. ""They can=20 provide a reliable source of energy at a stable price, and they can also=20 generate income for farmers, landowners and others who harness them,"" his= =20 administration's report said.=20 Despite this warm and fuzzy language, however, the administration offered n= o=20 tangible funding for the fledgling biofuels industry=01*other than an exten= sion=20 of an existing ethanol tax credit that was not due to expire until 2007=01*= a=20 significant disappointment, and surprise, to advocates of renewable=20 transportation fuels. The report did recommend expanding tax credits for biomass energy projects = to=20 include forest-related and agriculture fuel sources and threw its weighty= =20 support at a new credit for electricity produced from biomass co-fired with= =20 coal. These recommendations are already included in the president's 2002=20 budget.=20 ""We are pleased that the administration included expansion of the biomass t= ax=20 credit and hope that, with congressional leadership, we will see this=20 expanded provision signed into law this year,"" said Katherine Hamilton,=20 co-director of the American Bioenergy Association (ABA).=20 Unlike other portions of the recommended energy policy, biomass energy=20 probably will not suffer under the recent change in Senate composition, giv= en=20 Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle's (D-S.D.) agricultural constituency and= =20 his previous support of the biofuels industry.=20 According to the National Energy Policy Development report, biomass account= s=20 for about 76% of non-hydropower renewable electricity generation,=20 representing a total of about 1.6% of total U.S. electricity supply.=20 Biopower advocates, however, envision an even greater market penetration in= =20 the coming decades and point to its environmental and ancillary advantages.= =20 For example, given that biomass combustion can be carbon dioxide-neutral (i= f=20 the growth and use cycle is managed sustainably), environmental groups=20 support an expanded role. Farmers with marginal lands that could grow bioma= ss=20 fuel could enjoy economic benefits. With large amounts of wood residue, the= =20 forest industry also stands to benefit from wider use of wood as a power=20 source.=20 Renewable energy offers a particular advantage to the lumber and paper=20 industry, and many analysts project that the industry may soon become a net= =20 seller of electricity.=20 ""In the lumber and paper industries, wood scraps are sometimes directly fed= =20 into boilers to produce steam for their manufacturing processes or to heat= =20 their buildings. For that reason, renewable energy offers a particular=20 advantage to the lumber and paper industry, and many analysts project that= =20 the industry may soon become a net seller of electricity,"" said the energy= =20 policy report.=20 Co-firing with coal Biomass=01*usually wood or wood residue=01*has traditionally been burned di= rectly=20 in the industrial sector for heat or on-site electricity generation.=20 According to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the existing 10 GW of=20 installed capacity are based on this direct-combustion technology.=20 For utilities and power-generating companies with coal-fired capacity,=20 however, biomass co-firing may represent one of the least-cost renewable=20 energy options, said the DOE. The process involves blending different=20 materials in varying amounts with coal.=20 Not only does mixing biomass with coal reduce emissions, it is likely to be= =20 cost-effective. Southern Co. estimates that a biomass plant alone could=20 generate power, depending on its location, at 4 to 11 cents/kWh. Given that= =20 the lower range of this corresponds to coal generation costs, there are=20 clearly circumstances where biomass-coal co-firing would be economically=20 attractive today. Plus, the environmental public relations benefit for=20 utilities with coal-fired capacity would be valuable.=20 Domestic biomass generation capacity could reach 20-30 GW by the year 2020 = by=20 co-firing at existing U.S. coal-fired power plants.=20 According to a recent report prepared by five National Laboratories, domest= ic=20 biomass generation capacity could reach 20-30 GW by the year 2020 by=20 co-firing at existing U.S. coal-fired power plants.=20 A recent report by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel for Climate= =20 Change (IPCC) also cites the potential of coal co-firing with biomass. The= =20 IPCC report concludes that co-firing in coal boilers results in the lowest= =20 cost and least technical risk of the examined approaches for biomass=20 conversion to electricity.=20 Working out the technical kinks Already, said the DOE, six power plants in the U.S. are currently co-firing= =20 coal and wood residue products on a regular basis. Another 10 plants have= =20 successfully tested co-firing over the last decade, and at least six more= =20 plants are now conducting or planning tests.=20 For example, Southern Co. is working with DOE, the Southern Research=20 Institute and the Electric Power Research Institute to study ways to grow a= nd=20 harvest switchgrass to blend with coal as a fuel for power generation.=20 Ideally suited for the southeastern U.S., switchgrass is a rugged grass tha= t=20 can be grown on marginal agricultural land. Reaching heights of up to 12=20 feet, it requires little fertilization and herbicide and can be harvested= =20 twice a year.=20 Harvesting methods, co-milling of switchgrass and pulverized coal,=20 pilot-scale co-firing tests, and a full-scale demonstration of co-firing at= =20 Alabama Power Co.'s Plant Gadsden are part of Southern Co.'s collaborative= =20 project.=20 The U.S. Agriculture Department is also taking a role in exploring the=20 potential of biomass and coal co-firing as a means to give farmers new=20 markets, especially for currently idle land. The agency recently authorized= =20 funding for three co-firing demonstration projects.=20 In Iowa, the Chariton Valley Biomass Project is a cooperative effort to=20 develop warm and cool season grasses (such as switchgrass) to co-fire with= =20 coal at Alliant Energy's Ottumwa Generating Station. The project is designe= d=20 to generate a sustained supply of 35 MW of biomass energy. Eventually, the= =20 grass could substitute for as much as 5% of the coal currently burned at th= e=20 plant.=20 In addition to reducing coal emissions, the Chariton Valley Biomass Project= =20 will support the local farm economy.=20 In addition to reducing coal emissions, the project will support the local= =20 farm economy because the grass and trees will come from acreage taken out o= f=20 production under the Agriculture Department's Conservation Reserve Program= =20 (CRP). CRP land is generally marginal land that the government subsidizes= =20 farmers to leave idle to both prevent erosion and protect commodity prices= =20 from product surpluses.=20 The Pennsylvania Switchgrass Energy and Conservation Project will produce= =20 switchgrass on CRP land for sale to a local cooperative's coal-fired=20 fluid-bed combustors.=20 In New York, the Agriculture Department project will fund willow biomass=20 crops and switchgrass on CRP acreage in the central and western part of the= =20 state. The primary markets for the willow biomass are two coal-burning powe= r=20 plants and a small university central heating facility.=20 Land conflicts, transportation may be obstacles As these pilot projects illustrate, biomass conversion efforts may have the= =20 most significant potential in rural areas. ""Since biomass is widely=20 distributed it has good potential to provide rural areas with a renewable= =20 source of energy. The challenge is to provide =01( conversion and delivery = of=20 bioenergy to the marketplace in the form of modern and competitive energy= =20 sources,"" said the IPCC report.=20 A potential drawback to co-firing is transportation. Transportation of=20 wood-based energy products is more costly, per unit of energy, than coal, f= or=20 example, and most analysts believe it will prove most economical to site=20 generation plants near biomass sources.=20 ""The generating plant or biorefinery must be located near to the resource t= o=20 minimize transport costs of the low-energy-density biomass as well as to=20 minimize impacts on air and water use,"" the IPCC report said. However, note= s=20 the report's authors, economies of scale may be significant enough to offse= t=20 the transport costs involved.=20 A potential drawback over the long term, however, for biomass conversion is= =20 land use conflicts. The IPCC report notes that by 2100, the global land=20 requirement to feed the growing world population will increase substantiall= y.=20 ""Up until this time there may well be sufficient land to supply all demands= =20 for food, fibre and energy, but at some stage after that, land-use conflict= s=20 could arise and before that, competition for water and irrigation may be a= =20 constraint.""=20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Sen. Hagel's ESI speech; [EMail-Body]= attached is Sen. Hagel's energy speech. He focusses on oil primarily but also does a nice job of framing the importance of sound energy policy to our continued economic growth. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/22/2000 07:31 AM ----- Rosalee Fleming 09/21/2000 01:42 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Sen. Hagel's ESI speech Ken wanted to make sure you saw this speech. ---------------------- Forwarded by Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron on 09/21/2000 01:40 PM --------------------------- Joe Hillings 09/21/2000 12:41 PM To: Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Tori L Wells/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Sen. Hagel's ESI speech Rosalee: I understand that Ken Lay and Senator Hagel will be together this evening at the Horatio Alger event I believe in Williamsburg. The attachment is the speech Chuck gave this week before ESI and Ken may find it helpful in some discussion tonight. Joe ---------------------- Forwarded by Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron on 09/21/2000 12:47 PM --------------------------- Ken_Peel@hagel.senate.gov (Ken Peel) on 09/20/2000 06:34:56 PM To: rwbliss@aol.com, zb@csis.org, lcraner@iri.org, don.deline@halliburton.com, hpgoldfield@swidlaw.com, jhillin@enron.com, m.irace@erols.com, vp@mideasti.org, mahalati@ix.netcom.com, mh@dci.hhlaw.com, Jim_McVaney@CMAHQ.com, rich.merski@aig.com, wmorley@uschamber.com, John_Peschke@rpc.senate.gov, ggs2@columbia.edu, ssinger1@gmu.edu, staubenb@bechtel.com, ptomsen@unomaha.edu, gziv@ipforum.org, rzoellick@gmfus.org cc: Subject: Sen. Hagel's ESI speech I thought you might be interested in seeing a copy of a speech on international energy policy that Sen. Hagel gave today at the Economic Strategy Institute in Washington, D.C. - hagelesi.rtf [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Per Your Request; [EMail-Body]= Here are the message points ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/09/2001 01:05 PM ----- Yorleni Mendez 03/08/2001 10:00 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Per Your Request [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Tammy Hopkins - Resume; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/09/2001 01:08 PM ----- Tamara Hopkins/ENRON@enronXgate 03/08/2001 08:53 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Tammy Hopkins - Resume Steve, for the last two years I have been working for Shelley and my responsibilities include working with the ETS and NBPL to determine our positions as it relates to the standardization process at GISB. In the last budget process, it was decided to reduce our level of support at GISB and my position will be eliminated March 31. I have been working with Cindy and her Redeployment Team to look at other opportunities within Enron but to date, I have not received an offer. I would be interested in talking to someone in your organization about any opportunities within Government Affairs. If there are any opportunities in your areas, could you direct me to the appropriate person? Thanks! Tammy Hopkins [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= EGEP Sale Announcement; [EMail-Body]= Please make sure that nothing goes out internally or externally without the approval of Cliff Baxter or Mark Metts. We need to continue our usual vetting process through both PR and IR, but need also to add Cliff and Mark. In getting the OK from Cliff and Mark we must have no OKs by default -- ie because we haven't received comments or a response on time. If anybody needs help getting to Cliff or Mark, then Mark Palmer, Karen Denne, or I can help. Thanks ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/16/2000 10:05 AM ----- John Ambler@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 10/13/2000 04:39 PM To: Jimmy cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer@ENRON, Johan Subject: EGEP Sale Announcement Jimmy, I'll be working up a limited statement and Q&As, which we will need to run by Jeff Sherrick and Mark Metts. Once we have an approved statement I'll let you know. Of course, we would prefer to avoid publicity if possible. Until we have an approved statement, please call me to discuss if you have pressing demands. Thanks, John ---------------------- Forwarded by John Ambler/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 10/13/2000 04:26 PM --------------------------- Jeffrey Sherrick@ENRON 10/13/2000 03:04 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, John Jimmy cc: Stephen Wallace/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Larry Morse/Corp/Enron@Enron, Mike Stewart/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sanjay Subject: EGEP Sale Announcement On Friday (last night Houston time) we announced Enron's decision to sell Enron Oil & Gas India Ltd. (EOGIL), our subsidary that owns a 30% interest in the Panna, Mukta and Tapti concession areas. We now have bankers involved and a data room is being prepared in Houston which made it extremely difficult to keep the deal quiet any longer. There were a rumors circulating through the office, but the reality of the announcement was still a shock to most of the employees in India and Houston. Attached is a memo we handed out to employees, but basically we said the following: 1) Selling assets or companies is a routine part of Enron's strategy to redeploy capital in the higher return opportunities. The company has exposure to a number of tremendous opportunities today that were not envisioned even twelve months ago. In line with this strategy, we are placing EOGIL in the market. 2) Depending on the success of finding an acceptable buyer for EOGIL, we will be reviewing the balance of our portfolio for transfer to other Enron entities or for sale as separate packages. We anticipate closing the EOGIL transaction and rationalizing the remaining portfolio by March 31, 2001. 3) Pending the success outlined in item #2, we will eliminate Enron Global E&P as an Enron business unit on March 31, 2001. 4) We announced some interim staff changes to facilitate the process. a) Jeff Sherrick would re-focus his time largely on the sale process b) Mike Stewart will be responsible for all India activity except the sale process c) Steve Harper will be responsible for EGEP's sale activity and coordination with our bankers and Corporate Development 5) Commented on the potential impact to employees in general terms. We told them it was pre-mature to outline all of the possibilities until we signed a PSA with a buyer. However, in general, there is a good likelihood that many people will either have opportunities for future employment with the buyers or through redeployment within Enron. Those people that do not remain with the assets or are not redeployed in Enron will be involuntarily terminated March 31, 2001 unless they are needed to close a transaction or to provide transition services to a buyer. I would like to keep this as low-keyed as possible. Last year when we were for sale there were not a lot of comments, but you never know. If anyone in the media picks up on this I would expect it to happen early next week. Mike Stewart is currently in India in the Mumbai office (01191228395841) and can be reached at the Mariott after-hours(01191228577878). He is fully briefed on our position regarding the activities within EGEP and EOGIL. Mike will be traveling offshore and to Baroda over the weekend and on Monday. I will be available all weekend and next week at the following numbers; (work) 713-853-5934, (home) 281-320-2198, (cell) 713-569-4713. I would suggest talking with Mike or I before making any comments to the media if possible. This afternoon I notified our partners and thr Gov't of India of our intention to market our assets. I will be making a trip to India soon to visit with the appropriate people in these organizations within the next two weeks. While I wouldn't expect this to happen, please refer any inquiries from our partners (ONGC and Reliance) or the GOI to Mike or me. As you might expect, we want to be careful and consistent in our message to these groups. I will keep you informed regarding any changes to the above. If you have any questions, contact me at the above numbers. jeff [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Weekly Retail Meeting, EB 27C1; [EMail-Body]= Gordon Weil Joe Allen Dave Marquart Richard Tabors [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Tariffs Approved; [EMail-Body]= Congrats Ray. ... Now, get FERC to do something amazing. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/16/2001 02:12 AM --------------------------- Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp. From: Richard Shapiro 05/14/2001 09:52 PM To: Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON, Robert Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Rebecca McDonald/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Peter E Weidler/ENRON@enronXgate, Steve Hopper/TRANSREDES@TRANSREDES Subject: Re: Tariffs Approved Outstanding outcome- Ray, this was an incredible result given the challenging context, to say the least....You should feel quite proud of this achievment- Thanks! Linda Robertson 05/14/2001 01:06 PM To: Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, Robert Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON Subject: Re: Tariffs Approved Excellent, and congratulations. Ray Alvarez 05/14/2001 12:34 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Robert Subject: Tariffs Approved The rate case that the governmental affairs group filed in January, on behalf of Transredes, has come to a very successful conclusion and the new rates will go into effect towards the end of this month. The rates are not much lower than what we filed for, and represent a very significant increase over the previous rates. The tariff methodology and revised regulations, put into effect by the Supreme Decree, were followed to the letter by the regulator despite political pressure to arbitrarily keep rates down. The deliverables here were to (1) obtain a tariff methodology via Supreme Decree that would make the company finance-able / rescue it from dire financial straits and (2) file a rate case and prosecute it to obtain hard rates in accordance with the tariff methodology. This second deliverable has now been completed. Transredes has had a bond issue pending since last year due to the uncertainty about rates; it is my understanding that the financial market loved the ruling and that Transredes sold $40 million worth of bonds in about 5 minutes! This ruling should also significantly increase Transredes's market value, relative to Enron's efforts to sell its interest in the company. ---------------------- Forwarded by Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron on 05/14/2001 11:38 AM --------------------------- Doug Farmer 05/11/2001 06:09 PM To: Peter E cc: Jan van den Berg/TRANSREDES@TRANSREDES, John Naphan/TRANSREDES@TRANSREDES, Cyro Pedro Elio/TRANSREDES@TRANSREDES, Fernando Subject: Tariffs Approved Gentlemen, I am delighted to report that SIRESE approved substantial increases in TR's tariffs consistent with the Law and Regulation. The details are :- Existing Tariff SIRESE Approved % Increase TR/CLHB Proposed TR/CLHB % Increase Gas Export (including surcharges) $0.18 $0.2205 22.5% $0.26 (excluding RG) 44.4% Liquids Domestic $1.05 $2.46 134.3% $3.25 209.5% Liquids Export $1.55 $2.31 49% $3.35 116.1% CLHB's tariffs were also approved as follows $1.19 $2.20 84.9% $3.528 196.5% As you can see we did substantially better than CLHB (comparable with our liquids domestic) !! We will get a detailed report on the assumptions used by SIRESE to reach their conclusions on Monday, but our inteligence suggests the following :- 1. Export gas volumes increased to 100% TR capacity, and 100% GSA + Cuiaba 2 assumed for SDA and TEMIN purposes 2. RG Compresion project deleted 3. Interest rate reduced to 10 or 10.5 % i.e. the rate in our bond issue 4. Liquids expansion in the South reduced 5. Some continuity of service CAPEX reduced 6. Unknown OPEX reduction and maybe a change to the OPEX allocation between concesions 7. OCC in service date slipped from 2003 to 2004. 8. Debt/Equity assumption changed from 60/40 to 70/30 Our strategy to respond to each of these points is as follows :- 1. Volumes. Covered by 8% rule, we can blete but can expect little back here. Clearly we will appeal if volumes exceed installed capacity in the short term i.e. 2002/2003. 2. RG Compression - not worth fighting for since we don't even have the support of BG 3. Interest Rate - We'll get this back when we do a tariff revision and actual rates are used. When we get the detail we will appeal if Jan feels we have concrete grounds i.e. commision costs etc. are omited. 4. Liquids Expansion in the South. Here we intend to do a detailed analysis of exactly what has been deleted and as a result what liquids/gas production will be shut in. If possible all assumptions to be agreed with the affected producers (PB, BG, Vintage and Chaco). We will then write to those producers(copy SIRESE , VMEH etc.) stating that on their recommendation the project scope was reduced by SIRESE. We will give them an estimate of the lost liquids/gas production (in both volume and cash terms) resultant from this decision. We will tell them that since they proposed these reductions we have no intention of appealing them but invite them to appeal. 5. Continuity of Service Capex. We need to see the detail here. We will take the moral high ground and be absolutely clear that we are not prepared to compromise our safety and environmental standards. We need to see exactly what has been removed, but my thought is that if that means we are unable to provide some services (e.g. LPG transportation) or the continued operation of some liquids laterals, we should write to those producers affected suggesting that if they wish these services to be continued they need to appeal the decision. Again since this is Capex we will get it back in the end on tariff revisions as long as the expenditure is approved on an annual basis in the SIRESE budget process. 6. OPEX - need to see the detail on Monday. 7. OCC - will not appeal - we need to do a detailed study to develop an OCC strategy. 8. Debt/Equity ratio. Strictly speaking what has been done is in accordance with the Law/Regulation - the regulation says the maximum allowed equity is 40%. However, we have very strong grounds to appeal since : a) we are currently miles away from 60/40 let alone 70/30, b) we can only borrow for CAPEX (as per bond issue and the policy of all/most banks/lending institutions) with the case presented in the rate case if we borrow to cover 100% of CAPEX we can easily demonstrate that we are still miles away from 60/40. We intend to fight this one very hard using all the external/independant help we can get. As you are all aware our big exposure with the rate case was that the much needed substantial increase in liquids tariffs would not be approved and we would be subjected to some form of arbitary cut. This has not happened SIRESE has now approved and hence owns these substantial increases. Having got the big hike our job is now to claw back as much as we can from the above strategy in the full knowledge that the results of these efforts will be much smaller and hence managable increases. Attached is an analysis of the individual impacts on the tariff of the above points and the corporate model using the new tariff with our volume assumptions (i.e. the worst case). Regards, Doug [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Davis favors tiered rate increases but still clings to ""no new
 rate increases""; [EMail-Body]= He could have solved this problem in 20 minutes, right? Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 03/25/2001 12:40 PM To: skean@enron.com, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, mpalmer@enron.com, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Davis favors tiered rate increases but still clings to ""no new rate increases"" Power Hogs May Get Hit In Pocketbook Davis favors tiered rate increases David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Sunday, March 25, 2001 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle URL: N30195.DTL Gov. Gray Davis, faced with the near inevitability of raising consumers' electricity bills, is leaning toward a rate system whereby those who use more power pay more than those who conserve, The Chronicle has learned. Sources close to the governor said he is being lobbied by his own staff members to accept a so-called structured rate system. Top officials from his own administration told lawmakers Friday that the state may end up spending more than twice the $10 billion previously estimated to purchase power on behalf of California's near-bankrupt utilities. If so, the officials warned that consumers' electricity rates could double. In the case of Pacific Gas and Electric Co., this would mean customers' average monthly power bills would rise from $60 to $120. Consumers throughout the Bay Area believe that at least some increase is on the way. ""We're going to have to bite the bullet and pay the money,"" said Larry Webster, a retired Caltrans worker in Redwood City. ""We might as well admit that electricity is no longer a nickel. It's a dime. If you're going to use it, let's pay for it."" Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for the governor, distanced himself yesterday from estimates that rates would double. The figures reported in the press, he said, ""were wildly high."" ""The governor still believes he can live within the existing rate structure, "" Maviglio said. ""Until we know the results of the negotiations with the utilities, you can't conclude anything."" The state is negotiating a multibillion-dollar bailout package with PG&E and Southern California Edison Co. to relieve the utilities of about $13 billion in debt. PG&E and Edison have been saying for months that there is no way California can overcome its current energy woes without higher rates. The irony of the Davis administration now saying the same thing was not lost on the two companies. ""The state is in the exact same position the utilities were in last fall,"" said John Nelson, a PG&E spokesman. ""Either wholesale prices need to come down or retail prices need to go up. The disparity is too large."" Statewide blackouts last week drove home the precariousness of California's energy situation to ratepayers -- and may have served as a blessing in disguise for the governor. COST VS. OUTAGES If given a choice between further outages and paying higher rates, many consumers said they would accept increases in their power bills. ""I don't like either choice,"" said Janet Leroux, facing the possibility of a gooey mess if the air conditioning goes out at her downtown San Francisco candy store. ""But I guess I'd go with higher rates. I sure didn't like the blackouts."" Publicly, the governor has been insisting for weeks that rates will stay within ""the existing rate structure"" -- a stealthy way of saying that January's 9 percent increase and an expected 10 percent increase next year will remain in place. But privately, he and his staff are discussing additional rate increases that could be spread over as long as 10 years, sources said. Utility executives and power generators told The Chronicle last week that a minimum 30 percent rate increase lasting up to a decade is in the cards. ""For the good of California, it's inevitable,"" said Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, a Menlo Park energy industry association. Sacramento resident John Hax observed that when temperatures soar in the Central Valley this summer, he'd be more than willing to pay a higher price for power if this keeps the air conditioners on. ""It's like gasoline,"" he said. ""I don't like paying higher prices for gasoline, but that's the price of doing business."" Ratepayers draw the line, though, at any increase topping 10 or 20 percent. ""If it was 20 percent, I'd probably do it,"" said Tracy resident Mark Dougherty. ""But if it was more, like 50 percent, I'd rather go with rolling blackouts."" ""I'd rather have blackouts,"" agreed Jenny Soghomonian, owner of a shoe- repair shop in San Francisco's Financial District. ""I don't want to pay rates that are so much higher."" NOT EVERY COST PALATABLE This is the tightrope that state officials and industry players now find themselves walking: While consumers may be willing to pay more to avoid blackouts, they aren't willing to swallow virtually any cost thrown their way. Yet if rates are not high enough, they may not prevent daily blackout threats this summer and beyond. ""Higher rates are the price signal that it takes for conservation,"" said Tom Higgins, senior vice president of Edison International, parent company of Southern California Edison. Simply put, he meant that most consumers will not aggressively conserve power, and thus alleviate shortages, unless there is a financial incentive to do so. Rebates proposed by the governor have met with only a lukewarm response, requiring, critics say, too much effort on the part of individual ratepayers. But a sudden spike in monthly power bills almost certainly would prompt widespread conservation measures. ""It adjusts consumer behavior,"" Higgins said. ""People want to get their bills back down."" RATES' EFFECT ON USAGE He and other industry sources said higher rates are perhaps the only way Californians will achieve the 10 percent conservation goal sought by the governor -- a move seen as vital if blackouts are to be avoided this summer. ""It's intellectually dishonest to think there's any other way out of this,"" Higgins said. Consumer activists' initial reaction to any talk of a rate increase comes across loud and clear: No, no, no. ""No bailout. No rate increases. No secret deals,"" said Harvey Rosenfield, head of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa Monica. ""We need to get back to a regulated system."" Rosenfield is the biggest fly in the governor's ointment. He has threatened to push through a ballot initiative re-regulating California's power market if Davis cannot find a consumer-friendly way out of the current fix. Because of Rosenfield's past success in writing a ballot measure on insurance rebates, which delivered about $800 million to consumers, his threat is taken seriously in Sacramento. ""We've paid too much already,"" Rosenfield said. ""A fair price is what we were promised by deregulation, which was a 20 percent rate decrease."" However, when he was asked whether there was any room to discuss a structured rate increase such as the idea being promoted by the governor's staff, Rosenfield toned down his characteristic rhetoric. ""Big users should pay more,"" he said after a moment's reflection. ""I'm open to a tiered system but only if it's fair."" Rosenfield quickly added that he would have to see how other consumer advocates felt about the matter before agreeing to negotiate such things with Davis. MOVE TOWARD STRUCTURED RATES Clearly, though, momentum is building toward a system of structured power rates, which probably would include increases of varying sizes for consumers. The California Public Utilities Commission is scheduled to address January's 9 percent rate increase on Tuesday. That increase originally was given only a three-month duration, but most observers expect it to be renewed for at least another three months, if not longer. PUC President Loretta Lynch declined to comment on the likelihood of rates going up but added her voice to those backing a structured system. ""I am a fan of restructuring rates to exempt conservation,"" she said. ""People who use a whole lot of power should pay more."" The biggest electricity customer in the state is the state itself, now that California is purchasing power on behalf of its cash-poor utilities. The state already has spent about $4 billion buying electricity and has yet to determine how the cash will be recouped from consumers. San Francisco resident Rosita Magee accepts that for California to find its energy footing once more, rates will probably be heading up. ""That way, you have more convenience and electricity, more stability,"" she said. But Magee has come up with another solution, one that doesn't involve rate increases and rolling blackouts. She's moving to Texas. Chronicle staff writers Matthew Stannard and Pia Sarkar contributed to this report. / E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com. ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Tokyo Presentation 15 May; [EMail-Body]= I think the presentation looks fine, but consider adding this: there is real risk to utilities (as well as customers) in continuing a regulated regime. The California utilities have been pushed into or to the brink of bankruptcy [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Wolak's report; [EMail-Body]= Joe Attached find the report you requested. Alan - Governor Davis offered a highly discounted forward contract ($45-50/MWh) at the FERC settlement conference today. As usual, California is trying to get its refund with or without FERC requiring it. Alan - Tim and Joe will likely need your assistance with this settlement negotiation. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: Sac Bee, Wed, 7/11: Mediator talked of a bigger refund: He reportedly suggested a $4.5 billion deal midway through the failed talks Sac Bee, Wed, 7/11: Davis repeats threat to sue FERC to get full refund Sac Bee, Wed, 7/11: Dan Walters: Davis plays in a virtual world while the= =20 energy reality continues=20 Sac Bee, Wed, 7/11: Energy Digest: Ratepayer panel shot down again Sac Bee, Wed, 7/11: Missing megawatts: Conservation saving state from=20 blackouts (Editorial) SD Union, Wed, 7/11: Governor tells FERC to be fair and then some SD Union, Wed, 7/11: Calpine says deal with state close on alleged overchar= ges SD Union, Wed, 7/11: Judge refuses to let ratepayers form official committe= e=20 in utility bankruptcy case LA Times, Wed, 7/11: Judge Bars Ratepayers Panel From PG&E Case SF Chron, Wed, 7/11: Developments in California's energy crisis SF Chron, Wed, 7/11: Enron Corp. sues to block Senate from forcing document= =20 release SF Chron, Wed, 7/11: Governor threatens to sue utilities for refunds=20 Davis says California won't settle for $1 billion SF Chron, Wed, 7/11: News briefs on the California power crisis Mercury News, Wed, 7/11: White House bends under energy conservation pressu= re=20 Mercury News, Wed, 7/11: Davis ups the voltage (Editorial) OC Register, Wed, 7/11: Lights go out on Davis' power show (Commentary) --- Mediator talked of a bigger refund: He reportedly suggested a $4.5 billion= =20 deal midway through the failed talks. By David Whitney Bee Washington Bureau (Published July 11, 2001)=20 WASHINGTON -- Midway through the negotiations between California and power= =20 sellers to settle the myriad issues arising out of the state's energy crisi= s,=20 the mediator told California's negotiating team that he thought a deal wort= h=20 more than $4.5 billion would be appropriate -- a much higher figure than he= =20 suggested after the talks ended Monday.=20 Whether the statement by Curtis Wagner, the chief administrative law judge= =20 for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, was a negotiating ploy or a= =20 reflection of his evolving beliefs is not clear.=20 Before the settlement talks began two weeks earlier, Wagner said he thought= =20 Gov. Gray Davis' demand for $8.9 billion in refunds was too high and that a= =20 settlement probably would be in the range of $2 billion to $2.5 billion.=20 The disclosure that Wagner had contemplated a much higher figure midway=20 through the negotiations suggests the state had more support than the judge= =20 let on Monday when he said after the talks foundered that he thought a deal= =20 should involve ""hundreds of millions, maybe a billion"" dollars.=20 While the state wants $8.9 billion, $3 billion of that was for overcharges= =20 during the five months preceding last October and are beyond FERC's scope o= f=20 review. Even as a starting point then, the $4.5 billion mentioned by Wagner= =20 represented 75 percent of the money the state was demanding for alleged pri= ce=20 gouging between October and May.=20 The judge's $4.5 billion figure, divided between cash payments and savings= =20 from long-term power contracts, was confirmed by three sources who asked to= =20 be identified only as ""close to the negotiations"" because participants had= =20 been required to sign confidentiality statements.=20 The sources gave virtually identical accounts of a July 2 meeting with Wagn= er=20 in which the judge also dismissed as ""inadequate"" a $670 million settlement= =20 offer made by power generators and marketers.=20 By Monday, the settlement offer had risen to $716 million. But the state=20 refused to back off its $8.9 billion demand, and there never was any seriou= s=20 back-and-forth negotiations during the 15-day period the regulatory=20 commission had given Wagner to craft a deal.=20 As a consequence of the failed talks, Wagner said Monday that within a week= =20 he will send the five-member commission his recommendations on how it might= =20 approach an order refunding power overcharges.=20 Among Wagner's suggestions is that the commission convene a hearing before = a=20 different administrative judge to take testimony from generators, marketers= =20 and the state on how to arrive at a fair settlement.=20 The options sketchily outlined by Wagner on Monday included limiting the ti= me=20 when refunds are allowed -- something that could reduce state claims by abo= ut=20 one-third -- and changing the way power plant costs are calculated to a=20 formula more favored by generators.=20 It is not clear whether Wagner, who moved from one negotiating team to=20 another during his two-week quest for a deal, ever raised the $4.5 billion= =20 settlement figure to the power marketers and generators.=20 Joel Newton, who represented Dynegy Power, Duke Energy, Reliant Energy,=20 Williams-AES and Mirant in the talks, said Tuesday he was bound by the=20 confidentiality pledge to keep silent on the internal negotiations.=20 Wagner also is refusing all media calls.=20 According to the account of the negotiations confirmed by sources Tuesday,= =20 Wagner was angry at the snail's pace of progress after the first week of th= e=20 talks.=20 On Friday, June 29, Wagner called everyone into his hearing room and scolde= d=20 them. He condemned the California team, saying they all ought to wear ""clow= n=20 suits"" because they were ""in the pocket"" of Davis and refused to show any= =20 independence.=20 He then turned to the generators and said that after a week of talks, nothi= ng=20 had been heard from them. He told them he wanted them to produce ""real=20 numbers, and hard numbers"" over the weekend and that if they didn't, he wou= ld=20 -- ""and you're not going to like it.""=20 Wagner's admonition apparently moved no one toward a deal. On Monday, in th= e=20 meeting with the California delegation, one source quoted Wagner as saying= =20 the settlement number he received from the generators and marketers ""is so= =20 low I can't even present it to you.""=20 ""I'm not happy with the figures, they're not adequate,"" others quoted the= =20 judge as saying.=20 At that point, the sources said, Wagner said he was thinking of a settlemen= t=20 of $2.5 billion in cash, $2 billion in long-term contract savings and other= =20 money from out-of-state investor-owned utilities and even the federal=20 Bonneville Power Administration, which markets power from dams in the=20 Northwest.=20 But as the clock wound down on the negotiations, nothing much happened unti= l=20 Friday and Saturday, when the California team met with the five largest pow= er=20 generators.=20 It was at those meetings that the generators offered $510 million in refund= s=20 to settle their disputes with the state. But the money would have gone to= =20 reduce the tab for what they were owed by the state and California utilitie= s,=20 and it was loaded with conditions, including the state dropping all of its= =20 investigations and lawsuits.=20 Wagner declared the talks over Monday, saying he was unable to bring the=20 parties together.=20 The Bee's David Whitney can be reached at (202) 383-0004 or=20 dwhitney@mcclatchydc.com. Davis repeats threat to sue FERC to get full refund=20 By Emily Bazar Bee Capitol Bureau=20 (Published July 11, 2001)=20 Gov. Gray Davis shot words of caution at federal regulators Tuesday, warnin= g=20 that he will sue them if they order power companies to refund anything less= =20 than the $8.9 billion he and other state officials have demanded.=20 The Democratic governor also lobbed threats at state legislators, suggestin= g=20 that he may call a special session to prevent them from embarking upon a=20 monthlong summer break next week.=20 Instead of vacationing, Davis said, lawmakers must work to approve an=20 agreement between the state and Southern California Edison that would save= =20 the utility from bankruptcy.=20 Though the governor has indicated previously that the state may take the=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to court, his announcement Tuesday mad= e=20 it clear he intends to follow through.=20 Settlement talks with power generators to determine how much, if any, the= =20 companies overcharged California for electricity concluded Monday with no= =20 resolution.=20 Now, the decision rests with the FERC's governing board, and Davis said the= =20 state won't back away from the $8.9 billion figure it demanded during talks= .=20 ""You order what you think is fair,"" Davis said during a news conference wit= h=20 the state's top negotiators. ""We'll take what you order, and we'll see you = in=20 court.""=20 Davis acknowledged that a legal battle could drag out for months or years.= =20 He added that he believes the disagreement -- or even a protracted court=20 battle -- will not affect a tentative agreement between the state and Ediso= n.=20 Under terms of the deal, money to pay off the utility's debt would come fro= m=20 a state purchase of its transmission lines and from a portion of consumers'= =20 electricity rates.=20 According to the agreement, the Legislature must approve the deal by Aug. 1= 5,=20 and Davis said he intends to hold lawmakers to that date.=20 Davis said the deadline is important because creditor committees will=20 scrutinize the Legislature's every move to determine whether to force Ediso= n=20 into bankruptcy court rather than await a political deal.=20 Legislators are scheduled to leave for summer recess July 20 and return Aug= .=20 20.=20 Davis threatened to use his executive powers to force lawmakers to remain i= n=20 Sacramento and work on the Edison agreement, if necessary.=20 The Bee's Emily Bazar can be reached at (916) 326-5540 or ebazar@sacbee.com= . Dan Walters: Davis plays in a virtual world while the energy reality contin= ues (Published July 11, 2001)=20 California still has a very real and very severe energy crisis, to wit:=20 The state is still running up massive debts as it pays more for power than = it=20 can recover from ratepayers and is having trouble borrowing billions of=20 dollars to cover the debt.=20 There is a strong possibility, perhaps a probability, that when summer's he= at=20 truly descends, there will be severe power blackouts as air conditioners=20 demand more juice than California can generate or buy.=20 One major utility, Pacific Gas and Electric, has filed for bankruptcy=20 protection and a second, Southern California Edison, is on the brink of=20 joining it.=20 There is, however, a virtual energy crisis consisting of political spin,=20 media leaks and made-for-television buzz words -- and it is rapidly becomin= g=20 dominant, while the real situation fades into the background.=20 This week's comic opera proceedings before a Federal Energy Regulatory=20 Commission administrative judge in Washington had little to do with reality= =20 and everything to do with the virtual version.=20 Gov. Gray Davis and other officials demanded $8.9 billion in refunds from t= he=20 generators and brokers who have been selling California power for the past= =20 year, alleging that California is, in Davis' words, ""being gouged and rippe= d=20 off."" But the number itself was more or less plucked out of thin air -- an= =20 arithmetic exercise by the state power grid's traffic controller not intend= ed=20 for a refund proceeding. And while Judge Curtis Wagner saw it as unrealisti= c,=20 Davis and other state officials insisted on its validity.=20 ""There are refunds due that total hundreds of millions of dollars and maybe= a=20 billion dollars,"" Wagner said as a final negotiating session collapsed. But= =20 that's a far cry from the $8.9 billion that Davis insists is due. ""If you= =20 think California is going to settle for $1 billion in refunds, we will see= =20 you in court,"" Davis said Tuesday.=20 Why is Davis being so belligerent? Because it's good politics. Ever since h= e=20 began berating out-of-state generators and accusing them of ripping off=20 California, Davis' approval ratings have been climbing. If he settled for= =20 substantially less -- the power generators probably would agree to a couple= =20 of billion dollars to rid themselves of the matter -- Davis would be=20 embarrassed. Politically, he's served by continuing to portray himself as= =20 fighting for California and against the out-of-state generators.=20 That it's more political construct than reality is indicated by another eve= nt=20 this week, Davis' release of state power purchase data from early in the ye= ar=20 -- numbers that were made public only because a judge told him he had to do= =20 it.=20 Davis and his minions have been accusing Texas-based generators and power= =20 brokers of particularly egregious price gouging -- clearly playing on=20 Californians' instinctive mistrust of anything Texan and implying that Texa= n=20 George W. Bush is a co-conspirator. But the power purchase records -- which= =20 were released only to journalists willing to pay a stiff fee -- indicate th= at=20 less than 10 percent of California's power purchase dollars were going to= =20 Texas and the private sellers, in general, charged the state less than such= =20 publicly owned utilities as the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power.= =20 The clearly adverse position being taken by FERC and the purchase data that= =20 undercut his jingoistic sloganeering are not, however, deterring Davis from= =20 continuing to operate, at least for public consumption, in the melodramatic= =20 virtual world.=20 One cannot, however, ignore reality forever. The likelihood of a=20 pro-generator decision from FERC means that there will be no easy out for= =20 Davis, or for his pending deal to prevent Southern California Edison from= =20 slipping into bankruptcy court. The Legislature has refused to act on the= =20 Edison rescue plan while it awaited an indication of whether the utility's= =20 debts would be slimmed down by FERC.=20 This week's farcical events make it more likely that the Edison deal will= =20 stall out permanently in the Legislature and its creditors will force the= =20 utility into bankruptcy court later this summer. That's part of that nasty= =20 old reality that cannot simply be wished away.=20 The Bee's Dan Walters can be reached at (916) 321-1195 or dwalters@sacbee.c= om . Energy Digest: Ratepayer panel shot down again (Published July 11, 2001)=20 SAN FRANCISCO -- U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali on Tuesday reaffirmed= =20 his earlier decision to disband a ratepayers committee that would have give= n=20 consumers an official voice in the Pacific Gas and Electric Co. bankruptcy= =20 case.=20 The judge said bankruptcy court isn't the right forum for refunding rates o= r=20 settling potential future claims.=20 He eliminated erroneous statements from the opinion he originally issued=20 seven weeks ago. U.S. bankruptcy trustee Linda Ekstrom Stanley, who had mov= ed=20 for reconsideration, called the new version ""a very careful decision"" but d= id=20 not rule out an appeal.=20 Stanley on May 4 appointed an official committee of ratepayers to represent= =20 PG&E customers, saying they might be forced to pay for the utility's massiv= e=20 losses.=20 --Claire Cooper Missing megawatts: Conservation saving state from blackouts (Published July 11, 2001)=20 A public that doesn't believe that California's electricity crisis is genui= ne=20 is nonetheless acting as if it is. Experts are revising down scary=20 predictions of rolling blackout after rolling blackout as Californians have= =20 opted to conserve rather than consume.=20 During June, Californians cut back on electricity use by roughly 4,750=20 megawatts when it mattered the most, on hot afternoons. Those decisions=20 shaved about 12 percent from the expected demand. That's equivalent to the= =20 output of nine or 10 medium-size power plants. Last June, grid operators ha= d=20 to call six shortage alerts. This June, which was hotter, they called none.= =20 For a state that's been derided as selfish and wasteful, that's nothing sho= rt=20 of amazing.=20 Some of what Californians are doing now to conserve isn't likely to become= =20 habit in the long run. Businesses may want to turn back on all the banks of= =20 lights. Homeowners may decide that 82 degrees is the right temperature when= =20 power is short but too warm when California's supply emergency is over.=20 Yet there's a huge potential payoff into the future if some of these change= s=20 become permanent. It's encouraging that the most effective forms of=20 conservation -- switching to more energy-efficient appliances or=20 manufacturing techniques -- have yet to be implemented on a large scale.=20 Subsidies for these programs have yet to translate into changes in business= es=20 and in homes that will lower demand even further.=20 For a while this spring, some attempted to diminish the role of conservatio= n.=20 Conservation is a ""personal virtue,"" said Vice President Dick Cheney. But= =20 Californians know it's become both a personal and public necessity. The=20 public may have thought the electricity shortage was an illusion, but=20 everyone knew that the higher electricity bills that began arriving in June= =20 were real. And so was the risk that the lights would go out on hot days.=20 Yes, the state needs more supply to catch up with the growth in demand. Yet= =20 long after the crisis is over, there will be plenty of potential on the=20 efficiency side of the equation as well, to protect the quality of life and= =20 reduce the high electricity costs that will likely plague the state for yea= rs. Governor tells FERC to be fair and then some=20 Davis firm on demand for $8.9 billion refund By Ed Mendel=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 July 11, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO -- Gov. Gray Davis had a tough message for federal regulators=20 yesterday after the failure of settlement talks in California's bid to get = an=20 $8.9 billion refund from electricity suppliers: ""See you in court.""=20 The governor said California will seek a full $8.9 billion refund for=20 electricity overcharges, even if federal regulators award the maximum refun= d=20 of $5.4 billion allowed under their guidelines.=20 ""Our message is just order what you are going to order,"" Davis said of the= =20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. ""We believe you should order $8.9=20 billion. But you order what you think is fair. We will take what you order,= =20 then we will see you in court.""=20 Davis, joined by his negotiating team, made the remarks at a news conferenc= e=20 a day after two weeks of closed-door talks with suppliers in Washington=20 failed to reach an agreement.=20 An administrative law judge made a recommendation to the regulatory=20 commission that Davis' top negotiator, Michael Kahn, chairman of the=20 California Independent System Operator, expects to result in a refund of mo= re=20 than $1 billion.=20 Davis said that a revealing decision will be made by the commission, which = he=20 hopes has embarked on a ""new path"" with the appointment by President Bush o= f=20 two new members, Pat Wood of Texas and Nora Brownell of Pennsylvania.=20 ""Are they on the side of consumers, as the federal power act envisions them= =20 being,"" Davis asked, ""or are they just there to do the industry's bidding, = as=20 they have so often in the past?""=20 Kahn said rules adopted by FERC cut off the refund period at last October,= =20 trimming $3 billion from the $8.9 billion overcharge claimed by California= =20 dating to May 2000.=20 He said FERC has no jurisdiction over municipal utilities, such as the Los= =20 Angeles Department of Water and Power, that sold power to the state. The=20 municipal districts overcharged the state by about $600 million, according = to=20 Kahn.=20 As a result, he said, the maximum refund that FERC could order for Californ= ia=20 is about $5.4 billion.=20 ""We made it clear to everyone that if we did not settle for $8.9 billion, w= e=20 would seek redress in court for the remainder of the money above $5.4=20 billion,"" Kahn said.=20 Calpine of San Jose and several other generators have expressed interest in= =20 the state's offer to negotiate one-on-one with the state while the federal= =20 regulators consider their decision, Kahn said. Calpine says deal with state close on alleged overcharges=20 By Don Thompson ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 July 10, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) Calpine Corp. said Tuesday it is near agreement with Califo= rnia=20 officials over money the state says the company overcharged for electricity= .=20 That would make it the first company to settle a part of the $8.9 billion t= he=20 state wants in negotiations before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission= .=20 However, San Jose-based Calpine has offered far less than the $236 million= =20 the state claims it is owed.=20 ""We obviously disagree with that number, because we disagree with some of t= he=20 assumptions"" used for the estimate, said Calpine spokesman Bill Highlander.= =20 ""We don't think it's anywhere near that. We think it's a low number.""=20 He wouldn't specify the company's counteroffer, but noted new FERC figures= =20 showing the company did $29 million in business with the state in the first= =20 five months of this year.=20 The California Independent System Operator estimated the company owed more = in=20 overcharges than it had in total sales for the period from May 2000 to May= =20 2001, a financial impossibility, Highlander said.=20 The ISO essentially multiplied what Calpine was able to produce by the amou= nt=20 it charged for electricity, Highlander said, without taking into account ho= w=20 much electricity the company actually sold.=20 ISO spokesman Michael Bustamante defended the projections by the state's gr= id=20 operator, estimates he said were validated during two weeks of FERC=20 negotiations that ended Monday. The ISO took the methodology adopted by the= =20 federal regulator in a June 19 order capping electricity rates, then worked= =20 backward to May 2000 to reach its estimate, Bustamante said.=20 Generators and state negotiators were unable to reach a settlement during t= he=20 two weeks of talks overseen by FERC chief administrative law judge Curtis L= .=20 Wagner, leaving Wagner to make his own recommendation to the commission.=20 Wagner said Monday the state may be owed perhaps $1 billion in overcharges,= =20 but said that could be offset by money the generators are owed for the powe= r=20 they sold into the state.=20 California officials believe generators owe about $4 billion in refunds usi= ng=20 the June 19 order that Wagner adopted as his benchmark, even given Wagner's= =20 determination that the commission can only consider overcharges after Oct. = 2.=20 At one point during negotiations, Wagner told California officials he thoug= ht=20 an appropriate settlement should top $4.5 billion, according to one=20 negotiator who spoke on condition he not be named. Wagner suggested=20 generators could pay $2.5 billion in cash and $2 billion in long-term=20 electricity contracts at cheaper rates, the source said.=20 That was very different from the $670 million in refunds Wagner privately= =20 said generators were offering. For instance, the source said, while Reliant= =20 Energy on Monday offered $50 million in refunds, California believes=20 Reliant's share of overcharges is closer to $1 billion.=20 Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of the Independent Energy Producers,= =20 applauded the possibility that some generators will settle with the state= =20 without waiting for a FERC decision and likely protracted court battle.=20 ""We need to solve this problem and move on,"" Smutny-Jones said.=20 ?? =01) Associated Press writer Mark Sherman contributed to this story from=20 Washington, D.C.=20 Judge refuses to let ratepayers form official committee in utility bankrupt= cy=20 case=20 ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 July 10, 2001=20 SAN FRANCISCO =01) The federal judge overseeing Pacific Gas and Electric Co= .'s=20 bankruptcy case ruled Tuesday the utility's ratepayers cannot form an=20 official committee to represent their interests.=20 Ratepayer advocates had sought such recognition to ensure the utility would= =20 not raise rates further as a way of paying off its debts.=20 But U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali agreed with PG&E and the official= =20 creditors committee and rejected the idea for the second time in two months= .=20 Montali suggested instead that ratepayers organize an informal committee to= =20 bring their concerns to the court, and said the ratepayers also could bring= =20 matters before the state Public Utilities Commission.=20 A separate committee of ratepayers would have been able to vote on the fina= l=20 reorganization of the company, a plan that could affect power service and= =20 rates.=20 PG&E filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy April 6, and owes billions of dollars = to=20 more than 50,000 creditors. It was brought down, in part, by California's= =20 botched experiment with deregulation.=20 Judge Bars Ratepayers Panel From PG&E Case Power: Customers are not creditors in the utility's bankruptcy, ruling says= .=20 Action does not preclude refunds for consumers. TIM REITERMAN TIMES STAFF WRITER July 11 2001 SAN FRANCISCO -- A federal judge Tuesday reaffirmed his decision to bar a= =20 ratepayers committee from Pacific Gas & Electric Co.'s bankruptcy case and= =20 denounced the committee's attorney for suggesting that the action could=20 prevent PG&E customers from receiving refunds for excessive energy charges. Judge Dennis Montali ruled against a U.S. trustee and the ratepayers=20 committee in deciding that ratepayers as a group had no claims and were not= =20 creditors when PG&E filed for bankruptcy on April 6. But Montali criticized ""misguided remarks"" by a committee attorney on July = 5=20 and news media accounts that followed the hearing. The judge said the repor= ts=20 left the misconception that by disallowing a ratepayers committee, he would= =20 reject all claims of ratepayers and they could lose out on future refunds. The judge and PG&E officials emphasized that there are no matters involving= =20 PG&E customer refunds before the state Public Utilities Commission. State officials are seeking about $9 billion in refunds, however, from the= =20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for alleged overcharges to Californian= s=20 by energy companies since last year. The distribution of any ratepayer refunds would be decided by the PUC, and= =20 customers would be paid whether or not they filed Bankruptcy Court claims b= y=20 a Sept. 5 deadline, the judge and PG&E attorneys said. The judge took the highly unusual step of directing PG&E and U.S. Trustee= =20 Linda Ekstrom Stanley to consider remedies to allay any confusion among=20 PG&E's 5.5 million customers. He suggested publishing clarifications in newspapers that carried the=20 erroneous information, in PG&E customer bills and on Web sites. Stanley had formed a ratepayers committee of business, government and=20 consumer representatives, saying they will be affected by PG&E's Chapter 11= =20 reorganization. But Montali decided that ratepayers do not qualify as creditors under=20 bankruptcy law and are not entitled to official status that allows them to= =20 participate in the bankruptcy and receive funding from PG&E. Stanley said she has not yet decided whether to appeal the ruling to federa= l=20 district court.=20 Copyright 2001, Los Angeles Times=20 Developments in California's energy crisis=20 The Associated Press Wednesday, July 11, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate1 036EDT0129.DTL=20 (07-11) 07:36 PDT (AP) --=20 Developments in California's energy crisis:=20 WEDNESDAY=3D * No power alerts Wednesday as electricity reserves stay above 7 percent.= =20 TUESDAY=3D * U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali again agreed with PG&E and the=20 official creditors committee, saying such a committee of Pacific Gas and=20 Electric Co. ratepayers has no legal standing in bankruptcy court. Ratepaye= r=20 advocates had sought the recognition to ensure the utility would not raise= =20 rates further as a way of paying off its debts.=20 * PG&E has agreed to pay $4.1 million in tax penalties to 49 counties where= =20 the utility owns property. The utility already paid $41.2 million in overdu= e=20 property taxes in May -- the additional amount covers a 10 percent fee for= =20 paying those taxes late.=20 * Calpine Corporation says it is near agreement with California officials= =20 over money the state says the company overcharged for electricity. That wou= ld=20 make it the first company to settle a portion of the $8.9 billion dollars t= he=20 state is seeking in proceedings before the Federal Energy Regulatory=20 Commission. But the San Jose-based company is offering much less than the= =20 $236 million dollars the state claims it is owed.=20 * No power alerts Tuesday as electricity reserves stay above 7 percent.=20 * Shares of Edison International closed at $14.05, up 5 cents. PG&E Corp.= =20 drop 55 cents to close at $13.55. Sempra Energy, the parent company of San= =20 Diego Gas & Electric Co., closed at $27.67, up 15 cents.=20 WHAT'S NEXT=3D * The Senate committee investigating possible price manipulation in=20 California's energy market meets Wednesday. The committee will vote on=20 contempt citations against generators Mirant and Enron, which failed to=20 comply with subpoenas for documents. The committee will meet again July 18 = to=20 consider compliance by six other suppliers that have until Tuesday to turn= =20 over documents.=20 THE PROBLEM: High demand, high wholesale energy costs, transmission glitches and a tight= =20 supply worsened by scarce hydroelectric power in the Northwest and=20 maintenance at aging California power plants are all factors in California'= s=20 electricity crisis.=20 Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric say they've lost=20 nearly $14 billion since June 2000 to high wholesale prices the state's=20 electricity deregulation law bars them from passing on to consumers. PG&E,= =20 saying it hasn't received the help it needs from regulators or state=20 lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection April 6. Electricity and= =20 natural gas suppliers, scared off by the companies' poor credit ratings, ar= e=20 refusing to sell to them, leading the state in January to start buying powe= r=20 for the utilities' nearly 9 million residential and business customers. The= =20 state is also buying power for a third investor-owned utility, San Diego Ga= s=20 & Electric, which is in better financial shape than much larger Edison and= =20 PG&E but is also struggling with high wholesale power costs.=20 The Public Utilities Commission has approved average rate increases of 37= =20 percent for the heaviest residential customers and 38 percent for commercia= l=20 customers, and hikes of up to 49 percent for industrial customers and 15=20 percent or 20 percent for agricultural customers to help finance the state'= s=20 multibillion-dollar power buys.=20 Track the state's blackout warnings on the Web at=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 Enron Corp. sues to block Senate from forcing document release=20 DON THOMPSON, Associated Press Writer Wednesday, July 11, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate1 212EDT0141.DTL=20 (07-11) 09:12 PDT SACRAMENTO (AP) --=20 Enron Corp. is suing state officials to stop a Senate subpoena of its=20 financial records in a dispute over alleged overcharges for its electricity= =20 sales to California.=20 ""They've sent two things to Texas -- our money and these documents, and the= y=20 saying we can't get either one back,"" said Laurence Drivon, special legal= =20 counsel to the Senate Select Committee to Investigate Market Manipulation.= =20 The suit came hours before the committee will consider asking the full Sena= te=20 to cite the Houston-based company for contempt Wednesday. The other subject= =20 of possible sanctions, Atlanta-based Mirant Inc., appears to be cooperating= ,=20 Drivon said.=20 Committee chairman Joe Dunn, a Santa Ana Democrat, said the committee's=20 investigation will continue despite Enron's ""pure act of intimidation. We'r= e=20 not going to back down.""=20 Enron's suit said the company's financial papers are outside the committee'= s=20 jurisdiction because most of its operations and paperwork are outside=20 California.=20 That shouldn't matter, Drivon said, citing last year's successful of=20 out-of-state documents during the investigation into the activities of form= er=20 Insurance Commissioner Chuck Quackenbush. Previous investigations have=20 included documents subpoenaed from other nations, he said.=20 Companies doing business in California cannot claim immunity from its laws = or=20 oversight, Drivon and Dunn said. Houston-based Reliant Energy made the same= =20 argument but then agreed to turn over 1,800 documents.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 Governor threatens to sue utilities for refunds=20 Davis says California won't settle for $1 billion=20 Mark Martin, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, July 11, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /11/M N139275.DTL=20 Sacramento -- One day after a federal judge rebuked California's claim that= =20 energy generators owe the state $8.9 billion, Gov. Gray Davis all but vowed= =20 to sue the companies to recoup the money.=20 ""If you think California will settle for $1 billion in refunds, we'll see y= ou=20 in court,"" Davis said yesterday.=20 Continuing his heated rhetoric on the energy crisis, Davis blasted the ener= gy=20 companies for being inflexible during a 14-day negotiation session in=20 Washington, D.C., that ended Monday. Both the state and power generators=20 argue each is owed money as a result of California's dysfunctional=20 electricity market.=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission chief administrative law Judge Curtis = L.=20 Wagner ended the talks by saying the state was owed far less than it claime= d,=20 but the FERC's governing board will make a final decision on who owes what = to=20 whom in the coming months.=20 Yesterday, Davis made it clear he wouldn't accept a FERC decision that=20 strayed far from the state's calculations that power companies overcharged= =20 California nearly $9 billion.=20 ""The ball is in the FERC's court,"" he said. ""They must step up and provide= =20 the refunds we've asked for.""=20 While Davis said California officials had gone to Washington prepared to=20 discuss ways to reach a settlement, including renegotiating long-term=20 contracts to buy power, an energy industry official faulted the state for i= ts=20 unwillingness to compromise.=20 Generators put forward an offer even though they believe no refunds are owe= d,=20 said Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of the Independent Energy=20 Producers.=20 Smutny-Jones said the state needed to stop thinking it would get the $8.9= =20 billion.=20 ""It's clear from the way the issue was characterized by the judge that $9= =20 billion is not something the state is going to see any time in the near=20 future, "" he added. ""It is not based in reality.""=20 Davis also took heat from Republicans yesterday.=20 ""He desperately needs that refund, so he can renegotiate the dreadful=20 contracts he has entered into,"" said Rob Stutzman, a consultant for the=20 California Republican Party. ""He's sitting at the poker table with very few= =20 chips.""=20 In other energy news yesterday, a judge refused to let a committee represen= t=20 the public in the Pacific Gas & Electric Co. bankruptcy case and said a=20 consumer lawyer's ""irresponsible position"" at a hearing last week could=20 mislead PG&E customers into filing needless refund claims with the court.= =20 U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali said any refunds owed to customers wer= e=20 unrelated to the bankruptcy case and would be determined by regulators.=20 At the hearing Thursday, attorney KaarenThomas argued that unless a committ= ee=20 represented customers' interests, PG&E could try to bar all refund claims= =20 that weren't filed by Sept. 5.=20 Montali ruled in May that the committee was not authorized by federal=20 bankruptcy law, and reaffirmed his ruling yesterday.=20 Chronicle staff writers Lynda Gledhill and Robert Egelko contributed to thi= s=20 report.=20 E-mail Mark Martin at ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 3=20 News briefs on the California power crisis=20 The Associated Press Wednesday, July 11, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 738EDT0118.DTL=20 (07-11) 04:38 PDT SAN JOSE, Calif. (AP) --=20 Energy supplier Calpine Corp. has reached a deal to purchase 236 billion=20 cubic feet of natural gas in Texas and New Mexico for $355 million plus=20 assumption of nearly $50 million of debt.=20 Company officials made the announcement Tuesday and said the purchase will= =20 increase its natural gas reserves.=20 ""This transaction meets our desire to own and operate production in a=20 strategic basin,"" said Cathy Piece, Calpine's director of land and=20 acquisitions. ""These assets significantly strengthen our reserve base and= =20 will help fuel our growing Western power program.""=20 The San Jose-based company has agreed to purchase 35 wells in New Mexico th= at=20 produce 6 million cubic feet of gas per day from The Bayless Companies. The= =20 second transaction involves the acquisition of a majority interest of Micha= el=20 Petroleum of Houston. The Texas company produces about 43 million cubic fee= t=20 of gas per day.=20 Calpine officials said the agreements will allow them to meet their future= =20 capacity demands for both natural gas and electricity. The company wants to= =20 generate more than 70,000 megawatts of electricity by the end of 2005 and= =20 have natural gas reserves of 6.7 trillion cubic feet.=20 LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Newly elected Mayor James Hahn has postponed selling th= e=20 city's surplus power to the state so he can examine how it will impact=20 ratepayers.=20 Hahn's predecessor, Richard Riordan, said last month the city's Department = of=20 Water and Power would sell its extra electricity -- about 500 megawatts a= =20 day_ to the state at cost between July and September.=20 The contract was supposed to have been signed last week.=20 Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis, said Tuesday that the stat= e=20 is ready to sign the contract.=20 ""We're ready to sign,"" he said. ""Like most negotiations that aren't final,= =20 things go back and forth. The new (Hahn) administration wants to review the= =20 document before it.""=20 Davis had threatened to seize surplus power from municipal utilities, which= =20 haven't been subjected to the California energy crisis, because he claimed= =20 they were gouging the state.=20 TEMECULA, Calif. (AP) -- State officials said they are studying alternative= =20 routes for a power transmission line proposed by San Diego Gas and Electric= =20 Co.=20 The utility wants to run a 500,000-volt power line through southwestern=20 Riverside County connecting its power grid with Southern California Edison'= s.=20 The cost of the project is estimated at $271 million and must be approved b= y=20 the state's Public Utilities Commission.=20 But state officials listed alternative routes in papers released at a publi= c=20 hearing Tuesday. Some of the other ideas include putting the transmission= =20 line around the edges of an Indian reservation or running a route through t= he=20 Cleveland National Forest.=20 Once a final selection is made, the information will be given to PUC=20 commissioners who will either approve or deny the project.=20 Many residents who live in the path of the proposed transmission line don't= =20 want the project. An attorney representing several groups that oppose SDG&E= 's=20 plans said there was no mention of alternative routes in environmental=20 documents submitted by the company.=20 ""Looking at the various route segments offered by SDG&E as alternatives is= =20 like trying to arrange the deck chairs on the Titanic,"" said attorney Mark= =20 Mihaly.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 White House bends under energy conservation pressure=20 Posted at 6:25 a.m. PDT Wednesday, July 11, 2001=20 BY H. JOSEF HEBERT=20 Associated Press Writer=20 WASHINGTON (AP) -- Under pressure to include more conservation measures tha= t=20 reduce energy use, congressional Republicans are moving toward a compromise= =20 to increase fuel efficiency requirements for sport utility vehicles as part= =20 of an energy package.=20 Key House GOP lawmakers said Tuesday they expect some increase in fuel=20 economy requirements, especially for SUVs, in energy legislation working it= s=20 way through the House. Democrats, who have a majority in the Senate, also= =20 favor requiring improved motor vehicle fuel efficiency.=20 At the same time, the Bush administration signaled its willingness Tuesday = to=20 begin a rule-changing process that would allow the first increase in 25 yea= rs=20 in the federal corporate automobile fuel economy, or CAFE, standard.=20 Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta asked Congress to lift immediately a= =20 six-year prohibition that bans the department from consideration of fuel=20 economy increases. Lawmakers already agreed this year not to extend the ban= =20 beyond September, but Mineta said he wants to start examining possible=20 changes right away.=20 CAFE standards, which mandate fuel economy requirements for vehicle fleets,= =20 have not been increased since their introduction in 1975. That year's law,= =20 spurred by energy shortages in the early 1970s, required passengers cars to= =20 meet a fleet average of at least 27.5 miles per gallon. Light trucks -- a= =20 category that includes SUVs, vans and pickups -- have to meet a 20.7 mpg=20 fleet average.=20 With the widespread popularity of SUVs and vans in recent years, many=20 environmentalists have argued that the lower truck standard has compromised= =20 the intent of the 1975 law. SUVs and vans comprise more than 40 percent of= =20 the passenger vehicles on the road today.=20 As three committees began crafting energy legislation, lawmakers were=20 searching for a bipartisan compromise to increase fuel economy requirements= =20 for motor vehicles. Some increase in the CAFE requirement was virtually=20 assured, several GOP lawmakers said, although disagreements remain on how= =20 much of an increase, whether it should apply to automobiles as well as SUVs= ,=20 vans and small trucks, and the timetable for phasing in new requirements.= =20 Energy legislation that the House Energy and Commerce Committee was taking = up=20 later Wednesday contains no fuel economy provision.=20 But Rep. Billy Tauzin, R-La., the committee chairman, said discussions were= =20 under way to work out a compromise on a fuel economy proposal. He said he= =20 expects an amendment on CAFE to be added to the bill, either during=20 deliberations in his committee or on the House floor.=20 Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, chairman of the subcommittee drafting the energy= =20 package, saw a good chance the truck standards will be raised and said the= =20 automobile standard might be increased as well. Other GOP sources who talke= d=20 about the private discussions on condition of not being identified by name= =20 said a likely outcome is that the truck standard will be increased three or= =20 four mpg and the auto standard left alone.=20 Momentum for some CAFE increase has been growing in recent weeks as GOP=20 lawmakers came under increasing pressure to come up with additional=20 conservation proposals to those proposed in the White House's energy policy= .=20 It largely focuses on production, with few specific measures to dramaticall= y=20 curb energy demand.=20 Democrats have pressed for tougher automobile fuel economy standards.=20 Automakers have fought attempts to increase the standards. They say such=20 government edicts limit consumer choice and force manufacturers to build=20 smaller cars that customers don't want. Supporters of increased fuel econom= y=20 argue that new technologies are available to increase fuel efficiency witho= ut=20 decreasing vehicle size.=20 President Bush's energy blueprint would consider CAFE increases, but not=20 before a National Academy of Sciences report is issued, probably this month= ,=20 on impact of the standard on energy savings, safety and auto industry=20 competition. Davis ups the voltage=20 Published Wednesday, July 11, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News=20 Vow to sue for refunds may be a bluff, but he should keep pushing FERC=20 THE strategic choice facing Gov. Gray Davis in the struggle over electricit= y=20 price refunds has come down to three questions: When do you negotiate, when= =20 do you demand, and when do you bluff?=20 Negotiations are over, Davis declared Tuesday. He demanded that the Federal= =20 Energy Regulatory Commission order refunds now. ``The case is nearly a year= =20 old,'' he said. ``They have to decide which side they're on.''=20 Probably no one but Davis knew to what extent he was bluffing when he also= =20 said, ``If you think California is going to settle for $1 billion in refund= s,=20 we will see you in court.''=20 A FERC administrative judge said Monday that the amount due the state may b= e=20 around $1 billion, or perhaps nothing at all, when counter-claims against t= he=20 state are subtracted.=20 Energy experts are divided about whether the state would win a suit to=20 overturn a decision by a federal commission. The federal courts have some= =20 limited jurisdiction, according to University of California Energy Institut= e=20 director Severin Borenstein, but that a court would reverse a commission in= a=20 case like this is ``extremely unlikely.''=20 Frank Wolak, a Stanford economist, had the opposite view, when asked whethe= r=20 the state has a good chance of winning: ``I think so. It happens all the=20 time.''=20 At a Sacramento press conference, Davis continued to insist that there have= =20 been overcharges of $8.9 billion. But other state officials conceded that= =20 only $5.4 billion of that is actually on the table in the FERC proceedings.= =20 Davis said he'll take what he can get there, and sue for the rest.=20 The state argues that because FERC has determined that wholesale prices hav= e=20 not met the Federal Power Act's requirement to be ``just and reasonable,''= =20 refunds are in order. But the commission has not defined what portion=20 exceeded ``just and reasonable.''=20 Throughout his press conference, Davis used the prospect of litigation like= a=20 goad to spur the federal regulators into action. But if you listened=20 carefully, he also indicated he'll give them more time to consider the case= .=20 Considering the iffy odds of winning in court, we suggest he keep goading t= he=20 federal commissioners -- while giving them all the time they need. Wednesday, July 11, 2001=20 Lights go out on Davis' power show=20 Three new developments show that some economic reality finally is being=20 applied to California's electricity crisis:=20 First, ""The nation's chief energy judge said Monday that California is owed= =20 maybe $1 billion in refunds from power generators, a fraction of the $8.9= =20 billion demanded by Gov. Gray Davis,"" reported the Register yesterday. Even= =20 that $1 billion amount might be balanced by the amount the state still owes= =20 the power producers.=20 To suggest workable and market-oriented solutions to the California=20 electricity crisis. Judge Curtis Wagner's recommendation will be taken up by the Federal Energy= =20 Regulatory Commission, which is being petitioned for the money by the state= =20 of California.=20 Because the judge's words will bolster FERC's apparent desire not to grant= =20 the ""refunds,"" the state probably will go to court, where the matter could = be=20 stuck for years. ""In the long term, this may indicate that competitive electricity has a=20 future even in California, but not thanks to the state,"" Robert Michaels, a= =20 professor of economics at Cal State Fullerton, told us. He's referring to t= he=20 state's botched 1996 ""deregulation"" effort, which has been made worse by Go= v.=20 Gray Davis and other officials since the crisis began a year ago. ""FERC since the 1980s favors competition, within the parameters of politica= l=20 reality,"" Mr. Michaels added. ""Now we're at square one: The industry doesn'= t=20 owe $9 billion to California."" As this process continues, he said, another= =20 positive aspect will be that a lot of facts will get aired. ""We'll see what= =20 has been happening in the markets"" in which power is bought and sold. Second, light already is shining on one area: This crisis was not ""Made in= =20 Texas'' by cronies of President Bush, as Gov. Davis and other Democrats hav= e=20 been contending.=20 In May, the governor attacked the president for ignoring ""the greed of thes= e=20 Texas energy companies,"" such as Reliant and Dynergy. In fact, according to information on state power contracts the governor=20 finally released Monday, Texas companies were way down on the list of=20 producers.=20 ""In roughly the first five months of the year, the state shelled out $1.2= =20 billion to Atlanta-based Mirant, the most any company was paid for=20 electricity, followed by $1 billion to Powerex, the marketing arm of BC Hyd= ro=20 in British Columbia [in Canada]. It also paid $331 million to the Los Angel= es=20 Department of Water and Power,"" reported the San Jose Mercury News. Only about 10 percent of our state's power during this period came from=20 companies with headquarters in Texas. Third, and finally, a new study by the Cato Institute shows what should be= =20 done next:=20 lAbolish retail rate caps, allowing prices to be set by the market.=20 This would be a better system than the present one, where the state buys th= e=20 electricity and passes much of the cost along through the state budget (pai= d=20 by taxpayers) and bonds paid for by long-term electricity price increases.= =20 Higher immediate prices would encourage conservation and production, leadin= g=20 in time to lower prices. lMove to real-time pricing so people shift activities such as washing to=20 off-peak hours.=20 lAbolish the Independent System Operator, which moves electrons around.=20 Give this function back to the utilities, who did it far better before=20 ""deregulation."" Gov. Davis should set the pace by ending his Clintonian bla= me=20 shifting and embracing these realistic solutions.=20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW:; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Gibner, Stinson Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 11:34 PM To: Lu, Zimin; Kaminski, Vince J Subject: This is an early draft document and should be revised, but does explain the spread option structure. --Stinson [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: LA: Getting Mack and Kean together, as discussed; [EMail-Body]= I won't be going. Let's look for an alternate. I'd be happy to come to DC. Stephen D Burns@ENRON 07/31/2000 10:53 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: LA: Getting Mack and Kean together, as discussed Mack McLarty and his people would like to get together with you in Los Angeles during the Dem convention to discuss our Southern Cone issues, strategies, etc. Will you be there on the Monday? Steve ---------------------- Forwarded by Stephen D Burns/Corp/Enron on 07/31/2000 10:47 AM --------------------------- ""Kellie Meiman"" <kmeiman@mclarty.com> on 07/31/2000 09:17:51 AM Please respond to <kmeiman@mclarty.com> To: <Stephen.D.Burns@enron.com> cc: <am@mclarty.com> Subject: LA: Getting Mack and Kean together, as discussed Steve: Speaking of LA, I have spoken to Mack's scheduler, Andrea, and it appears that he'd be available for this on Monday AM -- don't know how that fits into the Enron schedule. It probably makes the most sense to have her coordinate any such meeting. How would you recommend that we proceed? Thanks, Kellie [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Information and Securities Trading; [EMail-Body]= To:SHACKLETON, SARA - 7138535620 ? Enron Wholesale Services - Office of the Chairman ? From:??Mark Frevert, Chairman & CEO ??????Greg Whalley, President & COO ??????Mark Haedicke, Managing Director & General Counsel ? Subject:??Confidential Information and Securities Trading ? Enron Wholesale Services ('EWS') maintains official Policies and Procedures Regarding Confidential Information and Securities Trading ('Policies and Procedures'), which have been revised as of November 15, 2000 to reflect the new EWS structure. These policies and procedures are intended to allow us simultaneously to pursue our diverse businesses and to protect confidential information, our reputation for integrity, and EWS and its employees from legal liability. ? You are required to become familiar with, and to comply with, the Policies and Procedures. The newly revised Policies and Procedures are available for your review on LegalOnline, the new intranet website maintained by the Enron Wholesale Services Legal Department. Please click on the attached link to access LegalOnline: ? ? You must certify your compliance with the Policies and Procedures within two weeks of your receipt of this message. The LegalOnline site will allow you to quickly and conveniently certify your compliance on-line with your SAP Personal ID number. If you have any questions concerning the Policies or Procedures, please call Lance Schuler at extension 3-5419, Mark Haedicke at extension 3-6544, Alan Aronowitz at extension 3-3214, Bob Bruce at extension 5-7780 or Donna Lowry at extension 3-1939. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Public Policy Contacts for California; [EMail-Body]= Jeff and Steve ? As you requested, I have prepared a list of my preferred public policy contacts?for California.? It is composed of professionals from an array of public, private and non-profit backgrounds.? I have worked in some capacity with?each of these people?and most I know quite well.? ? Please call me for further background. ? Kevin 213-926-2626 ? Attachment - Kevin Scott - Preferred Contacts - 6-20-01.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: Oakland Trib Wed 3/7: ""Breakthrough made in rescue of PG&E"" Bakersfield Californian, Wed 3/7: ""El Paso Energy closes six valley power plants"" Contra Costa Times, Wed 3/7: ""Still undecided: Who'll pay DWR for electricity"" SF Chron, Wed 3/7: ""State Taxpayers In Dark on Details Of Energy Deal"" Sac Bee, Wed 3/7: ""Lawmakers pitch fixes for region's energy woes"" Orange Co. Register, Wed 3/7: ""Power plan called wrong"" LA Times - Wed 3/7: ""Bill to Cut Some Power Prices Stalls"" Sac Bee, Wed 3/7: ""PG&E could face mutiny on outages: SMUD, others may balk if utility orders summer blackouts"" SF Chron, Wed 3/7: ""PUC to Decide Fate Of Utility Workers PG&E, Edison want to trim costs by laying off thousands, cutting service"" San Jose Mercury, Wed 3/7: ""Power prices could soar during the summer"" SF Chron, Wed 3/7: ""Power Plant Plans Cause Conflicts East county residents blast supervisors"" Contra Costa Times Wed 3/7: ""Supervisors set search for power plant sites"" Sac Bee, Wed 3/7: ""Peter Schrag: California's $90 billion infrastructure gap"" Contra Costa Times, Wed 3/7: ""PG&E power plan debated at hearing"" SF Chron, Thurs. 3/8: State OKs 'Peaker' Power Plant at SFO / Temporary generator could be sending electricity to 50,000 homes by August WSJ, Thurs. 3/8: Crossed Wires: Major Kinks Emerge In Gov. Davis's Plan To Power California --- State's Outlays for Electricity May Be Hard to Recover Without Rate Increases --- Betting on Long-Term Deals ------------------------ Breakthrough made in rescue of PG&E State ready to pay $7 billion for lines By Steve Geissinger SACRAMENTO BUREAU SACRAMENTO -- Signaling a breakthrough in secret energy crisis talks, the Davis administration disclosed Tuesday it may announce the framework of a pact to rescue the teetering Pacific Gas and Electric Co. next week. ""Things are going very well,"" said Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis. The state appears to be poised to pay at least $7 billion -- and possibly billions more -- for PG&E's high-voltage transmission lines as part of a deal to financially renovate the north-state utility, according to sources familiar with the negotiations. But consumer advocates insisted that even the $7 billion price is too much to pay. And experts warned that a deal with PG&E will be more complex than with other utilities. PG&E representatives declined comment, in keeping with their policy on the talks, even though the Davis administration said an announcement could come as early as next week or the following week. The new timetable for an announcement was substantially sooner than in Davis' original forecast. Until late last week, PG&E was still resisting the sale of its power grid despite the fact that Davis had announced the framework of an agreement with Southern California Edison. Davis expects to soon announce a similar deal with the San Diego Gas and Electric Co. However, any such deal still would need federal approval. The investor-owned utilities, trapped between high wholesale costs and lower, regulated retail rates, amassed nearly $13 billion in debts and were unable to buy electricity this winter. With the onset of rolling blackouts, the state began brokering billions of dollars in emergency short- and long-term power purchases. Davis' strategy to ease the energy price and supply crisis includes bolstering both conservation and generation while fiscally refurbishing the nearly bankrupt utilities. As part of the rescue deal, the utilities would have to drop legal actions seeking dramatically higher electricity bills, environmentally shield wildlands they own, sell power from their generators to Californians for the next decade and secure help with their debts from their parent companies. Together with the cash infusion from the sale of their power 26,000-mile power grids, the utilities would be allowed to sell bonds to raise funds and use customer money to pay them off. The state would upgrade the high-voltage lines and lease them back to the utilities for operation. In a reflection of the negotiations with the three utilities, a Davis administration official said the deal with PG&E is proving to be more complex than with the other firms. Though PG&E finally agreed late last week to sell its transmission grid, the utility apparently wants more than the $7 billion that Davis has offered, according to sources. The figure is more than twice the book amount, or the value placed on the system for purposes of accounting. And that's the markup that lured Edison into an agreement to sell its smaller portion of the transmission grid for $2.8 billion. But PG&E, which fears an erosion of its economic base, may be asking as much as $10 billion. Due to complexities in the state's 1996 deregulation of the industry, PG&E is more likely to lose revenue than Edison as a result of selling its transmission lines, according to experts. Big customers might be able to bypass the utility's remaining local distribution lines, thereby eroding its customer base. Therefore the utility may view bankruptcy, and sale of its transmission lines to the highest bidder, as a potentially attractive alternative to selling its share of the grid to the state at too low a price. ---- El Paso Energy closes six valley power plants Filed: 03/07/2001 By CHIP POWER, Californian staff writer e-mail: ppower@bakersfield.com El Paso Energy, citing non-payment from Pacific Gas & Electric Co., said it has shut down six cogeneration plants this week. The smaller plants produced about 175 megawatts of electricity and are located primarily in the San Joaquin Valley, said company spokesman Mel Scott. A megawatt can supply power to 1,000 homes. At least 10 plants have closed in the past two weeks as a result of non-payment, according to the state Independent System Operator, which manages most of the state's electrical distribution. The El Paso Energy plants are operated with various partners and had not been compensated for December, January and February deliveries, said Scott. He said he did not know the total amount due but said the plants would be closed until PG&E's credit worthiness is improved. A cogeneration plant, common in oil fields, simultaneously produces heat energy and electrical or mechanical power from the same fuel in the same facility. Typically, it produces electricity and steam, which can be deployed to enhance oil recovery. Kern County is the state's leading oil-producing county. El Paso owns or has interests in more than 40,000 miles of interstate and intrastate pipeline connecting the nation's principal natural gas supply regions to the five largest consuming regions in the United States, namely the Gulf Coast, California, the Northeast, the Midwest and the Southeast. El Paso closed up 99 cents on Tuesday, or 1.4 percent, at $71.49. The Houston-based company's stock price has ranged between $36.31 and $75.30 in the last 52 weeks. ---- Still undecided: Who'll pay DWR for electricity By Karen Gaudette ASSOCIATED PRESS SAN FRANCISCO -- The price tag is $3.2 billion and counting for electricity bought by the state Department of Water Resources for the customers of two nearly bankrupt utilities. Pacific Gas and Electric Co., Southern California Edison and the state disagree over how the DWR eventually will be reimbursed for its purchases on the expensive last-minute power market. So do the state power regulators, who have the final call over who gets the money when. Under a recent law, the DWR went into the electricity-buying business to help keep the two utilities from sinking further into their $13 billion debt. The state plans to retrieve the money by selling $10 billion in revenue bonds. The utilities continue to collect ratepayer dollars on that electricity, which the bill's author, Assemblyman Fred Keeley, D-Boulder Creek, says is meant to help them begin paying down their debt. In a recent letter, however, DWR officials requested that the state Public Utilities Commission order that a portion of that money be diverted to the state. But after the utilities subtract the costs of generating electricity, payments to environmentally friendly power plants and other expenses, there is no money left from ratepayer dollars to give to the DWR without sinking further into debt, PG&E spokesman Ron Low said Tuesday. If it passed along money to the DWR, ""our undercollection would grow by about $2.4 billion by the end of the year,"" Low said. The commission, unable to agree on the best course of action, left the issue untouched at its last meeting but expects to revisit the issue when it meets this morning. Commissioner Richard Bilas is proposing an alternate plan that would have the DWR set its own revenue requirements that would be passed on to ratepayers. The PUC also is expected to respond to complaints from laid-off workers and customers that layoffs by utilities to cut costs have been hurting service. Commissioner Carl Wood warned at the last meeting that failure to provide safe and reliable service could mean fines for the utilities. Representatives from electrical workers unions, the PUC and the utilities were to discuss the issue Tuesday afternoon. ""I don't think we believe that utilities can find a way out of their problems by laying off workers,"" said Mindy Spatt, a spokeswoman with the Utility Reform Network. ""We think consumers deserve safe and reliable service, and we think they deserve it at a reasonable price."" ---- State Taxpayers In Dark on Details Of Energy Deal David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, March 7, 2001 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle Few people would purchase a car simply because the dealer said, ''Trust me, it's a great deal.'' Yet Gov. Gray Davis essentially is telling Californians just that about dozens of long-term power contracts. Because of confidentiality agreements with power companies, the governor has revealed only scant details about the state's multibillion-dollar contracts for electricity over the next 10 years. ""Gov. Davis has our money, and we can't see how he's spending it,"" said Doug Heller, a spokesman for the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa Monica. ""We've been locked out of the room."" Neither Davis nor power companies would divulge specific details about the price, duration or scope of individual contracts. Each cited secrecy clauses that the governor's office said had been desired by both sides. What consumers do know is this: -- California has signed 40 contracts and tentative accords, valued at about $40 billion, to secure enough power to light 9 million homes over the next decade. -- The average purchase price of each deal is $69 per megawatt hour -- well above the $30 to $40 charged by power generators before California's energy market went haywire last summer. -- If, as is widely expected, wholesale power prices fall in years ahead, the state nevertheless will be locked into paying above-market rates for electricity. But it is not known which generator agreed to part with the most power at the cheapest level or the full range of the prices in concocting the $69 average. Moreover, it is unclear how shrewdly the state negotiated with taxpayer money in securing power on behalf of cash-strapped utilities. ""These agreements are the bedrock of our long-term energy policy,"" Davis said Monday in announcing the deals. The governor's office defended the murky nature of the contracts yesterday. ""It's a business transaction in which private corporate information is included,"" said Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Davis. ""That's the kind of information that never gets revealed."" While additional elements of the contracts will be publicized in coming months, he said, the contracts themselves will remain a secret. ""You'll never see all the details,"" Maviglio said. This did not sit well with many observers. ""It's a breach of public trust,"" said Daniel Bacon, a San Francisco attorney specializing in business law. ""A public servant spending public money shouldn't be able to keep the spending secret."" But Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, an energy-industry association in Menlo Park, called confidentiality agreements ""a necessary evil in transactions like this."" He explained that no power company would agree to a long-term contract if rival firms could learn the terms of the accord. The company would be losing too much of its competitive edge in the marketplace, Ackerman said. At the same time, he noted that secrecy allowed the buyer -- in this case, California taxpayers -- to secure more favorable terms with individual sellers. A high price with one generator would not necessarily be sought by all power providers. Still, the fact that public funds are being used makes confidentiality in this case a different matter than, say, Cisco Systems' quietly negotiating to take over yet another tech rival. ""The public is in a very awkward position,"" said Michael Shames, executive director of the Utility Consumers' Action Network in San Diego. ""It has to rely on the good word and expertise of the governor, and he has yet to demonstrate that he has expertise or good word in this field."" Shames likened consumers to passengers in a plane being flown by a pilot without a license to fly. ""But what choice do we have?"" he asked. ""I don't see many other options available right now."" There's the rub. No matter how bad a deal California may have cut to help meet its energy demands, the alternative -- blackouts, disruptions, economic catastrophe -- is far, far worse. On the other hand, it already appears that the new contracts will not shield Californians from the threat of daily outages this summer, when demand surges. Davis said only about 60 percent of the state's summertime electricity needs so far had been met. Part of the reason is that many power companies already have contracted for their output this year. Duke Energy said this was why it would not begin its nine-year contract with California until 2002, while Williams Cos. said it would only gradually increase the amount of available wattage in its 10-year contract. Both companies, meanwhile, will continue to profit this summer by selling into the volatile ""spot"" market, where wholesale power went for as much as $1, 500 per megawatt hour last year. ""You can't sell all your power into long-term contracts,"" said Paula Hall- Collins, a Williams spokeswoman. ""You save some for the spot market."" Consumer groups worry that consumers will be hammered again this summer with sky-high power prices, and then get nailed down the road by contracts for above-market rates. ""If we could look at the terms of the deals, we'd see that California is being gouged for 10 years,"" said Heller of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights. ""But the governor doesn't want us to see that."" Ackerman of the Western Power Trading Forum said the state had gotten the best rates it could under current market conditions. ""California went for long-term contracts when everyone else moved in as well,"" he said. ""Californians are paying a price for not acting sooner."" ---- Lawmakers pitch fixes for region's energy woes By David Whitney Bee Washington Bureau (Published March 7, 2001) WASHINGTON -- California members of Congress pleaded for everything from wholesale price caps to extending daylight-saving time an extra hour to help the region cope this summer with its persistent electricity shortage, but none of the ideas seemed to catch fire at a House hearing Tuesday. ""People will die in California because of this crisis,"" Rep. Brad Sherman, a Los Angeles-area Republican, warned the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Sherman testified that his idea for saving lives is to extend daylight-saving time by an extra hour, so that there would be more daylight at the end of the day when power consumption surges. ""One of the peak demand periods for electricity occurs between 5 p.m. and 8 p.m., when the sun sets and people come home from work,"" Sherman testified. ""If people come home and it is light out, there is less of an inclination to turn a light on."" Sherman said the state Legislature has called for congressional approval for states to be given authority to extend daylight-saving time, and he cited analyses by the California Energy Commission and other agencies suggesting that it could cut power consumption by 1 percent to 2 percent. Sherman, who was one of about a dozen California lawmakers presenting their views on the energy squeeze, drew no questions from committee leaders about what his legislation might do to everything from airline schedules to television programming if West Coast states didn't agree on the same time standard. Most of the committee's questioning was on the more popular idea proposed by several California and Western lawmakers, primarily Democrats, to require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to impose caps on wholesale electricity prices that have gone wild because of a regional power shortage. Rep. Bob Filner, D-San Diego, charged that the price spiral has little to do with power shortages but a lot to do with a ""small cartel"" of generators bilking ratepayers. Rep. Jay Inslee, D-Wash., said he brought up the idea of regional price caps with President Bush, who was initially skeptical. But Inslee said that Bush warmed to the idea after being told that protections could be built into the caps so as not to discourage construction of new power plants. Upon hearing that, Inslee said, Bush invited him to meet with the president's Cabinet-level task force led by Vice President Dick Cheney on a national energy strategy. But Inslee said he can't get the group to meet with him. ""It's very disappointing,"" Inslee said. Tuesday's hearing was part of a series the panel is holding on the California crisis, so far without any emerging consensus on what, if anything, Congress should do. ---- Power plan called wrong Wall Street analysts say the governor's approach to the problem avoids the issue that caused the imbalance. March 7, 2001 By DON THOMPSON The Associated Press SACRAMENTO California's scramble to insulate consumers from the soaring price of electricity may add to the state's power problems this summer, Wall Street analysts said Tuesday. Gov. Gray Davis' emphasis on buying utilities' transmission lines and negotiating long-term power contracts to help ease their debts skirts the deep imbalance between wholesale and market rates that led to the state's power problems in the first place, they said. ""In the long run, it doesn't solve anything,"" said Michael Worms, an industry analyst for Gerard Klauer Mattison & Co. ""In the long run, you need to send the right price signals to consumers, which will create its own conservation signals. Unfortunately, customers were shielded from that in California."" Davis said Monday that the state's first contracts to buy electricity for two financially struggling utilities will provide only about two-thirds of the power needed on a typical summer day, forcing Californians to cut power use at least 10 percent to avoid blackouts. Since early January, the state has been buying one- third of the power Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. customers need. The two utilities, denied credit by suppliers, say they have lost nearly $14 billion due to soaring wholesale electricity prices that the state's industry-deregulation law says they cannot pass on to consumers. The keepers of the state power grid had enough electricity Tuesday to avoid declaring an electricity alert, but have faced an almost-daily scramble for weeks due to a tight supply and high wholesale prices. Several wholesale and retail rate proposals are circulating. Among them: Free-market advocates such as Worms want an immediate end to the deregulation-imposed retail rate freeze on Edison and PG&E that will expire next year. Davis wants a Western price cap of $100 per megawatt hour on power generators he says have been prof iteering from California's short energy supply. The Bush administration and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission are cool to that idea. In December, FERC imposed a ""soft cap"" of $150 per megawatt hour on wholesale rates in the state and required suppliers to justify any higher prices they charge. Consumer groups such as The Utility Reform Network, or TURN, want regulated rates for residential and small-business customers, but free-market rates for large industrial customers, which sought deregulation in the first place. TURN also advocates a tiered rate structure, with higher rates for consumers who use more than a reasonable amount of electricity each month. Assembly Republicans say electricity and natural-gas prices will fall naturally if the state increases supply, mainly by making it easier to build plants and pipelines. ""Right now, you're sort of sitting partially with regulation and part with the free market,"" said Paul Fremont, an analyst with Jefferies & Co. ""Both these systems work. It's sort of that in-between system that you have in Califor nia that doesn't appear to be working."" The system discourages generators from building new power plants because they aren't guaranteed a profit, and it doesn't do enough to discourage power use by consumers because the price they pay doesn't reflect the true cost of power, Fremont said. ""I don't think people here have much faith in the market, and why should they?"" countered TURN's Mindy Spatt. ""I think there are probably better ways of encouraging consumers to conserve than by gouging them."" Davis insists the crisis can be resolved without raising rates for Edison and PG&E customers beyond ""the existing rate structure."" In January, state regulators imposed temporary rate hikes of 7 to 15 percent on Edison and PG&E customers. The Legislature and Davis extended the increases for up to a decade to help pay back the estimated $10 billion in power buying the state expects to do for Edison and PG&E over the next several years, and finance its purchase of the power lines owned by the two companies and San Diego Gas & Electric. Rates were already scheduled to increase next year for Edison and PG&E customers. Under the 1996 deregulation law, the pair's ratepayers saw a 10 percent rate reduction, but only until early 2002. That rate cut will likely expire as planned, Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio has said. Davis wants those rates to cover not only the traditional cost of generating, transporting and distributing power, but the added cost of paying off the two utilities' massive debt and buying their transmission lines, said Assemblyman Fred Keeley, D-Boulder Creek, the Assembly's chief power negotiator. Yet Davis has indirectly addressed the rate imbalance by signing legislation that will let regulators raise consumer rates if necessary, Keeley said. The governor and lawmakers are in effect spreading out rate increases over a decade by using long-term revenue bonds to buy power for the nearly bankrupt utilities, said Severin Borenstein, director of the University of California Energy Institute. ""At some point we have to deal with the reality that all of the power that we buy has to be paid for by somebody - it's either going to come from taxpayers or it's going to come from ratepayers,"" Bor enstein said. ""Raising rates now would get us a lot of conservation."" Davis also wants financial incentives for conservation and power-plant construction in time to make a difference this summer. ""Our mouths were agape"" at the rapid timetable, Keeley said. Legislators are rushing to pass those incentives by month's end, he said, allowing three months for consumers and suppliers to act before the heat of summer. Among bills considered Tuesday, the Senate Energy Committee approved legislation to accelerate the siting of power plants. It also was considering a proposal to restructure rates for generators that use renewable energy to provide about 30 percent of the state's electricity. ---- Bill to Cut Some Power Prices Stalls Energy: Democrats balk at varying payment levels for alternative generators. By DAN MORAIN, JULIE TAMAKI, Times Staff Writers SACRAMENTO--Legislation aimed at cutting prices for more than a fourth of the power consumed in California stalled Tuesday, as Democrats questioned why a few alternative energy generators--some of them campaign donors--stood to receive higher payments than others. Lawmakers working to unravel California's energy mess have been negotiating for weeks in an effort to cut the price paid to more than 600 generators of alternative power by more than half, to below 8 cents a kilowatt-hour. Those alternative generators' contracts with utilities have shot up in recent months because of a rise in the price of natural gas. The cash-strapped corporations have suspended or made partial payments to the generators over the last few months, causing many to shut down or reduce their outputs. But even as the lawmakers reached agreement that pushed the average price to near the 8-cent level per kilowatt-hour, some generators would have received higher prices under the bill by state Sen. Jim Battin (R-La Quinta). Some of the generators that stood to benefit had donated to Battin's campaigns. One--Windtec Inc.--gave Battin a $20,000 campaign donation in 1999. Others contributed from $3,000 and $5,000 last year. Battin acknowledged that he has received campaign contributions from some wind power generators but said there is no connection between the donations and the bill's provisions. ""It is illegal, it is unethical and it's not how I do business,"" he said. Battin noted that 25% of the state's alternative energy producers are in his district. As Democrats on the Senate Energy Committee blocked the bill, Battin warned that some alternative energy producers might react to the delay by trying to force Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric into bankruptcy. ""We will be the cause of bankruptcy,"" Battin said. That prompted Energy Committee Chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) to retort: ""I'm really tired of being threatened with bankruptcy."" Alternative energy producers, including those that use wind, solar power, biomass and other means, produce 27% of the energy used in California. They sell the electricity to the utilities, which in turn transmit it to retail consumers. But with the utilities facing multibillion-dollar debts, the alternative energy producers under contract with Edison have not been paid since November. Scores of alternative energy producers supported the measure. Edison International and the San Francisco-based consumer group, the Utility Reform Network, opposed it. Michael Florio of the Utility Reform group said the deal could result in higher consumer prices; an Edison representative said the same thing. Battin and Assemblyman Fred Keeley (D-Boulder Creek) worked out an arrangement with many of the generators. Keeley took the lead in the early negotiations, and then turned to Battin to introduce the legislation, SB 47X. Rather convoluted language would have allowed higher payments to a select few generators that produce electricity from wind and biomass. Most of California's wind suppliers, for instance, would have received about 6 cents per kilowatt-hour. But a handful of them, about half a dozen wind farms--mostly in the Palm Springs area represented by Battin--would have received 7.8 cents. Battin contends that other wind producers receive additional payments that boost them to the same level as Windtec and others that would get the higher payments. ""They get the same deal,"" Battin said of the handful of generators that would benefit from the provisions he added to the bill. In California's overall energy market, the amount of money that would have flowed to the favored generators is minor. But the added prices that would have been paid to the generators would have translated to at least $19 million in the next five years, to be absorbed by Southern California Edison customers, according to one analysis. Also Tuesday, more details were disclosed about another leg of the state's effort to escape from the energy crunch--the deals with large power generators to supply electricity to California for as long as 10 years. Those arrangements were announced by Gov. Gray Davis Monday as ""the bedrock"" of California's energy policy. But some consumer advocates warned that the deals could lock the state into excessively high-priced contracts. S. David Freeman, the general manager of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power and Davis' negotiator, said that the state guarded against that by varying the time spans of its deals. About 6,000 megawatts are expected to be available this summer, about one-third of the energy needed by the state, Freeman said. The amount of power under contract swells until more than 9,000 megawatts are contracted in 2004, half of the needed amount, before dipping to 8,000 megawatts in 2010. ""What we're doing here is what everybody said had to be done,"" Freeman said. ""We deliberately bought 50% so we'd have a good mix between long-term contracts, which may turn out to be somewhat higher or somewhat lower than the spot market,"" and purchases on the spot market. ---- PG&E could face mutiny on outages: SMUD, others may balk if utility orders summer blackouts By Carrie Peyton Bee Staff Writer (Published March 7, 2001) Sacramento's electric utility wants out of a deal that imposes rolling blackouts locally on PG&E's command. So do a lot of other utilities. They've been writing letters, lobbying lawmakers and launching informal talks with Pacific Gas and Electric Co. to get off the hook before summer. Who dodges the blackout bullet ""is going to play out as a political hot button"" around the state, said George Fraser, head of the Northern California Power Agency, a coalition of municipal utilities. In Sacramento, the next volley is expected soon, with the Sacramento Municipal Utility District reportedly poised to notify PG&E that it will no longer black out homes and businesses on the larger utility's command. ""We are absolutely trying to fight off the requirement for rolling blackouts for the Sacramento area,"" said Linda Davis, one of seven elected members of the SMUD board of directors. Saying they don't want to be dragged down by somebody else's problems, two Southern California utilities have written grid operators asking to be exempted from any blackouts caused by PG&E's or Southern California Edison's financial woes. But in PG&E's view, ""California is in an energy crisis (and) ... we're all in this together,"" said spokesman John Nelson. The maneuvering comes amid bleak forecasts for power supplies this summer. Although Gov. Gray Davis has said conservation, new power plants and moderate weather could avert blackouts, officials at the Independent System Operator, which runs much of California's grid, expect frequent rotating outages. One consulting firm, Cambridge Energy Research Associates, predicts 20 hours of rolling blackouts during July and August, and about 200 hours of especially intense calls for voluntary cutbacks. Before blackouts hit, the jockeying over just whose lights, air conditioners and assembly lines will be shut down is growing. The outcome could affect millions of people statewide. The state Public Utilities Commission is probing rolling blackout programs run by the for-profit utilities it regulates, including PG&E and Edison. A PUC analysis has suggested that PG&E's program, which currently exempts about 40 percent of its customers, should spread the burden more broadly. For example, it said, 1.9 million homes and businesses are spared just because they share a circuit with a customer deemed ""essential."" But not-for-profit utilities such as SMUD, which answer to their own elected boards or city councils, have other worries. Many have already lined up their power supplies for summer. Some have raised rates or are considering raising rates. Some have taken extra conservation steps. They think those preparations ought to give them leverage to ease blackout clauses in their contracts with PG&E. SMUD general manager Jan Schori ""is going to use every avenue ... any avenue, to put pressure on,"" including lobbying the ISO, the governor and others, said utility director Davis. The Northern California Power Agency, a joint-powers authority that owns and operates power plants for municipal utilities, has begun informal negotiations with PG&E to change blackout rules, according to Fraser, its top executive. It is preparing to write PG&E, asking that its members be exempted from outages altogether. Failing that, it wants them to face fewer outages or to be compensated for cutting off power, he said. At SMUD, the utility board has met in closed session to discuss exactly what it is required to do during electric emergencies, under terms of the interconnection contract that links SMUD's lines to PG&E's. ""The contracts are being inspected with a fine-tooth comb,"" said SMUD director Howard Posner. Schori declined to comment on any specifics. Sources indicated that the main option being considered is notifying PG&E that because of changed circumstances, SMUD believes it no longer is required to routinely comply with outage requests. Other options being explored include re-negotiating existing agreements with PG&E. Posner said that ever since two days of rolling blackouts in January, constituents have been asking him, "" 'Why are we participating when we're not the problem?' And I don't have a good answer to that."" Several directors said SMUD has already spent a lot of money -- and is considering 16 percent rate increases -- to ensure that it has enough electricity under contract to meet its customers' summer demands. They believe PG&E should do the same. ""We're almost like a David against Goliath here,"" said board vice president Genevieve Shiroma. ""The huge investor-owned utilities next door have severe problems that they need to get under control."" In addition, SMUD plans to argue that because it can cut usage through its ""Peak Corps"" program, which remotely turns off air conditioners at volunteer households, it has already done its part without rotating outages, director Davis said. PG&E believes the interconnection agreements that govern smaller utilities' ties to its transmission lines have ""benefits and burdens to both sides,"" said Nelson. ""It wouldn't be fair or good policy for just one provision to be altered without taking a look at how that affects the entire contract,"" he said. Interconnection contracts generally have clauses that require utilities to help each other out to avert greater emergencies. Sometimes reducing demand -- called load shedding -- can be the only way to stabilize the electric grid in the seconds after a major power plant or transmission line fails. ""It's been around in the electrical fabric forever,"" said Jim Pope, head of Silicon Valley Power, Santa Clara's city-run utility. In addition to legal requirements, ""you have a moral obligation so you don't bring the system to collapse."" Like other city-run utilities, Silicon Valley Power has a contract with PG&E that requires it to shed load during an electric emergency. But its contract allows it to work with big users to reduce their demand, so no one has to be completely shut off. Such agreements, formed long before deregulation when PG&E ran the north state's grid, now are complicated by the 1997 creation of the state Independent System Operator. The ISO today runs pieces of the grid owned by PG&E, Edison, and San Diego Gas & Electric Co. If it believes power use is about to surge past supply, potentially triggering a grid collapse across the western United States, the ISO notifies the three utilities that they have to shed a certain number of megawatts. The big utilities meet that requirement two ways. They cut circuits to some of their own customers, and they tell smaller, connected utilities to cut a proportionate share. In Northern California, about 80 percent of the outages are borne by PG&E customers and the rest by customers of SMUD and other municipal utilities and irrigation districts. ""In one sense, we are all in this together. If SMUD were in danger of going down, we would hope others would help us out,"" said SMUD's Posner. ""But that's if we're in danger from circumstances beyond our control, not from mismanagement or lack of financial wherewithal."" It is unclear what penalties, if any, a utility would face for violating an interconnection agreement. In the long run, the issue would be fought either in the courts or before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, grid officials said. As a practical matter, in the seconds when the risk to the grid is greatest, if one utility refused to shed load, the ISO would probably solve to problem by calling on PG&E, Edison or others who are willing to make deeper cutbacks, they said. ---- PUC to Decide Fate Of Utility Workers PG&E, Edison want to trim costs by laying off thousands, cutting service Bernadette Tansey, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, March 7, 2001 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle State regulators are set to decide today whether debt-ridden Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison can conserve cash by laying off thousands of workers and letting service standards slip. Union officials who protested the layoffs before the California Public Utilities Commission warn that if the cuts go through, neighborhoods hit by power outages could stay dark for hours, and more customers could face busy signals when they call about their bills. An administrative law judge agreed, advising the commission in February to order the utilities to restore 725 positions already cut and block the elimination of an additional 2,125 jobs. Judge John Wong said PG&E and Edison have acknowledged the layoffs will not substantially improve their shaky financial condition, which arose from skyrocketing wholesale electricity costs the utilities could not pass on to consumers under a rate cap. ""The savings would barely make a dent,"" Wong said in his draft decision. The two companies together claim that their debt from power purchases amounts to more than $13 billion. PG&E says it has saved $18 million from the first wave of 325 layoffs. Wong's recommendation is already running into resistance on the PUC. Commissioner Richard Bilas said the five-member panel should not be micromanaging the utilities in a time of crisis. Bilas has proposed an alternate ruling that would allow the utilities to make the cuts, but provide for PUC monitoring of service in case the commission wants to step in later. ""We're in a situation where the utilities are not collecting the revenues they need to operate, and yet we may be guilty of not letting them cut expenses where they can cut expenses,"" Bilas said. PG&E spokesman Jon Tremayne said savings from the layoffs are helping to keep electricity running and gas flowing. ""It keeps cash in our accounts so we can keep doing day-to-day business,"" Tremayne said. In addition to the 325 positions dropped so far, PG&E is proposing to cut an additional 675 during the next three to six months. The cuts affect temporary and contract workers who read meters, handle new service hookups and replace equipment. PG&E has no plans to eliminate permanent positions. The company is struggling to keep up with a higher workload at its call center as customers deluge the lines with inquiries about their rising bills and the effects of deregulation. Calls to PG&E ballooned from 1.3 million in January 2000 to 2.3 million in January 2001. Bilas advocates granting PG&E's request to temporarily relax standards requiring the utility to respond swiftly to customer calls and to read customers' meters once a month. PG&E wants to read meters bimonthly and send bills based on the estimated use between readings. Discrepancies could be corrected later. Wong called those measures unacceptable. He said customers need to know immediately if their efforts to conserve power are working. Wong also said the utilities' own experts have said the workforce reductions will lengthen the time required to restore power after nonemergency equipment failure. Eric Wolfe, communications director for the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 1245, said some customers have already been left without power overnight because PG&E is trying to avoid the use of overtime on nonemergency power outages. ""It hurts a lineman to walk away from the job leaving a customer without power,"" Wolfe said. Tremayne said PG&E is trying to minimize overtime costs, but denied the company has allowed customers to go without power out of financial concerns. He said crews were pulled out when darkness and falling trees made the work too dangerous. ---- Power prices could soar during the summer Posted at 10:35 p.m. PST Tuesday, March 6, 2001 BY STEVE JOHNSON Mercury News Unless Gov. Gray Davis arranges significantly more long-term electricity contracts or persuades people to turn off a lot more lights, California's unpredictable spot market for power could wreak havoc this summer. Even with the 40 long-term deals announced by Davis on Monday, experts interviewed Tuesday said, up to 43 percent of the state's daily needs may have to come from this highly volatile market, in which power is bought within a day of need. That could could prove hugely expensive, because some spot market energy has cost five to six times what it would under the long-term contracts. It's widely expected that consumers ultimately would have to pay that tab, which could amount to billions of dollars. And because that power won't be locked up in contracts, there is no guarantee it will be available when it's needed, which could lead to blackouts, according to a recent report to the California Independent System Operator, which oversees three-fourths of the state's power grid. ``The situation in California could reach catastrophic proportions,'' the report concluded, adding that unless things change dramatically, ``it is a virtual certainty that peak demand will go unmet during many hot summer days.'' Steven Maviglio, Davis' press secretary, conceded Tuesday that the spot market could be troublesome. ``It's a major concern,'' he said, which is why the state is trying to line up more power contracts, speed up power plant construction and promote conservation. During the normally hot month of August, peak daily demand for power in the Independent System Operator's territory is expected to hit about 47,700 megawatts -- enough for nearly 48 million homes. The state's three main utility firms generate about 8,200 megawatts and have long-term contracts from wind, solar and other energy sources for about 11,700 megawatts more. That totals about 20,000 megawatts. Add in the 7,000 megawatts of long-term power that Davis has announced for this summer, and the state is still nearly 21,000 megawatts short. Costly proposition If all that power has to be obtained on the spot market, the price could be high. On Friday, last-minute purchases on the market averaged $411 per megawatt-hour, compared to about $150 per megawatt-hour for all power obtained by the Independent System Operator and $69 per megawatt-hour on average under Davis' long-term contracts. It's possible that not all 21,000 megawatts would have to be purchased on the market. Assuming Davis is successful in getting people to save 10 percent -- which could prove difficult -- conservation could reduce peak demand by nearly 5,000 megawatts. California also might be able to trade for another 5,000 megawatts with the federal government's Bonneville Power Administration and a hydroelectric operator in British Columbia, said Arthur O'Donnell, editor of California Energy Markets, a trade publication. Under such deals, those two outfits often send that much power to California when they don't need it and California returns the same amount or more when its demand is low. But O'Donnell said it wasn't clear whether 5,000 megawatts would be available this summer, because ``they still haven't gotten the snowpack they need in the Pacific Northwest,'' which could limit that region's generating capacity. Still falling short Even if those hydropower imports are available and conservation works as Davis hopes, it's likely California would still require the spot market for 11,000 megawatts to meet the August demand. That's more than 20 percent of the state's overall power needs. ``All of the surrounding states are buying probably less than 5 percent, at most, of their energy on the spot market,'' said Frank Wolak, a Stanford economist, who monitors electricity prices for the Independent System Operator. He worries about how much that power could cost and is disturbed that state officials haven't adequately addressed the issue. ``No one has any idea what they are going to do, and that is part of the problem,'' he said. Officials at Pacific Gas & Electric Co. are particularly concerned. They fear that their company -- which is nearing bankruptcy -- could get stuck for much of the spot market purchases by the Independent System Operator, which has threatened to bill the utilities for the cost. Fearing the annual bill for that power could hit $2.4 billion this year, PG&E wants the tab sent to the Department of Water Resources, which also is buying power on the spot market for the state. But the Department of Water Resources has objected to that idea and the matter is expected to be heard today by the California Public Utilities Commission. ``We're looking for clarity on a number of issues'' regarding how the spot market will work ``and certainly that's one of them,'' said Thomas Hannigan, the water agency's director. ``I don't think anybody knows the answer of who's going to pay for it,'' added PG&E spokesman John Nelson. But Nettie Hoge, executive director of the Utility Reform Network in San Francisco, said she suspects consumers ultimately will foot the bill. The unfortunate likelihood about spot market purchases is that ``ratepayers are responsible for all of it eventually,'' Hoge said. ``It's a very big problem.'' ---- Power Plant Plans Cause Conflicts East county residents blast supervisors Jason B. Johnson, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, March 7, 2001 Industry dreams of building new power plants in east Contra Costa's hills are prompting an angry reaction among residents and elected officials who say they don't want more plants. The conflict was sparked by a vote by county supervisors yesterday to aggressively explore possible sites for new power plants throughout the county. The measure by Supervisors Mark DeSaulnier and Federal Glover, which passed on a 4-to-0 vote, directs the county administrator and Department of Community Development to compile a report on possible sites within 45 days. Supervisor Donna Gerber abstained after criticizing the plan for potentially repeating the same mistakes that plagued the state's energy deregulation effort by not considering how much energy the state, region and county will need in future years, and how much power is slated to come online. Gerber said alternative power sources, such as solar, should also be examined. A site drawing much attention is on top of a deposit of natural gas near the Concord Naval Weapons Station off Highway 4. The owners of 70 acres of land near the station recently formed a company, Golden State Power Co., to pursue construction of at least one small peaker plant and a much larger facility capable of producing 600 megawatts. The site could hold up to three small 50-megawatt peaker plants, and a larger 15-acre natural gas plant, said Steve Thomas, managing partner with Golden State. No land use applications have been filed. Thomas said 30 acres could be kept as open space to form a buffer around the project. ""Both (facilities) are state of the art,"" said Thomas. ""We believe that the site is ideal."" But east county residents at yesterday's meeting blasted the supervisorial measure and the power plant proposal, complaining that more plants could put people's health at risk. The region already is home to six power plants. ""We're going to get a good dose of poor air quality and (negative) health conditions from this,"" said Concord resident Evelyn Frietas. ""I think we need to stop and think about what we're doing to our quality of life."" Dan Torres said the home he bought in 1995 at a new Bay Point development would be alarmingly close to the proposed Golden State site. ""It will be dragging emissions over our home,"" said Torres. ""I didn't buy a home on that hill to be surrounded by power plants."" There are six power plants in operation in east Contra Costa. Pittsburg already has two power plants, and two more under construction. City Council members Frank Aiello and Yvonne Beals said the Antioch-Pittsburg area has done more than its share of energy production. Aiello said Pittsburg will soon produce enough energy to power three million homes in California. ""When is enough, enough?"" asked Aiello. ""Pittsburg has shouldered responsibility for a land-fill and two more power plants. At some point you have to say enough."" Beals said that while power plants have added millions to the city's general fund, the negatives of additional plants could outweigh the benefits. ""I don't think that Pittsburg or east county should be the dumping ground for energy for California,"" said Beals. ---- Supervisors set search for power plant sites The board also heard from the potential developers of a 650-megawatt plant between Bay Point and Concord By Thomas Peele TIMES STAFF WRITER MARTINEZ -- Contra Costa County supervisors took tentative steps Tuesday toward allowing the construction of at least one small power plant before summer, ordering that its staff identify potential sites in unincorporated areas within seven weeks. The board voted 4-0 to search for locations. Third District Supervisor Donna Gerber abstained, saying her colleagues lacked a ""comprehensive context'' to identify sites. ""I think the board knows just enough to be dangerous,'' she said. Gerber said the county should examine the potential for additional power plants within its borders but not investigate individual sites yet. But Fourth District Supervisor Mark DeSaulnier said the action was necessary because of the energy crisis and because of Gov. Gray Davis' call for local governments to help speed the construction of so-called ""peaker plants"" before July and August. ""I wouldn't do this except under an emergency,"" DeSaulnier said after the vote. ""There are unusual circumstances. We're not talking about putting this in a residential area."" Fifth District Supervisor Federal Glover backed DeSaulnier, but said he hoped for a location outside his heavily industrialized East County district. ""There's a lot of concern in East County as to the number of plants,"" he said. DeSaulnier said, though, that the only logical place for a small plant remains the ""industrial belt'' stretching along the waterfront from West County to Antioch. He declined to provide specifics, but said the only other potential site outside the industrial areas was the Concord Naval Weapons Station property. But he quickly added that he believes the U.S. Department of Defense ""would never go for it."" Also, DeSaulnier said he could not rule out the county building the plant itself and entering the electricity-selling market during peak demand times. Board Chairwoman Gayle Uilkema called that idea extremely premature and unlikely. ""That's a very powerful decision. I do not think we are ready,'' she said. The California Energy Commission listed the Equilon refinery in Martinez as one of 32 potential ""peaker plant"" sites in the state last week. Peaker plants kick in during peak usage times. Davis called for their quick construction before the height of summer and its energy demand for air conditioning. Plants that generate as much as 50,000 megawatts don't need Energy Commission approval. DeSaulnier said he believed a peaker plant could be built about a month after final approval. Supervisors also heard from the potential developers of a 650-megawatt plant between Bay Point and Concord. Walnut Creek commercial real estate developer Steve Thomas announced his intentions for the site north of Highway 4 last week. Construction could take two years. Eric Hasseltine, a consultant representing Thomas and what he described as a ""brand new"" company for the site, the Golden State Power Co., told supervisors that if they intended to speed peaker plant construction they should do what they can to expedite the larger plant. The Thomas site could house a peaker plant until the proposed larger one goes online. A large natural gas line passes under the site. DeSaulnier seemed cautious about the larger proposal, which he had described last week as ""a good site."" Uilkema, too, said she knew too little about it to comment. A resident who lives near the Thomas property asked the board to ""build it (the larger plant) closer to where you have industrial areas. You have to carefully consider the people"" who live nearby, said Dan Torres, 39. Evelyn Freitas of Concord said she lives downwind of the proposed site. ""Our air quality is going to be worse then it is now,"" she said. Gerber played on the environmental issues, saying the county already ranks second statewide to Los Angeles in volume of hazardous materials and amount of electrical generation. ---- Peter Schrag: California's $90 billion infrastructure gap (Published March 7, 2001) By now, California's surreal energy mess has grown from a crisis to a condition. It may not be quite as permanent as, say, death and taxes, but it's still something that could get a whole lot worse before it gets better. Until there's more realistic pricing, no gubernatorial pea-under-the-shell buyout scheme will solve it. Beyond the energy crisis, however, and in many ways similar to it, California faces a whole range of other infrastructure problems -- in transportation, in water resources and sewer systems, in school and university buildings -- that seem, once again, to be all but forgotten. The Business Roundtable has estimated the need at roughly $90 billion, though no number can possibly be exact. What's certain is that after a burst of high-level investment in public facilities during the 1950s and 1960s, California's annual capital investment has sunk precipitously -- from an annual $150 per capita in the 1960s, according to a set of recent studies for PPIC, the Public Policy Institute of California, to about $30 in the 1990s. But you probably don't need to tell anyone driving Bay Area or Los Angeles freeways or looking at the ubiquitous portable classrooms, those dreary brown boxes that house a fourth of our public school students. Ever since passage of Proposition 13 in 1978, we have been flying the flag of deferred maintenance. As in the state's electricity crisis, however, there's no way California can effectively address those problems merely by building or bonding itself out of them. In highway construction, in developing water resources, in finding enough university space to accommodate the Tidal Wave II of students, managing demand is likely to be as crucial to any solution as new construction. In the energy market -- and in electricity particularly -- it's been a familiar principle ever since David Roe of the Environmental Defense Fund first persuaded Pacific Gas and Electric that a dollar invested in conservation may be worth as much as the same investment in new generation. But in most other sectors of California's infrastructure, state and local, it's a lesson still to be learned. There have been scattered attempts to encourage conservation and reduce demand -- significant reduction in water use, for example, through the installation of low-flow faucets and low-flush toilets; some reduction in traffic by using rush-hour diamond lanes or by adjusting highway or (as in New York) bridge tolls to levels of congestion. But as pointed out by David Dowall, an urban economist at Berkeley, state policy-makers have not really begun to ""consider how demand management strategies can be applied to infrastructure service areas,"" or how the more efficient use of facilities and more realistic pricing -- highway tolls, say, or parking fees -- ""can reduce demand for scarce infrastructure resources."" In any case, says Dowall in one of the PPIC reports, we should pick which major projects we will build not just according to per capita estimates of how much we need, but according to how much consumers are willing to pay for them. To avoid hurting the poor, congestion-related highway tolls and other tariffs can be rebated on the basis of income. University fees can be means-tested. In California, they also could be adjusted to encourage summer school classes and other off-peak uses, rather than (as in the past) making UC summer courses more expensive. Given the political and economic uncertainties, there's no way to know how far such demand management can be taken. But there's not much doubt that, as Dowall and others point out, the state's infrastructure planning is a jumble of uncoordinated agency agendas and wish lists. The Legislature last year passed a bill, AB 1473, by Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg, that requires the governor, beginning next year, to submit an annual five-year infrastructure plan for state agencies and public schools, along with recommendations on how to fund it. In addition, Gov. Gray Davis' infrastructure commission is expected to recommend better coordination of infrastructure and land-use planning when it issues its report this spring. That would be a start. As California State Treasurer Phil Angelides has pointed out, the state desperately needs to start joint planning -- regional planning -- for housing, roads and other resources to reduce the need for long commutes; to preserve open space; and to bring jobs to where people live and housing to where the jobs are. That would itself reduce demand for more freeway lanes and, equally important, improve the quality of life. At present, most planning for housing, roads, water systems and other facilities rarely recognizes the regional impact of local decisions. In the East Bay, slow-growth forces push well-intended initiatives that would force more development into Tracy or Modesto and further tax the transportation systems to Silicon Valley. In city after city, there are beggar-thy-neighbor efforts to grab yet another shopping mall that produces a little extra sales tax revenue for the city that gets it, and that often compounds traffic and revenue problems in adjacent communities. In higher education we divide bond proceeds evenly among UC, the California State University and the community colleges even though the community colleges serve eight times as many students as UC. We plan road projects according to county, not regional, priorities. It is all done according to antiquated political and fiscal formulas that often no longer make sense. We don't just need better capital planning; we need a whole new planning system. ---- PG&E power plan debated at hearing A PUC meeting on the utility's capacity expansion project for the Tri-Valley follows weeks of protest from officials, residents Power upgrade in valley debated By Megan Long TIMES STAFF WRITER SAN FRANCISCO -- Dublin officials and the developer of a Livermore subdivision faced questions Tuesday about their opposition to alternative routes of PG&E's controversial Tri-Valley power upgrade plan -- and answered by restating their long-standing objections. Tuesday's cross-examination came during the third and likely final week of the California Public Utility Commission's evidentiary hearings on the utility's $91 million Tri-Valley 2002 Capacity Increase Project. It has followed weeks of protests of PG&E's upgrade plans by officials and residents of Livermore, Pleasanton, Dublin and San Ramon. And before the questioning started, Dublin Vice Mayor Janet Lockhart reiterated concerns about an alternative route deemed ""environmentally superior"" that would place a substation just 1,000 feet north of Interstate 580 between Tassajara and Fallon roads. She said that would undermine the results of a 15-year process to plan the eastern development of the city. ""It's extremely important to the residents of our community to follow a plan we worked hard to produce,"" she said. Dublin officials favor PG&E's proposed placement of the station three miles north of the freeway, away from new high-tech company offices and housing developments. Besides the Dublin substation, the project calls for construction of a substation in North Livermore, expansion of the Pleasanton substation and installation of 23.5 miles of new lines. In response to questions from PUC Administrative Law Judge Michelle Cooke, Dublin's public works director, Lee Thompson, confirmed that the Lin family, the owner of the property where the alternative substation would go, wasn't interested in selling the land to PG&E. Cooke also asked Thompson to define a ""discretionary permit,"" which is how city officials said they might treat a permit for a substation. Lee said that type of permit is one the city has the right to approve or not depending on the project's impact. Eddie Peabody, Dublin's community development director, testified that the zoning for the Lin property accommodates uses such as commercial business, research and development and light manufacturing. It would not, he said, be appropriate for a power substation. He said parcels within the East Dublin area that could host a station would include those zoned for public and semi-public uses, including land recently bought by Oracle and Sun Microsystems for new campuses. While Dublin officials testified that one buyer of land in that area paid $86 per square foot, others suggested land prices would be inflated to help make a PG&E land buy look prohibitively expensive. An executive of Centex Homes, the developer of new houses near Isabel Avenue and Concannon Boulevard, objected to an alternative route that would place high-voltage transmission lines overhead along Isabel and Stanley Boulevard. David Barclay, president of Centex's Northern California division, said that the 80-foot to 150-foot towers would have a severe visual impact on residents of the Prima tract. Ed O'Neill, a lawyer for the Kottinger Ranch Homeowners Association, pointed out that existing distribution lines on 50-foot poles on Isabel already mar the view for residents. The Foley family has been ranching on land south of Pleasanton city limits for years, said their attorney Kennedy Richardson. The utility's project would place overhead lines and a transmission station on rolling hills that the family envisions as one day being public open space with limited development, Richardson said. Lawyers for Pleasanton, Livermore, Kottinger Ranch and Centex are scheduled to cross-examine a PG&E engineer today about the project's routing. That testimony should be the most controversial of the hearings. Judge Cooke is expected to recommend an alignment by July to the PUC, which will make the final decision. ---- NEWS State OKs 'Peaker' Power Plant at SFO / Temporary generator could be sending electricity to 50,000 homes by August Marshall Wilson 03/08/2001 The San Francisco Chronicle FINAL Page A.20 (Copyright 2001) State energy officials yesterday approved plans to build a temporary electrical plant at San Francisco International Airport that should generate enough juice to power 50,000 homes by August. Meeting in Sacramento, the Energy Commission voted 4-0 to give the green light to the gas-fired plant. It will operate during peak summer and winter demand to help the state avoid Stage 3 power alerts and rolling blackouts. Texas-based El Paso Merchant Energy Co. won approval under a new state law mandating speedy, four-month reviews of so-called ""peaker"" plants. It was the only one of seven applications statewide to win approval. The other proposals were withdrawn for various reasons. The 51-megawatt plant, formally called the United Golden Gate Power Project, is scheduled to be built at the northwest corner of the airport near the United Airlines maintenance center. Within the next few weeks El Paso plans to apply to build a 571- megawatt, $400 million plant in the same area, company spokesman Jesse Frederick said. It would undergo a separate review by state energy officials. The small ""peaker"" plant approved yesterday is to generate electricity beginning around Aug. 1 for up to three years. After the end of three years, the plant would be closed or converted to a cleaner-burning system. Under state law, a temporary ""peaker"" plant is permitted to spew more air pollution than a permanent plant. El Paso's temporary plant is to be built next to a co-generation plant operated by United Airlines. It would use existing connections for natural gas and water supplies and tap into existing power transmission lines. Electricity generated by the plant would be pumped into the state's electrical grid, Energy Commission spokesman Gary Fay said. It would also serve as a backup for San Francisco Airport in case of a blackout. No one spoke against the proposed plant at yesterday's commission meeting. The proposal, however, has been criticized by area residents and environmentalists worried about air pollution. Scott Buschman, a professional photographer and San Bruno resident, said yesterday it was unjust that state officials 100 miles away in Sacramento approved a Texas company's proposal to put a power plant on land owned by San Francisco. ""The fact that they approved it without considering the public's concerns, foremost air quality, is very disturbing,"" he said. Fay said the plant complies with clean-air standards. Answering the criticism about the location of yesterday's deliberation, he said three hearings and several workshops were held in communities near the airport. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. ---- Crossed Wires: Major Kinks Emerge In Gov. Davis's Plan To Power California --- State's Outlays for Electricity May Be Hard to Recover Without Rate Increases --- Betting on Long-Term Deals By Wall Street Journal staff reporters Rebecca Smith, Mitchel Benson and John R. Emshwiller 03/08/2001 The Wall Street Journal A1 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- Earlier this year, Gov. Gray Davis made what may be the biggest bet in the history of the nation's biggest state: that he could tame an out-of-control electricity market and avoid devastating blackouts without busting the state's budget, antagonizing its consumers or derailing his own political career. His wager is still on the table, but the assumptions that underlie it are looking increasingly shaky these days. The governor has already spent around $2 billion of public money buying hugely expensive wholesale power, taking over the role formerly played by the state's near-bankrupt electric utilities. And California will probably be obliged to spend billions more before its electricity market stabilizes and those utilities are restored to some semblance of financial health. Under the governor's plan, California aims to recoup the money it is using to buy electricity by issuing $10 billion in bonds. That way it would still have a healthy budget surplus to finance new spending on roads, schools and other public services. But there's a potentially big obstacle to this plan. The state Legislature, worried about racking up billions in new debt, has put limits on the size of any bond offering. In broad terms, the Legislature's action would allow the state to borrow only four times as much as it can recover annually from utility customers. Right now that doesn't appear to be much. Under the current rate structure, essentially set in place by California's flawed 1996 electricity-deregulation plan, consumers pay far less for power than the cost of acquiring it on the wholesale market. Preliminary estimates submitted by utilities last month to the California Public Utilities Commission show the state's share of the proceeds from electricity sales this year could be as little as $241 million -- not enough to support even $1 billion in bond sales under the Legislature's formula. That would leave the state on the hook for much of the money it has already paid for power -- not to mention the billions more Gov. Davis will need to spend. That, in turn, raises the prospect that California's economy and its credit rating both could deteriorate significantly. But state finance officials say that, based on their own projections, they will be able to extract enough money to support a $10 billion bond issue. Walking a careful line between fiscal prudence and political survival, Mr. Davis and others in his administration are scrambling to come up with ways to get around the legislative restrictions without raising rates for consumers. ""If I wanted to raise rates, I could solve this problem in 20 minutes,"" Mr. Davis says. The governor says he believes that the state can obtain enough affordable power through long-term power-supply contracts to avoid the need for a big rate increase. The billions of dollars the state hopes to borrow would be used to help pay for power until electricity prices drop, as they are expected to do when new power plants come online over the next few years. The Davis administration fears that what may be its only other option -- a big increase in retail electric rates -- could prompt angry consumer groups to seek new electricity laws through a statewide ballot initiative during next year's election. That's when Mr. Davis is expected to run for a second term as governor. But trying to save California without rate increases is forcing Mr. Davis to make some colossal gambles with the state's money. State officials estimate that in the next several months, California will need to spend as much as $6 billion on power purchases -- equivalent to the state's entire fiscal surplus. Mr. Davis is also looking to spend several billion more to buy the transmission assets of three investor-owned utilities in order to restore two of them to credit-worthiness. He also has announced plans to spend several hundred million dollars more on conservation programs designed to reduce demand while new power plants are being built in the state. In order to limit the state's financial exposure in the meantime, the governor and his aides have, in some cases, ignored state law. They have threatened appointed officials who have stood in the way. And they have sharply restricted the flow of information to the public. None of those steps is expected to do much to reduce state spending on power in the coming months. In a few weeks, power usage is expected to begin a sharp seasonal rise as Californians switch on their air conditioners with the coming of warmer weather. By various estimates, demand during peak periods this summer could outstrip supply by 10%, or several thousand megawatts. That could produce more rolling blackouts like the ones that hit Northern California earlier this year. It is also likely to put strong upward pressure on wholesale electricity prices. Steven Zimmerman, managing director of Standard & Poor's Corp., says Mr. Davis and his aides don't ""have a lot of time"" to put a cap on the state's financial exposure to the crisis. The credit-rating agency has put the state on credit watch for a possible downgrade, which would affect the value of all of California's outstanding public debt. Moody's Investor Service Inc. is also concerned. It said in a recent report that the power crisis could soon ""seriously threaten the health"" of the state's economy. Mr. Davis, a Democrat and career politician, was dealt a bad hand when he took office in 1999. The deregulation plan that sparked the state's electricity crisis was enacted under his predecessor, Republican Pete Wilson. But Mr. Davis was slow to react to early signs of trouble this past summer and alarms sounded by members of the state Legislature. By the time Mr. Davis finally sprang into action earlier this year, a troublesome power-supply squeeze had escalated into a crisis. In a Jan. 17 declaration of emergency, the governor designated the state Department of Water Resources to take the utilities' place as the daily buyer of huge quantities of electricity. His hope: that by making the state the dominant player in California's power sector, he would ease electricity producers' concerns about getting paid and give the state enough clout to negotiate lower long-term power prices. Earlier this week, Mr. Davis announced final or tentative agreements with 20 power suppliers to furnish the state with a total of 8,900 megawatts for periods of as long as 20 years. But the supply situation remains extremely uncertain for this summer, when demand probably will top 45,000 megawatts. If the state can secure enough power under contract and push down demand through aggressive conservation, it might be able to squeak through the summer season. If not, it will be forced to keep buying huge amounts of costly power in the cash market. Under deregulation, retail electric rates were frozen for several years, while wholesale-power costs were free to fluctuate. When the plan was conceived, wholesale prices were low and expected to go lower. However, a combination of unexpected growth in power demand and a lack of new generating capacity helped produce a supply squeeze. Average wholesale prices more than tripled last year from 1999. And in January those prices were up 10-fold from a year earlier. By then, California's two biggest investor-owned utilities -- the Pacific Gas & Electric unit of PG&E Corp. and the Southern California Edison subsidiary of Edison International -- faced imminent financial collapse. They had racked up billions of dollars in wholesale power bills they couldn't afford to pay. As generators began shying away from selling to the two utilities, the Clinton administration forced them to sell power into the California market, an order left in place during the first weeks of the Bush administration. Still, northern California was hit by rolling blackouts on several days in early January. Since then, the DWR, which does some electricity trading as an adjunct to its main mission of managing the state's giant system of aqueducts and reservoirs, has had to learn the ins and outs of power markets on the run. It hasn't been easy. David Mills, trading-floor manager for the federal Bonneville Power Administration, says the water agency has at times offered to pay $50 to $100 per megawatt hour more than the available market price. ""They agree to prices that make you wonder,"" says Mr. Mills, whose organization markets electricity from federal dams in the Pacific Northwest. ""You'd at least think they'd check to see what the prevailing price is before throwing out their offer."" Mr. Mills says that ""to cut California some slack,"" he occasionally has instructed his traders to sell at prices lower than the DWR had offered to pay. Ray Hart, the water agency deputy director responsible for the power purchasing, says he isn't aware of any cases in which the DWR has overpaid. He says his team has been ""extremely successful by all measures."" Ultimately, the DWR's trading acumen is far less important than the overall arithmetic of power supply and demand in California. With the price of natural gas that feeds many of the region's generating plants at near record levels and some suppliers reluctant to sell into the troubled California market, wholesale electric prices remain stubbornly high and, in recent days, have again been rising. The Legislature has advanced the DWR about $3 billion from the state's general fund for power purchases. Under emergency legislation passed by the Legislature and signed by Mr. Davis on Feb. 1, the general fund is to be reimbursed from a planned bond sale later this year. But under terms of the emergency law, the water agency would have to wrest $2.5 billion a year in revenue from retail electricity rates in order to sell the $10 billion worth of bonds sought by Mr. Davis. Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg, a Southern California Democrat, says the formula was created to ensure that there would be a way to repay the bonds without draining the state's coffers. ""We didn't want to just open our wallets,"" he says. According to the language of the Feb. 1 law, the water agency gets what's left of revenue collected from ratepayers after the utilities pay certain of their own power-supply bills and other expenses. And, in their filings with the PUC last month, the utilities reckoned, under their worst-case scenarios, that there would be only $241 million available to the DWR this year. State officials are quietly pushing the PUC to rejigger the formula so that the water department gets more money -- even though that would clash with terms of the Feb. 1 law. Robert Miyashiro, deputy director of the Department of Finance, says the emergency law was ""drafted poorly"" and has led people to believe the DWR ""only gets the leftover money."" He predicts there will be ""cleanup legislation."" At the request of the Davis administration, the PUC is considering a plan to use a different revenue-sharing formula than the one in the state law. The proposed new formula was written ""in close consultation"" with Mr. Davis's Finance Department, says PUC President Loretta Lynch, who supports the initiative and is hoping to rush it through. The effort has drawn some opposition. Commissioner Richard Bilas at a recent PUC meeting questioned the legality of the commission attempting to change a formula set by the Legislature. PG&E is even more emphatic, since the DWR's extra money could come at the utility's expense. The formula ""threatens to undo the very financial protections for the utilities that [the new law] attempted to provide,"" the utility said in a recent filing with the PUC. As politicians and regulators wrestle with that issue, the Davis administration has taken a step to reduce the outflow of state cash that also seems to conflict with the Feb. 1 law. It was widely assumed that the law required the DWR to buy any electricity the state needed to keep its lights on. However, on many occasions, the DWR has refused to buy power on the grounds that it was too expensive, citing a portion of the new law that urges the agency to hold down costs. The task of covering any remaining shortfall has passed to the California Independent System Operator, which manages the state's energy grid and is charged with buying power when necessary to avert shortages. However, the ISO doesn't have any power-purchasing money of its own, and the major parties it would normally bill are PG&E and Edison, whose inability to pay their power bills was the reason the state started buying electricity in the first place. Amid criticism of its stance from generators, utilities and Wall Street, the DWR says it has started covering more of the utilities' electricity costs. The water agency is now buying 95% to 99% of what California needs in a given day, says the agency's Mr. Hart. But increased buying only adds to the uncertainty about the eventual tab. The state's legislative analyst, Elizabeth Hill, recently recommended that lawmakers hold off considering more than $2 billion in state spending on items ranging from college construction to beach cleanups because of continuing questions about the financial impact of the electricity crisis. Like others, Ms. Hill complains that the governor's office and state agencies haven't been forthcoming with information. Indeed, the DWR refuses to say precisely how much power it is purchasing and at what prices, though it has on several occasions gone back to the Legislature for more money. State officials say that data on its purchasing activities would give suppliers an advantage in continuing electricity-supply contract talks. State Controller Kathleen Connell, who is running for mayor of Los Angeles in an April election, recently announced plans to post state power-spending information on her department's Web site. But within 24 hours, Ms. Connell suspended that plan after discussions with senior Davis administration officials. ""I feel very strongly that this information should be publicly released,"" says Ms. Connell. ""I just don't want to do anything that would weaken the state's effectiveness in negotiating."" In an effort to more tightly control events, the governor obtained legislative approval to abolish the 26-member ISO board, which was made up of everyone from utility executives to representatives of consumer groups. He then appointed a new five-member board. To ensure a quick transition, the California attorney general threatened the old board members with fines of as much as $5,000 each if they didn't immediately relinquish their positions. All did. ""I was offended"" at the ""heavy-handed"" treatment, says Karen Johanson, a former ISO board member. One of the first acts of the ISO's new board was to close a meeting about the electricity crisis. The former ISO board routinely held such meetings in public. ISO attorneys say the meeting was largely designed as a private briefing for new board members and that the organization is committed to keeping its deliberations as open as possible. The Wall Street Journal and other news organizations have unsuccessfully challenged the closure in Sacramento state court. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= SB 27x meeting; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 02/28/2001 02:50 PM ----- Susan J Mara 02/16/2001 12:58 PM To: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Angela Schwarz/HOU/EES@EES, Beverly Aden/HOU/EES@EES, Bill Votaw/HOU/EES@EES, Brenda Barreda/HOU/EES@EES, Carol Moffett/HOU/EES@EES, Cathy Corbin/HOU/EES@EES, Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT, Christina Liscano/HOU/EES@EES, Christopher F Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT, Craig H Sutter/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Debora Whitehead/HOU/EES@EES, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Dorothy Youngblood/HOU/ECT@ECT, Douglas Huth/HOU/EES@EES, Edward Sacks/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Eric Melvin/HOU/EES@EES, Erika Dupre/HOU/EES@EES, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Fran Deltoro/HOU/EES@EES, Frank W Vickers/HOU/ECT@ECT, Gayle W Muench/HOU/EES@EES, Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@ENRON, Gordon Savage/HOU/EES@EES, Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@ENRON, Iris Waser/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON, James W Lewis/HOU/EES@EES, James Wright/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Jeff Messina/HOU/EES@EES, Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Jess Hewitt/HOU/EES@EES, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kathy Bass/HOU/EES@EES, Kathy Dodgen/HOU/EES@EES, Ken Gustafson/HOU/EES@EES, Kevin Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Leasa Lopez/HOU/EES@EES, Leticia Botello/HOU/EES@EES, Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Marsha Suggs/HOU/EES@EES, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Meredith M Eggleston/HOU/EES@EES, Michael Etringer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael Mann/HOU/EES@EES, Michelle D Cisneros/HOU/ECT@ECT, mpalmer@enron.com, Neil Bresnan/HOU/EES@EES, Neil Hong/HOU/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Paula Warren/HOU/EES@EES, Richard L Zdunkewicz/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Leibert/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, Rita Hennessy/NA/Enron@ENRON, Robert Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rosalinda Tijerina/HOU/EES@EES, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Scott Gahn/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES, Sharon Dick/HOU/EES@EES, skean@enron.com, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tanya Leslie/HOU/EES@EES, Tasha Lair/HOU/EES@EES, Ted Murphy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Terri Greenlee/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tony Spruiell/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Vladimir Gorny/HOU/ECT@ECT, Wanda Curry/HOU/EES@EES, William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jubran Whalan/HOU/EES@EES, triley@enron.com, Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert C dwatkiss@bracepatt.com, rcarroll@bracepatt.com, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, gfergus@brobeck.com, Kathryn Corbally/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bruno Gaillard/EU/Enron@Enron, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Ren, Lazure/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Michael Tribolet/Corp/Enron@Enron, Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Christian Yoder/HOU/ECT@ECT, jklauber@llgm.com, Tamara Johnson/HOU/EES@EES, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Greg Wolfe/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Dirk vanUlden/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Steve Walker/SFO/EES@EES, James Wright/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, Robert Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, psmith3@enron.com, mjackso7@enron.com cc: Subject: SB 27x meeting Nork Plotkin was recently hired by our retail coalition. Here is his report from the meeting on SB 27X Sue Mara Enron Corp. Tel: (415) 782-7802 Fax:(415) 782-7854 ----- Forwarded by Susan J Mara/NA/Enron on 02/16/2001 10:57 AM ----- nplotkin@tfglobby.com (Norman Plotkin) 02/15/2001 05:55 PM To: arm@phaser.com cc: Subject: SB 27x meeting The first meeting relative to the SB 27x fix to the suspension of da contained in AB 1x was held at the Capitol today. Present were ESPs, consumer groups, business interests, the utlities and representatives from the Department of Finance, the DWR and Finance's Bond Counsel. The meeting was led by Laurence Lingbloom from Senator bowen's office. Aaron Thomas led off with an articualtion of the AReM/business coalition proposal. Successive presentations were given by interests who submitted either correspondence or draft proposals- the details of which can be discussed in tomorrow's conference call. Of particular note, and the greatest obstacle facing the future of da, was the presentation by the attorney representing the Dept. of Finance. He expressed concern over broad exemptions from exit fees (ie: all residential and small commercial customers < 100kw) and broad authority to opt out will make it extremely difficult to actually sell the bonds. We need to follow up with Finance, their counsel and DWR to allay their fears- the sooner the better. We need to be able to speak their language on bonding particulars and we need to be able to articulate our position in terms relavant to their bonding requirements. We can discuss this further in the call tomorow. Finally, Lingbloom said he will circulate a proposal of his own by midweek next. The general tenor at the conclusion of the meeting was not good- we have our work cut out for us. Until tomorrow. Norm [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= HP -- confidential internal document; [EMail-Body]= Matt: As GSS Business Development transitions the HP relationship for broadband to your team, there are several issues I wanted to clarify in terms of how the relationship has been developed and who the contacts have been to date. Additionally, I outlined the discussion points/action items from this morning's meeting you held with Jennifer Medcalf and myself. Per your request, the HP presentation complete with a listing of HP's business partners was e-mailed to you this morning. HP contacts to date: Bill Lovejoy, Western Gulf Area Sales Manager Houston, TX #(713)-439-5587 (Gerry Cashiola's boss) Gerry Cashiola, sales representative Houston, TX #(713)-439-5555 (To date, HP person coordinating the relationship--seeking a short term play) Greg Pyle, Solution Control Manager Southeast Region Austin, TX (#(512)-257-5735 (Pyle has been playing the business developer role but continues to defer leadership of the process to Gerry Cashiola) Daniel Morgridge, Manager of Internet - E-Services long term alliances Austin, TX #(512)-257-5736 (Interested in E-services/wireless longer term alliances) Bill Dwyer, Chief Architect, e-Services Solutions Cupertino, CA #(408)-447-5240 (To date, clearly the most knowledgeable person on HP's business propositions; strong technical, financial background to craft value propositions. Gerry Cashiola and Greg Pyle deferred to his judgement in the 11/16th meeting) Matt, On November 10th, GSS Business Development took HP through a tour of Enron's trading floor, the gas control center, and the peaking power plant unit center on the trading floor. This tour was one meeting, amongst several, held in October and November to provide HP a full overview of Enron's products and services and introduce them to appropriate contacts at Enron (EBS, GSS buy side -- Peter Goebel). On November 16th GSS Business Development, Patrick Tucker, and Dale Clark outlined 3 possible EBS/HP focus areas -- connectivity, storage, and wireless. Three EBS action items were defined in that meeting: 1) HP was to provide an HP contact on connectivity (to date, Gerry Cashiola has stalled on providing this). Sarah-Joy will continue to pursue this information and get a sense from Gerry Cashiola of what he means by short term opportunity. What is HP's time horizon for short term? 2) EBS and GSS/BD was to facilitate a conference call on Storage with Ravi to explore size and potential scope of opportunity (completed 12/8) 3) GSS/BD was to facilitate a conference call with Peter Goebel, GSS IT Sourcing Portfolio Leader (set for 12/14) In conversations with you, Jennifer Medcalf and myself this morning, several decisions on forward-looking strategy with HP/EBS were confirmed: Gerry Cashiola has been unable to take control of the process. More importantly, despite numerous visits to Enron in which he has had overviews of Enron's products and services; met with Peter Goebel and his team on the GSS buy side, and participated in an Experience Enron tour, Gerry has been unable to define an HP business proposition. The coordination between Cashiola (short term initiative) Morgridge (long term, 12-24 months) has remained unorganized. These initiatives need to be developed separately. Clearly, the conversations with HP need to be elevated to a more senior level so EBS can work with HP decision makers who can move the relationship forward at a strategic level. As the relationship is developed at this strategic level, shorter term opportunities will crop up along the way. But Gerry's short term plans will not be the focus of the EBS/HP relationship, rather a by-product. To facilitate this process of elevating the relationship, Jennifer Medcalf and I are following up with Bill Lovejoy and Greg Pyle. Lovejoy's boss is Dan Sytsma, VP of HP's America's Central Region. In the conference call Thursday, 12/14 with Peter Goebel and HP regarding wireless initiatives, Peter will support the GSS/BD push for the HP/EBS initiative by reiterating the following two points: a) Enron is already an HP customer; the onus is on HP to move forward on the process of building a strategic relationship (IBM and Lexmark are only some of the HP competitors who could push them out of the running) b) HP's ability to bring the right people to the table will influence HP's business relationship process with Enron Patrick Tucker and Dale Clark could build their relationship with Bill Dwyer, Chief Architect e-Services Solutions, (met at the meeting 11/16) in the near term. Perhaps, plan a visit to Cupertino, California to see Dwyer in person. We look forward to continuing close collaboration with your team on this and other opportunities. Sarah-Joy Hunter Enron Corporation Global Strategic Sourcing - Business Development #(713)-345-6541 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Washington DC to meet with Northwest Delegation.  Starts at 9:30,
 should be over at 11:30.; [EMail-Body]= 2:30 - 3:30 Jim Ciconni - Enron 4:45 Fly to Houston [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Nepal; [EMail-Body]= There may be some press today about Enron's involvement in the Nepal hydro project. The government of Nepal is hopeful that we will pursue it, but we are not going to. Kelly's response on press inquiries will be that we are not pursuing the project. Kelly will also be getting in touch with David Howe. I just wanted to keep you guys posted in case you are getting questions. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Confidential - GSS Organization Value to ETS; [EMail-Body]= Given where we are I tend to agree with theswe statements. -----Original Message----- From: Hayslett, Rod Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 10:50 AM To: Horton, Stanley Subject: FW: Confidential - GSS Organization Value to ETS I agree with Morris. Little value to the pipes -------------------------- Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net) -----Original Message----- From: Saunders, James <James.Saunders@ENRON.com> To: Hayslett, Rod <Rod.Hayslett@ENRON.com> CC: Brassfield, Morris <Morris.Brassfield@ENRON.com> Sent: Wed Nov 21 10:31:29 2001 Subject: FW: Confidential - GSS Organization Value to ETS Rod, Stan is/was reviewing selected ""corp."" services, and one of those selected was GSS. I requested that Morris provide some persepective on GSS. Please review and forward to Stan, if appropriate. -----Original Message----- From: Brassfield, Morris Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 10:05 AM To: Saunders, James Subject: Confidential - GSS Organization Value to ETS Here are my thoughts on the value the GSS (Global Strategic Sourcing) brings to ETS: I believe totally in the concept of strategically sourcing our materials and services for ETS, which is the concept that GSS was founded under, while still within the ETS organization. Basically the value that GSS has brought to the bottom line during the last year has been minimal to ETS. The reasons for that statement, in my opinion, are: * The materials and services that ETS purchase are basic and routine. * Most of those materials and service providers were identified and sourced during 1999 and 2000. * ETS is reaching the point where we need fewer providers, not more. * New items identified are normally rolled into one of our already sourced NPA's. * Almost all large dollar items are bid out (three bids and a buy). * GSS's involvement and commitment to the deal ends with the contract signing. * ETS P&SM organization and our Contracts services group deals with the actual execution and the ringing of the cash register. If the GSS organization went away tomorrow, we would need the following expertise brought over from their group: (currently this group is close to 75 people.)(and very highly paid individuals) * Two (2) negotiators - Contract Managers * Two (2) analysts * Two (2) contract administrators The administration of the following services would need to be shifted to the ISC: * iBuyit System * Catalog system (part of iBuyit) * iPayit system We would need to re-assess the value of the contract with SourceNet and whether we continue down that path or implement our own A/P department. This would take very few staff adds to make that happen. Let me know if you need any further detail. Morris (713) 503-1409 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: my work situation; [EMail-Body]= This is an issue we have long struggled with. We have conducted several comprehensive reviews in the past and on an ongoing basis we go through a resource allocation process which enables subjective criteria to be considered in the prioritization and resource allocation process. I think the project is a good idea. Your sources would be John, Jim Steffes, and Rick Shapiro (for the RCR, or resource commitment process). Doug Schuler <schuler@rice.edu> on 05/01/2001 10:59:10 AM To: skean@enron.com cc: Subject: my work situation Dear Steve, Jim, and Rick: I just wanted to give you a quick update on my situation at Rice and to inquire as to a future project with your group at Enron. First, I apologize for my prolonged recent absences. I have had two long-standing academic projects: one was due 4/19 (it was on ""final review"" - a paper about corporate political strategy - and just was accepted for publication at our top academic journal) and another is due 5/31. The 5/31 paper was commissioned long ago but is a key paper in a June conference (topic is methods to study corporate political activities and the public affairs function). In order to get it done properly, I need to forego any work at Enron until later in the month. A project of interest to me at Enron - and I hope one that you also have interest - is assessing the effectiveness of governmental affairs. John told me that he conducted such a study for the group last year. One of the methodological challenges is to calculate the benefits that government affairs brings - especially in a system where, for example, on the legislative side, much of the ""work"" of government affairs is to block legislation at very early stages. I suspect that govt. affairs needs to justify its existence for internal budgets at Enron and thus the benefits of the function are important to quantify. I'd like to review any of the previous work and make suggestions as necessary. At some point, let me know how you would like to proceed. Otherwise, I hope all is well with you all. Cordially, Doug Doug Schuler Rice University Jesse H. Jones Graduate School of Management P.O. Box 1892 Houston, TX 77251-1892 (713) 285-5472 tel. (713) 285-5251 fax. schuler@rice.edu [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: An Interview Request by Maureen Raymond; [EMail-Body]= Shirley, I shall talk to him on Monday. The chances are he is a complete misfit if 2 organizations rejected him. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Crenshaw, Shirley Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 8:13 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: An Interview Request by Maureen Raymond Vince: Maureen asked me to set up an interview with you for a summer intern that has been displaced a couple of times, first with EES and then with EBS. She evidently wants him to assist her. He has some economics in his background. His name is Salah M. Mattoo.. Do you want to do this? I am afraid we don't have any space for him and if we put him somewhere else, he will not be much help to Maureen. Let me know. Shirley -----Original Message----- From: Kaminski, Vince J Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 12:06 PM To: Crenshaw, Shirley Subject: FW: Chris (VP-EES) would like to have breakfast or lunch with you sometime next week to discuss California issues and wanted me to check your availability. (x53725) Shirley, Please, set a meeting with him on Monday. Shirley, also please set up a meeting with Euford Cooper (Ford). His extension is 3-5612. Please, explain I did not have time to respond to his msg. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Staehlin, Roberta Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 9:34 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Chris (VP-EES) would like to have breakfast or lunch with you sometime next week to discuss California issues and wanted me to check your availability. (x53725) [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= <<Concur Expense Document>> - General Expenses; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/25/2001 07:58 AM --------------------------- eserver@enron.com on 04/24/2001 11:28:52 AM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - General Expenses The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: John Hardy Jr Jr. Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: General Expenses Report Total: $16,374.97 Amount Due Employee: $0.00 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://xms.enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Public Policy Contacts for California; [EMail-Body]= Jeff and Steve As you requested, I have prepared a list of my preferred public policy contacts for California. It is composed of professionals from an array of public, private and non-profit backgrounds. I have worked in some capacity with each of these people and most I know quite well. Please call me for further background. Kevin 213-926-2626 Attachment - Kevin Scott - Preferred Contacts - 6-20-01.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re:; [EMail-Body]= I just checked with Jeff and Ken. They are both out of the office that day. Sorry it didn't work out. gilbert whitaker <grwhit@rice.edu> 03/06/2001 07:14 PM To: skean@enron.com cc: Subject: Steve - With respect to CK Prahalad's visit to Rice. As you know we are having a breakfast for the business community the morning of March 19 and he gives the Neuhas Lecture on Campus at 9:45 am. Following the lunch there is a lunch with Mrs. Neuhas the donor of the fund and faculty. That should be over by 1:15. He has a date from two to five at Enron with Yeager (Steve or Scott). He would like to meet with Ken or Jeff sometime that afternoon if at all possible. Thanks for your help. gil [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California Power Issue; [EMail-Body]= See attached WSJ article, particularly the last paragraph. The message is: there has not been enough deregulation; the government is still very much in the way. California is a perfect example: the market has responded to demand increases with thousands of megawatts of new generation, but state and local officials have not sited them, and companies like Enron are offering price protection, but utilities are not allowed to take advantage. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/14/2000 10:38 AM --------------------------- Gavin Dillingham@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 08/14/2000 08:32 AM To: Joe Hartsoe@ENRON, Sandra McCubbin@EES, Susan Mara@EES, Paul Kaufman@ECT, Karen Denne@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich@EES, Mark Palmer@ENRON, James D Steffes@EES, Steven J Kean@EES, Richard Shapiro@EES, Elizabeth Linnell@EES, Jeannie Mandelker@ECT, filuntz@aol.com cc: Subject: California Power Issue Attached is an article about deregulation, price volatility, California power issues and how EES and other energy management type of companies are helping with solve these problems. Attached is an article about how PG&E is offering incentives to its larger customers in California that which asks them to use less energy, in turn the customers are guaranteed to be blackout free. There is a little controversy over this issue because the incentive is not offered to small business or residents. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Report on ""Anti-RTO Bill"" and on Andy Black Meeting; [EMail-Body]= This note is to report on two electricity legislative developments: the Aug. 2nd introduction of an anti-RTO bill (or at least anti-mandatory RTOs) and on a meeting I had yesterday afternoon with Andy Black, the policy coordinator for Chairman Joe Barton on the House Energy and Air Quality Subcommittee, to discuss their intentions with respect to electricity legislation this Fall. 1. H.R. 2814 (Reps. Tom Sawyer (D-OH) and Richard Burr (R-NC)) On Aug. 2nd (the last day Congress was in session before the August Recess), the above named members of the House Energy and Air Quality Subcommittee introduced H.R. 2814, the Interstate Transmission Act. The legislation is bad because, among other things, it requires FERC to establish transmission pricing policies that provide incentives for voluntary participation and formation of RTOs, with language prohibiting policies that have the effect of forcing transmitting utilities to join RTOs. Also objectionable is that the bill would ""limit"" pancaking but at the same time require FERC to establish a ""reasonable transition mechanism or period"" for additive charges. The legislation prohibits FERC from conditioning any order upon a transmitting utility being required to transfer operational control of jurisdictional facilities to an ISO or RTO. The bill would require that participating transmitting utilities must approve the form, structure and operating entity of any RTO. In addition to the RTO language, the bill has the ""old"" version of the NERC reliability legislation in it. The bill also has a PUHCA exemption for RTOs, repeals Federal Power Act sec. 203 on the disposition of property and includes the tax changes that IOUs seek for transfers of property to an independent transmission company. Barbara Hueter advises that First Energy has its hq in Rep. Sawyer's district. Rep. Burr is from North Carolina, so perhaps Duke had its utility hat on in working with him. I am checking into where Duke is on this issue. Rep. Burr is the Vice Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and close to Chairman Tauzin -- so his support for this legislation is significant (see Andy Black comment below). 2. Andy Black Meeting Andy is meeting with various trade associations this month to discuss electricity legislation. He is only meeting with a few companies on a one-on-one basis -- Enron, Reliant, Dynegy and TXU. His timing is to have a legislative draft for Chairman Barton to review when Congress returns after Labor Day. If Chairman Barton approves or makes changes, the draft will be circulated to members of the subcommittee and the public for further comment. The intent is to mark up an electricity bill this Fall so that if the Senate acts on electricity in its comprehensive energy bill, the issue will be ripe for consideration in a House-Senate conference committee. Here is a run down of my comments and Andy's comments on specific issues. a. RTOs Chairman Barton supports RTOs. At a minimum, the draft will affirm FERC's authority as the commissioners have requested. Andy is considering going beyond that to mandate RTO participation. Not sure he can hold that position in the subcommittee. He is looking to Enron and others to help them explain and build support for RTOs. Informed him of our initial informal coalition steps. However, Andy asked me to look at sec. 3 of the Sawyer-Burr referenced above, which I realized after the meeting is the part that deals with incentive rates and negotiated rates to expand transmission and voluntary RTOs. I have a call in to Andy to reconcile these statements since the Sawyer-Burr bill is based on voluntary RTOs. Hopefully, he is thinking of using the incentive and negotiated rate language and NOT the objectionable voluntary RTO aspects. I will strongly encourage him to ""do the right thing"" in that regard. b. PUHCA The draft will use the Pickering bill (H.R. 1101). Told Andy about our concerns with the record keeping provisions of that bill. Will send him our legislative language to clarify these provisions so that they do not open up all of Enron's records -- even those unrelated to transactions with a regulated utility affiliate. c. PURPA Prospective repeal. On back up power, they are thinking of requiring that rates for back up power be just and reasonable until there is retail competition in the state. d. Interconnection They have received a proposal from Trigen that Andy says we will like. I am contacting EPSA to get the details. e. Net Metering They are likely to include the Inslee bill to require ""net metering."" I explained our concern that the bill's mandate applies to all retail energy suppliers -- including EES -- even though this should only apply to utilities with an obligation to serve; that it does not make sense to mandate it on service providers like EES (per Jim's helpful comments yesterday). I need to get more information to Andy. f. Transmission Jurisdiction Thankfully, Andy is NOT going to use those portions of the bill as reported by subcommittee in the last Congress that gave use heart burn on jurisdiction. Specifically, the draft will not say FERC does not have jurisdiction over the transportation component of a bundled retail sale -- the draft will not get into the bundled/unbundled issue at all. The draft will bring munis, co-ops and PMAs under the FERC umbrella for transmission jurisdiction purposes. g. Siting On siting, Andy is thinking of some type of mechanism that would give a State one year before federal eminent domain attaches. h. Reliability On a negative note, Andy intends to use the latest NERC reliability language because NERC's version has strong support among the Members of the subcommittee and no other alternative has emerged with political support (i.e., not PJM). I explained our concerns. He said our best bet is for DoE or FERC to come forward to seek something other than the NERC version. He said Members eyes glaze over on reliability with everything else on the plate. i. Negawatts I raised the absence of negawatts on his issue list. He said he is open to considering it again, but that there was left over political baggage and unresolved issues from when this was attempted during consideration of the ""California bill"" earlier this summer. Your questions and comments on the any of the above are most welcome. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Some funnies; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/10/2001 07:33 AM --------------------------- Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp. From: Sherri Sera 04/09/2001 08:26 PM To: cc: (bcc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron) Subject: Some funnies -Had to share these...SRS - airolane.jpg - bombtech.jpg - fortune.jpg - hotdog.jpg - watchp.jpg - newad.jpg [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Rice Team Mtg.; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/23/2000 12:51 PM --------------------------- Celeste Roberts@ECT 08/23/2000 10:06 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Courtney/HOU/ECT@ECT, Traci Warner/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Scott Porter/HOU/EES@EES, Bernie Barcio/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Wilson, Bill Windle/Corp/Enron@Enron, Brian Spector/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Kate Fraser/HOU/ECT@ECT, Pushkar Shahi/HOU/ECT@ECT, Waymon Votaw/NA/Enron@Enron, Patrick Wade/HOU/ECT@ECT, David Dye/HOU/EES@EES, Jon Greg Characklis/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, William Kendrick/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Larry Leib/Corp/Enron@Enron, Andrew Miles/NA/Enron@Enron, Stephen Stenhouse/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Trevor Randolph/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Charles Barker Varnell/DEN/ECT@Enron, Doug Sewell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Alhamd Micha Makowsky/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Frank Bay/Enron Communications@Enron Communications cc: Subject: Rice Team Mtg. Greetings, Rice Recruiting Team! Each of you has been chosen to represent Enron for our Fall 2000 recruiting efforts at the Rice/Jones School. As part of the team, you will be challenged with choosing the best candidates from Rice to join our Associate Program. Our first campus event will be a tailgate party for the Rice/University of Houston game, Saturday, September 2nd. Everyone is invited to meet in the parking lot of Rice Stadium. We will have tickets to the game along with beer and sandwiches. The general presentation will be on Wednesday, September 6th, and interviews will be held on campus Thursday, October 5th, and Friday, October 6th. There are a variety of campus events planned, so I hope you are all able to participate. We are planning to have a brief team meeting Tuesday, August 29th, from 9:00 to 10:00 am in 42C1 (the Gas Control Presentation Room) to discuss the Associate Program, and the fall recruiting calendar. I look forward to seeing you all soon. Sincerely, Celeste Roberts Director of Associate & Analyst Campus Recruiting [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Ed Segner's Staff meeting, in 50M Dining Room; [EMail-Body]= John Stauffacher? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Governor Davis' Power Grab; [EMail-Body]= per my voicemail ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/25/2001 01:33 PM --------------------------- ""Wenner, Adam"" <awenner@velaw.com> on 05/25/2001 09:28:18 AM To: ""Kean, Steven (Enron Corp.)"" <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: Governor Davis' Power Grab Steve - per my voicemail, before we released this article that I prepared, we wanted to run it by you to make sure that Enron is comfortable with it. Thanks, Adam. ++++++CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE+++++ The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged. This email is intended to be reviewed by only the individual or organization named above. If you are not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination or copying of this email and its attachments, if any, or the information contained herein is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system. Thank You <<143590_1.DOC>> - 143590_1.DOC [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Fwd: DRAFT RELEASE; [EMail-Body]= Minor changes shown on the attached (gotta get the big guy's title right). Lisa Connolly@EES 05/06/2001 08:17 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Fwd: DRAFT RELEASE Please see attached press release with Skilling quote in red and on top of second page. The press conference is scheduled for 3:30pm on Monday, May 7. The City will need our comment by 10am Monday morning. Thanks, Lisa X54840, cell - 713-569-9563. ---------------------- Forwarded by Lisa Connolly/HOU/EES on 05/06/2001 08:11 AM --------------------------- JYoung1530@aol.com on 05/05/2001 04:13:49 PM To: <lisa.connolly@enron.com> cc: Subject: Fwd: DRAFT RELEASE Lisa... Here's the draft release. ((INSERT SKILLING QUOTE)) appears at top of second page. Please insert quote...and return to me at BOTH email addresses (jyoung1530@aol.com AND THANKS!! I'll call your cell to be sure you received this. Talk to ya soon. Jim Young Mayor's Office Return-Path: Received: from rly-xb05.mx.aol.com (rly-xb05.mail.aol.com [172.20.105.106]) by air-xb05.mail.aol.com (v77_r1.36) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 May 2001 17:42:14 -0400 Received: from 611wex04.cityofhouston.net ([204.235.224.240]) by rly-xb05.mx.aol.com (v77_r1.36) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 May 2001 17:41:12 -0400 Received: by 611WEX04 with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <K1QLPJ4D>; Fri, 4 May 2001 16:38:55 -0500 Message-ID: From: ""Young, James - MYR"" To: ""'jyoung1530@aol.com'"" <jyoung1530@aol.com> Subject: DRAFT RELEASE Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 16:38:50 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: multipart/mixed; Send to lisa.connolly@enron.com for insertion of Skilling quote.? Her cell number is (713) 569-9563. <<05.07.01 Fire Chief named.doc>> Jim Young, Sr. Communications Division Office of Mayor Lee P. Brown City of Houston, Texas phone (713) 247-2868? fax (713) 247-2039 Please update my contact info: james.young@cityofhouston.net - 05.07.01 Fire Chief named.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= EES QBR - in 30c1; [EMail-Body]= Lunch will be served at 11:30, QBR starts at 12:00. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Fwd: Enron Corporation; [EMail-Body]= Neither Ken nor Jeff are available. It would probably be better for one of you to speak anyway. Any interest? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/28/2000 05:42 PM --------------------------- Pankaj Ghemawat <pghemawat@hbs.edu> on 08/16/2000 01:47:29 PM To: skean@enron.com cc: Subject: Fwd: Enron Corporation Steve, Here's the invitation I mentioned.? Thanks for following up on this and my own personal invitation to get somebody to come to class. Pankaj X-Sender: esulliv@pop.fas.harvard.edu Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 17:44:34 -0400 To: pghemawat@hbs.edu From: Ellen Sullivan <esulliv@fas.harvard.edu> Subject: Enron Corporation Dear Pankaj, I enjoyed meeting you last week in BA.? Steve Reifenberg and I are both grateful for your willingness to speak to Ken Lay at Enron on our behalf.?? I have attached a copy of the letter we sent to him, as well as the preliminary program for the October 20 DRCLAS Corporate Partners Program.? When we called to follow up, we were told that it was unlikely that Ken Lay would be able to participate, so we extended the invitation to Jeff Skilling as well.? We would be delighted to have either one speak on the case of Enron at the event. Thanks again, and please let me know if there is someone in Lay's office with whom I should follow up after you speak with him. Best, Ellen <br> <br> <br> <div>Ellen Sullivan</div> <div>Associate Director</div> <div>David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies</div> <div>Harvard University</div> <div>61 Kirkland Street</div> <div>Cambridge, MA 02138</div> <br> <div>phone: 617.495.4873</div> <div>fax: 617.496.2802</div> <div>e-mail: esulliv@fas.harvard.edu</div> <a </blockquote></x-html> - Lay_invite_EMS.doc - Agenda_EMS_8_1.pdf Pankaj Ghemawat Tiampo Professor of Business Administration Morgan 227 Harvard Business School Soldiers Field Boston MA 02163, USA Tel: 617-495-6270 Fax: 617-495-0355 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CHEMICAL MANUFACTURERS BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING - CONTACT IS TIM
 BURNS 703-741-5900 IN NAPLES FLORIDA, WANT TO GET THEM MORE ACTIVE, THEY'VE
 ALREADY JOINED US, HAPHAZARD IN THEIR SUPPORT, DINNER ON THE 14, ASKED FOR
 SKILLING, CAN'T DO IT.; [EMail-Body]= Want you to speak from 10:15 - 11:00 ** Will be sending a letter this week (3/19/97) Flew to Austin on company plane [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Project Stanley; [EMail-Body]= Please revise the document as Aleck's changes indicate. With respect to the alternative responses shown near the end of the document, leave both alternatives in. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 07/31/2000 08:58 AM --------------------------- Richard Shapiro 07/31/2000 07:08 AM To: Aleck Dadson/TOR/ECT@ECT cc: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON@ECT, Eric Thode/Corp/Enron@ENRON@ECT, Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert Hemstock/CAL/ECT@ECT, Ginger Dernehl/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Re: Project Stanley I am comfortable w/ the changes. On question of whether we colluded W/ Powerex, I would opt for simpler alternative and say we complied w/ all rules of the pool. Thanks. To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Eric Thode/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert Hemstock/CAL/ECT@ECT cc: Ginger Dernehl/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Project Stanley Privileged and Confidential - For Instruction of Counsel Attached is a revised copy of the Background note discussed earlier this week. The revisions are based on comments from Frontier Economics and GPC, and further reflection by Rob Hemstock and myself. I have also attached the raw calculations from Frontier that underlie several of the revisions. I have not sent the revised document to outside counsel for review. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Lou's $50,000; [EMail-Body]= Lou -- you may be maxed out on Franks now. Don't write a check for the August fundraiser until you have talked to Eliz Labanowski ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 07/25/2000 02:06 PM --------------------------- Elizabeth Linnell 07/25/2000 01:55 PM To: Elizabeth Labanowski/EPSC/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Carolyn Cooney/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Lou's $50,000 FYI - Looks like they've already done the distribution. I didn't ever hear from Sue Pai Yang, so wasn't able to refer her to Tom Marinis. ---------------------- Forwarded by Elizabeth Linnell/HOU/EES on 07/25/2000 01:54 PM --------------------------- Enron Energy Services From: Karen Owens 07/25/2000 01:47 PM To: Elizabeth Linnell/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Lou's $50,000 Lou's $50,000 was dispursed as follows: Republican National Committee for Eagle's membership: $20,000 Sue Pai Yang - Chair of the Republican Task Force of the National Women's Political Caucus $15,000 Roselyn O'Connell, President of NWPC $5,000 - NJ Republican State Commitee $5,000 - Bob Franks Victory Fund $5,000 - Asian American Republican Convention [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Andrew Lundquist; [EMail-Body]= Your assessment makes perfect sense to me. What do you think about having Nels make the call to Lundquist just to find out what his status is, what he might look for when his current assignment is over, etc. (obviously without identifying us -- presumably Nels would have reason to talk to him anyway in the normal course of business)? I am not wedded to the idea but am inclined toward at least getting the information, unless you see a problem. Linda Robertson 03/13/2001 02:16 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Andrew Lundquist I got your message about Andrew. He would be an excellent catch. However, I see a couple of significant problems. My guess is that Andrew is too senior for this position, particularly after having chaired the Cheney task force. Also, I would not anticipate that he would be available for several months, if then. We should fill this position immediately. We are already missing opportunities because this position is vacant. As for our search, using Korn Ferry, I have narrowed the field to two very good candidates. I am setting up time for Rick to interview these candidates next Monday. The first candidate is Drew Maloney with Rep. Tom Delay's office. Drew would give us enormous visibility in House Republican leadership circles, seems trustworthy, and capable of learning most of the substance of the energy portfolio. Drew has strong networking skills, which I think would nicely fit with Tom's strategic and technical skills. The second candidate is John Shelk, whom I have known for nearly 15 years. John was the lead Republican staff on the House Energy and Commerce Committee under Norm Lent. John left the Committee in 1992. Since then John has worked in the financial services and gaming industries, where he has enhanced his political and Republican networking skills. John in very short order would have extremely strong technical skills, atlhough he has been away from the industry for eight years. I believe both candidates bring different but very strong talents to the job. I have a second opening for an enviromental advocate. I am discussing with Rick the possibility of whether we could redirect one of these candidates (probably John) to that slot. That said, please let me know if I should have Nels pursue Andrew. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Hope you're staying dry!; [EMail-Body]= Kate, Not yet. I will know sometimes in August - September. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Kate Szablya"" Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 3:39 PM To: Vince Kaminski Subject: Hope you're staying dry! Hi Vince, I just thought I'd check in to see if you had resolved your space issue for your analysts. If so, I would love to send you some people to consider for your team! Hope your summer is going well and that you are surviving all the rain! I recently spent a week rafting through the Grand Canyon...an adventure I would highly recommend. Hope to hear from you! Regards, Kate Szablya Power Brokers, LLC Energy Search and Recruitment 303-716-2987 303-619-7589 cell 303-716-3426 faxwww.powerbrokersllc.com << File: >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re:Energy Bar conference; [EMail-Body]= When we talked about me speaking at the conference in Nov. Enron's management conference had not yet been scheduled. Now it has and, of course, it conflicts... it also conflicts out just about every other senior person at Enron. I will take care of finding a substitute, but wanted your thoughts on a couple of candidates: how about Seabron Adamson, Richard Tabors or Scott Magrane(sp?). The latter is at Goldman Sachs and, last time I talked to him, was working on Transcos. Let me know what you think and let me know who you were working with at FEBA so I can take care of the problem. Thanks [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Information for Jeff Skilling from Kevin Scott; [EMail-Body]= Confirming 1:00 p.m. meeting on June 12 at the Venetian Resort in Las Vegas. Thanks, Joannie Williamson 713-345-7774 ""Kevin Scott"" on 04/25/2001 04:46:18 PM Please respond to To: ""Jeff Skilling"" <jeff.skilling@enron.com> cc: ""Sherri Sera"" <sherri.sera@enron.com> Subject: Information for Jeff Skilling from Kevin Scott April 25, 2001 Dear Jeff, Thank you for setting aside time to meet with me. I have attached my resume to help bring you up to date on my career. As you will see, I have been providing advisory services since 1995. During these years, I have done some of my best work. I am proud of the service that I have rendered as an independent consultant. Now, I feel it is time to move to a new chapter in my career. I look forward to sitting down with you to think through ways to apply my experience, intellect and energies to new professional challenges. I respect you tremendously, and wherever the next part of my career may lie, I know that my search and choice will benefit significantly from your perspective. Finally, I am attaching the recommendation to HBS that you wrote in 1981. I found it during a profoundly challenging period in my life. Your historic words of support helped me keep fighting and successfully moving forward. If you would like to reach me before our meeting, please call (213) 926-2626 or email kevinscott@onlinemailbox.net . Thank you again. Sincerely, [IMAGE] Kevin Attachments (2) - image001.png - image002.gif - Resume of Kevin Scott.doc - Skilling HBS Recommendation.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Schoenemann Resume; [EMail-Body]= Molly, Thanks. I am in London this week but I can pick up my messages from here. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Magee, Molly Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 5:23 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: RE: Schoenemann Resume Thank you, Vince. I might have a job opening for a manager of public relations within the next week or so, and I would be happy to pass his resume along to the hiring manager. I'll also give it to the other recruiters in case they are aware of other positions. Hope all is well with you, Molly -----Original Message----- From: Kaminski, Vince J Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 11:14 AM To: Magee, Molly Subject: FW: Schoenemann Resume Molly, This is the resume of my friend who is interested in a job with Enron. He is a very capable and hard working person. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""pschoenemann"" Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 2:38 AM To: vkamins@enron.com Subject: Schoenemann Resume Per your request. Thanks. Presly - Mar Comm Spec 2001.doc << File: Mar Comm Spec 2001.doc >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= EES Talking ABout Sending Back the New SDG&E Customers -- PLEASE
 READ; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/03/2001 05:23 PM --------------------------- Susan J Mara 04/03/2001 12:05 PM To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: EES Talking ABout Sending Back the New SDG&E Customers -- PLEASE READ Steve and Rick, EES is considering ""re-sourcing"" the new customers in SDG&E's area -- because of the uncertainty over whether the CA Procurement Charge will apply to those customers. I think this proposed action needs to be evaluated from a nationwide perspective -- this has long-term negative implications for Enron's credibility in the DA market as a whole. Sue Mara Enron Corp. Tel: (415) 782-7802 Fax:(415) 782-7854 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Board of Directors Meeting - February 13, 2001; [EMail-Body]= Attached are my edits. From: Rebecca Carter on 05/24/2001 04:42 PM Sent by: Kelly Johnson To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Board of Directors Meeting - February 13, 2001 Please provide comments the attached minutes by June 1, 2001. If you approve as written, please let us know. Regards, Rebecca CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE The information contained in this email may be confidential and/or privileged. This email is intended to be reviewed by the individual or organization named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination or copying of this email or its attachments, if any, or the information contained herein is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system. Thank you. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Jeff Skilling testifying at Murkowski workshop -- Workshop will
 run from 9:30 a.m. to 12:00, in room 216 of the Hart Senate Office
 Building.; [EMail-Body]= Came back with Skilling on company plane. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= <<Concur Expense Document>> - Rob Bradley-Mar 5-6; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/13/2001 01:26 PM ----- eserver@enron.com 03/12/2001 10:24 AM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - Rob Bradley-Mar 5-6 The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: Robert L. Bradley Jr Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: Rob Bradley-Mar 5-6 Report Total: $2,130.66 Amount Due Employee: $2,130.66 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://nahou-wwxms01p [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CATS House of Lords Appeal; [EMail-Body]= fyi ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/03/2001 05:01 PM --------------------------- Jackie Gentle@ECT 04/03/2001 12:34 PM To: Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Paula Rieker/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: CATS House of Lords Appeal Mark Palmer has asked me to send you the attached reactive holding statements in relation to the above. It has been signed off by everyone here except Michael Brown and John Sherriff, but we do not expect any material changes. The result is due mid-morning London time tomorrow and we will advise you of the outcome as soon as possible thereafter. If you have any queries you can reach me tonight on +44 7967 381557. Thanks. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: DRAFT - PRC Follow Up Memo; [EMail-Body]= Looks fine to me. Maureen - please keep on file From: Billy Lemmons/ENRON@enronXgate on 06/13/2001 07:08 AM To: Stanley Horton/ENRON@enronXgate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Ted C Bland/ENRON@enronXgate, Teresa Bosien/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: DRAFT - PRC Follow Up Memo Stan and Steve, Below is a short email that I suggest we send as a follow up to each PRC meeting. Please adjust as you feel appropriate, and I'll ask Terry Bosien to provide your assistant with a list of attendees after each meeting for distribution. I'm traveling today, but will be back in the office Thursday. If you'd like to discuss my asst Maxine (x33499) knows how to reach me, or you can contact Ted or Terry. Regards, Billy ___________________ Thank you for participating in the [EES] Analyst & Associate PRC meeting [last Friday]. The Western Hemisphere final PRC meeting for Analysts & Associates is set for July 18. The purpose of this meeting will be to review the collective ranking distributions, and to discuss the performance of individuals in categories 1 and 5. A subset of those who participated in [Friday's] meeting will be selected to participate on July 18. After the July 18 meeting, you will receive the ok to provide feedback to those you represented. If you are not the direct supervisor of those you represented, it is critically important that you work with the supervisor to insure consistent and clear feedback and ownership of the ranking results. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Terry Bosien (x35230). Thank you again for your contributions to this important process. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Customers; [EMail-Body]= You may want to forward this to your customers. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 06/30/2001 07:23 AM --------------------------- Scott Govenar <sgovenar@govadv.com> on 06/28/2001 04:51:56 PM To: Hedy Govenar <hgovenar@govadv.com>, Mike Day <MDay@GMSSR.com>, Bev Hansen <bhansen@lhom.com>, Jeff Dasovich <jdasovic@enron.com>, Susan J Mara <smara@enron.com>, Paul Kaufman <paul.kaufman@enron.com>, Michael McDonald <Michael.McDonald@enron.com>, Rick Shapiro <rshapiro@enron.com>, Jim Steffes <james.d.steffes@enron.com>, Alan Comnes <acomnes@enron.com>, Steven Kean <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com>, Karen Denne <kdenne@enron.com>, ""Harry.Kingerski@enron.com"" <Harry.Kingerski@enron.com>, Leslie Lawner <Leslie.Lawner@enron.com>, Robert Frank <rfrank@enron.com>, Ken Smith <ken@kdscommunications.com>, Janel Guerrero <Janel.Guerrero@enron.com>, Miyung Buster <Miyung.Buster@enron.com>, Jennifer Thome <Jennifer.Thome@enron.com>, Eric Letke <eletke@enron.com>, Mary Schoen <Mary.Schoen@enron.com>, David Leboe <David.Leboe@ENRON.com>, Ban Sharma <ban.sharma@enron.com> cc: Subject: Customers The California Chamber of Commerce received a call from someone at the CPUC who requested that they send as many customers as possible to testify at Tuesday's hearing in favor of direct access. The Chamber has requested the same thing of Enron. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Test; [EMail-Body]= testing [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= See natural gas price article below. Our buddy Paul Carpenter has turned o= n=20 us (not to mention that he seems to be talking nonsense). How about giving= =20 him a call? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/20/2001=20 02:58 PM --------------------------- Miyung Buster@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 04/20/2001 10:22 AM To: Ann M Schmidt/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bryan Seyfried/LON/ECT@ECT,=20 dg27@pacbell.net, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron, filuntz@aol.com, James = D=20 Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Janet Butler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeannie=20 Mandelker/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe=20 Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John =20 John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen=20 Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Margaret=20 Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark=20 Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Markus Fiala/LON/ECT@ECT, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@EC= T,=20 Mike Mona L=20 Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron, Nicholas O'Day/AP/Enron@Enron, Peggy=20 Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT, Richard=20 Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sandra=20 McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Stella=20 Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Sus= an=20 J Mara/NA/Enron@Enron, Mike Roan/ENRON@enronXgate, Alex=20 Parsons/EU/Enron@Enron, Andrew Morrison/LON/ECT@ECT, lipsen@cisco.com, Jane= l=20 Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Shirley A Hudler/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kathleen=20 Sullivan/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda=20 Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Lora Sullivan/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jennifer=20 Thome/NA/Enron@Enron, jkradin@marathon-com.com,=20 syamane@marathon-com.com,=20 ken@kdscommunications.com, hgovenar@govadv.com, sgovenar@govadv.com,=20 bhansen@lhom.com, Carin Nersesian/NA/Enron@Enron cc: =20 Subject: Energy Issues Please see the following articles: Sac Bee, Fri, 4/20: ""State might balk on power: But refusing to=20 pay 'ridiculous' prices could add to crisis"" Sac Bee, Fri, 4/20: ""SMUD directors vote to hike rates: A tentative=20 increase of 19% to 27% is blamed on rising energy costs"" Sac Bee, Fri, 4/20: ""Lieberman to Bush: Help California solve power woes"" SD Union, Fri, 4/20: ""Escondido calls a halt to power plant ideas"" SD Union, Fri, 4/20: ""Inflated natural-gas prices add to energy costs,=20 expert says"" SD Union (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""Davis, Congress members call for energy price= =20 controls"" SD Union (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""Regulators open investigation into alternative= =20 power providers"" SD Union (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""Attorney general taking two energy companies to= =20 court"" LA Times, Fri, 4/20: ""Legislators Unite Over Energy Price Issue"" SF Chron, Fri, 4/20: ""Small fry among big fish in PG&E bankruptcy=20 Some unlikely businesses are listed as creditors against utility"" SF Chron (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""Developments in California"" SF Chron (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""California utility wants to boost Mohave power= =20 plant production""=20 SF Chron (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""PG&E owes money to several small businesses,=20 unlikely creditors"" SF Chron, Fri, 4/20: ""Edison pushes lawmakers to accept deal"" Mercury News, Fri, 4/20: ""Who will pay the most for power?"" Mercury News, Fri, 4/20: ""Credit-raters put state on watch"" Mercury News, Fri, 4/20: ""Power company executives going without bonuses"" Mercury News, Fri, 4/20: ""Davis and US lawmakers call for price caps on=20 power"" Mercury News, Fri, 4/20: ""Generators cutting electric output; regulators= =20 want to find out why"" OC Register, Fri, 4/20: ""FERC remains an unlikely rescuer The federal agency hews to a hands-off policy on power rates"" OC Register, Fri, 4/20: ""Lawmakers seek bigger rollbacks, can't agree on= =20 caps"" OC Register, Fri, 4/20: ""Energy notebook Assembly urges federal regulation of natural gas"" OC Register, Fri, 4/20: ""Shed light on costs"" (Commentary) Individual.com (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""End To Deregulation of Nevada Power"" Individual.com (Business wire), Fri, 4/20: ""PG&E Co. Issues Statements On= =20 the=20 Increase in the State's Cost for Power"" Indivdual.com (PR/newswire), Fri, 4/20: ""J.D. Power and Associates Reports= /=20 Nationwide=20 Decline in Customer Satisfaction of Electric Utility Service Among=20 Midsize Businesses"" Individual.com (PR/newswire), Fri, 4/20: ""Calpine to Purchase 46 General= =20 Electric Gas Turbines Turbines in Place for 70,000-megawatt Program"" --- State might balk on power: But refusing to pay 'ridiculous' prices could ad= d=20 to crisis. By Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writer (Published April 20, 2001)=20 Adding to the risk of summertime blackouts, the state water department said= =20 Thursday it might not pay ""ridiculous"" prices for electricity even if that= =20 leaves California short of power.=20 The Department of Water Resources, which has been buying electricity for th= e=20 state's two beleaguered utilities since mid-January, wouldn't spell out wha= t=20 it considers ridiculous. But if prices get too high, the state might be=20 better off ordering blackouts or implementing proposed new conservation=20 programs designed at cutting usage on short notice, said Raymond Hart, the= =20 department's deputy director in charge of power purchases.=20 Gov. Gray Davis took a different view, saying: ""We will continue to keep th= e=20 lights on. When you're fighting a forest fire, you don't say, 'Let me see,= =20 how much is this going to cost me? Maybe I can't write the check, maybe I= =20 can't put the fire out.' You put the fire out and then worry about the cost= =20 later.""=20 But Davis' spokesman, Steve Maviglio, said the Governor's Office indeed is= =20 contemplating whether to refuse to buy power at any cost. ""At what point do= es=20 the state say, 'Enough is enough'? Those scenarios are certainly under=20 discussion,"" Maviglio said.=20 The water department until recently resisted buying all the power Southern= =20 California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. needed, refusing to=20 purchase electricity it deemed too costly. But lately it's had to relax tha= t=20 stance because of an order by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Har= t=20 said.=20 That April 6 order said power generators can no longer be forced to sell=20 electricity to uncreditworthy entities such as the Independent System=20 Operator, which manages the state's power grid. Because the ISO -- which ge= ts=20 its money from the utilities -- can no longer buy the power, the water=20 department is now buying all the electricity required by the utilities, Har= t=20 said. But he said the department could back off if prices get out of hand.= =20 ""If the prices just get ridiculous altogether, there's a policy call to be= =20 made, and we'll cross that bridge when we get there,"" Hart said.=20 The ISO has predicted that severe shortages could bring 34 days of rolling= =20 blackouts this summer. The potential refusal of the water department to buy= =20 ultra-expensive power could further strain the grid.=20 ""On a daily basis we're dealt a set of cards,"" said ISO spokesman Patrick= =20 Dorinson. ""It sounds like ... we're going to be handed another set of cards= ,=20 and we're going to have to try to maintain the reliability of the grid as= =20 best we can.""=20 Hart's comments came amid an increasingly rancorous debate between Davis an= d=20 PG&E over the water department's power expenditures. State spending shot up= =20 following PG&E's April 6 filing for bankruptcy protection.=20 Davis said generators began demanding a ""credit penalty"" from the water=20 department because of the PG&E bankruptcy proceedings. As a result, the=20 state's daily costs shot up last week to $73.2 million from $57.4 million i= n=20 the week before PG&E went bankrupt, the governor's office said.=20 Hart agreed, saying several generators raised their prices. ""Every time=20 there's a major hiccup in the market, such as PG&E bankruptcy or a staged= =20 alert by the ISO, there's a price run-up,"" Hart said.=20 But prices have settled down this week. After peaking at $345 a megawatt ho= ur=20 April 12, prices for north state power were at $243 on Thursday, just below= =20 what they were prior to the bankruptcy filing, according to the Enerfax new= s=20 service.=20 PG&E, however, said its bankruptcy filing had nothing to do with the state'= s=20 increased spending.=20 ""This claim is simply not accurate,"" the utility said in a memo to reporter= s.=20 Rather, the increased spending is due solely to the fact that the water=20 department is buying more units of electricity in the wake of the FERC orde= r,=20 PG&E said.=20 Regardless of the cause, the increased spending by the water department cou= ld=20 further strain the state's budget -- and complicate Davis' plan to finance= =20 the power purchases through a bond offering.=20 The state has committed $5.2 billion from its general fund for power=20 purchases since January. Those mounting purchases, along with PG&E's=20 bankruptcy filing and other energy crisis uncertainties, prompted a third= =20 Wall Street credit rating agency, Fitch, to place the state on a ""ratings= =20 watch"" this week, meaning the rating might be downgraded.=20 A downgrade could raise California's borrowing costs. All three of the=20 leading Wall Street credit agencies now have California on a ratings watch.= =20 Meanwhile, the state Public Utilities Commission on Thursday ordered an=20 investigation of why hundreds of cogenerators and other alternative energy= =20 providers haven't resumed production even though they've begun receiving=20 payments again from Edison and PG&E.=20 These generators, under contract to the utilities, provide more than 20=20 percent of the state's energy supply. Hundreds shut down, worsening=20 California's power situation, because they'd received little or no money fr= om=20 the utilities since November.=20 The PUC ordered Edison and PG&E to resume payments, starting this week, for= =20 new power deliveries.=20 But the generators say the payments aren't enough to get them back online.= =20 So PUC President Loretta Lynch said the commission will investigate whether= =20 to order Edison and PG&E to begin repaying them the hundreds of millions ow= ed=20 for past deliveries.=20 The Bee's Dale Kasler can be reached at (916) 321-1066 or dkasler@sacbee.co= m.=20 Emily Bazar of The Bee's Capitol Bureau contributed to this report.=20 --- SMUD directors vote to hike rates: A tentative increase of 19% to 27% is=20 blamed on rising energy costs. By Carrie Peyton Bee Staff Writer (Published April 20, 2001)=20 Ten years of stable electricity bills vanished in a single unanimous vote= =20 Thursday night as directors of Sacramento Municipal Utility District gave= =20 tentative approval to rate hikes ranging from 19 percent to 27 percent.=20 The new rates will go into effect immediately after a final vote, scheduled= =20 for May 3.=20 ""This is quite alarming to all of us,"" said director Peter Keat. But praisi= ng=20 the value of ""a community-owned electric company"" that provides everything= =20 from shade trees to public votes on rates, Keat said he saw no choice.=20 SMUD, which once hoped to lower electric bills this year or next as=20 deregulation took hold, was caught up in the spiraling wholesale costs that= =20 helped send Pacific Gas and Electric Co. into bankruptcy proceedings.=20 The price of natural gas, which fuels SMUD's cogeneration plants, has risen= =20 steeply.=20 Wholesale electricity, which SMUD buys to supplement power produced by its= =20 own plants, nearly tripled between October and January.=20 And the weather has been dismal. Rainfall and snowmelt that feed SMUD's=20 hydroelectric plants on the upper American River are about 53 percent of=20 normal to date.=20 But during a two-hour hearing, a small contingent of consumers asked the=20 board to reconsider.=20 ""I realize that rates have to go up, but this seems like a big percentage a= ll=20 at once,"" said Marian Ender.=20 Several criticized a 6 percent surcharge that until only a few days before= =20 had been proposed at 3 percent. Among them was Duy Tu, an engineering manag= er=20 at Intel who served on SMUD's advisory rate committee.=20 The increase ""cannot come at a worse time"" for Intel, he said, although he= =20 understands the need for it. He urged the board to act now to make more=20 electricity available in the future.=20 ""We are way too dependent on some external force to keep the lights on,"" Tu= =20 said.=20 Overall, a base rate increase averaging 16 percent will raise about $124=20 million annually for SMUD, and a special=20 6 percent surcharge will raise about $48 million in its first year. Most of= =20 the surcharge, scheduled to drop to 3 percent annually for two subsequent= =20 years, will go into an emergency fund.=20 ""We have to build back our savings account. It's been gutted,"" said directo= r=20 Susan Patterson.=20 The rate increases will fall most heavily on small commercial and large=20 industrial power users, although households with very low electricity bills= =20 will feel a sharp bite from the addition of a $5 monthly service fee.=20 The flat fee adds less than 10 percent to what was a ""typical"" residential= =20 SMUD bill of $67, but it's a 25 percent rate hike for someone whose monthly= =20 bill hovers around $20.=20 ""I just don't think that part is right,"" Ender said. ""We should only pay fo= r=20 usage.""=20 Tom Reavey took the board to task for ""unfair and unequitable"" rates that= =20 charge agriculture and small businesses less than what they cost SMUD to=20 serve, while charging homeowners and renters slightly more.=20 But board members defended going easier on rates for the pumps that run=20 farmers' wells and irrigation systems.=20 ""We all gain great benefits from living in a community that has nearby=20 agriculture,"" Keat said.=20 The new rates will apply throughout SMUD's service territory, which include= s=20 a narrow slice of southern Placer County and all but the southwestern tip o= f=20 Sacramento County. They will not=20 affect people who receive electric service from PG&E, which last month was= =20 granted a 29 percent hike by state regulators.=20 ""If you want to see a bunch of folks who are really facing some stark times= ,=20 it's PG&E customers,"" said board member Howard Posner.=20 While there is widespread speculation that PG&E's rate hikes are the first = of=20 many, Posner and other directors said they hoped Thursday's increases will = be=20 the last SMUD needs and that rates could decline in three to four years.=20 To boost conservation, both SMUD and PG&E are trying to craft rates that fa= ll=20 hardest on the heaviest household users.=20 SMUD's old residential rates were=20 divided into a baseline tier charged roughly 8 cents a kilowatt-hour in the= =20 summer and one higher tier billed at 12.7 cents a kilowatt-hour.=20 The new rates will start at 8.6 cents in the summer, rise to a middle tier = of=20 14.5 cents and top out at 16.2 cents for those who use more than 1,000=20 kilowatt-hours of electricity.=20 By comparison, PG&E has proposed to the state Public Utilities Commission= =20 that its residential rates be divided into four tiers, topping out at 27=20 cents per kilowatt-hour. A PUC decision is expected next month.=20 Under the new SMUD rate structure, including the surcharge, large industrie= s=20 will see their electric bills rise by an average of 27 percent, agricultura= l=20 rates will rise 22 percent, small commercial rates 27 percent and residenti= al=20 rates 19 percent.=20 Households that qualify for special low-income or life-support rates will p= ay=20 a smaller monthly customer charge of $3.50 and will not have to pay the=20 surcharge on their baseline electricity usage.=20 Information about qualifying for the reduced rates is available from SMUD a= t=20 (888) 742-7683.=20 The Bee's Carrie Peyton can be reached at (916) 321-1086 or=20 cpeyton@sacbee.com.=20 --- Lieberman to Bush: Help California solve power woes By Emily Bazar Bee Capitol Bureau (Published April 20, 2001)=20 On a brief visit to the capital Thursday, former Democratic vice presidenti= al=20 candidate Joe Lieberman called on President Bush to help rescue California= =20 from its deepening energy troubles.=20 After attending an early-morning prayer breakfast with legislators and Gov.= =20 Gray Davis, the U.S. senator from Connecticut met with them to discuss the= =20 federal government's role in easing California's electricity woes.=20 Lieberman, a potential Democratic presidential candidate in 2004, warned th= at=20 if the Bush administration does not act quickly in California, the rest of= =20 the nation will succumb to economic ripple effects.=20 ""No American leader can disengage from a problem that so profoundly affects= =20 our largest state,"" Lieberman told reporters after meeting with the=20 Democratic governor. ""I call on the president to get involved. ... We can't= =20 sit back in Washington and let California suffer.""=20 Sacramento was the last California stop for the senator, who has spent thre= e=20 days at fund-raisers and speaking engagements across the state.=20 In talks with lawmakers about the energy crisis, Lieberman told them he's= =20 strongly urging the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to impose temporar= y=20 caps on the wholesale price of electricity.=20 But the commission's chairman, Curt Hebert, is a fierce free-market advocat= e=20 who has long opposed price caps and has not indicated he will change his=20 mind.=20 If FERC doesn't act soon, Lieberman said he will support legislation=20 sponsored by Sen.=20 Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., to force FERC to impose temporary caps.=20 He expects Feinstein to introduce her legislation early next week.=20 Lieberman's first stop Thursday morning was the California Prayer Breakfast= ,=20 an annual springtime gathering of religious and political leaders.=20 At the breakfast, speakers told Davis they would pray for him as he navigat= es=20 the state's energy crisis. Before launching into a song from ""The Scarlet= =20 Pimpernel,"" singer Steve Amerson called on the governor to tell Californian= s=20 the truth throughout the ordeal.=20 Davis was solemn in his remarks, and his calm demeanor belied his behavior= =20 Tuesday, when he reportedly erupted in an obscene=20 tirade during a closed-door meeting with Senate Republicans.=20 ""I'm going to tell you the truth, Steve. We have a problem,"" Davis said to= =20 the singer. ""But God has provided a path out of that problem if we all do o= ur=20 part.""=20 The Bee's Emily Bazar can be reached at (916) 326-5540 or ebazar@sacbee.com= .=20 --- Escondido calls a halt to power plant ideas=20 Temporary step will give it time for overall planning By Jonathan Heller=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 April 19, 2001=20 ESCONDIDO -- After being inundated with proposals to build power plants in= =20 the past few months, the City Council yesterday called a timeout.=20 The council voted 3-2 to suspend consideration for 30 to 60 days of any=20 proposals to build energy generating facilities in the city. During that=20 period, city staff members will develop a comprehensive approval process th= at=20 will factor in the cumulative effects of such plants.=20 ""We need to step back and look at the direction we're going in,"" City=20 Councilwoman June Rady said.=20 The city has been juggling four power-plant proposals since January:=20 ?Sempra Energy Resources wants to build a 500-megawatt plant in the southwe= st=20 part of Escondido. It has not yet filed formal plans with the city Planning= =20 Department.=20 ?Ramco Inc. of San Diego has received approval to build a 44-megawatt plant= =20 on Mission Avenue in west Escondido.=20 ?CalPeak LLC of San Diego has filed plans to build a 49.5-megawatt plant on= =20 Enterprise Street, not far from the Ramco plant.=20 ?Another firm has expressed interest in building a 49.5-megawatt plant on= =20 city property on West Washington Avenue, but has not submitted plans yet.= =20 Yesterday's decision means that all the projects -- except the=20 already-approved Ramco plant -- are now on hold, and no new proposals can b= e=20 filed with the city.=20 The decision halts a mad dash by developers to bring power plants on line b= y=20 the summer to take advantage of special incentives offered by Gov. Gray=20 Davis.=20 Mayor Lori Holt Pfeiler and Councilwoman Marie Waldron opposed the move. Th= ey=20 said it would only delay much-needed solutions to the region's energy crisi= s,=20 which is expected to come to a head this summer.=20 ""If (plant developers) have a chance of getting power on line by the summer= ,=20 we should not be the ones to stand in the way,"" Pfeiler said.=20 Waldron argued that cities have to be more proactive at this time, not less= .=20 ""The governor is not solving the problem,"" Waldron said. ""It's up to local= =20 governments to try to do what they can.""=20 Joe Rowley, Sempra's project development director, said he doubted the=20 council's decision would upset his plans.=20 ""Our timetable is still not fully defined,"" Rowley said. ""Obviously there's= a=20 lot of work we have to do to get to the point where an application can be= =20 processed.""=20 Meanwhile, council members listened to two people who made impassioned plea= s=20 for the city to consider alternative power sources.=20 David Drake, a service architect for SAIC in La Jolla, urged the council to= =20 think about solar power. There is more than enough available land -- and=20 rooftop space -- to install enough solar panels to power the whole city, he= =20 said.=20 ""Escondido has 65 square miles,"" he said. ""But 2,500 acres could be employe= d=20 to power us forever without any reliance on imported energy.""=20 Local inventor Arnold Lund urged the council to consider energy generated= =20 from windmills.=20 The council also voted to work with San Marcos in exploring ways to seek=20 inexpensive, stable energy rates.=20 The hope is that the two cities can forge a deal with Sempra for cheaper=20 rates. Sempra officials have said they are willing to discuss possible rate= =20 deals with the city.=20 To buy power directly, a city has to adopt a special legal arrangement, suc= h=20 as forming a municipal utility district. San Diego Gas & Electric is the on= ly=20 energy service provider in the county that buys and sells power from the=20 regional energy grid.=20 San Marcos has formed a municipal utility district but has not signed any= =20 deals to buy power. It would be a more lengthy process for Escondido to for= m=20 such a district. San Marcos is a charter city and has more flexibility unde= r=20 the state Constitution. Escondido is a general-law city.=20 --- Inflated natural-gas prices add to energy costs, expert says=20 Windfall-profits tax gets Davis' backing By Bill Ainsworth=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 April 19, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO -- Federal regulators' failure to stop what they described as=20 anti-competitive practices in the natural-gas industry added $750 million t= o=20 Southern California Edison's cost of electricity, a consultant estimated=20 yesterday.=20 The consultant, Paul Carpenter of the Brattle Group, spoke to an Assembly= =20 subcommittee investigating why California pays the highest natural-gas pric= es=20 in the nation. Natural gas is a critical part of the electricity crisis=20 because most of the state's generating plants run on natural gas.=20 Natural-gas prices have soared throughout the nation, but the bench mark=20 price paid at California's border has been double that paid at other bench= =20 mark locations throughout the nation for months, according to figures=20 released by the Assembly Subcommittee on Energy Oversight.=20 Next week, Carpenter plans to testify at hearings in Washington, D.C., on= =20 behalf of Southern California Edison and the California Public Utilities=20 Commission, which are asking federal regulators to intervene.=20 The giant utility and the state regulatory body contend that a sweetheart= =20 deal between El Paso Natural Gas and El Paso Merchant Energy gave the siste= r=20 companies enough market power to artificially raise the price of natural ga= s=20 that flows into Southern California from Texas.=20 El Paso owns the major pipeline bringing natural gas from fields in New=20 Mexico and Texas to Southern California. El Paso Merchant Energy is an=20 unregulated sister company.=20 Carpenter called the prices paid in Southern California ""simply=20 unprecedented"" in the United States. He estimated that the sister companies= =20 manipulated the market enough to add $2.60 to the price of a million Britis= h=20 thermal units of gas.=20 In addition, he said, El Paso Merchant Energy owns part of 20 smaller power= =20 plants, ""qualifying facilities"" that get paid based on the price of natural= =20 gas in California. The higher natural-gas prices increase the company's=20 revenues, Carpenter said.=20 El Paso company officials are expected to testify in front of the Assembly= =20 subcommittee today, but in proceedings before the federal regulators they= =20 have denied any sweetheart deal.=20 In a report they commissioned, the company blamed the higher natural-gas=20 prices in Southern California on increased demand and constraints on pipeli= ne=20 capacity.=20 Gov. Gray Davis, meanwhile, gave his strongest endorsement yet to a=20 windfall-profits tax on generators as a Senate committee chaired by Joseph= =20 Dunn, D-Laguna Niguel, began a series of hearings to probe possible price= =20 gouging by generators.=20 ""I believe the Legislature would be well within its prerogative to insist= =20 that generators receive an appropriate reduction, whether it's 20 percent o= r=20 any other number the Legislature hit upon,"" Davis said.=20 Senate Democrats, Davis said, will form a special committee to help work on= =20 his plan for the state purchase of the transmission system of Southern=20 California Edison for $2.76 billion, in exchange for state aid in paying of= f=20 the utilities' debt.=20 The governor said he told Senate Democrats, a number of whom are skeptical = of=20 the plan, that Edison's parent firm has agreed to back a $3 billion upgrade= =20 of the neighborhood distribution system retained by Edison and to return a= =20 $400 million tax refund to the utility.=20 At the natural-gas hearing yesterday, state officials said that after El Pa= so=20 Merchant Energy bought a significant part of the pipeline capacity from its= =20 sister company, it withheld natural gas to drive prices up.=20 ""Marketers have gamed the system and figured out how to hoard capacity and= =20 undermine competition,"" said Harvey Morris, an attorney for the California= =20 Public Utilities Commission.=20 State regulators want the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which=20 regulates natural gas, to open the market to more competitors.=20 But the commission has repeatedly rejected similar complaints in the past. = On=20 March 28, FERC ruled that the affiliates did not arrange a sweetheart deal.= =20 ""The fact that El Paso Merchant controls a large volume of capacity does no= t,=20 in and of itself, render the El Paso contracts unjust, unreasonable or undu= ly=20 discriminatory,"" FERC ruled.=20 In other cases involving natural gas, federal regulators acknowledged that= =20 certain contract provisions allowed anti-competitive behavior, but they=20 approved those contracts anyway.=20 Lawmakers said they were puzzled by the federal regulators' lack of action.= =20 ""It baffles me that we've found the problem -- anti-competitive behavior an= d=20 market gaming, but there's no cure because federal regulators won't take=20 action,"" said Assemblyman Juan Vargas, D-San Diego. Staff writer Ed Mendel contributed to this report.=20 --- Davis, Congress members call for energy price controls=20 By Gary Gentile ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 April 19, 2001=20 LOS ANGELES =01) Gov. Gray Davis and a bipartisan group of the state's=20 congressional delegates agreed Thursday that the federal government must ac= t=20 to control the wholesale price of energy.=20 ""For us the big issue is how we address the unjust rates,"" said Rep. Mary= =20 Bono, R-Palm Springs. ""I believe we are up to it and will handle it as soon= =20 as we can.""=20 Davis met behind closed doors with 27 congressional representatives,=20 including Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., at the Sheraton Gateway Hotel ne= ar=20 Los Angeles International Airport. He said after the 90-minute meeting that= =20 the group discussed a threefold approach to the state's power crisis.=20 The strategy includes requiring federal agencies in the state, including=20 military facilities, to conserve energy this summer and asking the Federal= =20 Energy Regulatory Commission to find a way to control the wholesale price o= f=20 electricity and increase the flow of natural gas into California.=20 Davis repeated his criticism of federal regulators for not acting sooner to= =20 control the wholesale price of electricity and said he was hopeful the=20 state's congressional delegation could work together to find a bipartisan= =20 solution.=20 ""We agreed there has to be a mechanism to reduce the wholesale price of=20 electricity,"" Davis said. ""We have agreed to work cooperatively across part= y=20 lines to find ways we can reduce those costs. We're in this together. Party= =20 doesn't matter. Finding a solution does matters.""=20 ""To have the price of moving natural gas go up by a factor of 10 or more is= =20 absurd,"" said Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Los Angeles. ""So many of our colleagues= =20 are telling us it's California's fault, but California does not have the=20 authority to regulate these two items.""=20 The group also talked about easing environmental regulations during power= =20 emergencies to allow small companies and even military bases to run small= =20 generators.=20 ""If you have generators in the state, regardless of what they run on, becau= se=20 we're entering this emergency period in the summertime and will be short of= =20 power, you should be allowed to turn them on,"" said Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-E= l=20 Cajon.=20 Hunter said small generators could produce about 500 to 600 megawatts durin= g=20 a power emergency if exemptions to various clear air requirements could be= =20 made.=20 Officials discussed ways to allow FERC to control wholesale prices without= =20 violating ideological positions staked out by high-ranking Republican=20 officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney, who oppose price controls= =20 and favor free markets.=20 Rep Jane Harman, D-Torrance, said she would support a finding by FERC that= =20 power wholesalers should not be allowed to charge market rates, but rather= =20 rates more tightly pegged to the cost of generating power.=20 ""We're not talking about artificial caps,"" Harman said. ""We should insist= =20 that the FERC not renew their market-based rate authority. And if we go tha= t=20 route, it takes us to the same place and avoids the ideological fight.""=20 The meeting did not result in any specific proposals but participants prais= ed=20 the bipartisan nature of the talks and said it would result in a unified=20 approach in Washington.=20 ""We have a responsibility to make sure the federal government takes it's ro= le=20 seriously,"" said Rep Gary Condit, D-Modesto. ""We clearly understand what ou= r=20 assignment is today and I think we're going to work together in a bipartisa= n=20 way to get that done.""=20 --- Regulators open investigation into alternative power providers=20 By Michael Liedtke ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 April 19, 2001=20 SAN FRANCISCO =01) Hoping to prevent California's bleak power outlook from= =20 becoming even darker, state regulators Thursday launched an investigation= =20 into why alternative energy providers aren't producing more electricity.=20 With the action, the California Public Utilities Commission hopes to=20 determine if legitimate business reasons or ulterior motives underlie the= =20 reduced output by an independent group of small generators that provides mu= ch=20 of the state's energy.=20 These alternative generators =01) known in the industry as ""qualifying=20 facilities,"" or QFs =01) have been scaling back or shutting down as debts o= wed=20 by California's two largest utilities pile up. The QFs are owed an estimate= d=20 $700 million by bankrupt Pacific Gas and Electric and financially crippled= =20 Southern California Edison.=20 Some QFs say the unpaid bills have forced them to defer much-needed=20 maintenance, leading to more equipment breakdowns that reduce electricity= =20 output. Other QFs say they simply can't afford to keep operating.=20 The PUC is worried some QFs are trying to take advantage of the California= =20 crisis to get out of long-term contracts that require them to sell=20 electricity at prices far below the current market rate. Several QFs are=20 suing to get out of those contracts so they can cash in on the open market,= =20 said PUC Commissioner Carl Wood.=20 All the QFs want is to be paid for bills that date back as far as November,= =20 said Jack Raudy, a spokesman for the Renewable Energy Creditors Committee,= =20 which consists of 10 alternative power producers owed a combined $410=20 million. Those 10 generators produce about 3,000 megawatts =01) which Raudy= said=20 was enough electricity for 3 million homes.=20 ""We are outraged (by the PUC's investigation),"" Raudy said. ""We have heard = so=20 much rhetoric over the past five months and still haven't been paid a dime.= =20 That is what we are worried about.""=20 Raudy estimated his group is operating at about 95 percent of capacity.=20 After the temporary closure of several QFs contributed to rolling blackouts= =20 around the state last month, the PUC ordered PG&E and SoCal Edison to begin= =20 paying the generators for the energy purchased since March 27.=20 But the order has done nothing to help the QFs recover the past debts. The= =20 QFs are now in line in bankruptcy court with 30,000 creditors owed money by= =20 PG&E, which expects its unpaid bills to rise to $5.5 billion by the end of= =20 this month.=20 If the QFs get desperate enough, they may decide to push SoCal Edison into = an=20 involuntary bankruptcy case, Raudy said.=20 PUC Commissioner Geoffrey Brown defended the alternative energy providers= =20 during Thursday's hearing.=20 ""Any QFs that are not operating right now are doing so for financial reason= s,=20 not to game the system,"" he said.=20 California will need all the power that it can get from the QFs this summer= =20 when rolling blackouts threaten to become a daily occurrence.=20 Combined, the QFs account for about one-fourth of California's total power= =20 capacity, according to the PUC.=20 The QF output will become even more essential this summer because Californi= a=20 won't be able to import as much electricity from the Pacific Northwest as i= t=20 has in the past. A lack of rain has left the Pacific Northwest's=20 hydroelectric supply at its second-lowest level ever, and it could diminish= =20 to a record low if the recent drought continues.=20 ""We are not going to be able to look to the Pacific Northwest to meet our= =20 needs,"" Wood said after reviewing a new report on the hydroelectricity=20 supply.=20 The looming blackouts and electricity price increases caused by California'= s=20 energy crisis is exasperating businesses and households across the state.= =20 Fearing the frustration could boil over into terrorism, the PUC Thursday=20 installed metal detectors to screen everyone attending the agency's public= =20 meetings.=20 In other moves Thursday, the PUC tabled a scheduled vote on whether the=20 regulators should become more involved in PG&E's bankruptcy case. The San= =20 Francisco-based utility is challenging the PUC's authority in the case. The= =20 PUC now expects to take up the matter at a May 3 meeting.=20 --- Attorney general taking two energy companies to court=20 ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 April 19, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) Attorney General Bill Lockyer wants a judge to order two po= wer=20 generators to hand over documents he subpoenaed last month as part of his= =20 investigation into the state's electricity market.=20 Reliant Energy and Mirant Corp. failed to produce certain documents by Marc= h=20 19, despite assurances that the sensitive documents would be kept=20 confidential, Lockyer said Thursday.=20 Lockyer filed the request for a hearing in San Francisco Superior Court.=20 Lockyer says the companies are concerned the documents wouldn't be kept=20 confidential, even though he says they've been assured the sensitive=20 documents would not be released.=20 The attorney general is investigating allegations of price manipulation in= =20 the state's electricity market that may have led to soaring power costs.=20 Mirant spokesman Bill O'Neel said the company is cooperating with the=20 attorney general's office.=20 ""At this moment, we have our legal team working to pull together the=20 documentation the attorney general has requested,"" O'Neel said.=20 Mirant Thursday joined a complaint filed by Reliant last week in Los Angele= s=20 Superior Court. That petition seeks assurance that the attorney general wil= l=20 keep proprietary information confidential to prevent any competitive damage= ,=20 said Reliant spokesman Richard Wheatley.=20 ""We're committed to cooperating with the investigation that Attorney Genera= l=20 Lockyer is conducting,"" Wheatley said. ""It's the understanding of our=20 management that we do not have the proper assurance that the information wi= ll=20 be kept confidential.""=20 --- Legislators Unite Over Energy Price Issue=20 Power: Bipartisan congressional delegation called together by Davis says U.= S.=20 must step in to protect state from manipulation by suppliers.=20 By MITCHELL LANDSBERG and MIGUEL BUSTILLO, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????This may be the surest sign yet of the depth of California's energy=20 crisis: A bipartisan cross-section of the state's congressional delegation,= =20 brought together Thursday by Gov. Gray Davis, not only agreed about the=20 severity of the problem but also about the need for swift federal=20 intervention.=20 ?????""This meeting did not have the word 'Democrat' or 'Republican' used=20 once,"" Rep. Darrell E. Issa (R-Vista), said of the unusual spirit of=20 cooperation at the meeting near Los Angeles International airport. ?????Members of both parties said the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission= =20 must slash wholesale electricity prices so California utilities can once=20 again afford to buy power. Since January, the state government has been=20 buying electricity on their behalf, as skyrocketing wholesale prices put=20 Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern California Edison billions of dolla= rs=20 into debt and many power suppliers refused to sell to them; PG&E has since= =20 filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. ?????Although the Bush administration has said repeatedly that it is strong= ly=20 opposed to price caps, and FERC has refused to grant them, California=20 Republicans at the energy meeting said they are optimistic that the=20 administration will agree to some other form of price regulation. They=20 brushed aside the notion that such regulations might conflict with their=20 ideological belief in a free market. ?????""This is not a free-enterprise situation,"" Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Alpin= e)=20 said after the meeting. ""In fact, it's just the opposite."" ?????Specifically citing the huge disparity between natural gas prices=20 charged to California and those charged in other Western states, he said=20 California clearly has been the victim of unreasonably high energy costs.= =20 Under federal law, the FERC must regulate the prices of companies if it fin= ds=20 they are exerting ""market power"" to drive prices to unreasonable levels. ?????Executives from two Texas energy companies, meeting with legislators i= n=20 Sacramento, denied Thursday that they had caused natural gas prices in=20 California to artificially skyrocket by hoarding access to a critical=20 pipeline into the state. ?????After the extraordinary meeting in Los Los Angeles, Rep. Brad Sherman= =20 (D-Sherman Oaks) said the biggest disagreement between California Democrats= =20 and Republicans appeared to be their relative faith--or lack thereof--in th= e=20 ability of President Bush and his administration to help California. There= =20 has been much speculation that Bush, who lost California in November, has n= o=20 political motive to help the state. ?????""We Democrats,"" said Sherman, ""hope very much that our skepticism is= =20 proven wrong."" ?????Davis--who sat flanked by Democratic U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein and th= e=20 governor's newly appointed chief energy advisor, S. David Freeman--said he= =20 used the meeting mainly to discuss the importance of conservation by=20 Californians this summer and to ask the congressional delegation to pitch i= n.=20 Five Republicans and more than a dozen Democrats attended the gathering. ?????Feinstein said Thursday that she has asked for a third time to meet wi= th=20 Bush to discuss the energy situation. Meeting with Times reporters and=20 editors Wednesday, she described a recent meeting with Vice President Dick= =20 Cheney in which, she said, he ""ignored"" her appeal for federal assistance.= =20 ?????Feinstein has been among those critical of natural gas companies, sayi= ng=20 they appear to have constricted access to a California-bound pipeline to ru= n=20 up prices. ?????The Brattle Group, a respected consulting firm, alleged Wednesday befo= re=20 an Assembly committee that Dynegy Inc. and El Paso Natural Gas Co. had=20 manipulated the market by charging so much for the rights to their pipeline= =20 capacity that they had, in effect, withheld access to it. ?????That action, the experts said, directly forced companies trying to=20 deliver gas to California to look for alternatives, clogging other pipeline= s=20 and causing a surge in prices. ?????The explanation, El Paso executives said, was simple: Demand for gas= =20 soared in California because generators that use gas to make electricity=20 increased production last year in response to the energy crisis. ?????""We're not withholding capacity--no one is,"" said El Paso Merchant=20 Energy President Ralph Eads. ""With these prices, you want to sell every=20 molecule."" ?????In other developments Thursday: ?????* The agreement between Davis and Edison International to return its= =20 ailing utility arm to financial health is in ""deep trouble and could be=20 rejected by legislators,"" the Standard & Poor's credit rating agency said i= n=20 a note to clients, citing legislative and other sources. A rejection of the= =20 deal ""would be a humiliating setback for the governor,"" S&P said. ?????The agreement calls for, among other things, the sale of Edison's=20 transmission grid to the state for $2.76 billion and the sale of $2 billion= =20 in bonds--both designed to pay off the utility's huge electricity debt.=20 Edison agreed to several constraints, including the sale of electricity to= =20 the state at prices tied to the cost of producing power. ?????Since they returned Monday from a two-week recess, state legislators= =20 have been sharply critical of the Edison agreement and have indicated a=20 desire to tinker with aspects of the deal. Some lawmakers have said publicl= y=20 that a bankruptcy protection filing by Edison, like that of PG&E, might not= =20 be such a dire outcome. ?????But a senior Edison executive said it is ""way too early"" to give up on= =20 passage of the proposal, which legislators have not yet seen in official fo= rm. ?????""There is an education process to do here,"" the executive said of the= =20 highly detailed 38-page document. ""The legislators should be asking=20 questions. That is appropriate."" ?????* The Public Utilities Commission voted to investigate whether=20 alternative energy providers violated contractual agreements by withholding= =20 supplies from PG&E and Edison, which owe them hundreds of millions of dolla= rs. ?????The action, Commissioner Carl W. Wood said, was prompted in part by=20 lawsuits some providers have filed seeking release from their contracts wit= h=20 the cash-starved utilities. The producers of solar, wind and geothermal=20 energy account for more than 25% of California's electricity supply. ?????""The question is whether we will be able to rely on them in the long,= =20 hot days of summer,"" Wood said. ?????Jack Raudy of the Renewable Energy Creditors Committee said the PUC=20 needs to address the $700 million the producers are owed. ""All we have gott= en=20 is rhetoric from the governor, the PUC and the utilities,"" he said. ?????* An $850-million plan to entice Californians to conserve precious=20 megawatts appears to be running into roadblocks, compounding predictions by= =20 state officials of tighter than expected energy supplies in May and June. ?????Davis signed the conservation spending package last week, earmarking= =20 $242 million of the new funds for the Public Utilities Commission to=20 distribute to the state's investor-owned utilities to support existing=20 conservation programs. ?????But Barbara Hale, director of the PUC's Division of Strategic Planning= ,=20 said Thursday that since Pacific Gas & Electric Co. filed for bankruptcy=20 protection April 6, the utility has stopped releasing conservation funds. ?????Hale, testifying before a state Senate committee, said PG&E's=20 decision--coupled with the threat that Southern California Edison could=20 follow a similar route to U.S. Bankruptcy Court--has complicated her agency= 's=20 efforts. ?????PG&E spokeswoman Staci Homrig said her company plans to petition the= =20 Bankruptcy Court to have the conservation funds designated as a trust and= =20 separated from assets tied up in the bankruptcy proceedings. She said if th= e=20 court denies the request, PG&E would ask to be permitted to pay the expense= s=20 anyway. The process, she added, could take about a month--too long in the= =20 view of some legislators, given increasingly gloomy energy forecasts for la= te=20 spring and early summer. ?????Deputy Director Bob Therkelsen of the California Energy Commission sai= d=20 his agency had been counting on a number of small power producers to bolste= r=20 their output during that period. But he said some producers did not purchas= e=20 the necessary equipment because PG&E and Edison have failed to pay them in= =20 full for earlier electricity deliveries. ?????""It's not a huge amount,"" he said of the anticipated production=20 shortfall, ""but every little bit helps."" ---=20 ?????Landsberg reported from Los Angeles, Bustillo from Sacramento. Times= =20 staff writers Nancy Rivera Brooks in Los Angeles, Carl Ingram and Julie=20 Tamaki in Sacramento and Tim Reiterman in San Francisco contributed to this= =20 story. Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 --- Small fry among big fish in PG&E bankruptcy=20 Some unlikely businesses are listed as creditors against utility=20 Steve Rubenstein, Chuck Squatriglia, Chronicle Staff Writers Friday, April 20, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /20/M N185589.DTL=20 A San Francisco ice cream parlor, a karate studio and a costume shop are al= l=20 in the same boat, and that goes for a Divisadero Street psychiatrist, too.= =20 They're all in the fortunate position of having money coming to them.=20 And they're all in the tough spot of having that money owed by the sort-of= =20 bankrupt Pacific Gas and Electric Co.=20 Many of the 47,894 creditors that PG&E owes money to, according to a list= =20 filed with the bankruptcy judge, are banks, power companies, lawyers and th= e=20 like.=20 But a surprising number are businesses that, at first blush, might seem=20 unlikely to be power company creditors. Many businesses -- like the ACT=20 costume rental shop -- didn't know or had forgotten that PG&E had run up a= =20 tab.=20 And since the list didn't say how much they're owed, businesses had to gues= s.=20 ""How about that?"" said costume shop manager Callie Floor, when told she had= =20 PG&E money coming to her.=20 Floor, checking her books, said it looks like PG&E forgot to pay its $100= =20 bill to cover a costume rental for a corporate dress-up party in 1992.=20 ""We rent a lot of costumes for corporate events,"" she said. ""That's probabl= y=20 what it was.""=20 Psychiatrist Richard Lieberman says he does not know why or how much PG&E= =20 owes him.=20 ""But I'll take it,"" he said. ""PG&E has taken advantage of the consumer for = so=20 long. As far as I'm concerned, PG&E can go under and stay under.""=20 Of course, PG&E may wind up paying pennies on the dollar, if anything,=20 because that's how bankruptcies work. The notion is depressing, which=20 psychiatrists are used to.=20 KARATE STUDIO GETS HIT Karate master Scott Morton, whose Karate One studio on Van Ness Avenue is= =20 also a creditor, said karate is all about fairness and integrity, which PG&= E=20 seems to be even shorter on than cash.=20 ""I think the bankruptcy stinks,"" Morton said. ""All the money is going aroun= d=20 and around, it's all the same company.""=20 The karate studio conducted a self-defense class for about a dozen workers = at=20 PG&E headquarters. Morton, a black belt who does not take treachery lightly= ,=20 said he was ""pretty sure"" the check cleared, but maybe not.=20 NO BIG DEAL FOR SOME At Beauchamp's Welding and Repair in Petaluma, owner Dean Beauchamp wasn't= =20 concerned.=20 ""They don't owe us enough to worry about,"" he said. ""Less than $100, I'd=20 guess.""=20 Beauchamp's shop does small jobs for the big utility. ""They've been really= =20 good about sending us a check. Once in a great while, something will get=20 misplaced, and I guess that's how our name got on the list.""=20 Yolanda Fletcher, the owner of Red Shoes Slide Service, says the utility=20 probably owes her about $100 for preparing some photographs for a corporate= =20 slide show.=20 Larry Mitchell, proprietor of the award-winning Mitchell's Ice Cream shop o= n=20 San Jose Avenue, believes that PG&E may owe him $500 for a corporate ice=20 cream social.=20 ""That would cover the ice cream, the toppings, the dishes and the spoons,"" = he=20 said.=20 The utility's rocky road may be metaphorical, but an ice cream store's rock= y=20 road is the real thing, he said, and being owed $500 by a bankrupt company = is=20 not peaches and cream.=20 UNEXPECTED NAMES The list of creditors also includes such strange bedfellows as the San=20 Francisco Fire Department, the Yosemite Fund, The Chronicle and PG&E's own= =20 library petty cash fund. Perhaps the strangest bedfellow of all is the=20 perpetual PG&E foe known as TURN, or The Utility Reform Network, which stan= ds=20 to lose thousands of dollars in state-mandated legal fees from PG&E for its= =20 work as an ""intervener,"" or utility watchdog.=20 Among the utility's more sensible business partners is the Beale Street=20 sandwich shop a few steps from the main entrance to PG&E's headquarters=20 building in San Francisco.=20 Unlike the big banks and power companies that are on the hook for millions,= =20 proprietor Kenneth Chen does business with PG&E on a strictly pay-as-you-go= =20 business.=20 Chen, the owner of Cafe Leah at 25 Beale St., is often hired to send up a $= 40=20 tray of sandwiches to PG&E corporate officers. When he does so, he insists = on=20 cash up front because PG&E, who is the restaurant's landlord, insists on ca= sh=20 every month from Chen.=20 ""That's the way we've always done it, payment right away,"" he said. ""That w= ay=20 there's no hassle later on.""=20 E-mail Steve Rubenstein at srubenstein@sfchronicle.com and Chuck Squatrigli= a=20 at ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 --- Developments in California's energy crisis=20 The Associated Press Friday, April 20, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate1 004EDT0161.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 , , -- (04-20) 07:04 PDT Developments in California's energy crisis:=20 FRIDAY:< ?-- The state remains free of power alerts as reserves stay above = 7 percent. ?-- Southern California Edison plans a 1:30 p.m. conference call= with its ?creditors. ?-- Edison executives discuss the state's move to buy= thier transmission lines ?at a 9:30 a.m. briefing in Sacramento. ?< ?THURS= DAY:<=20 -- The Public Utility Commission launches an investigation into whether a k= ey=20 block of independent generators are purposely keeping their plants off line= .=20 -- The commission tables until May 3 a vote on whether the PUC should becom= e=20 more involved in Pacific Gas & Electric's bankruptcy case. The San=20 Francisco-based utility is challenging the PUC's authority in the case.=20 -- Texas-based natural gas companies defend themselves before an Assembly= =20 subcommittee against accusations they created a virtual monopoly on gas=20 flowing into California and used it to jack up prices sharply.=20 -- Attorney General Bill Lockyer says he will go to court to force two=20 electricity generators to hand over documents he subpoenaed as part of his= =20 probe of the state's electricity market.=20 -- Gov. Gray Davis and a bipartisan group of the state's congressional=20 delegates agree that the federal government must act to control the wholesa= le=20 price of energy, but offer no specific proposals.=20 -- The Assembly passes a resolution asking the federal government to regula= te=20 the price of natural gas, which has been deregulated since 1992. The Assemb= ly=20 also approves a bill to encourage natural gas exploration in the tidelands= =20 off Long Beach. Both measures go to the Senate.=20 -- The Senate approves a resolution asking Congress and the president to le= t=20 California use daylight-saving time year-round to help lower energy use. Th= e=20 measure now moves to the Assembly. A bill pending in Congress would give=20 Western states the authority to expand daylight-saving time.=20 -- The Electric Power Supply Association tells the Federal Energy Regulator= y=20 Commission that the California Independent System Operator, which runs the= =20 state's power grid, is not independent enough. The association alleges in a= =20 FERC filing that the ISO favors the state over electricity generators in it= s=20 actions and rule-making.=20 -- The California Energy Commission allows Pacific Gas & Electric Corp. to= =20 build a $350 million power plant in San Diego County capable of supplying= =20 electricity to 500,000 homes.=20 -- The Escondido City Council votes to suspend for 30 to 60 days its=20 consideration of proposals by developers trying to build plants before peak= =20 summer demand. The council wants to develop a comprehensive approval proces= s=20 that looks at the cumulative effect of such plants.=20 -- Edison International's stock closes at $10.98, down 42 cents, while stoc= k=20 in PG&E's parent closes down 31 cents at $8.73.=20 -- The state remains free of power alerts as reserves stay above 7 percent.= =20 <=20 WHAT'S NEXT:< ?-- Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra, = the parent ?company of San Diego Gas and Electric Co., to buy the utility's= transmission ?lines. Davis says he expects to have an agreement within two= weeks. ?-- An Assembly subcommittee meets Monday to discuss bills aimed at= improving ?California's natural gas market. ?-- Senate Select Committee to= Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale ?Energy Market continues i= ts investigation next week. ?< ?THE PROBLEM:<=20 High demand, high wholesale energy costs, transmission glitches and a tight= =20 supply worsened by scarce hydroelectric power in the Northwest and=20 maintenance at aging California power plants are all factors in California'= s=20 electricity crisis.=20 Edison and PG&E say they've lost nearly $14 billion since June to high=20 wholesale prices that the state's electricity deregulation law bars them fr= om=20 passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs= =20 from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection= =20 April 6.=20 Electricity and natural gas suppliers, scared off by the two companies' poo= r=20 credit ratings, are refusing to sell to them, leading the state in January = to=20 start buying power for the utilities' nearly 9 million residential and=20 business customers. The state is also buying power for a third investor-own= ed=20 utility, San Diego Gas & Electric, which is in better financial shape than= =20 much larger Edison and PG&E but also struggling with high wholesale power= =20 costs.=20 The Public Utilities Commission has raised rates up to 46 percent to help= =20 finance the state's multibillion-dollar power-buying.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 --- California utility wants to boost Mohave power plant production=20 Friday, April 20, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 926EDT0156.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 (04-20) 06:26 PDT BULLHEAD CITY, Ariz. (AP) -- With many opposed to allowin= g=20 Southern California Edison to increase power production at the Mohave=20 Generating Station, the City Council wants Nevada regulators to meet here.= =20 The plant Edison operates is located across the Colorado River in Laughlin,= =20 Nev. Edison is seeking a variance that would allow it to exceed the current= =20 cap of 70 percent of the plant's capacity and to do so for more than 20=20 hours.=20 ``We just want to do this in dire circumstances to avoid the rolling=20 blackouts (California has experienced recently),'' Edison spokesman Steve= =20 Hansen said.=20 Any is too much for former City Councilman Victor Urso.=20 ``That plant is one of the worst air pollution violators in the United Stat= es=20 already, and now they want variances to do even more damage,'' Urso said.= =20 Mohave County Supervisor Tom Sockwell, who presents the Bullhead City area,= =20 doesn't see it that way.=20 ``They'll only run it up to full power for very short periods, and we need= =20 that for the power shortages,'' Sockwell said this week. ``We've already go= t=20 pollution anyway, so what's another hour of a darker plume every now and=20 then?''=20 Rick Moore of the Flagstaff-based Grand Canyon Trust, which monitors the=20 plant's operation, said the plant exceeded its permissible emissions level= =20 1,200 times during the last calendar year. The trust sued, and the company= =20 was fined $180,000.=20 The City Council wants the Nevada Environmental Commission to meet in=20 Laughlin next month rather than in Carson City so members can hear local=20 opponents of Edison's request.=20 Hansen said the commission approved a variance last year but that the plant= =20 exceeded the emissions limit for only six minutes.=20 At peak capacity, the plant can produce 1,580 megawatts of electricity but = is=20 required to stay below that level because of air quality concerns=20 Edison owns 56 percent of the plant. The rest is owned by the Los Angeles= =20 Department of Water and Power (20 percent), Nevada Power (14 percent) and t= he=20 Salt River Project in Phoenix (10 percent).=20 Nevada Power has been trying to sell its share in the generating station to= =20 AES Corp. of Arlington, Va., has been trying to purchase both Edison's and= =20 Nevada Power's shares but has run into snags. The Nevada Public Utilities= =20 Commission approve the Nevada Power sale in October but suspended that=20 approval on Marcy 29 for at least 60 days. In January, the California Publi= c=20 Utilities Commission suspended sale of the Edison share and placed a=20 five-year moratorium on such sales about the same time.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 --- PG&E owes money to several small businesses, unlikely creditors=20 Friday, April 20, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 503EDT0125.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 (04-20) 02:03 PDT SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Several small fry are among the big= =20 fish in a pond full of creditors to which ailing Pacific Gas and Electric= =20 owes money.=20 A San Francisco ice cream parlor, a costume store, a psychiatrist's office= =20 and a karate studio are among a number of small businesses that should be= =20 receiving payments from the near bankrupt utility.=20 After checking her books, ACT Costume Shop manager Callie Floor was surpris= ed=20 to find that the utility owes her $100 for a costume rental for a corporate= =20 dress-up party in 1992.=20 Karate One Studio on Van Ness Avenue may be owed for a self-defense class i= t=20 conducted for about a dozen workers at PG&E headquarters.=20 Of course, PG&E may only have to pay pennies on the dollar to the small fry= ,=20 since that's how bankruptcies work.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 --- Edison pushes lawmakers to accept deal=20 David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday, April 20, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /20/M N190213.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 Although lawmakers are skeptical of the state's multibillion-dollar deal to= =20 acquire the power lines of Southern California Edison, the head of the=20 utility's parent company warned yesterday that failure to approve the accor= d=20 could lead to a ""long and costly"" bankruptcy.=20 But John Bryson, chief executive of Edison International, told The Chronicl= e=20 that he thought legislators would ""want to do the right thing"" by approving= =20 the multibillion-dollar agreement and preventing Edison from following=20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. into bankruptcy court.=20 Bankruptcy for California's two largest utilities could have severe=20 consequences for consumers. Financial analysts said a worsening of the=20 state's energy mess would increase the possibility of higher electricity=20 rates.=20 Nevertheless, lawmakers are unlikely to accept the Edison deal -- at least= =20 not in its present form.=20 ""We are going to go through this thing extensively,"" said state Senate=20 President Pro Tem John Burton, D-San Francisco. ""There are a lot of concern= s=20 about the valuation.""=20 Still, he said, legislative backing for the accord remains possible as long= =20 as Edison is open to amending some of the terms.=20 ""The Edison people are smart enough to know that the Legislature is going t= o=20 have its say,"" Burton said.=20 Indeed, sources familiar with the matter said Edison expected a certain=20 amount of tinkering with the deal and would not resist efforts to reach=20 common ground with lawmakers.=20 ""The Assembly members do not view bankruptcy as a favorable alternative,""= =20 said Assemblyman Herb Wesson, D-Los Angeles. ""There will be a big effort to= =20 try and work something out.""=20 Edison's Bryson seems eager at this point to present himself and his compan= y=20 as reasonable business partners who are willing to negotiate in good faith.= =20 This contrasts sharply with the state's relations with PG&E, which turned= =20 acrimonious after PG&E blindsided the governor with its bankruptcy filing.= =20 Each side blamed the other for the collapse of earlier negotiations.=20 ""We made the decision at an early stage that this was a massive problem for= =20 the state and that the best course was to find a practical solution that=20 would allow us to get on with operating our power system,"" Bryson said.=20 Bankruptcy, he said, ""is absolutely a last resort. It's a long and costly= =20 process.""=20 It is also the last thing Wall Street wants to see. On Wednesday, rating=20 agency Fitch Inc. joined Standard & Poor's and Moody's Investor Service in= =20 warning that California's credit rating could be lowered because of the=20 state's energy mess.=20 ""The state may be forced to issue junk bonds,"" said Carol Coale, an energy-= =20 industry analyst at Prudential Securities in New York. ""This could lead to = a=20 surcharge on electricity bills to guarantee the bonds.""=20 Bryson, not surprisingly, defended Edison's agreement with the governor as = a=20 prudent alternative to bankruptcy.=20 ""This is a very good deal for the state,"" he said. ""It is not a bailout.=20 Edison gives up a lot to make all this possible.""=20 Southern California Edison will sell its power lines to the state for $2.8= =20 billion. It also will provide low-cost power to California for 10 years and= =20 drop a federal lawsuit seeking full recovery of nearly $5 billion in past= =20 debt.=20 Critics say the state is paying far too much for Edison's transmission syst= em=20 -- more than two times book value -- and that the power lines are of little= =20 use unless PG&E's grid also can be acquired.=20 ""It's a multibillion-dollar ratepayer bailout of Edison,"" said Doug Heller,= a=20 spokesman for the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa=20 Monica. ""Edison gets off scot-free.""=20 Under the most likely scenario, lawmakers will seek to reduce the amount pa= id=20 for Edison's power lines and to increase the role of the California Public= =20 Utilities Commission in regulating the utility.=20 They also will try to come up with a workable contingency plan for the stat= e=20 if PG&E remains adamant in its refusal to sell off its part of the power=20 grid.=20 ""The deal on the table is still salvageable,"" said Michael Shames, executiv= e=20 director of the Utility Consumers' Action Network in San Diego. ""But Edison= =20 needs to understand that what it got from the governor is only a framework,= =20 not set in stone.""=20 For his part, Bryson signaled that plenty of room existed for give and take= =20 on the issue.=20 ""We're just at the initial stage,"" he said. ""We always have accepted the=20 notion that Edison is a California regulated utility and is subject to the= =20 laws of the Public Utilities Commission.""=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 4=20 --- Who will pay the most for power?=20 Posted at 9:46 p.m. PDT Thursday, April 19, 2001=20 JOHN=20 WOOLFOLK=20 AND MICHAEL=20 BAZELEY=20 Mercury News=20 State regulators last month announced an electric rate increase that would= =20 average a whopping three cents per kilowatt-hour, hit bills beginning in Ma= y=20 and punish power pigs while sparing energy misers.=20 Now, much of that is up in the air.=20 Higher rates are surely coming -- but not before June. And exactly which=20 consumers and businesses will pay how much is uncertain as regulators rush = to=20 forge a rate structure from a tangle of more than 20 proposals.=20 Their task has been complicated immeasurably by Gov. Gray Davis' decision t= o=20 weigh in with a competing rate plan and Pacific Gas & Electric Co.'s move= =20 into bankruptcy court.=20 ``Little details are moving billions of dollars around,'' said Nettie Hoge = of=20 the Utility Reform Network, a consumer advocacy group.=20 All the proposals assume a ``tiered'' structure that forces the heaviest=20 users of energy to pay the most. But key details yet to be decided mean=20 consumers could see their average rates go up anywhere from 7 percent to 30= =20 percent or more.=20 Among them:=20 ?How much of an overall increase? The Public Utilities Commission approved = a=20 three-cent per kilowatt-hour increase last month, which would boost utility= =20 revenue by $4.8 million. Davis' proposed increase -- left vague in his Apri= l=20 5 television address -- averages 2.8 cents for PG&E customers but only 2.3= =20 cents for customers of Southern California Edison.=20 ?What regions of the state will pay? The commission agreed to raise rates= =20 only for PG&E and Southern California Edison, but Davis would include the= =20 additional 1.2 million San Diego Gas & Electric customers.=20 ?Should heavier users of electricity subsidize those who are exempt from th= e=20 new rate increase? If so, those users will find themselves paying much more= =20 than any of the average increase figures being tossed about.=20 ?How will utilities bill customers retroactively for the increase? At the= =20 time of the PUC vote on March 27, commissioners said their increase would= =20 take effect immediately.=20 PUC vote May 14=20 Various plans are being presented this week to an administrative law judge= =20 working for the commission. The judge is expected to recommend a rate=20 structure to the PUC on May 4. Public hearings would follow May 7-11, and t= he=20 commission would vote on a plan May 14, condensing to a few weeks a process= =20 that normally lasts nearly a year.=20 Each of the major proposals before the commission assumes that residential= =20 customers using less than 130 percent of their baseline -- which is the=20 average basic level of use for each region of the state -- would be exempt= =20 from higher rates. That's mandated under a new law that allows the state to= =20 buy power. Customers already pay higher rates for exceeding their baseline.= =20 Each major proposal also sets new ``tiers'' with progressively higher rates= =20 for ``medium'' use at 130 to 200 percent of baseline and ``heavy'' use over= =20 200 percent of that level.=20 But that's where the similarities end.=20 Differences=20 The first distinction among the leading plans comes in the form of an=20 assumption: How many residential customers will avoid any increase because= =20 they don't exceed 130 percent of their baseline? Davis says more than half,= =20 commissioners say a little under half and PG&E says less than a third.=20 The second difference among the plans is a real difference: What happens to= =20 everyone else?=20 Under the plan by utilities commission President Loretta Lynch, medium PG&E= =20 users would see average bills rise 9 percent and heavy users would see bill= s=20 increase 36 percent.=20 Davis' plan says medium PG&E users would see average bills rise 11 percent= =20 while heavy users would pay 37 percent more. But the average total bill=20 increase for PG&E residential customers, including those who are exempt,=20 would be 20 percent under his plan and 24 percent under Lynch's, according = to=20 a statement on the governor's Web site.=20 Business customers would see proportionately greater increases, averaging 3= 0=20 percent under Lynch's proposal and 26 percent under Davis'.=20 The most consumer-friendly of the various proposals comes from=20 consumer-rights group TURN. They suggest an overall average residential=20 increase of 7.5 percent.=20 TURN's plan assumes utilities cannot charge other customers more to make up= =20 for the energy misers shielded from rate increases under state law.=20 PG&E disagrees with that interpretation. The utility wants other residentia= l=20 users to make up for any lost revenue from exempted customers through highe= r=20 rates. Under the utility's plan, residential customers would see an average= =20 rate increase of nearly 30 percent.=20 ``The proposal these folks are pushing rips the heart out of that law,'' sa= id=20 Matthew Freedman, staff attorney for TURN.=20 Another issue affecting consumers is how the utilities can bill for=20 electricity used in April and May, before the final plan is approved.=20 Utilities want surcharge=20 Utility officials have objected to making the rate structure retroactive.= =20 Instead, to recoup the revenue, they are proposing a flat surcharge that=20 everyone would pay, regardless of how much they use.=20 Edison proposes a higher surcharge added to bills for a shorter period of= =20 time -- in this case, June through August. PG&E officials are suggesting a= =20 smaller surcharge that would be spread out over 12 months.=20 ``It'll probably be something closer to the PG&E proposal,'' said Paul=20 Clanon, the commission's director of energy issues.=20 All the rate increase proposals stem from a commonly understood problem:=20 California's current, frozen rates don't generate enough money to cover the= =20 wholesale price of power. The PUC raised rates 10 percent -- or one cent pe= r=20 kilowatt-hour -- in January in an attempt to help, but that turned out to b= e=20 far from enough.=20 In March, the commission approved an additional three-cent increase. But=20 Davis followed quickly with an alternative proposal. The next day, PG&E fil= ed=20 for bankruptcy, raising the specter that a federal judge could order even= =20 higher rates.=20 Although the PUC has sole authority to raise rates under state law, Davis'= =20 proposal has complicated an already complex process. The governor appointed= =20 three of the five members of the commission, and his appointees seem inclin= ed=20 to show him deference. But Davis has been slow in filing the details of his= =20 plan, which has made it hard for the PUC to proceed. --- --- --- Credit-raters put state on watch=20 Posted at 9:41 p.m. PDT Thursday, April 19, 2001=20 BY JENNIFER BJORHUS=20 Mercury News=20 All three of the nation's influential judges of credit risk now have=20 California on a credit watch, saying they are deeply concerned about the=20 economic impact of the state's power crisis.=20 The Fitch credit rating agency made it unanimous Wednesday when it warned= =20 that the thickening electricity quagmire, as well as lower than expected ta= x=20 revenues in February and March, could mean broader risk for the state's=20 budget.=20 The announcement is a signal that Fitch, too, may downgrade its ratings on= =20 California's nearly $30 billion in public debt, a move which could cost=20 taxpayers millions.=20 The announcement comes as state lawmakers consider a bailout plan for=20 Southern California Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric Co. sits in bankruptcy a= nd=20 state officials bleed through the state's general fund as they buy expensiv= e=20 electricity for consumers.=20 Earlier this week, Gov. Gray Davis announced that the average bill for=20 electricity purchases has risen from $45.8 million a day in the last week o= f=20 March to $73 million a day.=20 Moody's Investors Service and Standard & Poor's have already issued their o= wn=20 credit warnings, although none of the three agencies has downgraded the=20 state's very good double-A credit rating.=20 Bond ratings are important yardsticks that bankers and investors use to pri= ce=20 municipal and corporate bonds. A downgrade would force California to offer= =20 bond buyers higher interest rates going forward, costing taxpayers.=20 The state was last at a lower A rating back in 1994.=20 Moody's changed California's Aa2 general obligation bond rating outlook fro= m=20 stable to negative on April 6, the day PG&E filed for bankruptcy. Standard = &=20 Poor's has had the state's AA rating outlook at negative since January, whe= n=20 the state began buying electricity for the utilities.=20 The deciding factor for Fitch, said Fitch vice chairman Claire Cohen, was t= he=20 disagreement over how the money from the new electricity rate increase will= =20 be spent.=20 The California Public Utilities Commission ruled in late March that money= =20 generated by higher electricity bills should go first to pay the state=20 Department of Water Resources, which has been buying electricity for the=20 utilities. PG&E has argued that if the state is paid first, there won't be= =20 any money left for the company.=20 The utility is formally challenging the PUC decision, and the move threaten= s=20 to hold up the estimated $12 billion to $14 billion of bonds the Department= =20 of Water Resources plans to issue to buy more electricity.=20 ``With that being appealed, you don't have a clean authorization,'' Cohen= =20 said. ``It signals to me that it could delay the financing process.''=20 A second concern is that the state isn't collecting as much in taxes as=20 expected, Cohen said. Tax collections for both February and March were belo= w=20 forecast. The amount of personal income tax the state collected in those=20 months fell short by $455 million, or 14 percent less than expected.=20 Cohen said she made her decision before hearing that the state's power cost= s=20 now exceed $70 million a day. Cohen and David Hitchcock, the California=20 analyst for Standard & Poor's, agreed those rising costs are a definite=20 concern.=20 ``It doesn't take much of a change in economic growth to make some of these= =20 projected fund balances disappear and so we're very worried about what the= =20 current economic activity is, particularly in Northern California with some= =20 of the problems with the high-tech area,'' Hitchcock told analysts and=20 investors last week in a conference call.=20 Other economy-watchers expressed concern.=20 Sandy Harrison, assistant director of the state Department of Finance, said= =20 the move reinforced the importance of solving the power problems soon.=20 Contact Jennifer Bjorhus at jbjorhus@sjmercury.com or (408) 920-5660.=20 --- --- -------------------- Power company executives going without bonuses=20 LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Senior executives at Southern California Edison and its= =20 parent company went without hundreds of thousands of dollars in bonuses in= =20 2000 because of California's power crisis.=20 Edison International's chairman and chief executive, John Bryson, was paid= =20 $950,000 in 2000, compared with salary and bonus totaling $2.16 million in= =20 1999.=20 Stephen Frank, the chairman and chief executive at Southern California=20 Edison, was paid $617,000 in 2000, compared with salary and bonus totaling= =20 $1.3 million in 1999, according to the company's proxy statement filed with= =20 the Securities and Exchange Commission.=20 The company also said Thursday it would not award merit increases to=20 executives in 2001 because of the continuing crisis.=20 In a similar statement released Tuesday, Pacific Gas and Electric Corp.=20 revealed it also withheld bonuses for its top two executives, although they= =20 did receive raises.=20 Edison and PG&E say they have lost nearly $14 billion since June to high=20 wholesale prices that the state's electricity deregulation law bars them fr= om=20 passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs= =20 from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection= =20 April 6.=20 Edison is continuing to work with state officials and its creditors. --- --- ----------------------- Davis and U.S. lawmakers call for price caps on power=20 LOS ANGELES -- Half of California's congressional delegation gathered with= =20 Gov. Gray Davis on Thursday to pressure the federal government to impose=20 energy price caps.=20 Limiting wholesale prices, they argued, is essential if the state is to ave= rt=20 the energy crisis threatening California's economy.=20 ``A big piece of this solution is federal. It's a four-letter word:=20 F-E-R-C,'' said U.S. Rep. Jane Harman, D-Redondo Beach, referring to the=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the agency that would have to approve= =20 price caps.=20 The governor has blamed FERC for allowing energy producers to charge=20 California stratospheric prices for electricity and natural gas.=20 The delegation met behind closed doors at an Los Angeles airport hotel, but= =20 Davis and several legislators met with reporters afterward.=20 ``The signal that has to come from FERC,'' Davis said, ``is, `You're chargi= ng=20 too much for electricity. The electricity is not worth driving California= =20 into an economic grave.'?''=20 Curt H,bert Jr., the FERC chairman, has argued that caps would encourage=20 generators to sell their power elsewhere and discourage them from building= =20 new plants in California.=20 The bipartisan group of lawmakers agreed with the governor that the state i= s=20 getting gouged on the open market.=20 ``There is an anti-free market enterprise mechanism in play here,'' said U.= S.=20 Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-El Cajon, noting that natural gas in parts of New=20 Mexico costs one-third what it does in California.=20 The generators maintain that they are charging fair prices that are the=20 simple result of supply and demand.=20 Rep. Mike Honda, D-San Jose, and Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, attended, bu= t=20 left before speaking with reporters. --- --- ------------------------- Generators cutting electric output; regulators want to find out why=20 Published Friday, April 20, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News=20 BY MICHAEL BAZELEY=20 Mercury News=20 State regulators launched an investigation Thursday into why some alternati= ve=20 energy providers are withholding electricity from the state's stressed powe= r=20 grid.=20 The California Public Utilities Commission in San Francisco said it wants t= o=20 determine whether the small power generators -- which provide about=20 one-fourth of the state's electrical power -- have legitimate business=20 reasons for scaling back their output.=20 Known as ``qualifying facilities,'' or QFs, many of the generators have bee= n=20 either scaling back output or shutting down entirely -- contending that the= =20 state's two largest utilities owe them $700 million.=20 ``The critical question is: Will we be able to rely on these facilities int= o=20 the high-demand summer months?'' PUC Commissioner Carl Wood said.=20 The financially strapped utilities, Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern= =20 California Edison, stopped paying the power generators several months ago.= =20 The PUC ordered the utilities to resume payments, and some generators start= ed=20 receiving payments this week.=20 But many generators are still hurting because of all the back payments they= =20 are owed, said Jack Raudy, a spokesman for the Renewable Energy Creditors= =20 Committee, which consists of 10 alternative power producers.=20 ``We're outraged,'' Raudy said.=20 Contact Michael Bazeley at mbazeley@sjmercury.com or (408) 920-5628.=20 --- --- --------------------- FERC remains an unlikely rescuer=20 The federal agency hews to a hands-off policy on power rates.=20 April 20, 2001=20 By DENA BUNIS The Orange County Register Washington - Californians who see federal re-regulation of the state's=20 crisis-bound energy market as an answer to the impending summer emergency= =20 better look for some other solution.=20 Even the possible short- term price fix that the Federal Energy Regulatory= =20 Commission may consider at its Wednesday meeting might be too little, too= =20 late.=20 Lobbyists, lawmakers and other FERC-watchers say they have seen a slight=20 shift in recent weeks among commission staff and at least one member. There= =20 is some willingness, they say, to consider some price controls, even though= =20 the Bush administration is adamantly opposed to such measures.=20 And many are looking to see if President George W. Bush's choices for the t= wo=20 vacancies on FERC will provide a margin for change.=20 But the commission's basic philosophy that open, unregulated markets are be= st=20 is not likely to change soon, members say.=20 ""I've been championing a revamping of FERC's antiquated standards for=20 determining market-based rates,'' Commissioner Richard Massey said Thursday= .=20 But with no success. "" My agency is not on the verge of turning on a dime o= n=20 this market-based pricing.""=20 The standards are a joke, Massey added, because the commission never turns= =20 down requests for such pricing authority. More than 600 power sellers have= =20 been given that authority, he said.=20 For a power company to be allowed to charge whatever the market will bear, = it=20 must show FERC, for example, that it doesn't have the power to manipulate t= he=20 market and drive prices up.=20 ""Any seller that can't pass our screen needs to fire their consultants and= =20 lawyers,'' Massey said.=20 While the overall philosophy remains consistent, FERC staff has proposed to= =20 the commission that a Stage 3 electricity emergency in California should=20 trigger cost-based rates, a form of price controls. Such triggers would be = in=20 place for one year, under the staff proposal.=20 The commission may decide Wednesday whether to accept that proposal. It has= =20 to make some decision by May 1 on how the market will be monitored from now= =20 on.=20 The theory behind controlling prices in Stage 3, says a FERC staff report, = is=20 that during such an emergency generators have the greatest opportunity to= =20 manipulate the market and drive prices up.=20 But generators have that power during Stage 2 and Stage 1 emergencies, says= =20 Les Starck, Southern California Edison Co.'s manager of federal regulatory= =20 affairs. Price caps during Stage 3 might avert the rolling blackouts=20 associated with that level of crisis, but they wouldn't do anything to stop= =20 generators from jacking up prices the rest of the time, he said.=20 And it is not clear how long it would take for such price controls to take= =20 effect, should the commission go along with the staff recommendation.=20 ""We're close because summer is approaching,'' Commissioner Linda Breathitt= =20 said Thursday. Breathitt, who had firmly opposed any form of price controls= ,=20 said in an interview last month that given the worsening crisis in Californ= ia=20 she was open to considering some short-term measures.=20 ""It's important to me that we address the summer,'' Breathitt said, but she= =20 said she could not predict what the commission would do Wednesday.=20 Even if an order is approved, Massey said, there could be delays while the= =20 power sellers file their costs with regulators and disputes over those=20 filings are handled.=20 Sen. Dianne Feinstein said Thursday such a move by the commission would be= =20 ""better than having no controls at all. There's no question that we're goin= g=20 to be in a Stage 3 emergency.''=20 Feinstein, D-Calif., and other Western lawmakers have been urging FERC to= =20 step in sooner and with price controls that extend beyond just the emergenc= y=20 period.=20 Waiting for Stage 3 to intervene ""is putting the whole grid at risk,'' said= =20 Roger Hamilton, a member of Oregon's Public Utility Commission. ""We have a= =20 real stability problem when you cut it that close.''=20 Feinstein says the future could well rest with the new commissioners,=20 particularly Patrick Wood, the head of the Texas PUC who many believe will= =20 replace Curt Heber as FERC chairman if he is confirmed by the Senate.=20 Even if Massey and Breathitt agree on broader price controls, as chairman,= =20 Heber could block consideration of such a move. It's unclear what stance Wo= od=20 would take as chairman.=20 ""The thing that deeply concerns me about Pat Wood is that he's from Texas,'= '=20 Feinstein said. ""What's reassuring is that it appears from my personal=20 discussion with him is that he appears to be pragmatic.''=20 But once again, timing could be a problem.=20 Bush has said he intends to nominate Wood and Nora Brownell, a member of th= e=20 Pennsylvania PUC, but has not formally sent their nominations to the Senate= .=20 ""The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is of vital importance right now,= =20 and to let the time go on without filling the spots makes no sense,''=20 Feinstein said.=20 ""Please, please, please, President Bush, process your nominees.''=20 --- --- Lawmakers seek bigger rollbacks, can't agree on caps=20 They promise to meet in Washington with a plan that would require federal= =20 agencies to conserve power this summer.=20 April 20, 2001=20 By DENA BUNIS The Orange County Register=20 Los Angeles - Gov. Gray Davis and a bipartisan sampling of the congressiona= l=20 delegation put politics aside Thursday and agreed something must be done=20 about runaway wholesale power prices in California.=20 ""We agreed that there has been unreasonable or unearned enrichment by the= =20 energy providers of natural gas and electricity"" said Rep. Darrell Issa,=20 R-Vista. ""And we agreed that there needs to be significantly greater=20 rollbacks than there already have been.""=20 The lawmakers did not, however, come to a consensus over the issue of price= =20 caps - something Davis and other Democrats, particularly Sen. Dianne=20 Feinstein, D-Calif., have been pushing the Federal Energy Regulatory=20 Commission to institute.=20 Davis met behind closed doors for 90 minutes with Feinstein and 27 of the 5= 2=20 House members at the Sheraton Gateway Hotel near LAX.=20 Participants from the Orange County delegation included Issa; Rep.=20 Christopher Cox, R-Newport Beach; Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Santa Ana; and Re= p.=20 Gary Miller, R-Diamond Bar.=20 They emerged with a promise to meet again soon, this time in Washington, an= d=20 with a four-pronged strategy to avert disaster this summer.=20 The strategy includes requiring federal agencies in the state, including=20 military facilities, to conserve energy this summer, and asking FERC to fin= d=20 a way to control the wholesale price of electricity and increase the flow o= f=20 natural gas into California.=20 Cox said much of the meeting was spent reviewing Davis' $850 million=20 conservation program.=20 Members promised to get the word out in their districts about conservation= =20 measures.=20 Cox said he expects emergency legislation dealing with the energy crisis to= =20 pass the Energy and Commerce Committee in the coming weeks.=20 That measure, he said, will include a direction to FERC to expand its=20 investigation of whether existing rates are just and reasonable.=20 --- --- ----------------------------- Energy notebook=20 Assembly urges federal regulation of natural gas=20 April 20, 2001=20 From Register news services=20 Sacramento - The California Assembly asked the federal government Thursday = to=20 regulate soaring natural gas prices once again.=20 A resolution passed 48-7 asked President George W. Bush, Congress and the= =20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to restore the regulation of natural g= as=20 that ended in 1992.=20 Natural gas rates at the California border have been as much as 11 times=20 higher than elsewhere in the nation since November, an industry consultant= =20 told an Assembly subcommittee Wednesday.=20 ""I think it's only rational in one of the biggest crises to befall this=20 country in the last 100 years. We're not seeing adequate action from the=20 federal government,"" said the author, Assemblyman Dennis Cardoza, D-Atwater= .=20 Republicans refused to vote for the resolution, complaining that it was an= =20 attack on the GOP Bush administration.=20 Top Edison officials forego bonus, take 45% pay cut=20 Rosemead - Edison International's top officers received no bonuses in 2000= =20 and generally took pay cuts of about 45 percent as the Southern California= =20 company's utility segment was forced to write off $4.2 billion spent buying= =20 overpriced power in the state's deregulated electricity market, according t= o=20 SEC disclosures the company filed Thursday.=20 Edison International Chief Executive Officer John E. Bryson received $1.62= =20 million in salary and other compensation, compared with $3.04 million last= =20 year. Southern California Edison CEO Stephen E. Frank received $760,000 in= =20 salary and other compensation, compared with $1.35 million last year. And= =20 Edison Mission Energy CEO Alan J. Fohrer received $584,000 in salary and=20 other compensation, compared with $922,000 last year.=20 Edison's compensation committee did give Bryson an incentive to pull the=20 company out of its quagmire, awarding stock options with a present-day valu= e=20 calculated at $7.26 million. But Bryson won't be able to profit from those= =20 options -- which vest over the next five years -- any time soon. The lowest= =20 price he can exercise the options at is $20 -- and Edison stock is trading = at=20 $11.=20 PUC seeks to shed light on meager energy alternatives=20 Sacramento - Hoping to prevent California's bleak power outlook from becomi= ng=20 even darker, state regulators Thursday launched an investigation into why= =20 alternative energy providers aren't producing more electricity.=20 With the action, the California Public Utilities Commission hopes to=20 determine if legitimate business reasons or ulterior motives underlie the= =20 reduced output by an independent group of small generators that provides mu= ch=20 of the state's energy.=20 These alternative generators - known in the industry as ""qualifying=20 facilities,"" or QFs - have been scaling back or shutting down as debts owed= =20 by California's two largest utilities pile up. The QFs are owed an estimate= d=20 $700 million by bankrupt Pacific Gas and Electric and financially crippled= =20 Southern California Edison.=20 In other developments:=20 California's Public Utilities Commission delayed until May 3 a decision on= =20 whether it will investigate how Pacific Gas & Electric's bankruptcy is goin= g=20 to affect customers.=20 Unbowed by Gov. Gray Davis' endorsement of Calpine's proposed power plant,= =20 San Jose officials said they may yet have the last word on the controversia= l=20 project. The city could sue the California Energy Commission or attempt to= =20 block the project by refusing to extend water and sewer lines or annex=20 several acres of needed land, they said.=20 PG&E Corp. won final approval to build a $350 million power plant in San=20 Diego County capable of supplying electricity to 500,000 homes.=20 The Escondido City Council has decided to take a break from considering a= =20 rush of proposals by developers trying to build plants before peak summer= =20 demand.=20 The council voted 3-2 Wednesday to suspend consideration for 30 to 60 days = of=20 any proposals to build energy plants in the city.=20 Register staff writers, The Associated Press and Knight Ridder Newspapers= =20 contributed to this report.=20 --- --- Friday, April 20, 2001=20 Shed light on costs=20 Unfortunately, California citizens will remain in the dark for at least=20 another month about the details of Gov. Gray Davis' long-term contracts wit= h=20 power producers. This is the sort of crisis the public needs to scrutinize and for which the= =20 Public Records Act was designed. At a Tuesday hearing in a Los Angeles County Superior Court in Pasadena on= =20 whether the documents should be released under the California Public Record= s=20 Act, Judge Michael J. Byrne said the case could better be heard in a Los=20 Angeles court. The case was brought by Judicial Watch, a Washington-based public interest= =20 law firm with its West Coast office in San Marino.=20 ""The case was reset for May 22 in a Los Angeles County Superior Court in th= e=20 city of Los Angeles although we're going to try to move it up a bit,""=20 Judicial Watch and General Counsel Larry Klayman told us.=20 Mr. Klayman remains hopeful. ""We're confident any judge who sees this will= =20 have to release the documents,"" he said. A similar but separate case, brought by several newspapers, will be heard M= ay=20 18 in a San Diego Superior Court.=20 ""This is a huge financial burden on the taxpayers without an opportunity fo= r=20 the taxpayers to scrutinize the terms,"" Hal Fuson, chairman of the governme= nt=20 affairs committee of the California Newspaper Publishers Association, told= =20 the San Diego Union-Tribune. ""The general climate surrounding the governor'= s=20 approach to this has been one of secrecy."" The governor's position is that releasing the details now could make it=20 harder for the state to get the best prices for electricity.=20 But given that the governor has mismanaged this crisis so far, it's clear= =20 that this is precisely the sort of crisis the public needs to scrutinize an= d=20 for which the Public Records Act was designed. The governor should end this legal wrangling and release the documents to= =20 which citizens are entitled.=20 --- --- ----------------------------- End To Deregulation of Nevada Power CARSON CITY, Nev. (AP) via NewsEdge Corporation - Gov. Kenny Guinn signed a bill Wednesday that would stop the sale of Nevada power plants, halt deregulation and bail out struggling utilities with a new rate system. The Senate and Assembly gave the measure final approval earlier in the day and rushed it to the governor. The bill was crafted to keep Nevada from suffering from a power crisis similar to California's. ``I must tell you this is a great relief,'' said Guinn, a former utility executive, as he signed the bill into law. ``Nothing can control escalating costs, but we're in the best position to protect ourselves.'' Legislators made a last-minute change to add language that ensured consumers would get a break on rates if utilities profit from sales of excess power to other states. Guinn said the bill takes care of the most pressing energy issues, but other deregulation-related bills are sure to follow. That includes a plan that would allow major power users, such as casinos and mines, to buy power on the open market. Legislators also are working on plans encouraging energy conservation and ensuring the poor can pay their utility bills. --- --- ----- PG&E Co. Issues Statements On the Increase in the State's Cost for Power SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 18, 2001 via NewsEdge Corporation - FROM: John Nelson, Director of the News Department Pacific Gas and Electric Company There seems to have been some confusion yesterday over the effect Pacific Gas and Electric Company's bankruptcy filing may have had on energy prices. I thought it might be helpful to provide a few useful facts and figures, to help you pin down the truth behind what may be driving the state's energy costs higher. Yesterday, Governor Davis claimed that the state was paying roughly $20 million more for electricity every day as a direct result of the bankruptcy filing by PG&amp;E. While it's understandable, even laudable, that the Governor would want to fully explain the downsides of utility bankruptcy, this claim is simply not accurate. The Governor should know better. Consider the facts: -- On January 19, the credit ratings of California's two largest investor-owned utilities -- PG&amp;E and SCE -- were downgraded to below investment grade by every major rating agency. Generators immediately raised concerns about continuing to sell power to such non-creditworthy entities. -- The state reacted by passing AB7x, which authorized the state Department of Water Resources to make $400 million in power purchases. Less than two weeks later, on February 1, the Governor signed AB1x, which authorized DWR to buy power on an ongoing basis at least through 2002, until the utilities could be restored to creditworthiness. The clear understanding in the legislative debate was that the DWR would purchase the full ""net open position"", which is the amount of additional generation needed, beyond what the utilities themselves own or have under contract, to meet customer demand. However, a few weeks later, in spite of the clear intent of state law, it was revealed that DWR was not buying the full net open position, and had no intention of doing so. It was only buying power that it considered ""reasonably priced"" and was leaving the ISO to buy whatever was necessary to keep the lights on -- an amount that most estimates place at 10- to 20-percent of the state's daily electricity need. -- The ISO, in turn, revealed its intention to attempt to pass along the costs of these last-minute, high-cost, spot-market purchases to the state's non-creditworthy utilities (despite existing FERC tariffs which precluded the ISO from doing so). PG&amp;E has estimated that its share of these costs was roughly $10 million a day; SCE has a similar estimate. (We don't know for sure, because we haven't seen the bill. The DWR won't say how much power it's buying, and at what cost, and neither will the ISO.) -- On February 14, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission informed the Independent System Operator that it could not force generators to sell to non-creditworthy entities (namely, both PG&amp;E and SCE). This order appeared to force the DWR to purchase the full net open after all. The ISO responded the next day with its own interpretation of the FERC order, saying the order was limited to ""emergency"" power only. The ISO also sought and obtained in federal court a temporary restraining order (issued by Judge Damrell), forcing generators to continue selling to it. -- On February 22, five power generators filed a complaint with FERC seeking to clarify that the ISO's interpretation of the February 14 order was contrary to FERC's intent. -- On April 5, the Ninth U.S. Court of Appeals reversed Judge Damrell's lower court order affecting one of the generators, Reliant, saying the generator was no longer required to sell electricity to the ISO without assurances of payment. Presumably this order would apply to other generators, if they sought such assurances. -- On April 6, PG&amp;E noted in the announcement of its Chapter 11 filing that one of the reasons for the decision was the ""financial exposure to unreimbursed wholesale energy procurement costs"" caused by the state's failure to assume the full procurement responsibility. -- On April 6, unrelated to PG&amp;E's bankruptcy filing, FERC issued an order responding to the generators' Feb. 22 complaint against the ISO. In this new order, FERC reaffirmed its February 14 order that the ISO could only buy power on behalf of creditworthy entities, meaning neither PG&amp;E nor SCE. -- On April 9 in remarks reported in the press, the Governor's office acknowledged the State's ""bill for energy purchases will increase by upward of $8 million a day after a ruling last week by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,"" once DWR started buying the full net open position, rather than force the ISO to try to bill the utilities. It seems likely that the $8 million was an estimate based on only one of the utilities' costs, not the combination of both. -- On April 11, the ISO discontinued its daily practice of publishing the total amount it spent on energy the day before. -- Despite the history, the state continues to try to avoid buying the full net open position. On April 13, in response to the FERC order -- NOT the PG&amp;E bankruptcy filing -- the ISO sent a ""murky"" notice to generators promising that ""any bid accepted by the ISO will be deemed to have the financial support of another Qualified Party or DWR as specified in this notice."" Generators were reportedly underwhelmed by the assurances contained in the letter. -- Yesterday, in response to the Governor's claim that bankruptcy was driving up the state's costs, Gary Ackerman, spokesman for the Western Power Trading Forum, said ""I don't believe, nor have I ever heard, of a bankruptcy surcharge being added to the cost of power.... If anything, I think that generators and marketers would take solace in the fact that bankruptcy brings order to an otherwise volatile situation."" What does it all mean? Clearly, the increase in the state's costs have come as a result of the DWR finally covering the state's energy needs, as promised in AB1x. This change in DWR's buying habits has come as a direct result of the February 14 and April 6 FERC orders that the ISO only sell to creditworthy entities. These orders were issued independent of PG&amp;E's bankruptcy filing and apply equally to PG&amp;E and SCE. Neither PG&amp;E nor SCE have been creditworthy since mid-January, when their credit ratings were reduced to below investment grade, and the DWR, ISO and Governor's office have been aware of the effect of the FERC order since mid-February. Some generators have suggested that California has been paying a credit penalty since December, when the utilities' deteriorating financial situation gave rise to payment concerns. There appears to be far more evidence that the state's coy approach to AB1x implementation has created far more uncertainty in the marketplace than has PG&amp;E's Chapter 11 filing. CONTACT: PG&amp;E Co. | News Department, 415/973-5930 --- --- ------------------- J.D. Power and Associates Reports/ Nationwide Decline in Customer=20 Satisfaction of Electric Utility Service Among Midsize Businesses Price and Value Performance Hit Hard Across Nation; Satisfaction in California Continues to Plummet AGOURA HILLS, Calif., April 19 /PRNewswire/ -- Midsize business customers, who are responsible for approximately fifteen percent of the nation's electricity consumption, are very critical of electricity prices, according= to the J.D. Power and Associates 2001 Electric Utility Midsize Business Custom= er Satisfaction Study(SM) released today. Consequently, the study's nationwid= e customer satisfaction index fell -- from 100 points in 2000 to 97 in 2001. (Photo: ) ""The entire country was affected by higher natural gas prices this winter, and with more states re-evaluating deregulation, midsize business customers are especially sensitive to electricity prices,"" said Jeffrey Conklin, seni= or director at J.D. Power and Associates. The 2001 study shows that average overall customer satisfaction with California's ""big three"" investor-owned utilities -- Pacific Gas and Electr= ic, San Diego Gas and Electric, and Southern California Edison -- fell an astonishing 14 index points among midsize businesses compared to the 2000 study. ""In California, electric utility satisfaction among midsize business customers has virtually fallen into the Pacific,"" said Alan Destribats, executive director of the utility practice at J.D. Power and Associates. The study finds that the chief determinants of satisfaction among electric utility midsize customers are a provider's company image, price and value, = and power quality and reliability. As expected, midsize business customers were extremely critical of performance in the areas of company image and price and value. Even outsid= e of California, satisfaction in the price and value component fell more than any other factor -- from an index score of 100 in 2000 to 93 in 2001. Power Quality and Reliability Utility performance in power quality and reliability is improving, with the national index increasing by 3 points. Although the number of interruptions and outages experienced was relatively the same in 2001 as it was in 2000, midsize businesses report much shorter outage durations, falli= ng from an average of seven hours for the longest outages in 2000 to four hour= s in 2001. Retail Competition ""Opening utility markets to competition has proven to be a difficult process and, so far, midsize business customers are giving the industry poo= r marks,"" said Destribats. The study shows that midsize business customers located in states with competition not only are less satisfied than are customers in other states, but they are also significantly less satisfied now than last year. The stu= dy also shows that more midsize businesses have switched electricity providers= . Of midsize businesses eligible to switch power suppliers, 9 percent have do= ne so, up from 5 percent in 2000. J.D. Power and Associates interviewed representatives from more than 7,200 midsize businesses, including manufacturers, retailers, business and consumer services firms, health care providers and other midsize businesses throughout the United States. Midsize business owners are defined as those who normally spend $1,500 to $25,000 per month on electricity. The study shows that midsize businesses are now spending an average of $4,827 per mon= th on electricity. The study shows that utilities in the south region of the United States consistently receive higher ratings across all factors of customer satisfaction. Likewise, these midsize business customers also report the lowest levels of monthly electricity expenditures, on average. Midsize businesses in North Carolina spend the least for electric usage ($3,885 per month on average), while those in New Hampshire, Nevada and Utah spend the most ($5,700 to $5,800 per month on average). The study also shows that midsize businesses in Alabama and Florida report the most service interruptions and outages within the past 12 months, and those in Washingto= n report the fewest. East Region PPL Utilities, serving east Pennsylvania, ranks highest in overall customer satisfaction with midsize businesses in the eastern United States. PPL Utilities ranked highest in the East Region in four of the six factors that comprise customer satisfaction, with its primary strength in price and value. Other solid performers in this region include Public Service Electr= ic and Gas, Allegheny Power and GPU Energy. Midwest Region LG&amp;E Energy, the parent company of Kentucky Utilities and Louisville Ga= s and Electric, ranks highest in overall customer satisfaction with midsize business electric service in the Midwest. LG&amp;E Energy midsize business customers give high ratings for power quality and reliability, customer service, and billing and payment. Alliant Energy, AEP-Midwest and Xcel Energy-NSP also rank high in midsize business customer satisfaction in the Midwest Region. South Region Southern Company ranks highest in overall customer satisfaction for midsize business electric service in the South Region and received the high= est customer satisfaction index score among all utilities included in the study= . Southern Company dominates all other electric utility service providers, achieving the highest ratings in the nation in five of the six components (2 in a tie). Other strong performers in the South Region include Duke Pow= er, Florida Power &amp; Light and Progress Energy (Carolina Power &amp; Light a= nd=20 Florida Power). West Region Sierra Pacific Resources ranks highest in overall customer satisfaction with midsize business electric service in the West Region. This utility significantly leads the region by rating highest in all six components (1 i= n a tie). The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power also ranks high in thi= s region. Headquartered in Agoura Hills, Calif., J.D. Power and Associates is a global marketing information services firm operating in key business sector= s including market research, forecasting, consulting, training and customer satisfaction. The firm's quality and satisfaction measurements are based o= n actual customer responses from millions of consumers annually. J.D. Power a= nd Associates press releases and media information can be accessed through the Internet at www.jdpa.com. Media e-mail contact: michael.greywitt@jdpa.com. This press release is provided for editorial use only. No advertising or other promotional use can be made of the information in this release or of other J.D. Power and Associates survey results without the express prior written consent of J.D. Power and Associates. SOURCE J.D. Power and Associates CONTACT: Michael P. Greywitt, 818-707-9526 or John Tews, 248-267-6800, both of J.D. Power and Associates Photo: NewsCom: AP Archive: http://photoarchive.ap.org PRN Photo Desk, 888-776-6555 or 201-369-3467 Web site: http://www.jdpa.com --- --- ----------------------------- Calpine to Purchase 46 General Electric Gas Turbines Turbines in Place for= =20 70,000-megawatt Program Turbines in Place for 70,000-megawatt Program SAN JOSE, Calif., April 19 /PRNewswire/ -- Calpine Corporation (NYSE: CPN), the nation's fastest growing independent power producer, announced today it will purchase 35 model 7FB and 11 model = 7FA gas-fired turbines from GE Power Systems. With this announcement, Calpine h= as firm orders in place for the delivery of 203 turbines. When operated in a combined-cycle application, this represents 50,000 megawatts of baseload capacity. The agreement marks the company's second large volume turbine acquisition from GE and is an important component of Calpine's five-year strategic plan= to have 70,000 megawatts of generation on line by the end of 2005. Calpine wil= l take delivery of 5 turbines in 2002, with the remainder of the contract to = be filled by the end of 2005. ""This purchase significantly strengthens Calpine's leadership position in project development,"" said Doug Kieta, senior vice president-construction f= or Calpine. ""Calpine's aggressive turbine procurement program also strengthens Calpine's first-mover advantage as we expand our development program and en= ter new electricity markets across the country."" ""GE Power Systems is pleased to provide Calpine today's technology of choice for power generation,"" said Delbert Williamson, President of GE Powe= r Systems Global Sales. ""Our FA technology is the most proven advanced technology available, and we're confident our evolutionary FB technology wh= ich has been designed using GE's Corporate-wide Six Sigma initiative will provi= de Calpine highly competitive power generation."" GE's current fleet of F technology gas turbines recently surpassed 3.8 million hours of operation around the globe. GE's 7FB turbine is an evolution of the current 7FA model and is designed for higher efficiency, lower life-cycle cost power generation. By employing this new technology, Calpine will continue to generate electricity competitively while consuming less natural gas and producing fewer emissions than a typical power plant o= f comparable size. GE Power Systems (http://www.gepower.com) is one of the world's leading suppliers of power generation technology, energy services and management systems with 2000 revenue of $15 billion. The business has the largest installed base of power generation equipment in the global energy industry. GE Power Systems provides equipment, service and management solutions acros= s the power generation, oil and gas, distributed power and energy rental industries. Based in San Jose, Calif., Calpine Corporation is dedicated to providing customers with reliable and competitively priced electricity. Calpine is focused on clean, efficient combined-cycle, natural gas-fired generation an= d is the nation's largest producer of renewable geothermal energy. To date, the company has approximately 31,200 megawatts of base load capacity and 6,800 megawatts of peaking capacity in operation, under construction and announced development in 28 states and Alberta, Canada. The company was founded in 1984 and is publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol CPN. For more information about Calpine, visit its Website at www.calpine.com. This news release discusses certain matters that may be considered ""forward-looking"" statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Excha= nge Act of 1934, as amended, including statements regarding the intent, belief = or current expectations of Calpine Corporation (the ""Company"") and its management. Prospective investors are cautioned that any such forward-looki= ng statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve a number of risks and uncertainties that could materially affect actual results such as= , but not limited to, (i) changes in government regulations and anticipated deregulation of the electric energy industry; (ii) commercial operations of new plants that may be delayed or prevented because of various development = and construction risks, such as a failure to obtain financing and the necessary permits to operate or the failure of third-party contractors to perform the= ir contractual obligations (iii) cost estimates are preliminary and actual cos= t may be higher than estimated, (iv) the assurance that the Company will deve= lop additional plants, (v) a competitor's development of a lower-cost generatin= g gas-fired power plant, (vi) receipt of regulatory approvals or (vii) the ri= sks associated with marketing and selling power from power plants in the newly competitive energy market. Prospective investors are also referred to the other risks identified from time to time in the Company's reports and registration statements filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. SOURCE Calpine Corporation CONTACT: press, Kent Robertson, 408-995-5115, ext. 1144, or investors, Rick Barraza, 408-995-5115, ext. 1125, both of Calpine Corporation Web site: http://www.gepower.com Web site: http://www.calpine.com (CPN) [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Question; [EMail-Body]= Dear Ken, I'm not sure quite were to turn but was hoping you could assist me. I would like to keep this confidential especially regarding the New York Office. As my request has nothing to do with the people in this office or the group they are wonderful I've been with Enron since '97 and I relocated up to Connecticut to work with the New Power Company when I thought that the Enron employees would stay Enron employees. Afterwards of course we all were changed to NewPower employees. After a couple of months I made the move back to Enron and went to the New York office and work with the Enron Metals group here at 53rd street. (It was never my intention to leave Enron) Since the bombing I feel very displaced and my husband and I would really like to come back to Houston and was wondering if you could help me. I was on the trading floor working with Dave Delainey's group when he was in ENA and also was the Exec Secretary/Coordinator with the MWB group in George Warsoff's group. I would appreciate it very much if you were able to assist/guide me. Sincerely, Teri Teri Connor-Smith Admin Coordinator Enron Metals & Commodities Corp tsmith3@enron.com (212)715-5601 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Memo to go out.; [EMail-Body]= looks good Maureen McVicker 05/01/2001 05:36 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Memo to go out. Steve: FYI - this is what went out Tuesday night, after a few minor changes. It was approved by Ken, Jeff & Cliff. ---------------------- Forwarded by Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron on 05/01/2001 05:35 PM --------------------------- Maureen McVicker 05/01/2001 05:35 PM To: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Memo to go out. Please see attached. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Miyung, You seem to be finding these okay by yourself so I guess I don't need to be= =20 forwarding the articles I find to you anymore? I don't mind doing it, but I can't see duplicating effort, either! :--) Either way...let me know,=20 Thanks! Joseph Miyung Buster@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 04/25/2001 08:25 AM To: Ann M Schmidt/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bryan Seyfried/LON/ECT@ECT,=20 dg27@pacbell.net, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron, filuntz@aol.com, James = D=20 Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Janet Butler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeannie=20 Mandelker/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe=20 Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John =20 John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen=20 Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Margaret=20 Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark=20 Schroeder/Enron@EnronXGate, Markus Fiala/LON/ECT@ECT, Michael R=20 Brown/LON/ECT@ECT, Mike Mona L= =20 Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron, Nicholas O'Day/AP/Enron@Enron, Peggy=20 Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT, Richard=20 Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sandra=20 McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Stella=20 Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Sus= an=20 J Mara/NA/Enron@Enron, Mike Roan/ENRON@enronXgate, Alex=20 Parsons/EU/Enron@Enron, Andrew Morrison/LON/ECT@ECT, lipsen@cisco.com, Jane= l=20 Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Shirley A Hudler/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kathleen=20 Sullivan/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda=20 Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Lora Sullivan/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jennifer=20 Thome/NA/Enron@Enron, jkradin@marathon-com.com,=20 syamane@marathon-com.com,=20 ken@kdscommunications.com, hgovenar@govadv.com, sgovenar@govadv.com,=20 bhansen@lhom.com, Carin Nersesian/NA/Enron@Enron cc: =20 Subject: Energy Issues Please see the following articles: Sac Bee, Wed, 4/25: ""State's credit takes hit"" Sac Bee, Wed, 4/25: ""Top energy adviser to quit as Davis pushes for plants= "" Sac Bee, Wed, 4/25: ""Senators offer bill to put a lid on power prices: Sen= .=20 Dianne Feinstein says there's a good chance the proposal can get out of committee"" Sac Bee, Wed, 4/25: ""Energy price gouging might end up felony"" Sac Bee, Wed, 4/25: ""Dan Walters: It's time for politicians to be honest= =20 about the energy crisis"" SD Union, Wed, 4/25: ""Bond-rating agency delivers reprimand, downgrade"" SD Union, Wed, 4/25: ""FERC to weigh limited curbs on electricity prices"" SD Union, Tues, 4/24: ""Grid officials declare a Stage 2 alert"" SD Union (AP), Tues, 4/24: ""Top credit agency lowers California's bond=20 rating"" LA Times,Wed, 4/25: ""State's Bond Rating Downgraded to A+"" LA Times, Wed, 4/25: ""Price Controls Spark Deja Vu"" LA Times, Wed, 4/25: ""Davis Names Executive to Speed Construction of Power= =20 Plants in State"" LA Times, Wed, 4/25: ""Power Plant Emits Tons of Fumes"" LA Times,Wed, 4/25: ""Power Plant Plan Worries Neighbors"" SF Chron, Wed, 4/25: ""Federal plan called 'too little, too late'=20 Limited price control seen as step in right direction, but officials renew= =20 call for price ceiling"" SF Chron, Wed, 4/25: ""S&P lowers California's bond rating=20 First cut since '94 could cost taxpayers millions"" SF Chron, Wed, 4/25: ""Richard Sklar=20 Ex-Muni boss becomes energy czar=20 Davis' pick to oversee power plant construction"" SF Chron (AP), Wed, 4/25: ""Will price caps deter investment, as federal=20 regulators say?"" SF Chron (AP), Wed, 4/25: ""Credit agency cites power troubles; lowers=20 state's bond rating""=20 SF Chron (AP), Wed, 4/25: ""S&P downgrades California's bonds citing energy= =20 troubles""=20 Mercury News, Wed, 4/25: ""State bond rating lowered"" Mercury News, Wed, 4/25: ""Q&A with Gov. Gray Davis on energy issues"" =20 (Opinions/Commentary) Mercury News (AP), Wed, 4/25: ""Davis: Power surplus by 2003"" Mercury News (AP), Wed, 4/25: ""Great America to avoid blackouts"" OC Register, Wed, 4/25: ""State's bond rating is lowered The energy crisis brings an A+ designation, which likely will mean higher= =20 borrowing costs"" =20 OC Register, Wed, 4/25: ""Fire stokes wholesale gas cost"" Individual.com (Business wire), Wed, 4/25: ""Power Companies and Regulators= =20 Must Take=20 Steps To Avoid Spread of California Power Virus/ Andersen Analysis"" Individual.com(Business wire), Wed, 4/25: ""Soaring Temperatures Produce Ca= ll=20 for Conservation; California ISO Also Announces New Outage Notification System and On-call=20 Number"" --- State's credit takes hit=20 By Dale Kasler and John Hill Bee Staff Writers (Published April 25, 2001)=20 Alarmed by the drain on California's treasury from more than $5 billion of= =20 electricity purchases, a leading Wall Street credit agency lowered its rati= ng=20 on state bonds Tuesday.=20 Standard & Poor's downgraded California's credit rating by two notches, a= =20 move that will increase the state's borrowing costs and illustrates a growi= ng=20 fear that the state's power expenditures could mushroom during a summer of= =20 blackouts and price spikes.=20 Although the state remains creditworthy, S&P said it has less confidence in= =20 California's ability to repay its debts. It said the state could be=20 downgraded further if electricity purchases spiral out of control and the= =20 economy suffers because of blackouts.=20 ""This reflects the mounting uncertainty and the cost to the state of the=20 power purchases,"" said S&P analyst Steven Zimmermann. ""The state is still= =20 strong -- it's just not as strong going forward.""=20 Bond ratings are a benchmark of a state's finances, and California official= s=20 have been proud of their ability to restore the state's ratings since they= =20 bottomed out during the recession and budget deficits of the mid-1990s. S&P= 's=20 downgrade is the first for California since July 1994 and comes as a slowdo= wn=20 in the high-tech industry adds to the budgetary anxiety caused by electrici= ty=20 costs.=20 Still, Gov. Gray Davis' office downplayed the significance of S&P's decisio= n.=20 ""California's economy is still fundamentally strong, period,"" said Davis=20 spokesman Roger Salazar. ""We expect that in 2001 California will continue t= o=20 lead the nation in economic growth and job creation.""=20 S&P lowered California from ""AA"" to ""A-plus"" status. That means California'= s=20 debt-payment ability has been reduced from ""very strong"" to ""still strong""= =20 but ""somewhat more susceptible to the adverse effects of the changes in=20 circumstances and economic conditions.""=20 While it won't directly hamper Davis' plan for solving the energy crisis, t= he=20 downgrade increases the pressure on Davis to issue $10 billion to $15 billi= on=20 worth of bonds this summer as part of his rescue package.=20 The bonds are intended to replenish the state treasury as well as finance= =20 future power purchases. Since mid-January the state has committed $5.7=20 billion to buy electricity for troubled Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and=20 Southern California Edison. The commitment has chewed up a significant=20 portion of a budget surplus estimated by state Treasurer Phil Angelides at= =20 nearly $6 billion; Davis and other state officials have pegged the surplus = at=20 $8 billion.=20 Either way, it's clear that the power expenditures have left Wall Street an= d=20 many state officials nervous. S&P and other rating agencies have had=20 California on a ratings ""watch"" for some time, signifying that a downgrade= =20 was possible.=20 ""The fact is that the state's credit rating and financial strength will=20 continue to be in jeopardy until the state's general fund is repaid for=20 energy costs,"" said Angelides, who's responsible for selling the bonds.=20 ""We have to get the general fund out of the business of purchasing energy.= =20 (The budgetary drain) will begin to affect very dramatically the ability of= =20 the state to provide for core programs, from education to health care to=20 public safety.""=20 Angelides spent much of the day urging legislators to pass legislation to g= et=20 the bond offering rolling.=20 The Legislature already authorized the bonds, but Angelides said it must do= =20 so again because PG&E and Edison are challenging the formula the state has= =20 developed for bond repayment. The bond will be repaid with money from a rat= e=20 hike passed by state regulators, but PG&E and Edison say the repayment=20 formula will siphon too much money from their coffers.=20 Angelides said lawmakers must quickly pass the new bill -- which requires a= =20 two-thirds majority -- or he might miss a make-or-break May 8 deadline for= =20 closing on a crucial $4.1 billion bridge loan. That loan is designed to tid= e=20 the state over until the bonds are sold later this summer. But the lenders= =20 won't fork over the funds until they're assured the bonds will be sold,=20 because the state will use the bond proceeds in part to pay off that loan, = he=20 said.=20 Ironically, the sale of those bonds won't be hurt by the S&P downgrade=20 because customer revenue instead of taxpayer dollars are being used to pay= =20 them off, analysts said.=20 ""What's important for the bonds is how the (utility) rates are structured t= o=20 pay them off,"" said analyst Susan Abbott of Moody's Inc. in New York.=20 But the downgrade will raise the interest rate on a host of other bonds=20 issued by the state in the coming months. The likely increase is as much as= =20 one-quarter of 1 percent, said chief economist Ted Gibson of the state=20 Department of Finance.=20 With the state authorized to sell $12 billion worth of general obligation= =20 bonds, the downgrade could add $50 million to $100 million in borrowing cos= ts=20 over the life of those bonds, Angelides said.=20 The S&P action also could raise a red flag to anyone thinking of investing = in=20 a public or private-sector project in California.=20 It ""will create perception issues about who we are and where we are in term= s=20 of the economy of the state,"" Angelides said. ""The real issue here is the= =20 reputational damage to the state of California.""=20 The two other leading credit agencies, Moody's and Fitch Investors Service,= =20 still have California on a credit watch but haven't issued downgrades.=20 S&P acted the same day the Independent System Operator, which manages=20 California's power grid, declared a Stage 2 power alert. Warm weather and t= he=20 unexpected shutdown of two key power plants caused electricity reserves to= =20 fall below 5 percent.=20 The Bee's Dale Kasler can be reached at (916) 321-1066 or dkasler@sacbee.co= m.=20 Bee Deputy Capitol Bureau Chief Dan Smith contributed to this report. --- ------------------------ Top energy adviser to quit as Davis pushes for plants Bee Capitol Bureau (Published April 25, 2001)=20 John Stevens, Gov. Gray Davis' staff director and top energy adviser, is=20 leaving the governor's office at the end of the week, Davis announced=20 Tuesday.=20 Stevens, of Carmichael, joined the administration a year ago as staff=20 director after working 13 years as a top staffer in the Legislature,=20 including a stint as chief of staff to former Assembly Speaker Antonio=20 Villaraigosa.=20 He is the second top Davis adviser to leave in the past two weeks as the=20 Democratic governor struggles to deal with California's energy woes.=20 Like Phil Trounstine, the governor's communications director who announced= =20 his resignation two weeks ago, Stevens said he needed more time with his=20 family.=20 ""It's an immense issue,"" he said of the energy crisis. ""I've given what I c= an=20 to it, and I need to take a break.""=20 Davis called Stevens, 54, ""one of the most dedicated and loyal people that= =20 I've ever had working for me,"" but acknowledged long hours and intensity to= ok=20 its toll.=20 ""This is tough work. This wears people out,"" Davis said. ""He's so self-driv= en=20 that he needs a break, but I venture a guess that down the road, he'll be= =20 willing to come back and help us in some meaningful way on this energy=20 situation.""=20 Davis also announced the appointment of Richard Sklar to head a Generation= =20 Implementation Task Force intended to speed up permitting and constructing= =20 power plants.=20 Sklar was the Clinton administration's representative in southeast Europe= =20 helping to rebuild war-torn Bosnia and Kosovo. --- ------------------------ Senators offer bill to put a lid on power prices: Sen. Dianne Feinstein say= s=20 there's a good chance the proposal can get out of committee. By Les Blumenthal Bee Washington Bureau (Published April 25, 2001)=20 WASHINGTON -- West Coast senators formally introduced legislation Tuesday t= o=20 temporarily cap wholesale electric rates and expressed hope that their=20 proposal to ease the huge run-up in energy prices might clear the committee= =20 and make it to a vote on the Senate floor.=20 ""I think we are very close to having the votes in committee,"" Sen. Dianne= =20 Feinstein, D-Calif., said of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee tha= t=20 has jurisdiction over the bill. ""I am taking nothing for granted, but the= =20 committee is 50-50.""=20 There are 11 Democrats and 11 Republicans on the committee, including=20 Feinstein and the other primary sponsor of the bill, Oregon Sen. Gordon=20 Smith.=20 Smith, a Republican, is the swing vote.=20 Feinstein said the committee chairman, Sen. Frank Murkowski, R-Alaska, has= =20 shown an increasing willingness to help her and Smith move the legislation,= =20 though some differences remain.=20 ""He (Murkowski) has told me he'd like to help,"" Feinstein said. ""I think we= =20 are very close to a markup and this could move quickly.""=20 Murkowski did not rule out price caps but said he thought the bill sacrific= ed=20 long-term solutions for short-term gains.=20 ""I have concerns about the proposal put forward today and the impact it may= =20 have in distorting the market,"" he said. ""It is time to address the=20 underlying causes -- not just the symptoms.""=20 Feinstein's comments came at a news conference during which she, Smith,=20 Washington state Democratic Sens. Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell, and New= =20 Mexico Sen. Jeff Bingaman, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Energy=20 Committee, unveiled details of the bill and criticized the Bush=20 administration and federal regulators for failing to take action to cap=20 rates.=20 If approved by Congress and signed by President Bush, the bill would give t= he=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 60 days to impose price caps or set up= a=20 cost-based rate structure that would allow electricity generators to recove= r=20 their costs and earn a fair return.=20 The controls would apply in 11 Western states, including California, Oregon= =20 and Washington. Similar legislation has been introduced in the House of=20 Representatives.=20 The lawmakers said the price controls would remain in effect until March=20 2003, when, they said, enough new generating plants will have come on line = to=20 overcome the West's current electricity shortage.=20 Under federal law, FERC has the authority to ensure wholesale rates are jus= t=20 and reasonable.=20 Feinstein said that during a warm day this summer California may fall 2,000= =20 megawatts short of meeting demand and on a hot day with air conditioners=20 cranked up, there could be a 10,000-megawatt shortfall.=20 Feinstein said that in 1999 California utilities paid $7 billion for=20 electricity, in 2000 more than $32 billion and, according to some estimates= ,=20 the price tag could reach $65 billion this year.=20 ""There has been a very strong element of price gouging in this,"" Feinstein= =20 said.=20 ""We should not have to pass legislation to compensate for a federal agency= =20 not doing its job,"" Murray said, adding that Northwest utilities were payin= g=20 the highest prices in the country for next-day delivery of wholesale power.= =20 ""This (bill) will bring the market under control until new generation comes= =20 on line.""=20 Cantwell, who is also a committee member, said wholesale rates have risen= =20 11-fold over the past several months, resulting in thousands of layoffs in= =20 the region and the shutdown of the aluminum industry.=20 ""We cannot allow our government to sit idly by and allow a tragically flawe= d=20 and easily manipulated power market to wreak havoc on our economy and quali= ty=20 of life,"" Cantwell said.=20 The Bonneville Power Administration has indicated it may have to raise its= =20 wholesale rates by 250 percent this fall as it is forced to buy power on=20 expensive spot markets because a severe drought in the Pacific Northwest ha= s=20 reduced electricity production at the region's vast hydropower system. BPA= =20 supplies 45 percent of the Northwest's wholesale electricity.=20 Smith said that, as a Republican, he was initially reluctant to support pri= ce=20 control and would have preferred the market sort out its own problems.=20 But, he said, ""Hard-nosed business practices that generate big profits are= =20 not always good politics. It's a mistake to defend a system that some can= =20 game to make incredible profits.""=20 The Oregon senator said he knew his decision to sponsor the bill was not=20 well-received at the White House.=20 ""I know I'm not making any friends down the street,"" he said. ""It's importa= nt=20 to keep this bipartisan, and I'm not going to attack the Bush=20 administration.""=20 Both Smith and Feinstein said a FERC staff proposal to cap wholesale electr= ic=20 rates in California when rolling blackouts are imminent falls well short of= =20 what's needed. FERC will consider the proposal at a meeting today.=20 ""California is not the only state affected,"" said Smith. ""This is not a=20 California problem alone.""=20 Feinstein said the proposal was inadequate.=20 ""I'm not sure that is the right way to go,"" she said. ""The only reason they= =20 are considering action is we are putting the heat on them.""=20 The Bee's Les Blumenthal can be reached at (202) 383-0008 or=20 lblumenthal@mcclatchydc.com. --- ------------------------ Energy price gouging might end up felony By Emily Bazar Bee Capitol Bureau (Published April 25, 2001)=20 Democratic lawmakers this week will unveil a proposal to make energy price= =20 gouging a felony -- punishable by stiff fines and possible jail time -- tha= t=20 could be subject to the state's controversial ""three strikes"" law.=20 The measure, sponsored by Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante, would punish companies= =20 that sell electricity or natural gas in California at ""unjust or unreasonab= le=20 rates.""=20 ""There is a tremendous amount of wealth that is being transferred from=20 California to five companies, mostly in Texas,"" Bustamante said. ""If what= =20 they're doing isn't illegal, it ought to be.""=20 Though lawmakers are expected to introduce the measure Thursday, it already= =20 has generated opposition from Republican lawmakers and constitutional=20 questions from legal experts.=20 Several aspects of the bill, AB 67x, are unresolved and could change.=20 But the intent will remain the same, and energy companies that take advanta= ge=20 of Californians will still face significant penalties, said the bill's=20 author, Assemblyman Dennis Cardoza, D-Merced.=20 According to a draft version of the bill and some proposed amendments, a=20 corporation, or a person with decision-making authority at the corporation,= =20 would be found guilty of a felony if ""they collude or conspire to manipulat= e=20 the market to achieve unjust or unreasonable rates for electricity or natur= al=20 gas.""=20 A state or federal regulatory agency -- such as the Federal Energy Regulato= ry=20 Commission -- would determine whether rates were unjust or unreasonable. If= =20 that happened, the bill would open the door for prosecution by the state=20 attorney general or local district attorneys.=20 In addition, if found guilty, companies would be forced to pay restitution= =20 and could face fines as high as 10 percent of their gross corporate assets.= =20 Lawmakers are debating whether to make the felony a ""three strikes"" offense= ,=20 which requires 25 years to life sentences for some people convicted of thre= e=20 felonies.=20 Though the provision was in an early draft of the bill, Cardoza said it's= =20 ""not likely"" to show up in the final version.=20 ""While I think this crime is every bit as abhorrent as going in and stealin= g=20 money from a bank, we're going to have to figure out a little bit different= =20 way of dealing with it,"" he said.=20 Even without the three strikes provision, the bill raises certain=20 constitutional issues, said Clark Kelso, a professor at the McGeorge School= =20 of Law in Sacramento.=20 For instance, he said, it's not clear whether the state can legally base a= =20 fine on an out-of-state company's gross assets.=20 And the measure, which requires a two-thirds vote for passage, already has= =20 generated Republican opposition.=20 ""To the extent this bill is onerous toward power producers, it may deter th= em=20 from selling here rather than risk fines and prison,"" said James Fisfis, a= =20 spokesman for the Assembly Republican Caucus. ""We haven't seen the details,= =20 but it sounds like it may be a piece of legislation that goes too far.""=20 The Bee's Emily Bazar can be reached at (916) 326-5540 or ebazar@sacbee.com= . --- ------------------------ Dan Walters: It's time for politicians to be honest about the energy crisis (Published April 25, 2001)=20 Gov. Gray Davis is continuing to tell Californians that he's on top of the= =20 state's energy crisis and, as he said at one gathering last week, ""in three= =20 years, this problem will be a distant memory."" Fat chance. All major aspect= s=20 of the situation are growing worse, not better, minute by minute.=20 Politicians took over the crisis in January as the state's major utilities= =20 exhausted their cash reserves and lines of credit. Davis began what he said= =20 then would be a short-term emergency program of power purchases to keep=20 electrons flowing into homes and businesses.=20 From that moment forward, the situation has steadily deteriorated, moving= =20 toward a three-pronged disaster: severe summer blackouts, the bankruptcy of= =20 the utilities and sharply escalating power bills. With the bankruptcy filin= g=20 by Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and decisions by Davis and the state Public= =20 Utilities Commission to begin ratcheting up utility rates, two of the three= =20 negative scenarios are now in place. And everyone involved in the crisis=20 expects blackouts this summer as demands for power soar and supplies dwindl= e.=20 The Davis strategy, if there is one, is to continue the state's massive pow= er=20 purchases while negotiating longer-term and presumably cheaper supply=20 contracts, encourage conservation, help utilities pay off their debts by=20 selling their intercity transmission system to the state and tapping=20 ratepayers, and build more power plants to ease the supply crunch.=20 Currently, the governor is touting his deal with Edison International, pare= nt=20 company of Southern California Edison, to sell its portion of the power gri= d=20 and is working on a similar deal with Sempra, the parent of San Diego Gas &= =20 and Electric. But PG&E's bankruptcy filing casts doubt on the viability of= =20 the cash-for-grid concept, and legislators, particularly Davis' fellow=20 Democrats, are very skeptical of the Edison deal.=20 Clearly, Davis rushed into the Edison deal just three days after PG&E made= =20 its bankruptcy filing, in hopes of erasing the political stain of the latte= r=20 action, but its provisions are being labeled a bailout by critics. It place= s=20 only a token financial burden on Edison International while guaranteeing th= e=20 profitability of its utility subsidiary by charging its customers whatever = is=20 required to cover its costs and past debts.=20 Meanwhile, the state is spending -- by Davis' own account -- about $70=20 million a day or $2 billion-plus a month on spot power purchases, paying=20 roughly five times what consumers are being charged at the retail level. An= d=20 the futures market for power indicates that wholesale power prices will jum= p=20 50 percent by midsummer; higher prices and greater purchases could increase= =20 the drain on the state treasury to as much as $5 billion a month.=20 State Treasurer Phil Angelides is desperately trying to arrange a bridge lo= an=20 to relieve pressure on the state's rapidly vanishing reserves, but Wall=20 Street is reluctant to lend without a fuller explanation of what's happenin= g=20 and a specific authorization from a suspicious Legislature. Meanwhile,=20 bankers are sending strong signals that the state government is becoming as= =20 poor a lending risk as the utilities.=20 Davis, for some reason, is unwilling to declare this situation the emergenc= y=20 that it is truly becoming -- one that could take a toll on human life if=20 major blackouts shut down air conditioners, respirators and traffic lights.= =20 He insists on issuing his periodic -- and wholly unrealistic -- assurances= =20 that things will turn out all right, even declaring to reporters on Tuesday= ,=20 ""We think we'll have this thing licked by the end of fall.""=20 It's time for someone -- the governor, preferably, but someone -- to lay ou= t=20 for Californians exactly what's happening, the downside financial and power= =20 supply risks, and what's being done to deal with the looming disaster facin= g=20 this state. It's time for politicians to treat us as adults who can face=20 reality, not as children to be fed sugar-coated sound bites and slogans.=20 The Bee's Dan Walters can be reached at (916) 321-1195 or dwalters@sacbee.c= om . --- ------------------------ Bond-rating agency delivers reprimand, downgrade=20 By Ed Mendel=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 April 25, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO -- An influential Wall Street firm yesterday gave Gov. Gray Davi= s=20 and the Legislature poor marks for handling the electricity crisis,=20 downgrading state bonds because of the drain on the state treasury and=20 warning of long-term damage to the state economy.=20 The bad news from Standard & Poor's came as state Treasurer Phil Angelides= =20 urged the Legislature to pass a bill this week needed to begin repaying the= =20 state general fund with a bond of $10 billion or more.=20 The bond would be paid off by ratepayers over 15 years. ""From a small problem that could have been solved in a short period of time= =20 this is escalating into a big problem,"" said David Hitchcock of Standard &= =20 Poor's. ""Even if they issue revenue bonds, it could stay with them for a lo= ng=20 period of time.""=20 Standard & Poor's lowered its rating on state of California general=20 obligation bonds from AA to A+, which means it will cost the state more to= =20 borrow money.=20 The firm left California on credit watch with a negative outlook, a ranking= =20 applied after the state began buying power for utility customers in January= .=20 The state general fund has spent more than $5 billion buying power so far.= =20 There are predictions that spending will sharply increase this summer as he= at=20 drives up the demand for electricity.=20 ""The fact is, we can't allow the general fund to be depleted,"" Angelides=20 said. ""There are limits to it. It will begin to affect very dramatically th= e=20 ability of the state to provide core programs for education, health care,= =20 public safety.""=20 Developments:=20 WEDNESDAY:=20 =01) No power alerts are called in the early morning, as electricity reserv= es=20 stay above 7 percent.=20 =01) The state Public Utilities Commission continues hearing energy experts= =20 evaluate ideas for implementing a recent rate increase. The panel includes= =20 George Sterzinger, a Washington-based renewable energy consultant; Peter=20 Bradford, an energy and regulatory adviser; and Severin Borenstein, directo= r=20 of the University of California, Berkeley's energy institute.=20 =01) Assembly Energy Committee holds a hearing on Gov. Gray Davis' proposal= to=20 keep Southern California Edison out of bankruptcy.=20 TUESDAY:=20 =01) Gov. Gray Davis says California will build enough power plants by 2003= to=20 end the state's power crisis, and have a 15 percent supply surplus by 2004.= =20 He names former U.S. diplomat Richard Sklar to be the state's new energy cz= ar=20 and head a Generation Implementation Task Force to speed up power plant=20 siting and construction.=20 =01) The Independent System Operator, which runs the state's power grid,=20 declares a Stage 2 alert, meaning the state is within 5 percent of running= =20 out of power. It warns rising temperatures could create problems later this= =20 week unless Californians conserve electricity.=20 =01) Standard and Poors lowers its rating on California state bonds, citing= the=20 growing financial drain from the continuing energy emergency. The state mus= t=20 quickly replenish its coffers if it is to avoid further damage, the rating= =20 agency says.=20 WHAT'S NEXT:=20 =01) Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra, the parent co= mpany=20 of San Diego Gas and Electric Co., to buy the utility's transmission lines.= =20 Davis says he expects to have an agreement within two weeks.=20 =01) Senate Select Committee to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Whole= sale=20 Energy Market continues its investigation Thursday.=20 Standard & Poor's said that if the sale of a state revenue bond is delayed,= =20 the potential impact on the state general fund could be ""severe"" without a= =20 rate hike much larger than the increase of more than 40 percent approved by= =20 the state Public Utilities Commission last month.=20 ""Rate increases appear difficult in the present political environment, and= =20 related voter initiatives, although none are currently on the ballot, remai= n=20 a possibility,"" said Standard & Poor's.=20 The state began buying power after the two largest utilities, Pacific Gas a= nd=20 Electric and Southern California Edison, were nearly bankrupt. The rates th= ey=20 could charge customers were frozen under deregulation as the cost of=20 wholesale power soared, producing a debt of $13 billion.=20 Standard & Poor's said the state expected in January to spend less than $1= =20 billion and resolve the problem in a few months with long-term power=20 contracts at lower prices. But most of the contracts do not begin until thi= s=20 fall or later.=20 ""In addition,"" said Standard & Poor's, ""it is not unreasonable to expect pa= st=20 and future blackouts to affect business location decisions, and hence the= =20 ultimate direction of the state's economy.""=20 A spokesman for the governor said that Standard & Poor's view of how the=20 California economy will fare during the electricity crisis is far too dim.= =20 ""California's economy is still fundamentally strong,"" said spokesman Roger= =20 Salazar. ""We expect that in 2001 we will continue to lead the nation in=20 economic growth and job creation.""=20 Another Wall Street credit-rating firm, Moody's, has a more positive view o= f=20 how the governor and the Legislature have handled the crisis and expects th= e=20 state general fund to be repaid by the ratepayer bond.=20 ""We are still at our AA2 with a negative outlook,"" said Ray Murphy, Moody's= =20 vice president. ""Nothing that we have learned over the last week or so has= =20 led us to change that opinion.""=20 Angelides said legislation is needed because PG&E and Edison are challengin= g=20 a PUC action last month that gives the state some revenue from monthly=20 ratepayer bills, which is needed to finance the bond to repay the state=20 general fund.=20 The utilities say they need more of the ratepayer revenue.=20 The treasurer said the legislation would bypass the lengthy PUC process and= =20 authorize the state to issue a ratepayer bond of $10 billion or more. The= =20 governor said again yesterday that he believes a bond of $12.4 billion will= =20 cover state power costs this year.=20 Angelides said legislation is urgent because a commitment from three lender= s=20 to give the state a $4.1 billion short-term loan expires May 8.=20 He said the short-term bridge loan would ease the strain on the state gener= al=20 fund until the main bond can be issued, probably in late June.=20 The treasurer said that failure to obtain the short-term loan could lead to= =20 more credit downgrades and ""create perception issues about who we are and= =20 where we are in terms of the economy of this state.""=20 Davis has been criticized on Wall Street for not pushing for an early rate= =20 hike to stabilize the utilities and avoid the need for the state to begin= =20 buying power.=20 The governor said earlier this year that he could have solved the problem i= n=20 ""20 minutes"" with a rate hike, but refused to do so.=20 While addressing the California Chamber of Commerce yesterday, Davis said= =20 that the long-term contracts will spread the cost of buying power over a=20 decade, causing ratepayers to pay less than market rates in the early years= =20 and a little above the market rate in later years.=20 ""I do not want to shock this economy into recession,"" Davis said. ""I do not= =20 want to burden small business with more than they can sustain.""=20 Davis wants the state to purchase the transmission systems of the utilities= =20 in exchange for giving them part of the ratepayer revenue to finance a bond= =20 to pay off their debts. That would enable the utilities to resume buying=20 power by the end of next year.=20 But negotiations to buy the transmission systems has taken much longer than= =20 expected. PG&E filed for bankruptcy earlier this month, and an agreement to= =20 buy the Edison transmission system announced a few days later faces=20 opposition in the Legislature.=20 Some legislators, who think Edison receives too much under the complex=20 agreement, have suggested that Edison join PG&E in bankruptcy, where=20 generators accused of price-gouging may not have all of their bills paid.= =20 ""If they go into bankruptcy, the state will be buying power for three or fo= ur=20 years,"" Davis told the Chamber yesterday. ""That is all we will be doing up= =20 here.""=20 A Stage 2 emergency alert was called yesterday when two power plants=20 unexpectedly stopped operating with temperatures around the state rising.= =20 Meanwhile, Davis announced that Richard Sklar, a former ambassador to the= =20 war-torn Balkans, will lead a task force to speed up the construction of ne= w=20 power plants.=20 The governor acknowledged while speaking to reporters that he has not met h= is=20 earlier goals of avoiding blackouts, rate increases and keeping the utiliti= es=20 out of bankruptcy.=20 ""This is probably the most complicated challenge the state has faced in 50= =20 years,"" Davis said. ""But we are providing steady and reliable leadership, a= nd=20 I believe we will have this thing behind us by the end of this fall.""=20 --- --------------- FERC to weigh limited curbs on electricity prices=20 Caps would apply in Stage 3 shortages By Toby Eckert=20 COPLEY NEWS SERVICE=20 April 25, 2001=20 CALIFORNIA'S POWER CRISIS=20 WASHINGTON -- Federal regulators are expected to consider limited wholesale= =20 price curbs for California's chaotic electricity market today, but the=20 approach falls far short of the controls sought by many state officials.=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission staffers have proposed limiting the=20 price that power sellers can charge for wholesale electricity in California= =20 only during the most severe shortages, known as Stage 3 emergencies. The=20 ""price mitigation"" would be pegged to ""the marginal cost of the=20 highest-priced (generating) unit called upon to run,"" according to a staff= =20 report.=20 Producers also would be required to sell their excess power to the state's= =20 grid operator.=20 The price controls would last one year and would not apply to other Western= =20 states suffering from gyrations in power costs and electricity shortages.= =20 FERC Chairman Curtis Hebert has been an implacable foe of price controls, b= ut=20 is under considerable political pressure to do more to help California as t= he=20 peak power-consuming summer months approach. Commissioner William Massey ha= s=20 advocated far-reaching price limits, while Commissioner Linda Breathitt has= =20 wavered on the issue.=20 Gov. Gray Davis and other California officials have called for broad price= =20 controls that also would include 10 other Western states. Yesterday, Sen.= =20 Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., formally introduced legislation that would=20 require FERC to impose regional price limits through March 1, 2003.=20 Feinstein said the FERC staff proposal was inadequate.=20 ""Once you put the cap just on Stage 3, you force the heavier pricing on=20 stages 1 and 2,"" she said.=20 Other critics have noted that wholesale power prices in California are=20 abnormally high during periods other than Stage 3 emergencies.=20 Feinstein's legislation, first outlined in March, would require FERC to set= =20 price caps or impose ""cost-based"" rates that would limit prices to the cost= =20 of producing the power, plus a set profit margin. New generating plants and= =20 power bought through long-term contracts would be exempt.=20 However, any state covered by the price controls would have to allow=20 utilities to recover their wholesale power costs from consumers. The clause= =20 helped draw a Republican co-sponsor to the bill, Sen. Gordon Smith of Orego= n.=20 Smith and other Western lawmakers have complained about the reluctance of= =20 California officials to raise retail rates while consumers in neighboring= =20 states have seen their power bills soar. In recent months, the California= =20 Public Utilities Commission twice has increased rates for customers of=20 Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric, the utilities hit= =20 hardest by skyrocketing wholesale power prices.=20 The FERC staff proposal rejected price caps or cost-based rates.=20 It would be hard to devise price caps that are low enough to provide price= =20 relief, but high enough to adequately compensate generators, the proposal= =20 said.=20 The Bush administration and top congressional Republicans are opposed to=20 price controls, so it is uncertain how far Feinstein's legislation will get= .=20 --- Grid officials declare a Stage 2 alert=20 ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 April 24, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) The state's electric grid operator declared a Stage 2 power= =20 alert Tuesday after two power plants suddenly went offline.=20 Higher-than-forecasted temperatures in Southern California also caused dema= nd=20 to increase, said Lorie O'Donley, spokeswoman for the Independent System=20 Operator, keeper of the state power grid.=20 A Stage 2 alert is declared when electricity reserves fall or are expected = to=20 fall below 5 percent.=20 The two power plants that went offline had been producing about 1,080=20 megawatts, or roughly enough power for 810,000 homes.=20 ""We think we may need to request interruptible customers, but barring any= =20 other big problems, we probably won't need to go to a Stage 3,"" said=20 O'Donley. Stage 3 alerts are called when the reserves drop below 1.5 percen= t=20 and could result in rolling blackouts like the state has seen on four days= =20 since January.=20 The ISO said 9,900 megawatts were unavailable Tuesday morning because of=20 power plants that were down for scheduled or unplanned maintenance. Another= =20 3,000 megawatts from alternative generators, such as solar, wind and=20 geothermal, was also not available, O'Donley said.=20 About half of the alternative generators say they can't afford to keep=20 operating because they are owed about $1 billion by Pacific Gas and Electri= c=20 Co. and Southern California Edison.=20 --- Top credit agency lowers California's bond rating=20 ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 April 24, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) A top credit agency lowered its rating on California state = bonds=20 Tuesday, citing the growing financial drain from the continuing energy=20 emergency.=20 ""The downgrade reflects the mounting and uncertain cost to the state of the= =20 current electrical power crisis, as well as its likely long-term detrimenta= l=20 effect on the state's economy,"" Standard and Poors said.=20 The state's ability to repay is debts has been reduced, though it is still= =20 adequate, S&P said.=20 It dropped the rating on general obligation bonds from double-A to=20 single-A-plus. It similarly revised other lease ratings, and ratings for th= e=20 California Health Facilities Construction Loan Insurance Fund, known as Cal= =20 Mortgage.=20 S&P said it didn't drop the rating farther because the state still has mone= y,=20 because of California's diverse economy, and because a proposed revenue bon= d=20 is slated to reimburse the state's treasury for money California is current= ly=20 using to buy power for two financially strapped utilities.=20 If the state can't quickly sell its revenue bond, the impact on the treasur= y=20 could be severe unless electricity rates are substantially increased beyond= =20 the large increases already scheduled to kick in, S&P warned.=20 S&P has had the state's general obligation bonds on a credit-watch ""with=20 negative implications"" since January, when the state began buying power for= =20 Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric.=20 --- State's Bond Rating Downgraded to A+=20 Finance: Reduction of 2 notches puts it among states with the lowest credit= =20 ratings. Move could cost California hundreds of millions in borrowing fees.= =20 By LIZ PULLIAM WESTON and MIGUEL BUSTILLO, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????A major credit rating agency downgraded $25 billion of California bond= s=20 Tuesday in a move that could add hundreds of millions of dollars to the=20 state's borrowing costs and saddles California with one of the lowest state= =20 credit ratings in the nation. ?????Standard & Poor's Corp. cut California's bond rating by two notches,= =20 from AA to A-plus, citing ""the mounting and uncertain cost . . . of the=20 current electrical power crisis,"" which has forced the state to spend=20 billions on electricity to keep the lights on. ?????S&P, one of three major rating agencies monitoring California's=20 financial health, said a further downgrade could occur if the state fails t= o=20 follow through on plans to issue at least $10 billion in revenue bonds to= =20 help pay off energy-related debts. ?????""S&P is saying, 'We don't have any faith that what you say you're goin= g=20 to do, you're going to do,' "" said Zane Mann, publisher of the California= =20 Municipal Bond Advisor, a newsletter that tracks government debt. ?????Wall Street is concerned by delays surrounding the electricity bond=20 issue, but lawmakers hope to pass legislation this week to put the bond iss= ue=20 on a fast track and speed up return of the money to the state's general fun= d. ?????Credit ratings help determine how much states and other borrowers have= =20 to pay when issuing bonds. The lower the rating, the higher the interest ra= te=20 the state must pay to entice investors to buy. ?????The state Treasurer's Office concluded in a preliminary estimate that = as=20 a result of the downgrade, California could have to pay $190 million to $57= 0=20 million more on the $12 billion in general obligation bonds the state has= =20 authorized to pay for ongoing expenses such as school and road-building=20 projects, but has yet to issue.=20 ?????State revenue bonds should not be affected by the downgrade, the=20 officials said. However, some bond experts disagree. ?????California's energy crisis already has driven down prices of a wide=20 range of the state's bonds, from general obligation issues that depend on t= he=20 state's ability to repay to small issues by school districts and cities tha= t=20 could be hurt by rising electricity prices. Bond traders said S&P's downgra= de=20 probably would cause prices to fall further. ?????""All California bond holders are going to lose value in their bonds=20 because the state's credit has been downgraded,"" said John Fitzgerald,=20 managing partner of Seidler-Fitzgerald, a Los Angeles municipal debt=20 underwriter. ?????The downgrade most affects investors who want to sell their bonds now,= =20 before the issues mature. Investors who hold onto their bonds are still=20 almost certain to get the face value when their securities reach maturity,= =20 because the state is unlikely to miss any interest payments or otherwise=20 default on its bonds, traders said. ?????S&P analysts said the state's continuing surplus and ""deep and diverse= ""=20 economy helped prevent a further downgrade. ?????Still, the downgrade places California below most other states on S&P'= s=20 rating scale and on par with Hawaii. Among states rated by S&P, only=20 Louisiana has a lower rating, at A-minus, according to Bloomberg News.=20 ?????In addition, the two other major credit rating agencies have indicated= =20 they may downgrade California's bonds. Fitch Inc. said last week that it wa= s=20 contemplating such a move, and Moody's Investors Service earlier this month= =20 changed its outlook on California bonds to ""negative"" from ""stable."" ?????Some politicians Tuesday accused S&P of overreacting. ?????""It's just unfair, premature and inappropriate for them to do that. We= =20 do have reserves, we do have good revenue projections, we do have a plan to= =20 get us out of this,"" said Assemblyman Gil Cedillo (D-Los Angeles). ?????In a statement, Gov. Gray Davis said California's economy ""is still=20 fundamentally strong, period. We expect that in 2001 we will continue to le= ad=20 the nation in economic growth and job creation."" ?????State Treasurer Phil Angelides has been pleading with lawmakers to pas= s=20 legislation to speed up repayment of $5 billion drained from the state's=20 general fund to buy electricity this year. That figure is expected to reach= =20 $15 billion by year's end, according to the governor. ?????The consequences of a downgrade are profound, Angelides said, noting= =20 that it took California years to overcome the downgrades spurred by the=20 recession of the early 1990s. ?????""It is critical that the Legislature act immediately to clearly=20 establish our legal authority to sell bonds and replenish the state's gener= al=20 fund,"" Angelides said. ?????California began buying massive quantities of electricity in January= =20 because the state's three major investor-owned utilities could no longer=20 afford to do so. Since then, the state has been purchasing roughly one-thir= d=20 of the electricity the utilities need to service their customers, according= =20 to state officials. ?????Under a plan approved by the Legislature and signed into law by Davis,= =20 the general fund is supposed to be reimbursed for the power purchases with= =20 what is expected to be the largest municipal bond issue in U.S. history. Th= e=20 bond issue is to be repaid by utility ratepayers through a monthly charge o= n=20 their electricity bills. ?????However, obstacles that threaten timely repayment of the fund are=20 causing consternation among Wall Street analysts about California's financi= al=20 status. ?????The bankruptcy filing of Pacific Gas & Electric Co., the state's large= st=20 investor-owned utility, has thwarted the state's plan to restore the=20 utilities to financial health. ?????But it is a dispute over the state's formula for repaying the bonds th= at=20 has raised the most concern among state officials. The state and the=20 utilities are at odds over how much of consumers' electricity payments shou= ld=20 go to reimburse the state for its power purchases. ?????The state's two major utilities, Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern= =20 California Edison, have challenged the Public Utilities Commission's plan f= or=20 splitting up the money--a legal move that threatens to delay issuance of th= e=20 bonds. The firms contend the allotment granted to the state is too generous= =20 and could make it harder for them to recover from the energy crisis. ?????Hoping to sidestep the controversy, Angelides is urging state lawmaker= s=20 to pass an emergency measure this week that sets the bond amount and the=20 amount the state will receive from utility payments. The revenue bond was= =20 initially expected to be $10 billion, but the Davis administration has sinc= e=20 proposed a $12.4-billion issue. ---=20 ?????Times staff writers James Flanigan, Jenifer Warren and Julie Tamaki=20 contributed to this report. Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 --- --- ----------------------- Price Controls Spark Deja Vu=20 Energy: The specter of Richard Nixon's actions 30 years ago hangs over=20 current debate on how to check the state's surging power costs.=20 By JAMES F. PELTZ, Times Staff Writer=20 ?????A debate now rages in California over whether price controls should be= =20 adopted to stem the state's soaring power costs and help consumers who are= =20 bracing for huge spikes in their electric bills. ?????But price controls are one of the most controversial actions in=20 economics--and in politics, for that matter. And now the caps are more in= =20 dispute than ever because they run counter to the nation's move over the la= st=20 two decades to deregulate more and more industries, from airlines to=20 railroads to energy. ?????Yet California is a good example of deregulation gone haywire, so=20 controls are again being demanded by lawmakers, consumer advocates and othe= rs=20 as a way to check surging prices. On the other side is a chorus of critics= =20 who ridicule price caps as being ineffective and, at times, making matters= =20 worse for consumers. ?????Case in point: the Golden State itself, which tried last summer to use= =20 temporary price caps to keep a lid on skyrocketing wholesale electricity=20 prices. ?????Critics claim that the caps drove power sales out of state, thus=20 widening the imbalance between supply and demand, reinforcing the existing= =20 shortages and contributing to this winter's rolling blackouts. ?????But defenders of the caps note that the dysfunctional California marke= t=20 had no way to self-correct. The utilities couldn't simply refuse to buy=20 electricity in the face of higher prices, and with no price ceiling in sigh= t,=20 something had to be done. ?????And now Gov. Gray Davis and others are again calling for temporary=20 controls until more electricity supplies can be added, especially as the=20 state enters the peak-power summer season. On Tuesday, Sens. Dianne Feinste= in=20 (D-Calif.) and Gordon Smith (R-Ore.) introduced legislation that would impo= se=20 price controls on wholesale energy throughout 11 Western states. ?????Mindful of the controversial history of controls, Feinstein and Smith= =20 stressed that the caps would last only through March 1, 2003. But they also= =20 argued that the economic damage to industries and consumers from escalating= =20 power costs would exceed any harm caused by price controls. ?????""I have a strong preference for markets, but it's a mistake to believe= =20 that we have a free market when it comes to energy,"" said Smith, the only G= OP=20 co-sponsor of the legislation. ?????Their bill would require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, whi= ch=20 regulates U.S. wholesale electricity prices, either to impose a regional=20 price cap or institute a rate schedule for each power generator, tying the= =20 price of electricity to the cost of producing it. ?????Coincidentally, FERC today is expected to decide on various other=20 proposals to again limit California's power costs--but without explicitly= =20 stating that the plans include price controls. Why? Because the Bush=20 administration and FERC Chairman Curt Hebert Jr., among others, are on the= =20 record as adamantly opposing price caps. ?????That's not surprising. Price controls often are tagged as a liberal=20 maneuver that flies in the face of conservatives' free-market ideology. Yet= ,=20 ironically, hanging over the California debate is the legacy of a Republica= n=20 president who was the last one to mandate price controls on a nationwide=20 level: Richard M. Nixon. ?????The late president took that rare step 30 years ago this August to try= =20 to quell inflation and spark an economic rebound. His actions were so=20 dramatic that they are still invoked by those wanting to criticize or, in= =20 some cases, endorse setting limits on prices. ?????""What he did is almost larger than life now,"" said Shannon Burchett,= =20 chief executive of RiskLimited Corp., a strategic consulting firm in Dallas= . ?????Nixon's controls were the most far-reaching since World War II, when= =20 prices were capped so that profiteers couldn't reap huge sums for scarce=20 commodities being used for the war and simultaneously rationed at home. ?????In most cases, price controls have been much less sweeping and targete= d=20 at specific products or services. They don't always involve changing the la= w,=20 either. In 1962, President Kennedy publicly rebuked the then-U.S. Steel Cor= p.=20 and its chairman, Roger Blough, for starting an industrywide move to raise= =20 steel prices. The price hikes were rolled back a few days later. ?????Since Nixon, price controls have become rarer as industries that were= =20 once regulated--which means their prices were government-controlled--have= =20 been deregulated. ?????So it is in California, where electric utilities' prices were controll= ed=20 for decades until the state's deregulation law in 1996. But now that the la= w=20 has been blamed for the soaring wholesale prices, power shortages, crippled= =20 utilities and the need for a huge jump in ratepayers' costs, some again wan= t=20 price controls on electricity until the crisis eases. ?????Which brings everyone back to Nixon. ?????Some Nixon Controls Were Lifted by Reagan ?????""I've heard people make the analogy to what happened . . . when Nixon= =20 put on controls,"" but in California ""this is fundamentally different,"" said= =20 Mike Florio, a board member of the California Independent System Operator,= =20 which oversees most of the state's electricity grid. ?????""When you get into a situation of shortage [of supplies], there is=20 really no restraint at all on prices,"" said Florio, who said he normally=20 prefers unfettered markets but also defended the state's caps last summer.= =20 Such government intervention ""on a temporary basis is better than nothing,= =20 but I don't think it's ideal."" ?????The reverberations from Nixon's fiat aren't just felt in California=20 either. When New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani recently proposed more stringe= nt=20 controls on wholesale electricity costs in New York state, critics promptly= =20 pointed to Nixon's controls. ""They were a disaster,"" one columnist wrote. ?????Even Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, who was in the private= =20 sector in the early 1970s, turned down several requests to take high-level= =20 White House jobs in part because he was disgusted with Nixon's price contro= ls. ?????Many economists and historians also judge Nixon's controls as a mistak= e.=20 But some maintain that his decision--which began with a 90-day freeze on=20 prices, wages and rents--wasn't entirely a failure and even provided ""shock= =20 value"" that, for a while at least, arrested higher inflation. ?????In addition, part of Nixon's move involved taking the dollar off the= =20 gold standard--which in effect meant its price was controlled--and letting = it=20 float in value against other major currencies. And that, many believe, is t= he=20 base upon which today's global financial markets operate. ?????Others disagree. ?????""There really isn't an example of where they've [price controls]=20 worked,"" said Robert Goldberg, a senior fellow at the National Center for= =20 Policy Analysis, a nonpartisan think tank in New York. ?????""Controls always lead to an underproduction"" of the commodity involved= =20 because producers don't have any incentive to spend more on additional=20 output, he said. When the caps ultimately are lifted, prices typically soar= =20 anyway as producers move to quickly recoup the profit they lost when the=20 controls were in place, Goldberg added. ?????Others note that although most of Nixon's price controls lasted only a= =20 couple of years, various forms of controls over crude oil and natural gas= =20 lasted for another decade until they were removed by President Ronald Reaga= n. ?????In the meantime, the controls--aggravated by embargoes and other suppl= y=20 cuts by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries--distorted the fr= ee=20 market for energy, critics say. The controls kept U.S. oil prices=20 artificially low, which in turn kept demand for oil high, giving OPEC more= =20 power over world production and prices in the 1970s, they contend. ?????Nonetheless, proponents keep calling for controls when prices for=20 certain items seem to be spiraling out of control. ?????Critics Say Controls Worsen the Problems ?????President Clinton's massive health-reform proposal in the early 1990s= =20 included price controls on drugs. But the idea set off howls of protest fro= m=20 the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, and ultimately the entire= =20 proposal was shelved. Consumer advocates and others also demanded federal= =20 controls on rising cable TV rates in 1997 and 1998, again contending that t= he=20 cable operators were hiking prices at a much faster rate than inflation.=20 Cable firms were allowed to keep passing certain costs on to their=20 subscribers, but specific price caps weren't enacted. ?????But proponents of temporary price controls on California power emphasi= ze=20 that electricity isn't in the same category as an airplane seat, steel or= =20 other commodities that don't have to be bought if the price soars too high. ?????""In soybeans maybe the market can adjust quickly"" to changes in supply= =20 and demand, ""but in electric generation in California it can't,"" said Flori= o,=20 who also serves as an attorney for the Utility Reform Network, a consumer= =20 group. ""For most products, one of the ways prices get determined is if buye= rs=20 refuse to buy when the price gets too high. But that's generally not an=20 option for people when it comes to electricity."" ?????Critics of California's attempt to cap prices last summer said the=20 controls instead prompted many power suppliers to sell their electricity to= =20 other states. That ""actually made the tight-supply problem worse [in=20 California] by driving imports out of the state,"" the Bay Area Economic=20 Forum, a research group funded by regional business and government agencies= ,=20 said in a report last week. ?????Indeed, the temporary caps were basically abandoned by year's end to= =20 keep enough electricity in the state. ?????Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economics professor who heads the= =20 Independent System Operator's market surveillance committee, said there are= =20 ways to mitigate the state's power prices without having to set rigid=20 controls. One proposal: Have FERC require that generators supply 75% of the= ir=20 expected future sales to California under long-term contracts at ""just and= =20 reasonable"" prices set by the federal agency, he said. ?????That would ""send the right [price] signal to suppliers to come into th= e=20 state,"" Wolak said. ?????And because it will take time for California to get more of its own=20 power-generating plants up and running, the state's electricity crisis isn'= t=20 unlike a natural disaster in which ""normal public service is disrupted"" and= =20 short-term controls serve a purpose, Florio said. ?????""Over time, market forces will work"" and controls shouldn't be need, h= e=20 said. ""But does that mean we're supposed to pay $10,000 per kilowatt-hour= =20 until something gets done?"" ---=20 ?????Times staff writer Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar in Washington contributed t= o=20 this report. Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 --- --- ------------ Davis Names Executive to Speed Construction of Power Plants in State=20 Energy: Richard Sklar headed a building firm and worked for Clinton in=20 Bosnia. Governor sees the crisis abating by fall.=20 By DAN MORAIN, Times Staff Writer=20 ?????SACRAMENTO--With temperatures rising and electrical supplies strained,= =20 Gov. Gray Davis on Tuesday tapped a former Clinton administration official= =20 and executives from major construction firms to help speed completion of=20 power plants. ?????Davis, who predicted that the worst of the energy crisis will abate by= =20 the fall, announced that he has retained Richard Sklar, 67, former presiden= t=20 of a construction firm, to head a team that will help accelerate the buildi= ng=20 of power plants. ?????Speaking to business leaders at a California Chamber of Commerce=20 convention in Sacramento, Davis said Sklar's job will be ""to make sure ther= e=20 are no hurdles [and] to cut red tape."" ?????""Richard Sklar knows electricity,"" Davis said. ""He knows how to find= =20 megawatts."" ?????Former President Bill Clinton sent Sklar to the Balkans in 1996 to try= =20 to help resolve the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Sklar arrived in Sarajevo to= =20 find that power was on for only two hours a day and set about expanding=20 electricity generation. ?????In an interview, Sklar said his father was a mechanical engineer who= =20 designed power stations. ?????""This power world is my world,"" Sklar said, adding that he had an=20 electric car and solar panels in the mid-1970s. ?????This Feb. 8, Davis announced at a news conference that he was appointi= ng=20 Larry Hamlin, a vice president of Southern California Edison, as his=20 ""construction czar."" Hamlin's job was to speed power plant construction. ?????Davis spokesman Roger Salazar said that Hamlin's stint was temporary a= nd=20 that the executive must return to Edison. Sklar's contract is for a longer= =20 period, Salazar said, but it is unclear how long. ?????Sklar is being retained as a consultant, paid $100,000 initially. Othe= r=20 firms, Salazar said, are loaning employees as volunteers. Joining Sklar wil= l=20 be representatives of the engineering and construction firms Bechtel, URS= =20 Corp. Engineering, Fluor Daniel, Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, and = A.=20 Teichert & Sons. At least one Bechtel subsidiary is involved in power plant= =20 construction in California. ?????""There is no conflict of interest,"" Sklar said, adding that no one in= =20 the group will have authority to decide who gets contracts. ?????A mechanical engineer, Sklar was president of the San Francisco-based= =20 construction management firm O'Brien Kreitzberg Inc. Sklar's firm also=20 oversaw construction of the Metro Rail Green Line in Los Angeles and the=20 rebuilding of the Los Angeles Central Library. ?????He was also chairman of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission= =20 under then-Mayor Dianne Feinstein. In that role, he oversaw rebuilding of t= he=20 cable car system, completing the work ahead of schedule--in time for the 19= 84=20 Democratic National Convention there. Feinstein's husband is a major invest= or=20 in URS, one of the firms that will loan employees to Sklar's team. ?????""He's very competent,"" said state Senate President Pro Tem John Burton= =20 (D-San Francisco) of Sklar, whom he met in 1972. ""He's a very good problem= =20 solver and he brooks no nonsense. . . . He's a renaissance man. He loves=20 music, he loves politics and he's a gourmet cook."" ?????Sklar has also displayed a sense of humor, once donating to San=20 Francisco Zoo two capybaras, rodents the size of a hog. He named one Quenti= n=20 and the other Kopp, after a former San Francisco city supervisor and state= =20 senator who is now a Superior Court judge. ?????""I'm 67; I've made all the money I need to make,"" said Sklar, who owns= a=20 vineyard near the Napa Valley town of Rutherford and has a home in San=20 Francisco. ?????""My reputation is what's going to be at stake in this, not the=20 governor's,"" he said. ""I have a 40-year history of delivering--and that's= =20 what I'm going to do. I don't like to lose."" ?????As Davis announced Sklar's appointment, one of the governor's top ener= gy=20 advisors, John Stevens, resigned, effective Friday. The governor praised=20 Stevens as a tireless worker. ?????Stevens worked on several energy-related tasks, among them Davis'=20 efforts to keep utilities out of bankruptcy. Davis appointed him for a day = in=20 January to the state Public Utilities Commission, on which he cast a key vo= te=20 to raise rates. ?????The state's power grid operators declared a Stage 2 emergency Tuesday= =20 afternoon, as temperatures hit 90 degrees in downtown Los Angeles and two= =20 major power plants in Southern California unexpectedly shut down. Power=20 reserves dropped to nearly 5%, below the minimum 7% that the California=20 Independent System Operator seeks to maintain. ?????Tuesday's emergency is not a predictor of worse electricity troubles t= o=20 come, said Cal-ISO's Stephanie McCorkle, because an unusually high number o= f=20 power plants are down for repairs that were planned months ago. ?????The plants not running Tuesday would be capable of supplying 10,000=20 megawatts, she said, or about a third of Tuesday's peak demand. By mid-June= ,=20 no power plants should be shut off for scheduled maintenance, McCorkle said= . ?????The state will lose more than 1,000 megawatts of production starting= =20 this weekend when a unit of the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant near San= =20 Luis Obispo is shut down for refueling. The shutdown, planned a year ago,= =20 will last 35 days, according to Pacific Gas & Electric. ?????In his remarks Tuesday, Davis said his goal is to boost the state's=20 energy supply to exceed demand 15% by 2003.=20 ?????""This is probably the most complicated challenge the state has faced i= n=20 50 years,"" Davis said. ""But we are providing steady and reliable leadership= ,=20 and I believe this thing will be behind us by the end of fall."" ---=20 ?????Times staff writers Nancy Vogel and Jenifer Warren contributed to this= =20 story. Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 --- --- Power Plant Emits Tons of Fumes=20 Round-the-clock operation of old generators in Glendale and elsewhere=20 produces more than twice the old limits of pollution.=20 By JEAN GUCCIONE, Times Staff Writer=20 ?????For the past five weeks, Glendale's Grayson power plant has been=20 belching a half-ton of pollutants into the air almost daily, more than twic= e=20 previous limits. ?????The same is true for many of the other 14 power plants in Southern=20 California as the ""haves"" generate power, sometimes round-the-clock, for th= e=20 ""have-nots."" ?????The generators, some of them nearly 50 years old and once considered t= oo=20 dirty for regular use, now keep electricity flowing to fellow residents=20 around the state. And those living downwind are subjected to twice as much= =20 air pollution as before California's energy crunch. ?????Not every Glendale resident is happy. ?????""You don't want anyone to get stuck with a rolling blackout, but we ge= t=20 struck with the pollution,"" Jerold Petrosian said as he and his family boug= ht=20 plants at a nursery across the street from the power plant. ""It is a tough= =20 decision."" ?????Not so for Ignacio Troncoso, director of Glendale Water & Power. ""Ther= e=20 is a pretty decent trade-off, helping our neighbors in the state to keep=20 their lights on,"" he said. ?????A USC specialist warned that increased power plant emissions raise the= =20 risks of asthma and other lung ailments in the young and old. ?????""There is a potential for more emergency room visits, more people seei= ng=20 their doctors and more hospitalizations this summer,"" said Dr. Henry Gong,= =20 professor of medicine and a specialist in the health effects of air polluti= on. ?????With extended hours, the Glendale generators are emitting as much as 9= 95=20 pounds of pollutants into the air during peak demand, more than double the= =20 old limit of 390 pounds a day, city and air-quality officials said. ?????The other 14 power plants in Southern California also have more than= =20 doubled their overall emissions, according to preliminary figures from the= =20 South Coast Air Quality Management District. As a group, the plants emitted= a=20 total of 2,045 tons of smog-forming nitrogen oxide in the first three month= s=20 of 2001, compared with 905 tons for the same period last year. ?????The AQMD hearing board on Tuesday eased pollution controls so Glendale= =20 may continue to generate excess electricity for sale to the energy-starved= =20 state. Under the plan, Glendale may run three of its old steam boilers=20 around-the-clock to meet the state's energy demand. Usually, these boilers,= =20 hidden behind a tall brick wall, sit idle except during the peak summer=20 demand because they are inefficient and costly. ?????Glendale, like Burbank and the Los Angeles Department of Water and=20 Power, continues to produce electricity at its city-owned plant. The three= =20 cities opted against participating in a scheme of deregulation, a decision= =20 that has shielded their residents, by and large, from the huge utility rate= =20 hikes and rolling power outages experienced elsewhere. But they also will= =20 contribute to easing the state's energy emergency in the dirtier air they= =20 will be forced to breathe. ?????Air-quality officials said power plants contribute just about 3% of th= e=20 900 tons of pollution emitted into the air daily, with about 70% of the=20 pollution coming from vehicles, not factories. And in recent years, many of= =20 the region's municipal power generators have been updated with=20 pollution-control devices that reduce emissions. ?????Glendale's three steam generators, built between 1953 and 1963, are=20 inefficient by today's standards, but they are 85% cleaner since the city= =20 pumped millions of dollars into upgrades. They will be even cleaner, city= =20 officials say, with more retrofitting. ?????Under the plan, Glendale must reinvest profits from energy sales,=20 estimated at $3 million to $5 million this year, in equipment to reduce=20 future emissions at the plant and in community-based programs, such as mobi= le=20 asthma clinics and programs to reduce school bus emissions. ?????The city plans to sell as much as 50 megawatts of power, enough to ser= ve=20 50,000 homes. Under the decision Tuesday, pollution limits resume Jan. 1,= =20 2002, or when the energy emergency ends. ?????In Los Angeles, power officials said they don't expect to exceed AQMD= =20 caps, because they are adding pollution controls at two of the city's four= =20 power plants. Although they will produce more electricity, they should not= =20 produce any more nitrogen oxide, which in sunlight and heat form ozone, sai= d=20 Angelina Galiteva, LADWP's director of strategic planning. ?????""We will have much cleaner equipment in place by June,"" she said. ?????Even the environmentalists are trying to balance the risks. ?????""We realize we have a problem this summer. We have to run these plants= ,""=20 said Sheryl Carter, a senior policy analyst for the National Resources=20 Defense Council. ?????Carter said natural-gas-powered generators, like the ones in Glendale,= =20 are ""a far superior solution to diesel generators,"" which produce 50 to 100= =20 times the emissions and would be turned on in businesses across the state i= f=20 energy is unavailable from other sources. ?????""We are trying to make sure the environment overall is made whole,"" sh= e=20 said. ?????Carl Zichella, regional staff director for the Sierra Club, said the= =20 generators should be run as a last resort. He also urged consumers to unplu= g=20 spare refrigerators and use energy-efficient light bulbs to reduce the=20 state's overall energy demand. ?????""The only thing that is going to work to offset air pollution is=20 efficiency,"" he said. Otherwise, ""we will pay not only with higher rates bu= t=20 also with our health."" ?????In neighboring Burbank, city officials are preparing for peak summer= =20 energy demands, when they expect to sell about 10% of their locally produce= d=20 electricity outside the city. ?????""For four or five years, we have been polluting Utah, Arizona, Nevada,= =20 Washington and Oregon, importing power to Los Angeles,"" said Ron Davis,=20 general manager of Burbank Water & Power, listing the energy-producing stat= es=20 that typically produce the bulk of Southern California's power. ""We are=20 returning the favor."" ?????Profits from those outside sales, Davis said, will help hold down=20 utility costs for local users. ?????""I think most people would take a little more smog to guarantee there= =20 are no rolling blackouts,"" he said. ""But it's not an easy question."" Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 --- --- ---------- Power Plant Plan Worries Neighbors=20 Energy crisis: Regulators will decide next week whether to allow Huntington= =20 Beach facility to boost output. Noise and pollution are concerns.=20 By CHRISTINE HANLEY, Times Staff Writer=20 ?????On Hula Circle in Huntington Beach, families have tried to live with= =20 their two very different neighbors. They live steps from the Pacific Ocean= =20 but next door to the mechanical shrieks and foul smells of the massive AES= =20 Corp. power plant. ?????But California's power crisis is rapidly unhinging life in the=20 neighborhood of ranch houses and bungalows. ?????State regulators will decide next week whether to allow the company to= =20 double the plant's operations by July, providing much-needed electricity bu= t=20 taking what residents fear will be a heavy toll on them. ?????It's one of several proposals to restart or build new power plants in= =20 the wake of the power crisis using a ""fast track"" process that allows the= =20 projects to go forward before environmental and pollution studies are=20 completed. ?????""The plant is so close. We want to know if it is impacting our kids in= =20 ways we won't know about until 10 years from now,"" said Janette Mortimer, w= ho=20 lives with her husband and their two young children in one of the homes=20 closest to the plant. ?????Already, residents say, the AES plant is casting a mightier shadow.=20 There are the ear-ringing rumbles and roars. There are the mysterious plume= s=20 of smoke that waft over the neighborhood. Then there is the grime that seem= s=20 never to go away. ?????If the California Energy Commission approves the permit for AES, the= =20 facility could run at full capacity for the first time in memory. Officials= =20 said the plant's previous owner, Southern California Edison, typically ran = it=20 at 30% of capacity. ?????AES could be allowed to run the four gas-fired boilers and a ""peaker""= =20 unit whenever California hits a Stage 3 alert--which is expected to happen= =20 often this summer. The ""peaker"" plant alone is powered by eight jet=20 engines--and sounds like it. ?????Currently, only two boilers are operating. ?????But residents say they are most worried about the air they breathe and= =20 the water they swim in. ?????Under the fast-tracking process designed to get more electricity for t= he=20 state as soon as possible, several key environmental questions have yet to = be=20 studied. ?????Scientists studying the cause of ocean pollution that closed much of= =20 Huntington Beach's shoreline in the summer of 1999 said that the plant, alo= ng=20 with other factors, played a role by drawing partially treated sewage that = is=20 discharged miles offshore back toward the coast. ?????AES Inc. will pay $1.5 million to further study the issue, but the=20 research won't be complete for some time. ?????""So much is uncertain,"" said Huntington Beach Councilwoman Shirley=20 Dettloff. ""These are big, big things."" ?????For now, residents say they are bracing for more noise, smoke and=20 disruption. ?????To begin with, AES' proposal calls for 20 hours a day of nonstop=20 construction to get the two mothballed generators in service by July. ?????Then there are the sizzling summer temperatures. Residents usually ope= n=20 their windows to let the ocean breezes cool their homes. But the noise and= =20 smells from the plants may make that impossible. ?????""It's going to be bad. There's no escape,"" said Bryan Visnoski. ?????The plant has towered over the Huntington Beach coastline for nearly 4= 0=20 years. The housing tracts came later, but most inhabitants of Hula Circle a= nd=20 surrounding streets seemed to make peace with their industrial neighbor. ?????Some have installed double-paned windows to dampen the sound. Others= =20 have remodeled their homes to obstruct ugly views. The Mortimers grew tall= =20 trees and trained vines past the windows. ?????The problems, they say, began with the energy crisis. ?????The plant was owned by Edison until 1998, when it was sold to=20 AES--California's largest private electricity producer--at the dawn of=20 deregulation. ?????The two gas-fired boilers that AES wants to restart have been dormant= =20 since 1995 and were slated for demolition until the power crisis struck. ?????But a few months ago as rolling blackouts hit the state, Gov. Gray Dav= is=20 signed an executive order allowing ""peaker plants"" to operate at extended= =20 hours. ""Peaker plants"" can produce electricity in quick bursts but guzzle= =20 large amounts of natural gas and are noisy. ?????Hulu Circle residents said the order has resulted in more hours of lou= d=20 jet noises that make then feel like they live by an airport. ?????Whenever the peaker plant goes on, residents call the Air Quality=20 Management District to send someone to test the plume of smoke. The=20 inspections have not detected any violations. ?????The proposal before the state Energy Commission would allow AES to=20 double its electricity output in Huntington Beach from 500 megawatts to 1,0= 00=20 megawatts. ?????The company's two 40-year-old units represent about 10% of the 5,000= =20 additional megawatts Davis has promised to meet an expected energy shortfal= l=20 this summer. ?????Despite the fast-tracking process, the company has vowed that it would= =20 safeguard against environmental damage and remedy any problems from plant= =20 operations. ?????If the plant is identified as drawing bacteria back to shore, AES woul= d=20 have to pay the costs deemed necessary to fix problems. ?????This is little consolation to residents, who would prefer a full=20 environmental review. Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 --- --- Federal plan called 'too little, too late'=20 Limited price control seen as step in right direction, but officials renew= =20 call for price ceiling Zachary Coile, Chronicle Political Writer Wednesday, April 25, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /25/M N104049.DTL=20 As federal energy regulators consider a plan intended to ease the state's= =20 worsening energy crisis, California officials and some energy experts are= =20 already criticizing it as inadequate.=20 The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is scheduled today to debate a=20 proposal that would force power generators to sell electricity at a=20 discounted price to California during severe power emergencies.=20 The proposal would require producers to sell energy to the state's power gr= id=20 during Stage 3 emergencies. Stage 3 emergencies are declared when energy=20 resources are almost depleted, allowing utilities to cut off power to=20 customers at any time.=20 The plan also would limit how much energy firms could profit off such sales= .=20 But Gov. Gray Davis and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, among others, say stronger= =20 remedies -- including the temporary regional price limits they have advocat= ed=20 for months -- are needed to stave off a summer of blackouts and power=20 shortages.=20 ""I think the plan before FERC is too little, too late,"" Davis said yesterda= y=20 in Sacramento.=20 ""We need help all the time. The regulatory commission plan excludes 95=20 percent of the purchases of power. A Stage 3 situation is, by definition,= =20 chaotic as we scramble to find the megawatts to keep the lights on.""=20 The commission ordered its staff in December to come up with remedies to=20 California's energy woes. The commissioners are expected to make their=20 decision by May 1, a self-imposed deadline to help the Golden State.=20 The proposal to be debated today would require producers to sell electricit= y=20 to California at a price based on the costs of the least-efficient plant=20 providing the energy. More efficient plants sending energy to the state wou= ld=20 still be able to make a sizable profit.=20 The plan has also drawn criticism because it applies only to California, no= t=20 other Western states that are also feeling the pinch of higher energy price= s.=20 But California officials say the proposal does signal a shift in the hard-= =20 line position of the commission's majority against any form of price=20 controls. The plan would set some form of price ceiling, even if only durin= g=20 extreme conditions.=20 In regulatory commission documents, the plan is referred to as ""price=20 mitigation"" -- not price limits.=20 ""I sincerely don't believe that FERC would even be considering the Stage 3 = if=20 it were not for us making substantial noise about a temporary cap,"" said=20 Feinstein, D-Calif., who introduced a bill with other Western senators=20 yesterday to require the agency to impose temporary price controls on energ= y=20 sold to Western states.=20 Severin Borenstein, director of the University of California Energy=20 Institute, said the regulatory commission has yet to make a compelling case= =20 for why its ""Stage 3"" plan would help lower sky-high prices.=20 ""The argument being made to support this is that firms are only able to=20 exercise market power during Stage 3 emergencies,"" Borenstein said. ""And th= e=20 evidence is quite clear that's just not true.=20 ""It's unfortunate that FERC thinks this is solving some problem for=20 California, because it won't.""=20 E-mail Zachary Coile at zcoile@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 10=20 --- S&P lowers California's bond rating=20 First cut since '94 could cost taxpayers millions=20 Kathleen Pender, Chronicle Staff Writer Wednesday, April 25, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /25/M N211494.DTL=20 Citing the ""rapidly escalating uncertainty"" surrounding the power crisis,= =20 Standard & Poor's slashed California's credit rating yesterday for the firs= t=20 time since 1994, when the state was still climbing out of a recession.=20 The downgrade -- and the energy debacle that led up to it -- will cost=20 taxpayers tens or hundreds of millions of dollars a year by raising the=20 state's borrowing costs. Investors will probably see the market price of=20 California municipal bonds and bond funds decline further.=20 But the biggest blow may be to the state's ego. S&P downgraded the state's= =20 general obligation bonds two notches -- to A+ from AA. The only other state= =20 currently rated A+ is Hawaii. The only state with a lower credit rating is= =20 Louisiana, according to S&P.=20 Most states are rated AA. Some states don't have a credit rating because th= ey=20 don't have bonds.=20 California's credit rating is still ""investment grade,"" which means it is n= ot=20 expected to default on its bonds. However, the state's ability to repay its= =20 debt ""isn't as strong as it used to be,"" said Steve Zimmermann, a managing= =20 director with Standard & Poor's. ""This is a very speculative situation.""=20 States hire companies like S&P to give them an independent credit rating wh= en=20 they borrow money by selling bonds. The rating reflects the state's ability= =20 to repay its debt in full, on time.=20 When they sell new bonds, states with lower credit ratings usually pay high= er=20 interest than higher-rated states, to make up for the added risk.=20 A rating change does not affect the interest rate states pay on bonds that= =20 have already been issued, but it can affect the price of bonds when they=20 trade on the open market among investors.=20 Yesterday's downgrade ""reflects the mounting and uncertain cost to the stat= e=20 of the current electrical power crisis, as well as its likely long-term=20 detrimental effect on the state's economy,"" S&P said in a news release.=20 ""Given the large magnitude of the problem in relation to the size of fund= =20 balances the state typically budgets, the capacity to pay debt service, whi= le=20 still adequate, has been reduced.""=20 In January, S&P placed the state's debt on ""CreditWatch with negative=20 implications,"" a signal that it might lower the rating.=20 In an unusual move, S&P kept the state on CreditWatch after yesterday's=20 downgrade, which means the rating could fall even lower.=20 Zimmermann said S&P is keeping California on CreditWatch pending its abilit= y=20 to sell $10 billion to $14 billion worth of bonds to reimburse the state's= =20 general fund for past and future power purchases.=20 ""If they did the bond issue, they'd replenish the fund, at least for the=20 short term. If they don't do it, then it's more of a concern,"" Zimmermann= =20 said.=20 Unfortunately, the downgrade could make it harder for the state to sell the= =20 bonds.=20 ""If they could have gotten the deal done before the downgrade, they would= =20 have had a stronger deal,"" said Kelly Mainelli, a municipal bond fund manag= er=20 with Montgomery Asset Management.=20 California must obtain an investment-grade rating (BBB- or higher) on the= =20 bonds before it can sell them.=20 Mainelli said California municipal bond prices have already fallen in=20 anticipation of a ratings cut. When prices fall, bond yields go up.=20 ""The downgrade is the culmination of everything that's happened since early= =20 December,"" he said.=20 In November, California municipal bonds yields were 0.4 to 0.5 percentage= =20 points below the national average. Today, they're 0.1 to 0.2 percentage=20 points above the national average, and Mainelli thinks they could go up 0.1= =20 to 0.2 percentage points more because of the downgrade.=20 The total difference -- about 0.7 percentage points -- doesn't sound like= =20 much, but it adds up.=20 Last year, the state itself sold $4.6 billion in new bonds (excluding bonds= =20 sold to replace existing bonds). If it sells the same amount this year, plu= s=20 $12 billion in energy bonds, that 0.7 percentage point difference on $16.6= =20 billion in bonds would cost the state $116 million a year in additional=20 interest costs.=20 Yesterday's downgrade only affected the state's general obligation bonds an= d=20 others secured by the ""full faith and credit of the state,"" such as the=20 California Health Facilities Construction Loan Insurance Fund (Cal Mortgage= ).=20 But the energy debacle could wind up costing other municipal bond issuers i= n=20 California -- such as cities, counties, school and water districts -- more= =20 money when they sell bonds. Although their ratings have not changed because= =20 of the energy crisis, analysts say the yields on most California municipal= =20 bonds have gone up, and will go up some more, as a result of the state's=20 downgrade.=20 ""The values of all California bonds will be hurt by this downgrade, whether= =20 they should be or not. Psychologically, it's just how the market reacts,""= =20 says Richard Goldstein, a San Ramon financial planner.=20 Investors who have to sell their California bonds on the open market before= =20 they mature may not get all their principal back. But investors who hold=20 their bonds until maturity will probably get paid in full, Goldstein said.= =20 No matter how bad the energy crisis gets, most experts believe the state wi= ll=20 continue making principal and interest payments on its bonds, even if it ha= s=20 to raise taxes, cut expenditures or run a temporary deficit to do so.=20 ""There's also the prospect at some point of federal help,"" Goldstein said.= =20 ""The federal government does not want California to default or even come=20 close.=20 Do you know what that would do to the national economy and the world=20 economy?""=20 California's bond-rating history=20 S&P cut its rating on California debt yesterday for the first time since=20 1994.=20 What credit ratings mean=20 -- AAA: Extremely strong capacity to meet financial commitments.=20 -- AA: Very strong capacity to meet financial commitments.=20 -- A: Strong capacity to meet financial commitments but somewhat more=20 susceptible to adverse circumstances and economic conditions.=20 -- BBB: Adequate capacity to meet financial commitments. However, adverse= =20 economic conditions could weaken ability to pay debts.=20 Note: Ratings below BBB are considered poor investment risks, and the issue= s=20 sometimes are called ""junk bonds.""=20 Source: Standard & Poor's=20 Chronicle Graphic=20 E-mail Kathleen Pender at kpender@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 --- NEWSMAKER PROFILE=20 Richard Sklar=20 Ex-Muni boss becomes energy czar=20 Davis' pick to oversee power plant construction=20 Greg Lucas, Sacramento Bureau Chief Wednesday, April 25, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /25/M N232441.DTL=20 Sacramento -- San Franciscan Richard Sklar, onetime trouble-shooter for the= =20 Municipal Railway and later a figure in the U.S. aid effort for Bosnia, wil= l=20 head a team of construction experts working to build power plants faster,= =20 Gov. Gray Davis said yesterday.=20 Sklar, 66, is the second energy ""czar"" the governor has appointed in a week= .=20 Last week he named S. David Freeman, head of the Los Angeles Department of= =20 Water and Power, to lead the state's conservation efforts.=20 ""Mr. Sklar is with us for the long haul,"" Davis said after speaking to the= =20 State Chamber of Commerce. ""He's a no-nonsense person.""=20 Sklar will work with representatives of some of the largest construction=20 firms in the world, such as Bechtel, to map out timelines and identify=20 potential problems in building power plants.=20 Under the Davis administration, 13 power plants have been approved, eight o= f=20 which are under construction.=20 ""This is the red meat I chew on, my friend,"" Sklar said yesterday in a=20 telephone interview from New York.=20 ""We're going to be getting these projects under way and follow them from th= e=20 'let's do it' stage to the day we cut the ribbon.""=20 Sklar has already had a chance to study the energy situation in California= =20 from afar. In January, while serving as then-President Bill Clinton's point= =20 man for helping southeast Europe move toward capitalism, Sklar said,=20 ""California is an object lesson in how not to deregulate. You've got to hav= e=20 both capitalism and regulation.""=20 The way California worked deregulation, Sklar said, was a ""colossal mistake= .=20 ""=20 Sklar has more than 35 years of public and private management experience,= =20 much of it in San Francisco.=20 He came to the city from Cleveland in the mid-1970s and soon joined the=20 mayoral campaign of the late George Moscone. Impressed by Sklar's drive,=20 Moscone handed him the reins to the city's huge wastewater program.=20 Sklar, known as a man of limitless self-confidence, quickly made a name for= =20 himself as a head-knocking administrator with an abrupt management style, b= ut=20 he got the languishing program moving.=20 Citing Sklar's ""vigor and force,"" then-Mayor Dianne Feinstein appointed him= =20 general manager of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, which=20 oversees the city's Water Department. He held the post until 1983 while als= o=20 leading the Muni for three years.=20 Sklar soon earned a reputation at City Hall for flamboyance. Critics said= =20 Sklar enjoyed seeing his name in print and his face on TV a bit too much. H= e=20 took the criticism in stride.=20 ""I inspire intense feelings,"" he told The Chronicle in 1982. ""You love me o= r=20 you hate me -- and probably for good reason.""=20 By the end of his tenure, Feinstein and Sklar were feuding openly over=20 everything from the Muni to high-rise development. The mayor called him=20 ""arrogant."" He, in turn, called her a ""lightweight"" who was no great=20 political star.=20 From 1983 through 1996, Sklar worked for San Francisco-based O'Brien-=20 Kreitzberg, one of the largest construction management firms in the United= =20 States. The firm specializes in public works projects.=20 Sklar became the company's president in May 1995 after running O'Brien-=20 Kreitzberg's Eastern and international operations, a job that led to=20 Clinton's naming him to coordinate the rebuilding of war-ravaged Bosnia in= =20 1996.=20 During Sklar's year on the job, the Sarajevo airport was quickly reopened,= =20 and round-the-clock electricity was restored in the city before winter.=20 In 1997, Clinton named Sklar ambassador to the United Nations for reform an= d=20 management. His primary task was to shake loose from a reluctant GOP-=20 controlled Congress more than $1 billion in delinquent dues owed by the=20 United States.=20 In June 1999, he moved to Rome to serve as Clinton's point man on economic= =20 development of southeast Europe. He is now a mediator specializing in=20 construction cases.=20 E-mail Greg Lucas at glucas@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 10=20 --- Will price caps deter investment, as federal regulators say?=20 KAREN GAUDETTE, Associated Press Writer Wednesday, April 25, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 343EDT0117.DTL=20 (04-25) 00:43 PDT SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Some key power generators say=20 California's dearth of energy supplies, and its growing demand, make it a= =20 good place to build more plants and sell more power in the years to come --= =20 even if dreaded price caps are imposed.=20 ``Regardless of what the (market) structure turns out to be, the state's=20 going to need electricity and it's going to need to buy it from somebody,''= =20 said Bill Highlander, spokesman for San Jose-based Calpine Corp.=20 Calpine is investing about $4 billion in power plants over the next four=20 years that will generate 9,000 megawatts, enough for more than 6 million=20 homes. The state's current energy crisis ``hasn't really changed our plans = or=20 our strategy,'' he said.=20 But Chief federal energy regulator Curtis Hebert says price caps on wholesa= le=20 electricity will hinder, not help, California's energy crisis.=20 Energy wholesalers seeking higher prices than California is willing to pay= =20 will invest in other states, warns Hebert, the chairman of the Federal Ener= gy=20 Regulatory Commission. And any regulations that cut into future profits wil= l=20 scare away desperately needed new power plants, he says.=20 Eight of the 13 new power plants approved in California already are under= =20 construction. Twelve more are under review, according to the California=20 Energy Commission, which approves power plants.=20 CEC spokesman Rob Schlichting said that's a huge boost over the last decade= ,=20 when uncertainty over the rules of deregulation -- not a threat of price ca= ps=20 -- kept applications down. No companies have withdrawn plans to build plant= s=20 since December.=20 ``The only way price caps would scare away investment is if they were set s= o=20 low you couldn't make a profit,'' Schlichting said. ``It's still a market= =20 that people seem to want to come in and produce power for.''=20 Other companies still planning to invest in California include North=20 Carolina-based Duke Energy, which has two plants in the works, and=20 Houston-based Reliant Energy, which is negotiating with the state to sell= =20 power on long-term contracts.=20 Reliant's spokesman, Richard Wheatley, wouldn't say whether price caps alon= e=20 would inhibit them from building more plants. What he did say is that=20 California's power politics leave a lot of room for improvement.=20 The state has considered taking over power plants through eminent domain an= d=20 implementing a windfall profits tax to take some of their earnings away.=20 Meanwhile, Attorney General Bill Lockyer is offering a bounty for any=20 information that could prove wholesalers worked together to drive up prices= ,=20 which could lead to more lawsuits and investigations.=20 If California wants to encourage construction, it's got to tone down its=20 vilification and stop adding more restrictions, Wheatley said.=20 ``Whenever we go into an area and consider building a power plant, we have = to=20 look at the economics of the facility, we have to look at the regulatory=20 situation, esoteric things like what the mindset is like,'' he said.=20 ``California is not the easiest place in which to do business.''=20 Some power companies have invested so much in pipelines, gas reserves and= =20 plants already under construction that it's folly to turn back now.=20 ``We want to build in California, but we need to have regulatory stability = or=20 at least regulatory clarity to move these things forward because they're=20 half-billion dollar projects in some cases,'' said Tom Williams, a spokesma= n=20 for Duke. ``That's a lot of bananas.''=20 Senators Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Gordon Smith, R-Ore., plan this we= ek=20 to introduce legislation urging FERC to impose a temporary price cap over t= he=20 11 Western states. They hope to keep prices down in the short-term and give= =20 California and other troubled states a breather to make long-term decisions= .=20 Feinstein's bill does not yet specify a price. Some economists say $150 to= =20 $250 per megawatt hour would be just and reasonable, yet provide generators= a=20 profit. Prices have gone as high as $1,500 for the same amount of power in= =20 the past year.=20 Tying the price cap to the cost of making power could make it easier for=20 generators to swallow, said Severin Borenstein, director of the University = of=20 California, Berkeley's energy institute. Such a cap would account for=20 variables such as the wildly fluctuating cost of natural gas used to genera= te=20 much of the energy in California's power plants.=20 Price caps can be effective, but only if they are very carefully designed,= =20 warned Frank Wolak, chairman of the Independent System Operator's market=20 surveillance committee. The ISO manages the state's power grid.=20 Set them too high, and companies will only bid that amount, saving little= =20 money, Wolak said. Too low, and the generators could choose to sell elsewhe= re=20 unless all other nearby states have the same price limits.=20 Also, capping the most expensive energy sales -- power sold on the spot=20 market at times of high demand -- won't lower prices for other key componen= ts=20 of the state's energy supply, such as electricity bought for the next day's= =20 power needs.=20 ``Suppose you're paying $150 every single (megawatt) hour. That still puts = us=20 in big trouble with wholesale energy costs,'' Wolak said.=20 The state already has spent $5.1 billion buying power for customers of=20 California's three largest investor-owned utilities, which lost their credi= t=20 -- and thus their ability to buy power -- after paying sharply higher costs= =20 for wholesale energy.=20 Borenstein said paying even $250 a megawatt hour is still preferable to the= =20 unknown, particularly since economists have warned that there is virtually = no=20 upper limit to what energy companies can charge.=20 ``This summer we are going to be truly short of power and at those times th= e=20 price is going to be at the price cap, and if we don't have a price cap, th= ey=20 will be way above the price cap,'' Borenstein said.=20 FERC remains opposed to price caps, but after months of complaints, the boa= rd=20 this week is considering a limited cap on the most expensive last-minute=20 power buys.=20 The proposal would cap California but not the rest of the West, and order= =20 wholesalers to sell to the state during the most extreme power shortages.= =20 Though it provides some cushioning, it does not address the high prices=20 California swallows the rest of the time. That's the point of Feinstein's= =20 bill.=20 ``The crisis point is this summer to next summer and we need some federal= =20 assistance,'' said Howard Gantman, spokesman for Feinstein. ``This would=20 assure the generators a reasonable profit and continue to spur on further= =20 investment into new plants.''=20 On the Net:=20 California Energy Commission: www.energy.ca.gov=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 --- Credit agency cites power troubles; lowers state's bond rating=20 Wednesday, April 25, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 552EDT0127.DTL=20 (04-25) 02:52 PDT SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- A major credit rating agency h= as=20 downgraded California's state bonds, citing the financial drain from the=20 continuing energy crisis.=20 ``The downgrade reflects the mounting and uncertain cost to the state of th= e=20 current electrical power crisis, as well as its likely long-term detrimenta= l=20 effect on the state's economy,'' Standard & Poors said Tuesday.=20 The state's ability to repay its debts, while still considered adequate, ha= s=20 been reduced, S&P said in dropping the rating on California's general=20 obligation bonds by two notches from AA to A+. It similarly revised other= =20 lease ratings, and ratings for the California Health Facilities Constructio= n=20 Loan Insurance Fund, known as Cal Mortgage.=20 S&P is one of three major rating agencies watching the state's financial=20 performance. Credit ratings help determine how much states and other=20 borrowers must pay when issuing bonds. The lower the rating, the higher the= =20 interest rate the state must pay to attract bond investors.=20 The downgrade now puts California's credit rating behind many other states= =20 and on par with Hawaii, which also has an A+ rating from S&P.=20 Preliminary estimates from the state's Treasurer's Office estimated that th= e=20 downgrade would cost the state an additional $190 million to $570 million o= n=20 the $12 billion in general obligation bonds that have been authorized, but= =20 not yet issued, for ongoing expenses, including school and transportation= =20 projects.=20 The agency said the rating was not reduced further because of California's= =20 diverse economy and a proposed revenue bond slated to reimburse the state's= =20 treasury. S&P said a further downgrade could occur if California does not= =20 follow through on plans to issue more than $10 billion in revenue bonds to= =20 pay off its energy-related debts.=20 The agency put the state's general obligation bonds on a credit-watch ``wit= h=20 negative implications'' Jan. 19, shortly after California began buying powe= r=20 for its two largest utilities, Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas a= nd=20 Electric Co.=20 On the Net:=20 Standard & Poors www.standardandpoor.com=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 --- S&P downgrades California's bonds citing energy troubles=20 Wednesday, April 25, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 ation al0443EDT0483.DTL=20 (04-25) 01:43 PDT SACRAMENTO (AP) -- A major credit rating agency has=20 downgraded California's state bonds, citing the financial drain from its=20 continuing energy crisis.=20 ``The downgrade reflects the mounting and uncertain cost to the state of th= e=20 current electrical power crisis, as well as its likely long-term detrimenta= l=20 effect on the state's economy,'' Standard & Poors said Tuesday.=20 The state's ability to repay its debts, while still considered adequate, ha= s=20 been reduced, S&P said in dropping the rating on California's general=20 obligation bonds by two notches from AA to A+.=20 The agency said the rating was not reduced further because of California's= =20 diverse economy and a proposed revenue bond slated to reimburse the state's= =20 treasury. S&P said a further downgrade could occur if California does not= =20 follow through on plans to issue more than $10 billion in revenue bonds to= =20 pay off its energy-related debts.=20 The agency put the state's general obligation bonds on a credit-watch ``wit= h=20 negative implications'' Jan. 19, shortly after California began buying powe= r=20 for its two largest utilities, Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas a= nd=20 Electric Co.=20 On the Net:=20 Standard & Poors www.standardandpoor.com=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 --- State bond rating lowered=20 Posted at 10:53 p.m. PDT Tuesday, April 24, 2001=20 BY JENNIFER BJORHUS=20 Mercury News=20 One of Wall Street's top credit-rating houses has downgraded California's= =20 bonds because of the state's handling of the energy crisis, a move that cou= ld=20 ultimately cost taxpayers tens of millions of dollars.=20 Saying that mounting and uncertain power costs are likely to do lasting har= m=20 to California's economy, New York-based Standard & Poor's on Tuesday lowere= d=20 the state's credit rating on its ``general obligation'' bonds two notches,= =20 from AA to A+ with a negative outlook. That puts California near the bottom= =20 of the state bond heap with only one state -- Louisiana -- rated lower.=20 Standard & Poor's said the rating could go lower if the state cannot resolv= e=20 the power crisis.=20 The downgrade will cost California millions of dollars in coming years=20 because a lower rating makes it more expensive for the state to issue gener= al=20 obligation bonds to finance projects such as school construction.=20 The interest on those bonds, which will rise from an estimated 5 to perhaps= =20 5.25 percent, is paid from the state's tax-financed general fund. Although= =20 the rating change doesn't apply technically to the different type of bond t= he=20 state plans to issue by June for power purchases, it will probably make tho= se=20 bonds more expensive for the state, too, bond experts say.=20 Heightened urgency=20 ``There's a sense of urgency that this problem has been escalating,=20 particularly since the PG&E bankruptcy,'' said David Hitchcock, California= =20 analyst for Standard & Poor's. ``This problem could move quickly.''=20 At least one bond expert said the downgrade was surprising.=20 ``To me it's clear that S&P doesn't have much faith in this power-bailout= =20 plan of the Legislature and the governor. To me that's the reason they did= =20 it,'' said Zane Mann, publisher of the monthly California Bond Advisor=20 newsletter.=20 No single new piece of information triggered the downgrade, Hitchcock said.= =20 The major factor, he said, was simply spiraling costs and no long-term plan= =20 for paying the bills. Last week Gov. Gray Davis said the state had been=20 spending $73 million a day to buy electricity, up from $45.8 million a day = in=20 late March. Hitchcock said some energy traders suspect the actual costs are= =20 higher.=20 All three major Wall Street credit-rating agencies have California on=20 so-called ``credit watch,'' but only Standard & Poor's has downgraded. One= =20 municipal bond expert said Standard & Poor's had been ``trigger happy'' and= =20 eager to downgrade. Raymond Murphy, Moody's California analyst, said he had= =20 no immediate plans to change California's bond rating, but that he's anxiou= s=20 to see officials produce a long-term plan for financing power purchases.=20 Murphy said he had a conference call with state officials about the issue= =20 Tuesday morning.=20 ``We want the state to develop the plan that gets the general fund out of= =20 power purchasing,'' Murphy said.=20 The state says it's working on that, but there's a roadblock.=20 Revenue bonds=20 A major piece of the state's plan is to have the Department of Water=20 Resources issue $10 billion to $14 billion in revenue bonds to pay back the= =20 general fund for what has been taken to buy power in recent months. But tha= t=20 portion of the plan is tied up in a dispute between PG&E and the California= =20 Public Utilities Commission over how to spend the extra money generated by= =20 electricity rate increases. The dispute has also held up the $4.13 billion = in=20 financing the state had arranged to pay down the advances it took out of th= e=20 general fund to buy power.=20 To break the logjam, officials from the state treasurer's office have asked= =20 lawmakers to pass emergency legislation to allow the state to issue the=20 revenue bonds.=20 ``California's credit rating and financial strength will be in jeopardy unt= il=20 the state's general fund is repaid for energy costs,'' state Treasurer Phil= ip=20 Angelides said in a statement Tuesday.=20 State Finance Director Tim Gage and Gov. Davis both downplayed the=20 significance of the rate change. Through a press officer, Davis said the=20 state's economy remains fundamentally strong.=20 The state was downgraded to a lower A rating in 1994 and went on to see=20 tremendous economic growth.=20 Mounting pressure=20 Still, a downgrade is bad news that sends a psychological signal in both th= e=20 finance and real worlds. Some industry watchers said they hope the downgrad= e=20 pushes lawmakers and state officials, whom they perceive to be too slow in= =20 responding to the crisis.=20 ``It sounds like the bond market might be out ahead of some of the=20 policy-makers in California,'' said Severin Borenstein, director of the=20 University of California Energy Institute. ``We're facing a real emergency= =20 here.''=20 John Hallacy, managing director of municipal research at Merrill Lynch, sai= d=20 a lower credit rating puts more pressure on the state to issue the revenue= =20 bonds fast, and to conserve cash.=20 ``We're kind of at the critical juncture now where the pieces are still all= =20 over the floor,'' Hallacy said of the state's efforts to build and approve = a=20 long-term solution to the power crisis.=20 To Nettie Hoge, executive director of the Utility Reform Network and a=20 leading critic of the state's efforts to bail out PG&E and Southern=20 California Edison, the downgrade means ``the analysts are watching.'' She= =20 said she hopes that President Bush and the Federal Energy Regulatory=20 Commission are watching, too.=20 ``Hopefully, this is a wake-up call for FERC. Those guys could solve this i= n=20 a nanosecond,'' Hoge said. ``This is just another milepost on the downward= =20 spiral to economic catastrophe.''=20 Contact Jennifer Bjorhus at jbjorhus@sjmercury.com or (408) 920-5660.=20 --- --- ----- Q&A with Gov. Gray Davis on energy issues=20 Gov. Gray Davis visited the Mercury News editorial board Monday. On the=20 subject of electricity, Davis talked about increasing the number of power= =20 plants, the rejection of price caps by the Federal Energy Regulatory=20 Commission, and the condition of the state's two largest utilities, Souther= n=20 California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric. Davis has proposed a deal to= =20 rescue Edison, and the Legislature is considering it. PG&E has filed for=20 bankruptcy.=20 Here is a condensed version of Davis' remarks.=20 Q: What would you like to say by way of introduction about the state's=20 electricity problems?=20 Davis: There are really two problems. One is the amount of power available= =20 and the other is the price of power.=20 In 2002, we'll have more megawatts on line, at least 5,000 more. By 2003,= =20 we'll have a slight excess of power over demand. That's very important.=20 Because at the moment, we import 20 percent of our power. We have no=20 leverage. We are at the mercy of forces that show no mercy. That will never= =20 change until we have more power than we need.=20 OK, price. As you know, the only entity that can influence the [wholesale]= =20 price of electricity is the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.=20 Deregulation surrendered the ability of the state to do that.=20 In 1999, this state for all power, including municipal power, spent roughly= =20 $7 billion. In 2000, we spent $32.5 billion. I don't know what it will be= =20 this year, but it will be substantially higher.=20 Through all this the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has refused to do= a=20 thing, zero, zippo. Lest you think I'm being partisan, that commission=20 consists entirely of Clinton appointees.=20 The final piece is the financial consequences of what's happened to date. I= t=20 is our hope that if we can keep Southern California Edison credit-worthy an= d=20 able to re-enter the power purchasing market Jan. 1, 2003, we can then go t= o=20 the PG&E creditors committee [the generators to whom PG&E owes money] and s= ay=20 to them: ``Look at the arrangement we made with Southern California Edison.= =20 We believe that this is a far better deal than PG&E can give you.''=20 I think this is a fair plan. We get every electron that Edison's utility ow= ns=20 committed for 10 years, at a cost-of-service basis. Under [current law] the= y=20 could sell that next March at market rates. We got $400 million returned fr= om=20 the holding company, a $3 billion investment in the transmission and delive= ry=20 systems .?.?. a permanent easement on about 20,000 acres of environmental= =20 property around all their hydro facilities.=20 Q: Do you have in mind a finished product for the changes that are happenin= g=20 in the electric system? What will it look like in a couple of years?=20 Davis: It is my expectation that the utilities will be purchasing the power= =20 entirely, commencing Jan. 1, 2003. Our goal is to get them back in business= .=20 In addition to investor-owned utilities, I believe we also need a public=20 power authority. At some point I believe the private sector will say to=20 itself, ``I want to build new plants to replace the 40-year-old plants, but= =20 do I really want to get the state to a 15 percent margin over supply, there= by=20 reducing the value of the electrons I already own?'' If they do, God bless= =20 them. But if they don't, at least we'll have the opportunity to build them= =20 ourselves.=20 Once we have even a slight margin of capacity over demand, the spot market= =20 prices will come down dramatically.=20 Q: You said in February that you could have solved the electricity problem = in=20 20 minutes if you'd been willing to raise rates. Now, rates are going to be= =20 raised. Should you have favored a rate increase earlier?=20 Davis: I should have been more specific. I should have said I could have=20 solved it in 20 minutes if I wanted to triple rates. I think the rate=20 increase I proposed is fair. It rewards people who are the most energy=20 efficient, the people who only use up to 130 percent of their baseline. The= y=20 are approximately half the state. So half the state will see no rate=20 increase, beyond the 10 percent that everyone saw in January.=20 Q: Is the state willing to spend anything it costs to keep the lights on, o= r=20 at some point, would it stiff the generators and just say we will accept a= =20 blackout?=20 Davis: We have to provide power. There are many people who have medical=20 devices that have to keep running. Blackouts can cause deaths, traffic=20 accidents, all kinds of calamities that I wouldn't want to happen.=20 I'm reluctant to tell the generators we'll pay any price, so I'm not going = to=20 say we'll pay absolutely any price, but my bias obviously is to find a way = to=20 keep the lights on.=20 Q: When will you reveal how much electricity the state has bought, from wha= t=20 companies, at what prices and what this will cost the state this year and i= n=20 coming years?=20 Davis: We'll reveal an awful lot of information as soon as the bonds go to= =20 market. [The state plans a bond issue to cover the upfront costs of=20 purchasing electricity.] That information has to be made public. That will= =20 probably be in less than two months.=20 Believe me, I don't like going around getting beat up for hiding informatio= n.=20 I'm doing it for one reason only, which is that I know every additional edg= e=20 I give the generators will result in higher prices for customers.=20 Q: There's an impression that the state budget is being drained by the powe= r=20 crisis. Is that right?=20 Davis: The simple answer to that is no, because the state will be fully=20 reimbursed with interest as soon as these bonds are sold.=20 At the moment, in the short term, it is crowding out other spending. But I= =20 think everyone understands that's a temporary phenomenon, until the state i= s=20 reimbursed by bonds that are repaid over time through the rate structure th= at=20 I proposed.=20 Q: Would it be your pledge that ratepayers, not taxpayers, will fully repay= =20 the state's cost in purchasing electricity?=20 Davis: That is the assumption underlying these bonds. That's right as it=20 relates to electricity, but obviously the conservation incentives came out = of=20 the general fund.=20 Q: Have you talked to President Bush about this?=20 Davis: I hear all these rumors as to why the Bush administration doesn't wa= nt=20 to be helpful, but this state, and particularly this region, has been=20 disproportionately helpful in America's economic growth and technological= =20 productivity. If he wants America to grow, it behooves him to keep Californ= ia=20 growing. To date, I think it's fair to say that of my public requests,=20 President Bush has been responsive to all but the price caps.=20 --- --- ------- Davis: Power surplus by 2003=20 Published Wednesday, April 25, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News=20 BY DON THOMPSON=20 Associated Press=20 SACRAMENTO -- Even as power grid operators warned the state's lights could= =20 flicker again by week's end, Gov. Gray Davis on Tuesday pledged that=20 Californians will be wallowing in electricity by the end of 2003.=20 Davis compared the emergency to fighting a large forest fire -- in a few=20 years, the fire will be out and the state will be out of the energy-buying= =20 business.=20 Just in case Davis' plans fail, however, an Assembly task force is=20 considering options, including having the state buy Southern California=20 Edison.=20 Critics have hammered Davis for his handling of the power crisis, and his= =20 predictions have faltered before.=20 In January, Davis set three goals as energy prices spiraled upward and shor= t=20 supply endangered the state's large investor-owned utilities: to avoid=20 blackouts, bankruptcies and rate increases.=20 All three have since happened.=20 On Tuesday, Davis lowered the bar substantially: ``If the lights stay on, w= e=20 will have succeeded. Our goal is to keep the power flowing in this state, t= o=20 avoid blackouts, to moderate the price increases in a fair and reasonable w= ay=20 and reward those who conserve the most, and to chart a steady course.''=20 Even keeping the lights on may be difficult as temperatures climb this week= ,=20 warned the Independent System Operator, which runs the state's power grid.= =20 The ISO declared a Stage 2 emergency Tuesday afternoon when the state came= =20 within 5 percent of running out of electricity after two power plants went= =20 off-line unexpectedly.=20 Spring's first warm spell is likely to boost demand by 2,000 megawatts -- t= he=20 equivalent of two large power plants able to power 1.5 million homes -- the= =20 ISO said in calling for more energy conservation.=20 The increase comes as hydroelectric power runs low across the dry Northwest= ,=20 and as 13,000 megawatts of power remain unavailable due to planned or=20 unplanned plant shutdowns.=20 Davis insisted that statewide conservation this summer can stave off=20 widespread blackouts as the state rushes to build its way out of the supply= =20 shortage.=20 ``At the end of 2003 we will have more power than we need, we will have=20 regained control of our energy destiny,'' Davis promised in a speech to the= =20 California Chamber of Commerce. ``By the end of 2003 you can have all the= =20 appliances on. You can, you know, don't turn anything off, you can just=20 luxuriate in all your electricity.''=20 Davis promised a 15 percent supply surplus by 2004.=20 To that end, he named former diplomat Richard Sklar to head a new=20 ``generation implementation task force'' of business consultants charged wi= th=20 speeding up power plant siting and construction. Before entering public=20 service, Sklar was president of San Francisco-based construction machinery= =20 manufacturer O'Brien Kreitzberg.=20 Standard and Poors dropped California's credit rating Tuesday, warning that= =20 continued purchases could hurt the state treasury. --- --- ---------- Great America to avoid blackouts=20 Published Wednesday, April 25, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News=20 Associated Press=20 Paramount's Great America amusement park in Santa Clara has struck a deal= =20 with the municipal utility to keep the power on even during rolling blackou= ts=20 this summer.=20 The park will cut electricity usage by 10 percent on ``high-demand days'' -= -=20 which could be nearly every day this summer -- by turning off fountains,=20 decorative lighting and air conditioning in some buildings.=20 Santa Clara's city-owned utility, Silicon Valley Power, will use the power= =20 savings to help avert blackouts, said Larry Owens, customer service manager= =20 for the utility. Even if the situation gets dire and blackouts are required= ,=20 the park will be exempt because of the arrangement, Owens said.=20 About 20 companies with facilities in Santa Clara, including Intel Corp., S= un=20 Microsystems Inc. and Agilent Technologies Inc., have agreed to the same=20 arrangement, as has Santa Clara University. --- --- ---------- State's bond rating is lowered=20 The energy crisis brings an A+ designation, which likely will mean higher= =20 borrowing costs.=20 April 25, 2001=20 By JOHN HOWARD The Orange County Register=20 SACRAMENTO California's electricity crisis prompted a top credit agency to= =20 downgrade the state's credit rating by two notches to its lowest level in= =20 seven years. The move is likely to force the state to pay millions of dolla= rs=20 more in interest when it borrows.=20 ""It's a statement from Wall Street to California to get your act together,""= =20 said Assemblyman George Runner, R-Lancaster, a GOP energy- finance expert i= n=20 the Assembly.=20 ""The ratings action is serious and should be a warning to the state that it= =20 is on the wrong course,"" added Mark McCray, a municipal-bonds manager at=20 Newport Beach-based Pimco. ""This downgrade will cost the state a lot in ter= ms=20 of increased financing and costs until, if ever, it is upgraded.""=20 Standard and Poor's Corp., concerned about the $5 billion drained from the= =20 state's coffers to buy power this year, cut California's credit rating from= =20 AA to A+. The reduction applies to voter-approved bonds, called general=20 obligation, or G.O., bonds, that typically provide funds for schools, parks= ,=20 water projects and highways.=20 About $19.3 billion worth of G.O. bonds have been approved by voters. About= =20 $12 billion have not yet been sold.=20 The credit-rating cut would force the state to pay higher interest rates to= =20 attract buyers to the unsold bonds. If the state were to sell all $12 billi= on=20 under the lower credit rating, it could be forced to pay an additional $190= =20 million to $500 million annually in interest, depending on market condition= s.=20 Shortly after Standard and Poor's announcement, state Treasurer Phil=20 Angelides urged lawmakers to limit the size of the state's looming=20 electricity-bond sale to $10 billion - or $2.4 billion less than Gov. Gray= =20 Davis wants.=20 Angelides said capping the revenue bond at $10 billion would head off legal= =20 challenges from utilities, expedite the passage of the bond plan through th= e=20 Legislature and allow the sale to go forward.=20 ""At a minimum, we need an authorization of $10 billion,"" Angelides said. If= =20 Davis and lawmakers want more, they should do it later, Angelides added.=20 Davis has sought $12.4 billion. The rift between the governor and the=20 treasurer, both Democrats, marks their sharpest political divergence since= =20 the energy crisis erupted last year.=20 A Davis spokesman declined to comment on the difference. ""We are working wi= th=20 the treasurer and others to draft legislation for that bond bill, and we'll= =20 continue to work with him,"" said Roger Salazar.=20 The Davis administration hopes to raise the money by selling revenue bonds,= =20 backed by a charge on consumers' utility bills. The sale had been planned f= or=20 May but has since been pushed back to June or July at the earliest.=20 But there is a clock ticking: The state has been spending $45 million to $6= 0=20 million a day for electricity. The longer the delay in selling the bonds, t= he=20 less money will be available to buy cheaper energy for the state under=20 long-term contracts.=20 Before funding future power purchases, the bond proceeds must go to pay bac= k=20 the $5 billion the state has spent on electricity purchased since January o= n=20 behalf of California's three big cash-strapped utilities.=20 While the Standard and Poor's downgrade won't directly affect the electrici= ty=20 bonds, since they won't be G.O. bonds, it does reflect Wall Street's concer= n=20 about the unstanched outflow of state funds.=20 ""In my mind there's no doubt that S&P is doing this because they simply don= 't=20 have faith in the proposed bailout and what the state is going to have to g= o=20 through to solve its power problems,' said Zane Mann, the editor of a=20 newsletter that tracks California's general-obligation bonds.=20 Mann said the A+ rating puts California ""below average"" nationally. The=20 rating downgrade sliced the value of an existing 30-year California G.O. bo= nd=20 by 3.5 percent, he said. But since most investors who buy California bonds= =20 hold them to maturity, Mann said the losses would be largely confined to=20 paper.=20 Assemblyman Fred Keeley, D-Boulder Creek, who authored the bill that=20 authorized the power bonds, said the sale should be limited to the $10=20 billion originally provided for in the bill. The bill provides for the=20 utilities to forward money collected from ratepayers to the state Departmen= t=20 of Water Resources, which purchases the power.=20 As the state spent more than anticipated on emergency electricity purchases= ,=20 Davis sought to increase the size of the bond sale. But that suggestion has= =20 led the utilities to challenge the bill's rate- diversion mechanism, which= =20 has ""put a cloud on our ability to acquire financing,"" Keeley said.=20 Assembly Republican Leader Dave Cox of Fair Oaks said he would strongly=20 support any move to cap the amount of borrowing the state would do to buy= =20 electricity.=20 His staff said Republicans are skeptical that the ratepayers' revenues are= =20 sufficient to cover the costs in the Davis administration's electricity-=20 rescue plan.=20 ""Nobody believes that the revenue stream is wide enough to cover all the=20 governor's energy solutions. It's still being sucked up by the state's=20 utilities,"" said Cox spokesman Jaime Fis Fis.=20 Register staff writers James B. Kelleher and Diana McCabe and the Associate= d=20 Press contributed to this report.=20 --- --- --------------------------- Fire stokes wholesale gas cost=20 The question is whether the retail price will climb, too.=20 April 25, 2001=20 By ANNE C. MULKERN The Orange County Register=20 The Tosco refinery fire may fuel rising prices on the gasoline retail marke= t.=20 The spot-market price rose 10 cents within hours of the fire. Photo: Leonard Ortiz / The Register ? ? Wholesale gasoline prices jumped Tuesday, a day after fire erupted at Tosco= =20 Corp.'s Carson refinery.=20 But energy experts said it is too soon to know whether the fire will drive= =20 retail gas prices higher.=20 Gas prices already are climbing because of increased demand heading into=20 summer, higher costs for additives that make cleaner-burning fuel and a shi= ft=20 in marketing strategy by Tosco, which wants to sell less gas at a higher=20 price.=20 The refinery fire has the ability to worsen an already bleak situation,=20 energy experts said.=20 ""It doesn't take much in this market,'' said Suzanne Garfield, California= =20 Energy Commission spokeswoman. ""It's very volatile.''=20 Tosco said it will shift any lost gasoline production to its Wilmington=20 refinery. It was unclear, however, how long the Carson refinery would be do= wn=20 for repairs. Tosco spokesman Clark Wrigley couldn't say whether the=20 Wilmington plant could make enough gasoline to meet the company's needs in= =20 Southern California.=20 Within hours of the fire, gas prices had jumped 10 cents per gallon on the= =20 spot market, a daily market where refiners sell surplus supplies. That was= =20 driven mainly by speculation, as those with gas to sell waited to see how= =20 high the price would go. Prices later fell back to an increase of about 3= =20 cents from a day before.=20 ""Just the fact that there is a hiccup in the refinery makes everyone cringe= =20 and say, 'I'm not going to sell,''' said Bob van der Valk, manager at Cosby= =20 Oil, a Santa Fe Springs gasoline wholesaler.=20 A day or so of higher spot prices probably won't affect retail costs. But i= f=20 wholesale prices stay up for several days, retailers will pass on those cos= ts=20 to consumers.=20 --- --- --------------------------- Power Companies and Regulators Must Take Steps To Avoid Spread of=20 California Power Virus/ Andersen Analysis WASHINGTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 24, 2001 via NewsEdge Corporation - A ""new virus spawned in California"" poses formidable challenges requiring new strategies on the part of power companies, regulators and policymakers to contain and reverse its damage, according to ""Energy Crisis in the Western United States: Lessons for Navigating Regulatory and Market Minefields,"" a new Andersen report released today. ""The implications for the development of competitive energy markets go far beyond the Western United States,"" Andersen's national utility practice head Matthew D. Smith told a Washington briefing. ""Unfortunately, California has taught the nation that regulatory and political barriers can create and sustain an energy crisis."" ""California has demonstrated that the risks in the electricity industry, if not properly acknowledged and managed, can simultaneously and profoundly impact all market participants. To be effectively managed, these risks need to be exposed, assumed or shared, measured and monitored. When they are hidden or ignored, all parties can potentially suffer. A shared, integrated view of these risks, and a strategy for their assumption and management, is critical to avoiding rapid value destruction within the energy market,"" Smith said. An Andersen survey of senior utility executives outside California, also released at the briefing, indicates most utility companies believe they inoculated themselves against the California virus so that it is unlikely to affect their operations beyond slowing the pace of deregulation and increasing investor scrutiny. However, based on the potential implications it sees of the California situation, Andersen believes a series of booster shots are advisable for power companies and regulators. ""To deliver reliable service at a predictable cost in today's environment, companies must focus on market integration by developing new and innovative relationships between suppliers, customers, employees and investors -- while working with government officials and regulators to chart a smoother transition to a deregulated power market,"" according to Smith. Eight Implications The Andersen report identified eight overriding implications emanating from the Western energy crisis that are shaping the longer-term operations of the Western grid, the regional and national economy, domestic energy policy and the industry's evolution: 1. Increased deregulation uncertainty and risk -- Tension and differences between state and federal regulators raise the specter of repeating the regulatory and political conundrum California's investor-owned utilities have faced. If federal initiatives open wholesale markets while retail markets remain regulated, a crucial question is raised: Will state regulators pass-through higher wholesale costs if they should materialize? Tensions between state and federal regulators over policies on deregulation will grow if states delay or abandon retail competition. As wholesale markets are deregulated and RTOs begin operating, the prudence principles that state regulators have used for many years may have to be changed. For example, if FERC and RTO monitors determine that deregulated wholesale markets operate fairly, prices derived from those markets must be considered reasonable. If so, these costs should be allowed into state-regulated retail rates without regard to the prudence principles state regulators have used for years. Therefore, utilities' traditional burden of proving costs are or are not justifiable shifts to regulators. 2. Reduced investor confidence -- Prior to deregulation, stringent prudence review and disallowance of generation costs in the rate base made regulatory risk largely uncontrollable, killing IOU interests in most new investment. A major purpose of deregulation was to create an environment in which risk could be managed, but California's political and regulatory environment provides only a limited ability to manage risks. The confidence and perceptions needed to support investment decision-making will be slow to return given the approach of the state to remedy the crisis. 3. Contributing factor in economic softening -- Uncertain energy reliability and higher costs can drive-out marginal businesses, cause healthy companies to constrain expansion, and lead new entrants to question whether to make new investments. As such, an extended energy crisis contributes to inflation pressures and may slow economic growth. 4. Increased pressure on the Western grid -- Even as capacity increases and demand reductions work to resolve the California crisis, these solutions have long-term implications for the Western Grid. These include a realistic possibility of California becoming an ""energy island"" as a result of near-term reduction in available regional resources for export to California; increased emphasis on security control to protect against overall Western grid failure as sub-regions have problems; RTO requirements to strengthen locally available supplies to bolster overall system reliability; longer-term development of new plants using plentiful coal resources and clean coal technology will alter the pattern of imports into California; and the emergence of Mexico as a major supplier to southern California and Arizona, contributing to a bifurcation of the Western Grid into northern and southern markets. 5. Unbundling failures that push companies back to portfolio strategies -- For California investor-owned utilities, unbundling has achieved neither the least-cost solution sought by regulators nor value maximization targeted by investors. This necessitates a reevaluation of portfolio management strategies potentially involving generation, transmission, power trading and marketing, and retail businesses in multiple geographies serving multiple markets. 6. Ineffectiveness in changing siting and development restrictions -- California's retail price caps and multiple explanations for the crisis have left accelerated siting processes and environmental standards changes open to challenge by various interests. In addition, limiting application of new siting orders only to small generators contributes to uncertainty and investor hesitancy. 7. Procurement management that alters user-utility negotiating leverage -- Competitive markets compel participants -- suppliers, marketers, large industrial buyers, etc. -- to strategically manage procurement as a critical value-driver. Because risk is explicitly shared and always has the potential of shifting advantage to either seller or buyer, the sophistication of negotiations and contracts increases as competitive markets evolve. 8. Increased emphasis on distributed generation and new technologies -- California's reliability and price challenges have triggered a re-emergence of energy crisis measures from the 1970s. End-users are investing in solutions they control, and the distributed generation market is being aggressively developed among large retailers, industrial users and residential customers. This makes possible the development of microgrids connecting consumers in local areas and related changes in traditional grid systems, from modifications in interconnection agreements to changing definitions of reserve margins and system reliability. Industry Executives' Response Senior executives from sixteen non-California utilities with a combined market capitalization over $120 billion and $145 billion in revenues responded to an Andersen survey with their views of the implications of the California power crisis for their companies and for the industry. The survey, conducted between February 19, 2001 and March 2, 2001 by Knowledge Systems &amp; Research, Inc. of Syracuse, found that the companies are observing the California situation carefully, expect a slowing -- but not a turnaround -- of deregulation, and believe their internal plans and preparations are on-target for the changing environment: -- Deregulation -- Nearly all executives believe recent California events will slow the pace of deregulation over the next five years for states that have not begun or finished writing restructuring legislation. None believe that it will cause advanced states to re-regulate markets, although many states will review their legislation to assess their risk of duplicating California's current situation and make any changes necessary to avoid it. -- National legislation -- Few executives suggest the situation will initiate national energy policy/legislation; others believe it will be a continuing issue but, because of state-to-state variances, Congress will be unable to pass any comprehensive measures or force states to a restructuring timeline. Some expect additional state-level legislation. -- Company strategies -- Most do not see any changes to their business models or strategies for generation, distribution or supply procurement as a response to the situation in California. However, many have expanded their risk management programs, reduced spot market purchases, begun emphasizing long-term supply contracts, planning new power generation capacity, and started hedging with futures trades. Those facing price caps are rethinking their stance on them. -- Investor scrutiny -- Many executives indicate their shareholders are aware of the situation and investors -- particularly institutional investors -- are more heavily scrutinizing their actions. Many say news coverage has prompted retail, commercial and industrial customer skepticism of industry restructuring. -- Transmission deregulation -- Many executives agree the California situation will increase interest in FERC's regional transmission organizations (RTO) deregulation effort. Utility Company Action Items Both to guard against a sudden California cascade and as a potentially powerful competitive thrust, forward-thinking utilities should bolster their basic preparedness with a variety of tactics -- or inoculations -- specifically aimed to combat a potential California power virus, according to Andersen partner Mark Moskovitz: -- Improve procurement management and risk management capabilities -- To manage exposure to volatile supply and demand shifts, organizations must be sure that comprehensive and clear supply procedures, controls, decision points, risk limits and communications are in place. -- Plan and design innovative rate and pricing structures -- Companies and regulators must focus on communicating price signals that create value for both the customer and the provider. Innovative rate and pricing structures that more closely tie the customer's price to the real cost of supply will better signal the value of the service as well as providing more accurate information upon which both end user and supplier can make decisions. -- Increase emphasis on demand side management (DSM) strategies -- In addition to new pricing strategies to help achieve and maintain supply-demand equilibrium, companies must now focus on employing more extensive and innovative demand side management programs. These programs may offer significant benefits with limited risk to both the customer and energy supplier. -- Assess the supply and generation dynamics in adjacent jurisdictions -- Companies must take a broader view -- beyond typical geographic market definitions -- of the economics of generation and related business decisions in an increasingly volatile market in which supply will follow the best prices. -- Develop contingency plans for the continued deferral of new generation capacity -- In the face of potential ongoing generation capacity shortages, companies and regulators must be prepared to move with a portfolio of strategies to meet demand, including for example DSM, flexible pricing and distributed generation. In addition, they should explore efficiency-improving upgrades to existing facilities and seize any opportunity to accelerate near-term construction plans. -- Proactively address potential organizational disruption -- As regulatory and economic changes continue to churn the industry waters and companies adjust and/or restructure, they must be highly cogniscent of, sensitive to, and directly address employees' concerns with information about the company's future and theirs'. Industry/Regulatory Lessons There are also a number of broad primary lessons the electric power industry -- nationally and internationally -- should take away from its first major domestic test case in deregulation and restructuring, according to Andersen principal David O. Jermain: -- Simplify market design. -- Build a continuing role for regulators. -- Maintain communications with multiple constituent interests. -- Prepare contingency plans for extreme stress conditions. -- Couple real-time retail pricing with transparently priced wholesale competition. -- Provide special incentives for RTO investment, formation and development. -- Break down regulatory and political barriers to market signals and responses. Andersen is a global leader in professional services. It provides integrated solutions that draw on diverse and deep competencies in consulting, assurance, tax, corporate finance, and in some countries, legal services. Andersen employs 85,000 people in 84 countries. Andersen is frequently rated among the best places to work by leading publications around the world. It is also consistently ranked first in client satisfaction in independent surveys. Andersen has enjoyed uninterrupted growth since its founding in 1913. Its 2000 revenues totaled US$8.4 billion. Learn more at www.andersen.com. Copies of the ""Energy Crisis in the Western United States: Lessons for Navigating Regulatory and Market Minefields"" report can be obtained at A PDF copy of the report can be obtained by contacting Melanie Fahey at 713/222-1600 or mfahey@sommersassoc.com CONTACT: Sommers &amp; Associates, Houston | Tom Sommers, 713/222-1600 |=20 tsommers@sommersassoc.com |=20 or | Andersen, Houston | Melissa Spradley, 713/237-2385 |=20 --- --- Soaring Temperatures Produce Call for Conservation;=20 California ISO Also Announces New Outage Notification System and On-call=20 Number FOLSOM, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 24, 2001 via NewsEdge Corporation - As the mercury climbs this week, the California Independent System Operator (California ISO) is reminding consumers to curb their electricity use in order to minimize the strain on the power grid. The first warm spell of the season is expected to cause temperatures to jump 10 degrees, leading to a 2,000 megawatt increase in electricity consumption -- the equivalent of two large power plants. The week started out with a peak demand of 28,835 megawatts, but by tomorrow it is forecasted to top 30,500 megawatts. This comes as hydroelectricity resources (both Northwest and California) run low, more than 10,000 megawatts of power plants remain off line due to planned and unplanned maintenance, and some 3,000 megawatts of Qualifying Facilities or alternative energy suppliers are not operating. The California ISO's renewed call for conservation precedes a forecast of 90 degree highs in the inland areas that may tempt many Californians to flip on air conditioners. For conservation tips -- such as using fans instead of air conditioners, setting thermostat at 78 degrees, etc. -- please see the California ISO's web site www.caiso.com. New Notification System: With a challenging summer around the corner, the California ISO wants to do all it can to bring information to the public as quickly as possible. For that reason, a new notification system is being brought on line. Media and the public can now access the Internet to keep current if rotating blackouts are issued. Navigation: Visit www.caiso.com Click on System Conditions for current information on rotating outages (will appear only when activated) For previous outage information (last hour, etc.), click on Market Notices, scroll to bottom of page and click on Notice Log The California ISO is also testing a new service to notify newsrooms immediately by email should the ISO initiate electrical emergencies (Stage One - Three) or rotating outages. If you would like to participate, please email kwerst@caiso.com with a maximum of one email address per newsroom. Additionally, a single on-call media pager number has been established: 916/815-0679. To make it easier on media, ISO Communications will no longer be posting on-call schedules for media spokespersons on the web site. Simply call the on-call pager after hours. News releases alerting the media to electrical emergencies will continue, as will news conferences held on-site in Folsom and via telephone. As a reminder, if you wish to visit the ISO control rooms (in Folsom or Alhambra) always call ISO Communications first at 888/516-NEWS to make an appointment. Access to the control rooms may be limited on certain days, depending on system conditions and/or level of requests from media. CONTACT: California ISO | Patrick Dorinson, 888/516-NEWS | Media Hotline:= =20 888/516-NEWS [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= enron advisory council; [EMail-Body]= Forgive me if I have forgotten, but had you suggested a topic for our next advisory council meeting? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= US Visit for GoodCorporation; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 02/28/2001 02:14 PM ----- Vicky Pryce <Vicky@goodcorporation.com> 02/26/2001 01:03 PM To: ""'skean@enron.com'"" <skean@enron.com> cc: ""'michael@zilkha.com'"" <michael@zilkha.com>, Jo White <Jo@goodcorporation.com> Subject: US Visit for GoodCorporation Dear Steven I know Michael Zilkha has written to you already but I wanted to thank you too for the time you spent with us last Friday and the very valuable insights you gave us. I hope that I have given you most of the information you need to understand our concept and to be able to discuss it with your colleagues. We agreed that on my return to the UK I would set out how Enron might be involved at this stage and be one of the first US firms to pioneer the idea and become a GoodCorporation network member able to display the GoodCorporation trademark and start conversing with other members. Those members could be private companies, public sector entities or government departments, trade associations, NGOs etc. As we discussed the GoodCorporation Charter and processes are near completion . We are in the process of starting our pilot verifications which will be done by PwC, KPMG, Ernst & Young, Intertek, SGS and Bureau Veritas.We are also setting up an Accreditation Body ( which is being modelled on the Forestry Stewardship Council) to oversee the annual verification process. The pilot programme provides companies with an excellent opportunity to have a low risk way of trying out the process and seeing if it works in their organisation. They can submit the whole or a small part of the organisation. Pilot companies pay for the verifiers' time only and the verifiers are giving their time at cost ($750/ day.) The pilot itself will take the form of a preliminary scoping meeting in which the verifier will take the company through the evidence (policies and procedures) that need to be in place in order to pass the GoodCorporation charter. The meeting will decide who needs to be interviewed, in which locations and therefore the number of days involved. As the emphasis is on verifying policies and the way they are implemented in the workplace rather than a full scale audit of impact, the number of days involved should be relatively limited. During the actual verification, the verifier will check for the evidence by reviewing documentation provided by the company, in addition to a series of meetings with the relevant people, such as the HR Director, Environmental Manager, Finance Directors and customer-facing staff. Assuming it is successful, the piloted part of the company can then become a member of the network if they so choose. It would be great to have Enron involved in this early piloting. Given your current policies and ethics I wouild be surprised if the charter posed any real problem for you . It could also be a useful supply chain tool for you to encourage your suppliers not only to say they behave in the manner you wish them to behave but also demonstrate this behaviour to you and the outside world in a transparent fashion. Please get back to me if you require any further clarification and of course I and my colleagues would be delighted to meet whoever else you need to get involved before a decision is made. Again, many thanks for your time and I was delighted that you were enthusiastic about our concept. With very best regards Vicky Pryce Chairman, GoodCorporation [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Subscription Renewal; [EMail-Body]= I want to keep my subscription current. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/09/2000 03:30 PM ----- Susan L Kennedy@ECT 10/09/2000 03:29 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Subscription Renewal Dear Steve: This is to inform you that your subscription to Harvard Business Review is up for renewal. In the past, such renewals were routed to Info Central to be paid. Our department has changed its focus to research. If you would like to renew as a courtesy, we would be happy to take care of this for you. We will contact the publisher and let them know that for the next renewal to send the invoice directly to you, and from then on, you would take care of payment. Please let me know if you would like to renew this publication. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me. Sincerely, Susan Kennedy eSource 713/835-9135 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Eurelectric conference; [EMail-Body]= Houston has experienced catastrophic flooding. My flight has been cancelled. It is conceivable that I could get out tomorrow, but I am wondering if I should try. I could still make the speech if we don't get more rain, but given the lack of other reasons for me to go, I am considering cancelling. I don't think it makes much sense for me to go for a 15 minute speech. what do you think? phone 713.621.6550 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Analysis by Academics----Why De-regulation is the right policy
 choice; [EMail-Body]= I think we need some clear indication that with Hogan on the Board this is not going to turn into a diatribe about the benefits of LMP. He's the most informed of the bunch and I doubt he would find a general work of interest (unless he can create a platform for his more detailed ideas). If it stays general, I think the study is a good idea. One topic area might be to explore how politicians mess up the basic idea of deregualtion and suggest that the process needs to be handled in a more objective (and pure) fashion. Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 03/16/2001 10:54 AM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, skean@enron.com Subject: Re: Analysis by Academics----Why De-regulation is the right policy choice Great points. Teece---and the lion's share of the folks on the participants list---are advocates of a minimalist role for government, particularly where markets are a clear and preferably option, as in the case of electricity. That said, I think we're going to have to make a fundamental decision about what the goal of this ""study"" would be, which will determine, to a large degree, whether we choose to pursue it. I'll throw out for comment the notion that the study should be designed to serve one purpose: to influence the policy decision currently under debate ""To de-regulate or not."" As such, I wouldn't see issues like ""PJM or APX"" or ""competitive default supplier or not,"" or ""divest generation with vesting contracts or retain the assets"" being the focus. That debate over critically important implementation details, would seem to come in ""Round 2,"" once the initial debate over ""deregulate or not"" is won. To try to do both, i.e., resolve in the broad policy issue AND make the case for the specific, ""right"" implementation plan, would arguably bog the study down, perhaps interminably. And it seems that time is of the essence in the current environment. In addition, unless the fundamental policy issue is won--and won rather quickly--debating implementation may be moot. Of course, it will be impossible to avoid some level of dicussion on ""how to do it,"" but that would not be the emphasis. In sum, I'd suggest for comment that it only makes sense to proceed---particularly since time is of the essence---if we focus on the high level policy level question of ""to deregulate or not,"" and address implementation in a second, or follow up, study. I think we should try to make a call on this swiftly, since the ""go/no go"" decision would seem to flow from resolution of this issue. Best, Jeff James D Steffes 03/16/2001 08:22 AM To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@Enron, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, skean@enron.com Subject: Re: Analysis by Academics----Why De-regulation is the right policy choice Jeff -- It would be helpful to get some feedback prior to starting to deal with the fundamental question related to direct access for smaller customers. I would like to know Teece's perspective on the role of government in this marketplace. In addition, I think that the paper must deal with the drawbacks of having mixed roles - utility default supply and competitive markets. Jim Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 03/15/2001 03:11 PM To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, skean@enron.com, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Analysis by Academics----Why De-regulation is the right policy choice Greetings: As I've mentioned, I've been discussing with a group of academics (principally from UC Berkeley) the possibility of producing an analysis of why it makes sense to move forward toward de-regulation, and makes no sense to turn back to command-and-control regulation. Clearly, we're at a fork in the policy road---move forward, or go back. I've (finally) gotten a proposal from the group. It's attached. Please take a look. I'd like to distribute more widely internally for comment, but wanted to run it through a preliminary screen to guage whether folks think it would be useful before cluttering up folks' in-boxes with more emails to read. Few points worth mentioning: The majority of the academics that would do the report are affiliated with LECG, Inc., the consulting group that I worked with prior to joing Enron. List also includes Dan McFadden, UC Berkeley nobel prize winner who wrote the recent op-ed piece in the WSJ. The list also includes Hogan and Joskow and Borenstein. We could certainly exclude these folks should we choose to go forward with the analysis. However, the goal is to produce a high level analysis, i.e., ""de-regulation is good and can work; command and control regulation is bad and we know that it does not work."" Once the study is released (if it is pursued), the ""authors"" could tour the country, testifying before federal and state bodies to advocate the virtues of de-regulation and the pitfalls of reversing course. The analysis would not be a debate over ""To Poolco, or not to Poolco, PJM, etc."" In this way, including folks like Joskow and Hogan could offer the added benefit of creating a ""Nixon goes to China"" scenario. Please take a look at the list of participants. Again, we can add to and subtract from the list. Laura Tyson would be one of the two project leaders. (The other would be David Teece, Chairman of LECG.) None of the folks on the list occupies either extreme of the political spectrum. It's a mix of D's and R's who are arguably centrist economist and strong believers in markets (I won't vouch for Joskow and Hogan). The idea would be to get a wide array of industry participants from across the country to support the project. This is for two reasons: 1) the more diverse the group supporting the effort, the greater the credibility, and 2) they are asking for about $1 million to do the study. If you think it would be useful to pursue the study as part of our national campaign to minimize the damage created by California, I would like to start immediately to approach trade associations, companies, customers, etc. nationwide to garner support for the project. Let me know if you think the effort would be worthwhile. Appreciate your comments. Best, Jeff ----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 03/15/2001 02:43 PM ----- - REAFFIRMING THE CASE FOR ELECTRICITY DEREGULATION.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CONFIDENTIAL - CA Customer Letter; [EMail-Body]= Here is the note we sent to our CA customers this weekend to extend with Evergreen. Jim ---------------------- Forwarded by James D Steffes/NA/Enron on 06/24/2001 10:10 AM --------------------------- From: Mike D Smith@EES on 06/22/2001 05:28 PM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES cc: Kevin Keeney/HOU/EES@EES Subject: CA Customer Letter We plan to send the attached to about 100 of our CA customers tomorrow, offering to extend the terms of their agreements at an indexed price. Please review asap and let me and Kevin know if you have any concerns. I can be reached over the weekend at 713 302 9089. I have attached the letters for EES and EEMC customers, but they are identical. Thanks. MDS [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: ISO Market Stabilization Plan; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/16/2001 01:43 PM --------------------------- Steven J Kean 04/15/2001 08:02 PM To: Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Re: ISO Market Stabilization Plan Thanks for taking the lead on this. Note Tim's question about handicapping the liklihood of approval. Prices will move in the West based on these odds. We need to have a better view than anyone else. Ray Alvarez 04/13/2001 01:19 PM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON Subject: Re: ISO Market Stabilization Plan Tim, although there's always a ""chance"" my impression is that the FERC won't buy the ban on exports, as this would appear to run afoul of the Commerce Clause and certainly goes counter to everything that FERC hopes to accomplish with their own Order 888 and 2000 initiatives. I am less certain about the direction FERC will go on pricing, since even the staff has recognized stumbling blocks in their own recommendation and offers possible variants. The ISO has not submitted revised tariff sheets for approval yet, so it is unlikely they would try to implement their own plan in the near term. If they try to do so without FERC approval, possible legal avenues might include the filing of a complaint at FERC, asking for fast track processing (this ""fast"" is measured in weeks, not days) and/or seeking injunctive relief in court (faster), which can be hard to obtain but not impossible, depending entirely on the circumstances. Will keep you posted if I learn anything new on this. Ray James D Steffes 04/12/2001 11:21 PM To: Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron Subject: Re: ISO Market Stabilization Plan Ray -- Can you please take the lead in responding to Tim re: FERC v. state actions? Sue -- Any info on whether the ISO would do this unilaterally? Jim To: Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: ISO Market Stabilization Plan The recent plan filed at FERC is horrible. The two most aggregious parts are the cost based standing bids and the ban on exports. I know that we are commenting on this proposal. I am also looking for intellegence on whether the ISO proposal has any chance of getting approved by FERC. If it is not approved by FERC, what can the Californians do? California has ignored FERC before. If they attempt to unilaterally implement changes what is the likelihood that the Feds step in to intervene? If you hear anything on this matter please keep me posted. The proposed plan will have a huge impact on the California market and we need as much advance notice as possible. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Follow up for Ken; [EMail-Body]= Rep Scott McGinnis (colo) told Ken that he would like to be briefed on the California and broader energy situation so that he can speak out on the issue. Also, don't forget that we need to go see your buddy Newt! [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: NASCAR Craftsman Truck Series Proposal; [EMail-Body]= Thank you for the information. Unfortunately, we are not interested at this time. Lorna Clark <dlpits@yahoo.com> on 05/16/2001 08:59:39 PM To: Steve Kean <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: NASCAR Craftsman Truck Series Proposal Steve: Approximately 3 weeks ago we sent you a Sponsorship proposal for Ware Racing. We are curious if you've had the time to look our package over. We have tried unsuccessfully to reach you by phone and understand that you are very busy. If you have time, would you please contact us reguarding this matter. You can reach us by phone or fax at (905) 680-1568 or on the net at dlpits@yahoo.com. We look forward to hearing from you. Thank-you, Dave/Lorna Clark Allied Motorsports (representing WARE Racing) Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/ [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: IHI Arbitration: PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY CLIENT
 COMMUNICATION; [EMail-Body]= Thanks. I have no idea why Enerson is being so panicky. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: SPEC SR PUBLIC RELATIONS, Job Code #0000109017; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Magee, Molly Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 12:23 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: RE: SPEC SR PUBLIC RELATIONS, Job Code #0000109017 Vince: That job was for Eric Thode who is a Director of Communications here in EWS. It has, however, been filled. I do know that there may be another job for a manager of public relations opening up soon if you would like to have your friend to send me his resume. Thanks, Molly x34804 -----Original Message----- From: Kaminski, Vince J Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 10:45 AM To: Magee, Molly Subject: SPEC SR PUBLIC RELATIONS, Job Code #0000109017 Molly, Do you know who has posted this ad: SPEC SR PUBLIC RELATIONS, Job Code #0000109017. I have a friend who is looking for a position who seems to have the perfect skills for this job. Vince [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: 1.  London, June 28 - 29; 2.  Houston, July 16 - 17; [EMail-Body]= Shirley, No problem. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Crenshaw, Shirley Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 3:03 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: RE: 1. London, June 28 - 29; 2. Houston, July 16 - 17 Vince: Zimin will be able to go and he suggested that we ask Alex, because of the college relationship? -----Original Message----- From: Kaminski, Vince J Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 12:08 PM To: Crenshaw, Shirley Subject: FW: 1. London, June 28 - 29; 2. Houston, July 16 - 17 Shirley, Can you get tickets for either night Ehud mentioned? Maybe Vasant and Zimin can join us? Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Ehud I. Ronn"" <eronn@mail.utexas.edu>@ENRON Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 11:08 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: 1. London, June 28 - 29; 2. Houston, July 16 - 17 Vince: Greetings. I write at this time for two reasons. First, w.r.t. 6/28 - 6/29 London, I remain uncertain whether you intend personally to attend and present at that EPRM Financial Math course. I wanted to advise you know that, in addition to the sightseeing/theatre we traditionally do at these events, we -- you, Duane Seppi, Peter Nance and I -- have been invited to dinner at the home of Klaus and Renee Toft Sat. evening 6/30. Second, w.r.t. the subsequent mid-July Houston training course, I write to remind you that at EPRM 2001 we discussed the possibility of jointly attending a baseball game at Enron Field 7/16 or 7/17. Per the Astros' schedule, it turns out the Cleveland Indians will be in town both nights for a 7:05 p.m. first-pitch start time at the Field. Let me know if either 7/16 or 7/17 works out from your perspective. Hope all is well. Best, Ehud Ehud I. Ronn Jack S. Josey Professor in Energy Studies Department of Finance McCombs School of Business University of Texas at Austin Austin, TX. 78712-1179 Voice: (512) 471-5853 FAX: (512) 471-5073 Internet: eronn@mail.utexas.edu [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= May 15 conference; [EMail-Body]= Joe -- could you see if someone at FERC -- Hebert or Madden, might be available -- or suggest a suitable alternative? ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/14/2001 05:54 PM ----- Nicholas O'Day 03/14/2001 12:28 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron cc: Subject: May 15 conference Steve, we talked about the possibility of securing a speaker from FERC for the May 15 deregulation conference in Tokyo, either in person or by video conference. Have things settled down sufficiently to approach the person you had in mind? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= potential media calls; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/30/2001 07:12 AM --------------------------- Peggy Mahoney@EES 04/27/2001 03:58 PM To: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Elizabeth Ivers/Enron@EnronXGate, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES Subject: potential media calls FYI: Early next week, EES is filing an environmental permit for a gas fired or diesel 50 megawatt mobile, temporary generation ""facility"" in Gallup, New Mexico. We anticipate that we will use gas, but in either case, we will not pass the emmissions threshold. Obviously diesel will provide less generation. Enron currently has a gas compressor on site and we own the land. We are seeking to deliver the power to markets in the west. This will serve the Palo Verde region. Jim Steffes has been advising as to the local permitting processes. I will keep you in the loop as we proceed. We will probably look to permit other such generation facilities in the west. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Kissinger; [EMail-Body]= I'm envious. See you when you get back From: Rebecca McDonald/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/15/2001 08:21 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: RE: Kissinger We're going to be two ships passing here. I leave town on Friday and return to the office on Wednesday morning. How about I give you a call when I get back. I am only in a few days and then I am heading to DC for my son's college graduation exercises. ( I know exactly what you are thinking - Lordy, she's old!!) Talk to you then, okay? Rebecca -----Original Message----- From: Kean, Steven Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 7:44 PM To: McDonald, Rebecca Subject: Re: Kissinger Sorry, I got overwhelmed by California. I have not talked to Ken yet and will be in Japan until Friday. Perhaps we can hook up then? From: Rebecca McDonald/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/11/2001 02:46 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Kissinger Steve, We never closed the loop on Kissinger. If you are around next week, why don't we talk and resolve what we want to do so that I can proceed? Does that work for you? Rebecca [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Barton Staff Meeting; [EMail-Body]= Yesterday I spent about 45 minutes with the three key energy staff to the H= ouse Energy and Commerce Committee -- Andy Black (for Barton) and Sean Cunn= ingham and Jason Bentley (the energy counsels to the full committee). We m= et at my request to discuss Barton RTO draft. (The group EPSA meeting with= Chairman Barton that was to have been yesterday afternoon has been resched= uled for next Tuesday.) =20 Key points from the meeting -- =20 1. They do not expect the Barton Subcommittee to mark up the electricity l= egislation this year. Time is running out and Members of the subcommittee = are not focused on the issue. Instead, they plan to continue working on th= e issue at the staff level. Probably will be another draft version circula= ted and then a version will be introduced by Barton as a formal bill by the= end of the year. The earliest they see any kind of vote is late Jan. or ea= rly February. =20 2. Barton feels strongly that FERC should not be the ""tail wagging the do= g"" on RTO policy. =20 3. On particulars of the bill, they are clearly reconsidering the 40,000 = MW minimum threshold for the size of an RTO. They are getting pulled in bo= th directions, they say, and are inclined to drop the 40,000 MW number -- p= ossibly leaving it to FERC to set a number. They conceded that the mechani= cs of the draft make it unlikely that the 18 month ""deadline"" for all trans= mission owners to get into an approved RTO would stick. They consciously c= hanged the normal judicial standard of review for FERC actions from ""arbitr= ary and capricious"" to ""preponderance of the evidence"" because they think o= therwise the courts will rubber stamp FERC. Spent a lot of time on how the= draft would aid and abet the recalcitrant utilities and that the overall n= ature of the draft assumes there are only two parties to this -- FERC and t= he transmission owners -- while the rest of those truly affected -- from us= to others -- are left out. Sean said we could still intervene, but I said= that was the truly pro forma aspect of their process since FERC's hands an= d our's would be tied by the ""rights"" given to transmission owners to drag = their feet. =20 Bottom line -- FERC has a window until next Spring without likely congressi= onal interference, at least not of the formal, legislative variety, to both= move on RTOs and improve its relations with Congress. FERC staff has been= pushing the committee staff on concerns similar to our concerns. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: FERC INVESTIGATION IN CA - What should they be looking for?; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/18/2000 02:23 PM --------------------------- From: Tim Belden@ECT on 08/17/2000 07:34 AM PDT To: James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES cc: Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES, Bruno Gaillard/SFO/EES@EES, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON@EES, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON@EES, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Re: FERC INVESTIGATION IN CA - What should they be looking for? Here are some more thoughts: FERC should take a hard look at why the ISO is almost always in an ""inc"" situation in real time. Without structural incentives to go short into real time, I would expect the CAISO to ""inc"" in some hours and ""dec"" in others -- with no consistent patterns. The IOU's have four choices for purchasing power: PX Block Forward, PX Day Ahead, PX Day Of, and CAISO Ex Post. They had ample opportunity to purchase lower cost power in the PX Block Forward but didn't buy enough. That left them short in the Day Ahead. They can reduce Day Ahead prices by moving some of their load to the Ex Post market. Dave Parquet did an Econ 101 presentation on this incentive at the CAISO board meeting in June. The ISO remains primarily in ""inc"" mode even during the shoulder months when prices are lower, another indicator that the real time ""inc"" problem is driven by the load side rather than the supply side. The IOU's continue to go short into the ISO Ex Post market even when the CAISO Ex Post price is consistently above the PX Day Ahead price. There is evidence that the IOU's are not willing to pay above the CAISO price cap for energy from the PX in the Day Ahead market. Does it matter that the price cap for the ISO also acts as a PX price cap? The NOx market in California is very tight. How has this contributed to higher costs and has the complete lack of available NOx credits prevented any generators from running? How large was the impact of the below normal water year on the supply side? The attached presentation quantifies this effect in the Northwest. (I have a theory on how hydro capacity completely overstates reserve margins in the west from an economic perspective. I can go into more detail if you wish.) Friction between California PX and ISO markets and other western markets. For example, why are actual flows going into the state yet prices out side of the state are higher? Another example of anomylous behavior is at COB on 8/11 and 8/12. There was congestion from California TO the northwest those days in the Day Ahead market. In real time the NW ended up being a net seller of about 3,000 MW from the NW TO California. Demand Side - we really need to press on this issue because all of the proponents of price caps claim that as soon as the demand side is ""workably competitive"" then there is no need for price caps. Is large-scale economic demand response required for a competitive market? What if demand response is there, but at very high prices? The demand response in California is a joke. With 2700 MW of interuptible, why did the utilities and the CAISO only get around 600 MW of economic demand response. Much of this response comes at $1500/MWh. The assymetric treatment of supply side resources and demand side resources can be justified on environmental grounds, but not economic grounds. So why this assymetric treatment? This gets to the question of the fine line between ""scarcity rents"" which are ok, and market power which is not. If power is scarce, and demand truly values it at $1500/MWh then shouldn't that be the price. At what price would the rest of the interuptible load economically curtail? Bottom line -- there are about 2,000 MW of load that should be able to respond to price signals that chooses not to or values power at more than $1500/MWh. Burden of proof -- what empirical measures should be used to assess market power? The reports published to date have been unimpressive. The Market Analysis Unit report, for example, does a bunch of handwaving and then concludes that there is market power. But they never explain why. I would think that proof might be something like this: Generator X sets price y% of the time when loads exceed Z MWs. Or, four generators set price 80% of the time when prices exceed $200/MWh. They have all the data to be able to tell, yet they don't provide any empirical measures. The only test I've heard of so far is the UC Energy Institute report that demonstrates that generators are submitting bids above their marginal cost. The PX report states that supply bids are fewer and at higher prices than last year. They fail to mention the fact that there are 5,000 fewer MW of hydro this year relative to last. James D Steffes@EES 08/17/2000 06:18 AM To: Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES, Bruno Gaillard/SFO/EES@EES, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES Subject: FERC INVESTIGATION IN CA - What should they be looking for? As we begin to meet with FERC Staff on the Wholesale market issues related to CA problems, I think that we need to put together a list of questions that FERC needs to be asking Western power market participants. The following are some questions that I think are important to have FERC ask; I'm sure there are more. 1. Were California utilities underscheduling load into the PX day ahead market? 2. How many MWs did the CA ISO procure during each hour during the Summer 2000? How does this compare with CA ISO procurement during 1999? 3. Has PG&E changed its bidding behavior associated with its Hydro facilities in 2000? 3. Are there baseload facilities that were operated differently in 2000 than in 1999? 4. Were any generation plants off-line due to unplanned maintenance during Summer 2000? 5. How did the CA ISO demand side program work? Why didn't more load participate? 6. What options did SDG&E have to ""hedge"" its retail rates? What were prices in the CAL PX block forward market on Jan 15, 2000 and May 15, 2000? 7. How high did natural gas prices go in California for generation during Summer 2000? 8. Were other Western power markets prices higher (year-on-year)? 9. Did the CA ISO Board face political pressure to reduce bid caps? Is this appropriate for a FERC jurisdictional entity? 10. What specific details is SDG&E referring to in its Complaint on ""unworkably competitive"" CA ISO markets? Can these be fixed ""quickly""? Please add other questions. Jim [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Possible letter to Eddington at BA; [EMail-Body]= Looks good to me. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/06/2001 07:11 AM --------------------------- Stelzer@aol.com on 07/05/2001 08:41:38 PM To: rosalee.fleming@enron.com, klay@enron.com, skean@enron.com cc: Subject: Possible letter to Eddington at BA POSSIBLE DRAFT LETTER TO ROD EDDINGTON at BA FROM KEN LAY Dear Rod: Irwin Stelzer says that he has mentioned to you that the next meeting of Enron's advisory council is scheduled for London on October 30 and 31. The council includes several prominent permanent members drawn from the business and academic communities, to which we add distinguished guests with expertise in areas of interest to us on an ad hoc basis. Several of our top executives attend these meetings. I am hoping that you might help us in two ways. Irwin tells me that your headquarters building is innovative and has many features that it would be well worth our while to know about and to study. Would it be possible for you to arrange a tour for a few of our executives, both from the US and the UK, say on the morning of October 30? Second, we understand from Irwin and from the press that you have done wonders in reinvigorating and revitalizing the BA staff. I am hoping that you might be willing to share some of the secrets of your success with us, perhaps at an informal buffet lunch at our new London headquarters on October 31, or at some other time on that day that might be more convenient for you. Let me take this opportunity to congratulate you on what you have achieved at BA, in a short time and in a tough market. Sincerely, [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= GREAT NEWS ****FERC Order on Morgan Stanley Complaint Against ISO; [EMail-Body]= See below. this is one of the issues that concerned us more than price caps, because it could limit our ability to move power to other markets in the west. In addition, if you get questions from the analysts on ""reregulation"" or price caps it is worth pointing out that the high prices prevailing in many markets help our retail sales pitch to end use customers and create opportunities for our wholesale price risk management services . . . even a $250 price cap is 5-10 times what large customers are accustomed to paying. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/01/2000 07:18 AM --------------------------- Susan J Mara 08/01/2000 03:07 AM To: David Parquet/SF/ECT@ECT, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Elsa Piekielniak/Corp/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Vonderheide/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bruno Gaillard/SFO/EES@EES, Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES, Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES, Sandra McCubbin/SFO/EES@EES, Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: GREAT NEWS ****FERC Order on Morgan Stanley Complaint Against ISO Dan Douglass summarized this. This really puts CA and the ISO on notice that they cannot confiscate the power as they seem ready to do -- FERC reiterates that the generators can sell power wherever they want because the cap is a cap on ISO purchases. ANd if the ISO want to set a sale price cap it has to file with FERC, wait 60 days and amend its contract ---------------------- Forwarded by Susan J Mara/SFO/EES on 08/01/2000 01:01 AM --------------------------- ""Daniel Douglass"" <douglass@ArterHadden.com> on 07/31/2000 07:27:24 PM To: <peter.bray@att.net>, <JBarthrop@electric.com>, <mnelson@electric.com>, <rschlanert@electric.com>, <Bruno_Gaillard@enron.com>, <kmagrude@enron.com>, <mpetroch@enron.com>, <susan_j_mara@enron.com>, <athomas@newenergy.com>, <bchen@newenergy.com>, <Jeff.Hanson@phaser.com>, <anchau@shellus.com>, <andrew.madden@utility.com>, <ben.reyes@utility.com>, <chris.king@utility.com>, <david.bayless@utility.com> cc: Subject: FERC Order on Morgan Stanley Complaint Against ISO We have good news on the ISO price caps front. The FERC has made it clear that ISO does not have the ability to mandate that generators sell to ISO at its price caps and that the proper response to inadequate supply is to lift the price caps. On Friday, the FERC issued its Order on Complaint in connection with the July 10 complaint filed by Morgan Stanley Capital Group Inc. (""MS""). As you may recall, MS requested FERC to issue a stay of the ISO's maximum purchase price authority and to direct the ISO to reverse any price cap reductions. MS sought Fast Track processing pursuant to Rule 206(h), which was granted by FERC on the grounds that the complaint ""warrants expeditious action."" As a quick background summary for you, last November, FERC issued an order approving Tariff Amendment 21 which extended ISO's price cap authority through 11/15/00. That order stated that the ISO ""maximum purchase price was not a cap on what the seller may charge the ISO, but a cap on what the ISO was willing to pay."" The Commission said that sellers dissatisfied with the price cap could ""choose to sell those services into the California Power Exchange or bilateral markets."" FERC notes in Friday's Order that the 6/28 the ISO's Board resolution lowered the caps to $500 and ISO further directed that, ""To the extent permitted by law, regulation and pre-existing contract, Management shall direct generators to bid in all their capacity when system load exceeds 38,000 MW."" The MS complaint alleged that the cap reduction was unlawful and would, ""threaten the stability and integroty of the marketplace."" MS also requested an emergency technical conference to examine ISO's justification for the price cap reduction. FERC denied the MS stay request, as well as its request that the $750 maximum purchase price be reinstated. The Commission reiterates that it is not approving a cap on sellers' prices, because they can sell at whatever price they want. Rather ISO has simply stated the maximum price it is willing to pay. ""Because sellers are not required to sell to the ISO, the ISO cannot dictate their price."" Importantly, however, FERC also states that, ""ISO has no more or less ability to procure capacity and energy than any other buyer of these services....if the ISO is unable to elicit sufficient supplies at or below its announced purchase price ceiling (because generators are free to sell elsewhere if they choose), it will have to raise its purchase price to the level necessary to meet its needs."" [Emphasis added] FERC then notes that this may lead to an increase in Out of Market (""OOM"") calls and that OOM calls are not subject to a maximum purchase price. Also, with regard to the ISO's resolution stating that generators must bid their capacity into the ISO markets when system load exceeds 38,000 MW, FERC states clearly that, ""such a requirement is not permitted by our November 12 Order and the ISO tariff."" [Emphasis added] FERC goes on to say that any requirement to sell to ISO in conjunction with a maximum purchase price would require significant revisions to ISO's market rules, which could not be made effective without a corresponding amendment to ISO's tariff. This would require 60 days' advance notice, ""and could not be implemented prior to Commission approval. As stated above, our November 12 Order was clearly based on the premise that the proper response to inadequate supply (due to a low maximum purchase price) is to raise the maximum purchase price."" ISO is then ""put on notice that any amendment to mandate sales must be accompanied by a demonstration that this extreme measure is the proper response to low supplies in the ISO markets."" Concurrences were filed by Commissioners Massey and Hebert. Massey suggests that the state has to facilitate solutions to market issues, such as risk management tools, removing constraints on hedging opportunities, introducing real time pricing through real time metering and expediting approval of new generation and transmission projects in California. Hebert says that the previous November Order tried to ""straddle the fence"" and that, ""Today, the Commission at least starts to lean slightly in the right direction of recognizing that we have a role."" He then reiterates his preference for removing all price caps. He also suggests that, ""Getting to the bottom of the problem, in my view, requires us to begin a proceeding to rescind our approval of the ISO as operator of the California grid. The record supports such a move."" He refers approvingly to the Collins resignation letter, stating that it, ""thoughtfully outlines consequences to the market of a return to 'command and control.' "" Hebert states that, ""The independence of the ISO's governing structure stands threatened. We should 'stand up,' to quote the resignation letter."" Hebert advocates opening a section 206 proceeding now, as part of the recently announced inquiry into bulk power markets, ""including the California markets."" This decision makes it clear that ISO cannot lower the caps at tomorrow's meeting and expect that sellers will be required to sell to it at that price. This is an important development and very good news in our ongoing efforts to seek economic sanity at the ISO. Please call if you have any questions. Dan [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= examples of auction processes that worked; [EMail-Body]= Jeff Skilling proposed a solution to Gov Davis to solve the supply and pricing problems in the California market. In summary, the proposal would have a neutral party conduct an auction wherein the utilities would seek bids for 5-10 year packages of power from suppliers. The gov asked if anyone had successfully conducted such an auction in the industry already. I need your help to identify and describe any such examples (European or North American) by mid day Monday. Jeff and I will have a follow up call with the governor on Monday. Thanks [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Fellow referred to me by Ken Lay; [EMail-Body]= It was not mentioned to me. I'm copying rosie and vanessa to find out if this was a simple referral (in which case you should keep the work to a minimum -- return the call, but don't get distracted from your other efforts) or whether Ken is especially interested in this and wants us to follow through. Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 03/12/2001 03:54 PM To: skean@enron.com cc: Subject: Fellow referred to me by Ken Lay Just got a call from a fellow named Jame Edgerly at the Enterprise Zone, Inc. He told me that Ken Lay (through Ken's secretary Vanessa) referred me to him. He is very interested in getting us to help him work with the Legislature to establish an ""Enterprise Zone"" energy tariff to encourage investment in California's Enterprice Zones. Before I launch on the effort, just wanted to check in and see if this rings a bell with you. Thanks. Best, Jeff [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Confidential Draft - David Pope; [EMail-Body]= Tara, You are right -- those changes were not included. For Vice President level employees, corporate comp.does not promote guaranteed performance bonuses. The request that he be able to ""get out"" of his employment contract if he is not promoted also is not something that we can do; otherwise, it will undermine the enforceability of our non-competes across the board. I spoke with David Oxley on both of those points, and he concurred that these changes could not be made. Michelle Tara Rozen 04/05/2000 12:23 PM To: Twanda Sweet/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Nigel Sellens/LON/ECT@ECT, Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Confidential Draft - David Pope Thanks for this, Twanda I have two comments; 1)I cannot find the exception clause which indicates that David Pope can resign if he doesn't make MD as described in previous email. Am I missing this or can we not put this in? 2)Danny McCarty wanted guaranteed bonus for 2000 rather than performance target bonus as per email. Is this possible? Thanks Tara [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= West Virginia Settlement; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 12/13/99 05:15 PM --------------------------- Janine Migden 12/13/99 03:57 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES, Elizabeth Linnell/HOU/EES@EES, Ginger Dernehl/HOU/EES@EES, Lynnette Barnes/HOU/EES@EES, Susan.R.Lewis@enron.com cc: Thomas S Reichelderfer/DUB/EES@EES, Barbara A Hueter/DUB/EES@EES, Lara Leibman/HOU/EES@EES Subject: West Virginia Settlement Thom and I have just completed negotiations in West Virginia involving APS, AEP and other stakeholders. The settlement, being filed today is a compromise on all the issues and is the result of negotiations. Enron was the only marketer involved in the process. While we weighed in all the issues, there are a number of items that but for our persistence would not have been included in the final agreement. These items include the following: 1. Native load language 2. Competitive metering and billing for industrial and large commercials as of day one, with other customers following no later than within the next four years. 3. Addition of competitive bidding for default service at end of 5 years. 4. Change from functional separation to a requirement to corporately separate as soon as possible but no later than within the next five years. 5. Strong codes of conduct that form the base for more detailed rulemaking. (A special thanks to Lara Leibman for her assistance). Below is a summary of the entire settlement: 1. All customers can exercise choice beginning January 1, 2001. 2. All utilities including IOU's, munies and coops can opt in. APS has committed to opt in whereas AEP is not because it did not get any stranded cost and it also did not get a guarantee of full recovery of all costs resulting from the environmental lawsuits against them irrespective of their financial condition. 3. Competitive metering and billing as described above. 4. Generation is deregulated. 5. PSC continues jurisdiction over implemention, rate unbundling, reliability, codes of conduct, supplier licensing, construction of transmission lines and eminent domain authority. 6. Native load language - Requires utilities to provide service to affiliated and unaffiliated suppliers only under the applicable distribution tariffs and proformatransmission tariffs. 7. RTO's - Each utility must join a FERC approved RTO or its equivlent by no later than 1/1/03; best efforts requirement to eliminate pancaking by 1/1/05 if IOU's are in separate RTO's. 8. Competitive bidding process for default service customers at end of year 5 for remainder of transition period. 9. Rate unbundling requirement 10. Rates capped for first 4 years with any FERC change in transmission being applied as an offset to distribution. Rates continue to be regulated through the 10th year with the rate gradually increasing during the second six years for the residential and small commercial customers. For the large commercial and industrial customers, the rate regulation ends 12/31/07. 11. A rate stabilization deferral fund is created to facilitate the transition to competition in years 11, 12 and 13, under which APS must contribute $56.75 million and AEP must contribute $81 million to be used as an offset to the prices paid by small residential and commercial default customers. 12. Large commercial and industrial customers receive for the first 4 years, rate decreases in an amount to be determined by the Commission for AEP customers and 3% for APS customers. The rate decrease is allocated to distribution. 13. No stranded costs (either generating or regulatory assets) for AEP or APS, however APS gets a ten year PURPA surcharge starting at 2.6 mills per kwh in year one and declining to .75 mills per kwh in the last two years. 14. Usual licensing requirements. (AEP fought for the right to have a second tier of licensing where they would have the ability to certify marketers but we defeated that). 15. Corporate separation and codes of conduct as described above. 16. Consumer protection and education requirements typically found in other plans. 17. Low income protection provisions providing a .2 mil surcharge with the minimum being $.40 and the maximum being $300. 18. Utility worker protection plan. Below for your information is the plan. At this point the plan goes to the PSC for approval and then on to the legislature for a resoulution approving the PSC order. We expect that AEP and labor will oppose it, so it will be a close call. Janine [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Eeegads...; [EMail-Body]= hey, when are you scheduled to go in for your attitude labotomy? Paul Kaufman/ENRON@enronXgate 05/10/2001 01:51 PM To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan M Landwehr/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: RE: Eeegads... I'll be there, as will Sandi McCubbin. Are you interested in going? I thought not. -----Original Message----- From: Dasovich, Jeff Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 11:02 AM To: Kaufman, Paul; Landwehr, Susan Subject: Eeegads... Don't know how I got on the list, but just got my invitation to the Western Conference of PUCs meeting June 3-6 where the guest speakers are Frank Wolak and Gary Locke. Oh dear.... Best, Jeff [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call
 Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and
 Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted; [EMail-Body]= Can you guys coordinate to make sure someone listens to this conference call each week. Tara from the fundamental group was recording these calls when they happened every day. Phillip ---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT on 05/07/2001 07:26 AM --------------------------- James D Steffes@ENRON 05/03/2001 05:44 AM To: Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Re: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted Please forward to anyone on your team that wants updates on Western wholesale matters (should also give you an opportunity to raise state matters if you want to discuss). Jim ---------------------- Forwarded by James D Steffes/NA/Enron on 05/03/2001 07:42 AM --------------------------- Ray Alvarez 05/02/2001 05:40 PM To: Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, jalexander@gibbs-bruns.com, Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Linda J Noske/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted Date: Every Thursday Time: 1:00 pm Pacific, 3:00 pm Central, and 4:00 pm Eastern time, Number: 1-888-271-0949, Host Code: 661877, (for Jim only), Participant Code: 936022, (for everyone else), Attached is the table of the on-going FERC issues and proceedings updated for use on tomorrow's conference call. It is available to all team members on the O drive. Please feel free to revise/add to/ update this table as appropriate. Proposed agenda for tomorrow: Power- Discussion of FERC market monitoring and mitigation order in EL00-95-12 and review of upcoming filings Gas- Response to subpoenas of SoCal Edison in RP00-241 and upcoming items Misc. I will be unable to participate in the call tomorrow as I will be attending the Senate Energy and Resource Committee Hearing on the elements of the FERC market monitoring and mitigation order. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Our Will; [EMail-Body]= no objection ""Robert Kean"" <rkean@starband.net> on 04/30/2001 10:00:52 AM Please respond to <rkean@starband.net> To: ""Phil Kean \(E-mail\)"" <kean.philip@mcleodusa.net>, ""Doug & Karen Reiman \(E-mail\)"" <dkreiman@mcleodusa.net>, ""Kathy Wedig \(E-mail\)"" <kat.wedig@netzero.net>, ""Steve & Melissa Kean \(E-mail\)"" <skean@enron.com> cc: ""Diane Kean \(E-mail 3\)"" <dkean@starband.net> Subject: Our Will Phil, Karen, Kathy, Steve, Diane and I are finally getting a will written. I would like to ask all of you if you have any objections to being named in the will as executors OR executing an Advanced Health Care Directive. An AHCD is document inwhich Diane and I will state what our wishes are regarding life support. I have attached a sample copy for review. If anyone objects, please reply to me in the next 10-14 days. We will be meeting with the lawyer sometime around the 15th or 16th. Rob - Advance Health Care Directive.pdf [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= recent developments; [EMail-Body]= Will we capture these ""accelerations"" in our accomplishments? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 07/19/2000 11:09 PM --------------------------- Mark Schroeder@ECT 07/19/2000 07:44 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Paul Hennemeyer/LON/ECT@ECT, Kyran Hanks/LON/ECT@ECT, Margaret Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kathryn Corbally/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sadia Haider/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: recent developments Several recent developments, and in the interest of economy (mine!), I am copying all of you, who will have varying interests in this. First, as soon as the upper house of parliament passes legislation, Austria will have accelerated their market oppening, to 100% in power by 2001, October, and by 2002, October for gas. Sadia, you will want to reflect this in what you are doing for Kyran/EES, and Kathryn, you will want to note this, if Investor Relations is updating this data for analysts. Margaret, FYI to you, too. Second, I note that this decision was reached after being supported by a studyby the Austrian Institute of Economic Research (WIFO), saying liberalisation would bring down prices by 12-15%. Paul H., suggest you have Viviana get a copy, and if in English, send copies to Margaret Carson. Belgian cabinet has approved draft regulation lowering power threshold to 20GWh p.a. This goes to 10 GWh on 31 December 2002. Sadia, I think this is again an acceleration, to be reflected in your updated numbers. Margaret and Kathryn, also note. Finally, Kyran, I see that EnergieNed has issued a study saying that there is ""not a direct relationship between efficiency and deregulation"". I may take issue with this, depending upon what the full text says. Can you work with Teun/Sadia to obtain a copy, and, if not too lengthy, get it translated for my review (and presumably your's, too)? thanks Please do not hesitate to contact me should any of you have any questions. thanks mcs [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 02/28/2001 02:19 PM ----- Miyung Buster@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 02/26/2001 09:03 AM To: Ann M Schmidt/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bryan Seyfried/LON/ECT@ECT, dcasse@whwg.com, dg27@pacbell.net, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron, filuntz@aol.com, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Janet Butler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeannie Mandelker/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Margaret Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Markus Fiala/LON/ECT@ECT, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT, Mike Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron, Nicholas O'Day/AP/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Stella Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@Enron, Mike Roan/ENRON@enronXgate, Alex Parsons/EU/Enron@Enron, Andrew Morrison/LON/ECT@ECT, lipsen@cisco.com, Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Energy Issues Riverside Press 2/23: ""Power line plan has new foes"" Contra Costa Times, 2/23: ""GOP in a fix over power crisis"" Sac Bee, Fri 2/23: ""Davis says State has tentative deal for Edison grid"" SF Chron 2/23: ""Utilities Search for Long-Term Fix During Breather..."" SJ Mercury 2/23: ""State's Energy Price Tag Increases"" LA Times 2/23: ""Paying for power still a big question"" Long Beach Press 2/23: ""Lowenthal returns utility money"" Sac Bee 2/23: Columnist Dan Walters: ""A power grab by politicians"" SF Chron, 2/23: ""Discount Urged Near Power Plants"" Sac Bee 2/23: ""At last, power alerts are lifted..."" Sac Bee 2/23: ""Davis' deadlines on energy much easier set than met"" SF Chron, 2/23: ""GOP Sees Power Crisis as Davis' Achilles' Heel"" Contra Costa Times 2/23: ""Pressure Is on Utilities to Accept Grid Sale"" SF Chron 2/23: ""Energy Firms Won't Pay All of Monster Debt PUC reverses, taxpayers could foot the bill "" San Diego Union, 2/23: ""Small electric producers OK big price cut"" Power line plan has new foes La Cresta residents vow to keep electricity equipment out of the Cleveland Forest and a wilderness area. By Thomas Buckley The Press-Enterprise LAKE ELSINORE A new group has raised its objections to Lake Elsinore's proposed hydroelectric plant and the power lines that might carry its electricity to San Diego County. On Thursday, the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District board set aside for further study later this month a motion by Director Gary Kelley to ensure that both the lines and the actual power plant that make up a $450 million proposal from Enron North America proceed together. But residents of La Cresta, a mountaintop community near where the lines might run, did not care whether the plant and lines happened together. Many of them do not want the lines to be there at all. ""We are resolved to keep power lines out of the Cleveland National Forest and the San Mateo Wilderness Area,"" said La Cresta resident Bill Stockmar. ""Our constituents and the local residents impacted by the proposed project are outraged and respectfully demand immediate intervention to stop this project at the planning level."" As it stands now, the power lines from the hydroelectric plant would run from Temescal Canyon to Camp Pendleton along the ridge line of the Elsinore Mountains just west of the lake. Those lines could run in a narrow strip of forest land just west of the La Cresta community. Enron project manager Rob Bakondy said the final determination of where the lines might run is not set, but he said the power lines could be built at least a year before the plant itself. Besides serving the hydroelectric plant, the power lines could be used to replace lines San Diego Gas and Electric wants to build through Murrieta and Temecula to bring power to San Diego. The water district also announced it is considering financing and building the lines itself. District General Manager John Rossi said Wednesday that it was too early to say exactly how the lines would be built, but that the district's building or owning the lines, or both, in cooperation with Enron is ""one possibility."" Board President Kris Anderson said it is too early to tell whether it would benefit the district to become so directly involved in the project. But he said the district would be able to borrow the approximately $50 million needed to build the lines at a lower interest rate than a private company could get. That difference, Anderson said, could mean extra dollars for the district. How Governor Davis' proposal to purchase thousands of miles of transmission lines from the ailing utilities will affect the project is not yet clear, said Enron spokeswoman Kathy Russeth. The timing of the construction of the project, if it is approved by state and federal regulators, will not be finally known until a contract between Enron and the water district has been agreed upon. That is expected to happen by the end of May. GOP in a fix over power crisis Leaders seek solutions that won't undercut past support for deregulation By Daniel Borenstein TIMES POLITICAL EDITOR California Republican Party leaders are trying desperately to politicize the state's electricity crisis by blaming Gray Davis, but it seems that the harder they try the more popular the Democratic governor becomes. The latest GOP push will come today when party leaders, meeting in Sacramento for the start of their three-day state convention, hold a hastily organized workshop on energy. ""We should be explaining to California that Gray Davis was asleep at the switch last year,"" said one of the scheduled speakers, Republican strategist Dan Schnur. ""But that message can only work if it's coupled with a proposal for an alternative solution."" So far, that hasn't happened. For all the complaints about Davis, Republicans are moving even slower. Looking to 2002, when Davis will stand for re-election, the GOP has run radio ads attacking the governor for delays. But the party has yet to distinguish itself with a solid plan of its own. ""If Republicans are able in the next couple of months to articulate a clear plan, which is different from the Democratic plan, yes, we can use it as a political message,"" said Stuart DeVeaux, spokesman for the California Republican Party. ""Are Republicans in Sacramento going to come up with a plan that articulates a future for our energy problem? I'm not telling you it's going to be revealed this weekend. It's my hope it will be articulated this weekend."" Republicans are caught in an ideological quagmire. Pushing for re-regulation of electricity conflicts with the party's basic tenet of less government interference. Conversely, arguing for full deregulation puts Republicans at odds with a solid majority of Californians. A Los Angeles Times poll taken Feb. 14-15 found that 60 percent of Californians want to go back to a regulated electricity industry, while 25 percent are opposed. The GOP problem is exacerbated because there is no easy policy solution to the energy mess, said Jack Pitney, government professor at Claremont McKenna College. ""It's difficult to see how we get out of this situation without considerable cost. If there were a silver bullet, somebody would have found it by now."" Republicans have attacked Davis for his plan to buy power lines from private utilities. ""Everybody agrees there's $1 billion or $2 billion in deferred maintenance,"" said GOP consultant Sal Russo, another speaker at the party's convention today. ""We need to be in this business like a hole in the head."" But the Times poll found that Californians, by a 52-36 margin, favor the idea. Moreover, Davis' job approval rating has climbed this year. In January, 49 percent approved and 25 percent disapproved. In February, it was up to 57-26. Californians give Davis better marks for handling the electricity crisis than they give President Bush. Republicans are going to have difficult time laying the political blame on Davis. ""It's 'Murder on the Orient Express.' Everybody did it,"" Pitney said. ""Although you can make a case that Davis was slow in reacting, no one can seriously pin him with the primary blame for the problem."" The deregulation bill passed the Legislature in 1996 with the strong support of both parties and a Republican governor, Pete Wilson. Senate Minority Leader Jim Brulte, R-Rancho Cucamonga, is considered one of the Republican Party's top strategists. He was also one of the leading proponents of the deregulation bill. For all of those reasons, Garry South, Davis' political strategist, said he does not fear a GOP attack on electricity. ""If the Republicans want to get into a full-out firefight over how this mess came about, I'm more than willing to play. They don't have a very good story to tell."" For now, Davis' political strength is stable. But the 2002 primary elections are still more than a year away, and the general election is a political eternity from now. ""If this isn't resolved, there is nothing to guarantee that there won't be a voter backlash against the government,"" said political analyst Sherry Bebitch Jeffe. ""And right now the government in California is the Democratic Party."" That's the message the Republicans want to drive home. But if they can't come up with their own alternative, they might have a hard time playing the blame game. Davis says state has tentative deal for Edison grid Updated: Feb. 23, 2001 - 4:42 p.m. LOS ANGELES -- After a week of intense closed-door negotiations with utility representatives, Gov. Gray Davis said Friday he had reached an ""agreement in principle"" with Southern California Edison to buy the utility's power lines for an estimated $2.7 billion. The deal also requires Edison International, the parent company of Edison, to sell cheap power to the state for a decade. ""This is the framework of a good, balanced deal,"" Davis said. ""It's not a final deal. There's a lot of work to be done, But we're making progress."" The governor said he did not expect customer rates to increase as a result of the deal. Edison did not immediately return calls seeking comment. The state has been in talks for a week to buy a total of 26,000 miles of transmission lines from Edison, Pacific Gas and Electric and Sempra Energy, which operates San Diego Gas & Electric. The total cost of the lines could range from $4.5 billion to $7 billion. The effort is intended to help restore the financial health of the state's two largest utilities, PG&E and Edison, both of which are near bankruptcy. The $2.7 billion price for the Edison lines amounts to 2.3 times the estimated book value, Davis said. The utilities say they have lost nearly $13 billion since June, trapped between soaring wholesale power prices and state-imposed rate caps for consumers. The tentative plan announced by Davis would allow Edison to issue bonds for a substantial portion of its losses. Davis said the state is making good progress in its talks with Sempra and ""some progress"" with PG&E. Thursday, Davis said he will not sign off on any grid buyout without all three utilities' participation. ""I do not believe we can make a satisfactory arrangement without 60 percent of the transmission grid, and that would require cooperation with PG&E,"" he said Friday. PG&E spokesman Ron Low said Thursday night that talks had ended with no resolution that day. ""These are complicated problems that will not be solved overnight,"" Low said. ""There are clearly some issues where we are very far apart."" Still, PG&E chief executive officer Robert Glynn Jr. said Friday the meeting with Davis was a ""milestone in the resolution of California's energy crisis"" and said he was willing to meet further to discuss the utility's proposal. ""Each utility's issues and opportunities in this crisis are different, and we believe that PG&E has proposed a detailed solution that balances ratepayer and shareholder interests,"" Glynn said in a statement issued Friday before the governor's news conference. The company said it would have no further comment. The tentative agreement also calls for: Edison parent Edison International to make payments to the utility of about $420 million. Edison International to commit the entire output of its Sunrise Mission power project at low, cost-based rates for 10 years. Davis said that arrangement could save ratepayers $500 million over the next two years. Edison to provide cost-based rates from generating plants it owns for another 10 years. Edison to drop its lawsuit against the California Public Utilities Commission claiming that imposed rate caps were illegal under federal law. ""This entire transaction, which I believe is fair and balanced for both sides, will be accomplished within the existing rate structure,"" Davis said. ""We will not be asking any more of consumers to allow this transaction to come to pass."" Davis said negotiations will continue in the coming days. Consumer advocate Harvey Rosenfield called the governor's plan ""an outrageous giveaway"" and predicted that if lawmakers didn't halt it, voters would revolt. ""The most outrageous part of this isn't even paying 2.3 times what the lines are worth, but then allowing the parent companies that siphoned off billions of dollars to pay only the tax payment they already owe,"" Rosenfield said. The Public Utilities Commission already regulates how much the utilities can charge for power their own plants generate, Rosenfield said. --By Leslie Gornstein, Associated Press Writer - Utilities Search for Long-Term Fix During Breather State purchase of power lines under discussion Friday,?February 23, 2001 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle Sacramento -- A break in the weather and a break in the energy crisis coincided yesterday, as California enjoyed its first day in more than a month without a power alert. With the short-term picture for power improving, representatives of the state's three troubled utilities met separately with Gov. Gray Davis and his staff to work on a longer-range fix for the power crisis that would include state purchase of the firms' transmission lines. Trouble loomed in at least one set of talks, however, as Pacific Gas and Electric Co. said it was ""very far"" from reaching a deal. The California Independent System Operator, which coordinates the flow of electricity through the state's power grid, removed all power alerts at about 9 a.m. yesterday. Spokeswoman Lorie O'Donley said that with springtime approaching and weather improving, and with some power plants coming back to full output from maintenance, the overall picture is brightening. ""We're optimistic,"" she said. ""We're coming into the spring season, the majority of generators have had their maintenance completed. But everything is dependent on the weather and temperature."" The last day California had no power alerts was Jan. 13. Since then, there have been two days of rolling blackouts in Northern California and many other days of Stage 3 alerts -- when power reserves dip below 1.5 percent of available capacity. The mildest alert, Stage 1, is declared when reserves are between 5 and 7 percent of capacity. The supply of power has been helped by warmer temperatures in other Western states, cutting demand there, and by an increase in generators on line in California, O'Donley said. Last week, when the state was still in Stage 3 alerts, 10,500 megawatts were offline in California. Yesterday, there were 8,200 megawatts offline, a difference that provides enough power for a couple million homes. O'Donley warned that the supply picture in California is still tight, and conservation still necessary. But the focus of attention was turning to Sacramento and Davis' talks with the utilities. Davis announced a plan last week for the state to purchase 26,000 miles of utility-owned transmission lines in exchange for backing bonds that allow the utilities to repay the almost $13 billion in debt they say they owe. While Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas and Electric have indicated willingness to sell their lines, PG&E has refused to comment on the proposal. It is not clear if PG&E is unwilling to sell or simply trying to strike a harder bargain. The utility had accumulated more debt than its Southern California counterparts, and also owns the largest part of the transmission line grid. Talks between Davis' staff and PG&E did not start until late yesterday afternoon, and indications were that they were more difficult than negotiations involving the other two utilities. ""They're just on a different page,"" Michael Peevey, the former Edison president who is Davis' chief negotiator, told Bloomberg News. PG&E spokesman Ron Low said, ""These are difficult problems that cannot be solved overnight. There are clearly some areas where we are very far apart."" Davis hopes to make an announcement with at least one of the utilities before leaving today for the four-day National Governors Association meeting in Washington, D.C. The union that represents some 11,000 PG&E employees, meanwhile, called on Davis to negotiate state ownership of two power plants under construction in which PG&E holds large stakes. Jack McNally, business manager of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 1245, in Walnut Creek told Davis in a letter that a transmission line takeover would be a ""grand experiment"" fraught with danger. Acquiring the two prospective power plants, in Kern and San Diego counties, would do more to address energy shortages than taking over transmission lines that need hundreds of millions of dollars in maintenance, union officials said. Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio countered that state acquisition of transmission lines ""would not affect one union job,"" as the state would simply lease the grid back to the utilities. Maviglio predicted union jobs would increase with investment in new capacity and system upgrades. Chronicle staff writers Patrick Hoge and Robert Salladay contributed to this report. State's energy price tag increases Published Friday, Feb. 23, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News BY DION NISSENBAUM Mercury News Sacramento Bureau SACRAMENTO -- California's energy crisis took another big bite out of the state budget Thursday when finance aides to Gov. Gray Davis announced that the cost of buying energy may top $3 billion by mid-March. In a move that raised new alarms for lawmakers, the governor's finance team for the third time this month asked for $500 million to buy electricity in the coming weeks while Davis tries to work out a deal to bail out the state's near-bankrupt utilities. That, combined with money spent last month to buy energy, could drain the state coffers of $3 billion by St. Patrick's Day. The request for more cash came on the same day that California spent its first day in weeks without an official energy emergency and Davis held critical talks with the heads of Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and San Diego Gas & Electric Co. The talks are aimed at rescuing the two companies and Southern California Edison from financial collapse. While Davis had expressed hope last week of working out a deal by today, sources said that an agreement still remains elusive. Until a compromise can be hammered out, the state is being forced to pay upward of $50 million a day from the general fund to buy electricity. State leaders expect that the money will eventually be repaid to the general fund under a $10 billion bond package. But lawmakers are growing increasingly concerned about the short-term impact on the state fiscal plan. Assemblywoman Carole Migden, D-San Francisco, said the latest request for more money could create ``greater concern and anxiety'' among lawmakers and added that the energy crisis was going to make it harder to fund other programs, such as support for abused children. ``It's going to be a bleak year for other budget priorities,'' said Migden, who is chairwoman of the powerful Assembly Appropriations Committee. Earlier this week, the state's independent financial analyst warned that the energy crisis could eat into state money the governor wants to spend on other things such as the environment and public safety. While lawmakers have so far bitten their tongues about the growing power price tag, Migden said the Legislature might be hesitant to allow the costs to go any higher. ``I can't imagine another infusion after this being required,'' Migden said. ``I think this has to be the last request because we're going to hit fundamental core programs.'' Waiting for bailout plan California stepped in to buy the energy last month after PG&E and Southern California Edison lost the financial wherewithal to do it themselves. At the time, state leaders reluctantly agreed to buy the energy for a short period of time as part of a larger plan for California to sign long-term contracts with power generators. But those negotiations have failed to produce much energy so far, and Davis said earlier this week that the power producers are hesitant to sign any deals until California agrees to a bailout plan for the utilities. On Thursday, one power producer -- Williams Cos. -- announced that it had signed a 10-year contract with the state to provide up to 1,400 megawatts of power to California. In a bid to work out the bailout plan, Davis and his advisers met Thursday and were to meet again today with top executives from all three electric utilities in financial trouble. The Democratic governor wants to buy 26,000 miles of high voltage transmission lines owned by the three companies in exchange for helping the utilities pay off $13 billion in debts. The utilities are being asked to protect thousands of acres of wilderness lands they own, hang onto power plants that provide the state with its cheapest electricity, and drop explosive lawsuits that could allow the companies to dramatically raise customer rates. But sources said talks have bogged down on the transmission line deal, which PG&E has been reluctant to accept. Alternative energy helps out While talks slogged along in the governor's office, state lawmakers announced that another key piece of the puzzle needed to solve the energy crisis was falling into place. State Sen. Jim Battin, R-Palm Desert, and Assemblyman Fred Keeley, D-Santa Cruz, said that alternative energy producers had agreed to dramatically lower their prices in a deal that could save California $3 billion to $4 billion. Those energy producers, nearly 700 wind, solar and natural gas-fired plants, provide about a third of the state's energy. Paying for power still a big question POWER CRISIS PG&E doesn't like the plan the PUC proposed to collect electricity costs By Mike Taugher TIMES STAFF WRITER Three weeks after Gov. Gray Davis signed into law the state's centerpiece for stabilizing energy costs, big differences remain over how the solutions will be implemented and who will pay for them. The plan, outlined in legislation known as AB1X, was intended first to stop the financial bleeding of California's two largest utilities by asking the state to buy enough unsecured power to keep the lights on. Next, the state would enter long-term contracts for less expensive power that would eventually lessen the need for more costly, last-minute electricity. But the state has balked at buying the entire portfolio of last-minute electricity that is needed, and a disagreement emerged Thursday over what portion of consumers' bills should be used to reimburse state coffers. Meanwhile, progress on completing contracts has been slow, although two were signed Thursday. A spokesman for Davis said more contracts for relatively low-cost power would be signed once the state bought the utilities' transmission lines and other assets, because then the utilities could pay their past-due bills. The governor said last week that he expected a deal with the utilities by today, but that might not happen. ""Clearly, there's been challenges getting long-term contracts, but we've turned the corner,"" said Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio. ""We've got three in the bank and 10 more once we get these deals (with the utilities) done."" Also Thursday, the Public Utilities Commission was poised to allow the state to collect the entire amount that customers pay specifically for electricity. But Pacific Gas & Electric Co. said it is entitled to deduct other costs from customers' payments before reimbursing the state. That would reduce payments from PG&E to the state by about half, according to the company. The PUC proposal was in response to a request from the state Department of Water Resources that it be allowed to start collecting money so that energy companies would be more willing to sell power to the agency. The two Republican-appointed commissioners of the PUC blocked the move, which needed four of five commissioners' approval to reach the agenda. ""DWR's (action) is exacerbating a problem AB1X was meant to alleviate,"" said Commissioner Richard Bilas. ""It is pushing the utilities closer to bankruptcy."" PG&E spokesman John Nelson said the proposal brought by PUC President Loretta Lynch would have been unfair to the utilities because AB1X allows them to deduct expenses for buying electricity and generating energy at their own power plants before reimbursing the state. ""All of those costs need to be paid going forward. Otherwise, you still leave the utilities to bleed,"" Nelson said. That stance appeared to be at odds with the office of Assemblyman Fred Keeley, the Boulder Creek Democrat who wrote AB1X. ""For PG&E to think it can keep money for electrons it never even owned is astounding to us,"" said Guy Phillips, a Keeley aide. While nothing has gone smoothly, Phillips and others expressed optimism that the state's biggest effort to date to fix the energy crisis would work. ""We think those will be sorted out,"" said Phillips, who acknowledged there has been much confusion about what lawmakers intended in AB1X. For example, Keeley's office said lawmakers wanted the water resources agency to make up the entire amount of electricity that the state's two largest utilities had not secured ahead of time. The high cost of this last-minute electricity -- and the utilities' heavy reliance on it -- is what drove PG&E and Southern California Edison to the brink of bankruptcy. But the water agency has balked at buying electricity offered at prices it calls ""unreasonable."" While state officials have refused to say how much electricity it has left to utilities to purchase, the state is paying about $55 million a day to keep electricity flowing. And that amounts to about 90 percent of the electricity purchased on behalf of the utilities on the same day it is needed, according to Phillips. The state's reluctance to buy all of the so-called real-time electricity has led to fears that the utilities will continue to run up debt and that power companies will not collect money owed to them. That dispute has landed in federal court, where a Sacramento judge is forcing three major power suppliers and a marketing company to continue selling power in the state. If a settlement is not reached today, U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell is expected to decide whether to extend his order, to modify it or to drop it. Staff writer Andrew LaMar contributed to this story. Lowenthal returns utility money By Will Shuck From our Sacramento Bureau SACRAMENTO Assemblyman Alan Lowenthal, D-Long Beach, this week joined a small group of legislators who returned campaign contributions to California utility companies and other energy firms. He sent $5,000 back to Southern California Edison and $500 to Sempra Energy, parent company of Southern California Gas. It was a small portion of the more than Lowenthal $500,000 Lowenthal had raised in 2000 for his re-election campaign. He said he returned the money, as did nine other Assembly members, at the urging of the consumer advocacy group Global Exchange. ""We think it's fantastic that he has recognized that in the eyes of the public there is a very serious potential conflict of interest,"" said group spokeswoman Medea Benjamin. ""We applaud him for wanting to ensure the integrity of the legislative process."" While Benjamin says it's critical that lawmakers not be tainted by energy money during the state's power crisis, others wonder where the line should be drawn. ""In the real world of politics it costs money to run for office and you have to get that money somewhere,"" said Paul Schmidt, a political science professor at Cal State Long Beach. ""To say that you can only make decisions on things involving individuals that haven't given you any money would result in paralysis of government."" Benjamin and other consumer advocates say the power crisis calls for special consideration. ""There are not many cases in which they're actually voting whether a company will survive with billions of dollars of taxpayer money or go bankrupt, as they're doing with the utility companies,"" Benjamin said. Lowenthal agreed. ""I thought it was an appropriate request,"" he said. ""These are unique circumstances, and I just think it's in the public's best interest that I return that money."" Dan Walters: A power grab by politicians (Published Feb. 23, 2001) Slowly, but inexorably, control over the generation, acquisition and distribution of electric power in California is being shifted from professional utility managers and independent regulators into the hands of politicians. The 1996 utility ""deregulation"" scheme enacted by the Legislature was an initial foray into politicization. Legislation granting the governor more control over the makeup of the Public Utilities Commission was another. But the current power supply/price crisis has led to even more direct political influence over -- or interference with -- electric service. One hastily enacted bill, for example, gives the governor direct control of the now-misnamed ""Independent System Operator,"" which operates the statewide power grid. More political intrusion is in the works, from a state takeover of the intercity power transmission grid to the creation of a state power authority that would buy, generate and sell electricity directly. And while local public utilities function well, a state power agency might operate on the whims of professional politicians. The Legislature, for example, wants appointments to the board that would direct a state power authority, and big state power projects would be subject to the same kind of pork-barrel mentality that distorts other public works appropriations. Where power plants were to be built, or where high-voltage lines would be strung, might well depend on who could, and could not, bring political influence to bear, rather than what the system needed to work efficiently. Clues to the potential pitfalls of a state-operated power system are found in the approaches of Capitol politicians to the current crisis. There is, for example, the unspoken goal of avoiding big power rate boosts until after the November 2002 election -- even if it means running up billions of dollars in debts to do it. Would future rates charged by a state power authority be raised or lowered to enhance the prospects of the dominant party or an incumbent governor? There's no evidence in past performances to indicate they wouldn't be. And then there's the knotty question of who would get vital power supplies in the event of shortages -- a situation that is already looming and could become worse in future months. Emergency legislation already gives the state the right to sell power as it pleases, without competitive bidding or even public notice. There's nothing, really, to prevent politically influential power customers such as big industrial enterprises from cutting their own supply deals with politically directed state officials. And whose juice would be cut off if shortages mean blackouts? Approximately 45 percent of current power customers are effectively exempt from rolling blackouts because they are connected to circuits (called ""blocks"") that also include vital services, such as hospitals, fire and police agencies, water supply systems and communications centers. The Capitol, not surprisingly, is in one of those noninterruptible blocks. With the threat of further blackouts looming, legislation is being drafted to designate which customers will suffer and which will not -- thus taking that authority out of the hands of utilities and regulators. And that, in turn, is generating pressure from lobbyists from all sorts of interest groups to place their clients on protected lists. Should farmers be cut off, or biotechnology facilities, or computer chip plants, or schools? When politicians control any process or system, one can be certain that they will always make expedient political decisions, regardless of the long-term or wider consequences. Thus, we may someday regret allowing the Capitol's self-serving politicians to get their hands on our electric power system. Discount Urged Near Power Plants Senator urges electricity rate break for neighbors of generators Friday,?February 23, 2001 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle As California officials propose building 32 new ""peaker"" power plants across the state by July, one legislator from plant-rich eastern Contra Costa County thinks residents should get a discount on their power bill for having a generator in their backyard. The proposed bill would provide a little payback for residents of state Sen. Tom Torlakson's district, which is home to a half-dozen plants and has three more in the construction pipeline. Under the bill introduced yesterday by Torlakson, D-Antioch, people living within a 20-mile circle around a power plant would receive a 20 percent discount on their electricity bill and be exempt from blackouts. The legislation was partially inspired by San Jose officials' rejecting a proposal to build a 600-megawatt power plant in the Coyote Valley, as well as Gov. Gray Davis' plan to build 5,000 megawatts of new generating capacity by July 1. ""It's a question of fairness,"" Torlakson said. ""People in communities who are shouldering the burden for having plants in their backyard should get some benefit from it."" Torlakson said consumers who lived in communities without plants could pick up the tab for the discounts. ""But the utilities would have to figure that out within their rate system,"" he said. A PG&E spokesman said yesterday that the company does not comment on pending legislation. While consumer advocates, environmentalists and power generators were lukewarm to the proposal yesterday, many admit that the state has not thought about how to -- of even if they have to -- offer communities a little incentive to approve a power plant within their borders. However, the state has allocated $30 million for plants that get online by July 1. ""As far as incentives, I'd think most communities would see the value of the employment they'd get and the increase to the tax base,"" said Larry Hamlin, the governor's recently appointed project manager for the plant-building campaign. A spokesman for California's Environmental Protection Agency, which permits plants, said the plan might be a ""worthwhile idea for making power plants more palatable to Californians."" Michael Shames, head of Utility Consumer Action Network in San Diego said the bill was attacking a ""not in my back yard"" problem that doesn't exist. ""Many San Diego communities are clamoring for plants in the hope that they would bring stability to the market,"" he said. James Peters of Mirent, the Atlanta-based company formerly known as Southern Energy, said the plan wouldn't encourage generators to build the number of plants needed to solve the energy crisis. Already, communities like Pittsburg have cut deals with power generators before letting them build. In exchange for letting the Calpine Corp. build two large plants in town, Pittsburg received the lifetime option to purchase 100 megawatts of power at below-market rates. Next week, a Pittsburg group is going to begin gathering signatures demanding that city leaders use the estimated 26 megawatts it would take to light residences and businesses to give local residents a break on bills. The group will hold an organizational meeting at 7 p.m. Tuesday at the Los Medanos Community Hospital, 2311 Loveridge Rd. in Pittsburg. At last, power alerts are lifted: Enjoy respite because crisis far from resolved, experts say By Carrie Peyton Bee Staff Writer (Published Feb. 23, 2001) As oddly as it arrived, California's electric emergency lifted Thursday morning. At 9 a.m., the Independent System Operator, which controls most of California's grid, ended a Stage 1 alert. It was the first time since Jan. 13 that the state hadn't been under a power emergency, declared when low supplies threaten grid stability. The alerts included 32 straight days of Stage 3 emergencies, the black clouds that gather before rotating outages. The clouds cleared on a day when predicted peak use was low -- but not the lowest it has been for the last five weeks. Many power plants were back on line after repairs -- but more plants had been operating during at least one Stage 3 day. So what happened? A little luck, a little planning and maybe a little group psychology, said those who have closely watched recent gyrations of the state's electric roller coaster. ""It is a roll of the dice,"" said Gary Ackerman, head of the Western Power Trading Forum, which represents plant owners and marketers. ""If it continues for the next three or four weeks I wouldn't be too surprised. That'll be our respite. Enjoy it."" The end of a 40-day string of emergencies could mean a few more lights in store aisles or a little less worry about running an electric furnace. Some speculated it might also mean lower wholesale prices. But major changes are not likely in the steady rain of conservation calls that have fallen on Californians since the north state was twice plunged into rotating blackouts last month. ""I hope people don't just go back to wasteful ways,"" said Mike Florio of The Utility Reform Network, a consumer group. Now that the emergencies have dissipated, ""we don't have to talk about imposing hardships on people, but prudent use of energy is an idea we're going to have to live with for a long time,"" he said. At the ISO, longer days and slightly warmer weather was credited with decreasing peak demand for electricity. Supplies are up within the state, and power imports from the Pacific Northwest have risen significantly, said Jim Detmers, who manages grid operations. Plus, in one of the biggest changes, the state Department of Water Resources has begun getting more power supplies lined up at least a day in advance, he said. Since the department stepped in to buy power on behalf of cash-strapped utilities, it has often managed to line up about 70 percent to 75 percent of what the state needed to supplement utility-controlled supplies, according to Detmers. That meant grid operators had to scramble to buy the rest on very short notice. But starting last Friday, the state began to schedule about 90 percent of its purchases at least one day in advance. ""The operators are able to enter a day with a lot more confidence about being able to make it,"" Detmers said. ""You don't have to search to find those megawatts at the last minute."" Closely in sync with increased purchases by the state, the ISO dropped from a Stage 3 emergency to Stage 2 on Friday, and then slid to a Stage 1 Wednesday. The stages are based on how much reserve power is left for unexpected crises; a Stage 3 is declared when reserves slip below 1.5 percent. For their part, power buyers at the water resources department weren't sure what has made the difference over the past few days. ""It's certainly not that people are lining up to sell us power at cheap prices,"" said Jim Spence, the department's director of emergency operations. ""We're just buying whatever we can, and it turned out that it was easier to make ends meet."" He said he couldn't make any prediction about how long that would last. The string of power emergencies has been unpredictable from the start, erupting in winter, when California's hunger for electricity traditionally declines and supplies are usually so flush that plants close for tune-ups. Consumer advocates and power traders blamed finances for the emergencies, rather than a fundamental lack of supply, as fears of utility bankruptcies triggered a descent into market chaos and high-stakes political maneuvering. But basic supply shortages are expected to move to the forefront by summer, when temperatures rise and demand soars. Meanwhile, the brief respite -- whatever the reason -- brought palpable relief to those charged with keeping the power grid stable. ""When we found out yesterday during the board meeting that we were only in Stage 1, we broke out in applause,"" said Florio, who sits on the five-member ISO board. The change also could be good news for consumers, who may one day be paying higher rates for the wholesale electricity now being purchased by the state. ""Getting out of a Stage 3 typically means prices are going to ease,"" Florio said. ""When you're even in a Stage 1, that's a signal to everybody, 'They're short, that means we can hold them up now.' "" Davis' deadlines on energy much easier set than met By Emily Bazar Bee Staff Writer (Published Feb. 23, 2001) Exactly one week ago, Gov. Gray Davis sounded hopeful, optimistic even, when he predicted that the state and its debt-ridden utilities would forge an agreement by today on a plan to save the companies from financial doom. Problem is, it won't work out that way. Negotiations between state officials and the investor-owned utilities have produced no comprehensive agreement to announce today. Davis' predictions during the energy crisis have been wrong before. For weeks, he has set deadlines for agreements and legislative action that haven't been met. On deadline days, even when there's little substantive progress to report, Davis often holds news conferences anyway -- many of them on Friday afternoons after financial markets close. The Democratic governor's office scheduled an ""announcement"" for today in Los Angeles, even though one utility representative said agreement is far away. Davis' actions have fueled speculation that he's trying to force consensus by setting artificial deadlines and putting a spin on the news, and tarnishing the state's credibility in the process. ""I can't see how you would negotiate such a complex deal, like the purchase of the transmission grid, in such a short period of time. It doesn't seem realistic,"" said Gary Ackerman of the Western Power Trading Forum, an association of wholesale generators. ""I guess the people I represent have turned it off. They have stopped listening. They hear it and say, 'OK, sure. Here's another photo op.' "" Last Friday, Davis told a gathering of reporters that state officials and the utilities would agree by today on a rescue plan for the utilities. ""I believe we'll have agreement before next week is out, on exactly what should go in a piece of legislation,"" he said at the time. ""And hopefully, that legislation will be passed by the end of the following week."" Legislative veterans said his comments were ill-advised and unrealistic. Davis met into the night Thursday with top officials of Pacific Gas and Electric Co., but no agrement was reached. ""These are complicated problems that will not be solved overnight,"" said PG&E spokesman Ron Low. ""On some issues, we are very far away from agreement."" Sources said PG&E has been unwilling to negotiate sale of its transmission lines, which Davis has said is a necessary component of a deal. More progress was reported with the two other near-bankrupt companies -- San Diego Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison -- although sources said talks with them were far from concluded. Davis has been setting specific deadlines for himself and the Legislature for months: In November, the governor promised to present a comprehensive ""plan"" by Dec. 1 to stave off a full-blown energy crisis, but ended up offering only a modest slate of proposals. Davis called Feb. 12 a ""drop dead"" date by which he hoped to cement a deal between lawmakers and the utilities. There's no deal yet. Davis told reporters that he and the state's legislative leaders would reach a ""consensus agreement"" on the proposal to take to utilities by last Friday. It didn't happen; he made the announcement alone. Leon Panetta, a White House chief of staff under former President Clinton, said it's important that the governor set deadlines because the nature of politics is to delay. However, he cautioned against missing deadlines. ""You have to be careful that you keep the deadlines you establish, because the more that you establish and not meet, the more that begins to lose its value as a political tool,"" Panetta said. The governor can't continue to indefinitely set deadlines without facing consequences, cautioned Steven Fetter, managing director of the Global Power Group at Fitch, a credit-rating agency based in New York. At some point, he warned, creditors and power suppliers may push the utilities into involuntary bankruptcy, which would trigger an official deadline that can't be ignored. The dispute would be tied up in court at a judge's discretion. ""Eventually, there is going to be a real deadline,"" Fetter said. ""The problem is it's probably not a deadline that will be set by Gov. Davis. It's a deadline that will be set by the banks and the (electricity) suppliers."" In several cases when deadlines haven't been met, Davis has held a news conference regardless, unveiling little new information and scant detail. On Jan. 26, for instance, the governor promoted the broad framework of a plan to save the utilities rather than a detailed plan that had been anticipated. One prong of the plan: ""Aggressively promote energy efficiency, conservation and demand reduction among consumers, businesses and public entities."" Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio said that the governor continues to set deadlines because it's important to show that the state is making progress, particularly to Wall Street. He added that it's not the governor's fault the deadlines have been missed. ""Many of the dates have been blown away by factors no one has been able to foresee or have control over: court decisions, actions by creditors, weather, you name it,"" Maviglio said. ""The governor sets deadlines that continue to move the ball forward and he has been successful at doing that."" Many of these announcements came after 2 p.m. on Fridays, triggering suggestions that the governor has attempted to spin the facts and manipulate the markets. Timing announcements after the close of East Coast financial markets is commonly used by politicians who don't want to send stocks soaring or tumbling by making an announcement, Panetta said. ""You want people to evaluate what's happening so there isn't a panic reaction to a news flash going over the wire,"" he said. But market analysts say that ever since PG&E and Edison stocks plummeted in early January, the governor's statements haven't significantly affected their performance. ""There has been so much news that has been so negative for the companies that I don't think it makes much of a difference,"" said Ed Schuller, a senior vice president for the full-service brokerage firm Sutro & Co. ""It's beyond that point now."" GOP Sees Power Crisis as Davis' Achilles' Heel Republicans line up to run for governor Friday,?February 23, 2001 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle Democratic Gov. Gray Davis, politically wounded by the state's power woes, has become the target of a growing pack of Republicans looking to turn him out of office. ""Four months ago, Davis looked on track to get re-elected by a voice vote,"" said Dan Schnur, a GOP strategist. ""But the energy crisis has exposed vulnerabilities that have encouraged others to look at the (2002 governor's) race."" The governor's backers, however, are confident California voters will recognize Davis is dealing with a problem that has been brewing for years, through previous Republican administrations. ""If the Republicans want to have a full-out firefight over who brought this (energy crisis) down, we're ready for it,"" said Garry South, the governor's top political adviser. ""It's a fight they can't win."" With the primary election still more than a year away, no one but Davis is a sure bet to leap into the contest, but at least three names will be circulating when California Republicans meet in Sacramento this weekend for their state convention. Secretary of State Bill Jones, Los Angeles investor Bill Simon Jr. and actor Arnold Schwarzenegger all have made noises about challenging Davis, but so far their incipient campaigns have been more talk than action. Simon's effort might be the farthest along, but he also has the longest way to travel. A political unknown, the 49-year-old Simon runs his family's investment company and has been active in a number of charitable organizations in Southern California. Simon, whose father was treasury secretary under President Richard Nixon, has brought in veteran GOP consultant Sal Russo to study a possible run for governor. ""Bill Simon feels we need a governor who's prepared to lead and not one who's focused on fund-raising or the next political office,"" Russo said in a jab at Davis. Simon was an assistant U.S. attorney in New York, but founded William E. Simon & Sons with his brother and late father in 1988. The $2 billion private investment firm owns a number of companies and has also invested heavily in South of Market real estate in San Francisco. Wealthy political outsiders don't have an enviable record in recent California elections. Republican Michael Huffington spent $29 million to lose a 1994 Senate race to Dianne Feinstein. Darrell Issa dropped around $13 million in a losing race for the 1998 GOP Senate nomination. Al Checchi spent about $38 million of his own money to lose the Democratic primary to Davis in 1998. While Simon likely would be spending plenty of his own money on a governor's bid, he's working to get outside support, both political and financial, before committing to the race, Russo said. With the state's problems mounting and the economy increasingly shaky, the time may be ripe for a political unknown, he added. ""When things start going bad, people are willing to look outside for a new face, someone who will get things done,"" Russo said. Jones is anything but a political outsider. A veteran legislator from the Fresno area, he is now serving his second and last term as California's secretary of state. He managed to hang onto his job during the GOP's 1998 electoral debacle, which cost the party every other constitutional office. While Jones has long talked about a run for governor, he's still playing coy. ""We have not made any decision and probably won't make one until early March,"" said Rob Lapsley, one of Jones' top advisers. ""Right now we're putting together information for Bill to make a decision."" While Jones' role as the state's top GOP officeholder makes him an obvious choice to challenge Davis, he's made a number of political enemies over the years, many of them in his own party. His surprise decision last year to switch his support from George W. Bush to Arizona Sen. John McCain in California's presidential primary won him no fans among Bush supporters and could hurt his attempts to raise money for a gubernatorial bid. Money is a major problem for Jones, who listed $118,000 in his campaign fund last month, compared with nearly $26 million for Davis. Some of his opponents have suggested that fund-raising woes may force Jones to run for an office other than governor. ""Right now, we're focused on the governor's race,"" Lapsley insisted. The real Republican wild card is Schwarzenegger, the movie action hero who would be instantly recognized by nearly every California voter. While Schwarzenegger's publicist told The Chronicle last month that he had no plans to get involved in next year's governor's race, the Austrian-born star was on the telephone to a Los Angeles Times columnist days later, talking about his love for politics and his political ambitions. Fame, however, has its drawbacks, as the 53-year-old Schwarzenegger has found. An article in Premiere magazine entitled ""Arnold the Barbarian"" accused him of groping women on movie sets and generally boorish behavior, while the supermarket tabloids have him on the cover this week, suggesting that his marriage to Maria Shriver is on the rocks. South, Davis' political adviser, gleefully sent copies of the Premiere article to reporters across the state, suggesting that ""the piece lays out a real 'touching' story -- if you get what I mean."" Whoever ends up with the GOP nomination still will face an uphill battle against Davis, a popular governor and a ""take no prisoners"" campaigner. ""I've been predicting since Day One that the GOP would find some moneybags candidate to throw against Gray,"" South said. ""That's why we've kept our political and fund-raising operation going since election day."" Pressure Is on Utilities to Accept Grid Sale Energy: Gov. Davis wants accord today, but Edison executive says company might prefer bankruptcy. By DAN MORAIN and NANCY VOGEL, Times Staff Writers ?????SACRAMENTO--His credibility at risk and California's energy future on the line, Gov. Gray Davis on Thursday turned up the heat on the state's utilities to accept today a series of tentative rescue accords that would put the companies' transmission systems into public hands. ?????How far the utilities are willing to bend to the governor's intensified pressure was unclear late Thursday. Given Davis' mandate, a top executive of Southern California Edison said his company is now being forced to seriously contemplate whether it might fare better in Bankruptcy Court. ?????""We are weighing two very unpalatable alternatives,"" he said. ?????Two alternatives facing the utilities are either to sell their electrical transmission systems to the state at a price they consider too low or gamble in Bankruptcy Court that they could hang onto their valuable assets. ?????After nearly a week of negotiations, Davis administration officials said they hoped to announce today a partial deal that would calm the utilities' jittery creditors and help subdue California's runaway electricity market. ?????State officials said Thursday they were close to agreements with Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric but remained at odds with the state's biggest utility, Pacific Gas & Electric, which has balked at giving up its transmission grid. ?????""These are complex issues that cannot be resolved overnight,"" said PG&E spokesman Ron Lowe. ""There are clearly some areas where we are very far apart."" ?????On Thursday, Edison Chairman John Bryson conferred with members of his utility's board of directors. But by evening, the company's top executives still had not decided whether to acknowledge that an agreement is near. ?????Although the utility has begun to contemplate the protections of bankruptcy, it is unclear when, or if, such a dramatic action would occur. ?????Davis is believed to be offering roughly $7 billion for the utilities' transmission grids. The companies could use the cash to restructure their debt, which resulted from the utilities' inability to pass along their soaring wholesale electricity costs to ratepayers. ?????Davis has significant political and fiscal reasons for wanting to make an announcement today. He is scheduled to arrive in Washington for the National Governor's Assn. conference this weekend, meet with U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham on Sunday, and attend the Democratic Governors Assn. annual fund-raising dinner Monday night. ?????Davis, a prodigious fund-raiser, is chairman of the Democratic Governors Assn., and the dinner is expected to raise more than $5 million. Of that amount, Davis' political organization raised in excess of $1 million, said Garry South, his chief political advisor. ?????Any progress Davis can cite could help improve his national political standing. But his aides say it's especially important to be able to show at least a semblance of an agreement when he travels to New York on Wednesday to confer with Wall Street analysts. ?????On Thursday, those analysts reacted exuberantly to early hints from the governor's office that settlements with the utilities might be announced. ?????The recently anemic stocks of Edison International and PG&E Corp. soared on the New York Stock Exchange on a day when most utility stocks closed lower. ?????Edison jumped $1.50 per share, or 11.15%, to close at $14.95 while PG&E gained $1.49, or 11.41%, to $14.55 per share. ?????""That suggests that someone thinks something good is happening in Sacramento,"" said analyst James D. von Riesemann of Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co. ?????But some analysts fear investor enthusiasm might be hasty. ?????""I'm concerned that the governor's optimism may not coincide with all the parties at the table and it may not coincide with the Legislature,"" said Paul Patterson, utility analyst at Credit Suisse First Boston Corp. ?????Davis met Thursday with Steve Baum, chairman of Sempra, the parent company of SDG&E. Administration officials are confident that an agreement can be reached. But the San Diego company is the smallest of the state's three major private utilities, and its debt is far smaller--$605 million, compared to the combined $12.7 billion that Edison and PG&E say they have amassed. ?????""[Baum] is willing to listen,"" said Sempra spokesman Doug Kline. "" . . . We're on the record as stating that we are willing to consider the sale of those [transmission] assets if it helps solve the crisis."" ?????PG&E executives had been scheduled to start meeting with Davis at 11 a.m. Thursday. But in what was seen a slight against PG&E, Davis' aides did not summon negotiators for the Northern California utility, including company Chairman Robert Glynn, until after 3:30. ?????Although the parties continued to wrangle over details, there was progress Thursday on the sidelines. ?????State officials announced they had signed a long-term contract for a relatively small amount of electricity with a major energy supplier--an achievement that was perhaps more symbolic than substantive. ?????Tulsa-based Williams Cos. said it had agreed to a 10-year deal to sell power to the Department of Water Resources. By April, the company will provide at least 175 megawatts--enough electricity to supply 175,000 homes--at times of the day when demand for electricity soars. Such peak supplies will increase through next summer and reach 900 megawatts by 2006, according to Williams. ?????The agreement is only the second such long-term contract since Davis signed a bill Feb. 1 putting the Department of Water Resources into the power-buying business for many years to come. ?????At least 10 other power suppliers have reached understandings with the state, Davis said Wednesday. But those companies refuse to sign deals, the governor said, until the state finds a way to help California's two biggest utilities pay off their billion-dollar debts. ?????""As soon as we revitalize the utilities,"" the governor said, ""I think you'll see a lot of movement on long-term contracts."" ?????Another small but important piece of the state's energy plan emerged Thursday when legislation was introduced by Sen. Jim Battin (R-La Quinta) to slash the rates paid to alternative energy producers--a move expected to shave $3 billion or more in annual costs charged to the big private utilities. Reducing the amount paid to producers of renewable energy such as solar, wind and biomass power is considered a crucial step in keeping expected consumer rate hikes down. ?????And, after 40 days of dangerously low electricity supplies, the state got a reprieve Thursday morning when grid officials lifted the state's ""electrical emergency"" status for the first time since Jan. 13. ?????So far, the state has spent nearly $2 billion buying electricity on behalf of the utilities, according to the Department of Finance, which informed the Legislature on Thursday that it will release another $500 million for electricity purchases. --- ?????Times staff writers Nancy Rivera Brooks, Nancy Cleeland and Mitchell Landsberg in Los Angeles and Julie Tamaki and Jenifer Warren in Sacramento contributed to this story. Energy Firms Won't Pay All of Monster Debt PUC reverses, taxpayers could foot the bill Christian Berthelsen, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday,?February 23, 2001 Under a ruling yesterday by state regulators, California taxpayers could be on the hook for hundreds of millions of dollars in power purchases the state has made in behalf of two troubled utilities. The California Public Utilities Commission voted unanimously to absolve Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison of responsibility for any costs above the revenue they collect from ratepayers. The ruling reversed a position taken earlier by the commission, which had said the utilities were responsible for making up the difference between the state's costs and their own revenue. John Tremaine, a PG&E spokesman, said the funding needed to make up the difference could come in the form of a surcharge imposed on customers who use 130 percent of the baseline amount of electricity. That is one option under a bill passed last month by the Legislature, he said. But Steve Maviglio, a spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis, said the governor does not believe the money will come from ratepayers' electric bills. The costs, Maviglio said, could be covered by the $10 billion bond measure the state recently issued to cover power purchases. As California tries to resolve its power crisis, state officials are working out the precise way that should be done. Under the state's deregulation plan approved in 1996, the utilities have been forced to absorb skyrocketing wholesale electricity costs while being prevented by law from passing the increases on to customers through higher rates. Since the California Department of Water Resources began buying power last month, details showing how it will be repaid, how much or by whom have not been established. Yesterday's PUC decision was an attempt to begin setting the repayment criteria. A precise accounting of how much money is at stake is impossible to determine at this point, officials said, because PG&E declines to release ratepayer revenue figures, and the state is refusing to say exactly how much it has spent buying power. Officials estimate the state will spend $2.3 billion by the beginning of March and Davis authorized the expenditure of $500 million more yesterday. The state's Department of Water Resources became the buyer of record on Jan. 17 when the two utilities' credit was so damaged that they were no longer able to buy power. Both utilities had opposed the commission's previous position that they be responsible for all power costs. The PUC's shift yesterday was summed up by Commissioner Richard Bilas, who said he could not support holding the utilities responsible for the revenue shortfall. ""The DWR is not about to go bankrupt; the utilities are,"" he said. Yet consumer advocates downplayed the commission's ruling yesterday. Nettie Hoge, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, said the ruling only dealt with the narrow issue of who has to account for the revenue shortfall, and did not reach an overarching decision about who, ultimately, will be financially responsible for it. ""This is not a huge deal,"" she said. The state has been buying the lion's share of its power in the real-time market run by the Independent System Operator since the demise of the longer- term California Power Exchange, said Jesus Arredondo, a spokesman for the exchange. The state has been paying premium prices because it is buying in a market that was designed to handle last-minute emergencies. The governor's office has been seeking cheaper, long-term power contracts with only modest results. Small electric producers OK big price cut By Ed Mendel STAFF WRITER February 23, 2001 SACRAMENTO -- Legislators said yesterday that small generators who produce about 30 percent of the state's power have agreed to cut their power prices in half, an important step toward easing the electricity crisis. Negotiations continued on what Gov. Gray Davis has called the final step: the state purchase of the transmission systems of the three investor-owned utilities in exchange for paying off their huge debt. Meanwhile, the amount that the state is spending to buy power for the customers of the utilities grows. Officials gave notice that an additional $500 million will be needed in 10 days, bringing the total to $2.6 billion. But for the first time in nearly six weeks the state did not declare an alert yesterday due to power shortages. More power was available from other states, and some power plants that had been shut down for maintenance resumed operation. Two legislators, Sen. Jim Battin, R-Palm Desert, and Assemblyman Fred Keeley, D-Boulder Creek, said they introduced legislation that sharply reduces the prices paid to small generators after weeks of difficult negotiations. ""Ultimately, this bill will reduce the cost of energy to the state and its ratepayers by billions of dollars,"" said Battin, who represents eastern San Diego County. About half of the small generators use ""renewable"" technologies such as solar, wind, geothermal and biomass. The rest is ""co-generation,"" when fuel is used for industrial purposes and electricity is generated as a by-product. The small generators have grown to produce nearly a third of California's power under a two-decade-old federal ""qualifying facilities"" program, which requires utilities to buy their power. Battin and Keeley said that under the bill, SB 47X, the average price for these QF contracts could drop from the current 17 cents per kilowatt-hour to about 8 to 8.5 cents per kilowatt-hour. ""We believe that the rates are at least that low, if not lower,"" said Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of the Independent Energy Producers, which represents small and large generators. The small generators support the bill because it will give them a stable price for five years, avoiding ups and downs and the possibility that state regulators might make a more unfavorable price cut. Much of the current price formula is based on the price of natural gas at the California border, which has soared this winter. The legislation spreads the price bench mark over a five-year period. ""We encourage the Legislature to take quick action to approve SB 47X as quickly as possible to help stabilize the electricity crisis,"" Smutny-Jones said. He said one of the side agreements to the legislation is the creation of a portfolio of long-term contracts to purchase natural gas for some co-generators, lowering their production costs. The legislation was applauded as ""a major step forward"" by a group of small generators who formed a creditors committee last week and threatened to take the utilities into bankruptcy. ""We call on the Legislature and the governor to act on it immediately,"" said Chris Thompson, a spokesman for the group. Thompson said Southern California Edison continues to collect money from ratepayers, as the state buys power for its customers, but is not paying anything to the small non-polluting generators. A spokesman for a geothermal generator in El Centro, which filed a lawsuit seeking $45 million from Edison for power provided since November, welcomed the legislation for giving generators stability and ratepayers cheaper power. But Vince Signorotti, a spokesman for CalEnergy, said it would be ""premature"" to consider dropping the lawsuit. Battin and Keeley said that payment of the small generators depends on the governor's attempt to negotiate the purchase of the transmission systems of Edison, Pacific Gas and Electric, and San Diego Gas and Electric in exchange for payment of their debt. As part of the governor's plan, the utilities would agree to provide low-cost power for five to 10 years from their generators, which provide about a third of the state's power. Davis aides are attempting to negotiate long-term contracts with generators for the remaining third of the power required by the state, sharply reducing the cost of buying power on the expensive spot market. But the governor said this week that many generators are reluctant to sign long-term contracts until they know how the utilities will pay their debt for previous power purchases. The state called off all power alerts yesterday for the first time since mid-January, rescinding a Stage 1 alert declared Wednesday. Grid operators made the change after increased power supplies became available. ""The supply situation this week has gradually been improving,"" said Lorie O'Donley, a spokeswoman with the California Independent System Operator, which manages most of the state's power supplies. However, she said the improvements shouldn't deter consumers from conservation. ""It is good news to be out of electrical emergencies but we just want to remind everybody that we are looking at a long-term power supply situation here,"" she said. ""And the high-demand summer is just around the corner. So we would ask that people continue with their conservation efforts."" In San Francisco yesterday, state power regulators decided unanimously that the Department of Water Resources is responsible for buying any power that cash-strapped utilities are unable to generate or buy on their own -- no matter what price wholesalers are charging. But the PUC voted 3-2 against taking action that would have allowed the DWR to receive a portion of ratepayer revenues from the utilities to help cover the cost of buying electricity. The state, through the DWR, was authorized by a recent law to buy power for the utilities. Edison and PG&E have such low credit ratings that no power companies will sell to them. SDG&E's rating is much better, but its debt also was mounting. The DWR purchases that portion of electricity beyond what the utilities provide through their own generating plants and through existing long-term contracts. But the DWR has refused to buy power beyond a certain price. That means more last-minute power purchases on the expensive spot market. The utilities and the state had disagreed over how the DWR will be reimbursed -- whether through state bonds or ratepayer dollars -- and the extent of its power-buying role. The author of the bill authorizing the long-term contracts, Assemblyman Keeley, said the legislation's intent was to fully cover the one-third of the power that utilities purchased on the spot market, either through extended contracts or through the state ISO. Staff writer Karen Kucher and The Associated Press contributed to this report. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Moday meeting; [EMail-Body]= Dan, Joe and Charles: Let's meet in the hallway 15 minutes before to discuss strategy. Joe, we can share a cab. thanks. ---------------------- Forwarded by Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron on 07/21/2000 03:26 PM --------------------------- ""Van Way, Cathy"" <Cathy.VanWay@mail.house.gov> on 07/21/2000 02:58:23 PM To: ""Black, Andy"" <andy.black@mail.house.gov>, ""'Betsy Moler'"" <Elizabeth.Moler@ucm.com>, ""'Bill Moore'"" <bmoore@worsham.net>, ""Bolster, Bob"" <Bob.Bolster@mail.house.gov>, ""'Bob Nordhaus'"" <rrn@vnf.com>, ""'Bud Albright'"" ""'Cal Odom'"" <codom@eei.org>, ""'Chris Giblin'"" ""'Chuck Gray'"" <cgray@naruc.org>, ""'Cindy Bogorad'"" <BogoradC@spiegelmcd.com>, ""'Cindy Marlette'"" ""Hagerty, Curry"" ""'Cynthia Sandherr'"" <Cynthia_Sandherr@enron.com>, ""'Gene Peters'"" <gpeters@epsa.org>, ""Stansell, Heather"" ""'Jane Cirrincione (APPA)'"" <jcirrincione@appanet.org>, ""Bentley, Jason"" ""'Jeanne Wolak'"" <jhwolak@southernco.com>, ""Kelliher, Joe"" ""'Joe Nipper'"" <jnipper@appanet.org>, ""'John Ryan'"" <jryan@mayor.lacity.org>, ""'Kathryn Steckelberg'"" <KSteckelberg@eei.org>, ""'Kerrill Scrivner'"" <kscrivner@txu.com>, ""'Marc Yacker'"" <myacker@elcon.org>, ""'Marty Kanner'"" <mkanner@kannerandassoc.com>, ""Willis, Mike"" <Mike.Willis@mail.house.gov>, ""Erickson, Miriam"" ""'Montee Wynn'"" <montee.wynn@nreca.org>, ""Betfarhad, Ramsen"" ""'Randy Davis'"" <rdavis@sdsatty.com>, ""'Renee Eastman'"" <creastma@srp.gov>, ""'Rich Glick'"" <richard.glick@hq.doe.gov>, ""Waguespack, Stephen"" ""'Tom Bonner'"" <TDBonner@midamerican.com> cc: Subject: Moday meeting We have reserved 2218 Rayburn for the group to meet on Monday at 8 am to discuss the various proposals that have been offered. Attached is a proposal that has been circulating among some of you to address the State role in unbundling. Also attached is a modification of the market power language discussed yesterday. <<stateamend.wpd>> <<marketpower.wpd>> -----Original Message----- From: Black, Andy Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 6:31 PM To: Van Way, Cathy Subject: Meeting Monday 8a We have decided to conduct the next meeting Monday at 8a. Room will be announced. Please get any proposals in to my email by Friday 11a. Thanks > - stateamend.wpd - marketpower.wpd [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Follow-up from Meeting with Andy Black; [EMail-Body]= Jim -- Please see attached from EPSA on their meeting today with Andy Black, Chairman Barton's chief energy adviser. I have my own one-on-one with Andy at 4 pm tomorrow. Would you have a minute to read the EPSA memo and a list that Andy sent me (which I will forward separately) and we could chat about these issues tomorrow before the 4pm -- just so I have everything in perspective going into the meeting? I am open to any time tomorrow except 10 am (EDT). Please let me know. Thanks. ---------------------- Forwarded by John Shelk/NA/Enron on 08/14/2001 04:11 PM --------------------------- ""Michael Reddy"" <Mreddy@epsa.org> on 08/14/2001 03:42:05 PM To: <carin.nersesian@enron.com>, <clong@enron.com>, <john.shelk@enron.com>, <linda.robertson@enron.com>, <richard.shapiro@enron.com>, <Sarah.Novosel@enron.com>, <tom.briggs@enron.com> cc: Subject: Follow-up from Meeting with Andy Black See the attached Memorandum. - Follow-up from Andy Black meeting 8-14-01.doc - Sawyer-Burr HR 2814.pdf - Summary of EPSA Legislative Objectives.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron Management Conference - Hyatt Hill Country Resort, San
 Antonio; [EMail-Body]= Need to be there by noon to attend Ashok's staff meeting. Fredericksburg A room Your Continental flight leaves at 9:45. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Dinner next week with Piotr; [EMail-Body]= Czwartek mi odpowiada. Zadzwonie do Ciebie do pracy we wtorek. Wicek -----Original Message----- From: ""Karasinski, Piotr [FI]"" Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 8:48 AM To: VKaminski@aol.com Cc: vkamins@enron.com; Karasinski, Piotr [FI] Subject: RE: Dinner next week with Piotr Ups ..., masz racje, spotkanie z Kolakowskim jest jutro ... ... na kolacje pojdziemy w czwartek ... Piotr -----Original Message----- From: marek.musiela@bnpparibas.com Sent: 25 June 2001 14:31 To: VKaminski@aol.com Cc: vkamins@enron.com; piotr.karasinski@ssmb.com Subject: Re: Dinner next week with Piotr Piotr i Vince, Czwartek wieczorem jest OK i dla mnie. Piotr, to spotkanie jest w czwartek czy we wtorek. Tak czy inaczej chetnie bym poszedl. Probowalem dzwonic ale bez rezultatu. Jesli bedziesz dzwonil na mobile to dzwon na moj 3band 07909533069. Marek 23/06/2001 22:48 Internet VKaminski@aol.com - 23/06/2001 22:48 To: Marek MUSIELA cc: piotr.karasinski bcc: Subject: Dinner next week with Piotr Marek, I shall be in London next week. What about a dinner next week with Piotr? Wednesday, Thursday or Friday works for me. Vince P.S. Please, carbon copy to my work address (vkamins@enron.com) This message and any attachments (the ""message"") is intended solely for the addressees and is confidential. If you receive this message in error, please delete it and immediately notify the sender. Any use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval. The internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS (and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message if modified. Ce message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le ""message"") sont etablis a l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires et sint confidentiels. Si vous recevez ce message par erreur, merci de le detruire et d'en avertir immediatement l'expediteur. Toute utilisation de ce message non conforme a sa destination, toute diffusion ou toute publication, totale ou partielle, est interdite, sauf autorisation expresse. L'internet ne permettant pas d'assurer l'integrite de ce message, BNP PARIBAS (et ses filiales) decline(nt) toute responsabilite au titre de ce message, dans l'hypothese ou il aurait ete modifie. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Stuff; [EMail-Body]= Here it is [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message(due to missing attachment)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Public Policy Contacts for California; [EMail-Body]= I kept your contact list, but now I can't find the CV you sent. Would you mind resending? Kevin Scott on 06/20/2001 02:02:00 PM Please respond to kevinscott@onlinemailbox.net To: Steve Kean <skean@enron.com>, Jeff Skilling <jeff.skilling@enron.com> cc: Subject: Public Policy Contacts for California Jeff and Steve ? As you requested, I have prepared a list of my preferred public policy contacts?for California.? It is composed of professionals from an array of public, private and non-profit backgrounds.? I have worked in some capacity with?each of these people?and most I know quite well.? ? Please call me for further background. ? Kevin 213-926-2626 ? Attachment - Kevin Scott - Preferred Contacts - 6-20-01.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Request for Confidential Information from the GAO; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Benevides, Dennis Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 4:04 PM To: Williams, Robert C. Subject: Request for Confidential Information from the GAO ---------------------- Forwarded by Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES on 06/29/2001 04:04 PM --------------------------- SJThompson@calpx.com on 06/29/2001 03:51:42 PM To: cc: rmcmanus@bakerbotts.com, lcottle@whitecase.com, thoulihan@mdbe.com, napedersen@jonesday.com, jareding@phjw.com, cabaker@duke-energy.com, jeff.lam@bchydro.bc.ca, jvaughn@luce.com, jmpa@dynegy.com, lynn.mcconnell@williams.com, mhaine@enron.com, macknemd@sce.com, mike-jines@reliantenergy.com, mkass@pillsburywinthrop.com, fmdutton@aep.com, dmbutz@butzdunn.com Subject: Request for Confidential Information from the GAO To All California Power Exchange Participants: Please be advised that the CalPX has received through FERC a data request from the United States General Accounting Office (GAO), as part of an investigation into ""issues surrounding the possible existence and use of market power in California's electricity industry."" The GAO seeks bid data that is confidential under Section 19.3.2 of the CalPX tariff. A copy of the request is attached below. The GAO has requested the CalPX to provide such information no later than Friday, July 6, 2001. The GAO has also agreed to certain processes that will govern how confidential materials are to be treated (see attached September 22, 2000 letter). If you desire to assert a claim of privilege or confidentiality pursuant to legal authority, please direct your written statement as follows by noon on July 5, 2001. David Lengenfelder Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street N.E. Washington, DC 20426 Tel: 202.208.0351 Fax: 202.208.1010 You may also deliver a copy of your statement to the California Power Exchange as follows: Lisa Urick California Power Exchange 200 S. Los Robles Avenue Suite 400 Pasadena, CA 91101 Tel: 626.685.9862 Fax: 626.796.5472 Thank you. (See attached file: GAO Data Request 6-26-01.doc) (See attached file: GAO Letter 9-22-00.pdf) - GAO Data Request 6-26-01.doc - GAO Letter 9-22-00.pdf <Embedded Picture (Device Independent Bitmap)> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Form 4 Reminder for March; [EMail-Body]= I didn't sell any, right? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/12/2001 06:33 PM --------------------------- From: Rebecca Carter on 03/21/2001 03:38 PM Sent by: Kelly Johnson To: Kenneth Lay/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Ken Harrison/ENRON@enronxgate, Cliff Baxter/Enron@EnronXGate, Mark Frevert/Enron@EnronXGate, Stanley Horton/Corp/Enron@Enron, Ken Rice/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Karen S Owens@ees@EES, Rick Buy/Enron@EnronXGate, Richard Causey/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James Derrick/Enron@EnronXGate, Andrew S Fastow/Enron@EnronXGate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Metts/Enron@EnronXGate, Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Dolly Henrici/ENRON@enronxgate, Susan Skarness/Enron@EnronXGate, Nicki Daw/Enron@EnronXGate, Cindy Stark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Dorothy Dalton/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Karen Owens/HOU/EES@EES, Karen K Heathman/Enron@EnronXGate, Sharron Westbrook/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Stephanie Harris/Enron@EnronXGate, Bridget Maronge/Enron@EnronXGate, Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Joannie Williamson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Dolores Fisher/Enron@EnronXGate, Kathy McMahon/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Form 4 Reminder for March CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE The information contained in this email may be confidential and/or privileged. This email is intended to be reviewed by the individual or organization named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination or copying of this email or its attachments, if any, or the information contained herein is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system. Thank you. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California Power Markets; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/02/2001 12:28 PM ----- Suzanne_Nimocks@mckinsey.com Sent by: Carol_Benter@mckinsey.com 03/02/2001 12:04 PM To: skean@enron.com cc: Subject: California Power Markets Sorry that we haven't talked in some time. I thought that you would want to take a look at some analysis we have recently completed with regard to the California Power Crisis. You may find some of the analysis to be helpful. Let me know if you have any questions. (See attached file: 10209 zxd414.ppt) | This message may contain confidential and/or privileged | | information. If you are not the addressee or authorized to | | receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, | | disclose or take any action based on this message or any | | information herein. If you have received this message in | | error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail | | and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. | - 10209 zxd414.ppt [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= LOGISTICAL INFORMATION FOR THE MAY 22-23, 2001 FORUM; [EMail-Body]= meeting folder ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/24/2001=20 04:48 PM --------------------------- ""Susan Green"" <s1green@carbon.cudenver.edu> on 04/18/2001 02:55:38 PM Please respond to <s1green@carbon.cudenver.edu> To: ""'Bill Chew'"" <bill_chew@sandp.com>, ""'Bill Keese'""=20 <wkeese@energy.state.ca.us>, ""'Bob Anderson'"" <baanderson@state.mt.us>,=20 ""'Charles Murphy'"" <charles_j_murphy@ml.com>, ""'Chris Hessler'""=20 ""'Chris Miller'""=20 ""'Cindy Edward'"" <cedward@pnm.com>, ""'David= =20 Olsen'"" <olsendil@concentric.net>, ""'Donna Coulson'"" <dcoulson@state.ut.us>= ,=20 ""'Donna Kraisinger'"" <kraisidl@bp.com>, ""'Gay Escobar'""=20 <gescobar@holnam.com>, ""'Hank Habicht'"" <hhabicht@getf.org>, ""'Jeff Burks'""= =20 <jburks@state.ut.us>, ""'Jeff Sterba'"" <jsterba@pnm.com>, ""'Jennifer Worlton= '""=20 ""'Jordan'"" ,=20 ""'Judy Edwards'"" ""'Kathie'""=20 <kathiek@calpine.com>, ""'Laurie Hutchinson'"" <hutchisl@energy.com>, ""'Maure= en=20 McVicker'"" <mmcvicker@enron.com>, ""'Nancy Kete'"" <nkete@wri.org>, ""'Rachel'= ""=20 <rgold@nrdc.org>, ""'Rachel Shimshak'"" <rachel@rnp.org>, ""'Ralph Cavanagh'""= =20 <rcavanagh@nrdc.org>, ""'Robert Dixon'"" <robert.dixon@ee.doe.gov>, ""'Steven= =20 Kean'"" <skean@enron.com>, ""'William Brack'"" <wsbrack@phelpsdodge.com> cc: =20 Subject: LOGISTICAL INFORMATION FOR THE MAY 22-23, 2001 FORUM Hello All: We look forward to seeing you in Denver for the Regional Leadership Forum o= n Securing the Energy Future of the Western United States on May 22-23. Following is logistical information for you on hotel and transportation. Forum Location: The Forum will be held at the Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce Building , 1445 Market Street in lower downtown Denver. Hotel: We have rooms held in all of your names at the Denver Marriott City Center, 1701 California Street in downtown Denver. Tel: 303-297-1300. Th= e room rate is $89/night. Please be prepared to pay your hotel bill directly at the hotel, upon check-out. The Marriott has a full fitness center and is a nine-block walk to the Denver Metro Chamber building. There is a free mall shuttle that runs east/west on the 16th Street Pedestrian mall that can also transport you fo= r six of those blocks. Transportation from the airport: The Super Shuttle is easily found at ground transportation at the airport and costs $17 one-way for a trip to th= e Marriott, or $30 if you purchase a round-trip ticket. Taxi cabs are readil= y available at a cost of $46 for the trip downtown. Please don=01,t hesitate to contact me with any additional questions or comments. Again, we look forward to seeing you in Denver in May. Sue Green Administrative Assistant Institute for Policy Research 1445 Market Street, Suite 350 Denver, CO 80202 303-820-5602 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: CFTC call to Gramm; [EMail-Body]= Not yet. May not be until sept 5 as ken is on vacation. but there is a chance that ken will try to reach him in the meantime. I'll let you know when I hear. From: Chris Long 08/21/2000 03:22 PM Sent by: Amy Fabian To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: CFTC call to Gramm Steve - Missed you in LA last week. Thanks for working with Ken on the CFTC talking points. Do you know if the call between Ken and Sen. Gramm occured and if there was any follow up needed. Thanks - Chris [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Rick Shapiro Presentation (Updated); [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/10/2001 10:25 AM --------------------------- Richard Shapiro 04/10/2001 10:10 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Rick Shapiro Presentation (Updated) ---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron on 04/10/2001 10:10 AM --------------------------- Ginger Dernehl 03/29/2001 04:45 PM To: Lauren Urquhart/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Rick Shapiro Presentation (Updated) Lauren, Mr. Shapiro has updated his presentation. Can you make sure that this version is available to him for Monday's meeting? Also, will his presentation be saved on a computer for his use or does he need to have it on a ""CD/diskette""? Thanks gngr 713-853-7751 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= In DC with Ken Lay per Desiree, CEO luncheon with Sect'y Rubin; [EMail-Body]= Desiree will schedule other appointments as well Cynthia will attend in your place. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: H&M Roses, Inc; [EMail-Body]= ok Janel Guerrero 03/13/2001 08:04 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: H&M Roses, Inc Steve....unless you think it's a potential problem, I'd like to include the CA flower grower in our list of businesses to target with ken's letter. (You handed me the letter from H&M Roses, Inc today). Let me know. thanks. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= EnronOnline; [EMail-Body]= Anybody at the CFTC or on the hill we want to send brochures to? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 09/08/99 05:24 PM --------------------------- David Forster@ECT 09/07/99 12:44 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: EnronOnline Steven, I understand you indicated to Louise Kitchen the other day that you may wish to provide a list of contacts to receive brochures about EnronOnline. Could you please confirm if you wish to do this, and if so, send me the list so I can ensure that it is included in the mailing? Thanks, Dave [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Speak to DFSC - Sharon Murphy, per Gary von Fischer, in 49C1; [EMail-Body]= Moved to 11:00 per Larry Trybus Please address issues in 889, OASIS, in addition to deregulation material You will have an hour to speak [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron Mentions; [EMail-Body]= See first item below ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/04/2000 09:06 AM ----- Ann M Schmidt 10/04/2000 08:44 AM To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Meredith Philipp/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mary Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron, Laura Schwartz/Corp/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Enron Mentions Letters Letters 10/09/2000 Time Magazine Time Inc. 12+ (Copyright 2000) Byzantine Practices? I was flying over Bolivia's Chiquitano Forest as I read your article on the ""old-time gas company"" Enron [BUSINESS, Aug. 28]. Over the past year, this forest, the largest remnant of intact primary dry tropical forest in the world, has been bisected by a 30-ft.-wide gash for construction of a gas pipeline by Enron and Shell. Enron in its quest for profit has ignored the scientific advice of conservation organizations to maintain the ecological integrity of this endangered forest ecosystem. Enron and Shell decided to open the 10 million- acre forest to fragmentation and deforestation by their pipeline. Enron may be keeping pace with advancing technologies to plow ahead in global markets, but its environmental practices are Byzantine and pose a global threat to biodiversity. PATRICIA CAFFREY World Wildlife Fund-Bolivia Santa Cruz, Bolivia Arena foes launch bid to defeat new plan By ERIC BERGER Copyright 2000 Houston Chronicle Wednesday, October 4, 2000 A handful of activists, including a Harris County Green Party official and several low-tax proponents, launched an effort Tuesday to defeat a second plan to build a downtown arena. Unlike the 1999 opposition campaign, this year's anti-arena movement is not seeking a better financing deal for taxpayers. These activists want no arena at all. Although this year's opponents lack the nearly $700,000 their higher-profile predecessors spent last year, that has done little to diminish their rhetoric. ""Should we spend our city's limited resources on building up rich guys, or do we spend it building up our communities?"" asked activist DeWayne Lark, standing in front of City Hall. ""There will be no more corporate welfare in Harris County."" Pro-arena campaign officials said Tuesday's event, which came about three weeks after their own kickoff, was more notable for who did not attend than for who did. Houston Aeros owner Chuck Watson, who funded a large chunk of last year's anti-arena effort, has endorsed the new deal. Gracie Saenz, a former city councilwoman and mayoral candidate who campaigned against the 1999 deal, also supports the new agreement. And although the Harris County Republican Party -- the primary organizer of the 1999 anti-arena effort -- has declined to support the new deal, it has not been as active in opposition as some of its members had hoped. In the GOP's stead this year is the Harris County Green Party, represented by Nathalie Paravicini, who said she rejects the argument that professional sports are critical to a city's identity. Arena boosters say a new downtown facility will promote Houston's image as a world-class city. ""Civic pride is not measured by a sports team that is ready to leave town at the drop of a hat,"" she said. And organizers of the anti-arena campaign also suggested that conservative political activist Bruce Hotze would announce plans Thursday to take a major role in their efforts, possibly becoming campaign manager. Although Hotze lacks the political and financial stature of the pro-arena campaign co-chairmen, Enron Corp. Chairman and Chief Executive Ken Lay and former Reliant Energy Chairman Don Jordan, he comes from a politically active family that can raise large amounts of money. Hotze has said he does not believe government should be involved in building sports stadiums, but he has declined to say how much he was willing to get involved in the anti-arena effort. Lark said Hotze told him that he will actively raise funds to fight the arena. The group is expected to form a political action committee this week to collect contributions. The philosophy of the anti-sports-arena efforts has reverted to its 1996 form, when a similar grass-roots effort coalesced to oppose the referendum to build a baseball stadium, which voters approved. That underfunded effort also opposed any public spending on stadiums, rather than merely trying to extract a better deal from team owners. Arena proponents this year have attracted most of their former foes, and certainly the best-known, to their ranks by altering the original proposal, which failed with voters last year by 10 percentage points. Still, they acknowledge that there will always be opposition in high-profile contests. ""We never expected this to be a unanimous vote,"" said Jordan, the co-chairman of the pro-arena campaign, Let's Build it Together. ""Some people will vote against anything."" FRANCE: Europe online power markets seen pressuring brokers. By Stuart Penson 10/03/2000 Reuters English News Service (C) Reuters Limited 2000. PARIS, Oct 3 (Reuters) - Online trading is set to sweep through Europe's power markets, sending transaction fees sharply lower and piling the pressure on traditional brokers, industry executives and consultants said on Tuesday. Scores of web-based trading platforms, offering a variety of functions, are expected to enter the European wholesale power market in the near term, forcing brokers who work over the telephone to rethink their approach, they told an energy conference. ""Transaction fees in Europe are already falling and I think we're going to see a big decline over the next six months,"" said Gilbert Toppin, principal of Deloitte Consulting's European e-business practice. ""Voice broking could become a distant memory,"" he told Reuters during the Powerisk 2000 conference. Leading the online charge in Europe's wholesale power market are EnronOnline, which launched last year, and HoustonStreet.com, which started up last week and is already planning to expand into Scandinavia. EnronOnline is a bilateral market in which Enron is always one party to a deal. HoustonStreet is a multilateral exchange. The major advantages for online markets over telephone brokers are seen as lower transaction costs and the ability to display a far wider range of prices to clients. Also, online trading is anonymous, which is attractive to traders, said Mark Crosno, president of electronic trading services at Altra Energy Technologies of the US. Altra is a partner with National Grid in EnMO in the UK, a consortium which runs a screen-based gas trading market and is planning to launch a power exchange. Many traditional brokers are still deciding how to respond to the online challenge. ""A lot of brokers are scratching their heads because there are going to be 20 or 25 electronic exchanges out there,"" said Per-Otto Wold, managing director of Natsource-Tullett Europe, one of Europe's biggest power brokers. Wold argued that doing a trade over the telephone was still, in most cases, the quickest method. And that would remain so until voice recognition enabled traders to ""talk"" to the screens on their desks. He expected brokers to focus on longer dated trades and options while online markets would capture a greater share of trading in short term, high volume contracts. The provision of market information and traders' liking for personal contact over the telephone would also help to preserve a niche for the voice brokers, said Wold. ""The markets are still going to need somebody to massage the markets, and that is where the brokers come in,"" he said. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Confidential - GSS Organization Value to ETS; [EMail-Body]= Will do. -----Original Message----- From: Hayslett, Rod Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 1:00 PM To: Brassfield, Morris Cc: Saunders, James Subject: RE: Confidential - GSS Organization Value to ETS I have forwarded to Stan and agree with your perspective. Could you begin to think about who those people might be if we decided to do something? -----Original Message----- From: Saunders, James Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 10:31 AM To: Hayslett, Rod Cc: Brassfield, Morris Subject: FW: Confidential - GSS Organization Value to ETS Rod, Stan is/was reviewing selected ""corp."" services, and one of those selected was GSS. I requested that Morris provide some persepective on GSS. Please review and forward to Stan, if appropriate. -----Original Message----- From: Brassfield, Morris Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 10:05 AM To: Saunders, James Subject: Confidential - GSS Organization Value to ETS Here are my thoughts on the value the GSS (Global Strategic Sourcing) brings to ETS: I believe totally in the concept of strategically sourcing our materials and services for ETS, which is the concept that GSS was founded under, while still within the ETS organization. Basically the value that GSS has brought to the bottom line during the last year has been minimal to ETS. The reasons for that statement, in my opinion, are: The materials and services that ETS purchase are basic and routine. Most of those materials and service providers were identified and sourced during 1999 and 2000. ETS is reaching the point where we need fewer providers, not more. New items identified are normally rolled into one of our already sourced NPA's. Almost all large dollar items are bid out (three bids and a buy). GSS's involvement and commitment to the deal ends with the contract signing. ETS P&SM organization and our Contracts services group deals with the actual execution and the ringing of the cash register. If the GSS organization went away tomorrow, we would need the following expertise brought over from their group: (currently this group is close to 75 people.)(and very highly paid individuals) Two (2) negotiators - Contract Managers Two (2) analysts Two (2) contract administrators The administration of the following services would need to be shifted to the ISC: iBuyit System Catalog system (part of iBuyit) iPayit system We would need to re-assess the value of the contract with SourceNet and whether we continue down that path or implement our own A/P department. This would take very few staff adds to make that happen. Let me know if you need any further detail. Morris (713) 503-1409 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Regulatory Roundtable, in 49C2; [EMail-Body]= 6:00 Photographer [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: UC-CSU-Enron press release; [EMail-Body]= Is there an alternative quote we could use instead of the reference to ""stabilizing"" in the California market? I think I know what we mean but most outside readers would see the situation as unstable. Perhaps we could reference the continued availability of direct access or renewed interest in Enron's offerings? To: Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES, Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Robert C Williams/Enron@EnronXGate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: UC-CSU-Enron press release Attached is a draft of the UC-CSU-Enron press release concerning the settlement agreement. Please review and let me know of any revisions or suggestions. We would like for this to go out tomorrow if possible. We're still waiting for a quote from CSU. I'll make sure you see that as well. Thank you. Max [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Daily Research reports; [EMail-Body]= I would like to see research from all of these sources on areas of interest to enron -- energy and broadband, North America and Europe. Thanks ""Henry Emery"" <HEMERY@firstunion1.com> on 07/19/2001 12:03:17 PM To: undisclosed-recipients:; cc: Subject: Daily Research reports Attached are two research reports that I can send to you on a daily basis. One of our many benefits here at our new location is the availability of various research sources. The two reports I have attached are from : The First Union Securities Equity Marketing Group and Merrill Lynch We also have access to Goldman Sachs research, and CS First Boston Research. Please let me know if you would like me to continue sending these reports on a daily basis, or if you have any particular companies that you are interested in hearing about. Sincerely, Hank Emery - Spotlight071801.pdf.pdf - smith.pdf.pdf [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: New Computer for Handling Stock Awards; [EMail-Body]= Do what you need to do; the system has to work. The only question I have is: why doesn't IT just take care of this without a charge? This is not an extraordinary item or special request. This ought to be something IT simply takes care of without us having to get involved or pay extra. Am I missing something? From: Aaron Brown/ENRON@enronXgate on 04/16/2001 09:41 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mary Joyce/ENRON@enronXgate cc: Subject: New Computer for Handling Stock Awards Steve, The IT group put it like this...""Justification: Current Server is PL1850, and has reached it's capacity and is non-redundant."" That means that our current system: (1) has a slow processor (2) is nearly out of memory for stock award administration (3) doesn't have a ""real-time"" back up in case the hard drives fails (4) needs to be upgraded The IT group has quoted about $19,000 for a new system that brings this server up to Enron's current server standards and takes care of the above issues. Let me know if this expense is a problem and whether you need to be involved with these types of decisions in the future. Thanks, Aaron [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Will Hixon - UT Candidate; [EMail-Body]= I don't see a fit Lexi Elliott 02/28/2001 02:39 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Chris Harman/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Subject: Will Hixon - UT Candidate Steve: Per my voicemail message to you, I have forwarded Will's resume for your consideration. Thank you! lexi ---------------------- Forwarded by Lexi Elliott/NA/Enron on 02/28/2001 02:35 PM --------------------------- From: Chris Harman@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS on 02/13/2001 10:15 PM To: Lexi Elliott/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Will Hixon - UT Candidate Lexi- Thanks for your message. Let me know what we can do with Will. I know Rick, so If you can have a conversation with him, let me know. Thanks for your assistance in placing Will. Call with any questions. Regards, Christopher T. Harman Global Bandwidth Risk Management Enron Broadband Services, Inc. EB4429C 713-853-3064 direct 877-311-1909 pager 713-306-7245 mobile chris_harman@enron.net ----- Forwarded by Chris Harman/Enron Communications on 02/13/01 10:13 PM ----- wlhv@hotmail.com 01/16/01 11:42 AM To: Chris Harman/Enron Communications@Enron Communications cc: Subject: interview (01-22-01) Chris, Attached to this message is a copy of my resume. A few thoughts on what I would be interested in this summer: 1)Political 2)International These are two areas which I have pursued in the past and might like to continue with in the future. Thanks for all your help. Will Hixon Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Skilling Get Davis Straightened Out?; [EMail-Body]= I'm still waiting for Davis' office to call. The plan currently is for me to talk to him when and if he calls. Sandi has been in touch with the governor's office. By the way, thanks for the summary of the California proceedings. I talked to Hebert yesterday and he was duly impressed with your remarks ... I had to remind him that you worked on the right answers for California, not the abomination that's in place today. Jeff Dasovich@EES 09/13/2000 06:48 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Skilling Get Davis Straightened Out? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Rick to Cover; [EMail-Body]= LTV Steel's Northern Ohio Energy Conference, in Cleveland Ohio You will be on a panel with reps from Centerior, Ohio Edison, Cinergy Audience will be between 400-500 ppl Per Terrie James [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: EnronOnline Market Descriptions; [EMail-Body]= Per my voicemail. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 09/03/99 02:02 PM --------------------------- Awais Omar@ECT 09/03/99 12:34 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Re: EnronOnline Market Descriptions Steven, attached in the document are the next four descriptions. Only 3 o/s now ont he liquids markets. I will try to get these to you today as well. Thanks Awais 44 171 970 7377 ---------------------- Forwarded by Awais Omar/LON/ECT on 03/09/99 18:34 --------------------------- Awais Omar 03/09/99 18:31 To: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Re: EnronOnline Market Descriptions Sorry for the delay. Here are the next four descriptions. Only the three liquids one waiting now. I have sent these to David Forster in our Project group to review first before I send them to yourself. If I don't get them back today I will send them over the weekend so they are there for you on Monday. Could you please send me comments back on all the other descriptions today. Is your fax machine at your end OK? It's just that the other fax you sent came through a dark background making the comments a little hard to read. My fax is 44 171 316 5420. Awais Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp. From: Tana Jones 01/09/99 23:13 To: Awais Omar/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Re: EnronOnline Market Descriptions Awais, I have forwarded the descriptions you have sent us thus far to the respective Legal Trading Lawyers to sign off as far any legal issues we may have with the descriptions. I understand your deadline is the end of the week. When can I expect the remaining descriptions? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Entry tax to dergulating markets; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/01/2001 07:35 AM --------------------------- John Sherriff@ECT 05/01/2001 02:15 AM To: Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Fiona Grant/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Lauren Urquhart/LON/ECT Subject: Entry tax to dergulating markets The Forbes April 30, 2001 editorial piece ""Slow Starters"" on page 24 discusses the ""entry tax"" which is the capital burden for starting a new business. It states that rich countries on average have relatively low entry costs while poor countries have stagering entry costs caused by corruption, endless beuacracy, and cost of delays. These ""entry hurdles"" and asscoiated costs do not produce any tangible benefits for consumers, workers or the environment. We might want to make the analogy of ""entry tax"" for new deregulated gas & power markets. Things like negotiated third-party access (rather than regulated TPA) substantially slow the speed of new entrants and hence deter competition. Negotiated TPA creates uncertainty for new entrants (they never know what they are going to get) and clearly slows the new comers down. I will send you a copy of the Forbes piece. John [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Comparable Worth Legislation; [EMail-Body]= This is an issue we need to stay on top of. Felicia: could you please put= =20 some background together for everyone on the list? ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/09/2001 01:00 PM ----- =09Felecia Acevedo =0903/08/2001 10:27 AM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: Comparable Worth Legislation Steve, Do you think your Gov't Affairs group could do some investigation for us on= =20 what the states are doing concerning strengthening the current equal pay=20 laws? Also, the Paycheck Fairness Act (S.77) was introduced in the U.S.=20 Senate on January 22, 2001 and referred to the Committee on Health,=20 Education, Labor, and Pensions. (Sponsors Mr. Daschle, Ms. Mikulski, Mr.= =20 Kennedy, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Wellstone, Ms. Landrieu, Mrs. Lincoln, Mr. Akaka,= =20 Mr. Breaux, Mr. Cleland, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Inouye, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Leahy, Mr.= =20 Reid, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. Schumer, and Mr. Johnson. Added after the bill was= =20 introduced.....Mr. Torricelli, Mrs. Murray, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Dodd, Mrs.=20 Clinton, Mr. Feingold). It appears that this proposed act has some reporti= ng=20 requirements that could be very burdensome for us--it would probably make u= s=20 have to re-think how we have our compensation system structured. Could=20 someone in your group get a feel for what is happening with this in=20 Washington and what kind of support it is getting? =20 Thanks! The below was published in SHRM=01,s HRVoice - MARCH 2001 INSIDER Campaign To Enact Comparable Worth Legislation Launched In 12 States;=20 Numerous Others Introducing Legislation On February 7, a number of state legislators, labor organizations, and poli= cy=20 advocates launched a campaign to promote state legislation that would=20 strengthen current equal pay laws and encourage comparable worth pay system= s.=20 Although 12 states have been explicitly identified as targets for the=20 passage of such legislation, a number of other states have already=20 introduced bills to further address wage discrimination.=20 Proponents of the campaign maintain that current national and state laws th= at=20 mandate equal pay for equal work do not go far enough to remedy past and=20 current discrimination in compensation. Therefore, they claim government= =20 intervention is necessary to raise women's or minorities' wages and elimina= te=20 gender and race-based wage discrimination.=20 State legislators are considering varying proposals to remedy wage=20 disparities, including: commissioning pay equity studies, increasing=20 penalties for violations of current equal pay laws, or implementing mandate= d=20 job evaluation and comparison (comparable worth) pay systems to raise wages= =20 for jobs that are traditionally dominated by women or minorities.=20 The following states have been identified as targets of this legislation. = =20 For those states that have already seen legislation introduced, the bill=20 numbers are also included:=20 Alabama Arizona (Senate Bill 1266) Colorado (SB 41), Connecticut Georgia (SR 147) Massachusetts (HB 2110) New Mexico Nevada Ohio Texas (HB 95) *House Bill 95 provides an employee who files a wage claim wi= th=20 legal protection from retaliation.=20 Wisconsin West Virginia Other states not included in the campaign are also seeking wage=20 discrimination legislation:=20 Indiana (HB 1438)=20 Iowa (HB 221, HB 226)=20 Minnesota (HB 666, SB 638) =20 Missouri (HB 115)=20 Mississippi (HB 176, SB 2632-both died)=20 New York (AB 3594, SB 2190-public sector employees affected only)=20 Pennsylvania (HB 140)=20 Rhode Island (SB 171)=20 Wyoming (HB 239-passed Senate Feb. 29)=20 For more information please visit the ""Equal Pay"" fact sheet at=20 pay.a sp [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Michael Travieso's testimony; [EMail-Body]= Below is a link to the prepared testimony of Michael Travieso, Maryland People's Counsel, at the Barton RTO hearing last week. His comments on the importance of a fewer number of RTOs, each with a broad geographic scope, track our own views. As with the CFA report by Mark Cooper several months ago, these consumer groups are important to showing third party support for our efforts, particularly among Democrats in Congress. -----Original Message----- From: Nersesian, Carin Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 3:36 PM To: Shelk, John Subject: Michael Travieso's testimony [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: NEW DRAFT OF ENRON STATEMENT; [EMail-Body]= As discussed. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/09/2001 06:27 PM --------------------------- Steven J Kean 07/09/2001 03:54 PM To: Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Comnes/Enron@EnronXGate, Carole Hodge/ETOL/EU/Enron@ETOL, dwatkiss@bracepatt.com, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@ENRON, Richard B Sanders/Enron@EnronXGate, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, Robert Frank/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON Subject: Re: NEW DRAFT OF ENRON STATEMENT I know we are holding for a later filing, but I have attached further comments anyway. The document is still too rough to send out. We need to take the opportunity, as soon as possible, to get a hard hitting, thoroughly researched and carefully written document in front of the Commissioners. California's reaction to the Judge's recommendation is likely to give FERC (especially the new commissioners) a feel for how irrational the California politicians can be. We will have a limited opportunity to take advantage of that realization. We need to hit it hard in the pleading, our conversations at the Commission, the Hill and the media. Linda Robertson 07/09/2001 09:58 AM To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Alan Comnes/Enron@EnronXGate, Carole Hodge/ETOL/EU/Enron@ETOL, dwatkiss@bracepatt.com, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@ENRON, Richard B Sanders/Enron@EnronXGate, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, Robert Frank/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON Subject: Re: NEW DRAFT OF ENRON STATEMENT Let me emphasize that these comments are to be filed COB TODAY. James D Steffes 07/09/2001 10:50 AM To: Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Carole Hodge/ETOL/EU/Enron@ETOL, Richard B Sanders/Enron@EnronXGate, dwatkiss@bracepatt.com, Alan Comnes/Enron@EnronXGate, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: NEW DRAFT OF ENRON STATEMENT HERE IS THE MOST RECENT STATEMENT WITH STEVE'S COMMENTS. Jim [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= <<Concur Expense Document>> - April-01 AMEX; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/02/2001 07:24 AM --------------------------- eserver@enron.com on 05/01/2001 06:06:08 PM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - April-01 AMEX The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: Mark A. Palmer Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: April-01 AMEX Report Total: $8,337.18 Amount Due Employee: $8,337.15 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://xms.enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Meeting Request - July 25th; [EMail-Body]= Yes. Maureen - please schedule. From: Michael on 07/06/2001 03:05 AM GDT To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Meeting Request - July 25th Steve - I'll be in Houston July 23-26 and would like to get together to bring you up to date on the latest developments in Japan regarding EBS and EGM, as well as energy markets. Would you have half an hour on the morning of Wednesday the 25th? Thanks, Mike [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Thank you to exec recruiter; [EMail-Body]= prepare for my siganture. cc Lisa ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/10/2001 09:43 AM --------------------------- Lisa Connolly@EES 05/07/2001 01:24 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Thank you to exec recruiter Hi Steve, I thought it might be nice to send Korn/Ferry (Bob Laughman and Trigg Bracewell) a thank you note. I've attached a first draft of two letters (one for each). Feel free to make any changes. I'm happy to send out once you've reviewed, or if you prefer to have Maureen make changes and send out, I'd just like a copy. Thanks. Lisa [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Speaking engagement with PUF Conference, on mergers, 9:00 a.m. -
 10:00, give a 10-15 minute presentation, then you're on a panel.; [EMail-Body]= In Washington DC. Get Des to set up appointments [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= california energy prices; [EMail-Body]= Summary of what we discussed the other night: Background: power -- power prices have moved above $1000/mwh in the Northwest and are showing $600-700 for the first quarter of 01; forward prices in California have also moved well above the ""soft cap"" of $150. Sellers are exporting power from California to the Northwest. gas -- balance of the month gas in California was trading at $26-27 with Jan trading at $19, feb at $12-14 and Summer at $8. The Cal gas and power utilities remain unhedged (price caps are in place for retail power and utilities continue to buy power from the ISO and PX while gas utilities, we believe, are primarily buying at spot prices even under their long term deals). The power utilities will continue to book large deferrals and gas utilities will be passing costs through a month or two after incurring them. The impact of the gas price increases will begin showing up in Jan billings to consumers. curtailment rules (gas): More work to be done here, but it appears that gas utilities will curtail deliveries in the following order: interruptible first (with some priority for cogens); firm service (with utilities alternating or rolling between generation load and nongeneration load); and core customers last. Curtailment rules apparently allow the utilities to confiscate gas sold to direct access customers [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: CA Price caps; [EMail-Body]= Oops. My computer sent the message before I was finished. I continue to hope that there is more opportunity than risk in this for us. Price volatility is in the news like never before and our main product is price risk management. I know that the inquiries are up, I hope EES and ENA can get some sales out of it. More utilities have been approaching TNPC, EES and ENA about taking over their merchant functions. On the policy side, we are working the issue on both a state and federal level. Whether this country does anything meaningful to deal with the current crisis comes donw to one person ... Linda Breathitt. Ken Lay spoke with Secy Richardson and Sen Schumer about proposing rulemaking initiatives to FERC. We are working the RTO process hard elsewhere in the country and coming up with messages to arm our remaining allies around the country. THis is the biggest time for us on this issue since the very beginnings in California and New Hampshire. In the current panic, however, we will be decimated if we are associated only with a move to keep price caps from going into effect (I saw your message to Mona). I am going to read the comments next, but I start off thinking we need to avoid running headlong into the price cap movement; we may be better off trying to co-opt the movement to get broader reform. Hang in there. Susan J Mara 08/11/2000 11:56 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: CA Price caps I heard you've been raising a ruckus about our activities on the price caps -- asking us to do more. Thanks. I feel as if I have been a voice in the wilderness for the past six months when I was trying to get people to pay attention to the bad things happening in CA and warning that the problems (mainly a threat of reregulation) will spread elsewhere. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Information and Securities Trading; [EMail-Body]= To:KAMINSKI, WINCENTY Email:vkamins@enron.com - 7138533848 ? Enron Wholesale Services - Office of the Chairman ? From:??Mark Frevert, Chairman & CEO ??????Greg Whalley, President & COO ??????Mark Haedicke, Managing Director & General Counsel ? Subject:??Confidential Information and Securities Trading ? Enron Wholesale Services ('EWS') maintains official Policies and Procedures Regarding Confidential Information and Securities Trading ('Policies and Procedures'), which have been revised as of November 15, 2000 to reflect the new EWS structure. These policies and procedures are intended to allow us simultaneously to pursue our diverse businesses and to protect confidential information, our reputation for integrity, and EWS and its employees from legal liability. ? You are required to become familiar with, and to comply with, the Policies and Procedures. The newly revised Policies and Procedures are available for your review on LegalOnline, the new intranet website maintained by the Enron Wholesale Services Legal Department. Please click on the attached link to access LegalOnline: ? ? You must certify your compliance with the Policies and Procedures within two weeks of your receipt of this message. The LegalOnline site will allow you to quickly and conveniently certify your compliance on-line with your SAP Personal ID number. If you have any questions concerning the Policies or Procedures, please call Lance Schuler at extension 3-5419, Mark Haedicke at extension 3-6544, Alan Aronowitz at extension 3-3214, Bob Bruce at extension 5-7780 or Donna Lowry at extension 3-1939. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Draft Response to CPUC OII; [EMail-Body]= I have taken a stab at putting a draft response together, indicating areas where we need more flesh. I will forward Tim/Mary's presentation to FERC, EPSA's California Fact Sheet and the transcript from the hearing held on 8/23 and 8/24. Witness Wolak, Market Surveillance Committee of ISO, had some good points about rational behavior in markets with scarcity of supply. His comments were on 8/23. Please feel free to comment. Dan Douglass, Arter&Hadden (818-596-2201) will be filing these comments on Enron's behalf, which are due on Friday. I would suggest that Dan provide some of the legal view on whether the CPUC has adequate jurisdiction over retail rates, not wholesale rates. We should shoot for final comments by 10:00 a.m. tomorrow, if possible. This will allow an opportunity to discuss any last minute changes, if necessary before filing. Seabron Adamson, Frontier Economics (617-354-0060), will be providing additional drafting. Be sure to send any comments to these parties along with the internal list. Thanks. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re:; [EMail-Body]= Frank, Thanks. I have given your name to the employee Energy and Power Risk Management magazine who organizes Power2001 Conference in Houston (May of 2001). Vince ""Frank A. Wolak"" <wolak@zia.stanford.edu> on 11/28/2000 09:04:42 AM To: Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com cc: Subject: Vince, Sorry about the delay in responding. It's the end of the quarter and I'm teaching 3 courses, so things are very busy, plus I had to work on a response to the FERC Proposed Order for California. Here is my student's CV. Please let me know if you need more information. Frank Wolak - jmyan_cv_new1.pdf [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: US CPI; [EMail-Body]= Maureen, How do you generate this forecast? Vince -----Original Message----- From: Mujica, Mitra On Behalf Of Raymond, Maureen Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 1:56 AM To: Hudler, Cindy; Shahi, Pushkar; Stuart III, William Cc: Koepke, Gwyn; Kaminski, Vince J Subject: US CPI Hello! Enclosed is the CPI monthly forecast file. Mitra on behalf of Maureen Raymond [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: You Can Put A Stake in Their Hearts but They Never Die; [EMail-Body]= Here's the proposal to form the Team. Note that the complete team list includes: =01&The MRT will be led by Philippe Auclair, and will include Market Partic= ipant=20 Advisor (MPA), Eric Woychik, Market Assessment Advisor (MAA), Steven Stoft, and any others= =20 appointed by the Board.=20 =01&The Market Design Group may be comprised of a number of national expert= s on=20 energy market structure and regulation, and to be used as needed by the MRT. Sever= in=20 Borenstein, Joe Bowering (PJM=01,s Market Monitor), William Hogan, Paul Joskow, and Fra= nk=20 Wolak have all expressed their willingness to assist the ISO Board through the Market Repa= ir=20 Team.=018 Does anybody have a read on Bowering from PJM? Alan Comnes Susan J Mara@ENRON 03/13/2001 03:06 PM To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe=20 Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Sandra=20 McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT,= =20 Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Steve=20 Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: =20 Subject: You Can Put A Stake in Their Hearts but They Never Die Gang, Just heard from someone at the ISO that the ISO Board is shoving a new mark= et=20 approach down the staff's throat. Rising from the almost dead ... This ""Market Repair Committee"" is supported by Eric Woychik, advisor to Boa= rd=20 Member Florio. The Committee members are Joskow, Hogan, PJM people, et=20 cetera, et cetera. There will be something posted on the ISO's web site=20 shortly. It will be approved at the Board meeting Thursday. I'll be there. Sue Mara Enron Corp. Tel: (415) 782-7802 Fax:(415) 782-7854 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Several matters; [EMail-Body]= Thanks for the message. It's good to hear from you again. We have already hired Racicot (who now works for Bracewell and Patterson), but I'm not sure that our arrangement would include what you may need, so I'm copying Linda Robertson in our DC office. Also, I'll copy Jim Derrick so he knows we might expand our relationship there. Linda and Joe - thoughts on BPA and EOL? Pamela Lesh/ENRON@enronxgate 03/05/2001 04:04 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT Subject: Several matters Hi, Steve! Long time no talk. I hope you are well - I KNOW you are busy! I just have a couple of matters for your attention: 1. We, as part of a group of Northwest IOUS, are exploring the possibility of retaining former Montana Governor Racicot to work BPA issues on our behalf. PGE will continue with Mike Andrews as our lobbyist but Racicot would work for the IOUs as a group. Does this cause you any concerns? Incidentally, we may step up our efforts somewhat in the general area of BPA because of the situation out here. Please let me know if I or Mike should be coordinating what we do with any of your folks in DC. 2. One of the major Northwest issues is who will be the next BPA Administrator. For a variety of reasons, there really aren't any good candidates from the Northwest and we're probably all to close to the situation anyway. I was wondering if the Enron net could come up with any good ideas for someone with good energy and policy experience from outside the Northwest? Someone who would appeal to the Bush administration? 3. With the delay in closing our sale to Sierra, we would very much like the ability to use Enron Online for trading. I believe we can get the regulatory approvals necessary but apparently when we raised this some months ago, there was strong opposition from within Enron, particularly Joe Hartsoe. Do you see an issue with pursuing this? How do you suggest I move this forward? Thanks, Steve. As you may hear from time to time, things are going well here in Oregon. We are proceeding on our restructuring, which is beginning to get notice from NARUC and others as a possible model for states that have not yet proceeded. It's an interesting world. I look forward to hearing from you. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= GM - private and confidential - attorney/client privilege; [EMail-Body]= As I mentioned at the Mgmt meeting yesterday 8-9 MTM plus 5 million likely 13-14 million worst case. I have accrued this amount below the line at present and will await further meetings before taking any other actions. Because of our presence in Spain and our role with GM , Vitol ,Veba and KPC are meeting with Chris this week as they would like us to continue to supply to them in Spain. We would also like to do this as it continues to give us the outlet we wanted when we entered the GM deal but with better partners. It also allows us to make money while we sort through the GM situation. ---------------------- Forwarded by John L Nowlan/HOU/ECT on 01/23/2001 07:22 AM --------------------------- Robert Quick 01/22/2001 12:33 PM To: John L Nowlan/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Chris Mahoney/LON/ECT@ECT, Adam Nye/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark Evans/Legal/LON/ECT@ECT, Justin Boyd/LON/ECT@ECT, Ted Murphy/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: GM - private and confidential - attorney/client privilege ---------------------- Forwarded by Robert Quick/LON/ECT on 22/01/2001 18:36 --------------------------- Robert Quick 22/01/2001 16:13 To: John L Nowlan/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Chris Mahoney/LON/ECT@ECT, Adam Nye/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark Evans/Legal/LON/ECT@ECT, Justin Boyd/LON/ECT@ECT, Ted Murphy/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: GM Chris, Adam and I met with the Spanish lawyers last Thursday night regarding GM. We then met up with GM on the Friday. Basically GM Petroleos (the main GM company) has entered into the Spanish equivalent of U.S. Ch.11. We have still not seen a copy of the petition presented to the Court, but this shd be forthcoming in the next day or so. The idea behind the petition for suspension of payments is to help companies that are facing liquidity problems. GM wd certainly fit that bill, although it remains doubtful as to whether GM can claim that its assets exceed its liabilities. The effect of the petition is to provide a moratorium on the repayment of any unsecured creditors, and on any judgments which those creditors obtain. The petition does not however prevent any preferred or secured creditors from enforcing their debts (in the latter case, to the extent of their security). The judge to whom the petition is presented appoints 3 administrators. 2 are appointed from a list of accountants that the court maintains, and the third (also appointed by the court) is a representative of one of the top third of the list of creditors. Once the administrators are appointed, the financial control of GMP will be their responsibility. They will authorize any future transactions, draw up the definitive list of creditors, and examine the solvency or otherwise of the company. In due course they will submit a report to the judge advising as to whether the company is insolvent or not. If insolvent, the Court will request that GMP provide a warranty for the difference between the amount owed and the assets. If this is not met within 14 days, subsidiary proceedings may be started to examine any personal liability of the management. Parallel with this, the administrators will be speaking to all the creditors with a view to reaching an inter creditor arrangement on repayment of an agreed level of debt. Even though secured creditors are not precluded in enforcing their security during the suspension of payments procedure, it is usual for them too to take part in these discussions. The outside lawyers seemed to think that the amount contained in the petition is equivalent to USD 85 million. We have no real idea how this is broken down, but the following shd be a rough guide: VAT authority - USD 25 million Veba - USD 15 million Enron - USD 5 million Total - USD 3million Bank debt - USD 22 million ? - balance USD15 million The Spanish lawyers confirmed our suspicion that the mark to market exposure may be difficult to prove as a debt. This exposure arises from the market difference we agreed to sell Dec. shipments to GMP (which then cd not put up the agreed purchase price to ensure delivery) and the current market price. Chris can confirm what these losses are today. We wd have to sue on those agreements (English arbitration), and then present to the administrators the arbitration judgments. However, as the administrators report is usually ready within 2-3months, I suspect that leaving aside any other factors there may be a timing problem here. The Spanish lawyers said that GMP Board may have some personal liability issues. The Board is supposed to call a shareholders meeting if the company is in financial difficulties. Moreover, if there has been stripping out of assets from GMP, then those responsible may face criminal sanction On the issue of preferences, it wd appear that Spanish law is somewhat inconsistent. On the one hand there is old jurisprudence to the effect that any and all transactions entered into by the debtor before its insolvency can be challenged by the administrators, irrespective of whether those transactions wd constitute a preference. On the other hand there is jurisprudence of equivalent weight which states that this is not the case, and that only preferences may be challenged. The Spanish lawyers were not able to say which system wd apply in the current scenario, but their insolvency lawyer made the following points: there was no immediate threat from anyone against Enron or ECTRIC Spain. The whole issue about preferences is not dealt with until the report by the administrators is made to the judge. There is no chance of any nasty shocks like injunctions on Arcos etc. the payment to Enron of USD50 million at the same time as the VAT authorities were not being paid shd not overly worry Enron at the moment, as such payments are unlikely to be seen as a preference. most companies (even those judged insolvent) end up being dissolved voluntarily, probably as a result of the uncertainty of Spanish insolvency law. If a voluntary arrangement is reached it is unlikely to provide for anything but the most obvious preference (and the transfer of the strategic oil from GM to ECTRIC Spain wd not fall within this category) The VAT authorities (probably the main creditor) are not pro active in these sorts of proceedings and tend to take a back seat For what t is worth, GM made the following points: GM's banks' inability to fund further prompted GMP management to make the petition (this despite the fact that GM had previously assured Enron that the GMP bank debt was minimal) petition is for Pta 10 billion GM lawyer said shd have made decision earlier to present the petition GM lawyer also said that GMP had made what he called ""third party financing"" of Pta 6 billion, and accepted my suggestion that the administrators wd be asking for such funds back GMP wd be willing to put up Don Antonio's assets to secure Enron's continuing supplies to it (we have heard that many times before). Without such supplies GM stated that GMP was insolvent. They were not able to provide a reason as to why such assets cd not be pledged beforehand GMP sees Enron as the ""key"", namely that the supplies if resumed wd trigger the payment to GM of its outstanding receivables. GM wants Enron to meet with the administrators next week. It is early days but I wd suggest the following: unlikely the old man's assets will be forthcoming likley the company will go into insolvency likley the creditors will reach a voluntary arrangement therefore unlikely there will be any clawback of earlier payments/strategic storage oil equally, unlikely Enron will receive any recognition of its MTM debt Chris, let me know if there is anything you wd like to add/clarify. otherwise once we get the petition we will advise further. tks [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CNN Link Update; [EMail-Body]= I think this is a good idea. We may want to think about CNBC as well. Brandon -- any technical obstacles? Margaret/Cindy -- how does the link work? does it go straight to the clip or do users have to navigate within CNN's site? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/01/2000 07:42 AM --------------------------- Cindy Derecskey@ENRON 07/31/2000 04:58 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Maureen McVicker/HOU/EES@EES Subject: CNN Link Update Steve, I spoke with Margaret and she mentioned she also takes the same route as I've started, to obtain the electronic link for CNN stories/profiles of Enron. Although, the contract looks like it only allows us Intranet use and not Internet use as well. This premise was confirmed by Margaret too, because she recalls paying $2,000.00 for a Intranet/Internet video link, and only $500.00 for a Intranet link. My unsolicited recommendation would be to purchase the external link as well as the internal link. I believe we would get a lot of mileage out of posting this link on our website - with downloadable supporting software - to allow users to view the video. From a PR perspective, I would refer 90% of incoming inquiries to our site, as well as sending them general company info. Also, it would unequivocally illustrate and promote why Enron's has been voted 'Most Innovative Company' for five consecutive years in a row. Now...enough of my blabber and to the point...I am still waiting to hear back from CNN to assess exact pricing for both types of links. I've placed two follow-up calls but have not yet heard anything. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to inquire with me. Regards, Cindy [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= EU household & industrial consumers benefit from lower electricty
 prices; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 07/25/2000 02:14 PM --------------------------- Mark Schroeder@ECT 07/25/2000 06:58 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Kathryn Corbally/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Margaret Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES cc: Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: EU household & industrial consumers benefit from lower electricty prices Interesting info for those of you who follow or have an interest in this type of data regarding succes of market liberalisation. Further interesting to note that household prices fell in Sweden and Finland, markets that already had liberalised wholesale markets, after furhter market opening to residential secotr. Note fall in German prices, which, despite bad access regime, ended up with a suicidal competition in the wholesale market by incumbents. Let me know if you need more/have any questions. mcs ---------------------- Forwarded by Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT on 25/07/2000 12:58 --------------------------- Peter Styles 20/07/2000 18:31 To: Kyran Hanks/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Nailia Dindarova/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: EU household & industrial consumers benefit from lower electricty prices Some useful stats below. ---------------------- Forwarded by Peter Styles/LON/ECT on 20/07/2000 18:31 --------------------------- Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp. From: ""EETC"" <eetc@euronet.be> 20/07/2000 15:25 To: ""Hanna Maria Tarjamo"" ""Martin Sjolund"" ""C.J. Schroot"" <k.schroot@remu.nl>, ""C van der Kaa"" <c.vander.kaa@remu.nl>, ""P de Visser"" <p.de.visser@remu.nl>, ""Fernando Lasheras"" ""Christina Tapper"" ""Stig Goethe"" <stig.goethe@vattenfall.se>, ""Kaija Kainurinne"" ""Kari Huopalahti"" <kari.huopalahti@fortum.com>, ""Jaime Echevarria"" ""Bruno Grobner"" ""Klaus Willnow"" <klaus.willnow@siemens.be>, ""Peter Styles"" <peter.styles@enron.com>, ""Nailia Dindarova"" <nailia.dindarova@enron.com>, ""Jaakko Tusa"" <jaakko.tusa@fortum.com> cc: Subject: EU household & industrial consumers benefit from lower electricty prices For your information, please find attached a summary and a short analysis of two reports just out the 18th of July by Eurostat, the Statistical Office of the European Communities in Luxembourg, which present the prices of electricity for both domestic and industrial consumers collected on 1 January 2000. ? - Electricity prices in the EU between 1998 and 2000.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= State's Power Grid Again Pushed to Brink of Rolling Blackouts
 Energy; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/20/2000 09:05 AM ----- Ann M Schmidt 09/19/2000 08:32 AM To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Meredith Philipp/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: State's Power Grid Again Pushed to Brink of Rolling Blackouts Energy F.Y.I. Business; Financial Desk State's Power Grid Again Pushed to Brink of Rolling Blackouts Energy: High temperatures, generator shutdowns push usage within 5% of capacity. Heat wave is expected to continue today. NANCY RIVERA BROOKS 09/19/2000 Los Angeles Times Home Edition Page C-1 Copyright 2000 / The Times Mirror Company Sweltering weather across California pushed the state's heat-stressed electricity grid close to meltdown Monday, and state power officials urged electricity conservation because today and Wednesday could be even worse. Power was cut to hundreds of large business customers and about 125,000 residential and business air-conditioner and agricultural pumping customers Monday after the California Independent System Operator, which runs the electricity grid for about 75% of the state, declared a Stage 2 power emergency. At Stage 2, when the grid is using more than 95% of available power, the state's big investor-owned utilities are asked to interrupt power to customers that have agreed to this voluntary action in exchange for discounted rates. Grid reliability was threatened when two electricity units in Northern California stopped working for a time as heavy air-conditioner demand began to push power use higher, Cal-ISO spokeswoman Stephanie McCorkle said. Demand peaked at about 42,000 megawatts on the Cal-ISO grid, but the two unidentified units, representing about 320 megawatts of generation, were returned to service in the afternoon--in time to help keep the state from reaching its first Stage 3, which would lead to neighborhood blackouts. ""We were right on the edge of warning about a possible Stage 3,"" McCorkle said. ""A couple of generators fell offline in late morning, and that kind of gave everybody a scare."" A Stage 3 emergency would be declared if power reserves fall below 1.5%--in essence, when the electricity grid is using more than 98.5% of available power--and rotating outages of nonessential customers for an hour or longer would become likely to keep the grid from failing. That would result in widespread blackouts lasting several hours. Electricity use was also high in the area served by the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, peaking near 4,750 megawatts Monday. But DWP customers were not threatened by power interruptions or rolling blackouts because the municipal utility has more than enough generating capacity to meet demand. ""We're doing OK as we have all summer long,"" said DWP General Manager S. David Freeman. Cal-ISO asked Southern California Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric and San Diego Gas & Electric to call on all of their interruptible-power customers to immediately stop using electricity, representing a potential 3,000 megawatts, or roughly the amount of electricity used by 3 million homes. Thousands of students at College of the Canyons in Valencia experienced the California equivalent of a snow day Monday when power outage alarms rang about 1:30 p.m, the seventh time this year, college spokesman Sue Bozman said. If the college doesn't pull the plug, it pays a big fine. ""For several years, we saved $100,000 a year by being on this interruptible-service plan,"" said Bozman, who with other administrators finished the work day with mobile phones and portable computers. ""But when the alarm rings and we decline to turn off our power, it's a whole different ballgame."" One such day in May, during final exams, the college didn't cut power and penalties totaled $30,000, she said. During the height of Monday's power crisis, PG&E--whose territory suffered local blackouts on June 14 in a similar reliability emergency--kept an open telephone line to Cal-ISO for minute-by-minute updates, spokesman Ron Low said. SCE and the other utilities begged customers to use as little electricity as possible, and grocery stores around the state voluntarily reduced lighting and other power use to comply. ""We're issuing a call to action, a call that everyone needs to take seriously,"" Pam Bass, SCE's senior vice president for customer service, said in a statement as electricity use soared Monday. ""If the demand for power does not decrease soon, we will be directed by the state to begin shutting off power for blocks of customers. Everyone needs to cut their use of power now to avoid forced outages."" Today and Wednesday could be even more challenging: Cal-ISO is predicting peak use of 44,827 megawatts for today. Peak demand was expected to be 44,537 megawatts on Monday, but conservation and power-interruption programs kept the total lower. ""We are anticipating tomorrow to be a good deal like today,"" SCE spokeswoman Karen Shepard-Grimes said Monday. Electricity demand in SCE territory peaked at 17,860 megawatts before the Rosemead-based utility asked power customers to cut 2,500 megawatts of electricity. ""It got really touchy today,"" she said. * Times staff writer Zanto Peabody contributed to this report. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= journalists in California sent by Ruhrgas; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/23/2001 08:46 AM ----- Eva Hoeffelman@ECT 03/23/2001 06:43 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Meredith Philipp/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT, Paul Hennemeyer/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: journalists in California sent by Ruhrgas Steve, Mark and Meredith, Please find below some emails between EFET (European Federation of Energy Traders) and myself. We have helped them to find out which German journalists the German gas incumbent, Ruhrgas, has sent to California this week. We found out about that yesterday. I have now passed on that list + some general PR recommendations and EFET will now take the lead on this (they will send out an EFET position paper on California and have a spokesperson available especially for California - he's not Enron!). Just wanted to make sure you are aware because it could be possible that people will come to us for further comment. The general consensus now is that we then refer them to EFET. Thanks Eva ---------------------- Forwarded by Eva Hoeffelman/LON/ECT on 03/23/2001 12:37 PM --------------------------- Eva Hoeffelman 03/23/2001 12:35 PM To: secretariat@efet.org, ingrid@efet.org, Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT@ECT, Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Paul Hennemeyer/LON/ECT@ECT, David Gallagher/LON/ECT@ECT, Andreas Radmacher/FRA/ECT@ECT, Eric Shaw/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Helge-J_rgen Beil/FRA/ECT@ECT, Carsten Haack/FRA/ECT@ECT Subject: journalists in California sent by Ruhrgas Jan, Please see below a summary of the journalists who will be returning this weekend from their trip to California courtesy of Ruhrgas. Up to you now to send them the EFET position paper on California. Would suggest you try to get it on their desk by Monday morning latest, if possible. Would also send it to those who have refused to go and other key contacts we have given to you. Media seems to be keen to know EFET's position on this. Let me know if you need translation of the personalised note that will accompany the position paper. Obviously, we will divert any requests we get to you. Will get their email addresses to you later so you can email it to them rather than fax it with the possibility they will get it too late. Good luck. Groet Eva ---------------------- Forwarded by Eva Hoeffelman/LON/ECT on 03/23/2001 12:15 PM --------------------------- on 03/23/2001 12:09:08 PM To: eva.hoeffelman@enron.com cc: Subject: journalists in California Eva, I've finished my guerilla-PR-job, here are the results: Ruhrgas has invited the Nordrhein-Westfalen (region where Essen is located) -based correspondents of the national dailies and also the energy journalists of the most important business magazines. Journalists in Califonia: -Werner Sturbeck (FAZ - Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung) -Werner Jaspert (S_ddeutsche Zeitung) -Dr. J_rgen Frech (WAZ - Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung -Jochen Schuster (Focus) Journalists that had been invited but refused: -Dr. Andreas Wildhagen (Wirtschaftswoche) -Hans-Willy Bein (Financial Times Deutschland) -Die Welt I also got the information that Ruhrgas held a press conference yesterday in California. So we can expect the first articles on California tomorrow or latest on Monday. I also will do an additional internet monitoring (for example WAZ, which we don't read daily) this afternoon to see if there are already some articles. We should recommend EFET to send their statement not only to those journalists who have been on the press trip but to all key contacts. Most of the journalists I spoke to or colleagues from the newsdesk seem to be keen to know what EFET has to say about the California issue!!!!! Please let me know if you need further information! Best regards, Christina M_ller Cohn & Wolfe Public Relations GmbH & Co. KG Kleyerstrasse 25, D-60326 Frankfurt am Main Telefon (069) 7506 1503, Telefax (069) 7506 1528 www.cohnwolfe.de [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= REVISED: Meeting with Antoinette Malveaux re: National Black MBA
 Association May 8th; [EMail-Body]= meeting file ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/04/2001 04:28 PM --------------------------- Gwynn Gorsuch 05/03/2001 04:20 PM To: Neil Davies/Enron@EnronXGate, Johnny Palmer/Enron@EnronXGate, Charles A Taylor/Enron@EnronXGate, Meliza Evanson/HOU/EES@EES, Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Ted C Bland/Enron@EnronXGate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Billy Lemmons/Enron@EnronXGate, Dennis Barbara Paige/Enron@EnronXGate, Jordan Mintz/Enron@EnronXGate, Kirk McDaniel/HOU/EES@EES, Traci Warner/ENRON@enronXgate, Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Laura Schwartz/Enron@EnronXGate, Calvin Eakins/Enron@EnronXGate, Joshua Duncan/ENRON@enronXgate, Mireya Adriana Cortes/Enron@EnronXGate cc: Christie Patrick/HOU/ECT@ECT, Karen Marshall/HOU/ECT@ECT, Andrea Yowman/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kathy McMahon/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: REVISED: Meeting with Antoinette Malveaux re: National Black MBA Association May 8th SK - this is on your schedule. mm Here's a follow-up to my earlier e-mail: Ms. Antoinette Malveaux, President and CEO of the National Black MBA Association (NBMBAA) will be at Enron on Tuesday, May 8th to visit with you regarding strategic partnerships between our organizations. Enron has a long-standing relationship with the NBMBAA primarily through the National Conference and Career Fair which is the largest and most prestigious resource for recruiting top minority MBA talent in the country (We have 10 hires from last year's convention). In order for our discussion to have the necessary scope and to convey Enron's respect for the NBMBAA organization, Antoinette Malveaux will be meeting with top managers from human resources, branding and strategic marketing, business development and diversity. Here is her bio, as well as some a profile of NBMBAA: - Antoinette Malveaux short bio.doc - Mission Statement bio.doc As a reminder, here is the schedule for Antoinette's visit. Please re-verify your calendar, so that we can have complete discussions with her about potential ways we can work together. 8:30 to 9:30 Lemmons, Bland, Warner EB1196 9:30 to 10:30 Kean and Olson EB 4746 10:30 to 11:30 FUSION: Evanson, Kerr, Booth, Phillips, Duncan EB 4746 11:30 to 1:00 Lunch: Vegas, Marshall, Gorsuch, Schwartz?, Eakins Outside EB (The Met?) 1:00 to 2:00 Davies, Palmer, Taylor EB 4746 2:00 to 3:00 Paige 3AC 37th floor 3:00 to 4:00 Mintz, McDaniel EB 2081 Many thanks, Gwynn [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Important - CPUC Motion - Confidential Attorney ClientPrivil
 ege and Work Product; [EMail-Body]= While I appreciate the virtue of flying below the radar if possible, the matter here is complicated by the fact that FERC's discovery rules (18 CFR, Subpart D) pertain only to ""proceedings set for hearing . . . and to such proceedings as the Commission may order."" 18 CFR 385.401. In this case, FERC stated that ""a trial-type hearing is not necessary . . . ."" and specifically rejected the use of a ""trial-type evidentiary hearing."" Slip op. at 47-48 & n.97. Thus, while I have not researched the matter as yet, my preliminary view is that the CPUC's attempt to invoke FERC's discovery processes would appear to be outside the contemplation of FERC's Nov. 1 order and its regulations, unless FERC specifically orders discovery in this case. (The CPUC seems to recognize the relevance of this consideration when it specifically attempts to equate ""paper"" hearings with ""trial-type"" hearings; see page 1 of its Motion.) The CPUC's motion may prompt FERC to decide whether or not to allow discovery in this case under Rule 401. While the CPUC's motion does not apply directly to marketers, FERC's ruling will be precedent in the event the CPUC or someone else hereafter serves discovery on other parties. As a result, we need to consider whether laying in the weeds risks losing an opportunity to present our views on whether FERC should allow discovery in a paper hearing with an expedited decisional track, particularly in light of the fact that Staff has already conducted. >>> Jeffrey Watkiss 11/08/00 10:31AM >>> Does anyone have an idea as to why marketers, including EPMI, are not included in the list of subject companies: Exh. B? Since EPMI is not a subject of the motion, why should it answer? Lying in the weeds may be a more prudent course of action. >>> ""Fergus, Gary S."" <GFergus@brobeck.com> 11/07/00 10:08PM >>> I just spoke with Mary to make sure we have the same information. Here are the facts we have so far. On November 4th, the CPUC filed a motion with FERC to adopt the form of protective order that the CPUC entered, to compel the production of documents and to shorten time to answer. According to Exhibit B (read to me by Nancy Pickover at Bracewell) the following CPUC moved against the following entities: AES, Williams, Duke, Dynegy, Reliant and Southern. Enron entities were NOT named in exhibit B. This is not to say that we could not be easily added to the group. While the motion reads as if the CPUC was moving against everybody, in fact, in footnote 2 they state they are only moving against the entities named in Exhibit B. We will have Exhibit B in hand first thing tomorrow via FEDEX to confirm this. To repeat, Enron is not named yet. Thanks Gary -----Original Message----- From: Mary.Hain@enron.com [mailto:Mary.Hain@enron.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2000 6:23 PM To: dwatkiss@bracepatt.com; Susan.J.Mara@enron.com; Richard.B.Sanders@enron.com; James.D.Steffes@enron.com; Christian.Yoder@enron.com; Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com; mday@gmssr.com; gfergus@brobeck.com; rcarroll@bracepatt.com; Alan.Comnes@enron.com; Joe.Hartsoe@enron.com; Sarah.Novosel@enron.com Cc: Tim.Belden@enron.com; Lysa.Akin@enron.com Subject: Important - CPUC Motion - Confidential Attorney Client Privilege and Work Product As you may already know, the CPUC filed a motion at FERC asking for a protective order and to compel production of the information they subpoened from us in the CPUC's OII case. Given the timing, we should discuss this on our conference call scheduled for tomorrow. They request that we be required: to answer their motion on Thursday, to provide the information within 5 working days of a FERC ordering production, and to provide of P&L information and spread sheets detailing our deals, specifically delivery point, delivery date, counterparty, volume and price. We may not have a problem providing this information for use by FERC in its proceeding subject to a confidentiality agreement but I think we would oppose their requests for: the information to be provided for ""government eyes only"" - this would prohibit EPMI from defending itself vis-a-vis other market participants. a FERC confidentiality order that would could allow FERC to ""share"" this information with the CPUC (for purposes of the PUC's OII proceeding) pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 824h(c). 16 USC 824g(c) requires the Commission to make information available to state commissions as may be of assistance in state regulation of public utilities. We should argue that 16 USC 824h(c) does not apply here given that we are not a public utility nor does the PUC regulate how much market power wholesale marketers exercise or the level of market power mitigation (these are the bases the PUC provides for explaining why it should have this information.) the above contractual information to allow them to analyze the competitiveness of the forward market to evaluate the wisdom of the Commission's decision to allow the UDC's ""unfettered access"" to the forwards market. This argument is unpersuasive given that the CPUC can get information about the competitiveness of the forward markets from the Wall Street Journal's listing of NYMEX prices. This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. To reply to our email administrator directly, send an email to postmaster@brobeck.com BROBECK PHLEGER & HARRISON LLP http://www.brobeck.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Affirmative Direct Case of the California Parties; [EMail-Body]= Hi Cal. guys--Do we have a summary/brief overview of these filings? Thank= s. =20 -----Original Message-----=20 From: LSH=20 Sent: Fri 8/17/2001 3:59 PM=20 To: A Wagenfeld; A. W. Turner; Adrian Clair; Al Alexanderson; Alan Propper;= Alan Z. Yudkowski; Amie V. Colby; Andrea J. Weinstein; Andrew B. Art; Andr= ew N. Chau; Antoine Cobb; Arlen Orchard; Bonnie Blair; Brian M. Zimmett; Ca= ble Huston Benedict Haagensen & Lloyd LLP; Carla J. Urquhart; Carmen Cintro= n; Carol Gosain; Catherine Giovannoni; Catherine Krupka; Cheryl Feik Ryan; = Cheryl Foley; Christi Nicolay; Christie Richart; Christopher R. Villarreal;= CRB; Dan Adamson; Daniel M. Jaffe; Dave Walsh; David Facey; David Perlman;= David Tewksbury; Deanna King; Debra Bolton; Donald A. Kaplan; Donald Brook= hyser; Doron Ezickson; Doug Little; Edward A. Finklea; Edward Berlin; Eliza= beth M. McQuillan; Erik Saltmarsh; Erin Perrigo; Floyd Norton; Frederick Ko= lb; Gary Bachman; Gary S. Fergus; George Galloway; Gerit F. Hull; Ginnette = Cannon; Glen L. Ortman; Howard H. Shafferman; J Schwitzer; Jacqueline Java;= James Beh; James Pembroke; Jane Alfano; Janet Jones; Jeffrey Watkiss; Jenn= ifer Key; Jennifer Nichols; Jennifer Tribulski; Jesse A. Dillon; Jessica Fr= iedman; Jim Vasile; Joel L. Greene; John Bremer; John D. McGrane; John E. M= cCaffrey; John P. Mathis; John Stough; Jonathan F. Christian; Judy Simon; K= atherine C. Zeitlin; Kathleen L. Barron; Kenneth Irvin; Kenneth Wiseman; Ke= vin J. McIntyre; Kevin M. Downey; Kimberly Curry; KJM; Lawrence Acker; Lisa= Cherkas; Lisa Decker; Lisa Dowden; Lisa Gant; Lot Cooke; LSH; Lynn Church;= M N Kunselman; Margaret A. Moore; Margaret McGoldrick; Mark F. Sundback; M= ark L. Perlis; Mark R. Haskell; Meg Meiser; Michael D. Mackness; Michael Ge= rgen; Michael P. Manion; Michael Postar; Michael Yuffee; Mike Naeve; Montin= a M. Cole; Nancy Saracino; Neil Levy; Paul J. Pantano, Jr.; Paul W. Fox; Pe= ter J. Berger; Philip L. Chabot Jr.; R Notebo; Ray Foianini; Rich Glick; Ri= chard I. Beitler; Richard Tabors; Rick Roberts; Robert Cedarbaum; Robert D.= Rosenberg; Robert Frank; Robert McDiarmid; Roger Eklund; Ron W. Johnson; R= onald Carroll; Ronald Klinefelter; Sally Johnston; Sandra E. Rizzo; Scott S= pettel; Sean H. Gallagher; Sean Neal; Shelly Richardson; Sherry Quirk; Sidn= ey Jubien; Simon Ffitch; Stephanie Andrus; Sterling Koch; Steve N. Isser; S= teven M. Kramer; Susan N. Kelly; T Culber; T. Gadsden; Thomas M. Tiehen; Ti= mothy Bolden; TSS; Vickie Whitney; Wallace Duncan; Will Patton; William E. = Peterson; William M. Dudley=20 Cc: 'vickie.whitney@doj.ca.gov'; 'nancy.saracino@doj.ca.gov'; 'shg@cpuc.ca.= gov'; 'sjubien@eob.ca.gov'; 'ens@eob.ca.gov'; KJM; CRB; TSS; LSH=20 Subject: Affirmative Direct Case of the California Parties Your Honor and all parties:=20 Attached are electronic copies of the Affirmative Direct Case filed= with FERC today by the California Parties. Paper copies are being served = in accordance with the attached Certificate of Service. Respectfully submitted,=20 Lillian Harris=20 <<Exhibit CAL-8 - The Impact of Input Fuel Price Increases_v1.DOC>> <<Exhib= it CAL-5 - Wolack Prepared Direct Testimony_v1.DOC>> <<Exhibit CAL-4 - CERS= Sales Summary_v1.XLS>> <<Exhibit CAL-3 - Exchange Summary_v1.XLS>> <<Exhib= it CAL-2 - Overall Summary Report Combined_v1.XLS>> <<Exhibit CAL-7 - Decem= ber 2000 Prices_v1.DOC>> <<Boergers filing Green and Wolak testimony and Ce= rtificate of Service (Puget Sound)_v1.DOC>> <<Verification of Frank A. Wola= k_v1.DOC>> <<Exhibit CAL-6 - Qualifications of Frank A. Wolak_v1.DOC>> <<Ex= hibit CAL-1 - Prepared Direct Testimony of Bill Green_v1.DOC>> <<bill green= affidavit for direct testimony_v1.DOC>> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Telephone Interview with The Enron Corp. Research Group; [EMail-Body]= Martin: Lance will be out of town on the 6th of December and he suggested that you interview Jingming (Marshall) in his place (it is a telephone=20 interview). =20 Can you do that? Thanks! Shirley ---------------------- Forwarded by Shirley Crenshaw/HOU/ECT on 11/29/2000= =20 01:54 PM --------------------------- Shirley Crenshaw 11/28/2000 01:32 PM To: ""Jingming 'Marshall' Yan"" <jmyan@stanford.edu> @ ENRON cc: Lance Cunningham/NA/Enron@ENRON, Alex Huang/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Vince J= =20 Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, Vasant Shanbhogue/HOU/ECT@ECT=20 Subject: Re: Telephone Interview with The Enron Corp. Research Group =20 Marshall: Thanks for responding so quickly. I have scheduled the following intervie= w: Wednesday, December 6 - 1:00 PM Houston time. It will last approximately 1 hour. We will call you at (605) 497-4045 unless otherwise instructed. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 713/853-5290. Best regards, Shirley Crenshaw ""Jingming 'Marshall' Yan"" <jmyan@stanford.edu> on 11/28/2000 12:59:55 PM To: Shirley.Crenshaw@enron.com cc: Vince.J.Kaminski@enron.com=20 Subject: Re: Telephone Interview with The Enron Corp. Research Group Ms. Crenshaw, Thank you very much for the message. I am very interested in the opportunity to talk to personnel from the Research Group at Enron. Between the two days you suggest, I prefer Wednesday 12/6. Considering the two-hour time difference between California and Texas, 11:00 am Pacific time (1:00 pm your time) seems to be a good slot. However, I am open most of the day on 12/6 so if some other time slot is prefered on your end, please let me know. Thanks again. I look forward to talking to you and your colleagues. Jingming On Tue, 28 Nov 2000 Shirley.Crenshaw@enron.com wrote: > Good afternoon Jingming: > > Professor Wolak forwarded your resume to the Research Group, and > they would like to conduct a telephone interview with you, sometime next > week, at your convenience. The best days would be Tuesday, 12/5 or > Wednesday, 12/6. > > Please let me know which day and what time would be best for you and > they will call you. Let me know the telephone number that you wish to be > contacted at. > > The interviewers would be: > > Vince Kaminski Managing Director and Head of Research > Vasant Shanbhogue Vice President, Research > Lance Cunningham Manager, Research > Alex Huang Manager, Research > > Look forward to hearing from you. > > Best regards, > > Shirley Crenshaw > Administrative Coordinator > Enron Research Group. > 713-853-5290 > > > Jingming ""Marshall"" Yan jmyan@leland.stanford.edu Department of Economics (650)497-4045 (H) Stanford University (650)725-8914 (O) Stanford, CA 94305 358C, Economics Bldg If one seeks to act virtuously and attain it, then what is there to repine about? -- Confucius _?OO??OOo? ?T=15xO-?? -- =14??<o=15 O""?> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Privileged and Confidential Communication to my Attorney; [EMail-Body]= Hoyt, If GSP LLC would assume the liability at the time of return, why would it risk bringing them back for light duty work? Why not wait until they are fully released, particularly if one of them is going to sue under workers comp scheme? Also, Hoyt, you need to be careful about revealing conversations with GSP counsel to MG -- I noticed you had cc'd someone from Media General in the prior email. We don't want to waive any privileges. Michelle HThomas@gspcorp.com on 11/15/2000 06:10:00 PM To: peter.del.vecchio@enron.com, david.howe@enron.com cc: michelle.cash@enron.com, LFaucheaux@media-general.com, MParker@gspcorp.com Subject: Privileged and Confidential Communication to my Attorney Peter, we have two long-term worker's comp cases whose accidents happened before Enron bought GSP. We would like to bring them back to do light-duty work, to get them in the swing of working again and also to get some adminstrative work done. I am concerned that bringing these employees back to work on light duty will cause these cases to become an Enron liability rather than an MG liability. I discussed this with Pat McCarthy, the labor and employment law attorney we are using in NJ, and he said that the liability would typically not transfer to GSP just because we brought them back . . . it would still be an MG liability, UNLESS THE EMPLOYEE HURT HIMSELF AGAIN. In which case, GSP owns it. However, Pat said that a lot of what determines the ownership of the worker's comp cases is written into the purchase and sale agreement. He said that there may be language that addresses an employee's return to work from worker's comp. I know that we have an ongoing dispute about worker's comp with MG at this point. What would be your recommendation on bringing these employees back to work? As a bit of additional info, one of the two employees seems eager to come back . . . the other one does not. An employee told me that the second employee actually has a lawsuit filed against MG/old GSP about his injury. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: AGA; [EMail-Body]= What have they done for us? Terence H Thorn@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 10/03/2000 08:30 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: AGA Steve I need your help. Twice in the last three months I have run into the Chairman of AGA who has taken my head off for Enron not renewing its AGA dues. I understand that the dues had been paid by Stan Horton who had decided that the pipeline group with INGAA representing it had no need for and received no benefit from the membership. I guess a few years back, when AGA ""kicked"" the pipelines out, they renegotiated the dues into some type of sub membership for around 85K. AGA approached the gas marketing team and talked to Mike Roberts about renewing the membership and maintaining relations with his customers and later to Jeff Shankman who passed them off to some other person and never got back to them as promised. This is a heads up to tell you that Bob Catell of Brooklyn Union fame- one of Enron's oldest customers and friends will be calling Lay. It seems to me that pro rating the dues among ENA and EGM and maybe GPG might be a solution. Anyhow, I promised to pass on the complaint. Thanks. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Memo For Thursday Meeting; [EMail-Body]= Richard and Elizabeth, At Christian's suggestion, I am sending a memo I prepared summarizing some of the more exotic strategies used by our traders. Christian has reviewed the memorandum and believes that it will assist you both in preparing for our Thursday meeting. Between now and Thursday, Christian and I are going to analyze the ISO tariff to determine if the tariff prohibits any of these strategies. Steve [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Meet with Ralph Reed in EB49c5; [EMail-Body]= With Rick, Mark, Lou, and possibly Hillings [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: good luck and Houston; [EMail-Body]= Maureen, please schedule some time on my calendar for Littlechild. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/02/2001 07:37 AM ----- Richard Shapiro@ENRON 04/02/2001 01:17 AM To: Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron@ECT, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron@ECT, Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron Subject: Re: good luck and Houston I will try to make the time. Thanks. Mark Schroeder@ECT 03/31/2001 07:16 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: good luck and Houston Can any of you meet with Professor Littlechild on 23 April. He has a small consulting services contract with me, to write on liberalisation of energy markets. his current work is devoted to, among other thins, debunking Joskow, et al., on the argument that most of the benefits of liberalisation are cpatureed at the wholesale level, and he argues that a working/funcitoning retail market, and corresponding contracts market for risk management, is paramount to ultimate success (very Enron). He comes across very much as an academic (Jeff Dasovich heard him speak on this subject in San Francisco, and he has spoken in Tokyo), and very Staid British, but he was electricity regulator in UK for 9 years, and is indisputably a top academic, so he carries some status when he speaks. i would hope that all 3 of you could make some time with him, and any toerhs you could think of. Your response/thoughts? thanks mcs ---------------------- Forwarded by Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT on 31/03/2001 14:16 --------------------------- ""Stephen Littlechild"" on 30/03/2001 17:40:00 To: ""Mark Schroeder"" <mark.schroeder@enron.com> cc: Subject: good luck and Houston Dear Mark ? I was just talking to Kyran, who mentioned your impending move back to Houston. I shall be disappointed to see you go, but congratulate you and wish you well.? Two things. 1. Any further thoughts on the work we began to talk about,and envisaged in the contract? Or shall I wait to hear from your successor? 2. We spoke some time ago about a possible visit to Houston. I shall be in DC on Friday 20 April and Austin on weekend of 21/22 April. I thought of visiting on Monday 23 April if that would be convenient and if relevant people would be available. My main interest would be Enron thinking on US developments such as retail, California, trading, Pools versus bilateral markets, capacity auctions etc. Also Enron global strategy in other countries. ? I gather you're off on holiday now. Enjoy the last dose of British weather - if you can. ? Best wishes Stephen [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: PG&E PX Credit Calculation -- CONFIDENTIAL ATTY CLIENT WORK
 PRODUCT; [EMail-Body]= Alan -- The only way to collect the ""overpayment"" is to artificially reduce the PX Credit going forward to thereby allow for more CTC. Jim -----Original Message----- From: Comnes, Alan Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 6:15 PM To: Steffes, James D. Subject: RE: PG&E PX Credit Calculation -- CONFIDENTIAL ATTY CLIENT WORK PRODUCT I am not sure I understand your second paragraph. If PG&E reduces going-forward procurement costs to reflect FERC-ordered refunds, I do not understand why it would affect already-issued CTC charges. The cost of power would be cheaper going forward. -----Original Message----- From: Steffes, James D. Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 3:24 PM To: Comnes, Alan; Dasovich, Jeff; Tribolet, Michael; Curry, Wanda; Mellencamp, Lisa; 'Jan Paul Acton (E-mail)'; Swain, Steve; Mara, Susan Cc: Alvarez, Ray Subject: RE: PG&E PX Credit Calculation -- CONFIDENTIAL ATTY CLIENT WORK PRODUCT Thanks for the thoughts. I fully agree on BF costs and DWR costs. I believe that you are right on Est RT$ = CAISOM Imbalance, but I need to check. On the question of retroactive ratemaking, it is my understanding that you are correct. PG&E probably won't rebill, but will need to put in place an adjustment to the going forward PX Credit to ""collect"" the overpayment of Negative CTC. All of this means that the impact of the FERC refund is less than 100c on the $ for the Negative CTC. Jim -----Original Message----- From: Comnes, Alan Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 4:35 PM To: Steffes, James D.; Dasovich, Jeff; Tribolet, Michael; Curry, Wanda; Mellencamp, Lisa; 'Jan Paul Acton (E-mail)'; Swain, Steve; Mara, Susan Cc: Alvarez, Ray Subject: RE: PG&E PX Credit Calculation -- CONFIDENTIAL ATTY CLIENT WORK PRODUCT I assume that if an hourly PX market clearing price is mitigated per a FERC order it would affect variable ""HC"" in the formula laid out in the attachment. It is not clear to me which variable represents hourly ISO imbalance energy costs, but I assume its ""Est RT$"". If I am right, that variable would be affected by the mitigated market price (MMP) for CAISO imbalance energy. My comments are: The FERC is able to only order refunds to jurisdictional entities and, given appeals, it may take years before the full extent of thre refunds are known. Therefore there will be a significant difference between the change in the mitigated market price (MMP) as declared by FERC and the PX credit. That is, a 10% reduction in the MMP should not be construed as having a 10% effect on the PX credit, assuming it can be recalculated at all. Specifically, only some of the ""HC"" or ""Est RT$"" costs can be adjusted per FERC refund orders. Also, the PX credit is a tariffed rate. I do not believe the PU code allows for retroactive adjustments to tariffed rates unless there was an explicit cost tracking account (e.g. a balancing A/C). To my knowledge, no such account exists here. Finally, I do not see a relationship between MMPs and (1) block forward costs on any date and (2) PG&E and/or DWR's procurement costs for the net short position post January 19. So, those PX credit costs should be unaffected by any FERC refund order. Alan Comnes -----Original Message----- From: Steffes, James D. Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 7:22 AM To: Dasovich, Jeff; Tribolet, Michael; Curry, Wanda; Mellencamp, Lisa; Jan Paul Acton (E-mail); Swain, Steve; Mara, Susan; Comnes, Alan Subject: PG&E PX Credit Calculation Attached is a summary of PG&E's notes on how they calculate the PX Credit (until January 19, 2001 when they hardwired $150/mwh). We continue to try and get a handle on how the FERC Refund case will impact the PX Credit and Negative CTC. If anyone has any issues or comments, please let me know. Thanks. Jim << File: PG&E PX Credit Calculation.doc >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= ECT Strategy Meeting, per Julie Armstrong; [EMail-Body]= At the Four Seasons Hotel - Livingston Room [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FTC Staff Report on Electricity Restructuring; [EMail-Body]= Yesterday, the Federal Trade Commission issued a staff report on electricity restructuring issues. It is an update of the July 2000 report done at the request of House Energy Chairman Tauzin and Subcommittee Chairman Barton. They requested the report be updated. A summary of the report and the full 80+ page text is on the FTC web site at www.ftc.gov on the upper left side of the home page. I read the summary and will read the balance. So far, so good. It basically says that even states that have opened up to retail competition are in transition with a hybrid of regulation and competition, thus the expected benefits of competition have not yet emerged. However, the report states that nothing to date indicates that competition, once the transition period is over, will not produce additional benefits for consumers. The report's major conclusion is that competitive wholesale markets are important to achieving effective competition in retail markets. The summary includes something that sounds promising on RTO policy, saying ""And as wholesale and retail markets become regional, governing policies and jurisdictional approaches also must move in that direction for wholesale and retail competition to be successful."" [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re:; [EMail-Body]= I'll give 150. Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp. From: Jeff Skilling 04/19/2001 05:18 PM Sent by: Sherri Sera To: Cliff Baxter/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rick Buy/HOU/ECT, Ben Glisan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeffrey Sherrick/Corp/Enron, Philippe A Bibi/HOU/ECT, Michael Brown/NA/Enron, Wade James A Hughes/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rebecca McDonald/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Greg Piper/Corp/Enron, John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES, Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Matthew Scrimshaw/LON/ECT@ECT, David Cox/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Kevin Hannon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Rod Hayslett/FGT/Enron, Stan Horton/Houston/Eott@Eott, Danny McCarty/ET&S/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: I know how incredibly busy you all are, so I'm sure that making a pledge to Jeff for the MS150 has simply slipped your mind. Well the ride is this weekend, time is running out and we need you! Enron's goal is to raise $700,000, and Jeff's personal goal is to raise $50,000. As of today, we are a little better than half way there. Won't you consider helping him reach his goal? Thanks for your consideration. I look forward to hearing from you tomorrow... Sherri :-) [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CFTC Reauthorization; [EMail-Body]= Please go ahead with preparation of the talking points. I'll give Ken a heads up. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/14/2000 08:52 AM --------------------------- Richard Shapiro 08/10/2000 06:11 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Chris Long/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: CFTC Reauthorization I agree w/ chris's recommendation- you too? ---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES on 08/10/2000 06:10 PM --------------------------- Chris Long@ENRON 08/10/2000 05:12 PM To: Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron cc: raislerk@sullcrom.com, Allison Navin/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: CFTC Reauthorization At his request, I met Lee Sachs, Assistant Treasury Secretary, who had requested the meeting after a brief conversation recently. Lee said that senior-level negotiations led by Secretary Summers were initiated last week between the CFTC and SEC and that progress was being made on the single stock futures issue (the major issue postponing movement of the legislation). As you know, the House completed committee work on HR 4541 before it recessed. The bill will now is pending before the Rules Committee where differences will be worked out between the three different Committee versions (Agriculture, Commerce, and Banking). The Senate Agriculture Committee passed out the Senate version in July. However, the bill is not moving quickly in the Senate due to Senator Phil Gramm's desire to see significant changes made to the legislation (not directly related to our energy language). Last week at the Republican Convention, I asked the Senator about the bill and he said they were working on it, but much needs to be changed for his support. More telling perhaps, were Wendy Gramm's comments that she would rather the current bill die if a better bill can be passed next year. What this means is that we must, at the least, remove Senator Gramm's opposition to the bill to move the process and more importantly seek to gain his support of the legislation. Lee Sachs message was just that. I told Lee that we shared his desire to move the legislation as long as it contains a full exclusion for all non-agriculture commodities (including metals). He said that we would have a difficult time defending the metals provision politically. But, Lee said ""we would not find Treasury opposition to the House Commerce Committee language"" (which includes favourable language on energy and metals). This is a positive development, because it isolates the CFTC from its key defenders and I hope ensures no veto threat on our issues. However, I do not expect Treasury to be vocal in support of our position. It is clear that Congressional leaders and the Administration want to get this bill done this year and there remains a good opportunity for enactment. However, with less than 20 or so legislative days left, we need Senator Gramm to engage. A call from Ken Lay in the next two weeks to Senator Gramm could be an impetus for Gramm to move his staff to resolve the differences. Gramm needs to fully understand how helpful the bill is to Enron. Let me know your thoughts on this approach. I am prepared to assist in coordinating the call and drafting the talking points for a Ken Lay/Sen. Gramm call. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Crisis Management at Enron; [EMail-Body]= Contact Mike Terraso (who heads the environmental function) and Mike Hicks (who oversees corporate security). Jason Sokolov@ECT 10/11/2000 08:46 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Crisis Management at Enron Steven, I have not spoken to you in a while! How are things going? I have a question for you. I am enrolled in a Corporate Crisis MGMT class at Rice, and my assignment for the up-coming Tuesday is to evaluate the crisis system (if there is one) at Enron. Do you happen to know anything about Crisis Management in our company? Let me know at your earliest convenience.. Jason Sokolov [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Memo For Thursday Meeting; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT on 11/01/2000 03:48 PM ----- Steve C Hall 10/30/2000 05:38 PM To: Elizabeth Sager/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Christian Yoder/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Confidential Memo For Thursday Meeting Richard and Elizabeth, At Christian's suggestion, I am sending a memo I prepared summarizing some of the more exotic strategies used by our traders. Christian has reviewed the memorandum and believes that it will assist you both in preparing for our Thursday meeting. Between now and Thursday, Christian and I are going to analyze the ISO tariff to determine if the tariff prohibits any of these strategies. Steve [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: 2000 eSpeak Schedule; [EMail-Body]= Looks like a full slate; you're off to a great start. Maureen -- please put times and locations on my calendar as an fyi. Sarah Palmer@ECT 01/05/2000 02:24 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Marie Hejka/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: 2000 eSpeak Schedule Steve: Attached are the eSpeak events currently scheduled for 2000. Please review at your convenience. Have a great day! The eThink Team [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Meeting with Debra; [EMail-Body]= Anne, That's great. The meeting is at 3:00 in or area on th 19th. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Labbe, Anne Sent: Monday, July 02, 2001 10:19 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Meeting with Debra Vince, I am in the office today, and am just wondering if you are still meeting with Debra from Rice's Communications dept. If so, I would still like to join you when you meet at 3:00. Thanks, Anne [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Confidential --CFTC Chair; [EMail-Body]= do not circulate; fyi ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 02/14/2001 02:28 PM ----- WGramm@aol.com 02/14/2001 07:58 AM To: Steven.J.Kean@enron.com cc: Subject: Re: Confidential --CFTC Chair Hi Steve, Folks love Newsome, and I think he's very nice and appears to be very free market. Spears, the other Republican appointee is not at all free market, in my view. I would not like this to mentioned anywhere else, but I have found that the farm reps on the Commission may sound deregulatory but are not, and have been really troublesome without a good free market person on board. And there are no truly free market persons on board at the Commission (every single other agricultural rep that I worked with on the Commission were trouble, even though they claimed to be deregulatory -- and they were far worse before I got there and after I left.) I visited with Newsome a day before Inauguration, and I was appalled at what they were planning to do concerning agency structure -- that would have elevated the regulatory lawyers and diminished the role of the economists at the agency. Misguided and showed to me a lack of understanding of how organizational structures can affect what comes out of an agency. I am often at odds with ""the industry view"" regarding CFTC issues. I don't think the futures exchanges, who have a lot of power, necessarily are pro-competition; and many of the non-exchange folks who lobby on CFTC issues are Washington or New York (Democrat - which is why they want to involve Ken at this level) lawyers who do not understand markets and who are more interested in being able to claim influence or impact. The CFTC is in awful shape -- the quality of staff is horrendous, and the Commission is relying on some of the worst people for their policy work (same folks that Brooksley Born used, same folks who have advocated more regulation of the OTC market for years). Many quality folks do not want the job as Chairman because it's been such a backwater. I am looking for some good folks. Have at least one person who would be good at that job. And it's not Newsome. Please do not share this information with the usual folks, as they hate me anyway (I'm too free market and have argued against their ""fixes""). Sorry for this scathing review, but this is an important appointment. Wendy [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Conf Call on Mon., May 14; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/16/2001 02:32 AM --------------------------- ""Stuart Ryan"" <sryan@aesc.com> on 05/11/2001 06:10:19 PM To: Steven.J.Kean@enron.com cc: Subject: Re: Conf Call on Mon., May 14 Hi Steve - I won't be able to make the call on Monday. I'd be happy to volunteer not to be on the negotiating team. It sounds like there's no shortage of people who want to be on the committee. My big issue is default service. This industry needs real customers and the only way to get real customers is to get rid of default service. Starting with big customers, along the lines of the core/non-core gas model, is the best way to go. The only way to sell this, however, is to get the big customers to agree it's a good idea. J. Stuart Ryan AES Pacific Suite 3300 100 Pine Street San Francisco, CA 94111 office: 415 395 7887 mobile: 415 608 0080 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Associations; [EMail-Body]= No special requirements, but it's good to keep track of in case we want a point of contact. Thanks John Wack@EES 09/22/2000 05:05 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Samuel Harrell/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Associations Steve, a recent hire within my group of Risk Management , Samuel Harrell is on two energy associations. They are the Association of Energy Services Professionals International (AESP) and the American Association of Blacks in Energy (AABE). Sam is a member of good standing in both and has recently been nominated to join the Board of Directors for the AESP. I was not sure if Enron had any special requirements concerning registration of employees in associations or not. If I need to do anything specific I would appreciate your guidance. Hopefully this will work as the needed notice. Thanks [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: FW: Urgent/Confidential to ALL ON 'BLIND' LIST: Speaker(s) Ne
 ede d to brief Governor's Office; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Susan J Mara/SFO/EES on 09/26/2000 11:20 AM --------------------------- MBD <MDay@GMSSR.com> on 09/26/2000 12:14:23 PM To: ""'Susan J Mara'"" <smara@enron.com> cc: Subject: RE: FW: Urgent/Confidential to ALL ON 'BLIND' LIST: Speaker(s) Ne ede d to brief Governor's Office Now that I know that Anthony and George Cluff are organizing the event, I would stay far, far away. Maybe it would be good for them to talk to Gray Davis, just to clear up this energy thing for him. -----Original Message----- From: Susan J Mara [mailto:smara@enron.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2000 9:16 AM To: MBD Cc: 'Jeff Dasovich Enron SF'; Mona L Petrochko; Sandra McCubbin Subject: Re: FW: Urgent/Confidential to ALL ON 'BLIND' LIST: Speaker(s) Neede d to brief Governor's Office I certainly don't see why this is confidential. Distribution wheeling has been ""my baby"" at Enron for years but I don't see Anthony Mazy contributing anything to the effort. We don't need a big conference, or 150 people, or the Governor. We just need the CPUC and the FERC to say ""Stop the Madness and Open the System."" So, I won't be participating. Thanks for asking. MBD <MDay@GMSSR.com> on 09/25/2000 05:43:49 PM To: ""'Jeff Dasovich Enron SF'"" <jdasovic@ees.enron.com>, Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES, Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Sandra McCubbin/SFO/EES@EES cc: Subject: FW: Urgent/Confidential to ALL ON 'BLIND' LIST: Speaker(s) Neede d to brief Governor's Office Here is something you don't see every day. An invitation to talk to Gray Davis (maybe) about distribution wheeling. Has Enron got a candidate to offer? I would act quickly. Mike Day -----Original Message----- From: Mazy, Anthony [mailto:am1@cpuc.ca.gov] Sent: Friday, September 22, 2000 9:01 PM Subject: Urgent/Confidential to ALL ON 'BLIND' LIST: Speaker(s) Needed to brief Governor's Office Importance: High Sensitivity: Confidential To all persons BCC'd: There is an urgent need to identify at least one, and possibly two, persons to sit on a discussion panel to discuss Distribution Wheeling* at a conference October 21-22, at UC Berkeley. The conference/symposium will be limited to approximately 150 persons, to allow close and interactive Q&A between panelists and the key audience of California's executive, legislative, and regulatory officers, and their key staff. We have been told that Governor Davis himself is expected to participate. Please respond ASAP, nominating one individual per message (suitable for public viewing), identifying the individual together with that person's relevant interests and affiliations. Add approximately 1/4- to 1/2 page of details of the person's issue, point-of-view, or proposal, together with their relevant qualifications to address such. If there are any questions, please call me at my office number and leave a message or reply to this e-mail. Due to the urgency of this need, and the short turn-around requested, you are welcomed to call me at home, 925-855-0554, from 7:00 AM to 9:00 PM Sat-Sun, or 5:30 to 7:30 AM Mon-Fri, Pacific time. *Distribution Wheeling is the practice of relieving certain local, distribution-level energy transactions from some or all of the regulations, including tariff responsibilities, pertaining to interstate transmission transactions. This issue has been addressed at some length in the CPUC proceeding R.99-10-025. For quick reference, a copy of ORA's testimony in that proceeding (which, admittedly, does not equally cover all possible interpretations of DW) is provided for your convenience. Anthony Mazy, P.E. Utilities Engineer Office of Ratepayer Advocates CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION San Francisco V: (415) 703-3036 FAX: (415) 703-1981 <<Mazy, Anthony.vcf>> <<ORA DG OIR Apr12 rev2 Ch2 only for distribution.doc>> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: FEA Announces the Release of @GLOBAL 5.0; [EMail-Body]= Zimin, FYI. Please, install it. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Erin Hopkins"" <erin@fea.com>@ENRON Sent: Monday, July 02, 2001 2:11 PM To: vkamins@enron.com Subject: FEA Announces the Release of @GLOBAL 5.0 July 02, 2001 Enron North America Corp. Vince Kaminski 1400 Smith Street 30th Floor, Rm. 3036B Houston, TX 77002-7361 1 713-853-3848 Dear Vince Kaminski, This is to inform you of the release of @GLOBAL v5.0. FTP download instructions are available immediately. The download instructions are included at the end of this email. Your CD's and manuals will be shipped to you within 2 weeks. Please see below for more information regarding this new release. Please confirm that you are the correct recipient for this shipment and your address above is correct by clicking reply and send. If any changes need to be made, please make the changes above and reply. Here is an overview of the new features from the release notes: New License Keys Required FEAs new licensing scheme requires new keys. If you received new @GLOBAL license keys recently (within the last 6 months to a year), you need do nothing, otherwise contact FEA to receive updated license keys. To get new keys, contact FEA by email info@fea.com, fax +1-510-548-0332, or telephone +1-510-548-6200. *To avoid downtime we strongly recommend you get and install the new keys before installing the new software. New Functions The following functions have been added: Function Module Description MCEAPO 2 Monte Carlo based, European average (inverse)price option. CPAMW 4 Cash-or-nothing digital barrier option (hit in time window, pay at maturity. EPINM 4 Kick-in at maturity option. REVEADOM 4 Reverse knock-out at maturity option. EURO_BESTOF 5 Best-Worse of (two/three) assets. EURO_DBESTOF 5 Best-Worse of (two/three) assests, digital payment. MCEQUITY_ASAIN 5 Monte Carlo European average-returns option (up to 12 equities). MCEQUITY_ASIAN_CLIQUET 5 Monte Carlo European average-returns option (up to 12 equities) with cliquet features. New Add-in Manager @GLOBAL 5.0 comes with a new add-in manager that makes navigating between different FEA templates very easy. Simply open the fea\xlutil\readme.xls and follow the instructions specified in the spreadsheet. New Module @GLOBAL.5 Baskets & Averages has been added. Prior to this release, functions in this module were part of the SPAV product. New Templates Templates have been added for the new functions and existing templates have been updated. New Features All options now allow for positive or negative input amount. Negative amounts can be useful to represent short positions. All options can now be consistently evaluated on expiration date (zero time to expiry). An error is still returned if the option has already expired (negative time to expiry). European spread option models (EUDU, ECMXX, EPMNX) now support an alternative tree implementation. Speed Improvement Our tests show a substantial speed improvement (40%-60%) from version 4.2, especially for computationally demanding models. If you have any questions please feel free to contact us. We appreciate this opportunity to be of continuing service to Enron North America Corp.. Regards, Michelle Mendoza Email to: Support@fea.com or michelle@fea.com Direct Tel: +1-510-549-8702 *111 Financial Engineering Associates, Inc. To download @GLOBAL via FTP, follow the following instructions: NOTE: Using EXPLORER leads to unpredictable results, so we suggest using NETSCAPE or a DOS shell. USING NETSCAPE: In the Location box type: ftp://global@ftp.fea.com Password: 9cmccfcd global-5.0-win32.exe is for Excel 7 or 97SR1, 2000 or XP, download and run on a local drive. global40-unix.tar.Z is for Applix, download, unzip, and untar and then follow the instructions in Readme_Install. USING A DOS SHELL: At a DOS prompt type: ftp ftp.fea.com User: global Password: 9cmccfcd Type ""binary"" and hit 'return'. Type ""ls"" for a list of available files. Type ""get"" global-5.0-win32.exe and and wait for the ftp> prompt. Type ""quit"". The file will be downloaded into the directory at which you entered the ftp site. Double click on the exe and follow the instructions on the screen. N.B.: The password is only valid until the first Friday of next month. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Information for Jeff Skilling from Kevin Scott; [EMail-Body]= Confirming 1:00 p.m. meeting on June 12 at the Venetian Resort in Las Vegas. Thanks, Joannie Williamson 713-345-7774 ""Kevin Scott"" on 04/25/2001 04:46:18 PM Please respond to To: ""Jeff Skilling"" <jeff.skilling@enron.com> cc: ""Sherri Sera"" <sherri.sera@enron.com> Subject: Information for Jeff Skilling from Kevin Scott ? ? ? ? ? April 25, 2001 ? ? ? Dear Jeff, ? Thank you for setting aside time to meet with me.? I have attached my resume to help bring you up to date on my career.? ? As you will see, I have been providing advisory services since 1995.?? During these years, I have done some of my best work.? I am proud of the service that I have rendered as an independent consultant.? ? Now, I feel it is time to move to a new chapter in my career.? I look forward to sitting down with you to think through ways to apply my experience, intellect and energies to new professional challenges.? I respect you tremendously, and wherever the next part of my career may lie, I know that my search and choice will benefit significantly from your perspective. ? Finally, I am attaching the recommendation to HBS that you wrote in 1981.? I found it during a profoundly challenging period in my life.? Your historic words of support helped me keep fighting and successfully moving forward. ? If you would like to reach me before our meeting, please call (213) 926-2626 or email Thank you again. ? Sincerely, ? [IMAGE] ? Kevin ? ? Attachments (2) - image001.png - image002.gif - Resume of Kevin Scott.doc - Skilling HBS Recommendation.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: bilateral request; [EMail-Body]= No. Any idea how these guys are finding out where Jeff is going? Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp. From: Joannie Williamson 04/03/2001 03:58 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: bilateral request Should I try to accommodate this request? Thanks, Joannie ---------------------- Forwarded by Joannie Williamson/Corp/Enron on 04/03/2001 03:50 PM --------------------------- Swathi Kappagantula on 04/03/2001 03:51:03 PM To: joannie.williamson@enron.com cc: Subject: bilateral request Dear Joannie, Minister Luhut Pandjaitan will be attending the USA Meeting 2001 in Washington, DC over the next two days. He has requested a bilateral meeting with Mr. Skilling, and would like to arrange a time (it is no problem to find a meeting room here at the Chamber on either April 4 and 5). If it is easier, you can reach the Minister's accompanying advisor, Mr. Mani Maren, directly at the following mobile number: ++62-81-693-0637. Alternatively, please feel free to call me in order to confirm a meeting time (++41-79-615-1612). The Minister is available throughout the day on Wednesday, or early on Thursday morning. Thank you for your assistance. Best regards, Swathi Kappagantula World Economic Forum Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Pre-Election Discounts!; [EMail-Body]= Any interest? ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/21/2000 10:59 AM ----- ""Flavin, Deborah"" <Flavin@bipac.org> 09/21/2000 10:20 AM To: cc: Subject: Pre-Election Discounts! Communications is the new commodity in politics, more effective even than dollars. Invest in yourself first -- improve your internal communications structure and increase your political clout. Get started today and take advantage of pre-election discounts offered by BIPAC's Business Technology Partnership! <<BTP Pre-Election Discounts.doc>> - BTP Pre-Election Discounts.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= The ""Dark"" Side of Popular Culture; [EMail-Body]= Jeff I thought you might find this of interest. Who would have guessed that the California power crisis and Gray Davis could be so funny. Kevin Los Angeles Daily News Friday, June 22, 2001 'Tonight Show' pokes fun at power crisis By Fred Shuster Staff Writer BURBANK -- Jay Leno pulled the plug on his late-night chat show Thursday, doing his part for the state's energy crisis, but viewers weren't left in the dark. Flashlights, mining helmets and multicolor glow sticks helped to illuminate the set for the show dubbed a one-time-only ""The Tonight Show Unplugged,"" which Leno said saved enough electricity to light a house for a month. [IMAGE] The ""unplugged"" edition of ""The Tonight Show with Jay Leno"" pokes fun at the California power crisis(Reed Saxon / A.P.) Call it NBC's ""Can't See TV."" ""This is not some cheap rating ploy. ... If this works, they're gonna make us do this every night,"" Leno joked as part of his opening monologue. The nationally broadcast show, featuring a comic interlude with California Gov. Gray Davis, utilized just a small amount of electricity to run the cameras, Leno said before the show began. Actually, in Burbank, where the taping took place at NBC Studios, the city owns the power company and residents and businesses have not been hit by rolling blackouts as in other areas. The city made $5 million in profit in May after racking up $60 million in excess power sales. But Leno said not using studio lights, TV monitors, amplifiers and other power sources Thursday saved enough electricity to light a four-bedroom house for a month. Members of the house band wore miner's helmets, with group leader Kevin Eubanks strumming an acoustic guitar rather than his regular electric instrument. The stage was lit by candles, torches and flashlight beams trained on Leno. Members of the studio audience used the gear to help brighten the set. ""This is real goofy,"" Leno said before taping got under way. ""We'll see what happens."" Guests included Arsenio Hall, Gilbert Gottfried, a trainer of nocturnal animals and a Hawaiian fire dancer -- and a brief visit from the governor. Exuding whatever is the direct opposite of charisma, Davis had a brief exchange with Leno, drawing laughs with the line, ""This is the first time Gray Davis and (the word) electricity have ever appeared in the same sentence."" Leno's staff wore glasses with small lights attached and audience prompter Bob Perlow held a hand-scrawled applause sign aloft throughout the show instead of switching on the usual electric model. While there was little energy in play, there was no shortage of laughs. Leno joked that President George W. Bush told Davis not to worry because, ""I've been operating in the dark for years."" Those in the studio said Leno's nocturnal transmission added excitement to the program. ""It was cool,"" said Lillie Harrell, 17, a tourist from Hammond, La. ""The crowd got really involved. I guess it shows you don't really need all those lights."" Added Jose Tano, 21, a Burbank resident and student at the University of California, Los Angeles, ""It was a good idea and a great way to make a point."" The local power company might not have made out very well, but the studio audience didn't end up empty-handed. Each received a fluorescent lantern and pack of batteries as they left the studio. Contact Information E-mail kevinscott@onlinemailbox.net Phone (213) 926-2626 Fax (707) 516-0019 Traditional Mail PO Box 21074 ?Los Angeles, CA 90021 - image001.jpg - image001.jpg [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FYI From Marty Sunde: Request for Ken to contact Chancellor Reed,
 California State University System; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/10/2001 09:28 AM --------------------------- From: Carol Moffett@EES on 05/09/2001 08:49 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: FYI From Marty Sunde: Request for Ken to contact Chancellor Reed, California State University System FYI.... ---------------------- Forwarded by Carol Moffett/HOU/EES on 05/09/2001 08:48 AM --------------------------- Enron Energy Services From: Marty Sunde 05/09/2001 08:16 AM Phone No: 713 853-7797 Phone 888-953-9478 SkyTel Pager EB 889 To: Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Tom Riley/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Lamar Frazier/HOU/EES@EES, David W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES (bcc: Carol Moffett/HOU/EES) Subject: Request for Ken to contact Chancellor Reed, California State University System Rosalee, I have left Ken a voicemail request but thought I would follow up with a note to you that might help clarify the request. As Ken knows, Enron Energy Services recently won a STAY by the 9th Circuit Court of an order by a lower court to require us to provide electricity service to the UC/CSU systems directly versus via using PG&E and SCE service. The formal court hearing of the appeal is still scheduled for 60 to 90 days from now. We would like Ken to phone Charlie Reed, Chancellor of CSU, and solicit Charlie's support for Enron, CSU, and the UC system to get back together to attempt to work out a commercial resolution to these issues. We believe that sponsorship and support coming from the most senior executives' offices will help bring the parties together. Additionally, if CSU and UC are interested in working out a settlement, we would like to solicit their joint request for a delay in the court calendar. This would allow both teams to focus on a commercial resolution versus splitting their focus between a settlement and preparing briefs for the appeal appearance. We would like to see a delay request of one month, as long as the setttlement discussions progress. A desirable way to kick off settlement discussions would be to ask Ken to have lunch with the Head of UC , Charlie Reed of CSU, and perhaps one business lead (in this case, this could be me). I am not sure that Ken's schedule could accomadate that, but I thought I would ask. If timing is bad for a meeting like this, we can find a different alternative. I will follow up with a phone call to you. Hope this helps. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= <<Concur Expense Document>> - JS5/8/2001; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/11/2001 01:58 PM --------------------------- eserver@enron.com on 05/11/2001 01:50:41 PM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - JS5/8/2001 The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: James Steffes Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: JS5/8/2001 Report Total: $9,865.42 Amount Due Employee: $9,865.42 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://xms.enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Console Tape Recordings; [EMail-Body]= fyi ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 06/13/2001 08:10 AM --------------------------- From: Brenda Anderson on 06/11/2001 01:56 PM To: Robert Knight/Enron@EnronXGate, Darren P Adamik/Enron@EnronXGate, David cc: Steve Woods/EPSC/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bill Donovan/EPSC/HOU/ECT@ECT, Marcia Broom/EPSC/HOU/ECT@ECT (bcc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron) Subject: Console Tape Recordings Steve Kean is requesting that tape recorders be installed on the 10 ACD consoles that the operators use. Bomb Threats and personal threats to Ken Lay have been received regularly through out the last week. A Task Force is being formed to handle these types of calls. Please charge this Co.0901 Rc.100158. If you need further information please contact me, ext.36342 This needs to be done ASAP......... Thanks .............. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Texas energy exec says, 'I told you'; [EMail-Body]= Jeff FYI ?From the Contra Costa Times (East San Francisco Bay Area) Kevin Published Friday, June 22, 2001 Texas energy exec says, 'I told you' POWER CRISIS ? Enron's Skilling gets pied before his speech blaming lawmakers, but says he understands Californians' anger By Rick Jurgens TIMES STAFF WRITER SAN FRANCISCO -- A Texas energy executive who said his warnings were ignored by regulators who restructured California's electricity industry came to the Bay Area on Thursday to say, in effect, ""I told you so."" Jeffrey Skilling, chief executive of Houston-based Enron Corp., said that California wouldn't be in its current mess if regulators had followed his advice in 1994 and 1995. Regulators erred by forcing wholesale electricity transactions into the spot market so that deals could more easily be monitored, Skilling said in a speech to about 100 people at the Commonwealth Club of California. ""They created a flawed marketplace in the name of regulatory expediency."" Enron is a broker that buys and sells contracts to deliver power. Such bilateral transactions shouldn't have been banned, Skilling said. Skilling said that's what he said six years ago. ""I probably made a pest of myself (in the restructuring hearings called by regulators) because I told them they were doing it wrong,"" he said. ""They finally told me to keep quiet."" On Thursday night, it was Skilling's turn to be pestered. A woman threw a chocolate pie into his face before the event began. Police said Francine Cavanaugh of Oakland was arrested on suspicion of battery and released. Skilling tried to ignore protesters but said he understood why Californians, facing blackouts and rising power costs, were angry. He even had kind words for Gov. Gray Davis, who, he said, ""was dealt a very difficult hand."" Skilling became Enron's chief executive in February, replacing company founder Kenneth Lay, an early proponent of electricity deregulation who is close to President Bush. Enron, a global energy giant with roots in the natural gas industry, owns some power plants, but its influence in the electricity industry reflects the rapid growth of its energy trading operation. Enron's only California generators are small wind facilities. However, the company has developed power plants. Enron initiated two 750-megawatt projects that were sold to Calpine Corp., including a Pittsburg plant due to go online next month. Enron has announced plans to seek regulators' approval for a 750-megawatt power plant in Roseville in Placer County. During the first three months of 2001, Enron posted a huge jump in revenue, to $50.1 billion from $13.1 billion a year ago, but a much smaller gain in net income, to $425 million from $338 million. Skilling himself cashed an $850,000 paycheck and got a $5.6 million bonus last year. But the energy crisis has taken its toll on Enron's stock price and on Skilling, who owned or held options to buy 1.9 million shares of Enron common stock at the time of the company's February proxy filing. At Thursday's closing price of $44.05 a share, the stock was down more than 50 percent from its 52-week high of $90.75 in August. That proved that Enron wasn't the villain in California, Skilling said. ""This thing in California has been bad for everybody,"" he said. ""If we had anything to do with this, we're the stupidest people in the world."" Contact Information E-mail kevinscott@onlinemailbox.net Phone (213) 926-2626 Fax (707) 516-0019 Traditional Mail PO Box 21074 ?Los Angeles, CA 90021 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Sandy Fain; [EMail-Body]= Randy Rich in town [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Time Magazine - Enron Plays the Pipes....; [EMail-Body]= this is fantastic!! ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/22/2000 04:57 PM --------------------------- From: Ann M Schmidt 08/22/2000 09:03 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Paula Rieker/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Time Magazine - Enron Plays the Pipes.... This article is forwarded to you per Mark Palmer's request... Business Enron Plays The Pipes This old-time gas company is trading fuel for a future as a new-economy superpower. Will the swap work? Frank Gibney Jr./Houston 08/28/2000 Time Magazine Time Inc. 38+ (Copyright 2000) It's Saturday night, and the only thing between you and a movie from Blockbuster Video is the unpaid late fee for last week's rental. If that sounds familiar, then you'll appreciate this: next year Blockbuster plans to offer up to 500 movie titles online in more than a dozen major cities around the U.S. That's right, video on demand (not the frustrating no-rewind, no-pause pay-per-view offerings of today) for anyone with a DSL line at home. What's remarkable is that Blockbuster's partner happens to be an energy company called Enron. At a time when so many old-economy companies seem helpless against the dizzying pace and technology of the digital age, Enron is demonstrating why FORTUNE magazine keeps voting it the most innovative large company in America. For years the Houston-based firm simply produced, transported and marketed natural gas. Then, as energy deregulation threatened profit margins in the gas business, Enron discovered it could make billions by trading and brokering packages of energy the way Midwesterners do pork bellies. Now Enron is moving into the telecommunications business, with a national fiber-optic cable network and a floor bulging with Sun supercomputers. In fact, Enron may be the most interesting old-economy company around. Since moving its trading operations from the phone to the Web eight months ago, the company has doubled revenues to more than $30 billion. Most of that is made through trading everything from energy and paper to weather risk derivatives and now bandwidth--more than 800 offerings in all. Think of eBay, but instead of auctioning $5 used Baby Gap pajamas, the company trades $600,000 blocks of natural gas--and pockets commensurately huge commissions. Boasts Enron president Jeffrey Skilling: ""In terms of dollars transacted, we're the world's largest online site by a factor of 10."" So far this year, that has meant $120 billion in transactions. And when you're running the network, all sorts of profitable opportunities arise. Last week, when word spread that natural-gas prices would spike this winter, Enron's in-house traders saw their gains surge as customers raced to lock in future supplies at today's prices. And Enron's stock price? It hit $90 last week, tripling its value of a year ago. Kind of like an Internet play, only better. The market loves Enron because Skilling and CEO Kenneth Lay seem to have come up with a business model that works for just about anything. They provide a service to their customers by packaging a supply of name your commodity and then using the efficiency of their vast network to beat most prices. They arrived at this model back in the mid-1980s almost out of desperation, when crude-oil prices had collapsed, natural-gas deregulation had thrown that market into chaos, and the Peruvian government had just nationalized Enron's offshore properties. Figuring they might as well leverage deregulation instead of succumbing to it--call it business judo-- Skilling, a McKinsey & Co. consultant at the time, came up with a plan called the Gas Bank, to buy up reserves of natural gas, then package them for sale, with various prices and conditions for different customers. When electricity markets deregulated a few years ago, the company did the same. It's the oldest concept in business: buy low, sell high. Enron also leverages its assets and expertise to provide services to big customers. Since 1997, companies like Owens Corning and Chase Manhattan Bank have signed long-term, multibillion-dollar contracts with Enron subsidiary Enron Energy Services (EES) that lock in their energy costs for up to 10 years and provide Enron with a steady revenue stream. What's more, Enron is beginning to actively manage its clients' heating and cooling plants, installing new equipment when necessary and monitoring it all over the Internet. Skilling's latest gambit is to apply the same principles he learned in the power and energy sectors to making Enron a leader in the booming telecommunications business. The plan isn't to go head to head with established fiber-optic carriers such as AT&T, Qwest and Williams Communications. Instead, Enron wants to use new switching technology and its expertise in trading pipeline access to transform a modest telecom network into a powerful arbiter of bandwidth. Enron's bet is simple: supply and demand will increase exponentially, turning bandwidth into a tradable commodity, just like gas and electricity. Along the way, why not partner with companies such as Blockbuster and use this new technology to offer content--like movies- -and blow it through existing, underutilized pipe? ""They are jump- starting an application [telecom content] with a potential market of $200 billion a year,"" says Tom Nolle, president of the telecom consulting firm CIMI. Other new-economy players are also beginning to see the power merchant as a prize partner. IBM and AOL have joined with Enron to form the New Power Co. (TNPC), an independent start-up that will offer pricing schemes and a choice of power and gas service for residential and small-business customers. Enron provides the electricity; AOL enables customers to buy it via the Web; and IBM takes care of the billing. ""It's ludicrous that we're in the 21st century, and you still have people jumping over fences to read meters,"" says Skilling, pointing out that the technology exists to offer real-time pricing for gas and electricity. In deregulated markets, TNPC will allow consumers to switch power companies as easily as they do phone companies. Despite all Wall Street's enthusiasm for Enron's bold plans, there are still plenty of skeptics. Critics point out that there is barely a market today for the company's bandwidth trading exchange. They also stress that pushing digital signals through pipe is a world away from routing natural gas. Although there is plenty of cable across the country, carriers are not set up to mix and match access to it. ""It's a very, very difficult concept,"" says Nolles. Even the Blockbuster venture is risky: technology aside, there is also the highly political question of digital rights. How do you satisfy Hollywood that its content is secure? But Skilling and his lieutenants are quick to counter that everyone thought they were crazy to try to make markets in gas and electricity. And Enron, after all, is a company that thrives on entrepreneurial defiance of convention. Many of its new ventures were started because managers simply set new ideas in motion without waiting for approval from the top. Even the online operation was cobbled together in a mere seven months. Skilling and Lay found out about EnronOnline only two weeks before it went live. Is taking risks really a part of a gas-pipeline company's culture? Just ask John Arnold, the 26-year-old chief of natural-gas derivatives, who after nine hours and $1 billion in trades last Wednesday had this to say: ""You can't turn away for a minute or you get picked off."" That has happened to too many traditional companies because they were unable to find a niche in the new economy. Enron, however, has traded its way into a starring role, and now it hopes it is ready for the movies. [BOX] THE PIPELINE OF PLENTY --Natural-gas production --Electric-power generation --Enron Online: global-trading system for 800 commodity products; $120 billion in trades so far in 2000 --Enron Energy Services: contracts with institutional customers to manage all power needs at fixed, long-term prices. Ultimate aim is control, via the Web, of heating, ventilation and air conditioning --Enron Broadband Services: trades bandwidth capacity to fill customers' transmission needs. Offers bandwidth to content providers like Blockbuster and AtomFilms.com COLOR PHOTO: GREG GIRARD--CONTACT PRESS IMAGES THE KING OF REINVENTION Desperate conditions in the '80s forced Enron's president Skilling to come up with a new and highly adaptable business model COLOR PHOTO: PAUL S. HOWELL--LIAISON AGENCY FOR TIME POWER MERCHANT Even as it trades commodities from coal to bandwidth, Enron continues to expand its gas and electric production around the globe COLOR ILLUSTRATION: ILLUSTRATION FOR TIME BY BILL SCHWARTZ Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential - Voicemail Messages; [EMail-Body]= These were the messages in your voicemail: 1. 10/18/01 - Margaret Allen ....needed your advice on whether her sister should take job with Cal-Pine or Kinder Morgan 2. 10/19/01 - Adrianne Engler ....regarding candidantes that you were suppose to phone interview. (you have sent her an email since this) 3. 10/23/01 - Bob Shults(X3-0397)....they met with Nymex last week and are getting ready send the proposal ont eh document you saw last week. He wants to make sure that you are okay with this and dont have any issues. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Greetings from London; [EMail-Body]= Hello Darrell, I am in London this week, looking, among other things, at our CreditDesk.com operation. I was trying to access your expert report from your web site, but it's password protected. Can you send me a copy? Vince [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Help for Krishnarao Pinnamaneni; [EMail-Body]= Wade, Thanks for your help. Krishna advised me of the conversation he had with you. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Cline, Wade Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 1:37 AM To: Vince.Kaminski@enron.com Subject: Re: Help for Krishnarao Pinnamaneni ---------------------- Forwarded by Wade Cline/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 05/14/2001 12:04 PM --------------------------- Delivery Failure Report Your document: Re: Help for Krishnarao Pinnamaneni was not delivered to: Vince J. Kaminski/ENRON@enronXgate because: Invalid/unknown recipient [MAPI Reason Code: 1, MAPI Diagnostic Code 1] What should you do? You can resend the undeliverable document to the recipients listed above by choosing the Resend button or the Resend command on the Actions menu. Once you have resent the document you may delete this Delivery Failure Report. If resending the document is not successful you will receive a new failure report Unless you receive other Delivery Failure Reports, the document was successfully delivered to all other recipients. NAHOU-LNINT01/Enron, ENE-NS03/Enron, EI-NHUB01/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, ________________________ To: Vince J. Kaminski/ENRON@enronXgate cc: Pinnamaneni Krishnarao/ENRON@enronXgate From: Wade Date: 05/14/2001 12:49:39 AM CDT Subject: Re: Help for Krishnarao Pinnamaneni Vince, I will certainly try. I am not optimistic primarily because this is handled out of Chennai, as it must since the parents are residents of Andhra Pradesh. Our earlier requests for visas from Chennai have been a very mixed bag, with us being turned down more often than not. The fact of the matter is that the visa officers in the respective consulates have incredible amounts of discretion and ability to say no. Once they say no, it is very difficult to reverse. But I will go through our good contacts at the US Consulate in Mumbai, as this has had more success than us speaking directly to Chennai. Wade From: Vince J. Kaminski/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/11/2001 10:37 AM CDT To: Wade cc: Vince J. Kaminski/ENRON@enronXgate, Pinnamaneni Krishnarao/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: Help for Krishnarao Pinnamaneni Wade, I am writing to ask you to help my associate, Krishnarao Pinnamaneni, who faces a very difficult personal situation. You probably remember Krishna from his visits to our Bombay office when he was helping you on a few projects. A brief outline of the facts. 1. His wife is pregnant. She gave birth to their daughter, Pallavi, a few years ago after a very complicated pregnancy. Pallavi was a premature child and her survival was a miracle (we all thank the Almighty for this wonderful child). Current pregnancy is also very complicated. 2. Krishna invited his in-laws to visit and stay with them to care for his wife. The application for a tourist visa was denied and the reason given for the denial was that they had overstayed the term of the visa during the previous visit. The irony is that they complied with the US laws: they had asked for an extension of the visa and the extension was granted. The company can, of course, intervene on Krishna's behalf. Krishna made an outstanding contribution to Enron (he is currently a VP) and to the American society. I am sure that Ken Lay would have no objections to write a letter on his behalf to the State Department. I would prefer, however, to try informal channels first to avoid confrontational approach. It may be better for all the involved in the long-run. I hope you can use your personal contacts to intervene on Krishna's behalf and ask for a reversal of the decision on humanitarian grounds. I shall fax to you a copy of the decision. Thanks. Vince << File: Krishna's Letter.DOC >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Dates for Emerson Meeting; [EMail-Body]= I think I can recommend that the time be set aside, but it would be helpful if we pointed out to Emerson that it must be clear that there is a clear opportunity for Enron before we schedule the meeting. Maybe you could use this to get some progress on a bundled outsource deal. Nate Ellis@EES 02/28/2001 03:05 PM To: Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Michael Mann/HOU/EES@EES, Troy Henry/HOU/EES@EES cc: Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES, Micah Hatten/HOU/EES@EES, Joannie Williamson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: RE: Dates for Emerson Meeting Gentlemen: Situation: Emerson is aggressively seeking at least a three hour time slot for a meeting with Jeff Skilling in April or May 2001. Mr. Skilling's office is hesitant to allocate more than two hours without your recommendation. Emerson is being persistent. The key players from Emerson are David Farr, newly appointed CEO, and James Berges, President and effectively the leader of Emerson's strategic development effort. It is anticipated that both would attend the meeting. Emerson execs want to (i) get to know Mr. Skilling and other senior management, (ii) discuss mutual business opportunities, and (iii) hold a discussion about the transformation of Enron from a pipeline company to its current form. The last point has to do with Emerson's continuing self-transformation effort and how Enron achieved its transformation. I need your advice and recommendation. Please respond by e-mail or telephone (x5-4040). Background: Emerson initiated this latest round of contact with Enron in November 2000, when Mike Train and Mark Proudfoot, both Emerson VPs of Corporate Development, visited the Enron building hosted by Steve Kean. I met them at that time. Since that initial meeting, Emerson has aggressively pursued a business joint venture as preferred supplier with Martin Wenzel and the distributed power business, I believe with promising results. My sense is that Emerson is uniquely positioned as EES' partner in that business. I am waiting to receive an update from Martin. Emerson is also interested in becoming a preferred supplier for EES's DSM business. While we generally support that idea, we are pressing Emerson to reciprocate by becoming a customer of our bundled outsource business. Emerson is highly decentralized, and our efforts to date have been unsuccessful. I want to use the meeting as an opportunity to press Emerson to consider a proposal from EES's bundled outsource business. Please let me know your recommendation on this matter. Thanks, Nate ---------------------- Forwarded by Nate Ellis/HOU/EES on 02/28/2001 02:21 PM --------------------------- ""Train, Mike [CORP/STL]"" <Mike.Train@emrsn.com> on 02/27/2001 08:51:23 PM To: ""'Nate Ellis'"" <nellis2@enron.com> cc: Subject: RE: Dates Nate, Thanks for the note - - I have dropped some ideas to Thad to follow up on during my absence from the office. I am a little nervous about having only two hours - - is it possible to get a larger block of time to get to know each other better and talk through some of the mutual business opportunities? Mike (from Hong Kong) -----Original Message----- From: Nate Ellis [mailto:nellis2@enron.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 6:16 PM To: mike.train@emrsn.com Subject: Dates ---------------------- Forwarded by Nate Ellis/HOU/EES on 02/27/2001 06:14 PM --------------------------- Nate Ellis 02/26/2001 04:28 PM To: thad.ewald@emrsn.com cc: Subject: Dates Skilling's calendar is amazingly full! Let's shoot for one of the following. Let's schedule it ASAP. March is unavailable for a two-hour meeting. Monday, April 2nd: 12:00p to 2:00p Tuesday, April 3rd: 9:00a to 11:00a Wednesday, May 2nd: 10:00a to 12:00p or 1:00p to 3:00p Thursday, May 3rd: 10:00a to 12:00p or 1:00p to 3:00p Call or e-mail when you have a suggestion. Nate [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Summer; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/01/2000 07:56 AM --------------------------- Paula Rieker@ENRON 07/31/2000 10:47 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Summer Steve - Attached are my comments to the press release which Mark P. forwarded late Friday. Please call as you get updates on the transaction during the week or to discuss the release - great progress so far! THX Paula [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FERC/SEC Update; [EMail-Body]= please print ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/16/2000 10:14 AM ----- Sarah Novosel 10/13/2000 07:13 PM To: J Mark Metts/NA/Enron@Enron, Mitchell Taylor/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Ann Ballard/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Dwight Larson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: FERC/SEC Update As you all may know, we have scheduled a conference call for the group for Thursday, Oct. 19. Bernadette called each of your assistants, so it should be on your calendars. As a brief update prior to our call: We have a phone call in to FERC to check on the procedural status of the merger. Donna Fulton, my colleague in Washington, has many contacts at FERC and is working with those people to learn what she can about the status of our proceeding. Joanne is supposed to be meeting with Bob Wasson at the SEC (along with Bill Weedon) early next week to get a sense of where the SEC is on the case. Per Rick's suggestion, I have asked another colleague of mine in Washington, Chris Long, to help us decide who would be the appropriate person to make contact at the SEC if we decide to make that contact. Chris is working with some political operatives on this. We have been working with Portland General and Sierra on their RTO filing. As you may recall, a commitment to join an RTO (Regional Transmission Organization) is one of the things FERC will require of the merging parties. An RTO filing will be made at FERC on October 23. While RTO progress has been good so far, Sierra and PGE have indicated that they may have concerns with the RTO they are working with (the Northwest RTO). We are working with Sierra and PGE to make sure that they do not do anything in the RTO proceeding that could cause concern for FERC regarding the companies' commitment to join an RTO. There was some question about the status of a temporary services company being created by the merged company. Joanne has been working with the Sierra and PGE people on this issue and does not see this as being a problem now, but I have asked her for confirmation that this ""alternative"" type of service company arrangement will not delay the SEC proceeding. I am waiting for a response from Joanne. Please let me know if you have any questions. Sarah [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Senator Dunn Hearing; [EMail-Body]= Can you circulate the link to Cal TV again? ""Scott Govenar"" <sgovenar@govadv.com> on 07/16/2001 01:58:41 PM Please respond to <sgovenar@govadv.com> To: ""Ban Sharma"" <ban.sharma@enron.com>, ""David Leboe"" <David.Leboe@ENRON.com>, ""Eric Letke"" <eletke@enron.com>, ""Jennifer Thome"" <Jennifer.Thome@enron.com>, ""Ken Smith"" <ken@kdscommunications.com>, ""Bev Hansen"" <bhansen@lhom.com>, ""Hedy Govenar"" <hgovenar@govadv.com>, ""Miyung Buster"" <Miyung.Buster@enron.com>, ""Janel Guerrero"" <Janel.Guerrero@enron.com>, ""Robert Frank"" <rfrank@enron.com>, ""Mike Day"" <MDay@GMSSR.com>, ""Leslie Lawner"" <Leslie.Lawner@enron.com>, ""Harry. Kingerski@enron. com"" <Harry.Kingerski@enron.com>, ""Karen Denne"" <kdenne@enron.com>, ""Steven Kean"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com>, ""Alan Comnes"" <acomnes@enron.com>, ""Susan J Mara"" <smara@enron.com>, ""Paul Kaufman"" <paul.kaufman@enron.com>, ""Jeff Dasovich"" <jdasovic@enron.com>, ""Jim Steffes"" <james.d.steffes@enron.com>, ""Rick Shapiro"" <rshapiro@enron.com> cc: Subject: Senator Dunn Hearing THE SELECT COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE PRICE MANIPULATION OF THE WHOLESALE ENERGY MARKET WILL MEET ON WEDNESDAY, JULY 18 AT 9:30 A.M. IN ROOM 3191 TO REVIEW COMPLIANCE WITH SUBPOENAS FOR DUKE, DYNEGY, RELIANT, AES, NRG AND WILLIAMS. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Steffes Testimony To House Committee Today; [EMail-Body]= Attached is Jim's prepared statement filed last night for today's House Energy and Air Quality Subcommittee (Chairman Barton) hearing on reliability, transmission incentives and siting issues. You will see we use the opportunity to make a plug for large RTOs as well. Jim will actually deliver a five minute oral summary. He is appearing as the EPSA witness in his capacity as chairman of the EPSA Regulatory Affairs Committee. There will be ten witnesses on the panel. Others will represent EEI, NARUC, APPA, LPPC, NRECA, NERC (David Cook), ELCON, Consumers for Fair Competition, and GF Energy. We will provide a report following the hearing. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Commodity Futures Act - Talking Points; [EMail-Body]= please print ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/16/2000 10:14 AM ----- Chris Long 10/13/2000 03:09 PM To: Tori L Wells/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lisa Yoho/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Commodity Futures Act - Talking Points Tori: We have contacted Senator Gramm and Majority Leader Armey about the calls from Ken on Monday. Because of the uncertainty of the Congressional schedule, both offices told us to call on Monday morning to schedule the call. If Ken wants to make the calls unscheduled, we expect Armey and Gramm to both be in DC by Monday morning. The numbers are as follows: Senator Gramm (202) 224-2934 Majority Leader Armey (202) 225-4000 Here are the talking points ** CONFIDENTIAL ** Talking Points on Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 Background: We have hit an impasse on the CFTC Reauthorization legislation. On legal certainty, nearly all interested parties agree. However, Senator Gramm continues to raise objections unrelated to legal certainty for our business. There are two issues (which we understand have primarily been advanced by Senator Gramm, one on bank products and one on SEC jurisdiction). Majority Leader Dick Armey is trying to gain consensus with the interested parties which include Senator Gramm, the Chairmen of the House Agriculture, Commerce, and Banking Committees, as well as the Department of Treasury, CFTC, and SEC. Meetings are occurring on a daily basis, but little concrete progress has been made since draft legislation was released on October 9. Talking Points: We need your help to resolve outstanding differences so that the Commodities Futures Modernization Act of 2000 can pass this year. There are very few legislative days left and movement now on this legislation is essential. Do not let the Congressional calendar be the enemy of gaining legal certainty for this dynamic and growing industry. The current version of the legislation provides important legal certainty for all physical commodity transactions (not including agricultural commodities) entered into on a counterparty-to-counterparty basis or on an electronic trading facility. We strongly support these provisions. The legislation eliminates concerns that our derivatives transactions may be illegal or that our online platforms may be unregulated futures exchanges. These provisions allow our businesses to grow and innovate. Without this legislation the industry will be crippled with legal uncertainty and these platforms will develop overseas. Virtually all of the issues in this very complex legislative package have been resolved. We are indifferent to outstanding provisions, except to the extent that they impede passage of the legislation. We cannot allow the great progress made to date, fail in the end. If asked, about a possible solution to the logjam. Answer: Encourage Majority Leader Armey, Senator Gramm, and Secretary Summers to meet immediately to finalize the remaining issues. Given time constraints, if such a meeting does not occur in the next few days, there may not be enough time to pass this important legislation. Note: Congress will be going out on either October 20 or October 27. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Tokyo Presentation 15 May; [EMail-Body]= The presentation looks fine but consider adding this idea in a few slides: the continuation of a regulated structure poses considerable risk for utilities. California's utilities were pushed to the brink of, or into, bankruptcy because of a regualtory regime which allocated price risk to them. All parties are better off in a system where the regulated enterprise is limited to natural monopoly functions and all other acitivities are conducted in a marketplace. Also, did we cover the shortcomings of the Japanese market sufficiently? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Madera Ranch Press Release; [EMail-Body]= Heads up. This is not to be discussed in advance out side of Enron, but you guys need to know. If there are ways we can be helpful, call Carolyn Green to discuss. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 10/06/99 01:39 PM --------------------------- Mark Palmer@ENRON 10/06/99 11:18 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Madera Ranch Press Release This will touch off a firestorm. Diane is doing a good job, retaining McNally Temple in CA and even getting some message development help from our old friends at Public Strategies in Austin. I'll stay on top of it. ---------------------- Forwarded by Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron on 10/06/99 11:03 AM --------------------------- Diane Bazelides@AZURIX 10/05/99 04:23 PM To: Rebecca P Mark/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, John Ale/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, Neil D Meyer/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, Rodney Faldyn/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, Rodney L Gray/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, Andrea Mainelli/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, Amanda K Martin/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, David Pruner/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, Edward Robinson/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, Colin Skellett/BTH/AZURIX@AZURIX, Elizabeth Ivers/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, Cole Frates/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, trusso@mcnallytemple.com, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@Enron, Carol Hensley/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX cc: Subject: Madera Ranch Press Release Attached is the proposed press release, which includes input from Rebecca, Cole and Neil. We are tentatively planning to issue the release Monday , October 11, but in case word leaks to the media from Cole's meetings with local landowners starting tomorrow, we may need to issue this week. With that in mind, would you please provide me any comments on the attached document by the end of the day tomorrow, October 6. Please note that this project has received tremendous local resistance to date, so we are quoting Cole and adding much more information about the local benefits to try to address these issues. We are drafting a Q&A document and key message points for use with local and national media and the investor audience. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Additional Lobbying Efforts; [EMail-Body]= FYI. I think they should try to get in to see Lundquist, but I don't think we need to participate in this. We have been focussed on nation-wide issues when we have had the opportunity to meet with Lundquist and I don't think we should use our limited shots here. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/30/2001 07:07 AM --------------------------- ""Steve Crain"" <SteveC@pandaenergy.com> on 04/27/2001 04:12:14 PM To: <mgreen@duke-energy.com>, <rrwhyde@duke-energy.com>, <skean@enron.com> cc: ""Harold Green"" <HaroldG@pandaenergy.com> Subject: Additional Lobbying Efforts We have met an individual named Wayne Valis, of the Lobbying firm of Valis Associates. He likes the approach we are taking to the problem. He is offering to get us access to Andrew Lundquist (I said staffer preciously, but we now know he is Chairman of the President's Energy Task force). He also thinks he can get us in to top levels of the Energy Department, and the White House (we think he is talking about Carl Rove - who was G.W.'s Campaign Manager and is now a senior White House Counsel). For this service, he wants $10,000 plus direct expenses. If unsuccessful in at least getting us into Lundquist, he will not charge anything. We think it's a worthwhile shot. Could Duke and/or Enron agree to split the expense with us? Also, it will be imperative that all of us, whether paying or not, be represented at whatever meetings are arranged. Please advise. Regards, Steve Crain [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Invitation to the EUROFORUM Conference ""Emissions Trading""; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/10/2000 09:16 AM --------------------------- From: Jeffrey A Shankman@ECT on 08/08/2000 11:20 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Kevin McGowan/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Invitation to the EUROFORUM Conference ""Emissions Trading"" FYI. John Palmisano previously addressed this group. Do we want to send anyone? Jeff ---------------------- Forwarded by Jeffrey A Shankman/HOU/ECT on 08/08/2000 11:14 AM --------------------------- ""Hagemann, Nicole"" on 08/08/2000 08:50:31 AM To: ""'jshankm@enron.com'"" <jshankm@enron.com> cc: Subject: Invitation to the EUROFORUM Conference ""Emissions Trading"" Dear Jeff, as we discussed on the phone, I send you the conference paper of the EUROFORUM Conference ""Emissions Trading"", to which I would like to invite a speaker of your company. Just for info: EUROFORUM in a susidary of ibc conference. <<KonzeptEnglisch.DOC>> I will call you again next week. Sincerely Nicole Hagemann RAin Nicole Hagemann Projektleiterin Energie/Umwelt EUROFORUM Deutschland GmbH Tel.: 0211/ 9686-429 Fax.: 0211/ 9686 94-429 - KonzeptEnglisch.DOC [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential - Calif Peaking Plant; [EMail-Body]= Phil-- Enron is currently evaluating the possibility of installing an NGL peaking facility with appurtenant storage and rail facilities near Needles, California. Ideally, the plant would inject / vaporize normal butane at the rate of 18,750 gallons per hour into a high pressure natural gas transmission system. Current gas pipeline specs are as follows: Operating pressure - 850 - 1000 psig, worst case 750, normal range 800-900 Gas Volume - 650,000 - 750,000 MMBtu/day Expected normal butane (GPA spec) requirement - 450,000 gallons/day (18,750 gal/ per hour) My questions are: 1) Is anyone currently using butanes for peaking service and if so, where? 2) Do we need to blend with air (how much) or can we inject straight normal butane? 3) At what line pressure point do the butanes re-liquefy further downstream of the injection point as the pipeline pressure falls? 4) Is this peaking plant configuration feasible and if so, at what price (ball park here, don't go way out of your way)? (If it's not, what would your suggestion be for a design). I will fax you the normal butane specs as soon as I get them (please email back your fax number). As always, we're on a pretty tight time frame. After you've had a chance to review the above, I'd like to get together and discuss this with you. I can meet you in Ohio if it fits your schedule better, just let me know. Thanks for the help and I look forward to talking with you soon. Kevin Hyatt 713-853-5559 kevin.hyatt@enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: implied pdf paper; [EMail-Body]= Zimin, Looks like a very good paper for the Tech Corner next week. Please, review before publication. I looked at it and it looked OK. Sam will need it by Fri evening. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Parkhill, Kenneth Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 8:42 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: implied pdf paper Vince, I've been meaing to ask you about the paper I sent to Sam on calculating implied pdf's for futures prices. Sam told me that you didn't want to include it in RI because it and the EOL article gave too much away. I've talked with several folks about the approach outlined in the paper. I've reworked the paper to try and better tailor it to traders, and I'd be interested in your feedback. thanks ken [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Hearing Materials; [EMail-Body]= Below are copies of the prepared statements of commissioners Wood, Massey and Breathitt for this afternoon's House hearing on electricity issues. The witnesses are the four FERC commissioners on one panel and the Deputy Sec. of Energy on a second panel. Chairman Wood's statement is very strong on RTOs and why a few, larger ones are needed for economic and security reasons. The only troublesome note is he describes the recent mediation proceedings as ""encouraging."" However, elsewhere he refers to voluntary RTO formation in the past tense, saying ""the Commission can go further and require them"" (although he raises the likelihood of litigation unless Congress clarifies the Commission's authority in this area. I will provide a more detailed report after the hearing. P.S. Since the commissioner's statements are in word perfect, you will need the right computer software or know how to reformat them. If you have any trouble, please advise. This is the format in which we received them. Thanks. John -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Andrews Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 2:46 PM To: Robertson, Linda; Shelk, John; Shortridge, Pat; Long, Chris; Nersesian, Carin Cc: ENRON; Harriet James Subject: Hearing Materials In case you have not seen these yet, attached are materials for tomorrow's hearing that Harriet James at QGA received from Committee staff. Please contact us if you have any questions. Bruce Andrews Quinn Gillespie & Associates 1133 Connecticut Ave., NW Fifth Floor Washington, DC 20036 direct dial: (202) 429-4006 QGA Main Line: (202) 457-1110 QGA fax: (202) 457-1130 bandrews@quinngillespie.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Revised Merger Release & Q&A; [EMail-Body]= fyi ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/13/2001 01:12 PM ----- Karen Denne 03/13/2001 11:54 AM To: Mark Metts/Enron@EnronXGate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Revised Merger Release & Q&A fyi... ---------------------- Forwarded by Karen Denne/Corp/Enron on 03/13/2001 11:53 AM --------------------------- From: Diane Bazelides@AZURIX on 03/13/2001 11:45 AM To: Elizabeth Ivers/NA/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Revised Merger Release & Q&A Here are the latest documents. We plan to issue the release immediately after the meeting, which is scheduled to begin at 10 on Friday and probably lasting less than 30 minutes. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Draft New Power press release; [EMail-Body]= In the second paragraph we should delete the ""partnership"" statement. I think it's more effective to refer to the New Power Company's risk management capabilities (as provided by Enron, if necessary). That's the basis for the ability to guarantee savings (not economies of scale). I am also concerned that the current statement implies that Enron is taking the risk on the commodity price guarantees. Peggy Mahoney@EES 08/24/2000 01:15 PM To: Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Cedric Burgher/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Paula Rieker/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mike Kerns/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen S Owens@ees@EES, Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Draft New Power press release See draft release below. I have made some suggestions. Let me know what you think by Friday at 10:00am. Peggy ---------------------- Forwarded by Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES on 08/23/2000 05:36 PM --------------------------- Kathy Johnson 08/22/2000 12:56 PM To: Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Draft New Power press release Peggy: Attached is the first draft of an announcement that we're targeting for release before market opening on Monday, August 28th. It announces our entry into the New Jersey and Pennsylvania markets (and guess what, we're already beginning to sign up customers as of yesterday!). We'd put it out on PR Newswire (nationally) as well as to all the key industry trades. Please feel free to pass it along for comments to the usual crew at Enron. Thanks! Kathy [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: energy humor; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/16/2001 01:31 PM ----- =09Daniel Casse <dcasse@whwg.com> =0901/05/2001 06:01 PM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: <skean@enron.com>, <mpalmer@enron.com>, <rshapiro@enron.com> =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: FW: energy humor Apparently I forgot to attach the material referred to in this morning's=20 email. ?My dumb mistake -- daniel----------From: Daniel Casse=20 <dcasse@whwg.com>Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 08:19:00 -0600To: <skean@enron.com> Cc: <rshapiro@enron.com>, <mpalmer@enron.com>Subject: energy humorSteve --= =20 here is a first crack at some humor based on this week's news from=20 California.At the end is an idea for a cartoon. ?I thought I should run it = by=20 you before we get our cartoonist working on it.I'm in New York today and=20 probably will check my email late in the day. ?But I will be checking my=20 voicemail regularly.Daniel-- Daniel CasseWhite House Writers=20 Group615-297-5999615-297-5908 (fax) - EnergyHumorJan5.DOC ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/16/2001 01:31 PM ----- =09Daniel Casse <dcasse@whwg.com> =0901/10/2001 01:27 AM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: <skean@enron.com>, <rshapiro@enron.com>, <mpalmer@enron.com> =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: jan 9 enron humor Steve -- here is another installment on the continuing California story. There is another cartoon idea here. I am ready to get our cartoonist rolling, but let me know if you like this or the previous idea. -- Daniel Casse White House Writers Group 615-297-5999 615-297-5908 (fax) - Jan9humor.DOC ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/16/2001 01:31 PM ----- =09Daniel Casse <dcasse@whwg.com> =0901/12/2001 11:26 AM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: <skean@enron.com> =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: FW: Energy crisis material here are a few more items -- Daniel Casse White House Writers Group 615-297-5999 615-297-5908 (fax) - Jan12humor.DOC ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/16/2001 01:31 PM ----- =09Daniel Casse <dcasse@whwg.com> =0901/16/2001 03:27 PM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: <skean@enron.com>, <rshapiro@enron.com>, <mpalmer@enron.com> =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: Jan 16 humor Attached is some more humor based on California events -- Daniel Casse White House Writers Group 615-297-5999 615-297-5908 (fax) - January16humor.DOC ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/16/2001 01:31 PM ----- =09Daniel Casse <dcasse@whwg.com> =0901/23/2001 01:56 PM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: <skean@enron.com>, <mpalmer@enron.com>, <rshapiro@enron.com> =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: California Humor Observations on the California Electricity Crisis White House Writers Group January 23, 2001 Will the last business to leave California please turn out the lights. Oh wait, they?re already out. California Governor Gray Davis may ultimately prove responsible for the=20 dimming of more lights than Frank Sinatra music. California has done for energy deregulation what Florida has done for=20 elections. California Governor Gray Davis says he?ll appoint a ""power plant czar"" to= =20 help solve the state?s energy crisis. There must be a sign on his desk=20 saying, ""The buck stops here=06?just long enough for me to pass it to someo= ne=20 else."" During the current energy crisis in California, the spotlight shines on=20 Governor Gray Davis=06?so long as it?s not knocked out by rolling blackouts= ,=20 that is. Gray Davis was shocked when told about the ""doomsday scenario."" Not the on= e=20 from Pacific Gas & Electric which envisions California power blackouts=20 lasting 12 hours a day, the one from his aides saying he might lose the=20 governor?s race in 2002. California politicians have learned what thieves have known for a longtime.= =20 It?s easier to pick someone?s pocket in the dark. California is talking conservation. One good conservation measure would be= =20 for Governor Gray Davis to save his breath trying to convince people that= =20 government control is the answer to the energy crisis. Possible Jingle Themes for Gray Davis Re-election Bid: My Hopes Were High 'til the Lights Went Low Brother, Can You Spare a Megawatt? There's Dark at the End of the Tunnel Return Me to Power (Even if You Don't Have Any) Top 10 Reasons to Not Have California Government Electricity 10: Would create yet another oxymoron. 9: Electricity might go to wrong address the way mail does. 8: Promise of efficient electricity gives politicians one more thing to li= e=20 about. 7: Power keeps going off when Rush Limbaugh comes on air. 6: Light bulbs would match politicians for dimness. 5: Special tax on flashlights. 4: Fifteen day waiting period to use microwave. 3: Rolling blackouts joined by rolling the taxpayers. 2: Consumer manual on government-mandated way to change a light bulb runs= =20 25,000 pages. 1: Nine words: From the same people who gave you the DMV. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/16/2001 01:31 PM ----- =09Daniel Casse <dcasse@whwg.com> =0901/31/2001 09:39 AM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: <skean@enron.com>, <mpalmer@enron.com>, <rshapiro@enron.com> =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: California Energy Crisi Humor Observations on the California Energy Crisis The White House Writers Group January 31st Gray Davis has announced that he will soon announce two energy czars to lea= d=20 the state through the current crisis. Logical candidates include: Laurel a= nd=20 Hardy, Abbott and Costello, Beavis and Butthead, and Siegfried and Roy. The environmentalist Green Party is well-named. Thanks to its role in=20 blocking construction of new power plants, Californians are forking over=20 plenty of green for energy. California?s power industry is very Kennedyesque. Their message to consume= rs=20 is, ""Ask not what your energy company can do for you; ask what you can do f= or=20 your energy company."" Congress might get involved in California?s energy crisis. There?s nothing= a=20 drowning victim needs more than having an anchor thrown to him. It?s one thing for California politicians trying to solve the energy proble= m=20 to go back to the drawing board, but do they have to ask taxpayers to buy= =20 them a new one? In California, lawmakers are now getting down to details. The latest debat= e=20 involves what to name the bonds the state will issue to help bail out the= =20 utilities. Proposals on the table include: Blackout Bonds;Bailout Bonds;= =20 Davis Debts; Blunder Bonds; Fiasco Funds. ### ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/16/2001 01:31 PM ----- =09Daniel Casse <dcasse@whwg.com> =0901/31/2001 09:45 AM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: <skean@enron.com>, <mpalmer@enron.com>, <rshapiro@enron.com> =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: carton Here is a cartoon you might like to pass on - lightswitch.pdf ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/16/2001 01:31 PM ----- =09Daniel Casse <dcasse@whwg.com> =0901/31/2001 09:47 AM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: <skean@enron.com>, <mpalmer@enron.com>, <rshapiro@enron.com> =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: two cartoons either of these cartoons might work well with the news about the energy czars. -- Daniel Casse White House Writers Group 615-297-5999 615-297-5908 (fax) - powercorrupts.pdf - PleaseSir.pdf [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Ashok's all-day staff meeting today.; [EMail-Body]= Eric (713) 464 1955 Steve Williams PGE information for Boise [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Refund Cases Timelines--Confidential Atty Client Work Product; [EMail-Body]= The prehearing conference in the CA case was an interesting proceeding. It= became very apparent that the ISO was primarily responsible for the delay = in producing data. The parties complained that they had not received what = the ISO had promised. The PX complained that they had received NO reliable= data from ISO (it was riddled with errors) and that they were at the same = point as at the beginning of the entire proceeding. The PX needs the ISO d= ata in order to commence generating the data that the PX itself needs to pr= oduce. In any event, the new, delayed schedule is a positive development. = It is noteworthy that we were able to group consideration of refunds issue= s and offsets to refunds on the same date- October 26 (previously refund te= stimony was considered first, and testimony related to possible offsets to = refunds was considered on a subsequent date). This is very positive since = it reduces the chance that the proceeding will be only about refunds and th= at the offsets issue will be marginalized. Ray Alvarez -----Original Message----- From: =09Comnes, Alan =20 Sent:=09Wednesday, September 05, 2001 7:42 PM To:=09Comnes, Alan; 'Gary Fergus (E-mail)'; Alvarez, Ray; Frank, Robert; Be= lden, Tim; Sanders, Richard B.; Curry, Wanda; Nicolay, Christi L. Cc:=09Steffes, James D. Subject:=09RE: Refund Cases Timelines--Confidential Atty Client Work Produc= t The DC Team (Linda Robertson, Ray Alvarez) attended and reported on today's= prehearing conference in the California case. The schedule has moved back= about a full month mostly due to the time required by PX and CAISO to prod= uce mitigated market clearing prices and to re-run settlements based on tho= se revised prices. Testimony by Enron on what it is owed is now not due un= til October 26. In addition to adopting this schedule, the ALJ reported th= at the FERC likely not rule on petitions for rehearing of the July 25 order= until October 15, 2001. A revised schedule is attached. (To see how it has changed, you can toggle= Track Changes | Hightlight on Screen on and off) The PNW case is moving along on schedule; changes attached are corrections = rather than actual changes to the schedule. Notably in today's case, Seatt= le and Tacoma waived all cross on TFG witnesses, including Enron's. Alan Comnes << File: Refund Cases Calendar 090501.doc >>=20 -----Original Message----- From: =09Comnes, Alan =20 Sent:=09Thursday, August 30, 2001 1:32 PM To:=09Gary Fergus (E-mail); Alvarez, Ray; Frank, Robert; Belden, Tim Cc:=09Steffes, James D. Subject:=09Refund Cases Timelines--Confidential Atty Client Work Product Tim, Per your request. Everybody else: please forward corrections/updates to me. Thanks, Alan Comnes << File: Refund Case Calendars.doc >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= External Affairs Meeting in 50M03, conference bridge 853-3233
 passcode 3000, you are the host; [EMail-Body]= Merger call 8004570183 506711 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Daily Research reports; [EMail-Body]= I would like to see research from all of these sources on areas of interest to enron -- energy and broadband, North America and Europe. Thanks ""Henry Emery"" <HEMERY@firstunion1.com> on 07/19/2001 12:03:17 PM To: undisclosed-recipients:; cc: Subject: Daily Research reports Attached are two research reports that I can send to you on a daily basis. One of our many benefits here at our new location is the availability of various research sources. The two reports I have attached are from : The First Union Securities Equity Marketing Group and Merrill Lynch We also have access to Goldman Sachs research, and CS First Boston Research. Please let me know if you would like me to continue sending these reports on a daily basis, or if you have any particular companies that you are interested in hearing about. Sincerely, Hank Emery - Spotlight071801.pdf.pdf - smith.pdf.pdf [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Regulatory Policy Committee; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/06/2001 07:29 AM --------------------------- David W Delainey@EES 07/05/2001 05:24 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT cc: Subject: Regulatory Policy Committee Guys, we have a unique capability at this time (ie) me in EES and Greg in EWS to have a singular voice in the regulatory market. I would recommend a policy committee be formed including Greg, Dave, Janet Dietrich, John Lavorato, Tim Belden, Kevin Presto, Rick Shapiro and Steve Kean that meets on a regular basis to review and approve our regulatory agenda, policy and tactical moves on a regular basis. Thoughts.....? Regards Delainey [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call
 Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and
 Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Alvarez, Ray Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 1:43 PM To: Walton, Steve; Mara, Susan; Comnes, Alan; Lawner, Leslie; Cantrell, Rebecca W.; Fulton, Donna; Dasovich, Jeff; Nicolay, Christi; Steffes, James D.; jalexander@gibbs-bruns.com Allen, Phillip K.; Noske, Linda J.; Perrino, Dave; Black, Don; Frank, Robert; Miller, Stephanie; Tycholiz, Barry; Novosel, Sarah; Thome, Jennifer Subject: Re: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted PLEASE MARK YOUR CALENDAR Date: Every Thursday Time: 7:30 am Pacific, 9:30 am Central, and 10:30 am Eastern time Number: 1-888-271-0949 Host Code: 661877 (for Ray only) Participant Code: 936022 (for everyone else) The table of the on-going FERC issues and proceedings is available to all team members on the O drive. Please feel free to revise/add to/ update this table as appropriate. Proposed agenda for tomorrow: Refund order discussed at today's Commission meeting; CA refund issues; PacNW refund issues NOPR on information and filing requirements discussed at today's Commission meeting Answer to motions of CA parties ISO tariff filing response Upcoming meeting in Portland Please feel free to communicate any additional agenda items to the group. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Daily Update/ Legislative activity - 08/24/00; [EMail-Body]= I agree that we should not be opposing rate caps for small customers and schools, but I think we should be pounding on the fact that market participants have been putting offers in front of sdge and that allowing the market to provide this solution is superior to legislated caps that require the creation of huge deferrals (and more problems in the future). Can we make that argument work? Mona L Petrochko 08/24/2000 09:45 PM To: Bruno Gaillard/SFO/EES@EES cc: West GA, Edward Hamb/HOU/EES@EES, Jennifer Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES, Chris Hendrix/HOU/EES@EES, Greg Cordell/HOU/EES@EES, Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES, Douglas Condon/SFO/EES@EES, James M Wood/HOU/EES@EES, Gary Mirich/HOU/EES@EES, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, David Parquet@ECT, mday@gmssr.com, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Marcie Milner/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Hain@Enron, Harry Kingerski/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Karen Denne@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Daily Update/ Legislative activity - 08/24/00 I attended Cmmr. Wood's two-day hearing on Wholesale Markets, which concluded today (8/24) in San Diego. Three Commissioner's were present (Wood, Lynch and Neeper) with Duque and Bilas participating by phone. Administrative Law Judge Wetzel was present and a transcript was taken. The quasi-legislative hearing was the beginning of a record developed for the investigation into the workings of wholesale/retail markets. This session focused on Wholesale markets. There will be subsequent sessions on retail issues, market structure and other related issues in the future. My conclusion from this session is that Wood is looking for support for increasing regulatory intervention in the market. Dan Larcamp, Director of the Office of markets, Tariffs and Rates, FERC, was present. He relayed FERC's concern of this matter and a desire to hold hearings in San Diego. He also relayed that Hoecker held a press conference announcing the opening of a 206 investigative proceeding into the operation of the wholesale markets in California, which carried with it refund authority. The format of the hearing was to respond to pre-filed questions developed by Wood/Lynch. Each member of the panel would respond to the questions and any questions posed by the Commissioners, the Judge or the CPUC Attorney. No questions were posed by members of the audience. Yesterday's panel of academics were comprised of: 1. Dr. Timothy Duane-UC Berkley 2. Dr. William Hogan-Harvard 3. Dr. Frank Wolak-Stanford (ISO Market Surveillance Committee) 4. David Marcus-Energy Consultant for the Coaltion of Utility Employees 5. Dr. Gene Coyle 6. Dr. Jean-Michel Glachant, Universite Paris I Pantheon Sorbonne The panel was asked to speak as individuals and not on behalf of any institutions they may represent. While the purpose of the panel seemed to be to determine that market power was being exercised and that prices were too high and therefore not just and reasonable, the panelist stopped short of blaming generators and market participants in behaving illegally. The concensus generally was that market power did exist at various times, but the mere existence did not constitute bad behavior. None, with the exception of Dr. Wolak who is in the process of doing a study using recent data as part of his role for the Market Surveillance Committee, had done a study. There was some discussion, though not much, of the monopsony power of the utilities. I think ultimately the group conceded that scarcity of supply amplified concerns about the exercise of market power, as even the increase in gas costs did not fully explain the recent spikes. Wolak believes that encourage utilities to enter into forward purchases will reduce the exercise of real-time market power. Hogan seemed to be there with Sempra's interests in mind. He continued to promote expansion of the ISO's abilities to dispatch load as well as maintain system reliability. There was alot of discussion about forward purchase ability for utilities so as to be less subject to volatile market prices. The concerns were also discussed about the appropriateness of a distribution utility making purchasing decisions on behalf of its customers. This included discussion of separation of these functions and the default provider role. Most everyone agreed that rolling back to a regulated market was not feasible without raising other major and serious concerns, however there seemed to be support for some interim measures where cost-of-service regulation may be a good idea and that was during peak periods. All agreed that a demand response, and price signals, are important in the long-run, although not to the extent currently experienced in San Diego. Today's panel included representatives from SDG&E, SCE and PG&E, TURN, UCAN and ORA. While yesterday's panel maintained objectivity as to whether or not generators were exercising market power to the detriment of the system, today's panel made no bones about the generators being to blame. SCE/PG&E indicated their need for relief for recovery of market costs in excess of the rate freeze. SDG&E was still on the hot seat for their inaction in hedging any of their supply. SDG&E brought up their failed PBR proposal and ORA and UCAN thought that that may be one way to incent the utility to be more responsible with their purchases. UCAN discussed the Governor's direction and the potential for putting rate caps into affect for residential and small commercial. He mentioned that C&I customers are experience difficulties as well. TURN raised the need for cost-based bid caps and cost-based peaking contracts. Mike Florio, TURN, urged against any further divestitute of assets and alleged market concentration on those assets that had been divested. In fact, TURN urged the Commission to seek legislation to clarify the Commission's authority to order retention of assets. Neeper urged that part of the solution should be changing the current requirement to use the PX as the only authorized exchange, although TURN disagreed. Bruno Gaillard 08/24/2000 06:09 PM To: SF Directors, Edward Hamb/HOU/EES@EES, Jennifer Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES, Chris Hendrix/HOU/EES@EES, Greg Cordell/HOU/EES@EES, Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES, Douglas Condon/SFO/EES@EES, James M Wood/HOU/EES@EES, Gary Mirich/HOU/EES@EES, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, David Parquet@ECT, mday@gmssr.com, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Marcie Milner/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Hain@Enron, Harry Kingerski/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Karen Denne@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Daily Update/ Legislative activity - 08/24/00 Siting related bills 1. Good new - The Williamson Act passed the Senate 34-1, It should be heard at the assembly Saturday or Monday if it is not redirected to a Committee hearing. 2. There was a long meeting with Ducheny with regards to AB 970. The enviro's boycotted, they want to draft a bill with Keeley. Labor was obstructionist - they wanted to gut all the expediting siting language with regards to all facilities except for the peaking plants. Rate Cap related bills 1. The Edison Language on Rate Stabilization may not go anywhere. Edison has not found an author because of the efforts of Enron and others lobbying against it. Furthermore there are signs that Gov. Davis opposes it. 2. The Governor's office has issued a proposed language for a rate cap bill. The language however is not available as of yet. It may be released today or tomorrow. SDG&E has shown concerns over the content of the bill. They seem to think that it is worse than initially proposed by the Governor in his press release. The bill includes retroactive rate caps through 6/1/00. The rate cap could reflect Wood's rate cap proposal (6.5 cts cap on the energy component The bill does not specify who or how the costs associated with the cap will be recovered. (The reasoning is that UDCs will be more cautious in their procurement if there is uncertainty on who is responsible for the costs.) All of this is speculative. We hope to see the actual language soon. 3. Enron has been working with the Republican leadership to promote a rate cap proposal similar to the amended language we have proposed for AB2290. The bill focuses only on SDG&E customers and our major principals are the following. The Interim Rate Cap should be limited to residential and small commercial customers, plus specific institutions that have a significant public role, such as schools and hospitals. The Interim Rate Cap should be limited to the period ending December 31, 2001. The Interim Rate Cap must be structured so that any undercollection is eventually recovered from the same customers who benefit from the lower rates provided by the rate cap. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential - Mid Year Overview; [EMail-Body]= Please review the attachment and let me know if you have any changes. The final document will provide a starting place for the year end review process. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message(due to missing attachment)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE:; [EMail-Body]= Anne, Thanks. I shall join. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Labbe, Anne Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 11:17 PM To: Barkley, Tom; Bennett, Steve; Bharati, Rakesh; Chilkina, Elena; Crenshaw, Shirley; Cunningham, Lance; De, Rabi; Dupont, Anita; Feng, Youyi; Grigorov, Anguel; Halliburton, Tom; Hrgovcic, Joseph; Huang, Alex; Issler, Paulo; Kaminski, Vince J; Kiatsupaibul, Seksan; Koepke, Gwyn; Kohli, Sandeep; Krishnarao, Pinnamaneni; Lee, Bob; Lew, Jaesoo; Lin, Martin; Lu, Zimin; Lucas, Kate; Marquez, Jose; Mellacheruvu, Praveen; Moore, Kevin G.; Mujica, Mitra; Narongwanich, Wichai; Neale, Nelson; Parkhill, Kenneth; Pernoud, Christopher; Raymond, Maureen; Roberts, Mike A.; Sezgen, Osman; Shanbhogue, Vasant; Smith, William; Sokolov, Jason; Stevens, Adam; Supatgiat, Chonawee; Tamarchenko, Tanya; Walton, Leann; Yaman, Sevil; Zadorozhny, Roman; Zimmerman, Dayne Subject: As you all know, I am working with Vince to try and develop some effective communication skills programs for your group. As a result, I am hoping that one outcome will be the formation of a new Toastmasters group at Enron. Toastmasters is an organization that helps employees give better sales presentations hone their management skills work better with fellow employees offer constructive criticism accept criticism more objectively. Before I begin trying to work out all of the ""details"" of this new organization, I would like to know how many, if any, of you have ever participated in this organization or would like to join. Additionally, if you are interested in joining, please let me know your preferred meeting times (generally meetings are an hour to an hour and a half) such as at lunch or work. If you have any questions or additional suggestions as to how I can help your group meet your business objectives, please just let me know. Thanks, Anne [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Customers; [EMail-Body]= You may want to forward this to your customers. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 06/30/2001 07:23 AM --------------------------- Scott Govenar <sgovenar@govadv.com> on 06/28/2001 04:51:56 PM To: Hedy Govenar <hgovenar@govadv.com>, Mike Day <MDay@GMSSR.com>, Bev Hansen <bhansen@lhom.com>, Jeff Dasovich <jdasovic@enron.com>, Susan J Mara <smara@enron.com>, Paul Kaufman <paul.kaufman@enron.com>, Michael McDonald <Michael.McDonald@enron.com>, Rick Shapiro <rshapiro@enron.com>, Jim Steffes <james.d.steffes@enron.com>, Alan Comnes <acomnes@enron.com>, Steven Kean <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com>, Karen Denne <kdenne@enron.com>, ""Harry.Kingerski@enron.com"" <Harry.Kingerski@enron.com>, Leslie Lawner <Leslie.Lawner@enron.com>, Robert Frank <rfrank@enron.com>, Ken Smith <ken@kdscommunications.com>, Janel Guerrero <Janel.Guerrero@enron.com>, Miyung Buster <Miyung.Buster@enron.com>, Jennifer Thome <Jennifer.Thome@enron.com>, Eric Letke <eletke@enron.com>, Mary Schoen <Mary.Schoen@enron.com>, David Leboe <David.Leboe@ENRON.com>, Ban Sharma <ban.sharma@enron.com> cc: Subject: Customers The California Chamber of Commerce received a call from someone at the CPUC who requested that they send as many customers as possible to testify at Tuesday's hearing in favor of direct access. The Chamber has requested the same thing of Enron. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: SMS conference; [EMail-Body]= Shirley, I shall pay for the trip, I cannot pay for the conference. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""MacMillan, Ian"" Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 8:39 AM To: 'vkamins@enron.com' Subject: SMS conference Hi Vince. We really feel that there could be enormous benefit to your presenting at the SMS conference. So few people are actually using real options in practice and we feel that the topic is critical in these uncertain times. I am very happy to cover the conference costs out of my Chair budget - that is what the Chair is for! [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Trip to Santa Fe & California; [EMail-Body]= Liz, Frank Wolak can meet Greg and me in his office and for dinner Thursday night, August 16, at Stanford. Can Greg fly to San Francisco or San Jose from his Asset Tour trip in late afternoon on that day? If Greg can get a co plane to go San Francisco on Thursday, we could fly together to Santa Fe on Friday morning, August 17. Norman Packard can meet us on that day. I could go to San Francisco Thursday morning on a commercial flight. Vince [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Meeting with RW Beck, per Everett Chartier, 508/935-1675.  They'll
 be in a conference room to be determined.; [EMail-Body]= Dan Leff also setting up other meeting with wholesale, retail, and gov't affairs people with RW Beck.Rates discussion - Rebecca knows you won't be there. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION; [EMail-Body]= For you to add the wire instructions which are in my out box. Mark ----- Forwarded by Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT on 12/21/2000 05:52 PM ----- ""Caren S. Sweetland"" <csweetland@Gibbs-Bruns.com> 12/21/2000 03:35 PM To: ""'mark.e.haedicke@enron.com'"" <mark.e.haedicke@enron.com> cc: Subject: PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION Attached please find the Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release, edited pursuant to our discussion this morning. Only one other change has been made; Robin wanted to include the language ""or which could have been asserted"" in paragraphs 6 and 7. If you need any additional changes or have any comments, please do not hesitate to contact me. <<#94919 v3 - TVA Settlement Agreement II.wpd>> - #94919 v3 - TVA Settlement Agreement II.wpd [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= <<Concur Expense Document>> - 041601LC; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/25/2001 07:45 AM --------------------------- eserver@enron.com on 04/16/2001 10:53:15 AM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - 041601LC The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: Lisa Connolly Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: 041601LC Report Total: $280.03 Amount Due Employee: $280.03 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://xms.enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= See natural gas price article below. Our buddy Paul Carpenter has turned o= n=20 us (not to mention that he seems to be talking nonsense). How about giving= =20 him a call? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/20/2001=20 02:58 PM --------------------------- Miyung Buster@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 04/20/2001 10:22 AM To: Ann M Schmidt/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bryan Seyfried/LON/ECT@ECT,=20 dg27@pacbell.net, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron, filuntz@aol.com, James = D=20 Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Janet Butler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeannie=20 Mandelker/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe=20 Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John =20 John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen=20 Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Margaret=20 Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark=20 Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Markus Fiala/LON/ECT@ECT, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@EC= T,=20 Mike Mona L=20 Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron, Nicholas O'Day/AP/Enron@Enron, Peggy=20 Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT, Richard=20 Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sandra=20 McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Stella=20 Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Sus= an=20 J Mara/NA/Enron@Enron, Mike Roan/ENRON@enronXgate, Alex=20 Parsons/EU/Enron@Enron, Andrew Morrison/LON/ECT@ECT, lipsen@cisco.com, Jane= l=20 Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Shirley A Hudler/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kathleen=20 Sullivan/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda=20 Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Lora Sullivan/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jennifer=20 Thome/NA/Enron@Enron, jkradin@marathon-com.com,=20 syamane@marathon-com.com,=20 ken@kdscommunications.com, hgovenar@govadv.com, sgovenar@govadv.com,=20 bhansen@lhom.com, Carin Nersesian/NA/Enron@Enron cc: =20 Subject: Energy Issues Please see the following articles: Sac Bee, Fri, 4/20: ""State might balk on power: But refusing to=20 pay 'ridiculous' prices could add to crisis"" Sac Bee, Fri, 4/20: ""SMUD directors vote to hike rates: A tentative=20 increase of 19% to 27% is blamed on rising energy costs"" Sac Bee, Fri, 4/20: ""Lieberman to Bush: Help California solve power woes"" SD Union, Fri, 4/20: ""Escondido calls a halt to power plant ideas"" SD Union, Fri, 4/20: ""Inflated natural-gas prices add to energy costs,=20 expert says"" SD Union (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""Davis, Congress members call for energy price= =20 controls"" SD Union (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""Regulators open investigation into alternative= =20 power providers"" SD Union (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""Attorney general taking two energy companies to= =20 court"" LA Times, Fri, 4/20: ""Legislators Unite Over Energy Price Issue"" SF Chron, Fri, 4/20: ""Small fry among big fish in PG&E bankruptcy=20 Some unlikely businesses are listed as creditors against utility"" SF Chron (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""Developments in California"" SF Chron (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""California utility wants to boost Mohave power= =20 plant production""=20 SF Chron (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""PG&E owes money to several small businesses,=20 unlikely creditors"" SF Chron, Fri, 4/20: ""Edison pushes lawmakers to accept deal"" Mercury News, Fri, 4/20: ""Who will pay the most for power?"" Mercury News, Fri, 4/20: ""Credit-raters put state on watch"" Mercury News, Fri, 4/20: ""Power company executives going without bonuses"" Mercury News, Fri, 4/20: ""Davis and US lawmakers call for price caps on=20 power"" Mercury News, Fri, 4/20: ""Generators cutting electric output; regulators= =20 want to find out why"" OC Register, Fri, 4/20: ""FERC remains an unlikely rescuer The federal agency hews to a hands-off policy on power rates"" OC Register, Fri, 4/20: ""Lawmakers seek bigger rollbacks, can't agree on= =20 caps"" OC Register, Fri, 4/20: ""Energy notebook Assembly urges federal regulation of natural gas"" OC Register, Fri, 4/20: ""Shed light on costs"" (Commentary) Individual.com (AP), Fri, 4/20: ""End To Deregulation of Nevada Power"" Individual.com (Business wire), Fri, 4/20: ""PG&E Co. Issues Statements On= =20 the=20 Increase in the State's Cost for Power"" Indivdual.com (PR/newswire), Fri, 4/20: ""J.D. Power and Associates Reports= /=20 Nationwide=20 Decline in Customer Satisfaction of Electric Utility Service Among=20 Midsize Businesses"" Individual.com (PR/newswire), Fri, 4/20: ""Calpine to Purchase 46 General= =20 Electric Gas Turbines Turbines in Place for 70,000-megawatt Program"" --- State might balk on power: But refusing to pay 'ridiculous' prices could ad= d=20 to crisis. By Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writer (Published April 20, 2001)=20 Adding to the risk of summertime blackouts, the state water department said= =20 Thursday it might not pay ""ridiculous"" prices for electricity even if that= =20 leaves California short of power.=20 The Department of Water Resources, which has been buying electricity for th= e=20 state's two beleaguered utilities since mid-January, wouldn't spell out wha= t=20 it considers ridiculous. But if prices get too high, the state might be=20 better off ordering blackouts or implementing proposed new conservation=20 programs designed at cutting usage on short notice, said Raymond Hart, the= =20 department's deputy director in charge of power purchases.=20 Gov. Gray Davis took a different view, saying: ""We will continue to keep th= e=20 lights on. When you're fighting a forest fire, you don't say, 'Let me see,= =20 how much is this going to cost me? Maybe I can't write the check, maybe I= =20 can't put the fire out.' You put the fire out and then worry about the cost= =20 later.""=20 But Davis' spokesman, Steve Maviglio, said the Governor's Office indeed is= =20 contemplating whether to refuse to buy power at any cost. ""At what point do= es=20 the state say, 'Enough is enough'? Those scenarios are certainly under=20 discussion,"" Maviglio said.=20 The water department until recently resisted buying all the power Southern= =20 California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric Co. needed, refusing to=20 purchase electricity it deemed too costly. But lately it's had to relax tha= t=20 stance because of an order by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Har= t=20 said.=20 That April 6 order said power generators can no longer be forced to sell=20 electricity to uncreditworthy entities such as the Independent System=20 Operator, which manages the state's power grid. Because the ISO -- which ge= ts=20 its money from the utilities -- can no longer buy the power, the water=20 department is now buying all the electricity required by the utilities, Har= t=20 said. But he said the department could back off if prices get out of hand.= =20 ""If the prices just get ridiculous altogether, there's a policy call to be= =20 made, and we'll cross that bridge when we get there,"" Hart said.=20 The ISO has predicted that severe shortages could bring 34 days of rolling= =20 blackouts this summer. The potential refusal of the water department to buy= =20 ultra-expensive power could further strain the grid.=20 ""On a daily basis we're dealt a set of cards,"" said ISO spokesman Patrick= =20 Dorinson. ""It sounds like ... we're going to be handed another set of cards= ,=20 and we're going to have to try to maintain the reliability of the grid as= =20 best we can.""=20 Hart's comments came amid an increasingly rancorous debate between Davis an= d=20 PG&E over the water department's power expenditures. State spending shot up= =20 following PG&E's April 6 filing for bankruptcy protection.=20 Davis said generators began demanding a ""credit penalty"" from the water=20 department because of the PG&E bankruptcy proceedings. As a result, the=20 state's daily costs shot up last week to $73.2 million from $57.4 million i= n=20 the week before PG&E went bankrupt, the governor's office said.=20 Hart agreed, saying several generators raised their prices. ""Every time=20 there's a major hiccup in the market, such as PG&E bankruptcy or a staged= =20 alert by the ISO, there's a price run-up,"" Hart said.=20 But prices have settled down this week. After peaking at $345 a megawatt ho= ur=20 April 12, prices for north state power were at $243 on Thursday, just below= =20 what they were prior to the bankruptcy filing, according to the Enerfax new= s=20 service.=20 PG&E, however, said its bankruptcy filing had nothing to do with the state'= s=20 increased spending.=20 ""This claim is simply not accurate,"" the utility said in a memo to reporter= s.=20 Rather, the increased spending is due solely to the fact that the water=20 department is buying more units of electricity in the wake of the FERC orde= r,=20 PG&E said.=20 Regardless of the cause, the increased spending by the water department cou= ld=20 further strain the state's budget -- and complicate Davis' plan to finance= =20 the power purchases through a bond offering.=20 The state has committed $5.2 billion from its general fund for power=20 purchases since January. Those mounting purchases, along with PG&E's=20 bankruptcy filing and other energy crisis uncertainties, prompted a third= =20 Wall Street credit rating agency, Fitch, to place the state on a ""ratings= =20 watch"" this week, meaning the rating might be downgraded.=20 A downgrade could raise California's borrowing costs. All three of the=20 leading Wall Street credit agencies now have California on a ratings watch.= =20 Meanwhile, the state Public Utilities Commission on Thursday ordered an=20 investigation of why hundreds of cogenerators and other alternative energy= =20 providers haven't resumed production even though they've begun receiving=20 payments again from Edison and PG&E.=20 These generators, under contract to the utilities, provide more than 20=20 percent of the state's energy supply. Hundreds shut down, worsening=20 California's power situation, because they'd received little or no money fr= om=20 the utilities since November.=20 The PUC ordered Edison and PG&E to resume payments, starting this week, for= =20 new power deliveries.=20 But the generators say the payments aren't enough to get them back online.= =20 So PUC President Loretta Lynch said the commission will investigate whether= =20 to order Edison and PG&E to begin repaying them the hundreds of millions ow= ed=20 for past deliveries.=20 The Bee's Dale Kasler can be reached at (916) 321-1066 or dkasler@sacbee.co= m.=20 Emily Bazar of The Bee's Capitol Bureau contributed to this report.=20 --- SMUD directors vote to hike rates: A tentative increase of 19% to 27% is=20 blamed on rising energy costs. By Carrie Peyton Bee Staff Writer (Published April 20, 2001)=20 Ten years of stable electricity bills vanished in a single unanimous vote= =20 Thursday night as directors of Sacramento Municipal Utility District gave= =20 tentative approval to rate hikes ranging from 19 percent to 27 percent.=20 The new rates will go into effect immediately after a final vote, scheduled= =20 for May 3.=20 ""This is quite alarming to all of us,"" said director Peter Keat. But praisi= ng=20 the value of ""a community-owned electric company"" that provides everything= =20 from shade trees to public votes on rates, Keat said he saw no choice.=20 SMUD, which once hoped to lower electric bills this year or next as=20 deregulation took hold, was caught up in the spiraling wholesale costs that= =20 helped send Pacific Gas and Electric Co. into bankruptcy proceedings.=20 The price of natural gas, which fuels SMUD's cogeneration plants, has risen= =20 steeply.=20 Wholesale electricity, which SMUD buys to supplement power produced by its= =20 own plants, nearly tripled between October and January.=20 And the weather has been dismal. Rainfall and snowmelt that feed SMUD's=20 hydroelectric plants on the upper American River are about 53 percent of=20 normal to date.=20 But during a two-hour hearing, a small contingent of consumers asked the=20 board to reconsider.=20 ""I realize that rates have to go up, but this seems like a big percentage a= ll=20 at once,"" said Marian Ender.=20 Several criticized a 6 percent surcharge that until only a few days before= =20 had been proposed at 3 percent. Among them was Duy Tu, an engineering manag= er=20 at Intel who served on SMUD's advisory rate committee.=20 The increase ""cannot come at a worse time"" for Intel, he said, although he= =20 understands the need for it. He urged the board to act now to make more=20 electricity available in the future.=20 ""We are way too dependent on some external force to keep the lights on,"" Tu= =20 said.=20 Overall, a base rate increase averaging 16 percent will raise about $124=20 million annually for SMUD, and a special=20 6 percent surcharge will raise about $48 million in its first year. Most of= =20 the surcharge, scheduled to drop to 3 percent annually for two subsequent= =20 years, will go into an emergency fund.=20 ""We have to build back our savings account. It's been gutted,"" said directo= r=20 Susan Patterson.=20 The rate increases will fall most heavily on small commercial and large=20 industrial power users, although households with very low electricity bills= =20 will feel a sharp bite from the addition of a $5 monthly service fee.=20 The flat fee adds less than 10 percent to what was a ""typical"" residential= =20 SMUD bill of $67, but it's a 25 percent rate hike for someone whose monthly= =20 bill hovers around $20.=20 ""I just don't think that part is right,"" Ender said. ""We should only pay fo= r=20 usage.""=20 Tom Reavey took the board to task for ""unfair and unequitable"" rates that= =20 charge agriculture and small businesses less than what they cost SMUD to=20 serve, while charging homeowners and renters slightly more.=20 But board members defended going easier on rates for the pumps that run=20 farmers' wells and irrigation systems.=20 ""We all gain great benefits from living in a community that has nearby=20 agriculture,"" Keat said.=20 The new rates will apply throughout SMUD's service territory, which include= s=20 a narrow slice of southern Placer County and all but the southwestern tip o= f=20 Sacramento County. They will not=20 affect people who receive electric service from PG&E, which last month was= =20 granted a 29 percent hike by state regulators.=20 ""If you want to see a bunch of folks who are really facing some stark times= ,=20 it's PG&E customers,"" said board member Howard Posner.=20 While there is widespread speculation that PG&E's rate hikes are the first = of=20 many, Posner and other directors said they hoped Thursday's increases will = be=20 the last SMUD needs and that rates could decline in three to four years.=20 To boost conservation, both SMUD and PG&E are trying to craft rates that fa= ll=20 hardest on the heaviest household users.=20 SMUD's old residential rates were=20 divided into a baseline tier charged roughly 8 cents a kilowatt-hour in the= =20 summer and one higher tier billed at 12.7 cents a kilowatt-hour.=20 The new rates will start at 8.6 cents in the summer, rise to a middle tier = of=20 14.5 cents and top out at 16.2 cents for those who use more than 1,000=20 kilowatt-hours of electricity.=20 By comparison, PG&E has proposed to the state Public Utilities Commission= =20 that its residential rates be divided into four tiers, topping out at 27=20 cents per kilowatt-hour. A PUC decision is expected next month.=20 Under the new SMUD rate structure, including the surcharge, large industrie= s=20 will see their electric bills rise by an average of 27 percent, agricultura= l=20 rates will rise 22 percent, small commercial rates 27 percent and residenti= al=20 rates 19 percent.=20 Households that qualify for special low-income or life-support rates will p= ay=20 a smaller monthly customer charge of $3.50 and will not have to pay the=20 surcharge on their baseline electricity usage.=20 Information about qualifying for the reduced rates is available from SMUD a= t=20 (888) 742-7683.=20 The Bee's Carrie Peyton can be reached at (916) 321-1086 or=20 cpeyton@sacbee.com.=20 --- Lieberman to Bush: Help California solve power woes By Emily Bazar Bee Capitol Bureau (Published April 20, 2001)=20 On a brief visit to the capital Thursday, former Democratic vice presidenti= al=20 candidate Joe Lieberman called on President Bush to help rescue California= =20 from its deepening energy troubles.=20 After attending an early-morning prayer breakfast with legislators and Gov.= =20 Gray Davis, the U.S. senator from Connecticut met with them to discuss the= =20 federal government's role in easing California's electricity woes.=20 Lieberman, a potential Democratic presidential candidate in 2004, warned th= at=20 if the Bush administration does not act quickly in California, the rest of= =20 the nation will succumb to economic ripple effects.=20 ""No American leader can disengage from a problem that so profoundly affects= =20 our largest state,"" Lieberman told reporters after meeting with the=20 Democratic governor. ""I call on the president to get involved. ... We can't= =20 sit back in Washington and let California suffer.""=20 Sacramento was the last California stop for the senator, who has spent thre= e=20 days at fund-raisers and speaking engagements across the state.=20 In talks with lawmakers about the energy crisis, Lieberman told them he's= =20 strongly urging the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to impose temporar= y=20 caps on the wholesale price of electricity.=20 But the commission's chairman, Curt Hebert, is a fierce free-market advocat= e=20 who has long opposed price caps and has not indicated he will change his=20 mind.=20 If FERC doesn't act soon, Lieberman said he will support legislation=20 sponsored by Sen.=20 Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., to force FERC to impose temporary caps.=20 He expects Feinstein to introduce her legislation early next week.=20 Lieberman's first stop Thursday morning was the California Prayer Breakfast= ,=20 an annual springtime gathering of religious and political leaders.=20 At the breakfast, speakers told Davis they would pray for him as he navigat= es=20 the state's energy crisis. Before launching into a song from ""The Scarlet= =20 Pimpernel,"" singer Steve Amerson called on the governor to tell Californian= s=20 the truth throughout the ordeal.=20 Davis was solemn in his remarks, and his calm demeanor belied his behavior= =20 Tuesday, when he reportedly erupted in an obscene=20 tirade during a closed-door meeting with Senate Republicans.=20 ""I'm going to tell you the truth, Steve. We have a problem,"" Davis said to= =20 the singer. ""But God has provided a path out of that problem if we all do o= ur=20 part.""=20 The Bee's Emily Bazar can be reached at (916) 326-5540 or ebazar@sacbee.com= .=20 --- Escondido calls a halt to power plant ideas=20 Temporary step will give it time for overall planning By Jonathan Heller=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 April 19, 2001=20 ESCONDIDO -- After being inundated with proposals to build power plants in= =20 the past few months, the City Council yesterday called a timeout.=20 The council voted 3-2 to suspend consideration for 30 to 60 days of any=20 proposals to build energy generating facilities in the city. During that=20 period, city staff members will develop a comprehensive approval process th= at=20 will factor in the cumulative effects of such plants.=20 ""We need to step back and look at the direction we're going in,"" City=20 Councilwoman June Rady said.=20 The city has been juggling four power-plant proposals since January:=20 ?Sempra Energy Resources wants to build a 500-megawatt plant in the southwe= st=20 part of Escondido. It has not yet filed formal plans with the city Planning= =20 Department.=20 ?Ramco Inc. of San Diego has received approval to build a 44-megawatt plant= =20 on Mission Avenue in west Escondido.=20 ?CalPeak LLC of San Diego has filed plans to build a 49.5-megawatt plant on= =20 Enterprise Street, not far from the Ramco plant.=20 ?Another firm has expressed interest in building a 49.5-megawatt plant on= =20 city property on West Washington Avenue, but has not submitted plans yet.= =20 Yesterday's decision means that all the projects -- except the=20 already-approved Ramco plant -- are now on hold, and no new proposals can b= e=20 filed with the city.=20 The decision halts a mad dash by developers to bring power plants on line b= y=20 the summer to take advantage of special incentives offered by Gov. Gray=20 Davis.=20 Mayor Lori Holt Pfeiler and Councilwoman Marie Waldron opposed the move. Th= ey=20 said it would only delay much-needed solutions to the region's energy crisi= s,=20 which is expected to come to a head this summer.=20 ""If (plant developers) have a chance of getting power on line by the summer= ,=20 we should not be the ones to stand in the way,"" Pfeiler said.=20 Waldron argued that cities have to be more proactive at this time, not less= .=20 ""The governor is not solving the problem,"" Waldron said. ""It's up to local= =20 governments to try to do what they can.""=20 Joe Rowley, Sempra's project development director, said he doubted the=20 council's decision would upset his plans.=20 ""Our timetable is still not fully defined,"" Rowley said. ""Obviously there's= a=20 lot of work we have to do to get to the point where an application can be= =20 processed.""=20 Meanwhile, council members listened to two people who made impassioned plea= s=20 for the city to consider alternative power sources.=20 David Drake, a service architect for SAIC in La Jolla, urged the council to= =20 think about solar power. There is more than enough available land -- and=20 rooftop space -- to install enough solar panels to power the whole city, he= =20 said.=20 ""Escondido has 65 square miles,"" he said. ""But 2,500 acres could be employe= d=20 to power us forever without any reliance on imported energy.""=20 Local inventor Arnold Lund urged the council to consider energy generated= =20 from windmills.=20 The council also voted to work with San Marcos in exploring ways to seek=20 inexpensive, stable energy rates.=20 The hope is that the two cities can forge a deal with Sempra for cheaper=20 rates. Sempra officials have said they are willing to discuss possible rate= =20 deals with the city.=20 To buy power directly, a city has to adopt a special legal arrangement, suc= h=20 as forming a municipal utility district. San Diego Gas & Electric is the on= ly=20 energy service provider in the county that buys and sells power from the=20 regional energy grid.=20 San Marcos has formed a municipal utility district but has not signed any= =20 deals to buy power. It would be a more lengthy process for Escondido to for= m=20 such a district. San Marcos is a charter city and has more flexibility unde= r=20 the state Constitution. Escondido is a general-law city.=20 --- Inflated natural-gas prices add to energy costs, expert says=20 Windfall-profits tax gets Davis' backing By Bill Ainsworth=20 UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER=20 April 19, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO -- Federal regulators' failure to stop what they described as=20 anti-competitive practices in the natural-gas industry added $750 million t= o=20 Southern California Edison's cost of electricity, a consultant estimated=20 yesterday.=20 The consultant, Paul Carpenter of the Brattle Group, spoke to an Assembly= =20 subcommittee investigating why California pays the highest natural-gas pric= es=20 in the nation. Natural gas is a critical part of the electricity crisis=20 because most of the state's generating plants run on natural gas.=20 Natural-gas prices have soared throughout the nation, but the bench mark=20 price paid at California's border has been double that paid at other bench= =20 mark locations throughout the nation for months, according to figures=20 released by the Assembly Subcommittee on Energy Oversight.=20 Next week, Carpenter plans to testify at hearings in Washington, D.C., on= =20 behalf of Southern California Edison and the California Public Utilities=20 Commission, which are asking federal regulators to intervene.=20 The giant utility and the state regulatory body contend that a sweetheart= =20 deal between El Paso Natural Gas and El Paso Merchant Energy gave the siste= r=20 companies enough market power to artificially raise the price of natural ga= s=20 that flows into Southern California from Texas.=20 El Paso owns the major pipeline bringing natural gas from fields in New=20 Mexico and Texas to Southern California. El Paso Merchant Energy is an=20 unregulated sister company.=20 Carpenter called the prices paid in Southern California ""simply=20 unprecedented"" in the United States. He estimated that the sister companies= =20 manipulated the market enough to add $2.60 to the price of a million Britis= h=20 thermal units of gas.=20 In addition, he said, El Paso Merchant Energy owns part of 20 smaller power= =20 plants, ""qualifying facilities"" that get paid based on the price of natural= =20 gas in California. The higher natural-gas prices increase the company's=20 revenues, Carpenter said.=20 El Paso company officials are expected to testify in front of the Assembly= =20 subcommittee today, but in proceedings before the federal regulators they= =20 have denied any sweetheart deal.=20 In a report they commissioned, the company blamed the higher natural-gas=20 prices in Southern California on increased demand and constraints on pipeli= ne=20 capacity.=20 Gov. Gray Davis, meanwhile, gave his strongest endorsement yet to a=20 windfall-profits tax on generators as a Senate committee chaired by Joseph= =20 Dunn, D-Laguna Niguel, began a series of hearings to probe possible price= =20 gouging by generators.=20 ""I believe the Legislature would be well within its prerogative to insist= =20 that generators receive an appropriate reduction, whether it's 20 percent o= r=20 any other number the Legislature hit upon,"" Davis said.=20 Senate Democrats, Davis said, will form a special committee to help work on= =20 his plan for the state purchase of the transmission system of Southern=20 California Edison for $2.76 billion, in exchange for state aid in paying of= f=20 the utilities' debt.=20 The governor said he told Senate Democrats, a number of whom are skeptical = of=20 the plan, that Edison's parent firm has agreed to back a $3 billion upgrade= =20 of the neighborhood distribution system retained by Edison and to return a= =20 $400 million tax refund to the utility.=20 At the natural-gas hearing yesterday, state officials said that after El Pa= so=20 Merchant Energy bought a significant part of the pipeline capacity from its= =20 sister company, it withheld natural gas to drive prices up.=20 ""Marketers have gamed the system and figured out how to hoard capacity and= =20 undermine competition,"" said Harvey Morris, an attorney for the California= =20 Public Utilities Commission.=20 State regulators want the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which=20 regulates natural gas, to open the market to more competitors.=20 But the commission has repeatedly rejected similar complaints in the past. = On=20 March 28, FERC ruled that the affiliates did not arrange a sweetheart deal.= =20 ""The fact that El Paso Merchant controls a large volume of capacity does no= t,=20 in and of itself, render the El Paso contracts unjust, unreasonable or undu= ly=20 discriminatory,"" FERC ruled.=20 In other cases involving natural gas, federal regulators acknowledged that= =20 certain contract provisions allowed anti-competitive behavior, but they=20 approved those contracts anyway.=20 Lawmakers said they were puzzled by the federal regulators' lack of action.= =20 ""It baffles me that we've found the problem -- anti-competitive behavior an= d=20 market gaming, but there's no cure because federal regulators won't take=20 action,"" said Assemblyman Juan Vargas, D-San Diego. Staff writer Ed Mendel contributed to this report.=20 --- Davis, Congress members call for energy price controls=20 By Gary Gentile ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 April 19, 2001=20 LOS ANGELES =01) Gov. Gray Davis and a bipartisan group of the state's=20 congressional delegates agreed Thursday that the federal government must ac= t=20 to control the wholesale price of energy.=20 ""For us the big issue is how we address the unjust rates,"" said Rep. Mary= =20 Bono, R-Palm Springs. ""I believe we are up to it and will handle it as soon= =20 as we can.""=20 Davis met behind closed doors with 27 congressional representatives,=20 including Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., at the Sheraton Gateway Hotel ne= ar=20 Los Angeles International Airport. He said after the 90-minute meeting that= =20 the group discussed a threefold approach to the state's power crisis.=20 The strategy includes requiring federal agencies in the state, including=20 military facilities, to conserve energy this summer and asking the Federal= =20 Energy Regulatory Commission to find a way to control the wholesale price o= f=20 electricity and increase the flow of natural gas into California.=20 Davis repeated his criticism of federal regulators for not acting sooner to= =20 control the wholesale price of electricity and said he was hopeful the=20 state's congressional delegation could work together to find a bipartisan= =20 solution.=20 ""We agreed there has to be a mechanism to reduce the wholesale price of=20 electricity,"" Davis said. ""We have agreed to work cooperatively across part= y=20 lines to find ways we can reduce those costs. We're in this together. Party= =20 doesn't matter. Finding a solution does matters.""=20 ""To have the price of moving natural gas go up by a factor of 10 or more is= =20 absurd,"" said Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Los Angeles. ""So many of our colleagues= =20 are telling us it's California's fault, but California does not have the=20 authority to regulate these two items.""=20 The group also talked about easing environmental regulations during power= =20 emergencies to allow small companies and even military bases to run small= =20 generators.=20 ""If you have generators in the state, regardless of what they run on, becau= se=20 we're entering this emergency period in the summertime and will be short of= =20 power, you should be allowed to turn them on,"" said Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-E= l=20 Cajon.=20 Hunter said small generators could produce about 500 to 600 megawatts durin= g=20 a power emergency if exemptions to various clear air requirements could be= =20 made.=20 Officials discussed ways to allow FERC to control wholesale prices without= =20 violating ideological positions staked out by high-ranking Republican=20 officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney, who oppose price controls= =20 and favor free markets.=20 Rep Jane Harman, D-Torrance, said she would support a finding by FERC that= =20 power wholesalers should not be allowed to charge market rates, but rather= =20 rates more tightly pegged to the cost of generating power.=20 ""We're not talking about artificial caps,"" Harman said. ""We should insist= =20 that the FERC not renew their market-based rate authority. And if we go tha= t=20 route, it takes us to the same place and avoids the ideological fight.""=20 The meeting did not result in any specific proposals but participants prais= ed=20 the bipartisan nature of the talks and said it would result in a unified=20 approach in Washington.=20 ""We have a responsibility to make sure the federal government takes it's ro= le=20 seriously,"" said Rep Gary Condit, D-Modesto. ""We clearly understand what ou= r=20 assignment is today and I think we're going to work together in a bipartisa= n=20 way to get that done.""=20 --- Regulators open investigation into alternative power providers=20 By Michael Liedtke ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 April 19, 2001=20 SAN FRANCISCO =01) Hoping to prevent California's bleak power outlook from= =20 becoming even darker, state regulators Thursday launched an investigation= =20 into why alternative energy providers aren't producing more electricity.=20 With the action, the California Public Utilities Commission hopes to=20 determine if legitimate business reasons or ulterior motives underlie the= =20 reduced output by an independent group of small generators that provides mu= ch=20 of the state's energy.=20 These alternative generators =01) known in the industry as ""qualifying=20 facilities,"" or QFs =01) have been scaling back or shutting down as debts o= wed=20 by California's two largest utilities pile up. The QFs are owed an estimate= d=20 $700 million by bankrupt Pacific Gas and Electric and financially crippled= =20 Southern California Edison.=20 Some QFs say the unpaid bills have forced them to defer much-needed=20 maintenance, leading to more equipment breakdowns that reduce electricity= =20 output. Other QFs say they simply can't afford to keep operating.=20 The PUC is worried some QFs are trying to take advantage of the California= =20 crisis to get out of long-term contracts that require them to sell=20 electricity at prices far below the current market rate. Several QFs are=20 suing to get out of those contracts so they can cash in on the open market,= =20 said PUC Commissioner Carl Wood.=20 All the QFs want is to be paid for bills that date back as far as November,= =20 said Jack Raudy, a spokesman for the Renewable Energy Creditors Committee,= =20 which consists of 10 alternative power producers owed a combined $410=20 million. Those 10 generators produce about 3,000 megawatts =01) which Raudy= said=20 was enough electricity for 3 million homes.=20 ""We are outraged (by the PUC's investigation),"" Raudy said. ""We have heard = so=20 much rhetoric over the past five months and still haven't been paid a dime.= =20 That is what we are worried about.""=20 Raudy estimated his group is operating at about 95 percent of capacity.=20 After the temporary closure of several QFs contributed to rolling blackouts= =20 around the state last month, the PUC ordered PG&E and SoCal Edison to begin= =20 paying the generators for the energy purchased since March 27.=20 But the order has done nothing to help the QFs recover the past debts. The= =20 QFs are now in line in bankruptcy court with 30,000 creditors owed money by= =20 PG&E, which expects its unpaid bills to rise to $5.5 billion by the end of= =20 this month.=20 If the QFs get desperate enough, they may decide to push SoCal Edison into = an=20 involuntary bankruptcy case, Raudy said.=20 PUC Commissioner Geoffrey Brown defended the alternative energy providers= =20 during Thursday's hearing.=20 ""Any QFs that are not operating right now are doing so for financial reason= s,=20 not to game the system,"" he said.=20 California will need all the power that it can get from the QFs this summer= =20 when rolling blackouts threaten to become a daily occurrence.=20 Combined, the QFs account for about one-fourth of California's total power= =20 capacity, according to the PUC.=20 The QF output will become even more essential this summer because Californi= a=20 won't be able to import as much electricity from the Pacific Northwest as i= t=20 has in the past. A lack of rain has left the Pacific Northwest's=20 hydroelectric supply at its second-lowest level ever, and it could diminish= =20 to a record low if the recent drought continues.=20 ""We are not going to be able to look to the Pacific Northwest to meet our= =20 needs,"" Wood said after reviewing a new report on the hydroelectricity=20 supply.=20 The looming blackouts and electricity price increases caused by California'= s=20 energy crisis is exasperating businesses and households across the state.= =20 Fearing the frustration could boil over into terrorism, the PUC Thursday=20 installed metal detectors to screen everyone attending the agency's public= =20 meetings.=20 In other moves Thursday, the PUC tabled a scheduled vote on whether the=20 regulators should become more involved in PG&E's bankruptcy case. The San= =20 Francisco-based utility is challenging the PUC's authority in the case. The= =20 PUC now expects to take up the matter at a May 3 meeting.=20 --- Attorney general taking two energy companies to court=20 ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 April 19, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) Attorney General Bill Lockyer wants a judge to order two po= wer=20 generators to hand over documents he subpoenaed last month as part of his= =20 investigation into the state's electricity market.=20 Reliant Energy and Mirant Corp. failed to produce certain documents by Marc= h=20 19, despite assurances that the sensitive documents would be kept=20 confidential, Lockyer said Thursday.=20 Lockyer filed the request for a hearing in San Francisco Superior Court.=20 Lockyer says the companies are concerned the documents wouldn't be kept=20 confidential, even though he says they've been assured the sensitive=20 documents would not be released.=20 The attorney general is investigating allegations of price manipulation in= =20 the state's electricity market that may have led to soaring power costs.=20 Mirant spokesman Bill O'Neel said the company is cooperating with the=20 attorney general's office.=20 ""At this moment, we have our legal team working to pull together the=20 documentation the attorney general has requested,"" O'Neel said.=20 Mirant Thursday joined a complaint filed by Reliant last week in Los Angele= s=20 Superior Court. That petition seeks assurance that the attorney general wil= l=20 keep proprietary information confidential to prevent any competitive damage= ,=20 said Reliant spokesman Richard Wheatley.=20 ""We're committed to cooperating with the investigation that Attorney Genera= l=20 Lockyer is conducting,"" Wheatley said. ""It's the understanding of our=20 management that we do not have the proper assurance that the information wi= ll=20 be kept confidential.""=20 --- Legislators Unite Over Energy Price Issue=20 Power: Bipartisan congressional delegation called together by Davis says U.= S.=20 must step in to protect state from manipulation by suppliers.=20 By MITCHELL LANDSBERG and MIGUEL BUSTILLO, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????This may be the surest sign yet of the depth of California's energy=20 crisis: A bipartisan cross-section of the state's congressional delegation,= =20 brought together Thursday by Gov. Gray Davis, not only agreed about the=20 severity of the problem but also about the need for swift federal=20 intervention.=20 ?????""This meeting did not have the word 'Democrat' or 'Republican' used=20 once,"" Rep. Darrell E. Issa (R-Vista), said of the unusual spirit of=20 cooperation at the meeting near Los Angeles International airport. ?????Members of both parties said the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission= =20 must slash wholesale electricity prices so California utilities can once=20 again afford to buy power. Since January, the state government has been=20 buying electricity on their behalf, as skyrocketing wholesale prices put=20 Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern California Edison billions of dolla= rs=20 into debt and many power suppliers refused to sell to them; PG&E has since= =20 filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. ?????Although the Bush administration has said repeatedly that it is strong= ly=20 opposed to price caps, and FERC has refused to grant them, California=20 Republicans at the energy meeting said they are optimistic that the=20 administration will agree to some other form of price regulation. They=20 brushed aside the notion that such regulations might conflict with their=20 ideological belief in a free market. ?????""This is not a free-enterprise situation,"" Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Alpin= e)=20 said after the meeting. ""In fact, it's just the opposite."" ?????Specifically citing the huge disparity between natural gas prices=20 charged to California and those charged in other Western states, he said=20 California clearly has been the victim of unreasonably high energy costs.= =20 Under federal law, the FERC must regulate the prices of companies if it fin= ds=20 they are exerting ""market power"" to drive prices to unreasonable levels. ?????Executives from two Texas energy companies, meeting with legislators i= n=20 Sacramento, denied Thursday that they had caused natural gas prices in=20 California to artificially skyrocket by hoarding access to a critical=20 pipeline into the state. ?????After the extraordinary meeting in Los Los Angeles, Rep. Brad Sherman= =20 (D-Sherman Oaks) said the biggest disagreement between California Democrats= =20 and Republicans appeared to be their relative faith--or lack thereof--in th= e=20 ability of President Bush and his administration to help California. There= =20 has been much speculation that Bush, who lost California in November, has n= o=20 political motive to help the state. ?????""We Democrats,"" said Sherman, ""hope very much that our skepticism is= =20 proven wrong."" ?????Davis--who sat flanked by Democratic U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein and th= e=20 governor's newly appointed chief energy advisor, S. David Freeman--said he= =20 used the meeting mainly to discuss the importance of conservation by=20 Californians this summer and to ask the congressional delegation to pitch i= n.=20 Five Republicans and more than a dozen Democrats attended the gathering. ?????Feinstein said Thursday that she has asked for a third time to meet wi= th=20 Bush to discuss the energy situation. Meeting with Times reporters and=20 editors Wednesday, she described a recent meeting with Vice President Dick= =20 Cheney in which, she said, he ""ignored"" her appeal for federal assistance.= =20 ?????Feinstein has been among those critical of natural gas companies, sayi= ng=20 they appear to have constricted access to a California-bound pipeline to ru= n=20 up prices. ?????The Brattle Group, a respected consulting firm, alleged Wednesday befo= re=20 an Assembly committee that Dynegy Inc. and El Paso Natural Gas Co. had=20 manipulated the market by charging so much for the rights to their pipeline= =20 capacity that they had, in effect, withheld access to it. ?????That action, the experts said, directly forced companies trying to=20 deliver gas to California to look for alternatives, clogging other pipeline= s=20 and causing a surge in prices. ?????The explanation, El Paso executives said, was simple: Demand for gas= =20 soared in California because generators that use gas to make electricity=20 increased production last year in response to the energy crisis. ?????""We're not withholding capacity--no one is,"" said El Paso Merchant=20 Energy President Ralph Eads. ""With these prices, you want to sell every=20 molecule."" ?????In other developments Thursday: ?????* The agreement between Davis and Edison International to return its= =20 ailing utility arm to financial health is in ""deep trouble and could be=20 rejected by legislators,"" the Standard & Poor's credit rating agency said i= n=20 a note to clients, citing legislative and other sources. A rejection of the= =20 deal ""would be a humiliating setback for the governor,"" S&P said. ?????The agreement calls for, among other things, the sale of Edison's=20 transmission grid to the state for $2.76 billion and the sale of $2 billion= =20 in bonds--both designed to pay off the utility's huge electricity debt.=20 Edison agreed to several constraints, including the sale of electricity to= =20 the state at prices tied to the cost of producing power. ?????Since they returned Monday from a two-week recess, state legislators= =20 have been sharply critical of the Edison agreement and have indicated a=20 desire to tinker with aspects of the deal. Some lawmakers have said publicl= y=20 that a bankruptcy protection filing by Edison, like that of PG&E, might not= =20 be such a dire outcome. ?????But a senior Edison executive said it is ""way too early"" to give up on= =20 passage of the proposal, which legislators have not yet seen in official fo= rm. ?????""There is an education process to do here,"" the executive said of the= =20 highly detailed 38-page document. ""The legislators should be asking=20 questions. That is appropriate."" ?????* The Public Utilities Commission voted to investigate whether=20 alternative energy providers violated contractual agreements by withholding= =20 supplies from PG&E and Edison, which owe them hundreds of millions of dolla= rs. ?????The action, Commissioner Carl W. Wood said, was prompted in part by=20 lawsuits some providers have filed seeking release from their contracts wit= h=20 the cash-starved utilities. The producers of solar, wind and geothermal=20 energy account for more than 25% of California's electricity supply. ?????""The question is whether we will be able to rely on them in the long,= =20 hot days of summer,"" Wood said. ?????Jack Raudy of the Renewable Energy Creditors Committee said the PUC=20 needs to address the $700 million the producers are owed. ""All we have gott= en=20 is rhetoric from the governor, the PUC and the utilities,"" he said. ?????* An $850-million plan to entice Californians to conserve precious=20 megawatts appears to be running into roadblocks, compounding predictions by= =20 state officials of tighter than expected energy supplies in May and June. ?????Davis signed the conservation spending package last week, earmarking= =20 $242 million of the new funds for the Public Utilities Commission to=20 distribute to the state's investor-owned utilities to support existing=20 conservation programs. ?????But Barbara Hale, director of the PUC's Division of Strategic Planning= ,=20 said Thursday that since Pacific Gas & Electric Co. filed for bankruptcy=20 protection April 6, the utility has stopped releasing conservation funds. ?????Hale, testifying before a state Senate committee, said PG&E's=20 decision--coupled with the threat that Southern California Edison could=20 follow a similar route to U.S. Bankruptcy Court--has complicated her agency= 's=20 efforts. ?????PG&E spokeswoman Staci Homrig said her company plans to petition the= =20 Bankruptcy Court to have the conservation funds designated as a trust and= =20 separated from assets tied up in the bankruptcy proceedings. She said if th= e=20 court denies the request, PG&E would ask to be permitted to pay the expense= s=20 anyway. The process, she added, could take about a month--too long in the= =20 view of some legislators, given increasingly gloomy energy forecasts for la= te=20 spring and early summer. ?????Deputy Director Bob Therkelsen of the California Energy Commission sai= d=20 his agency had been counting on a number of small power producers to bolste= r=20 their output during that period. But he said some producers did not purchas= e=20 the necessary equipment because PG&E and Edison have failed to pay them in= =20 full for earlier electricity deliveries. ?????""It's not a huge amount,"" he said of the anticipated production=20 shortfall, ""but every little bit helps."" ---=20 ?????Landsberg reported from Los Angeles, Bustillo from Sacramento. Times= =20 staff writers Nancy Rivera Brooks in Los Angeles, Carl Ingram and Julie=20 Tamaki in Sacramento and Tim Reiterman in San Francisco contributed to this= =20 story. Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 --- Small fry among big fish in PG&E bankruptcy=20 Some unlikely businesses are listed as creditors against utility=20 Steve Rubenstein, Chuck Squatriglia, Chronicle Staff Writers Friday, April 20, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /20/M N185589.DTL=20 A San Francisco ice cream parlor, a karate studio and a costume shop are al= l=20 in the same boat, and that goes for a Divisadero Street psychiatrist, too.= =20 They're all in the fortunate position of having money coming to them.=20 And they're all in the tough spot of having that money owed by the sort-of= =20 bankrupt Pacific Gas and Electric Co.=20 Many of the 47,894 creditors that PG&E owes money to, according to a list= =20 filed with the bankruptcy judge, are banks, power companies, lawyers and th= e=20 like.=20 But a surprising number are businesses that, at first blush, might seem=20 unlikely to be power company creditors. Many businesses -- like the ACT=20 costume rental shop -- didn't know or had forgotten that PG&E had run up a= =20 tab.=20 And since the list didn't say how much they're owed, businesses had to gues= s.=20 ""How about that?"" said costume shop manager Callie Floor, when told she had= =20 PG&E money coming to her.=20 Floor, checking her books, said it looks like PG&E forgot to pay its $100= =20 bill to cover a costume rental for a corporate dress-up party in 1992.=20 ""We rent a lot of costumes for corporate events,"" she said. ""That's probabl= y=20 what it was.""=20 Psychiatrist Richard Lieberman says he does not know why or how much PG&E= =20 owes him.=20 ""But I'll take it,"" he said. ""PG&E has taken advantage of the consumer for = so=20 long. As far as I'm concerned, PG&E can go under and stay under.""=20 Of course, PG&E may wind up paying pennies on the dollar, if anything,=20 because that's how bankruptcies work. The notion is depressing, which=20 psychiatrists are used to.=20 KARATE STUDIO GETS HIT Karate master Scott Morton, whose Karate One studio on Van Ness Avenue is= =20 also a creditor, said karate is all about fairness and integrity, which PG&= E=20 seems to be even shorter on than cash.=20 ""I think the bankruptcy stinks,"" Morton said. ""All the money is going aroun= d=20 and around, it's all the same company.""=20 The karate studio conducted a self-defense class for about a dozen workers = at=20 PG&E headquarters. Morton, a black belt who does not take treachery lightly= ,=20 said he was ""pretty sure"" the check cleared, but maybe not.=20 NO BIG DEAL FOR SOME At Beauchamp's Welding and Repair in Petaluma, owner Dean Beauchamp wasn't= =20 concerned.=20 ""They don't owe us enough to worry about,"" he said. ""Less than $100, I'd=20 guess.""=20 Beauchamp's shop does small jobs for the big utility. ""They've been really= =20 good about sending us a check. Once in a great while, something will get=20 misplaced, and I guess that's how our name got on the list.""=20 Yolanda Fletcher, the owner of Red Shoes Slide Service, says the utility=20 probably owes her about $100 for preparing some photographs for a corporate= =20 slide show.=20 Larry Mitchell, proprietor of the award-winning Mitchell's Ice Cream shop o= n=20 San Jose Avenue, believes that PG&E may owe him $500 for a corporate ice=20 cream social.=20 ""That would cover the ice cream, the toppings, the dishes and the spoons,"" = he=20 said.=20 The utility's rocky road may be metaphorical, but an ice cream store's rock= y=20 road is the real thing, he said, and being owed $500 by a bankrupt company = is=20 not peaches and cream.=20 UNEXPECTED NAMES The list of creditors also includes such strange bedfellows as the San=20 Francisco Fire Department, the Yosemite Fund, The Chronicle and PG&E's own= =20 library petty cash fund. Perhaps the strangest bedfellow of all is the=20 perpetual PG&E foe known as TURN, or The Utility Reform Network, which stan= ds=20 to lose thousands of dollars in state-mandated legal fees from PG&E for its= =20 work as an ""intervener,"" or utility watchdog.=20 Among the utility's more sensible business partners is the Beale Street=20 sandwich shop a few steps from the main entrance to PG&E's headquarters=20 building in San Francisco.=20 Unlike the big banks and power companies that are on the hook for millions,= =20 proprietor Kenneth Chen does business with PG&E on a strictly pay-as-you-go= =20 business.=20 Chen, the owner of Cafe Leah at 25 Beale St., is often hired to send up a $= 40=20 tray of sandwiches to PG&E corporate officers. When he does so, he insists = on=20 cash up front because PG&E, who is the restaurant's landlord, insists on ca= sh=20 every month from Chen.=20 ""That's the way we've always done it, payment right away,"" he said. ""That w= ay=20 there's no hassle later on.""=20 E-mail Steve Rubenstein at srubenstein@sfchronicle.com and Chuck Squatrigli= a=20 at ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 --- Developments in California's energy crisis=20 The Associated Press Friday, April 20, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate1 004EDT0161.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 , , -- (04-20) 07:04 PDT Developments in California's energy crisis:=20 FRIDAY:< ?-- The state remains free of power alerts as reserves stay above = 7 percent. ?-- Southern California Edison plans a 1:30 p.m. conference call= with its ?creditors. ?-- Edison executives discuss the state's move to buy= thier transmission lines ?at a 9:30 a.m. briefing in Sacramento. ?< ?THURS= DAY:<=20 -- The Public Utility Commission launches an investigation into whether a k= ey=20 block of independent generators are purposely keeping their plants off line= .=20 -- The commission tables until May 3 a vote on whether the PUC should becom= e=20 more involved in Pacific Gas & Electric's bankruptcy case. The San=20 Francisco-based utility is challenging the PUC's authority in the case.=20 -- Texas-based natural gas companies defend themselves before an Assembly= =20 subcommittee against accusations they created a virtual monopoly on gas=20 flowing into California and used it to jack up prices sharply.=20 -- Attorney General Bill Lockyer says he will go to court to force two=20 electricity generators to hand over documents he subpoenaed as part of his= =20 probe of the state's electricity market.=20 -- Gov. Gray Davis and a bipartisan group of the state's congressional=20 delegates agree that the federal government must act to control the wholesa= le=20 price of energy, but offer no specific proposals.=20 -- The Assembly passes a resolution asking the federal government to regula= te=20 the price of natural gas, which has been deregulated since 1992. The Assemb= ly=20 also approves a bill to encourage natural gas exploration in the tidelands= =20 off Long Beach. Both measures go to the Senate.=20 -- The Senate approves a resolution asking Congress and the president to le= t=20 California use daylight-saving time year-round to help lower energy use. Th= e=20 measure now moves to the Assembly. A bill pending in Congress would give=20 Western states the authority to expand daylight-saving time.=20 -- The Electric Power Supply Association tells the Federal Energy Regulator= y=20 Commission that the California Independent System Operator, which runs the= =20 state's power grid, is not independent enough. The association alleges in a= =20 FERC filing that the ISO favors the state over electricity generators in it= s=20 actions and rule-making.=20 -- The California Energy Commission allows Pacific Gas & Electric Corp. to= =20 build a $350 million power plant in San Diego County capable of supplying= =20 electricity to 500,000 homes.=20 -- The Escondido City Council votes to suspend for 30 to 60 days its=20 consideration of proposals by developers trying to build plants before peak= =20 summer demand. The council wants to develop a comprehensive approval proces= s=20 that looks at the cumulative effect of such plants.=20 -- Edison International's stock closes at $10.98, down 42 cents, while stoc= k=20 in PG&E's parent closes down 31 cents at $8.73.=20 -- The state remains free of power alerts as reserves stay above 7 percent.= =20 <=20 WHAT'S NEXT:< ?-- Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra, = the parent ?company of San Diego Gas and Electric Co., to buy the utility's= transmission ?lines. Davis says he expects to have an agreement within two= weeks. ?-- An Assembly subcommittee meets Monday to discuss bills aimed at= improving ?California's natural gas market. ?-- Senate Select Committee to= Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale ?Energy Market continues i= ts investigation next week. ?< ?THE PROBLEM:<=20 High demand, high wholesale energy costs, transmission glitches and a tight= =20 supply worsened by scarce hydroelectric power in the Northwest and=20 maintenance at aging California power plants are all factors in California'= s=20 electricity crisis.=20 Edison and PG&E say they've lost nearly $14 billion since June to high=20 wholesale prices that the state's electricity deregulation law bars them fr= om=20 passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs= =20 from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection= =20 April 6.=20 Electricity and natural gas suppliers, scared off by the two companies' poo= r=20 credit ratings, are refusing to sell to them, leading the state in January = to=20 start buying power for the utilities' nearly 9 million residential and=20 business customers. The state is also buying power for a third investor-own= ed=20 utility, San Diego Gas & Electric, which is in better financial shape than= =20 much larger Edison and PG&E but also struggling with high wholesale power= =20 costs.=20 The Public Utilities Commission has raised rates up to 46 percent to help= =20 finance the state's multibillion-dollar power-buying.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 --- California utility wants to boost Mohave power plant production=20 Friday, April 20, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 926EDT0156.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 (04-20) 06:26 PDT BULLHEAD CITY, Ariz. (AP) -- With many opposed to allowin= g=20 Southern California Edison to increase power production at the Mohave=20 Generating Station, the City Council wants Nevada regulators to meet here.= =20 The plant Edison operates is located across the Colorado River in Laughlin,= =20 Nev. Edison is seeking a variance that would allow it to exceed the current= =20 cap of 70 percent of the plant's capacity and to do so for more than 20=20 hours.=20 ``We just want to do this in dire circumstances to avoid the rolling=20 blackouts (California has experienced recently),'' Edison spokesman Steve= =20 Hansen said.=20 Any is too much for former City Councilman Victor Urso.=20 ``That plant is one of the worst air pollution violators in the United Stat= es=20 already, and now they want variances to do even more damage,'' Urso said.= =20 Mohave County Supervisor Tom Sockwell, who presents the Bullhead City area,= =20 doesn't see it that way.=20 ``They'll only run it up to full power for very short periods, and we need= =20 that for the power shortages,'' Sockwell said this week. ``We've already go= t=20 pollution anyway, so what's another hour of a darker plume every now and=20 then?''=20 Rick Moore of the Flagstaff-based Grand Canyon Trust, which monitors the=20 plant's operation, said the plant exceeded its permissible emissions level= =20 1,200 times during the last calendar year. The trust sued, and the company= =20 was fined $180,000.=20 The City Council wants the Nevada Environmental Commission to meet in=20 Laughlin next month rather than in Carson City so members can hear local=20 opponents of Edison's request.=20 Hansen said the commission approved a variance last year but that the plant= =20 exceeded the emissions limit for only six minutes.=20 At peak capacity, the plant can produce 1,580 megawatts of electricity but = is=20 required to stay below that level because of air quality concerns=20 Edison owns 56 percent of the plant. The rest is owned by the Los Angeles= =20 Department of Water and Power (20 percent), Nevada Power (14 percent) and t= he=20 Salt River Project in Phoenix (10 percent).=20 Nevada Power has been trying to sell its share in the generating station to= =20 AES Corp. of Arlington, Va., has been trying to purchase both Edison's and= =20 Nevada Power's shares but has run into snags. The Nevada Public Utilities= =20 Commission approve the Nevada Power sale in October but suspended that=20 approval on Marcy 29 for at least 60 days. In January, the California Publi= c=20 Utilities Commission suspended sale of the Edison share and placed a=20 five-year moratorium on such sales about the same time.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 --- PG&E owes money to several small businesses, unlikely creditors=20 Friday, April 20, 2001=20 ,2001 Associated Press=20 URL:=20 tate0 503EDT0125.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 (04-20) 02:03 PDT SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Several small fry are among the big= =20 fish in a pond full of creditors to which ailing Pacific Gas and Electric= =20 owes money.=20 A San Francisco ice cream parlor, a costume store, a psychiatrist's office= =20 and a karate studio are among a number of small businesses that should be= =20 receiving payments from the near bankrupt utility.=20 After checking her books, ACT Costume Shop manager Callie Floor was surpris= ed=20 to find that the utility owes her $100 for a costume rental for a corporate= =20 dress-up party in 1992.=20 Karate One Studio on Van Ness Avenue may be owed for a self-defense class i= t=20 conducted for about a dozen workers at PG&E headquarters.=20 Of course, PG&E may only have to pay pennies on the dollar to the small fry= ,=20 since that's how bankruptcies work.=20 ,2001 Associated Press ?=20 --- Edison pushes lawmakers to accept deal=20 David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday, April 20, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /20/M N190213.DTL&type=3Dnews=20 Although lawmakers are skeptical of the state's multibillion-dollar deal to= =20 acquire the power lines of Southern California Edison, the head of the=20 utility's parent company warned yesterday that failure to approve the accor= d=20 could lead to a ""long and costly"" bankruptcy.=20 But John Bryson, chief executive of Edison International, told The Chronicl= e=20 that he thought legislators would ""want to do the right thing"" by approving= =20 the multibillion-dollar agreement and preventing Edison from following=20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. into bankruptcy court.=20 Bankruptcy for California's two largest utilities could have severe=20 consequences for consumers. Financial analysts said a worsening of the=20 state's energy mess would increase the possibility of higher electricity=20 rates.=20 Nevertheless, lawmakers are unlikely to accept the Edison deal -- at least= =20 not in its present form.=20 ""We are going to go through this thing extensively,"" said state Senate=20 President Pro Tem John Burton, D-San Francisco. ""There are a lot of concern= s=20 about the valuation.""=20 Still, he said, legislative backing for the accord remains possible as long= =20 as Edison is open to amending some of the terms.=20 ""The Edison people are smart enough to know that the Legislature is going t= o=20 have its say,"" Burton said.=20 Indeed, sources familiar with the matter said Edison expected a certain=20 amount of tinkering with the deal and would not resist efforts to reach=20 common ground with lawmakers.=20 ""The Assembly members do not view bankruptcy as a favorable alternative,""= =20 said Assemblyman Herb Wesson, D-Los Angeles. ""There will be a big effort to= =20 try and work something out.""=20 Edison's Bryson seems eager at this point to present himself and his compan= y=20 as reasonable business partners who are willing to negotiate in good faith.= =20 This contrasts sharply with the state's relations with PG&E, which turned= =20 acrimonious after PG&E blindsided the governor with its bankruptcy filing.= =20 Each side blamed the other for the collapse of earlier negotiations.=20 ""We made the decision at an early stage that this was a massive problem for= =20 the state and that the best course was to find a practical solution that=20 would allow us to get on with operating our power system,"" Bryson said.=20 Bankruptcy, he said, ""is absolutely a last resort. It's a long and costly= =20 process.""=20 It is also the last thing Wall Street wants to see. On Wednesday, rating=20 agency Fitch Inc. joined Standard & Poor's and Moody's Investor Service in= =20 warning that California's credit rating could be lowered because of the=20 state's energy mess.=20 ""The state may be forced to issue junk bonds,"" said Carol Coale, an energy-= =20 industry analyst at Prudential Securities in New York. ""This could lead to = a=20 surcharge on electricity bills to guarantee the bonds.""=20 Bryson, not surprisingly, defended Edison's agreement with the governor as = a=20 prudent alternative to bankruptcy.=20 ""This is a very good deal for the state,"" he said. ""It is not a bailout.=20 Edison gives up a lot to make all this possible.""=20 Southern California Edison will sell its power lines to the state for $2.8= =20 billion. It also will provide low-cost power to California for 10 years and= =20 drop a federal lawsuit seeking full recovery of nearly $5 billion in past= =20 debt.=20 Critics say the state is paying far too much for Edison's transmission syst= em=20 -- more than two times book value -- and that the power lines are of little= =20 use unless PG&E's grid also can be acquired.=20 ""It's a multibillion-dollar ratepayer bailout of Edison,"" said Doug Heller,= a=20 spokesman for the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa=20 Monica. ""Edison gets off scot-free.""=20 Under the most likely scenario, lawmakers will seek to reduce the amount pa= id=20 for Edison's power lines and to increase the role of the California Public= =20 Utilities Commission in regulating the utility.=20 They also will try to come up with a workable contingency plan for the stat= e=20 if PG&E remains adamant in its refusal to sell off its part of the power=20 grid.=20 ""The deal on the table is still salvageable,"" said Michael Shames, executiv= e=20 director of the Utility Consumers' Action Network in San Diego. ""But Edison= =20 needs to understand that what it got from the governor is only a framework,= =20 not set in stone.""=20 For his part, Bryson signaled that plenty of room existed for give and take= =20 on the issue.=20 ""We're just at the initial stage,"" he said. ""We always have accepted the=20 notion that Edison is a California regulated utility and is subject to the= =20 laws of the Public Utilities Commission.""=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 4=20 --- Who will pay the most for power?=20 Posted at 9:46 p.m. PDT Thursday, April 19, 2001=20 JOHN=20 WOOLFOLK=20 AND MICHAEL=20 BAZELEY=20 Mercury News=20 State regulators last month announced an electric rate increase that would= =20 average a whopping three cents per kilowatt-hour, hit bills beginning in Ma= y=20 and punish power pigs while sparing energy misers.=20 Now, much of that is up in the air.=20 Higher rates are surely coming -- but not before June. And exactly which=20 consumers and businesses will pay how much is uncertain as regulators rush = to=20 forge a rate structure from a tangle of more than 20 proposals.=20 Their task has been complicated immeasurably by Gov. Gray Davis' decision t= o=20 weigh in with a competing rate plan and Pacific Gas & Electric Co.'s move= =20 into bankruptcy court.=20 ``Little details are moving billions of dollars around,'' said Nettie Hoge = of=20 the Utility Reform Network, a consumer advocacy group.=20 All the proposals assume a ``tiered'' structure that forces the heaviest=20 users of energy to pay the most. But key details yet to be decided mean=20 consumers could see their average rates go up anywhere from 7 percent to 30= =20 percent or more.=20 Among them:=20 ?How much of an overall increase? The Public Utilities Commission approved = a=20 three-cent per kilowatt-hour increase last month, which would boost utility= =20 revenue by $4.8 million. Davis' proposed increase -- left vague in his Apri= l=20 5 television address -- averages 2.8 cents for PG&E customers but only 2.3= =20 cents for customers of Southern California Edison.=20 ?What regions of the state will pay? The commission agreed to raise rates= =20 only for PG&E and Southern California Edison, but Davis would include the= =20 additional 1.2 million San Diego Gas & Electric customers.=20 ?Should heavier users of electricity subsidize those who are exempt from th= e=20 new rate increase? If so, those users will find themselves paying much more= =20 than any of the average increase figures being tossed about.=20 ?How will utilities bill customers retroactively for the increase? At the= =20 time of the PUC vote on March 27, commissioners said their increase would= =20 take effect immediately.=20 PUC vote May 14=20 Various plans are being presented this week to an administrative law judge= =20 working for the commission. The judge is expected to recommend a rate=20 structure to the PUC on May 4. Public hearings would follow May 7-11, and t= he=20 commission would vote on a plan May 14, condensing to a few weeks a process= =20 that normally lasts nearly a year.=20 Each of the major proposals before the commission assumes that residential= =20 customers using less than 130 percent of their baseline -- which is the=20 average basic level of use for each region of the state -- would be exempt= =20 from higher rates. That's mandated under a new law that allows the state to= =20 buy power. Customers already pay higher rates for exceeding their baseline.= =20 Each major proposal also sets new ``tiers'' with progressively higher rates= =20 for ``medium'' use at 130 to 200 percent of baseline and ``heavy'' use over= =20 200 percent of that level.=20 But that's where the similarities end.=20 Differences=20 The first distinction among the leading plans comes in the form of an=20 assumption: How many residential customers will avoid any increase because= =20 they don't exceed 130 percent of their baseline? Davis says more than half,= =20 commissioners say a little under half and PG&E says less than a third.=20 The second difference among the plans is a real difference: What happens to= =20 everyone else?=20 Under the plan by utilities commission President Loretta Lynch, medium PG&E= =20 users would see average bills rise 9 percent and heavy users would see bill= s=20 increase 36 percent.=20 Davis' plan says medium PG&E users would see average bills rise 11 percent= =20 while heavy users would pay 37 percent more. But the average total bill=20 increase for PG&E residential customers, including those who are exempt,=20 would be 20 percent under his plan and 24 percent under Lynch's, according = to=20 a statement on the governor's Web site.=20 Business customers would see proportionately greater increases, averaging 3= 0=20 percent under Lynch's proposal and 26 percent under Davis'.=20 The most consumer-friendly of the various proposals comes from=20 consumer-rights group TURN. They suggest an overall average residential=20 increase of 7.5 percent.=20 TURN's plan assumes utilities cannot charge other customers more to make up= =20 for the energy misers shielded from rate increases under state law.=20 PG&E disagrees with that interpretation. The utility wants other residentia= l=20 users to make up for any lost revenue from exempted customers through highe= r=20 rates. Under the utility's plan, residential customers would see an average= =20 rate increase of nearly 30 percent.=20 ``The proposal these folks are pushing rips the heart out of that law,'' sa= id=20 Matthew Freedman, staff attorney for TURN.=20 Another issue affecting consumers is how the utilities can bill for=20 electricity used in April and May, before the final plan is approved.=20 Utilities want surcharge=20 Utility officials have objected to making the rate structure retroactive.= =20 Instead, to recoup the revenue, they are proposing a flat surcharge that=20 everyone would pay, regardless of how much they use.=20 Edison proposes a higher surcharge added to bills for a shorter period of= =20 time -- in this case, June through August. PG&E officials are suggesting a= =20 smaller surcharge that would be spread out over 12 months.=20 ``It'll probably be something closer to the PG&E proposal,'' said Paul=20 Clanon, the commission's director of energy issues.=20 All the rate increase proposals stem from a commonly understood problem:=20 California's current, frozen rates don't generate enough money to cover the= =20 wholesale price of power. The PUC raised rates 10 percent -- or one cent pe= r=20 kilowatt-hour -- in January in an attempt to help, but that turned out to b= e=20 far from enough.=20 In March, the commission approved an additional three-cent increase. But=20 Davis followed quickly with an alternative proposal. The next day, PG&E fil= ed=20 for bankruptcy, raising the specter that a federal judge could order even= =20 higher rates.=20 Although the PUC has sole authority to raise rates under state law, Davis'= =20 proposal has complicated an already complex process. The governor appointed= =20 three of the five members of the commission, and his appointees seem inclin= ed=20 to show him deference. But Davis has been slow in filing the details of his= =20 plan, which has made it hard for the PUC to proceed. --- --- --- Credit-raters put state on watch=20 Posted at 9:41 p.m. PDT Thursday, April 19, 2001=20 BY JENNIFER BJORHUS=20 Mercury News=20 All three of the nation's influential judges of credit risk now have=20 California on a credit watch, saying they are deeply concerned about the=20 economic impact of the state's power crisis.=20 The Fitch credit rating agency made it unanimous Wednesday when it warned= =20 that the thickening electricity quagmire, as well as lower than expected ta= x=20 revenues in February and March, could mean broader risk for the state's=20 budget.=20 The announcement is a signal that Fitch, too, may downgrade its ratings on= =20 California's nearly $30 billion in public debt, a move which could cost=20 taxpayers millions.=20 The announcement comes as state lawmakers consider a bailout plan for=20 Southern California Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric Co. sits in bankruptcy a= nd=20 state officials bleed through the state's general fund as they buy expensiv= e=20 electricity for consumers.=20 Earlier this week, Gov. Gray Davis announced that the average bill for=20 electricity purchases has risen from $45.8 million a day in the last week o= f=20 March to $73 million a day.=20 Moody's Investors Service and Standard & Poor's have already issued their o= wn=20 credit warnings, although none of the three agencies has downgraded the=20 state's very good double-A credit rating.=20 Bond ratings are important yardsticks that bankers and investors use to pri= ce=20 municipal and corporate bonds. A downgrade would force California to offer= =20 bond buyers higher interest rates going forward, costing taxpayers.=20 The state was last at a lower A rating back in 1994.=20 Moody's changed California's Aa2 general obligation bond rating outlook fro= m=20 stable to negative on April 6, the day PG&E filed for bankruptcy. Standard = &=20 Poor's has had the state's AA rating outlook at negative since January, whe= n=20 the state began buying electricity for the utilities.=20 The deciding factor for Fitch, said Fitch vice chairman Claire Cohen, was t= he=20 disagreement over how the money from the new electricity rate increase will= =20 be spent.=20 The California Public Utilities Commission ruled in late March that money= =20 generated by higher electricity bills should go first to pay the state=20 Department of Water Resources, which has been buying electricity for the=20 utilities. PG&E has argued that if the state is paid first, there won't be= =20 any money left for the company.=20 The utility is formally challenging the PUC decision, and the move threaten= s=20 to hold up the estimated $12 billion to $14 billion of bonds the Department= =20 of Water Resources plans to issue to buy more electricity.=20 ``With that being appealed, you don't have a clean authorization,'' Cohen= =20 said. ``It signals to me that it could delay the financing process.''=20 A second concern is that the state isn't collecting as much in taxes as=20 expected, Cohen said. Tax collections for both February and March were belo= w=20 forecast. The amount of personal income tax the state collected in those=20 months fell short by $455 million, or 14 percent less than expected.=20 Cohen said she made her decision before hearing that the state's power cost= s=20 now exceed $70 million a day. Cohen and David Hitchcock, the California=20 analyst for Standard & Poor's, agreed those rising costs are a definite=20 concern.=20 ``It doesn't take much of a change in economic growth to make some of these= =20 projected fund balances disappear and so we're very worried about what the= =20 current economic activity is, particularly in Northern California with some= =20 of the problems with the high-tech area,'' Hitchcock told analysts and=20 investors last week in a conference call.=20 Other economy-watchers expressed concern.=20 Sandy Harrison, assistant director of the state Department of Finance, said= =20 the move reinforced the importance of solving the power problems soon.=20 Contact Jennifer Bjorhus at jbjorhus@sjmercury.com or (408) 920-5660.=20 --- --- -------------------- Power company executives going without bonuses=20 LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Senior executives at Southern California Edison and its= =20 parent company went without hundreds of thousands of dollars in bonuses in= =20 2000 because of California's power crisis.=20 Edison International's chairman and chief executive, John Bryson, was paid= =20 $950,000 in 2000, compared with salary and bonus totaling $2.16 million in= =20 1999.=20 Stephen Frank, the chairman and chief executive at Southern California=20 Edison, was paid $617,000 in 2000, compared with salary and bonus totaling= =20 $1.3 million in 1999, according to the company's proxy statement filed with= =20 the Securities and Exchange Commission.=20 The company also said Thursday it would not award merit increases to=20 executives in 2001 because of the continuing crisis.=20 In a similar statement released Tuesday, Pacific Gas and Electric Corp.=20 revealed it also withheld bonuses for its top two executives, although they= =20 did receive raises.=20 Edison and PG&E say they have lost nearly $14 billion since June to high=20 wholesale prices that the state's electricity deregulation law bars them fr= om=20 passing on to consumers. PG&E, saying it hasn't received the help it needs= =20 from regulators or state lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection= =20 April 6.=20 Edison is continuing to work with state officials and its creditors. --- --- ----------------------- Davis and U.S. lawmakers call for price caps on power=20 LOS ANGELES -- Half of California's congressional delegation gathered with= =20 Gov. Gray Davis on Thursday to pressure the federal government to impose=20 energy price caps.=20 Limiting wholesale prices, they argued, is essential if the state is to ave= rt=20 the energy crisis threatening California's economy.=20 ``A big piece of this solution is federal. It's a four-letter word:=20 F-E-R-C,'' said U.S. Rep. Jane Harman, D-Redondo Beach, referring to the=20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the agency that would have to approve= =20 price caps.=20 The governor has blamed FERC for allowing energy producers to charge=20 California stratospheric prices for electricity and natural gas.=20 The delegation met behind closed doors at an Los Angeles airport hotel, but= =20 Davis and several legislators met with reporters afterward.=20 ``The signal that has to come from FERC,'' Davis said, ``is, `You're chargi= ng=20 too much for electricity. The electricity is not worth driving California= =20 into an economic grave.'?''=20 Curt H,bert Jr., the FERC chairman, has argued that caps would encourage=20 generators to sell their power elsewhere and discourage them from building= =20 new plants in California.=20 The bipartisan group of lawmakers agreed with the governor that the state i= s=20 getting gouged on the open market.=20 ``There is an anti-free market enterprise mechanism in play here,'' said U.= S.=20 Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-El Cajon, noting that natural gas in parts of New=20 Mexico costs one-third what it does in California.=20 The generators maintain that they are charging fair prices that are the=20 simple result of supply and demand.=20 Rep. Mike Honda, D-San Jose, and Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, attended, bu= t=20 left before speaking with reporters. --- --- ------------------------- Generators cutting electric output; regulators want to find out why=20 Published Friday, April 20, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News=20 BY MICHAEL BAZELEY=20 Mercury News=20 State regulators launched an investigation Thursday into why some alternati= ve=20 energy providers are withholding electricity from the state's stressed powe= r=20 grid.=20 The California Public Utilities Commission in San Francisco said it wants t= o=20 determine whether the small power generators -- which provide about=20 one-fourth of the state's electrical power -- have legitimate business=20 reasons for scaling back their output.=20 Known as ``qualifying facilities,'' or QFs, many of the generators have bee= n=20 either scaling back output or shutting down entirely -- contending that the= =20 state's two largest utilities owe them $700 million.=20 ``The critical question is: Will we be able to rely on these facilities int= o=20 the high-demand summer months?'' PUC Commissioner Carl Wood said.=20 The financially strapped utilities, Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern= =20 California Edison, stopped paying the power generators several months ago.= =20 The PUC ordered the utilities to resume payments, and some generators start= ed=20 receiving payments this week.=20 But many generators are still hurting because of all the back payments they= =20 are owed, said Jack Raudy, a spokesman for the Renewable Energy Creditors= =20 Committee, which consists of 10 alternative power producers.=20 ``We're outraged,'' Raudy said.=20 Contact Michael Bazeley at mbazeley@sjmercury.com or (408) 920-5628.=20 --- --- --------------------- FERC remains an unlikely rescuer=20 The federal agency hews to a hands-off policy on power rates.=20 April 20, 2001=20 By DENA BUNIS The Orange County Register Washington - Californians who see federal re-regulation of the state's=20 crisis-bound energy market as an answer to the impending summer emergency= =20 better look for some other solution.=20 Even the possible short- term price fix that the Federal Energy Regulatory= =20 Commission may consider at its Wednesday meeting might be too little, too= =20 late.=20 Lobbyists, lawmakers and other FERC-watchers say they have seen a slight=20 shift in recent weeks among commission staff and at least one member. There= =20 is some willingness, they say, to consider some price controls, even though= =20 the Bush administration is adamantly opposed to such measures.=20 And many are looking to see if President George W. Bush's choices for the t= wo=20 vacancies on FERC will provide a margin for change.=20 But the commission's basic philosophy that open, unregulated markets are be= st=20 is not likely to change soon, members say.=20 ""I've been championing a revamping of FERC's antiquated standards for=20 determining market-based rates,'' Commissioner Richard Massey said Thursday= .=20 But with no success. "" My agency is not on the verge of turning on a dime o= n=20 this market-based pricing.""=20 The standards are a joke, Massey added, because the commission never turns= =20 down requests for such pricing authority. More than 600 power sellers have= =20 been given that authority, he said.=20 For a power company to be allowed to charge whatever the market will bear, = it=20 must show FERC, for example, that it doesn't have the power to manipulate t= he=20 market and drive prices up.=20 ""Any seller that can't pass our screen needs to fire their consultants and= =20 lawyers,'' Massey said.=20 While the overall philosophy remains consistent, FERC staff has proposed to= =20 the commission that a Stage 3 electricity emergency in California should=20 trigger cost-based rates, a form of price controls. Such triggers would be = in=20 place for one year, under the staff proposal.=20 The commission may decide Wednesday whether to accept that proposal. It has= =20 to make some decision by May 1 on how the market will be monitored from now= =20 on.=20 The theory behind controlling prices in Stage 3, says a FERC staff report, = is=20 that during such an emergency generators have the greatest opportunity to= =20 manipulate the market and drive prices up.=20 But generators have that power during Stage 2 and Stage 1 emergencies, says= =20 Les Starck, Southern California Edison Co.'s manager of federal regulatory= =20 affairs. Price caps during Stage 3 might avert the rolling blackouts=20 associated with that level of crisis, but they wouldn't do anything to stop= =20 generators from jacking up prices the rest of the time, he said.=20 And it is not clear how long it would take for such price controls to take= =20 effect, should the commission go along with the staff recommendation.=20 ""We're close because summer is approaching,'' Commissioner Linda Breathitt= =20 said Thursday. Breathitt, who had firmly opposed any form of price controls= ,=20 said in an interview last month that given the worsening crisis in Californ= ia=20 she was open to considering some short-term measures.=20 ""It's important to me that we address the summer,'' Breathitt said, but she= =20 said she could not predict what the commission would do Wednesday.=20 Even if an order is approved, Massey said, there could be delays while the= =20 power sellers file their costs with regulators and disputes over those=20 filings are handled.=20 Sen. Dianne Feinstein said Thursday such a move by the commission would be= =20 ""better than having no controls at all. There's no question that we're goin= g=20 to be in a Stage 3 emergency.''=20 Feinstein, D-Calif., and other Western lawmakers have been urging FERC to= =20 step in sooner and with price controls that extend beyond just the emergenc= y=20 period.=20 Waiting for Stage 3 to intervene ""is putting the whole grid at risk,'' said= =20 Roger Hamilton, a member of Oregon's Public Utility Commission. ""We have a= =20 real stability problem when you cut it that close.''=20 Feinstein says the future could well rest with the new commissioners,=20 particularly Patrick Wood, the head of the Texas PUC who many believe will= =20 replace Curt Heber as FERC chairman if he is confirmed by the Senate.=20 Even if Massey and Breathitt agree on broader price controls, as chairman,= =20 Heber could block consideration of such a move. It's unclear what stance Wo= od=20 would take as chairman.=20 ""The thing that deeply concerns me about Pat Wood is that he's from Texas,'= '=20 Feinstein said. ""What's reassuring is that it appears from my personal=20 discussion with him is that he appears to be pragmatic.''=20 But once again, timing could be a problem.=20 Bush has said he intends to nominate Wood and Nora Brownell, a member of th= e=20 Pennsylvania PUC, but has not formally sent their nominations to the Senate= .=20 ""The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is of vital importance right now,= =20 and to let the time go on without filling the spots makes no sense,''=20 Feinstein said.=20 ""Please, please, please, President Bush, process your nominees.''=20 --- --- Lawmakers seek bigger rollbacks, can't agree on caps=20 They promise to meet in Washington with a plan that would require federal= =20 agencies to conserve power this summer.=20 April 20, 2001=20 By DENA BUNIS The Orange County Register=20 Los Angeles - Gov. Gray Davis and a bipartisan sampling of the congressiona= l=20 delegation put politics aside Thursday and agreed something must be done=20 about runaway wholesale power prices in California.=20 ""We agreed that there has been unreasonable or unearned enrichment by the= =20 energy providers of natural gas and electricity"" said Rep. Darrell Issa,=20 R-Vista. ""And we agreed that there needs to be significantly greater=20 rollbacks than there already have been.""=20 The lawmakers did not, however, come to a consensus over the issue of price= =20 caps - something Davis and other Democrats, particularly Sen. Dianne=20 Feinstein, D-Calif., have been pushing the Federal Energy Regulatory=20 Commission to institute.=20 Davis met behind closed doors for 90 minutes with Feinstein and 27 of the 5= 2=20 House members at the Sheraton Gateway Hotel near LAX.=20 Participants from the Orange County delegation included Issa; Rep.=20 Christopher Cox, R-Newport Beach; Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Santa Ana; and Re= p.=20 Gary Miller, R-Diamond Bar.=20 They emerged with a promise to meet again soon, this time in Washington, an= d=20 with a four-pronged strategy to avert disaster this summer.=20 The strategy includes requiring federal agencies in the state, including=20 military facilities, to conserve energy this summer, and asking FERC to fin= d=20 a way to control the wholesale price of electricity and increase the flow o= f=20 natural gas into California.=20 Cox said much of the meeting was spent reviewing Davis' $850 million=20 conservation program.=20 Members promised to get the word out in their districts about conservation= =20 measures.=20 Cox said he expects emergency legislation dealing with the energy crisis to= =20 pass the Energy and Commerce Committee in the coming weeks.=20 That measure, he said, will include a direction to FERC to expand its=20 investigation of whether existing rates are just and reasonable.=20 --- --- ----------------------------- Energy notebook=20 Assembly urges federal regulation of natural gas=20 April 20, 2001=20 From Register news services=20 Sacramento - The California Assembly asked the federal government Thursday = to=20 regulate soaring natural gas prices once again.=20 A resolution passed 48-7 asked President George W. Bush, Congress and the= =20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to restore the regulation of natural g= as=20 that ended in 1992.=20 Natural gas rates at the California border have been as much as 11 times=20 higher than elsewhere in the nation since November, an industry consultant= =20 told an Assembly subcommittee Wednesday.=20 ""I think it's only rational in one of the biggest crises to befall this=20 country in the last 100 years. We're not seeing adequate action from the=20 federal government,"" said the author, Assemblyman Dennis Cardoza, D-Atwater= .=20 Republicans refused to vote for the resolution, complaining that it was an= =20 attack on the GOP Bush administration.=20 Top Edison officials forego bonus, take 45% pay cut=20 Rosemead - Edison International's top officers received no bonuses in 2000= =20 and generally took pay cuts of about 45 percent as the Southern California= =20 company's utility segment was forced to write off $4.2 billion spent buying= =20 overpriced power in the state's deregulated electricity market, according t= o=20 SEC disclosures the company filed Thursday.=20 Edison International Chief Executive Officer John E. Bryson received $1.62= =20 million in salary and other compensation, compared with $3.04 million last= =20 year. Southern California Edison CEO Stephen E. Frank received $760,000 in= =20 salary and other compensation, compared with $1.35 million last year. And= =20 Edison Mission Energy CEO Alan J. Fohrer received $584,000 in salary and=20 other compensation, compared with $922,000 last year.=20 Edison's compensation committee did give Bryson an incentive to pull the=20 company out of its quagmire, awarding stock options with a present-day valu= e=20 calculated at $7.26 million. But Bryson won't be able to profit from those= =20 options -- which vest over the next five years -- any time soon. The lowest= =20 price he can exercise the options at is $20 -- and Edison stock is trading = at=20 $11.=20 PUC seeks to shed light on meager energy alternatives=20 Sacramento - Hoping to prevent California's bleak power outlook from becomi= ng=20 even darker, state regulators Thursday launched an investigation into why= =20 alternative energy providers aren't producing more electricity.=20 With the action, the California Public Utilities Commission hopes to=20 determine if legitimate business reasons or ulterior motives underlie the= =20 reduced output by an independent group of small generators that provides mu= ch=20 of the state's energy.=20 These alternative generators - known in the industry as ""qualifying=20 facilities,"" or QFs - have been scaling back or shutting down as debts owed= =20 by California's two largest utilities pile up. The QFs are owed an estimate= d=20 $700 million by bankrupt Pacific Gas and Electric and financially crippled= =20 Southern California Edison.=20 In other developments:=20 California's Public Utilities Commission delayed until May 3 a decision on= =20 whether it will investigate how Pacific Gas & Electric's bankruptcy is goin= g=20 to affect customers.=20 Unbowed by Gov. Gray Davis' endorsement of Calpine's proposed power plant,= =20 San Jose officials said they may yet have the last word on the controversia= l=20 project. The city could sue the California Energy Commission or attempt to= =20 block the project by refusing to extend water and sewer lines or annex=20 several acres of needed land, they said.=20 PG&E Corp. won final approval to build a $350 million power plant in San=20 Diego County capable of supplying electricity to 500,000 homes.=20 The Escondido City Council has decided to take a break from considering a= =20 rush of proposals by developers trying to build plants before peak summer= =20 demand.=20 The council voted 3-2 Wednesday to suspend consideration for 30 to 60 days = of=20 any proposals to build energy plants in the city.=20 Register staff writers, The Associated Press and Knight Ridder Newspapers= =20 contributed to this report.=20 --- --- Friday, April 20, 2001=20 Shed light on costs=20 Unfortunately, California citizens will remain in the dark for at least=20 another month about the details of Gov. Gray Davis' long-term contracts wit= h=20 power producers. This is the sort of crisis the public needs to scrutinize and for which the= =20 Public Records Act was designed. At a Tuesday hearing in a Los Angeles County Superior Court in Pasadena on= =20 whether the documents should be released under the California Public Record= s=20 Act, Judge Michael J. Byrne said the case could better be heard in a Los=20 Angeles court. The case was brought by Judicial Watch, a Washington-based public interest= =20 law firm with its West Coast office in San Marino.=20 ""The case was reset for May 22 in a Los Angeles County Superior Court in th= e=20 city of Los Angeles although we're going to try to move it up a bit,""=20 Judicial Watch and General Counsel Larry Klayman told us.=20 Mr. Klayman remains hopeful. ""We're confident any judge who sees this will= =20 have to release the documents,"" he said. A similar but separate case, brought by several newspapers, will be heard M= ay=20 18 in a San Diego Superior Court.=20 ""This is a huge financial burden on the taxpayers without an opportunity fo= r=20 the taxpayers to scrutinize the terms,"" Hal Fuson, chairman of the governme= nt=20 affairs committee of the California Newspaper Publishers Association, told= =20 the San Diego Union-Tribune. ""The general climate surrounding the governor'= s=20 approach to this has been one of secrecy."" The governor's position is that releasing the details now could make it=20 harder for the state to get the best prices for electricity.=20 But given that the governor has mismanaged this crisis so far, it's clear= =20 that this is precisely the sort of crisis the public needs to scrutinize an= d=20 for which the Public Records Act was designed. The governor should end this legal wrangling and release the documents to= =20 which citizens are entitled.=20 --- --- ----------------------------- End To Deregulation of Nevada Power CARSON CITY, Nev. (AP) via NewsEdge Corporation - Gov. Kenny Guinn signed a bill Wednesday that would stop the sale of Nevada power plants, halt deregulation and bail out struggling utilities with a new rate system. The Senate and Assembly gave the measure final approval earlier in the day and rushed it to the governor. The bill was crafted to keep Nevada from suffering from a power crisis similar to California's. ``I must tell you this is a great relief,'' said Guinn, a former utility executive, as he signed the bill into law. ``Nothing can control escalating costs, but we're in the best position to protect ourselves.'' Legislators made a last-minute change to add language that ensured consumers would get a break on rates if utilities profit from sales of excess power to other states. Guinn said the bill takes care of the most pressing energy issues, but other deregulation-related bills are sure to follow. That includes a plan that would allow major power users, such as casinos and mines, to buy power on the open market. Legislators also are working on plans encouraging energy conservation and ensuring the poor can pay their utility bills. --- --- ----- PG&E Co. Issues Statements On the Increase in the State's Cost for Power SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 18, 2001 via NewsEdge Corporation - FROM: John Nelson, Director of the News Department Pacific Gas and Electric Company There seems to have been some confusion yesterday over the effect Pacific Gas and Electric Company's bankruptcy filing may have had on energy prices. I thought it might be helpful to provide a few useful facts and figures, to help you pin down the truth behind what may be driving the state's energy costs higher. Yesterday, Governor Davis claimed that the state was paying roughly $20 million more for electricity every day as a direct result of the bankruptcy filing by PG&amp;E. While it's understandable, even laudable, that the Governor would want to fully explain the downsides of utility bankruptcy, this claim is simply not accurate. The Governor should know better. Consider the facts: -- On January 19, the credit ratings of California's two largest investor-owned utilities -- PG&amp;E and SCE -- were downgraded to below investment grade by every major rating agency. Generators immediately raised concerns about continuing to sell power to such non-creditworthy entities. -- The state reacted by passing AB7x, which authorized the state Department of Water Resources to make $400 million in power purchases. Less than two weeks later, on February 1, the Governor signed AB1x, which authorized DWR to buy power on an ongoing basis at least through 2002, until the utilities could be restored to creditworthiness. The clear understanding in the legislative debate was that the DWR would purchase the full ""net open position"", which is the amount of additional generation needed, beyond what the utilities themselves own or have under contract, to meet customer demand. However, a few weeks later, in spite of the clear intent of state law, it was revealed that DWR was not buying the full net open position, and had no intention of doing so. It was only buying power that it considered ""reasonably priced"" and was leaving the ISO to buy whatever was necessary to keep the lights on -- an amount that most estimates place at 10- to 20-percent of the state's daily electricity need. -- The ISO, in turn, revealed its intention to attempt to pass along the costs of these last-minute, high-cost, spot-market purchases to the state's non-creditworthy utilities (despite existing FERC tariffs which precluded the ISO from doing so). PG&amp;E has estimated that its share of these costs was roughly $10 million a day; SCE has a similar estimate. (We don't know for sure, because we haven't seen the bill. The DWR won't say how much power it's buying, and at what cost, and neither will the ISO.) -- On February 14, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission informed the Independent System Operator that it could not force generators to sell to non-creditworthy entities (namely, both PG&amp;E and SCE). This order appeared to force the DWR to purchase the full net open after all. The ISO responded the next day with its own interpretation of the FERC order, saying the order was limited to ""emergency"" power only. The ISO also sought and obtained in federal court a temporary restraining order (issued by Judge Damrell), forcing generators to continue selling to it. -- On February 22, five power generators filed a complaint with FERC seeking to clarify that the ISO's interpretation of the February 14 order was contrary to FERC's intent. -- On April 5, the Ninth U.S. Court of Appeals reversed Judge Damrell's lower court order affecting one of the generators, Reliant, saying the generator was no longer required to sell electricity to the ISO without assurances of payment. Presumably this order would apply to other generators, if they sought such assurances. -- On April 6, PG&amp;E noted in the announcement of its Chapter 11 filing that one of the reasons for the decision was the ""financial exposure to unreimbursed wholesale energy procurement costs"" caused by the state's failure to assume the full procurement responsibility. -- On April 6, unrelated to PG&amp;E's bankruptcy filing, FERC issued an order responding to the generators' Feb. 22 complaint against the ISO. In this new order, FERC reaffirmed its February 14 order that the ISO could only buy power on behalf of creditworthy entities, meaning neither PG&amp;E nor SCE. -- On April 9 in remarks reported in the press, the Governor's office acknowledged the State's ""bill for energy purchases will increase by upward of $8 million a day after a ruling last week by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,"" once DWR started buying the full net open position, rather than force the ISO to try to bill the utilities. It seems likely that the $8 million was an estimate based on only one of the utilities' costs, not the combination of both. -- On April 11, the ISO discontinued its daily practice of publishing the total amount it spent on energy the day before. -- Despite the history, the state continues to try to avoid buying the full net open position. On April 13, in response to the FERC order -- NOT the PG&amp;E bankruptcy filing -- the ISO sent a ""murky"" notice to generators promising that ""any bid accepted by the ISO will be deemed to have the financial support of another Qualified Party or DWR as specified in this notice."" Generators were reportedly underwhelmed by the assurances contained in the letter. -- Yesterday, in response to the Governor's claim that bankruptcy was driving up the state's costs, Gary Ackerman, spokesman for the Western Power Trading Forum, said ""I don't believe, nor have I ever heard, of a bankruptcy surcharge being added to the cost of power.... If anything, I think that generators and marketers would take solace in the fact that bankruptcy brings order to an otherwise volatile situation."" What does it all mean? Clearly, the increase in the state's costs have come as a result of the DWR finally covering the state's energy needs, as promised in AB1x. This change in DWR's buying habits has come as a direct result of the February 14 and April 6 FERC orders that the ISO only sell to creditworthy entities. These orders were issued independent of PG&amp;E's bankruptcy filing and apply equally to PG&amp;E and SCE. Neither PG&amp;E nor SCE have been creditworthy since mid-January, when their credit ratings were reduced to below investment grade, and the DWR, ISO and Governor's office have been aware of the effect of the FERC order since mid-February. Some generators have suggested that California has been paying a credit penalty since December, when the utilities' deteriorating financial situation gave rise to payment concerns. There appears to be far more evidence that the state's coy approach to AB1x implementation has created far more uncertainty in the marketplace than has PG&amp;E's Chapter 11 filing. CONTACT: PG&amp;E Co. | News Department, 415/973-5930 --- --- ------------------- J.D. Power and Associates Reports/ Nationwide Decline in Customer=20 Satisfaction of Electric Utility Service Among Midsize Businesses Price and Value Performance Hit Hard Across Nation; Satisfaction in California Continues to Plummet AGOURA HILLS, Calif., April 19 /PRNewswire/ -- Midsize business customers, who are responsible for approximately fifteen percent of the nation's electricity consumption, are very critical of electricity prices, according= to the J.D. Power and Associates 2001 Electric Utility Midsize Business Custom= er Satisfaction Study(SM) released today. Consequently, the study's nationwid= e customer satisfaction index fell -- from 100 points in 2000 to 97 in 2001. (Photo: ) ""The entire country was affected by higher natural gas prices this winter, and with more states re-evaluating deregulation, midsize business customers are especially sensitive to electricity prices,"" said Jeffrey Conklin, seni= or director at J.D. Power and Associates. The 2001 study shows that average overall customer satisfaction with California's ""big three"" investor-owned utilities -- Pacific Gas and Electr= ic, San Diego Gas and Electric, and Southern California Edison -- fell an astonishing 14 index points among midsize businesses compared to the 2000 study. ""In California, electric utility satisfaction among midsize business customers has virtually fallen into the Pacific,"" said Alan Destribats, executive director of the utility practice at J.D. Power and Associates. The study finds that the chief determinants of satisfaction among electric utility midsize customers are a provider's company image, price and value, = and power quality and reliability. As expected, midsize business customers were extremely critical of performance in the areas of company image and price and value. Even outsid= e of California, satisfaction in the price and value component fell more than any other factor -- from an index score of 100 in 2000 to 93 in 2001. Power Quality and Reliability Utility performance in power quality and reliability is improving, with the national index increasing by 3 points. Although the number of interruptions and outages experienced was relatively the same in 2001 as it was in 2000, midsize businesses report much shorter outage durations, falli= ng from an average of seven hours for the longest outages in 2000 to four hour= s in 2001. Retail Competition ""Opening utility markets to competition has proven to be a difficult process and, so far, midsize business customers are giving the industry poo= r marks,"" said Destribats. The study shows that midsize business customers located in states with competition not only are less satisfied than are customers in other states, but they are also significantly less satisfied now than last year. The stu= dy also shows that more midsize businesses have switched electricity providers= . Of midsize businesses eligible to switch power suppliers, 9 percent have do= ne so, up from 5 percent in 2000. J.D. Power and Associates interviewed representatives from more than 7,200 midsize businesses, including manufacturers, retailers, business and consumer services firms, health care providers and other midsize businesses throughout the United States. Midsize business owners are defined as those who normally spend $1,500 to $25,000 per month on electricity. The study shows that midsize businesses are now spending an average of $4,827 per mon= th on electricity. The study shows that utilities in the south region of the United States consistently receive higher ratings across all factors of customer satisfaction. Likewise, these midsize business customers also report the lowest levels of monthly electricity expenditures, on average. Midsize businesses in North Carolina spend the least for electric usage ($3,885 per month on average), while those in New Hampshire, Nevada and Utah spend the most ($5,700 to $5,800 per month on average). The study also shows that midsize businesses in Alabama and Florida report the most service interruptions and outages within the past 12 months, and those in Washingto= n report the fewest. East Region PPL Utilities, serving east Pennsylvania, ranks highest in overall customer satisfaction with midsize businesses in the eastern United States. PPL Utilities ranked highest in the East Region in four of the six factors that comprise customer satisfaction, with its primary strength in price and value. Other solid performers in this region include Public Service Electr= ic and Gas, Allegheny Power and GPU Energy. Midwest Region LG&amp;E Energy, the parent company of Kentucky Utilities and Louisville Ga= s and Electric, ranks highest in overall customer satisfaction with midsize business electric service in the Midwest. LG&amp;E Energy midsize business customers give high ratings for power quality and reliability, customer service, and billing and payment. Alliant Energy, AEP-Midwest and Xcel Energy-NSP also rank high in midsize business customer satisfaction in the Midwest Region. South Region Southern Company ranks highest in overall customer satisfaction for midsize business electric service in the South Region and received the high= est customer satisfaction index score among all utilities included in the study= . Southern Company dominates all other electric utility service providers, achieving the highest ratings in the nation in five of the six components (2 in a tie). Other strong performers in the South Region include Duke Pow= er, Florida Power &amp; Light and Progress Energy (Carolina Power &amp; Light a= nd=20 Florida Power). West Region Sierra Pacific Resources ranks highest in overall customer satisfaction with midsize business electric service in the West Region. This utility significantly leads the region by rating highest in all six components (1 i= n a tie). The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power also ranks high in thi= s region. Headquartered in Agoura Hills, Calif., J.D. Power and Associates is a global marketing information services firm operating in key business sector= s including market research, forecasting, consulting, training and customer satisfaction. The firm's quality and satisfaction measurements are based o= n actual customer responses from millions of consumers annually. J.D. Power a= nd Associates press releases and media information can be accessed through the Internet at www.jdpa.com. Media e-mail contact: michael.greywitt@jdpa.com. This press release is provided for editorial use only. No advertising or other promotional use can be made of the information in this release or of other J.D. Power and Associates survey results without the express prior written consent of J.D. Power and Associates. SOURCE J.D. Power and Associates CONTACT: Michael P. Greywitt, 818-707-9526 or John Tews, 248-267-6800, both of J.D. Power and Associates Photo: NewsCom: AP Archive: http://photoarchive.ap.org PRN Photo Desk, 888-776-6555 or 201-369-3467 Web site: http://www.jdpa.com --- --- ----------------------------- Calpine to Purchase 46 General Electric Gas Turbines Turbines in Place for= =20 70,000-megawatt Program Turbines in Place for 70,000-megawatt Program SAN JOSE, Calif., April 19 /PRNewswire/ -- Calpine Corporation (NYSE: CPN), the nation's fastest growing independent power producer, announced today it will purchase 35 model 7FB and 11 model = 7FA gas-fired turbines from GE Power Systems. With this announcement, Calpine h= as firm orders in place for the delivery of 203 turbines. When operated in a combined-cycle application, this represents 50,000 megawatts of baseload capacity. The agreement marks the company's second large volume turbine acquisition from GE and is an important component of Calpine's five-year strategic plan= to have 70,000 megawatts of generation on line by the end of 2005. Calpine wil= l take delivery of 5 turbines in 2002, with the remainder of the contract to = be filled by the end of 2005. ""This purchase significantly strengthens Calpine's leadership position in project development,"" said Doug Kieta, senior vice president-construction f= or Calpine. ""Calpine's aggressive turbine procurement program also strengthens Calpine's first-mover advantage as we expand our development program and en= ter new electricity markets across the country."" ""GE Power Systems is pleased to provide Calpine today's technology of choice for power generation,"" said Delbert Williamson, President of GE Powe= r Systems Global Sales. ""Our FA technology is the most proven advanced technology available, and we're confident our evolutionary FB technology wh= ich has been designed using GE's Corporate-wide Six Sigma initiative will provi= de Calpine highly competitive power generation."" GE's current fleet of F technology gas turbines recently surpassed 3.8 million hours of operation around the globe. GE's 7FB turbine is an evolution of the current 7FA model and is designed for higher efficiency, lower life-cycle cost power generation. By employing this new technology, Calpine will continue to generate electricity competitively while consuming less natural gas and producing fewer emissions than a typical power plant o= f comparable size. GE Power Systems (http://www.gepower.com) is one of the world's leading suppliers of power generation technology, energy services and management systems with 2000 revenue of $15 billion. The business has the largest installed base of power generation equipment in the global energy industry. GE Power Systems provides equipment, service and management solutions acros= s the power generation, oil and gas, distributed power and energy rental industries. Based in San Jose, Calif., Calpine Corporation is dedicated to providing customers with reliable and competitively priced electricity. Calpine is focused on clean, efficient combined-cycle, natural gas-fired generation an= d is the nation's largest producer of renewable geothermal energy. To date, the company has approximately 31,200 megawatts of base load capacity and 6,800 megawatts of peaking capacity in operation, under construction and announced development in 28 states and Alberta, Canada. The company was founded in 1984 and is publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol CPN. For more information about Calpine, visit its Website at www.calpine.com. This news release discusses certain matters that may be considered ""forward-looking"" statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Excha= nge Act of 1934, as amended, including statements regarding the intent, belief = or current expectations of Calpine Corporation (the ""Company"") and its management. Prospective investors are cautioned that any such forward-looki= ng statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve a number of risks and uncertainties that could materially affect actual results such as= , but not limited to, (i) changes in government regulations and anticipated deregulation of the electric energy industry; (ii) commercial operations of new plants that may be delayed or prevented because of various development = and construction risks, such as a failure to obtain financing and the necessary permits to operate or the failure of third-party contractors to perform the= ir contractual obligations (iii) cost estimates are preliminary and actual cos= t may be higher than estimated, (iv) the assurance that the Company will deve= lop additional plants, (v) a competitor's development of a lower-cost generatin= g gas-fired power plant, (vi) receipt of regulatory approvals or (vii) the ri= sks associated with marketing and selling power from power plants in the newly competitive energy market. Prospective investors are also referred to the other risks identified from time to time in the Company's reports and registration statements filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. SOURCE Calpine Corporation CONTACT: press, Kent Robertson, 408-995-5115, ext. 1144, or investors, Rick Barraza, 408-995-5115, ext. 1125, both of Calpine Corporation Web site: http://www.gepower.com Web site: http://www.calpine.com (CPN) [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Red Herring Article; [EMail-Body]= Hap -- could you provide a response and get it to Meredith. I'd like to correct this. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/18/2001 07:54 PM ----- Joannie Williamson 03/16/2001 09:20 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Red Herring Article Thought you would like to see. Joannie ---------------------- Forwarded by Joannie Williamson/Corp/Enron on 03/16/2001 09:18 AM --------------------------- From: Chris Hilgert@ECT on 03/16/2001 08:43 AM To: Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Red Herring Article Jeff, I was recently skimming the Enron news articles on Yahoo Finance and saw this one published in Red Herring about the sad demise of the renewable energy business in California: 00001 I thought the article was reasonable until I got to a certain part about the impact that recent high prices have had on these companies and Enron was mentioned in a rather improper light, in my opinion. Below is a short excerpt from the article with a particular sentence highlighted concerning Enron: ""Proponents of renewable power viewed California's deregulation as flawed from the onset three years ago. Still, they anticipated that with adequate publicity millions of consumers could be persuaded to switch from the traditional power supply, which comes mainly from the more polluting fossil fuels and nuclear power, and that the demand would spur supply. The number of producers and retailers getting into the green market would then only grow -- as long as the big utilities didn't interfere. That's what almost happened. Over the last three years, retailers like Green Mountain Energy and Utility.com bought green power already available in California and started to invest in building their own renewable energy generators, like windmill farms and large solar-panel assemblies. Still, for all the optimism and effort, only about 200,000 customers -- less than 1 percent of the 8.5 million households that had the option of switching providers -- chose to support them. Many of those were swayed by a deregulation-mandated credit of 1.5 cents per kilowatt hour for consumers who switched. When natural gas prices were high, the credit actually represented a real savings. Historically, environmentally conscious consumers have paid a penny or two more per kilowatt hour for renewable energy, along with an average monthly surcharge of $5. Then, last fall, the fledgling industry started to crumble. Energy wholesalers like Enron (NYSE: ENE) and Calpine (NYSE: CPN) responded to a rising demand for energy by raising their prices from 6 cents per kilowatt hour to as much as $1.50. Green retailers had trouble getting credit to buy power. Many chose to drop out of the market rather than have to charge a price that was less than their cost. When the energy crisis hit, many green consumers' bills more than doubled."" In light of the recent e-mail that was sent out, I thought that I would bring this to your attention as it may warrant a response to bring clarity that Enron does not raise prices, it transacts in a market where prices are set by supply and demand. The average person reading this could very easily come to the conclusion that Calpine and Enron broke the back of the renewable energy companies, which is clearly not the case. Nonetheless, thought you might find this of interest. Chris Hilgert Enron Americas Enron Compression Services [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Refund Cases Timelines--Confidential Atty Client Work Product; [EMail-Body]= Tim, Per your request. Everybody else: please forward corrections/updates to me. Thanks, Alan Comnes [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Request Confidential Information by FERC; [EMail-Body]= We will be asking for confidential treatment unless and until the FERC requires similar information to be released by all market participants. ---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Hain/HOU/ECT on 09/08/2000 04:28 PM --------------------------- To: Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Request Confidential Information by FERC ---------------------- Forwarded by Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT on 09/08/2000 04:19 PM --------------------------- Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp. From: 09/08/2000 04:19 PM To: cc: Karen_Y_Koyano@calpx.com Subject: Request Confidential Information by FERC To All California Power Exchange Participants: Notice is hereby provided pursuant to Section 19.3.4 of the California Power Exchange Tariff that the staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), as part of its investigation of California markets, has requested information that my be confidential under Section 19.3.2 of the Tariff. Such information consists of participant specific schedules and bids. The FERC staff has requested the California Power Exchange to provide such information no later than 24 business hours after the date of this notice. If you desire to assert a claim of privilege or confidentiality pursuant to FERC's regulations or other legal authority, the California Power Exchange will include your written assertion of that claim together with its submittal to the FERC staff, provided that it is timely received. Your written statement should be directed to FERC and delivered to: Karen Koyano California Power Exchange 1000 S. Fremont Avenue Building A-9 W, Fifth Floor Alhambra, CA 91801 626.537.3173 facsimile Information must be received no later than Tuesday, September 12, 2000, 9:00 A.M. PDT, to be included with any information delivered to the FERC staff. You are also free to take any other legal action you may deem appropriate in the circumstances of this investigation. Thank you. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= <<Concur Expense Document>> - February 2001-CR; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/18/2001 08:01 PM ----- eserver@enron.com 03/16/2001 08:31 AM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - February 2001-CR The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: Kelly L. Kimberly Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: February 2001-CR Report Total: $2,475.53 Amount Due Employee: $2,475.53 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://nahou-wwxms01p [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FREETRIAL - Enron Corporation News Alert:
 KEANSTEVEN_J_ENRON_COPORATIONS 9 new stories.; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/02/2001 12:45 PM ----- =09<FREETRIAL@ptvnews.net> =0903/02/2001 06:00 AM =09=09=20 =09=09 To: <skean@enron.com> =09=09 cc:=20 =09=09 Subject: FREETRIAL - Enron Corporation News Alert:=20 9 new stories. News Alert=20 Each business day, Power Television will send to you by email a listing of= =20 the news your company has made from television stations across the Unites= =20 States. Over 100 local media markets and 20 networks will be monitored by o= ur=20 service at NO COST to you.=20 Each headline will allow you to link to a text transcript of the news story= .=20 If the story is of significant interest, a video clip can be ordered online= =20 as well.=20 As a way to introduce our innovative new service, you will be able to view= =20 text transcripts for free. After a week=01,s trial, the news notifications = will=20 be delivered to you at no cost but if you would like to view actual text=20 transcripts of news stories there is a nominal $9 per view cost. VHS tapes= =20 can be ordered for $95 plus shipping. Our goal is to provide an online=20 alternative to the costly traditional television monitoring and clipping=20 services.=20 The following stories have been posted to your KEANSTEVEN_J_ENRON_COPORATIO= NS=20 account for the Enron Corporation search: 2001-02-28 22:27:50 NBC=20 Tyler/Longview (Lufkin/Nacogdoches), TX DREW-OVER 3-MILLION FANS LAST-SEASON TO ENRON-FIELD.. . BUT THEY WON'T=20 2001-03-01 05:06:27 NBC Miami/Ft. Lauderdale, FL USE IT. >> REPORTER: TEXAS-BASED ENRON IS SEEKING ZONING APPROVAL FOR=20 2001-03-01 06:04:35 NBC Miami/Ft. Lauderdale, FL TOLERATE IT. I KNOW THAT ENRON IS A BIG POWERFUL INTERNATIONAL=20 2001-03-01 17:18:49 NBC Houston, TX A LOOK AT NUMBERS FROM ENRON. NORTH ZULCH, THIRD INCH RAIN.=20 2001-03-01 18:59:06 CNN National ENERGY CRISIS? WE''LL TALK TO ENRON LEADER, THIS COMPANY WAS SHOWING=20 2001-03-01 19:12:10 CNN National CRISIS, A ONE-ON-ONE INTERVIEW WITH ENRON''S CHAIRMAN, AND EARNINGS WARNING= S,=20 LABOR=20 2001-03-01 19:17:45 CNN National POWER CRISIS COULD GET WORSE, ENRON''S CHAIRMAN, KENNETH LAY, WHEN=20 ""MONEYLINE""=20 2001-03-01 19:20:00 CNN National AGREES, KENNETH LAY, CHAIRMAN OF ENRON, THE LARGEST BUYER AND SELLER=20 2001-03-01 19:23:55 CNN National OVER THE PAST 52 WEEKS, ENRON HAS DROPPED 24% FROM ITS=20 Power Television offers a daily news notification service free of charge.= =20 Costs are only incurred when viewing text transcripts, ordering VHS tapes o= r=20 when a link is forwarded and a new user who views a transcript.=20 Please alter my news alert=20 Please add an email addresses to this news alert=20 Please remove me from your free service=20 If you have any questions, please call 1.888.628.9191 or inquire online at= =20 www.ptvnews.net=20 Disclaimer: Material supplied may be used for internal review, analysis or= =20 research only. Any editing, reproduction, publication, rebroadcast, public= =20 showing or public display is forbidden and prohibited by copyright laws. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Distribution; [EMail-Body]= There is also a california update call (used to be daily, now weekly). Marcia Linton (Jim Steffes' assistant) can give you the call in information and add you to the distribution list. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 02/28/2001 02:20 PM ----- Miyung Buster@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 02/26/2001 09:09 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Shirley A Hudler/HOU/ECT@ECT@ENRON Subject: Re: Distribution Steve, I just added Shirley this morning, and I am forwarding her the articles that I distributed earlier today. Steven J Kean@ENRON 02/25/2001 08:56 PM To: Miyung cc: Shirley A Hudler/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Distribution please include shirley on your california updates ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 02/25/2001 08:56 PM ----- Shirley A Hudler@ECT 02/23/2001 10:46 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Distribution You mentioned at the end of our conf call last week that there might be an internal distribution I should be on. Is there someone I should contact to get on the list? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Message points; [EMail-Body]= please print ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/16/2000 10:21 AM ----- Paul Kaufman@ECT 10/13/2000 07:00 AM To: Steve Kean, Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Ginger Dernehl cc: Subject: Message points I've revised both the backgrounder and message point documents. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= confidential (client-attorney); [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Hain/HOU/ECT on 02/01/2000 09:47 AM --------------------------- From: Cooper Richey on 02/01/2000 09:18 AM To: Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: confidential (client-attorney) revised excel workbook is attached please forward to Ellen B. Ellen - I added the statistic you wanted and updated the older ones (you'll notice slightly different prices/occurrences because I hadn't cut off the date at Jan 1 2000 - i.e., the averages previously included the last month's worth of data.) - c [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= I'm Leaving Enron; [EMail-Body]= Congratulations on your new position! This all came up rather suddenly, at least as far as I can tell. If you have any interest, I would like to talk to you sometime. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/25/2001 06:38 PM ----- Mary Hain@ECT 03/23/2001 12:24 PM To: David_Aamodt@pgn.com, dapnucc@teleport.com, dick@pnucc.org, Frank_Afranji@pgn.com, raa@vnf.com, Joseph Alamo, ajaldrich@snopud.com, Jeff Alexander, Al Alexanderson@Enron, Keonee Almaida, hollis.alpert@ferc.fed.us, Brenda Anderson, angles@howry.com, Alan B Aronowitz/HOU/ECT@ECT, gdb@vnf.com, npbaker@bpa.gov, ellen@tca-us.com, paulb@citizenspower.com, paulb@citizenspower.com, garybarbour@email.msn.com, jbartus@cammckenna.com, glynda.becker@mail.house.gov, Samuel Behrends, bbennett@bpa.gov, sberman@hewm.com, KBILAS@SKADDEN.COM, sbooye@Skadden.com, raymond.r.boyce@state.or.us, tbradley@bracepatt.com, sbrose@steptoe.com, sbuchheit@bracepatt.com, alanb@wutc.wa.gov, Jim Byrne, johncameron@dwt.com, Doug Carmichael, Ed Cassidy, ajchambe@llgm.com, Melissa Chiechi, elchristensen@snopud.com, kevin.clark@ci.seattle.wa.us, rcloward@avistacorp.com, david_cohen@rniinc.com, Bill Comish, Victor Contract, powerlac@aol.com, Frederick Coolbroth, kcorum@nwppc.org, KCurry@bracepatt.com, Wanda Curry/HOU/EES@EES, gdahlke@paine-hamblen.com, mday@gmssr.com, dearing@chelanpud.org, tdeboer@paine-hamblen.com, Tom_Delaney@enron.com, sdleonard@earthlink.net, dldorrell@stoel.com, Mary Doyle, Jay Dudley, mce2280@idahopower.com, michaelearly@earthlink.net, Katherine Edwards, rle@givenspursley.com, imaxtrans@aol.com, Chris Elliott, sandra.elliott@ferc.fed.us, kerwin@ect.enron.com, dezickson@mwe.com, Jim Fallon, fallonr@howrey.com, Elias Farrah, Michele_Farrell@pgn.com, dfaulk@puget.com, gfergus@brobeck.com, Willard Fields, sfisher@avistaenergy.com, pfox@bracepatt.com, Pat Franklin, John Frazzell, ericf@prestongates.com, don.furman@pacificorp.com, segfurst@bpa.gov, Jackie Gallagher, craiggannett@dwt.com, Alvaro Garcia/LON/ECT@ECT, sbishop@gibbs-bruns.com, wgibson@nwppc.org, ggilbert@ci.tacoma.wa.us, Pat Gilman, Alex Goldberg, jlgreene@energyadvocates.com, Chris_Groener@mail.house.gov, Mary Groggin, Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stephen Hall, steve.c.hall@enron.com, Leo Hamblin, whannaford@NWPPC.org, jim.harding@ci.seattle.wa.us, rhardy@hardyenergy.com, kharri@puget.com, Steve_Hawke@pgn.com, dhawkins@caiso.com, marc.hellman@state.or.us, Scott Helyer, mhenry@bracepatt.com, dwmp@teleport.com, rhornby@tca-us.com, mhornst@aol.com, dhuard@jmbm.com, Marlene Huntsinger@pgn.com, cfi1@tca-us.com, Richard Ingersoll/HOU/ECT@ECT, pljacklin@stoel.com, montrey@aol.com, danj@cfmdc.com, kgjohnson@bpa.gov, ljohnson@pwrteam.com, Karen E Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT, mkanner@kannerandassoc.com, karid@perkinscoie.com, pkaufma@ect.enron.com, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Jeffrey Keeler/Corp/Enron@Enron @ Enron, Devon Kehoe <devon_kehoe@mentorg.com>, James Keller, Joe.Kelliher@mail.house.gov, kkennedy@bdbc.com, Rick Kessler, rdking@bpa.gov, Harry Kingerski/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, rsk@schwabe.com, gwilliams8@austin.rr.com, John Klauberg, Holli Krebs/HOU/ECT@ECT, ekrogh@wiredweb.com, blafferty@avistacorp.com, wdlamb@bpa.gov, John Lamb, Therese Lamb, srlarson@bpa.gov, zora.lazic@bchydro.com, kaleathley@bpa.gov, pamela_lesh@pgn.com, Debi LeVine, lcg@europa.com, doug.little@powerex.com, Robert Loeffler, Chris Long, sjlong@bpa.gov, rlopezv@www.conet.com.mx, david_lucio@iep.illinova.com, king.lum@bchydro.bc.ca, kevin.lynch@pacificorp.com, Mark Maehr, Randal T Maffett/HOU/ECT@ECT, John Malowney/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sueyen Mao, Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@Enron, Lee Martin@Enron, maurw@perkinscoie.com, Wayne Mays/PDX/ECT@ECT, Michael McCall/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Travis McCullough/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael McDonald, brugen@erols.com, mckinley@wpuda.org, mcm@vnf.com, mcnichol@wapa.com, shauna@pnucc.org, Maureen McVicker, pmeringolo@brobeck.com, demetcalf@bpa.gov, cemeyer@bpa.gov, jmilegich@sppc.com, fred_miller@pgn.com, Jeffrey Miller/HOU/ECT@ECT, jerry.miller@pacificorp.com, Laura Miller, scott.miller@ferc.fed.us, Bill Miner, pmohler@hewm.com, emoler@velaw.com, nkmorgado@bpa.gov, Mike@tonkon.com, krmoxness@bpa.gov, mmps@millcreeklaw.com, pmurphy@mbllp.com, terrym@millcreeklaw.com, bmurtha@acy.sunint.com, Rich Nassief, tod@mgninc.com, Douglas_Nichols@pgn.com, Patty Nichols, Christi Nicolay, tmnoguchi@bpa.gov, darcy@tonkon.com, Sarah Novasel@sarah novosel/Corp/Enron@Enron, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Tom O'Donnell, PObenchain@idahopower.com, Pegy Olds, Carol Opatrny, tpaine@avistacorp.com, Dave Parquet, bpascoe@mtpower.com, afpaschke@bpa.gov, ccperigo@bpa.gov, wlpernas@stoel.com, lpeters@pacifier.com, jill@pnucc.org, Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron, npickover@bracepatt.com, Phillip Platter/HOU/ECT@ECT, Alfred Pollard/HOU/ECT@ECT, Walt Pollock@Enron, gporter@sppc.com, Kevin M Presto/HOU/ECT@ECT, jquint@puget.com, maraschio@bpa.gov, Dale Rasmussen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Scott Rasmussen, Bobby Reeves/PDX/ECT@ECT, preiten@pngc.com, reyna2r@kochind.com, shellyr@pacifier.com, Jeff Richter/HOU/ECT@ECT, raroach@bpa.gov, atrodrigues@bpa.gov, rarogers@bpa.gov, peterroi@erols.com, Rothfelder@rlo-law.com, Richard Sanders, jsaven@pacifier.com, Michael Schilmoeller/PDX/ECT@ECT, jschlect@avistacorp.com, Diana Scholtes/HOU/ECT@ECT, Roger Seifert, Cara Semperger, asettanni@bracepatt.com, Richard Shapiro, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Joshua Sheinkman, jshurts@nwppc.org, Sid, msizer@ci.tacoma.wa.us, slavens.paula@deps.ppl.com, small@wrightlaw.com, small@wrightlaw.com, douglas.smith@ferc.fed.us, Mike Smith, Roger Smith, Larry Soderquist/HOU/ECT@ECT, Harvey Spigal, mstauffer@mtpower.com, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, JKStier@BPA.gov, rbstrong@paine-hamblen.com, DASwanstrom@Verner.com, Mike Swerzbin/HOU/ECT@ECT, tabors@tca-us.com, Ron Tapscott/HOU/ECT@ect @ ECT, James K Tarpey/DEN/ECT@ECT, Jake Thomas, ryan_thomas@burns.senate.gov, jrt2058@idahopower.com, maryann@pnucc.org, mtierney@sempra.com, robin_tompkins@pgn.com, Ann Tumlinson, AW Turner, Sheila Tweed, Lisa Urick, rvermeers@avistacorp.com, Frank W Vickers/HOU/ECT@ECT, John Walley, kristiwallis@sprintmail.com, walshl@howrey.com, swalton@enron.com, Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, kaward@bpa.gov, Kim Ward/HOU/ECT@ECT, Carol Wardell, dwatkiss@bracepatt.com, sawatson@bpa.gov, judy.welch@NWPP.ORG, 211-6155@MCIMAIL.COM, Kwenzel@zzz.com, cwestadt@sppc.com, Brian Whalen, Bill Williams/PDX/ECT@ECT, klwmtp@worldnet.att.net, lyn_williams@pgn.com, Greg Wolfe@ECT, Vickie Wolk-Laniewski@Enron, Ed Wood/HOU/ECT@ECT, mwood@stoel.com, Steve Wright, Teresa L Wright/HOU/ECT@ECT, WSCC, Charles Yeung, Christian Yoder/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Steve Kean, Travel in the Park, D Brett Hunsucker/HOU/ECT@ECT, Carla Hoffman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Bernadette Hawkins, Joe Hartsoe@Enron, Donna Fulton, Roger Fragua/HOU/ECT@ECT, James B Fallon/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael Etringer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Terry W Donovan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stacy Dickson@ECT, Ginger Dernehl/HOU/EES@EES, Rhonda L Denton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Sean Crandall/PDX/ECT@ECT @ ECT, Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron, t.briggs@enron.com, Stacey Bolton, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Phillip K Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Alan Comnes, Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Portland West Desk, assad@elektro.com.br, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Alberto Levy/SA/Enron@Enron, Aleck Dadson/TOR/ECT@ECT, Allison Navin/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Amy Fabian/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Barbara A Hueter/NA/Enron@Enron, Bernadette Hawkins/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bill Moore/NA/Enron@Enron, cristinah@elektro.com.br, Carlos Gustavo Azevedo/SA/Enron@Enron, Carmen Carolyn Cooney/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Charles Yeung/HOU/ECT@ECT, Chauncey Hood/NA/Enron@ENRON, Chris Long/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cynthia Sandherr/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Damon Dan Staines/HOU/ECT@ECT, Daniel Allegretti/NA/Enron@Enron, Dave Mangskau/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Donald Lassere/NA/Enron@Enron, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Eidy Catala/TRANSREDES@TRANSREDES, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron, Frank Rishe/NA/Enron@Enron, Geriann Warner/NA/Enron@Enron, Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron, Gisele S Braz/SA/Enron@Enron, Gloria Guillermo Canovas/SA/Enron@Enron, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Howard Fromer/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Janine Migden/NA/Enron@Enron, Javier Jean R Dressler/NA/Enron@Enron, Jean Ryall/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Brown/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeffrey Keeler/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Joao Joe Allen/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Connor/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jose Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron, Kathleen Sullivan/NA/Enron@ENRON, Kerry Stroup/NA/Enron@Enron, Kikumi Kishigami/NA/Enron@Enron, Kirsten Bellas/NA/Enron@Enron, Lara Leibman/NA/Enron@Enron, Laurie Knight/NA/Enron@Enron, Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda J Noske/HOU/ECT@ECT, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Lindsay Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron@Enron, Lora Sullivan/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Luiz Maurer/SA/Enron@Enron, Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Marchris Robinson/NA/Enron@Enron, Marcia A Linton/NA/Enron@Enron, Marcie Milner/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Melinda Pharms/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michelle Belzak/TOR/ECT@ECT, Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron, Nancy Hetrick/NA/Enron@Enron, Patrick Keene/NA/Enron@Enron, Ray Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ricardo Charvel/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Ingersoll/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron, Robert Hemstock/CAL/ECT@ECT, Robert Robin Kittel/NA/Enron@Enron, Ron McNamara/NA/Enron@Enron, Roy Boston/HOU/EES@EES, Rubena Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Scott Bolton/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Sergio Assad/SA/Enron@Enron, Stella Stephen D Burns/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steve Montovano/NA/Enron@Enron, Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Sue Nord/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Susan M Landwehr/NA/Enron@Enron, Terri Miller/NA/Enron@Enron, Thane Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron, Tom Chapman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Delaney/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Tom Hoatson/NA/Enron@Enron, Tracy Cooper/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Valeria Lima/SA/Enron@Enron, Vinio Floris/Corp/Enron@Enron, Xi Xi/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeffrey Keeler/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron, Lara Leibman/NA/Enron@Enron, Gloria Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Aleck Dadson/TOR/ECT@ECT, Daniel Allegretti/NA/Enron@Enron, Howard Fromer/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Roy Boston/HOU/EES@EES, Janine Migden/NA/Enron@Enron, Christie Patrick/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jane Rhonda L Denton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kathleen E Magruder/HOU/EES@EES, Susan T Covino/HOU/EES@EES, Rebecca Carter/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron, Janet Butler/ET&S/Enron, Kevin M Presto/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brad Richter/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Greg Piper/Corp/Enron, Kevin McGowan/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kim Ward/HOU/ECT@ECT, Leslie Reeves/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: I'm Leaving Enron I am going to be the Senior Regulatory Counsel at ISO New England starting on April 9, 2001. My last day in the Portland area will be March 31, 2001. I enjoyed working with you and wish you the best of everything. My new address will be: Mary Hain Senior Regulatory Counsel ISO New England Inc. One Sullivan Road Holyoke, MA 01040-2841 (413) 535-4000 mhain@ISO-NE.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= WPTF Friday Deliver Unto Us A Burrito; [EMail-Body]= THE FRIDAY BURRITO ""...more fun than a fortune cookie, and at least as accurate."" =01&Are those folks smoking crack?=018 he asked in an outrage. My friend, = Ol=01, Dave in Houston, has trouble understanding the workings of our power business here in California. In fact, so do I. Yesterday=01,s Joint Senate/Assembly Committee on Energy and Natural Resources did nothing to improve either Dave=01,s or my understanding of the national embarrassment California is perpetrating with electricity deregulation. =01&The next thing you know, they will be taking property, and forcing utilities to build power plants and transmission,=018 he mused between sips of Dixie longneck beer and chomps of jalapeno peppers. =01&Come to think of it, Dave, they did say something about that. Yeah,=018 I recalled, =01&Senator Peace was expounding on his favorite idea which is forcing the ISO or the utilities to build peakers, and not let the market build them. I can=01,t remember if that was before or after he suggested to EOB Chairman Kahn that the ISO and the PX should be folded into State agencies under the direction of the Electric Oversight Board.=018 I know what you are thinking right now. The next thing you know California will have regulated retail rates. That recipe should be out of the PUC=01,s oven sometime next week. =01&Well, the power marketers are jigging the system, bidding up to the ISO=01,s bid cap. There is no way you can tell me that a generator planned to make $750/MWH in its pro forma,=018 Dave added. =01&So you agree with Herr (Hair) Peace! You don=01,t believe in markets,=018 I retorted. = =01&Oh, I believe in them, but I remember when I was short on a 300 MW trade, and without any notice or advanced warning, the price in the Midwest market went against me,=018 Dave recalled. =01&I called everyone who I tra= ded with, and they had nothing. I finally called XXXXX, and I asked what will it cost for 50 MW?=018 =01&Why didn=01,t you ask for 300?=018 I wondered. =01&I didn=01,t want to= show him my position. You get hosed when you show the buyer your position. Ask for 50, first,=018 Dave chided. =01&What happened?=018 =01&Oh, they offered to sell for $150/MWH. I said I= =01,d take it, and then said I needed another fifty. He asked $300. I took that, and he priced the next 50 MW at $600,=018 lamented Dave. =01&He just wanted to see how far he could push me. That=01,s what I mean when I say the traders are jigging it.=018 =01&But Dave, you old communist, your forgetting the trading function is what mitigates the risk. The traders are the in between people who guess at the price. Sometimes they guess right, and sometimes they guess wrong. But the damage, or the reward, is on their book, not passed on to the ultimate consumer. It has nothing to do with the marginal cost of a generating plant.=018 And there you have it. Put in a price cap, and the traders have a target for which to shoot. I can=01,t prove the following, yet, but I=01,l= l wager with any of you that as the price cap level dips down, the average trading price climbs even as the so-called =01&dysfunctional=018 price spik= es are eliminated. Consumers get hosed, and the fundamental economic principle is upheld, which is, one can never be made better off with the imposition of an additional constraint. I feel better already. Here is what is on our short agenda this week. >>> Things in the Mailbag >>> Things in the People=01,s Republic of California @@@ The ISO Replies to the EOB Report @@@ Reflections on a Day of Senate Hearings @@@ PUC Issues OII on Functioning of Wholesale Market >>> Odds & Ends (_!_) >>> Things in the Mailbag It has been awhile since we put the mail feedbag on and had a munch. Here is what my friends have been writing me. FPL Energy=01,s Steve Ponder was only too quick to tell me, =01&Please Gary= , no more whining about your computer. How old are you?? Is this the year you get the AARP letter??? A very depressing moment. Do you really not know how to spell Morro Bay??? Please let us know what is going on with your son's hockey team?? Don't forget the cigars for Moron??? Bay!!!!=018 It is good to have friends like Steve. They make the pain of separation so much easier. And Steve, when you FPL guys get that Entergy merger sorted out, in a dozen years or so, you let us know. I want to participate in the name selection for the new entity. How about Fentergy PLus? Next, from the PX=01,s Mark Hoppe, who writes, =01&As you've heard from others, I don't know quite how you manage to knock out all this material each week. The burrito is informative, humorous and usually contains a sprinkle of irony, tragedy (ISO Drama). Though you are usually neutral regarding the PX, you are not unduly negative which I appreciate. I think we do a pretty good job over here and so often people in the industry forget the amount effort and challenge it took the PX to successfully open this market.=018 Thanks, Mark. I just want you to know that my ability to write this stuff every week is not constrained by the facts or evidence. I have learned from watching Herr (Hair?) Peace, that as long as you can talk (write, too) fast, and have conviction in your statements, regardless of how groundless they may be, you will have a willing and eager audience. A few weeks ago, I received from the PX=01,s Jennifer Sherwood a note, which she wants you to know are her opinions, not necessarily the PX=01,s. It=01,s okay, Jennifer. I paid George,yesterday, the $20 I owed him for that sham Rose Bowl bet, (remember?, Stanford lost) and your opinions are cool with us. =01&Just curious - has anyone been comparing high unleaded prices to high CA electricity prices? What I mean is, we are up in arms about how we should protect the unfortunate San Diego consumer who can't afford to keep the AC on. But what about the inflated unleaded gas prices the whole country has seen over the last few months? No effort is made by the government to shield the consumer from how much it costs to fill their gas tank. No mention is made of those who can't afford to drive to the grocery store because they can't afford the extra 15 or 20 cents a gallon. The costs are passed along to the consumer without pause. Granted there are differences between the unleaded market and the electricity market in terms of demand-side responsiveness, but then again is it that much different to say, =01+I can't drive today because gas is too expensive=01, vs. =01+I can't turn up the AC today because it's too expensive.=01,=018 Finally, from one of our [secret] Washington readers, and I am not telling who, I received the following: =01&I ... broke down and listened to the [ISO Governing Board] discussion and vote. Ugh! I too noted that the ""speak fast"" was applied to everyone but Herr Peace. My goodness, what a mess we have. I loved Jerry's picture in USA Today -- it spoke volumes. My sources at FERC tell me, though, that we should keep an eye out for {FERC Chairman] Hoecker to do something really ... [Censored] ... for political reasons. Given no Commission meetings til September, the only way to act is by unanimous consent, so I would hope he can't do all that much.=018 >>> Things in the People=01,s Republic of California @@@ The ISO Replies to the EOB Report Several of you people commented to me that the ISO=01,s reply to the PUC/EOB report was very good. I decided to excerpt the best sections of it for the Burrito. The full document can be found on the ISO=01,s website. =01&... the [PUC/EOB] Report asserts that the suspected activities of certain generators on June 13 created frequency instability leading to the Bay Area blackouts the following day. In fact, the events of June 13 and June 14 were completely independent of one another. The voltage instability on June 14 was caused by system conditions on that day alone -- exceptionally high loads, insufficient generation in the specific local area, and transmission constraints that prevented the import of generation from outside the area. =01&The Report states that the ISO =01&never tried=018 to call upon consume= rs to reduce demand in order to avoid the Bay Area blackouts. In fact, the ISO had in place on June 14 a number of demand response programs designed to reduce load including the Summer 2000 Demand Response Program, under which customers have agreed, through a prior solicitation, to curtail energy use in exchange for a fee =01&The Report makes a number of assertions concerning the prices paid by =01+purchasers=01, of energy as a result of the recent price spikes (e.g. $= 1.2 billion in the month of June alone). These assertions leave one with the mistaken impression that these prices reflect amounts actually paid by the UDCs and/or passed through to customers. However, in determining the total cost of energy, one must determine the impact of any forward contracts entered into by the UDCs in advance of the wholesale energy markets. These contracts, which are designed to =01&lock-in=018 a specific price in advance of real-time or near real-time market activities, are specifically designed to mitigate the impact of price volatility, and are standard in all commodities markets. We have reason to believe that some of the UDCs were substantially hedged during the period of the recent price spikes. =01&In a similar vein, the reports asserts that California =01&might well= =018 have saved $110 million dollars had a $250 price cap been in place in May and June. This assertion assumes that all energy purchases would have been made at or below the $250 bid cap. In fact, during times of peak demand, when all of the state=01,s generation has been exhausted, the ISO competes with neighboring regions for available generation. In order to secure the necessary power, the ISO must purchase, on a bilateral basis, this energy from resources located outside of the ISO=01,s control area. =01&The Report asserts that California power markets =01&are not now competitive=018 and implies, erroneously in our view, that this is the normal state of affairs. It is not. The Market Surveillance Committee has noted that =01&market power in the California energy market appears to arise primarily during periods of peak demand,=018 and warned that demand growth would increase the incidence of market power during the summer of 2000. =01&The Report asserts that the ISO is answerable only to a self-interested board and not to the citizens of California. This simply is not the case. The ISO is subject to the provisions of the Federal Power Act and to the rules and regulations of FERC, which dictate, in part, that wholesale energy rates must be just and reasonable and in the public interest. The ISO further operates under a detailed tariff reviewed and approved by FERC. Every change to our market design and virtually every aspect of the ISO=01,s business is subject to review and scrutiny by FERC. The FERC process provides substantial opportunities for input by the state agencies and such agencies have, in fact, been active participants in the FERC proceedings. =01&The Report asserts that California supply conditions have been affected by restructuring and that somehow the restructuring choices have made California more vulnerable to supply shortages. This assertion is unfounded. Significant load growth in California and neighboring states coupled with a lack of significant infrastructure investment in both generation and transmission have caused this vulnerability. Restructuring has increased proposed power plant applications many fold. Only by immediate and sustained attention to streamlining approval and siting processes for both of these critical infrastructure elements will this significant shortage be addressed.=018 >>> Things in the People=01,s Republic of California @@@ Reflections on a Day of Senate Hearings If you want to imagine a scary sight, imagine, then, twelve California legislators gathering together in one hearing room to rectify the wrongs of electric restructuring. Also imagine, as if you are in the Twilight Zone, witnesses that are slow on their feet, and reckless in their facts. Then you get a glimpse of what yesterday=01,s Joint Senate/Assembly hearing was like. It started over two hours late. The Senate was busy congratulating one of their own who is term-limited out next session, and they wanted to heap on the glory. That said, the show began with CEC Commissioner Bill Keese. Mr. Keese has one story, and regardless how well he tells it, and he does, it is always the same story. It is the heat storm story. One can imagine in the heat storm story a lead character who is a single-mom, call her Lady-Bird Bowen, who travels across an angry land with her precocious pre-teen child, Stevie Wonderboy. They are searching for electric power plants in the dessert, which, by the grace of God have been shipped to other countries which have more liberal returns on investment. Being the first speaker, Mr. Keese took at least half the heat (storm) of the day. The rage of the Energy Fuhrer was palpable. Last week, San Diegans shed 350 MW of load last week to save the entire system, and did not receive one penny of compensation (I=01,m not making that up ... He said it). He is sick of hearing about demand management as being a solution for the problem over the last five years, and he is about done listening. People in San Diego are depressed by the sudden price hikes. Yikes! Keese did mention that the California reserve margin has sunk to 7%, but in neighboring Arizona, the reserve margin is -1% or -2%!! Mr. Keese correctly pointed out that electric power is not solely a California problem, it is a regional problem. One member of the Committee asked what the legislature could do to speed up the power plant siting and construction process? Keese referred to Governor Gray Davis=01, Executive Order issued last week to which the CEC plans to respond soon, date uncertain, that lays out a 6 month permitting time line. The six months are enough if the applicant has the land secured, zoning okayed, transmission access, and air offsets. Hmmmmmm. That alone might take six months before you get to the CEC. The next panel included Mr. Kahn of the EOB, and Ms. Lynch. I went too hard on her last week, calling her Let=01,s Do Lynch. That was a 0.8 TPC. Sorry. I promise to be nicer starting now. The Energy Fuhrer instructed Ms. Lynch to use her authority to order SDG&E to divert the pass through of funds from the customers to the PX until the dysfunction of the market is cured. Put it in an escrow account. Ms Lynch promised to review this option at her August 21 PUC Meeting where she will enact SDG&E rate caps (told you). The star of the day, I thought, was FERC General Counsel Doug Smith. Mr. Smith comes to Sacramento. Isn=01,t that a switch? Mr. Smith came in place of Mr. Hoecker, thank the Lord. Mr. Smith put into FERC-eese what these 12 legislators could not get through their heads any other way. The 12 angry legislators were looking for a way for FERC to declare the wholesale market as non-competitive, and then ask the generators to give back the money they over collected. When can we do that? Mr. Smith answered as only a FERC attorney can answer. There is a process. It takes time. You must have evidence. FERC uses a three-part criteria for assessing whether or not market based rates are allowable. It=01,s based on market concentration and dominance, not the existence of high prices. You would have to sue FERC in federal court, and the best you could hope for is for FERC to reconsider its decision upon remand from the US Court of Appeals. Slowly, the wind came out of the sails of the gang of 12. They were stumped. Herr (Hair?) Peace screamed, couldn=01,t you, Mr. Smith of FERC, today use your authority to declare the markets non-competitive, that generators who had market based rates have exercised market power, and retro-actively implement a $250 rate cap across the Western region? Like a wheezing accordion, Mr. Smith played back and forth the familiar strains of music, like a solo street musician on the corner. Back and forth: the process, the process, the process. There have been times in the past I hated the process at FERC. Today, I have a renewed respect for what process affords me and you ... Freedom from the tyranny of a mob. For the remainder of the hearing, they focused on remedies that could be undertaken by the PUC. >>> Things in the People=01,s Republic of California @@@ PUC Issues OII on Functioning of Wholesale Market Well, the official title is, =01&Order Instituting Investigation into the Functioning of the Wholesale Electric Market and Associated Impact on Retail Electric Rates in the Services Territory of San Diego Gas & Electric Company=018. I like my title better. This Order, or OII was issued at the last business meeting of the Commission, on August 3. It calls for an investigation of the wholesale markets, responses from the three UDCs, and a pre-hearing conference in San Diego on August 29 at the San Diego Convention Center. Here are the questions the PUC wishes us to address: =01=07 What bill payment options should be provided to assist residential a= nd small commercial customers? (What does this have to do with the functioning of the wholesale market?) =01=07 Should SDG&E be authorized to participate in bilateral contracts or other supply procurement activities? How should the Commission assess reasonableness? Are SDG&E=01,s purchasing activities serving its customers on just and reasonable terms? =01=07 What is SDG&E=01,s obligation to minimize energy costs for its curre= nt customers? =01=07 How should the Commission, Attorney General, EOB, ISO and PX coordinate to investigate wholesale market events, behaviors, and irregularities? How should state/federal concerns be addressed? =01=07 What are the causes of the price increases? Are anticompeititve practices causing some of the price increases? Are there mechanisms the Commission can employ to make ratepayers whole? >>> Odds & Ends (_!_) As promised last week, I have a message from our event coordinator, Barb Ennis, regarding the upcoming WPTF General Meeting on October 5 and 6. Listen up! She writes: Hi Folks...... Well it is almost that time again....WPTF's October General Meeting will be held at the Inn at Morro Bay, Sixty State Park Road, Morro Bay, California 93442. Their phone numbers are: 800-321-9566 or 805 772-5651. The dates are October 5th and 6th, Thursday and Friday. The Inn at Morro Bay will also honor the same room prices if you choose to also stay Wednesday,Friday or Saturday. We have blocked 24 rooms for October 5th. Which range in prices: Petite Room with Queen Bed $89. (16 rooms) Pool and Garden View with King Bed and Private Hot Tub $152. (4 rooms) View of Bay rooms with two (2) Double Beds $152. (4 rooms) All these rooms are on a First come basis. SHUTTLE Information: The San Luis Obispo Airport is about 25 to 30 minutes by shuttle NOTE: FOG CAN BE THICK AT THIS AIRPORT..FLY IN THE AFTERNOON ....... Ride-On Shuttle (805) 541-8747 Rates Door to Door are $22.00 per person for the 1st person and ONLY $2.00 per person afterwards....SO if some planning can be done on the Airline Arrival times, through Barb, and one person books the Shuttle for a Group....the cost is substantially lower. Now, for(e) our Golfers....Tee times have been booked for Thursday, October 5th starting at 8.07am, 8.15am and 8.22am (space for 12 Golfers)..Sorry for the early morning start. The Golf Course has a Group going out from 8.30 am until 11.30am. The Golf Course is across the Inn at Morro Bay and your contact at the Course is Pat (805) 471-4360. For folks that may want to tour, Hearst Castle is located only 30 minutes from the Inn at Morro Bay. Within walking distance of the Inn is a Natural History Museum, a marina with kayak and canoe rentals. Shopping and dining along the Embarcadero, and some great hiking. World class wineries and tasting rooms numbering over 40 are located within a short drive from the Inn. If you choose to drive it is 3-hours from San Jose, American Eagle, Skywest and United Express all serve the local Airport in San Luis Obispo. Duke Energy is willing to conduct a Plant Tour (A woman=01,s only plant tour will be led by Duke=01,s Carolyn Baker) if some may wish to do so. The sooner we can do the booking, the better. So, bring the Family and we are looking forward to seeing you at WPTF's General Meeting. Agenda for October General Meeting Thursday, October 5 3:30 pm - 5:30 pm All Member=01,s Meeting 7:00 pm - Dinner Reception (We are still working on the details) Friday, October 6 9:00 am Opening Remarks and Program Irene Moosen - Distributed Generation Case at the PUC Bill Freddo - Confessions of a Merchant Plant Operator in New England ISO Dr.Frank Wolak - Topic of his choice Open Session - Everyone Gets a Chance to Speak Lunch provided at Noon. The object of humor notwithstanding, and seeing how the flow of new material has slowed a bit, my wife provided this week=01,s laughter. She didn=01,t have to attend the Senate hearing. Subject: The Brilliance of Women There were 11 people hanging onto a rope that came down from a helicopter. Ten were men and one was a woman. They all decided that one person should get off because if they didn't the rope would break and everyone would die. No one could decide who should go so finally the Woman gave a really touching speech saying how she would give up her life to save the others, because women were used to giving up things for their husbands and children and giving in to men. All of the men started clapping. Have a great weekend, y=01,all [applause] gba [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Confidential --CFTC Chair; [EMail-Body]= Hi Steve, Folks love Newsome, and I think he's very nice and appears to be very free market. Spears, the other Republican appointee is not at all free market, in my view. I would not like this to mentioned anywhere else, but I have found that the farm reps on the Commission may sound deregulatory but are not, and have been really troublesome without a good free market person on board. And there are no truly free market persons on board at the Commission (every single other agricultural rep that I worked with on the Commission were trouble, even though they claimed to be deregulatory -- and they were far worse before I got there and after I left.) I visited with Newsome a day before Inauguration, and I was appalled at what they were planning to do concerning agency structure -- that would have elevated the regulatory lawyers and diminished the role of the economists at the agency. Misguided and showed to me a lack of understanding of how organizational structures can affect what comes out of an agency. I am often at odds with ""the industry view"" regarding CFTC issues. I don't think the futures exchanges, who have a lot of power, necessarily are pro-competition; and many of the non-exchange folks who lobby on CFTC issues are Washington or New York (Democrat - which is why they want to involve Ken at this level) lawyers who do not understand markets and who are more interested in being able to claim influence or impact. The CFTC is in awful shape -- the quality of staff is horrendous, and the Commission is relying on some of the worst people for their policy work (same folks that Brooksley Born used, same folks who have advocated more regulation of the OTC market for years). Many quality folks do not want the job as Chairman because it's been such a backwater. I am looking for some good folks. Have at least one person who would be good at that job. And it's not Newsome. Please do not share this information with the usual folks, as they hate me anyway (I'm too free market and have argued against their ""fixes""). Sorry for this scathing review, but this is an important appointment. Wendy [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= A Supportive Note; [EMail-Body]= Dear Mr. Lay: I'm writing this note to you as a show of support to you during your dire times. The reason that I share this with you is my respect for you as a CEO, a business leader and a person. My wife is one of your employees who routinely shares stories about you that are nothing less than inspiring. I know that during difficult times, sometimes words emerge that can help people through difficult times. I believe that you are sincere man and know that you must be broken hearted, but I hope that this article can help you lead a dispirted workforce to see things more clearly. My wife, Shelly Pierce, has worked for Enron for the past two years and like many of your employees, has lost a great deal of her life savings. Of course, I accept most of the blame for this for reasons related to this article. I lost my investment discipline and held out the false hope that Enron could not falter. After reading the article to her while I was out of town, I believe that her spirit was a bit rejuvenated and she was ready to face the challenges that lay before you. Mr. Lay, I appreciate the opportunity that you have given my wife and our family and hope that this story inspires you to regain your successes. From the USA Today, Tuesday, November 27, 2001, page 15A. ""In recession, face brutal facts, thrive"" By Jim Collins A man in his early 20s recently asked me, ""So what's a recession like?"" Its an entirely alien concept to him; he'd grown up during the greatest economic boom in modern memory. His question drove home the fact that we haven't faced a severe, protracted economic setback for nearly 2 decades, leaving us terribly unpracticed at dealing with tough times. With this recession - long in coming, perhaps long to stay - now officially upon us, it is imperative that corporate leaders relearn a key lesson about how great companies (and great people) deal with difficult times differently from how they deal with merely good ones. That lesson is the ""Stockdale Paradox,"" a peculiar psychology shown by those who emerge from tough times not just intact, but stronger. Adm. Jim Stockdale was the highest-ranking U.S. military officer in the Hanoi prison camp during the Vietnam War. Tortured many times during his 8-year imprisonment, Stockdale lived without any prisoner's rights, no set release date and no certainty as to whether he would ever again see his family. He shouldered the burden of command while fighting an internal war against his captors and their attempts to use the prisoners for propaganda. At one point, he beat himself with a stool and cut himself with a razor, deliberately disfiguring himself so that he could not be put on video as an example of a ""well-treated prisoner."" He exchanged secret intelligence information with his wife through their letters knowing that discovery would mean more torture and perhaps death. After his release, Stockdale became the first three-star officer in the history of the Navy to wear both aviator wings and the Congressional Medal of Honor. You can understand, then, my anticipation at the prospect of spending part of an afternoon with Stockdale, who happened to be at the Hoover Institute across the street from my office when I taught at Stanford. In preparation, I read In Love and War, the book he and his wife wrote to chronicle their experiences those 8 years. As I read the book, I found myself getting depressed. It just seemed so bleak - the uncertainty of his fate, the brutality of his captors. And then it dawned on me: Here I am sitting in my warm comfortable office, looking out over the Stanford campus on a beautiful Saturday afternoon. I'm getting depressed reading this, and I know that he gets out, reunites with his family and becomes a national hero. If it feels depressing for me, how on earth did he deal with it when he was actually there and did not know the end of the story? ""I never lost faith in the end of the story,"" Stockdale said when I asked him. ""I never doubted not only that I would get out, but also that I would prevail in the end and turn the experience into the defining event of my life that, in retrospect, I would not trade."" I didn't say anything for many minutes, and we continued the slow walk toward the faculty club, Stockdale limping and arc-swinging his leg, still stiff from repeated torture. Finally, I asked, ""Who didn't make it out?"" ""Oh, that's easy,"" he said. ""The optimists."" ""The optimists? I don't understand,"" I said, completely confused. ""The optimists. Oh, they were the ones who said, 'We're going to be out by Christmas.' And Christmas would come, and Christmas would go. Then they'd say, 'We're going to be out by Easter.' And Easter would come, and Easter would go. And then Thanksgiving, and then it would be Christmas again. And they died of a broken heart."" After another long pause, he turned to me and said, ""This is a very important lesson. You must never confuse faith that you will prevail in the end - which you can never afford to lose - with the need for discipline to confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be."" My conversation with Stockdale had a profound influence on me, but I never really considered it a business lesson until my research team began to wrestle with the question of why some companies rise from difficulty to become great while others emerge from those exact same difficulties weakened and dispirited. We found that companies that became great embraced a corporate version of the Stockdale Paradox. Fannie Mae, for example found itself in the 1982 recession losing $1M every business day, with $56B in loans under water. Many analysts thought Fannie Mae, which was getting 9% on its mortgage portfolio but paying 15% on the debt it issued, was doomed. But CEO David Maxwell and his team never wavered in their aim to not merely survive, but also to prevail as a great company. Yes, they confronted the brutal fact that the interest-rate problem was not going to magically disappear (certainly not by Christmas). But they used this grim fact as a catalyst for creating an entirely new business model based on asking three central questions of greatness: What can we potentially do better than any other company in the world? What can best drive our economic engine? What best ignites the passions of our people? Instead of reacting to the recession with mindless restructuring, Fannie Mae rebuilt itself based on its answers to these questions. Eventually, it generated investor returns nearly eight times those of the general stock market. When asked how he dealt with the nay Sayers and the analysts who wrote Fannie Mae off, Maxwell said that it was never an issue inside the company. ""Of course, we had to stop doing a lot of stupid things, but we never entertained the possibility that we would fail. We were going to use the calamity as an opportunity to remake Fannie Maw into a great company."" The sad truth is that most executive teams won't respond that way to these dark days of uncertainty. Instead of using this recession as an opportunity to fundamentally rethink their business and rebuild a culture of discipline, the will simply restructure, lay off a bunch of people and liquidate their cultural equity. Mediocre leaders will hold out false hopes for a quick fix, only to watch those hopes be swept away by events. Their companies will begin to die of a broken heart. It need not be this way. Those who lead with the Stockdale Paradox - those who retain the unwavering faith that they will find a way to prevail in the end, but who also retain the discipline to confront the most brutal facts of reality - will find this an ideal time to rebuild and reinforce greatness. Used correctly, this recession can be a defining time in your firm's history that , in retrospect, you would not trade. Used wrongly, this recession will weaken your foundations and make it that much harder to become great. The choice is yours. Jim Collins, the author of Good to Great, operates a management-research laboratory in Boulder, Colo. Regards, Steve Steve Alexander Vice President, North American Artemis Consulting Artemis International Solutions Corporation Office: +1 281.338.9616 Mobile: +1 281.830.7430 www.artemisintl.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: confidential ee info; [EMail-Body]= Mark, Can you email me or fax me any written documentation we have give to Heidi in regard to performance. I have her reviews but thought we did some other written documentation. Let me know. Thanks. -----Original Message----- From: Whitt, Mark Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 2:33 PM To: Slone, Jeanie Subject: Termination of Heidi Dubose Have you heard anything from the HR lawyers regarding our ability to fire her in the near future for poor performance? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= <<Concur Expense Document>> - JB 004; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/24/2001 02:39 PM --------------------------- eserver@enron.com on 05/24/2001 03:37:44 PM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - JB 004 The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: John Brindle Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: JB 004 Report Total: $2,566.85 Amount Due Employee: $2,566.85 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://xms.enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= re: On Workplace Sleeves, Few Political Hearts; [EMail-Body]= The PAC did not give the money. PAC contributions to federal candidates are limited. The money was a combination of individual contributions Ken solicited and soft money donations to the Republican Party. 09/12/2000 10:33 AM Erin Rice Erin Rice Erin Rice 09/12/2000 10:33 AM 09/12/2000 10:33 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: re: On Workplace Sleeves, Few Political Hearts I think I understand why people get confused now. See below, in blue..... I know you mean the Enron PAC has contributed more than $615k to the Bush campaign (right?), but it reads like Enron Corp gave money directly to Bush. It's a complicated issue -- which I am hoping to simplify with my story! I'm going to use the second quote below in the article. ----- Forwarded by Erin Rice/Corp/Enron on 09/12/2000 10:27 AM ----- Money and Business/Financial Desk; Section 3 Personal Business On Workplace Sleeves, Few Political Hearts By MELINDA LIGOS 09/10/2000 The New York Times Page 10, Column 2 c. 2000 New York Times Company An example is Enron, the Houston energy conglomerate, which even suggests how much employees should give. Kenneth L. Lay, the chairman, recently sent top executives a memo on his stationery asking them to contribute $1,000 each to the Bush campaign, said Steven J. Kean, an executive vice president. This year, Enron and its employees have contributed more than $615,000 to the Bush campaign, he said. But there are limits, even at companies like Enron. ''We might tell employees to go out and vote, but nobody tells them who to vote for or passes out brochures,'' Mr. Kean said. ''That kind of thing is just not acceptable in today's workplace.'' Photos: Rosa Erives, at her Denver apartment, was a delegate to the Democratic National Convention but does not discuss politics at work. (Essdras M. Suarez for The New York Times); Daniel Lysk draws a parallel between the time he spends at work sending e-mail messages about animal rights and the time other employees take to smoke cigarettes. (Karen Segrave for The New York Times) Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Mid Year PRC Meetings; [EMail-Body]= for meeting file ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/14/2000 09:13 AM --------------------------- Cindy Olson@ENRON 08/14/2000 08:51 AM Sent by: Bobbie Power@ENRON To: James M Cliff Baxter/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sanjay Bhagat/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Rick Buy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Causey/Corp/Enron@ENRON, David W Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT, Diomedes Christodoulou/SA/Enron@Enron, James Derrick/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Andrew S Fastow/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Frevert/NA/Enron@Enron, Ben F Glisan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kevin Hannon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, David Nancy Young/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Stan Horton/Houston/Eott@Eott, Larry L Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kenneth Lay/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mike McConnell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rebecca Jeffrey McMahon/HOU/ECT@ECT, J Mark Metts/NA/Enron@Enron, James L Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lou L Pai/HOU/EES@EES, Ken Rice/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Jeffrey Sherrick/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Joseph W Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Thomas E White/HOU/EES@EES, Rebecca P Mark/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, Brenda Susan Skarness/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stacy Karen K Heathman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sharron Westbrook/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kay Chapman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Molly Bobrow/NA/Enron@Enron, Stephanie Harris/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bridget Maronge/HOU/ECT@ECT, Nicki Daw/NA/Enron@Enron, CAROL BROWN/ENRON@Gateway, Elaine Nancy Young/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Cindy Stark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary E Maureen McVicker/HOU/EES@EES, Joannie Williamson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cathy Phillips/HOU/ECT@ECT, Loretta Sue Ford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dolores Fisher/NA/Enron@Enron, Sherryl Bobbie Power/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Owens/HOU/EES@EES, Dorothy Dalton/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Christina Grow/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lauren Urquhart/LON/ECT@ECT, Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Pam Liz M Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Judy G Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Marsha Lindsey/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, Rob Walls/NA/Enron@Enron, John J Lavorato/Corp/Enron@Enron, Michael Kopper/HOU/ECT@ECT, James L Philippe A Bibi/HOU/ECT@ECT, David W Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joe Kishkill/SA/Enron@Enron, Wade James A Rod Hayslett/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Danny McCarty/LON/ECT@Enron, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Richard DiMichele/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Greg Piper/Corp/Enron@Enron, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/ECT@ECT, Charlene Jackson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Joe Gold/LON/ECT@ECT, Steve Elliott/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Scott Yeager/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Wes Colwell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paula Rieker/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Dick Kevin Hannon/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Shawn Debra Hicks/NA/Enron@Enron, Kimberly Hillis/HOU/ECT@ect, Inez Dauterive/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sherryl Peggy McCurley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kay Chapman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Edineth R Santos/SA/Enron@Enron, Mrudula Jana L Connie CarolMoffett/HOU/EES@EES, Kerry Ferrari/LON/ECT@ECT, Kathy Dodgen/HOU/EES@EES, Crissy Collett/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Tina Spiller/Corp/Enron@Enron, Christy Chapman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cheryl Kuehl/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Ginger Dernehl/HOU/EES@EES, Kirsten Nelz/LON/ECT@ECT, Sue Wadsworth/Enron Communications@Enron Communications Shirley Tijerina/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Laura Valencia/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Christina Carol Ann Brown/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Leah Rijo/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Shimira cc: Gina Corteselli/Corp/Enron@Enron, Julie Clyatt/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Mid Year PRC Meetings See attached memo. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message(due to missing attachment)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Portal; [EMail-Body]= Attached are some late night thoughts on the portal. Most of this is focussed on the portal for opinion leaders, but some of it could be applicable to the comemrcial portal as well. Could you forward this to Palmer ... for some reason my address book doesn't pull him up when I'm off the system. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGDE - Draft FERC Brief on Settlement
 Process; [EMail-Body]= see below. Federal price limits backfire=20 Some generators withhold power rather than abide by rate caps=20 David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer=20 Wednesday, July 4, 2001=20 ?2001 San Francisco Chronicle =20 URL: 01/07/04/MN186091.DTL =20 Officials in California and Nevada, after months of lobbying for federal re= gulators to cap Western power prices, warned yesterday that the newly impos= ed limits have had the unintended consequence of increasing a threat of bla= ckouts in the two states.=20 The warnings were issued as California came within minutes of rolling black= outs yesterday afternoon, and one day after the first-ever rolling blackout= s in Las Vegas forced energy-hungry casinos to shut off fountains and reduc= e air conditioning.=20 The two states are asking the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to take = a closer look at the so-called price mitigation plan and come up with revis= ions that would deter power companies from withholding electricity during s= hortages.=20 ""We need some clarity to this order,"" said Oscar Hidalgo, a spokesman for t= he California Department of Water Resources, which is spending billions of = dollars to keep the state's lights on.=20 ""Generators need to be held accountable,"" he said.=20 The crux of the problem is that price limits kick in during shortages, yet = power companies say these caps force them to sell power at below-market rat= es during periods of high demand.=20 Some companies have responded by holding back power rather than face the ex= pense of shipping electricity from state to state. Each mile that electrici= ty must be transmitted adds to the overall cost.=20 ""No one's going to pay for transmission if the cost is near the caps,"" said= Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, an e= nergy-industry association in Menlo Park.=20 Ackerman said several companies in his organization decided that there was = no economic advantage to offering power in regional markets when price cont= rols are in effect.=20 ""This means individual regions like California or Las Vegas could end up no= t having enough,"" Ackerman said. ""It increases the threat of blackouts.""=20 BLACKOUT ALERT CANCELED California authorities issued a blackout alert at 1:45 p.m. yesterday when = power reserves dipped to dangerously low levels. They canceled the alert ab= out an hour later, after finding additional supplies.=20 ""Everyone in the West is fighting for megawatts,"" said Stephanie McCorkle, = a spokeswoman for the California Independent System Operator, which oversee= s the state's power network.=20 The Golden State's latest brush with lights-out conditions came a day after= Nevada experienced its own rolling blackouts for the first time, prompting= heavy power users such as the MGM Grand and Caesars Palace to dim their li= ghts.=20 Don Soderberg, chairman of the Nevada Public Utilities Commission, said tha= t the sudden power emergency took state authorities by surprise and that th= ey are investigating to see what role the federal price limits may have had= in exacerbating Monday's shortage.=20 ""We're looking very closely at this,"" he said. ""There seems to be a potenti= al for unintended consequences.""=20 Specifically, Soderberg said Nevada is focusing on operators of older, less= - efficient plants who would find profit margins shrinking, if not vanishin= g, under capped prices.=20 ""We're going to see how the caps might have played into this,"" he said.=20 The federal ceiling in 10 Western states, excluding California, is about $9= 2 per megawatt hour. In California, a 10 percent surcharge is added because= of the state's credit risk, bringing the price to just over $101.=20 Ackerman at the Western Power Trading Forum said regional price controls ha= ve extended California's power crisis to neighboring states.=20 ""California sneezed and the rest of the region caught the virus,"" he said.= =20 'LAWYERS LOOKING FOR LOOPHOLES'=20 California and Nevada officials, however, said that they still have faith t= hat price limits can stabilize Western electricity markets but that federal= regulators may have to tweak the system so that power companies cannot wit= hhold output.=20 ""The generators have banks of lawyers looking for loopholes (in the plan),""= said Hidalgo at the Department of Water Resources.=20 Unfortunately, it may take some time for the regulators to revisit an issue= that they took up only with the greatest reluctance. For months, federal r= egulators refused to impose price controls, preferring instead to let suppl= y and demand determine costs.=20 Hidalgo said that when it appeared that power companies were throttling bac= k on output Monday, California officials immediately dialed the hot line nu= mber provided by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in case of emerge= ncies.=20 ""No one answered,"" he said. ""They were closed.""=20 State officials tried again yesterday, and this time were told that the com= mission would look into the matter. They were not given a time frame for wh= en the commission might come up with a response.=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com .=20 ?2001 San Francisco Chronicle Page A - 1=20 Out-of-state generators pull plug over uncertainty on price controls By Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writer (Published July 3, 2001)=20 Confused by the federal government's new controls on electricity prices, ge= nerators withheld so much power from California on Monday that the state wa= s nearly plunged into rolling blackouts, state officials said.=20 The confusion began when the state's electric grid operators declared a Sta= ge 1 power alert in the early afternoon, triggering the price caps for the = first time since they went into effect June 21.=20 Out-of-state generators pulled about 1,500 megawatts of electricity off the= table at midafternoon, enough to power about 1.1 million homes, because of= uncertainty about how much they could charge under the new Federal Energy = Regulatory Commission pricing system, said Oscar Hidalgo, spokesperson for = the state Department of Water Resources. The department buys electricity fo= r the state's financially distressed utilities.=20 ""They didn't understand what they were going to be paid; there was confusio= n over the FERC order,"" Hidalgo said. ""We saw 1,500 megawatts disappear.""= =20 The problem was exacerbated by a heat wave across the West, which forced Ca= lifornia to compete with other states for scarce electricity, he said. Roll= ing blackouts hit southern Nevada.=20 Most California officials credit the FERC system, which is based on a varia= ble price cap, with reining in what had been a runaway wholesale power mark= et. But power generators have complained that the price caps, by limiting p= rofits, could discourage the production of critically needed electricity. A= nd as Monday's episode suggested, even the uncertainty about where the cap = will fall could lead to unexpected shortages.=20 ""That's the risk that you run (with price controls),"" said Arthur O'Donnell= , editor of the newsletter California Energy Markets. ""People want any kind= of certainty at all.""=20 Hidalgo said the state avoided blackouts only because of last-minute import= s from the Bonne=07ville Power Administration, the federal agency that mark= ets government-produced hydroelectric power in the Pacific Northwest. The s= tate went into a Stage 2 power alert, the next-to-last level before blackou= ts are ordered. The alert was canceled in late afternoon.=20 The blackouts would have been the first in California since May 8.=20 FERC imposed a round-the-clock ceiling on power throughout the West. The pr= ice fluctuates and is tied to the production costs of the least-efficient p= lant operating in California during a ""power alert"" declared by the Indepen= dent System Operator, which runs the state's power-transmission grid. When = there's no alert, prices can't exceed 85 percent of the cap that was establ= ished during the latest alert.=20 Until Monday, the maximum price held steady at about $101 a megawatt-hour i= n California. But when the ISO declared a Stage 1 power alert in early afte= rnoon, signifying that reserve supplies had dwindled to less than 7 percent= of demand, confusion set in, Hidalgo and others said.=20 Because of a steep drop in the price of natural gas, which fuels many Calif= ornia power plants, suppliers knew the cap would fall. But no one knew by h= ow much until the price was posted by the ISO.=20 The ceiling for California fell to about $77 at 3 p.m. but was back up to $= 98 in two hours, according to the ISO. Those prices include the 10 percent = premium that sellers can charge California because FERC said there's a cred= it risk in selling to the state.=20 O'Donnell said it's likely suppliers will pull back from the market every t= ime the ISO declares a power alert.=20 In-state generators have to operate their plants if summoned by the ISO. Bu= t out-of-state suppliers can withhold supplies, and on Monday it was the ou= t-of-staters that were pulling back, Hidalgo said.=20 The Bee's Dale Kasler can be reached at (916) 321-1066 or dkasler@sacbee.co= m .=20 Power Sales Halted by New Pricing Curbs=20 Electricity: Confused suppliers, unsure what they will be paid, refuse to s= ell to state, which asks FERC for a ruling but doesn't get it.=20 By NANCY VOGEL, Times Staff Writer=20 SACRAMENTO--Confusion over new federal price restrictions prompted sev= eral electricity sellers to back away from sales to California on Monday af= ternoon, pushing the state closer to blackouts, energy officials said. The state lost sales that would have provided enough electricity to su= pply more than 1 million homes, said Ray Hart, deputy director of the Calif= ornia Department of Water Resources, which has been buying much of the stat= e's electricity since January. At least five companies producing or marketing power ""are telling us t= hat since they don't know what they're going to get paid, they're not going= to take the risk, and so they're not going to sell the energy,"" Hart said. The electricity sales fell through after power consumption soared in s= ummer heat and grid operators were forced to declare a Stage 1 emergency, m= eaning reserves had dipped below 7%. It was the first such emergency since = May 31. Under a June 19 order by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission inte= nded to bring down wholesale electricity markets across the West, a power e= mergency in California triggers the setting of a new price limit that appli= es to power plant owners from Washington to Arizona.=20 The new price is supposed to be based upon whatever it costs to run th= e most inefficient, expensive power plant selling electricity to California= grid operators during the first full hour of a Stage 1 emergency. But much uncertainty remains about exactly how and when the new price = is supposed to be established under the commission's order, and that appare= ntly drove away sellers, Hart said. Shortly after the state issued the Stage 1 alert at 1:30 p.m., putting= the old price limit of $90 per megawatt-hour in question, companies that h= ad committed to provide the state electricity hour by hour Monday afternoon= backed out, Hart said. The companies include TransAlta Energy Marketing of= Oregon, Constellation Power of Baltimore and Sempra Energy Trading, a unit= of the San Diego-based energy conglomerate. Forced to dip even deeper into the state's power reserves and declare = a Stage 2 emergency, water agency officials called the federal energy commi= ssion's hotline for clarification about what the new price should be and wh= en it should take effect. They got no answer. Hart said commission officials reached at home promised to try to clar= ify their order today. One outstanding question is what obligations power s= uppliers have to deliver electricity to California in an emergency. Both buyers and sellers in the market agree that the new price, when i= t is set, will probably be lower than $90 per megawatt-hour because the pri= ce of natural gas, the main fuel in California power plants, has dropped la= tely. Temperatures soared several degrees higher Monday than grid operators = had anticipated. But they said they expected to avoid rolling blackouts in = part because the Bonneville Power Administration in Portland, Ore., had agr= eed to provide several hundred megawatts of Pacific Northwest hydropower ea= ch hour in exchange for a return of electricity from California later this = summer. ""Bonneville is giving us emergency power to get us through,"" Hart said= .=20 Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times=20 James D Steffes 07/06/2001 10:04 PM To:=09Jeffrey T Hodge/Enron@EnronXGate, Robert C Williams/Enron@EnronXGate cc:=09Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda R= obertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Alan Comnes/Enron@EnronXGate, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enr= on@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron, Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron, Ray Alvarez/N= A/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, dwatkiss@bracepatt.com=20 Subject:=09ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGDE - Draft FERC Brief on Settlement Proc= ess The attached is a rough draft of a potential filing Enron would make in to = Judge Wagner in the Settlement process (it is unclear if this would remain = confidential per the gag order). Please provide Ray Alvarez your comments. This would be filed as early as = Monday am. Jim =20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Trains - Light rail; [EMail-Body]= Mary- Ken has been asked by Mayor Brown to chair the fundraising effort to get voter approval on a light rail referendum in Houston. My guess is that he will decline given the other demands on his schedule, but I don't know that for sure. I think our respnse Mary Clark@ENRON 04/13/99 02:21 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Joe Allen/Corp/Enron@Enron cc: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@Enron Subject: Trains - Light rail Steve/Joe: Mark suggested that I contact you to provide a response to this employee's question (see below) to Ken and Jeff about trains and light rail. Please draft a response and send it to me. I will format it and send it to Ken and Jeff for their review. Thanks. Mary Clark ---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Clark/Corp/Enron on 04/13/99 02:13 PM --------------------------- Office Chairman 04/12/99 02:55 PM To: Mary Clark/Corp/Enron@Enron, Sherri Reinartz/Corp/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Trains - Light rail A question to the Office of the Chairman. Rosie ---------------------- Forwarded by Office Chairman/Corp/Enron on 04/12/99 02:53 PM --------------------------- Office of the Chairman@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 04/12/99 07:25 AM To: Office Chairman@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT cc: Subject: Office of the Chairman: While traveling within Germany recently, I noticed that electric powered trains are popular and also provide a safe, reliable, affordable and comfortable means of transportation to the public. This brought to mind a question to ask you: Is Enron taking any action to promote development and implementation of electric trains or light rail in the USA and/or abroad, either through the Political Action Committee, Lobbying or through the efforts of the Business Development Offices? I do believe that the commuters would benefit from having access to electric trains that provide safe, clean and comfortable transport. Enron could potentially benefit by supplying the power for these trains within the USA (and abroad as well). Just think if the city of Houston offered light rail as an option for commuting to and from work, as well as commuting to other locations - both interstate and intrastate. A person could take a train to Galveston, Austin, or elsewhere and arrive in short time with the high speed rail available. With the new Ballpark downtown and the revitalization of the downtown area, it would seem that a legitimate method of public transportation is the element that is missing from the Houston city model. Buses that run on diesel are clearly not the solution for mass transit. Regards, Dave Hubbard Cuiaba, Brasil 011-55-65-612-2102 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Conference call with Stan Horton, Terry Thorn, Joe Hartsoe,
 Cynthia Sandherr - Re:  Democratic opening for FERC Commisssioner, in
 Stan's office, EB 5023; [EMail-Body]= Ashok? Maureen Palmer -- Voltage upgrade issue [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Presidential Power Question; [EMail-Body]= thanks From: Sarah Novosel on 05/23/2001 02:54 PM To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON Subject: Presidential Power Question I spoke with Donna Bobbish this morning about Steve's question -- does the President have broader authority to take action during times of crisis. Donna sent me this quick write up about what she has looked into so far. Because these questions go beyond a FERC practitioner's expertise, we asked Donna to work with a Constitutional Law expert at V&E to determine whether, and under what circumstances, the President's authority may be extended beyond the authorities discussed in the memo. We will let you know what we learn from that further research. Sarah ----- Forwarded by Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron on 05/23/2001 03:48 PM ----- ""Bobbish, Donna J."" <dbobbish@velaw.com> 05/23/2001 12:16 PM To: ""'snovose@enron.com'"" <snovose@enron.com> cc: Subject: Presidential Power Question Sarah: In response to Steve's inquiry, I did look into this question briefly when you first gave me the assignment. I read an interesting law review article on ""The Imposition of Martial Law in the United States,"" for a discussion of presidential powers. There is no general emergency authority granted the President in the U.S. Constitution. Also, the article discussed the famous ""Truman steel mills case,"" Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952), in which the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional President Truman's seizure of the steel mills during the Korean War. In that case, in light of a threatened national-wide strike in the national steel industry, President Truman, concerned about the national defense, issued an Executive Order directing the Secretary of Commerce to take possession of most of the steel mills and keep them running. The Supreme Court said that if the President had authority to take such an action, he had to derive it either from an act of Congress or the Constitution itself. Since the Supreme Court could not find any seizure authority, it invalidated the President's action. The Supreme Court also rejected the argument that the President had any powers that could be implied from the aggregate of his powers under the Constitution. Based on the Truman steel mills case, I thought it the wiser course of action to look for specific authorities given to the President by statute which might prove useful. I could look into this question further, if you would like, but we would be entering ""martial law-type"" legal territory, where the President would be acting outside of specific Constitutional or congressional authority (which has been described a ""zone of twilight""), and in light of the Truman steel mills case, I don't know how fruitful that might be. Please let me know if you would like me to do anything more. Thank you. Donna ++++++CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE+++++ The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged. This email is intended to be reviewed by only the individual or organization named above. If you are not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination or copying of this email and its attachments, if any, or the information contained herein is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete this email from your system. Thank You [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Daily Update / Legislative Update - 8/23/00; [EMail-Body]= It's hard to formulate a position without more of the specifics, but I think our message should generally be: We support providing immediate rate relief to small residential customers. We believe that relief is best provided by giving San Diego the ability to procure power on a fixed price basis from the market. San Diego has offers in front of it now; those should be evaluated and the legislature and the commission should give San Diego the flexibility to accept one or more of them. This is sounder than running huge deferrals (deficits) to be later recovered from consumers. Rate relief should be accompanied by real reform. Rate caps have bad long term consequences: they cause shortages. Combining short-medium term rate relief with expedited siting of new facilities will address the near term problem while laying the proper groundwork for a long term solution. Bruno Gaillard@EES 08/24/2000 11:08 AM To: Edward Hamb/HOU/EES@EES, Jennifer Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES, Chris Hendrix/HOU/EES@EES, Greg Cordell/HOU/EES@EES, Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES, Douglas Condon/SFO/EES@EES, James M Wood/HOU/EES@EES, Gary Mirich/HOU/EES@EES, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, David Parquet@ECT, mday@gmssr.com, SF Directors, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Marcie Milner/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Hain@Enron, Harry Kingerski/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Karen Denne@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Christopher F Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Daily Update / Legislative Update - 8/23/00 This email reflects today's events in Sacramento. The information provided is subject to change because of constant flux. However it is important for us to provide this information for feedback and to caution as to new regulations that may affect some deals in the making . Governor Davis, Assembly Women Susan Davis, and Senator Alpert had a press conference. They will introduce a rate/bill stabilization plan for SDG&E and an expediting siting bill. There is no language as of yet. Although there is no specific language, the following elements may be included: The stabilization plan will be applicable to residential and probably commercial customers in SDG&E The bill cap may be set at $68 for residential. The cap will be in place until the end of 2002 There will be language on expediting siting for generation plants Sam Wehn and Sandra McCubbin have been talking with the CEC executive director and several legislators about the siting portion of the bill. Any comments as to the bill cap proposal? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Sen. Hagel's ESI speech; [EMail-Body]= The senator's speech is focused on the oil sector almost exclusively, but it does an exceptional job of framing the importance of the issue. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/26/2000 05:08 PM ----- Rosalee Fleming 09/21/2000 01:42 PM To: StTeven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Sen. Hagel's ESI speech Ken wanted to make sure you saw this speech. ---------------------- Forwarded by Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron on 09/21/2000 01:40 PM --------------------------- Joe Hillings 09/21/2000 12:41 PM To: Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Tori L Wells/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Sen. Hagel's ESI speech Rosalee: I understand that Ken Lay and Senator Hagel will be together this evening at the Horatio Alger event I believe in Williamsburg. The attachment is the speech Chuck gave this week before ESI and Ken may find it helpful in some discussion tonight. Joe ---------------------- Forwarded by Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron on 09/21/2000 12:47 PM --------------------------- Ken_Peel@hagel.senate.gov (Ken Peel) on 09/20/2000 06:34:56 PM To: rwbliss@aol.com, zb@csis.org, lcraner@iri.org, don.deline@halliburton.com, hpgoldfield@swidlaw.com, jhillin@enron.com, m.irace@erols.com, vp@mideasti.org, mahalati@ix.netcom.com, mh@dci.hhlaw.com, Jim_McVaney@CMAHQ.com, rich.merski@aig.com, wmorley@uschamber.com, John_Peschke@rpc.senate.gov, ggs2@columbia.edu, ssinger1@gmu.edu, staubenb@bechtel.com, ptomsen@unomaha.edu, gziv@ipforum.org, rzoellick@gmfus.org cc: Subject: Sen. Hagel's ESI speech I thought you might be interested in seeing a copy of a speech on international energy policy that Sen. Hagel gave today at the Economic Strategy Institute in Washington, D.C. - hagelesi.rtf [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= <<Concur Expense Document>> - JB 005; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/05/2001 08:48 AM --------------------------- on 07/03/2001 02:09:20 PM To: ""Steven Kean"" <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - JB 005 The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: John . Brindle Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: JB 005 Report Total: $10,697.32 Amount Due Employee: $10,697.32 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://expensexms.enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Draft of Market rate filing CONFIDENTIAL AND LEGALLY PRIVILEGED; [EMail-Body]= CONFIDENTIAL AND LEGALLY PRIVILEGED Julia/Mark If and when we decide to file I agree with Sam's recommended ""second best"" approach set out below. Also note his opinion on the 30 day waiver in point 2. Regards, Marcus -----Original Message----- From: Samuel Behrends [mailto:SBEHREND@LLGM.COM] Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 1:10 PM To: Nettelton, Marcus; Catherine McCarthy Cc: Sager, Elizabeth; Yvonne Coviello Subject: RE: Draft of Market rate filing Marcus: Here are the others points I wanted to make, just briefly: 1. I still think I need to talk to FERC staff before we file. Here's why: - - FERC, as you know, is about to issue a new rule on market-based rate eligibility. - - In the meantime, they've been kicking out a very high percentage of MBR applicants for trumped up reasons. I.e., issuing deficiency letters on issues we know they don't care about. I think the real reason is they don't want to issue a lot of approvals until the new rule comes out. - - No matter how perfect our filing is, we're liable to get kicked out, too. They might not want to give MBR to a new Enron entity until they see the new rule. - - The best way to deal with that is to sit down with staff, go over the draft page by page, and see what more they want. But that would take too long, because of staff's schedule. - - The second best way is for me to call Dan Larcamp or Mike Coleman, at FERC; tell them that we're not in a huge hurry, but we really don't want a deficiency letter; read him the language in the draft about how we'll comply with the new rule, and see if that's good enough. If he suggests different language, we'll have to put it in there. - - Alternatively, if we really want to try to slide this through without saying anything to FERC in advance, we can file it, and just hope that the language we have about complying with the new rule is good enough. But that's really not what I would recommend. If we do decide to call FERC, I could call right away, and probably get an answer in time to file today. If not, then certainly tomorrow. Otherwise, we're pretty much ready. 2. I really do think that we could ask for 30 days without raising any eyebrows. Good luck, and I'll talk to you soon. >>> ""Nettelton, Marcus"" <Marcus.Nettelton@ENRON.com> 10/30/01 09:35AM >>> Catherine Attached is a mark up of suggested changes to the filing as per my voicemail earlier this morning. In addition we will need to confirm whether Sandhills is a subsidiary of Enron Corp. We will be adding two contacts from our Regulatory Group. Regards, Marcus -----Original Message----- From: Catherine McCarthy [mailto:CPMCCART@LLGM.COM] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 6:32 PM To: Nettelton, Marcus Cc: Sager, Elizabeth; Samuel Behrends; Yvonne Coviello Subject: RE: Draft of Market rate filing Marcus, The attached revised draft ""fixes"" the ESVL/EVSL error. Also, we tried to catch the reference to ENA. We will work on that further tomorrow. I wanted to send this draft to you now, however, so that you could review it without constantly being distracted by seeing EVSL throughout the document. I know that would distract me. I hope this helps. Cathy >>> ""Nettelton, Marcus"" <Marcus.Nettelton@ENRON.com> 10/29/01 07:11PM >>> Catherine ESVL Corp will be a wholly owned subsidiary of Enron Corp. not Enron North America Corp. In addition I see that some of the letters have become transposed and ESVL often reads EVSL. With ESVL Corp being a wholly owned subsidiary of Enron Corp. there may well be other changes that need to be made. Will speak tomorrow. Regards, Marcus -----Original Message----- From: Catherine McCarthy [mailto:CPMCCART@LLGM.COM] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 5:53 PM To: Nettelton, Marcus Cc: Sager, Elizabeth; Samuel Behrends; Yvonne Coviello Subject: RE: Draft of Market rate filing The draft filing is attached. We are working on adding headers to the rate schedule and code of conduct. Thank you for the information on New Albany. I removed all references to New Albany because we recently worked with Susan, Stuart and Robert on that transaction. Also we removed the references to five other peakers Enron sold recently - we worked with Stuart to get those FERC approvals. In addition, we did not include a reference to North Carolina Power Holdings, L.L.C. made in earlier filings. We are aware that Enron received 203 authorization to sell that entity earlier this year. We am uncertain about whether that transaction closed but we assumed it did and removed it but need to confirm with you that it is appropriate to remove it. Thank you for the suggestion about updating the information from the triennial filing. We will certainly double check to make sure the companies we have listed in the attached draft have not been sold. Also, we refer to exhibit 2 to the triennial filing made on January 14, 2000 rather than listing the names of Enron's generating units with market-based rate authorization whose output is dedicated under long-term contracts. We will confirm that this information is still accurate as well. Thanks again, Cathy Catherine P. McCarthy LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene & MacRae, LLP 1875 Connecticut Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20009 (202) 986-8253 cpmccart@llgm.com >>> ""Nettelton, Marcus"" <Marcus.Nettelton@ENRON.com> 10/29/01 06:11PM >>> Sam/Catherine In addition to Sandhills Enron also made a 203 filing this year in respect of the sale of the New Albany plant to Duke. You will probably need to run a check on Enron at FERC to ensure that between us we have identified any changes to the three year update for EPMI which was prepared at the beginning of this year. Kind regards, Marcus -----Original Message----- From: Samuel Behrends [mailto:SBEHREND@LLGM.COM] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 2:48 PM To: Nettelton, Marcus Cc: Catherine McCarthy Subject: Draft of Market rate filing Marcus - This is ready to go as soon its reviewed and we get the names. If we can do that in the next 45 minutes, we can file today. Thanks 0209376.01 ====== This e-mail, including attachments, contains information that is confidential and may be protected by the attorney/client or other privileges. This e-mail, including attachments, constitutes non-public information intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient, please delete this e-mail, including attachments, and notify me. The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this e-mail, including attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. ====== This e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or its relevant affiliate and may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient (s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender or reply to Enron Corp. at and delete all copies of the message. This e-mail (and any attachments hereto) are not intended to be an offer (or an acceptance) and do not create or evidence a binding and enforceable contract between Enron Corp. (or any of its affiliates) and the intended recipient or any other party, and may not be relied on by anyone as the basis of a contract by estoppel or otherwise. Thank you. ====== This e-mail, including attachments, contains information that is confidential and may be protected by the attorney/client or other privileges. This e-mail, including attachments, constitutes non-public information intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient, please delete this e-mail, including attachments, and notify me. The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this e-mail, including attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. ====== ====== This e-mail, including attachments, contains information that is confidential and may be protected by the attorney/client or other privileges. This e-mail, including attachments, constitutes non-public information intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient, please delete this e-mail, including attachments, and notify me. The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this e-mail, including attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. ====== This e-mail, including attachments, contains information that is confidential and may be protected by the attorney/client or other privileges. This e-mail, including attachments, constitutes non-public information intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not an intended recipient, please delete this e-mail, including attachments, and notify me. The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this e-mail, including attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Lunch Break - You are speaking in 50M Dining Room.; [EMail-Body]= Per Mary Clark x37325 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: EOL; [EMail-Body]= Is this it? I thought we had heard it from ""3 or 4"" sources. Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp. From: Rebecca W Cantrell @ ECT 05/24/2001 11:30 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: EOL The attorney for SoCal Edison mentioned it to Randy Rich when they were discussing the data request that SoCal Edison sent ENA/EES in the CPUC complaint proceeding. However, it has not been brought up in any of the testimony filed in the case, nor raised at the hearing. Steven J Kean@ENRON 05/23/2001 05:34 PM To: Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: I just spoke with Clark Smith, head of Elpaso's merchant arm. I told him that we had been hearing that El Paso was blaming Enrononline for problems in Western gas markets. He asked for some more specifics about who exactly was spreading the rumor (I told him we had heard it from 3-4 sources). He acknowledged that EOL was not the problem; said he couldn't believe that it had been identified as such; and said he would bring it up on his call with his Washington team this afternoon. I think he will put it to rest (except for whatever damage has already been done). I did promise to get some more specifics on who has told us that El Paso pointed to us. Can anybody give some info on that? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= WSJ: PG&E's Huge losses...; [EMail-Body]= Eliz -- I need your group to put together a search which captures the comments of PG&E and Edison officials in trade press, anlyst reports, and speeches which would be inconsistent with the idea that they can now recover their shortfall. In other words, when they were trying to get AB 1890 passed, when they were fighting Proposition 9, when they floated their ""rate reduction bonds"" and when they talked to analysts and rating agencies I'm sure they assumed that they would live under the rate freeze and take the risk of stranded cost recovery whithin the statutory deadline. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/27/2000 11:45 AM ----- ""Dick S George"" <dsgeorge@firstworld.net> 09/27/2000 08:04 AM To: ""Dick George"" <dsgeorge@firstworld.net> cc: Subject: WSJ: PG&E's Huge losses... CC list suppressed... September 27, 2000 California Utilities' LossesOn Electricity Pose Risk By REBECCA SMITH Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL California's two biggest utilities are losing so much money buying electricity in the state's deregulated market that they have run up deficits equivalent to half their net worth in just four months. If the cost of wholesale power continues to exceed the price these utilities are allowed to bill their customers, as currently seems likely, they could become technically insolvent sometime next year. That would put pressure on regulators to orchestrate a multibillion-dollar public bailout, similar to the ""too big to fail'' response that in the past pushed governments to rescue banks. Such a scenario is quietly being discussed by bond-rating concerns that recently reduced their credit outlooks for Pacific Gas & Electric Co., a unit of San Francisco-based PG&E Corp., and Southern California Edison, a unit of Edison International of Rosemead, Calif. Bond- rating concerns say they aren't sure how much additional debt can be borne by the two affected utilities before they will have difficulty paying their bills. Probe of California Power Prices Begins, but New Plants Aren't Seen as Solution (Sept. 11) Los Angeles Utility Is Benefitting, Surprisingly, From Deregulation (Sept. 6) California Lawmakers Vote to Limit Electricity Costs (Sept. 1) ""If this is just a seasonal aberration, the utilities can get through it,"" says Lori Woodland, analyst for Fitch IBCA. ""If it goes on for six or nine months, it's a very serious situation."" Adds A.J. Sabatelle, senior credit officer at Moody's Investors Service Inc.: ""At some point, you have a financial crisis."" The utilities say they are having no difficulty meeting expenses and don't envision problems in servicing their debts. But they are vigorously lobbying state and federal regulators to change the rules of the game, hoping somehow to raise rates to make up for the shortfall. The California utilities' experience may be a harbinger of what could happen in other states where wholesale power prices have surpassed the amount that utilities are allowed to charge their ratepayers. For now, utilities are making ends meet by going to the financial markets to borrow money. PG&E, a giant utility that serves one out of every 20 Americans, is seeking approval to increase its debt capacity by $1.4 billion. It is borrowing $200 million, while Edison is tapping $250 million from the commercial paper market. ""This is going to be a long, tough road,"" says Jim Scilacci, chief financial officer for Southern California Edison. Today's situation represents a complete turnabout from what was expected when California deregulated its energy market on March 31, 1998, which opened electricity pricing to competition. California tried to give its utilities a competitive edge nationally by deregulating faster than other states and by creating a mechanism to allow investor-owned utilities, such as PG&E and Edison, to quickly pay down debts incurred to serve customers under the old regulatory system. To do this, the state legislature set retail rates at high levels, which, at first, generated fat surpluses for the utilities. As the money piled up, utilities used it to pay down debts for generation facilities that were otherwise unprofitable in the new deregulated world. By the end of this June, PG&E and Edison together had collected more than $12 billion and were on track to finish paying down debts well ahead of the March 31, 2002, deadline set by the legislature. At that point, rate freezes were to end and retail prices were to fluctuate with the market. But all that went out the window in June, when wholesale power prices surged, topping the rates the utilities were allowed to charge retail customers. Average prices at state-sanctioned energy markets were four to five times the prices of a year earlier, and three to four times the level utilities could charge customers. The accumulated shortfall has been so enormous at PG&E, that analysts expect its deficit to exceed $3 billion by Oct. 31, more than half its shareholder equity of $5.7 billion, which is defined as assets minus liabilities. Southern California Edison finished August with a deficit of $2 billion, equivalent to almost two-thirds its net worth of $3.2 billion. The utilities, though they have been accumulating deficits, aren't required to report these as losses on their earnings statements. That leaves utilities in a bind. They want to end the rate freeze to be able to pass on the real cost of electricity to consumers. But should the freeze end before the statutory deadline of 2002, they get clobbered. That is because they will immediately have to book a loss on their power-purchase deficits. What's more, they can't use the proceeds from planned power-plant sales to cover those losses; instead, should the freeze end, they will be obliged to refund some of the proceeds to ratepayers. In PG&E's case, the refunds could total $500 million, while in Edison's case, the amount is $254 million. Publicly at least, utility executives insist a mechanism will be found to let them recoup the money spent on electricity. Consumer advocates are gearing up for the fight. Nettie Hoge, executive director for San Francisco consumer group Utility Reform Network, says ratepayers shouldn't end up footing the bill for a deal cut by utilities that benefited them before prices shot up. Utility executives are now distancing themselves from the legislation that got them into such a mess, which was drafted with their assistance. PG&E Chairman Robert Glynn says it is best not to ""overanalyze"" the ""old deal."" Instead, he says, regulators and legislators should sit down with utilities and construct a new agreement, since ""it's in the broad interests of the state not to have critical energy infrastructure look like a leper."" Mr. Glynn says the current deal offers ""mutually assured destruction"" to both utilities and ratepayers. Something must be done, he says, or consumers throughout most of the state will experience ""a San Diego-style rate shock."" The utility serving that city, San Diego Gas & Electric Co., ended its freeze a year ago and began passing wholesale power costs directly through to ratepayers. Legislators intervened this summer, however, and temporarily capped retail rates when monthly power bills nearly tripled. The utility, a unit of Sempra Energy, is also accumulating a deficit as a result. So long as banks and bond markets believe the utilities will be repaid, they will be able to borrow, analysts say. ""Until we hear politicians of consequence state otherwise, our position is that we believe the utilities will be made whole,"" says Richard Cortright, a director at Standard & Poor's corporate ratings group. But that opinion could change if it looks like the utilities will have to swallow a big loss. The result: lower credit ratings that would raise borrowing costs and could trigger a downward spiral. ""You're talking about top-rated companies, though,"" said Ms. Woodland of Fitch IBCA. ""To get to insolvency, a lot would have to happen."" In the meantime, utilities are doing all they can to control the hemorrhaging. They have gotten authority from regulators to buy more power under long-term contracts at fixed prices, reducing their vulnerability to spot-market volatility. And they have petitioned federal regulators to declare California's market so badly flawed that generators should be denied market pricing and, even, ordered to pay refunds. Nevertheless, several forces are working against them. Although they can sign bilateral contracts, prices remain high for those as well. What's more, they can't buy less power than their customers need. If they don't buy enough, the California Independent System Operator, the organization responsible for reliability, will step in and make purchases for them and send them the bill. Perhaps the biggest problem facing PG&E and Edison, though, is one of timing. The California legislature is out of session until December, and regulators haven't even really started to address the issue formally. In the meantime, the utilities' deficit is growing by tens of millions of dollars daily. Write to Rebecca Smith at rebecca.smith@wsj.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= European Trip Report 22-30 Jan 2000; [EMail-Body]= Is Catherine working on environmental policy related to sustainability or is she working on greenhouse gas transactions . . . or both? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 02/20/2000 05:15 PM --------------------------- Mark Schroeder@ECT 02/20/2000 06:51 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: European Trip Report 22-30 Jan 2000 You do not need to real Catherine McKalip-Thompson's full trip report from her European venture, but you did express some surprise that on her trip to Europe she went beyond policy and discussed ""busienss"" or commercial activities, as I recall our conversation. her note below makes clear, to me, that partnerships and investments were discussed with, inter alia, a Dutch distribution company, Credit Lyonnais, and CGU (an insurer). Just FYI. mcs ---------------------- Forwarded by Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT on 20/02/2000 12:51 --------------------------- Catherine 31/01/2000 18:36 To: John cc: Mark Schroeder@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Fiona Grant@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Terence H Mary J Heather J Subject: European Trip Report 22-30 Jan 2000 John, Attached is my trip report for Amsterdam, Paris and London - I've given the contact information for everyone to Kathy to be entered in the database and thank you notes are going out today. The company meetings did not go quite as well as I might have hoped (Edon was not so interested), but we need to discuss further the potential relationship with Credit Lyonnais' effort to develop the ""gap financing"" fund.UNEP conference not as billed but some contacts there such as Credit Suisse First Boston and Gerling's Sustainable Development Company were useful as both are quite interested in climate change business opportunities. Also it provided a chance to gather interesting updated info on current financial-sustainable development metrics, links, funds, firms, etc. Discussions with participants in the UK Emissions Trading group were interesting and I now have several working papers on this effort which I can distribute to anyone who is interested (though Mark's group probably has them already but I'll check with them directly on that). I did not get the chance to meet up with Nicola Steen. Catherine [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Memo Re State Processes for Takeover of Transmission; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 02/28/2001 02:52 PM ----- Susan J Mara 02/21/2001 05:26 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Memo Re State Processes for Takeover of Transmission Here is an initial draft from our attorneys in California on the state processes that could be required. In my experience, the single biggest issue the utilities have is the transfer of the rights of way -- there are thousands of these -- each like an individual contract. If the state tried eminent domain, it seems like it could face a long-time in the courts to finish that process. Sue Mara Enron Corp. Tel: (415) 782-7802 Fax:(415) 782-7854 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Fwd: GENERATOR ORGANIZATION; [EMail-Body]= Joe is working with the Governor's office and so should go on that list, not the sellers list. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/15/2001 06:58 PM --------------------------- ""Joseph S. Fichera"" <jfichera@saberpartners.com> on 05/15/2001 01:37:52 PM To: skean@enron.com cc: Subject: Fwd: GENERATOR ORGANIZATION Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 21:43:25 -0400 To: SKEAN@ENRON.COM From: ""Joseph S. Fichera"" <jfichera@saberpartners.com> Subject: GENERATOR ORGANIZATION Good meeting you. Sorry not to get this to you sooner. See below. Please use two e-mail addresses: jfichera@saberpartners.com (NY) joseph.fichera@gov.ca.gov (Sacramento) PHONE NUMBERS BELOW... joe Corporate Contact Information Joseph S. Fichera Senior Managing Director & CEO Saber Partners, LLC 44 Wall Street, 12th Floor New York, NY 10005 TEL: 212-461-2370 FAX: 212-461-2371 Web Site: http://www.saberpartners.com Corporate Contact Information Joseph S. Fichera Senior Managing Director & CEO Saber Partners, LLC 44 Wall Street, 12th Floor New York, NY 10005 TEL: 212-461-2370 FAX: 212-461-2371 Web Site: http://www.saberpartners.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Request for Confidential Information by the US GAO; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 09/29/2000 06:04 PM ----- 09/29/2000 05:53 PM To: cc: Subject: Request for Confidential Information by the GAO To All California Power Exchange Participants: Notice is hereby provided pursuant to Section 19.3.4 of the California Power Exchange Tariff that the United States General Accounting Office (GAO), as part of the ongoing investigation of California markets, has requested the same information to be provided to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Such information may be confidential under Section 19.3.2 of the Tariff. The manner in which the GAO will treat such confidential information is outlined in the attached letter. The GAO states that it has authority under 31 U.S.C. 717 to evaluate programs or activities of the Federal Government, in this case, deregulation of the electricity markets initiated by FERC. The GAO has requested the California Power Exchange to provide such information no later than Thursday, October 5, 2000. If you desire to assert a claim of privilege or confidentiality pursuant to legal authority, the California Power Exchange will include your written assertion of that claim together with its submittal to the GAO, provided that it is timely received. Your written statement should be directed to the GAO as follows: Mr. Jim Wells Director, Energy Resources, and Science Issues United States General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548 You may deliver your statement to the California Power Exchange as follows: Karen Koyano California Power Exchange 1000 S. Fremont Avenue Unit 20 Alhambra, CA 91801 626.537.3173 facsimile Any written statement must be received by Ms. Koyano no later than Wednesday, October 4, 2000, 5:00 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time, to be included with any information delivered to the GAO. You are also free to take any other legal action you may deem appropriate in the circumstances of this investigation. Thank you. (See attached file: GAO Letter 9-22-00.doc) - GAO Letter 9-22-00.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron Mentions; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/04/2000 09:06 AM ----- Ann M Schmidt 10/04/2000 08:44 AM To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Meredith Philipp/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mary Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron, Laura Schwartz/Corp/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Enron Mentions Letters Letters 10/09/2000 Time Magazine Time Inc. 12+ (Copyright 2000) Byzantine Practices? I was flying over Bolivia's Chiquitano Forest as I read your article on the ""old-time gas company"" Enron [BUSINESS, Aug. 28]. Over the past year, this forest, the largest remnant of intact primary dry tropical forest in the world, has been bisected by a 30-ft.-wide gash for construction of a gas pipeline by Enron and Shell. Enron in its quest for profit has ignored the scientific advice of conservation organizations to maintain the ecological integrity of this endangered forest ecosystem. Enron and Shell decided to open the 10 million- acre forest to fragmentation and deforestation by their pipeline. Enron may be keeping pace with advancing technologies to plow ahead in global markets, but its environmental practices are Byzantine and pose a global threat to biodiversity. PATRICIA CAFFREY World Wildlife Fund-Bolivia Santa Cruz, Bolivia Arena foes launch bid to defeat new plan By ERIC BERGER Copyright 2000 Houston Chronicle Wednesday, October 4, 2000 A handful of activists, including a Harris County Green Party official and several low-tax proponents, launched an effort Tuesday to defeat a second plan to build a downtown arena. Unlike the 1999 opposition campaign, this year's anti-arena movement is not seeking a better financing deal for taxpayers. These activists want no arena at all. Although this year's opponents lack the nearly $700,000 their higher-profile predecessors spent last year, that has done little to diminish their rhetoric. ""Should we spend our city's limited resources on building up rich guys, or do we spend it building up our communities?"" asked activist DeWayne Lark, standing in front of City Hall. ""There will be no more corporate welfare in Harris County."" Pro-arena campaign officials said Tuesday's event, which came about three weeks after their own kickoff, was more notable for who did not attend than for who did. Houston Aeros owner Chuck Watson, who funded a large chunk of last year's anti-arena effort, has endorsed the new deal. Gracie Saenz, a former city councilwoman and mayoral candidate who campaigned against the 1999 deal, also supports the new agreement. And although the Harris County Republican Party -- the primary organizer of the 1999 anti-arena effort -- has declined to support the new deal, it has not been as active in opposition as some of its members had hoped. In the GOP's stead this year is the Harris County Green Party, represented by Nathalie Paravicini, who said she rejects the argument that professional sports are critical to a city's identity. Arena boosters say a new downtown facility will promote Houston's image as a world-class city. ""Civic pride is not measured by a sports team that is ready to leave town at the drop of a hat,"" she said. And organizers of the anti-arena campaign also suggested that conservative political activist Bruce Hotze would announce plans Thursday to take a major role in their efforts, possibly becoming campaign manager. Although Hotze lacks the political and financial stature of the pro-arena campaign co-chairmen, Enron Corp. Chairman and Chief Executive Ken Lay and former Reliant Energy Chairman Don Jordan, he comes from a politically active family that can raise large amounts of money. Hotze has said he does not believe government should be involved in building sports stadiums, but he has declined to say how much he was willing to get involved in the anti-arena effort. Lark said Hotze told him that he will actively raise funds to fight the arena. The group is expected to form a political action committee this week to collect contributions. The philosophy of the anti-sports-arena efforts has reverted to its 1996 form, when a similar grass-roots effort coalesced to oppose the referendum to build a baseball stadium, which voters approved. That underfunded effort also opposed any public spending on stadiums, rather than merely trying to extract a better deal from team owners. Arena proponents this year have attracted most of their former foes, and certainly the best-known, to their ranks by altering the original proposal, which failed with voters last year by 10 percentage points. Still, they acknowledge that there will always be opposition in high-profile contests. ""We never expected this to be a unanimous vote,"" said Jordan, the co-chairman of the pro-arena campaign, Let's Build it Together. ""Some people will vote against anything."" FRANCE: Europe online power markets seen pressuring brokers. By Stuart Penson 10/03/2000 Reuters English News Service (C) Reuters Limited 2000. PARIS, Oct 3 (Reuters) - Online trading is set to sweep through Europe's power markets, sending transaction fees sharply lower and piling the pressure on traditional brokers, industry executives and consultants said on Tuesday. Scores of web-based trading platforms, offering a variety of functions, are expected to enter the European wholesale power market in the near term, forcing brokers who work over the telephone to rethink their approach, they told an energy conference. ""Transaction fees in Europe are already falling and I think we're going to see a big decline over the next six months,"" said Gilbert Toppin, principal of Deloitte Consulting's European e-business practice. ""Voice broking could become a distant memory,"" he told Reuters during the Powerisk 2000 conference. Leading the online charge in Europe's wholesale power market are EnronOnline, which launched last year, and HoustonStreet.com, which started up last week and is already planning to expand into Scandinavia. EnronOnline is a bilateral market in which Enron is always one party to a deal. HoustonStreet is a multilateral exchange. The major advantages for online markets over telephone brokers are seen as lower transaction costs and the ability to display a far wider range of prices to clients. Also, online trading is anonymous, which is attractive to traders, said Mark Crosno, president of electronic trading services at Altra Energy Technologies of the US. Altra is a partner with National Grid in EnMO in the UK, a consortium which runs a screen-based gas trading market and is planning to launch a power exchange. Many traditional brokers are still deciding how to respond to the online challenge. ""A lot of brokers are scratching their heads because there are going to be 20 or 25 electronic exchanges out there,"" said Per-Otto Wold, managing director of Natsource-Tullett Europe, one of Europe's biggest power brokers. Wold argued that doing a trade over the telephone was still, in most cases, the quickest method. And that would remain so until voice recognition enabled traders to ""talk"" to the screens on their desks. He expected brokers to focus on longer dated trades and options while online markets would capture a greater share of trading in short term, high volume contracts. The provision of market information and traders' liking for personal contact over the telephone would also help to preserve a niche for the voice brokers, said Wold. ""The markets are still going to need somebody to massage the markets, and that is where the brokers come in,"" he said. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: California Transactions of EPMI--Confidential ATTY Client Work
 Product; [EMail-Body]= Robert, Here is an updated sheet with EPMI physical transactions with deliveries in California. The format has been improved and I added a breakout for transactions with Dynegy. Please destroy earlier versions of this report. Rick Shapiro has asked to be the point of contact in Government Affairs regarding the merger. Please copy him on future communications. Robert, or Rick: Please let me know if you need any help such as adding months, putting the data in another format, or combining this data with Dynegy market share data. Alan Comnes [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Question For All-Employee Meeting; [EMail-Body]= I don't know. Can we get someone in IT to respond? Mary Clark 09/26/2000 05:42 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Re: Question For All-Employee Meeting Steve, I believe the answer is that we don't mandate a specific format for dates for all locations but rather use what is done locally -- just like this employee's recollection. Do you agree? Mary ---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Clark/Corp/Enron on 09/26/2000 05:37 PM --------------------------- Richard Causey 07/14/2000 07:14 AM To: Mary Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Re: Question For All-Employee Meeting Mary, Rick is on vacation and I am monitoring his email. This question has come up before and we sent it to Philippe Bibi. It is a computer question. Mary Clark 07/13/2000 11:27 AM To: Richard Causey/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Question For All-Employee Meeting Rick, can you prepare a response to this question for Ken, Jeff and Joe? If you're not the right contact for this, do you know who is? I need a response by Aug. 3. Thanks. Mary ---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Clark/Corp/Enron on 07/13/2000 11:21 AM --------------------------- David M Fabian@ECT 07/13/2000 11:14 AM To: Mary Clark/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Question For All-Employee Meeting Dear Ms. Clark, Here is my question: Would you allow our staff and customers to vote on Enron adopting the International Standards Organization Specification for formatting dates (i.e. ""YYYY-MM-DD"")? Please let me know if you would like me to send you a list of the many advantages in using the ISO standards. I asked Ken Lay this question a few years ago, but he thought we should use local customs; however, as we are becoming more international and more internet-based, the ISO standard is becoming more advantageous. Thank you, Dave Fabian [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: 1.  London, June 28 - 29; 2.  Houston, July 16 - 17; [EMail-Body]= Shirley, Can you get tickets for either night Ehud mentioned? Maybe Vasant and Zimin can join us? Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Ehud I. Ronn"" <eronn@mail.utexas.edu>@ENRON Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 11:08 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: 1. London, June 28 - 29; 2. Houston, July 16 - 17 Vince: Greetings. I write at this time for two reasons. First, w.r.t. 6/28 - 6/29 London, I remain uncertain whether you intend personally to attend and present at that EPRM Financial Math course. I wanted to advise you know that, in addition to the sightseeing/theatre we traditionally do at these events, we -- you, Duane Seppi, Peter Nance and I -- have been invited to dinner at the home of Klaus and Renee Toft Sat. evening 6/30. Second, w.r.t. the subsequent mid-July Houston training course, I write to remind you that at EPRM 2001 we discussed the possibility of jointly attending a baseball game at Enron Field 7/16 or 7/17. Per the Astros' schedule, it turns out the Cleveland Indians will be in town both nights for a 7:05 p.m. first-pitch start time at the Field. Let me know if either 7/16 or 7/17 works out from your perspective. Hope all is well. Best, Ehud Ehud I. Ronn Jack S. Josey Professor in Energy Studies Department of Finance McCombs School of Business University of Texas at Austin Austin, TX. 78712-1179 Voice: (512) 471-5853 FAX: (512) 471-5073 Internet: eronn@mail.utexas.edu [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Andy Zipper; [EMail-Body]= Andy Zipper [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FERC Presentation on California/West Wholesale Market; [EMail-Body]= Per our discussion ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/02/2000 04:58 PM ----- Mary Hain@ECT 08/29/2000 08:17 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: FERC Presentation on California/West Wholesale Market ---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Hain/HOU/ECT on 08/29/2000 06:23 PM --------------------------- Mary Hain 08/29/2000 06:11 PM To: James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, David W Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT, John J Lavorato/Corp/Enron@Enron, Christopher F Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Joe Hartsoe@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, David Parquet/SF/ECT@ECT, jdasovic@ees.enron.com, Mona Petrochko, Kevin M Presto/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro, Steve Kean, Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Richter/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES cc: Christi Nicolay Subject: FERC Presentation on California/West Wholesale Market Last Thursday, I made the first attached presentation to the FERC Staff at the power marketer's meeting on the FERC's investigation of the wholesale market in the West (and in particular California). Ellen Wolf (of Tabors Caramanis) and I created this presentation building on previous presentations by Tim Belden and Dave Parquet. In the presentation and the meeting we made the following points: There isn't much FERC can do because the cause of the price spikes is not in the wholesale market. We discouraged FERC from taking any action that would hurt the vibrant wholesale market in the California and the rest of the West as well. High prices logically resulted from scarcity and if the Commission does anything it should (1) investigate whether market power was being exercised by any party and, (2) if necessary to protect the market (while still incenting needed generation) establish a price cap at a scarcity rent level equal to the price at which loads were willing to interrupt. The IOUs have not properly prepared for the risk of high prices caused by scarcity. They have failed to hedge and have underscheduled their load, therefore having to fill a large percentage of their load at ISO real time prices. My analogy was that this was like day trading your retirement fund as an asset allocation scheme. The market would function better if more information was provided to the market. The Commission should do whatever it can to incent participation by load. To see the presentation, detach, save, and view in Powerpoint. When you do, you will find there are many ""hidden"" slides that were not part of the oral presentation but were provided to Staff in hard copy for additional information. According to the head of the investigation (Scott Miller), the staff got alot more out of this meeting than Staff's previous meetings with the IOUs and the generators. Based on the numerous phone calls I've been getting, the Staff is looking into the data we provided. I have also attached a revised version of the presentation that Tim sent to Scott Miller on Friday. Tim's version conveys the same message but takes a different approach to conveying the message. On Friday, Tim talked to Scott and answered some additional questions. Tim said that Enron is in favor of eliminating the mandatory PX buying requirement and would like the IOUs to be able to buy from Enron Online. He also explained more fully the existence of scarcity . [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: EGM presentaion and update; [EMail-Body]= Thanks for the updated presentation. It helps me a great deal to keep up with you guys. Send more as you do them. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Corporate Allocations April 2001; [EMail-Body]= Is this a 2001 question? If so it seems to me we shouldn't bother with it. If this is a 2002 question, then let;s discuss ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/17/2001 11:30 AM --------------------------- Richard Shapiro 05/16/2001 07:19 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Re: Corporate Allocations April 2001 Can you help me on this one? ---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron on 05/16/2001 07:18 PM --------------------------- Peter Styles@ECT 05/16/2001 02:07 PM To: Greg McMahon/LON/ECT, Stephen Wood/ENRON@EUEnronXGate @ ENRON cc: Paul Dawson/Govt. Affairs/LON/ECT@ECT, Paul Hennemeyer/LON/ECT@ECT, Doug Wood/LON/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: Corporate Allocations April 2001 I frankly don't see Enron Europe getting $12,000 per month value from ""Environment"" nor ""Environmental policy and compliance"". I have raised with the Washington office why someone there is apparently following European environmental legislation and policy, when such things can only directly affect Enron Europe's business. I see that PR get hit with more than twice this amount to pay for our ""Chief Environmental Officer"". By copy I'm asking RIck Shapiro's view; we could obviously take the question up direct with Steve Kean. Doug may wish to comment on the international project finance allocation, also from Washington. We need to schedule a review with you of the May indicative expenditure report. Would late pm on 29th be convenient? From: Stephen Wood/ENRON@EUEnronXGate on 05/16/2001 06:07 PM GDT To: Fernley Dyson/LON/ECT@ECT, Melissa Allen/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark Pickering/Enron@EUEnronXgate, Anne Edgley/LON/ECT@ECT, Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT@ECT, Ted Murphy ii/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Adam Overfield/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Rod Sayers/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark Evans/Legal/LON/ECT@ECT, Doug Wood/LON/ECT@ECT, Paul Hennemeyer/LON/ECT@ECT, Paul Dawson/Govt. Affairs/LON/ECT@ECT, Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT, Drew Lynch/Enron@EUEnronXGate cc: Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT, Suzanne Lane/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Greg McMahon/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Damien Campbell/ENRON@EUEnronXGate, Ben Williams/ENRON@EUEnronXGate, Nicola Luxford/EU/Enron@Enron Subject: Corporate Allocations April 2001 All, please review the below Corporate allocations for April. Total allocations for the month are below plan by $1.1m. Congratulations to HR who managed to get a net credit from Corp of $165k. If you have any questions please get back to your management accountant or myself. regards, Stephen x34738 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Political Contributions; [EMail-Body]= Please add Linda Robertson (Head of our DC office) to this list if that's ok. Sally Keepers 05/04/2001 03:04 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Elizabeth Labanowski/EPSC/HOU/ECT, Carolyn Cooney/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Political Contributions Attached is final list for 2000 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Information and Securities Trading; [EMail-Body]= To:CASH, MICHELLE Email:michelle.cash@enron.com - 7138536401 Enron Wholesale Services - Office of the Chairman From: Mark Frevert, Chairman & CEO Mark Haedicke, Managing Director & General Counsel Subject: Confidential Information and Securities Trading To keep pace with the fluid and fast-changing demands of our equity trading activities, Enron Wholesale Services (""EWS"") has recently revised its official Policies and Procedures Regarding Confidential Information and Securities Trading (""Policies and Procedures""). These revisions reflect two major developments: (1) our equity trading activities have been extended into the United Kingdom, and (2) in an effort to streamline the information flow process, the ""Review Team"" will play a more centralized role, so that the role of the ""Resource Group"" is no longer necessary.You are required to become familiar with, and to comply with, the Policies and Procedures. The newly revised Policies and Procedures are available for your review on LegalOnline, the new intranet website maintained by the Enron Wholesale Services Legal Department. Please click on the attached link to access LegalOnline: If you have already certified compliance with the Policies and Procedures during the 2001 calendar year, you need not re-certify at this time, although you are still required to to review and become familiar with the revised Policies and Procedures. If you have not certified compliance with the Policies and Procedures during the 2001 calendar year, then you must do so within two weeks of your receipt of this message. The LegalOnline site will allow you to quickly and conveniently certify your compliance on-line with your SAP Personal ID number. If you have any questions concerning the Policies or Procedures, please call Bob Bruce at extension 5-7780 or Donna Lowry at extension 3-1939. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Draft - Confidential - New Procedures to be introduced by ENA
 OTC for Exec Employment Agreements and Hiring of Commercial Staff below VP
 into ENA; [EMail-Body]= You should include VP's and also you should make it a little clearer that I don't want to be on the schedule unless they have made a decision. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Board presentations; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/27/2001 02:41 PM ----- Terry West 02/09/2001 01:36 PM To: Rebecca Carter/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Board presentations Attached are the presentations for the Corporate Staff Group and the 2001 Goals. There have been slight modifications to the format. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: DRAFT - AA PRC MEMO; [EMail-Body]= Looks fine to me. I have not cross checked the lists, but I assume you have included everyone who was designated to serve on the PRCs per the original memo (in addition to the new bus unit additions) Billy Lemmons 04/30/2001 06:41 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Ted C Bland/Enron@EnronXGate, Teresa Bosien/Enron@EnronXGate Subject: DRAFT - AA PRC MEMO Attached is a draft memo (including attachments) outlining the modifications we discussed last week. We can communicate changes by email, or I'll be happy to arrange a short conference call. If possible, I would like to distribute this by Wednesday or Thursday of this week. After the four of us reach consensus, I suggest we preview Cindy (and maybe the HR heads) prior to distributing. You will note that based on conversations I had with Skilling last week (where he emphasized his desire that we have one program, rather than a fractured program by business unit), I have added a review of the business unit distributions to the final meeting where we discuss the top perfomers. I've also added Janet Dietrich (tent.) and another EES person (tbd) to the AA Committee, since they have a large group of AAs and no representation on the committee. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments, and thanks for your help. Ted and Terry did all the hard work. Regards, Billy Click Print Preview or print a hard copy - it's easier to read. We do not have the Europe groups included. Should probably include, or note in the memo itself that info is forthcoming. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= The Energy Daily, EEI, and EPRI Present ""Surviving The Summer of
 2000: A Summit On Reliability""; [EMail-Body]= I'm normally not a big fan of conferences, but this one may be of interest. I think it may be of even more interest if we don't speak: it's possible some utilities may say some of the same things we would say, but they may be less likely to do so if we speak and they feel they have to respond. Let me know what you think. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 04/11/2000 01:27 PM --------------------------- info@kingpublishing.com on 04/11/2000 11:32:54 AM Please respond to info@kingpublishing.com To: info@kingpublishing.com cc: Subject: The Energy Daily, EEI, and EPRI Present ""Surviving The Summer of 2000: A Summit On Reliability"" The Energy Daily, the Edison Electric Institute, and the Electric Power Research Institute are co-sponsoring a summit on the vital issue of reliability in the energy industry.? This meeting will be held May 31, 2000 in Washington, DC at the Edison Electric Institute's conference center. At this summit, we'll examine: * The need for new transmission lines and gas pipelines and how serious consumer opposition is to these factors. * Longer term generation requirements and how much is needed and the obstacles facing these requirements. * The role of TRANSCOs & ISOs in assuring reliability. * Plus, much more! REGISTER TODAY as seating is limited!? Please click on the following address to review the conference. If you have any difficulty, call (800) 926-5464 and we will fax the summit flyer immediately. Forward this email to your colleagues for we offer group discounts. If you wish to be excluded from any future mailings, reply with ""remove"" in the subject header.? We honor all ""remove"" requests. ? - info.vcf [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron Mentions; [EMail-Body]= See last story attached. Congratulations, it looks like you are shaking things up in typical Enron fashion. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/14/2001 03:41 PM --------------------------- From: Ann M Schmidt on 07/13/2001 05:13 PM To: cc: (bcc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron) Subject: Enron Mentions Wisconsin Gas to Purchase Nine Mile Line From Northern Natural Gas PR Newswire, 07/13/01 Commodities Review: LME Copper Hit By Another Stock Rise Dow Jones Commodities Service, 07/13/01 LME Base Metals: Copper Pressured Down By Stock Build Dow Jones Commodities Service, 07/13/01 UK: Telecoms, drugs drive FTSE 100 rally, Vodafone leads. Reuters English News Service, 07/13/01 Futures Contract Covering Coal Debuts in New York (Correct) Bloomberg, 07/13/01 Enron: Panacea or Pariah? Modern Metals, July 2001 Wisconsin Gas to Purchase Nine Mile Line From Northern Natural Gas 07/13/2001 PR Newswire (Copyright (c) 2001, PR Newswire) Line Will Enhance Competition in Southeast Wisconsin and Use Existing Facilities MILWAUKEE, July 13 /PRNewswire/ -- Wisconsin Gas, Northern Natural Gas and Guardian Pipeline announced today that Wisconsin Gas has signed an agreement with Northern Natural Gas (NNG) to purchase a nine mile, high pressure natural gas pipeline in Walworth and Waukesha counties. The purchase price is $5 million. The proposed transaction will require approval from federal and state regulators. The pipe, known as the Eagle line, is located southeast of the Kettle Moraine Forest near Eagle, Wis. The existing line has been part of the NNG interstate transmission system. Under the new ownership, the line will become part of the Wisconsin Gas distribution system and will interconnect with Guardian Pipeline as well as the NNG system. ""Northern Natural Gas is pleased to be a part of a creative, cost-effective solution to provide additional gas service to southeastern Wisconsin,"" said Dave Neubauer, vice president of business development and marketing, Northern Natural Gas. ""This transaction enables Wisconsin Gas and its customers to obtain natural gas supplies from Guardian or NNG. Providing reliable, economical choices for consumers will benefit all of the parties involved."" ""We saw this as an opportunity to minimize environmental impact and still realize the benefits of increased competition in the natural gas market,"" said James Schott, senior vice president, Wisconsin Gas. ""The purchase of the Eagle line will enable Wisconsin Gas to further our goal of providing cost-efficient natural gas service to our customers."" As a result of the purchase Guardian Pipeline, the 141-mile interstate pipeline from Joliet, Ill. to Ixonia, Wis., will no longer build an 8.5-mile lateral to Eagle. The lateral was part of the originally certified Guardian Pipeline. This portion of the line would have generally run parallel to the current Northern Natural pipeline. ""This sale is a win-win situation for Guardian and consumers,"" said George Hass, project manager of Guardian Pipeline. ""The Eagle line purchase by Wisconsin Gas saves Guardian time and resources by taking away the need to build the 8.5-mile lateral and allows all three companies to create a better environment for competition in the natural gas marketplace."" The existing gate stations at LaGrange and Eagle will remain in-service for regulation purposes. Odorization and measurement will take place at a new gate station that will be constructed at the interconnect with Guardian. This new gate station will be called the Bluff Creek station and will be located near Whitewater. The Bluff Creek gate station will be constructed during the construction of Guardian Pipeline. Northern Natural Gas, a subsidiary of Enron Corp., with a market area capacity of about 4.3 Bcf/d, provides natural gas transportation services to utility customers in the upper Midwestern United States through its approximately 16,000 miles of pipeline. Guardian Pipeline is a partnership of three Midwestern energy companies: CMS Energy, based in Dearborn, Mich.; Wisconsin Energy, headquartered in Milwaukee, Wis.; and Viking Gas Transmission Co., a wholly owned subsidiary of Xcel Energy Inc., and located in St. Paul, Minn. Wisconsin Electric-Wisconsin Gas, the principal utility subsidiary of Wisconsin Energy Corp. (NYSE: WEC), serves more than one million electric customers and more than 960,000 natural gas customers throughout Wisconsin and Michigan's Upper Peninsula. Visit our company's Web site at www.WE-WG.com. Learn about Wisconsin Energy Corp. by visiting www.WisconsinEnergy.com MAKE YOUR OPINION COUNT - Click Here /CONTACT: Media only: Kelly Farr of CMS Energy, 313-436-9253; or Megan McCarthy of Wisconsin Energy, 414-221-4444; or Gina Taylor of Northern Natural Gas, 713-853-7681/ 17:01 EDT Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Commodities Review: LME Copper Hit By Another Stock Rise By Mark Long and Steve McGrath Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES 07/13/2001 Dow Jones Commodities Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LONDON -(Dow Jones)- Copper futures traded in London fell Friday, as a further influx of stocks into official warehouses put the copper market under pressure and dragged down the rest of the base metal complex. Three-month copper traded on the London Metal Exchange ended $6 down from Thursday's late kerb close at $1,554.50 a metric ton. An increase of 7,475 tons of copper into LME warehouses Friday brought total stocks up to a 12-month high of 550,300 tons. This pressured prices in early trade down to test $1,550/ton support, although prices recovered slightly in later trade. Unconfirmed market talk said Enron is behind much of the week's stock rise, in an effort to ease nearby supply tightness and to alleviate the large short positions it is thought to have built up on the July-for-a-week spread, which is currently showing a $6-$8/ton backwardation. The July futures contract will switch over to cash Monday. Enron declined to comment on the market talk Friday. A backwardation is a pricing structure in which deliveries to be made in the near future are more expensive then those set for a more distant delivery. The opposite situation is called contango. ""The spreads are still tight. The major longs are still reluctant to lend, with no signs of that (tightness) dissipated,"" said Kevin Norrish, an analyst with Barclays Capital in London. Dealers and analysts said they expect further stock increases next week. The entire base metals complex ignored Thursday's 237-point rally in the Dow Jones Industrial Average, dealers said. ""Copper has been sensitive to moves in the stock market, but not this time,"" Norrish said. In fact, now it appears that base metals markets ignore equities markets when they rally, but follow stocks down when they slump, he added. European Grain Futures See Profit-Taking, But More Gains Expected European grain and oilseed futures were hit by a bout of profit-taking and pre-weekend position-squaring Friday, after rising to long-time highs, brokers said. However, world and domestic crop concerns, the strength of the dollar and general bullish sentiment will carry the markets to fresh highs short term, they said. On the London International Financial Futures and Options Exchange, the benchmark November feed wheat contract ended just 25 pence up at GBP82/ton, after hitting a new two-year high of GBP83/ton in early trade. Meanwhile, Matif November rapeseed futures fell EUR2.75 on the day to EUR265/ton, after hitting a three-year high of EUR271/ton in early trade. The U.K. wheat crop and the French rapeseed crop are forecast to be well down on last year, and wheat and canola crops in some other major producing countries are also expected to fall. Meanwhile, the strength of the dollar is allowing European grain and oilseed traders to up prices and still remain competitive against U.S. imports and dollar-denominated grains on the world market. -By Mark Long and Steve McGrath, Dow Jones Newswires; 44-20-7842-9358; mark.long@dowjones.com Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. LME Base Metals: Copper Pressured Down By Stock Build 07/13/2001 Dow Jones Commodities Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LONDON -(Dow Jones)- London Metal Exchange three-month copper ended Friday's late kerb lower compared with Thursday, pressured by another stock build, dealers said. (LME three-month metals prices in dollars a metric ton at 1600 GMT, with the previous late kerb close in parentheses. Comex copper at 1641 GMT in cents a pound, with the previous close in parentheses.) Copper 1,554.50 (1,560.50) Tin 4,452.50 (4,502.50) Aluminum 1,452.25 (1,458.50) Zinc 871.50 (877.50) Nickel 5,925.00 (6,012.50) Lead 462.50 (465.00) Comex Sep Copper 70.75 (70.80) An increase of 7,475 tons of copper Friday brought total stocks up to a 12-month high of 550,300 tons. This pressured prices in early trade down to test $1,550/ton support before rising slightly to close at $1,554.50/ton, down from Thursday's close of $1,560.50/ton. Unconfirmed market talk said Enron is behind much of the week's stock rise, in an effort to ease nearby supply tightness and to alleviate the large short positions it is thought to have built up on the July-for-a-week spread, which is currently showing a $6-$8/ton backwardation. The July futures contract will switch over to cash Monday. Enron declined to comment on the market talk. A backwardation is a pricing structure in which deliveries to be made in the near future are more expensive then those set for a more distant delivery. The opposite situation is called contango. ""The spreads are still tight. The major longs are still reluctant to lend, with no signs of that (tightness) dissipated,"" said Kevin Norrish, an analyst with Barclays Capital in London. Dealers and analysts said they expect further stock increases next week. The entire base metals complex ignored Thursday's 237-point rally in the Dow Jones Industrial Average, dealers said. ""Copper has been sensitive to moves in the stock market, but not this time,"" Norrish said. In fact, now it appears that base metals markets ignore equities markets when they rally, but follow stocks down when they slump, he added. Aluminum also ended the late kerb lower Friday. News of the restart of some smelters has dampened sentiment, despite a stock drawdown of around 8,000 tons since the end of last week, dealers said. ""The stock drawdowns are fairly small percentage-wise,"" said Standard Bank analyst Robin Bhar, adding that they would need to be much larger to significantly improve market sentiment. ""A test of $1,435/ton cannot be ruled out, though we would expect forward buying to prevent a break below this level for the time being,"" Barclays said in a market report. Zinc continued its slump, falling to a seven-and-a-half-year low, mainly on technicals. Technicals also hurt nickel, which rose slightly after breaking $5,900/ton support but still closed at its lowest level since April. Nickel's fall was ""just on some speculative liquidation and short selling, mostly chart-based,"" Bhar said. -By Mark Long, Dow Jones Newswires; +44-20-7842-9356; mark.long@dowjones.com Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. UK: Telecoms, drugs drive FTSE 100 rally, Vodafone leads. By Camila Reed 07/13/2001 Reuters English News Service (C) Reuters Limited 2001. LONDON, July 13 (Reuters) - Britain's largest companies raced higher at the close on Friday fired by telecoms and drug stocks as they bounced back from Wednesday's 16-week low. Index heavyweights Vodafone and GlaxoSmithKline provided 27 of the day's 55-point gain, while technology firms wobbled. However, the telecoms giant surged 4.1 percent to 157-1/4p. The FTSE 100 finished 55.4 points or one percent firmer at 5,537.0, having jumped 1.66 percent on Thursday after seven consecutive losing sessions, with gainers outnumbering losers by three to one. Stocks steamed higher and refused to be derailed by sluggish U.S. retail sales figures for June, which showed only a meagre rise, and a weaker Wall Street, but volumes were thin at 1.4 billion shares. By London's 1530 GMT finish the blue chip Dow Jones industrial average was down five points, while the tech-laden Nasdaq Composite Index was flat, having streaked up in the previous session. Mike Lenhoff and Simon Rubinsohn at money managers Gerrard said that the UK equity market was deeply oversold and long-term this presented a buying opportunity for UK equities. DRUGS SEE-SAW Drugs reversed an earlier decline with Nycomed Amersham among the day's top performers, up nearly four percent at 536-1/2p and AstraZeneca rising over one percent. Mining giant Anglo American moved into the FTSE 100 top ten gainers with a three percent rise, as investors sought refuge in mining stocks as a cyclical play. Another major gainer was British business services firm Hays Plc up 3.4 percent. The shares leapt on market talk that Germany's Deutsche Post was looking to make a bid for it, dealers said. Both Deutsche Post and Hays declined to comment. Firmer crude prices gave support to the oil sector. BP rose 0.6 percent to 572 pence and Shell also added 0.6 percent to 581-1/2p lifting the index by four points. FTSE MIXED PICTURE But dealers and analysts said it would be a mixed picture going forward with the market scrutinising data for signs of a sustained economic recovery or a lapse in consumer confidence. ""This week we had a really bloody day on Wednesday and then the opposite on Thursday, so we're going to be on a rollercoaster still. It's very fragile but it does show the potential of the market,"" said Foreign & Colonial director of UK equities David Manning. ""It's not only the holiday period, it's also that the market can make you look an idiot one day to the next. In that sort of circumstance the temptation is to do very little,"" he said. ABN Amro strategist Gareth Williams said the market would make modest progress over the next month or so, with moves downward quite likely although the trend would be upwards over the course of the year. TECHS DIP Thursday's 5.3-percent rally in the Nasdaq failed to bring any cheer to UK technology shares. Logica and Colt Telecom slid four percent, while microchip designer ARM fell 3.9 percent to 223 pence trimming Thursday's 13 percent jump. The techMARK index of technology shares rose 0.98 percent to 1,602.87. Elsewhere on the downside, UK holiday operator Airtours lost nearly 10 percent of its value after Swiss peer Kuoni issued a profit warning. Among second liners, Baltimore Technologies closed up 3.3 percent. It initially rallied 22 percent after the Irish Internet security firm said it received an approach from an unlisted British-based company for an all-paper deal to combine the companies. The FTSE 250 Mid-cap index finished 5.1 points stronger at 6,163.8. Among small-caps, Paladin Resources' shares jumped 10 percent after the UK oil explorer said that major shareholder U.S. oil giant Enron had sold the whole of its 40-million-share stake via HSBC bank for 44 pence a share. Britain's Litho Supplies Plc slumped 42.5 percent after the company, which supplies printing and graphic arts products, said that sales in the first six months of 2001 were on target, but profits would likely be below expectations due to tough market conditions and pressure on margins. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Futures Contract Covering Coal Debuts in New York (Correct) 2001-07-13 08:48 (New York) Futures Contract Covering Coal Debuts in New York (Correct) (Corrects location of FirstEnergy Corp. in 10th paragraph of story that moved yesterday.) New York, July 12 (Bloomberg) -- The New York Mercantile Exchange today began trading a futures contract for low-sulfur coal, a fuel that President George W. Bush said will play a major role in meeting electricity demand over the next two decades. The contract's debut came after prices for coal, considered the dirtiest of power-plant fuels, doubled in the past year, as demand from power plants outstripped mine production. Coal for September delivery opened at $42 a ton and settled at $40.75, as 98 contracts were traded, exchange officials said. ``We had a big run-up in coal prices this past winter,'' said Andy Ozley, who buys coal for Atlanta-based Mirant Corp.'s six coal plants in New York, Illinois, Maryland and Virginia. ``This contract affords us a way to mitigate our exposure'' to large price swings. The Bush administration said in an energy policy report this spring that coal would be the dominant fuel for electricity generation through 2020. Bush gave an added boost to the fuel when he retreated from a campaign pledge to restrict carbon dioxide emissions, implicated in global warming. Coal plants are responsible for a third of the nation's carbon dioxide emissions. They also produce sulfur dioxide, which causes acid rain, and nitrogen oxides, which cause smog. The Nymex started the futures contract to give mining companies and utilities a way to hedge their risks in the $33 billion coal market. Producers such as Peabody Energy Corp. and Arch Coal Inc., whose shares have soared in the past year, have said they would trade the futures. New Plants Last year's quadrupling of prices for natural gas -- a cleaner-burning power-plant fuel -- prompted many generators to ramp up output from their coal plants. Utility coal stockpiles dwindled, and prices have risen to their highest levels since at least 1989. So far this year, more than a dozen companies have announced plans to build coal-fired plants, including Kansas City, Missouri- based Kansas City Power & Light Co. and Portland, Oregon-based PacifiCorp. Although coal is used to produce 52 percent of the nation's electricity, few plants were built during the 1990s because of the high costs of building them and the difficulty of complying with federal and local environmental regulations. Demand for coal has eased in recent weeks as below-normal temperatures in the U.S. Midwest and Northeast reduced demand for air conditioning, said Jim Parks, who buys coal for six power plants in Ohio and Pennsylvania as director of fuels at Akron, Ohio-based FirstEnergy Corp. ``The summer's been pretty mild so far -- you haven't seen any big heat waves'' in regions with the most coal generation, he said. Big Sandy The Nymex futures contract calls for the delivery of 1,550 tons of low-sulfur coal to the mouth of the Big Sandy River near Huntington, West Virginia. From there, the fuel would be loaded onto Ohio River barges and shipped to power plants in the U.S. and possibly Europe. The new contract is tailored to producers in Appalachian states that account for about 40 percent of U.S. production, including West Virginia, Kentucky and Pennsylvania, the No. 2, 3 and 4 coal producers. The industry lacks a futures contract for coal from Western states that account for 47 percent of the nation's production, including the No. 1 producer, Wyoming. Avoiding the Past The exchange, which earns commissions on trades, hopes coal futures will avoid the fate of other contracts it has started over the past few years. Its six electricity futures contracts have fizzled, as has its Middle East sour crude oil contract, which debuted in May 2000. ``I said yesterday, if you traded 100 to 200 contracts, that would be a really a good day,'' said Chris Casale, vice president of energy trading at Dynegy Inc. in Houston, which trades coal and buys the fuel for its six power plants in New York and Illinois. ``It came out sort of on target.'' Most of today's trading was originated by large energy marketing companies, he said, although he declined to say whether Dynegy traded any contracts. Enron Corp., the largest energy trader, and Duke Energy Corp., the largest U.S.-based utility holding company, have said they would trade coal futures. Exchange officials have said the coal market has the potential to reach 5,000 trades a day after a year of trading. The Nymex's 17-year-old crude oil futures contract averages about 66,700 trades a day, and its 11-year-old natural gas contract averages about 33,500. Wary of Coal ``The coal market is still lacking liquidity,'' said Anthony McAuley, a floor broker at ABN Amro Inc., who said he bought five coal contracts for a client at $42 a ton -- the market's first transaction. ``You probably need to see a little more participation'' from industry coal buyers and sellers for the market to take off. Independent floor traders, known as locals, are wary of trading coal futures without assurances that the industry will be active as well. ``Floor traders lost millions'' in electricity futures when some were caught with high-priced contracts and nobody in the industry to sell them to, he said. ``Because of that, people are a little bit tentative about coal,'' said Tom Schiff, an independent crude oil trader. ``We're here to help make liquidity but we can't tackle all the risk.'' Modern Metals, July 2001 Giant energy concern now turns its attention to steel. The company's aggressive posture has begged controversy. Industry reactions vary from hand-wringing to open arms. Still others characterize Enron as a ""non-event."" By Michelle Martinez Arjona, Editor-in-Chief, and Paul Hohl, Contributing Editor These days, saying the word ""Enron"" in a room full of metals executives is like screaming ""fire"" in a crowded theater. For most in the steel industry, the idea of a futures market is enough to raise a few eyebrows. But when a major market maker with annual revenues of 10 times the market cap of the U.S. steelmaking industry stakes a claim (for 2000 alone, Enron logged revenues of $101 billion--that's with a ""b""), a lot more than eyebrows are likely to be raised. After a bold presentation from Jeff McMahon, president and CEO of Enron Industrial Markets, at the SSCI annual convention in May (in which he accused steel mills of treating their service center customers as ""annoyances""), industry leaders rushed to understand this latest market contender. Friend or foe? Competitor or partner? These are just a couple of the questions surrounding Enron's aggressive push into the metals industry. Judging from the service center and mill executives Modern Metals queried, there are as many answers as there are opinions in the industry. Reactions ranged from fear to acceptance to downright resentment. At least one mill was reticent to discuss Enron at all--still others seemed to meet the issue with unaffected shrugs. If the saying is true that all publicity is good publicity, the buzz that Enron has generated would make even a Hollywood spin doctor envious. What's the hubbub? Although products such as natural gas and energy--Enron's major business platform--have been traded as commodities for years, until Enron's appearance a formal forward market for steel has never existed. According to McMahon, the absence of a liquid and transparent market has resulted in ""uninformed investment decisions"" that have exacerbated the current oversupply situation, and left companies exposed to the hazards of price volatility. Enron's answer is to offer a variety of financial hedging products along with forward contracts in hot-rolled, cold-rolled and galvanized (plate and long products are soon to follow), locking in prices for as many as five years out. Enron contends that it can act as a ""risk intermediary"" in steel transactions, ensuring healthier profit margins and lowering the cost of capital. Certain grades of steel are commodities, McMahon insists, and as such should be bought and sold on a commodity market basis, instead of the strategic relationships that now exist between the mills and consumers. Enron has been offering steel online, and via phone and fax, since November of last year. ""Before you add capacity, before you make an investment decision, you'll be able to see a three, five, maybe even a 10-year forward price of steel,"" McMahon stated, ""and if you want to hedge that investment you can do that."" The company plans to buy steel at a floating price and then sell it to steel consumers at a fixed rate, making money on the spread. In February, Greg Hermans, VP of steel trading at Enron, reported to AMM that it was offering U.S.-made 10-gauge, 48-in. wide hot-rolled for April delivery in Chicago for $225 a ton. Hermans said Enron was buying the same product for April delivery at $215 a ton. Eventually, Enron sees the development of four different marketplaces: the Northeast, the Midwest (or Chicago area), the Gulf Coast (or Houston area), and the West Coast. Enron will hedge against spot price spikes through equity and physical holdings in domestic mills. The company closed on Huntco's Arkansas-based cold-rolling mill in June. ""It's a big portfolio,"" McMahon said. ""We wanted to put together a portfolio of supply and demand. In some cases, we'll own assets--hopefully we'll own some term contracts with domestic mills. To the extent that imports are a part of the equation, we'll be a part of that market. We may purchase capacity from somebody, not necessarily the assets, but toll slab through a hot strip mill. All of those combined is how we do our business."" Steel mills can benefit, McMahon said, by entering into a multi-year ""physical off take"" with Enron, thus giving steel mills a degree of certain volume and on product specification. Enron would guarantee purchase of a specified amount of tonnage, and use a floating price or a floor price to guard against market shocks. Whether mills would be willing to divert capacity to the commodity grades being bought and sold by Enron remains uncertain. At least one mill executive privately said no . . . at least for now. Nucor president, CEO and vice chairman, Dan DiMicco also sees little value in Enron's proposal. ""What we need to have is stable pricing at levels where the most efficient mills can make a good return on their capital and further invest in new technologies and equipment,"" he stated. ""I define true value as helping the industry to become stronger. It doesn't do any good to maintain a lack of price volatility at $200 a ton."" Keith Busse, CEO at Steel Dynamics, echoed that sentiment in a recent New Steel article. ""If you're trying to get volatility out at $320 [per ton], great,"" he said. ""But at $230, you want to stick your fingers down your throat."" For the service centers Service centers, McMahon suggested, could benefit immediately. ""The only way [distributors] are able to hedge themselves is to go out and buy inventory,"" he explained. ""That takes capital, and cash, and space. We can offer a financial product that gives the exact same protection, but doesn't require any of the above. ""We can hold those inventories and price the steel at the time of delivery to the service centers,"" he continued, ""so their 4- or 5- percent net margins are somewhat certain."" ""I do think that Enron is providing a service for the industry . . . "" commented Dave Lerman, CEO of Steel Warehouse, South Bend, Indiana. But he pointed out that ""how [it] moves forward will be interesting. If they just move forward with hedge instruments . . . that's independent of whether you run your business well by having a good supplier that matches up with the demands of your customers. I think [Enron] will be a good thing for some people and a non-event for others."" Beyond hedging, McMahon pointed out, firm and enforceable contracts could become a key benefit to service centers. As one Midwestern distributor source commented, ""One of the terrible things that happens in our business is that end users demand long-term pricing, beyond what anybody can foresee. When they anticipate the market is going up, or that it has hit a low point, they push harder for it--as any one would. But historically, they don't honor the deals."" In a down market, he explained, customers demand lower prices. Noncompliance can result in orders, but no releases, and a ""don't call us, we'll call you"" attitude from customers. The consequence for service centers, he said, are price reductions on the way down and on the way up. ""If Enron brings integrity to both sides of this market,"" he concluded, ""that would be a very big plus for the steel industry."" But integrity, another Midwest service center exec countered, has got nothing to do with it. In his estimation, Enron is like a profiteering carpetbagger, ""trying to make a buck in between the producer and the user. That's all we need right now,"" he declared, ""somebody trying to squeeze out a few more dollars."" But, he recognized, ""we're all going to have to deal with it."" Don McNeeley, president and CEO of Chicago Tube & Iron, indicated that some good could come of a heavy-hitter like Enron introducing new ideas into the industry, but acknowledged that people might be offended by somebody picking the so-called ""low-hanging fruit"" of the steel market in the current economy. ""What do you think the mills are going to do when you come to them for just the peripheral items?"" he queried. ""My concern would be that the price would go up on [those items]."" McNeeley also questioned the wisdom of distributors relinquishing control of their inventories. ""In distribution, 60 percent of our net worth is inventory, 30 percent is accounts receivable, and 10 percent is plant property and equipment,"" he related. ""Our single largest asset is our inventory. If a distribution company surrenders control of its inventory to a third party, does not that distributor, in effect, surrender its own sovereignty?"" Only just begun Questions abound regarding Enron's role as a physical supplier of steel as well. As one Minnesota-based service center exec put it, ""are they ready to deal with problems?"" Although Enron has expressed interest in being a physical supplier, Dave Lerman explained, ""I think that's going to be a lot more difficult to implement."" Enron would have to consider specific qualities, coil sizes, nuances of chemistry, surface quality, and formability. ""Most customers require better than standard tolerances,"" he pointed out. ""These are all issues that might complicate commodity sales."" Delivery is another issue. As a physical supplier, Enron has virtually guaranteed just-in-time delivery, but as one service center source said, ""the guarantee is good when the material shows up at my door. What happens if it doesn't show up? I disappoint a customer. What good does it do to sue [Enron] if I've lost a customer?"" Mill executives have questioned whether Enron is a potential competitor. ""They see Enron as someone likely to buy foreign steel in order to deliver it to a U.S. customer,"" said Chuck Bradford, principal of Bradford Research and a long-time industry observer. He cautioned against seeing Enron as too much of a physical supplier, speculating that the future of Enron, similar to the LME, will be in hedging. ""You may see some [physical transactions] to start with,"" Bradford predicted, ""just to get the ball rolling. But I don't see that as the way the market will develop."" McMahon has been consistent in saying that Enron has little interest in becoming a steel manufacturer. The real value, he said, is in a transparent, liquid market. ""We know the products work, we know the market wants them. Can any one particular mill or mills prevent that? We don't think so,"" he said. ""It's not an 'if', it's a 'when'."" The jury is still out on just how soon that ""when"" will come, and what those effects will be for the steel industry. And for all of the debate surrounding the issue, it seems a bit soon to be hitting the panic button. As Don McNeeley recounted, ""I can recall similar controversy over a speech a guy gave about 15-17 years ago. That guy's name was Ken Iverson, and he had this concept called a mini-mill. Look at it now."" [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential (sic)...chew immediately after reading (sic).; [EMail-Body]= You have to love the availability of beautiful lasses for viewing. Things are interesting. Enron is moving right along and we will find out about who I am working for on Friday (our auction should be completed then). Not too much else is new. My place continues to get better (as I slowly furnish it), but Portland continues to be the little sister to Seattle. A couple new bars in town suggest she might be getting closer to puberty but definitely not the woman about town that Seattle is. Morgan told me you may no longer be with Steph? Is this true? (And I hope you are the only one reading this if it is not). If that is the case, well, we can see what we can do about it. As always, I have no plans the next couple weekends, so give me a shout (still have my cell phone at 503-887-3449) if you want to take a trip on down. Your always welcome to crash on my couch...(sorry its all I have, I got rid of the futon). Hope youre doing well. Word. -----Original Message----- From: Scott Kuehn Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 2:28 PM To: Williams III, Bill Subject: Re: What up? Awww Jeahh. It's nice to hear from you. Ive been trying to get in touch with yall for quite some time. Please reply back to this message and let me know how ""Things"" are. Yes, the question is ambiguous, but try to go with it. In response to ""What up?:"" Everything has reached a new status quo. I live in Gig Harbor and attend class at UW Tacoma (UWT for short). Class is great and their are plenty of beautiful lasses for viewing pleasure. Hopefully I will be out of GH soon. I will start looking for jobs in Portland, Seattle, and SF (possibly) in Spring. I have not been working on my tan. I would really like to visit the city of Roses in the next few weekends. What are your plans? I hope everything is well with you. Please write back soon. Buenos Nachos, Scott Sent by Go2net Mail! [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call
 Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and
 Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Comnes, Alan Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 1:34 PM To: Alvarez, Ray; Walton, Steve; Mara, Susan; Lawner, Leslie; Cantrell, Rebecca W.; Fulton, Donna; Dasovich, Jeff; Nicolay, Christi L.; Steffes, James D.; jalexander@gibbs-bruns.com Allen, Phillip K.; Noske, Linda J.; Perrino, Dave; Black, Don; Frank, Robert; Miller, Stephanie; Tycholiz, Barry; Novosel, Sarah; Thome, Jennifer; Hall, Steve C. Cc: Hawkins, Bernadette Subject: RE: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call Privileged & Confidential Communication Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted Ray asked me to notice tomorrow's meeting as he is traveling today. Please let me know if there are other items to add to the agenda. PLEASE MARK YOUR CALENDAR Date: Every Thursday Time: 7:30 am Pacific, 9:30 am Central, and 10:30 am Eastern time Number: 1-888-271-0949 Host Code: 661877 (for Ray only) Participant Code: 936022 (for everyone else) The table of the on-going FERC issues and proceedings is available to all team members on the O drive. Please feel free to revise/add to/ update this table as appropriate. Proposed agenda for tomorrow: 1. Comments on July 10 CAISO tariff filing due Thursday 2. Comments on the WSCC-wide price mitigation due August 18th 3. CA refund proceeding update and upcoming FERC hearings 4. PacNW refund proceeding update 5. CEOB expedited rehearing request . Reply by IEP? 6. letter to CAISO re: whether DWR is a credit worthy counter party 7. DSTAR update [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Request from Bob Frank; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/19/2001 07:42 AM ----- Ginger Dernehl 03/15/2001 10:29 AM To: assad@elektro.com.br, Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Alberto Levy/SA/Enron@Enron, Aleck Dadson/TOR/ECT@ECT, Allison Navin/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Amy Fabian/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Barbara A Hueter/NA/Enron@Enron, Bernadette Hawkins/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bill Moore/NA/Enron@Enron, cristinah@elektro.com.br, Carmen Carolyn Cooney/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Charles Yeung/HOU/ECT@ECT, Chauncey Hood/NA/Enron@ENRON, Chris Long/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dan Staines/HOU/ECT@ECT, Daniel Allegretti/NA/Enron@Enron, Dave Mangskau/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Donald Lassere/NA/Enron@Enron, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Eidy Catala/TRANSREDES@TRANSREDES, Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron, Eric Benson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Frank Rishe/NA/Enron@Enron, Geriann Warner/NA/Enron@Enron, Germain Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron, Gisele S Braz/SA/Enron@Enron, Gloria Guillermo Canovas/SA/Enron@Enron, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Howard Fromer/NA/Enron@Enron, jpr@ceibo.entelnet.bo, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Janine Migden/NA/Enron@Enron, Javier Jean R Dressler/NA/Enron@Enron, Jean Ryall/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Brown/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeffrey Keeler/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Joao Joe Allen/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Connor/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Joe Hillings/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jose Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron, Kathleen Sullivan/NA/Enron@ENRON, Kerry Stroup/NA/Enron@Enron, Kikumi Kishigami/NA/Enron@Enron, Kirsten Bellas/NA/Enron@Enron, Lara Leibman/NA/Enron@Enron, Laurie Knight/NA/Enron@Enron, Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda J Noske/HOU/ECT@ECT, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Lindsay Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron@Enron, Lora Sullivan/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Luiz Maurer/SA/Enron@Enron, Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Marchris Robinson/NA/Enron@Enron, Marcia A Linton/NA/Enron@Enron, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Melinda Pharms/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mike Roan/ENRON@enronXgate, Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron, Nancy Hetrick/NA/Enron@Enron, Patrick Keene/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Ray Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ricardo Charvel/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Ingersoll/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron, Robert Hemstock/CAL/ECT@ECT, Robert Robin Kittel/NA/Enron@Enron, Ron McNamara/NA/Enron@Enron, Roy Boston/HOU/EES@EES, Rubena Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Scott Bolton/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Sergio Assad/SA/Enron@Enron, Stella Stephen D Burns/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steve Montovano/NA/Enron@Enron, Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Sue Nord/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Susan M Landwehr/NA/Enron@Enron, Terri Miller/NA/Enron@Enron, Thane Tom Briggs/NA/Enron@Enron, Tom Chapman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tom Hoatson/NA/Enron@Enron, Valeria Lima/SA/Enron@Enron, Vinio Floris/Corp/Enron@Enron, Xi Xi/Enron Communications@Enron Communications cc: Subject: Request from Bob Frank gngr 713-853-7751 ----- Forwarded by Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron on 03/15/2001 10:27 AM ----- Robert Frank 03/15/2001 09:07 AM To: Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Ginger - please forward this to all of GA. Thanks. This is a request for help from my colleagues in GA. I am preparing Enron's comments to the Federal Trade Commission concerning the results of different ""regulatory approaches"" by states implementing retail electric competition programs or legislation. The FTC has invited comments on a number of specific issues, but their goal is to ""examine various state retail competition programs and describe those features that have resulted in consumer benefits and those that have not yielded consumer benefits."" There are some obvious areas where we'll comment - California - but I'd appreciate people sending me specific examples of good or bad regulatory policies in other states. Also, does anyone know of any good reports or analyses already prepared on these issues? Thanks. -Bob [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION
 Terminability of Val Verde interconnect agreement; [EMail-Body]= I've looked into whether we can terminate our Val Verde interconnect agreement with Burlington, and have determined we may do so only if we take the following steps: 1. Terminate the OBA by giving 30 days notice to Burlington. Paragraph 13 of the 6/1/94 OBA with Burlington (as successor in interest to Meridian) provides that either party may terminate the OBA ""at the end of the primary term, or thereafter by providing thirty (30) days prior written notice"" to Burlington. (The one-month primary term ended June 30, 1994 and has since gone month-to-month.) 2. On the effective termination date of the OBA, terminate the interconnect agreement by giving 30 days notice to Burlington. The 12/31/92 Interconnect Point Operating Agreement, Paragraph 6, provides that either party may terminate on 180 prior notice after expiration of the primary term. This is of limited use to us since the primary term does not expire until 12/31/02. However, the paragraph also provides that the agreement ""may be terminated by either party upon thirty (30) days prior written notice in the event the OBA between the parties is terminated."" As we've already discussed, termination of the agreement is an extreme measure from a customer relations standpoint and we probably need to weigh our other options first. Let me know if you have further questions. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Media Alert: Arbitration with Reliance and ONGC; [EMail-Body]= FYI ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/09/2000 06:35 AM --------------------------- Jimmy Mogal@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 08/09/2000 04:44 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Jeffrey Sherrick/Corp/Enron@ENRON, John Larry Morse/Corp/Enron@Enron, Mike Stewart/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sanjay Michael J Smalling/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stephen Wallace/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Wade Rick Phillips/Corp/Enron@Enron, Johan Zaayman/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT cc: Subject: Media Alert: Arbitration with Reliance and ONGC Just happened to pick up from a third source that Shantanu, Principal Correspondent in Delhi of 'The Telegraph' is doing a story today about the arbitration. So far he has not called in for our participation and I am refraining from being proactive. While the eastern centric 'Telegraph' is Calcutta's largest daily, we can expect further pick up thereon with possible media querries tomorrow onwards. As advised, I will forward such querries to John Ambler. Jimmy [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Senate Reliability Billl; [EMail-Body]= It would not be accurate to conclude or assert that the NERC language is ""close"" to congressional approval. Here is the state of play. There are two interrelated tracks at present: the DeLay, et al negotiations of all stakeholders (which I attended and participated in today but did not concern reliability) and the NERC process that is underway to consider how to bring those such as Enron that are not ""on board"" with the so-called ""consensus"" NERC language (Sarah participated in the Tuesday meeting on this issue, where PJM put a proposal on the table that Sarah advises largely tracks our draft; this process will continue next week and a follow up meeting the week after). The interrelationship is that it is likely that IF (a big IF) there is an electric title that is added to the congressional bill that will start moving in the House subcommittee next week, the NERC version will be included as a ""place holder"" with the understanding that if the NERC discussion process yields a different result, it will be substituted. Furthermore, those who oppose the NERC version would be free to continue opposing it on the Hill and elsewhere. So you might say there is a rebuttable ""presumption"" of sorts in favor of the NERC version (which is shorter than the old NERC version) because so many groups favor it, but those who oppose it such as ourselves continue to seek allies for a shorter, streamlined version. Congress is far from approving any final version. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= possible RTP conference; [EMail-Body]= Dear Mr. Kaminski: Thank you for talking with me about a possible RTP conference. I would like to include some discussions of what has been learned in other industries. As I indicated, Frank Wolak suggested that I contact you. In discussing power markets with Frank and other colleagues at Stanford and EPRI, it seems quite evident that real-time pricing for retail customers is the ""forgotten resource"" in more efficient power markets. There seems to be a lot of confusion about what RTP means and it also seems that many researchers need to address some practical but important problems. I was asked whether a group like Stanford's EMF might explore this topic and give it the visibility that would have it considered more seriously by policymakers. Frank thought that you might be someone who could help me structure a useful approach and who might also see whether Enron could become a major sponsor. I was hoping that this issue was sufficiently important to Enron that the company might consider providing $25,000. As you may appreciate, it requires some thought and effort to make sure that the product of the conference is widely circulated among key government groups. I would be very interested in hearing from you if you can provide ideas and recommendations for people (perhaps yourself or a colleague) to participate. I would also appreciate any consideration by Enron of providing funding for this effort. Thank you, Hill Huntington - retail notes.rtf Hillard G. Huntington EMF - an international forum on energy and environmental markets Voice: (650) 723-1050 408 Terman Center Fax: (650) 725-5362 Stanford University Email: hillh@stanford.edu Stanford, CA 94305-4026 EMF Website: [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Calypso Tribal Letters; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/19/2001 07:50 AM ----- Christie Patrick@ECT 03/15/2001 10:02 AM To: Alice Jordan Hunter/FGT/Enron@ENRON, Stephen Veatch/Enron@EnronXGate, Frank S Wang/Corp/Enron@Enron, ricardo_n_calvo@urscorp, roger_w_gunther@ursc cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Danny McCarty/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Mike McConnell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kelly Kimberly/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Lauren Iannarone/NY/ECT@ECT, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Calypso Tribal Letters Friends, The statute should be reviewed by whichever lawyer is supporting the project. As I mentioned to Alice Weekley, I am unfamiliar with the recent amendments referenced requiring the notice for projects that do not actually cross reservation property. The amendment does not surprise me though. In the past, for example, during the Transwestern expansion in '91, we developed a comprehensive NAGPRA plan with tribes whose reservations we crossed, yet neighboring tribes were included--the thinking by the various State Historic Preservation officers was that unearthed remains (bones, funerial objects, pottery pieces, holy objects, etc) may have belonged to tribes other than those from whose reservation they were ultimately unearthed. It made for a VERY VERY long and complicated plan and consultation process....not only when objects were unearthed, but simply putting the required anticipatory plan and procedures in place PRIOR to construction. (It gives me a chuckle: my late husband, Leonard Hilton, who was in charge of the TW project, is likely rolling in his own grave at the mere thought of Enron having to put another of these plans together..Haha!!) As I said, I've not read the amendment , but hopefully it only legally requires 'notice'---yet, in my nearly 20 years of practicing law, I've rarely seen a 'notice' that didn't crack the door or sound the alarm of further buerocratic opportunity! For your further information, I have met Billie Ray Cypress personally and he's a decent and seemingly reasonable guy with a huge casino on the rez ; yet these personal attributes frequently go by the wayside when it comes to 'perceived economic opportunity'. Chief James Billie,[chief of the Seminoles, 2nd largest/2nd wealthiest tribe in North America] on the other hand, is shrewd in business, dictitorial in management, and personally , has an ego bigger than Texas, behavior to match, and is proud of it!! --which makes him a ton of fun to be with if he likes you--he wrestles alligators, writes rock and roll and ""plays""in whatever stage opportunity is presented him--as long as he can be the center of attention. The Seminoles have not only a tribal web site, James Billie has his own!! Check it out--it's a hoot!! He has been chief for about 25 years (and I'm guessing he's maybe in his early 50's). The Seminoles have recognized significant economic development under James, but he is definitely a ""My way or the highway"" kind of guy--he loves you, hates you, or ignores you--and he has a tribal council that is respectfully terrified of him. If any activity smacks of anything James Billie doesn't like, he'll know no limits in stopping it...remember, this guy wrestles alligators!! No Joke! I don't recognize the other names on the list, but I think it's clear from both the beurocratic issues, as well as the specific tribal issues incident to each affected tribe, everything associated with the process should be executed with all of this in mind. I'd be happy to speak with the project's lawyer to discuss this further, if information beyond that set forth above would be helpful. Thanks! --Christie. ----- Forwarded by Christie Patrick/HOU/ECT on 03/15/2001 08:53 AM ----- roger_w_gunther@urscorp.com 03/15/2001 08:32 AM To: alice.weekley@enron.com cc: jordan.hunter@enron.com, stephen.veatch@enron.com, frank_s_wang@enron.com, christie.patrick@enron.com, ricardo_n_calvo@urscorp.com Subject: Calypso Tribal Letters Alice: Janus Research sent the enclosed letters to me; I understand that they have been modified per your discussions with them. Also enclosed is a summary document outlining recent revisions to Section 106 (National Historic Preservation Act). Regards, Roger (See attached file: Section 106 regs (1).doc)(See attached file: Fred McGhee 3-7-01.doc)(See attached file: James Billie 3-7-01.doc)(See attached file: Jerry Haney 3-7-01.doc)(See attached file: R. Perry Beaver 2-7-01.doc)(See attached file: Billie Cypress 3-7-01.doc) - Section 106 regs (1).doc - Fred McGhee 3-7-01.doc - James Billie 3-7-01.doc - Jerry Haney 3-7-01.doc - R. Perry Beaver 2-7-01.doc - Billie Cypress 3-7-01.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= ABX1 70 Further Nail in Generator's Coffin -- Absurdity in CA; [EMail-Body]= test ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/02/2001 11:51 AM ----- Susan J Mara 03/02/2001 10:44 AM To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Christopher F Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT, David Parquet/SF/ECT@ECT, Laird Dyer/SF/ECT@ECT, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: ABX1 70 Further Nail in Generator's Coffin -- Absurdity in CA I just heard about this bill by La Seur ABX1 70 attempts to criminalize acts of unregulated generators if they perform maintenance at times other than the California Public Utilities Commission requires. Further, the commission is required to allow scheduled maintenance of only one generator at a time. So, with 500 generators in the state, just how many years would it take to complete one round of maintenance? Also, please note it does not apply to munis. Sue Mara Enron Corp. Tel: (415) 782-7802 Fax:(415) 782-7854 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: USG overtures on Dabhol; [EMail-Body]= Thanks for the update. From: John Hardy@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 05/10/2001 09:48 AM To: Rebecca McDonald/Enron@EnronXGate cc: Ben Glisan@ECT, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Rob Walls/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: USG overtures on Dabhol Rebecca At a meeting yesterday at OPIC on Trakya, another of our problem projects, Dabhol was raised. A representative from the White House transition team joined the conversation. I was asked the terms under which we were prepared to negotiate and I told them at a minimum upon a commitment by the Indian authorities to serious negotiations which would include full compliance with the terms of the contracts and progress in the reform of the MSEB. I made clear that we do not see the Godbole Committee as the basis for such a discussion. I think the USG wants to be on record politically encouraging the Indian Govt. to engage in discussions all parties consider to be meaningful in hopes of working things out before it is too late, even while through OPIC and EXIM it is supporting the move towards PNT. The administration may be concerned that without such a diplomatic overture on its part it could be concluded that the USG has politically taken a position on the project. In Trakya, for example, the USG has been quite proactive in pressing the Turkish govt on the payments issue and even in discussing the payment concerns with the IMF so that the payments issues for the BOTs (two of the four in Turkey are US sponsored) are taken into account as the IMF program moves forward. So I anticipate that the USG will shortly be meeting with the Indian ambassador here and the US Charge in Delhiwill likely be directed to make the rounds and meet with senior government officals on the project. I wanted you to be aware of this; also any guidance you can provide would be helpful. Thanks John [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Havamann Litigation PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY CLIENT
 COMMUNICATION; [EMail-Body]= I am in London this week and will be meeting with David Best on Thurs to discuss. Thanks for your inquiry. I'll let you know after the meeting. Gail Brownfeld@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 01/30/2000 10:45 AM To: Richard B Sanders@ECT cc: Robert C Subject: Havamann Litigation PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY CLIENT COMMUNICATION Richard, Did your office get everything it needed from David Best to do the wire transfer of the settlement funds? Is there anything you need us to do on the remaining bit of the claim against the underwriters? I believe you all have retrieved the whole file; however, let me know if there is anything we can do to help. I will be in the UK during the week of February 14 if there is something I can do while I'm there, let me know. Thanks. GAIL [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Natural Resources and Energy MBA students; [EMail-Body]= Barry, Thanks for your message. I am forwarding it with my recommendation to Billy Lemmons who is in charge of our analyst/associate program. Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Calder, Barry"" Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 4:00 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Natural Resources and Energy MBA students Hello Vince; Joseph Doucet has passed along your name to me, in regards to exploring opportunities between Enron, and the Natural Resources and Energy MBA students at the U.of A. I would be pleased to assist in any capacity, from helping organize an information session by Enron to our students in the fall at the U.of A., to co-ordinating job interviews for permanent or summer internship positions, and everything in between! My function is to assist MBA students and appropriate corporations to find each other! I look forward to hearing from you. Regards, Barry. Barry D. Calder, BSc, MBA MBA Placement Coordinator Office of Placement Services Faculty of Business University of Alberta PH: (780) 492-2320 Fax: (780) 492-7980 Email: Barry.Calder@ualberta.ca http://www.bus.ualberta.ca [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Monthly Billing - Detail Class 845 / s100105.xls; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/07/2000 07:55 AM --------------------------- EIS Billing@ENRON 08/04/2000 03:30 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Monthly Billing - Detail Class 845 / s100105.xls Year 2000 changes: Phone charges: Phones are being charged to the person's company and cost center where possible, otherwise rent as before. The description will start with People\ or Room\ unless it was entered manually at the source. Data connections: One connection is being charged for each room instead of one connection for each port in a room. Attached are spreadsheets with the detail supporting the expenses for telephones, data ports, EDI, Enterprise LAN, Enterprise Help Desk, video conferencing, Internet access, email, and other services provided to Enron business units by Enron Information Services. EIS billings for items attached to the room, such as phones and data ports, and people specific services for contractors, such as LAN ID's and AT&T calling cards, are billed to the same company and cost center as room rent in EB or 3AC. For Omaha, EIS uses a phone database maintained by Tammy Anderson for this purpose. People specific services for employees are billed to the company and cost center corresponding to the employee's HR company and department. Video conference usage, data circuits, Ardmore usage, EDI, and web site billings are based on a company and cost center furnished by the person requesting the service. EIS bills services on a one month lag. We take a snapshot of the Corporate Administrative Services rent file for each room in EB and 3AC, of the Omaha phone database for each room in Omaha, and of the HR company and department for each employee. This snapshot is taken at the end of each month for use as a source for billing information. Please examine these billings for accuracy. If our billings are incorrect, generally speaking either the rent should be corrected by contacting Corporate Administrative Services or the person should be moved to the correct HR department by contacting your HR representative. If the room number is incorrect on the phone or long distance billings, this may be corrected by sending the room number along with the telephone number to Notes Mail ID ""Move-Team"". [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: UBS deal; [EMail-Body]= Marilyn Yes, please call Shirley (3-5290) to setup a meeting. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Baker, Marilyn N Sent: Monday, June 18, 2001 4:29 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: RE: UBS deal Vince: Are you available to talk about it tomorrow (Tuesday)? Marilyn -----Original Message----- From: Kaminski, Vince J Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 11:09 AM To: Baker, Marilyn N Cc: Lu, Zimin Subject: UBS deal Marilyn, Krishna sent to me the information about the structure proposed by UBS . I shall review it during the weekend and we can talk about it on Monday. Vince [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= NWE Proposed Language to ABX2 82 -- Need to know if we support
 these --CONFIDENTIAL -- LEGISLATIVE STRATEGY; [EMail-Body]= New West is proposing these amendments to the bad bill AB XX 82. Its view is that it wants to start getting Some interest in the PX credit issue to see if they can get it into a bill. They acknowledge that AB XX 82 is a bad bill. We will be having a teleconf on this tomorrow with all the ESP consolidated billers. So far, I've told New West that it would likely be better for them, if Enron stays away from formally supporting this, given the target on our face in the Legislature. More important, I need to know if EES would like to see some PX credit language in legislation. I have some questions about the approach New West took in modifying the legislation, so, I have a call into them. Sue Mara Enron Corp. Tel: (415) 782-7802 Fax:(415) 782-7854 ----- Forwarded by Susan J Mara/NA/Enron on 07/17/2001 01:05 PM ----- jsmollon@newwestenergy.com 07/16/2001 11:11 AM To: <jsmollon@newwestenergy.com>, <davef@abag.ca.gov>, <athomas@newenergy.com>, <Bob_Anderson@apses.com>, <kennethm@abag.ca.gov>, <susan_j_mara@enron.com>, <jerryl@abag.ca.gov>, <merilyn_ferrara@apses.com> cc: Subject: NWE Proposed Language to ABX2 82 <<NWE Proposed Language for ABx2 82.doc>> > Thank you, > Janie Mollon > Manager > Legislative and Regulatory Affairs > 602-629-7758 > FAX 602-629-7773 > - NWE Proposed Language for ABx2 82.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FYI; [EMail-Body]= Let's add this to our daily distribution. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 07/21/2000 11:06 AM --------------------------- Mark Koenig@ENRON 07/20/2000 11:29 AM To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: FYI Mark and Steve - Interesting article. Would this publication be a good addition to Gas Daily, etc on the Intranet? MEK ---------------------- Forwarded by Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron on 07/20/2000 11:20 AM --------------------------- ""Yannello, James"" <JYannello@PaineWebber.COM> on 07/20/2000 10:33:00 AM To: ""'mark_koenig@enron.com'"" <mark_koenig@enron.com>, ""'paula_rieker@enron.com'"" <paula_rieker@enron.com> cc: Subject: FYI <<Bandwidth.pdf>> - Jay - Bandwidth.pdf [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: FW: Meeting with Mayor Willie L. Brown, Jr.; [EMail-Body]= I think it would be a good idea for them to talk, but I wouldn't want Jeff to go to California right now. Maybe they could meet outside the state (if, for example, brown is going to be in DC or New York) or by phone. From: Joannie Williamson/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/13/2001 08:36 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: FW: Meeting with Mayor Willie L. Brown, Jr. Wanted you to be aware that Mayor Brown is inviting Jeff to meet with him, either in San Francisco or elsewhere. Please advise, but I know that Jeff would probably not travel to California. Mark Koenig and Andy Fastow will discuss meeting with Mayor Brown on the CalPERS issue. Thanks, Joannie -----Original Message----- From: Michael Moyer <mamoyer@pacbell.net>@ENRON ON.com] Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 3:50 PM To: Skilling, Jeff Subject: Meeting with Mayor Willie L. Brown, Jr. Dear Mr. Skilling, On behalf of Mayor Willie L. Brown, Jr. (San Francisco), it is my pleasure to invite you to meet with him regarding energy issues in California. Mayor Brown wishes to meet with you in his capacity as a trustee of the Board of Administration of the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS). As you know, CalPERS is the largest public pension fund in the nation and is a sizeable investor in domestic energy stocks, bonds, debentures, etc. The Board has appointed Mayor Brown to lead a delegation of trustees to meet with the CEOs of CalPERS' largest energy holdings. Enron represents one such holding. The Mayor would be pleased to host you in his office at the newly renovated City Hall in San Francisco or arrange an alternative location at your earliest convenience. I will await your response. Sincerely, Monique Moyer Director, Mayor's Office of Public Finance City & County of San Francisco [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron Advisory Council Meeting; [EMail-Body]= I have also received regrets from Horton, but confirmation from Metts ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 09/08/99 07:42 AM --------------------------- Nicki Daw@ECT 09/08/99 05:09 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Maureen McVicker/HOU/EES@EES, Sherri Reinartz/Corp/Enron@Enron cc: Joannie Williamson/Corp/Enron@Enron Subject: Enron Advisory Council Meeting Unfortunately, Mark Frevert is unable to attend the Enron Advisory Council Meeting on 16-17 September as he will be attending Analyst meetings with Mark Koenig in London and Brussels. Please accept his apologies. Regards Nicki [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Confidential Concern; [EMail-Body]= Sharon, I suggest that we ask Valeria Hope to investigate the fact situation here and report back to us jointly. What do you think? Michelle -----Original Message----- From: Walls Jr., Rob Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 5:53 PM To: Cash, Michelle Cc: Butcher, Sharon Subject: FW: Confidential Concern Michelle - Since this is in Venezuela and thus part of wholesale, I am sending you a copy of this letter for you to review. I'm not sure who should take the lead between you and Sharon but I'll leave that to you guys to work out. Please let me know who is taking the lead on this. Thanks. -----Original Message----- From: Sera, Sherri On Behalf Of Office of the Chairman, Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 10:54 AM To: Fleming, Rosalee; Clark, Mary Cc: Butcher, Sharon; Walls Jr., Rob; Kean, Steven J. Subject: Confidential Concern I'm not sure I understand what has happened to this guy, but it's something that should be handled post haste. Thanks, SRS ---------------------- Forwarded by Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron on 07/25/2001 10:52 AM --------------------------- << OLE Object: Picture (Device Independent Bitmap) >> Anonymous From: Anonymous on 07/23/2001 02:08 PM To: cc: Subject: Confidential Concern << File: Ken Lay - Jeff Skilling.doc >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Antitrust meeting with Rick, Lara, and Vicki Sharp, in teamroom.; [EMail-Body]= Cynthia -- regulator to speak on same day as Shaheen Tom Delainey [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Electric System Reliability Task Force Steering Committee
 Conference Call; [EMail-Body]= to discuss June 3 meeting. 202-586-3093. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Lou Pai's staff meeting, 25C3.; [EMail-Body]= Maggie's Birthday party tonight Bill Hogan (617) 495-1317 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential issues; [EMail-Body]= As requested, I investigated potential government approvals or potential political interventions if India assets/investments are sold. My understanding from the India CFO (in response to my query about approvals necessary for any sell-down like we are working on for Dabhol) is that it depends to whom we sell. If we sell to an Indian company, then the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) must approve taking dollars out of India. If a sale is made outside India, no Indian approvals are necessary. There are, however, many other approvals that would need to be obtained -- specifically from lenders and counterparties pursuant to project documents. I have not analyzed these financial-related approvals. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Project Power Play meeting, in Causey's office, EB 5015.  With
 Rick Causey, Kathleen Magruder, Jordan Mintz, Bob Hermann; [EMail-Body]= Per Bobbie Moody, x35955 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Gooooooooooood Bye!; [EMail-Body]= Thanks for the note and congratulations. Sorry we didn't get a chance to talk before you left. But, I'm still here; give me a call when you get a chance - 1586. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/17/2000 07:56 AM --------------------------- Robert Bryngelson@AZURIX 08/16/2000 12:05 PM To: Kevin Kuykendall/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeffery Ader/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ozzie Pagan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Donald M- ECT Origination Black/HOU/ECT@ECT, John Allario/HOU/ECT@ECT, Eva Pao/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brian O'Rourke/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Laura Luce/HOU/ECT@ECT, Todd Busby/NA/Enron@Enron, Dax Sanders/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, Abrar Sait/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, Vinio Floris/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX, Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Beverly Aden/HOU/EES@EES, Leticia G Smith/HOU/AZURIX@AZURIX cc: Subject: Gooooooooooood Bye! I just wanted to send you a quick note to let you know that I'm outta here! Today is my last day in the office here at Azurix, and in the coming months, I will start in a new position as SVP in the LNG development group at El Paso Energy. This happened very quickly, and I wanted to make sure that I let everyone know before I left. I don't have any contact information yet for my new job, but if you want to reach me, you can do so at RobBrnglsn@aol.com or at 713-664-7478. I enjoyed working with all of you during the past five years at Enron / Azurix, and I wish you all of the best. Take care. Rob Bryngelson PS -- There is a happy hour tonight at Scudeiros on Dallas Street (just west of the Met Garage) beginning around 5:00. If you can make it, please come! [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Ricardo Charvel; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/03/2001 08:28 AM --------------------------- Margaret Daffin@ECT 03/27/2001 02:37 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: RE: Ricardo Charvel Steve: can you please let me have the information I need for Ricardo Charvel? Many thanks Margaret ---------------------- Forwarded by Margaret Daffin/HOU/ECT on 03/27/2001 02:36 PM --------------------------- From: Fran L Mayes/ENRON@enronXgate on 03/27/2001 01:30 PM To: Margaret Daffin/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: RE: Ricardo Charvel Margaret, I do not support him. He is a corporate employee under Steve Kean. Fran -----Original Message----- From: Daffin, Margaret Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2001 2:25 PM To: Mayes, Fran L. Cc: Verity, Jackie Subject: Ricardo Charvel Fran: In order that I may prepare a ""letter of introduction"" for Ricardo for purposes of a house purchase, here in Houston, can you please let me have the following information: Ricardo's date of hire with Enron Servicios de Mexico? His current title Many thanks Margaret x55083 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= California Pricing; [EMail-Body]= For the call with Davis this am..... ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/02/2000 07:33 AM ----- Tim Belden@ECT 09/29/2000 09:14 PM To: Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: John J Lavorato/Corp/Enron Subject: California Pricing The attached spreadsheet contains indicative prices for northern California. Call me if you have any questions. Tim Belden 503-464-3820 (w) 503-701-5181 (c) ---------------------- Forwarded by Tim Belden/HOU/ECT on 09/29/2000 07:15 PM --------------------------- From: Elliot Mainzer on 09/29/2000 07:10 PM To: Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: California Pricing Tim, Northern California Electricity Prices. EM [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Thu evening; [EMail-Body]= Thanks. Confirmed. Vince -----Original Message----- From: On Behalf Of marek.musiela@bnpparibas.com Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 11:48 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Re: Thu evening Just to confirm the time and location for tonight: Marek has a table booked for 8:30pm at: Tamarind 20 Queen Street London W1X 7PJ Tel: 020 7629 3561 Rgds, Jody 28/06/2001 11:31 Internet Vince.J.Kaminski@ENRON.com - 28/06/2001 11:31 To: piotr.karasinski cc: Marek MUSIELA bcc: Subject: Thu evening Piotr, I can pick up my E-mail messages from here. You can E-mail me with the place and location for tonight. Vince This message and any attachments (the ""message"") is intended solely for the addressees and is confidential. If you receive this message in error, please delete it and immediately notify the sender. Any use not in accord with its purpose, any dissemination or disclosure, either whole or partial, is prohibited except formal approval. The internet can not guarantee the integrity of this message. BNP PARIBAS (and its subsidiaries) shall (will) not therefore be liable for the message if modified. Ce message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le ""message"") sont etablis a l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires et sint confidentiels. Si vous recevez ce message par erreur, merci de le detruire et d'en avertir immediatement l'expediteur. Toute utilisation de ce message non conforme a sa destination, toute diffusion ou toute publication, totale ou partielle, est interdite, sauf autorisation expresse. L'internet ne permettant pas d'assurer l'integrite de ce message, BNP PARIBAS (et ses filiales) decline(nt) toute responsabilite au titre de ce message, dans l'hypothese ou il aurait ete modifie. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Oklahoma legislators will be in Houston this afternoon.; [EMail-Body]= You speak at 3:00 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Joao Neves; [EMail-Body]= Rita, I have postponed all the hiring decisions till late August - early September. We can revisit Joao's case at this point. We shall have better information about the space in the new building we can count on and the time of the move. We appreciate Joao interest in Enron. Vince Kaminski -----Original Message----- From: ""rita declaris"" Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 6:33 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Joao Neves Vince, Thought this might be a better form of communication since it has been so difficult for us to communicate via telephone. As I had mentioned this morning, Joao Neves is quite interested in joining your team and I would like to ask you, if you feel it appropriate at this time, for Joao to re-visit you and your team to discuss, possibly more in depth issues. Please advise. Kind regards, Rita DeClaris 713 868-4440 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Folder to safely pass information to  Arthur Andersen; [EMail-Body]= We have become increasingly concerned about confidential information (dpr/position info, curves, validations/stress tests, etc) being passed to Arthur Andersen for audit purposes over the Web to their Arthur Andersen email addresses. (necessary now they no longer have access to Enron's internal email system) Please use the folder described below when passing any info (that you would have concerns about if it was picked up by a third party) via the shared drive that has been set up for this specific purpose. Note: AA should also use the shared drive to pass info back if there are questions, or the data needs updating. We should also consider the sensitivity of audit findings and special presentations if they are being distributed electronically. Please pass this note to others in your groups who have the need to pass info back and forth. Details on how to access for those who will use this method to pass info: A secured folder has been set up on the ""o"" drive under Corporate called Arthur_Andersen Please post all confidential files in this folder rather than emailing the files to their company email address. If you need access to this folder, submit an eRequest through the IT Central site: Arthur Andersen will be able to retrieve these files for review with their terminal server access at the Three Allen Center location. Please contact Vanessa Schulte if you have any problems or questions Beth Apollo [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: i2 Bandwidth Management Agreement Press Release; [EMail-Body]= looks good Meredith Philipp 10/13/2000 09:30 AM To: Kenneth Lay/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Joseph W cc: Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Pam Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: i2 Bandwidth Management Agreement Press Release Attached is a draft news release announcing Enron's bandwidth management agreement with i2. EBS is planning to issue this release on Monday, Oct. 16 prior to Enron's earnings release on Tuesday, Oct. 17. Please review and let me know if you have any comments by end of day today, Friday, Oct. 13. Thank you. Meredith Philipp [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Privileged and Confidential communication to my attorneys; [EMail-Body]= Felicia, This is a merchant asset, which we currently own 100%, but plan to sell down in the coming months. It absolutely has separate HR functions from Enron -- they do not participate in Enron benefits, and we are working hard to prevent any claims that we could be a joint employer with it. Thoughts? Michelle Enron North America Corp. From: Felecia Acevedo @ ENRON 11/02/2000 08:56 AM To: Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Re: Privileged and Confidential communication to my attorneys Michelle, who is GSP? Are they a legal entity? Are they on our payroll? If they are we filed EEO-1's for them. Below is the criteria to file an EEO-1 report: Standard Form 100 must be filed by - A. All private employers who are: (1) subject to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (as amended by the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972) with 100 or more employees EXCLUDING State and local governments, primary and secondary school systems, institutions of higher education, Indian tribes and tax-exempt private membership clubs other than labor organizations; OR (2) subject to Title VII who have fewer than 100 employees if the company is owned or affiliated with another company, or there is centralized ownership, control or management (such as central control of personnel policies and labor relations) so that the group legally constitutes a single enterprise, and the entire enterprise employs a total of 100 or more employees. B. All federal contractors (private employers), who: (1) are not exempt as provided for by 41 CFR 60-1.5, (2) have 50 or more employees, and (a) are prime contractors or first-tier subcontractors, and have a contract, subcontract, or purchase order amounting to $50,000 or more; or (b) serve as a depository of Government funds in any amount, or (c) is a financial institution which is an issuing and paying agent for U.S. Savings Bonds and Notes. All multi-establishment employers, i.e. employers doing business at more than one establishment, must file: (1) a report covering the principal or headquarters office; (2) a separate report for each establishment employing 50 or more persons; (3) a consolidated report that MUST include ALL employees by race, sex and job category in establishments with 50 or more employees as well as establishments with fewer than 50 employees; and (4) a list, showing the name, address, total employment and major activity for each establishment employ-ing fewer than 50 persons, must accompany the consolidated report. All forms for a multi-establishment company must be collected by the headquarters office for its establishments or by the parent corporation for its subsidiary holdings and submitted in one package. For the purposes of this report, the term parent corporation refers to any corporation which owns all or the majority stock of another corporation so that the latter stands in the relation to it of a subsidiary. The OFCCP has always held that subsidiary companies that do not have direct govt contracts must comply with AAP regulations if the parent company or other subsidiary companies benefit from government contracts. Their line of thought is that the subsidiary without government contracts benefits indirectly from the contract as well. If GSP is completely free standing and they do not participate in Enron's benefits, abide by our policies or procedures , participate in our bonus process that may partially or wholly be funded by Enron Corp. , etc., they may have some type of argement not to comply but I doubt it. If we own them over 51% I don't see a way they could not file EEO-1's and have an AAP. We do all the AAP's in Corporate so if this is a freestanding Business Unit I need to know. Thanks! Felecia Michelle Cash@ECT 11/01/2000 07:49 PM To: Felecia Acevedo/Corp/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Privileged and Confidential communication to my attorneys Felicia, Does this sound right to you? Just wanted to confirm. Thanks. Michelle ---------------------- Forwarded by Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT on 11/01/2000 07:48 PM --------------------------- HThomas@gspcorp.com on 11/01/2000 07:19:00 PM To: michelle.cash@enron.com, david.oxley@enron.com, peter.del.vecchio@enron.com cc: david.howe@enron.com, fran.mayes@enron.com Subject: Privileged and Confidential communication to my attorneys Michelle and Peter, we (GSP) have determined that we are not a federal government contractor. Based on feedback from GSP employees, we do sell newsprint to printers who print material for the federal government, but we are a 'second-tier' contractor, not a 'first-tier' contractor. (Pat McCarthy, the local employment law attorney that I have been using, used these terms when David Howe and i talked to him today.) Pat informed us that second-tier contractors do not have to abide by all the federal government requirements for contractors. Based on this, GSP does not plan to file EEO-1 reports or prepare affirmative action plans. In addition, we do not feel that we are subject to an OFCCP audit. Michelle, since you left me the voicemail telling me that we are not included in the Enron EEO-1, i assume that also means that Enron's status as a government contractor does not force us to prepare EEO-1 and AAPs. Please advise us if you feel we have made incorrect assumptions on any of this. Hoyt [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Pension Reform Bill; [EMail-Body]= I think it's a good idea, but we will need a different summary ... either limit the summary to a couple of key points or provide an explanation, in layman's terms, of the practical effect of each of the changes. Cindy Olson 04/26/2001 01:46 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Pension Reform Bill Steve, what do you think????? ---------------------- Forwarded by Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron on 04/26/2001 01:42 PM --------------------------- Mikie Rath 04/26/2001 01:12 PM To: Cynthia Barrow/HR/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cindy Olson/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Pension Reform Bill What do you think of us sending out a U.S. Domestic employee mass e-mail asking our participants to lobby for passage of this very important bill. I tried to make it more interesting than dry toast. Let me know since this is heating up as you can see from the bulletin just received below. p.s. Obviously, I didn't get in enough protesting during my hippie years! ""In related news, the House Ways and Means Committee voted 35 to 6 to expand tax breaks for retirement savings plans. The bill, which will go to the full House next week, would increase the contribution level for IRAs from $2,000 to $5,000, increase the annual dollar limits for 401(k) plans, and allow employees over age 50 to ""catch up"" on pension contributions they may have skipped when they were younger. (The New York Times, 04/27/2001, National ed., p. A16; The Wall Street Journal, 04/27/2001, Midwest ed., p. A22 ; The Washington Post, 04/27/2001, p. A1)"" [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= GENERATOR ORGANIZATION; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/16/2001 02:09 AM --------------------------- ""Joseph S. Fichera"" <jfichera@saberpartners.com> on 05/14/2001 08:43:25 PM To: SKEAN@ENRON.COM cc: Subject: GENERATOR ORGANIZATION Good meeting you. Sorry not to get this to you sooner. See below. Please use two e-mail addresses: jfichera@saberpartners.com (NY) joseph.fichera@gov.ca.gov (Sacramento) PHONE NUMBERS BELOW... joe Corporate Contact Information Joseph S. Fichera Senior Managing Director & CEO Saber Partners, LLC 44 Wall Street, 12th Floor New York, NY 10005 TEL: 212-461-2370 FAX: 212-461-2371 Web Site: http://www.saberpartners.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Comments On Draft RTO Letter On  Barton Proposal; [EMail-Body]= Following up on last night's e-mail, here are some specific suggestions to strengthen the draft EPSA letter on the Barton RTO draft. The second paragraph and the first few bullets after it should be rewritten as follows to make it clear that the current legislative proposal on RTOs is far off the mark as opposed to being fixed by ""technical corrections"" as the draft letter now states: You have identified RTOs as critical to the development of a well-functioning transmission system, and we wholeheartedly agree. We commend you for including all transmission-owning utilities in the RTO provisions and for requiring that transmission be conducted on an open-access basis. However, to accomplish the RTO and transmission goals we share, it is essential that any legislation on RTOs not slow down the process already underway at FERC. Unfortunately, the discussion draft as issued on October 9th does not meet this test. Specifically, the proposal Establishes a lengthy and cumbersome process that will delay the formation of RTOs by imposing procedural requirements that advantage those who oppose properly functioning RTOs, including evidentiary hearings and court appeals review under standards of judicial review not normally applicable to Federal Power Act cases. Removes the ability of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to deal with an evolving marketplace by statutorily freezing market and operational structures in place as of date of enactment regardless of changed circumstances. [rest of the bullets as in the draft letter] We appreciate the opportunity to offer these suggestions to strengthen the draft letter. Please call with any questions or comments before the Legislative Affairs Committee meeting tomorrow. Thanks. John [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW:  Guide for Hormone Hostages (Thought you might enjoy this); [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Crenshaw, Shirley Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 5:52 PM To: Barbara Taylor (E-mail); Irene Yoars (E-mail); Summers, Kelly; Crenshaw, Kayla; Cunningham, Lance; Jenifer & John McIntyre (E-mail); Kaminski, Vince J; Virginia & Harold Melville (E-mail); Dupont, Anita Subject: Guide for Hormone Hostages (Thought you might enjoy this) The Hormone Hostage knows that there are days in the month when all a man has to do is open his mouth and he takes his life in his hands! This is a handy guide that should be as common as a driver's license in the wallet of every husband, boyfriend, or significant other. ------------ DANGEROUS: What's for dinner? SAFER: Can I help you with dinner? SAFEST: Where would you like to go for dinner? ------------- DANGEROUS: Are you wearing THAT? SAFER: Gee, you look good in brown. SAFEST: Wow! Look at you! ------------- DANGEROUS: What are you so worked up about? SAFER: Could we be overreacting? SAFEST: Here's fifty dollars. -------------- DANGEROUS: Should you be eating that? SAFER: You know, there are a lot of apples left. SAFEST: Can I get you a glass of wine with that? ---------------- And my personal favorite. . . . . . . DANGEROUS: What did you DO all day? SAFER: I hope you didn't overdo today. SAFEST: I've always loved you in that robe. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Purely Personal"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: DRAFT response to Greenpeace Kyoto letter; [EMail-Body]= I think Mike should sign Peter Styles@ECT 04/20/2001 04:57 AM To: Jeffrey Keeler/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT@ECT, Kate Bauer/EU/Enron@Enron, Paul Hennemeyer/LON/ECT@ECT, Doug Wood/LON/ECT@ECT, Kelly Kimberly/Enron Communications@Enron Communications@ENRON, Catherine McKalip-Thompson/Enron Communications@Enron Communications@ENRON, Lauren Iannarone/NY/ECT@ECT, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Schoen/NA/Enron@Enron, Stacey Bolton/NA/Enron@Enron, Lisa Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Nailia Dindarova/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: DRAFT response to Greenpeace Kyoto letter Jeff: Following our conference call yesterday, Nailia and I will send you a European Government Affairs mark-up later today. We'll try to incorporate any views expressed by Paul Hennemeyer and Doug Wood too. Jeffrey Keeler@ENRON 19/04/2001 22:00 To: Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT@ECT, Kate Bauer/EU/Enron@Enron, Paul Hennemeyer/LON/ECT@ECT, Doug Wood/LON/ECT@ECT, Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT, Kelly Kimberly/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Catherine McKalip-Thompson/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Lauren Iannarone/NY/ECT@ECT, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Mary Schoen/NA/Enron@Enron, Stacey Bolton/NA/Enron@Enron, Lisa Jacobson/ENRON@enronXgate, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON Subject: DRAFT response to Greenpeace Kyoto letter Attached is a first draft of a response to Greenpeace's April 5 letter to Jeff Skilling asking for Enron's answers to some specific questions on the Kyoto Protocol and climate change. Similar letters were delivered by Greenpeace Europe in native languages to Enron's offices in the UK, Netherlands, Spain, and Belgium. I have attached a copy of one of the letters below. All the questions are the same in each. I have drafted a response with the goals of: 1) Being responsive to Greenpeace without being defensive or without ""greenwashing."" We have an already-published public ""statement"" on climate change and a very positive, solution-oriented story to tell, with many facts and accomplishments to back up our statements. I think our letter can land in the stack that they consider ""positive"" responses, and not in the stack of non-responses or ""we don't care"" responses. 2) Steering away from directly answering the no-win questions about ""Kyoto."" I think we can respond to the letter in a way that provides meaningful answers to the general themes of the letter. I have discussed this with many of you already, but I strongly feel that we should not get dragged down into debates over what we like/dislike, support/oppose about Kyoto....we'll quickly get into questions we can't now answer, and may never be able to answer. I'd prefer it if we rise above the politics of the issue and look solution-oriented by saying counties and companies should continue to be engaged in this important issue. 3) Developing corporate-wide messages that we can use in multiple applications -- arming our PR and govt. affairs advocates with a tight script to use in their efforts; responding to shareholder inquiries and annual meeting Q&A; Ken Lay or other executive speeches and presentations; something for our Corporate Responsibility annual report. Sorry for the long preamble, but climate change has become a very sensitive issue of late, and our message/strategy needs to be very coordinated and we need to have one clear set of statements that everyone in the company can understand and use. With that said, I also believe that these messages should be used very carefully, as the subject matter is complex and straying too far from the basics can be dangerous. We should designate one or two clear spokespeople that can answer any follow up to the Greenpeace letter by press or policymakers, and really stick to the boundaries of what's in our response letter. There is also the issue of customizing responses from the European offices, using this letter as a template and adding a few examples of Enron good deeds in the local areas. I am not opposed to doing so, but would again appreciate being able to review these responses before they go. Please let me know if you have other views. I would like to send our response by early next week, maybe even Monday 4/23 if we can turn it around that fast. Thank you for your input and assistance and I look forward to your reply. Jeff Jeffrey Keeler Director, Environmental Strategies Enron Washington DC office - (202) 466-9157 Cell Phone (203) 464-1541 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Industry News: Charges of Gouging as Power Costs Skyrocket; [EMail-Body]= fyi ---------------------- Forwarded by Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES on 08/28/2000 01:29 PM --------------------------- kpope@enron.com on 08/28/2000 11:39:17 AM To: <meberts@enron.com>, <pmahoney@enron.com> cc: Subject: Industry News: Charges of Gouging as Power Costs Skyrocket fyi from kpope@enron.com E-mailed by: Dow Jones Interactive (R) Server Software Folder: Industry News Headlines: Charges of Gouging as Power Costs Skyrocket Energy: Critics say tactics allowed in the deregulated market, which let suppliers reap big profits, illustrate flaws in the system. As the state's booming economy taxes the ability to meet electricity demands, a federal investigation is underway. National Desk Charges of Gouging as Power Costs Skyrocket Energy: Critics say tactics allowed in the deregulated market, which let suppliers reap big profits, illustrate flaws in the system. As the state's booming economy taxes the ability to meet electricity demands, a federal investigation is underway. CHRIS KRAUL TIMES STAFF WRITER Aug. 28, 2000 Los Angeles Times Home Edition Page A-1 Copyright 2000 / The Times Mirror Company With Southern Californians reeling from skyrocketing electric bills, critics charge that fewer than a dozen power suppliers are reaping far greater profits than are justified by the recent surge in wholesale prices of the natural gas they use to create electricity. Their behavior is a major focus of a formal investigation announced last week by federal regulators. Among those under scrutiny are power merchants including <B>Duke</B> <B>Energy</B>, <B>Dynegy</B>, <B>Reliant</B> <B>Energy</B>, Calpine, Southern Co. and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. Critics say the companies are earning huge windfalls selling energy to the two state agencies charged with distributing power in California. The power merchants themselves deny any profiteering, describing their market moves as legal business practices and welcoming the investigation. The underlying cause of California's energy turmoil is a severe shortage of power-generating capacity to meet the soaring energy demands of the state's booming economy. This summer the state at times has had to import more than 20% of its energy needs, a shortfall equal to the output of about 20 medium-size power plants. No plants of any size have been built in the state in 10 years. But the problem goes beyond a supply-and-demand imbalance. The so-called merchant power companies' ability to bend the market to their advantage--using what appear to be legal strategies--illustrates what many say are serious flaws in the state's deregulated energy market. One major flaw is that sellers do not have to participate in the state's main electricity auction--the so-called ""day forward"" sale held one day before electricity is delivered to the state's residences and businesses. Instead, generators are withholding power until the day of delivery, when desperate state agencies are willing to pay steep prices to keep the power flowing. The upshot has been a doubling of electric bills for the 1.2 million customers in San Diego Gas&Electric's coverage area, and Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas&Electric customers may be facing higher prices once their rates are unfrozen in 2002. There is little prospect for short-term relief; with no additional power generation due for a year, the prices of natural gas and crude oil are still rising. In fact, state officials expect the market to become tighter over the next year as demand and fuel prices rise. In pointing the finger at the power merchants, Gov. Gray Davis, some academics and utility executives charge that California consumers are being victimized by sophisticated trading techniques that take advantage of the market system to extract huge profits. Deregulation ""only works if people act responsibly. It won't work if people say their only goal is to make as much money as humanly possible,"" Davis said last week. This brokering takes place on the California Power Exchange and the Independent System Operator, two agencies created by the 1996 legislation that ostensibly opened up 70% of the state's power market--represented by the PG&E, SCE and SDG&E service areas--to competition. To create that competition, lawmakers ordered the utilities to sell power plants to independent companies, which now are selling electricity to the state. The Power Exchange is a clearinghouse for the bulk of energy trading that is completed a day in advance of delivery, which normally fills most of the state's energy needs. The ISO, the nominal traffic cop arranging deliveries over the power grid, also has the authority to hold same-day power auctions for immediate delivery in the event of unexpectedly high demand. The Power Exchange is subject to a price cap of $250 per megawatt-hour, a ceiling imposed earlier this summer as prices began to soar. But the ISO has the authority to pay as much as it has to for supplementary power if the previous-day purchases prove insufficient to keep the state's lights on. And it is the secondary ISO market where power suppliers, leveraging a seller's market, are holding sway. By withholding their energy from the Power Exchange and opting instead to bid their supply to the ISO, they are betting that same-day shortages will generate prices as close to the price cap as possible, possibly even above it. It's apparently working. On some days, the ISO has ended up buying one-fifth of the state's energy needs, not the 5% to 10% maximum originally envisioned. In the process, desperate to meet demand, the ISO is paying premium prices and those prices are being passed along to consumers. The problem with the market apparently defies easy solutions. At an emergency meeting Friday to discuss ways of dealing with the crisis, the ISO board rejected a staff proposal to force energy merchants to allocate at least 90% of the electricity they intend to sell in the ""day forward"" auction held by the Power Exchange, instead of holding back until the day of delivery. Although ISO Chief Executive Terry Winter said the measure would restore some market order, the board rejected it on fears that it might create unforeseen ramifications, possibly even power suppliers abandoning the state altogether. As the market stands now, independent power companies have been able to exploit the power shortages and the market's quirks to charge the state higher rates than the increases in the price of natural gas would seem to warrant, said Severin Borenstein, a UC Berkeley professor and energy specialist. With fellow UC Berkeley professor James Bushnell and Stanford's Frank Wolak, Borenstein studied the Power Exchange over a 15-month period ended in September and found evidence of ""market power,"" or the power generators' ability to raise prices above competitive levels for sustained periods. Unless there is collusion among two or more power providers, the exercise of market power is not illegal, experts say. But if prolonged, it is a symptom of a seriously dysfunctional market. ""I think [market power] has probably gotten worse this year. There are players big enough to move the price and move it a lot. Prices are clearly way above their costs,"" Borenstein said. Edison CEO John Bryson and Stephen Baum, head of SDG&E parent Sempra Energy, have similar criticisms. Their claims will be investigated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the latest of five probes underway into California's worsening energy predicament. ""We'll see whether there are alternative market rules that should be adopted to have a better functioning, more efficient market,"" said Daniel Larcamp, FERC's director of market tariffs and rates. ""Looking at market power issues is an important focus of our investigation."" Power suppliers Duke Energy and Calpine denied any market manipulation, saying the bulk of their energy is sold on long-term contracts and is not used to unduly sway day-ahead prices on the Power Exchange or same-day sales on the ISO. ""No way are we manipulating the market, and we have welcomed investigation into our business practices,"" said Tom Williams, spokesman for Duke Energy's California regional office in Morro Bay. ""It's easy to point fingers at someone who controls only 4% of the market, much of which has already been sold in the forward market months ago."" Calpine spokesman Bill Highlander said the high prices are simply a case of demand far outstripping the state's ability to meet it. ""Ten years ago, you had more supply than demand. Now you have a skyrocketing demand from population growth, a robust economy and Internet-fed additions to demand,"" Highlander said. Charles Cicchetti, a USC professor of government, business and the economy, agrees and said the market is performing exactly as expected, given supply shortages. He objects to the limited price ceilings opposed by state officials. ""The choice should be to either regulate the whole thing, go back to where we were or let the market work,"" Cicchetti said. ""This hybrid is causing problems to get worse."" But something appears to be worsening an already bad pricing situation, and critics believe it is market manipulation. In the FERC order initiating its investigation, the agency noted that California's wholesale electricity costs on June 29 were $340 million--a sevenfold increase over the same date in 1999. Over the same period, natural gas prices only doubled. FERC will look at other aspects of the state's energy deregulation as well--at the fact that utilities have no choice but to purchase power from the central power exchange and have only limited power to hedge or make bilateral deals on their own with outside firms. In an interview last week, the FERC's Larcamp said his agency is reserving the right to roll back rates, order refunds or even impose a new market framework to replace the Power Exchange and ISO. Larcamp said the FERC's probe will contrast California's troubled power market with the Pennsylvania-Maryland-New Jersey system, which gives end users more freedom to cut their own deals with suppliers. The result is that Pennsylvania has more than 130 power suppliers competing for the state's business, versus no more than 15 in California. * Times staff writers Nancy Vogel and Nancy Rivera Brooks contributed to this story. LATM0024100606 To view all headlines in the folder Industry News, go to To go to the front page of Dow Jones Interactive Intranet Toolkit Server Software, go to http://eeshou-dowj1/ For assistance, contact Dow Jones Customer Service by e-mail at djip.itkhelp@dowjones.com or by phone at 800-369-7466. (Outside the U.S. and Canada, call 609-452-1511 or contact your local sales representative.) Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones Reuters Business Interactive LLC. All Rights Reserved. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Vision Focus Groups; [EMail-Body]= Rosie and Sherrie: Jeff Ken and Joe wanted to discuss the attached. Joe -- this is the same document I forwarded to you earlier. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 03/10/2000 04:31 PM --------------------------- Mary Clark@ENRON 02/28/2000 06:58 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Maureen McVicker/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Vision Focus Groups Steve, I've attached the results of the focus groups as per my notes from the meetings. Let me know if you need anything else. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Board presentations; [EMail-Body]= Ask Karen for the distribution list she would like to send these to for today's 1:30 meeting. Also please reserve 47c1 for the meeting so I can use the computer screen. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/05/2001 07:23 AM ----- Terry West 02/09/2001 01:36 PM To: Rebecca Carter/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Board presentations Attached are the presentations for the Corporate Staff Group and the 2001 Goals. There have been slight modifications to the format. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Corporate Watch article; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/01/2000 09:24 AM --------------------------- Sherri Sera@ENRON 08/01/2000 09:15 AM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Corporate Watch article Steve, Mark - Here's the link to the entire message in the event you're interested...you'll go through several links to get all the information that was posted. In addition to the Corporate Watch article, there is an Environmental Defense Scorecard on Enron's Methanol Plant in Deer Park, TX, and the old Amnesty International article on human rights issues in India... [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= ATTORNEY/CLIENT COMMUNICATION//////CONFIDENTIAL and Privileged; [EMail-Body]= Article II of the NONCOMPETITION AGREEMENT entered in connection with the sale of HPL to AEP (which closed as of June 1,2001) provides: ""ENA [for 3 months post-close] will not solicit, negotiate or enter into any contract, agreement or arrangement for the purchase of natural gas on the HPL Pipeline from any Person which is a supplier or producer of natural gas connected to the HPL Facilities; provided, however, nothing herein shall be construed or interpreted as prohibiting ENA from entering into any such contract, agreement or arrangement which is less than one month in duration and involves or is related to an Enron Online transaction."" This is not the most clearly drafted provision as it was the subject of much negotiation....and was significantly narrowed from the original scope proposed by AEP. Thus, please consult with me prior to entering into any solicitation, agreement or arrangement which might arguably be covered by our limited covenant not to compete on the supply side for 3 months. There are many aspects of the post-close transition which will require cooperation between Enron and AEP/HPL and thus, it behoves us to carefully weigh the risks and rewards of ""stepping too close to or over the line"". Further,although a technical reading of the non-competition agreement only applies to ENA, no ENA UPSTREAM deals which would violate this covenant if there were to be done as ENA should be done without clearance from Brian Redmond and me. Please communicate this restriction to those who report to you and have need to be aware of this limited restriction. Sincerely BNG Dan J Hyvl 06/07/2001 04:59 PM To: Barbara N Gray/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Jeffrey T Hodge/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: ONEOK Energy Marketing and Trading Company Barbara, This appears to be supply deal for deliveries at Katy that would be subject to the 90 day non-compete. Sandi is in the process of getting me a copy of the non-compete so that I can determine if this deal is covered. Do you have any thoughts. ----- Forwarded by Dan J Hyvl/HOU/ECT on 06/07/2001 04:56 PM ----- Richard Deming/ENRON@enronXgate 06/07/2001 02:22 PM To: Dan J Hyvl/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: ONEOK Energy Marketing and Trading Company Dan, Please find below details of Phy Gas deals with GTC agreements: Deal Date: 6/06/01 Deal No: VF1896 / 835431 Buyer: ENA Seller: ONEOK Energy Marketing and Trading Company Start Date: 7/01/01 End Date: 6/30/02 Firm Volume: 10,000 / day Price: HOU.SHIP-LGPKG.IF.M.I minus USD 0.03000 Delivery Point: Exxon Katy - Katy Tailgate Please let me know if you need any more details. Thanks, Richard x54886 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Welcome Lunch for new hire analysts - Monday, July 17 from
 12:00 p.m. to 12:30 p.m.; [EMail-Body]= That's OK, I was going to use it in the presentation, but it wasn't essential. Was my talk what you were looking for? Celeste Roberts@ECT 07/17/2000 02:41 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Re: Welcome Lunch for new hire analysts - Monday, July 17 from 12:00 p.m. to 12:30 p.m. Sorry I did not get this prior to your presentation. We do have this information if you would still like a copy. Let me know if you need it and by when. Steven J Kean@EES 07/17/2000 07:45 AM To: Celeste Roberts/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Re: Welcome Lunch for new hire analysts - Monday, July 17 from 12:00 p.m. to 12:30 p.m. Do you have an ""alumni"" list of analysts/associates in key positions at Enron? Celeste Roberts@ECT 07/14/2000 03:05 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Joseph W Sutton@Enron Subject: Welcome Lunch for new hire analysts - Monday, July 17 from 12:00 p.m. to 12:30 p.m. Steve Thanks for stepping in and backing up for Joe Sutton on Wednesday. I wanted to provide you with talking points for your speaking engagement with our new hire analysts during their orientation. As a reminder, you are scheduled to speak over lunch on Monday, July 17 from 12:00 p.m. to 12:30 p.m. at the Doubletree Hotel in the LaSalle Ballroom. Purpose of the luncheon: Welcome the new hire analysts and impart to them our important this program is to Enron. The analyst program is the ultimate pipeline of top entry-level talent, strategically deployed to meet anticipated business needs. We look to this program to provide the company with our future business leader. The program is a premier partner in providing exciting career challenges in areas of Finance, Origination/Structuring, Technology, Risk Management, Sales and Marketing, Trading, Valuation, and Accounting. The analyst program is also an avenue for providing the solid foundation of knowledge and skill needed in a competitive and dynamic global corporation. We are very excited to have you on our team. This is a very exciting company that is always reinventing itself. The opportunities are endless. There will be 75 new hire analysts attending this orientation. Other than the recruiting process, this is their first impression of Enron and Senior Management. The first week of their orientation will consist of presentations given by all business units/operating companies. Weeks two and three will consist of technical training (i.e., modeling, valuation, working styles, communicating effectively and computer training). Additionally, we have social events scheduled to allow them to network with peers and management. Additionally, I have attached a calendar of the orientation for your review. Steve, let me know if you require additional information. Thank you for your support in our new hire orientation efforts. Regards, Celeste Roberts [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Conversation with Wanda Curry; [EMail-Body]= Yes. Mary will discuss with you. Michelle Cash @ ECT 05/24/2001 04:35 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Mary Joyce/Enron@EnronXGate Subject: Re: Conversation with Wanda Curry Did we offer her a contract in any of the scenarios? --------------------------- Michelle Cash Enron North America Corp. 1400 Smith Street, EB 3823 Houston, Texas 77002 (713) 853-6401 michelle.cash@enron.com This message may contain confidential information that is protected by the attorney-client and/or work product privileges. Steven J Kean@ENRON 05/23/2001 06:40 PM To: Michelle Cash/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mary Joyce/Enron@EnronXGate cc: Subject: Conversation with Wanda Curry Today, Mary Joyce and I met with Wanda Curry. I realize that there is some concern that Wanda is a litigation threat, so for the purposes of soliciting legal advice and in anticipation of litigation, I am forwarding my recollection of today's meeting to you: Wanda remains very emotional about what she perceives as ""unfair and discriminatory"" treatment. When I asked her what she meant specifically (and did she intend those terms to have their legal meaning), she said that she did not intend the legal meaning of those terms; rather, she, on a ""personal"" level, felt that the company should have treated her better. She mentioned specifically: that no one ever called to explain in detail why she had not been further promoted at Enron or given more responsibility at Enron, that she viewed the job in Sally Beck's organization as unsatisfactory (because Sally should be treated as a peer, not a superior), and that she felt as though she did not have the support of upper management of the company. I described several options for her: Take the job she was offered in Sally Beck's organization; Take the job in Rick Buy's organization (I said I would have to talk to Rick again) Take severence under the standard package; Take severence as a ""business reorg"" but consult with Enron for a period. At first she seemed most interested in the fourth option (although she wasn't particularly happy about any of the alternatives), but at the end of the discussion expressed interest in the second option. A large part of the conversation involved discussion of Wanda's complaints about how she had been treated. Most of Wanda's concerns focussed on jobs she did not get, or jobs she felt were taken from her, reduced scope of control, and the fact that she felt that her supervisors did not communicate with her sufficiently prior to or subsequent to making their decisions about job assignments. I suggested that there were likely two sides to the story and that most of the problem was insufficient communication or perhaps some insensitivity. I also pointed out that in all my conversations I heard good things about her performance and had no indication that anyone had treated her unfairly. Wanda did complain about many things, but never once complained about her pay at Enron. Mary, these are my recollections from today. Do you have anything to add? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Important - CPUC Motion - Confidential Attorney Client Privilege
 and Work Product; [EMail-Body]= As you may already know, the CPUC filed a motion at FERC asking for a protective order and to compel production of the information they subpoened from us in the CPUC's OII case. Given the timing, we should discuss this on our conference call scheduled for tomorrow. They request that we be required: to answer their motion on Thursday, to provide the information within 5 working days of a FERC ordering production, and to provide of P&L information and spread sheets detailing our deals, specifically delivery point, delivery date, counterparty, volume and price. We may not have a problem providing this information for use by FERC in its proceeding subject to a confidentiality agreement but I think we would oppose their requests for: the information to be provided for ""government eyes only"" - this would prohibit EPMI from defending itself vis-a-vis other market participants. a FERC confidentiality order that would could allow FERC to ""share"" this information with the CPUC (for purposes of the PUC's OII proceeding) pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 824h(c). 16 USC 824g(c) requires the Commission to make information available to state commissions as may be of assistance in state regulation of public utilities. We should argue that 16 USC 824h(c) does not apply here given that we are not a public utility nor does the PUC regulate how much market power wholesale marketers exercise or the level of market power mitigation (these are the bases the PUC provides for explaining why it should have this information.) the above contractual information to allow them to analyze the competitiveness of the forward market to evaluate the wisdom of the Commission's decision to allow the UDC's ""unfettered access"" to the forwards market. This argument is unpersuasive given that the CPUC can get information about the competitiveness of the forward markets from the Wall Street Journal's listing of NYMEX prices. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Project California; [EMail-Body]= I agree with Rick. I know Jose is tied up on current business, but his input will be important. To date we have been relying on legal analysis of required approvals etc. That information is essential but it is, as you know, about 10% of the issue. The far more critical considerations are how is the government likely to react on a political level and what can we do about it. I think our government affairs people are in the best position to make these assessments. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 04/20/2000 11:43 AM --------------------------- Richard Shapiro 04/20/2000 11:07 AM To: Diomedes cc: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES Subject: Project California I have reviewed the most recent IM and don't have any significant comments, but my review did highlight the need to have a set or sets of eyes(internally) who understand the regulatory overlay of the Southern Cone better and who are also in a better position ( physically and with language skills ) to assess the nature of the regulatory approvals needed and to effectively pull on a set of local resources when this project begins to take shape- With all of that in mind, I would recommend we , at the very least, bring Jose into the loop. I intend to stay actively engaged and do whatever I can, but we need help immediately on the regulatory front - the last thing I would want to have happen to the project would be have it held hostage at the governmental approval stage- being proactive now by bringing Jose over the wall would be my strong recommendation.Please advise. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Invitation to address UTILITIES 2001; [EMail-Body]= Decline is ok. Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp. From: Sherri Sera 05/09/2001 11:04 AM To: Ursula Brenner/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: Invitation to address UTILITIES 2001 I had originally declined this invitation, but decided to run it by you after closer review. He could be there if he chooses to and if you think he should. Please advise. SRS ---------------------- Forwarded by Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron on 05/09/2001 11:02 AM --------------------------- From: Jeff Skilling 05/09/2001 10:34 AM Sent by: Sherri Sera To: Felicia Griffin <feliciag@marcusevanstx.com> cc: Subject: Re: Invitation to address UTILITIES 2001 Thank you for the invitation to Utilities 2001. Due to a prior commitment, Mr. Skilling is unable to attend. Regards, Sherri Sera 713.853.5984 713.646.8381 (fax) sherri.sera@enron.com Felicia Griffin <feliciag@marcusevanstx.com> on 05/09/2001 10:07:02 AM To: ""'jeff.skilling@enron.com'"" <jeff.skilling@enron.com> cc: Subject: Invitation to address UTILITIES 2001 <<SKILLING, Jeff (ENRON).doc>> <<UTILITIES 2001 Fact Sheet.doc>> Felicia Griffin Strategic Business Summits Energy, Utilities, & Chemicals marcus evans Office Phone : 713.650.6007 Home Phone :281-931-3009 Fax : 713-759-1478 E-mail :feliciag@marcusevanstx.com URL http://www.marcusevans.com *************** This message was sent by an employee of marcus evans OUR VISION: marcus evans is dedicated to being a strategic information partner for all its customers by understanding what they need and want, and delivering it through premium products and services in the format best suited to each customer. ----- To find out more about how you and your organization can access the very best in ""Business Information for Business Excellence,"" please visit us at: www.marcusevans.com ************** - SKILLING, Jeff (ENRON).doc - UTILITIES 2001 Fact Sheet.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: job applicant; [EMail-Body]= yes lyoho@enron.com 09/26/2000 09:03 AM To: Steven.J.Kean@enron.com cc: Subject: Re: job applicant Steve -- Yes, I am interested in talking to him. Should I contact Eric? Thanks for passing this along. Lisa From: Steven J Kean@ENRON on 09/24/2000 05:37 PM Sent by: Steven J Kean@ENRON To: Lisa Yoho/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: job applicant any interest? ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/24/2000 05:37 PM ----- Eric Thode To: 09/20/2000 cc: 11:46 AM Subject: Is this of interest to you? Eric ---------------------- Forwarded by Eric Thode/Corp/Enron on 09/20/2000 11:46 AM --------------------------- (Embedded image moved to file: From: Yvette Parker pic11478.pcx) 09/18/2000 05:14 PM To: Eric Thode/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: job applicant Imad Tareen forwarded me his resume for a possible job opportunity in our group. (Please see below.) I have never met him before, and I have no idea how he got my phone number, but his resume looks quite good. What do you think? Yvette ---------------------- Forwarded by Yvette Parker/Corp/Enron on 09/18/2000 05:06 PM --------------------------- Imad Tareen 09/18/2000 04:39 PM To: Yvette Parker/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Rotation Hi Yvette Thanks for your help. I am very interested in exploring opportunities in your group. I have a Masters in Public Policy from Harvard which deals a lot with communications and running campaigns. Imad (See attached file: resumeimad[2].doc) - pic11478.pcx - resumeimad[2].doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Enron's policy on Libya; [EMail-Body]= I assume we avoid Libya completely. The question, though, may be how we proceed if we are doing business with someone who has activities in Libya. Your views please. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/16/2000 09:01 AM ----- Nicholas O'Day 10/16/2000 04:59 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron cc: Subject: Enron's policy on Libya Steve, Itochu Corporation, a Japanese trading company with which we are developing a relationship, is considering reactivating its activities in Libya. They have identified an opportunity to source LNG from Libya for the purposes of importing to Japan, either directly or through an LNG swap. What is Enron's current policy on dealing with Libya? kind regards [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Monthly Billing - Detail Class 845 / s100061.xls; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 09/06/99 02:06 PM --------------------------- EIS Billing@ENRON 09/03/99 02:43 PM To: Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Monthly Billing - Detail Class 845 / s100061.xls SAP Impact: File names have changed from ""b"" + company + rc for MSA booking to ""s"" + cost center for SAP. Other changes have also been implemented. Please send a Notes mail to ""Bill Myers"" if you notice any problems, particularly if you think that they might be conversion or program related. (I already know about the company description for the MSA spreadsheets where companies are rebooked to themselves). Attached are spreadsheets with the detail supporting the expenses for telephones, data ports, EDI, Enterprise LAN, Enterprise Help Desk, video conferencing, Internet access, email, and other services provided to Enron business units by Enron Information Services. These expenses are posted in MSA Detail Class 845. EIS billings for items attached to the room, such as phones and data ports, and people specific services for contractors, such as LAN ID's and AT&T calling cards, are billed to the same company and cost center as room rent in EB or 3AC. For Omaha, EIS uses a phone database maintained by Tammy Anderson for this purpose. People specific services for employees are billed to the company and cost center corresponding to the employee's HR company and department. Video conference usage, data circuits, Ardmore usage, EDI, and web site billings are based on a company and cost center furnished by the person requesting the service. EIS bills services on a one month lag. We take a snapshot of the Corporate Administrative Services rent file for each room in EB and 3AC, of the Omaha phone database for each room in Omaha, and of the HR company and department for each employee. This snapshot is taken at the end of each month for use as a source for billing information. Please examine these billings for accuracy. If our billings are incorrect, generally speaking either the rent should be corrected by contacting Corporate Administrative Services or the person should be moved to the correct HR department by contacting your HR representative. If the room number is incorrect on the phone or long distance billings, this may be corrected by sending the room number along with the telephone number to Notes Mail ID ""Move-Team"". If you wish to move EIS charges after to a different company and/or department after billings have been processed or if you wish to discuss an alternative to using your HR department for people specific billings, please send a message to Notes Mail ID ""EIS Billing"". [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: PERSONAL & CONFIDENTIAL - My Last Thoughts on GRA; [EMail-Body]= JT's thoughts FYI. -----Original Message----- From: Thompson, John (London) Sent: 05 October 2001 14:04 To: Dawson, Paul Cc: Brown, Michael - COO London; Shaw, Eric; Baumerich, Gregor; Kingsley, Sophie Subject: PERSONAL & CONFIDENTIAL - My Last Thoughts on GRA Sensitivity: Confidential Paul, sorry that you were in meetings when I was not yesterday morning. Since I am on vacation (or at least trying to be) I didn't go back into the office looking for you later in the day. The following are my last thoughts regarding Government and Reg Affairs people and organisational issues. I will leave them with you and the others do with as you like. John T. 0) Background: Cross-border issues in power and EU vs. the Germans and Dutch in Gas will likely be the big issues in the next 12 to 18 months on the continent. We have the potential to add as much value via GovRegAffairs activity on the continent in the next 12 months as through any commercial activity. Much of this activity will have to be EU focused. In power especially we have gotten almost - not quite all - but almost all that we can hope to get exclusively from national level work. (Italy and Spain are of course big exceptions.) Gas is and always has been much more of a Europe-wide theme than a national theme. We will have to carefully manage our public GRA message and approach to take tough positions without creating unneeded enemies. We should look for local national allies where possible. We cannot be the only voice in any country supporting a major position. If there are no local forces supporting the position, we need to find/create some allies. It cannot be Enron vs. Germany; or, even worse, Enron and EU vs Germany (or Switzerland, or wherever). Loss of momentum at this time would be an error; however, focus would be an accomplishment. Each issue will need a simultaneous AND co-ordinated EU and local effort. 1) Styles and the EU Office: I am convinced that Peter Styles is the most important single continent based GRA asset at this time and for the next 18 to 24 months. Everyone including me has their own stories about Peter - not all positive. But he is the right man, at the right time at the right place. Within the bounds of what is managerially and financially responsible, it is important to keep the Styles-force working for Enron at the EU level. Beyond his linguistic skills he understands absolutely what Enron needs to make money on the continent. Of course, we should begin thinking about Peter's EVENTUAL retirement. We should never allow anyone to be permanently as essential as Peter has become. BUT, right now he is essential. 2) German GRA Activities: Permanent resource (100%) should become Jan Haizmann (or however you spell it). He is abrupt and offensive to Anglo-Saxons - but then, he is very German - and the directness that some of us have come to appreciate about the Germans is often mistaken as rudeness by those who have not worked with them much. I have gotten consistently positive feed-back from senior German colleagues especially about his performance with senior German officials such as the head of the Federal Cartel Office. My understanding is that Haizmann wants to move to Frankfurt. If this is true, I would encourage it. There are no German official offices (other than the Embassy) in London. We have, I believe, all agreed that Paul Hennemeyer is more of a self-propelled project guy than a team player. Thus, I would agree that probably mid- to long-term he should move on within Enron to other Hennemeyer sized projects. But, in the immediate future, he has several very important projects going on in German speaking Europe. Additionally, with a new more profound emphasis on getting the gas market opened up, with renewed interest in Austria and with the necessity to engage somewhat in Switzerland (regarding transit), it does not look to me like we should let Paul leave too quickly. As a somewhat mentor to Haizmann, passing off relationships in an orderly manner, ensuring that projects do not fall through the cracks, etc. there is still much for Paul to do. It will be, however, necessary to give him a clear picture of his future or Enron will lose him entirely. An open ended ""project boy"" job will not keep Paul indefinitely. Let's not lose Paul to Enron even if we have to slowly move him out of Europe. 3) Lars Atenhoefer: Lars is much in demand by Gregor and others for his unique brand of consulting based commercial work. I continue to believe that he would be a very powerful less than 50% GRA front-end for Switzerland. He would be glad to do that but for the next time will clearly keep his commercial focus. Switzerland does not/will not justify full-time GRA support; but, we must get more engaged there. Less for our Swiss business than for our cross-border business and for continued grid and water power access. The liberalisation vote next year will fail if it is held. Everything going on in Switzerland now by real players is based on the failure of that vote. Important to work with Gregor and Eric to ensure that Lars continues to see a variety of opportunities in Enron. His academic and professional preparation is perfect for a GRA person. He belongs to Gregor and Eric. I recommend talking with them about him. 4) Doug Wood: I do not see a mid- or long-term role for Doug Wood on the continent. He only speaks English and currently has little feel for the continent - which is neither American nor Britain. English only players will ALWAYS fall behind locals. In every country where we need to have an impact, the impact MUST be in local language and should be with a local national. GRA work is political (i.e., irrational and emotional). Brits are Europeans and Americans are people too doesn't wash with local politicians. The fact that some locals are willing to speak English is a trick. The real business - particularly regulatory and political business - is always done in local language. Local GRA people, local country managers, local lawyers, etc. are not going to suffer an English only player gladly. Let's be realistic about this. Doug Wood has no future on the continent. 5) Research Specialists (and other such creatures): We should not have such creatures. That is a go nowhere job and it attracts go nowhere people. More seriously, it would be a fantastic place for a direct out of the university eager Analyst to get an introduction to Enron before hitting a commercial desk. That will also help ensure that future commercial teams will better understand the role of GRA. The continuity argument doesn't wash. Many commercial Analyst and Associates rotate leaving continuity problems behind. I am getting rid of my personal Research Specialist and will farm the work out in the future to rotating Analysts (watch out Gregor and Eric). Reg Affairs should get rid of all of their Research Positions. We must ensure that enough first rotation Analysts are assigned to this task. I have several times in several different countries seen Analyst level work outsourced to very highly paid consultants simply because GRA didn't have any resource. Besides being expensive and wasteful, this costs a would be Analyst a great learning experience. Perhaps each commercial country manager and each country specific GRA person should share a research analyst as a first round rotator. All of our senior relationship work, etc. would be done much more professionally if that were the case and our consulting bills would fall. 6) Country Managers: Each country manager (such as Radmacher, Renggli, a hopefully soon to be new Italian one, etc.) should be spending a meaningful (ca. 10 to 15%) of their time on GRA activities. The commercial country manager should by definition have the best feel in Enron for what we need to do how and with whom in his/her country. They must be told that GRA leadership - together with you and the gas and power leadership executives - is part of their job. A new market manager such as the future Italian country manager should consider GRA leadership an essential part of getting their market off of the ground. Any commercial country manager who wants to 100% outsource GRA leadership in his/her country should be replaced. Further, this should also reduce the need for too many VP and Sr Director level GRA people at this time. 7) Italy: A Spaniard that speaks Italian is a good SHORT-term solution for Italy. If we successfully hire a new Italian country manager, he should get heavily involved in this initially. Eventually, we will need a real-live Italian in Italy but we probably don't need to look for him/her this quarter. 8) Local Politics, Local Language, Local National: Should apply to: Germany, The Netherlands, Austria/Switzerland (perhaps together, but then done by a German), France(&, perhaps Belgium), Spain, Italy. I cannot imagine that we need any resource in former Communist Europe - Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovak Republic, etc. I have a lot of much more minor thoughts and suggestions; but, I am going to make this my final and conclusive list of GRA suggestions. I look forward to working with you in this regard. Already have engagements in the GRA space in Switzerland and Germany this year and am sure that there are many to come. Congratulations in you new role and best of wishes. JT [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CAISO Notice - CMR Recommrendation for Board Approval; [EMail-Body]= Market Participants: The ISO Recommendation for Congestion Management Reform to be presented for approval by the ISO Governing Board on September 6-7, 2000 is now posted on the ISO web site at . As a reminder, there will be an informational conference call from 10:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. tomorrow, August 25, to provide an opportunity for you to clarify the content and format of what we will be asking the Board to approve. The teleconference information is as follows: Call In: (877) 381-6004 Password: 781871 Leader: Byron Woertz Byron Woertz Director, Client Relations [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Request for Confidential Information from The Attorney General; [EMail-Body]= ***Sent on behalf of Sandi Thompson*** To All California Power Exchange Participants: Notice is hereby provided pursuant to Section 19.3.4 of the California Power Exchange Tariff that the Attorney General for the State of California (AG), as part of an ongoing investigation of California markets, has requested information that may be confidential under Section 19.3.2 of the Tariff. Such information is detailed in the attached subpoena. The California Power Exchange will provide such information no later than Wednesday, October 25, 2000. If you desire to assert a claim of privilege or confidentiality pursuant to legal authority, the California Power Exchange will include your written assertion of that claim together with its submittal to the AG, provided that it is timely received. Your written statement should be directed to the AG as follows: Bill Lockyer, Attorney General Attn: Richard Rochman, Deputy Attorney General 455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 11000 San Francisco, CA 94102-7004 Please deliver your statement to the California Power Exchange as follows: Karen Koyano California Power Exchange 1000 S. Fremont Avenue Unit 20 Alhambra, CA 91801 626.537.3173 facsimile Any written statement must be received no later than Friday, October 20, 2000, 5:00 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time, to be included with any information delivered to the AG. You are also free to take any other legal action you may deem appropriate in the circumstances of this inquiry. Thank you. (See attached file: calpxsubpoena1 AG 10-3-00.doc) (See attached file: AG Confidentiality Ltr 10-13-00.doc) - calpxsubpoena1 AG 10-3-00.doc - AG Confidentiality Ltr 10-13-00.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Clickathome - Proposed treatment for Involuntary Terminations -
 Business Reorganizations; [EMail-Body]= No need to review with policy committee. Kalen Pieper@EES 06/14/2001 05:44 PM To: James Sandt/ENRON@enronXgate @ ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Suzanne Brown/ENRON@enronXgate@ENRON, Sharon Gary P Smith/ENRON@enronXgate@ENRON, Marla Barnard/Enron Communications@Enron Communications@ENRON, David Oxley/ENRON@enronXgate@ENRON, Robert W Jones/ENRON@enronXgate@ENRON, Cindy Olson/ENRON@enronXgate@ENRON, Drew Mary Joyce/ENRON@enronXgate@ENRON, Cynthia Sarah A Davis/ENRON@enronXgate@ENRON, Marie Elizabeth Subject: RE: Clickathome - Proposed treatment for Involuntary Terminations - Business Reorganizations All, Please let me know by noon tomorrow if you have any issues with this approach. If not, we are going to roll out this change effective close of business tomorrow. Steve/Cindy, I'd suggest that we simply make this change tomorrow. Do you feel the need to run it by any of the policy committee beforehand? Kalen From: James Sandt/ENRON@enronXgate on 06/14/2001 05:00 PM To: Suzanne Brown/ENRON@enronXgate, Sharon Butcher/ENRON@enronXgate, Kalen Pieper/HOU/EES@EES, Gary P Smith/ENRON@enronXgate, Marla Barnard/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, David Oxley/ENRON@enronXgate, Robert W Jones/ENRON@enronXgate, Cindy Olson/ENRON@enronXgate, Drew Lynch/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Mary Joyce/ENRON@enronXgate, Cynthia Barrow/ENRON@enronXgate cc: Sarah A Davis/ENRON@enronXgate, Marie Newhouse/ENRON@enronXgate, Elizabeth Boudreaux/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: RE: Clickathome - Proposed treatment for Involuntary Terminations - Business Reorganizations Suzanne: It is my understanding that everyone is signed off on the suggested revisions to the Clickathome documents relating to redeployed individuals. Tax is. In summary, if a person is terminated from Enron or one of its subsidiaries as a result of a business reorganization, the forfeiture penalty is waived. The amount of the waived forfeiture penalty is added to that individuals income as salary (imputed income) and is subject to Federal, State, and FICA taxes. V&E and I recommend that the changes are effective as of now and not retroactive back to the start of the plan. A retroactive date would weaken the plan as it stands and take out some of the teeth that we put in at its inception. Jim X 3 5673 -----Original Message----- From: Brown, Suzanne Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 5:53 PM To: Sandt, Jim; Butcher, Sharon; Pieper, Kalen; Smith, Gary; Barnard, Marla; Oxley, David; Jones, Robert W.- HR Exec; Olson, Cindy; Lynch, Drew; Joyce, Mary; Barrow, Cynthia Cc: Davis, Sarah A.; Newhouse, Marie; Boudreaux, Elizabeth Subject: RE: Clickathome - Proposed treatment for Involuntary Terminations - Business Reorganizations To all, the severance pay plan is not affected. Please refer to the original language : Reason for this email: Gain consensus on this change Business Issue : Find alternatives to the PC forfeiture penalty when an employee who has participated in the Clickathome program is involuntarily terminated due to business reorganizations. Proposed Alternative : Replace the cash forfeiture penalty with imputed income to be reported on year-end W-2. The alternative defers or removes the cash impact to the employee. Employees moving to other Enron units who currently do not participate in the program such as PGE and EFS will not be required to report the PC as imputed income as long as they remain in a wholly-owned division. New Process : Requires payroll administration Timing: Effective immediately. Question: Do you want this retroactive to program inception? Other Applications: The imputed income option could be expanded to all types of terminations. However, in doing so, would allow easier entry into the program when an employee is planning to leave the company voluntarily. No recommendation at this time to change the forfeiture penalty for these other types of separations. Please email me with your vote as Kalen is interested in enacting this change as soon as possible for the current redeployment candidates. Thanks. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY CLIENT COMMUNICATION; [EMail-Body]= Jeff & Sue -- We need to discuss at 9am your time (as well as other things). Jim -----Original Message----- From: =09Williams, Robert C. =20 Sent:=09Wednesday, August 08, 2001 7:11 PM To:=09Dietrich, Janet; Frazier, Lamar; Wu, Andrew; Steffes, James D.; Keene= y, Kevin; Adzgery, Ronald Cc:=09Sharp, Vicki; Sanders, Richard B.; Haedicke, Mark E.; Mellencamp, Lis= a; Tribolet, Michael; Curry, Wanda; Huddleson, Diann Subject:=09EES Billing Issues Privileged and Confidential Attorney-Client Communication This is to recap our discussion today about two billing issues--recoupment = of the PX Credit and the $10 surcharge. I would appreciate it if those of = you with more first-hand information, particularly Wanda and Diann, correct= or clarify anything I've misstated. Also, please forward this to anyone e= lse with an interest in this matter. A. Recoupment of the PX Credit (also known as the ""Negative CTC"") 1. Background: The issue here relates to the fact that PG&E and SCE = are no longer reflecting credit balances on the bills for our customers. P= rior to our returning the customers to bundled service in March, the bills = would reflect the PX Credit as an offset to T&D charges. SCE and PG&E have= now removed the PX Credit from the bill and are attempting to charge us fo= r T&D, despite the fact that they owe us hundreds of millions of dollars in= PX Credits. This is potentially harmful particularly in view of the opini= on of perhaps three of the Commissioners that the PX Credit can only be col= lected as a bill credit, and not in cash. Mike Day, our regulatory lawyer,= expressed his strong opinion that removing the Credit from the bills was i= mproper, and that we should challenge the action by making a filing with th= e CPUC. Note: the PX Credit to which I am referring here is that which ac= crued to prior to December 31, 2000; the utilities do not dispute that a PX= Credit accrued during that time frame, and there is no dispute as to the p= roper methodology for computing the PX Credit for that time frame. Further= more, PG&E and SCE are in virtual agreement with us as to the amount of the= Credit that had accrued as of December 31, 2000. 2. Action Items/Issues: (a) With respect to SCE, Legal is evaluatin= g filing a suit in federal court versus filing at the CPUC. The CPUC has a= process whereby we could prevent the utilities from disconnecting our cust= omers while the issue is being determined (by depositing the payments in an= interest-bearing account controlled by the CPUC); while there is no equiva= lent procedure in federal court, one can request that the court enter an in= junction against the utilities disconnecting customers. While the analysi= s is worth doing, I suspect that we will conclude that we have to go to the= CPUC for relief. (b) With respect to PG&E, the banruptcy team is evaluat= ing whether to file at the CPUC or in bankruptcy court. 3. Timing: Late fees will begin accruing August 20. The first discon= nect notices would not be received until September 19. 4. Effect on other CTC issues: Pursuing action at the CPUC or in cour= t to force the utilities to restore the PX Credit to our bills has no effec= t on the issues of how the CTC should be calculated post-January 17, and pr= ospectively. B. $10 Surcharge 1. Backgound: Although when provisionally imposed in January the $10= surcharge went to the utilities to keep them financially solvent, when ma= de permanent in March it became dedicated to defray the DWR's purchases of = power on behalf of the utilities. This evolution gives rise to two bases f= or EES to argue that it should not bear the financial burden of the $10 sur= charge. First, since the $10 surcharge is now dedicated to purchasing gene= ration for bundled customers only, and not direct access customers, direct = access should not have to pay it. This is the same logic that caused the C= PUC to exempt direct access customers from the $30 surcharge. Secondly, if legitimately applied to direct access, because it is of no dir= ect benefit to direct access customers it (arguably) can only be viewed as = a tax. Under EES's contracts with its customers, taxes assessed at the del= ivery point are borne by the customer. Note: SCE, unlike PG&E, may not im= pose the $10 surcharge on direct access customers, according to a filing ma= de at the staff level at the CPUC, so this action may relate to PG&E only. 2. Action Items/Issues: (a) Regulatory (Jim Steffes) has the lead i= n advising us about a challenge to the application of the $10 surcharge to = direct access customers at the CPUC. It may be advisable for an industry g= roup rather than Enron to make the filing. (b) I would expect that we wou= ld follow the same procedure outlined above--depositing the payment with th= e CPUC--to prevent any customer from being disconnected. In the interim we= would likely bill the customer for the surcharge and promise a credit if o= ur challenge to the application of the surcharge to DA customers is success= ful. (c) A decision will need to be made on how far we go back--to July 1 w= hen the customers became DA again or to January 4 when the surcharge was fi= rst imposed. 3. Timing. Same timeframe as with the Recoupment issue since we will= need to have CPUC challenge on file to prevent late fees and disconnect no= tices. 4. Effect on other CTC issues: Regulatory (Jim Steffes) will analyze= with the appropriate people the effect, if any, of taking this position on= other CTC issues (principally how CTC should be calculated post-January 17= , and prospectively).=20 End. =20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Comp Committee Meeting - April 30th; [EMail-Body]= calendar ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/17/2001 04:17 PM --------------------------- Kelly Johnson 04/16/2001 04:19 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mary Joyce/Enron@EnronXGate cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Teresa Wright/Enron@EnronXGate Subject: Comp Committee Meeting - April 30th [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= <<Concur Expense Document>> - RS032901; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/30/2001 02:20 PM ----- eserver@enron.com 03/30/2001 12:48 PM To: ""Steven.J.Kean@enron.com"" <Steven.J.Kean@enron.com> cc: Subject: <<Concur Expense Document>> - RS032901 The following expense report is ready for approval: Employee Name: Richard Shapiro Status last changed by: Automated Administrator Expense Report Name: RS032901 Report Total: $6,928.79 Amount Due Employee: $6,928.79 To approve this expense report, click on the following link for Concur Expense. http://xms.enron.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Deadline Today -- Draft Enron Comments on NERC Bill; [EMail-Body]= Attached are suggested comments on the draft NERC bill for which we were asked to provide comments by today. You will see that the response is a firm, but polite -- no thanks. While I doubt NERC assumes that silence means support by their deadline today, I would like to get something to them by COB if at all possible. (I will be on vacation tomorrow in any event). With apologies for the short turn around, please call or e-mail your comments or OK this afternoon. John [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= New Congressional Report on California; [EMail-Body]= Ray Alvarez brought to my attention today a news item indicating that the Congressional Budget Office released a report earlier this week entitled ""Causes and Lessons of the California Electricity Crisis."" The 30+ page report is available on the home page of the CBO's web site at www.cbo.gov. I have quickly read through the summary and it is largely favorable. For example, the summary says: ""Much of the blame for California's electricity crisis attaches to the state's restructuring plan -- but not to its objective, electricity deregulation. (...) But deregulation itself did not fail; rather, it was never achieved."" ""The restructuring plan did not remove sufficient barriers on both the supply and demand sides of the market to allow competition to work -- in part because it was not designed to."" ""Even without restructuring, California's electric utilities would have faced a difficult challenge in meeting the demand for power and holding down prices in 2000."" ""Consequently, wholesale electricity prices were higher than they probably would have been in either a traditionally regulated market or a more fully deregulated market."" ""Long-term solutions to California's electricity problems will most likely require three changes: removing barriers to the addition of generating capacity, eliminating bottlenecks in the electricity transmission system, and removing regulatory restrictions on the sale of power throughout the broad western market."" On the negative side, the report summary does state that ""some generators may also have withheld supplies at certain times to boost prices even more"" and ""the plan's auction system for the spot market appears to have created strong incentives for suppliers to bid strategically in a way that raised wholesale prices."" [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Transredes spill; [EMail-Body]= Do we have someone who works for us now who was at Transredes when the government owned it and could help us do a comparison between our respective environmental records? It seems to me that even though we are having our share of problems, we have probably had fewer problems than the government did and have probably been more responsive and thorough in our clean up efforts. Obviously, we would need to be judicious about how we used such information (we don't want to aggravate the government), but having such an analysis may be helpful in showing the progress made and in discouraging overly punitive action by the government. What do you think? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= thank you; [EMail-Body]= fyi ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/26/2001 10:23 AM ----- Kim Frumkin@EES 03/26/2001 09:30 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: thank you Steve, Thank you for participating, once again, in the video for deal central. The videos are created, housed and maintained in Beth Tilney's area. I mentioned to Beth that Corporate may have an interest in sharing/utilizing the EES video equipment and expertise. Robert Pearson (our in-house film expert) has a masters in video programming, taping, etc. And the good news....within the next few weeks, the editing equipment will be fully up and running. Once installed and operational, all in-house produced videos will have the look and feel of those created by outside vendors. Please feel free to contact Beth (ext. 3.5022) if you have an interest in exploring this concept. And thank you again for your participation. Best-Kim [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: DRAFT Comments on Barton RTO Draft; [EMail-Body]= I tried to make it clear that we were not ourselves moving off of 4/5 RTOs -- and I will try to make that clearer. I was just trying to take advantage of what Wood and others said to show that they are not the heavy-handed regulators that Barton and others on the Hill are painting. In other words, I wouldn't have asked them to say what they did -- but once said, we might as well get some mileage out of it. -----Original Message----- From: Steffes, James D. Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 5:48 PM To: Shelk, John Subject: RE: DRAFT Comments on Barton RTO Draft Fine by me. Not sure if I'd make so much of the recent FERC statements - may come true if we don't keep a straightforward message. -----Original Message----- From: Shelk, John Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 1:03 PM To: Shapiro, Richard; Robertson, Linda; Steffes, James D.; Novosel, Sarah; Nicolay, Christi L.; Nord, Sue; Guerrero, Janel; Shortridge, Pat; Nersesian, Carin; Montovano, Steve; Susan Landwehr (Business Fax); Allegretti, Daniel; Thome, Jennifer Subject: DRAFT Comments on Barton RTO Draft Attached for review and comment is a draft set of talking points on the Barton RTO discussion draft. I went through the testimony at the recent hearing and parsed the legislative language of the discussion draft. You will see that the talking points are designed to respond to two basic points being raised by our opponents: (1) that FERC is rushing and being heavy-handed and (2) that the only interests involved are those of the transmitting utilities (i.e., no mention of discrimination as being what RTOs will remedy). Please let me have your thoughts in the next few days. Once Capitol Hill is up and running again, we will distribute the final talking points to our consultants and to members/staff of the Barton Subcommittee as we continue our efforts against the discussion draft's treatment of RTOs. << File: >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= CAISO NOTICE:  Market Surveillance Committee Nominations and
 Selection Process; [EMail-Body]= MARKET NOTICE November 6, 2001 Market Surveillance Committee Nominations and Selection Process ISO Market Participants: The MSC Selection Committee is currently accepting nominations (including self-nominations) for the two vacant Market Surveillance Committee (MSC) positions. The MSC Selection Committee is comprised of Frank Wolak, Chair of the MSC; Severin Borenstein, Director of the Energy Institute at the University of California; and Anjali Sheffrin, the ISO's Director of Market Analysis. The selection committee will conduct an extensive review of each candidate's independence and qualifications and compose a short recommendation list for the two additional member positions on the MSC. In order to meet the goal of presenting a final recommendation list of 5 candidates to the ISO CEO by December 21, 2001, from which the ISO CEO will select the two candidates for ratification as new members by the Governing Board on January 24, 2002, all nominations need to be submitted to the MSC Selection Committee by November 21, 2001. Please review the attached documents for more information. <<MSC Board Memo_Oct01_v2.doc>> <<Request for nominations_memo.doc>> Client Relations Communications CRCommunications@caiso.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Letter to President on Energy Efficiency - Immediate Review
 Reque sted; [EMail-Body]= Decline. Rosalee Fleming 09/21/2000 05:29 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Letter to President on Energy Efficiency - Immediate Review Reque sted Is this something we want to do? ---------------------- Forwarded by Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron on 09/21/2000 05:27 PM --------------------------- nemtzow@ase.org on 09/21/2000 05:00:08 PM To: cc: dham@ase.org Subject: Letter to President on Energy Efficiency - Immediate Review Reque sted To Alliance Board and Associates: As you may know, President Clinton is considering releasing oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, perhaps as early as the next several days. Regardless of what you think about release of oil from the Reserve, I hope you will help us take advantage of this opportunity to encourage the President to renew his efforts to pursue energy efficiency - our nation's best long-term response to rising oil imports. Due to the immediacy of the decision, we ask that you let us know if we can sign you on, no later than this Monday, September 25 at noon Eastern. Please respond with sign ons (giving us the precise company/organization name) by reply email, or call Dave Hamilton or myself at 202-857-0666. Thank you for your consideration and support. David ============ David Nemtzow Alliance to Save Energy nemtzow@ase.org <mailto:nemtzow@ase.org> ph: (202) 857-0666 fax: (202) 331-9588 http://www.ase.org <http://www.ase.org> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Barton,Tauzin letter to Gov. Davis; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by John Shelk/NA/Enron on 07/12/2001 10:12= AM --------------------------- Carin Nersesian 07/12/2001 07:47 AM To:=09John Shelk/NA/Enron@Enron, Pat Shortridge/Corp/Enron@Enron cc:=09Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON=20 Subject:=09Barton,Tauzin letter to Gov. Davis Committee News Release The Committee on Energy and Commerce W.J. ""Billy"" Ta= uzin, Chairman Chairmen Tauzin, Barton Urge Gov. Davis To Respond Immedia= tely to Inquiries Washington (July 11) - House Energy and Commerce Commit= tee Chairman Billy Tauzin (R-LA) and Energy and Air Quality Subcommittee Ch= airman Joe Barton (R-TX) today sent the following letter to California Gove= rnor Gray Davis: July 11, 2001 The Honorable Gray Davis Governor State o= f California State Capitol Sacramento, California 95814 Dear Governor Da= vis: As you know, the Energy and Commerce Committee recently c= onsidered legislation containing several targeted measures to assist Califo= rnia in resolving its energy supply crisis. One of these measures was a te= mporary ""safe harbor"" provision, effective only upon the California Governo= r's request, to protect critical extended emergency operation of powerplant= s from challenges under the Clean Air Act. During the course o= f six hearings the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality held on the Calif= ornia electric crisis, including two hearings on draft legislation, Members= of the Committee repeatedly told California officials that these plants we= re vulnerable to legal challenge, even with written ""agreements"" for extend= ed operation between state air officials and the powerplants. Nevertheless= , California officials testifying or providing information on behalf of you= r state and your citizens claimed that such a safe harbor was not necessary= . I fear events have proven that on this important matter, the= concerns expressed by Members of our Committee were valid and that our int= erpretation of the legal jeopardy faced by California was accurate. On Jun= e 19th, several community groups filed a lawsuit in federal court against t= hree electric generating units in California (all located at the Potrero po= wer plant site) alleging multiple violations of the Clean Air Act for emerg= ency extended operation. On the same day, the City and County of San Franc= isco filed formal notice that it would also pursue legal action against the= three Potrero units. All parties involved in the litigation strongly asse= rt that the extended operation agreement between state air officials and th= e Potrero power plant does nothing to prevent them from pursuing all availa= ble legal remedies under federal and state law. The legal acti= on against the units located at the Potrero power plant claims that extende= d operation violates limits contained in federal air permits and seeks fine= s potentially amounting to millions of dollars. Understandably, as a resul= t of this potentially huge fine, the operator of the Potrero power plant ha= s filed a motion with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to clarify t= hat it will not be required to operate the three generating units, even dur= ing periods of electrical emergency. Thus, the mere filing of this lawsuit= could have a near-term impact of the amount of power available in Californ= ia. Perhaps even more troubling is our understanding that subs= tantial amounts of electric power produced by peaking plants and other faci= lities in California could also be subject to similar legal action. The Ca= lifornia Independent System Operator lists 31 units representing 1,430 mega= watts of peaking units which are subject to legal limits on their total hou= rs of operation. In addition, several new units are being brought on-line = this summer without required Clean Air Act control equipment. According to= incomplete information we received from the California Air Resources Board= (CARB), 37 generating units have been identified in California which may e= xhaust allowable annual operating hours contained in their air permits prio= r to this summer's peak demand period. These units may represent up to 2% = of generation, approximately the critical operating reserve shortfall of a = Stage III electric emergency. Although presented with written = requests for information from the Committee on April 2, 2001, CARB could no= t or would not provide the Committee with precise information on units that= may have been off-line due to permit limits, a projection of the number of= generating units that will face permit constraints that could cause such u= nits to be off-line, the amount of generation associated with these facilit= ies, the possible impact of these units on system reliability, and addition= al information related to air emissions from facilities that will be operat= ing under ""modified"" conditions. We believe that in the face of the pendi= ng legal action, it is even more important that such information be accurat= ely and objectively determined. As we mentioned above, over se= veral months in the spring and early summer of this year, the Committee sou= ght California's support of an extremely narrow safe harbor provision to pr= otect the extended operation of certain powerplants. Regrettably, the Comm= ittee did not receive any support from your administration for such changes= to the law, as represented by the testimony and responses attached to this= letter. Instead, witnesses representing California claimed such a legal s= afe harbor for emergency generation was unnecessary -- even if it could onl= y be granted during periods of emergency and upon your personal request to = the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It appears now tha= t citizen groups in California -- as well as the City and County of San Fra= ncisco -- do not believe that the actions taken by you, your state agencies= and local air quality districts are legal. The pending litigation challen= ges the very agreements which California previously claimed granted suffici= ent legal ""flexibility"" to keep these units running during times of emergen= cy. It is time, then, to reconsider this issue. So that the C= ommittee may understand the extent of this critical situation and respond a= ccordingly, we would ask for your consideration of the following: (1) We w= ould urge you to reply fully to the Committee's earlier requests that CARB = specifically identify each generating unit and power plant that is in jeopa= rdy of exceeding limitations contained in the Clean Air Act and thus potent= ially subject to the citizen suit provisions of the Act. We should have a = clear idea of the power production which is at risk. (2) In view of the fa= ct that we have moved from the world of legal theory into the world of lega= l fact and several California generating units are now being sued under aut= horities contained in the Clean Air Act, we ask whether you will now favor = creating in federal law a limited, environmentally-neutral safe harbor for = these essential units which could only be effectuated upon your request to = EPA. (3) Finally, we would ask that if you support such legislation, that = you work with our Committee so that we can truly try and resolve this issue= in a targeted provision which helps ensure the lights stay on in Californi= a this summer. Thank you in advance for your consideration of = our requests. Sincerely, W.J. (Billy) Tauzin Chairman Energy and Commerce C= ommittee Joe Barton Chairman Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality Peter= Sheffield 202.225.5735 =09 Carin Nersesian Legislative Coordinator Enron Corp. 1775 Eye St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20006 202-466-9144 (ph.) 202-828-3372 (fax) [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: INVITATION; [EMail-Body]= Molly, Thanks. I shall join you. I assume it's Ninfa's on West Dallas. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Carnes, Molly Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 11:17 AM To: Kumar, Biren; Rao, Murthy; Nadler, Jody; Suchoff, Debbie; Corey, Paula; Christensen, Alisa; Mayeux, Gay; Culver, Matt; Shoemaker, Paul; Kaminski, Vince J; Perlman, Beth; Weatherspoon, Pat; Crane, Penny; Reyna, Martha; Hall, Richard; Olsovsky, Jo Carolyn; Plante, Everett; Garcia, Frances; Stubblefield, Wade; Bryan, Jennifer; Smith, Renee; Hong, Neil; Kim, Michael; Prihoda, Warren; Draper, David; Thorne, Judy; Knowlton, Barbara; Perkins, Kim; White, Melissa; Cousino, Lisa; Schwarz, Stephen; Glover, Sheila; Messina, Jeff; Gregorcyk, Vicky; Mally, David; Myers, Thomas; Echols, John; Coffey Jr., Jim; Crofton, Cory; Williams, Karin; Kilchrist, Shawn; Hayslett, Rod; Chun, Inja; Huddleson, Diann; Hart, Vivian; Tsang, Sung-Hang; Pearce, Barry; Lord, Phillip; Nebergall, Brad; Watkins, Sherron Subject: INVITATION You are invited to Ninfa's next Wednesday, June 20, at 5:00 pm to say Farewell and Good Luck to Lou Casari as he leaves Enron to pursue other opportunities Feel free to forward this to anyone omitted from this distribution inadvertently. Thanks. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= DRAFT PRESS RELEASE: NBP Announces Intent to Purchase ENA Assets in
 Powder River and Wind River Basins; [EMail-Body]= Eric - I think the release looks fine. Shelley -- I take it there are no affiliate issues here (or they have been fully vetted)? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/22/2000 04:49 PM --------------------------- Eric Thode 08/22/2000 11:34 AM To: Mark Frevert/NA/Enron@Enron, David W Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT, John J Lavorato/Corp/Enron@Enron, Brian Redmond/HOU/ECT@ECT, Shonnie Daniel/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Whitt/DEN/ECT@Enron, Brian Bierbach/DEN/ECT@Enron, Jean Mrha/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kenneth Lay/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Skilling/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Paula Rieker/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kathryn Corbally/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Scott Vonderheide/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Andrew S Fastow/HOU/ECT@ECT, Rex Rogers/Corp/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: DRAFT PRESS RELEASE: NBP Announces Intent to Purchase ENA Assets in Powder River and Wind River Basins Attached is a draft press release regarding NBP's intent to purchase ENA's assets in the Powder River and Wind River Basins. Please return all comments to me via e-mail by 5:00 pm on Tuesday, August 22. If you have any questions, please call me at ext. 3-9053. Thanks. Eric [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Confidential - Lavo's Trading Program; [EMail-Body]= You missed logistics as a rotaion. Also - Let's leave out where they graduate to. This might be an issue with the AA program if we say that they are going to re-enter the program. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= AG letter - privileged and confidential: request for legal advice.; [EMail-Body]= The letter looks good. A couple of comments for your consideration: On page three we describe the change to the definition of Public Utility an= d then argue that we don't fit into it. Would it be worth explaining why t= hat makes sense? Specifically, the New Jersey restructuring law, like most= efforts of its kind in other markets, is designed to separate the competit= ive from monopoly elements of the power (and gas) businesses. Economic reg= ulation would then be restricted to the remaining monopoly elements of the = business (eg distribution). The competitive market can not be solely relie= d upon to ""regulate"" the behavior of monopoly asset owners, such as distrib= ution utilities. Therefore, regulators continue to be called upon to set p= ricing and other terms of service. What those regulators decide matters a = great deal to those monopoly utilities and it consequently makes sense for = lawmakers to be concerned about attempts by such entities to use campaign c= ontributions to tacitly influence decision makers. The same public policie= s simply do not apply to that portion of the market which is competitive. = The generation and sales business has a competitive structure (i.e. relativ= ely low barriers to entry, multiple competitors etc.). These components of= the power and gas business can be ""regulated"" by the market with respect t= o rates and terms of service. They do not require economic regulation any = more than grocery stores, department stores, appliance sellers or other ""re= tailers"" (who presumably are not prohibited from making contributions. Com= petition and markets discipline behavior and establish competitive prices a= nd terms of service. Because regulators don't set the prices and terms of = service for such sellers, there is no reason to be concerned about campaign= contribuitions from such organizations. Indeed, the legislation, and the = legislative history, clearly conform to this underlying policy rationale. As a former practicing lawyer, I certainly understand the value of pleading= in the alternative. But, I question how certain of our arguments woud be = perceived by the public if they ever came to light (which these documents h= ave a habit of doing).. . I can just see the press seizing on Enron's clai= m of ""ignorance or mistake"" or the fact that we pled for the favorable exer= cise of ""prosecutorial discretion"". I suggest that we add whatever we feel= is necessary to the very solid looking intent argument, not make specific = reference to ""ignorance or mistake"", and not plead for the favorable esxerc= ise of PD. If we feel we need to write about this last item, perhaps we co= uld suggest that it would be a waste of the public's resources to pursue a = claim under such circumstances. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Portal; [EMail-Body]= Attached are some late night thoughts on the portal. Most of this is focussed on the portal for opinion leaders, but some of it could be applicable to the comemrcial portal as well. Could you forward this to Palmer ... for some reason my address book doesn't pull him up when I'm off the system. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Daily Update / Legislative Update - 8/23/00; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/24/2000 05:43 PM --------------------------- Steven J Kean@EES 08/24/2000 12:28 PM Sent by: Steven J Kean@EES To: Bruno Gaillard/SFO/EES@EES cc: Edward Hamb/HOU/EES@EES, Jennifer Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES, Chris Hendrix/HOU/EES@EES, Greg Cordell/HOU/EES@EES, Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES, Douglas Condon/SFO/EES@EES, James M Wood/HOU/EES@EES, Gary Mirich/HOU/EES@EES, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, David Parquet@ECT@EES, mday@gmssr.com@EES, SF Directors@EES, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT@EES, Marcie Milner/Corp/Enron@ENRON@EES, Mary Hain@Enron@EES, Harry Kingerski/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Karen Denne@Enron@EES, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON@EES, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron@EES, Christopher F Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT@EES Subject: Re: Daily Update / Legislative Update - 8/23/00 It's hard to formulate a position without more of the specifics, but I think our message should generally be: We support providing immediate rate relief to small residential customers. We believe that relief is best provided by giving San Diego the ability to procure power on a fixed price basis from the market. San Diego has offers in front of it now; those should be evaluated and the legislature and the commission should give San Diego the flexibility to accept one or more of them. This is sounder than running huge deferrals (deficits) to be later recovered from consumers. Rate relief should be accompanied by real reform. Rate caps have bad long term consequences: they cause shortages. Combining short-medium term rate relief with expedited siting of new facilities will address the near term problem while laying the proper groundwork for a long term solution. Bruno Gaillard@EES 08/24/2000 11:08 AM To: Edward Hamb/HOU/EES@EES, Jennifer Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES, Chris Hendrix/HOU/EES@EES, Greg Cordell/HOU/EES@EES, Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES, Douglas Condon/SFO/EES@EES, James M Wood/HOU/EES@EES, Gary Mirich/HOU/EES@EES, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, David Parquet@ECT, mday@gmssr.com, SF Directors, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Marcie Milner/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mary Hain@Enron, Harry Kingerski/HOU/EES@EES, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Karen Denne@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Christopher F Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Daily Update / Legislative Update - 8/23/00 This email reflects today's events in Sacramento. The information provided is subject to change because of constant flux. However it is important for us to provide this information for feedback and to caution as to new regulations that may affect some deals in the making . Governor Davis, Assembly Women Susan Davis, and Senator Alpert had a press conference. They will introduce a rate/bill stabilization plan for SDG&E and an expediting siting bill. There is no language as of yet. Although there is no specific language, the following elements may be included: The stabilization plan will be applicable to residential and probably commercial customers in SDG&E The bill cap may be set at $68 for residential. The cap will be in place until the end of 2002 There will be language on expediting siting for generation plants Sam Wehn and Sandra McCubbin have been talking with the CEC executive director and several legislators about the siting portion of the bill. Any comments as to the bill cap proposal? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: External Advisory Council; [EMail-Body]= Having worked on the Enron Advisory council process, I have one observation: consider having some or all of these individuals as ""guest speakers"" rather than formal memebers. You can still have them review information, do their homework, and tailor their remarks to Enron specifics. Also, you should definitely include Paul Portney at Resources for the Future. He sits on the Enron Advisory Council and knows the company well. Kelly Kimberly@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS Sent by: Stacy Walker@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS 03/01/2001 02:27 PM To: Brian Stanley/EU/Enron@Enron, Dan Bruce/Enron@EnronXGate, Dave Schafer/NA/Enron@ENRON, Eddie Clay/EFS/EES@EES, Elyse Kalmans/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Gene Humphrey/Enron@EnronXGate, George Wasaff/Enron@EnronXGate, Gregory Adams/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Hap Boyd/EWC/Enron@Enron, James A Jean Mrha/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jimmy Mariella Miguel Padron/NA/Enron@ENRON, Mark Schroeder/LON/ECT@ECT, Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron@Enron, Mitchell Taylor/Enron@EnronXGate, Paula Rieker/Corp/Enron@Enron, Rick Buy/Enron@EnronXGate, Rob Walls/ENRON@enronXgate, Shelley Corman/Enron@EnronXGate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tim DeSpain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES cc: Nicola Blancke/EU/Enron@Enron, Mary Lisa Costello/NA/Enron@Enron, Barbara Zulie Flores/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bert Frazier/Enron@EnronXGate, Karina Prizont/Enron@EnronXGate, Dortha Gray/GPGFIN/Enron@Enron, Connie Melissa Jones/NA/Enron@ENRON, Leena Isabel Beverley Ashcroft/LON/ECT@ECT, Laura Glenn/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Karen E Campos/NA/Enron@ENRON, Rosario Boling/Enron@EnronXGate, Laura Valencia/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Karen K Heathman/Enron@EnronXGate, Debra Hicks/Enron@EnronXGate, Ruth Mann/Enron@EnronXGate, Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@ENRON, Marion Sczykutowicz/HOU/ECT@ECT, Leasa Lopez/HOU/EES@EES, Lauren Iannarone/NY/ECT@ECT, Catherine McKalip-Thompson/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Susan Subject: External Advisory Council As we discussed at the last Corporate Responsibility task force meeting, one activity that we have underway is recruiting an external advisory council. This council will be comprised of global experts on environmental and social issues, from non-governmental organizations and potentially other businesses, to advise us on trends and issues in this area. An outline of the advisory council structure, along with categories of experts and proposed names is attached below. We expect to convene meetings with this group twice a year, inviting the Enron executive committee and board of directors, as well as the Corporate Responsibility task force, to engage in a dialogue. We plan to present a slate of possible candidates to Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling later this month, and would appreciate your input and any ideas by March 16. Thanks for your consideration. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= DeLay Dinner; [EMail-Body]= ""Americans for a Republican Majority"" Ritz-Carlton Hotel, 1919 Briar Oaks Lane Reception 6:00 - 7:30 Dinner 7:30 - 9:30 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Important - CPUC Motion - Confidential Attorney ClientPrivil
 ege and Work Product; [EMail-Body]= While I appreciate the virtue of flying below the radar if possible, the matter here is complicated by the fact that FERC's discovery rules (18 CFR, Subpart D) pertain only to ""proceedings set for hearing . . . and to such proceedings as the Commission may order."" 18 CFR 385.401. In this case, FERC stated that ""a trial-type hearing is not necessary . . . ."" and specifically rejected the use of a ""trial-type evidentiary hearing."" Slip op. at 47-48 & n.97. Thus, while I have not researched the matter as yet, my preliminary view is that the CPUC's attempt to invoke FERC's discovery processes would appear to be outside the contemplation of FERC's Nov. 1 order and its regulations, unless FERC specifically orders discovery in this case. (The CPUC seems to recognize the relevance of this consideration when it specifically attempts to equate ""paper"" hearings with ""trial-type"" hearings; see page 1 of its Motion.) The CPUC's motion may prompt FERC to decide whether or not to allow discovery in this case under Rule 401. While the CPUC's motion does not apply directly to marketers, FERC's ruling will be precedent in the event the CPUC or someone else hereafter serves discovery on other parties. As a result, we need to consider whether laying in the weeds risks losing an opportunity to present our views on whether FERC should allow discovery in a paper hearing with an expedited decisional track, particularly in light of the fact that Staff has already conducted. >>> Jeffrey Watkiss 11/08/00 10:31AM >>> Does anyone have an idea as to why marketers, including EPMI, are not included in the list of subject companies: Exh. B? Since EPMI is not a subject of the motion, why should it answer? Lying in the weeds may be a more prudent course of action. >>> ""Fergus, Gary S."" <GFergus@brobeck.com> 11/07/00 10:08PM >>> I just spoke with Mary to make sure we have the same information. Here are the facts we have so far. On November 4th, the CPUC filed a motion with FERC to adopt the form of protective order that the CPUC entered, to compel the production of documents and to shorten time to answer. According to Exhibit B (read to me by Nancy Pickover at Bracewell) the following CPUC moved against the following entities: AES, Williams, Duke, Dynegy, Reliant and Southern. Enron entities were NOT named in exhibit B. This is not to say that we could not be easily added to the group. While the motion reads as if the CPUC was moving against everybody, in fact, in footnote 2 they state they are only moving against the entities named in Exhibit B. We will have Exhibit B in hand first thing tomorrow via FEDEX to confirm this. To repeat, Enron is not named yet. Thanks Gary -----Original Message----- From: Mary.Hain@enron.com [mailto:Mary.Hain@enron.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2000 6:23 PM To: dwatkiss@bracepatt.com; Susan.J.Mara@enron.com; Richard.B.Sanders@enron.com; James.D.Steffes@enron.com; Christian.Yoder@enron.com; Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com; mday@gmssr.com; gfergus@brobeck.com; rcarroll@bracepatt.com; Alan.Comnes@enron.com; Joe.Hartsoe@enron.com; Sarah.Novosel@enron.com Cc: Tim.Belden@enron.com; Lysa.Akin@enron.com Subject: Important - CPUC Motion - Confidential Attorney Client Privilege and Work Product As you may already know, the CPUC filed a motion at FERC asking for a protective order and to compel production of the information they subpoened from us in the CPUC's OII case. Given the timing, we should discuss this on our conference call scheduled for tomorrow. They request that we be required: to answer their motion on Thursday, to provide the information within 5 working days of a FERC ordering production, and to provide of P&L information and spread sheets detailing our deals, specifically delivery point, delivery date, counterparty, volume and price. We may not have a problem providing this information for use by FERC in its proceeding subject to a confidentiality agreement but I think we would oppose their requests for: the information to be provided for ""government eyes only"" - this would prohibit EPMI from defending itself vis-a-vis other market participants. a FERC confidentiality order that would could allow FERC to ""share"" this information with the CPUC (for purposes of the PUC's OII proceeding) pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 824h(c). 16 USC 824g(c) requires the Commission to make information available to state commissions as may be of assistance in state regulation of public utilities. We should argue that 16 USC 824h(c) does not apply here given that we are not a public utility nor does the PUC regulate how much market power wholesale marketers exercise or the level of market power mitigation (these are the bases the PUC provides for explaining why it should have this information.) the above contractual information to allow them to analyze the competitiveness of the forward market to evaluate the wisdom of the Commission's decision to allow the UDC's ""unfettered access"" to the forwards market. This argument is unpersuasive given that the CPUC can get information about the competitiveness of the forward markets from the Wall Street Journal's listing of NYMEX prices. This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. To reply to our email administrator directly, send an email to postmaster@brobeck.com BROBECK PHLEGER & HARRISON LLP http://www.brobeck.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Can you help me?; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/06/2001 07:40 AM --------------------------- on 06/25/2001 12:57:25 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Can you help me? I am looking for some help in identifying the right person(s) at: Enron Corp., for an introduction of our software solution. Steven, if you could take a moment and point me to the appropriate contact I would greatly appreciate it. Summary of eProvisioning: eProvisioning radically improves people's Time-To-Productivity by transforming the disparate activities that allocate IT resources to people into a secure and automatic process. Once provisioned, these resources remain digitally connected to each person as they move through the business cycle and are dynamically updated as necessary. At the appropriate time, they are systematically, securely and automatically removed. Organizations that employ eProvisioning gain a competitive edge and access complete security by ensuring that people are kept productive from day one, and are prevented from becoming counterproductive beyond the day they leave. In addition, by aligning their IT infrastructure with business priorities, organizations can effectively manage change across the extended enterprise, and better respond to emerging market requirements. eProvision Day One provides business and IT executives with the ability to quickly identify bottlenecks and maintain accountability of the eProvisioning process through comprehensive reporting and tracking capabilities. As business relationships between organizations expand, Business Layers technology provides the framework for integration and interoperability between eProvisioning partners - suppliers and service providers, devices and applications - which are the digital foundations of the Internet economy. Please, if you could give me a few minutes of your valuable time or guide me to the right person to describe the significant benefits of what we offer."" Web Site: http://www.businesslayers.com Demo-Site: User: blayers Pass: blayers Thank you for your time. Steve Knight SC Regional Sales Manager Business Layers, Inc. 817-490-0170 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Camisea; [EMail-Body]= fyi ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/01/2000 09:15 AM --------------------------- Vinio Floris@ENRON 07/26/2000 03:00 PM To: Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES cc: Ricardo Charvel/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Camisea Steve and Rick, This is just to inform you that I have been involved with the Camisea gas project in Peru since Shell-Mobil developed it several years ago. As you can see in the article below, Enron is one of the possible candidates for getting the transportation and distribution contract. I am in continuous contact with Roberto Pensotti, the lead developer for the this deal. Roberto knows that I have strong contacts in the government and the private sector in Peru, and I would be more than happy to help in any way possible. I will keep you posted on this issue. Regards, Vinio [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= WPTF Friday Deliver Unto Us A Burrito; [EMail-Body]= THE FRIDAY BURRITO ""...more fun than a fortune cookie, and at least as accurate."" =0F""Are those folks smoking crack?=0F"" he asked in an outrage. My friend, = Ol=0F' Dave in Houston, has trouble understanding the workings of our power business here in California. In fact, so do I. Yesterday=0F's Joint Senate/Assembly Committee on Energy and Natural Resources did nothing to improve either Dave=0F's or my understanding of the national embarrassment California is perpetrating with electricity deregulation. =0F""The next thing you know, they will be taking property, and forcing utilities to build power plants and transmission,=0F"" he mused between sips of Dixie longneck beer and chomps of jalapeno peppers. =0F""Come to think of it, Dave, they did say something about that. Yeah,=0F"" I recalled, =0F""Senator Peace was expounding on his favorite idea which is forcing the ISO or the utilities to build peakers, and not let the market build them. I can=0F't remember if that was before or after he suggested to EOB Chairman Kahn that the ISO and the PX should be folded into State agencies under the direction of the Electric Oversight Board.=0F"" I know what you are thinking right now. The next thing you know California will have regulated retail rates. That recipe should be out of the PUC=0F's oven sometime next week. =0F""Well, the power marketers are jigging the system, bidding up to the ISO=0F's bid cap. There is no way you can tell me that a generator planned to make $750/MWH in its pro forma,=0F"" Dave added. =0F""So you agree with Herr (Hair) Peace! You don=0F't believe in markets,=0F"" I retorted. = =0F""Oh, I believe in them, but I remember when I was short on a 300 MW trade, and without any notice or advanced warning, the price in the Midwest market went against me,=0F"" Dave recalled. =0F""I called everyone who I tra= ded with, and they had nothing. I finally called XXXXX, and I asked what will it cost for 50 MW?=0F"" =0F""Why didn=0F't you ask for 300?=0F"" I wondered. =0F""I didn=0F't want to= show him my position. You get hosed when you show the buyer your position. Ask for 50, first,=0F"" Dave chided. =0F""What happened?=0F"" =0F""Oh, they offered to sell for $150/MWH. I said I= =0F'd take it, and then said I needed another fifty. He asked $300. I took that, and he priced the next 50 MW at $600,=0F"" lamented Dave. =0F""He just wanted to see how far he could push me. That=0F's what I mean when I say the traders are jigging it.=0F"" =0F""But Dave, you old communist, your forgetting the trading function is what mitigates the risk. The traders are the in between people who guess at the price. Sometimes they guess right, and sometimes they guess wrong. But the damage, or the reward, is on their book, not passed on to the ultimate consumer. It has nothing to do with the marginal cost of a generating plant.=0F"" And there you have it. Put in a price cap, and the traders have a target for which to shoot. I can=0F't prove the following, yet, but I=0F'l= l wager with any of you that as the price cap level dips down, the average trading price climbs even as the so-called =0F""dysfunctional=0F"" price spik= es are eliminated. Consumers get hosed, and the fundamental economic principle is upheld, which is, one can never be made better off with the imposition of an additional constraint. I feel better already. Here is what is on our short agenda this week. >>> Things in the Mailbag >>> Things in the People=0F's Republic of California @@@ The ISO Replies to the EOB Report @@@ Reflections on a Day of Senate Hearings @@@ PUC Issues OII on Functioning of Wholesale Market >>> Odds & Ends (_!_) >>> Things in the Mailbag It has been awhile since we put the mail feedbag on and had a munch. Here is what my friends have been writing me. FPL Energy=0F's Steve Ponder was only too quick to tell me, =0F""Please Gary= , no more whining about your computer. How old are you?? Is this the year you get the AARP letter??? A very depressing moment. Do you really not know how to spell Morro Bay??? Please let us know what is going on with your son's hockey team?? Don't forget the cigars for Moron??? Bay!!!!=0F"" It is good to have friends like Steve. They make the pain of separation so much easier. And Steve, when you FPL guys get that Entergy merger sorted out, in a dozen years or so, you let us know. I want to participate in the name selection for the new entity. How about Fentergy PLus? Next, from the PX=0F's Mark Hoppe, who writes, =0F""As you've heard from others, I don't know quite how you manage to knock out all this material each week. The burrito is informative, humorous and usually contains a sprinkle of irony, tragedy (ISO Drama). Though you are usually neutral regarding the PX, you are not unduly negative which I appreciate. I think we do a pretty good job over here and so often people in the industry forget the amount effort and challenge it took the PX to successfully open this market.=0F"" Thanks, Mark. I just want you to know that my ability to write this stuff every week is not constrained by the facts or evidence. I have learned from watching Herr (Hair?) Peace, that as long as you can talk (write, too) fast, and have conviction in your statements, regardless of how groundless they may be, you will have a willing and eager audience. A few weeks ago, I received from the PX=0F's Jennifer Sherwood a note, which she wants you to know are her opinions, not necessarily the PX=0F's. It=0F's okay, Jennifer. I paid George,yesterday, the $20 I owed him for that sham Rose Bowl bet, (remember?, Stanford lost) and your opinions are cool with us. =0F""Just curious - has anyone been comparing high unleaded prices to high CA electricity prices? What I mean is, we are up in arms about how we should protect the unfortunate San Diego consumer who can't afford to keep the AC on. But what about the inflated unleaded gas prices the whole country has seen over the last few months? No effort is made by the government to shield the consumer from how much it costs to fill their gas tank. No mention is made of those who can't afford to drive to the grocery store because they can't afford the extra 15 or 20 cents a gallon. The costs are passed along to the consumer without pause. Granted there are differences between the unleaded market and the electricity market in terms of demand-side responsiveness, but then again is it that much different to say, =0F`I can't drive today because gas is too expensive=0F' vs. =0F`I can't turn up the AC today because it's too expensive.=0F'=0F"" Finally, from one of our [secret] Washington readers, and I am not telling who, I received the following: =0F""I ... broke down and listened to the [ISO Governing Board] discussion and vote. Ugh! I too noted that the ""speak fast"" was applied to everyone but Herr Peace. My goodness, what a mess we have. I loved Jerry's picture in USA Today -- it spoke volumes. My sources at FERC tell me, though, that we should keep an eye out for {FERC Chairman] Hoecker to do something really ... [Censored] ... for political reasons. Given no Commission meetings til September, the only way to act is by unanimous consent, so I would hope he can't do all that much.=0F"" >>> Things in the People=0F's Republic of California @@@ The ISO Replies to the EOB Report Several of you people commented to me that the ISO=0F's reply to the PUC/EOB report was very good. I decided to excerpt the best sections of it for the Burrito. The full document can be found on the ISO=0F's website. =0F""... the [PUC/EOB] Report asserts that the suspected activities of certain generators on June 13 created frequency instability leading to the Bay Area blackouts the following day. In fact, the events of June 13 and June 14 were completely independent of one another. The voltage instability on June 14 was caused by system conditions on that day alone -- exceptionally high loads, insufficient generation in the specific local area, and transmission constraints that prevented the import of generation from outside the area. =0F""The Report states that the ISO =0F""never tried=0F"" to call upon consume= rs to reduce demand in order to avoid the Bay Area blackouts. In fact, the ISO had in place on June 14 a number of demand response programs designed to reduce load including the Summer 2000 Demand Response Program, under which customers have agreed, through a prior solicitation, to curtail energy use in exchange for a fee =0F""The Report makes a number of assertions concerning the prices paid by =0F`purchasers=0F' of energy as a result of the recent price spikes (e.g. $= 1.2 billion in the month of June alone). These assertions leave one with the mistaken impression that these prices reflect amounts actually paid by the UDCs and/or passed through to customers. However, in determining the total cost of energy, one must determine the impact of any forward contracts entered into by the UDCs in advance of the wholesale energy markets. These contracts, which are designed to =0F""lock-in=0F"" a specific price in advance of real-time or near real-time market activities, are specifically designed to mitigate the impact of price volatility, and are standard in all commodities markets. We have reason to believe that some of the UDCs were substantially hedged during the period of the recent price spikes. =0F""In a similar vein, the reports asserts that California =0F""might well= =0F"" have saved $110 million dollars had a $250 price cap been in place in May and June. This assertion assumes that all energy purchases would have been made at or below the $250 bid cap. In fact, during times of peak demand, when all of the state=0F's generation has been exhausted, the ISO competes with neighboring regions for available generation. In order to secure the necessary power, the ISO must purchase, on a bilateral basis, this energy from resources located outside of the ISO=0F's control area. =0F""The Report asserts that California power markets =0F""are not now competitive=0F"" and implies, erroneously in our view, that this is the normal state of affairs. It is not. The Market Surveillance Committee has noted that =0F""market power in the California energy market appears to arise primarily during periods of peak demand,=0F"" and warned that demand growth would increase the incidence of market power during the summer of 2000. =0F""The Report asserts that the ISO is answerable only to a self-interested board and not to the citizens of California. This simply is not the case. The ISO is subject to the provisions of the Federal Power Act and to the rules and regulations of FERC, which dictate, in part, that wholesale energy rates must be just and reasonable and in the public interest. The ISO further operates under a detailed tariff reviewed and approved by FERC. Every change to our market design and virtually every aspect of the ISO=0F's business is subject to review and scrutiny by FERC. The FERC process provides substantial opportunities for input by the state agencies and such agencies have, in fact, been active participants in the FERC proceedings. =0F""The Report asserts that California supply conditions have been affected by restructuring and that somehow the restructuring choices have made California more vulnerable to supply shortages. This assertion is unfounded. Significant load growth in California and neighboring states coupled with a lack of significant infrastructure investment in both generation and transmission have caused this vulnerability. Restructuring has increased proposed power plant applications many fold. Only by immediate and sustained attention to streamlining approval and siting processes for both of these critical infrastructure elements will this significant shortage be addressed.=0F"" >>> Things in the People=0F's Republic of California @@@ Reflections on a Day of Senate Hearings If you want to imagine a scary sight, imagine, then, twelve California legislators gathering together in one hearing room to rectify the wrongs of electric restructuring. Also imagine, as if you are in the Twilight Zone, witnesses that are slow on their feet, and reckless in their facts. Then you get a glimpse of what yesterday=0F's Joint Senate/Assembly hearing was like. It started over two hours late. The Senate was busy congratulating one of their own who is term-limited out next session, and they wanted to heap on the glory. That said, the show began with CEC Commissioner Bill Keese. Mr. Keese has one story, and regardless how well he tells it, and he does, it is always the same story. It is the heat storm story. One can imagine in the heat storm story a lead character who is a single-mom, call her Lady-Bird Bowen, who travels across an angry land with her precocious pre-teen child, Stevie Wonderboy. They are searching for electric power plants in the dessert, which, by the grace of God have been shipped to other countries which have more liberal returns on investment. Being the first speaker, Mr. Keese took at least half the heat (storm) of the day. The rage of the Energy Fuhrer was palpable. Last week, San Diegans shed 350 MW of load last week to save the entire system, and did not receive one penny of compensation (I=0F'm not making that up ... He said it). He is sick of hearing about demand management as being a solution for the problem over the last five years, and he is about done listening. People in San Diego are depressed by the sudden price hikes. Yikes! Keese did mention that the California reserve margin has sunk to 7%, but in neighboring Arizona, the reserve margin is -1% or -2%!! Mr. Keese correctly pointed out that electric power is not solely a California problem, it is a regional problem. One member of the Committee asked what the legislature could do to speed up the power plant siting and construction process? Keese referred to Governor Gray Davis=0F' Executive Order issued last week to which the CEC plans to respond soon, date uncertain, that lays out a 6 month permitting time line. The six months are enough if the applicant has the land secured, zoning okayed, transmission access, and air offsets. Hmmmmmm. That alone might take six months before you get to the CEC. The next panel included Mr. Kahn of the EOB, and Ms. Lynch. I went too hard on her last week, calling her Let=0F's Do Lynch. That was a 0.8 TPC. Sorry. I promise to be nicer starting now. The Energy Fuhrer instructed Ms. Lynch to use her authority to order SDG&E to divert the pass through of funds from the customers to the PX until the dysfunction of the market is cured. Put it in an escrow account. Ms Lynch promised to review this option at her August 21 PUC Meeting where she will enact SDG&E rate caps (told you). The star of the day, I thought, was FERC General Counsel Doug Smith. Mr. Smith comes to Sacramento. Isn=0F't that a switch? Mr. Smith came in place of Mr. Hoecker, thank the Lord. Mr. Smith put into FERC-eese what these 12 legislators could not get through their heads any other way. The 12 angry legislators were looking for a way for FERC to declare the wholesale market as non-competitive, and then ask the generators to give back the money they over collected. When can we do that? Mr. Smith answered as only a FERC attorney can answer. There is a process. It takes time. You must have evidence. FERC uses a three-part criteria for assessing whether or not market based rates are allowable. It=0F's based on market concentration and dominance, not the existence of high prices. You would have to sue FERC in federal court, and the best you could hope for is for FERC to reconsider its decision upon remand from the US Court of Appeals. Slowly, the wind came out of the sails of the gang of 12. They were stumped. Herr (Hair?) Peace screamed, couldn=0F't you, Mr. Smith of FERC, today use your authority to declare the markets non-competitive, that generators who had market based rates have exercised market power, and retro-actively implement a $250 rate cap across the Western region? Like a wheezing accordion, Mr. Smith played back and forth the familiar strains of music, like a solo street musician on the corner. Back and forth: the process, the process, the process. There have been times in the past I hated the process at FERC. Today, I have a renewed respect for what process affords me and you ... Freedom from the tyranny of a mob. For the remainder of the hearing, they focused on remedies that could be undertaken by the PUC. >>> Things in the People=0F's Republic of California @@@ PUC Issues OII on Functioning of Wholesale Market Well, the official title is, =0F""Order Instituting Investigation into the Functioning of the Wholesale Electric Market and Associated Impact on Retail Electric Rates in the Services Territory of San Diego Gas & Electric Company=0F"". I like my title better. This Order, or OII was issued at the last business meeting of the Commission, on August 3. It calls for an investigation of the wholesale markets, responses from the three UDCs, and a pre-hearing conference in San Diego on August 29 at the San Diego Convention Center. Here are the questions the PUC wishes us to address: =0F=07 What bill payment options should be provided to assist residential a= nd small commercial customers? (What does this have to do with the functioning of the wholesale market?) =0F=07 Should SDG&E be authorized to participate in bilateral contracts or other supply procurement activities? How should the Commission assess reasonableness? Are SDG&E=0F's purchasing activities serving its customers on just and reasonable terms? =0F=07 What is SDG&E=0F's obligation to minimize energy costs for its curre= nt customers? =0F=07 How should the Commission, Attorney General, EOB, ISO and PX coordinate to investigate wholesale market events, behaviors, and irregularities? How should state/federal concerns be addressed? =0F=07 What are the causes of the price increases? Are anticompeititve practices causing some of the price increases? Are there mechanisms the Commission can employ to make ratepayers whole? >>> Odds & Ends (_!_) As promised last week, I have a message from our event coordinator, Barb Ennis, regarding the upcoming WPTF General Meeting on October 5 and 6. Listen up! She writes: Hi Folks...... Well it is almost that time again....WPTF's October General Meeting will be held at the Inn at Morro Bay, Sixty State Park Road, Morro Bay, California 93442. Their phone numbers are: 800-321-9566 or 805 772-5651. The dates are October 5th and 6th, Thursday and Friday. The Inn at Morro Bay will also honor the same room prices if you choose to also stay Wednesday,Friday or Saturday. We have blocked 24 rooms for October 5th. Which range in prices: Petite Room with Queen Bed $89. (16 rooms) Pool and Garden View with King Bed and Private Hot Tub $152. (4 rooms) View of Bay rooms with two (2) Double Beds $152. (4 rooms) All these rooms are on a First come basis. SHUTTLE Information: The San Luis Obispo Airport is about 25 to 30 minutes by shuttle NOTE: FOG CAN BE THICK AT THIS AIRPORT..FLY IN THE AFTERNOON ....... Ride-On Shuttle (805) 541-8747 Rates Door to Door are $22.00 per person for the 1st person and ONLY $2.00 per person afterwards....SO if some planning can be done on the Airline Arrival times, through Barb, and one person books the Shuttle for a Group....the cost is substantially lower. Now, for(e) our Golfers....Tee times have been booked for Thursday, October 5th starting at 8.07am, 8.15am and 8.22am (space for 12 Golfers)..Sorry for the early morning start. The Golf Course has a Group going out from 8.30 am until 11.30am. The Golf Course is across the Inn at Morro Bay and your contact at the Course is Pat (805) 471-4360. For folks that may want to tour, Hearst Castle is located only 30 minutes from the Inn at Morro Bay. Within walking distance of the Inn is a Natural History Museum, a marina with kayak and canoe rentals. Shopping and dining along the Embarcadero, and some great hiking. World class wineries and tasting rooms numbering over 40 are located within a short drive from the Inn. If you choose to drive it is 3-hours from San Jose, American Eagle, Skywest and United Express all serve the local Airport in San Luis Obispo. Duke Energy is willing to conduct a Plant Tour (A woman=0F's only plant tour will be led by Duke=0F's Carolyn Baker) if some may wish to do so. The sooner we can do the booking, the better. So, bring the Family and we are looking forward to seeing you at WPTF's General Meeting. Agenda for October General Meeting Thursday, October 5 3:30 pm - 5:30 pm All Member=0F's Meeting 7:00 pm - Dinner Reception (We are still working on the details) Friday, October 6 9:00 am Opening Remarks and Program Irene Moosen - Distributed Generation Case at the PUC Bill Freddo - Confessions of a Merchant Plant Operator in New England ISO Dr.Frank Wolak - Topic of his choice Open Session - Everyone Gets a Chance to Speak Lunch provided at Noon. The object of humor notwithstanding, and seeing how the flow of new material has slowed a bit, my wife provided this week=0F's laughter. She didn=0F't have to attend the Senate hearing. Subject: The Brilliance of Women There were 11 people hanging onto a rope that came down from a helicopter. Ten were men and one was a woman. They all decided that one person should get off because if they didn't the rope would break and everyone would die. No one could decide who should go so finally the Woman gave a really touching speech saying how she would give up her life to save the others, because women were used to giving up things for their husbands and children and giving in to men. All of the men started clapping. Have a great weekend, y=0F'all [applause] gba [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: 2001 Officer's Questionnaire; [EMail-Body]= can you help me wiht this? ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/02/2001 12:39 PM ----- Vickie Nicholson/ENRON@enronXgate 03/02/2001 10:38 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: FW: 2001 Officer's Questionnaire -----Original Message----- From: Vickie Nicholson Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 9:22 PM To: Steven J Kean; Maureen McVicker Subject: 2001 Officer's Questionnaire Vickie EB4836 713-853-9864 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: confidential Job Descriptions; [EMail-Body]= I entrust that you will not forward to anyone. -----Original Message----- From: todd@mrienergy.com [mailto:todd@mrienergy.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 2:27 PM To: Mrha, Jean Subject: FW: confidential Job Descriptions jean: it was nice to speak with you. please find attached the job descriptions for the 2 positions that we have been retained to work on for exelon. if you have any ideas, i would be extremely interested in speaking with you further. i will await your reply and information. best regards, Best Regards, Todd J. Goehring Vice President, MRI Energy 1129 Broad Street, Suite 8 Shrewsbury, NJ 07702 tel: 732-578-0100 x105 fax: 732-578-1800 todd@mrienergy.com [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Employment arrangements(job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc) "
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Carin Energy Rumor; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 08/31/2000 02:24 PM --------------------------- Jeffrey Sherrick 08/31/2000 01:23 PM To: John Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Stephen Wallace/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Horace Snyder/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Stephen Harper/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Alex Warmath/Corp/Enron@ENRON Subject: Carin Energy Rumor FYI, There is a rumor on Yahoo that Enron has bid for Carin Energy. I have talked with Jackie Gentle in our London Office who first heard the rumor and we have confirmed that neither EGEP or the London office is pursuing such a deal. My guess is that it is either EOGR ( I know they are pursuing an Int'l deal) or just a bad release. jeff [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: RGA request; [EMail-Body]= Just a ""heads up"" ... Ken may get a call from Gov Gilmore regarding the Republican Governors' Association. Below are Sue Landwehr's recommendations (with which I concur). Let me know if he calls and let us know if you need any additional information. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/04/2000 09:20 AM ----- Richard Shapiro@ENRON 10/04/2000 07:17 AM To: Susan M Landwehr/HOU/EES@EES cc: Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron@EES, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron@EES Subject: Re: RGA request I agree w/ your recommendations. Susan M Landwehr@EES 10/03/2000 09:50 PM To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Elizabeth Linnell/NA/Enron@Enron, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: RGA request Rick--you may have seen a recent letter from Gov Jim Gilmore and the RGA requesting that we make an additional contribution in the next few weeks to the RGA for their efforts on the upcoming November elections. They list a fundraising goal of $1,660,000 (just a bit aggressive!) If we are not able to make an additional contribution, he asks that we renew our 2001 annual membership of $40,000 now instead of in January of 2001. If we do anything, my recommendation would be to cut a check now for our annual membership (the downside of doing that, of course, is that they will hit us a number of times in 2001 for incremental contributions to specific events/causes). I bring this to your attention for two reasons-one is that if I know Governor Gilmore, he will probably make a call directly to Ken Lay and you and Steve may want to have an answer available if Mr. Lay gets the call. Secondly, what are your thoughts on my response to RGA? My preference would be to not commit to any additional dollars, with a fall back that if Gilmore does call Lay and he wants to respond positively, we then commit to renewing our membership early. I think you are pretty busy over the next few days--please respond as your schedule allows. THanks. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential Information and Securities Trading; [EMail-Body]= To:SALISBURY, HOLDEN - 503-464-3835 Enron Wholesale Services - Office of the Chairman From: Mark Frevert, Chairman & CEO Mark Haedicke, Managing Director & General Counsel Subject: Confidential Information and Securities Trading To keep pace with the fluid and fast-changing demands of our equity trading activities, Enron Wholesale Services (""EWS"") has recently revised its official Policies and Procedures Regarding Confidential Information and Securities Trading (""Policies and Procedures""). These revisions reflect two major developments: (1) our equity trading activities have been extended into the United Kingdom, and (2) in an effort to streamline the information flow process, the ""Review Team"" will play a more centralized role, so that the role of the ""Resource Group"" is no longer necessary.You are required to become familiar with, and to comply with, the Policies and Procedures. The newly revised Policies and Procedures are available for your review on LegalOnline, the new intranet website maintained by the Enron Wholesale Services Legal Department. Please click on the attached link to access LegalOnline: If you have already certified compliance with the Policies and Procedures during the 2001 calendar year, you need not re-certify at this time, although you are still required to to review and become familiar with the revised Policies and Procedures. If you have not certified compliance with the Policies and Procedures during the 2001 calendar year, then you must do so within two weeks of your receipt of this message. The LegalOnline site will allow you to quickly and conveniently certify your compliance on-line with your SAP Personal ID number. If you have any questions concerning the Policies or Procedures, please call Bob Bruce at extension 5-7780 or Donna Lowry at extension 3-1939. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Possible Enron Visit to Tulane Univ. Late March or April; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/15/2001 10:25 AM ----- Rene Chapoton <rchapot@tulane.edu> 03/11/2001 11:47 PM To: SKean@Enron.com cc: Subject: Possible Enron Visit to Tulane Univ. Late March or April Mr. Kean, I've attached a document outlining a proposal for an associate in Enron's Capital & Risk Management Services division to come and speak in several graduate and undergraduate classes this semester. Times and dates are extremely negotiable. I will make all necessary arrangements to ensure a pleasant visit. Thank you for your time and have a great day. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Rene Chapoton RChapot@Tulane.edu (504)251-7363 Additional questions: Dean Peggy Babin PBabin@Tulane.edu (504)865-5412 Associate Dean Freeman School External Operations Prof. Sheri Tice STice@Tulane.edu (504)865-5469 - Enron Tentative Schedule.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Enron; [EMail-Body]= Has this previously been covered by the Office of the Chairman budget? If so, please handle; otherwise let me know. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/09/2001 08:54 AM --------------------------- ""Nelson W. Cunningham"" <ncunningham@mclarty.com> on 06/27/2001 01:09:46 PM Please respond to <ncunningham@mclarty.com> To: ""J. Steven Kean \(E-mail\)"" <skean@enron.com> cc: Subject: FW: Enron Steve -- A question aimed far below your pay grade. Our most recent invoice to Enron (dating from April) has not yet been paid. Our accountant, Paul Hart, reports that the individual to whom we had previously been told to direct the invoices says he is no longer the appropriate person to approve it. Any guidance on to whom we should turn? All the best, Nelson -----Original Message----- From: Paul Hart [mailto:phart@ahartco.com] Sent: Monday, June 25, 2001 11:03 AM To: Nelson Cunningham Subject: Enron Nelson: We spoke to Enron's accounting dept who said that the invoice is still in their system because James Derrick (whom all the previous invoices have been sent) said that he is not the person to approve the payment. The accountant asked me whom he sould direct the invoice to. Please let me know your thoughts. Paul [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: organizational announcement; [EMail-Body]= I talked with Ken yesterday. He would like to keep David on until May 15 to finish up some things he is working on for Ken. Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp. From: Sherri Sera 04/09/2001 08:45 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Re: organizational announcement Just out of curiosity, did this ever get resolved? Apologies if I'm being too bold! SRS From: Steven J Kean on 03/14/2001 07:33 AM To: Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Re: organizational announcement Ken was meeting with him the day before yesterday. I'm just waiting to hear back. Sherri Sera 03/13/2001 10:07 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: organizational announcement Just saw the memo about Sanjay, Diomedes and Jim. Guess David Haug is still around? SRS [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: EPSA/EEI on Reliability; [EMail-Body]= Charles -- Thanks for the reply. Your thoughts on the EEI draft in terms of details would be helpful. As I read it, we still have the problems with the EEI draft that we had with the NERC draft on which it is based -- deference, regional rules variances, regional reliability entities, regional advisory boards, limits on FERC authority, etc., etc. It would also be helpful to have input on whether the plans for EISB could go forward if legislation like the EEI bill were enacted into law. It would seem not since the ""SRO"" would focus only on ""reliability"" as defined by how the bill defines what matters are subjects for an ""organization standard."" -----Original Message----- From: Yeung, Charles Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 7:02 PM To: 'Shelk, John'; Shapiro, Richard; Steffes, James D. Cc: Robertson, Linda; Nersesian, Carin; Novosel, Sarah Subject: RE: EPSA/EEI on Reliability I guess the point of debate is what is meant by ""self-regulating"" ? Can we live with such a name in the language - as long as the language has all the hooks to FERC and other regulators? ( No deference, etc.) If the language is there that we want - then from the other guys' side, what do THEY see left in the name ""self-regulating""? I think we need to understand this before we can be comfortable with any type of support for ""SRO"". -----Original Message----- From: Shelk, John Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 9:25 AM To: Shapiro, Richard; Steffes, James D.; Yeung, Charles Cc: Robertson, Linda; Nersesian, Carin; Novosel, Sarah Subject: EPSA/EEI on Reliability This follows up on Rick's inquiry late last week on the talks between EPSA and EEI on reliability. Yesterday I spoke with Mark Bennett and Donn Salvosa of the EPSA staff. Mark did the talking. The upshot is that EPSA and EEI are meeting to see if they can't agree on reliability legislation. EEI is working off of the NERC draft and has sent a version to EPSA dated 9/14 (see attached) that was the basis for last Thursday's meeting. EPSA is now doing some drafting of its own. I need to read the 9/14 draft, but the fact that they are working off of the old NERC language is of considerable concern. EPSA staff emphasizes the value of having EEI off the NERC reservation (which is good in terms of showing that there is NERC ""consensus""), but I think EPSA staff may be ""too flexible"" in how they are approaching it. I reminded them of our position and concerns and of Jim's prepared statement on EPSA's behalf filed for the Sept. 11 Barton hearing. EPSA staff claims that other EPSA members are OK with them embarking on this project. It is not clear if this effort will succeed. EPSA staff said EEI's board insists on having engineers do reliability, which is objectionable to EPSA. EPSA staff seems to think that some type of reliablity SRO is inevitable and that it is wise to get the best one they can. I will check with some other EPSA members. << File: >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Fw: Comments of Wolak; [EMail-Body]= kaminski -----Original Message----- From: Lin, Martin <Martin.Lin@ENRON.com> To: Kaminski, Vince J <Vince.J.Kaminski@ENRON.com> CC: 'vkaminski@aol.com' <vkaminski@aol.com>; Cunningham, Lance <Lance.Cunningham@ENRON.com> Sent: Fri Oct 19 17:36:33 2001 Subject: Comments of Wolak Wolak makes some good points. In ERCOT, Enron is in support of nodal pricing. I would not go so far as to say we are pushing for PJM's implementation, however, but for a market with nodal prices (and unilateral bids - aka unbalanced schedules, congestion reflect by price differentials, etc). I was unaware PJM had such great power to alter bids. This is something we don't want, and something for which I am not aware we have advocated. Perhaps in Enron's promotion of locational prices, it has been retold as PJM-style locational prices. Given that PJM is the most commonly cited example of locational prices, it does not surprise me to have the sloppiness in discussions that could lead to the rumors. Martin -----Original Message----- From: Kaminski, Vince J Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 4:35 PM To: Lin, Martin Cc: 'vkaminski@aol.com' Subject: FW: Martin, Lance What do you think? Vince -----Original Message----- From: ""Frank A. Wolak"" Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 4:28 PM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: Vince, I've been hearing rumors that Enron has decided to endorse the nodal pricing model as implemented in PJM. I just wanted to warn you that I'm not sure this is in Enron's long-term interest at all. Let me explain why. Feel free to give me a call if you'd like to talk more about this. First, let me say that I firmly believe in locational pricing and specifically pricing congestion. However, the way that PJM implements nodal pricing is to eliminate as much price volatility and reduce the transparency of the market. Specifically, the PJM tariff gives the ISO the ability to mitigate to cost plus a %10 adder the bids of any market participant that the ISO deems is out of merit in one of the three zones in region. (The fact that a nodal market is talking about zones should give you cause for alarm.) Then the ISO takes this mitigated bid and re-runs its price-setting software to compute new nodal prices. The way I have (somewhat unfairly) decribed this price-setting process is that the PJM ISO decides what prices it would like for a given day and mitigates bids until it gets them. This is not a transparent market, nor one where it makes any sense to buy the risk management services that Enron provides. The only price volatility you have to worry about in the PJM market is that kind that comes about if they need imports into their control area to meet demand. Under these circumstances, you need to pay the imports whatever is necessary to get them to come to your market. However, bear in mind FERC's desire to make a large RTO on the East Coast. This will effectively mean little imports to the East Coast RTO, so all bids can be mitigated at the discretion of the ISO. Paying market-clearing prices to cost-of-service mitigated bids is just paying too much to eliminate price volatility. It effectively kills off the development of risk management at the wholesale and retail level. Power marketing becomes much less profitable because retailers know you can always buy at cost-mitigated prices. In short, the PJM model is not market. It is just an alternative form of regulation that is politically attractive because it reduces price volatility, but it is not good for consumers or traders because they just get a higher cost form of regulation than traditional cost-of-service regulation. You pay market-clearing prices to cost-of-service mitigated bids, but under regulation you could just pay cost-of-service prices and eliminate the infra-marginal profits to low cost generators. As we discussed during our dinner, I think the two biggest sources of benefits from re-structuring will come from getting the demand-side involved in the market and from more efficient risk management. A necessary condition for both of these to occur is prices that reflect actual conditions in the market (including the extent of market power exercised). Masking these signals dulls any incentive for market participants to make the investment necessary to management. The PJM model is just way to have a market in name without achieving any significant benefits to consumers or energy traders. Frank [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Comprehensive Solution; [EMail-Body]= Fax the attached word document to Jeff ASAP, thanks. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/24/2001 10:05 AM --------------------------- From: Jeff Dasovich on 05/18/2001 11:50 AM Sent by: Jeff Dasovich To: sryan@aesc.com, bbailey@duke-energy.com, Lynn.A.Lednicky@Dynegy.com, john.harrison@elpaso.com, rachel.king@elpaso.com, clark.smith@elpaso.com, skean@enron.com, tom.allen@mirant.com, sonnet.edmonds@mirant.com, randy.harrison@mirant.com, alex.goldberg@williams.com cc: Subject: Comprehensive Solution These are the materials that Ken Lay used in his discussions with California business leaders. The word document was provided as background. Please keep confidential and if I've missed anyone please forward along. Comments are welcome and appreciated. Best, Jeff [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: FW: Request for PR2 Access; [EMail-Body]= OK From: Jo Ann Hill/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/18/2001 04:31 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Kathryn Schultea/ENRON@enronXgate, Mary Joyce/ENRON@enronXgate Subject: FW: Request for PR2 Access Steve -- For your approval. As some additional information regarding the request, Kathy, Diane Taylor and I met with Deana Taylor this afternoon to understand what each person's role was and the specific access needed. For the interim, we are recommending that the HR View Basic Data & Org ENTP and View Payroll and Time ENTP role be granted to each of the individuals listed below. Until January 1, this function was performed in the Payroll Department and at that time was transitioned to Karen and Deana's group. The people listed below actually transferred from the Payroll Department. For the long term, we are going to look at creating a specific role for this group that would let them access only those data elements needed. I've spoken with Mary Joyce by phone and she has approved, so I am requesting your approval as well. These people have basically been prevented from being able to reconcile any of the net pay accounts, etc. for the past week. Please let me know if you will approve or if you need any additional information. Thanks. Jo Ann -----Original Message----- From: Taylor, Deana Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 4:37 PM To: Hill, Jo Ann Cc: Choyce, Karen; Lindsey, Mark E. Subject: Request for PR2 Access Jo Ann, As we discussed I am sending this email to request PR2 Enterprise access re-activated for the following employees: Karen Choyce HR View Basic Data & Org ENTP Deana Taylor HR View Basic Data & Org ENTP Joanne Cortez HR View Basic Data & Org ENTP (starting in the group 7/16) Rebecca Tran HR View Basic Data & Org ENTP & View Payroll and Time Roy Comeaux HR View Basic Data & Org ENTP & View Payroll and Time George Howell HR View Basic Data & Org ENTP & View Payroll and Time Please note I am not requesting access for the entire department, the list of employees above are the only individuals in our group that will be allowed this type of access. Corp's payroll accounting group is responsible for reconciling the general ledger balance sheet accounts across all Enron companies, therefore Enterprise access is needed. The requested access is essential for our group to perform our job. Without this, we are unable to trace amounts related to FIT, FICA, net pay, stock option deductions, etc, through the payroll system to the ledger, and to ensure that the items are accounted for properly. Equally as important, the access enables us to identify system issues between PR2 (payroll) and PR1 (ledger). Corp's payroll accounting group has already identified several processing issues and alerted the ISC. I hope this ""pleads our case"" on why we need the access and request it be re-activated. Please feel free to call me or Mark Lindsey, if you need additional information. Thanks, Deana 3-4593 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= More info from ISO -- May be Providing Confidential Data to State; [EMail-Body]= The ISO reported that it looked at 26 companies that may have exerted market power. They are listed by number only in the public. FERC has been provided the actual names. NOTE: The ISO's Gen Counsel would not respond to a reporter's question asking if he gave confidential data to other state agencies. I guess we can assume that means the ISO has done that. The ISO has calculated its view of what a competitive price is for several months: Jan -- $180/MWh Feb -- $260/MWh Sue Mara Enron Corp. Tel: (415) 782-7802 Fax:(415) 782-7854 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential communications; [EMail-Body]= J.C. asked that I send you the following message: In light of rumors that investigations into Enron's financial difficulties may be launched or expanded, including investigations by the civil plaintiffs or by the FBI on behalf of the SEC or Congress, we believe it prudent to advise you that if anyone contacts you and seeks to question you (even someone with a badge and an authoritative demeanor), don't answer their questions. Refer them to us for the purpose of arranging an interview. Second, if you know of any individuals who you believe might be interviewed in connection with these investigations, please call us so we can discuss how such information should be forwarded to the appropriate people. Please call if you have any questions. This e-mail and any attached files may be confidential and subject to attorney/client privilege. If you received it in error, please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail or by calling (713)654-7600. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Update Day 1 Second Session FERC CA Settlement; [EMail-Body]= In the Room Conference attended by all in-state generators, a few munies, the IOUs and a few others. One attorney from CPUC, but on phone. Barbara Barkovich attended for CA Large Consumers. Nader sent someone. No other consumers. One other ESP -- Strategic Energy (only operates in San Diego). Judge reports that only 6 offers have been submitted to FERC for sales to the IOUs (note; Enron submitted one of the offers). The offers total 2000 MW. The prices are quite divergent. He expresses concern at the little offered. Generators suggest that more could be offered if FERC could be more flexible on terms (FERC required 24/7 offers). IOUs and others press judge to seek offers from others not present (e.g., BPA, other marketers, SW utilities), but judge does not offer to do so. Barkovich says can't throw large customers into non-core market now. Everyone agrees that we are all looking for a blended wholesale rate (part existing gen, part OFs, part forward contract and part spot) that meshes with the IOUs' ability to recover the costs in rates -- so tied to CPUC rate increase. Discussion of CPUC PD -- not enough Enron able to take low profile. SDG&E suggested terminating the settlement talks at FERC, saying nothing could be achieved. Not much happens until 4:30 pm, when judge blows up -- judge directed epithets at SDG&E and SCE. SCE had refused to cooperate from the beginning. Out of the Room Separate talks between PG&E and SDG&E and some of the generators. Late in the day, Judge meets with IOUs. Parties agree informally that forum does not work well given lack of CPUC involvement, but some believe that FERC is only hope for a workable resolution. Next Steps -- The Judge Speaks Judge asked everyone to consider how to ""Share the Pain"" for Thursday's meeting and said not to expect any ""win:win"" scenario. His view is that FERC is better than the CA legislature or bankruptcy court. His focus will be on Wolak proposal to share the pain, as submitted in 12/1/00 comments to FERC -- forces all sellers to CA to sell most of its supply (either generation or marketer offers) as cost-based rates in forward contracts, or lose ability to sell at market-based rates. Generators oppose this, I believe. Enron planning to continue low profile but to discuss options with ENA. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE:; [EMail-Body]= Liz, It's in Stanford. We can stay at the Stanford Inn Hotel Tuesday night and leave early in the morning for Santa Fe on Wednesday. I am still waiting for Prediction to confirm their meeting on Wednesday. Vince -----Original Message----- From: Taylor, Liz M. Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 10:00 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: RE: So the 1st meeting is @ 4:00 p.m. on the 4th? Is this going to be near Sanford? Liz -----Original Message----- From: Kaminski, Vince J Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 9:44 AM To: Crenshaw, Shirley Cc: Taylor, Liz M. Subject: FW: FYI. The first leg of the trip has been confirmed. Vince. -----Original Message----- From: ""Frank A. Wolak"" Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 9:26 AM To: Kaminski, Vince J Subject: RE: Vince, 4 pm on September 4 and I'd be happy to go to dinner. Frank At 08:33 AM 8/23/01 -0500, you wrote: >Frank, > >Thanks for your message. > >What about a meeting on Tuesday, September the 4th. >We could meet at your office, let's say at 4 p.m. We would be delighted if >you >could join us for dinner later in the evening on the same day. > > >Vince > > -----Original Message----- > From: ""Frank A. Wolak"" > >Eedu+3E+40ENRON@ENRON.com] > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 11:13 AM > To: Kaminski, Vince J > Subject: > > Vince, > > I'll be out of the country for the next > two weeks, but should be back September 3 > and will be in the office all that week. > > Frank > > > >This e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or its relevant affiliate >and may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of >the intended recipient (s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by >others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or >authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender or >reply to Enron Corp. at and >delete all copies of the message. This e-mail (and any attachments hereto) >are not intended to be an offer (or an acceptance) and do not create or >evidence a binding and enforceable contract between Enron Corp. (or any of >its affiliates) and the intended recipient or any other party, and may not >be relied on by anyone as the basis of a contract by estoppel or >otherwise. Thank you. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: Refund Cases Timelines--Confidential Atty Client Work Product; [EMail-Body]= The DC Team (Linda Robertson, Ray Alvarez) attended and reported on today's prehearing conference in the California case. The schedule has moved back about a full month mostly due to the time required by PX and CAISO to produce mitigated market clearing prices and to re-run settlements based on those revised prices. Testimony by Enron on what it is owed is now not due until October 26. In addition to adopting this schedule, the ALJ reported that the FERC likely not rule on petitions for rehearing of the July 25 order until October 15, 2001. A revised schedule is attached. (To see how it has changed, you can toggle Track Changes | Hightlight on Screen on and off) The PNW case is moving along on schedule; changes attached are corrections rather than actual changes to the schedule. Notably in today's case, Seattle and Tacoma waived all cross on TFG witnesses, including Enron's. Alan Comnes -----Original Message----- From: Comnes, Alan Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 1:32 PM To: Gary Fergus (E-mail); Alvarez, Ray; Frank, Robert; Belden, Tim Cc: Steffes, James D. Subject: Refund Cases Timelines--Confidential Atty Client Work Product Tim, Per your request. Everybody else: please forward corrections/updates to me. Thanks, Alan Comnes << File: Refund Case Calendars.doc >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: Bay City News, Wed 3/21: ""Blackouts Not Expected=20 Today"" Dow Jones Newswire, Wed 3/21: ""Calif State Controller:General Fund Surplus = Dn=20 To $3.2B"" CBS.MarketWatch.com, Wed 3/21: ""Davis says regulators will act to pay QFs Electricity providers insist they need to be paid"" Long Beach Press, Wed 3/21: ""Rash power bill may need fix"" SF Chron, Wed 3/21: ""PUC considers rewarding producers that sign long-term= =20 contracts"" Sac Bee, Thurs, 3/22: ""State claims $5.5 billion overcharge: Refunds by=20 wholesale generators sought"" Sac Bee, Thurs, 3/22: ""Power solution eludes Davis: Lawmakers grow edgy as= =20 crisis drags on"" Sac Bee, Thurs., 3/22: "" Legislators learn some details of power contracts= "" San Diego Union, Thurs, 3/22: ""Federal judge orders major power wholesaler= =20 to sell to California"" San Diego Union, Thurs., 3/22: ""Controller: State's power spending imperil= s=20 its financial health"" San Diego Union, Wed, 3/21: ""Governor says utilities must pay in advance f= or=20 some power"" LA Times, Thurs, 3/22: ""Energy Overcharge of $5.5 Billion Is Alleged"" LA Times, Thurs, 3/22: ""Power Strain Eases but Concerns Mount"" LA Times, Thurs, 3/22: Graphics: Overcharges Alleged=20 San Fran Chron, Thurs, 3/22: ""Net Complex A Dilemma For San Jose=20 SERVER FARM: Plant would tax grid"" San Fran Chron, Thurs, 3/22: ""Contracts Won't Meet Summer Demands=20 DETAILS: 2004 before full impact felt"" Mercury News, Thurs, 3/22: ""California overcharged $5.5 bln for wholesale= =20 power"" Orange Cty Register, Thurs, 3/22: Commentary: ""If the Power Goes Off"" =20 Orange Cty Register, Thurs, 3/22: Commentary: ""Socialized Electricity"" San Fran Chron, Thurs, 3/22: ""Bush's Energy Policy Will Backfire,=20 Feinstein Warns / She wants federal price controls now"" Dow Jones Newswires, Thurs, 3/22: ""Reliant Still In Power Pact Talks With= =20 Calif. DWR"" Dow Jones Newswires, Thurs, 3/22: ""CPUC Must Address Rates In QF Repayment= =20 Order - SoCal Ed"" Dow Jones Newswires, Thurs, 3/22: ""Calif Small Pwr Producers To Shut Plant= s=20 If Rates Capped"" --- --- Blackouts Not Expected=20 Today Bay City News=20 Following two consecutive days of rolling blackouts, California's power=20 picture looks much brighter today, but conservation is still needed.=20 The California Independent System Operator is urging consumers to continue= =20 conservation measures during today's Stage One Electrical Emergency.=20 ""The conservation efforts of Californians, particularly Tuesday evening, we= re=20 significant and helped to reduce the duration and impact of yesterday's=20 blackouts,'' according to officials. ""The California ISO asks customers to= =20 continue their voluntary reductions during this time of tight supply.""=20 More than 11,500 megawatts of in-state generation remain unavailable with= =20 power plants completing repairs and needed maintenance. However, several=20 generating units returned to service today and the level of imported power= =20 has increased, boosting the supply.=20 ""The ISO is cautiously optimistic that customer outages will be avoided=20 today,'' according to officials.=20 Today's Stage One alert is in effect through midnight tonight.=20 Stage One Emergencies are declared when power reserves fall below 7 percent= .=20 Stage Two kicks in when reserves fall below 5 percent. Stage Three is=20 initiated when reserves drop to below 1.5 percent. --- Calif State Controller:General Fund Surplus Dn To $3.2B 03/21/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- California State Controller Kathleen Connell=20 Wednesday said the state's general fund surplus has dropped to $3.2 billion= =20 from $8.5 billion in January, mostly because of electricity purchases made = by=20 the state's Department of Water Resources, a press release said.=20 Connell also denied Gov. Gray Davis' request to transfer an additional $5.6= =20 billion from the general fund to the Special Fund for Economic Uncertaintie= s,=20 the release said. Connell noted that, given the rapid depletion of the general fund on power= =20 purchases, the state would need to borrow $2.4 billion in order to tranfer= =20 the $5.6 billion from the general fund to the special fund.=20 ""We started this year with a generous budget surplus. The energy crisis has= =20 taken much of that away, and this transfer on top of the electricity=20 purchases would put the fund at risk,"" Connell said.=20 Connell called on Davis to ensure that the CDWR completes by the end of May= =20 2001 the revenue bond sales that will be used to buy power and repay the=20 general fund.=20 She also asked that the CDWR notify her of all power purchases made and=20 contracts negotiated thus far and requested that she be told within 7 days = of=20 any purchases and contracts negotiated in the future.=20 Connell also said she wanted to be told within 24 hours of any power buys= =20 that exceed $55 million and asked that the Department of Finance be directe= d=20 to prepare new general fund cash flow estimates for the next 30 and 60 days= ,=20 and for the end of the fiscal year.=20 The state's Department of Water Resources has been buying power since Janua= ry=20 in lieu of Edison International (EIX) utility Southern California Edison an= d=20 PG&E Corp (PCG) utility Pacific Gas and Electric Co, because suppliers=20 refused to sell to the nearly-bankrupt utilities.=20 -By Jessica Berthold; Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872;=20 Gov. Davis' office said, in response to Connell's comments, that the state= =20 budget was solid and the economy remained strong.=20 ""We will be getting the money back we've paid for energy and it should have= =20 no significant effect on the state's finances from the Wall Street=20 perspective,"" said Davis press secretary Steve Maviglio.=20 -By Jessica Berthold; Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872;=20 jessicaberthold@dowjones.com --- -------- Davis says regulators will act to pay QFs Electricity providers insist they need to be paid By Russ Britt, CBS.MarketWatch.com=20 Last Update: 9:45 PM ET Mar 20, 2001 LOS ANGELES (CBS.MW) - California Gov. Gray Davis said regulators will act= =20 Tuesday on a plan to guarantee that independent power generators are paid. Independent power producers provide about 30 percent of California's=20 electricity from a variety of sources including wind, solar and other=20 sources. Because many of the companies, known as Qualifying Facilities, or= =20 QFs, haven't been paid they've begun to withhold power, contributing to=20 blackouts in the state Monday and Tuesday.=20 ""We are anxious to pay the QFs because they're falling like flies,"" Davis= =20 said at a news conference late Tuesday. ""If they don't get paid, the lights= =20 will go out."" Davis said the state's PUC order will require the state's nearly bankrupt= =20 utilities to enter five-year contracts with the QFs at rates of 7.9 cents p= er=20 kilowatt hour, or 10-year contracts for lower rates. The structure is simil= ar=20 to rates Davis claims he was able to negotiate for long-term power contract= s=20 from out-of-state generators. --- Rash power bill may need fix By Will Shuck From our Sacramento Bureau SACRAMENTO Even as lawmakers lament the slow pace of solving California's= =20 energy crisis, the cost of haste has cropped up in their first major act, a= =20 multibillion dollar measure that put the state in the power-buying business= .=20 AB1X, the highly touted bill that put California in the power-buying=20 business, may have been so rashly crafted that it will take another piece o= f=20 legislation to fix it, an influential senator said Tuesday.=20 At issue is vague wording that makes it unclear when and to what extent=20 Southern California Edison and other utilities have to repay the state for= =20 buying power.=20 State Sen. Debra Bowen, chairwoman of the Senate Energy, Utilities and=20 Communications Committee, said the bill apparently has left room for utilit= y=20 lawyers to argue that their companies needn't repay the state until they ha= ve=20 covered other costs.=20 But Bowen, a Redondo Beach Democrat who represents downtown and western Lon= g=20 Beach, said ""the legislative intent is crystal clear"" that the state wanted= =20 to be repaid directly for supplying about a third of the power utility=20 companies deliver to their customers.=20 ""We need a cleanup bill"" to set the matter straight, she said.=20 Although AB1X illustrates the flaws that come with speed, Bowen said, the= =20 Legislature can't afford to delay.=20 ""I think we are much too slow in our response,"" she said. ""But that has to = be=20 balanced against things we've done in a tearing hurry and then have had to= =20 fix later.""=20 No matter what the Legislature does in the coming weeks, she said, Californ= ia=20 is in for a tough summer, and only determined conservation efforts will put= =20 much of a dent in a precarious supply-demand equation. --- PUC considers rewarding producers that sign long-term contracts=20 Greg Lucas, Lynda Gledhill, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau Wednesday, March 21, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 Sacramento -- Some cash-strapped producers of wind, solar and other=20 alternative forms of energy will get long-delayed financial relief under a= =20 proposed order by state regulators, Gov. Gray Davis said yesterday evening.= =20 A proposed order by the Public Utilities Commission is designed to reward= =20 energy producers who sign long-term contracts with utilities at lower rates= .=20 Alternative energy producers that voluntarily enter such contracts, which= =20 would start on April 1, would be paid within 15 days, said Davis, who=20 requested the order. Those that do not would have to wait until the utiliti= es=20 that buy their power return to solvency.=20 Davis blasted Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern California Edison for= =20 not paying the alternative generators -- know as qualified facilities, or= =20 ""QFs"" -- even though the companies have been collecting money through rates= .=20 ""It is wrong and irresponsible of the utilities to pocket and withhold the= =20 money designed to compensate the QFs,"" Davis said. ""It's immoral and has to= =20 stop.""=20 Alternative producers -- ranging from massive co-generation facilities at o= il=20 refineries to tiny biomass plants -- produce about a third of the state's= =20 supply of electricity. But many are shutting down because utilities have no= t=20 paid them since November.=20 The loss of some 3,000 megawatts from tapped-out alternative energy produce= rs=20 contributed to the blackouts that snarled California yesterday and Monday,= =20 according to the Independent System Operator, which manages the state's pow= er=20 grid.=20 The PUC's proposed order -- which will be considered at the board's Tuesday= =20 meeting -- offers the generators a choice of agreeing to a five-year contra= ct=20 at $79 per megawatt or a 10-year deal at $69 per megawatt, Davis said.=20 The order does not address the more than $1 billion already owed to the mor= e=20 than 600 alternative energy producers around the state. Davis said to favor= =20 one creditor over another in past debt could bring on bankruptcy proceeding= s=20 from other creditors.=20 The Legislature would also need to act to make the order work.=20 ""It is critical to keep these facilities up and online,"" said Sen. Debra=20 Bowen, D-Marina del Ray, who estimates that Edison has $1.5 billion in cash= =20 on hand, and PG&E $2.5 billion. ""The utilities owe it to the people of the= =20 state to pay them.""=20 Edison said yesterday that it opposed any attempt to place alternative=20 producers ahead of their other creditors.=20 But Tom Higgins, a senior vice president for Edison International, which ow= es=20 alternative producers some $835 million, said his company was talking to th= e=20 governor's office about possible payment structures.=20 Alternative energy producers, particularly those that use high-priced natur= al=20 gas to fire their generators, say that without an immediate infusion of cas= h=20 they must close their plants.=20 ""We've been obsessed with the health of the utilities and (have) forgotten= =20 the health of everyone else,"" said V. John White, legislative director of t= he=20 Clean Power Campaign, which lobbies for alternative energy producers.=20 CalEnergy Operating Corp., which operates eight geothermal plants in the=20 Imperial Valley producing 268 megawatt hours for Edison has sued the utilit= y=20 asking to be paid and to be temporarily released from their contract with= =20 Edison which has paid them nothing since November.=20 CalEnergy has a court hearing tomorrow on its Edison contract. Edison owes= =20 the company $75 million, and the debt increases by $1 million a day.=20 ""We've lived up to our end of the bargain but Edison hasn't. We're now not = in=20 a position to make a property tax payment on April 10 and we're the largest= =20 employer in the county,"" said Vince Signorotti, CalEnergy's property manage= r.=20 Unlike Edison, PG&E is paying its creditors 15 cents on the dollar.=20 ""We have offered over the past five days to prepay for future power not yet= =20 delivered to keep as many of them operating as possible, but the state need= s=20 to decide how its going to divvy up the limited money under the frozen=20 rates,"" said John Nelson, a PG&E spokesman.=20 The PUC's sudden attempt to recast the rates paid to alternative generators= =20 comes after several months of inaction, partly a result of waiting for=20 legislative negotiations on the issue to conclude. Those negotiations=20 eventually failed to move forward.=20 --- State claims $5.5 billion overcharge: Refunds by wholesale generators sough= t By Dale Kasler Bee Staff Writer (Published March 22, 2001)=20 In its boldest attempt yet to extract refunds from wholesale power=20 generators, the state's grid operator accused the generators Wednesday of= =20 overcharging Californians by $5.5 billion for electricity since last May.= =20 The state's Independent System Operator, which manages the state's=20 transmission grid, plans to tell a federal regulatory agency today that pow= er=20 generators consistently took advantage of their stranglehold on the=20 California market to ratchet up prices.=20 The federal agency, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, recently=20 threatened to order generators to refund $134.8 million for overcharges,=20 mostly covering January and February. But those refunds amounted to just a= =20 fraction of what the grid operator was seeking. The ISO, which has been=20 complaining about market abuses for several months, says FERC must do more.= =20 ""We're happy that (FERC) took this first step, but we think there's a long= =20 way to go,"" said Anjali Sheffrin, the ISO's director of market analysis. ""A= s=20 far as I'm concerned, it's been too little, too late. ... The refunds they= =20 have acted on (so far) have been minimal.""=20 She said the report covers five major power suppliers and 16 other power=20 importers.=20 FERC Commissioner William L. Massey said it would be improper for him to=20 comment on a report that has not yet been filed. But when told of the $5.5= =20 billion total, Massey told the Los Angeles Times: ""That doesn't shock me in= =20 any way.""=20 ""Prices over the past 10 months in California have greatly exceeded the=20 federal standards of just and reasonable prices, and I think they have=20 exceeded the standards by possibly billions of dollars,"" he said.=20 However, most FERC critics are skeptical that the federal agency, which is = a=20 strong believer in letting free markets run their course, would order a=20 refund anywhere near as large as $5.5 billion -- even though it has found= =20 that California prices at times have been ""unjust and unreasonable.""=20 The big power generators, saying their charges were reasonable, are disputi= ng=20 the $134.8 million refunds proposed so far and have vowed to fight the ISO'= s=20 latest effort.=20 If the ISO were to prevail, the $5.5 billion in refunds could go a long way= =20 toward remedying California's energy mess.=20 They could help restore the financial health of Pacific Gas and Electric Co= .=20 and Southern California Edison, which have nearly been bankrupted by the=20 prices charged by the power generators. They also could ease the strain on= =20 the state treasury, which is spending billions to purchase electricity for= =20 Californians because PG&E and Edison can't.=20 Sheffrin said her department studied sales made by the power generators to= =20 ISO, which makes last-minute power purchases to balance supply with demand,= =20 and the California Power Exchange, the now-bankrupt entity where most of=20 California's wholesale electricity was bought and sold until December.=20 She said the study made ""very generous"" allowances for natural gas expenses= ,=20 costly air-pollution credits and other factors, including the scarcity of= =20 electricity. The result was $5.5 billion worth of charges ""in excess of=20 competitive costs,"" she said.=20 In many cases, the companies used their market clout to submit bids that we= re=20 ""way beyond their costs,"" she said.=20 ""It was insufficient competition,"" Sheffrin said. ""They got away with a lot= .""=20 She said the refund request isn't just a shot in the dark. FERC, she noted,= =20 ""has already found that prices in the California wholesale energy market ha= ve=20 been unreasonable. We took it upon ourselves ... to show FERC how they got = to=20 be so high.""=20 FERC proposed refunds totaling $124 million for January and February sales,= =20 declaring that generators' prices were too high.=20 In a separate case the federal agency, for the first time, accused two=20 generators last week of taking plants offline to force prices up.=20 --- Power solution eludes Davis: Lawmakers grow edgy as crisis drags on=20 By Emily Bazar and Amy Chance Bee Capitol Bureau (Published March 22, 2001)=20 Gov. Gray Davis likes to compare the state's energy crisis to a complicated= =20 ""three-cornered"" billiard shot.=20 But as California plunged into another round of power blackouts this week,= =20 Davis has yet to line up the angle on an ultimate solution.=20 The state's short-term power bill is nearing $4.2 billion, and legislators= =20 are balking at the administration's requests for additional money.=20 Getting even the least controversial pieces of the puzzle through the=20 Legislature is taking weeks longer than expected.=20 While the Democratic governor has insisted secrecy about details of his pow= er=20 purchases is necessary to protect the state's bargaining position, other=20 state officials are complaining vigorously about the lack of information.= =20 And critical deals the governor hoped to reach with energy suppliers and=20 utility companies are proving difficult to close.=20 ""I think we all got lulled into a little complacency a few weeks ago. All= =20 these things seemed to be going along, and the governor was making all thes= e=20 warm and fuzzy comments,"" said Assemblyman John Campbell, R-Irvine.=20 ""But it only takes one deal to go sideways and we're all blacked out,"" he= =20 added. ""The governor is running around basically saying, 'Trust me.' I'm no= t=20 sure he's deserving of the trust at this point.""=20 Davis and his aides insist they are working around the clock on plans to=20 boost power generation, encourage conservation and reach an agreement with= =20 utilities that will keep them out of bankruptcy.=20 The utility plan, they say, is the equivalent of a large corporate merger= =20 that simply can't be accomplished overnight. Davis notes that earlier=20 deregulation efforts might have benefitted from a little more time.=20 Although the state has reached a broad ""agreement in principle"" with Southe= rn=20 California Edison to obtain its power transmission lines in exchange for he= lp=20 paying off its debts, a final, detailed deal has not been reached. The=20 initial agreement with Edison was announced Feb. 23.=20 And the governor has yet to achieve a tentative agreement with Pacific Gas= =20 and Electric Co., which is driving a harder bargain over price and other=20 elements of a potential rescue plan.=20 Joseph Fichera, one of several consultants receiving more than $11 million= =20 from the administration for advice on the energy crisis, said many people= =20 don't realize the complexity of the deal they're brokering.=20 In their bid to achieve a public takeover of the investor-owned utilities'= =20 transmission lines, he said, negotiators have to pore over thousands of=20 documents related to the transmission lines alone.=20 ""We are doing what is normal in a transaction of this magnitude, which is= =20 investigate, document, circulate, redocument, agree, move forward,"" said=20 Fichera, an investment banker with Saber Partners in New York City. ""The=20 governor has put a 'I want this yesterday' fire"" under his negotiating team= .=20 The negotiator, however, declined to say when he expects final agreements t= o=20 be reached with the companies.=20 ""It could be days, it could be weeks,"" he said.=20 There were signs, meanwhile, of trouble brewing on another front: the giant= =20 bond sale the state must make to repay the money it has spent so far on=20 electricity and to finance future long-term contracts for energy.=20 State Treasurer Phil Angelides said Wednesday the utilities are appealing a= =20 ruling by the state Public Utilities Commission that essentially ensures th= e=20 state will be repaid, a move that he said threatens to delay the sale=20 indefinitely.=20 ""If the utilities have decided to adopt a scorched earth policy until they= =20 get what they need and want, then it will be a significant problem,""=20 Angelides said.=20 PG&E spokesman Ron Low said the governor is simply placing too many demands= =20 on a rate structure that doesn't compensate the utilities for their current= =20 costs.=20 ""Political rhetoric is not going to change the math,"" he said.=20 In the Legislature, lawmakers are growing grumpier. Most were taken by=20 surprise Monday when blackouts were ordered across the state, weeks before= =20 summer temperatures were expected to set in and strain the power system.=20 ""I'm more worried than ever,"" said Assemblyman Bill Leonard, R-San=20 Bernardino. ""A lot of the elements we thought we had a handle on in January= =20 are unraveling.""=20 A deal the governor said had been worked out weeks ago between the state an= d=20 more than 600 small alternative energy suppliers collapsed last week.=20 The alternative generators have not been paid by the utilities for months,= =20 and state leaders attempted to bargain down the price utilities pay those= =20 generators for power.=20 But administration officials complained privately that lawmakers instead=20 sweetened the pot for the suppliers to the point that the measure no longer= =20 helped solve the overall financial situation pushing the utilities toward= =20 bankruptcy. Under a proposal announced Tuesday by Davis, the Legislature=20 would authorize the PUC to require the utilities to pay the alternative=20 suppliers at prices more closely resembling the original deal.=20 But the governor ran into immediate opposition, as some suppliers said said= =20 he would not pay them enough to cover their fuel costs.=20 ""We would go from not being paid, to losing money,"" said Hal Dittmer of=20 Wellhead Electric, a Sacramento-based supplier that has been shut down for= =20 more than a month. ""Almost everybody who burns natural gas is going to shut= =20 down. (Davis) got it wrong.""=20 Democrats outside the Davis administration, meanwhile, are complaining abou= t=20 the amount of money the state Department of Water Resources is spending on= =20 expensive, last-minute power purchases. Within a week, $4.2 billion will ha= ve=20 been committed.=20 State Sen. Steve Peace, D-El Cajon, chairman of the joint Legislative Budge= t=20 Committee, is warning the Davis administration that he will block additiona= l=20 funds for last-minute purchases of power until the PUC makes progress=20 recovering money that already has been spent. He intends to hold a hearing = on=20 the issue this morning.=20 On Wednesday, state Controller Kathleen Connell told Davis she will refuse = to=20 make a routine budget transfer he had requested, saying she is concerned th= at=20 there is ""no outside check and balance"" on the money the administration is= =20 spending to buy electricity on the spot market.=20 As the statewide elected official who pays the state's bills, Connell said= =20 she has yet to receive information from the Department of Water Resources= =20 about how much it is spending.=20 ""We really need an accounting as to the total amount of liability they have= =20 accumulated,"" she said. ""I understand they're in an emergency situation ...= =20 but it begins to imperil the state's ability to manage its cash flow.""=20 Meanwhile, a bill to provide $1 billion for conservation programs, aimed at= =20 reducing power needs this summer, also has languished for several weeks in= =20 the state Senate. While Davis has focused his attention elsewhere, Republic= an=20 lawmakers have opposed the measure as too expensive. Democrats argue that= =20 each two-week delay prevents the state from saving as much energy as one=20 ""peaker"" plant will produce this summer. Peaker plants are designed to help= =20 meet the peaks of electricity demand.=20 ""I'm the eternal optimist, but we have to keep working on all fronts,"" said= =20 Sen. Byron Sher, D-Palo Alto, who hopes to take his energy conservation bil= l=20 up for a vote in the Senate again today. ""It's a formidable challenge.""=20 Bee staff writer Dale Kasler contributed to this report.=20 --- Legislators learn some details of power contracts By John Hill Bee Capitol Bureau (Published March 22, 2001)=20 The veil of secrecy surrounding the state's electricity contracts lifted=20 Wednesday -- a little.=20 Gov. Gray Davis gave state legislators a report laying out some of the=20 details of long-term contracts designed to help the state pull out of its= =20 energy crisis. But the report left legislators and others clamoring for mor= e.=20 ""The information raises more questions,"" said Assemblyman George Runner,=20 R-Lancaster. ""I liken it to watching a parade through a knothole in a fence= .=20 You get to look at one float, but you're not sure about what's coming up an= d=20 what you've missed.""=20 Davis had previously disclosed that the state had signed or was close to=20 signing 40 long-term contracts, at an average price over 10 years of $69 pe= r=20 megawatt-hour.=20 The contracts are part of the state's strategy for trying to avoid a fiscal= =20 shellacking in the energy spot market while making sure there's enough=20 electricity to avoid more blackouts.=20 Davis also previously disclosed that the contracts were for an average of= =20 about 9,000 megawatts a year, and that the total cost exceeded $40 billion.= =20 But Davis has resisted telling more, saying the state would jeopardize its= =20 ability to get the best prices if electricity generators knew what their=20 counterparts were getting.=20 On Wednesday, the governor's office released a March 15 report from S. Davi= d=20 Freeman, general manager of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, = to=20 the state Department of Water Resources. The state agency has been given th= e=20 responsibility of making power purchases, and Freeman was brought in to lea= d=20 the negotiations.=20 As of March 15, the state had signed 19 contracts with seven suppliers for= =20 periods ranging from 14 months to 20 years, with many for three or five=20 years, the report says. Some of the contracts are for electricity to meet t= he=20 state's everyday power demand, while others are only for times of peak use,= =20 such as hot summer days.=20 The state had ""agreements in principle"" for an additional 25 contracts.=20 Runner said he has been told that two of these contracts have since been=20 finalized.=20 The amount of power provided reaches a peak in 2004 of more than 10,000=20 megawatts. As the long-term contracts start to expire around then, the stat= e=20 is hoping that demand can be met with new contracts or spot purchases at=20 prices expected to be much cheaper.=20 The report says nine more long-term contracts were under discussion.=20 Some of the contracts are with power generators, while others are with=20 marketers who may get the power from a number of sources.=20 In some cases, the state may supply the natural gas used to generate the=20 electricity, or power costs may be pegged to the going rate for the fuel.= =20 Some suppliers can cancel if the state fails to sell bonds by a certain dat= e=20 to cover power costs or fails to maintain an investment grade credit rating= .=20 Some depend on the construction of power plants, but Freeman said they were= =20 firm commitments.=20 ""We were pretty careful not to put a hope and a dream in the portfolio,"" he= =20 said.=20 More contracts will have to be signed to meet summer demand, and these=20 agreements will probably be more expensive, the report says.=20 One item not in Freeman's report was a secret deal to relieve several major= =20 generators from having to pay for polluting the air beyond allowable limits= .=20 The long-term power contracts include language that would have the state pa= y=20 the costs of ""pollution credits"" that allow power plants to exceed their=20 permitted levels of smog-forming pollutants, the governor's office confirme= d=20 Wednesday. Spokesman Steve Maviglio said that several generators are being= =20 relieved from having to pay those costs.=20 V. John White, a Sierra Club lobbyist close to the negotiations, said Dyneg= y=20 Inc., which has power plants in El Segundo, Encina and Long Beach, is one o= f=20 them. Dynegy officials did not return calls to The Bee on Wednesday.=20 Freeman said that generators were demanding hefty premiums for having to de= al=20 with air quality regulators in the summer and he figured it would be cheape= r=20 just to pay for the pollution credits.=20 In other energy-related developments:=20 With more power plants back online, grid operators dropped down to a Stage = 1=20 electricity alert. The state Independent System Operator was expecting=20 supplies to gradually increase over the next few days.=20 The state Public Utilities Commission issued a revised draft decision that= =20 would impose the prices outlined Tuesday by Davis for power produced by=20 alternative energy companies -- $79 a megawatt-hour for five-year contracts= =20 or $69 a megawatt-hour for 10 years. The proposal is scheduled for a PUC vo= te=20 March 27.=20 A federal judge ruled that one of the nation's major electricity generators= =20 must continue supplying California with emergency power.=20 In imposing an injunction on Reliant Energy Services Inc., U.S. District=20 Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. noted the ""rolling blackouts (that have) darkene= d=20 the California landscape"" and said the loss of Reliant's production ""poses = an=20 imminent threat.""=20 Bee staff writers Carrie Peyton, Chris Bowman and Denny Walsh contributed t= o=20 this report.=20 --- Federal judge orders major power wholesaler to sell to California=20 By Don Thompson ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 21, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction Wednesday= =20 ordering a major electricity wholesaler to continue selling to California= =20 despite its fear that it will not get paid.=20 U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said Californians were at risk of= =20 irreparable harm if Reliant Energy Services stopped selling power to the=20 Independent System Operator, which oversees the state's power grid. The ISO= =20 buys last-minute power on behalf of utilities to fill gaps in supply to try= =20 to fend off blackouts.=20 Damrell dismissed Reliant's attempt to force the state Department of Water= =20 Resources to back the ISO's purchases for the state's two biggest utilities= .=20 The state has been spending about $50 million a day on power for Pacific Ga= s=20 and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison, both denied credit by=20 suppliers after amassing billions of dollars in debts.=20 Controller: State's power spending imperils its financial health=20 Governor says utilities must pay in advance for some power=20 ?=20 The judge said he had no authority to force the DWR to pay for that power.= =20 Gov. Gray Davis has said the state isn't responsible for purchasing the=20 costly last-minute power ISO buys for Edison and PG&E, despite a law=20 authorizing state power purchases on the utilities' behalf.=20 ISO attorney Charles Robinson said the ruling gives ISO operators ""a tool t= o=20 assist them in keeping the lights on in California.""=20 ""Had the decision gone the other way, one could expect other generators to= =20 simply ignore emergency orders,"" Robinson said.=20 Damrell's preliminary injunction will remain in effect until the Federal=20 Energy Regulatory Commission rules on the matter.=20 Damrell denied the ISO's request for preliminary injunctions against three= =20 other wholesalers, Dynegy, AES and Williams, who agreed to continue selling= =20 to the ISO pending the FERC ruling.=20 The ISO went to court in February after a federal emergency order requiring= =20 the power sales expired. The judge then issued a temporary restraining orde= r,=20 requiring the sales, but dropped it after the suppliers agreed to continue= =20 sales to California, pending his Wednesday ruling.=20 The ISO said it would lose about 3,600 megawatts if the suppliers pulled ou= t,=20 enough power for about 2.7 million households. One megawatt is enough for= =20 roughly 750 homes.=20 Grid officials said Reliant's share alone is about 3,000 megawatts. Reliant= =20 said the amount at issue actually is less than a fourth of that, because mo= st=20 of the power is committed under long-term contracts.=20 Reliant, which provides about 9 percent of the state's power, worries it=20 won't get paid due to the financial troubles of PG&E and Edison.=20 PG&E and Edison say that together they have lost about $13 billion since Ju= ne=20 due to soaring wholesale electricity costs that California's 1996=20 deregulation law bars them from passing onto customers.=20 At the same time, the state has faced a tight electricity supply, due in pa= rt=20 to California power plant shutdowns for maintenance and to a tight=20 hydroelectric supply in the Pacific Northwest.=20 Managers of the state power grid imposed rolling blackouts across the state= =20 Monday and Tuesday as supply fell short of demand. Wednesday, cooling=20 temperatures and the completion of repairs at several power plants allowed= =20 the state to avoid blackouts.=20 State Controller Kathleen Connell said Wednesday that the energy crunch als= o=20 imperils California's financial health.=20 Connell said the state's power-buying on behalf of Edison and PG&E is is=20 gutting its budget surplus. Since the state started making emergency power= =20 buys in January, the surplus has fallen from $8.5 billion to about $3.2=20 billion, she said.=20 Connell ordered an audit of the state's power-buying, saying Davis is=20 withholding key financial information from her office and the Legislature.= =20 She is refusing a request by Davis and the Legislature to transfer $5.6=20 billion into a ""rainy day fund"" she said was set up to impress Wall Street = as=20 the state prepares to issue $10 billion in revenue bonds to cover its=20 power-buying.=20 Transferring the money would leave the state general fund $2.4 billion in= =20 debt, Connell said.=20 Sandy Harrison, spokesman for the state Department of Finance, and Keely=20 Bosler of the Legislative Analyst's Office, said such transfers are routine= =20 and required by law.=20 They put the state's budget surplus at $5.6 billion.=20 ""The law says she has to do it. The law does not give her the power to dema= nd=20 that kind of audit information,"" Harrison said.=20 He said the state's budget isn't in danger because it will be repaid with t= he=20 $10 billion in long-term debt.=20 Wells Fargo & Co. chief economist Sung Won Sohn said he sees little progres= s=20 in efforts to fix the state's power problems and end state electricity=20 purchases.=20 ""If we're going to pour money into a bottomless pit, I would worry about th= e=20 state's finances,"" he said. ""At some point we're going to run out of money.= ""=20 The controller's criticism of fellow Democrat Davis won support from Assemb= ly=20 Republicans and Secretary of State Bill Jones, a Republican considering=20 challenging Davis next year.=20 Jones said he wants to announce his own plan to solve the state's energy=20 woes, but can't unless Davis releases more financial details.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio dismissed the criticism.=20 ""Political grandstanding doesn't generate one more kilowatt of energy for= =20 California in this time of emergency,"" he said.=20 Maviglio said the administration has released the financial information it= =20 can without jeopardizing negotiations for long-term power contracts with=20 wholesalers.=20 --- Controller: State's power spending imperils its financial health=20 By Don Thompson ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 21, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) California's power-buying on behalf of two strapped utiliti= es is=20 gutting its budget surplus and putting the state at financial risk, the sta= te=20 controller said Wednesday.=20 The surplus dropped from $8.5 billion in January, when the state began buyi= ng=20 electricity for Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern California Edison= ,=20 to $3.2 billion now, Kathleen Connell estimates.=20 Connell ordered an audit of the state's power-buying, saying Gov. Gray Davi= s=20 is withholding key financial information from her office and the Legislatur= e.=20 Wednesday marked the first time in three days the state avoided rolling=20 blackouts. Power grid officials credited cooling temperatures and the=20 completion of repairs at several power plants.=20 Connell said the energy crunch now imperils the state's budget as well as i= ts=20 electric grid.=20 California has been spending about $45 million a day =01) $4.2 billion so f= ar =01)=20 to buy power for Edison and PG&E, both denied credit by electricity=20 wholesalers.=20 The two utilities, California's largest, say they are nearly $14 billion in= =20 debt due to soaring wholesale power costs the state's deregulation law bloc= ks=20 them from recovering from customers.=20 Meanwhile, the state has faced high natural gas costs and a tight power=20 supply driven in part by power plant repairs in California and scarce=20 hydroelectric power in the Pacific Northwest.=20 Standard & Poor's has put the state on a credit watch due to its power=20 purchases and chastised Davis, the Legislature and state regulators for not= =20 taking more aggressive steps to assure the utilities can pay their bills.= =20 On Wednesday, Connell said she is refusing a request by Davis and the=20 Legislature to transfer $5.6 billion into a ""rainy day fund"" she said was s= et=20 up to impress Wall Street as the state prepares to issue $10 billion in=20 revenue bonds to cover its power-buying.=20 Transferring the money would leave the state general fund $2.4 billion in= =20 debt, Connell said.=20 Sandy Harrison, spokesman for the state Department of Finance, and Keely=20 Bosler of the Legislative Analyst's Office, said such transfers are routine= =20 and required by law.=20 They put the state's budget surplus at $5.6 billion.=20 ""The law says she has to do it. The law does not give her the power to dema= nd=20 that kind of audit information,"" Harrison said.=20 He said the state's budget isn't in danger because it will be repaid with t= he=20 $10 billion in long-term debt.=20 Connell said the scope of the proposed transfer is unprecedented and amount= s=20 to a ""shell game"" that disguises the power purchases' impact on the state= =20 budget.=20 Wells Fargo & Co. chief economist Sung Won Sohn said he sees little progres= s=20 in efforts to fix the state's power problems and end state electricity=20 purchases.=20 ""If we're going to pour money into a bottomless pit, I would worry about th= e=20 state's finances,"" he said. ""At some point we're going to run out of money.= ""=20 The controller's criticism of fellow Democrat Davis won support from Assemb= ly=20 Republicans and Secretary of State Bill Jones, a Republican considering=20 challenging Davis next year.=20 Jones said he wants to announce his own plan to solve the state's energy=20 woes, but can't unless Davis releases more financial details. He said his= =20 plan may involve giving the utilities low-interest loans with their=20 transmission lines held as collateral.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio dismissed the criticism.=20 ""Political grandstanding doesn't generate one more kilowatt of energy for= =20 California in this time of emergency,"" he said.=20 Maviglio said the administration has released the financial information it= =20 can without jeopardizing negotiations for long-term power contracts with=20 wholesalers.=20 --- Governor says utilities must pay in advance for some power=20 By Jennifer Coleman ASSOCIATED PRESS=20 March 21, 2001=20 SACRAMENTO =01) The state's two largest utilities will be ordered to pay=20 environmentally friendly power generators in advance, a move Gov. Gray Davi= s=20 hopes will bring a quick end to the power blackouts that darkened Californi= a=20 this week.=20 The statewide blackouts that stretched from San Diego to Oregon on Monday a= nd=20 Tuesday were caused in part by the failure of Southern California Edison an= d=20 Pacific Gas and Electric Co. to pay millions of dollars they owe ""qualifyin= g=20 facilities"" or QFs, Davis said.=20 Such suppliers use cogeneration =01) steam from manufacturing plus natural = gas =01)=20 or solar, wind and other renewable energy to generate electricity. This wee= k=20 California lost about half the power those generators normally provide.=20 Controller: State's power spending imperils its financial health=20 ?=20 Several of them said they hadn't been paid by Edison and PG&E in weeks and= =20 can't afford to keep operating their plants.=20 Davis accused the utilities of taking in money from customers while failing= =20 to pay the QFs. The state has been spending about $45 million a day since= =20 January to buy power for customers of Edison and PG&E, which are so=20 credit-poor that suppliers refuse to sell to them.=20 ""It's wrong and irresponsible of the utilities to pocket this money and not= =20 pay the generators,"" the governor said at a Capitol news conference Tuesday= =20 evening. ""They've acted irresponsibly and immorally and it has to stop.""=20 PG&E called the governor's statements ""inappropriate and unjustified,"" addi= ng=20 that it was negotiating a payment plan with the QFs. Edison said it is inte= nt=20 on paying creditors and working with the California Public Utilities=20 Commission to pay QFs for future power sales.=20 Controller Kathleen Connell warned Wednesday that the state's $2=20 billion-a-month power purchases are jeopardizing California's budget.=20 The state's budget surplus dropped from $8.5 billion in January, when the= =20 power purchases began, to $3.2 billion now, Connell estimates. She blamed= =20 Davis for withholding key financial information, and ordered an audit of th= e=20 state's power spending starting next week.=20 She blocked a request by the Legislature and Davis administration to transf= er=20 $5.6 billion from the state's general fund into a special ""rainy day"" fund,= =20 saying that would have left the general fund $2.4 billion in debt.=20 The Legislative Analyst's Office said such transfers are routine; Connell= =20 agreed, but said the size of the transfer is unprecedented.=20 ""We started this year with a generous budget surplus,"" Connell said. ""The= =20 energy crisis has taken much of that away and this transfer on top of the= =20 electricity purchases would put the fund at risk.""=20 Meanwhile, keepers of the state's power grid were optimistic California wou= ld=20 get through Wednesday without another day of rolling blackouts. Two plants= =20 down for repairs returned to service.=20 Several power plants that were taken down for repairs are also expected com= e=20 online by the end of the week, reducing the likelihood of blackouts, said J= im=20 Detmers, ISO vice president.=20 Power may flow to homes and businesses, but it could soon cost consumers=20 more, said Assemblyman Fred Keeley, one of the Legislature's leaders on=20 energy issues.=20 ""I think it's intellectually appropriate and honest to tell people as soon = as=20 it's apparent"" that a rate increase is warranted, the Boulder Creek Democra= t=20 said Tuesday, indicating that time had come.=20 He estimated that the state Public Utilities Commission may soon have to=20 raise rates by about 15 percent to cover the state's costs and its utilitie= s'=20 bills.=20 ""My sense is that people will appreciate having some certainty and being ab= le=20 to plan for it,"" he said. ""They don't have to like it but I think they'll= =20 appreciate it.""=20 Davis said he is confident the utilities and the state can pay their bills= =20 without further rate increases for Edison and PG&E customers.=20 In the meantime, the Independent System Operator, keeper of the grid, is=20 counting on continued conservation by residents and businesses to avoid mor= e=20 blackouts. Conservation accounted for about 300 megawatts in savings during= =20 Tuesday's peak usage, enough to power 300,000 homes.=20 Roughly a half-million homes and businesses were affected by Tuesday's=20 blackouts, which snarled traffic and plunged schools and businesses into=20 darkness across the state.=20 The outages began at 9:30 a.m. and continued in 90-minute waves until about= 2=20 p.m., when the ISO lifted its blackout order. They were blamed for at least= =20 one serious traffic accident.=20 Two cars collided at an intersection in the Los Angeles suburb of South El= =20 Monte where the traffic lights were out. Two people were seriously hurt, sa= id=20 California Highway Patrol Officer Nick Vite.=20 In San Francisco's Chinatown, souvenir shops normally bustling with visitor= s=20 were forced to shut down. Nearby, irritated customers waited for a bank to= =20 reopen.=20 The blackouts, like Monday's, were caused by a combination of problems,=20 including unseasonably warm weather, reduced electricity imports from the= =20 Pacific Northwest and numerous power plants being shut down for repairs.=20 Adding to those troubles, the state lost about 3,100 megawatts from the QF= =20 plants.=20 Senate Energy Committee Chairwoman Debra Bowen, D-Marina del Rey, estimated= =20 Tuesday that Edison has amassed more than $1 billion and PG&E more than $2= =20 billion that they have not paid to generators.=20 Davis said the PUC planned to issue an order next week directing the=20 utilities to pre-pay their future QF bills.=20 PG&E said its prepayments hinge on an upcoming PUC decision on whether the= =20 utility's rates are sufficient to pay its bills and cover the state's power= =20 purchases on its behalf, which amount to $4.2 billion since early January.= =20 Edison and PG&E say they have lost more than $13 billion since last June to= =20 climbing wholesale electricity prices, which the state's 1996 deregulation= =20 law prevents them from passing on to ratepayers.=20 --- Energy Overcharge of $5.5 Billion Is Alleged=20 Power: Money should be refunded to taxpayers and utilities, the state grid= =20 operator says, citing evidence of market manipulation. Suppliers deny the= =20 accusation.=20 By TIM REITERMAN and NANCY RIVERA BROOKS, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????Wholesale electricity suppliers overcharged California by about $5.5= =20 billion between May and last month, and that money should be refunded to th= e=20 state's taxpayers and financially strapped utilities, the state power grid= =20 operator said Wednesday. ?????Generators engaged in market manipulation and consistent patterns of= =20 bidding far above costs in the deregulated energy market, the California=20 Independent System Operator found in a study of pricing data. The findings= =20 support the widespread belief that these suppliers reaped massive additiona= l=20 revenue by manipulating the market. ?????Spokesmen for the companies denied the accusation. ?????The study, prepared for a filing with federal regulators today, is=20 central to Cal-ISO's efforts to seek reimbursement for what it considers=20 excessive charges by electricity suppliers during the state's energy crisis= . ?????""This might be the first time we told them the total impact and=20 magnitude [of the overcharging],"" said Anjali Sheffrin, Cal-ISO's director = of=20 market analysis. ""We think the entire amount deserves consideration for=20 refunds."" ?????Using confidential bidding data on tens of thousands of electricity=20 sales, Cal-ISO found that five companies that together supply about 30% of= =20 the power delivered to customers of the state's investor-owned utilities=20 engaged in two types of behavior that tended to push up prices: ?????* They effectively withheld supplies by bidding at excessive prices,= =20 even though they could have made some money selling more electricity. ?????* Less frequently, they had power generation available but did not bid= =20 at all. ?????The study concluded that energy suppliers commonly offered their=20 electricity at twice their cost. For example, Sheffrin said, the average=20 markup in August was 100% during peak hours. ?????A spokeswoman at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which=20 oversees wholesale electricity pricing across the country, declined to=20 comment Wednesday, saying, ""This is part of an ongoing proceeding."" ?????FERC member William L. Massey, who has considered previous commission= =20 actions on refunds to be inadequate, said it would be improper for him to= =20 comment on a report that has not yet been filed. But when told of the=20 $5.5-billion total, Massey said: ""That doesn't shock me in any way."" ?????""Prices over the past 10 months in California have greatly exceeded th= e=20 federal standards of just and reasonable prices, and I think they have=20 exceeded the standards by possibly billions of dollars,"" he said. ?????Cal-ISO, which oversees grid operations and an emergency energy market= ,=20 previously detailed $550 million in alleged overcharges for December and=20 January and asked FERC for refunds. But the commission has proposed refunds= =20 of only a tiny fraction of that amount. ?????The study covered five major in-state power suppliers--Reliant Energy,= =20 Dynegy, Williams/AES, Duke Energy and Mirant, formerly Southern Energy--plu= s=20 16 power importers, all of which deliver power to customers of Pacific Gas = &=20 Electric Co., Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric Co. ?????""All [21] overcharged, but some excessively and some by moderate=20 amounts,"" Sheffrin said. ?????Cal-ISO's public filing will quantify the alleged overcharging by each= =20 company, but the companies will be identified only by a number. The code wi= ll=20 be provided to FERC, Sheffrin said, and Cal-ISO lawyers will determine how= =20 much information about the companies will be made public. ?????State, U.S. Investigations ?????California electricity markets and the companies that buy and sell pow= er=20 in the state have been the subject of several investigations by state and= =20 federal authorities since wholesale electricity prices first skyrocketed in= =20 May. ?????Electricity suppliers have repeatedly denied manipulating the Californ= ia=20 market in any way, whether through above-cost bidding in spot markets or=20 through physical withholding of electricity to drive up prices. ?????Reliant Energy is cooperating with FERC's requests for more data and i= s=20 confident the commission will conclude that prices charged by Reliant were= =20 justified, said Joe Bob Perkins, president of the Houston-based company. ?????Perkins also bitterly disputed charges that Reliant has shut down unit= s=20 so that it can earn bigger profits on the power sold by the remaining plant= s.=20 These charges have been leveled against all of the power-plant owners in th= e=20 state. ?????Reliant Vice President John Stout said Cal-ISO's calculations typicall= y=20 don't include such fixed costs as salaries, taxes and the interest on bonds= =20 they sold to finance their power plants, which they acquired under terms of= =20 the state's landmark 1996 deregulation law. ?????In addition, he said, many high-priced power days have resulted from= =20 buyers bidding against each other for scarce supplies rather than sellers= =20 charging excessive amounts--like a house price being driven far above the= =20 listing price in a hot real estate market. ?????Williams Energy Services, a trading company that markets most of the= =20 power produced by plants owned by AES, also says it will be exonerated by= =20 FERC once the commission examines documentation being submitted, said Paula= =20 Hill-Collins, spokeswoman for the Tulsa, Okla., company. ?????""FERC has the obligation to investigate when these accusations are=20 made,"" Hill-Collins said. ""This is just a process of justification, not=20 necessarily proof of guilt."" ?????Williams/AES was recently ordered by FERC to prove that it did not tak= e=20 generating units out of service last year to drive up electricity prices, o= r=20 refund $10.8 million to California utilities. ?????During the period studied, suppliers sold electricity in the Californi= a=20 Power Exchange to Southern California Edison, PG&E and San Diego Gas &=20 Electric Co. and in a backup market for last-minute electricity operated by= =20 Cal-ISO. But sky-high prices plunged Edison and PG&E deeply into debt, and= =20 most suppliers stopped selling to them in January, forcing the state=20 Department of Water Resources to step in as the primary electricity buyer f= or=20 the three big utilities' 27 million customers. ?????The Cal-ISO study, first summarized at an energy conference last week = at=20 UC Berkeley but not otherwise publicized, concluded that the companies=20 exercised so-called market power to pump up electricity prices. ?????Severin Borenstein, director of the Energy Institute at Berkeley, said= =20 Cal-ISO's study is consistent with his research examining pricing practices= =20 in 2000. ?????""We found several billion dollars . . . in departures from competitive= =20 pricing,"" he said. ""When the market was tight this summer, they were able t= o=20 push up prices, and they did."" ?????The early warning signs of electricity price spikes, the study found,= =20 appeared in May after two years of relatively stable prices of $30 to $40 p= er=20 megawatt-hour under deregulation. Prices went up during the summer, dipped = in=20 September and October with lower demand, then took off in November and=20 December as weather turned cold and the price of natural gas, which is used= =20 to generate much of the state's electricity, reached record levels. ?????""There were plant outages, and demand and supply became close,"" Sheffr= in=20 said. ""Whatever price they bid had to be taken, and market power asserted= =20 itself."" ?????Cal-ISO found that $3 billion of the alleged overcharges occurred=20 between May and November. ?????On Friday, federal regulators ordered six wholesale power suppliers to= =20 refund $55 million to California if they cannot justify prices charged in= =20 February. The refund was limited to power sold that month in excess of $430= =20 per megawatt-hour during Stage 3 power alerts, when supplies are so tight= =20 that rolling blackouts are threatened. (One megawatt-hour is enough=20 electricity to supply 750 typical homes for an hour.) ?????The previous week, FERC ordered 13 suppliers to justify or refund $69= =20 million for power sold in January at prices above $273 per megawatt-hour. ?????Massey opposed the potential refunds as too low because they were=20 limited to hours in which a Stage 3 power emergency was in place and becaus= e=20 the benchmark price set for each month was too high--combining to exempt mo= re=20 than 70,000 transactions from scrutiny. ?????""We're still looking for our lost wallet under the lamppost, which is= =20 Stage 3 alerts,"" said Massey, one of three commissioners on the five-member= =20 board (two seats are vacant). ?????Generators ""have been given the free and clear,"" he said. ?????""These tinkling little refunds they have come out with recently are=20 almost a joke,"" said Cal-ISO board member Mike Florio, senior attorney at t= he=20 Utility Reform Network. ?????Resisting Price Caps ?????Cal-ISO contends that the last 10 months have proved that generators c= an=20 no longer be allowed to receive electricity prices that are dictated by wha= t=20 the market will bear. ?????""FERC granted market-based rate authority on each of these suppliers'= =20 own showing that they could not manipulate prices, yet their actions have= =20 shown the contrary,"" Sheffrin said. ""We feel FERC needs to look at the=20 premise of allowing these generators to continue selling at market-based=20 rates."" ?????The commission is responsible for ensuring just and reasonable=20 electricity rates. Although it has called California's power market=20 dysfunctional and vulnerable to manipulation, the agency has resisted setti= ng=20 firm price caps sought by California's congressional delegation. ?????Chairman Curt L. Hebert Jr. strongly opposes caps, while Massey wants = to=20 use caps across the West as a ""temporary timeout."" ?????Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, in a New York news conference=20 Wednesday, reiterated his opposition to electricity price caps as a way to= =20 cope with California's energy crisis. ?????""If we put price caps in place, there will be more blackouts, and=20 they'll be worse,"" Abraham said. ?????Cal-ISO is filing its market study as part of its comments on FERC sta= ff=20 recommendations on ways to thwart market manipulation. FERC's proposal=20 includes strict coordination of power plant outages by Cal-ISO with reporti= ng=20 of suspicious closures to FERC, and generator-by-generator bid caps tied to= =20 costs. ---=20 ?????Reiterman reported from San Francisco, Rivera Brooks from Los Angeles.= =20 Times staff writer Thomas S. Mulligan in New York contributed to this story= . --- --- Power Strain Eases but Concerns Mount=20 Energy: Officials say summer prices will be high, and a state report shows= =20 that contracts with generators are far short of goals.=20 By DAN MORAIN and JENIFER WARREN, Times Staff Writers=20 ?????SACRAMENTO--California's fragile electricity system stabilized=20 Wednesday, but a Davis administration report suggested troubles ahead becau= se=20 the state could be forced to buy most of its power for the coming summer on= =20 the costly and volatile spot market. ?????After two days of statewide blackouts, power plants that had been shut= =20 down were cranked up. Unseasonable heat tapered off. The operators of the= =20 statewide power grid relaxed their state of emergency. ?????But plenty of ominous signs remained. Many small producers remained sh= ut=20 down, skeptical about Gov. Gray Davis' plan for utilities to pay them. ?????State Controller Kathleen Connell issued a sharp warning about the hig= h=20 cost of the state's foray into the power business and announced that she wi= ll=20 block an administration request that she transfer $5.6 billion into an=20 account that could be tapped to pay for state purchases of electricity. ?????And a report from the administration summarizing contracts between Dav= is=20 and independent power generators showed that the state has signed contracts= =20 for only 2,247 megawatts of electricity, significantly less than the 6,000 = to=20 7,000 megawatts previously claimed. ?????While there are agreements in principle for the full amount, the repor= t=20 notes that generators can back out of the contracts for a variety of reason= s,=20 including the state's failure to sell bonds to finance power purchased by= =20 July 1. The Legislature has approved plans to sell $10 billion in bonds, bu= t=20 none have yet been issued. ?????""We are exposed enormously this summer,"" Senate Energy Committee=20 chairwoman Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) said after looking at the report.= =20 ""We owe the people the truth about how difficult this summer is going to be= .=20 We don't have a power fairy."" ?????Perhaps most significant, the report suggests that the contracts fall= =20 significantly short of Davis' stated goal of buying no more than 5% of the= =20 state's summer needs on the spot electricity market, where prices can be ma= ny=20 times those of long-term contracts. ?????After reading the report, Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economist= =20 who studies the California electricity market, said the numbers suggested= =20 that the state's long-term contracts will cover less than half of what the= =20 state will need this summer. ?????""We're definitely short this summer, next summer and the summer of=20 2003,"" he said. ?????California was forced to start buying electricity in December--at a co= st=20 of $50 million a day--because producers refused to sell to Southern=20 California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric. The two utilities amassed=20 billions of dollars in debt when prices for wholesale power soared on the= =20 spot market. ?????Vikram Budhraja, a consultant retained by Davis to negotiate deals wit= h=20 generators, said the report represents a ""work in progress."" He said the=20 state may yet sign new contracts. ?????However, Wolak said the contract figures confirm what he and others ha= ve=20 been dreading: that summer is going to be rife with rolling blackouts unles= s=20 serious steps to cut demand are taken immediately. ?????Wolak and other experts say large industrial customers must be switche= d=20 to real-time meters and pricing to persuade them to use the bulk of their= =20 energy at times of low demand. ?????The head of the Energy Foundation, a San Francisco-based nonprofit tha= t=20 promotes sustainable sources of power, made the same proposal to Davis on= =20 Wednesday. ?????""The government need not ask customers to swelter in the dark this=20 summer,"" foundation President Hal Harvey argued in a letter. ?????He also proposed a crash campaign to boost sales of efficient applianc= es=20 and lightbulbs. He said the state needs to take over the utilities' contrac= ts=20 with alternative energy providers to ensure they stay in business, and sign= =20 new contracts for 1,500 megawatts of new wind power--the cheapest, fastest= =20 and cleanest source of new supply. ?????Davis had proposed a formula Tuesday to force private utilities to pay= =20 the alternative producers, some of which have not been paid since November.= =20 But some of them warned Wednesday that Davis' plan offers them little=20 incentive to turn on their generators. ?????Alternative energy producers supply more than a quarter of the=20 electricity consumed in California. ?????Many producers generate electricity from wind, sun and geothermal=20 sources. But most of them generate power using natural gas--and the cost of= =20 natural gas has been soaring. Several natural gas users said Davis' plan,= =20 which caps rates, won't cover their fuel costs. ?????Davis assumes that the price of natural gas will fall. But small=20 generators say they don't have sufficient purchasing power or sophisticatio= n=20 to gamble on future prices. ?????The Public Utilities Commission is expected to approve Davis' proposal= =20 next week. It offers producers two choices: 7.9 cents a kilowatt-hour if th= ey=20 agree to supply power for five years, or 6.9 cents a kilowatt-hour over 10= =20 years. ?????""The price of natural gas is higher than that,"" said Marty Quinn,=20 executive vice president and chief operating officer of Ridgewood Power LLC= ,=20 which owns three natural gas-fired co-generation plants. ""If we operate,=20 we'll lose money."" ?????Ridgewood is not operating, having been cut off by gas suppliers. The= =20 company sued PG&E last month seeking overdue payments and release from its= =20 contracts with the utility. ?????A hearing is scheduled in El Centro today in another lawsuit filed by = a=20 small energy producer, an Imperial Valley geothermal producer that sued=20 Edison for refusing to let it break its contract and sell on the open marke= t.=20 CalEnergy says Edison owes it about $140 million for energy sold since=20 November. ?????A company spokesman, Jay Lawrence, said CalEnergy was going ahead with= =20 its suit despite Davis' proposal. ""We've had promises before,"" he said. ?????In other developments: ?????* A federal judge in Sacramento on Wednesday ordered Reliant Energy of= =20 Houston, a major producer, to continue selling power to California during= =20 emergencies, despite the company's argument that it may not be fully=20 reimbursed. The order will remain in effect for 60 days or until the U.S.= =20 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission decides a related case. ?????* Connell said the state budget surplus has shrunk to $3.2 billion=20 because the state has spent roughly $2.8 billion on electricity. She=20 criticized the administration for withholding basic information about state= =20 finances, and said she will begin an audit on Monday of the Department of= =20 Water Resources, which is responsible for purchasing power. ?????Davis' aides said Connell took her action because the Democratic=20 governor endorsed one of Connell's foes this week in the race for Los Angel= es=20 mayor, former Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa. A Connell aide scoffed= =20 at the notion. ?????* Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said she ""never has had a response""= =20 from President Bush after writing him last month for an appointment to=20 discuss the California energy crisis. ?????In a wide-ranging lunch talk with reporters in Washington, she deplore= d=20 the fact that ""huge, huge profits are being made"" in the California crisis,= =20 and said ""an appropriate federal role"" would be to guarantee a reliable=20 source of power until the state can get nine new generators online. ---=20 ?????Times staff writers Mitchell Landsberg in Los Angeles and Robert L.=20 Jackson in Washington contributed to this report. --- --- ------------------------ --- --- ------------------------ Net Complex A Dilemma For San Jose=20 SERVER FARM: Plant would tax grid=20 David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer Thursday, March 22, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /22/M N236772.DTL=20 San Jose, while trying to block construction of a new power plant, is set t= o=20 approve a vast computer complex that could overwhelm California's already= =20 strained power grid.=20 City officials gave preliminary approval last week to what would be the=20 world's largest ""server farm."" The sprawling facility to handle Internet=20 traffic would drain about 150 megawatts of power from the state electricity= =20 grid.=20 If granted final authorization on April 3, the $1.2 billion project would a= dd=20 the equivalent of about 150,000 homes to California's power system, which w= as=20 hit this week by rolling blackouts as demand for juice outstripped availabl= e=20 supply.=20 The server-farm issue highlights a vexing dilemma for the state.=20 On the one hand, Gov. Gray Davis is calling for widespread conservation to= =20 help California overcome its current troubles. On the other, no one wants t= o=20 curtail growth of the high-tech industry, which is an engine for economic= =20 vitality.=20 ""San Jose will make a lot of money from this project,"" said Craig Breon,=20 executive director of the Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society. ""But to not= =20 help the state out of its energy situation, there's a fair amount of=20 hypocrisy going on.""=20 The server farm would be owned by U.S. DataPort, a San Jose data-management= =20 firm. As planned, it would occupy 10 buildings on more than 170 acres in th= e=20 city's Alviso area.=20 Total projected energy use would be 180 megawatts. About 30 megawatts would= =20 be generated by a small on-site facility, and the rest would have to be=20 provided by Pacific Gas and Electric Co.=20 ""We're confident that the DataPort project will be approved because it's ve= ry=20 important to San Jose and to the local economy,"" said San Jose Mayor Ron=20 Gonzales.=20 But PG&E already is saying that its power cupboard is bare. The utility ""do= es=20 not have sufficient existing electric infrastructure"" to meet U.S. DataPort= 's=20 needs, it said in a recent letter to San Jose officials.=20 John Mogannam, U.S. DataPort's senior vice president of operations, counter= ed=20 that it could take as long as five years for the server farm to grow big=20 enough to require the full 150 megawatts from the state grid.=20 ""Hopefully, by then the whole energy crisis will pass by, and we won't have= a=20 problem,"" he said.=20 Mogannam stressed the positive aspects of the project, such as its ability = to=20 handle about 15 percent of global Internet traffic, the 700 jobs it would= =20 create, and the $70 million over 10 years it would generate for San Jose in= =20 property and utility taxes.=20 ""That's why the city likes it,"" he said.=20 Indeed, San Jose officials are so enamored with such developments that they= =20 have all but turned a deaf ear to warnings that the server farm will=20 exacerbate California's already dire power shortage.=20 Andrew Crabtree, the city's senior planner, said the planning commission ha= d=20 barely touched the question of energy supply when it approved the server fa= rm=20 last week.=20 ""It wasn't incumbent on the commission to solve the state's energy-supply= =20 problems,"" he said.=20 Rather, San Jose city planners focused on the environmental ramifications o= f=20 the proposed facility, including air pollution from diesel generators and t= he=20 impact on nearby wildlife.=20 How it would affect dozens of burrowing owls in the area was a key topic of= =20 discussion.=20 ""We all recognized that there's a power shortage,"" Crabtree said. ""But we= =20 couldn't do anything about that with this project.""=20 Except to make things tougher, of course.=20 Server farms run 24 hours a day, seven days a week. They are an aspect of t= he=20 high-tech boom that was never foreseen by energy experts, and which are now= a=20 major contributor to California's surging electricity demand.=20 A server farm essentially is a large building filled with computers. Each= =20 computer handles the Web site or Internet traffic for hundreds of corporate= =20 clients that do not have the technical resources to look after such things= =20 in- house.=20 Most server farms consume between 10 and 60 megawatts of power. At 180=20 megawatts, the U.S. DataPort facility is billed as the most extensive data= =20 center on the planet.=20 ""There won't be another this size anywhere in the world,"" said Mogannam, th= e=20 company's senior vice president. ""This will be the biggest.""=20 With such a vast scale, however, comes additional concerns. For example, al= l=20 that hardware will generate huge amounts of heat, requiring powerful air=20 conditioners running around the clock to keep things cool.=20 Patrick Dorinson, a spokesman for the Independent System Operator, which=20 oversees California's electricity network, said server farms had ""a big=20 impact"" on the state's tight energy supply.=20 ""We have an economy that's increasingly based on delivery of information,"" = he=20 observed. ""We certainly need to make sure we're building adequate generatio= n=20 and transmission to get it there.""=20 As it stands, no major power plants have been built in California for the= =20 past 12 years, while dozens of server farms have sprung up throughout the= =20 state.=20 The Yankee Group, a Boston consulting firm, estimates that the amount of=20 space taken up by server farms nationwide rose to 9 million square feet fro= m=20 1999 to 2000.=20 By 2003, it expects that figure to increase to 25 million square feet, or= =20 enough room for more than a hundred 10-story office buildings.=20 San Francisco may be the exception. Supervisor Sophie Maxwell proposed=20 interim zoning controls last week that would require server farms to receiv= e=20 special permission from City Hall to operate.=20 San Jose, for its part, has no such reservations. It does, however, draw th= e=20 line at big, fat power plants in the backyard of the city's leading corpora= te=20 citizen.=20 Gonzales is spearheading opposition to a proposed 600-megawatt generating= =20 facility in Coyote Valley because of its proximity to a residential area at= =20 the site of a planned Cisco Systems office complex.=20 ""There's plenty of opportunities to generate power in the city,"" he said.= =20 ""This project is just in the wrong site.""=20 The matter is now in the hands of the California Energy Commission, which i= s=20 expected to issue a ruling by May.=20 Cisco, critics say, twisted the mayor's arm to fight the plant because it d= id=20 not want a generating facility in its neighborhood. The area will be home t= o=20 thousands of well-heeled tech workers.=20 ""It's politics,"" said Breon at the Audubon Society. ""City officials are=20 making political decisions rather than good planning decisions.""=20 Ted Smith, executive director of the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, a=20 grassroots organization, is calling for a moratorium on construction of all= =20 new server farms in the South Bay until sufficient power can be found to ke= ep=20 them running.=20 ""Until they figure out how to build these things without draining the=20 electricity grid even dryer it is, they shouldn't build them,"" he said.=20 ""The Internet industry is creating unintended consequences that will really= =20 screw up our future,"" Smith added. ""They are so busy focusing on next=20 quarter's profits that they don't stop and think about the consequences."" .= =20 .=20 SOME FAST FACTS ABOUT 'SERVER FARMS' .=20 -- What are they? ""Server farms"" are facilities dedicated exclusively to=20 housing powerful computers for Internet use.=20 -- Who uses them? Companies and individuals pay server farms to maintain=20 their Web sites, handle Net traffic and store vast amounts of data --=20 functions that otherwise would require extensive hardware and technical=20 support.=20 -- Why do they use them? As Internet use explodes, server farms play an=20 increasingly vital role in managing data and keeping information moving.=20 -- What's the problem? Server farms drain considerable amounts of electrici= ty=20 to keep running.=20 E-mail David Lazarus at dlazarus@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 --- Contracts Won't Meet Summer Demands=20 DETAILS: 2004 before full impact felt=20 Lynda Gledhill, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau Thursday, March 22, 2001=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle=20 URL:=20 /22/M N230640.DTL=20 Sacramento -- Long-term power contracts negotiated by the state won't cover= =20 California's entire demand for electricity until 2004, according to newly= =20 released details about the agreements.=20 The information suggests that California might have to scrounge for=20 electricity on the high-priced spot market for a couple more years even as = it=20 continues to push conservation efforts and construction of more generating= =20 plants.=20 Details of the agreements released by Gov. Gray Davis' administration show= =20 that the contracts will provide for just over a third of the state's demand= =20 for power this year. Energy secured by the contracts will grow to meet the= =20 expected demand in three years.=20 Short-term purchases of power have at least temporarily depleted the state'= s=20 budget surplus and have raised the possibility of sharp rate increases=20 sometime in the future for electricity customers.=20 Davis administration officials are banking on the hope that conservation=20 efforts and increased generating capacity will cover the shortfall along wi= th=20 purchases of electricity on the spot market.=20 ""We're facing an extreme challenge still this summer,"" said Severin=20 Borenstein, head of the University of California at Berkeley Energy=20 Institute. ""Signing contracts doesn't create more electricity.""=20 The information released did not include the names of companies that the=20 state has signed contracts with or the purchase prices.=20 The sketchy details did not satisfy frustrated lawmakers, who said many=20 questions remain, especially how much the state will end up paying under th= e=20 terms of the contracts.=20 ""The fundamental question is how much is it costing the state of California= =20 to keep the lights on,"" said Assemblyman Tony Strickland, R-Thousand Oaks.= =20 ""What we really need is total disclosure.""=20 The state started buying power in January, after generators began refusing = to=20 provide electricity to the state's investor-owned utilities. Pacific Gas an= d=20 Electric Co. and Southern California Edison say they have more than $13=20 billion in past debt.=20 The state has been spending $49 million a day on power purchases since Jan.= =20 17, according to documents obtained by The Chronicle last week.=20 Those documents said the average price of the contracts across 10 years is= =20 $69 per megawatt hour, including summer peak. The five-year average price i= s=20 $79 per megawatt hour.=20 According to one chart provided by the governor's office yesterday, the=20 long-term contracts will fall about 35 million megawatt hours short in 2002= .=20 Based on the average price per megawatt hour the state has been paying sinc= e=20 January, that could end up costing between $6.6 billion and $13 billion.=20 The law creating the state purchasing authority allowed purchases up to $10= =20 billion and extends until 2003.=20 The governor's office said 21 contracts have been signed and another 23=20 agreements that have been reached but not yet signed.=20 Several generators have said that they will not sign contracts with the sta= te=20 until the back debt by the utilities has been taken care of.=20 ""We have some real potential problems,"" said Senate President Pro Tem John= =20 Burton, D-San Francisco.=20 Strickland and several media outlets, including The Chronicle, have filed= =20 public information requests to get more information about the prices of the= =20 contracts from the administration.=20 Releasing the information would jeopardize the negotiations for future=20 contracts, said Steve Maviglio, Davis' spokesman.=20 Lawmakers, also frustrated by the lack of information given out by the Davi= s=20 administration, were not given notice that the information was coming, and= =20 many said it was lost in their mail pile.=20 The cover letter was on Los Angeles Department of Water and Power letterhea= d,=20 not that of the administration. The letter was written by S. David Freeman,= =20 head of the Los Angeles system who was on leave for the month of February t= o=20 help the state negotiate the contracts.=20 Assemblyman George Runner, R-Lancaster, said the ""ambiguity of the=20 information raises more questions than it answers.""=20 ""It's like watching a parade through a peephole,"" he said. ""He's showing us= =20 another float, but I don't know what the parade looks like.""=20 Blaming the state's purchases of electricity, Controller Kathleen Connell= =20 said yesterday that the state's cash on hand had fallen from $8.5 billion i= n=20 January to $3.2 billion. Connell ordered an audit of the state's power=20 buying.=20 Connell said she would block a transfer sought by the Davis administration = of=20 $5.6 billion from the general fund to the state's emergency reserve account= ,=20 claiming it would lead to a ''serious cash flow crisis.""=20 The transfer, however, is not related to the energy crisis. The sum=20 represents a routine rollover of unspent money from the previous fiscal yea= r.=20 State law requires that money to be sent to a special reserve account for= =20 emergencies.=20 Davis officials acknowledged that $3.7 billion in energy purchases have had= =20 an impact on state coffers, but they say the state will be repaid once bond= s=20 are issued in the coming weeks. They also said the state typically has its= =20 lowest cash reserves at this time of year. That changes in mid-April when a= =20 flood of income tax revenue pours in.=20 ""The transfer has nothing to do with energy purchases,"" said Sandy Harrison= ,=20 a spokesman for the Department of Finance.=20 ""It's not helpful to ratepayers, taxpayers and people who want their lights= =20 to stay on to have the issue muddied with this sort of inaccurate innuendo,= ""=20 Harrison said.=20 In other developments yesterday:=20 -- After two days of statewide rolling blackouts, power grid managers avoid= ed=20 outages. Demand was lower because of cooler temperatures around the state a= nd=20 supply increased as several power plants completed repairs.=20 -- A federal judge in Sacramento ordered a major power generator to continu= e=20 supplying power to California. Reliant Energy Services Inc. had insisted th= at=20 it should not be forced to sell to debt-heavy utilities unless the state=20 guaranteed the bills.=20 Chronicle staff writer Greg Lucas contributed to this story. / E-mail Lynda= =20 Gledhill at lgledhill@sfchronicle.com.=20 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1=20 --- --- ----------------- California overcharged $5.5 bln for wholesale power=20 SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- Electricity wholesalers overcharged California= =20 $5.5 billion over the past 10 months, according to a report by managers of= =20 the state's power grid.=20 The five companies, among other things, frequently offered electricity at= =20 prices double what it cost them to produce, concludes the California=20 Independent System Operator study, which was published Thursday in the Los= =20 Angeles Times.=20 ``All overcharged, but some excessively and some by moderate amounts,'' sai= d=20 Anjali Sheffrin, the ISO's director of market analysis.=20 The Times said the ISO planned to file the study with federal regulators=20 Thursday and are demanding that the money be paid back.=20 The companies denied the allegations, adding they expect the Federal Energy= =20 Regulatory Commission will determine their prices were justified.=20 The commission has recently stepped up its scrutiny of power companies'=20 behavior during California's power crisis, asking suppliers to justify $124= =20 million in sales during the first two months of the year or refund the mone= y.=20 Critics claim thousands of additional questionable sales are not being=20 challenged.=20 The ISO study alleges the wholesalers manipulated the market by bidding at= =20 excessive prices, effectively withholding supplies, or by not bidding at al= l=20 when they had generation capability available.=20 California has been spending about $45 million a day -- $4.2 billion since= =20 January -- to purchase power for Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Southern= =20 California Edison. Both utilities, the state's largest, have been cut off b= y=20 electricity wholesalers because their credit is almost worthless.=20 State Controller Kathleen Connell said Wednesday that the state's=20 power-buying is gutting its budget surplus. Since the state started making= =20 emergency power buys, the surplus has fallen from $8.5 billion to about $3.= 2=20 billion, she said.=20 A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction Wednesday ordering a major= =20 electricity wholesaler, Reliant Energy Services, to continue selling to=20 California despite its fear that it will not be paid.=20 U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said Californians were at risk of= =20 irreparable harm if Reliant stopped selling power to the ISO, which buys it= =20 at the last minute on behalf of utilities to bolster supplies and try to fe= nd=20 off rolling blackouts.=20 Such blackouts hit the state twice this week. On Wednesday, cooling=20 temperatures and the completion of repairs at several power plants allowed= =20 the state to avoid blackouts.=20 Standard & Poor's has put the state on a credit watch due to its power=20 purchases and chastised Gov. Gray Davis, the Legislature and state regulato= rs=20 for not taking more aggressive steps to make sure the utilities can pay the= ir=20 bills.=20 Edison and PG&E say they are nearly $14 billion in debt due to soaring=20 wholesale power costs. The state's deregulation law blocks them from=20 recovering the costs from customers.=20 Connell ordered an audit of the state's power-buying, saying Davis is=20 withholding key financial information from her office and the Legislature.= =20 She said she would refuse to transfer $5.6 billion into a ``rainy day fund'= '=20 she said was set up to impress Wall Street as the state prepares to issue $= 10=20 billion in revenue bonds to cover its power buys. Transferring the money=20 would leave the state general fund $2.4 billion in debt, Connell said.=20 She called the scope of the proposed transfer unprecedented and said it=20 amounted to a ``shell game'' that disguises the power purchases' effect on= =20 the state budget.=20 Sandy Harrison, spokesman for the state Department of Finance, and Keely=20 Bosler, of the Legislative Analyst's Office, said such transfers are routin= e=20 and required by law. They put the state's budget surplus at $5.6 billion.= =20 ``The law says she has to do it. The law does not give her the power to=20 demand that kind of audit information,'' Harrison said.=20 Harrison said the state's budget isn't in danger because it will be repaid= =20 with the revenue bonds.=20 Connell's criticism of Davis, a fellow Democrat, won support from Assembly= =20 Republicans and Secretary of State Bill Jones, a Republican who may challen= ge=20 Davis next year.=20 Jones said he wants to announce his own plan to solve the state's energy=20 woes, but can't unless Davis releases more financial details.=20 Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio dismissed the criticism.=20 ``Political grandstanding doesn't generate one more kilowatt of energy for= =20 California in this time of emergency,'' he said.=20 Maviglio said the administration has released the financial information it= =20 can without jeopardizing negotiations for long-term power contracts with=20 wholesalers. --- --- ---------------------------- If the power goes off=20 Thursday, March 22, 2001=20 For most of us, rolling power blackouts are a nuisance. For some people, it= =20 could mean life or death.=20 ""In Laguna Hills, cancer patient Ruben Marquez said the blackout interrupte= d=20 and prolonged his dialysis treatment. He was unharmed,"" the Register report= ed=20 on Monday's blackouts, which hit about 1.2 million Californians, including= =20 100,000 Orange County homes and businesses.=20 What can people do to prevent disaster?=20 ""They and their families should have a backup plan,"" Rebecca Long,=20 spokesperson for the Orange County Red Cross, told us.=20 ""The Red Cross recommends in general that you plan for this as you would fo= r=20 any disaster, making sure you have battery-operated radios and flashlights.= =20 We do not recommend candles for an emergency,"" because of the fire hazard.= =20 She recommended a Web site: www.prepare.org People with special health needs, such as electric-powered respirators and= =20 oxygen machines, also should register with the power company. ""There's a whole classification"" for such persons with health needs, Southe= rn=20 California Edison spokesperson Clara Potes-Fellow told us. ""The list is for us to alert them that the power could be discontinued. The= y=20 arrange to have power through other means, batteries or generators. We=20 recommend that they have a battery backup of eight hours. Therefore, if the= =20 rotating outages are one hour, they will have plenty."" Even though the power company has such people's names, she said, ""we don't= =20 inform them in advance because we have just minutes from when the Independe= nt=20 System Operator,"" which directs where the electrons go, orders Edison to=20 implement a power outage on the grid Edison owns. ""By the time it took to= =20 call people, the outage would be over."" What's the problem at the ISO? ""We notify as best we can,"" Pat Dorinson, IS= O=20 director of communications, told us.=20 ""The object is to keep the lights on. Sometimes it's just a moment's notice= ""=20 before a blackout. ""It makes [giving more notice] pretty difficult. We're= =20 looking into ways to make the system better.""=20 In the meantime, citizens will have to keep taking precautions. We can't help noting that free market pricing, instead of politically-drive= n=20 prices, would much more likely make electricity available, albeit at higher= =20 prices.=20 We would expect, too, there would be hardship allowances, donations and=20 level-pay plans to accommodate various types of needs. --- Socialized electricity=20 Thursday, March 22, 2001=20 Government control of state power won't add one watt for consumers' use TOM MCCLINTOCK Sen. McClintock, R-Thousand Oaks, represents the 19th state Senate District= =20 in the state Legislature.=20 In a city where bad ideas never die, Sacramento is once again host to a=20 variety of plans for the government takeover of California's power system.= =20 The private sector, it is said, has done such a terrible job of providing= =20 electricity that government must now step in to save the day. Thus, the=20 Legislature is awash in proposals to spend billions of dollars of public=20 money to acquire existing power facilities. Fifteen billion dollars has=20 already been authorized for this purpose, and an additional $10 billion is= =20 pending in the Senate.=20 Meanwhile, Gov. Davis is losing about a $1.5 billion a month day-trading in= =20 the electricity market. The irony is that after the expenditure of as much = as=20 $25 billion for ""public power,'' not a single inch will have been added to= =20 the transmission lines, nor a single watt to the generating capacity of=20 California. The root of California's crisis is a catastrophic shortage of electricity. = In=20 a shortage, prices rise or blackouts occur. To reduce prices and avoid=20 blackouts, the only permanent solution is to increase the supply. Merely=20 changing the ownership of existing facilities leaves Californians with=20 exactly the same shortage, only billions of dollars the poorer for it.=20 Government takeover advocates argue that at least a government power=20 authority will protect consumers against price gouging and poor management.= =20 Unfortunately, government power authorities don't insulate against price=20 gouging. The biggest price gouger in this entire crisis has been the Los=20 Angeles Department of Water and Power, which was generating electricity for= =20 $51 per megawatt hour and selling it back to California ratepayers for as= =20 much as $1,400.=20 Nor does a government takeover assure better management. Just a few years= =20 ago, the LADWP was buried in $7 billion in debt. The Sacramento Municipal= =20 Utilities District was a managerial laughing stock, having squandered=20 hundreds of millions of dollars for a nuclear plant it barely used. ""Say what you will,'' the government takeover advocates reply, ""when push= =20 came to shove, the municipal utility districts of California are in great= =20 shape, while the private utilities are a basket case.'' But one needs to lo= ok=20 at the reason. Ever since the state reorganized the electricity market in= =20 1996, the municipal utility districts were allowed to trade in a free marke= t,=20 while the private utilities were forced to buy power exclusively in a=20 Soviet-style power exchange where the highest bid during an hour set all=20 prices. The municipal utilities were able to retain their generators. Government=20 forced the private utilities to sell theirs. The municipal utilities were= =20 able to enter into long-term contracts. Government prevented the private=20 utilities from doing the same thing. The municipal utilities were able to= =20 negotiate the lowest prices available for power. Government forced the=20 private utilities to pay the outlandish prices on the government's power=20 exchange. The municipal utilities were allowed to adjust their rates to=20 reflect the actual cost of power to consumers. Government forced the privat= e=20 utilities to sell at astronomical losses. The final argument is simply an ideological one: that power is just too=20 important to be left in private hands. Really? Food is a great deal more=20 important and private hands have kept this nation well fed for centuries.= =20 Picturing the Department of Motor Vehicles running the local supermarket=20 should sober even the most euphoric of the government takeover advocates. California's Independent System Operator is predicting a 6,000-megawatt=20 shortfall this summer. When there is no electricity on the transmission=20 lines, it really won't matter who owns them. During the hottest hours of th= e=20 hottest days of the year, when as many as 6 million homes are without=20 electricity, it may begin to dawn on most people that socialism doesn't wor= k=20 any better in California than it did in the Soviet Union. --- --- ------- NEWS=20 Bush's Energy Policy Will Backfire, Feinstein Warns / She wants federal pri= ce=20 controls now Carolyn Lochhead 03/22/2001=20 The San Francisco Chronicle=20 FINAL=20 Page A.3=20 (Copyright 2001)=20 Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., warned yesterday that when blackouts=20 intensify in California this summer, the pressure will intensify on the Bus= h=20 administration to explain why it rejected price controls on wholesale=20 electricity.=20 ""If by this summer California is, as anticipated, facing these blackouts, a= nd=20 the federal government won't help, I don't think the American people are=20 going to be very pleased,"" Feinstein told California reporters.=20 Asked if help means the cost-based price controls Feinstein is pushing, she= =20 said, ""Right now, yes.""=20 Feinstein said California Democrats will begin to escalate their criticism = of=20 the administration, predicting that support will build among Western senato= rs=20 for her legislation to impose price caps on wholesale electricity in exchan= ge=20 for lifting the rate cap on California consumers.=20 If it passes, she said, ""the administration is really going to have to face= =20 whether they're going to help or not help.""=20 Feinstein said House Democrats from the West Coast also told her they expec= t=20 that White House inaction on price caps would help them gain seats in 2002.= =20 But she refused to speculate on the political fallout from the energy crisi= s=20 against Democrats in California .=20 Feinstein characterized Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham's adamant argument= s=20 against price controls as ""recalcitrant,"" saying his statement to a Senate= =20 committee last week ""essentially said California 's on its own.""=20 She speculated that because "" California is dominantly Democratic, even=20 somebody like me that works across party lines is beginning to wonder if th= is=20 isn't an unnecessarily barbed stick at California .""=20 White House spokesman Ken Lisaius disputed the charge, saying the Bush=20 administration is doing all it can, but can't control that demand is=20 outstripping supply.=20 ""The federal government cannot prevent blackouts, but can only help at the= =20 margins in situations like this,"" Lisaius said. ""The only thing that can=20 prevent blackouts is reduced demand, increased supply and good weather.""=20 Abraham has twice in the last week argued strongly against price controls,= =20 including the cost-based ones Feinstein advocates, saying they could increa= se=20 blackouts by discouraging power sales into the Western electricity grid.=20 He also said many power providers, including the federal Bonneville Power= =20 Administration in the home district of Sen. Gordon Smith, the Oregon=20 Republican co-sponsoring Feinstein's bill, would be exempt from federal pri= ce=20 caps. Feinstein disputed that, but Smith's office agreed.=20 Abraham argued that price controls would not work in part because roughly= =20 half the Western electricity market would be exempt, including federal powe= r=20 marketing authorities such as Bonneville, rural electric cooperatives and= =20 municipal utilities such as the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power.= =20 On another front, House Republicans omitted from their budget projected=20 revenues from opening part of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil an= d=20 gas exploration.=20 A Budget Committee spokeswoman said Chairman Jim Nussle, R-Iowa, determined= =20 that the $1 billion in revenues from the wildlife refuge the Bush=20 administration included in its budget were not needed and that there was ""n= o=20 reason to put in something that controversial, that some of our members don= 't=20 even like, when you don't have to.""=20 But Rep. Gary Miller, R-Diamond Bar (Los Angeles County) said House=20 Republicans ""are not backing off at all"" from opening the wildlife refuge t= o=20 drilling. ""Our goal is to get it passed in the House,"" he said, saying the= =20 Budget Committee omitted the revenue projections because the drilling has n= ot=20 yet been approved.=20 PHOTO; Caption: Sen. Dianne Feinstein wants to cap wholesale electricity=20 costs and end caps on con- sumer rates.=20 --- ------ Reliant Still In Power Pact Talks With Calif. DWR=20 By Christina Cheddar 03/22/2001=20 Dow Jones News Service=20 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)=20 Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES=20 =20 (This report was originally published late Wednesday.)=20 =20 NEW YORK -(Dow Jones)- Reliant Energy Inc. (REI) remains in discussions wit= h=20 the California Department of Water Resources to sign long-term power=20 contracts.=20 However, issues regarding the creditworthiness of the agency remain, said J= oe=20 Bob Perkins, president of Reliant's Wholesale Division.=20 ""We want to be part of the solution,"" Perkins said. At the same time, Relia= nt=20 is trying to protect itself from incurring additional unpaid accounts=20 receivable, he said.=20 The DWR has been buying power on behalf of California 's financially troubl= ed=20 utilities. However, Reliant has yet to sign a formal agreement with the=20 agency because Reliant is concerned it won't be paid.=20 During a conference call Wednesday, Perkins said he couldn't comment on a= =20 lawsuit between Reliant and the California Independent System Operator=20 because he didn't know how it was progressing.=20 Further court action on the case is expected Wednesday.=20 The lawsuit stems from Reliant's desire not to be required to sell power to= =20 California if the state won't guarantee payment. The Houston energy company= =20 is concerned that it won't be paid for power being bought by the ISO on=20 behalf of Edison International's (EIX) Southern California Edison unit and= =20 PG&E Corp.'s (PCG) Pacific Gas & Electric Co. unit.=20 To date, Reliant is owed ""some $370 million"" from unpaid power sales to the= =20 utilities.=20 Much of Perkins' presentation centered on how the power crisis in Californi= a=20 emerged.=20 Using data from research firm Cambridge Energy Research Associates, the=20 company discussed the imbalance between California 's power demand and its= =20 power supply.=20 Looking ahead to the summer, it isn't a question of whether rolling blackou= ts=20 will occur, but ""how many and how severe,"" Perkins said.=20 Low hydroelectric availability, loss of imported power, warm weather, deman= d=20 growth and plant outages could lead to a worst-case scenario in California = ,=20 he said, adding that some estimates predict California could experience 1,1= 00=20 hours of power outages this summer.=20 The skyrocketing power prices in the region are a reflection of the power= =20 market's imbalance, he said.=20 Reliant submitted only ""economically sound"" bids for power, Perkins said. H= e=20 expects the company can document why it charged the prices it did as requir= ed=20 by regulators.=20 ""We have been very rigorous and very disciplined in what we have submitted,= ""=20 Perkins said.=20 He added that retail customer price increases are one way of sending a sign= al=20 to consumers to lower consumption. He cited studies that show a 20% retail= =20 price increase could reduce consumption by 2,000 megawatts. A megawatt is= =20 enough power to serve roughly 1,000 homes.=20 -By Christina Cheddar, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-5166;=20 --- ------ CPUC Must Address Rates In QF Repayment Order - SoCal Ed 03/22/2001=20 Dow Jones Energy Service=20 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)=20 (This article was originally published Wednesday)=20 =20 LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Any order from the California Public Utilities=20 Commission requiring utilities to pay small, independent generators going= =20 forward must determine how that could be done within the existing rate=20 structure, a spokesman for Edison International (EIX) utility Southern=20 California Edison said Wednesday.=20 The utility was responding to a PUC proposed decision that would require=20 utilities to pay small generators, called qualifying facilities, $79 a=20 megawatt hour within 15 days of electricity delivery. The decision will be= =20 voted March 27 by the CPUC.=20 ""We're still reviewing (the decision) and should have more to say in a day = or=20 two. To the extent that the commission orders us to pay going forward of=20 course we will. But it needs to address how we will pay the QFs,"" a SoCal= =20 Edison spokesman said.=20 SoCal Edison and PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric Co. are=20 struggling under nearly $13 billion in uncollected power costs due to an=20 inability to pass high wholesale power costs to customers under a rate=20 freeze.=20 Gov. Gray Davis Tuesday blasted the utilities for not having paid their QF= =20 bills in full since December. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. has made some=20 partial payments to QFs, but SoCal Edison has paid nothing. Together, they= =20 owe the QFs about $1 billion, but the order doesn't address that debt.=20 An Edison executive said, in reaction to the governor's sharp comments, tha= t=20 the company simply doesn't have the money to pay creditors.=20 ""The root problem here is there just isn't enough money in the current rate= =20 base to pay our bills,"" said Edison Senior Vice President of Public Affairs= =20 Bob Foster. ""We understand the financial distress (the QFs) face; we are=20 facing financial distress ourselves.""=20 The proposed PUC order would also require the state's investor-owned=20 utilities to offer the small generators five- and 10-year contracts for pow= er=20 for $79/MWh and $69/MWh, respectively.=20 The QFs ""may be able to live with"" the PUC proposal, but the five- and=20 10-year contract prices may be inadequate if natural gas prices at one of t= he=20 California borders are high, said Jan Smutny-Jones, president of the=20 Independent Energy Producers Association. Natural gas prices into Californi= a=20 are currently higher than anywhere in the country.=20 But some say the proposed decision may not be enough to prevent the QFs fro= m=20 filing involuntary bankruptcy proceedings against the utilities for the mon= ey=20 they are still owed.=20 ""There's still a lot of skepticism. To say our position has changed based o= n=20 the CPUC decision or the governor's announcement is not accurate. A lot sti= ll=20 has to happen,"" said Jay Lawrence, a spokesman for a renewable creditors=20 committee.=20 -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872;=20 --- ------ Calif Small Pwr Producers To Shut Plants If Rates Capped By Jason Leopold 03/22/2001=20 Dow Jones Energy Service=20 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)=20 Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES=20 =20 (This article was originally published earlier Thursday.)=20 =20 LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Many of California 's independent power producers= =20 late Wednesday threatened to take their small power plants offline this wee= k=20 if state lawmakers pass legislation that would cap the rates the generators= =20 charge for electricity they sell directly to the state's three investor-own= ed=20 utilities.=20 At issue is a bill that would repeal a section of the state's Public=20 Utilities Code, which links the 688 so-called qualifying facilities'=20 electricity rates to the monthly border price of natural gas.=20 Lawmakers, however, are poised to pass the legislation.=20 State regulators are then expected to approve a measure that would=20 restructure the fluctuating rates the QFs charge PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit=20 Pacific Gas & Electric , Edison International (EIX) unit Southern Californi= a=20 Edison, and Sempra Energy (SRE) unit San Diego Gas & Electric from $170 a= =20 megawatt-hour to $69-$79/MWh, regardless of the price of natural gas.=20 Whereas each of the 688 QF contracts differed, largely because natural gas= =20 prices are higher in Southern California than Northern California , the sta= te=20 wants the QFs to sign a general contract with the utilities.=20 The cogeneration facilities, which produce about 5,400 megawatts of=20 electricity in the state, said the rates are too low and they won't sign ne= w=20 supply contracts with the utilities.=20 ""For $79/MWh, natural gas would have to be $6 per million British thermal= =20 unit at the Southern California border,"" said Tom Lu, executive director of= =20 Carson-based Watson Cogeneration Company, the state's largest QF, generatin= g=20 340 MW. ""Our current gas price at the border is $12.50.""=20 Other gas-fired QFs said the state could face another round of rolling=20 blackouts if lawmakers and state regulators pass the legislation, which is= =20 expected to be heard on the Senate floor Thursday, and allow it to be=20 implemented by Public Utilities Commission next week.=20 Lu, whose company is half-owned by BP Amoco PLC (BP) and is owed $100 milli= on=20 by SoCal Ed, said the proposals by the PUC and the Legislature ""will only= =20 make things worse.""=20 David Fogarty, spokesman for Western States Petroleum Association, whose=20 members supply California with more than 2,000 MW, said the utilities need = to=20 pay the QFs more than $1 billion for electricity that was already produced.= =20 =20 State Loses 3,000 MW QF Output Due Of Financial Reasons=20 =20 The QFs represent about one-third, or 9,700 MW, of the state's total power= =20 supply. Roughly 5,400 MW are produced by natural gas-fired facilities. The= =20 rest is generated by wind, solar power and biomass.=20 About 3,000 MW of gas-fired and renewable QF generation is offline in=20 California because the power plant owners haven't been paid hundreds of=20 millions of dollars from cash-strapped utilities SoCal Ed and PG&E for near= ly=20 four months.=20 Several small power plant owners owed money by SoCal Ed have threatened to= =20 drag the utility into involuntary bankruptcy if the utility continues to=20 default on payments and fails to agree to supply contracts at higher rates.= =20 The defaults have left many of the renewable and gas-fired QFs unable to=20 operate their power plants because they can't afford to pay for the natural= =20 gas to run their units. Others continue to produce electricity under their= =20 contracts with the state's utilities but aren't being paid even on a forwar= d=20 basis.=20 The California Independent System Operator, keeper of the state's electrici= ty=20 grid, said the loss of the QF generation was the primary reason rolling=20 blackouts swept through the state Monday and Tuesday.=20 Gov. Gray Davis, recognizing the potential disaster if additional QFs took= =20 their units offline, held marathon meetings with key lawmakers Monday and= =20 Tuesday to try and hammer out an agreement that would get the QFs paid on a= =20 forward basis and set rates of $79/MWh and $69/MWh for five and 10 year=20 contracts. He also said he would direct the PUC to order the utilities to p= ay=20 the QFs for power they sell going forward.=20 ""After next week the QF problem will be behind us,"" Davis said Tuesday. ""We= =20 want to get the QFs paid...the QFs are dropping like flies...and when that= =20 happens the lights go out.""=20 But this just makes the problem worse, said Assemblyman Dean Florez,=20 D-Shafter, a member of the Assembly energy committee.=20 ""I don't know how we are going to keep the lights on,"" Florez said in an=20 interview. ""Many of these congenerators are in my district. They said if th= e=20 legislation doesn't change they are going offline. This compounds the issue= =20 of rolling blackouts, especially now when we need every megawatt.""=20 Davis, who didn't meet with people representing the QFs, said he was handin= g=20 the QF issue to the PUC because lawmakers failed to pass legislation that= =20 would have set a five-year price for natural gas and allow the QFs to sign= =20 individual contracts with the utilities. In addition, SOCal Ed opposed the= =20 legislation, saying the rates should be below $50/MWh.=20 Some renewable power producers said they aren't vehemently opposed to the n= ew=20 rate structure because it guarantees them a higher rate than what was=20 originally proposed.=20 =20 QFs Want Third Party Supply Contracts=20 =20 John Wood, who represents the SoCal Ed Gas Fired Creditors Committee, one o= f=20 a handful of groups that have formed since January to explore options on=20 getting paid by the utilities, said his group of gas-fired QF creditors wan= t=20 to be released from their supply contracts and sell to third parties.=20 ""Under our plan, we would be permitted to sell electricity to third parties= =20 (including the state Department of Water Resources) until a resolution to t= he=20 crisis can be accomplished,"" wood said.=20 Hal Dittmer, president of Sacramento-based Wellhead Electric in Sacramento,= =20 which is owed $8 million by PG&E, has 85 MW of gas-fired generation units= =20 offline.=20 Under the state's plan, Dittmer said he risks going out of business.=20 ""I can't buy natural gas for what I would be paid under this decision,"" he= =20 said. ""The state needs to quit kidding themselves that they don't need to= =20 raise electricity rates. All of this is being driven by an artificial=20 construct that California can avoid raising rates.""=20 =20 -By Jason Leopold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3874;=20 jason.leopold@dowjones.com=20 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Confidential re: McConville--Indemnity; [EMail-Body]= David, As we discussed, Mark Haedicke and I discussed the possibility of providing Kevin McConville with some sort of indemnity in order to make sure that he remains available and cooperative during the pendency of the NSM case and other litigation matters. We could agree to enter into a Consulting Services Agreement with Kevin. The terms of that Agreement would include: 1. He agrees to be available and cooperative with Enron and its counsel regarding litigation matters. He will agree to meet with counsel, prepare for testimony, review documents, testify, and provide other assistance, as needed. 2. Through February 1, 2001, Kevin would not be directly compensated for this cooperation/testimony (because he is to be receiving his salary pursuant to the terms of his employment agreement). After Feb.1, 2001, he will be paid a rate of $125 per hour for his services in this regard. 3. Enron would agree to indemnify Kevin for his conduct taken in the ordinary course and scope of his employment with Enron, up to the last date of his employment with Enron. Excluded from this indemnity would be allegations or claims based upon the following: -- any conduct that is outside the course and scope of Kevin's employment, -- any conduct violating policies of Enron or ENA, -- Kevin's intentional acts, -- Kevin's gross negligence, -- Kevin's reckless conduct, -- conduct that is in violation of any law, statute, regulation, or other legal obligation, or -- the commission of an unlawful or illegal act. 4. Kevin would invoice Enron for time spent in performing the services after 2/1/01. The invoice would be paid within 30 days of receipt. In addition, all related expenses would be reimbursed throughout the term of the agreement. Let me know if you have any questions or require additional information. I am available to participate in your call with him, if you would like me to attend. Michelle [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Enron Mentions; [EMail-Body]= Thanks for the note. Jim Hughes asked the same question you did. Here is my (and John's) response. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/09/2001 02:33 PM ----- Steven J Kean 03/07/2001 11:41 AM To: James A cc: Subject: Re: Enron Mentions It looks like we are playing a smaller role than the WSJ article indicates -- i.e. a role commensurate with our level of interest. I have talked with John several times about the relative importance of OPIC, ExIm and other funding organizations in light of the change in emphasis in our business. As a result of those discussions we cut headcount and expenditures from the proposed budget for ""01 and John has joined Linda Robertson's organization in the DC office (instead of being a stand alone effort). Having said that, my view (based on the work John has been doing) is that we continue to have a considerable amount of work for him to do on the project finance front as a result of existing projects, projects we continue to pursue, and transfer issues associated with the asset sales. Do you agree? ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/07/2001 11:27 AM ----- John Hardy@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT 03/07/2001 10:59 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Re: Enron Mentions Steve This is not a battle to fight with OMB, but we have to show the agencies that we are supportive of their programs and their budgets. We are not going to lead the battle and in fact have not particpated in meetings on the hill. But we are in negotiations with both EXIM and OPIC on Electrobolt and will need their support on our problem projects. Also, Rebecca McDonald is on EXIM's private sector advisory committee. If you need more lets talk. Thanks John Steven J Kean@ENRON 03/07/2001 11:43 AM To: John cc: Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON Subject: Enron Mentions How important is this fight to us now (see attached article on ExIm)? ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 03/07/2001 10:41 AM ----- Ann M Schmidt 03/07/2001 08:19 AM To: Ann M Schmidt/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: (bcc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron) Subject: Enron Mentions Exporters Rush to Ex-Im Bank's Defense --- Lobby Campaign to Prevent Budget Cuts Seeks Help Of 100,000 Small Firms The Wall Street Journal, 03/07/01 Plots & Ploys The Wall Street Journal, 03/07/01 Dutch Gas Competition Grows Despite Sluggish Reforms Dow Jones Energy Service, 03/07/01 USA: Big U.S. exporters to fight Ex-Im Bank cuts - WSJ. Reuters English News Service, 03/07/01 Major U.S. Exporters Rush to Export-Import Bank's Defense Dow Jones Business News, 03/07/01 What's News United States The Globe and Mail, 03/07/01 Deal with state could take until 2002 to close Associated Press Newswires, 03/06/01 Sierra Pacific CEO Doubts SEC OK Of Enron Unit Buy-Report Dow Jones Energy Service, 03/06/01 Many Power Deals Announced by California Governor Still Not Final Dow Jones Business News, 03/06/01 US Natural Gas Prices Fall As Demand Slips In Most Areas Dow Jones Energy Service, 03/06/01 Economy Exporters Rush to Ex-Im Bank's Defense --- Lobby Campaign to Prevent Budget Cuts Seeks Help Of 100,000 Small Firms By Michael M. Phillips and Laura Heinauer Staff Reporters of The Wall Street Journal 03/07/2001 The Wall Street Journal A2 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) WASHINGTON -- Angry and confused that a Republican administration has targeted one of their favorite programs for big cuts, America's largest exporters are appealing for help from lawmakers. Boeing Co., Caterpillar Inc., Enron Corp., Halliburton Co. and others are launching an aggressive lobbying campaign on Capitol Hill to protect the Export-Import Bank from budget reductions; the White House labels the Ex-Im Bank as corporate welfare. ""The administration has fired its shot, and now we're firing ours,"" said Edmund B. Rice, president of the Coalition for Employment Through Exports, an industry group that is leading the effort. Since they got wind of the proposed cuts a few weeks ago, business lobbyists have been trying to rally sympathetic lawmakers. And executives at Boeing, Caterpillar and other big companies plan to contact some 100,000 smaller suppliers that benefit indirectly from the $12.6 billion of export loans, guarantees and insurance that Ex-Im Bank provided in the last fiscal year. Those small companies, the executives hope, will create a groundswell of support in Congress for the Ex-Im Bank. ""Companies large and small who have similar interests here are banding together to provide an educational effort so people understand the impact of this,"" said Chris Hansen, Boeing senior vice president for government relations. Corporate lobbyists also have dug up a speech that Vice President Dick Cheney, while chief executive of Halliburton, gave in 1997 praising the bank and scoffing at those who consider it a giveaway to big business. They plan to pass Mr. Cheney's comments to influential members of Congress this week. ""We'll be circulating them very broadly,"" Mr. Rice said. A spokeswoman for Mr. Cheney had no immediate comment. Ex-Im Bank officials aren't talking publicly, avoiding the appearance that they are battling the White House to overturn the proposed 25% cut in the bank's $865 million operating budget for the current fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30. But an Ex-Im official said the topic has come up in conversations between key lawmakers and Ex-Im Bank Chairman James A. Harmon, who is soon to be succeeded by Mel Sembler, a Bush campaign fund-raiser and a shopping-center developer. At first, business lobbyists assumed administration budgeteers were just looking for savings anywhere they could find it. Before President Bush released his spending plan last week, companies appealed to Mitchell Daniels, head of the White House budget office, in an attempt to keep the Ex-Im Bank cuts out of the final proposal. The Ex-Im Bank's corporate clients include some of the country's largest political contributors. Boeing, the bank's largest user, received $3.3 billion of financing last year. The Seattle aerospace company and its employees contributed $1.8 million to politicians and parties during the 2000 election cycle, 61% to Republicans, according to federal election data assembled by the Center for Responsive Politics. Caterpillar, a Peoria, Ill., maker of engines and heavy equipment that secured seven Ex-Im Bank deals last year, and its employees contributed more than $500,000 -- 96% to Republicans. Company officials deny they wanted to leverage donations to try to secure political support for the Ex-Im Bank. Many lobbyists have come to the conclusion that administration officials -- those of a libertarian persuasion -- oppose Ex-Im Bank as a form of welfare for corporations. Indeed, the White House budget plan criticized the bank's operations as unjustified public subsidies for companies. ""That makes it a much more serious issue,"" Mr. Rice said. ""We're concerned that the administration seems to be turning its attention in this direction."" Barring intervention from Mr. Cheney, business groups now have largely given up hope of convincing the White House to back down, planning instead to use their muscle to convince Congress to restore the Ex-Im Bank's funding. Bank officials and U.S. companies argue that, far from being a subsidy, the bank simply allows American companies to compete with European and Japanese firms that receive assistance from their own governments. ""In many markets in Asia and Africa, the bank is absolutely critical to our ability to sell American-made products,"" said Bill Lane, Caterpillar's Washington director for governmental affairs. --- Corporate Beneficiaries Top 10 recipients of Ex-Im Bank loans, guarantees and insurance for fiscal year 2000, as measured by amount of financing, in millions Boeing $3,335 Bechtel Group $1,075 Distributed Processing Systems $388 Willbros Group $387 United Technologies $334 Raytheon $156 General Electric $150 Halliburton $136 Enron $135 LSI Logic $120 Source: Ex-Im Bank Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. The Property Report Plots & Ploys By Peter Grant 03/07/2001 The Wall Street Journal B10 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) [What's Brewing in the Real Estate Market] No Problem, Houston CENTURY DEVELOPMENT is about to announce plans to break ground on downtown Houston's third major office development in less than three years. In another sign of the strength of the city's energy sector, Century is finalizing a headquarters deal with Reliant Resources Inc. to take more than two-thirds of the project's 850,000 square feet, says Edwin Murphy, a Century senior vice president. Two other towers also are underway. In 1999, Hines began building a 1.2 million square-foot tower for Enron Corp. and late last year Crescent Real Estate Equities broke ground on a 27-story tower that will be anchored by Ernst & Young. These three projects are the first major downtown office projects to get underway since 1986. The surge is part of a renaissance of downtown Houston, where new sports facilities, hotels, apartment buildings and restaurants have been mushrooming in recent years. ""The new amenities have kept people from leaving and enticed people to come back,"" says Michael Hassler, of CB Richard Ellis. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Dutch Gas Competition Grows Despite Sluggish Reforms By Germana Canzi Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES 03/07/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LONDON -(Dow Jones)- The Netherlands is emerging as an important testing ground for E.U. gas liberalization, as new trading hubs for competitive, short-term gas supplies from the U.K. and Norway emerge on the Belgian and German borders. However, much remains to be done. A group of large energy users and traders is preparing to confront Gasunie Thursday in a hearing organized by the regulator. The main issues of contention are the balancing system, which Gasunie conducts on an hourly basis, the extent to which transport tariffs are cost-focused and third-party access to storage facilities. The emergence of competition in the Dutch gas sector is mostly due to the initiative of new market entrants who, despite a difficult regulatory environment, have managed to develop a market for short-term gas virtually from scratch. If liquidity improves in these emerging hubs, the Netherlands could become an important transit country for freely tradeable gas supplies to other countries in northwest Europe, as well as being an important market in its own right. However, the difficulty of implementing transparent third-party access systems in the Netherlands and in neighboring Germany casts a dark cloud over recent progress in competition. Since December, Enron Europe Ltd. (U.ENE), Duke Energy Corp. (DUK), E.On AG (EON), RWE AG (G.RWE) and Electrabel SA (B.ELE) have been actively buying and selling gas, sourced in the U.K., the Netherlands and Norway, in a number of hubs between Emden in Germany and Emshaven and Oude Statenzijl in the Netherlands. David Gallagher, head of European gas trading at Enron in London, estimates that at least one trade a day of around 100,000 therms for a quarterly contract is done at the Oude Statenzijl hub, where the Gasunie pipeline system connects to the network of Wingas GmbH. An important element kick-starting short-term trading was the sale, in December 2000, of a 2 billion cubic meter a year Norwegian gas supply contract to five Dutch-based power generators. Robert van der Hoeven, head of fuel procurement at Electrabel, the owner of Dutch generator EPON, said his company uses most of the gas it imports from Norway for its plants in the Netherlands and trades the rest on a short-term basis in the Oude-Emden area. This pattern is common to the other Dutch-based parties to that contract. Trading in Dutch hubs received a further boost when Nederlandse Gasunie NV (N.NEG) decided, after months of wrangling with regulator DTe, to lower its transport tariffs by 6.5% from January 2001 and to unbundle its combined commodity and service tariff, the so-called CSS system, from July 2001. Gasunie now claims its pipeline system is fully open and transparent. To prove this, it says it has lost 30% of its customers in the eligible market, but that figure hasn't changed much since March 2000. Small wonder that critics say the switching figure doesn't necessarily indicate an ideal system of third-party access. According to energy consultants The Brattle Group, around half of the gas used by alternative suppliers goes through the 1 bcm/year Zebra pipeline from Zelzate to Zeeland, which was built by Dutch utilities a few years ago precisely because Gasunie refused to provide access on favorable terms. Shippers have complained that the hourly system used by Gasunie to balance the pipeline system raises the overall cost of shipping through its network significantly. Gasunie imposes a balancing charge which effectively forces shippers to pay for the extra gas brought into the system from storage sites, in addition to the capacity and transmission price. Critics say Gasunie has so far failed to unbundle these charges, although it agreed to do so in January. According to the Brattle Group, another controversial aspect of Gasunie's tariff system is that it is based on theoretical costs of constructing new pipelines rather than its actual costs. The DTe is also considering ways of reforming the storage system to make it competitive. BP PLC (U.BP) and Nederlandse Aardolie Maatschappij NV operate storage facilities and lease capacity to Gasunie through long-term contracts. The regulator is studying ways of allowing third parties access to storage facilities. Gasunie has so far shown little sign of negotiating more competitive tariffs with storage operators and passing on the benefits to customers, critics say. The growth of short-term trading in the Dutch gas market is also inevitably linked to its potential as a transit country for gas coming from the U.K.-Belgium gas interconnector and going towards the 82bcm-a-year German market. Market participants say liquidity at the Emden and Oude hubs has grown considerably since E.On and RWE started trading there earlier this year. However, the obstructive attitude of incumbents toward third-party access there has meant that so far most gas traded in the Netherlands has remained there. -By Germana Canzi, Dow Jones Newswires; +44 20 7842 9283; germana.canzi@dowjones.com Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. USA: Big U.S. exporters to fight Ex-Im Bank cuts - WSJ. 03/07/2001 Reuters English News Service (C) Reuters Limited 2001. NEW YORK, March 7 (Reuters) - America's largest exporters are launching an aggressive lobbying campaign on Capitol Hill to protect the Export-Import Bank from budget reductions, the Wall Street Journal reported in its online edition on Wednesday. The exporters, including Boeing Co. , Caterpillar Inc. , Enron Corp. , Halliburton Co. and others, are angry and confused that a Republican administration has targeted one of their favourite programmes for big cuts, the paper reported. Ex-Im Bank officials were not talking publicly, avoiding the appearance that they are battling the White House to overturn the proposed 25 percent cut in the bank's $865 million operating budget for the current fiscal year, which ends Sept 30, it said. The White House labels the Ex-Im Bank as corporate welfare. ""The administration has fired its shot, and now we're firing ours,"" Edmund Rice, president of the Coalition for Employment Through Exports, an industry group that is leading the effort, was quoted as saying by the paper. Executives at Boeing, Caterpillar and other big companies plan to contact some 100,000 smaller suppliers who benefit indirectly from the $12.6 billion of export loans, guarantees and insurance that Ex-Im Bank provided in the last fiscal year, the paper said. Those small companies, the executives hope, will create a groundswell of support in Congress for the Ex-Im Bank, it said. New York Newsroom (212) 859-1700. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Major U.S. Exporters Rush to Export-Import Bank's Defense 03/07/2001 Dow Jones Business News (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) WASHINGTON -- Angry and confused that a Republican administration has targeted one of their favorite programs for big cuts, America's largest exporters are appealing for help from lawmakers, Wednesday's Wall Street Journal reported. Boeing Co. (BA), Caterpillar Inc. (CAT), Enron Corp. (ENE), Halliburton Co. (HAL) and others are launching an aggressive lobbying campaign on Capitol Hill to protect the Export-Import Bank from budget reductions; the White House labels the Ex-Im Bank as corporate welfare. ""The administration has fired its shot, and now we're firing ours,"" said Edmund B. Rice, president of the Coalition for Employment Through Exports, an industry group that is leading the effort. Since they got wind of the proposed cuts a few weeks ago, business lobbyists have been trying to rally sympathetic lawmakers. And executives at Boeing, Caterpillar and other big companies plan to contact some 100,000 smaller suppliers that benefit indirectly from the $12.6 billion of export loans, guarantees and insurance that Ex-Im Bank provided in the last fiscal year. Those small companies, the executives hope, will create a groundswell of support in Congress for the Ex-Im Bank. Corporate lobbyists also have dug up a speech that Vice President Dick Cheney, while chief executive of Halliburton, gave in 1997 praising the bank and scoffing at those who consider it a giveaway to big business. They plan to pass Mr. Cheney's comments to influential members of Congress this week. A spokeswoman for Mr. Cheney had no immediate comment. Ex-Im Bank officials aren't talking publicly, avoiding the appearance that they are battling the White House to overturn the proposed 25% cut in the bank's $865 million operating budget for the current fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30. But an Ex-Im official said the topic has come up in conversations between key lawmakers and Ex-Im Bank Chairman James A. Harmon, who is soon to be succeeded by Mel Sembler, a Bush campaign fund-raiser and a shopping-center developer. Copyright (c) 2001 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Report on Business: The Wall Street Journal What's News United States Wall Street Journal 03/07/2001 The Globe and Mail Metro B10 ""All material Copyright (c) Bell Globemedia Publishing Inc. and its licensors. All rights reserved."" Boeing Co., Caterpillar Inc. and Enron Corp. are among the big U.S. exporters launching an aggressive lobbying campaign on Capitol Hill to protect the Export-Import Bank from budget reductions. The White House labels the Ex-Im Bank as corporate welfare. ""The administration has fired its shot, and now we're firing ours,"" said Edmund Rice, president of the Coalition for Employment Through Exports, an industry group leading the campaign. Since they got wind of the proposed cuts a few weeks ago, business lobbyists have been trying to rally sympathetic U.S. law makers. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Deal with state could take until 2002 to close By LESLIE GORNSTEIN AP Business Writer 03/06/2001 Associated Press Newswires Copyright 2001. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. LOS ANGELES (AP) - A tentative deal aimed at rescuing Southern California Edison from insolvency might not close in time to prevent the utility from begging creditors for more patience, Edison officials said Tuesday. The utility's tentative, $2.7 billion agreement to sell its power lines to the state could take until 2002 to be consummated, thanks to complicated legal issues and other paperwork, an Edison official told bondholders Tuesday. Once the deal is signed, Edison will try to borrow against the promised cash, but Edison International Chief Financial Officer Ted Craver admitted the utility might have to ask creditors to simply wait for their money until it has the $2.7 billion in hand. Energy suppliers owed money by Edison did not immediately return calls for comment Tuesday. At least four groups of suppliers have sued Edison for millions in unpaid bills going back months. Edison and fellow utility Pacific Gas & Electric have said they have lost $13 billion on the open power market thanks to soaring prices paired with state-imposed price caps. PG&E's parent company was able to recently borrow $1 billion to pay its stockholders and its debuts. It did not use any of that money to pay PG&E's bills. Edison's disclosure, meanwhile, shocked state officials. Steve Maviglio, spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis, initially declined to comment on the status of the Edison deal, but eventually said, regarding its closure, ""We're optimistic it will be sooner rather than later."" The pacing would have nothing to do with whether fellow utilities Sempra Energy and PG&E also sell their transmission lines to California, Craver said. Among the things that could delay the deal's closing is Edison's need to find landowners on whose property its lines were built to assure no legal agreements are being violated by the sale. Edison would also have to pin down exactly what it would be selling to the state - terms that might not be decided until after a deal has been inked, Craver said. ""Trust me,"" Craver said in a phone call after the conference. ""There are a lot of legal-type documents - stuff that you and I ... would think of as a bloody nightmare."" The disclosure comes at a time when an increasing number of power suppliers are suing the utility for millions in unpaid bills. Edison also disclosed Tuesday that two more lawsuits had landed in its lap - one by a group of wind-powered generators including Enron Wind, the other by two suppliers including New York-based Caithness Energy. Both suits were filed during the past five days, Edison Assistant General Counsel Barbara Reeves said. It was not immediately clear how much the complainants were seeking; neither Enron nor Caithness returned calls for comment. The two filings bring the total number of suits by renewable-energy suppliers against Edison to four, the utility said. The city of Long Beach and CalEnergy Operating Group, a geothermal supplier, have also sued for back payments. CalEnergy alone has said it is owed $45 million in November and December payments. The line sale, part of a multifaceted, tentative deal with the state that could save Edison from insolvency, could take anywhere from several months into next year, Craver said. The tentative deal, announced by Gov. Gray Davis Feb. 23, calls for the state to pay more than twice the book value for Edison's lines. It also would require Edison to sell cheap power to the state for a decade and for Edison to end its lawsuit against state regulators. The suit asserts that price caps imposed by the California Public Utilities Commission are illegal under federal law. Additionally, Edison's parent would have to return $420 million it collected from the utility over the past several years. The money was used to pay debt, buy back stock and pay dividends to investors. SCE, PG&E and Sempra have complained they are near bankruptcy because of soaring prices on the open market combined with the state-imposed price caps for consumers. Sempra and PG&E have yet to announce similar line-sale deals with the state, though they and the governor have said negotiations are ongoing. The total cost of the 26,000 miles of lines has been estimated at $4.5 billion to $7 billion. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Sierra Pacific CEO Doubts SEC OK Of Enron Unit Buy-Report 03/06/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- Sierra Pacific Resources (SRP) CEO Walter Higgins said in an interview last week that he doubts the company's $3.1 billion acquisition of Enron Corp.'s (ENE) utility Portland General Electric will be approved by the federal Securities and Exchange Commission, the Las Vegas Sun reported Tuesday. The SEC must find that Sierra Pacific is in a strong financial position before it will approve the deal, but the company is currently weakened by having lost millions of dollars in fuel and purchased power costs, Higgins said in the report. A $311 million rate increase to cover those costs began March 1, but Higgins said that money would only pay back those expenses and wouldn't improve the company's stability to a level the SEC would find adequate, according to the report. The Public Utilities Commission can halt the rate hike and order refunds if it decides the hike isn't necessary. The PUC is holding hearings to determine the prudency of the hike, and members of the state's powerful casino and mining industries have filed to intervene. Sierra Pacific's plan to shore up its financial position through the sale of its 10 power plants, worth nearly $2 billion, may also be in jeopardy. The state Senate is considering a bill to block the sales, and Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn recently sent a letter to the PUC asking that it reconsider its order allowing electric utilities to sell assets. Financial analysts have said that not allowing Sierra Pacific's two utilities to sell their assets would have a ripple effect on the company's financial position. The asset sales are tied to low-priced power contracts, and if the sales are canceled, the low-priced power will be gone as well. ""If the divestiture is stopped...the state may be dealing with a much bigger rate increase,"" Steve Fleishman, Merrill Lynch utility analyst, told Dow Jones Newswires recently. Sierra Pacific is the parent company of electric utilities Sierra Pacific Power Co. and Nevada Power, which serve customers in the state's North and South, respectively. -By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3872, jessica.berthold@dowjones.com -0- 07/03/01 01-04G Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Many Power Deals Announced by California Governor Still Not Final By Jason Leopold 03/06/2001 Dow Jones Business News (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) Dow Jones Newswires LOS ANGELES -- Many of the long-term power-supply contracts announced by California Gov. Gray Davis this week remain under negotiation or are the subject of ongoing lawsuits, power suppliers said Tuesday. The lack of finality to the deals raises questions about the state's success in covering its power needs, particularly going into what is expected to be an unusually tight summer. Generators said privately they were surprised the governor went ahead with his announcement Monday, given that many of the contracts haven't been signed. David Freeman, general manager of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, who negotiated the contracts on behalf of the state, conceded that details remain to be worked out. ""This is not a done deal,"" Mr. Freeman said, adding that credit concerns are keeping generators from signing the deals. Gov. Davis announced Monday that California has secured 40 long-term contracts that will provide California with about 629 million megawatt hours of electricity over 10 years, at a price of more than $40 billion. A megawatt hour is roughly the amount of electricity needed to power 1,000 homes. Several of those forward deals, however, involve contracts originally held by Edison International (EIX) unit Southern California Edison and PG&E Corp. (PCG) unit Pacific Gas & Electric at the California Power Exchange, previously the state's main power market. The governor seized those contracts earlier this year, just before the Power Exchange liquidated them to cover hundreds of millions of dollars in power bills the utilities had failed to pay. The contracts, which total about 1.3 million megawatt hours of electricity and have a market value of about $1 billion, according to market sources, have yet to be paid for or signed over to the state. Duke Energy Corp. (DUK), one of the suppliers that sold the contracts to Pacific Gas and SoCal Ed, has sued Gov. Davis for unlawfully commandeering those contracts. Although Duke has reached an interim settlement to continue providing power to the state Department of Water Resources until April 30, the company and the Davis administration still have to ""develop a comprehensive long-term settlement to pay for the power supply contracts,"" said Duke spokesman Tom Williams. The governor went ahead with the announcement, because the California Department of Water Resources believes it will be able to finalize and sign the contracts over the next several weeks, Davis spokesman Steve Maviglio said. Separately, several suppliers named in the governor's announcement Monday -- including Duke, Reliant Energy Inc. (REI), Mirant Corp. (MIR), Sempra Energy, Enron Corp. (ENE) and Avista Corp. (AVA) -- said they have yet to sign final agreements with the state, although negotiations were ongoing. ""We are working in good faith with the DWR toward a long-term contract,"" said Art Larson, spokesman for Sempra Energy Resources, a unit of Sempra. Mr. Larson said Sempra signed a terms of agreement with the water-resources department and expects to reach a final agreement over the next several weeks. Reliant said it has only signed a short-term contract with the state that expires in about two weeks. The company will only sign a long-term contract once it's paid more than $400 million owed by Pacific Gas and SoCal Ed, spokesman Richard Wheatley said. Mirant said it also won't sign contracts with the state until it's paid. Enron said it's reached agreement on terms with the state, but has some credit-related details to hammer out. ""Everything's been agreed to except for some credit technicalities,"" Enron spokesman Mark Palmer said. Meanwhile, small, independent power plants in California that are capable of generating 1,800 megawatts of power are shut down because their owners haven't been paid by the state's two main utilities, the California Independent System Operator said Tuesday. The decline in small-plant output has contributed to the state's power-supply problems the past two months. Partnerships involving El Paso Corp. (EPG), for example, shut down 350 megawatts of generation last weekend due to nonpayment, the company said Tuesday. SoCal Ed hasn't paid the owners of the smaller generators, known as ""qualifying facilities,"" since early December, which means the generators are still owed for electric production in October, while PG&E has paid only a small percentage of its qualifying facility bills since its last full payment in early January. The plants, one-third of which are powered by renewable sources like wind and solar power, meet almost 30% of California's electricity needs. Almost all of the closed generators are fueled by natural gas, and many haven't been able to pay their gas suppliers and have been cut off from their gas supply. The California Senate Energy Committee plans to vote on legislation to create a new pricing system for all qualifying facilities this week. The proposed bill would cut the prices to qualifying facilities from about 17 cents a kilowatt-hour the past eight months to about eight cents, depending on the price of five-year natural-gas contracts the generators can sign. The plants that run on renewable resources would be paid 5.4 cents a kilowatt-hour. -- Mark Golden contributed to this article. Write to Jason Leopold at jason.leopold@dowjones.com Copyright (c) 2001 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. US Natural Gas Prices Fall As Demand Slips In Most Areas 03/06/2001 Dow Jones Energy Service (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) HOUSTON -(Dow Jones)- U.S. natural gas physical prices fell Tuesday as demand eased, except in the Northeast and Southeast areas of the country, traders said. Heavy snowstorms in the upper Northeast supported some pricing, as did cooler weather in Georgia, the Carolinas and the Florida panhandle. Some storage buying occurred in Texas ""if they could make it work,"" a trader said. ""It was a pretty uneventful day,"" a Gulf Coast trader said late Tuesday. Also, because of the snowstorm in the Northeast, traders had purchased gas ahead of time to make up for needed load, he said. A scheduled work outage on Enron's Transwestern San Juan lateral in New Mexico was completed, and the return of a power plant in California alleviated demand in the West, traders said. At the Arizona-California border hub, buyers paid around $13-$33 a million British thermal units, West Coast traders said, down as much as $15 from Monday. At PG&E Citygate, prices were mixed, with buyers paying $9.75-$10.65/MMBtu, down 25 cents on the bid, up 15 cents on the offer. In the Midwest, Chicago Citygate prices fell 7 cents-8 cents to a range of $5.42-$5.53/MMBtu. Alliance Pipeline into Chicago traded around $5.47-$5.52/MMBtu, down 4 cents to 9 cents from Monday. The Nymex April natural gas futures contract settled at $5.315/MMBtu, down 2.1 cents in a tight, range-bound, uneventful session that started late due to bad weather. Physical gas prices at the benchmark Henry Hub in south Louisiana ended in a range of $5.25-$5.30/MMBtu, down 2 cents-6 cents from Monday. Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line at Station 65 deals were made in a similar range of $5.26-$5.35/MMBtu, down 2 cents on the bid, unchanged on the offer. At Katy in East Texas, buyers paid $5.21-$5.30/MMBtu, down 5 cents-6 cents. At Waha, prices fell 9 cents-12 cents to a range of $5.15-$5.30/MMBtu. -By John Edmiston, Dow Jones Newswires; 713-547-9209; john.edmiston@dowjones.com Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Weekly Retail Meeting, EB 27C1; [EMail-Body]= John Anderson PTC/NERC Brad Petzold Power Nav -- John Henry (202) 466-0547 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Rick Buy Status; [EMail-Body]= Rick -- I'm so sorry to hear about this, but I'm glad the outlook is good. Let me know if there is anything I can do to help. From: Karen K Heathman/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/17/2001 02:38 PM To: Richard Causey/ENRON@enronXgate, Andrew S Fastow/ENRON@enronXgate, Ben Glisan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeffrey McMahon/ENRON@enronXgate, Raymond Bowen/ENRON@enronXgate, Mark Koenig/ENRON@enronXgate, Rebecca Carter/ENRON@enronXgate, Mark Frevert/ENRON@enronXgate, Greg Whalley/ENRON@enronXgate, David W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, John J Lavorato/ENRON@enronXgate, John Sherriff/ENRON@EUEnronXGate, Stanley Horton/ENRON@enronXgate cc: Subject: Rick Buy Status Sent this out to my direct reports, but I wanted you to be aware as well. Rick Buy -----Original Message----- From: Heathman, Karen K. Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 2:32 PM To: Bradford, William S.; Ruane, Mark; Brackett, Debbie R.; Furey, Denise; Harris, Molly; Moran, Tom; Rohauer, Tanya; Curry, Ken; Wilson, Mark K; Gorte, David; Tribolet, Michael; Petersen, Randy; Barbour, Karen L.; Larson, Bradford; Schneider, Chip; Hachen, James; Crews, David; Ledlow, James; Schlemmer, Jack; Walker, Mark A.; Murphy, Ted; Port, David; Schultz, Cassandra; Zipter, Rudi; Andrews, Naveen; Nordstrom, Mary; Gorny, Vladimir; Hagelmann, Bjorn; Curry, Wanda; Carson, Rick L.; Lowry, Donna; Rollins, Don; Mcginnis, Stephanie; Bellinghausen, Lynn Subject: FW: Rick Buy Status -----Original Message----- From: Buy, Rick Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 12:07 PM To: Heathman, Karen K. Subject: My Status Most of you have gathered that I haven't been in the office much lately and I wanted to let you why and I am doing it via email so I don't have to say it many times. I have had surgery in the interior of my mouth, specifically the lower right side of my tongue. My dentist had suspected cancer and sent me to an oral surgeon who biopsied the area. This biopsy confirmed the dentist's opinion and off I went to MD Anderson for examination. MDA was more optimistic of diagnosis but said the area needed to be excised in any event which occured at MDA last Wednesday (the 11th). I have been at home recovering since. It has been difficult to speak although it is now much better. I will return to MDA in a month for a follow-up exam. Hopefully the excision was complete and no additional follow- up treatments will be necessary. I have missed several critical meetings and just haven't ""been around"" but I wanted everyone to know that its not because I've lost interest. Thanks for patience, Rick [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: California Refund Proceeding--Got some exhibits to
 prepare--Confidential Atty Client Work Product; [EMail-Body]= I think the best person to provide the affidavits for the PX Credit receivable is Wanda Curry (if we want to make this claim inside of the FERC proceeding - still an open question). Jim -----Original Message----- From: Comnes, Alan Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 7:49 PM To: O'Neil, Murray P.; Ngo, Tracy; Stokley, Chris; Gary Fergus (E-mail); Alvarez, Ray; Dan Watkiss (E-mail); Ron Carroll (E-mail); Hall, Steve C.; Williams, Robert C. Cc: Belden, Tim; Steffes, James D.; Sanders, Richard B.; Robertson, Linda Subject: California Refund Proceeding--Got some exhibits to prepare--Confidential Atty Client Work Product I met with Gary Fergus and we determined the need to prepare affidavits and/or exhibits as part of our August 15th showing in the Califronia refund case. Exhbits in a FERC case require supporting documents and a sponsor (witness). I am trying to contact various people on getting the data together but here are the parameters of the exhibits: Witness designations are preliminary. 1. EPMI's receivables from ISO/PX What it shows: ISO owes us $41.5 million and the PX $9.1 million plus any claims we want to make w.r.t. letters of credit with the PX Sponsor: Tracy Ngo (PX data) and Murray O'Neil (ISO data) (Tracy has agreed to prepare the exhibit but wants support from Murray's group on the ISO numbers.) 2. EPMI's ""receivables"" from ISO for the underscheduling penalty What it shows: ISO has yet to actually implement the underscheduling penalty but has been tracking it. According to information provided Chris Stockly, EPMI would receive $30 million of penalty revenues Sponsor: Chris Stokley or Murray O'Neil 3. Enron's PX credit receivables What it shows: PG&E and SCE collectively owe EES $500 million Sponsor: Steve Swain or ?? GAC [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Dow Jones Reports that PG&E Buys Forward for 5.6 cents for two
 years; [EMail-Body]= ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 10/16/2000 09:58 AM ----- Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 10/13/2000 05:10 PM To: skean@enron.com, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Christopher F Calger/PDX/ECT@ECT, David Parquet/SF/ECT@ECT, Laird Dyer/SF/ECT@ECT, Sandra McCubbin/SFO/EES@EES, Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Robert Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Margaret Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Dow Jones Reports that PG&E Buys Forward for 5.6 cents for two years [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Empty message"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Barton substitute amendment; [EMail-Body]= Attached is from Andy Black of Congressman Barton's staff. This is the bill language and summary of changes to H.R. 1647, the Barton bill that will be marked up on Thursday, that the chairman will offer by way of changes to the original bill text. ---------------------- Forwarded by John Shelk/NA/Enron on 05/08/2001 06:58 PM --------------------------- ""Black, Andy"" <Andy.Black@mail.house.gov> on 05/08/2001 06:49:35 PM To: ""Bud Albright (E-mail)"" ""Annie Caputo (E-mail)"" ""Roy Coffee (E-mail)"" <rcoffee@oconnorhannan.com>, ""Carol Connors (E-mail)"" <carol.connors@ferc.fed.us>, ""Randy Davis (E-mail)"" <rdavis@sdsatty.com>, ""'Charlie DeWitt' (E-mail)"" <nymex4@unidial.com>, ""Ed Gillespie (E-mail)"" ""Rich Glick (E-mail)"" <Rich.Glick@PacifiCorp.com>, ""Jimmy Glotfelty (E-mail)"" <jimmyg@calpine.com>, ""Jim HAGAN (E-mail)"" <jgh@nei.org>, ""Charles Ingebretson (E-mail)"" <cingebretson@bracepatt.com>, ""Joe Nipper (E-mail)"" <jnipper@appanet.org>, ""Marty Kanner (E-mail)"" <mkanner@kannerandassoc.com>, ""Genevieve Laffly-Murphy (E-mail)"" <Laffly@api.org>, ""Lori Laudien (E-mail)"" <Lori.Laudien@ElPaso.com>, ""Les Starck (E-mail)"" <les.starck@sce.com>, ""David Lynch (E-mail)"" <dlynch1@txu.com>, ""Jeff MacKinnon (E-mail)"" <Jeff@rpum.com>, ""Yvonne Mcintyre (E-mail)"" <yvonne.mcintyre@mirant.com>, ""Mike McKenna (E-mail)"" <Lazgrp@aol.com>, ""Jim McVaney (E-mail)"" ""Philip Moeller (E-mail)"" <pmoeller@calpine.com>, ""Nicole Morgado (E-mail)"" <nkmorgado@bpa.gov>, ""Cal Odom (E-mail)"" <codom@eei.org>, ""Gene Peters (E-mail)"" <gpeters@epsa.org>, ""Mike Riith (E-mail)"" <mjriith@southernco.com>, ""Linda Robertson (E-mail)"" <linda.robertson@enron.com>, ""Cynthia Sandherr (E-mail)"" ""Stephen Sayle (E-mail)"" <ssayle@dutkogroup.com>, ""Kerrill Scrivner (E-mail)"" <kscrivner@txu.com>, ""Mike Scrivner (E-mail)"" <mscrivner@lentdc.com>, ""Scott Segal (E-mail)"" <ssegal@bracepatt.com>, ""Rhod Shaw (E-mail)"" <rshaw@alpinegroup.com>, ""John Shelk (E-mail)"" <john.shelk@enron.com>, ""Kathryn Steckelberg (E-mail)"" <KSteckelberg@eei.org>, ""Linda Stuntz (E-mail)"" <lstuntz@sdsatty.com>, ""Joe Vasapoli (E-mail)"" <joe@rpum.com>, ""Montee Wynn (E-mail)"" <montee.wynn@nreca.org>, ""Marc Yacker (E-mail)"" <myacker@elcon.org> cc: Subject: Barton substitute amendment > <<substitute text.PDF>> <<substitute section by section.doc>> > <<substitute changes.doc>> - substitute text.PDF - substitute section by section.doc - substitute changes.doc [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Digital Power Demand: JP Morgan Report; [EMail-Body]= See if there is anythiing of use in here for your high tech group messages. ----- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 09/27/2000 05:21 PM ----- Rob Bradley 09/25/2000 10:31 AM To: Margaret Carson/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Digital Power Demand: JP Morgan Report The JP Morgan report below gives further credence to the Mills/Huber thesis of digital-age power growth. The in-the-trenches story is different from some of the academic studies by the conservation mavens. - Rob - jp morgan.pdf [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= RE: CONFIDENTIAL - DO NOT DISTRIBUTE; [EMail-Body]= Steve looks ok. Although I always thought I built Canada. I guess not eh. Lavo. -----Original Message----- From: McVicker, Maureen On Behalf Of Kean, Steven Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 4:42 PM To: Lay, Kenneth; Skilling, Jeff; Palmer, Mark; Frevert, Mark; Delainey, David; Dietrich, Janet; Kitchen, Louise; Whalley, Greg; Bibi, Philippe; Karen S Owens@ees; Leff, Dan; Sunde, Marty; Mahoney, Peggy; Lavorato, John J. Subject: CONFIDENTIAL - DO NOT DISTRIBUTE CONFIDENTIAL - DO NOT DISTRIBUTE Steve Kean would like your comments on this email as soon as possible. Thanks. << File: 2001memoOrgChangesC.doc >> [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Energy Forum; [EMail-Body]= See last point: MIT would like to talk to us about energy procurement and management. Could you put someone in touch with them? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/14/2001 03:51 PM --------------------------- From: Margaret Allen on 07/13/2001 02:59 PM To: skean@enron.com, Mark Palmer/Enron@EnronXGate, Dennis Vegas/Enron@EnronXGate cc: Subject: FW: Energy Forum FYI -- He also responded back to Intellibridge accepting particpation in the Steering Committee. What a nice guy! -----Original Message----- From: Paul Joskow <pjoskow@MIT.EDU>@ENRON ] Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 1:41 PM To: Skilling, Jeff Subject: Energy Forum Dear Jeff, Thank you for inviting me to participate in the energy policy forum event in Washington, DC on October 3-4. Ordinarily, I would be happy to participate. However, my wife is scheduled to have hip surgery (#2) on October 1. Judging from the last time she went through this I will have to stay around until she is out of the hospital and settled back at home. Accordingly, I am not planning any travel before October 10. Too bad. On another matter, can you ask someone in your energy services company to get in touch with me? I would like to set something up with MIT's executive VP in charge of the business side of running MIT, including energy purchases and management. We have a 22 MW cogenerator, buy gas and electricity at wholesale and use lots of heating and cooling on an ever growing campus with 8,000 students, as many employees, many computer facilities and laboratories. I'm sure that we can do it more efficiently and I have been encouraging the management to look for opportunities to out-source some or all of these activities. I would like to put them in touch with someone at Enron. Thanks Paul Professor Paul L. Joskow Elizabeth and James Killian Professor of Economics and Management and Director, MIT Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research E52-280B MIT Cambridge, MA 02142-1347 phone: 617-253-6664 fax: 617-258-7070 pjoskow@mit.edu [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Rich Products; [EMail-Body]= Looks good. Peggy Mahoney 07/24/2000 06:20 PM To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cedric Burgher/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Mark Koenig/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Paula Rieker/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Karen S Owens@ees@EES, Kevin Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Elizabeth Tilney/HOU/EES@EES, Dave S Laipple/DUB/EES@EES, James E Keller/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Rich Products Please review the attached draft news release about our agreement with Rich Products and let me know if you have any comments by 5pm Tuesday, July 25. We are scheduled to release on Wednesday, July 26. If you have any questions, please call me at x57034. Rich Products is a major US food manufacturer headquartered in Buffalo, NY. The company ranked #122 in Forbes Private 500 and has sales around $1.5 billion. Rich Products is owned and operated by the founding Rich family. Products manufactured include frozen meats, bakery products and non-dairy creamers. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Challenge to exercise of Eminent Domain - Confidential Attorney
 Work Product; [EMail-Body]= USA: UPDATE 1-Calif. seizes stranded SoCal Edison energy contracts. 02/02/2001 Reuters English News Service (C) Reuters Limited 2001. SAN FRANCISCO, Feb 2 (Reuters) - California Gov. Gray Davis on Friday blocked the California Power Exchange from liquidating stranded energy contracts held by cash-strapped utility Southern California Edison, seizing the assets for the state. The governor's office said the order, issued late on Thursday and put in effect on Friday, was needed to ""preserve"" the contracts' value for power-starved California consumers. ""I am using my emergency powers to seize options to buy very inexpensive power that would otherwise be lost forever,"" Davis said in a statement. ""These options will provide reliable power through the end of the year. It is important to protect these contracts for the people of California,"" he said. A Los Angeles judge on January 24 issued a temporary injunction, valid for a week, blocking the exchange's sale of the contracts. The California Power Exchange (CalPX) said Davis' order nullified a Los Angeles County Superior Court decision earlier Friday that authorized CalPX to liquidate Edison's forward market positions. The exchange said they had sought to liquidate the contracts to recover about $255 million that Edison has failed to pay to CalPX market participants. While agreeing to transfer the contracts to the state, the exchange pointed out that the law requires that California pay a ""reasonable value"" for them, which it estimated at nearly $652 million on today's market. Delivery of the first contracts, which total 2.8 million megawatt hours, is scheduled to begin Monday, February 5. One megawatt hour is roughly the amount of electricity needed to light 1,000 homes for 60 minutes. Davis is desperately seeking cheap power for the state after the utilities' financial meltdown pushed them to the market's sidelines. Spot market purchases for the state are currently being made by the Department of Water Resources, but at typically higher prices than in the ""forwards"" market. Block forward energy contracts secure electricity deliveries over a given ""block"" of time at a price agreed months in advance, shielding the buyer from the kind of price volatility that has recently roiled the short-term ""spot"" market. The overall value of SoCal Edison's contracts, agreed last year for power to be delivered in 2001, was not immediately known, but CalPX officials said last month they hoped their liquidation would cover the $215 million SoCalEdison owned the exchange. SoCal Edison, the utility subsidiary of Rosemead, Calif.-based Edison International, has warned it is no longer able to meet its financial obligations after running up a debt of nearly $5 billion buying wholesale power in the spot market, where prices have soared ten-fold over the past few months amid a regional energy shortage. The utility is blocked by the state's 1996 deregulation law from passing these high wholesale prices down to consumers, who are still protected by a rate freeze. That same deregulation legislation created the CalPX, making it the state-sanctioned exchange for electricity trading. SoCal Edison was among the biggest buyers on the exchange. CalPX, crushed by a mountain of debt it is unable to recover from Edison, has shut its spot market operations and is winding down its business affairs. Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: FW: Draft of Organizational Announcement; [EMail-Body]= I'm not sure yet. I think we are going to be sending two memos -- one that I am working on and on that Andy is working on. It looks to me like the message below fits better into Andy's memo. I don't think they will be combined into one, but I'll know more tomorrow. From: Sherri Sera/ENRON@enronXgate on 06/11/2001 04:51 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: FW: Draft of Organizational Announcement Steve, Kevin Garland sent this to me hoping to get Jeff's approval to send it out from the office of the chairman. Would it make sense to incorporate it into the memo you're working on? Please advise. Thanks, SRS -----Original Message----- From: Garland, Kevin Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 3:28 PM To: Sera, Sherri Subject: FW: Draft of Organizational Announcement Announcing the Formation of One Corporate Equity Investing Unit To better develop and manage equity investment opportunities related to our core businesses, Enron has formed one corporate equity investment unit. This new unit, Enron Principal Investments, will combine the existing investment units of ENA, EBS and Enron Investment Partners. Additionally, the Enron Special Asset Group will also become part of Enron Principal Investments. The strategy of Enron Principal Investments will be to work with all the business units of Enron to identify, execute, and manage equity investments, which leverage Enron's unique and proprietary knowledge. These investments may be in the form of venture capital, LBO's, traditional private equity and distressed debt positions. Kevin Garland will serve as Managing Director, overseeing all activities of Enron Principal Investments. Gene Humphrey, Michael Miller, Dick Lydecker, and their groups, will join Kevin and his group to form Enron Principal Investments. This new business unit will report to an investment committee, consisting of Greg Whalley, Ken Rice and Dave Delainey. Please join me in congratulating and supporting Kevin, Gene, Michael, Dick and the other members of this group in this effort. Jeff Skilling [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Document editing/checking(collaboration)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: California Refund Proceeding Privileged and Confidential
 Attorney Work Product Attorney-Client Communication; [EMail-Body]= -----Original Message----- From: Alvarez, Ray Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 3:32 PM To: Sanders, Richard B.; Williams, Robert C.; gfergus@brobeck.com Cc: Steffes, James D.; Comnes, Alan; Robertson, Linda; Shapiro, Richard; dwatkiss@bracepatt.com Subject: California Refund Proceeding Privileged and Confidential Attorney Work Product Attorney-Client Communication In our litigation meeting last Tuesday, we learned that netting of spot purchases and sales is of paramount importance in limiting our exposure to refunds, under the FERC's July 26 Order, in both the California and Pacific Northwest proceedings. However, in the California proceeding we are also afforded the opportunity in the Order to offset our receivables against any refund that would otherwise have to be paid by us. Also, to the extent that our receivables exceed the refund amount, the Order provides for payment of interest to us in accordance with CFR Section 35.19a. At present, I am aware of the existence of three receivables. As you will recall, I mentioned at Tuesday's meeting that we should be able to treat as a receivable for purposes of offset, the revenues due us from the application of the CAISO underscheduling penalty. I communicated the possibility of offsetting this receivable against any potential refund at this mornings Western Wholesale conference call, and subsequent research conducted by Alan Comnes indicates that the CAISO owes us $30MM, as per the CAISO's own numbers. The CAISO also owes us approximately $40MM due to nonpayment for one to two months of business. These two figures alone, totalling approximately $70MM, exceed the estimate of our potential exposure in the California proceeding. Finally, the negative CTC issue is another receivable due us by IOU's that, under the plain language of the Order, could potentially be used to offset any refund amount. I am not aware of the magnitude of this receivable but do understand that there are some sensitivities regarding this issue, including concerns about revealing the amount of the credit due us. It is likely that the amount would become public if it is presented in the California proceeding. Please give us your thoughts as to the use of the CTC receivable to offset potential refunds in the California proceeding. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Electricity Issues; [EMail-Body]= Thanks. We are preparing a memo (John has seen it) to go out to each of our offices telling them about this incident (and the related ones that occurred the same day) and including some tips on how to handle such confrontations in the future. John_Presley@enron.net on 05/23/2001 02:14:25 PM To: SKean@enron.com, Mark.Palmer@enron.com cc: John_Brindle@enron.net, David_Cromley@enron.net Subject: Electricity Issues Steve/Mark, I have looked into the demonstration by the ACORN group which occurred on 5/21 at our New York Office (780 3rd Ave). I believe you are well aware of the incident as the office there immediately contacted Mark Palmers group. I will respond to the building management to discuss security issues and to gain a better understanding of the security posture of the facility. If you have any questions or require further follow-up please let me know. - John P. John Presley Business Controls Enron Corp (EB4646) Ext. 58208 ----- Forwarded by John Presley/Enron Communications on 05/23/01 01:59 PM ----- | | John Brindle | | | | | | 05/23/01 | | | 01:21 PM | | | | | | | To: Skean@enron.com, Mark.Palmer@enron.com | | cc: John Presley/Enron Communications@Enron Communications | | Subject: Electricity Issues | Steve/Mark - I have asked John Presley to look into this. I am leaving the building right now, but John will be in touch. Please contact him (58208) if you need anything before he calls you. John John Brindle Enron Corporation Business Controls Tel: 713.853.3843 Fax:713.646.8838 email: John_Brindle@Enron.net ----- Forwarded by John Brindle/Enron Communications on 05/23/01 12:58 PM ----- | | Paula Corey | | | | | | 05/23/01 | | | 10:34 AM | | | | | | | To: John Brindle/Enron Communications@Enron Communications | | cc: | | Subject: Electricity Issues | John I have just gotten off the phone with the building management for our facility in New York. We were picketed at 780 3rd Ave and the 100 picketeers stormed the lobby. We will accrue some additional costs for added security and apparatntly the local police were not really on top of the deal. He would like us to provide any advance notice if we ever have access to this information. Our office was spared as thet shut down the elevators during the disturbance. He will be happy to speak with you. I am on my cell 713.560.7763 Paula [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= [Second Delivery: WPTF Friday Amen Burrito]; [EMail-Body]= Sorry about this gang, but my new computer messed up the e-mail list. It's 4 am and I think I have fixed it. Maybe. Bear with me if you are getting this for the second time this morning. gba X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Message-ID: <398A81DA.E883D290@idt.net> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 01:42:26 -0700 From: Gary Ackerman <foothi19@idt.net> Reply-To: foothi19@idt.net Organization: Foothill Services X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74C-CCK-MCD {C-UDP; EBM-APPLE} (Macintosh; U; PPC) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: webmaster <charlotte@wptf.org> Subject: WPTF Friday Amen Burrito Content-Type: multipart/alternative;=20 ?=20 THE FRIDAY BURRITO=20 ""...more fun than a fortune cookie, and at least as accurate.""=20 Everyone is getting into the act.? When I started this gig, I was the only= =20 guy in town writing to folks like you about the power industry in=20 California.? I wrote about what=01,s new, what=01,s happening, and all the= =20 important stuff.? This week, Governor Gray Davis decided to write his own= =20 Burrito.? His epistle got more press than mine, but why is he muscling in o= n=20 my turf?? Not to be outdone, PUC President Loretta Lynch released a report= =20 which looks into every facet of California=01,s power business.? No stone l= eft=20 unturned. I=01,m telling you, there isn=01,t enough room in this business f= or all=20 of us.? They need to clear out.=20 With people like Herr (Hair?) Peace, Governor I=01,m-Not Mr.-Rogers Davis a= nd=20 Let=01,s Do Lynch, who needs a Friday Burrito?? They re-define our reality = each=20 week with mind-numbing aplomb.? For example, starting in early June, the PX= =20 was ordered to compete for business against other Qualified Trading=20 Vehicles.? Then, two weeks later, the Energy F_hrer legislated that idea to= =20 an early death which kept the status quo for at least one year.? This week= =20 the PUC approved 5-year bilateral deals for PG&E and SCE, thereby opening t= he=20 PX to competition, and emasculating the PX=01,s Block Forward Market. Zip, = bam,=20 boom.=20 I can=01,t wait to see what next week will bring.? I hear Senator Bowen is= =20 holding Committee hearings on re regulating the industry, and the Governor= =01,s=20 new Energy Security Council will meet to decide six things:=20 What=01,s for lunch?=20 Who will sit at the head of the table?=20 Does anyone have good seats for next week=01,s Democratic convention?=20 Is there anyone we haven=01,t indicted yet in the power industry?=20 Who will crank up the air conditioning in this room?? It=01,s getting too w= arm.=20 Then, they will collect data from innocent businesses under subpoena, ignor= e=20 the facts, and publish a report.? It makes one want to take a deep breath,= =20 and inhale the scented fumes of democracy.=20 You know, I can=01,t think about where to begin, so let=01,s start somewher= e.=20 Things on the Island of California=20 ?@@@ Is there anyone left at SDG&E with a brain?=20 ?@@@ The PUC issues its scathing report=20 ?@@@ The ISO invokes $250 price caps.? Duh!=20 Things at the throne of FERC=20 ?@@@ Amen for the Morgan Stanley Order=20 Odds and Ends (_!_)=20 Things on the Island of California=20 ?@@@ Is there anyone left at SDG&E with a brain?=20 Well, the answer very clearly is no.? I have been astounded by repeated=20 attempts of SDG&E=01,s most senior people to ape humans, but instead they m= imic=20 apes.=20 Consider the following.? First, they waltz their default customers into the= =20 summer with little of no protection from price spikes in the wholesale=20 market.? Forgivable in that it is human to err.? The prices skyrocket in=20 June, and they start looking for who to blame.? =01&Must be them damn=20 independent generators,=018 say their managers.? Gary Cotton informs the IS= O=20 Governing Board that hedging SDG&E=01,s position in the Block Forward Marke= t=20 wouldn=01,t have made any difference.? There=01,s one nobel laureate who mi= ssed his=20 prime.=20 Next, under pressure, they ask for help from suppliers and anyone else who= =20 will assist the utility and their customers.? Nine offers show up at their= =20 table, and they can=01,t choose any of them.? Again, Mr Cotton tells his fe= llow=20 ISO Governing Board members that these things take time, and we don=01,t to= rush=20 since there are many legislative barriers, and, well, the surfing was good= =20 this week so why spoil it?=20 Now they are in a panic because the Energy F_hrer is visiting old ladies=20 living in trailer parks, advising them not to pay their SDG&E electricity= =20 bill, and to continue to operate their air conditioners.? SDG&E puts a full= =20 page ad in the local newspaper telling everyone that SDG&E is doing=20 everything it can to lower their electric bills, including asking the ISO f= or=20 a $250 price cap, but the public can help by calling the ISO [address and= =20 phone number provided in the ad] and urging them to lower the cap.? I alway= s=20 thought the location of the ISO was a State secret for security reasons.? N= o=20 secrets in San Diego.=20 But we are not done.? No sir, we are not.? Those buffalo heads who run that= =20 company decide they will win a gold star on their collective foreheads, and= =20 implement one of the four resolutions passed by the Electric Oversight=20 Board.? The one they pick is to petition FERC on an expedited basis to cap = at=20 $250, the price at which sellers may bid energy or ancillary services into= =20 the ISO and the PX.? The primary reason is that Western power markets are n= ot=20 workably competitive.? In other words, they want FERC to set a max price on= =20 what generators can sell in addition to the price limit at which the ISO ca= n=20 buy!=20 What I find most astounding about this double talk is that SDG&E continues = to=20 collect tons of money from the sales of regulatory must run energy into the= =20 PX.?? These are sales from their stranded assets.? Their grief hasn=01,t ab= ated=20 their greed.=20 So, to recap, SDG&E missed the boat on price hedging, failed to win consume= r=20 confidence in public meetings, asked for help from suppliers and did nothin= g=20 in response, then filed at FERC to cap the sale price because the wholesale= =20 market into which they sell (over-priced?) energy is not workably=20 competitive.? Too much time in the direct sun light.=20 Things on the Island of California=20 ?@@@ The PUC issues its scathing report=20 The PUC report released yesterday is a gem with which I have not spent enou= gh=20 time.? I only read the Executive Summary, and that only because our counsel= ,=20 Dan Douglass forwarded me a copy. Let me pick out some of the gems in=20 President Lets Do Lynch=01,s burrito.? I would recommend reading the whole = text=20 if you have time, and if you seek perverse entertainment.=20 =01&California is experiencing major problems with electricity supply and= =20 pricing caused by policies and procedures adopted over the past ten years.= =20 =01& Since June, wholesale prices for electrical power in California have= =20 increased on average 270% over the same period in 1999, resulting in over $= 1=20 billion in excess?? payments for electricity.=20 =01&Hot weather, aging power plant and transmission infrastructure, and=20 dysfunctional bidding behavior in the wholesale power markets combined to= =20 drive prices up ...=20 =01&Because of serious market defects and tight supply of electricity,=20 purchasers of California power will likely pay billions more in electricity= =20 costs this year. Moreover, these price increases do not necessarily fund ne= w=20 investments in electricity supply or delivery reliability - they may flow= =20 solely to power producer profit margins.=20 =01&Despite the Electricity Oversight Board's legislative mandate to overse= e=20 those institutions, we have been unable to obtain [bid] data. Nevertheless,= =20 ... , we believe enough evidence of questionable behavior exists that the= =20 Attorney General should conduct an investigation into these statewide marke= t=20 practices, coordinating with other State agencies, including the PUC and th= e=20 EOB. Such an investigation would provide the factual foundation that=20 California policy makers and regulators need to recover any illegally=20 obtained profits.=20 =01&A momentous consequence of California's attempt to create a market in= =20 electricity is that the federal government now regulates California's=20 electric system. Washington D.C. now controls pricing decisions directly at= =20 the wholesale level and indirectly at the retail level and, to the extent= =20 that supply incentives are correlated to prices, Washington, D.C. now affec= ts=20 California's ability to attract new investment in power plants.=20 =01&Past administrations' willingness to cede the State's authority to the= =20 federal government combined with the legislative creation of two non-public= =20 supervisory organizations that have no duty to protect the public or consid= er=20 the retail customer. The ""Independent System Operator"" (ISO) and the ""Power= =20 Exchange"" (PX), the nonprofit private corporations that operate the State's= =20 transmission system and control wholesale pricing policies, are governed by= =20 boards whose members can have serious conflicts of interest. Some of these= =20 board members or their companies financially benefit from higher prices in= =20 electricity markets. Neither of these private organizations is accountable = to=20 the State or its consumers ....=20 ?=20 =01&Despite the federalization and the fragmentation of the State's electri= c=20 services, the State of California should protect its businesses and consume= rs=20 from cartel pricing; collusive behavior; inadequate power plant maintenance= =20 and lack of market planning for adequate electricity supplies.=20 =01&California consumers and businesses deserve to know in advance - as San= =20 Diegans did not this summer - how and when the price of an essential servic= e=20 like electricity will double. California is now largely constrained by=20 federal mandates from providing comprehensive retail price relief as long a= s=20 wholesale prices remain so high. If California tried to re-impose a price= =20 freeze in San Diego now, federal regulators would likely prevent that=20 action.? ... Short-term price relief, however, cannot resolve market gaming= =20 or fundamental wholesale pricing problems controlled by federal regulators.= =20 ?=01&We have been precluded from obtaining the data necessary to know if th= e ISO=20 and PX failed to detect manipulation and gaming on several fronts. We do no= t=20 know how market players acted in price offering and bidding and scheduling.= =20 The FERC has just announced an inquiry into national pricing and energy=20 market issues. California should not wait for national findings before it= =20 investigates California market practices. We recommend that the California= =20 Attorney General immediately subpoena relevant records and data to determin= e=20 the pricing and offering behavior of market participants; the actions of th= e=20 ISO and its board members; and the actions of generators in supplying=20 California's energy needs.=20 =01&Ten Actions to Consider or Act Upon to Prevent Current Electricity Prob= lems=20 From Spreading in 2001: ...=20 ?=20 ? 2. Create a California Energy Council, modeled on the National Security= =20 Council, to unify State action to resolve energy problems and to perform=20 integrated energy planning;=20 3. Ask FERC for extended wholesale price cap authority to moderate Californ= ia=20 wholesale market pricing;=20 4. Ask FERC to recognize the defects in the California and western regional= =20 markets and find that no competitive market exists in California power=20 markets;=20 ?...=20 ? ?8. Eliminate potential conflicts of interest in ISO/PX stakeholder board= s;=20 9. Improve California's ability to obtain ISO and generator data and enhanc= e=20 the State's enforcement capability for power plant maintenance; price=20 manipulation and generation gaming, consistent with protection of proprieta= ry=20 business information;=20 10. Provide the EOB with effective enforcement ability and additional=20 oversight authority for the ISO and PX. =01&Ten Issues to Consider or Act Upon Within the Next Six Months: ...=20 ? 4. Streamline state power plant siting procedures; consistent with=20 environmental requirements, and prioritize applications to advance clean,= =20 BACT+ power plant proposals.=20 5. Institute ""use-it -or- lose-it"" permitting power plant licensing and=20 emissions credits rules to ensure power plants get built;=20 ...=20 ?8. Reform PX pricing protocols and structures to lower wholesale and retai= l=20 prices and reduce excess profits=018 I told you I don=01,t need to write a Burrito anymore.? The Democrats in=20 Sacramento are doing that for me.? Welcome comrade.=20 Things on the Island of California=20 ?@@@ The ISO invokes $250 price caps.? Duh!=20 It is really hard to describe the drama of an ISO Governing Board meeting,= =20 especially when our favorite topic arises.? It seems the only time the Boar= d=20 becomes animated is when one of three issues are on the agenda: price caps,= =20 FTRs, and priorities for software enhancements. Otherwise, its pretty much= =20 hum-drum.=20 =01+Round and =01+round we went, once again.? A few more forced votes tippe= d the=20 scale in favor of the cap.? There were 15 yes votes, which included a force= d=20 yes vote from our friend Jerry Toenyes by order of Secretary of Energy Mr.= =20 Richardson. [Jerry, did you realize that the last letters of your name coul= d=20 be re-arranged to spell =01&NO ET YES=018?? Kind of a french thing.] I=01,m= sorry=20 about that vote, Jerry.? You still go in my book as one of the brave and bo= ld=20 for standing up to that sort of intimidation for so long.? Your picture in= =20 the SF Chron said it all.=20 The brave souls who stood tall and voted NO included David Parquet (Enron),= =20 Jan Smutny-Jones (IEP), Barbara Barkovich (CLECA), Caolyn Kehrein (CMA), Da= n=20 Kirshner (EDF), and Stacy Roscoe (Procter & Gamble).? Now, I must admit tha= t=20 Dynegy=01,s Greg Blue did help by voting a Texas No, spelled =01&A-B-S-T-A-= I-N=018.??=20 I have instructed Dynegy trader Dave Francis in Houston to work with Greg t= o=20 correct that problem.? We=01,re going to work things out.=20 The Energy F_hrer addressed the Board, again.? I didn=01,t mind that I only= had=20 a few brief, very brief moments to address the Board, and Herr (Hair?) Peac= e=20 got over 20 minutes.? That didn=01,t bother me at all.? He did more damage = to=20 himself in 20 than I could do in 2.? He blasted away at everyone who oppose= d=20 him.? He pined about Camden quitting the Board.? He said he knew how prices= =20 and markets work, that it isn=01,t the way those academic egg-head, FERC-lo= ving=20 economists tell you who pray to the gods of competition.? He lambasted WAPA= =20 for withholding generation to protect fish and wildlife (what was that all= =20 about?).? He predicted that on Thursday=01,s PUC meeting he and all the oth= er=20 powerful Democrats, Republicans and angry citizens of San Diego would deman= d=20 that the PUC impose a rate cap on retail electric rates in San Diego that a= re=20 just and reasonable (it didn=01,t happen).? And on and on and on.? This man= is=20 very delusional. He believes that Steve, and only Steve Peace can save the= =20 world.? He believes that political will trumps judicial, quasi-judicial, or= =20 independent Board actions.? This man makes relevant all the abstract musing= s=20 of the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) ... The will to power, t= he=20 ?bermensch, the transvaluation of values, etc.=20 But we are getting under (uber?) his skin, with the help of the press.?=20 Wednesday afternoon I called Commissioner Dick Bilas to see if he thought= =20 whether the next day=01,s PUC meeting was going to be a roll over. Dick sai= d he=20 got a call from Peace, and that Peace said he would not come to the meeting= .?=20 Apparently, Peace had received a lot of press, and all of it bad.=20 That=01,s the thin line of freedom which keeps tyranny at least one step aw= ay=20 from our front door.=20 ?>>> Things at the throne of FERC=20 ?@@@ Amen for the Morgan Stanley Order=20 And now, the good news.? You deserve this.? FERC gave the California market= a=20 little wiggle room last Friday.? FERC issued a last minute reply to the=20 complaint by Morgan Stanley Capital Group relating to the ISO=01,s intent t= o=20 lower the price cap.? FERC denied the complaint, but they didn=01,t waste t= ime=20 with an Order to simply deny a complaint.? FERC danced on the head of the I= SO=20 and pulled the bite out of the price cap.=20 Here are some excerpts:=20 =01&We accepted this [Amendment 21], not because it was a cap on sellers=01= , prices=20 but because it would promote order and transparency in the market by clearl= y=20 telling sellers of the maximum price the ISO was willing to pay and allowin= g=20 sellers to make informed economic choices on whether to sell in the ISO=20 market or to sell elsewhere...=20 =01& ... The ISO has no more or less ability to procure capacity and energy= than=20 any other buyer of these services ... If the ISO is unable to elicit=20 sufficient supplies at or below its announced purchase price ceiling (becau= se=20 generators are free to sell elsewhere if they choose), it will have to rais= e=20 its purchase price to the level necessary to meet its needs. ... Therefore,= =20 an increase in out-of-market (OOM) calls for generation may be necessary to= =20 maintain system reliability.? Because the current payment for OOM is not=20 subject to a maximum purchase price, the resulting overall payments may be= =20 higher.=20 =01&To the extent the ... ISO Board resolution contemplates implementing a= =20 directive that generators must bid their capacity into the ISO markets unde= r=20 any circumstances (e.g., when system load exceeds 38,000 MW), such a=20 requirement is not permitted by our ... Order and the ISO tariff. ... Futur= e=20 implementation of the ISO Board resolution with regard to a requirement to= =20 sell would require significant revisions to the ISO market rules.? Such=20 market changes could not become effective absent a corresponding amendment = to=20 the ISO tariff which would have to be filed under section 205 of the FPA.= =018=20 Well. What do you think about that?=20 Just wait.? Here is what the sleeping bear, Commissioner Hebert said in his= =20 concurring remarks:=20 =01&Getting to the bottom of the problem, in my view, requires us to begin = a=20 proceeding to rescind our approval of the ISO as the operator of the=20 California grid.? The record supports such a move. ... A memorandum to the= =20 ISO from a stakeholder who resigned from the governing board eloquently=20 brings to our attention repeated attempts to undermine the independence of= =20 the ISO. The memorandum also thoughtfully outlines consequences to the=20 markets of a return to =01+command and control.=01,=20 =01&Because these allegations come from a non-market participant, especiall= y=20 should we take heed.? We must also take notice of the public pressure on th= e=20 Board to compromise its independence.=018=20 Amen, brother, amen.=20 Odds and Ends (_!_)=20 As you can imagine, this week, like an endless string of weeks before this= =20 has been interminable.? I get about three phone calls a day from press=20 reporters, very little of which ever sees print.? My shtick is just too=20 complex for casual readers.? But I do notice that the reporters are asking= =20 better questions.? The public is becoming more savvy.? The information flow= =20 is moving in our favor, and will disarm the forces of evil, in about 10=20 years.=20 I have other problems on my mind.? I am working on a new computer system.?= =20 Really, it=01,s just an upgrade of an older computer that is a bit faster t= han=20 the laptop I tried to upgrade, very unsuccessfully.? As a result of the all= =20 the new hardware and software I purchased, my office looks like a war zone= =20 with an odd mix of PUC service copies, computer documentation, and diskette= s=20 laying all around. Quite a mess.=20 Prepare for the future.? Our next general meeting is scheduled for Thursday= =20 and Friday, October 5 and 6 at Moro Bay.? Barb Ennis will prepare a blurb f= or=20 us in next week=01,s Burrito about room reservations, timing, golf, etc.? O= ur=20 guest speakers will include MSC Chairman Professor Frank Wolak who will tal= k=20 on the subject of his choice, Ms. Irene Moosen of Grueneich Resource=20 Advocates who will make a presentation on the distributed generation case= =20 before the PUC, and William Freddo of PG&E National Energy Group who will= =20 give us some education on operating a power plant inside the New England IS= O.=20 Now for your daily bread, provided this week by Dan Douglass.? Last week we= =20 had a joke about Catholics.? This week it=01,s agnostics.=20 An atheist was taking a walk thru the woods, admiring all that the accident= ?=20 of evolution had created.? ""What majestic trees!? What powerful rivers! Wha= t?=20 beautiful animals!""? he said to himself.=20 As he was walking alongside the river he heard a rustling in the bushes?=20 behind him.? As he turned to look, he saw a 7 foot grizzly bear charging?= =20 towards him. He ran as fast as he could up the path.? He looked over his?= =20 shoulder and saw that the bear was closing in on him.? He tried to run even= ?=20 faster, so scared that tears were coming to his eyes. His heart was pumping= ?=20 frantically as he tried to run even faster, but he tripped and fell on the?= =20 ground.? He rolled over to pick himself up and saw the bear right on top of= ?=20 him raising its paw to kill him.=20 At that instant he cried out ""Oh my God!"" And time stopped. The bear froze.= ?=20 The forest was silent.? The river even stopped flowing.? A bright light=20 shone? upon the man, and a voice out of the sky said, ""You deny my existenc= e=20 all? these years, teach others I don't exist and even credit my creation to= =20 a? cosmic accident, and now do you expect me to help you out of this?=20 predicament?? Am I to count you as a believer?""=20 The atheist, ever so proud, looked into the light and said, ""It would be=20 rather hypocritical to ask to be counted as a believer after all these=20 years,? but could you make the bear a believer?""=20 ""Very well"" said the voice. And the light went out, the river flowed, the?= =20 sounds of the forest continued, and the bear brought both paws together,?= =20 bowed his head, and said, ""Lord, I thank you for this food which I am about= ?=20 to receive.""=20 Amen.? And have a great weekend.? Oh, and thanks to all of you who sent me= =20 happy birthday wishes.? It was very much appreciated.=20 KSB=20 gba [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Summary of the MOU; [EMail-Body]= ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/10/2001=20 07:35 AM --------------------------- From: Jeff Dasovich on 04/09/2001 07:00 PM Sent by: Jeff Dasovich To: Alan Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Angela Schwarz/HOU/EES@EES, Beverly=20 Aden/HOU/EES@EES, Bill Votaw/HOU/EES@EES, Brenda Barreda/HOU/EES@EES, Carol= =20 Moffett/HOU/EES@EES, Cathy Corbin/HOU/EES@EES, Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT,= =20 Christina Liscano/HOU/EES@EES, Craig H Sutter/HOU/EES@EES, Dan=20 Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Debora Whitehead/HOU/EES@EES, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EE= S,=20 Don Black/HOU/EES@EES, Dorothy Youngblood/HOU/ECT@ECT, Douglas=20 Huth/HOU/EES@EES, Edward Sacks/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Eric Melvin/HOU/EES@EES,= =20 Erika Dupre/HOU/EES@EES, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Fran Deltoro/HOU/EES@EES,= =20 Gayle W Muench/HOU/EES@EES, Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@ENRON, Gordon=20 Savage/HOU/EES@EES, Harold G Buchanan/HOU/EES@EES, Harry=20 Kingerski/NA/Enron@ENRON, Iris Waser/HOU/EES@EES, James D=20 Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON, James W Lewis/HOU/EES@EES, James Wright/Western=20 Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Jeff Messina/HOU/EES@EES, Jeremy=20 Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Jess Hewitt/HOU/EES@EES, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON= ,=20 Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kathy Bass/HOU/EES@EES, Kathy=20 Dodgen/HOU/EES@EES, Ken Gustafson/HOU/EES@EES, Kevin Hughes/HOU/EES@EES,=20 Leasa Lopez/HOU/EES@EES, Leticia Botello/HOU/EES@EES, Mark S=20 Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Marsha Suggs/HOU/EES@EES, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES,=20 Meredith M Eggleston/HOU/EES@EES, Michael Etringer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Michael=20 Mann/HOU/EES@EES, Michelle D Cisneros/HOU/ECT@ECT, mpalmer@enron.com, Neil= =20 Bresnan/HOU/EES@EES, Neil Hong/HOU/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Paula= =20 Warren/HOU/EES@EES, Richard L Zdunkewicz/HOU/EES@EES, Richard=20 Leibert/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, Rita=20 Hennessy/NA/Enron@ENRON, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Rosalinda=20 Tijerina/HOU/EES@EES, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah=20 Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Scott Gahn/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES= ,=20 Sharon Dick/HOU/EES@EES, skean@enron.com, Tanya Leslie/HOU/EES@EES, Tasha= =20 Lair/HOU/EES@EES, Ted Murphy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Terri Greenlee/NA/Enron@ENRON, Ti= m=20 Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tony Spruiell/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES,=20 Vladimir Gorny/HOU/ECT@ECT, Wanda Curry/HOU/EES@EES, William S=20 Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kathryn Corbally/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jubran=20 Whalan/HOU/EES@EES, triley@enron.com, Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert= C=20 Greg Wolfe/HOU/ECT@ECT, James= =20 Wright/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Dirk vanUlden/Western= =20 Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange, Steve Walker/SFO/EES@EES, Jennifer=20 Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES, Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES, Douglas=20 Condon/SFO/EES@EES, wgang@enron.com, Scott Govenar <sgovenar@govadv.com>,= =20 Hedy Govenar <hgovenar@govadv.com> @ ENRON, jklauber@llgm.com, Mike D=20 Smith/HOU/EES@EES, John Janel= =20 Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Eric Letke/DUB/EES@EES, Richard B=20 Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT, gfergus@brobeck.com, Michael Tribolet/ENRON@enronXgate= ,=20 Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT,=20 gfergus@brobeck.com, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Mercy Gil/Enron@EnronXGat= e,=20 Jennifer Thome/NA/Enron@Enron, David Leboe/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: =20 Subject: Summary of the MOU The following is an outline of the basic terms of the Southern California= =20 Edison Memorandum of Understanding: ? Commitment to Provide Power =01) SCE will keep its current generation pla= nts=20 and other generation assets and commit them to provide power on a regulated= =20 cost-of-service basis for 10 years. ? Dedication of Power =01) Edison International will commit the entire outp= ut of=20 Sunrise (one of Edison International=01,s non-regulated generating faciliti= es)=20 to the State on a fixed price basis for 10 years. Phase I of Sunrise is to = be=20 brought online by August 15, 2001. If not brought online by August 15, 2001= ,=20 Edison International shall be assessed a $2 million penalty. ? Transmission Sale =01) SCE will sell to the State its transmission assets= for=20 approximately $2.76 billion (2.3 times the net book value of the assets),= =20 subject to certain adjustments. Of the $2.76 billion, the $1.5 billion gain= =20 on sale, will be used to reduce SCE=01,s net undercollected amount as of Ja= nuary=20 31, 2001. In connection with the purchase, the State will also assume certa= in=20 liabilities associated with the transmission assets. ? Backup Transaction =01) If the transmission sale does not occur within tw= o=20 years for reasons beyond the parties=01, control, then if the State elects,= SCE=20 shall sell to the State SCE=01,s hydro generation assets. If the hydro asse= ts=20 are not worth $1.5 billion, then SCE will also sell the state after Decembe= r=20 31, 2010 enough below-market-price-power to make up the shortfall. ? Conservation Property =01) SCE shall grant perpetual conservation easemen= ts to=20 the State covering approximately 260,000 acres of its Big Creek hydroelectr= ic=20 related lands and 825 acres of its Eastern Sierra hydroelectric related=20 lands. Some of the land may be deeded in fee. ? Contribution by Edison International =01) Edison International will refun= d to=20 SCE not less than $400 million. This money will consist of a refund of=20 approximately $293 million in estimated 2000 quarterly tax payments plus=20 approximately $197 million in federal loss carryback tax savings. ? Investment =01) Edison International and SCE will invest not less than $3= =20 billion over the next 5 years in capital improvements for SCE. ? Litigation =01) SCE shall dismiss certain claims, including its takings a= nd=20 filed rate doctrine cases. ? CPUC Regulation =01) CPUC shall continue to regulate SCE using historical= =20 principles of ratemaking. ? Payment for Portion of QF Drop-off =01) SCE shall pay an amount that=20 represents that portion of the net short from January 18, 2001 to April 1,= =20 2001 that is attributable to QF=01,s not selling to SCE (due to SCE=01,s fa= ilure to=20 pay the QF=01,s). SCE will securitize this amount. ? Securitization =01) SCE shall securitize its full net undercollected amou= nt=20 (approx. $3.5 billion). The securitization shall occur in two tranches (i.= e.=20 two different nonbypassable dedicated rate components). ? The first tranche will occur after the passage of legislation and the=20 signing of the definitive agreements and will cover the net undercollected= =20 amount, less the gain on sale, plus interest on certain obligations in the= =20 net undercollected amount. ? The second tranche would be triggered if the transmission sale does not= =20 occur within two years. Accordingly, the second tranche would not show up = in=20 rates for two years, if at all. ? Buying the Net Short =01) The State will be required to buy the net short= =20 through December 31, 2002. After 2002 SCE will be responsible for covering= =20 the net short. ? Investment Recovery =01) SCE shall have an authorized rate of return that= will=20 not drop below its current rte (11.6%) during the 10 year cost of service= =20 ratemaking period. ? Next Steps (Definitive Agreements and CPUC Action): ? Definitive Agreements =01) Once the MOU is signed, the next stage is to= =20 negotiate definitive agreements which contain the specific terms of the=20 transmission sale, as well as the specific terms of the various other relat= ed=20 agreements (e.g., the O&M Agreement, Transmission Services Agreement and th= e=20 Facilities Services Agreement). ? CPUC Action =01) Prior to entering into the definitive agreements, the CP= UC=20 must undertake certain actions (which include: establishing mechanisms for= =20 preapproval of procurement costs and URG costs, deferring SCE=01,s general = rate=20 case until 2003, granting SCE some relief from direct access credits and=20 clarifying the first priority condition in the holding company act). [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= GREAT NEWS ****FERC Order on Morgan Stanley Complaint Against ISO; [EMail-Body]= See below. This would have presented a bigger problem than price caps. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/HOU/EES on 08/01/2000 07:25 AM --------------------------- Susan J Mara 08/01/2000 03:07 AM To: David Parquet/SF/ECT@ECT, Tim Belden/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert Badeer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Elsa Piekielniak/Corp/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Vonderheide/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Bruno Gaillard/SFO/EES@EES, Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES, Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES, Sandra McCubbin/SFO/EES@EES, Chris H Foster/HOU/ECT@ECT, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/HOU/EES@EES, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: GREAT NEWS ****FERC Order on Morgan Stanley Complaint Against ISO Dan Douglass summarized this. This really puts CA and the ISO on notice that they cannot confiscate the power as they seem ready to do -- FERC reiterates that the generators can sell power wherever they want because the cap is a cap on ISO purchases. ANd if the ISO want to set a sale price cap it has to file with FERC, wait 60 days and amend its contract ---------------------- Forwarded by Susan J Mara/SFO/EES on 08/01/2000 01:01 AM --------------------------- ""Daniel Douglass"" <douglass@ArterHadden.com> on 07/31/2000 07:27:24 PM To: <peter.bray@att.net>, <JBarthrop@electric.com>, <mnelson@electric.com>, <rschlanert@electric.com>, <Bruno_Gaillard@enron.com>, <kmagrude@enron.com>, <mpetroch@enron.com>, <susan_j_mara@enron.com>, <athomas@newenergy.com>, <bchen@newenergy.com>, <Jeff.Hanson@phaser.com>, <anchau@shellus.com>, <andrew.madden@utility.com>, <ben.reyes@utility.com>, <chris.king@utility.com>, <david.bayless@utility.com> cc: Subject: FERC Order on Morgan Stanley Complaint Against ISO We have good news on the ISO price caps front. The FERC has made it clear that ISO does not have the ability to mandate that generators sell to ISO at its price caps and that the proper response to inadequate supply is to lift the price caps. On Friday, the FERC issued its Order on Complaint in connection with the July 10 complaint filed by Morgan Stanley Capital Group Inc. (""MS""). As you may recall, MS requested FERC to issue a stay of the ISO's maximum purchase price authority and to direct the ISO to reverse any price cap reductions. MS sought Fast Track processing pursuant to Rule 206(h), which was granted by FERC on the grounds that the complaint ""warrants expeditious action."" As a quick background summary for you, last November, FERC issued an order approving Tariff Amendment 21 which extended ISO's price cap authority through 11/15/00. That order stated that the ISO ""maximum purchase price was not a cap on what the seller may charge the ISO, but a cap on what the ISO was willing to pay."" The Commission said that sellers dissatisfied with the price cap could ""choose to sell those services into the California Power Exchange or bilateral markets."" FERC notes in Friday's Order that the 6/28 the ISO's Board resolution lowered the caps to $500 and ISO further directed that, ""To the extent permitted by law, regulation and pre-existing contract, Management shall direct generators to bid in all their capacity when system load exceeds 38,000 MW."" The MS complaint alleged that the cap reduction was unlawful and would, ""threaten the stability and integroty of the marketplace."" MS also requested an emergency technical conference to examine ISO's justification for the price cap reduction. FERC denied the MS stay request, as well as its request that the $750 maximum purchase price be reinstated. The Commission reiterates that it is not approving a cap on sellers' prices, because they can sell at whatever price they want. Rather ISO has simply stated the maximum price it is willing to pay. ""Because sellers are not required to sell to the ISO, the ISO cannot dictate their price."" Importantly, however, FERC also states that, ""ISO has no more or less ability to procure capacity and energy than any other buyer of these services....if the ISO is unable to elicit sufficient supplies at or below its announced purchase price ceiling (because generators are free to sell elsewhere if they choose), it will have to raise its purchase price to the level necessary to meet its needs."" [Emphasis added] FERC then notes that this may lead to an increase in Out of Market (""OOM"") calls and that OOM calls are not subject to a maximum purchase price. Also, with regard to the ISO's resolution stating that generators must bid their capacity into the ISO markets when system load exceeds 38,000 MW, FERC states clearly that, ""such a requirement is not permitted by our November 12 Order and the ISO tariff."" [Emphasis added] FERC goes on to say that any requirement to sell to ISO in conjunction with a maximum purchase price would require significant revisions to ISO's market rules, which could not be made effective without a corresponding amendment to ISO's tariff. This would require 60 days' advance notice, ""and could not be implemented prior to Commission approval. As stated above, our November 12 Order was clearly based on the premise that the proper response to inadequate supply (due to a low maximum purchase price) is to raise the maximum purchase price."" ISO is then ""put on notice that any amendment to mandate sales must be accompanied by a demonstration that this extreme measure is the proper response to low supplies in the ISO markets."" Concurrences were filed by Commissioners Massey and Hebert. Massey suggests that the state has to facilitate solutions to market issues, such as risk management tools, removing constraints on hedging opportunities, introducing real time pricing through real time metering and expediting approval of new generation and transmission projects in California. Hebert says that the previous November Order tried to ""straddle the fence"" and that, ""Today, the Commission at least starts to lean slightly in the right direction of recognizing that we have a role."" He then reiterates his preference for removing all price caps. He also suggests that, ""Getting to the bottom of the problem, in my view, requires us to begin a proceeding to rescind our approval of the ISO as operator of the California grid. The record supports such a move."" He refers approvingly to the Collins resignation letter, stating that it, ""thoughtfully outlines consequences to the market of a return to 'command and control.' "" Hebert states that, ""The independence of the ISO's governing structure stands threatened. We should 'stand up,' to quote the resignation letter."" Hebert advocates opening a section 206 proceeding now, as part of the recently announced inquiry into bulk power markets, ""including the California markets."" This decision makes it clear that ISO cannot lower the caps at tomorrow's meeting and expect that sellers will be required to sell to it at that price. This is an important development and very good news in our ongoing efforts to seek economic sanity at the ISO. Please call if you have any questions. Dan [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Contact Steve Kean; [EMail-Body]= Feel free to call me at 713.853.1586. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/17/2001 11:32 AM --------------------------- From: Cindy Derecskey on 05/16/2001 05:36 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Contact Steve Kean ----- Forwarded by Cindy Derecskey/Corp/Enron on 05/16/2001 05:35 PM ----- ""Ron Crane"" <RCrane@sto.state.id.us> 05/16/2001 04:40 PM To: <public-relations@enron.com> cc: Subject: Contact Steve Kean Dear Sirs: I am trying to find an address and phone number to contact Mr. Steve Kean, Exec. VP at Enron Corp. as a possible speaker for an energy panel being put together for the Western State Treasurer's Assn. meeting in July in Sun Valley, Idaho. Could you please provide me with an address to send him a letter of invitation and a phone number to contact him? Thank you for your consideration. Ron G. Crane Idaho State Treasurer (208) 334-3200 Statehouse Room 102 700 W. Jefferson Boise, ID 83720 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Philippe; [EMail-Body]= Yes, Phillippe left to join a firm in New York -- I don't know who. ""Christopher Culberson"" <cmculbe@us.ibm.com> on 06/26/2001 02:42:53 PM To: skean@enron.com cc: Subject: Philippe Steven, I hear Philippe is leaving for Putnam, any truth to this? I've been unable to contact him directly. Thanks in advance. Best Regards, Chris M. Culberson cmculbe@us.ibm.com (281) 556-8104 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Personal but in professional context(e.g., it was good working with you)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Security; [EMail-Body]= We are concerned about leaks to the press which may have ocurred from our Washington office over the last few months (including leaks from a former employee). Could you put someone in touch with Rick and Linda Robertson (head of our DC office)? ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 05/04/2001 03:33 PM --------------------------- Richard Shapiro 05/02/2001 08:03 AM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Security Should I also talk to Brindell about possible inside leak? anything else I need to do relative to security ? [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FW: Request for contribution; [EMail-Body]= Cindy - this looks like it might be an opportunity for you or David to reach your target audience. ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 04/24/2001 02:12 PM --------------------------- From: Mark Metts/Enron@EnronXGate on 04/22/2001 08:39 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: FW: Request for contribution Steve, Any thoughts on this? Take care, Mark -----Original Message----- From: Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 4:39 PM To: Metts, Mark Cc: Fisher, Dolores Subject: Request for contribution Dear Mr. Metts, Enron, being one of the extraordinary companies that has been able to restructure the corporation in an effective way, and that still is under important business transformation, is a subject of many interests. The current challenges are keeping company's management busy. Being aware of this I wanted to take liberty of asking, if it would be possible to get someone of Enron's top executive to contribute Nokia's top executive development program. We have invited a few external key note speakers to elaborate their company's transformation. This kind of experience change has proved to be beneficial for both parties. Also Nokia's experiences have been valuable input in certain restructuring processes. This program, called Panorama, is an annual top executive development program, which takes about half a year in three modules. In every year we have nominated 35 participants to this intensive action. The program target is three folded, give input to company's strategy development, strengthen and integrate common understanding of company's direction, and develop leadership capacity. The program owner is Jorma Ollila, CEO of Nokia. What are benefits from Enron's point of view in the case we are able to get someone of Enron's executives in the program? I think that one of the most important outcome of this kind of events is to open a dynamic networking and discussion forum between our executives. Both parties could capitalize this cooperation. In short, we would appreciate very much if we could have your company's presentation in this Panorama forum. Looking forward to hearing from you, Yours sincerely, Juhani Hokkanen, Senior Vice President, Human Resources Development Nokia Group Tel. (858)831-4877 Mobile (972) 467-1453 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Energy Issues; [EMail-Body]= Please see the following articles: Sac Bee, Fri, 7/27: Hopes dim for a quick Edison deal SD Union, Fri, 7/27: Sempra's trading unit generates a windfall LA Times, Fri, 7/27: Smog Rules May Be Eased LA Times, Fri, 7/27: Federal Caps Didn't Deter Higher Prices SF Chron, Fri, 7/27: Calpine profits double on skyrocketing sales Escalating power prices inspire plant building program SF Chron, Fri, 7/27: Generators continue to set high electricity prices SF Chron, Fri, 7/27: THE ENERGY CRUNCH Environmental suit against power plant Expansion called danger to slough OC Register, Fri, 7/27: Let's make a real deal with Edison (Editorial) LA Times, Fri, 7/27: California Sempra Continues Improved Results LA Times, Fri, 7/27: California Calpine Doubles Earnings, Beats Forecasts Energy: San Jose-based company credits higher electricity prices in California and sales from new plants LA Times, Fri, 7/27: Cap No Bar to Higher Prices Power: Cal-ISO study says suppliers continued to charge as much as five times more than the U.S.-imposed limits WSJ, Fri, 7/27: Calpine Net Soars On Added Plants; Sempra Profit Rises Hopes dim for a quick Edison deal By Kevin Yamamura Bee Capitol Bureau (Published July 27, 2001) The Assembly will not return this week to consider a plan to save California's second-largest utility from bankruptcy, all but ending hopes that legislation would reach Gov. Gray Davis by a mid-August deadline. A group of legislators and Davis staffers has worked this week on an agreement that would restore Southern California Edison's credit and relieve the state of having to purchase energy for the utility. Assembly leaders, who convened the group, set an ambitious schedule that would have led to a vote today had they reached consensus and been able to recall enough of the 80 Assembly members from summer recess destinations. But the newly formed plan, which would issue $2.9 billion in consumer-backed bonds in exchange for several Edison concessions, remains too rough for a vote, said Paul Hefner, a spokesman for Assembly Speaker Robert Hertzberg, D-Sherman Oaks. Hefner was quick to note that Hertzberg has the Assembly ""on call"" for the scheduled monthlong break and is prepared to ask members to return if a deal comes in the next three weeks. But staff and lawmakers said earlier that organizing a mass return after today would prove nearly impossible because Assembly members are expected to travel throughout the state and beyond. Davis set an Aug. 15 deadline in his original Edison deal and recently said he could call a special session forcing legislators to return if they do not authorize a plan by then. His spokesman, Steven Maviglio, said Thursday the governor is not ruling out that idea but is waiting to see what comes of further legislative discussions. ""It's pretty clear that everyone's working pretty hard to form a consensus, but they're just not there,"" Maviglio said. ""The governor is optimistic about the Aug. 15 date."" Even so, Edison does not expect a solution by then. Company officials stated earlier this week that they would wait for a political deal at least until lawmakers return Aug. 20. The Bee's Kevin Yamamura can be reached at (916) 326-5542 or kyamamura@sacbee.com Sempra's trading unit generates a windfall \ objattph By Craig D. Rose UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER July 27, 2001 Sempra Energy, the parent company of SDG&E, reported a 25 percent surge in profit to $137 million last quarter but said yesterday it lost money on the sale of electricity under a long-term contract to California. On the other hand, Sempra said its largest source of profits was its energy trading unit, a middleman that earned $69 million during the quarter buying and selling energy produced by others. The results underscore the transformation of relatively simple utility companies into diversified energy holding companies that have learned to profit in new ways from the deregulation of electricity and the turmoil in energy markets. The surprising announcement -- that a company lost money selling power during California's run-up in electricity prices -- was explained by Sempra as an intentional consequence of the long-term contract it signed with the state to provide power. Stephen Baum, chairman and chief executive officer of Sempra, said the company agreed to provide a steep discount to California during the summer months but would recoup the losses later in the 10-year deal. California sought long-term electricity purchase contracts so it could reduce its purchases in daily and near-term power markets, where prices reached record levels. Critics say Gov. Gray Davis rushed into long-term deals because of concerns about getting through next year's election. They also say the contracts will saddle customers with higher costs for years. The governor has acknowledged that long-term contracts might cause consumers to pay relatively high prices for electricity in later years, but he maintains it is a fair price to pay for lowering prices that were devastating the state economy. Michael Shames, executive director of the Utility Consumers' Action Network in San Diego, said the steep discount Sempra provided to the state on power this summer raised questions about the governor's proposal to help San Diego Gas & Electric Co. clear a debt of $750 million. SDG&E says it is owed that money for power purchases on behalf of its customers. In a media conference last month, Davis said the agreement would eliminate the threat of a possible balloon payment for consumers, who he said might have faced the so-called balancing account debt as early as next year. Shames says the proposal, which took the form of a memorandum of understanding, or MOU, is costly for consumers and a bonanza for Sempra. He said the relatively cheap power provided by Sempra this summer ""makes the MOU sound like more of a hidden payback to Sempra than a real relief plan for local ratepayers."" Shames said he will release an analysis of the state's Sempra plan next week. The state Public Utilities Commission is expected to rule on the plan in August. A Sempra spokesman said there is no connection between discount power and the tentative agreement to clear the $750 million debt. Doug Kline, the Sempra spokesman, said the power contract with the state was signed in early May and the agreement on the balancing account was reached in mid-June. Sempra Energy Trading, meanwhile, said only 10 percent of its $69 million profit was earned from sales of energy in the western region, which includes California. The trading operation earned $40 million in profit during the comparable period last year. California's Independent System Operator, which manages most of the state power grid, and other investigators have said trading and bidding strategies were tools used by energy companies to raise prices during the California power crisis. Though Sempra earned money on trading, its wholesale power generating business lost $9 million during the quarter. Baum said the discounts on electricity provided the state were the prime cause of the loss for Sempra Energy Resources but added that a plant outage also contributed. Sempra Energy Resources, which co-owns a generating plant near Las Vegas with Reliant Energy, earned $2 million during the second quarter last year. Baum added that Sempra's long-term contract with the state -- under which it will provide up to 1,900 megawatts -- has allowed its wholesale business to pre-sell about half the power it expects to generate from the Nevada plant, which will be expanded, and three generating facilities it expects to build. Profits at SDG&E slipped to $37 million during the quarter ended June 30, down from $40 million last year, according to Sempra. SDG&E, whose business is restricted to delivering gas and electricity, said it provided increased customer service during the crisis, which lowered profits. Wall Street analysts generally applauded Sempra's results, noting that the company was ahead of its plan to generate at least a third of its profits from its newer businesses by 2003. ""They're really two years ahead of schedule for their non-utility businesses,"" said Brian Youngberg, an analyst with Edward Jones & Co. Bud Leedom, a San Diego-based analyst with Wells Fargo Van Kasper, said Sempra's move into energy trading now seems shrewd. ""We never dreamed they were setting themselves for a windfall like this,"" Leedom said. Investors pushed Sempra shares up 17 cents yesterday, to close at $25.49 in trading on The New York Stock Exchange. Bloomberg news service contributed to this report. Smog Rules May Be Eased Power plants: EPA proposes a sweeping change in how utilities' emissions are curbed, a flexible approach favored by the industry. By GARY POLAKOVIC and ELIZABETH SHOGREN Times Staff Writers July 27 2001 WASHINGTON -- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Christie Whitman proposed sweeping changes Thursday in the regulation of power plant pollution that would replace five of the government's toughest programs with a single, flexible approach favored by utilities. Whitman outlined a plan for cleaning up major components of power plant smog that represents a significant departure from the EPA's traditional regulatory dictums. She called for a major expansion of pollution credit trading, which, up to now, has had varying success. Under the new plan, the EPA would scrap some of the most stringent measures devised by the agency to deal with power plant emissions. One provision to be set aside aims to cut harmful mercury emissions; another is meant to reduce emissions from Midwestern power plants by 85%; another is designed to restore visibility at national parks. Especially unpopular with industry, one measure, known as new source review, requires the installation of advanced pollution controls whenever power plants are expanded or modified. It too would be phased out. ""New source review is certainly one of those regulatory aspects that would no longer be necessary,"" Whitman told Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio) at the hearing by the Environment and Public Works Committee. ""All of those [programs] could be aligned into one regulatory process"" that she said would work better than existing rules. Whitman's comments offer the first peek into the administration's plans for cleaning some of the dirtiest polluters left in the nation. Debate over the administration's clean-air approach has shifted to Congress as it considers whether to revise the national Clean Air Act. The magnitude of the proposed revisions caught environmentalists by surprise but buoyed industry representatives who say existing controls are costly and inefficient. ""She has raised an appalling prospect of junking virtually every rule and strategy to deal with emissions of electric companies in return for some vague industry-sought plan for an emissions trading scheme,"" said Frank O'Donnell, executive director of the Clean Air Trust, an environmental advocacy group. ""If they go forward with this, it means a wholesale fight over the Clean Air Act in Congress."" After the hearing, Whitman stressed that the overall goal is to clean the air more efficiently than current rules do. Although the administration has not yet released a so-called multipollutant cleanup strategy, Whitman contended that collapsing several regulations into one far-reaching approach would be easier for regulators and industry to manage. ""What we're looking for is targets under this legislation that significantly clean up the air beyond what our current regulatory, statutory requirements would do,"" Whitman said. She added that new source review, for example, ""could potentially be no longer necessary if you have the right kind of targets set in a multi-emissions bill. We have to wait and see where the targets are set."" Utilities have lobbied Vice President Dick Cheney's energy task force to prevent the EPA from aggressively enforcing the new source review regulation. Industry and administration officials say the provision is onerous and prevents plant upgrades, although EPA officials say it is a key tool for forcing dirty, old plants to cut emissions by up to 95%. During the Clinton administration, federal officials charged that 32 coal-fired power plants in several Southern and Midwestern states ignored a requirement that companies install advanced emission controls when their plants were upgraded. The government reached settlement with three utilities, but a provision in the Bush administration's energy plan stalled those enforcement actions pending a review of power plant controls. C. Boyden Gray, attorney for the Electric Reliability Coordinating Council and former White House counsel for the first President Bush in the 1980s, praised the administration's proposal. He said major utility companies he represents, including Southern Co., Duke Energy Co. and the Tennessee Valley Authority, could clean up with greater flexibility and less cost under the plan outlined by Whitman. ""To put everything in a market-incentives basis is a great step. It would be a real breakthrough and a plus for the business community,"" Gray said. For example, Gray said EPA has four separate measures to control nitrogen oxides from power plant combustion, including programs to cut acid rain, ozone and haze. Another program scheduled to take effect in May 2004 requires power plants in 19 states to cut summer emissions by 1 million tons annually. He said those programs can be confusing and costly and could easily be replaced by a credit-trading program run largely by power companies. Under the program being considered by the Bush administration, an emission limit could be established at hundreds of power plants followed by annual reductions in mercury, a toxic metal, as well as smog-forming nitrogen and sulfur oxides. However, a provision to reduce carbon dioxide, a gas implicated in global warming, was dropped under industry pressure. Power companies that reduce beyond their limits could sell emission credits, which represent a pound of pollution, to companies that exceed their limits. Although industry and free-market advocates favor such programs, they are not without controversy. The record of market-driven programs is mixed. On the one hand, the nation's acid rain program uses marketable permits and is widely credited with cutting sulfur oxides at less cost. On the other hand, the world's first market-driven program to tackle urban smog has not worked in Los Angeles, where nearly 400 power companies and manufacturers failed to achieve significant cleanup for the nearly eight years the program has been in effect. Further, many environmental groups are wary of market-driven programs because by design they preclude active government intervention. Critics say such programs could potentially limit public review of power plant operations, allow emissions to concentrate in poor communities and slow efforts to cut haze in national parks downwind from plants that elect to buy pollution credits instead of cleaning up. The Bush administration's power plant strategy was aired before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, which is chaired by Sen. James M. Jeffords (I-Vt.), whose dramatic departure from the GOP threw control of the Senate to the Democrats. Jeffords is proposing legislation, different from the administration's approach, that would control four power plant pollutants, including the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide, an approach rejected by the Bush administration. Prospects appear to be increasing that Congress will pass one or more measures designed to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, a belated response to this week's decision by more than 180 countries to deal with the problem without the involvement of the United States. Indeed, in recent weeks several members in the GOP-led House and Democratic Senate have voted on bills with the intention of disassociating themselves from President Bush's environmental policies before the next election. Among the votes, the House struck down a provision supported by the Bush administration that could hinder progress on global climate change policy. The Senate banned new coal mining and oil and gas drilling in national monuments. Other recent rebuffs included rejections of administration initiatives on such issues as the Endangered Species Act, hard-rock mining regulations and offshore drilling for oil and gas. Copyright 2001, Los Angeles Times <http://www.latimes.com> Federal Caps Didn't Deter Higher Prices Power: Cal-ISO study says suppliers continued to charge as much as five times more than the imposed limits. By NANCY VOGEL TIMES STAFF WRITER July 27 2001 SACRAMENTO -- After federal regulators limited wholesale electricity prices last month, big private sellers of power in California continued to ask as much as five times more for electricity than the federal cap, according to a confidential study by state grid operators. The analysis by the California Independent System Operator covers only the first week after the caps were imposed June 20. Cal-ISO has submitted the data to federal regulators for potential investigation. The report is a summary of what Cal-ISO calls possible anti-competitive behavior by Duke Energy, Williams Cos., Mirant Corp., Reliant Energy and Dynegy Corp. ""In a truly competitive market we would expect these suppliers to bid very close to their actual operating cost,"" said Greg Cook, senior policy analyst with Cal-ISO's Department of Market Analysis. The state did not necessarily purchase any power at the high prices being demanded. Instead, the significance of the bids is that they show how California could find itself paying exorbitant prices for electricity again if hot weather returns and conservation slackens, said Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economist who studies the California electricity market. ""The bottom line is that the generators are putting out these bids in expectation of high demand,"" he said. ""If weather all of a sudden gets really hot from Southern to Northern California, the bids submitted by generators could be very costly to California."" Cal-ISO calculated the cost of production for each company based on the efficiency of its power plants and estimates of what each paid for natural gas to fuel the plants. The average cost for the five was $105 per megawatt-hour, which closely matches the federal price limit in California, which now stands at $101 per megawatt-hour. According to the power bidding procedures, companies that bid at or below their cost of production often still get paid a higher price, allowing them to make a substantial profit. On average, four of the five companies submitted bids either slightly below or slightly above their cost of production. But with the exception of Atlanta-based Mirant, each company at times submitted bids that were substantially higher. Houston-based Reliant, for example, bid as much as $540 per megawatt-hour, more than five times its estimated cost. Overall, Reliant's average bid was close to costs, according to the analysis. Cal-ISO identified companies by code in its report. Sources familiar with the study identified the companies for The Times. The Cal-ISO report singled out ""Supplier 5,"" identified by sources as Charlotte, N.C.-based Duke Energy, saying the company ""continues to bid significantly in excess of its operating costs."" Duke owns two large power plants on the central coast. It marked up its bids an average of 88% beyond its cost to produce electricity, according to the analysis. For example, it cost Duke $85 to $121 to generate a megawatt-hour of electricity in the time period studied, the report shows, but the company offered to sell a megawatt-hour from $149 to $195. Duke spokesman Tom Williams on Thursday said, ""The use of the data in some cases doesn't appear to add up and in all cases appears to be selective and could easily be misunderstood."" Duke sells nearly the entire output of its power plants under long-term contracts, and not on the spot market, which the Cal-ISO report studied, he noted. Reliant spokesman Richard Wheatley said, ""We're looking at the data, and we question whether or not it is correct."" A combination of cool weather, heavy conservation, the start-up of new power plants and recently signed long-term power contracts that guarantee supplies have eased the state's electricity crisis in recent weeks. Market prices that as recently as May averaged $271 per megawatt-hour have dropped to less than $100 per megawatt-hour. The more abundant power supplies have freed grid operators to ignore higher-priced bids. But they will have to consider paying such prices to avoid blackouts if supplies tighten, Wolak said. Such a scenario would test the effectiveness of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission order issued June 19, he said. The bids of the five companies analyzed were offers of sales to Cal-ISO, a Folsom-based agency that manages the electrical transmission grid serving 75% of California. Cal-ISO buys power on short notice to smooth the flow on the state's electrical freeway and avert blackouts. As California's fledgling market began to go haywire last fall, Cal-ISO workers struggled to purchase as much as 30% of the state's power demand with just hours to spare. Since then, the market has stabilized, and Cal-ISO's purchases now amount to roughly 5% of the electricity California consumes. RELATED STORY Power profits: Power plant operator Calpine said its quarterly profit more than doubled. C2 Copyright 2001, Los Angeles Times <http://www.latimes.com> Calpine profits double on skyrocketing sales Escalating power prices inspire plant building program Carolyn Said, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday, July 27, 2001 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle </chronicle/info/copyright> URL: BU234287.DTL> Fueled by high electricity prices, power generator Calpine Corp. reported strong second-quarter results yesterday. Calpine of San Jose said profit for the quarter ended June 30 almost doubled to $107.7 million (32 cents per share) from $59.5 million (20 cents) during the year-ago quarter. Revenue almost quadrupled to $1.61 billion from $417.2 million a year ago. Excluding charges related to the acquisition of Canada's Encal Energy, Calpine's net income was $132.2 million (39 cents), well above the 31 cents per share predicted by analysts, according to Thomson Financial/First Call. Calpine is on an ambitious path to expand its roster of generating plants. By the end of 2005, it expects to have 75,000 megawatts in operation in the United States, including 12,000 megawatts in California. A megawatt is about enough power for 1,000 homes. The company, which generates 2,428 megawatts in California, this summer opened the state's first two major power plants in a decade. The new plants in Yuba City (Sutter County) and Pittsburg generate 547 and 555 megawatts, respectively. Combined with a new plant in Arizona that sells power to California, Calpine's new facilities helped the state stave off threatened blackouts this summer, Chief Executive Officer Peter Cartwright said. Calpine is building the 847-megawatt Delta Energy Center in Pittsburg, scheduled to open in May, and a 750-megawatt plant in Kern County, due in June 2003. It is also awaiting an August decision by the California Energy Commission on its proposed 600-megawatt Metcalf Energy Center in San Jose. ""California is a very good market for us,"" said Bill Highlander, a Calpine spokesman. ""The pricing in California has benefited Calpine."" However, he said, the company was not one of the traders that focused on making top dollar in California's volatile spot market, because its business model concentrated on selling electricity through long-term contracts. During the past few months, Calpine signed 10-year and 20-year contracts with the state for as much as 2,500 megawatts, at prices ranging from $58.60 to $73 per megawatt hour. With most of its plants fired by natural gas, Calpine wants to control about a quarter of the gas it uses, Highlander said. Its April purchase of Encal Energy for $1.77 billion more than doubled its gas reserves, to about 1. 7 trillion cubic feet equivalent, according to Hoover's Online. Calpine's stock closed up $1.08 at $36.89 yesterday. E-mail Carolyn Said at csaid@sfchronicle.com ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle </chronicle/info/copyright> Page B - 1 Generators continue to set high electricity prices Friday, July 27, 2001 ,2001 Associated Press URL: 0359EDT0121.DTL> (07-27) 00:59 PDT LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Power wholesalers continued to demand higher prices for energy despite federal regulation that capped electricity rates, according to a confidential report by the California Independent System Operator. In one case, an energy company charged as much as five times more for electricity than the federal cap, which were imposed June 20. State grid operators have given the study to federal regulators for a possible investigation, the Los Angeles Times reported Friday. Five companies were identified by code in the report and sources familiar with the study named the wholesalers for the Times. They include Duke Energy, Dynegy Corp., Mirant Corp., Reliant Corp., and Williams Cos. The average price charged by the five power companies was $105 per megawatt-hour, which closely matches the federal price limit in California set at $101 per megawatt-hour. Four of the five companies submitted bids either just below or just above their cost of production. Houston-based Reliant, however, asked as much as $540 per megawatt-hour in some cases. Overall, the company's average bid was close to costs, the report said. The state wasn't required to purchase power at the rates set by wholesalers but the bids reflect a potential repeat of charging exorbitant electricity prices if temperatures soar and conservation dwindles, said Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economist who studies the California electricity market. ""The bottom line is that the generators are putting out these bids in expectation of high demand,"" he said. ""If weather all of a sudden gets really hot from Southern to Northern California, the bids submitted by generators could be very costly to California."" The Cal-ISO report singled out Duke Energy, noting it ""continues to bid significantly in excess of its operating costs."" The report shows the company's cost to produce electricity was between $85 and $121 but it offered to sell a megawatt-hour from $149 to $195. Cal-ISO calculated the cost of production for each company based on the efficiency of its power plants and estimates what each paid for natural gas to fuel the plants. ""The use of the data in some cases doesn't appear to add up and in all cases appears to be selective and could easily be misunderstood,"" said Duke spokesman Tom Williams. ,2001 Associated Press THE ENERGY CRUNCH Environmental suit against power plant Expansion called danger to slough Christian Berthelsen, Scott Winokur, Chronicle Staff Writers Friday, July 27, 2001 ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle </chronicle/info/copyright> URL: MN236840.DTL> An environmental group filed suit yesterday to overturn a permit granted to Duke Energy Co. to expand a major power plant south of Santa Cruz. Saying the permit was illegally awarded, the suit warns that the resulting project will damage the ecologically important Elkorn Slough. Voices of the Wetlands accuses the board that awarded the permit of violating federal law by not requiring Duke to use the best possible technology to minimize impacts on the environment around the Moss Landing power plant. If plans to expand the plant proceed without change, the group said, it would kill off critical organisms at the bottom of the food chain. The suit, filed in Monterey County against the California State Water Resources Control Board and the regional board that serves the central coast, seeks a court order to return the case to the regional water district so that more environmentally sensitive cooling technology can be ordered for use at the plant. State officials said yesterday that the issues raised in the suit were considered and rejected during the initial permit approval process last year, and again during the appeal process this year. The case comes amid enormous pressure on state officials, in light of California's energy crisis, to rapidly accelerate power plant approvals and expand the amount of power generation available. Against this backdrop, the state water board on June 21 essentially rejected environmental groups' appeal that had sought to overturn the district board's decision approving the Moss Landing expansion permit. On another front, board members of the California Energy Commission took testimony earlier this week on a proposal to curtail public review of plant project proposals, with one board member, Robert A. Laurie, acknowledging in an interview that he believed ""in some cases"" it posed one of the most time- consuming aspects of project approval. A recommendation is expected within the next month. Duke, of Charlotte, N.C., bought the Moss Landing plant from Pacific Gas & Electric Co. in 1998, when the Northern California utility sold off many of its facilities to prepare for deregulation of the energy market. The plant was built in 1950 using a cooling system technology that sucks water out of the Elkorn Slough and Monterey Bay to cool generating turbines before spitting the water out into the Pacific Ocean. The group says wildlife conditions and sea otter population have improved markedly since PG&E mothballed many of the generating units at Moss Landing in 1995. But Duke now is proposing to resurrect parts of the cooling system in a major expansion that will make Moss Landing the state's largest power plant after its completion next summer. With an output of 2,538 megawatts, the plant when completed is expected to account for 30 percent of all new electricity generated in California next year, serving about 2.5 million households in the Monterey, Santa Cruz and southern Santa Clara County areas, including San Jose. Regional water quality board officials declined comment yesterday, citing the pending litigation. But in public documents filed yesterday, water officials said cooling alternatives had been considered and rejected. The documents did not elaborate on why they were not mandated. Duke had acknowledged during the process that more ecologically sensitive technologies were available, but at prohibitive costs of $20 million to $50 million more. Deborah Sivas, an attorney for the Earthjustice Environmental Law Clinic, which filed the suit on behalf of Voices of the Wetlands, considered the best technology alternatives mandatory, not optional. She said the board had not considered alternative approaches in reaching its conclusions. E-mail the writers at swinokur@sfchronicle.com and cberthelsen@sfchronicle.com ,2001 San Francisco Chronicle </chronicle/info/copyright> Page A - 3 Let's make a real deal with Edison July 27, 2001 By JONATHAN LANSNER The Orange County Register When any government official tries to play business executive, it's time to get nervous. Take the Edison bail out as evidence. At its essence, the deal works like this: Taxpayers give the utility a big pile of cash; the state gets some old, rickety transmission lines in return. Don't be fooled: The power bounty is basically a political ploy. The state doesn't need to control electric distribution. What politicos need is a face-saving trade as evidence that this is a business deal - not a government handout. The state probably should just write the check and eat its losses. But if bureaucrats wanted real remuneration from this bail out, California would eye some juicy Edison assets. As a public service, I'll list a few. Now, for argument's sake, I won't differentiate between the utility and its parent company, Edison International. Hey, lawyers built those walls between the two. Let 'em figure out how to take 'em down. For starters, you'd figure an energy-strapped state would like some regional power plants, no? Like the San Onofre facility. However, it might be laughable to see Sacramento-types defending their future handling of the local nuclear plant. OK, if that's a tad too dicey for the state, how about a coal-fired plant in Nevada? Heck, Edison had a buyer at half a billion bucks before the state oddly quashed that deal. Maybe the state could grab it from Edison -- then flip it to pay off electricity-related debts. Of course, buying one of the out-of-town power plants that Edison's sister company in Irvine has acquired might be educational for Sacramento. Owning a plant in Illinois or Pennsylvania or possibly New Zealand might show state honchos how easy - or not - it is to rig supply and prices. Alternatively, the state could demand a small entity called Edison Capital. Basically, it's a bank. One specialty: the politically correct field of affordable-housing lending. A good fit for bureaucrats. Speaking of money, there's the Edison pension plan. Governments are really good at running retirement benefits. Heck, California already has a huge one. There's got to be some economies of scale - real cash savings - in merging the Edison plan with some state pension fund. Do note that Edison's plan might be overfunded by about $400 million. You can bet, though, that the state would never have the nerve to play 1980s corporate raider: profiting by grabbing some of a company's overfunded retirement kitty. Finally, there's Edison International Field in Anaheim. Stadium naming-rights contracts must have some value since corporations always seem to fight over these promotional gimmicks. (The utility's parent company paid $50 million in 1997 for two decades of ""free"" publicity.) Imagine the buzz the state could get out of the huge sign age on a nationally renowned stadium. Plus, maybe the Angels could be good corporate citizens and tie into this deal. It's possible they'd allow a slight change in the team name to better emphasize the state's role in the ballpark. So, how does ""California Angels"" sound to you? Business; Financial Desk California Sempra Continues Improved Results NANCY RIVERA BROOKS 07/27/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition Page C-2 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company Sempra Energy on Thursday reported another quarter of higher earnings and revenue, a sharp contrast to California 's bigger and beleaguered investor-owned utilities. Although California 's electricity crisis has pushed Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electricity into insolvency--and PG&E into U.S. Bankruptcy Court--the parent of San Diego Gas & Electric and Southern California Gas continues to post improved results on the strength of its non-utility businesses. Net income for the period ended June 30 rose 25% to $137 million, or 66 cents a share, up $25 million, or 55 cents, earned a year ago, the San Diego-based utility holding company said. Revenue jumped 40% to $2.1 billion. Pretax operating income rose 24% to $291 million. Sempra's earnings came in just ahead of the 65-cent average estimate of analysts surveyed by First Call/Thomson Financial. ""Our strong second-quarter performance is primarily the result of our efforts to accelerate growth through new businesses,"" Stephen L. Baum, Sempra's chairman, chief executive and president, told analysts in a conference call. Sempra is in a vastly different position than Edison International and PG&E Corp. because its electric utility arm was able to avoid the deep financial woes afflicting their respective Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric utilities. SDG&E was first to sell its power plants two years ago and thus was freed from a rate freeze. That in turn allowed the utility to pass along to customers the soaring costs of electricity beginning last summer. The state Legislature eventually rolled back and capped the rates for SDG&E customers, but promised the utility it would be allowed to recover those losses. Edison and PG&E, however, continued to accumulate staggering debts because their retail rate freezes remained in place. In contrast, Sempra is solvent, with $1.5 billion in cash and $1 billion in available credit, Baum said. The performance of its utilities was lackluster, with Southern California Gas earning $47 million, unchanged from the second quarter of 2000, and SDG&E earning $37 million, down from $40 million in the year-ago period. But Sempra's unregulated businesses--including energy trading, power plant construction and operation, international electricity operations and energy services--turned in an overall strong performance, contributing 39% of the parent company's earnings. Sempra's trading unit provided most of that profit, contributing $69 million to second-quarter net income compared with $40 million in the same quarter last year. Sempra's stock gained 17 cents to close at $25.49 on the New York Stock Exchange. Business; Financial Desk California Calpine Doubles Earnings, Beats Forecasts Energy: San Jose-based company credits higher electricity prices in California and sales from new plants. 07/27/2001 Los Angeles Times Home Edition Page C-2 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company Calpine Corp., one of the biggest U.S. power-plant builders, said Thursday that second-quarter earnings more than doubled, beating estimates, because of higher electricity prices in California and sales from new plants. Profit from operations rose to $132.2 million, or 39 cents a share, from net income of $59.5 million, or 20 cents, a year earlier. Revenue almost quadrupled to $1.61 billion. San Jose-based Calpine opened plants in the U.S. with a combined capacity of 1,545 megawatts--enough to light 1.5 million average homes--and benefited from existing plants in California . Calpine has insulated itself from rising fuel costs by buying natural-gas fields to supply its plants. ""Given the strategy they have chosen, they're following through quite well,"" said Andre Meade, an analyst at Commerzbank Capital Markets Co. ""They are growing from a small base and adding a lot of plants, so we'd expect high growth."" Profit topped the 31-cent average estimate of analysts surveyed by First Call/Thomson Financial. Calpine said it expects to earn $2 a share this year. The average First Call forecast was $1.92, with a range of $1.80 to $2.04. Calpine's shares rose $1.08, or 3%, to close at $36.89 on the New York Stock Exchange. The shares had fallen 21% this year amid concern that generators might have to give back some of the profit they made selling power in California during the last year. In addition, cooler-than-normal weather and conservation efforts recently reduced power prices in the state. Calpine runs or is building natural gas plants in 29 U.S. states and Canada that produce more than 30,000 megawatts of power. The company plans to more than double capacity to 70,000 megawatts by the end of 2005. Calpine this month opened the $350-million Sutter plant, California 's first major generator in more than a decade. The company is building 11 plants to run during times of peak demand in the state and getting permits for four more, James Macias, who oversees Calpine's West Coast power plants, said in a conference call with analysts and investors. Separately, Arlington, Va.-based AES Corp., a power producer that supplies California and operates in 27 countries, said second-quarter profit fell 20% because of losses tied to currency fluctuations and the sale of a U.S. electricity retailer. Net income fell to $112 million, or 21 cents a share, from $140 million, or 28 cents, a year earlier. Sales rose 26% to $2.21 billion. California ; Metro Desk Cap No Bar to Higher Prices Power: Cal-ISO study says suppliers continued to charge as much as five times more than the U.S.-imposed limits. NANCY VOGEL 07/27/2001 Los Angeles Times Ventura County Edition Page B-1 Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company SACRAMENTO -- After federal regulators limited wholesale electricity prices last month, big private sellers of power in California continued to ask as much as five times more for electricity than the federal cap, according to a confidential study by state grid operators. The analysis by the California Independent System Operator covers only the first week after the caps were imposed June 20. Cal-ISO has submitted the data to federal regulators for potential investigation. The report is a summary of what Cal-ISO calls possible anti-competitive behavior by Duke Energy, Williams Cos., Mirant Corp., Reliant Energy and Dynegy Corp. ""In a truly competitive market we would expect these suppliers to bid very close to their actual operating cost,"" said Greg Cook, senior policy analyst with Cal-ISO's Department of Market Analysis. The state did not necessarily purchase any power at the high prices being demanded. Instead, the significance of the bids is that they show how California could find itself paying exorbitant prices for electricity again if hot weather returns and conservation slackens, said Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economist who studies the California electricity market. ""The bottom line is that the generators are putting out these bids in expectation of high demand,"" he said. ""If weather all of a sudden gets really hot from Southern to Northern California , the bids submitted by generators could be very costly to California ."" Cal-ISO calculated the cost of production for each company based on the efficiency of its power plants and estimates of what each paid for natural gas to fuel the plants. The average cost for the five was $105 per megawatt-hour, which closely matches the federal price limit in California , which now stands at $101 per megawatt-hour. According to the power bidding procedures, companies that bid at or below their cost of production often still get paid a higher price, allowing them to make a substantial profit. On average, four of the five companies submitted bids either slightly below or slightly above their cost of production. But with the exception of Atlanta-based Mirant, each company at times submitted bids that were substantially higher. Houston-based Reliant, for example, bid as much as $540 per megawatt-hour, more than five times its estimated cost. Overall, Reliant's average bid was close to costs, according to the analysis. Cal-ISO identified companies by code in its report. Sources familiar with the study identified the companies for The Times. The Cal-ISO report singled out ""Supplier 5,"" identified by sources as Charlotte, N.C.-based Duke Energy, saying the company ""continues to bid significantly in excess of its operating costs."" Duke owns two large power plants on the central coast. It marked up its bids an average of 88% beyond its cost to produce electricity , according to the analysis. For example, it cost Duke $85 to $121 to generate a megawatt-hour of electricity in the time period studied, the report shows, but the company's bids ranged from $149 to $195 per megawatt-hour. Duke spokesman Tom Williams on Thursday said, ""The use of the data in some cases doesn't appear to add up and in all cases appears to be selective and could easily be misunderstood."" Duke sells nearly the entire output of its power plants under long-term contracts, and not on the spot market, which the Cal-ISO report studied, he noted. Calpine Net Soars On Added Plants; Sempra Profit Rises By Rebecca Smith 07/27/2001 The Wall Street Journal Page B4 (Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.) Calpine Corp. reported net income nearly doubled in the second quarter, reflecting the independent power producer's aggressive plant-building program. Meanwhile, the parent of a San Diego utility said profit rose 25%. Calpine, of San Jose, Calif., said net was $107.7 million, or 32 cents a share, up from $59.5 million, or 20 cents a share, a year earlier. The latest results, which were in line with analysts' expectations, included a special charge of seven cents a share related to Calpine's purchase of Encal Energy Ltd., a natural-gas company. Revenue grew even more strongly, soaring to $1.61 billion from $417.2 million. Separately, Sempra Energy, parent of electric utility San Diego Gas & Electric, reported profit rose to $137 million from $110 million a year earlier. Revenue jumped 40% to $2.1 billion from $1.5 billion. Sempra Chairman Steve Baum attributed the growth, which stands in marked contrast to the financial woes of California 's other electric-utility-owning energy companies, to Sempra's unregulated operations. Calpine's profit increased despite paying substantially more for natural gas to fuel its plants. It spent an average of $4.80 per million British Thermal Units for natural gas, up from $3.31 a year before. At the same time, Calpine's revenue per megawatt hour of electricity sold also rose, to $71.03 in the latest period from $64.80 a year earlier. At Sempra, Mr. Baum said profit from Sempra's biggest utility unit, San Diego Gas & Electric, fell 7.5% to $37 million from $40 million. Results were flat at its gas-distribution company, Southern California Gas Co. Sempra Energy Trading was the big profit center, generating half its total profit, or $69 million, compared with $40 million a year earlier. Mr. Baum said Sempra's stock, which trades at a low price/earnings multiple of 10, still is being ""affected negatively by the California situation."" He also said the company made less money in spot-power markets than in prior quarters but nevertheless intends to invest $2 billion in new power plants. In 4 p.m. New York Stock Exchange composite trading, Calpine shares rose $1.08 to $36.89, while Sempra climbed 17 cents to $25.49. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Ken Lay Mention At NRSC Reception Last Night; [EMail-Body]= Last night I attended the National Republican Senatorial Committee's reception at Senator Frist's home in DC. (Frist is the NRSC chairman this cycle.) Enron, including Jeff and Linda, had been invited to the reception, the purpose of which was to introduce ex-RNC chairman Haley Barbour as the NRSC's National Finance Chairman. Present were over a dozen Republican senators, including Minority Leader Lott, Whip Nickles, and Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison, Bunning (KY), Fitzgerald (IL), Cochran (MS), Inhofe (OK), Bond (MO), Crapo (ID), Voinovich (OH), Allen (VA), and Chafee (RI). The ""news"" from our perspective is that Haley Barbour singled out Ken Lay for praise as the first person to step to the plate and agree to help with their new ""Majority Makers"" program. This is the effort that Barbour will head up to raise $21 million for this election cycle by concentrating on events outside DC that would target businesses and business leaders without a DC presence. Barbour said that Ken had agreed to organize and chair a Houston fundraiser to raise $1 million toward the $21 million total. Ken was the first name he mentioned. The only others were the DeVos family in Michigan and Julie Finley, a major GOP fundraiser based in DC. Needless to say, I was suddenly quite ""popular"" after Haley made his remarks to the assembled group. Haley said he looked forward to working with us on this project. As you know from a previous e-mail, Pat Shortridge had earlier seen our mutual friend Mitch Bainwol, the executive director of the NRSC, who had told Pat at lunch last week that Haley had spoken with Ken, but last night was the first I had heard a dollar figure -- and a big one at that -- linked to the effort. While it was not stated, I assume from the location and size of the event's goal that the President would be involved (but this is only an educated assumption on my part). Later I saw Karen Hughes of the White House staff, but I do not think she was present when Haley made his comments. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FERC investigation; [EMail-Body]= Have we suggested to FERC staff that they force the ISO and PX to open the ""blackbox"" to show how they determine dispatch? In addtion, if you are not on the distribution list for Belden's memo on utility behavior in California this summer, I will forward it to you. It suggests some other areas FERC ought to be looking into. [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= FYI - California Conference Call, 800-749-9927, ask for Maureen
 Palmer; [EMail-Body]= Lydia McGowan (Chairman Frisbee) 410 767 8072 Christa Donahue (PFI in North Carolina -- 2024672778) Greg Piper Carol Dillon 503-464-8536 Kathleen -- Providence Gas (Mike McCall) Linda Clemmons -- MIT forum at MIT [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Re: Funky Business; [EMail-Body]= Follow up to previous message: I would not have ""managing for the slow down"" on the agenda. I don't think it is as relevant to our business as it is to many others. TERRIE JAMES@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS 07/05/2001 01:09 PM To: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Funky Business Steve, Have you had a chance to look at the book ""Funky Business"" and to give any thought to having Jonas present at the Management Conference? I know you have a thousand other things on your plate, not the least of which is California, so I understand if the answer is no. However, they've been contacted by someone else about the date so we may be forced to decide rather soon. On a related subject, I'm contemplating another topic for the conference. I'd seen an article in Fortune several months ago titled ""Managing for the Slowdown."" It talked about new challenges managers face in light of the economic downturn. (Most young managers have never experienced anything but boom times.) The article also outlines a dozen or so things companies should be thinking about now. (Use the downturn as a new opportunity to evaluate people. Overhaul your budget process. Don't stop communicating. etc.) I think it would be beneficial to address similar strategies and ideas with our managers. I'd love to get your thoughts on this idea. (Is it appropriate for Enron or am I just seeing the world through bleak-colored glasses?) Terrie James Sr. Director, Corporate Communication Enron Broadband Services 713-853-7727 (phone) 713-646-8887 (fax) terrie_james@enron.net ----- Forwarded by Terrie James/Enron Communications on 07/05/01 12:44 PM ----- Alison@isbspeakers.com 07/05/01 10:40 AM To: Terrie James/Enron Communications@Enron Communications cc: Subject: Funky Business July 5, 2001 Terrie: We received an e-mail today from the Funky Business office asking about the date we have on hold with Enron. They have another inquiry about that date and wondered if Enron is still considering using Jonas. If you are still considering them I will keep him on hold. And if they get a firm offer I will let you know immediately. We will have 24 hours to make an offer or release the hold once a firm offer comes in from another company. Hope you had a great 4th of July, Alison Kravetz 800-842-4483 x239 [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Logistic Arrangements(meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Transatlantic meetings; [EMail-Body]= fyi ---------------------- Forwarded by Steven J Kean/NA/Enron on 07/09/2001 07= :56 AM --------------------------- From:=09John on 07/09/2001 09:43 A= M GDT Sent by:=09Kerry Ferrari/Enron@EUEnronXGate To:=09Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Raymond Bowen/ENRON@enronXgate, Michael = Brown/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Rick Buy/ENRON@enronXgate, Richard Causey/ENRON@e= nronXgate, Wade David Cox/Enron = Communications@Enron Communications, David W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES, James De= rrick/ENRON@enronXgate, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES, Jim Fallon/Enron Comm= unications@Enron Communications, Andrew S Fastow/ENRON@enronXgate, Mark Fre= vert/ENRON@enronXgate, Ben Glisan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kevin Hannon/Enron Communica= tions@Enron Communications, Rod Hayslett/ENRON@enronXgate, Stanley Horton/E= NRON@enronXgate, James A Hughes/ENRON@enronXgate, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@En= ron, Louise Kitchen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Koenig/ENRON@enronXgate, John J Lavor= ato/ENRON@enronXgate, Kenneth Lay/ENRON@enronXgate, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, D= anny McCarty/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Mike Mcconnell/ENRON@enronXgate, Mark Metts/= Enron@EnronXGate, Mark S Muller/HOU/EES@EES, Cindy Olson/ENRON@enronXgate, = Lou L Pai/HOU/EES@EES, Greg Piper/ENRON@enronXgate, Ken Rice/Enron Communic= ations@Enron Communications, Matthew Scrimshaw/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Jeffrey = A Shankman/ENRON@enronXgate, Jeffrey Sherrick/ENRON@enronXgate, John Sherri= ff/ENRON@EUEnronXGate, Jeff Skilling/ENRON@enronXgate, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@= EES, Greg Whalley/ENRON@enronXgate, Richard Lewis/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Joe G= old/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Matthew Scrimshaw/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Michael Hutch= inson/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Mike Farmer/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Michael Brown/Enr= on@EUEnronXGate, Fernley Dyson/Enron@EUEnronXGate cc:=09=20 Subject:=09Transatlantic meetings To the Executive Committee: Attached is a note that has been sent to our managers regarding off-site an= d team-building meetings. My impression is that our commendable efforts to= build transatlantic synergies are resulting in too many get-togethers that= require substantial travel. Our challenge is that such gatherings are far= more costly and time-consuming for us to attend than our Houston colleague= s might realize. Often, participating in these meetings takes an entire we= ek for Enron Europe employees (especially if they are outside of Texas). Na= turally, they may feel that this time of year (PRC time) is exactly the wro= ng time from a career perspective to miss this kind of gathering. These off-sites are sometimes scheduled at the end of a quarter, which comp= ounds the difficulty; worse still are the times they occur at the end of Q2= , since it also coincides and conflicts with the PRC process. I would appreciate your efforts to remind your managers to consider the tra= vel time and costs (both direct and indirect) when inviting international e= mployees to off-site meetings in the US. We appreciate the chance to be in= cluded in the broader Enron initiatives and to share ideas across organizat= ions, but we are really trying to reinforce the message about managing expe= nses. Thanks! John Sherriff (Letter sent to all Enron Europe VPs and direct reports) We still have issues regarding Offsites and 'Team Building' exercises. In = particular, we have recently had examples of departments failing to inform = other key work groups when workplace absences are pending. In order to avoid misunderstandings, and to increase transparency, the foll= owing will apply with immediate effect: Any Offsite or 'Team Building' exercise which any group (both commercial an= d non-commercial, and including John and myself)intends to undertake must b= e communicated, in advance, to all department heads. Issue to be identified= include: all participants who will out of the office, total costs of the = exercise; and, where appropriate, work load coverage details. John and I are very supportive of team building exercises but we much prefe= r that they be conducted in the evenings or at weekends. To the extent that= is not possible, we must absolutely avoid quarter ends and ensure all work= is appropriately covered. Trips to Houston and especially resorts in the US are far more difficult to= justify based on the substantial travel time and costs involved. So pleas= e pay particular attention to optimising our transatlantic travel. Please communicate this policy to your staff. Michael Brown [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"
"<s>[INST] <<SYS>> I am sharing an email body and its subject with you. Based on the text in the body and the subject, you need to classify the email in only one of the following eight categories: 'Company Business, Strategy, etc.'; 'Purely Personal'; 'Personal but in professional context (e.g., it was good working with you)'; 'Logistic Arrangements (meeting scheduling, technical support, etc)'; 'Employment arrangements (job seeking, hiring, recommendations, etc)'; 'Document editing/checking (collaboration)'; 'Empty message (due to missing attachment)'; 'Empty message'. <</SYS>> [EMail-Subject]= Materials from Energy & Power Risk Conference; [EMail-Body]= For your information: Vince Kaminski passed on to me the following California-related presentations delivered at a recent conference he attended (Energy and Power Risk Management, 5/14-5/15, Houston). Please let me know if you would like a copy of any of these: *Roach, Craig (Boston Pacific Company, Inc.), ""Price Caps: An Apparent Short-Term Solution That Creates Long-Term Problems"" (hard copy only) *Wolak, Frank (Department of Economics, Stanford; Chairman, Market Surveillance Ctte., CAISO), 1. ""What Went Wrong with California's Re-Structured Electricity Market (and How to Fix It)"" 2. ""How to Make Competitive Electricity Markets Benefit Consumers"" (hard copy only) *Yeres, David (Partner, Clifford Chance Rogers & Wells, LLP), ""Wholesale Power Sales: A Marketplace Under Scrutiny"" (hard copy only) Jennifer [/INST] [EMail-Category]= Company Business, Strategy, etc.(elaborate in Section 3 [Topics])"